Jagannath University Journal of Psychology 31

ISSN 2225-4439

Adaptation and Validation of Parental Bonding

Instrument in Bangladeshi Context
Kishor Roy1 and Jannatul Ferdous21

Abstract
The present study aimed to adapt and validate the Parental Bonding Instrument
(PBI), originally developed by Parker, Tupling and Brown (1979), in the context
of Bangladesh. PBI is a tool that is used to measure the parent-child bonds from
the perspective of the child. The process of translation, adaptation and cross-
cultural validation of the “Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI)” were conducted
following and accepting the guidelines of standard procedure through the
subsequent steps (Sousa & Rojjanasrirat, 2011). To determine the reliability of
PBI, internal consistency and test-retest reliability were assessed. Cronbach Alpha
for PBI were .92 for mother form (.88 and .86 for care and overprotection subscale
respectively) and .94 for father form (.92 and .87 for care and overprotection
subscale respectively), which is satisfactorily significant. Test-retest reliability
coefficients within the PBI for mother and father form were .934 and .969
respectively with an interval of 15 days, which indicates that both forms of
parental bonding instrument were highly reliable. Validation of the instrument was
assured by content and convergent validity. Satisfactory level of validity was
found for the Bangla version of PBI. Significant correlations between the two sub-
scales (care and overprotection) of both mother (r = .717, p <.01) and father (r =
.865, p <.01) forms provided the evidence for convergent validity. Thus, the
Bangla version of PBI appeared psychometrically sound and hence ethnically
apposite.

Keywords: parental bonding, adaptation, validation

Introduction
Parental bonding can be described as the formation of a reciprocal emotional and
psychological proximity between parents and child. Usually, we tie with our parents
in the minutes, hours, or days following our birth. The importance of parental
bonding is beyond our imagination. It is a unique connection that every child and
parent can foster. One’s individuality and overall behavior depends on his or her
affiliation with parents (Cassidy & Shaver, 2008). The brain development of
children, as well as their physical, social, emotional and cognitive progress, depends
on a loving bond or attachment relationship with parents (Winston & Chicot, 2016).
According to Bowlby (1977), attachment is determined by the parent’s attitude and

1
Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, Jagannath University, Dhaka 1100, Bangladesh
2
Lecturer, Department of Psychology, Jagannath University, Dhaka 1100, Bangladesh
Correspondence should be sent to- E-mail: [email protected]
32 Kishor Roy and Jannatul Ferdous

behavior towards the child’s needs. When parents remain aware in responding to
their child’s need, secure attachment occurs and securely attached adults tend to be
more competent, sociable and comfortable in dealing with different kinds of
relationship in life (Halft & Slade, 1987). There is increasing evidence that parents
who often ignore or decline their child’s need for attention will lead to insecure
attachment and insecurely attached adults showed higher tendency to engage in
antisocial behaviors (Brennan & Shaver, 1991). They have a lower level of self-
reliance and self-esteem compared to securely attached counterparts (Steinberg,
2001). Parental inconsistency and deficiencies in maternal and paternal bonding can
lead to long-term social, physical, emotional and mental health problems such as
depression, anxiety, eating disorders (Tetley, Moghaddam, Dawson, & Rennoldson,
2014), schizophrenia (Helegeland & Torgersen, 1997) etc.
Apprehending the consequence of parental bonding that provides a lot of insight into
parent-child relationship, Parker, Tupling, and Brown (1979) developed the most
widely used Parental Boning Instrument (PBI) to assess the perceptions of parenting
received in childhood. It yields a two-dimensional four-category model. The ‘care’
dimension has one pole defined by affection, emotional warmth, empathy and
closeness and the other by emotional coldness, neglect and indifference. The
‘overprotection’ dimension has one pole defined by control, intrusion and prevention
of independent behavior and the other by allowance of independence and autonomy.
When children receive high care and low overprotection, it is optimal parenting, high
care and high overprotection is for affectionate constraint, low care and low
overprotection is for neglectful parenting, and low care and high overprotection is for
affectionless control (Parker et al., 1979).
Rationale of the study
Parental bonding is an imperative forecaster that proffers imminent into parent-child
affiliation. It plays indispensable role on children’s adjustment as well as on their
physical, social, emotional and psychological development and wellbeing. Every
child and parent can enjoy this precious bonding. In Bangladesh, there appears to be
lack of available instrument for assessing parental bonding. As a result, the need for
adaptation and validation of Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI), the widely used
instrument over the past decades, into the Bangladeshi cultural context is felt so
much important. It is an internationally renowned, structured, easily understandable
and meaningful measurement tool for assessing parental bonding. It has been
adapted, validated and used in different cultures, without significant modification of
the construct (Qadir, Serwart, Khan, & Prince, 2005; Kitamura & Suzuki, 1993).
Moreover, emotional factors and mood changes do not seem to affect the perception
of such bonds, even when the instrument is primarily applied to populations with
severely diseased, and after considerable time intervals (Lizardi & Klein, 2005). So,
the present authors intended to adapt the original PBI into the Bangla version and to
validate it in our culture.
Jagannath University Journal of Psychology 33

