Yantra to defeat enemy(in well)

November 1, 2026

A working with a place in it

The source for this yantra is unusually concrete about its method, and that concreteness is what makes it distinct. This figure is useful for defeating enemies and their designs. It also works towards the fulfilment of desires and the attainment of well being. This yantra is to be engraved on a copper plate and thrown in an old well, which will cause a specific and named enemy to be defeated. The method, the material, and the naming are all stated together, and this article keeps them together, without adding a further method, a further place, or a further condition.

The named enemy is the key. Not enemies in general, and not a climate of opposition, but a specific and named enemy, whose designs are the matter at hand. That naming should be done plainly, to yourself, before anything else. Who is the enemy, in the sense of a person whose designs are working against you? What are those designs, in terms of their effects: the dealing blocked, the reputation attacked, the opportunity taken, the pressure applied? Effects can be named and watched. Motives, guessed at, cannot, and a working aimed at guessed motives will produce a record full of guesses, however certain the guesses feel.

The old well is also specific, and it should not be generalised into any body of water, any hole, or any place of disposal. The source says an old well, and the article keeps that wording. An old well is a place already out of ordinary use, set apart, and deep enough that what is thrown in it is gone from ordinary reach. That set-apart quality is part of the working's picture: the figure, engraved on copper, is placed where it will not be retrieved, handled, or displayed afterwards. The working, in this picture, is done by the placing, and then left, rather than tended daily.

Enemies, designs, and well being

Defeating enemies and their designs, in the source's phrase, covers two things that should be kept distinct. Defeating an enemy may mean that a person's power to harm you is ended, or that a particular campaign against you stops. Defeating their designs may mean that a particular plan fails, even if the person remains. Name which one you mean, and which design, if it is the design, is the matter. A design is a plan with steps: a legal move, a rumour campaign, a business move, a social pressure. Name its steps as far as you know them, and watch those steps, so that a later change in them can be recognised as a change in the design, rather than as a general feeling that opposition has eased.

The source adds fulfilment of desires and attainment of well being, alongside defeating enemies. Those additions matter, because they show that the working, in this source, is not only about ending opposition. It is also about what follows afterwards: desires fulfilled, and well being attained, once the enemy's designs no longer block them. Name the desire and the well being that are blocked, in the same specific way as the enemy. What would you do, or be able to do, if this design no longer blocked you? That question gives the working its second measure, beside the enemy's designs themselves.

Well being, in this context, is best read practically: a life no longer organised around defence, time and attention freed for work, family, or study, and a return to ordinary routines that opposition had disrupted. If well being is your second measure, note the routines that were disrupted, and whether they return. A return to ordinary life, after a period organised around an enemy, is a change worth recording, even if it arrives quietly rather than dramatically.

Specificity when the enemy is named

Specificity here means one enemy, one set of designs, and one blocked desire or well being, stated in sentences you can return to later. Not a list of everyone who has ever opposed you, and not a general wish for all enemies to be defeated. One enemy, named, whose designs are described by their effects, and whose defeat would be recognisable in those effects ceasing, changing, or failing. If more than one enemy is pressing, choose the one whose designs are doing the most damage now, or the one whose defeat would unlock the blocked desire. The others can be noted, and addressed in turn, but they should not be bundled into the same working.

That singularity also protects the record. A working aimed at one enemy produces a record that can say, plainly, whether that enemy's designs continued, changed, or stopped, and whether the blocked desire moved. A working aimed at all enemies produces a record that can say only that opposition in general felt better or worse, which is no record at all. The source's insistence on a specific and named enemy is therefore not a detail. It is the discipline that makes the working observable.

If you cannot yet name the enemy specifically, that is a finding, not a reason to generalise the working. Spend a period observing the designs themselves: their steps, their timing, their effects, and any evidence that points to a particular person. When a name can be stated on evidence, rather than on suspicion alone, the working can be aimed. Until then, observation, and ordinary-world steps to protect yourself from the designs' effects, are the work to be done.

Ordinary steps beside the working

A working aimed at an enemy does not replace ordinary-world steps to deal with that enemy's designs. If a design is legal, the ordinary step may be legal advice, or a formal response. If a design is a rumour, the ordinary step may be a plain correction to the people who matter, or a decision to stop feeding the rumour with responses. If a design is a business move, the ordinary step may be a better offer, a clearer term, or a dealing ended. If a design is a social pressure, the ordinary step may be distance, or a boundary stated plainly. Take the step that fits the design, alongside any working, and note it in the record, so that a later change is not credited to one side alone when both sides were at work.

Distance is often the most honest ordinary step, and it deserves to be named plainly. Distance may mean ending a dealing, leaving a group, changing a routine, or simply refusing to engage with a provocation. Distance is not defeat, and it is not avoidance of a decision. It is a decision, and it is often the decision that allows well being to return, whether or not the enemy's designs have formally ended. Note, in the record, any distance taken, and whether it eased the pressure, because distance itself may be the change that matters most.

The copper plate, thrown in an old well in the source's method, is not tended afterwards in the way a worn yantra is tended daily. That difference should be respected in the record. The record for this working is not a record of daily tending. It is a record of the designs, their effects, and the blocked desire, watched over weeks after the placing, with ordinary steps noted alongside them. A single placing, followed by steady observation, is the rhythm the source's method suggests, and the record should follow that rhythm rather than inventing a daily practice around it.

Keeping a record for this working

Keep a short, dated record for the single enemy you named. Note the designs and their effects, the blocked desire or well being, the ordinary steps taken, and what actually happened afterwards: designs continuing, changing, or stopping, and the desire moving or staying still. Keep entries brief, and keep them on days when nothing happened as well as on days when something did. A record kept only on dramatic days will exaggerate drama and miss the quiet easing that is often the real change.

Read the record back after a fair period and ask what changed in the specific designs. Did the particular plan fail, stall, or change form, or did it continue unchanged while you only felt more defended? Did the blocked desire move, or did it stay blocked while the feeling about the enemy changed? Did well being return in the routines you named, or did life stay organised around defence? Those distinctions are the point of the record. No magical result is promised or guaranteed here, and the record is kept within that limit, to observe what happened rather than to claim what must happen.

If nothing in the named designs changed, reconsider the naming before repeating the work. Perhaps the enemy named is not the source of the designs, perhaps the designs need a different ordinary-world response, or perhaps the blocked desire needs a different route that does not pass through this enemy at all. Adjust the ordinary step, keep the purpose specific, and then decide calmly whether a further working is warranted. Repetition without a changed naming or a changed step is not persistence. It is the same working, placed again.

Size and material: Copper Yantras are about 1 inch by 1 inch by 2 millimetres, and hand-drawn Yantras are around 2 inches by 2 inches. These sizes are approximate, because Yantras come in different shapes.