View source for Again, he (Rupa Gosvami) analyzes the affection of the Yadus: If it is on the platform of friendship, then it is spontaneous love, but if it is on the platform of regulative principles, then it is not

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"Again, he analyzes the affection of the Yadus: If it is on the platform of friendship, then it is spontaneous love, but if it is on the platform of regulative principles, then it is not"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|HanumanIC}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|2017-05-07T06:00:16Z}}
{{last|2017-05-07T06:00:16Z}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=1|Lec=0|Con=0|Let=0}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Again]]
[[Category:Rupa Gosvami]]
[[Category:Analyze]]
[[Category:Affection]]
[[Category:Yadu Dynasty]]
[[Category:It Is]]
[[Category:Platform]]
[[Category:Friendship]]
[[Category:Then]]
[[Category:Spontaneous Love]]
[[Category:But]]
[[Category:Regulative Principles]]
[[Category:It Is Not]]
[[Category:The Nectar of Devotion Chapter 15 - Spontaneous Devotional Service]]
</div>
<div id="section">
<h2>Other Books by Srila Prabhupada</h2>
</div>
<div id="sub_section">
<h3>Nectar of Devotion</h3>
</div>
<div class="quote">
<div class="quote_heading">
According to Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī, such attractions are not considered to be in devotional service. Again, he analyzes the affection of the Yadus: If it is on the platform of friendship, then it is spontaneous love, but if it is on the platform of regulative principles, then it is not. And only when affection comes to the platform of spontaneous love is it counted in the category of pure devotional service.
</div>

<div class="quote_link">
[[Vanisource:NOD 15 (1970)|Nectar of Devotion, 15]]
</div>
<div class="text">
The gopīs may be considered to be examples of spontaneous love in sensual attraction. The gopīs are young girls, and Kṛṣṇa is a young boy. Superficially it seems that the gopīs are attracted to Kṛṣṇa on grounds of sex. Similarly, King Kaṁsa was attracted to Kṛṣṇa because of fearfulness. Kaṁsa was always fearful of Kṛṣṇa because it had been foretold that his sister's son, Kṛṣṇa, would kill him. Śiśupāla was also always envious of Kṛṣṇa. And the descendants of King Yadu, due to their family relationship with Kṛṣṇa, are always thinking of Him as one of their members. All of these different kinds of devotees have a spontaneous attraction for Kṛṣṇa, in different categories, and they achieve the same desired goal of life.

The attraction of the gopīs for Kṛṣṇa and the affection of the members of the Yadu dynasty are both accepted as spontaneous, or rāgānugā. The attraction of Kaṁsa to Kṛṣṇa in fearfulness and the attraction of Śiśupāla in enviousness are not accepted as devotional service, however, because their attitudes are not favorable. Devotional service should be executed only in a favorable frame of mind. Therefore, according to Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī, such attractions are not considered to be in devotional service. Again, he analyzes the affection of the Yadus: If it is on the platform of friendship, then it is spontaneous love, but if it is on the platform of regulative principles, then it is not. And only when affection comes to the platform of spontaneous love is it counted in the category of pure devotional service.

There may be some difficulty in understanding that both the gopīs and Kaṁsa achieved the same goal, so this point should be clearly understood, because the attitudes of Kaṁsa and Śiśupāla were different from that of the gopīs. Although in all these cases the focus is on the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and all of the devotees are elevated to the spiritual world, there is still a distinction between these two classes of souls. In the First Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is said that the absolute truth is one, and He is manifested as impersonal Brahman, Paramātmā (supersoul), and Bhagavān (the Supreme Personality of Godhead). Here is a spiritual distinction. Although Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān are the same and one absolute truth, still devotees like Kaṁsa or Śiśupāla could attain only to the Brahman effulgence. They could not have realization of Paramātmā or Bhagavān. That is the distinction.

An analogy can be given with the sun globe and the sunshine: to remain in the sunshine does not mean one has gone to the sun globe. The temperature of the sun globe is different from the temperature of the sunshine. One who has gone through the sunshine in jet planes or in space ships has not necessarily gone to the sun globe. Although the sunshine and the sun globe are actually one and the same, still there is a distinction, for one is the energy and one is the energetic source. The absolute truth and His bodily effulgence are in the same way simultaneously one and different. Kaṁsa and Śiśupāla attained to the absolute truth, but they were not allowed to enter into the Goloka Vṛndāvana abode. Impersonalists and the enemies of the Lord are, because of attraction to God, allowed to enter into His kingdom, but they are not allowed to enter into the Vaikuṇṭha planets or the Goloka Vṛndāvana planet of the Supreme Lord. To enter the kingdom and to enter the king's palace are not the same thing.
</div>
</div>
</div>