uesday, October 30, 2012

Explanation of Real Sri Vidya and Refutation of Kaulachara / Vamachara

Background
Well, I am neutral to all the sects of Tantra and Sri Vidya schools, and have never shown much interest to either foray into those dominions or bloc their !ath" #owever recently an incident ha!!ened which hurt my sacred feelin$s towards the mother $oddess, hence reali%in$ this as the hi$h time I resolved to brea the ice and call a s!ade a s!ade& ' month bac in a social networ in$ site someone added me to a $rou! on Sri Vidya (#e was the owner of that $rou!)" I felt ha!!y because Sri Vidya is even hidden in Vedas and there was no reason for me to not feel elated to *oin my mother+s $rou!" That $rou! focused on the teachin$s of ,evi -uram (www"devi!uram"com)" #owever I didn+t now that it was a $rou! which focused on ./aulachara+ form in Sri Vidya worshi!" The !osts there ma*orly revolved around one to!ic 0 1oni& I felt little discomfort when someone !osted an ima$e of a mountain cave which resembled the 1oni" I wasn+t sure whether it was a real ima$e or a ma$ic of adobe -hotosho!, but still I saluted the divine mother+s !resence in that" So far so $ood& Then one day the owner of that $rou! !asted a beautiful !icture of ,ur$a mata and said his friend $ains erotic feelin$s on seein$ *a$adamba, and I was flabber$asted to see that this $entleman (owner) was ind of in a$reement to his thou$hts as thou$h it was .O/+ to have such thou$hts for

the divine mother" That was the first missile which !ierced throu$h me"

Then I ha!!ened to visit their website of ,evi -uram, and the 2'3 section a$ain shattered by bosom by !iercin$ another shaft within my core" See ad*acent a screenshot of the 3 4 ' section of that or$ani%ation" The answer $iven to the see er doesn5t loo li e from a learned 6uru" Of course nudity is not im!urity, but the 7uestion as ed was different" 8alita Sahasranama be$ins with the foremost name as 5srI m'ta5 meanin$ 5the divine mother of all5" ' devotee of srIm'ta is for her a !utr' always, a !urush' never& The latter case is !ossible only when the identity of 5*Iva5 $ets destroyed and the reali%ation of 5shiv'5 ha!!ens" #owever, this case arises after the !r'nas !ierce throu$h sahasr'ra and the *iv' becomes one with 'tman (shiv'), and there we can see the !henomenon of don9duality between *Iv' and shiv'" :ut after this situation of unitin$ your self with the 'tman, your body would die and it5s a onetime !rocess" When direct incarnation of shiv' vi%" 'di shan ar' himself addressed her always as 5madamba (mother mine)5, in his hymns and com!ositions; then who are these modern day 6urus who dare to see 'mba with the eyes of !assion<

Then another document is found e=!lainin$ dasa9mudras where the author has associated incorrect inter!retations of tanm'tras with meanin$s filled with !assion" Same is shown in the ad*acent screenshot which is a 7uic view of their document on ,asa9>udras" I would really li e to now which cha!ter from the scri!tures vi%" :ha$awad 6ita,

u!anishads, >ahabharata, ?amayana or any -urana associates tanmatras with !assionate meanin$s< This was the last shaft that !ierced me" 'fter all these moments, finally I unsubscribed from that forum" That5s where the roots of ori$ination of this article are& @ow, let me refute the incorrect inter!retations of the sacred science called Sri Vidya" In fact, Tantra also is not everythin$ about se=uality, it is a $reat science where a !art is se=uality" #owever, we can5t blindly acce!t every Tantric boo as authentic" #induism is so vast that there are numerous scri!tures and e7ually there are numerous inter!olations" '!art from that every scri!ture is so esoteric that the literal meanin$ always remains !oles a!art from the inner meanin$" Therefore whichever scri!ture you want to follow, you need to follow with an analytical mind instead of followin$ blindly the literal meanin$s" In this article, within the limits of my limited nowled$e I will try to analy%e and e=!lain the conce!ts of sri vidy' and also of Tantra under the li$ht of shruti, smriti, itihasa as a!!licable" A-lease note that one learned !erson told me that v'm'ch'r' and aul'ch'r' are different !aths and e=ternal !anchama 'ras are followed only in aul'ch'ra and not in v'm'ch'ra" Still then since a lot of !eo!le consider both these words to mean same doctrine, I5m retainin$ them to$ether" #owever I only mean to condemn that !ath which uses e=ternal tools of !anchama 'r's, and who hold amorous thou$hts for divine mother " "
B"

Sri Vidya is Inward Science - so External ractices of Kaulachara/Vamachara is Incorrect

I don5t understand why do !eo!le resort to Vamachara and /aulachara ind of e=ternal !ractices while callin$ themselves as the followers of lalita devi and call themselves as the Sri Vidya C!asa as, 're they really the 5followers5 of the !ath shown by lalitambi a< I don5t believe they are& :rahmanda -urana contains the $reat hymn 58alita Sahasranama stotram5 where everythin$ about $oddess Tri!urasundari has been described includin$ the mode of worshi! which needs to be followed to reali%e her in true sense" I don5t say Tantras are bo$us te=ts, I understand that Tantra is a $reat science" #owever what I could understand so far is, !eo!le only $o by the literal meanin$ of Tantra

scri!tures and fail to correlate them with the inner meanin$ what they actually convey" This is the reason why we see !anchama ara ind of worshi! to lalitambi a" :ut !robably they are unaware of the fact that ,evi !leases with internal -anchama aras and not with e=ternally !racticed -anchama aras" Well, -anchama aras are five !ractices vi%" madya (wine), mamsa (meat), matsya (fish), mudra (they call it as $rains but I5ll e=!lain it in a different meanin$ later), and maithuna (co!ulation)" I5ll refute these outward meanin$s in se!arate sections and would try to e=!lain their actual meanin$s" 8alita Sahasranama Stotram clearly says what the method of worshi! that is ordained for reali%in$ 8alitambi a is, D'ntarmu ha samaradhya bahirmu ha sudurlabha ED (8S verse 1F2) DShe is easily obtainable for those whose worshi! is based on their mind turned inwards, and She is difficult to be obtained by those who are outward focusedD" There are two words vi%" /ula and ' ula in Sri Vidya" In normal sense 5 ula5 means family and 5a ula5 means one who has no !arents" In this sense, even thou$h Sha ti and Shiva are both unborn, since Sha ti transforms herself as the Ga$at (and Shiva *ust infuses the chaitanya), Sha ti becomes manifest, therefore she is 5/ula5 and Shiva is 5' ula5" #owever, a te=t 5tar'rahasyavritTi '5 defines /ula by elaboratin$ the same conce!t as 9 It says /ulam is Dmatri9mana9meyamD which are further e=!lained to mean *Iva (mata), *n'na (manam) and the manifold universe or vishv' (meyam)" The meanin$ is 9 entire cosmos of *iva and vishwa is Sha ti" So, Sha ti is called as /ula" The same truth is laid in >ahanirvana Tantra as follows" DThe /ula are Giva, -ra riti, s!ace, time, ether, earth, water, fire, and airD" (>ahanirvana Tantra HIJH) Therefore, Shiva who is transcendental and is :rahman is s!o en of as 5' ula5" Interestin$ly the same fact has been mentioned in Sruthi as well" Our body bein$ a microcosm ( shudra brahmanda), it is identical to the e=ternal vishwam" 'nd a$ain let me reiterate that Sri Vidya is all about internal, and not e=ternal& The si= cha ras are the seat of Sha ti hence they re!resent /ula" Seat of Shiva re!resents ' ula" KmCl'dh'r'diShaTcha ra"n sha tisth'namudIritam"h E a@Th'du!ari mCrdh'nta"n sh'>bhava"n sth'namuchyate EL (Varaha C!anishad MIM3)

KThe si= Nha ras be$innin$ with >uladhara are said to be the seat of Sa ti (6oddess)" 2rom the nec to the to! of the head is said to be the seat of Sambhu (Shiva)L" On similar lines, ula9m'r$a (/ula -ath), doesn5t mean the !ractices or !ath followed by neo9 aulacharIs O v'm'charis" ula9m'r$a is nothin$ but Dsushum@aD throu$h which the mother Tri!urasundari ascends as the ser!ent !ower 5 undalini5 to unite with her consort in Sahasrara,Therefore essentially /aulas are those 1o$is who ta e the !ath of /undalini 1o$a for emanci!ation" Pven /ali Tantra confirms the same" Kali Tantra (24-6) says, "A person who takes the journey of Sushumna is a Kaula" Therefore it is !roven now, that ori$inally aul'ch'ra used to mean /undalini 1o$a, therefore in that sense aul'ch'ra is the hi$hest sacred !ath, the su!reme !ath of liberation" #owever, with this you should also understand that /undalini 1o$a is totally an inward science, hence aul'ch'ra ori$inally should have been an inward science" Therefore the -anchama ara rituals must have ori$inally been inward sacrifices," :ut the !resent situation of aul'ch'ra is totally o!!osite to what it technically meant to be" Therefore, whatever refutation of /aulachara I would do in this article, consider that to be about modern aul'ch'ra (neo9 aul'ch'ra) and not the ori$inal one which was the !ath of yo$a" #o!efully now the terms related to /ula, /aula, etc", should be clear" @ow, let5s move ahead with another verse of 8alita Sahasranama Stotram which is usually misinter!reted"
"

D/ulan$ana ulantastha aulini ulayo$ini E ' ula samayantastha samayachara tat!ara ED (8S verse 3H) This verse is a bit com!le= hence let5s not read it5s meanin$ in totality" 8et5s s!lit each word and understand the meanin$ here" !" Kulangana# Who is the emale in the Kula !ath " This doesn5t mean she is a lady who strides the Vamachara !ath" '!!lyin$ the ri$ht meanin$s learned in above analysis the meanin$ now becomes 9 DWho is the 2emale element /undalini in the /ula -ath (sushumna)D" $" Kulantastha# Who is the innermost ?eality of the /ula -ath" here also ula -ath means Sushumna %" Kaulini# Who is "alle# Kaulini$ the "ore of the Kaula form of worship " @ow a!!ly the meanin$ of /ula" The shat cha ras are in totality called as /ula which is nothin$ but the universe within us" So, the worshi! O 1o$a Sadhana that is !erformed at all the Shat Nha ras durin$ /undalini 'wa enin$ is in essence she alone& This 1o$a sadhana has her for its core"

&" Kulayogini# Who is the %eity of the Kaulas " Outwardly it means somethin$ !leasin$ to aulachari9vamacharis" :ut that yo$i who follows /undalini 1o$a and understands that si= cha ras which encom!ass the universe are called as 5/ula5 is a learned 5/aula5" 'nd since Tri!urasundari is the deity who travels as /undalini and awards self9reali%ation to the 1o$i, she is the central ob*ect of worshi! for such a /aula" So, now the correct meanin$ is that She is the tar$et divinity for the 1o$is who !ractice /undalini 1o$a" '" (kula# Who is also the Akula (Si&a) who is in the thousan#-petalle# lotus a'o&e the Kula !ath" Shiva and Sha ti are always one and the same" The difference is only due to m'y'" Therefore at the Sahasrara Nha ra level Sha ti and Shiva remain as 'rdhanareeshwara (one body shared half by each)" This is why 8alita Sahasranama calls her as 5Shiva9sha tyai yaroo!ini lalitambi a5" )" Samayantastha# Who is the "enter of the Samaya #o"trine (in whi"h the worship is #one internally throu(h me#itation an# whi"h hol#s Si&a-Sakti as of e)ual importan"e in all respe"ts) "@ow, from above analysis we should be clear that ori$inally /aula is also internal !ath of worshi!" Samaya and /aula both are ori$inally same in meanin$, but the incorrect inter!retations of te=ts made them different" *" Samayanchara tatpara# Whom the Samaya tra#ition of worship is #ear* This verse should be li e a *olt on the vamacharI9/aulas" here the hymn clearly states that 8alitambi a finds Samayachara worshi! dear to her which means internal worshi! throu$h meditation, -ranayama and 1o$a is the ri$ht !ath !referred by her and not the e=ternal methods of -anchama aras (we5ll discuss this in detail shortly)" I understand that !eo!le mi$ht try to counter my above analysis by showin$ me the below verse from same hymn" So, let me ri$ht away !ut here my two cents on this verse as well" -eo!le mi$ht misinter!ret Da!asavy'D as Dneo9 aul'ch'ra O v'm'ch'raD, but it is not that" 's !er our analysis so far savya is the inward !ath and a!asavya is the outward !ath (here it means smartha !ath and not the v'm'ch'ra O neo9 aul'ch'ra
)

