PN Oak, Taj Mahal is really a Hindu Temple
By Koenraad Elst
Countless Hindus nowadays swear by the historical and linguistic theses of journalist and self-styled historian PN Oak. Twenty years ago, I expected his star to wane and get eclipsed by more sensible voices of Hindu historical revisionism, but the opposite has happened. In NRI/PIO circles, at least, he seems to enjoy a lasting popularity. What a pity. Purushottam Nagesh Oak (1917-2007) was a soldier in Subhas Chandra Bose’s Indian National Army. That much should endear him to Hindus, fair enough. But he is better known and revered for his theories on history and etymology. And these are best put aside and forgotten, instead of being parroted by Hindus on ever larger forums. In the main, three lines of argument have been pioneered or promoted by P.N. Oak. One is that the Taj Mahal, the Red Fort and a few other well-known Indo-Muslim buildings were really Hindu temples, not built but only usurped by the Muslims. The second is that Vikramaditya (1st cent. BCE) ruled Arabia, a claim that is then linked with the more widespread belief that the Kaaba was originally a Hindu temple featuring a Shiva Lingam. The third is that names of places and people around the globe are of Sanskrit origin and thus testify to the omnipresence and omnipotence of the ancient Hindus. All three are fanciful and totally unfounded. We will consider them in reverse order.
Donkey etymology
Etymology is the science of the original, or at least oldest traceable, forms of words. It is a tricky field and requires knowledge of older stages of a language and of related languages. You may find that seemingly similar words are unrelated while totally dissimilar words may prove to be related.
Consider e.g. the French word feu and the German word Feuer, quite similar in appearance. Moreover, they are identical in meaning, viz. “fire”. So are they cognate words? No, Germanic f- is evolved from Indo-European p-, and Feuer is related to Greek pur, meaning “fire”, whence English pyromaniac and (funeral) pyre, ultimately from IE *péhur. By contrast, French f- generally preserves an Latin f-, which in most cases evolved from IE th/dh- (compare Latin fumus, “smoke”, to Greek thumos, “spirit”, and Sanskrit dhumah, “smoke”). In this case, feu is from focus, “hearth”, and fovere, “burn” (related to Sanskrit dahati), ultimately from IE *dhegh, “burn”. (The forms marked with asterisk* are not attested in writing but reconstructed from younger attested forms.)
Or consider e.g. the English words let. Yes, word-s, for there are two identical-looking words let. Here we don’t need to move up as far as the dim Indo-European past to find their seeming identity deceptive. One is the verb meaning “to allow”, “not to prevent”. The other is less common but known in the expression “without let or hindrance”, where let is a synonym of “hindrance”, meaning “prevent”, “block”, or the very opposite of the other let in the sense of “allow”. How can that be? It becomes clear when we look back only a thousand years, to Old English, or even closer, to its nearest cognate, Dutch. In Dutch till today we have on the one hand the verb lat-en, “let, allow” and on the other the verb be-let-ten, “prevent” and the noun be-let, “hindrance, objection”. In English the distinction between the sounds of the two stems has eroded and they have ended up coinciding. The identical form conceals different origins.
This caveat against trusting appearances is systematically violated by P.N. Oak. To him, similarity proves a common origin. And that common origin is always a one-way street: any word resembling a Sanskrit word must have been borrowed from Sanskrit, never the other way around. Some fifteen years ago, I received a letter from him in which he proposed to collaborate. That proposal made no sense to me as we were working along very different lines and from radically conflicting premises, I suppose he hadn’t even noticed that. There is only one version of history approved by the Nehruvians, with which both of us disagree, but there are many alternatives, some sound and others nonsensical. In passing, he claimed that my native tongue, Dutch, is “the language of the Daityas”. A dubious compliment, for the Daitya-s are demons, kind of opposite to the Aditya-s or gods.
Similar etymological claims have been made by Oak and his acolytes in large numbers. Thus, England, named in reality after the Germanic tribe of the Angles (whence East-Anglia, Anglo-Saxon), is explained as originating from Angulisthan, which happens to mean “finger-land”. Arabia is derived from Arvasthan, “horse-land”. In fact, the name has a Semitic root attested since the Akkadian empire in the 3rd millennium BCE. Horses have nothing to do with Arabia but originate in the Eurasian plain, stretching northwest from Bactria, thousands of miles from Arabia, where they were imported only in the 2nd millennium BC. Rome is said to be derived from Rama, and Vatican (actually from vates, “inspired poet”, cognate to the Germanic theonym Woden/Odin, hence “poets’ hill”) from Veda-vatika, “Veda park”, incidentally “proving” that Christianity is an offshoot of Vedic dharma. In cases where a foreign name coincides completely with a Sanskrit word, such as the Amerindian ethnonym Maya and Shankara’s philosophical concept maya, there is simply no stopping the euphoric eureka-s in the Oakist camp.
I will not take the easy route of amusing the readers with a long list of Oakisms. Let us only note that this line of thought has caught on in broad Hindu circles. A textbook introducing Hinduism to UK schoolchildren, Hindu Dharma (at least the first edition, perhaps it has been corrected since) claims that the Tibetan title Lama, “ordained monk”, is derived from Rama, the hero’s name. Firstly, this is not true: Lama is pure Tibetan, belonging to the Sino-Tibetan language family, unrelated to Indo-Aryan. The word was originally pronounced, and still written in Tibetan as, bla-ma, of which the first syllable means “upper”, as in bla-dakh, “high mountain-pass”, better known as Ladakh. Secondly, how would it make sense? Why should a community of celibate renunciates name itself after a romantic warrior-prince? Likewise, what is gained by deriving foreign names from Sanskrit? Proving that the ancient Hindus were big losers who once dominated the world and were then chased from all those lands except for India? It seems that a lot of Hindus, when glimpsing a mirage that flatters their collective ego, suspend their critical sense and go ecstatic.
King Vikram and the Arab ghost
On quite a few Hindu websites, you find the claim that king Vikramaditya, presumably the one whose name is linked to the Vikram Samvat calendar (starting 58 BCE, so that 2010 CE roughly coincides with 2067 VS), ruled over Arabia. One can understand where the idea originates: in confusion over genuine data, viz. his proverbial defeat of the Yavana (“Ionian”, i.e. stemming from the lands to India’s northwest) or Shaka (“Scythian”) invaders. “Defeat” can be read as “conquest”, hence conquest of their homelands, hence conquest of all the lands who armies have been labelled by the Indian defenders as Yavanas or Shakas, i.e. Central and West Asia. This could be reckoned as including even Ionia (the formerly Greek west coast of Anatolia) and definitely Arabia, land of origin of invaders like Mohammed bin Qasim, and of the religion of India’s numerous Turkic and Afghan invaders.
