Subscribe for Newsletters and Discounts
Be the first to receive our thoughtfully written
religious articles and product discounts.
By registering, you may receive account related information, our email newsletters and product updates, no more than twice a month. Please read our Privacy Policy for details.
.
Share
Share our website with your friends.
Email this page to a friend
By subscribing, you will receive our email newsletters and product updates, no more than twice a month. All emails will be sent by Exotic India using the email address info@exoticindia.com.

Please read our Privacy Policy for details.
|6
Your Cart (0)
Books > Philosophy > ANTARVYAPTI
Displaying 721 of 2716         Previous  |  NextSubscribe to our newsletter and discounts
ANTARVYAPTI
ANTARVYAPTI
Description

About the Book:

Antarvyapti, hitherto an untouched area of Indian Logic, is the foundation of the Buddhist and the Jaina theory of anumana. The book not only discusses the theory of antarvyapti to its minutest details but also provides an English translation of Antarvyapti Samarthanam of Ratnaka-rasantipada and an edited version of this Sanskrit text. In this book the author, who himself is a student of Nyaya, tries to defend the Nyaya position.

About the Author:

Arun Mishra (born in December 1956) was trained in Nyaya by his uncle Pandit Kundanath, alias Phekan Mishra, in the family itself which till today is considered as the centre of Nyaya in Mithila. The author has translated Vyapti Nirmaya and Anupalabadhi Rahasya of Ratnakirti and Jnanasrimitra respectively. He is the editor of the volumeSpirituality, Science and Technology, published by Indian Philosophical Congress. He has also published papers in various philosophical journals. At present he is working onAn Analysis of Nyaya Epistemology: From Gautama to Sankara Misra.

Preface

This work will remain incomplete without naming Honourable Professor D.P. Chattopadhyaya and Professor S.R. Bhatt. Whether it be symposium or seminar organised by Indian Council of Philosophical Research or Centre for Studies in Civilizations or on any other occasion I always try to learn something from Honourable Professor Chattopadhyaya. I, on all such occasions, take note of the philosophical problems which he raises and the solutions which he offers. My notebook is full of those problems and their solutions by him along with my own reflections upon both. Thus I strongly feel that it is difficult for me to develop myself intellectually without him. I am obliged to Professor S.R. Bhatt also, who equipped me academically to reach to the level where from I try to understand the intricacies and subtlety of philosophy of Professor D.P. Chattopadhyaya. Thus I am indebted to both of them and more so to Honourable Professor Chattopadhyaya, who enriches me philosophically by providing his philosophical reflections whenever occasions arise.

Professor R.C. Pradhan of Central University (Hyderabad) and present Member Secretary of Indian Council of Philosophical Research loves me like his younger brother and does not allow me to feel isolated in this maddening crowd of Delhi. Whenever I discuss any philosophical problem with him I am enriched by his insight and experience. His love always inspires me to work harder and harder. I should also express my thanks to Dr. Mercy Helen who relentlessly serves for the cause of philosophy in ICPR.

While translating the text I have followed the para- graphing done by the first editor Mahamahopadhyaya Haraprasad Shastri and referred to the paragraph by the number left of the point in my numbering system. The number which has been given at the right of the point refers to the sentence of the paragraph. Sanskrit sentence too has been given the number, so one may find correspondence between English sentence and Sanskrit sentence with the help of this number. In English translation I have used bracket to spell out the noun to which pronoun of Sanskrit language refers or to complete the sentence and thus to make it meaningful.

The Sanskrit text under consideration is one among the Six Buddhist Nyaya Tracts originally published by the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal in 1910. In those days printing technology was not so developed, consequently one may notice methodological as well as textual mistakes. Certainly due to printing errors, corrections made by Mahamaho-padhyaya Haraprasad Shastri sometime occur in square bracket and some time in small bracket. I have kept all his corrections under square bracket and corrections done by me under small bracket. While doing so I have not disturbed the original. I have made the following changes in the text:

(i) I think that a Sanskrit sentence should not end with .an anusvaranta pada, so I have opted for hlanta pada and kept the original outside the bracket.

