Swaminaryan & Shikshapatri - Part 1

[Guest guest]

The Logic of the Absolute

 

Given a proof of God, who knows how to read it?

People often ask us “can you prove the existence of God?” The word “proof” indicates a conclusive demonstration that establishes the validity of an assertion, in this case the assertion that God exists.

 

But as soon as we speak of a demonstration, the next question is: “to whom shall I demonstrate?” If we speak of evidence of data, we must know who will see and hear it. In other words, who will judge the results of a particular experiment, test, or trial.

 

Consider a hypothetical example. Doctor Waterport, the famous scientist, has just discovered a sophisticated formula that solves a technical mathematical problem. He proudly calls his colleagues together and presents them with thirty pages of ultra technical symbols. His fellow scientists pore over the pages and conclude: “yes, this is the answer we have been looking for.” If Dr. Waterport were to show the proof to an ordinary person on the street, the person wouldn’t even know how to hold the pages right side up. Because he is not trained in mathematics, the proof would be meaningless to him. So the conclusion of our analysis is that the proof demands a qualified audience.

 

Certainly, any valid proof must be logical. But just how we apply logic depends on our previous experience. For example, suppose an apple tree is growing outside your window. One morning you hear a sound like that of an apple hitting the ground and when you look outside you see a ripe apple lying beneath the tree. Logically, you conclude, the apple has just fallen from the tree. Your logical statement rests on your previous observation that the apple tree produces apples, that ripe apples fall to the ground, and that they make a certain sound when this occurs. And your statement appears logical to those with similar experience.

 

We apply logic, then, in terms of our experience. Therefore, how can we expect to make God logical to a person who has had no spiritual experience? How can God appear logical to a person to whom the very terminology of the science of God is unintelligible? Thus, it is ludicrous when those who are spiritually blind, deaf, and dumb demand that God be made “logical” to them and that His existence be “proved” in their terms.

 

In general, it is illogical for a person untrained in some field of knowledge to demand that a particular fact pertaining to that field of knowledge be logically demonstrated to him. Thus, if someone who has no idea of what a number is demands that I logically demonstrate that two plus two equals four, I can’t do it. Similarly, if a spiritual ignoramus demands that God be logically demonstrated to him, his very request is illogical. How could the illogical demands of atheists be possibly met?

On logic and spiritual experience

We can easily submit innumerable proofs of God — provided we are free to stipulate that the judge be a person who is spiritually trained. Devotees of the Lord who are advanced in Krishna consciousness can logically, evidentially, and demonstratively deal with the reality of the soul and God. But materialistic fools demand that God, a non-material being, be reduced to a material formula.

 

It is patently absurd to demand material proof for a non-material entity. Mathematical or physical laws describe predictable ways in which material things interact, yet God and the soul are not material and thus cannot be reduced to material descriptions. This does not mean, however, that the soul is outside the jurisdiction of logical discussion. Consciousness itself is spiritual, not material, and thus the study of consciousness, or spirit, is not beyond the scope of human beings.

 

In fact, all fields of knowledge depend on tangible perception by the soul, since all sciences depend on conscious scientists, who do all the thinking and perform all the tests (and consciousness is spiritual). In other words, spiritual awareness is intrinsic to all types of awareness, although materialistic people do not recognize that consciousness is spiritual.

 

Therefore, there is no lack of data to prove the existence of spirit since, by definition, consciousness itself is spiritual. The problem is that foolish intellectuals whimsically designate consciousness as a material, not a spiritual, entity. But as soon as we accept the simple truth that consciousness itself is spiritual, we find that in every stage of awareness and in every field of knowledge our perception of all manner of data is resting on a spiritual experience — the experience of being conscious. And when consciousness studies itself, it reaches the stage called spiritual consciousness, or self- realization. Ultimately, when the self-realized person fixes his consciousness on the source of all consciousness, he reaches the realization of Krishna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

 

For one who has not perceived the superior pleasure of Krishna consciousness, it will seem illogical to restrict his material enjoyment. A Krishna conscious person, however, perceives that spiritual consciousness is far more pleasurable and satisfying than materialistic consciousness. He further perceives that sinful activities, activities against the laws of God, harm that consciousness. Thus it is entirely logical for a Krishna-conscious person to obey the laws of God, just as it is logical for an ordinary citizen to obey the laws of the state.

 

Ultimately, we must come to the stage of absolute logic, which refers to absolute perception, a perception of things with eternally recognizable properties and eternally established relationships. For example, God is the supreme master and enjoyer and we are His eternal servants. Thus it is absolutely logical for us to serve Him, for we are then situated in our natural constitutional position. To serve a mundane employer may be logical, but it is not absolutely logical, since after the employer’s death, or upon his bankruptcy, serving him is illogical.

 

In conclusion, logic is a secondary process that follows the primary process of consciousness. We are conscious, for example, that numbers have particular values and properties, and based on this perception, we can state that a particular mathematical equation is either logical or illogical. Similarly, by purifying our existence through the practice of Krishna consciousness we are able to perceive the values and properties of God, and thus we can discern that a particular statement about God is either logical or illogical. By confirming our analysis with the Vedic literature, standard reference books of spiritual science compiled by realized devotees, we can come to the point of perfectly understanding the science of God in Krishna consciousness.

 

Source:

http://www.acharyadeva.com/en/life/logicofabsolute.php

© Hridayananda das Goswami

[Guest guest]

If Pramukh Swami is not considered God, what difference does it make?

You are serving and worshipping the same IF NOT MORE than God himself so what difference does it make that you or he claim he is not God

Because you sure as hell treat him like he is.

 

[Guest guest]

"STUPID PERSONS THINK THAT PRAMUKHSWAMI IS NOT A GOD "

 

wrong.. intelligent persons want demonstrations before believe even to much easier and less important qualifications

 

i want to be sure if a doctor is a doctor before going to him, i want to be sure that someone called god, is really god before surrendering..

 

so please help me... until now you and your brothers have only said:

 

"why not?"

 

and "why not?" is not a demonstration... even saibabist demonstrate the divinity of such cheater with "why not?"

[Guest guest]

"If someone claims to be God then ask him to show the universal form. If he cannot then kick him in the face"

 

(From Srila Prabhupada's statements)

 

 

[Guest guest]

There is no hope for those who discard the authorized scriptures. Thus the BAPS followers are on a path to hell by ignoring the original teachings of Swaminarayan (Sikhsapatri) and all the Vedic scriptures like the Bhagavad-gita.

 

"Those who Mock Krishna should be considered as demonic"

 

(From Srila Prabhupada's purport in the BG)

[Guest guest]

There are infinite universes... therefore infinite incarnations of Vishu of whom Krishna was one. Bhagwan Swaminarayan is Parabrahm and is above these universes. For all of the universes there is only Parabrahm and Brahm.

 

Agreed Krishna bhagwan was Purushottam - meaning purush (man/persons), uttam(above, first, highest)... so he is the highest form of man... above the caste of bhramin... but not classified at the level of Purna Purshottam Narayan (Sarave Jivo no Kalyankar ... the salvator of all souls).

 

In reply to:

--

 

And who is it?

Bhagavad Gita 10.42

 

In reply to:

--

 

 

atha va bahunaitena

kim jnatena tavarjuna

vistabhyaham idam krtsnam

ekamsena sthito jagat

 

TRANSLATION

But what need is there, Arjuna, for all this detailed knowledge? With a single fragment of Myself I pervade and support THIS entire universe.

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

dear Sir,

in all sincerity, this is getting a little ridiculous from you so-called Swaminarayan devotees.

 

Time and time again, you people bring up stupid and ridiculous arguments, and time and time again, we try to point the correct path, not according to our interpretation of the what the correct path is, but according to established scriptures, and according to whom YOU believe to be God. I have gone out of my way to bring forth evidence from the Swaminarayan literature - which you are supposed to believe, but repeatedly fail to. You call yourselves devotees of Swaminarayan when you absolutely refuse to believe what He has told you. You concoct your own excuses to fulfill yourselves as to why you do what you do.

 

so far in this thread alone, there have been 3 stupid arguments put forth:

 

1. Swaminarayan said Krishna is supreme but he really didnt mean that because no one would believe him - totally foolish argument! Krishna IS Purna Purshottam Narayan. He didnt care who would believe him or not when he said it. Many fools refuse to do so, even to this day! that does not diminish His divinity. So when Swaminarayan says Krishna is Supreme, he wasnt lying.

 

2. Swaminarayan assumed leadership of a Vaishnav sect, and therefore to uphold that he said Krishna is Supreme, but in fact he really didnt mean it, in other words, according to this argument again, Swaminarayan was lying. Another absolutely foolish argument. An avatar of God doesnt have to accept another samradaya. He usually starts His own. If Swaminarayan accepted leadership of a sampradaya, it means He absolutely and unconditionally accepted the preaching of that sampradaya. Who are we, and who are you, to try to explain His actions??? If God does something, we must accept it as being authentic and truthful.

 

3. this latest and most ridiculous excuse. That Krishna is not Parabrahm. Let me quote from Shikshapatri: "Lord Shree Krishna is PARABRAHM Purushottam and our most cherished deity. He is worthy of worship by us all. He is the source of all incarnations." - Shikshapatri 108. "All persons shall worship Shree Krishna with devotion, knowing that there is nothing more conducive to the realisation of salvation other than devotion to Lord Shree Krishna" - Shikshapatri 113.

 

There was an authorotative commentary/bhasya on the Shikshapatri by Shatanand Muni. Why was it authorotative? Because it was personally examined by Lord Swaminarayan and approved by him. In that bhasya, for the above verse 108, the following is found, verbatim :

 

"Lord Swaminarayan explains that that Ishwara is none other than Lord Krishna. He is Parabrahman - Purushottam (the supreme God), who is the cause of creation of all. He is our Upasya Deva or God that is worthy of worship, service and devotion. He is ‘Ishtadev’ personal or favoured God for worship. He is worthy of devotion by all, as he is the best - Parabrahman. Shree Krishna is Paramatma - the highest form. ‘There is none other, to my knowledge, greater than Shree Krishna.’ "

 

ALL Swaminarayan devotees are supposed to read Shikshapatri and Vachanamrut daily. I am not saying this - YOUR guru is saying this. So read whom you believe to be GOd said. Also read Vachanamrut Vadtal 18.

 

Lord Swaminarayan Himself stated that He is an avatar of Lord Krishna in the form of Nar-Narayan. He has stated this in more than one location. He has stated KRISHNA is whom you should worship, and that KRISHNA is the lord of Akshardham.

[Guest guest]

What's the point of learning about the Swaminarayan culture and 'Akshar' and 'Akshardham' when all these ideas and philosophies have been categorically and coherently discussed by the Gaudiya Vaisnava Sampraday in particular by the likes of:

 

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu (Sri Caitanya-caritamrta):

http://www.bvml.org/books/CC/index.html

 

Srila Bhaktvinoda Thakura (Jaiva Dharma):

http://www.bvml.org/SBNM/JaivaDharma/index.html

 

Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada (The Science of Self Realisation) :

 

http://www.bvml.org/books/

 

[sumedh 0]

Dear guest

 

You said:

 

There are infinite universes... therefore infinite incarnations of Vishu of whom Krishna was one. Bhagwan Swaminarayan is Parabrahm and is above these universes. For all of the universes there is only Parabrahm and Brahm.

 

Agreed Krishna bhagwan was Purushottam - meaning purush (man/persons), uttam(above, first, highest)... so he is the highest form of man... above the caste of bhramin... but not classified at the level of Purna Purshottam Narayan (Sarave Jivo no Kalyankar ... the salvator of all souls).

 

 

 

If you would have cared to read the quote before, you would not have jumped and exposed your ignorance.

 

 

Vishnu is the ParaBrahm.

 

From Bhagavad-Gita 10.12-13

 

In reply to:

 

arjuna uvaca

param brahma param dhama

pavitram paramam bhavan

purusam sasvatam divyam

adi-devam ajam vibhum

 

ahus tvam rsayah sarve

devarsir naradas tatha

asito devalo vyasah

svayam caiva bravisi me

 

TRANSLATION

Arjuna said: You are the Supreme Brahman, the ultimate, the supreme abode and purifier, the Absolute Truth and the eternal divine person. You are the primal God, transcendental and original, and You are the unborn and all-pervading beauty. All the great sages such as Narada, Asita, Devala, and Vyasa proclaim this of You, and now You Yourself are declaring it to me.

