A very different kind of protest is underway at Delhi’s Jantar Manatr. It is dignified and disciplined, like the faujis sitting in protest. But, accustomed to violent, disruptive protests, this has got hardly any mention in the media. In fact Babustan has made it a point to smother all coverage of the protest. About 15,000 medals of ex-servicemen of all three services – Generals to Jawans – have been collected and returned to Supreme Commander, Pratibha Patil.
What do medals signify? To civilians these are trinkets which make ‘stupid’ faujis happy. But to a fauji, each medal is a reminder of courage, comradeship and sacrifice: the first time under fire - fear overcome and manhood gained; friends attaining veergati; some wounded or disabled. Hardship and separation from loved ones – perhaps, serving in Himalayas, protecting the very people who now deny him his dues, he became a father and yearned for the day he could proceed on leave to cuddle his newborn.
When Mrs Shikha Bhardwaj, mother of Shaheed Capt Umang Bhardwaj, packed his Shaurya Chakra, she renounced the most precious nishani of her ‘jigrey ka tukra’. Even the shaheed hero’s father, Col Bhardwaj returned his own Sena Medal to Pratibha Patil. Every ‘ma and mai-ka-lal’ will feel Shikha’s heart- wrench over her tyaag. Only, Pratibha Patil, was made to miss the occasion – even her Military Advisor was absent. Such is the power and heartlessness of Babustan! After imposition of the election model code, when she met IESM delegation, she told them she had not been informed!
What do faujis want; are they not paid enough? They seek justice and equity. Their demand is for one defined pension for every rank from Rifleman to General applicable to all retirees, irrespective of retirement dates (OROP). Due to steep promotion pyramid faujis face extreme supercession, based mainly on performance. Hence, denial of OROP affects them acutely. Consider some Army examples: there is only one Subedar-Major for 60,000 sepoys. Of 1100 officers commissioned every year, just three reach HAG-equivalent grade. In IAS/IPS there are more HAG posts than the intake level! Performance-based promotions are as foreign to these services as Burkina-Faso. Out of 11 lac armymen, only eight are eligible for OROP. But, over 99% of IAS/IPS officers, 100% judges and MPs have entitled themselves to it.
Before Defence Forces were brought under ambit of the Central Pay Commissions (CPC), every rank had a specified pension. Thereafter, while subjected to the CPCs’ ‘awards’, they were denied representation in all of them - despite constituting 40% of all Central Employees. This is the key to Babustan’s steady erosion of Defence Forces’ emoluments and status. 6CPC took the cake. Not only were they denied representation, but were not even allowed to make even a presentation to the Commission! What is the result? ‘Anomalies’ from as far back as the 4CPC are still pending for 23 years! Atleast three are in Supreme Court .No wonder faujis term them ‘peeth mein chhura’! As cases drag on most faujis would never see benefits in their lifetimes; when these back-stabs are settled. That’s how Babustan denies justice to those who safeguard their air-conditioned lifestyles.
Babustan’s MoD has consistently played a pernicious role in heaping injustice on the faujis. 4PC (1986), for the first time unshackled the Forces from the steep hierarchical pyramid by adopting a running pay band and superimposing rank pay. However, sly manipulation by Defence Finance ensured that the basic pay was depressed by the amount of rank pay! What the CPC gave, diabolic accounting denied. Major Dhanapalan’s contention was upheld by Supreme Court. Quarter century later, far from conceding their mistake, MoD is still fighting other veterans in the Supreme Court.
5PC (1996) included Non Practicing Allowance (NPA) of Government doctors in their pensions. Subsequently, GOI reversed this for earlier retirees, forcing them to court. Having lost in High Courts, GOI appealed to Supreme Court. Later, better sense dawned on all other Departments, who withdrew their cases. But MoD still persists in singling out military doctors - the only group being discriminated against.
The 6PC fiasco revealed the purposeful machinations of MoD-bureaucrats to depress defence forces’ status, yet again. When the Chiefs protested, newspapers, once renowned for fearlessly frank journalism, carried explicit threats. Thankfully, many TV channels and intrepid journals defied MoD and exposed Babustan’s degradation of two crucial ranks. This had immediate ramifications in security-sensitive Kashmir at police-chiefs’/ Corps Commanders’ levels. Clearly, defence of the Republic is inconsequential; only ‘putting-the-Army-down’ counts.
More than 80% faujis retire before they turn 40 and nearly all before 60! However, while previous CPCs removed pension weightages which had partially compensated for early retirements, 6CPC further aggravated the disparities between pensioners. Today, a sepoy who retired in Dec 2005 gets 82% less pension than one who retired in Jan 2006! Even a pre-2006 Havildar gets 37% less pension than a sepoy - two ranks his junior. Surely, Parliament is there to safeguard fauji interests, as it is reflects the citizens’ solid support of their fauji bhaiyyas. Yes, the KP Singh-Deo Committee appointed back in 1980s first enunciated the term OROP and recommended it. But Babustan has been able to consistently ensure that it is not implemented.
