KariMccool73: starting new entry

2026-05-07T20:46:24Z

starting new entry

New page

{{Infobox book
| name = Unifying Hinduism: Philosophy and Identity in Indian Intellectual History
| title_orig =
| translator =
| image = File:Unifying Hinduism.jpg
| image_size =
| caption = First edition
| author = Andrew J. Nicholson
| illustrator =
| cover_artist =
| country =
| language = [[English language|English]]
| series =
| subject =
| genre = [[Hindu philosophy]],<br>[[history of Hinduism]],<br>[[Indian philosophy]]
| publisher = [[Columbia University Press]], Permanent Black
| pub_date = 2010
| english_pub_date =
| media_type =
| pages = 266
| isbn = 0231149875
| oclc = 881368213
}}

'''''Unifying Hinduism: Philosophy and Identity in Indian Intellectual History''''' is a 2010 book written by the American [[Indology|Indologist]] Andrew J. Nicholson, Associate Professor of Hinduism and Indian Intellectual History at the [[State University of New York]] (SUNY), on the history of [[Indian philosophy]], describing the philosophical unification of [[Hinduism]], which the author places in the [[Medieval India|Middle Ages]]. The book was published in the [[United States]] in 2010 in hardcover, with a paperback edition appearing in 2014. An Indian hardcover edition was published by Permanent Black in 2011. The book won the 2011 award for Best First Book in the History of Religions from the [[American Academy of Religion]],<ref name=aarawards/> and has been reviewed in numerous [[academic journal]]s.{{refn|<ref name=chapple12/><ref name=allen14/><ref name=long12/><ref name=locklin12/><ref name=nemec10/><ref name=srinivas12/><ref name=buchta11/><ref name=mahmood12/><ref name=leach11/><ref name=mathoor11/>}}

==Topics covered==
''Unifying Hinduism'' contains 10 chapters.<ref name=uh14>{{cite book |last1=Nicholson |first1=Andrew J. |title=Unifying Hinduism: philosophy and identity in Indian intellectual history |date=2014 |publisher=[[Columbia University Press]] |location=New York |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LSg0RGmMaTwC |isbn=9780231149877}}</ref> Much of the book focuses on the thought of the [[Medieval India|medieval]] [[Indian philosophy|Indian philosopher]] [[Vijnanabhiksu|Vijñānabhikṣu]]. The book's central concern is to show that Vijñānabhikṣu provided a philosophical synthesis of diverse schools of Indian philosophy, thereby providing a philosophical unification of Hinduism long before the [[Presidencies and provinces of British India|British colonial conquest]] and [[British Raj|rule of India]]. This refutes claims that Hinduism only attained unity (or only was "invented") as a response to colonial influence.

After an introductory first chapter, the next five chapters focus on Vijñānabhikṣu's philosophical syntheses. Chapter 2, entitled "An Alternate History of Vedanta", sets the stage by tracing the history of [[Bhedabheda|Bhedābheda]] [[Vedānta]], a comparatively neglected tradition that teaches the "difference and nondifference" of [[Brahman]] and the individual self. Vijñānabhikṣu's version of this "Difference and Non-Difference" Vedānta is described in Chapter 3.

Chapter 4 offers a historical overview of two important non-Vedānta, earlier [[Āstika and nāstika|orthodox Indian philosophies]]: the philosophical schools of [[Sāṃkhya]] and [[Yoga (philosophy)|Yoga]], focusing on their views of [[God in Hinduism|God]], documenting that, contrary to the widespread view of Sāṃkhya as an entirely [[Atheism|atheistic]] school of thought, most first millennium Sāṃkhya philosophers were [[Theism|theistic]].
Chapter 5, "Reading Against the Grain of the ''Sāṃkhyasūtras''", focuses on a controversial assertion by Vijñānabhikṣu that some verses in the ''Sāṃkhyasūtras'' that explicitly argue against God's existence do not ultimately intend to deny God's existence, but represent merely a “temporary concession” (''abhyupagamavāda'') or “bold assertion” (''prauḍhivāda'').
Finally, Chapter 6, "Yoga, Praxis, and Liberation", discusses Vijñānabhikṣu's commentary on [[Yoga Sutras of Patanjali|Patañjali's ''Yogasūtras'']], arguing that Vijñānabhikṣu's commentaries on Vedānta, Sāṃkhya, and Yoga represent a unified whole.

