here is my WhatsApp number, best way to reach me: 2487296668. I don’t want to get your hopes up, ishta is elusive and extremely meaningful. I’ll ask you to use two ayanamsa, one traditional Lahiri and one that might be called a hybrid or rectification. Then you’ll have to look at major aspects of these charts, sun sign moon sign ascendant maybe certain yogas etc, along with the karakas (which is where the biggest divergence will be between the two systems), and you would analyze which system seems more fitting to you, and then we can go forward using those respective karakas. So a normal jaimini chart calculator, and the vaultoftheheavens one. In my little experience, I’ve only noticed that one or the other seems to fit people much better, in a clear fashion, while the less fitting one sheds some light on the planetary effects as well. Not to make it too confusing. I am a total novice and this would be fully a learning experience for me. I will make errors but if you are interested, I am honored to try to be of service. Here is the alternative system that sometimes shows great promise and others times seems to miss the mark: https://vaultoftheheavens.com/VOTH_ChartCreator/Welcome.aspx Let’s use prokerala for the traditional lahiri ayanamsa, iirc the degrees are clearly shown, along with the major life and personality indicators: https://www.prokerala.com/astrology/birth-chart/ I must emphasize, this is new ground for me, and it will surely take experimentation and a lot of internal searching form you, before you can be confident in some things. There may be risks to such experiments of sadhana, and I am no guru, and I wouldn’t know what to do if anything goes wrong. My advice would be to try what Tivra has graciously shared, panchakuta Bhairavi vidya. While that is happening, we can try to uncover your ishta as well. That I think would be safest and most effective. The Mahabhairavi practice very well may shine the most light. If you like, send screenshots of those two charts on WhatsApp

Namaste Kartikeyan Generally the syllable count is very important. The mantra has sixteen in the name. In other mantras there will be a space for atma bija that is typically held by om until a guru provides the initiation and special seed. But the syllable count stays constant in these cases. There are some famous mantras people get only the faintest drops of benefit from, or nothing at all, because they try to append om and break the Chandas. Namah Śivaya is the most famous, chandi navakshari is another that comes to mind. I have personally experimented with adding om or hrīm, against guru’s guidance because I was stubborn and very immature. Nothing at all happened, except I wasted many, many hours. Maybe there was a subtle result or something that will carry over to a future birth, but maybe not. I could’ve caused damage as well. It’s a rarely ever a good idea to modify and add or subtract seeds. The power and mystery of the mantra or vidya lies very much within the meter too. Changing the meter means the deity in subtle form is not invoked, or at least that is my impression. This is definitely a question to put to a guru who initiates you.

Namaste Rook, Yes it is just that one, with the recording provided. I found the more i read and re-read Tivra’s posts about it, the more my heart began to feel like it would overflow. This mantra really seems like a perfect one to let permeate the mind throughout each day’s waking journey as well. Let it be the most real thing in each day, and perhaps it will begin to show effects even sooner. As you may have seen in Kapil’s recent comment, Ravi Guruji taught that panchadashi mantra can be recited (always mentally) throughout the day, while keeping the mind predominantly on Lalitambika. I think the case would be the same for Panchakuta Tripura Bhairavi. This vidya really looks like a perfect form for the human being. Will reply to your other post shortly, apologies for delay