DS Nakra, a retired FADS, approached the Courts when he in turn faced pension inequity. Supreme Court in its landmark judgment of 17-12-1982 upheld the principle of OROP. Revealing extracts from the judgment are quoted below:
"Pension is ….. but a payment for past services rendered”. The hon’ble court further stated, “Payment of Pension is a statutory liability incurred and must be provided in the Budget. The argument (regarding limitations of resources) is an argument of desperation ...without merit and must be rejected as untenable (Para 45)…” On 9-9-08, delivering judgment in a 5CPC-related case, whereby veteran Maj-Gens’ pensions were equalled to that of Brigs (junior rank) retiring prospectively, the Supreme Court quoted extensively from the Nakra case and ruled that different dates of retirement cannot be a basis for denial of equity in pensions - a senior rank-holder must get higher pension than his junior. At first 6CPC denied this to Brigs, Maj-Gens and Lt-Gens, all of whose pensions were made equal to Cols (junior to all) retiring prospectively. Only when faced with contempt notice, Babustan gave a nominal increase to these ranks. But still denies them OROP!
In a TV debate anchored by Karan Thapar in Feb ‘09, it was brought out that OROP was part of the Congress 2004 election manifesto. In light of the above judgements, Manoj Tewari had to defend the indefensible: INC’s denial of OROP during 41/2 years in office. He mouthed the party line, ‘I empathise with these people (sic), but due to legal, financial and administrative reasons, OROP cannot be given.’ One month later, now seeking election from Punjab, he issued a statement that, should he return as MP, he would ensure that OROP is granted to Defence Personnel!
If the citizens, Parliament and Supreme Court all favour granting OROP, what stops the Govt from acceding to this demand? Obviously, it is the Haath of Babustan. At a time when perilous security storms are gathering around us, the Defence Forces are forced to fight the might of Babustan for justice and honour. All patriotic citizens, who value the nation’s integrity, must vote for those who will support its fauji saviours and ensure that ‘farebi jhhootas’ are given the ‘joota’ in the polls.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
VARUN HAS A RIGHT TO DEFEND HIMSELF by Pankaj Vohra
In what appears to be an unfortunate and misleading campaign, a section of media has already declared Varun Feroze Gandhi, Indira Gandhi’s youngest grandchild, guilty of making hate speeches in the Pilibhit area of Uttar Pradesh without allowing him a chance to defend himself. If Varun has indeed said what is being attributed to him, he will naturally attract criminal charges under the existing penal code. But, like any other citizen, he has every right to defend himself. The prosecution will have to establish without any doubt that he incited communal hatred while addressing an audience. A CD believed to contain the recording of the said speech has already been declared as “doctored’’ by the young man who is seeking to contest and win his maiden election to the Lok Sabha in 2009 from a constituency earlier represented by his mother Maneka Gandhi.
There are several dimensions to the Varun episode if one looks at it objectively. First and foremost is his ambition of getting into politics like the rest of his illustrious family. Since he bears the most popular surname in Indian politics, he is naturally bound to attract more public attention than others. Second, he has to live with the perceptions, wrong or right, people have about his father, Sanjay, a man far ahead of his times. Issues like the small family norm, literacy, ecology and discipline he raised are valid even today. Therefore, the sanctimonious attitude of many in the media have led to them visiting the so-called `sins’ of the father upon the son.
Sanjay Gandhi, irrespective of perceptions, had a very shrewd political brain. No one can deny that he helped his mother come back to power at the Centre in 1980. Had he lived, there is no doubt in anyone’s mind that he would have been Prime Minister. But his life came to a premature and tragic end with the crash of his Pitts 2 aircraft on June 23, 1980. Varun was just three months old.
Coming back to Varun, he is, of course, the “other’’ Gandhi. The Nehru Gandhi legacy is, by all accounts, now with his aunt, Sonia Gandhi and cousin, Rahul Gandhi who control the Congress, the party his father, uncle, grandmother and great grandfather had once nurtured. So from a purely political perspective, he has to carve out a political identity for himself.
In doing so, he cannot be seen as using the same political idiom as his cousin uses since he has chosen to be in a different political party espousing a different ideology. If he uses the same idiom, he will be a clone like Suman Kalyanpur is till today remembered as the poor man’s Lata Mangeshkar. He has to pursue a different political path. This is not to suggest that he should spread hatred towards other communities. But like many in the BJP, he too wants to play the Hindu card and wear his identity on his sleeve. His real aim is to distinguish himself and not necessarily propagate a licence to kill.
Fourth, the controversy has helped him come to the centre stage of politics. Until the polls are over, he will get as much attention as any other leader involved in the campaign. This has worried many of the BJP’s second rung leaders who fear that Varun could supersede them in the hierarchy. Now that a change has taken place in the RSS and hardliner Mohan Bhagwat, a stickler for ideology, is in command; Varun could well enjoy a meteoric rise. The RSS will want Indira Gandhi’s grandson on its side.
