A very ancient temple (Shakti Peeth) of Mother Matangi is located in Bodh Gaya across the Phalgu river according to Pranatoshini Tantra. This seems to have been a well-known place of sadhana for Matangi devotees in the first millennium. The story goes that Matanga Rishi meditated here and gained grace. I have located this temple to be at the google location below. It is very small, and ancient, and not very popular. It is opposite the Mahabodhi temple across the Falgu River. Have any of the devotees here visited the place? Would love to hear your thoughts. https://goo.gl/maps/AtGURupMFpF8QrLV7

Dear MnX, thank you for providing your personal views, which you are free to do but mentioning me in specific, forgetting out the others who made a mockery out of Amba is definitely not right for someone who sees Shiva and Shakti as heart and soul. I am strong with my arguments and references, both scriptural and historical, thus it doesn't really matter to me or affect me if you mentioned my name. I agree that the supreme is to be experienced but productive debates are welcomed, in fact sometimes important for understanding the fundamental basic knowledge. No one of this era is equivalent to Jagadguru Shankaracharya in supreme spiritual experience. Yet, didn't he debate for the welfare of mankind? I understand that these articles were written long time ago but it doesn't mean I can't question about them now as I just got to see more of them. Previously, when similar issue was brought up on a different article, Sri Ravi guruji was very polite in answering, infact even agreed to my references and viewpoints. You were right that the original author, Sri Ravi guruji would have been very polite and wouldn't have mocked Shaktism like our fellow commenters here. Indeed Amba would be laughing at the words people have used towards her pathway and Herself in this page. If you believe that followers of this website (in facf all websites focused on spiritual empowerment) are guided by Devi, hence even my comments are also under Her guidance. Theory is 'just' a base. Theory is extremely important as how the base is extremely important for a building. Even I am very thankful towards Sri Ravi guruji as I have really learned a lot from his articles. There are in reality many more to learn which are not in this website. Only through Devi's blessings, all knowledge are known. Lalitambika who exists as both Shiva and Shakti is my cosmos. May Amba bless you too. Sri Mathre Namah.

I am just stating my observations. Various questions are being raised about articles written in 2009. We are in 2021 today. Technically these doubts should have asked at that time. Original author would have replied with love & patience. But now Ravi sir is in much advance stage of Spirituality. He is beyond this play of Maya. In fact Maa Herself must be laughing at this display of words. Main Intention of articles posted here is to provide a place of knowledge to the seekers, who are from different part of the World. Who can not reach to a school teaching Spiritual texts. This portal is for all such souls, who may grow well in their journey. They are guided by Maa Herself. She holds their hand & takes them a step or many steps ahead. Once anyone is progressing, mind is just conditioned to see beyond veil of Maya. Theory just provides a base. Practical application of that knowledge is what counts the most. There is a lot more to learn besides available sources provide. The Supreme is to be experienced not to be debated on. @ Mr Acharya, these are my personal views. I have learned a lot from Ravi sir & this site. Please don't bother quoting me. For me both Shiva & Shakti, are my heart & soul.

I think right hands hold plough and skull as per sanskrit dyanam verse...

I have been doing tara ashtakam and neela saraswati stotram for about two years with intense devotion.Everything auspicious has happened in my life. But not initiated or chanting her mantras . But i do japa of saraswati mantra taken from sharada tilaka tantra , saraswati stotras, and saraswati kavacha. Since tara is none other than saraswati can one go ahead with the recitation of this kavacham?

Owh lets see what you have to clarify here about Lalita Sahasranama. As I have statued earlier, Lalita Sahasranama is primarily vedic as well as tantric, which also traces from vedic sources. Even those scholars whom you mentioned have also stated that even the tantric origins can be traced back to the vedic ones. Not a few, there are ample of evidences of it being Vedic, more than ones that I have pointed out. For this, Saubagya Bhaskaram would be a very good example. Regarding the matter of Adi Shankaracharya, you yourself agreed that Adi Shankaracharya left his human body at 32 then contradict yourself stating the other 80-90 years story. There are many works attributed to Shankaracharya, which some believe to have been written by later Acharyas while some believe to have been from the master himself. So who has to authorize this?? Definitely not you, me, or western scholars who just research for papers' sake. That's where we need true insights from great Acharyas. If you wanna know about someone, would you ask a random person who has been observing that someone or directly to the person's close relatives? Wonderful acharyas from Sri Chandrasekhara Bharati, Kanchi Paramacharya, Sri Bharati Tirtha Mahasannidhanam, and many more has expounded what it true and false. Just because SOME (NOT ALL) of the summarised version or part translation do not contain Lalita Sahasranama or Lalita Trishati, it doesn't mean the puranas lack those. The famous Sri Bhaskararayar has clearly pointed out that it is directly from the Lalithopakhyana, Brahmanda Purana, compiled by Sri Veda vyasa. If some parts are currently missing, that doesn't mean the scripture cannot be trusted. That's where the roles of Guru/Acharya comes in. That's why I pointed out that all Chaturamnaya peetam accept Lalita Sahasranama. Not only this purana, as per your so called great western definition, way many puranas were traced only after the medieval era. So does that mean these scriptures do not come from compilation of Krishna Dvaipayana? This is where the concept of overtime adaptation of theories comes in. Nobody knows which was added later or has been existing since the beginning, other than the lineage of Jagadgurus, who have spent and dedicated their whole life in establishing Advaita from Sruti, Smriti and Purana. If you say Shaktism is based mostly on tantrism, then it shows that you only focus on tantric scriptures, forgetting the Vedopanishads, Itihasas and Puranas. Even the Tantras are traced back to the vedas, which directly establishes firmly that Shaktism is from Vedism. Tantric Shaktism may have been kept hidden as stated by you but the Vedic Shaktism has been there since time immemorial. The valuable efforts of Acharyas and Scholars who follow the path of Shaktism have contributed a lot for our benefits currently and that's why I say claiming superiority of other philosophies over Shaktism is naive. It might not matter to you if someone says Shaktism came late or Shaivism came late. But for a person who sees both as two eyes with one sight, would never abandon or place one over the other. It DOES MATTER when someone induce a superiority complex between my Mata and Pita. If you say Shaivism and Vaisnavism focus directly on spiritual matters or mukti, then you should really study more about the schools within them, like Shaiva Siddhantam and Sri Vaishnavam. When all darshanas from Bauddha, Saura, Vaidika, Vaishnava, Shakta, Shaiva and finally Shambhava darshanas merge into Srividya, Ambal is Bhogamoksha Pradayini. Lastly, regarding the efforts from Sringeri and Kanchi mutts, I think they have been doing great efforts in sharing knowledge on Devi throughout their websites, Facebook pages, Youtube, all full of Anugraha Bhashanam of Shankaracharyas, translation of holy scriptures, clarification on misunderstandings about vedas and many more. For mutts which follow more on Adi Shankaracharya's philosophy, it wasn't necessary for them shedding light much on Tantras, as they clearly establish a solid foundation of Shaktism from Vedas, Puranas and Itihasas. Whatever that has been written in Tantras are already existant in our Shankara Advaita Vedantic tradition. Since it seems that you weren't much aware of the priceless contribution of our mutts, claiming that these are only for privileged ones is not practical. Therefore, I suggest you to go through Deivathin Kural by Kanchi Mahaswamigal, to just get a glimpse of our Shankara tradition. Aum Sri Mathre Namah.

