Meritocracy and Quotas

[tks]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

edited .

Some one who is Satvic or whatever dont care to signify anything to anyone .. my question is why do you care what other think? No one cares if you claim you are a satvic person. As far as the world it is following the natural laws and balances itself. It does not need people to balance it

I have edited mine too

 

[sravna]

That is a meaningless and actually an offensive response ..Most people do not want to rape anyone and do not want their family members to be victim of a crime. You should be ashamed for saying something like this here. If you have any decency you will edit your post.

Some one who is Satvic or whatever dont care to signify anything to anyone .. my question is why do you care what other think? No one cares if you claim you are a satvic person. As far as the world it is following the natural laws and balances itself. It does not need people to balance it

Dear Shri TKS,

I am sorry, that was not meant to be offensive . I have edited the post.

 

[ShivKC]

I understand sir. Its been ages since i went losing my religion, met all kinds of arguments, all kinds of people all along, used to it by now, so well...life goes on.
R.E.M.-Losing My Religion(With Lyrics) *in the description box* - YouTube

Sangom sir, pls dont get misguided with this un-related lyrics.

peter bucks uses this phrase, just like how southerners (U.S) use it as an expression meaning, losing one's temper or civility / being at the end of one's rope / unrequited love.

Loosing civility =>> loosing my religion

This song is nothing related to religion..

 

[sangom]

Sangom sir, pls dont get misguided with this un-related lyrics.

peter bucks uses this phrase, just like how southerners (U.S) use it as an expression meaning, losing one's temper or civility / being at the end of one's rope / unrequited love.

Loosing civility =>> loosing my religion

This song is nothing related to religion..

Shri ShivKC, Palindrome,

Usually I do not try to listen to such 'exotic' music because it is difficult for me to decipher whatever the words are and what actually they mean. So, no need to worry that I will hear it and come to some wrong conclusion.

Palindrome probably means that many of her notions about "her religion" which I feel relates to how she grew up viewing hinduism. For any person who has no bias for or against religion, the more he/she studies religion, the more it will become clear that there is nothing spiritual or superhuman in it and that all religions are man-made artifices to attract and keep the masses under the complete sway of the "priesthood" which usually controls religion. When that stage is reached one tends to become agnostic and non-religious.

 

[rishikesan]

Dear Mr Praveen, The above write-ups by 2 or 3 Sr members speak subjective ,than objective. This does not give a healthy opening for new entrants. I would humbly request you to briefly formulate the matters primarily to be discussed in this Forum, & a time frame to be fixed by you during the period of contributions by all members , both Senior & new.
You will agree that the purpose with which you had started this wonderful forum should endeavour to see that we reach a solution to the T.Brahmins , without much loss of time. Kindly at least discuss with the most Sr Veterans & wildly publisize for objective / responsible contribution for reaching the GOALS.

Sincerely,
Rishikesan/ A.Srinivasan
Ph (044) 24806871

 

[auh]

Dear Mr Praveen, The above write-ups by 2 or 3 Sr members speak subjective ,than objective. This does not give a healthy opening for new entrants. I would humbly request you to briefly formulate the matters primarily to be discussed in this Forum, & a time frame to be fixed by you during the period of contributions by all members , both Senior & new.
You will agree that the purpose with which you had started this wonderful forum should endeavour to see that we reach a solution to the T.Brahmins , without much loss of time. Kindly at least discuss with the most Sr Veterans & wildly publisize for objective / responsible contribution for reaching the GOALS.

Sincerely,
Rishikesan/ A.Srinivasan
Ph (044) 24806871

Hello Sir,

This is just a discussion board, a platform for exchanging views under broad guidelines, and should not be confused with a society meeting or a trust meet where the purpose is made out in legal terms and all the members agree to it.

The "Sr.Veterans" means that they have amassed enough points/posts to be called a veteran in the cyber world, and need not indicate a veteran by age, always.

Just for your information, and if you already know this, please ignore my ramblings.

Regards,

 

[palindrome]

Palindrome probably means that many of her notions about "her religion" which I feel relates to how she grew up viewing hinduism. For any person who has no bias for or against religion, the more he/she studies religion, the more it will become clear that there is nothing spiritual or superhuman in it and that all religions are man-made artifices to attract and keep the masses under the complete sway of the "priesthood" which usually controls religion. When that stage is reached one tends to become agnostic and non-religious.

