|
RHTDM
KALKI is offline
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: I own a tent, it has a hole in it.
Posts: 47,405
My Mood:
Country 
Star Sign:  |
Taj Mahal was actually a Hindu temple of Shiva named ‘Tejo Mahalaya?’
COUNTER NARRATIVE:
Quote:
1. Mumtaz Was Shahjahan’s 4th Wife Out Of His 7 Wives
2. Shahjahan Killed Mumtaz’s Husband To Marry Her !
3. Mumtaz Died In Her 14th Delivery !
4. He Then Married Mumtaz’s Sister !
Question Arises Where The Hell Is The Love…
Another legend states that Taj Mahal was actually a Hindu temple of Shiva named ‘Tejo Mahalaya’ which was seized by Shah Jahan and renamed as Taj Mahal. This story was brought into light by an Indian Professor P.N. Oak, the writer of “Taj Mahal: The True Story”, a book that was published in 1965. He even filed a petition in the Indian court seeking permission to break open the cenotaphs, and tear down brick walls in the basement chambers of Taj Mahal to prove his theory. But, his petition was rejected as there was no hardcore evidence to support the claim. More proofs are required to justify that Taj Mahal was actually Tejo Mahalaya. Opening the hidden chambers for investigation could uncover more facts. Many researchers still continue to believe Oak’s theory, and the legend lives on.
|
ADDITIONAL ONLINE ARTICLES
Quote:
|
"The Question of the Taj Mahal" (Itihas Patrika, vol 5, pp. 98-111, 1985) by P. S. Bhat and A. L. Athavale is a profound and thoroughly researched and well balanced paper on the Taj Mahal controversy. This paper goes well with the photographs listed below. It uncovers the reasons for the rumors and assumptions of why it is said that Shah Jahan built the Taj Mahal, and presents all the inconsistencies of why that theory doesn't hold up. It also covers such things as the descriptions found in the old Agra court papers on the Taj; descriptions and measurements of the building in the old records; Aurangzeb's letter of the much needed repairs even in 1632 which is unlikely for a new building; records that reveal Shah Jahan acquired marble but was it enough for really building the Taj or merely for inlay work and decorative coverings; the observations of European travelers at the time; the actual age of the Taj; how the architecture is definitely of Indian Hindu orientation and could very well have been designed as a Shiva temple; the issue of the arch and the dome; how the invader Timurlung (1398) took back thousands of prisoner craftsmen to build his capital at Samarkhand and where the dome could have been incorporated into Islamic architecture; how it was not Shah Jahan's religious tolerance that could have been a reason for Hindu elements in the design of the Taj; how the direction of the mosque does not point toward Mecca as most mosques do; the real purpose of the minarets at the Taj; the Hindu symbolism recognized in the Taj which would not have been allowed if it was truly Muslim built; and even as late as 1910 the Encyclopaedia Britannica included the statement by Fergusson that the building was previously a palace before becoming a tomb for Shah Jahan; and more. A most interesting paper.
|
https://www.stephen-knapp.com/was_th...dic_temple.htm
IF SOMETHING IS YOUR FAVOURITE, IT CLEARY MEANS YOU HOLD THAT MORE DEAR IN COMPARISON TO THE OTHER... 
|