THE TRUE STORY OF TAJ MAHAL

[Guest guest]

Note: forwarded message attached.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Take Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.

http://mobile./maildemo

"Mohan Gupta" mgupta

"a4India\"" info

THE TRUE STORY OF TAJ MAHAL

Sat, 9 Oct 2004 00:02:22 -0400

THE TRUE STORY OF TAJ MAHALRomantic story of Taj Mahal may be fiction

 

The Mogul 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. No one has ever challenged it except Professor P.N.Oak, who

believes that the whole world has been duped in his book Taj Mahal. The True

Story,

In his book Taj Mahal: The True Story, Oak says the Taj Mahal is not Queen

Mumtaz Mahal'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

Shiva temple palace was usurped by Shah Jahan from then Maharaja of Jaipur,

Jai Singh. Shah Jahan then remodeled the palace into his wife's memorial. 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 begin with the name Taj Mahal. He says this term

does not occur in any Moghul court papers or chronicles, even after Shah Jahan's

time. The term "Mahal" has never been used for a building in any of

the Muslim countries, from Afghanistan to Algeria. "The unusual explanation

that the term Taj Mahal derives from Mumtaz Mahal is illogical in at least 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 the 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.

(According to another different account Mumtaz was a Hindu married lady, whose

real Hindu name I am forgetting now. Once Shah Jahan happened to see her and

was wonder struck by the beauty of Hindu lady. He then prisoned the Hindu

husband of Hindu lady for about two years and forcing him to divorce his Hindu

wife. Hindu husband kept refusing of divorcing his wife. After 2 years, Shah

Jahan killed the Hindu husband of Hindu lady and then married the widowed

Hindu lady by force. After marriage he named the Hindu lady Mumtaz.)

Furthermore, Oak cites several documents suggesting the Taj Mahal predates Shah

Jahan's era, and was a temple palace dedicated to Shiva worshipped by the

Rajputs of Agra city. For example, Professor 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 Al!

Bert Man delslo, 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 long well before Shah Jahan's time. 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

not accessible to the public. Oak asserts they contain a headless statue of

Shiva and other objects commonly used for worship rituals in Hindu temples.

Fearing political backlash, Indira Gandhi's government tried to have Oak's book

withdrawn from the bookstores, and threatened the Indian publisher of the first

edition with dire consequences. There is only one way to discredit or validate

Oak's research. The current Indian government should open the sealed rooms of

the Taj Mahal under UN supervision, and let international experts investigate.

Do Circulate this to all your friends and let them know about this reality. I

would like to add that near the rivers only big Shiva temples are there.

Also...the designs are like BEL leaves and also they say that water falls at

some place ...and that can be the place where the shivling would have been.

Also people tell that actual grave of mumtazmahal is in Rajasthan somewhere.WE

should do something...For those who do not think this is a true article go

through these: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A5220

http://www.designcommunity.com/discussion/6485.html

http://www.humnri.com/Humex/Submission/bhat/bhat69.asp

http://www.gurgaonharyana.com/taj.htm

 

The Tajmahal is Tejomahalay

Probably there is no one who has been duped at least once in a lifetime. But can

the whole world be duped? This may seem impossible. But in the matter of

Indian and world history the world can be duped in many respects for hundreds

of years and still continues to be duped. The world famous Tajmahal is a

glaring instance. For all the time, money and energy that people over the world

spend in visiting the Tajmahal, they are dished out of concoction. Contrary to

what visitors are made to believe the Taj Mahal is not a Islamic mausoleum but

an ancient Shiva Temple known as Tejo Mahalaya which the 5th generation Moghul

Emperor Shahjahan commandeered from the then Maharaja of Jaipur. The Tajmahal,

should therefore, be viewed as a temple palace and not as a tomb. That makes a

vast difference. You miss the details of its size, grandeur, majesty and

beauty when you take it to be a mere tomb. When told that you are visiting a

temple palace you wont fail to notice its annexes, ruined defensive walls,

hillocks, moats, cascades, fountains, majestic garden, hundreds of rooms

archived verandahs, terraces, multi stored towers, secret sealed chambers,

guest rooms, stables, the trident (Trishul) pinnacle on the dome and the

sacred, esoteric Hindu letter "OM" carved on the exterior of the wall of the

sanctum sanctorum now occupied by the cenotaphs. For detailed proof of this

breath-taking discovery, you may read the well-known historian Shri. P. N.

