 |
| Sir V. S. Naipaul had called the Taj Mahal a vulgar, crude building, a display of power built on blood and bones. "The Taj is so wasteful, so decadent and in the end so crue l that it is painful to be there for very long. This is an extravagance that speaks of the blood of the people." As one famous Telugu poet wrote, "It is not to remember who built the Taj Mahal. It is to remember who are the labourers" |
THE story has been challenged by Professor P.N. Oak (1917 - 2007), He was the author of "Taj Mahal: The True Story", He believed the whole world had been duped by the history regarding this monument.
Mr. Oak graduated from Agra University and completed his MA LLB from Bombay University . He was one of the organizers of the Indian National Army, a director and commentator at the Free India Radio, Saigon , and later a co-worker of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. He later worked on the editorial staffs of the Hindustan Times and the Statesman. He also worked as an editor in the American Embassy’s Information Service in New Delhi.
He has claimed that the Taj Mahal is not Queen Mumtaz Mahal's tomb, but an ancient Hindu temple palace of Lord Shiva (then known as Tejo Mahalaya), worshipped by the Rajputs of Agra city.
In the course of his research, Oak discovered that the Shiva temple palace had been usurped by Shah Jahan from then Maharaja of Jaipur, Jai Singh. Shah Jahan then remodelled 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.
 |
French merchant Jean Baptiste
Tavernier (1605 - 1689) who visited India during Shah Jahan’s reign, has said in his book, Travels in India, the cost of the scaffolding exceeded that of the entire work done regarding the mausoleum.This proves that all Shah Jahan had to do was engrave Koranic texts on the walls of a Hindu palace; that is why the cost of the scaffolding was much more than the value of the entire work done. The Encyclopedia Brittanica states, that the Taj Mahal building complex comprises stables and guests and guard rooms. Mr. Nurul Hassan Siddiqui’s book, The City of Taj, admits that the Badshahnama states that a Hindu palace was commandeered to bury Mumtaz in. Historian Vincent Smith, also states that Babur died in the Taj Mahal 100 years before the death of the lady for whom the Taj is believed to have been built as a mausoleum. On page 321, Smith in his book Akbar the Great Moghul, says: " It is surprising to find unmistakable Hindu features in the architecture of the tomb of a most zealous Musalman saint, but the whole structure suggests Hindu feeling and nobody can mistake the Hindu origin of the column and struts of the porch." |
The ex-Maharaja of Jaipur is said to retain in his secret collection two orders from Shah Jahan for the surrender of the Taj building.
The use of captured temples and mansions as a burial place for dead courtiers and royalty was a common practice among Muslim rulers. For example, Hamayun, Akbar, Etmud-ud-Daula and Safdarjung are all buried in such mansions.
Is world history written from a Christian or Islamic perspective alone credible?
There are no final answers to our questions about humanity's past. In world history, all "conclusions" must be tentative. Yet, accounts of the past construed by Western historians usually come neatly packed in western cultural and sociological paradigms. But the nagging question diligent seekers of truth about the past ask remains, "Is world history written from a Christian or Islamic perspective alone credible?" The fact is, world's distant past is pre-Christian and pre-Islamic. Though it remains unknowable, scattered evidence of an older world (that is periodically reported in world media) tends to arouse the speculative impulse of a historian like India 's P.N. Oak who believed that our world's origins go back to its Vedic heritage.
Many believe that the Taj Mahal was a 12th century temple-palace seized from Raja Jaisingh of Jaipur and converted to accommodate Mumtaz's tomb. Mullah Abdul Hamid Lahori, Shah Jehan's own official chronicler, has written, that Mumtaz's body was laid to rest in a "lofty sky-high palace with a majestic dome" procured from Raja Jaisingh.
The journals of Tamerlane (1336-1405) and Babur (1483-1530) show that this palace pre-dates Shah Jahan and also points to the notable absence of any claim by Shah Jahan himself for its construction.
