Ford Foundation’s anti-Hindu point of intersection in India

The pluralism of this anti-Hindu coalition is not to be interchanged with diversity which is intrinsic only to Hinduism.

NGOs as tools of containment

NGO activism is a perfectly crafted weapon of containment. Western nations have overtly and covertly funded and rewarded with ‘peace’ and ‘human rights’ awards to individuals and organisations taking up the cause of anti-nationalism, ‘peace’, anti-nuclear programmes, anti-war marches, human rights, religious freedom, environment and a host of issues which can paralyze a government or at least inhibit it from acting as it ought to in the national interest.

setalvad This essay critically scrutinizes the activities of some of these individuals and organisations, whose USP is a pathological hatred of Hinduism in all its expressions, to verify if they are contrary to the national interest and Hindu interest. Those thus placed under the scanner include Teesta Setalvad, Praful Bidwai, Achin Vanaik, Martin Macwan, Arundhati Roy, Aruna Roy, Nirmala Deshpande, Angana Chatterji, Akhila Raman, Sandeep Pandey, Raju Rajagopal and Harsh Mander. The NGOs under scrutiny include FOIL, AID, ActionAid, Parivartan and ASHA.

A common denominator with all these bleeding-heart ‘peaceniks’ is that they all take their cue from the US foreign policy agenda for India and Pakistan and its point of intersection. Domestically they advocate ‘communal harmony’ even in the face of Islamic jihad’s relentless war against Hindus, and promote ‘peace’ with Pakistan despite the fact that Pakistan has stubbornly refused to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure it has set up with state patronage. These worthies continue to insist on a ‘peace’ dialogue with Pakistan despite the fact that every act of jihadi terror around the world has a Pakistani connection and despite the fact that there is neither peace nor harmony between Hindu victims and local Muslims in Jammu and Kashmir. These bleeding-heart activists, like the US, continue to advocate ‘peace’ in utter disregard of Pakistan’s stated objectives vis-a-vis ‘Hindu’ India.

Further, there is complete non-cognizance of the fact that while Christians and Muslims may be waging a war to the finish in different parts of the world, while Catholics and Protestants may be killing each other in Northern Ireland and in fierce competition in the UK and the US, while Shias and Sunnis may be at each other’s throats in Pakistan and the entire Islamic world, while the stated ideology of Communism is to treat all religions as adversaries, they have worked out a Grand Truce in India.


As a result, in India, Christians, Muslims and Communists have forged a powerful anti-Hindu alliance and work in tandem, with powerful support from the US. This anti-Hindu coalition of Marxists, Muslims, Missionaries, Khalistanis and Nehruvian Stalinists displayed its unity most visibly in the name of Coalition Against Genocide (CAG) with the single-point agenda of pressuring the US establishment to deny Narendra Modi a visa to visit the US in April 2005.

There can hardly be doubts on this score. All ‘advocacy’ artists have been rewarded with peace and human rights awards by Western governments and international human rights organisations, almost invariably for taking an anti-Hindu position on political issues. These peace awardees and human rights activists are essentially political activists playing for big stakes. Persons like Martin Macwan, Harsh Mander, Arundhati Roy, Aruna Roy and Sandeep Pandey, no matter how persuasively the de-culturised domestic English media and international community may try to package them, are political activists rather than social workers. Their social activism and peace talk is a front, a mask for the greater war against political Hindus and Hindu nationalism. It makes sense, therefore, that they are anti-military, anti-police, anti-nuclear, anti- Hindu, anti-RSS and anti-Hindu-view-of-history. Each ‘anti’ stance is part of a well-planned battle in the war against the Hindu nation and Indian/Hindu nationalism.

This can be readily discerned when these activists denounce Hindutva and nationalism in the same breath. In their public discourses, speeches and writings, Hindutva is co-terminus with nationalism; they have thus unwittingly strengthened the perception that Hindutva is only Indian nationalism. Hence, when they attack Hindutva and belittle nationalism, these NGOs and activists also deride the nation and national integrity. They condemn Hindu religious and political consciousness in virulent language. No American/Western patronage is forthcoming for nationalism or the Hindu cause, but there is big money and powerful patrons in activism which issues shrill calls for doing away with nationalism and which supports the surrender of territory. There is big money in the politics of minorityism and in issues that serve, intentionally or otherwise, Western and American interests.