Perfectly put sir. The same applies to christianity too. An artificial edifice loaded with plenty of humbug. So also all other religions of the world.

I grew up in a hindu home and what i relate to is what i express. But Simon (aka ShivKC), did not grow up in a hindu home. As a Christian having been very mendacious in the past, what is he doing here, i wonder. Perhaps he is the fox that comes along when monkeys fight. To all newcomers - go thru this post. Anyways, sangom sir, I request you to ignore all of his posts when made in context to my postings.

 

[palindrome]

Some one who is Satvic or whatever dont care to signify anything to anyone .. my question is why do you care what other think? No one cares if you claim you are a satvic person. As far as the world it is following the natural laws and balances itself. It does not need people to balance it

I have edited mine too

Yes, no one cares. But the attitude well defines the person stating it. If a person claims he has brahmin genes, satvik genes, etc, that's fine as long as he does not desperately seek scientific validation for his claims. But when he pulls out established research like that of Boyd and fraudulently atrributes his own opinions to Boyd, what does it mean? I'd say such folks are deserving of the public distrust and dislike of their lot.

 

[renuka]

For any person who has no bias for or against religion, the more he/she studies religion, the more it will become clear that there is nothing spiritual or superhuman in it and that all religions are man-made artifices to attract and keep the masses under the complete sway of the "priesthood" which usually controls religion. When that stage is reached one tends to become agnostic and non-religious.

Dear Sangom Ji,

I would like to add my comments here too....yes in a way a agree but with just some points to differ..when one reads more and more even if one makes an attempt to read religious text in Sanskrit..one just feels that there is actually nothing spiritual or superhuman as you correctly said and religions are man made to keep the masses under sway as I previously said that "God is Marijuana for most people"

It is hard to pinpoint who actually controls "religion" in the Hindu atmosphere cos besides the priest even the trader/bussiness man is kept happy..there seems to be a symbiotic relationship between the 1st 3 Varnas to keep each other happy for their general well beings and the 4th Varna and the newly coined 5th Varna get the F's!

I have no idea why uplifting the masses is never really stressed upon..everything is left to the fatalistic Law of Karma but when it comes to wealth and money alone everyone seems to want to have a hand in it..that time everyone feels they are entitled to prosperity and the Law of Karma goes of the door.

Yes...I do see hypocrisy....and one does not become religious after getting this feeling but faith in God need not decline..cos one just starts to wonder may be there are still much more to add to the 'I do not know" list.

These days only for documentation purposes I write I am a Hindu but on a personal basis when anyone asks me my religion all I reply is none.

I think what a human really needs is just Love All Serve All and nothing more.

 

[palindrome]

I have no idea why uplifting the masses is never really stressed upon..everything is left to the fatalistic Law of Karma but when it comes to wealth and money alone everyone seems to want to have a hand in it..that time everyone feels they are entitled to prosperity and the Law of Karma goes of the door.

Once i was watching a TV interview of Lee Kuan Yew. He spoke on Indians and Karma. He seemed to think India and Indians cannot achieve any real progress as long as they are stuck to such an ideology.

Incidentally, Buddhism defines karma a lot more elaborately than sanskrit 'hindu' texts (after all karma as a concept was borrowed from shramana belief systems into 'hinduism). But in Buddhism, the doer is aksed to work out his karma, that is, he is asked to reach out to the troubled. Hindus unfortunately, have taken it to be fatalistic -- they won't look at an accident victim, and wud rather leave him to die on the streets, claiming it is his own karma.

 

[zebra16]

Dear Sangom Ji,


It is hard to pinpoint who actually controls "religion" in the Hindu atmosphere cos besides the priest even the trader/bussiness man is kept happy

It is not that hard to pinpoint who actually controls religion, because nobody controls religion. So a point cannot be placed much less a pin point It has always been quite voluntary at least once one has reached the adolescence. Have you heard of anybody being thrown out of the house for not conforming to their religious practices such as reciting stotrams or for refusing to go to a mosque or to attend the church prayers etc.?

In some sense religion is like money. Everybody needs it at least to a minimum extent. But when they (the masses) run short of it they start bad mouthing the person who seem to have a little bit more of it. Kings, Aristocrats, Wealthy nobles etc. in case of money and Pope, maTadhipatis, priests etc. in respect of religion.

