UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The two school theory of Urdu literature Petievich, Carla Rae 1986

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1986_A1 P47_4.pdf [ 16.78MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0097307.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0097307-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0097307-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0097307-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0097307-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0097307-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0097307-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0097307-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0097307.ris

Full Text

THE TWO SCHOOL THEORY OP URDU LITERATURE By CARLA RAE PETIEVICH M.A., The University of C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley, 1979 A.B., The University of C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley, 1977 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Asian Studies) We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA July, 1986 ©Carla Rae Petievich, 1986 In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of t h i s thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. I t i s understood that copying or publication of t h i s thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department of ftsxAN STUDICS The University of B r i t i s h Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date \ C Qcrro&eg. \9%$> DE-6 (3/81) ABSTRACT The Two School t h e o r y , perhaps the most p r e v a l e n t i n Urdu l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m , holds t h a t the D e l h i School and the Lucknow School comprise the bulk of c l a s s i c a l p o e t r y . The two s c h o o l s are named a f t e r the c i t i e s o f D e l h i and Lucknow, Muslim I n d i a ' s two g r e a t e s t c e n t e r s of Urdu c u l t u r e . D i h l a v i p o e t r y (the p o e t r y w r i t t e n i n D e l h i ) , c o n s i d e r e d by c r i t i c s t o be t r u e r t o the P e r s i a n l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n than the p o e t r y of Lucknow, i s d e s c r i b e d as emphasizing m y s t i c a l concerns, P e r s i a n s t y l e s of com p o s i t i o n , and a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d , melancholy p o e t i c d i c t i o n . Lakhnavi p o e t r y (that w r i t t e n i n Lucknow) by c o n t r a s t , i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d as s e n s u a l , f r i v o l o u s , a b s t r u s e , f l a s h y , even decadent. Reasons p o s i t e d f o r Lakhnavi p o e t r y ' s decadence are the d e l e t e r i o u s e f f e c t s o f the c i t y ' s prosperous, even o p u l e n t , economic and s o c i a l c l i m a t e d u r i n g the l a t e e i g h t e e n t h and n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r i e s . D e l h i ' s ravaged c o n d i t i o n d u r i n g the same p e r i o d i s l i k e w i s e c o n s i d e r e d the cause of D i h l a v i p o e t r y ' s a l l e g e d l y c o n t r a s t i n g , m e l a n c h o l i c o u t l o o k . The p r e s e n t study c h a l l e n g e s the Two School theory on s e v e r a l counts, arguing t h a t i t i s more an e x p r e s s i o n of c u l t u r a l v a l u e s than the s u p p o r t a b l e r e s u l t s of r i g o r o u s t e x t u a l a n a l y s i s . In the f i r s t p l a c e t h i s study does not recog n i z e the l i t e r a r y d i s t i n c t i o n s between D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi p o e t r y which are claimed by "Two School" c r i t i c s . Secondly, i t p l a c e s the Two School t h e o r y i n the context of c u l t u r a l and p o l i t i c a l events of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries which touched the two c i t i e s of Delhi and Lucknow, including t h e i r l i t e r a r y spokespeople. This study's challenge i s two-fold: i t f i r s t traces the development of the Two School theory's a r t i c u l a t i o n in Urdu c r i t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e . It follows the theory's t r a n s i t i o n from usually unspecific, subjective statements about Lakhnavi poetry by Urdu's e a r l i e s t c r i t i c s , Maulana Azad and A l t a f Husain Hali—who were D i h l a v i poets themselves—into a full-blown, formal c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of l i t e r a r y d i s t i n c t i o n s between a "Delhi School" and a "Lucknow School." This l a t e r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n was formalized by such twentieth century c r i t i c s as Abdus Salam Nadvi, Andalib Shadani, Nurul Hasan Hashmi and Abul Lais S i d d i q i . The next section challenges both Nadvi*s and Shadani's l i t e r a r y d i s t i n c t i o n s and t h e i r methods of argumentation as w e l l . A comparative study of D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi poetry, based on a s t r u c t u r a l l y - c o n t r o l l e d sample of verses composed in the same zamin (meter and end-rhyme), suggests that the poetic choices made by any Urdu poet — r e g a r d l e s s of his or her d o m i c i l e — i s influenced at least as much by the s t r u c t u r a l demands of the ghazal form as by s o c i e t a l influences. Following the comparison between D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi poetry comes a comparison of the two most important Lakhnavi ghazal poets, Nasikh and A t i s h . Though named by c r i t i c s as co-founders of the Lucknow School, t h e i r s t y l e s are also characterized by the same c r i t i c s as fundamentally different—some have even c a l l e d Atish a "Delhi-style" Lucknow poet. This study concurs with the claim that Nasikh and Atish often write in two c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t s t y l e s , showing various differences in choice which the two exercise. These c h a r a c t e r i s t i c differences can be seen in ghazals composed by both poets i n a single zamin. as well as in Nasikh's and Atish*s i n d i v i d u a l address of conventional ghazal themes (mazamin). The differences between the two foremost Lakhnavi poets further challenge the claim that Nasikh and Atish both developed and manifest the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c "Lakhnavi" s t y l e which forms the basis of a "school" d i s t i n c t i o n between D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi poetry. The concluding chapter argues that despite i t s l i t e r a r y q u e s t i o n a b i l i t y , the Two School theory endures because i t s a t i s f i e s fundamental elements of Indo-Muslim c u l t u r a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . The theory's origins are t i e d in with the b i r t h of l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m i n Urdu, which occurred during a time when p o l i t i c a l circumstances had caused Indian Muslims to question established perceptions, both of themselves and of the i r role in Indian society as a whole. The symbolism attached to "Lucknowness" and "Delhiness" seems to r e f l e c t these s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l dynamics better than they r e f l e c t text-based analyses of Delhi and Lucknow poetry. TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE: Background to Conventions of the Ghazal v i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS x x i i i INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTERS I. LITERARY TENETS OF THE TWO SCHOOL THEORY 19 I I . TRACING THE GENESIS OF THE TWO SCHOOLS: D i h l a v i y a t and Lakhnaviyat 26 I I I . CULTURAL ASPECTS OF THE TWO SCHOOL THEORY 39 IV. ORIGINS OF_THE DELHI-LUCKNOW DIFFERENTIATION i n Azad's Ab-i Hayat 48 V. LAKHNAVI POETRY IN HALT. 1S MUQADDAMA-I SHE'R-0 SHA'IRI 69 VI. ASSESSING NADVI'S EXPOSITION OF THE TWO SCHOOLS..... 92 VI I . ANDALIB SHADANI'S "LAKHNAVI SHA'IRI KI CHAND KHUSOSIYAT" 117 V I I I . ZAIDI'S CHALLENGE TO THE TWO SCHOOL THEORY 125 IX. COMPARISON OF LAKHNAVI AND DIHLAVI POETRY IN THE SAME ZAMIN 142 X. COMPARISON OF NASIKH AND ATISH 218 XI. CULTURAL IDENTITY AND LITERARY PRINCIPLES 268 BIBLIOGRAPHY 317 - V -PREFACE BACKGROUND TO CONVENTIONS OF THE URDU GHAZAL Before embarking on a study of the Two School theory i t w i l l be u s e f u l to p r o v i d e a gen e r a l i n t r o d u c t i o n to the s t r u c t u r e and conventions of the Urdu g h a z a l , the l i t e r a t u r e with which that theory i s concerned. In the f o l l o w i n g pages a number of the ghazal's stock themes and conventions w i l l be int r o d u c e d through p r e s e n t a t i o n and d i s c u s s i o n of s p e c i f i c v e r s e s . The ghazal i s by f a r the most popular of the four major p o e t i c genres i n c l a s s i c a l Urdu.l I t i s a love l y r i c form, c o n s i s t i n g of v a r y i n g numbers of two-line verses c a l l e d she'rs (pronounced much l i k e the E n g l i s h word " s h a r e " ) . 2 Cohesion w i t h i n a ghazal i s co n s i d e r e d , c o n v e n t i o n a l l y , to be provided by the uniform s t r u c t u r a l p a t t e r n of a l l i t s she'rs r a t h e r than by a n a r r a t i v e sequence such as that which e x i s t s i n a b a l l a d . Thus, i n a manner of speaking, i n d i v i d u a l she'rs r e l y on the gr e a t e r context of the ghazal genre rather than on a context to 1. The others are the n a r r a t i v e form, masnavi; the panegyric q a s i d a ; and the e l e g a i c marsiya. For f u l l e r d i s c u s s i o n of these other forms, see M.A.R. Barker, A Reader of Modern Urdu  Poetry, Montreal: M c G i l l U n i v e r s i t y , 1968, I n t r o d u c t o r y chapter on P o e t i c s , p. x v i i . 2. Though the p l u r a l of "she'r" i s t e c h n i c a l l y "ash'ar" we w i l l r e f e r to the p l u r a l as "she'rs" f o r the sake of reading f l u e n c y i n E n g l i s h . - v i -be p r o v i d e d by verses i n sequence, as would be the case i n a b a l l a d or other n a r r a t i v e verse form. Each she'r i s composed i n a p a r t i c u l a r s t r u c t u r a l 3 _ framework c a l l e d a zamln. That zamm i s d e f i n e d by i t s meter (bahr) and rhyme-scheme. Bahr ( l i t e r a l l y , "sea, bay, flow, 4 rhythm)" c o n s i s t s of a f i x e d sequence of s h o r t and long s y l l a b l e s . End-rhyme has two components, q a f i y a h and r a d l f . The r a d l f of a ghazal i s the repeated p o r t i o n which concludes each v e r s e , w h i l e the q a f i y a h i s a s i n g l e s y l l a b l e l e a d i n g i n t o the r a d l f . which rhymes i n the same way t h a t rhyme i s experienced i n Western l i t e r a t u r e s . Thus, i n the she'r below the r a d i f i s " k a " 5 w h i l e the q a f i y a h i s the long s y l l a b l e "-an." g i v i n g t h i s she'r (and the e n t i r e g h a z a l i n which i t appears) the end-rhyme "-an ka;" {N M i r a s i n a h a i mashriq a f t a b - i dagh-i h i j r a n ka t u l u ' - i s u b h - i mahshar chak h a i mere g i r l b a n ka My b r e a s t i s the e a s t e r n h o r i z o n whence the wounded sun of s e p a r a t i o n r i s e s : The dawn of Doomsday breaks through the rend i n my c o l l a r . 3. L i t e r a l l y , zamln i s d e f i n e d as "the e a r t h , s o i l , l a n d , ground, r e g i o n , " e t c . John T. P l a t t s , h. D i c t i o n a r y of Urdu. C l a s s i c a l H i n d i and E n g l i s h . London: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press, f i f t h i m p r i n t , 1974, p.617. 4. P l a t t s , p.137. 5. "Ka" i s the masculine s i n g u l a r p o s s e s s i v e p o s t p o s i t i o n , r o u g h l y e q u i v a l e n t to " *s" i n E n g l i s h orthography. - v i i -The qafiyah-word i n the second l i n e ( c a l l e d a "misra'") i s " g i r i b a n " — t h e q a f i y a h i t s e l f being "-an"—and the r a d i f , as we have s a i d , i s "ka." The reader may have n o t i c e d t h a t t h i s s h e 1 r has end-rhyme i n both l i n e s . While the rhyme-scheme of a ghazal t y p i c a l l y appears o n l y i n the second m i s r a ' of each she' r , the ghazal*s opening verse ( c a l l e d m a t l a 1 ) r e v e a l s the poem's zamln by i n c l u d i n g the end-rhyme i n both m i s r a ' s . Thus, the rhyming p a t t e r n of every g h a z a l i s AA, BA, CA, DA, e t c . w i t h the end-rhyme c o n t a i n e d i n every "A" l i n e . The second she'r i n the g h a z a l from which the above matla' was taken shows the rhyming p a t t e r n (B,A): A z a l se dushmanl ta'us-o mar apas men rakhte hain D i l - i pur dagji ko kyonkar h a i ' i s h q us z u l f - i pechan ka The peacock and snake have and w i l l always m a i n t a i n deep enmity: Why then does t h i s s c a r o f a heart so l o v e those c o i l i n g t r e s s e s ? The p a t t e r n of W e s t e r n - s t y l e rhyme can be seen i n the f i n a l long s y l l a b l e of the words " h i j r a n . " " g i r i b a n " and "pechan." In the f o l l o w i n g pages we w i l l p resent s e l e c t e d s h e ' r s , along with n o t e s , i n or d e r to i n t r o d u c e the reader to the p o e t r y under c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h i s study. The purpose of the notes i s to p r o v i d e some of the background necessary t o render 6. K u l l i y a t - i Nasikh, Lucknow: Naval K i s h o r e , n.d. p.7. - v i i i -the Urdu g h a z a l more a c c e s s i b l e to those readers w i t h l i m i t e d exposure to the genre. T h i s study's ensuing l i t e r a r y arguments w i l l r e l y , t o some e x t e n t , on a f a m i l i a r i t y with t h i s background. A l l g h a z a l poets address themselves t o the s u b j e c t of Love ('ishq) and w r i t e i n the persona of an ' a s h i q , or Lover. He i s , by d e f i n i t i o n , h o p e l e s s l y i n l o v e with an i n d i f f e r e n t , even c r u e l , Beloved (mahbQb. ma'shuq) and i s t h e r e f o r e g e n e r a l l y m i s e r a b l e . He i s obsessed by h i s c o n d i t i o n ( h a i ) , and i t i s mostly i n the form of ruminations upon t h i s c o n d i t i o n t h a t she' rs are composed. The e x p r e s s i o n s of h i s o p p r e s s i o n f o l l o w c e r t a i n c o n v e n t i o n a l e x a g g e r a t i o n s , such as the n o t i o n t h a t an 'ashiq s u f f e r s almost unto death, but i s denied death's f i n a l r e l i e f ; t h a t h i s heart i s l i t e r a l l y wounded by s u f f e r i n g — i n n u m e r a b l e she'rs c r e a t e g r a p h i c images of the h e a r t ' s s c a r s and wounds (dagh, zakhm). comparing them t o the f i e r y sun, f o r example, or to the markings on a peacock's t a i l ; t h a t he i s d r i v e n insane by h i s untenable p o s i t i o n — l i k e the legendary P e r s i a n ' a s h i q . Majnun (whose name means "the c r a z y o n e " ) — a n d so t e a r s h i s h a i r and c l o t h i n g , and wanders through the w i l d e r n e s s or d e s e r t , barren p l a c e s l i k e h i s h e a r t . A l l these conventions are evoked i n the matla' we now r e c a l l by Nasikh, the g r e a t poet of Lucknow: Mira s l n a h a i mashriq a f t a b - i d5gh-i h i j r a f i ka T u l Q ' - i subh-i mahshar chak h a i mere g i r l b a n ka My b r e a s t i s the e a s t e r n h o r i z o n - i x -whence the wounded sun of S e p a r a t i o n r i s e s : The dawn of Doomsday breaks 7 through the rend i n my c o l l a r . Here the ' I s h i q - n a r r a t o r g i v e s eloquent v o i c e to the e x t e n t of h i s s u f f e r i n g and a f f l i c t i o n . The sense of h i s f i r s t m i s r a ' i s : "My heart i s so wounded by s e p a r a t i o n ( h i j r f h i j r a n ) from the Beloved t h a t i t f e e l s l i k e a burning sun w i t h i n my bosom." The second m i s r a 1 f o l l o w s through t h i s thought with an almost p a r a l l e l statement: "The t e a r i n my c o l l a r (chak-i, g i r i b a n ) — w h i c h I have made i n the anguish of my s u f f e r i n g , as I s t r u g g l e f o r r e l i e f — s e r v e s as the h o r i z o n over which the sun r i s e s , u s h e r i n g i n the dawn of the F i n a l Day (mahshar). the Day Q of Judgement." B r i a n S i l v e r has a p t l y observed t h a t "The words, m o t i f s , and images of the ghazal are important not i n i s o l a t i o n , but r a t h e r i n t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s t o each o t h e r . . . " and t h a t "the e x p e r i e n c e of [many] g h a z a l s . . . i s more than the sum of i t s g p a r t s . " Such i s c e r t a i n l y the case i n t h i s verse of Nasikh's. The amount of a l l u s i o n and imagery packed i n t o t h i s she'r i s g r e a t e r than i n the average verse but i s by no means 7. I b i d . 8. S.R. F a r u q i informs me t h a t the sun, on Doomsday, w i l l come down ve r y low, "at the h e i g h t of one lance and a q u a r t e r . " P e r s o n a l Communication, New D e l h i , 25 December 1985. 9. B r i a n Quayle S i l v e r , Nuclear S t r u c t u r e and P o e t i c  Connotation i n the Urdu Divan of M i r z a G h a l i b , Ph.D. D i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago, 1980, p.51. In f a c t , f o r an i n t e r e s t i n g i n t r o d u c t i o n to the major t o p o i of the g h a z a l , emphasizing G h a l i b ' s p o e t r y , see S i l v e r ' s Chapter I I , pp.50-85, passim. - x -unheard of; nor would i t be considered inappropriate or undesirable by the ghazal audience. In f a c t , i t i s quite desirable, and t h i s verse represents something of a triumph in i t s construction of layers of meaning. In the f i r s t place, by mentioning his torn c o l l a r , the 'ashiq i s t e s t i f y i n g to the fact that he i s in a frenzied state, and that he has been driven there by the a f f l i c t i o n of love. That his c o l l a r i s torn a t t e s t s to the 'ashiq's i m p l i c i t claim that he i s a paragon of 'ashiql; and that dawn i s about to break confirms that the 'gshiq has withstood his anticipatory suffering throughout the long night. In other words, he has been true to his Beloved by carrying on his v i g i l as long as the night has l a s t e d . Such self-aggrandizing claims of 'ashiql constitute another common convention i n the ghazal. An 'Sshiq generally tears his c o l l a r at some point during the long (seemingly endless) night of Separation, s i g n i f y i n g that he has reached the f i n a l point of his endurance. He i s usually driven beyond endurance by the sight of the moon, which reminds him of his Beloved's b e a u t i f u l , lustrous face. Comparison of the moon with her face i s among the most primary images i n the ghazal's stock. Mention of the chak-i g i r l b a n f evoking the night of separation, offers a contrast with the breaking dawn which the she'r e x p l i c i t l y evokes. That dawn moves the suffering heart ( i m p l i c i t l y present in the verse's opening misra 1) out into the open, where i t bursts forth as the red, f i e r y sun. Although the sun i s not e x p l i c i t l y described - x i -as red and f i e r y , the reader knows that i t i s so because the heart (or the heart's wound) i s red and f i e r y , burning with the 'ashiq's a f f l i c t i o n . F i n a l l y , exaggeration i s also embodied i n t h i s verse by the fact that the dawn which breaks i s that of the F i n a l Day. The night of separation which has wreaked such havoc on t h i s 'ashiq must, therefore, have been the F i n a l Night of Separation. By r e l a t i n g his own suffering to the termination of a l l time, past and present (which mahshar brings about) the 'ashiq raises himself and his own personal condition to epic proportion. A f i n a l statement which i s subtly implied by Nasikh's verse i s that those who would torment t h i s p a r t i c u l a r 'ashiq had better beware the consequences—the advent of the dawn of the F i n a l Dayl A contrasting perspective on the same f u t i l e wait for union with the Beloved i s offered in the following famous matla' by Ghalib: Yih na t h l hama"ri qismat kih v i s S l - i yar hota Agar aur j i t e rahte yahl i n t i z a r hota It was not my fate to unite with the Beloved: had I gone on l i v i n g there would s t i l l have been t h i s same waiting. 10. Divan-i G_halib, Arshi e d i t i o n , New Delhi: Anjuman-i Taraqqi-i Adab, 1982, p.186. - x 1 1 -Here G h a l i b ' s ' a s h i q r e a f f i r m s h i s commitment t o the B e l o v e d . H i s l i f e i s a l r e a d y o v e r . Death i s u s u a l l y sought by t h e ' a s h i q , s i n c e i t i s h i s o n l y hope f o r r e s p i t e from h i s s u f f e r i n g , and s i n c e u n i o n ( v i s a l - i y a r ) cannot be a t t a i n e d d u r i n g h i s l i f e t i m e ( e s p e c i a l l y i f he i s r e f e r r i n g t o a D i v i n e B e l o v e d ) . That t h e B e l o v e d might be e i t h e r human or D i v i n e i s an o t h e r e s s e n t i a l c o n v e n t i o n o f t h e g h a z a l . H i s / h e r i d e n t i t y was s i m i l a r l y ambiguous i n N a s i k h ' s s h e ' r above. However i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r s h e ' r t h e ' a s h i q i m p l i e s t h a t t h e f u t i l e w a i t i n g ( i n t i z a r ) , w h i l e i n e v i t a b l e f o r a m o r t a l L o v e r , i s perhaps an end i n i t s e l f : "Had I gone on l i v i n g I would have ke p t on w a i t i n g " i s c e r t a i n l y a b a l d s t a t e m e n t o f f a c t , but i t a l s o i m p l i e s t h a t "Had I my l i f e t o l i v e o v e r a g a i n I would f o l l o w t h e v e r y same p a t h a g a i n , d e s p i t e i t s f u t i l i t y , because I am so committed t o my B e l o v e d ( y a r ) . " G h a l i b ' s s h e ' r . a t a more immediate l e v e l t h a n N a s i k h ' s , h i g h l i g h t s t h e r o l e o f t a s a v v u f ( S u f i s m , m y s t i c i s m ) i n t h e g h a z a l . A c c o r d i n g t o S u f i s , t h e m y s t i c ' s d e s i r e t o know God i s the m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f True Love ( ' i s h q - i h a q l q i ) . I t i s p a r a l l e l e d on t h e p r o f a n e l e v e l i n human b e i n g s ' d e s i r e f o r u n i o n w i t h human B e l o v e d s . That p r o f a n e l e v e l o f Love i s c a l l e d ' i s h q - i m a j a z i . o r M e t a p h o r i c a l Love, because t h e human e x p e r i e n c e i s m e r e l y a metaphor f o r e s s e n t i a l e x p e r i e n c e , t h a t o f t h e D i v i n e . Enumerations and d e c l a r a t i o n s o f t h e Be l o v e d ' s b e a u t y , p l a y f u l n e s s and i n d i f f e r e n c e b o r d e r i n g on c r u e l t y p r o v i d e - x i i i -tremendous g r i s t for the ghazal's m i l l . The likening of her beauty to the moon has already been noted. To li k e n her face to other radiant objects l i k e the sun and the candle-flame are also standard: Amad amad us sarapa nur k i hai bazm men Shama* ur jave jo hath aven p a r - i parvana aj She approaches the assembly radiant from head to foot: If the moth's wings were on hand today the candle i t s e l f would take f l i g h t . Aside from the Beloved's radiant countenance, her entire form i s b e a u t i f u l . Her stature i s t a l l and elegant l i k e the cypress tree (sarv). That stature i s not s p e c i f i c a l l y named in t h i s she'r by A t i s h , but i t i s alluded to by the description of her graceful approach into the assembly of admirers, radiant from head to foot (sarapa nur k i amad) . That head to foot radiance connotes the t a l l graceful candle, and, with another conventional device, the poet suggests that her beauty i s even more radiant than that of the candle (an exemplar of radiance) . His proof: that the candle would f l y away in shame at being outdone. Whenever the candle-flame i s mentioned in the ghazal, a moth i s not far to be found. Their relationship p a r a l l e l s that of the 'ashiq and Beloved, with the moth he l p l e s s l y drawn to 11. K u l l i y a t - i A t i s h , ed. Z.A. S i d d i q i , Allahabad: Ram Narayan Lai Beni Madhav, 1972, p.122. - x i v -t h e b e a u t y o f t h e c a n d l e , even though u n i o n w i t h i t means s e l f - i m m o l a t i o n . T h i s theme, a l t h o u g h not e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e d i n A t i s h ' s s h e 1 r . i s c e r t a i n l y a l l u d e d t o ; and i t i s g i v e n a l i t t l e t w i s t t o keep i t f r e s h by p l a c i n g t h e c a n d l e - f l a m e — n o r m a l l y r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e B e l o v e d — i n o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e r e a l B e l o v e d whose approach i s d e s c r i b e d i n t h e v e r s e ' s f i r s t m i s r a ' . Unable t o bear t h e f a c t t h a t i t s r a d i a n c e i s w a n t i n g i n c o mparison w i t h t h a t o f t h e a p p r o a c h i n g B e l o v e d , t h e c a n d l e wants t o "borrow" i t s ' a s h i q ' s wings and f l e e . Perhaps t h e most c o n v e n t i o n a l metaphor f o r t h e B e l o v e d ' s b e a u t y i s t o compare i t w i t h t h e r o s e ( g u l ) . Thousands and thousands o f Urdu s h e ' r s use t h i s d e v i c e . G e n e r a l l y , t h e r o s e ' s ' a s h i q i s t h e b u l b u l , o r n i g h t i n g a l e , who i s caged and can o n l y admire t h e o b j e c t o f h i s d e s i r e from a f a r . The r o s e , l i k e t h e B e l o v e d , i s q u i t e i n d i f f e r e n t t o i t s a t t e n t i o n s and a f f l i c t i o n . A f i n a l c o n v e n t i o n t o be i n t r o d u c e d i s t h e theme o f wine d r i n k i n g i n t h e g h a z a l . S i n c e t o imbibe a l c o h o l ( s h a r a b . mai) i s f o r b i d d e n t o M u s l i m s , wine imagery s e r v e s two p u r p o s e s : f i r s t , on t h e m a j a z l , or m e t a p h o r i c a l , l e v e l , i t s i g n i f i e s t h a t an ' a s h i q i s so enamored o f t h e B e l o v e d t h a t he w i l l commit g r i e v o u s s i n s t o p r ove h i s l o v e . T h i s theme i s r e i n f o r c e d by t h e s a g ! . or c u p - b e a r e r — w h o pours wine f o r t h e d r i n k e r s who go t o t h e t a v e r n ( m a i - k h a n a ) — c o m i n g t o r e p r e s e n t t h e B e l o v e d . S i n c e he p r o v i d e s t h e w i n e , t h e s o u r c e o f t h e i r i n t o x i c a t i o n , t h e s a g i becomes t h e ' a s h i q - d r i n k e r s ' o b j e c t o f d e s i r e . The -xv-t a v e r n scene i s evoked i n the f o l l o w i n g matla' by A t i s h : F a s l - i g u l h a i l u t i y e k a i f i y a t - i maikjiana a j D a u l a t - i Saqi se malamal h a i paimana Sj Press from the s p r i n g the t a v e r n ' s essence! Let the wine-cup s p i l l over-today w i t h the Saqi's abundance. Wine imagery a l s o lends i t s e l f t o h a g l q i f or m y s t i c a l , themes i n the g h a z a l . To i n t e r p r e t the above verse on a h a g l q i l e v e l , the s a g ! would represent the 'ashiq-seeker's p l r , or s p i r i t u a l p r e c e p t o r . The wine he serves the d r i n k e r s r e p r e s e n t s m y s t i c a l wisdom and guidance along the path l e a d i n g to u l t i m a t e i n t o x i c a t i o n , i . e . union w i t h the D i v i n e . Again, t h i s theme i s so g e n e r a l t o the g h a z a l t h a t i t would be l e s s a p p r o p r i a t e to e l a b o r a t e upon i t here than t o d i s c u s s i t i n terms of the s p e c i f i c she'rs which c o n t a i n i t elsewhere i n t h i s s t u dy. Other p r i n c i p a l c h a r a c t e r s b e s i d e s the 'ashiq and h i s Beloved are h i s r i v a l s f o r her a t t e n t i o n (ghair or r a g i b ) ; and the messenger (gasid) who o s t e n s i b l y c a r r i e s messages back and f o r t h between the 'ashig and the ma'shuq (but who o f t e n uses the o p p o r t u n i t y to p l e a d h i s own case or t o otherwise f o i l the p l a n s of h i s employer, the ' a s h i g ) . S i m i l a r l y , t h e r e i s the n a s i h ( c o n f i d a n t , moral t e a c h e r , and busybody), who t r i e s t o 12. I b i d . - x v i -talk sense into the 'ashig's head and save him from the calumny of the disgrace into which ' ishg leads his f r i e n d . He becomes a suspect, however, since the 'ashig sees anyone who t r i e s to dissuade him from his obsession as a person with his own intentions toward the Beloved—after a l l , who could not be drawn into her snare, once he had set eyes upon her, or even heard about her second-hand? Such i s the case evoked in the following verse by Ghalib: Zikr us parivash ka aur phir bayan apna Ban gaya raglb akhir tha jo razdan apna Mention, in the end, of her f a i r y - l i k e beauty— and my elaborations on that theme— , have made a r i v a l of my c l o s e s t f r i e n d . The commonly mentioned places where the 'ashig finds himself are the garden (chaman. g u l i s t a n ) ; the lane outside the Beloved's house (ku-i yar), where he s i t s along with her other admirers, waiting in vain for a glimpse of her;*^ the desert (vahshat. v i r a n . biyaban) or barren place which epitomizes the 15 desolation of his condition; and the assembly of the 13. Divan-i Ghalib, Arshi e d i t i o n , p.186. 14. See Chapter X for further discussion of how Nasikh and Atish employ the ku-i yar theme in t h e i r poetry. 15. And where he compares his l o t to that of the legendary Persian 'ashig, Majnun, who wandered insanely over the desert in separation from his beloved L a i l a . - x v i i -Beloved's admirers (majlis or bazm). There are more motifs than these just mentioned, but these form the core of the ghazal's stock. Below are l i s t e d a few more examples of poetry by Nasikh and Atish in which the reader w i l l recognize a number of the motifs just introduced: Tere kuche ka hai a i khana-kJiarSb afsana aj Shaikh Ka'aba cchorta hai Barhaman but-kji§na aj What st o r i e s they t e l l , home-wrecker, of the lure of your lane: the shaikh abandons the Ka'ba today the Brahmin his idol-house. Ku-i q a t i l men pahunch kar sar hu'a mujh ko vabal Bojh utarne k i jagah dam charh gaya mazdur ka I arrived i n the executioner's lane staggering under the burden of my head— instead of laying down7my load I panted even harder. Mere marne k i du'a mange voh but parh kar namaz Kis taraf ja kar karun main sajda-i shukrana aj If in her prayers she begs the blessing of my death should my gr a t e f u l prostration be toward Mecca or to h e r ? ± 0 16. A t i s h , Op.Cit.. p.122. 17. K u l l i y a t - i Nasikh. p.11. 18. K u l l i y a t - i A t i s h . p.122. - x v i i i -Around the subject of supplication, prayer and prostration, Atish gives p l a y f u l twists to the standard themes of death, and the Beloved-as-idol, or but. A common phrase used to refer to 1 i s h q - i majazi i s "idol-worship" because love for an earthly Beloved in t e r f e r e s with the 'ashiq's absolute supplication to A l l a h . The poet has combined t h i s i d o l - c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n with that of the Beloved's perennial c r u e l t y toward the 'ashiq. It i s written into the s c r i p t of the ghazal genre that the Beloved deny the 'ashiq his heart's desire, while keeping him hanging on with the merest glimmer of hope that she might, just t h i s once, a c t u a l l y keep her g l i b promises to meet him or acknowledge him i n some form or another. To a Muslim, a but connotes graven images and paganism. In his view, one submits to Al l a h ; while to a but (say, for example, to a Hindu deity) people pray for the bestowal of a favor or boon. In t h i s she'r the Beloved performs Islamic worship, namaz parhna, but also pleads for a boo n — i n t h i s case the death of the 'ashiq. Thus the Islamic tone i s p a r t i a l l y mixed with one of i d o l a t r y . The verse's success l i e s in i t s open-ended, or non-resolved, resolution: " I f she should pray for my death, that cruel i d o l ; and i f the boon should be granted and then I die; her power, as well as that of God, w i l l be proven. Her power over me w i l l be confirmed, showing once again that she can do with me as she w i l l . And i f A l l a h , too, l e t s her have her way with me, then i s the act of k i l l i n g me a demonstration of her ultimate power, or of His? I must - x i x -determine t h i s in order to give my prayerful thanks." In the second l i n e the query about whom to supplicate in thanksgiving (sajda-i shukrana) arises because, even though i t i s out of cr u e l t y that the Beloved wishes the 'ashiq's death, i t i s in death that he, too, finds his own wishes (at least p a r t i a l l y ) f u l f i l l e d . Not only i s i t miserable to l i v e with a hopeless love for a crue l i d o l , i t i s only through death that ultimate union with the True Beloved (i.e God) w i l l be 19 achieved. Therefore death i s quite welcome to the 'Sshiq and he i s thankful for i t s prospect. But his dilemma l i e s in trying to decide whether to thank the True God for his death, or to thank the Beloved but who has put i n a word for him, so to speak. He asks, "In which d i r e c t i o n should I prostrate myself?" As a Muslim he should face Mecca, but as an idol-worshipper he should bow i n the d i r e c t i o n of the but whom he worships. Kab hamare f i k r se hota hai Sauda ka jav5b Han tatabbu' karte hain Nasikh ham us maghfur ka When could our thoughts ever keep pace with those of Sauda? Nasikh, we but f o l l o w 2 j n the footsteps of that departed one. In the nineteenth century the great poetic ustads often made 19. It i s understood that the 'ashiq's love for a cruel i d o l i s merely a metaphor for his devotion to the True Beloved. 20. K u l l i y a t - i Nasikh. p.11. -xx-reference to e a r l i e r masters of th e i r l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n . One finds t h i s e s p e c i a l l y so in the poetry of Nasikh and Ghalib, who were themselves both noted innovators in the Urdu ghazal. In spite of a desire to carve out a s p e c i a l place for themselves, i t was very important for them to be acknowledged as part of t h e i r own t r a d i t i o n ; they were wholly i d e n t i f i e d with the t r a d i t i o n of Perso-Urdu l i t e r a t u r e , and from i t they gained c u l t u r a l legitimacy. This she'r i s one of a number of those in the c o l l e c t e d works of Nasikh which honor a great master (usually Sauda, but often Mir or Dard as w e l l ) , sending the poet's own name along in the wake of the e a r l i e r bard. The e f f e c t of t h i s i s to claim legitimacy by association, often to compete with the venerated ustads for a paramount p o s i t i o n in the culture, but always to keep company with them. Here, Nasikh does not challenge Sauda's authority; rather, he r e s t r i c t s himself to paying homage. When he says, however, "We follow that departed one (Ham tatabbu' karte hain)." he implies a carrying on of Sauda's noble t r a d i t i o n ; a firm entrenchment in i t . Since Sauda was unquestionably the most revered poet of the eighteenth century, deferred to even by the talented and arrogant Mir Taqi Mir, Nasikh chooses august company for himself in t h i s verse, perhaps even suggesting that just as Sauda was the great bard of the eighteenth century so i s he, Nasikh, the greatest in the nineteenth. The previous discussion, though necessarily much -x x i -abbreviated, has intended to outline some of the Urdu ghazal's conventions and l i t e r a r y aesthetic; and a context for t h i s study's l i t e r a r y analyses and i t s discussion of the analyses offered by the Urdu c r i t i c s who have developed and who subscribe to the Two School theory. Chapters I and II offer a general description of the l i t e r a r y nature of that theory and i t s genesis in the l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m of Urdu; and Chapter III f i l l s in some of the h i s t o r i c a l facts pertaining to the Delhi-Lucknow r i v a l r y from which i t evolved. - x x i i -ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am greatly indebted to the American I n s t i t u t e of Indian Studies, which offered generous support for the research conducted in India during 1981-1982 on a Junior Fellowship; and to the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, whose Graduate Fellowships supported me through much of my doctoral program. As for the people to whom I am indebted, f i r s t acknowledgment must go to my committee members, Supervisor Ken Bryant, and Professors Ashok Aklujkar and F r i t z Lehmann, for a l l t h e i r guidance. Tremendous thanks also to David Gilmartin, Fran P r i t c h e t t and Tom Metcalf for t h e i r personal warmth and generosity in reading a succession of drafts and o f f e r i n g valuable help and insight along the way. This study could never have been done without the aid and expertise of Professors CM. Nairn, Gopi Chand Narang of Jamia M i l l i a Islamia i n New Delhi, Nayyar Masud of Lucknow University, and M.A.R.Barker of the University of Minnesota, who generously opened his fabulous personal l i b r a r y to me. Without his beneficence I would never yet have seen a c o l l e c t i o n of Nasikh Lakhnavi's poetry. For my ustad r Shamsur "Rahman Faruqi, whose time, care, i n s p i r a t i o n , wealth of knowledge and humanity are at the heart of t h i s work, there simply are no adequate words of thanks. May our association ever continue. F i n a l l y , I wish to thank my family and friends for t h e i r love, support and patience: Zaida and George Petievich, Luba - x x i i i -Ljepava, and Connie Carlson; Marsha Ablowitz, Laura Chapman, Ina Dennekamp, Ruth Frankenberg, Kathy Hansen, Petra L i l j e s t r a n d , Lata Mani, A l i c e Philipson, A.L. Riley, Rakesh Singhai, Betsy Spaulding and numerous others who know who they are. Very s p e c i a l thanks to Jay Linder, and accolades to the game of tennis. - x x i v -INTRODUCTION The student of Urdu poetry cannot help but be exposed, very early on in her studies, to the magic of Mirza Asadullah Khan Ghalib (1797-1869). As Brian S i l v e r observes, "No p r a c t i t i o n e r of the Urdu ghazal i s more renowned" and "no other modern writer of the subcontinent—with the exceptions of Rabindranath Tagore and Muhammad Iqbal—has inspired such a range of c r i t i c a l and biographical l i t e r a t u r e i n a va r i e t y of languages..."''" and not a l l of them in Indian languages. A l l the more remarkable i s the brevity of l i t e r a r y output which has inspired so much secondary l i t e r a t u r e . Ghalib's authorized Urdu div3n consists of 1468 verses, while many major poets' c o l l e c t e d works run to twenty or t h i r t y times 2 that volume. Though t r a d i t i o n has i t that Ghalib himself claimed to hold his Urdu poetry far i n f e r i o r to his Persian verse—and t h i s can be understood in view of the Persian c u l t u r a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of Indian Muslims which w i l l be discussed elsewhere i n t h i s s t u d y — i t i s his Urdu divan which 1. Brian Q. S i l v e r , Nuclear Structure and Poetic Connotation in the Urdu Divan of Mirza Ghalib (1797-1869), Ph.D. Di s s e r t a t i o n , University of Chicago, 1980, p.3. 2. Mir's K u l l i y a t runs to.six divans of some 1818 f u l l ghazals alone, perhaps ten to f i f t e e n times as many verses as are contained in Ghalib's divan, Divan-i Gjialib. Arshi e d i t i o n , New Delhi: Anjuman-i Taraqqi-i Urdu [Hind], 1982; Jur'at's K u l l i y a t contains nearly twenty thousand she'rs . See Dr. Iqtida Hasan, ed. K u l l i y a t - i Jur'at, Naples: I s t i t u t o U n i v e r s i t a r i o Orientale, 1970-1975. The only notable exception to t h i s pattern i s Dard, whose div^n contains only about half as many she'rs as does that of Ghalib. - 1 -w i l l continue to excite the c r i t i c s and maintain for Ghalib widespread acclaim as C l a s s i c a l Urdu's greatest poet. The very f a c t of Ghalib's enormous popularity has led to a most unbalanced portrayal (be i t intended or otherwise) of the picture of Urdu poetry as a whole body of l i t e r a t u r e . In f a c t , I have heard a number of scholars, e s p e c i a l l y Westerners, go so far as to disclaim the merits of nearly any other Urdu poet. Only in the l a s t few years has a project been underway by a leading Indian scholar of Urdu to provide a commentary for the K u l l i y a t (collected works) of Urdu's second 3 best-known ustad. Mir Taqi Mir, who i s said by some to have attained the Urdu ghazal's l y r i c heights. By contrast, 4 commentaries on Ghalib abound, while the remaining twenty or thirty-odd poets i n the Urdu canon have been almost thoroughly 5 neglected by commentators. Given the paucity of c r i t i c a l attention i t has received, an entire period of Urdu l i t e r a t u r e (the early 19th century) might as well never have occurred, yet i t i s t h i s very period which represents the heydey of Urdu's efflorescence. To the 3. The scholar i s Shamsur Rahman Faruqi, editor of the l i t e r a r y journal Shab Khun. published in Allahabad since 1969. 