Tuesday, September 05, 2006
National Song
'Unnecessary And Irrelevant'
Challenge to religion comes from those who indulge in terrorism in the name of religion, not from those who sing the National Song and express their gratitude for all the beneficence of motherland - thus strengthening the bond of fraternity and brotherhood. 
Tasleemat, maan tasleemat
tu bhari hai meethe pani se
phal phoolon ki shadabi se
dakkin ki thandi hawaon se
faslon ki suhani fizaaon se
tasleemat, maan tasleemat
teri raaten roshan chand se
teri raunaq sabze faam se
teri pyar bhari muskan hai
teri meethi bahut zuban hai
teri banhon mein meri rahat hai
tere qadmon mein meri jannat hai
tasleemat, maan tasleemat -
- This is an attempt to translate Vande Mataram in easy spoken language. I wonder if those who declare the song anti-Islamic may have a look at this rendering in urdu and point out the line or portion they find objectionable?
The new controversy regarding Vande Mataram is unnecessary and irrelevant. It is true that in the 1930s, there were differing opinions. The Congress Working Committee after lengthy deliberations took a view in 1937 to adopt first two stanzas as National Song. It is also true that the Muslim League persisted in its opposition till the country was divided. But the Constituent Assembly adopted Vande Mataram as National Song ('the song Vande Mataram, which has played a historic part in the struggle for Indian freedom, shall be honoured equally with Jana Gana Mana and shall have equal status with it'). Those who persist in their opposition are actually negating a constitutional ideal. After all, the Constitution is not merely an exercise in semantics but expression of the people's national faith.
Vande Mataram was composed in 1870s and was made part of the Anandamath in 1881. In the
It is important to remember that when Maulana Abul Kalam Azad was the president of the Congress, Vande Mataram was sung in all party sessions. In fact, Mr Rafi Ahmad Kidwai in his statement that was published in The Pioneer on
"For years the song was sung at the beginning of Congress sessions and Muslims including Jinnah began to object only in the late 1930s. Jinnah left Congress not because he thought Vande Mataram was an anti-Islamic song but because he had found the idea of swaraj unacceptable."
There is no denying the fact that Vande Mataram was a great source of inspiration for freedom fighters and became a powerful expression of Indian resolve to free the nation from foreign subjugation. The British government, on the other hand, saw it as challenge to its authority and subsequently declared singing of the song a crime. The opposition to Vande Mataram came from the Muslim League, which under the leadership of Mohammad Ali Jinnah had developed a different attitude from those of nationalists on the question of
It is worth recalling the comment of Reyazul Karim, a leading litterateur of
"The main purpose of opposition to Vande Mataram was to bring Muslims out of the freedom struggle." He further said that the song gave language to the dumb and courage to the faint-hearted, and this remains Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay's lasting gift to the country. He went to the extent that "even if criticism against Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay is accepted, is his literary worth lessened by that. Literature should be read as literature".
There are people who hold Allama Iqbal as one of the ideologues of
With this historical background, I have no doubt that opposition to Vande Mataram is not rooted in religion but in divisive politics that led to Partition. This song is important not only because it inspired our freedom fighters, but also because it gives remarkable description of beautiful and beneficent aspects of the motherland.
While opposing Vande Mataram, the Muslim Personal Law Board has gone to the extent of advising Muslim parents not to send their ward to schools on September 7. May I inform them the every session of Parliament concludes with Vande Mataram. Are they going to advise Muslim MPs to abstain from Parliament when Vande Mataram is being sung, or will they ask Muslims not to participate in elections because of the National Song?
From the Islamic viewpoint, the basic yardstick of an action is Innamal Aamalu Binnyat (action depends on intention). Hailing or saluting Motherland or singing its beauty and beneficence is not sajda. Maulana Azad was a great Islamic scholar, but he found nothing anti-religion about this song. Rafi Ahmad Kidwai strongly defended Vande Mataram. Moreover, we must remember the words of the Prophet: "The whole earth has been made mosque for me." Now, nobody would dispute that mosque deserves reverence. More so the piece of earth where we are born and brought up, the piece of earth that God has blessed us with to enjoy its beneficence. And if we join our compatriots to revere that piece of earth as our motherland, can this be anti religious? Certainly not.
