There could be at least three reasons for the speaker's sense of shame, depending on the prior circumstances. =If we imagine that the speaker, like the other drinkers, is presently being given normal glasses of wine, then he would feel shame at saying he doesn't need (or even want?) as much as everybody else is getting. To declare himself satisfied to settle merely for the dregs, would be to mark himself out as a more humble, less entitled person. =If we imagine that the speaker is now not getting any wine at all, then he would feel shame at asking, in what would inevitably be a humiliating way, for the mere dregs or leftovers. The request would turn him into a beggar pleading for scraps. =If we imagine that the speaker is asking for the dregs from the Cupbearer's own cup, then we have Bekhud Mohani's suggestion: the Cupbearer would conclude-- perhaps rightly-- that a new admirer of his beauty was seeking to ingratiate himself; the speaker feels ashamed to incur the Cupbearer's scorn. Or perhaps there's even a fourth possibility. The 'dregs' (or 'lees') is a sediment that has settled to the bottom of the glass, and thus it could be considered much more concentrated than the ordinary wine. Perhaps asking for only the lees would be a sort of 'cut to the chase' request? Might it imply that the speaker had no concern with the wine's flavor and bouquet, or with sociability and the other elegant pleasures of the gathering, but was intent on immediate, powerful (Divine?) intoxication? The only other verse in the divan that mentions 'dregs' is also an ambiguous one: 100,8 . graphics/winedregs.jpg