Chapter 7, "Vedanta and Samkhya in the [[Oriental studies|Orientalist Imagination]]", discusses how Vijñānabhikṣu was diversely viewed by 19th-century European scholars, who in some sense can be understood as "intellectual inheritors of Vijñānabhikṣu’s thought".<ref name=uh14/>{{rp|125}}

The next two chapters return to South Asian thought, with Chapter 8 focuses on Indian philosophical [[Doxography|doxographies]] (categorizations) and Chapter 9, "Affirmers (Āstikas) and Deniers (Nāstikas) in Indian History", providing a history and preferred translation of the two terms ''[[āstika and nāstika]]'', which are more often translated as "[[Orthodoxy|orthodox]]" and "[[Heterodoxy|heterodox]]".
The concluding tenth chapter, "Hindu Unity and the Non-Hindu Other", discusses the timing of the unification of Hindu philosophical schools, suggesting that the stimulus was the [[Islam in India|presence of Islam in the Indian subcontinent]].

==Reception==
''Unifying Hinduism'' won the 2011 award for Best First Book in the History of Religions from the [[American Academy of Religion]].<ref name=aarawards>{{cite web |title=Book Awards |url=http://www.aarweb.org/programs-services/book-awards |website=American Academy of Religion |access-date=23 May 2015 |archive-date=5 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190405024027/http://www.aarweb.org/programs-services/book-awards |url-status=dead }}</ref>

Reviews have appeared in [[academic journal]]s such as the ''[[Journal of the American Academy of Religion]]'',<ref name=chapple12>{{cite journal |author=Christopher Key Chapple |year=2012
|title=Untitled [review of Unifying Hinduism, by Andrew Nicholson]
|journal=[[Journal of the American Academy of Religion]]
|volume=80 |issue=2 |pages=546–549
|doi=10.1093/jaarel/lfs017 |issn=0002-7189}}</ref><ref name=allen14>{{cite journal |last1=Allen |first1=Michael S.
|title=Untitled [review of Unifying Hinduism, by Andrew Nicholson]
|journal=[[Journal of the American Academy of Religion]] |date=17 July 2014 |volume=82 |issue=3 |pages=879–883 |doi=10.1093/jaarel/lfu052}}</ref> ''[[Religious Studies Review]]'',<ref name=long12>{{cite journal |last1=Long |first1=Jeffery D.
|title=Untitled [review of Unifying Hinduism, by Andrew Nicholson]
|journal=[[Religious Studies Review]] |date=March 2012 |volume=38 |issue=1 |page=33
|doi=10.1111/j.1748-0922.2011.01585_5.x |issn=0319-485X}}</ref> ''[[Sophia (journal)|Sophia]]'',<ref name=locklin12>{{cite journal |last1=Locklin |first1=Reid
|title=Untitled [review of Unifying Hinduism, by Andrew Nicholson]
|journal=[[Sophia (journal)|Sophia]] |date=27 May 2012 |volume=51 |issue=2 |pages=331–332
|doi=10.1007/s11841-012-0312-6 |issn=0038-1527}}</ref> ''[[Journal of the American Oriental Society]]'',<ref name=nemec10>{{cite journal |author=John Nemec |year=2010
|title=Untitled [review of Unifying Hinduism, by Andrew Nicholson]
|journal=[[Journal of the American Oriental Society]] |volume=130 |issue=4 |pages=31–33
|issn=0003-0279 }}</ref> ''[[Journal of Asian Studies]]'',<ref name=srinivas12>{{cite journal |last1=Srinivas |first1=Tulasi
|title=Untitled [review of Unifying Hinduism, by Andrew Nicholson]
|journal=[[Journal of Asian Studies]] |date=9 May 2012 |volume=71 |issue=2 |pages=571–572
|issn=1752-0401 |doi=10.1017/S0021911812000496}}</ref> ''[[Journal of Hindu Studies]]'',<ref name=buchta11>{{cite journal |last1=Buchta |first1=David
|title=Untitled [review of Unifying Hinduism, by Andrew Nicholson]
|journal=[[Journal of Hindu Studies]] |date=4 August 2011 |volume=4 |issue=2 |pages=216–218 |doi=10.1093/jhs/hir021}}</ref> ''South Asian History and Culture'',<ref name=mahmood12>{{cite journal |last1=Mahmood |first1=Kaif
|title=Untitled [review of Unifying Hinduism, by Andrew Nicholson]
|journal=South Asian History and Culture
|date=January 2012 |volume=3 |issue=1 |pages=137–139
|doi=10.1080/19472498.2012.639528 |issn=1947-2498}}</ref> ''[[Literature and Theology]]'',<ref name=leach11>{{cite journal |last1=Leach |first1=Robert
|title=Untitled [review of Unifying Hinduism, by Andrew Nicholson]
|journal=[[Literature and Theology]] |date=9 August 2011 |volume=25 |issue=4 |pages=474–477 |doi=10.1093/litthe/frr030 |issn=1477-4623}}</ref> ''[[Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries|Choice]]'',<ref name=puligandla11>{{cite journal |author=R. Puligandla |year=2011
|title=Unifying Hinduism: Philosophy and identity in Indian intellectual history
|journal=[[Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries]] |volume=48 |issue=8 |pages= 1498–1499
|doi= 10.5860/CHOICE.48-4424 |doi-broken-date=1 July 2025
|issn=0009-4978 }}</ref> and ''Metapsychology''.<ref name=mathoor11>{{cite journal
|author=Vineeth Mathoor
|year=2011
|title=Untitled [review of Unifying Hinduism, by Andrew Nicholson]
|journal=Metapsychology
|volume=15
|issue=39
|url=http://metapsychology.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=book&id=6242
|issn=1931-5716
|access-date=2015-05-23
|archive-date=2016-04-12
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160412170601/http://metapsychology.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=book&id=6242
|url-status=dead
}}</ref> ''Unifying Hinduism'' has also been discussed in the 2014 book ''[[Indra's Net (book)|Indra's Net: Defending Hinduism's Philosophical Unity]]'', written by Indian-American author [[Rajiv Malhotra]].<ref name=malhotra14/>