Objectives of the study

The present study was intended to adapt the widely used Parental Bonding
Instrument (PBI) to administrate in Bangla language in the context of Bangladeshi
culture and to determine the psychometric properties of the Bangla version of the
Parental Bonding Instrument.

Methods
Participants
A total of 120 university students, age ranging from 17 to 20 years, were selected on
the basis of a purposive sampling technique from two public universities of Dhaka
city. Among them, 60 were males (50%) and 60 were females (50%). The
participants were of different socio-economic background, race and religion. Those
120 students were considered as the most consistent with their recollections of their
own parenting, before they had contact with children in their work or as parents.
Description of the Measures
The Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI) was originally developed by Parker et al.
(1979). It is a 25-item self-report measure of two parenting styles- care and
overprotection, which was designed to measure perceptions of parenting to the first
sixteen years of life. The ‘Care’ subscale comprises of 12 items (items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6,
11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 24) which represent a continuum of parental style from
coldness and neglect to affection and emotional warmth. The ‘Overprotection’
subscale comprises of 13 items (items 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 15, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25)
representing a continuum ranging from independence to control and intrusion. Each
of the items is rated on a 4-point scale, ranging from ‘very unlikely’ to ‘very likely’.
For a positive item (1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 19, 20, 23) participant’s
responses are scored as 0 = very unlikely, and 3 = very likely; for a negative item (2,
3, 4, 7, 14, 15, 16, 18, 21, 22, 24, 25) responses are scored in reversed fashion. The
total ‘care’ score ranges between 0 and 36, and the total ‘overprotection’ score ranges
between 0 and 39. A higher score on the ‘care’ subscale indicates higher parental
care and a higher score on the ‘overprotection’ subscale indicates higher parental
control. The combined ‘care’ and ‘overprotection’ assessments allow parents to be
allocated into one of the four categories, such as affectionless control, affectionate
constraint, optimal parenting, and neglectful parenting. Affectionless control equates
to low care and high overprotection; affectionate constraint has high care and high
overprotection; neglectful parenting equates to low care and low overprotection;
whereas optimal parenting has high care and low overprotection. The cutoff scores of
the mother version ‘care’ and ‘overprotection’ subscales are 27.0 and 13.5
respectively. The original PBI demonstrated high construct validity in correlation
with other measures of parental behavior which ranged from .69 to .85, with a test-
retest reliability of .63–.76. In parental bonding scale high score indicates positive
parental bonding and low score indicates negative parental bonding.
34 Kishor Roy and Jannatul Ferdous