 

 

 

That Parabrahman Sri Hari is the same who expands as infinite Forms of Kshirodakashayi Vishnu and Garbhodakashayi Vishnu in each of the universes. All His Forms are one and the same. If you fail to understand this simple point, you are truly lost.

[Guest guest]

I think it is about time some one cleared up a few things here. Pramukh Swami Maharaj is not God we belive he is the God realised sant he is ekantic and through him he guides us to the parth of liberation. Just as If you wanted to learn to ride a horse you could not just go into a bookshop pick up a book and learn everything you need a teacher who knows what they are talking about in the same way we all need a teacher to help us understand dharma Pramukh Swami Maharaj does not teach us anything diffrent from Any of our Hindu scriptures he shows us the way to god shows us the route we must take and how to make our life pure and to lead us aways from maya'd of this world through him we learn the parth of true dharma. I and any true followers of BAPS will never put down or disregard another avtar we a taught to respect all God has many names many forms and we should respect all but just as a wife is dedicated to her husband we should be dedicated to our Istadev while respecting others we follow one. There is nothing that Swami shree says that is contradicting any of our vadic scriptures and he always teaches respect to all scriptures. Bhagwan Swaminarayan has said that God is incarnate on this earth always through te God Realissed sant and we belive that Pramukh Swami Maharaj is that sant he is true to the Bhagwat Dharma and stays within the Niyams given by Shree Krishna Bhagwan in the Bagwat and also in the Shikshapatri by Bhagwan Shree Swaminarayan.

[Guest guest]

Pramukh Swami is not following the Vedic scriptures like the Bhagavad-gita.

 

He is leading his followers to darkness.

 

Even Swaminarayan himself worshipped Lord Krishna as the supreme. In the temples built by him, Lord Krishna's deity is in the center. In the temples built by Pramukh Swami, Lord Krishna is on the side, just about to fall off the altar.

 

You can't fool all the people, all the time.

 

 

[Guest guest]

There is only one Bhgaawan, Lord Krishna.

 

The fall of the Vedic religion is due to the fact that so many foolish Gurus create so many Gods.

 

I am god, he is god, and so is he.

 

It's all non-sense, fools and raskals. There is only one Bhagawan, Lord Krishna.

[Guest guest]

It is interesting to note the very people who claim BAPS wrongly put Pramukh Swami on a pedastal are the same people who have a photo of Shri Prabhupada on their website but not one of Shri Krishna Bhagwan...

 

/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Guest guest]

it is agood suggestion to put a krsna's photo in the forum, prabhupada woulf be happy of it

 

but there's a difference... prabhupada never claimed to be god and no disciple considers him god

[Guest guest]

adding to this, a few points...if you're not going to read them properly, dont bother reading them:

 

firstly, "nowhere has maharaj talked of aksharbhram," get your facts right please, during his time he has revealed it many times...one such time ebing at fuldol at rathod dhadhal's house where he pointed to gunatitanand swami saying "he is that sadguru" Also refer to Vartal 10: we should do sarkhi seva of God AND his Sant to achieve liberation.

 

secondly, in the Gita, Krishna has been used to name many people including Arjun, and Swaminarayan has used it in a similar way. If he talked about himself ebing supreme all the time, nobody would come to listen to his talks, and whats the point of that. He had to get people to listen.

 

Thirdly, If he kept propounding Krishna to be supreme asnwer me one question: why did he give the Mantra "Swaminarayan Swaminarayan." Why did he do that??? He knew he was supreme and he has also said it in the Vachnamrut.

 

Fourthly you say that you agree Pramukh Swami is God-realised. Well if he claims Swaminarayan to be supreme, and he is god-realised, then that means he is right does it not?

 

You say that Swaminarayan scriptures ignore Hindu scriptures: well the Vachnamrut contains many quotes from the Gita and Upanishads. Also, give me a quote of Krishna being supreme from the Vedas or Upanishads. There arent any, because they were written before Krishna. This is the same for Swaminarayan.

