# Hindi, Urdu: banwaari / baaNvrii



## MonsieurGonzalito

Friends,

This stanza has a lot of Hindu references, and it is a little difficult for me to understand who is doing (or not doing) what to whom.
The context is:
The song "Aao Huzoor Tumko" from the 1968 movie "Kismat". A drunk woman is performing a musical act and flirting with every man in the audience. She speaks in a mockingly solemn language, sounding like a brothel madam inviting a man in by promising him some earthly paradise or something. (In 1968 this might have been quite a transgression  )

The stanza goes:

_phir koii banvaarii mohbbat kii
apnii zulfeN nahiiN samNvaaregii
aarti phir kisii  kii
koii raadhaa nahiiN utaaregii_

Where_:
banvaarii: is an epithet of Krishna (I believe it is related to the place he spent his childhood). It also seems to be a common Indian male name
kanhaiyaa:  is another epithet of Krishna, I believe from Sanskrit, meaning "little boy". Also another Indian male name.
raadhaa: is the consort and lover of Krishna
aarti: that ceremony where one homages a god or a dear person by moving a try or burning candles around
aarti utaarna: the idiomatic way of saying "to perform an aarti"._


So, I don't understand whether or not _banvaarii  _is masculine but "grammatically feminine", like, say, Jugnii-ji, so it is not clear to me whose hair is not being taken care of, leading to the consequent absence of aarti.

My attempt below:_

Again and again some Krishna of love
would not arrange (his/her) locks ---> (the locks of Krishna, or Krishna is supposed to arrange her locks?)
and again and again some Radha
would not perform his arti (to him)._

Please clarify for me this hair problem.


----------



## Frau Moore

There´s a film called "Baiju Bawra", translated as "Baiju the Insane". 

A quote from the film content "In his delirious state, Baiju reaches Tansen's city, singing the whole way. The residents fear for his life and call him _bawra_ (insane), hence the title of the movie. "

I guess the "koii" in your lyrics is not a banwaarii = Krishna but actually a bawrii (or baawrii? I never saw the word written in Nagri, I even didn´t find it in any dictionary, but surely one or the other native speaker will shed light on it, also if it is related with banwaarii). At least a "love crazy woman" who won´t do her hair anymore would make sense to me.


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

Thanks, @Frau Moore
I am pretty sure that in this case बनवारी is an epithet for Krishna. It has to be, given the rest of the lyrics, although I couldn't find it in the usual dictionaries either.
Below are the lyrics in Devanagari. I will post the Urdu ones next year  


फिर कोई बनवारी मोहब्बत की
अपनी ज़ुल्फ़ें नहीं सँवारेगी
आरती फिर किसी कन्हैया की
कोई राधा नहीं उतारेगी


----------



## desi4life

Yes, बनवारी is an epithet for Krishna. Please see the following dictionary reference: Hindi sabdasagara.

And बावरा (fem. बावरी) is a regional variation of बावला (fem. बावली).


----------



## littlepond

The word in the song can very clearly be heard as "baaNvrii", not "banvaarii"! "baaNvrii" is simply the female equivalent of "baaNvraa, baavraa, baavlaa, baavRaa" - crazy, often used for someone crazy in love. The line here though even specifies crazy for what: "baaNvrii mauhabbat kii". "banvaarii" would make no sense here: just because Krisha and Radha are in the 3rd and 4th lines does not mean that lines 1 and 2 also need to have them!

There is no reference to Krishna in the first two lines of your couplet: the lyrics are quite well rendered here.


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

Thank you, @littlepond!
I stand corrected, @Frau Moore, you were right.


----------



## bakshink

The last two lines are not related to the first two in context Monsieur Gonzalito is perfectly correct. the word used here is बांवरी BaaNwari and not Banwari which is an epithet for Lord Krishna. Baanwari means दिवानी, someone who has gone crazy over something or someone. No woman who has gone crazy in love will do her hair.  In the second line the simile of Radha and Kanhaiyya has been used as a comparison- to give the measure of the extent of going insane in love.


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

bakshink said:


> the word used here is बांवरी BaaNwari and not Banwari


but then, _mohbbat kii_ ...