Procedures
The process of translation, adaptation and cross-cultural validation of the æParental
Bonding Instrument (PBI)” were conducted following and accepting the guidelines
of standard procedure (Sousa & Rojjanasrirat, 2011) through the subsequent stages:
Stage 1: Forward translation. At first, two forward translations were made from the
original language (English) to the target language (Bangla). Both translators were
proficient in English and Bangla language, and were well-known to the steps of scale
adaptation.
Stage 2: Comparison of the two translated versions (TL1 and TL2): synthesis I. Next,
the instructions, the items and the response format of the two forward translated
versions of the original version of the instrument were compared. Instead of a word-to-
word translation, researchers checked the language constitution, translation quality, and
conceptually suitable words. Then this synthesized version was given to the expert
panel and essential modification was made according to their significant suggestions.
Stage 3: Back-translation. The initial synthesized translated version of the scale was
given to two other persons, who were unfamiliar with the original scale, for back
translation. It was a process of validity check to ensure that the translated version
was reflecting the similar item content as the original one.
Stage 4: Comparison of the two back-translated versions (B-TL1 and B-TL2):
synthesis II. Initially, the instructions, items and response format of the two back-
translations were compared with those of the original instrument. All the ambiguities
and discrepancies regarding cultural meaning and idioms in words and sentences of
the instructions, the items, and the response format between the two back-translations
and between each one of the two back-translations and the original instrument were
discussed and resolved to derive a pre-final version of the instrument in the Bangla
language.
Stage 5: Pilot testing of the pre-final version of the instrument in the target language.
The pre-final Bangla version of the instrument was administered to 20 students from
the target population, to check the appropriateness of items concerning their meaning
and complexity. Each participant was asked to rate the instructions and items of the
scale using a dichotomous scale (clear or unclear). Participants who rated the
instructions, response format or any item of the instrument as unclear were asked to
provide suggestions as to how to rewrite the statements to make the language clearer.
Instructions, response format and items of the instrument that were found to be unclear
were re-evaluated. It was done to further support the conceptual, semantic and content
equivalency of the translated instrument and to improve the structure of sentences used
in the instructions and items of the pre-final version. So that, it could be easily
understood by the target population prior to psychometric testing.
Stage 6: Psychometric testing of the pre-final version of the translated instrument
with a sample of the target population. After synthesizing all the documents, the final
Jagannath University Journal of Psychology 35

Bangla version of the Parental Bonding Instrument was prepared and administered to
120 participants, who were spontaneous and showed positive attitudes towards the
research. For taking consent at the beginning, participants were briefed about the
general purpose of the study and were requested to cooperate. They were also
assured that all information given by them would be kept confidential and would be
used only for research purpose. Both written and verbal instructions were provided to
them for clarification about what to do, and how to fill up the questionnaire. As the
participants may become emotional while filling the questionnaire, they were
verbally informed about the sources from which they could receive mental health
services if needed. All the participants were given thanks for their cooperation. After
fifteen days, retest was done with interested 30 participants who had filled up the
Bangla version of the “Parental Bonding Instrument” earlier.

Results
Item Analysis
To determine if an item is useful and/or how it performs in relation to the other items
on the instrument, corrected item-total correlation was computed. The item-total
statistics of all items of Parental Bonding Instrument is presented in Table 1.
Table 1
Item-Total Statistics and the Reliability of the Parental Bonding Instrument (120
Cases)
Items Mother Father
Corrected Item- Cronbach’s Corrected Item- Cronbach’s
Total Correlation Alpha if Item Total Correlation Alpha if Item
Deleted Deleted
Item 1 .516 .919 .670 .940
Item 2 .759 .915 .493 .942
Item 3 .661 .917 .578 .941
Item 4 .704 .916 .561 .942
Item 5 .381 .922 .729 .940
Item 6 .784 .914 .698 .940
Item 7 .731 .915 .675 .940
Item 8 .739 .915 .705 .940
Item 9 .310 .922 .618 .941
Item 10 .316 .923 .644 .941
Item 11 .260 .923 .698 .940
Item 12 .277 .923 .777 .939
Item 13 .368 .921 .652 .940
(Continued)
36 Kishor Roy and Jannatul Ferdous