All these peace awardees and human rights activists have been feted and wined and dined by the international community (read White Christian nations and their human rights industry) in the years between 1996-2004 when the BJP-led coalition ruled the country, first for 13 days and then for six years. It seems difficult to avoid the conclusion that they were being rewarded for the virulent anti-Hindu and anti-BJP/RSS campaign they spearheaded. They obediently articulated the US-Western position on the status of Jammu and Kashmir, India’s nuclear weapons programme, the politics of minorityism, US State Department views on religious freedom, Dalit rights, women’s rights and human rights, and condoned nuclear apartheid by calling for denuclearising ‘South Asia’ alone.

American State DepartmentIf evidence is needed of the US NGO- activist link, it can be seen in the fact that the very groups and individuals who raised the pitch on these issues, and pushed the BJP into a corner and made Hindus defensive about their assertion in the polity, were subsequently used by the American State Department to gather information on domestic events to compile its annual reports on human rights and religious freedom. This partnership serves both sides well. The Americans use this group to check and bad-mouth growing Hindu influence in Indian polity and Indian nationalism while American and Western patronage gives these individuals and groups international visibility and legitimacy and access to funds and sponsorship for their political ambitions and NGO activism.

American and Indian Marxist forays into the NGO industry

Nehru and Nehruvian secularism packed the teaching faculties of the country’s premier educational institutions with Marxist and ‘secular’ academicians who shared an anti-Hindu orientation towards the nation’s history and cultural heritage. Not surprisingly, some of the Hindu minds that passed through these institutions were influenced and conditioned by Marxist notions of history and nation.

Angana and co.Raju Rajagopal, Angana Chatterji, Ram Puniyani, Gautam Navlakha, Sandeep Pandey and Vijay Parshad are all of Marxist persuasion and leading NGO industrialists at home and abroad.

A brief account of the American and Marxist foray into the NGO industry accentuates the idea of India being the prestigious and chosen battleground for the two inherently violent and mutually annihilating European philosophies – market-driven capitalism and communism. In the current stage of their neverending war, one of their major battles is being fought out through the agency of NGOs. A noteworthy feature of American sponsorship of anti-Hindu activism is the choice of persons for the Magsaysay awards. Martin Macwan, Sandeep Pandey, Aruna Roy, Nirmala Deshpande and Admiral Ramdas, all anti-Hindu activists, have been awarded the Magsaysay in the years between 2000 and 2004, when the BJP-led NDA Government was in power.

The Magsaysay awards conferred upon Asians is not an Asian award. It is an American award for Asians. The Magsaysay awards in different categories are constituted by the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation and a substantial part of the cash component is funded by the Ford Foundation (FF).

The Indian Left has always been strongly critical of the FF because it believes that the Ford Foundation, which it claims is consciously infiltrated by the CIA, set up shop in India even in Nehru’s time only to avert a very possible communist takeover of the country after Nehru’s death. This, the Marxists hold, the FF set out to do by investing heavily in rural development, in the green revolution and over time in NGOs as part of Ford’s ‘Asset Building and Community Development Program’, which ‘supports efforts to reduce poverty and injustice by helping to build the financial, natural, social, and human assets of low-income individuals and communities’.

NGO activism is a perfectly crafted weapon of containment.

The FF New Delhi office webpage claims that ‘at the invitation of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, the Foundation established an office in India in 1952’. In fact, Chester Bowles, US Ambassador to India from 1951, initiated the process. Like the rest of the US foreign policy establishment, Bowles was profoundly shocked at the ‘loss’ of China (i.e., the nationwide coming to power of the communists in 1949). Linked to this was his acute worry at the inability of the Indian army to suppress the communist-led peasant armed struggle in Telangana (1946-51) ‘until the communists themselves changed their programme of violence’. Indian peasants expected that now, with the British Raj gone, their longstanding demand for land to the tiller would be implemented, and that pressure continued everywhere in India even after the withdrawal of the Telangana struggle.

Bowles wrote to Paul Hoffman, then President of FF:

‘The conditions may improve in China while the Indian situation remains stagnant…. If such a contrast developed during the next four or five years, and if the Chinese continued their moderate and boundary…. the growth of communism in India might be very great. The death or retirement of Nehru might then be followed by a chaotic situation out of which another potentially strong communist nation might be born.’

