to be or not to be ھو یا نہ ھو
Should it happen or should it not.

"to be, or not to be" comes from William Shakespeare's Hamlet,and considered by some people to be among the most famous quotations in world literature۔

(Sorry, I'm using someone else's computer so can't provide Urdu font.)

I think translating this phrase literally takes away from its meaning. Two options have come to mind. Perhaps someone can come up with a better version that may not be literal but would convey the essence of the phrase in a better way.

The placement of this phrase with the image of the child seems odd. The only thing that comes to mind is that it may be a commentary on the hopelessness of the present age--a commentary on the legacy of poverty and corruption being left for children. For those suffering from hunger and poverty in many parts of the world, this phrase may be an every day reality.

In my view this could also be a translation of thought. Only second part i.e. نہ ہوتا میں تو کیا ہوتا can also be used.

رہیں یا نہ رہیں/بچیں یا نہ بچیں/جیئں یا نہ جیئں/بنیں یا نہ بنیں
can also be replaced by suitable varients like:
رہیں نا رہیں ہم /بچیں نہ بچیںہم /جیئں نہ جیئں ہم /بنیں نہ بنیں ہم

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 6 days (2008-07-11 10:07:45 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

My wise peers are committing a mistake. "To be or not to be" isn't to be associated with the context with which Shakespeare used it. That will rob language and words and expressions of any further use except the one in which a famous person did it first time. Similarly, Ghalib's context in the expression "Na Hoota Main to Kya Hoota?" isn't to be understood as the only meaning in which the expression was brought into being by Ghalib. Everybody has his freedom to use any expression in new contexts, with new messages and meanings. "To be or not to be" in a painting is just a fresh expression, with fresh meaning. Shakespeare has nothing to do with it, though Shakespeare also used it in whatever he meant it for.

My dear learned friends and asker, let me just paraphrase the background of this all-time-famous phrase and then we can look at it from the context of the given image of a child;
This favourite of mine has been taken from Shakespeare's play 'Hamlet', 1603 (Shakespeare's actual title is - The tragedie of Hamlet, prince of Denmarke):
It's about one's existence...well at least it's how we were taught so in English Lit. any how,
The speech is a subtle and profound examining of what is more crudely expressed in the phrase out of the frying pan into the fire. - in essence 'life is bad, but death might be worse'.
So when you have a small child with his/her hand under his/her chin, I think 'death' should not shadow any of the above context, quite contrary to that, this is more of a child's mature thinking, on life and his/her existence and the reasons and objectives of life itself. (I think that's quite sweet actually)

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 6 days (2008-07-11 13:49:40 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

I'm feeling really sorry for the asker here, because all they want to know is not purely the meaning, but : ''This is the pharase written under a picture of an infant....'' so i think it would be a helpful thing if we all tried to revise our responses but this time, putting them in the above context.... so my friends................THAT is the question!