 

If Yagnapurushdas left the Vartal Sampraday to make his own name, why did he leave at all? He was the most respected Sant in Vartal, out of all 2000 Saints. After the Acharya, he was the most respected. So wh ydid he have to leave? Why did he get poisoned, stabbbed with needles, bare all the hardships and leave with 5 sadhus and no money from a place where he was already respected? Tell me?

He did it because he knew he had the right philosophy and he wanted to spread it.

 

By the way, Pramukh Swami doesnt tell anyone to kick anyone in the face like Srila Prabhupada. He is non-violent (the highest ethical code in case you didnt know.) He has no kaam, krodh, maan, irshaa. He is the complete observer of niskaam, nisneh, nirlobh, niswaad and nirman, and is God-realised. If you cannot see this, look harder.

Jai Swaminarayan

[Guest guest]

They still don't get it. As stated in the Bhagavad-gita, the demons never surrender onto Krishna.

 

Follow the authorized scriptures, the eternal scriptures, like the Bhagavad-gita and not any man made scripture like the swaminarayan scriptures.

 

When someone mocks Lord krishna, they should be kicked in the face, no matter who they are.

[Guest guest]

"man made"? Please. The fact that BAPS is the fastest growing Hindu sect goes to show something does it not.

 

As for mocking Krishna and insulting him, tell me, how many of the "95%" of Hindus that believe in Krishna fast on Jamashtmi??????

 

Well followeres of BAPS fast on that day, yes, very insulting to Krishna isnt it.

[Guest guest]

It's no surprise that the irreligions are out growing the religion (Krishna consciousness).

 

This was predicted 5000 years ago.

 

It's no surpruse. It just gives another clear indication of the BAPS movement, an irreligious movement.

[Guest guest]

to my post sometime above, please add the following additional foolish excuses:

 

4) Since BAPS is the fastest growing Hindu sect, it is not man-made, in other words, because there are a lot of followers, the beliefs are authentic. Absolutely rubbish. Over half the USA population (which is greater than the entire world population of BAPS devotees) was in favor of the Iraq war because of "weapons of mass destruction". Does that make it justifiable??? A similar excuse along the same lines is...Pramukh Swami has to be a manifestation of God, because how else could he build so many temples?

 

5) "secondly, in the Gita, Krishna has been used to name many people including Arjun, and Swaminarayan has used it in a similar way". The cleverness of you so-called Swaminarayan devotees in concocting excuses and bending the meaning of scriptures is simply mind-boggling. Where has Krishna said that He was the Supreme but actually He meant someone else? Where has YOUR GOD, Lord Swaminarayan, saying that Krishna is supreme, has at the same time said "but oops...I really didnt mean that". Quit the garbage of your verbage. You dont realise it, and you probably dont want to believe it even if someone told you this a million times, but you are calling Lord Swaminarayan a liar.

 

6) "He knew he was supreme and he has also said it in the Vachnamrut" - He said Krishna is Supreme, and that He is an incarnation of that Shri Krishna. WHich Shri Krishna? That Shri Krishna who eternally has Radharani beside Him. Now, how many Shri Krishna's are there that match this discription?

 

7) "Also, give me a quote of Krishna being supreme from the Vedas or Upanishads. There arent any, because they were written before Krishna". There are 108 principal Upanishads. You may refer to Kali-santarana Upanisad; the Mundaka Upanishad also supports our exact same beliefs. Of the Vedas, the Puranas are considered the 5th Vedas. I am not saying this - Lord VedaVyas (whom your Lord called the only source of authentic literature) has said it, specifically in the Brahma Sutras. In the Puranas, Krishna is mentioned as the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the Bhagawat Purana, Skand Purana, Varaha Purana, Padma Purana, Vishnu Purana, Brhan-Naradiya Purana. DO you know what the favorite scripture of Lord Swaminaryan was? And no, it was not the Vachanamrut. It was the Vasudev Mahatmya from the Skand Purana. THat scripture starts out by proclaiming Shri Krishna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead (and that is prolly why I have never heard a quote from that scripture in any BAPS function).