In the ''[[Journal of the American Academy of Religion]]'', Christopher Key Chapple wrote that the author "has created a tour-de-force that puts India’s premodern thinkers in conversation with its postmodern intellectuals".<ref name=chapple12/>{{rp|549}} In particular, Chapple stated that "Nicholson has created a masterful analysis of how premodern India conceptualized and reflected upon the issues of unity and plurality. Medieval Hindu thinkers set forth a philosophical position that seeks to articulate a coherent worldview without sacrificing the complexity of India’s divergent views and deities. Nicholson demonstrates that this endeavor was not an artificial product of modernist, revisionist hybridity as asserted by [[Oriental studies|Orientalist scholars]] but an authentic autochthonous response to an intricate theological context [and] had a reflexive self-awareness and a level of sophistication commensurate and perhaps even more inclusively complex than those found in the western Christian, Jewish, and Islamic theological traditions."<ref name=chapple12/>{{rp|546–7}}

Also in the ''[[Journal of the American Academy of Religion]]'', Michael S. Allen wrote that the book won Best First Book "for good reason: lucid and accessible... Nicholson’s book offers an excellent model for South Asianists seeking to engage with the wider field of religious studies",<ref name=allen14/>{{rp|879}} while the book "can also be recommended to nonspecialists with interests in religious identity, boundary formation, and comparative theology".<ref name=allen14/>{{rp|883}} To Allen, "Nicholson has convincingly shown that a process of unification began well before the British colonial period, extending back several centuries at the very least".<ref name=allen14/>{{rp|882}} However, "there is reason to suspect that the beginnings of the process he describes predate the twelfth century.... [which] would in turn call into question the degree to which Islam influenced the process."<ref name=allen14/>{{rp|882–3}}

In ''[[Religious Studies Review]]'', Jeffrey D. Long wrote that the book "sets the record
straight"<ref name=long12/>{{rp|33}} regarding the historical emergence Hinduism, and "promises to change the scholarly conversation on Hindu identity".<ref name=long12/> Long describes the book as "marvelously clear, meticulously researched, and tightly argued", pointing out that the book also "problematizes or demolishes a number of other oft-repeated truisms of Indian intellectual history, such as that Samkhya was always atheistic, that Advaita is the earliest and truest to the original sources of the systems of Vedanta, and that Vijnanabhiksu... was an unrepresentative thinker of little importance to the Vedanta tradition."<ref name=long12/>{{rp|33}}

