Truth about Tajmahal - new debate

[Guest guest]

 

Hi seending a forwarded message Pl read it.

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 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 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.