So, the shift from Vikram as defeater of northwestern invaders to Vikram as conqueror of the lands to the northwest is understandable. But it is unfounded all the same. There was plenty of literature in West Asia in Vikramaditya’s time, in Greek, Latin, Egyptian and various Semitic dialects, yet none ever mentions Vikramaditya. Conversely, in what little reliable historical testimony of Vikramaditya that we have, we find no recognizable description of Arabia nor a narrative of its conquest.
But, according to those Hindu websites, there is an Arabic record of Vikramaditya’s glorious presence in Arabia, the Sayar-ul-Okul, “memorable words”, said to be available in the Maktab-al-Sultania (Royal library) in Istanbul. But none of them has ever cared to go and see the book. And all of these references can be traced to P.N. Oak, apparently the only person in the world who has ever seen this spectacularly revisionist source of history. This reminds us of the manuscript purportedly left by Jesus in a Ladakhi monastery, where a late-19th-century Russian adventurer claimed to have seen it, without ever being confirmed in this finding by a second eyewitness, yet successful in setting millions of Hindus and New-Agers jubilating that “Jesus lived in India”, thereby only strengthening the missionary claim on India and on Hindu souls. For neither claim is there the slightest serious evidence. Believers who take Oak’s bait do so at their own peril: they take the risk of being outed as fools.
As for the Kaaba being a Shiva temple, this is untrue but it has a serious kernel of truth. Typologically it was of course Pagan “idol” temple. Muslims recognized Hinduism as essentially the same kind of idol-worship as the native Arab religion. The Kaaba’s presiding deity was the moon-god Hubal, similar to Shiva in that the latter is depicted as carrying the moon on his head. His three goddesses Al-Lat, Uzza and Manat, were believed by the Muslims to have taken refuge in the Somnath (Shiva) temple on the Gujarat coast. This is the reason why more than any other, that particular Hindu temple was singled out for destruction upon destruction.
Paganism has thrown up similar deities in widely separated parts of the globe. The Arabs could easily think up a moon god and a triple goddess without ever having heard of Shiva and his Parvati, Durga and Kali. And if at all there was a Hindu influence at work here, it can easily be explained through the well-attested trade contacts rather than through a fairy-tale of King Vikram.
The Taj Mahal a Shiva temple?
In autumn 2009, one Dr. Radheshyam Brahmachari posted an article series, “Distortion of Indian History For Muslim Appeasement” to various Hindutva lists and to the vanguard Islam-critical website faithfreedom.org, e.g.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/
(where it seems to have been pulled sometime since, probably under the impact of the kind of criticism that I will now formulate). The message he develops is entirely based on PN Oak’s influential thesis that the Taj Mahal is a Shiva temple usurped by the Moghuls. Other mighty instances of Indo-Muslim architecture including the Red Fort are likewise claimed to be originally Hindu structures.
In fact, Hindu tradition has handbooks on temple-building, and none contain the groundplan and features of the Taj Mahal. Nor is there any Hindu temple past or present that looks like the Taj Mahal even remotely. The building may well stand on the site of a Rajput pavilion expropriated by or gifted to the Moghul, but it never ever was a Shiva temple.
In defence of his thesis, Brahmachari challenges the sceptics to explain one particular inscription dedicating an unspecified marble temple in the area to Vishnu. It is not clear from the inscription as given by him that one of the temples stood at the very site of the Taj Mahal. According to his own data, at any rate, the inscription is from ca. 1150 AD. That is well before the destruction of just about every temple in North India by Ghori and Aibak in 1192-94 and by their successors in the Delhi Sultanate. Especially in Agra, lying on the main route of Muslim advance and a sometime Muslim capital, no sizable temple could have been left standing in that orgy of iconoclasm. So there is some 500 years between the destruction of the said marble temples and the appearance of the Taj Mahal.
At any rate, even if standing on a Hindu site, the Taj Mahal is absolutely no Hindu building. It entirely follows the conventions of Indo-Saracenic architecture, with domes and arches borrowed by the first Muslims in West-Asia from the Byzantines, with no Hindu connection in sight anywhere. As a grave, too, it is wildly contrary to Hindu sensibilities. Only accomplished (jivanmukta) sages are buried, other human bodies are cremated or, in related (Parsi, Tibetan) traditions, left to disintegrate under the impact of animals and the elements. The idea of keeping decomposing human bodies close to human centres of habitation in graveyards is repulsive to the Hindu mind. It is a sign of Hindus’ estrangements from their roots that they insist on claiming this un-Hindu site, probably because (Brahmachari writes as much) it is applauded world-wide. Well, proud Hindus don’t care for the poor taste of Western tourists and may point out that the Taj Mahal is bland and vulgar when compared with Ajanta and Ellora, the Meenakshi temple or the Elephanta caves.
The typical Oakist argument exemplifies some flaws in the Hindu nationalist mind. In his very first sentence of his Taj article, Brahmachari falsely claims that three Western authorities have confirmed that the Taj was built in the Hindu temple style. None of them, however, is quoted as explicitly saying so. I won’t accuse Brahmachari of lying; the far more common source of untrue claims is self-delusion. Misreading bonafide documents, like a child misunderstanding a text by and for grown-ups, is probably the most common source of Hindutva misconceptions. Every reader who checks with the original, or who even only knows the field in general, will see through these false claims, the main exception being some even sillier fellow Hindus egged on by their eagerness to find some soothing delusion to indulge. At any rate, if a Westerner or anyone else can believe that the Taj is in the Hindu temple style, he clearly has never seen a temple. And hence is not an “authority”.
The appeal to authority is one particularly harmful Hindutva trait. Rather than thinking for themselves, Hindutva polemicists prefer to latch onto some all-knowing Guru and unwisely expect everybody else to be equally taken in by this mindless reliance on authority. It’s like in the crisis in the BJP, where most arguments are not about: “What line should we, the BJP membership, take?”, but rather: “Which big man can come and save us from this mess?”
Dr. Brahmachari’s and Mr. Oak’s own writings exemplify yet another eyesore trait of Hindutva polemic. When a Hindutva history-rewriter uses logical connectors like “this proves”, “therefore”, “this provides another evidence for…”, you’d better watch out. Invariably, a non-sequitur or other logical fallacy is following.