In ''[[Sophia (journal)|Sophia]]'', Reid Locklin wrote the book was "somewhat fragmented", with chapters showing marks of prior publication or presentation elsewhere, but that "The cumulative effect is nevertheless very impressive",<ref name=locklin12/>{{rp|332}} and that "Given the enormous scope of its enquiry, the work is relatively concise, very accessible and therefore suitable for the advanced undergraduate or graduate classroom".<ref name=locklin12/>{{rp|332}}

In ''[[Journal of the American Oriental Society]]'', John Nemec wrote that the book's strengths "lie with the larger, theoretical argument Nicholson makes regarding the role of doxography in shaping knowledge",<ref name=nemec10/>{{rp|32}} and that the book "is unquestionably a theoretically subtle and thought-provoking treatment of a neglected chapter in the history of Indian philosophy [that] raises important questions about intellectual history and convincingly makes the case for the significance of Vijñānabhikṣu’s writings."<ref name=nemec10/>{{rp|32–3}} On the other hand, Nemec was still left "with certain doubts and questions",<ref name=nemec10/>{{rp|32}} such as how our understanding of Vijnanabhiksu's views might change if more of his works were available in translation, and whether premodern Indian philosophers might have been "more aware of their mutual differences than this volume allows".<ref name=nemec10/>{{rp|32}} Despite such doubts, Nemec suggested that the volume would be "of value to medievalists, scholars of Vedānta, Sāṃkhya, and Yoga, and of Indian philosophy more generally, to scholars concerned with colonialism, and even those concerned with [[Communalism (South Asia)|communal relations]] in contemporary South Asia."<ref name=nemec10/>{{rp|33}}

In ''[[Journal of Asian Studies]]'', [[Tulasi Srinivas]] wrote that she "found this book very valuable, challenging of my assumptions",<ref name=srinivas12/>{{rp|572}} calling the book "erudite and thought provoking",<ref name=srinivas12/>{{rp|571}} and its argument "powerful, well researched and delivered, and... remarkably persuasive".<ref name=srinivas12/>{{rp|572}} She wondered whether "penetrability"<ref name=srinivas12/>{{rp|572}} between various philosophical schools might be overstated, and how views of Vijnanabhiksu might change if more of his works were available in translation. She regarded the book as having "political ramifications that suggest that the origins of Hinduism are not only the [[Vedas]], as Hindu nationalists claim... nor a product of British colonial rule... as understood by some scholars."<ref name=srinivas12/>{{rp|571}} She also viewed the book as significant for its "broader political and critical claim that Bhedabheda Vedanta is valuable and on par with the better known schools of Indian philosophy".<ref name=srinivas12/>{{rp|572}}

In ''[[Journal of Hindu Studies]]'', David Buchta wrote that the author's position is "clearly and coherently argued and well-supported",<ref name=buchta11/>{{rp|218}} stating that "the balance that Nicholson's analysis offers, correcting exaggerated claims about the colonial invention of Hinduism, is its most important contribution to the study of Hinduism".<ref name=buchta11/>{{rp|218}} Furthermore, Nicholson "shows sensitivity to the political implications of the discussion and the possibility that scholarship supporting the pre-colonial development of a sense of Hindu unity can be co-opted in support of communalism",<ref name=buchta11/>{{rp|218}} and is therefore "careful to emphasise that, while Hindus may have long agreed that a sense of unity exists, the details have just as long been to subject of debate and development".<ref name=buchta11/>{{rp|218}}

In ''South Asian History and Culture'', Kaif Mahmood pointed out that "beliefs" have been only one among many types of religious expression that also include religious art, ritual, and law; Mahmood suggested that Nicholson engaged in "unstated [and debatable] theoretical presumptions that philosophy is identical to religion".<ref name=mahmood12/>{{rp|138–139}} Nicholson's analyses also raise the question, unaddressed by the book, of whether "if what we call Hinduism was invented for the purpose of preserving a particular identity, what was it that was being preserved, if there was no Hinduism before? A weak identity may be strengthened, even refined, but can an identity be invented out of nothing?"<ref name=mahmood12/>{{rp|138}} Mahmood is also concerned that the book fails to discuss or acknowledge a core question related to Vijnanbhiksu's motivation, that is
{{quote|
Did Vijñānabhikṣu create an inclusive classification of Indian philosophy primarily [as propaganda] to preserve an identity, rather than to state the truth as he saw it? Or, did Vijñānabhikṣu's historical circumstances merely act as catalysts for the elaboration of the fundamentally 'polycentric' nature of Indian philosophy, an elaboration for which conditions had not been ripe earlier – that the schools of philosophy are primarily concerned with different aspects of reality, and hence, fundamentally reconcilable.... This is an important distinction for anyone seriously interested in Indian philosophy and the nature of philosophy in general...<ref name=mahmood12/>{{rp|139}}
}}

