Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan: An Intellectual Bridge Between India and the West

Radhakrishnan_S

Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (1888–1975) stands as a towering figure of the 20th century, renowned as an academic, philosopher, and statesman who profoundly influenced intellectual discourse both in India and the West. Throughout his illustrious life and extensive body of work, Doctor Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan dedicated himself to articulating, defending, and propagating his deeply held religious beliefs, which he often described as Hinduism, Vedanta, or the religion of the Spirit. His intellectual pursuit aimed to demonstrate the philosophical coherence and ethical robustness of his interpretation of Hinduism. Radhakrishnan’s deep engagement with personal experience, coupled with his comprehensive understanding of Western philosophical and literary traditions, cemented his legacy as a vital bridge-builder connecting Indian and Western thought. Comfortable within both Indian and Western intellectual frameworks, he skillfully drew upon sources from both spheres, enriching his writing and thought. This unique ability positioned Doctor Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan as a prominent representative of Hinduism to the Western world. His prolific writings have been instrumental in shaping Western perceptions of Hinduism, India, and the East more broadly, leaving an indelible mark on global intellectual history.

1. Biography and Context

a. Formative Years (1888-1904)

Details surrounding Doctor Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan’s early childhood and education remain relatively scarce. He was a man of considerable private nature, rarely discussing personal matters, and the biographical details available often come from reflections shared decades later in his life. Born in Tirutani, Andhra Pradesh, in 1888, Radhakrishnan hailed from a Brahmin family, likely adhering to the Smarta tradition. Tirutani, a predominantly Hindu town, served as a significant temple town and pilgrimage destination. Radhakrishnan’s family actively participated in the devotional practices prevalent there. The Smarta tradition’s implicit acceptance of Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta suggests that an Advaitic philosophical framework subtly shaped Radhakrishnan’s early religious and philosophical sensibilities.

In 1896, Radhakrishnan was sent to school in Tirupati, another prominent pilgrimage center nearby. Tirupati, drawing devotees from across India, presented a more cosmopolitan environment. For four formative years, Radhakrishnan attended the Hermannsburg Evangelical Lutheran Missionary school. This period marked his initial encounter with non-Hindu missionaries and 19th-century Christian theology, which emphasized personal religious experience. The theological doctrines taught at the missionary school may have resonated with the strong devotional atmosphere surrounding the Tirumala temple in Tirupati, activities that Radhakrishnan undoubtedly witnessed. This shared emphasis on personal religious experience might have hinted at a common thread between the missionaries’ faith and the religious practices at the Tirumala temple.

Between 1900 and 1904, Radhakrishnan continued his education at Elizabeth Rodman Voorhees College in Vellore. This institution was managed by the American Arcot Mission of the Reformed Church in America. The Mission’s core objectives were to preach the Gospel, disseminate vernacular religious tracts, and educate those they considered “heathen.” Robert Minor highlights that it was at Voorhees College that Radhakrishnan was “introduced to Dutch Reform Theology, which emphasized a righteous God, unconditional grace, and election, and which criticized Hinduism as intellectually incoherent and ethically unsound.” Simultaneously, the Mission actively engaged in social welfare initiatives, demonstrating a commitment to education, healthcare, and social uplift through famine relief efforts, hospital establishment, and universal education irrespective of social standing. These activities, while serving as potential incentives for conversion, were integral to the Mission’s broader mandate. In this environment, Radhakrishnan faced what he perceived as fundamental challenges to his Hindu beliefs. He also observed the positive societal impact of the Mission’s social programs, undertaken within the context of Christian evangelism.

Thus, Doctor Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan’s early life involved absorbing the implicit Advaita Vedanta of his upbringing and experiencing the devotional practices within the Smarta tradition. His time in Tirupati exposed him to Lutheran Christian missionaries, whose focus on personal religious experience may have suggested commonalities with his Hindu heritage. In Vellore, he witnessed a systematic social gospel intertwined with the religion of those critical of his cultural norms and religious worldview.

Radhakrishnan married Sivakamuamma in 1904 while residing in Vellore. Their marriage, lasting over five decades, produced six children: five daughters and a son.

It was within this historical and hermeneutic context, shaped by these experiences, that Radhakrishnan encountered a revitalized Hinduism. He was significantly influenced by the writings of Swami Vivekananda and V.D. Savarkar’s The First War of Indian Independence. The Theosophical Society was also actively present in the South Arcot region during this period. The Theosophists not only celebrated the ancient wisdom they believed resided in India but also ardently advocated for a philosophical, spiritual, and scientific convergence of East and West. Furthermore, the Society’s involvement in the Indian nationalist movement is evidenced by Annie Besant’s participation in the Indian National Congress. While Radhakrishnan does not explicitly mention the Theosophists’ presence, it’s improbable he remained unaware of their perspectives.

Vivekananda, Savarkar, and Theosophy collectively instilled in Radhakrishnan a sense of cultural self-assurance and independence. However, this affirmation from resurgent Hinduism didn’t immediately lead him to philosophical studies or the interpretation of his own religion. It was Radhakrishnan’s experiences at Madras Christian College that catalyzed his endeavor to articulate his understanding of Hinduism in writing.

b. Madras Christian College (1904-1908)

In 1904, Radhakrishnan enrolled at Madras Christian College. Initially, his academic inclinations leaned towards the physical sciences, and prior to commencing his MA in 1906, he seemed to consider a career in law.

Two pivotal influences at Madras Christian College profoundly shaped Radhakrishnan’s intellectual development. Firstly, he received formal training in European philosophy. He was introduced to the philosophies of Berkeley, Leibniz, Locke, Spinoza, Kant, J.S. Mill, Herbert Spencer, Fichte, Hegel, Aristotle, and Plato, among others. Secondly, he was mentored by Professor A.G. Hogg, his MA supervisor and a highly influential non-Indian figure in his academic journey. Hogg, a Scottish Presbyterian missionary, was versed in the theology of Albrecht Ritschl and studied under philosopher Andrew Seth Pringle-Pattison. As a student of Arthur Titius, himself a disciple of Albrecht Ritschl, Hogg adopted Ritschl’s distinction between religious value judgments, emphasizing subjective perception, and theoretical knowledge, aimed at uncovering ultimate reality. Religious value judgments, in this framework, provide a distinct form of knowledge, not necessarily opposed to theoretical knowledge. For Ritschl, Titius, and Hogg, this distinction implied that doctrines and scriptures are records of personal insights, essential for religious, particularly Christian, faith. This distinction profoundly impacted Radhakrishnan’s philosophical and religious thought, echoing throughout his writings.

The second significant factor shaping Radhakrishnan’s sensibilities during this period was encountering intense religious debate within an academic context at Madras Christian College. Radhakrishnan later recalled, “The challenge of Christian critics impelled me to make a study of Hinduism and find out what is living and what is dead in it… I prepared a thesis on the Ethics of the Vedanta, which was intended to be a reply to the charge that the Vedanta system had no room for ethics” (MST 19). This intellectual sparring and the need to articulate a robust defense of Vedanta ethics marked a turning point in his philosophical trajectory.

c. Early Teaching and Writing (1908-1912)

Upon completing his MA in 1908, Doctor Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan faced professional and financial uncertainties. Family obligations prevented him from pursuing scholarships for studies in Britain, and he struggled to find employment in Madras. The subsequent year, with the support of William Skinner at Madras Christian College, Radhakrishnan secured a temporary teaching position at Presidency College in Madras.

At Presidency College, Radhakrishnan lectured on diverse subjects encompassing psychology and European philosophy. As a junior Assistant Professor, his teaching repertoire included logic, epistemology, and ethical theory. During his tenure at the College, he also undertook the study of Sanskrit.

During these years, Radhakrishnan was eager to publish his work, targeting both Indian and European journals. The Guardian Press in Madras published his MA thesis, and slightly revised excerpts from this work appeared in Modern Review and The Madras Christian College Magazine. While he achieved publication success in other Indian journals, it was his article “The Ethics of the Bhagavadgita and Kant,” published in The International Journal of Ethics in 1911, that marked his breakthrough to a substantial Western audience. Additionally, his edited lecture notes on psychology were published as Essentials of Psychology.

d. The War, Tagore, and Mysore (1914-1920)

By 1914, Doctor Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan’s reputation as a scholar was gaining momentum. However, the security of a permanent academic position in Madras remained elusive. He briefly served in Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh, for three months in 1916, and in 1917, he was again transferred, this time to Rajahmundry. It was only after a year in Rajahmundry that Radhakrishnan achieved some professional stability with his appointment to a philosophy position at Mysore University. This respite from occupational uncertainty was short-lived. His most prestigious Indian academic appointment, the George V Chair in Philosophy at Calcutta University, in February 1921, would take him out of South India for the first time just two and a half years later.

Between 1914 and 1920, Radhakrishnan continued his prolific publishing output. He authored eighteen articles, ten of which were featured in prominent Western journals such as The International Journal of Ethics, The Monist, and Mind. Throughout these publications, Radhakrishnan dedicated himself to refining and expanding his interpretation of Hinduism.

A pronounced polemical tone characterized many of these articles. Radhakrishnan moved beyond simply defining and defending Vedanta. Instead, he directly confronted not only Vedanta’s Western intellectual competitors but also what he perceived as the broader Western philosophical project and the Western ethos in general.

