04-13-2007, 12:45 PM
shiv, I cannot but agree with you when you say:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Living in India I believe I have some insight into how Hindus are working/not working in our own country and I believe there are hundreds of thousands of "Hindu stories", of happiness, sorrow, tribulation and displacement that must be written and recorded as part of what I would call a "Hindu narrative".The Hindu narrative is automatically going to point out how Islam and Christianity spread in India and I believe it is this point on which all talk of Hindu narrative is switched off. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think that is the excerise that a Hindu, or a group of Hindus should take part in first - as in defining a Hindu narrative.
The fundamental problem here is the way "Hindu dharma" is codified. i.e. There is no codification at all. While the other Abrahmic religions start off with a book (i.e. written word), a Hindu begins his religious initiation by "living" and "experiencing" the religion. Which means there is no way a Hindu will be able to point out a certain book and say that is the truth, because the moment you open up the said book, it will say - Don't follow me, find your own path - A Hindu's strength and weakness is right there.
I am a lurker in BRF and have been following the whole saga of the said thread, and I thought I would do a simple excercise in my mind. Putting aside the question as to whether a single Hindu narrative is required or not, since that needs to be discussed first and a concensus gotten, if there is required a single Hindu narrative, how would we define a Hindu - I mean can we actually find the "bindhu" from which all the various threads of Hindu thought came into existence, and define it in a simple sentence.
Don't tell me we don't need it, because we all know we do. If a child, going to a convent school in India, comes back to it's parents and asks the parent - Why am I a Hindu? What is a Hindu? - can the parent actually give a simple definition that a child can understand.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Living in India I believe I have some insight into how Hindus are working/not working in our own country and I believe there are hundreds of thousands of "Hindu stories", of happiness, sorrow, tribulation and displacement that must be written and recorded as part of what I would call a "Hindu narrative".The Hindu narrative is automatically going to point out how Islam and Christianity spread in India and I believe it is this point on which all talk of Hindu narrative is switched off. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think that is the excerise that a Hindu, or a group of Hindus should take part in first - as in defining a Hindu narrative.
The fundamental problem here is the way "Hindu dharma" is codified. i.e. There is no codification at all. While the other Abrahmic religions start off with a book (i.e. written word), a Hindu begins his religious initiation by "living" and "experiencing" the religion. Which means there is no way a Hindu will be able to point out a certain book and say that is the truth, because the moment you open up the said book, it will say - Don't follow me, find your own path - A Hindu's strength and weakness is right there.
I am a lurker in BRF and have been following the whole saga of the said thread, and I thought I would do a simple excercise in my mind. Putting aside the question as to whether a single Hindu narrative is required or not, since that needs to be discussed first and a concensus gotten, if there is required a single Hindu narrative, how would we define a Hindu - I mean can we actually find the "bindhu" from which all the various threads of Hindu thought came into existence, and define it in a simple sentence.
Don't tell me we don't need it, because we all know we do. If a child, going to a convent school in India, comes back to it's parents and asks the parent - Why am I a Hindu? What is a Hindu? - can the parent actually give a simple definition that a child can understand.