PDA

View Full Version : The truth behind Taj Mahal


dinesh.kataria
December 22nd, 2005, 03:34 PM
I dont how correct is this ... but somewhere down inside i feel its true !! I support such investigation !! What do u guys have to say about this ? May be someone can post a better view ...

The Truth behind Taj Mahal

"The Moghul Emperor Shah Jahan in the memory of his wife Mumtaz Mahal
built the Taj Mahal. It was built in 22 years (1631 to 1653) by 20,000
artisans brought to India from all over the world! . Many people believe
Ustad Isa of Iran designed it." This is what your guide probably told
you if you ever visited the Taj Mahal. This is the same story I read in
my history book as a student

NOW READ THIS.......

No one has ever challenged it except Prof. P. N. Oak, who believes the
whole world has been duped. In his book Taj Mahal: The True Story, Oak
says the Taj Mahal is not Queen Mumtaz's tomb but an ancient Hindu temple palace of Lord Shiva (then known as Tejo Mahalaya). In the course of his research Oak discovered that the Shiva temple palace was usurped by Shah Jahan from then Maharaja of Jaipur, Jai Singh. In his own court
chronicle, Badshahnama, Shah Jahan admits that an exceptionally beautiful grand mansion in Agra was taken from Jai SIngh for Mumtaz's burial. The
ex-Maharaja of Jaipur still retains in his secret collection two orders
from Shah Jahan for surrendering the Taj building. Using captured
temples and mansions, as a burial place ! for dead courtiers and royalty
was a common practice among Muslim rulers.
For example, Humayun, Akbar, Etmud-ud-Daula and Safdarjung are all buried
in such mansions. Oak's inquiries began with the name of Taj Mahal. He
says the term "Mahal" has never been used for a building in any Muslim
countries from Afghanisthan to Algeria. "The unusual explanation that the
term Taj Mahal derives from Mumtaz Mahal was illogical in atleast two
respects.

Firstly, her name was never Mumtaz Mahal but Mumtaz-ul-Zamani," he
writes. Secondly, one cannot omit the first three letters 'Mum' from a
woman's name to derive the remainder as the name for the building."Taj
Mahal, he claims, is a corrupt version of Tejo Mahalaya, or Lord Shiva's
Palace.

Oak also says the love story of Mumtaz and Shah Jahan is a fairy tale
created by court sycophants, blundering historians and sloppy
archaeologists.

Not a single royal chronicle of Shah Jahan's time corroborates the love
story. Furthermore, Oak cites several documents suggesting the Taj Mahal
predates Shah Jahan's era, and was a temple dedicated to Shiva,
worshipped by Rajputs of Agra city. For example, Prof. Marvin Miller of
New York took a few samples from the riverside doorway of the Taj.
Carbon dating tests revealed that the door was 300 years older than Shah
Jahan. European traveler Johan Albert Mandelslo,who visited Agra in 1638
(only seven years after Mumtaz's death), describes the life of the city
in his memoirs. But he makes no reference to the Taj Mahal being built.
The writings of Peter Mundy, an English visitor to Agra within a year
of Mumtaz's death, also suggest the Taj was a noteworthy building well
before Shah Jahan's time.

Prof. Oak points out a number of design and architectural inconsistencies
that support the belief of the Taj Mahal being a typical Hindu temple
rather than a mausoleum.Many rooms in the Taj ! Mahal have remained
sealed since Shah Jahan's time and are still inaccessible to the public.
Oak asserts they contain a headless statue of Lord Shiva and other
objects commonly used for worship rituals in Hindu temples. Fearing
political backlash, Indira Gandhi's government tried to have Prof. Oak's
book withdrawn from the bookstores, and threatened the Indian publisher
of the first edition dire consequences.

There is only one way to discredit or validate Oak's research.
The current government should open the sealed rooms of the Taj Mahal
under U.N. supervision, and let international experts investigate.

raj2rif
December 22nd, 2005, 05:46 PM
Dear Mr. Kataria,

Is Prof Oak's book available in the market? I personally feel, there is no harm in opening the locked rooms. However I am surprised, as to why Britishers did not open those rooms? They did not have any fear of a political backlash. Similarly, the Indian Governments prior to and after Mrs. Indira Gandhi could have done it. And finally why do we need UN supervision to open it. It can be done live on TV these days for the entire nation to see it and know the facts.

lucky
December 22nd, 2005, 10:55 PM
if UN comes then we should be prepared for another hindu muslim riots. becouse or common public would not fight but ya politions would love to have a war on it for thier votes. :mad:
well facts are realy clear and may be it can be true. becouse mugals realy have a bad image. and i my self when ever read mugal history i never see any notes of mumtaz and shah love.:rolleyes:

dinesh.kataria
December 26th, 2005, 03:15 PM
I am not able to find the book in the market .. but i have been able to find more articles on the net supporting the views of Mr Oak !!

