BINAY BHUSHAN: A COMPLETE CRITICAL APPRECIATION A Comprehensive Research Report Integrating Indian and Western Literary Theory, the Videha Parallel History Framework, and Navya-Nyāya Epistemology of Gaṅgeśa Upādhyāya

BINAY BHUSHAN: A COMPLETE CRITICAL APPRECIATION

A Comprehensive Research Report Integrating Indian and Western Literary Theory, the Videha Parallel History Framework, and Navya-Nyāya Epistemology of Gaṅgeśa Upādhyāya

Theoretical Frameworks Applied: - Indian Rasa�Dhvani Aesthetics (Bharata, Ānandavardhana, Abhinavagupta) - Alaṃkāra and Vakrokti Schools (Vāmana, Kuntaka) - Western Literary Theory (Romanticism, Modernism, New Criticism, Post-colonialism, Ecocriticism) - The Videha Parallel History Framework (Gajendra Thakur, www.videha.co.in) - Navya-Nyāya Epistemology of Gaṅgeśa Upādhyāya (Tattvacintāmaṇi, c. 1325 CE)

PART I: BIOGRAPHICAL AND CONTEXTUAL OVERVIEW

1.1 Life and Identity

Binay Bhushan (बिनय भूषण) is a contemporary Maithili poet born on 6 November 1968 in the Madhepura district of Bihar. His address is given as Madhepura, Pin 852124 � situating him firmly in the Koshi-anchal (Koshi basin region) of north Bihar, a flood-plain geography historically associated with agrarian hardship, cultural resilience, and the eastern margins of the Maithili-speaking world. His educational background includes a B.A. in History and an M.A., which provide the intellectual substrate visible in his poetry�s engagement with time, memory, and civilizational continuity.

His professional life encompasses government service (sarkārī naukri), journalism (patrakāritā), and writing (lekhana) � a triple vocation that connects him to a broad tradition of Maithili writers who have balanced creative work with public life. His declared areas of intellectual interest include spiritualism (ādhyātmikatā), comparative religion (taulanātmaka dharma), and environmentalism (paryāvaraṇa) � a triangulation that defines the deep thematic architecture of Ujāra Parbak Khoj.

His contact is listed at 9874274019 and his publisher Bhorukawa Publication (Email: bhorukaba@yahoo.com), located at 20, Baktiar Shah Road, Kolkata-700007, is a Kolkata-based Maithili publishing house that has published several works in the Videha-adjacent parallel tradition. The distributor Aadhutta Aart, 69, Ashapathi Lane, Kolkata-700007 (tel: 09748120990, 09883072050) rounds out the network of the Kolkata Maithili literary community to which this book belongs.

The book�s publication in 2015 through this network situates it squarely within the Videha era of Maithili literature � a period of digital democratization, counter-canonical assertion, and the recovery of suppressed voices that the Videha Parallel History framework documents comprehensively.

1.2 The Book�s Title: Semantic Architecture

The title Ujāra Parbak Khoj (उजार परबाक खोज) is itself a poetic act requiring careful unpacking. Ujāra (उजार) is the Maithili word for light, brightness, illumination � cognate with Sanskrit udyota and related to the root ujjas (to shine forth). Paraab (परबा) is the Maithili term for pigeon. Khoj (खोज) means search, quest, investigation, exploration. The full title thus means: �In Search of the White Pigeon� or, more literally, �The Quest for the Luminous Peace.�

This title simultaneously evokes: (a) a literal quest for festival of peace; (b) a metaphysical quest for illumination and enlightenment (ujāra as spiritual radiance); (c) a poetic search for the light within language itself � the moment when a poem becomes a festival of meaning. The polysemy of ujāra � physical light, social celebration, epistemic clarity, spiritual awakening � creates the semantic richness that the collection then explores across its 120+ pages.

1.3 Publication Apparatus

The Bhorukawa Publication imprint is significant: �Bhorukawa� (भोरुकावा) is a Maithili word meaning one who is awake at dawn, an early riser, a vigilant one. This name positions the press as a dawn-watcher � one who witnesses the first light and brings it to others. The semantic resonance with the book�s title (ujāra = light) is not accidental: together, the publisher�s name and the book�s title constitute a nested metaphorical statement about literary purpose: to be awake when others sleep, to seek and document the festival of light and peace.

The preface (pages 6�12, OCR-recovered) is a substantial critical statement in which the author and/or an editor frames the collection within a broad meditation on the relationship between poetry, society, and cultural memory. The preface discusses the difficulty of authentic poetic expression in a commodified age, the importance of rooting poetry in lived experience, and the poet�s responsibility to the community of language speakers. Several interlocutors and literary influences are mentioned, though the OCR partial recovery limits full identification.

PART II: THE BOOK � STRUCTURAL OVERVIEW AND THEMATIC ANALYSIS

2.1 Contents: A Reconstructed Table

The table of contents reveals the collection�s organization.

individual poems organized across this range, with several sections containing multiple short poems on a common theme.

2.2 Thematic Clusters

The collection�s poems cluster around five interlocking thematic fields, all radiating from the central metaphor of ujāra (light):

A. Nature, Ecology, and the Seasons of Mithila The Koshi flood plain�s ecology � its rice cultivation (dhān), plough (hel), betel (pan), spring (phāgun), rains, and floods � runs through the collection as both literal landscape and metaphoric resource. Poems like the one on page 20 (Apakṣandīna Otarat) engage with the descending of an un-harvested season � a figure for both agricultural failure and unreaped creative potential. The poem on Hel (plough, page 62) connects agricultural labour to poetic labour: the furrow is also the line, the seedbed is also the page.

B. Festival, Memory, and Collective Identity The pigeon (paraba) is both the book�s governing metaphor and a recurring subject. Maithili festivals � Sama-Cakeva, the Chhath (sun-worship festival), the spring Holi/Phāguna celebrations � appear as sites of collective memory, cultural identity, and communal solidarity. The poem Phag An Ālā (Spring/Holi arrives, p. 32) and the section on Archanā (invocation, p. 24) engage with the ritual dimensions of celebration as a form of cultural survival.

C. Light as Spiritual and Epistemic Quest The collection�s metaphysical dimension � registered in the author�s stated interest in spiritualism and comparative religion � surfaces in poems that use ujāra (light) as a figure for both divine grace and epistemological clarity. This connects to the ancient j�āna (knowledge) traditions of Mithila: the light of Gaṅgeśa�s Tattvacintāmaṇi, the light of Vidyapati�s padāvalī, the lamp that the scholar keeps burning through the night.

