S. R. Faruqi:

The first line of this verse is usually reputed to be this: shaam se kuchh bujhaa saa rahtaa hai . But the text as I have given it is correct, and is better.

A verse of Mus'hafi's has almost gone head to head [la;R jaanaa] with this one:

shaam se hii bujhaa saa rahtaa hai
dil hai goyaa chiraa;G muflis kaa

[right from the evening, it remains extinguished-ish
the heart is, so to speak, the lamp of a pauper]

Mir's verse is somewhat better than Mus'hafi's, because in the first line he said, since the evening I remain somewhat melancholy. This melancholy is of the whole temperament, the whole personality.

In the second line he said an apparently disconnected thing, that 'my heart has become the lamp of a pauper'. But in reality, in the first line is a claim, and in the second line is the proof. When the heart is like a pauper's lamp, then it's clear that there will be very little light in it; that is, it will have little heat/energy. That is, in it there will be few longings and hopes. And when the longings and hopes in the heart are few, then it's clear that the whole temperament will be melancholy. In Mus'hafi's verse there's only one observation: that the heart remains extinguished-ish. In Mir's, there are two observations, and between them there's also the connection of claim and proof.

Then, there's also the point that if in the heart the light is less, then in it the burning will also be less. (However much a lamp is bright, that's how much burningness it will have.) So since in the heart the burning of love is less, the temperament remains melancholy, or the heart is lightless; that is, the glory/appearance of the beloved isn't in it, or the light of mystic knowledge isn't in it.

The specification of the evening is because in the day, the heart keeps being diverted by many kinds of preoccupations. The moment the evening comes, helplessness and solitude come and surround it. Since the heart is not entirely lightless, but rather like the lamp of a pauper has a dim light, he has described himself as 'somewhat extinguished-ish', not as entirely melancholy. For the diminishedness of tumult in the heart, or the glory/appearance of the beloved, or the light of mystic knowledge, to give the simile of a dim lamp, and then not directly to call the lamp dim, but rather in an implicative way to call it a pauper's lamp, is a miracle of poetic composition.

The image of the 'lamp of a pauper' Mir has used one more time in the first divan, in a comparatively weaker way [{388,14}]:

kah saa;Njh ke muu))e ko ay miir ro))e;N kab tak
jaise chiraa;G-e muflis ik dam me;N jal bujhaa to

[say, oh Mir, how long will you weep for the one dead at twilight?
like the lamp of a pauper, in a single breath it burnt and was extinguished]

Shahryar has presented an aspect of this theme in a very fine way:

yih tab hai kih ik ;xvaab se rishtah hai hamaaraa
din ;Dhalte hii dil ;Duubne lagtaa hai hamaaraa

[this is the time that we are connected with a single dream
as soon as the day declines, our heart begins to sink]

Qa'im Chandpuri too has lighted his lamp from Mir's lamp. But by saying 'a lamp not held by hands' he has made a new image. And another new idea that he has created is that the hand is empty, and there is also a lamp in it. Qa'im's verse is:

tab hii qaa))im bujhaa saa rahtaa huu;N
kis tahii dast kaa chiraa;G huu;N mai;N

[thus indeed, Qa'im, I remain extinguished-ish
whose lamp without a hand am I?]

FWP:

While we're at it, we might also compare Ghalib's more elaborate, baroque treatment of the theme: {10,8}. The difference is not entirely due to poetic temperament-- it's also related to the fact that Mir is here using a short meter, while Ghalib is using a much longer one.