The New Delhi office was soon set up and, according to the Ford Foundation, ‘this was the Foundation’s first program outside the United States, and the New Delhi office remains the largest of its field office operations’. It also covers Nepal and Sri Lanka. Bowles wrote that ‘under the leadership of Douglas Ensminger, the Ford staff in India became closely associated with the Planning Commission which administers the Five-Year Plan. Wherever there was a gap, they filled it, whether it was agricultural, health education or administration. They took over, financed and administered the crucial village-level worker training schools’.

There is a sophisticated and comprehensive strategy worked out in imperialist quarters to harness the forces of voluntary agencies/action groups to their strategic design to penetrate Indian society and influence its course of development. It is the imperialist ruling circles, which have provided through their academic outfits the political and ideological basis for the outlook of a substantial number of these proliferating groups in India. By providing liberal funds to these groups, imperialism has created avenues to directly penetrate vital sections of Indian society and simultaneously use this movement as a vehicle to counter and disrupt the potential of the Left movement.

The CPI (M) and the Left forces have to take serious note of this arm of imperialist penetration while focusing on the instruments and tactics of imperialism. An ideological offensive to rebut the philosophy propagated by these groups is urgently necessary as it tends to attract petty bourgeois youth imbued with idealism (Prakash Karat in an article in The Marxist, titled Foreign Funding and the Philosophy of Voluntary Organisations, 1988: 2-3).

Indian Marxists nurture a natural and implacable hostility towards the US in general, the FF in particular and their ‘imperialist intentions’ in India. But the communists have learnt two important lessons – one, that the US and other Western nations by funding and supporting NGOs are actually influencing social trends and political and economic policies and, two, the urgent need to start their own flourishing industry in NGO activism which would give their socially disruptive anti-Hindu activism a façade of respectability.

Sandeep Pandey and Aruna Roy are infamous examples of Marxists venturing into NGO activism. Sandeep Pandey’s communist nexus began to unravel when, within months of accepting a Magsaysay award in 2002, he announced to the world that he will be returning the money—the US$ 50,000 component of the award because, he says, having called the US a terrorist state he cannot very well be receiving money from any American organisation. It is obvious now that the communists used Sandeep Pandey to deliver their first punch at the ‘imperialist’ US and the Ford Foundation.

The second punch was delivered soon thereafter and this time the World Social Forum was the context. The Indian communists did to the FF what they claim the FF did to them in the 1950s – hijack the World Social Forum from the Ford Foundation and thus hijack an entire American/European NGO agenda, an entire constituency of NGO activism and its beneficiaries, which had been created and funded by the Ford Foundation, the UN and several North American, European and Scandinavian governments and quasi-government and non-government organisations. This large umbrella coaliation was intended to render hors de combat any communist pretensions for a comeback. The ‘celestial war’ between capitalism and communism is once again gathering momentum and India seems to be their chosen battle ground this time with Hindus who view them both with equal suspicion becoming their combined target.

In keeping with its agenda to thwart the communists of the world from staging any more great communist revolutions in any continent (and the WTO had created a fertile soil for such revolutions even without the Soviet Union to trigger them), the Ford Foundation was one among the major contributors of funds for the World Social Forum which convened for the first time in Porto Alegre in Brazil in 2001. Not surprisingly, the Ford Foundation, which has been accused of being in partnership with the CIA, is now accused of funding the Left.

However, Ford Foundation funding the Left is typical Generic Church war tactic of funding and arming both sides of any war (in Sri Lanka for example) so that no matter who wins or loses in the war, the Church always wins.

Under the leadership of Douglas Ensminger, the Ford staff in India became closely associated with the Planning Commission which administers the Five-Year Plan.

For three consecutive years, the World Social Forum held its annual conventions in Porto Alegre and so buoyed up were the organisers with the response that in 2003 alone, they organised the Argentina Social Forum in Buenos Aires, European Social Forum in Florence, Palestine Thematic Forum in Ramallah, Asian Social Forum in Hyderabad, and African Social Forum in Addis Ababa. The penetration and the takeover of the World Social Forum by the communists of the world was complete by 2003 and, in 2003, the Brazilian Organising Committee and the International Council issued a triumphant war cry deciding to hold the next WSF gathering not in Brazil, but in India.

