<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->This question is both to Bodhi and Shiv (sengotuvel):
Does/should the hindu narrative include Jaina, Bauddha and Sikh narrative or not?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In my opinion, such a narrative shall not be complete without including these traditions. When an ordinary, non-scholarly, plain, simple, even uneducated but practicing Hindu thinks of his/her tradition, he is completey at home with Jaina, Bauddha, Sikh or several other unnamed indigenous traditions of Bharat.
The narrative should (also) serve as the synthesis of these, with due respect to the mutual differences, of different countless streams that flow within the broad Bramhaputra-like Bharat Dharma. Narrative has (also) to be a bridge across all. This narative must include ALL the traditions that have roots in Bharat.
In fact, if I may suggest, instead of calling it "Hindu" narrative, might we call it "Bharatiya" or "Dharmik" narrative? "Hindu" although accurate, often leads to readymade misunderstanding as an "-ism" or "religion" these days, thanks to the artificial definitions that have been now well-internalized. We may have to utilize a better-understood term.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->On the other hand, if a Hindu does feel embarrassed in speaking these facts - then he should not be treated with contempt. Contempt only attempts to show that "I" (who do not feel embarrassed) am superior to "you" (who is feeling embarrassed to speak the truth and may be a dhimmi). Contempt at dhimmi Hindu is laughable - like a slave ridiculing at another. We are in the same boat and should not be against each other. The dhimmi has to be converted. And he can be converted only if you show confidence and affectionate conviction. Not uncertainty and contempt. It is easy to suppress contempt, but uncertainty can be removed only with knowledge of your own narrative.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is very important. There is no place for contempt to dhimmi pseudo-Hindu. However if I may submit, narrative we are talking about, can not be altered/filtered/conditioned to appease the dhimmi Hindus or to make it "acceptable" for anyone else. It has got to be a natural phenomenon, an innocent understanding, not a concious creaion. Let it be uncomfortable to some, if it is
Also very important is to really have a forward looking appraoch of converting the dhimmi pseudo-Dharmik to Dharma. "Dharmik Narrative" will be a crucial tool. Please do consider that usually these dhimmi pseudo-Hindus show more 'confidence' (or belligerence) than the plain dharmik-Hindu.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Funnily enough, even Naipaul sensed it.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Shivji, why do you say 'funnily'?
Does/should the hindu narrative include Jaina, Bauddha and Sikh narrative or not?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In my opinion, such a narrative shall not be complete without including these traditions. When an ordinary, non-scholarly, plain, simple, even uneducated but practicing Hindu thinks of his/her tradition, he is completey at home with Jaina, Bauddha, Sikh or several other unnamed indigenous traditions of Bharat.
The narrative should (also) serve as the synthesis of these, with due respect to the mutual differences, of different countless streams that flow within the broad Bramhaputra-like Bharat Dharma. Narrative has (also) to be a bridge across all. This narative must include ALL the traditions that have roots in Bharat.
In fact, if I may suggest, instead of calling it "Hindu" narrative, might we call it "Bharatiya" or "Dharmik" narrative? "Hindu" although accurate, often leads to readymade misunderstanding as an "-ism" or "religion" these days, thanks to the artificial definitions that have been now well-internalized. We may have to utilize a better-understood term.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->On the other hand, if a Hindu does feel embarrassed in speaking these facts - then he should not be treated with contempt. Contempt only attempts to show that "I" (who do not feel embarrassed) am superior to "you" (who is feeling embarrassed to speak the truth and may be a dhimmi). Contempt at dhimmi Hindu is laughable - like a slave ridiculing at another. We are in the same boat and should not be against each other. The dhimmi has to be converted. And he can be converted only if you show confidence and affectionate conviction. Not uncertainty and contempt. It is easy to suppress contempt, but uncertainty can be removed only with knowledge of your own narrative.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is very important. There is no place for contempt to dhimmi pseudo-Hindu. However if I may submit, narrative we are talking about, can not be altered/filtered/conditioned to appease the dhimmi Hindus or to make it "acceptable" for anyone else. It has got to be a natural phenomenon, an innocent understanding, not a concious creaion. Let it be uncomfortable to some, if it is
Also very important is to really have a forward looking appraoch of converting the dhimmi pseudo-Dharmik to Dharma. "Dharmik Narrative" will be a crucial tool. Please do consider that usually these dhimmi pseudo-Hindus show more 'confidence' (or belligerence) than the plain dharmik-Hindu.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Funnily enough, even Naipaul sensed it.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Shivji, why do you say 'funnily'?