Dsavy'!asavya m'r$asth' ED (8S verse 1FJ) DWho is reached by both the !aths 0 Savya (internal worshi! throu$h 1o$a) and '!asavya (e=ternal worshi! throu$h smartha O da shinachara)D" #owever, one may a$ain 7uestion, why did I call Smartha worshi! as 5a!asavya5< @o" don5t $et me wron$" I am not callin$ Smartha !ath as inferior" #ere the com!arison is *ust a relative one and not at absolute levels" 8et me try to e=!lain this as well" 'll our Vedantic scri!tures and even -uranas as us to focus inwards" Therefore always the inward focused worshi! is su!erior (!ar')

and the outwardly focused ritualistic worshi! althou$h im!ortant yet is inferior (a!ara)" Since not everyone succeeds in drawin$ one5s mind inwards, the outward worshi! li e *a!a, 'radhan', !C*', etc" are also acce!ted by the 6od and sa$es" #owever, outward worshi! is lo$ically meanin$less" 8et me e=!lain it clearly" #ow can you offer a seat to the all !ervadin$ infinite :ha$awanO:ha$awati by sayin$ "Asanam samarpayAm+ (I offer you a seat, !lease come and sit)D< #ow can >ahadeva who is called Dsth'nuD (because he cannot move any more havin$ !ervaded everythin$), come and sit on the asana !rovided by you< Is he not already seated there< @ow tell me don5t you feel it is innocence to offer a seat< 1ou say, Dyajnopa&+tam samarpayAm+ (I offer this sacred thread to you)D" Tell me how can you offer a sacred thread that can encom!ass the su!reme bein$5s chest< When Vedas themselves say that only a 7uarter of ?udra is nown to them and three 7uarters are still non9entity; don5t you thin it is im!ossible for us to offer a sacred thread encirclin$ his body< What len$th of clothes can you manufacture which can cover the body of that lord who has the directions as his clothes and hence called as Ddi$ambaraD for the fact that none of the clothes can ever cover him< ,on5t you thin D &astram samarpayAmiD is a statement encom!assed with i$norance< What amount of food can you really offer if ShivaOSha ti really says D-lease fill my stomachD< So, don5t you thin offerin$ naivPdyam by sayin$ D nai&,#yam samarpayAm+D is i$norance< 8i ewise, can you really $arland himOher with flower $arland if they really as you to do so< Im!ossible& Well, don5t lau$h at me, these ar$uments are not foolish& Pven 'di Shan ara stated the same in his com!osition (hymn) for lord Shiva by nameD!ar'!C*' stotra>D" 'll these are !art and !arcel of Smartha worshi!, so at relative order they are inferior hence Da!asavyaD" #owever, the main in$redient of the e=ternal smartha worshi! is Dbha ti (devotion)D, which is consumed by the almi$hty as the offerin$" 6od has nothin$ to do with how many times you chant his name and how many hymns you sin$ daily" What matters is with what intensity of bha ti you remember him, even rememberin$ once with full devotion and love is $reater than chantin$ 1000 names mechanically while your mind wanderin$ in a !ub& So, in my o!inion Da!asavyaD should be understood as the e=ternal smartha worshi! (and not the v'm'chara)" In Smartha tradition (,a shinachara) as

established by 'di Shan ara, 8alitambi a is worshi!ed in smartha way, with flowers, vermillion, by recitin$ her thousand names, by offerin$ her !'yas'nna> (?ice mi=ed with mil ) as naivPdyam; etc" This e=ternal worshi! is essential because !eo!le easily follow the !ath of devotion and they find it difficult to focus their mind inwards" Pven :ha$awad 6ita states the same "asanshayam mahA'Ah- man- #urni(raha."hala." which means, "no #ou't$ - mi(hty arme# one$ the min# is unsta'le an# &ery #iffi"ult to 'e tame# an# fo"use#" " P=treme focus and mind control is re7uired in the !ath of 1o$a (inward !ath), but for :ha ti !ath 9 life is easy& One *ust needs enormous amount of sacred love and devotion for hisOher favorite form of 6od" That5s it" #ence it5s the :ha ti which is the ey in$redient of Smartha worshi! throu$h which the divine mother $ets !leased easily" -lease also note that the e=ternal smartha worshi! is also e7ually ca!able of showerin$ 8alitambi a5s $race" In fact she loves this :ha ti very much as confirmed in below verse" D:ha ti!riya bha ti$amya bha tivashya bhaya!aha ED (8S verse Q2) DWho is fond of true devotion" Who is attained throu$h true devotion" Who can be won over throu$h true devotion" Who dis!els all fearsD" So, there are two !aths to a!!roach her vi%" 1o$a and :ha ti where the former one is the !ath of Gnana ( nowled$e) and the latter one is the !ath of devotion or love" :oth these !aths are e7ually $ood and she a!!roves them" The !ath of v'm'ch'ra where celibacy is not $iven im!ortance, where wine, meat and co!ulation is $iven im!ortance is a$ainst the !reachin$s of Vedic dharma" That !ath is a$ainst the !reachin$s of Sa$es in other authentic scri!tures li e >ahabharata" Therefore aulachara9v'm'ch'ra is @OT a DShishthaD !ath and is called a D:hrashthaD !ath because it is Dav'idi am (anti9 vedic)D" 8et me show another evidence from 8alita Sahasranama Stotram that 6oddess is fond of Shishtha !ath which is a!!roved by Vedas" This should be the eye9 o!eners for those Veda9:rahshtha9Vamachara followers that $oddess cannot yield to their lust and she is ever devoted to Shiva alone, and she is worshi!ed by Shsihtha (ri$hteous) men& Dshiva!riya shiva!ara shishteshta shishta!u*ita ED (8S verse RJ) DWho is the beloved of Shiva" Who is solely devoted to Shiva" Who is dear to the ri$hteous" Who is adored by the ri$hteousD"

There is another verse which seemin$ly attests v'm'char'" 8alita Sahasranama Stotram (8S verse 1HQ) calls her as D &amakesh&ari" which can be misinter!reted as "who is the (o##ess of the left han#e# path followers" " #owever, I would inter!ret it in a different way" 8o$ically it can never be true that in some verses the hymn says she should be followed usin$ samayachara (ri$ht hand !ath) and in some other verse it says she is the $oddess of left handed followers" This is a lo$ical incon$uence" Therefore what I would inter!ret it as is, 9 v'm' means left, Cma occu!ies the left half of Shiva, hence she is called as Vamadevi also" Shiva5s west facin$ head which falls on his left side is called as Vamadeva for the same reason of bein$ at the left side of his body" Shiva and Sha ti are always one and share one body" -eo!le who worshi! the ri$ht !ortion are Shiva devotees, and !eo!le who worshi! his left !ortion are Sha tas" So, it means "those Shaktas who worship the &ama (left) si#e of lor# Shi&a "an 'e "alle# as followers of /ama* So$ the eshwari ((o##ess) of all su"h Shakta #e&otees is /amakeshwari"" @ow, this meanin$ fits in sync with other verses of this hymn and doesn5t contradict them at all" Therefore, finally, note it carefully that as !er the above analysis, nowhere Dv'm'ch'raD has been a!!roved or attested by this hymn&

(m+ika is always chaste and cannot yield to your amorous approaches,

8et me now refute the filthy thou$hts of neo9 ul'char' followers" 's shown in the very be$innin$ of this article some $rou!s of !eo!le outwardly show themselves to be the followers of sacred Sri Vidya tradition and inwardly ee! amorous thou$hts for the ,evi" 8et this section be dedicated to all such !eo!le" >ay the $oddess bless this section to be an eye9o!ener for them" When you see beautiful face of the $oddess, if you $ain erotic thou$hts for her, then it is a serious !roblem with your moral system and not with any scri!ture" Show me one scri!ture where she has been shown to yield to the lust of anyone a!art from bein$ devoted to her consort >ahadeva& 1ou cannot show& #owever, let me show how many !eo!le lusted for her and finally faced their doomsday& >ahishasura lusted for her, and faced his death in her hands" 'ndha asura lusted for her and faced his fate in the hands of >ahadeva" Galandhara felt erotic to see her and tried to !ossess her, and faced his doomsday in the hands of

Shiva" Pven the chastity of his consort Vrinda (Tulasi) couldn5t safe$uard Galandhara for lon$" ?uru lusted for her, and he also met the same fate" 6o, o!en -uranas and you would find many such demons who met with their death for seein$ her with lustful eyes" @one of the mi$hty demons in the entire scri!tural base of #induism is stated to succeed in ever beddin$ with her, then how can the aul'ch'rIs O v'm'charIs ever dare to su!!ort eroticism for that $oddess who has no blemishes< I don5t care which stu!id 6uru of this /aliyu$a you follow who su!!orts your erotica for her" 8et me blast your eroticism with my missiles from authoritative scri!tures now& .aha'harata 01ook-4 (/irata !ar&a)-Se"tion-62 !raises ,evi ,ur$a sayin$, 3Thou art the only female in the uni&erse that possesses the attri'ute of purity4" Pven 'di Shan ara in his hymn Soundarya 8ahari hails the same attribute and says Tri!urasundari is the only chaste $oddess as follows" K>ahadevam hithva thava sathi sathinam acharame E /uchabhyam aasan$ah urava a9tharor a!yasulabhah D (Verse JF9Soundarya 8ahari) DOh, first amon$ chaste woman, P=ce!t 8ord Shiva your consort; 1our breasts have not even touched, The holy henna treeD" 'nd you thou$ht you would $et liberation by followin$ her with lust< If not, then what is that rubbish inter!retation of Dtanm'trasD that has been listed for ,asa9 >udra worshi!< 8et me list down what has been mentioned in ,evi -uram website as the meanin$s of ,asamudras" 8et me 7uote the e=tract directly here for the criticism !ur!ose (this is allowed as !er co!yri$ht laws)" I have bulleted them for easy readability"

"(,evi -uram website says)

We show to %e&i ten han# mu#ras to ask 5er to a(ree to intera"tin( with 5er* 6ine of these (estures are asso"iate# with nine su'-"hakras in the Sri 7hakra* We are askin( %e&i throu(h mu#ras8 #ram (sha'#a - 7an + talk to you9)$ #rim (sparsha- 7an + tou"h you9) klim(rupa- 7an + see you nu#e9)$ 'lum (rasa- 7an + kiss you9)$ sah((an#ha- 7an + apply perfumes to your 'o#y9 ) - these are the fi&e sensory mo#es of per"eption$ plus krom(ankusham- Stop me where you wish to*)$

hasakhaphrem (:et;s for(et that we are separate 'ein(s an# fly to(ether in spa"e out-ofthe-'o#y*) hsaum (.ay + pla"e my see# in you9 The see# is the see# of knowle#(e* )$ an# aim (represents the yoni)* +n the :alita Sahasranama it says she is to 'e worshippe# 'y ten mu#ras "%asamu#ra samara#hya"*

"
>y 7uestions is do !eo!le understand what are Sabda, S!arsha, ?u!a, ?asa and 6andha< Nan you show me any scri!ture where these five have been inter!reted as incorrectly as 7uoted above< Nan you really touch her who e=tends till infinity< Nan you really see her nude in reality has no form bein$ identical with :rahman< Nan you really iss that entity that holds entire macrocosm in her womb and you are not even as bi$ as the si%e of a microbe< Nan you really a!!ly !erfume on her body< #ow many litres of scent would you need decide first& 'nd the e!ic desire is you want to !ut your seed within her& I !ity this mentality& On to! of that, the author (is he a 6uru<) e=!lains the seed further as the seed of nowled$e& 2unny& It is you who want to !lace your seed of nowled$e in her who is the ori$inal source of all wisdom& #ow much nowled$e of her do you have< Vedas themselves say that they com!rehend only one9 fourth of Shiva and rest three 7uarters are even not now to Vedas" Shiva and Sha ti bein$ the same this fact revealed by Vedas is e7ually a!!licable on the divine mother as well" K!raa@a# !rasuutirbhuvanasya yonirvyaa!ta"n tvayaa e a!adena vishvam"h ED (P a shara C!anishad 3) DThou AShivaB art the -rinci!le of life; Thou the manifestation (the manifested world); Thou the source of the world; by a 7uarter hast Thou !ervaded this worldD" 'tharva Veda raises 7uestions, on the vastness of >ahadeva5s Gwala98in$a form which e=tends in !ast, !resent and future but still this hymn leaves only with 7uestionin$" It doesn5t have e=act estimate of >ahadeva5s vastness" D SyatT s ambhU !rU viveVa bhWtUm Syad bhaviyUd anvTXVaye 5sya E Y a yUd U$am U rot sahasradhTX SyatT s ambhU !rU viveVa tUtra ED ('tharvana veda ZIHIJ) D#ow far within the !ast hath S ambha (8in$aO!illar) entered< #ow much of him hath reached into the future< That one !art which he set in thousand !laces,[ how far did S ambha (lin$aO!illar) !enetrate within it<D

-urusha of -urusha su tam is ?udra (and not Vishnu as incorrectly !eo!le understand)" That hymn also sin$s the same $lory of Veda -urusha ?udra5s vastness as follows" :elow verse clearly says that all this that e=ists, is *ust a !art of him" Vedas and every scri!ture could describeO now only and only about this one !art of him" Dtri!TdWrdhva udait !urua !Tdo"asyehTbhavat !una E tato viva vya rTmat sTVanTnaVane abhi ED (?i$ Veda 10IJ0IQ) DThree !arts of his are beyond all this; all of this is but a !art" '$ain and a$ain, all that eats, and that eats not a!!eared from this one !art of #isD" ?udra and Cma bein$ one and the same, the above verses are e7ually a!!licable on divine mother 'mbi a as well" So, it should be enou$h to understand the fallacy that e=ists in the e=!lanation of ,evi -uram way of ,asamudras" 8et me e=!lain the meanin$ of the !ancha tanm'tras now" shabda, means the !erce!tion of sound, s!arsha, the !erce!tion of touch, ru!a, the !erce!tion of si$ht, rasa, the !erce!tion of taste, and $andha, the !erce!tion of smell" The whole universe of !erce!tion is constituted of these fivefold forces" What do we see in this world< What do we mean by .the world+< Whatever is called .world+ is nothin$ but what we hear, touch, see, taste, and smell" These five tanm'tras are the as!ects of S y, 'ri, 2ire, Water and Parth which are called as -ancha :hutas" This world which com!rises of these -ancha9:hutas is e=!erienced throu$h the five tanm'tras"The world vanishes for that !erson who is blind, deaf, dumb, who has lost his sense of touch and smell" These terms of San hya 1o$a have been ma!!ed with ,asa9mudras but with incorrect meanin$s" ,asa >udras, !robably mean to convey re7uests to ,evi to hel! the 1o$iOdevotee to transcend these material attribute levels and mer$e into the inner self (:rahman)" This loo s more !romisin$ understandin$ since this thou$ht is in sync with what Vedanta (C!anishads) convey& 's already analy%ed in the !revious section, 8alita Sahasranama (hence Sri Vidya) is a science of liberation throu$h /undalini awa enin$ which is an inward !rocess" So, the ,asa >udras also >CST be somethin$ inwards only" It loo s absurd to see someone as!irin$ to $et liberated by hand !ostures" ,efinitely the ten !ostures must be internal in nature" Pven the 8alita Sahasranama Stotram says $oddess 'mbi a loves the five

internal sacrifices" What these sacrifices are would be discussd in subse7uent sections, but for now, I am citin$ this reference to a$ain stress on the fact that Sri Vidya is entirely an internal !rocess of /undalini risin$ and has nothin$ to do with e=ternal $estures or !ostures" D!ancha ya$ya!riya ED (8S verse 1HQ) DWho loves the five sacrifices of the ri$htward Savya !athD" /undalini yo$a is not somethin$ alien to Vedas and C!anishads, and it is not a !ro!rietary science of Tantras" C!anishads have described this science in very much detail" @owhere in any of the u!anishads have ever been mentioned the hand $estures (mudras) for enli$htenment" >andala :rahmana C!anishad (1I02) describes the usa$e of fin$ers to close the ears for focusin$ inwards, for a >udra of meditation called as 5'ntar9 8a shyam5" 1o$a Tattwa C!anishad (1I3Fa) describes the use of hand for namas ara >udra before !racticin$ the /undalini 1o$a" The same C!anishad in verse (1I112) e=!lains the usa$e of both hands to hold the le$s (one by one) firmly while !racticin$ the D>ula9:andhaD !osture" 1o$a /undalini C!anishad (1I11b913a) describes the usa$e of the fore fin$ers and thumbs of both hands in bindin$ the Saraswati n'di and stirrin$ u! /undalini to enter Sushumna" The same u!anishad in verse no" (QRb9QJa) describes the usa$e of hand for Va*ra mudra" 1o$a /undalini C!anishad (2I3R93J) mentions about /aranyasam (hand $estures) while describin$ /hechari >udra !ractice" Varaha C!anishad (MIF19 F2) mentions about !lantin$ both hands evenly on the $round before !iercin$ /undalini u!wards" '!art from these there are no s!ecific usa$e of >udras found in C!anishads for /undalini risin$" #owever, there are numerous >udras that are used in /undalini 1o$a out of which !rimary ten as found in C!anishads are bein$ cited here" They are Dkhe"hari$ 'hu"hari$ ma#hyama$ shanmukhi$ sham'ha&i$ antarlakshyam$ 'ahir-lakshyam$ ma#hya-lakshyam$ taraka-yo(am$ an# amanaskha-yo(am" " Nould these be termed as dasa9mudras used for /undalini awa enin$< The answer is best nown to the really awa ened yo$is and not to the $urus flauntin$ their theoretical nowled$e" #owever I can say one thin$ that the hand $estures described in ,evi -uram te=ts are not su!!orted by C!anishads" Ps!ecially the meanin$s associated with the mudras are not at all su!!orted& remember that 8alita Sahasranama Stotram says she is difficult to be worshi!ed outwardly, and easily worshi!able O attainable throu$h inward focus" With this !oint in mind her name "%asha mu#ra samara#hya <" (:S &erse =>?) , should

mean, "She (Kun#alini) is worshipe#@arouse# with ten Ao(i" .u#ras"* This is because only throu$h /undalini risin$ one transcends the five elements of earth, fire, water, air and s y" In any case with !lain outward hand movements if someone could achieve transcendin$ !ower on the five elements, every Sri Vidya !ractitioner would have become a su!erhuman by now" The transcendence over sabdha, s!arsha, ru!a, rasa, $andha !ro!erties thereby elevatin$ a 1o$i to deathlessness over the five elements earth, water, air, fire and s y as described in ,asa9mudras is totally a yo$ic e=ercise" 1o$a Tatwa C!anishad details it out in the followin$ verses" Kdhaarayet!a\ncha$haTi aa# !?]ithivii*ayamaa!nuyaat"h E !?]ithiviiyo$ato m?]ityurna bhavedasya yo$ina# EL (1o$a Tattwa C!anishad RF9RHa) KWhen one !erforms ,harana Aat the re$ion of earthB there for a !eriod of two hours" #e (1o$i) then attains mastery over the earth" ,eath does not trouble him, since he has obtained mastery over the earth elementL" Kdhaarayet!a\ncha$haTi aa# sarva!aa!ai# !ramuchyate E tato *alaadbhaya"n naasti *ale m?]ityurna vidyate EL (1o$a Tattwa C!anishad J0) K:y !racticin$ ,harana there (in the re$ion of '!as) for a !eriod of two hours, he is freed from all sins" Then there is no fear for him from water and he does not meet his death in waterL" Kdhaarayet!a\ncha$haTi aa vahninaasau na daahyate EL (1o$a Tattwa C!anishad J3) K-racticin$ ,harana there (in the re$ion of Te*as) for a !eriod of two hours, he is not burnt by fire even thou$h his body enters the fire9!itL" Kdhaarayet!a\ncha$haTi aa vaayuvadvyoma$o bhavet"h "E mara@a"n na tu vaayoshcha bhaya> bhavati yo$ina# EL (1o$a Tattwa C!anishad JF9JHa) K-racticin$ ,harana there (in the re$ion of Vayu) for two hours, he enters Vayu and then ' asa"The 1o$in does not meet his death throu$h the fear of VayuL" Kaa aashadhaara@aattasya hecharatva> bhaved^_dhruvam"h E yatra utra sthito vaa!i su hamatyantamashnute E eva"n cha dhaara@aa# !a\ncha uryaadyo$ii vicha sha@a# E tato d?]i,hashariira# syaanm?]ityustasya na vidyate E brahma@a# !ralayenaa!i na siidati mahaamati# EL (1o$a Tattwa C!anishad 1019103) K:y !ractisin$ ,harana in the re$ion of ' asa, he obtains certainly the !ower of levitatin$ in the ' asa (ether)"Wherever he stays, he en*oys su!reme bliss" The

!roficient in 1o$a should !ractice these five ,haranas"Then his body becomes stron$ and he does not now death" That $reat9minded man does not die even durin$ the delu$e of :rahmaL" With res!ect to shruti v' ya (verses from C!anishad) I have shown a lo$ical correlation between the sounds of ,asa9>udras vi%" dram (shabda), drim (s!arsha), lim(ru!a), blum (rasa), sah($andha) and how they hel! in transcendin$ death and ac7uirin$ liberation and siddhis over the five elements" @ow I throw it as a challen$e to those aul'ch'rIs O v'm'charIs to !rove me how their understandin$ of tanm'tr's which they attach with lustful inter!retations (li e issin$ ,evi, touchin$ ,evi etc") can be derived from Shruti" I would acce!t Vedas, C!anishads, and also Itihasa (>ahabharata and ?amayana) and smritis (-uranas till they are in sync with Shruti)" :ein$ even more liberal let me also $ive them the o!tion of Tantras" -rove me that your inter!retation of lustful meanin$s to the tanm'tr's e=ist in some scri!ture" That scri!ture should be authoritative and authentic" One should not show me a write9 u! of any tom9dic 9harry" Gust by be$innin$ a write9u! with Ddevi uv'cha"""Ishwara uv'chaD, you cannot call it as a scri!ture, mind it& Nonclusion of this section is 9 With the above analysis we couldn5t find any correlation between hand !ostures and the lustful meanin$s associated with them" 'll >udras must be yo$ic and !lain hand movements without 1o$a accom!animent would result in no awa enin$" 1o$a reco$ni%es ten (and many) mudras of meditation and asanas usin$ which /undalini awa enin$ ha!!ens" Other than them none of the C!anishads reco$ni%e the $estures followed by aul'ch'rIs O v'm'ch'ris"So, in no way their lustful meanin$s can ever touch my chaste mother" >y mother :havani is the only chaste woman in this universe whom leavin$ Shiva none can ever touch" 'nd when truly self9reali%ed divine incarnations li e 'di Shan ara always called her as 5mother5 then who are these demons of /aliyu$a to $a%e at her with lustful vision<

Refuting panchamak(r( rituals of neo-kaul(ch(ra / -(m(ch(ra

@ow, let5s first understand what is meant by 5-anchama ara5" This is a combination of five rituals 5!ancha5 means 5five5 and 5ma aras5 mean five acts whose name be$ins with 5ma5 sound" They are 5madya (wine), 5m'msa (meat)5, 5matsya (fish)5, 5mudra5 and 5maithuna (co!ulation)" @ote that I have not $iven Pn$lish meanin$ for 5>udra5" That5s !ur!osely left out" Traditionally the definition

of 5mudra5 from tantra boo s is 5!arched $rain or rice5" #owever, I do not find any correlation between that word and it5s $iven meanin$ as $rain" I5ll tell you why later" 8alita Sahasranama Stotram clearly states she is attainable throu$h inner worshi!, D'ntarmu ha samaradhya bahirmu ha sudurlabha ED (8S verse 1F2) DShe is easily obtainable for those whose worshi! is based on their mind turned inwards, and She is difficult to be obtained by those who are outward focusedD" It states further that she loves five sacrifices as stated below" This cannot contradict the above verse hence lo$ically it has to be inter!reted in sync with the above one" Therefore these sacrifices must be internal" D!ancha ya$ya!riya ED (8S verse 1HQ) DWho loves the five sacrifices of the ri$htward Savya !athD" What are those five sacrifices< They are the 5-ancha >a aras5 but internal ones" :efore describin$ each ma ara one by one, let me first e=!lain the internal sacrifices" Shruti declares that the e=ternal universe (brahm'nda) is identical with the internal microcosm (!ind'nda) as stated below" K!i@,abrahmaa@,ayorai ya"n li\@$asuutraatmanora!i E svaa!aavyaa ?]itayorai ya"n sva!ra aashachidaatmano# EL (1o$a /undalini C!anishad 1IR1) KThe microcosm and the macrocosm are one and the same; so also the 8in$a and Sutratman, Svabhava (substance) and form and the self9res!lendent li$ht and NhidatmaL" The body is a fire altar, the fire Vaisvanara '$ni is the sacrificial fire, the inta e of breaths (!ranas) are also the form of fires which indles the inward Vaswanara and ee!s it always burnin$" food, water etc all items consumed are the #avis (libations)" 'nd the acce!tor of all this is the :rahman ('tman) who is verily Shiva"This has been clearly declared in Shruti and also in Itihasa" In this connection Sata!atha :rahmana of 1a*urveda states the followin$" Ktadyatrainamado manthanti E ta**Ttamabhi!rT iti !rTo vT a$nir*Ttamevainametatsanta *anayati sa !unara!Tniti tadenamantarTtmannTdhatte so 5syaio 5ntarTtmanna$nirThito bhavati EL (Shata!atha :rahmana 2I2I2I1M)

K@ow, when, on that occasion, they !roduce that (fire) by churnin$, then he (the sacrificer) breathes (blows) u!on it, when !roduced; for fire ('$ni) indeed is breath (!rana)I he thereby !roduces the one thus !roduced" #e a$ain draws in his breathI thereby he establishes that (fire) in his innermost soul; and that fire thus becomes established in his innermost soulL" The below verse clarifies in more detail about the -rana bein$ fires" Dte vT ete !rTT eva yada$naya E !rTodTnTvevThavan`yaVca $Trha!atyaVca vyTno 5nvThTrya!acana ED (Shata!atha :rahmana 2I2I2I1R) KThe (sacrificial) fires, assuredly, are those breathsI the ahavanbya and 6crha!atya are the out9breathin$ and the in9breathin$; and the 'nvchcrya9 !a ana is the throu$h9breathin$L" The same '$ni which is !resent within us (in our inward sacrificial altar as vaisv'nara) is also the same which is the '$ni of the sacrifice done in outward world as described in Taittiriya 'ranya a of 1a*urveda as follows" Kha"nsa# shuchishhadvasurantari shasaddhotaa vedishhadatithirduro@asat"h E n?]ishhadvarasad?]itasadvyomasadab*aa $o*aa ?]ita*aa adri*aa ?]ita> b?]ihat"h EL (Taittiriya 'ranya a 10"12"2"F) KThat which is the sun who abides in the clear s y, is the Vasu in the mid9re$ion, is the fire that dwells in the sacrificial altar and in the domestic hearth as the $uest, is the fire that shines in men and in the $ods, as the Soul, is the fire that is consecrated in the sacrifice, is dwellin$ in the s y as air, is born in water as submarine heat, is born in the rays of the sun, is the fire that is directly seen as the luminary, and is born on the mountain as the risin$ sun 0 that is the Su!reme Truth, the ?eality underlyin$ allL" :ha$awad 6ita says, Dbrahmar!anam brahma havir brahma$nau brahmana hutam E brahmaiva tena $antavyam brahma9 arma9samadhina E (:6" Q"2Q) D:rahman is the act of offerin$; :rahman is the constituent the offerin$s ($hee, food etc"); by :rahman (offerrer) it is offered into the fire (which is :rahman); :rahman is that which is to be reached by him who always sees :rahman in all his wor sD" :rihad9'ranya a u!anishad states that the !r'n's are verily :rahman"

K atama e o deva iti E !rTX a iti, sa brahma, tyad ity TXca ate E ( :rihadaranya a C!anishad III9J9J) K.Which is the one $od <+ .The -rana (ie" 'tman) is the only 6od; it is :rahman, which is called Tat (that)"+ The food is offered to -ranas by chantin$ .!r'n'ya sw'ha E a!'n'ya sw'ha""etc"L since -rana is verily the :rahman" This is confirmed in Nhhando$ya C!anishad as stated below" Dtadyadbha ta> !rathamam'$achNhettaddhomIyadme sa y'> !ratham'm'huti> *uhuy'tt'> *uhuy't!r'@'ya sv'heti !r'@ast?]i!yati ED (Nhhando$ya C!anishad VI1JI01) DTherefore, the food that comes first should be an ob*ect of oblation" That eater, when he offers the first oblation, should offer it with the >antra 5Svaha to -rana5; thereby -rana is satisfiedD" 8i ewise the subse7uent verses of this C!anishad narrate the oblations to other forms of -ranas (vi%" Vyana, samana, Cdana etc")" Why I5m !oint all this out here is to ma e one sim!le fact clear to everyone that whatever is ta en inside our body is an oblation where the body itself is a ya*na9 unda (sacrificial altar), and the 'tman is the one who consumes all the oblations" If someone is still not clear then let me hit the nail on its head and show one direct reference from 'nu96ita as s!o en by Sri /rishna to 'r*una in >ahabharata" DmanasT $amyate yac ca yac ca vTcT nirudhyate E Vrotre a VrWyate yac ca ca uT yac ca dVyate E s!arVena s!Vyate yac ca $hrTena $hrTyate ca yat E manaahTni sayamya hav`y etTni sarvaVa E $uavat !Tva o mahya d`!yate havyavThana E yo$aya*fa !ravtto me *fTnabrahma manodbhava E !rTastotro 5!Tna Vastra sarvatyT$asu da ia E armTnumantT brahmT me artTdhvaryu tastuti E ta!raVTstT tac chTstram a!avar$o 5sya da iT ED (>:# 1QI2MI1291M) DWhatever is thou$ht of by the mind, whatever is uttered by s!eech, whatever is heard by the ear, whatever is seen by the eye, whatever is touched by the (sense of) touch, whatever is smelt by the nose, constitute oblations of clarified butter which should all. after restraining the senses with the mind numberin$ the si=th, be !oured into that fire of hi$h merits which burns within the body, vi%", the Soul" The sacrifice constituted by 1o$a is $oin$ on as re$ards myself" The s!rin$ whence that sacrifice !roceeds is that which yields the fire of nowled$e" The u!ward life9wind -rana is the Stotra of that sacrifice" The downward life9wind '!ana is its Sastra" The renunciation of everythin$ is the e=cellent ,a shina of

that sacrifice" Nonsciousness, >ind, and Cnderstandin$99these becomin$ :rahma, are its #otri, 'dhwaryyu, and Cd$atri" The -rasastri, his Sastra, is truth" Nessation of se!arate e=istence (or Pmanci!ation) is the ,a shinaD" #old on& ,on5t come to a conclusion that this theory very much su!!orts the neo9 aul'ch'r'Ov'm'char' !ractices, since eatin$ meat, fish, drin in$ wine, etc" also could be considered inward libations" #old on, my !oint is not yet com!leted& 2irst thin$ is, the above verse from 'nu96ita should be enou$h to understand that 1o$ic (esoteric) sacrifice is the one which awards emanci!ation" 1es, eatin$ food is also a libation, but that !hysical, and not 1o$ic (esoteric)" Our scri!tures are very esoteric in nature and every statement of scri!tures has two meanin$s, one outward and another inward" Similarly every action in our ,harma is of two ty!es 9 a!ara (inferior), and !ar' (su!erior)" Of course yes, it is true that eatin$ flesh is also a libation to the inward fire (:rahman), however that is an inferior sacrifice, whereas it has another su!erior s!iritual meanin$ which is re$arded as a su!erior sacrifice" 8et me cite a very $ood e=am!le which would clarify all such doubts" We now that in /undalini yo$a !r'n'y'm' is hi$hly im!ortant ste!" It consist of three activities ?echa a (e=!iration of breath), -oora a (ins!iration of breath) and /umbha a (retention of breath)" @ow if you sim!ly $o by the literal meanin$s and ee! breathin$ in and out you can never achive /undalini awa enin$ because these have another vital as!ect at the inner meanin$ level as stated in the below verse from Shruti" ,ettachment with all e=ternal ob*ects is 5rPcha a5, $ainin$ s!iritual wisdom throu$h scri!tures is 5!Cra a5, and assimilation of that learned nowled$e as wisdom is 5 umbha a5" Kb'hyasthaviShaya"n sarva"n recha a# samud'h?]ita# E !Cra a"n sh'stravi*\n'na"n umbha a"n sva$ata"n sm?]itam"h EL (Varaha C!anishad MIMR) K(The $ivin$ out of) all e=ternal ob*ects is said to be ?echa a (e=!iration)" The (ta in$ in of the) s!iritual nowled$e of the Shastras is said to be -ura a (ins!iration) and (the ee!in$ to oneself of) such nowled$e is said to be /umbha a (or restraint of breath)L" @ow, if you thou$ht only by breathin$ and breath control you can achieve enli$htenment then !lease $o ahead with your fancies&

,id you understand now that even thou$h the !hysical !r'n'y'm' is necessary for /undalini awa enin$, yet, without succeedin$ to attain the inner meanin$ of that !r'n'y'm' it is of no use for the 1o$i" On similar lines, the sacrifice what we do within ourselves; there also we have inner meanin$ for each libation amon$ the 5!anchama 'r's5" These I5ll cover one by one in se!arate headin$s"

mady( /intoxicating drink0 as a li+ation for inward sacrifice

Nonsum!tion of >adya (wine) is hi$hly !rohibited by all the authentic scri!tures of #induism" #ere is a direct verse from 'nu96ita of >ahabharata which is a dialo$ between /rishna and 'r*una" #ere /rishna clearly says that drin in$ wine ruins a !erson" @o where in Vedas, C!anishads, >ahabharata, ?amayana, and -uranas has ever been said that wine can award liberation& (Show me !roofs from one of these scri!tures if you want to counter my challen$e)" Dabha ya bha aa caiva madya !Tna ca hanti tam E sa cTnna hanti tac cTnna sa hatvT hanyate budha ED (>:# 1QI2MIJ910) DThe eatin$ of food that should not be eaten, and the drin in$ of wine, ruin him" #e destroys the food (he ta es), and havin$ destroyed that food, he becomes destroyed himselfD" In another cha!ter, 1udhishthira as s :hishma the followin$ 7uerya nd in res!onse :hishma $ives many in*unctions but one of them I5m 7uotin$ here" D liVyamTneu bhWteu tais tair bhTvais tatas tata E dur$Ty atitared yena tan me brWhi !itTmaha E madhu mTsa ca ye nitya var*ayant`ha mTnavT E *anma!rabhti madya ca dur$Ty atitaranti te ED (>:# 12I111I1 and 21) D1udhishthira said, 5Nreatures are seen to be afflicted by diverse means and almost continually" Tell me, O $randsire, in what way can one overcome all those difficulties"5" :hishma said, D1hey that a+stain. from their +irth. from honey and meat and intoxicating drinks, succeed in overcomin$ all difficultiesD" 2rom our analysis in the !revious section we understand that whatever we do with our mind, whatever we consume with mouth, whatever we breathe, everythin$ is a libation in our internal 1o$ic sacrifice" 'nd also we have seen that 8alita Sahasranama Stotram (8S verse 1HQ) says D!ancha ya$ya!riya ED which means D6oddess loves five sacrificesD"

@ow, if you are a aul'ch'rI O v'm'ch'rI don5t blindly a!!ly your bo$us idea that $oddess is fond of your !hysical !anchama aras and don5t call them your libations offered to $oddess within yourself" '!!ly little brain and lo$ic" Scri!tures should @PVP? contradict each other in terms of universal rutam (law)" 8et5s here focus only on wine as!ect" 'll the scri!turescondemn the consum!tion of wine" 'nd :rahmanada -urana5s this 8alita Sahasranama Stotram N'@@OT claim that $oddess is fond of !eo!le who consume wine" If this is the case, then this hymn should be re*ected outri$ht& #owever, this cannot be the case since Sri Vidya is verily an essence concealed in Vedas and 8alitambi a is herself !resent in Shruti" So, here your neo9 aul'ch'r' inter!retation of Dwine as libationD stands refuted, and my inter!retation of madya would be correct" ,ivine nectar flows from Sahasrara which a 1o$i can drin when his /undalini (8alitambi a) meets with Shiva in Sahasrara" The followin$ verse from Shruti confirms the flow of nectar from Sahasrara" Kevamet'su n',IShu dharanti dashav'yava# E eva"n n',I$ati"n v'yu$ati"n *\n'tv' vicha Sha@a# E sama$rIvashira# 'ya# sa"nv?]it'sya# sunishchala# E n's'$re chaiva h?]inmadhye bindumadhye turIya am"h E sravantamam?]ita> !ashyennetr'bhy'"n susam'hita# EL (Varaha C!anishad MI31933a) KThus ten Vayus move in these @adis" ' wise man who has understood the course of @adis and Vayus should, after ee!in$ his nec and body erect with his mouth closed, contem!late immovably u!on Turya a ('tman) at the ti! of his nose, in the centre of his heart and in the middle of :indu and should see with a tran7uil mind throu$h the (mental) eyes, the nectar flowin$ from thereL" 'fter undalini awa enin$, a 1o$i $ains all siddhis (!owers) and wal s amon$ the man ind as the embodied form of the !arabrahman" #is immortality is obtained by the drin in$ divine nectar of Sahasrara" Klabhyate yadi tasyaiva yo$asiddhi# are sthitaa E atiitaanaa$ata"n vetti hecharii cha bhaved^_dhruvam"h E amarii"n ya# !ibennitya"n nasya"n urvandine dine E va*roliimabhyasennityamamaroliiti athyate EL (1o$a tattwa C!anishad 12H912R) KIf the 1o$a Siddhis are ever to be attained, he only has them within his reach" #e nows the !ast and the future and certainly moves in the air" #e who drin s of the nectar thus is rendered immortal day by day" #e should daily !ractice Va*roli" Then it is called 'maroli (which ma es him .amar+ (deathless)L"

This nectar is called as SO>' in Vedas, and this nectar (Soma) is verily the li7uid form of brahma*n'nam" This is why the Vedic deities li e Indra et al, are fond of drin in$ this soma" @ow, when a 1o$i en*oys this nectar for himself, he is a bho$i" '@d when he does ar!anam (offers) the bliss, siddhis, and all outcomes of this nectar (madya) to $oddess with the bent of mind of renunciation" That becomes ty'$am (sacrifice), and that offer where a 1o$i says, DO divine mother& what will I do with these siddhis and this nectar of immortality" I offer it on your lotus feet" It5s all yours, !lease acce!t&D Then this becomes the inward sacrifice (ya*n') where the yo$i has made the :rahman ('tman g 8alit'mbi a) the actual bho$i (consumer of sacrifice), and he became *ust the witnesser standin$ out merely as the instrument in this entire !rocess" That $ives final liberation" 'ttachment can never $ive liebration, and attachment with this or$asm of sahasrara and the bliss of the nectar of sahasrara are also the shac les which ee!s you away from the final sta! of liberation" 1ou $ive them u! to $oddess li e a sanyasi, and you would $et the su!reme state called emanci!ation& This is the internal meanin$ of mady' as one of the in$redient of !ancha9ya*n' O i$norant fellows of 'ul'ch'r' O v'm'ch'r' schoolD, come out of your illusions" ,evi would never acce!t your wine as a libation in your worshi!&

m(ms( /meat0 as a li+ation for inward sacrifice

8et me state here firmly that whosoever be your 6uru in this /aliyu$a, who tau$ht you that eatin$ >eat is $ood; !erha!s that !erson is not educated in the authentic scri!tures of #indusim" 2lesh eatin$ has always been condemned in the scri!tures" 'h& ,on5t !ounce at me sayin$ in vedic sacrifices #orses and otehr animals used to be illed" Well, you are ri$ht, but !robably you haven5t ever been told by anyone that that those animal sacrifices were lon$ bac converted from !hysical slau$hter to sacrifice by mantras by Sa$e '$astya" 'nd !eo!le from !revious /al!a also used to use beans and seeds as sacrificial animals and not the actual livin$ bein$s& (I5ll $ive !roofs don5t worry)" 8et me first educate you here what scri!tures say about meat eatin$"

:ut before I narrate what scri!tures say about animal sacrifice, one sim!le 7uestion I would li e to raise here, 8alita Sahasranama Stotram describes 'mbi a as fond of eatin$ all Satwi foods as 7uoted below" D!ayasanna!riya ED (8S verse JJ) which means, DWho li es offerin$s of -ayasa (mil mi=ed with rice)D" Dsni$dhau dana!riya ED (8S verse 101)D which means, DWho loves offerin$s of rice mi=ed with $heeD"" Dharidrannai a rasi a ED (8S verse10R)D, which means, DWho loves offerin$s of turmeric0 flavoured rice (-ulihora)D" @ow when she is so satwic food lover sweet mother of mine, how could she be fond of bali< (Sacrifice)< as the hymn says, "'alipriya <" (:S &erse*=B2)"9 I now the answer but foud some !eo!le misinter!retin$ Dbali !riyaD as fond of animal sacrifices hence derivin$ her attribute as fond of eatin$ flesh" #owever, let me ma e it clear !oint blan that D 'ali priya" means, "Who lo&es the sa"rifi"es(offerin(s) of #e&otees" " We have seen above that 8alitambi a is fond of all satwi food and nowhere she is shown as ta in$ deli$ht in eatin$ fish or meat"Therefore the understandin$ of aul'ch'rIs O v'm'ch'rIs in eatin$ meat and offerin$ it as one of the libations in D!ancha ya*nasD stands refuted& >oreover, her hymn itself be$ins with her first name as DsrI m't'D, which emans, DShe who is the divine mother of '88D" Then with what foolish lo$ic of yours you can *ustify illin$ an animal and thin that she would be ha!!y with you act< 'll animals are her own little ids as li e as you and me" If you really thin animal illin$ is a virtuous act, and she would be ha!!y to see you offerin$ her a livin$ bein$ in sacrifice, then I would as you why don5t you $o ahead and cho! off your son5s head and offer it as sacrifice to her< She would definitely be overcome by enormous $race for you since you have offered her your own son" Why don5t you eat flesh of your own id< -anchama ara of aul'ch'ra O v'm'ch'ra tal s about meat so why can5t you eat your own family member as humans are the su!erior creatures< ,id you understand the stu!idity of the lo$ic of eatin$ flesh< 'h& ,on5t start utterin$ curses u!on me" I will show you that the ancients seers have also condemned animal illin$ and meat eatin$" Who are you and your 6urus of this aliyu$a to stand in front of the wise men of ancient era< #ere are ST?O@6 !roofs from >ahabharata that animal illin$ was never

recommended and meat eatin$ was a sin" I5m !resentin$ the instructions of :hishma from >ahabharata" 'nd if need his credentials to see how nowled$eable that foremost of seers :hishma was, then here it is as s!o en by $oddess 6an$a herself" Dya !utram aama rT*as tva !urT mayy a*TyithT E sa te 5ya !uruavyT$hra nayasvaina $hTnti am E vedTn adhi*a$e sT$Tn vasihTd eva v`ryavTn E tTstra !aramevTso devarT*asamo yudhi E surTT samato nityam asurTT ca bhTrata E uVanT veda yac chTstram aya tad veda sarvaVa E tathaivT$irasa !utra surTsuranamas ta E yad veda VTstra tac cT!i tsnam asmin !ratihitam E tava !utre mahTbThau sT $o!T$a mahTtmani E i !arair anTdhyo *Tmada$nya !ratT!avTn E yad astra veda rTmaV ca tad a!y asmin !rati hitam E mahevTsam ima rT*an rT*adharmTrtha ovidam E mayT datta ni*a !utra v`ra v`ra $hTn naya ED (>:# 1IJQI3193F) D'nd 6an$a said, 5O ti$er amon$ men, that ei$hth son whom thou hadst some time before be$at u!on me is this" /now that this e=cellent child is conversant with all wea!ons, O monarch, ta e him now" I have reared him with care" 'nd $o home, O ti$er amon$ men, ta in$ him with thee" Pndued with su!erior intelli$ence, he has studied with Vasishtha the entire Vedas with their branches" S illed in all wea!ons and a mi$hty bowman, he is li e Indra in battle" 'nd, O :harata, both the $ods and the 'suras loo u!on him with favour" Whatever branches of nowled$e are nown to Csanas, this one noweth com!letely" 'nd so is he the master of all those Sastras that the son of 'n$iras (Vrihas!ati) adored by the $ods and the 'suras, noweth" 'nd all the wea!ons nown to the !owerful and invincible ?ama, the son of Gamada$ni are nown to this thy illustrious son of mi$hty arms" O in$ of su!erior coura$e, ta e this thy own heroic child $iven unto thee by me" #e is a mi$hty bowman and conversant with the inter!retation of all treatises on the duties of a in$"D :hishma studied under the tutela$e of the $reatest sa$es of #induism vi%" Vasishtha, :rihas!ati, Csanas (Shu racharya), and -arashurama" :hishma is one man who encom!asses the nowled$e of four celestial sa$es" @ow, thin before you try to say what your aul'ch'r' O v'm'ch'r' $uru said is correct and :hishma5s tal s were bo$us& 'lso, note that >ahabharata is an e!ic (itihasa), and is one of the authentic and authoritative scri!tures of #induism" 8et5s see what >ahabharata (boo 13Icha!ter 11F) says about illin$ animals" :hishma says the below thin$s" Deva vai !arama dharma !raVasanti man`ia E !rTT yathTtmano

5bh`T bhWtTnTm a!i te tathT E Ttmau!amyena $antavya buddhimadbhir mahTtmabhi E mtyuto bhayam ast`ti viduT bhWtim icchatTm E i !unar hanyamTnTnT tarasT *`vitTrthinTm E aro$T Tm a!T!TnT !T!air mTso!a*`vibhi E tasmTd viddhi mahTrT*a mTsasya !arivar*anam E dharmasyTyatana Vreha svar$asya ca su hasya ca E ahisT !aramo dharmas tathThisT !arata!a E ahisT !arama satya tato dharma !ravartate E na hi mTsa tTt ThTd u!alTd vT!i *Tyate E hatvT *antu tato mTsa tasmTd doo 5sya bha ae E svThT svadhTmta bhu*o devT satyTr*ava !riyT E ravyTdTn rT asTn viddhi *ihmTnta !arTyaTn ED (>:# 13I11FI2192H) DThe life9breaths of other creatures are as dear to them as those of one5s to one5s own self" >en endued with intelli$ence and cleansed souls should always behave towards other creatures after the manner of that behaviour which they li e others to observe towards themselves" It is seen that even those men who are !ossessed of learnin$ and who see to achieve the hi$hest $ood in the form of Pmanci!ation, are not free from the fear of death" What need there be said of those innocent and healthy creatures endued with love of life, when they are sou$ht to be slain by sinful wretches subsistin$ by slau$hter< 2or this reason, O monarch, now that the discardin$ of meat is the hi$hest refu$e of reli$ion, of heaven, and of ha!!iness" 'bstention from in*ury is the hi$hest reli$ion" It is, a$ain, the hi$hest !enance" It is also the hi$hest truths from which all duty !roceeds" 2lesh cannot be had from $rass or wood or stone" Cnless a livin$ creature is slain, it cannot be had" #ence is the fault in eatin$ flesh" The deities who subsist u!on Swaha, Swadha, and nectar, are devoted to truth and sincerity" Those !ersons, however, who are for $ratifyin$ the sensation of taste, should be known as Rakshasas wedded to the attribute of -assionD" :hishma says what the Sa!tarishis and Vala hilyas said in the same cha!ter as, Dsa!tarayo vTla hilyTs tathaiva ca mar`ci!T E amTsa bha aa rT*an !raVasanti man`ia ED(>:# 13I11FI11) DThe seven celestial ?ishis, the Vala hilyas, and those ?ishis who drin the rays of the sun, endued with $reat wisdom, a!!laud abstention from meatD" :hishma says what the Self9born >anu said in the same cha!ter as, Dna bha ayati yo mTsa na hanyTn na ca $hTtayet E ta mitra sarvabhWtTnT manu svTyambhuvo 5brav`t E adhya sarvabhWtTnT viVvTsya sarva*antuu E sTdhWnT samato nitya bhaven mTsasya var*anTt ED (>:# 13I11FI12913)

DThe Self9born >anu has said that that man who does not eat meat, or who does not slay livin$ creatures, or who does not cause them to be slain, is a friend of all creatures" Such a man is inca!able of bein$ o!!ressed by any creature" #e en*oys the confidence of all livin$ bein$s" #e always en*oys, besides, the a!!robation and commendation of the ri$hteousD :hishma says what the celestial sa$e @arada said in the same cha!ter as, DsvamTsa !aramTsena yo vardhayitum icchati E nTrada !rTha dharmTtmT niyata so 5vas`dati ED (>:# 13I11FI1Q) DThe ri$hteous9souled @arada has said that that man who wishes to increase his own flesh by eatin$ the flesh of other creatures, meets with calamityD :hishma says whosoever slau$hters or becomes indirect cause of slau$hter (as meat eater), his life s!an $ets reduced" DyasmTd $rasati caivTyur hisa TnT mahTdyute E tasmTd vivar*ayen mTsa ya icched bhWtim Ttmana ED (>:# 13I11FI31) DSince, O thou of $reat s!lendour, the !eriod of life is shortened of !ersons who slau$hter livin$ creatures or cause them to be slau$htered, it is clear that the !erson who wishes his own $ood should $ive u! meat entirelyD" @ow comes the most si$nificant as!ect ofthis analysis" Pven the Vedic sacrifices and animal illin$ has been sto!!ed by '$astya by once for all dedicatin$ all deers to 6ods usin$ his !ower of !enance" That5s how that $reat sa$e had !revented !hysical illin$ of animals and also made sure that Vedic rites assumed that animals were sacrificed and offered to deities" In this connection, :hishma in .aha'harata (.15 =B8==6) says, D!ra*TnT hita Tmena tv a$astyena mahTtmanT E Tra yT sarvadaivatyT !ro itTs ta!asT m$T E riyT hy eva na h`yante !itdaivatasaVritT E !r`yante !itaraV caiva nyTyato mT satar!itT E ida tu Vu rT*endra `rtyamTna mayTna$ha E abha ae sarvasu ha mTsasya manu*Tdhi!a E yas tu varaVata !Wra ta!as ta!yet sudTruam E yaV cai a var*ayen mTsa samam etan mata mama ED (>:# 13I11FIMF9MJ) D,esirous of benefitin$ all men, the hi$h9souled '$astya, by the aid of his !enances, dedicated, once for all, all wild animals of the deer s!ecies to the deities" #ence, there is no lon$er any necessity of sanctifyin$ those animals for offerin$ them to the deities and the -itris" Served with flesh accordin$ to the ordinance, the -itris become $ratified" 8isten to me, O in$ of in$s, as I tell thee

this, O sinless one" There is com!lete ha!!iness in abstainin$ from meat, O monarch" #e that under$oes severe austerities for a hundred years and he that abstains from meat, are both e7ual in !oint of merit" Pven this is my o!inionD" @ow, let me show you that even in !revious /al!as (e!ochs) Vedic sacrifices used to be conducted by considerin$ seeds as sacrificial animals and not the actual animals that were ever used to be slau$htered" Dya icchet !uruo 5tyantam TtmTna niru!adravam E sa var*ayeta mT sTni !rTinTm iha sarvaVa E VrWyate hi !urT al!e nT vr`hi maya !aVu E yenTya*anta ya*vTna !uyalo a!arTyaT ED (>:# 1QI11FIM29M3) DThat man who wishes to avoid calamity of every ind should abstain from the meat of every livin$ creature" It is heard that in the ancient /al!a,!ersons, desirous of attainin$ to re$ions of merit hereafter, !erformed sacrifices with seeds, re$ardin$ such animals as dedicated by themD" @ow, let5s see a conversation between @arada and Vasudeva" 8et5s see whom @arada !ays his homa$e" This e=tract is ta en from >ahabharata (:oo 13, cha!ter 32)" DnirmamT ni!ratidvadvT nirhr` T ni!rayo*anT E ahisT niratT ye ca ye ca satyavratT narT E dTntT Vama !arTV caiva tTn namasyTmi eVava ED (>:# 13I32I1R) D@arada said, 5I bow unto them that are devoted to the !ractice of the duty of compassion towards all creatures, that are firm in the observance of truth, that are self-restrained. and that are !eaceful in their behaviour5D" #o!e these many evidences are enou$h to understand that bali (Sacrifice) has always been condemned and eatin$ flesh ahs always been considered sinful by the hi$h souled sa$es and celestial seers" Therefore, 8alitambi a would never a$ree to see her child illin$ and eatin$ the flesh of another child of hers" If she is a real mother, she would never acce!t that" 'nd she indeed is a true mother hence called as DsrI m't'D" Therefore meat can not be considered as a valid libation for the internal sacrifice (1a*na) within our body" So, let5s understand what could be the meanin$ of Dm'msaD which constitutes as the libation in !anchaya*nas which are loved by lalitambi a" In reality, all those vices vi%" 'ma (lust), rodha (an$er), lObha ($reed), mOha (attachment) etc" are all of the cate$ories of animal instincts" @ot only these, but in fact all the vices that we have in ourselves, are all li e wild animals which

sub*u$ate and defat our virtuous self" So, sacrificin$ all these animals of esoteric nature to the su!reme $oddess and offerin$ their meat throu$h the internal libation is what is meant by Dm'msaD of D!ancha ma 'raD" @ow, how do we offer these libations is the 7uestion" Sacrifice 'ma (lust) usin$ the celestial sword called as brahmacharya (celibacy), sacrifice rOdha (an$er) throu$h the sword called as sh'nti (!eacefulness), sacrifice mOha (attachment or infatuation) with the wea!on called vair'$yam (dis!assion or detachment)" and so on so forth" 'nd then offer the slau$htered !ieces to the inward fire (:rahman which is 8alitambi a)" ,id you note that all these wea!ons what we discussed are all internal in nature as li e as the animals (vices)" So, you are essentially doin$ all these slau$hterin$ of vices internally" 'nd that5s the !oint which ma es it in a$reement to our !revious analysis that all !ancha9ya*nas (five sacrifices) are inward in nature" This is the internal meanin$ of m'ms' as one of the in$redient of !ancha9ya*n' O i$norant fellows of Dneo9 aul'ch'r'Ov'm'ch'r'D school, come out of your illusions" ,evi would never acce!t your !ieces of meat as a libation in your worshi!&

m(tsy( /fish0 as a li+ation for inward sacrifice

Well, meat is a su!er set wherein fish also comes as one of the subsets" So, it5s absurd to consider the meanin$ of mastya as fish in e=ternal sense as the aul'ch'rIs O v'm'ch'rIs consider& 1eah, yeah I now that there are Tantra te=ts which whose translations in Pn$lish called matsya as fish& I would say those translators were not com!etent enou$h to $ras! the esoteric meanin$s intended in Tantras" flesh of a fish (>atsya) also comes under the cate$ory of >eat (mamsa), so lo$ically it doesn5t fit to see fish se!arately as one of the m' 'r' in !anchama 'r's" So, what coudl be the real meanin$ of fish, is the 7uestion now" ?emember that we are analy%in$ the !ancham' 'r's as internal oblations in the inward sacrifice (ya*na) which awards us liberation" 8et me e=!lain what it means by 5m'tsya5" /undalini 1o$a re7uires to be !erformed with few 1o$a9'sanas (1o$ic !ostures)" >aha91o$a is the !rocedure called out in C!anishads which com!rises" Pntire /undalini 1o$a is called as 5>aha 1o$a5 and it com!rises of four sub9divisions

vi%" >antra 1o$a, 8aya 1o$a, #atha 1o$a, and ?a*a 1o$a"In this seris, one needs to sit in various 1o$a9'sanas vi%" -admasana, siddhasana, etc" When a 1o$i is seated in !adm'san' or siddh'sana, his body !osture resembles the form of a fish" The folded le$s resemble the tail9fin of a fish, the erect body resembles the truc of a fish, the two hands resemble the fins of a fish and head resembers the head of a fish" 1ou can see any ima$e of a dol!hin and com!are it with the ima$e of a 1o$i in !adm'san'" With this yo$ic !osture resemblin$ m'tsya, the yo$ic does the !r'n'y'm', and all other /undalini risin$ tric s" These ste!s are the libations which he offers into the sacrifice called as /undalini 1a*na, and as a result of these libations 8alitambi a as /undalini rises u!wards" 'nother inter!retation is, for /undalini to rise u!wards, breath reversal should be done" That means !r'na should be channeli%ed as a!'n' and vice versa" In short, !r'n'yama hel!s a yo$i to do these breath channeli%in$ e=cercise into the id' and !in$'l' nerves" Within these two n'dIs, the !r'nas when channeli%ed usin$ rPcha a, !oora a, and umbha a techni7ues, the !r'n's move li e fish throu$h the coiled id' and !in$al' n'dIs" So, the resemblance of the movement of !r'n's with fish is termed as 5matsy') and is considered as an oblation in the sacrifice of /undalini awa enin$" We have already seen in !revious sections also that Sata!atha :rahmana clearly states that !r'n's are the libations which indle the internal fire" Internal fire within us is same but called by various names based on the functions !erformed" While di$estin$ food it is called Vaisvanara, which considerin$ it as consciousness it is called as Nhida$ni (/udnalini), and also caleld S hambha and Gatavedas in Vedas" Dte vT ete !rTT eva yada$naya E !rTodTnTvevThavan`yaVca $Trha!atyaVca vyTno 5nvThTrya!acana ED (Shata!atha :rahmana 2I2I2I1R) KThe (sacrificial) fires, assuredly, are those breathsI the ahavanbya and 6crha!atya are the out9breathin$ and the in9breathin$; and the 'nvchcrya9 !a ana is the throu$h9breathin$L" Therefore when we reverse our normal breath cycle usin$ !r'n'y'm' and channeli%e them as fuels in the inward sacrifice they indle the 'tman (2ire) by circulatin$ lime fish (matsy')" Therefore this is the matsy' (fish) which a 1o$i

offers as a sacrificial libation to the $oddess 8alitambi a ('tman) as one of the in$redient of !anchama 'r'" therefore a$ain it should be noted by aul'ch'rIs O v'm'ch'rIs that eatin$ fishes daily for the entire lifetime would never brin$ you liberation, !eriod&

mudr( /postures0 as a li+ation for inward sacrifice

I don5t understand why do !eo!le and also Translated te=ts of Tantra associate >udra with $rains or !arched rice" There is no lo$ic in eatin$ $rains for becomin$ elevated s!iritually" 'lso for inward sacrifice I don5t see any connection between !arched rice or $rains and internal libation" Obviously, durin$ the /undalini 1o$a !ractice you would not eat rice balls, would you< So, even thou$h inta e of food is a libation, but when we tal with res!ect to the 1a*na called /undalini91o$a, eatin$ is not one of the activity durin$ this yo$a" >udra in Sans rit means !osture" There are various >udras and >andhas mentioned in 1o$a related C!anishads which are !re9re7uisite ste!s for awa enin$ the /undalini" Without !racticin$ these >undras and :andhas /undalini risin$ wouldn5t ha!!en" Some of the mudr's and bandhas are listed below" These mudr's are !ostures for meditation, !r'n'y'm' and the bandh's are related to 1o$a" "khe"hari$ 'hu"hari$ ma#hyama$ shanmukhi$ sham'ha&i$ antarlakshyam$ 'ahirlakshyam$ ma#hya-lakshyam$ taraka-yo(am$ an# amanaskha-yo(am* mCla'an#ha$ jalan#hara-'an#ha$ &ajrol+-mu#rA$ amarol+-mu#rA" and many more" So, when you !ractice these mudr's as !re9re7uisite libations in your inward ya*na (sacrifice) for undalini awa enin$, you would succeed in unleashin$ the ser!ent !ower u!wards" So, in a way you offer these libations to $oddess and she rises u!wards bein$ !leased with your sacrifice (ya*na)"

maithuna /copulation0 as a li+ation for inward sacrifice

'ha& I bein$ a $reat admirer of celibacy and a $reat fan of :hishma (the mi$hty $randsire who was an eternal celibate), and a $reat fan of Sri rama for !reachin$ the one9woman9man !rinci!le (e '!atnIvrat'9dharmam) this section of maithuna (co!ulation) is my favorite section for refutation&

I have always li ed men of !rinci!les, and that5s why I love followin$ :hishma5s !ath till marria$e and after that would love to follow Sri ?ama5s teachin$" In fact all the authentic scri!tures !reach the same" Pither scri!tures $lorify :rahmacharya (celibacy) or they advocate for bein$ faithful to one wife" 'nd believe me, these two are the only !aths for a ha!!y life" #induism has numerous e=am!les where !eo!le tried to a!!ease their lust by satisfyin$ it, but reali%ed very late that it cannot be satiated with fulfillin$ the desire, rather it can be illed by self9restraint" ?ead in$ 1ayati5s story from >ahabharata, which is an e=cellent lesson to learn from his life" 'fter s!endin$ hundreds of years tryin$ to satisfy his lust by a!!easin$ it, at last he reali%ed that there is no end to it" It can be !ut to culmination only by abstainin$ from it" -assion is li e a fire , you cannot !ut it out by throwin$ $asoline on it" It needs water to !ut it out" 'nd I never understood the stu!id lo$ic of aul'ch'rIs O v'm'ch'rIs behind the Dmaithun'D !ractice" 2irst of all there cannot be any liberation throu$h co!ulation" 8iberation can be achieved throu$h :rahmaharya thou$h" Secondly, there is no !oint in co!ulatin$ with multi!le women of various races as followed by them"If someone !refers the $ruhasth'shram' (house9holder life), is it not sufficient to en$a$e with one wife< Nan5t she fulfil all your so called s!iritual needs in aul'ch'ra
your !ractices<

!ractices< Why do you need multi!le 1o$inis for

'nd I found in that social networ in$ forum what i discussed at the be$innin$ of this article, that someone was fond of !ostin$ the !ictures of some $urus statin$ fondly that those men !racticed !anchama 'r's with many 1o$ini disci!les of their school" I felt bad seein$ those !osts also" In the name of 5$uru9business5 where is my sacred #induism headin$ at< 6od nows the answer& Well, let me start the refutation !rocess now&

If liberation was so easy by a!!easin$ your animal desires and by eatin$ every filth that !leases you, then :ha$wad 6ita would not have said that out of thousands of as!irants of liberation only one attains it" DmanushyTnhTmX sahasreshu E aVcid yatati siddhaye E yatatTm a!i siddhTnTmX E aVcin mTmX vetti tattvatahh ED (:6 HI03) DOut of many thousands amon$ men, one may endeavor for !erfection, and of those who have achieved !erfection, hardly one nows >e in truthD"

If !hysical maithuna was really ca!able of awardin$ liberation, then all animals, and all !rostitutes would have become liberated in every era of /aliyu$a" #owever, liberation is not that easy achievement" 8iberation cannot be $ained without :rahmacharya, :rahma*nana and con7uerin$ of your senses and mind" 8et me !ut an ar$ument before you all" If co!ulation could have really been ca!able of liberatin$ the cou!le, then why was that $reat science never discoursed by $reat seer :hishma in the entire >ahabharata< ?emember that :hishma narrated multi!le cha!ters on s!iritual sub*ects to 1udhishthira, entire two !arvas of >ahabharata vi%" Santi !arva and 'nusasana -arva are totally their conversations only" #owever, nowhere such a $reat science has ever been discussed" Why< 'h& ,on5t say Dthis is a secret science and needs to be tau$ht only to eli$ible candidatesD" If you said that then answer me that who out of the billions of men of this /aliyu$a do you thin is far more eli$ible that 1udhishthira of $reat nowled$e< If 1udhishthira was not eli$ible for $ainin$ such a nowled$e, then who else is eli$ible in today5s 1u$a< Or in other words, weren5t there any sin$le eli$ible candidate in /rita, treta and ,wa!ara yu$as that these to!ics are bein$ tau$ht now in this /aliyu$a to these $reat men of unrestrained senses< 'lso, don5t say D:hishma was not aware of this secret scienceD, because you would become dumbstruc if I 7uestion you how can a disci!le of vasishtha, :rihas!ati, Shu racharya and -arashurama be devoid of that nowled$e< 'nother ar$ument that I want to raise is, if liberation would have been so easy with union, then why did Sanat /umaras ind of $reat sa$es too the !ath of celibacy< ,efinitely somethin$ must be fishy here, ri$ht< ,efinitely Tantra is a $reat science but it >CST be esoteric in nature and it must not have tal ed in true sense of intercourse while tal in$ about >aithuna" I5ll !rove this" Dnanarna&a-tantra (2286E) says, "the union of male an# female is the true yo(a" " 'nd you aul'ch'rIs O v'm'ch'rIs stu!idly followed it5s literal meanin$ and started co!ulatin$ with females, ri$ht< ,o you even have the sli$htest awareness that even C!anishads state the same truth and this is a fact indeed< ,on5t *um! with *oy, I meant to say it is truth however not on literal sense" It has its inner meanin$ which is the truth" That male and female are within everyone of us irres!ective of our $ender, and they are Shiva and Sha ti, and not you are your se=ual !artner& In this connection Shruti has am!le no" of references I5ll 7uote only few as follows" K!ra ?]ityashhTa aruu!a"n cha sthaana"n $achchhati u@,alii E ro,ii ?]itya

shiva"n yaati ro,ii ?]itya viliiyate EL (1o$a /undalini C!anishad HQ) K/undalini assumes the ei$ht forms of -ra riti (matter) and attains Shiva by encirclin$ him and dissolves itself in ShivaL" See below whose union is the $iver of final bestitude (liberation) and decide whether you still want to slee! with your !artner " Krudra$ranthi"n cha bhittvaiva amalaani bhinatti shhaT"h E sahasra amale sha ti# shivena saha modate E saivaavasthaa !araa *\neyaa saiva nirv?]iti aari@ii iti EL (1o$a /undalini C!anishad 1IRF) KThen it !ierces ?udra$ranthi, after, (all) the si= lotuses (or cha ras)" Then Sa ti is ha!!y with Shiva in Sahasrara /amala (1000 lotuses seat)" This should be nown as the hi$hest 'vastha (su!reme state) and it alone is the $iver of final beatitudeL" @ow did you understand why .ahesh&ara-tantra says$ "'ein( in lo&e is a'o&e the worl#"9 Where does the actual love ha!!en< 'nswer is 9 sahasr'ra" 'nd it is the sahasr'r' which is above the world and is called as the indestructible su!reme station (!arama !adam) in Vedas" So, Shiva and Sha ti5s bein$ in love is above the world obviously" That5s true indeed& Therefore the su!reme ecstacy that is e=!erienced by a 1o$i when his /undalini sha ti unites herself with Shiva in sahasr'r', that or$asm is the $iver of *oy and liberation both" This is why 8alitambi a and Sri Vidya !ath is said to be "'h-(am-ksha pra#Ayini" (that path whi"h (i&es 'liss an# li'eration 'oth) " This is the internal bho$a (or$asm of sahasr'ra) and not e=ternal one" This !oint is also hi$hly misinter!reted by aul'ch'rIs O v'm'ch'rIs" When you $enerously $ive away this su!reme ecstasy to the divine mother, that becomes ty'$am ($ivin$ away) and it acts as the oblation (havis) in your internal !anchaya*n' (sacrifice)" 'nd this offerin$ of yours when $iven to the $oddess, your !ancha9ya*n' (five internal sacrifices) becomes com!leted" Then $oddess awards you the su!reme state of emanci!ation" This is the meanin$ of maithun'm (co!ulation) and it has nothin$ to do with your intercourse with any e=ternal !artner" Well, I now, after readin$ this where you aul'ch'rIs O v'm'ch'rIs would come from" 1es, your 51oni Tantra5 boo definitely states !hysical worshi! of 51oni5 and co!ulation, but I would say that 1oni Tantra is not an authentic tantra scri!ture" It is almost JJi bo$us and only one verse I found as valid which I5ll discuss here"

'!art from this verse all other verses are bo$us and I5ll refute them in a se!arate section alto$ether" 1oni Tantra says, DOne should only cou!le with the yoni that bleeds ED (1oni TantraI !atala9M), Well if you inter!reted in literally then it is a $rievous sin to co!ulate durin$ the first Q days of menses cycle as !er Shiva 6ita from -adma -urana and also as !er the scri!ture called 5/ama Shastram5" So, why did I call this verse as a fact< I called it as true with an esoteric sense which I5ll e=!lain now" Irres!ective of your $ender, whether you are a male of female or an eunuch; you have all the seven cha ras within you, and mCl'dh'ra cha ra which e=ists at the base of your s!ine, is in fact a 1oni of Sha ti, mCl'dh'ra cha ra is of trian$ular sha!e for the same reason" It is of red color symboli%in$ the sho6itam (female re!roductive fluid which is usually identified with blood)" In the same mCl'dh'ra !r'n's which are veily called as shu lam in C!anishads mi= and rise u!wards alon$ with undalini sha ti durin$ the awa enin$ yo$a" The 'm' hy' -eetham is also the mCl'dh'ra, the !assion related teachin$s of tantra are all actually about union of male9female !rinci!le in mCl'dh'ra and that male9female are shiva9Sha ti only" 2ools are they who consider all these as outward instructions and start en$a$in$ in co!ulation with women" So, this is what is meant by cou!lin$ of male as!ect with a bleedin$ female yoni" 8et me show what C!anishad says about this" Dyonimadhye mahaa shetre *a!aabandhuu asa"nnibham"h Era*o vasati *antuunaa"n deviitattva"n samaav?]itam"h E ra*aso retaso yo$aadraa*ayo$a iti sm?]ita# E a@imaadi!ada> !raa!ya raa*ate raa*ayo$ata# E !raa@aa!aanasamaayo$o *\neya"n yo$achatushhTayam"h ED (1o$atattwa C!anishad 13F913R) DIn the $reat tem!le of the middle of yoni (the female or$an) the !rinci!le of the ,evi, which is red li e #ibiscus flower lives as ?a*as in all bein$s" The mer$er of this ra*as with the male !rinci!le is called ?a*a 1o$a" 's a result of ?a*a 1o$a, the 1o$i $ets all the occult !owers li e 'nima" 1ou have to understand that all these four ty!es of 1o$as are nothin$ but the mer$er of -rana, '!ana and SamanaD" Ddeha"n shivaalaya> !ro ta"n siddhida"n sarvadehinaam"h E $udame,hraantaraalastha> muulaadhaara"n tri o@a am"h E shivasya *iivaruu!asya sthaana"n taddhi !racha shate E yatra u@,aliniinaama !araa

sha ti# !ratishhThitaa E yasmaadut!adyate vaayuryasmaadvahni# !ravartate E yasmaadut!adyate binduryasmaannaada# !ravartate E yasmaadut!adyate ha"nso yasmaadut!adyate mana# E tadetat aamaruu!aa hya> !iiTha"n aama!hala!radam"h ED (1o$atattwa C!anishad 1FR91H1) D2or all those who have a body, their body is the tem!le of Shiva" It can $ive them occult !owers" The trian$ular !art in between the anus and !enis is called the mooladhara" This is the !lace where Shiva lives as a life $ivin$ force" There the -arasha thi called /undalani lives" 2rom there wind is !roduced" The fire is also !roduced from there" 2rom there only the sound 5#amsa5 and the mind are also !roduced" This !lace which would $ive whatever is as ed for is called /ama hya !eetam (the seat of !assion)D" So, this maithuna is also an internal sacrifice" -eo!le blindly follow whatever is written in Tantras instead of havin$ the discrimination of what5s true scri!tural statement and what could be later inter!olation" 8et me e=tend this discussion further to showcase some other im!ortant as!ects around this to!ic on 5maithun'5" Well, @O@P of the scri!tures of #induism ever said that co!ulation is meritorious" yes it is meritorious, but O@81 when it is used ri$hteously for $ainin$ children and continuin$ your race" Why is it that not even once >ahabharata discussed the $lories of maithun'< 1ou cannot answer& #owever, i can show you the $lories of brahmacharya from >ahabharata" 8et me show you what learned seers and celestial sa$es have to say about it& :hishma who had no other !arallel on earth e=ce!t /rishna in nowled$e who could stand before him, such a $reat seer san$ the $lory of :rahmacharya to1udhishthira in res!onse to his 7uery as follows" Dsva armaniratTnT ca VWrTT cT!i i !halam E satye ca i !hala !ro ta brahmacarye ca i !halam E brahmacarya dahed rT*an sarva!T!Tny u!Tsitam E brThmaena viVeea brThmao hy a$ir ucyate E !ratya a ca tavT!y etad brThmaeu ta!asviu E bibheti hi yathT Va ro brahma cTri !radharita E tad brahmacaryasya !halam `Tm iha dVyate ED (>:# 13IHQIM, 3F93H) D1udhishthira as ed, DWhat are the fruits that have been declared to attach to the observance of !urity and to the !ractice of :rahmacharya<D D:hishma said, 58isten now to me, O lord of Parth, as I e=!ound to thee the merits of :rahmacharya" 1hat man. who practices the -ow of Brahmacharya from his +irth to the time of his death. know. 2 king. has nothing unattaina+le, >any millions of ?ishis are residin$ in the re$ion of :rahma" 'll of them, while here, were devoted to Truth, and self9restrained and had their -ital

seed drawn up" The vow of :rahmacharya, O in$, duly observed by a :rahmana, is sure to burn all his sins" The :rahmana is said to be a bla%in$ fire" In those :rahmanas that are devoted to !enances, the deity of fire becomes visible" If a :rahmacharin yields to wrath in conse7uence of any sli$ht the chief of the deities himself trembles in fear" Pven this is the visible fruit of the vow of :rahmacharya that is observed by the ?ishis5"D Sanat9Su*ata who is one amon$ the umaras (:rahma5s mind born children), and who is foremost of the celestial sa$es and !rece!tor of even the celestials; let5s see what this seer had said" This e=cer!t is from 5sanat9su*'tIya $It'5 from >ahabharata which is a hi$hly revered $It'; even 'di Shan ara wrote commentary on this $It'" @ote it very carefully that here Sanat9Su*ata says that liberation or :rahma*nanam is attainable only by :rahmacharya" This must be a *olt on aul'ch'rIs O v'm'ch'rIs" Dnaitad brahma tvaramTena labhya; yan mT !cchasy abhihyasy at`va E avya tavidyTm abhidhTsye !urT`; buddhyT ca teT brahmacaryea siddhTm ED (>:# MIQQI2) DSanat9su*ata said, 5That 1rahman about which thou as est me with such *oy is not to be attained soon" 'fter (the senses have been restrained and) the will hath been mer$ed in the !ure intellect, the state that succeeds in one of utter absence of worldly thou$ht" Pven that is nowled$e (leadin$ to the attainment of 1rahman)" It is attainable only +y practising Brahmacharya"3D @ow, carefully read the below conversation between ,hritarashtra and Sanat9 Su*ata where the former in7uires how nowled$e of :rahman and immortality (liberation from births and deaths) is attained, the latter answers that it is throu$h :rahmacharya" This e=tract is also from >ahabharata (boo M cha!ter QQ)" Davya tavidyTm iti yat sanTtan` ; brav`i tva brahmacaryea siddhTm E anTrabhyT vasat`hTrya Tle; atha brThmayam amtatva labheta ED (>:# MIQQI3) D,hritarashtra said, 5Thou sayest that the nowled$e of 1rahman dwelleth of itself in the mind, bein$ only #is"o&ere# by 1rahma"harya; that is dwellin$ in the mind, it re7uires for its manifestation no efforts (such as are necessary for wor ) bein$ manifested (of itself) durin$ the see in$ (by means of 1rahma"harya)" #ow then is the immortality associated with the attainment of 1rahman<5 DTcTrya yonim iha ye !raviVya; bhWtvT $arbha brahmacarya caranti E ihaiva te VTstra TrT bhavanti; !rahTya deha !arama yTnti yo$am ED (>:# MIQQIF)

DSanat9su*ata said, 5Thou$h residin$ in and inherent to the mind, the nowled$e of 1rahman is still unmanifest" It is by the aid of the !ure intellect and 1rahma"harya that, that nowled$e is made manifest" Indeed, havin$ attained to that nowled$e, Ao(ins forsa e this world" It is always to be found amon$ eminent !rece!tors" I shall now discourse to thee on that nowled$e"5 2urther, note what Sanat9Su*ata !roclaims& Dbrahmaiva vidvTs tenTbhyeti sarva; nTnya !anthT ayanTya vidyate ED (>:# MIQQI1Hb) D1here is no other path /than Knowledge or the attainment of Brahman0 leading to emancipation4" So, how come the !aths of eatin$ flesh, drin in$ wine, and co!ulation ever lead you to emanci!ation< 2ood for thou$ht for all aul'ch'rIs Ov'm'ch'rIs, isn5t it< Well, let5s !roceed ahead" Sanat9Su*ata furtehr states the 7ualities of a sinful !ersona dn the 7ualities of a ri$hteous :rahmana" See what that seer has to say" "He that regardeth sensual gratification as the end of life $ he that is self"on"eite#$ he that 'oasteth ha&in( ma#e a (ift$ he that ne&er spen#eth$ he that is weak in min#$ he that is (i&en to self-a#miration$ an# he that hateth his own wife$--these seven are counted as wicked men of sinful habits * Fi(hteousness$ truth$ as"eti"ism$ self-restraint$ "ontentment$ mo#esty$ renun"iation$ lo&e of others$ (ift$ a")uaintan"e with the s"riptures$ patien"e$ an# for(i&eness$--these twel&e are the pra"ti"es of a 1rahmana*"* (.15 G84G) 'nd here is the nuclear wea!on by Sanat9Su*ata" 't least now !eo!le should o!en their blindfolds" "Self-restraint$ renun"iation$ an# knowle#(e$--in these resi#e eman"ipation"* (.15 G84G) @ow, let5s see a conversation between @arada and Vasudeva" 8et5s see whom @arada !ays his homa$e" This e=tract is ta en from >ahabharata (:oo 13, cha!ter 32)" Dsamya$ dadati ye ceTn TntT dTntT *itendriyT E sasya dhana iti $TV ca tTn namasyTmi yTdavaED (>:# 13I32I10) @arada said, DI worshi! them that have become irresistible by studyin$ the Vedas, that are elo7uent in discoursin$ on the scri!tures, that are o+ser-ant of

the -ow of Brahmacharyya, and that are always devoted to the duties of officiatin$ at the sacrifices of others and of teachin$ disci!lesD" DnirmamT ni!ratidvadvT nirhr` T ni!rayo*anT E ahisT niratT ye ca ye ca satyavratT narT E dTntT Vama !arTV caiva tTn namasyTmi eVava ED (>:# 13I32I1R) DI bow unto them, O /esava, that are conversant with :rahman, that are endued with nowled$e of the Vedas, that are attentive to the a$$re$ate of three, that are free from cupidity, and that are ri$hteous in their behaviourD" 2urther in another cha!ter :hishma says that throu$h :rahmacharya one attains emanci!ation" Dyad ida brahmao rW!a brahmacaryam iti smtam E !ara tat sarvabhWtebhyas tena yTnti !arT $atimED (>:# 12I20HIH) D:hishma said, 5That which is called Brahmacharya (reli$ion of abstention or yo(a) is re$arded as the means of attainin$ to :rahma" That is the foremost of all reli$ions" It is by the !ractice of that reli$ion that one obtains the hi$hest end (&iH", Pmanci!ation)5D" 2urther >ahabharata says, DTVrameu ca sarveu dama eva viViyate E yac ca teu !hala dharme bhWyo dTnte tad ucyate E anasWyT amT VTnti satoa !riyavTditT E satya dTnam anTyTso naia mTr$o durTtmanTm ED (>:# 213IR and 1H) DIn all the (four) modes of life, the practice or self-restraint is distinguished a+o-e all other -irtues" The fruits of self9restraint are much $reater than those obtainable in all the modes of life" 1hey. howe-er. that are of wicked soul never beta e themselves to the !ath re!resented by benevolence, for$iveness, tran7uillity, contentment, sweetness of s!eech, truth, liberality and comfort" 1heir path consists of lust and wrath and cupidity and envy of others and boastfulness"D" Sa$e :haradwa*a clearly refutes the Tantric belief that the *oy of co!ulation is the hi$hest bliss a sadha a should crave for" See, how :haradwa*a thwarts this statement clearly" DbharadvT*a uvTca E yad etad bhavatTbhihita su hTnT !aramT striya iti tan na $hn`ma E na hy eTm `T mahati sthitTnTm a!rT!yaia $uaviVeo na cainam abhilasanti E VrWyate ca bha$avT s trilo a d brahmT !rabhv e T ` tihati E brahmacTr` na Tmasu he v TtmTnam avadadhTti E a!i ca bha$avTn

viVveVvaromT !ati Tmam abhivartamTnam ana$atvena Vamam anayat E tasmTd brWmo na mahTtmabhir aya !rati$h`to na tv ea tTvad viVio $ua iti naitad bha$avata !ratyemi ED (>:# 12I1R3I10) D:haradwa*a said, 51ou have said that ha!!iness (of se=ual $ratification) is the hi$hest ob*ect, I do not com!rehend this" This attribute of the soul that (you say) is so desirable is not sou$ht by the Fishis who are re$arded to be en$a$ed in somethin$ !romisin$ a hi$her reward" It is heard that the Nreator of the three worlds, &iH", the !uissant :rahman, lives alone, observant of the vow of 1rahma"harya" #e never devotes himself to the ha!!iness obtainable from the $ratification of desire" 'lso, the divine >aster of the universe, the lord of Cma, reduced Kama (the deity of desire) to e=tinction" 2or this reason, we say that ha!!iness is not acce!table to hi$h9souled !eo!le" @or does it a!!ear to be a hi$h attribute of the SoulD" 6andherva said to 'r*una, when 'r*una defeated him" 'ctually 6andhervas are ma$ical warriors and it is nearly im!ossible to defeat them in war" #owever 'r*una could defeat them only because 'r*una was followin$ :rahmacharya those days" Dbrahmacarya !aro dharma sa cT!i niyatas tvayi E yasmTt tasmTd aha !Trtha rae 5smin vi*itas tvayT E yas tu syTt atriya aV cit Tmavtta !arata!a E na ta ca yudhi yudhyeta na sa *`vet atha cana ED (>:# 1I1MJI1391Q) DThe 1rahma"harya is a very su!erior mode of life, and as thou art in that mode now, it is for this, O -artha, that I have been defeated by thee in battle" O chastiser of foes, if any married /shatriya fi$ht with us at ni$ht, he can never esca!e, with lifeD #o!e these many references are enou$h to understand how im!ortant is celibacy in the !ath of liberation& 'nd if you thou$ht that one can overcome lust by satiatin$ it with maithun', then that is a $reat misconce!tion" 's discussed earlier also, lust can be overcome only by self9restraint and not by co!ulation" #ere is a verse of wisdom su!!ortin$ this !oint from >ahabharata" D*`ryanti *`ryata eVT dantT *`ryanti *`ryata E ca u Vrotre ca *`ryete tai T tu na *`ryate ED (>:# 13I0HI2Q) DWith a$e, man5s hair $rows $rey, his teeth become loose; his eyes and ears too become dim in action; but the only thing that does not a+ate is his desire for en5oymentsD So, the sum and the substance of this section is, the maithun' which is an

oblation to the $oddess is !roved to be internal in nature and it is the maithun' of shiva and sha ti" We have analy%ed numerous verses from mahabharata and found that everywhere everys a$e condemned intercourse and !raised celibacy" so, in no way aul'ch'rI O v'm'ch'rI understandin$ of maithunam stands correct&

6orrecting the 7isinterpretation of 1ripura 8panishad

Tri!ura C!anishad is derived from ?i$ Veda and is a sha ta C!anishad" This scri!ture is a $reat source of wisdom for Sri Vidya"followers, however, there is one verse in this u!anishad whose literal inter!retation has made the neo9 aul'ch'rIs O v'm'ch'rIs mas their wron$ deeds under the fabric of the authority of this C!anishad" Verse no" 12 of this u!anishad says, D!aris?]itam *haSham'dya> *haSham'*a> !hala> cha E bha t'ni yonI# su!ariSh ?]it'shcha E nivedayandevat'yai mahatyai sv'tmI ?]ite su ?]ite siddhimeti ED (Tri!ura C!anishad 12) D,ressed fish, animal flesh, Noo ed rice, !leasure of se=, Who offers to the 6oddess $reat, >erit and success for himself achievesD" This is the !roblem with literal inter!retations, surface nowled$e and true translations" These thin$s in e=ternal sense are not a!!roved by 8alitambi a" We have already seen what 8alita Sahasranama stotram says" let me re!roduce the same here as this section also re7uires that very same analysis" 8alita Sahasranama Stotram clearly states she is attainable throu$h inner worshi!, D'ntarmu ha samaradhya bahirmu ha sudurlabha ED (8S verse 1F2) DShe is easily obtainable for those whose worshi! is based on their mind turned inwards, and She is difficult to be obtained by those who are outward focusedD" It states further that she loves five sacrifices as stated below" This cannot contradict the above verse hence lo$ically it has to be inter!reted in sync with the above one" Therefore these sacrifices must be internal"

D!ancha ya$ya!riya ED (8S verse 1HQ) DWho loves the five sacrifices of the ri$htward Savya !athD" We have already done an e=tensive analysis in the !revious sections on the fivesacrifices usin$ !anchama 'r's and found that in every case that has resulted to be internal in nature when analy%ied to match and synchroni%e with the 8alita Sahasranama verses" therefore it should be crystal clear to everyone by now, that the verse of Tri!ura C!anishad tal s O@81 about the internal yo$ic offerin$s and not at all anythin$ about the e=ternal activities (which are condemned by all scri!tures of #induism)" 8alitambi a bein$ mother of all and a $reat $oddess it is not ri$ht to e=!ect her to a!!rove your carnal desires by misinter!retin$ the shruti and smriti verses as !er your !erverted thin in$&

Refuting 9oni-1antra - 1he fa-orite scripture of kaul(ch(rIs / -(m(ch(rIs

Some fellows were !ostin$ 1oni9-u*a !hotos in that social networ in$ forum, which was to my !ersonality shameful to be dis!layed !ublicly" The !rimary authority for aul'ch'rIs O v'm'ch'rIs in !erformin$ !hysical 1oni9-u*a of their female counter!arts is the boo named 51oni9Tattra5" I am a $reat devotee of :ha$awan Shiva , but that doesn5t mean I can acce!t 1oni tantra as authentic when I clearly see many contradictions !resent in it" Well, I am not amon$ those men who would readily acce!t any boo as scri!ture if someone says so" -eo!le of this aliyu$a had found the $eneral wea ness of the s!iritual fools that they would readily acce!t any rubbish if it is said as s!o en by Shiva to -arvati" If you write any third $rade fantasy and be$in that boo with "#,&+ u&A"hA an# +shwara u&A"hA", that doesn5t become a dialo$ue really e=chan$ed between Cma and >aheshwara, !eriod&

1oni9Tantra is a boo com!osed in 1Fth century in :en$al" I5m not sure how could 1Fth century /aliyu$is could listen to the conversation of >ahadeva and :havani" So, definitely this doesn5t loo authentic boo to me" Standard Tantra boo s always stress on self9reali%ation as the means to liberation" 8i e for e=am!le, >ahanirvana Tantra says, "6either 'y a"ts$ nor 'y 'e(ettin( offsprin($ nor 'y wealth is man li'erate#I it is 'y the knowle#(e of the Spirit$ 'y the Spirit that man is li'erate#" ( .ahanir&ata Tantra =48=B6)* This is very much in sync with Shruti and Smriti" @ow, if 1oni Tantra contradicts this, then we should rethin on the authenticity of 1oni9Tantra and should decide whether to inter!ret it differently or to com!letely re*ect it" 8et me refute some bo$us verses from that te=t" !robably the bo$us verses can be ran ed as inter!olations" 8et me now show you the some bo$us statements from the 1oni tantra and let me refute them with authentic references from other standard scri!tures" Second -atala says the followin$ dis$ustin$ statement" This is not my #induism, it loo s li e some !erverted western culture follower mi$ht have added this verse to that te=t" "The #e&otee shoul# worship the motherJs yoni an# ha&e inter"ourse with all yonis* 5e may ha&e inter"ourse with any woman 'etween the a(es of twel&e an# siKty* 5e shoul# worship the yoni #aily$ usin( the fi&e tatt&as" (Aoni-tantra !atala2) See what >ahabharata instructs us to do"

"They that (o to their own we##e# wi&es in season without seeking the companionship of other women$ they that are honest an# attenti&e to their A(ni-hotras$ su""ee# in o&er"omin( all #iffi"ulties"* (.15 =28==L) 2urther, it also instructs in another cha!ter the followin$ $reat !oint" "Without seekin( the "ompanionship of other people;s wi&es$ the man of wis#om who seeks his own wife in her season a")uires the merit of 1rahma"haryya"* (.158 =28=?B)

@ow, let5s see another :O6CS verse from this boo "read the followin$ verse" ":isten$ !ar&atiM Krishna$ after worshipin( Fa#haJs yoni$ 'e"ame No# Krishna* Sri Fama Danaki 6ath worshipe# SitaJs yoni* Killin( Fa&ana an# his "lan$ he then went to Ayo#hya 7ity an# li&e# in a 'eautiful pala"e there"* (Aoni-tantra !atala-4) If a Vaishnava sees this comment he would commit suicide" 8et me su!!ort Vaishnavas here" I cannot acce!t this !oint on lord Sri /rishna and Sri ?ama" ?adha9/rishna5s many amorous love activities have been e=tensively described in :rahma9Vaivarta -urana, and in devotional !oetry li e *ayadeva5s 6eeta9 6ovindam" Or even if we $o and search all the scri!tures followed by IS/NO@, in none of the boo s such an amorous worshi! has ever been mentioned" Nomin$ to ?ama and Sita" There are three hundred versions of ?amayana all over the world" In Indonesia, Gava etc" countries they follow a ?amayana called 5?ama ein5" In :uddhist scri!tures also we have ?amayana" 's said, there are 300 versions of ?amayana in this world" In India itself we have Valmi i ?amayana, Tulasi ?amayana, 'dhyatma ?amayana, :hushundi ?amayana and /amba ?amayana that I am aware of" '!art from these there could be many versions of ?amayana available in India" #owever #induism considers only Valmi i ?amayana as the authentic one" #owever, I $ive the liberty to aul'ch'rIs O v'm'ch'rIs to show me any version of ?amayana obtained from any corner of this world, and !rove me that ?ama really worshi!ed Sita5s yoni" If this cannot be !roved, then that verse of 1oni9 Tantra is bo$us& 'nd ta e it for $ranted, there is no version of ?amayana where such a stu!id claim e=ists" Same is the case with /rishna and ?adha5s mention in any te=ts" 8et5s see another marvelous defect in yoni9tantra" "/e#a is the hi(hest of all thin(s an# 'etter than /e#a is /aishna&a* 1etter than /aishna&a is Shai&a an# 'etter than Shai&a is %akshina* Nreater than %akshina is /ama an# 'etter than /ama is Si##hanta* 5i(her than Si##hanta is the Kaula who #esires the yoni----like a sun shinin( in the sky or a &erita'le .eru to a mustar# see#"* (Aoni-tantra !atala-4) What5s the authenticity of this statement< can anyone !rove this statement from Vedas, C!anishads, >ahabharata, ?amayana, and -uranas < Vedas is definitely the hi$hest and su!reme of all sources of nowled$e" #owever, vaishnava, Shaiva and sha ta schools do not have any inde!endent e=istence, they are

based on vedas" The worshi!ers of Vedic Vishnu and his incarnations are called as vaishnavas" The worshi!er of Vedic ?udra (Shiva) are Shaivas" ,a shinachara is a Sri Vidya school which follows smartha mode of worshi! and it is a$ain based on Vedic rites" @one of these schools are inde!endent of Vedas and are actually based on Vedas" Therefore the 7uestion of these schools becomin$ hi$her that Vedas is itself a bo$us statement" ?emainin$ neo9 aul'ch'r' O v'm'ch'r' schools are out of 7uestion" If I say Nhristianity is $reater than Veda, Islam is $reater that Nhristianity; that doesn5t become a word from the mouth of :rahma; my statements need to be attensted by some !ram'@a (authentic !roofs), and Vedas and C!anishads are the O@81 su!reme !ram'@as" 'fter them, >ahabharata, and ?amayana ta es the second !lace then comes -uranas" 'nd this claim of 1oni9Tantra is not at all su!!orted by any !ram'@a from any of the standard scri!tures of #induism" Therefore this verse is a bo$us one and is !urely an inter!olation" 8et5s see another outstandin$ly bo$us verse from that so called scri!ture" "+ a"hie&e# my status of .ahA#,&a 'y Kula Ao(a an# throu(h eK"lusi&e #e&otion to yoni worship* The #emon Tripura was o'literate# in times past 'y your yoniJs (ra"e* The !an#a&as su""ee#e# in 'attle 'y worshippin( %raupa#iJs yoni"* (Aoni-tantra !atala-4) Well, the !oint on -andavas ma es me lau$h" -andavas were the only warriors in the entire >ahabharata who had never tasted the fruit of defeat, not because of 1oni9worshi!, but because of their real s ills if warfare" I cannot show any references from >ahabharata to counter this, because entire >ahabharata is a !roof that such a baseless claim doesn5t e=ist in any of the cha!ters of that e!ic" @ow, comin$ to the !oint on Shiva" -robably the author of this tantra was not aware who >ahadeva is& This statement itself shows his total i$norance about :ha$awan ?udra& >ahadeva is not any 5status5 or 5!osition5 that one can attain by worshi!in$ someone5s 1oni" 8ord shiva is the ultimate reality, he is the :rahman of Vedas" he is -urusha of -urusha Su tam" he is the S hambha desribed in 'tharva Veda" #e is the ori$inal cause of allc auses and has no boss above him" he $ives statusses and !ositions to other $ods but he is the su!reme rule by default" In this connection Shruti states the followin$I 9 Svetaswatara C!anishad (FI0J) says,

Dna tasya ashchit"h !atirasti lo eD, which means,DThere is no master of his in the world, no ruler of hisD" Svetaswatara C!anishad (FI0R) says, Dna tasya aarya"n ara@a"n cha vidyateD, which means,DThere is no effect and no cause nown of himD" Svetaswatara C!anishad (FI1H) says, Dya iishe"asya *a$ato nityameva naanyo heturvidyata iishanaayaD, which means,D#e rules this world for ever, for no one else is able to rule itD" So, that !oint of 1oni9tantra is clearly refuted" @ow, let me show another meanin$less verse" ":i'eration is a"hie&e# throu(h enjoyment* 5appiness is (aine# throu(h enjoyment* Therefore$ 'y e&ery effort$ a sA#hakA shoul# 'e"ome an enjoyer* The wise man shoul# always a&oi# 'lame$ #is(ust or shame of the yoni"* (Aonitantra !atala-6) This is clearly refuted by sa$e :haradwa*a in >ahabharata as follows"'ll the scri!tures su!!ort :haradwa*a5s this same !oint, liberation lies in self9restraint and we have already seen numerous evidences in !revious sections" DbharadvT*a uvTca E yad etad bhavatTbhihita su hTnT !aramT striya iti tan na $hn`ma E na hy eTm `T mahati sthitTnTm a!rT!yaia $uaviVeo na cainam abhilasanti E VrWyate ca bha$avT s trilo a d brahmT !rabhv e T ` tihati E brahmacTr` na Tmasu he v TtmTnam avadadhTti E a!i ca bha$avTn viVveVvaromT !ati Tmam abhivartamTnam ana$atvena Vamam anayat E tasmTd brWmo na mahTtmabhir aya !rati$h`to na tv ea tTvad viVio $ua iti naitad bha$avata !ratyemi ED (>:# 12I1R3I10) D:haradwa*a said, 51ou have said that ha!!iness (of se=ual $ratification) is the hi$hest ob*ect, I do not com!rehend this" This attribute of the soul that (you say) is so desirable is not sou$ht by the Fishis who are re$arded to be en$a$ed in somethin$ !romisin$ a hi$her reward" It is heard that the Nreator of the three worlds, &iH", the !uissant :rahman, lives alone, observant of the vow of 1rahma"harya" #e never devotes himself to the ha!!iness obtainable from the $ratification of desire" 'lso, the divine >aster of the universe, the lord of Cma, reduced Kama (the deity of desire) to e=tinction" 2or this reason, we say that ha!!iness is not acce!table to hi$h9souled !eo!le" @or does it a!!ear to be a hi$h attribute of the SoulD"

@ow, here comes the bloc buster verse which ma es me lau$h thin in$ about the i$norance of the author" "Without seKual union there is ne&er li'eration$ whether from shastras$ shrutis$ smriti$ puranas et" "reate# 'y me"* (Aoni-tantra !atala-E) No!ulation is a arma and it has a !halam (fruit) as well" armas cannot liberate any Giva" Only *nana can burn all armas and liberate" 8iberationis an e=tensive to!ic to discuss and C!anishads have !lenty of cha!ters on it" #owever, let me 7uote here a verse from >ananirvana Tantra itself which refutes the above verse" "Therefore men will not attain final li'eration e&en at the en# of a hun#re# kalpas so lon( as a"tion$ whether (oo# or e&il$ is not #estroye#"* (.ahanir&ana Tantra =48=L?)* "So lon( as a man has not real knowle#(e$ he #oes not attain final li'eration$ e&en thou(h he 'e in the "onstant pra"ti"e of reli(ious a"ts an# a hun#re# austerities"* (.ahanir&ana Tantra =48===)* ":i'eration #oes not "ome fram japa$ homa$ or a hun#re# fastsI man 'e"omes li'erate# 'y the knowle#(e that he himself is 1rahman"* (.ahanir&ana Tantra =48==G)* " inal li'eration is attaine# 'y the knowle#(e that the Atma (Soul) is the witness$ is the Truth$ is omnipresent$ is one$ free from all illu#in( #istra"tions of self an# not-self$ the supreme$ an#$ thou(h a'i#in( in the 'o#y$ is not in the 'o#y*"* (.ahanir&ana Tantra =48==6)* "All ima(ination of name-form an# the like are 'ut the play of a "hil#* 5e who put away all this sets himself in firm atta"hment to the 1rahman$ is$ without #ou't$ li'erate#"*"* (.ahanir&ana Tantra =48==>)* I have !rovided counter references from tantra itself, if any aul'ch'rI O v'm'ch'rI wants to see evidences from C!anishads, let them as for it" I would be ha!!y to bombard them with numerous references"

Therefore the conclusion from this section is, 1oni9tantra is clearly a :O6CS scri!ture and it has no value when challen$ed by authentic scri!tures" this boo

!robably was an ima$ination of some aul'ch'rI O v'm'ch'rI who wanted to ma e his amorous !ractices le$ali%ed, hence created this boo as a conversation between Cma and Shiva"

SUMMARY and FINAL VERDICT

We have e=tensively analy%ed and found that $oddess lalitambi a5s 7ualities have been described as s'twi in nature in the hymn lalita Sahasranama Stotram from :rahmanda -urana" 'nd when the Sri Vidya tradition was analy%ed under the li$ht of 8alita Sahasranama stotram, it was found that the ,a shinachara (samayachara) or the ri$ht handed smartha worshi! or the !ath of /undalini yo$a matches correctly with 8alita sahasranama descri!tion" We have found that in none of the cases neo9 aul'ch'ra O v'm'ch'ra matches with the attributes of 8alitambi a and her hymn" We have done a detailed analysis of -ancha91a*nas (five sacrifices), !ancha9>a aras (madya, mamsa, matsya, mudra, and maithuna) and found that the understandin$ of neo9 aul'ch'ra O v'm'ch'r' followers is flawed" We have seen that !ancha9ya*nas and !ancha9ma aras are totally internal activities within our own body and they re su!!oed by 1o$a u!anishads" When they are thou$ht of as e=ternal activities they are stron$ly refuted by all the authentic scri!tures" We have also analy%ed the 1oni9Tantra and found it to be a bo$us scri!ture, not worthy of even a !enny" Therefore, I would li e to conclude this article by $ivin$ a su$$estion to the aul'ch'rI O v'm'ch'rIs 9 O $reat men of flawed understandin$ of scri!tures; there is no $ood awaitin$ for you on the !ath that you are traversin$" 'theists are better in a sense because for them there is no $od, so they are bound by no rules of reli$ion" Therefore they can sm e, they can drin , they can visit a brothel9house without fear of any sin" 't least they ta e the ownershi! of their activities on themselves totally" #owever, your cult !romotes all sinful activities under the name of reli$ion, under the name of the $reat benevolent $oddess who is the mother of all" 1ou ill animals and eat them for the $oddess who is the mother of those animals also" 1ou drin wine for the $oddess by trans$ressin$ the authentic in*unctions from authentic scri!tures which are all laid by her" 1ou wra! your carnal desires under the name of tradition and en$a$e in amorous acts brea in$ the rules enforced by reli$ion" I have no business to correct you, however it5s my ind re7uest that have son li e feelin$s for srim'ta, loo at her only with a child li e heart, do her worshi! with the feelin$s of an

infant" /indly don5t create your own lustful inter!retations for ,asa9>udras" Cnderstand her to be your mother" This is the only messa$e I have for you, rest is your destiny" 8et >ahadeva not ta e u! his bow and aim at you, correct yourself before he wields his -ina a Sri Vidya is very much !resent in Vedas in hidden form" In Vedas Sri Vidya and /undalini have been described as inward science" There is nothin$ which tal s about outward science there" So, definitely outward rituals es!ecially -anchama ara are unauthentic" To now more about how Vedas describe about 8alitambi a and /undalini read my analysis on the below two to!ics"