INTRODUCTION:

The periodization of Indian history, it should be based on significant changes in socio-economic and religious conditions of different periods rather than on the basis of dynastic changes. So, in order to interpret the changes, we must analyze the literary trends which indicate the transformations in society and culture of the medieval period. Hence, it is also necessary to study the intellectual and literary systems developed by the Brāhmans and Jains under Turks-Afghans rule to understand the socio-culture history of medieval India. Besides, we must know the continuity of intellectual process in the various regional kingdoms, where often such exercises were led by particular communities and how they played out in the regional arena.

Evaluating the emerging cultural institutions and intellectual paradigms can be a fruitful exercise in grasping conceptual difficulties of regional history. By looking at a region over a long period, the critical question of identity and social-formation can also be addressed. In the sense, that when, how and in what ways geographical and cultural identities have emerged, transformed, solidified, sustained or replaced over the medieval period.¹ Historian B. D. Chattopadhyaya has discussed in detail that how the literate elite like Brāhman and Kāyashtha were gathering and drawing upon a well-established pool of conventions, motifs and symbols at court of local rulers during this period.² These processes, contributed to a large extent to formation of newer identities, both at community and regional level. Besides, other identities - linguistic, cultural, and culinary – were indistinctly enmeshed with this place-specific and caste identities. This enmeshing and mixture of identities, however, demand that regional history to be studied beyond particular geographical boundaries. It also requires an engagement with the socio-cultural and economic interdependence of the regions too. This phenomenon becomes more prominent when people try to seek or create a distinct identity within a region. In such condition, it is necessary to study the religious institutions and beliefs, economic structures and social mores organized on a local basis and political institutions of the particular region.

It is in the context that, I hope to lay a different perspective on the medieval period and indigenous writing and literary culture, by analyzing Mithila as a composite region. Mithila has always been the centre of the intellectual attainments and spiritual advancement which formed the foundation of its distinct culture. For long the region of Milthila has remained a seat of Vedic and Upanisadic studies. The history of Mithila though rarely studied in modern times, but the history of this region is well documented in detailed description in the scriptures of ancient and medieval period.³ Mithila had made notable contributions to different branches of education, science and literature. If we study ancient texts, then, we find the tradition of scholarship has continued unabated since the days of Janaka. Many intellectual figures were associated with his court where the learned philosophical discussions took place. It is believed that Mithila was the place where philosophical gathering used to be convened by Janaka and later day kings. Mithila made a significant contribution to the realm of philosophy and Nyāya on which rest its cultural edifice. After the spread of Buddhism and Jainism, the complex texture of philosophy in Mithila was made by diverse faiths and concepts which attracted many intellectual from outside of Mithila. However, to locate Mithila’s intellectual tradition and cultural landscape only in Brahmanical philosophy could be misleading. It was also a battlefield of Buddhist, Jaina and Brahmanical philosophies during the Gupta period. In such conditions Mithila emerged as a great center of Indian knowledge during the early medieval period. By the early medieval period, however, the conflict between these contesting, diverging, some time converging philoshpies, became more prominent and often resulted in an aggressive reaction from Brahmanical scholars to Jaina and Buddhist tradition. For the purpose of opposing Buddhism and Jain philosophy, Brāhmanical philosophers of Mithila, in the early medieval period, established three different sects under the most defensive way by Mīmāmsā School were Prabhakra Mishra’s Guru-mata, Kumaril Bhatt’s Bhatt-mata and Murari Mishra’s Mishra-mata.⁴ They wrote many texts on Vedic rituals and orthodox behavior. Besides, on one hand, Brāhmanical intellectuals were producing the Vedic norms to reconstruct the society and encounter the Buddhism and Jaina influences over society. On the other hand, Buddhist and Jaina intellectuals were trying to get out the people from complex ritualistic Hinduism.