Radhakrishnan’s polemical inclinations during this period were intensified by the political upheaval both in India and globally. His articles and books from this era reflect his desire to offer a philosophically sound response to the growing discontent he observed. World War One and its aftermath, particularly the Amritsar massacre in spring 1919, further fueled Radhakrishnan’s disillusionment with what he considered an irrational, dogmatic, and authoritarian West. Radhakrishnan’s 1920 publication, The Reign of Religion in Contemporary Philosophy, exemplifies his heightened polemical stance during this time.

A more positive influence in Radhakrishnan’s life during these years was his engagement with the works of Rabindranath Tagore, the Bengali poet. Radhakrishnan joined the global English-speaking readership in 1912 in discovering Tagore’s translated works. Although they had not yet met, Tagore became perhaps Radhakrishnan’s most influential Indian mentor. Tagore’s poetry and prose deeply resonated with Radhakrishnan. He appreciated Tagore’s emphasis on aesthetics and his appeal to intuition. From 1914 onwards, both aesthetics and intuition began to feature prominently in Radhakrishnan’s interpretations of experience, which he considered a fundamental epistemological category for his philosophical and religious perspectives. Over the subsequent five decades, Radhakrishnan repeatedly referenced Tagore’s writings to bolster his own philosophical ideals.

e. Calcutta and the George V Chair (1921-1931)

In 1921, Doctor Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan assumed the prestigious George V Chair in Philosophy at Calcutta University. As a respected, though initially hesitant, successor to Brajendranath Seal, his appointment was met with some opposition from those who favored a Bengali candidate for the position. In Calcutta, Radhakrishnan found himself outside his South Indian comfort zone—geographically, culturally, and linguistically.

However, the initial isolation Radhakrishnan experienced in Calcutta provided him with the space to work on his two-volume Indian Philosophy. He commenced the first volume while in Mysore, publishing it in 1923, with the second volume following four years later. Throughout the 1920s, Radhakrishnan’s scholarly reputation continued to expand both in India and internationally. He was invited to Oxford to deliver the 1926 Upton Lectures, published in 1927 as The Hindu View of Life, and in 1929, Radhakrishnan delivered the Hibbert Lectures, later published as An Idealist View of Life. The latter is considered Radhakrishnan’s most sustained and original work, receiving significant scholarly attention.

While enjoying growing scholarly acclaim, Radhakrishnan also encountered increasing social and political turmoil in Calcutta. The Amritsar massacre of 1919 had severely strained relations between Indians and the British Raj. Gandhi’s intermittent Rowlatt Satyagraha proved ineffective in unifying Indian political voice. The ambiguous Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms, offering a glimmer of “responsible government,” further fragmented the already divided Congress. The Khalifat movement splintered the Indian Muslim community and exacerbated growing tensions between its supporters and those who viewed it as secondary to swaraj (self-rule). However, the racial paternalism of the 1927 Simon Commission reignited nationalist sentiment. While Indian solidarity and protest gained international attention, largely due to media coverage of Gandhi’s Salt March, this unity remained fragile. Indian political consensus, let alone swaraj, remained elusive. Communal divisions, power struggles among Indian factions, and renewed conservatism in Britain crippled the London Round Table Conferences of the early 1930s, reinforcing the fragmentation and political volatility of India.

With the publication of An Idealist View of Life, Radhakrishnan had fully matured philosophically. He believed he had identified the core “religious” problem, examined various solutions, and proposed his own. He argued that unreflective dogmatism could not be addressed by abandoning “experiential religion,” the true foundation of all religions. Instead, he advocated for recognizing the creative power of integral experience, tempered by a critical scientific approach, as the only viable antidote to dogmatic claims of exclusivity based on external, second-hand authority. While Hinduism (Advaita Vedanta), as he interpreted it, best exemplified his position, Radhakrishnan asserted that genuine philosophical, theological, and literary traditions in both India and the West supported his perspective.

f. The 1930s and 1940s

Doctor Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan was knighted in 1931, the same year he assumed administrative responsibilities as Vice-Chancellor at the newly established Andhra University in Waltair. He served as Vice-Chancellor for five years. In 1936, Calcutta University reaffirmed his professorship permanently, and Oxford University appointed him to the H.N. Spalding Chair of Eastern Religions and Ethics. In late 1939, Radhakrishnan began his second Vice-Chancellorship at Benares Hindu University (BHU), serving throughout World War II until mid-January 1948, just weeks before Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination in New Delhi.

Shortly after resigning from BHU, Radhakrishnan was appointed chairman of the University Education Commission. The Commission’s 1949 Report assessed the state of university education in newly independent India and provided recommendations for its improvement. While a collaborative effort, Radhakrishnan’s influence is particularly evident in chapters addressing “The Aims of University Education” and “Religious Education.”

During these decades, the question of nationalism increasingly occupied Radhakrishnan’s attention. The growing communalism he witnessed in the 1920s intensified with the ideological rise of the Hindu Mahasabha under Bhai Parmanand and V.D. Savarkar. Similarly, Muhammad Iqbal’s 1930 poetic vision and call for Muslim self-assertion provided Muhammad Jinnah with an ideological framework for demanding an independent Pakistan, a claim acknowledged at the London Round Table Conferences. If the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms of the 1920s had fragmented fragile political alliances, the Government of India Act of 1935, promising greater self-government, further complicated the political landscape and divided groups vying for power. The spectrum of nationalist visions was as broad as Indian solidarity was elusive.

For Radhakrishnan, education and nationalism were intertwined. He believed university education fostering holistic individual development was crucial for creating Indian solidarity and a clear national vision. Throughout the 1930s and 1940s, Radhakrishnan articulated his vision for an autonomous India, built and led by educated individuals deeply committed to raising Indian self-consciousness.

g. Post-Independence: Vice-Presidency and Presidency

The years following India’s independence marked Doctor Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan’s increasing involvement in Indian politics and international affairs. The late 1940s were particularly busy. Radhakrishnan was actively involved in the newly formed UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization), serving on its Executive Board and leading the Indian delegation from 1946 to 1951. He also served in the Indian Constituent Assembly for the two years immediately following independence. His commitments to UNESCO and the Constituent Assembly were in addition to his responsibilities with the University Commission and his Spalding Professorship at Oxford.

After completing the Universities Commission Report in 1949, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru appointed Radhakrishnan as Indian Ambassador to Moscow, a position he held until 1952. Radhakrishnan’s opportunity to implement his philosophical-political ideals arrived with his election to the Rajya Sabha, where he served as India’s Vice-President (1952-1962) and subsequently as President (1962-1967).

During his terms in office, Radhakrishnan emphasized the growing need for global unity and universal fellowship. He felt the urgency of this need acutely due to unfolding global crises. At the start of his Vice-Presidency, the Korean War was underway. Political tensions with China in the early 1960s, followed by hostilities between India and Pakistan, dominated his presidency. The Cold War further divided East and West, fostering mutual suspicion and defensiveness.

Radhakrishnan challenged what he saw as the divisive potential and dominating nature of international organizations like the League of Nations. Instead, he advocated for promoting creative internationalism grounded in the spiritual foundations of integral experience. He believed only through such an approach could genuine understanding and tolerance be fostered between peoples and nations.

Radhakrishnan retired from public life in 1967 and spent his final eight years at his home in Mylapore, Madras. He passed away on April 17, 1975, leaving behind a legacy as a philosopher-statesman who profoundly shaped 20th-century thought and Indian public life.

2. Philosophy of Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan

a. Metaphysics

Radhakrishnan located his metaphysical framework within the Advaita (non-dual) Vedanta tradition (sampradaya). Like other Vedantins before him, Doctor Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan authored commentaries on the Prasthanatraya, Vedanta’s foundational texts: the Upanishads (1953), Brahma Sutra (1959), and the Bhagavad Gita (1948).

As an Advaitin, Radhakrishnan embraced metaphysical idealism. However, his idealism acknowledged the reality and diversity of the world of experience (prakriti) while upholding the concept of a wholly transcendent Absolute (Brahman), which he identified as identical to the self (Atman). While the empirical world, characterized by change, finitude, and multiplicity, is not ultimate reality, it originates from and is sustained by the Absolute (Brahman), which is devoid of limitations, diversity, and distinctions (nirguna). Brahman is the source of the world and its manifestations, yet these modes do not compromise Brahman’s integrity.

In this vein, Radhakrishnan did more than simply reiterate the metaphysics of Shankara (8th century C.E.), arguably Advaita Vedanta’s most influential figure. He sought to reinterpret Advaita for contemporary needs. Specifically, Radhakrishnan re-evaluated Shankara’s understanding of maya, traditionally seen as illusion. For Radhakrishnan, maya should not be construed as strict objective idealism, where the world is inherently disconnected from Brahman. Instead, maya, among other interpretations, indicates a subjective misperception of the world as ultimately real. [See Donald Braue, Maya in Radhakrishnan’s Thought: Six Meanings Other Than Illusion (1985) for a detailed analysis of this aspect.]

b. Epistemology: Intuition and the Varieties of Experience

This section explores Radhakrishnan’s epistemology, focusing on his understanding of intuition and interpretations of experience. It begins by surveying the range of terms and characteristics Radhakrishnan associates with intuition. It then details how Radhakrishnan understands specific manifestations of intuition in relation to other forms of experience—cognitive, psychic, aesthetic, ethical, and religious.

i. Intuition

Radhakrishnan associates a broad range of terms with intuition. At its peak, intuition is an “integral experience.” He uses “integral” in at least three senses. Firstly, intuition is integral because it coordinates and synthesizes all other experiences, unifying them into a more cohesive whole. Secondly, intuition is integral as it forms the foundation of all other experiences. Radhakrishnan posits that all experiences are fundamentally intuitional. Thirdly, intuition is integral because its outcomes are integrated into an individual’s life. For Radhakrishnan, intuition finds expression in actions and social interactions.

