Ashok Vajpeyi, born in 1941, occupies a singular position in contemporary Hindi poetry as a poet whose work quietly but decisively reorients modern literary consciousness toward ethical, ecological, and civilizational questions. Across more than six decades of writing, Vajpeyi has forged a poetic idiom marked by restraint, philosophical attentiveness, and moral seriousness, resisting both rhetorical excess and ideological simplification.
His poetry collections include “Śahara Aba Bhī Sambhāvanā Hai” (The City is Still a Possibility), “Eka Pataṅga Ananta Meṃ” (A Kite in the Infinite), “Agara Itane Se” (If Only by This Much), “Tatpuruṣa” (The Supreme Being), “Kahīṃ Nahīṃ Vahīṃ” (Nowhere But There), “Bahuri Akelā” (Alone Once More), “Thoṛī-sī Jagaha” (A Little Bit of Space), “Ghāsa Meṃ Dubakā Ākāśa” (The Sky Hidden in the Grass), “Jo Nahīṃ Hai” (That Which Is Not), “Abhī Kucha Aura” (Something More Yet), “Samaya Ke Pāsa Samaya” (Time Has Time), “Kahīṃ Koī Daravāzā” (A Door Somewhere), “Duḥkha Ciṭṭhīrasā Hai” (Grief is a Postman), “Punarvasu” (Restoration of Wealth), “Vivakṣā” (The Desire to Speak), “Kucha Rafū Kucha Thigaṛe” (Some Mending Some Patches), and “Isa Nakṣatrahīna Samaya Meṃ” (In This Starless Time).
His poetry does not shout ecological alarm, nor does it indulge in pastoral nostalgia; instead, it performs what may be called an ethics of attention, where the earth, its elements, silences, wounds, and continuities are approached with humility and care. In an era defined by accelerating environmental crises—air pollution, vanishing rivers, climate instability, and the psychological alienation of urban life—Vajpeyi’s poetry emerges as one of the most sustained ecological meditations in modern Indian literature. When read through the lens of ecocriticism and placed in dialogue with Pablo Neruda, Octavio Paz, and contemporary ecological philosophy such as Timothy Morton’s “dark ecology,” Vajpeyi’s work reveals a distinctive synthesis: a Vedic-inflected ecological ethics that neither romanticizes nature nor surrenders to despair.
In the area of eco-criticism, Vajpeyi moves beyond his predecessors’ nature poems or laments into ethical interrogation. His poetry does not merely record environmental loss; it questions the epistemological and moral frameworks that have rendered such loss acceptable. In this sense, Vajpeyi anticipates ecocriticism’s central concern: the displacement of the non-human from ethical consideration. Eco-criticism, as articulated by Cheryll Glotfelty, examines the relationship between literature and the physical environment, asking how texts shape and reflect human attitudes toward nature. Lawrence Buell’s insistence that environmental literature must decenter the human and grant agency to the non-human world is especially relevant to Vajpeyi’s work, where leaves pray, rivers speak through words, and grass growing on ruins announces ethical return.
Jonathan Bate’s notion of “thinking fragility” through poetry finds resonance in Vajpeyi’s minimalism, which exposes the vulnerability of both human and ecological systems without grandiose gestures. Rob Nixon’s concept of “slow violence”—environmental harm that unfolds gradually and invisibly—illuminates Vajpeyi’s recurring images of polluted rivers, rotting cities, and delayed seasons. Ursula K. Heise’s transnational ecocriticism further contextualizes Vajpeyi’s work within global ecological entanglements, where local crises echo planetary ones. Timothy Morton’s “dark ecology,” which rejects sentimental notions of nature and insists on humanity’s inescapable entanglement with ecological catastrophe, offers a provocative comparative framework. Yet Vajpeyi’s poetry, while fully aware of ecological darkness, refuses to relinquish ethical possibility.
At the heart of Vajpeyi’s ecological vision lies a profound engagement with Vedic philosophy, particularly the conception of the earth as a living, sacred presence rather than a passive resource. The “Atharvaveda’s Pṛthvī Sūkta” articulates this vision with remarkable clarity, declaring: mātā bhūmiḥ putro’ham pṛthivyāḥ / pṛthivyāḥ sāṃjñāṃ bibharmi (Earth is my mother; I am her son. I bear the consciousness of the earth.) This mantra establishes an ethical kinship between human and earth, a relationship of care, dependence, and responsibility. The hymn further implores: "Yat te bhūme vikhānāmi kṣipraṃ tad api rohatu / mā te marma vimṛgvarī" (Whatever I dig from you, O Earth, may that grow back quickly; may I not strike your vital points.)