This conflict and eminence of the region as an intellectual center didn’t go unnoticed. Many contemporaries often noted the intellectual achievement of the region and praised them. Even Abul Fazal observed this uniqueness of the land. In his words “Tirhut has, from immemorial time, been a seat of Hindu learning.’’⁵ Most scholars consider Maithil Brahmins as the intellectual superior in the field of their specific spiritual activities and Vedic education in north India. Due to this reason Mithilanchal has also been introduced as a distinct cultural identity for a long time. This is the reason that during the medieval period, Mithila emerged as the center of Vedic education. It was the period when many literatures and ideas were being produced by Maithil intellectual on the basis of Vedic philosophy and scriptures through which efforts were made to create a socio-cultural arrangement on these criteria. Although it is believed that no one culture or civilization is always in its special form because according to the circumstances, it changes, but the intellectual tradition of any particular region or in a particular field always creates a historical identity in which a community and its ideology have a big role. It is also important to know that after all what kind of mentalities were working in the intellectual traditions of such a community. Whether the motive of this kind of mentality was to change the society or to oppose any other ideologies?

Due to being the center of Vedic education, the later Maithil kings and scholars also tried to maintain the Varṇā-system in every realm of society. Because of this society remained conservative for a long time. Though it was not a new phenomena in Indian culture, when other religious ideologies counter the Brahmanical hegemony over the society and its established mechanism, then this is necessary to know that how the promulgator of Brahmanical ideology justified their such hegemony through different ways. Similarly, even though, many famous intellectuals were from Mithila, the real purpose behind their writing was to preserve the established Vedic culture against those beliefs or opinion which challenged it. Hence, on the one hand, the Maithil Nibandhakars, on the side of philosophy, led to the creation of a vast literature on Nyāya and Purv-Mīmānsa and on the social side, the Dharamsāstra. In early medieval Mithila, a famous scholar of MīmāṃsāSchool Madana Mishra wrote Vidhīvivekā, Bhāvana-Vivekā and Brāhmasīddhi on Vedic rituals and orthodox behavior. The study of Purv-Mīmāmsa reached its height of glory during the period under consideration. The famous Nibandhkara Gangesha was the founder of Nava-Nyāya (neo-logic) in the late twelfth century, his education was extended by Vardhamana and Vachaspati II in the medieval period. They wrote several notable works on Smritis and Nyāya. Due to their vast literary aggression, Buddhist and Jainism weakened in this region. They discussed about Achārā, Srāddhā, Shuddhī, Vyāvaharā and Dandā in such huge digest. Vidyapati has given detail to various types of learning and learned persons in his works Purusa-Parīkṣā.

Based on the Vedic educational norms, the contemporary education structure was created by intellectuals in which, arrangements were made to provide education according to Varnāshramadhārma. The Vedic laws ordained the Brāhmans to study and teach. The process of education started with hard religious rituals. A Brāhaman child started their education after the Upanāyāna ceremony. After the Upanāyāna sacrament he became a Dwīja. In Mithila, Brāhman students were to study the four Vedas, Purāna, Vyakarāna, Jyostīsha, Nyāya,Kosh and six Vedāngas. The Kshatriya students were trained in knowledge relating to military science, archery, elephants, horses and chariots. Through literature, the criteria for agriculture, commerce and animal husbandry was fixed for Vaiśyā and Śūdra. Education was given through Tols, Pathshāla and Chatušpathi or Chaupari. Chatušpathi was the four Sastras- Vyākarana, Nyāya, Purāna and Darshan were studied.⁶ It was a higher education institute, but in the Pathshala, first of all, boys were required to learn the alphabet, spellings and reading and writing in Sanskrit. The medium of instruction in these institutions was Sanskrit. Studies show that one of there subjects was Tantrā, for which study, Varna system was not followed. Being a great center of Vedic education, students as well as teachers from distant parts of the country were attracted toward Mithila for education and philosophy. Further, it is most important to know that these institutions were functioning on the grant of a state or financed by local gentry.

