varsanp

Murlidhar, I don't see much point in arguing this out any further. We believe in Lord Swaminarayan and the authenticity of the Vedas and Puranas. Whether they have been interpolated or not, well that could be said of anything including the version of Bhagwat Gita and Shrimad Bhagwat Purnana which is worshipped by ISKON. I could quite easily go on to say that the commentaries by Acharyas of ISKON may not be acurate in my view and I'm sure that you could say the same for scriptures and commentaries of the Swaminarayan Sampraday as our saints have also written commentaries on Bhagwat Gita/Bhagwat etc. I believe in the trancendental form of Lord Swaminarayan and I accept him as God Supreme. The facts are their within the text of the Sampraday, whether you believe them or not but it's always going to be subjective. I have been posting to this topic as the original questioner wished to know more about the Sampraday. I feel that I have done that, and therefore there is little more for me to do here as there is little chance of me convinicing you just as you have little chance of convincing me of your beliefs. Unfortunately we are a very young religion and that hasn't given us the profile we justly deserve but I'm sure that if people open up their minds and are willing to look into our Sampraday they too will see it's greatness and indeed the greatness of it's founder Lord Swaminarayan. With that I conclude, offering my 'Ashtang Dandvata Pranama' to the Lord Almighty which resides in the souls of all devotees here present. Jay Swaminarayan.

I've taken the liberty to provide you with translated text by Shatanand Swami (a saint of the order) who has written a commentary on the Shikshapatri in Sanskrit. TEXT 47 No distinction shall be made between Narayan and Shiva, as they are both proclaimed as Brahmanswarupa by the Vedas. Ekatmyameva Vigneyam Narayanamaheshyoha | Ubhyorbrahmanrupera Vedeshu Pratipadanat ||47|| Those who think of God differently to this, where Narayan or Shiva are defamed in some way are insulting God. Shatanand says that such people should have their eyes removed. Such a person is blind to the truth and can never be enlightened to that truth. Many Shastras speak of the oneness of Narayan and Shiva. Our ancient Shastras in some instances speak of Narayan as supreme and in other instances speak of Shiva as supreme. Both views should be accepted as correct, hence they should be accepted as the one and the same. The following Veda scriptures are Shaiva in context as they speak of Shiva as Brahman: Atharvashikha, Atharvashisha, Shetasvataria, Mantropanishad, Kaivalyopanishad. The following speak of Vishnu as the supreme Brahman: Mahanarayanopanishad, Narayaropanishad, Mahopanishad, Shubhalopanishad. Thus the four Vedas sing only the oneness of Shiva and Narayan. Shrimad Bhagwat’s Fourth Chapter explains, ‘Those who find indifference in Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva and recognise the oneness in them obtain eternal peace.’ The Eighth Chapter adds, ‘Shiva Brahma and Vishnu are thy manifested forms, which create, maintain and destroy the universe at thy will. Thou is Ishwara who delivers Moksha (Salvation). Thou is Parabrahman (the Supreme Lord).’ Narad Pancharatra succinctly states: Shivo Harirhariha Shakshatchiva Eva Nirupitaha | Shivadveshi Haridrohi Vishnum Nityam Bhajanapi || ‘Shiva is Hari and Hari is none other than Shiva. An enemy of Shiva is an enemy of Hari, even though he may daily worship Vishnu.’ Bhattacharya has said, ‘I have looked in the Puranas, Upapuranas, Vedas, Smrutis and all other such Shastras, but have not come across anything to suggest a difference in Shiva and Vishnu.’ God himself has said, ‘Those who find difference in the two of us fall to the Hells.’ Shree Dhar Swami prays, ‘I humbly bow before Vishnu and Shankar who are one, who revere one another and who provide for all.’ Vallabhacharaya, a famed Vaishnava, in similar fashion says, ‘Glory to thee, who is honoured as Brahman in the Vedanta - Lord of the three worlds - Mahadev.’ Lord Swaminarayan has gone out of his way to glorify both Vaishnav and Shaiva Sampradais in order to get back to the true Vedic teachings. We must conform to this dream of Lord Swaminarayan’s by never uttering a word contrary to the Lord’s standpoint. We must always, with love, observe the Vratas of Lord Shiva and bow respectfully to the icons of Shiva. It does not in anyway fault our devotion to Lord Vishnu by doing so - indeed it strengthens devotion for Vishnu. Narayan and Shiva are one and the same. They are, if you like, two sides of the same coin. That coin being the Supreme Godhead. ---------- Whether you accept this or not it is the truth as suggested by Lord Swaminarayan.

For some reason Murlidhar seems to have a problem with the authenticity of Skand Purana. May I remind you that Veda Vyaas wrote both the Skand Purana and Bhagwat Purana and therefore for you to make the statement ‘You say that Swaminarayan is mentioned as an avatar in Skand Purana. If you believe in this, good luck to you. I hope you have a happy life!’ is I find very hypocritical! So does that mean you know more than Veda Vyaas? Are you implying that all scriptures bar the Gita and Bhagwat are useless? I have taken the liberty to elaborate upon the Skand Purana: Adhyaya 18 of the Vasudev Mahatmya of Skand Purana details many of the manifestations of God Supreme which seem to be presented in chronological order - including Rama, Krishna, Veda Vyaas etc. God himself is addressing Lord Kartikeya (Skand) and Narad Muni in this Adhyaya to details his future manifestations. Verse 41 details Budhha Avatar then the following: Maya krushnana Nihataha Sarjunana Raneshu Yay | Pravartayishyantyasurastay Tvadharmam Yada Kshitauha ||42|| Dharmadevatada Murtaum Naranarayatmana | Pravrutayapi Kalau Brahman ! Bhutvaham Samago Dvijaha ||43|| Muni-shapan-nrutam Praptam Sarshim Janakmatmanaha | Tatoavita Gurubhyoaham Sadharmam Sthapayanaja ||44|| This clearly explains that in Kali yuga, the Lord will be born to a family of Samvedi brahmins, to Dharma dev and Murti devi using Narnarayan as the causal factor. By establishing Dharma, he will free the Munis and his parents from the curse of the Rishi, which sent them all on earth to be reborn. The scriptures of the Sampraday confirm that the causal force of the manifestation of Lord Swaminarayan was the curse of the Sage Durvasa upon Narnarayan, Dharma and Murti and Rishis Maricha etc. (It is for this reason that Narnarayan Dev plays a central role in the Sampraday – Lord Swaminarayan himself installed Lord Narnarayan dev in two major temples.) He was as predicted by Vyaas, born to a family of Samavedi Brahmins. The parents of the Lord were Dharmadev and Bhakti Mata (Dharma and Murti incarnate) and the Rishis were in the guise of the saints of the order. Lord Swaminarayan is noted for his establishment of Bhagwat Dharma and the Shikshapatri epitomises this along with the pure conduct of its saints and devotees alike. Verse 45 details the avatar of Kalki. Hence the Avatar of Lord Swaminarayan is correctly placed between Buddha and Kalki. Furthermore Verse 46 explains that the avatars here listed are not the only ones but God incarnates whenever Dharma is in decline and hence the number of avatars is infinite. Therefore why should there be just one incarnation in Kali? If you accept Chaitanya as an incarnation then there are at least 3 incarnations in total (Buddha and Kalki being the other two). Please feel free to investigate these yourself from the authentic orthodox scripture Skand Purana. Therefore, unless you are willing to provide evidence to contradict this by disproving Lord Swaminarayan’s claim as a manifestation of God or have evidence to suggest that Lord Chaitanya matches the description above, then there is no doubt in my mind that Veda Vyaas, in the Skand Purana is revering to Lord Swaminarayan. There is other evidence of his manifestation as ‘Lord Supreme’ and it even has reference to the name Swaminarayan but unfortunately I cannot locate the scripture at present. I will try to do so and post the references. Unfortunately I am unable to confirm your references to the Bhagwat Purana (11:5:32-34) as when I tried to locate them within the copy of the Bhagwat Purana by Ramakrishna Math they were incorrect. Please