The government has rightly asked the educational institutions to organise collective singing of Vande Mataram as a tribute not only to the author but also freedom fighters who laid down their lives with this song on their lips. But the strange thing is that now they are sounding defensive as if they have done something wrong.
History shows us that by giving concessions to communal demands, we can buy temporary peace but in the long term the country pays dearly and we become abettors in perpetuating the legacy of divisive politics. We have not able to overcome the malignant fallout of what we did in 1986 under pressure of the Muslim Personal Law Board. We simply can not afford another blunder.
Challenge to religion comes from those who indulge in terrorism in the name of religion, not from those who sing the National Song and express their gratitude for all the beneficence of motherland - thus strengthening the bond of fraternity and brotherhood.
Senior BJP leader Arif Mohammad Khan is a former union minister, well-known for the stand he had taken as a part of Rajiv Gandhi's government on the Shah Bano issue. This piece first appeared in the Pioneer.
Vande Mataram: FAQ
So what is the current controversy about Vande Mataram? What is this about 
So what is the current controversy about Vande Mataram?
It began with a letter that the Human Resources Development minister, Arjun Singh, wrote to all the chief ministers, about Vande Mataram on August 8, which said inter alia: "It was adopted as a National Song at the
As Narendra Bhalla reports in Outlook Saptahik, the idea seems to have germinated in an all-party meet on the 150th anniversary celebrations of 1857, chaired by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, where Murali Manohar Joshi had insisted that in schools and government functions, not just the first two stanzas of the song, but the entire song should be sung. L.K. Advani had reiterated that
Significantly, the PM had also emphasised that "the celebration of our freedom movement should not become an occasion for jingoism, narrow nationalism and chauvinism. Rather, it must be an opportunity to celebrate our diversity, our liberalism, our civilisational inheritance and the values of integrity and service to man that defined the national movement. I hope we can communicate these ideas and values through the programmes we undertake to organize." Little did he know.
Soon after, Arjun Singh shot off the "controversial" letter. BJP must have been thrilled, for it seemed that Muraliji had managed to wangle out of Arjunji what even Atalji and Advaniji had frowned at in 1998.
But it set alarm bells ringing in UP where elections are round the corner. For a bankrupt and bereft bunch of self-proclaimed "leaders and saviours" of Muslims -- the Samajwadi Party and some Muslim "leaders" -- this was an issue that seemed to have been offered on a plate. A right royal hai tauba ensued. It was assumed that the directive was for a mandatory singing not only at all institutions, but by all. The HRD minister, realising the electoral seriousness perhaps, joined the debate at a gathering of a Muslim academic institution at Jamia Salfiya in Raja Telab locality of
Predictably, the self-appointed saviour of all Hindus, the BJP, always in search of a non-issue to make into a "national cause" jumped in the fray and charged the HRD minister with "appeasement" of Muslims because of his "clarification".
All of this was enough to stall the proceedings of both houses of the Parliament on August 22. Madrasas were predictably targeted. Slogans such as "agar is desh meiN rahnaa hogaa to Vande Mataram kahnaa hogaa [If you wish to live in the country, you have to say "Vande Mataram]" were chanted. The BJP wanted that Arjun Singh should not have made the singing of the song "voluntary". BJP chief ministers, the party warned, would be advised to make the singing mandatory in all schools, including madrasas.
As noted historian Sumit Sarkar [1] points out, "Clearly, the HRD ministry had been wrongly advised, and has handed over an issue on a platter to the BJP, as part of the repeated Congress efforts to steal the sangh parivar's thunder. One more effort at appeasement that every time proves harmful for secularism." As he went on to point out, the good minister had got his dates wrong as well.
Why this confusion? When was Vande Matram written? What is this about
According to historian Sabyasachi Bhattacharya [2], Bankim wrote it "sometime in the early 1870s". According to him, Aurobindo Ghose "states very precisely that the poem was written in 1875 [but] [o]n the whole, it seems that the composition of the poem [first two stanzas of the] can be dated between 1872 and 1875." For a complete discussion and reasons cited by him, please see pp 68-94 of his book, Vande Mataram, the Biography of a Song. But there is no confusion that it was included in the novel Anandamath in 1881.