In these schools, the students were taught Vedic philosophy and encouraged to attain spiritual advancement. In the medieval period, we get references of three types of examination in Mithila- Shalākā Parikshā, Shadyantra Parikshā and Dhout Parikshā. These examinations were conducted at various educational levels, which were controlled by the state. Often these schools were run like patriarchal households with male students and teachers sharing the father-son relation, but women were also allowed in these schools. The opportunity to receive education was mostly limited to women of the aristocratic family. Common women were restricted from attending these institutions. Some of the ladies of royal houses displayed their intellectual skill in the field of literature. Vidyapati has mentioned the name of some educated women like Vishwasdevi and Dhirmati in his works, who organized a conference for the scholars as well as help in the governance. Because of the study of philosophy and Smriti, many Smritikaras and Nibandhkaras like Chandeshwara, Jyotishwara and Vardhmana wrote on various issues of socio-political matters. It is also necessary to study that how were the Mathil Nibandhkaras and intellectuals reconstructing society on the basis of the Dhramšāstra or on the basis of changing socio-political circumstances.

Moreover, some Mithila scholars wrote about science, medicine and various types of education. For example, Jyotishwara mentioned various kinds of Vidyās, such as, Visavaidya, Naravidya, Gajavidya and Asvvidya, etc.⁷ Vidyapati wrote Jyotish Darpana⁸ and Varsakrtya on the discipline of astronomy.⁹ Therefore, it is necessary to understand how the state created an educational environment in Medieval Mithila and what effect it had on the society. It is also worth studying in the context of the medieval Mithila that how the Maithil Nibandhakaras (commentators) and political thinkers were producing political ideas in the form of an advisory literature, as well as to study that what kind of attention was shown to such literatures by the rulers and nobles. Undoubtedly, these literatures were being written on the basis of old scriptures, but this would be wrong to say that pre-formulated political principles were being repeated again. A new political power, as Turks, had arrived on the stage of Indian politics, which brought a different kind of political culture and ideology with them. In short, it can be said that there was a confrontation between two political ideologies due to which new kind of political configuration was created in the political milieu of the established Indian politics. New backgrounds were created for the scholars of both ideologies to create a discourse of legitimacy for their respective political power. In a situation, what was the role of Maithil intellectuals in the political legitimacy of both powers? Mithila was an important Vedic education center of the Eastern India, where the rule was based on Vedic principles.

In the thirteen century C.E., after the establishment of the Turkish power in north India which ushered a new era in the political history of Mithila. Initially, Mithila under Karnatas offered resistance to the military arms of Bengal and later the Delhi Sultanate. Although whenever Bengal became independent from Delhi Sultanate, they tried to capture Mithila, however, such trends also continued in the Mughal period. In a such tense situation, the Maithil intellectuals tried to rearrange political ethics according to needs. Undoubtedly, they rearranged political ethics on the basis of legitimacy so that their power could legitimized with new emerging political power as Turks and Afghans. However, it was not like that the Maithil intellectuals presented quite different a new political aspects from ancient Indian treatises, but we find that they tried to include the new Persianate norms in their old political discourse. Therefore, such changes at the regional level need to be studied.

