Originally posted by g60kg
rather than to shy away from it because it may offend people.
Offense is never a reason to not investigate, indeed.
However, again, I would caution, there is a lot of bad information out there being floated by both sides, and the hindu nationalists in india are not
above making these sorts of claims in order to advance their prestige, both in the public's mind and their own minds.
Similar to Dr. Zahi Hawass in Egypt.
Perhaps this is the best reason to not bother with any investigations, because they will be fruitless. When people came to Hawas with good evidence
of chambers or voids underneath the sphinx, he engaged, with them, in digging down to the level of the chambers, exposing the sphinx, one of the
oldest man-made things out there, to great danger. There was nothing there; fair enough it was an error.
And yet, people continue to insist that there is something there, and then smear the good name of the esteemed, open-minded, and honourable Dr.
There is no reason to deal with such demands.
As far as destroying the Taj Mahal, I think that its fame might
protect it, but there are other muslim mosques and shrines that hindu
nationalist mobs have destroyed, claiming that there are ancient vedic temples underneath.
how would it tarnish the image of the Taj?
By having mobs of people incite sectarian violence and having people die over it. Lets not pretend that thats not a possibility.
once again I am only after the truth if the truth is in fact that it was built by Shah Jahan, then so be it.
No one is claiming that Jahan found it, said 'neat' and then carved his name on it. They are saying that there was a structure on the site, built
by non-muslim hindu indians, and that muslim non-hindu indians built the current structure.
Clearly, the Taj Mahal is not a hindu building, it is clearly a muslim building. Muslims don't make statues, wall decorations of living things, etc,
and that is why the Taj Mahal is so 'plain', unornate, and geometric. Indian Temples celebrate the image of life to the point of practical
As far as the site you are citing:
By now you all know through my previous articles, the irrefutable facts and deductive logic which prove that Islam is evil right at its very
foundation. It is not a religion, but a means to legalize rape, murder, loot and destruction!
Lets take anything this yahoo says with a few metric tonnes of salt.
Please keep in my mind that this is the same Shah Jahan who had a harem of 5,000 women and the same Shah Jahan who had a incestuous relationship
with his daughter justifing it by saying, 'a gardner has every right to taste the fruit he has planted'! Is such a person even capable of imagning
such a wondrous structure as the Taj Mahal let alone be the architect of it?
Clearly, they are. Being a lout or oversexed has nothing to do with nothing. SOme of the greatest temples in india are absolutely covered with
statuettes depicting every sex act between a man, woman, and a half dozen of her friends, possible.
The writer Abdul Hamid has stated that Taj Mahal is a temple-palace taken from Jaipur's Maharaja Jaisigh and the building was known as Raja
IOW, there was a hindu building there, and now there is a giagantic muslim mausoleum.
In that letter Aurangzeb records in 1652 A.D itself that the several buildings in the fancied burial place of Mumtaz were seven storeyed and were
so old that they were all leaking, while the dome had developed a crack on the northern side. Aurangzeb, therefore, ordered immediate repairs to the
buildings at his own expense while recommending to the emperor that more elaborate repairs be carried out later. This is the proof that during
Shahjahan's reign itself that the Taj complex was so old as to need immediate repairs.
Again, irrelevant. THe structure you see now is not a hindu temple, it is a great work of muslim art, built on the site of an old hindu temple. The
facets that make the builidng remarkable are the muslim facets, not the fact that there is yet another big stone building.