Is Krishna premika or not? - a topic returns

The lecture bellow was presented here sometime ago but it was shortly after removed. I am not sure the reason but since I have been asked for that text by a few readers, I am posting it again. If in doing so I am transgressing any will and decision of the Administration, please note that I offer my apologies in the matter and request that you do with this post as you wish.

From a lecture by BV Narayana Maharaja, sometime last August:

Krsna is always superlative from every angle. He is the greatest politician - He arranged the Mahabharat War. He's the most humble person. He was the most devoted to Guru. Along with Baladeva He walked barefoot to Sandipani Muni's ashrama in Ujjain. All the students there with Him were very special. Sudama Brahmana was extraordinary. He went to forest with Krsna at night to collect wood. Storm came and they kept bundles of wood on their heads all night. Parambrahma, the Supreme Lord, stood in the rain the whole night, shivering. Then Sandipani Muni came and blessed Him that He would realize all knowledge.

We have come here for Bhagavat Bhakti, but even so, sometimes someone slips. Even Brahma and Siva got trapped by Maya. Haridasa Thakura was tempted two times by prostitute, but he got away. Others get trapped. Stay absorbed in guru-seva. Have full faith in Guru - don't have any doubts in your Guru. Serve him without duplicity. Then you can be successful.

Krsna is Parambrahma. All qualities are in Him. But He is not premika; He is not a proper lover. He's a cheater. He left Vraja and said He would come back in two days, but He never returned. He's a cheater. If someone loves another, He will not leave that person his whole life. Suppose they are separated due to circumstances, he will not go and marry someone else. Krsna left Vraja and went to Mathura, because He has so many devotees and He had to help and satisfy them. He freed Vasudeva from prison and killed Kamsa. He went to Dvaraka, taking all the Mathuravasis with Him. He had so many duties and He had to protect His devotees, including the Pandavas. But if He loved the gopis, why did He marry other ladies? What was the need for Him to get married?

Rukmini sent a letter through her messenger to Krsna: "I've given myself to You and I will not marry Sisupala. I will take poison if necessary but I cannot take my feelings back from You." Reading this Krsna went and kidnapped her and married her. "I was forced to marry her. If I didn't, she was going to kill herself." Okay, but why did He marry others after that? He had a few wives, but still His stomach was not full. He married 16,100 more. Is this a symptom of love? He abandoned the gopis. What was He doing for them while in Dvaraka? I think something is wrong in Him. He's very cruel and hard-hearted. All qualities are in Him except prema. Stay away from Him. If He catches you, you'll be sorry. If you do bhajana, don't do bhajana of Krsna. Do bhajana of Radhika. (Only Radhika knows if Krsna is premika or not.)

Backbone of bhakti is guru-nistha. If you don't have faith in Guru, if you criticize Vaisnavas, what will be your destination? Krsna will not kill them because then they will get liberation; Kamsa will kill them. Sin is not as bad as aparadha. If Guru has helped you, always be grateful. Surrender your life to him and always serve him. Krsna bhakti rasa bhavati matih. . .Rasa-mayi bhakti is not easily gotten. If it is being given and you go
there and commit some offense, you will be ruined. So be very careful.

I remember this post! I thought this part especially was very sweet.

Right. Someone's poison will be another's dessert.

Gee, by sweet I meant chastising Krishna is sweet. I meant your Guruji's words are very very bittersweetly hot with anger towards Krishna. Everyone knows maanini sri radhe is exceptionally beautiful, and so are your guru's words of maan. Do you have a problem with me glorifying your Gurudev in public?

very, very true...

I don't think Anand's latest post was pitched at you.

I will confirm that Talasiga. And therefore I did not reply to the subsequent post. Sometimes we take others' words in such a personal way that the relevance [of what was said] applies to no one but ourselves.

Communication goes hand in hand with intention. There is a sort of touch of genious in someone who can catch a word or two and with them ignite a colorful, mesmerizing explosion of fireworks. The trouble with this however is in the aftermath of such display: wonder quickly fades into smoke, and the original idea charred, covered in cinders.

Forgive me, the author's writing style in certain previous correspondences led me to believe otherwise.

Just wondering, er, what is this thread about?

And the quote from Narayana Maharaja's lecture not to do Krsna bhajan, but rather Radha bhajan? Such statements can be easily misconstrued and taken out of context; and the heavy caution about ingratitude to the guru and offence to vaisnavas.
What is it all about?

I initially posted this lecture in the thoughts and journals section. My intention was to show it for its colorful and somewhat curious style. The initial post was removed and since a few members contacted asking for the text, I decided to re-post. (I am pretty sure I re-posted in the journals section, but I could be wrong. Maybe I put it here mistakenly. )

In any case, sharing the subject of the lecture was my aim, not so much its author (for the obvious reason). In another thread symbolism and lila was/is being discussed. There it was proposed that the symbolism in the lila is flawed because the literal version makes more sense according to various points collected throughout Srimad Bhagavatam. Here in this thread it seems the reciter of the lila is interesting readers as much as the subject. So, this thread could be about "how the lila (and any spiritual information for that matter) will be interpreted according to individual's needs, taste, and desire." Or, in other words, how Krishna lila is all about survival.

Which brings us to NM's recomendation to his audience of doing Radha bhajan exclusively, leaving Krishna out. Indeed, I have seen that Maharaja takes a quite risqué position in this matter. I mean, to dismiss Krishna over Srimati Radharani and to recomend others to do the same is bordering irresponsibility - how much is at stake there, whom one would be dismissing - Krishna! Oh my! What of all the attractiveness?! What about surviving then?

Now, as for the heavy warnings about sticking with guru, my personal undertanding is that this is a very broad and general warning. He is of the position that there is no question of properly discussing lila prior to one accepting Guru. As far as to not commit offense to guru and vaisnavas - its meaning is quite obvious.