 |
| Dr. Ernest Binfield Havell (1861-1934 (principal to the Madras College of Art in the 1890s and left as principal of the Calcutta College of Art some 20 years later) has observed: " His first point was that whatever the inspiration, ‘there is one thing which has struck every writer about the Taj Mahal and that is its dissimilarity to any other monument in any other part of the world.." Havell insisted that the Islamic architecture in India was influenced by the Hindus. He supplied the following quotes from the opening quotes of his book, Indian Architecture - Its Psychology, Structure and History from the First Mohammedan Invasion to the Present Day. These give evidence at the admiration the Muslims had for Indian architecture: " Alberuni, the Arab historian, expressed his astonishment at andadmiration for the work of Hindu builders. "Our people, he said, "when they see them, wonder at them and are unable to describe them, much less to construct anything like them." Abdul Fazal author of Akbar-nama, wrote, "It passes our conception of things, few indeed in the whole world can compare with them." Outside India, its supposedprecursor, Humayun’s tomb in Delhi, or the other two white marble tombs, those of Itimad-ud-Daula in Agra and Salim Chishti at Fatehpur Sikri, were so inferior as to be unworthy of comparison. There was no precedent in the strictly non-representational art of Islam. And only an Hindu artist with his purely conceptual approach could have created a building that was so blatantly seductive. "The best Agra workers of the present day are also Hindus..." In my opinion the Delhi pietra dura (the figure drawing of birds inlaid in the rear wall of the royal balcony in the Diwani-i-Am, Red Fort) has been wrongly attributed to Shahjahan's reign..the naturalistic representation of birds and animals are a violation of Muslim law. The strict letter of (Koranic) law forbade the representation of the likenessof anything which is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath." (Note: Taliban recently has banned images of animals in Afghanistan). The Taj Mahal had a grand garden. A graveyard never boasts of luscious fruit and fragrant flower trees, since the idea ofenjoying the fruit and flowers of graveyard is revolting. The garden could therefore, only have been the adjunct of a palace. |
There is a passage from Shah jahan’s court chronicle, the Badshahnama, which despairingly admits that the Taj Mahal is a commandeered Hindu palace. Mansingh’s mansion (manzil) was then in the possession of his grandson Jaisingh – says the Badshahnama.
French merchant Jean Baptiste Tavernier (1605 - 1689) who visited India during Shah Jahan’s reign, has said in his book, Travels in India, the cost of the scaffolding exceeded that of the entire work done regarding the mausoleum. This proves that all Shah Jahan had to do was engrave Koranic texts on the walls of a Hindu palace; that is why the cost of the scaffolding was much more than the value of the entire work done.
 |
| Shah Jahan was no patron of the arts. Had he been one, he would not have had the heart to chop off the hands of those who are said to have toiled to 'build' the monument for his wife. An art lover, disconsolate over his wife's death, would not indulge in an orgy of maiming skilful craftsmen. Emperor Shahjahan’s wife Arjumand Banu died in Burhanpur somewhere between 1629 and 1632 A.D. Her body was buried in a garden there but is said to have been exhumed after about six months and transported to Agra. Jean Baptiste Tavernier, 17th century French jewel merchant, toured India for trade between 1641 and 1668 A.D . In his book, Travels in India, he has recorded all kinds of information on India. Mumtaz died somewhere between 1629 and 1632. Tavernier arrived in India nearly 11 years after Mumtaz’s demise. According to Tavernier the work commenced and ended during his stay in India. According to some Muslim accounts the Taj Mahal was complete starting from the foundations, by 1643, while Tavernier tells us that the work concerning the mausoleum was not begun by at least 1641. That means that even if the work began in 1641 it ended only in 1663. This was impossible since Shah Jahan was no longer on the throne after 1658. If a stupendous monument had been built for the burial of a consort, there would have been a ceremonial burial date and it would not go unrecorded. Even Encycopedia Brittanica states that Tavernier began a journey (1638-43) as far as Agra and Golconda . His visit to the Great Moghul and to the diamond mines. Tavernier has recorded: “ Of all the tombs which one sees at Agra that of the wife of Shahjahan is the most splendid. He purposely made the tomb near the Tasimacan (which had six large courts) where all foreigners come, so that the whole world should see and admire it. “ |
The Encyclopedia Brittanica states, that the Taj Mahal building complex comprises stables and guest and guard rooms.
Mr. Nurul Hassan Siddiqui’s book, The City of Taj, admits that the Badshahnama states that a Hindu palace was commandeered to bury Mumtaz in.
Historian Vincent Smith, also states that Babur died in the Taj Mahal 100 years before the death of the lady for whom the Taj is believed to have been built as a mausoleum. On page 321, Smith in his book Akbar the Great Moghul, says: " It is surprising to find unmistakable Hindu features in the architecture of the tomb of a most zealous Musalman saint, but the whole structure suggests Hindu feeling and nobody can mistake the Hindu origin of the column and struts of the porch."