In the Oakist case for the Red Fort as a Hindu building, we get the following instance, among others. The whole case is built on the presence of Hindu motifs in the Red Fort. Part of this claim is simply false. The so-called Aum sign next to the sun wheel in the gate is just a flourish, distinctly different from the real, Aum sign (e.g. vertically symmetrical, which the OM sign is not). But even to the extent that the claim is true, it doesn’t prove what Oak deduces from it. Firstly, the building was built by a Muslim ruler, in the sense that he ordered it built, but in actual stone it was built by Hindu masons, who slipped a few Hindu elements in. There are numerous instances of this in Moghul architecture. But they couldn’t go too far, so you don’t see any Hindu deities depicted, or emphatically Hindu symbols. The presence of elephants, cited as distinctly un-Islamic, is a borderline case in Muslim sensitivities, but not off-limits and in fact fairly common in Moghul Indo-Saracenic art (indeed, even humans are routinely depicted, at least in the Moghul school of painting).
Secondly, a certain amount of Hindu presence was a deliberate part of Muslim building policy. Theologically, it made good sense to Muslims to incorporate recognizably Hindu (but non-deity) elements in their architecture as a sign of the submission of Hindus to Islam, vide e.g. the parts of the Kashi Vishvanath temple visibly present in the mosque that forcibly replaced it. Orthodox theologians like the Wahhabis did indeed reject this syncretism, and took it as a sign of the Islamic laxism that in their view caused the downfall of the Moghuls,— thereby implicitly testifying to the presence of non-Islamic elements in Moghul art. So, even if some Hindu elements could be discerned in the Red Fort, it still does not deny its belonging to the Indo-Muslim building style.
Conclusion
In my close involvement with the Ayodhya debate, I noticed how excellent Hindu historians and archaeologists were very successful at finding evidence, but rather poor in presenting a coherent picture of where exactly their findings fit into the argumentation (a job with which I busied myself). If that is true for real historians, it is all the more true for amateurs like Oak and Brahmachari. For even if their case that the Red Fort was built by a Hindu rather than a Muslim ruler were true, what would it prove? That even when in possession of such a mighty stronghold, the Hindus were too incompetent to retain Delhi in the face of aggression by the militarily far less sophisticated Muslims? That Muslims were incapable of building forts of their own, though the Muslim world inside and outside the subcontinent has quite a few? PN Oak and his followers are not only unable to prove their points, they are also totally confused about why perforce they should want to prove those specific points.
This self-defeating Quixotic exercise can only compromise the credibility of its authors, and of all those trusting enough to convey it. That is why it is grimly irresponsible to contaminate with this nonsense a spearhead website in the struggle for the hearts and minds, faithfreedom.org. That website was created by ex-Muslims who try to help Muslims break free from the mental prison of Islam. Its only weapon is the truth, factual data presented in a scholarly manner, the light of reason that alone is able to defeat Islamic obscurantism. The enemy will love it if such a centre of truth gets tainted with the eager but silly delusions peddled by the Oakist crowd. If Dr. Brahmachari were perchance an enemy agent, he would do exactly what he has actually done in this case. Hare-brained Hindutva polemicists are ten a penny, but one who is in a position to drag down with himself a quality entreprise, that’s exceptional.
The popularity of PN Oak’s theses is a sign of gross immaturity among contemporary Hindu activists. It indicates confusion regarding the facts of religious conflict in Indian history, along with a narcissistic greed, a morbid desire to lay ludicrous ownership claims to all manner of precious objects produced by outsiders (as if Hindu Dharma’s genuine achievements weren’t enough to be proud of). In that respect, it is of one piece with claims that Hindus in Rama’s age already used helicopters. But helicopters would at least be a more progressive and scientific achievement to show off than a mere grave, no matter how embellished. No, the best thing to do here is to take the advice of genuine Hindu historians like R.C. Majumdar and Sita Ram Goel, which is to ignore the P.N. Oak school of history. Let it pass gently into the night.
@Koenraad :
In your article, you have only superficially questioned the existing indepth articles by PN Oak. Let me show how,
1) Talking about Latin, greek and Sanskrit, you have not talked about how old each of these languages are. Vedic timeline states entire cycle of four yuga as 4320000 years and originally the vedic knowlede was passed in oral tradition. Mahabharat itself is stated to be atleast 5500 BC old and some puranas we have the mention of dinosaur like creatures too. The exact age of Rigveda alone is still unknown. Perhaps you would like to enlighten us of the latin and greek literature on similar events and traditions?
2) You have questioned about the architecture of Taj-mahal, not its name, history and the vedic inscriptions as shown in the PN Oak’s articles. Even the design of the pyramids are not similar to that of ancient Indian architectures, but the egyptian civilization is strikingly similar to that of the Vedic civilization where the architecture is based on the Vedic science. Going by your mindset, I guess you’d say that the egyptian civilization cannot by Vedic because its design is not like of a temple.
Some say that a 3000 year old Egyptian pyramid has Gita verse on it, the news which was published in Nav Bharat Times ( A reputed news paper in India ) dated 18th April 1967. So clearly your understanding of Vedic science an civilization is like a “child misunderstanding a text”.
Perhaps to you, the term ‘Hindu architecture’ refers to some set of similar ‘temples’ undermining other plethora of architectures that India is famous for like Jantar mantar, Konark, qutab minar (Dhruv Stambh/Vishnu dhwaj) etc.
Your infatuation to reducing ‘Hindu architecture’ to some temples is rather amusing. You are not only reducing the vast vedic science and mathematics which has influenced the whole of the world today to a ‘temple architecture’ but also ignoring the vedic based architectures in other regions outside India.
The vast literature of the vedic texts do not have the term ‘Hindu or Hinduism’, as you might be knowing, that you think ‘Hindus are egotistical about it and secondly the veda based designs do not consist of temple architecture only. Today the scientists are not only contemplating whether life originated in India which only conforms to the smritis, but the modern science itself is closing in on the vedic sciences of consciousness which is reflected in the essence of quantum theory, parallel universes etc.
Conclusion :
Well, your article was not only amusing but IMO, it was naive as well as absurd as it was based on ignorance and perhaps some personal vendetta against PN Oak where you repeatedly called him ‘amateur’ with phrases like ‘child misunderstanding a text’. Clearly, you do not even know how to write an ethical article. It is an instance of a work done in haste!
This is a much needed article to Hindus. More so for those that are active on the internet and deal with polemical discussions emanating from Abrahamics. Taj Mahal, if it were a Hindu structure, culd not have been a temple. At best, it could have been a palace,perhaps, belonging to the Rajputs. Similarly, it is true that too much has been made out of the Kaaba. Kaaba did house 300+ idols that were torn down by Muhammad when Mecca was captured.But was it a Shiva temple? We simply do not have enough archeological evidences to state so. These kind of ideas on Kaaba and Taj Mahal reduce Hindus to the level of Mullahs claiming that Muhammad split the moon and he rode on a weird animal to Jerusalem in the middle of the night…all unilateral w** dreams.
