04-13-2007, 06:36 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-eswarpr+Apr 13 2007, 06:15 PM-->QUOTE(eswarpr @ Apr 13 2007, 06:15 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->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.
< snip >
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.
understand.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No No
It is easier than that and there is no need to waste any time.
Anything deemed Hindu is part of the narrative. Start with what is close to you.
Please look at "Hindu narrative" from the lens of the plane crash site analogy I have used above and in fact I will give you another analogy.
I stated that at a plane crash site every scar, fragment and shred is noted, coded, described and documented. The "whole picture" is bult up later. The otehtr analogy is an ancient archeological site that is suddenly found. You don;t define what you want to find first. You just look at everything and pinpoint its position and shape and size and colur and later build up the picture.
Hindus have a natural feel for what is Hindu but we come into conflict with authors (Marxists, non Hindus) whopick up the fragments that suit them to write OUR history and OUR narrative. That is wrong.
We pick up everything and document it as part of our narrative and we know in our hearts that there is more good in there than the dirt that is thrown at Hindus.
< snip >
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.
understand.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No No
It is easier than that and there is no need to waste any time.
Anything deemed Hindu is part of the narrative. Start with what is close to you.
Please look at "Hindu narrative" from the lens of the plane crash site analogy I have used above and in fact I will give you another analogy.
I stated that at a plane crash site every scar, fragment and shred is noted, coded, described and documented. The "whole picture" is bult up later. The otehtr analogy is an ancient archeological site that is suddenly found. You don;t define what you want to find first. You just look at everything and pinpoint its position and shape and size and colur and later build up the picture.
Hindus have a natural feel for what is Hindu but we come into conflict with authors (Marxists, non Hindus) whopick up the fragments that suit them to write OUR history and OUR narrative. That is wrong.
We pick up everything and document it as part of our narrative and we know in our hearts that there is more good in there than the dirt that is thrown at Hindus.