Chandeshvara Thakur, the most renowned political thinker of Mithila, wrote Rajnītiratnākāra in the second half of the thirteen century under the patronage of the Karnata king. Chandeshvara Thakur prescribes that the sovereign can be of any caste.¹⁰ He contemplates a Hindu king dependant on an emperor as his own patron kings. He further argues that the ceremony of the sacrament of coronation was not essential for kingship. Chandeshvara Thakur was quick to adjust to the changing political conditions and sharply differed from the Dharmšāstra writers on many key issues. The writing of Chandeshvara provided a legitimate grund to the rulers of Oinvara and Khandavala dynasties as it was a state sponsored enterprise. Rajnītiratnākāra is the oldest work on the subject of state affairs and politics in Mithila. Chandeshvara was followed by many writers in Mithila. For example, Misaru Mishra’s Vīvādachandra, Jyotishwara’s Varnā-Ratnākāra, Vidyapati’s Bībhāgasāra, Vardhamana’s Dandavīveka and Vacaspati’s Vyāvāharāchīntāmani are well-marked works on the law, administrative matters and justice as such they are important for the study of contemporary polity. In Bībhāgasāra, Vidyapati strongly supports monarchy and he believes that the king is the main source of all law. He tries to fit monarchy within the temporal sovereignty which was not a new concept in the medieval tradition, but it becomes interesting to know that, in his other works Purush-Parīkshā, he places Ibrahim Shah Sharqi next to God, and praises him and calls him intelligent, generous and conqueror of the earth.¹¹ He further asserts that the Sultan is capable of bestowing desired blessing on those who pay adulation to him. It shows that the Maithil political thinkers and intellectuals made necessary political, social and ideological adjustment. It's also a matter of thinking that, during this period, Maithil Nibandhkaras continuously produced their works related to justice, which would be very useful to study the methods of governance.

Jyotishwara Thakur has given detailed description about eighty four types of kingly qualities and use of thirty six kinds of weapons in which a competent king must be skilled.¹² He has given a long list of administrative officers and also vividly describes the court life and its decorum.¹³ Chandeshvara and Jyotishwara affirm that the country is like a god and the king is its protector who must be fulfill his Rajādhārma. They also insisted on indivisible governance, but practically it was not possible when Mithila was conquered by the Turks and Afghāns. However, they have discussed the duties of subordinate kings as a ‘Karāda’.¹⁴ The important qualities of the king has been given by them, in which avoiding intoxicants, anger, and sensual pleasure were the most important qualities.They have discussed situations when the king loses his kingdom. According to Vidyapati, the king is a reflection of divine power therefore, he is the essence of all the powers so the king is called Prājādhīpā and Ekdāsā-avatāra. Although Vidyapati has written this for his patron king Sivashima Dev, it shows how the poet placed a divine origin of kingship so that, his subordinates, maintained their loyalty to the king and the kingdom. Jyotishwara and Vidyapati believed that kings must have deep knowledge of the scriptures which helps them in dispensing the justice. In Dandāvīveka, Vardhamana suggests that before inflicting punishment, some important points must be noticed, i.e. caste of the offender, subject of offense, age and merit of the offender, application of punishment and locale, etc.¹⁵ He has given a lengthy details about the reason and their punishments which is necessary for the study of the judicial system of medieval polity.

Cultural and social norms are expectations of ideal behavior within a specific cultural or social group. Norms govern a wide range of phenomena, including property rights, contracts, bargains, forms of communication, and concepts of justice. Norms impose uniformity of behavior within a social group, but often vary substantially among groups. Although often believed that these norms offer social standards of appropriate and inappropriate behavior, governing what is acceptable and coordinating our interactions with others. When we study about medieval Maithil society, then we find that, in the medieval period, like other Indian society, the social system of Mithila was also based on Brahmanical social arrangements where the caste system helped the formation of a class structure which was maintained by the state. In the medieval Mithila, Bhakti saints also did not directly oppose the Brahminical caste system. Even Vidyapati and other Bhakti poets of Mithila have supported such system and customs in their compositions. So, it is worth mentioning that the different social perspectives which encouraged to the Maithil scholars or Nibandhakaras for social reconstruction.

