S. R. Faruqi:

thalaknaa = dha;Raknaa ['To blaze up, to burn fiercely; to be intensely hot (as the body in fever, &c.); to be inflamed (with anger, or lust, &c.; ... ;—to be distressed, to tremble (from fear, &c.); to beat, throb, palpitate, flutter' (Platts p.544)]

In ai mirii va;hshat , the ai is not vocative, but rather congratulatory-- that is, in a tone of praise he has said, 'bravo [vaah re], my wildness!'.

The image in the second line is very fine. It also has two aspects. One is that the liver of the sand of the desert used to quiver with such force that it left the ground and came down again tens of yards away. The quivering of the liver of the sand of the desert could have been because of fear, or because of ebullience and gladness; or it could be that the throbbing of my madness was so powerful that the ground trembled for a long distance.

In this, and in a number of verses of this kind, another noteworthy thing is that now the madness has already declined. The reason for this could be death, or a state of mystical absorbedness, or the decline of the lover. Compare

{17,1}, {70,6}, {74,9}, {84,2}, {100,5}, {115,3}.

To say thalaknaa in place of dha;Raknaa is also a marvel of expression, because the visual and aural effect of the latter is not so attention-compelling. And in addition, thalaknaa isn't an obvious word. In [the dictionaries] farhang-e aa.sifiyah and nuur ul-lu;Gaat , it doesn't even appear. See

{700,12}.

For further discussion of ai as an expression of praise, see

{1567,2}.

For an image similar to das das gaz thalaktaa thaa see

{1794,4}.

FWP:

SETS == BHI
MOTIFS == DESERT; LIVER; MADNESS
NAMES
TERMS == FRESH WORD; THEME

The standard kulliyat, which I follow, has tire at the beginning of the first line; SSA has mire , and plainly it's not a calligraphic error but one that SRF follows in his reading. This means that SRF's interpretation has to accommodate the odd syntax of 'from the... of mine, ai my wildness'. Thus he insists on reading ai as an expression of praise, since it would look so odd as a vocative. This reading is possible, of course. But if we use the kulliyat reading, then the syntactical oddness of the repetition of 'my' is removed, and the speaker is able quite easily to address his semi-personified wildness/madness on the subject of its behavior. This means that praise becomes only one of the possible tones in which the verse could be read. Nostalgia, regret, detachment, rueful humor, are also available, and the choice is left up to us.

I consulted SRF about these two readings, and he replied (Apr. 2018):

The mere is much better. Unfortunately, the Fort William College edition says tere . Please note this as a discrepancy. At the time of the next edition, I'll consult Naval Kishor, 1867, and other editions to arrive at a conclusion whether we should really go with the much inferior tere .

(SRF's spellings reflect his personal disapproval of the policy of changing mere / tere into mire / tire to show the metrically-induced changes in pronunciation. The most recent edition of the kulliyat retains tire .

The thalaknaa is indeed a rare gem with remarkable sound effectrs, as SRF notes; it fully deserves the rank of a 'fresh word'.

The use of bhii is elegantly ambiguous. If we read it as 'even', then the effect is to suggest that the thrashing around of the speaker's wildness was so powerful that, not to speak of more likely things for it to agitate, it even went so far as (improbably) to agitate the 'liver' of the sands of the desert. (The unlikeliness here is augmented by the use of kalejaa , with its anthromorphic overtones). And if we read it as 'also', then the effect is to suggest that the thrashing around of the speaker's wildness not only greatly agitated his own liver, as would be expected, but also greatly agitated the liver of the desert sands (and possibly any number of other livers as well).