« first day (91 days earlier)      last day (1342 days later) » 

4:30 AM
@sv. Do you think personal experience should be considered as source?
4:48 AM
@Pandya Yes, provided it's explicitly stated as such. E.g., "This is my personal opinion" or "what I heard from my parents" etc.
@sv. Personal opinion & learning form parents are ok but it needs to be backed up with sources. Isn't it?
5:03 AM
@iammilind can you bit clarify your super-sacred-texts.com case?
@iammilind I mean are you talking about interpolating English translation or providing your own commentary or something else?
2 hours later…
6:35 AM
@Pandya, regarding "super-sacred-text.com", the name is chosen quite similar to "sacred-text.com", so that it's evident to all that it's just an example.

Currently we haven't decided which websites are allowed to cite sources. Suppose if some XYZ website is used for citing sources, then there is no way to prove its authenticity. Hence we need to decide, which are allowed and which are not.

For example, anything from "sacred-texts.com" is allowed, but manythings from "wikipedia.com" is not allowed.
@iammilind Most of the Scriptures are written originally in Sanskrit and various websites provide English translation and commentary.
So that can be set as an objective criteria that "websites with Sanskrit & English translations are valid sources". Now whether the website is hosted in certain way & the Sanskrit is from 19-20th century or not .. etc. points can be ignored.
@iammilind so, basically scriptures are original sources.
@iammilind Some websites don't provide Sanskrit source but we can verify/check it. And what do you mean by "Sanskrit is from 19-20th century?"
I meant, if some of the works are written in modern times (hence either new work or interpolation). I am not aware of such websites specifically But I am just showing the possibility.
And I want to understand possibility. Let me clear that modern work and interpolation is different things.
6:46 AM
For exmaple, do we consider this as a valid source: kamakoti.org/kamakoti/dharmasindhu/bookindex.php or yoga-age.com/modern/brahma.html which is cited in Rickross's answer on Hinduism view on Pornography: hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/15336/1049
@iammilind ok. It seems modern works on various topics regarding Hinduism. can we first make clear the thing regarding interpolation?
If you go by "Sanskrit" rule, then they may be put in question. Now from the content cited, it's clear that it's modern work.
Take an example celextel.org provides many scriptures.
@Pandya, "interpolation" or "interpretation" cannot be determined objectively. Hence it's better left out. Only "translation" has the objectivity, hence that should be considered.
@iammilind Yes it is modern works (plus it is not scripture)
6:52 AM
Correct, but now since the answer is highly upvoted & accepted, it will set an example for the new users. We have 2 choices: either include such sources under some objective rule (e.g. it's hosted in some religious looking website) or exclude such sources in future (e.g. it's not having any Sanskrit backup)
@iammilind Ok. Considering translation, celextel.org provides English translation for many Scriptures; now what possibility you want to talk about?
@iammilind We should concentrate on Scripture rather than Sanskrit. What do you think?
@Pandya, I am not aware of this website. Just seeing it. I don't have any particular objection or rejection of any website. Currently we are discussing, what is a valid source & what is not.

If we want to allow scripture, then we have to define what is "scripture"? Sanskrit backup is a good criteria to make it objective. Otherwise, personal work is also a "scripture".
@iammilind ok. We've clear idea on well known and perarless scriptures like shruti and smriti. Do you have any query regarding such scriptures?
No question. So above 2 links I posted. Are they considered scripture according to this criteria?
@iammilind How personal work would be scripture?
6:58 AM
@Pandya Personal work can be scripture, because you are saying that "rather than Sanskrit". If the "Sanskrit" is removed then anything written in English becomes a scripture.
@iammilind No, anything can't be scripture. Regarding the source cited in answer it says "Daksha Smriti" says but that website doesn't provide proper reference of Daksha Smriti, so in that case it looks "missing reference"
@Pandya, OK nice chat. I have get to go for sometime. Hoping that I cleared the Qn-s asked to me. Do we have anything to be discussed?
@iammilind If I say Rigveda says xyz or Krishna said in BG xyz then it can't be considered as valid source. I should provide proper reference like Rigveda verse 2.3.4 or BG 4.33 etc.
@Pandya, Yes what you said above is correct way. Hence put those into the answer. What is considered valid and what is invalid?
This is because, we want to make the sources back-up as a (near) mandatory rule.
@iammilind Yes, I'll but I wanted to clear about your super-sacred-texts case.
@iammilind your possibility mentioned there is wrong translation or interpolation?
7:08 AM
@Pandya, ok think "super-sacred-texts.com" as the websites which are propagated by individuals, who write their own philosophies. They might be right or wrong. But there is no affiliation with gita, veda, etc.
My point was, should we allow those or not. Why yes, or why no?
I neither meant translation nor interpolation. I meant, "new creation".
@iammilind Ok. So, I think scripture case is now clear. Now, allowing or not allowing other sources is bit complicated.
That's correct.
OK .. I will take a leave. Thanks , bye.
@iammilind ok, we'll discuss it later bye! (This was constructive discussion :))
4 hours later…
11:10 AM
@Tezz @SwiftPushkar @SreeCharan @Rickross @AnkitSharma I've just explained answer: What do you think?
A: Which scriptures / sources are considered valid?

PandyaWhat scriptures are considered valid? All Hindu scriptures (Shruti, Smriti etc.) are valid and authentic source. Works of Acharyas, Saying of Saints, Swami and Gurus are also valid source to cite. What sources are considered valid? Now talking about citing texts from websites. Websites that ...

looks good
11:26 AM
@Pandya What if blogs give correct sources from scriptures?
@SreeCharan Then directly quote that scripture
> For example, if a blog has exact Vedic Verses or Puranic verses, we can cite them in answers (without citing blog in answer)
@SreeCharan ^^ explained in The Destroyer's answer
@Pandya OK.
6 hours later…
5:10 PM
@Pandya - yes , Good Answer 👍🏻