Radhakrishnan sometimes emphasizes the “mystical” and “spiritual” nature of intuition, using terms like “religious experience” (IVL 91), “religious consciousness” (IVL 199), “mystical experience” (IVL 88), “spiritual idealism” (IVL 87), “self-existent spiritual experience” (IVL 99), “prophetic indications,” “the real ground in man’s deepest being” (IVL 103), “spiritual apprehension” (IVL 103), “moments of vision” (IVL 94), “revelation” (IVL 210), “supreme light” (IVL 206), and even “faith” (IVL 199). However, it is the creative power of intuition, denoted by terms like “creative center” of the individual (IVL 113), “creative intuition” (IVL 205), “creative spirit” (IVL 206), and “creative energy” (IVL 205), that is central to Radhakrishnan’s understanding of intuition. He believes all progress stems from the creative potential of intuition.

For Radhakrishnan, intuition is a distinct and self-validating form of experience (svatassiddha). It is sufficient and complete, self-established (svatasiddha), self-evidencing (svasamvedya), and self-luminous (svayam-prakasha) (IVL 92). Intuition implies pure comprehension, complete significance, and absolute validity (IVL 93). It is both truth-filled and truth-bearing (IVL 93), its own cause and explanation (IVL 92), and sovereign (IVL 92). Intuition is accompanied by positive feelings of calm, confidence, joy, and strength (IVL 93), profoundly satisfying, and embodying peace, power, and joy (IVL 93).

Intuition is the ultimate form of experience for Radhakrishnan, representing the fullest and most authentic realization of the Real (Brahman). Its ultimacy also stems from its role as the ground of all other forms of experience.

Intuition is a self-revelation of the divine, an immediate experience. Immediacy, in Radhakrishnan’s view, does not mean “absence of psychological mediation, but only non-mediation by conscious thought” (IVL 98). Intuition operates at a supra-conscious level, unmediated by conscious thought. Yet, Radhakrishnan maintains that “there is no such thing as pure experience, raw and undigested. It is always mixed up with layers of interpretation” (IVL 99). This statement, rather than conflating experience and interpretation, aims to counter the Hegelian interpretation of Hinduism’s “contentless” experience, affirming intuition as the plenitude of experience.

Finally, Radhakrishnan considers intuition ineffable, transcending the limits of language and logic, defying definition (IVL 96). In intuitive experiences, “[t]hought and reality coalesce and a creative merging of subject and object results” (IVL 92). While the experience itself exceeds expression, it also compels it (IVL 95). This drive to express is, for Radhakrishnan, evidence of intuition’s creative impulse. All creativity and progress across life’s domains are, in his view, the inevitable outcomes of intuition.

ii. Varieties of Experience

1) Cognitive Experience

Radhakrishnan identifies three categories of cognitive experience: sense experience, discursive reasoning, and intuitive apprehension. He posits that all contribute, in varying degrees, to knowledge of the real (Brahman) and are rooted in intuition.

Sense Experience

Among cognitive forms of knowledge, sensory knowledge is, in one sense, closest to intuition. Radhakrishnan argues that in the act of sensing, one is in “direct contact” with the object. Sense experience “helps us to know the outer characters of the external world. By means of it we acquire an acquaintance with the sensible qualities of the objects” (IVL 134). He believes, “Intuitions are convictions arising out of a fullness of life in a spontaneous way, more akin to sense than to imagination or intellect and more inevitable than either” (IVL 180). In this sense, sense perception can be considered intuitive, although Radhakrishnan doesn’t explicitly label it as such.

Discursive Reasoning

Discursive reasoning and the logical knowledge it produces follow sensory experience (perception). Logical knowledge, obtained through analysis and synthesis, unlike sense perception which Radhakrishnan considers closer to direct knowledge, “is indirect and symbolic in its character. It helps us to handle and control the object and its workings” (IVL 134). Radhakrishnan seems to suggest a paradox: the direct proximity to an external object in sense perception is compromised when interpreted and incorporated into a more systematic, though supposedly higher, form of knowledge through discursive reasoning.

For Radhakrishnan, discursive reasoning and the logical systems it constructs contain an element of intuition. The methodical process of logical problems and rational systems is inseparable from what he might term an “intuitive hunch” that such an approach will yield positive results: “In any concrete act of thinking the mind’s active experience is both intuitive and intellectual” (IVL 181-182).

Intuitive Apprehension

Radhakrishnan challenges what he sees as a common (Western) tendency to reduce intuition to logic. While logic deals with known facts, intuition transcends logic to reveal previously unseen connections between facts. “The art of discovery is confused with the logic of proof and an artificial simplification of the deeper movements of thought results. We forget that we invent by intuition though we prove by logic” (IVL 177). Intuition clarifies relationships between facts and seemingly discordant systems and facilitates the discovery of new knowledge, which then becomes a subject for philosophical inquiry and logical analysis.

Drawing inspiration from Henri Bergson, Radhakrishnan offers three explanations for overlooking intuition in discursive reasoning. First, intuition presupposes rational knowledge of facts: “The insight does not arise if we are not familiar with the facts of the case…. The successful practice of intuition requires previous study and assimilation of a multitude of facts and laws. We may take it that great intuitions arise out of a matrix of rationality” (IVL 177). Second, the intuitive element is often obscured because facts known prior to intuition are retained, synthesized, and perhaps reinterpreted in light of the intuitive insight. “The readjustment [of previously known facts] is so easy that when the insight is attained it escapes notice and we imagine that the process of discovery is only rational synthesis” (IVL 177). Finally, intuition in discursive reasoning is often overlooked, disguised in the language of logic. In short, the intuitive is mistaken for the logical. “Knowledge when acquired must be thrown into logical form and we are obliged to adopt the language of logic since only logic has a communicable language.” This last point is somewhat perplexing, given Radhakrishnan’s recognition of meaning conveyed through symbols, poetry, and metaphors. Perhaps he means that logic is the primary valid method for organizing and systematizing empirical facts. Regardless, according to Radhakrishnan, the presentation of facts in logical form contributes to “a confusion between discovery and proof” (IVL 177).

Conversely, Radhakrishnan argues for intuition’s role in discursive reasoning. “If the process of discovery were mere synthesis, any mechanical manipulator of prior partial concepts would have reached the insight and it would not have taken a genius to arrive at it” (IVL 178). A purely mechanical account of discursive reasoning ignores the inherently creative and dynamic dimension of intuitive insight. In Radhakrishnan’s view, logic alone is creatively barren (IVL 181).

However, he holds that “creative insight is not the final link in a chain of reasoning. If it were that, it would not strike us as “inspired in its origin” (IVL 178). Intuition is not the end but part of an ongoing, dynamic process of realization. Radhakrishnan sees a continuous system of “checks and balances” between intuition and discursive reasoning. Cognitive intuitions “are not substitutes for thought, they are challenges to intelligence. Mere intuitions are blind while intellectual work is empty. All processes are partly intuitive and partly intellectual. There is no gulf between the two” (IVL 181).

2) Psychic Experience

Perhaps an under-explored aspect of Radhakrishnan’s interpretations of experience is his acknowledgment of “supernormal” experiences. As early as his first volume of Indian Philosophy (1923), he affirms the validity of “psychic phenomena.” Radhakrishnan explains these experiences as stemming from a highly developed sensitivity to intuition: “The mind of man,” he explains, “has the three aspects of subconscious, the conscious, and the superconscious, and the ‘abnormal’ psychic phenomena, called by the different names of ecstasy, genius, inspiration, madness, are the workings of the superconscious mind” (IP1 28). He views these experiences as not “abnormal” or unscientific but as products of controlled mental exploration. In the Indian tradition, “The psychic experiences, such as telepathy and clairvoyance, were considered to be neither abnormal nor miraculous. They are not the products of diseased minds or inspiration from the gods, but powers which the human mind can exhibit under carefully ascertained conditions” (IP1 28). Psychic intuitions align with Radhakrishnan’s understanding of intellect, demonstrating the potential of the intellect beyond its typical limitations. They represent achievements, not failures, of human consciousness.

As highly refined powers of apprehension, psychic experiences represent a state of consciousness “beyond the understanding of the normal, and the supernormal is traced to the supernatural” (IVL 94). Moreover, psychic premonitions, even if partial or momentary, support the “psychic hypothesis” that the universal spirit is inherent in all things (IVL 110). Radhakrishnan believes psychic intuitions are suprasensory: “We can see objects without the medium of the senses and discern relations spontaneously without building them up laboriously. In other words, we can discern every kind of reality directly” (IVL 143). He boldly asserts that “the facts of telepathy prove that one mind can communicate with another directly”(IVL 143).

3) Aesthetic Experience

“All art,” Radhakrishnan declares, “is the expression of experience in some medium” (IVL 182). However, the artistic experience should not be confused with its expression. While the experience is ineffable, the artist’s challenge is to concretize it. “The success of art is measured by the extent to which it is able to render experiences of one dimension into terms of another. (IVL 187) For Radhakrishnan, art originating from “creative contemplation which is a process of travail of the spirit is an authentic “crystallization of a life process” (IVL 185). Ultimately, the “poetical character is derived from the creative intuition (that is, integral intuition) which holds sound, suggestion and sense in organic solution” (IVL 191).

