You are here: Sri Vaishnava Home Page : Bhakti List : Archives : September 1999

RE: two questions

From: Krishna Kalale (kkalale1_at_san.rr.com)
Date: Wed Sep 01 1999 - 08:39:17 PDT

Dear friends, I am happy we are getting information from Sri Bharat 
regarding this important issue.

I would like to add some of my views and doubts on this subject.  I am very 
interested to find out more regarding Radha.  I tried to talk to HH 
Rangapriya swamy,  NT Srinivasaieyengar, and my Uncle garudachar (who in 
fact cited this verse from Yadavabhudaya) :

devaki danuja sthuna divyam dhama vrajankanam rama radhadhayascheti rashi 
bhedaihi na bhidyase

this is in 10 sarga - 71st verse of Yadavabhudaya of Sri Vedanta Desika.

This is means that Lord is the one and same whether associated with Ramaa 
(Ramaa : Sri) or radha and other consorts, or (being born of) devaki or the 
pillar (as in nrsimhavatara) or living in vaikunta or vraja (brindavan).

However, I looked into Uttamoor viraraghavacharya's note below the appayya 
dikshita commentary :

He mentions :
neelayah parampadastha nitya mahisheetvat tat tyagena radhadi uktih shloke

which means (according to me) :  Neela is associated with Krishna eternally 
as  consort in paramapada;  Hence here the consorts Radha etc. are 
mentioned to indicate that consorts such as Radha are in this bhooloka, 
rather than in Vaikunta.  Or else Neela adi etc. could have been used 
instead of Radha adi etc.  This probably indicates that Radha is more of a 
jiva (of course an extremely elevated one) since she had the special favour 
of Krishna in Bhagavatham.

I would appreciate if Sri Bharat can find shlokas in Brahma vaivarta to 
support or contradict this view of Radha being a Jiva or an epithet of 
Lakshmi. In general I want to know textual testimony regarding the concept 
of Radha, who according to gaudiya vaishnavas is the highest form of 
Lakshmi, since they accept several hundreds of Lakshmis.

According to Srivaishnava scholars, Radha is not identical to Lakshmi or 
Nila and in fact be taken as an elevated Jiva, due to lack of testimony 
otherwise.

In fact Nila in bhagavata is kumbhakasya putri - ie. yashoda's brother's 
daughter - Nila, who got married to Krishna.

This Radha-Lakshmi hierarchy issue is interesting since, Baladeva Vidya 
Bhusana, a great gaudiya vaishnava scholar quotes in his prameya rathnavali 
 (at the end of his book "The Vedanta Sutras of Badarayana, with commentary 
on baladeva vidya bhushana" appendix II, p 19 (available from munshiram 
manoharlal das publishers - (gangaram & sons in bangalore MG road)),

quotes of Baladeva Vidya Bhusana explained :

Sri no doubt is Rukmini in Krishnavatara as given in vishnu purana - 
rukmini krishna janmani;  However, as per atharva upanisad there is a 
difference in Lakshmi's avataras  the text of atharva upanisad states :

atha sriyah tat yatha purusha bhodhinyam atharva upanisadi gokulakhye 
mathur mandale iti upakramya dve parshve chandravali radhika cha iti 
abhidhaya paratra  "yasyah amshe lakshmi durgadika shaktih" -

 meaning :  As regard the avatara of Lakshmi, we have it stated in the 
Atharva Upanisad that there is difference in her avataras also.  Beginning 
with "in the region of Mathura called Gokula," etc, the text goes on to say 
"the two sides of Visnu are CHandravali and Radhika" and then it mentions 
the lower avataras, by saying "Laksmi, Durga and the rest are her partial 
avataras"

Further Baladeva VidyaBhusana quotes : Gautamiya tantra :

Devi krishnamayi prokta radhika paradevata sarva laksmi mayi sarva kanthih 
sammohini para :

which means:

Radhika is said to be the highest deity, the Goddess full of Krishna; all 
Lakshmis are her avataras, she is the source, she is full of all prosperity 
and every beauty; and is the enchanter of all.

Further,  regarding the divine abode,  a rig mantra says : "yatra bhuri 
sringa ayasah"  referring to the divine abode of visnu as having cows with 
big horns.  Here,  HH Rangapriya swamy said we can always include goloka as 
an extension of vaikunta since vaikunta descriptions are manifold in 
various texts.

MY QUESTION :

The Radha - Lakshmi issue from a VIsistadvaitic perspective has to take 
into account the quotes of Baladeva Vidya bhusana and give out its view of 
such statements.  I could not find the original work "atharva upanisad". 
Baladeva vidya bhusana cites, and He mentions that it is "purusha bodhinyam 
atharva upanishadi" which means that the name of the upanisad is purusha 
bodhini?  I dont know such an upanisad.   I have texts for atharva sikha 
upanisad and atharva sira upanisad.  Both do not have such a statement 
mentioned here. Further I checked into gopala tapani, gopala uttara tapani 
and krishnopanishad, from which a number of statements are taken to support 
his brahma sutra bhasya.  Radha is not mentioned in those, but definitely 
there are numerous citations to Rukmini as the consort of Krishna.  I would 
like to understand visistadvaitic view on this. Further, I dont know what 
is gautamiya tantra and whether that is considered authentic by 
Visistadvaitins.

One other clear view from visistadvaitic perspective is that "brahma 
samhita" accepted by only Gaudiya vaishnavas is not accepted by 
visistadvaitins and further it is not even in pancharatra samhita as 
available.  Further, Baladeva Vidya bhusana basically takes views, as he 
openly states in his work, from Sri Ramanuja sampradaya, MAdhva sampradaya, 
Vishnu swamy and nimbaraka.  However, He is stays very close to Sri 
Ramanuja sampradaya, even though they mention Madhva as their one of their 
preceptors!!.

My quest in this is only to find the real difference in view points between 
these schools.  As Sri K.P Sridharan mentioned, the transgressing of all 
norms and dharmas to express deep attachment to Krishna as depicted in 
Radha stories is of key importance to Gaudiya Vaishnavas.  I remember  in 
chaintanya charitamrta, it is clearly mentioned that "love as in matrimony 
is sort of constrained  due to an inherent duty consciousness in the 
relationship;  however, when there is no agreement (like marriage) love can 
be very pure and limitless"  When we take this in the context of spiritual 
world, this is what is indicated by Radha- Krishna love.

I would like to hear from erudite scholars here some details and textual 
assessment from Visistadvaitic point of view.

adiyen

Krishna Kalale







-----Original Message-----
From:	A. Bharat [SMTP:kbharat@giasbg01.vsnl.net.in]
Sent:	Tuesday, August 31, 1999 7:56 AM
To:	bhakti@lists.best.com
Subject:	Re:two questions

In continuation of Mani's masterly summing up
re Sri Vesel's question,I may just add a few lines.
The only traditional reference to Radha in Sri
Bhagavatham is taken to be the phrase-
<anaya-radhito> in the Rasakrida chapter.When
Krishna disappears suddenly and the gopis go
in search of him they find indication that one
girl seemed to have been with him.That phrase
with the possible pun on the letters "radh"
is taken as the hint that the favorite of
Krishna's was Radha.

The later Brahma Vaivarta Purana deals extensively
with Radha and even details their marriage.

EmberumAnAr TiruvaDigaLE SaraNam!
aDiyEn
BHARAT