However, in the medieval Maithil society, the state had a very big role to promote a particular social ideology. For example, a grand annual conference was organized by the rulers of Mithila in which Vedic philosophers and pundits were invited from every corner of the country. Therefore, Vedic education was dominated in Mithila during the medieval period. Perhaps it was also a reason that, scholars with the help of the rulers, fabricate a social norms were made to maintain the Brahmanical social arrangement. ‘Kulīnīkarāna’ and ‘Panjī-Prābandha¹⁶ were also one of the systems under which efforts were made to reconstruct contemporary Maithil society. The Maithil king Harising Dev was directly involved in the implementation of this system.¹⁷ Brahmins and Kayasthas were classified on the basis of such a system. It is also necessary to study that were the Mathil Nibandhkaras and intellectuals reconstructing society on the basis of the Dhramšāstra or on the basis of changing political and economic circumstances. Undoubtedly, the changing political and economic situation might have affected the society that’s why so many social norms were being produced by Maithil intellectuals during this period. Chandeshwara prescribes in his work Grīhsthratnākāra that a Brāhman can take uncooked or cooked food from Sūdras, and in addition to this, a Brahman can also do agriculture works if he paid taxes to the state. From an economic perspective, the involvement of the Brāhmans among the peasantry was important for revenue system as well as a social system. Further, many Nibandhakaras and Smiritikaras of medieval Mithila approved that Śūdras could study other theologies along with the Vedas and the Purāns. Detailed description has been given for the duties of Vyšya in the other chapter Vānikputrāvarnan of the Varnrātnakāra. Here it has been laid down, how should a Vyšya be and duties of the Vaishyas and trade of various permitted commodities by them.¹⁸ Chandeshwara allows the Vyšya to sell liquor and meat.¹⁹ Perhaps, there a reason for such norm was to tie the castes with their professions because due to economic changes, many sub castes had emerged during this period. In a such condition, Maithil Nibandhkara Jyotishwara divided the lower castes into two categories- Nirvāsit and Anīrvāsit. There were also different rules for those associated with that category. Jyostishvara explains that Sanskrit, Avhatta, Prakrit, Paichashi, Saurseni and Mahgahi total six languages were prohibited for some lower castes. However, due to the advent of new technology in the medieval period, created new opportunities for employment along with development in agriculture and industry.

Indian culture still presents a picture of a number of identifiable sub-cultural groups, separated by differences of race, religion, region, language, style of living, art and thought and philosophy of life. Therefore, India is often marked by its pluralism in which co-existence and co-operation have been the basic features on which other a syncretic culture has been built for many centuries, but it would also be wrong to say that there was no inter-group tension in the society. There have always been kinds of tension between various ideologies. Even this type of tension was mainly for the supremacy of their ideologies, not for different customs and lifestyle. The people of this land adopted tolerance for each other's cultural ritual according to their circumstances and needs; they also adopted the rituals and customs of other communities. Here, many ideologies have been born from one ideology, sometimes; many ideologies have combined to create an ideology. As far as Mithila society is concerned, this society also changed over time. Therefore, it is necessary to study the changes in every aspect of the Mathil society. During the medieval period, especially in Mithila, there was a major influence of Shaktism, Shaivism and Vaishnavism sect over the society because Buddhism and Jainism were largely deported from this region.²⁰ But the way Buddhism and Jainism, mainly Buddhism, gave a message to the common masses against harsh Brahmanical rituals, its effect remained in the society for a long time. And because of this, the followers of all prevalent sects adopted each other's customs and rituals.

Even the way Shakta sect was one of the prominent sact and the Tantra was being studiedin the Mithila during the medieval period, due to which other Brahminical cults and Tantra branch of Buddhism like Sahajiya sect came closer to eachothers.²¹ And this was the reason that the Shakta and Buddhist devotees gave place to each other's goddess their own sect.²² Even there was no demarcation between the followers of these sects in the case of the religious rituals. But this tolerance was limited to religious practices, not on the level of each other's philosophy. Therefore, the Mathil Brahmans accepted Buddha as the tenth incarnation of the lord Vishnu, but did not compromise with the Buddhist philosophy and philosophical animosity between these sects remained. As far as the Shaiva and Vaishnava sects are concerned a number of Maithil scholars have especially written compositions related to the beliefs and practices of these sects, from which it is known how much the importence of these sects were in the contemporary society. A great poet of the medieval Mithila, Vidyapati wrote a book titled Shivsārvsvārand Gorakshvijayafor the devotion of the Lord Shiva, Durgābhakti-Tarangini for the devotion of the goddess Shakti Durga and Gangāvākyāvalīfor the sacred river Ganga.²³ Even Vidyapati has shown the composite of Shiva and Vishnu in their work Gangāvākyāvalī²⁴ which indicates that the saints and their devotees of Shaiva and Vaishnav sacts adopted the path of amiability.