In Radhakrishnan’s view, without intuitive experience, art becomes mechanical and repetitive. Such “art” is reproduction rather than a communication of the artist’s intuitive encounter with reality. “Technique without inspiration,” he asserts, “is barren. Intellectual powers, sense facts and imaginative fancies may result in clever verses, repetition of old themes, but they are only manufactured poetry” (IVL 188). This is not merely a difference in quality but a “difference of kind in the source itself” (IVL 189). For Radhakrishnan, true art expresses the whole personality, seized by the creative impulse of the universe.

Artistic intuition tempers rational reflection. Yet, “[e]ven in the act of composition,” Radhakrishnan believes, “the poet is in a state in which the reflective elements are subordinated to the intuitive. The vision, however, is not operative for so long as it continues, its very stress acts as a check on expression” (IVL 187).

For Radhakrishnan, artistic expression is dynamic. Recalling the intuition is not a slow reconstruction or dispassionate analysis but an emotionally vibrant process: “The experience is recollected not in tranquility… but in excitement” (IVL 187). The aesthetic experience’s emotional vibrancy provides knowledge through being rather than knowing (IVL 184).

Art and Science

Radhakrishnan sees a “scientific” aspect to genuine artistic expression. In the “science of art,” he believes “the experience or the vision is the artist’s counterpart to the scientific discovery of a principle or law” (IVL 184). Art and science share a common purpose. “What the scientist does when he discovers a new law is to give a new ordering to observed facts. The artist is engaged in a similar task. He gives new meaning to our experience and organizes it in a different way due to his perception of subtler qualities in reality” (IVL 194).

Despite this synthesis, Radhakrishnan clarifies that the two disciplines are not identical. The distinction lies in the predominantly aesthetic and qualitative nature of artistic expression. “Poetic truth is different from scientific truth since it reveals the real in its qualitative uniqueness and not in its quantitative universality” (IVL 193). He likely means that, unlike science’s universal laws, art is more subjective in its expression, though not in its creative origin. A further distinction highlights Radhakrishnan’s appreciation for poetry: “Poetry,” he believes, “is the language of the soul, while prose is the language of science. The former is the language of mystery, of devotion, of religion. Prose lays bare its whole meaning to the intelligence, while poetry plunges us in the mysterium tremendum of life and suggests the truths that cannot be stated” (IVL 191).

4) Ethical Experience

Unsurprisingly, intuition also plays a role in Radhakrishnan’s ethics. For him, ethical experiences are profoundly transformative, resolving dilemmas and harmonizing conflicting courses of action. “If the new harmony glimpsed in the moments of insight is to be achieved, the old order of habits must be renounced” (IVL 114). Moral intuitions lead to “a redemption of our loyalties and a remaking of our personalities” (IVL 115).

Radhakrishnan’s view of ethical development as a form of conversion underscores his identification of ethics and religion. He equates ethical transformation driven by intuition with religious growth and heightened realization, reflected in his interchangeable use of “intuition” and “religious experience.”

While not all ethical decisions are guided by intuition, Radhakrishnan concedes that most moral choices result from adhering to established moral codes. However, ethical intuitions become crucial during moral crises. In an analogy reminiscent of his chess example, Radhakrishnan describes the growth of moral consciousness through intuition: “In the chessboard of life, the different pieces have powers which vary with the context and the possibilities of their combination are numerous and unpredictable. The sound player has a sense of right and feels that, if he does not follow it, he will be false to himself. In any critical situation the forward move is a creative act” (IVL 196-197).

Moral actions are inherently social. Ethical intuitions therefore have social consequences. While intuition is individual, Radhakrishnan believes it must be translated into positive, creative action and shared. He suggests a sense of urgency, even inevitability, in this sharing, stating one “cannot afford to be absolutely silent” (IVL 97) and saints “love because they cannot help it” (IVL 116).

Sharing moral insight provides an opportunity to test its validity against reason. The moral hero, Radhakrishnan notes, does not rely solely on intuition. Intuitive experience, though the creative force behind moral progress, must be examined and validated by reason. There’s a “scientific” and “experimental” dimension to Radhakrishnan’s ethics. Moral heroes, guided by ethical experience, are, for Radhakrishnan, akin to discoverers in science or artists in their respective fields: “The moral hero, guided as he or she is by the ethical experience, who carves out an adventurous path is akin to the discoverer who brings order into the scattered elements of a science or the artist who composes a piece of music or designs buildings” (IVL 196). Ethical living, in this sense, is both an art and a science.

Radhakrishnan’s moral heroes, having developed “large impersonality” (IVL 116), realizing joy, freedom, and bliss beyond ego, become “self-sacrificing” exemplars. “Feeling the unity of himself and the universe, the man who lives in spirit is no more a separate and self-centered individual but a vehicle of the universal spirit” (IVL 115). Like artists, moral heroes engage with the world, “[h]e throws himself on the world and lives for its redemption, possessed as he is with an unshakable sense of optimism and an unlimited faith in the powers of the soul” (IVL 116). Radhakrishnan’s moral hero is a conduit whose “world-consciousness” delights “in furthering the plan of the cosmos” (IVL 116).

Radhakrishnan believes ethical intuitions at their deepest transcend conventional ethical systems. Moral heroes exemplify his ethical ideal while prompting those adhering to the status quo to re-evaluate imperfect moral codes. As the moral hero “is fighting for the reshaping of his own society on sounder lines [his] behavior might offend the sense of decorum of the cautious conventionalist” (IVL 197). Moral progress stems from these ethically realized individuals. “Though morality commands conformity, all moral progress is due to nonconformists” (IVL 197). The moral hero is guided not by external codes but by an “inner rhythm” of harmony between self and universe, revealed through intuitive experience. “By following his deeper nature, he may seem to be either unwise or unmoral to those of us who adopt conventional standards. But for him the spiritual obligation is more of a consequence than social tradition” (IVL 197).

5) Religious Experience

To clarify, we must distinguish between religious experience and integral experience. Radhakrishnan’s distinction between “religion” and “religions” is helpful. Religions, for him, are interpretations of experience, while integral experience is the essence of all religions. “If experience is the soul of religion, expression is the body through which it fulfills its destiny. We have the spiritual facts and their interpretations by which they are communicated to others” (IVL 90). “It is the distinction between immediacy and thought. Intuitions abide, while interpretations change” (IVL 90). Interpretations should not be mistaken for the experiences themselves. For Radhakrishnan, “[c]onceptual expressions are tentative and provisional… [because] the intellectual accounts… are constructed theories of experience” (IVL 119). He cautions us to “distinguish between the immediate experience or intuition which might conceivably be infallible and the interpretation which is mixed up with it” (IVL 99).

For Radhakrishnan, religious creeds and theological formulations are intellectual representations and symbols of experience. “The idea of God,” he affirms, “is an interpretation of experience” (IVL 186). Religious experiences, therefore, are context-relative and imperfect, shaped by cultural, historical, linguistic, and religious lenses. This contextuality limits experiences in the religious sphere. In this sense, experiences within specific religious traditions are “religious experiences.” Radhakrishnan gives limited attention to “religious experiences” within specific traditions, using them primarily to illustrate theological preconditioning and “religious” relativity. However, “religious experiences” are valuable insofar as they potentially enhance religious consciousness, bringing one closer to “religious intuition.”

Radhakrishnan uses “religious experience” both for sectarian religious experiences and for “religious intuitions” that transcend sectarian boundaries and are identical to intuition itself.

He explicitly states that religious intuition is a unique form of experience, more than just a confluence of cognitive, aesthetic, and ethical aspects of life. While these are vital components, they are partial elements of a greater whole, fully and immediately experienced in religious intuition.

Radhakrishnan views religious intuition not only as autonomous but also as a form of experience that informs and validates all aspects of life. Philosophical, artistic, and ethical values of truth, beauty, and goodness are not known through senses or reason but “apprehended by intuition or faith…” (IVL 199-200). Religious intuition, for Radhakrishnan, informs, unites, and transcends fragmented consciousness.

Radhakrishnan’s interpretation of religious intuition is informed by his affirmation of the identity of self and ultimate reality. He interprets the Upanishadic mahavakya, tat tvam asi, as declaring the non-duality (advaita) of Atman and Brahman. This Advaitic interpretation allows him to affirm the ineffability of the truth behind this formula. Radhakrishnan applies his acceptance of non-dual experience to his interpretation of religious intuition, claiming support in the Upanishads and believing ancient sages expounded his interpretation. Any interpretation can only approximate the truth of the experience itself. As the ultimate realization, religious intuition must encompass and unify all other forms of experience and overcome distinctions between them. Radhakrishnan even claims this intuition is the essence of religion. All religions are informed by it, though all imperfectly interpret it. “Here we find the essence of religion, which is a synthetic realization of life. The religious man has the knowledge that everything is significant, the feeling that there is harmony underneath the conflicts and the power to realize the significance and the harmony” (IVL 201).

This brings the discussion of intuition and experience full circle. Radhakrishnan equates intuition—in its various contexts—with integral experience. These terms are synonymous for him. Integral experience coordinates and synthesizes life’s experiences, providing a deepening awareness and appreciation of Reality’s unity. As an intuition, integral experience is not only the basis of all experience but the source of all creative ingenuity—philosophical, scientific, moral, artistic, or religious. Moreover, this expression in various life spheres, Radhakrishnan believes, inspires intuition and creativity in those who encounter it.

c. Religious Pluralism

Doctor Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan’s hierarchy of religions is well-known. “Hinduism,” he affirms, “accepts all religious notions as facts and arranges them in the order of their more or less intrinsic significance”: “The worshippers of the Absolute are the highest in rank; second to them are the worshippers of the personal God; then come the worshippers of the incarnations like Rama, Krishna, Buddha; below them are those who worship ancestors, deities and sages, and the lowest of all are the worshippers of the petty forces and spirits” (HVL 32).

