[Citation needed]

[Alobha]

I would like a new rule on this forum on how to cite the Buddha and Palicanon sources in general.

Reason for this suggestion: Misinterpreting the buddha or the palikanon and declaring it as true statements are likely to cause much confusion, doubt or anger. While i'm sure that stating misinterpreted statements as true is more of an unintentional mistake, clear rules for citations can prevent much harm for both the reader and the writer.
Citing sources literally also is a good way to get familiar with the sources themselves, which i regard as a positive thing when it comes to the Palicanon.
With that said, i feel that citing rules would be for the benefit of everyone and a good opportunity to train right speech and right effort.

Suggestion on how this rule could look like:

1. Citations should always be given with a link to (an english version of) the sutta. Accesstoinsight is easily accessible. Giving a link to the cited source invites other forum members to find and check out the suttas for themselves.

2. The name of the Sutta should be given / The short code.
Common codes are
DN -> Digha Nikaya
MN -> Majjhima Nikaya
SN -> Samyutta Nikaya
AN -> Anguttara Nikaya
KN -> Khuddaka Nikaya
The exact code for citation is always given in Access to insight at the top of the page.
Example --> "SN 56.36" Is right above the title of the sutta.

3. Quotes from other teachers, such as Ajahn Chah, the Dalai Lama or Sayagyi U Ba Khin should also only be cited if one can provide a source, too. Since not every text of other teachers might be available online, one should give as much information as possible as on the source. (e.g.: book title, context of the given talk,..)

4. The suttas should only be quoted from literal sources. Figuratively or interpreted statements ("The Buddha said you should love everyone.") should be clearly marked as such (perhaps by adding "[citation needed]" to the statement) or better: avoided in the first place.

Most users already quote their literal sources which is great and has already been very helpful for me on several occasions here. I'd be glad if we could establish some sort of standard for citing sources here. There is no need to accept my suggestion 1:1, but i'd appreciate if there would be any form or rule endorsing citing sources.

Metta,
Alobha

[Zom]

Turn the forum into Wikipedia?

What for? These are 2 different things.

[tiltbillings]

Example --> "SN 56.36" Is right above the title of the sutta.

SN 56.36 PTS: S v 441 CDB ii 1860

Of this, I would go the with the PTS citation, since in the Wisdom translation it is the easiest to use. The Wisdom citations CDB ii 1860 are also good, but any of them would be okay, as long as it is cited.

[Fede]

this worries me - I can show links to 'accesstoinsight' and the suchlike, but I am not learned or well-versed enough to start literally quoting chapter, verse and minutiae as requested....Is this proposal for certain forums only, or is it site-widespread?
I don't lie, and rely on 'thus have I heard'...but sometimes, being immediately unable to locate source is daunting....

I dunno...it seems to wish to separate 'the men from the boys' and might be limiting to those who are minded as I....

Don't get me wrong - I can full well see and appreciate the reasoning behind it.
And FWIW, we require people to quote sources on the Buddhist website I moderate.... but not as stringently, perhaps....

[tiltbillings]

this worries me - I can show links to 'accesstoinsight' and the suchlike, but I am not learned or well-versed enough to start literally quoting chapter, verse and minutiae as requested....Is this proposal for certain forums only, or is it site-widespread?

If you are quoting from ATI, then the link is fine, but if you are quoting from a book translation, then a more percise citation is helpful, as long as the passage in question can be located.

[cooran]

Hello all,

I agree - any mention of ''the Buddha said in a sutta'' or ''the Buddha taught that ..'' must have a link or citation. There seems to me to have been a growth lately on DhammaWheel of unattributed alleged remarks made by the Buddha to support the posters' point of view.

with metta
Chris

[Ben]

Greetings Alobha,
In some of our sub-forums we do have as part of the guidelines to provide textual support and citation.
I don't think the style of citation is important.
In other fora I have been involved with, I have sought to have a similar rule implemented to stop people from misrepresenting the Dhamma.
I would be inclined to support your suggestion following more discussion here and on the advice from mod/admin team.
kind regards,

Ben

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

'the Buddha taught that ..''

I don't mind this syntax so much, because it's quite reasonable to structure statements like this. If someone says, "The Buddha taught that craving is the cause of suffering" that hardly warrants hunting around in the Sutta Pitaka for corroboration.

Where the line is hazy and no citation is given, I think it's reasonable that the poster back it up with some substantiating evidence, or at least acknowledges the source (e.g. "my teacher said...")

With a bit of effort on everyone's part, maintaining an appropriate level of referencing needn't become burdensome for anyone.

Metta,
Retro.

[Kim O'Hara]

Hi, everyone,
It would be nice if quotes and paraphrases were always well enough documented to be tracked back to their sources - there are lots of good reasons for wanting that, and most of them have been mentioned.
But we must remember that many DW members are new to both Buddhism and the forum when they join, and we want to make them welcome, not intimidate them with rules they don't understand and haven't got the knowledge to be able to follow. In the early stages, just working out how and where to post was a big enough challenge to me, as it often seems to be for others. So let's encourage referencing by all means, but let's not talk about making it compulsory.


Kim

[Cittasanto]

CITE! CITE! CITE! CITE!
oh thats abit like fight! fight!

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

So let's encourage referencing by all means, but let's not talk about making it compulsory.

Metta,
Retro.

[Alobha]

Thanks for the participation everyone! I appreciate very much that so many viewpoints come together on matters like these

I don't think the style of citation is important.

Right, i just wanted to offer a concept so that people get what i mean
As long as there is some sort of citation given the readers can work with, formalities are just a minor thing imho.

It would be nice if quotes and paraphrases were always well enough documented to be tracked back to their sources - there are lots of good reasons for wanting that, and most of them have been mentioned.
But we must remember that many DW members are new to both Buddhism and the forum when they join, and we want to make them welcome, not intimidate them with rules they don't understand and haven't got the knowledge to be able to follow. In the early stages, just working out how and where to post was a big enough challenge to me, as it often seems to be for others. So let's encourage referencing by all means, but let's not talk about making it compulsory.

That's a very good point. Fede already mentioned that too strict citation rules might be discouraging so yeah - I like the idea of a guideline very much, too. I trust in this community to do its best on following a kind guideline on why and how to cite. I don't see a big difference between obligatory rules and guidelines here anyways. In both cases new & old members can be expected to be treated with patience and metta.

Sooo... Metta!
Alobha