Hello everyone thankyou for the wonderful information on this channel for all the people,tivra,agni ,sumit and anyone who knows about this please please help and clarify my doubt it's my humble request, the doubt is regarding amatyakarak planets it has raisen a lot of doubts, please help me for my deity to worship, According to my kundli I'm also including rahu since in some other practice rahu is not considered atmakakarak, rahu and moon is conjucted in Virgo (earth element) rahu is placed in Uttara Phalguni nakshatra(fire element) whose nakshatra lord and sub lords are sun and jupiter and moon is placed in hasta nakshatra(fire element)whose nakshatra lord and sub lord is moon and Saturn. Actually rahu is my atmakakarak since rahu is generally not considered as atmakakarak jupiter generally becomes my atmakarak my jupiter is placed in Capricorn (earth element) in dhanishta nakshatra (space tatva)whose lord and sub lord are mars and jupiter. If jupiter becomes my atmakarak then mars is my amatyakarak mars is placed in leo(fire sign) in Purva Phalguni nakshatra(water element) whose lord and sub lord are Venus and Mercury, according to this I consider may be pratyangira ,lakshmi narasimha will be the devata because mars and fire nature is denoted for pratyangira and Venus is generally considered to be a female deity and mercury is associated with Lalitha devi since there is no bhed between Lalitha and pratyangira there are similar instances from pratyangira sahasranama so both are same with different aspect so I consider pratyangira may be deity it may also be lakshmi narasimha. So anyone please help me the deity to choose according to the above instances which maybe the deity, anyone please enlighten, tivra and agni ji please please help.

