Among these scriptures, the Vedas are apaurusheya. This means Now, he is showing the uniqueness of each. In which scripture, what is its uniqueness, what is its specialty? The Vedas are apaurusheya; no human is their author. Therefore, they are authoritative in all aspects. In them, nothing is unauthoritative. If the author is a human, then there is a possibility of such defects. Which defects? Bhrama (delusion), pramada (negligence), vipralipsa (desire to deceive), And karana-apatava. There is a possibility of these four defects. He might experience delusion sometimes. Even if it is a great person like Naradji, he also experienced delusion sometimes. That does not happen to God. And as for the Vedas, they have no author at all; they are eternal, so that question does not even arise. So, there is a big difference between them. Between the Vedas and other scriptures, there is a vast difference. There is no doubt about it. Bhrama, vipralipsa, meaning one's own fame or wanting to promote one's own importance. Such a thing can happen if it is a human. But the Vedas have no such thing; they have no author. And karana... Yes? Pramada. Pramada. Out of negligence, wanting to say one thing and saying another. Wanting to do one thing and... That is not the case in them. And karana-apatava. Many times, we have everything, but our intellect cannot reach it. So, that is called karana-apatava. No mastery. Karana, meaning the instrument to comprehend scriptures, is intellect. So, sometimes there is a deficiency in intellect, our intellect does not reach there. That happens to humans, it even happens to sages. Even for sages, not all things are considered authoritative. So, in this scripture, the Vedas, there is no doubt for anyone. Vedas mostly mean the Upanishads. No one has a doubt in the Upanishads. The Upanishads mostly give the decision on moksha and the decision on the truth. Purva-Mimamsa does not give that much of a decision. The Vedas are apaurusheya, meaning no human has made them, or just like that. Not even God. God is said to have made the Gita. The speaker of the Gita is said to be God, but even the speaker of the Vedas is not God. God is their manager; He manages them every time. When creation happens, He tells Brahma. When God says it, what is the difference? It is preserved, it is preserved as it is, no change happens in it. If sages say it, changes happen. Therefore, differences of opinion arose in all the Smritis. If that sage says this, then this sage says that. All the Smritis are what the sages, by performing penance and increasing their sensory power, realized as the hymns of the Vedas. So, it is the source of the Vedas. They all came from the Vedas, but still, a difference arose. Because the intellects of sages are also different. Someone's mastery is in one subject, someone's mastery is in another subject, someone's mastery is in a third subject. One person cannot be considered to have mastery in all subjects. So, even sages... but if it is God, then no change happens. Therefore, God is the speaker of the Vedas, not the creator. No one has composed them. He is the speaker. Every time a new creation happens, He 'yathapurvam dhata akalpayat' (the Creator created as before). Taking the Vedas as they were before, He gives them to Brahma, saying, 'Go, you have to do according to this.' Therefore, all creations happen the same way. The map of the Vedas is the same, so all buildings turn out the same. And God is their speaker, not the composer. It is in the form of anupurvi, meaning? Yes? The Vedas are in the form of anupurvi, meaning? Anupurvi means, for example, arranging the same words in a different order. The Vedas are considered eternal; in what way are they considered eternal? The letters of the Vedas, the alphabet, cannot be eternal because when creation dissolves, everything is destroyed. So, God keeps the same anupurvi. Anupurvi means, for example, the Swaminarayan mantra mantra 1) A repeated word or phrase. 2) A sacred verbal phrase repeated in prayer, or meditation, such as ‘Swãminãrãyan’. Wicked people use mantras to cast evil curses. Tap to open in glossary → so which letters come in the Swaminarayan mantra mantra 1) A repeated word or phrase. 2) A sacred verbal phrase repeated in prayer, or meditation, such as ‘Swãminãrãyan’. Wicked people use mantras to cast evil curses. Tap to open in glossary → Only those letters come which are from the 52 alphabets, no others. But Swaminarayan Bhagwan arranged the anupurvi of those letters: first 'Swa', then 'mi', then 'Narayan'. He arranged that anupurvi. That anupurvi is eternal. No one can change the order, cannot move 'mi' from here to there, cannot make a short vowel long, or a long vowel short, like that. That is called anupurvi, and that anupurvi is preserved by God. Such anupurvi, otherwise these poems or others, their specialty is anupurvi. And no one can arrange such anupurvi. Swaminarayan Bhagwan arranged this mantra mantra 1) A repeated word or phrase. 