Post 3/6
(Connected with the excerpt pasted in the previous post.)
Some other things:
- With the statement "the Prakrit language is specially the language of the canonical works of the Jains" the author seemed to imply Pkt is one language. Meanwhile, the Jain canon is said to be written in Ardha MagadhI, which is just one of the Pkts. Not even the earliest one. Even its name indicates it's a spin-off of MagadhI, which I'm just going to assume is an earlier Pkt. But hopefully that was an error on the writer's part. (Still, with their whole encroachment/pouncing on Pkt, it makes one wonder whether they're next going to pretend that Pkt is native and independent from "alien" Skt, and that Pkts are the native ur-Shramanic/Jain tongues? Actually I wouldn't put it past them: they certainly sound deluded enough to try. And it would not be *more* absurd than several of their other claims. And would in fact make their absurdity internally-consistent.)
- And oh yeah, even if the Sapta Sindhu is where the Vedam had its geographic wellspring - this was Talageri et al, right? (note it ain't just the AIT-ers that were listening and using absolutely anything that comes out of all the 'analyses' as ammo/incorporating it all for use against Hindus) -
Again: even if the Sapta Sindhu were the originating locus, by the time of the Vedic epic MBh - whose context is further east and which recollects a long history of Vedic society there stretching back - the MBh *still* hasn't heard of Jainism. Yet the same MBh does however know of long lineages of Vedic Hindus in this more eastern (eastern w.r.t. Sapta Sindhu) part of the subcontinent. <= And that just undermines the entire Mere Assertion of "the east was probably Jain when the Sapta Sindhu was conquered/settled by the invading Vedic Oryans". These guys have absolutely nothing to back up their assertions - their probablies and possiblies don't count - but that doesn't stop them from spinning fictions in every possible direction. Which just goes to show they *know* they're making it up as they go along (i.e. fibbing, lying). They're not innocent. They know *exactly* what they're doing. And why they do it. (The Why is in the credo - affirmation of Jain theology of sanatana-ness - at the end of the linked article.)
But Yuck.
Over and over (and over) again, these nouveau religions - which have no actual internal evidence for their own alleged ancientry - resort to *using* [by mangling] pre-existing Hindu sacred literature (and pre-existing Hindu contexts) to "prove their ancientry" by falsely force-reading themselves into said literature, even as they then proceed to paint Hindus/Hindu religion as the villain by inventing morbid fictions (i.e. lies) against these. That is, they both:
1. need Hindus' religion to prop themselves up - thereby implicitly acknowledging that Hindu texts are of verifiably-older traditions than their own (else their own traditions would also be universally recognised as quite so ancient just based on their own testimony, nah?) - and
2. want Hindus/Hindu religion to get denounced as oppressor and evicted as alien, in order to claim for their own late religions both superiority and uniqueness (i.e. nativeness as well as being influential toward Vedic religion, instead of the reality of the direction of travel of influence).
* The language used in the Vedam is externally dated - even were it not accurately - to a time that relatively predates Jainism/Buddhism. Whatever the date assigned (and re-assigned), the *relative* difference is going to be unavoidable (as also the direction of language derivation being Skt to Pkt). I.e. the chronological ordering is always going to be there. And elaborate theologies can't do anything about that. Which is why there's all this frequent desperate backward-projection onto the Vedam and itihAsas by the non-Hindus (the later Indic religions).
(Connected with the excerpt pasted in the previous post.)
Some other things:
- With the statement "the Prakrit language is specially the language of the canonical works of the Jains" the author seemed to imply Pkt is one language. Meanwhile, the Jain canon is said to be written in Ardha MagadhI, which is just one of the Pkts. Not even the earliest one. Even its name indicates it's a spin-off of MagadhI, which I'm just going to assume is an earlier Pkt. But hopefully that was an error on the writer's part. (Still, with their whole encroachment/pouncing on Pkt, it makes one wonder whether they're next going to pretend that Pkt is native and independent from "alien" Skt, and that Pkts are the native ur-Shramanic/Jain tongues? Actually I wouldn't put it past them: they certainly sound deluded enough to try. And it would not be *more* absurd than several of their other claims. And would in fact make their absurdity internally-consistent.)
- And oh yeah, even if the Sapta Sindhu is where the Vedam had its geographic wellspring - this was Talageri et al, right? (note it ain't just the AIT-ers that were listening and using absolutely anything that comes out of all the 'analyses' as ammo/incorporating it all for use against Hindus) -
Again: even if the Sapta Sindhu were the originating locus, by the time of the Vedic epic MBh - whose context is further east and which recollects a long history of Vedic society there stretching back - the MBh *still* hasn't heard of Jainism. Yet the same MBh does however know of long lineages of Vedic Hindus in this more eastern (eastern w.r.t. Sapta Sindhu) part of the subcontinent. <= And that just undermines the entire Mere Assertion of "the east was probably Jain when the Sapta Sindhu was conquered/settled by the invading Vedic Oryans". These guys have absolutely nothing to back up their assertions - their probablies and possiblies don't count - but that doesn't stop them from spinning fictions in every possible direction. Which just goes to show they *know* they're making it up as they go along (i.e. fibbing, lying). They're not innocent. They know *exactly* what they're doing. And why they do it. (The Why is in the credo - affirmation of Jain theology of sanatana-ness - at the end of the linked article.)
But Yuck.
Over and over (and over) again, these nouveau religions - which have no actual internal evidence for their own alleged ancientry - resort to *using* [by mangling] pre-existing Hindu sacred literature (and pre-existing Hindu contexts) to "prove their ancientry" by falsely force-reading themselves into said literature, even as they then proceed to paint Hindus/Hindu religion as the villain by inventing morbid fictions (i.e. lies) against these. That is, they both:
1. need Hindus' religion to prop themselves up - thereby implicitly acknowledging that Hindu texts are of verifiably-older traditions than their own (else their own traditions would also be universally recognised as quite so ancient just based on their own testimony, nah?) - and
2. want Hindus/Hindu religion to get denounced as oppressor and evicted as alien, in order to claim for their own late religions both superiority and uniqueness (i.e. nativeness as well as being influential toward Vedic religion, instead of the reality of the direction of travel of influence).
* The language used in the Vedam is externally dated - even were it not accurately - to a time that relatively predates Jainism/Buddhism. Whatever the date assigned (and re-assigned), the *relative* difference is going to be unavoidable (as also the direction of language derivation being Skt to Pkt). I.e. the chronological ordering is always going to be there. And elaborate theologies can't do anything about that. Which is why there's all this frequent desperate backward-projection onto the Vedam and itihAsas by the non-Hindus (the later Indic religions).