To this, I would like to add some things. The energies of the phonemes are pure cognitive consciousness, and as such are the basis for grosser forms of cognition as seen in the mind and language. As a word is formed by the succession of various phonemes, yet remaining whole, so are the various aspects of cognition unified in the pure cognitive consciousness of the varṇādhvan. Put another way, the relationship between the knower, known, and knowledge is grounded in a unitary awareness which grasps them all at once. For this reason, this pure cognitive consciousness appears as the diversity of grosser forms of cognition while remaining essentially pure. The various aspects have no inherent relation to one another; they are in and of themselves split off from each other. However, cognition as it pertains to the knower, known, and knowledge is precisely the relation between these. The object has to rest in the subject, whose defining feature is precisely the perception of the object: “I see this.” An experience, by definition, requires an experiencer. The link is the varṇādhvan, pure cognitive consciousness. Letters/phonemes by themselves have no meaning. Their meanings are established through linguistic convention. Yet, they are the basis of the intelligibility of language. Likewise, the pure cognitive consciousness of the varṇādhvan is not some particular awareness of a particular thing, hence it is “pure”. Yet, it is the basis of subject-object referentiality. It is intuitive, not of the nature of convention. Language is not merely the expressed languages that are spoken by people. It is essentially referentiality. Hence, even babies and animals, who have no knowledge of linguistic convention, are able to form intelligible representations of themselves and their environment. This is varṇādhvan. Moreover, it is because of this that linguistic convention is able to take root. There are two ways in which the meaning of a word (or, in a more general sense, intelligibility of oneself and environment) can be understood: directly and indirectly. Indirectly here means learning the meaning through another word. For instance, one may learn what ‘jar’ means because it is synonymous with ‘pot’. This is how dictionaries work, for instance. However, a problem arises here. If words are only ever learned indirectly, then to understand the meaning of ‘jar’ through ‘pot’, I would have to know what ‘pot’ means through another word, and so on and so forth ad infinitum. The result would be that there is no stable ground of intelligibility, and we would be none the wiser as to the meaning of ‘jar’ in the end. Pure cognitive consciousness is that basis, the a-priori knowledge by means of which we can directly, that is, intuitively, know things, including at the indirect level. Even if one were to say that babies and animals are able to understand themselves and their environment because of their karmic impressions, those too would ultimately have to be grounded somewhere. The various great Goddesses are understood to be the “body of letters”. Kuṇḍalinī is taught to be the of the form of the phonemes, the Womb or Matrix of energies. Speaking of Tripurasundarī, the Nityāṣoḍaśkārṇava says: “I give homage to the Queen of all – the Goddess who is the sacred alphabet of great splendour, and I give homage to the triple worlds beautified by the moonlight of Her syllable. I give homage to Her who is the sacred alphabet and on whose letters the three worlds from Brahmā to the lowest infernal region are threaded as on a great string.” That the three worlds are “beautified” by “Her syllable” is explained by Jayaratha: “She gives life to all things which fall under the categories of knower, known, and knowledge, and who is addicted to the sporting play of the variety of perceivers.” Hence, She is the “Beautiful one of the Three Cities”. She is, in that respect, THE Phoneme. It is said in the Svacchanda Tantra: “The God who resides in the chest of all living beings spontaneously utters the Mantra not uttered by anybody and that none obstructs.” Note here that by “Mantra” here is meant the Unstruck Sound of pure consciousness, not any specific mantra (although mantra japa is aimed at attaining precisely this). Likewise, in Tantrāloka: “There is just one Phoneme, which is Sound, that is undivided in all the letters and common to all of them. It never ceases, and so is Unstruck Sound that arises here.” This is the ajapājapa of Haṁsa, but back to the point. Mantras are composed of phonemes, and the phonemes are of the nature of Śakti. As you can imagine given everything I have already said, this is in fact always the case, whether in ignorance or liberation. However, for one caught up in the bondage of ignorance, this pure cognitive consciousness serves to throw one about in the net of words and meanings, consciousness directed at “another” (yet, ultimately, it is only ever directed at its own nature. How curious!). Kuṇḍalinī, in the form of the vital breath, is thus Mahāmāyā, throwing the bound soul about in the spiraling motions of the left and right channels; the Moon and Sun of the known and knowledge. Some masters even suggest that the pulsation of the inhaled and exhaled breaths – SA and HA – is the Unstruck Sound of consciousness specifically at the level of the bound soul. However, being pierced by the vitality of mantra, one is thus able to turn consciousness back on itself. When the oscillation of the left and right channels are united in the central channel; or, from a cognitive perspective, when the known and knowledge come to rest in the subject, one taps into the underlying potency of Mantra, which is not concerned with objective referents, consciously (not “unconsciously” as in the aforementioned oscillation, which is just another form of the same thing). The Haṁsaparameśvara Tantra says: “Mantras recited in a fettered state of consciousness are nothing more than mere articulated sounds, but those recited in the central channel become all-powerful.” As a result, even the dualistic thought constructs that mantra japa serves to quell are recognized to be ultimately nothing other than this Great Mantra and so cannot bind the practitioner. Hence, all things become (or, more accurately, are understood to be) Mantra for such a one. This is the meaning of the verses from the Ūrmikaulārṇava and Svacchanda Tantras from my previous comment.

