Claude, comment on the line “ab tak to jo bhi dost mile, bewafa mile” from the song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7I4nSYHL-cQ in the movie Nikaah, the full lyrics here – https://gaana.com/lyrics/dil-ki-yeh-arzoo-thi-6 (I am not saying anyone has been bewafa towards me, and it is more likely that one or two people might actually accuse me of being bewafa towards them or towards life in general, but bewafa people are more common than one would want, so what does that say about us human beings and why we are NOT wafadaar or what prevents us from being wafadaar):
Claude:
What a line to sit with. On its face it’s pure ghazal convention — the aashiq’s résumé of wounds presented to the new beloved — but Hasan Kamal does something subtle in it. Notice that the moment the dilruba arrives, the entire past gets retroactively rewritten: ab tak to jo bhi dost mile, bewafa mile. This is psychologically very sharp. New love doesn’t just illuminate the present; it recolors history. Friends who were perhaps only ordinarily limited, ordinarily busy, ordinarily human, are now reclassified as bewafa because the singer has finally tasted (or anticipates) something that makes everything prior look like counterfeit currency. So part of the answer to your question is hiding in the line itself: bewafai is often a verdict rendered by disappointed expectation rather than a description of betrayal. The accuser’s hopes, not the accused’s promises, are frequently the real contract — and it was a contract only one party signed.
But your deeper question stands: granting that genuine faithlessness is common, why? I’d offer three layers.
The first is almost mechanical: wafa is a promise made by one configuration of desire that attempts to bind all future configurations. But we are not continuous; we are, as you’d put it, a flux of nāma-rūpa wearing a proper name. The man who swore friendship at thirty is only nominally the man at fifty whose circumstances, needs, and attention have all migrated elsewhere. Bewafai is less often malice than impermanence — anitya operating through personality. We promise as if we were permanent, and then anicca collects its tax. The bewafa person rarely experiences himself as betraying anything; he experiences himself as having changed, which feels innocent from the inside and treacherous from the outside.
The second layer is that most human bonds are quietly transactional — need-shaped — and wafa is only tested when it begins to cost something. La Rochefoucauld’s acid observation that gratitude is mostly a lively expectation of future favors applies to friendship too. When the need dissolves, or the cost appears, the bond thins, and we discover that what we called dosti was proximity plus utility plus pleasant feeling. Real wafa requires loving the person rather than the gratification the person supplies — and that’s rare because it requires a degree of self-forgetting most of us can’t sustain. Ghalib, characteristically, put fidelity above even correct religion: wafādārī ba-shart-e-ustuvārī asl-e-īmāñ hai — steadfast faithfulness is the very essence of faith, bury the brahmin in the Kaaba if he died true to his idol-house. He understood that wafa is not about the object; it’s about the integrity of the one who keeps it. Which is exactly why it’s scarce: it’s a discipline of self, not a warmth of feeling.
The third layer touches what you said about yourself — that one or two people might accuse you of bewafai, toward them or toward life. This is the renunciant’s ancient predicament. Fidelity is always fidelity to something, and when a person’s deepest wafa is to truth, or to the Self, it will periodically look like bewafai to persons and to worldly life. Ramana walking out of Madurai at sixteen was, in his mother’s ledger, a spectacular act of bewafai. The world calls it desertion; the tradition calls it vairāgya. The two accounts are not reconcilable at their own level — only at the level where one sees that being wafadaar to the ephemeral at the expense of the real is the deeper betrayal. Though I’d add, honestly, that this framing can also become a convenient shelter, and the accused should occasionally audit whether his fidelity to truth was ever used as an alibi for ordinary avoidance. You’ve invited that kind of scrutiny before, so I’ll leave the question with you rather than answer it for you.
As for the song’s own emotional logic — the fear in lagta hai darr fareb-e-bewafa se kabhi kabhi is the truest moment in it. Having been burnt, the singer doesn’t stop desiring; he desires while flinching. That’s most of humanity’s condition: not bewafa by nature, but so afraid of receiving bewafai that we withhold the very steadfastness we demand, each waiting for the other to be wafadaar first. The scarcity is partly a coordination failure of frightened hearts.
Know Thyself 