 

BTW - "He is non-violent (the highest ethical code in case you didnt know.)" - this is another one of your fascinating interpretation of the scriptures without making heads or tails out of it. Give me a quotation from any of the 8 "authentic" scriptures, without doing what you are expert at doing - quoting one sentence when there are hundreds of sentences to the contrary. Ahimsa is not, let me repeat, Ahimsa, or non-violence, is NOT the highest ethical code. Being a so-called devotee of Swaminaryan, even you should know this. Ahimsa is THE highest ethical principle when it is ordained by the Lord or by the scriptures; take Arjuna for instance. If someone makes a mockery of one's beliefs that are supported by the authentic scriptures, or if someone makes mockery of Vishnu or any Vaishnav, NOT being violent is one of the worst ethical principal.

 

 

And the same way you prefaced your answer by saying...if you dont want to read the whole thing then dont bother replying, let me say if you dont read ALL the posts on this thread, then dont bother replying, because its really the same points over and over and over and over again that you refuse to accept.

[kcp1982 0]

Jai shree Krishna.

 

I totally agree with the above post 'quit the foolish excuses..'.

 

The BAPS followers should now come to their senses and stop this non-sense of worshiping a Guru as God and worship only Lord Krishna.

 

Krishna is mentioned as the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the Brahma Sutras, Bhagawat Purana, Skand Purana, Varaha Purana, Padma Purana, Vishnu Purana, Brhan-Naradiya Purana.

 

Even in the swaminarayan Shikshapatri:

 

"The Paramatma – Shree Krishna who is supreme, Parabrahman, Bhagwan or Purushottam and who is the cause of all manifestations is the Lord of us all. He is to be worshipped for final redemption. (108)"

 

So stop all the non-sense talk and surrender onto Lord krishna now.

 

The BAPS movement is an irreligious movement out to destroy dharma by refusing to follow the authorized Vedic scriptures and concocting their own new God.

 

 

[Guest guest]

"We are calling him a liar." If he meant to leave the principle of Krishna's supremacy, why did he established his own Sampraday, install His own murti in Vartal, and give the mantra "swaminarayan" and leave a sampraday of people believeing Him to be supreme? If he kept propounding Krishna's supremacy in His time 200 years ago, why did the Paramahnsas believe Him to be supreme???

 

"Moreover, the happiness of humans exceeds the hapiness of animals; and the hapiness of a king exceeds that; and the hapiness of deities exceeds that; and the hapiness of Indra exceeds that; then Bruhaspati's hapiness, then Bhrama's, then Vaikunth's. Beyond that, the hapiness of Golok is superior, and finally, the bliss of God's Akshardham is far more superior" ~ Vach Panchala 1.

 

"the image of God seen in the divine light of Akshardham is Me. However if you cannot quite believe this truth, at least know that, 'Maharaj is able to see that Murti which resides in the effulgant light of Akshar.' If you have the conviction within you of this sacred truth, you will remain attached to me with ties of devotional love and will be redeemed." ~ Gadhada II-13

 

"millions of universes are evolved, sustained and destroyed only by My power. The infinite number of Shivas, Bhramas, Vaikunthas, Golokas residing in the infinite number of universes, and the divine Bhramapur become illuminated only by My divine light, Sat-chitt-anand. I am the transcandental highest, and I, with My divine power can move millions of universes only by a divine touch. Such is the power that I, the ultimate God, possess. I shall transport those jivas who have sought refuge in Me, to the divine Bhramadham, which transcends all other regions. I shall make them omniscient and even capable of evolving millions of universes" ~ Gadhada II-13

 

"I went alone to Akshardham which transcends all other regions. There I saw that I am the ultimate Purushottam, the highest transcendental reality...I am the all-doer." ~ Amdavad 3

 

"The Purushottam visible here is the controller of all, including Akshar, is the controller of all Lords, the ultimate cause of cosmic evolution, and is transcendentally the supreme one. From Him all incarnations emanate, and in Him they finally merge. He is the ultimate God, who alone should be offered implicit devotion with Ekantikbhav" ~ Gadhada III-38 (One year before he reverted back to Akshardham)

 

Therefore, whatever you believe, stop saying we are calling Swaminarayan a liar, because it is clear, and He has mentioned it several times that He reveals Himself as supreme. Don't tell me Swaminarayan never said he was supreme. Even one incident is enough. What was the need for Him to say that if He believed Krishna to be supreme? There are enough quotes here so that is no point quoting Him anymore. If you don't believe Him, thats fine, but we ARE following His principles.