Thank you very much Seongsoo and Dylan. You are very kind, but the extent of my ignorance exceeds the measure of your compassion. It seems to me that you only hint at the most important concepts, but do not give direct instructions that one could grasp and use as a support for the mind. If I were a deity, or a realized siddha, I would write a fundamental text of the highest truths, where each shloka would be like a step for ascent to the highest liberation. Perhaps such scriptures exist and I just do not know about them. The texts of Kashmir Shaivism are many sublime and inspiring ideas and what you have written is very consonant with the Trika Teachings. I will reflect on what you have written and most likely will ask more questions in the near future.

thank you dear dylan

Namaste Bhairavat. Your question is one that has been asked by many who have come before. The Siddhayogeśvarīmata Tantra, the root scripture of the Trika, begins with this very subject. Devī says to Bhairava: "You have explained the systems of mantras several times, O Lord of Gods, but people do not succeed in the practice of yoga and such other practices however hard they try. They do not succeed even with the prescribed rituals; the proof of success is lacking. You have fooled the minds of those who have performed sacrifices, O Great Lord, and even the minds of those who have been reciting the mantras making great effort, no doubt. How is it that these extraordinary mantras given by you do not succeed? You have confused the whole world and even your disciples with this, O Śaṅkara. What can you gain from deluding the world, O Best of Gods?" Bhairava replies thus: "The mantras I have taught can can fulfill all desires, but they are all protected through my power, O Goddess... I have seen that ignorant people have abandoned their purificatory initiatory rites everywhere, and that mean people have violated the established rules of conduct. Therefore, the vigour of all mantras has been protected, and through this protected vigour, the mantras themselves are protected; and the letters left without this vigour have become solitary. Their vigour is thus hidden even if they are used according to prescription, O Great Goddess. This is why they do not succeed even if one recites them 1,000,000,000 times." The word 'mantra' is traditionally understood to derive from 'man-', meaning 'to think', and 'trai', meaning 'to save'. So, mantra is 'salvific thought'. So the Mahārthamañjarī says: "Reflection (manana) upon one's own omnipresence, 'protection' (trāṇa) against the fear of one's limitations, an indescribable experience wherein all dichotomized thought is dissolved, such is the meaning of the word mantra." Normally, the mind is engaged in externalized cognition, perceiving duality everywhere. This is "reflection" in the mode of bondage; vikalpa. The Spandakārikā says: "The rise in the bound soul of all sorts of ideas marks the disappearance of this bliss of supreme immortality. On account of this, he loses his independence. The appearance of ideas has its sphere in the sense objects." And, "Brahmī and the other powers are ever in readiness to conceal his real nature, for without the association of words, ideas cannot arise." Consciousness is inherently linguistic in nature, that is, its nature is referentiality. It is Parāvāc which is the a-priori basis of all other knowledge, including ignorance, for even ignorance is ultimately nothing more than a sort of knowledge. Were it not so, it would simply be nothing at all. Vikalpa is discursive consciousness. Mantra, however, is pure reflexive awareness in the sense that it does not denote an external, objective referent. Thus, the mantra and the reality which it denotes are one and the same, hence the understanding that the mantra IS the deity. Even though ultimately all cognitions are empowered by Parāvāc, the difference between mantra and discursive mentation is that the latter concerns objectivity, while the former is awareness turned back on itself. The external form of the mantra composed of letters is like a vessel through which the mind becomes attuned to the inner energies which they represent. The mind of the practitioner and the mantra are one and the same, and the mantra is only efficacious to the extent that the practitioner comes to realize that that is so. The Śivasūtra says: cittaṁ mantraḥ; "Mind is mantra". The mind is the pure awareness of the Self in a contracted mode. The Spandakārikā: "Being deprived of his glory by kalā, he becomes a victim of the group of Powers arising from the multitude of words, and thus he is known as a bound one." Through mantra, however, it can re-cognize its true nature. Amṛtānandanātha says in his 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 tis ultimate form, is bringing speech and the mind to rest in that luminous reality that transcends the mind and conventional language." Even if the mantra does have an intelligible meaning in Sanskrit, its essence is an awareness beyond the discursivity of common language and the mind. I bring all of this up because it contextualizes what Bhairava says next in the Siddhayogeśvarīmata: "For those who know how to obtain this hidden vigour and know the liberation of the soul, the guru and the mantra, success is not far off. If practitioners who desire the rewards taught in the doctrine turn to a guru without śakti, they will not succeed, even if they practice very hard. Therefore, if someone initiated by the rite of Śiva wishes success, he should know how to be possessed by Rudraśakti and should perform the grasping of the mantra." Rudraśakti is the inner reflexive awareness which is the vitality of mantra. Given everything I have already said, you can understand that mere words on a page (or screen) or mere articulated sounds are not efficacious. This is what Bhairava means when He says the