Would that make बांवरी grammatically feminine, despite being a common male name?
I am tinking Chulbul, don't know why


----------



## bakshink

It is not a common name, it is an adjective and in Hindi the variants for masculine and feminine genders exist. Paagal ( पागल ) mad man (पगली).
He is mad- वह पागल है | for the female we can use paagal like Wah ladaki paagal hai, but if we say Wah pagali hai, we won't need to use 'ladaki' (लड़की) here because Pagali can't be used for a man. Same way BaNwari essentially has to be a female and unlike Pagal we can't say Wah ladaki 'BaNwara' hai


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

I am sorry, but this is not making sense to me


bakshink said:


> It is not a common name, it is an adjective


This is an ex-governor of Uttar Pradesh (male).




bakshink said:


> it is an adjective and in Hindi the variants for masculine and feminine genders exist. Paagal ( पागल ) mad man (पगली).


true, but many other adjectives end in -ii for both genders




bakshink said:


> Pagali can't be used for a man. Same way BaNwari essentially has to be a female


I was aiming at proper names like, say Jugnii (female firefly) which would require female agreement despite the character being clearly masculine.

It is clear that you think the song says बनवारी as the epithet of Krishna, what I still don't understand are your reasons. The rest of the sentence suggest a female agreement, so, unless there is this relatively rare issue of a "grammatical gender  being different from the logical gender", then it is "crazed woman", not Krishna, IMO.


----------



## bakshink

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> I am sorry, but this is not making sense to me
> 
> This is an ex-governor of Uttar Pradesh (male).
> 
> 
> 
> true, but many other adjectives end in -ii for both genders
> 
> 
> 
> I was aiming at proper names like, say Jugnii (female firefly) which would require female agreement despite the character being clearly masculine.
> 
> It is clear that you think the song says बनवारी as the epithet of Krishna, what I still don't understand are your reasons. The rest of the sentence suggest a female agreement, so, unless there is this relatively rare issue of a "grammatical gender  being different from the logical gender", then it is "crazed woman", not Krishna, IMO.



Yes, it is about the crazed woman. She is speaking about all the women who go crazy in love. It has nothing to do with the word Banwari which is a epithet of Lord Krishna. बांवरी, बनवारी are two different words. The first one stands for an insane woman and the second is a epithet for Krishna. In the song the first word has been used. Type the two words on Google Translate and hear the difference


----------



## bakshink

Check the Youtube video: "Banwari re" - a lord Krishna Bhajan

Hear this devotional song being sung for Lord Krishna where the woman addresses him as Banwari. There are many epithets used for Lord Krishna and they are all related to the mythological story of His incarnation. Banwari means the one who lives in Vrindavan. As per the legend, He was born here.


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

Thanks, @bakshink
Lata has good diction, I understand a lot of the song!


----------



## littlepond

I thought from post 6 that you had understood, @MonsieurGonzalito jii: it seems that you had not? "baaNvrii" and "banvaarii" are two completely different words: written differently, pronounced differently, meaning differently. What's your confusion?


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

littlepond said:


> What's your confusion?


I am not confused, @littlepond ji
I believe baaNvrii is being used in the song, and I understand it to be a different word than banvaarii.
I was just responding to @bakshink suggestion of it being banvaarii, which I would have found confusing given the surrounding grammar.


----------



## littlepond

MonsieurGonzalito said:


> I am not confused, @littlepond ji
> I believe baaNvrii is being used in the song, and I understand it to be a different word than banvaarii.
> I was just responding to @bakshink suggestion of it being banvaarii, which I would have found confusing given the surrounding grammar.



But @bakshink jii did say बांवरी (baaNvrii - the word exists both with and without nasal), not बनवारी (banvaarii).


----------



## MonsieurGonzalito

littlepond said:


> But @bakshink jii did say बांवरी (baaNvrii - the word exists both with and without nasal), not बनवारी (banvaarii).


Correct, sorry, I misunderstood his clarification.
So we are all in agreement:
- first 2 verses: crazed female
- final 2 verses: Radha and Krishna


----------

