Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [Aryakrishti Vedic Dharma] RE: Re: krishna and Radha

Expand Messages
  • Arun Upadhyay
    Radha was definitely known to Vedavyasa as the name figures in Brahmavaivartta Purana-indicated by Mishraji. However, it is not described in Bhagavata and
    Message 1 of 14 , Apr 30, 2011
      Radha was definitely known to Vedavyasa as the name figures in Brahmavaivartta Purana-indicated by Mishraji. However, it is not described in Bhagavata and Mahabharata as it is not  needed there. Bhagavata is to explain the Purusha element called Bhagavan and hits human incarnation Sri Krishna. That is Nirvishehsa Brahma. When it creates its vivartta i.e. its variety, its divides itself into two parts-Conscious being is still called Krishna and its associate in creation-Mula Prakriti is Radha which is stated in so many words. Krishna is center of attraction or action, base of  creation is Radha (adhara). For galaxy, central massive black hole is Krishna and stars rotating round it are Radha. In solar system, sun is krishna and planets are Radha.Source of creation or river is called Dhara, its opposite is division into many streams forming a delta. Ruler of source of ganga was Ganga-putra Bhishma. Ruler of Radha region (after Munger delta starts at Farakka) was Karna called son of Radha. Within atom, nucleus is Krishna and electrons are Raddha. Rotation of Gopis around that attractor Krishna at various levels is Rasa by which creation has been described in Brahma-vaivartta purana, Prakriti Khanda, chapter 3. Similarly, Mahabharata is basically story of fight among Kuru family and Radha is obviously irrelevant. Nothing can be discussed at all places without its relevance and that should not be made a basis of arbitrary conclusions. For cooking and agriculture, discussion of soul is not needed, so such theorists cannot be called against existence of Atma like division of Sankhya into sa-Ishvara and Nirishvara sankhya.
      -Arun Kumar Upadhyay, Cuttack 9437034172


      From: BVP Misra <bvp@...>
      To: Aryakrishti-Vedic-Dharma@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Sat, 30 April, 2011 6:38:57 PM
      Subject: [Aryakrishti Vedic Dharma] RE: Re: krishna and Radha

       

      Respected Scholars,

      This type of interpretation and comparison may not be liked by many. However I feel it is worth reading. There is no mention of Radha in Shrimad Bhagavat Purana, Mahabharat and other major contemporary scriptures.

      The earliest mention of Radha appears to be in Bramha Vaivartha Purana.

      In Vrindavan, Mathura thr tour guides show the different places associated with the legend of Radha with such conviction that you get the feeling  as if Radha has left that spot just a few days (or even a few hours) before your arrival.

      At Agra the tour guides and many local people show the places associated with the legend of Anarkali (including a small structure where she is said to have been burried alive) which has no mention in the oficial version of  history. The believers say that Akbar and his associates saw to it that no historical record of the love story is left for posterity. However the facts lived on in public memory.

      One such guide at Vrindavan said that as Lord Krishna weilded great influence over all the contemporary authors like Ved Vyas Krishna Dwaipayan, Badarayan Vyas, Vaishampayan etc. they saw to it that the facts about Radha were not recorded though the factual legend remained in public memory, to be recorded much later.

      With regards,

      Yours truly,                

      DDMisra

      At 28 Apr 2011 13:26:34 +0200 (CEST) from yashendra108 <yashendra108@...>:

       

       

      Dear Ratan bhai, Vijyan ji & Dr. Satish Prakash,

      Most probably, there was NO ONE by the name of Radha among the Gopikas in Braj/Vrindavan.

      There is NO mention of Radha in Srimad Bhagvat Puran  and Mahabharata.  Only ONE reference is there of Krishna's `priya sakhi' ( dear friend) which can be interpreted anyway.

      There was NO worship of Radha and NO mention of her name before the so-called `Bhakti Period'.

      The first mention of `Radha' name is found in Jaydeva's (circa 1200 AD) `Geet Govind' and Nimbarkacharya's ( 11th century) sayings.

      It was Saint Kabir (14401518) who was the FIRST to mention RADHA as the DHARA (stream) of AGAM ( BEYOND).

       " Kabira DHARA Agam ki, Sadguru diyo lakhaay,

         ULATI taahi sumiran karo…………."

