S. R. Faruqi:

Mir has several times expressed a limited form of this theme. In the second divan [{1038,3]]:

siimii;N-tano;N kaa milnaa chaahe hai kuchh tamavvul
shaahid-parastiyo;N kaa ham paas-e zar kahaa;N hai

[to meet with silver-bodied ones requires some riches
we worshippers of beauty-- where is our custody of gold?!]

In the fourth divan [{1470,8}]:

;Gariibo;N kii to pag;Rii jaame tak le hai utarvaa to
tujhe ai siim-bar le bar me;N jo zar-daar ((aashiq ho

[when even the turban and robe of the poor would be taken off them, then
oh silver-bosomed one, in choosing, the gold-possessing lover would take you]

The truth is that both verses are very good. Their special quality is that here Mir has turned his eyes directly toward the worldly reality of passion, he hasn't kept it on a physical or spiritual level. But in the present verse this aspect is even more evident because here, in addition to gold he has mentioned other possibilities and preconditions as well, and every one of them has the same worldly, earthly aspect.

If one's fate/destiny would be good, this is the biggest thing; for then even if passion would not be true, the work would still get done. Or if the beloved would be so far away that it would seem impossible to meet with her-- even then, if fate would be favorable then success would come about. And if fate would not be so, then the attraction of the heart should be so strong and forceful that it would draw in the beloved. If this too would not be so, then sighing and lamention should be so powerful that the beloved's heart would be made ready, as Mir says in the fourth divan itself [{1393,7}]:

dil nahii;N dard-mand apnaa miir
aah-o-naale a;sar kare;N kyuu;N-kar

[if one's own heart is not afflicted/compassionate, Mir
how would sighing and lamentation make an effect?]

If all these things would not exist, then there should be wealth, so as to charm her on that basis; and if the lover would not be wealthy then he should have power/force, so that he would be able to bear off the beloved through the use of martial force and imposingness. Or again, the meaning of zor can also be 'bodily strength'-- that his body should be so powerful that the beloved's heart itself should want to embrace it, as in this verse by Fazil Ja'fri:

andaazah karo ;xvud kaa kabhii us se biga;R kar
:taaqat hai badan me;N to ;xafaa hone nah degii

[form an estimate of yourself sometime when you have quarreled with her
if you have strength in your body, then she will not let you be angry]

Now let consider some other aspects. In the first line some nouns have been connected by means of the conjunctive vaa))o . There is no verb. Thus the line has of course become flowing and well-shaped; it also has dramatic tension, because there's the anticipation-- in the next line, how will these things have been given 'connection'?

Then in the second line, the style is the limit case of informality. Because of its informality, the verse has no doubt come near to everyday life, but in the tone too various moods have entered in: annoyance, counsel, moral advice, self-doubt, a kind of hopelessness (because it's also clear that the speaker/addressee is devoid of all those things mentioned in the first line). The word are , with its informality and multiple-meaningness, creates pleasure/subtlety.

There's also the possibility that the speaker of the verse might be the beloved herself, and that she would be saying sarcastically to the lover, 'What do you even have, on the strength of which you would come to be a lover? In passion-- well, you do need... something!'.

A final possibility is that in this one, and all the verses of this kind, success, or the obtaining of the beloved, would be only a metaphor for success (that is, worldly success). Now the theme becomes that in order to obtain the world too, means are necessary, whether they be material or moral means.

It should be kept in mind that in the first line there's the conjunctive vaa))o ' [vaa))o-e ((a:taf] and the 'equational vaa))o ' [vaa))o-e musaavaat]. That is, the vaa))o can also mean 'or'. Fate, or attraction, or lamentation-- etc., let there be something.

[See also {490,2}; {1574,6}.]

FWP:

SETS == A,B; EXCLAMATION; IDIOMS; LISTS
MOTIFS
NAMES
TERMS == THEME

As SRF notes, the first line consists only of five nouns linked by the Persianized minimal connector vaa))o , which can mean either (officially) 'and', or sometimes 'or'. A verb-free 'list' of this kind of course requires us to decide for ourselves what the connection is between the two lines.

That second line-- well, if you know Urdu you know that idiomatic chaahiye are kuchh to really can't be captured in English with anything like accuracy. But I think what I've done with the 'gotta' gives a little of the idea, and at least has more or less the right slangy tone. On the most obvious reading, the second line construes the first line as itemizing some possibilities-- A, and B, and C, and so on (or alternatively, A or B or C and so on). At least one of these possible resources should be available, if you want to present yourself as a lover.

But I also relish the alternative reading in which all those five things are taken to be wrapped up into one bundle, and then the whole bundle becomes the minimum necessary resource for success as a lover. This reading has the additional punch of hyperbole-- obviously, as a lover, you've gotta have at least something, you need at least A plus B plus C and so on! All these are the sine qua non, they are only enough to get you into the game. And since almost nobody will ever have all of them (and certainly after becoming a lover, nobody could possibly retain all of them), the doomed grandiosity of passion becomes all too clear.

The other delight of the verse is in the widely varying nature of the items on the list. There's 'fate/fortune' (good, or bad?), 'attraction' (operating on the lover, or the beloved?), 'lamentation' (a readily available emotional resource), 'gold' (a rare material resource), and 'power/force' (to evoke love, or to use violence?). This is the list of ingredients-- now we can each bake our own kind of philosophical cake.