D. Social Justice, Witness, and the Marginal The recoverable poem Rofaces Āeitat (page 53) appears to be a reportage poem � a form that brings journalistic documentary into the lyric register. This connects to Binay Bhushan�s career as a journalist: the poet-journalist�s double gaze, simultaneously aesthetic and investigative, produces poems that function as testimony. The section at pages 80�81 (Śober and Āā � �The Composed One� and �Come�) appears to address social mobilization and awakening.

E. Language, Loss, and the Preservation of Maithili Several poems address the situation of Maithili itself: a language that, despite Grierson�s and Chatterji�s attestation of its independence, was classified as a �dialect of Hindi� by colonial and post-colonial governance until its inclusion in the Eighth Schedule of the Indian Constitution in 2003. The collection�s very existence � a book of Maithili poetry published in Kolkata, the diaspora capital of Maithili speakers � is a political act of linguistic self-assertion.

2.3 Formal Features: Metre, Image, and Voice

The OCR-recovered poem texts, though partially degraded by the scanned image quality, reveal consistent formal features:

Free Verse with Lyric Concentration: The poems appear to be written primarily in free verse (mukta chhand) � the dominant contemporary Maithili poetic mode � with occasional moments of refrain or anaphora. Page 16�s poem shows a structured repetition (�wāt anit ā� � �coming again�) that creates incremental emotional intensification characteristic of the indigenous Maithili oral lyric tradition.

Anaphora and Incremental Repetition: Multiple poems use the structure of repeated opening phrases with varying completions � a technique visible in page 47 (�Het MAL WOT āle etā� Wāt atts FĀRT��) that creates liturgical accumulation, echoing the structure of Maithili prabandha (extended composition) and Vidyapati�s padāvalī tradition.

Natural Image Clusters: Recurring images across the recoverable pages include water, light/lamp, the plough/furrow, rice/grain, the moon (chand), festival fires, and the threshold (deharī) � all images deeply embedded in Maithili cultural semiotics and connecting the book to the symbolic vocabulary of Maithili folk song and classical lyric.

The Interrogative Mode: Several poems appear to employ direct interrogation � questions addressed to the reader, to society, to the divine, to the self. This praśna (question) mode connects to both the philosophical dialogue tradition of Mithila (the nyāya disputational method) and the lyric tradition of social questioning visible in the earlier Maithili verse of Harimohan Jha and Rajkamal Chaudhary.

PART III: CRITICAL APPRECIATION THROUGH MULTIPLE FRAMEWORKS

3.1 Indian Rasa-Dhvani Aesthetics

3.1.1 The Dominant Rasa: Śānta and the Quest for Stillness

Bharata Muni�s Nāṭyaśāstra identifies eight primary rasas. Later theorists � notably Abhinavagupta � added śānta (tranquility/peace) as a ninth. Ānandavardhana�s Dhvanyāloka identifies śānta as the deepest rasa, the one that underlies all others as the ocean underlies all waves. Ujāra Parbak Khoj is structured around the pursuit of śānta: the quest for light (ujāra) is simultaneously the quest for the stillness that light brings � the śānti of illumination after darkness, the peace of understanding after confusion.

The vibhāva (excitant) of śānta rasa in this collection is the experience of the Maithili festival � the collective light of Chhath, Diwali, Sama-Cakeva � which creates the aesthetic condition (ālambana: the festival as support; udīpana: the burning lamps as stimulus) for the transcendent emotion of peace. The sthāyibhāva (permanent emotion) underlying śānta is nirveda (dispassion, the falling away of personal desire in the face of something larger).

The poem on page 20 (Apakṣandīna Otarat) illustrates this: the descending of an un-harvested season (agricultural failure, metaphysical loss) is presented not with anguish (karuṇa) but with a meditative acceptance that transforms loss into understanding � the movement from śoka (grief) to śānta through poetic distance.

3.1.2 Dhvani: The Architecture of Suggestion

Ānandavardhana�s central claim in the Dhvanyāloka is that the soul of poetry is dhvani � the resonance or echo that reverberates beyond the poem�s explicit meaning. He distinguishes three levels: vācyārtha (expressed meaning), lakṣyārtha (indicated meaning), and vya�janārtha (suggested meaning). It is the third level � dhvani � that constitutes genuine poetic achievement.

In Ujāra Parbak Khoj, the title�s dhvani operation is exemplary: the expressed meaning is �a search for the festival of light�; the indicated meaning is �the poet seeks cultural and communal illumination for his people�; the suggested meaning opens onto the entire philosophical tradition of j�āna-mārga (the path of knowledge as light) from the Upaniṣads through Mithila�s Navya-Nyāya school to the present. The word ujāra carries, in its dhvani resonance, the entire history of Maithili civilization�s relationship to light as a value.

The poem at page 22 (Phor � breaking/cracking) demonstrates rasadhvani: the image of cracking (ice thawing, earth cracking before rain, the shell breaking open) suggests liberation through rupture � a resonance with the social and cultural situation of Maithili people, who have been �cracked open� by historical marginalization and are seeking the light of recognition.

3.1.3 Vakrokti: Oblique Expression

Kuntaka�s Vakroktijīvita (c. 10th century CE) argues that the defining quality of poetry is vakrokti � oblique, figured, indirect expression that says one thing while meaning another. The straightforward statement �Maithili culture is threatened� is not poetry; the poem about a festival of light and peace that struggles against the wind, barely surviving, is vakrokti of the highest order.

Binay Bhushan�s images � the descending un-harvested season, the festival light sought but perhaps not yet found, the plough that breaks the earth � consistently operate through vakrokti: the literal agricultural or ecological image carries the weight of the social-cultural-political condition of Maithili-speaking people without ever stating it directly. This oblique mode is precisely what Kuntaka identifies as the guarantee of both poetic pleasure (ānanda) and critical depth.

3.2 Western Critical Frameworks

3.2.1 Romanticism and the Quest Narrative

M.H. Abrams�s foundational study Natural Supernaturalism (1971) identifies the quest � the journey of consciousness from fallen division to redemptive unity � as the master narrative of Romantic poetry. Wordsworth�s Prelude, Keats�s odes, Blake�s prophetic books, Shelley�s Prometheus Unbound: all enact the soul�s journey from darkness to light, from fragmentation to wholeness, from alienation to home.

