Search:
Bhakti List Archives

Re: Of Hari, Green and Radha

From the Bhakti List Archives

kalaivani retnavellu • February 12, 2002 


radheshyam
namo narayana

dear malolan prabhu and all other bhaagavatas,
i'd like to beg all ur pardon again. thanks to malolan prabhu we now do know 
the meaning of krishna's name hari. :) stand corrected. sorry  for 
misleading anyone.
what i wanted to say was that the union of pirati and perumal gave the color 
green. and since i'm attached to krishna, i used him as the example. but i 
guess that's just fanciful speculation on my part. sorry again.

best wishes
kalaivani
radhegovinda
namo venkateshaya
hari hari


>From: "Malolan Cadambi" 
>To: 
>Subject: Of Hari, Green and Radha
>Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 15:24:08 -0600
>
>--- In bhakti-list@y..., "Srikant Sadagopan"  wrote:
> > Dear Kumari Kalaivani et al,
> > When I started to read Kalaivani's explanation on the color "green" for
> > Krishna, I wondered if you were heading in the right direction because,
> > Radhe per se is not considered as "Piratti" or Thaayar in toto among Sri
> > Vaishnava Acharyas. It is Rukmini, the officially wedded wife of Sri 
>Krishna
> > who is considered the manifestation of Thaayar. All other feminine forms
> > attracted to Krishna were either Amshams of thaayar or 
>Gopikaas(reembodiment
> > of Vaanaras from the Ramayana times --there's a sperate story to that).
>
>True. Radha is not pirAtti in the purest sense of the term. In the 
>ISKCON(Gaudiya Vaishnava) Sampradaya Lakshmi is consider as the Amsham of 
>Radha and Naarayana is considered the Amsam of Krishna. These notions are 
>in one word *FALSE* and represent very poor understanding of tarka sastras. 
>I wish to bring to the notice of members that this list is dedicated to the 
>Sri Vaishnava Sampradaya and is meant for discussing the works of Sri 
>Vaishnava Acharyas. Please do not mix Gaudiya Vaishnava Logic over here.
>
>On the other hand, Radha in the Sri Vaishanava Sampradya was outlined by 
>Sri.Krishna Kashyap in an old post which I picked up from the archives. 
>Radha in the Sri Vaishnava Sampradaya is recognised as an amsam of the 
>Vaanaras who re-incarnated during the Krishna Avatara as Gopikas. Radha is 
>refered to in Swami Vedanta Desikar's Yadhavabhudayam. Yadhava-bhudhayam 
>was commented upon even by the Advaitha Scholar Appayya Diskhita. This also 
>means that the advaita school or as a matter of fact even the dvaita school 
>do not recognise Krishna as the supreme god-head, but Krishna is recognised 
>only as an avatara of Sriman naarayana.
>
>For a Complete Reference, please check the following link: 
>http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/sep99/0005.html
>
>Further more, in the Sri Vaishnava Sampradayam, Radha is a jiivatma and is 
>Anu(finite) not vibhu(infinite). This is not the case in the Gaudiya 
>Vaishnava Sampradaya.
>
>
> > But I must admit I was bowled over by your deduction of color schemes. 
>It
> > was pure Bhakthi, intense anubhavam and a very constructive use of 
>logic.
> > Really good to see some variety in Anubhavams among the youth today.
>
>I did not reply to Smt.Kalaivani's previous mail about the question of hari 
>being green. The Combination with Radha does not make Sriman Naarayana 
>Green as Smt.Kalaivani draws from her kindergarden logic. I refered to the 
>Samskrutha Sabakosha (Sanskrit Dictionary) and here is what is present:
>
>HaritA means Green. This word is attributed to Mahalakshmi to emphasize the 
>fact that the green wealth of the forests and crops have personified 
>Mahalakshmi as Green therefore HaritA. Hari due to his association with 
>Mahalakshmi is also Green therefore becoming HaritA sametha Hari. Equating 
>Radha with Yellow is then again *now-where* found in sruthi vakhyams. To 
>me, Smt.Kalaivani's logic does not go more than Kindergarten Logic or even 
>represent 1% of the logic present in vyakharanam or tarka sastram.
>
>Her bhakti anubhavam is laudable. But without proper knowledge of 
>attributes, contemplating on them or devotion towards them not recommended. 
>For example, let us consider this;
>
>A person confused the Demon hayagriva with Bhagavan Hayagriva and presumed 
>that both are the same. Thence, the person was singing in praise of 
>Hayagriva without knowing the difference between the both. It is for this 
>reason that worship should never be offered just by invoking a name, 
>without knowledge of attributes.
>
>Without knowledge of attributes invoking a name is not recommended. Why 
>would a person want to sing in praise of the demon Hayagriva???
>
>
> >
> > ||Rukmini SamEtha sri Venugopala swAminE namaha||
>
>Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan,
>
>Malolan Cadambi
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------
>            - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
>To Post a message, send it to:   bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
>Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>




radhe krishna!


_________________________________________________________________
Join the worldÂ’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com



--------------------------------------------------------------
           - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
To Post a message, send it to:   bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/
 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/