Last, another dimension which needs to be examined by legal experts is whether the Election Commission was empowered to serve him a notice under section 125 of the Representation of People’s Act even before the President has notified the elections. Knowledgeable sources believe that the role of the EC can come into play only after the President notifies the polls on March 23. Even the order for the removal of the Andhra DGP by the EC was questionable. In both cases, it would seem that the EC has overstepped its limits. In this context, it is important to note that Varun Feroze is neither an office-bearer nor technically the official candidate of the BJP as yet. He will be a candidate after he files his nomination. It is only then that the jurisdiction of the EC can kick in. There are some who have been speculating on the fact that despite his candidacy being announced, his nomination could be rejected during scrutiny. He can no doubt be charged under 153 (a) of the IPC. But, as of now, the EC has no jurisdiction over him.
One can understand why a worried and confused BJP reacted the way it did. But what about Varun’s lawyers? They should take on the EC. To condemn a young man seeking a political future without according him a chance to defend himself goes against our democratic traditions. Between us.
There are several dimensions to the Varun episode if one looks at it objectively. First and foremost is his ambition of getting into politics like the rest of his illustrious family. Since he bears the most popular surname in Indian politics, he is naturally bound to attract more public attention than others. Second, he has to live with the perceptions, wrong or right, people have about his father, Sanjay, a man far ahead of his times. Issues like the small family norm, literacy, ecology and discipline he raised are valid even today. Therefore, the sanctimonious attitude of many in the media have led to them visiting the so-called `sins’ of the father upon the son.
Sanjay Gandhi, irrespective of perceptions, had a very shrewd political brain. No one can deny that he helped his mother come back to power at the Centre in 1980. Had he lived, there is no doubt in anyone’s mind that he would have been Prime Minister. But his life came to a premature and tragic end with the crash of his Pitts 2 aircraft on June 23, 1980. Varun was just three months old.
Coming back to Varun, he is, of course, the “other’’ Gandhi. The Nehru Gandhi legacy is, by all accounts, now with his aunt, Sonia Gandhi and cousin, Rahul Gandhi who control the Congress, the party his father, uncle, grandmother and great grandfather had once nurtured. So from a purely political perspective, he has to carve out a political identity for himself.
In doing so, he cannot be seen as using the same political idiom as his cousin uses since he has chosen to be in a different political party espousing a different ideology. If he uses the same idiom, he will be a clone like Suman Kalyanpur is till today remembered as the poor man’s Lata Mangeshkar. He has to pursue a different political path. This is not to suggest that he should spread hatred towards other communities. But like many in the BJP, he too wants to play the Hindu card and wear his identity on his sleeve. His real aim is to distinguish himself and not necessarily propagate a licence to kill.
Fourth, the controversy has helped him come to the centre stage of politics. Until the polls are over, he will get as much attention as any other leader involved in the campaign. This has worried many of the BJP’s second rung leaders who fear that Varun could supersede them in the hierarchy. Now that a change has taken place in the RSS and hardliner Mohan Bhagwat, a stickler for ideology, is in command; Varun could well enjoy a meteoric rise. The RSS will want Indira Gandhi’s grandson on its side.
Last, another dimension which needs to be examined by legal experts is whether the Election Commission was empowered to serve him a notice under section 125 of the Representation of People’s Act even before the President has notified the elections. Knowledgeable sources believe that the role of the EC can come into play only after the President notifies the polls on March 23. Even the order for the removal of the Andhra DGP by the EC was questionable. In both cases, it would seem that the EC has overstepped its limits. In this context, it is important to note that Varun Feroze is neither an office-bearer nor technically the official candidate of the BJP as yet. He will be a candidate after he files his nomination. It is only then that the jurisdiction of the EC can kick in. There are some who have been speculating on the fact that despite his candidacy being announced, his nomination could be rejected during scrutiny. He can no doubt be charged under 153 (a) of the IPC. But, as of now, the EC has no jurisdiction over him.
