vuh iltimaas-e la;z;zat-e be-daad huu;N kih mai;N
te;G-e sitam ko pusht-e ;xam-e iltijaa karuu;N
1) I am such a prayer/entreaty of the relish/savor of injustice/inquity that I
2)
would make the scimitar of tyranny the bent/curved back of supplication
iltimaas : 'Prayer, petition, supplication, entreaty, request'. (Platts p.74)
la;z;zat : 'Pleasure, delight, enjoyment; sweetness, deliciousness; taste, flavour, relish, savour; —an aphrodisiac; an amorous philter'. (Platts p.955)
iltijaa : 'Fleeing to (one) for relief or protection, taking refuge (with); refuge, protection; entreaty, petition, urgent request or prayer, solicitation, supplication'. (Platts p.74)
Raza p. 151; Raza p. 152. S. R. Faruqi's choices. Ghalib originally composed a ghazal of nine verses, from which he chose one for publication in his divan. In the original nine-verse ghazal, this verse was the seventh one.
Well, the conceit is ingenious enough: the curved shape of a scimitar is made to resemble the bent-over shape of a person bowing deeply in humble supplication. The 'am' is presumably meant to equate the speaker himself with his plea, just as the plea itself is equated with the scimitar that can provide such a desirable 'relish of injustice/cruelty'.
Still, the karuu;N doesn't quite seem to work. How would I 'make' the curved scimitar into a bent back? Just by the sheer power of my longing? We lack an 'objective correlative for how this might work. We also don't know what would be the point, even if I could pull off such a feat. Despite its clever imagery, the verse makes a claim that seems arbitrary and unsupported. In the much more successful {1,3}, there's no assertion that the lover any such (physical?) power over the universe.
Gyan Chand:
When the beloved shows cruelty toward me, then I obtain relish; thus I always petition her, Do more tyranny! To me, the tyranny-performing scimitar is as if I am bending over in supplication to be killed, and the scimitar is an interpreter of my plea. (259)