On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 3:47:32 PM UTC-5, Sarwar A. Raz wrote:

> Dear Zoya: I am afraid (and sorry) you are reading more into my response than I ever intended. Just look at how you have interpreted the word "riddle". Perhaps we will talk outside of ALUP? Thanks.

> Raz

Sarwar sahib,

I am sorry that you are sorry. This just proves that I was quite off the mark on this one, and didn't even interpret your response as intended. Oh and, I have never been good at any sort of riddles. Never ever.

But if all this leads to an individual tutoring session with you, then I can't really complain! :-)

Regards,

_______Zoya

Thanks, Bekas Sahib! I believe the treatment of harkat and sakoon syllables was discussed by Irfan Abid Sahib in one of his later posts on aruuz. I should go back and read that material again.

Regards,

Nagesh

On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 4:03:42 PM UTC-7, bekas Murray wrote:
> On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 1:55:04 PM UTC-7, Nagesh wrote:
> > Sarwar Sahib:
> >
> > Thanks for the lesson. I am not sure my understanding of meter has improved, but I am sure my understanding of my own limitations has become greater. That is a good lesson in itself. I have a lot more to learn in this regard.
> >
> This has to do with how aruuzis treat certain combinations of harkat aur sakoon.
> When three harkaats show up together the middle one can be changed to a sakoon. So in the misra two the order was
> 221 | 1221 | 1221 | 1222
>
> Wherever you are seeing 112 the harkat represented by the second 1 can be changed to a sakoon turning the 11 to a 2.
> In the given example the first misra is doing it to 112 at the end of the second rukan and beginning of the third and pulling the 11 across the border of the second and third rukan into the second rukan as a 2 leaving only a 221 in the third rukan.
> Thus 221 | 1222 | 221 | 1222
> > Regards,
> >
> > Nagesh
> > On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 1:47:32 PM UTC-7, Sarwar A. Raz wrote:
> > > On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 2:51:26 PM UTC-5, Zoya wrote:
> > > > On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 12:27:29 PM UTC-5, Sarwar A. Raz wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Dear Friends: aadaab!
> > > >
> > > > Sarwar sahib, aadaab,
> > > > > I think it is time I provided the answer to the riddle.
> > > > So it was a riddle! I should have guessed there was a catch when you invited RK sahib and Irfan sahib to respond. :)
> > > >
> > > > It was designed to show that the 1-2 gardaan is of very limited use in Arooz, and that too for the novices. Most Arooz books start with 1-2 or l-s gardaan and graduate to the real Arooz fast.
> > > >
> > > > Nagesh sahib and I will readily admit to be novices, we are nowhere near graduation, definitely not fast graduation. We are still taking baby steps. We can't spot trick questions! :)
> > > > To make a long story short:
> > > > >
> > > > > The subject she'r (by Safi Lucknawi) and its taqtee' are given below:
> > > > > waqt aane do, waqt aane do, phir tum ko bataa deN gey
> > > > > (maf,oolu, mu,faa,eelu , mu,faa,eelu, mu,faa,ee,lun )
> > > > > mashriq kaa siraa uThh kar maGhrib se milaa deN gey
> > > > > (maf,oolu, mu,faa,ee,lun, maf,oo,lu, mu,faa,ee, lun)
> > > > >
> > > > > Some of you have tried to change the she'r so it will fit your ideas. That is not allowed. The she'r is perfectly OK and acceptable AS IS!! The wazn of the both of the misra's is different but the she'r is flawless according to Arooz. Something to think about, is it not?
> > > > Definitely something to think about, Sarwar sahib. We have previously discussed in Alup examples of asha'ar by established poets where the two misraas are in slightly different beHrs. I am still pretty clueless as to how and when to decide if those asha'ar are flawless (or flawed).
> > > > Let me explain:
> > > > >
> > > > > There is an important principle in Arooz called "Taskeen-e-Ausat" (explanation and details deferred for later). When you apply it to the first miSra', a new wazn emerges (maf,oolu, mu,faa,ee,lun, maf,oo,lu, mu,faa,ee, lun) i.e. the wazn of the second miSra' ! How neat!
> > > > That's a 'wow' neat! I will wait for your deferred explanation and details, because honestly this is way beyond my current level of expertise.
> > > > Arooz allows the use of these miSra's in the Ghazal. The principle and the usage are universally accepted and practiced by those who know! Thanks for your time and attention.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sarwar Raz
> > > > Sarwar sahib, thanks for your time and attention. Alup has not been as vibrant lately as it once was, the golden phase is long over. Your presence is infusing new life in the group, I am hoping you will continue to participate as much as you can. We need you here.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you.
> > > >
> > > > PS: I will not ask you anymore to grade my paper. But maybe an 'A' for effort? At least I tried! :-)
> > > >
> > > > Thank you, for everything,
> > > >
> > > > Your 'nowhere near graduation' pupil,
> > > >
> > > > ________Zoya
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Dear Zoya: I am afraid (and sorry) you are reading more into my response than I ever intended. Just look at how you have interpreted the word "riddle". Perhaps we will talk outside of ALUP? Thanks.
> > >
> > > Raz

