Truth Of Taj Mahal

Subject: A truth of TAJ MAHAL.


As great making "TAJ MAHAL" has completed the glorious
350 yrs, I
would like to let you know some real facts.
Real History of "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 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 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 validat