      " The Satguru (Guru) has shown (make known) the current (Dhara) from the topmost regions of spirituality. Just reverse it (reverse of Dhara is Radha) and…… "

      [see… http://ashramunderstanding.blogspot.com/ ]

      Sri Sri Thakur Anukulchandra ji (1888-1969) has also said that it was Saint Kabir who was the first one to get this realization.  HE further says that " `Radha word comes from `Radh' dhatu ( Sanskrit root) and it means `Nishpannkarini Shakti' …" ( Ref: `Amiya Vani' )

      Radha is Krishna's `Nishpann-karini shakti' … `Nishpann'to dispense, to execute….

      The essence is that `Radha' is the name of a Shakti of Krishna, the Param Purush.

      In other words, it is the DHARA ( stream) coming down from Param Purusha. To reach HIM, we have to follow this DHARA in opposite direction. Its there that it is referred to as RADHA, the reverse of DHARA.

      …….

      Saint Kabir's teachings were followed by Sikh Gurus and in the Guru Granth Sahib.

      Later, Swamiji Maharaj ( 1818-1878), established Radhasoami Dayal Bagh Satsang. It is known as the Sant Mat tradition.

      This Sant Mat tradition is about `Surat Shabd Yoga' ( following the Sound Current of the Absolute Supreme Being).

      As per this, RADHA is " the dynamic force of creative energy that was sent out, as sound vibration, from the Supreme Being into the abyss of space at the dawn of the universe's manifestation, and that is being sent forth, through the ages, framing all things that constitute and inhabit the universe."

      ………………………….

      Swamiji Maharaj's successor Huzur Maharaj (1829-1881) initiated Manomohini Devi who was mother of Sri Sri Thakur Anukulchandra ji (18881-1969). When Manomohini Devi initiated her son Anukulchandra, the spiritual head of Dayalbagh was Maharaj Sahab ( Pandit Brahm Shankar Mishra of Varanasi).

      [ Sri Sri Thakur Anukulchandra ji ideology is NOT a continuation of Sant Mat tradition, though it fulfils that tradition as well. ]

      ...

       

      ANANT SRI BABA has explained the spiritual dynamics of every syllable of `Radha' etc. but that can not be discussed on a public platform as its forbidden to talk about such things with Non-initiates ( who have not taken `dikhsa').

      Rgds

      Yashendra


      --- In Aryakrishti-Vedic-Dharma@yahoogroups.com, Ratan Das <das_ratan@...> wrote:
      >
      > Jayguru Dada
      >
      > It is not my question actually I want to know .Who is Radha? What is the relation with Lord Krishna.Some times Radha is Seen as Lover(premika) of Krishna.it is described in Sri Krishna Raslila,But some time krishna says Pronounce Radha is Equal to Krishna .I.e. krishna is Radha.IN Geet Govind it Jaidev Identify himself as Radha to Praise of Lord Krishna.Thakur also says that Naam and Naami is Same so Who is Naami and What is naam.
      > Therefore I feel harass to think about it So please answer me to remove the above painful question.
      > Thanking youJayGuru. 
      >
    • vagabondindia
      Respected Arun ji, I just want to make one point & ask for one clarification. 1. I am sure you must have read the full text of 7 volumes of Mahabharata, the
      Message 2 of 14 , May 1, 2011
        Respected Arun ji,

        I just want to make one point & ask for one clarification.

        1. I am sure you must have read the full text of 7 volumes of Mahabharata, the unabridged version. This full text makes it obvious that the fight of Kauravas with Pandavas is merely a backdrop plot to talk about the sciences of life and practical demonstration of spirituality & 'Dharma' by Sri Krishna. 'Dharma' ( the eternnal, universal & inherent laws of Nature by which it exists & operates)was demonstarted by Krishna, who also made it clear that 'morality' is NOT always synonymous with 'Dharma'.

        2. I have not understood the meaning of the sentence: "....so such theorists cannot be called against existence of Atma like division of Sankhya into sa-Ishvara and Nirishvara sankhya." Pls help.