One can understand why a worried and confused BJP reacted the way it did. But what about Varun’s lawyers? They should take on the EC. To condemn a young man seeking a political future without according him a chance to defend himself goes against our democratic traditions. Between us.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
TAJ MAHAL ! WAS IT REALLY BUILT BY SHAH JAHAN ? NO. written by indianvoice
Recently, One of my friend send me one chain-email where I got stuck on the logics where Taj Mahal is referred as "Tejo Mahalya" means Lord Shiva Temple. This is really eye-opening and shocking for all the Hindu Community. It will be appreciated if all of you can spread it to all of your friends, relatives and everyone your nearby. This History is going to edited as Google itself contains more than 3500 search results when typing Tejo Mahalya means daily more people are awaring with this fact, check it here: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=tejo+mahalya&spell=1
Chain Email Content:
You must have heard about the 7th wonders of the world. But have you heard about the 8th wonder of the world? The 8th wonder is the temple of the God Shiva (who is revered for the all the HIndus) which is known as the Taj Mahal in the present. When was TejoMahalaya constructed? How much money was spent on it? About this questions historians have different opinions. It is obvious because truth is always one but the lie is not indifferent. Some historians believe that the name of Taj Mahal is derrived from the name of "Mumtaz Mahal" who was queen of Shahjahan. But the fact is that the original name of queen "Mumtaz Mahal" was "Mumtaz-ul-Zamani". In the literature of memories king Babar, who was ancestor of Shahjahan, had noted that he had stayed in the "Tejo Mahalaya." Originally, on the bank of the river Yamuna this Hindu temple was built by the king "Parmardi Dev" who was ancestor of king of Jaipur, Mansing. He built this temple in 1156 a.d. (By Hindu calendar - Ashwin Shukla Pancham, Vikram Samvat 12122 - Sunday). The temple was so huge and glorious that a poet had once writted that "God Shiva" will leave the Kailash (One of the peak of the Himalayas) and will come to this "Cristal White Temple". The documentary proof of this temple is preserved in Government Muesum in Lucknow. The king who is called as the ideal of the lovers, Shahjahan, was the most cruel and fantic person. In India, the subject of history teaches us "Shahjahan was a lover of art and generous hearted. He also respected other religions. In his reign supreme was the time of peace and goldenera for India." But the reality was that in 30 years of his reign 48 wars were fought which means one and half battle per year! So, it is strange to say this period was the time of peace. These wars had greatly affected to the economical condition of Kingdom. The history writer of Shahjahan had noted that at the 4th year of his reign (the year of Mumtaz's death) in South India and Gujarat there was a terrible famine. People were also ready to give up their children for a piece of bread. For long period the meat of dog was being sold as meat of Goat. Powder of bones was being mixed with the floor. To overcome this situation king had started the stalls of food in Surat etc. Can you imagine what the people would have affected by eating the meat and floor of such kind of? What would have been the position of people ? In this terrible period. A king who had 5000 wives, spent a carore of ruppees for his dead wife's tomb! How can you say that this period as a goldenera? In this terrible period, when Shahjahn had seen the "Tejo Mahalya" (The Temple of lights) which was the Rich and Holy temple of Hindu people he had decided to rob and destroy the temple which was also called as a Palace of King Mansing. The windows of this temple were constructed from Silver. On the walls of this temple very precious dimonds were fitted. It is natural the any robber would have noticed a precious temple like "Tejo Mahalaya". During the same period Mumtaz died, Shahjahan took the golden opportunity and the dug the dead body of Mumtaz from the grave yard of Barhanpur and reburial into the Hindu Temple "Tejo Mahalya".
Proof and Conclusions on Taj Mahal Name:
1. The term Tajmahal itself never occurs in any mogul court paper or chronicle even in Aurangzeb's time. The attempt to explain it away as Taj-i-mahal is therefore, ridiculous.
2. The ending "Mahal" is never muslim because in none of the muslim countries around the world from Afghanistan to Algeria is there a building known as "Mahal".
3. The unusual explanation of the term Tajmahal derives from Mumtaz Mahal, who is buried in it, is illogical in at least two respects viz., firstly her name was never Mumtaj Mahal but Mumtaz-ul-Zamani and secondly one cannot omit the first three letters "Mum" from a woman's name to derive the remainder as the name of the building.
4. Since the lady's name was Mumtaz (ending with 'Z') the name of the building derived from her should have been Taz Mahal, if at all, and not Taj (spelled with a 'J').
5. Several European visitors of Shahjahan's time allude to the building as Taj-e-Mahal is almost the correct tradition, age old Sanskrit name Tej-o-Mahalaya, signifying a Shiva temple. Contrarily Shahjahan and Aurangzeb scrupulously avoid using the Sanskrit term and call it just a holy grave.
6. The tomb should be understood to signify Not A Building but only the grave or centotaph inside it. This would help people to realize that all dead muslim courtiers and royalty including Humayun, Akbar, Mumtaz, Etmad-ud-Daula and Safdarjang have been buried in capture Hindu mansions and temples.
7. Moreover, if the Taj is believed to be a burial place, how can the term Mahal, i.e., mansion apply to it?
8. Since the term Taj Mahal does not occur in mogul courts it is absurd to search for any mogul explanation for it. Both its components namely, 'Taj' and' Mahal' are of Sanskrit origin.
Temple Tradition:
9. The term Taj Mahal is a corrupt form of the sanskrit term TejoMahalay signifying a Shiva Temple. Agreshwar Mahadev i.e., The Lord of Agra was consecrated in it.
