The inadequacies and obsolescence of Eurocentric theories based on a binaryand static worldview have become a staple topic of postcolonial studies, and tosome extent also of translation studies. Nonetheless, the literary texts that arecalled upon in order to show the dynamism and hybridity of (post)modern worksbelong for the most part to the languages of the former colonial powers, especiallyEnglish, and remain inserted in a system that construes literatures interms of opposition. As a consequence, there is outside India a doubly misleadingunderstanding of Indian literatures other than those written in English:firstly, that translations of works in Hindi and in the Indian bhāṣā seem to belacking, if not inexistent, and secondly, that these "minor" literatures - as theyare regularly termed - are still often viewed as being highly dependent on theidea of "tradition," in opposition to the "postmodern" hybridity of the literatureswritten in the "dominant" languages, such as English or French. Againstthese views and supported by the analysis of Ajñeya's works in Hindi togetherwith their English translations, this paper aims to show: 1) that translationsfrom Hindi, which are not in fact non-existent, are mainly carried out in India,and 2) that Ajñeya's works, while representing a significant instance of the effectivehybridity present in Indian literatures, help to illustrate the moving spaceof translation. This demonstration effectively invalidates the above-mentionedoppositional standpoint.