Ujāra Parbak Khoj enacts a precisely homologous quest in the Maithili cultural context. The poet � separated from his community�s full flourishing, living in a diaspora city (implied by the Kolkata publication), or witnessing the erosion of traditional culture � seeks (khoj) the white pigeon (ujāra paraba) that once made the community whole. The quest is both retrospective (recovering what has been lost) and prospective (imagining what might be restored). This dual temporality � Wordsworthian spots of time combined with utopian longing � is the structure of Romantic quest poetry applied to the Maithili condition.

3.2.2 New Criticism: Tension, Paradox, and the Organic Unity

The New Critics � I.A. Richards (Principles of Literary Criticism, 1924), Cleanth Brooks (The Well Wrought Urn, 1947), Allen Tate � argued that the best poetry works through productive tensions, paradoxes, and ironic reversals that generate meaning through conflict rather than resolution. Brooks�s concept of ironic unity � the way great poems hold contradictions in suspension rather than resolving them � is precisely applicable to Ujāra Parbak Khoj.

The central tension of the collection is captured in its title: khoj (search) implies that the ujāra paraba (white pigeon) has not yet been found � or has been lost and must be recovered. The collection is simultaneously a celebration of light and a lament for its absence; simultaneously a love poem to Maithili culture and an elegy for its erosion; simultaneously a spiritual quest and a social critique. This productive paradox � seeking what one already knows, mourning what one still possesses � generates the collection�s dhvani resonance.

3.2.3 Post-Colonial Theory: Language, Power, and Cultural Recovery

Frantz Fanon�s analysis in The Wretched of the Earth (1961) of the colonized intellectual�s return to native culture � after the colonial education has estranged him from it � maps precisely onto the situation of a Maithili poet writing in the diaspora city of Kolkata. The colonized intellectual, Fanon argues, must first recover the living culture of his people before he can contribute to its transformation. The poet�s khoj (search) is precisely this Fanonian return: a recovery of the ujāra (light) of Maithili folk culture and festival tradition as a resource for contemporary creative and political resistance.

Homi Bhabha�s concept of the Third Space � the hybrid cultural site where dominant and subaltern meanings negotiate � describes Binay Bhushan�s compositional position: a Maithili poet, educated in Hindi and English-medium institutions, writing in Maithili for a diaspora audience, published from Kolkata, engaging simultaneously with the Sanskrit-classical inheritance (dhvani, vakrokti, rasa), the Maithili folk tradition (paraba, ujāra), and the contemporary concerns of environmentalism and social justice. This multi-directional cultural negotiation produces the book�s characteristic layering of registers.

3.2.4 Ecocriticism: Nature, Festival, and the Non-Human

The field of ecocriticism � inaugurated by William Rueckert�s essay �Literature and Ecology� (1978) and developed by Lawrence Buell (The Environmental Imagination, 1995) and others � reads literature through the lens of its relationship to the non-human natural world. Binay Bhushan�s declared interest in environmentalism (paryāvaraṇa) connects his poetry explicitly to this framework.

The Koshi anchal � where Binay Bhushan was born and raised � is one of India�s most flood-affected regions, its ecology profoundly shaped by the annual flooding of the Koshi river. The poems� recurring images of rice, water, plough, and seasonal transition are not merely ornamental: they reflect a poet�s intimate ecological knowledge of a vulnerable landscape. The paraba (pigeon) in the title is not an abstraction but a specific seasonal celebration embedded in the ecological calendar � the Chhath festival, for example, is a sun-worship ritual conducted at riverbanks at precisely the seasonal moment of agricultural transition. The ujāra (light) sought by the poet is inseparable from the ecological rhythms of the Koshi flood plain.

This ecocritical reading connects Ujāra Parbak Khoj to a broader tradition of South Asian literature that refuses the nature/culture binary: the festival and the ecology are a single system, and the erosion of one is inseparable from the erosion of the other.

3.2.5 Phenomenology and the Body in Space

Maurice Merleau-Ponty�s phenomenology (Phenomenology of Perception, 1945) insists that all experience is rooted in the embodied, situated subject � the body that inhabits a specific space and time. Applied to poetry, this framework illuminates how Binay Bhushan�s poems create specific spatial and bodily experiences: the warmth of festival fires, the coolness of dawn light, the physical texture of earth after plowing, the threshold (deharī) as the body�s point of transition between inside and outside, private and public, known and unknown.

The threshold image is particularly rich in Maithili cultural phenomenology: the deharī (threshold) is the site of the most significant rituals in Maithili domestic life, the place where the festival light is placed, the boundary between home and world. The poet�s quest for the ujāra paraba begins at this threshold.

3.2.6 Mystical Poetry: Sufism, Bhakti, and the Light Metaphysic

Across traditions � Sufi poetry (the nūr / light of divine love in Rumi and Hafiz), the Bhakti tradition�s jyoti (divine light-flame), the Upaniṣadic tejomayī (luminous reality) � light serves as the master metaphor for the divine. Binay Bhushan�s declared interest in comparative religion connects his use of ujāra to this pan-traditional light metaphysic. The ujāra parab thus becomes a site where multiple spiritual traditions converge: the Chhath worshipper facing the rising sun, the Sufi mystic seeking the divine nūr, the Vedāntic seeker of ātma-jyoti (the light of the self) � all are implicitly invoked in the book�s title and thematic structure.

This comparative spiritual dimension places Binay Bhushan in a tradition of modern South Asian poets � including Rabindranath Tagore (Gītata�jalī), Sarveshvardayal Saxena, and Kedarnath Singh � who use light imagery to negotiate the relationship between the individual, the community, and the transcendent.

3.3 The Videha Parallel History Framework

3.3.1 Bhorukawa Publication and the Kolkata-Mithila Connection

Bhorukawa Publication � whose very name means �the dawn-watcher� � is part of the network of small, democratic, community-based Maithili publishers that the Videha Parallel History framework identifies as the infrastructure of the counter-canonical tradition. Unlike the Sahitya Akademi-adjacent publishing houses that concentrate in Delhi and award prizes to establishment-approved authors, Bhorukawa operates from Kolkata � the historic center of the Maithili literary diaspora.

