The Golry of Shaivism

[A.Ravi sekhar 0]

So many researches saying that Kaaba(mecca) of muslims and Tajmahal of India are old temples of Lord Shiva ,Means that the shaivism is across the world .

 

In Kaaba,Vikramaditya(olden Indian King)'s incrination was found and Taj Mahal is Tejo Mahalaya(temple palace of Lord shiva which is 500 years older to Shajahan

[sambya 0]

taj mahal a hindu temple ?!!!!!!!!!!!

 

could you go ask the propagaters of this bizzare theory what proove they have for this ? they would inevitably revert to local folklores thats barely half a century old.

 

this theory gained popularity because of the hindu revivalist movement that india has been undergoing recently. these fundamentalists want to see everything as being hindu.

 

the area of taj mahal was previously owned by a rajput chief who had an outhouse there,which was obviuosly demolished before the construction began.this gave rise to that bogus concept of hindu temple.

 

as legends and folklore cant be basis of any thoery better do away with them till some more important proofs surface.

 

you proposition almost sound like some 19th century european historians who wanted to proove that taj was designed by european architects just because it had some pteirre durra (italian artform)carvings on it.

 

isnt it better to leave the credits to the mughals?trying to have a share in the glory of taj is insulting to hindus who does have lot more to take pride in.

[chandu_69 0]

 

taj mahal a hindu temple ?!!!!!!!!!!!

 

could you go ask the propagaters of this bizzare theory what proove they have for this ? .

.

A well researched article is at http://stephen-knapp.com/true_story_of_the_taj_mahal.htm

 

 

Tej-o-Mahalaya:

[ranjeetmore 0]

Glory of shaivism doesn't really happen even if taj mahal IS a shiva temple.

 

Shaivism is unreasonable really.It propagates astanga Yoga.Whereas Vedavyasa is condemning Yoga sadhanas to the core.

 

Please don't take offense.You cannot really know the tone of my posts so...

[sambya 0]

 

A well researched article is at http://stephen-knapp.com/true_story_..._taj_mahal.htm

 

 

Tej-o-Mahalaya:

 

the entire article is sheer non sense. almost all the 'proofs' and resoning are bogus. im really sorry for not having the required patience to pic up each of the point and analytically proove them wrong. had it been only one proof i could have attempted on that.

 

there is no trident on taj.who is oak to comment how local folklore would take its course ? taj mahal is a common name given to the mausoleum.there is no rule how language will change over time.

 

the entire article is hilarious and shows a serious lack of susbtantial evidence.most of his propositions are without backup sources at all.

 

if a few more guys like p.n.oak surface on earth im sure face of history would change forever.

[sambya 0]

 

Shaivism is unreasonable really

 

non scriptural proof please .

 

 

It propagates astanga Yoga

 

nothing else ?!!!!!!! and whats exactly the non spiritual thing about ashtanga yoga that you dont like it ?

 

 

Whereas Vedavyasa is condemning Yoga sadhanas to the core.

 

ho ho ho !!!!! really ?!!! get a membership in national library. that would help to clear up the clot in your mind.

 

btw , how do you classify bhakti ? something seperate from yoga ???

[chandu_69 0]

 

the entire article is sheer non sense. almost all the 'proofs' and resoning are bogus. im really sorry for not having the required patience

.

 

 

If you don't have the patience to read you should not be commenting on it in the first place

[sambya 0]

 

If you don't have the patience to read you should not be commenting on it in the first place

 

you didnt get me . i read through most of the article ( not entirely though to be honest) and found it idiotic. i dont have the patience to proove each and every point wrong. if it was a matter of a few isolated points it was easy.but in oak's study almost all points are baseless and conjured from fertile imaginative power. its a sheer waste of time to refute all these idiotic points one by one.i dont have patience for that.

 

but for your understanding i shall give you a few examples :

 

1 . there is no trident but a crescent moon on top of taj.

 

2 . muntaz might not have been the complete name of the empress but certainly the one in which she was known all over india.

 

3 . linking tej o mahalaya with taj mahal is not a proof but just a mere hypothetical speculation without any backing. proper claims should be backed by solid reasoning and historical evidence.

 

4 . why dosent the idiot mention the names and location of the two workers who have seen the shiva lingam.and what proove is there to suggest that archaeological survey is keeping silent ?

 

5 . all his 'documentary evidence' is mere narration of incidents , not depiction of sources or proofs.

