The Epistemic Guide: Discerning Śāstra from Superstition
How to ask of any claim in Indian Knowledge Systems how it is known. Put it to the four pramāṇas of Indian epistemology, and be wary of any claim that cannot answer them, or that works by making you afraid.
तस्माच्छास्त्रं प्रमाणं ते कार्याकार्यव्यवस्थितौ। ज्ञात्वा शास्त्रविधानोक्तं कर्म कर्तुमिहार्हसि॥
tasmāc chāstraṃ pramāṇaṃ te kāryākāryavyavasthitau | jñātvā śāstravidhānoktaṃ karma kartum ihārhasi ||
1. The Four Pramāṇas
In Indian philosophy (Nyāya and Mīmāṃsā), any knowledge claim must satisfy valid means of knowledge (Pramāṇa). These are the four questions the reference tries to answer for each rule; the rule corpus records how far it does:
Is the rule stated in a classical text (the Bṛhat Saṃhitā, the Mayamata, the Mānasāra, the Sūrya Siddhānta)? A rule that cannot be traced to a treatise, chapter and verse is a modern practice, and should be called one.
Can the claim be stated as a formula, a geometry or an astronomical computation that anyone can repeat? A rule that can be computed can be checked.
Does the recommendation agree with what can be observed — the sun's angles through the year, the prevailing wind, how materials behave? Where it does, the reference says so (class D); where it cannot be observed, it says that.
Is the rule coherent and humane? A rule that asks a household to fear, to spend beyond its means or to endanger a structure has failed this test whatever text it cites.
2. Common myths, and what to make of them
What this reference holds: No text the reference has read prescribes pyramids, plastic chips, metal strips or crystals for a house. They are modern retail products, and this reference names no remedy product.
What this reference holds: Service ducts and the sanctioned plan are not an occupant's to change, and structural work needs a licensed architect or engineer and the authority's approval. Where a rule cannot be met without that, the reading says so and does not suggest a remedy that alters the structure.
What this reference holds: A plan turned a few degrees from true north is not "ruined". No text read here names a threshold at which a small offset harms a house. The reference reports the offset it used and the reading it gave, with its limits, and leaves the fear out.
What this reference holds: Almanacs computed by the older table methods (vākya) and by observational (drik) methods can name different days for the same tithi or festival, without either being wrong. The reference states the method and the ayanāṃśa behind each figure, and says why two almanacs can disagree.
We do not sell charms, pyramids or amulets, and no reading on this site carries a remedy for sale. The aim is to keep classical Indian Knowledge Systems open to inspection: computations anyone can repeat, citations anyone can follow to a verse, and a plain mark on whatever could not be checked.