could you check that this is the correct reference and I will try to relocate from my version of the Bhagwat Purana. In any case verse 32, the sanskrit text has no reference to ‘Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’ which is what I wanted to confirm in my version of the Bhagwat and so I really wanted to verify these as you have clearly used this in the translated text. Just because we are quite a young sect (only 250 years has elapsed) we cannot reject Lord Swaminarayan’s claims. Maybe in 5000 years times Lord Swaminarayan will be widely accepted as a manifestation of God. Pravin

Jay Swaminarayan / Jay Shree Krishna to all. I think we need to question the basis on which we accept that Krishna (or Swaminarayan for that matter) as the Supreme Godhead: Firstly you accept Krishna as the Supreme Godhead as He has said so in the Gita. Well Swaminarayan has also said this on a number of occasions in the Vachnamrita. The Vachnamrita is revered by devotees of Lord Swaminarayan to be on par wit the Gita as it contains sermons which the Lord himself gave and therefore are his own words. In Gadhada Madya Prakran 12, he has lucidly explained that he Purushottam Narayan and that there is no distinction between the form before them and the one in Akshardhaam. He fully endorsed Nityanad Swami’s belief that he was God Supreme and instructed all to worship his form as Shakshat Parabrahman Purushottam Narayan as Swami Nityanand worshipped. Secondly you accept Krishna as the Supreme Godhead as others such as Veda Vyaas and Narad Muni say that he is the Supreme Godhead. Within the Swaminarayan Sampraday, saints of the order have sung and written about him as the Supreme Lord after realising this eternal truth. Muktanand Swami sang, ‘Potay Parabrahman re Swami Sahajanand…..’ – i.e. this Swami Sahajanand (another name for Swaminarayan) is Parabrahman (God Supreme). These saints are accepted in the fold to be incarnations of Muktas. i.e. Premanand Swami was in fact Narad Muni, Sukanand Swami was Sukhdevji etc. Thirdly you accept Krishna as the Supreme Godhead because his manifestation was predicted in scriptures. Lord Swaminarayan’s manifestation was also predicted by Veda Vyaas in the Skand Purana’s Vasudev Mahatmya (see further post on this). Fourthly you accept Krishna as the Supreme Godhead because he is all merciful i.e. he liberated even the likes of Putana. Swaminarayan was merciful also. He changed the very habits of those countless that were evil minded to live a disciplined devout life. He did not have to slay them to give them a second life to serve them. He changed them there and then and gave them Mukti at the end of that lifetime! Fifthly you accept Krishna as the Supreme Godhead as he displayed all the relevant signs. Swaminarayan too displayed these signs and on his lotus feet he had the 16 holy marks to prove his supreme Godhood. These 16 marks are meditated upon daily by his devotees. (I’m not sure but it is my understanding that Lord Krishna had 12 such symbols on his feet – is this true?) Sixthly you accept Krishna as the Supreme Godhead as his form and pastimes are so wonderful. We too find Lord Swaminarayan’s form and pastimes wonderful. Swami Premanand has sang in details about his wonderful form. His pastimes are equally absorbing and include granting all devotees the bliss of darshan of the heavens and God Supreme in Samadhi state. Parvatbhai was once put into Samadhi where he had darshan of the 24 incarnation emanating from the form of Lord Swaminarayan. We can probably go on and on to draw comparisons. Does that make Lord Swaminarayan