TRUTH OF THE TAJ MAHAL ~~~ WHAT THE SECULAR BASTARDS DONT WANT THE WORLD TO FIND OUT .!!!!!!!!

[ravi]

http://voi.org/sourced/bharatspeaks/tajmahal:itistimetotellthetruth.html

Taj Mahal: It is Time to Tell the Truth

By Dr V S Godbole,

[Editors Note: The following article is sourced to present the topic
for further investigation. The editors do not necessarily endorse nor
reject the findings and the conclusions presented herewith. Due to the
technical nature of the subject, it is upto the unbiased professional
historians and archaelogists to take up this subject for further
research and development, and present their findings preferably at a
professional conference.]

There are many legends about the Taj Mahal. But one sentence is common
in all of them. "For the construction, 20,000 men worked for 22
years." This is well known throughout the world. The simple question
is - where do these figures come from?

These figures come from a book Travels in India by J B Tavernier, a
French jewel merchant. He was a great adventurer who made six voyages
to India in the days of Shivaji (1638 to 1668). Tavernier says," I
witnessed the commencement and completion of this monument (Taj Mahal)
on which 20,000 men worked incessantly for 22 years."

Tavernier's book was first published in French in 1675. In those days,
it was a great adventure for a single man to travel over such a long
distance, face many difficulties, deal with peoples of many cultures
and languages, adjust to their customs and traditions, and come home
safely - that in itself was incredible. In addition Tavernier carried
out a trade in precious stones like diamonds. He completed such
voyages, not once but six times. His book was therefore a great
sensation at that time. It was naturally translated into English and
during 1677 to 1811; nine editions of the English translation were
published, whereas during the same period twenty-two editions of the
French book were printed.

In 1889 Dr Ball translated the original French book into English,
corrected some mistakes in earlier translation and provided extensive
footnotes. He also studied Tavernier's movements thoroughly and
provided details of his six voyages. From this it is clear that
Tavernier came to Agra only twice - in the winter of 1640-41 and in
1665. This raises another interesting question.

Historians say that Mumtaz, wife of Shahjahan died in 1631 and the
construction of Taj Mahal started immediately. But if that is the case
Tavernier could not have seen the commencement of Taj Mahal, as he
came to Agra nearly 10 years later.

Aurangzeb had imprisoned his father Shahjahan in the Red Fort of Agra
since 1658 and usurped power. No historian claims that Aurangzeb
completed Taj Mahal. So, Tavernier could not have seen the completion
of Taj Mahal either. And that being the case his statement that 20,000
men worked on it incessantly is meaningless.

Why have Historians kept this truth from us for the last 117 years?
The reason is simple. It strikes at the heart of the legend.

Badshahnama - what does it say?

British Historians have proclaimed that in India, Hindu Kings had no
historical sense. Historical records were kept only by the Muslim
rulers. Fair enough, then let us turn to Badshahnama which was written
during the reign of Shahjahan. Asiatic Society of Bengal published the
Persian text of Badshahnama in two parts, part I in 1867 and part II
in 1868. The compilation was done by two Maulavis, under the
superintendence of an English Major. The funny thing is that no one
quotes Badshahnama to explain how Taj Mahal was built. Why?

Elliot and Dowson, two English gentlemen undertook the formidable task
of writing history of India from the attack on Sindh by Mohammed bin
Kasim in the 8th century to the fall of Marathas in the 19th century.
A period covering some 1200 years. But it was written, based on
chronicles of Muslim rulers only. Elliot and Dowson's work was
published in 8 volumes during 1867 to 1877. Volume 7 deals with the
reigns of Shahjahan and Aurangzeb. And yet in the entire volume we do
not find the word ‘Taj Mahal.' The authors should have said, "Though
we have presented history of Shahjahan based on his official chronicle
Badshahnama, we did not find any reference to Taj Mahal in it." They
did no such thing. And Historians have kept even this information from
us for the last 130 years.

In 1896 Khan Bahaddur Syed Muhammad Latif wrote a book entitled Agra
Historical and Descriptive. He refers to Badshahnama many times but
does not quote specific page numbers. On page 105 he says, " - The
site selected for the mausoleum was originally a palace of Raja
Mansingh but it was now the property of his grandson Raja Jaisingh."
Many authors have referred to Latif in their bibliography but have not
cared to see what he has said. This truth was also hidden away from us
by our Historians.

In 1905 H R Nevill, ICS, compiled Agra District Gazetteer. In it he
changed the words ‘Raja Mansingh's Palace' to ‘Raja Mansingh's piece
of land'. Ever since all historians have followed suit and repeated ‘
Shahjahan purchased Raja Mansingh's piece of land, at that time in the
possession of his grandson Raja Jaisingh.' This deception has been
going on for more than a century.

One may ask, "Why would an English officer be interested in playing
such a mischief?" Well if we look at the events of those times the
reason is clear cut.

1901


Viceroy Lord Curzon separated some districts from Punjab to create a

Muslim majority North West Frontier Province. Hindus became an
insignificant minority in this province and that marked the beginning
of their misfortune.