 

6 . his 'architectural evidence' is also nonsense. indo islamic art always had a combination of hindu and muslim architecture.no wonder some features of taj are prominently hindu.

 

probably he would next claim fatehpur sikri a direct hindu dham as because it has even more hindu and jain influence.

 

7 . numerous places he cites lack of records as an conclusive evidence . it is ridiculous to expect all records to survive in history.

 

 

you may challenge me for not having read the entire text. here i would like you to realise that whenever any person puts forward his theory (whatever it may be) he is likely to place his most important proofs at the begining. in case of this article i found most views to be bogus even after reading through half of it. i have personally read quite a lot about mughals and taj in particular.

 

as there was nothing substantial to find in the first half i didnt continue any further where things would invariably get more comical. an article by a fundamentalist unintellectual idiot for sure.

 

sorry ,couldnt help it.have no mercy for such persons trying to rob others of their glory.

[chandu_69 0]

 

you didnt get me . i read through most of the article ( not entirely though to be honest) and found it idiotic. i dont have the patience to proove each and every point wrong. if it was a matter of a few isolated points it was easy.but in oak's study almost all points are baseless and conjured from fertile imaginative power. its a sheer waste of time to refute all these idiotic points one by one.i dont have patience for that.

Sure, You dont have any patience whatsover .Since you now, with great patience read and raised the points in Sri Oak's article let us examine them one by one

 

 

but for your understanding i shall give you a few examples :

 

1 . there is no trident but a crescent moon on top of taj.

 

Is it inconceivable for you to think that the trident was removed and Moon symbol was placed???

 

 

2 . muntaz might not have been the complete name of the empress but certainly the one in which she was known all over india.

 

 

Now you are speculating without reading the article and not doing any research.

 

Her name was "Mumtaz-ul Zamani" as recorded in Badshahnama(Take a look at home.freeuk.net/tajmahal/4badshah.htm for the scan copy obtained from archives of Government of India)

 

 

4 .

why dosent the idiot mention the names and location of the two workers who have seen the shiva lingam.and what proove is there to suggest that archaeological survey is keeping silent ?

 

archaeological survey of india will not be taking any risks without government approval.Dont u know that?

 

 

5 .

all his 'documentary evidence' is mere narration of incidents , not depiction of sources or proofs.

 

One of the important proofs is Badshanama .Pls go through the link i gave above.

 

6 .

his 'architectural evidence' is also nonsense. indo islamic art always had a combination of hindu and muslim architecture.no wonder some features of taj are prominently hindu.

 

Do you know of any muslim mausoleum built with so called "indo islamic art".

Did you read any points he raised about the architecture..

 

"western building which is claimed to be a mosque has no minarets"

 

 

7 .

numerous places he cites lack of records as an conclusive evidence . it is ridiculous to expect all records to survive in history.

 

Badshahnama did survive and it has description about Mumtaz burial

 

 

 

sorry ,couldnt help it.have no mercy for such persons trying to rob others of their glory.

What Glory??? Glory of claiming other's work as their own?? Destruction of hindu temples and using the idols as steps???

 

What islamic glory you are talking about??

[chandu_69 0]

 

 

probably he would next claim fatehpur sikri a direct hindu dham as because it has even more hindu and jain influence.

.

He(p.n. Oak) is not alive to make such a claim.But why does it bother you ???

The ferocity with which you are rubbishing Mr oak without reading the article tells me something.

 

Are u a muslim??

[sambya 0]

ha ha !! not at all . im an hindu brahmin from bengal ,born in a vaishnav goswami lineage originating from nityananda prabhu. thankfully my family was not orthodox and brought me up in a liberal atmosphere.currently im a 23 year old student.

 

as i believe in teachings of ramakrishna paramahamsa i cant tolerate narrowmindedness and condemming other faiths.thats why you shall find me agressive towards such fundamentalist people ,many places in this forum.

 

among my numerous fields of interst is the history of india. i have tried to read through many books and writings regaurding indian mughal history and architecture. so naturally it was shocking to see such a bogus claim without any solid basis of truth being propagated.

 

also i dont support the new hindu revivalist movement thats being propagated by vhp and such groups.they are destroying the very foundation on which sanatan dharma has rested through millenia -- tolerance.