(source: Proof of Vedic Culture's Global Existence - By Stephen Knapp p. 280-9)
 |
Mumtaz mahal – The Lady of the Taj
According to Shah Jahan’s own
court chronicle, the Badshahnama, which says, “ On the 17th Sil-I-Kada, 1040, died Nawab Aliya Begam, in the 40th year of her age… She had borne him eight sons and
six daughters…”
Maulvi Mionuddin Ahmed
observes that Mumtaz's original
name wasArjumand Banu Begum,
and she was conferred the
honorific title Mumtaz-ul-Zamani
by her father-in-law Jehangir,
but never Mumtaz Mahal,
and sheacquired the addition
"Mahal" posthumously by virtue
of being entombed in a palace,
and that
on the contrary it was not
the monument which acquired
her name, as latter-day historians would have us believe. What was the status of this lady? Arjumand Banu’s father was Khwaja Abul Hasan (also known as Yamin-ud-Daula Asaf khan) and mother, Diwanji Begum.
Born in1594, Mumtaz was
married to Shah Jahan in 1612.
She was 18 while Shah jahan was
21 years of age at the time of
marriage. But she as
not Shah Jahan’s first wife.
Shah Jahan’s first wife, the
queen, was a great
grand-daughter
of the ruler of Persia –
Shah Ismail Safwi. Shah Jahan
had numerous other wives
and manyconsorts. He not only
was married before taking Mumtaz
as his wifebut also married
again after her
death. In between these
weddings he also used to take
consorts by the hundreds into his
harem. It is, therefore,
futile to argue, as is traditionally
done, that Shah Jahan
was so devoted to Mumtaz
as to lose all interest in life after her death and that he, therefore, perpetuated her memory in a magnificent monument. During the 18 years of her married life she bore 14 children of whom 7 survived her. That meant in no single year was she free from pregnancy, which shows Shah Jahan’s utter disregard to his wife’s health, so much so that Mumtaz died soon after her last delivery. She
wasonly 37 years of age.
This questions the whole myth that Taj Mahal is a monument
of Love?
|
Havell insisted that the Islamic architecture in India was influenced by the Hindus. He supplied the following quotes from the opening quotes of his book, Indian Architecture - Its Psychology, Structure and History from the First Mohammedan Invasion to the Present Day. These give evidence at the admiration the Muslims had for Indian architecture: "
Alberuni, the Arab historian, expressed his astonishment at and admiration for the work of Hindu builders.
"Our people, he said, "when they see them, wonder at them and are unable to describe them, much less to construct anything like them."
Abdul Fazal author of Akbar-nama, wrote, "It passes our conception of things, few indeed in the whole world can compare with them."
Outside India, its supposed precursor, Humayun’s tomb in Delhi, or the other two white marble tombs, those of Itimad-ud-Daula in Agra and Salim Chishti at Fatehpur Sikri, were so inferior as to be unworthy of comparison. There was no precedent in the strictly non-representational art of Islam. And only an Hindu artist with his purely conceptual approach could have created a building that was so blatantly seductive.
"The best Agra workers of the present day are also Hindus..." In my opinion the Delhi pietra dura (the figure drawing of birds inlaid in the rear wall of the royal balcony in the Diwani-i-Am, Red Fort) has been wrongly attributed to Shahjahan's reign..the naturalistic representation of birds and animals are a violation of Muslim law. The strict letter of (Koranic) law forbade the representation of the likeness of anything which is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath." (Note: Taliban recently has banned images of animals in Afghanistan). The Taj Mahal had a grand garden. A graveyard never boasts of luscious fruit and fragrant flower trees, since the idea of enjoying the fruit and flowers of graveyard is revolting. The garden could therefore, only have been the adjunct of a palace.
An American visitor named "I have been struck by the singular fact that, while at the central seats of the Moslem empire art reached but a comparative degree of development here and there, on the opposite and most distant frontiers (i. e. Spain and in India) it attained a rapid and splendid culmination." In other words, in lands so distant as Spain and India Muslim invaders apparently built stupendous and magnificent monuments but in their own lands like Syria, Iraq and Arabia they have pretty little to show of the same caliber.
