My Qata’a in response to Qateel Shafai’s followling verse:
شعر قتیل
میں نے تو قتیل اُس سا منافق نہیں دیکھا
جو ظلم تو سہتا ہے بغاوت نہیں کرتا
قطعہ از اشرف
ہے خلق کی جنبش میں تقاضاِ قضا بھی
طوفاں کے اُمڈنے میں ہے کردار ِفضا بھی
مظلوم کو اشرف تو منافق نہیں کہتا
دستور ِ بغاوت میں ہے قدرت کی رضا بھی
Attachments
| untitled-[1].plain | 0.9 k | [text/plain] | Download View |
This Qatta is based on a verse of Qateel Shafai.
Qateel’s verse has a progressive message.
Oppressed must revolt against oppression.
It is a liberating message for mankind.
Whereas the Qatta has beautiful words and smoothly flowing poetic expression,
But meaning wise it is riddled with ambiguity.
I could not get the clear message what the creator of Qatta intended to say.
In the first line of Qatta I think “Taqaza” should be “Taqaza-e”.
If I am not right I should be corrected.
The last line of Qatta is not giving me a clear message.
“Qadrat ki Razaa” means what? I was not able to get a clear message.
Other Urdu speaking affiliates can help me.
Comment by Salahuddin M. Sarwar Ali. 02/12/2013
Noor Salik Sahib,
Thank you for repeating the required email. My response has been delayed due to my occupation with certain personal matters requiring immediate attention. I have before me now, the couplet of Qateel, the Qatta of Mirza Ashraf Sahib as well as your comments on the same. I believe we have first to determine whether the oppressed who does not revolt against the oppressor is a “Munafiq”or “Mazloom”.Obviously the oppressor is is more powerful and if the oppressed fights back, he will be annihilated.(This is true for nations as well).Under such a situation he is Mazloom. With favorable/changed conditions mentioned by Ashraf Sahib the oppressed may be able to revolt. Only Cowards will miss the opportunity, but here we are not discussing them.Oppressed who are unable to revolt successfully are used to their miserable condition over a period of time.
ITNEY MANOOS SAYYAD SE HO GAYE GAR REHAI MILE GI TO MAR JAENGEY
Following examples illustrate the above analysis.
“HAREES of SIND”. Men who are supposed to work on the agricultural fields of the “Waderas ‘but in fact the entire families are almost like slaves. News about private jails
of Waderas are occasionally published. Some times Police raids these Jails and get s the prisoners released. It appears that the concerned Wadera is neither arrested nor prosecuted. No such news in the press. There is a possibility that Harees may fight for their rights on the basis of their numerical strength. Today they are Mazloom due to their ignorance.
“Untouchables/shudra of India”. They have a very large population in INDIA, and there are a good number of well -educated persons among them. Dr.Ambedkar, who became the Law Minister of India had the highest academic qualifications, a B.Sc. from London School of Economics, a D.Phil. in Sociology from Columbia University, a D.Sc. from Bonn, and M.A,LL.B from Bombay was not invited even once to any party/Dinner of Cabinet Ministers, as he was a Shudra. Once the Community threatened to convert to Islam .There was a hue and cry among the Hindus with danger of bloodshed. Eventually Dr.Ambedkar converted to Buddhism..They continue to fight for their rights..,
RECENT CASE OF ZULM. Babri Masjid was demolished by Hindus in presence of a large Police Force. More than 2000 Muslims were killed during agitation.
After many years the court gave such a judgment ,which goes in favor of Hindus. No more agitation by Muslims, otherwise another 2-3000 will be killed. Better remain as
Mazlooms.This is the usual story in India.
In the case of Harees and Shudras, due to changing environment, the two populations have the opportunity to struggle for their rights, which will lead to their freedom from ZULM.Muslims in India have no such opportunity, at least for the present.In Gujrat thousands were killed. Chief Minister Modi said, they were all terrorists. He has been rewarded by the Hindu industrialists with heavy investment in Gujrat.
In the last line Noor Sahib has asked for help from some Urdu Speaking person to understand the Qatta of Mirza Ashraf Sahib.This is confusing because all of us speak
Urdu. I think he meant “URDU SCHOLAR” or Ahle Zaban.I do not claim to be one.
Sarwar ALI
In my humble opinion, Aurangzeb Khan Marhoom, almutakhallus Qateel, was not an Ahl-ezubaaN himself. However, that did not stop him from being a great poet. Iqbal, Faiz or Faraz too were not ahl-e-zubaan but their greatness as Urdu poets is acknowledged universally.