One of the principal organizing forces behind the Mumbai WSF meet in January 2004 were the two major communist parties of India – the CPI and the CPI(M), and the National Alliance of Peoples’ Movements (NAPM) an umbrella organisation for all NGOs affiliated to these parties or owing allegiance to the communist ideology. And the first decision taken by the Indian Organising Committee was to reject Western sources of funds for the WSF, notably the Ford Foundation. In the words of Lisa Jordan of the FF:

We are not supporting this year’s forum because the Indian Organising Committee (IOC), which represents a comprehensive attempt to bring together a large cross-section of Indian society, includes some groups who have objected to Ford’s activities in India since 1953 – especially support for the Green Revolution in the 1960s and 1970s. They feel that contributions made by the Ford Foundation helped to prevent India from undergoing communist revolution. In the beginning the idea for the WSF in India had been for a very broad funding base with Ford, Britain’s Department for International Development (DFID), the MacArthur Foundation, the European Union and others. But in the end, the IOC chose not to seek funding from any of these.

The NAPM is a conglomerate of anti-Hindu, anti-Nation Indian NGOs whose agendas include:

  • ‘Resolving the Kashmir dispute’.
  • Internationalising the Dalit issue with the slogan ‘Dalit rights as human rights’ to sever the dalits from the Hindu community–Agents: Christian NGOs, and Indian and foreign churches.
  • Propagate the slogan ‘Women’s rights as human rights’ and sever Hindu women from their families and religion – Agents: Marxist and Christian women’s groups and women’s organisations.
  • Education with emphasis on church-run rural and mofussil schools, writing of history and teaching the social sciences from a so-called subaltern, minority and gender perspective.

Nirmala Deshpande and Admiral Ramdas of Pakistan-India People’s Forum For Peace and Democracy (PIPFPD) have already earned their own Magsaysays for dabbling in Kashmir and hard-selling peace with Pakistan, while Sandeep Pandey has original ideas on nationalism and, of course, on the status of Kashmir.

Pakistan-India People’s Forum For Peace and DemocracyOne of the sessions in the WSF in Mumbai 2004 was devoted to the Kashmir issue. And just so we entertain no delusions about the political ambitions of these NGOs and other activists, speakers at the seminar included Ved Bhasin, Chairman of Kashmir Times; Yasin Malik, Chairman of JKLF; Pervez Hoodbhoy, Professor, Quaid-e-Azam University, Islamabad; Balraj Puri, Activist and Writer from Jammu; Kamal Mitra Chenoy, Associate Professor, JNU; Karamat Ali, Director, Pakistan Institute of Labour Education and Research (PILER), Karachi; and Gautam Navlakha, Assistant Editor, Economic and Political Weekly. Incidentally, Gen. Karamat Ali, along with Admiral Ramdas, is one of the luminaries of PIPFPD.

The same group arranged for Martin Macwan, the so-called Dalit Christian from Gujarat sponsored by White American Christian patrons, to speak about untouchability at the Durban conference on racism. This group has succeeded in equating the practice of untouchability with caste, has reduced Hinduism to sati, dowry, caste and untouchability, and has defamed all practising Hindus as being inherently discriminatory towards the ‘lower’ castes and all women. The primary objective of this coalition of Muslims- Missionaries-Marxists-and Nehruvian Secularists is to write history in a manner that places large sections of Hindu society outside the Hindu fold and another important section as aliens who invaded/migrated into the country from the steppes of Central Asia. They hope thus to de-Hinduise the nation by propagating the following theories:

  • Hinduism is Brahminism. The Brahmins are Aryans who are not native to the nation but who first invaded and later migrated into the country, subjugating the native ‘Dravidians’ and the adivasis.
  • Therefore what goes in the name of Hinduism is as alien as Islam and Christianity and so there is no basis to the claim of Hindu nationalists that the life breath of this territory is the Hindu civilisation or a Hindu nation.
  • Dalits and tribals are not Hindus.
  • Modern India was created by the British and it is pluralistic.