2) A sacred verbal phrase repeated in prayer, or meditation, such as ‘Swãminãrãyan’. Wicked people use mantras to cast evil curses. Tap to open in glossary → Swaminarayan; no one else can arrange such a thing. No one else can arrange the anupurvi. If it is a human, then that much anupurvi... so this is eternal, God's anupurvi, its anupurvi is eternal. The letters are not eternal. It is a bit deep, but it is understandable to everyone. But in that lies its greatness. Brahmanand Swami composes a kirtan kirtan Divine songs about Bhagvãn and His charitras, usually sung to the accompaniment of musical instruments. Tap to open in glossary → and it is modern, Premanand Swami composes a kirtan kirtan Divine songs about Bhagvãn and His charitras, usually sung to the accompaniment of musical instruments. Tap to open in glossary → They move this letter from there to here, then if it doesn't fit there, they remove it and put another letter. All those who have arranged, they have all arranged by taking from the alphabet. Premanand Swami and Brahmanand Swami have also arranged by taking from the alphabet. And the modern rhymers also arrange from the alphabet. Still, are they all the same? So, they are not all the same. Maharaj spoke the Vachanamrut, and others use even better philosophical statements. But this anupurvi is said to be arranged by Shreeji Maharaj; that is called anupurvi. In today's language, it is called composing. That is called anupurvi. Order. Order, the order of letters. And who has arranged it? In that, whose order is considered the best of the best? So, the best of the best, as long as its arranger is a human, then there is a possibility of deficiency in it. If it is God, there is no possibility of deficiency. Even more, even if God made them, sometimes they get worn out, such letters and all get worn out, but God has arranged the eternal anupurvi. Say it is by God's resolve or whatever you say. God is eternal and the Vedas are also eternal. So, God has arranged the anupurvi, and the anupurvi is important. Brahmanand Swami's kirtan kirtan Divine songs about Bhagvãn and His charitras, usually sung to the accompaniment of musical instruments. Tap to open in glossary → Brahmanand Swami must have realized that anupurvi. God... Premanand Swami must have composed the kirtan kirtan Divine songs about Bhagvãn and His charitras, usually sung to the accompaniment of musical instruments. Tap to open in glossary → So, Premanand Swami, when he sat sat 1) True. Real. 2) Permanent, imperishable and unchanging. Is unbound by the past, the present, and the future. Tap to open in glossary → he did not take words from a dictionary or a thesaurus. He received that anupurvi from God, as he was contemplating and God revealed Himself to him. Sage Vishwamitra, Sage Vishwamitra is the... of the Gayatri mantra mantra 1) A repeated word or phrase. 2) A sacred verbal phrase repeated in prayer, or meditation, such as ‘Swãminãrãyan’. Wicked people use mantras to cast evil curses. Tap to open in glossary → what is it called? Presiding deity? Yes? Presiding? No. Its creator, the one who realized it. The Gayatri mantra mantra 1) A repeated word or phrase. 2) A sacred verbal phrase repeated in prayer, or meditation, such as ‘Swãminãrãyan’. Wicked people use mantras to cast evil curses. Tap to open in glossary → From the Vedas, then the sages tune in their receivers. And realize from it. Sages are all realizers, not creators. The Vedas are very vast, so whatever truth, whatever good fact they realized, the sages wrote it down. What Manu Manu Manu is responsible for overseeing the first stages of all life forms in the new cycle of creation and he lives for the entire cycle. Manu and his wife become the first parents for each cycle (Adam and Eve). In one day of Brahmã, fourteen Manus reign and die. The duration of the reign of one Manu is 306,720,000 human years, and is called a manvantar. Fourteen Manus are created and destroyed during one day of Brahmã. Tap to open in glossary → What Parashar Bhagwan wrote was called Parashar Smriti, but he must have realized it. Similarly, Premanand Swami, when he was contemplating on Maharaj, then devotion would suddenly well up in him and he would realize. How Maharaj's eyes are, how Maharaj's walk is, how Maharaj's gestures are, and what is expressed in them, he realized that, so he directly noted down the realization; he did not have to arrange words. 'If this doesn't work, I'll put another.' Like we show someone to proofread, 'If this doesn't work, I'll put another.' It is not like that. Therefore, no one has the right to change even a single letter in it. Then he is said to have damaged the realization. And he is said to have damaged its anupurvi. Therefore, all those kirtans of the Nand saints are considered equal to the Vedas. So, no change should be made in them, actually. Honestly, if there is faith and belief, then no change should be made. If it didn't fit oneself, then moving this word here and that word there, that should not be done. If it does not fit oneself, then one has to find how to make it fit. We should not make it fit, we should fit ourselves to it. Then that is called devotion towards it. And that is considered correct. So, the Vedas, no one can make them fit, like 'this doesn't fit well, so this is not correct'. Shankaracharyaji Maharaj did a bit of that. He did not make any change in the anupurvi, but made it secondary and primary. 