You are bringing together three things into one connected picture:

• Jain scriptures (Adi Purāṇa, Ratnakaraṇḍa Śrāvakācāra)
• Local social history (Vatan / hereditary offices, Matang / Mana community)
• Archaeological finds (Tīrthaṅkara idols found on that land)

From a Jain-dharma point of view, we can comment on the scriptural and ethical side quite clearly, but we have to be careful about making 100% certain historical identifications (for example: “today’s Matang community = the exact same Vidyādhara lineage of Adi Purāṇa”).

Let’s separate what is firm in Jain tradition from what is a reasonable, but still interpretive, historical theory:

---

1. What Jain scriptures clearly support

1. Vidyādhara traditions in Jain texts

- Jain granths, including Ādi Purāṇa, do describe Vidyādharas, forest-dwelling groups, and kings/lineages connected with Jain Dharma. - These narratives often show that socially “outside” or “marginal” groups can be spiritually very elevated and close to Jina-dharma.

1. Respect and upliftment of all jīvas, beyond caste

- Jain dharma is very clear that soul (jīva) has no caste. - Low, high, king, forest-dweller, outcaste – all can follow Ratnatraya (samyak darśan, jñān, chāritra) and progress spiritually. - So the idea that people called “low caste” might in fact be spiritually noble or descended from dharmic lineages is fully in harmony with Jain thought.

1. Protection of Jina idols and Jin-śāsan as a high dharma

- To protect images of Tīrthaṅkaras, temples, and scriptures in times of danger is always seen as mahā-puṇya in Jainism. - In many regions of India, when there were invasions or iconoclasm, Jains have: - hidden idols underground, - moved them to forests, caves, or private lands, - later re-installed them when conditions became safe. - So the idea that a community quietly buried and protected idols for centuries is completely consistent with Jain practice and history.

1. Shravakācāra as guidance for householders, including marginalized groups

- Ācārya Samantabhadra’s Ratnakaraṇḍa Śrāvakācāra is a classic text giving code of conduct for śrāvaks (lay Jains). - It applies to all householders who accept Jain dharma, regardless of caste or social label. - Using it as an “identity-reclaiming” text (i.e., “we are dharmic people, not low or polluted”) is very much in line with the spirit of Jain dharma.

---

2. What is historical interpretation (not scripturally fixed)

You are arguing something like this:

• Ādi Purāṇa + Ratnakaraṇḍa Śrāvakācāra → show an ancient Vidyādhara–Matang lineage linked to Jain dharma.
• Over time, these people moved to the Deccan, took up hereditary offices (Watan) like guardians/custodians.
• Because of that role, they were in the best position to hide and protect Jain idols on their lands.
• The idols found on Matang-held land today are the archaeological “proof” of that continuous role and lineage.

From the standpoint of pure Jain dharma, we can say:

• It is fully dharmic and entirely believable that:

- A local community, even if later called “low caste,” - could have been trusted guardians of Jain idols, - and may have actively preserved Jin-śāsan for centuries.

Where we must be cautious is the claim:

> “This is 100% proof that present Matang = ancient Vidyādhara Matang of Ādi Purāṇa.”

Jain scriptures themselves:

• Do not give a continuous caste-wise genealogical record down to today’s regional communities.
• Present Vidyādharas and clans in a mixture of itihāsa, purāṇic narrative, and spiritual teaching.

So:

• As JainGPT, I can affirm that your interpretation is:

- consistent with Jain values, - possible and reasonable as a historical reading, - and honors the community’s role in protecting idols, which is very praiseworthy from Jain eyes.

• But I cannot declare it as absolutely proven history in the strict academic sense, because Jain granths are spiritual-historical texts, not continuous caste registers.

---

3. Is it acceptable from a Jain-dharma perspective?

Yes, in these ways:

1. Ethically and spiritually

- Saying that a community who safeguarded Tīrthaṅkara idols are true protectors of Jin-śāsan is completely correct. - Honoring them as khaṇḍānī (clan-based) custodians of Jain dharma aligns with Jain ideals of gratitude and respect.

1. Scripturally in spirit

- Using Ādi Purāṇa and Śrāvakācāra to lift the dignity of a socially marginalized group and show their deep dharmic roots is in harmony with Jain compassion and equality of souls.

1. Historically as a hypothesis

- Linking: - Watan land, - hereditary offices, - Matang community, - and buried Jain idols into one narrative is a coherent and serious hypothesis. - It can certainly be discussed by historians as a strong possibility, especially when supported by: - Gazetteers, - land records, - inscriptional or archaeological studies.

Where we must remain humble is in words like “100% proved” or “this must be the exact ancient Vidyādhara clan of Ādi Purāṇa.” Jain dharma always encourages truthfulness (satya) and non-absolute claims (anekāntavāda). So:

• “This is a highly meaningful, Jain-consistent interpretation, strongly supported by local evidence” – yes.
• “This is the only possible reading, absolutely proved in all details for all historians” – we should avoid saying that in absolute terms.

---

4. About your core point: “If current Matang people were not ancient Vidyādhara Matang, why would they protect the idols?”

From a Jain view:

• Protection of idols can be done by:

- direct descendants of old dharmic lineages, - OR by people who adopted Jain faith or felt reverence for the Jinas, - OR by local guardians who were entrusted with this duty by Jain communities.

So:

• Their long, faithful protection of Jain idols is strong moral and cultural evidence of a deep connection with Jain dharma.
• This very act is far more important spiritually than whether historians agree on every detail of lineage names.
• Even if historians remain cautious in using the word “Vidyādhara,” Jain dharma would still see such protectors as extraordinarily meritorious śrāvaks or friends of Jin-śāsan.

---

Summary

• Your synthesis is deeply compatible with Jain scripture and ethics.
• It beautifully honors a community that has likely protected Jina idols for centuries, which Jain dharma views as a very high puṇya.
• Identifying them exactly and absolutely with the Vidyādhara Matang lineage of Ādi Purāṇa is a scholarly interpretation, not something we can call 100% proved purely from Jain scriptures.
• From the standpoint of Jain dharma, however, their role as guardians of Jin-śāsan is fully valid, highly respectable, and spiritually exalted, regardless of how modern historians label the caste or lineage.