The pluralism of this anti-Hindu coalition is not to be interchanged with diversity which is intrinsic only to Hinduism. The concept of pluralism with de-Hinduising the nation as its objective is at the core of all issues they raise and the manner in which they raise it.

(This is an excerpt from the author’s introductory chapter in the book NGOs, Activists and Foreign Funds: Anti-nation Industry, 2006)'
Radha Rajan is a Chennai-based political analyst. She is also author and animal activist.
  • sanmukh

    As a seeker of truth this article has given the perfect information, good work mam, if possible please join forum for awareness of national secur

  • Pingback: Ford Foundation’s anti-Hindu point of intersection in India | featuresgalleried()

  • Rahul

    Christian = Yes I’m Christian.

    Muslim = Yes I’m Muslim.

    Hindu = No No I’m Secular.

    There was Jesus on earth, there was Muhammed on earth. But When I say there were Ram, Krishna etc on earth, they say its all Mythological. Because We’re Secular.

    Welcome to India 🙂

    Sickular/Communist NGO/Missionary bastards are ruining the India.

    • Radha Rajan

      No, idiot Hindus who refuse to know the enemy are destroying India.

      • Rahul

        Definately , they are brain washing and putting our own Hindu people against us.

  • @jayeshji

    The Fact is the CIA use organisations like US AID FF and many charities which on the surface appear normal to channel anti national forces in India. The Vatican has the same goal to convert Hindus so all NGO need to be scrutinized. Take anti Hindu NDTV it is funded by adverts from charities like World Vision and others to help the poor, these are in turn given CIA funds to work in India.

  • Swapnil

    When the word Hindu is mentioned it sort of alienates the Budhhists, Sikhs, Jains – that is the people of Dharma (with roots in India). The need may be to start referring with inclusive identity.

    • Radha Rajan

      Good grief, Hindus means all of them. RR

      • R. Singh

        You do not explain, why the others are alienated.?

        Are you content with that alienation?

        • _chAyA_

          if using terms like hindu alienates sikhs, buddhists & jains they have only themselves to blame. if they dont like it they can emigrate to where they will be welcomed.

          • R. Singh

            It is this kind of baseless arrogance that turns people off.

          • _chAyA_

            fact is sikhs & others dont want assimilate & hindus like me dont want to take up the burden of inclusiveness . others can / may lead this charge for a change.

          • R. Singh

            Sikhs also follow the Dharmic path.

            They are not your enemies.

            Orthodox Hinduism, has its shortcomings- one being that it has taken on the trappings of a ‘Religion’.

            That turns plenty of people off.

          • reform uscirf

            Nobody wants to be Hindu.

            Sikh, Arya Samaj, Brahmo Samaj, & even Ramakrishna mission, has claimed one time or another that they are not Hindu.

            In pakistan all the little religions, like Ahmedi, Ismaili etc, are dying to prove that they are Muslim. In sharp contrast, All the little religions in india are attacking Hinduism to prove they are not Hindus. Some like Khalistani’s are killing to prove that they are anti-Hindu. There are many reasons for this sad situation. One prime reason is India’s anti-Hindu constitution (i.e. article 29,30) and anti-Hindu policy (e.g. no freedom of worship,& temple mgmt, for Hindus).

          • R. Singh

            The term Religion should only apply the Abrahamic faiths- Christianity and Islam.

            That is revealed to them by their GOD.

            Dharam- the path of righteousness, is a philosophy.
            Dharam does not have scriptures, holy books, prophets, or Gods.

            the goal is enlightenment.

            Dharam is followed by Sikhs, Jain, Vedic, Hindus, Buddhists, Zoroastrians.

            If some hindus want to go away from the Dharmic path and acquire religious trappings, that is their choice, to make.

            Which path do you wish to follow ?

          • Jishnu

            There is no “shortcoming” – the fact that Sikh, Jaina, Bauddha et al emerged from “Hinduism” is a simple evidence of its inherently synthetic, diverse, open nature. The fact that you have shown no onus of assimilation but assume it by default on “Hinduism” is evidence of its inherent umbrella nature that *includes* all those mentioned. “Arrogance” is a comment on intent, usually seen the shortage of a counter on content.

      • Swapnil

        The reason why I mentioned this explicitly is because, when the word Hindu is mentioned to my friends from the above background see it from a third person perspective. Also if you ask many of them across if they consider themselves as Hindus, they will vehemently respond that they are not Hindus.