And arguers both for and against religion will use one side of the argument that suits them. In this site you will find "reformers" bemoaning the foolishness of ignorant masses for following this Baba and that Swamiji and the same masses miraculously become all knowing when the follow select social reformers or elect their representatives to form the government.

 

[Vaagmi]

Dear Vaagmi Ji,

You are one of the most predictable persons I have ever "known"!LOL

In fact I was waiting for this question from you..you have used Sai Baba all of sudden in this debate when the OP is not even about Sai Baba and the whole discussion is about the Sattva Gene theory proposed by you which you somehow have lost memory about.

Ok now my answer to you..You remember the story you said about the train encounter you had with the short stature man who was intoxicated with alcohol who challenged you for a "fight"?

Before that I chose to use the word Short Stature which sounds more polite than the original word "Dwarf" used in your post.
So kindly excuse the substitution of words here.

Ok now back to the story..I learnt from you that it is not worth it actually getting into a brawl with a person who is just hoping for some '"fight" to prove some point or in this case to prove some "unproven" theory.

So in this case Vaagmi Ji..too bad yaar....you are the "short stature" man here intoxicated with a "theory" that has no basis.

At least that guy you met in the train was only intoxicated with alcohol which when metabolized by the liver ceases to have an effect anymore.

BTW if you want to know about Sai Baba kindly visit Sai Thread and you will have all your answers.

Oh yeah. Thank you very much for reminding me about that. I should not argue with drunk dwarfs. Thank you. We will argue about this another day another place and I hope to see you there as a grown up.

 

[C RAVI]

I do not want to argue with you on how the world balances itself but my point is that if the world is bereft of people with noble qualities sooner or later it will lead to the destruction of the world

Exactly!!!! That's why Legal systems through out the world are strongly in place with a motive of establishing a peaceful and healthy society.

Since humans are in fact another kind of dangerous animals, having the capabilities to over rule law with their crookedness, greediness, jealousy, hatred etc..etc. with their powerful brain, humans are expected by their religious doctrines to develop Sattvik tendencies for their own betterment and the betterment of the society.

 

[Vaagmi]

Is Boyd one of them? Many people agree with you, and therefore you are on solid grounds, nice (il)logic.

If I say Dr. Umesh Gupta, Dr.Kasturi Rengan and Dr. Tamil Selvi are in agreement with me, is it going to make any difference to you? You are beholden to white supremacy, living in an alien culture, completely sold on the superiority of it. So no wonder what makes excellent logic here makes little logic for you. When Boyd takes up a sufficiently large TB population sample size to repeat his findings you will believe it. But that will not happen because he may not be interested in it. Now a humble suggestion. Why don't you take up this project and prove my projection/hypothesis wrong? I will not ask you whether you have the gall to do that because that language is an exclusive privilege of your friend.

Of course you would word it that way, as sympathetic to your POV as possible. But the fact is, you are twisting Boyd out of shape and that is unconscionable to put it mildly.

Where is the twist. Please point it out precisely taking Boyd's findings. Chapter and verse please (you are familiar with this language, I am sure)

You claim a Brahmin cultural gene that embodies such things as vegetarianism, intelligence, honesty, etc. To make such a claim you have to do two things, (i) Brahmins in general do have these characteristics, and (ii) isolate the gene sequence that is exclusive to Brahmins and one that switches on these characteristics. This is what Boyd did, he showed lactose tolerance among a homogeneous population of cattle herders, and he isolated the gene sequence that was responsible for it.In the absence of such painstaking research any claim of Brahmin cultural gene being responsible for asserted characteristics such as natural inclination to vegetarianism, honesty, intelligence, but not established through verifiable data, is at best supremacist.......

A quick 'on the back of an envelope' calculation shows that such a study will cost about INR 20 to 25 lakhs at today's cost of input and resources. Are you ready to finance this project. If you are ready I can engage a team to do this.

and at worst Nazi-like. Yea, that is science as much as astrology is science.

Nazi-like? LOL. You said astrology. What is it? Afrikaans for sanitary-napkin?

 

[zebra16]

Dear Narayan, if you have so much anger and conviction that what we are saying is all baloney, why do you always make comments like these only from the sidelines and never get into serious discussion? Such speculative mocking does't become you my friend....

Dear Sri Nara,

It is your own concoction that what I believe is what you are saying is "all baloney". My comments have their own validity even if you think you are negating it. Let me take up just the issue of IC/IR marriages.

