धर्मसम्राट

I admit, I, too, don't do it regularly. Kshamasva🙏🙏

अगर महाभारत ढङ्ग से पड़ा होता तो यहाँ से सब नहीं बोलते बैठते महाभारत मे रुद्र अर्थात शिव कोई राजर्षि नहीं स्वयं ईश्वर है ! ब्रह्मचारी लोकचारी सर्व्वचारी सुचारवित् । ईशान ईश्वर≍कालो निशाचारी पिनाकधृक् ॥ महाभारत अनुशासन पर्व्व , अध्याय 17 , श्लोक 72 , BORI Critical Edition

How did jiva fall into prakriti sambandha?

When I corrected your misunderstanding of "Brahman is in avidya" Now, you are goal-shifting to "avidya is in Brahman" 😂😂😂 Thinking darkness exists in sunlight is as peak retardedness as thinking avidya is in Brahman 😂😂 😂 Stop consuming fart, aka gas. It is messing up your mind.

Drunkard - I'm distinct from Brahman Vaishnavas- I'm distinct from Brahman So Drunkards are true Vaishnavas? 😂😂😂 How dull-witted you must be.

Only Advaitians truly know this from direct perception and realisation because only they get rid of bodily attachment, get rid of source of sorrow, destroy aham vritti, transcend 3 gunas, transcend 3 bodies (sthoola, sukshma, karana sharira) and transcend 3 avasthas (waking, dreaming and deep sleep) and attain 4th avastha called turiya which is the abode of Brahman and realise their self to be blissful Brahman. The reason why it is called Advaita because they directly perceive and experience (as directly you see any object infront of you) the atma, the self is non-different from blissful Brahman.

Asking again - why do the Shastras reveal the same thing that even a common man already knows? If you say the final purport of the Upanishads is- you are distinct from Brahman, which an uneducated man too knows already- what previously unknown reality would the Shastras be revealing? Shastras are pramana because it reveals what we do not know or what is unavailable to common experience. Are you saying - the purpose of the Shastras is to reinforce the already-known truth? Common experience already presents us as a limited individual distinct from Brahman. Why would a Shastra pramana whose purpose is to reveal the unknown merely repeat the same conclusion that is already known by an experience?

Why does Nirguna Brahman manifest as Saguna Brahman? For the sake of creation. For this, Brahman needs power, and that power is called Maya. What is Maya? Maya is an eternal power or energy of Brahman. Maya is not independent, but is dependent upon Brahman. Maya has no independent existence apart from Brahman. Who is Bhagavan? When Brahman does the work of creation, preservation, and destruction of the universe with the help of his power, Maya, Brahman is then called Saguna Brahman. Saguna Brahman is also called Ishwara or Bhagavan. That's why Bhagavan is always with his shakti, and is worshipped along with his shakti. Lakshmi-Narayana, Shiva-Parvati etc. In simple words, Brahman + maya = Ishwar or Bhagavan. Saguna Brahman or Bhagavan has a divine form and names, qualities, and attributes. Bhagavan, his glories, his divine leela's works attributed to him (creation, preservation and destruction) have to be explained with the help of Maya. Without Maya, Bhagavan is attributesless. Bhagavan is pure consciousness. Consciousness means that which illuminates everything. It gives light to all that exists. Therefore, Bhagavan with Maya and attributes is called Saguna Brahman. Bhagavan without Maya and without attributes is called Nirguna Brahman.

“BAPS isn’t Sanatan.” That claim collapses when confronted with facts. BAPS is a Swaminarayan Hindu sampradaya rooted in the Vedic tradition—not a religion detached from it. Our foundation includes the Vedas, Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita and Brahmasutras (Prasthanatrayi), along with the Shikshapatri, Vachanamrut and Swamini Vato. Our philosophy is Akshar-Purushottam Darshan, a Vedantic school based on the teachings of Bhagwan Swaminarayan. (BAPS Swaminarayan Sanstha) And then there is something difficult to dismiss as “BAPS propaganda”: In 2017, the Shri Kashi Vidvat Parishad, a respected scholarly council associated with Vedic studies, formally recognized Swaminarayan’s Vedanta as Akshar-Purushottam Darshan, a Vedic siddhanta distinct from other Vedanta schools. Its declaration described the Prasthanatrayi-Swaminarayana-Bhashya and Swaminarayana-Siddhanta-Sudha as sacred texts protecting the eternal Vedic religious tradition. It further acclaimed Mahamahopadhyaya Bhadreshdas Swami as an Ācārya and contemporary commentator in the lineage of Prasthanatrayi commentators. And a copper-plated Tamra-patra declaration was presented in connection with this recognition. (BAPS Swaminarayan Research) In 2019, Bhadreshdas Swami was further honoured in Kashi with the title “Darshanshastra-Sarvabhauma”, and the Akshar-Purushottam Darshan Pith was established there. (BAPS Swaminarayan Sanstha) This isn’t just modern institutional recognition either. In Sastri Yagnapurushadji v. Muldas Bhudardas Vaishya (1966), the Supreme Court examined the Swaminarayan Sampradaya and upheld the conclusion that it was not a religion distinct and separate from Hinduism. The judgment specifically discussed its Vedic foundation, bhakti, moksha and Hindu philosophical character. (Indian Kanoon) And what does Sanatan practice actually look like within BAPS? Nitya puja. Mala. Dhyan. Mansi. Prarthana. Pradakshina. Dandvat. Arti. Darshan. Tilak-chandlo. Ekadashi and other vrat. Ghar Sabha. Satsang sabha. Reading and living the shastras. Seva. Ahimsa. Dharma. Brahmacharya. Bhakti. Guru-bhakti. Respect for parents, elders and all devotees. These aren’t imported rituals. BAPS itself describes tilak-chandlo as a Hindu Sanatan Dharma tradition, particularly associated with the Vaishnav sampraday. (BAPS Swaminarayan Sanstha) We don’t reject Sanatan Dharma. We live one of its sampradayic traditions. Sanatan has never meant that every Hindu must have the same guru, the same darshan, the same form of upasana or the same sampradaya. Advaita is not the only Vedanta. Vishishtadvaita is not the only Vedanta. Dvaita is not the only Vedanta. Shuddhadvaita is not the only Vedanta. And Akshar-Purushottam Darshan does not cease to be Vedic merely because it is distinct. That is precisely what a living Sanatan tradition looks like: unity without uniformity. So yes—criticise BAPS if you disagree with something. Debate its theology. Question its practices. But saying “BAPS isn’t Sanatan” while ignoring its Vedic scriptures, Vedantic philosophy, Hindu practices, Supreme Court precedent, and the formal scholarly recognition from Kashi is not scholarship. It is simply rewriting facts to fit a narrative. Debate the doctrine. Don’t erase the sampradaya.

Nigga You better don't touch my Jagannatha.