4 . S i l v e r , Qp_. C i t . , p.5, note 1. 5. A few studies ex i s t i n English of the other " P i l l a r s of Urdu"—Sauda and Dard—though they are by no means as comprehensive as those dedicated to Ghalib. Cf. Ralph Russell and Khurshidul Islam, Three Mughal Poets; Mjr, Sauda and Mir Hasan, London: George Allen and Unwin, Ltd., 1969; and Annemarie Schimmel's study of Khvaja Mir Dard. - 2 -lover of the Urdu ghazal i t seems unfortunate to dismiss the greater bulk of c l a s s i c a l poetry just because i t was not composed by Ghalib, for the other poets by whom i t was composed were products and a r t i s t i c exponents of the same c u l t u r a l t r a d i t i o n . These other poets, and t h e i r poetry, were received i n t h e i r own time with d e l i g h t , appreciation and great reverence. Yet today i t i s almost impossible to locate the c o l l e c t e d works of many nineteenth century Urdu poets, be they sought in manuscript or published form. Furthermore, the focus of attention in the exi s t i n g body of scholarship has been almost e n t i r e l y devoted to poets of D e l h i — a t the expense of poets associated with the court cultures of Lucknow, Rampur, Hyderabad and others. In the past several decades some redress has been sought for the neglect of Urdu's other important poets, and much of t h i s new attention has been focused upon poets associated with the court at Lucknow (1775-1857). This choice of focus i s l o g i c a l , even necessary, since Lucknow was Delhi's r i v a l center of Urdu culture (markaz) from i t s inception i n 1775 u n t i l 1856.^ Important work has been done, for instance, on Lucknow's two masters of the marsiya (elegy), Anis and 6. Delhi's c u l t u r a l r e v i v a l in the Red Fort during the 1840s, while symbolically important for the Mughal Empire's swan song, did not create enough momentum to completely s h i f t the focus—and thus the markaz—away from Lucknow. - 3 -Dabir. And Lucknow's two masters of the ghazal, Nasikh and "Atish, are also being gently r e h a b i l i t a t e d , with two f u l l - l e n g t h works now published on Nasikh and several others g on A t i s h . Although several editions of Atish's poetry are 9 10 a v a i l a b l e , a single a r t i c l e and no book at a l l has yet been published in English on any poet of Lucknow, despite a burgeoning i n t e r e s t in the West in Urdu l i t e r a t u r e This study i s undertaken with the need f i r m l y in mind to address these unfortunate circumstances. 7. Cf. S.R. Faruqi, "The Problem of Interpretation in Mir Anis," i n The Secret Mirror: Essays on Urdu Poetry. Delhi: Academic L i t e r a t u r e , 1981, pp. 107-118; Dr. Akbar Haidari, Intikhab-i M i r a s i - i Mirza Dabir. Lucknow: Uttar Pradesh Urdu Akademi, 1979; and Prof. G.C. Narang, Anis ShanasI. Delhi: Educational Publishing House, 1981; e t c . 8. Cf. Dr. Shabihul Hasan, Nasikh: Taiziya-o Tagdir. Lucknow: Uttar Pradesh Urdu Akademi, 1974; Rashid Hasan Khan, Intikhab-i N3sikh. Delhi: Maktaba-i Jami'a Ltd., 1972; and Khal i l u r Rahman Azimi, Mugaddama-i Kal5m-i A t i s h . Aligarh, 1959; Dr. Aijaz Husain, Intikhab-i Kalam-i A t i s h . Allahabad, Hindustani Akademi, Uttar Pradesh, 1972; Shah Abdus Salam, Dabistgn-i A t i s h . Delhi: Maktaba-i Jami'a Ltd., 1977. 9. Sayyid Martaza Husain F a z i l Lakhnavi, K u l l i y a t - i A t i s h . Lahore: M a j l i s - i Taraggi-i Adab,_1973, Volumes I and II; Dr. Zahir Ahmed S i d d i g i , K u l l i y S t - i A t i s h . Allahabad: Ram Narayan Lai Beni Madhav, 1972; Div3n-i A t i s h . Pocket Book e d i t i o n , Delhi, 1972; K u l l i y a t - i A t i s h : H51at-i Zindagi. Lahore: Urdu Akedmi-i Sindh, n.d. 10. See note 7. 11. Although Igtida Hasan has given us a welcome three-volume edition of Jur'at's c o l l e c t e d works, which includes a substantial c r i t i c a l introduction in English. Igtida Hasan observes that although Jur'at i s generally considered to be a Lakhnavi poet, he i s r e a l l y one generation too old to have been part of what became known as the Lucknow School. See K u l l i v a t - i Jur'at, V o l . I l l , pp.34-38. - 4 -The Standard Notion of Two Schools My own introduction to Lakhnavi poetry's reputation came in reading the following anecdote: One evening toward the close of the eighteenth century, the popular poet of Lucknow, Qalandar Bakhsh Jur'at, was entertaining a musha'ira (poetic assembly) with his r e c i t a t i o n of a ghazal. Also present was Mir Taqi Mir, the most venerated l i v i n g master of Urdu poetry, who had, in the preceding few years, migrated to Lucknow from the Mughal c a p i t a l of Delhi. Jur'at was among the leading poets of Lucknow, and his poetry met with an enthusiastic response, the praise increasing with each verse. But when Jur'at sought the approval of Mir for his r e c i t a t i o n , the Dihlavi ustad (poetic master) i s said to have disgustedly pronounced Jur'at's work to be not poetry, but chumachati—descriptions of kissing and 12 cuddling. This story i s often r e t o l d , for i t s denunciation of a Lakhnavi's poetry by a D i h l a v i poet r e f l e c t s a stereotype in Urdu poetry which developed in l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m much l a t e r than the incident just reported—a c r i t i c i s m which i s known to nearly every modern reader of Urdu. 12. Cf. Shamsul Ulama Muhammad Husain Azad, Ab-i Hayat, Allahabad: Ram Narayan La i Beni Madhav, 1980, p.241; also c i t e d in M. Sadiq, A History of Urdu L i t e r a t u r e . London: Oxford University Press, 1964, p. 130; in Annemarie Schimmel, C l a s s i c a l Urdu Poetry from the Beginning to Iqbal, Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1975, p. 195; and in nearly every extant history of Urdu l i t e r a t u r e . - 5 -As a student of Urdu l i t e r a t u r e , I had heard the names of Nasikh and A t i s h — t h e two Lakhnavi poets featured in t h i s study—but had never read them. The few surveys of Urdu poetry available in English reported that Atish and Nasikh had created a so-called decadent s t y l e , and had founded a Lucknow School of poetry. I wanted to learn more about t h i s decadent s t y l e , and what constituted the Lucknow school. Lucknow, as a center of Indo-Muslim culture, with i t s f a i r y - t a l e reputation, i s f a s c i n a t i n g , and the paradox of i t s place in history i s quite i n t r i g u i n g : i t i s acclaimed as the quintessential symbol of what Muslim culture in India achieved, yet i s simultaneously denounced today for the s o c i e t a l immorality, waste and decadence of i t s past, as w i l l be seen. To explore t h i s paradox, and to study the culture of Lucknow, as a complement to recent work done on i t s p o l i t i c a l 14 history, was a motivating force behind t h i s study. Reading what I could f i n d of the poetry of Nasikh and Atish did not s a t i s f y my c u r i o s i t y . From the b r i e f selections 14. Cf. Richard B. Barnett, North India Between Empires: Awadh, the Muahals. and the B r i t i s h . 1720-1801. Berkeley: University of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1980; Michael H. Fisher, "The Imperial Court and the Province: A S o c i a l and Administrative History of P r e - B r i t i s h Awadh," Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Chicago, 1978; Thomas R. Metcalf , L a n d , Landlords. and the  B r i t i s h Raj.: Northern India in the Nineteenth Century. Berkeley: University of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1979; Veena Talwar Oldenburg, The Making of Colonial Lucknow. 1856-1877. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984. - 6 -a v a i l a b l e , both seemed to be very much l i k e most of the other Urdu poets I had read in s i m i l a r l y l i m i t e d volume. True, Nasikh's language seemed heavily Persianized, and therefore d i f f i c u l t l y ornate, while A t i s h often read more e a s i l y and provided fewer l e x i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s . But they reminded me, respectively, of what I had seen in Ghalib and Sauda, or in Mir and Dard, who were considered to be the founders and standard bearers of the Delhi School of poetry. Where, exactly, lay the d i s t i n c t i o n between the two so-called schools? As a student of the Urdu ghazal (albeit the ghazals of mostly D i h l a v i poets heretofore), I found that Nasikh and Atish both f u l f i l l e d my expectations of the genre, and that reading them was a pleasure. What was i t that caused so much consternation in the c r i t i c s ? What was so objectionable about t h i s poetry, how was i t d i f f e r e n t from Di h l a v i poetry, and what was I missing in not being more offended by i t ? It seemed a strong p o s s i b i l i t y that the c r i t e r i a brought to bear i n the judgments I read of Lakhnavi poetry (which were so d i f f e r e n t from my own) were grounded more in c u l t u r a l r i v a l r y between Delhi and Lucknow than on s t r i c t l y defined l i t e r a r y p r i n c i p l e s . Names widely hailed in one generation as creators of a new poetic language are ra r e l y dropped f l a t in the next without s i g n i f i c a n t reasons. What were those reasons? Delving into l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m , where the terms "Lucknow - 7 -and Delhi Schools" had been coined, I read much about the sensuousness and degeneracy of the Lakhnavi populace. Far less prominently featured were the actual l i t e r a r y t r a i t s which distinguished Lucknow's poetry from that of Del h i . It also seemed that the poets favored by c r i t i c s tended to be 15 la b e l l e d " D i h l a v i , " even when th e i r domicile was Lucknow; while the poets whose work was less favored tended to be grouped with the Lakhnavis.^ It also emerged, rather quickly, that the two most important Urdu c r i t i c s whom 17 everyone else c i t e d repeatedly, and whose opinions understandably carry tremendous weight, were both D i h l a v i s . Furthermore, they were both students of the two most prominent ustads who had adorned the l a s t c u l t u r a l l y active Mughal court 18 at D e l h i , that of Bahadur Shah Zafar. The following she'r (couplet, verse) by Shaikh Imam Bakhsh Nasikh (1771-1838), also known as the "Imam of 15. Mir, Mushafi, and A t i s h , for example. 16. In Ahmed A l i ' s Golden T r a d i t i o n . for example, Zauq's poetry i s characterized "by p o l i s h of language and didacticism" [p.58 fn.6.]; by "the perfections of labor, didacticism, embellishment and p o l i s h of phrase and s t y l e ; " [p.218] and that "even Zauq...displayed the decay of thought [that] had become apparent i n the f l e s h l y school [ i e . in Lakhnavi poetry]." [p.274] Polished language and embellishment are o f t - c i t e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s attributed to Lakhnavi poetry, as w i l l be seen. 17. i . e . Maulana Azad and Khvaja A l t a f Husain H a l i . 18. The ustads were Zauq and Ghalib, respectively. - 8 -19 \* i# L a k h n a v i y a t f u l f i l l s the worst expectations of the "Two Schools" stereotype, to the extent that i t i s p h y s i c a l l y 20 e x p l i c i t and sensual in nature: {N:I.70.4} ShSkJi ahu hai bhaven ankhen hain chashm-i,Shu Mashk nSfa tha koi naf men gar t i l hota. Your eyebrows are s o f t , fuzzy antlers Your eyes those of the gazelle: Were there a mole on your navel It would be a gland of musk. Whereas Dihlaviyat ( l i t e r a l l y , "Delhi-ness"), of whom one of the acknowledged masters i s Mir Taqi Mir, might be exemplified by a she'r l i k e the following: y {Mir:V. 11.1} 'Ishq hamare k_hy51 para hai khv5b gai aram gaya _ 9 J i k3 jana thahr raha hai subh gaya ya sham gaya. Since my thoughts have fixed upon love repose eludes me, dreams have f l e d — Imminent death i s now quite c e r t a i n , 19. Dr. Sayyid Abdullah refers to Nasikh as the "Imam of the Lucknow School" i n his essay "NSsikh k i Mansukh S h a ' i r i f r o m V a l i se iqbai Tak, 3rd ed. Lahore: Maktab Khayaban-i Adab, 1966, p.224. Lakhnaviyat translates roughly as "Lucknow-ness." 20. Although i t does not allude s p e c i f i c a l l y to kissing and cuddling. 21. K u l l i y a t - i Nasikh. Lucknow: Naval Kishore, 1891, Divan-i Avval, p.28. 22. K u l l i y a t - i Mir. Allahabad: Ram Narayan Lai Beni Madhav, 1972, volume I, p.596. - 9 -w i l l i t come by dusk or dawn? In the world of the ghazal, an entire spectrum separates the two she'rs, although they both f i t within that spectrum by virtue of being inspired by the experience of love, or 'ishq. Descriptions of the Beloved's beauty form a ce n t r a l , stock theme in the ghazal, but Nasikh's graphic metaphors—except for the gazelle-eyes—represent a shocking departure from the standard images evoked upon this theme. For example, the 'ashiq (Lover) might refer, in any given she'r, to the down on the Beloved's cheeks, to the lovely arch of his/her eyebrow; or to his/her t a l l , slim, willowy stature; but to draw attention to her limbs or navel would be thought of as being rather o f f - c o l o r . As a prominent Urdu c r i t i c noted, "there i s an element of (disagreeable) eroticism in talking about the navel and the mole on it."23 Mir's verse, on the other hand, conforms to the notion of the ghazal as the ideal expression of that l o f t i e s t human experience, 'ishq. The image of this she'r i s that of the 'ashig's tormented state as he meditates on the idea (tasavvur) of the unattainable Beloved. He anticipates death, the inevitable end for any true 'ashiq. The Beloved's identit y remains ambiguous in Mir's verse, and this ambiguity provides much of the ghazal's special appeal: i t i s not apparent whether the mahbub (Beloved) i s male or female, human 23. S.R. Faruqi, Personal Correspondence, 25 May 1984. - 10 -or d i v i n e . The d i s t r a c t i o n which the 'ashiq describes i s appropriate to a l l of those p o s s i b i l i t i e s . Unlike the 24 e x p l i c i t l y profane love referred to in Nasikh's verse, the emotion described by the Lover i n Mir's verse i s l i f e - f o r s a k i n g . This 'Sshiq does not even hope f o r , l e t alone refer to, the physical union with his Beloved which i s implied by Nasikh's reference to her navel. Mir's she'r therefore affirms the ideal nature of the ghazal so important to i t s audience. If the above two couplets were an adequate representation of the essence of Dihlavi and Lakhnavi poetry, then there would be l i t t l e problem with the c r i t i c a l theory which divides the two bodies of poetry into separate schools. The characterization of Lakhnavi poetry as a "vehicle for coquetry, blandishments, coarse language and enumerations of 25 feminine beauty" which " g l o r i f i e s the e r o t i c pleasures of 2 6 the f l e s h " and the notion that D i h l a v i poetry was " r i f e with the pain of existence and the sorrow of love.. .founded 27 upon the Dihlavi legacy of Sufism" might also then be more 24. While Nasikh's verse also maintains ambiguity with reference to the Beloved's gender, there i s no doubt that the physical attributes described are those of a human. 25. A.L. Siddiqi in Lakhna'u ka Dabistan-i S h 5 ' i r l . Lahore; Urdu Markaz, 1955, p.47. 26. Ahmed A l i , The Golden T r a d i t i o n . New York: Columbia University Press, 1973, p.212. 27. Nurul Hasan Hashmi, D i l l l kj. Dabistan-i S h a ' i r i , Lucknow: Uttar Pradesh Urdu Akedmi, 1971, 1980, p.13. - 11 -persuasive. But the two verses just c i t e d are not completely representative. From the same two poets, each considered the exemplar of his p a r t i c u l a r dabistan. one can as read i l y encounter she'rs which would reverse the above characterizations: Ham zab3n-i shama' se sunte hain h i j r - i yar men Chahiye ghul ghul ke marna 'ishq ke azar men. From the candle's tongue I hear what to do separated from the Beloved: In Love's inferno I, too, should melt and waste away. Gundh ke goya p a t t i gul k i voh tarkib banal hai Rang badan ka tab dekho jab c h o l i bhlge pasine men. Look how her body takes on the look of a mound of kneaded rose-petals When the sweat soaks through her bright red blouse. 28 The former of these two she'rs i s by Nasikh and the l a t t e r 29 by Mir. Here i t i s Nasikh who evokes the poignant p l i g h t of the su f f e r i n g 'ashiq. employing the popular image of the candle-flame. Mir's she'r evokes a v i v i d image, too, but i t s eff e c t i s e r o t i c and not p l a i n t i v e . Nor does i t exude the 28. Nasikh, K u l l i y a t , Divan-i Avval, p.55. 29. K u l l i v a t . Divan-i Chaharum, volume I, p.596. - 12 -" l o f t i n e s s of thought" which c r i t i c s allege characterizes Dihlavivat . At t h i s point one might well ask the question, "How representative are these examples of the poetry of Mir and Nasikh; and of D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi ghazal in general?" According to the Two School theory's characterizations, the f i r s t p air of couplets i s quite representative, while the second i s an anomalous exception. Short of conducting a protracted survey of a l l c l a s s i c a l poetry, one i s l e f t to consult l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m in order to discern what characterizes each body of poetry. But so widespread has been the impact of the Two School theory that Dihlavi and Lakhnavi poetry are almost always discussed with 30 constant reference and comparison to one another. Poetry being seen e s s e n t i a l l y as an expression of c u l t u r e , much of that cross-referencing has focused upon Delhi and Lucknow as c u l t u r a l centers (marakiz), and upon how the two c i t i e s and their s o c i e t i e s are understood to have d i f f e r e d . In the case of Lakhnavi poetry, most c r i t i c s have described the society of Lucknow as l e i s u r e d , pleasure-loving and courtesan-pursuing, and said: "That was Lakhnavi society, and i t s poetry i s a 31 v i v i d r e f l e c t i o n of that culture." Entrapped in the Two School theory, Lakhnavi poetry has 30. Examples are given in Chapter II's discussion of Lakhnavivat and Dihlaviyat below. 31. M. Sadiq, A History of Urdu L i t e r a t u r e . p.121. - 13 -been treated as the l i t e r a t u r e of a p a r t i c u l a r l y anomalous, and somehow unworthy, time and place i n Indo-Muslim hi s t o r y , rather than as l i t e r a t u r e composed in an Urdu markaz during a time when Urdu poetry as a whole became firml y established as the l i t e r a t u r e of Indian Islam. In order to assess i t s l i t e r a r y value in the broader terms of c l a s s i c a l Urdu l i t e r a t u r e , Lakhnavi and D i h l a v i poetry both must be removed from the context of the Two School theory and placed in the greater context of the c l a s s i c a l Urdu g h a z a l — a l i t e r a r y genre which developed and flourished over a period of nearly two centuries. One Urdu c r i t i c , A l i Javad Z a i d i , has indeed come f o r t h 32 to challenge the Two School theory, arguing that "the designators of the Two Schools have simply delineated a few s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Lucknow [rather than delineating s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Delhi as w e l l ] " and that "close scrutiny reveals that those same c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are also 33 found i n Delhi and found in ample quantity." Despite the considerable merits and strength of his arguments, Zaidi does not seem to have dissuaded the Urdu audience away from the Two School theory: a number of important works have been published since 1970 which f r e e l y refer to the Delhi and Lucknow "schools" and they w i l l be noted. 32. In Do Adabi I s k u l , Lucknow: U.P. Urdu Akedmi, 1970. 33. Do Adabi Is k u l. p.15. - 14 -The Present Approach to the Two Schools The present study complements Zaidi's rejection of the Two School theory, r e i t e r a t i n g that the school-designating c r i t i c s can be challenged r e a d i l y on the i r own terms, but i t s two-fold method d i f f e r s from that of Z a i d i . F i r s t the major steps in the theory's development in l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m over time w i l l be traced for the English audience, and much of the c r i t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e which has dealt with Lakhnavi poets and poetry w i l l be examined and reinterpreted. Facts of the Two School theory's genesis provide one basis for ref u t a t i o n , for t h i s l i t e r a r y d i s t i n c t i o n appears to have developed to a great degree on e x t r a - l i t e r a r y c r i t e r i a . Secondly, in contrast to the method of poetic analysis employed by others, t h i s study compares a controlled sample of Dihlavi and Lakhnavi ghazal poetry based on examination of st r u c t u r a l variables inherent in the genre, and discusses their influence on poets' thematic choices. One purpose of th i s method i s to demonstrate that, whether the comparison i s based on theme (mazmun) or on formal structure (zamln), differences between Lakhnavi and D i h l a v i poetry do not occur in c h a r a c t e r i s t i c enough or observable enough patterns of frequency to warrant "school" designations for the respective poets of Delhi and Lucknow. This both bo l s t e r s , and provides one possible corroboration f o r , Zaidi's argument. It may also be seen as an attempt to address the need which Zaidi announces for less " u n s c i e n t i f i c " (na-sayinsi) approaches to - 15 -the Two School question. As far as I know, t h i s i s the f i r s t attempt to analyze D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi poetry using t h i s method. The ghazal's inherent structure i s posited here as the es s e n t i a l and most important force to determine a l l Urdu poets' compositional choices, be the poets D i h l a v i or Lakhnavi: previous studies, including Z a i d i ' s , have a l l selected verses for comparison on the basis of thematic content, examining poets' s p e c i f i c s o c i a l environments as determinants. A f i n a l aspect of the present refutation i s based on contradictions i n the Two School theory's characterization of Lucknow's two primary ghazal poets. Although Nasikh and Atish were contemporaries and, reputedly, co-founders of the so-called Lucknow School, c r i t i c s emphasize that "the s t y l e of 34 these two masters i s completely d i f f e r e n t . " In f a c t , some recent scholarship goes so fa r as to designate separate schools (dabistSns) for the pupils of Nasikh and Ati s h , creating not only the dabistan-i Lakhna'u and the dabistan-i - 35 D i l l i but the dabistan-i A t i s h and the dabistan-i NSsikh. The question w i l l be raised as to how two poets could have simultaneously founded a Lucknow school of poetry d i s t i n c t from the Di h l a v i poetry and yet write in "completely d i f f e r e n t 34. Maulana Azad, Ab-i Hayat. Allahabad: Ram Narayan La i Beni Madhav, 1980, p.355. 35. See e s p e c i a l l y Shah Abdus Salam, Dabistan-i A t i s h . Delhi: Maktaba-i Jami'a Limited, 1977. - 16 -s t y l e s , " one of which i s the s t y l e that characterizes the r i v a l "Delhi School." In l i g h t of these points of r e f u t a t i o n , the underlying cause for the Two School d i s t i n c t i o n w i l l be argued as, e s s e n t i a l l y , the r e s u l t of a c u l t u r a l r i v a l r y between Delhi and Lucknow, p a r t i c u l a r l y the reaction of India's Mughal- and D e l h i - i d e n t i f i e d c u l t u r a l e l i t e against Lucknow as Delhi's 36 c u l t u r a l successor. It w i l l be argued that the h i s t o r i c a l p o l a r i z a t i o n between Nasikh and A t i s h p a r a l l e l s the p o l a r i z a t i o n between Lakhnavi and Dihlavi poetry; that both po l a r i z a t i o n s follow an established pattern which i s perhaps more convenient as a discursive device than i t i s r e f l e c t i v e of l i t e r a r y f a c t s ; and, f i n a l l y , that these two p o l a r i z a t i o n s ultimately contradict one another and weaken the premises of the Two School theory. The best j u s t i f i c a t i o n for a study featuring the poetry of Nasikh, A t i s h and lesser-known nineteenth century poets i s to bring t h e i r work back into c i r c u l a t i o n . This i s e s p e c i a l l y true for Nasikh, the "Imam of the Lucknow School," since his work has suffered greater suppression than that of A t i s h . It i s also true for D i h l a v i poets l i k e Shah Nasir, whose s t y l e has been compared to that of the Lakhnavis, and whose work 36. While Lakhnavis may also be assumed to have participated in the r i v a l r y , the e a r l y l i t e r a r y c r i t i c s whose work appears to have provided the foundation for the Two School theory were, s i g n i f i c a n t l y , D i h l a v i s . - 17 -also seems to have been larg e l y suppressed. The work of a l l but the best-known—and, therefore, best-studied—poets c a l l s for greater attention, and can shed l i g h t on the development of Urdu l i t e r a t u r e as a whole. Examples of both Lakhnavi and D i h l a v i p o e t r y — i n c l u d i n g Nasikh, Atish and Shah Nasir as well as Ghalib, Momin, Zafar and Z a u q — w i l l be drawn upon to substantiate the arguments put f o r t h . A l l t r a n s l a t i o n s , unless otherwise noted, are o r i g i n a l . My hope i s that t h i s study w i l l begin to f i l l i n some h i s t o r i c a l gaps in our understanding of Urdu's l i t e r a r y and c r i t i c a l development, and w i l l also encourage other western students of the c l a s s i c a l ghazal to study Urdu poets other than just the "Four p i l l a r s . " The need for i t cannot be denied. 37. However, larger-scale studies of these poets w i l l have to come from others than myself. - 18 -CHAPTER I LITERARY TENETS Q_F_ THE TJJO SCHOOL THEORY The Two School theory serves, fundamentally, as an organizing p r i n c i p l e for surveying Urdu poetry. Its f i r s t tenet, i m p l i c i t l y , i s that nearly every major Urdu poet can be considered either a D i h l a v i or a Lakhnavi because the overwhelming bulk of c l a s s i c a l poetry was composed in these two c u l t u r a l centers (marakiz) of Muslim India. Though there i s universal agreement that the Delhi School was anteceded by Dakhni poetry from Muslim courts in southern India; and that the c l a s s i c a l ghazal t r a d i t i o n ended with the death of Dr. Muhammad Iqbal (d.1938), c l a s s i c a l poetry ( s p e c i f i c a l l y the ghazal) i s understood by the c r i t i c s to be pri m a r i l y that which was composed from about the middle of the eighteenth century to the late-middle nineteenth century in the two great seats of culture: Delhi and Lucknow. The second tenet, as has been indicated, i s that Lakhnavi and D i h l a v i poets wrote in c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t s t y l e s . The terms by which these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t y l e s are known are Dihlaviyat and Lakhnaviyat. The l i t e r a t u r e of the Two School theory i s e s s e n t i a l l y comprised of various c r i t i c s ' assays at defining Dihlaviyat and Lakhnaviyat. Nurul Hasan Hashmi, the author of D i l l l ka Dabistan-i S h a ' i r i . a leading reference work on D i h l a v i poetry in the context of the TWO School theory, o f f e r s the following description: - 19 -"Dihlaviyat i s the name of a point of view, an outlook, an i n t e l l e c t u a l s i m p l i c i t y , a poetic temperament, in order to comprehend which a step-by-step comparison with Lakhnaviyat w i l l be made..." Abul Lais Siddiqi's primary d e f i n i t i o n of Lakhnaviyat i s : "What i s meant by Lakhnaviyat in poetry and l i t e r a t u r e i s that s p e c i a l q u a l i t y which the early poets of Lucknow adopted and established, and whose sp e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s d i s t i n g u i s h i t from t r a d i t i o n a l poetry..." Perhaps the most common att r i b u t e s of Lakhnavi poetry in the eyes of the c r i t i c s are sensuality and effeminacy: "A general effeminacy (zananapan) was born i n Lucknow*s populace and society and i t s influence i s manifest in the poetry as well...From a survey of Lucknow divans a det a i l e d index of women's jewels, dress, and adornments can be compiled. Furthermore i t s [Lakhnavi poetry's] idiom and expression i s often that of the zanana. The poets of Delhi do not speak in women's idiom ( b o l i ) . " Besides effeminacy, other non-traditional features of Lakhnaviyat are said to be (1) new conventions in describing the Beloved's beauty which pay spec i a l attention to her pa r t i c u l a r items of apparel (as suggested above by Nadvi's 1. "Dihlaviyat Kya Hai?" in D i l l i kJ. Dabistan-i S J i a ' i r i , pp. 257-327. 2. This notion of D i h l a v i poetry as " t r a d i t i o n a l " and of Lakhnavi poetry as a departure from t r a d i t i o n c a r r i e s profound implications, which are explored in the f i n a l chapter's c u l t u r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the Two School theory. 3. Abul Lais S i d d i q i , Lakhna'u k5 DabistSn-i S h a ' i r i . Lahore: Urdu Markaz, t h i r d e d i t i o n , 1967, p.39. 4. Nadvi, She'rui Hind, vol.1, pp.204-5. - 20 -i n i t i a l d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c ) and (2) a tendency toward mu'inula bandi. or repartee between the 'ashiq and the mahbOb.5 Both of these tendencies are thought to weaken the conventional ambiguity of the Beloved's i d e n t i t y and gender. The f i r s t point not only suggests very strongly that the Beloved i s female,** but also that she i s unequivocally mortal. Not only gender ambiguity, but also the Divine/human ambiguity are important parts of the t r a d i t i o n a l ghazal. Based la r g e l y on the Lakhnavi convention of elaborately enumerating the [female] Beloved's dress and adornments, c r i t i c s have argued that the Lakhnavi ghazal i s almost devoid of s p i r i t u a l 7 or mystical thought or emotion. That p a r t i c u l a r charge i s perhaps the most devastating condemnation that could be made, since i t a l t e r s the entire nature of ghazal expression, robbing i t of i t s e s s e n t i a l Truth (haqiqat). o Mu'Smila bandi (amorous banter, repartee) i s also consistently l i s t e d as a feature of Lakhnaviyat: 5. Both features are apparently attributed to the influence of courtesans in Lakhnavi society. See Nadvi, She'rui Hind. vol.1, p.204. 6. See Andalib Shadani's f i r s t point of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n i n "Lakhnavi S h a ' i r i k i Chand Kjiususiyat" from Tahqiq k i Roshni  Men, Lahore: Shaikh Ghulam A l i and Sons, 1963, p.249: "Lakhnavi poets focused on a female Beloved while...the Beloveds of the Di h l a v i poets were foppish young boys..." 7. Nadvi, She'rui Hind., p.209: "Sho1 r a - i Lakhna'u ke kalSm men  rOhSnl jazbat bahut kam pa'e jate hain." 8. This term i s discussed further in l a t e r chapters. - 21 -"The general s t y l e of Lakhnavi poets i s mu'Smila band! which, spreading over a l l , created the tenor of the marketplace, and one does not, therefore, f i n d the vigor-ous and genuine s t y l e that i s found i n the writings of the poets of Delhi..." Mu'amila bandi i s f e l t to debase the Beloved's t r a d i t i o n a l l y superior p o s i t i o n with regard to the 'ashiq insofar as repartee implies greater equality than would be expected between a supplicant and his omnipotent bestower—or non-bestower—of favors. One reason for t h i s i s that a previous union (visal) i s often implied in verses of mu'Smila bandi. While physical union with a courtesan i s not uncommon, the t r a d i t i o n a l ghazal has been a poetry of love i n s e p a r a t i o n . ^ The courtesan may not always bestow her physical favors on a l l the men who frequent her salon and exchange clever and l i v e l y witticisms with h e r 1 * but she c e r t a i n l y does make herself available to the select few who are w i l l i n g to pay a high enough fee. To equate the Beloved with such a woman i s h e r e t i c a l to the ghazal's noble t r a d i t i o n . Language usage i s another area where the Two School c r i t i c s d i s t i n g u i s h between the more t r a d i t i o n a l poetry of 9. Nadvi, p.211. 10. Recall the quintessential she'r by Ghalib which was c i t e d in the background discussion of ghazal conventions: "yih na t h i hamSri gismat kih v i s S l - i ygr hota/ agar ajjx j i t e rahte yahl  i n t i z S r hota." 11. Cf. Mirza Ruswa, The Courtesan of Lucknow. Khushwant Singh and M.A. Husaini, trans., Delhi: Hind Pocket Books, n.d., pp.55-56. - 22 -Delhi and that of Lucknow. xhey argue that Lakhnavi poets 12 employ too much word-play, and that i t i s employed in a base fashion; s i m i l a r l y , that they a f f e c t excessive delicacy of expression which results in abstruseness of thought rather than "charming and d e l i g h t f u l constructions which resulted from the 13 Persian and D i h l a v i poets' usage of language." C r i t i c s o v e r a l l f i n d Lakhnavi poetry to exhibit "a c e r t a i n 14 v u l g a r i t y , " and t h i s i s t i e d to t h e i r use of language in several ways. F i r s t l y , the desired d i c t i o n of the ghazal i s elegant and p l a i n t i v e , employing words and phrases which allude to greater layers of meaning than are obvious from t h e i r 15 surface d e f i n i t i o n s . To be too s p e c i f i c i s to overstate oneself, and that i s considered vulgar in noble (sharif) society, which has been the ghazal's primary venue.1** 12. " r i ' g y a t - i l a f z i " — N a d v i ' s f i f t h point of d i s t i n c t i o n , She_'riiX Hind, p.210. 13. Nadvi, pp.212-13. The expression used to indicate the charming and d e l i g h t f u l Persian constructions i s "F5rsi  taraklb" or " F f l r s l tarkiben." This point of Nadvi*s i s also a primary complaint of Maulana Azad's i n Rb-i HaySt. He discusses differences in idiom between the two c i t i e s on p.341; he also objects to the general d i c t i o n of Lucknow during Nasikh's and Atish's time [p.348.]; and observes that there are i n t e r n a l , i f not external, f a u l t s in Nasikh's poetic writing, pp.355-6. 14. Nadvi's s i x t h point, Sjie.'rjil Hind. I, p.210. 15. That was the great strength of Nasikh's and Ghalib's matla's that were featured in the prefatory discussion of ghazal conventions: "Mira sina hai mashriq a f t a b - i dSgh-i h i j r a i i k5..." and "Yih na t h i hama*ri qismat..." 16. For a discussion of shargfat and i t s r e l a t i o n to Urdu poetry, see Chapter XI of t h i s study. - 23 -Secondly, the excessive wordiness of Lakhnavi poets i s considered to render t h e i r poetic output frivolous-. One c r i t i c claims that t h i s f r i v o l o u s love of word play contributed to a trend of much-lengthened ghazals in Lucknow which resulted in " r i d i c u l o u s resolution of qafiyas and, therefore, degraded themes," while "the poets of Delhi, i n accordance with t r a d i t i o n , generally wrote short ghazals and thereby avoided s u p e r f l u i t y and degraded themes." 1 7 This general outline of the Two School c r i t i c s ' l i t e r a r y d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n between the poetry of Lucknow and that of Delhi has been abstracted from the numerous sources upon which t h i s study draws. Although necessarily abbreviated, i t includes a l l the major d i s t i n c t i o n s a r t i c u l a t e d in relevant l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m . The theory's a r t i c u l a t e d elements of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n rest l a r g e l y in the realms of thematic content, or subject matter, and in language usage. D i s t i n c t i o n s of spe c i a l note are the Lakhnavi poets' attention to the d e t a i l s of female dress and adornment and the Lakhnavis' elaborate d i c t i o n , as opposed to the s p i r i t u a l i t y and F a r s i tarakib (Persian manner of verbal construction) of D i h l a v i poetry. It may be said that these two key elements—elaborate d i c t i o n and d e t a i l s of female a p p a r e l — a r e thought by c r i t i c s to render an 17. This i s Nadvi's t h i r d point of d i s t i n c t i o n between the two schools, She'rui Hind, p.208. Azad, too, on p.81 of A b-i Hayat. mentions the degraded themes which predominate in the Urdu ghazal of the nineteenth century, e s p e c i a l l y in those of Lakhnavi poets, as does Khvaja A l t a f Husain Hali on p.130 of his Mugaddama-i Sh'er-o S h a ' i r i . - 24 -o v e r a l l aesthetic to Lakhnavi poetry that i s more sensual and fr i v o l o u s than i s found in the " t r a d i t i o n a l " ghazal, which i s better-preserved in D i h l a v i poetry. The next chapter begins to reconstruct the genesis and evolution of the Two School theory in Urdu l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m . - 25 -CHAPTER II TRACING T M GENESIS QF_ TMQ. SCHOOLS: Dihlaviyat and Lakhnaviyat As outsiders to the Urdu l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n , we look to secondary l i t e r a t u r e to provide insight into how the Urdu audience views i t s own l i t e r a t u r e . The l a s t chapter summarized what the Two School theory consists of in l i t e r a r y terms. In t h i s chapter we trace i t s development in Urdu c r i t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e and begin to c r i t i q u e i t s argumentation. Because the concepts of "Lakhnaviyat" and "Dihlaviyat" are fundamental to the Two School theory, i t i s important to come to an understanding of the values and assumptions which these terms connote for the modern reader of Urdu poetry. Some of the Two School c r i t i c s ' s p e c i f i c statements on Lakhnaviyat and Dihlaviyat are examined below. Two books have served as standard references for the past several decades on the subject of Lakhnavi and D i h l a v i poetry. Written as doctoral theses in 1942 and 1943 for Aligarh Muslim University, and e n t i t l e d Lakhna'u k_a Dabistan-i S h a ' i r i by Abul Lais S i d d i q i , and D i l l i ka Dabistan-i S h a ' i r i by Nurul Hasan Hashmi, they have been published and reprinted under the same t i t l e s several times each. Both books are primarily concerned with presenting biographical and h i s t o r i c a l information about the varied and numerous poets of Lucknow and Delhi, respectively. Both are modelled on the t a z k i r a form of - 26 -secondary l i t e r a t u r e . Where they d i f f e r from the t a z k i r a model i s that they both s t a r t from the premise that D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi poetry constitute two separate schools, and both authors attempt to define what c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s d i s t i n g u i s h one dabist5n from the other. Recall t h e i r d e f i n i t i o n s of Dihlaviyat ("Delhi-ness") and Lakhnaviyat ("Lucknow-ness"): "Dihlaviyat i s the name of a point of view, an outlook, an i n t e l l e c t u a l s i m p l i c i t y , a poetic temperament, in order to comprehend which a step by step comparison with Lakhnaviyat w i l l be made..." and "What i s meant by Lakhnaviyat i n poetry and l i t e r -ature i s that s p e c i a l q u a l i t y which the early poets of Lucknow adopted and established, and whose s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s d i s t i n g u i s h i t from t r a d i t i o n a l poetry..." And what were the t r a d i t i o n a l l i t e r a r y p r i n c i p l e s and values? Neither are they anywhere a r t i c u l a t e d by Hashmi or S i d d i q i , nor does the " t r a d i t i o n a l " vs. "non-traditional" p o l a r i t y between D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi poetry originate with these two c r i t i c s ' work.