See, your ideology itself lacks too much of clarity. If Siva and Sakthi are one and the same, then who is Lalita? Siva or Sakthi? If you say sakthi was created by siva, then Lalita cannot be sakthi as LS confirms that she cannot be created. I did take the pain (which is no more a pain after viewing it under the eyes of Advaita Vedanta) of reading through and found out that you place Lalita as sakthi only. This itself gives rise to duality. But LS asserts that She has no duality (Nirdvaita) and transcends the state of duality (Dvaitavarjita). This is confirmed by sruti itself that Brahmam can never be two. It is Ekam, hence not dwitiyam. Sri Lalithopakhyana points out this fact as Brahma will praise Lalitha as both Brahmam and its Shakti. In the same purana, Lalitha herself brings out a mirror image of her own self called Kameswara and then becomes Kameswari by marrying him. So who is Lalitha? She is the Sakthi of Kameswara and also Kameswara himself. Sahasrakshara Vidya of Lalithopakhyanam also calles her Sivasivaatmika, the soul of Siva and Sivaa. Bhavanopanishad points this out as Lalitha being the soul where Kameswara is pure knowledge. Through Kameswara, we realise one's supreme soul as Lalitha. That is why She is called Kameswara Prananadi in LS. She herself is the form of Siva (Sivamurthih) and also the names and formless brahman (Namaroopa Vivarjita). This is how you explain Sivasakthyaikya roopini, as the oneness of two concepts, which are emanations of Lalitha only. It is easier for you to understand it with explanation of Prakasa and vimarsa, which is good. But showing Devi as vimarsa only is totally wrong. This prakasa vimarsa concept of tantras is only valid if it goes by vedas. In reality, it does. That's why Yogini Hridayam praises her as both (Prakasa Vimarsa Samarasya rupini). Whatever it is are emanations of Brahman only, strongly asserted by Advaita Vedantam. Of course that Brahmam can never be comprehended easily, not even to our rshis. But when it comes from the words of almighty itself as Sruti, we should never contradict it. So, Kashmir Saiva, Sakta or any other doctrine may believe in any scriptures as long as they don't go against sruti. If by terms of sruti, LS proves that She is Brahman and Brahma Shakti, no one can ever go against it. Infinite is infinite and it is ONE only!, which 'is' nothing in the beginning and the end, and everything now. Saivites see it as Parasiva, Saktas see it as Mula Chandika, vaisnavas see it as Paravasudeva Narayana. For Srividya upasakas, in which the shad dharsanas of Bauddha, Saura, Vaidika, Vaisnava, Saktha, Saiva becomes one as Sambhava dharsana (Sa - Siva becomes one with Amba- Shakti) at the bindu where Lalitha Parabhattarika is seen as the only non dual state of Parabrahmam. To show this practically, the only temple which Lalitha directly manifested at Kanchi has no separate shrines as Kameswara Kameswari, but as both in one singular form as Kamakshi. Even Ekambareswara is not the spouse of Parabhattarika Kamakshi, but of the Gauri Kamakshi who emanated from the third eye of mula Kamakshi. Even the Sharadha Parameswari consecrated on Srichakra by Adi Shankaracharya on basis of Advaitam has no consort, which shows that She is the absolute, there for beyond the state of siva sakthi duality.

Dear Sir, if you take the pains of reading through the explanations provided for all the nāmas, the exact same conclusion is derived, that both Śakti and Śiva are one and the same and are/is the manifested and unmanifested super-consciousness. It is much easier to understand by first separating them as prakāśa and vimarśa and various entities arising out of vimarśa and ultimately combining everything leading up to the super-consciousness as a single indivisible omniscient entity. "She" is simply something that cannot be comprehended in any manner. As humans, the best we can do is to contemplate "Her" in this manner to better understand and elevate our own consciousness to ultimately merge into Her. Whether we start with the Kashmir Śaiva ideology or the Śākta or for that matter Advaita or any other, the end result is the same. The infinite is just the infinite and is both nothing and everything.

Your entire explanation of Srividya, Lalithambika and her Sahasranama is too faulty as it contradicts many aspects of it's own self. In all these explanations, you just consider Lalithambika as Shakti, therefore place her beneath Siva and being created by Siva, claiming that siva gave the authority to her and more out-of-sense stuffs. This itself contradicts Lalitha Sahasranama as it asserts that She cannot be created, She herself is prakasa and vimarsa, She herself is 'that' nirguna Brahman beyond siva and sakthi, She herself has no ruler or instructer as she is the ultimate. This is the perfect example of typical male-dominant community. People claiming to be very knowledgeable like you though not, always defame womanhood and place Devi below siva... It is too funny isn't it?? Siva created Sakthi?? Can he??? This itself contradicts the first law of thermodynamics, proving it to be not scientific and hence impractical. Explaining in terms of siva and sakthi which are more towards siddhantik explanation is only secondary to the vedantik brahman and maya aspects. If She is that Brahman who acts through her own form as Maya, then who are you to even distinguish Her who is nirdvaita and call her only as Sakthi or Maya???? I have already explained briefly in my comments on your LS introduction part but you seem to be so happy to make 100s of devotees of Lalithambika who consider her as both Siva and Sakthi, therefore supreme to both concepts feel bad! No real Srividya upasaka would ever place the position of Lalithambika below siva as it contradicts the Lalitha Sahasranama itself. Never forget that all these are just earning you karma.... Good luck... Aim Kleem Sauh...

Sorry to say, that you might misunderstood the whole spirit of this site. Purpose of this publication is not to gather follower nor publishing add, rather a source of scared knowledge which is spreading to the thirsty community like me and so many others. Try to enrich if any information which could be better or if you can add value with your acquired knowledge. Let's help the community.

Yes, that would be the procedure. It is essential to say "svāhā" and then offer the āhuti. Do this homam only if you are already initiated into any of the Śrī Pratyaṅgirā Devi mantras. The same mantra should be used where appropriate in this homam.

While doing the homan, If I read the kavacham do I have to give aahutis after each verse. Thanks in advance.

Beloved Śrī Guruji , I completely surrender at Your Divine Feet I humbly beg You, just let me hear Your voice, let me see Your face, let me follow in Your footsteps. I humbly beg You, let me live Yours and die Yours.

My blessings for this wonderful site! Krishna Ji keep continuing your noble work. While I agree that a true Guru would ignite the spark during initiation there is absolutely nothing wrong in giving out the information for the public so that it is not a mystery. Amritananda natha ( Dr Prahlada Sastry ) has given the meaning of all Sri Vidyamantras in a scientific manner. He has many videos teaching the Sri Vidya Upasana. He was initiated by the Devi herself first and later he went in search of gurus who gave all the mantras to him

How about Ramakrishna paramhansa? He had multiple gurus and realised the highest

These mantras are not to be chanted without a proper initiation. You may consider the Divine Mother Sarasvatī devī mantras instead. May the Divine Mother guide you through your exams and lead you to greater heights in life. When you are ready, you may consider an initiation to Śrīvidyā and learn all these mantras in a proper manner.