position of radha in Sri Vaishnava (Ramnuja) Sampradaya

[tesh 0]

Jai Sri Krishna

 

I understand that Sri (Ramanuja) VAisnavas worship Bhagavan largely in mood of awe and Reverence as opposed Sweetness, hence their priority of murthies such as Laxminarayan and Rukmini Krishna in worship. Radha and Krishna worship is generally associated with worship in a mood of madhuraya or sweetness whcih is important in Gaudiya and NImbarka VAishnavism. What is the official position held in the Sri Vaishnava Sampraday concerning Radha. Thanks

[Guest guest]

It is not true that Sri Vaishnavas only worship God in the "mood of awe and reverence". Have you ever heard of Sri Andal? There is gopi-bhava too in the Sri Sampradaya. Sriman Narayana is the source of everything. Lord Sri Krishna is His avatara and not different from Him.

 

Humbly,

 

Madhava Ramanaujadasa

[Guest guest]

Thank u Sri Madhava Ramanaujadasa, yes I do agree with you, that sri vaisnvas DONT "ONLY" worship in mood of awe. But if you read my original comment again, i did not use the word "only", i used the word "Largerly" meaning that empahsis seems to be on mood of awe, i DO know about the lilas of Sri Godai Devi Andal and Thirupavai where there is so much Gopee bhav. And yes Bhagavan is source of everything what ever bhav you approach him in. So i do not doubt the Richness of doing bhakthi in Sri Vaishnava sampradaya Alawars, Ramanuja, desika and all other Acharays in this parampara have very kindly revealed to us all the bhavas or bhakthi whcoh are in shastra!!

 

My question is that what is the emphasis on Srimati Radharani, in This sampradaya. So far i have seen hyms, and Murthies of other aspects of the lords consort such as Sri, Bhu and Nila. I want to know if there is any specific reference and worship of this form of HER, Srimati, Vrishabhnu-putri Radha-rani, in vrindavan.

 

Thank you very much and Jai Sri Krishna!!

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

What evidence is there from veda/purana that Shree Krishna is the avatar of Vishnu/Narayana and not the other way around??

[Guest guest]

in Sri Sampradaya, Narayana is the source. In Gaudiya Vaishnavism, Krishna is the source. It is a theological difference, but both are Sri Hari, so don't worry too much about it.

 

jaya sri krishna

[Guest guest]

To make comparison between Sri and Gaudiya vaisnavism is like comparing orange with apple. Each has its own authority and interpretations etc.

 

Sri Vaisnavism claims the prasthana trayam, pancaratra agama along with the 4000 Divya Prabandhams as its principle authority.

The Gaudiya vaisnavism's main authority are the Bhagavatam, Padma puranas, Chaitanya Caritamrita etc

 

In Sri Vaisnavism tradition, Nappinai can be considered to be Srimati Radha. Prominence is given to Sri (Laskmi) as Sri vaisnavas belief their sampradaya originated from Sri, who is the mediatrix between the Lord and the jivas.

 

In Andal's Tirupavai verse stanza 16 to 22, the gopis arouse the intimate associates of Krsna beginning with

a) Gate keepers (vasal/kovil kappan)

b) Nandagopala

c) Yasoda

d) Baladeva

e) Nappinai/Radha ('Nanda Gopalan marumagale' - daughter-in-law of Nandagopala)

f) and then Krsna Himself.

 

While other vaisnava lineages propogate bhakti (devotion) as a means to attain God. The emphasis in Sri vaisnavim is on total surrender (prapatti) and worshipping the Lord in the attitude of servants (dasya bhava).

 

Naturally questions may arise in regard to Sri vaisnava's position on the nature and state of liberation. From the sri vaisnava perspective, such discussions are irrelevant to the practice of dharma as it impossible to conceptualise with our limited mental faculties.

 

In Bhagavat Gita, chapter 2:47, Sri Krsna states

 

"karmanyevadhikaraste ma phalesu kadacana

ma karma phala hetur bhurma te sango stvakaramani"

 

To act alone is your right, and never to the fruits thereof. Do not regard yourself as the cause of action and fruit, nor become attached to inaction.

 

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

Yetiraja Ramanuja dasanudasan

 

Readers interested in sri tardition can to

srisampradaya/

[Guest guest]

I understand that Laksmi is ever engaged in serving her Lord, Shree Narayana and that in 'tattva' there is no difference between Krishna and Narayana. But, in Lila there is a big difference. Otherwise why Lakshmi went to Baelvan to perform austerities in order to enter Rasalila. Something was more attractive to her. Krishna means all-attractive and thus even the goddess of fortune leaves the chest of her Lord for an ideal she could never realize.

