What is 'Development'? Questioning perceptions of development in Nepal

          Usually, when we talk about development in regards to other countries, we usually look towards the economic development of a particular country and subsequently determine its adequacy. However, as I spend more time in Nepal and gain more insight from Nepalis, I'm beginning to question the popular stigma that development equates to economic prowess and political might. Perhaps one of the greatest pieces of insight I discovered whilst here in Nepal (thanks to a great Nepali friend of mine) is the level of religious tolerance that is abundant in the culture here. While the two dominating "religions" in Nepal are Buddhism and Hinduism, there seems to be a very open and accepting nature towards other faiths and lifestyles. In fact, some people often refer to themselves as both Buddhist and hindu. Thinking of the states, it would probably be very rare to find someone express that they have two religions. My friend then further explained that him and his family attend both Buddhist and hindu festivities and celebration and even Christian celebrations. In fact, he said he goes to church when the Christmas time arrives and that most Nepalis celebrate Christmas as well as their respective buddhist or hindu festivals. From my experience in studying international relations, I've noticed that countries that coincide two religious often end-up in high levels of sectarian religious violence. However, this is not the case in Nepal. Monasteries, churches, mosques, etc. all coexist harmoniously here from what I've gathered. According to my friend, there is a respect for all gods and there seems to be a belief that  all gods are equal and although we might not believe in the same one we respect your choices. There seems to exists a mutual respect for all belief systems. And, I never heard one person preach to me why I should become a Buddhist or hindu. It seems to be a much more personal part of people's lives and the goal is not to evangelize. Also, in terms of comparison between Nepal and America, my friend and I discussed contraception distribution in our countries. He seemed undoubtedly shocked to hear that there are a lot of groups in the states attempting to thwart the distribution of contraception. Apparently, in Nepal such a problem does not exist. Additionally, while homosexuality is still seen as taboo on a societal level, there is already a declared third-gender and the constitution, currently a work in progress, is said to include rights and protections for sexual minorities including marriage. One theory I construed lies in the fact that hinduism and buddhism are more philosophical then religious. They seem to be more about giving people a broad guideline on how to live a good life while the more mainstream monotheistic religious preach specifically what one can and can't do. Furthermore, as I stay in my friends small, but cozy, village home and take a look around people look genuinely happy and comfortable.  Then I think about the gargantuan lavish homes that Americans so very much crave. Do we really need that though? Will those material possessions really leave us happier? Why does majority of the world determine a countries welfare by its gross domestic product? Are we really defined by money? So, as I sat on a long and uncomfortable bus ride back from staying at my friends place in Chitiwan, I contemplated the very meaning of development and came up with the conclusion that its relative.  So maybe I should stop thinking of Nepal as solely an underdeveloped country. Yes, it had many infrastructure problems but, on the other hand, some social advancements such as religious tolerance can be seen as developed. So what is development?