10. The tradition of removing the shoes before climbing the marble platform originates from pre Shahjahan times when the Taj was a Shiva Temple. Had the Taj originated as a tomb, shoes need not have to be removed because shoes are a necessity in a cemetery.
11. Visitors may notice that the base slab of the centotaph is the marble basement in plain white while its superstructure and the other three centotaphs on the two floors are covered with inlaid creeper designs. This indicates that the marble pedestal of the Shiva idol is still in place and Mumtaz's centotaphs are fake.
12. The pitchers carved inside the upper border of the marble lattice plus those mounted on it number 108-a number sacred in Hindu Temple tradition.
13. There are persons who are connected with the repair and the maintainance of the Taj who have seen the ancient sacred Shiva Linga and other idols sealed in the thick walls and in chambers in the secret, sealed red stone stories below the marble basement. The Archaeological Survey of India is keeping discretely, politely and diplomatically silent about it to the point of dereliction of its own duty to probe into hidden historical evidence.
14. In India there are 12 Jyotirlingas i.e., the outstanding Shiva Temples. The Tejomahalaya alias The Tajmahal appears to be one of them known as Nagnatheshwar since its parapet is girdled with Naga, i.e., Cobra figures. Ever since Shahjahan's capture of it the sacred temple has lost its Hindudom.
15. The famous Hindu treatise on architecture titled Vishwakarma Vastushastra mentions the Tej-Linga amongst the Shivalingas i.e., the stone emblems of Lord Shiva, the Hindu deity. Such a Tej Linga was consecrated in the Taj Mahal, hence the term Taj Mahal alias Tejo Mahalaya.
16. Agra city, in which the Taj Mahal is located, is an ancient centre of Shiva worship. Its orthodox residents have through ages continued the tradition of worshipping at five Shiva shrines before taking the last meal every night especially during the month of Shravan. During the last few centuries the residents of Agra had to be content with worshipping at only four prominent Shiva temples viz., Balkeshwar, Prithvinath, Manakameshwar and Rajarajeshwar. They had lost track of the fifth Shiva deity which their forefathers worshipped. Apparently the fifth was Agreshwar Mahadev Nagnatheshwar i.e., The Lord Great God of Agra, The Deity of the King of Cobras, consecrated in the Tejomahalay alias Tajmahal.
17. The people who dominate the Agra region are Jats. Their name of Shiva is Tejaji. The Jat special issue of The Illustrated Weekly of India (June 28,1971) mentions that the Jats have the Teja Mandirs i.e., Teja Temples. This is because Teja-Linga is among the several names of the Shiva Lingas. From this it is apparent that the Taj-Mahal is Tejo-Mahalaya, The Great Abode of Tej.
Documentary Evidence:
18. Shahjahan's own court chronicle, the Badshahnama, admits (page 403, vol 1) that a grand mansion of unique splendor, capped with a dome (Imaarat-a-Alishan wa Gumbaze) was taken from the Jaipur Maharaja Jaisigh for Mumtaz's burial, and the building was known as Raja Mansingh's palace.
19. The plaque put the archealogy department outside the Tajmahal describes the edifice as a mausoleum built by Shahjahan for his wife Mumtaz Mahal, over 22 years from 1631 to 1653 That plaque is a specimen of historical bungling. Firstly, the plaque sites no authority for its claim. Secondly the lady's name was Mumtaz-ulZamani and not Mumtazmahal. Thirdly, the period of 22 years is taken from some mumbo jumbo noting by an unreliable French visitor Tavernier, to the exclusion of all muslim versions, which is an absurdity.
20. Prince Aurangzeb's letter (Refer to Figure above) to his father, emperor Shahjahan, is recorded in atleast three chronicles titled Aadaab-e-Alamgiri, Yadgarnama, and the Muruqqa-i-Akbarabadi (edited by Said Ahmed, Agra, 1931, page 43, footnote 2). 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.
21. The ex-Maharaja of Jaipur retains in his secret personal KapadDwara collection two orders from Shahjahan dated Dec 18, 1633 (bearing modern nos. R.176 and 177) requestioning the Taj building complex. That was so blatant a usurpation that the then ruler of Jaipur was ashamed to make the document public.
22. The Rajasthan State archives at Bikaner preserve three other firmans addressed by Shahjahan to the Jaipur's ruler Jaisingh ordering the latter to supply marble (for Mumtaz's grave and koranic grafts) from his Makranna quarris, and stone cutters. Jaisingh was apparently so enraged at the blatant seizure of the Tajmahal that he refused to oblige Shahjahan by providing marble for grafting koranic engravings and fake centotaphs for further desecration of the Tajmahal. Jaisingh looked at Shahjahan's demand for marble and stone cutters, as an insult added to injury. Therefore, he refused to send any marble and instead detained the stone cutters in his protective custody.
