Plagiarism is not Indian problem as contended by Sharma

by Naveen Chandra Ph. D. A Christian, parading as a Hindu. Jesuits of 15th Century invented it when they stole from Hindu scriptures and published it as their own without mentioning the source. An American with the help of a Telugu person had the Sumati Satakam translated and then he published it as his own without mentioning the source. He also made money and fame. It now looks from what I read on the Net  Andrew J. Nicholson himself lifted passages from old Rishi’s books and published as his own without mentioning the source. Sharma says Malhotra  plagiarised from Nicholson. At least now Malhotra can refer to the original source of Sanskrit version and not mention Nicholson at all. In the light of these new revelations Malhotra  seems to be the victim and deserves to defend himself in BS in a  full-fledged  article  not in the comment section. Terminological inexactitudes of Sharma:
  1. The Indians outside NJ are not loud enough in defending Dharma. Well what decibel level will reach the ears of Sharma? We in Toronto, Canada are thriving well as supporters of Dharma. Bold a weekly magazine is serializing Being Different in every issue. Is that loud enough? Ignorance, insolence and arrogance mark Sharma’s writings.
  2. What he mentions as facts referring to Mr. Young are not facts at all in view of the fact that Nicholson himself seems to have plagiarized.
  3. Sharma doesn’t clarify what Mr. Young really does in the Dalit project. There is a similar project in Janagam taluq of Warangal district in Telangana where they convert Hindus into Christians with the personnel from Houston and financed by Texas Churches.
  4. Western Academicians are jealous of little achievements they make especially in History. They want to make History science- a far cry from reality. History is interpreted and reinterpreted to suit the convenience of the talker. Trump, a Republican Presidential candidate proves my point when he says John McCain was not a war hero. As a matter of fact non academicians have written excellent history books and better ones than the Professors.
  5. This respect for University Professors as expounded by Sharma is not justified when applied universally. William L. Shirer’s short memoir on Gandhi is not an academic book but a masterpiece of history writing. I certainly do not share Sharma’s  adoration and respect  so misplaced in many cases.
  6. Sharma exalts Young as Professor this Professor that- does he deserve this? He stooped so low as to go to social media about the unproven plagiarism of Malhotra. Is that the forum to air these differences? It looks more like Tyler Swift using social media to get at Kate Perry.There are no doubt academic platforms where they can be hashed out. That is cheap for a Professor especially one from Christian Seminary. But who said seminaries are beyond doubt with all that sexual abuse that goes on inside?
  7. Malhotra according to Sharma reinterpreted the data of Nicholson who himself allegedly plagiarised from Rishis, so how can this be plagiarism?
  8. Michael Danino put Sharma in right place by exposing the intellectual dishonesty, intellectual unpreparedness, ignorance etc.. If Sharma was allegedly telling lies about Danino can you take his word about Malhotra?
  9. Now he mentions Hindu jihad. How BS permitted this phrase is beyond my comprehension. Christians have Crusaders among who a presidential family stands out, Moslems have their Jihad but Hindus have only Geeta. What sustained Hindus after 1200 years of domination of Muslim Dynasties, Christian Rule (British) and Nehru’s 60 years is the treasure trove of metaphysics, literature, arts, science, mathematics, political science, an inner belief system that could not be conquered etc.. My children who grew up in the West with western traditions often marvel how Hindus were not all converted. The reason is there is a strength innate that will not succumb to physical forces.
  10. Malhotra was a victim undoubtedly.
In view of these factors I strongly urge you to invite Mr. Malhotra to write a rejoinder not in a comment section as you have insulted Professor Danino with but in the main body of the magazine. That is only fair. Sharmas of this world who masquerade as Hindus like some Chief Ministers of Andhra Pradesh should listen their opponent defending himself. It is democratic and it is fair.

Copyright © 2009 Hindu Dialogue. All rights reserved.
Designed by Balesh Dhankhar.