kis ko har dam hai lahuu rone kaa hijraa;N me;N dimaa;G
dil ko ik rab:t saa hai diidah-e ;xuu;N-baar ke saath

1) who has a mind to weep blood at every breath/moment, in separation?!
2) the heart has something like a single/particular/unique/excellent connection with the blood-scattering eyes



dimaa;G : 'The brain; head, mind, intellect; spirit; fancy, desire; airs, conceit; pride, haughtiness, arrogance; intoxication; high spirits'. (Platts p.526)


ek : 'One, single, sole, alone, only, a, an; the same, identical; only one; a certain one; single of its kind, unique, singular, preƫminent, excellent'. (Platts p.113)


rab:t : 'Binding, connecting, uniting; connexion, bond, relation, dependence; consistency, fixity; friendship, intercourse; familiarity, practice, habit, use'. (Platts p.586)

S. R. Faruqi:

Because of its insha'iyah style, the first line has at least two readings: (1) No one has the courage/spirit, in separation, to weep blood at every breath/moment. (2) For heaven's sake, who has the courage/spirit, in separation, to weep blood at every breath/moment?

In the light of the first meaning, there's a kind of helplessness in the verse, that nobody has the courage/spirit to weep blood at every breath/moment, but what can I do, the heart has something like a relationship with the blood-scattering eyes-- where there is a heart (that is, a passion-tormented heart, a sympathetic heart), there blood-scattering eyes will be as well. As long as the heart beats, blood will keep being drawn into the eyes and will keep flowing.

With regard to the second meaning, in the verse there's a kind of dignity, and a theme of the triumph of passion and the heart: that nobody has such courage/spirit as to weep blood-- this is simply the miracle of passion, that it has created a connection between the heart and the blood-scattering eyes, and in this way has made the impossible, possible.

The informality and casualness of ek rab:t saa are fine. Thanks to them, the unnecessary vexation or emotionality in the first line has been lessened, and a tone of conversation has come into the verse. Then, the 'commonality' [muraa((aat ul-na:ziir] among dimaa;G , dil , diidah too is very interesting.

There's only a small defect in the verse: that the word hijraa;N seems unnecessary, and the meaning is created that in addition to separation there are other situations in which it's possible to have a mind to weep blood at every breath/moment. But the word hijraa;N also doesn't seem very inappropriate, if the intent is taken to be that it's the time of separation-- in it are of course many other difficulties and harshnesses, they are difficult to endure. Here, who has a mind to weep blood at every breath/moment?

The zila between dam (meaning 'blood') and lahu should also be kept in view. In this regard there's also wordplay between dam and dil , because there's blood in the heart. If we take dam to mean 'strength, ability', then there's also the relationship of a zila between it and dimaa;G (meaning 'strength, ability').



This weeping at every 'breath'/moment seemingly doesn't come from anyone's having a 'mind' to do it, but from a 'heart' that insists on doing it willy-nilly, through its special connection with the 'eyes'. A fine lot of body-parts, elegantly brought together.

Then, the 'connection' between heart and eyes is made very prominent in the verse, and also intriguingly blurry. By calling it ik (short for ek ) connection, Mir has opened a wide range of possibilities (see the definition above): from the limiting ('single, sole') through the particularizing ('certain') to the admiring ('unique, preeminent, excellent'). Then by adding saa , he's created an '-ish' penumbra-- the connection is not exactly that of ik rab:t , but only something like it. So what exactly would such a connection be like? Needless to say, we're left to speculate about it, and put the mood and tone of the verse together for ourselves.