Item 14 .610 .918 .679 .940

Item 15 .532 .919 .586 .941
Item 16 .352 .922 .692 .940
Item 17 .675 .916 .669 .940
Item 18 .724 .915 .705 .940
Item 19 .494 .920 .343 .944
Item 20 .382 .922 .483 .943
Item 21 .537 .919 .554 .942
Item 22 .689 .917 .442 .943
Item 23 .498 .920 .484 .943
Item 24 .652 .917 .668 .940
Item 25 .623 .918 .671 .940
Note: All the items were retained for the adapted version of Parental Bonding Instrument
as they have corrected item-total correlation above .2 (Everitt, 2002; Field, 2005).
Reliability
Reliability of the parental bonding instrument were assessed by using Cronbach
Alpha for the two sub-scales separately for both mother and father form. Reliability
statistics of the parental bonding instrument is presented in Table 2.
Table 2
Cronbach’s Alpha within the Parental Bonding Instrument and Two Sub-Scales of it
for Both Mother and Father Form (120 Cases)
Form Total Scale Care Subscale Overprotection Subscale
Mother .922 .880 .864
Father .943 .919 .872
These findings are quite comparable with the original version of the instrument.
In order to assess the temporal stability of the PBI, a sample of 30 university students
completed the PBI for the second time with an interval of fifteen days. Results from
the test-retest correlations appear in Table 3.
Table 3
Test-Retest Reliability Coefficients within the Parental Bonding Instrument for
Mother and Father Form with an interval of 15 Days (n = 30)
Parental Bonding Instrument Test-Retest Correlations
Mother Form .934**
Father Form .969**
Note: ** p <.01.
Jagannath University Journal of Psychology 37

Table 3 indicates that both form of parental bonding instrument were highly reliable
which support the temporal stability of the Bangla version of the instrument.
Validity
The validity of the Bangla version of the PBI was measured by using content and
convergent validity. Content validation of the adapted version of the scale was
determined by the experts’ essential opinions that the translated items, instructions,
response formats and scoring were relevant to the insight of the original scale
Convergent validity is one method to determine the construct validity of the scale
(Colman, 2008). It was assumed that if the score of two subscales of both mother and
father form significantly correlate with each other, then it could be said that the
inventory will have convergent validity. To assess the convergent validity of PBI,
correlations between the individual sub-scales of both forms were measured by
Pearson product moment correlation. The correlations among the subscales are
presented in Table 4.
Table 4
Correlations within the Parental Bonding Instrument for Mother and Father Form (n
= 120)
Mother Form Father Form
1 2 1 2
1. Care Sub-scale - -
2. Over protection Sub-scale .717** - .865** -
Note: ** p <.01
Results indicate that the correlations between the two sub-scales (care and
overprotection) of both mother (r = .717, p <.01) and father (r = .865, p <.01) form
were significant which specify that the adapted version of the PBI had a high level of
convergent validity.

Discussion
The present study was intended to adapt the widely used Parental Bonding
Instrument (PBI) to administrate in Bangla language in the context of Bangladesh
and to determine the psychometric properties of the Bangla version of the PBI. It is
complex and time consuming to develop a new instrument (Hossain, Islam, & Zohra,
2017), that is why the present authors selected the original Parental Bonding
Instrument to adapt and validate in Bangla, which is already reliable and valid. The
process of translation, adaptation and cross-cultural validation of the “Parental
Bonding Instrument (PBI)” were conducted following and accepting the guidelines
of standard procedure through the subsequent steps (Sousa & Rojjanasrirat, 2011).
38 Kishor Roy and Jannatul Ferdous