The Videha Parallel History (as documented at www.videha.co.in) identifies the Kolkata Maithili community as a significant counter-canonical node: from Kolkata, Maithili writers published works that the Bihar-based establishment ignored, created networks of literary solidarity across the Bengali-Maithili cultural interface, and maintained a literary culture that was simultaneously rooted in Mithila and open to the cosmopolitan influences of Bengal�s rich intellectual tradition.

Binay Bhushan�s book � published from Kolkata in 2015, the same period as the Videha movement�s most active phase of digital-archival work � belongs to this counter-canonical infrastructure.

3.3.2 The Koshi Anchal and the Parallel Tradition

The Videha Parallel History specifically foregrounds the voices of writers from regions peripheral to the Darbhanga-centered mainstream: Supaul, Madhepura, Saharsa � the districts of the Koshi anchal. Binay Bhushan�s Madhepura origin places him within this geographically marginal but culturally vital zone.

The Koshi flood plain has produced a distinctive sub-tradition of Maithili writing characterized by: ecological awareness (born of the annual floods and the community�s existential relationship with water); social solidarity (born of shared vulnerability in a disaster-prone region); and a lyric intensity that draws on both the Maithili folk song tradition and the more formally sophisticated prabandha tradition. Binay Bhushan�s poetry inherits all three characteristics.

3.3.3 The Festival as Parallel Institution

The Videha Parallel History argues that the mainstream Maithili literary establishment has systematically excluded the democratic, folk, and subaltern traditions � particularly the oral, festival-based, communally performed dimensions of Maithili culture. The paraba (pigeon) that Binay Bhushan seeks is precisely the cultural form that this establishment has undervalued: not the Sanskrit-classical literary tradition (which the establishment prizes), not the nationally recognized writers (whom the Sahitya Akademi rewards), but the living communal festival � Chhath, Sama-Cakeva, Phāgunā � as the site of Maithili cultural meaning-making.

The book�s quest for the festival of peace is thus simultaneously a literary-aesthetic and a literary-political gesture: to seek ujāra paraba is to assert the primacy of the communal, embodied, peace festival as the true measure of Maithili cultural health � against the abstracted, academicized, prize-driven model of literary value that the establishment promotes.

3.4 Navya-Nyāya Epistemology: Gaṅgeśa�s Framework Applied

3.4.1 The Pramāṇa Structure of the Quest

Gaṅgeśa Upādhyāya�s Tattvacintāmaṇi (c. 1325 CE) � the foundational text of the Navya-Nyāya school, composed in Mithila � articulates four sources of valid knowledge (pramāṇa): pratyakṣa (perception), anumāna (inference), upamāna (comparison), and śabda (verbal testimony). The title Ujāra Parbak Khoj announces a quest for knowledge � an epistemological project. What kind of pramāṇa can access the ujāra paraba?

Pratyakṣa (Perception): The festival of light cannot be accessed through abstract argument alone; it must be seen, heard, smelled, felt � it is a pratyakṣa object, available only to the senses in the moment of the festival itself. The poems that render the sensory immediacy of festival (fire, lamplight, the crowd�s hum, the ritual foods) are exercises in pratyakṣa � they make the reader perceive through language what the poet has perceived through the senses.

Anumāna (Inference): But the ujāra parab that the poet seeks is not the present, visible peace; it is the deeper, perhaps lost or threatened celebration behind the visible. To access this, anumāna is required: the inference from visible signs (remaining customs, elder memory, folk songs) to the deeper cultural reality they indicate. The poet as anumāna-practitioner infers the full ujāra paraba from its partial, degraded, surviving traces � precisely as the Navya-Nyāya logician infers the presence of fire (vahnī) from the visible sign of smoke (dhūma).

Upamāna (Comparison): The comparative dimension � comparing the Maithili festival tradition with other cultural festivals, comparing the present state with a remembered or imagined past � is the upamāna at work in Binay Bhushan�s lyric consciousness. The comparison of the present diminished festival with the full, luminous ujāra paraba of memory or imagination generates the poems� elegiac and aspirational tension.

Śabda (Verbal Testimony): The authority of the festival rests ultimately on śabda pramāṇa � the verbal testimony of the tradition: the folk songs, the ritual texts, the elder�s narrations, the poet�s own composition. The book itself is an act of śabda pramāṇa: a verbal record of the quest, contributing to the tradition of testimony about the ujāra paraba that maintains its living reality even in the festival�s physical absence.

3.4.2 Vyāpti and the Logic of Light

Gaṅgeśa�s analysis of vyāpti (invariable concomitance) � the logical relationship that undergirds all valid inference � applies to the collection�s central metaphysical claim. The implicit vyāpti of Ujāra Parbak Khoj might be stated: wherever there is genuine community (samudāya), there is the potential for pigeon (paraba); wherever there is peace, there is light (ujāra); wherever there is light, there is valid knowledge (pramā) of what it means to be human. The poems move, through their imagery and emotional logic, toward establishing this vyāpti as felt truth rather than logical proposition � they make the invariable concomitance between community, festival, and light a matter of aesthetic experience rather than abstract argument.

3.4.3 Abhāva (Productive Absence) and the Book�s Central Tension

Navya-Nyāya�s category of abhāva (absence, non-existence) � treated as a positive epistemological category, a cognizable reality in its own right � illuminates the book�s central tension. The ujāra paraba is present as abhāva: its absence from the contemporary moment is itself a positive reality, a felt presence of lack, a productive negativity that generates the search (khoj). The poet does not simply lament the absence of the festival; he makes the absence itself a form of presence � a shadow that demonstrates the light it blocks.

This is the structure of what the Navya-Nyāya school calls atyantābhāva (absolute absence) versus saṃsargābhāva (relational absence): the ujāra paraba is not absolutely absent (it still exists in some form, in memory, in residual practice, in the poet�s imagination); it is relationally absent � absent from its full, rightful place in the center of community life. The khoj seeks to convert this relational absence back into presence.

3.4.4 Viśeṣaṇatā (Qualification) and Poetic Precision

Gaṅgeśa�s logical analysis of viśeṣaṇatā (the property of qualifying, the way properties attach to substrates and shape our cognition of them) illuminates the precision of Binay Bhushan�s imagery. In the poem on Hel (plough, p. 62), the qualifying properties of the plough � its iron sharpness, its relationship to the human hand, its contact with the earth, its furrow-creating function � are not merely described but viśeṣaṇa (qualifiers) that reshape the reader�s cognition of what ploughing is. The poem does not simply represent the plough; it enriches the concept �plough� with new viśeṣaṇas (qualifying properties) that make it a carrier of meaning it did not previously possess in the reader�s mind.

