Thoughts on Radha and Krishna - Prakruti and Purusha

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

I came across this tweet on twitter.

I am reminded of preface of a novel on krishNa- yugandhar. By author who wrote “Mrityunjay” on karNa - Shivaji Sawant. So plenty of revisionism. Anyways that’s not the point. Author mentions in preface about how he had to fight with himself on whether to keep rādhā in book at all. He makes these arguments (with himself) on why should rādhā be completely omitted from book. He says what is the point of mentioning fictional character. Rādhā is absent in Mahābhārata - critical edition (or any other edition). Absent in harivansha. Absent in bhāgvat. Why bother!!

He mentions ahead that Rādhā is mentioned only in some “obscure” brahmavaivarta purāNa and is a secondary character. By the way, this is the person who argued in this same book (and same preface) that the verse “चातुर्वण्य मया सृष्टं गुणकर्म विभागश:” from gītā is inserted by some “usual suspects” much later to justify casteism.

I am saying again and again this just to make a point that this person makes in this preface. 

He says,

” I almost made up my mind and deleted rādhā from initial manuscripts. Then one day I thought why is this fictional character so popular? What does it even mean? I then looked up the vyutpatti of term rādhā. Consulted many scholars from BORI and many dictionaries and amarakosha-s. 

The meaning of the word rādhā that kept emerging from each inquiry started blowing my mind away. Bhāvārtha of word Rādhā is one who yearns for jñāna/moksha. One who longs for Moksha. One who longs to reach the SOURCE. Chaitanya. 

Suddenly, the rādhā who is fictional. Rādhā whom I had meticulously deleted from my mind, my manuscripts - entered my mind and my narrative with such a force that I could not stop her. She occupied my mind and I could only helplessly watch her doing it. I started seeing rādhā in everyone. Every gopikā became rādhā. Uddhav became rādhā. Arjun became rādhā. Everyone in all places and all times who yearns or have yearned for jñāna / moksha even for a single moment in any one of the countless births - became rādhā. That is when I decided to include her in my book.

My rationality helped me keep limit on how bigger a role she will play and how much space (in terms of pages) will she occupy.

But krishNa is incomplete without rādhā. She has to be there in any story of krishNa ever told”

 I read this book in one sitting. I was perhaps 12-13 then. I could not keep this book away. 16 hours straight. Now I cannot read it. Too rational. To “chārvāka”. And many experiences due to gurukrupā have helped me see some bigger picture. And I was grappling with nirishwarvādi inclinations with what my experiences in daily sādhanā were indicating. Truly confusing times. This is when my guru subtly started pushing me towards sānkhya (I didn’t even know this word - except Gita class - 2nd chapter name)

But this preface and this revelation of Shri Shivaji Savant helped me visualise what it is like when prakriti “yearns” for moksha. When ĪshwarikrishNa says in kārikā - it is prakruti that gets moksha. Purush is always free. And it is prakruti which yearns for (and also resists) moksha. It looks schizophrenic. It didn’t make sense. And then rādhā taught me how prakruti yearns for liberation but resists  breakage of last bond. Because once last bond (of ahamkāra) is broken, she is free. And what remains is shuddha Chaitanya. Only Chaitanya. Kaivalya or lonely Chaitanya.

Lastly returning to īhalaukika plane - Without rādhā, we wouldn’t have had this heavenly composition in yaman-kalyāNa by a Gandharva incarnated on earth perhaps due to some kārmik baggage - Pandit Bhimsen Joshi.

राधाधर मधुमिलिंद जय जय

रमारमण हरि गोविंद

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIGd9aMSZgI