The findings of the present study ensure the usability of Parental Bonding Instrument
in Bangladesh. The reliability coefficient (internal consistency and test-retest
reliability) for each of the sub-scales of both mother and father forms of PBI is
highly satisfactory. The internal consistency was computed by Cronbach’s alpha, and
its value for PBI was .92 for mother form (.88 and .86 for care and overprotection
subscale respectively) and .94 for father form (.92 and .87 for care and
overprotection subscale respectively), which is satisfactorily significant. The criteria
for evaluating alpha coefficients were derived from George and Mallery (2003) who
provided the following rules of thumb: “α ≥ .9 (Excellent), .9 > α ≥ .8 (Good), 8 > α
≥ .7 (Acceptable), .7 > α ≥ .6 (Questionable), .6 > α ≥ .5 (Poor), and .5 > α
(Unacceptable)”. It is notable that the coefficients of alpha of the adapted Bangla
version of PBI were ranged from .86 to .94. Test-retest reliability coefficients within
the PBI for mother and father form were .934 and .969 respectively with an interval
of 15 days, which indicates that both forms of parental bonding instrument were
highly reliable.
Validation of the instrument was assured by content validity and convergent validity.
Satisfactory level of validity was found for the Bangla version of PBI. Significant
correlations between the two sub-scales of both mother (r = .717, p <.01) and father
(r = .865, p <.01) form provided the evidence for convergent validity. Thus, the
findings can be taken to suggest that the Bangla version of Parental Bonding
Instrument is suitable for assessing the parent-child bonds from the perspective of the
child and youth in Bangladesh. The studies on parental bonding are necessary for
understanding the underlying patterns of parent-child relationships. More research is
still required in this field to discover the relationship with lot more other factors.
Some limitations like economical, time, and manpower hindered the study in
different ways. Future researchers may include the relationship studies of parental
bonding with different variables or situations. Moreover, this research will help
future researchers to be inspired researching on this field. The adapted Bangla
version of the PBI can help to identify parental bonding more accurately and give
suggestions and recommendations.

Conclusion
The Bangla version of PBI can be widely used to point out individuals’ insight of
their parental attachment. Based on the scores, counselors or concerned authority
may design interventions that fit the specific needs of individuals. Although the
reliability coefficient of the instrument is satisfactory, but further studies on large
sample from different types and levels of participants is required. Moreover, data
were collected only from the Dhaka city. A larger and more exhaustive sample of all
over Bangladesh would be taken for more amendment results. It means that the
validation studies over the general population should be conducted by taking a
countrywide sampling. Supplementary research is compulsory to refine the PBI.
Jagannath University Journal of Psychology 39

Additionally, qualitative investigation should be undertaken in the future to provide

sufficient evidence of aptness in the Bangladeshi culture and population. Despite of
all these boundaries, it is the fact that the present findings can serve as a base or open
the door of further research on parental bonding and parent-child relationship in
Bangladesh. It is expected that the Bangla version of the PBI will facilitate the
assessment of parent-child bonds from the perspective of the child by the youth and
adults of Bangladesh.

References
Bowlby, J. (1977). The making and breaking of affectional bonds. British Journal of
Psychiatry, 130, 201-210.
Brennan, K. A., & Shaver, P. R. (1991). Dimensions of adult attachment and
dynamics of romantic relationships. Personality and Social Psychological
Bulletin, 99, 66-77.
Cassidy, J., & Shaver, P. R. (2008). Handbook of attachment: Theory, research and
clinica applicants. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Colman, A. M. (2008). A dictionary of psychology (3rded.). Oxford University Press.
Everitt, B. S. (2002). The Cambridge Dictionary of Statistics (2nded.). CUP ISBN 0-
521-81099-X
Field, A. (2005). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. London: Sage.
George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide
and Reference. 11.0 update (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Halft, W. L., & Slade, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment
process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511-524.
Helgeland, M. I. W., & Torgersen, S. (1997). Maternal representations of patients
with schizophrenia as measured by the parental bonding instrument.
Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 38(1), 39-43.
Hossain, K. N., Islam, M. N., & Zohra, F. T. (2017). Adaptation of academic
motivation questionnaire for use in Bangladesh. Jagannath University
Journal of Psychology, 7(1), 61-78.
Kitamura, T., & Suzuki, T. (1993). A validation study of the parental bonding
instrument in Japanese population. The Japanese Journal of Psychiatry and
Neurology, 47(1), 29-36.
Lizardi, H., & Klein, D. N. (2005). Long-term stability of parental representations in
depressed outpatients utilizing the Parental Bonding Instrument. The Journal
of Nervous and Mental Disease, 193(3), 183-188.
Parker, G., Tupling, H., & Brown, L. B. (1979). A parental bonding instrument. British
Journal of Medical Psychology, 52, 1-10.
Qadir, F., Stewart, R., Khan, M., & Prince, M. (2005). The validity of the parental
bonding instrument as a measure of maternal bonding among young
40 Kishor Roy and Jannatul Ferdous