Sumit Sarkar points out: "It was the HRD ministry that had started it all by calling for the observance of September 7 as some kind of centenary occasion for the song. The surprising thing is that nothing relevant to the song happened on
The Congress Working Committee statement of 1937 is categorical: "At no time, however, was this song, or any other song formally adopted by the Congress as the National Anthem of India".
But what, concerning the song, happened in 1905?
While Tagore had sung the song before a gathering of the Calcutta Congress in 1896, Sabyasachi Bhattacharya points out that "the song attained mass popularity only since 1905. The swadeshi movement, in reaction to the partition of
And thus from 1905, "the Swadeshi agitation in
Many translations were made, including one by Subramaniya Bharathi in 1905. Likewise, far away from
The Congress Working Committee's statement also talks about the importance of this period:
"At a famous session of the Bengal Provincial Conference held in
What is all this about the first two stanzas? What exactly is objectionable in the song? Was it written to honour those who sacrificed their lives for the country? Is it a 'Hindu' song? Is it anti-Muslim?
Sabyasachi Bhattacharya maintains that the first two stanzas have to be distinguished from the full text that later appears in Anandamath. "When Bankim first wrote it in the early 1870s it was just a beautiful hymn to the motherland, richly-watered, richly-fruited, dark with the crops of the harvests, sweet of laughter, sweet of speech, the giver of bliss. For several years these first two stanzas remained unpublished ...
''In 1881 this poem [i.e. the first two stanzas] was included by Bankim in the novel, Anandamath, and now it was expanded to endow the motherland with militant religious symbolism as the context of the narrative demanded". He takes considerable pains to point out that "when the poem was inserted in the novel [Anandamath] and serialised in the journal [Bangadarshan], the first twelve lines (the first two stanzas), were put within quotation marks; the rest of the poem was printed without quotation marks. Why was this done? It has been rightly inferred that the author wanted to separate the first two stanzas which he had written earlier, around 1875, from the part written later (lines 13 to 27); the latter part was put outside quotation marks. The latter part was written probably in 1881 bearing in mind the context of Anandamath.
This distinction between the originally composed song and the additions made later to fit into the narrative of the novel is important, because it was the latter part which contained those explicitly Hindu and idolatorous imageries which were objected to by many outside the Hindu community."
As further evidence, Bhattacharya also mentions that "Bankim's figure of 'seven crore' [he wrote of sapta-koti, but in the 1905 Congress session, it was sung as 'tringhsha koti' or 'thirty crores' and then later, with each new census, the figure kept changing, finally becoming "crores and crores"] was of the total population of the area under the lieutenant governor of Bengal in 1871
, and thus that figure also included the Muslim population. In that quantitative sense the poem is inclusive but it is far from being so if one considers the ensemble of symbols in the poem as a whole." Another notable point he makes, along with others, is that 'dharma' in the expanded verses is not 'religion' but 'conduct', and that indeed is how Aurobindo translates it.
Now, what was the problem with Anandamath?
Plenty can be mentioned as having been articulated, but let us take Sumit Sarkar's summary: "Vande Mataram further is an integral part of a novel that has been much translated and read. Anandamath is set in a
What about the independence movement? Congress leader Digvijay Singh said on Rajat Sharma's India TV recently that only the extremist Muslims now have problems with the song whereas even the Muslim league never had any problem with it in the past...
Wrong again. This time, let us allow Sabyasachi Bhattacharya to provide a summary of the 'problems' in the pre-Independence days: "In the 1930s ... objections began to be raised against the song on two grounds: first, its association with Anandamath, which depicted the Muslims of the Nawabi era of the 1770s in Bengal in a poor light; second, the religious imagery and idolatry implicit in the stanzas of the poem following the first two. (Today those innocent of any knowledge of the song and the novel probably mistake the part for the whole). M.A. Jinnah, as well as a number of Muslim legislators in the provincial assemblies elected in 1937, became vociferous against the recitation or singing of Vande Mataram, a practice introduced by provincial Congress governments."
