It’s nitpicking time. I’ll only address the Indian ones because that’s what I’m familiar with. 1. Madhyamaka. Can it really be said that it is not well know

It’s nitpicking time. I’ll only address the Indian ones because that’s what I’m familiar with. 1. Madhyamaka. Can it really be said that it is not well known in the West? It is the basis of Tibetan Buddhism which is pretty popular. Perhaps “pop” Buddhism doesn’t go into all the details but I’ve met plenty of Westerners who at least know who Nagarjuna was and usually much more than that. 2. Charvaka. A few days ago here in HN I wrote about a theory that the charvakas may not have been the anti-religious radicals of popular belief. Be that as it may, Madhavacharya was not a “14th century Charvaka philosopher.” He was an Advaita Vedantin who after becoming a monk became the Abbot of the premier centre of Advaitic thought, the Shringeri Matha and wrote many classics of that philosophy. In his Sarvadarshanasamgraha (“Compendium of all Schools of Thought”) the first (and lowest) place is given to a description of the Charvakas but they had already gone extinct by that time so unlike the other schools, Madhava’s description is not based on primary sources. 3. Nyaya. It should be noted that Nyaya is also “intimately connected to religion.” Nyaya says that Ishvara (God) is the Prime Mover of the universe who has set the atoms which make up matter (a theory of Nyaya’s sister Vaisheshika school.) into motion. Specifically the Vedas are the source of the true religion because the testimony of an apta (expert) is valid knowledge and Ishvara the most expert of them all is the author of the Vedas. Udayana mentioned in the article wrote a treatise called Kusumanjali which offers many cosmological and ontological arguments for the existence of God. Navya (“neo”) Nyaya is perhaps more interesting from a philosophical view. It is a 15th century onwards combination and progression of the older Nyaya and Vaisheshika schools that concentrated on valid means of knowledge. It anticipates many of the ideas of the formal logic that developed in the West from the 19th century onwards. 4. Jainism. I think Jains would be miffed to learn they borrowed concepts from the Buddhist canon. In fact both Buddhism and Jainism developed at the same time and in the same geographical region. It would be fairer IMO to say both borrowed from stock cultural tropes and folk parables. Sorry this is the Internet. I have to be pedantic — it’s the law. But I did actually enjoy the article.