As Hasrat points out, the verse doesn't make clear in whose sleep I might kiss her foot-- in her sleep, or in mine? The phrase is cleverly arranged so that it can be read either way ( would nowadays be ). If we take the former reading, that the beloved is asleep, then the lover seems to be in a position of utter submission-- the beloved is so disdainful of him, and so confident of his helplessness, that she is willing to go to sleep in his presence, undisturbed by any thought that he might take advantage of the situation. As in fact he will not, because he knows she will become , distrustful or suspicious, if he does. Since she is asleep, though, how will she know? Maybe he would be unable to kiss her foot lightly enough not to wake her? Maybe her omniscience (along with her deep though subliminal interest in dominating the lover) extends even to the realm of sleep? If we take the latter reading, that the lover is asleep, then we locate the whole scene in the lover's dream. He dreams of the beloved, but even in his dream he's afraid to kiss her foot, for fear of vexing her. Because she so dominates his imagination that he doesn't dare take liberties even with a dream-image of her? Because she's so mysteriously powerful that her real self will know if he kisses her dream-self's foot? In the latter case, doesn't it imply a deep bond between beloved and lover despite everything, since she carefully monitors (and dominates) even his dreams? And of course, kissing someone's foot is itself a sign of complete humility and subservience-- yet not even that is permitted to the lover. graphics/sleepingbelovedmet.jpg