http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/modern/taj_oak.html

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/was_the_taj_mahal_a_vedic_temple.htm

These links give more substance to the claims made by Mr Oak ... Hope you find it interesting !!

sampuran
December 27th, 2005, 12:18 AM
Just going by the history and culture of Islamic invadors, it wont be incorrect to assume that
taj is also a stolen property, a temple at that. All over the world they practised this type of shameless goondagardi/ dacoity. As far as moral inhibitions are concerned, when Prophet didnot have any, why will Shahjahan ? When Kaba, an international Vedic shrine can be usurped, Taj Mahal came so late that this kind of thing had become their nature. It remains today when you find them changing wives like shirts.

As far as historical and logical substance in Sh Oak's paper is concerned, it is plenty.
Good that the Sunnis want to usurp it from the ASI. Now court will force them to dig out the truth, like the Ram /Mandir issue of Ayadhayaya. On the other hand Shias are also claiming because Mumtaz was Shia.

dndeswal
December 27th, 2005, 03:39 AM
Some comments which I have heard from elderly villagers are posted below. Some historical facts have been added in-between.

Shahjehan was neither a lover, nor a good administrator. He was cruel, deceitful and a fundamentalist guy, had hundreds of women in his harem and was insensitive to sufferings of the general public. In his times, there was acute famine (1630-32) in Gujarat and Deccan region but he preferred to spend public money on buildings like Deewan-e-Aam, Sheesh Mahal, Angoori bagh, Mussamman Burj, Moti Masjid etc. in Agra. With public money, he also erected a new city (1638) called Shahjehanabad in Delhi, along with Lal Quila and Jama Masjid. Here too, he erected Deewan-e-Aam and Deewan-e-Khaas. Here lied the Takht-e-Taoos and world-famous Kohinoor.

Shahjehan became a custodian of Sunni Islam, imposed travel tax on Hindus and put restrictions on repair of old temples and construction of new ones. He spent his last days in captivity in Agra fort. Fed up with acute loneliness, he requested his son Aurangzeb to arrange some child-students for him so that he could get rid of the solitary confinement. Auranzeb reportedly replied: “Abba huzoor, tumhara hakoomat karne se jee nahin bharaa. Ab tum bachhon per hakoomat karma chahte ho?”

Begum Arjumandbano (real name of Mumtaj Mahal) died in Burhanpur and was buried there. Her grave was shifted to the present site in Agra after 6 months. Many Muslim historians (including Abdul Hamid Lahori) have written that Begum’s body was buried in Raja Jaisingh’s mansion in Agra.

Taj Mahal is not a sign of love, beauty or secularism. It does not remind us of tenets of life but rather horrifies us and reminds us of medieval barbarianism.

An elderly villager was once saying that when Maharaja Surajmal captured Agra, his soldiers filled the Taj with bhoosa (gehoon ka toora) which remained there for two years.


* * * * *

dndeswal
December 27th, 2005, 10:43 PM
After putting my message above, I searched through Internet. Prof. P.N. Oak's book is available in USA: Please click the following link:

http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/modern/taj_oak.html

- Dayanand Deswal

lucky
December 31st, 2005, 03:27 PM
great work thanks for the knowelege:D



After putting my message above, I searched through Internet. Prof. P.N. Oak's book is available in USA: Please click the following link:

http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/modern/taj_oak.html

- Dayanand Deswal

dahiyarules
December 31st, 2005, 04:10 PM
TOTALLY FALSE INFORMATION

TAJAMAHAL MAINE BANWAYA THAA. IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT, THEN LETS FIGHT. :d

suchitraa
January 2nd, 2006, 08:16 AM
yeah i have heard abt this thing before that taj mahal was not built by shahjahan.i think i read it sumwhere on the net also.if its true(which i think it is)then see how wrong it is that our historians r telling us entiterly wrong history.some time back during Vajpayee's govt, something wrong was written in class nine history books abt muslims.even the dob of our very own mahatama gandhi was incorrect.there was such a loud uproar in both the houses on this issue.every one in the opposition was after murli manohar joshi.and thats good.
i would say if someone has proof abt this taj mahal thing then they should certainly question our historians.no body has the right to teach us something untrue.

raj2rif
January 2nd, 2006, 05:54 PM
After putting my message above, I searched through Internet. Prof. P.N. Oak's book is available in USA: Please click the following link:

http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/modern/taj_oak.html

- Dayanand Deswal

Dear Deswal Ji,

Thanks a lot for the link.
Wish you a very happy new year.