As neophytes can’t understand tattva and rasa accurately, isn’t it better to consider Krishna-lila depictions as literal and not artistic?

From Raja Parikshita Prabhu:
Answer Podcast:

Question from Rajiparikshit Prabhu, when we talk about artistic license and we say that Krishna’s pastimes can be depicted differently as long as the rasa and tattva is correct, but then we are neophytes and we can’t know what is the exact rasa and tattva. So how can, so isn’t it better to think that Krishna’s pastimes which are described in scripture are the literal narratives without any artistic license within them? Answer, we have to be careful about the scope of artistic license over here. Now we are not saying necessarily that all the scriptural renditions of Krishna’s pastimes are artistic licenses.
Now the acharyas themselves have made statements at times that there are artistic licenses which are used, but certainly though it’s not that the whole pastime of Krishna is filled with artistic license. Now there are some elements which are, if you talk about the original scripture, there are few elements and that also we have to evaluate based on Guru Sadhu Shastra. When we talked about artistic license being used in devotional service, it was primarily in our depicting Krishna according to our artistic talents.
So if we are to say that in the name of artistic license, in the name of preserving the accuracy of Krishna’s depictions, there is no artistic license allowed, then no one will be allowed to draw any picture of Krishna unless that person is self-realized enough, God realized enough to have direct darshan of Krishna. Because actually when an artist draws, so even if that artist is drawing under the guidance of a pure devotee like Srila Prabhupada, still that devotee just has a few minutes with Srila Prabhupada and that also not all devotees have and it’s not that the devotee is able to get guidance for everything. So for example, an artist is drawing Krishna’s face or Krishna’s body.
At that time, the exact shade of the complexion, the exact dress that Krishna is wearing, now is it that that has to be perfectly, is that all of that revealed? No, that is artistic depiction and to say that unless one has a revelation, one should not use artistic creativity, then actually the whole faculty of art will be divorced from bhakti and the flowering of human culture towards devotional culture happens when the artistic impulse is used in the service of Krishna. So for example, say when devotees do Bharat Natyam and then they are depicting Krishna’s pastimes. Now, so there are maybe say two participants, one who is participating to depict Yashoda, another is depicting Krishna.
Now, they depict certain actions and certain emotions and certain words, certain speeches. Now, is it that every single one of the actions and words and expressions were done by Krishna exactly like that? No, not necessarily. Now, the scriptures may not give us that detailed description and even if they give detailed description, scriptures simply say what Krishna did, what Krishna spoke and what Yashoda Mai spoke.
But when Krishna and Yashoda Mai were speaking, was Yashoda Mai standing erect or Yashoda Mai standing bending down towards Krishna? When Krishna was tied, was he tied exactly at the middle of his belly or the upper part of his belly or the lower part of his belly? These are details which are not given. So these are, you know, we naturally use our artistic creativity and depict Krishna’s pastimes accurately. So now where all is artistic creativity used? As I gave you an example of painting.
Another example is of drama. Now, third example, which can be confusing. Second example is of dance.
Third example can be of drama, which is actually similar to dance and fourth can be of textual rendition. So now when we are talking about textual rendition, we are not talking about books which are like scripture. Scriptures are revelations of Krishna’s pastimes, whereas there can be retellings.
Now, for example, Krishnadharma Prabhu has written a Ramayana and Mahabharata. So his subtitle says, retold by Krishnadharma. Now, if we look at the Sanskrit Ramayana Mahabharata and we look at the retelling which has been done by Krishnadharma Prabhu, actually the retelling is very captivating.
But then there are several places where it is basically it is made like a historical novel and when made like a historical novel, it depicts the characters in some of their thoughts also. So, for example, what Krishna is thinking when he is talking with Karna, what Arjuna is thinking when he is talking with Krishna. Now, these inner thoughts are not actually described in the Mahabharata directly.
So now where has the author got these from? Author has got this from Guru Sadhu Shastra and from Vichara that is called Shastra Moolak Anuman is called as Vichara. Generally, we use Anuman as meaning speculation and speculation is undesirable. But using the faculty for logical inference in according to Guru Sadhu Shastra, that is called Shastra Moolak Anuman and that is technically called as Vichara.
Vichara is contemplation guided by scripture. So, that is considered desirable because that gives us a deeper understanding of scripture. So, that means the scripture gives a certain narrative, but then to fill in the gaps, an author can use the artistic faculty in accordance with Guru Sadhu Shastra and according to ones which are according to Guru Sadhu Shastra and use one’s artistic faculty in Krishna’s service.
So, now imagine if we say that the artistic faculty is not to be used, then two things will happen. Many things will happen, but two important things will be that devotees will be forever deprived of the opportunity to use their artistic talents in Krishna’s service. So, no singing, no dancing, no Bharatnatyam depicting Krishna, no dramas depicting Krishna, no paintings depicting Krishna, no books in contemporary language with contemporary styles of presentation talking about Krishna.
So, basically we will make the whole artistic world bankrupt of spirituality and devotion and we will make the whole artistic world a free field for materialists and atheists to take over. So, not only will devotees lose the opportunity for using their creative talents in Krishna’s service, but also people in general, people in general are not very philosophical. So, when they are not so philosophical, they are not going to study scripture and look at the literal precision of every pastime of Krishna.
They want attractive artistic depictions and if they don’t get devotional artistic depictions, then they will look for atheistic artistic or materialistic or atheistic artistic depictions. So, then there will be more and more materialism and degradation that will happen in society. So, that’s why for the individual, for the dovetailing of devotees talents and for the facilitation of people’s connection with Krishna through devotional culture, the concept of artistic license has to be an integral part of any devotional culture.
So, we may not be advanced enough to discriminate. So, then if a devotee is going to use artistic talents in Krishna’s service, a devotee should take guidance from senior devotees and then do the artistic depictions so that there are no serious inaccuracies in the depiction and we shouldn’t think that the artistic license that is used by the current generation of devotees in artistic depictions, that applies to the Shastric revelations also. We are talking about two different things.
Shastric revelations depict Krishna’s pastimes, whereas when we depict Krishna’s pastimes, we can have artistic license which is guided according to Guru Sadhu Shastra. Thank you. Hare Krishna.