It is my opinion that the main opposition to IC/IR marriages is the clash or competition between parental love and love for the spouse. When I pointed this out to you in an earlier post you just said threw it out of hand saying that it is a "zero sum" game whatever you meant by it.

You yourselves with a total disbelief in the "empty rituals" had said in this very forum that you did antyeshti for one of your parents for the mental satisfaction of the surviving one. If this is not one of the best examples of expressing love to the parents there would not be many others easy to find.

There was no notion of religious purity or impurity in your thoughts or action when you did those religious functions. Then why do you go about drumming up the religious purity in every alternate post of yours?

You are advising the parents to have a chat with their off-springs with regard to IC/IR marriages should they have some reservations.

Is it beneath your dignity to offer such an advice even to the prospective run-away brides and grooms to have a chat with their parents before enacting their elopement plans to see if a via media is possible? For all practical purposes it may be the last time they may be seeing the other person alive. I am yet to come across even one post from you on this line.

Ever since girls and women have been bestowed with beauty and looks and men acquired valour and wealth, marriage has been institutionalized as a ladder to climb up the social ladder. Failure to look at this angle would simply be foolishness. And I do not mean "ritual purity" by ladder of social status.

Regards

 

[zebra16]

Dear Sangom Ji,


I have no idea why uplifting the masses is never really stressed upon..

I do not know why you were looking for it. None of the religions ever said anything about "others" in their religious texts. In fact the active content of all religious texts has been to give up on all persons including blood relations and to consider the Almighty as the *only* relation.

This idea has been epitomized in all languages with words to the english equivalent of "You came alone and You would depart alone" from this world. Strangely none of the religious texts even considered the birth of twins, or triplets or quadruplets though such births would surely have occurred when these texts were composed or "revealed" or whatever.

 

[tks]

Yes, no one cares. But the attitude well defines the person stating it. If a person claims he has brahmin genes, satvik genes, etc, that's fine as long as he does not desperately seek scientific validation for his claims. But when he pulls out established research like that of Boyd and fraudulently atrributes his own opinions to Boyd, what does it mean? I'd say such folks are deserving of the public distrust and dislike of their lot.

Highlighted part is what I want to respond to.

Why again interpret anyone putting forward a hypothesis in such a negative light?

Today certain theories and hypothesis in physics (e.g., parallel universes and implications of quantum mechanics) reads like science fiction. One can disagree with an interpretation or a generalization of a concept or even established law. But we dont have to dislike the person or say 'they deserve distrust' ..

There is a big difference between disagreeing with a concept or an idea and disliking/distrusting the people who are stating those ideas.

Suppose I say that a child learns certain traits from the environment the child is raised in. There will be no question that most reasonable people will agree based on available data that this is likely to be true. It is also possible that certain way of approaching life to situations can be handed down through many generations (though exceptions are always possible).

If someone takes the above empirical information and puts forward an idea of a mechanism of why this happens - so what? Why attach a negative intent to the idea?

Even if such a hypothesis is true what does one do with that information? World cannot operate on one Guna trait alone. And even in B.Gita it is properly taught that focus on any Guna including Satvic guna detracts one from ultimate goal.


Cant we disagree with a concept without being disagreeable with the person...or question their motives?

 

[C RAVI]

Highlighted part is what I want to respond to.

Why again interpret anyone putting forward a hypothesis in such a negative light?

Today certain theories and hypothesis in physics (e.g., parallel universes and implications of quantum mechanics) reads like science fiction. One can disagree with an interpretation or a generalization of a concept or even established law. But we dont have to dislike the person or say 'they deserve distrust' ..

There is a big difference between disagreeing with a concept or an idea and disliking/distrusting the people who are stating those ideas.

Suppose I say that a child learns certain traits from the environment the child is raised in. There will be no question that most reasonable people will agree based on available data that this is likely to be true. It is also possible that certain way of approaching life to situations can be handed down through many generations (though exceptions are always possible).

If someone takes the above empirical information and puts forward an idea of a mechanism of why this happens - so what? Why attach a negative intent to the idea?

Even if such a hypothesis is true what does one do with that information? World cannot operate on one Guna trait alone. And even in B.Gita it is properly taught that focus on any Guna including Satvic guna detracts one from ultimate goal.


Cant we disagree with a concept without being disagreeable with the person...or question their motives?