It will not be of much value to do so. But you can give it a try with seeking Her permission first with a prayer. If you notice any untoward results, then stop reciting the kavacam and considering obtaining an initiation into any of Her mantras, from a practicing guru.

can someone who is not initiated into Tara mantras chant this?

Exactly! I stick to mine and you stick to yours, without chasing people away! Just because the topic is trivial to you, it doesn't mean it is to others, like a blind person assuming world is full of darkness. First of all, I didn't even request you to agree with me, as I knew since the beginning that it is useless to put a torch for the sake of blinds, and it is not my job. You were not in this picture at all, as I have said earlier. So, you may just end this as you said and do something progressive. May Amba bless all. Sri Mathre Namah.

I had decided not to comment any further extending this conversation or replying to any accusations, but felt a need to clarify a few important points. Śrī Lalita Sahasranāmam is a tantric treatise and a mantra in itself. It is verily, the essence of Śrīvidyā. Agreed, it does pull in a few Vedic references to help us understand that She pervades everything. Moving to another topic, It is agreed by most scholars that Shri Adishankaracharya died at the age of 32. The most important of his contributions are the doctrine of Advaita, commentaries on the Brahma Sūtras, Upaniṣads etc. There are 100s of voluminous works attributed to him. It is an established fact that Shri Adishankara spent a considerable amount of time travelling on foot throughout the length and breadth of the Indian sub-continent debating with scholars to establish his doctrine as well as to unify all Vedantic religions, which had been reduced to less than 20% amongst the population of that day and age. Had he lived upto 80-90 years and spent most of his time in writing the commentaries, then all of his works could be firmly established to him. Various scholars are of the opinion, from a logical standpoint, that many of his works especially related to the tantra, such as Saundarya Lahari, Prapañcasārā, Śrī Lalitā Triśati etc. could be attributed to other Shankaracharyas that followed him, or to various other scholars who dedicated their works to their esteemed guru Shri Adishankara. Opinions differ among scholars and I am no expert to either agree or disagree. In my own personal opinion, it could have been another scholar or scholars of great merit who has/have attributed the works to the great master. Now shifting our focus to the Brahmāṇḍa Purāṇā, you may be aware that there are many versions of it, some of which DO NOT contain the Śrī Lalitā Triśati, Śrī Lalita Sahasranāmam, Lalitopākhyāna etc. There are versions that contain Ādhyātmika Rāmāyaṇa also, which is essentially Advaita combined with Bhakti of Śrī Rāmā. The point I am trying to make, is that this Purāṇā has gone through several editions and some portions of it, that have been quoted in other texts are now entirely missing. There is no known copy of this Purāṇā, discovered as yet, that can be traced back prior to the 10th Century, although the original dates of its composition in written format could be traced back to the 4th Century C.E. It remains a fact that Śaktism based mostly on tantra, has remained well hidden to this day and age. It has only come to light with the works of Shri Vidyaranya Yeti, Shri Bhaskararaya, Shri Mahidhara, Shri Deshikendra etc. and more recently by the yeoman efforts of various scholars such as Sir John Woodroofe, Shri S.K. Ramachandra Rao, Shri S.V. Radhakrishna Sastri, Shri Raviji etc. It honestly does not matter if Śaktism came later or Śaivism came first. One may choose whichever doctrine appeals the most or is followed in the tradition that one chooses to follow. As I said previously, all the paths from the base of the mountain may help in reaching the summit. In my personal opinion, I find Śaktism to be most suitable for the accomplishment of all material and spiritual desires, while Śaivism, Vaiṣṇavism etc. are directly focused on spiritual emancipation - mokṣa. Lastly, from an appeal standpoint, It would be of great help if Mutts such as Shringeri, Dwaraka etc. who seem to be flushed with a treasure trove of manuscripts associated with Śākteyam, take the necessary steps to publish these documents for the benefit of all. This may probably bring more light to the fascinating doctrine of Śaktism and Tantra in general and be of immense value to the sādhaka community. It should be regarded as a world heritage and not restricted to a privileged few.