Despite the harsh Brahmanical land like Mithila, even during the medieval period, Islamic mysticism Sufism made its place because it was imperative that a new political power as the Turks-Mughals had established their power in entire northern India. Also, Mithila was the gateway of Bengal, so its importance always remained for political powers. For these reasons, the spread of some Sufi Silsilas in Mithila was also possible. Chishti, Shattari and Madaria Sufi Silsilas were mainly active in Mithila. Shattari Sufi saint Sheikh Kazin, who composed Minhāj ūs Shattār, was very famous in Mithila.²⁵ Even though, not only Mithila, an important feature of Sufi Saints of entire India adopted local languages as well as other local customs to spread their ideas. For example, folklores such as Satyapir and Marsia²⁶ were famous in all parts of Bihar including Mithila during the medieval period, which is a mixture of songs and words of contemporary Sufi saints and those Sufi saints also adopted yogic practices and tantaric mantras.²⁷ That's why their access to Brāhman religion-dominated areas like Mithila was possible. Besides Shattari Sufi Silsila, Madaria Sufis were also active in Maithil society and they also adopted many Brahmancial customs such as to have his hair shaved after death (Mundan) and praying for his Guru (Pīr) on Thursday. Thus, the process of a religious co-ordination from both sides proved to be helpful in maintaining a cosmopolitan atmosphere in the medieval Mithila and the religious condition of Mithila presents a vivid picture of the contemporary society which was beset with a multitude of religious creeds and sects.

Conclusively, I want to close with the argument that when a religious and social activities are controlled or persisted under any specific ideology in a terrain for a long time, then it becomes the specialty of that particular terrain. And because of that specialty, the masses of that terrain seek and create their identity on the basis of that specialty. Sometimes this identity also takes the form of vainglory that tries to present the ideology in the form of pragmatism. Even, under this process, efforts are made to shape the social regulations, cultural perspective, rituals and language in an identical framework, which have both negative and positive sides. In the context of Mithila, we find something similar that Mithila had been maintaining its Brahminical structure and activities since ancient times and in the some other way it remained firmly in the later period also. The support of the local ruling class and the intellectuals to maintain such kind of specialties as it appears to be clear in the case of Mithila. Mithila was the main center of Vedic education and philosophy since ancient times, and educated scholars from here contributed to the prevailing education in other parts of India, but it would be absolutely wrong to assume that this was a self-created success of the Maithil scholars in the field of philosophy. Because there was a philosophical war between the scholars of Brāhman religion and the scholars of Jainism and Bhuddism religion for a long time. Consequently, this battle for domination filled the bitterness in the society and made the social structure complex. Besides, local rulers and ruling classes participated directly and indirectly to support this battle. However, in this struggle, Brāhmanreligion and its scholars won, because the basis of this whole conflict was connected with the issue of the legitimacy of each other's power. Therefore, we find that the intellectuals of the medieval Mithila again started writing commentaries on the Purāṇas, Smritis and Dharamsāstras during medieval period, and they considered the proper manners and demeanours described in the Dharamsāstras as an ideal for the develop society in their texts and tried to implement it on society with the help of the rulers, which gradually became part of the culture of that region.

REFERENCES:

1. Adrian Green and A. J. Pollard.ed, Region and Regionalism in History: Regional Identities in North-East England 1300-2000, The Boydell Press, Woodbridge, 2007, pp. 3-5.

2. B. D. Chattopadhyaya, Representing the Other? Sanskrit Sources and the Muslims (Eighth to Fourteenth Century),Manohar, New Delhi, 1998, pp. 21-22.

