This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Hinduism: Philosophy / Swaminarayan Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Philosophy task force (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Swaminarayan (assessed as Top-importance). Religion: New religious movements Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by New religious movements work group (assessed as High-importance). Theology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Theology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Theology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TheologyWikipedia:WikiProject TheologyTemplate:WikiProject TheologyTheology High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. India Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article was last assessed in April 2012. Organizations Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Alternative views Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Veganism and Vegetarianism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of veganism and vegetarianism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veganism and VegetarianismWikipedia:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismTemplate:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismVeganism and Vegetarianism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

@Jonathansammy: Hey!! I don't have access to the full source you cited in this section but the preview page that I could see uses the term "members" of the swaminarayan sect. Not sure if later it outlines the whole faith or specific branches partaking in attempts to ban castes. Based on these 3 sources: 1, 2, 3....It seems that The Baps branch and its founder were the one pursuing the caste based discrimination. Might make sense to outline that nuance in this section for clarity. Kbhatt22 (talk) 04:13, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good point; it seems you're right on the post-independence restrictions. But, from Hardiman:

The lowest social groups, such as dalits and adivasis, did not join the sect in significant numbers. Makrand Mehta has shown in his article how untouchables were not permitted to enter Swaminarayan temples, though in one case a separate temple was constructed for them.

Hardiman's article is revealing, and worth to be added more from. He refers to Makrand Mehta, 'Scan1iptruda vaki Soaliiva ane Sainajik Chte'ia: Saiuminara 'van Samn pradayano Abhyas 1800-1840' (Sect Literature and Social Consciousticss: A Study of the Swaminaravan Sect, 1800-1840'), Arthat, Vol 5, No 4, October- December 1986. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:12, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh that makes sense. That court case was by one of the branches but the general premise of it is rooted in the history and texts of the faith. I think your recent changes lay that out nicely. Kbhatt22 (talk) 12:23, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shastri yagnapurushdas case was the only case in which dalits weren't allowed in mandirs and that was due to personal ego of yagnapurushdas. But if we look back in history we can find that shudras were allowed to enter swaminarayan mandirs for example- jaga bhagat who was a disciple of gunatitanand swami in junagadh was a shudra and yet he stayed within the temple and same in case of narayandasji of chhani, he was a poet of swaminarayan sampraday who wrote kirtans by sitting in vadtal temple while meditating om harikrushna maharaj, so I don't feel that entire swaminarayan sect or sahajanand swami himself was casteist, the castes struggle within sect is mostly seen in the late post swaminarayan period but not completely in the entire history of swaminarayan sect Desi samurai (talk) 17:54, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also can somebody please tell me why my edits are getting deleted again and again although I am putting proper citations to them? Please don't delete the paragraphs I took that information after surfing through many websites Please, atleast tell me what. Was wrong in the information that I gave.... Desi samurai (talk) 17:56, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because you first deleted a lot of sourced info, meanwhile stating in your edit-summaries that you added info; then you added info from primary sources, that is, non-WP:RS. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:41, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kbhatt22 The case you are referring to is not by the BAPS organization but rather by the Nar Narayan diocese. Sadhu Yagnapurushdas from BAPS had passed in 1951 prior to the verdict and end of the case. "In their plaint, the appellants had alleged that the Swaminarayan temple of Sree Nar Narayan Dev of Ahmedabad and all the temples subordinate thereto are not temples within the meaning of the former Act." Ram112313 (talk) 07:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I must note here that I believe this particular court case (The State Of Bombay vs Shastri Yagna Purushadasji on 3 October, 1958) is not related to BAPS if I'm correct. I read through the beginning of the case at the first source you provided and it says "As regards the nature of the temples, after considering exhaustively the evidence on the record, the trial Court recorded a finding that the Swaminarayan temple at Ahmedabad and the temples subordinate thereto were Hindu religious institutions within the meaning of Article 25(2)(b) of the Constitution."[1] The court case was tried in 1958 whereas the BAPS temple in Ahmedabad was opened in 1962.[2] I would guess this case is related to the Kalupur Temple. Prapannam (talk) 20:17, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The BAPS did not file the case and did not partake in the case. I have shared various links to the court case in which it is shown that the Nar Narayan diocese filed the case. Shastri Yagnapurushdas had passed before the case finalized and reached a verdict in 1951.