All right, but isn't Tagore somehow involved in this debate? How does he come into the picture? What did he say?
Subhas Chandra Bose was up in arms in defence of the song. The Congress working committee was to meet on
He wrote to Tagore on
"I do not know your opinion on this matter and that is why I write to you. In
On
"I have managed to get an English translation of Anandamath and I am reading it at present to get the background of the song. It does seem that the background is bound to irritate the Muslims ... I do not understand it without the help of a dictionary"
On
"To me the spirit of the tenderness and devotion expressed in its first portion, the emphasis it gave to beautiful and beneficient aspects of our motherland made a special appeal, so much so that I found no difficulty in dissociating it from the rest of the poem and from those portions of the book of which it is a part, with all the sentiments of which, brought up as I was in the monotheistic ideals of my father, I could have no sympathy."
Tagore goes on to point out: "The privilege of originally setting its first stanza to the tune was mine when the author was still alive and I was the first person to sing it before a gathering of the Calcutta Congress". Sabyasachi Bhattacharya sums up the rest of the letter from Tagore who, "also recalled the historical associations of the song with the nationalist movement. ... He also recalled how 'at the poignant period of our strenuous struggle for asserting the people's will against the decree of separation', i.e. the partition of
`I freely concede that the whole of Bankim's Vande Mataram poem, read together with its context, is liable to be inpterpreted in ways that might wound Moslem susceptibilities, but a national song, though derived from it, which has spontaneously come to consist only of the first two stanzas of the original poem, need not remind us every time of the whole of it, much less of the story with which it was accidentally associated. It has acquired a separate individuality and an inspiring significance of its own in which I see nothing to offend any sect or community.'"
Letter #314, written to Subhas Chandra Bose in the Selected Letters of Rabindranath Tagore, edited by K. Datta and A. Robinson, Cambridge University Press, provides a more elaborate explanation:
"The core of Vande Mataram is a hymn to goddess Durga: this is so plain that there can be no debate about it. Of course Bankim does show Durga to be inseparably united with
The novel Anandamath is a work of literature, and so the song is appropriate in it. But Parliament is a place of union for all religious groups, and there the song can not be appropriate. When Bengali Mussulmans show signs of stubborn fanaticism, we regard these as intolerable. When we too copy them and make unreasonable demands, it will be self-defeating."
That is not all. He even adds a thoughtful postscript which remains relevant even today:
"Bengali Hindus have become agitated over this matter, but it does not concern only Hindus. Since there are strong feelings on both sides, a balanced judgement is essential. In pursuit of our political aims we want peace, unity and good will - we do not want the endless tug of war that comes from supporting the demands of one faction over the other."
So what did the Congress decide to do back then?
Well, the answers are provided in the Congress Working Committee [CWC] statement of 1937 where the CWC went to considerable pains to dissociate and decontextualise the song from Anandamatha:
"This song appears in Bankim Chandra Chatterji's novel Anandamatha but it has been pointed out in his biography, that the song was written independently of, and long before, the novel, and was subsequently incorporated in it. The song should thus be considered apart from the book."
That was not all. The Committee also recognised "the validity of the objection raised by Muslim friends to certain parts of the song". Having "taken note of such objection insofar as it has intrinsic value, the Committee wish to point out that the modern evolution of the use of the song as part of national life is of infinitely greater importance than its setting in a historical novel before the national movement had taken shape."
The statement goes on then to make a case for using the "first two stanzas" as suggested by Tagore and rationalised as follows:
"the rest of the song was very seldom used and is even now known by few persons. These two stanzas described in tender language the beauty of motherland and the abundance of her gifts. There was absolutely nothing in them to which objection could be from the religious or any other point of view. The song was never sung as challenge to any group or community in
So was the Congress decision acceptable to all?
Let us go back to Sabyasachi Bhattacharya again to provide a useful summary for the period 1937-47: "Jinnah wrote to Nehru in March 1938 that the decision was not to his satisfaction but the Congress stuck to it; in any event, there was a proviso that any one who wished not to participate was free to do so. From then on the song was a dividing line between those who doubted the wisdom of this compromise (C. Rajgopalachari) and those, led by Nehru, who were opposed to making the song obligatory. In1939 some provincial governments — like
But what about M.K. Gandhi?