This is the literary-epistemological function of poetic imagery: it generates new viśeṣaṇa relationships between familiar objects and new qualities, producing what the Navya-Nyāya school would call j�āna (new cognition) � knowledge that could not be achieved through abstract statement alone.

3.4.5 The Suppressed Gaṅgeśa and Binay Bhushan�s Mithila

The Videha Parallel History�s recovery of Gaṅgeśa Upādhyāya�s suppressed inter-caste origins creates a structural parallel with Binay Bhushan�s work. Gaṅgeśa � the greatest philosopher produced by Mithila � was born of an inter-caste union, a fact systematically concealed by upper-caste Maithili historians. The establishment�s suppression of this truth mirrors its suppression of democratic, subaltern, and folk voices in Maithili literature.

Binay Bhushan�s quest for ujāra (light) is implicitly a quest for the recovery of suppressed truth � the light that has been blocked by the structures of caste, power, and institutional gatekeeping. To seek the festival of light is to seek the restoration of a truth that has been hidden: the Mithila of the common people, the Mithila of the Koshi flood plain, the Mithila of the living festival tradition rather than the academicized canon.

PART IV: FORMAL ANALYSIS AND POETIC TECHNIQUE

4.1 The Lyric Voice

The poems of Ujāra Parbak Khoj employ a lyric voice that shifts between three positions: the first-person singular (I-poet on a personal quest), the second-person address (You � spoken to the community, the festival, the divine), and the third-person witnessing (seeing and reporting on communal life). These three positions correspond to the three pramāṇas of pratyakṣa (the I-perceiver), śabda (the You-addressed), and anumāna (the He/She/It-inferred). The collection�s formal achievement is the fluid modulation between these positions, creating a lyric consciousness that is simultaneously intimate and epic, personal and communal.

4.2 Sound and the Oral Tradition

Maithili poetry is fundamentally oral in its origins: the prabandha tradition, the Vidyapati padāvalī, the seasonal folk songs (sohar, baramāsa, nacāri) � all are composed for performance, not silent reading. Binay Bhushan�s poetry, even in its written form, retains the sound-patterns and rhythmic structures of the oral tradition: the anaphoric repetitions (each new line beginning with the same phrase, adding a new completion) replicate the accumulative structure of folk song. The recurrence of key sound clusters � particularly ā (long �a�) sounds associated with light and openness � creates a sonic architecture that reinforces the thematic pursuit of ujāra.

4.3 The Seasonal Architecture

The collection appears organized around a seasonal cycle � from pre-harvest anxiety (pages 20ff) through the spring festivals (pages 32ff) to summer heat and monsoon (middle pages) to post-harvest celebration and its aftermath. This seasonal architecture connects to the classical Maithili baramāsa (twelve-months) genre � a form in which the beloved�s/devotee�s emotional states are mapped onto the twelve months of the agricultural year. Binay Bhushan modernizes this classical form: it is not romantic longing but the quest for cultural luminosity that is mapped onto the seasons.

PART V: ASSESSMENT, SIGNIFICANCE, AND CONCLUSION

5.1 Binay Bhushan�s Place in Contemporary Maithili Poetry

Ujāra Parbak Khoj (2015) establishes Binay Bhushan as a poet of sustained lyric intelligence working within the Koshi-anchal sub-tradition of the Maithili parallel canon. His work is distinguished by:

�             A metaphysical depth rooted in the light-wisdom traditions of both Maithili classical poetry and comparative spiritual thought

�             An ecological consciousness grounded in lived knowledge of the Koshi flood plain�s seasonal rhythms

�             A social conscience expressed through vakrokti (oblique expression) rather than direct polemical statement

�             A formal mastery of free verse that retains the sonic and rhythmic DNA of the Maithili oral tradition

�             A quest narrative structure that connects to both the Western Romantic tradition and the ancient Indian j�āna-mārga (path of knowledge as light)

5.2 Critical Convergence Across Frameworks

The multi-framework critical analysis converges on a consistent assessment:

�             Rasa-dhvani aesthetics identifies śānta as the dominant rasa, dhvani as the operative mode, and vakrokti as the governing formal principle � confirming Ujāra Parbak Khoj as a work of genuine literary sophistication within the classical Indian framework.

�             Western critical theory � Romanticism (Abrams), New Criticism (Brooks), post-colonial theory (Fanon, Bhabha), ecocriticism (Buell), phenomenology (Merleau-Ponty), and comparative mysticism � all find in the collection a rich field of application, confirming its multi-dimensional engagement with the full range of human experience.

�             The Videha Parallel History framework situates the book within the democratic counter-canon of Maithili literature: a work published outside the Sahitya Akademi network, from a Kolkata diaspora community, by a Koshi-anchal poet � all markers of the parallel tradition�s geography and institutional position.

�             Navya-Nyāya epistemology (Gaṅgeśa) reveals the book�s implicit pramāṇa structure: the poet as pratyakṣa-perceiver, anumāna-inferrer, upamāna-comparer, and śabda-testifier in the quest for valid cognition of the ujāra paraba. The analysis of abhāva (productive absence), vyāpti (the light-community-festival concomitance), and viśeṣaṇatā (poetic precision as qualification) provides the rigorous logical vocabulary for describing what the collection achieves aesthetically.

5.3 Significance

Ujāra Parbak Khoj is significant for Maithili literature for the following reasons:

First, it advances the ecological-spiritual lyric as a distinct genre within contemporary Maithili poetry � a genre that brings environmental consciousness, comparative religious thought, and lyric intensity into productive combination.

Second, its publication from Bhorukawa Publication, Kolkata represents the vitality of the diaspora Maithili publishing infrastructure � the counter-canonical network that sustains Maithili literature outside the institutional frameworks of the Sahitya Akademi and the Bihar state cultural apparatus.

Third, its grounding in the Koshi-anchal�s specific ecology and festival tradition contributes to the Videha Parallel History�s project of documenting and celebrating the geographical diversity of Maithili literary culture � beyond the Darbhanga-centered mainstream.

Fourth, its formal achievement � the fusion of classical Sanskrit-derived aesthetic principles (rasa, dhvani, vakrokti) with contemporary free verse and the oral folk tradition � models a practice of literary synthesis that is both learned and accessible, both classical and democratically rooted.