^ Both were building on e a r l i e r c r i t i c s ' s work, the most important of whom, for the purposes of 1. Tazkiras were biographical memoirs of poets, usually including selected samples tintikjiab] of t h e i r poetry. 2. Hashmi, D i l l i ka Dabistan-i Sha' i r I, p.257. 3. S i d d i q i , Lakhna'u ka Dabjstfln-i Sja&'iii, p.39. 4. A l i Javad Z a i d i , for example, writing in 1980, considers the Delhi-Lucknow d i s t i n c t i o n to have been in currency for seventy or eighty years; see D_o Adabi Iskul, Lucknow: Nasim Book Depot, 1980, Preface to the Second E d i t i o n . - 27 -t h i s study, were Maulana Azad, A l t a f Husain Hali and Abdus Salam Nadvi. Nadvi had been Hashmi's and Siddiqi's most recent predecessor. His t a z k i r a . She'rui Hind (1926), marks the point at which the Two School theory was formally a r t i c u l a t e d and i t s authority cemented in the Urdu c r i t i c a l t r a d i t i o n . Nadvi refers to an "Intermediate Era" of Urdu l i t e r a t u r e , the time following Mir and Sauda, as the time when "Lakhnavi poetry became established and Delhi's and Lucknow's two separate schools were founded...The period's various masters were Momin, Zauq, ShahgNasir, Ghalib, Nasikh, A t i s h , and t h e i r d i s c i p l e s . . . " Here Nadvi i s building on e a r l i e r work. In 5 b - i Hay5t (1880) a l l Lakhnavi poetry had been treated as an e n t i t y separate from the rest of Urdu poetry. D i h l a v i poetry was considered to comprise the remainder, and i t i s important that Lakhnavi poetry i s understood to have developed l a t e r than, as well as at variance with, the standard set by e a r l i e r , more " t r a d i t i o n a l " poets. While the above statement i s c l e a r l y i m p l i c i t in many of Azad's remarks in Ab-i Hayat. i t i s nowhere a r t i c u l a t e d as e x p l i c i t l y as I have just done. Even so i t i s a p r i n c i p l e upon which even the second work of Urdu c r i t i c i s m , Hali's Muqaddama. builds heavily. Without being e x p l i c i t , Azad gave voice to the Delhi-Lucknow c u l t u r a l r i v a l r y in his strongly-conveyed 5. Nadvi, She'rui Hind f vol.1, p.10. - 28 -preference for t r a d i t i o n a l ( i . e . Dihlavi) p r a c t i c e s . The concept of t r a d i t i o n , both in language and in culture, threads i t s way through the pages of Ab-i Hayat. which i s i t s author's reverent o f f e r i n g to a noble, dying t r a d i t i o n embodied in the Mughal culture of Del h i . Its death k n e l l seems to have begun to t o l l , for Maulana Azad, with the advent of culture and poetry in Lucknow. Later c r i t i c s , too, accepted and developed Azad's point of view. His immediate successor in l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m , though a chronological contemporary, was Khvaja A l t a f Husain H a l i , author of the Muqaddama-i She'r-o S h a ' i r l (1893) . 6 Ostensibly an introduction to Hali's own divan, the Mugaddama i s , i n f a c t , a protracted t r e a t i s e on the state of Urdu poetry i n general. Hali's p o s i t i o n i s that a l l Urdu poetry had suffered a deplorable decline during the nineteenth century, and he sets out a sort of agenda for the reform and re v i v a l of the Urdu ghazal. Of p a r t i c u l a r relevance to t h i s inquiry i s his c i t a t i o n of Lakhnavi poetry as a primary example of Urdu poetry's general decline. Lakhnavi poets, and discussion of Lucknow in general, figure far less in the Mugaddama than in S b - i Hayat, appearing almost i n c i d e n t a l l l y to i t s f o c a l discussion of Urdu l i t e r a t u r e ' s f a t e . Yet t h i s second work of Urdu c r i t i c i s m was extremely important in shaping a n a l y t i c a l c r i t e r i a for assessing Urdu poetry. Some of them—especially Hali's notions 6. H a l i , A l t a f Husain, Mugaddama-i She'r-o Sha ' i r i , Delhi: Maktaba Jami'a Limited, 1981. - 29 -of what constitute "natural p o e t r y " — l a t e r became integrated into the full-blown Two School theory. As such, they have had 7 an impact on most subsequent analysis of Lakhnavi poetry. The Mugaddama complements Ab-i HaySt in cert a i n ways, elaborating upon a number of issues given b r i e f e r mention in the e a r l i e r work. For example, H a l i echoes Azad's decrying of "worn-out themes" in the ghazal, and the need to have poetry " f u l l y express our every goal and every kind of desire in our g hearts." This l a t t e r point i s not argued prominently in the Mugaddama. although i t contributes s i g n i f i c a n t l y to the major thrust of Hali's t r e a t i s e . "Worn-out themes" run contrary to the concept of Reality ( a s l i y a t or ka 'inat ka mutali'a), and i n t e r f e r e with the achievement of a poetry which i s 9 "natural." Another g u a l i t y in Urdu poetry which Hali decries i s over-elaborated, or a r t i f i c i a l , language. Both q u a l i t i e s , in his eyes, contribute to an emotional shallowness, and thus to the moral decline of l i t e r a t u r e . Both Azad and Hali were reformers, but Azad's work i s not pr i m a r i l y a piece of reformist l i t e r a t u r e , while Hali's 7. Later discussion w i l l include, where appropriate, Hali's ideas about "natural poetry" since he came to represent an authority for l a t e r c r i t i c s drawing d i s t i n c t i o n s between Lakhnaviyat and pihJ . a v i y q t . 8. Azad, A b - i HaySt. p.51. 9. A s l i y a t and "ka 1inSt ka mutali'a—the examination of real t h i n g s " — a r e two expressions used by Hali to describe the q u a l i t y of R e a l i t y , which was one of three e s s e n t i a l features in necaral ["natural"] poetry. Natural poetry was the end sought by Hali's proposed reforms. - 30 -unabashedly i s , as l a t e r discussion w i l l demonstrate. Whatever need there was for ghazal reform, as perceived by Azad, seems to have l a i n mainly in the realm of a e s t h e t i c s — i n other words, a "getting back to the basics" of the existing Perso-Arabic l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n . H a l i , by contrast, c a l l e d for l i t e r a r y reform as part and parcel of a widespread moral reform i n Indian Islam. What they have in common i s a b e l i e f that the q u a l i t i e s most i n need of reform in Urdu poetry were to be found i n the verse of Lucknow's poets. Nadvi does not c a l l for reform but he does build on Azad's h i s t o r i c a l framework, d i r e c t l y r e i t e r a t i n g the major events and poets of the pSnchvan daur ( F i f t h Epoch) delineated in Ab-i HaySt. It had been in the context of that F i f t h Epoch that Azad discussed D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi poetry as two diverging streams, writing that the new age ushered in two kinds of poets: those who honored t h e i r ancestors and those who forged new paths of t h e i r own.1^ Along the new paths, according to Azad, lay f l i g h t s of fancy and l i n g u i s t i c creations of great de l i c a c y . Such an advent i s explained as natural in the course of any language's evolution and the point i s i l l u s t r a t e d by the observation that Delhi's l i n g u i s t i c authority had begun to be less s t r i c t l y observed within a generation a f t e r i t s a r t i s t i c e l i t e ' s migration to Lucknow. Examples of difference in idiom 10. Azad, Ab-i Hay5t. p.339: "Do qism ke ba-kamal nazar a'enge. Ek voh kih jinhon ne apne buzurgon k i p a i r v i ko din a'en samjha...dusre voh ' a l l dimagh jo f i k r ke dukhan se Ijad k i hava'en ura'enge." - 31 -were drawn from Nasikh's divan. In She'rui Hind Nadvi offered an even more formal statement of what Azad's writings had implied: "Although the delineation of a [ d i s t i n c t ] Lakhnavi s t y l e of poetry had already begun i n the time of Mushafi and Insha, even so a d i s t i n c t i o n of schools had not yet been formalized. But Nasikh and A t i s h further developed t h i s [special] s t y l e , and as a r e s u l t of t h i s , from t h e i r time onward two separate schools of Delhi and Lucknow were established, whose s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s can be distinguished from one another..." Conceptions of Dihlaviyat and Lakhnaviyat are t y p i c a l l y approached against the backdrop of Lucknow and Delhi as centers of culture (marakiz) . The conventionally held picture of Delhi and Lucknow as marakiz depicts r i v e r s of wealth flowing in Lucknow i n contrast to a desperation i n Delhi that gave r i s e to melancholic s p i r i t u a l i t y : "The p o l i t i c a l conditions created great despair. Delhi's poetry i s thus r i f e with the pain of existence and the sorrow of love. The legacy of Sufism had given b i r t h to a climate o f ^ s p i r i t u a l i t y , upon which D i h l a v i poetry was founded..." while in Lucknow "Rivers of wealth flowed, riches rained down from the sky...there was a p r o l i f e r a t i o n of pleasure-seeking, an excess of material wealth. This state of a f f a i r s brought about licentiousness and imbalanced thoughts and actions. ...The re s u l t was that poetry became a vehicle for 11. Nadvi, vol.1, p.204. The Mushafi and Insha referred to in t h i s statement were Shaikh Ghulam Hamdani Mushafi [1750-1824] and Insha Allah Khan Insha [1756-1818], who were of the f i r s t generation of poets in Lucknow, the generation which preceded Nasikh and A t i s h . 12. Hashmi, D i l l i kJ. Dabistan-i S h a ' i r l . p.13. - 32 -coquetry, blandishments, coarse language and enumer-ations of feminine beauty..." Hashmi also writes: "In comparison with Dihlaviyat's s p i r i t u a l i t y and attachment to sorrow Lucknow's s u p e r f i c i a l gaity seems th i n and cheap. Lakhnavi poets concentrated on enumerations of feminine beauty but omitted l o f t i n e s s of thought. There i s not that flame, that profound lamentation, that tone of longing which there i s in the poetry of Delhi..." The prejudice against Lucknow apparent in the remarks above has permeated nearly every c r i t i c a l work since the e a r l i e s t publications in Urdu l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m . This i s true even of those c r i t i c a l works which pay homage to the markaz of Lucknow, in affirmation of i t s importance as a major Urdu 15 center. For example, in his introduction to the chapter e n t i t l e d "Urdu Poetry's Two Different Schools: Delhi and Lucknow," 1 6 Nadvi features a she 1r by Nasikh which serves well to i l l u s t r a t e the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c depiction of Lucknow and Lakhnaviyat in l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m o v e r a l l : R l s t i ka n3m bhi i s shahr men sunte nahin 13. S i d d i q i , L-CS.., p.47. 14. Hashmi, D_.D_.S_., p.13. 15. Cf. such works as Si d d i q i ' s L.D_.S_., Nadvi's She'rui Hind. and Abdul Halim Sharar's Guzishta Lakhna 'u. Lucknow: Nasim Book Depot, 1974. 16. Nadvi, She'rui Hind, pp.204-215. - 33 -Kyofl na hon sab Lakhna'u ke kuche-o bazar kaj Straightforwardness in t h i s c i t y i s unknown even by name: Why then should not Lucknow's every lane and bazaar be crooked? The e f f e c t of t h i s introduction on the audience i s to associate Lucknow at once with crookedness and d e c e i t — l e a v i n g rectitude and forthrightness to the domain of the D i h l a v i s . I n d i r e c t l y , the reader has already been forewarned to expect 18 deviant poetry from Lakhnavi poets. It i s l i t t l e surprise, then, that Urdu readers f i n d crookedness, deceit and " u n t r a d i t i o n a l " poetic values in the poetry of Nasikh and Atish Lakhnavi; nor that, by the same token, readers approach Momin or Zauq or Ghalib as D i h l a v i s , expecting to see c h a r a c t e r i s t i c Dihlaviyat: l o f t y thought, s p i r i t u a l i t y , the "pain of existence and the sorrow of love." A l l the more unfortunate, in t h i s l i g h t , i s the omission of i l l u s t r a t i v e she'rs in Hashmi's and Siddiqi's d e f i n i t i o n s of Dihlaviyat and Lakhnaviyat. The c r i t i c s thereby miss what would have been a welcome opportunity to make e x p l i c i t what they mean by Dihlaviyat's " s p i r i t u a l i t y , " "rifeness with the pain of existence and sorrow of love;" and Lakhnaviyat's 17. Shaikh Imam Bakhsh Nasikh, DlvSn-i Duvvam. Lucknow: Naval Kishore, A.H. 1324, p.49. 18. We also saw t h i s notion of Lakhnavi poetry as a conscious departure from t r a d i t i o n r e f l e c t e d in Abul Lais Siddiqi's d e f i n i t i o n of Lakhnaviyat c i t e d above. - 34 -"licentiousness, coquetry and blandishments, etc." Furthermore, Hashmi's discussion of Dihlaviyat draws heavily on Si d d i q i ' s remarks about Lakhnaviyat. This implies a mutual understanding between the two c r i t i c s which requires no e x p l i c i t d e f i n i t i o n of terms from e i t h e r . Such i n t e r n a l cross-referencing leaves the outside reader with l i t t l e sense of what the c r i t i c s ' evaluative c r i t e r i a are. Although the g h a z a l — t h e genre implied by the more general term "Urdu poetry" unless otherwise s p e c i f i e d — i s known to exist in a realm independent of the temporal and p o l i t i c a l worlds (at least as far as subject matter i s concerned) i t i s p r e c i s e l y t h i s temporal, p o l i t i c a l world which Urdu c r i t i c s often evoke i n t h e i r l i t e r a r y a n a l y s i s . Their discussions of the two so-called dabistans become descriptions instead of the actual c i t i e s of Delhi and Lucknow—as perceived in retrospect by t h e i r c u l t u r a l successors, ivecall that the reason Hashmi and S i d d i q i posited for t h e i r characterizations of Lakhnavi poetry (as f l i r t a t i o u s and sensual) and D i h l a v i poetry (as s p i r i t u a l l y oriented and expressive of l o f t y thought) was that in the l a t e eighteenth century Delhi had been plundered and impoverished while Lucknow enjoyed wealth and l e i s u r e . In t h i s regard Hashmi and S i d d i q i were merely r e i t e r a t i n g conventional wisdom. 19. This missed opportunity i s s i g n i f i c a n t because i t exemplifies why understanding, analysis, and even refutation of the Two School theory are so elusive and d i f f i c u l t . - 35 -In other words, the c r i t i c s seem to have confused the concept of dabistan with that of markaz. While "markaz" s i g n i f i e s a locus of a c t i v i t y , "dabistan" s i g n i f i e s a group of poets who subscribe to c e r t a i n shared l i t e r a r y p r i n c i p l e s that d i s t i n g u i s h them from other poets i n t h e i r own t r a d i t i o n . D i l l * 111 Dabistan-i £hj.'ir_l and LaKhna'u. k l pa.bjstan.-i  S h a ' i r l serve very well as compendia of information and conventional wisdom regarding Lucknow and Delhi as marakiz though they contribute l i t t l e analysis that enhances understanding of the elusive question, "What comprises l i t e r a r y Dihlaviyat and Lakhnaviyat?" In t h e i r assumption that readers already know what i s implied by the terms "Lakhnaviyat" and " t r a d i t i o n a l poetry" Hashmi and S i d d i q i indicate that Nadvi's formal declaration of the existence of two schools for D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi poetry was already f i r m l y entrenched by the time t h e i r own books were being written. Nadvi's formal delineation of two schools, in turn, had met with no apparent opposition i n the world of Urdu l e t t e r s , most probably because i t merely made formal what had already been established as conventional wisdom by Maulana wzad and A l t a f Husain H a l i . Because of t h e i r importance in the Two School theory's leap from e x i s t i n g in an impressionistic form to becoming a concretely-argued l i t e r a r y d i s t i n c t i o n , Ab-i Hayat's and Hali's Muqaddama-i She'r-o S h a ' i r l ' s discussion of Lakhnavi poetry w i l l receive detailed examination. In summary, then, the publication of She'rui Hind in 1926 - 36 -represented a culmination of the Two School theory's t r a n s i t i o n from what may be seen as a prototypical idea in Azad's discussion of what kind of poetry honored t r a d i t i o n (Dihlavi) and what did not (Lakhnavi), through Hali's employment of D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi poetic examples to highlight the reforms required to insure Urdu's "naturalness," and into a f u l l y a r t i c u l a t e d d i s t i n c t i o n based on s p e c i f i c l i t e r a r y c r i t e r i a . Among those who took up and discussed these c r i t e r i a were Abul Lais. S i d d i q i and Nurul Hasan Hashmi in t h e i r studies of the two dabistSns. C r i t i c s in the middle decades of t h i s century, in turn, drew heavily on work such as Hashmi's and S i d d i q i ' s , contributing to the propagation of the Two School theory. One of i t s f i n a l r e i t e r a t i o n s has been Andalib Shadani's essay "A 20 Few Special C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Lakhnavi Poetry." This essay—which i s almost an exact restatement of Nadvi's argument in She'rui Hind—and A l i Javad Zaidi's challenge to the Two School theory based on refutation of Shadani's arguments, w i l l 21 be taken up in l a t e r chapters. The following chapter w i l l continue, b r i e f l y , to lay out a c u l t u r a l and h i s t o r i c a l context into which the Two School theory can be placed. 2 0 . In Tahgiq k i Raushni Men., Lahore: Shaikh Ghulam A l i and Sons Publishers, 1 9 6 3 , p p . 2 4 7 - 2 7 2 . 2 1 . See A l i Javad Z a i d i , Qo Adabi Is k u l . Lucknow, 1 9 7 0 . CHAPTER III CULTURAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND TO THE TWQ_ SCHOOL THEORY The marSkiz of Delhi and Lucknow f l o u r i s h e d , broadly speaking, at d i f f e r e n t times. Lucknow emerged as a center toward the end of the eighteenth century just as Delhi's c u l t u r a l efflorescence began to d e c l i n e . Lucknow's establishment as a center of culture was, in f a c t , the d i r e c t r e s u l t of Indian p o l i t i c a l events at t h i s time. Repeated invasions of the Mughal center at D e l h i — b y Persians, Afghans and Marathas—had rendered the c a p i t a l weak, impoverished, and generally d e s t i t u t e . The Navabs of Avadh, though also nominally serving as Vazirs of the Mughal empire, began to e s t a b l i s h themselves as v i r t u a l l y independent rul e r s to the east of the imperial c e n t e r . 1 They were able to achieve t h i s independence by v i r t u e of Avadh's wealth and r e l a t i v e s e c u r i t y , o f f the beaten track of the marauders. A d d i t i o n a l l y , the Navabs were able to off e r asylum and c u l t u r a l patronage on a grand scale, a t t r a c t i n g the destitute i n t e l l e c t u a l and a r t i s t i c e l i t e from D e l h i . I n i t i a l l y , patronage had come from Navab Shuja' ud-Daula 2 (r.1754-1775), whose c a p i t a l was at Faizabad: 1. For an excellent, f u l l study of t h i s process see Richard B. Barnett, North India Between Empires; Awadh, the Mughals. and the  B r i t i s h . 1720-1801, Berkeley: University of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1980. 2. I t i s the opinion of K.S.Santha and Iqtida Hasan, in K u l l i y a t - i Jur'at. p.21, that Shuja's wife, Sadr un-Nisa "Navab Begam" was an even greater patron than her husband. - 38 -"In Shuja's time v a r i o u s c l a s s e s of p e o p l e . . . e s p e c i a l l y from D e l h i , began po u r i n g i n [to Faizabad] . A r c h i t e c t s , e n g i n e e r s , p h y s i c i a n s , a r t i s a n s and poets f l o c k e d to the c i t y . . . " 1 3 Shuja's son and s u c c e s s o r , A s i f ud-Daula, i s perhaps the most important Navabi p a t r o n o f the a r t s . Upon h i s a s c e n s i o n to the t h r o n e , he moved the c a p i t a l and c o u r t from Faizabad t o Lucknow and began to pour enormous wealth i n t o b e a u t i f y i n g the c i t y and d e v e l o p i n g i t as a seat of c u l t u r e . During A s i f ' s r e i g n (1775-1797) the g r e a t e s t names i n Urdu l i t e r a t u r e migrated from D e l h i and Faizabad to Lucknow, a t t r a c t e d by the Navab's generous patronage. Among them were Sauda, Mir T a q i M i r , Mir Hasan, Soz, Insha, J u r ' a t , and M u s h a f i . Lakhnavi c u l t u r e — p a r t i c u l a r l y i t s poetry—became a legend w i t h i n a s i n g l e g e n e r a t i o n : the markaz e s t a b l i s h e d by A s i f ud-Daula f l o u r i s h e d f o r more than a c e n t u r y , and l a s t e d f o r n e a r l y two hundred years i n a l l : "The h i g h c u l t u r e of Lucknow was i n f u l l flower from the l a s t q u a r t e r of the e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y u n t i l the c o l l a p s e of the Lucknow monarchy i n 1856. I t a c t u a l l y s u r v i v e d , however, as long as the f e u d a l system s u r v i v e d i n U.P.— t h a t i s , u n t i l the B r i t i s h l e f t I n d i a i n 1947." A s i g n i f i c a n t by-product of Lucknow's new r o l e as the Urdu markaz was the i n t e n s e c u l t u r a l r i v a l r y between D e l h i and Lucknow which l i e s a t the heart of the Two School t h e o r y . T h i s r i v a l r y 3. K.S. Santha, Beaams of Avadh. p.9. 4. F a k h i r Husain, I n t r o d u c t i o n t o Abdul Halim Sharar'sLucknow: TJae L a s t Phase of, an O r i e n t a l C u l t u r e . Boulder: Westview P r e s s , 1976, p.13. - 39 -persisted for generations, and i s manifest in the words of nineteenth century writers as well as those of the twentieth. Though the stubbornness of venerated Dihlavis l i k e Mir** wavered l i t t l e despite his nearly thirty-year tenure as Lucknow's leading resident ustad. there was, mostly of necessity, some softening on the part of poets of the following generation. Insha A l l a h Khan INSHA (1756-1818), an emigre poet who became famous in Lucknow during the f i n a l quarter of the eighteenth century, indicates i n the following remarks a grudging acknowledgement of Lucknow's achievements (though he i s adamant i n a t t r i b u t i n g t h e i r cause to the e f f o r t s of emigre D i h l a v i s ) : "Is there anyone i n t h i s place of asylum [i.e.Lucknow] whose family house was b u i l t even a hundred years ago? Among men of l e t t e r s there i s not a sing l e house which could be even f i f t y years old...the reason Lucknow stands above other c i t i e s i s that poets who were born and beloved of Delhi have come to t h i s c i t y . Thus, Lucknow was moulded in Delhi's image, according to i t s r u l e , and i s i t s s p i r i t , i t s l i f e , i t s j a j i . . . " What lay at the heart of t h i s r i v a l r y between the two c i t i e s ? I would suggest that i t was the issue of c u l t u r a l authority, of which the role of patronage was a c r u c i a l element. Cu l t u r a l patronage i s a valuable p o l i t i c a l resource. The Navabs 5. Re c a l l that Mir c a l l e d the Lakhnavi poet Jur'at's poetry "chumachSti." 6. Darya-i Latafat [1807], Urdu t r a n s l a t i o n by B r i j Mohan Datatariya K a i f i , Aurangabad: Anjuman-i Taraqqi-i Adab [Deccan], 1935, p.117. A l i Javad Zaidi also points to the time of Navab Sa'dat A l i Khan [r.1801-1814] as the time when t h i s r i v a l r y was expressed f i r s t on a l i t e r a r y plane: "Lakhna'u aur D i l l l k i bahs. ghaliban Sa'dat A l l ke zamane men 'ilml-o adabi sath par p a h l i bar u t h i . . . " Do Adabi I s k u l . p.73. - 40 -of Avadh, in extending patronage to Delhi's leading l i g h t s after the demise of Delhi's court c u l t u r e , began to compete with the Mughal emperor for p o l i t i c a l and c u l t u r a l pre-eminence. Ostensibly, the patronage extended to Delhi's greatest exponents showed the Navabs to be l o y a l supporters of the empire, interested in bolstering i t s a r t i s t i c endeavors and helping to perpetuate i t s c u l t u r a l achievements. In f a c t , by drawing the great names to t h e i r own court the Navabs were also enhancing the i r own stature as r u l e r s . An understanding of t h i s phenomenon i s i m p l i c i t i n the following remarks by the Indian h i s t o r i a n K.S. Santha. They are a continuation of the passage c i t e d e a r l i e r , r e f e r r i n g to the growth of Faizabad as the c a p i t a l of Avadh: "[These] artisans and poets flocked to the c i t y to diminish the. glory o_£ Delhi ajid. to. enhance the richness g_f. Faizabad. The very seat of Muslim culture and c i v i l i z a t i o n was thus eclipsed by the emergence and r i s e of a new centre of culture at Faizabad." That the Navabs were well aware of the implications of t h e i r actions i s strongly suggested by the Lakhnavi writer, Abdul Halim Sharar: " [ A s i f ud-Daula] c o l l e c t e d to himself a l l the pomp and splendour that could be found in the world, and his ambition was that the magnificence and grandeur of no court should equal that of his own..." 7. Emphasis mine. 8. K.S. Santha, Beaams gJL Avadh , p. 9. 9. Lucknow: The Last Phase. p.48. - 41 -Other s c h o l a r s w r i t e t h a t L a k h n a v i s were v e r y keen t o c r e a t e a r i v a l c u l t u r e t o t h a t o f D e l h i . I n h i s H i s t o r y o f Urdu L i t e r a t u r e S a d i q s a y s : "Lucknow i s n o t c o n t e n t w i t h j u s t b e i n g t h e c o n t i n u a t o r o f t h e t r a d i t i o n s o f D e l h i i n l i f e and c i v i l i z a t i o n . . . I t w i s h e s t o e v o l v e a c i v i l i z a t i o n o f i t s own...to mould a new i d i o m o f i t s own and t o mark i t o f f from t h a t o f D e l h i . . . " 1 U R a s h i d Hasan Khan a l s o s t a t e s t h a t i n t h e new kingdom a need was f e l t f o r s t y l e s and manners o f s p e e c h , d r e s s and a r t i s t i c endeavor which would d i s t i n g u i s h L a k h n a v i c u l t u r e from t h a t o f D e l h i . 1 1 And A b u l L a i s S i d d i q i w r i t e s i n Lakhna'u ka D a b i s t a n - i ShJL'jrl: " J u s t as t h e Navab V a z i r o b t a i n e d freedom from t h e D e l h i c o u r t , L a k h n a v i s f r e e d t h e m s e l v e s i n e v e r y r e s p e c t ; new s t a n d a r d s a r o s e i n c u l t u r e and s o c i e t y , i n c l u d i n g new f a s h i o n s i n d r e s s , a p p a r e l and adornments. There a r o s e d i f f e r e n c e s i n p o l i t e d i s c o u r s e . I n keep-i n g w i t h a l l t h i s , w r i t e r s and p o e t s a l s o began t o r e b e l a g a i n s t t h e l i t e r a r y c o n v e n t i o n s w h i c h had been i n vogue [ i n D e l h i ] , T h e r e , i f i t had been e x p r e s s i v e o f n a t u r a l , s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d i d e a s , t h e n here th e s t a n d a r d was toward f a n c i f u l f a b r i c a t i o n ; t h e r e s i m p l i c i t y and p r o p r i e t y had p r e v a i l e d , w h i l e here i t w a s 2 e x c e s s i v e f o r m a l i t y and making a d i s p l a y o f a r t . . . " I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t where new s t y l e s a r o s e i n Lucknow 10. S a d i q , Qr>. C i t . . p.123. 11. see I n t i k h a b - i N5sikh. New D e l h i : Maktabah Jami'ah L i m i t e d , 1972, pp.10-13. T h i s i s t h e c o n t e x t i n which he e x p l a i n s N a s i k h ' s development o f a "new s t y l e " which he wanted t o s e t up " i n o p p o s i t i o n t o D i h l a v i y a t . " 12. S i d d i q i , L.B..S.., p.55. - 42 -they are seen by modern c r i t i c s to have manifested r e b e l l i o n against the t r a d i t i o n a l status quo. Even S i d d i q i , a c r i t i c who sin c e r e l y attempts to present a Lakhnavi perspective, sees the standards and norms of Delhi as ultimately a u t h o r i t a t i v e . The i n f a l l i b i l i t y of the Delhi markaz may be seen as a manifestation of the widespread (and well-recognized, by 13 historians) p o l i t i c a l phenomenon of Mughal legitimacy. During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, when Mughal power was no longer the strongest p o l i t i c a l l y or m i l i t a r i l y , and when numerous other powers (the Afghans, Marathas and B r i t i s h , to name a few) were competing to f i l l the vacuum gradually created by Mughal decline (that i s , by the time of the 1760s), t h i s s p e c i a l legitimacy was manifest in various ways. P e r c i v a l Spear observes that "The emperor's was the ultimate l e g a l authority in India and there was for his authority a s p i r i t of reverence and acceptance...[this] intangible but not n e g l i g i b l e authority of the imperial name explains the constant e f f o r t s of r i v a l p o l i t i c i a n s to get the imperial sanction for t h e i r acts, and i f possible, to keep the imperial person in t h e i r camps." Just as the p o l i t i c a l l y ambitious sought the rubber stamp of Mughal approval to j u s t i f y t h e i r claims over r i v a l s and those whom they aspired to c o n t r o l , so may Lucknow be understood to have sought a s i m i l a r stamp of legitimacy as the new 13. See Spear, Barnett, et. a l . 14. Twilight of. ths. M j j g M l s . , p.9. - 43 -s t a n d a r d - b e a r e r o f Mughal c u l t u r e . D e l h i , t o o , sought t o r e t a i n c o n t r o l o v er t h i s symbol o f l e g i t i m a c y . W h i l e unable t o m a i n t a i n c o n t r o l o v er p a t r o n a g e o f t h e a r t s because o f t h e r e v e r s a l i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s w h i c h i t s u f f e r e d a t t h e t i m e , D e l h i c o u l d s t i l l w i t h h o l d s a n c t i o n o f L a k h n a v i a r t i s t i c e f f o r t s by r e f u s i n g t o r e c o g n i z e them as s u c c e s s f u l , and so c o u l d w i e l d the modicum o f power i t h e l d by v i r t u e o f h i s t o r i c a l p r e c e d e n t . 1 * ' As we examine how t h i s e x e r c i s e o f power t i e s i n w i t h t h e a t t i t u d e s p r o p a g a t e d i n t h e Urdu c r i t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e o f a c e n t u r y l a t e r , we w i l l see t h a t t h e "modicum" o f power h e l d a s i g n i f i c a n c e n o t t o be u n d e r e s t i m a t e d by o u t s i d e r s t o I n d i a n c u l t u r e . 1 * * I n l i g h t o f t h e s e consequences o f L a k h n a v i p a t r o n a g e , one can a p p p r e c i a t e why some o f t h e emigre p o e t s and a r t i s t s r e a c t e d t o Lucknow w i t h a m b i v a l e n c e . D i h l a v i s o f t e n r e s i s t e d any i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h t h e i r new home, v o c i f e r o u s l y d i s d a i n i n g L a k h n a v i ways. S a d i q w r i t e s t h a t " d e s p i t e t h e m a n i f o l d a t t r a c t i o n s o f Lucknow and F a i z a b a d , and t h e m a g n i f i c e n t p a t r o n a g e he e n j o y e d t h e r e , Sauda k e e n l y y earned f o r D e l h i and i t s a s s o c i a t i o n s " and t h a t " t h i s n o s t a l g i c r e v e r s i o n . . . i s a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c he s h a r e s w i t h M i r and, i n f a c t , w i t h p r a c t i c a l l y 15. Whether t h e D i h l a v i s were a b s o l u t e l y d e l i b e r a t e i n t h e i r d e n i a l o f L a k h n a v i a c h i e v e m e n t s , o r whether t h e y were m e r e l y m a n i f e s t i n g a p a r o c h i a l a t t i t u d e i s d i f f i c u l t t o d e t e r m i n e . I t does n o t change t h e f o r c e o f t h e i r b e h a v i o r , however. 16. An i n t e r e s t i n g a s p e c t o f t h i s l e g i t i m a c y i s t h a t L a k h n a v i s d i d l i t t l e t o c h a l l e n g e t h e D i h l a v i s ' sense o f s u p e r i o r i t y , or t h e i r e x e r c i s e o f power and c u l t u r a l a u t h o r i t y . - 44 -a l l o t h e r p o e t s who had sought r e f u g e i n Lucknow. n 17 T h i s n o s t a l g i a f o r D e l h i , combined w i t h d i s d a i n f o r Lucknow, i s r e f l e c t e d i n t h e v e r s e s o f M u s h a f i and M i r below: Yarab shahar apna yun c c h u r a y a t u ne V i r a n e men mujh ko l a b i t h a y a t u ne Main a u r kahan ye Lakhna'u k i k h i l q a t A'e vae kya k i y a khudaya t u ne You've robbed me o f my own c i t y and l e d me i n t o t h i s w i l d e r n e s s : What can t h e r e be between me and t h e s e L a k h n a v i s ? Dear God, what have you done t o me? Kjiaraba D i l l i ka dah-chand b a h t a r Lakhna'u se t h a V a h i n ae kash mar j a t a s a r a s i m a na a t a yan How f a r b e t t e r t h a n Lucknow were t h e r u i n s o f D e l h i : Would t h a t I had d i e d back t h e r e , g t h a n l e t my madness l e a d me h e r e l ( Mir) The n o b l e s o f D e l h i c o u l d n o t h e l p but p e r c e i v e Lucknow and i t s c i t i z e n r y as p r o v i n c i a l u p s t a r t s . To p r e t e n d t h a t t h i s new c i t y c o u l d r e p l a c e t h e i r b e l o v e d and o n c e - m a g n i f i c e n t D e l h i as the c e n t e r o f Mughal c u l t u r e was t o add i n s u l t t o t h e i n j u r y o f h a v i n g been f o r c e d t o f l e e . D i h l a v i emigres t h e r e f o r e s e t th e m s e l v e s a p a r t from L a k h n a v i manners and customs i n e v e r y 17. S a d i q , Qr>. C i t . . p.83. 18. F o u r t h D i v a n , K u l l i y a t - i M i r . A l l a h a b a d : Ram Narayan L a i B e n i Madhav, 1972, volume I , p.597. (Mushafi) - 45 -c o n c e i v a b l e way, and t h e i r d i s t i n c t i o n s n a t u r a l l y extended t o the realm o f p o e t r y as w e l l . They l a y a t t h e h e a r t o f M i r ' s famous "chumachafrl" remark about J u r ' a t ' s p o e t r y . The c u l t u r e f e l t by I n d i a n Muslims t o be u n q u e s t i o n a b l y " l e g i t i m a t e , " t h e n , was Mughal c u l t u r e . The c i t y w hich c o u l d c l a i m t o be t h e Mughal markaz h e l d u l t i m a t e c u l t u r a l l e g i t i m a c y . I t i s i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h i s i d e a o f c u l t u r a l l e g i t i m a c y , I would a r g u e , t h a t t h e term " t r a d i t i o n a l " (and r e f e r e n c e s t o d e p a r t u r e s from t r a d i t i o n ) a r o s e i n Urdu c r i t i c s ' c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n s o f L a k h n a v i c u l t u r e . Because p o e t r y was, a f t e r the Urdu l a n g u a g e , the s i n g l e most i m p o r t a n t i d e n t i f i e r o f Indo-Muslim c u l t u r e , t o c h a r a c t e r i z e L a k h n a v i c u l t u r e as d e p a r t i n g from t h e " t r a d i t i o n a l " was, by e x t e n s i o n , t o negate i t s l e g i t i m a c y . I n t h e m i d d l e decades o f t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y D e l h i ' s c o u r t c u l t u r e began t o reemerge w i t h i n t h e w a l l s o f the Red F o r t , 19 under t h e a u s p i c e s o f t h e Mughal h e i r - a p p a r e n t , who was a l s o t h e p o p u l a r poet Bahadur Shah ZAFAR (1775-1862). Surrounded by the v e r y g i f t e d p o e t s Momin Khan MOMIN (1800-1851) , S h a i k h I b r a h i m ZAUQ (1789-1854), and M i r z a A s a d u l l a h Khan GHALIB (1797-1869), Bahadur Shah was a b l e t o sponsor t h e Mughal e m p i r e ' s — a n d D e l h i ' s — c u l t u r a l swan song. L a t e r g e n e r a t i o n s o f D i h l a v i s , b o l s t e r e d by t h i s f i n a l f l u r r y o f l i t e r e r y a c h i e v ement, began t o seek ways t o r e c l a i m f o r t h e m s e l v e s t h e paramount p l a c e 19. Z a f a r l a t e r became t h e l a s t Mughal emperor, Muhammad Bahadur Shah, r.1847-1857. - 46 -i n Urdu c u l t u r e . T h i s r e q u i r e d a d i m i n i s h i n g o f t h e p o s i t i o n which Lucknow had b u i l t up over t h e p r e c e d i n g h a l f - c e n t u r y , and was b r o u g h t about by what c o n s t i t u t e s something o f a campaign t o d i s c r e d i t Lucknow i n t h e a n n a l s o f Urdu l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m . Whether c o n s c i o u s l y o r n o t , t h i s campaign was e n g i n e e r e d and s e t i n motion by t h e p i o n e e r s o f l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m , Maulana Shamsul Ulama Muhammad H u s a i n AZAD (1830-1910) and K h v a j a A l t a f H usain HALI (1837-1914). I t w i l l be argued here t h a t i t was no 20 c o i n c i d e n c e t h a t t h e y were b o t h D i h l a v i s and s t u d e n t s o f the g r e a t masters Zauq and G h a l i b , r e s p e c t i v e l y . The purpose here has been t o o u t l i n e t h e h i s t o r i c a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s w h i c h n o u r i s h e d t h e Delhi- L u c k n o w r i v a l r y on a p o l i t i c a l as w e l l as c u l t u r a l l e v e l . Knowledge o f t h i s i n t e r - c i t y r i v a l r y h e l p s t o e l u c i d a t e t h e d i s t i n c t i o n s drawn by c r i t i c s between t h e p o e t r y o f t h e two m a r a k i z w h i c h e v e n t u a l l y became e x p r e s s e d f o r m a l l y i n t h e Two S c h o o l t h e o r y . Those d i s t i n c t i o n s , though s p o r a d i c a l l y h i n t e d a t i n v a r i o u s s h e 1 r s o f numerous p o e t s , and i n works l i k e I n s h a ' s D a r y a - i L a t a f a t as c i t e d above, b e g i n t o be d e v e l o p e d c o n s i s t e n t l y o v er t h e y e a r s from 1880 t o 1926, b e g i n n i n g w i t h Azad's A b - i Hayat and c u l m i n a t i n g i n N a d v i ' s S h e ' r u i H i n d . 20. Though i n H a l i ' s case D e l h i was h i s adopted home. He was born i n P a n i p a t . - 47 -CHAPTER IV ORIGINS OF THE DELHI-LUCKNOW DIFFERENTIATION IN AZAD'S AJi-X HAYAT Azad's l b - i Hayat was, according to at l e a s t one modern c r i t i c , "the f i r s t attempt to p u l l things together" 1 into a comprehensive h i s t o r y of Urdu l i t e r a t u r e . In his study of Maulana Azad, Muhammad Sadiq writes that, in addition to being "an up-to-date account of the Urdu poets, embodying the maximum amount of information, c r i t i c a l and biographical, along Western l i n e s , " Ab-i Hayat was also "...much more than a hist o r y of Urdu poetry; i t [was] a human document, intense, v i t a l , v i b rating with l i f e , and i s , without doubt, one of the most b r i l l i a n t reconstructions of the past that we possess." There are few opinions found anywhere i n the entire corpus of Urdu l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m that cannot be traced back to Ab-i 3 Hayat. So impressive i s the range of material presented i n 1. M.Sadiq, Azad; His L i f e and Works. Lahore: West-Pak Publishing Co. Ltd., 1965, p.47. 2. Sadiq, Ibid. 3. Although Azad does not necessarily claim to be the o r i g i n a l source for much of the information he presents. It i s a compilation of vast amounts of material gleaned from numerous sources. For example, M. Sadiq c r e d i t s the source of much of Azad's biographical and anecdotal information to an e a r l i e r work, the Majmu'a-i Naghzf or Tazkirah-i Shu'ara-i Urdu by Hakim Abul Qasim Mir Qudrat-Ullah Qasim, Sadiq, H.H.. Azad. p.140. - 48 -Ab-i Hayat that in the l a s t hundred years c r i t i c s have been able to add l i t t l e new c r i t i c a l analysis or biographical information about Urdu's great writers to that which was c o l l e c t e d and reported by Azad. It i s here that we read bf such widely-repeated anecdotes as Mir's famous "chumachatl remark" about Jur'at's poetry in the opening of t h i s study; and of the legendary r i v a l r i e s between Sauda and Mir, Mushafi and Insha, Nasikh and At i s h , and Zauq and Ghalib. While i t i s c e r t a i n l y not the work's primary focus, Ab-i Hayat does represent perhaps the earliest/example in Urdu c r i t i c i s m of Lakhnavi poetry being d i f f e r e n t i a t e d from D i h l a v i poetry. Here begins the f i r s t glimmer of the notion which la t e r grew and strengthened, that Lakhnavi poetry developed l a t e r than—and at variance w i t h — t h e standard set by e a r l i e r , more " t r a d i t i o n a l " poets. It w i l l also be suggested here that a p o l a r i z a t i o n between Nasikh and A t i s h p a r a l l e l s that which i s drawn between Delhi and Lucknow; and that although i t i s r e a l l y elaborated upon by l a t e r c r i t i c s , i t , too, can be traced back to Ab-i Hayat. P a r t i c u l a r attention w i l l be paid to s p e c i f i c passages i n Ab-i Hayat which may be seen as providing a basis for t h i s dual point of view. The section on Urdu l i t e r a t u r e ' s F i f t h Epoch opens with a short essay on how the new era brought in a kind of poet who ceased to honor his venerated predecessors i n t r a d i t i o n a l fashion, s t r i k i n g out on his own path; and how, being timely, t h i s new s t y l e brought acclaim to the newer poets. But Azad - 49 -also goes on to say that "those f i r s t excellent masters of Lucknow were the destroyers of Delhi;" and that they began to flo u t the authority of Delhi , e s p e c i a l l y in the realm of 4 language usage. The offender he s p e c i f i c a l l y c i t e s i n t h i s context i s Nasikh; and the f i r s t section on poets of the F i f t h Epoch i s devoted to the l i f e and work of Nasikh. Azad thus moves from general comments on the era into a very s p e c i f i c discussion of Nasikh—the poet who would seem to characterize the undesirable departure from t r a d i t i o n which can be seen in the F i f t h Epoch. That that poet i s the "Imam of Lakhnaviyat" i s neither i n s i g n i f i c a n t nor, very l i k e l y , c o i n c i d e n t a l . A t i s h and Nasikh are the only two Lakhnavi ghazal poets of whom Azad makes detailed mention, in contrast to Abul Lais S i d d i q i ' s discussion of twenty-five to t h i r t y major Lakhnavi poets' work i n Lakhna'u ka Dabistan-i S h a ' i r l . 