 

It is also hard not to follow the words of an ekantik sadhu like Pramukh Swami Maharaj (no, I am not calling Him God, I am calling Him Akshar, of whom Maharaj has spoken of many many times also.) If you think He is spreading irreligion and destroying dharma, just take a look at Swaminarayans and satsangis all over the world - they are some of the strongest observers of Hindu dharma. His aim isnt to get people to believe in him as God. It is in fact to spread dharma all over the world.

 

 

[Guest guest]

You are calling Him a liar - why? because He said Krishna is Supreme, and as you said it, even if He said it only once, that is enough. Yes, He said that He was also Supreme, but at the same time He says that He is an incarnation of Krishna in the form of Nar-Narayan. I am sure that you will never quote that, as I already have. So, when you use the garbage of your verbage saying that He never said Krishna is Supreme, or that He never meant that Krishna is Supreme, you ARE calling Him a liar.

 

He did not start His own sampradaya - another one of your hallucinatory interpretations of the Vachanamrut. I thought I told you to read this entire post before responding, which you obviously did not. I asked that you read Vadtal 18 before placing foolish words that are in complete contradiction to what you are saying.

 

I have never said that Pramukh Swami is spreading irreligion - I AM saying that YOU, the supposed "devotees" of Lord Swaminarayan, are not following his commands, which are enlisted in Shikshapatri. I have gone over this in significant detail before, and it seems that your kali-yuga infected mind fails to grasp even the most minute detail of what I am trying to tell you.

 

Shikshaptri is not a book of suggestions, it is a book of commands, with dozens and dozens of commands of worshiping Shri Krishna. He even goes to the extent of telling you that Lord Shri Krishna, AND NO ONE ELSE, is the source of ultimate redemption. He specifically states NO ONE ELSE. We are not making this up. IF you dont like it, complain to your God. So yes, you continue to call Him a liar, and as I already said, even if someone told you this a million times, you will continue to make excuses and not believe it.

 

Hare Krishna

[Guest guest]

>firstly, "nowhere has maharaj talked of aksharbhram," get >your facts right please, during his time he has revealed >it many times...one such time ebing at fuldol at rathod >dhadhal's house where he pointed to gunatitanand swami >saying "he is that sadguru"

 

COMPLETELY MADE UP STORY!!!

 

>Also refer to Vartal 10: we should do sarkhi seva of God >AND his Sant to achieve liberation.

 

Rubbish! Vadtal 10 says sarkhi seva of sant ....WHERE does it say Aksharbhrahm!?! You truth corrupter!

 

>If Yagnapurushdas left the Vartal Sampraday to make his >own name, why did he leave at all?

 

He didnt leave he was KICKED OUT. EX-COMMUNICATED because he wanted to be worshipped.

 

>So wh ydid he have to leave? Why did he get poisoned, >stabbbed with needles, bare all the hardships and leave >with 5 sadhus and no money from a place where he was >already respected? Tell me?

 

He WAS KICKED OUT. And all these BS stories of poisoned, stabbed LOL! U been watching too many movies. THats all made up cr@p that cannot possibly be substantiated.

 

[Guest guest]

It cannot be denied that Swaminarayan taught the worship of Shree Krishna.

But in those very Vachanamruts it states that Swaminarayan IS Shree Krishna- the same, even his 'christened' name (By Markandey Rish) was Krishna.

So maybe it is a question of Which Krishna should we worship. the 'Swaminarayan' Krishna or the Krishna of the Madhav Gauidya Sampraday

[Guest guest]

if im calling him a liar, then so are you. In the quotations that i gave, he said himself that akshardham was greater than golok, so if u dont believe this, then you are also a calling him a liar. seems very logical