Very well said, Sir!

 

[palindrome]

Highlighted part is what I want to respond to.

Why again interpret anyone putting forward a hypothesis in such a negative light?

Today certain theories and hypothesis in physics (e.g., parallel universes and implications of quantum mechanics) reads like science fiction. One can disagree with an interpretation or a generalization of a concept or even established law. But we dont have to dislike the person or say 'they deserve distrust' ..

There is a big difference between disagreeing with a concept or an idea and disliking/distrusting the people who are stating those ideas.

Suppose I say that a child learns certain traits from the environment the child is raised in. There will be no question that most reasonable people will agree based on available data that this is likely to be true. It is also possible that certain way of approaching life to situations can be handed down through many generations (though exceptions are always possible).

If someone takes the above empirical information and puts forward an idea of a mechanism of why this happens - so what? Why attach a negative intent to the idea?

Even if such a hypothesis is true what does one do with that information? World cannot operate on one Guna trait alone. And even in B.Gita it is properly taught that focus on any Guna including Satvic guna detracts one from ultimate goal.


Cant we disagree with a concept without being disagreeable with the person...or question their motives?

Well, this opinion was not mine alone. Just happened to discuss with a few people who remarked they deserve the distrust. So its my opinion as well as that of a few others. And we are entitled to it.

The idea of projecting oneself in a certain light (due to nothing but sheer ego) is what begets such comments. Abusing science is another. We are all humans, there is no such thing as brahmin genes, satvik genes, and such like. If people use such terms (all of which is merely to put oneself in an exclusive club with the abuse of science which supports no such thing, plus abuse of Boyd's work) it merely shows what sort of people they are. So if (we) people have an opinion about such people, we are entitled to it. Thankyou.

Addition: You and other forum members may think the words of such people should not reflect on the whole community. Unfortunately these people represent the community. It is pretty much understood the views of such folks is often the vox populi of the entire lot; hence many supporters for vaagmi's views. So if others have opinions about the whole community based on such people, it cannot be helped.

 

[palindrome]

Oh yeah. Thank you very much for reminding me about that. I should not argue with drunk dwarfs. Thank you. We will argue about this another day another place and I hope to see you there as a grown up.

From the words you speak, it is obvious who is drunk. The drunk dwarf is you, not Renu. She is a tall pretty lass. And yeah, no expects you to grow up.

 

[Vaagmi]

Well, this opinion was not mine alone. Just happened to discuss with a few people who remarked they deserve the distrust. So its my opinion as well as that of a few others. And we are entitled to it.

Oh yeas. we brahmins are used to this since time immemorial. You are just the latest addition to the list of people who determine who is to be trusted and who is not to be trusted among the castes. You are entitled to your -what do you call it-opinion. Please keep it safely or hang by it. We do not care.

The idea of projecting oneself in a certain light (due to nothing but sheer ego) is what begets such comments. Abusing science is another. We are all humans, there is no such thing as brahmin genes, satvik genes, and such like. If people use such terms (all of which is merely to put oneself in an exclusive club with the abuse of science which supports no such thing, plus abuse of Boyd's work) it merely shows what sort of people they are. So if (we) people have an opinion about such people, we are entitled to it. Thankyou.

There is no such thing as brahmin genes, satvik genes and such like. But there are lactose tolerant genes because it is said by some one from Los Angeles. It is no one's claim that there are brahmin genes, satvik genes etc. along with human genes, gorilla genes and mosquito genes. The claim is that satvik practices,life style, habits etc., which form a distinct culture can impact on the genes. This is what was proved by Boyd. It is as if you have made up your mind that you should harp only on your own inventions of brahmin genes but completely ignore the finding of the Boyd-that culture has an impact on the genes in a fundamental way. As someone said, you can only take a camel to the water: you can not make it drink the water.

Addition: You and other forum members may think the words of such people should not reflect on the whole community. Unfortunately these people represent the community. It is pretty much understood the views of such folks is often the vox populi of the entire lot; hence many supporters for vaagmi's views. So if others have opinions about the whole community based on such people, it cannot be helped.

Yes our community is not begging for recognition from anyone. We decide who represents the community. The very fact that there are many supporters should open your eyes to the reality that there is substance in my claim about culture and genes. If you choose to close your eyes nothing can be done.

