॥ या देवी सर्वभूतेषु शक्तिरूपेण संस्थिता ॥

Śākta Pīṭhasशक्ति पीठ

This page presents the 51-Pīṭha tradition of the Pīṭhanirṇaya / Mahāpīṭhanirūpaṇa. Each entry keeps the textual Pīṭha name, associated aṅga, Devī and Bhairava editable as text. Living regional identifications are respected, and places where manuscripts or traditions differ are marked rather than forced into a single claim.

Why 51 here?

The Śākta Pīṭha tradition is transmitted in more than one enumeration. The Pīṭhanirṇaya, also known as the Mahāpīṭhanirūpaṇa, is a major textual tradition that gives fifty-one Pīṭhas together with the associated Devī, Bhairava and aṅga. D. C. Sircar prepared a critical edition from multiple manuscripts and related textual materials.

Devotional respect: a “variant” label does not mean a temple or regional belief is being rejected. It means that more than one honoured textual or living tradition survives, and Shades of Bharat will present those traditions side by side.
51 entries
No matching Pīṭha found.

References & Textual Basis

  1. Pīṭhanirṇaya / Mahāpīṭhanirūpaṇa. Critical text in Dineschandra Sircar, The Śākta Pīṭhas, 2nd revised edition, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 1973 (first study/edition published 1948). Sircar's edition collates multiple manuscripts and discusses the development and variation of Pīṭha lists.
  2. D. C. Sircar, The Śākta Pīṭhas. Bibliographic record: Google Books; library record: IGNCA Central Library.
  3. Śrīmad Devī Bhāgavatam, Skandha 7, Chapter 30, especially the concluding enumeration describing 108 Pīṭhas. This parallel Purāṇic tradition is cited to make clear that sacred enumerations differ across texts.
  4. For manuscript variants and the history of the Pīṭha corpus, individual profiles will consult the Sanskrit text, Sircar's apparatus, later critical scholarship, inscriptions/temple records where available, and the living temple tradition itself.
Editorial method: Veda, Itihāsa, Purāṇa, Tantra, Āgama, Rishi/Āchārya traditions, inscriptions and modern historical scholarship will be cited only where they actually speak to the specific claim. Antiquity will never be manufactured by attaching an unrelated Vedic reference to a later Pīṭha tradition.