On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 4:55:09 PM UTC-7, Zoya wrote:
> On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 3:47:32 PM UTC-5, Sarwar A. Raz wrote:

***Zoya wrote:
"So it was a riddle! I should have guessed there was a catch when you invited RK sahib and Irfan sahib to respond." :)

It was indeed a catch, ZS!***
> > Dear Zoya: I am afraid (and sorry) you are reading more into my response than I ever intended. Just look at how you have interpreted the word "riddle". Perhaps we will talk outside of ALUP? Thanks.
>
> > Raz
> Sarwar sahib,
>
> I am sorry that you are sorry. This just proves that I was quite off the mark on this one, and didn't even interpret your response as intended. Oh and, I have never been good at any sort of riddles. Never ever.

***Zoya sahiba, as regards this "riddle" thing, your goody-goody response to Sarwar sahib is just amusing!

Please note that, in the very first post in this thread, Sarwar sahib said:

"is nukteh ko waaZeh karne ke liye maiN ek she'r likh rahaa hooN. yahaaN kisee kaa imtiHaan hargiz naheeN mat'loob hai. Sirf do teen sawaaloN kaa jawaab chaahiye. ALUP ke tamaam membraan se aur Khaas taur se Irfan saaHeb, Naseer SaaHeb aur Qais SaaHeb se rehnumaayee kee guzaarish hai".

In particular, please look at the words "rehnumaayee kee guzaarish"!

My question is: agar Sarwar sahib ko is savaal ka javaab ma'aluum tha aur is javaab ka javaaz bhi ma'aluum tha to phir ham GhareeboN se "rehnumaayee ki guzaarish" kyaa ma'ane rakhti hai? yihii naa k agar Irfan sahib yaa Qais sahib Ghalat javaab deN to aaN-Hazrat ko apni ilmiiyat jataane ka (aur hameN neechaa dikhaane ka) mauqa' mile?

In my opinion, the question posed by Sarwar sahib wasn't just a "riddle"; it was a "trap". And I am glad that none of us two fell for it.

du'aa-go, Raj Kumar***

On Thursday, June 3, 2021 at 9:13:28 PM UTC-4, Zoya wrote:
> On Thursday, June 3, 2021 at 8:01:09 PM UTC-5, bekas Murray wrote:
>
> > The above is if you wish to match all 2s and 1s but let's say this is not always necessary for meter we can write the second misra as
> > mash. riq. kaa. | si. raa. ut. kar. | magh. rib. se. | mi. laa. de. gey.. |
> > 221 | 1222 | 221 | 1222 |
> > Now let us look at first misra again
> > waq. taa. ne. | do. waq. taa. ne do | phir. tum. ko. | ba. taa. de. gey.. |
> > 221 | 1221 | 1221 | 1222
> >
> > This is allowed
> > So if one is not purely following the matching of 1 and 2s this is considered acceptable.
> I agree. I have discussed this with Irfan sahib before. As per my understanding, with some exceptions, most of the 2 s can be broken as 1-1. However, I personally prefer a perfect match, keeping the corresponding feet in the two misraas identical. I find that easier to work with.
>
> ______Zoya
>

Zoya sahiba, aadaab!

What you just said is important. While it's permitted to use certain different auzaan with each other in the same Ghazal, you don't have to do so. In fact, poets have rarely used them.

And don't feel bad if you thought the first misra' given by Sarwar sb was out of bahr. Even the writer of that misra', Safi Lakhnavi (1962 - 1950), who was a pretty good poet, thought so! :) Some folks (apparently to test Safi's knowledge of aruuz) complained that this misra' is out of bahr. Safi was convinced and changed it to "vaqt aane do, vaqt aane, phir tum ko bataa deNge," taking the second "do" out. Applying taskiin-e-ausat for the taqtii'a of this misra' and finding that the bahr of this misra' is okay with the bahr of the second one is more than the routine aruuz material and therefore, not in the knowledge of many poets. I did refer to this feature in the fourth bullet point in the opening of my second article under the "Urdu Bahrs" post, but didn't use the official name taskiin-e-ausat. Hopefully Sarwar sb will give us more info on it.

niyaazmand,
Irfan :Abid:

On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 7:24:06 PM UTC-5, Nagesh wrote:

> Thanks, Bekas Sahib! I believe the treatment of harkat and sakoon syllables was discussed by Irfan Abid Sahib in one of his later posts on aruuz. I should go back and read that material again.

