Where “Radha” name is mentioned in the ‘Bhagavatam’?

Concept: Puri Peethadhishwar Jagadguru Shankaracharya Swami Nishchalananda Saraswati Ji Maharaj

Credits: Rajiv Sharma Ji

Radha Ji is the heart of Indian devotion. People are not finding her name properly in “Bhagavatam”. I am writing this blog after listening the right answer from the recommended source as Puri Shankaracharya.

You will find it in many ‘Puranas’ and in ‘Shrimad Bhagavatam’ also there is mention of the word “Radhika” as “Anaya”. It is a popular name used for Radha Ji. By taking references from many Puranas of Veda Vyas Ji and great scholars of ‘Gaudiya Sampradaya’ have drawn the picture of Radha as “Eka, Radhika, Anaya”, etc. There is symbolic description of her.

Now the question arises: Why, is it not in the original Bhagavatam?

Maybe not in an obvious way but other ‘Granthas’ it’s mentioned. Isn’t it? It is called “Gunopasamhara Nyaya”. This Nyaya is commonly used to hint persons, places, attributes, actions in a symbolic way. That is the way of traditional teachings. Students used to understand these meanings in a similar way. Now our educational system is different and gross as compared to ancient studies. This is my personal evaluation.

Whenever Bhagwan Sukadev Ji used to pronounce the word ‘Radha’, he would attain ‘Satvik Moorchha’ and he wasn’t able to continue the narration, this happened with him every time. It is a specified state of consciousness where devotees cross the material knowledge focus and stay in a higher vertical of understanding. There is a difference in views, in vision, in consciousness. For example, A goldsmith, a man, and a lady see a gold ornament in different ways. You can get the point if you contemplate on human psychology. This is a gross example. Here the ‘Satvik Moorchha’ is a subtle topic and can be observed with the right guidance from traditional masters.

Sukadev Ji used symbolic words to describe Radha Ji. Is any other Gopi’s name mentioned? An indication has been given via the Shrimad Bhagavatam. Names of those Devis who got married to Bhagwan Shri Krushna Chandra after his Yagyopavit, those are all mentioned in Srimad Bhagavatam. Even none of his childhood friend’s names are mentioned there.

In our Vrindavan approx 300–350 years back there was no Murti (deity) of Radha Ji. So it is important to understand this in a prescribed way. Is there any Murti of Radha ji in the Banke Bihari Mandir in Vrindavan? They are talking about what was there 300–350 years back. They have to understand things related to Vrindavan. In the Banke Bihari Mandir is there Radha ji’s or Bihari ji’s murti? Whose murti is there in Radha Vallabh? Is it Radha Ji or RadhabVallabh Ji? Even if Radha ji’s Murti is not there you shouldn’t say that Radha Ji is not a historical figure.

Clear your doubts wherever Shri Krishna Ji is present Radha Ji’s presence is embodied there. You cannot imagine heat and light is not present with fire. This is philosophy.

If there is no ‘murti’ of Radha Ji that doesn’t mean that Radha Ji didn’t exist. It is a mistake if someone thinks so. What is the meaning of the word ‘Shri Krishna’?

It is made up of two words. In Shri Krishna, the Radha word is automatically embodied. Heat is always there with fire. You should not recite heat differently when you are shouting fire. There is a text called “Bhakti Rasarnavah” written by Dharma Samrat Swami Karapatri Ji. It’s written in Sanskrit. Baldev Upadhyay Ji commented on Radha Ji said that she is not a historical figure. Guru Sri Karpatri Ji Maharaj has written a detailed rebuttal in ‘Bhakti Rasarnavah’. Please read that. We can’t just quote one particular Shastra (scripture) to prove something and not quote the other Shastras which do contain the information. There are several Granthas (holy books) and Shastras written by Veda Vyas Ji as Brahma Purana etc

As per the ‘Gunopasamhara Nyaya’, everything is not available in one Upanishad. But by studying all the Upanishad meaning is derived by this methodology. If you want to say that Radha Rani Ji is a fictional character do you consider yourself as imaginary? All this knowledge comes from the tradition of Guru Parampara (Lineage of traditional teachings). If you can get all the meaning by reading just one or two Granthas then why are these Acharyas are needed?

Narayana !!