English Renditions of Urdu Poetry --- The Reverse Process

Afzal A. Khan

unread,

Jan 11, 2011, 11:22:03 AM1/11/11

to

A few days back, I had posted two Urdu renditions of Shelley's "Ode
To The West Wind". Unfortunately, there aren't too many examples of
such translations that are readily available.

At the same time, attempts have been made in the reverse direction,
i.e. Urdu poems being rendered in English. I have seen
some posts in the past where such translations from K.C. Kanda's
book were reproduced in our Newsgroup. Also, there have been
English literateurs who have done the same. The late Ralph Russell
comes to mind. And Ms. Frances Pritchett too has done the same.

Here, I would like to present an English rendition of a poem by
the noted poet Faiz. I do not know who is the translator (it is
NOT me !). It may or may not be from Kanda's book, for all I know.
However, I can confess making a few "amendments" here and there
that (in my view) would make the English version slightly less
prosaic and more in line with the English idiom. Noble and sincere
intentions no doubt -- though it is probable that the net effect or
impact could turn out to be quite the opposite ! With apologies to
the original translator, I may add that such attempts may not be of
much literary merit. But, it is my hope that ALUPers would read the
following in the spirit of Ghalib's misra' :

NaheeN nigaar ko ulfat, na ho, nigaar to hai !!!

Faiz : {Original Urdu}

R A Q E E B S E

Aa k(e) waabasta haiN us husn ki yaadeN tujh se
Jis ne is dil ko paree~KHaana bana rakkha tha
Jis ki ulfat men bhula rakkhi thi duniya hum ne
Dehr ko dehr ka afsaana bana rakkha tha

Aashna haiN tire qadmoN se woh raaheN jin par
Us ki mad'hosh jawaani ne 'inaayat ki hai
Kaar'waaN guzre haiN jin se usi r'anaaii ke
Jis ki in aaNkhoN ne be~sood 'ibaadat ki hai

Tujh se kheli haiN woh mehboob hawaayeN jin men
Us ke mal'boos ki afsurda mahek baaqi hai
Tujh pe bhi barsa hai us baam se mehtaab ka noor
Jis men beeti huwi raatoN ki kasak baaqi hai

Tu ne dekhi hai woh peshaani, woh ruKHsaar, woh hoN'T
Zindagi jin ke tasawwur men luTa di hum ne
Tujh pe uT'Thi haiN woh khoi huwi saahir aaNkheN
Tujh ko m'aloom hai kyoN 'umr gaNwa di hum ne

Hum pe mushtaraka haiN ahsaan GHam-e-ulfat ke
Itne ahsaan k(e) gin'waauuN to ginwa na sakooN
Hum ne is 'ishq men kya khoya hai kya seekha hai
Juz tire aur ko samjhaauuN to samjha na sakooN

{English Version}

Come, for memories are linked with you of that beauty
Which had turned this heart into a fairy-house
Immersed in her love, I had forgotten the world
And had deemed those times as an age-old fable

Familiar with your feet are those pathways
On which her intoxicated youth had bestowed itself
Pathways traversed by her incomparable charms, alas !
That beauty which these eyes had held in futile adoration

With you have played those beloved breezes in which
The faded scent of her dress still lingers
You have now basked in that moonlight from the rooftop
Fond memories of which contain the ache of bygone nights

That forehead, those cheeks and lips -- you have seen them all
In contemplating which I had squandered my very existence
On you are now fixed those lost-in-thought magical eyes
Which should explain why I have wasted my entire life in vain

The pain of devotion has conferred its favours on both of us
So many favours indeed that I can hardly count
What we have lost in this quest, and what we have learnt
I can explain this to you alone -- and to none else

Afzal

Vijay

unread,

Jan 11, 2011, 3:58:01 PM1/11/11

to

Even with your embellishments, I dare say, the effort remains prosaic,
in my opinion at least. It may be that Urdu to English is a taller
order than vice versa. Whereas I was able to enjoy Shelly's
translations into Urdu, there is little joy here.
I have a question about the last stanza. In the original, I feel the
word 'hum' is a royal we, i.e. should be translated as 'I' in English.
I think poet is talking about himself alone. He (obviously) is not in
a position to comment about anyone else; so 'both of us' seems a bit
presumptuous. My view is further born out by how the poem continues,
i.e.

aajizii siikhii ghariiboN kii himaayat siikhii
yaas-o-hirmaan ke dukh dard ke ma'ane siikhe
etc.

which is a reflection of what poet has learnt from the experience.

Best regards,

Vijay

PS. Have you purposely truncated the poem or is that where the
original rendering ends?