In ''Literature and Theology'', Robert Leach wrote that the book was "rich, erudite, challenging, and always interesting [and] it will be very difficult to read this book and retain the notion that the idea of Hinduism was dreamt up, virtually from scratch, in the 19th century".<ref name=leach11/>{{rp|477}} Leach added that
{{quote|
it is not wholly convincing that Vijñānabhikṣu's inclusivist project is categorically distinct from strategies applied by earlier authors whom Nicholson omits from the historical process of unifying Hinduism. Among pre-12th century authors who systematically assembled South Asian intellectual traditions in a conceivably 'proto-Hindu' fashion, and who did so in a context which does not appear to have been shaped by rivalries with Islam, we can count, for example, [[Bhasarvajna]] and [[Jayanta Bhatta|Bhatta Jayanta]]. And to these we may add several passages from Puranic works such as the [[Vishnudharmottara Purana|Visnudharmottarapurana]] (e.g. 2.22.128-134) and the [[Agni Purana|Agnipurana]] (219.57c-61).<ref name=leach11/>{{rp|477}}
}}

Leach also found of interest Nicholson's conclusion that "in Classical India nastika principally denoted non-acceptance of 'correct ritual performance' (i.e. heteropraxy), but in late medieval Vedanta came to be understood as the rejection of 'correct opinion' (heterodoxy)",<ref name=leach11/>{{rp|476}} pointing out that "This conclusion can have significant consequences for the debate on the so-called 'Protestantisation' of Hinduism in the 19th century".<ref name=leach11/>{{rp|476}}

In ''[[Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries|Choice]]'', R. Puligandla described the book as "clear, analytical, well-documented", recommending that "all scholars and students of Hinduism and Indian philosophy should find this book beneficial and rewarding", although "Nicholson's arguments and conclusions will not persuade some scholars, especially those who hold the view that Hinduism as a unified tradition has existed since ancient times".<ref name=puligandla11/>

In ''Metapsychology'', Vineeth Mathoor described the book as presenting "the history of [the] dialectical relation between Hinduism and the many streams within it [yielding] what it today stands for: tolerance, pluralism and inclusivism", calling the book "path-breaking" and "a must read for scholars of Indian history, Hinduism and south Asian religious traditions".<ref name=mathoor11/>

== Controversy ==
In the 2014 book ''[[Indra's Net (book)|Indra's Net: Defending Hinduism's Philosophical Unity]]'', written by Indian-American author [[Rajiv Malhotra]], the author quoted Nicholson several times and cited numerous ideas from ''Unifying Hinduism'', describing it as an "excellent study of the pre-colonial coherence of Hinduism",<ref name="malhotra14">{{cite book
|title=Indra's Net: Defending Hinduism's Philosophical Unity
|last=Malhotra |first=Rajiv |author-link=Rajiv Malhotra |year=2014
|location=Noida, India |publisher=HarperCollins Publishers India |isbn=9789351362449
|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=M7TlAgAAQBAJ}} {{ISBN|9351362442}}, {{OCLC|871215576}}</ref>{{rp|156}} and as a "positive exception to many [reifying, homogenizing, and isolating] trends in scholarship"<ref name="malhotra14" />{{rp|169}} by Westerners about the evolution of [[Hindu philosophy]]. However, despite the citations, it was alleged that Malhotra's book [[Plagiarism|actually plagiarized Nicholson's work]].<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.firstpost.com/living/historian-richard-fox-young-accuses-writer-rajeev-malhotra-plagiarism-2331532.html|title=Historian Richard Fox Young accuses writer Rajeev Malhotra of plagiarism|date=2015-07-07|work=Firstpost|access-date=2017-03-26|language=en-US}}</ref> It led to an online controversy without any actual lawsuit being filed against Malhotra.<ref>{{Citation|last=Rajiv Malhotra Official|title=Columbia University Talk "Hinduphobia in Academia": Rajiv Malhotra|date=2016-04-24|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olQlPZuEWLY|access-date=2017-03-26}}</ref> In response to Nicholson, Malhotra stated "I used your work with explicit references 30 times in Indra's Net, hence there was no ill-intention," and provided with a list of these citations. He added that he will be removing all references to Nicholson, replacing them with [[Indian literature|original Indian sources]]. Thereafter, a re-written version of the debated chapter was posted on the book's website.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://indrasnetbook.com/changes-chapter-8/|title=Changes to Chapter 8 - Indra's Net|work=Indra's Net|access-date=2017-03-26|language=en-US}}</ref>

