How to decide prakshipt Edited Question(as previous question was misunderstood/not giving exact response seeking for) :

I expect answer with flowchart of question that I can ask myself to prove prakshipt like


Include following or related question in flowchart

Or answer these questions with examples of prakshipt

  1. does it contradict holy vedas?
  2. is it morally unacceptable (from view point of some or all)

A) on basis of something that was morally acceptable then but now

-people are misunderstanding leelas

-scripture is wrong when...

B) not morally acceptable then and now both

C) scripture verses on morality contradicts

3)a) same scripture contradicts the told fact/story.

b) Different scripture contradict the fact told.

  1. date of scripture composition is close to modern times??

  2. It contradicts science

A) authentic theories most scienctist agree on

B) doubtful theories like new theory may or may not be true

You can add more questions and subquestions+subparts. This is my request for general answer of prakshipt. You can even change wordings of question but I have given general idea of what I am seeking for?

  • You can have anything as fundamental and consider the rest as interpolation. Usually, Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita and Brahma Sutras are considered fundamental words and rest as prakshipt only.
    – User 29449
    Jan 27 at 12:54
  • 1
    It's not about thought. Hinduism is no Buddhism. You are supposed to believe in things here.
    – User 29449
    Jan 27 at 14:45
  • 1
    How can you believe in gods and not ghosts in that format?
    – User 29449
    Jan 27 at 15:50
  • 2
    Proving prakshipta or interpolation is not a simple process. It is sometimes subjective. There is unlikely to be a simple flow chart. Its complicated.
    – estimator
    Feb 1 at 18:00
  • 2
    There is no completely objective way of proving prakshipta. The method used by the academicians though is to compare all the various existing manuscripts of a text and then discard the verses which are not present in majority of the manuscripts as interpolations.
    – user32423
    Feb 6 at 2:21

2 Answers 2


Answer can be given this way

brahmavaivat puran chapter 105

गवां लक्षंछेदनं च हरिणानाँ द्विलक्षकम् |

चतुर्लक्षं शशानाँ च कूर्माणां च तथा करु ||61||

दशलक्षं छागलानाँ भेटाना तच्चतुर्गुणम् |

पर्वणि ग्रामदेव्यै च बलिं देहि च भक्तितः ||62||

एतेषाँ पक्वमाँसं च भोजनार्थ च कारय |

परिपूर्ण व्यँजनानाँ सामग्री कुरु भूमिप ||63.

One lakh cows were cut down and two lakh deer were cut down

Do the same for four lakh rabbits and tortoises. Meeting ten lakh goats is four times that And offer sacrifice to the village goddess on the festival with devotion.

Make these cooked meat and food

Now, if you know basics of hinduism then you will know cow is sacred and people should avoid non veg(tamsic food)

So, above verse is prakshipt

Now, come to other things.

Let's suppose a verse is claiming unscientific and false things then deny it.

Yoga vasistha 2.18

verse 2 Even human compositions are acceptable when they are instructive of good sense; otherwise the Vedas also are to be renounced (as unreliable); because men are required always to abide by reason.

verse 3 Words conformable with reason are to be received even if spoken by boys; otherwise they are to be rejected as straws though pronounced by the lotus-born (Brahma himself).

But don't apply this thing to idea of atma and parmatma because it is beyond human intellect

Bhagavad Gita: Chapter 3, Verse 42 The senses are superior to the gross body, and superior to the senses is the mind. Beyond the mind is the intellect, and even beyond the intellect is the soul.

If different scripture contradict a story

Then scripture which is historically before or initial must be given priority

If same scripture contradict the story then coming to conclusion is hard but whatever one's intellect feels right should be kept in mind.

  • The Answer isn't convincing. It simply asserts that whatever doesn't fit one's view of correct should be rejected as interpolation.
    – user33953
    Mar 13 at 4:39
  • The reasoning given for the rejection of the Brahmavaivarta verses are flimsy and ignore the context completely. The text isn't actually endorsing meat eating and stuff it is simply depicting someone doing it in the course of the story. That someone happens to be Rukmi, who is himself depicted in the story as an Adhārmika personality
    – user33953
    Mar 13 at 4:50

If someone don't think any prakshipt exist, then allopanishad is proof

Everything except Allah Upanishad is authentic, simple.

On a serious note though, to understand what goes against Veda, you have to understand Veda. To understand Veda, read Itihaasa and Puraana. If one portion of Purana is completely opposite to another section in Puraana or Itihaasa, then you try to understand that section in different ways. If in no way is it in agreement with Veda, other Puranas and Itihaasas, then you can set it aside.

Pretty simple. It requires you to read, a LOT though.

Ghosts are real because many Puranas and Itihaasas refer to them.

Basically, read a lot, and keep what makes sense. If you're not able to put that much time or don't think you have that amount of mental capability, then follow a guru like Svami Avimukteshwarananda, Shankaracharya of Badarika Aashrama. He and others of similar position have done that work for you, so you can just follow what they say.

Anything you dislike or are uncomfortable with doesn't magically become an interpolation. UtaaraKaanda of Raamayana is authentic, horse sacrifice in Veda is authentic, (what appears like) beastiality with that horse is also authentic, discrimination based on Varna in DharmaShashtras is authentic, (what from a modern view looks like) oppression of women is also authentic. Shivalinga being the phallus of Shiva is also authentic. Child marriage is authentic. The attempted rape by Brahmaa of Saraswati is also authentic among many many other things. All these are authentic, unless you want to just throw away the whole thing altogether or do mental gymnastics like Arya Smaaj or neo Vedantins. Of course, most of these things do not have a malicious meaning that they appear to have, but you can't just throw out things because you don't like how it looks on the surface.

You can throw these things out, sure, but then you shouldn't attempt to call them interpolations, because they're not. Just say you follow your own cherry picked religion, like the Christians who support homosexuality despite what the Bible, old and new testament, says. Simply don't pretend to be traditional or authentic, and it's all good.

  • Yes Allopanishad is fake
    – Haridasa
    Jan 28 at 0:23
  • aryasamajvserranthindus.wordpress.com/2015/12/02/… means too many later additions if you read the page
    – user32378
    Jan 28 at 8:39
  • @Hope 1The translation for the Daitya one is wrong, it talks about 6000 Daityas living in Bharata, in Satya Yuga (Mahabharata didn't even exist til start of Kali, remember?) 1 Mahabharata Tatparya Nirnaya is opinion of Madhavacharya, that's not valid, the source hasn't been provided either in terms of verses. 3The adhyaayas can be split up, or joined together to make things flow together, this is observed in all texts, it doesn't mean there's interpolation. As for missing verses, even the Veda has only less than 15 Shakhas out of 1100+, does that mean it's interpolated? No. Jan 28 at 13:13
  • @DushyantShreyaskar so, in one chapter balram is avtar of vishnu and in other, he is avtar of vishnu. Also what about garud puran verse
    – user32378
    Jan 28 at 13:28
  • 1
    Don't do this because manu 11.56 ब्रह्मोज्झता वेदनिन्दा कौटसाक्ष्यं सुहृद्वधः । गर्हितानाद्ययोर्जग्धिः सुरापानसमानि षट् ॥ Neglecting/Forgetting the Veda, reviling the Vedas, giving false evidence, slaying a friend, eating forbidden food, or (swallowing substances) unfit for food, are six (offences) equal to drinking Sura.
    – user32378
    Feb 1 at 18:26

You must log in to answer this question.