 

[Vaagmi]

From the words you speak, it is obvious who is drunk. The drunk dwarf is you, not Renu. She is a tall pretty lass. And yeah, no expects you to grow up.

When did Renukaji appoint you her agent to talk on her behalf? Anyway I don't bother about a tall pretty lass because I do not get an opportunity to see her here. I look at the output here and decide whether the person is dwarf or tall. She is a dwarf alright but whenever I see you I have to use a magnifying glass. LOL.

 

[palindrome]

When did Renukaji appoint you her agent to talk on her behalf? Anyway I don't bother about a tall pretty lass because I do not get an opportunity to see her here. I look at the output here and decide whether the person is dwarf or tall. She is a dwarf alright but whenever I see you I have to use a magnifying glass. LOL.

Wow you have proved you have brahmin genes and satvik genes. So now we all know what it means lol

 

[palindrome]

Oh yeas. we brahmins are used to this since time immemorial. You are just the latest addition to the list of people who determine who is to be trusted and who is not to be trusted among the castes. You are entitled to your -what do you call it-opinion. Please keep it safely or hang by it. We do not care.



There is no such thing as brahmin genes, satvik genes and such like. But there are lactose tolerant genes because it is said by some one from Los Angeles. It is no one's claim that there are brahmin genes, satvik genes etc. along with human genes, gorilla genes and mosquito genes. The claim is that satvik practices,life style, habits etc., which form a distinct culture can impact on the genes. This is what was proved by Boyd. It is as if you have made up your mind that you should harp only on your own inventions of brahmin genes but completely ignore the finding of the Boyd-that culture has an impact on the genes in a fundamental way. As someone said, you can only take a camel to the water: you can not make it drink the water.



Yes our community is not begging for recognition from anyone. We decide who represents the community. The very fact that there are many supporters should open your eyes to the reality that there is substance in my claim about culture and genes. If you choose to close your eyes nothing can be done.

Thanks for proving what have been saying all along about public opinion of your likes. Good luck.

 

[zebra16]

Incidentally, Buddhism defines karma a lot more elaborately than sanskrit 'hindu' texts (after all karma as a concept was borrowed from shramana belief systems into 'hinduism). But in Buddhism, the doer is aksed to work out his karma, that is, he is asked to reach out to the troubled. Hindus unfortunately, have taken it to be fatalistic -- they won't look at an accident victim, and wud rather leave him to die on the streets, claiming it is his own karma.

Should be a joke and may be it is being repeated with an anticipation that lies would somehow would acquire the status of truth.

Jamisonl & Witel in Vedic Hinduism say (reproduction of actual portions):

QUOTE:

All of this may indicate that the ideas of second death (and recurrent rebirth), even of karma, are nothing but the gradual, but logical outcome of Brahmanical thought. One can see this gradual development quite clearly also in the case of the veneration of the cow (Alsdorf 1962, W. N. Brown 1978, D. Srinivasan 1979, Witzel 1991a).

The idea originated with some people, obviously fellow brahmins in ​Yajnavalkya's area, and slowly spread through society. Nevertheless, it is typical of the uneven pace of development in various groups of Vedic society that even in the last part of ChU, at 8.15, the Brahmanical author still felt it necessary to add a word about killing in ritual which he claimed not to be evil, in fact !important guiltless[ quite apparently even with regard to karma.

The UpaniSads are often treated as the beginning of a tradition, the founding texts of Vedanta philosophy (and, to much lesser degree, as the necessary precursor to early Buddhist and Jain thought).

As far as culture and civilization are concerned, even the late Vedic UpaniSads clearly precede the urban civilization as described in the Pali texts. The Vedic texts do not mention towns (cf. Mylius 1969, 1970) and forbid entry into the country of Magadha to Brahmins while the Pali texts speak of Brahmin villages south of the Ganges.

UNQUOTE

Again the words of the authors are the best testimony as to how the academic community views these silly claims made by bloggers. So quote once again from the same source:

QUOTE:

Similarly, the idea that it (the idea of karmas) was the Jainas, the aboriginals, etc. who "invented" these ideas is, of course, nothing more than saying "we do not know" with other words (O'Flaherty, 1982). There simply are no early records of the Jainas and even less of the aboriginal inhabitants of Northern India.

UNQUOTE

So much for the scholarship of the defenders of the Hinduism, who want to appropriate every branch knowledge to their pet belief system.