Radhakrishnan uses his distinctions between experience and interpretation, religion and religions, to equate his brand of Hinduism (Advaita Vedanta) with religion itself. “Religion,” he holds, is “a kind of life or experience,” an insight into reality (darshana), or experience of reality (anubhava). It is “a specific attitude of the self, itself and not other” (HVL 15). He characterizes religion as “personal experience,” “an independent functioning of the human mind, something unique, possessing and autonomous character. It is something inward and personal which unifies all values and organizes all experiences. It is the reaction to the whole of man to the whole of reality. [It] may be called spiritual life, as distinct from a merely intellectual or moral or aesthetic activity or a combination of them” (IVL 88-89).

For Radhakrishnan, integral intuitions are the authority and soul of religion (IVL 89-90). Here lies a critical convergence in his thought. If personal intuitive experience and inner realization are defining features of Advaita Vedanta and also the “authority” and “soul” of religion as he understands it, Radhakrishnan can confidently affirm: “The Vedanta is not a religion, but religion itself in its most universal and deepest significance” (HVL 23).

For Radhakrishnan, Hinduism at its Vedantic best is religion. Other religions, including lower forms of Hinduism, are interpretations of Advaita Vedanta. Religion and religions are related like experience and interpretation. Various religions are interpretations of his Vedanta. In a sense, Radhakrishnan “Hinduizes” all religions. He uses traditional exegetical categories to clarify this relationship: “We have spiritual facts and their interpretations by which they are communicated to others, shruti or what is heard, and smriti or what is remembered. Shankara equates them with pratyaksha or intuition and anumana or inference. It is the distinction between immediacy and thought. Intuitions abide, while interpretations change” (IVL 90).

The apologetic purpose is clear. For Radhakrishnan, the intuitive, experiential immediacy of Advaita Vedanta is the genuine authority for all religions, and all religions as intellectually mediated interpretations derive from and must ultimately defer to Advaita Vedanta. Simply put: “While the experiential character of religion is emphasized in the Hindu faith, every religion at its best falls back on it” (IVL 90).

For Radhakrishnan, religions are not equally valid interpretations of a common experience. Each religion has value to the extent it is informed by what he claims is a common experiential ground (Advaita Vedanta). As interpretations, all religions are open to development and spiritual progress. “While no tradition coincides with experience, every tradition is essentially unique and valuable. While all traditions are of value, none is finally binding” (IVL 120). The value of each religion, according to Radhakrishnan, is determined by its proximity to his understanding of Vedanta.

d. Authority of Scripture and the Scientific Basis of Hinduism

Doctor Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan argues that Hinduism, as he understands it, is a scientific religion. “[I]f philosophy of religion is to become scientific, it must become empirical and found itself on religious experience” (IVL 184). True religion, he argues, remains open to experience and encourages an experimental approach to religious data. Hinduism, more than any other religion, exemplifies this scientific attitude. “The Hindu philosophy of religion starts from and returns to an experimental basis” (HVL 19). Unlike other religions that limit spiritual experience, “The Hindu thinker readily admits of other points of view than his own and considers them to be just as worthy of attention” (HVL 19). Hinduism’s unique characteristic is its unlimited appeal to and appreciation for all forms of experience. Experience and experimentation are, for Radhakrishnan, the origin and goal of Hinduism.

He claims a scientific attitude has been a hallmark of Hinduism historically. “The truths of the rishis are not evolved as the result of logical reasoning or systematic philosophy but are the products of spiritual intuition, drishti or vision. The rishis are not so much the authors of the truths recorded in the Vedas as the seers who were able to discern the eternal truths by raising their life-spirit to the plane of universal spirit. They are the pioneer researchers in the realm of the spirit who saw more in the world than their followers. Their utterances are not based on transitory vision but on a continuous experience of resident life and power. When the Vedas are regarded as the highest authority, all that is meant is that the most exacting of all authorities is the authority of facts” (IVL 89-90).

If ancient seers are “pioneer researchers,” the Upanishads are records of their experiments. “The chief sacred scriptures of the Hindus, the Vedas register the intuitions of the perfected souls. They are not so much dogmatic dicta as transcripts from life. They record the spiritual experiences of souls strongly endowed with the sense of reality. They are held to be authoritative on the ground that they express the experiences of the experts in the field of religion” (HVL 17).

Radhakrishnan’s view of scripture as scientific records of spiritual insights applies not only to Hinduism but to all religious creeds. World scriptures, properly understood, are not infallible revelations but scientific hypotheses: “The creeds of religion correspond to theories of science” (IVL 86). He recommends that “intuitions of the human soul… should be studied by the methods which are adopted with such great success in the region of positive science” (IVL 85). Religious experience records, integral intuitions, and world scriptures constitute the “facts” of religious endeavor. “Just as there can be no geometry without the perception of space, even so there cannot be philosophy of religion without the facts of religion” (IVL 84).

Religious claims, for Radhakrishnan, are for testing, not inherently authoritative. Only integral intuitions validated by reason are the ultimate religious authority. “It is for philosophy of religion to find out whether the convictions of the religious seers fit in with the tested laws and principles of the universe” (IVL 85). “When the prophets reveal in symbols the truths they have discovered, we try to rediscover them for ourselves slowly and patiently” (IVL 202).

This scientific approach aligns with Radhakrishnan’s affirmation of the Advaitic Absolute. Religious plurality should be seen as “tentative and provisional, not because there is no absolute, but because there is one. The intellectual accounts become barriers to further insights if they get hardened into articles of faith and forget that they are constructed theories of experience” (IVL 199).

For Radhakrishnan, the marginalization of intuition and abandonment of the experimental approach in religion have led Christianity to dogmatic stagnation. “It is an unfortunate legacy of the course which Christian theology has followed in Europe that faith has come to connote a mechanical adherence to authority. If we take faith in the proper sense of truth or spiritual conviction, religion is faith or intuition” (HVL 16). The religious impasse of Europe and Christian theology reflects their reluctance to adopt the Hindu principle that “theory, speculations, [and] dogma change from time to time as the facts become better understood” (IVL 90). Religious “facts” must be assessed “from their adequacy to experience” (IVL 90). Just as intellect has dominated Western philosophy at the expense of intuition, Christianity has similarly over-relied on scripture for theological grounding.

e. Practical Mysticism and Applied Ethics

Radhakrishnan’s emphasis on intuition underlies his vision for an ethical Hinduism, free from ascetic excesses. Intuition’s ethical potency affirms the world’s validity. “Asceticism,” he emphasizes, “is an excess indulged in by those who exaggerate the transcendent aspect of reality.” The rational mystic, in contrast, “does not recognize any antithesis between the secular and the sacred. Nothing is to be rejected; everything is to be raised” (IVL 115).

Radhakrishnan’s ethical mystic values the world and engages in its affairs, guided by an intuitive drive to creatively advance the world, challenging conventions and social norms. This ethically integrated mode of being positively challenges moral dogmatism by promoting social tolerance and accommodation. Just as Radhakrishnan’s Hinduism rejects absolute truth claims and external authority, it has “developed an attitude of comprehensive charity instead of a fanatic faith in an inflexible creed” (HVL 37).

i. Ethics of Caste

Doctor Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan argues that the caste system, properly understood, exemplifies ethical tolerance and accommodation born from an intuitive consciousness of reality. “The institution of caste illustrates the spirit of comprehensive synthesis characteristic of the Hindu mind with its faith in the collaboration of races and the co-operation of cultures. Paradoxical as it may seem, the system of caste is the outcome of tolerance and trust” (HVL 93). Based on Hinduism’s spiritual values and ethical ideals, not mechanical fatalism of karma, caste affirms each individual’s right to pursue spiritual realization, understood in terms of integral experience. Similar to his ranking of religions based on proximity to Vedanta, caste, in his view, is a social recognition that every society member can experiment with spiritual consciousness free from dogmatic constraints. Radhakrishnan sees this as the ethical power and creative genius of integral experience. Caste is a creative innovation of those “whose lives are characterized by an unshakable faith in the supremacy of the spirit, invincible optimism, ethical universalism, and religious toleration” (IVL 126). [For a discussion of the democratic basis of caste in Radhakrishnan’s thinking, see Robert Minor, Radhakrishnan: A Religious Biography (1989).]