Bekas sahib, I want to ditto Nagesh sahib's reply. Your explanation is very clear, thank you.
And yes, I too need to go back and carefully study Irfan sahib's and Sarwar sahib's old posts on Aruuz.

Thanks again, looking forward to communicating with you in future also.

Regards,

_____Zoya

On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 10:48:10 PM UTC-5, Raj Kumar wrote:
> On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 4:55:09 PM UTC-7, Zoya wrote:

> It was indeed a catch, ZS!***

RK sahib,

In retrospect, I should have realized that there was probably more to the 'sawaal' than met the eye, the answer seemed too simple. I took the most obvious and easy route.

> ***Zoya sahiba, as regards this "riddle" thing, your goody-goody response to Sarwar sahib is just amusing!

What I was trying to say is that I usually take things completely at face value. Both Sarwar sahib and you know me well enough, that's your Zoya. :-)

> Please note that, in the very first post in this thread, Sarwar sahib said:
>
> "is nukteh ko waaZeh karne ke liye maiN ek she'r likh rahaa hooN. yahaaN kisee kaa imtiHaan hargiz naheeN mat'loob hai. Sirf do teen sawaaloN kaa jawaab chaahiye. ALUP ke tamaam membraan se aur Khaas taur se Irfan saaHeb, Naseer SaaHeb aur Qais SaaHeb se rehnumaayee kee guzaarish hai".
> In particular, please look at the words "rehnumaayee kee guzaarish"!

RK sahib, honestly, I am reading it as a request for guidance to other participants from the three members that Sarwar sahib named. I think that's all there is to it.

> My question is: agar Sarwar sahib ko is savaal ka javaab ma'aluum tha aur is javaab ka javaaz bhi ma'aluum tha to phir ham GhareeboN se "rehnumaayee ki guzaarish" kyaa ma'ane rakhti hai? yihii naa k agar Irfan sahib yaa Qais sahib Ghalat javaab deN to aaN-Hazrat ko apni ilmiiyat jataane ka (aur hameN neechaa dikhaane ka) mauqa' mile?

Raj uncle, I really don't think Sarwar sahib had any motive like that. I truly believe he was simply soliciting expert input from you and Irfan sahib for guidance to students like me, before he gave the answer to the quiz. All of us know that you and Irfan sahib are established experts in the field of Urdu poetry in your own right, there is no need to prove or disprove it.. Trust me on this one, it is coming straight from my heart.

> In my opinion, the question posed by Sarwar sahib wasn't just a "riddle"; it was a "trap". And I am glad that none of us two fell for it.
> du'aa-go, Raj Kumar***

See Prof RK, that just verifies my point. The experts knew better. :-)
And some of us novices did fall for it! :-))
I probably needed a humbling exercise like this anyway. You may deduct my grade by .01, as long as it is still an A for effort. And sign me up for some remedial courses. :)

Seriously though, I am grateful for another excellent learning opportunity, and looking forward to the detailed lessons on the topic.

My thanks and regards to everyone,

________Zoya

On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 11:48:10 PM UTC-4, Raj Kumar wrote:
> On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 4:55:09 PM UTC-7, Zoya wrote:
> > On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 3:47:32 PM UTC-5, Sarwar A. Raz wrote:
> ***Zoya wrote:
> "So it was a riddle! I should have guessed there was a catch when you invited RK sahib and Irfan sahib to respond." :)
> It was indeed a catch, ZS!***
> > > Dear Zoya: I am afraid (and sorry) you are reading more into my response than I ever intended. Just look at how you have interpreted the word "riddle". Perhaps we will talk outside of ALUP? Thanks.
> >
> > > Raz
> > Sarwar sahib,
> >
> > I am sorry that you are sorry. This just proves that I was quite off the mark on this one, and didn't even interpret your response as intended. Oh and, I have never been good at any sort of riddles. Never ever.
> ***Zoya sahiba, as regards this "riddle" thing, your goody-goody response to Sarwar sahib is just amusing!
> Please note that, in the very first post in this thread, Sarwar sahib said:
>
> "is nukteh ko waaZeh karne ke liye maiN ek she'r likh rahaa hooN. yahaaN kisee kaa imtiHaan hargiz naheeN mat'loob hai. Sirf do teen sawaaloN kaa jawaab chaahiye. ALUP ke tamaam membraan se aur Khaas taur se Irfan saaHeb, Naseer SaaHeb aur Qais SaaHeb se rehnumaayee kee guzaarish hai".
> In particular, please look at the words "rehnumaayee kee guzaarish"!
>
> My question is: agar Sarwar sahib ko is savaal ka javaab ma'aluum tha aur is javaab ka javaaz bhi ma'aluum tha to phir ham GhareeboN se "rehnumaayee ki guzaarish" kyaa ma'ane rakhti hai? yihii naa k agar Irfan sahib yaa Qais sahib Ghalat javaab deN to aaN-Hazrat ko apni ilmiiyat jataane ka (aur hameN neechaa dikhaane ka) mauqa' mile?
>
> In my opinion, the question posed by Sarwar sahib wasn't just a "riddle"; it was a "trap". And I am glad that none of us two fell for it.
>
> du'aa-go, Raj Kumar***