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/145565/

https://libertatem.in/blog/sastri-yagnapurushadji-and-others-v-muldas-brudardas-vaishya-and-anr/

https://www.legalbites.in/amp/landmark-judgements/case-study-sastri-yagnapurushadji-and-ors-v-muldas-brudardas-vaishya-and-another-943421 Ram112313 (talk) 23:34, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're right about the Nar Narayan diocese, but that's not an excuse to revert the rest. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 03:29, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am proposing remaming this article to Swaminarayan Hinduism. The other docturnal split offs of the Sampraday are legally separate institutions.

The split offs are Separate Institutions: Most operates an independent institution with its own governance, management, and organizational structure. While it adheres to the general tenets of the Swaminarayan faith, its specific practices, rituals, and organizational practices may differ significantly from those of other Swaminarayan factions.

Disconnection from the Centralized Leadership: They is not under the direct control of the central leadership of the Swaminarayan Sampraday, such as the Acharya of the main Swaminarayan temples in places like Vadtal and Ahmedabad. This organizational independence means these are separate from the core Swaminarayan tradition.

Desh Vibhag No Lehk 15:

"Should any person of a sect (belief) other than that of the two acharyas of the line of Dharmadev be pre-eminent for his knowledge of the Shastras or for his practice of Yoga or for asceticism or self-renunciation, or for any other virtue, and if thereby the two ruling acharyas of the line of Dharmadev be lowered in estimation, nevertheless we command all sadhus and brahmcharis and Palas and all our followers, that in order to the salvation of their souls, they always and forever honor the two ruling acharyas of the line of Dharmadev, and obey them in thought, word, and deed. Should one, failing this, seek refuge in another and honor him, his soul shall never have happiness in this world or in the world to come but shall suffer extreme pains."

The discussion regarding the changes should incorporate on key scriptures of the time not retroative re-interpretations where founders became a source of worship themselves, in direct violation of the Lekh authorized by Swaminarayan.

Inigmalover3 (talk) 19:24, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Criticism of Swaminarayan sect has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 April 15 § Criticism of Swaminarayan sect until a consensus is reached. Wareon (talk) 11:08, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a list of BAPS manipulated, edited or ignored scriptures. BAPS should be removed from this page. Sources are easily available. Swamini Vato must be removed from this page because it was made after Swaminarayans death and not a core scripture.

• Manipulation: BAPS publishes Shikshapatri Gems, which removes references to the Acharyas and alters the original focus on their authority.

Kunze, A. (2021). Transnational Swaminarayan Hinduism, mass meditation, and the rise of BAPS [Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago]. Scribd. https://www.scribd.com/document/777501814/Rise-of-Baps . (p. 93)

• Manipulation: BAPS's version includes Gunatitanand Swami's name and image on the cover, despite him never being mentioned in the text itself.

https://www.baps.org/Publications/Books/Vachanamrut-60.aspx

https://www.anirdesh.com/vato/index.php?by=prakaran&prakaran=5&sortby=prakaran&beg=143&increment=1

"Gunatitanand Swami’s name is not mentioned in the Vachanamrut."

• Exclusion: BAPS outright ignores this scripture, even though Indian courts have cited it to affirm the Acharya’s role as both spiritual and administrative leader.

Groups like BAPS..."emphasizes the authority of sadhus over the acharyas and different lineages of gurus downplay or ignore the Lekh as simply an administrative document for temporary application and not as sacred scripture."

Williams, R. B. (2019). Introduction to Swaminarayan Hinduism (p. 208). Cambridge University Press.

• Downplay: BAPS downplays the importance of Satsangi Jeevan—the authorized biography of Swaminarayan—by promoting their edited Swamini Vato as one of their central scriptures over the Satsangi Jivan.

https://www.baps.org/Spiritual-Living/Scriptures/Central-Swaminarayan-Scriptures/Vachanamrut.aspx

https://download.kids.baps.org/Data/Sites/1/Media/DownloadableFile/Satsang%20Vihar%20Part%201%20English.pdf

• Exclusion: BAPS altered the original Jay Sadguru Swami aarti multiple times newest in 2022, creating the Shri Swaminarayan Arti, version to align with their agenda.

