Can we quote the Shabari pastime when it is not mentioned in the Valmiki Ramayana?

Is the Sabari pastime authentic when it is not mentioned in the Valmiki Ramayana answer three points about this overall one is the nature of the Ramayana tradition second is how we understand how the tradition is has been approached by our tradition and third is recognizing the room for subjectivity so first is that it is a foundational principle of Bhakti that the Lord's pastimes are unlimited and one text may be the source text the foundational text but it does not mean that it is the exclusive text that describes the that exhaustively describes the Lord's pastimes so Valmiki Ramayana is the you could say the Adi Ramayana is the Adi Kavi is the first original poetry also however if we consider in general the Bhakti tradition it spread across the Indian subcontinent and beyond because of vernacularization and most people even in the past didn't really know Sanskrit so it is the vernacular renditions of the Ramayana whether it become Ramayana in South India or Tulsi Ramayana in North India these have nourished devotion and they have created vibrant traditions of devotion so now there could be chances that during this vernacularization not everything may be exactly the same as in the original Ramayana so we don't have the resources to go back and interrogate the particular authors, why they put particular pastimes, what are the sources in general if we consider Phalena Parichayate then there has been vibrant and sincere very intense devotion for Ram which has been fostered among people who may not ever have read the Sanskrit Ramayana but they read and were nourished by the vernacular versions, retellings of the Ramayana in general if we see in our Gaudiya tradition there has not been much emphasis on Ram Leela but analogously if we consider Krishna Leela many of the most relishable pastimes of Krishna are not are not many some of the most relishable and important pastimes of Krishna are not directly found in Shastra so for example the pastime of the Gopis offering the dust of their lotus feet to Krishna is not found in any of the Puranas or in any of the Goswami literatures also and yet it conveys in an extraordinary even unparalleled way the utter selflessness and exaltedness of the Gopis love for Krishna so our tradition has widely accepted and spoken about this pastime and pointing to this Rupa Goswami talks about Shastra Pramana and Loka Pramana so Loka Pramana is that which is widely circulated so for example in Vrindavan there are many pastimes of Krishna which are told by the Vrajavasis and they are a part of the devotional or cultural lore that has been passed down and often hearing these sweet stories of Krishna is a special part of going to Vrindavan and hearing from devotees who are deeply rooted in the mood of Raja so one traditional metaphor used for understanding these pastimes is that they are that Ramlila is like or Ramlila or Krishnlila so the principles that apply for Krishnlila can also apply for Ramlila so Sabari pastime very beautifully conveys the mood of devotion now from a strictly cultural perspective somebody might say that the Gopis wouldn't think about giving the dust of their feet to Krishna and similarly Sabari wouldn't think about giving her half eaten berries to Krishna however is that orthodox Brahminical culture the only determining element in bhakti bhakti often delights in transcending or even inverting traditional Brahminical hierarchies as when the Brahmin patnis are shown to be far greater devotees than Brahminas than their husbands or when even a demon like Uttarasur is shown to be a greater devotee than the king of the gods like Indra in the sixth canto of the Bhagavatam so if a devotional principle is being conveyed in a sweet way through a pastime then that pastime has been broadly accepted by our tradition and the Sabari pastime is quite significantly a part of Ramlila as the Gopis offering the dust of their lotus feet as a pastime is a part of the broad understanding of Krishna Ila and we could say that the lord's pastimes are like an orchestra or a musical concert in which multiple performers are there. So there is one core person who is a singer or who is about a singer and maybe playing an instrument and then others join in and others join in and the more the more impactful, the more sweet the performance can become provided they are all in harmony that's what ultimately makes it a symphony so if the later retellings or vernacular renditions of the epics of the Ramayana or Ramlila or Krishna Ila they are more or less in harmony with the mood and the with the mood, the tattva and the overall storyline of the Mahabharata, of the original retelling, then they can be accepted. Now there are certain retellings which are not accepted by the tradition so for example there is a pastime in which there are retellings of the Ramayana in which Hanuman is considered to be married and Hanuman is sometimes depicted almost like a Casanova and that is not at all accepted by the tradition so those kind of pastimes are like a additional musical instrument being played which does not, which is not harmonious but is disharmonious with the main performance so the Sabari pastime is harmonious and that is why it has been widely accepted in the tradition now if you consider the description in Chaitanya Bhagwat especially Nityananda Prabhu is performed, or generally the Nityananda Prabhu's pastimes his childhood pastimes are described, it is described that he performed Ramlila and several of the pastimes that are described that he performed are from the Valmiki Ramayana but some that are described that he performed are not from the Valmiki Ramayana especially some demon killing pastimes are described in later retellings like the Ramcharitmanas and they are performed by Lord Nityananda himself so obviously they were considered acceptable by, accepted and acceptable by him so this will be the last point about subjectivity in our understanding, just as music can be subjective to some extent and some people may feel that this particular instrument adds to the symphony and others may feel that this is unnecessary so like that some devotees may prefer to stick only to the Valmiki Ramayana and they may tell only the pastimes from the Valmiki Ramayana but often while telling those pastimes also they may they may use some artistic license and tell them in a more dramatic way using dialogues that might not be there in the script exactly as they are in the scripture so overall the principle is that if we or our immediate teachers feel that a particular pastime doesn't gel with the overall mood that we, with which we approach or with which we relish the pastime then we don't have to dwell on that pastime we don't have to teach that pastime to others we don't have to speak on that pastime so much but there is no one central authority that is universally accepted by everyone which will adjudicate that this pastime is authentic and this pastime isn't and especially pastimes which have been quoted by in the tradition widely and which do convey a sweet devotional import if we start making a campaign against those pastimes then we will unnecessarily alienate a lot of people with genuine devotional aspirations and we may ourselves become distracted from our devotional focus so we could use the principle of Anukulyasa Sankalpapati Kulyasa Varjanam over here that what is favorable for our devotional nourishment we use that we accept that and what is unfavorable we put it aside.