According to "Jain mythology", Chandragupta Maurya was a Jain.
But as per Itihasa and History, this is a blatant lie. Not a single contemporary record confirms him being Jain.
This is why this myth is not part of standard #History books. Nobody in academia take it seriously.
But as per Itihasa and History, this is a blatant lie. Not a single contemporary record confirms him being Jain.
This is why this myth is not part of standard #History books. Nobody in academia take it seriously.
https://twitter.com/SolarisePravesh/status/1319893079482978305
• Not a single "Contemporary Record" says Bhadrabahu ever meet to Hindu Maurya Emperor
• Converting him into Jain fold is a pure "Jain Tradition/myth" started after 1200+ yrs of Chandragupta Maurya.
Not a single Hindu source says he accepted Jainism.
• Converting him into Jain fold is a pure "Jain Tradition/myth" started after 1200+ yrs of Chandragupta Maurya.
Not a single Hindu source says he accepted Jainism.
https://twitter.com/truejainology/status/1320001938079899654?s=19
Had Smith or anybody found a single evidence, he would have presented.
But he didn't. Why ? Because no such evidence exists even today.
Stop circululating motherhood statements as History.
But he didn't. Why ? Because no such evidence exists even today.
Stop circululating motherhood statements as History.
https://twitter.com/ANKURJAIN1811/status/1320007942481997826?s=19
The word "चन्द्रगुप्त मौर्य" is not there in any #Inscription.
Now take this as your homework and check the translation.
Next time, come with primary sources rather than random images.
Now take this as your homework and check the translation.
Next time, come with primary sources rather than random images.
https://twitter.com/Anshpihu007/status/1320020227581620225?s=19
The word in the #Inscription (After 1000+ yrs of Chandragupta Maurya) at Shravanabelagola (#Karnataka) is चन्द्रगुप्त-मुनीन्द्र.
No where it is mentioned that he is from मौर्य dynasty/Pataliputra or even a King.
Assuming him as the great Maurya emperor is an utter foolishness.
No where it is mentioned that he is from मौर्य dynasty/Pataliputra or even a King.
Assuming him as the great Maurya emperor is an utter foolishness.
Then how this myth and fancy tales of Chandragupta Maurya being Jain appear suddenly ?
Ans. - Very late Jain traditions/literature (Post 12th c. CE) ... After 1500+ yrs of Chandragupta Maurya !!
Ref. - The Age of Imperial Unity, Radhakumud Mookerji, p.61
Ans. - Very late Jain traditions/literature (Post 12th c. CE) ... After 1500+ yrs of Chandragupta Maurya !!
Ref. - The Age of Imperial Unity, Radhakumud Mookerji, p.61
Jain texts which propagated this myth (Chandragupta Maurya was Jain) -
• बृहत्कथाकोष - 931 CE
• भद्रबाहुचरित - 1450 CE
• Kannada Texts post 16th c. CE
Fancy tales of these texts and चन्द्रगुप्तमुनीन्द्र word utilized by agenda driven Indologists in making this myth.
• बृहत्कथाकोष - 931 CE
• भद्रबाहुचरित - 1450 CE
• Kannada Texts post 16th c. CE
Fancy tales of these texts and चन्द्रगुप्तमुनीन्द्र word utilized by agenda driven Indologists in making this myth.
It is not only atrocious but unfair mean to highjack Hindu icons and history by agenda driven scholars.
This is the reason why this myth - Chandragupta Maurya was Jain - was never considered as a Historical Truth.
This myth is also absent in Hindu texts.
// End //
This is the reason why this myth - Chandragupta Maurya was Jain - was never considered as a Historical Truth.
This myth is also absent in Hindu texts.
// End //
Imp. Info -
Indologists have already rejected this myth - Chandragupta Maurya was Jain - in 1892 itself.
Even after all these, if still people propagate this myth then they are zealots and enemy of the society.
Indologists have already rejected this myth - Chandragupta Maurya was Jain - in 1892 itself.
Even after all these, if still people propagate this myth then they are zealots and enemy of the society.
https://twitter.com/Bhaktirassagar/status/1320059254024204288?s=19
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