(ii) At few places I have given the punctuation mark for full stop and at some places I have shifted the position of the same to make the sentence consistent with the structure of the argument. Wherever I have done so, I have tried my best to retain the original with the help of a footnote. In the footnote I have mentioned where exactly the punctuation mark was situated.

(iii) Carelessness on the part of the printer caused several spelling mistakes. I have corrected them and put them within small brackets while retaining the original outside the bracket.

It would not have been possible for me to submit the manuscript on time without the help of Mr. Vijay Kumar jha. Despite his heavy engagement he personally typed it and made the submission possible. I am obliged to Mr. Ashitava Dutta, a student from Silchar (Assam), who helped me to read the final proof.

I must beg an apology from the departed soul of the great Pandit Mahamahopadhyaya Haraprasad Shastri, if I myself have committed any error or caused any harm to the text. At last I must admit that our Nyaya-systern is so rigorous, sophisticated and complex that I have yet to learn it. Under such a situation one should not expect anything novel or extra ordinary from me. So I must conclude it with a statement of jarannaiyayika Jayanta Bhatta.

Introduction

"God", said John Locke, "has not been so sparing to man to make them barely two legged creatures and left it to Aristotle to make them rational".' Rationality-our capacity to think and to know the world-is as old as our history of evolution itself. If we go through the history of Philosophy, whether Oriental or Occidental, we find very few philosophers who would reject the validity of inference. Inference is a common translation of anumana, and it is safe to retain this translation. Carvaka philosophers in general and Grammarian, such as Bhartrhari," are among those few Indian philosophers who questioned the validity of inference as a source of knowledge. Their critique is essentially based on their denial of the possibility of necessary concomitance (vyapti) which makes our knowledge of the thing-to-be-inferred (sadbya) possible.

One's ability to prove the thing-to-be-inferred, with the help of the source of knowledge called inference, depends upon the necessary relationship between what is technically called logical mark (sadbana) and the thing- to-be-inferred (sadbya)', The necessary relationship which allows us to infer the thing-to-be-inferred on the basis of our knowledge of the logical mark is called necessary concomitance.

A clear disagreement emerges among Indian logicians from their answers to the following two questions : Where do we ascertain necessary concomitance, and, how do we ascertain it?

To ask the first question, i.e., where do we ascertain the necessary concomitance, is to ask whether necessary concomitance should be ascertained in the subject-of- inference (sadbyadbarmin) or in the corroborative- example (drstantadbarmin). To ask the second question, i.e., how do we ascertain necessary concomitance, is to ask the question regarding the source (pramana) of ascertaining necessary concomitance.

If one ascertains necessary concomitance in the subject-of-inference (sadbyadbarmin), it is called internal- concomitance (antarvyapti). If one ascertains necessary concomitance in the corroborative-example (drstanta- dbarmin), it is called external-concomitance (babirvyapti). Jaina logicianas and the Buddhist logician Ratnakara- santipada are few Indian logicians who argue for internal- concomitance and oppose external one.

From the available resources it appears that jaina logician Siddhasena Divakara was the first one who long before Ratnakarasantipada argued for the theory of internal-concomitance in his famous work entitled Nyayauatara': The age of this Jaina logician is still not known but it is absolutely clear that they were Jaina who, due to their metaphysical commitment, favoured internal- concomitance and opposed external one. As Jaina thinkers had to infer 'a thing has many aspects (anekantatmakam vastu)' from the logical mark 'real (sat)', so they opted for internal-concomitance Similarly Buddhists had to infer sarvam ksanikam (all things are momentary), so it was necessary for them to opt for internal-concomitance. As all things existing under this world are under dispute", so homogeneous (paksa) and hetrogeneous (vipaksa) example is not available in this case of inference. Further, in the case of unavailability of homogeneous or hetrogeneous example the theory of trairupya as formulated by Dignaga and Dharmakirti" cannot justify the validity of the logical mark. Hence to make the logical mark valid it was necessary for them to argue that necessary concomitance must be ascertained in the subject-of- inference itself. Since Jaina logicians have vehemently argued for the theory of internal-concomitance, it is necessary to discuss them along with Ratnakarasantipada's analysis of internal-concomitance.

