Thanks to Rajeev Srinivasan  for providing in his blog a link  to an article “Spirited away” by Meera Nanda  in the New Humanist . Simply put, the article by Nanda is a verbose tirade against (a) the Dharmic systems (particularly Hinduism) and (b) Sam Harris   for his sympathetic views towards Hindu and Buddhist spirituality in his book “The End of Faith”.
For those unacquainted with Meera Nanda, this is what the indomitable Koenraad Elst had to say in reply to her hysterical polemics some years back. 
It is not contrived to describe Meera Nanda as a Marxist scholar. She works within a Marxist conceptual framework, relies on Marxist sources, and speaks of leftist authors as belonging to a collective “us” as opposed to a hated right-wing “them”
Coming back to Nanda’s article on Sam Harris’s book, along expected lines true to her ideological moorings; as aptly pointed out by Dr. Elst; Nanda indulges in unabashed anti-Hindu polemics. Selected excerpts are reproduced here. Emphasis in bold has been added my me.
An idealistic, spirit-centered metaphysics continues to structure the worldview of ordinary people, while intuitive and certain knowledge of the ‘absolute truth’ of ‘pure consciousness’ is still the culturally hegemonic paradigm of knowledge and truth.
Moreover, the notion that such knowledge is rational and scientific is routinely used by Hindu nationalists to assert the superiority of Hinduism over Islam and Christianity, which they condemn as being superstitious in terms not dissimilar to those used by Harris. A rationalist endorsement of mysticism could have dire consequences for the development of a rational scepticism adequate to the challenge of fundamentalism.
The ever ubiquitous Hindu nationalists invariably pops up whenever those from the left seek to sell their fare. And what does Meera Nanda provide to back her purported views on Hindu nationalists? Nothing except her own ideological predilections. The much maligned Hindutva or Hindu nationalism not doubt seeks to imbibe in all Hindus and in fact in all Indians a strong sense of belonging, pride and patriotism towards the country. And why is this wrong? Sadly, the question of right or wrong is always construed by the Marxists and secularists from a myopic ideological viewpoint. And when ideology is used to construct parochial postulates, truth invariably suffers.
Now consider this other quote by Nanda from the same article.
My experience of the deep connections between Hindu metaphysics and Hindu nationalist politics underpins my scepticism and naturalistic world view.
Left unsaid, Sam Harris is now; what Nanda and her ideological bedfellows like to call; a Hindutvavaadi.
While perusing the New Humanist site, I came across another article by Nanda, “Rush hour of the gods” . And yes not very surprisingly it is another voracious tirade on Hinduism. What really struck me however was Nanda’s stridently haughty and foolish dismissal of ancient Indian scientific contributions and particularly her crass belittling insinuation towards Aryabhata , the ancient Indian mathematician and astronomer who is credited with many momentous contributions. Excerpt below. Emphasis in bold has been added by me.
The theme of the superiority of ancient Hindu science was taken up a week later when the president of India, Abdus Kalam, came down to the temple-ashram complex to inaugurate its “science museum”, which highlights ancient Hindu discoveries in astronomy/astrology, medicine (ayurveda), architecture (vastu) and such. Without ever questioning what validity the Earth-at-the-centre astronomy/astrology of Aryabhatta has in the modern world, the nuclear physicist president went on to claim not only the greatness of antiquity but also the continued relevance of the ancients for “enriching” modern astronomy.
If there was any doubt about the extra-academic agenda and ideological predilections of Meera Nanda, her insidious insinuation on Aryabhata clears it. It is true that scholars have divergent views on interpretations of Aryabhata’s model of the solar system. David Pingree, Noel Swerdlow believe it is geocentric. While Otto Neugebauer, Hugh Thurston, Naturforschenden Gesellschaft, van der Waerden, Dennis Duke believe it to be heliocentric. His sighrocca (in Sanskrit) model is cited by most as evidence for being heliocentric. Notwithstanding this academic debate, Meera Nanda’s dismissive polemics and foolish sarcasm regarding ancient Indian scientific contribution and specially her belittling insinuation towards Aryabhata is particularly distasteful given his irrefutable contribution to science and mathematics. Be it in trigonometry, algebra, explaining eclipses, sidereal periods, earth’s axis, etc. Aryabhata did some really seminal work. Among his many accomplishments, Aryabhata is credited with postulating the movement of earth around its axis and approximation of the value of pi. So, clearly either Nanda has never read any of Aryabhata’s work, or worse is willfully allowing her perfidious predilections to propound a consummate travesty.
Many luminaries throughout history, unburdened by ideological baggage, have made famous quotes on the many contributions of ancient India to science and civilization. Of these many famous quotes, Einstein’s comes to mind.
We owe a lot to the Indians, who taught us how to count, without which no worthwhile scientific discovery could have been made.