1903


Curzon declared his intention to partition Bengal to create a Muslim
majority province of East Bengal

1905


Curzon resigned but put into effect the partition of Bengal

1906


A Muslim delegation led by Agakhan called upon new Viceroy Lord Minto.
Muslims pleaded that in any political reforms they should be treated
separately and favourably. This move was obviously engineered by the
British rulers.

December - Muslim League was started in Dacca.

1909


In the Morley - Minto reforms Muslims were granted separate
electorates.

We should also remember that during 1873 and 1914, some English
officers had translated into English the Persian texts of Babur-nama.
Humayun-nama,

Akbar-nama, Ain-e-Akbari and Tazuk - i - Jehangiri, but NOT
Badshahnama.

Judging from above events it is obvious why Mr Nevill played the
mischief when compiling Agra District Gazetteer in 1905.

It is astonishing that though Maulavi Ahmad (History of Taj 1905) and
Sir Jadunath Sarkar (Anecdotes of Aurangzeb, 1912) repeat that Raja
Mansingh's piece of land was purchased by Shahjahan, they also provide
a reference - Badshahnama,

Volume I page 403. Strange as it may sound, no one had bothered to see
what is written on that page.

In 1964 Mr P N Oak of New Delhi started having his doubts about Taj
Mahal. He put forward an argument that it was originally a Hindu
Palace. Oak had to cross swords with many historians. One of his
opponents was a Kashmiri Pandit. Eventually they went to Government of
India Archives. At the suggestion of the Librarian there the Pandit
started to read Badshahnama, soon he came to Volume I page 403. One
line read - va pesh azin manzil-e-Raja Mansingh bood, vadari vakt ba
Raja Jaisingh. He confessed that Shahjahan took over Raja Mansingh's
palace for burial of Mumtaz. We owe so much to this honest opponent of
Mr Oak. He gave word by word translation of pages 402 and 403 to Mr
Oak who promptly published it in his book Taj Mahal is a Hindu Palace
(1968). However, Mr Oak never stated that the translation was NOT his.
It was done for him by a Persian expert. That made life of his
opponents easy. They said, "Mr Oak's translation is wrong."

I obtained Oak's book in London in 1977. I made a study for one year.
First of all I read all the references generally quoted by Historians
and writers. That was made possible by my being in England. Mr Oak did
not have that facility. All the references led to the same conclusion
that Taj Mahal is a Hindu Palace and it was NOT built by Shahjahan. My
booklet entitled - Taj Mahal : Simple Analysis of a Great Deception
was published in 1986. In 1981 while going through some references I
started suspecting that the British knew the true nature of Taj Mahal
for a long time but had deliberately suppressed the truth. Eventually
my research was published in 10 parts in the Quarterly Itihas Patrika
of Thane (India). I collected all the information available on Taj
Mahal over the 200 year period from 1784 to 1984, and shown how the
British suppressed vital pieces of evidence or twisted the truth. My
research continued and was published in 1996 under the title - Taj
Mahal and the Great British Conspiracy

Taj legend exposed in England in 1980

Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) is a reputable
Institution in London. In1980, in their monthly Journal, they
published two letters challenging the validity of usual Taj Legend.
One was by Mr Oak, the other by me. No one has refuted our arguments.
Mr Oak refers to Badshahnama, Volume I page 403. What have I disclosed
in my letter?

What was Agra City like before Shahjahan came to power? That is the
question dodged by all Historians. In the 17th century, the Dutch like
the English were trying to trade in India. They had a Factory (trading
post) in Agra. Fransisco Pelsaert, was their Senior Factor (Merchant)
at Agra from 1620 to 1627. In 1626 he prepared a commercial report for
his directors in Holland. By strange coincidence, he describes Agra
City at that time. He says, "The city is narrow and long, because all
the rich and influential people have built their palaces on the river
bank and this stretches for

10 ½ miles. I will mention some of the well known ones. Starting from
the North there is the palace of Bahadur Khan, Raja Bhoj, ....... Then
comes the Red Fort.

(Pelsaert then describes the Fort) beyond it is Nakhas - a great
market, then follow the palaces of great Lords - Mirza Abdulla, Aga
Naur ...... Mahabat Khan, Late Raja Mansingh, Raja Madho Singh."

English translation of this report was available since 1925. And yet
no Historian refers to it. Why? The reason is simple. In 1626 Pelsaert
has said that 10 ½ mile stretch of the river-bank was full of palaces,
Late Raja Mansingh's Palace being the last but one. Badshahnama says
that Shahjahan took over this palace for burying his wife Mumtaz. Thus
what we call Taj Mahal today is nothing but Late Raja Mansingh's
Palace. That is the truth which Historians have kept away from us.

My efforts had one effect. In 1982 Archaeological Survey of India,
published a booklet entitled - Taj Museum. Though the authors repeat
the usual legend they say, " Mumtaz died in Burhanpur and was buried
there. Six months later Shahjahan exhumed her body and sent her coffin
to Agra, on that site until then stood Late Raja Mansingh's
Palace...... "

Today that palace is called Taj Mahal. Nothing could be simpler. What
building work is needed for burying a corpse in a Palace?