it is always better to read the original texts from possibly the most authentic sources

After a lot of reading, experimentation and trial and error,

I realized that it is always better to read the original texts from possibly the most authentic sources

and then interpret, translate and evaluate direct

with the experience, whatever it is, gained in the usage of language, and on the basis of ideas developed through original readings and verbal traditions..

Such outputs are surely imperfect and inadequate..No denying of that..

Relying even slightly or peripherally on secondary authors and the so called translators usually makes one lose grip of the real content of the subject, the real spirit, and one inherits only the mistakes, howlers and faulty interpretations made by most of the secondary authors who pose as scholars, but whose depth of intellect and grasp on the subject are illusory..

If one jumps into a pool believing that it is sufficiently deep but actually what he saw was just an illusion, he would crash on hard surface and perish..

This is my experience with many secondary scholars and their interpretations..

We should only sharpen our curiosity by reading what secondary writers including me churn out, but after that we should go into the original sources and texts.. and ensure the authenticity of the material..

And social media thrives in secondary, tertiary or even nth generation copying..

The danger is unthinkably huge..