23. The three firmans demanding marble were sent to Jaisingh within about two years of Mumtaz's death. Had Shahjahan really built the Tajmahal over a period of 22 years, the marble would have needed only after 15 or 20 years not immediately after Mumtaz's death.
24. Moreover, the three mention neither the Tajmahal, nor Mumtaz, nor the burial. The cost and the quantity of the stone also are not mentioned. This proves that an insignificant quantity of marble was needed just for some supercial tinkering and tampering with the Tajmahal. Even otherwise Shahjahan could never hope to build a fabulous Tajmahal by abject dependence for marble on a non cooperative Jaisingh.
European Visitor's Accounts:
25. Tavernier, a French jeweller has recorded in his travel memoirs that Shahjahan purposely buried Mumtaz near the Taz-i-Makan (i.e.,`The Taj building') where foriegners used to come as they do even today so that the world may admire. He also adds that the cost of the scaffolding was more than that of the entire work. The work that Shahjahan commissioned in the Tejomahalaya Shiva temple was plundering at the costly fixtures inside it, uprooting the Shiva idols, planting the centotaphs in their place on two stories, inscribing the koran along the arches and walling up six of the seven stories of the Taj. It was this plunder, desecrating and plunderring of the rooms which took 22 years.
26. Peter Mundy, an English visitor to Agra recorded in 1632 (within only a year of Mumtaz's death) that `the places of note in and around Agra, included Taj-e-Mahal's tomb, gardens and bazaars'. He, therefore, confirms that that the Tajmahal had been a noteworthy building even before Shahjahan.
27. De Laet, a Dutch official has listed Mansingh's palace about a mile from Agra fort, as an outstanding building of pre shahjahan's time. Shahjahan's court chronicle, the Badshahnama records, Mumtaz's burial in the same Mansingh's palace.
28. Bernier, a contemporary French visitor has noted that non muslim's were barred entry into the basement (at the time when Shahjahan requisitioned Mansingh's palace) which contained a dazzling light. Obviously, he reffered to the silver doors, gold railing, the gem studded lattice and strings of pearl hanging over Shiva's idol. Shahjahan comandeered the building to grab all the wealth, making Mumtaz's death a convineant pretext.
29. Johan Albert Mandelslo, who describes life in agra in 1638 (only 7 years after mumtaz's death) in detail (in his Voyages and Travels to West-Indies, published by John Starkey and John Basset, London), makes no mention of the Tajmahal being under constuction though it is commonly erringly asserted or assumed that the Taj was being built from 1631 to 1653.
Chain Email Content:
You must have heard about the 7th wonders of the world. But have you heard about the 8th wonder of the world? The 8th wonder is the temple of the God Shiva (who is revered for the all the HIndus) which is known as the Taj Mahal in the present. When was TejoMahalaya constructed? How much money was spent on it? About this questions historians have different opinions. It is obvious because truth is always one but the lie is not indifferent. Some historians believe that the name of Taj Mahal is derrived from the name of "Mumtaz Mahal" who was queen of Shahjahan. But the fact is that the original name of queen "Mumtaz Mahal" was "Mumtaz-ul-Zamani". In the literature of memories king Babar, who was ancestor of Shahjahan, had noted that he had stayed in the "Tejo Mahalaya." Originally, on the bank of the river Yamuna this Hindu temple was built by the king "Parmardi Dev" who was ancestor of king of Jaipur, Mansing. He built this temple in 1156 a.d. (By Hindu calendar - Ashwin Shukla Pancham, Vikram Samvat 12122 - Sunday). The temple was so huge and glorious that a poet had once writted that "God Shiva" will leave the Kailash (One of the peak of the Himalayas) and will come to this "Cristal White Temple". The documentary proof of this temple is preserved in Government Muesum in Lucknow. The king who is called as the ideal of the lovers, Shahjahan, was the most cruel and fantic person. In India, the subject of history teaches us "Shahjahan was a lover of art and generous hearted. He also respected other religions. In his reign supreme was the time of peace and goldenera for India." But the reality was that in 30 years of his reign 48 wars were fought which means one and half battle per year! So, it is strange to say this period was the time of peace. These wars had greatly affected to the economical condition of Kingdom. The history writer of Shahjahan had noted that at the 4th year of his reign (the year of Mumtaz's death) in South India and Gujarat there was a terrible famine. People were also ready to give up their children for a piece of bread. For long period the meat of dog was being sold as meat of Goat. Powder of bones was being mixed with the floor. To overcome this situation king had started the stalls of food in Surat etc. Can you imagine what the people would have affected by eating the meat and floor of such kind of? What would have been the position of people ? In this terrible period. A king who had 5000 wives, spent a carore of ruppees for his dead wife's tomb! How can you say that this period as a goldenera? In this terrible period, when Shahjahn had seen the "Tejo Mahalya" (The Temple of lights) which was the Rich and Holy temple of Hindu people he had decided to rob and destroy the temple which was also called as a Palace of King Mansing. The windows of this temple were constructed from Silver. On the walls of this temple very precious dimonds were fitted. It is natural the any robber would have noticed a precious temple like "Tejo Mahalaya". During the same period Mumtaz died, Shahjahan took the golden opportunity and the dug the dead body of Mumtaz from the grave yard of Barhanpur and reburial into the Hindu Temple "Tejo Mahalya".
