Every other day, we get a query whether an uninitiated person can keep a śrīcakra at home. In reality, not even all so-called “initiated” can keep a śrīcakra at home. Recently an acquaintance mentioned of an incident which we would like to share with our readers. This seems to have taken place in the last six months.
A very sincere and devout gentleman from Pālakkāḍ was initiated into Bālā Mahāmantra by a disciple of late śrī Najan (Pratibhānandanātha). He seemed to have not stayed in touch with his Guru but instead decided to approach the junior Māthādhipati (pontiff) of a popular Smārta maṭha in Southern India. The pontiff gave him a Meru śrīcakra and told him to worship the same. This gentleman did not know the procedure for Navāvaraṇa and he was told, ‘just do whatever else you do for your other idols’. His father-in-law, an elderly upāsaka belonging to Guhānanda Maṇḍalī, was a little concerned about the whole thing, especially about not receiving the pūjā yantra or instructions to worship it, from Svaguru. Our friend decided, “It’s okay! The pontiff who gave it to me is Jagadguru, he is sarvajña is it not? If he gave it to me, it must all be fine!”
And then started his troubles. He had several bouts of misfortune, ill-health, and frequent nightmares. The womenfolk in his household got angry and irritated all the time. The sudden change in the atmosphere right after the śrīcakra entered his house was hard to miss. It took him quite a bit of time to be able to reach the pontiff again. When he narrated his woes to the pontiff, the Yati, who did not seem to have much knowledge in matters of mantra śāstra or āgama vidhi, told him to perform a Satyanārāyaṇa pūjā. The pūjā probably did work in reducing his woes, no one can say, but nothing significantly improved. He again approached the same pontiff, and also the senior Maṭhādhipati of the same organization, but both of them told him it was his karma and he should continue his pūjā and have faith in God.
This gentleman’s father-in-law, who also accompanied him to the pontiffs, said: “Look, I told you one should not take instructions in matters of upāsanā from anyone but Svaguru. My Parameṣṭhi guru śrī Chidānandanātha (Sri Nediminti Subrahmanya Iyer) never prostrated before any renunciates or Yatis with the exception of śrī Saccidānanda śivābhinava Nṛsiṃha Bhāratī who had proved through his Siddhi that he was not different from his own Guru Paramahamsa śrī Guhānandanātha. So, let’s pray to our all-pervading Guru śrī Chidānandanātha for guidance; incidentally, in the course of walking we have reached the shrine of śrī Kāmākṣī, where better to find the Guru’s presence?”
The two gentlemen sat for a few hours in the shrine of Kāmākṣī Parābhaṭṭārikā and prayed to their Guru in front of the shrine of śrī Durvāsā. By the grace of Guru and Parāmbā, they ran into a upāsaka from Kerala who had come to seek blessings from śrī Kāmākṣī. When they narrated their grief, our friend from Kerala (we heard this incident narrated by both of them as both parties happen to be our acquaintances) who is an expert in aṣṭamaṅgala praśna as well as añjana, performed some rituals and found out that the śrīcakra given by the pontiff was indeed responsible for all the troubles as it was flawed in design, bore negative energies from the past and the deity in the Yantra was kruddhā (angry).
They did try to find out more details about this Yantra from some officials in the Mutt but were not successful as it was one of the many Yantras given by devotees to the Mutt, which the pontiff seems to have recycled by giving it to our friend. With help from the upāsaka from Kerala (Bhattathiripad), our friend performed some rituals, did a proper visarjana of the śrīcakra, performed a śānti homa as per śrīkrama to pacify the yoginīs, offered balidāna to chatuHShaShTi yoginī and bhairavas, and finally performed auspicious rituals such as kumārī, vaṭuka, and suvāsinī pūjā to rid his home and life of the various troubles. With the grace of śrī Kāmākṣī and śrī Chidānandanātha, the gentleman and his family are now doing fine.
Unfortunately, we put Maṭhādhipatis on such a high pedestal that we refuse to believe they are not “all-knowing”. While one may have the bhāva that all Maṭhādhipatis are in essence śrī śaṅkara Bhagavatpāda or are in the state of Pāramahaṃsya, the reality is something else. While one should respect Yatis and Maṭhādhipatis, one should not go overboard or turn blind in their devotion. While their intentions may be good, many of these pontiffs have less than elementary knowledge of mantra śāstra and are not aware of anything beyond Nityapūjā and daily Japa. Consulting them on subjects dealing with mantra śāstra or āgama is like asking a biologist to perform a surgery.
We have the bad habit of lumping everything together without examining different topics with the pure focus they deserve and demand. All mantras are assumed to be similar, all deities are presumed to be similar as also their upāsanā vidhi; we sacrilegiously disregard technicalities required in dealing with mantra śāstra in the guise of applying concepts of Neo-Advaita or devotion. We disregard the pramāṇa of Tantras and āgamas when dealing with śrīcakra but rely on folklore and populist notions of Bhakti – which is rather incorrect. Bhakti in the context of śrīvidyā does not mean emotionally worshiping the śrīyantra anyway one feels, but it rather means strictly following the scriptural authority and the instructions of the Guru diligently with faith and perseverance. We also mix worldviews from Vedānta, dualistic Bhakti schools, etc., and overlay them on our upāsanā, and this dilutes one’s view and one cannot attain Siddhi of a mantra without the right-view. Tantra śāstra is an exact science, a complete path, and should not be mixed with other paths, especially by those incapable of such hoary tasks. This is not really different from how the śāstras deal with yajñas. The Dharma śāstra says:
आर्षं वै दैवतं छन्दत्वविज्ञाय भृगूत्तम |
मन्त्रस्य तेन मन्त्रेण जप्यहोमौ न कारयेत् ||
छन्दसि ब्राह्मणे सूक्ते यदव्यक्तं प्रदृश्यते |
विद्वद्भिः स निश्चित्य तद्यज्ञमवतारयेत् ||
सम्भारा ये यथा यत्र यानि द्रव्याणि यो विधिः |
शाखां प्रति तथा तत्र तत्प्रमाणमिति स्थितिः ||
यः स्वसूत्रमतिक्रम्य परसूत्रेण वर्तते |
अप्रमाणमृषिं कृत्वा सोऽप्यधर्मेण युज्यते |
तस्मात् सर्वप्रयत्नेन स्वसूत्रं न विलङ्घयेत् ||
Our Guru, who was closely associated with many maṭhas and such organizations, in the end, advised us to stay away from all of them and immerse ourselves in āntaraṅgikopāsanā. One can easily note that some of these famous maṭhas have permitted immense dharma chyuti within their precincts and such acts have not gone unpunished by Parāśakti. It must also be noted that Siddhas such as śrī Saccidānanda śivābhinava Nṛsiṃha Bhāratī never handed out śrīcakras or gave mantras to people without discretion.
So, for all those who have questions on whether you can keep śrīcakra in your home – there is no universal answer. It depends on you, on the śrīcakra, and a host of other things. The best guide would be Sadguru, who is to be chosen after careful deliberation as instructed by the śāstras and further elucidated by masters such as Mahāmāheśvara Abhinavagupta and Bhāskararāya Makhīndra.