        Thanks & Warm Rgds



        --- In Aryakrishti-Vedic-Dharma@yahoogroups.com, Arun Upadhyay <arunupadhyay30@...> wrote:
        >
        > Radha was definitely known to Vedavyasa as the name figures in Brahmavaivartta
        > Purana-indicated by Mishraji. However, it is not described in Bhagavata and
        > Mahabharata as it is not needed there. Bhagavata is to explain the Purusha
        > element called Bhagavan and hits human incarnation Sri Krishna. That is
        > Nirvishehsa Brahma. When it creates its vivartta i.e. its variety, its divides
        > itself into two parts-Conscious being is still called Krishna and its associate
        > in creation-Mula Prakriti is Radha which is stated in so many words. Krishna is
        > center of attraction or action, base of creation is Radha (adhara). For galaxy,
        > central massive black hole is Krishna and stars rotating round it are Radha. In
        > solar system, sun is krishna and planets are Radha. For earth itself Chandra is
        > Krishna and earth is Radha. Source of creation or river is called Dhara, its
        > opposite is division into many streams forming a delta. Ruler of source of ganga
        > was Ganga-putra Bhishma. Ruler of Radha region (after Munger delta starts at
        > Farakka) was Karna called son of Radha. Within atom, nucleus is Krishna and
        > electrons are Raddha. Rotation of Gopis around that attractor Krishna at various
        > levels is Rasa by which creation has been described in Brahma-vaivartta purana,
        > Prakriti Khanda, chapter 3. Similarly, Mahabharata is basically story of fight
        > among Kuru family and Radha is obviously irrelevant. Nothing can be discussed at
        > all places without its relevance and that should not be made a basis of
        > arbitrary conclusions. For cooking and agriculture, discussion of soul is not
        > needed, so such theorists cannot be called against existence of Atma like
        > division of Sankhya into sa-Ishvara and Nirishvara sankhya.
        > -Arun Kumar Upadhyay, Cuttack 9437034172
        >
        >
        >
        > ________________________________
        > From: BVP Misra <bvp@...>
        > To: Aryakrishti-Vedic-Dharma@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Sat, 30 April, 2011 6:38:57 PM
        > Subject: [Aryakrishti Vedic Dharma] RE: Re: krishna and Radha
        >
        >
        > Respected Scholars,
        > This type of interpretation and comparison may not be liked by many. However I
        > feel it is worth reading. There is no mention of Radha in Shrimad Bhagavat
        > Purana, Mahabharat and other major contemporary scriptures.
        > The earliest mention of Radha appears to be in Bramha Vaivartha Purana.
        > In Vrindavan, Mathura thr tour guides show the different places associated with
        > the legend of Radha with such conviction that you get the feeling as if Radha
        > has left that spot just a few days (or even a few hours) before your arrival.
        > At Agra the tour guides and many local people show the places associated with
        > the legend of Anarkali (including a small structure where she is said to have
        > been burried alive) which has no mention in the oficial version of history. The
        > believers say that Akbar and his associates saw to it that no historical record
        > of the love story is left for posterity. However the facts lived on in public
        > memory.
        > One such guide at Vrindavan said that as Lord Krishna weilded great influence
        > over all the contemporary authors like Ved Vyas Krishna Dwaipayan, Badarayan
        > Vyas, Vaishampayan etc. they saw to it that the facts about Radha were not
        > recorded though the factual legend remained in public memory, to be recorded
        > much later.
        > With regards,
        > Yours truly,
        >
        > DDMisra
        >
        > At 28 Apr 2011 13:26:34 +0200 (CEST) from yashendra108 <yashendra108@...>:
        >
        > >
        > >Dear Ratan bhai, Vijyan ji & Dr. Satish Prakash,
        > Most probably, there was NO ONE by the name of Radha among the Gopikas in
        > Braj/Vrindavan.
        >
        > >There is NO mention of Radha in Srimad Bhagvat Puran and Mahabharata. Only ONE
        > >reference is there of Krishna's `priya sakhi' ( dear friend) which can be