CONTENTS

 

A.The Logic of Antarvyapti  
Introduction 3
Age of Ratnakarasantipada 6
Two Major Problems of Ratnakarasantipada 11
Buddhist theses regarding the locus of
ascertaining necessary concomitance
13
 

The locus of ascertaining necessary
concomitance

13
  Three kinds of the logical mark 13
  Karyabetu 15
  Classification of Karyabetu 16
  Svabbavabetu 17
  Anupalabdbibetu 20
  Locus of ascertaining necessary concomitance
according to the kinds ofbetu
27
Different kinds of sources (pramana) to ascertain
necessary concomitance
29
  Pratyaksanupalambba 30
  Trividba and pancavidba pratyaksanupalambba 32
  Prasangaandprasangabetu 34
  Prasangaandprasanga-viparyaya with
reference to Dharmakirti and Dignaga
38
Ratnakarasantipada and his sadbyaviparyyaye
badbaka pramana
39
  The theory ofanupalabdbi and the theory of
vipaksa assumed in badbaka pramana
40
Different theories of anupalabdbi 40
  Perception of something which is incompatible
with the presence of what is to be
negated(svabbavaviruddbopalabdbi)
42
  Perception of the effect of that thing which
is incompatible with the essence of what
is to be negated(svabbavaviruddbakaryopalabdbi)
43
  Non-cognition of a cause(karnanupalabdbi) 43
  Non-cognition of an entity itself(svabbavanupalabdbi) 43
  Perception of what is incompatible with the
pervader (vyapakaviruddbopalabdbi)
44
  Non-cognition of the pervader (vyapakanupalabdbi) 44
  Perception of that phenomena which is
incompatible with the cause(karanaviruddbopalabdbi)
45
  Perception of an effect of some phenomena
which is incompatible with the causes
of what is to be negated(karanaviruddbakaryopalabdbi)
45
The theory of vipaksa 46
Ratnakarasantipada on reality and transitoriness 49
Buddhist definition of reality   52
  Theories ofvyavaccbeda 63
Jaina's theory for the validity of a logical mark
and their theory of internal-concomitance
67
  Jaina's arguments against three-fold conditions
and five-fold conditions of Buddhist and
Naiyayika
68
  Agreement and difference between Jaina
logicians and Ratnakarasantipada
76
  Jaina's arguments against the validity of the
logical mark 'real'
79
  Tarka as a source of necessary concomitance
in Jainism
88
  Definition oftarkagiven by Jaina logicians 90
  Jaina's Argument Against Naiyayika and
Buddhist Logicians
92
The Theory of internal Concomitance
According to Ratnakarasanti
97
Ratnakarasantipada on Syllogism 107
  Naiyayikas on the number of constituents 107
  Dignaga and Dharmakirti on the number
of constituents
107
  Ratnakarasatipada against Dignaga andDharmakirti 109
  Jaina logicians on Syllogism 109
  Ratnakarasantipada on the number and the
order of constituents
114
Word (Sabda/Vacana) is not a source of knowledge 129
Ratnakarasantipada on the use of
corroborative-example.
135
Hetu trairupya and its interpretation by
Ratnakarasantipada
147
  Logical mark must be present in the subject-of-
inference
148
  A Logical mark is present in similar-instances
(sapaksa>only
150
  A Logical mark is definitely and absolutely
absent from contrary-instances
152
  Buddhist logicians on the Necessity of
Positive and Negative Concomitance
155
  Theories ofvipaksa 157
Ratnakarasantipada on fallacy of
uncommonness of a logical mark
161
B. English Translation of Antarvyapti samarthanam 169
C. Sanskrit Text of Antarvyapti samarthanam
in its Edited form
189

Sample Pages









Click Here for More Books Published By Indian Council of Philosophical Research

ANTARVYAPTI

Item Code:
IDG106
Cover:
Hardcover
Edition:
2002
Publisher:
INDIAN COUNCIL OF PHILOSOPHICAL RESEARCH
ISBN:
8185636575
Language:
WITH SANSKRIT TEXT AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION
Size:
8.9" X 5.8"
Pages:
212
Other Details:
Weight of the Book: 405 gms
Price:
$35.00
Discounted:
$26.25   Shipping Free
You Save:
$8.75 (25%)
Add to Wishlist
Send as e-card
Send as free online greeting card
ANTARVYAPTI

Verify the characters on the left

From:
Edit     
You will be informed as and when your card is viewed. Please note that your card will be active in the system for 30 days.