@ Giridhar, I have had chances to skim through some translations of Turkish and Yemeni historical archives (found in the US libraries) that chronicle events during the timeline of Maurya rule in India. Nothing there ties that part of the geo to us. Hindus have a great history to cherish and we do not want to be linked with Turkic and Arabian scum to prove that Hindus ruled the world. And also, you may not have not had a chance to read the parallelism in history across Greeks, Romans and Hindus from a language standpoint and some of the legends too. If Mr.Oak’s logic on etymology is to be used, we will end up having a discussion on whether Greek originated from Sanskrit or Sanskrit originated from Greek. Nothing to take away from Mr.Oak but I have read his works and I tend to more or less agree with the above article.
@Apolloreach : I was not referring to the geography pointed by the western literatures or their links to other lands. But I was simply talking of the chronological events and earliest history pointed out by those texts. Can they be compared to the rich history pointed out by smritis and science pointed out by shrutis? I know, not perfectly though, the parallelism in history across Greeks, Romans and Hindus from language as well as legend point of view. But again that is not my point either.
My questions are simple
1) Why ignore the rest of the indepth analysis of PN Oak as I pointed out earlier?
2) Why ignore the ‘earliest’ accounts of the literatures. We have the shrutis and smritis that talk of 3.011 trillion years and the world that started from the state of perfection i.e satyuga. It is contrary to the modern theories which stand refuted again and again e.g evolution theory. The accounts of the Vedic cannon only reflects the nature.
A man is born from the state of perfection where his cell rate division is perfect, the child heals quickly and learns fast. He then deteriorates as he grows to old age, where healing takes time, bleeding may not stop and his memory as well as health deteriorates. Water comes from clouds i.e from a pure state and then comes to earth after mixing with pollution. It also comes from mountains and gradually stagnates and gets polluted.
It talks of puranas where matsya avatar helped in the revival of life, where all the plants and animal species with perfect sages were taken to a new land. It talks of cyclic nature of time.
My question is where is the accounts of such or similar earliest history and science in latin, greek or roman literature? If yes, then to what extent? The method of verification of sanskrit is its structurization and the chrnonological events by astronomical configurations. We all know that the western history is unlike the Indian history. The theories of caveman, IMO, are not applicable in the case of India whose history speaks of golden age, a scientific language, rich sciences and history which cannot be verified to ‘stone age or caveman’.
I’m not of an opinion that all the words of other language were imported from sanskrit. But to debate on which words were imported or distorted then following understanding is crucial :
a) Author needs to brief as to which language is older
b) Which word was imported and how.
c) Which civilization was older and when did the younger civilization start.
Finally, I do not the understand the terms like ‘Hindu building, Hindu site, Hindu temple past’. Such words themselves are very abrahamic in nature and hence reduce the true understanding of the Vedic civilization and science.
Had the invaders not called the people beyond Sindhu as Hindu, then I’m sure the world would still be seeing the connect of various architectures to designs based on veda instead of reducing a region to ‘Hindu land’, a bulding as ‘Hindu building’ etc (like I pointed out earlier) and thus ignoring the connect to veda based configurations.
“Taj mahal not a temple because it doesn’t have ‘hindu temple architecture'”, is the most illogical argument IMO. Perhaps, the author doesn’t understand that in the past, the temples were rather the places of research and experiments and a place for raising one’s consciousness. Therefore, I gave the example of egyptian pyramids and civilization which has striking resemblance to vedic civilization but the designs unlike that of typical temples.
In the hospitals, one would commonly find slogans on cancer e.g in radiotherapy department, slogans on eye and its safety in an eyecare unit. Is it not possible, that the egyptians were actually trying to experiment with the body and soul for which the verse 2.22 of Gita was inscribed on the pyramid?
I too had have read the works of PN Oak, but I disagree with the above article which is not only ignorant on facts (history and true context of Veda) but as well as logic.
Girdhar its best to put your points to Koanraad elst directly on his blog here
http://koenraadelst.blogspot.com/2010/06/incurable-hindu-fondness-for-pn-oak.html
Giridhar is another Oakist nutcase.
I bet you he can’t even read basic Sanskrit let alone be able to read the Vedas in their original and interpret them (no easy task) but is prepared to spout off as if he is an expert.
What is this clown’s contribution to the Hindu revival exactly?
Munching pakoras and passing gas on the net with Oakisms doesn’t count.
It’s not the Muslims, Xtians who are the main dangers but nuts like these who are destroying the Hindu civilization from the inside.
Hey julian| tvam kasya krishyotpati asi? gurujanah vadanti, ashishtbuddhijanah kukursamaan bhavanti| yadi buddhihitah na bhavasi, tu mam vachanam poornam karosi|
IM SICK TO DEATH OF PRO COLONIALIST LIKE THIS WEBSITE THAT NOT ONLY LOOKS AWAY FROM THE PLUNDERS, MURDER, RAPE, DESRTUCTION OF INDIA BY THE BRITISH, it was they who WROTE THE HISTORY OF INDIA, IN WHICH SANE MIND IS THAT LOGICAL, they had a christian agenda which was at their core ideals for over 2000years. Their history is littered with out right racism and hatred for non christian europeans, WE MUST CORRECT OUR OWN HISTORY AND NOT ALLOW A MISSIONARIES GUIDE TO HEATHEN INDIA TO CONTINUE IN OUR SCHOOLS.
Now islamic arabs NEVER HAD THE SKILLs to create such buildings, the arabs conquered persia, BUT MAKE NO MISTAKE THE PERSIAN NEVER WANTED ISLAMIC RULE AND FAUGHT AGAINST THEM, but beacues islam converted persia, persian architects and engineers TOOK ON AN ISLAMIC FAITH, but that does not make the achievement of the persians the achievement of islam, THEY DO NOT, THE PERSIANS ARE NOT MUSLIMS, THEY WERE TAKEN OVER, …in arabia their is NO SUCH TEMPLES AT ALL OR MOSQUES THAT COMPARE TO TEJA MAHAL, ..
NOW LETS LOOK AT SOME SCIENTIFIC DATA IN RECENT TIMES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
—————————————————————————————————————————————————–
According to a new study, the designers of the 17th century Taj Mahal have employed the same unit of measurement used by the Harappan civilization of 2000 BC.