        > >interpreted anyway.
        > >There was NO worship of Radha and NO mention of her name before the so-called
        > >`Bhakti Period'.
        > >The first mention of `Radha' name is found in Jaydeva's (circa 1200 AD) `Geet
        > >Govind' and Nimbarkacharya's ( 11th century) sayings.
        > >It was Saint Kabir (14401518) who was the FIRST to mention RADHA as the DHARA
        > >(stream) of AGAM ( BEYOND).
        > > " Kabira DHARA Agam ki, Sadguru diyo lakhaay,
        > > ULATI taahi sumiran karo…………."
        > >" The Satguru (Guru) has shown (make known) the current (Dhara) from the topmost
        > >regions of spirituality. Just reverse it (reverse of Dhara is Radha) and…… "
        > >[see… http://ashramunderstanding.blogspot.com/ ]
        > >Sri Sri Thakur Anukulchandra ji (1888-1969) has also said that it was Saint
        > >Kabir who was the first one to get this realization. HE further says that "
        > >`Radha word comes from `Radh' dhatu ( Sanskrit root) and it means
        > >`Nishpannkarini Shakti' …" ( Ref: `Amiya Vani' )
        > >Radha is Krishna's `Nishpann-karini shakti' … `Nishpann'to dispense, to
        > >execute….
        > >The essence is that `Radha' is the name of a Shakti of Krishna, the Param
        > >Purush.
        > >In other words, it is the DHARA ( stream) coming down from Param Purusha. To
        > >reach HIM, we have to follow this DHARA in opposite direction. Its there that it
        > >is referred to as RADHA, the reverse of DHARA.
        > >…….
        > >Saint Kabir's teachings were followed by Sikh Gurus and in the Guru Granth
        > >Sahib.
        > >Later, Swamiji Maharaj ( 1818-1878), established Radhasoami Dayal Bagh Satsang.
        > >It is known as the Sant Mat tradition.
        > >This Sant Mat tradition is about `Surat Shabd Yoga' ( following the Sound
        > >Current of the Absolute Supreme Being).
        > >As per this, RADHA is " the dynamic force of creative energy that was sent out,
        > >as sound vibration, from the Supreme Being into the abyss of space at the dawn
        > >of the universe's manifestation, and that is being sent forth, through the ages,
        > >framing all things that constitute and inhabit the universe."
        > >………………………….
        > >Swamiji Maharaj's successor Huzur Maharaj (1829-1881) initiated Manomohini Devi
        > >who was mother of Sri Sri Thakur Anukulchandra ji (18881-1969). When Manomohini
        > >Devi initiated her son Anukulchandra, the spiritual head of Dayalbagh was
        > >Maharaj Sahab ( Pandit Brahm Shankar Mishra of Varanasi).
        > >[ Sri Sri Thakur Anukulchandra ji ideology is NOT a continuation of Sant Mat
        > >tradition, though it fulfils that tradition as well. ]
        > >...
        > >
        > >ANANT SRI BABA has explained the spiritual dynamics of every syllable of `Radha'
        > >etc. but that can not be discussed on a public platform as its forbidden to talk
        > >about such things with Non-initiates ( who have not taken `dikhsa').Rgds
        > >
        > >Yashendra
        > >--- In Aryakrishti-Vedic-Dharma@yahoogroups.com, Ratan Das <das_ratan@>
        > >wrote:
        > >>
        > >> Jayguru Dada
        > >>
        > >> It is not my question actually I want to know .Who is Radha? What is the
        > >>relation with Lord Krishna.Some times Radha is Seen as Lover(premika) of
        > >>Krishna.it is described in Sri Krishna Raslila,But some time krishna says
        > >>Pronounce Radha is Equal to Krishna .I.e. krishna is Radha.IN Geet Govind it
        > >>Jaidev Identify himself as Radha to Praise of Lord Krishna.Thakur also says that
        > >>Naam and Naami is Same so Who is Naami and What is naam.
        > >> Therefore I feel harass to think about it So please answer me to remove the
        > >>above painful question.
        > >> Thanking youJayGuru.
        > >>
        >
      • Tapan Ghosh
        Respected Arunji, Namaskar. I sincerely want to know from you that if you yourself have read the book Brahmavaivartta Purana , either in Sanskrit or in
        Message 3 of 14 , May 1, 2011
          Respected Arunji, Namaskar.
          I sincerely want to know from you that if you yourself have read the book 'Brahmavaivartta Purana', either in Sanskrit or in translation in any language?
          Regards, Tapan Ghosh