Viewed 4946 times since 29th Dec, 2015

About the Book:

Antarvyapti, hitherto an untouched area of Indian Logic, is the foundation of the Buddhist and the Jaina theory of anumana. The book not only discusses the theory of antarvyapti to its minutest details but also provides an English translation of Antarvyapti Samarthanam of Ratnaka-rasantipada and an edited version of this Sanskrit text. In this book the author, who himself is a student of Nyaya, tries to defend the Nyaya position.

About the Author:

Arun Mishra (born in December 1956) was trained in Nyaya by his uncle Pandit Kundanath, alias Phekan Mishra, in the family itself which till today is considered as the centre of Nyaya in Mithila. The author has translated Vyapti Nirmaya and Anupalabadhi Rahasya of Ratnakirti and Jnanasrimitra respectively. He is the editor of the volumeSpirituality, Science and Technology, published by Indian Philosophical Congress. He has also published papers in various philosophical journals. At present he is working onAn Analysis of Nyaya Epistemology: From Gautama to Sankara Misra.

Preface

This work will remain incomplete without naming Honourable Professor D.P. Chattopadhyaya and Professor S.R. Bhatt. Whether it be symposium or seminar organised by Indian Council of Philosophical Research or Centre for Studies in Civilizations or on any other occasion I always try to learn something from Honourable Professor Chattopadhyaya. I, on all such occasions, take note of the philosophical problems which he raises and the solutions which he offers. My notebook is full of those problems and their solutions by him along with my own reflections upon both. Thus I strongly feel that it is difficult for me to develop myself intellectually without him. I am obliged to Professor S.R. Bhatt also, who equipped me academically to reach to the level where from I try to understand the intricacies and subtlety of philosophy of Professor D.P. Chattopadhyaya. Thus I am indebted to both of them and more so to Honourable Professor Chattopadhyaya, who enriches me philosophically by providing his philosophical reflections whenever occasions arise.

Professor R.C. Pradhan of Central University (Hyderabad) and present Member Secretary of Indian Council of Philosophical Research loves me like his younger brother and does not allow me to feel isolated in this maddening crowd of Delhi. Whenever I discuss any philosophical problem with him I am enriched by his insight and experience. His love always inspires me to work harder and harder. I should also express my thanks to Dr. Mercy Helen who relentlessly serves for the cause of philosophy in ICPR.

While translating the text I have followed the para- graphing done by the first editor Mahamahopadhyaya Haraprasad Shastri and referred to the paragraph by the number left of the point in my numbering system. The number which has been given at the right of the point refers to the sentence of the paragraph. Sanskrit sentence too has been given the number, so one may find correspondence between English sentence and Sanskrit sentence with the help of this number. In English translation I have used bracket to spell out the noun to which pronoun of Sanskrit language refers or to complete the sentence and thus to make it meaningful.

The Sanskrit text under consideration is one among the Six Buddhist Nyaya Tracts originally published by the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal in 1910. In those days printing technology was not so developed, consequently one may notice methodological as well as textual mistakes. Certainly due to printing errors, corrections made by Mahamaho-padhyaya Haraprasad Shastri sometime occur in square bracket and some time in small bracket. I have kept all his corrections under square bracket and corrections done by me under small bracket. While doing so I have not disturbed the original. I have made the following changes in the text:

(i) I think that a Sanskrit sentence should not end with .an anusvaranta pada, so I have opted for hlanta pada and kept the original outside the bracket.

(ii) At few places I have given the punctuation mark for full stop and at some places I have shifted the position of the same to make the sentence consistent with the structure of the argument. Wherever I have done so, I have tried my best to retain the original with the help of a footnote. In the footnote I have mentioned where exactly the punctuation mark was situated.

