*GODDESS OF THE WEEK* Bani Thani Radha: ( Questions )

[Guest guest]

Devi Bhakta's [ see message 2940 ]

However, most Vaishnavas would place Radha as Krishna's subordinate

rather than His equal – and thus She is rarely afforded much

attention in Shaktism, where the Goddess is seen as at least Her

consort's equal, and largely independent of His influence"

 

Says Prisni in her presentation [ see message 2869 ]

"She is not just the pretty girl that is the lover of Krishna,

but

she is also the female Shakti, force-energy, of the whole

manifestation"

 

In the Brahma-vaivarta-purana she is often called by many names :

Mahavisnormatr, Manavisnudhatri : mother of Visnu

Jaganmatr, Jagadambika : mother of the world

Sarvamatr : mother of all.

 

Questions for Prisni or other Radha Bhakta : Does Radha ( I believe

she does )too have the one hundred or the one thousand names? Could

you be kind enough to share them with us if you do have the list of

names?

 

** A shakta understanding of Radha is not popular, maybe because many

think it is inferior **

 

I believe Radha is not popular because she is not been given the

opportunity to be explored further. That is why we have agreed to

feature Radha as our Goddess of the week, in a hope to know more. It

would be interesting to have an explanation of Her attributes and

such as with the other goddesses. This is what we should do,

Prisni.

 

I was having a discussion with some friends, and obviously we talk

about Radha. One of them commented about Radha marriage and her

illicit affairs with Krsna. How do you reconcile this affairs?

Another said : there is a lot of misinformation or distortions in the

Radha and Krsna story.

 

Anybody care to comment on this?

 

Om ParaShaktiye Namaha

[Guest guest]

, "thegoddessisinme2002" wrote:

> I was having a discussion with some friends, and obviously we talk

> about Radha. One of them commented about Radha marriage and her

> illicit affairs with Krsna. How do you reconcile this affairs?

> Another said : there is a lot of misinformation or distortions in

the

> Radha and Krsna story.

>

> Anybody care to comment on this?

>

> Om ParaShaktiye Namaha

 

Hi Nora,

 

"Illicit" would not be a fitting term to describe Sri Radha's affair

with Krsna. Had the latter been an ordinary mortal, then of course

the affair would be classed as sordid in the conventional moral

sense. But Krsna is God, so everything he did was most worshipable -

even his stealing of butter; which would be otherwise condemned if it

were done by any other. The Vaishnava saints of yore who commented on

the Srimad Bhagavata also reiterated that the union of Radha and

Krsna was not slaked on mortal lust. Had that been the case,

Vaishnavas around the world would be adoring their RadhaKrsna icons

for the most mundane reason.

 

btw, isn't it interesting that the Radhe-Krishna icon is more popular

and accessible than Rukmini-Krsna? Compared to Sri Radha, Sri Rukmini

seems a very distant and nebulous personality in popular Vaishnavism -

considering that she is Krsna's official wife.

 

 

Just my $0.02

 

Can we can have Sri Rukmini as next week's goddess? One can't

talk about Sri Radha without mentioning Sri Rukmini. Besides, next

week runs into Krishna Janmashtami.

 

 

Hari Om Tat Sat

[Guest guest]

, Karolina Lindqvist <pgd-karolinali@a...>

wrote:

> torsdagen den 22 augusti 2002 04.56 skrev blu_ochs:

>

> > btw, isn't it interesting that the Radhe-Krishna icon is more

popular

> > and accessible than Rukmini-Krsna? Compared to Sri Radha, Sri

Rukmini

> > seems a very distant and nebulous personality in popular

Vaishnavism -

> > considering that she is Krsna's official wife.

>

> Rukmini is Radha's expansion in Dwaraka. Here mode towards Krishna

is that of

> a daksine (right-wing) gopi, and thus submissive.

> Why it is not popular today? Actually, I don't know.

 

 

I think the structure of your question already contains the germ of

the answer. It is almost a law that there has to be similar shared

traits between a devotee and his/her ishta which pulls the former

towards the latter. The modern-day prominence and popularity of the

Radha-Krsna icon over the Krsna-Rukmini model suggests a triumph

of 'left-wing' activist sentiments over 'right-wing' docilism amongst

today's Krsna bhakta generation; particularly the Westerners(?).