As was usual, Gandhi's response to the song changed and evolved with the times:
On
"The song, it is said, has proved so popular that it has come to be our National Anthem... Just as we worship our mother, so is this song a passionate prayer to
On
"You have sung that beautiful song, on hearing which all of us sprang to our feet. The poet has lavished all the adjectives we possibly could to describe Mother India ... it is for you and me to make good the claim that the poet has advanced on behalf of his Motherland."
In January 1939, after the continuing criticism of the stance adopted by Congress in its 1937 CWC statement, Gandhi placed before the CWC at its meeting in Wardha, a draft statement which was marked 'Strictly Confidential. Not for publication':
"As for the singing of the long established national song, Vande Mataram, the Congress, anticipating objections, has retained as national song only those stanzas to which no possible objection could be taken on religious or other grounds. But except at purely Congress gatherings it should be left open to individuals whether they will stand up when the stanzas are sung. In the present state of things, in local Board and Assembly meetings which thier members [are] obliged to attend, the singing of Vande Mataram should be discontinued."
On
"It never occurred to me that it was a Hindu song or meant only for Hindus. Unfortunately, now we have fallen on evil days. All that was pure gold has become bsae metal today. In such times, it is wisdom not to market pure gold and let it be sold as base metal. I would not risk a single quarrel over singing Vande Mataram at a mixed gathering. It will never suffer from disuse. It is enthroned in the hearts of millions."
On
Something which was obviously not liked by Nathuram Godse who cited Gandhi's objections to ban on cow-slaughter and a mandatory singing of Vande Mataram as one of the reasons for his act:
"It is notorious that some Muslims disliked the celebrated song of Vande Mataram and the Mahatma forthwith stopped its singing or recital wherever he could... It continued to be sung at all Congress and other national gatherings but as soon as one Muslim objected to it, Gandhiji utterly disregarded the national sentiment behind it and persuaded the Congress also not to insist upon the singing as the national song. We are now asked to adopt Rabindranath Tagore's Jana Gana Mana as a substitute of Vande Mataram. Could anything be more demoralising or pitiful...?"
All of this might provide a sighful sense of deja-vu to all those who still come across such sentiments every now and then, as web-campaigns in particular.
So what is the constitutional status of the song?
For this, it is useful to visit the debates in the Constituent Assembly. Well aware of the strong emotions it aroused in all sections, Nehru perhaps figured that a middle path might work best by emphasising on the tune and accordingly he made a statement to the Legislative committee of the Constituent Assembly on
"The question of having a national anthem tune, to be played by orchestras and bands became an urgent one for us immediately after
''It is unfortunate that some kind of argument has arisen as between Vande Mataram and Jana Gana Mana. Vande Mataram is obviously and indisputably the premier national song of
"The question has to be considered by the Constituent Assembly, and it is open to that Assembly to decide as it chooses. It may decide on a completely new song or tune, if such is available."
The final word on this before the Constitution came into the picture is Rajendra Prasad's on
"Mr. President: There is one matter which has been pending for discussion, namely the question of the National Anthem. At one time it was thought that the matter might be brought up before the House and a decision taken by the House by way of a resolution. But it has been felt that, instead of taking a formal decision by means of a resolution, it is better if I make a statement with regard to the National Anthem. Accordingly I make this statement.
"The composition consisting of the words and music known as Jana Gana Mana is the National Anthem of India, subject to such alterations in the words as the Government may authorise as occasion arises; and the song Vande Mataram, which has played a historic part in the struggle for Indian freedom, shall be honoured equally with Jana Gana Mana and shall have equal status with it. (Applause). I hope this will satisfy the Members."
Significantly, as Sabyasachi Bhattacharya points out, and is apparent from Rajendra Prasad's quote, "unlike other parts of the Constitution, it was never debated upon in the Constituent Assembly. But the matter continues to be debated until today. This is not unexpected, given the eventful history of this song. Judging by various erroneous statements which are now being made, it is vitally important to bear in mind what happened in the past. That is because the memories of the past, rightly or wrongly, constitute our present."