3. Criticism

Numerous criticisms can be raised against Radhakrishnan’s philosophy. The following are three common critiques.

a. Epistemic Authority

A primary criticism concerns epistemic authority: Does the test for knowledge reside in scripture or experience? Radhakrishnan argues knowledge stems from intuitive experience (anubhava), citing the Upanishads as scriptural support. He interprets the Upanishads as endorsing a monistic ontology, based on their recording of ancient sages’ personal experiences. Thus, the validity of experience is judged by its alignment with Upanishadic teachings, while the Upanishads are authoritative because they record monistic experiences. This presents a circularity. However, Radhakrishnan might embrace this circularity, arguing that intuitive knowledge is non-rational, beyond logical analysis but not contrary to reason.

b. Cultural and Religious Constructions

A second criticism targets Radhakrishnan’s characterizations of “East” and “West.” He portrays the West and Christianity as prone to dogmatism, limiting science to the external world, and relying on second-hand knowledge. The East, conversely, is depicted as open to inner experience and spiritual experimentation, with the West being rational and logical, while the East is religious and mystical. Scholars in post-colonial studies and orientalism argue that these constructions of “West” and “East” (categories themselves being constructs) perpetuate orientalist and colonialist knowledge forms from the 18th and 19th centuries. These characterizations are arguably “imagined,” reflecting neither the philosophical nor religious realities of “East” or “West.”

c. Selectivity of Evidence

A related criticism concerns Radhakrishnan’s religious pluralism and treatment of religious traditions.

Firstly, he minimizes the contributions of Western monistic philosophers and religious mystics. While acknowledging figures like Henri Bergson, Goethe, and various Christian, Jewish, and Muslim mystics, he suggests these approaches are exceptions rather than the norm in the West. He even implies these figures are imbued with the spirit of the East, particularly Hinduism as he understands it.

Secondly, while recognizing religious diversity within “Hinduism,” his treatment of Western traditions is less nuanced. He homogenizes and generalizes Western traditions. In his religious hierarchy, forms of Hinduism can be placed in each category (monistic, theistic, incarnational, ancestral, natural). In contrast, he suggests theistic and incarnational categories primarily correspond to Unitarian and Trinitarian Christianity, respectively, simplifying Western religious diversity.

4. List of Abbreviations

HVL – The Hindu View of Life (1927)

IP1 – Indian Philosophy: Volume 1 (1923)

IVL – An Idealist View of Life (1929)

MST – My Search for Truth (1937)