Afzal A. Khan

unread,

Jan 11, 2011, 6:45:49 PM1/11/11

to

You are right about the rendition being quite prosaic.
It is possible that the translator might have made the
attempt in a very light-hearted manner or in fun.

You say that Urdu to English is a taller order than
vice versa. I am inclined to agree with you.

Ralph Russell has tried his hand at rendering some
verses of Ghalib into English. One is hard put to
connect many of these English versions to the original
verses. And even where the connection is clear (or,
perhaps somewhat clear), the net effect detracts from the
beauty or perfection of the original sher. Here is
just one example :

I no more long to reap a harvest from my love for her
All that was gained by it was grief that nothing could
be gained

And this is the original sher :

Dil se hawaaye kisht-e-wafa miT gayee k(e) waaN
Haasil siwaaye hasrat-e-haasil naheeN raha

I don't think Faiz has used "hum" in the sense of the
"royal I". The very next word is "mushtaraka" which means
"shared". The sense of the poem seems to be that the
poet (who was the original lover) has since been supplanted
by the rival or "raqeeb". The same experiences that had
been undergone by the poet are now the lot of the rival.
And how else can we explain "tire" in the expression "juz tire"
in the last line ?

To my mind, the last three stanzas of the poem are quite
unconnected with the earlier five stanzas. Here, as you say,
the poet is presumably talking about himself. Or we can say
that the poet's "taraqqi~pasaNdi" has broken through the cocoon
of "'ishq-o-muhabbat".

The English rendition is confined to the first five stanzas
only. And this could be on account of the fact that this part
alone is directly concerned with the title "Raqeeb Se". Just my
take.

Afzal

arahim

unread,

Jan 11, 2011, 11:54:37 PM1/11/11

to

Yes the we refers to both himself and the raqeeb. He is saying to the
raqqeeb since we have been through all this you are the one who has
learned or can understand what I do. And this is why the last three
stanzas are important; based on all the commonalities mentioned above
he expects or concludes that the raqeeb can understand the things he
really wants him to understand (which follow in the last three
stanzas). Infact where you end it he is speculating on what we have
learned and understood or can understand and then he lays out his
case.

> Afzal- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Afzal A. Khan

unread,

Jan 12, 2011, 11:20:32 AM1/12/11

to

Afzal

Regrettably, I am unable to persuade myself to agree with the
above proposition.

I have read the said poem several times --- and, each time, I
get the same impression. There is little connect, if at all,
between the first five and the last three stanzas. The first
five deal very clearly with sentiments of traditional love.
In the first line of the fifth stanza, the poet refers again
to the favours received through "GHam-e-ulfat". So there is
a continuous thread or theme running through the first five
stanzas.

All of a sudden, however, the poet starts talking about the
poor, the downtrodden, the labour class and their blood
flowing on the streets etc. etc. All this is, of course,
hard-core leftist ideology which can be found in the poetry
of practically all poets who were part of the "taaqqi~pasaNd"
brigade. It was fashionable to talk of these things in those
times. But I cannot understand why and how these topics are
related to the traditional love which the poet had talked
about in the first five stanzas.

To my mind, it seems that, in these three stanzas, the poet is
sort of reworking or re-hashing the dominant theme in one of
his other well-known poems --- "raahateN aur bhi haiN was'l ki
raahat ke siwa". But that poem {"Mujh Se Pehli Si Muhabbat"}
constitutes a cohesive whole, which does not seem to be the
case with "Raqeeb Se".

Afzal

arahim

unread,

Jan 12, 2011, 11:58:22 AM1/12/11

to

I agree that in quality (personal taste:) this poem is not in the same
place as the one you mention. However this work/politics and the
imagery of traditional romantic poetry are employed by Faiz again and
again. He starts by empathizing with the raqeeb (in this case anyone
really who has had the feelings of love) and from there tries to draw
him into another discussion. The thought in the last two lines of the
fifth stanza

Hum ne is 'ishq men kya khoya hai kya seekha hai
Juz tire aur ko samjhaauuN to samjha na sakooN

is continued on

'aajizee seekhee, gharibon kee himaayat seekhee
yaas o hirman kay, dukh dard kay ma'ni seekhay
zair daston kay musaib ko sumjhna seekha
sard aahon kay, rukh e zard kay ma'ni seekhay

jab kaheen baith kay roatay hain wo(h) baykas jin kay
ishk aankhon main bilaktay hooay so jatay hain
naatawaanon kay niwaalon pe(h) jhapaTtay hain ukaab
bazoo tolay hu'ay mundlatay hu'ay aatay hain

jab kabhi bikta hai bazaar main mazdoor ka gosht
shahrahon pe(h) gharibon ka lahoo behta hai
aag see reh reh kay ubalti hai na pooch
apnay dil per mujhay qaaboo he nahin rehta hai