Indeed. Even more significant is that while the CWC had put its stamp of approval on the first two stanzas, Rajendra Prasad's statement is absolutely silent on the issue of stanzas.
But even if we remove the historical baggage accompanying the song, even if there weren't any religious or other ideological imagery associated with it, there is the simple matter of what common sense dictates. The 1998 case in UP is a good example, when even Atal Behari Vajpayee is supposed to have been upset at the wedge issue being raked up. Apart from common-sense, the experience of any forcible imposition has been well-observed in the language controversy -- take, for example, the case of what happened in
Why do you think it all happened? How should we protest?
The BJP going berserk on its divisive and disruptive agenda is nothing new, but how and why did the HRD minister ignore all the historical controversies surrounding the song? Surely he ought to remember the reinvention of the song by AR Rahman in recent times without any state diktat, if not what Gandhi and Nehru said about it? Or is there a simpler explanation? Perhaps he just wished to provide the students protesting against his reservation policy with a more palatable slogan than the not so nice ones they have been using against him? What would he come up with next? A similar ceremonial diktat for Saare Jahaan Se Achha? (And once again have BJP get all apoplectic, with its collective knickers in a twist about the song written by the 'advocate of
The BJP states — and leaders — are as usual in various states of confusion. Some have pointed out that madrasas, being private institutions, are not covered in the purview of the state administration for such diktats to be enforced. What those BJP state governments which have rushed forward breathlessly to exclaim that they would make the singing of it mandatory would do in cases of non-compliance remains to be seen, but the mind boggles at the unmusical possibilities. Would it be the teachers' responsibility or would the poor students be penalised? What would be the punishment? Would there be close-circuit televisions to monitor every citizen? What if the audio were to fail? Even if not, would they hire lip-readers to ascertain that the more mischievous lot were not muttering not-so-nice imprecations? Would it be possible to just download a ringtone instead? More importantly, do all the BJP members know the words of the song? Can they all sing in key? Should there not be compulsory riaz -- sorry, abhyaas -- at Shakhas? And as for the "leaders and saviours" of the Muslims, the less said the better. But it still leaves open the question of those who for whatever reason — and not just for those excellent reasons articulated by Tagore and Gandhi — do not wish to be compelled to sing the song? Is that going to be a litmus test for one's patriotism?
I know what many would be doing if there were no threat of violence. They'd hire the biggest Cacophonix available, make the most off-key recording possible, amplify it at a crazy decibel and make it mandatory for all followers to play it non-stop in front of all BJP offices and all residences of BJP members. It would be purely voluntary for all to do so in front of Shri Arjun Singh's house and office. Same goes for the likes of Shahi Imam, Shri Mulayam Singh and the rest of them. What could be a more fitting tribute to such a revolutionary song than to appropriate it back to protest against the ruling class? But then, after the recent incident in
There seems to be a clear consensus among the non-BJP sections of society that anybody who willingly wishes to sing the song is more than welcome to sing it joyously, however off-key. Why, even the Shahi Imam seems to indicate as much.
But for those—and it does not apply only to Muslims— who don't wish to be dictated to by people of, to put it mildly, dubious credibility, surely there should be some relief available so that they do not have to put up with such whimsicality that the HRD minister seems to make a fetish of displaying or the nonsense that BJP is going around publishing on the covers of its various mouthpieces? What precisely is the implication of agar hindustan mein rahna hogaa to vande matram kahnaa hoga? Will Shri Rajnath Singh or some other worthy of the party kindly explain? Will the Election Commission or the Supreme Court please step in?
And yet another simple question: how would we have reacted if Shri MM Joshi had been the HRD minister who had issued such a letter and later "clarified" under pressure from, say, Atal Behari Vajpayee? In the end, it is just about dealing with bullies who seem to hold the country to ransom on the threat of violence.
Having said all of this, now I know what I wish to do: Thankfully, it's just a click away
(But that is because I am not in any school and, besides, most schools I know of, had anyway happily known when to make the children sing it without any official diktat for it to be sung on an arbitrarily chosen day.)