Coming back to Qateel’s verse, harboring a sentiment, but not expressing it for fear of adverse reaction, is ‘munafiqat’. The use of ‘munafiq’ by Qateel in this verse is an epitome of poetic expression. His use of the Munafiq can not be over-admired in that ‘misra’. Its not a linguistic angle but the poetic angle that makes it extra ordinary and creates great poetic expression.
As far as Mirza Ashraf Saheb’s Qita is concerned, it deals with ‘Masla e Qaza-o-qadr’ rather than ‘munafiqat or mazloomiyet’. Just because similar words happen to be in both samples, does not mean they are discussing the same situation.
Soon after the creation of Pakistan and adopting Urdu as a national language the word “ahl-e-zubaan” became obsolete. Although some literary figures from Laknow, Amroha and around boasted to be ahl-e-zubaan but all the poets like Iqbal, Faiz, Hafeez, Eshan Danish, Faraz and many more became so popular that Josh Malihabadi, Raees Amrohi and many others, with all their pride of being ahl-e-zubaan are no match in popularity to the poets and literary personalities of the region which is now Pakistan. I view “ahl-e-zubaan” as “ahl-e-zawaal.” Urdu is the language of the people not of the nobility.
Mirza
I beg to differ. Neither the difference between Ahl-e-zabaan and speakers of Urdu as second language has extinguished nor the concept itself has gone obsolete. I agree that many proponents of this idea are, and will remain, in denial. That is simply because they do not have the same sense of hearing the fine difference between the tone of ahle-zubaan’s audio/diction and those whose second language is Urdu. This is true though that Urdu has been lovingly adopted and patronized by many litterateurs of eminence like Iqbal, Faraz and Faiz etc but they have not replaced or surpassed the great Ahle zabaan poets. The non-ahle zabaan poets are iconic among those whose second language is Urdu, period. Any accomplished student of Arabic & Persian manages to build a vast vocabulary bank, but the nuances, imperceptible musical notes and sing-song rythm of the ahle-zabaan ( I’m using these expressions for lack of better words to describe these) only comes to the child who grows up in an educated family of ahle-zubaan parents. The great tradition of “Fiqray baazi” and use of “Zu-maani” words in humor or satire, as regular part of conversation among ahle-zubaan is almost non-existent phenomenon among those whose second language is Urdu.
I read the comments by Mirza Ashraf as well as Wequar Azeem.
Mirza Ashraf’s comments reflect intellectual objectivity where as Wequar Azeem’s comment reflect cultural elitism. What Wequar Azeem is saying has some factual relevance but intellectually those points do not carry much weight.
Of course people who are born in any language capture nuances which the outsider cannot. A child’s mind is a clean slate, so every initial mark leaves a deeper imprint than the marks which appeared later on during the development of any individual.
But the same principles apply to non-Urdu languages. (Gujrati, Pushto, Balochi, Punjabi, Sindhi and Bengali) Bengali being the one of the original languages of Pakistani ethnic groups. People who are born in these languages can appreciate deeper and complex nuances which the outsider cannot. It is something natural, not particularly a privilege for Urdu speaking as Wequar Azeem indirectly implies to claim.
Bengali language produced Rabinder Nath Tagore and Qazi Nazrul-Islam.
Tagore was the only Indian who won noble prize in literature.
Punjabi produced Waris Shah and Mian Muhammad Bukhsh Sahib.
Tagore and Waris Shah may not be equal to Ghalib but their poetic depth is only appreciated by Bengalis and Punjabis respectively.
If we dig deeper, we may be able to establish links between Persian speaking in Afghanistan and Urdu speaking in Pakistan. These cultural and linguistic elitism are slow poisons which corrode the national unities among ethnic groups.
Persian is far superior because of its longevity and profound literary creations.
Whereas Urdu is a product of interaction between foreign and native cultures in India during last 4 to 5 hundred years. Linguistic scholars can throw a better light on these complex issues and enlighten others.
Mirza Ashraf’s comparison of Ahle-zuban poets and non-Ahle-Zuban poets is an astute observation.
His comment “Ahle-Zuban” are “Ahle-Zawaal” may be an overstretch but cannot be ignored.
One theory is that Urdu Speaking people are somewhat responsible for cultural and political debacle of division of India. The movement was initiated by cultural elite and Nawabs/jargirdars but it was taken over by the masses.
There was no intellectually competent political leadership who should have analyzed and predicted the long-term consequences of the division of India. Only few Muslim groups benefited from division of India. Majority of Muslims just suffered and still suffering – go and ask Biharis and Balochis.
Expression Ahle-Zawaal may have some element of truth – that is why it is extremely painful.
Marwan