The study by R. Balasubramaniam of the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, has for the first time shown that the unit of length called “angulam” – mentioned in Kautilya’s treatise “Arthasastra” dated 300 BC – has been used without a break by Indian builders for over 3,900 years until the British imposed their units in the 18th century.
The ancient “angulam” has been found to be equal to 1.763 modern centimetres, according to Balasubramaniam, a professor of materials and metallurgical engineering. He has carried out dimensional analysis of some of India’s historical structures, built during different times, to identify the measuring units used in their engineering plans.
He says he was surprised that “angulam” and its multiples “vitasti” (12 angulams) and “dhanus” (108 angulams) have been used as the unit of measurement right from the Harappan times till the pre-modern era when the Taj was built.
Balasubramaniam, who last year studied the dimensions of the 1,600-year-old Delhi Iron Pillar at the Qutub Minar complex, found that “angulam” and its multiple “dhanus” were used as the basic units of length in its design.
In a paper published in Current Science, Balasubramaniam has shown that the modular plan of the Taj Mahal complex is based on use of grids of sides measuring 60 and 90 “vitasti”.
He says the study has established that the design and architecture of the Taj is based on traditional Indian units codified in “Arthasastra” and that “there is nothing foreign” in its design.
“The fact that the unit of angulam of 1.763 cm could match very well the dimensions of historical monuments establishes the continuity of India’s engineering tradition through the ages for as long as 3,900 years,” says Balasubramaniam in his paper.
“With the new knowledge we can analyse all the important ancient structures in India,” he says, and hopes the findings “will open a new chapter in the study of metrology (science of measurements)”.
But how did the “angulam” tradition remain unbroken for so long?
As quoted in the website of “Nature India”, Balasubramaniam believes the workers from the Harappan days were perhaps using some kind of scale “that was handed over through generations”.
If the Taj Mahal was built by Muslim architects or engineers why would they use an indian vedic system of measurement?, the answer because it was a Hindu temple, around the world history is full of Islamic empires that have taken control of temples and edited them to fit an islamic context
Sadly, respected Koenrad Elst never visited Taj Mahal !!!!!!!!!
Amusing how he demolish some claims of PN Oak without visiting Taj Mahal!
This article is an old product of Elst and now admins of this site as a part of their anti-RSS agenda published here.
@ Arjun, plse u go through Elst’s blog and look how he replied to some contradictory comments there before advising more to again go there..
he didn’t replied yet!!
and i found amazingly in one of his latest comment by him under his blogpost he telling he never visited Taj Mahal!
haha, so i have no respect for his views on Oak’s Taj mahal research..
Well said @Truthwillshine.
Hindus take @Koenraad’s words blindly because he has written a few books on Hinduism. But I have never found any of his book or his articles that may show some vedic (shrutis) comprehension or historical knowledge as per smritis.
Koenraad Elst, is only a journalist and writing on politics is his domain. He seems to be totally ignorant on shrutis and the smirits and perceives Hinduism through an abrahamic framework and hence the disconnect!
If Koenraad is listening then I can only request him to write articles on politics instead of the Hindu conceptions and the past which include the puranas and other smritis. Otherwise he will be denigrating hinduism and giving more ammunition to the anti-hindus like the Christian missionaries did.
Julian u vanished ??
Jayesh his email is on the blog so you can directly email him..Pn oak is seen as nutcase by other respected Hindu scholars as well from Sita Ram Goel to NS.Rajaram to even writers like Sandhya Jain..Sita Ram Goel called him a black spot on indian history.Thats why he sided with the secularists against the VHP over their evidence of the demolition of the Ram Temple.So maybe you should wear less tight khaki shorts so the blood gets to brain..
Girdhar, Not all Hindus take koenraad elsts words blindly and he hasnt written any books on hinduism so get your facts right.His books are purely political.The trouble with many of you hindus is that you dont know the world of politics but end up taking hindus in the looney fringe so what hindus have facts get put into the same catergory..PN Oak and his types even claimed Rome and vatican was originally Hindu and the list goes on .Its then not surprisng that the Ram Temple still has not been built because all the hindu looney fringe is more interested in trying to prove the Taj Mahal is a hindu temple
So his article ‘Was There an Islamic “Genocide” of Hindus?’ must be also all based on false evidence then ?
@Arjun : You did not understand the context.
First the scientists predicted of a contracting and expanding universe. They claimed that it would slow down. The kids scored big marks in their schools by mugging up these theories blindly. But the truth baffled the scientists later and the education of the kids was wasted. Then, they theorised for the theory of everything, but the quantum theory alone seems to be breaking the foundations of modern science.
Similarly, in much of the history of the world, the Indian contribution has been largely ignored. Therefore if one needs to refute PN Oaks details, then he should analyse each of his facts. Ignoring casually, the claims like “Rome and vatican was originally Hindu”, is again illogical.
Thus as I stated, Koenraad has ignored a lot of details of PN Oaks articles. His article is questionable completely like I showed before. If anyone agrees with Koenraad, then perhaps he should debate on the points I raised.
There was indeed an Islamic genocide of Hindus as stated by Baburnama and aurangzebnama alone. No one is questioning that. But what is being questioned is the ignorance like in this article against PN Oak, which ignores
1. The contribution and literature in the original language
2. Age of the civilizations
3. The vedic history and concepts (shrutis and smritis)
4.
And hence, the truth of Tajmahal and other architectures go beyond politics and hence beyond the domain of Koenraad, who unfortunately, has no knowledge of. It is like the work done by missionaries who did not have true understanding of Indian tradition and culture, the riddles and Vedic worldview, but tried to analyze the Veda through their abrahamic understanding and hence ended distorting the Vedas.
Similar is the case with Koenraad. He doesn’t have any understanding of the shrutis and smritis, how riddles are used, for what purposes temples were built in the past etc. Therefore for even analyzing the work of PN Oak, one needs to have a first hand comprehension of Indian history and concepts which go beyond the scope of politics.
In the case of Hinduism, when one speaks of politics without even knowing the Vedic wisdom, spirituality, the smritis and intuitive insight of it all, one may end up distorting Hinduism. Thus, we have the business where Hinduism is sold on the empty and distorted theories based on karma, dharma etc like done by Wendy Doniger, Patrizia Norelli etc, politics where ‘cast system’ was used for power by corrupt bhrahmins and is still used for power today by politicians.