Oak's celebrated book titled “ Tajmahal: The True Story". But let us place

before you, for the time being an exhaustive summary of the massive evidence

ranging over hundred points: 1.The term Tajmahal itself never occurs in any

mogul court paper or chronicle even in Aurangzeb's time. The attempt to explain

it away as Taj-i-mahal is therefore, ridiculous. 2.The ending "Mahal"is

never Muslim because in none of the Muslim countries around the world from

Afghanistan to Algeria is there a building known as "Mahal". 3.The unusual

explanation of the term Tajmahal derives from Mumtaz Mahal, who is buried in

it, is illogical in at least two respects viz., firstly her name was never

Mumtaj Mahal but Mumtaz-ul-Zamani and secondly one cannot omit the first three

letters "Mum" from a woman’s name to derive the remainder as the name of the

building. 4.Since the lady's name was Mumtaz (ending with 'Z') the name of the

building derived from her should have been Taz Mahal, if at all, and not Taj

(spelled with a 'J'). 5.Several European visitors of Shahjahan's time allude to

the building as Taj-e-Mahal is almost the correct tradition, age old Sanskrit

name Tej-o-Mahalaya, signifying a Shiva temple. Contrarily Shahjahan and

Aurangzeb scrupulously avoid using the Sanskrit term and call it just a holy

grave. 6.The tomb should be understood to signify NOT A BUILDING but only the

grave or cenotaph inside it. This would help people to realize that all dead

Muslim courtiers and royalty including Humayun, Akbar, Mumtaz, Etmad-ud-Daula

and Safdarjang have been buried in capture Hindu mansions and temples.

7.Moreover, if the Taj is believed to be a burial place, how can the term

Mahal, i.e., mansion apply to it? 8.Since the term Taj Mahal does not occur

in mogul courts it is absurd to search for any mogul explanation for it. Both

its components namely, 'Taj' and' Mahal' are of Sanskrit origin.

Another article on the same topic:

http://www.telugupeople.com/discussion/article.asp?id=10761I hope the anti Oak

crowd will see the truth now. if nothing else, why most of the rooms and the

like are kept sealed, as if they are hiding a secret?But India is a majority

Hindu nation, now controlled by Hindu nationalists whose bête noire is the

Muslim invaders who built the Taj. As Hindu nationalists never fail to remind,

the Moguls were marauding conquerors who brutalized the bodies, psyches, and

monuments of Hindu India. But they also gave the country many of its most

beautiful buildings and gardens, which lie almost casually studded throughout

Delhi and Agra and nearby Fatepur Sikri, the fabulous abandoned city built by

Akbar.

Some ardent Hindu nationalists ignore this; others deny it altogether. In our

office library I recently unearthed a small volume called the ''The Taj Mahal

Is a Temple Palace,'' by one P.N. Oak in 1974, and billed as ''An

Epoch-Making Discovery Which Has Proved All Histories and Historians Wrong.''

He argues that the Taj was ''built by a powerful Rajput king in pre-Muslim

times,’’ constructed ''of the Hindus, for the Hindus and by the Hindus.''

Obviously, this is not a story of Tejo Mahalaya. What NYT wrote above is

nonsense. Certainly I can't find a good reason why polemics should be dragged

into a column of travelogue. What nationalists or any body else have got to do

with Shah Jahan? The point we are looking here is about whether Taj has been a

rehash of a Shiva temple as claimed. Nationalists or not, the fact what Shah

Jahan has done or not done cannot be undone. And admittedly, this claim is made

as long ago as 1974 (exactly 30 yrs ago). More over, if the author found the

book of PN Oak and is a regular visitor to Taj Mahal, he should have supported

or refuted the visual points made by Oak instead of going off (wrongly so) on

the religious polemics. Facts are presented here for the benefit of other

members. May be some of you, who have visited Taj, may look into these aspects:

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

set of photos on Taj Mahal which tends to prove the claims of the Oak given

below. The site also lists some online articles on the issue.

2http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/modern/taj_oak.html)

Until the lions have their own historians, the history of hunt will always

glorify the hunter. The Indians have been most unfortunate that India has been

under foreign and minority rule since 712 A.D. until 15.8.1947 and this fact we

must accept first then only we can think realistically. Unfortunately things

got even worse because of daydreamer J.L. Nehru AND HIS POLICY OF APPEASEMENT

OF MINORIRTY.The apartheid may have ended in South Africa but not in Bharat so

unless there is one law for all the citizens a country cannot be strong so this

must be our first priority in having similar common laws and Uniform Civil Code.

It may be worth for people to read the book by PN Oak "Taj Mahal the Hindu

temple". He had written that it was investigated by NY Archaeologist by carbon

dating and govt. did not allow till that date for full-scale investigation.It

was built by Ràjaput king as was MANDIR called TAJOMAHALA but was converted by

Mogul king into Mausoleum. The original things are just skin deep; and if

superficial tiles are removed it may so some things! Mumtaz died in south and

could not be buried in Agra. Also the tomb cannot be above ground level.P.N.Oak

also argues that Taj Mahal faces to East like Shiva Mandir.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/819614.cms?headline=Book~documents~'Islamic~holocaust'~in~India

Sh. P.N. Oak has written a book that Taj Mahal is a Hindu Temple. This book has

been published by Voice of India, 2- Ansari Rd. Delhi, Bharat (India).

The Taj Mahal is Tejomahalay, A Hindu Temple, By P.N.Oak

Bharat celebrated the 350th anniversary of the fraud by Shah Jahan and other

Muslims on Hindu population of Bharat.

 

=========