Dosto!
haalaaN kih maiN bhi janaab-e-Naseer Saahab ki taraH Urooz aur us ki ilmiyaat kaa nah to shauK rakhtaa huuN nah kih us par ziyadah tavajjo’...( aur nah to maiN ne kabhii ko’ii she’r yaa misra’ kehne ki jasaarat kee hai) maiN is laRii ko dilachaspi se paRhtaa huuN.. agar kuChh nahiiN to.. hamaare Ustaad-o-maaHir moHtaram Sarwar saahab se kuChh faa’idah uThaane ke sabab se!

Mujhe lagtaa hai kih janaab MoHtaram Sarwar saahab ki dee hu’ii yeh “ exercise” nah to ko’ii “riddle” thii nah to “trap”

Mash,huur-e-zamaanah philsuuf Sucraat ( Socrates) apne taalibain ko isii taraH ko’ii pechidaa baat samjhaata thaa to shuruu’ eik savaal se kartaa.. aaj bhi is “style of teaching” ko “Socraterian” style samjhaa jaataa hai or har paRhne paRhaane waale ke liye ik naseeHat saa ban gayaa hai.

Ham sab ALUPers ki yeh Khush qismati hai kih hamaare beech aise ustaad maujud hai.

Agar maiN ChhoTe muNh baRii baat kar gayaa huuN to m’aazirat Khwaah huuN.

Naachiiz- o- Hakeer

du’aa go
======================B G ====================

On Friday, June 4, 2021 at 10:51:53 PM UTC-5, Irfan Abid wrote:

> Zoya sahiba, aadaab!

aadaab, Irfan sahib,

> What you just said is important. While it's permitted to use certain different auzaan with each other in the same Ghazal, you don't have to do so. In fact, poets have rarely used them.

Thank you so much for responding. I was really curious as to how common this practice is in Urdu poetry. I was actually going to ask Sarwar sahib or you to provide some more examples of this sort, may I submit that request now? Please?
>
> And don't feel bad if you thought the first misra' given by Sarwar sb was out of bahr. Even the writer of that misra', Safi Lakhnavi (1962 - 1950), who was a pretty good poet, thought so! :) Some folks (apparently to test Safi's knowledge of aruuz) complained that this misra' is out of bahr. Safi was convinced and changed it to "vaqt aane do, vaqt aane, phir tum ko bataa deNge," taking the second "do" out.

Slight typo, 1862-1950.

Really?! You are making me feel better now. See, after all I have done my basic training under the three best ustaads ever! :-)))

Irfan sahib, I'm not sure if you will agree, but I honestly like the alternates that Bekas sahib and I proposed better, i.e. taking out the second 'waqt' or 'phir', rather than the second 'do'. If we go with the fix suggested by the poet himself, then I might want to replace 'phir' with 'par'. Just 'vaqt aane' does not seem to gel, seems incomplete.

In any case, this is a moot point because the original share is fine as is.

Applying taskiin-e-ausat for the taqtii'a of this misra' and finding that the bahr of this misra' is okay with the bahr of the second one is more than the routine aruuz material and therefore, not in the knowledge of many poets. I did refer to this feature in the fourth bullet point in the opening of my second article under the "Urdu Bahrs" post, but didn't use the official name taskiin-e-ausat. Hopefully Sarwar sb will give us more info on it.
>

I definitely need to reread your baHr articles. They will make better sense to me now that I have had some actual field practice, thanks to RK sahib and you. After all, 'Ek Sawaal' was just a preamble, really looking forward to Sarwar sahib's expert additions to this topic.

> niyaazmand,
> Irfan :Abid:

Thank you,

________Zoya