5 Whether t h i s was his intention or not, with his discussion of Lakhnavi ghazal poetry i n the F i f t h Epoch lim i t e d to the work of just two poets Azad diminishes the scope and importance of the 4 . Azad, Ab-i Hayat. p.339. 5. Three other Lakhnavi poets were included i n Ab-i Hayat. namely Mir Khaliq, Mir Anis, and Mirza Dabir, but they were not ghazal poets, and i t i s the ghazal with which c r i t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e has generally been concerned. Khaliq was l i k e l y included out of respect for his father, Mir Hasan; while Anis and Dabir, as Urdu's greatest mars, iya writers, could hardly be ignored altogether. He also mentions Jur'at and Insha, but these two poets are not considered to be part of the F i f t h Epoch, the time when the Delhi-Lucknow d i s t i n c t i o n i s alleged to have f i r s t been manifest; and both migrated to Lucknow as mature a r t i s t s , so i t i s questionable as to which markaz to associate them with. - 50 -Lucknow markaz i n the h i s t o r y of Urdu l i t e r a t u r e . A l s o i n A b - i Hayat i s a d e p i c t i o n of Lucknow's c u l t u r e and customs as d i s c r e t e from the s o c i a l and l i n g u i s t i c or a r t i s t i c customs of D e l h i . Again, i t i s s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t where Azad addresses h i m s e l f t o such d i f f e r e n c e s he o f t e n uses Nasikh as h i s Lakhnavi example. From Azad's time onward, j u s t as Lucknow became the c u l t u r a l "enfant t e r r i b l e " of Indian Islam, so d i d Nasikh become Lucknow's exemplar. The two stigmas r e i n f o r c e d one another, and l e f t room f o r A t i s h — a poet upon whom Azad and the r e s t of the t r a d i t i o n have looked w i t h g r e a t e r f a v o r — t o be a p p r e c i a t e d as a d e s i r a b l e e x c e p t i o n t o the Lakhnavi s t e r e o t y p e . ^ I t i s r e l e v a n t i n t h i s c o n t e x t t o observe t h a t Azad h i m s e l f was not o n l y a proud and l o y a l D i h l a v i ; he was a l s o the p u p i l of Shaikh Ibrahim Zauq (d.1854), the l a s t "Poet Laureate" of the Mughal Empire, when Azad speaks of the Delhi-Lucknow s p l i t , he i s speaking of "us" and "them." Another example of such d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n can be seen when he r e l a t e s how Insha's f r i e n d , the P e r s i a n poet Q a t i l , toyed 6. T h i s i s m i l d l y c o u n t e r a c t e d by the assiduous l i p s e r v i c e he pays i t , along w i t h D e l h i , as a sanad. or e s t a b l i s h e d c e n t e r of c u l t u r a l a u t h o r i t y ^ from whose example a l l Indian Muslims took i n s p i r a t i o n . C f . Ab_-± Hayat P pp.66-67. 7. Not o n l y i s A t i s h e s t a b l i s h e d as Nasikh's p o l a r o p p o s i t e , he i s even c a l l e d a " D i h l a v i " type poet by one c r i t i c , Z.A. S i d d i q i , i n K u l l i v S t - i A t i s h . A l l a h a b a d : Ram Narayan L a i Beni Madhav, 1972, I n t r o d u c t i o n , p. f . The i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h i s c l a i m w i l l be d i s c u s s e d l a t e r on. For now, s u f f i c e i t t o say t h a t Z.A. S i d d i q i i s not alone i n l a b e l l i n g A t i s h more a " D i h l a v i s t y l e " poet than a Lakhnavi. - 51 -w i t h t h e t r a d i t i o n a l manner o f i d e n t i f y i n g metre: where i t had been customary t o communicate metre by r e c i t i n g p a t t e r n s u s i n g A r a b i c words " f a ' i l u n , f a 1 i l u n , " e t c . he amused h i m s e l f by Q c h o o s i n g words w h i c h evoked d a l l i a n c e w i t h b e a u t i f u l nymphs. A g a i n , t h e e f f e c t o f c i t i n g s uch examples was t o s u ggest t h a t L a k h n a v i t a s t e s and customs were not o n l y d i f f e r e n t , but a l s o r a t h e r v u l g a r as compared w i t h t h o s e o f D e l h i . Most s e n s i b l e c r i t i c s would agree t h a t t h e r e c i t a t i o n o f " p a r i khanum" i n s t e a d o f " m a f a 1 i l u n " was something done i n j e s t and was a p l a y f u l g e s t u r e w h i c h might j u s t as w e l l have been p r a c t i c e d i n D e l h i as anywhere, i n c l u d i n g Lucknow. N o n e t h e l e s s , t h i s anecdote b o l s t e r s t h e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t L a k h n a v i p o e t s were v u l g a r and f r i v o l o u s . W i t h i n t h e framework o f t h e F i f t h Epoch, Azad p r e s e n t s t h e two L a k h n a v i s i n v e r y d i f f e r e n t f a s h i o n s and t h e r e b y e s t a b l i s h e s a p o l a r i z a t i o n w i t h i n t h e p o l a r i z a t i o n between 9 Lucknow and D e l h i . When he exempts A t i s h from L a k h n a v i t r a i t s , as w i l l be i l l u s t r a t e d s h o r t l y , he appears t o a t t r i b u t e t o A t i s h t h e s t a t u s o f someone who i s "more l i k e one o f us." By e x t e n s i o n t h e n , A t i s h ' s p o l a r o p p o s i t e must be N a s i k h , t h e L a k h n a v i p a r e x c e l l e n c e : "one o f them." Language usage appears t o form Azad's p r i m a r y c r i t e r i o n 8. See A b - i Hayat, p.66. 9. I t w i l l l a t e r be d i s c u s s e d how t h e modern c r i t i c Shah Abdus Salam, i n D a b i s t a n - i A t i s h [ D e l h i : Maktaba Jami'ah L i m i t e d , 1977] e x t e n d s t h i s p o l a r i z a t i o n t o p o s i t i n g two s e p a r a t e d a b i s t a n s f o r t h e p u p i l s o f N a s i k h and A t i s h . - 52 -f o r D e l h i - L u c k n o w and N a s i k h - A t i s h d i s t i n c t i o n s . I n t h i s m a t t e r , he conveys c r i t i c a l judgments i n two b a s i c ways: f i r s t , t h r o u g h anecdotes w h e r e i n r e v e r e d D i h l a v i s , s u c h as M i r T a q i M i r , f r e e l y e x p r e s s contempt f o r L a k h n a v i language and p o e t r y . ^ A l t h o u g h Azad does not e x p l i c i t l y c o r r o b o r a t e M i r ' s s u g g e s t i o n t h a t L a k h n a v i language i s f a u l t y and s o , i n a l l p r o b a b i l i t y , i s i t s p o e t r y , he does n o t c h a l l e n g e i t , t h e r e b y a l l o w i n g t h e a u d i e n c e t o i n f e r t h a t " I f M i r h i m s e l f t h o u g h t thus and so about L a k h n a v i l a n g u a g e , i t must be t r u e . " S e c o n d l y , Azad's own assessment o f t h e work o f L a k h n a v i p o e t s o f t e n b e g i n s w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e i r employment o f l a n g u a g e , where t h e p r i m a r y c r i t e r i o n i s how a p p r o p r i a t e t h e i r use o f language i s (as i n t h e f o l l o w i n g remarks on N a s i k h ' s p o e t r y ) : " G e n e r a l l y , N a s i k h ' s p o e t r y i s q u i t e f r e e o f a p p a r e n t d e f e c t s and v e r b a l o r g r a m m a t i c a l f a u l t s . . . a l t h o u g h t h e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e between a d r o i t c l e v e r n e s s o f c o m p o s i t i o n and c r e a t i v e p a s s i o n he makes a g r e a t e f f o r t n o t t o l e t [the p r o p e r ] p r i n c i p l e s g e t out o f hand...In h i s g h a z a l s t h e r e i s much grandeur o f l a n g u a g e , l Q f t y d i c t i o n and d e l i c a t e imagery but l i t t l e t S s i r . . . " A l t h o u g h Azad acknowledges t h a t i n a p p r o p r i a t e language usage i s not a d e f i c i e n c y i n N a s i k h ' s p o e t r y , he c o n t r a s t s t h e grandeur of language ( s h a u k a t - i a l f a z ) , l o f t y d i c t i o n ( b uland p a r v a z i ) 10. c f . A b - i Hayat. p.205 i n w h i c h Azad t e l l s o f M i r ' s r e f u s a l t o p a s s t h e t i m e w i t h a L a k h n a v i t r a v e l l i n g companion en r o u t e from D e l h i t o Lucknow by c o n v e r s i n g , l e s t h i s own d i c t i o n be compromised by t h e exchange"—Ap_ ka s h u g h a l h a i m e r l zaban  kjiarab ho j a t i h a i . " 11. Op_. C i t . , p.354. T a s l r r e f e r s t o t h e h e a r t o f t h e a u d i e n c e b e i n g touched by t h e i d e a - c o n t e n t o f a s h e ' r . - 53 -and d e l i c a t e imagery (nazuk k j i a y a l i ) w i t h t h e a b i l i t y o f a v e r s e t o t o u c h t h e h e a r t ( t a s i r ) o f i t s a u d i e n c e . He draws a d i s t i n c t i o n between mere v e r b a l accomplishment and c r e a t i v e p a s s i o n (kalam k i garmi) i n p o e t r y . H i s p h r a s i n g s u g g e s t s t h a t N a s i k h must work hard t o keep th e " p r o p e r p r i n c i p l e s i n hand." F u r t h e r m o r e , a l t h o u g h t h e r e i s no s p e c i f i c v e r b a l d e f e c t i n N a s i k h ' s p o e t r y , t h e r e i s a l s o l i t t l e e m o t i o n a l e f f e c t . Few would d i s a g r e e w i t h t h e o p i n i o n t h a t t h e r e i s more t o p o e t r y t h a n j u s t v e r b a l p y r o t e c h n i c s . What t h e r e a d e r i s l i k e l y t o i n f e r from t h e s e comments, t h e n , i s t h a t L a k h n a v i p o e t r y , i n g e n e r a l , i s v e r b a l accomplishment masquerading as p o e t r y , l i k e t h e work o f i t s f o r e m o s t exponent, N a s i k h ; and t h a t Lucknow's p o e t s speak and w r i t e a d i f f e r e n t k i n d o f Urdu t h a n do D i h l a v i s . W h i l e N a s i k h ' s language i s n o t f a u l t y g r a m m a t i c a l l y , h i s d i c t i o n i s t o o "grand and l o f t y " t o t o u c h t h e h e a r t and 12 t h e r e f o r e m e r i t a c c e p t a n c e . Compare Azad's remarks on N a s i k h ' s d i c t i o n w i t h what he has t o s a y about A t i s h ' s s t y l e o f c o m p o s i t i o n : " H i s w r i t i n g i s v i r t u a l l y a handbook o f c o l l o q u i a l Urdu and a f i r s t - r a t e example o f t h e e l e g a n t e x r e s s i o n o f I n d i a . I t p r e s e n t s t h e i d i o m and manner o f speech o f t h e n o b i l i t y o f Lucknow. J u s t as t h e n o b i l i t y o f Lucknow spoke, so d i d A t i s h compose h i s p o e t r y . H i s w r i t i n g b o t h p l e a s e d t h e - g e n t r y and engendered a d m i r a t i o n i n t h e common f o l k . . . " 12. For f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n o f where "grand and l o f t y " d i c t i o n i s — a n d i s n o t — c o n s i d e r e d a p p r o p r i a t e see C h a p t e r X I ' s d i s c u s s i o n o f s h a r a f a t . 13. £b_-i Hayat. p.389. - 54 -The point Azad i s making here i s that i t i s desirable to write poetry that r e f l e c t s the spoken idiom of the people (in t h i s case r the noble, or s h a r i f f people). This point i s one of the tenets of the c a l l for reform i n the ghazal, and i s a prominent theme i n Hali's Muqaddama-i She 1r-o S h a ' i r i . It was inspired by the Romantic movement i n English poetry, launched nearly a 14 century e a r l i e r by Wordsworth and Coleridge. A contradiction arises here. It i s brought to the attention of the reader because Azad, though perhaps the f i r s t , i s by no means the sole c r i t i c to f a l l v i ctim to ce r t a i n contradictions which s t r i k e us as inherent i n the Delhi-Lucknow "school" d i s t i n c t i o n . A great f a u l t perceived in Nasikh as a poet (indicated by the previous quotation from Ab-i Hayat) was that his language was too fancy to be c o l l o q u i a l . On the other hand, as was suggested by the anecdote involving Mir's journey with a Lakhnavi, c o l l o q u i a l Lakhnavi Urdu was considered to be so vulgar as to pose a threat of corruption to a well-spoken D i h l a v i . Yet a number of c r i t i c s c i t e the great virt u e of Atish's poetry as i t s c o l l o q u i a l f e l i c i t y . And Atish i s the second greatest exemplar of the so-called Lucknow School. It can be seen from the above contradiction that neither have the c r i t e r i a c i t e d for Delhi-Lucknow d i s t i n c t i o n s been consistent or concrete; and also that—even when stated i n a 14. Later in the present work i t w i l l be discussed in the context of H a l i , Azad and other early Urdu reformist c r i t i c s . See e s p e c i a l l y Chapters V and XI below. - 55 -c o n c r e t e f a s h i o n — t h e i r i n h e r e n t c o n t r a d i c t i o n s o f t e n r e n d e r the Two S c h o o l c r i t i c s * arguments u n c o n v i n c i n g . N o n e t h e l e s s , Azad's i m p l i c a t i o n — t h a t j u s t as i d i o m d i f f e r e d from one c i t y t o t h e o t h e r , so d i d each c i t y ' s a pproach t o l i t e r a t u r e — c o m e s t h r o u g h l o u d and c l e a r . The p r o s e s t y l e o f Azad's s e c t i o n on N a s i k h i s e x t r e m e l y c o m p l i c a t e d , f l o r i d , and d i f f i c u l t t o d e c i p h e r . The messages i t c o n t a i n s a r e mixed, and h i s c r i t i c a l comments a r e o f f e r e d i n an i n d i r e c t manner. L a u d a t o r y e x c l a m a t i o n s about th e marvelous s t y l e N a s i k h a c h i e v e d a r e f o l l o w e d by s t a t e m e n t s w h i c h , under s c r u t i n y , p r o ve t o c o n t r a d i c t t h e t h r u s t o f t h e i r c o m p l i m e n t a r y n e i g h b o r s (as i n t h e passage c i t e d e a r l i e r ) . Azad's b i o g r a p h i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g N a s i k h ' s l i f e c o n s i s t s l a r g e l y i n s e v e r a l a n e c d o t e s f e a t u r i n g " S h a i k h S a h i b " [ N a s i k h ] , t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e p i c t u r e emerges o f an a r r o g a n t g l u t t o n o f f o r m i d a b l e p h y s i q u e w i t h a g r e g a r i o u s — e v e n g a r r u l o u s — p e r s o n a l i t y , who e v e n t u a l l y found h i m s e l f a t odds w i t h many o f Lucknow's famous men (not t h e l e a s t o f whom were 15 t h e K i n g h i m s e l f and h i s Prime M i n i s t e r ) . Azad t h e n moves on t o a d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e g r e a t r i v a l r y w h i c h e x i s t e d between N a s i k h and A t i s h , and between t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e s t u d e n t s and f o l l o w e r s . 15._In subsequent e d i t i o n s Azad e x p l a i n s t h a t t h e f i r s t e d i t i o n o f A b - i HaySt c o u l d c o n t a i n v e r y l i t t l e b i o g r a p h i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n on N a s i k h because th e a u t h o r had been unable t o f i n d any. However, he was l a t e r s u p p l i e d w i t h a good d e a l o f a n e c d o t a l i n f o r m a t i o n from a f a m i l y f r i e n d , and t h e s e a r e t h e a n ecdotes r e f e r r e d t o above. - 56 -I t i s i n t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e A t i s h - N a s i k h r i v a l r y t h a t Azad compares t h e p o e t i c s t y l e s o f t h e two L a k h n a v i m a s t e r s . D i s c u s s i o n o f t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e i n p o e t i c d i c t i o n has a l r e a d y been i l l u s t r a t e d . I n Ab-i, H a y a t 1 s s e c t i o n d e v o t e d t o each poet t h e r e i s a s u b - s e c t i o n w h i c h compares e i t h e r p o e t ' s work w i t h t h a t o f t h e o t h e r . Azad w r i t e s t h a t t h e s t y l e s o f t h e two masters a r e " a b s o l u t e l y d i f f e r e n t from one a n o t h e r " and t h a t s c o r e s o f Lucknow's l i t e r a t e u r s took t h e s i d e o f one u s t S d o r the o t h e r . Augmenting t h i s p i c t u r e o f p o l a r i t y , t h e Maulana then moves on t o c i t e c e r t a i n " o b j e c t i o n s w h i c h t h e f o l l o w e r s o f A t i s h made t o N a s i k h ' s s t y l e o f p o e t r y , " 1 * 5 and v i c e v e r s a . For example: "The f o l l o w e r s o f K h v a j a S a h i b [ A t i s h ] make s e v e r a l k i n d s o f o b j e c t i o n s t o S h a i k h S a h i b ' s [ N a s i k h ' s ] s t y l e . . . a n d s i n c e t h e r e i s some f o r c e t o some o f , t h e i r arguments, one i s o b l i g e d t o r e p o r t them... I t must be s a i d t h a t Maulana Azad does not agree w i t h t h e f o l l o w e r s o f A t i s h on a l l t h e s e p o i n t s . He does o f f e r t h e f o l l o w i n g d e f e n s e : " K h v a j a S a h i b ' s f o l l o w e r s s ay t h a t t h o s e p e o p l e who have t r u l y u n d e r s t o o d t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f t h e g h a z a l — f o r example K h v a j a H a f i z and S h a i k h S a ' d i i n P e r s i a n ; and, i n Urdu such a u t h o r i t i e s as Soz, M i r and J u r ' a t — w i l l n o t c a l l [ these v e r s e s o f N a s i k h ' s ] g h a z a l . But t h e m a t t e r i s not as s i m p l e as t h a t , because i n P e r s i a n , t o o , such r e v e r e d p o e t s as J a l a l , A s i r , Qasim Mashhadi, B e d i l and N a s i r A l i made names f o r t h e m s e l v e s w i t h t h e h e l p o f t h e i r nazuk k j i a y a l i and k h a y a l b a n d l . 16. A b - i Hay5t f p.356. 17. I b i d . - 57 -I f S h a i k h S a h i b a l s o f o l l o w e d t h e i r s t y l e , what's wrong w i t h t h a t ? " 1 0 The r o l e o f p e r s o n a l i t y i n much Urdu c r i t i c i s m i s 19 paramount. I t has j u s t been shown how Azad i n t r o d u c e s N a s i k h t h r o u g h r e p o r t s o f h i s h a b i t s and p e r s o n a l i t y . He goes even f u r t h e r w i t h a s h o r t d i s c o u r s e on t h e p e r s o n a l i t y o f t h e k i n d o f p o e t who t e n d s toward t h e l i t e r a r y t a s t e s t o w h i c h "t h e f o l l o w e r s o f A t i s h " o b j e c t . J u s t as L a k h n a v i y a t i n l i t e r a t u r e i s " d e f i n e d " by means o f p a i n t i n g a p i c t u r e o f Lucknow's c h a r a c t e r as a c i t y , so a l s o i s N a s i k h ' s p o e t i c s t y l e i m p l i e d t o be a m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f h i s c h a r a c t e r and p e r s o n a l i t y . Azad's d e p i c t i o n o f A t i s h s t r i k e s t h e r e a d e r as q u i t e a c o n t r a s t t o h i s t r e a t m e n t o f N a s i k h . B i o g r a p h i c a l comments on A t i s h r e p o r t i n s y m p a t h e t i c terms A t i s h ' s t a l l , f r a i l b e a r i n g ; h i s u n w o r l d l y d i s r e g a r d o f c o m f o r t s , as e x e m p l i f i e d by t h e penury i n w h i c h he l i v e d ; h i s D i h l a v i and S u f i h e r i t a g e , and h i s s i m p l e p e r s o n a l i t y . ^ 18. I b i d : " K j i v a j a S a h i b ke mo'taqid k a h t e h a i n k i h j i n l o g o n ne g h a z a l ke ' u s u l ko samjha h a i y a ' n i F a r s i men KJivaja H a f i z aur S h a i k j i S a ' d l se aur Urdu men Soz, M i r aur J u r ' a t se sanad p a ' I voh use g h a z a l na kahenge. Magar y i h b a t a i s i g i r i f t ke q a b i l n a h i n k y o n k i h F a r s i men* b h i J a l a l , A s i r , Qasim Mashhadi, B e d i l aur N a s l r ' A l i v a g j i a i r a h u s t S d ho g u z r e h a i n j i n h o n ne apne nazuk k h a y a l i y o n k i b a d a u l a t k j i a y a l bad aur ma'ni yab l a q a b h S s i l k i y a h a i . S h a i k j i S a h i b ne un k i t a r z i k j i t i y a r k i t o kya b u r a k i y a ? " 19. C f . T i t l e s o f l i t e r a r y s t u d i e s such as g h a l i b k i  S h a k h s i y y a t aur S h a ' i r l — " G h a l i b ' s P e r s o n a l i t y and P o e t r y " — b y R a s h i d Ahmad S i d d i q i , D e l h i : Department o f Urdu, D e l h i U n i v e r s i t y , 1969. 20. I b - i H a y a t , pp.387-89. - 58 -The one bone o f c o n t e n t i o n w h i c h Azad does p i c k w i t h A t i s h * s p o e t r y l i e s i n t h e r e a l m o f language u s e . He f e e l s o b l i g e d t o p o i n t o u t c e r t a i n f a u l t s t h a t l i e i n A t i s h ' s employment o f P e r s i a n , A r a b i c and T u r k i s h words o r e x p r e s s i o n s , a t l e a s t , a c c o r d i n g t o o t h e r s : j u s t as N a s i k h ' s p o e t r y i s c r i t i c i z e d i n t h e words o f A t i s h ' s f o l l o w e r s , so t o o does Azad now p r e s e n t c r i t i c i s m s o f A t i s h ' s f a u l t y language use as o b j e c t i o n s v o i c e d by t h e f o l l o w e r s o f N a s i k h . F o r example: D u k h t a r - i r a z m i r i mu'nis h a i m i r i hamdam h a i Maifl j a h a n g i r nun voh nur j a h a n begam h a i The d a u g h t e r o f t h e v i n e i s my s o l a c e and my i n t i m a t e : I am J a h a n g i r 2 a n d she my Nur J a h a n . Azad r e p o r t s t h a t when A t i s h r e c i t e d t h e above s h e ' r . N a s i k h ' s champions o b j e c t e d t o h i s p r o n u n c i a t i o n o f "begam." s a y i n g t h a t s i n c e i t was a T u r k i s h word, and was pronounced "begum" i n T u r k i s h — w i t h a s h o r t "u" sound i n s t e a d o f a s h o r t "a" s o u n d — A t i s h ' s q a f i y a h was f a u l t y . Azad r e p o r t s t h a t A t i s h r e t o r t e d w i t h t h e o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t he was s p e a k i n g Urdu and would pronounce t h e word as i t was pronounced i n Urdu—when s p e a k i n g T u r k i s h he would a l t e r h i s p r o n u n c i a t i o n a c c o r d i n g l y . The e f f e c t o f t h e above anecdote i s t w o f o l d : i t p o i n t s up 21. The r e f e r e n c e i s t o Emperor J a h a n g i r [r.1605-1627] and h i s c o n s o r t , Nur J a h a n . - 59 -t h e f a c t t h a t N a s i k h ' s f o l l o w e r s f a u l t e d A t i s h — w h o s e e d u c a t i o n was n o t as e x t e n s i v e as t h a t o f c e r t a i n o f h i s c o n t e m p o r a r i e s , n o t a b l y t h e i r own u s t a d — f o r l a c k i n g s u f f i c i e n t e r u d i t i o n t o know t h e d i f f e r e n c e between Urdu p r o n u n c i a t i o n and t h a t o f t h e 22 languages from w h i c h i t s v o c a b u l a r y i s borrowed. I n t h i s way the anecdote r e i n f o r c e s t h e p o l a r o p p o s i t i o n between t h e two u s t a d s . S e c o n d l y , i t d e p i c t s A t i s h as a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d , no-nonsense p e r s o n who was c o n t e n t t o o p e r a t e w i t h i n t h e r e a l m o f h i s p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e . I n o t h e r words, i t s e t s him up a g a i n s t t h e p r e t e n s i o n s o f N a s i k h ' s f o l l o w e r s who c i t e d t e c h n i c a l r u l e s o f a language t h a t t h e y d i d n o t even speak, and p r e s e n t s h i s s i m p l i c i t y o f p e r s o n a l h a b i t as a complementary v i r t u e t o h i s s i m p l i c i t y o f language and p o e t i c s t y l e . Azad's p r o s e s t y l e when d i s c u s s i n g A t i s h i s v e r y s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d , c l e a r and e a s i l y comprehended, complementing i t s c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n o f A t i s h ' s p o e t i c s t y l e as p u r e , s i m p l e and c o l l o q u i a l — i n s h o r t , as u n p r e t e n t i o u s as t h e man h i m s e l f . A f t e r t h u s c h a r a c t e r i z i n g A t i s h ' s s t y l e ( t a r z - i kalam) Azad r e i t e r a t e s t h e c o n t r a s t i t r e p r e s e n t s t o N a s i k h ' s " c o m p l i c a t e d , 23 c o n v o l u t e d , h a i r - s p l i t t i n g s t y l e o f c o m p o s i t i o n . " F i n a l l y , we would s u g g e s t t h a t comments d i r e c t e d i n s i m p l e , c l e a r language a r e al m o s t g u a r a n t e e d t o make t h e d e s i r e d i m p r e s s i o n on t h e r e a d e r s t h e y a r e i n t e n d e d t o 22. The Mughals' mother tongue was o r i g i n a l l y T u r k i s h even though t h e i r c o u r t language was P e r s i a n . 23. A b - i Hayat. pp.390-91. - 60 -i n s t r u c t . Azad's c h o i c e o f d i c t i o n i n h i s d i s c u s s i o n s o f b o t h A t i s h and N a s i k h h as, no d o u b t , c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l wisdom a b o u t , and c o n s t a n c y o f , b o t h p o e t s ' r e p u t a t i o n s w i t h i n t h e c r i t i c a l t r a d i t i o n , t h a t o f A t i s h as b e i n g s i m p l e and m e l l i f l u o u s o f d i c t i o n and N a s i k h as b e i n g c o n v o l u t e d , even o b s c u r e . By p o i n t i n g o u t — w i t h e l a b o r a t e c o u r t e s y , o f c o u r s e — A t i s h ' s i m p e r f e c t u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f P e r s i a n ; and by d e p i c t i n g N a s i k h as a b r a s h , a l m o s t c o m i c a l l y o b t u s e b u f f o o n ; Azad d i s s u a d e s h i s r e a d e r s from j u d g i n g t h e p o e t r y o f t h e s e two L a k h n a v i u s t S d s w i t h t h e same s e r i o u s n e s s and c o n s i d e r a t i o n which t h e Urdu a u d i e n c e c o u l d n o r m a l l y be e x p e c t e d t o e x t e n d toward g r e a t m a s t e r s . And, as we have s a i d , a l t h o u g h he defends N a s i k h i n p l a c e s Azad d e f i n i t e l y promotes t h e p o l a r i z a t i o n between N a s i k h and A t i s h by p r e s e n t i n g q u e s t i o n a b l e q u a l i t i e s — w h i c h N a s i k h might be i n f e r r e d t o d i s p l a y — i n terms o f t h e k i n d s o f o b j e c t i o n s w h i c h A t i s h and h i s f o l l o w e r s e x p r e s s e d . T h i s e f f e c t i s a c h i e v e d w i t h o u t any s t a t e m e n t s d i r e c t enough t o l e a v e Azad a t r i s k o f b e i n g accused o f c h a u v i n i s m o r p a r t i s a n s h i p . I t i s not t h i s s t u d y ' s purpose t o d i s a g r e e w i t h Azad's c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a p o l a r o p p o s i t i o n between A t i s h and N a s i k h . There a r e , i n d e e d , c e r t a i n v a l i d grounds f o r c o n t r a s t . R a t h e r , i t s i n t e n t i o n i s t o p o i n t out t h a t t h i s p a r t i c u l a r p o l a r i z a t i o n i s framed i n t h e c o n t e x t o f i n d i v i d u a l p e r s o n a l i t i e s , p e r s o n a l h a b i t s , f a m i l y background, e t c . i n s t e a d o f a c c o r d i n g t o more c o n c r e t e , and t h u s more c r e d i b l e , l i t e r a r y c r i t e r i a . - 61 -S i m i l a r l y , i t i s f r u i t l e s s and possibly inaccurate to argue here that the q u a l i t a t i v e differences between Lakhnavi and D i h l a v i poetry claimed by Urdu c r i t i c s and scholars are not genuinely f e l t . The point i s that t h i s alleged "differentness" has thus far proved impossible to a r t i c u l a t e in such a way as to convince those who do not acknowledge i t ; and i t cannot, therefore, be accepted that these f e l t "differences" are c r u c i a l enough to warrant a formal d i v i s i o n of D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi poetry into separate schools. The "differences" which have been a r t i c u l a t e d i n the major works of Urdu c r i t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e simply do not bear up under close scrutiny, as w i l l be shown i n l a t e r chapters. We w i l l continue to assert that the major c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Atish and Nasikh as poets, and of Lakhnavi and D i h l a v i poetry as bodies of l i t e r a t u r e , reproduce the wide variety of elements and features found in c l a s s i c a l Urdu poetry as a whole. Ab-i Hayat serves as an i l l u s t r a t i o n of how myths can be born and legends sustained. Though a document of great interest and value to s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l h i s t o r i a n s , i t cannot always be r e l i e d upon for fa c t u a l accuracy. Rather, as Muhammad Sadiq has said, the abiding value of Ab-i Hayat l i e s in i t s v i v i d picture of the c u l t u r a l milieu of the waning Mughal empire's l i t e r a r y and s o c i a l e l i t e . There i s unquestionably much that t h i s work has contributed to the world of Urdu l e t t e r s . The time and circumstances of i t s publication, together with the p o s i t i o n Azad enjoyed in - 62 -Indo-Muslim c u l t u r e , have ensured f o r A b - i Hayat a s u b t l e a u t h o r i t y which l e a v e s l i t t l e room f o r i t t o be c h a l l e n g e d . I t s i n v u l n e r a b l i t y s t a n d s , p r e v e n t i n g even i t s own l i t e r a r y d e s c e n d a n t s — w e r e t h e y so i n c l i n e d — f r o m q u e s t i o n i n g a number o f t h e d e e p l y - h e l d b e l i e f s put f o r t h as f a c t by i t s a u t h o r . The most i m p o r t a n t o f t h e s e , f o r t h e p urposes o f t h i s s t u d y , a r e h i s c o n v i c t i o n t h a t M u s l i m c u l t u r e i n I n d i a was i n d i s t r e s s i n g d e c l i n e , i n f e r i o r t o t h a t o f t h e Mughals' g l o r i o u s p a s t ; and t h a t t h e e x p r e s s i o n o f c u l t u r e i n Lucknow was a c h i e f example o f t h e p r e s e n t age's u n w o r t h i n e s s . R e c a l l S a d i q * s assessment o f A b - i HaySt as a c u l t u r a l c h r o n i c l e : " I t i s r e a l l y a l i v i n g book, i n t h e sense t h a t i t i s n o t t h e p i c t u r e o f a w o r l d dead and embalmed; but a l i v i n g page t o r n out o f t h e p a s t , w h i c h was, p e r h a p s , n e v e r p r e s e n t , but w h i c h , as p r e s e n t e d 2 t o u s , t h r o b s w i t h l i f e , and i s , t h e r e f o r e , r e a l . " In o t h e r words S a d i q a s t u t e l y o b s e r v e s t h a t t h e v e r a c i t y o f c u l t u r a l images and s t e r e o t y p e s i s n o t as i m p o r t a n t as t h e a f f i r m a t i o n w h i c h t h e y p r o v i d e t o members o f t h e c u l t u r e about who t h e y a r e and where t h e y came fr o m . Nowhere i n A b - i Hayat does Azad e x p r e s s l y s t a t e t h a t L a k h n a v i p o e t r y c o n s t i t u t e s a s e p a r a t e s c h o o l o f Urdu p o e t r y . Nor does he ever come r i g h t out and say t h a t e i t h e r N a s i k h or A t i s h i s not a major p o e t o f t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y . He d e v o t e s about f i f t y p a g e s — a s u b s t a n t i a l p o r t i o n o f h i s b o o k — t o d i s c u s s i n g t h e i r l i v e s and work. I n f a c t , t h e 24. S a d i q , Azad: H i s L i f e and Works. p.53. - 63 -t h i r t y - f i v e pages devoted t o N a s i k h e q u a l t h e amount o f space g i v e n t o G h a l i b , and a r e s l i g h t l y more th a n Azad d e v o t e s t o 25 e i t h e r Sauda o r M i r . Y e t one must ask what s o r t o f i n f o r m a t i o n i s c o n t a i n e d i n t h o s e pages on N a s i k h and A t i s h ? What t o n e does Azad choose f o r h i s t r e a t m e n t o f t h e L a k h n a v i m a s t e r s ? Anecdotes about N a s i k h range from r e p o r t s o f h i s 26 g l u t t o n y as we have s e e n , t o a c c o u n t s o f h i s f e i s t y temperament and t h e q u a r r e l s he had w i t h everyone from h i s r i v a l , A t i s h , t h r o u g h t h e Prime M i n i s t e r o f Avadh, t o t h e r u l e r 27 h i m s e l f . Such a c c o u n t s do c r e a t e a r a t h e r s u b j e c t i v e i m p r e s s i o n . Of t h e t h i r t y - f i v e pages on N a s i k h , f u l l y h a l f i n v o l v e t h i s s o r t o f a n e c d o t a l m a t e r i a l about h i s h a b i t s and l i f e s t y l e . S t i l l , i n t e r p r e t i n g A b - i Hayat i s a c o m p l i c a t e d b u s i n e s s . I n t e r m i n g l e d w i t h t h e s e a n e c d o t e s a r e genuine comments i n t h e r e a l m o f l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m . And Azad does defend N a s i k h ' s r i g h t t o f o l l o w a s t y l e w h i c h , even i f u n p o p u l a r o r n o t t o t h e Maulana's p e r s o n a l t a s t e , has i t s p r e c e d e n t i n t h e P e r s i a n and 28 Urdu l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n . A l i t t l e l e s s t h a n a t h i r d o f t h e N a s i k h s e c t i o n i s c o m p r i s e d o f such comments. Azad mentions 25. The s e c t i o n on M i r c o n s i s t s o f t w e n t y - e i g h t pages o f t e x t , and t h a t on Sauda i s t h i r t y - t w o pages l o n g . C f . A b - i Hayat. pp.203-231; and 148-180, r e s p e c t i v e l y . 26. A z a d , Qp_. C i t . . p.347. 27. Qp_. C i t . r pp.352-56, p a s s i m . 28. As i n t h e e x c e r p t s from A b - i H a y a t f p. 356 c i t e d above. - 64 -t h a t N a s i k h has a tendency toward such s t y l i s t i c elements as nazuk k h a y a l i : s a k h t - o s a n g i n a l f 5 z ( u n n e c e s s a r i l y d i f f i c u l t l e x i c a l i t e m s w h i c h o b s c u r e t h e verse's meaning); k h a y a l band! and dushvar p a s a n d i ( l o v e o f d i f f i c u l t and c o m p l i c a t e d i m a g e s ) ; 29 p h a s i n d e a l f a z ; t a s a v v u f ( m y s t i c a l themes); and namak-i 30 z a r a f a t i n language ( s p i c y w i t t i c i s m s ) . And l a t e r c r i t i c s have c l e a r l y i n c o r p o r a t e d Azad's i n s i g h t s i n t o t h e i r own terms o f a n a l y s i s . F o r example, most o f t h e above c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s seem t o be i m p l i e d by t h e terms " r i ' a y a t - i l a f z i " and "mazmun a f i r i n i . " p e r h a p s t h e two most common c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n s o f Lucknow's p o e t i c s t y l e . Azad i s i n d e e d a m a s t e r f u l r h e t o r i c i a n and d i p l o m a t . W h i l e drawing a g r e a t d e a l o f a t t e n t i o n t o l i n g u i s t i c usage as a p r i m a r y d e f i c i e n c y o f L a k h n a v i p o e t r y i n h i s s e c t i o n o f c r i t i c a l comments on N a s i k h ' s p o e t r y , he s t r o n g l y s u g g e s t s t h a t A t i s h , on t h e o t h e r hand, i s not t o o d i f f i c u l t o r a b s t r u s e , but 31 r a t h e r t h a t he i s r e f r e s h i n g l y s i m p l e . Y e t Azad w i l l n o t commit h i m s e l f t o f o r t h r i g h t s t a t e m e n t s o f h i s own p r e f e r e n c e . He ends by s a y i n g t h a t " I n my own o p i n i o n t h e r e i s no re a s o n t o f a u l t e i t h e r o f t h e two r i v a l s o r t h e i r f o l l o w e r s , s i n c e t h e r e i s no l a c k o f accomplishment on e i t h e r s i d e . R a t h e r , t h e y were o f two d i f f e r e n t d i s p o s i t i o n s , t h e r e f o r e t h e i r t a s t e s were 29. I t i s u n c l e a r what i s meant by t h i s p h r a s e . 30. A zad, Qp_. C i t . . pp.347;356-62. 31. ftb-i Hayat. p.356 - 65 -d i f f e r e n t . P e o p l e can s a y whatever t h e y w i l l . . . " Once a g a i n , Azad's d i s c u s s i o n o f A t i s h r e i t e r a t e s a p o l a r i z a t i o n between t h e two L a k h n a v i u s t a d s . N a s i k h , t h e exemplar o f t h e L a k h n a v i s t y l e , w hich Azad s u g g e s t s i s n o t q u i t e up t o s t a n d a r d , i s g i v e n about t h r e e t i m e s as much space as A t i s h , t o whom l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m has been c o n s i s t e n t l y more s y m p a t h e t i c . The s e c t i o n on him i s o n l y f o u r t e e n pages l o n g . Of t h i s , t h r e e - a n d - a - h a l f pages c o m p r i s e t h e i n t i k h S b o f h i s g h a z a l s ; about f i v e c o n t a i n s p e c i f i c examples o f p o e t r y w i t h c r i t i c a l commentary; and f i v e c o n t a i n b i o g r a p h i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n on A t i s h , i n c l u d i n g a b r i e f l i s t o f h i s most famous p u p i l s . There i s o n l y one a n ecdote about A t i s h w h ich does n o t s p e c i f i c a l l y r e l a t e t o h i s p o e t r y ; i t r e l a t e s t o h i s f o n dness f o r t h e company o f b o t h h i s p u p i l s and h i s r e g a r d 33 f o r h i s g r e a t r i v a l , N a s i k h . I n s h o r t , Azad seems t o view A t i s h q u i t e s y m p a t h e t i c a l l y . Even when he d i s c u s s e s q u e s t i o n a b l e language use i n A t i s h ' s p o e t r y , he i s i n c l i n e d t o c o n s i d e r t h e s e as "words which r e f l e c t t h e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e e a s t e r n and w e s t e r n 34 i d i o m s . " By c o n t r a s t , t h e s e c t i o n on N a s i k h and language r e f o r m — f o r w h i c h Lucknow i s famous t o t h i s d a y — i s l i m i t e d t o a few e x p r e s s i o n s . Even t h e s e r e f i n e m e n t s he s c r u p u l o u s l y 32. O p . C i t . . p.361. 33. A b - i Hayat. p.397. 