          On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 8:56 PM, Arun Upadhyay <arunupadhyay30@...> wrote:
           

          Radha was definitely known to Vedavyasa as the name figures in Brahmavaivartta Purana-indicated by Mishraji. However, it is not described in Bhagavata and Mahabharata as it is not  needed there. Bhagavata is to explain the Purusha element called Bhagavan and hits human incarnation Sri Krishna. That is Nirvishehsa Brahma. When it creates its vivartta i.e. its variety, its divides itself into two parts-Conscious being is still called Krishna and its associate in creation-Mula Prakriti is Radha which is stated in so many words. Krishna is center of attraction or action, base of  creation is Radha (adhara). For galaxy, central massive black hole is Krishna and stars rotating round it are Radha. In solar system, sun is krishna and planets are Radha.Source of creation or river is called Dhara, its opposite is division into many streams forming a delta. Ruler of source of ganga was Ganga-putra Bhishma. Ruler of Radha region (after Munger delta starts at Farakka) was Karna called son of Radha. Within atom, nucleus is Krishna and electrons are Raddha. Rotation of Gopis around that attractor Krishna at various levels is Rasa by which creation has been described in Brahma-vaivartta purana, Prakriti Khanda, chapter 3. Similarly, Mahabharata is basically story of fight among Kuru family and Radha is obviously irrelevant. Nothing can be discussed at all places without its relevance and that should not be made a basis of arbitrary conclusions. For cooking and agriculture, discussion of soul is not needed, so such theorists cannot be called against existence of Atma like division of Sankhya into sa-Ishvara and Nirishvara sankhya.
          -Arun Kumar Upadhyay, Cuttack 9437034172


          From: BVP Misra <bvp@...>
          To: Aryakrishti-Vedic-Dharma@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Sat, 30 April, 2011 6:38:57 PM
          Subject: [Aryakrishti Vedic Dharma] RE: Re: krishna and Radha

        • Arun Upadhyay
          I have read all the Puranas in sanskrit in my childhood and I always refer original text only. Most are now available on website also. Such query creates doubt
          Message 4 of 14 , May 2, 2011
            I have read all the Puranas in sanskrit in my childhood and I always refer original text only. Most are now available on website also. Such query creates doubt about questioner. There are many parallel references in Vedas and tantra books. Measure of Goloka or Kurma is given in Tandya mahabrahmana, Narapatijayacharya, etc. Summary of measures may be seen in 60 slides titled 'Astronomy' on my website-www.scribd.com/Arunupadhyay.
            Arun Kumar Upadhyay, 9437034172 


            From: Tapan Ghosh <tapanghosh6@...>
            To: Aryakrishti-Vedic-Dharma@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Sun, 1 May, 2011 10:59:35 PM
            Subject: [Aryakrishti Vedic Dharma] Re:RE: Re: krishna and Radha

             

            Respected Arunji, Namaskar.

            I sincerely want to know from you that if you yourself have read the book 'Brahmavaivartta Purana', either in Sanskrit or in translation in any language?
            Regards, Tapan Ghosh

            On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 8:56 PM, Arun Upadhyay <arunupadhyay30@...> wrote:
             

            Radha was definitely known to Vedavyasa as the name figures in Brahmavaivartta Purana-indicated by Mishraji. However, it is not described in Bhagavata and Mahabharata as it is not  needed there. Bhagavata is to explain the Purusha element called Bhagavan and hits human incarnation Sri Krishna. That is Nirvishehsa Brahma. When it creates its vivartta i.e. its variety, its divides itself into two parts-Conscious being is still called Krishna and its associate in creation-Mula Prakriti is Radha which is stated in so many words. Krishna is center of attraction or action, base of  creation is Radha (adhara). For galaxy, central massive black hole is Krishna and stars rotating round it are Radha. In solar system, sun is krishna and planets are Radha.Source of creation or river is called Dhara, its opposite is division into many streams forming a delta. Ruler of source of ganga was Ganga-putra Bhishma. Ruler of Radha region (after Munger delta starts at Farakka) was Karna called son of Radha. Within atom, nucleus is Krishna and electrons are Raddha. Rotation of Gopis around that attractor Krishna at various levels is Rasa by which creation has been described in Brahma-vaivartta purana, Prakriti Khanda, chapter 3. Similarly, Mahabharata is basically story of fight among Kuru family and Radha is obviously irrelevant. Nothing can be discussed at all places without its relevance and that should not be made a basis of arbitrary conclusions. For cooking and agriculture, discussion of soul is not needed, so such theorists cannot be called against existence of Atma like division of Sankhya into sa-Ishvara and Nirishvara sankhya.
            -Arun Kumar Upadhyay, Cuttack 9437034172