A good collection is available at Hinduism.about.com . However, Meera Nanda with an arrogant haughtiness adamantly refuses to acknowledge any of ancient India’s contribution to humanity be it scientific, spiritual or otherwise. A result perhaps of viewing everything with parochial ideological lenses. While not at all surprising, it is a very sad reality that has however become staple offering from the Marxist-secularist stable.
In her book “The God Market” Nanda pompously avers to Swami Ramdev’s Yoga propagation as
a paradigm case of the seamless merging of state, business, and religious-cultural elites and the openly communalist, xenophobic Hindu right
Swami Ramdev  is singularly responsible for a revival of the ancient Hindu tradition of Yoga in modern India. In fact Ramdev has even tried to include hardline Islamists from the Deoband into his Yoga mission .
Ramdev was the first non-Muslim cleric to address the annual convention of Islamic seminaries under the auspices of Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind at the seminary, known for its influence over bulk of the Sunni Muslims across the country.
Emphasising the need for promoting communal harmony, he contended that the unity between Hindus and Muslims was the strength of the nation. “It was high time people realized that ‘Ishwar’ and ‘Allah’ were two names of one and the only god,” he said.
Sadly this inclusiveness has almost always been a one way street with only Hindus walking the way. But for the likes of Nanda their ideological postulates dictate that they very perfidiously call this inclusiveness “openly communalist, xenophobic”.
Moreover, Yoga; and hence Swami Ramdev; being an inseparable part of Hinduism is undoubtedly anathema to the likes of Nanda. In fact any attempt at imbibing into Hindus a sense of pride and belonging towards its more than 5000 year old cultural heritage is construed by the secularists as communalist. If this is communalism, then every person on this planet with a sense of pride and belonging for his/her faith and/or country is a communalist. The pope is communal, the church going President of the United States is communal, as are the millions of Muslims going for Haj.
In the same book, “The God Market”, Nanda defensively says that her work is not “of polemics or ideological argumentation”. That’s right! And Pol Pot was a gentle caretaker of an orphanage for abandoned children.
Incidentally, Meera Nanda is closely associated with the Marxist den, Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi. In 2009, she was made a fellow at the Jawaharlal Nehru Institute for Advanced Study, in the Jawaharlal Nehru University for research in Science, Post-Modernism and Culture . She also happens to have received a major fellowship from the John Templeton Foundation  to support her research on defining, debating and teaching science in India   between 2005 and 2007.
The Templeton Foundation has been criticized by many for its alleged agenda of trying to reconcile religion and science. An American science journalist and author John Horgan , in 2006 wrote in an article in The Chronicle of Higher Education  of his “misgivings about the foundation’s agenda of reconciling religion and science”. He claimed that a conference he attended favored scientists who “offered a perspective clearly skewed in favor of religion and Christianity”
The article by Horgan can also be found in . Horgan also says in the same article
A devout Presbyterian born and raised in Tennessee, John M. Templeton launched the extremely successful Templeton mutual funds in the 1950s and became a billionaire. He started spending serious money to promote his religious values in 1972, when he established the Templeton Prize for Progress Toward Research or Discoveries About Spiritual Realities.
I will leave it to readers to judge the John Templeton Foundation’s; that provided a generous fellowship to Meera Nanda; religion of choice.
Koenraad Elst in the same paper referenced earlier in this post  made the following observation about Nanda. Emphasis in bold has been added by me.
There are more points in Ms. Nanda’s paper which are worthy of further discussion, but for now I will conclude with an observation on what seems to be her sincere declaration of interest. Among the points that “worry” her, she mentions this as the final one: “The more prominence Hinduism gets abroad, even for wrong reasons like the new age and paganism, the more prestige it gains in India.”
Here, she really lays her cards on the table. It is very good that, unlike many other “secularists”, she does not try to be clever and claim to speak for “true Hinduism” against a “distorted Hinduism” of the Hindu revivalists. Instead, she clearly targets Hinduism itself, deploring any development which might make Hinduism “gain prestige”. Let us see if I can translate that correctly: wanting something or someone to suffer rather than to prosper is what we call “hate”. She hates Hinduism, and her academic work is written in the service of that hate.
As Dr. Elst has aptly noted, Meera Nanda’s scholarship is born out of a hatred for Hinduism. This hatred and its resultant mendacious polemics is shared by many of her ideological bedfellows. Thanks to a cartel being successfully formed by these ideological bedmates and their Eurocentic associates in the west, their drivel is being passed off as scholarship. Another blogger wrote an erudite post a while back on a different paper by Nanda where he rightly made a very pertinent observation. 
The tone and content of Nanda’s piece only stops short of giving a public call to destroy Hinduism.
I really couldn’t agree more.