Sri Priti-Sandarbha
BY: SUN STAFF
Srila Jiva Goswami
Aug 27, CANADA (SUN) —
Sri Priti-sandarbha
Volume One
by Srila Jiva Goswami
Anuccheda 189
It is said in Srimad-Bhagavatam (10.55.40):
yam vai muhuh. . .
"It is not astonishing that the palace women, who should have felt maternal affection for Pradyumna, privately felt ecstatic attraction for him as if he were their own lord. After all, the son exactly resembled his father.
Indeed, Pradyumna was a perfect reflection of the beauty of Lord Krishna, the shelter of the goddess of fortune, and appeared before their eyes as Cupid himself. Since even those on the level of his mother felt conjugal attraction for him, then what to speak of how other women felt when they saw him?"***
Here the truth that the palace women were agitated by feelings of amorous love for Pradyumna seems to be inappropriate. What seems here to be inappropriate is actually appropriate, as has already been explained in a previous passage of this book.
Someone may say that inappropriate alambanas or inappropriate lovers (prity-adhara) bring rasabhasa situations in the descriptions of the yajna--patnis, pulinda girls, does, and others in Srimad-Bhagavatam. This assertion will be refuted later in this book.
Someone may claim that an inappropriateness in relation to the object of love (priti-vishaya) is seen in these words of Srimad-Bhagavatam (10.21.7):
akshanvatam. . .vaktram vrajesha-sutayoh
"The cowherd girls said: O friends, those eyes that see the beautiful faces of the sons of Maharaja Nanda are certainly fortunate. As these two sons enter the forest, surrounded by Their friends, driving the cows before Them, They hold Their flutes to Their mouths and glance lovingly upon the residents of Vrindavana. For those who have eyes, we think there is no greater object of vision."***
Here someone may say that although Lord Krishna and Lord Balarama , still the form of Lord Balarama is not the same as the form of Lord Krishna, and therefore it is not appropriate for Lord's girlfriends to have feelings of amorous love for Lord Balarama, and therefore this verse has a rasabhasa of shringara-rasa. The truth, however, is that in this verse the gopis are hiding their amorous feelings for Lord Krishna. They are pretending that they have no amorous feelings for Lord Krishna. Therefore their praising Lord Krishna and Lord Balarama equally is in now way a statement of their amorous feelings for Lord Balarama. Therefore there is no rasabhasa in this verse. In his commentary on Srimad-Bhagavatam (10.65.17) Srila Sridhara Svami states: "The gopis who enjoyed amorous pastimes with Lord Balarama were different from the gopis who enjoyed pastimes with Lord Krishna." Srimad-Bhagavatam 10.21.7 quoted in this anuccheda was spoken by the goddess-like gopis of Vraja.
Anuccheda 190
Here someone may say that in Srimad-Bhagavatam there are descriptions of love where the object of love is a person other than lord Krishna. This, they say, is sangaty-abhasa (improper object of love). They quote this verse describing Srimati Devahuti in Srimad-Bhagavatam (3.22.16):
kamah sa bhuyat. . .kshipatim iva shriyam
"Let your daughter's desire for marriage, which is recognized in the Vedic scriptures, bew fulfilled. Who would not accept her hand? She is so beautiful that by her bodily luster alone she excels the beauty of her ornaments."*
Someone may say that Devahuti's devotion to Kardama Muni is bhakty-abhasa (devotion directed to the wrong person). This criticism is not valid. Her union with Kardama Muni brought great glory and good fortune to the world. Therefore no one should find fault with it. This verse was spoken by Sri Kardama Muni.
Anuccheda 191
It is said in Srimad-Bhagavatam (10.57.26):
uvasa tasyam katicin
mithilayam sama vibhuh
manitah priti-yuktena
janakena mahatmana
tato 'shikshad gadam kale
dhartarashörah suyodhanah
"The almighty Lord Balarama stayed in Mithila for several years, honored by His affectionate devotee Janaka Maharaja. During that time Dhritarashtra's son Duryodhana learned from Balarama the art of fighting with a club."***
In this verse the word "vibhuh" (almighty) refers to Lord Balarama. The word "manitah" (honored) and other worlds like it are adjectives modifying Lord Balarama. Any claim that rasabhasa is present in this verse is not justified. There is no rasabhasa here.
Return to Anuccheda 186-188