1. All quotes from Sumit Sarkar are from his article "Much Ado About A Song" in the Times of India of
2. All quotes from Sabyasachi Bhattacharya are from his book Vande Mataram, the Biography of a Song, which is the primary source of this FAQ, and his article, "Five lives of Vande Mataram" in the Indian Express of
3. If you would rather play the Lata/Hemant version from Anandamath, please click here or just earch for your favourite version.
Vande Mataram by Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay
Sujalaam, suphalaam, malayaja shiitalaam,
Shasya-shyamalaam, maataram
Shubhra-jyotsnaa-pulakita-yaminiim,
Phulla-kusumita drumadala-shobhiniim,
Suhasiniim sumadhura-bhashiniim,
Sukhadaam varadaam, maataram
Saptakoti-kantha-kalakala-ninaada-karaale
Dwisaptakoti bhujairdhrtua-kharakaravaale
Ke bale maa tumi abale! (Abalaa kena maa eta bale!) [1]
Bahubala-dhariniim namaami tariniim
Ripdala-variniim maataram.
Tumi vidyaa tumi dharma
Tumi hridi tumi marma
Twam hi praanah shariire
Bahute tumi maa shakti
Hridaye tumi maa bhakti
Tomaari pratimaa gadi
Mandire mandire
Twam hi durgaa dashapraharana-dhaarinII
Kamalaa kamala-dala-vihaarinii
Vaanii vidyaadaayinii
Namaamii twaam
Namaami kamalaam amalaam atulaam
Sujalaam suphalaam maataram
Bande Mataram.
Shyamalaam saralaam susmitaam bhuushitaam
Dharaniim bharaniim maataram
***
Here is the translation of the above stanzas by Aurobindo Ghose in Karmayogin, 20 November, 1909:
I bow to thee, Mother,
richly-watered, richly-fruited,
cool with the winds of the south,
dark with the crops of the harvests,
the Mother!
Her nights rejoicing in the glory of the moonlight,
her lands clothed beautifully with her trees in flowering bloom,
sweet of laughter, sweet of speech,
The Mother, giver of boons, giver of blissI
Terrible with the clamorous shouts of seventy million throats,
and the sharpness of swords raised in twice seventy million hands,
who sayeth to thee, Mother, that thou are weak?
Holder of multitudinous strength,
I bow to her who saves,
to her who drives from her the armies of her foremen,
the Mother!
Thou art knowledge, thou art conduct,
thou art heart, thou art soul,
for thou art the life in our body.
In the arm, thou art might, O Mother,
in the heart, O Mother, thou art love and faith,
it is thy image we raise in every temple.
For thou art Durga holding her ten weapons of war,
Kamala at play in the lotuses
And speech, the goddess, giver of all lore,
to thee I bow!
I bow to thee, goddess of wealth
pure and peerless,
richly-watered, richly-fruited,
the Mother!
I bow to thee, Mother,
dark-hued, candid,
sweetly smiling, jewelled and adorned,
the holder of wealth, the lady of plenty,
the Mother!
-----
Notes:
1. This is the revised version in the fifth edition of Anandamath. Aurobindo followed the Bangadarshan text [the literary journal edited by Bankim in which Anandamath was first serialised].
2. Text taken from Sabyasachi Bhattacharya's Vande Mataram: The Biography of a Song. The stanzas written prior to Anandamath are given in bold. and this is what was approved by the CWC. There is some confusion in various writings on the numbering of stanzas and what the CWC had approved in 1937. This can be verified by reference to all government of India websites, where only the text of the first stanza is given, for example, please see the pages on India Image linked from the PMO which provides an India factfile.
3.. There have been demands by some that the song should be translated in Urdu so that many Muslims can find out for themselves whether they find it objectionable or not.Following effort at a transcreation (not a literal translation) by Arif Mohammad Khan has done the rounds:
Tasleemat, maan tasleemat
tu bhari hai meethe pani se
phal phoolon ki shadabi se
dakkin ki thandi hawaon se
faslon ki suhani fizaaon se
tasleemat, maan tasleemat
teri raaten roshan chand se
teri raunaq sabze faam se
teri pyar bhari muskan hai
teri meethi bahut zuban hai
teri banhon mein meri rahat hai
tere qadmon mein meri jannat hai
tasleemat, maan tasleemat