 

 

I am learning a lot from your writings, Prisni. Thanks.

Do cross over to ParaShakti if you can, Shakta-ism wants you!

 

 

Hari Om Tat Sat

[Guest guest]

torsdagen den 22 augusti 2002 04.20 skrev thegoddessisinme2002:

> Questions for Prisni or other Radha Bhakta : Does Radha ( I believe

> she does )too have the one hundred or the one thousand names? Could

> you be kind enough to share them with us if you do have the list of

> names?

 

Yes, 108 names, I'll send them in a separate text.

> I believe Radha is not popular because she is not been given the

> opportunity to be explored further. That is why we have agreed to

> feature Radha as our Goddess of the week, in a hope to know more. It

> would be interesting to have an explanation of Her attributes and

> such as with the other goddesses. This is what we should do,

> Prisni.

 

The amorous relationship between Radha and Krishna has been explored in depth

by the Bengal Vaisnavas, and has been digged out and translated to english.

But Radha's aspect as Shakti has not been digged out and translated. That's

why I said it was not particularly popular.

> I was having a discussion with some friends, and obviously we talk

> about Radha. One of them commented about Radha marriage and her

> illicit affairs with Krsna. How do you reconcile this affairs?

> Another said : there is a lot of misinformation or distortions in the

> Radha and Krsna story.

 

There are two Vaisnava schools (after Chaitanya). One that says that Radha and

Krishna married. That version is described in the Brahma-vaivarta Purana. The

other version is that Radha is married to someone else, and the relationship

is illicit. That version is described in the Bhagavata-Purana. The Bengal

Vaisnavas rejected the "married" idea. There were other vaisnava schools that

followed it. It appears that the Bengal Vaisnava ideas has surrvived today,

but the other have not.

 

The illicit affairs can be understood in the way that this branch of

Vaisnavism is actually in core quite rebellious and rejecting of societal

norms. Externally Radha was well-behaved to her husband, and it was in

secrecy without her husband knowing, that she met Krishna. So the Vaisnavas

have also acted like that. Externally supporting of societal norms, but

internally rejecting them.

 

Among Krishna, there are also two groups of gopis gangs, the left wing

(daksine) and the right wing (vama). They have a different relationship with

Krishna. The left wing is rebellious, the right wing is submissive and

societal conforming. Radha is heading the left wing gopis, and can in some

way today maybe be seen as a kind of wild, passionate teenage girl-gang. Seen

like that, the right wing is more like the well-behaved teenage girls. These

two gangs are not particularly friendly towards each other, it appears like.

Both are competeing for Krishna's attention.

 

Basically, where you belong depends on inner character. But how many knows

their own spiritual inner character? Vaisnavism is a process to discover just

that. Sex-life is not part of that process. Still, some might find the

relationship between Radha and Krishna as amourous, erotic, and try to

imitate that. Which might account for the popularity of Radha and Krishna.

Such things are completely forbidden for Vaisnavas.

 

-- Prisni

[Guest guest]

torsdagen den 22 augusti 2002 04.56 skrev blu_ochs:

> btw, isn't it interesting that the Radhe-Krishna icon is more popular

> and accessible than Rukmini-Krsna? Compared to Sri Radha, Sri Rukmini

> seems a very distant and nebulous personality in popular Vaishnavism -

> considering that she is Krsna's official wife.

 

Rukmini is Radha's expansion in Dwaraka. Here mode towards Krishna is that of

a daksine (right-wing) gopi, and thus submissive.

Why it is not popular today? Actually, I don't know.

 

Just a while ago, maybe in the beginning of the 19:th centrury, Bengal

Vaisnavism had degraded into a group of sects that tried to copy the amourous

relationship between Radha and Krishna. Some dressed up like Krishna, some

dressed up like Radha, and then they had sex like that. Nowadays sex-sects

are quite common in the west, so for some of us it might not be something

special. Real Bengal Vaisnavism was down to just a few persons. Then one or a

few them revived Bengal Vaisnavism, and from then on it spread again.

