Jai Shri Krishna!!

Pls let me tell u all tht I'd made above postings by referring a book SHRI RADHA AVTAR by PB Bhogibhai Shah..........

Continuing with same reference...... Before the last days of Shri Krishna in Dwarika a nine days Navgrah Shanti yaag was organised where many rishis participated... Here Shri Krishna did many leela n made Rohiniji, Uddhavji, Naradji, Subhadraji, Arjunji to tell all abt Shri Radha n Her Holinessn Highness... so tht all can know wht Shri Radhaji is!!!!

Shri VedVyasji were also present there  n said tht Shri Radha's name is alos so holy n rasmay tht thinking , talking, writing abt Her shall make him Bhavmay so he found it hard to write it evrywhere in Bhagwatji so he had  mentioned her as Mukhya Gopi in Bhagwatji n had asked Shri Shukdevji to mention Shri Radhaji in place of Mukhya Gopi while telling ppl abt Bhagwadji

JSK,

As I have before, the bhav and experience of saints / poets is valid from their own prespective.  I am not denying them their experiences or their “anubhutis”.  They are too great for me to even contemplate !!  Their sadhana and their experiences are unique in the realm of Bhakti.  

Lets be objective about this and not get emotional.  

Fact is, there is no mention of Shri Radha in any scripture or Itihas written at the time of Shri Krushna.  Let us remember, the SM Bhagvatam we have at present is what Sutaji narrated to the sages in Naimisharanya.  If he wanted to, he could / would have added Radhaji’s name as the mukhy sakhi.  He didn’t.  There is no reason for Vyasji to be teary eyed at the mention of Shri Radha, as he never “met her”.  If she had been a historical person, he would have done so.  Shri Uddhavji is also silent on this matter and he visited Vraj on numerous occasions.  He would know of Shri Radhaji if she had been there at the time.

Shri Vallabh is also silent on the subject.  His pramans are the Vedas, Vedant, Brahma Sutra, SM Bhagvat, SMB Gita.  In his own writing – Subodhiniji, he does not mention her.  Writings of Astachap are the experiences of those poet saints. They are authentic versions of their experience, but can not be substituted for SMB for authenticity.  The 84 and 252 Vaishnav vartas are the historical and allegorical stories of vaishnavs that lived at the time of Shri Vallabh / Gosaiji – not at the time of Shri Krushna.  Once the Vallabh kul started to live in Vraj, they adopted the festivals, ideas and philosophies of people around them.  Shri Radhaji and a whole host of sakhis were integral to that. 

The later purans you have mentioned were written in the Medieval times.  We can deduce this from the language, grammar etc.  Its like trying to compare Valamiki Ramayan with Tulsi Ramayan and saying Valamikiji is wrong not to have mentioned certain episodes in his original.  There is only one Authentic Ramayan – that of Valmikiji.  All 330 others are based on the original and show the bias of the later authors.  Similarly, all the others you have mentioned use the SM Bhagvatam as their seed idea, but than create a wonderful picture of their authors’ own making.  

Read the original SM Bhagvatam.  Translations in regional languages are available from Gorakhpur publications.  They give each shloka and than its translation next to it.  Commentaries by saints, no matter how great, will always show their bias towards a particular philosophy (dvaita, advaita, shuddhadvait, bhedabhed etc).  So if you want to explore the original as a scholarly pursuit, you have to read the original.  If you want to advance the “bhakti” side of your sadhna and want to read about Shri Radhaji, read the Vaishnav granthas of Pushti and Gaudiya Sampraday at your heart’s content.  All I am trying to say is, you wont find Shri Radhaji in the “original” scriptures.

JSK

Bhagwat