Also Shah Jahan was no patron of the arts. Had he been one, he would not have had the heart to chop off the hands of those who are said to have toiled to 'build' the monument for his wife. An art lover, disconsolate over his wife's death, would not indulge in an orgy of maiming skilful craftsmen.
 |
| "I have been struck by the singular fact that, while at the central seats of the Moslem empire art reached but a comparative degree of development here and there, on the opposite and most distant frontiers (i. e. Spain and in India) it attained a rapid and splendid culmination." – Baynard Taylor In other words, in lands so distant as Spain and India Muslim invaders apparently built stupendous and magnificent monuments but in their own lands like Syria , Iraq and Arabia they have pretty little to show of the same caliber. (The Al Hambra, Granada Spain) |
Emperor Shah Jahan’s wife Arjumand Banu died in Burhanpur somewhere between 1629 and 1632 A.D. Her body was buried in a garden there but is said to have been exhumed after about six months and transported to Agra. Jean Baptiste Tavernier, 17th century French jewel merchant, toured India for trade between 1641 and 1668 A.D. In his book, Travels in India, he has recorded all kinds of information on India. Mumtaz died somewhere between 1629 and 1632. Tavernier arrived in India nearly 11 years after Mumtaz’s demise. According to Tavernier the work commenced and ended during his stay in India.
According to some Muslim accounts the Taj Mahal was complete starting from the foundations, by 1643, while Tavernier tells us that the work concerning the mausoleum was not begun by at least 1641. That means that even if the work began in 1641 it ended only in 1663. This was impossible since Shah Jahan was no longer on the throne after 1658. If a stupendous monument had been built for the burial of a consort, there would have been a ceremonial burial date and it would not go unrecorded.
Even the Encycopedia Brittanica states that Tavernier began a journey (1638-43) as far as Agra and Golconda. His visit to the Great Moghul and to the diamond mines.
Tavernier has recorded: “ Of all the tombs which one sees at Agra that of the wife of Shahjahan is the most splendid. He purposely made the tomb near the Tasimacan (which had six large courts) where all foreigners come, so that the whole world should see and admire it.“
The word Tasimacan is Taz-I-macan, ie. Royal residence, which is synonymous with Taj Mahal. That is to say, the Hindu palace was known as Tasimacan alias Taj mahal even before Mumtaz’s burial, according to Tavernier. He tells us that foreigners used to flock to see the magnificent palace and that Shahjahan’s object in burying Mumtaz there was precisely to cash in on the sculptural grandeur of that dreamland palace. "Mahal" is exclusively used in India, is not of Arabic or Persian origin therefore not of the Mughal period, and contends that it is instead of Sanskrit origin. One can easily identify "Mahal" as a contraction of the Sanskrit "Mahalaya" or "Maha-alaya" meaning "Grand Residence" and when "Taj or Tej" meaning a crown is the qualifying adjective, the term takes on a whole new meaning, i.e. Grand Residence of the Crown, or Grand Royal Palace. "Tejas" is also the Sanskrit term for "resplendence" and "Teja Mahalaya" also means "Resplendent Shrine". The entire Taj building consists of over 1000 rooms along its corridors, in the two basements, on the upper floors and in its numerous towers, which clearly bears out that the contention that it was meant to be a temple-palace. The Taj Palace is located in the twin township of Jaisinghpura and Khawaspura, which are Rajput words, not Muslim. The Taj complex houses a pair of Nakkar Khana, i.e. drum houses. Drum houses are not only superfluous in a tomb but is a positive misfit for a departed soul.
Radiocarbon dating was performed on some door samples taken from the Taj Mahal by Prof Marvin Mills of the Pratt Institute Archaeological History Department, New York, who with Dr. Evan Williams of the Brooklyn College radiocarbon laboratory, thereby determined that the monument pre-dates Shah Jehan by at least three centuries.
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. 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 of the East India Company (The Travels 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. Many rooms in the Taj Mahal have remained sealed since Shah Jahan's time, and are still inaccessible to the public. 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. The current Indian government should open the sealed rooms of the Taj Mahal and let experts investigate.
Shah Jahan is often misrepresented in Indian histories as a fabulously rich Mughal. The image o his derives from the belief that he built a number of costly buildings while he actually did not build even a single one. Far from being a monarch possessing fabulous wealth Shah Jahan could hardly command any resources worth his name because his near – 30 –years reign was marred by 48 military campaigns. Shah Jahan’s relative poverty is fully borne out by Tavernier’s remark that from “want of wood” the scaffolding, including the support of arches, had all to be made of bricks. The reader may well consider whether a monarch who cannot muster even the timber necessary for a scaffolding, in a country like India which had vast stretches under dense forest, can ever hope or dream of ordering a building as magnificent and majestic as the Taj Mahal?
The Taj Mahal originated as a Shiva Temple?