Pakistani women. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 40(4),

276-82.
Sousa, V. D., & Rojjanasrirat, W. (2011). Translation, adaptation and validation of
instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: a clear
and user-friendly guideline. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 17,
268–274.
Steinberg, L. (2001). We know some things. Parent-adolescent relationship in
retrospect and prospect. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 11(1), 1-19.
Tetley, A., Moghaddam, N. G., Dawson, D. L., & Rennoldson, M. (2014). Parental
bonding and eating disorders: A systematic review. Eating Behaviors, 15(1),
49-59.
Winston, R., & Chicot, R. (2016). The importance of early bonding on the long-term
mental health and resilience of children. London Journal of Primary Care,
8(1), 12–14.
Jagannath University Journal of Psychology 41

Parental Bonding Scale (Mother Form)

wb‡Pi cÖkœgvjvwU wcZv-gvZvi g‡bvfve Ges AvPiY m¤úwK©Z| Rxe‡bi cÖ_g †lvj eQi eqm ch©šÍ
Avcwb Avcbvi gv‡K ¯§iY K‡i wb‡¤œi cÖwZwU cÖ‡kœi †ÿ‡Î m¤¢ve¨ DËi ¸‡jv †_‡K Avcbvi Rb¨ cÖ‡hvR¨
DËiwU‡K wUK () wPý w`b|
cÖvq KL‡bv Lye Kg cÖvq
μwgK
Avgvi gv me©`vB KL‡bv mgq KLbB bq
bs
01 Avgvi mv‡_ Dò I eÜzZc ¡ ~b© ¯^‡i K_v ej‡Zb|
02 Avgvi cÖ‡qvRb Abyhvqx Avgv‡K mvnvh¨ Ki‡Zb
bv|
03 Avwg hv cQ›` KiZvg Avgv‡K Zv Ki‡Z w`‡Zb|
04 Avgvi cÖwZ A‡eMxqfv‡e kxZj wQ‡jb|
05 Avgvi mgm¨v Ges D‡ØM¸‡jv eyS‡Z cvi‡Zb|
06 Avgvi cÖwZ †¯œnkxj wQ‡jb|
07 Avgvi wb‡Ri wm×všÍ MÖnY Kiv‡K cQ›` Ki‡Zb|
08 Avgv‡K eo n‡Z w`‡Z PvB‡Zb bv|
09 Avwg hv KiZvg mewKQz wbqš¿Y Ki‡Z †Póv
Ki‡Zb|
10 Avgvi †MvcbxqZv j•Nb Ki‡Zb|
11 Avgvi mv‡_ K_v ejv Dc‡fvM Ki‡Zb|
12 cÖvqB Avgvi w`‡K ZvwK‡q nvm‡Zb|
13 wkïi g‡Zv Avgv‡K AvM‡j ivL‡Zb|
14 Avgvi cÖ‡qvRb ev PvIqv ¸‡jv eyS‡Z cvi‡Zb
bv|
15 Avgv‡K Avgvi wb‡Ri wm×všÍ wb‡Z w`‡Zb|
16 Avwg AvKvw•ÿZ wQjvg bv GgbUv Avgv‡K Abyfe
Kiv‡Zb|
17 hLb Avwg wech©¯’ _vKZvg ZLb Avgv‡K fv‡jv
Abyfe Kiv‡Z cvi‡Zb|
18 Avgvi mv‡_ Lye †ewk K_v ej‡Zb bv|
19 Avgv‡K Zvi cÖwZ wbf©ikxj Ki‡Z †Póv Ki‡Zb|
20 wZwb Avgvi Kv‡Q bv _vK‡j Avwg wb‡Ri †`Lvïbv
Ki‡Z cvi‡ev bv GgbUv Abyfe Kiv‡Zb|
21 Avgvi hZUzKz ¯^vaxbZv cÖ‡qvRb Avgv‡K Zv
w`‡Zb|
22 hLb Avwg evB‡i †h‡Z PvBZvg Avgv‡K cÖvqB
†h‡Z w`‡Zb|
23 Avgvi cÖwZ AwZwi³ hZœkxj wQ‡jb|
24 Avgvi cÖksmv Ki‡Zb bv|
25 memgqB/ me©`vB Avgvi cQ›` Abyhvqx Avgv‡K
†cvkvK ci‡Z w`‡Zb|
42 Kishor Roy and Jannatul Ferdous