Proof and Conclusions on Taj Mahal Name:
1. The term Tajmahal itself never occurs in any mogul court paper or chronicle even in Aurangzeb's time. The attempt to explain it away as Taj-i-mahal is therefore, ridiculous.
2. The ending "Mahal" is never muslim because in none of the muslim countries around the world from Afghanistan to Algeria is there a building known as "Mahal".
3. The unusual explanation of the term Tajmahal derives from Mumtaz Mahal, who is buried in it, is illogical in at least two respects viz., firstly her name was never Mumtaj Mahal but Mumtaz-ul-Zamani and secondly one cannot omit the first three letters "Mum" from a woman's name to derive the remainder as the name of the building.
4. Since the lady's name was Mumtaz (ending with 'Z') the name of the building derived from her should have been Taz Mahal, if at all, and not Taj (spelled with a 'J').
5. Several European visitors of Shahjahan's time allude to the building as Taj-e-Mahal is almost the correct tradition, age old Sanskrit name Tej-o-Mahalaya, signifying a Shiva temple. Contrarily Shahjahan and Aurangzeb scrupulously avoid using the Sanskrit term and call it just a holy grave.
6. The tomb should be understood to signify Not A Building but only the grave or centotaph inside it. This would help people to realize that all dead muslim courtiers and royalty including Humayun, Akbar, Mumtaz, Etmad-ud-Daula and Safdarjang have been buried in capture Hindu mansions and temples.
7. Moreover, if the Taj is believed to be a burial place, how can the term Mahal, i.e., mansion apply to it?
8. Since the term Taj Mahal does not occur in mogul courts it is absurd to search for any mogul explanation for it. Both its components namely, 'Taj' and' Mahal' are of Sanskrit origin.
Temple Tradition:
9. The term Taj Mahal is a corrupt form of the sanskrit term TejoMahalay signifying a Shiva Temple. Agreshwar Mahadev i.e., The Lord of Agra was consecrated in it.
10. The tradition of removing the shoes before climbing the marble platform originates from pre Shahjahan times when the Taj was a Shiva Temple. Had the Taj originated as a tomb, shoes need not have to be removed because shoes are a necessity in a cemetery.
11. Visitors may notice that the base slab of the centotaph is the marble basement in plain white while its superstructure and the other three centotaphs on the two floors are covered with inlaid creeper designs. This indicates that the marble pedestal of the Shiva idol is still in place and Mumtaz's centotaphs are fake.
12. The pitchers carved inside the upper border of the marble lattice plus those mounted on it number 108-a number sacred in Hindu Temple tradition.
13. There are persons who are connected with the repair and the maintainance of the Taj who have seen the ancient sacred Shiva Linga and other idols sealed in the thick walls and in chambers in the secret, sealed red stone stories below the marble basement. The Archaeological Survey of India is keeping discretely, politely and diplomatically silent about it to the point of dereliction of its own duty to probe into hidden historical evidence.
14. In India there are 12 Jyotirlingas i.e., the outstanding Shiva Temples. The Tejomahalaya alias The Tajmahal appears to be one of them known as Nagnatheshwar since its parapet is girdled with Naga, i.e., Cobra figures. Ever since Shahjahan's capture of it the sacred temple has lost its Hindudom.
15. The famous Hindu treatise on architecture titled Vishwakarma Vastushastra mentions the Tej-Linga amongst the Shivalingas i.e., the stone emblems of Lord Shiva, the Hindu deity. Such a Tej Linga was consecrated in the Taj Mahal, hence the term Taj Mahal alias Tejo Mahalaya.
16. Agra city, in which the Taj Mahal is located, is an ancient centre of Shiva worship. Its orthodox residents have through ages continued the tradition of worshipping at five Shiva shrines before taking the last meal every night especially during the month of Shravan. During the last few centuries the residents of Agra had to be content with worshipping at only four prominent Shiva temples viz., Balkeshwar, Prithvinath, Manakameshwar and Rajarajeshwar. They had lost track of the fifth Shiva deity which their forefathers worshipped. Apparently the fifth was Agreshwar Mahadev Nagnatheshwar i.e., The Lord Great God of Agra, The Deity of the King of Cobras, consecrated in the Tejomahalay alias Tajmahal.
17. The people who dominate the Agra region are Jats. Their name of Shiva is Tejaji. The Jat special issue of The Illustrated Weekly of India (June 28,1971) mentions that the Jats have the Teja Mandirs i.e., Teja Temples. This is because Teja-Linga is among the several names of the Shiva Lingas. From this it is apparent that the Taj-Mahal is Tejo-Mahalaya, The Great Abode of Tej.
