The following (as are
some earlier snippets in this blog) is a rough extract from a new biography of
Pandit Narayana Das. It is still a work in progress and the extracts are likely
to undergo changes.
Translating ‘Rubaiyat of Omar Khaiyam’ into Samskrutam and Atcha-Telugu
The reason that attracted Narayana Das to Omar Khaiyam could perhaps be a shared worldview towards life and religion. Both of them were Sun-worshippers and polymaths. In his introduction to the “Rubaiyat of Omar Khaiyam”, Narayana Das says “Omar Khaiyam commences his verses with the word “Khurshid”, which means the Sun; because I presume he was a sun worshipper…”
Omar Khaiyam’s interests
extended from poetry, music, philosophy and theology to mathematics, astronomy,
geography, mineralogy and meteorology. Narayana Das’ interests extended from
poetry, music and musicology, literature and linguistics, dance and acting,
philosophy, theology and Vedic studies to astrology and
medicine (Ayurveda). Of these ‘Vedic studies’ is itself a
conglomeration of various branches of theology, philosophy, arts and sciences.
Neither of them was
properly understood by his contemporaries during his life time. Omar Khaiyam
was seen either as an atheist and hedonist or at the other extreme, as a
mystical Sufi poet. In the case of Narayana Das although his
proclivity to the Bhakti tradition was never in doubt, his
philosophy of humanism might not have been fully understood. While Narayana Das
devoted his life to the teaching of ‘Bhakti, Jnana, Moksha’ he
condemned with vehemence some prevailing practices of his time as unacceptable,
as he felt they were at variance with the spirit of Vedic philosophy.
As has been said earlier
Narayana Das used to absorb knowledge from his environs just as a sponge
absorbed water, and improve upon it. After coming into contact with the Hindustani musician,
Mohabbat Khan at Vizianagaram, he cultivated the Hindustani genre
of music to develop a Carnatic-Hindustani hybrid timbre.
Similarly when he was thirty-seven he came into contact with a Maulvi, he
utilized the opportunity to pick up the rudiments of Arabic and Persian from
him, obtained books on their teaching and began developing his knowledge of the
two languages.
His interest in Persian grew
when he observed that Old Persian* has
some resemblance to Prakrit, considered to be the colloquial form
of literary Samskrutam. This could well be the case because Old Avestan,
the precursor of the Iranian languages, was closer to what
linguists call ‘Indic Samskrutam’ whereas Young Avestan was
closer to Persian. In fact both Old Persian and Middle
Persian were written from left to right like Prakrit unlike
their modern day version, which adapted the Perso-Arabic script.
In his Samskrutam introduction to “Rubaiyat of Omar Khaiyam”
Narayana Das observed that although there were yavana** terms, much of the Rubaiyat Omar
Khaiyam wrote was in Old Persian, which in
his view was closer to Prakrit.
Over time, Narayana Das developed a great
admiration for the Persian philosopher-poet. When he read
Edward Fitzgerald’s English translation of the Persian quatrains,
he felt they were not true to the original. It is now known that not only
Fitzgerald’s translations were not literal but he also mingled
the quatrains. Fitzgerald’s translation has about three hundred
verses. Of these Narayana Das selected a hundred and ten and their original Persian
quatrains and translated the original and their English translation
into Samskritam and Accha-Telugu.
Translating from one
language to another could be a daunting task because it is not just conveying
the meaning of words. A language evolved over time embeds the culture and
traditions; beliefs and values; rituals and practices and history and legends
of a society in its usage and idioms. If the translator is not proficient in
either of the languages, he might miss the meaning altogether or the
translation might appear to be artificial like a patchwork quilt. Good
translation requires not only proficiency in both the languages but great
technical skill to express the idiom of one language in the corresponding idiom
of the other. As languages continue to evolve, meanings of words and usages
change; metaphors that form the substrate of idioms might lose their relevance
or the flavour of idioms might change. Therefore translating from an ancient
language to another classical language requires great scholarship if one were
to convey the true intended meaning of the original writer.
Narayana Das translated
Omar Khaiyam’s Rubaiyat when he was well into his sixties and published the
book when he was sixty-eight. This was what former president of India Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, then Vice-Chancellor of Andhra University, had
to say of the translations in his ‘FOREWORD’:
“[…] was greatly struck
by his varied talents, remarkable linguistic equipment, and technical power of
versification. […] The Telugu verses are written in what is called Atcha Telugu
or pure Telugu, which is rather difficult. […] I am tempted to congratulate him
on a performance which, taking all things into account, is certainly
astounding.”
The book opens with a
prayer in four languages, Persian, English, Samskrutam and Telugu. The poem was
written in the Kandam metre, one of the toughest prosodies in
the Telugu language. Writing a poem in difficult prosody, with each line in a
different language is an expression of Narayana Das’ penchant for the
formidable.
He introduced Omar
Khaiyam, the poet and his poetry in three languages, English, Samskrutam and
Telugu. He used the introductions to express his deep admiration for Omar
Khaiyam and his poetry. But the introductions were more than that. Narayana Das
used them to express his worldview about his field of work, poetry and poets
and to address questions like, ‘what inner urges, objectives or ideology should
drive them?’ and ‘how should literature influence society?
In his English
introduction he expresses the view that ‘an original writer’ should take ‘pride in having his works published as they
are so that critics might see him in his true colours’. It was for this reason, he says, ‘it is not my habit to have my works corrected
and recast by others’.
He laments the
propensity of literary critics to judge the work of writers based more on their
outward appearance than a true evaluation of their literary work. Could
Fitzgerald’s impression of how Omar lived his life coloured
his translations of the poet’s immortal verses?
Did Narayana Das find a
twin soul when he observed that Omar Khaiyam decried ‘all religious shows and
philosophical discussions’ as ‘merely vain and whimsical actions for passing an
idle life’? He says Khaiyam was vexed with the deep chasm between precept and
practice of crafty philosophers. He therefore satirized
their philosophy. For him pleasing society was true religion and
devotion to Almighty was the happiest enjoyment. It was perhaps because of this
perception that Narayana Das found in Khaiyam, a mystic rather than a romantic poet.
He feels Khaiyam’s philosophy was largely misunderstood and his advocacy of
wine, woman & music should be read as cryptic symbols for divine
service, pure mind and meditation.
* Old Persian was
an Iranian language which was in use from circa 600 B.C.E to 300 B.C.E. The
next phase in the evolution of the language between 300 B.C.E. and 800 C.E. has
been designated Middle Persian and from 800 C.E. it is known
as Modern Persian or Farsi.
** By Yavana terms
Narayana Das was probably referring to Middle Persian.
