This is an appeal to the members of this society.

This is an appeal to the members of this society. Out of love for Sanskrit /Hinduism we forward anything in the name of Sanskrit or Hinduism. People are forwarding messages and posts - without knowing what is the inherent and subtle meaning of such posts. Many are just wishful thinking (meaning no use) done out of ignorance, some are quackery (meaning just to fool people), and some are outright foolish (meaning fanatic jingoism).

If you truly love Sanskrit and Bharatiya Sanskriti then you must learn Sanskrit and communicate in Sanskrit (here I don't mean that one has to be a fluent public speaker of the language but understand the depth of the language's ability, and also the complex concepts of day to day life). I feel sorry that I had to write this in English. This is not the way to develop Sanskrit. The least one can do is to learn the 10 day spoken Sanskrit course offered by Samskrita Bharati. Also some basic understanding Sanatana Dharma is essential before someone starts to become the spokespersons of Hinduism with its foundation on पुरुषार्थः . The right kind of qualities one need to become spokesperson we need to evolve. However we can look at cues from the great guides such as Swami Vivekananda, Bhagavan Sri. Ramana Maharishi, Sri. Aurobindo ji, Swami Chinmayananda, to name a few. 

इयं सूचना भवतां यथार्थसंस्कृतानुरागिनां कृते निवेद्यते । यः कोऽपि लेखः अस्माकं सांस्कृतिकं शास्त्रसम्बद्धं इतिहासपुराणसम्बद्धं वा भवतु तं लेखं संयक् पठित्वा सुविचारं कृत्वा प्रेषयतु इति प्रार्तये । अद्यत्वे अस्मतीयाः भहवः कस्मिञ्चित् लेखे याथार्थ्यं किं वर्तते उत अयं लेखः संस्कृताभिवर्धनार्थम् उचितं वा इत्यादि अज्ञात्वा बहून् लेखान् forward कुर्वन्तः सन्ति । अनेन अस्माकं ज्ञानवर्धनापेक्षया मौढ्यमेव वर्धमानम् अस्ति । इदम् अस्माकं शास्त्रपरम्परायाः विरोदः । इदमस्ति संस्कृतज्ञानां दायित्वम् अर्थात् शास्त्रविरुद्धलेखानां प्रतार-सूचनानां निराकरणं तिरस्कारश्च ।

"संस्कृतं संस्कृतमाध्यमेनैव" इति द्येयवचनं मनसि निधाय वयम् इदं कुर्मः । अधुना संस्कृतस्य सांस्कृतिकस्य च विषये भहवः लेखाः सन्ति प्रतिदिनम् क्रियमाणानि च वर्तन्ते । तच्च  अवश्यमेव किन्तु तदन्यत्र अन्येषां सर्वेषां स्वीकरणाय अत्र संस्कृतलेखानामेव प्रशंसा भवतु इति प्रार्थये । वयं तु संस्कृतलेखान् रचयितुं यतामहे । अन्यान् सामान्यजनान् वयं न्यूनातिन्यूनं संस्कृतसम्भाषणं कर्तुम् अवगमनशक्तिं प्राप्तुं वा  प्रेरयाम । धन्यवादः ॥

----------------------
First, one should gain the basic knowledge of Samskrit, Samskriti and the basic tenets of Bharatiya Shastra - else we keep forwarding some message which appear to be doing service to Sanatana Dharma but actually demeans our Shastra /Jnana parampara. In our system we question everything and only after rational evaluation we accept. Note every Shishya questioned the Gurus, Arjuna questioned Sri. Krishna and even the shishyas of Bhagavan Sri. Ramana Maharishi and Sri. Ramakrishna Paramahamsa questioned them throughout. So lets not get scared if someone questions us. It actually gives an opportunity to learn for us.