vigour of mantras is guarded. They must be alive, pulsing radiantly with this vigour. And Bhairava explains that the source of this vigour is the guru. However, there is some nuance that needs to be explained regarding this. A guru is necessary for those of us who cannot intuit this vigour, the essential nature of all things, on our own, which is most of us. However, if (key word here: IF) one can do so, then even a mantra from a book can become vitalized. If you see a mantra somewhere and feel an urge to practice it, but have even the slightest doubt about its efficacy, then what I just described did not happen. If this intuitive vitalization does happen, it will be exceedingly obvious. The guru and the disciple are not separate. The same Self appears as both, reflecting on the level of mundane reality the referentiality of awareness. It is because of this that the guru's vitality becomes the disciple's vitality, like a lamp used to light another lamp without the former losing its potency and which is preserved unaltered in the latter. When the disciple is able to intuit the supreme reality in the "other", it then becomes possible to intuit it everywhere. As the Śivasūtra says: "As it is here, so is it elsewhere." The mantra transmitted is the receptacle of the guru's vitality and indeed is that vitality itself, the destruction of pauruṣa ajñāna. To attempt to practice japa otherwise would be, as Bhairava says, is a violation of the rules of conduct. More than just practical rules, the Rule of the scriptures and the teacher is the liberating power they hold. To violate it, to take it unjustly and without permission, is to deprive it of its true potency. This was Dakṣa's mistake, you know. Through it, he incited the Lord's wrath. The Rājarājabhaṭṭāraka Tantra states: "The mantra does not consist of phonemes. It is not the ten-armed or five-faced body of a deity. It is the flashing forth of the subtle resonance arising at the starting point of the intention to utter it." The starting point of any cognition is the non-discursive state of paśyantī, becoming attuned to which one is then able to perceive the unfolding of the discursive levels that follow in the light of their source. Moreover, in the Īśvarapratyabhijñāvivṛttivimarśinī: " Surely, if the repetition of mantra is a continuous round of words, how can the activity of repetition of mantra take place within the nature of Supreme Speech which, being undivided, is not affected by temporal division? The utterance of a round of sounds takes place by separating one sound from another repeatedly, and that itself is its nature. In the supreme state, the repetition takes place once (i.e. atemporally) like a single flash, and repetition of mantra is like a continually repeated action there when it has just arisen. The word 'once', that denotes something that takes place a single time or one that is synonymous with 'always' removes the doubt that there is a break. As was said before, 'Speech arises spontaneously.'" Thorugh japa, the mantra and the mind become one and, their outer form dissolving away into the pure light of consciousness, all things become infused with that same supreme reality. Or, describing from my own experience, one recognizes that a thing and the knowledge/awareness of that thing are in fact one and the same, like how the mantra and the deity are one and the same. The Śivasūtra says: "Common talk is his recitation of mantra." The Tantrāloka explains: "A lover, who is beautiful with the delight of discourse and joyful union with his beloved, and so too etched with the memories of it, whatever else he happens to be doing, he is satisfied and joyful within himself. Likewise, one who is sanctified by this mantric discourse, even when saying anything else, it is spontaneously identified with it even if he does not wish it, and it most certainly produces the same results." He recognizes that all things are essentially the light of consciousness, the "object" of mantra, even in the midst of discursivity. And, in the Ūrmikaulārṇava Tantra: "And when his mind is elsewhere and his gaze too has fallen elsewhere, even in that case the yoga of such yogis continues unabated." And in the Svacchanda Tantra: "One whose mental disposition is firm and unwavering, full (i.e. without craving) all around and made of the supreme reality which is to be known, his mind, although he is in all the states of consciousness, does not move. For such a great yogi, wherever his mind goes, he thinks of the supreme reality which is to be known. As everything is Śiva, having moved from one place, where will it go? Present in all the fields of consciousness and objects of the senses, wherever one pays attention, there is no place where Śiva is absent." The deities do not reveal mantras; the mantras ARE the deities. And the deity/mantra is the awakened awareness which the practitioner comes to embody through practice. So says the Kaulasūtra: "There is but one deity, the Reality perceived by virtue of the transmission." This Reality is the Brahman of the Upaniṣads, Śiva/Śakti of the Tantras. You ask about the deities' (i.e. Brahman's) indifference. I have gone on much too long already (even so, I have barely scratched the surface of this beautiful maṇḍala of teachings), so I will not explain the details of grace and concealment here. So, I will leave you with a passage from the Ānandabhairava Tantra for you to contemplate, and perhaps later I can go into details if you wish: "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 (i.e. the retinue of Bhairava) are satisfied by the sacrifice of bloody meat, not by applying the rules of 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 from agitation. Hell is the result of dualistic thought. It is clear that the body of all living beings, irrespective of caste or other conceived differences, is made of all the gods."

