There is often a tendency among intellectuals to treat indigenous knowledge 9IK) as binaries. Cynicists dub IK as irrational and unscientific; whereas critical intellectuals regard IK as narrtive knowledge, which need not be irrational or orthodoxical. As one goes through the idea of IK and looks at the contemporary social reality, one encounters a series of queries which is as follows. • Why is it called indigenous? • Does it include all forms of local knowledge? • Does it relate to people’s livelihood? • Is it utilitarian? • Do IK and modern knowledge exist as binaries? • Do they operate contrary to each other? • Is IK static? • Or, is this dynamic and transformative? • Is this oriented towards human development/ skill development like modern knowledge? • Can modern knowledge afford to run contrary to IK/ customs? • Why does it encounter a perpetual threat of extinction? What are its threats? • Is IK a resource? • If the answer is yes, is this collective or individualistic? • Should science and IK mutually exclude each other? • Or, should they mutually include each other? • Is there a need to evolve an inclusive approach to combine science and IK in greater interests of the mankind? • Why is there a clarion call for its preservation, promotion and integration with modern knowledge? It is in this context, the paper assumes its relevance. It seeks to emphasize the need to rise above binaries and blend IK and modern knowledge. The idea is to encompass all forms of ideas in the making of the sociology of knowledge