You have expressed a very deep and beautiful feeling of “hereditary protection of Jin‑śāsan” through land, office, and family duty. From a Jain‑dharma point of view, we can look at your statement on two levels:

1. What the Jain śāstras (like Ratnakaraṇḍa Śrāvakācāra and Ādi Purāṇa) actually teach.
2. How a particular community in the Deccan (Matang / Watan‑holders, Weskar, Paricharaka, etc.) may have lived those ideals in history.

These two should not be mixed as if they are the same thing.

---

1. What Ratnakaraṇḍa Śrāvakācāra (Acharya Samantabhadra) is actually teaching

Ratnakaraṇḍa Śrāvakācāra is mainly a manual of conduct for the Jain householder (śrāvaka). It teaches:

• Right faith (samyak‑darśan)
• Right knowledge (samyak‑jñān)
• Right conduct (samyak‑cāritra)
• The 12 vows of a śrāvaka
• The 11 pratimās (stages of an ideal layperson)
• Duty to protect Jain dharma, support sādhus, support temples and icons, live with restraint, and gradually purify karma.

The central message in the early verses (including around verse 28–30) is:

• First establish right faith.
• On that basis, right knowledge and right conduct arise.
• With this triad (darśan–jñān–cāritra), the householder walks on the path to mokṣa and also supports and protects the Jin‑śāsan in society.

It does not explicitly say:

• That a particular caste labeled “low” is secretly Vidyādhara by origin.
• That a specific historical clan in the Deccan, tied to Watan land grants, is being directly addressed.
• That a particular modern archaeological find is the “final proof” of the meaning of that verse.

Those are beautiful interpretations, but they are not directly written in Ratnakaraṇḍa Śrāvakācāra.

You can read a simple introduction to this text here: “Ratnakaraṇḍa Śrāvakācāra – conduct manual for lay Jains”

---

2. Ādi Purāṇa and the Vidyādhara theme

Ādi Purāṇa (by Acharya Jinasena) mainly narrates:

• The life of Ādinātha (Ṛṣabhadeva)
• His sons (Bharata, Bahubali, etc.)
• The journey of the soul toward perfection and mokṣa

In Jain Purāṇic literature, Vidyādharas do appear as:

• Powerful beings with special abilities
• Often linked with protection, administration, and defense, but always under the higher ideal of dharma.

However:

• The text does not clearly name a specific historical “Matang” Watan‑holding clan in the Deccan as descendants of those Vidyādharas.
• The connection you are making (Vidyādhara → Matang → Watan in Akola → present excavation) is a historical and identity‑based interpretation, not a direct statement of the Purāṇa.

From a Jain‑dharma perspective, the spiritual point is:

• Every jīva, whatever its social label, can rise to the highest purity.
• Worldly honors (Vidyādhara lineage, royal office, etc.) are secondary; the real greatness is right faith, right conduct, and protection of dharma without ego.

---

3. Protection of images (mūrtis) and “shield of the faith”

Here your narrative strongly resonates with known Jain practice:

• In many periods of political and social disturbance, Jains have:

- Hidden or buried Tīrthaṅkara images. - Removed mūrtis from temples in advance of attacks. - Preserved them quietly until conditions became safer.

This fits very well with the duty of a śrāvaka described by Acharyas:

• To protect Jin‑bimba (Tīrthaṅkara idols), Jinālaya (temples), and Jin‑śāsan (the entire order of dharma) as far as possible.
• To use whatever worldly position (land, office, wealth, skills) one has in service of dharma, not in pride.

So, if a particular community:

• Held Watan lands as “service grants”,
• Had the hereditary “right of handling” sacred objects,
• And actually hid the mūrtis on their own lands to save them during upheavals,

then spiritually this is a very good example of:

> “Gṛhastha (householders) living as the outer shield of the Jin‑śāsan.”

That spirit is 100% in line with Jain śrāvaka‑dharma.

---

4. About caste, “low status”, and reclaiming identity

From pure Jain siddhānta:

• A jīva’s true identity is not caste, clan or occupation.
• Its real nature is consciousness (caitanya), capable of kevala‑jñāna.
• Social labels like “low caste”, “forest‑dweller”, “servant”, “official” etc. are vyavahār (worldly convention), not niścaya satya (ultimate truth).

So, using Acharya Samantabhadra’s teaching as a reminder:

> “Whatever the world may call you, remember your true nature and duty as a follower of Jin‑śāsan”

– this is fully correct in spirit.

Whether:

• This or that clan is historically Vidyādhara‑origin,
• The Akola excavation is “final proof” of a specific genealogical story,

are questions of history, archaeology, and local tradition, not of basic Jain doctrine.

---

5. A respectful way to hold both

So, a balanced Jain‑dharma view could be:

• Yes – the recovery of clustered Tīrthaṅkara idols from old Watan / service land strongly suggests that:

- Someone in that community took great risks to protect the mūrtis. - They lived the śrāvaka ideal of guarding Jin‑śāsan quietly, even if outwardly seen as simple servants.

• Yes – Acharya Samantabhadra’s teaching can be felt as a spiritual reclaiming of dignity:

- “Do not accept society’s ‘low’ label; your true worth is in right faith, knowledge and conduct, and in loyal service to dharma.”

• But – we should not state as śāstric fact:

- That this exact verse was intended as a coded message to one Deccan caste, - Or that Ādi Purāṇa explicitly names this modern community as Vidyādhara‑Matang founders of that region.

Those remain beautiful community traditions and interpretations, which can inspire pride and seva, but they should be clearly kept separate from what the texts themselves literally say.

---

In short

• Jain śāstras fully support the ideal of hereditary protection of Jin‑śāsan through land, office, and lifelong seva.
• The burial and later recovery of Tīrthaṅkara mūrtis on such lands is a powerful confirmation of that lived dharma, even if history cannot prove every detail of lineage.
• Spiritually, the highest identity is not Vidyādhara or Matang or Watan‑holder, but a śrāvaka devoted to right faith and protection of Jin‑śāsan, exactly as Ratnakaraṇḍa Śrāvakācāra teaches.