'This shruti shruti That which is revealed and heard. Philosophical and spiritual wisdom – as revealed to the rushis after strict tap and deep dhyãn. The four Veds are Shruti shãstras. Tap to open in glossary → shruti shruti That which is revealed and heard. Philosophical and spiritual wisdom – as revealed to the rushis after strict tap and deep dhyãn. The four Veds are Shruti shãstras. Tap to open in glossary → He said so in his philosophy. Ramanujacharya said, 'Who has the right to make this secondary and this primary in the Vedas?' Even Narayan has not done it, so who are you? Narayan Himself has not done it. He 'yathapurvam dhata akalpayat'. The way the anupurvi is arranged, it is the same in the second creation, the same in the third creation. Even Narayan cannot make changes in it, like 'this is primary and this is secondary', so who are you? So, we have to fit into the Vedas, we should not fit the Vedas according to our mind. We have to fit into the sentences of the Vachanamrut; we should not twist and turn the Vachanamrut to make it fit. For a follower of Swaminarayan, that is not proper. We have to fit into Maharaj's work and we have to fully accept Maharaj's work. 'When Maharaj was there, He did not know well,' or 'when Maharaj was there, they could not do all that and Maharaj was confused, and He passed away confused, and now we are doing it,' they are called over-wise. Maharaj has written a whole Vachanamrut on 'akhtardaya' (experimentally wise). Experimentally wise. Those who experiment are wise, meaning they experiment. 'Maharaj wanted to do this, but look how we managed to do it.' 'But Maharaj could not do it,' even if they are Maharaj's followers, many say so. So, they are called experimentally wise. To make any change in Maharaj's beliefs, Maharaj's actions, and what Maharaj has done, is called experimental wisdom. To make changes in the Vedas is called experimental wisdom. To meddle in the kirtans of the Nand saints is experimental wisdom. To meddle in Swami's talks is also called experimental wisdom. He has realized it and he has written it. He did not sit down to compose it for you. Whatever realization of Maharaj he had, he wrote it down. He spoke it, and then those who were sitting in front to listen wrote it down. So, if we meddle in it, then that is our experimental wisdom. That should not be done. We have to think about what he has said, how it fits us. Because they were greater than us. And how it fits, we have to think like that. Do we have to fit into it, or do we have to fit it into us? Even if our mind is a bit distracted, we have to fit into it; we have to do that. So, that is called anupurvi. Anupurvi is of two types. One is the anupurvi made by one's own intellect and wisdom, and another is what realized souls have realized. So, Maharaj... these Nand saints were the realizers of Maharaj. There is no question about Maharaj. The Vachanamrut was written by Maharaj Himself, so it is composed by Maharaj, so it is anupurvi. Moving one word from here to there, and from there to here, that should not be done. Just like that. No change. It should be left as it is. How to explain it properly? Without devaluing it. Many, when they explain, they devalue it, saying, 'He did not know this, so we are doing it, this is correct.' So, that is devaluing Nishkulanand Swami Nishkulanand Swami Disciple of Sahajanand Swami (Swaminarayan Bhagwan) and author of the Bhaktachintamani, as stated in the scripture's own closing colophon at the end of every chapter. Tap to open in glossary → If we meddle in it and do something new, we do not increase its glory, and we do not increase its brand, and if we make such an meaning somewhere with our intellectual wisdom and experimental wisdom, then that is devaluing it. If we make changes in Nishkulanand Kavya, like 'no, no, here it should be like this and here like this', in Muktanand Kavya, in Swami's kirtan kirtan Divine songs about Bhagvãn and His charitras, usually sung to the accompaniment of musical instruments. Tap to open in glossary → Premanand Swami, or if we make changes in Brahmanand Swami's kirtan kirtan Divine songs about Bhagvãn and His charitras, usually sung to the accompaniment of musical instruments. Tap to open in glossary → That is why, in Maharaj's dhun dhun Form of jap often to the accompaniment of musical instruments. Tap to open in glossary → dhun dhun Form of jap often to the accompaniment of musical instruments. Tap to open in glossary → Yes, Swami would not allow any deviation in the dhun dhun Form of jap often to the accompaniment of musical instruments. Tap to open in glossary → Someone would say 'Swami'. Once, our devotee, Akshar Akshar 1) Imperishable. In his personal form, Akshar serves Bhagvãn in Akshardhãm, and takes birth on earth as His ideal bhakta (sat-purush). Both forms are human in appearance. In his impersonal form, Akshar is the dhãm of Bhagvãn called Akshardhãm. In his all- pervading anvay form, Akshar is called Chidãkãsh. Tap to open in glossary → like those who sing in a dragging tone. [laughs] AI translation of the Gujarati transcript above, produced in the same pass that transcribed the audio, one English segment per Gujarati segment. Devotional and technical terms with no precise English equivalent (kirtan, satsang, vasana, samskara, and similar) are kept as their plain transliteration rather than force-translated. Not human-proofread., AI-translated, unverified · Source details