In another poem he states this adhoora-pun that you probably feel:)

kuch ishq kiya kuch kaam kiya

wo log bohat khush kismat thay
jo ishq ko kam samajhtay thay
ya kam say 'ashqi kartay thay
hum jeetay ji musroof rahay
kuch ishq kiya, kuch kaam kiya
kaam ishq kay aaRay aata rahaa
aur ishq say kam ulajhta raha
phir akhir tang a kar hum nay
donon ko adhoora choR diya.

Or consider his famous hum keh thairay ajnabi itni mulaqaton kay ba'd.
It is often "misinterpreted as a "love" poem but the name of that poem
is dhaka say wapisi per (in 1974) and is an emotional response to the
relationship between Pakistan and Bangladesh.

The interplay between these two (love and politics) is so much that
perhaps had he written the following couplet in the last few years it
would have been interpreted as a description of pre-emptive strike:)
sitam ki rasmain bohat theen laikin, na thi tairi anjuman say pehlay
saza, khuta'ay nazar say pehlay, 'atab jurm e sukhan say pehlay

As for translation I would say there are two issues here. One is that
this is more of a direct word for word translation which tend to not
work so well. Second is the issue of subject matter. Winds (or more
tangible things:) are easier to interpret than more abstract issues or
where it is the play of words itself that is extremely important (as
in Ghalib).

Afzal A. Khan

unread,

Jan 12, 2011, 1:17:52 PM1/12/11

to

Let us agree to disagree with respect to the poem "Raqeeb Se".

You have referred to (and cited extracts from) other poems by
Faiz. But these require a separate discussion. Perhaps these
issues can be discussed in a separate thread in due course.

As for the translation, it is agreed that it has little or no
literary merit. The difficulties involved in Urdu to English
translations can be best exemplified by the following sher by
Ghalib :

Har chaNd ho mushaahida-e-haq ki guftugoo
Banti naheeN hai baada(h)-o-saaGHar kahe baGHair

Afzal

Vijay

unread,

Jan 12, 2011, 3:10:16 PM1/12/11

to

On Jan 11, 11:45 pm, "Afzal A. Khan" <me_af...@privacy.net> wrote:

> I don't think Faiz has used "hum" in the sense of the
> "royal I". The very next word is "mushtaraka" which means
> "shared". The sense of the poem seems to be that the
> poet (who was the original lover) has since been supplanted
> by the rival or "raqeeb". The same experiences that had
> been undergone by the poet are now the lot of the rival.
> And how else can we explain "tire" in the expression "juz tire"
> in the last line ?
>
> To my mind, the last three stanzas of the poem are quite
> unconnected with the earlier five stanzas. Here, as you say,
> the poet is presumably talking about himself. Or we can say
> that the poet's "taraqqi~pasaNdi" has broken through the cocoon
> of "'ishq-o-muhabbat".
>
> The English rendition is confined to the first five stanzas
> only. And this could be on account of the fact that this part
> alone is directly concerned with the title "Raqeeb Se". Just my
> take.
>

> AfzalI

I agree with you more than I disagree. In the end, I feel, the
consensus will come down to the 'hum' referring to both, poet and
raqiib.
My interpretation of this poem has always been that poet's mehboob has
broken up with him and gone with the raqiib. So when poet talks about
gham-e-ulfat, I didn't see how it would apply to raqiib (who has got
lazzat-e-qarb). And when poet says 'juz tire aur ko samjhaauN to
samjha na sakuuN', I took it to mean that only raqiib, who now has the
mehboob and knows all the qualities she possesses, can understand how
one would suffer her parting. And finally, when poet talks about what
he has learnt from the 'gham-e-ulfat', he can't be presumptuous and
imagine that raqiib would also have learnt the same things, can he?
That's why I had always felt that poet is talking about him-self
alone.

With regards to Urdu to English translation (of Urdu poetry), I have
seen a few attempts and all have been disappointing. The example you
furnish of Ralph Russell trying his hand at translating Ghalib, amply
proves the point. Having said this, there is one work that comes
closer than most at capturing the spirit, intent and the substance of
the original, and that is Khushwant Singh's attempt at translating
Iqbal's Shikwah/Jawaab-e-shikwah. I am away from home for a few days.
When I return, I shall endeavour to post a passage or two from that
work.