34. Ab_-i Hay5t. p.394. - 66 -c r e d i t s to Nasikh's p u p i l Rashk (who presented his own work 35 merely as an edited version of his l a t e ustad's work) rather than to Nasikh himself. Once again, Nasikh's contribution to Urdu l i t e r a t u r e i s e f f e c t i v e l y diminished. Despite his apparent prejudice against poets l i k e Nasikh, and his strong partisanship i n favor of his own ustSd Zauq, Azad, in Sb-i HaySt. contributes much invaluable information about major poets that might otherwise be l o s t to modern Urdu readers. He also conveys a deeply f e l t c r i t i c a l sense about Urdu l i t e r a t u r e . His observations on Lakhnavi language r e f l e c t a genuine concern about the d i r e c t i o n s i n which Urdu was moving as i t continued to develop as a l i t e r a r y language. This concern i s not s u p e r f i c i a l by any means. The s i g n i f i c a n c e of Azad's s p e c i f i c comments regarding Lakhnavis* command of language—such as that which related Atish's "mispronunciation" of the word "begam" (or "begum" as the case may be) may not be f u l l y apprehended by the outsider. Yet they c e r t a i n l y convey a c r u c i a l connection, recognized by Azad at l e a s t , between how a language i s spoken and what that speech t e l l s about i t s speaker. Language—like the l i t e r a t u r e for which i t i s a v e h i c l e — i s a r e f l e c t i o n of a speaker's i d e n t i t y , of what his or her values are. Since the ebb of Mughal culture and i t s values i s , a f t e r a l l , Azad's primary i n s p i r a t i o n for 3 5 . I have never seen a copy of t h i s work, but various scholars in India agree to i t s existence, e.g. Professor Naiyar Masud of Lucknow University and Shamsur Rahman Faruqi. - 67 -writing Ab-i Hayat. the r e f l e c t i o n of that ebb in Lakhnavi language spoke worlds to the Maulana. Although such differences i n d i a l e c t or idiom alone would not j u s t i f y a designation of separate poetic schools—and indeed we r e i t e r a t e that Azad did not i n fact make such a formal d e s i g n a t i o n — t h e i r weight in a culture which defines i t s e l f a great deal by language must not go unrecognized. That Azad conveyed t h i s aspect of c u l t u r a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n so strongly leaves l i t t l e wonder that his writing has proved to be the cornerstone of Urdu l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m , and perhaps the single most important monument of s e l f - i d e n t i f i c a t i o n to many Indian Muslims. - 68 -CHAPTER V LAKHNAVI POETRY IN HALI'S MUOADDAMA-I SHE'R-O SHA'IRI The Muqaddama-i She'r-o S h a ' i r i (1893) 1 i s the second pioneering work of Urdu l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m , and i s of rather a di f f e r e n t nature than Azad's Ab-i Hayat. O r i g i n a l l y written and published as the introduction to Hali's divan, the Mugaddama i s a t r e a t i s e on how to reform Urdu poetry, e s p e c i a l l y the ghazal. Though d i f f e r e n t in i t s main thrust from Ab-i Hayat f Hali's work has had an influence no less s i g n i f i c a n t on the development of a c r i t i c a l framework in Urdu l i t e r a r y theory. A devout Muslim, H a l i was dedicated to using his own l i t e r a r y e f f o r t s to advance the cause of Indian Islam. Because of his pie t y , his conversance with Western l i t e r a t u r e , and his well-known association with the great ustad Mirza Ghalib, Hali commands a tremendous respect in the world of Urdu l e t t e r s . His word i s considered no less authoritative than that of Maulana Azad. As was mentioned in the e a r l i e r outline of the Two School theory's genesis in l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m , Lakhnavi poets—and discussion of Lucknow in g e n e r a l — f i g u r e much less prominently in the Mugaddama than they did in Ab-i Hayat. Nowhere are they singled o u t — e i t h e r i n d i v i d u a l l y or as a gr o u p — f o r s p e c i f i c 1. The edition used for t h i s study was published in Delhi: Maktaba-i Jami'a Limited, 1981. - 69 -s c r u t i n y by H a l i . A v e r y few examples of v e r s e by N a s i k h and A t i s h a r e p r e s e n t e d i n i l l u s t r a t i o n o f H a l i ' s e n umerations of where change i s needed, and o n l y one s h e ' r . by A t i s h , i s c i t e d f o r p o e t i c v i r t u e . I n f a c t L a k h n a v i p o e t r y i s mentioned almost i n c i d e n t a l l y t o t h e Muqaddama's f o c a l d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e f a t e of Urdu l i t e r a t u r e . Y e t t h i s second work o f l i t e r a r y a n a l y s i s has been i n s t r u m e n t a l i n f o r m i n g a c r i t i c a l framework f o r a s s e s s i n g Urdu p o e t r y i n t h e modern e r a , and H a l i ' s n o t i o n s o f what c o n s t i t u t e 2 " n a t u r a l p o e t r y " l a t e r became i n t e g r a t e d i n t o c r i t i c i s m ' s f u l l - b l o w n Two S c h o o l t h e o r y . As s u c h , they have had a c r u c i a l impact on Urdu c r i t i c s ' a n a l y s i s o f L a k h n a v i p o e t r y . T h i s s e c t i o n w i l l examine H a l i ' s t r e a t m e n t o f Lucknow. A l s o mentioned e a r l i e r was t h e a s s o c i a t i o n o f b o t h Azad 3 and H a l i w i t h groups of l i t e r a r y r e f o r m e r s . Both men were concerned about and m o t i v a t e d by t h e a l a r m i n g d e c l i n e o f Muslim c u l t u r e i n l a t e - n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y I n d i a . But w h i l e A b - i Hayat was a monument t o Indo-Muslim c u l t u r e ' s former g l o r y — t o t r a d i t i o n s w hich were dear t o Azad's h e a r t and w h i c h he 2. " N e c a r a l s h a ' i r l . " 3. W h i l e H a l i was a s s o c i a t e d w i t h S i r S a y y i d Ahmad Khan's A l i g a r h Movement, b e f o r e t h e f o r m a t i o n of the A l i g a r h Movement t h e r e were B r i t i s h - s p o n s o r e d l i t e r a r y c i r c l e s i n L a h o r e . Perhaps the most i m p o r t a n t o f t h e s e was the Anjuman-i P a n j a b , whose i n t e r e s t i n " v e r n a c u l a r l i t e r a t u r e impregnated w i t h the s p i r i t o f the West" [ S a d i q , Muhammad Husain Azad: H i s L i f e and  Work. Lahore: 1965, p.24] may be seen as k i n d r e d i n purpose t o the A l i g a r h g r o u p . Azad was a f f i l i a t e d w i t h t h i s e a r l i e r group but not w i t h t h e A l i g a r h Movement per s e . - 70 -r e g r e t t e d t o s e e d i e — t h e p r i m a r y e m p h a s i s o f t h e Muqaddama i s t o i m p r e s s upon i t s a u d i e n c e t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f i n c o r p o r a t i n g t h e r e f o r m s o u t l i n e d by i t s a u t h o r i n t o a f r e s h , r e v i t a l i z e d l i t e r a t u r e f o r I n d i a n M u s l i m s . The d i f f e r e n c e may be e x p r e s s e d as f o l l o w s : A z a d ' s p o i n t o f v i e w was i n c l i n e d t o w a r d a g l o r i f i c a t i o n o f t h e o l d a e s t h e t i c s , r a t h e r t h a n t h e d i s c o v e r y 4 o f new s o l u t i o n s f o r I n d o - M u s l i m c u l t u r e . One i n f e r s t h a t A zad s o u g h t r e f o r m s w h i c h w o u l d i n v o l v e a r e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o r r e v i t a l i z a t i o n o f t r a d i t i o n a l s t a n d a r d s and p r a c t i c e s . The i n t e r n a l s t a n d a r d s would be drawn f r o m t h e example s e t by t h e g r e a t D i h l a v i p o e t s , who, i n o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e L a k h n a v i s , a r e p r e s e n t e d as a d h e r e n t s t o t h e t r a d i t i o n a l a e s t h e t i c o f P e r s i a n p o e t r y . T h i s i s A z a d ' s f r a m e o f r e f e r e n c e . I t r e n d e r s q u i t e c o m p r e h e n s i b l e h i s s t r e s s on p e r c e i v e d c u l t u r a l and l i t e r a r y d i f f e r e n c e s between D e l h i and Lucknow as d e l i b e r a t e , e v e n an i n f e r e n c e t h a t t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s may have been p e r v e r s e l y i n s t i g a t e d by t h e L a k h n a v i s ; and a s c a u s a l i n t h e d e c l i n e o f Mughal c u l t u r e . 5 H a l i , on t h e o t h e r h a n d , blames Mughal d e c l i n e on a s o r t o f p e r v a s i v e m o r a l l a s s i t u d e i n M u s l i m s o c i e t y , t y i n g i t t o t h e m i l i t a r y and p o l i t i c a l d e c l i n e o f t h e Mughals i n t h e f a c e o f 4 . R e c a l l t h a t S a d i q had s a i d : " A b - i Hayat i s a m e m o r i a l t o t h e o l d l o v e s and l o y a l t i e s , d o u b l y s a c r e d b e c a u s e t h e y had c e a s e d t o e x i s t . " A z a d : H i s L i f e and Works, p.4 8 . 5. The above d i s c u s s i o n f o c u s e s on g h a z a l r e f o r m , and n e i t h e r a d d r e s s e s n o r d i m i n i s h e s t h e s e p a r a t e i s s u e o f H a l i ' s i d e a s on t h e new p o e t i c f o r m , nazm. - 71 -B r i t i s h t e r r i t o r i a l e x p a n s i o n . He seeks s a l v a t i o n i n the a d o p t i o n o f Western modes: s i n c e w e s t e r n e r s were the new c o n q u e r o r s of I n d i a t h e i r c u l t u r e must, t h e r e f o r e , be more 6 v i t a l t h a n t h a t o f I n d i a n I s l a m . T h i s c o n t r a s t i n o u t l o o k i s r e m i n i s c e n t o f t h a t which e x i s t e d between the W e s t e r n - l o o k i n g " A l i g a r h S c h o o l " and Deoband's I s l a m i c r e v i v a l i s t s . 7 They w i l l be d i s c u s s e d , b r i e f l y , i n t h e c o n c l u d i n g c h a p t e r o f t h i s s t u d y . The reforms H a l i c a l l s f o r a r e based on h i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f Western l i t e r a r y p r i n c i p l e s . He had been i n t r o d u c e d t o t h e 8 w r i t i n g o f M i l t o n , Macaulay and a few o t h e r E n g l i s h w r i t e r s d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e o f h i s employment by t h e B r i t i s h government, i n w h i c h c a p a c i t y he c o r r e c t e d t r a n s l a t i o n s o f E n g l i s h works i n t o Urdu. The p r i m a r y c o n d i t i o n s f o r good p o e t r y are c i t e d i n the Muqaddama as t a k j i a i y y u l ( i m a g i n a t i o n ) , ka' i n a t ka m u t a l a 'a 6. See t h e Muqaddama. p.192, where H a l i e x p l a i n s why Western c o u n t r i e s a r e " s u p e r i o r " i n a r t , s c i e n c e and i n d u s t r y . 7. A l t h o u g h , as i t happens, H a l i was a s s o c i a t e d w i t h A l i g a r h . For f u l l e r t r e a t m e n t of t h e s e r e f o r m movements, see D a v i d L e l y v e l d , A l i g a r h ' s F i r s t G e n e r a t i o n : Muslim S o l i d a r i t y i n B r i t i s h I n d i a . P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1978; and B a r b a r a D a l y M e t c a l f , I s l a m i c R e v i v a l i n B r i t i s h I n d i a : Deoband, 1860-1900. P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1982. I am i n d e b t e d t o F r i t z Lehmann f o r t h i s o b s e r v a t i o n . 8. S i r W a l t e r S c o t t ' s p o e t r y i s g i v e n b r i e f d i s c u s s i o n , f o r example; pp.56-57, as i s t h e work o f O l i v e r G o l d s m i t h , pp.41-42. Of some i n t e r e s t i s L a u r e l S t e e l e ' s o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t H a l i ' s exposure t o t h e s e E n g l i s h c l a s s i c s would have come t h r o u g h v e r s i o n s t r a n s l a t e d i n t o Urdu. See " H a l i and h i s Muqaddamah: The C r e a t i o n o f a L i t e r a r y A t t i t u d e i n N i n e t e e n t h C e n t u r y I n d i a , " pp.1-45 i n Annual of Urdu S t u d i e s , n o . l , 1981, p.8. - 72 -(consideration of existing things), and tafahhus-i a l f az 9 (scrutiny of word choice); and l a t e r on, e s s e n t i a l l y r e f e r r i n g to the same desired conditions, the q u a l i t i e s are referred to as sadagi ( s i m p l i c i t y ) , josh (passion, emotion) and a s l i y a t ( r e a l i t y ) . 1 0 These p r i n c i p l e s are openly borrowed from Milton's exhortation that poetry should "have s i m p l i c i t y , should spring from emotion, and should be based on t r u t h . " 1 1 It i s not within the scope of t h i s p a r t i c u l a r study to address the f u l l scale of Hali's l i t e r a r y v i s i o n . That has 12 been done by other scholars. The purpose here i s to examine the extent to which Hali's Mugaddama. in contributing to the development of l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m in Urdu, helped to e s t a b l i s h the l i t e r a r y reputation of Lucknow and so to pave the way for the a r t i c u l a t i o n of a Two School theory, based on markazi d i s t i n c t i o n . Consistent with the difference i n thrust from Azad's work, the Mugaddama d i f f e r s s t r u c t u r a l l y from i t s predecessor. Ab-i 9. Mugaddama.pp.50-58. 10. Op.Cit.. pp.67-78. 11. Op. Cit.., p.68: "Milton.. .kahta hai k i she ' r k i khubl yih  hai kih sada ho, josh se bhara hua ho, aur a s l i y a t par mabni ho." 12. Cf. Laurel Steele, Op.Cit.: Wahid Quraishi, Ed. Mugaddama  She'r-o-Sha'iri, reprint e d i t i o n , Aligarh, 1977; Salihah Abid Husain, Yadgar-i H51i f Aligarh, n.d.; Shuja'at ' A l i S a n d i l v i , Hali ba-Haisiyat-i Sha'ir, Lucknow, 1960; Kalim ud-Din Ahmad, Urdu S h a ' i r i par Ek Nazar: and Saiyid Masu'd Hasan R i z v i "Adib," Hamari Sha' i r i ' . Lucknow, 1923, 1964; V.Alavi, H a l l . Mugaddama aur Ham, Allahabad, 1983; and Salim Ahmad, "Nal Nazm aur Pura Admi," Karachi, 1962? - 73 -Hayat had vaguely followed the t a z k i r a format—while also providing a narrative describing the h i s t o r i c a l evolution of Urdu l i t e r a t u r e — a n d thereby reiterated the established method for presentation of secondary l i t e r a t u r e in the Perso-Arabic t r a d i t i o n . The Muqaddama. however, i s the f i r s t book of c r i t i c i s m in Urdu not based on the t a z k i r a model. Hali's Muqaddama employs a new r h e t o r i c a l technique for writing in Urdu. Having the form of an essay, i t i s a d i d a c t i c c a l l for reforms in poetry and society through t h e i r interdependence upon one another. Along the way, i t traces the history of Islamic l i t e r a r y antecedents to Urdu. Hali assesses the state of Urdu during his own time (the assessment i s not favorable) and then outlines what changes would be required for the sort of reform he envisions. He does not focus upon the work of s p e c i f i c poets, presenting b r i e f intikhabs of the i r verse as a t a z k i r a writer would do, although he c e r t a i n l y draws heavily upon a few poets of his own choosing i n corroborating arguments about what i s good and bad in the writing of poetry in general. Hali's approach—in both the Muqaddama's format and a n a l y t i c a l scope—constitutes a s i g n i f i c a n t turning point for Urdu l e t t e r s . In further contrast to the structure of Ab-i Hayat. the Muqaddama manifests less concern with the Delhi-Lucknow r i v a l r y . H ali believes that Urdu poetry as a whole requires serious reform, and he does l i t t l e to bolster the idea that two - 7 4 -s e p a r a t e s c h o o l s e x i s t , or t h a t d i f f e r e n t s t a n d a r d s p e r t a i n i n 13 the two s e a t s o f Urdu c u l t u r e . To the e x t e n t t h a t he o f f e r s p o l a r o p p o s i t e s o f "what i s good and what i s bad," t h e two p o l e s would be I n d i a n (Urdu) l i t e r a t u r e and Western ( E n g l i s h ) l i t e r a t u r e r a t h e r t h a n D i h l a v i and L a k h n a v i . I n t h e m a t t e r o f lan g u a g e , H a l i w r i t e s : "Those p e o p l e who c o n s i d e r t h e m s e l v e s masters o f lan g u a g e , t h a t i s , t h e p e o p l e o f D e l h i o r t h e p e o p l e o f Lucknow, s h o u l d n o t t a k e t o o much p r i d e i n t h i s m a t t e r , t h i n k i n g t h a t t h e a u t h o r i t y o f t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r i d i o m s h o u l d be o b s e r v e d . They must remember t h a t i f t h e y do not t a k e c a r e t o improve and p r o t e c t t h e i r l a n g u a g e . . . i t w i l l n e i t h e r p r o g r e s s nor d e v e l o p i n p o e t r y o r p r o s e . " In o t h e r words, r a t h e r t h a n p l a c e one markaz i n a p o s i t i o n o f h i g h e r a u t h o r i t y t h a n t h e o t h e r , H a l i d e s i g n a t e s b o t h p l a c e s as the b a s t i o n s o f c u l t u r a l a u t h o r i t y i n t h e Urdu w o r l d . I n f a c t he a s s e r t s t h a t whatever d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t between t h e two a r e m i n i m a l anyway. H a l i ' s emphasis i s on t h e imminent danger f a c i n g b o t h D e l h i and Lucknow as s u s t a i n e r s o f Indo-Muslim c u l t u r e ; and on t h e u r g e n t need f o r p r a c t i t i o n e r s o f language i n b o t h p l a c e s t o pay heed t o the cha n g i n g needs o f language and l i t e r a t u r e i n a c h a n g i n g s o c i e t y , l e s t t h e y c o m p l e t e l y l o s e 15 t h e i r a r t i s t i c v i t a l i t y . 13. A l t h o u g h , as w i l l be demonstrated below, he does s t a t e t h a t D i h l a v i p o e t s do not commit the " s i n " o f r i ' a y a t - i l a f z i . which he d e p i c t s as a p r i m a r i l y L a k h n a v i " d e f e c t . " 14. Mugaddama. p.117. 15. I n the f i n a l c h a p t e r the i s s u e w i l l be t a k e n up o f t h e c o n n e c t i o n between t h i s c a l l f o r a r e c o n s t i t u t e d a r t i s t i c - 75 -Given that for Hali both marakiz together represent a dual authority to Indian Muslims, there would seem to be l i t t l e p o i n t — i n his v i e w — i n promoting an i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of oneself as Lakhnavi or D i h l a v i : both are Urdu speakers, and must address themselves to the requirements of Muslim society in a changing India. One of the greatest changes of his times i s the loss of a "ruler vs. ruled" relationship between Muslims and Hindus—they are now a l l ruled by the B r i t i s h . I m p l i c i t l y acknowledging t h i s change, Hali remarks upon the need for Urdu's leadership to look thoroughly at t h e i r own environment, not just at the Islamic antecedents of Urdu, to Indian influences as well: " I t i s not enough to simply follow in the footsteps of D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi language i f [we are] to achieve high standards in Urdu.. .rather i t i s also necessary,to pay attention to Arabic and H i n d i . . . " 1 0 This p r e s c r i p t i o n runs counter to the general nineteenth century trend to make Urdu more esote r i c , more elegant and elaborate by discarding Indian words and replacing them with vocabulary borrowed from Persian and Arabic. Examples of this Persianate language are to be found in most of the Urdu poets 17 of the century. In t h i s way Hali advocates a new sort of v i t a l i t y and the Aligarh Movement's desire to reclaim a favorable p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l p osition for Indian Muslims. 16. Muqaddamaf p.118. 17. Especially the great ustads l i k e Nasikh, Ghalib and Zauq and Shah Nasir, to name a few. These same poets comprise our - 76 -i d e n t i f i c a t i o n for Indian Muslims, one which emphasizes the "Indian" as well as the "Muslim." Within such an "umbrella" i d e n t i f i c a t i o n the importance of i n d i v i d u a l c i t y - i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i s diminished, thus comparisons of Lucknow and Delhi in c u l t u r a l terms are not at a l l emphasized in the Mugaddama. The Mugaddama elaborates upon a number of issues given b r i e f e r mention in Ab-i Hayat. For example, H a l i echoes Azad's decrying of "worn-out themes" in the ghazal, and the need to have poetry " f u l l y express our every goal and every kind of 18 desire in our hearts." Azad did not argue t h i s point prominently, but i t contributes s i g n i f i c a n t l y to the major thrust of Hali's t r e a t i s e . "Worn-out themes" run contrary to the concept of a s l i y a t . or ka'inat ka mutala'ah, and i n t e r f e r e with the achievement of a poetry which i s "natural." As did Azad, Hali decries over-elaborated, or a r t i f i c a l , language. Both g u a l i t i e s , i n his eyes, contribute to an emotional shallowness, and thus to the moral decline of l i t e r a t u r e . And yet i t must be realized that the Mugaddama contains a number of contradictions. Hali makes the general statement that " a r t i f i c e in words (san'at-i. alfaz) has caused i n f i n i t e 19 damage to our poetry, in fact to our entire l i t e r a t u r e , " for example, but then contradicts himself on the very next page by own sample group in Chapter IX's l i t e r a r y test of the Two School theory. See below. 18. Ab-i Hayat, p.81; Mugaddama, p.159. 19. Mugaddama. p. 183. - 77 -laying that crime at the feet of Lakhnavi poets only: "In general, a r t i f i c i a l and ingenious constructions and r h e t o r i c a l flourishes are r a r e l y — i n f a c t , i t must be s a i d , never—found in the poets of Delhi; while a number of the Lakhnavi poets made i t s s t r i c t a pplication compulsory. And in comparison with the people of Delhi, even the most ordinary Lakhnavi poets were overly concerned with r i ' a y a t - i l a f z i (word-play)." This p a r t i c u l a r statement i s not corroborated with examples of Lakhnavi poetry which i l l u s t r a t e i t s concern with r i ' a y a t - i l a f z l ; nor, indeed, which would i l l u s t r a t e what Hali means by the term. Furthermore, the claim runs contrary to the impression given by corroborative examples presented elsewhere throughout the Muqaddama. Those corroborative examples are drawn almost exclusively from D i h l a v i poets (when they are not drawn from Persian), and would appear to serve as instances of s a n 1 a t - i a l f a z ( a r t i f i c e in words), improper treatment of themes (mazamin), and other poetic defects in addition to 21 excellences achieved by the same poets. There are eight she'rs by Atish in the Muqaddama and two by Nasikh. Though these numbers seem almost too few to extrapolate any p a r t i c u l a r point of view at a l l on Hali's part, they do appear to reinforce the Delhi-Lucknow and Atish-Nasikh pol a r i z a t i o n s that were suggested in Ab-i Hayat. and which have been since reiterated in succeeding c r i t i c i s m . Both she'rs by 20. Op.Cit.. p.184. 21. See e s p e c i a l l y "unnatural" she 1rs by Ghalib, Amir Minai and Zauq on p.105 of the Muqaddama. - 78 -Nasikh are presented as examples of "unnatural" poetry, as are six of those by Atish; while two of Atish's verses are presented for t h e i r l i t e r a r y merit. On pages 85 and 86 two sets of three she'rs each are presented as i l l u s t r a t i o n s of f a i l e d "naturalness:" Fursat ik dam *ahd-i t i f l i men na rone se m i l l Parvarish paya hu'a hun daman-i s a i l a b ka In my childhood not for a moment Did I gain respite from crying: I've been brought up in the s k i r t s of the flood . v n/Jp\i fro*r& Jama'-i tan ho gaya rah-i 'adam men nazar-i gor Bojh uthaya tha magar thag ke l i y e asbab ka Along the road to non-being the e f f e c t s of my body became an o f f e r i n g for the grave: It was as i f I'd borne t h i s burden for the sole sake of the robber. S a h i l - i maqsud dekha main ne ja kar gor men Dubna k a s h t i - i tan ko muzhda tha payab ka I went to the grave and saw the desired shore: The drowning of the ship of my body brought the glad tidings 2 ? of feet touching the ground. Hali's c r i t i c i s m of these f i r s t three verses i s that "while one 22. Mugaddama„ p.85. - 7 9 -m i g h t , w i t h g r e a t d i f f i c u l t y , e x t r a c t some sense o f r e a l i t y ( a s l i y a t ) from them, t h e r e i s n e i t h e r , as i s a p p a r e n t , s a d a g i 23 i n t h e i r e x p r e s s i o n , nor j o s h . " U n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e t r u t h o f H a l i ' s a s s e s s m e n t — w h i l e v e r y l i k e l y u n i m p e a c h a b l e — i s not n e c e s s a r i l y a p p a r e n t , and i s n o t e l a b o r a t e d upon as a r e o t h e r 24 such c l a i m s e l s e w h e r e . In t h e second s e t , " a l t h o u g h t h e s e t h r e e s h e ' r s a r e u n b l e m i s h e d , a p a r t from s i m p l i c i t y o f e x p r e s s i o n — a s i s 25 a p p a r e n t — t h e r e i s n e i t h e r a s l i y a t nor j o s h : " T i r i t a q l i d se k a b k - i d a r l ne thokareff k h a y i n C h a l a j a b j a n v a r i n s a n k i c h a l us ka c h a l a n b i g r a I m i t a t i n g you t h e mountain p a r t r i d g e stumbled When an a n i m a l w a l k s l i k e a human b e i n g i t s g a i t i s compromised. Nahin b e - v a j h hansna i s qadar zakhm-i s h a h i d a n ka T i r i t a l v a r ka munh kucch na kucch ae t e g h zan b i g r a The wounds o f t h e m a r t y r s do not l a u g h f o r no r e a s o n : Swordswoman, somehow your weapon seems t o have l o s t f a c e . Amanat k i t a r a h rakha zamln ne r o z - i mahshar t a k Na i k mu kam hu'a apna na i k t a r - i k a f a n b i g r a 23. I b i d . 24. See d i s c u s s i o n s o f N a s i k h ' s s h e ' r s below. 25. Mugaddama. p.86. - 80 -The ground provided safekeeping t i l l the Day of Judgment: Not a hair was out of place not a s t r i p of my shroud decayed. Again, Hali does not elaborate upon these she'rs' manifest lack of a s l i y a t and josh. The she'r below i s c i t e d in the context of a generation-by-generation sampler of c l a s s i c treatment of 'ishq in the Urdu ghazal. The implied honor to At i s h i s considerable, since he i s the representative of the F i f t h 2 6 Epoch here, following Mir, Sauda, and Shah Abru: Takhta nard-i 'ishq d i l khela jo husn-i yar se Cchut gaye aise mire cchakke kih shashdar ho gaya On the chess-board of love where the heart squares o f f against the Beloved I'm bewildered into checkmate. In the f i n a l appearance of Atish's poetry i n the Muqaddama. the following she'r i s c i t e d for how true i t s expression i s to idiomatic speech: Chal hai mujh natavan k i murgji-i bismil k i tarap Har qadam par hai yaqin yan rah gayS van rah gaya My exhausted gait 26. H a l i does dot divide l i t e r a r y eras quite the same way as Azad and Nadvi, but says that Atish may be considered to be of the fourth or f i f t h generation—chautha ya panchvan tabqa. p . n o . - 81 -i s t he f l a p p i n g o f a wounded b i r d : E very s t e p I'm c e r t a i n i s my l a s t — o r maybe i t w i l l be t h e n e x t . In c o r r o b o r a t i o n o f H a l i ' s assessment t h a t t h i s s h e ' r i s c o m p l e t e l y i d i o m a t i c i s t h e f a c t t h a t a s a t i s f a c t o r y t r a n s l a t i o n y e t e l u d e s t h i s w r i t e r . The Muqaddama's o n l y two examples o f N a s i k h ' s v e r s e appear i n t h e i n t r o d u c t o r y d i s c u s s i o n o f " n a t u r a l p o e t r y . " D i r e c t l y f o l l o w i n g a l i s t o f e i g h t s h e ' r s w h i c h m a n i f e s t 2 8 " n a t u r a l n e s s " H a l i b e g i n s h i s examples o f f a i l e d " n a t u r a l n e s s " w i t h t h i s v e r s e by N a s i k h : K a b h i h a i dhyan ' a r i z ka k a b h i y a d - i mizha d i l ko k a b h l h a i khar p a h l u men k a b h i g u l - z a r p a h l u men Sometimes I c o n t e m p l a t e her cheek sometimes my h e a r t r e c a l l s an e y e l a s h Sometimes I have a t h o r n i n my_side sometimes a garden by my s i d e . Of t h i s f i r s t example H a l i o p i n e s t h a t N a s i k h employs r e a s o n a b l y n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e , but t h a t the she' r cannot be c a M e d n a t u r a l i n meaning. He s a y s : " T h i s v e r s e can o n l y be c a l l e d n a t u r a l i n terms o f v o c a b u l a r y . But i n terms o f meaning i t cannot be [ c a l l e d n a t u r a l ] . D o u b t l e s s c o n t e m p l a t i o n o f the B e l o v e d can b r i n g t h e ' a s h i q j o y or p a i n . But when i t b r i n g s 27. Muqaddama. p.180. 28. The n e c u r a l a s h ' a r a r e by M i r Hasan, Zauq, Z a f a r , Momin, Dagh and G h a l i b — a l l D i h l a v i s . 29. Muqaddama. p.104. - 82 -j o y , t h e n t h e c o n t e m p l a t i o n must be o f b o t h t h e cheek and t h e e y e l a s h . And when i t b r i n g s p a i n t h e n t h e p a i n must come from c o n t e m p l a t i o n o f b o t h [cheek and e y e l a s h ] . I t cannot be t h a t e y e l a s h e s — w h i c h resemble t h o r n s — c a n have t h e e f f e c t of t h o r n s from c o n t e m p l a t i o n ; and the c h e e k — w h i c h resembles t h e r o s e — c a n n o t - h a v e the e f f e c t o f a garden j u s t by b e i n g i m a g i n e d . " In o t h e r words, H a l i c o n s i d e r s t h e v e r s e l a c k i n g i n a s l i y a t . The o t h e r example of N a s i k h ' s p o e t r y i s : J a - i k a f u r - i s a h r c h a h i y e k a f u r - i hunut y i h s h a b - i h i j r ' h a i y§ro s h a b - i d a i j u r n a h i n What's needed, Love, i n p l a c e o f t h e s o o t h i n g break o f dawn a r e embalming s a l t s : i t ' s n o t w i n t e r ' s l o n g e s t d a r k e s t n i g h t but t h e n i g h t o f s e p a r a t i o n . T h i s second s h e ' r . says H a l i , i s p e r f e c t l y p l a u s i b l e because i t e l a b o r a t e s upon t h e f a m i l i a r theme o f how l o n g a n i g h t i n s e p a r a t i o n from th e B e l o v e d can seem; and because i t i s q u i t e p l a u s i b l e t h a t , when each minute and each hour seems t o t a k e as l o n g t o pass by as a whole l i f e t i m e , an ' a s h i q might w e l l 32 become a g i t a t e d enough t o d e s i r e d e a t h . B u t , says H a l i , " N a s i k h ' s e x p r e s s i o n i n t h i s s j i ' g r . i s so f a r removed from r e g u l a r Urdu p a r l a n c e t h a t i t can i n no way be c o n s i d e r e d a 30. Muqaddama. p.104. 31. O p . C i t . . p . l l l . 32. The d e s i r e f o r d e a t h i s s i g n i f i e d i n the above s h e ' r by t h e ' a s h i q ' s c a l l f o r enbalming f l u i d i n s t e a d o f t h e a r r i v a l o f dawn. - 83 -natural expression." Hali's s p e c i f i c objection to the second of the above pair of she'rs. then, i s that i t s language i s unnatural because i t i s not c o l l o q u i a l . Recalling that Azad objected to Nasikh on the grounds that his language was too elaborate and that his admiration of Atish's poetry lay in i t s collo q u i a l i s m , i t would seem that the primary c r i t e r i o n of analysis for both Hali and Azad i s language usage, s p e c i f i c a l l y sadaai ( s i m p l i c i t y ) . The word "hanut" (embalming) i s c e r t a i n l y not c o l l o q u i a l — i n f a c t , i t does not even appear in P l a t t s ' d i c t i o n a r y . The expression "daijur" or "shab-i d a i j u r " i s not in common parlance, but i s not as obscure as "hanut," and i t does appear regularly throughout Nasikh's divan. Hali does not specify, but one wonders i f his objection to the she'r doesn't l i e more in i t s s l i g h t l y macabre v i s u a l image than in i t s actual vocabulary. In other words, i s Hali's objection r e a l l y to the language of t h i s she'r or i s he, rather, judging the appropriateness of introducing " k a f u r - i hanut" into a she'r whose basic theme i s the highly romantic and charged night of separation? Except for one verse by A t i s h , and other examples c u l l e d 34 from marsivas by Anis, Lakhnavi poetry i s presented in the Muqaddama as d e f i c i e n t . On the other hand, examples of poetry 33. "Nasikji k i t a r z - i bay5n Urdu k i ma'mull bol chal se i s qadar ba'id hai k i us ko k i s l tarah necural bayan nahln kaha j i sakta." p . l l l . 34. For example, see p.74. - 84 -considered to f u l f i l l the requirements of josh, a s l i v a t and sadagi come from Arabic, Persian, and (in Urdu) ce r t a i n D i h l a v i 35 poets. While D i h l a v i poets also appear occasionally to i l l u s t r a t e f a u l t y verse, t h e i r appearance i n other places in a favorable l i g h t contributes to a more balanced picture of D i h l a v i poetry in general. Overall, except for two she'rs by Nasikh and eight by A t i s h , the Lakhnavi ghazal i s ignored altogether. Thus, whether inadvertently or d e l i b e r a t e l y , Hali's t r e a t i s e on Urdu poetry may be seen to v i r t u a l l y condemn Lucknow by omission. A possible explanation for the paucity of Lakhnavi poets among Hali's examples i s that he was much less f a m i l i a r with t h e i r work than with that of D i h l a v i poets. After a l l , H a li was educated in D e l h i . Not only was he influenced by his patron, Navab Mustafa Khan Shefta (1806-69) as well as the great master, Ghalib; but he would also have had much occasion to hear the verses of the poet laureate, Zauq, and other contemporaries such as Momin and Bahadur Shah Zafar. It i s no surprise, then, that these poets figure so prominently in Hali's examples of Urdu poetry. Despite the impressive volume of foreign l i t e r a t u r e apparently at his f i n g e r t i p s (he quotes Arabic, Persian, and even c i t e s the example of Hebrew poetry in 3 6 his discussion of josh) the dearth of Lakhnavi poetry in the 35. His examples include Ghalib, Zauq, Mir; and, secondarily, Dard, Shefta, and Momin;pp.81-83. 36. Muqaddama, pp.78-79. - 85 -Muqaddama suggests that Hali i s not as well-read as his c r i t i c a l predecessor, or that he i s — e v e n i f benignly—prejudiced against Lucknow, that he considers the work of Lucknow's poets generally unworthy of comment. While Azad had l i t t l e good to say about Nasikh, his remarks did 37 indicate a respectable f a m i l i a r i t y with the poet's work. Despite other differences in outlook, H a l i i s a product of l i t e r a r y circumstances s i m i l a r to those of Azad, and they share certa i n assumptions and a t t i t u d e s . Hali unwittingly bolsters a number of the same myths and prejudices that are expressed by the Maulana. At the very l e a s t , he manifests preferences which have become incorporated into the p o s t - c l a s s i c a l tastes of the general Urdu audience. The dearth of Lakhnavi poetry in the Muqaddama i s the primary r e f l e c t i o n of t h i s . Secondary i s the fact that Atish i s s t i l l looked upon with greater favor than Nasikh. Consistent with the standard treatment of both Lakhnavi ustads i n Urdu c r i t i c i s m , the Muqaddama features considerably less of Nasikh's poetry than of Atish's. S i m i l a r l y , the one example of Lakhnavi poetry which i s c a l l e d "good" (because of being c o l l o q u i a l ) i s by Atish rather than Nasikh, the "Imam of the Lucknow School." Hali follows other points of conventional wisdom, too, sounding the most l i k e Azad when he makes comments such as 37. In f a c t , i t i s inte r e s t i n g to note that the intikhab of Nasikh's ghazals in Ab-i Hayat draws large l y upon the second divan which i s far less known than the f i r s t divan. e n t i t l e d D a f t a r - i Pareshan. - 86 -t h i s : " I n Lucknow the s i t u a t i o n was [such t h a t ] p o e t r y was heard i n g r e a t e r q u a n t i t y t h a n i n D e l h i . . . b u t i t i s u n f o r t u n a t e t h a t t h e f o o t s t e p s [of L a k h n a v i l i t e r a t u r e ] have n ot marched i n s t e p w i t h t h e t i m e s . As much as l i t e r a t u r e has been p r o p a g a t e d , t h a t much h a v e g L a k h n a v i s d e p a r t e d from t h e p r o p e r p a t h o f p r o g r e s s . . . " A b i t f u r t h e r on, u s i n g c r i t e r i a a l s o employed by Azad i n A b - i Hayat. H a l i d i s c u s s e s d e f e c t i v e i d i o m a t i c usage i n L a k h n a v i l a n g u a g e , j u d g i n g t h a t t h e abandonment o f c e r t a i n p h r a s e s i s " e x c e e d i n g l y d e s i r a b l e , because i t i s a l o n g such l i n e s t h a t d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n between D i h l a v i and L a k h n a v i language i s b o r n . I f t h e p e o p l e o f Lucknow were t o d i s c a r d s uch words t h e n we c o u l d i n t r o d u c e many o t h e r s , and no g r e a t change i n t h e scope o f t h e ^ l a n g u a g e would r e s u l t from d i s c o n t i n u i n g t h o s e words." An example o f L a k h n a v i d i c t i o n d i s c u s s e d i s i t s use o f " u j y a l a " f o r " u j a l e " (morning b r i g h t n e s s ) . One wonders how s i g n i f i c a n t t h e employment o r absence o f t h i s word c o u l d be i n such a r i c h l e x i c a l sphere as t h a t o f t h e g h a z a l , and H a l i does not e l a b o r a t e . I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t he draws p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n t o i t p r i m a r i l y because Azad had p o i n t e d i t out i n A b - i H a y a t . 4 0 So H a l i seems t o f o l l o w c r i t i c a l c o n v e n t i o n i n i m p l y i n g t h a t where t h e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e between L a k h n a v i and D i h l a v i i d i o m , the D i h l a v i ought t o be p r e f e r r e d . And y e t , d i s c u s s i n g 38. Mugaddama. pp.117-118. 39. I b i d . 40. Azad, A b - i Hayat. pp.371-72. - 87 -the decline of straightforward (sldhi-sadi) language, Hali mentions a D i h l a v i as well as a number of Lakhnavis: "I t was not that straightforward Urdu was abandoned completely in noble and learned society, rather that such language among intimates came to be seen as f a u l t y , or b a z a r l . This custom [of elaborate, fancy diction] came to dominate prose and poetry. In verse, in the divans of Jur'at and Nasikh; and i n prose, in Baq_h-o Bahar and Fasana-i Aia' i b . . .there i s plenty of proof of t h i s . . . " To recapitulate: Hali does not appear to promote the p o l i c y of Delhi-Lucknow d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n i n the way that we see i t threading in and out of the pages of A b-i Hayat. He says that he does not consider differences between the two c i t i e s , at l east i n terms of idiom, to be s i g n i f i c a n t . He names the 42 major poets associated with Lucknow along with the major D i h l a v i s , in his exhortation to the new generation to study the work of t h e i r predecessors in Urdu l i t e r a t u r e , and to learn from the meritorious example set by those predecessors. And yet H a l i contributes to the Two School theory by t a c i t l y accepting the v a l i d i t y of D i h l a v i idiom over Lakhnavi; by drawing attention to idiomatic usage as a distinguishing feature between D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi poetry; and by presenting Dih l a v i ustSds almost exclusively as the Urdu poets whose work constitutes "necaral poetry." Hali quite overlooks Lakhnavi 41. p.158. Bagh-o Bahar and Fasana-i Aja' ib were the work of writers Mir Amman, a D i h l a v i , and Rajab A l i Beg Suroor, a Lakhnavi. 42. Jur'at, Insha, Mushafi, Nasikh, A t i s h , Vazir, Rind, A s i r , Barq, Anis and Dabir, as well as others, p.116. - 88 -poets except in the few instances already c i t e d . By the time Abdus Salam Nadvi wrote his Ta z k i r a - i She'r-ul Hind in 1926, i t was quite l o g i c a l for him to have assumed that the e x p l i c i t d i s t i n c t i o n he drew between Lakhnavi and D i h l a v i poetry as two separate schools, l a r g e l y because Lakhnavi poetry departed from the older t r a d i t i o n of Urdu and Persian l i t e r a t u r e , was neither new nor c o n t r o v e r s i a l . Rather, i t was a succinct statement of a widespread and commonly-held l i t e r a r y judgment that had been made much e a r l i e r . - 89 -CHAPTER VI ASSESSING NADVI 1S EXPOSITION OF THE TWO SCHOOLS I t w i l l now be e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t Abdus Salam Na d v i p l a y e d a c r u c i a l r o l e i n t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e Two S c h o o l t h e o r y by b e i n g t h e f i r s t Urdu c r i t i c t o c a l l t h e p o e t r y o f D e l h i and t h a t o f Lucknow "Urdu p o e t r y ' s two s e p a r a t e s c h o o l s . " 1 More th a n t h a t , even, N a d v i e x p l i c i t l y enumerated and i l l u s t r a t e d t h e e i g h t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w h i c h , f o r him, d i s t i n g u i s h e d t h e two s c h o o l s . Most o f them a r e c r i t e r i a w h i c h had been s u g g e s t e d s e v e r a l decades b e f o r e by Azad and H a l i , but H a l i and Azad had not e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e d them as t h e e s s e n t i a l p o i n t s o f 2 d i s t i n c t i o n . S h e ' r u i Hind's p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e Two S c h o o l t h e o r y i s t h e f i r s t and most m e t h o d i c a l e x p o s i t i o n o f what l i t e r a r y d i f f e r e n c e s d i s t i n g u i s h t h e d a b i s t a n - i D i l l i from the 3 d a b i s t a n - i Lakhna'u. Na d v i ' s e x p l i c a t i o n s a r e t h e most t h o r o u g h — a n d t h e most c o n c r e t e — o f any i n t h e Two S c h o o l l i t e r a t u r e . As s u c h , t h e y p r o v i d e t h e b e s t t e s t c a s e f o r c l o s e s c r u t i n y o f t h e c r i t i c a l p r o c e s s i n Urdu l i t e r a t u r e , 1. "Urdu s h a ' i r l ke do m u k h t a l i f i s k u l . " N a d v i , S h e ' r u i H i n d . Azimgarh: M a t b a * - i M a ' a r i f , 1926, v o l . 1 , pp.204-215. 2. E x c e p t t h a t H a l i had c l a i m e d t h a t r i ' a y a t - i l a f z i was t h e domain o f L a k h n a v i p o e t s and was eschewed by t h e p o e t s o f D e l h i . 