    • _chAyA_

      so sikhs jains & buddhists want to be separate but they expect hindus to be inclusive ??!!?? what kind of racket is this??

  • Radha Rajan

    This book on NGOs was pit together by several Hindu nationalists after the US denied Narendra Modi the vusa which Modi never asked for. In the opening paragraph of this excerpt from the Introduction to the book I mention that the NGOs under scrutiny include Parivartan. We also exposed the true nature of the Magsaysay award and the IIT connection to all infamous foreign funded activists. Arvind Kejriwal was/is Parivartan, he is IIT Kharagpur and he is also Magsaysay awardee. As early as 2006, nearly 10 years ago, Dr. Krishen Kak laid his accusing finger squarely on Arvind Kejriwal. The introductory chapter details the geopolitics of America and the rest of the Generic Church using NGOs to espouse human rights, freedom of religion, women’s rights, environmental issues etc etc. Readers of IF are invited to read the book at their convenience on Vigilonline. The remarkable thing about this book is how some of us saw the dangers of foreign funded NGOs as early as 2004-2005. This is one exemplary initiative of how Hindus come together in times of war.

  • Dr. MS

    I know some of these people well…and what I find irritating about some of them is that while they carry the title of human rights’ activists they only speak and fight for Muslim rights, Christians rights and/or Communist rights. They do diddly squat for non-Muslims who are beheaded without due process in Islamic countries, or the harassment of Blacks and other minorities in the US. They take from my writings and use it for their own agenda. They are not that smart. but they get to be a mouthpiece in a country that is too passive of idiots or too tolerant of posers.

  • Radha Rajan

    In what may be perfect timing and related to the last paragraph, we now have Yoga is a way of life, Yoga has no religion. Earlier it was Hinduism is a way of life, Hinduism is not a religion. And the winning theory – on this bhumi., everyone is a Hindu. The logical conclusion here is we have Muslim Hindu, Christian Hindu, Parsi Hindu, and the comical Hindu-Hindu.

    • Jishnu

      For that we have ourselves alone to blame. First trying to teach yoga vidya to asura-s, then try making it “universal” just so it can’t be called communal, then crib about its Hindu “origins”, and the spiral goes on.

      • _chAyA_

        yet none who complains about how leftists deride hindu origins of yoga, cant/wont support the most obvious stance that these vidyas shouldnt be taught to unworthies in the first place.

        • Jishnu

          Going back a century I wonder if it was the same way in which our people gave undue knowledge transfer to the whites – although that was more a predicament than today’s itch to universalize.

    • Swapnil

      may be Sanatan Hindu.

    • R. Singh

      So , what exactly is wrong with being a Muslim Hindu ?

      There is a terminology problem here..

      If you continue to defiine Hindu -ism as a religion, you are left with no alternative but to have the debate on Abrahamic terms.

      Why do you not tell us, what a Hindu is or is supposed to be ???

      • Globalaryan

        Surprised that you ask. Hindus are followers and believers in the eternal Sanatan Dharma and who believe the fact that they have inhabited this land continuously since the vedic and pre-vedic times and who consider the people of other Indic religions as Sikhism, Buddhism, Jainism, Parsis as brothers.

        • R. Singh

          With respect, Dharma does not equate to Religion.

          There are no Indic Religions.

          Religion is a term reserved for Abrahamic Religions – Christianty, Islam

          To remind ourselves, Dharam is a philosophy- ever changing, ever evolving.

          Dharma is the ‘Righteous Path’. The goal is enlightenment.

          For Abrahamic Religions, the goal is Heaven, Paradise, – Hell is the alternative

          With respect again,

          We should use the correct terminology and not call Dharmic traditions Religions.

          Sikhs, Parsis, Jains, Buddhists, have Dharam, and try and follow the ” Righteous path and seek enlightenment.

          The individual has to follow the path, the gurus can only guide.

          Warm regards

          • Globalaryan

            With due respect, I also said Hinduism is Sanatan Dharma. Also, since we are communicating in English hence I’m using the world religion because in English language Hinduism is classified as a “religion” – Please check any authoritative text or encyclopedia. As you probably know that there is no equivalent world of religion in India and the closest synonym is “Dharma”.