Those scholars who write about Sanatana Dharma in English to note:
Please don't call our 'Veda' as Scriptures. The word Scripture means that which is written (script) - Veda is not written (even if written forms are available they are of no use for a Veda vidyaarthi or for studying Veda). Every educated westerner who wants to know about Hinduism and every Hindu understands the word Veda itself - no need to translate it into another word called 'Scripture'

the word "Agni" means that which is a natural phenomenon (प्रकृत्यंशः - prakrti amshaH) and at the same time is 'alive' (which we call as "devataa") - so which are the fires that are living fires - the sacrificial Yajna fire (which is kept alive in the homes of the 'Yajees') - called "aahavaneeyam". The symbolic 'householder life fire' called as "gaarhapatyam" - actually this is the extension of the living digestive fire - inherent in each and every living being, and the third living fire "daakshinayanam" (knowledge fire) - means the eternal quest for knowledge which is in the form of the fire (desire) of jnaana (the jnaana shakti) - both the worldly knowledge quest (sensory) as well as the non-worldly (extra-sensory) knowledge quest. These three are only referred to as "agni" - rest of all non living fires are referred to as "vahni" or "analaH" etc. But people without knowing the significance of the word "agni" - which represents a living "devataa" (a life force) are using the word agni in all the contexts and also translated the word as 'fire'. The same thing applies with "vayuH" (the living air), "parjanyaH" (the living rain devataa), same way "PraaNa" (life force) - "praaNaayaama" is not breath exercise - understanding that there are many such inherent subjective aspects are essential before one embarks on any translation of Sanskrit treatises.

Don't call our Shastra as Science, because it is much more than that. In the western world the word science means "objective and mathematically provable theories". Many times Science has opposing view from that of Religion in the West. Our shastra are both objective and subjective and also is not against our Sanatana Dharma (Religion) and the Sanatana Dharma is dependent on Shastra. In my opinion Science and Shastra need not be compared to each other.

Don't call our Itihaasa and purana as Mythology - this word means "mithyaa" or false. For our Itihaasa we have evidences - particularly with respective Mahabharata we have objective proofs. So they are not Mythology. Lets call them as Itihaasa - westerners also know this word.

Don't call Christianity and Islam as 'Christian dharma' - because they are not dharma based religions - they are Prophet based religions (I am not talking about merits or demerits here). There are huge differences between dharma based system and Prophet based religions. Let us call them as 'Religion' itself.

Samskriti is translated in many places as 'Custom' - this is wrong the correct word is 'Culture' (even this is not exact match).
Samskaara is again not 'Custom' - but 'Cultural practices'
Sampradaya is again not 'Custom' but something that comes close is "Ethos"

"Shaanti" is not silence. It is "tranquility" and in some sense "peace"  and in some other it is "equanimity" and in other it is "balance" - this depends on the context. Same way "Mouna" is not silence but "mental silence" ('thoughtless observation') or "Mental equilibrium" where the need for words don't arise.  

"Bhaasha" is not language. Mathematics is accepted as a language but still it is not a "Bhaasha". "Bhaashyate iti bhasha" (भाष्यते इति भाषा) - That which is spoken is Bhaasha - we can't speak Mathematics, therefore it is not a "Bhaasha"

Don't ever call Sanskrit as a "Classical language" - the word classical means - old, not in use (Classical language = मृत-भाषा). In reality millions of people are speaking, using Sanskrit in their Daily life not just for teaching but for other professions too - such as Ayurvedic doctors, Poojaris, Purohits, etc. So it is a "Bhaasha".

Sanskrit has 2 flavors - one that is part of Veda and other that is Worldly. If you want to differentiate between Vaidika (वैदिक & व्यावहारिक) and Vyavaharika Sanskrit - then use the words like 'Vedic' and 'Worldly' Sanskrit- both the flavors use the same Roots (Verb and Noun), Words, Prefix /Suffix, etc. 

Please don't translate the words such as 'Dharma' (even Sri. Vyasa Maharishi himself says in Mahabharata that he can't define what is Dharma), also the words like 'Karma', 'Yoga', 'Pranayama', 'Samadhi' etc. are not objective but are both subjective and contextual.

The above are just few I could think of now, there are many more mistakes our people are doing when they translate complex treatises such as Bhagavadgita and Upanishad etc.

Overall we don't need to translate generic Paribhaasha (domain specific terminology) into English - does any one translate the words like "Kung Fu" or "Tai Chi" or "Zen" or "Himalaya"- people use them as they are. We should also cultivate this habit. Most importantly we should gain mastery over English with good vocabulary,  before any attempt is made to translate into English. Translating some Sanskrit text into Hindi is entirely different from translating into English - mainly due to the Cultural differences as well as the mindset of the wider audience who read them. 

Translation of Himalaya = Ice adobe, can anyone understand this ?? - all translations are having such similar effect. Because the Sanskrit words are not just words with objective meanings - they hold with them the deep meanings of our Samskriti and Shastra.
Thanks.