5. References and Further Reading

a. Primary Sources by Radhakrishnan

• The Ethics of the Vedanta and Its Metaphysical Presuppositions. Madras: The Guardian Press, 1908.
• “Karma and Freewill” in Modern Review. (Calcutta) Vol. III (May 1908), pp. 424-428.
• “Indian Philosophy: The Vedas and the Six Systems” in The Madras Christian College Magazine. III (New Series), pp. 22-35.
• “‘Nature’ and ‘Convention’ in Greek Ethics” in The Calcutta Review, CXXX (January 1910), pp. 9-23.
• “Egoism and Altruism: The Vedanta Solution” in East and West (Bombay) IX (July 1910), pp. 626-630.
• “The Relation of Morality to Religion” in The Hindustan Review (September 1910), pp. 292-297.
• “Morality and Religion in Education” in The Madras Christian College Magazine. X (1910-1911), pp. 233-239.
• “The Ethics of the Bhagavadgita and Kant” in The International Journal of Ethics. XXI, Number 4 (July 1911), pp. 465-475.
• Essentials of Psychology. London: Oxford University Press, 1912.
• “The Ethics of the Vedanta” in The International Journal of Ethics. XXIV, Number 2 (January 1914), pp. 168-183.
• “The Vedanta Philosophy and the Doctrine of Maya” in The International Journal of Ethics. XXIV, Number 4 (April 1914), pp. 431-451.
• “A View of India on the War” in Asiatic Review. (London), VI (May 1915), pp. 369-374.
• Religion and Life, Leaflet No. 15, The Theistic Endeavor Society of Madras. November 1915.
• “The Vedantic Approach to Reality” in The Monist. XXVI, Number 2 (April 1916), pp. 200-231.
• “Religion and Life” in The International Journal of Ethics. XXVII, Number 1 (October 1916), pp. 91-106.
• “Bergson’s Idea of God” in The Quest. (London), VII (October 1916), pp. 1-8.
• “The Philosophy of Rabindranath Tagore – I” in The Quest. (London) VIII, Number 3 (April 1917), pp. 457-477.
• “The Philosophy of Rabindranath Tagore – II” in The Quest. (London) VIII, Number 4 (July 1917), pp. 592-612.
• “Vedantamum Mayavadamum in Cittantam” in Siddhantam: Journal of the Saiva Siddhanta Association. V, pp. 159-163.
• The Philosophy of Rabindranath Tagore. London: Macmillan & Co., 1918.
• “James Ward’s Pluaralistic Theism: I” in The Indian Philosophical Review. II, Number 2 (October 1918), pp. 97-118.
• “James Ward’s Pluaralistic Theism: II” in The Indian Philosophical Review. II, Number 3 (December 1918), pp. 210-232.
• “Bergson and Absolute Idealism – I” in Mind. (New Series) XXVII (January 1919), pp. 41-53.
• “Bergson and Absolute Idealism – II” in Mind. (New Series) XXVII (July 1919), pp. 275-296.
• The Reign of Religion in Contemporary Philosophy. London: Macmillan & Co., 1920.
• “The Future of Religion” in The Mysore University Magazine. IV, (1920), pp. 148-157.
• “Review of Bernard Bosanquet’s ‘Implication and Linear Inference’” in The Indian Philosophical Review. III, Number 3 (July 1920), p. 301.
• “The Metaphysics of the Upanisads – I” in The Indian Philosophical Review. III, Number 3, (July 1920), pp. 213-236.
• The Metaphysics of the Upanisads – II in The Indian Philosophical Review. III, Number 4, (October 1920), pp. 346-362.
• “Gandhi and Tagore” in The Calcutta Review. (Third Series), I (October 1921), pp. 14-29.
• “Religion and Philosophy” in The Hibbert Journal. XX, Number 1 (October 1921), pp. 35-45.
• “Tilak as Scholar” in The Indian Review. XXII (December 1921), pp. 737-739.
• “Contemporary Philosophy” in The Indian Review. XXIII (July 1922), pp. 440-443.
• “The Heart of Hinduism” in The Hibbert Journal. XXI, Number 1 (October 1922), pp. 5-19.
• “The Hindu Dharma” in The International Journal of Ethics. XXXIII, Number 1 (October 1922), pp. 1-22.
• Indian Philosophy: Volume 1. London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1923.
• “Islam and Indian Thought” in The Indian Review. XXIV (Novermber 1923), pp. 53-72.
• “Religious Unity” in The Mysore University Magazine. VII, pp. 187-198.
• The Philosophy of the Upanisads**. London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1924.
• “Hindu Thought and Christian Doctrine” in The Madras Christian College Magazine. (Quarterly Series) (January 1924), pp. 18-34.
• “The Hindu Idea of God” in The Quest. (London) XV, Number 3 (April 1924), pp. 289-310.
• “Indian Philosophy: Some Problems” in Mind. (New Series) XXV (April 1926), pp. 154-180.
• The Hindu View of Life. London: George Allen & Unwim, Ltd., 1927.
• “The Role of Philosophy in the History of Civilization” in Edgar Shefield Brightman (ed.)Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Philosophy. New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1927. pp. 543-550.
• “The Doctrine of Maya: Some Problems” in Edgar Shefield Brightman (ed.) Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Philosophy. New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1927. pp. 683-689.
• Indian Philosophy: Volume 2. London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1927.
• “Presidential Address” in Proceedings of the III Indian Philosophical Congress. Calcutta: Calcutta University, 1927. pp. 19-30.
• “Educational Reform” in The Calcutta Review. (May 1927), pp. 143-154.
• The Religion We Need. London: Ernest Benn, Ltd., 1928.
• The Vedanta According to Åšaá¹…kara and Ramanuja. London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1928.
• “Indian Philosophy (To the Editor of Mind)” in Mind. (New Series) XXXVII (January 1928), pp. 130-131.
• Buddhism in Prabuddha Bharata. XXXIII, Number 8 (August 1928), pp. 349-354.
• “Evolution and Its Implications” in The New Era. I (November 1928), pp. 102-111.
• Kalki or The Future of Civilization. London: Kegan, Paul, Trench & Co. Ltd., 1929.
• An Idealist View of Life. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1929.
• “Indian Philosophy” in Encyclopedia Britannica. (14th edition) Volume XII, New York, pp. 242-243.
• Prof. Radhakrishnan’s Reply in The Modern Review. XLV, Number 2 (February 1929), pp. 208-213.
• Prof. Radhakrishnan’s Reply in The Modern Review. XLV, Number 3 (March 1929), pp. 321-322.
• “Review of John Baillie’s ‘The Interpretation of Religion’” in The Hibbert Journal. XXVIII, Number 4 (July 1930), 740-742.
• “”Foreword”” in Abhay Kumer Majumdar, The SÄṃkhya Conception of Personality. Calcutta: Calcutta University Press, 1930. pp. ix-xii.
• “The Hindu Idea of God” in The Spectator. May 30, 1931 (Number 51370), pp. 851-853.
• “Intuition and Intellect” in Ramananda Chatterjee (ed.) The Golden Book of Tagore: A Hommage to Rabindranath Tagore from India and the World in Celebration of His Seventieth Birthday. Calcutta: Golden Book Committee, pp. 310-313.
• “”Foreword”” in Nalini Kanta Brahma, The Philosophy of Hindu Sadhana. London: Kegan, Paul, Trench & Co., pp. ix-x.
• “Presidential Address” in H.D. Bhattacharyya (ed.) Proceedings of the Eighth Indian Philosophical Congress: The University of Mysore. Calcutta: N.C. Ghosh, pp. v-xvi.
• “Sarvamukti (Universal Salvation) – A Symposium” in H.D. Bhattacharyya (ed.) Proceedings of the Eighth Indian Philosophical Congress: The University of Mysore. Calcutta: N.C. Ghosh, pp. 314-318.
• East and West in Religion. London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1933.
• “Intellect and Intuition in Sankara’s Philosophy” in Triveni. VI, Number 1 (July-August 1933), pp. 8-16.
• The Teaching of the Buddha: Being the Inaugural Lecture under the Alphina Ratnayaka Trust Delivered by Sir Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan at Columbo, 2nd October, 1933. Columbo: The Public Trust of Ceylon, 1933.
• “The Teaching of the Buddha by Speech and by Silence” in The Hibbert Journal. XXXII, Number 3 (April 1934), pp. 342-356.
• “”Foreword”” in Perviz N. Peerozshaw Dubash Hindu Art in its Social Setting. Madras: National Literature Publishing Co. Ltd., 1934. pp. iv-v.
• Freedom and Culture. Madras: G.A. Natesan & Co., 1936.
• The Heart of Hindusthan. Madras: G.A. Natesan & Co., 1936.
• “The Spirit in Man” in Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan and J.H. Muirhead (eds.) Contemporary Indian Philosophy. London: George Allen and Unwin, Ltd., 1936. pp. 257-289.
• “The Supreme Spiritual Ideal” in A. Douglas Millard (ed.) Faiths and Fellowship: Being the Proceddings of the World Congress of Faiths Held in London, July 3rd-17th, 1936. London: J.M. Watkins, 1936. pp. 422-430.
• “Spiritual Freedom and the New Education in New Era” in Home and School. XVII (September-October 1936). pp. 233-235.
• “”Foreword”” in B.L. Atreya The Philosophy of Yoga-Vasistha. Adyar: Theosophical Publishing House, 1936. p. vii.
• “Progress and Spiritual Values” in Philosophy: The Journal of the British Institute of Philosophy. XII, Number 47 (July 1937), pp. 259-275.
• “Education and Spiritual Freedom” in Triveni. (New Series) X, Number 3 (September 1937), pp. 9-22.
• “Hinduism” in G.T Garratt (ed.) The Legacy of India. London: Oxford University Press, 1937. pp. 256-286.
• “Introduction to the First Edition” in The Cultural Heritage of India. Calcutta: The Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture, I, 1937. pp. xxiii-xxxvi.
• “My Search For Truth” in Vergilius Ferm (ed.) Religion in Transition. London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1937. pp. 11-59.
• “The Individual and the Social Order” in Hinduism in E.R. Hughes (ed.) The Individual in East and West. London: Oxford University Press, 1937. pp. 109-152.
• “The Failure of the Intellectuals” in The Indian Review. XXXVIII (December 1937), pp. 737-739.
• “”Foreword”” in Saroj Kumar Das A Study of the Vedanta. Calcutta: Calcutta University, 1937. pp. ix-x.
• Gautama the Buddha. London: Oxford University Press, 1938.
• “Religion: A Plea for Sanity” in Triveni. (New Series) XI, Number 5 (November 1938), pp. 9-14.
• “The Renascence of Religion: A Hindu View” in The Renascence of Religion: Being the Proceedings of the Third Meetings of the World Congress of Faiths. London: Arthur Probstain, 1938. pp. 8-18.
• “Convocation Address” (December 17, 1938) reprinted in Benaras Hindu University News Letter. (Teacher’s Day Special Number) 5th September 1993. pp. 9-19.
• “Letter to Madan Mohan Malaviya” dated 3/12/39 reprinted in Benaras Hindu University News Letter. (Teacher’s Day Special Number) 5th September 1994. p. 5.
• “Letter to Madan Mohan Malaviya” dated 20/8/39 reprinted in Benaras Hindu University News Letter. (Teacher’s Day Special Number) 5th September 1993. p. 8.
• “Letter to Madan Mohan Malaviya” dated 26/11 reprinted in Benaras Hindu University News Letter. (Teacher’s Day Special Number) 5th September 1993. pp. 20-21.
• “”Foreword”” in T.M.P. Mahadevan The Philosophy of Advaita. Madras: Ganesh and Co., 1938.
• Eastern Religions and Western Thought. London: Oxford University Press, 1939.
• “Introduction: Gandhi’s Religion and Politics” in Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (ed.) Mahatma Gandhi: Essays and Reflections on His Life and Work. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1939. pp. 13-40.
• “Foreword” in S.K. George Gandhi’s Challenge to Christianity. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1939. pp. 9-10.
• “Presidential Address” in Proceedings of the 15th Conference, All India Federation of Educational Associations, Lucknow, December 26-31, 1939. Allahabad: Ram Narain Lal, 1939. pp. 100-105.
• “Hinduism and the West ‘in L.S.S. O’Malley (ed.) Modern India and the West. London: Oxford University Press, 1941. pp. 338-353.
• “Supreme Values of the Spirit” (Speech on the laying of the foundation-stone to Holdar House, Banaras Hindu University) reprinted in Benaras Hindu University News Letter. (Teacher’s Day Special Number) 5th September 1994. pp. 10-14.
• “Coming Out of Darkness” (Speech delivered on the Silver Jubilee of Benaras Hindu University, January 21, 1942) excerpts reprinted in Benaras Hindu University News Letter. (Teacher’s Day Special Number) 5th September 1993. pp. 6-7.
• “General Preface” in Ganganatha Jha PÅ«rva-MÄ«mÄṃsÄ in its Sources. Benaras: Benaras Hindu University, 1942. pp. v-vi.
• “The Cultural Problem” in A.I.J. Appasamy (ed.) The Cultural Problem (Oxford Pamphlets on Indian Affairs) Number 1. Madras: Oxford University Press, 1942. pp. 41-50.
• “India’s Heritage” in The Proceedings and Transactions of the XII Session of the All India Oriental Conference. Benaras: Benaras University Press, 1943. pp. 1-5.
• “Silver Jubilee Address” in Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. XXIV, Parts 1-2 (Monday January 4, 1943), 1943. pp. 1-8.
• Education, Politics and War. Poona: The International Book Service, 1944.
• India and China: Lectures Delivered in China in May 1944. Bombay: Hind Kitabs, Ltd., 1944.
• “Foreword” in Swami Nirvedananda Hinduism at a Glance. Calcutta: Vidyamandira, 1944.
• “Foreword” in D.S. Sharma Studies in the Renaissance of Hinduism in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Century. Banaras: Banaras Hindu University, 1944. pp. v-vi.
• Is this Peace? Bombay: Hind Kitabs, Ltd., 1945.
• Moral Values in Literature in K.R. Srinivasa Iyengar (ed.) Indian Writers in Council: Proceedings of the First All-India Writers Conference (Jaipur 1945). Bombay: International Book House Ltd., 1945. pp. 86-105.
• “Introduction” in Dilip Kumar Roy Among the Great. Bombay: Nalanda Publication, 1945. pp. 11-18.
• “Foreword” in Swami Avinasananda Gita Letters. Bombay: Hind Kitabs Ltd., 1945.
• “Foreword” in R.K. Prabhu and U.R. Rao (eds.) The Mind of Mahatma Gandhi. Bombay: Oxford University Press, 1945. pp. v-vi.
• “Speech” in P.E.N. News. Number 142 (March 1946), pp. 8-10.
• “The Voice of India in the Spiritual Crisis of Our Times” in The Hibbert Journal. XLV, Number 4 (July 1946), pp. 295-304.
• “Bhagavan Sri Ramana: Sustainer of Spiritual Reality” in Golden Jubilee Souvenir. Tiruvannamalai: Sri Ramanasram, 1946. pp. 51-56.
• “Speech” in General Discussion of the Work of the Prepatory Commission in UNESCO General Conference: First Session. Held at UNESCO House, Paris from 20 November to 10 December, 1946. Paris: UNESCO, 1947. pp. 27-28.
• Religion and Society. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1947.
• “Science and Religion” in K. Bharatha Iyer (ed.) Art and Thought: A Volume In Honour of the Late Dr. Ananda K. Coomaraswamy. London: Luzac & Co., 1947. pp. 180-185.
• “Speech” in Discussion of the Director-General’s Report in Records of the General Conference of the UNESCO. Second Session, Mexico, 1947. Paris: UNESCO, 1948. pp. 58-61.
• The Bhagavadgita with an Introductory Essay, Sanskrit Text, English Translation and Notes. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1948.
• “Mahatma Gandhi” in The Hibbert Journal. XLVI, Number 3 (April 1948), pp. 193-197.
• “General Statement” in Clara Urquhart (ed.) Last Chance: 11 Questions on Issues Determining Our Destiny Answered by 26 Leaders of Thought in 14 Nations. Boston: Beacon Press, 1948. pp. 46-54.
• “Hinduism” in Hutchinson’s Twentieth Century Encyclopedia. London: Hutchinson, 1948. pp. 522.
• Great Indians. Bombay: Hind Kitabs Ltd., 1949.
• Report of the University Education Commission (December 1948-August 1949). New Delhi: Ministry of Education, 1949.
• Indian Culture in Reflections on Our Age: Lectures Delivered at the Opening Session of UNESCO at Sorbonne University, Paris. New York: Columbia University Press, 1949. pp. 115-133.
• “Speech” in Discussion of the Director-General’s Report in Records of the General Conference of the UNESCO. Third Session, Beruit, 1948. Paris: UNESCO, 1949. pp. 56-59.
• “Speech” in Presentation by the Chairman of the Executive Board of the Director-General’s Report on the Activities of the Organization during 1949 in Records of the General Conference of the UNESCO. Fourth Session, Paris, 1949. Paris: UNESCO, 1949. pp. 44-45.
• “Speech” in Discussion of the Director-General’s Report in Records of the General Conference of the UNESCO. Fourth Session, Paris, 1949. Paris: UNESCO, 1949. pp. 58-60.
• “Speech” in Consideration of the Report of the Official and External Relations Commission on UNESCO’s Work in Germany in Records of the General Conference of the UNESCO. Fourth Session, Paris, 1949. Paris: UNESCO, 1949. pp. 194-195.
• “Goethe” in Goethe: UNESCO’s Hommage on the Occassion of the Two Hundredth Anniversary of His Birth. Paris: UNESCO, 1949. pp. 101-108.
• Clean Advocate of Great Ideals in Nehru Abhinandan Granth: A Birthday Book. New Delhi: Nehru Abhinandan Committee, 1949. pp. 93-96.
• The Dhammapada. London: Oxford University Press, 1950.
• “Speech” in Discussion of the Second Report of the Credentials Committee in Records of the General Conference of the UNESCO. Fifth Session, Florence, 1950. Paris: UNESCO, 1950. pp. 178-180.
• UNESCO and World Revolution in New Republic. July 10, 1950. pp. 15-16.
• “Foreword” in R.R. Diwarkar The Upanishads in Story and Dialogue. Bombay: Hind Kitabs Ltd., 1950. pp. v-vi.
• “Religion and World Unity” in The Hibbert Journal. XLIX (April 1951), pp. 218-225.
• The Nature of Man in Barbara Waylen (ed.) Creators of the Modern Spirit: Towards a Philosophy of Faith. New York: Macmillan Co., 1951. pp. 64-66.
• “The Religion of the Spirit and the World’s Need: Fragments of a Confession” in Paul A. Schilpp (ed.) The Philosophy of Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan. New York: Tudor Publishing Co., 1952. pp. 5-82.
• “Reply to Critics” in Paul A. Schilpp (ed.) The Philosophy of Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan. New York: Tudor Publishing Co., 1952. pp. 789-842.
• “Vedanta – The Advaita School” in S. Radhakrishnan (ed.) History of Philosophy Eastern and Western: Volume 1. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1952. pp. 272-286.
• “Inaugural Address in Report of the Proceedings, 1952.” International Congress on Planned Parenthood. London: Family Planning, 1952. pp. 10-13.
• “Religion and the World Crisis” in Christopher Isherwood (ed.) Vedanta for Modern Man. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1952. pp. 338-341.
• “Foreword” in D.F.A. Bode and P. Nanavutty Songs of Zarathustra: The Gathas. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1952. p. 9.
• “Concluding Survey” in S. Radhakrishnan (ed.) History of Philosophy Eastern and Western: Volume 2. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1953. pp. 439-448.
• The Principal Upanishads. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1953.
• Convocation Address on the occasion on the Silver Jubilee of the Andhra University, Waltair, 1953. Copy available at Andhra University Library Special Collections Section.
• Comment in Visitor’s Book: Voorhees College, Vellore. Dated: 17.1.53. Voohees College Archives, Vellore, Tamil Nadu.
• “Preface” in Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, A.C. Ewing, Paul Arthur Schilpp, et al. (eds.) A.R. Wadia: Essays in Philosophy Presented in His Honour. (nd/np), 1954.
• Recovery of Faith. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1955.
• Bhoodan – The Economic Agrarian Revolution (Speech delivered at the Sixth Sarvodaya Sammelan at Bodh-Gaya on 19/4/1954) reprinted in Bhoodan (nd/np), 1955. pp. 1-5. Available in the Tamil Nadu State Archives, Chennai, general reference.
• Occasional Speeches and Writings: October 1952-January 1956. New Delhi: Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, 1956, 1960.
• East and West: Some Reflections. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1956.
• Occasional Speeches and Writings (Second Series): February 1956-February 1957. New Delhi: Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, 1957.
• A Sourcebook in Indian Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957. (ed. with Charles A. Moore)
• The Brahma Sutra: The Philosophy of Spiritual Life. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1959.
• “Prefatory Remarks” in S. Radhakrishnan and P.T. Raju (eds.) The Concept of Man. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1960. pp. 9-13.
• Note on Vice-Presidential Letterhead (No. 26/1303) to the Principal of Voorhees College located in Visitor’s Book: Voorhees College, Vellore. Dated: 23rd June, 1960. Voorhees College Archives, Vellore, Tamil Nadu.
• “Foreword” in Ramakrishnan Bajaj The Young Russia. Bombay: Popular Book Depot, 1960.
• Fellowship of the Spirit. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1961.
• Two Addresses Delivered in Germany: October 1961. New Delhi: Max Muller Bhavan, 1961.
• “Most Dear to All the Muses” in A Centenary Volume: Rabindranath Tagore: 1861-1961. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi, 1961. pp. xvii-xxv.
• “Tagore the Philosopher” in Indo-Asian Culture. XI (January 1962), pp. 283-295.
• “Tagore and the Realization of God” in Indo Asia. IVV (April 1962), pp. 150-157.
• Occasional Speeches and Writings (Third Series): July 1959-May 1962. New Delhi: Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, 1963.
• “Swami Vivekananda – A Spokesman of the Divine Logos” in Vedanta Kesari. L, Number 4 (August 1963), pp. 158-163.
• President Radhakrishnan’s Speeches and Writings: May 1962-May1964. New Delhi: Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, 1965.
• On Nehru. New Delhi: Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, 1965.
• President Radhakrishnan’s Speeches and Writings (Second Series): May 1964-May1967. New Delhi: Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, 1967.
• Religion in a Changing World. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1967.
• “The Indian Approach to the Religious Problem” in Charles A. Moore (ed.) The Indian Mind. Honolulu: East-West Center Press, 1967. pp. 173-182.
• Religion and Culture. Delhi: Hind Pocket Books, 1968.
• “Introduction” in Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (ed.) Mahatma Gandhi: 100 Years. New Delhi: Gandhi Peace Foundation, 1968. pp. 1-10.
• Our Heritage. Delhi: Hind Pocket Books, 1973.
• The Creative Life. New Delhi: Orient Paperbacks, 1975.
• “Are We Planning for Life?” in Mira. XXXIII, Numbers 8-9 (July-August 1975), pp. 179-180 and 206.

