A highly subtle and important point of literary beauty is that words should be chosen according to the nature of the subject matter. Since a word is a type of sound, and sounds possess various characteristics such as being terrifying, awe-inspiring, harsh, soft, sweet, and delicate, words similarly have different temperaments based on their form and weight. Some words are soft and sweet, plucking at the strings of the heart; some exude majesty and grandeur; while others express a deep sense of pain and sorrow.
Based on this phonetic and semantic temperament, distinct vocabularies have been designated for different poetic genres. In the ghazal, whose subjects are love, affection, and delicate emotions, simple, sweet, easy, and soft words are used. In contrast, in the qasida (panegyric ode), where the grandeur and majesty of the patron must be described, the use of forceful, magnificent, and weighty words is preferred. The battlefield (razm) and the banquet (bazm), praise and condemnation, pride and longing, preaching and advising—each of these themes requires its own distinct and appropriate vocabulary.
Poets who are aware of this hierarchy of distinctions take full account of it in their poetry, and this is the greatest secret behind the impact of their work. However, those who are unfamiliar with this nuance, or who are so dominated by a particular style that they use the same kind of words for every type of subject, find their poetry rendered ineffective. This is why Sheikh Saadi, who is the king of the banquet and of ethics, cannot depict the battlefield (razm) as masterfully as Ferdowsi. Conversely, Ferdowsi, the creator of the Shahnameh and the master of epic poetry, instinctively lets martial words slip from his pen when describing the lamentations of Prophet Joseph: 'Ba-ghareed Yusuf digar baara-zaar' (Joseph roared loudly once again).
The best examples of this harmony are found in the Urdu marsiya (elegy). When describing the majesty and fury of a brave warrior, the words themselves must be equally awe-inspiring. Consider these couplets by Mir Anees and other marsiya writers:
Kam tha na hamhama Asad-e-Kirdagar se
Nikla dakarta hua zaigham kachar se
[The roar was no less than that of the Lion of the Creator,
The lion emerged roaring from its den.]
Kya jaane kis ne tok diya hai diler ko
Sab dasht goonjta hai ye ghussa hai sher ko
[Who knows who has challenged the brave one,
The whole desert echoes, such is the lion's wrath.]
Tha ye biphra hua Abbas mira sher-e-jawan
Seena-e-Hur pe rakhe deta tha neze ki sinaan
[My young lion Abbas was so enraged,
He was about to thrust the spear's point into Hur's chest.]
In these verses, words like 'hamhama' (roar/rumble), 'dakarta' (bellowing), 'zaigham' (lion), and 'biphra hua' (enraged) do not merely convey the meaning of fury and wrath; rather, the very sound, structure, and tone of these words fully express awe, majesty, and anger. It is this perfect harmony of meaning and words that makes poetry immortal.
A highly subtle and important point of literary beauty is that words should be chosen according to the nature of the subject matter Since a word is a type of sound, and sounds possess warious characteristics such as being terrifying, awe-inspiring, harsh, soft, sweet, and delicate, words similarly hawe different temperaments based on their form and weight Some words are soft and sweet, plucking at the strings of the heart; some exude majesty and grandeur; while others express a deep sense of pain and sorrow
Based on this phonetic and semantic temperament, distinct wocabularies hawe been designated for different poetic genres In the ghazal, whose subjects are lowe, affection, and delicate emotions, simple, sweet, easy, and soft words are used In contrast, in the qasida (panegyric ode), where the grandeur and majesty of the patron must be described, the use of forceful, magnificent, and weighty words is preferred The battlefield (razm) and the banquet (bazm), praise and condemnation, pride and longing, preaching and adwising—each of these themes requires its own distinct and appropriate wocabulary
Poets who are aware of this hierarchy of distinctions take full account of it in their poetry, and this is the greatest secret behind the impact of their work Howewer, those who are unfamiliar with this nuance, or who are so dominated by a particular style that they use the same kind of words for ewery type of subject, find their poetry rendered ineffectiwe This is why Sheikh Sadi, who is the king of the banquet and of ethics, cannot depict the battlefield (razm) as masterfully as Ferdowsi Conwersely, Ferdowsi, the creator of the Shahnameh and the master of epic poetry, instinctiwely lets martial words slip from his pen when describing the lamentations of Prophet Joseph: 'Ba-ghareed Yusuf digar bara-zar' (Joseph roared loudly once again)
The best examples of this harmony are found in the Urdu marsiya (elegy) When describing the majesty and fury of a brawe warrior, the words themselwes must be equally awe-inspiring Consider these couplets by Mir Anees and other marsiya writers:
Kam tha na hamhama Asad-e-Kirdagar se
Nikla dakarta hua zaigham kachar se
[The roar was no less than that of the Lion of the Creator,
The lion emerged roaring from its den]
Kya jaane kis ne tok diya hai diler ko
Sab dasht goonjta hai ye ghussa hai sher ko
[Who knows who has challenged the brawe one,
The whole desert echoes, such is the lion's wrath]
Tha ye biphra hua Abbas mera sher-e-jawan
Seena-e-Hur pe rakhe deta tha neze ki sinan
[My young lion Abbas was so enraged,
He was about to thrust the spear's point into Hur's chest]
In these werses, words like 'hamhama' (roar/rumble), 'dakarta' (bellowing), 'zaigham' (lion), and 'biphra hua' (enraged) do not merely conwey the meaning of fury and wrath; rather, the wery sound, structure, and tone of these words fully express awe, majesty, and anger It is this perfect harmony of meaning and words that makes poetry immortal