Such lines articulate an ecological ethic millennia before modern environmental discourse, emphasizing restraint, repair, and humility. Vajpeyi’s poetry repeatedly echoes this sensibility, not through explicit citation but through posture and tone. In poems such as “Prithvi ka Mangal Ho,” the earth is not addressed as an object to be saved through human heroism but as a source of auspiciousness before which humans must bow. Leaves shimmer and tremble in collective prayer; silence itself becomes a participant in ecological care. The poem’s insistence that “the earth alone can give us auspiciousness and fearlessness” reverses modern assumptions of human mastery and aligns with the Vedic understanding of bhūmi as both sustainer and judge.
This ethical humility distinguishes Vajpeyi sharply from Pablo Neruda, whose eco-poetics are rooted in revolutionary materialism and historical struggle. In Neruda’s work, especially in “Canto General” and poems such as “Keeping Quiet” and “Oh Earth, Wait for Me,” the earth is a wounded body bearing the scars of colonialism and exploitation. Neruda calls for political awakening and collective action, urging humanity to pause, reflect, and reclaim its bond with the natural world. Vajpeyi, by contrast, resists the rhetoric of reclamation. His earth does not demand; it offers. The ethical movement in his poetry is downward, toward bowing, listening, and restraint rather than upward toward protest.
 |
| Pablo Neruda, Octavio Paz |
Timothy Morton’s “dark ecology” provides a crucial contemporary framework for understanding Vajpeyi’s relevance. Morton argues that ecological awareness begins in depression, as humans confront the irreversible damage they have caused, and proceeds through ontological strangeness toward a fragile, unsettling sweetness. Vajpeyi’s poetry aligns with this perspective in its refusal to idealize nature. His rivers are polluted or vanished; his cities rot. Yet unlike Morton’s deliberately ironic tone, Vajpeyi introduces an ethical softness. When he writes of saving grain for birds, leaving offerings under trees, or a child caressing the earth after parrots depart, these gestures insist on ethical response within catastrophe. Morton's assertion that humans are “poems about the hyper-object Earth” finds a parallel in Vajpeyi’s “Shubhsrava,” where a river becomes a river of words, surviving as language even when geography fails.
The poem “Shubhsrava” is especially significant. The river it describes is ancient, unnamed, untouched by gods or geography, a river made entirely of words. This linguistic river stands in quiet indictment of real rivers reduced to toxic channels. Vajpeyi’s river survives only in language, suggesting that when material ecology collapses, cultural memory becomes a site of resistance. The poet writes in one poem on mother earth: “May the earth be auspicious, may there be auspiciousness upon the earth. / The earth alone can give us / auspiciousness / and fearlessness.” This is a profound statement of environmental consciousness. Rather than being a merely emotive expression, the poem attempts to restore the primordial relationship that has been almost forgotten amid the shadows of modern industrial civilization.
The statement by Jonathan Bate that “the environmental crisis is a crisis of imagination and ethics” provides an important key. The poem “May the Earth be Auspicious” is an artistic attempt at precisely such a reconfiguration. It rejects the aggressively objectifying language of our times and seeks to re-establish the human relationship with the Earth on an ethical plane. This vision is also deeply embedded in the Upanishads and the Vedic peace chants, such as “Dyauḥ śāntirantarikṣaṃ śāntiḥ pṛthivī śāntirāpaḥ śāntiroṣadhayaḥ śāntiḥ.”
The recurring presence of children in Vajpeyi’s ecological poems, such as “The Earth Rescued from Parrots,” further deepens this vision. The image of a child caressing the earth aligns with an eco-feminist ethics of care. Throughout his work, silence plays a crucial role as a space for listening and non-human voices. In the poem("Ek Ādim Kavi kā Pratyāvartan" (Return of a Primal Poet), images of “the rotting of cities” and “the dying of fields” generate karuṇa rasa, while “primal memory” leads toward śānta rasa. This poem is a powerful expression of civilizational crisis, questioning whether progress without sensibility is possible.
From a postmodern perspective, the poem deconstructs concepts like “development” and “modernity.” In the context of feminist criticism, the earth, valleys, and lakes emerge as symbols of nourishment and memory, reflecting a feminine consciousness. From a postcolonial perspective, the “primal poet” re-establishes indigenous experience against the dominant Western model. In today’s “post-truth” era, as Hannah Arendt warned in “The Origins of Totalitarianism,” the distinction between fact and fiction is blurring. In such a time, the primal music in Vajpeyi’s poetry becomes a symbol of fundamental human truth.
In an age marked by planetary exhaustion, Vajpeyi’s poetry insists that the earth does not require our salvation as much as our reverence. His work reminds us that ecological crisis is a civilizational one, demanding new ways of seeing and speaking. By restoring the earth to the center of ethical imagination, Ashok Vajpeyi offers a model of ecological thought that is at once ancient and urgently modern.
---
*Professor & Former Head, Department of Hindi, University of Hyderabad. This is the abridged version of the original article by the author
Comments