 

if you glance through internet you shall definitely find a lot of such articles where almost every great schievement of man(whether architectural,philosophical etc) has been robbed of its credit. just like erich von daniken went to to such lenghts as to play with imagination of the masses and proclaim egypt's pyramids to be constructed by aliens. just like europeans formulated the idea that the architect of taj was an italian merely because it had some italian carvings on it which was done by venician craftsmen.

 

in history or science the norm is that , out of several proposed hypothesis the one that fits in the puzzle most perfectly is chosen as truth ,untill some more potent hypothesis surfaces.

 

in this case the hypothesis that taj is a product of indo islamic art is infinitely more stonger than the hypothesis that it was a hindu temple.so why chose the crooked path ? why cant we accept the first one that fits in more nicely?!!! and i would apply the same 'ferocity' if a muslim dared to rob a hindu of his credit.

 

that is all that i wanted to say.

[chandu_69 0]

 

as i believe in teachings of ramakrishna paramahamsa i cant tolerate narrowmindedness and condemming other faiths.

 

You may have lot of tolerance but abrahamic faiths especially islamic faith condemns people like u with ferocity.As per them polytheists(they define u that way) has no reason to live

 

 

among my numerous fields of interst is the history of india. i have tried to read through many books and writings regaurding indian mughal history and architecture.

 

You should read mughal history written by mughals themselfes, Not written by leftist hindu hating historians.

 

Fatehpur sikri was built after making Pyramid of hindu skulls(This was actual happening recorded ) Take a look at the book "

A History of the Great Moghuls

 

By Pringle Kennedy"

at

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=X43K1xXI-3IC&pg=PA264&lpg=PA264&dq=Pyramid++skulls+Fatehpur+sikri&source=web&ots=xyJ59iDsbY&sig=LD_uNzY_WJOBn-GaFYP_yuQrBCk&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=2&ct=result#PPA265,M1

 

Now tell me what is bogus in the book "

The True Story of the Taj Mahal"

 

 

I have answered the points raised by you.

[chandu_69 0]

Sambya,

 

Did u read the relevent portion of Badshahnama??.

It may be also of interest to you to go through this article http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/Printable.aspx?GUID=401C6222-3668-4E4B-9824-D85A9D2B4B6A

The article also quotes from "The Story of Civilization, by historian Will Durant "

 

[sambya 0]

 

You may have lot of tolerance but abrahamic faiths especially islamic faith condemns people like u with ferocity.As per them polytheists(they define u that way) has no reason to live

cant comment on that .that their freedom of belief . and after knowing their ways the love for my own religion has increased tenfold.

 

 

Fatehpur sikri was built after making Pyramid of hindu skulls(This was actual happening recorded ) Take a look at the book "

A History of the Great Moghuls

i am never denying the immunerable cases of unrecorded torture and destruction of temples that hindus had to undergo that time.

 

 

Is it inconceivable for you to think that the trident was removed and Moon symbol was placed???

 

not at all .it is easily concievable.but i need firm indications so as to belive that it actually happened.for ex a written historical record of such a trident can be a forcefull indication.unless such a thing is available it is mere imagination

 

 

 

Her name was "Mumtaz-ul Zamani" as recorded in Badshahnama(Take a look at home.freeuk.net/tajmahal/4badshah.htm for the scan copy obtained from archives of Government of India)

 

 

 

 

oak says " 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 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. "

taj mahal is a term developed by commoners.it was a result of alteration in speech over time.now such alteration is not bound by any rules and regulations. can any logical man say " one cannot omit the first three letters "Mum" from a woman's name to derive the remainder as the name of the building. " that was the point that i wanted to convey.

archaeological survey of india will not be taking any risks without government approval.Dont u know that?

true . highly probable that it would be so.but here im talking of solid indications not hypothesis or assumptions. what made him think that ASI is hiding it in this particular case ? without corrobarating such reasons for suspicion the point remains ordinary speculation.

 

 

Do you know of any muslim mausoleum built with so called "indo islamic art".

immidiately i can remember of jahangirs tomb , imatuddaullah, sher shahs tomb, tansens tomb at gwalior and of course the much later bibi ka mukbara.i will give some more names later.

 

 

Badshahnama did survive and it has description about Mumtaz burial

did you know mumtaz was not buried initially in taj.she was buried originally at buhranpur(as far as i can remember of the name) and later her coffin was taken to be relocated at taj when it was completed.