[Guest guest]

Dear Guest,

 

Namaskaram, your question is similar to the one posed by Lord Caitanya to Sriman Venkata Bhattar in SriRangam (ref CC).

 

Can you please give me the scriptural reference, in regard to your comment

 

"Otherwise why Lakshmi went to Baelvan to perform austerities in order to enter Rasalila. Something was more attractive to her"

 

Reflect on the following statement by Srila Sanatana Goswami in Sri Brhat Bhagavatamrtam, Part 2, chapter 4 (Vaikuntha nama) Published by Gaudiya Matha

 

"The omniscient great God of Vaikunta (viz Sri Narayana) at once manifested Himself before me as Sr Krsna, the eternal son of Nanda and forthwith Sri Laksmi Devi became Radhika, followed by Bhudevi as Candra valli"

 

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

 

Yetiraja Ramanuja dasan

 

 

 

 

[Guest Narasimha krishna Dasa]

 

Thank u Sri Madhava Ramanaujadasa, yes I do agree with you, that sri vaisnvas DONT "ONLY" worship in mood of awe. But if you read my original comment again, i did not use the word "only", i used the word "Largerly" meaning that empahsis seems to be on mood of awe, i DO know about the lilas of Sri Godai Devi Andal and Thirupavai where there is so much Gopee bhav. And yes Bhagavan is source of everything what ever bhav you approach him in. So i do not doubt the Richness of doing bhakthi in Sri Vaishnava sampradaya Alawars, Ramanuja, desika and all other Acharays in this parampara have very kindly revealed to us all the bhavas or bhakthi whcoh are in shastra!!

 

My question is that what is the emphasis on Srimati Radharani, in This sampradaya. So far i have seen hyms, and Murthies of other aspects of the lords consort such as Sri, Bhu and Nila. I want to know if there is any specific reference and worship of this form of HER, Srimati, Vrishabhnu-putri Radha-rani, in vrindavan.

 

Thank you very much and Jai Sri Krishna!!

As an answer to above question - In Sri Sampradaya -NO. IT IS NOT. ACCORDING TO ORIGINAL SRIMAD BHAGAVATHAM, COMPOSED BY THE GREAT SAGE VEDA VYASA, THERE IS NO CHARACTER CALLED AS "RADHA" AT ALL. 

THE MENTION OF RADHA IS AVAILABLE IN RAJASA PURANA LIKE 'BRAHMA VAIVARTHA PURANAM'.

 

WE CAN TAKE 'RADHA' AS A SYMBOL OF DEVOTEE WITH SELFLESS DEVOTION. IN SANSKRIT "RADH" MEANS TO PLEASE. THE DEVOTION OF ONE, WHO PLEASED LORD WITH HIS HEART, DEED AND WORD, WILL BE CALLED AS RADHA. BECAUSE THE WORD 'DEVOTION' IS IN FEMININE GENDER, SO THE WORD 'RADHA' ALSO BECAME A FEMININE GENDER WORD. WHEN A CHARACTER IS PERSONIFIED THAT CHARACTER BECAME 'LADY RADHA'.

 

HOW LORD LOVES SUCH A DEVOTEE AND HOW SUCH DEVOTEE IS MERGED IN LORD, IS SEEN IN RADHA-KRISHNAS. HENCE RADHA IS NOT REALLY A PERSON, IT APPEARS. THAT IS THE REASON WHY KALYANAM IS NOT PERFORMED TO THEM. IT IS DONE TO THOSE WHO WERE REALLY THERE DURING HIS PERIOD.

 

Sri Ramanujasya Sharanam, Sharanam Prapadye!

[Guest krishna das]

 

As an answer to above question - In Sri Sampradaya -NO. IT IS NOT. ACCORDING TO ORIGINAL SRIMAD BHAGAVATHAM, COMPOSED BY THE GREAT SAGE VEDA VYASA, THERE IS NO CHARACTER CALLED AS "RADHA" AT ALL. 

THE MENTION OF RADHA IS AVAILABLE IN RAJASA PURANA LIKE 'BRAHMA VAIVARTHA PURANAM'.

 

WE CAN TAKE 'RADHA' AS A SYMBOL OF DEVOTEE WITH SELFLESS DEVOTION. IN SANSKRIT "RADH" MEANS TO PLEASE. THE DEVOTION OF ONE, WHO PLEASED LORD WITH HIS HEART, DEED AND WORD, WILL BE CALLED AS RADHA. BECAUSE THE WORD 'DEVOTION' IS IN FEMININE GENDER, SO THE WORD 'RADHA' ALSO BECAME A FEMININE GENDER WORD. WHEN A CHARACTER IS PERSONIFIED THAT CHARACTER BECAME 'LADY RADHA'.

