Right Use of References

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna. One thing I've been wanting to say is that often there are

discussions in which there are statements that say that the Puranas say this,

or the ancient sources say that, or the records of old verify a particular

view, but WHAT RECORDS? If you are going to discuss, for example, the hollow

earth theory based on references in the Puranas, then lets have those Puranic

references so that we can read them ourselves. It's easy to say that the

Puranas say this or that. However, if someone says that a reference in the

Puranas justifies a particular point or theory, or contains a particular

Sanskrit word from which you derive your conclusions, then give which Purana,

which Canto or Book, which chapter, and which verse. This lends more

credibility to the contribution or article. In fact, I would like to see all

the references, a list, that Dharmapada Prabhu uses in which make mention of

the hollow earth theory. Then I could look it up and see for myself how I agree

or disagree with this idea. And I've got all the books, so once I know the

reference, I can simply go into the next room and look it up. Naturally

it can sound so lofty and erudite to use so many Sanskrit words or throw names

around that show a connection with a theory or a proof of a cultural

connection, but without any refernces, then it is totally up to personal

interpretation. Or at least more so without it. So if you are going to refer to

a Vedic text, then that calls for giving exactly the text to which you refer so

we all can see exactly what you are talking about and read it for ourselves.

Many contributors seem to leave this out. Of course, when you are writing a

quick letter it can be a hassle to look up and provide the exact references.

But when dealing with controversial issues, it could certainly help.

Hare Krishna. Your servant,

Sri Nandanandana dasa (Stephen Knapp)