any different and can we be blamed in any way for accepting him as the Supreme Godhead? Krishna Says in the Gita, “Yada Yadi hi Darmasya, Glanir bhavatu Bharataha……” i.e. “Whenever there is a decline in Dharma, I manifest upon this earth. I manifest in all yugas to provide succour to holy men, eliminate evil and establish Dharma.” There was a time about 250 years ago when Dharma had declined and so God Supreme himself manifested upon this earth as Lord Swaminarayan and he achieved all this (by establishing Bhagwat Dharma) and more. I’m sure that we’re going to forever argue our cases as devotees of the ISKON movement will be biased towards Shree Krishna’s supremacy whilst myself and devotees of Lord Swaminarayan will equally be biased towards Lord Swaminarayan as the Supreme Lord. But this isn’t anything new as Shaivas and Vaishnavas have been at it for years and will probably continue for time immemorial!!! Lord Swaminarayan put an end to this argument by saying that Narayan and Shiva are one as proclaimed by the Vedas. If Krishna is the Manifested form of the Supreme Lord then is it not possible for that Supreme Lord to manifest again? Or is that beyond his supreme powers? Don’t forget in terms of time to the next Pralay and the dawn of a new day for Brahma, we’ve elapsed very little and so I’m sure that time will see many more manifestations albeit greater or smaller forms than Krishna. Are we then going to keep on refuting their claims as Krishna has said there is none greater than him? Just because we do not possess the relevant knowledge about another sect does not give us the right to refute them or pass judgement. Once we have read up on them and do possess such knowledge we can then make a judgement. If we feel that the sect is not consistent with Vedic belief then fair enough but I think you will certainly find in the case of the Swaminarayan Sampraday that it is praiseworthy. Whether you accept Lord Swaminarayan as the Supreme Lord or an incarnation for that matter is a case of personal preference and understanding. Can we not compromise by accepting the greatness of both Krishna and Swaminarayan? Finally please do not compare Sai baba to Lord Swaminarayan as Sai Baba has been proven to be a fake!!! Pravin

Murlidhar, I do not deny for a second the greatness of Lord Shree Krishna. Indeed Lord Swaminarayan himself writes in the Shikshapatri that he meditates on that very same form of Shree Krishna as his Istadev. And therefore all temples of Lord Swaminarayan will have idols of Radha Krishna in them. The Shrimad Bhagwat Purana and specifically the 10th canto have been given pride of place within the sect as 'Bhakti Shastra' and Shrimad Bhagwat Gita too is revered. Please refer to the Shikshapatri for the basic teaching's of Lord Swaminarayan: http://www.swaminarayan-online.org/html/shikshapatri/ He himself wrote these tenets for the spiritual walfare of all devotees. From it you will realise that the teachings are consistant with Vedas and Puranas. Like yourself, I also find the divine episodes (leelas) of Sri Krishna attractive. But I also find the pastimes and accomplishments of Lord Swaminarayan attractive and so choose to worship him. Whilst he did not necessarily slay great demons, he did slay the evils within such as lust, anger, avarice etc. It is these accomplishments and the fact that by his very personality he delivered souls from the clutches of hell to live a life of piety that I find him extremely attractive. If you have any other questions then do not hesitate to contact me. I will try my best to respond. Regards, Pravin.