Best regards,

Vijay

gshresth

unread,

Jan 14, 2011, 2:40:26 AM1/14/11

to

On Jan 13, 12:10 am, Vijay <guz...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 11, 11:45 pm, "Afzal A. Khan" <me_af...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>
>

> > I don't thinkFaizhas used "hum" in the sense of the

The lack of 'connect' between the first part of this nazm and the last
three stanzas is quite deliberate. Faiz has used similar 'disconnect'
elsewhere too, in his effort to commandeer traditional tropes of urdu
poetry in the service of his socio-political message. In this case,
the last three stanzas make it clear that the 'mehboob' whose charms
are being discussed with the Raqeeb (in the earlier stanzas) is not a
woman, but an ideal state of the world, of society. This is the focus
of much of Faiz's poetry, and hence should not surprise us.

Due to these key three stanzas, the essential message of the nazm
becomes something like - 'You who have fallen in love with the same
ideal as I, you who have despaired, like me, at the state of the
present world, only you can understand why I remain enamoured of that
goal, why I rail against the injustices of the present imperfect
world.' The poem is, thus, essentially a political message, a sharing
of the joys and sorrows of 'action' with fellow-campaigners. May like
to see a possible translation/interpretation on
http://urdustuff.blogspot.com/2008/03/faiz-aa-ke-vaabastaa-hain.html.

Gaurav

Afzal A. Khan

unread,

Jan 14, 2011, 12:09:33 PM1/14/11

to

Gaurav Saheb,

Now, this is a very interesting take on the above poem and, for all
that I know, it could well be what the poet actually meant.
{Aside : UVR Saheb, where are you ? !!}

Giving it further thought, I am inclined to agree that the
"disconnect" is deliberate. But I am not sure whether the
traditional aspects or phraseology of Urdu love poetry can
easily be interpreted by the readers as referring to the "ideal
world" that is spoken about in the last three stanzas and which
is supposed to be the poet's real "beloved".

Faiz can be very alluring with his magical mastery over
classical Urdu diction, but this kind of "fake" or "pseudo"
concern for "the poor, the downtrodden and the labour class"
leaves me quite cold. Just my view, please.

On another note, we haven't seen you in this Newsgroup earlier.
It is to be hoped that you will find time to visit it more
often. In the meantime, let me extend a very warm welcome to you.
We can certainly do with more gentlemen like you.

Afzal

arahim

unread,

Jan 14, 2011, 1:00:15 PM1/14/11

to

Here's my shot at the first stanza

Bound by the chain of vision that charmed us,
The talisman held captive our very nexus
We forgot the miseries of this world
Roaming in our utopian plexus

Rajiv Chakravarti

unread,

Jan 14, 2011, 1:53:17 PM1/14/11

to

On Jan 14, 11:09 am, "Afzal A. Khan" <me_af...@privacy.net> wrote:
> Faiz can be very alluring with his magical mastery over
> classical Urdu diction, but this kind of "fake" or "pseudo"
> concern for "the poor, the downtrodden and the labour class"
> leaves me quite cold. Just my view, please.
>
> On another note, we haven't seen you in this Newsgroup earlier.
> It is to be hoped that you will find time to visit it more
> often. In the meantime, let me extend a very warm welcome to you.
> We can certainly do with more gentlemen like you.
>
> Afzal

I am not a big Faiz fan really for various reasons, but could you
please elaborate on your viewpoint of Faiz's "pseudo concern?" What
is it that made you conclude that this concern is "fake?" I actually
find most of what I have read from Faiz quite "detached" (and
therefore cold), but that could be my own personal preference for
style etc.

Please note that I am only looking to understand your viewpoint
better.

I join Afzal sahab in welcoming Gaurav-sahab to this forum.

Regards,
RC

gshresth

unread,

Jan 15, 2011, 5:28:25 AM1/15/11

to

Dear Afzal Saheb, Rajiv Ji,
Many thanks for the welcoming words!

Afzal saheb, given that Faiz, in his lifetime, was fairly active in the 'progressive' movement, and commented frequently on the political events in his time - not just in Pakistan but also elsewhere - I am not sure I would classify his stated concern for the downtrodden as 'pseudo'. Of course, his activism was without doubt coloured by his particular brand of socialistic ideology, but then, that particular ideology WAS a dominant strain among the intelligentsia of the time, at least in the third world. With the benefit of hindsight, we can question his politics, but I don't, per se, see much reason to question his personal commitment to it. Of course, his activism did not take the form of regular political activity (and hence could be called 'detached' to an extent), but then he was essentially a man of letters and ideas, and would probably have been a misfit in public life...