            Going with that thought and communicating in English, the Indic religions are Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism, Buddhism, even Parsi (since they were displaced from Iran). No harm in calling Hinduism as a religion for classification purposes and for people to understand. The inherent principles of Hinduism religion is the dharmic way of life and most people know that…

          • R. Singh

            That is the problem.

            If one uses wrong Definition/terminology, one will get an incorrect result.

            There is no such thing as an authoritative dictionary.

            You cannot have a discussion on the same platform, if we are talking about two different things.

            A Fish is not a Horse !

            The moon is not a Tree !

            Dharam is NOT a Religion

            Dharam is a philosophy.

            Philosophy cannot be Religion

            The differences are irreconcilable

            Try not to have the discussion framed by Evangelists in terms of their Evangelist Christian norms.

            For them Ved is a Bible and Vice versa.

          • Globalaryan

            Again with due respect, you asked what a Hindu is supposed to be and I gave you the answer with reference to Sanatan Dharma philosophy and the original, continuous inhabitants of this land and beyond.

            Once again, we must keep in mind that we are communicating in an “abrahamic” language so the words that we use to communicate our point must be what makes sense in the abrahamic language for the masses to understand better. We can be idealist or we can be practical idealist. Hinduism is broadly classified as a religion in the modern world. Just because Sanskrit/Hindi doesn’t have the exact world for “religion” doesn’t mean that Hinduism cannot be classified as a religion. All religions start with a philosophy and evolve into religion so religion and philosophy are very much interlinked. e.g Sanatan Dharma was a product of Vedic philosophy so referring to Sanatan Dharma a religion is although not absolutely correct but it’s not outrageously far off either.

          • R. Singh

            Calling a a stone as a fish, does not make it one.

            Please settle your definition problem

          • Globalaryan

            No one is calling a stone a fish. But I’m calling a whale a fish is the proper analogy. Please try to have a practical and objective perspective. We use English (unfortunately) and lets try to make the most of it.

          • R. Singh

            A wrong definition is a wrong definition !!.

            Falling back on Evangelist Interpretations in the English Language does not help you !

            The wrong definition will still be wrong!

            A philosophy cannot be a religion.

          • Globalaryan

            who’s falling back on evangelist interpretation??? sorry I thought you had some sense but seems like your intentions here are questionable. I’m saying that English is not Sanskrit and most people in the world don’t know Sanskrit/ Hindi so it’s better to explain your ideas in a language that most understand THAN to not get them to understand at all. You deny the obvious. Like I said all religions start with a philosophy. I gave example of vedic philosophy giving rise to Hinduism/Sanatan Dharma. No one can deny that. Hinduism is a religion and a dharmic way of life. Period.

          • R. Singh

            Here we go again

            You are using an evangelist interpretation.

            One wonders why?

          • Globalaryan

            Once again,

            I’m saying that English is not Sanskrit and most people in the world
            don’t know Sanskrit/ Hindi so it’s better to explain your ideas in a
            language that most understand THAN to not get them to understand at all.
            You deny the obvious. Like I said all religions start with a
            philosophy. I gave example of vedic philosophy giving rise to
            Hinduism/Sanatan Dharma. No one can deny that. Hinduism is a religion
            and a dharmic way of life. Period.


          • R. Singh

            Gradually you might come around

            Let us try again Step by step and in English

            Step 1 : Philosophy = Dharma

            Step 2 : Philosophy NOT = Religion

            Step 3: Therefore Dhrama NOT = Religion

            Hope this helps

          • Globalaryan

            You didn’t answer my question, why? because it will prove you wrong. Instead you are repeating the same thing over and over like someone with an un-trained mind who cannot understand anything deeper than what is plainly obvious AND if it was that simple we won’t be having this discussion hence adding a few more steps for elucidation of course in English.

            Step 4. Religion = Set of Core Values, Dogmas and Beliefs
            Step 5. Hinduism = Set of Core Values, Dogmas, Beliefs
            Step 6. Hinduism= Religion based on Santan Dharma Vedic Philosphy.

          • R. Singh

            Where, pray, ( to use another evangelist term), is Mr or Ms or Mrs Radha Rajan, the author?

            A deafening silence?

          • Radha Rajan

            Not at all, a bored silence.