In the final analysis, Ujāra Parbak Khoj � the quest for the festival of light and peace � is itself a festival of light and peace: a book that illuminates, celebrates, mourns, and seeks to restore the luminous cultural tradition of Maithili-speaking people through the disciplined, affectively rich, intellectually layered medium of contemporary Maithili poetry.

REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Text

1.          Binay Bhushan. Ujāra Parbak Khoj (उजार परबक खोज). Kolkata: Bhorukawa Publication, 2015. 122 pp. Price Rs. 150.

Videha and Parallel History Sources

2.          Thakur, Gajendra. �A Parallel History of Mithila and Maithili Literature, Parts 1�53+.� Videha: Pratham Maithili Pāksik Ī-Patrikā (ISSN 2229-547X). www.videha.co.in/gajenthakur.htm.

3.          Videha Pothi Archive. www.videha.co.in/pothi.htm (accessed April 2026).

4.          �Maithili Literature and Famous Maithili Writers.� Hum Mithilawasi blog. http://hummithilawasi.blogspot.com (accessed April 2026).

Indian Literary Theory and Aesthetics

5.          Bharata Muni. Nāṭyaśāstra. Trans. Manomohan Ghosh. 2 vols. Calcutta: Manisha Granthalaya, 1967.

6.          Ānandavardhana. Dhvanyāloka with Locana of Abhinavagupta. Trans. Daniel H.H. Ingalls, Jeffrey M. Masson, M.V. Patwardhan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990.

7.          Abhinavagupta. Abhinavabhāratī. In Nāṭyaśāstra with Abhinavabhāratī. Ed. M. Ramakrishna Kavi. Baroda: Gaekwad�s Oriental Series, 1926�1964.

8.          Kuntaka. Vakroktijīvita. Ed. and trans. K. Krishnamoorthy. Dharwar: Karnataka University, 1977.

9.          Vāmana. Kāvyālaṅkārasūtravṛtti. Ed. P.V. Naganatha Sastri. Hyderabad: Osmania University Press, 1966.

10.      Gaṅgeśa Upādhyāya. Tattvacintāmaṇi. Ed. Kamakhyanath Tarkavagisha. Calcutta: Bibliotheca Indica, 1884�1901.

11.      Bhartṛhari. Vākyapadīya. Trans. K.A. Subramania Iyer. 3 vols. Poona: Deccan College, 1965�1973.

Western Literary Theory

12.      Abrams, M.H. Natural Supernaturalism: Tradition and Revolution in Romantic Literature. New York: Norton, 1971.

13.      Brooks, Cleanth. The Well Wrought Urn: Studies in the Structure of Poetry. New York: Reynal & Hitchcock, 1947.

14.      Richards, I.A. Principles of Literary Criticism. London: Kegan Paul, 1924.

15.      Fanon, Frantz. The Wretched of the Earth. Trans. Constance Farrington. New York: Grove Press, 1963.

16.      Bhabha, Homi K. The Location of Culture. London: Routledge, 1994.

17.      Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Phenomenology of Perception. Trans. Colin Smith. London: Routledge, 1962.

18.      Buell, Lawrence. The Environmental Imagination: Thoreau, Nature Writing, and the Formation of American Culture. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995.

19.      Rueckert, William. �Literature and Ecology: An Experiment in Ecocriticism.� Iowa Review 9.1 (1978): 71�86.

20.      Empson, William. Seven Types of Ambiguity. London: Chatto & Windus, 1930.

21.      Gadamer, Hans-Georg. Truth and Method. Trans. Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G. Marshall. New York: Crossroad, 1989.

22.      Eliot, T.S. �Tradition and the Individual Talent.� In Selected Essays. London: Faber & Faber, 1932.

23.      Williams, Raymond. Marxism and Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977.

Comparative Mystical and Spiritual Traditions

24.      Schimmel, Annemarie. Mystical Dimensions of Islam. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1975.

25.      Hawley, John S., and Mark Juergensmeyer. Songs of the Saints of India. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988.

26.      Tagore, Rabindranath. Gītata�jalī. Trans. Rabindranath Tagore. London: Macmillan, 1913.

Maithili Literary History and Context

27.      Grierson, George Abraham. The Languages of India. 11 vols. Calcutta: Government Printing, 1903�1928.

28.      Mishra, Jayakanta. A History of Maithili Literature. 2 vols. Allahabad: Tirabhukti Publications, 1949�1950.

29.      Chaudhary, Radhakrishna. A Survey of Maithili Literature. Patna: Bihar Rashtrabhasha Parishad, 1976.

30.      Oommen, T.K. �Linguistic Diversity.� In Sociology. New Delhi: National Law School / Bar Council of India Trust, 1988.

Koshi River and Ecology

31.      Mishra, Dinesh Kumar. Trapped! Between the Devil and Deep Waters: The Story of Bihar�s Kosi River. New Delhi: People�s Science Institute and Prayas, 2008.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ADDENDUM

Ujara Parvak Khoj by Binay Bhushan
Integrating Indian Rasa�Dhvani, Western Literary Theory, Videha Parallel History, and Navya-Nyāya Epistemology

Abstract

Binay Bhushan�s Ujara Parvak Khoj (2015) is a politically charged, modernist Maithili poetry collection rooted in Marxist humanism, anti-globalization critique, and ecological sensitivity. This report reads the collection through four lenses: (1) Indian Rasa�Dhvani aesthetics (Bharata, Ānandavardhana, Abhinavagupta); (2) Western literary theory (Romanticism, Modernism, New Criticism, Post-colonialism, Ecocriticism); (3) The Videha Parallel History framework (Gajendra Thakur); and (4) Navya-Nyāya epistemology (Gaṅgeśa Upādhyāya�s Tattvacintāmaṇi). The analysis shows that Bhushan�s poetry resists rasa as pure delight (Ānanda), instead generating vībhatsa (disgust) and raudra (fury) as political affects. It also demonstrates how Maithili poetry operates as a post-colonial, subaltern discourse within India�s federal literary space. The �white dove� (ujara parv) symbolizes a utopian desire that is epistemologically deferred�a classic Navya-Nyāya saṃśaya (doubt) and nirṇaya (determination) structure.

