and so on. A feeling for the ocean must somehow have remained very deeply lodged in Mir's psyche, because throughout his life he kept versifying the uncommon theme of the sea. With other poets, this is not the case.
For example the theme that the heart will have flowed away along with the tears-- when other poets versified it, then the usually based the verse on the image of the caravan. As did Mus'hafi:
surāġh-e qāfilah-e ashk lījiye kyūñ-kar
gayā hai dūr nikal vuh diyār-e ḥirmāñ se
[how will one find the track of the caravan of tears?
it has emerged from the land of hopelessness, and gone far]
And Zafar Iqbal:
dil kā patah sirishk-e musalsal se pūchhiʾe
āḳhir vuh be-vat̤an bhī usī kāravāñ meñ thā
[ask the whereabouts of the heart, from the line of tears
after all, that homeless one
too was in that same caravan]
In Mir's verse there's a touch of wit, or of rakish good cheer; there's a composure: if the heart has been lost, that's fine. The wet eyes have been called, by implication, the sea; this too is very excellent. In both lines, the insha'iyah style has reinforced the narrative and dramatic structure.
The ocean is very wide; what can anyone know of things on the far side of it? This view, and this image, bring the verse near to ordinary life. In Zafar Iqbal's verse there's a light and moderate wit and composure like Mir's. In Mus'hafi's verse there's the reference to the caravan of tears, but not the theme of the heart's emerging. To the extent of something's becoming lost without a trace, Mir and Mus'hafi's themes are the same. In Mus'hafi's verse, there's a rush of 'mood'.
In Mir's verse, along with the 'mood' there are also depths, and because of the distance between the speaker and the poet there's absolutely no unnecessary self-pity, pathos, and so on. It seems that he deliberately made the tone flat and apparently colorless. He hasn't even said whether his eyes are inherently like the sea, or usually like the sea. Rather, he has called the eyes 'the sea' as though 'the sea' is another name for them. In this way there's absolutely no 'emotional surplus' in the verse. Instead, if there's a rush of emotion, then it's in the reader's/hearer's mind. In this regard this verse is also established as 'tumult-arousing'.
The theme of calling the eyes rivers/sea appears in Jur'at as well, but in his verse, in the contrivedness of the speaker and in the other part of the theme itself (a garden on the river) there's artificiality. Thus although Jur'at composed a very elaborate verse, it lacks the wit, 'mood', and 'tumult-arousingness' of Mir's present verse. Jur'at's verse:
bhalā kisī ne agar nah dekhā ho bāġh daryā meñ to yih dekhe
kih kis maze se har ek ṭukṛā jigar kā chashm-e pur-āb meñ hai
[well, if anyone would not have seen a garden in the river, then let him look
with what relish every single fragment of the liver is in the water-filled eye]