==Editions==
The original hardcover edition was published by in 2010 by [[Columbia University Press]]. A hardcover edition was published in India in 2011 by Permanent Black. Paperback and electronic versions have also been published:
* {{cite book |last1=Nicholson |first1=Andrew J. |title=Unifying Hinduism: philosophy and identity in Indian intellectual history |date=2014 |publisher=[[Columbia University Press]] |location=New York |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LSg0RGmMaTwC |isbn=9780231149877}} {{ISBN|0231149875}}, {{OCLC|881368213}} (266 pages), paperback
* {{cite book |last1=Nicholson |first1=Andrew J. |title=Unifying Hinduism: philosophy and identity in Indian intellectual history |date=2011 |publisher=Permanent Black |location=Delhi |url=http://www.orientblackswan.com/display.asp?categoryID=34&isbn=978-81-7824-328-3 |isbn=9788178243283 }} {{ISBN|8178243288}} (266 pages), hardback
* {{cite book |last1=Nicholson |first1=Andrew J. |title=Unifying Hinduism: philosophy and identity in Indian intellectual history |date=2010 |publisher=[[Columbia University Press]] |location=New York, London |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LSg0RGmMaTwC |isbn=9780231149860 }} {{ISBN|0231149867}}, {{OCLC|898542146}} (266 pages), hardback
* {{cite book |last1=Nicholson |first1=Andrew J. |title=Unifying Hinduism: philosophy and identity in Indian intellectual history |date=2010 |publisher=[[Columbia University Press]] |location=New York |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LSg0RGmMaTwC |isbn=9780231149860 }} {{ISBN|0231526423}}, {{OCLC|897040609}} (266 pages), electronic book
* {{cite book |last1=Nicholson |first1=Andrew J. |title=Unifying Hinduism: philosophy and identity in Indian intellectual history |date=2010 |publisher=[[Perseus Books Group|Perseus Book LLC]] |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LSg0RGmMaTwC |isbn=9781282872417}} {{ISBN|1282872419}}, {{OCLC|816612398}} (266 pages), electronic book

==See also==
* [[Brahmanism]]
* [[Hindu philosophy]]
* [[Hindu texts]]
* [[History of India]]
* ''[[Indra's Net (book)|Indra's Net: Defending Hinduism's Philosophical Unity]]'' (2014), book by [[Rajiv Malhotra]] on [[Neo-Vedanta]]
* ''[[Infinite Paths to Infinite Reality]]'' (2018), book by Ayon Maharaj, also known as [[Swami Medhananda]] on [[Ramakrishna|Sri Ramakrishna]]
* [[Sanskrit literature]]

==References==
{{Reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [http://permanent-black.blogspot.com/2011/04/andrew-j.html Interview with Andrew J. Nicholson on "Unifying Hinduism"] at the Permanent Black Publishers website
* [http://scroll.in/article/742022/upset-about-rajiv-malhotras-plagiarism-even-more-upset-about-distortions-of-my-work Andrew J. Nicholson's statement] on Rajiv Malhotra's alleged plagiarism of "Unifying Hinduism"
* [http://www.stonybrook.edu/commcms/asianamerican/facultystaff/AndrewNicholson.html Andrew J. Nicholson's homepage] at Stony Brook University

{{Hinduism footer small}}

[[Category:2010 essays]]
[[Category:2010 non-fiction books]]
[[Category:Advaita]]
[[Category:Books about the Upanishads]]
[[Category:Books about yoga]]
[[Category:Columbia University Press books]]
[[Category:Essays about religion]]
[[Category:History books about Hinduism]]
[[Category:History books about philosophy]]
[[Category:Neo-Vedanta]]
[[Category:Samkhya]]
[[Category:Vedanta]]

Unifying Hinduism - Revision history

KariMccool73: starting new entry