Sir, it is funny how you falsely claim that historically Shaktism evolved from Shaivism as many historians have pointed out that both schools have heavily influenced each other, though has developed independently. There are also few historical accounts which state that Shaivism originated from Jainism, but does that mean it is acceptable? SriVaishnavas have many times established that Shaivism originated from Vaishnavism as per Ramanuja, Madhva and Vijayendra Tirtha, but does that mean it is true? Historical accounts NEVER trace Shaktism from Shaivism but directly from the Vedas and even older, the Paleolithic era. In reality, Shaivism has been shown to borrow many deities from Shaktism patheon, therefore it is never right to support the Shaiva origin theory, hence, this perspective is rendered null in this context. Being a Shakta as you said earlier, I leave it to you whether to believe in this theory or not. If there is nothing wrong in taking up trika advaita in explaining the Divine Mother, then no harm if anyone take up Srivaishnava and Gaudiya Vaishnava in explaining Shiva, whom is nowhere superior to Narayana at any cost as per their context. First, you claimed that Devi originated from Shiva and now Shaktism originated from Shaivism? Where are the evidences other than the very late Trika theory compared to evidences from Vedopanishads and Purana Itihasas, which I have provided to support your perspective? I leave this between you, your guru and Devi to think upon. If a self-realized person who really see all as one and the same, then no harm in writing up Lalita as Parabrahman, isn’t it? Again, I leave this to Devi to consider this as anti-feminism or something that is right. Anyone is free to pursue any school of thought for self-realization, but should never impose contradictory ideas on another school’s scriptures. Happy that you welcome polite criticisms but we here have now understood the real intention of this website from your first sentence itself. As followers of Srividya and Advaita Vedanta, we would never discriminate the school of thought propounded by your guru, just like how you discriminated us by your false origin theory. I really respect Sri Ravi swamigal hence I thought I could freely share my thoughts. Now I see what the articles have done as a few readers are asking us to stay away, which don’t really matter to us. Thanks for the views from you and your peers. May Devi Bless you. Sri Mathre namah.

As it has been told multiple times that no single philosophy is followed in this website. I really cant understand as to why the questions keeps popping up. As said earlier if you and your follower have a problem with the contents of the website then its very good that you and your students stop visiting the website. The language used to malign the author is not fit for a guru. Krishnaji has been patient enough in explaining things and then you just want to prove a point with an intention unknown. This type of comments shows your true color rather than this websites as it was never claimed to follow any single philosophy from start and you created the misdirection by introducing Shathi principle is being disrespected here. To be honest I think these comments now seems more malicious than simply pointing out the so called mistakes. There will be no problem whatsoever if you stop visiting this website. If your response is again going to that its against scriptures etc, keep in mind no single philosophy is followed here, so your argument drops immediately. Hope you can understand this.

Mr. Murugan. you must understand that this website has more than 7.2 million readers. If you, along with your disciples leave this website, it is not going to have any impact. Further, you claim to be a guru, but you do not have the qualities of a good Good Guru. Please ask your disciples not to visit this website and in particular, you kindly do not visit this website. Many of us have evolved spiritually with this website, which is simple, straightforward and non-commercial. Kindly stay from this website.

I received Batuka Bhairava from a qualified teacher. I am no expert, but it doesn't take long for his mantra to fructify. Life happens Roshan. Don't count on the a shield to prevent you from making good choices. Like driving a car without a seatbelt. Will the Creatrix bend the rules just for one jiva who chants a shield mantra? That being said, I have witnessed the power of my sweet and terrible lord protecting me during the last 6 months. Sanatana Dharma is the best shield my dear Roshan. To do what's right, to remain constantly in Bhairava consciousness, to follow the sadhana given to you by your Guru, and to fall madly in love with him or her, is the true way. Mother takes care of the details. As my old friend Santosh Kumar once told me, too much info confuses the mind. Sri matre namaha.

Sir, you must understand that Śaktism has evolved from Śaivism based on all historical accounts. Given this perspective, there is nothing wrong in explaining about the Divine Mother from the perspective of Trika/Advaita etc. There is also nothing wrong in taking up the pure Śakteya view, which has been given full importance in the explanation of many Kavacas and Stotras on this site. The same view is also present in the Mantra explanations of the various forms of the Divine Mother. For a self-realized person like Shri Ravi guruji heading towards liberation, they're all one and the same. More than any theory or philosophy expounded in the scriptures of any particular tradition, the actual practice and gaining the treasure of self-realization is of utmost importance. We must understand that Buddhists or followers of various religions and those meditating on pure awareness and even atheists can gain self-realization. We can follow any philosophy that appeals to us and is harmonious with our spiritual growth and tolerant towards all other belief systems that profess in harmony with nature and mutual co-existence. That said, we are not forcing our views upon anyone nor are we holding steadfast upon any one single philosophy. Anybody is welcome to shun our website or the articles posted here. We just request that they be considerate in expressing their criticism and keeping it polite. We wish you and your disciples speedy spiritual progress and may the grace of the Divine Mother be showered upon you. Thank you for visiting us and sharing your perspectives for the benefit of everyone!

Same appearing as two can never be called created... In Srimad Devi Bhagavatam, MulaBhagavati Bhuvaneswari divided herself into two and became Siva, Bhuvaneswara Mahadeva. Does that mean Siva was created?? So, if you accept this theory of creation, then you have to also accept the theory which I pointed out too. I disagree to both as neither Siva or Sakthi created each other. Both are combos of Sivasakthi, while they just take incharge of those tatvas. In both ocean and sea, water is what that is present. Devi is that water, hence cannot be called either ocean or the sea separately. If you wanna follow Saiva understanding in this post, which is really vital, then no issues at all. But if you say all posts on this website would follow this theory, then it is extremely unfair and degradatory towards the worshippers of Devi. I have read your articles on Srihari and Bhagavat Gita where none of these theories are shown but Narayana is shown as Parabrahman. Then why none of your articles focusing on Lalita didn't actually pointed out the fact that She is Parabrahmam?? Why falsely portray Her as being created while She herself mentions that She is both the creator and creation? Isn't that some sort of fanaticism? If you only talk about Trika on this article, it is very true. But it is goes very contradictory and wrong for articles on Devi or Narayana paratvam. Or, you can easily say that this is a Saiva oriented website and not a Srividya website. I and my disciples would just walk away from a website where Devi's Parabrahma tatvam is made a mockery! If you really understand about the sampoorna tatvam of Nirvana Sundari who shines beyond the amakala, then you should have been concerned more than me regarding this matter. Anyways, thank you for showing the true colour and intention of this website.... Aum Sri Mathre Namah

ŚrīBālā mantras provide the foundation and basis for Śrīvidyā. It should be noted that the Śuddha Pañcadaśī mantra becomes the Saubhāgya Pañcadaśī mantra only when it is combined with the Tryākṣarī Bālā mantra. For the Bālā mantras to be effective, this kavacam is considered essential. It maybe substituted by equivalent kavacams of Śrī Lalitā when one is reciting Her mantras. The decision of the guru must be considered final and his/her advice overrides my suggestions here.

It would be 4 bījas.

āgacca āgacca is correct. Thank you for pointing out the errors. It has now been corrected for both the articles that you have pointed out. We are grateful for the input from your end.

jvala jvala is correct. It was a typo on my part. Thank you for pointing out the errors!