Parental Bonding Scale (Father Form)

wb‡Pi cÖkœgvjvwU wcZv-gvZvi wewfbœ g‡bvfve Ges AvPiY m¤úwK©Z| Rxe‡bi cÖ_g †lvj eQi eqm ch©šÍ
Avcwb Avcbvi evev‡K ¯§iY K‡i wb‡¤œi cÖwZwU cÖ‡kœi †ÿ‡Î m¤¢ve¨ DËi ¸‡jv †_‡K Avcbvi Rb¨
cÖ‡hvR¨ DËiwU‡K wUK () wPý w`b|
μwgK cÖvq KL‡bv Lye Kg cÖvq
Avgvi evev
bs me©`vB KL‡bv mgq KLbB bq
01 Avgvi mv‡_ Dò I eÜzZ¡c~b© ¯^‡i K_v ej‡ Zb|
02 Avgvi cÖ‡qvRb Abyhvqx Avgv‡K mvnvh¨ Ki‡Zb bv|
03 Avwg hv cQ›` KiZvg Avgv‡K Zv Ki‡Z w`‡Zb|
04 Avgvi cÖwZ A‡eMxqfv‡e kxZj wQ‡jb|
05 Avgvi mgm¨v Ges D‡ØM¸‡jv eyS‡Z cvi‡Zb|
06 Avgvi cÖwZ †¯œnkxj wQ‡jb|
07 Avgvi wb‡Ri wm×všÍ MÖnY Kiv‡K cQ›` Ki‡Zb|
08 Avgv‡K eo n‡Z w`‡Z PvB‡Zb bv|
09 Avwg hv KiZvg mewKQz wbqš¿Y Ki‡Z †Póv Ki‡Zb|
10 Avgvi †MvcbxqZv j•Nb Ki‡Zb|
11 Avgvi mv‡_ K_v ejv Dc‡fvM Ki‡Zb|
12 cÖvqB Avgvi w`‡K ZvwK‡q nvm‡Zb|
13 wkïi g‡Zv Avgv‡K AvM‡j ivL‡Zb|
14 Avgvi cÖ‡qvRb ev PvIqv ¸‡jv eyS‡Z cvi‡Zb bv|
15 Avgv‡K Avgvi wb‡Ri wm×všÍ wb‡Z w`‡Zb|
16 Avwg AvKvw•ÿZ wQjvg bv GgbUv Avgv‡K
Abyfe Kiv‡Zb|
17 hLb Avwg wech©¯’ _vKZvg ZLb Avgv‡K fv‡jv
Abyfe Kiv‡Z cvi‡Zb|
18 Avgvi mv‡_ Lye †ewk K_v ej‡Zb bv|
19 Avgv‡K Zvi cÖwZ wbf©ikxj Ki‡Z †Póv Ki‡Zb|
20 wZwb Avgvi Kv‡Q bv _vK‡j Avwg wb‡Ri †`Lvïbv
Ki‡Z cvi‡ev bv GgbUv Abyfe Kiv‡Zb|
21 Avgvi hZUzKz ¯^vaxbZv cÖ‡qvRb Avgv‡K Zv w`‡Zb|
22 hLb Avwg evB‡i †h‡Z PvBZvg Avgv‡K cÖvqB
†h‡Z w`‡Zb|
23 Avgvi cÖwZ AwZwi³ hZœkxj wQ‡jb|
24 Avgvi cÖksmv Ki‡Zb bv|
25 memgqB/ me©`vB Avgvi cQ›` Abyhvqx Avgv‡K
†cvkvK ci‡Z w`‡Zb|