নদিয়ার সংস্কৃতি চর্চা (Nadiyar Samskriti Carca)

The present book contains several essays on the history of Nadia. Some of the essays focus on the history and archaeological importance of Nadia. Some other essays focus on the cultural activities in Navadvipa. There are some other essays that describe the literacy and library in Nadia. Folk theaters (jātrā) and modern theaters in Nadia have also been talked about in some essays.

क्रोड्पत्त्रसंग्रहः (Krodapattrasangraha or Critical Notes)

This book is a collection of short essays by Kāliśankara Siddhāntavāgīsa on different issues in Navya-Nyāya. The essays in the present collection include discourses on Gadādhara’s theory of Prāmāṇya, 2. Gadādhara’s theory of Anumāna, 3. On Vyāptipañcaka, 4. On Siṅhavyāghralakṣaṇa, 5. Gadādhara’s theory of Vyādhikaraṇa, 6. On the Siddhāntalakṣaṇa, 7. Gadādhara’s theory of Anugama of Vyāpti, 8. Gadādhara’s theory of Pakṣatā, 10. Gadādhara’s theory of Avayava, 11. Gadādhara’s theory of Sāmānyanirukti, 12. On Savyabhicara, 13. On Sādharaṇa, 14. On Asādharaṇa and 15. On Satpratipakṣa.

शब्दशक्तिप्रकाशिका (Śabdaśaktiprakāśikā (Vol-2))

In the second volume of Śabdaśaktiprakāśikā, Jagadīśa presents a detailed analysis of Prabhākara’s kāryānvitaśaktivāda and refutes this view. Jagadīśa defends the niravacchinna śaktivāda of the words like ākāśa etc. The view of Raghuntha Siromani with regard to the causal nexus of linguistic understanding has been refuted. Jagadisa offers an analysis of the nature of paribhāṣika śabda and argues that proper names given to individuals do not have śakti and they are to be treated as paribhāśaika śabda. Jagadīśa defends the view that śakti resides in all the three loci: the individual, the universal and the relation of samavāya that holds between an individual and the universal. Jagadīśa also refutes the Mīmāṃsaka view that the sentence has lakṣaṇā and the view of Ālaṃkārika regarding the vyāñjanā relation has been rejected. In this book, Jagadīśa offers a detailed analysis of different kinds of lakṣaṇā and in this context, one comes across a criticism of the Prabhākara thesis that the word having lakṣaṇā is not the cause of syntactic knowledge of the sentence. This book ends with an analysis of the nature of yogaruḍa śabda.

अनुमितेमानसत्त्वबिचाररहस्यम् (Anumiter Mānasatvavicārarahasyam)

Harirama Tarkavagisa, in this book, examines the proposal that inference could be subsumed under supersensual perception as accepted in Nyāya. Harirama argues that not all cases of inference could be so explained. He imagines all sorts of possible objections to the view that inference, really speaking, is a kind of perception and refutes all these, defending the thesis that inference is to be regarded as an independent source of knowledge.

প্রস্থানভেদঃ (Prasthānaveda)

The present work is a commentary by Madhusudana Saraswati on a part of Śivamahimāstotra (Hymns to the glory of Śiva) written by Puṣpadanta. In this commentary, Madhusudana talks about eighteen disciplines of knowledge. All the āstika and nāstika systems of knowledge could be included in the eighteen disciplines and all these systems of knowledge, either directly or indirectly, aimed at determining the nature of god. According to Madhusudana, even the philosophy of art written by Bharata aims at worshiping god. Madhusudana argues that one could talk about three fundamental prasthānas viz. ārambhavāda, parināmavāda and vivartavāda. We start our intellectual journey from ārambhavāda and then through pariṇāmavāda reach vivartavāda. It is only in vivartavāda that one realizes that the world is a vivarta of Brahmaṇ. The varieties of prasthānas have been created only to cater to the needs of people of various inclinations.

The Padārthatattva-Nirūpaṇam (পদার্থতত্বনিরুপনম)

The present book, written by Raghunātha Śiramaṇi and translated and explained in Bengali by Madhusudan Bhattacharya,  is an attempt to present his views on the metaphysical categories generally accepted in the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika tradition. Raghunātha, of course, refutes some of the categories accepted by earlier Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika philosophy. He even does not hesitate to accept some of the views of the Mīmāṁsā philosophy, thereby going against his own tradition.