Gaurav

Vijay

unread,

Jan 15, 2011, 8:57:32 AM1/15/11

to

I would like to extend a warm welcome to you, too. I read the
interpretation provided in the link you posted. It is 'an interesting'
interpretation, and as is usual with poetry in general, but Urdu
poetry in particular, it is only one of the takes. I feel there are
some difficulties with this particular line of thought and why the
conventional interpretation is more appealing, to me at least. Other
than the very jarring opener which calls the poem 'raqiib ko' rather
than the original 'raqiib se', following are some of the points one
may want to raise to broaden this disagreement/debate:

1. If the mehboob here is the socialist/communist ideal, then it
doesn't have to be the property of just one person , i.e., poet
doesn't have to give it up for some one else to attain it. Faiz never
abandoned this ideal, so far as I know, whereas the poem under
discussion clearly talks about this 'mehboob' having moved on, from
the poet to the 'raqiib'.

2. Phrases/words like 'peshaani', 'honT', 'ruKhsaar', 'saahir
aaNkheN', more intuitively describe a 'person' rather than the
personification of an idea/ideal. Similarly, 'bhulaa rakkhi thii dunya
ham neN' will be so discordant if one is talking of political ideal,
where forgetting the material world is the last thing one would
expect.

3. The natural interpretation is just so much more meaningful and
moving. That the poet has been able to deal with the loss of his
beloved to his raqiib by sublimating his sorrow in a positive and
constructive manner. That the lessons he had learnt from the
relationship, he has been able to apply to the wider societal causes.

4. I feel the 'disconnect' is the 'raison d'eter' of this poem. If it
had ended where the truncated version ends, it will be no more than
the conventional 'ishq-e-mizaaji' poetry that is just so 'common'. It
is the 'connect' between the loss of a beloved and the poet's
transformation as a result of it, that makes it the wonderful poem it
is.

Finally, as the Occam's razor goes, and I paraphrase, the simpler and
obvious interpretations are best ( and more appealing) than the
complex, not so obvious ones.
Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate.

With best regards,

Vijay

Afzal A. Khan

unread,

Jan 15, 2011, 11:06:13 AM1/15/11

to

Well said and nicely put.

My simple(st) theory is that Occam's Razor is not applicable to
Urdu poetry in general and Ghalib/Meer in particular.

Some years back, someone quoted a noted Urdu critic's observation
in these very pages ---> "Jo sher jitna kaseer-ul-m'aani hoga,
woh utna hi achchha samjha jaayega".

But please tell us whether "'ishq-e-mizaaji" is merely a typo or
it is exempt from Occam's Razor ?

Afzal

Vijay

unread,

Jan 15, 2011, 1:19:32 PM1/15/11

to

I think there may be a subtle difference here. There are asha'ar that
are designed by the sha'ir to be convoluted and 'difficult'. Ghalib
has many such examples. Some may feel that the mere fact of them being
difficult to understand confers them a higher status. I don't agree
with this position, but 'de gustibus non est disputandum'.

There are many simpler asha'ar (many by Miir) that fall easily to our
comprehension and yet are masterful.

What I was talking about in the present context is the meaning of a
particular she'r. It is the straightforward one that is more likley to
be the more eloquent one. There is no need to evoke complexity in a
she'r or naz'm/ghazal, when there is no need to do so.

Best,

Vijay

arahim

unread,

Jan 16, 2011, 1:40:38 AM1/16/11

to

Second attempt...

The vision of beauty that bound us
Made us forget the world around us.
The heart was a chamber of devotion;
The world a world of myth and notion.

> > Afzal- Hide quoted text -
>

> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

azeeman...@gmail.com

unread,

Feb 16, 2013, 9:39:52 AM2/16/13

to

i think poetrymysoul.com is one of the great site for poetry.

Naseer

unread,

May 9, 2020, 10:21:48 AM5/9/20

to

Naseer

unread,

May 10, 2020, 10:16:54 AM5/10/20

to

srinage...@gmail.com

unread,

May 10, 2020, 11:13:45 AM5/10/20

to

Thanks for your diligent work, Naseer Sahib. I visited several of these threads and found them to be informative and engaging. I came across a reference to a poem by Thomas Moore - "The Light of Other Days" - which was translated to Urdu. The title intrigued me. My grandfather published his thinly disguised memoirs in a book called "The Flight of Other Days". I wrote a small ghazal (in English) with the radeef "of other days" some time ago. It was not in Urdu, so I will leave it on my Facebook page.

This thread led me to look at both Thatha's book and Thomas Moore. I highly value the very indirect connections established by poetry, especially when the connections come with a surprising force.

Thanks as always.

Regards,

Nagesh