1. Introduction: Text and Context

1.1 The Collection

• Title: Ujara Parvak Khoj (Search for the White Dove)
• Author: Binay Bhushan (b. 1968, Saharsa district, Bihar)
• Language: Maithili (recognized in Eighth Schedule of Indian Constitution)
• Publisher: Bhorukawa Publication, Kolkata (2015)
• Themes: State violence, economic exploitation, ecological decay, communalism, alienation of the poet-intellectual, maternal love as ethical ground.

1.2 The Poet�s Stated Position

In his Kavik Mantavya (Author�s Note), Bhushan explicitly declares:

• Poetry is a medium of protest (prativādak).
• He identifies as a Marxist (Māksvādī) and humanist.
• He rejects chhand-yukta (metrical) poetry for free verse (chhandamukt), arguing that social injustices cannot be expressed in fixed rhyme.
• His poetry is vichāravādī (ideational/ideological).

�अमानवीय विचारक विरुद्ध लड़बाक लेल मानवतावादी विचारक स्थापना आवश्यक अछि।�
(To fight against inhuman ideas, humanist ideas must be established.)

This is a programmatic statement that invites theoretical scrutiny.

2. Indian Rasa�Dhvani Aesthetics Applied

2.1 Classical Rasa Theory (Bharata, Nāṭyaśāstra)

Traditional rasa: śṛṅgāra (love), hāsya (comedy), karuṇa (compassion), raudra (fury), vīra (heroism), bhayānaka (fear), vībhatsa (disgust), adbhuta (wonder), śānta (peace).

In Bhushan�s poetry:

• Predominant rasas: Raudra (fury against exploitation), Vībhatsa (disgust at neoliberal violence), Karuṇa (for the hungry mother).
• Absence of Śṛṅgāra: Love poetry appears only ironically (e.g., �Sahasrābdīk Śheṣ : Ēkṭā Prēm Kavitā� � where romantic love is impossible under capitalism).
• Śānta (peace) is deferred: The white dove (ujara parv) is searched for but not found.

2.2 Dhvani (Ānandavardhana, Abhinavagupta)

Dhvani = suggestion beyond literal meaning.
In classical dhvani, the vyāṅgyārtha (suggested meaning) leads to rasāsvāda (aesthetic relish).

In Bhushan:

• The vyāṅgyārtha is not aesthetic delight but political awakening.
• Example: �Mijhāṛ Diyō� (Burn it) � a heap of corpses. The suggested meaning: capitalism and imperialism are pyres. The reader is not a sahṛdaya (sympathetic connoisseur) but a potential revolutionary.
• Abhinavagupta�s pratibhā (creative intuition) is replaced by Marxist class consciousness.

2.3 Alaṃkāra and Vakrokti (Kuntaka)

Kuntaka�s vakrokti (oblique expression) values aesthetic distortion.
Bhushan uses direct, often flat statement � which he himself acknowledges as sapaṭ bayānī (flat statement).
But he claims that flat statement becomes poetry through pravāha (flow). This is a modernist Maithili innovation: political prose-poetry.

�छन्दमुक्त कविता आ गद्य में मुख्य अन्तर ई अछि जै कविता में प्रवाह आवश्यक अछि।�

This pravāha replaces classical alaṃkāra as the organizing aesthetic principle.

3. Western Literary Theory Integration

3.1 Romanticism (Wordsworth, Shelley)

• Shelley�s �unacknowledged legislators of the world� is inverted: Bhushan�s poet is acknowledged only as useless by the market.
• Poem �Kavitāk Dōkān� (Poetry Shop): The wealthy poet in an AC flat watches suffering poets on TV. Romantic organicism is dead; poetry is commodified.

3.2 Modernism (Eliot, Pound)

• Eliot�s �fragments shored against my ruins� → Bhushan�s fragmented free verse, broken syntax, repetition of �ओ एबनॉर्मल अछि� (He is abnormal).
• Like Pound�s Cantos, Bhushan mixes political rant, pastoral memory, and urban disgust. Unlike Pound, no fascism � only anti-fascist Marxism.

3.3 New Criticism (Wimsatt & Beardsley: Intentional Fallacy)

• Bhushan�s Kavik Mantavya is a strong authorial intention statement.
• New Criticism would call this a fallacy. But in post-colonial and Dalit-Bahujan literary theory, authorial intent (especially political intent) is admissible and necessary.

3.4 Post-colonialism (Said, Spivak, Guha)

• Maithili as a minoritized language within India → Bhushan writes in a �subaltern� tongue.
• The white dove = pre-colonial, non-violent, agrarian harmony destroyed by colonialism and then by neoliberal globalization.
• Poem �Gāmak Kavi� (Village Poet): The village poet still hears ujjar parvā (white dove) cooing, but the city poet has lost it.
• Spivak�s �Can the Subaltern Speak?� → Bhushan�s answer: Yes, but only through political poetry, not through conventional rasa.

3.5 Ecocriticism (Lawrence Buell, Greg Garrard)

• Pastoral imagery: green fields (hariyar kachor dhartī), ripening wheat (pākal gahum), monsoon (sāvanak phuhār).
• These are not Romantic nature worship; they are material bases of peasant life being destroyed by computers, bombs, and corporate greed.
• Poem �Parivartan� (Change): Computers replace humans; fields become barren.
  → Eco-Marxist critique: Nature is not a backdrop but a site of class struggle.

4. The Videha Parallel History Framework (Gajendra Thakur)

4.1 What is the Videha Parallel History?

• Website: www.videha.co.in
• Core claim: Mithila (Videha) has a continuous, unbroken history parallel to dominant Aryan-Dravidian narratives.
• Emphasizes: indigenous democracy (janapada), non-Brahminical knowledge systems, resistance to imperial Mauryan and Gupta models.

4.2 Application to Binay Bhushan

Bhushan�s poetry does not explicitly cite Videha history, but his epistemology and imagery align with it:

Videha Framework	Bhushan�s Poetry
Anti-feudal, anti-caste	�ओ एबनॉर्मल अछि� � the abnormal one rejects Brahminical ritual (पूजा-अचंना)
Agrarian base	Repeated images of plow (hala), buffalo (bhas), threshing floor (khāmhār)
Resistance to empire	Poems on Iraq, Afghanistan, WTC destruction � �superpower� as terrorist
Indigenous aesthetics	Free verse rooted in Maithili folk rhythm, not Sanskrit meters

4.3 The White Dove as Videha Symbol

In Videha Parallel History, the white dove represents Videha-nirvāṇa � a peaceful, stateless, classless society before the rise of kingdoms.
Bhushan�s �search� is thus not utopian fantasy but historical retrieval.

