silentwalk

17 Comments:

At 12:53 pm, June 29, 2005,  Anonymous said...

How can a man who has taken a vow not see a woman or her shadow be holy? Was he not born from the womb of a woman?

 

At 4:55 pm, June 29, 2005,  Shantisudha said...

Yes! you are correct. That is the main problem...... the basic understanding of the concepts. He himself and especially his disciples might have thought that Jeeva Goswami can be called holy due to certain principles. But when he heard Meerabai's justification, he realised his mistake and reformed his misconception. I think in any humanbeings misconceptions and mistakes can be there. But a person can be called one step above when s/he rectifies it as soon as it is realised. So as Jeeva Goswami immediately rectified his misconcept and mistake he can be called as a holy man.

 

At 6:40 pm, June 29, 2005,  Anonymous said...

Well said. May i ask why God is depicted as a Man, Purusha in Madhura Bhakti. Does this not emphasis the superiority of men over women?

 

At 6:59 pm, June 29, 2005,  Shantisudha said...

Again the same problem ...that is the basic understanding of the concept.
While answering to Jeeva Goswami's disciples Meerabai purposefully used the word Man for Lord Krishna. i) She was a woman. ii) The context was related to a man doesn't want to see a woman. iii) which was very important that is, the love between a husband and wife ....(at that time)...was supposed to be greatest. And the devotion of a wife to her husband (at that time)....was supposed to be greatest. Again everthing is in the context of that period. (That time there was no concept of feminisam, no concept of gey or lesbian).

Now let's come to the spiritual part of the answer.
Madhura Bhakti is related to devotion or worship with Radha-Krishna feeling. I have explained it in the previous blog. One aspect of it is when a devotee merges in that feeling (Madhura Bhakti) there is no difference between Radha-Krishna. They are united. I mean so there is no gender difference at all. May be you can call Lord as Radha and Devotee as Krishna.
So I must correct my last sentense of the post but I am keeping it because most of the devotees think that they are gopies. There is no question of any gender superiority. It can come to only our mind and not the spiritual persons.

 

At 1:03 am, June 30, 2005,  Anonymous said...

Your last statement is self-contradictory: if there is no gender difference, then how can you make a distinction between gopi[s] and Krishna, in relation to gender.

 

At 9:58 am, June 30, 2005,  Anonymous said...

While i perfectly agree with the author that we have to consider the time and situation of the incidence to understand it, i like to raise a few questions with the permission of the author. To the best of my knowledge, Sri Krishna had eight wives and Radha was not one among them. "the love between a husband and wife ....(at that time)...was supposed to be greatest." The title of your post suggests that the love between a bhakta (Sant Meerabai) and the God is greatest. " (That time there was no concept of feminism , no concept of gay or lesbian )." I beg your pardon that the concepts of gay and lesbianism deal with attraction towards same gender and while you suggest that there is no gender difference in Madhura bhakti, it cannot be agreed upon. The Lord Sri Krishna is regarded as a husband, but there has been no single instance where the feminine form of God has been treated as a Wife. The feminine form is always considered as Mother. If the Love between husband and Wife is greatest, why is the Love between Radha and Krishna cited as the example of Madhura bhakti. BTW, if there were no concepts of feminism at that time, does it mean that Madhura bhakti is appropriate only at that time but not these days because of feminism?

 

At 11:38 am, June 30, 2005,  Shantisudha said...

I mean to say in the post that the concept of devotion of lovers for eachother is related with Radha-Krishna feeling. Lord Krishna was the ideal person and because of that all the gopis used to love him in diferent forms. I have never read except Subhadra that Lord Krishna is anybody's brother other than his real sister. So may be in Madhura Bhakti Lord Krishna ....especially for Meerabai he was her eternal husband. Except Lord Krishna in Madhura Bhakti everywhere in Bhakti God is treated as a "Mother & Father" both according to one's own concept irrespective of gender. I think when one walks towards a path of the supreme no gender difference remains. The difference is only Bhakta and The Supreme.

I mentioned about Gays and Lasbians and feminisam not in the context of the Madhura Bhakti. it was about the common concept among people regarding love at that time. This also a guess of mine I really don't know the reality. Here now I am not supporting or opposing any moment (feminisam, gay, lasbians).

Regarding the last....
I think you are twisting the meanings. For another twist :-)
If the concept of femenism was there then I think Meerabai and other women who suffered due to patriarchal reasons would have been members of feminist movement and would not have searched Lord Krishna for their sufferings.

I am just jocking. Nowadays there is a concept of feminism and other things..but..There is no question of existance of Madhura Bhakti. It is a feeling to worship God which anybody can have without any particular gender at any time period.

 

At 12:09 pm, June 30, 2005,  Anonymous said...

"I have never read except Subhadra that Lord Krishna is anybody's brother other than his real sister."

Draupadi, was also having the pet name Krishna and was amongst the most loved sisters of Sri Krishna. Do you mean to suggest that there can be only two relations, either a sister or a lover? According to one of your posts, Sri Krishna had an aunt called Kunti.

 

At 12:39 pm, June 30, 2005,  Shantisudha said...

I didn't mean to intend to say there are only two relationships.

About Draupadi's view about Krishna. I am afraid that she called Krishna as her brother. Her name was "Krishna" beacause she was having a beautiful dark shining complexion like Lord Krishna. She always considered Lord Krishna as her 'Friend....the most beloved friend'. I am sure if somebody thinks from Draupadi's perspective then she was also in love with Lord Krishna. As he was always supportive and never humiliated her. He always saved her. Indeed, Draupadi initially was in love with Arjuna but I am sure after whatever happened in te game of Dyuta and after that, she surely have lost that love for Arjuna.

 

At 12:58 pm, June 30, 2005,  Anonymous said...

I'm confused now!! You say that Draupadi's Love for krishna was of a friend. But Draupadi's Love for Arjuna is that of a wife/lover. And that she should have lost her love for arjuna after the humiliation for her. What is Love? How is it different in Madhura Bhakti, between wife and husband and what is love for a friend.

 

At 1:54 pm, June 30, 2005,  Shantisudha said...

No need of confusion. I think you are just weaving a net of words around yourself to feel so.

There are different shades of love among and within humanbeings for different persons, different relationships and of course different time. Different shades of love can be found at different time for the same person in the same relationship. This concept might be indigestable to many but I personally feel that it is there.

I am not stamping my opinions about Draupadi or relationships or meaning of love. I cannot elaborate the whole thing whatever I mean (which is quite complex) in the comment.

Now the love in Madhura Bhakti is free from sexuality (as per my understanding level). I didn't say that Draupadi's love for Krishna comes under Madhura Bhakti.

 

At 2:30 pm, June 30, 2005,  Anonymous said...

" Different shades of love can be found at different time for the same person in the same relationship. " Thanks for clearing my confusion. It also suggests the very ephemeral nature of Love because it changes the shades depending on circumstances. In my humble opinion, the love of Saint Meerabai or Radha which comes under Madhura bhakti can also be viewed as love between bhakta and God and not just as that considering Lord Krishna as husband, because the Love for a husband can decrease (as Draupadi's for Arjuna if any) but the Love for Lord Krishna can never cease.

 

At 3:11 pm, June 30, 2005,  Shantisudha said...

Indeed! I mean to say the same thing about Radha-Krishna and Meerabai. It was Meera's perception about Lord Krishna to be her eternal husband and not mine :-)

 

At 1:52 am, July 01, 2005,  Shantisudha said...

"....Thanks for clearing my confusion. It also suggests the very ephemeral nature of Love because it changes the shades depending on circumstances."
I think again you are weaving another net because of lack of basic understanding what I mean to say in my comment. You are continuously misinterpreting my words and I have already said that I can't clearly state myself much more in the comment than this.

 

At 8:59 am, July 03, 2005,  Anonymous said...

"I think again you are weaving another net because of lack of basic understanding what I mean to say in my comment. You are continuously misinterpreting my words"

It's just my perception!!!

 

At 5:39 pm, September 15, 2005,  Anonymous said...

Why to make a wonderful topic like Madhurabhakti, a topic of debet any more. Let us understand it more. thats perhaps one of the most wonderful topics in this blog or any other blog and I think Author is really trying to think of such a madhura-bhakti.

Madhura-bhakti, as I know and feel is a form of bhakti in which everything is madhur, sweet. there is no place for pain.

There is one stotra of Madwacharya Adharam Madhuram.... madhuradhipate rakhilam madhuram.

Its madhura-bhakti.

Sorry to differ and dont creat any more debet on this, but Meera's bhakti is not madhura-bhakti.

There is quite a lot of difference, for ordinary human perception, in bhakti of Radha and Meera. In one of the book only on this topic by Ram Shevalkar, he upholds Meera's bhakti as superior. Of course I feel that its perception of ordinary man.

Both were at most superior degree of bhakti. Sayujyata is a degree of liberation / salvation / mukti, where there doesnt remain place for any difference, discrimination. A kind of Adwait. Adwait - no two. When no two, how difference could be there.

This is beyond brain's reach. Its to be experienced, not to be discussed or understood. We cant speak about how sweets are mangoes, we have to experience them. Of course discussing about taste of mango would certainly force us someday to search for mangoes and develope unending thirst for mangoes.

keep discussing. I really want to go on and on with this topic, but restrict myself as I am blogging in someone else's blog.

 

At 7:51 pm, September 15, 2005,  Shantisudha said...

Please read the post which is written on MadhurashhTakam and the comments on that.

People can have different views and they must express those. Why to say sorry for that? The difference of opinions really doesn't matter but it is the way how you express it!!

Why cann't you start writing your blog? It will be nice.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

About Me

Name: Shantisudha

Location: Eternal world

View my complete profile