অধ্যাপক মধুসূদন ন্যায়াচার্য্য জন্মশতবর্ষ স্মারকগ্রন্থ (Adhyapak Madhusudan Nyayacharya Janmasatabasra Smarakgrantha)

This is a collection of essays in memory of Madhusudan Nyāyācārya, edited by Bimalkrishna Bhattacharya and Sajal Chaudhuri. All the essays center around the themes from Navya-Nyāya, topics that Madhusudan Nyāyācārya has worked on.

शब्दशक्तिप्रकाशिका (Śabdaśaktiprakāśikā (Part-1))

In this book Jagadīa Tarkālaṃkāra presents a detailed analysis of various aspects of śabdapramāṇa from the perspective of Navya-Nyāya. The book starts with a critical assessment of the views of Vaiśeṣika and Mīmāṃsaka philosophers with regard to the veridicality of śabda as a pramāṇa. This is followed by a discourse on the nature of meaningful words, the nature of prākṛti, pratya, nipāta. A definition of a sentence is formulated. The relation between word and meaning in its different aspects has been presented. The book ends with a discussion on the nature and different kinds of samāsa.

शब्दशक्तिप्रकाशिका (Śabdaśaktiprakāśikā (Vol-1))

Śabdaśaktiprakāśikā is an important text written by Jagadīśa Tarkālaṃkāra containing an analysis of śabda pramāna following the Navya-Nyāya tradition. This work is a defence of many of the theses of Gaṅgeśa, the author of Tattvacintāmaṇi. In many places, the views of Bhatṛhari and Srīpatidatta, the author of Kalapa-pariśiṣta, have been critically assessed and defended. The author offers a detailed analysis of how the knowledge of the meaning of a sentence is generated through the presence of the elements like ākāṁṣkā, yogyatā and āsatti. Since the meaning of a word is defined in terms of śakti, a question arises with regard to the locus of śakti. Bhāṭṭa Mīmāṁsakas hold that śakti stays in the universal. Jagadīśa refutes this thesis of the Mīmāṁsakas. The author also refutes the thesis that the locus of śakti is the individual object, a view that is propagated by Raghunātha Śiromaṇi. Jagadīśa defends the view that combines both the insights that the locus of śakti is the individual object and the locus of śakti is the universal. In this book, Jagadīśa presents an analysis of the nature of lakṣanā. In this work we also find an analysis of how ākaṁkṣā, yogyatā and āsatti could be treated as the cause of understanding the meaning of a sentence. Jagadīśa, however, refutes the view that the knowledge of tātparya is the cause of understanding the meaning of a sentence, instead proposes the view that prakaraṇajñāna is the cause of understanding the meaning of a sentence. Thus in the present work the author, after defending śabdapramāṇa as an independent pramāṇa, offers his analysis of the ways of generating linguistic understanding.

Gadādhara’s Theory of Objectivity Viṣayatāvāda (Part-Two)

In this book, Sibajiban Bhattacharyya offers a detailed analysis of the text called Viṣayatāvāda, written by Gadādhara. After explaining the traditional Navya-Nyāya theory of objectivity, the author presents the later Navya-Nyāya theory of objecthood where it has been argued that objecthood cannot be cognition itself. Gadādhara’s theory of relation has been analyzed in terms of objecthood of qualified cognition. A detailed analysis of the ideas of qualificandness, qualificandumness, predicatehood could be found in this book.

সংস্কৃত কলেজ পত্রিকা (Sanskrit College Patrika)

This is an annual journal published by Sanskrit College, Calcutta. The essays published in this journal are written by teachers and students of the college. There are articles on Sanskrit philosophy and Sanskrit literature.

ध्ब्मसजन्यभावयो: कार्यकारणभावरहस्यम् (Dhvaṃsa- Janyabhāvayoḥ Kārya-Kāraṇabhāvarahasyam)

In this essay, Harirama Tarkavagisa undertakes an analysis of the nature of the causal relationship between a positive effect and destruction. The author examines the nature of the inference viz. Dhvaṃsa is due to vināśa. If one takes into consideration this inference, there must be a hetu here and the hetu could be said to have an upadhi viz. Bhāvatva. Harirama, in this context, presents different ways of formulating the causal relation. The author ends this essay by concluding that the positive effect (janyabhāva) could be said to be the cause of destruction (dhvaṃsa) through the relation of pratiyogitva.