�उजरा परवा कहाँ अछि हमर देश मे / कहाँ देखि पबैं छी उजरा परवा कैं एहि ग्लोब पर?�

The dove is absent because empire (ancient and modern) killed it.

5. Navya-Nyāya Epistemology (Gaṅgeśa Upādhyāya, Tattvacintāmaṇi, c. 1325 CE)

5.1 Key Navya-Nyāya Concepts

• Pramāṇa (valid means of knowledge): perception (pratyakṣa), inference (anumāna), comparison (upamāna), testimony (śabda).
• Saṃśaya (doubt): prerequisite for inquiry.
• Nirṇaya (determinate conclusion): end of inquiry.
• Pakṣatā (probative property): the logical subject of an inference.

5.2 Application to the Collection�s Title and Structure

Saṃśaya (Doubt):
The entire collection is structured as a saṃśaya: Does the white dove still exist? Can poetry find it?

Pramāṇa used:

• Pratyakṣa (perception): direct images of hunger, bombing, computers replacing humans.
• Śabda (testimony): the poet�s mother�s voice (�Telephone par Mām̐�), other poets� works.
• Anumāna (inference): If exploitation continues, the dove cannot exist. Therefore, revolution is necessary.

Pakṣatā:
The pakṣa (subject of inference) is �the present globalized world.�
The sādhya (property to prove) is �the white dove is absent.�
The hetu (reason) is �because violence and exploitation are universal.�

Nirṇaya (Conclusion):
The collection does not end with the dove found. Instead, the final poem (�Ahāṁ Je Dekhi Rahal Chī�) shows only barren land, corpses, vultures.
This is a Navya-Nyāya non-conclusion � a nirṇaya that inquiry must continue. The book is not closure but a tarkaprakriyā (process of reasoning).

5.3 Navya-Nyāya and Abhāva (Absence)

Gaṅgeśa�s theory of abhāva (negation/absence) is crucial:
The white dove is not a positive entity but an absence that is perceived indirectly through the presence of its opposite (violence, war, hunger).
Thus, the �search� is epistemological, not geographical.

6. Synthesis: A Multi-Theoretical Reading of One Poem

Poem: �Mijhāṛ Diyō� (Burn It), p. 14

एहि बास्कदक ढेरी कें / जूनि भरकाउ हमर मित्र / एकर चिन्नगी सें / ध्याकि रहल अछि गाम / ध्याकि रहल अछि देश / ध्याकि रहल अछि ग्लोब

Framework	Reading
Rasa�Dhvani	Vībhatsa (disgust) at corpse-heap. No rasāsvāda � only political horror.
Western (New Criticism)	Paradox: burning to stop burning. Tension between destruction and purification.
Post-colonial	The corpse-heap is global south under US-led wars.
Ecocriticism	Lava from volcano becomes metaphor for capitalism.
Videha Parallel History	The heap is Aryan invasion, Mughal, British, and now neoliberal violence.
Navya-Nyāya	Inference: If this heap exists, then white dove is absent (abhāva). Conclusion: burn the heap to make inquiry possible.

7. Critical Evaluation: Strengths and Limitations

Strengths

1. Political clarity without sacrificing poetic intensity.
2. Successful integration of Marxist content into Maithili folk forms.
3. Courageous critique of both Hindu nationalism and Western imperialism.
4. Epistemologically sophisticated � the �search� structure mirrors Nyāya inquiry.

Limitations (from theoretical perspectives)

• From Rasa�Dhvani: Lacks dhvani�s subtlety; too direct for classical taste.
• From New Criticism: Over-reliance on authorial intention (Kavik Mantavya).
• From Videha framework: Does not explicitly cite Videha historiography; remains implicit.
• From Navya-Nyāya: Does not formalize the inference; remains poetic, not logical.

But these are not failures � they are generic choices: political poetry rejects classical rasa; Maithili modernism requires authorial voice; implicit Videha is strategic, not ignorant.

8. Conclusion

Binay Bhushan�s Ujara Parvak Khoj is a landmark in Maithili literary modernism. It demonstrates that:

1. Indian Rasa�Dhvani can be radicalized for political affect (not just aesthetic delight).
2. Western theory (post-colonialism, ecocriticism, modernism) applies productively to Maithili texts without erasing their specificity.
3. The Videha Parallel History framework provides a non-Brahminical, indigenous epistemic ground for reading Mithila�s contemporary poetry.
4. Navya-Nyāya epistemology � especially Gaṅgeśa�s abhāva (absence) and nirṇaya (determination) � clarifies the structure of the �search� as a logical inquiry, not a mystical quest.

The white dove is not found. That is the book�s honesty. But the search itself � rigorous, angry, tender, and epistemologically disciplined � becomes the only valid pramāṇa for hope in the 21st century.

9. Select Bibliography

Primary

• Bhushan, Binay. Ujara Parvak Khoj. Kolkata: Bhorukawa Publication, 2015.

Indian Aesthetics

• Ānandavardhana. Dhvanyāloka. Trans. K. Krishnamoorthy. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1982.
• Abhinavagupta. Abhinavabhāratī. (On Rasa).
• Kuntaka. Vakroktijīvitam. Trans. K. Krishnamoorthy. Dharwad: Karnatak University, 1977.

Western Theory

• Said, Edward. Orientalism. New York: Pantheon, 1978.
• Spivak, Gayatri. �Can the Subaltern Speak?� 1988.
• Buell, Lawrence. The Future of Environmental Criticism. Blackwell, 2005.

Videha Parallel History

• Thakur, Gajendra. Articles at www.videha.co.in (2008�2025).

Navya-Nyāya

• Gaṅgeśa Upādhyāya. Tattvacintāmaṇi. Ed. & trans. (selected) by Stephen H. Phillips. Classical Indian Epistemology. New Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research, 2012.

Maithili Literary Criticism

• Jha, Ramanath. Maithili Sāhityak Itihās. Patna: Maithili Akademi, 1976.
• Mishra, Jayakant. Maithili Kavitā: Nayā Uday. Darbhanga: Mithila Prakashan, 2008.

 

 

 

अपन मंतव्य editorial.staff.videha@zohomail.in पर पठाउ।