|
|
|
|
Articles: My Thoughts | Symbol of eternal love?
- Ms. kiran A
| |
His many provocative assertions have gained a lot of popular interest and made Oak a well-known media figure.
He has sued to break open the cenotaphs, and to tear down brick walls in the lower plinth: In these 'fake tombs' and 'sealed apartments', Oak says Shivalingams or other temple items were hidden by Shah Jahan.According to Oak, the Indian government's refusal to allow him unfettered access amounts to a conspiracy against Hinduism.
Oak's assertions are not accepted by legitimate scholars. But these stories are widely believed and publicized by some contemporary Hindutva (Hindu nationalist) activists.
In 2000 India's Supreme Court dismissed Oak's petition to declare that a Hindu king built the Taj Mahal and reprimanded him for bringing the action. In 2005 a similar petition was dismissed by the Allahabad High Court. This case was brought by Amar Nath Mishra, a social worker and preacher who claims that the Taj Mahal was built by the Hindu King Parmar Dev in 1196.
Probably there is no one who has been duped at least once in a life time. But can the whole world can 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 Tajmahal is not a Islamic mausoleum but an ancient Shiva Temple known as Tejo Mahalaya which the 5th generation moghul emperorShahjahan 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 archaded verendahs, 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 centotaphs. 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'.
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'.
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 centotaph 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.
| Read 4 Comment(s) posted so far on this Article!
| |
|
|
|
 |
| Advertisements |
|
|
|
|
| Advertisements |
|