Documentary Evidence:
18. Shahjahan's own court chronicle, the Badshahnama, admits (page 403, vol 1) that a grand mansion of unique splendor, capped with a dome (Imaarat-a-Alishan wa Gumbaze) was taken from the Jaipur Maharaja Jaisigh for Mumtaz's burial, and the building was known as Raja Mansingh's palace.
19. The plaque put the archealogy department outside the Tajmahal describes the edifice as a mausoleum built by Shahjahan for his wife Mumtaz Mahal, over 22 years from 1631 to 1653 That plaque is a specimen of historical bungling. Firstly, the plaque sites no authority for its claim. Secondly the lady's name was Mumtaz-ulZamani and not Mumtazmahal. Thirdly, the period of 22 years is taken from some mumbo jumbo noting by an unreliable French visitor Tavernier, to the exclusion of all muslim versions, which is an absurdity.
20. Prince Aurangzeb's letter (Refer to Figure above) to his father, emperor Shahjahan, is recorded in atleast three chronicles titled Aadaab-e-Alamgiri, Yadgarnama, and the Muruqqa-i-Akbarabadi (edited by Said Ahmed, Agra, 1931, page 43, footnote 2). 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.
21. The ex-Maharaja of Jaipur retains in his secret personal KapadDwara collection two orders from Shahjahan dated Dec 18, 1633 (bearing modern nos. R.176 and 177) requestioning the Taj building complex. That was so blatant a usurpation that the then ruler of Jaipur was ashamed to make the document public.
22. The Rajasthan State archives at Bikaner preserve three other firmans addressed by Shahjahan to the Jaipur's ruler Jaisingh ordering the latter to supply marble (for Mumtaz's grave and koranic grafts) from his Makranna quarris, and stone cutters. Jaisingh was apparently so enraged at the blatant seizure of the Tajmahal that he refused to oblige Shahjahan by providing marble for grafting koranic engravings and fake centotaphs for further desecration of the Tajmahal. Jaisingh looked at Shahjahan's demand for marble and stone cutters, as an insult added to injury. Therefore, he refused to send any marble and instead detained the stone cutters in his protective custody.
23. The three firmans demanding marble were sent to Jaisingh within about two years of Mumtaz's death. Had Shahjahan really built the Tajmahal over a period of 22 years, the marble would have needed only after 15 or 20 years not immediately after Mumtaz's death.
24. Moreover, the three mention neither the Tajmahal, nor Mumtaz, nor the burial. The cost and the quantity of the stone also are not mentioned. This proves that an insignificant quantity of marble was needed just for some supercial tinkering and tampering with the Tajmahal. Even otherwise Shahjahan could never hope to build a fabulous Tajmahal by abject dependence for marble on a non cooperative Jaisingh.
European Visitor's Accounts:
25. Tavernier, a French jeweller has recorded in his travel memoirs that Shahjahan purposely buried Mumtaz near the Taz-i-Makan (i.e.,`The Taj building') where foriegners used to come as they do even today so that the world may admire. He also adds that the cost of the scaffolding was more than that of the entire work. The work that Shahjahan commissioned in the Tejomahalaya Shiva temple was plundering at the costly fixtures inside it, uprooting the Shiva idols, planting the centotaphs in their place on two stories, inscribing the koran along the arches and walling up six of the seven stories of the Taj. It was this plunder, desecrating and plunderring of the rooms which took 22 years.
26. Peter Mundy, an English visitor to Agra recorded in 1632 (within only a year of Mumtaz's death) that `the places of note in and around Agra, included Taj-e-Mahal's tomb, gardens and bazaars'. He, therefore, confirms that that the Tajmahal had been a noteworthy building even before Shahjahan.
27. De Laet, a Dutch official has listed Mansingh's palace about a mile from Agra fort, as an outstanding building of pre shahjahan's time. Shahjahan's court chronicle, the Badshahnama records, Mumtaz's burial in the same Mansingh's palace.
28. Bernier, a contemporary French visitor has noted that non muslim's were barred entry into the basement (at the time when Shahjahan requisitioned Mansingh's palace) which contained a dazzling light. Obviously, he reffered to the silver doors, gold railing, the gem studded lattice and strings of pearl hanging over Shiva's idol. Shahjahan comandeered the building to grab all the wealth, making Mumtaz's death a convineant pretext.
29. Johan Albert Mandelslo, who describes life in agra in 1638 (only 7 years after mumtaz's death) in detail (in his Voyages and Travels to West-Indies, published by John Starkey and John Basset, London), makes no mention of the Tajmahal being under constuction though it is commonly erringly asserted or assumed that the Taj was being built from 1631 to 1653.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
THIS IS YOUR PAGE
Friends, this is your page. You can write articles on any topic, you wish to. Welcome to your page.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
