In mantra Last spell "srim srim hum phat " or srim sram hum phat ( nyasah giving ) which is correct sir

Sapindikaranam of my paternal uncle (my father's younger brother), who was a bachelor, falls on the annual sharda day of my father. Can we perform my father's annual sharda after performing Sapindikaranam of my uncle...?

True. May amba bless us all. Sri Mathre Namah.

This entire website is a humongous and tireless effort of Shri V. Ravi guruji. His selfless efforts and dedication over the past 2 decades is the result of this website that has been a beacon of light for Truth seekers across the world. All credit goes entirely to him. Whatever is written here by us, is an ode to him and an icing over what has already been described in various other documents that guruji has previously rendered. May the Divine Mother bless us all and lead us to liberation.

Thanks brother.. I believe no matter Kashmir doctrine, Pasupata, Saivasiddhanta, Saktha, Srivaisnava, Or Advaita vedanta, all lead to self realization and acceptable as long as it goes by Vedas. Your efforts are really valuable and useful to many sadhakas nowdays, including devotees of Srimata under guidance provided by me, by grace of Amma. That's why I had to clarify one of their doubts through my comments. Wish you all good luck for your future posts celebrating oneness of Sivasakthi in the form of Lalithambika. May Amba bless you... Sri Mathre Namah

I agree with your viewpoint sir. Lalitā Devi is both Śakti and Śiva. These are all synonyms of each other. The viewpoints expressed on this website are not purely Śākteya but also influenced by Kashmir Trika and other related philosophies. Even by separating Śiva and Śakti, we are eventually concluding that they are all the same. Thank you very much for your valuable and constructive input that would be helpful for all sādhakas.

Don't you think after all of this I understand the concept of Sakthi, Vimarsa and Prakasa? Brother, I do but your statement of Lalitha being Sakthi only in many of the posts is false. Lalita is Siva, Lalita is Sakthi, Lalita is Prakasa, Lalitha is Vimarsa, Lalita is Purusa, Lalita is Prakriti. Lalita is everything that exist and everything beyond existence, not just sakthi (excluding Siva) as stated by you, because the entire existence is Sivasakthimayam, which is none other than Lalita. She is Parabrahmam. If you still don't get this, only Amma knows what to do brother. I am not as knowledgeable like you in Srividya and Tantras. I was very happy to read your posts everytime but it really disappointed me when every post claim her to be sakthi which is possessed by Siva whom you call Brahmam. But Lalita is neither only the possesser nor possessed. Lalita is Brahmam and Brahma Sakthi. Whatever I stated is the basis of Advaita Srividya of Adi Shankaracharya. It is upon you to take it or not but pls try not to place her position below Siva in each and every posts of yours, which is again my humble request. May Amba bless you. Sri Mathre Namah

To explain the transition from the vimarśa-rūpa to the prakāśa-vimarśa-rūpa states of the Parabrahman, the concept of separating Śakti and Śiva is used. As stated previously and by yourself as well, they are exactly one and the same. All that exists and does not exist is Śakti only.

In one of your old replies at Parashodashi mantra webpage, you yourself stated that both Paramasiva and Devi belong to Gurumandala and Devi herself becomes the true guru who brings to Paramasiva who only gives liberation. If LS confirms that She herself is the entire Gurumandala and you said that Paramasiva is one of the anga, then who is Paramasiva? If Devi cannot grant mukthi by her own will, how can she be Mukthinilaya, Mukthiroopini, Mukthidha, Kaivalyapada dhayini and more? So your ideology of Paramasiva granting mukthi through Lalithambika is false as per Lalita Sahasranama. But, it can be understood this way, the same Parabrahmam which grants mukhi in which the atman becomes Paramatman, is known as Paramasiva as per Saiva, Lalitha as per Srividya explained in LS and Narayana of Vaisnavas.

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.