Williams, Raymond Brady (2001). Introduction to Swaminarayan Hinduism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 75–76. ISBN 0-521-65279-0.

https://www.baps.org/arti

https://www.swaminarayan.org/announcements/2009/arti.htm

https://www.baps.org/Spiritual-Living/Hindu-Practices/Aarti.aspx

• Exclusion: BAPS ignores the Shri Radhika Krishnashtaka, reciting their own Shri Swaminarayan Ashtakam instead, and omits it from their scripture list to avoid scrutiny of their edits.

https://www.swaminarayan.nu/youth/aarti.shtml

http://scribd.com/document/711555494/KK-Adhiveshan-Booklet-Jan-2024-FINAL-1 Page 10

• Manipulation: Gunatitanand Swami only approved the original five chapters of Swamini Vato. BAPS’s version adds an extra ten "found" chapters that conveniently push a BAPS narrative and theological agenda. These additions, made by untrained disciples after Gunatitanand Swami's death, are not recognized by any other branch of the Swaminarayan Sampradaya.

https://www.bapssatsangexams.org/Downloads/Eng_Prag1/BVAG_Final.pdf Page 70-72

https://www.baps.org/Spiritual-Living/Scriptures/Central-Swaminarayan-Scriptures/Swamini-Vato.aspx

All of the above have proof and documented sources. In the BAPS, many of the original scriptures have been edited, manipulated, or downplayed to fit their sectarian narrative. BAPS should not be included in the Swaminarayan Sampraday. This group should be mentioned as a separate group that broke off because their founder, Dungar Patel believe he was a manifest of god. Their theology needs to be on their page. Even the Swaminarayan Sampradaya text box excludes many of these altered versions, avoiding the attention of readers who might notice these significant changes and omission. Touchedme123 (talk) 22:17, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Touchedme123 I see you are posting on multiple talk pages and using primary sources with your claims - multiple times I have tried to explain reading WP:RS - that will help clarify usage of sources. e.g. the websites references you have listed here are primary sources. Where you have used secondary sources, the claims are WP:SYNTH. e.g. you have said "...altered ... multiple times newest in 2022 ... to align with their agenda" using few primary websites and a source from 2001 (Williams, Raymond Brady (2001)) - how would a source from 2001 support a claim something that happens in 2022? Asteramellus (talk) 12:27, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because the aarti has been changed multiple times. I have those sources that I listed but they are not required only that Swaminarayan Sampraday was established with a certain aarti. An aarti is a part of Hinduism. The Swaminarayan Sampraday sings an aarti produced by Muktananad Swami in 1802. BAPS has created multiple versions after this and it is clear from the lyrics alone. This is not original research. The sources may list different versions and BAPS lists the most details about their changes and deviations.Touchedme123 (talk) 13:42, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BAPS Claims: "The arti prayer sung within the Swaminarayan tradition was composed by Muktanand Swami, one of Bhagwan Swaminarayan’s most senior and learned sadhus, on 5 November 1802. Muktanand Swami composed the arti and performed it personally by waving lighted wicks before Bhagwan Swaminarayan himself, who was only 21 at the time. Muktanand Swami was 44. Below are the words of the Gujarati arti (transcribed from an original manuscript of Muktanand Swami’s works) transliterated and translated into English."

Additional Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20140730114853/https://londonmandir.baps.org/worship/swaminarayan-arti/

This version of the aarti differs from the original composition, as confirmed by multiple sources validated by Williams and others. The aarti linked in the BAPS article intentionally omits the connection to Jay Sadguru Swami, likely to mislead readers. Over time, several changes have been made to the aarti by BAPS from simply reading them NO ORIGINAL RESEARCH, with the most recent revision occurring in 2022. This BAPS source claims to possess an original manuscript of Muktanand Swami’s works, which aligns with evidence of BAPS’s consistent alterations. This version is irreverent to BAPS outright changing it completely to a new arti in 2022.

Touchedme123 (talk) 19:05, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]