Sri Ramanuja Munaye Namaha,
Sri Velukkudi Krishnan Swami Guruve Namaha,
Honestly, adiyen believe Swami Answers some questions ‘Implicitly‘ referring to the question, and Swami Answers some questions ‘Explicitly‘ by NOT referring to the question, but still Swami answers.
So, adiyen believe Swami has already answered ‘Explicitly’ in the very next day Enpani 1118 on 23-Aug-18 after Bhagavata posted the question on 22-Aug-18 without referring to the question.
The reason why adiyen say Swami has ‘Explicitly’ answered is because, Swami’s answer on Enpani 1118, matches Bhagavatas Question plus matches Swami’s audio on SriRadha that Bhagavata has posted along with the question.
Here is how it is:
Bhagavata in the above thread already said that “adiyen have been wanting to learn about scriptural references (Bhagavtam/Divya Pradhandham) about Srimathi Radharani. Unfortunately, as Swami mentioned in the link that there are no scriptural references about Srimathi Radharani in any of these above mentioned scriptures“
So, when Bhagavatas question already has answer that there is no scriptural reference, but still Bhagavta has continued again as ” My humble and sincere request, adiyen would like to hear more in deatil about Srimathi Radharani from devareer’s voice.”
So, adiyen feel, when Swami already says there is no scriptural reference, how could Swami be able to explain more in detail about Srimathi Radharani.
Hence, adiyen feel Swami has ‘Explicitly’ answered in the next day Enpani 1118 “Paanai Sottrukku Oru Soru Padham”
Swami says in Enpani 1118 as, “We follow many things/rituals/pazhakka vazhakkangal since Mahans has said about it from period to period in the past. Then further, if we need to understand more detail of what they said inorder for us to follow it properly, then those can be explained within a LIMITED BOUNDARY only. If Mahans explain to in detail, or if Mahans DON’t explain it in deatil, then are we ina postion to accept those answers. We should look all the things that Mahans have said and we accept and follow it. So, if Mahans are not saying anything on few things/questions, then there are reasons for it, and we should also accept the answer that “Mahans didnot want to talk about it in detail. If Mahans few answers are convincing, then other answers also should be accepted without further questions“.
That’s why adiyen feel, Swami has explicitly asnwered to Bhagavtas question by NOT referring to the question directly, since Swami has already said the above Youtube link that “there are no scriptural evidences for Srimathi RadhaRani, then that itself is the answer to the question, and how could it be possible to explain in detail, when is no scriptural evidence.
Kindly, please listen to the Enpani 1118 over and over again to understand Swami’s ThiruUllam.
Sri Velukkudi Swami,
Since Bhagavata was repeatedly asking the same question, Adiyen felt, it will be unfair if adiyen don’t reflect adiyens understanding on what devareer has said in Enpaini 1118 that devareer has already answered it explicitly. Otherwise, Bhagavatas inner mind will keep pondering around the same question.”
Sri Velukkudi Krishnan Swami to forgive adiyen for explaining it in detail.
Adiyen Sri Velukkudi Krishna Dasan,
Uyya Oraey vazhi UdayavAr ThiruvAdi,
Sarvam SriKrishnarpanam Asthu