S. R. Faruqi:

The opening-verse is by way of introduction.

With some changes in wording and the addition of a closing-verse, this ghazal is also present in the fifth divan. From an analytical point of view,to decide which of the two should be given primacy is outside my abilities and resources. But from a poetic point of view, the text of the present ghazal seems preferable. Thus [in the kulliyat] I've given it a place only in the second divan. In the fifth divan {757,3} is given like this:

.sa;hn me;N mere ai gul-e mah-taab
kyuu;N shiguufah le khilne kaa aayaa

The text of {757,4} is like this in the fifth divan:

yih shab-e hijr hai kha;Rii nah rahe
ho safedii kaa jis jagah saayah

In this form the latter verse becomes easy, but the excellence that is created by sar kare hai pare no longer remains in the theme.

FWP:

SETS
MOTIFS
NAMES
TERMS

A note on textual problems: What SRF discusses in SSA is a hybrid form of the ghazal, using what he considers the best readings from both the second-divan and fifth-divan versions, and including the final verse that is present in the fifth-divan version only. Thus for {757,4} he follows the fifth-divan text, for reasons he indicates above. But in the kulliyaat , which he helped to edit, he felt that he shouldn't tamper with the text since it wasn't corrupt or meaningless, so the original second-divan text of the fourth verse is preserved. A note on p. 454 of the kulliyaat explains the basics of what has been done, but not the details.