            From: BVP Misra <bvp@...>
            To: Aryakrishti-Vedic-Dharma@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Sat, 30 April, 2011 6:38:57 PM
            Subject: [Aryakrishti Vedic Dharma] RE: Re: krishna and Radha

          • Tapan Ghosh
            Respected Arunji, Many many thank you for your response. But you have not mentioned about Brahmavaivartta Purana. You wrote all Puranas . Most humbly I want
            Message 5 of 14 , May 3, 2011
              Respected Arunji,�
              Many many thank you for your response. But you have not mentioned about �Brahmavaivartta Purana. You wrote 'all Puranas'. Most humbly I want a specific answer whether you have read it, whether you remember it and �whether you are in possession of a copy of it. The other things you wrote, I could not understand any relevance of those regarding my specific question.
              From your phone number I understand that you live in Eastern part of India, may be in Kolkata. In that case, I will be happy to meet you and take lesson of the�Brahmavaivartta Purana�from you, because I cannot read and understand Sanskrit.�
              Perhaps you will admit that reading a Purana in Sanskrit in childhood, particularly this�Brahmavaivartta Purana, is not enough for any serious discussion.
              With regards,
              Tapan Ghosh�

              On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 8:36 PM, Arun Upadhyay <arunupadhyay30@...> wrote:
              �

              I have read all the Puranas in sanskrit in my childhood and I always refer original text only. Most are now available on website also. Such query creates doubt about questioner. There are many parallel references in Vedas and tantra books. Measure of Goloka or Kurma is given in Tandya mahabrahmana, Narapatijayacharya, etc. Summary of measures may be seen in 60 slides titled 'Astronomy' on my website-www.scribd.com/Arunupadhyay.
              Arun Kumar Upadhyay, 9437034172�


              From: Tapan Ghosh <tapanghosh6@...>Sent: Sun, 1 May, 2011 10:59:35 PM
              Subject: [Aryakrishti Vedic Dharma] Re:RE: Re: krishna and Radha

              �

              Respected Arunji, Namaskar.

              I sincerely want to know from you that if you yourself have read the book 'Brahmavaivartta Purana', either in Sanskrit or in translation in any language?
              Regards, Tapan Ghosh

              On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 8:56 PM, Arun Upadhyay <arunupadhyay30@...> wrote:
              �

              Radha was definitely known to Vedavyasa as the name figures in Brahmavaivartta Purana-indicated by Mishraji. However, it is not described in Bhagavata and Mahabharata as it is not �needed there. Bhagavata is to explain the Purusha element called Bhagavan and hits human incarnation Sri Krishna. That is Nirvishehsa Brahma. When it creates its vivartta i.e. its variety, its divides itself into two parts-Conscious being is still called Krishna and its associate in creation-Mula Prakriti is Radha which is stated in so many words. Krishna is center of attraction or action, base of �creation is Radha (adhara). For galaxy, central massive black hole is Krishna and stars rotating round it are Radha. In solar system, sun is krishna and planets are Radha.Source of creation or river is called Dhara, its opposite is division into many streams forming a delta. Ruler of source of ganga was Ganga-putra Bhishma. Ruler of Radha region (after Munger delta starts at Farakka) was Karna called son of Radha. Within atom, nucleus is Krishna and electrons are Raddha. Rotation of Gopis around that attractor Krishna at various levels is Rasa by which creation has been described in Brahma-vaivartta purana, Prakriti Khanda, chapter 3. Similarly, Mahabharata is basically story of fight among Kuru family and Radha is obviously irrelevant. Nothing can be discussed at all places without its relevance and that should not be made a basis of arbitrary conclusions. For cooking and agriculture, discussion of soul is not needed, so such theorists cannot be called against existence of Atma like division of Sankhya into sa-Ishvara and Nirishvara sankhya.
              -Arun Kumar Upadhyay, Cuttack 9437034172


              From: BVP Misra <bvp@...>
              To: Aryakrishti-Vedic-Dharma@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Sat, 30 April, 2011 6:38:57 PM
              Subject: [Aryakrishti Vedic Dharma] RE: Re: krishna and Radha


            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.