Had koenraad understood the conceptions of dharma, karma, varna, architectures and designs based on Vedic knowledge and how it orginates and from which verses etc, he wouldn’t have written such a naive article. Well, I heard he didn’t even visit TajMahal. Thus, Koenrad’s one article may be correct and one may be wrong based on his knowledge of it. Therefore please don’t generalise like “So his article ‘Was There an Islamic “Genocide” of Hindus?’ must be also all based on false evidence then ?”.
Anyways, different authors may disagree on some points. It may not be the case that what author X is saying is exactly what author Y is saying. Therefore the arguments of Sitaram and Rajaram need to be put on the table and analysed before putting them on the same table as that of Koenraad.
Yes his books are political, but such articles like this one go beyond politics and hence politics becomes small when vedic wisdom and the Indian history comes in the picture. I hope you got my point.
“And hence, the truth of Tajmahal and other architectures go beyond politics and hence beyond the domain of Koenraad, who unfortunately, has no knowledge of. ”
So why did experts like Sita Ram Goel who provided clear evidence from all sources on 2 thousand temples demolished by muslims say that Pn oak is a big black spot on history and coudn’t stand him ? NS Rajaram who has done plenty of research into Indian history and is well respected scholar also thinks that the Oak school are nutcases.And the same goes for many other hindu scholars and intellectuals who are at the forefront fighting for the Hindu cause ? The truth is people like yourself and others give the ammunition to the anti hindu forces who then promote PN Oak like they did against the VHP during the Ram Janambhoomi movement to wash away all the real evidence from the Hindu side as all fantasy and all third rate scholarship of a ooney fringe ..Most temples especially important ones have a history where solid information can be found or provided by some sources.Where muslims demolished a temple they wrote it in their chronicles proudly .Theres been many battles over many temples where hindus and muslims have clashed and theres evidence to that but theres nothing on the Taj Mahal like that
And lets not forget that according to Pn oak the Kutub Minar is originally a Hindu tower so that means all the 27 temples that were destroyed to build it was not true either..
@Arjun : I don’t know if your criticism against PN Oak is your own or plagiarised from people Koenraad. But clearly, instead of discussing on what I stated previously and reiterating it again and again, you are only stating one thing i.e “What about Sitaram and rajaram?”. This clearly shows that you do not have your own primary understanding or criticism of Pn Oak’s work.
Perhaps, you would like to establish excerpts wher Rajaram and Sitaram called him “nutcases”. Such vocab, IMO, is used by the judgmental herd which itself doesn’t know anything on its own, but rather reads the work of other people. Since, you fail to understand the context again, here’s a list of questions you need to answer
1. Which civilization and architectures are older as spoken in Koenraad’s article
2. Which language is older?
3. What exactly is Hindu temple design, when Egyptian civilization shows striking resemblance with Vedic civilizations and other similar argument in my previous replies?
4. Does literature provided in Sanskrit covered similarly in other languages like Latin, Greek etc? If yes, where and what?
5. Most importantly, where did Rajaram and Sitaram called PN Oak a “nutcase”, which article/book? Or is such a word your own creation out of hate caused by secondary criticism?
BTW, you again comprehended incorrectly. I neither promote PN Oak nor criticise him. I’m just questioning this article of Koenraad, which you generalise and mistake as
a) Me being personally against Koenraad
b) ‘People like me’ giving ammunition to anti-hindu squads. May be you can tell me how?
I’m not making empty criticism and judgments like yours, but also showing you ‘how and what’ of each point from the very first reply of mine on this article. Let me show how Koenrad is giving ammunition to anti-hindu squads again..
1) He ignores the age of civilizations. It is a criticial aspect of arguing what was ‘borrowed’. Ignoring such a point, can arm the anti-hindus by arguing, on the basis of this article, that Vedic civilization wasn’t old enough.
2) Similar is the case with that of language. The anti-hindu brigade can argue that words from latin and greek were imported to sanskrit, solely based on this article.
3) Anti-hindu brigade can end up coining terms like ‘Hindu architecture and temple design’ coined by people like Koenraad which is again a reduction of the vast vedic knowledge and designs based on it and its far reaching effects. Such words would single out egyptian architecture and other designs based on Veda, just because the term ‘Hindu’ is not associated with them.
4) Because of the language aspect that Koenraad ignored, people can also say that verses inside the TajMahal may be written afterwards.
Now since ‘nutcase’ seems to be your favourite word, I guess, you can easily tell where ‘Sitaram and Rajaram’ have used it and in what context? I also know that you think ‘Sitaram and Rajaram were against PN Oak’. Perhaps we can move beyond it to get into the details of the repeated same old accusations? So, I would request you to take some time out of your judgmental attacks and intellectually analyse objectively on each and every point that I have raised from the start.
History shouldn’t be forgotten, thats why smritis are called ‘that which is to be remembered’, but shrutis are the ones which are called ‘that which is heard’, which needs to be analyzed and understood. Hence politics even though important, is indeed tiny when compared to the Vedic wisdom. In clearer terms, one needs to understand the vedic wisdom before talking on politics at length, otherwise like I stated and showed how in my previous reply, one may end up ruining and distorting Hinduism.
Maybe you should read Sita Goels Rams books and get in touch with NS Rajaram to get the evidence yourself directly instead of writing the long lectures on the subject..Theres a massive difference on what professional scholarship of Sita Ram Goel is with the amateur scholarship of PN oak is which is something you yourself dont seem to grasp..You should read VOI books to see the difference of standards of scholarship.Then you might understand why Sita Ram Goel told PN oak he is a black spot on history.Or do you want me to provide you the evidence from the source and in what context he said that or if thats not enough then we should contact Sita Ram Goels atma during a ouija board session to provide the evidence ?
Ive already studied PN oaks work longer before you even became familiar with his writings it seems and thats why i dont give space to go into a discussion of deep analysis of his evidence because soon we will be discussing how Stone Henge is also made by hindus according to the PN oak school..And you think im going to waste my time on that ?…Have you personally gone and checked PN oaks sources ? If you dont understand how people like ‘yourself’ give ammunition to the anti hindu brigade then that itself proves why you are stuck in your dilemma because you have not faced the anti Hindu brigade intellectuals face to face in debate..
@Arjun : ‘People like you’, ‘nutcases’, ‘giving long lectures’ are the typical childish words used by those who cannot talk on facts and logic. Imagine a person watching a crime and telling police, ‘Hey a crime happened, go check it out’. Don’t you think it is utterly juvenile? To register a complaint/FIR you have to atleast tell ‘where and what’ kind of crime happened. Later you go into more details.
