Philosophers in Modern India/ Śāṅkhāyana-Brāhmaṇaṃ / Sanskrit College/ Publication: 1970/ Number of Pages:319 / Calcutta Sanskrit College Research Series NO.LXXIII/
Śāṅkhāyana-Brāhmaṇaṃ शाङ्खायन् ब्राह्मणम्
Śāṅkhāyana-Brāhmaṇaṃ is a Bengali translation and explanation of the original Sanskrit text Śāṅkhāyana-Brāhmaṇaṃ. The translation describes the different kinds of rituals as prescribed in the Vedic literature. The translation is done by Harinarayan Bhattacharya.
| System |
* |
|---|---|
| Publication Category |
Twentieth Century Panditas of Kolkata |
| Publication Author | |
| Added Author |
Bhattacharya, Harinarayan |
| Publication Language |
Sanskrit, Bangali |
| Publisher Name |
Sanskrit College |
| Publication Place |
Calcutta |
| Publication Year |
1970 |
| Series Name |
Calcutta Sanskrit College Research Series NO.LXXIII |
Kindly Register and Login to Darshan Manisha Digital Library. Only Registered Users Can Access the Content of Darshan Manisha Digital Library.
0
People watching this product now!
Description
Related products
Sāṃkhyadarśan সাংখ্যদর্শন
This book, written by Bhupendranath Bhattacharya, is a detailed presentation of the main features of Sāṃkhya philosophy. There are seven chapters in the book that contain discussions on Saṃkhya theory of pramāṇa, Sāṃkhya theory of god, Sāṃkhya theory of causation, Sāṃkhya theory of guṇa, Sāṃkhya theory of prakṛti, Sāṃkhya theory of puruṣa, Sāṃkhya theory of mahat-tattva, Sāṃkhya theory of subtle body, Sāṃkhya theory of bhautika sarga, Sāṃkhya theory of pralaya, Sāṃkhya theory of liberation respectively.
Ātmatattvaviveka (Volume-1) আত্মতত্ত্ববিবেক (১ম খন্ড)
This book is a Bengali translation and explanation of Ātmatattvaviveka (written by Udayanāchārya) done by Dinanath Tripathi. Ātmatattvaviveka is a philosophical work refuting the Buddhist thesis. In the present volume, there is a detailed discussion of the Buddhist thesis of momentariness. The translator offers an exhaustive analysis of Udayana’s attempt to refute the doctrine of momentariness.
Studies in the Upaniṣads
This book is a detailed study of the philosophical significance of the Upaniṣads. Govinda Gopal Mukhopadhyay, the author of the book, reconstructs the salient themes of the Upaniṣads in seven chapters: 1. The Problem of Reality, 2. The Problem of Knowledge, 3. The Preparation, 4. Contemplation, 5. The Synthetic Way, 6. The Analytic Way and 7.The Problem of Attainment. The first two chapters deal with the metaphysical and epistemological views of the Upaniṣads. The next four chapters present an analysis of the different methods of attaining the ultimate reality as prescribed in different Upaniṣads. The last chapter deals with the nature of the state where one attains the ultimate goal by contrasting the Upaniṣadic views with other alternative theories.
Kāṭhakopaniṣada কাঠকোপনিষদ
This book is a detail exposition of Saṅkarācārya’s commentary on Kāthopaniṣada by Brahmacari Medhacaitanya. This book alludes to the story of Naciketas asking Yama about the destiny of man after death. Yama responds to the query by elaborating on the nature of self that survives the physical death of a man.
Bhāratīya Darśan Śāstrer Samanvaya ভারতীয় দর্শন শাস্ত্রের সমন্বয়
In this book, the author, Yogendranatah Tarka-Sāṃkhya-Vedāntatīrtha, explores how the different schools of classical Indian Philosophy converge on the idea of liberation as the ultimate goal of human life. Even though there are divergent views on the nature of liberation, all the schools of classical Indian philosophy have liberation as the tātparya of their respective fundamental texts. The author also mentions the different ways of ascertaining the tātparya of a text. Using this hermeneutic principle the author concludes that each of the systems of Indian philosophy culminates in the idea of liberation as its tātparya.
Advaitamata-samīkṣā অদ্বৈতমত-সমীক্ষা
In this book, Srimohan Tarkavedāntatārtha, the author, offers an explanation of some of the central tenets of Advaita Vedānta. The first chapter discusses how some of the philosophical views of the opponents of Advaita Vedānta have been reformulated in accordance with the tenor of Advaita Vedānta. The second chapter undertakes a discussion of the comparative estimate of the views of the two schools of Advaita Vedānta viz. Vivaraṇa and Bhāmatī schools. The last chapter presents an analysis of the theory of Śabdaparokṣavāda, a view defended by the Vivaraṇa school of Advaita Vedānta.
Advaitavedānte Avidyānumān অদ্বৈত বেদান্তে অবিদ্যানুমান
This book written by Yogendranatah Bagchi is an exposition and defence of the Advaita Vedānta concept of avidyā as one finds in Advaitasiddhi of Madhusudana Saraswati. Following the Vivaraṇa school of Vedānta, Madhusudana Saraswati undertakes a detailed analysis of the inference that purportedly proves the concept of avidyā. Several possible objections to the validity of this inference have been presented and all of these have been refuted by the author of this book. There is also a detailed deliberation on the object and locus of avidyā.
Mānmeyodayaḥ (Volume-1) মানমেয়োদয়: (২য় খন্ড)
This book written by Dīnanāth Tripathi is a detail exposition of Mīmāṃsā text Mānameodaya, originally authored by Nārāyaṇa Bhaṭṭa. This book is divided into two sections, viz. Pramāṇa and Prameya. After proposing the definition of pramāṇa, the author presents a detailed analysis of all the six pramāṇas accepted by the Bhaṭṭa school of Mīmāṃsā philosophy. During this discourse, the views of Nyāya, Vaiśeṣika, Vedānta, Buddhism and Prābhākara have been refuted. In the Prameya section, there is a discussion on the five prameyas accepted in the Bhaṭṭa school, viz. dravya, jāti, guṇa, kriya and abhāva.
Ātmatattvaviveka (Volume-3) আত্মতত্ত্ববিবেক (৩য় খন্ড)
This book is a Bengali translation and explanation of Ātmatattvaviveka (written by Udayanāchārya) done by Dinanath Tripathi. Ātmatattvaviveka is a philosophical work refuting the Buddhist thesis. In the present volume, there is a detailed discussion of the Buddhist thesis that no external object exists independent of knowledge of them. The translator explains Udayanāchārya’s refutation of this Buddhist thesis.