 

 

 

 

What Glory??? Glory of claiming other's work as their own?? Destruction of hindu temples and using the idols as steps???

 

What islamic glory you are talking about??

 

iknow that . in bengal theres a mosque there is a a tiled raodway hwere the tiles are 'U' shaped,it is presumed to be sliced shiva lingams. but that dosent mean that they lacked in culture.their civilization had its own glory.its only that their concept of culture differed to us.hindus held tolerance to be a great virtue but mohammedans held forcefull or willfull conversion as highest instead.

 

sorry as i didnt notice your 3rd post while answering previously.

 

once again i dont doubt the possibility of the point raised by oak.it might have been the case.but the probality is very less.and as i said before , the other hypothesis that it is a product of indo islamic art is better fitting.so there is no point in following the second leaving out the first one.

[ranjeetmore 0]

Btw,Sambya,

What is that ungodly picture for your avatar ?

[sambya 0]

 

Btw,Sambya,

What is that ungodly picture for your avatar ?

oh !! thats a clay deity of durga after the first coat of paint but before the eyes were painted .you can see the ten arms at the back. it was shot by me in candle light this navaratri. incidentally my family celebrates durga puja and ive been making the idol for the last 6 years now,just as a hobby . however the picture didnt come up so good here beacuse of its small size.

[kaisersose 0]

 

.

A well researched article is at http://stephen-knapp.com/true_story_of_the_taj_mahal.htm

 

 

Tej-o-Mahalaya:

 

A piece of trash - to sum it up.

 

Our patriots were so damn sure that the Babri Masjid was built on a Rama temple - until they were not able to prove it archaeologically. If you are unaware of the story, please find some time to read it and educate yourself on how jingoistic thinking runs in India.

 

Cheers

[chandu_69 0]

 

A piece of trash - to sum it up.

 

 

 

How?

[kaisersose 0]

 

How?

 

Here's how,

 

1) Knapp - a Hare Krishna - is motivated by ideology than anything else, and as is usual in such cases, his work does not pass the scrutiny of real professionals. His book about evidence for a gobal vedic culture has been criticized by scholars like Mark Newbrook, etc., for its inferior quality and Knapp's poor grasp of linguistics (connecting a sankrit word astralaya to australia, etc).

 

2) His work on the Taj is a rehash of Oak's theory.

 

3) Oak's petiton was quashed by the Supreme court in 2000

 

Enough said.

[chandu_69 0]

 

Here's how,

 

1) Knapp - a Hare Krishna - is motivated by ideology than anything else, and as is usual in such cases, his work does not pass the scrutiny of real professionals.

 

This is not his work.This is an excerpt from P.N. oak's book.

Which professionals scrutinised this subject???

is book about evidence for a gobal vedic culture has been criticized by scholars like Mark Newbrook, etc., for its inferior quality and Knapp's poor grasp of linguistics (connecting a sankrit word astralaya to australia, etc).

Hot air.One should at least read the article heading before jumping in with comments.Once again this is not Knapp's work.

Stay on topic.The reference to mark et al is irrelevent.

2) His work on the Taj is a rehash of Oak's theory.

More hot air.

3) Oak's petiton was quashed by the Supreme court in 2000

Of course the court banned the petition without even examining the evidences he presented and his requests for reopening the sealed rooms

 

 

Enough said.

 

I Look forward to reading Your highly logical and esteemed views.

[chandu_69 0]

 

Here's how,

 

1) Knapp - a Hare Krishna - is motivated by ideology than anything else, and as is usual in such cases, his work does not pass the scrutiny of real professionals.

 

This is not his work.This is an excerpt from P.N. oak's book.

Which professionals scrutinised this subject???

 

 

his book about evidence for a gobal vedic culture has been criticized by scholars like Mark Newbrook, etc., for its inferior quality and Knapp's poor grasp of linguistics (connecting a sankrit word astralaya to australia, etc).

 

Hot air.One should at least read the article heading before jumping in with comments.Once again this is not Knapp's work.

Stay on topic.The reference to mark et al is irrelevent.

 

 

2) His work on the Taj is a rehash of Oak's theory.

 

More hot air.

 

 

3) Oak's petiton was quashed by the Supreme court in 2000

 

Of course the court banned the petition without even examining the evidences he presented and his requests for reopening the sealed rooms

 

 

Enough said.

Good.But ,I Look forward to reading Your highly logical and esteemed views.