Loading...

facts about taj mahal.mp4

97,943 views

Loading...

Loading...

Transcript

The interactive transcript could not be loaded.

Loading...

Loading...

Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.
Published on Sep 20, 2010

Disclaimer
This Video is not intended to hurt the feeling of any religion,cast or race.This is just to inform u about some claim done by Mr.PN Oak on Taj Mahal.




Taj Mahal Theory
In his book Taj Mahal: The True Story, Oak claims that the Taj Mahal was originally a Shiva temple or a Rajput palace seized by Shah Jahan and adopted as a tomb.
The Taj, Oak says, is a "typical illustration of how all historic buildings and townships from Kashmir to Cape Comorin though of Hindu origin have been ascribed to this or that Muslim ruler or courtier".[14] He goes on to propose Hindu origins for the tombs of Humayun, Akbar and Itmiad-u-Dallah and "all historic buildings" in India as well as the Vatican,[9] the Kaaba and Stonehenge.
Oak claims that Hindu ornaments and symbols were effaced from the Taj, whose sealed chambers hold the remnants, including a Shiva Lingam, of the original temple and that Mumtaz Mahal was not buried at her cenotaph.
In support of these claims, Oak presents carbon dating results of the wood from the riverside doorway of the Taj, quotes from European travellers' accounts and the Taj's Hindu architectural features. Oak further alleges that eyewitness accounts of the Taj Mahal's construction as well as Shah Jahan's construction orders and voluminous financial records are elaborate frauds meant to hide its Hindu origin[citation needed].
Oak petitioned demanding that the Taj be declared a Hindu monument and that cenotaphs and sealed apartments be opened to determine whether Shivalingam or other temple remains were hidden in them.[14] According to Oak, the Indian government's refusal to allow him unfettered access amounts to a conspiracy against Hinduism. The Indian government has maintained that unnecessary openings of cenotaphs (tombs) cannot be allowed out of respect for the dead.
Oak's denial of Islamic architecture in India has been described as one of the "more extreme manifestations of anti-Muslim sentiment" in Maharashtrian popular culture.[15] K. N. Panikkar locates Oak's work in the Hindutva movements attempt to foster a communal understanding of Indian history.[16] Tapan Raychaudhuri has referred to him as "a 'historian' much respected by the Sangh Parivar."[17]
The writer Koenraad Elst sees Oak's claim as an example of "funny attempts at compensation" within a "Hindu inferiority complex" arising from what he describes as a crackdown by "arrogant Leftists" on Hindutva following the murder of Gandhi.[18]
In 2000 India's Supreme Court dismissed Oak's petition to declare that a Hindu king had built the Taj Mahal and reprimanded him for bringing the action, saying he had a "bee in his bonnet" about the Taj.[19] 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 says that the Taj Mahal was built by the Hindu King Parmar Dev in 1196

Loading...

Advertisement
When autoplay is enabled, a suggested video will automatically play next.

Up next


to add this to Watch Later

Add to

Loading playlists...