3. ShatapathaBrahaman, Tr. Julius Eggeling, SBE-Vol.43, The Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1882, p. 62; Vayu-Purana, Tr. G. V. Tagare, Vol. 2, MotilalBanarasidass, New Delhi, pp. 88.3-5.

4. G. N. Jha, Purava-Mimamsa in its sources, Library of Indian Philosophy and Religion, Banaras Hindu University, 1964, pp. 1-3.

5. AbulFazl, Ᾱīn-i-Akbarī, tr. H.S. Jarret, Vol. 2, The Asiatic Society of Bengal, Calcutta, 1939, pp. 149-156.

6. Jata Shankar Jha, Education In Bihar, K.P. Jayaswal Research Institute, Patna, 1979, p. 3.

7. Jyotishwar Thakur, Varn-ratnakara, ed. S. K. Chatterjee& B. Mishra, BibliothicaIndica, Calcutta, 1940, p. 9.

8. Vidyapati Thakur, Purusa- Parīkṣā, pp.87

9. These two books of Vidyapati are no longer available, but for the facts described in these books, we can see S. Dvivedi, GanagaTarangini, Banaras, 1933 and S. B. Dikshit, BharatiyaJyotish, Lucknow, 1963.

10. Chandeshwara Thakur, Rajnitiratnakara, ed. K. P. Jayaswal, The Bihar and Orissa Research Society, Patna, 1936, pp. 3-4.

11. Vidyapati Thakur, Kritilata, ed. VirendraShrivastava, Bihar RashtraBhashaParishad, Patna, 1983, pp. 106-08.

12. Jyotishwar Thakur, Varn-ratnakara, pp. 8, 26.

13. Ibid. pp. 8-9.

14. Chandeshwara Thakur, Rajnitiratnakara, p. 4.

15. Vardhamana, Dandaviveka, ed. Mm. K. K. Smrtitirtha, Gaekwad’sOrental Series, Baroda, 1931, P. 36.

16. ‘Panji-PrabandhaVyvastha’is a book of genealogy In which the genealogy of Maithil Brahmans and Kayasthas families has beenrecorded.

17. R. K. Chaudhary, The Mithila In The Age of Vidyapati, ChaukhambaOrentalia, Varanasi, 1976, p. 111.

18. JoytishwarThakur,Varnaratnakara, ed. GovindJha, Maithili Akadami, Patna, 1990, pp. 84-85.

19. Chandeshwara Thakur, Grishth-Ratnakara, pp. 336-38.

20. Vidyapati Thakur, Varshkritya, ed. R. C. Jha, Maithil Academy, Part-1, Patna, 1977, pp. 129-174. Upendra Thakur,

21. Upendra Thakur, Studies in Jainism and Bhuddism in Mithila, The Chowkhamba Sanskrit Studies, Vol. XLIII, Varanasi, 1964, pp. 152-157.

22. R. K. Chaudhary, Bihar: The Homeland of Buddhism, Sri Siddhartha Press, Patna, 1956, pp. 139-40.

23. Vidyapati Thakur, Saivasarvasara, ed. IndrakantJha, Maithil Akadami, Patna, 1979. Durgabhakti- Tarangini, ed. Kashinath Mishra, K.S.D. Sanskrit University, Darbhanga, 2001. Gorakshvijaya, eds. Umesh Mishra and Jayakant Mishra, AkhilBharatiya Maithili SahityaAamiti, Allahabad, 1961.

24. IndrakantJha, Vidyapatikalin Mithila, Maithil Akadami, Patna, 1986, pp. 351-52.

25. S. H. Askari, AFiftheen Century Shattari Sufi Saint of North Bihar, JBRS, Vol. 34. Patna, 1951, p. 74.

26. R. K. Chaudhary, The Mithila In The Age of Vidyapati, p. 379

27. Ibid. pp. 81-82.

Received on 05.12.2017 Modified on 15.12.2017

Int. J. Ad. Social Sciences. 2017; 5(4):231-236.

Ideology, Identity and Pragmatism: Formation of the Medieval Mithila