Namaste sid. The mūlamantras of deities are typically understood to bring about realization of the highest reality, even if they are also understood to bring about other results too. The deities and their mantras, which are really one and the same, are embodiments of the reflective awareness of one's true nature. A mantra is distinct from common discursive thought in that it is an inward-oriented awareness that is not different from its object of denotation. As is said in the Cidvilāsastava: "There is an undivided and pristine reality that should be realized, from which speech, together with the mind, turn away. The repetition of the mantra, in its ultimate form, is bringing speech and the mind to rest in that luminous reality that transcends the mind and conventional language." And it is said in the Kaulasūtras: "There is but one deity, the Reality perceived by the transmission." Hence, there are many mantras which are equally said to be the "highest" for this reason. With the Pañcadaśī in particular, the Yoginīhṛdaya Tantra makes its nature undoubtedly clear: "It consists in uniting oneself with the indivisible, supreme, subtle, imperceptible, with no concrete existence, the reality supreme, above the inner sky, light and bliss, both transcending the universe and identical with it. Since luminosity is the state of things that are luminous and also that of those that are dark, there is therefore a necessary and essential connection between the universe and the highest reality. The highest reality shines, O Flame of the essence of the divine play!" The Pañcadaśī is in essence this reflective awareness. The outer forms of mantras are expressions of the powers that are powers experienced inwardly. That there are so many such liberating mantras in various traditions is explained by the Mahārthamañjarī: "The Lord is capable of churning this reality and so is the Lord of Kula who is the ultimate fixed ground of all things. It is He who, churning His own energy, brings about creation and the other cosmic processes. And so, I salute the venerable Manthānabhairava who is such." This is a very powerful teaching that has implications with respect to cognition, the divisions of scriptures, and various traditions. Now about this reflective awareness called Ucchiṣṭa Gaṇapati. The key lies in the appellation of "ucchiṣṭa". Specifically, how it relates to discursive thought. Discursive thought is defined in the Īśvarapratyabhijñākārikā as follows: "For we call vikalpa the ascertainment of a certain thing arrived at through the exclusion of its opposite by the knowing subject only, in whom that and the opposite of that are manifested." To explain by way of a simile, blood is a singular, unitary thing. However, due to the activity of discursive thought, it could be understood as being two things: liquidity and redness. Discursive thought basically takes the unitary supreme reality of consciousness and bliss and breaks it up into apparently mutually exclusive parts. This is the function of the mind, and is necessary for embodied beings to function in worldly life. However, the trouble arises when one views these distinctions as absolute, because in actual fact the supreme reality is always manifest and undivided. So, how does the concept of ucchiṣṭa fit into this? The worship of Ucchiṣṭa Gaṇapati is undertaken without the common procedures of ritual purity and by using "impure" substances. The word 'ucchiṣṭa' means something that is left over. From what I said about discursive thought, it is easy to understand that when one is able to see through it into the undivided supreme reality, the latter is what is "left over". One attains the realization that "I am not, nor is there another. There is only Śakti." The Great Reality is what remains when all else has fallen away. Moreover, ucchiṣṭa can also be understood in the sense of left-over food, which in orthodox brahmanical society is deemed impure. Purity and impurity exist only within the confines of vikalpa. But as the supreme reality is undivided and unitary, such concepts have no absolute existence. I wrote about this in detail in another comment on this page responding to Yasuo. In this case the idea is that, in reference to the worldly norms dictated by vikalpas, the supreme reality is "impure" precisely because it essentially lies beyond such concepts, the realm of worldly norms, even as it is their source. It is an outcast(e) from the fold of worldly norms, if you will. Conversely, as the supreme reality descends into immanence from its lofty state of perfection, it engages freely in "impurity" in reference to its transcendental repose without ever falling from that essential nature. It is said in the Ānandabhairava Tantra: "The Lord is without bias and acts in a manner contrary to the common worldly norms. The cause of His bestowal of grace is not the purity of the recipient. Similarly, the goddesses are satisfied by the sacrifice of bloody meat, not by applying the rules concerning purity. Brahmins and those belonging to the lowest castes should be made equal. Thus, the rays of consciousness radiating through the senses, although savouring their objects, are freed of agitation. Hell is the result of dualistic thought. it is clear that the bodies of all living beings, irrespective of caste or other conceived differences, is made of all the gods." The Śivadṛṣṭi: "If you ask how someone pure could be eager for something impure, we reply: because He savors the expansion of His own form, contemptibility is not appropriate for the universe. Given that it is said that it is Śiva’s nature to perform the five types of activities, what need is there to search for other motives, when He is engaged in His own conduct?" The Mahārthamañjarī: "Some think that the ineffable nature of the Self can be defined as the distinctness of the Lord; for those who turn away thus from the Self, let there remain the error of tending to separate the 'privileged' from those who are not. What is prescribed is recognition; what is prohibited is non-recognition. For those of us who consider the scriptures to be the effusion of the Heart, this is the understanding." The Devīpañcaśataka: "That action which inexorably sends people to hell is the very action which makes the conquerers of the three aspects of time prosper."

Namaste Mary. Unfortunately, I do not have all of the details on Nirvāṇa Sundarī. Evidently the details from Her paddhatis are only shared amongst advanced sādhakas of certain lineages, of which I am not a part.

Namaste Dylan. Please can you tell us about Ucchista Ganapati and his Dvicatvarimsatyaksara mantra? How many letters is this mantra? It has been said by Dakshinmurthy that this mantra is equal to the panchadasaksari mantra. Please can you explain how this is so?

dear Dylan, I would like you to explain to us about the correspondence of waking, dreaming, dreamless sleep, and turiya in relation to mahakameswari to Maha tripurasundari. Furthermore a peculiar practice of invoking the 5 mahasamatas (Chinna, Bagala, Srividya etc.) to the 5 sheaths. Thank you

Dylan is it possible to share the details and mantra japa vidhi of Maha Nirvana sundari ?

thank you dylan

How many times are we to recite the Pīṭha sthāpanamantra? Just once also or full mala?

Namaste Yasuo. Mantravidyārahasya is not published I don't think. It is cited several times in Sthaneshwar Timalsina's book "Language of Images: Visualization and Meaning in Tantras." He cites its descriptions of multiple deities.

dear Dylan, thank you for your explanation. May I ask, where does one read the mantravidyarahasya? it would be helpful also if you could introduce this work to us.