Similarly, you directly accused PN Oak and called him a nutcase. I was expecting more than the typical apologist arguments that a person shows when he cannot back his/her words. So yes, you have to present what crime happened and where it happened! I have studied PN Oak’s work in detail and anyone who has genuinely read Pn Oak’s work can see that Koenraad has not questioned even 30% of the details given by him. Even the minute fraction that he has questioned is also based on the ignorance of Vedic wisdom and logically flawed for which I have questioned him from the start.
But as usual, I get the amusing replies like ‘people like you’, ‘nutcases’, ‘giving long lectures’, ‘other people said this and that..yay’ and the other secondary works and judgments which the person cannot back completely. Your reply “Ive already studied PN oaks work longer before you even became familiar wit” is again not new to me. Yes, I know you are the great saint who has known the vedic sanskrit, the smritis and the shrutis and even achieved the various kind of sidhis with all his seven chakras opened, meditated on Himalayas for the previous 3 yugas…..”long before I or anyone else even got familiar with them”.
Now perhaps you can answer my questions?? (refer my post dated “September 5, 2011 at 10:34 am “)
Yes, I want you to provide evidences. The book and the page number and more importantly, where did Sitaram and Rajaram called PN Oak a “nutcase”.
BTW, sorry for ignoring your “VOI” argument. Here’s a read from your beloved “VOI”
voiDOTorg/sourced/faithfreedom/distortionofindianhistoryformuslimappeasement:part6d/page-4.html
Replace DOT with .
Girdhar , Lets not digress the this into my my language terminology to avoid the focus of this whole article because like the title says you suffer from The Incurable Hindu Fondness for PN Oak Thats your reference point and thats the reason im not taking you serious at all…If are so knowledgeable then why dont you go directly to sources and the academics ive mentioned to find out exactly why I think Pn Oak is a nutcase ..
“Yes, I know you are the great saint who has known the vedic sanskrit, the smritis and the shrutis and even achieved the various kind of sidhis with all his seven chakras opened, meditated on Himalayas for the previous 3 yugas…..”long before I or anyone else even got familiar with them”.”
Yeh man you are so spiritually advanced that you picked up the vibe of me coming from mthousands of miles away …Maybe you should also try to find a way to cure you inferiority complex when it comes to anyone from the west which you seem to show each time.. Also it would be nice of you to first provide the picture of the Pyramid that has the Gita verse on it so others can go there and also take pictures..
“BTW, sorry for ignoring your “VOI” argument. Here’s a read from your beloved “VOI”
That again proves you are even a bigger fool than most because this is not directly connected with Voice Of Dharma books but is run by a group of hindus in the US.Do you want their details as well ? lol
Monday, November 16, 2009
P.N. Oak’s humbug
Subject: P.N. Oak’s humbug
1. Quote: Will you please stop exposing a worthy cause/website like faithfreedom to ridicule by tainting it with PN Oak nonsense? Hindu tradition has handbooks on temple-building, and none contain the groundplan and features of the Taj Mahal. Nor is there any Hindu temple past or present that looks like the Taj Mahal. The building may well stand on the site of a Rajput pavilion, but it never ever was a Shiva temple.
Regards,
KE
2. My Take:
P.N. Oak’s argument has been denounced by nearly every Hindu activity in India. Every reputable writer ( Anwar Shaikh, Dr. Rajaram, Dr. Elst, Sita Ram Goel et al ) have deprecated his flimflam observations. Sita Ram Goel calls P.N. Oak as the biggest disaster for Hinduism. Sita Ram Goel tells me that as early as 1955, he had warned P.N. Oak in person, to cease & desist from twisting & mis-representing ” words ” and ” events, ” but P.N. Oak won’t suspend his Bull-Sh**,
3. P.N. Oak had a fancy for ” twisting ” and ” mis-construing ” the meaning of words and events of history. He was the biggest bull-sh**er, and that is not an exaggeration either.
4. But what bothers me is Not so much as P.N. Oak, but P.N. Oak-ism, because several Hindus believe his Bull-Sh**, and Oak’s copy-cats are expanding & enlarging Oak-ism to more words & events, which have absolutely no basis in truth or fact. This ruins the reputation of Hindus & Hinduism. It diminishes Hindu arguments on such issues as Ram Janam Bhoomi, because if Hindus can lie about Taj Mahal, then they can lie about Ram Janam Bhoomi as well.
Surinder Paul Attri
http://hinduismdefense.blogspot.com/2009/11/pn-oaks-humbug.html
@Arjun : The only problem with the egotistical kids is that they don’t know when to stop their circus acts. Talking in your kindergarten language is a child’s play for me.
Your post “September 5, 2011 at 12:43 pm and at 12:49 pm” seem to have only increased the size of the sql database of this website without any intellectual inputs. And your post at “September 5, 2011 at 1:08 pm” is indeed laughable.
I asked you “what and where” Sitaram and Rajaram have opined on Pn Oak and where did they call him nutcase and here you are like an empty minded apologist giving me some discussions from a blogspot which speak like you “Hey look, this what this and that guy said against Pn Oak…hurray majority wins and hence Pn oak is bad guy”. I don’t think you understand simple English. Going by your analogy of blind beliefs in secondary works and majority wins, I guess earth would have been flat for you if your were present in ancient Europe. Some 10 years into the future, a few other Arjuns would be calling Pn Oak a bad guy because ‘Konraad criticised him”. Well, in hindi its called ‘bhains ke saamne been bajana”.
Let me try again….
Where did Sitaram and Rajaram called him a ‘nutcase’? Which book and page number they opined on PN oak and in what context? C’mon its a simple question in simple English and please don’t provide me with blogs with people ranting like you. It is highly demoralising!
And noting your permanent amnesia, let me reiterate my questions again..
1. Which civilization and architectures are older as spoken in Koenraad’s article
2. Which language is older?
3. What exactly is Hindu temple design, when Egyptian civilization shows striking resemblance with Vedic civilizations and other similar argument in my previous replies?
4. Does literature provided in Sanskrit covered similarly in other languages like Latin, Greek etc? If yes, where and what?
5. Most importantly, where did Rajaram and Sitaram called PN Oak a “nutcase”, which article/book? Or is such a word your own creation out of hate caused by secondary criticism?
Neways,
pediaviewDOTcom/openpedia/Koenraad_Elst
Here’s what this has to say,
“he (Elst) makes some secondary criticisms about particular points. For instance he claims, “there is no intellectual life in this Hindutva movement”.[28] He claims that Hindutva advocates have not developed a “wellfounded coherent vision on a range of topics which any social thinker and any political party will have to address one day”, and that there is as yet very little original or comprehensive work being done in the Hindutva movement.[28] According to Elst, “Hindutva is a fairly crude ideology, borrowing heavily from European nationalisms with their emphasis on homogeneity. Under the conditions of British colonialism, it was inevitable that some such form of Hindu nationalism would arise, but I believe better alternatives have seen the light, more attuned to the genius of Hindu civilization.”[29] Sometimes, Elst is critical of Hindutva for not going far enough in its criticism of Islam.”