3. A n d a l i b S h a d a n i , n e a r l y f o r t y y e a r s l a t e r , p r e s e n t s a s i m i l a r e x p o s i t i o n w h i c h o b v i o u s l y borrows h e a v i l y from Nadvi's work. I t w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n t h e c h a p t e r w h i c h f o l l o w s . - 90 -e x a m i n a t i o n o f w h i c h i s a p r i m a r y purpose o f t h i s s t u d y . T h i s s e c t i o n c o n d u c t s a f u l l s t u d y o f t h e c h a p t e r i n which Nadvi l a y s out h i s Two S c h o o l t h e o r y . I t c o n s i s t s o f t h r e e e l e m e n t s : naming t h e k h u s u s i y a t ( s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ) o f L a k h n a v i p o e t r y ; i l l u s t r a t i o n s o f t h o s e k h u s u s i y a t : and commentary or e l a b o r a t i o n upon t h o s e i l l u s t r a t i o n s . The f o l l o w i n g a r e t h e e i g h t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f S h e ' r u i  Hind's Delhi-Lucknow d i s t i n c t i o n . The p o i n t s t h e m s e l v e s w i l l f i r s t be c i t e d v e r b a t i m and l a t e r argued as f u l l y as p o s s i b l e : 1. "The i n f l u e n c e o f t h e e f f e m i n a c y w h i c h was b o r n i n t o Lucknow's s o c i e t y and p o p u l a t i o n i s m a n i f e s t l y a p p a r e n t i n i t s p o e t r y as w e l l . F o r example: K i s T ke mahram-i-ab-i r a v a n k i yad a ' I Habab ke j o b a r 5 b a r k a b h l habSb aya — A t i s h Whenever a b u b b l e By a n o t h e r b u b b l e rose I t h o u g h t o f h e r . b r a s s i e r e Of f i n e s t gauze. J a l d rang ae d l d a h - i kjiun-bar ab t a r - i n i g a h H a i muharram us p a r i p a i k a r ko n a r a c h a h i y e — N a s i k h Q u i c k l y now 0 b l o o d - d r i p p i n g eyes dye t h e t h r e a d o f s i g h t : I t ' s Mohurram, That one w i t h a f a i r y ' s countenance 4. T r a n s l a t i o n by Ahmed A l i , The Golden T r a d i t i o n , New York: Columbia U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1973, p.214. - 91 -Needs a t h r e a d t o hang round her neck. and K a f i r k j i a t - i i s t i v a badan ka T e r i sone k i k a r d h a n l h a i L i k e t h e e q u a t o r , B e l o v e d , Your g o l d e n g i r d l e d e l i n e a t e s t h e axes o f your body. — N a s i k h In t h e case o f t h e s e t h r e e s h e 1 r s i t seems c l e a r t h a t t h e m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f e f f e m i n a c y l i e s i n the mention o f k a r d h a n l ( g i r d l e ) , n a r a ( t h r e a d ) and mahram ( b o d i c e , o r b r a s s i e r e ) — i n o t h e r words, i n t h e mention o f f e m i n i n e i t e m s o f apparel.** Nadvi says f u r t h e r t h a t "These v e r s e s a r e but a h a n d f u l out o f a huge amount. However, i f a t h o r o u g h s u r v e y o f t h e d i v a n s o f L a k h n a v i p o e t s were made, one c o u l d c o m p i l e a v e r i t a b l e i n d e x o f women's j e w e l s , d r e s s and adornments* o f t e n e m p l o y i n g women's i d i o m — t h a t o f t h e zanana." The second a s p e c t o f e f f e m i n a c y c i t e d by Nadvi i s t h e o c c u r r e n c e o f women's i d i o m i n t h e v e r s e o f L a k h n a v i p o e t s j u s t c i t e d . He l i s t s f i v e s h e ' r s by R i n d — o n e o f t h e most 5. Women and c h i l d r e n a p p a r e n t l y were known t o wear a r e d t h r e a d around t h e i r necks d u r i n g Mohurram t o s y m b o l i z e t h e b l e e d i n g t h r o a t o f A l i Asghar, Husain's baby k i l l e d a t K a r b a l a . 6. T h i s same p o i n t i s made i n A n d a l i b Shadani's " L a k h n a v i S h a ' i r l k i Chand K h u s Q s i y a t , " a l t h o u g h he expands i t t o t h r e e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , s p e c i f y i n g saman-i I r a ' i s h . [accoutrements o f adornment], z e v a r a t [ j e w e l r y ] and zanana l i b a s aur a i z a - i l a b a s [ f e m i n i n e garments and a c c e s s o r i e s ] . These a r e Shadani's second, t h i r d and f o u r t h c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . See T a h q l q k i RaushnI Men. Lahore: S h a i k h Ghulam A l i and Sons, 1963, pp.250-253. 7. S h e ' r u i H i n d , v o l . 1 , p.204. - 92 -s u c c e s s f u l d i s c i p l e s o f A t i s h — a s i l l u s t r a t i o n s , p o i n t i n g out o t h e p h r a s e s and words i n women's i d i o m . They a r e as f o l l o w s : (1) an i d i o m a t i c use o f t h e e x p r e s s i o n "maut a'e:" (2) the p h r a s e " T e r i e r i par karun sadqe men c h o t i hur k i ; " (I would s a c r i f i c e a f a i r y ' s b r a i d f o r your h e e l ) . (3) " ' a l a m - i h a z r a t - i 'abbas h i k i mar p a r e " (X w i l l g e t a b e a t i n g w i t h t h e s t a n d a r d o f Abbas, a f l a g b e a r e r a t K a r b a l a . ) ; (4) t h e p hrase " j a l a p e men" ( i n t h e t h r o e s o f p a i n , g r i e f o r e n v y ) ; and (5) t h e e x p r e s s i o n "ankhen phutna" ( f o r t h e eyes t o b u r s t and run o u t , t o become b l i n d ) ; Nadvi s a y s , "Those words and p h r a s e s w hich we have u n d e r l i n e d a r e a l l e x p r e s s i o n s o f t h e zanana. The p o e t s o f D e l h i do not speak i n women's i d i o m . " 2."The D i h l a v i p o e t s , as can be s u r m i s e d from t h e charming F 5 r s i t a r k i b e n ( P e r s i a n c o n s t r u c t i o n s ) w h i c h f i l l t h e i r w r i t t e n work, r e s p e c t e d and h e l d t o t h e customs e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e i r l i t e r a r y f o r e b e a r s . . . " In s u b s t a n t i a t i o n o f t h i s c l a i m N a d v i l i s t s t h r e e s h e ' r s by G h a l i b ; f o u r by Momin; n i n e by S a y y i d Z a k a r i y a Khan ZAKI (1839-1903); and seven by M i r Mahdi MAJRUH. I n each case he u n d e r l i n e s t h e words o r p h r a s e s which r e f l e c t charming and d e l i g h t f u l F a r s i t a r k i b e n . He c o n c l u d e s t h i s p o i n t w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t : "But t h e works o f L a k h n a v i p o e t s a r e c o m p l e t e l y d e v o i d o f t h e s e c o n s t r u c t i o n s . And even among D i h l a v i p o e t s , t h e work o f Zauq and Shah N a s i r do not m a n i f e s t t h i s s t y l e 8. A l l f i v e s h e ' r s a r e c i t e d on pp.204-205 o f S h e ' r u i H i n d , v o l . 1 . - 93 -o f c o m p o s i t i o n , and t h e p o e t r y o f t h e s e two masters shows much s i m i l a r i t y w i t h t h a t o f N a s i k h and A t i s h . Thus t h e i r s t y l e i s not d i f f e r e n t from t h e L a k h n a v i s t y l e ; but we do not c o n s i d e r t h e L a k h n a v i p o e t s ' s t y l e t o be f a u l t y * f o r pure language i s a t h i n g a l s o worthy o f honor." 3. "The p o e t s o f D e l h i , i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t r a d i t i o n , g e n e r a l l y wrote s h o r t g h a z a l s and t h e r e f o r e a v o i d e d s u p e r f l u i t y and ' f i l l e r v e r s e s . ' But t h e L a k h n a v i p o e t s g e n e r a l l y wrote v e r y l o n g g h a z a l s . . . w h i c h r e s u l t e d i n r i d i c u l o u s r e s o l u t i o n o f q a f i y a s and, t h e r e f o r e , degraded t h e m e s . . . " 1 0 Nadvi c i t e s f o u r s h e ' r s by A t i s h — t w o p a i r s each o f v e r s e i n t h e same z a m l n — w h e r e t h e q a f i y a h s and r a d i f s s u f f e r as t h e r e s u l t o f e l o n g a t e d g h a z a l s . The end-rhymes a r e "muhase p a i d a " 1 1 and " b a t a s a " (a sweet): w L a b - i s h i r l n k i t i r i c h a s h n i mumkin na h u i Ras se s h a k k a r h u i s h a k k a r se b a t a s e p a i d a I t was i m p o s s i b l e t o s a v o r t h e t a s t e o f your sweet l i p s : Sugarcane c r y s t a l l i z e d i n t o sugar and sugar b l e n d e d i n t o a sweet. 4. "The e s s e n t i a l p o i n t o f d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e w r i t i n g of t h e p o e t s o f Lucknow and t h o s e o f D e l h i i s t h a t one f i n d s v e r y l i t t l e e x p r e s s i o n o f s p i r i t u a l emotion i n t h e L a k h n a v i p o e t s , and i n i t s p l a c e [ a r t i c u l a t i o n o f ] t h e B e l o v e d ' s e x t e r n a l a t t r i b u t e s and endowments. For example c u r l s , downy 9. N a d v i , O p . C i t . . pp.205, 208-9. 10. S h e ' r u i H i n d , v o l . 1 , p.208. 11. The meaning o f muhasa i s "a p i m p l e on t h e f a c e . " - 94 -c h e e k s , b o d i c e , b r a s s i e r e and b l o u s e , e t c . a r e mentioned t o 12 such an e x t e n t t h a t the p l e a s u r e o f t a g h a z z u l i s g r e a t l y 13 d i m i n i s h e d i n r e a d i n g t h e i r d i v a n s . " Nadvi t h e n l i s t s f i v e s h e ' r s by N a s i k h from t h e same g h a z a l . The f i r s t m entions a m u s l i n d u p a t t a (maIma1 ka  d u p a t t a ) ; t h e second t h e B e l o v e d ' s v e l v e t b e l l y (makhmal ka  s h i k a m ) : t h e t h i r d t h e B e l o v e d ' s mount or conveyance ( g u l k i  s a v a r i . n i k a h a t - i g u l ) ; t h e f o u r t h a c h a f i n g - d i s h (minqal) and t h e B e l o v e d ' s f i e r y cheek ( a t i s h - i r u k h ) ; and the f i f t h compares t h e B e l o v e d ' s i n k - b l a c k eyes t o c o l l y r i u m . Nadvi c o n c l u d e s t h i s p o i n t w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g s e n t e n c e : "These few s h e ' r s a r e j u s t a f l e e t i n g example but t h e d i v a n s o f N a s i k h and A t i s h a r e r e p l e t e w i t h t h i s t y p e o f v e r s e . " 5. " I n t h e m a t t e r o f r i ' a y a t - i l a f z l (word p l a y ) , i t i s t h e common p r a c t i c e o f L a k h n a v i p o e t s , and t h e y employed i t 14 w i t h e x c e s s i v e baseness..." The f o u r s h e ' r s o f r i ' a y a t - i l a f z i which N a d v i l i s t s a r e : ( i ) D i l a s o t e maifi q a n d - i l a b ke k h a t i r khvah buse l e M a s a i mashhur h a i d u n i y a men g u r m i t h a h a i c h o r i ka H e a r t , as she s l e e p s 12. L i t e r a l l y , " g h a z a l n e s s . " See C M . Nairn, "Ghazal and t a g h a z z u l : The l y r i c , p e r s o n a l and s o c i a l , " i n Edward C. Dimock, J r . , ed., The L i t e r a t u r e s o f I n d i a : An I n t r o d u c t i o n , C h i c a g o : U n i v e r s i t y o f C h i c a g o P r e s s , 1974, pp.181-197. 13. N a d v i , Qp_. C i t . . p.209. 14. N a d v i , Op_. C i t . . p.210. - 95 -l e t me t a k e k i s s e s from t h o s e sugar l i p s t o my h e a r t ' s c o n t e n t : The whole w o r l d knows how sweet i s s t o l e n candy. — H u s a i n A l i Khan ASAR Where the p h r a s e s q a n d - i l a b (sugar l i p s ) and gur m i t h a c h o r i ( " s t o l e n m o l a s s e s i s always sweet") a r e n o t e d as o b j e c t i o n a b l e ; ( i i ) j o m i t h i m i t h i n a z r o f i se voh dekhe Kahufi ankhofi ko main* bSdam-i s h i r i n I would c a l l t h o s e eyes "sweet almonds" t h a t l o o k w i t h sweet, sweet, g l a n c e s . — N a s i k h where the r e l a t i o n s h i p between " m i t h i m i t h i (sweet, s w e e t ) " and "badam-i s h i r i n (sweet almonds)" i s o b j e c t i o n a b l e ; ( i i i ) Kya l i k h u n s h o r i s h - i d i l kaghaz men* t a ' o k a k u l k i t a r a h khayega What can I w r i t e on paper o f t h e t u m u l t i n my h e a r t ? I t would c u r l up l i k e her t r e s s e s . — K h a l i l I n t h i s v e r s e t h e p h r a s e " k a k u l k i t a r a h t a ' o khana" (to c u r l l i k e t r e s s e s o f h a i r ) i s o b j e c t i o n a b l e . 1 5 15. S.R. F a r u q i e x p l a i n s t h i s v e r s e as f o l l o w s : he s a ys the p o i n t i s t h a t " t a ' o khana" means " t o be e x c i t e d , t o become c u r l e d , " b u t " t 3 ' o " a l o n e a l s o means "a s h e e t of p aper." P e r s o n a l c ommunication, New D e l h i , 26 December 1985. - 96 -( i v ) V a s l k i shab p a l a n g ke upar m i s l c h l t e ke voh m a c h a l t e h a i n — K h a l i l On t h e n i g h t o f u n i o n a t o p t h e bed She s t r u g g l e s l i k e a c h e e t a h . 6. "Commonness o r degeneracy ( m u b t a z a l . the s t a t e o f b e i n g i b t i z a l . o r degraded) i s a l s o a g e n e r a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f 17 L a k h n a v i p o e t s . " N a d v i i l l u s t r a t e s t h a t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g s i x s h e ' r s by N a s i k h and two from t h e same g h a z a l by K h a l i l : / / *„f' .. . . ( i ) Dekh k a r t u j h ko na kyonkar n a ' r a zan hon sab r a q i b B e s h t a r k u t t o n ko bhukvata h a i j a l v a mah ka Why s h o u l d n ' t my r i v a l s r a i s e a hue and c r y when t h e y see you? Dogs, t o o , go w i l d a t t h e s i g h t o f t h e moon. f ( i i ) U s t a r a munh pe j o p h i r n e n a h i n d e t a h a i baja" Mahv d i n d 5 r se kyonkar k j i a t - i qur'an h o t a I t ' s f i t t i n g t h a t no r a z o r be l a i d upon h i s f a c e : How can a l i n e o f t h e Qur'an be e f f a c e d by a b e l i e v e r ? ( i i i ) Mujh se h i l v a t a h a i ab l e z i m junun z a n j i r kx Aur k o h - i ' i s h q k i k a h t a h a i t o mugdar u t h a 16. P l a t t s ' D i c t i o n a r y o f Urdu, C l a s s i c a l H i n d i and E n g l i s h , p.268 o f f e r s as a sec o n d a r y meaning o f " p a l a n g " " p a n t h e r , l e o p a r d o r t i g e r . " Here t h e r e i s r i ' a y a t - i l a f z l between t h e H i n d i r o o t where p a l a n g s i g n i f i e s a bed, and t h i s s e c o n d a r y , P e r s i a n word. 17. N a d v i , S h e ' r u i H i n d , v o l . 1 , p.210. The chains of madness I have l i f t e d up l ike a bar-bell and raised the mountain of love in the manner of a dumbbell. (iv) Tu ne mugdar hilaye kyon na karen Bagh 'Slam mer? iftik_h5r darakht Why shouldn't the trees feel proud when you practice with dumb-bells? (v) BaloK ko kucch agar baqhal-i yar men nahin parta hai *aks-i z u l f - i syah-fam dosh par I t ' s not real ly hair in the Beloved's armpits: The shadow of her blackish locks f a l l s upon her shoulder. (vi) Mujh ko sauda'I banaya hai dikha kar ankhen Turn dhature ka l i ya karte ho badSm se kam You drove me insane when you showed me your eyes with almonds you achieved the effect of datura. (vii) Me'mar hi samjhe voh agar apne mahal ka kya kjiush hun kih hakim main" hu'a raj mahal ka If she were to treat me just as a suitable house-builder how happy I'd be for I'd be l ike the ruler of a palace. k y (v i i i ) Phirte hu'e din k 5 t t a hai n3mah bar! men* qasid-i mira goy3 kih ravanna hai mahal ka He passes the day going back and forth bearing letters: My messenger is l ike - 98 -the errand-boy of the harem. — K h a l i l 7. The seventh c h a r a c t e r i s t i c set out by Nadvi i s : "The general s t y l e of Lakhnavi poets i s mu'Smila band! which, spreading over a l l , created the tenor of the marketplace, and one does not, therefore, f i n d the vigorous and genuine s t y l e 18 that i s found in the writings of the poets of Delhi..." The three examples of mu'amila bandl are a l l by K h a l i l : Ham ky3 qumar-i 'ishq men ghaten batayenge Voh khud juvariyon se bhl zySda hain chaliye What can I teach of her strategies in the game of love? She outmaneuvers even the greatest of gamblers. Munh gal pe rakhne se khafa hote ho nahaq Mas karne se qur'an k i f a z l l a t nahin j a t i Don't be angered when I rest my face on your cheek: One does not erase the Qur'an's sanctity Merely by caressing i t . (ftirt frl cjl- fr* ^ £ 7 Dekhi shab-i vasl naf us k i Raushan hu'i chashm arzu k i On the night of union I saw her navel: The eye of my desire l i t up. 8. "In the l a s t epoch of Persian poets the employment of deli c a t e similes and elegant figures of speech reached the 18. Nadvi, Qp_. C i t . . p.211. - 99 -h e i g h t o f r e f i n e m e n t . I t s verdance i s seen i n t h e w r i t i n g o f U r f i , N a z i r i and T a l i b - i A m u l i . The e a r l y p o e t s V a l i , M i r and Sauda f o l l o w e d t h i s t r a d i t i o n and one f i n d s t h e same r e f i n e m e n t i n t h e i r work as w e l l . And t h e p o e t s o f D e l h i s c h o o l a l s o added t o t h e s t o c k p i l e o f t h e s e f i g u r e s o f s p e e c h . For 19 example..." There f o l l o w f i f t e e n s h e 1 r s by D i h l a v i p o e t s which d i s p l a y d e l i g h t f u l f i g u r e s o f s p e e c h . They, i n t u r n , a r e f o l l o w e d by seven o f N a s i k h ' s s h e ' r s f i n t r o d u c e d by: " N a s i k h ' s work c o m p l e t e l y o v e r f l o w s w i t h s i m i l e s and f i g u r e s o f s p e e c h , but what manner o f s i m i l e has h i s nSzuk khay51I ( e x c e s s i v e d e l i c a c y o r a b s t r u s e n e s s o f t h o u g h t ) g i v e n r i s e Q t o ! . . . a n d i t g o t even worse w i t h t h e e r a o f h i s p u p i l s . . . " The f i r s t few examples from N a s i k h ' s kalam appear below: Shakji ahu h a i bhaven ankhefi h a i n chashm - i ahu Mashk n a f a t h a k o ' I naf men* gar t i l h o t a Your eyebrows a r e s o f t , f u z z y a n t l e r s Your eyes t h o s e o f t h e g a z e l l e : Were t h e r e a mole on your n a v e l I t would be a g l a n d o f musk. K j i 5 k - i s a hrS c c h a n t a p h i r t a hurl i s g h i r b a l men A b l o n mefi k a r d i y e kanton ne rauzan z e r - i pa 19. F i v e by G h a l i b ; f o u r by Z a k i ; t h r e e by M a j r u h ; and t h r e e by K h a l i l . 20. S h e ' r u i H i n d , pp.213-14. 21. T h i s v e r s e was d i s c u s s e d i n t h e opening pages of t h i s s t u d y . See I n t r o d u c t i o n , p.8. - 100 -In t h i s sieve I wander hopelessly s t r a i n i n g in t h i s sieve the dust of the desert: Thorns have gashed out b l i s t e r s — peepholes through the soles of my feet. Kyon na ae k a f i r karuK s a j d a main" tere pa'on par SGrat-i mahrab hai halqa t i r e khalkhal ka" I n f i d e l , why should I not prostrate myself at your feet? The l i n k of your ankle bracelet looks l i k e an Imam's prayer arch. Hai dahafi men i s qadar khush-bu kih ab rakha hai nam ' i t r k i s h i s h l t i r i b i l l u r k i muhnal ka The fragrance of your mouth i s so sweet that the c r y s t a l l i p of your hookah i s c a l l e d a p h i a l of a t t a r . D i l - i sakjit us b u t - i k a f i r ka hai koh j u d i Kar gar khak mire ashk ka tufan hota That i d o l - i n f i d e l ' s stony heart i s l i k e the Ararat: what in the world could my storm of tears do to i t ? Yad a j a t l hai t i k r i us kabutar naz k i Kya ura dete hain meri nind tare rat ko I remember her f l i r t a t i o n s , a flock of pigeons: the scattered stars take my sleep away. Te r i a i s l ungliyan hain ustukjivan j i s men nahln Por por unki magar khurma-i tar be-kjiastah hai It's as though there are no bones in your fingers each d i g i t i s l i k e a fresh unbroken date. - 101 -Nadvi s a y s t h a t "Khvaja A t i s h c e r t a i n l y c r e a t e d e x c e l l e n t and s u i t a b l e s i m i l e s , but t h e r e i s no l a c k , e i t h e r , o f base and 22 v u l g a r metaphors i n h i s work." And two examples o f A t i s h ' s base and v u l g a r metaphors a r e p r e s e n t e d . He t h e n o f f e r s a d i s c l a i m e r r e m i n i s c e n t o f t h o s e o b s e r v e d i n A b - i Hayat; " A l l t h e s e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , as w i l l have been s u r m i s e d by t h e examples, though found i n t h e w r i t i n g o f A t i s h and h i s d i s c i p l e s , a r e r e a l l y t h e s p e c i a l t y o f N a s i k h and t h e d i s c i p l e s o f N a s i k h . . . " We have j u s t p r e s e n t e d a n e u t r a l r e p o r t o f N a d v i ' s e i g h t l i s t e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w h i c h d i s t i n g u i s h L a k h n a v i p o e t r y from D i h l a v i . However, t h e r e a r e c e r t a i n e x c e p t i o n s t o be t a k e n or o t h e r r e s p o n s e s t o be made t o N a d v i ' s argument, and t h e y now f o l l o w . There a r e m y r i a d p r o b l e m s , f o r example, w i t h N a d v i ' s s t a t e m e n t o f p o i n t 2, i . e t h a t t h e D e l h i p o e t s ' F a r s i t a r a k i b e v i d e n c e a r e s p e c t f o r t h e customs o f t h e i r l i t e r a r y f o r e b e a r s . I n t h e f i r s t p l a c e he does not e x p l a i n why t h e v e r s e s he has chosen a r e p a r t i c u l a r l y d e l i g h t f u l , a p p r o p r i a t e or r e f l e c t i v e o f t h e t r a d i t i o n o f t h e i r p o e t s ' l i t e r a r y f o r e b e a r s . Nor does he o f f e r any " i n a p p r o p r i a t e " or " v u l g a r " examples o f L a k h n a v i employment f o r c o m p a r i s o n . Then, t o o , Nadv i l i s t s more th a n t w i c e as many examples from o b s c u r e p o e t s l i k e Z a k i and Majruh as from h i s two famous u s t a d s . G h a l i b and 22. N a d v i , Op_. C i t . . p.214. 23. I b i d . - 102 -Momin. I f , indeed, t h i s type of expression was c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of D i h l a v i poetry, why i s the preponderance of his examples from p r a c t i c a l l y unheard-of poets? The reader i s l e f t to suppose that either Nadvi's choices are simply id i o s y n c r a t i c or that the F a r s i tarkiben which he has in mind are not, perhaps, as readily found in the pages of Di h l a v i poets' written works as he had e a r l i e r suggested. The objection i s not to Nadvi's claim that D i h l a v i poetry i s f u l l of charming and d e l i g h t f u l F a r s i tarkiben. But one cannot help but wonder how representative Nadvi's examples are of the dabistan-i D i l l i ; and how illuminating those examples are of the points he i s arguing. A more i n s t r u c t i v e method of i l l u s t r a t i o n would, perhaps, have been to take a number of verses by both Lakhnavi and D i h l a v i poets which contained Persian words or expressions and to then e x p l i c i t l y demonstrate the r e l a t i v e appropriateness and charm of t h e i r manner of employment; and t h e i r patterns of occurrence in each body of poetry. As Nadvi's point now stands, i t i s unclear what kind of Persian expression i s meant by F a r s i tarkiben; what constitutes t h e i r appropriate or inappropriate employment; and what are the s p e c i f i c p r i n c i p l e s of employment that d i s t i n g u i s h the D i h l a v i poets from the Lakhnavis. And f i n a l l y , as regards t h i s second point of d i s t i n c t i o n , attention must be drawn to Nadvi's mention of Zauq's and Shah Nasir's s t y l e as "not d i f f e r e n t from the Lakhnavi s t y l e . " Every Two School c r i t i c l i s t s both poets unequivocally as - 103 -D i h l a v i s . Indeed, as has been n o t e d , Zauq was t h e u s t a d of t h e l a s t Mughal Emperor, Bahadur Shah Z a f a r , and was s i t u a t e d a t t h e Red F o r t i n D e l h i . To c a l l them " L a k h n a v i " s t y l e D i h l a v i p o e t s " i n t h e same manner t h a t Z.A. S i d d i q i has c a l l e d A t i s h a 24 " D i h l a v i ^ s t y l e L a k h n a v i p o e t " i s t o p r e s e n t a g r a v e c o n t r a d i c t i o n t o t h e whole b a s i s o f two p o e t i c s c h o o l s whose s t y l e s r e f l e c t t h e t i m e s and s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s o f t h e c i t i e s 25 f o r w hich t h e y a r e named. In p o i n t 3, t h e " b a t a s e p a i d a " v e r s e i s a p p a r e n t l y f r i v o l o u s . One need t a k e no e x c e p t i o n t o t h a t . However, when p l a c e d o u t s i d e t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e v e r y l o n g g h a z a l from w h i c h i t i s presumably l i f t e d , i t i s i m p o s s i b l e t o judge t h e v e r a c i t y o f N a d v i ' s c l a i m t h a t t h e r e i s a c a u s a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o n g g h a z a l s , r i d i c u l o u s o r f r i v o l o u s q a f i y a h s and, t h u s , degraded themes. F u r t h e r m o r e , even a c a s u a l s u r v e y o f t h e d i v a n s o f D i h l a v i and L a k h n a v i p o e t s shows t h a t t h e r e i s no c l e a r p a t t e r n o f l o n g e r g h a z a l s i n t h e L a k h n a v i p o e t s * kalam t h a n i n t h a t o f t h e D i h l a v i s . I t i s t r u e t h a t some e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y p o e t s , such as Dard and Sauda, t y p i c a l l y w rote s h o r t e r g h a z a l s t h a n d i d many n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y p o e t s l i k e N a s i k h , A t i s h , Zauq or Shah N a s i r . But i t seems f a r more l i k e l y t h a t f a c t o r s o t h e r t h a n l o c a l e d e t e r m i n e d g h a z a l l e n g t h even among t h i s g r o u p . R e s i d e n c e i n D e l h i or Lucknow i s s i m p l y not a 24. See above, p.47. 25. Dagh, t o o , i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d as d i s p l a y i n g t h e f e a t u r e s o f L a k h n a v i p o e t r y . See Ahmed A l i , The Golden T r a d i t i o n . p.274. - 104 -r e a l i s t i c organizing p r i n c i p l e for discussing the t y p i c a l ghazal length of large numbers of Urdu poets who' composed unde d i f f e r e n t sets of circumstances without the substantiation of f u l l - s c a l e ghazal count of a l l the major Urdu poets, which nobody has yet done. The question of l i t e r a r y era would seem to suggest i t s e l f as a more r e a l i s t i c f o c a l point, although a survey of ghazal length for a l l eighteenth and nineteenth 26 century poets would not be r e a l i s t i c for the present study. Nadvi's fourth point of d i s t i n c t i o n — t h a t s p i r i t u a l emotion in D i h l a v i poetry i s replaced by discussion of the Beloved's external a t t r i b u t e s in Lakhnavi p o e t r y — i s also troublesome. In the f i r s t place, one i s obliged to trust Nadvi's word that the divans of Nasikh and A t i s h — a t o t a l of some f i f t e e n thousand v e r s e s — a r e f u l l of such she'rs. Furthermore, why does Nadvi claim that t h i s type of she'r replaces what would, in the divSn of a D i h l a v i poet, be a she' which expressed s p i r i t u a l emotion (ruhani iazbat)? There i s simply no evidence on which to base such a c o r r e l a t i v e assertion, without a laborious word-count of a l l the divans of a l l the major D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi ustads. Even then i t seems impossible to determine that Lakhnavi poets wrote verses describing the Beloved's external appearance in. l i e u of those 26. An impressionistic observation i s that the average length for an Urdu ghazal by the poets addressed in t h i s study i s f i f t e e e n she'rs. But there are ghazals examined in l a t e r chapters which are as short as* three verses and as long as twenty-seven. - 105 -concerned w i t h s p i r i t u a l e m o t i o n . The e n t i r e v e r s e comparing t h e B e l o v e d t o a h e a v i n g c h e e t a h i s a p p a r e n t l y o b j e c t i o n a b l e t o N a d v i , s i n c e he does not u n d e r l i n e any p a r t i c u l a r words. I t would have been v e r y u s e f u l f o r him t o s p e c i f y a l l t h a t was o b j e c t i o n a b l e i n t h e s h e ' r s i n c e we must s p e c u l a t e i n s t e a d . W h i l e t h e theme (mazmun) i t s e l f i s p r o f a n e — i n t h a t g r a p h i c a l l u s i o n i s made t o p h y s i c a l u n i o n ( v i s a l . v a s l ) — t h e e x p r e s s i o n i s p l a y f u l i n tone and theme as w e l l as whatever w o r d - p l a y i t c o n t a i n s . The w o r d - p l a y i s based on " p a l a n g " (bed) w h i c h a l s o can mean "panther or c h e e t a h . " He f u r t h e r s a y s : " A l t h o u g h t h i s s o r t o f f i g u r e o f speech i s p r e s e n t i n p l a c e s i n t h e work o f D e l h i p o e t s , i t i s not t h e r e t o s uch a degree t h a t i t can be f i x e d as a d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c [of D i h l a v i y a t ] . " N a dvi's d i s c u s s i o n o f r i ' a y a t - i l a f z l b e g i n s and ends h e r e . C o n s i d e r i n g t h a t r i ' S y a t - i l a f z i i s c o n s i d e r e d t o be a major 28 d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f L a k h n a v i y a t , t h e t o p i c m e r i t s a more t h o r o u g h e x p l i c a t i o n . U n l i k e H a l i ' s e x p l a n a t i o n f o r why N a s i k h ' s she' r s were " u n n a t u r a l , " N a d v i does not e x p l a i n what i s d e g e n e r a t e about the e i g h t v e r s e s he uses t o i l l u s t r a t e t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c d egeneracy o f L a k h n a v i p o e t s . However he does s a y , b e f o r e 27. I b i d . 28. An i m p o r t a n t modern c r i t i c , P r o f e s s o r N a i y a r Masud of Lucknow U n i v e r s i t y even r e f e r s t o t h e s o - c a l l e d Lucknow s c h o o l as t h e " d a b i s t a n - i r i ' a y a t - i l a f z i . " P e r s o n a l communication, Lucknow, F e b r u a r y , 1982. - 106 -moving on t o t h e n e x t L a k h n a v i c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , t h a t "except f o r Zauq and Shah N a s i r t h i s k i n d o f d e g e n e r a t e v e r s e i s not t o be 29 found i n t h e p o e t s o f D e l h i . " To s p e c u l a t e , t h e n , on why t h o s e e i g h t s h e ' r s show b a s e n e s s , one would guess t h a t v e r s e s w hich d e p i c t " v u l g a r " s i t u a t i o n s o r t h e m e s — a s i n t h e two s h e 1 r s by K h a l i l — a n d p h y s i c a l u n i o n a r e c o n s i d e r e d b a s e . The m i x i n g o f p r o f a n e ( m a i a z l ) t o p i c s w i t h s u b l i m e t o p i c s — s u c h a s , i n t h e f i r s t o f N a s i k h ' s s h e ' r s , e q u a t i n g t h e r i v a l s ' c o n t e m p l a t i o n o f t h e B e l o v e d w i t h dogs s t a r i n g a t t h e m o o n — i s no doubt c o n s i d e r e d t o be i n poor t a s t e . Even though th e B e l o v e d i s compared w i t h t h e moon a c c o r d i n g t o c o n v e n t i o n , t o compare her a d m i r e r s t o dogs d e t r a c t s from t h e compliment, f o r i t l a c k s " l o f t y t h o u g h t " or s e r i o u s n e s s . Even t o compare one's r i v a l s t o dogs would n o t be thought p r o p e r , o r s h a r i f . One s h o u l d , r a t h e r , t r e a t even one's m o r t a l enemy w i t h e l a b o r a t e c o u r t e s y i n t h e e t h o s o f s h a r S f a t w h i c h p a r a l l e l s t h a t o f t h e u i 3 0 g h a z a l . S i m i l a r l y , t h e second o f N a s i k h ' s v e r s e s equates a r a z o r t r a v e l l i n g o v e r t h e B e l o v e d ' s f a c e w i t h t h e f a i t h f u l ( d i n d a r ) r e a d i n g t h e l i n e s o f t h e Qur'an. W h i l e t h e r e a r e c e r t a i n l y i n s t a n c e s where the B e l o v e d ' s f a c e i s compared t o t h e Qur'an, and t h e down on h i s f a c e w i t h l e t t e r s o f t h e Qur'an, th e n o t i o n o f s h a v i n g seems t o be d i s t a s t e f u l . The p r e s e n c e o f t h e r a z o r 29. S h e ' r u i H i n d , v o l . 1 , p.211. 30. T h i s p o i n t w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n t h e f i n a l c h a p t e r . - 107 -as well as the pun on "kjiat" ("peach fuzz" as well as "writing") leaves no doubt at a l l as to what sort of Beloved the narrator speaks o f — i t i s c l e a r l y a young man—and that manner of e x p l i c i t n e s s as well as the play on "khat" i s probably what caused Nadvi to l a b e l the verse "mubtazal" (degenerate). Nasikh's employment of w e i g h t - l i f t i n g terms to refer to the burdens of 'ishq are probably the objectionable elements in she 1 r number ( i i i ) . To refer to the ghazal's great heroes Majnun and Farhad—which i s done by alluding to the "chains of madness" (junun k i zanjlr)and the "mountain of 1 i s h q " (koh-i ' i s h q ) — i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r context are probably deemed inappropriate because of the verse's l e v i t y of tone. C e r t a i n l y the accoutrements of wrestlers do l i t t l e to universalize the legendary su f f e r i n g s , burdens and feats of Majnun and Farhad because the 'ashiq i s not claiming that he has prevailed over Majnun and Farhad by suffering greater or more intense g r i e f . Rather he i s suggesting that he overcomes the burdens of love by sheer brute strength. In the ethos of the ghazal, the narrator's own boastful claims of outdoing these heroes at physical games are appropriate i f they communicate a n o b i l i t y or are placed in the grander scheme of things. That grander scheme of things i s not suggested, one speculates, by bar-bells and dumb-bells. The fourth "vulgar" or "degenerate" verse which Nadvi c i t e s shows the Beloved himself/herself p r a c t i c i n g with dumb - 108 -b e l l s . The o b j e c t i o n i s o b v i o u s : t h e w o r l d ' s t r e e s a r e supposed t o be p r o u d . o f t h e f a c t t h a t t h e wood o f one o f them has gone i n t o t h e making o f t h e b e l l s w h i c h t h i s B e l o v e d now l a y s hands upon. The f i f t h and s i x v e r s e s r e f e r t o p h y s i c a l a t t r i b u t e s o f t h e B e l o v e d , b u t t h a t i n i t s e l f i s p r o b a b l y not why Nadvi c o n s i d e r s them d e g e n e r a t e . The r e f e r e n c e t o t h e h a i r i n t h e B e l o v e d ' s a r m p i t might be t h o u g h t o f f - c o l o r . And i f the o b j e c t i o n t o t h e s i x t h v e r s e i s t h a t t h e e f f e c t o f t h e B e l o v e d ' s almond eyes i s n a r c o t i c — a s opposed t o f i e r c e l y p a i n f u l i n t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l sense o f t h e g h a z a l — t h e n one might 31 c l a i m t o u n d e r s t a n d N a d v i ' s judgment. In summary, t h e n , what Nad v i means by t h e v u l g a r i t y o r degeneracy (mubtazal) o f L a k h n a v i y a t remains l a r g e l y u n c l e a r . The educated r e a d e r o f g h a z a l p o e t r y can s p e c u l a t e as t o N a d v i ' s c r i t e r i a f o r j u d g i n g , e x t r a p o l a t i n g from one's own e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e g e n r e . But s/he does so o n l y a d v i s e d l y . The sense o f m u b t a z a l as e s s e n t i a l t o L a k h n a v i y a t has been t h o r o u g h l y i n t e g r a t e d i n t o n ot o n l y Urdu c r i t i c a l works o f t h e p a s t c e n t u r y , b u t a l s o i n t o w r i t i n g s i n E n g l i s h on t h e s u b j e c t 32 33 of L a k h n a v i p o e t r y , e s p e c i a l l y Ahmed A l i , Muhammad S a d i q , 31. N a d v i ' s p o i n t a c t u a l l y seems t o be t h e e q u a t i o n o f eyes w i t h r e a l almonds, and t h e n w i t h d a t u r a . I t i s a h a r m l e s s , p l a y f u l f a n c y r a t h e r t h a n t r u l y d e g e n e r a t e , one would t h i n k . 32. The Golden T r a d i t i o n , p.56: " I n p o e t r y . . t h e f l e s h l y s c h o o l , d e v e l o p i n g i n a f a s t d e g e n e r a t i n g Lucknow, th e second s e a t o f c u l t u r e , d e c a y i n g b e f o r e i t had become r i p e , g a i n e d p o p u l a r i t y and s u b s i d i z e d a d e s p e r a t e o r d e r f l o u n d e r i n g i n a morass of s u p e r f i c i e s ; " p.76: " . . . l i t e r a t u r e o f w i d e r a p p e a l t o t h e b a s i c p r i m a r y e m o t i o n s , such as was found i n t h e p o e t r y o f t h e - 109 -and Annemarie Schimmel. I t would have been o f i n v a l u a b l e use t o t h e p u r p o s e s o f t h i s and o t h e r s t u d i e s had Nadvi s e t an example o f e x p l i c a t i o n as w e l l as i l l u s t r a t i o n when he e s t a b l i s h e d m u b t a z a l as a fundamental c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f L a k h n a v i y a t . That he d i d not do so has c a u s e d — o r c o n t r i b u t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o — t h e i n c r e a s i n g l y d i f f i c u l t t a s k o f e l u c i d a t i n g , d e f e n d i n g or c h a l l e n g i n g t h e Two S c h o o l t h e o r y . Yet a g a i n , t h e o n l y k i n d o f c o n t r a s t p o s i t e d by Nadvi between D i h l a v i p o e t r y and t h e L a k h n a v i v e r s e s o f K h a l i l i n p o i n t 7 — w h i c h a r e t o i l l u s t r a t e mu'amila b a n d ! — i s t h a t 35 " [ t h i s ] c o u l d not come from t h e pen o f any D e l h i p o e t . " These v e r s e s would seem t o be b e t t e r d e s c r i b e d by M i r ' s term "chumachat!" t h a n by mu'amila band!, w h i c h — a c c o r d i n g t o one c r i t i c — i s an e n t i r e sub-genre d e p i c t i n g a p a r t i c u l a r a s p e c t o f f l e s h l y s c h o o l o f Lucknow which had a d i r e c t a p p e a l t o e r o t i c s e n s a t i o n s . . . " and p.274: " [ D a g h ] , though a D e l h i p o e t , d i s p l a y a f f i n i t y w i t h t h e f l e s h l y s c h o o l o f Lucknow i n h i s manner and, l i k e A t i s h and N a s i k h , s a c r i f i c e s r e f i n e m e n t t o s e n s u a l i t y , though he does not s t o o p t o t h e o b s c e n i t i e s o r v u l g a r i t y w h i c h a r e d i s p l a y e d by t h e f l e s h l y s c h o o l . " 33. A H i s t o r y o f Urdu L i t e r a t u r e . pp.121: " . . i n i t s want of d e p t h , i t s absence o f s e n t i m e n t , i t s s u p e r f i c i a l p o l i s h and g l i t t e r , i t s w i t , b r i l l i a n c e , p e r s i f l a g e , e f f e m i n c a y , and d a l l i a n c e w i t h c o u r t e s a n s , the p o e t r y o f Lucknow p r e s e n t s a f a i t h f u l r e f l e c t i o n o f t h e l i f e o f t h e p e r i o d . " 34. C l a s s i c a l Urdu L i t e r a t u r e from t h e B e g i n n i n g t o I q b a l . I n a d d i t i o n t o r e f e r r i n g t o "the smooth and r e f i n e d Lucknow s t y l e " o f Urdu, [pp.167 and 157] Schimmel d i s c u s s e s i t s "decadent and u n h e a l t h y c u l t u r e and i t s f l i r t a t i o u s p o e t r y , not r a r e l y t r a n s g r e s s i n g t h e b o r d e r s o f o b s c e n i t y . . . " p.190. 35. " D i l l i ke k i s i s h a ' i r ke qalam se n a h i n n i k a l s a k t l . " S h e ' r u i H i n d , v o l l , p.211. - 110 -the nature of the 'ashiq-ma'shuq r e l a t i o n s h i p . The above three she'rs by K h a l i l might well f i t into the category of mu'5mila bandi by v i r t u e of t h e i r reference to union (in the second and t h i r d verses) and by the tone of shikayat 37 (complaint) in the f i r s t . But there are numerous other facets of mu'amila band! than t h i s , and can be found in far less obscure poets than K h a l i l . For example, there i s an entire ghazal by the famous D i h l a v i poet Momin which i s b u i l t on mu'amila band! and contains almost none of the e x p l i c i t n e s s 38 or chumlchati of the verses by K h a l i l which Nadvi l i s t s . The only exception i s to be found i n verse 10 of that ghazal. It i s a verse whose subject i s the same as K h a l i l ' s fourth verse in Nadvi's f i f t h point above ( i . e , r i ' a y a t - i l a f z i ) . where the Beloved eludes the 'Sshiq even when they are p h y s i c a l l y together. But Momin does not e x p l i c i t l y mention bed, and her refusals are not unequivocally to physical overtures: ^f/(JtfjJ\^o\yi(ftrio*» ^^tr^L^^1/^.1, J j ^ bj£& 37. See the Appendix on d e f i n i t i o n of terms. 