 

Popularity of certain paths might boil down to the history of the social

climate in India If the story is similar to what I have written (I actually

don't know in detail). You can't make illicit affairs out of the relationship

between Radha and Rukmini, so maybe therefore it was not very popular. And to

see Radha as Shakti might not have a popular appeal either. I think the

(past) strict social climate of India has very much to do with it.

 

Now in the west, with a complely different social climate, different things

have an appeal. To have sex in the name of religion is not anything

particularly appealing, since you can have free sex without religion. It

appears that the (dry) philosophy, which was the cure for Bengal Vaisnavism

in India, in the previus centur(ies), is actually something which degrades

the same relgion today. Westerners just love dry philosophy, and have a deep

problem with emotionalism (or bhakti). So the cure today, in the west, is

what caused the degradation in India. Things might be different in India

today, but as it is the west which is the world-leading nation today, it is

also the world-leading philosophy (material advancement and consumer

ideology), so Indian is following, slowly rejecting its own culture.

 

To dryly analyse the relationship between Radha and Krishna, without having an

idea about it, at least I find pretty annoying. The hare krishna's, for

example. You can't practice bengal Vaisnavism in theory, or even make a

deeper theory about it. It is something that primarily has to be practiced

and experienced in person. It is a mystical path, not a theoretical. Many

things are just not logical, to the western mind. We might also have the odd

situation that while illicit relationships was kind of revolutionary in

India, steady married relationships might be the revolutionary thing in the

west. At least where I live.

Westerners have serious problems with the no-sex approach of Bengal Vaisnavism

(the hare krishna's again), so I think a system which more deal with sex in

theory is more appropriate. To run around and preach no sex, and in reality

have sex on the side, hidden, makes you into a lier and a hyporcit. Then you

are not a bhakta of Radha or Krishna, but a bhakta of Maya, that aspect of

Radha that captures the materially incarnated soul with Her beautiful female

form. As I see it, any bhakta of any form of Shakti is freed from that fate.

Which is also the clue on Vaisnavism. Worship Radha (or Laxmi, or any such

female form), and then you will understand everything and also be freed from

Maya.

 

Anyway, this is just my 50 öre (5 cents in the local currency). I really don't

want to open a debate. I don't want to critisize India, I am just trying to

understand the western situation, and what to do with it. West is so

different, so I don't think you can take a religious system from India

unchanged, and that it will be appropriate. If you try, it will change and

become something else. Better make adaptions on a philosophical basis, than

to let it happen uncontrolled by itself. I don't mean watering down, but

rather to forsee the watering down and counteract it by adding some

appopriate substance.

 

-- Prisni

[Guest guest]

torsdagen den 22 augusti 2002 11.54 skrev blu_ochs:

> I think the structure of your question already contains the germ of

> the answer. It is almost a law that there has to be similar shared

> traits between a devotee and his/her ishta which pulls the former

> towards the latter. The modern-day prominence and popularity of the

> Radha-Krsna icon over the Krsna-Rukmini model suggests a triumph

> of 'left-wing' activist sentiments over 'right-wing' docilism amongst

> today's Krsna bhakta generation; particularly the Westerners(?).

 

I do agree with you in principle, and many (westerners) claim that they are

left-wing. But in my opinion, many lack the sentiments of the left wing. Most

are actually faithful followers, which is seen as a kind of severe fanatism

to their guru. They would never do anything that is the slightly rebellious

towards their Vaisnava social system as told by their guru. Whatever it is.

Me, and a friend, have discussed that, and we think that many westerners are

actually followers of Krishna, or the male principle. There is absolutely

nothing wrong with that, it is just another mood. The only problem is that

when many speak about the female, it does not make sense, since they simply

don't grasp it, and don't even care so much for it.

> I am learning a lot from your writings, Prisni. Thanks.

> Do cross over to ParaShakti if you can, Shakta-ism wants you!

 

Thanks.

I am slowly learning something about Shaktism. That's why I am here.

 

-- Prisni