(iii) Carelessness on the part of the printer caused several spelling mistakes. I have corrected them and put them within small brackets while retaining the original outside the bracket.

It would not have been possible for me to submit the manuscript on time without the help of Mr. Vijay Kumar jha. Despite his heavy engagement he personally typed it and made the submission possible. I am obliged to Mr. Ashitava Dutta, a student from Silchar (Assam), who helped me to read the final proof.

I must beg an apology from the departed soul of the great Pandit Mahamahopadhyaya Haraprasad Shastri, if I myself have committed any error or caused any harm to the text. At last I must admit that our Nyaya-systern is so rigorous, sophisticated and complex that I have yet to learn it. Under such a situation one should not expect anything novel or extra ordinary from me. So I must conclude it with a statement of jarannaiyayika Jayanta Bhatta.

Introduction

"God", said John Locke, "has not been so sparing to man to make them barely two legged creatures and left it to Aristotle to make them rational".' Rationality-our capacity to think and to know the world-is as old as our history of evolution itself. If we go through the history of Philosophy, whether Oriental or Occidental, we find very few philosophers who would reject the validity of inference. Inference is a common translation of anumana, and it is safe to retain this translation. Carvaka philosophers in general and Grammarian, such as Bhartrhari," are among those few Indian philosophers who questioned the validity of inference as a source of knowledge. Their critique is essentially based on their denial of the possibility of necessary concomitance (vyapti) which makes our knowledge of the thing-to-be-inferred (sadbya) possible.

One's ability to prove the thing-to-be-inferred, with the help of the source of knowledge called inference, depends upon the necessary relationship between what is technically called logical mark (sadbana) and the thing- to-be-inferred (sadbya)', The necessary relationship which allows us to infer the thing-to-be-inferred on the basis of our knowledge of the logical mark is called necessary concomitance.

A clear disagreement emerges among Indian logicians from their answers to the following two questions : Where do we ascertain necessary concomitance, and, how do we ascertain it?

To ask the first question, i.e., where do we ascertain the necessary concomitance, is to ask whether necessary concomitance should be ascertained in the subject-of- inference (sadbyadbarmin) or in the corroborative- example (drstantadbarmin). To ask the second question, i.e., how do we ascertain necessary concomitance, is to ask the question regarding the source (pramana) of ascertaining necessary concomitance.

If one ascertains necessary concomitance in the subject-of-inference (sadbyadbarmin), it is called internal- concomitance (antarvyapti). If one ascertains necessary concomitance in the corroborative-example (drstanta- dbarmin), it is called external-concomitance (babirvyapti). Jaina logicianas and the Buddhist logician Ratnakara- santipada are few Indian logicians who argue for internal- concomitance and oppose external one.

From the available resources it appears that jaina logician Siddhasena Divakara was the first one who long before Ratnakarasantipada argued for the theory of internal-concomitance in his famous work entitled Nyayauatara': The age of this Jaina logician is still not known but it is absolutely clear that they were Jaina who, due to their metaphysical commitment, favoured internal- concomitance and opposed external one. As Jaina thinkers had to infer 'a thing has many aspects (anekantatmakam vastu)' from the logical mark 'real (sat)', so they opted for internal-concomitance Similarly Buddhists had to infer sarvam ksanikam (all things are momentary), so it was necessary for them to opt for internal-concomitance. As all things existing under this world are under dispute", so homogeneous (paksa) and hetrogeneous (vipaksa) example is not available in this case of inference. Further, in the case of unavailability of homogeneous or hetrogeneous example the theory of trairupya as formulated by Dignaga and Dharmakirti" cannot justify the validity of the logical mark. Hence to make the logical mark valid it was necessary for them to argue that necessary concomitance must be ascertained in the subject-of- inference itself. Since Jaina logicians have vehemently argued for the theory of internal-concomitance, it is necessary to discuss them along with Ratnakarasantipada's analysis of internal-concomitance.