“The Hindu nationalist N.S. Rajaram criticized Elst’s book Asterisk in Bharopiyasthan because of Elst’s alleged agenda of “rescuing Indo-European linguistics from oblivion””
@Arjun : So we see, the two people you blindly follow (not that I’m saying they are bad or anti-hindu) i.e Elst and rajaram seems to have differences as well. Which side would you take?
C’mon grow up and give me the direct answers!
Your whole argument is just about yourself isn’t ? I think you dont seem to get it that you are not important enough for me to go out and get the resources and links because even if did waste my time doing so then you will find a different point to argue around as you want to prove you are right…its the me me me right attitude…Anyone with any common sense can work out that PN Oak is a nutcase but because you so desperate to prove your useless arguments that you think using the Oxford dictionary itself becomes the proof.
Like i said before you should try to sort out your inferiority complex out first .While trying to criticise me for putting links here from a blog you yourself put a link from a the voice of india blog to prove your point it failed because it nothing to do with Voice of Dharma and now you are going further trying to show me that NS rajarams critque of Asterisk in Bharopiyasthan which is total different argument from the subject of PN oak..This proves the whole argument is about you and nothing else because you suffer from an inferiority complex…..If you are so good at digging info up then why do you Go and directly contact NS rajaram directly to find out what he thinks of PN oak and the current Hindutva movement .And get one thing straight i dont follow anyone blindly and definitely not nutcases like Pn Oak like you do..
“@Arjun : The only problem with the egotistical kids is that they don’t know when to stop their circus acts. Talking in your kindergarten language is a child’s play for me.”
There you are desperately trying to prove to me how in reality you are not affected but you are so above it all…Sure you so mature and we kids are so egoistical that we dont worship your prophet Pn Oak lol
Hmmmmmm 😉
ARJUN i gues you havent read the science behind the TAJ MAHAL have you..
ARJUN please comment on the following SCIENCE..
tell me why islamic engineers would use a VEDIC SYSTEM OF MEASUREMENT on the TAJ MAHAL?
____________________________________________________________________________________
The study by R. Balasubramaniam of the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, has for the first time shown that the unit of length called “angulam”. – mentioned in Kautilya’s treatise “Arthasastra” dated 300 BC – has been used without a break by Indian builders for over 3,900 years until the British imposed their units in the 18th century..
He says he was surprised that “angulam” and its multiples “vitasti” (12 angulams) and “dhanus” (108 angulams) have been used as the unit of measurement right from the Harappan times till the pre-modern era when the Taj was built..Balasubramaniam, who last year studied the dimensions of the 1,600-year-old Delhi Iron Pillar at the Qutub Minar complex, found that “angulam” and its multiple “dhanus” were used as the basic units of length in its design..
.In a paper published in Current Science, Balasubramaniam has shown that the modular plan of the Taj Mahal complex is based on use of grids of sides measuring 60 and 90 “vitasti”.He says the study has established that the design and architecture of the Taj is based on traditional Indian units codified in “Arthasastra” and that “there is nothing foreign” in its design..
But how did the “angulam” tradition remain unbroken for so long?As quoted in the website of “Nature India”., Balasubramaniam believes the workers from the Harappan days were perhaps using some kind of scale “that was handed over through generations”..
If the Taj Mahal was built by Muslim architects or engineers why would they use an indian vedic system of measurement?, the answer because it was a Hindu temple.
______________________________________________________________________________
ARJUN TELL ME WHY ISLAMIC ARCHITECTS WOULD USE A VEDIC SYSTEM OF ARCHITECTURE??…you can refute many things, you can counter claim, make false claims,
WHEN science tells us the TAJ MAHAL WAS constructed to VEDIC SYSTEM OF MEASUREMENT….why do you not comment on that???…COULD it be possilble that india with history of 4000years on great construction, compared to arabia with little to none, persians faught against islam so persian architects are not islamic but today they claim they where. But ARJUN tell me WHY its impossible for the taj mahal to be VEDIC..when history shows islamic armies carrying out such destruction on india.
what are we know expecting a 500 page essay because you cant get to the point but as usual go around it and still end up more confused than before lol
@Girdhar – 3. //What exactly is Hindu temple design, when Egyptian civilization shows striking resemblance with Vedic civilizations and other similar argument in my previous replies?//
give me a break now from Saudi you reached Egypt. just because other culture have similarities it doesn’t make them same. see the similarities between Sikhs and Hindus but they are separate religions. those religion are called Pagan, just because they had god and idol it doesnt make them Hindus or close to Hindus, unless you think from Abrahmic religion’s point of view which clubs anything pre-christian, pre-islam as Pagan. so first remove the Abrahamic glasses you are wearing and then see. and yes, Koenraad Elst’s criticism about Hindutva are right, there is nothing intellectual about hindutva movement, go to facebook and see what most hindu youth are doing, showing their love of India and Hinduism by abusing Pakistan and izlam 24/7, when someone ask them a simple question on Hinduism they go blank. it is nothing more than a political movement confined to India, it is more a copy of political islam trying to add a nationalist political side to Hinduism with a Hindu label. organizing a few stupid rallies, shouting kabba is also Hindu temple does not yield any result it only make hindus look stupid in front of the whole world. For gods sake stop thinking Hinduism from india centric approach, Indian are worst following of Hinduism, your god is not a mobile phone only work in limited network range if you move out of india. stop being a build nationalist. this and rss article have so many comments but a hindu genocide article dont have any, it just shows where the priority of people are.
TRUTH , start talking some TRUTH how is some crap like the Taj Mahal Vedic ? and even if they did use Vedic system of measurement that doesnt mean anything either because most of the world uses the hindu zero doesn’t mean everything around the world with zero in it is Hindu..Most mogul tombs paraded in india and abroad are near about in the same design of the Taj..Everything used for making the taj is well documented..If it would have been a hindu temple they would have made sure everyone knew about it like they have done with all their hindu temples they have destroyed..There’s no hindu records of anyone claiming it was hindu temple ..You are in the same category of the loony fringe where people like Giridhar also belong to and who open hindus to ridicule..
@arjun,
Elst didn’t have yet commented on his blog as a reply to the man who contradicted his views . So why should i contact with him through email now?
I am quite happy seeing ur debating skill with Giridhar. