Drop Down MenusCSS Drop Down MenuPure CSS Dropdown Menu

Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Explanation of Real Sri Vidya and Refutation of Kaulachara / Vamachara



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 block their path. However recently an incident happened which hurt my sacred feelings towards the mother goddess, hence realizing this as the high time I resolved to break the ice and call a spade a spade!

A month back in a social networking site someone added me to a group on Sri Vidya (He was the owner of that group). I felt happy because Sri Vidya is even hidden in Vedas and there was no reason for me to not feel elated to join my mother’s group. That group focused on the teachings of Devi Puram (www.devipuram.com). However I didn’t know that it was a group which focused on ‘Kaulachara’ form in Sri Vidya worship. The posts there majorly revolved around one topic – Yoni!  I felt little discomfort when someone posted an image of a mountain cave which resembled the Yoni. I wasn’t sure whether it was a real image or a magic of adobe Photoshop, but still I saluted the divine mother’s presence in that. So far so good! Then one day the owner of that group pasted a beautiful picture of Durga mata and said his friend gains erotic feelings on seeing jagadamba, and I was flabbergasted to see that this gentleman (owner) was kind of in agreement to his thoughts as though it was ‘OK’ to have such thoughts for the divine mother. That was the first missile which pierced through me.

Then I happened to visit their website of Devi Puram, and the FAQ section again shattered by bosom by piercing another shaft within my core. See adjacent a screenshot of the Q & A section of that organization. The answer given to the seeker doesn't look like from a learned Guru. Of course nudity is not impurity, but the question asked was different. Lalita Sahasranama begins with the foremost name as 'srI mAta' meaning 'the divine mother of all'. A devotee of srImAta is for her a putrA always, a purushA never! The latter case is possible only when the identity of 'jIva' gets destroyed and the realization of 'shivA' happens. However, this case arises after the prAnas pierce through sahasrAra and the jivA becomes one with Atman (shivA), and there we can see the phenomenon of don-duality between jIvA and shivA. But after this situation of uniting your self with the Atman, your body would die and it's a onetime process. When direct incarnation of shivA viz. Adi shankarA himself addressed her always as 'madamba (mother mine)', in his hymns and compositions; then who are these modern day Gurus who dare to see Amba with the eyes of passion?

Then another document is found explaining dasa-mudras where the author has associated incorrect interpretations of tanmAtras with meanings filled with passion. Same is shown in the adjacent screenshot which is a quick view of their document on Dasa-Mudras.

I would really like to know which chapter from the scriptures viz. Bhagawad Gita, upanishads, Mahabharata, Ramayana or any Purana associates tanmatras with passionate meanings? This was the last shaft that pierced me. After all these moments, finally I unsubscribed from that forum. That's where the roots of origination of this article are! Now, let me refute the incorrect interpretations of the sacred science called Sri Vidya.  In fact, Tantra also is not everything about sexuality, it is a great science where a part is sexuality. However, we can't blindly accept every Tantric book as authentic. Hinduism is so vast that there are numerous scriptures and equally there are numerous interpolations. Apart from that every scripture is so esoteric that the literal meaning always remains poles apart from the inner meaning. Therefore whichever scripture you want to follow, you need to follow with an analytical mind instead of following blindly the literal meanings.

In this article, within the limits of my limited knowledge I will try to analyze and explain the concepts of sri vidyA and also of Tantra under the light of shruti, smriti, itihasa as applicable. 

[Please note that
one learned person told me that vAmAchArA and kaulAchArA are different paths and external panchamakAras are followed only in kaulAchAra and not in vAmAchAra. Still then since a lot of people consider both these words to mean same doctrine, I'm retaining them together. However I only mean to condemn that path which uses external tools of panchamakArAs, and who hold amorous thoughts for divine mother]. .

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

I don't understand why do people resort to Vamachara and Kaulachara kind of external practices while calling themselves as the followers of lalita devi and call themselves as the Sri Vidya Upasakas, Are they really the 'followers' of the path shown by lalitambika? I don't believe they are!

Brahmanda Purana contains the great hymn 'Lalita Sahasranama stotram' where everything about goddess Tripurasundari has been described including the mode of worship which needs to be followed to realize her in true sense. I don't say Tantras are bogus texts, I understand that Tantra is a great science. However what I could understand so far is, people only go by the literal meaning of Tantra scriptures and fail to correlate them with the inner meaning what they actually convey. This is the reason why we see panchamakara kind of worship to lalitambika. But probably they are unaware of the fact that Devi pleases with internal Panchamakaras and not with externally practiced Panchamakaras.
Well, Panchamakaras are five practices viz. madya (wine), mamsa (meat), matsya (fish), mudra (they call it as grains but I'll explain it in a different meaning later), and maithuna (copulation). I'll refute these outward meanings in separate sections and would try to explain their actual meanings.

Lalita Sahasranama Stotram clearly says what the method of worship that is ordained for realizing Lalitambika is,

"Antarmukha samaradhya bahirmukha sudurlabha |" (LS verse 162)
"She is easily obtainable for those whose worship is based on their mind turned inwards, and She is difficult to be obtained by those who are outward focused".

There are two words viz. Kula and Akula in Sri Vidya. In normal sense 'kula' means family and 'akula' means one who has no parents. In this sense, even though Shakti and Shiva are both unborn, since Shakti transforms herself as the Jagat (and Shiva just infuses the chaitanya), Shakti becomes manifest, therefore she is 'Kula' and Shiva is 'Akula'. However, a text 'tarArahasyavritTikA' defines Kula by elaborating the same concept as - It says Kulam is "matri-mana-meyam" which are further explained to mean jIva (mata), jnAna (manam) and the manifold universe or vishvA (meyam). The meaning is - entire cosmos of jiva and vishwa is Shakti. So, Shakti is called as Kula. The same truth is laid in Mahanirvana Tantra as follows.

"The Kula are Jiva, Prakriti, space, time, ether, earth, water, fire, and air". (Mahanirvana Tantra 7:97)

Therefore, Shiva who is transcendental and is Brahman is spoken of as 'Akula'. Interestingly the same fact has been mentioned in Sruthi as well. Our body being a microcosm (kshudra brahmanda), it is identical to the external vishwam. And again let me reiterate that Sri Vidya is all about internal, and not external! The six chakras are the seat of Shakti hence they represent Kula. Seat of Shiva represents Akula.

“mUlAdhArAdiShaTchakra.n shaktisthAnamudIritam.h | kaNThAdupari mUrdhAnta.n shAMbhava.n sthAnamuchyate |” (Varaha Upanishad 5:53)
“The six Chakras beginning with Muladhara are said to be the seat of Sakti (Goddess). From the neck to the top of the head is said to be the seat of Sambhu (Shiva)”.

On similar lines, kula-mArga (Kula Path), doesn't mean the practices or path followed by neo-kaulacharIs / vAmAcharis. kula-mArga is nothing but "sushumNa" through which the mother Tripurasundari ascends as the serpent power 'kundalini' to unite with her consort in Sahasrara, Therefore essentially Kaulas are those Yogis who take the path of Kundalini Yoga for emancipation. Even Kali Tantra confirms the same.
Kali Tantra (24-6) says, "A person who takes the journey of Sushumna is a Kaula". Therefore it is proven now, that originally kaulAchAra used to mean Kundalini Yoga, therefore in that sense kaulAchAra is the highest sacred path, the supreme path of liberation. However, with this you should also understand that Kundalini Yoga is totally an inward science, hence kaulAchAra originally should have been an inward science. Therefore the Panchamakara rituals must have originally been inward sacrifices,. But the present situation of kaulAchAra is totally opposite to what it technically meant to be. Therefore, whatever refutation of Kaulachara I would do in this article, consider that to be about modern kaulAchAra (neo-kaulAchAra) and not the original one which was the path of yoga.  Hopefully now the terms related to Kula, Kaula, etc., should be clear. Now, let's move ahead with another verse of Lalita Sahasranama Stotram which is usually misinterpreted.

"Kulangana kulantastha kaulini kulayogini |
Akula samayantastha samayachara tatpara |" (LS verse 37)

This verse is a bit complex hence let's not read it's meaning in totality. Let's split each word and understand the meaning here.

1. Kulangana: Who is the Female in the Kula Path. This doesn't mean she is a lady who strides the Vamachara path. Applying the right meanings learned in above analysis the meaning now becomes - "Who is the Female element Kundalini in the Kula Path (sushumna)".
2. Kulantastha: Who is the innermost Reality of the Kula Path. here also kula Path means Sushumna
3. Kaulini: Who is called Kaulini, the core of the Kaula form of worship. Now apply the meaning of Kula. The shat chakras are in totality called as Kula which is nothing but the universe within us. So, the worship / Yoga Sadhana that is performed at all the Shat Chakras during Kundalini Awakening is in essence she alone! This Yoga sadhana has her for its core.
4. Kulayogini: Who is the Deity of the Kaulas. Outwardly it means something pleasing to kaulachari-vamacharis. But that yogi who follows Kundalini Yoga and understands that six chakras which encompass the universe are called as 'Kula' is a learned 'Kaula'. And since Tripurasundari is the deity who travels as Kundalini and awards self-realization to the Yogi, she is the central object of worship for such a Kaula. So, now the correct meaning is that She is the target divinity for the Yogis who practice Kundalini Yoga.
5. Akula: Who is also the Akula (Siva) who is in the thousand-petalled lotus above the Kula Path. Shiva and Shakti are always one and the same. The difference is only due to mAyA. Therefore at the Sahasrara Chakra level Shakti and Shiva remain as Ardhanareeshwara (one body shared half by each). This is why Lalita Sahasranama calls her as 'Shiva-shaktyaikyaroopini lalitambika'.
6. Samayantastha: Who is the center of the Samaya doctrine (in which the worship is done internally through meditation and which holds Siva-Sakti as of equal importance in all respects).Now, from above analysis we should be clear that originally Kaula is also internal path of worship. Samaya and Kaula both are originally same in meaning, but the incorrect interpretations of texts made them different.
7. Samayanchara tatpara: Whom the Samaya tradition of worship is dear. This verse should be like a jolt on the vamacharI-Kaulas. here the hymn clearly states that Lalitambika finds Samayachara worship dear to her which means internal worship through meditation, Pranayama and Yoga is the right path preferred by her and not the external methods of Panchamakaras (we'll discuss this in detail shortly).

I understand that people might try to counter my above analysis by showing me the below verse from same hymn. So, let me right away put here my two cents on this verse as well. People might misinterpret "apasavyA" as "neo-kaulAchAra / vAmAchAra", but it is not that. As per our analysis so far savya is the inward path and apasavya is the outward path (here it means smartha path and not the vAmAchAra / neo-
kaulAchAra )

"savyApasavya mArgasthA |" (LS verse 169)
"Who is reached by both the paths – Savya (internal worship through Yoga) and Apasavya (external worship through smartha / dakshinachara)".

However,  one may again question, why did I call Smartha worship as 'apasavya'? No. don't get me wrong. I am not calling Smartha path as inferior. Here the comparison is just a relative one and not at absolute levels. Let me try to explain this as well. All our Vedantic scriptures and even Puranas ask us to focus inwards. Therefore always the inward focused worship is superior (parA) and the outwardly focused ritualistic worship although important yet is inferior (apara). Since not everyone succeeds in drawing one's mind inwards, the outward worship like japa, AradhanA, pUjA, etc. are also accepted by the God and sages. However, outward worship is logically meaningless. Let me explain it clearly.

How can you offer a seat to the all pervading infinite Bhagawan/Bhagawati by saying "Asanam samarpayAmI (I offer you a seat, please come and sit)"? How can Mahadeva who is called "sthAnu" (because he cannot move any more having pervaded everything), come and sit on the asana provided by you? Is he not already seated there? Now tell me don't you feel it is innocence to offer a seat?

You say, "yajnopavItam samarpayAmI (I offer this sacred thread to you)". Tell me how can you offer a sacred thread that can encompass the supreme being's chest? When Vedas themselves say that only a quarter of Rudra is known to them and three quarters are still non-entity; don't you think it is impossible for us to offer a sacred thread encircling his body?

What length of clothes can you manufacture which can cover the body of that lord who has the directions as his clothes and hence called as "digambara" for the fact that none of the clothes can ever cover him? Don't you think "vastram samarpayAmi" is a statement encompassed with ignorance?

What amount of food can you really offer if Shiva/Shakti really says "Please fill my stomach"? So, don't you think offering naivEdyam by saying "naivEdyam samarpayAmI" is ignorance? Likewise, can you really garland him/her with flower garland if they really ask you to do so? Impossible!

Well, don't laugh at me, these arguments are not foolish! Even Adi Shankara stated the same in his composition (hymn) for lord Shiva by name "parApUjA stotraM". All these are part and parcel of Smartha worship, so at relative order they are inferior hence "apasavya".  However, the main ingredient of the external smartha worship is "bhakti (devotion)", which is consumed by the almighty as the offering. God has nothing to do with how many times you chant his name and how many hymns you sing daily. What matters is with what intensity of bhakti you remember him, even remembering once with full devotion and love is greater than chanting 1000 names mechanically while your mind wandering in a pub!

So, in my opinion "apasavya" should be understood as the external smartha worship (and not the vAmAchara). In Smartha tradition (Dakshinachara) as established by Adi Shankara, Lalitambika is worshiped in smartha way, with flowers, vermillion, by reciting her thousand names, by offering her pAyasAnnaM (Rice mixed with milk) as naivEdyam; etc. This external worship is essential because people easily follow the path of devotion and they find it difficult to focus their mind inwards. Even Bhagawad Gita states the same "asanshayam mahAbAhO manO durnigrahaMchalaM" which means, "no doubt, O mighty armed one, the mind is unstable and very difficult to be tamed and focused". Extreme focus and mind control is required in the path of Yoga (inward path), but for Bhakti path - life is easy! One just needs enormous amount of sacred love and devotion for his/her favorite form of God. That's it. Hence it's the Bhakti which is the key ingredient of Smartha worship through which the divine mother gets pleased easily.

Please also note that the external smartha worship is also equally capable of showering Lalitambika's grace. In fact she loves this Bhakti very much as confirmed in below verse.

"Bhaktipriya bhaktigamya bhaktivashya bhayapaha |" (LS verse 42)
"Who is fond of true devotion. Who is attained through true devotion. Who can be won over through true devotion. Who dispels all fears".

So, there are two paths to approach her viz. Yoga and Bhakti where the former one is the path of Jnana (knowledge) and the latter one is the path of devotion or love. Both these paths are equally good and she approves them.

The path of vAmAchAra where celibacy is not given importance, where wine, meat and copulation is given importance is against the preachings of Vedic dharma. That path is against the preachings of Sages in other authentic scriptures like Mahabharata. Therefore kaulachara-vAmAchAra is NOT a "Shishtha" path and is called a "Bhrashtha" path because it is "avAidikam (anti-vedic)".

Let me show another evidence from Lalita Sahasranama Stotram  that Goddess is fond of Shishtha path which is approved by Vedas. This should be the eye-openers for those Veda-Brahshtha-Vamachara followers that goddess cannot yield to their lust and she is ever devoted to Shiva alone, and she is worshiped by Shsihtha (righteous) men!

"shivapriya shivapara shishteshta shishtapujita |" (LS verse 89)
"Who is the beloved of Shiva. Who is solely devoted to Shiva. Who is dear to the righteous. Who is adored by the righteous".

There is another verse which seemingly attests vAmAcharA. Lalita Sahasranama Stotram (LS verse 174) calls her as "vamakeshvari" which can be misinterpreted as "who is the goddess of the left handed path followers". However, I would interpret it in a different way. Logically it can never be true that in some verses the hymn says she should be followed using samayachara (right hand path) and in some other verse it says she is the goddess of left handed followers. This is a logical inconguence. Therefore what I would interpret it as is, - vAmA means left, Uma occupies the left half of Shiva, hence she is called as Vamadevi also. Shiva's west facing head which falls on his left side is called as Vamadeva for the same reason of being at the left side of his body. Shiva and Shakti are always one and share one body. People who worship the right portion are Shiva devotees, and people who worship his left portion are Shaktas. So, it means "those Shaktas who worship the vama (left) side of lord Shiva can be called as followers of Vama. So, the eshwari (goddess) of all such Shakta devotees is Vamakeshwari". Now, this meaning fits in sync with other verses of this hymn and doesn't contradict them at all.

Therefore, finally, note it carefully that as per the above analysis, nowhere "vAmAchAra" has been approved or attested by this hymn!

Ambika is always chaste and cannot yield to your amorous approaches!

Let me now refute the filthy thoughts of neo-kulAcharA followers. As shown in the very beginning of this article some groups of people outwardly show themselves to be the followers of sacred Sri Vidya tradition and inwardly keep amorous thoughts for the Devi. Let this section be dedicated to all such people. May the goddess bless this section to be an eye-opener for them.

When you see beautiful face of the goddess, if you gain erotic thoughts for her, then it is a serious problem with your moral system and not with any scripture. Show me one scripture where she has been shown to yield to the lust of anyone apart from being devoted to her consort Mahadeva! You cannot show! However, let me show how many people lusted for her and finally faced their doomsday!

Mahishasura lusted for her, and faced his death in her hands. Andhakasura lusted for her and faced his fate in the hands of Mahadeva. Jalandhara felt erotic to see her and tried to possess her, and faced his doomsday in the hands of Shiva. Even the chastity of his consort Vrinda (Tulasi) couldn't safeguard Jalandhara for long. Ruru lusted for her, and he also met the same fate. Go, open Puranas and you would find many such demons who met with their death for seeing her with lustful eyes. None of the mighty demons in the entire scriptural base of Hinduism is stated to succeed in ever bedding with her, then how can the kaulAchArIs / vAmAcharIs ever dare to support eroticism for that goddess who has no blemishes?

I don't care which stupid Guru of this Kaliyuga you follow who supports your erotica for her. Let me blast your eroticism with my missiles from authoritative scriptures now!

Mahabharata [Book-4 (Virata Parva)-Section-6] praises Devi Durga saying, “Thou art the only female in the universe that possesses the attribute of purity”. Even Adi Shankara in his hymn Soundarya Lahari hails the same attribute and says Tripurasundari is the only chaste goddess as follows.

“Mahadevam hithva thava sathi sathinam acharame | Kuchabhyam aasangah kuravaka-tharor apyasulabhah " (Verse 96-Soundarya Lahari)
"Oh, first among chaste woman, Except Lord Shiva your consort; Your breasts have not even touched, The holy henna tree".

And you thought you would get liberation by following her with lust? If not, then what is that rubbish interpretation of "tanmAtras" that has been listed for Dasa-Mudra worship? Let me list down what has been mentioned in Devi Puram website as the meanings of Dasamudras. Let me quote the extract directly here for the criticism purpose (this is allowed as per copyright laws). I have bulleted them for easy readability.

"(Devi Puram website says)
We show to Devi ten hand mudras to ask Her to agree to interacting with Her. Nine of these gestures are associated with nine sub-chakras in the Sri Chakra. We are asking Devi through mudras:
  • dram (shabda - Can I talk to you?),
  • drim (sparsha- Can I touch you?)
  • klim(rupa- Can I see you nude?),
  • blum (rasa- Can I kiss you?),
  • sah(gandha- Can I apply perfumes to your body? ) - these are the five sensory modes of perception, plus
  • krom(ankusham- Stop me where you wish to.),
  • hasakhaphrem (Let's forget that we are separate beings and fly together in space out-of-the-body.) 
  • hsaum (May I place my seed in you? The seed is the seed of knowledge. ), and aim (represents the yoni). In the Lalita Sahasranama it says she is to be worshipped by ten mudras "Dasamudra samaradhya".
My questions is do people understand what are Sabda, Sparsha, Rupa, Rasa and Gandha? Can you show me any scripture where these five have been interpreted as incorrectly as quoted above? Can you really touch her who extends till infinity? Can you really see her nude in reality has no form being identical with Brahman? Can you really kiss that entity that holds entire macrocosm in her womb and you are not even as big as the size of a microbe? Can you really apply perfume on her body? How many litres of scent would you need decide first! And the epic desire is you want to put your seed within her! I pity this mentality! On top of that, the author (is he a Guru?) explains the seed further as the seed of knowledge! Funny! It is you who want to place your seed of knowledge in her who is the original source of all wisdom! How much knowledge of her do you have? Vedas themselves say that they comprehend only one-fourth of Shiva and rest three quarters are even not know to Vedas. Shiva and Shakti being the same this fact revealed by Vedas is equally applicable on the divine mother as well.

“praaNaH prasuutirbhuvanasya yonirvyaapta.n tvayaa ekapadena vishvam.h |" (Ekakshara Upanishad 3)
"Thou [Shiva] art the Principle of life; Thou the manifestation (the manifested world); Thou the source of the world; by a quarter hast Thou pervaded this world".

Atharva Veda raises questions, on the vastness of Mahadeva's Jwala-Linga form which extends in past, present and future but still this hymn leaves only with questioning. It doesn't have exact estimate of Mahadeva's vastness.

"kíyatā skambháḥ prá viveśa bhūtám kíyad bhaviṣyád anvā́śaye 'sya |
ékaṃ yád áṅgam ákr̥ṇot sahasradhā́ kíyatā skambháḥ prá viveśa tátra |" (Atharvana veda X:7:9)
"How far within the past hath Skambha (Linga/pillar) entered? How much of him hath reached into the future? That one part which he set in thousand places,—how far did Skambha (linga/pillar) penetrate within it?" 

Purusha of Purusha suktam is Rudra (and not Vishnu as incorrectly people understand). That hymn also sings the same glory of Veda Purusha Rudra's vastness as follows. Below verse clearly says that all this that exists, is just a part of him. Vedas and every scripture could describe/know only and only about this one part of him.

"tripādūrdhva udait puruṣaḥ pādo.asyehābhavat punaḥ |
tato viṣvaṃ vyakrāmat sāśanānaśane abhi |" (Rig Veda 10:90:4)
"Three parts of his are beyond all this; all of this is but a part. Again and again, all that eats, and that eats not appeared from this one part of His".

Rudra and Uma being one and the same, the above verses are equally applicable on divine mother Ambika as well. So, it should be enough to understand the fallacy that exists in the explanation of Devi Puram way of Dasamudras.

Let me explain the meaning of the pancha tanmAtras now. shabda, means the perception of sound, sparsha, the perception of touch, rupa, the perception of sight, rasa, the perception of taste, and gandha, the perception of smell. The whole universe of perception 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 nothing but what we hear, touch, see, taste, and smell. These five tanmAtras are the aspects of Sky, Ari, Fire, Water and Earth which are called as Pancha Bhutas. This world which comprises of these Pancha-Bhutas is experienced through the five tanmAtras.The world vanishes for that person who is blind, deaf, dumb, who has lost his sense of touch and smell.

These terms of Sankhya Yoga have been mapped with Dasa-mudras but with incorrect meanings. Dasa Mudras, probably mean to convey requests to Devi to help the Yogi/devotee to transcend these material attribute levels and merge into the inner self (Brahman). This looks more promising understanding since this thought is in sync with what Vedanta (Upanishads) convey!

As already analyzed in the previous section, Lalita Sahasranama (hence Sri Vidya) is a science of liberation through Kundalini awakening which is an inward process. So, the Dasa Mudras also MUST be something inwards only. It looks absurd to see someone aspiring to get liberated by hand postures. Definitely the ten postures must be internal in nature.

Even the Lalita Sahasranama Stotram says goddess Ambika loves the five internal sacrifices. What these sacrifices are would be discussd in subsequent sections, but for now, I am citing this reference to again stress on the fact that Sri Vidya is entirely an internal process of Kundalini rising and has nothing to do with external gestures or postures.

"pancha yagyapriya |" (LS verse 174)
"Who loves the five sacrifices of the rightward Savya path".

Kundalini yoga is not something alien to Vedas and Upanishads, and it is not a proprietary science of Tantras. Upanishads have described this science in very much detail. Nowhere in any of the upanishads have ever been mentioned the hand gestures (mudras) for enlightenment.

Mandala Brahmana Upanishad (1:02) describes the usage of fingers to close the ears for focusing inwards, for a Mudra of meditation called as 'Antar-Lakshyam'. Yoga Tattwa Upanishad (1:36a) describes the use of hand for namaskara Mudra before practicing the Kundalini Yoga. The same Upanishad in verse (1:112) explains the usage of both hands to hold the legs (one by one) firmly while practicing the "Mula-Bandha" posture. Yoga Kundalini Upanishad (1:11b-13a) describes the usage of the fore fingers and thumbs of both hands in binding the Saraswati nAdi and stirring up Kundalini to enter Sushumna. The same upanishad in verse no. (48b-49a) describes the usage of hand for Vajra mudra. Yoga Kundalini Upanishad (2:38-39) mentions about Karanyasam (hand gestures) while describing Khechari Mudra practice. Varaha Upanishad (5:61-62) mentions about planting both hands evenly on the ground before piercing Kundalini upwards.

Apart from these there are no specific usage of Mudras found in Upanishads for Kundalini rising. However, there are numerous Mudras that are used in Kundalini Yoga out of which primary ten as found in Upanishads are being cited here. They are "khechari, bhuchari, madhyama, shanmukhi, shambhavi, antarlakshyam, bahir-lakshyam, madhya-lakshyam, taraka-yogam, and amanaskha-yogam". Could these be termed as dasa-mudras used for Kundalini awakening? The answer is best known to the really awakened yogis and not to the gurus flaunting their theoretical knowledge. However I can say one thing that the hand gestures described in Devi Puram texts are not supported by Upanishads. Especially the meanings associated with the mudras are not at all supported!

remember that Lalita Sahasranama Stotram says she is difficult to be worshiped outwardly, and easily worshipable / attainable through inward focus. With this point in mind her name "Dasha mudra samaradhya |" (LS verse 179), should mean, "She (Kundalini) is worshiped/aroused with ten Yogic Mudras". This is because only through Kundalini rising one transcends the five elements of earth, fire, water, air and sky. In any case with plain outward hand movements if someone could achieve transcending power on the five elements, every Sri Vidya practitioner would have become a superhuman by now.

The transcendence over sabdha, sparsha, rupa, rasa, gandha properties thereby elevating a Yogi to deathlessness over the five elements earth, water, air, fire and sky as described in Dasa-mudras is totally a yogic exercise. Yoga Tatwa Upanishad details it out in the following verses.

“dhaarayetpa~nchaghaTikaaH pR^ithiviijayamaapnuyaat.h | pR^ithiviiyogato mR^ityurna bhavedasya yoginaH |” (Yoga Tattwa Upanishad 86-87a)
“When one performs Dharana [at the region of earth] there for a period of two hours. He (Yogi) then attains mastery over the earth. Death does not trouble him, since he has obtained mastery over the earth element”.

“dhaarayetpa~nchaghaTikaaH sarvapaapaiH pramuchyate | tato jalaadbhaya.n naasti jale mR^ityurna vidyate |” (Yoga Tattwa Upanishad 90)
“By practicing Dharana there (in the region of Apas) for a period 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 water”.

“dhaarayetpa~nchaghaTikaa vahninaasau na daahyate |” (Yoga Tattwa Upanishad 93)
“Practicing Dharana there (in the region of Tejas) for a period of two hours, he is not burnt by fire even though his body enters the fire-pit”.

“dhaarayetpa~nchaghaTikaa vaayuvadvyomago bhavet.h .|
maraNa.n na tu vaayoshcha bhayaM bhavati yoginaH |” (Yoga Tattwa Upanishad 96-97a)
“Practicing Dharana there (in the region of Vayu) for two hours, he enters Vayu and then Akasa.The Yogin does not meet his death through the fear of Vayu”.

“aakaashadhaaraNaattasya khecharatvaM bhaved{}dhruvam.h | yatrakutra sthito vaapi sukhamatyantamashnute | eva.n cha dhaaraNaaH pa~ncha kuryaadyogii vichakshaNaH | tato dR^iDhashariiraH syaanmR^ityustasya na vidyate | brahmaNaH pralayenaapi na siidati mahaamatiH |” (Yoga Tattwa Upanishad 101-103)
“By practising Dharana in the region of Akasa, he obtains certainly the power of levitating in the Akasa (ether).Wherever he stays, he enjoys supreme bliss. The proficient in Yoga should practice these five Dharanas.Then his body becomes strong and he does not know death. That great-minded man does not die even during the deluge of Brahma”.

With respect to shruti vAkya (verses from Upanishad) I have shown a logical correlation between the sounds of Dasa-Mudras viz. dram (shabda), drim (sparsha), klim(rupa), blum (rasa), sah(gandha) and how they help in transcending death and acquiring liberation and siddhis over the five elements. Now I throw it as a challenge to those kaulAchArIs / vAmAcharIs to prove me how their understanding of tanmAtrAs which they attach with lustful interpretations (like kissing Devi, touching Devi etc.) can be derived from Shruti. I would accept Vedas, Upanishads, and also Itihasa (Mahabharata and Ramayana) and smritis (Puranas till they are in sync with Shruti). Being even more liberal let me also give them the option of Tantras. Prove me that your interpretation of lustful meanings to the tanmAtrAs exist in some scripture. That scripture should be authoritative and authentic. One should not show me a write-up of any tom-dick-harry. Just by beginning a write-up with "devi uvAcha...Ishwara uvAcha", you cannot call it as a scripture, mind it!

Conclusion of this section is - With the above analysis we couldn't find any correlation between hand postures and the lustful meanings associated with them. All Mudras must be yogic and plain hand movements without Yoga accompaniment
would result in no awakening. Yoga recognizes ten (and many) mudras of meditation and asanas using which Kundalini awakening happens. Other than them none of the Upanishads recognize the gestures followed by kaulAchArIs / vAmAchAris.So, in no way their lustful meanings can ever touch my chaste mother. My mother Bhavani is the only chaste woman in this universe whom leaving Shiva none can ever touch. And when truly self-realized divine incarnations like Adi Shankara always called her as 'mother' then who are these demons of Kaliyuga to gaze at her with lustful vision?

Refuting panchamakArA rituals of neo-kaulAchAra / vAmAchAra

Now, let's first understand what is meant by 'Panchamakara'. This is a combination of five rituals 'pancha' means 'five' and 'makaras' mean five acts whose name begins with 'ma' sound. They are 'madya (wine), 'mAmsa (meat)', 'matsya (fish)', 'mudra' and 'maithuna (copulation). Note that I have not given English meaning for 'Mudra'. That's purposely left out. Traditionally the definition of 'mudra' from tantra books is 'parched grain or rice'. However, I do not find any correlation between that word and it's given meaning as grain. I'll tell you why later.

Lalita Sahasranama Stotram clearly states she is attainable through inner worship,

"Antarmukha samaradhya bahirmukha sudurlabha |" (LS verse 162)
"She is easily obtainable for those whose worship is based on their mind turned inwards, and She is difficult to be obtained by those who are outward focused".

It states further that she loves five sacrifices as stated below. This cannot contradict the above verse hence logically it has to be interpreted in sync with the above one. Therefore these sacrifices must be internal.

"pancha yagyapriya |" (LS verse 174)
"Who loves the five sacrifices of the rightward Savya path".

What are those five sacrifices? They are the 'Pancha Makaras' but internal ones. Before describing each makara one by one, let me first explain the internal sacrifices. Shruti declares that the external universe (brahmAnda) is identical with the internal microcosm (pindAnda) as stated below.
 “piNDabrahmaaNDayoraikya.n li~Ngasuutraatmanorapi |svaapaavyaakR^itayoraikya.n svaprakaashachidaatmanoH |” (Yoga Kundalini Upanishad 1:81)
“The microcosm and the macrocosm are one and the same; so also the Linga and Sutratman, Svabhava (substance) and form and the self-resplendent light and Chidatma”.

The body is a fire altar, the fire Vaisvanara Agni is the  sacrificial fire, the intake of breaths (pranas) are also the form of fires which kindles the inward Vaswanara and keeps it always burning. food, water etc all items consumed are the Havis (libations). And the acceptor of all this is the Brahman (Atman) who is verily Shiva.This has been clearly declared in Shruti and also in Itihasa. In this connection Satapatha Brahmana of Yajurveda states the following.

“tadyatrainamado manthanti | tajjātamabhiprāṇiti prāṇo vā
agnirjātamevainametatsantaṃ janayati sa punarapāniti tadenamantarātmannādhatte so
'syaiṣo 'ntarātmannagnirāhito bhavati |” (Shatapatha Brahmana 2:2:2:15)
“Now, when, on that occasion, they produce that (fire) by churning, then he (the sacrificer) breathes (blows) upon it, when produced; for fire (Agni) indeed is breath (prana): he thereby produces the one thus produced. He again draws in his breath: thereby he establishes that (fire) in his innermost soul; and that fire thus becomes established in his innermost soul”.

The below verse clarifies in more detail about the Prana being fires.

"te vā ete prāṇā eva yadagnayaḥ | prāṇodānāvevāhavanīyaśca gārhapatyaśca vyāno
'nvāhāryapacanaḥ |" (Shatapatha Brahmana 2:2:2:18)
“The (sacrificial) fires, assuredly, are those breaths: the Âhavanîya and Gârhapatya are the out-breathing and the in-breathing; and the Anvâhârya-pakana is the through-breathing”.

The same Agni which is present within us (in our inward sacrificial altar as vaisvAnara) is also the same which is the Agni of the sacrifice done in outward world as described in Taittiriya Aranyaka of Yajurveda as follows.

“ha.nsaH shuchishhadvasurantarikshasaddhotaa vedishhadatithirduroNasat.h |
nR^ishhadvarasadR^itasadvyomasadabjaa gojaa R^itajaa adrijaa R^itaM bR^ihat.h |” (Taittiriya Aranyaka
“That which is the sun who abides in the clear sky, is the Vasu in the mid-region, is the fire that dwells in the sacrificial altar and in the domestic hearth as the guest, is the fire that shines in men and in the gods, as the Soul, is the fire that is consecrated in the sacrifice, is dwelling in the sky 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 rising sun – that is the Supreme Truth, the Reality underlying all”.

Bhagawad Gita says,

"brahmarpanam brahma havir brahmagnau brahmana hutam |
brahmaiva tena gantavyam brahma-karma-samadhina | (BG. 4.24)
"Brahman is the act of offering; Brahman is the constituent the offerings (ghee, food etc.); by Brahman (offerrer) it is offered into the fire (which is Brahman); Brahman is that which is to be reached by him who always sees Brahman in all his works".

Brihad-Aranyaka upanishad states that the prAnAs are verily Brahman. 

“katama eko deva iti | prā́ṇa iti, sa brahma, tyad ity ā́cakṣate | ( Brihadaranyaka Upanishad III-9-9)
“‘Which is the one god ?’ ‘The Prana (ie. Atman) is the only God; it is Brahman, which is called Tat (that).’

The food is offered to Pranas by chanting ‘prAnAya swAha | apAnAya swAha..etc.” since Prana is verily the Brahman. This is confirmed in Chhandogya Upanishad as stated below.

"tadyadbhaktaM prathamamAgachChettaddhomIya\m+ sa yAM prathamAmAhutiM juhuyAttAM juhuyAtprANAya svAheti prANastR^ipyati |" (Chhandogya Upanishad V:19:01)
"Therefore, the food that comes first should be an object of oblation. That eater, when he offers the first oblation, should offer it with the Mantra 'Svaha to Prana'; thereby Prana is satisfied".

Likewise the subsequent verses of this Upanishad narrate the oblations to other forms of Pranas (viz. Vyana, samana, Udana etc.). Why I'm point all this out here is to make one simple fact clear to everyone that whatever is taken inside our body is an oblation where the body itself is a yajna-kunda (sacrificial altar), and the Atman 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 Anu-Gita as spoken by Sri Krishna to Arjuna in Mahabharata.

"manasā gamyate yac ca yac ca vācā nirudhyate | śrotreṇa śrūyate yac ca cakṣuṣā yac ca dṛśyate | sparśena spṛśyate yac ca ghrāṇena ghrāyate ca yat | manaḥṣaṣṭhāni saṃyamya havīṃṣy etāni sarvaśaḥ | guṇavat pāvako mahyaṃ dīpyate havyavāhanaḥ | yogayajñaḥ pravṛtto me jñānabrahma manodbhavaḥ | prāṇastotro 'pāna śastraḥ sarvatyāgasu dakṣiṇaḥ |  karmānumantā brahmā me kartādhvaryuḥ kṛtastutiḥ | kṛtapraśāstā tac chāstram apavargo 'sya dakṣiṇā |" (MBH 14:25:12-15)
"Whatever is thought of by the mind, whatever is uttered by speech, 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 numbering the sixth, be poured into that fire of high merits which burns within the body, viz., the Soul. The sacrifice constituted by Yoga is going on as regards myself. The spring whence that sacrifice proceeds is that which yields the fire of knowledge. The upward life-wind Prana is the Stotra of that sacrifice. The downward life-wind Apana is its Sastra. The renunciation of everything is the excellent Dakshina of that sacrifice. Consciousness, Mind, and Understanding--these becoming Brahma, are its Hotri, Adhwaryyu, and Udgatri. The Prasastri, his Sastra, is truth. Cessation of separate existence (or Emancipation) is the Dakshina".

Hold on! Don't come to a conclusion that this theory very much supports the neo-kaulAchArA/vAmAcharA practices, since eating meat, fish, drinking wine, etc. also could be considered inward libations. Hold on, my point is not yet completed!

First thing is, the above verse from Anu-Gita should be enough to understand that Yogic (esoteric) sacrifice is the one which awards emancipation. Yes, eating food is also a libation, but that physical, and not Yogic (esoteric). Our scriptures are very esoteric in nature and every statement of scriptures has two meanings, one outward and another inward. Similarly every action in our Dharma is of two types - apara (inferior), and parA (superior). Of course yes, it is true that eating flesh is also a libation to the inward fire (Brahman), however that is an inferior sacrifice, whereas it has another superior spiritual meaning which is regarded as a superior sacrifice. Let me cite a very good example which would clarify all such doubts.

We know that in Kundalini yoga prAnAyAmA is highly important step. It consist of three activities Rechaka (expiration of breath), Pooraka (inspiration of breath) and Kumbhaka (retention of breath). Now if you simply go by the literal meanings and keep breathing in and out you can never achive Kundalini awakening because these have another vital aspect at the inner meaning level as stated in the below verse from Shruti.

Dettachment with all external objects is 'rEchaka', gaining spiritual wisdom through scriptures is 'pUraka', and  assimilation of that learned knowledge as wisdom is 'kumbhaka'.

“bAhyasthaviShaya.n sarva.n rechakaH samudAhR^itaH |
pUraka.n shAstravij~nAna.n kumbhaka.n svagata.n smR^itam.h |” (Varaha Upanishad 5:58)
“(The giving out of) all external objects is said to be Rechaka (expiration). The (taking in of the) spiritual knowledge of the Shastras is said to be Puraka (inspiration) and (the keeping to oneself of) such knowledge is said to be Kumbhaka (or restraint of breath)”.

Now, if you thought only by breathing and breath control you can achieve enlightenment then please go ahead with your fancies!

Did you understand now that even though the physical prAnAyAmA is necessary for Kundalini awakening, yet, without succeeding to attain the inner meaning of that prAnAyAmA it is of no use for the Yogi. On similar lines, the sacrifice what we do within ourselves; there also we have inner meaning for each libation among the 'panchamakArAs'. These I'll cover one by one in separate headings.

madyA (intoxicating drink) as a libation for inward sacrifice

Consumption of Madya (wine) is highly prohibited by all the authentic scriptures of Hinduism. Here is a direct verse from Anu-Gita of Mahabharata which is a dialog between Krishna and Arjuna. Here Krishna clearly says that drinking wine ruins a person. No where in Vedas, Upanishads, Mahabharata, Ramayana, and Puranas has ever been said that wine can award liberation! (Show me proofs from one of these scriptures if you want to counter my challenge).

"abhakṣya bhakṣaṇaṃ caiva madya pānaṃ ca hanti tam | sa cānnaṃ hanti tac cānnaṃ sa hatvā hanyate budhaḥ |" (MBH 14:25:9-10)
"The eating of food that should not be eaten, and the drinking of wine, ruin him. He destroys the food (he takes), and having destroyed that food, he becomes destroyed himself".

In another chapter, Yudhishthira asks Bhishma the following querya nd in response Bhishma gives many injunctions but one of them I'm quoting here.

"kliśyamāneṣu bhūteṣu tais tair bhāvais tatas tataḥ | durgāṇy atitared yena tan me brūhi pitāmaha | madhu māṃsaṃ ca ye nityaṃ varjayantīha mānavāḥ | janmaprabhṛti madyaṃ ca durgāṇy atitaranti te |" (MBH 12:111:1 and 21)
"Yudhishthira said, 'Creatures are seen to be afflicted by diverse means and almost continually. Tell me, O grandsire, in what way can one overcome all those difficulties.'. Bhishma said, "They that abstain, from their birth, from honey and meat and intoxicating drinks, succeed in overcoming all difficulties".

From our analysis in the previous section we understand that whatever we do with our mind, whatever we consume with mouth, whatever we breathe, everything is a libation in our internal Yogic sacrifice. And also we have seen that Lalita Sahasranama Stotram (LS verse 174) says "pancha yagyapriya |"  which means "Goddess loves five sacrifices".

Now, if you are a kaulAchArI / vAmAchArI don't blindly apply your bogus idea that goddess is fond of your physical panchamakaras and don't call them your libations offered to goddess within yourself. Apply little brain and logic. Scriptures should NEVER contradict each other in terms of universal rutam (law).

Let's here focus only on wine aspect. All the scripturescondemn the consumption of wine. And Brahmanada Purana's this Lalita Sahasranama Stotram CANNOT claim that goddess is fond of people who consume wine. If this is the case, then this hymn should be rejected outright!

However, this cannot be the case since Sri Vidya is verily an essence concealed in Vedas and Lalitambika is herself present in Shruti. So, here your neo-kaulAchArA interpretation of "wine as libation" stands refuted, and my interpretation of madya would be correct.

Divine nectar flows from Sahasrara which a Yogi can drink when his Kundalini (Lalitambika) meets with Shiva in Sahasrara. The following verse from Shruti confirms the flow of nectar from Sahasrara.

“evametAsu nADIShu dharanti dashavAyavaH | eva.n nADIgati.n vAyugati.n j~nAtvA vichakShaNaH | samagrIvashiraH kAyaH sa.nvR^itAsyaH sunishchalaH | nAsAgre chaiva hR^inmadhye bindumadhye turIyakam.h | sravantamamR^itaM pashyennetrAbhyA.n susamAhitaH |” (Varaha Upanishad 5:31-33a)
“Thus ten Vayus move in these Nadis. A wise man who has understood the course of Nadis and Vayus should, after keeping his neck and body erect with his mouth closed, contemplate immovably upon Turyaka (Atman) at the tip of his nose, in the centre of his heart and in the middle of Bindu and should see with a tranquil mind through the (mental) eyes, the nectar flowing from there”.

After kundalini awakening, a Yogi gains all siddhis (powers) and walks among the mankind as the embodied form of the parabrahman. His immortality is obtained by the drinking divine nectar of Sahasrara.

“labhyate yadi tasyaiva yogasiddhiH kare sthitaa | atiitaanaagata.n vetti khecharii cha bhaved{}dhruvam.h | amarii.n yaH pibennitya.n nasya.n kurvandine dine | vajroliimabhyasennityamamaroliiti kathyate |” (Yoga tattwa Upanishad 127-128)
“If the Yoga Siddhis are ever to be attained, he only has them within his reach. He knows the past and the future and certainly moves in the air. He who drinks of the nectar thus is rendered immortal day by day. He should daily practice Vajroli. Then it is called Amaroli (which makes him ‘amar’ (deathless)”.

This nectar is called as SOMA in Vedas, and this nectar (Soma) is verily the liquid form of brahmajnAnam. This is why the Vedic deities like Indra et al, are fond of drinking this soma.

Now, when a Yogi enjoys this nectar for himself, he is a bhogi. ANd when he does arpanam (offers) the bliss, siddhis, and all outcomes of this nectar (madya) to goddess with the bent of mind of renunciation. That becomes tyAgam (sacrifice), and that offer where a Yogi says, "O divine mother! what will I do with these siddhis and this nectar of immortality. I offer it on your lotus feet. It's all yours, please accept!"

Then this becomes the inward sacrifice (yajnA) where the yogi has made the Brahman (Atman = LalitAmbika) the actual bhogi (consumer of sacrifice), and he became just the witnesser standing out  merely as the instrument in this entire process. That gives final liberation. Attachment can never give liebration, and attachment with this orgasm of sahasrara and the bliss of the nectar of sahasrara are also the shackles which keeps you away from the final stap of liberation. You give them up to goddess like a sanyasi, and you
would get the supreme state called emancipation!

This is the internal meaning of madyA as one of the ingredient of pancha-yajnA O ignorant fellows of kAulAchArA / vAmAchArA school", come out of your illusions. Devi would never accept your wine as a libation in your worship!

mAmsA (meat) as a libation for inward sacrifice

Let me state here firmly that whosoever be your Guru in this Kaliyuga, who taught you that eating Meat is good; perhaps that person is not educated in the authentic scriptures of Hindusim. Flesh eating has always been condemned in the scriptures. Ah! Don't pounce at me saying in vedic sacrifices Horses and otehr animals used to be killed. Well, you are right, but probably you haven't ever been told by anyone that that those animal sacrifices were long back converted from physical slaughter to sacrifice by mantras by Sage Agastya. And people from previous Kalpa also used to use beans and seeds as sacrificial animals and not the actual living beings! (I'll give proofs don't worry). Let me first educate you here what scriptures say about meat eating.

But before I narrate what scriptures say about animal sacrifice, one simple question I would like to raise here, Lalita Sahasranama Stotram describes Ambika as fond of eating all Satwik foods as quoted below.

"payasannapriya |" (LS verse 99) which means, "Who likes offerings of Payasa (milk mixed with rice)".
"snigdhau danapriya |" (LS verse 101)" which means, "Who loves offerings of rice mixed with ghee"..
"haridrannaika rasika |" (LS verse108)", which means, "Who loves offerings of turmeric– flavoured rice (Pulihora)".

Now when she is so satwic food lover sweet mother of mine, how could she be fond of bali? (Sacrifice)? as the hymn says, "balipriya |" (LS verse.132)"?

I know the answer but foud some people misinterpreting "bali priya" as fond of animal sacrifices hence deriving her attribute as fond of eating flesh. However, let me make it clear point blank that "bali priya" means, "Who loves the sacrifices(offerings) of devotees". We have seen above that Lalitambika is fond of all satwik food and nowhere she is shown as taking delight in eating fish or meat.Therefore the understanding of kaulAchArIs / vAmAchArIs in eating meat and offering it as one of the libations in "pancha yajnas" stands refuted!

Moreover, her hymn itself begins with her first name as "srI mAtA", which emans, "She who is the divine mother of ALL". Then with what foolish logic of yours you can justify killing an animal and think that she would be happy with you act? All animals are her own little kids as like as you and me. If you really think animal killing is a virtuous act, and she would be happy to see you offering her a living being in sacrifice, then I would ask you why don't you go ahead and chop off your son's head and offer it as sacrifice to her? She would definitely be overcome by enormous grace for you since you have offered her your own son. Why don't you eat flesh of your own kid? Panchamakara of
kaulAchAra /
vAmAchAra talks about meat so why can't you eat your own family member as humans are the superior creatures?

Did you understand the stupidity of the logic of eating flesh? Ah! Don't start uttering curses upon me. I will show you that the ancients seers have also condemned animal killing and meat eating. Who are you and your Gurus of this kaliyuga to stand in front of the wise men of ancient era?

Here are STRONG proofs from Mahabharata that animal killing was never recommended and meat eating was a sin. I'm presenting the instructions of Bhishma from Mahabharata. And if need his credentials to see how knowledgeable that foremost of seers Bhishma was, then here it is as spoken by goddess Ganga herself.

"yaṃ putram aṣṭamaṃ rājaṃs tvaṃ purā mayy ajāyithāḥ | sa te 'yaṃ puruṣavyāghra nayasvainaṃ gṛhāntikam |  vedān adhijage sāṅgān vasiṣṭhād eva vīryavān | kṛtāstraḥ parameṣvāso devarājasamo yudhi |  surāṇāṃ saṃmato nityam asurāṇāṃ ca bhārata | uśanā veda yac chāstram ayaṃ tad veda sarvaśaḥ |  tathaivāṅgirasaḥ putraḥ surāsuranamaskṛtaḥ | yad veda śāstraṃ tac cāpi kṛtsnam asmin pratiṣṭhitam | tava putre mahābāhau sāṅgopāṅgaṃ mahātmani |  ṛṣiḥ parair anādhṛṣyo jāmadagnyaḥ pratāpavān | yad astraṃ veda rāmaś ca tad apy asmin pratiṣṭhitam |  maheṣvāsam imaṃ rājan rājadharmārthakovidam | mayā dattaṃ nijaṃ putraṃ vīraṃ vīra gṛhān naya |" (MBH 1:94:31-36)
"And Ganga said, 'O tiger among men, that eighth son whom thou hadst some time before begat upon me is this. Know that this excellent child is conversant with all weapons, O monarch, take him now. I have reared him with care. And go home, O tiger among men, taking him with thee. Endued with superior intelligence, he has studied with Vasishtha the entire Vedas with their branches. Skilled in all weapons and a mighty bowman, he is like Indra in battle. And, O Bharata, both the gods and the Asuras look upon him with favour. Whatever branches of knowledge are known to Usanas, this one knoweth completely. And so is he the master of all those Sastras that the son of Angiras (Vrihaspati) adored by the gods and the Asuras, knoweth. And all the weapons known to the powerful and invincible Rama, the son of Jamadagni are known to this thy illustrious son of mighty arms. O king of superior courage, take this thy own heroic child given unto thee by me. He is a mighty bowman and conversant with the interpretation of all treatises on the duties of a king."

Bhishma studied under the tutelage of the greatest sages of Hinduism viz. Vasishtha, Brihaspati, Usanas (Shukracharya), and Parashurama. Bhishma is one man who encompasses the knowledge of four celestial sages. Now, think before you try to say what your kaulAchArA / vAmAchArA guru said is correct and Bhishma's talks were bogus! Also, note that Mahabharata is an epic (itihasa), and is one of the authentic and authoritative scriptures of Hinduism.

Let's see what Mahabharata (book 13:chapter 116) says about killing animals. Bhishma says the below things.

"evaṃ vai paramaṃ dharmaṃ praśaṃsanti manīṣiṇaḥ | prāṇā yathātmano 'bhīṣṭā bhūtānām api te tathā |  ātmaupamyena gantavyaṃ buddhimadbhir mahātmabhiḥ | mṛtyuto bhayam astīti viduṣāṃ bhūtim icchatām | kiṃ punar hanyamānānāṃ tarasā jīvitārthinām | arogāṇām apāpānāṃ pāpair māṃsopajīvibhiḥ |  tasmād viddhi mahārāja māṃsasya parivarjanam | dharmasyāyatanaṃ śreṣṭhaṃ svargasya ca sukhasya ca |  ahiṃsā paramo dharmas tathāhiṃsā paraṃtapaḥ | ahiṃsā paramaṃ satyaṃ tato dharmaḥ pravartate |  na hi māṃsaṃ tṛṇāt kāṣṭhād upalād vāpi jāyate | hatvā jantuṃ tato māṃsaṃ tasmād doṣo 'sya bhakṣaṇe |  svāhā svadhāmṛta bhujo devāḥ satyārjava priyāḥ | kravyādān rākṣasān viddhi jihmānṛta parāyaṇān |" (MBH 13:116:21-27)
"The life-breaths of other creatures are as dear to them as those of one's to one's own self. Men endued with intelligence and cleansed souls should always behave towards other creatures after the manner of that behaviour which they like others to observe towards themselves. It is seen that even those men who are possessed of learning and who seek to achieve the highest good in the form of Emancipation, 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 sought to be slain by sinful wretches subsisting by slaughter? For this reason, O monarch, know that the discarding of meat is the highest refuge of religion, of heaven, and of happiness. Abstention from injury is the highest religion. It is, again, the highest penance. It is also the highest truths from which all duty proceeds. Flesh cannot be had from grass or wood or stone. Unless a living creature is slain, it cannot be had. Hence is the fault in eating flesh. The deities who subsist upon Swaha, Swadha, and nectar, are devoted to truth and sincerity. Those persons, however, who are for gratifying the sensation of taste, should be known as Rakshasas wedded to the attribute of Passion".

Bhishma says what the Saptarishis and Valakhilyas said in the same chapter as,

"saptarṣayo vālakhilyās tathaiva ca marīcipāḥ | amāṃsa bhakṣaṇaṃ rājan praśaṃsanti manīṣiṇaḥ |"(MBH 13:116:11)
"The seven celestial Rishis, the Valakhilyas, and those Rishis who drink the rays of the sun, endued with great wisdom, applaud abstention from meat".

Bhishma says what the  Self-born Manu said in the same chapter as,

"na bhakṣayati yo māṃsaṃ na hanyān na ca ghātayet | taṃ mitraṃ sarvabhūtānāṃ manuḥ svāyambhuvo 'bravīt |  adhṛṣyaḥ sarvabhūtānāṃ viśvāsyaḥ sarvajantuṣu | sādhūnāṃ saṃmato nityaṃ bhaven māṃsasya varjanāt |" (MBH 13:116:12-13)
"The Self-born Manu has said that that man who does not eat meat, or who does not slay living creatures, or who does not cause them to be slain, is a friend of all creatures. Such a man is incapable of being oppressed by any creature. He enjoys the confidence of all living beings. He always enjoys, besides, the approbation and commendation of the righteous"

Bhishma says what the  celestial sage Narada said in the same chapter as,

"svamāṃsaṃ paramāṃsena yo vardhayitum icchati | nāradaḥ prāha dharmātmā niyataṃ so 'vasīdati |" (MBH 13:116:14)
"The righteous-souled Narada has said that that man who wishes to increase his own flesh by eating the flesh of other creatures, meets with calamity"

Bhishma says whosoever slaughters or becomes indirect cause of slaughter (as meat eater), his life span gets reduced.

"yasmād grasati caivāyur hiṃsakānāṃ mahādyute | tasmād vivarjayen māṃsaṃ ya icched bhūtim ātmanaḥ |" (MBH 13:116:31)
"Since, O thou of great splendour, the period of life is shortened of persons who slaughter living creatures or cause them to be slaughtered, it is clear that the person who wishes his own good should give up meat entirely".

Now comes the most significant aspect ofthis analysis. Even the Vedic sacrifices and animal killing has been stopped by Agastya by once for all dedicating all deers to Gods using his power of penance. That's how that great sage had prevented physical killing of animals and also made sure that Vedic rites assumed that animals were sacrificed and offered to deities.

In this connection, Bhishma in Mahabharata (MBH 13:116) says,

"prajānāṃ hitakāmena tv agastyena mahātmanā | āraṇyāḥ sarvadaivatyāḥ prokṣitās tapasā mṛgāḥ |  kriyā hy evaṃ na hīyante pitṛdaivatasaṃśritāḥ | prīyante pitaraś caiva nyāyato māṃsatarpitāḥ |  idaṃ tu śṛṇu rājendra kīrtyamānaṃ mayānagha | abhakṣaṇe sarvasukhaṃ māṃsasya manujādhipa |  yas tu varṣaśataṃ pūrṇaṃ tapas tapyet sudāruṇam | yaś caikaṃ varjayen māṃsaṃ samam etan mataṃ mama |" (MBH 13:116:56-59)
"Desirous of benefiting all men, the high-souled Agastya, by the aid of his penances, dedicated, once for all, all wild animals of the deer species to the deities. Hence, there is no longer any necessity of sanctifying those animals for offering them to the deities and the Pitris. Served with flesh according to the ordinance, the Pitris become gratified. Listen to me, O king of kings, as I tell thee this, O sinless one. There is complete happiness in abstaining from meat, O monarch. He that undergoes severe austerities for a hundred years and he that abstains from meat, are both equal in point of merit. Even this is my opinion".

Now, let me show you that even in previous Kalpas (epochs) Vedic sacrifices used to be conducted by considering seeds as sacrificial animals and not the actual animals that were ever used to be slaughtered.

"ya icchet puruṣo 'tyantam ātmānaṃ nirupadravam | sa varjayeta māṃsāni prāṇinām iha sarvaśaḥ |  śrūyate hi purākalpe nṛṇāṃ vrīhi mayaḥ paśuḥ | yenāyajanta yajvānaḥ puṇyalokaparāyaṇāḥ |" (MBH 14:116:52-53)
"That man who wishes to avoid calamity of every kind should abstain from the meat of every living creature. It is heard that in the ancient Kalpa, persons, desirous of attaining to regions of merit hereafter, performed sacrifices with seeds, regarding such animals as dedicated by them".

Now, let's see a conversation between Narada and Vasudeva. Let's see whom Narada pays his homage. This extract is taken from Mahabharata (Book 13, chapter 32).

"nirmamā niṣpratidvaṃdvā nirhrīkā niṣprayojanāḥ | ahiṃsā niratā ye ca ye ca satyavratā narāḥ | dāntāḥ śama parāś caiva tān namasyāmi keśava |" (MBH 13:32:18)
"Narada said, 'I bow unto them that are devoted to the practice of the duty of compassion towards all creatures, that are firm in the observance of truth, that are self-restrained, and that are peaceful in their behaviour'".

Hope these many evidences are enough to understand that bali (Sacrifice) has always been condemned and eating flesh ahs always been considered sinful by the high souled sages and celestial seers. Therefore, Lalitambika would never agree to see her child killing and eating the flesh of another child of hers. If she is a real mother, she would never accept that. And she indeed is a true mother hence called as "srI mAtA". Therefore meat can not be considered as a valid libation for the internal sacrifice (Yajna) within our body.

So, let's understand what could be the meaning of "mAmsa" which constitutes as the libation in panchayajnas which are loved by lalitambika.

In reality, all those vices viz. kAma (lust), krodha (anger), lObha (greed), mOha (attachment) etc. are all of the categories of animal instincts. Not only these, but in fact all the vices that we have in ourselves, are all like wild animals which subjugate and defat our virtuous self. So, sacrificing all these animals of esoteric nature to the supreme goddess and offering their meat through the internal libation is what is meant by "mAmsa" of "pancha makAra".

Now, how do we offer these libations is the question. Sacrifice kAma (lust) using the celestial sword called as brahmacharya (celibacy), sacrifice krOdha (anger) through the sword called as shAnti (peacefulness), sacrifice mOha (attachment or infatuation) with the weapon called vairAgyam (dispassion or detachment). and so on so forth. And then offer the slaughtered pieces to the inward fire (Brahman which is Lalitambika).  Did you note that all these weapons what we discussed are all internal in nature as like as the animals (vices). So, you are essentially doing all these slaughtering of vices internally. And that's the point which makes it in agreement to our previous analysis that all pancha-yajnas (five sacrifices) are inward in nature.

This is the internal meaning of mAmsA as one of the ingredient of pancha-yajnA O ignorant fellows of "neo-kaulAchArA/vAmAchArA" school, come out of your illusions. Devi would never accept your pieces of meat as a libation in your worship!

mAtsyA (fish) as a libation for inward sacrifice

Well, meat is a super set wherein fish also comes as one of the subsets. So, it's absurd to consider the meaning of mastya as fish in external sense as the kaulAchArIs / vAmAchArIs consider! Yeah, yeah I know that there are Tantra texts which whose translations in English called matsya as fish! I would say those translators were not competent enough to grasp the esoteric meanings intended in Tantras. 

flesh of a fish (Matsya) also comes under the category of Meat (mamsa), so logically it doesn't fit to see fish separately as one of the mAkArA in panchamakArAs. So, what coudl be the real meaning of fish, is the question now. Remember that we are analyzing the panchamAkArAs as internal oblations in the inward sacrifice (yajna) which awards us liberation. Let me explain what it means by 'mAtsya'.

Kundalini Yoga requires to be performed with few Yoga-Asanas (Yogic postures). Maha-Yoga is the procedure called out in Upanishads which comprises. Entire Kundalini Yoga is called as 'Maha Yoga' and it comprises of four sub-divisions viz. Mantra Yoga, Laya Yoga, Hatha Yoga, and Raja Yoga.In this seris, one needs to sit in various Yoga-Asanas viz. Padmasana, siddhasana, etc.

When a Yogi is seated in padmAsanA or siddhAsana, his body posture resembles the form of a fish. The folded legs resemble the tail-fin of a fish, the erect body resembles the truck of a fish, the two hands resemble the fins of a fish and head resembers the head of a fish. You can see any image of a dolphin and compare it with the image of a Yogi in padmAsanA. 

With this yogic posture resembling mAtsya, the yogic does the prAnAyAmA, and all other Kundalini rising tricks. These steps are the libations which he offers into the sacrifice called as Kundalini Yajna, and as a result of these libations Lalitambika as Kundalini rises upwards.

Another interpretation is, for Kundalini to rise upwards, breath reversal should be done. That means prAna should be channelized as apAnA and vice versa. In short, prAnAyama helps a yogi to do these breath channelizing excercise into the idA and pingAlA nerves. Within these two nAdIs, the prAnas when channelized using rEchaka, pooraka, and kumbhaka techniques, the prAnAs move like fish through the coiled idA and pingalA nAdIs. So, the resemblance of the movement of prAnAs with fish is termed as 'matsyA) and is considered as an oblation in the sacrifice of Kundalini awakening. 

We have already seen in previous sections also that Satapatha Brahmana clearly states that prAnAs are the libations which kindle the internal fire. Internal fire within us is same but called by various names based on the functions performed. While digesting food it is called Vaisvanara, which considering it as consciousness it is called as Chidagni (Kudnalini), and also caleld Skhambha and Jatavedas in Vedas.

"te vā ete prāṇā eva yadagnayaḥ | prāṇodānāvevāhavanīyaśca gārhapatyaśca vyāno
'nvāhāryapacanaḥ |" (Shatapatha Brahmana 2:2:2:18)
“The (sacrificial) fires, assuredly, are those breaths: the Âhavanîya and Gârhapatya are the out-breathing and the in-breathing; and the Anvâhârya-pakana is the through-breathing”.

Therefore when we reverse our normal breath cycle using prAnAyAmA and channelize them as fuels in the inward sacrifice they kindle the Atman (Fire) by circulating lime fish (matsyA). Therefore this is the matsyA (fish) which a Yogi offers as a sacrificial libation to the goddess Lalitambika (Atman) as one of the ingredient of panchamakArA.

therefore again it should be noted by
kaulAchArIs / vAmAchArIs that eating fishes daily for the entire lifetime would never bring you liberation, period!

mudrA (postures) as a libation for inward sacrifice

I don't understand why do people and also Translated texts of Tantra associate Mudra with grains or parched rice. There is no logic in eating grains for becoming elevated spiritually. Also for inward sacrifice I don't see any connection between parched rice or grains and internal libation. Obviously, during the Kundalini Yoga practice you would not eat rice balls, would you? So, even though intake of food is a libation, but when we talk with respect to the Yajna called Kundalini-Yoga, eating is not one of the activity during this yoga.

Mudra in Sanskrit means posture. There are various Mudras and Mandhas mentioned in Yoga related Upanishads which are pre-requisite steps for awakening the Kundalini. Without practicing these Mundras and Bandhas Kundalini rising wouldn't happen. Some of the mudrAs and bandhas are listed below. These mudrAs are postures for meditation, prAnAyAmA and the bandhAs are related to Yoga.

"khechari, bhuchari, madhyama, shanmukhi, shambhavi, antarlakshyam, bahir-lakshyam, madhya-lakshyam, taraka-yogam, and amanaskha-yogam. mUla-bandha, jalandhara-bandha, vajrolI-mudrA, amarolI-mudrA" and many more.

So, when you practice these mudrAs as pre-requisite libations in your inward yajna (sacrifice) for kundalini awakening, you would succeed in unleashing the serpent power upwards. So, in a way you offer these libations to goddess and she rises upwards being pleased with your sacrifice (yajna).

maithuna (copulation) as a libation for inward sacrifice

 Aha! I being a great admirer of celibacy and a great fan of Bhishma (the mighty grandsire who was an eternal celibate), and a great fan of Sri rama for preaching the one-woman-man principle (ekApatnIvratA-dharmam) this section of maithuna (copulation) is my favorite section for refutation!

I have always liked men of principles, and that's why I love following Bhishma's path till marriage and after that would love to follow Sri Rama's teaching.  In fact all the authentic scriptures preach the same. Either scriptures glorify Brahmacharya (celibacy) or they advocate for being faithful to one wife. And believe me, these two are the only paths for a happy life.

Hinduism has numerous examples where people tried to appease their lust by satisfying it, but realized very late that it cannot be satiated with fulfilling the desire, rather it can be killed by self-restraint. Read king Yayati's story from Mahabharata, which is an excellent lesson to learn from his life. After spending hundreds of years trying to satisfy his lust by appeasing it, at last he realized that there is no end to it. It can be put to culmination only by abstaining from it.

Passion is like a fire , you cannot put it out by throwing gasoline on it. It needs water to put it out. And I never understood the stupid logic of
kaulAchArIs / vAmAchArIs behind the "maithunA" practice. First of all there cannot be any liberation through copulation. Liberation can be achieved through Brahmaharya though. Secondly, there is no point in copulating with multiple women of various races as followed by them.If someone prefers the gruhasthAshramA (house-holder life), is it not sufficient to engage with one wife? Can't she fulfil all your so called spiritual needs in kaulAchAra practices? Why do you need multiple Yoginis for your practices?

And I found in that social networking forum what i discussed at the beginning of this article, that someone was fond of posting the pictures of some gurus stating fondly that those men practiced panchamakArAs with many Yogini disciples of their school. I felt bad seeing those posts also. In the name of 'guru-business' where is my sacred Hinduism heading at? God knows the answer!

Well, let me start the refutation process now!

If liberation was so easy by appeasing your animal desires and by eating every filth that pleases you, then Bhagwad Gita would not have said that out of thousands of aspirants of liberation only one attains it.

"manuṣyāṇāḿ sahasreṣu | kaścid yatati siddhaye |

yatatām api siddhānāḿ | kaścin māḿ vetti tattvataḥ |" (BG 7:03)
"Out of many thousands among men, one may endeavor for perfection, and of those who have achieved perfection, hardly one knows Me in truth".

If physical maithuna was really capable of awarding liberation, then all animals, and all prostitutes would have become liberated in every era of Kaliyuga. However, liberation is not that easy achievement. Liberation cannot be gained without Brahmacharya, Brahmajnana and conquering of your senses and mind. Let me put an argument before you all. If copulation could have really been capable of liberating the couple, then why was that great science never discoursed by great seer Bhishma in the entire Mahabharata? Remember that Bhishma narrated multiple chapters on spiritual subjects to Yudhishthira, entire two parvas of Mahabharata viz. Santi parva and Anusasana Parva are totally their conversations only. However, nowhere such a great science has ever been discussed. Why? Ah! Don't say "this is a secret science and needs to be taught only to eligible candidates". If you said that then answer me that who out of the billions of men of this Kaliyuga do you think is far more eligible that Yudhishthira of great knowledge? If Yudhishthira was not eligible for gaining such a knowledge, then who else is eligible in today's Yuga? Or in other words, weren't there any single eligible candidate in Krita, treta and Dwapara yugas that these topics are being taught now in this Kaliyuga to these great men of unrestrained senses? Also, don't say "Bhishma was not aware of this secret science", because you would become dumbstruck if I question you how can a disciple of vasishtha, Brihaspati, Shukracharya and Parashurama be devoid of that knowledge? Another argument that I want to raise is, if liberation would have been so easy with union, then why did Sanat Kumaras kind of great sages took the path of celibacy? Definitely something must be fishy here, right?

Definitely Tantra is a great science but it MUST be esoteric in nature and it must not have talked in true sense of intercourse while talking about Maithuna. I'll prove this.

Jnanarnava-tantra (22:68) says, "the union of male and female is the true yoga".  And you
kaulAchArIs / vAmAchArIs stupidly followed it's literal meaning and started copulating with females, right? Do you even have the slightest awareness that even Upanishads state the same truth and this is a fact indeed? Don't jump with joy, I meant to say it is truth however not on literal sense. It has its inner meaning which is the truth.

That male and female are within everyone of us irrespective of our gender, and they are Shiva and Shakti, and not you are your sexual partner! In this connection Shruti has ample no. of references I'll quote only few as follows.

“prakR^ityashhTakaruupa.n cha sthaana.n gachchhati kuNDalii | kroDiikR^itya shiva.n yaati kroDiikR^itya viliiyate |” (Yoga Kundalini Upanishad 74)
“Kundalini assumes the eight forms of Prakriti (matter) and attains Shiva by encircling him and dissolves itself in Shiva”.

See below whose union is the giver of final bestitude (liberation) and decide whether you still want to sleep with your partner .

“rudragranthi.n cha bhittvaiva kamalaani bhinatti shhaT.h | sahasrakamale shaktiH shivena saha modate | saivaavasthaa paraa j~neyaa saiva nirvR^itikaariNii iti |” (Yoga Kundalini Upanishad 1:86)
“Then it pierces Rudragranthi, after, (all) the six lotuses (or chakras). Then Sakti is happy with Shiva in Sahasrara Kamala (1000 lotuses seat). This should be known as the highest Avastha (supreme state) and it alone is the giver of final beatitude”.
 Now did you understand why Maheshvara-tantra says, "being in love is above the world"? Where does the actual love happen? Answer is - sahasrAra. And it is the sahasrArA which is above the world and is called as the indestructible supreme station (parama padam) in Vedas. So, Shiva and Shakti's being in love is above the world obviously. That's true indeed!
Therefore the supreme ecstacy that is experienced by a Yogi when his Kundalini shakti unites herself with Shiva in sahasrArA, that orgasm is the giver of joy and liberation both. This is why Lalitambika and Sri Vidya path is said to be "bhOga-mOksha pradAyini" (that path which gives bliss and liberation both). This is the internal bhoga (orgasm of sahasrAra) and not external one. This point is also highly misinterpreted by kaulAchArIs / vAmAchArIs.  

When you generously give away this supreme ecstasy to  the divine mother, that becomes tyAgam (giving away) and it acts as the oblation (havis) in your internal panchayajnA (sacrifice). And this offering of yours when given to the goddess, your pancha-yajnA (five internal sacrifices) becomes completed. Then goddess awards you the supreme state of emancipation. 

This is the meaning of maithunAm (copulation) and it has nothing to do with your intercourse with any external partner.

Well, I know, after reading this where you
kaulAchArIs / vAmAchArIs would come from. Yes, your 'Yoni Tantra' book definitely states physical worship of 'Yoni' and copulation, but I would say that Yoni Tantra is not an authentic tantra scripture. It is almost 99% bogus and only one verse I found as valid which I'll discuss here. Apart from this verse all other verses are bogus and I'll refute them in a separate section altogether.

Yoni Tantra says, 

"One should only couple with the yoni that bleeds |" (Yoni Tantra: patala-5),

Well if you interpreted in literally then it is a grievous sin to copulate during the first 4 days of menses cycle as per Shiva Gita from Padma Purana and also as per the scripture called 'Kama Shastram'. So, why did I call this verse as a fact? I called it as true with an esoteric sense which I'll explain now.

Irrespective of your gender, whether you are a male of female or an eunuch; you have all the seven chakras within you, and mUlAdhAra chakra which exists at the base of your spine, is in fact a Yoni of Shakti, mUlAdhAra chakra is of triangular shape for the same reason. It is of red color symbolizing the shoNitam (female reproductive fluid which is usually identified with blood). In the same mUlAdhAra prAnAs which are veily called as shuklam in Upanishads mix and rise upwards along with kundalini shakti during the awakening yoga. The kAmAkhyA Peetham is also the mUlAdhAra, the passion related teachings of tantra are all actually about union of male-female principle in mUlAdhAra and that male-female are shiva-Shakti only. Fools are they who consider all these as outward instructions and start engaging in copulation with women. So, this is what is meant by coupling of male aspect with a bleeding female yoni. Let me show what Upanishad says about this.

"yonimadhye mahaakshetre japaabandhuukasa.nnibham.h |rajo vasati jantuunaa.n deviitattva.n samaavR^itam.h | rajaso retaso yogaadraajayoga iti smR^itaH | aNimaadipadaM praapya raajate raajayogataH | praaNaapaanasamaayogo j~neya.n yogachatushhTayam.h |" (Yogatattwa Upanishad 136-138)
"In the great temple of the middle of yoni (the female organ) the principle of the Devi, which is red like Hibiscus flower lives as Rajas in all beings. The merger of this rajas with the male principle is called Raja Yoga. As a result of Raja Yoga, the Yogi gets all the occult powers like Anima. You have to understand that all these four types of Yogas are nothing but the merger of Prana, Apana and Samana".

"deha.n shivaalayaM prokta.n siddhida.n sarvadehinaam.h | gudameDhraantaraalasthaM muulaadhaara.n trikoNakam.h | shivasya jiivaruupasya sthaana.n taddhi prachakshate | yatra kuNDaliniinaama paraa shaktiH pratishhThitaa | yasmaadutpadyate vaayuryasmaadvahniH pravartate | yasmaadutpadyate binduryasmaannaadaH pravartate | yasmaadutpadyate ha.nso yasmaadutpadyate manaH | tadetatkaamaruupaakhyaM piiTha.n kaamaphalapradam.h |" (Yogatattwa Upanishad 168-171)
"For all those who have a body, their body is the temple of Shiva. It can give them occult powers. The triangular part in between the anus and penis is called the mooladhara. This is the place where Shiva lives as a life giving force. There the Parashakthi called Kundalani lives. From there wind is produced. The fire is also produced from there. From there only the sound 'Hamsa' and the mind are also produced. This place which would give whatever is asked for is called Kamakhya peetam (the seat of passion)".

So, this maithuna is also an internal sacrifice. People blindly follow whatever is written in Tantras instead of having the discrimination of what's true scriptural statement and what could be later interpolation.

Let me extend this discussion further to showcase some other important aspects around this topic on 'maithunA'. Well, NONE of the scriptures of Hinduism ever said that copulation is meritorious. yes it is meritorious, but ONLY when it is used righteously for gaining children and continuing your race. Why is it that not even once Mahabharata discussed the glories of maithunA? You cannot answer! However, i can show you the glories of brahmacharya from Mahabharata. Let me show you what learned seers and celestial sages have to say about it!

Bhishma who had no other parallel on earth except Krishna in knowledge who could stand before him, such a great seer sang the glory of Brahmacharya toYudhishthira in response to his query as follows.

"svakarmaniratānāṃ ca śūrāṇāṃ cāpi kiṃ phalam | satye ca kiṃ phalaṃ proktaṃ brahmacarye ca kiṃ phalam | brahmacaryaṃ dahed rājan sarvapāpāny upāsitam | brāhmaṇena viśeṣeṇa brāhmaṇo hy agir ucyate |  pratyakṣaṃ ca tavāpy etad brāhmaṇeṣu tapasviṣu | bibheti hi yathā śakro brahma cāri pradharṣitaḥ | tad brahmacaryasya phalam ṛṣīṇām iha dṛśyate |" (MBH 13:74:5, 36-37)
"Yudhishthira asked, "What are the fruits that have been declared to attach to the observance of purity and to the practice of Brahmacharya?"
"Bhishma said, 'Listen now to me, O lord of Earth, as I expound to thee the merits of Brahmacharya. That man, who practices the vow of Brahmacharya from his birth to the time of his death, know, O king, has nothing unattainable! Many millions of Rishis are residing in the region of Brahma. All of them, while here, were devoted to Truth, and self-restrained and had their vital seed drawn up. The vow of Brahmacharya, O king, duly observed by a Brahmana, is sure to burn all his sins. The Brahmana is said to be a blazing fire. In those Brahmanas that are devoted to penances, the deity of fire becomes visible. If a Brahmacharin yields to wrath in consequence of any slight the chief of the deities himself trembles in fear. Even this is the visible fruit of the vow of Brahmacharya that is observed by the Rishis'."

Sanat-Sujata who is one among the kumaras (Brahma's mind born children), and who is foremost of the celestial sages and preceptor of even the celestials; let's see what this seer had said. This excerpt is from 'sanat-sujAtIya gItA' from Mahabharata which is a highly revered gItA; even Adi Shankara wrote commentary on this gItA. Note it very carefully that here Sanat-Sujata says that liberation or Brahmajnanam is attainable only by Brahmacharya. This must be a jolt on kaulAchArIs / vAmAchArIs.

"naitad brahma tvaramāṇena labhyaṃ; yan māṃ pṛcchasy abhihṛṣyasy atīva | avyaktavidyām abhidhāsye purāṇīṃ; buddhyā ca teṣāṃ brahmacaryeṇa siddhām |" (MBH 5:44:2)
"Sanat-sujata said, 'That Brahman about which thou askest me with such joy is not to be attained soon. After (the senses have been restrained and) the will hath been merged in the pure intellect, the state that succeeds in one of utter absence of worldly thought. Even that is knowledge (leading to the attainment of Brahman). It is attainable only by practising Brahmacharya.'"

Now, carefully read the below conversation between Dhritarashtra and Sanat-Sujata where the former inquires how knowledge of Brahman and immortality (liberation from births and deaths) is attained, the latter answers that it is through Brahmacharya. This extract is also from Mahabharata (book 5 chapter 44).

"avyaktavidyām iti yat sanātanīṃ; bravīṣi tvaṃ brahmacaryeṇa siddhām | anārabhyā vasatīhārya kāle; kathaṃ brāhmaṇyam amṛtatvaṃ labheta |" (MBH 5:44:3)
"Dhritarashtra said, 'Thou sayest that the knowledge of Brahman dwelleth of itself in the mind, being only discovered by Brahmacharya; that is dwelling in the mind, it requires for its manifestation no efforts (such as are necessary for work) being manifested (of itself) during the seeking (by means of Brahmacharya). How then is the immortality associated with the attainment of Brahman?'

"ācārya yonim iha ye praviśya; bhūtvā garbhaṃ brahmacaryaṃ caranti | ihaiva te śāstrakārā bhavanti; prahāya dehaṃ paramaṃ yānti yogam |" (MBH 5:44:6)
"Sanat-sujata said, 'Though residing in and inherent to the mind, the knowledge of Brahman is still unmanifest. It is by the aid of the pure intellect and Brahmacharya that, that knowledge is made manifest. Indeed, having attained to that knowledge, Yogins forsake this world. It is always to be found among eminent preceptors. I shall now discourse to thee on that knowledge.'

Further, note what Sanat-Sujata proclaims!

"brahmaiva vidvāṃs tenābhyeti sarvaṃ; nānyaḥ panthā ayanāya vidyate |" (MBH 5:44:17b)

"There is no other path (than Knowledge or the attainment of Brahman) leading to emancipation".

So, how come the paths of eating flesh, drinking wine, and copulation ever lead you to emancipation? Food for thought for all kaulAchArIs / vAmAchArIs, isn't it? Well, let's proceed ahead. Sanat-Sujata furtehr states the qualities of a sinful persona dn the qualities of a righteous Brahmana. See what that seer has to say.

"He that regardeth sensual gratification as the end of life, he that is self-conceited, he that boasteth having made a gift, he that never spendeth, he that is weak in mind, he that is given to self-admiration, and he that hateth his own wife,--these seven are counted as wicked men of sinful habits. Righteousness, truth, asceticism, self-restraint, contentment, modesty, renunciation, love of others, gift, acquaintance with the scriptures, patience, and forgiveness,--these twelve are the practices of a Brahmana.". (MBH 5:45)

And here is the nuclear weapon by Sanat-Sujata. At least now people should open their blindfolds.

"Self-restraint, renunciation, and knowledge,--in these reside emancipation". (MBH 5:45)

Now, let's see a conversation between Narada and Vasudeva. Let's see whom Narada pays his homage. This extract is taken from Mahabharata (Book 13, chapter 32).

"samyag dadati ye ceṣṭān kṣāntā dāntā jitendriyāḥ |
sasyaṃ dhanaṃ kṣitiṃ gāś ca tān namasyāmi yādava|" (MBH 13:32:10)
Narada said, "I worship them that have become irresistible by studying the Vedas, that are eloquent in discoursing on the scriptures, that are observant of the vow of Brahmacharyya, and that are always devoted to the duties of officiating at the sacrifices of others and of teaching disciples".

"nirmamā niṣpratidvaṃdvā nirhrīkā niṣprayojanāḥ | ahiṃsā niratā ye ca ye ca satyavratā narāḥ | dāntāḥ śama parāś caiva tān namasyāmi keśava |" (MBH 13:32:18)
"I bow unto them, O Kesava, that are conversant with Brahman, that are endued with knowledge of the Vedas, that are attentive to the aggregate of three, that are free from cupidity, and that are righteous in their behaviour".

Further in another chapter Bhishma says that through Brahmacharya one attains emancipation.

"yad idaṃ brahmaṇo rūpaṃ brahmacaryam iti smṛtam |
paraṃ tat sarvabhūtebhyas tena yānti parāṃ gatim|" (MBH 12:207:7)
"Bhishma said, 'That which is called Brahmacharya (religion of abstention or yoga) is regarded as the means of attaining to Brahma. That is the foremost of all religions. It is by the practice of that religion that one obtains the highest end (viz., Emancipation)'".

Further Mahabharata says,

"āśrameṣu ca sarveṣu dama eva viśiṣyate | yac ca teṣu phalaṃ dharme bhūyo dānte tad ucyate | anasūyā kṣamā śāntiḥ saṃtoṣaḥ priyavāditā | satyaṃ dānam anāyāso naiṣa mārgo durātmanām |" (MBH 213:8 and 17)
"In all the (four) modes of life, the practice or self-restraint is distinguished above all other virtues. The fruits of self-restraint are much greater than those obtainable in all the modes of life. They, however, that are of wicked soul never betake themselves to the path represented by benevolence, forgiveness, tranquillity, contentment, sweetness of speech, truth, liberality and comfort. Their path consists of lust and wrath and cupidity and envy of others and boastfulness.".

Sage Bharadwaja clearly refutes the Tantric belief that the joy of copulation is the highest bliss a sadhaka should crave for. See, how Bharadwaja thwarts this statement clearly.

"bharadvāja uvāca | yad etad bhavatābhihitaṃ sukhānāṃ paramāḥ striya iti tan na gṛhnīmaḥ | na hy eṣām ṛṣīṇāṃ mahati sthitānām aprāpyaiṣa guṇaviśeṣo na cainam abhilasanti | śrūyate ca bhagavāṃs trilokakṛd brahmā prabhv ekākī tiṣṭhati | brahmacārī na kāmasukheṣv ātmānam avadadhāti | api ca bhagavān viśveśvaromā patiḥ kāmam abhivartamānam anaṅgatvena śamam anayat | tasmād brūmo na mahātmabhir ayaṃ pratigṛhīto na tv eṣa tāvad viśiṣṭo guṇa iti naitad bhagavataḥ pratyemi |" (MBH 12:183:10)
"Bharadwaja said, 'You have said that happiness (of sexual gratification) is the highest object, I do not comprehend this. This attribute of the soul that (you say) is so desirable is not sought by the Rishis who are regarded to be engaged in something promising a higher reward. It is heard that the Creator of the three worlds, viz., the puissant Brahman, lives alone, observant of the vow of Brahmacharya. He never devotes himself to the happiness obtainable from the gratification of desire. Also, the divine Master of the universe, the lord of Uma, reduced Kama (the deity of desire) to extinction. For this reason, we say that happiness is not acceptable to high-souled people. Nor does it appear to be a high attribute of the Soul".

Gandherva said to Arjuna, when Arjuna defeated him. Actually Gandhervas are magical warriors and it is nearly impossible to defeat them in war. However Arjuna could defeat them only because Arjuna was following Brahmacharya those days.

"brahmacaryaṃ paro dharmaḥ sa cāpi niyatas tvayi | yasmāt tasmād ahaṃ pārtha raṇe 'smin vijitas tvayā | yas tu syāt kṣatriyaḥ kaś cit kāmavṛttaḥ paraṃtapa | naktaṃ ca yudhi yudhyeta na sa jīvet kathaṃ cana |" (MBH 1:159:13-14)
"The Brahmacharya is a very superior mode of life, and as thou art in that mode now, it is for this, O Partha, that I have been defeated by thee in battle. O chastiser of foes, if any married Kshatriya fight with us at night, he can never escape, with life"

Hope these many references are enough to understand how important is celibacy in the path of liberation! And if you thought that one can overcome lust by satiating it with maithunA, then that is a great misconception. As discussed earlier also, lust can be overcome only by self-restraint and not by copulation. Here is a verse of wisdom supporting this point from Mahabharata.

"jīryanti jīryataḥ keśā dantā jīryanti jīryataḥ |
cakṣuḥ śrotre ca jīryete tṛṣṇaikā tu na jīryate |" (MBH 13:07:24)
"With age, man's hair grows grey, his teeth become loose; his eyes and ears too become dim in action; but the only thing that does not abate is his desire for enjoyments"

So, the sum and the substance of this section is, the maithunA which is an oblation to the goddess is proved to be internal in nature and it is the maithunA of shiva and shakti. We have analyzed numerous verses from mahabharata and found that everywhere everys age condemned intercourse and praised celibacy. so, in no way
kaulAchArI / vAmAchArI understanding of maithunam stands correct!

Correcting the Misinterpretation of Tripura Upanishad

Tripura Upanishad is derived from Rig Veda and is a shakta Upanishad. This scripture is a great source of wisdom for Sri Vidya.followers, however, there is one verse in this upanishad whose literal interpretation has made the neo-kaulAchArIs / vAmAchArIs mask their wrong deeds under the fabric of the authority of this Upanishad.

Verse no. 12 of this upanishad says,

"parisR^itam jhaShamAdyaM jhaShamAjaM phalaM cha |
bhaktAni yonIH supariShkR^itAshcha |
nivedayandevatAyai mahatyai svAtmIkR^ite sukR^ite siddhimeti |" (Tripura Upanishad 12)
"Dressed fish, animal flesh, Cooked rice, pleasure of sex, Who offers to the Goddess great, Merit and success for himself achieves".

This is the problem with literal interpretations, surface knowledge and true translations. These things in external sense are not approved by Lalitambika. We have already seen what Lalita Sahasranama stotram says. let me reproduce the same here as this section also requires that very same analysis.

Lalita Sahasranama Stotram clearly states she is attainable through inner worship,

"Antarmukha samaradhya bahirmukha sudurlabha |" (LS verse 162)
"She is easily obtainable for those whose worship is based on their mind turned inwards, and She is difficult to be obtained by those who are outward focused".

It states further that she loves five sacrifices as stated below. This cannot contradict the above verse hence logically it has to be interpreted in sync with the above one. Therefore these sacrifices must be internal.

"pancha yagyapriya |" (LS verse 174)
"Who loves the five sacrifices of the rightward Savya path".

We have already done an extensive analysis in the previous sections on the fivesacrifices using panchamakArAs and found that in every case that has resulted to be internal in nature when analyzied to match and synchronize with the Lalita Sahasranama verses.

therefore it should be crystal clear to everyone by now, that the verse of Tripura Upanishad talks ONLY about the internal yogic offerings and not at all anything about the external activities (which are condemned by all scriptures of Hinduism).

Lalitambika being mother of all and a great goddess it is not right to expect her to approve your carnal desires by misinterpreting the shruti and smriti verses as per your perverted thinking!

Refuting Yoni-Tantra - The favorite scripture of kaulAchArIs / vAmAchArIs

Some fellows were posting Yoni-Puja photos in that social networking forum, which was to my personality shameful to be displayed publicly. The primary authority for kaulAchArIs / vAmAchArIs in performing physical Yoni-Puja of their female counterparts is the book named 'Yoni-Tattra'.

I am a great devotee of Bhagawan Shiva , but that doesn't mean I can accept Yoni tantra as authentic when I clearly see many contradictions present in it. Well, I am not among those men who would readily accept any book as scripture if someone says so. People of this kaliyuga had found the general weakness of the spiritual fools that they would readily accept any rubbish if it is said as spoken by Shiva to Parvati.

If you write any third grade fantasy and begin that book with "dEvI uvAchA and Ishwara uvAchA", that doesn't become a dialogue really exchanged between Uma and Maheshwara, period!

Yoni-Tantra is a book composed in 16th century in Bengal. I'm not sure how could 16th century Kaliyugis could listen to the conversation of Mahadeva and Bhavani. So, definitely this doesn't look authentic book to me.

Standard Tantra books always stress on self-realization as the means to liberation. Like for example, Mahanirvana Tantra says,

"Neither by acts, nor by begetting offspring, nor by wealth is man liberated; it is by the knowledge of the Spirit, by the Spirit that man is liberated" ( Mahanirvata Tantra 14:136).

This is very much in sync with Shruti and Smriti. Now, if Yoni Tantra contradicts this, then we should rethink on the authenticity of Yoni-Tantra and should decide whether to interpret it differently or to completely reject it. Let me refute some bogus verses from that text. probably the bogus verses can be ranked as interpolations.

Let me now show you the some bogus statements from the Yoni tantra and let me refute them with authentic references from other standard scriptures.

Second Patala says the following disgusting statement. This is not my Hinduism, it looks like some perverted western culture follower might have added this verse to that text.

"The devotee should worship the mother’s yoni and have intercourse with all yonis. He may have intercourse with any woman between the ages of twelve and sixty. He should worship the yoni daily, using the five tattvas" (Yoni-tantra Patala-2)

See what Mahabharata instructs us to do.

"They that go to their own wedded wives in season without seeking the companionship of other women, they that are honest and attentive to their Agni-hotras, succeed in overcoming all difficulties". (MBH 12:110)

Further, it also instructs in another chapter the following great point.

"Without seeking the companionship of other people's wives, the man of wisdom who seeks his own wife in her season acquires the merit of Brahmacharyya". (MBH: 12:193)

Now, let's see another BOGUS verse from this book.read the following verse.

"Listen, Parvati! Krishna, after worshiping Radha’s yoni, became God Krishna. Sri Rama Janaki Nath worshiped Sita’s yoni. Killing Ravana and his clan, he then went to Ayodhya City and lived in a beautiful palace there". (Yoni-tantra Patala-4)

If a Vaishnava sees this comment he would commit suicide. Let me support Vaishnavas here. I cannot accept this point on lord Sri Krishna and Sri Rama. Radha-Krishna's many amorous love activities have been extensively described in Brahma-Vaivarta Purana, and in devotional poetry like jayadeva's Geeta-Govindam. Or even if we go and search all the scriptures followed by ISKCON, in none of the books such an amorous worship has ever been mentioned.

Coming to Rama and Sita. There are three hundred versions of Ramayana all over the world. In Indonesia, Java etc. countries they follow a Ramayana called 'Ramakein'. In Buddhist  scriptures also we have Ramayana. As said, there are 300 versions of Ramayana in this world. In India itself we have Valmiki Ramayana, Tulasi Ramayana, Adhyatma Ramayana, Bhushundi Ramayana and Kamba Ramayana that I am aware of. Apart from these there could be many versions of Ramayana available in India. However Hinduism considers only Valmiki Ramayana as the authentic one.

However, I give the liberty to kaulAchArIs / vAmAchArIs to show me any version of Ramayana obtained from any corner of this world, and prove me that Rama really worshiped Sita's yoni. If this cannot be proved, then that verse of Yoni-Tantra is bogus! And take it for granted, there is no version of Ramayana where such a stupid claim exists. Same is the case with Krishna and Radha's mention in any texts.

Let's see another marvelous defect in yoni-tantra.

"Veda is the highest of all things and better than Veda is Vaishnava. Better than Vaishnava is Shaiva and better than Shaiva is Dakshina. Greater than Dakshina is Vama and better than Vama is Siddhanta. Higher than Siddhanta is the Kaula who desires the yoni----like a sun shining in the sky or a veritable Meru to a mustard seed". (Yoni-tantra Patala-4)

What's the authenticity of this statement? can anyone prove this statement from Vedas, Upanishads, Mahabharata, Ramayana, and Puranas ? Vedas is definitely the highest and supreme of all sources of knowledge. However, vaishnava, Shaiva and shakta schools do not have any independent existence, they are based on vedas. The worshipers of Vedic Vishnu and his incarnations are called as vaishnavas. The worshiper of Vedic Rudra (Shiva) are Shaivas. Dakshinachara is a Sri Vidya school which follows smartha mode of worship and it is again based on Vedic rites. None of these schools are independent of Vedas and are actually based on Vedas. Therefore the question of these schools becoming higher that Vedas is itself a bogus statement. Remaining
neo-kaulAchArA / vAmAchArA schools are out of question. If I say Christianity is greater than Veda, Islam is greater that Christianity; that doesn't become a word from the mouth of Brahma; my statements need to be attensted by some pramANa (authentic proofs), and Vedas and Upanishads are the ONLY supreme pramANas. After them, Mahabharata, and Ramayana takes the second place then comes Puranas. And this claim of Yoni-Tantra is not at all supported by any pramANa from any of the standard scriptures of Hinduism. Therefore this verse is a bogus one and is purely an interpolation.

Let's see another outstandingly bogus verse from that so called scripture.

"I achieved my status of MahAdEva by Kula Yoga and through exclusive devotion to yoni worship. The demon Tripura was obliterated in times past by your yoni’s grace. The Pandavas succeeded in battle by worshipping Draupadi’s yoni". (Yoni-tantra Patala-4)

Well, the point on Pandavas makes me laugh. Pandavas were the only warriors in the entire Mahabharata who had never tasted the fruit of defeat, not because of Yoni-worship, but because of their real skills if warfare. I cannot show any references from Mahabharata to counter this, because entire Mahabharata is a proof that such a baseless claim doesn't exist in any of the chapters of that epic.

Now, coming to the point on Shiva. Probably the author of this tantra was not aware who Mahadeva is! This statement itself shows his total ignorance about Bhagawan Rudra! Mahadeva is not any 'status' or 'position' that one can attain by worshiping someone's Yoni.

Lord shiva is the ultimate reality, he is the Brahman of Vedas. he is Purusha of Purusha Suktam. he is the Skhambha desribed in Atharva Veda. He is the original cause of allc auses and has no boss above him. he gives statusses and positions to other gods but he is the supreme rule by default. In this connection Shruti states the following: -

Svetaswatara Upanishad (6:09) says,
"na tasya kashchit.h patirasti loke", which means,"There is no master of his in the world, no ruler of his".

Svetaswatara Upanishad (6:08) says,
"na tasya kaarya.n karaNa.n cha vidyate", which means,"There is no effect and no cause known of him".

Svetaswatara Upanishad (6:17) says,
"ya iishe.asya jagato nityameva naanyo heturvidyata iishanaaya", which means,"He rules this world for ever, for no one else is able to rule it".

So, that point of Yoni-tantra is clearly refuted. Now, let me show another meaningless verse.

"Liberation is achieved through enjoyment. Happiness is gained through enjoyment. Therefore, by every effort, a sAdhakA should become an enjoyer. The wise man should always avoid blame, disgust or shame of the yoni". (Yoni-tantra Patala-6)

This is clearly refuted by sage Bharadwaja in Mahabharata as follows.All the scriptures support Bharadwaja's this same point, liberation lies in self-restraint and we have already seen numerous evidences in previous sections.

"bharadvāja uvāca | yad etad bhavatābhihitaṃ sukhānāṃ paramāḥ striya iti tan na gṛhnīmaḥ | na hy eṣām ṛṣīṇāṃ mahati sthitānām aprāpyaiṣa guṇaviśeṣo na cainam abhilasanti | śrūyate ca bhagavāṃs trilokakṛd brahmā prabhv ekākī tiṣṭhati | brahmacārī na kāmasukheṣv ātmānam avadadhāti | api ca bhagavān viśveśvaromā patiḥ kāmam abhivartamānam anaṅgatvena śamam anayat | tasmād brūmo na mahātmabhir ayaṃ pratigṛhīto na tv eṣa tāvad viśiṣṭo guṇa iti naitad bhagavataḥ pratyemi |" (MBH 12:183:10)
"Bharadwaja said, 'You have said that happiness (of sexual gratification) is the highest object, I do not comprehend this. This attribute of the soul that (you say) is so desirable is not sought by the Rishis who are regarded to be engaged in something promising a higher reward. It is heard that the Creator of the three worlds, viz., the puissant Brahman, lives alone, observant of the vow of Brahmacharya. He never devotes himself to the happiness obtainable from the gratification of desire. Also, the divine Master of the universe, the lord of Uma, reduced Kama (the deity of desire) to extinction. For this reason, we say that happiness is not acceptable to high-souled people. Nor does it appear to be a high attribute of the Soul".

Now, here comes the blockbuster verse which makes me laugh thinking about the ignorance of the author.

"Without sexual union there is never liberation, whether from shastras, shrutis, smriti, puranas etc created by me". (Yoni-tantra Patala-8)

Copulation is a karma and it has a phalam (fruit) as well. karmas cannot liberate any Jiva. Only jnana can burn all karmas and liberate. Liberationis an extensive topic to discuss and Upanishads have plenty of chapters on it. However, let me quote here a verse from Mananirvana Tantra itself which refutes the above verse.

"Therefore men will not attain final liberation even at the end of a hundred kalpas so long as action, whether good or evil, is not destroyed". (Mahanirvana Tantra 14:109).

"So long as a man has not real knowledge, he does not attain final liberation, even though he be in the constant practice of religious acts and a hundred austerities". (Mahanirvana Tantra 14:111). 

"Liberation does not come fram japa, homa, or a hundred fasts; man becomes liberated by the knowledge that he himself is Brahman". (Mahanirvana Tantra 14:115).

"Final liberation is attained by the knowledge that the Atma (Soul) is the witness, is the Truth, is omnipresent, is one, free from all illuding distractions of self and not-self, the supreme, and, though abiding in the body, is not in the body.". (Mahanirvana Tantra 14:116).

"All imagination of name-form and the like are but the play of a child. He who put away all this sets himself in firm attachment to the Brahman, is, without doubt, liberated".". (Mahanirvana Tantra 14:117).

I have provided counter references from tantra itself, if any kaulAchArI / vAmAchArI wants to see evidences from Upanishads, let them ask for it. I would be happy to bombard them with numerous references.

Therefore the conclusion from this section is, Yoni-tantra is clearly a BOGUS scripture and it has no value when challenged by authentic scriptures. this book probably was an imagination of some kaulAchArI / vAmAchArI who wanted to make his amorous practices legalized, hence created this book as a conversation between Uma and Shiva.


We have extensively analyzed and found that goddess lalitambika's qualities have been described as sAtwik in nature in the hymn lalita Sahasranama Stotram from Brahmanda Purana. And when the Sri Vidya tradition was analyzed under the light of Lalita Sahasranama stotram, it was found that the Dakshinachara (samayachara) or the right handed smartha worship or the path of Kundalini yoga matches correctly with Lalita sahasranama description.

We have found that in none of the cases neo-kaulAchAra / vAmAchAra matches with the attributes of Lalitambika and her hymn. We have done a detailed analysis of Pancha-Yajnas (five sacrifices), pancha-Makaras (madya, mamsa, matsya, mudra, and maithuna) and found that the understanding of neo-kaulAchAra / vAmAchArA followers is flawed. 

We have seen that pancha-yajnas and pancha-makaras are totally internal activities within our own body and they re suppoed by Yoga upanishads. When they are thought of as external activities they are strongly refuted by all the authentic scriptures. We have also analyzed the Yoni-Tantra and found it to be a bogus scripture, not worthy of even a penny.

Therefore, I would like to conclude this article by giving a suggestion to the kaulAchArI / vAmAchArIs - O great men of flawed understanding of scriptures; there is no good awaiting for you on the path that you are traversing. Atheists are better in a sense because for them there is no god, so they are bound by no rules of religion. Therefore they can smke, they can drink, they can visit a brothel-house without fear of any sin. At least they take the ownership of their activities on themselves totally. However, your cult promotes all sinful activities under the name of religion, under the name of the great benevolent goddess who is the mother of all. You kill animals and eat them for the goddess who is the mother of those animals also. You drink wine for the goddess by transgressing the authentic injunctions from authentic scriptures which are all laid by her. You wrap your carnal desires under the name of tradition and engage in amorous acts breaking the rules enforced by religion. I have no business to correct you, however it's my kind request that have son like feelings for srimAta, look at her only with a child like heart, do her worship with the feelings of an infant. Kindly don't create your own lustful interpretations for Dasa-Mudras. Understand her to be your mother. This is the only message I have for you, rest is your destiny. Let Mahadeva not take up his bow and aim at you, correct yourself before he wields his Pinaka

Sri Vidya is very much present in Vedas in hidden form. In Vedas Sri Vidya and Kundalini have been described as inward science. There is nothing which talks about outward science there. So, definitely outward rituals especially Panchamakara are unauthentic. To know more about how Vedas describe about Lalitambika and Kundalini read my analysis on the below two topics.

sampUrNa vishNu tatwaM - Demystifying the Mystic Vishnu
NARAYANA SUKTAM - A hymn to Tripurasundari Devi

|| Etat sarvam srI umA mahEshwara parabrahmArpaNamastu ||

|| srImAtA twamEva mama-mAtA ||

Copyright © 2012, by Santosh Kumar Ayalasomayajula. All Rights Reserved.
Check the Footer of this blog for Licenses related details.