CONTENTS

 

A.The Logic of Antarvyapti  
Introduction 3
Age of Ratnakarasantipada 6
Two Major Problems of Ratnakarasantipada 11
Buddhist theses regarding the locus of
ascertaining necessary concomitance
13
 

The locus of ascertaining necessary
concomitance

13
  Three kinds of the logical mark 13
  Karyabetu 15
  Classification of Karyabetu 16
  Svabbavabetu 17
  Anupalabdbibetu 20
  Locus of ascertaining necessary concomitance
according to the kinds ofbetu
27
Different kinds of sources (pramana) to ascertain
necessary concomitance
29
  Pratyaksanupalambba 30
  Trividba and pancavidba pratyaksanupalambba 32
  Prasangaandprasangabetu 34
  Prasangaandprasanga-viparyaya with
reference to Dharmakirti and Dignaga
38
Ratnakarasantipada and his sadbyaviparyyaye
badbaka pramana
39
  The theory ofanupalabdbi and the theory of
vipaksa assumed in badbaka pramana
40
Different theories of anupalabdbi 40
  Perception of something which is incompatible
with the presence of what is to be
negated(svabbavaviruddbopalabdbi)
42
  Perception of the effect of that thing which
is incompatible with the essence of what
is to be negated(svabbavaviruddbakaryopalabdbi)
43
  Non-cognition of a cause(karnanupalabdbi) 43
  Non-cognition of an entity itself(svabbavanupalabdbi) 43
  Perception of what is incompatible with the
pervader (vyapakaviruddbopalabdbi)
44
  Non-cognition of the pervader (vyapakanupalabdbi) 44
  Perception of that phenomena which is
incompatible with the cause(karanaviruddbopalabdbi)
45
  Perception of an effect of some phenomena
which is incompatible with the causes
of what is to be negated(karanaviruddbakaryopalabdbi)
45
The theory of vipaksa 46
Ratnakarasantipada on reality and transitoriness 49
Buddhist definition of reality   52
  Theories ofvyavaccbeda 63
Jaina's theory for the validity of a logical mark
and their theory of internal-concomitance
67
  Jaina's arguments against three-fold conditions
and five-fold conditions of Buddhist and
Naiyayika
68
  Agreement and difference between Jaina
logicians and Ratnakarasantipada
76
  Jaina's arguments against the validity of the
logical mark 'real'
79
  Tarka as a source of necessary concomitance
in Jainism
88
  Definition oftarkagiven by Jaina logicians 90
  Jaina's Argument Against Naiyayika and
Buddhist Logicians
92
The Theory of internal Concomitance
According to Ratnakarasanti
97
Ratnakarasantipada on Syllogism 107
  Naiyayikas on the number of constituents 107
  Dignaga and Dharmakirti on the number
of constituents
107
  Ratnakarasatipada against Dignaga andDharmakirti 109
  Jaina logicians on Syllogism 109
  Ratnakarasantipada on the number and the
order of constituents
114
Word (Sabda/Vacana) is not a source of knowledge 129
Ratnakarasantipada on the use of
corroborative-example.
135
Hetu trairupya and its interpretation by
Ratnakarasantipada
147
  Logical mark must be present in the subject-of-
inference
148
  A Logical mark is present in similar-instances
(sapaksa>only
150
  A Logical mark is definitely and absolutely
absent from contrary-instances
152
  Buddhist logicians on the Necessity of
Positive and Negative Concomitance
155
  Theories ofvipaksa 157
Ratnakarasantipada on fallacy of
uncommonness of a logical mark
161
B. English Translation of Antarvyapti samarthanam 169
C. Sanskrit Text of Antarvyapti samarthanam
in its Edited form
189

Sample Pages









Click Here for More Books Published By Indian Council of Philosophical Research

Post a Comment
 
Post Review
Post a Query
For privacy concerns, please view our Privacy Policy

Related Items

न्यायशास्त्रपरिचय: Nyaya Shastra Parichay
Prof. Gangadhar Bhatt
Samskrit Bharati
Item Code: IZA288
$20.00$15.00
You save: $5.00 (25%)
Ayurveda…The Mantra Of Niramaya (Interactive CD-Rom On The Ancient System Of Indian Medicine) (CD - ROM)
Invis Multimedia (2008)
Item Code: ICI064
$40.00$30.00
You save: $10.00 (25%)
न्यायदर्शनम्: Nyaya Darshanam (Nyaya Sutras of Gautama)
by उदय नारायण सिंह (Uday Narayan Singh)
Paperback (Edition: 2015)
Chaukhambha Sanskrit Pratishthan
Item Code: NZD255
$25.00$18.75
You save: $6.25 (25%)
न्यायलीलावती: Nyaya Lilavati with Three Sanskrit Commentaries
by वलभाचार्य (Valabhacharya)
Hardcover (Edition: 1992)
Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office
Item Code: HAA543
$30.00$22.50
You save: $7.50 (25%)
A PRIMER OF NAVYA NYAYA LANGUAGE AND METHODOLOGY: (Navya-Nayaya-Bhasa-Pradipa of MM Mahesha Chandra Nyayaratna)
by UJJWALA JHA
Hardcover (Edition: 2010)
The Asiatic Society
Item Code: IDG245
$22.50$16.88
You save: $5.62 (25%)
Mimamsa Nyaya Prakasa of Apadeva (An Old and Rare Book)
by Dr. K. N. Chatterjee
Hardcover (Edition: 1993)
Rabindra Bharati University Calcutta
Item Code: NAM117
$25.00$18.75
You save: $6.25 (25%)
Classical Indian Philosophy of Mind: The Nyaya Dualist Tradition
by Kisor Kumar Chakrabarti
Hardcover (Edition: 2001)
Motilal Banarsidass
Item Code: NAC961
$30.00$22.50
You save: $7.50 (25%)
जैमिनीयन्यायमाला: Jaimini Nyaya Mala
by डॉ. महेन्द्र पाण्डेय (Dr. Mahendra Pandya)
Paperback (Edition: 2013)
Chaukhambha Surbharti Prakashan
Item Code: NZJ947
$25.00$18.75
You save: $6.25 (25%)
Contribution of Nyaya System to Indian Thought Structure
by V.N. Jha
Paperback (Edition: 1994)
Department of Sanskrit University of Calicut, Kerala
Item Code: NAC112
$15.00$11.25
You save: $3.75 (25%)

Testimonials

Thank you for allowing me to shop in India from my desk in the United States!! I love your website! Om Shanthi
Florence Ambika, USA
I finally got my nearly $300 Meenakari earrings today. They were promised in 4-6 days but it took a week for them to be shipped. Then it was 4-6 days. When I saw them I had mixed feelings. They are cute but it took me a half hour to get them in my ears as the posts are really large in diameter. I had to use vaseline and force them through and then the screw on backs (a good thing) wouldn't line up. There seems to be something inside the screw on locks that act as a securing agent. Any way most of the things I've got from ExoticIndia were gifts and acceptable.
Beverly, USA
'My' Ganesha-pendant arrived ! Thank you a lot-it's really very lovely ! Greetings from Germany.
Birgit Kukmann
I got the parcel today, and I am very happy about it! a true Bible of Subhashitam! Thanks again a lot.
Eva, France
I have been your customer for many years and everything has always been A++++++++++++ quality.
Delia, USA
I am your customer for many years. I love your products. Thanks for sending high quality products.
Nata, USA
I have been a customer for many years due to the quality products and service.
Mr. Hartley, UK.
Got the package on 9th Nov. I have to say it was one of the excellent packaging I have seen, worth my money I paid. And the books where all in best new conditions as they can be.
Nabahat, Bikaner
Whatever we bought from Exotic India has been wonderful. Excellent transaction,very reasonable price excellent delivery. We bought so many huge statues, clothes, decorative items, jewels etc. Every item was packed with love.
Tom and Roma Florida USA
Namaste. I want to thank you as I have received the statue and I shall always remember the service provided to such good standards.
Dr. B. Saha, UK
TRUSTe online privacy certification
Language:
Currency:
All rights reserved. Copyright 2016 © Exotic India