38. We refer here to the famous musalsal ghazal whose matla' i s "Voh jo ham men* turn me ft qar5r tha tumhefi yad ho kih na yad "ho/ Vahi ya'ni va'da nibah kg tumhen yad ho Kih na yad ho—Do you or don't you remember/That understanding we had/ That very vow of eternal t r o t h / Do you remember that or don't you?" from K u l l i y a t - i Momin, Allahabad: Ram Narayan Beni Madhav, 1971, No.152, p.136. See Appendix for the f u l l ghazal. - I l l -Voh bigarna vasl k i rat ka voh na manna k i s i bat ka Voh nahln nahlR k i har an ada tumhen yad ho kih na yad ho That displeasure of yours on the night of union that refusal at every point that petulant no, no to every entreaty Do you remember that or not? Nothing i s obscure about the se t t i n g of t h i s verse, but the c l a s s i c reluctance of the beloved to bestow her favors i s conveyed i n a much broader r e i t e r a t i o n of the ent i r e relationship between 'ashiq and ma'shuq than K h a l i l conveyed by his bedroom scene. The example above i s offered in i l l u s t r a t i o n of isadvi's questionable argumentation. In the f i r s t place, the most famous ghazal of one of the most famous Dihlavis i s e n t i r e l y a poem of mu'amila bandl. contrary to Nadvi's claim that i t i s the common s t y l e Cam. rang) of Lakhnavi poets which distinguishes i t from D i h l a v i poets. In the second place, Nadvi's claim that mu'amila band! "gives r i s e to the tenor of the market-place" and i n e v i t a b l y erodes the "vigor and genuineness" of the Delhi s t y l e i s patently untrue. Despite i t s entire basis on mu'amila band! Momin's ghazal i s his most famous because i t does convey genuine emotion, i t s language i s straightforward, and i t f u l f i l l s i t s audience's requirement that the ghazal express the condition of 'ishq in a romantic fashion. To summarize t h i s review of Nadvi's argument, there are two primary points to be made which contribute to t h i s study's refutation of the Two School theory. The f i r s t i s that Nadvi - 112 -converted Azad's and Hali's general feelings of difference between Lakhnavi and Di h l a v i poetry into concrete c r i t e r i a , neglecting the onus of substantiation which should have been placed on so profound a d i s t i n c t i o n . One would l i k e to have seen some proof offered of the v a l i d i t y of his i n i t i a l two-school premise, rather than see Nadvi bu i l d on that premise as though i t s truth were self-evident or already established. For Nadvi, in establishing as o f f i c i a l opinions which were conveyed obliquely and informally by his l i t e r a r y predecessors, irrevocably converted conventional wisdom into " f a c t . " It i s true that the general impression of Lakhnavi poetry conveyed i n Ab-i Hayat forms the skeleton of Nadvi's two-school delineation, but the onus of rigorous documentation could not be put upon Azad because he never a c t u a l l y declared two formal schools. Nadvi could c i t e Azad as his authority, but Azad i could not be impeached for a po s i t i o n which he had never s p e c i f i c a l l y taken. Thus the theory entered l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m without ever being challenged to defend i t s e l f . Nadvi's o v e r a l l treatment of Delhi and Lucknow echoes that originated by Azad and continued by Ha l i in the Muqaddama. Most s p e c i f i c a l l y , She'rui Hind features the same dual p o l a r i z a t i o n between Delhi and Lucknow; and Nasikh and A t i s h — w i t h blatant preferences expressed for Delhi in the f i r s t case and Atish in the second—which have been observed in Azad's and Hali's works. While Nadvi's i l l u s t r a t i v e examples represent a constructive addition to the Two School theory's - 113 -a r t i c u l a t i o n , Nadvi i s s c a r c e l y more c o n s i s t e n t i n h i s commentary upon c i t e d examples t h a n was H a l i i n t h e Muqaddama. and t h i s l a c k forms t h e b a s i s f o r our second p o i n t o f r e f u t a t i o n : t h e manner o f t h e Two S c h o o l t h e o r y ' s 39 a r g u m e n t a t i o n . S e c o n d l y , t h e i l l u s t r a t i o n and s u b s t a n t i a t i o n o f Nadvi's e i g h t d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s l a c k s u f f i c i e n t d e t a i l t o c o n v i n c e t h e s k e p t i c . For each i l l u s t r a t i o n o f a k h u s u s i y a t o f L a k h n a v i p o e t r y a s i m i l a r v e r s e — c o n t a i n i n g t h e same e s s e n t i a l f e a t u r e s — c a n be found by a D i h l a v i p o e t , and a major D i h l a v i p o e t , a t t h a t . One need not c i t e t h e work o f o b s c u r e p o e t s from e i t h e r markaz t o i l l u s t r a t e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c f e a t u r e s o f Urdu p o e t r y . Even when Nadvi o f f e r s ample q u a n t i t i e s o f i l l u s t r a t i v e s h e ' r s he does n o t s p e c i f y how t h e y i l l u s t r a t e t h e p a r t i c u l a r k h u s u s i y a t he i s d i s c u s s i n g . T h e r e f o r e , w h i l e i t i s f a r more h e l p f u l t o have u n c l e a r i l l u s t r a t i o n o f f e r e d than t o have no i l l u s t r a t i o n a t a l l , N a d v i ' s d i s c o u r s e u l t i m a t e l y l e a v e s s e r i o u s q u e s t i o n s as t o how c o n v i n c i n g a r e t h e t e n e t s o f t h e Two S c h o o l t h e o r y . The p a u c i t y o f r i g o r o u s s u b s t a n t i a t i o n s e r i o u s l y undermines N a d v i ' s d i s s e r t a t i o n . Had h i s a n a l y s i s been c o n s i s t e n t l y r i g o r o u s t h e m e t h o d o l o g i c a l problems o f coming t o terms w i t h t h e Two S c h o o l t h e o r y — i n c l u d i n g t h e t a s k o f t h i s 39. Chapter V I I I ' s d i s c u s s i o n o f A l i Javad Z a i d i ' s Do. A d a b i  I s k u l shows how t r o u b l e s o m e Z a i d i , t o o , f i n d s t h e s e s t a n d a r d modes o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n . - 114 -p r e s e n t s t u d y — w o u l d have been g r e a t l y d i m i n i s h e d . However, the fundamental problem i s not w i t h N a d v i — i t i s w i t h the Delhi-L u c k n o w d i s t i n c t i o n i t s e l f . We r e i t e r a t e t h a t L a k h n a v i and D i h l a v i p o e t r y draw upon t h e v e r y same fundamental a e s t h e t i c s , s t r u c t u r a l and t h e m a t i c c o n v e n t i o n s . N e i t h e r Nadvi n or anyone e l s e has a c t u a l l y argued 40 t o t h e c o n t r a r y ; n or has any Urdu c r i t i c shown why s e p a r a t e s c h o o l s s h o u l d be f o r m a l l y d e c l a r e d on t h e b a s i s o f more s u p e r f i c i a l d i f f e r e n c e s t h a n an i n h e r i t e d a e s t h e t i c , s t r u c t u r e and s t o c k o f themes. C e r t a i n l y none o f t h e c r i t i c s o f t h e Two S c h o o l t h e o r y has e v e r s p e c i f i c a l l y e s t a b l i s h e d what t h a t d i s t i n g u i s h i n g a e s t h e t i c o r t h o s e d i s t i n g u i s h i n g s t r u c t u r e s a r e . The e x i s t i n g g e n e r a l c h a r g e s o f c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s e n s u a l i t y and degeneracy i n L a k h n a v i p o e t r y cannot s t a n d because even some o f t h e Two S c h o o l c r i t i c s acknowledge t h a t t h e elements o f b o t h b o d i e s o f p o e t r y a r e t h e s a m e — t h e d i f f e r e n c e , t h e y a r g u e , 41 i s one o f d e g r e e . W h i l e t h i s s t u d y acknowledges t h a t t h e r e may indeed be d i f f e r e n c e s o f degree i n L a k h n a v i and D i h l a v i p o e t s ' p r e f e r r e d d i c t i o n s and s u b j e c t m a t t e r a t any g i v e n t i m e , a l l t he p o e t s w r i t e on t h o s e same t o p i c s i n much t h e same 40. F u r t h e r m o r e t h i s w i l l be i l l u s t r a t e d i n Chapter I X's e x a m i n a t i o n o f a c o n t r o l l e d sample o f D i h l a v i and L a k h n a v i p o e t r y . 41. See A l i Javad Z a i d i , Q T J . C i t . . p.16; and M . S a d i q , H i s t o r y  o f Urdu L i t e r a t u r e . pp.121-122. Note: a l t h o u g h Z a i d i w r i t e s on t h e s u b j e c t o f the Two S c h o o l s he cannot be c o n s i d e r e d a Two S c h o o l c r i t i c , s i n c e h i s w r i t i n g c h a l l e n g e s t h e Two S c h o o l d i s t i n c t i o n . - 115 -d i c t i o n s at one time or another. How, then, can the exercise of preferences within the same stock of s t r u c t u r a l elements and t o p i c a l themes constitute separate schools of poetry? Chapter IX offers an i l l u s t r a t i o n of how poets of Delhi and those of Lucknow, writing in the same l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n at roughly the same time i n history, can be seen to exhib i t greater s i m i l a r i t i e s than differences in the i r treatment of s t r u c t u r a l and thematic aspects of the ghazal. - 116 -CHAPTER VII ANPALIB SHADANI'fi "LAKHNAVI SHA'IRI K i CHAND KHUSUSIYAT" As the l a s t chapter r e i t e r a t e d , Nadvi was the c r i t i c who bridged the time gap separating H a l i and Azad—the nineteenth century l i t t e r a t e u r s — f r o m the twentieth century c r i t i c s through whose writing the Two School Theory has come down to us, thoroughly and e x p l i c i t l y integrated into Urdu l i t e r a r y theory. Later c r i t i c s b u i l t upon the platform established by Nadvi. 1 One such twentieth century c r i t i c i s Andalib Shadani. His essay e n t i t l e d "Lakhnavi S h a ' i r l k i Chand Khususiyat" or "A Few Cha r a c t e r i s t i c s of Lakhnavi Poetry" (1963) l i s t s twelve s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (khususiyat) of Lakhnavi poetry, four more than Nadvi's. In general, they resemble the major features outlined by Nadvi, although Shadani introduces two important points of his own. The essay i s discussed here b r i e f l y because i t i s mentioned by A l i Javad Zaidi as a di r e c t motivation for Do 2 Adabi I s k u l . which came some eight years l a t e r . The 1. When Abul Lais S i d d i q i and Nurul Hasan Hashmi undertook f u l l - f l e d g e d studies of Lakhnavi and D i h l a v i poetry i n the earl y 1940s, for example, they took for granted that the existence of the Delhi and Lucknow "schools" was proven and uncontroversial. Their works—Lakhnau kg Dabistgn-i S h a ' i r i and D i l l i kg Dabistgn-i S h a ' i r l — i n turn have served as the standard references for c r i t i c s of the past four decades. 2. See the next chapter. - 117 -k h u s u s i y a t a r e l i s t e d below: 1. L a k h n a v i p o e t s f o c u s e d on a v e i l e d female B e l o v e d (parda n a s h i n ) . w h i l e " i n t h e t w e l f t h c e n t u r y H i j r i t h e 3 B e l o v e d s o f D i h l a v i p o e t s were f o p p i s h boys..." 2. C o s m e t i c s : " L a k h n a v i p o e t s g i v e a l l t h e p a r t i c u l a r s o f 4 f e m i n i n e adornments and c o s m e t i c s . " 3. J e w e l r y : "One f i n d s more d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n s o f female j e w e l r y t h a n anywhere e l s e . " 5 4. C l o t h i n g : Lengthy d e s c r i p t i o n s o f f e m i n i n e r a i m e n t and a p p a r e l . 5. N u d i t y : " N u d i t y , l e w d n e s s , and d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e Bel o v e d ' s l i m b s and o r g a n s , though w r i t t e n about i n e v e r y language o f e v e r y epoch, i s n o t found t o t h i s e x t e n t anywhere e l s e . " 7 6. M e n t i o n o f s o n g , dance and d a n c i n g g i r l s . 7. " N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g t h e f a c t t h a t L a k h n a v i p o e t s e x p u r g a t e d many H i n d i words and e x p r e s s i o n s which were p a r t o f common p a r l a n c e i n D e l h i ; and t h a t t h e y drew h e a v i l y upon P e r s i a n v o c a b u l a r y and p r a c t i c e d f 5 r s i t a r k i b e n ( P e r s i a n 3. S h a d a n i , " L a k h n a v i S h a ' i r i k i Chand K h u s u s i y a t " i n T a h q i q k i RaushnI Men. Lahore: S h a i k h Ghulam A l i and Sons, 1963, p.249. 4. S h a d a n i , Qp_.£it. ,p.250. 5. S h a d a n i , pp.251-253. 6. S h a d a n i , p.253. 7. S h a d a n i , p.254. 8. S h a d a n i , pp.255-258. - 118 -c o n s t r u c t i o n s ) ; s t i l l , t h e r e i s a g r e a t i n f l u e n c e o f Hindu 9 s o c i e t y , customs and manners i n L a k h n a v i p o e t r y . . . " 8. L a k h n a v i p o e t s use t h e word p a r i ( f a i r y ) a g r e a t d e a l , and sometimes change i t s gender from f e m i n i n e t o m a s c u l i n e . 1 0 9. L a k h n a v i p o e t s l o v e t o make j e s t s ( p h a b t i kahna) and draw a t t e n t i o n t o t h e i r own c l e v e r n e s s . 1 1 10. A s p e c i a l a f f l i c t i o n o f L a k h n a v i p o e t s i s d a g j i - i 12 junGn, o r t h e brand o f madness. 11. E x a g g e r a t e d d r o l l e r y w h i c h , r a t h e r t h a n s e r v i n g t o r e i n f o r c e o r e l u c i d a t e t h e meaning o f a f i g u r e o f spe e c h , 13 r e n d e r s i t r i d i c u l o u s . 12. T a v a s s u l (the e v o c a t i o n o f S h i ' i t e m a r t y r s A l i , Hasan and Husain) i n t h e g h a z a l ' s maqta' i n o r d e r t o a t t a i n some 14 g r a c e o r b l e s s i n g by a s s o c i a t i o n . S h a dani's f i r s t p o i n t , t h a t t h e B e l o v e d i n L a k h n a v i p o e t r y i s f e m a l e , whereas i n D i h l a v i p o e t r y he had been a young 9. S h a d a n i , pp.259-261. 10. S h a d a n i , O p . C i t . . p.261. 11. S h a d a n i , p.262. 12. S h a d a n i , p.263. 13. S h a d a n i , pp.264-269. 14. An example o f t h i s can be seen i n A t i s h ' s maqta'r Naz' k i m u s h k i l b h i asan h o t l h a i A t i s h na d a r s h a h - i mardafi se t a l a b k a r himmat-i mardana a j Fear n ot de a t h ' s a f f l i c t i o n , A t i s h / i t , t o o , i s made e a s y / Seek manly c o u r a g e / from A l i , K i n g o f Men. K u l l i y a t - i Atish, {1:203.26} , S h a d a n i , Qp_.CjJt.p.351. - 119 -" f o p p i s h " boy, i s v e r y p r o v o c a t i v e . W h i l e we agree t h a t t h e Be l o v e d i n L a k h n a v i p o e t r y i s o f t e n c l e a r l y f e m a l e , i t i s q u i t e o v e r s t a t i n g t h e case t o say t h a t D i h l a v i p o e t s o f t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y were enamored o n l y o f young b o y s . Recent s c h o l a r s h i p i n E n g l i s h c o r r o b o r a t e s Shadani's a s s e r t i o n t h a t some D i h l a v i p o e t s d i d r e f e r unambiguously t o young male 15 B e l o v e d s some o f t h e t i m e , d e s p i t e t h e a t t e m p t s o f E n g l i s h - e d u c a t e d and r e f o r m i s t I n d i a n Muslims t o s u p p r e s s o r deny t h i s f a c t . But one c o u l d c i t e as many ca s e s i n o p p o s i t i o n , i n d i c a t i n g a female B e l o v e d , o r a D i v i n e B e l o v e d . However, Shadani's main argument here i s t h a t a m b i g u i t y o f gender i n t h e g h a z a l ' s B e l o v e d gave way i n Lucknow t o an unambiguously female B e l o v e d . Even among t h e examples o f L a k h n a v i p o e t r y t h a t Nadvi c i t e d i n t h e l a s t s e c t i o n t o i l l u s t r a t e h i s own k j i u s u s i y a t o f L a k h n a v i p o e t r y t h e r e were c l e a r r e f e r e n c e s t o male B e l o v e d s . And one wonders how Shadani can s a y , on t h e one hand, t h a t L a k h n a v i s wrote e x c l u s i v e l y o f a female B e l o v e d and s a y — a s he does i n h i s e i g h t h L a k h n a v i k h u s u s i y a t — t h a t i n d e s c r i b i n g t h e B e l o v e d as a p a r i ( f a i r y ) , t h e y sometimes changed the gender o f " p a r i " from female t o male. T h i s would appear t o be a c o n t r a d i c t i o n . Shadani's 15. See C M . Nairn, "The Theme o f Homosexual [ P e d e r a s t i c ] Love i n Pre-Modern Urdu P o e t r y , " i n S t u d i e s i n t h e Urdu G h a z a l and  P r o s e F i c t i o n f Ed. M.U. Memon, Madison: South A s i a n P u b l i c a t i o n S e r i e s , No.5., 1979, pp.120-142; and F r a n c e s W. P r i t c h e t t , " C o n v e n t i o n i n t h e C l a s s i c a l Urdu G h a z a l : The Case o f M i r , " i n The J o u r n a l o f South A s i a n and M i d d l e E a s t e r n S t u d i e s , v o l . 8 , n o . l , F a l l 1979, pp.60-77. - 120 -point cannot, therefore, be accepted as stated. However, had the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the Beloved a c t u a l l y made the t r a n s i t i o n from young boy to mature woman, as suggested by Shadani, the implications of such a development for the e n t i r e ghazal genre would have been s i g n i f i c a n t . Certainly a discussion of those implications would have been of great i n t e r e s t and value to the student of the Two School theory. Points 2-5 can a l l be grouped together into one broad statement which p a r a l l e l s Nadvi's f i r s t point: that the p a r t i c u l a r s of the (unambiguously female) Beloved's body and clothing often appear i n the verse of Lakhnavi poets. Again, however, i t i s not at a l l cl e a r that p a r t i c u l a r s of the Beloved's external appearance are more c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the Lakhnavi ghazal than the D i h l a v i , without a word count to determine r e l a t i v e frequency i n the two bodies of poetry. Shadani's seventh point can be broken up into two. His primary argument i s that Lakhnavi poetry i s greatly influenced by Hindu society ( r i t e s , customs and manners). Secondarily Shadani broaches the issue of Persianized constructions, or F a r s i tarkiben. On t h i s point he would appear to d i f f e r with Nadvi, who says that the Dihlavis employ Persian constructions but that the Lakhnavis do not. Shadani says that "notwithstanding the fact that Lakhnavis Persianized t h e i r - 121 -language t h e i r p o e t r y s t i l l r e f l e c t s t h e i n f l u e n c e o f Hindu s o c i e t y . " P o i n t s 8-11 may w e l l be a c c u r a t e o b s e r v a t i o n s o f d i s c e r n i b l e s u b j e c t m a t t e r — a s may be h i s s i x t h p o i n t r e g a r d i n g t h e mention o f song, dance and d a n c i n g g i r l s — b u t t h e r e i s n o t h i n g i n them w h i c h s u p p o r t s t h e i d e a t h a t L a k h n a v i p o e t r y c o n s t i t u t e s i t s own l i t e r a r y s c h o o l : even i n such s h e 1 r s as t h o s e , L a k h n a v i p o e t s observe t h e s t a n d a r d c o n v e n t i o n s o f t h e g h a z a l . There i s n o t h i n g i n song, dance, d a n c i n g g i r l s , d r o l l e r y , p h a b t i kahna o r mention o f brands o f madness ( d a g h - i junun) w h i c h go a g a i n s t the e s t a b l i s h e d format o f t h e Urdu g h a z a l . S h a d a n i ' s o u t l i n e g e n e r a l l y emphasizes t o p i c s o r o b s e r v a b l e f e a t u r e s i n L a k h n a v i p o e t r y w h i c h a r e o b j e c t i o n a b l e because t h e y i n d i c a t e r a t h e r f o r c e f u l l y t h e p h y s i c a l a s p e c t o f th e ' a s h i q ' s r e l a t i o n t o t h e B e l o v e d . I t may be i n f e r r e d t h a t Shadani f i n d s L a k h n a v i p o e t r y t o be f r i v o l o u s because o f what he sees as an emphasis on e x t e r n a l a t t r i b u t e s o f t h e B e l o v e d . I t i s f u r t h e r i n f e r r e d t h a t he would have wished t o s e e , i n t h e L a k h n a v i g h a z a l , a showcase f o r more a b s t r a c t , s p i r i t u a l , " n o b l e " ( s h a r i f ) f a c e t s o f Indo-Muslim i d e n t i t y . In s h o r t , Shadani's u n f a v o r a b l e c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n o f L a k h n a v i y a t i s based on moral and c u l t u r a l — r a t h e r t h a n l i t e r a r y — j u d g m e n t s . N a d v i ' s c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n s were based f a r more on l i t e r a r y 16. Emphasis mine. - 122 -c r i t e r i a . T h i s i s n o t t o say t h a t he f a v o r s L a k h n a v i y a t , or t h a t he does not s h a r e Shadani's i m p l i e d m o r a l o b j e c t i o n s t o i t ; few Urdu c r i t i c s , i n my e x p e r i e n c e , do not e x p r e s s t h e s e m o r a l o b j e c t i o n s . S t i l l N a d v i , i n h i s a t t e m p t t o e l u c i d a t e t h e d i f f e r e n c e s between L a k h n a v i y a t and D i h l a v i y a t . g e n e r a l l y c o n f i n e s h i m s e l f t o l i t e r a r y c r i t e r i a — t o s t r u c t u r a l , r a t h e r t h a n t h e m a t i c , elements i n t h e p o e t r y . The " m o r a l " v s . " l i t e r a r y " bases o f Shadani's and Nadvi's arguments r e f l e c t a w i d e s p r e a d , and f u n d a m e n t a l , c o n f u s i o n i n t h e l i t e r a r y s c h o l a r s h i p a d d r e s s e d t o Lucknow, s t a r t i n g as f a r back as H a l i ' s Mugaddama. Shadani a l s o emulates N a d v i i n t h e m a t t e r o f i l l u s t r a t i n g h i s p o i n t s . H o w e v e r — l i k e N a d v i — h e , too, o f t e n c u l l s h i s examples from l e s s e r known p o e t s . I f t h e f e a t u r e s c i t e d by Two S c h o o l c r i t i c s a r e i n f a c t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f L a k h n a v i p o e t r y t h e n t h e r e s h o u l d be ample i l l u s t r a t i o n o f them i n t h e f o u n d i n g p o e t s o f t h e s o - c a l l e d d a b i s t S n - i Lakhna'u. The p e r s u a s i v e n e s s o f N a d v i ' j and Shadani's arguments would be g r e a t l y enhanced were t h e y t o c i t e t h e major p o e t s o f e i t h e r markaz. A f i n a l p o i n t w h i c h emerges from t h i s e x a m i n a t i o n o f Shadani i s t h a t c o n c e p t i o n s o f what c o n s t i t u t e L a k h n a v i y a t and D i h l a v i y a t i n l i t e r a t u r e n e i t h e r changed s i g n i f i c a n t l y nor became more s o p h i s t i c a t e d i n t h e i r a r t i c u l a t i o n from 1 9 2 6— w i t h S h e ' r u i H i n d — t o 1963, d e s p i t e a p r o l i f e r a t i o n o f l i t e r a r y s c h o l a r s h i p i n Urdu w h i c h a t t e m p t e d t o break away from t h e - 123 -17 r i g i d i t y of the Two School theory. In recent years there has been one p a r t i c u l a r dissenting Urdu c r i t i c . His name i s A l i Javad Z a i d i , and his book Do  Adabi Iskul. which challenges the Two School theory, i s discussed in the next chapter. 17. We refer here to the work of such c r i t i c s as Abdul Haqq, Masud Hasan R i z v i 'Adib,* Shamsur Rahman Faruqi, Gopichand Narang. - 124 -CHAPTER V I I I ZAIDI'S CHALLENGE TO THE TWO SCHOOL THEORY In 1970 A l i Javad Z a i d i p u b l i s h e d a book c a l l e d Do A d a b i I s k u l (Two L i t e r a r y S c h o o l s ) , 1 which c h a l l e n g e d t h e Two S c h o o l t h e o r y . He w r i t e s , on t h e f i r s t page o f t h e f i r s t P r e f a c e , " I n t h i s s t u d y I have made so b o l d as t o s t a t e t h a t I do not a c c e p t t h e i d e a t h a t t h e r e a r e two s e p a r a t e l i t e r a r y s c h o o l s o f p o e t r y 2 i n D e l h i and Lucknow." Z a i d i c l a i m s t h a t what moved him t o w r i t e t h e book was r e a d i n g S h a d a n i ' s " L a k h n a v i S h a ' i r i k i Chand K h u s u s i y a t , " a l t h o u g h t h i s s c h o o l - d e s i g n a t i n g p r o b l e m had concerned him f o r about t h r e e decades. H i s p r i m a r y c o n c e r n i s " w i t h t h e t r u t h and i n t e l l i g e n c e o f Shadani's arguments," 3 w r i t e s Z a i d i . What s t r u c k him most o f a l l was t h a t t h e t h e o r y o f Two S c h o o l s seemed j u s t as muddled and u n p o l i s h e d i n 1963 as i t had been i n 1926 when Nadvi f i r s t p u b l i s h e d S h e ' r u i H i n d . ^ Because i t i s beyond t h e scope o f h i s book t o a n a l y z e i n d e t a i l a l l t h e f e a t u r e s o f D i h l a v i y a t and L a k h n a v i y a t r says Z a i d i , he w i l l c o n f i n e h i m s e l f t o t h e p a r t i c u l a r f e a t u r e s w h i c h 1. I n a d d i t i o n t o Do A d a b i I s k u l , see Z a i d i ' s e s s a y s , "Mafruza  A d a b i I s k u l . " and " D i l l i aur Lakhna'u I s k u l f " i n F i k r - o R i y a z . D e l h i : M a k t a b a h - i Jami'a L i m i t e d , 1977, pp.41-53; and 54-101. 2. 2o A d a b i I s k u l . P r e f a c e t o t h e F i r s t E d i t i o n , 1970, p.13: "Main ne i s maqale men 'arz k a r n e k i . j u r 'at k i t h l k i h main Lakhna'u aur D i l l i ko a l a g a l a g a d a b i i s k u l n a h i n manta." 3. "Main" ne z y a d a t a r ' A n d a l i b Shadani h i ke haqa'iq-o d a g a ' i q se s a r o k a r rakha h a i . " p.15. 4. Z a i d i , O p . C i t . pp.15, 175. - 125 -S h a d a n i , N a d v i and A b u l L a i s S i d d i q i c o n s i d e r t o be e s p e c i a l l y 5 c h a r a c t e r i s t i c : "For c o n v e n i e n c e I have named i t Do A d a b i I s k u l but I must make i t c l e a r from t h e o u t s e t t h a t t h i s i s n o t a c o m p a r a t i v e s t u d y o f D e l h i and Lucknow, nor i s i t a d e t a i l e d s t u d y o f t h e two a l l e g e d s c h o o l s . My e n t i r e t h e s i s s h o u l d be re a d i n l i g h t o f t h e " s c h o o l d e s i g n a t o r s ' " — e s p e c i a l l y A n d a l i b S h a d a n i ' s — w r i t i n g s . . . " A c c o r d i n g t o Z a i d i , S h a dani's l i s t o f L a k h n a v i p o e t r y ' s k j i u s u s i y a t ( d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ) l e f t him w i t h many q u e s t i o n s and r e s p o n s e s . He argu e s t h a t Shadani p r a c t i c a l l y c o p i e d h i s k h u s u s i y a t v e r b a t i m from N a d v i ; t h a t t h e new k h u s u s i y a t o u t l i n e d were q u i t e s u p e r f i c i a l i n n a t u r e , 7 r e f l e c t i n g a v e r y c u r s o r y s t u d y o f L a k h n a v i p o e t r y a t b e s t ; and t h a t t h e d i s c o u r s e o f t h e two s c h o o l d e s i g n a t o r s i s Q c o m p l e t e l y u n s c i e n t i f i c , o r " n a - s a y i n s i . " Z a i d i a l s o argues t h a t c i t i e s o r m a r a k i 2 do n o t d e t e r m i n e l i t e r a r y s c h o o l s . Elements o f t h i s argument a r e made i n d e t a i l . I n t h e D e l h i markaz. he w r i t e s , p o e t r y was w r i t t e n and r e c i t e d c o n t i n u o u s l y f o r over two hundred y e a r s . P o e t s l i k e Shah Hatim, Sauda, D a r d , Shah N a s i r and Momin c o u l d h a r d l y be 5. Z a i d i , Do A d a b i I s k u l , p.16. 6. I b i d . 7. Z a i d i , p.177: "In, k h u s u s i y a t p a r s a t h i n a z a r daurane v a l a  b h i y i h mahsus k i y e b a g h a i r n a h i n r a h s a k t a k i h tamam  k h u s u s i y a t ek manfivana aur munazirana n u q t a h - i n a z a r se  muntakhab k i g a y i h a i n . . . " 8. Z a i d i , p.177: "Sach t o y i h h a i k i h Lakhna'u aur D i l l i ko  a l a g a l a g a d a b i d a b i s t a n o n men bantna h i s a r a s a r n a - s a y i n s i f e ' l h a i . " - 126 -grouped t o g e t h e r a c c o r d i n g t o any c r i t e r i a o t h e r t h a n t h a t t h e y were a l l Urdu p o e t s and a l l l i v e d i n D e l h i ( a l b e i t o v er a span o f f o u r o r f i v e g e n e r a t i o n s ) . Why, s i n c e t h e i r s t y l e s a d m i t t e d l y d i f f e r , he a s k s , s h o u l d t h e y a l l be c o n s i d e r e d members o f t h e same l i t e r a r y s c h o o l ? And why, i f Shah N a s i r and Sauda seem t o resemble N a s i k h and I n s h a i n p o e t i c s t y l e , s h o u l d t h e f i r s t p a i r be members o f t h e D e l h i " s c h o o l " and t h e g l a t t e r b e l o n g t o t h e L a k h n a v i d a b i s t S n ? F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e r e i s t h e problem o f d e s i g n a t i n g p o e t s " D i h l a v i " o r " L a k h n a v i " even when t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e i r l i v e s were l i v e d i n o t h e r p l a c e s . I n h i s s e c t i o n c a l l e d "Shahr aur SnS'ir." ( C i t y and P o e t ) 1 0 Z a i d i r e c o u n t s t h e p e r e g r i n a t i o n s o f a number o f major Urdu p o e t s , o b s e r v i n g , f o r i n s t a n c e , t h a t t h e D i h l a v i p o e t p a r e x c e l l e n c e , M i r T a q i M i r , was b o r n i n A g r a , moved t o D e l h i when he was n i n e y e a r s o l d , r e t u r n e d t o Agra d u r i n g t h e i n v a s i o n o f N a d i r Shah i n 1739, r e t u r n e d t o D e l h i t h e r e a f t e r , and s p e n t t h e l a s t t h i r t y y e a r s o f h i s l i f e (1781-1810) i n Lucknow. S i m i l a r l y K h a n - i A r z u , r e p u t e d l y t h e f i r s t g r e a t Urdu u s t a d , was b o r n and educ a t e d i n G w a l i o r o f a f a m i l y from A v a d h — F a i z a b a d i n Ayodhya d i s t r i c t — m o v e d t o D e l h i a t t h e age o f twenty-one, and a f t e r t h i r t y - f i v e y e a r s i n D e l h i moved back t o F a i z a b a d and f i n a l l y t o Lucknow, where he d i e d . S i m i l a r l y , b o t h L a k h n a v i u s t a d s N a s i k h and A t i s h were born i n 9. Z a i d i , Do A d a b i I s k u l , pp.21-22. 10. Z a i d i , O p . C i t . . pp.83-88. - 127 -F a i z a b a d and moved t o Lucknow as young men. Even N a s i k h — t h e q u i n t e s s e n t i a l L a k h n a v i poet i n many e y e s — w a s f o r c e d t o spend a number o f y e a r s i n e x i l e due t o t h e p o l i t i c a l c l i m a t e i n Lucknow and h i s p e r s o n a l a f f i l i a t i o n s w i t h c e r t a i n o f f i c i a l s . I n s h a , whom Nadvi named as t h e e a r l y s c u l p t o r o f t h e Lucknow rang ( s t y l e ) , was b o r n i n B e n g a l and a c h i e v e d t h e s t a t u s o f u s t 5 d i n D e l h i b e f o r e m i g r a t i n g t o F a i z a b a d and, f i n a l l y , Lucknow. Z a i d i ' s p o i n t i s t h i s : I f t h e s c h o o l - d e s i g n a t i o n i s based on a f f i l i a t i o n o f p o e t s w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r c i t y , how can i t h o l d up under t h e i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s o f most p o e t s ' h a b i t a t i o n and p e r e g r i n a t i o n s ? How many y e a r s ' r e s i d e n c e i n a p a r t i c u l a r c i t y q u a l i f i e s one f o r a " D i h l a v i " or " L a k h n a v i " t i t l e ? I n o t h e r words, how can i t r e a l l y be d e t e r m i n e d — a n d j u s t i f i e d — w h o i s a D i h l a v i and who a L a k h n a v i ? A d d i t i o n a l p o i n t s r a i s e d by Z a i d i a r e t h a t l i t e r a t u r e d e v e l o p s over t i m e , and t h e r e can be no s i n g u l a r r a n g 1 1 i n 12 D e l h i o r Lucknow o v e r a span o f s e v e r a l c e n t u r i e s . In o t h e r words when Shah Hatim and Shah N a s i r — o r G h a l i b , Momin, Zauq and Shah N a s i r — a r e a l l D i h l a v i s and i t i s a c c e p t e d t h a t t h e i r s t y l e s d i f f e r d r a m a t i c a l l y from one a n o t h e r , whose s t y l e can 11. L i t e r a l l y , " c o l o r , " but a l s o used t o mean " a s p e c t , s t y l e , manner, c h a r a c t e r , n a t u r e . " See P l a t t s * D i c t i o n a r y o f Urdu, C l a s s i c a l H i n d i and E n g l i s h , London: O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1974, p.601. 12. Z a i d i , Op_. g i t . , p.21. - 128 -most j u d i c i o u s l y be c a l l e d exemplary o f D i h l a v i y a t ? Z a i d i ' s f i n a l o b j e c t i o n t o t h e methods o f t h e s c h o o l - d e s i g n a t o r s i s t h a t t h e y c o n f i n e t h e m s e l v e s t o d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e g h a z a l . T h i s does Lucknow a g r a v e i n j u s t i c e , argues Z a i d i , s i n c e t h e g h a z a l was a r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l p o r t i o n o f t h e l i t e r a r y o u t p u t i n t h e L a k h n a v i markaz. I n f a c t , he goes on t o s a y , t h e g r e a t e s t L a k h n a v i u s t a d was n o t N a s i k h a t a l l , but [were] M i r Hasan and M i r Babar A l i A n i s whose masnavl S i h r u l Bayan and m a r s i y a s , r e s p e c t i v e l y , were t h e g r e a t e s t 14 l i t e r a t u r e produced i n Lucknow. The arguments Z a i d i r a i s e s a r e v e r y w e l l t a k e n : i n t h e f i r s t p l a c e , he s a y s , a l l t h e s o - c a l l e d k h u s u s i y S t named by N a d v i , S hadani and A b u l L a i s S i d d i q i can e a s i l y be found i n D i h l a v i p o e t r y as w e l l — a n d i n a m p l i t u d e : " I f t h e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e i t i s one o f q u a n t i t y r a t h e r t h a n q u a l i t y . From a s c i e n t i f i c p o i n t o f v i e w a d i f f e r e n c e i n q u a n t i t y a l s o becomes a d i f f e r e n c e i n q u a l i t y . But even the q u a l i t a t i v e d i f f e r e n c e s between D e l h i and Lucknow seem v e r y s l i g h t . " - 1 3 He goes on t o say t h a t i f t h e s e s o - c a l l e d d i f f e r e n c e s form t h e b a s i s o f t h e " s c h o o l - d e s i g n a t o r s * t h e s i s , " and can be proved s p u r i o u s , t h e n where i s t h e fundamental m e r i t i n t h e i r 13. Z a i d i , p.154. Elsewhere he c h a l l e n g e s t h e s u b - d i v i s i o n o f t h e Lucknow s c h o o l i n t o two f u r t h e r s c h o o l s — t h o s e o f N a s i k h and A t i s h — o n t h e same grounds, [ p . 8 8 ] . 14. Z a i d i , Do A d a b i I s k u l . pp.159-60. 15. Z a i d i , O p . C i t . . p.16. - 129 -d i s t i n c t i o n between the two s c h o o l s ? " N a d v i ' s e i g h t p o i n t s a r e r e c a p i t u l a t e d b e f o r e Z a i d i u n d e r t a k e s h i s d i s c u s s i o n o f S h a d a n i . Perhaps t o show the n a t u r e o f N a d v i ' s c h o i c e s o f s u b s t a n t i a t i n g v e r s e — h e c i t e s a s o l i t a r y example o f Nadvi's i l l u s t r a t i o n o f zananapan i n L a k h n a v i p o e t r y , 1 7 b u t no o t h e r s . He r e f u t e s t h e c l a i m t h a t L a k h n a v i s ' use o f language was v u l g a r , s a y i n g t h a t , on t h e c o n t r a r y , N a s i k h improved Urdu as a p o e t i c language by 18 c h a s t e n i n g i t , and t h a t N a s i k h expanded the e n t i r e scope o f t h e g h a z a l i n h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n o f new mazamin. o r p o e t i c 19 themes. He r e p e a t s h i s p o i n t t h a t t h e r e i s k h a r i j i s h a ' i r l ( p o e t r y enumerating o r c o n cerned w i t h e x t e r n a l , p h y s i c a l a t t r i b u t e s and phencCmena) i n D e l h i ; and a d a k h i l i andaz ( i n t r o s p e c t i v e mode) i n L a k h n a v i p o e t r y ; a g a i n , by showing t h a t t h e r e i s no one rang i n e i t h e r body of p o e t r y , c i t i n g t h e examples o f N a s i k h and A t i s h as p o e t s o f g e n e r a l l y d i v e r g e n t temperaments t o whom c r i t i c s a t t r i b u t e i n d i v i d u a l s c h o o l s o f 20 d i s c i p l e s , Z a i d i r e p e a t s t h e q u e s t i o n o f how t h e r e can be two s e p a r a t e s c h o o l s w i t h i n a d i s t i n c t L a k h n a v i s c h o o l , as N a d v i and o t h e r s have s u g g e s t e d . 16. I b i d . 17. The s h e ' r i s A t i s h ' s "Whenever a b u b b l e / by a n o t h e r bubble r o s e / I t h o u g h t of her b r a s s i e r e / o f f i n e s t gauze." 18. Z a i d i , Do A d a b i I s k u l , pp.169-70. 19. I b i d . 20. Z a i d i , O p . C i t . . pp.173-74. - 130 -Do A d a b i I s k u l i s a rem a r k a b l e a s s a y a t a r g u i n g a g a i n s t t h e Two S c h o o l d e s i g n a t i o n from a l o g i c a l , s c i e n t i f i c p o i n t o f v i e w . I t s r e f u t a t i o n o f Shadani opens w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g remarks: "Maulana Abdus Salam Nadvi d e c l a r e d t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e Lucknow S c h o o l and A n d a l i b adopted them. Those fundamental d e f e c t s i n t h e Lucknow S c h o o l d e s i g n a t i o n w h i c h were f i r s t d i s p l a y e d by Nadvi were c o p i e d , w i t h u n d e r s t a n d a b l e c o n f i d e n c e . Having e s t a b l i s h e d an e d i f i c e on l i m i t l e s s l y weak f o u n d a t i o n s , Shadani then gave i t s t r a n g e and wondrous e m b e l l i s h m e n t . . . " T h e r e a f t e r i s l a u n c h e d a p o i n t - b y - p o i n t e x p o s i t i o n . D u r i n g t h e c o u r s e o f n e a r l y t h r e e hundred pages, Z a i d i p a i n s t a k i n g l y p r e s e n t s a number o f s h e ' r s by D i h l a v i p o e t s w h i c h m a n i f e s t t h e v a r i o u s s o - c a l l e d k h u s u s i y a t o f L a k h n a v i p o e t r y ; and o t h e r v e r s e s by L a k h n a v i p o e t s which bear t h e mark of s o - c a l l e d D i h l a v i y a t . I t i s n o t w i t h i n t h e scope o f t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y t o f u l l y r e c o u n t Z a i d i ' s examples: f o r t h a t t h e r e a d e r i s r e f e r r e d t o Do A d a b i I s k u l i t s e l f . But Z a i d i ' s c o u n t e r - a r g u m e n t s and c o u n t e r - e x a m p l e s d i s p r o v e s o u n d l y and c o n v i n c i n g l y Nadvi's and Shadani's a s s e r t e d d e l i n e a t i o n o f t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w hich p a r t i c u l a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h t h e Lucknow s c h o o l o f p o e t r y from t h e D e l h i s c h o o l o f p o e t r y . In summary, Z a i d i r a i s e s v e r y l o g i c a l and p l a u s i b l e o b j e c t i o n s t o t h e Delhi-Lucknow d a b i s t a n d i s t i n c t i o n . H i s o b j e c t i o n s a r e a d d r e s s e d t o t h e s c h o o l - d e s i g n a t o r s ' methods o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n as w e l l as t o t h e fundamental l o g i c o f e q u a t i n g 21. Z a i d i , p_o Adabi I s k u l , p.175. - 131 -Urdu m a r a k i z w i t h l i t e r a r y s c h o o l s . He d e m o n s t r a t e s t h e n e a r - i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f a s s i g n i n g most major p o e t s t o one s c h o o l o r t h e o t h e r w i t h a c c u r a c y , g i v e n t h e f a c t s o f t h e i r l i v e s and movements i n s e a r c h o f p a t r o n a g e . He r a i s e s t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e Two S c h o o l t h e o r y ' s i n a b i l i t y t o a c c o u n t f o r developments i n l i t e r a r y s t y l e and genre over t i m e . And he d e m o n s t r a t e s amply t h a t t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a t t r i b u t e d t o one d a b i s t a n or t h e o t h e r a r e t o be found i n t h e p o e t r y o f t h e o p p o s i t e " s c h o o l , " r e n d e r i n g t h e fundamental d i s t i n c t i o n by markaz f a l l a c i o u s . And y e t t h e r e have been a number o f c r i t i c a l works p u b l i s h e d i n t h e 1970s and 1980s which c o n t i n u e t o o p e r a t e on t h e assumption t h a t two s e p a r a t e d a b i s t a n s e x i s t and which do 23 not appear t o t a k e Z a i d i ' s work i n t o a c c o u n t . S i n c e one o f t h e t w o - f o l d p u r p o s e s o f t h i s s t u d y i s t o p r e s e n t and c r i t i q u e t h e l i t e r a t u r e r e l e v a n t t o t h e Two S c h o o l t h e o r y , r e s p e c t f o r t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n o f Qo A d a b i I s k u l c a l l s f o r a s u b s t a n t i a l r e sponse t o i t s c r i t i c a l c o n t e n t . On t h e one hand i t has been amply r e c o r d e d t h a t Z a i d i makes a genuine 22. Z a i d i a l s o o b s e r v e s t h a t t h e r e were m a r a k i z i n Rampur, Hyderabad, Azimabad but no s e p a r a t e s c h o o l s have been d e s i g n a t e d f o r them. Qp_. C i t . . p.17. 