The truth about Taj Mahal

Status
Not open for further replies.

blackpearl

The Devil
I got the following as an email forward:

Truth about Taj Mahal!!!! Read Carefully and Think Yourself!!! May be the biggest love story in Indian History is a blunder of historian!!!!!

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 cit y 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.

Do circulate this to all you know and let them know about this reality.....
 

prasad_den

Padawan
Ya... heard of it before.. check these out..:
*www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/A5220
*www.stephen-knapp.com/was_the_taj_mahal_a_vedic_temple.htm
 

Rollercoaster

-The BlacKCoaT Operative-
isnt that pretty old stuff...

personally i dont give a 5hit... what difference does it make if taj belongs to hindus or muslims.
 
OP
blackpearl

blackpearl

The Devil
Rollercoaster said:
isnt that pretty old stuff...

personally i dont give a 5hit... what difference does it make if taj belongs to hindus or muslims.

It isn't about hindu or muslims, its about the belief that Shan Jahan built Taj Mahal.
 

ahref

In the zone
It is RSS theory. I know it since ages. There is not iota of truth in it.
P. N. Oak, is a Maharashtrian Brahmin historian associated with the Hindutva movement.
He is associated with Hindutva movement, thats why he is claiming this.

Check these links
*en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purushottam_Nagesh_Oak

*webpages.marshall.edu/~laher1/oaks.html
 

nishant_nms

Cyborg Agent
shemi4444 said:
Please dont speard foolishness, be care this is only a tech site not sanghparivar site
Plz don't quote something like that u may be a critciser of RSS(because u actualy know nothing about RSS just had lernt about it through the mouths of Congress) but I am not. So stop these things or it will get hot here
 

sysfilez

Welcome To The Jungle
blackpearl said:
I got the following as an email forward:

Truth about Taj Mahal!!!! Read Carefully and Think Yourself!!! May be the biggest love story in Indian History is a blunder of historian!!!!!

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 cit y 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.

Do circulate this to all you know and let them know about this reality.....
from which source did u get this.
chalo lets accumulate all the hindus and demolish this structure. i hope this wat the RSS is planning.
 

AshishSharma

Livin' in the ghetto
Incomplete truth is more dangerous than Lie, so we should stop making remarks about nything without complete knowledge may it be the Taj or RSS. It should be researched and debated on a higher level before any conclusions are passed on, people should understand that even small things could make big impact. I am sure it's being researched further and truth will reveal itself, lets wait and watch.
 

ahref

In the zone
I am sure it's being researched further and truth will reveal itself, lets wait and watch
There is nothing to researched to find the truth about Taj or RSS. Everyone know abt them and their true color.
 

tuxfan

Technomancer
IMO, even if this is true, we should not try to make it a shiv temple again and let it remain Taj Mahal.

This is for only two simple reasons:
  1. There are hundreds of shiv temple. One more will do no good.
  2. As Taj Mahal, the structure brings thousands of foreign tourists and brings in lot of foriegn exchange. As a shiv temple, it won't bring any!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom