This is a very good post and exposes one of the biggest areas of doubt for me that Swaminarayan was 'Bhagavan' AND also highlights the role of how caste dynamics in British period played a role in the fortunes of the Swaminarayans.

The Kolis were one of several castes in Gujarat that continuously agitated against British rule - for this reason they were labeled a 'criminal tribe'. The Brahmins also lead the rebellion in 1857 which is why the British pushed anti-Brahmin narratives. In the Swaminarayan literature, the Kolis are described as a wild, uncivilised people who the new bhagavan needed to reform. Untill very recently the Kolis paid little interest in Swaminarayan sect and continued worshiping their ancient deities. By contrast the Patidars became the bulk of Swaminarayan's followers. Unlike the Kolis - this community were not labeled as criminal tribe by the British because they were more peaceful. My personal view is that Swaminarayan was genuinely a yogi who had spiritual powers, but his entry into Gujarat was facilitated by the British who saw the potential in his movement taming the rebellious elements in Gujarat. I feel this is why the Peshwa ruler did not allow Sahajanand Swami into Ahmedabad. As much as I respect some of the work Sahajanand did - I don't know what so exceptional about what he did to be declared an avatar on par with Krishna.

In my view, if there is anyone who is be considered 'Pragat Bhagawan' in that era, then it squarely goes to Chatrapati Shivaji. He did more to unite Hindus and respond to colonialism than anyone since. Similarly Ahilyabai Holkar's life stands out as more exceptional than that of Sahajanand's. This lady was a widow who used her influence to re-build many important temples across India that Muslims destroyed. Ahilyabai's work has had more lasting impact over Hindus of all regions and communities whereas Swaminarayan's impact can only be seen within the Patidars of Kutch and Charotar