 

HOW LORD LOVES SUCH A DEVOTEE AND HOW SUCH DEVOTEE IS MERGED IN LORD, IS SEEN IN RADHA-KRISHNAS. HENCE RADHA IS NOT REALLY A PERSON, IT APPEARS. THAT IS THE REASON WHY KALYANAM IS NOT PERFORMED TO THEM. IT IS DONE TO THOSE WHO WERE REALLY THERE DURING HIS PERIOD.

 

Sri Ramanujasya Sharanam, Sharanam Prapadye!

 

This is faulty logic. This answer is actually from Chinna Jeeyar Swami in one of his email correspondences, but still it is very faulty logic. For example he states:

 

"ACCORDING TO ORIGINAL SRIMAD BHAGAVATHAM, COMPOSED BY THE GREAT SAGE VEDA VYASA, THERE IS NO CHARACTER CALLED AS "RADHA" AT ALL."

 

This is a false statement. There is no statement in the Srimad Bhagavatam that says there is no character called as Radha. Saying that "the name is not present in the Srimad Bhagavata", is different than saying "the Bhagavatam refutes the existence of Radha", which is what Chinna Jeeyar Swami is stating. The fact that he cannot understand this very basic level of logic shows he is not a qualified authority on the matter of scriptural debate.

 

Next he states: "THE MENTION OF RADHA IS AVAILABLE IN RAJASA PURANA LIKE 'BRAHMA VAIVARTHA PURANAM'."

 

He wants to imply that the fact a name is mentioned in a rajasic purana means the character actually never existed and was just made up out of thin air. We should note that the name of Narayana is also present in rajasic puranas. Using his same logic we should conclude there is no such person as Narayana because his name is found in a rajasic purana. Consistent logic needs to be applied. The fact that he admits the name of Radha is present in the rajasic puranas already establishes the fact that Radha exists as a person. He may debate as to whether the stories about her in the rajasic puranas are exaggerated or not, but he cannot claim the person does not exist, otherwise there is no reason for Vyasa to have mentioned this name in the first place. All of the names mentioned in rajasic puranas (thousands of devas, asuras, rishis, etc.) are all found to be real people who actually existed and are further mentioned in other vedic literatures. Likewise the name of Radha is also found throughout other vedic literatures.

 

Swamiji further goes on to say: "WE CAN TAKE 'RADHA' AS A SYMBOL OF DEVOTEE WITH SELFLESS DEVOTION."

 

This is another absurdity. We don't just make up what we want to take as symbols and what we want to take as reality. The vedic scriptures are not such a man made creation that they are filled with false tales which we need to interpret as symbols according to our whims. This same Swami also claims that Lord Rama was just an ordinary human being, not a divine personality like Krishna. Such feeble attempts to understand God and his incarnations with one's own fertile imagination is useless.

 

His final conclusion further displays his ignorance: "HENCE RADHA IS NOT REALLY A PERSON, IT APPEARS. THAT IS THE REASON WHY KALYANAM IS NOT PERFORMED TO THEM. IT IS DONE TO THOSE WHO WERE REALLY THERE DURING HIS PERIOD."

 

According to him "it appears" as such. He doesn't really know, but he is guessing based on how it appears. That isn't the qualification for delivering spiritual transcendental knowledge - to base your judgments on your own opinions according to how it appears to you.

 

His last statement, trying to draw a connection between kalyanam and the existence or nonexistence of personalities is again futile. The Bhagavatam describes the meeting of Lord Krishna with Kubja, but there is no kalyanam performed today for them. The reason is because the mood of devotion was not according to svakiya bhava.

 

By such logic does the Swamiji also deny the existence of all the gopis of vraja? There is no kalyanam performed for them as well, yet the Bhagavatam clearly speaks of the gopis of vraja as real personalities. So again, there is no logical consistency with any of the Swamiji's statements. It is not the answer of a scholarly person, but appears to be from some one who had a cursory glance of the Bhagavatam but failed to study it in depth.

 

vyadhah kubja vraje gopyo

yajna-patnyas tathapare 

 

The gopis of Vraja, the yajna-patnya, kubja, all are described in the Bhagavatam and none of them have kalyanam performed for them. Thus the Swamiji's answer is incorrect and fails to maintain a consistent logical conclusion.