The Taj edifice which Shah Jahan’s own chronicle (The Badshahnama) admits to be a Hindu mansion could have been an ancient Hindu temple. It is often wondered what determines the size of Mumtaz’s centoph. It is neither of the average height of a Muslim woman of the 17th century nor is it of the average height of an Islamic grave. It could be possible that the height of Mumtaz’s cenotaph is the height of the Hindu Shiva Linga consecrated in the Taj Mahal may have been the deciding factor. It could be then that the ancient Hindu sacred Shiva Linga is buried in the cenotaph while the grave in the basement may or may not contain Mumtaz’s body because bodies are always buried in the earth and not on a two-storey-high stone flooring.
Tavernier also mentions the six courts in the Taj Mahal building complex where a bazaar use to be held. It is common knowledge that in Hindu tradition bazaars and fairs are held around temples which constitute the focal points of Hindu life.
Some antecedents of the Taj Mahal. It was built over a pre-existing Hindu temple on the banks of Yamuna and has been extensively documented by few archeologists who smelled foul. It is like King's clothes story - nobody dares to question it because of sheer image of the Taj Mahal in the world. It is very rare to have Muslim structures near banks of rivers, esp. Indian rivers. And all the builders of Taj Mahal had their hands chipped off which is a fact.
The confession is contained in the "Badshahnama", a chronicle containing an account of Shah Jahan's reign by his court employee, Mulla Abdul Hamid Lahori. Printed copies of the "Badshahnama" (Bibliotheca Indica Series of the Asiatic Society of Bengal) are now available in all prominent historical libraries. A photostat of the relevant extract in Persian is provided herewith. The passage reads:
"Before this (i.e. being taken over) it was the manzil of Raja Mansingh. At this time, it was in the occupation of Raja Jaisingh, his nephew. This was selected for Mumtaz's heavenly abode...Although Raja Jaisingh deemed the take over of the grand mansion (Ala manzil) as a great honor done to him yet as a matter of etiquette and since it (taking over without compensation) is not permitted by religious convention - he was paid a certain sum for it from the royal treasury."
A few other points to note are:
Mumtaz died and was buried at Burhanpur on June 1631. Her body was exhumed and taken to Agra on Dec.11, 1631 and was reburied on the Taj ground on Jan 8, 1632. Is it humanly possible to build such a vast magnificent complex within six months? The first farman (emperor's decree) issued on 9/20/1632 by Shah Jahan urges Raja Jaisingh to expedite shipment of marble for the facing of the interior walls of theTaj, which suggests that the building was already in existence.
Aurangazeb wrote to his father (Shah Jahan) on Dec. 9, 1652 reporting serious leaks on the north side and several other parts of the complex. Would the Taj have shown symptoms of decay within mere 13 years of its construction? Since the Taj was built a few hundred years ago, it was showing normal wear and tear. Islam forbids building such mausoleum for a dead person's tomb and therefore it is farfetched to believe that Taj is an Islamic construction.
A piece of a wooden panel was subjected to a carbon-14 test by Evan T, Williams, Chemistry professor, City of New York College (Itihas Patrika- a quarterly Journal, Vol. 4, dt. 12/31/1984). As per the test report, the age of the wooden samples was determined to be 1359 + - 89 AD. Thus there is a 67% probability that the age of the sample lies between 1448 and 1270 AD.
Professor Marvin H. Mills (an architect and architectural historian), Pratt Institute, New York had written to the Archaeology Survey of India (ASI) on Oct. 3, 1984 requesting for permission to carry out tests on 20 samples from different locations of the Taj by using science of thermo-luminescence. The permission was denied by ASI on flimsy grounds.
Other valid questions mentioned below have never been answered:
Why does the "mosque" face west instead of facing Mecca against the Islamic norm? Why does a mausoleum need hundreds of rooms- unusual for a mosque? What are the sealed-up rooms on the south side of the long corridor opposite the twenty contiguous rooms? Why is the public allowed to see only the garden level floors and not the rest of the several seven-storied edifices? Why does the ASI not allow scholars and research workers to enter and study whatever objects and decor are within? Why has the ASI blocked carbon or any other scientific tests to verify the age of the Taj? Why are there Hindu symbols of the lotus and 32 tridents in the concave dome ceiling of Mumtaz's cenotaph? Why does the dome of the Taj bear a trident pinnacle with the crescent (Islamic crescents are always oblique)? Where are the texts and manuals on Islamic architecture? Where are the records and architectural designs of the Taj Mahal?
Astara Chandra, Brahmanists vs. Abrahmanists (Courtesy : From the wall of
Comments