________________
15
king Laksmanasena (7&HUTTA) was ruling Bengal in 1030 A.D. and there was a Pundit Halāyudh Bhatt (EcliET VE) in his court. Gangesopādhyāya is considered to be prior to Halāyudh Bhatt. Prof. Dineśa Chandra Bhattācarya (FGANG Elarf) had criticized the view of Dr. Keat, Dr. Vidyābhusana, Dr. Hari Prasād sastrī etc. (EŤ. faahu, RUHIG girait) and had proved that the time of Gangesa was the 13th century A.D. according to historical evidence found in Mithilā. Dr. Vidyābhusana had established that Gangeśa was the native of the village Khārian (afen) situated in the state of Mithilā. He had pointed out that some scholars point that Gangesa was a native of Māngroni (HİR) village situated near Madhubani (pari) in the state of Mithilā. It is known that the earlier name of Mangroni was Mangalvāni (Han). (2) Pakṣadhara Miśra
After Gangesa, Pakşadhara Miśra was the only scholar who established his own independent traditon in the field of Navya Nyāya by writing the commentary on Tattvacintāmaņi name Aloka (341611). Aloka was the main treatise for study of Navya Nyāya all over India for so many years. Aloka was written on the three chapters of Tattvacintāmani except Upamāna (34717). The commentary Aloka was the only work of Paksadhara Miśra known to scholars for very long time. Later after search and investigation two more works by Pakşadhara Miśra were found : Dravyaviveka and Nyāyalīlāvatīviveka (garaach, peccanicach). The manuscripts of them were found in the India Office Library together with a commentary of Vardhamān Updhyāya on Dravyaviveka. This is referred to in Nyāyalīlāvatīviveka. Nyāyalīlāvatīviveka is a more voluminous work but there is no any reference to Pakşadhara Miśra in it.