23. C f . S h a b i h u l Hasan, N a s i k h : T a i z i y a - o T a q d i r . Lucknow: U.P.Urdu Akedmi, 1974; R a s h i d Hasan Khan, I n t i k h a b - i N 5 s i k h F D e l h i : M a k t a b a h - i J a m i ' a L i m i t e d , 1972; Shah Abdus Salam, D a b i s t a n - i A t i s h . D e l h i : M a k t a b a h - i Jami'a L i m i t e d , 1977; A b u l L a i s S i d d i q i , Tanqid-o T a b s i r e . Hyderabad: Urdu Book C e n t r e , 1971; and K h a l i l Ahmad S i d d i q i , R e k h t l ka* T a n q i d i M u t a l a ' a . Lucknow: Nasim Book Depot, 1974, t o name a few. - 132 -attempt t o p l a c e p o e t i c t r e n d s i n t h e i r h i s t o r i c a l c o n t e x t , and t h a t he amply s u p p o r t s h i s p o i n t - b y - p o i n t r e f u t a t i o n o f Shadani w i t h numerous p o e t i c samples o f h i s own c h o i c e . On t h e o t h e r hand c e r t a i n q u e s t i o n s do a r i s e f o r us i n s t u d y i n g Z a i d i ' s t r e a t m e n t o f t h e t o p i c . I n t h e f i r s t p l a c e , D_o A d a b i I s k U l h i n t s a t t h e t r e a t i s e o f a Lucknow a p o l o g i s t , whose r e i t e r a t e d message seems t o be t h a t " D e l h i was j u s t as bad as Lucknow," o r "Lucknow wasn't any worse than D e l h i , " b e c a u s e , a f t e r a l l , t h e whole Mughal S u l t a n a t e was i n d e c l i n e . A g r e a t p a r t o f Z a i d i ' s r e f u t a t i o n o f t h e Two S c h o o l d e s i g n a t i o n appears t o be m o t i v a t e d by a d e s i r e t o defend Lucknow a g a i n s t t h e a s p e r s i o n s c a s t by the Two 24 S c h o o l t h e o r y ' s t e n e t s . A t one p o i n t Z a i d i argues t h a t because t h e S h i ' i 'ulema were so much s t r o n g e r an i n f l u e n c e i n n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y Lucknow th a n t h e y were i n contemporary D e l h i , t h e y e x e r t e d s t r i n g e n t m o r a l d i s c i p l i n e on 25 l i t e r a t u r e . He even goes so f a r as t o r e j e c t t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l wisdom t h a t L a k h n a v i p o e t r y was d e g e n e r a t e because o f t h e i n f l u e n c e o f t h e whole Lucknow e n v i r o n m e n t , s a y i n g t h a t t h e 'ulemS k e p t the g e n e r a l p o p u l a c e i n l i n e , and t h a t i t was 24. I n t h i s c o n t e x t Z a i d i c i t e s o t h e r d e f e n d e r s o f Lucknow.Cf. A b i d A l i A b i d , T a n q i d i Mazamin: R a s h i d Hasan Khan, I n t i k h a b - i N a s i k h ; K h a l i l u r Rahman Azami, Muqaddama-i Kalam-j A t i s h : A l - i Ahmad S u r o o r , "Lakhna 'u I s k u l ne Nahin. Lakhna 'u ne.." 25. Z a i d i , Qo A d a b i I s k u l . pp.95-97. - 133 -o n l y t h e n o b i l i t y who were d e g e n e r a t e ; and t h a t , i n f a c t , d u r i n g Lucknow's heyday, the p o l i t i c a l and economic c o n d i t i o n s were not a t a l l as d e p i c t e d by t h e Two S c h o o l - d e s i g n a t i n g 27 c r i t i c s , and t h e r i v e r s o f w e a l t h were no l o n g e r f l o w i n g . These p o i n t s may be w e l l t a k e n , b u t t h e y do n o t p a r t i c u l a r l y advance t h e b a s i c t h e s i s t h a t t h e r e i s no sound l i t e r a r y b a s i s f o r t h e Two S c h o o l t h e o r y . S e c o n d l y , the r i g o r o u s s c i e n t i f i c method whose l a c k Z a i d i laments i n t h e " s c h o o l d e s i g n a t o r s " p r o v e s i t s e l f t o be more e l u s i v e , p e r h a p s , t h a n Z a i d i h i m s e l f had a n t i c i p a t e d . W h i l e c l a i m i n g t o l i m i t h i m s e l f t o a d d r e s s i n g " t h e Two S c h o o l d e s i g n a t o r s , e s p e c i a l l y A n d a l i b S h a d a n i , " Z a i d i d e v o t e s more t h a n a hundred pages t o r e c o u n t i n g t h e h i s t o r y o f Urdu's development as a language as w e l l as t o t h e g e n e r a l p o l i t i c a l 28 h i s t o r y o f e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y Avadh. On t h e b a s i s o f t h i s r e c o u n t e d h i s t o r y , he c o n c l u d e s t h a t p o l i t i c s and c u l t u r e a l l o v e r M u s l i m I n d i a were i n d e c l i n e , t h a t any d e g e n e r a t e t e n d e n c i e s i n Lucknow had been i n h e r i t e d from D e l h i anyway, and 26. Z a i d i , O p . C i t . . p.93: "Avam k i a k j i l a q i h a l a t d u r u s t t h i . Rang r a l i y a f i umara ta k mahdud t h i n . " However, s i n c e i t was a l m o s t s o l e l y t h e upper c l a s s e s who produced Urdu l i t e r a t u r e u n t i l v e r y r e c e n t l y ; and s i n c e t h e custom o f c o n s p i c u o u s consumption as a means o f a r t i c u l a t i n g t h e e l i t e i n I n d i a has been seen by h i s t o r i a n s t o o u t l a s t t h e r e s o u r c e s r e q u i r e d f o r i t , t h i s p a r t i c u l a r p o i n t o f Z a i d i ' s does l i t t l e t o advance h i s o v e r a l l p o s i t i o n . 27. Z a i d i , O p . C i t . . p.91. 28. Only on page 175 o f Do A d a b i I s k u l does Z a i d i a c t u a l l y b e g i n h i s c l o s e e x a m i n a t i o n of Shadani's d e s i g n a t e d L a k h n a v i k h u s u s i y a t . t h e s t a t e d purpose and domain o f t h e book. - 134 -t h a t t h e i n f l u e n c e o f Hindu customs on L a k h n a v i p o e t r y was no g r e a t e r t h a n t h o s e o f A v a d h i , B r a j Bhasha, S a n s k r i t and 29 I n d o - P e r s i a n s a b k - i H i n d i . U n f o r t u n a t e l y — r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e i r e s s e n t i a l m e r i t w i t h w h i c h we do not q u i b b l e a t a l l — t h e s e arguments a r e u n s u p p o r t e d by c o r r o b o r a t i v e samples o f p o e t r y . Such c o r r o b o r a t i o n would have been most welcome. I t might even have i n s p i r e d a more s a t i s f a c t o r y response from t h e Urdu l i t e r a r y e s t a b l i s h m e n t , though t h a t i s by no means c e r t a i n . Z a i d i ' s o b j e c t i o n s t o the Two S c h o o l d e s i g n a t o r s a r e v e r y sound, but a r e perhaps d i m i n i s h e d by h i s a p o l o g e t i c s t a n c e w i t h r e g a r d t o Lucknow. F u r t h e r m o r e , he appears t o r e p e a t c e r t a i n m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p r a c t i c e s which he c o n s i d e r s t o be m i s t a k e s on t h e p a r t o f Shadani and N a d v i . He says i n t h e b e g i n n i n g : " A f t e r enumerating each k j i u s u s i y a t Shadani and Nadvi have i l l u s t r a t e d t h e i r p o i n t by p r e s e n t i n g s e v e r a l s h e ' r s . I n each p l a c e I have o f f e r e d a few more s h e ' r s from D i h l a v i p o e t r y t o prove t h a t t h e s e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a r e a l s o p r e s e n t i n D e l h i p o e t r y and t h u s cannot be c a l l e d s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Lucknow..." W h i l e o b s e r v i n g t h a t i t i s i m p o s s i b l e t o g e t t h e measure o f an 31 e n t i r e body o f p o e t r y from o n l y a few v e r s e s he appears t o o v e r l o o k t h e f a c t t h a t t h e — a d m i t t e d l y more n u m e r o u s — s h e ' r s w h i c h he o f f e r s i n r e f u t a t i o n o f Nadvi and Shadani might be 29. See Qo_ A d a b i I s k u l . p. 171. 30. Z a i d i , Do A d a b i I s k u l . p.16. 31. S a y i n s i n u q t a h - i n a z a r se y i h t a r i q a h q j i a l a t h a i . " I b i d . - 135 -c o n s i d e r e d e q u a l l y i n c o n c l u s i v e by s k e p t i c s because t h e y a re p r e s e n t e d out o f d i r e c t c o n t e x t ; and because t h e y r e p r e s e n t o n l y a f r a c t i o n o f a l l D i h l a v i and L a k h n a v i p o e t r y . When he d i s c u s s e s " t h e o t h e r a s p e c t o f D e l h i " ( D i l l i ka d u s r a r u p ) — m e a n i n g o t h e r t h a n t h e l o f t y , s p i r i t u a l a s p e c t — Z a i d i o f f e r s a f i f t e e n - p a g e i n t i k h a b o f g h a z a l s by D i h l a v i masters from Shah Hatim t h r o u g h Bahadur Shah Z a f a r which i n c l u d e s h e 1 r s 32 c o n t a i n i n g k h a n j i ( e x t e r n a l ) p o e t r y . W h i l e he does not s i m p l y e x t r a c t i n c r i m i n a t i n g s h e ' r s from t h e whole g h a z a l — a s he c o r r e c t l y accused Shadani and Nadvi o f d o i n g — h e o f f e r s no commentary on which o f t h e s h e ' r s i n h i s i n t i k h a b a r e examples of D e l h i ' s d u s r a r a n g . and why. Once a g a i n , t h i s p r e s e n t s problems s i m i l a r t o t h i s which a r o s e f o r Z a i d i i n t h e " n a - s S y i n s i " ( u n s c i e n t i f i c ) method o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n employed by th e Two S c h o o l c r i t i c s . The one t r a c e a b l e r e v i e w o f £o_ Ad a b i I s k u l was p u b l i s h e d 33 by S.R. F a r u q i i n Shab Kjiun. I n h i s e s t i m a t i o n Z a i d i made th e same s e v e r e m e t h o d o l o g i c a l e r r o r made by a l l t h e Two S c h o o l c r i t i c s . A l l a r e " i l l o g i c a l and u n r e a l i s t i c , " a r g u e s F a r u q i , i n t h a t t h e y s e t up t h e paradigm o f " D e l h i i s good and Lucknow i s bad." L a k h n a v i p o e t r y need n o t be l e g i t i m a t e d by showing 32. Z a i d i , O p . C i t . . pp.125-140. 33. Shab KhSn. No.81, F e b r u a r y 1973, pp.74-75. Z a i d i a l s o r e f e r s t o a r a d i o response by Gopi Chand Narang on pg.54 o f F i k r - o R i y 5 z . New D e l h i : M a k t a b a - i Jam'iah L i m i t e d , 1975. However, I have n ot been a b l e t o l o c a t e a t e x t of t h i s r e s p o n s e . - 136 -how much i t resembles D i h l a v i p o e t r y : t o employ such a s t r a t e g y , as Z a i d i l a r g e l y does, o n l y s e r v e s t o p e r p e t u a t e t h e myth o f D e l h i ' s e x c l u s i v e c u l t u r a l a u t h o r i t y . F a r u q i and Z a i d i seem t o a g r e e , however, on the p r oblem of d e s i g n a t i n g who i s a D i h l a v i and who a L a k h n a v i , e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e case o f t h e i n t e r i m g e n e r a t i o n o f p o e t s between M i r , Sauda, e t c . and N a s i k h and A t i s h : "The f a c t i s t h a t t h e p o e t r y o f the emigre g e n e r a t i o n [ J u r ' a t , I n s h a , M u s h a f i , e t c . ] i s d i f f e r e n t from t h a t o f t h o s e p o e t s b o r n and b r o u g h t up i n Lucknow...there c e r t a i n l y a r e s i m i l a r i t i e s between L a k h n a v i and D i h l a v i p o e t r y b u t t h e y won't be proven^by t a l k i n g about combs, j e w e l s , moles, n o s e r i n g s , e t c . " A l s o i n h i s r e v i e w , and more r e c e n t l y , F a r u q i has d e c l a r e d t h a t i t i s n e c e s s a r y " t o make a c o m p a r a t i v e s t u d y o f l a r g e chunks o f v e r s e by t h e major p o e t s from b o t h c i t i e s , " u s i n g perhaps t e n thousand s h e ' r s and c o u n t i n g t h e f r e q u e n c y w i t h w h i c h t h e k h u s u s i y a t enumerated by t h e " s c h o o l d e s i g n a t o r s " o c c u r on b o t h s i d e s . Then, he a r g u e s , i f t h e o c c u r r e n c e i s "more or l e s s t h e same between D i h l a v i and L a k h n a v i p o e t r y , one can say t h a t i n t h e s e s p e c i f i c a s p e c t s D e l h i and Lucknow a r e not d i f f e r e n t . " 3 5 The c r u x o f F a r u q i ' s argument i s t h a t t h e r e do e x i s t p e r c e p t i b l e d i f f e r e n c e s among t h e p o e t s o f t h e t h r e e g e n e r a t i o n s ( D i h l a v i s l i k e M i r , Sauda and Dard; t h e e m i g r e s ; 34. I b i d . 35. P e r s o n a l Communication, B e r k e l e y , 20 November 1984. - 137 -and N a s i k h and A t i s h , t h e L a k h n a v i s ) but t h e y have y e t t o be p i n p o i n t e d by l i t e r a r y c r i t i c s . To d i s c u s s t h e p r o s and cons of " q u a l i t a t i v e and q u a n t i t a t i v e " d i f f e r e n c e s , as Z a i d i e s s a y s a t one p o i n t , does n o t s o l v e t h e p r o b l e m . The c o m p a r a t i v e s t u d y o f t e n thousand s h e ' r s w h i c h F a r u q i s u g g e s t s i n h i s r e v i e w o f Do. A d a b i I s k u l comes as c l o s e as p o s s i b l e t o t h e s o r t o f s c i e n t i f i c method presumably e n v i s i o n e d by Z a i d i . I t would c e r t a i n l y be o f i n t e r e s t t o see t h e r e s u l t s o f a f r e q u e n c y count o f s p e c i f i e d mazSmin i n D i h l a v i and L a k h n a v i p o e t r y . T h i s has y e t t o be u n d e r t a k e n , no doubt due i n some p a r t t o t h e arduousness o f such a t a s k . But even s o , argues F a r u q i , t h e r e i s no g u a r a n t e e t h a t t h o s e r e s u l t s would s o l v e t h e p r o b l e m o f d e f i n i n g what d i s t i n g u i s h e s D i h l a v i and L a k h n a v i p o e t r y i n l i t e r a r y t e r m s . F a r u q i seems t o argue t h a t i t would be more a p p r o p r i a t e t o i d e n t i f y t h e d i s t i n g u i s h i n g f a c t o r between v a r i o u s p o e t s as one o f g e n e r a t i o n , r a t h e r t h a n o f w h i c h markaz t h e y i n h a b i t e d . As was mentioned e a r l i e r , Z a i d i makes t h i s same p o i n t i n Do A d a b i I s k Q l . He even r e i t e r a t e s i t i n a l a t e r e s s a y , "Mafruzah A d a b i 3 6 I s k u l (Supposed L i t e r a r y S c h o o l s ) ." C e r t a i n l y t h i s i s t h e 37 p r e s e n t s t u d y ' s assessment, s i n c e a t t r i b u t i n g d i s t i n c t i o n s w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o p o e t i c g e n e r a t i o n would acknowledge, a t l e a s t t a c i t l y , t h a t Urdu c o n t i n u e d t o d e v e l o p as a l i t e r a r y language 36. F i k r - o R i y a z . pp.41-42. 37. I t w i l l be i l l u s t r a t e d i n t h e next c h a p t e r ' s c o n t r o l l e d s t u d y o f D i h l a v i and L a k h n a v i p o e t r y . - 138 -o v e r a l o n g p e r i o d o f t i m e . T h e r e f o r e one e x p e c t s t o f i n d s i m i l a r i t i e s between p o e t s o f a s i n g l e g e n e r a t i o n t h a t a r e not n e c e s s a r i l y s h a r e d by p o e t s o f d i f f e r e n t g e n e r a t i o n s , even i n t h e same markaz. I t i s p e r p l e x i n g , t h e n , t h a t t h e p o i n t has n o t y e t been d r i v e n home, and t h a t Hashmi's and S i d d i q i ' s c o n c e p t i o n , n o t t o m ention t h a t o f A n d a l i b S h a d a n i , a p p a r e n t l y 3 8 c o n t i n u e s t o c a r r y g r e a t e r w e i g h t t h a n t h a t o f Z a i d i . As w i t h t h e o l o g i a n s who a r e wont t o s u p p o r t whatever i s t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r p o i n t o f view by c i t i n g c h a p t e r and v e r s e from s c r i p t u r e s , t h e r e i s ample s u p p o r t f o r a l m o s t any k i n d o f a s s e r t i o n about th e n a t u r e of Urdu p o e t r y when t h e same method i s employed. I n s h o r t , w i t h a g r e a t enough volume o f a u t h o r i t a t i v e m a t e r i a l a t h a n d — s u c h as t h e m i l l i o n s o f s h e ' r s i n t h e e s t a b l i s h e d Urdu c a n o n — U r d u p o e t r y can be p r o v e d t o have a l m o s t any t e ndency o r s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a t a l l . T h i s cannot n o t be c a l l e d " s c i e n t i f i c method," and w i l l u l t i m a t e l y f a i l t o c o n v i n c e t h o s e whose d i s s e n t i s based on i n t u i t i o n . The f a c t i s t h a t whatever d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t or have been argued by c r i t i c s a r e p e r c e i v e d i n t u i t i v e l y , s i n c e nobody has read a l l o f t h e p o e t r y w h i c h t h e y have atte m p t e d t o 38. I n d i c a t i o n s t h a t t h i s i s so a r e t h a t b o t h Hashmi and S i d d i q i a r e quoted i n n e a r l y e v e r y p u b l i s h e d work on t h e Two S c h o o l s ; whereas Z a i d i i s n o t . Even i n Shah Abdus Salam's D a b i s t a n - i A t i s h . one o f t h e few books t h a t l i s t s Do A d a b i  I s k u l i n i t s B i b l i o g r a p h y , does not quote Z a i d i i n i t s d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e d u b i o u s d i f f e r e n c e s between D i h l a v i y a t and L a k h n a v i y a t on pp.39-40. T h i s i s a l l t h e more s u r p r i s i n g i n v i e w o f t h e f a c t t h a t Abdus Salam's d i s c u s s i o n here appears t o c o i n c i d e a l m o s t c o m p l e t e l y w i t h t h a t of Z a i d i i n p_o A d a b i I s k u l . - 139 -characterize. As has been acknowledged throughout t h i s section, most of the points of refutation advanced by Zaidi have been raised and corroborated during the course of our own research. Of especial merit are his arguments that Nadvi and Shadani, the two most e x p l i c i t school-designators, often point to s u p e r f i c i a l thematic content and back up t h e i r declarations with verse selected, apparently, at random; and that just assessment of the l i t e r a r y questions which a r i s e from designating separate l i t e r a r y schools for Lucknow and Delhi must be made with attention paid to the h i s t o r i c a l context in which l i t e r a t u r e i s produced, patronized and received by i t s audience. It i s hoped that the present study i n developing some of these arguments raised by Zaidi o f f e r s some complement to his pioneering challenge. In the following chapter a model for 3 9 l i t e r a r y analysis of a controlled sample of poetry i s suggested which might serve to de f l e c t claims of randomness and s u b j e c t i v i t y i f employed in addition to the method used by 40 Nadvi, Shadani and Z a i d i . 39. The sample i s offered as an i l l u s t r a t i o n of how comparative studies of Urdu ghazal poetry might be made, and in no way claims to address a l l the aspects of a question as large as how to accurately determine and designate schools of poetry for a l i t e r a t u r e l i k e the ghazal. 40. In f a c t , i t i s quite l e g i t i m a t e — i f not e s s e n t i a l — t o question the appropriateness of attempting "objective, s c i e n t i f i c " analysis of something as inherently subjective as l i t e r a t u r e . One insight i t does substantiate, however, i s that - 140 -And with regard to the issue of placing D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi poetry in h i s t o r i c a l context in order to best understand the Two School theory, the l a s t chapter of t h i s study attempts to develop a discussion of the interlocking r e l a t i o n s h i p between culture, p o l i t i c a l h i s t o r y , and l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m i n Indo-Muslim c u l t u r e . It i s not of present concern to t r y to l e g i t i m i z e Lucknow within the terms set by Urdu culture, as other c r i t i c s have t r i e d . Whether Delhi was as degenerate as Lucknow—or Lakhnavi morals as l o f t y as those i n D e l h i — i s of far less i n t e r e s t than why a l i t e r a r y theory which can e a s i l y be refuted, even in i t s own terms, continues to dominate Urdu c r i t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e ; and why serious a n a l y t i c a l attempts, such as A l i Javad Z a i d i ' s , apparently cannot dissuade the Urdu audience—nor Urdu l i t e r a r y culture—away from the Two School theory. s t r u c t u r a l demands such as meter and end-rhyme can play an important role the thematic choices of any given poet in a given compositional context. For example, in a musha'ira f where a number of poets are a l l given a set zamin—meter and rhyme-scheme—several or more w i l l often choose s i m i l a r rhyming words. This, in turn, results in a number of she'rs with s i m i l a r thematic features. - 141 -CHAPTER IX Comparison of D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi Poetry in the Same ZamXn 9.0—Introduction The l a s t chapter's exposition of Do Adabi Iskul by A l i Javad Zaidi showed that a reader f a m i l i a r with the Urdu poetry of both Delhi and Lucknow can quite e a s i l y f i n d numerous examples i n D i h l a v i poetry that display the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s described, by Two School c r i t i c s Nadvi and Shadani, as t y p i c a l l y Lakhnavi—and vice versa. The fa c t that c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of "Lakhnaviyat" were r e a d i l y apparent in D i h l a v i poetry—and that c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of "Dihlaviyat" were also manifest in Lakhnavi poetry—formed Zaidi's fundamental objection to the delineation of two l i t e r a r y schools for Delhi and Lucknow. Zaidi also c i t e d a number of other arguments (see Chapter VIII) which further challenged the l o g i c a l premises of the Two School theory. While I personally f i n d many of Zaidi's arguments not only persuasive but in accord with the findings of my own research, the challenge represented by Do Adabi Iskul appears to have had l i t t l e impact on the theory's overwhelming prevalence as conventional wisdom among the Urdu l i t e r a r y establishment. One wonders i f there might not be additional f r u i t f u l a l t e r n a t i v e s to Zaidi's p a r t i c u l a r approach to the Two School theory, other possible methods of comparison for the Urdu - 142 -ghazal that might illuminate the thorny problem of what distinguishes one s t y l e of Urdu ghazal poetry from another. The primary problem i s that any comparison of poets or groups of poets would necessarily involve an enormous volume of poetry. Z a i d i condemned as "unscientific 1* (na-sayinsl) other c r i t i c s ' "proof" of D i h l a v i or Lakhnavi c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (khususiyat) that were based on the c i t a t i o n of a few ind i v i d u a l s h e ' r s — o r sets of she 1 r s — o u t of the context of t h e i r ghazals. In l i g h t of t h i s , Zaidi made a point of c i t i n g greater numbers of she'rs in his refutation of Nadvi and Shadani than they had o r i g i n a l l y offered as examples of D i h l a v i and Lakhnavi khususiyat . The question s t i l l remains of how one can apply the s c i e n t i f i c method alluded to by Zaidi—dependent as i t i s on q u a n t i f i c a t i o n — t o arguing what characterizes t o p i c a l differences i n such a subjective f i e l d as l i t e r a t u r e . U n t i l such time as the f i e l d of Urdu c r i t i c i s m has complete access to computer technology—and the i n c l i n a t i o n to apply i t — i t i s highly u n l i k e l y that a t r u l y s c i e n t i f i c word-count of the Two School theory's distinguishing khususiyat w i l l be effected . In t h i s chapter we propose to employ a method of comparing d i f f e r e n t bodies of ghazal poetry that does not appear to have been applied in c r i t i c a l l i t e r a t u r e concerned with the Two School theory. Since the ghazal has such a r i g i d technical structure, i t st r i k e s us as promising to base poetic comparison on choices made within the context of the genre's s t r u c t u r a l - 143 -p a r a m e t e r s . A l l t h e c r i t i c s d i s c u s s e d so f a r — i n c l u d i n g Z a i d i — h a v e based t h e i r c o m p a r a t i v e samples l a r g e l y on a l l e g e d l y " L a k h n a v i " o r " D i h l a v i " themes; and t h e i r a s s u m p t i o n has been t h a t p o e t s w i l l g r a v i t a t e t o c e r t a i n themes as a r e s u l t o f t h e s o c i a l o r economic o r p o l i t i c a l environment i n w h i c h t h e y a r e composing. But knowledge t h a t t h e r o l e o f s t r u c t u r a l f e a t u r e s on t h e t h e m a t i c outcome o f a s h e 1 r has been debated i n Urdu c r i t i c i s m 1 encourages an e x a m i n a t i o n o f D i h l a v i and L a k h n a v i p o e t r y on t h e b a s i s o f end-rhyme. I f t h e r e were d i f f e r e n t D i h l a v i and L a k h n a v i approaches t o p o e t r y , one would e x p e c t t o see D i h l a v i y a t and/or L a k h n a v i y a t r e f l e c t e d i n how D e l h i and Lucknow p o e t s evoked v a r i o u s a s s o c i a t i o n s s u g g e s t e d by t h e same word i n q a f i y a h p o s i t i o n . T h e r e f o r e q a f i y a h words a r e emphasized i n t h e a n a l y s i s below. F u r t h e r m o r e , by a l s o r e s t r i c t i n g t h e meter (bahr) and r a d i f . t h e o n l y f l u i d s t r u c t u r a l f e a t u r e i n t h e g h a z a l e x c e r p t s examined w i l l be t h e q a f i y a h . I n some i n s t a n c e s a p a r t i c u l a r q a f i y a h word w i l l seem t o g i v e r i s e t o s h ' e r s d i s p l a y i n g more c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h " L a k h n a v i y a t : " w h i l e c e r t a i n o t h e r q a f i y a h words w i l l t end t o g i v e r i s e t o s h e 1 r s which more c l o s e l y resemble t h e " D i h l a v i y a t " d e s c r i b e d by t h e Two S c h o o l c r i t i c s . I t i s i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e t h a t , on t h e whole, most s h e 1 r s w i l l m a n i f e s t a m i x t u r e o f t h e s e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , and 1. Two passages from S a y y i d Masud Hasan R i z v i " A d i b ' s " Hamari  S h i ' i r l , 8 t h e d i t i o n , [pp.51-53] and Muhammad S a d i q ' s A H i s t o r y  o f Urdu L i t e r a t u r e . 2nd e d i t i o n , [p.22] r e f e r t o t h e r o l e o f q a f i y a h i n i n f l u e n c i n g t h e p o e t ' s c h o i c e o f mazmun. - 144 -t h a t no p a r t i c u l a r " D e l h i - t y p e " o r "Lucknow-type" p a t t e r n s o f c h o i c e a r e a p p a r e n t . The reason f o r t h i s , i t seems t o me, i s s i m p l y t h a t a l l Urdu p o e t s s u b s c r i b e t o t h e same e s s e n t i a l l i t e r a r y v a l u e s and a e s t h e t i c . O n l y one o r two v e r s e s i n t h e pages t o come w i l l appear t o e p i t o m i z e " D i h l a v i y a t " o r " L a k h n a v i y a t " as t h e y have been a r t i c u l a t e d by N a d v i , Shadani and o t h e r s — a n d , i r o n i c a l l y , even t h e n a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y " L a k h n a v i " s h e ' r w i l l o f t e n have been w r i t t e n by a D i h l a v i u s t a d . The p o e t i c samples which appear i n t h e f o l l o w i n g pages have been s e l e c t e d on t h e b a s i s o f zamln„ t h a t i s , a c c o r d i n g t o 2 t h e i r meter and rhyme-scheme. They have a l l been drawn from a p o o l o f seven p o e t s : N a s i k h and A t i s h L a k h n a v i ; and f i v e o f t h e i r c o n t e m p o r a r i e s from D e l h i — M o m i n , Zauq, Shah N a s i r , Z a f a r and G h a l i b . A l l seven p o e t s a r e d i s c u s s e d i n t h e c o n t e x t o f Azad's panchvan daur i n A b - i H a y a t . which i s t h e age Nadvi p o i n t s t o as t h e time when the two s e p a r a t e s c h o o l s were 3 e s t a b l i s h e d . A c o m p a r i s o n o f D i h l a v i and L a k h n a v i p o e t r y r e s t r i c t e d t o p o e t s o f a s i n g l e e r a f u r t h e r reduces t h e number of v a r i a b l e s c o n t r i b u t i n g t o t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n w h i c h t h e y w r o t e . For t h i s r e a son we have n o t i n c l u d e d such D i h l a v i 2. Zamin. as was noted i n t h e I n t r o d u c t i o n [note 3 ] , l i t e r a l l y means " e a r t h , l a n d , s o i l , r e g i o n , etc.' 1 but by e x t e n s i o n , i n p o e t i c p a r l a n c e i t r e f e r s t o t h e s t r u c t u r a l elements o f a g i v e n poem such as m e t e r — b a h r — a n d rhyme s c h e m e — q a f i y a h and r a d l f . See John T. P l a t t s , A D i c t i o n a r y of. Urdu. C l a s s i c a l H i n d i and  E n g l i s h . London: O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1974, p.617. 3. S h e r u l H i n d . v o l . 1 , p.204. - 145 -u s t a d s as M i r and Sauda, nor su c h L a k h n a v i u s t a d s as M u s h a f i , 4 J u r ' a t o r I n s h a . I t was n o t p o s s i b l e t o c u l l numbers o f s h e ' r s by a l l seven p o e t s i n a s i n g l e z a m l n — w h i c h would p r o b a b l y have been i d e a l t o a t r u l y " s a y i n s i " m e t h o d — b u t a l l t h e p o e t s have been r e p r e s e n t e d w i t h t h e c o m p a r a t i v e b a s i s expanded t o two zamins. Those two zamins a r e (1) rhyme scheme "-ab men" i n t h e meter m u z a r i ' 5 and (2) the rhyme scheme " -ur kg" i n t h e p o p u l a r ramal m e t e r . 6 I n t h e f i r s t zamin s i x o f t h e seven p o e t s a r e compared, l e a v i n g out o n l y t h e D i h l a v i Shah N a s i r , whose 7 K u l l i y a t i n c l u d e s no g h a z a l i n t h a t p a r t i c u l a r zamln. In t h e second zamln G h a l i b and Momin a r e n o t r e p r e s e n t e d f o r t h e same r e a s o n , i . e . , t h a t t h e i r p u b l i s h e d works i n c l u d e no g h a z a l s i n t h a t zamin. a l t h o u g h t h e r e a r e a number w r i t t e n i n t h a t p p a r t i c u l a r bahr ( m e t r e ) . 4. T h i s r e s t r i c t i o n i s i n t e n d e d t o m i n i m i z e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f d i f f e r e n c e s i n s t y l e p e r c e i v e d between p o e t s — o r groups o f p o e t s — f r o m d i f f e r e n t g e n e r a t i o n s b e i n g i n t e r p r e t e d as " s c h o o l " d i s t i n c t i o n s . 5. R e p r e s e n t e d as f o l l o w s : I — " / - " - " / " — ~ / - ~ - ] w i t h [-] i n d i c a t i n g a l o n g s y l l a b l e and [~] i n d i c a t i n g a s h o r t s y l l a b l e . 6. A l s o d e p i c t e d i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner: [-~—/-~—/-"—/-"-] where a l o n g s y l l a b l e i s r e p r e s e n t e d by [-] and a s h o r t s y l l a b l e by [ ~ ] . 7. Ed. T a n v i r Ahmad A l v i , Lahore: M a j l i s - i T a r a q q i - i Adab, 2 v o l s . , 1971, 1977. 8. See K u l l i y a t - i Momin, Ed. Dr. M a s i h uz-Zaman, A l l a h a b a d : Ram Narayan L a i B e n i Madhav, 1971; and the D i v a n - i G h a l i b . A r s h i e d i t i o n , New D e l h i : Anjuman T a r a q q i - i Urdu, 1982 [second p r i n t i n g ] . - 146 -The following experiment should be seen as an i l l u s t r a t i o n rather than an attempt at d e f i n i t i v e or conclusive argument. The poetic sample upon which i t draws i s very small i n r e l a t i o n to the t o t a l output of a l l the seven represented poets, and cannot possibly serve to prove or disprove—on the basis of s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s — a s complicated and comprehensive a l i t e r a r y theory as the Two School theory. As we have said, that would be quite impractical and not necessarily conclusive in any case. Yet even a cursory comparison of poetry by contemporaneous Lakhnavis and Dihlav i s confirms that, in general, a l l Urdu poets follow the same fundamental rules of structure and adhere to the same system of l i t e r a r y a esthetics. No matter where a ghazal poet dwells, the technical structure of the ghazal remains the same. For example, the presence of a strongly-loaded term such as sharab (wine) in the f i r s t zamln below; or hur (heavenly nymph) in the second; can be seen as a word-choice made to f i t the demands of the qafiyah "-ab" or "-ur." Such words w i l l often exert great influence on the she 1rs central theme or g image and, thus, on the verse's o v e r a l l f l a v o r . It i s therefore extremely d i f f i c u l t to lend credence to the notion that poets' thematic choices are any r e f l e c t i o n at a l l of t h e i r geographic or s o c i e t a l surroundings. Rather, the thematic 9. In the second zamin e s p e c i a l l y the qafiyah words "hur." "angur." and "kafur" give r i s e to she'rs based on mazmun  S f i r l n i * . or the creation of unusual images, often involving subtle deviations from accepted themes. - 147 -choices are being exercised from within the she'r. in accordance with the formal demands of Urdu ghazal composition. 1 0 When these dynamics are observed in the context of neutral r a d l f s such as "men" (in) or "ka" (of)—which are perhaps the two most common postpositions i n U r d u — a l l the more persuasive i s the notion that the qafiyah works to bring together structure and theme i n the g h a z a l . 1 1 Again, the following experiment i s offered as an i l l u s t r a t i o n of t h i s point of view rather than a hard and fast proof of i t . The comparison begins with four sets of she'rs i n the f i r s t zamin. s t a r t i n g with those which employ the word "naqab" (veil) for t h e i r qafiyah. Other sets i n the f i r s t zamin w i l l feature she'rs with qafiyah words "sharab" (wine), "mahtab" 10. To compare the r e l a t i v e frequency of the various zamins i n which individuals and/or groups of Urdu poets compose would indeed be f a s c i n a t i n g . Such an enquiry might shed new l i g h t on the Two School debate: i t i s possible that differences in nuance presently perceived as r e f l e c t i o n s of s o c i e t a l differences between Delhi and Lucknow marakiz do somehow r e f l e c t the popularity of various meters and rhyme-schemes at c e r t a i n times and places. But in the absence of such a s t u d y — q u i t e beyond the scope of t h i s present s t u d y — f u r t h e r speculation along t h i s l i n e would be inappropriate. 11. Another l i n e of enquiry might be developed at some time which measured the impact of qafiyah on both mazmun and o v e r a l l mood of whole ghazals when there was not a f a i r l y neutral r a d l f . For example, the presence of the r a d l f "tumhen yad ho kih na yad ho—do you remember or not?" might well exert extra influence on both i n d i v i d u a l she'rs in the ghazal as well as on the o v e r a l l mood of the ghazal; and qafiyah words leading into t h i s long and semantically s i g n i f i c a n t r a d l f might be seen to exercise r e l a t i v e l y less influence on theme than in the present examples. Again, however, i t i s not within the present scope of t h i s study to conduct such an experiment. - 148 -(moonlight) and "javSb" (answer, r e p l y ) . We w i l l see that the verses in t h i s f i r s t zamln have qafiyah words which represent key terms i n the ghazal lexicon and therefore provide layers of connotation and a l l u s i o n which the poets can exploit without having to s p e c i f i c a l l y c i t e them. The four sets of she 1rs in the second zamln. on the other hand, w i l l feature the qafiyah words "kafur" (camphor), "hur" (houri, heavenly nymph), "angur" (grape) and "dur" (d i s t a n t ) . Except for "hur" these words carry far less s p e c i f i c connotations i n the world of the ghazal, and t h e i r poets must therefore create associations which bridge that distance and draw them into the stock realm of the the genre. This being the case, the verses i n the f i r s t zamln w i l l tend, o v e r a l l , to r e i t e r a t e f a m i l i a r themes; while the second set of verses w i l l include much more creation of new themes (mazmun a f i r i n l ) . Choices of d i c t i o n and tone, while sometimes exercised i n accordance with the associations suggested by the qafiyah word, w i l l s t i l l tend to r e f l e c t , o v e r a l l , the s p e c i f i c whim or mood of the poet at the time of composition. Thus there w i l l be instances where the qafiyah word has given r i s e to she ' rs by more than one poet on a similar theme, but the tone or d i c t i o n might vary from she'r to she'r. The point remains, however, that i f mazmun and s p e c i f i c t o p i c a l concerns are said to d i s t i n g u i s h between Lakhnaviyat and Dihlaviyat. then there ought to be a r e f l e c t i o n of t h i s i n she 1rs by poets of both marakiz. even emanating from employment of the same qafiyah w o r d . - 149 -£.1—"Naqab mefi" Five p o e t s — Z a f a r , Nasikh, Momin, At i s h and Ghalib—ended at least one she'r in t h e i r ghazals i n t h i s zamln with the qafiyah word "nagSb." meaning " v e i l , " or "hood." A l l f i v e poets b u i l t on the meaning of "naga*b" to r e i t e r a t e the conventional theme of the Beloved's i n a c c e s s i b i l i t y . Since Zafar's she'r with t h i s gafiyah i s a matla' i t i s appropriate that i t be studied f i r s t : A l l ah r i sharm a'e jo voh shab ko khvab men Pinhan rakha hijab se munh ko naqab men {Zf:II.153.1} God, what modesty! that even i n my dreams at night (9.1a) she kept her face hidden behind the v e i l . (9.1a) This i s a p l a y f u l verse i n which Zafar simultaneously praises and teases the Beloved's modesty in keeping her face v e i l e d from admiring eyes—even those of a dreamer. Word-play ( r i ' a y a t - i l a f g l ) gives the verse i t s punch, e s p e c i a l l y plays on the various connotations and i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s between night (shab), v e i l s (pinhan. naqab), concealment and modesty (sharm). The p i v o t a l word i n t h i s play i s " hiiab." which c a r r i e s a l l those connotations. The poet also employs assonance (shab and sharm in the f i r s t misra': and the long vowel sound "a" in the second s y l l a b l e s of pinhan. rakha, hij5b and naqab) . At f i r s t glance the occurrence of " h i j a b " and "naqab" i n the same misra' might appear to be redundant, since the primary meaning of "hijab" i s " v e i l . " - 150 -However, i t a l s o can mean " c u r t a i n , n i g h t , c o n c e a l m e n t , m o desty," 1 and a l l t h o s e c o n n o t a t i o n s a r e c l e a r l y i n t e n d e d h e r e , d e m o n s t r a t i n g Z a f a r ' s mastery o f la n g u a g e . The e l u s i v e a s p e c t o f t h e B e l o v e d w h i c h permeates t h i s v e r s e might w e l l l e n d i t s e l f t o a m y s t i c a l ( h a q l q l ) i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . I n a m y s t i c a l s t a t e m e n t o f 1 i s h q t h e ' a s h i q r e f e r s t o — o r b e s e e c h e s — a d i v i n e B e l o v e d . Such an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s p o s s i b l e , but n o t c o m p u l s o r y , here e s p e c i a l l y g i v e n the v e r s e ' s i r o n i c t i n t . The B e l o v e d i s not p r e s e n t d u r i n g t h e ' a s h i q ' s d i s c o u r s e , as he c o m p l a i n s about her e l u s i v e n e s s . S i n c e b o t h God and human B e l o v e d s e l u d e t h e hungry eyes o f t h e i r a d m i r e r s , t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e B e l o v e d ' s i d e n t i t y remains d e l i c i o u s l y ambiguous. N a s i k h drew upon t h e g h a z a l ' s c o n v e n t i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n s w i t h S u f i m o t i f s t o remind t h e r e a d e r t h a t t h e D i v i n e B e l o v e d , as w e l l as a human, i s h i d d e n from t h e s i g h t o f e a r t h l y l o v e r s and a l s o u n a t t a i n a b l e . T h i s n e x t v e r s e d e p i c t s t h e ' a s h i q ' s d e l u d e d c o n d i t i o n , b r o u g h t on by h i s v a i n s t r u g g l e t o c a t c h a g l i m p s e o f t h e B e l o v e d who o b s e s s e s him: 1. John T . P l a t t s , A D i c t i o n a r y o f Urdu, C l a s s i c a l H i n d i and  E n g l i s h , p.474. {N:I.140.5} G h a f l a t se apna t a l i b - i d i d a r ap nun Mera h i c h a h r a h a i j o n i h a n h a i naqab men (9.1b) I'm so f o o l i s h : I seek a g l i m p s e o f m y s e l f when i t ' s my own f a c e - 151 -c o n c e a l e d b e h i n d t h a t v e i l . T h i s s h e ' r i s u n d o u b t e d l y i n t e n d e d t o be read f o r i t s m y s t i c a l message. On t h e S u f i s t i c p l a n e , i t i s God who c o n c e a l s H i m s e l f b e h i n d t h e v e i l o f t h i s t e m p o r a l w o r l d . Because th e S u f i ( I s l a m i c m y s t i c ) i s f i l l e d w i t h 1 i s h q . or l o v e f o r God, he s e e k s t h e same u n i o n w h i c h an ' a s h i q n o r m a l l y seeks w i t h h i s e a r t h l y B e l o v e d . I n deep c o n t e m p l a t i o n o f t h e o b j e c t of h i s l o v e , and i n t h e d i s o r i e n t a t i o n b r o u g h t on by t h a t c o n t e m p l a t i o n , t h e ' a s h i q p e r c e i v e s t h a t t h e r e i s no d i s t i n c t i o n between h i m s e l f and G o d — t h e y a r e one and t h e 2 same. T h e r e f o r e t h e f a c e o f t h e B e l o v e d (God) i s none o t h e r t h a n t h e ' a s h i q ' s own. Another i n t e r p r e t a t i o n might be t h a t t h e ' a s h i q i s r e p o r t i n g h i s i n a b i l i t y t o t r a n s c e n d t h e phenomenal w o r l d , and h i s e f f o r t s l e a d him o n l y back t o images 3 o f h i s own making. A c c o r d i n g t o t h e k h u s G s i y a t d e l i n e a t e d by Two-school c r i t i c s , t h e t a s a v v u f w h i c h p r e d o m i n a t e s i n t h i s v e r s e — a n d i t s s i m p l e , s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d d i c t i o n — m i g h t l e a d one t o guess t h a t i t s a u t h o r was a D i h l a v i . Enumerations of f e m i n i n e b e a u t y and a p p a r e l ; song, dance, e f f e m i n a c y and f r i v o l o u s n e s s ; l a s c i v i o u s 2. Perhaps t h e most famous i n c i d e n t o f t h i s d i v i n e r e v e l a t i o n was t h a t o f Mansur a l - H a l l a j , who was e x e c u t e d i n 922 A.D. f o r h i s e c s t a t i c e x c l a m a t i o n , " ' a n a l - H a g — I am t h e U l t i m a t e t r u t h [ i e . God]." See Annemarie Schimmel, M y s t i c a l Dimensions o f  I s l a m . Chapel H i l l : U n i v e r s i t y o f N o r t h C a r o l i n a P r e s s , 1975, pp.62-77 and p a s s i m . 3. Thanks t o F r a n c e s P r i t c h e t t f o r p o i n t i n g out t h i s s e c o n d a r y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . - 152 -b a n t e r and mu'amila b a n d l : and c o m p l i c a t e d , e x t r e m e l y r e f i n e d d i c t i o n — i n o t h e r words, c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w h i c h one might w e l l e x p e c t t o e n c o u n t e r i n a v e r s e by t h e Imam o f L a k h n a v i y a t — a r e nowhere t o be found i n t h i s v e r s e . I n t h e n e x t t h r e e s h e ' r s f t h o s e o f A t i s h , Momin and G h a l i b , the ' a s h i q r e p o r t s on images of t h e B e l o v e d w h i c h he g l i m p s e s f l e e t i n g l y t h r o u g h t h e o p e n i n g i n