Dear bhairavat, although I am not as knowledgeable as Dylan is, I may be able to give a simple answer to your doubts. First, you wrote "What is the reason that the deities cannot build a channel into our world of suffering and manifest in it?" The deities do not ever exist in some realm separate from ours. They are, like everything including ourselves, simply different pulsations of Consciousness (which we may call Bhairava) which is both the sole cause and nature of the universe. That is to say, Consciousness alone exists, and this universe is the self-illumination of Consciousness within Itself. By virtue of being perfect, Consciousness lacks nothing. By lacking nothing, it is completely full of everything. We can conceptualize this by simply thinking and imagining by which things that are both logically possible and impossible are manifest within the field of our own awareness. Why did Consciousness manifest reality as we know? It is because Consciousness is supremely free and the resultant play of absolute freedom is this universe and other universes (which are again all contained within Consciousness and hence is Consciousness alone) where innumerable realities are manifest in because of the infinite nature of Consciousness. Good, evil, happiness, sadness, bliss, and suffering, from the perspective of absolute Consciousness is unreal as only It exists in relation to Itself. Hence the various deities which are nothing but the pulsations of the one Consciousness simply enjoy this infinite play of absolute freedom which can manifest from our relative perspectives as bliss and suffering or good and evil. To make it easier to digest, a good theatrical play must involve all sorts of activities and feelings (which are called "rasa" in Sanskrit). The reality we live in is no different. So it's not that the deities are not compassionate, as in actuality any subject that realizes its true nature as nondual Consciousness will only act out of compassion, but it's that from their perspective which is established in absolute nonduality, there is no suffering, only God shining as God in the field of God. "Mananāt trāyatē iti mantraḥ". This translates to, "Mantra is the sustained contemplation (mananāt) of that which protects (trāyatē)." In essence, a mantra is recited so that discursive thought constructs or concepts (which are superimpositions on the true Reality/Consciousness) are dissolved from the mind through repeated contemplation of Śakti (which is the essence of mantra, and again Consciousness Itself). Why does it get dissolved? When you become so absorbed in something, everything around you disappears and finally even your sense of "you" disappears. Only the object of contemplation remains with no concepts to the reality of that object. Since mantra is contemplation upon Consciousness, it is one of the ways by which mind is dissolved and the Self shines clear. They are not supposed to be miracle cures for worldly sufferings but are meant to shield your mind from discursive thought constructs and finally to dissolve even your egoic mind itself. We are definitely not worms in a pile of manure for the deities. Remember, the various forms of the deities are but pulsations of one Consciousness, our Self, hence they are not separate from us but our very unitary Self. As Ravi ji wrote in the past, when results are promised for different mantras and even stotras/hymns, these are usually written so that the aspirant actually puts them into practice and experiences the Reality behind everything. This is not to say that the Tantras were lying, because when you realize nondual Consciousness through practice, this entire world becomes You, simply put. And so the entire wealth of the world is yours, because You (your Self) are that very wealth which is sought after. You attain the highest position among men and gods precisely because You are their very Self. I hope you understand where I am going with this. Best wishes.

Kindly let us know the scriptural source of these mantras and sadhana krama.

Dylan, why don't the deities simply give such a mantra, after reading which the goddess will manifest and give all the knowledge about the highest reality herself. All these multiple tantras, methods, convictions, statements and beliefs seem not effective enough. After all, they do not give quick results, but only promise them. What is the reason that the deities cannot build a channel into our world of suffering and manifest in it? Are they not strong enough, or do they not have such an intention? Maybe they are not close to compassion and do not care at all, just as we do not care about worms in a pile of manure? Sometimes such questions visit me and doubts arise about the advisability of wasting time and effort on worshiping this or that deity. If it were not for this wonderful resource, on which Krishnaji, whom I deeply respect, has made available to the public a lot of what is usually hidden and concealed, then I would hardly have returned to Indian tantra. I have answers to these questions and I will of course try to justify the indifference of the deities to the world of people, but sometimes I really want to read the most secret mantra several times, after which the Goddess will come to me and tell me all the secrets about the highest reality.