TAJ MAHAL PALACE FROM INDIA WAS A HINDU TEMPLE OF LORD SHIVA, NOT QUEEN'S MUMTAZ'S TOMB

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 Safdar
jung 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 cit y 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 validate Oak's research. 


The current government should open the sealed rooms of the
Taj Mahal under U.N. supervision, and let international 
experts investigate. 


Do circulate this to all you know and let them know about 
this reality..... 


Please check this link ........it adds as a visual proof .........
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/was_the_taj_mahal_a_vedic_temple.
htm seven-storied structure


Edited by Haminia