Jay Swaminarayan I apologise in advance for the length of this post. I have read the replies/comments on this subject with interest. I am a member of the original authentic Swaminarayan Sampraday and not the spin off BAPs organisation, which places the unfounded ideology that Brahman is incarnate in the successive Sadhu leaders of it’s organisation. (Please note that Swaminarayan here is one word and NOT two pertaining to two separate figures of Swami and Narayan as instructed by Lord Swaminarayan who gave us the Mahamantra himself for the name of the single supreme ultimate personality) The original Swaminarayan Sampraday is lead by the 2 Acharyas of each Gadi (seat) – these are the Spiritual Leaders of the Sampraday. They were originally taken from Lord Swaminarayan’s own family and successive Acharyas were then anointed from their families (passed down). Their duties are outlined in the Desh Vibhag Lekh written by the Lord himself. It has no affiliation with Lord Chaitanya / Vallabh / Nimbarka etc. It does however hold Ramanujacharya’s philosophy of Vishistadvaita (special theory of non-dualism) as correct and therefore is based on this. The question of Lord Swaminarayan’s position is likely to be debated forever but to me and all members of the authentic Swaminarayan Sampraday, he is the Supreme Reality above all else. He is Purushottam Shakshat Narayan and is the fountain-head of all incarnations – this was the belief that Nityanand Swami, a super-scholar of the time held (here fore-mentioned) and it is the belief that I choose to abide by. He is Parabrahman and my Istadev and therefore is alone worthy of meditation, worship and devotion for me. That is not to say that Rama, Krishna and the like are not worthy of equal praise by their own devotees. A devotee of Hanuman would pledge allegiance and service for his favoured deity but Hanuman serves and worships Lord Rama as his favoured deity, is such a devotee therefore wrong in his belief? I say not as all deities have a place within mainstream Hinduism but it is for the individual to decide which deity they wish to serve as their Ishtadev (favoured form worthy of meditation, worship and devotion). Ultimately they all lead to the same ultimate reality. I don’t think it is necessary for us to debate the Sampraday’s authenticity as many Hindu organisations and leading figures (such as Mahatma Ghandhi, Rameshbhai Oza, and Morari Bapu) have commented on the authenticity of the Swaminarayan Sampraday and so I would hope that this would certainly not be debated here as it is a true Sanatan Sampraday with strong roots in the Vedas and Puranas. The teachings and basis of the religion is in line with the orthodox scriptures and indeed it has kept to these original teachings by our ancient Rishis. This has sometimes earned us the reputation of being ‘too strict’ but I question whether religion can ever be too strict. In fact we are proud to be part of the Swaminarayan Sampraday which has in fact simplified the true teachings of Hinduism and has firmly established the true tenets of Hinduism. I’m sure that if you were to ask a devotee of Rama, who their Supreme Reality is then they will invariably say Lord Rama. Similarly devotees of Krishna, Shiva and Parvati will all have particular emphasis on their Ishtadev. Is this any different to the Swaminarayan Sampraday? This would imply that either all are correct or all are wrong, but it is still not going to stop a Krishna devotee worshipping his Lord as the Supreme being. Narad did say Krusnastu Bhagwan Swayam in the Bhagwat but you will find similar quotes from ‘Shaiva’ Puranas proclaiming Lord Shiva as the Supreme Reality. Furthermore it is written ‘Vaishnavo Yatha Shambhu’ – Shiva is the greatest amongst Vaishnavas, so where’s the logic in that? As I’ve said the question of whether Lord Swaminarayan is God Supreme is going to be forever debated. Indeed, saints of the order regularly participated in Scholarly debates of the time and proved without any reasonable doubt that the Swaminarayan Sampraday has it’s foundations in the Vedas and therefore is authentic. They also proved Lord Swaminarayan’s divinity. There is enough evidence in the original orthodox scriptures (as my learned friend has already suggested, quoting from the Vasudev Mahatmya) as well as the scriptures of the Sampraday written by saints of the fold who were great in their own right to support this. These were saints of the highest calibre with excelled learning who had studied the Vedas and Puranas and had mastered Yoga. It was through association with Lord Swaminarayan that they saw in him his greatness and pledged allegiance to him. I have no doubt in the vision and understanding that these great saints had and therefore choose to have firm faith and devotion in Lord Swaminarayan as the Supreme Being. It is a great shame that we spend time bickering amongst ourselves trying to identify who the Supreme Lord of the Universe is when we should be spending more time to improve ourselves, our devotion to God (be it Rama, Krishna, Shiva etc.) and our way of life. However the favoured deity of worship should be one which is supported by Vedas (i.e. one of the Panchayatan – Vishnu, Shiva, Ganapati, Parvati and Surya or their incarnations). Under no circumstances should a Guru or Acharya of a sect be taken as a form worthy of meditation and devotion. Yes they are worthy of respect and honour but they can never be substituted for God. This is in my humble opinion. Thankyou for taking the time to read this.