b. Selected Secondary Sources

• Arapura, J.G. Radhakrishnan and Integral Experience: The Philosophy and World Vision of Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan. Calcutta: Asia Publishing House, 1966.
• Atreya, J.P. (ed.) Dr. S. Radhakrishnan: Sovenir Volume. Moradabad: Darshana International, 1964.
• Baird, Robert D. (ed.) Religion in Modern India. New Delhi: Manohar, 1981.
• Banerji, Anjan Kumar (ed.) Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan: A Centenary Tribute. Varanasi, 1991-1992.
• Bishop, Donald H. (ed.) Thinkers of the Indian Renaissance. New Delhi: Wiley Eastern Limited, 1982.
• Braue, Donald A. Maya in Radhakrishnan’s Thought: Six Meanings Other than Illusion. Columbia: South Asia Books, 1985.
• Brookman, David M. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan in the Commentarial Tradition of India. Bhubaneswara, 1990.
• Gopal, Sarvepalli. Radhakrishnan: A Biography. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1989.
• Harris, Ishwar C. Radhakrishnan: The Profile of a Universalist. Columbia: South Asia Books, 1982.
• Hawley, Michael. A Biography of Experience: Radhakrishnan, Apologetics and Orientalism. (Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation) University of Calgary, 2002.
• Hawley, Michael. “The Making of a Mahatma: Radhakrishnan’s Critique of Gandhi” in Studies in Religion. 32/1-2 (2003) 135-148.
• Hawley, Michael. “Reorienting Tradition: Radhakrishnan’s Hinduism” in Steven Engler and Greg P. Grieve (eds.) Historicizing’ Tradition’ in the Study of Religion. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2005.
• Kalapati, Joshua. Dr. S. Radhakrishnan and Christianity. (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation) Madras Christian College, Tambaram, March 1994.
• Kalidas, Vuppuluri (ed.) The Radhakrishnan Number: A Souvenir Volume of Appreciations. Madras: Vyasa Publications, 1962.
• Kulangara, Thomas. Absolutism and Theism: A Philosophical Study of S. Radhakrishnan’s Attempt to Reconcile Sankara’s Absolutism and Ramanuja’s Theism. Trivandrum, 1989.
• McDermott, Robert A. Radhakrishnan: Selected Writings on Philosophy, Religion and Culture. New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1970.
• Minor, Robert N. Modern Indian Interpreters of the Bhagavadgita. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1986.
• Minor, Robert N. Radhakrishnan: A Religious Biography. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1987.
• Murthy, K. Satchidananda Radhakrishnan: His Life and Ideas. Delhi, 1989.
• Nanadakumar, Prema S. Radhakrishnan: Makers of Indian Literature. New Delhi, 1992.
• Naravane, V.S. Modern Indian Thought. Columbia: South Asia Books, 1978.
• Pappu, S.S. Rama Rao (ed.) New Essays in The Philosophy of Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan. Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications, 1995.
• Parthasarathi G. and D.P. Chattapadhyaya (eds.) Radhakrishnan: Centenary Volume. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1989.
• Schilpp, Paul Arthur (ed.) The Philosophy of Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan. New York: Tudor Publishing, 1952.

Author Information

Michael Hawley Email: [email protected] Mount Royal College Canada