Taj Mahal: The True Story

Dear All.....

Just go thru. ...... AND DONT FORGET TO VISIT THE LINKS ATTHE END OF THE MAIL (find out images confirming the same)


Real History of the "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 Jah! an
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.


Hey guys please check this link ........it adds as a visual
proof

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/was_the...dic_temple.htm

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/was_the...dic_temple.htm

Wow that story sounds like some kind of BJP pro fundamentalist Hindu smoke screen story discounting Islam ...

I would rather believe the story where the Taj Mahal is actually an UFO antennia that guides UFO through their interplanitary travels...
.
.
.
Which is actually the TRUE story of the Taj IMHO

wow. i'm going next month and i'll look at it in a different light with this alternative history in mind. thanks.

regards,

Hi Triplex, welcome to Indiamike.

And you think this story is important, why?

And you copied and pasted it from, where?

and stephen-knapp is, who?

Interesting (and thank for posting), but IMHO Prof Oak's theory is rubbish.

Although I don't actually believe that the Taj was solely a monument to love, more to dynastic pride. The previous Moghul's left enormous monuments to themselves, why would Shah Jehan be any different? The idea of a dynastic pride comes from John Keay.
Also, it doesn't resemble any Hindu temple I've ever seen: not an icon in sight. I haven't noticed any onion domes of that style on too many Hindu temples. Having made a point of looking at as much Islamic architecture as I am able, everything it about it say 'Islam'.
The link provided by the site to the BBC, which is cited as a source, goes to page on the BBC site that is produced by the 'public' not the BBC. There is no controversy as far as I'm concerned. Just a theory here that tries to appropriate the Taj away from its creators.

Where would this type of theory come from:

Give me an R
Give me an S
and I think you can guess the last letter.

But, thanks for posting it's always nice to hear alternative though.

not that i'm jumping on the conspiracy bandwagon full-throttle - but if you read all the accompanying descriptions w/the pics there are some odd things going on with the symbols used and construction/placement of buildings.

stephen knapp doesn't seem like some fly-by-night conspiracy theorist. i read several bio pages about him and he seems to be a genuine scholar and subject matter expert on vedic history/culture/religious practices.

It is certainly interesting, but completely unconvincing.
It ignores that so much of the Taj, just shouts 'Islam' in its construction.
We must not forget that the Moghul's were not utterly oblivious to the beauty of buildings and symbols from other faiths.
Humayoun's tomb, features the Star of David.
See my picture:
http://www.indiamike.com/photopost/s...cat/500/page/3

Akbar's masoleum has gates dedicated to Christianity, Buddhism and Hinduism; why shouldn't Shah Jehan be the same?

These pictures:

http://www.indiamike.com/photopost/s...cat/500/page/3

http://www.indiamike.com/photopost/s...cat/500/page/2

shows the Koranic script, does it look out of place or added as an after-thought? No.
Everything about this building screams Islam. I sure there is Hindu influence on the building, why wouldn't there be? The Moghuls had been there for many years.
If you need evidences that invaders absorb indigenous/earlier architectural concepts - take a look at the Brighton Pavillion.

Cheers

RTP

Its possible that the Taj was built upon some older (probably hindu) monument. Even the BBC article claims that it was at the least remodeled by Shah Jahan. IMHO, the fact that the architecture of the Taj is similar to typical mughal architecture and there are no other vedic temples that have architecture similar to the Taj, tells me the "remodeleing" by Shah Jahan must have been extensive.

Its common knowledge that the mughals destroyed a lot of hindu monuments and rebuilt theirs on on the same location (Babri Masjid is one claim). But to say that the Taj is actually a Hindu structure, which was left more or less unchanged by the mughals, is a little far fetched.

In this day and age it has become dangerous for the officials acknowledge that the Taj might have some element of hindu in it. They would be risking another Babri Masjid incident. I'll take the Taj as is, thank you.

I think you're absolutely spot on crvlvr, it may well sit on a Hindu site, but no more than that.

I have also heard claims made by an extreme hindu group that Jerusalem is Yedushayam, or the shrine of the Lord of Yadus -- Krishna. St. Paul's Cathedral in London is originally 'Gopal Krishna Mandir.' The Kaaba in Mecca was a gigantic Vishnu temple, Paris was Panneshwaram, etc...

whats next?

The Moghul's were very savvy and diplomatic, they married with Hindu brides for polictial alliance. It would not be wrong for there to be some Hindu influence in the Islamic arcitecture of the Indian Subcontinent Naa?

This is all a big conspiracy theory. The unfortunate thing is there seems to be anti-Islam overtones with this one don't you think?

I still like the Taj Mahal as an antennia for UFO navigation theory the best though

.

I am a Hindu. I do not think it makes any difference at all as to what might have been at the site where the Taj is today. Any expression of beauty and love as pure as the Taj is spiritual and has a connection with the supreme being, irrespective of the religion.

If the Taj does have Vedic influences in its structure, its not a surprise, is it? One has to study the history of the Vedic civilisation and the Aryans to understand why, instead of wasting time reading articles that promote controversies.

"Different people call on [God] by different names: some as Allah, some as God, and others as Krishna, Siva, and Brahman. It is like the water in a lake. Some drink it at one place and call it 'jal', others at another place and call it 'pani', and still others at a third place and call it 'water'. The Hindus call it 'jal', the Christians 'water', and the Moslems 'pani'. But it is one and the same thing."

"All religions are true. The important thing is to reach the roof. You can reach it by stone stairs or by wooden stairs or by bamboo steps or by a rope. You can also climb up by a bamboo pole."

"Once some blind men chanced to come near an animal that someone told them was an elephant. They were asked what the elephant was like. The blind men began to feel its body. One of them said the elephant was like a pillar; he had touched only its leg. Another said it was like a winnowing fan; he had touched only its ear. In this way the others, having touched its tail or belly, gave their different versions of the elephant. Just so, a man who has seen only one aspect of God limits God to that alone."

- Ramakrishna Paramhans

Its difficult to believe that Sri Ramakrishna was born in the same country.

What is it that they sat at Konarak, that it was built as a giant magnet to draw Portugeese ships in. I got my aluminum foil hat for when I next visit there..

On Koanarak, I have heard a slightly different version of the story. There was a huge magnet placed in the roof of the temple - not to draw ships in but had something to do with sun/cosmic rays - as its a Sun Temple.

Apparently, the magnet caused problems with the navigation systems of ships of East India Company that used to ply on the coast - so eventually the British administration had it removed.

Could be true (or not) - does not change the beauty of Koanarak for me.

Now the Archeology museum nearby was good but they never heard of either story..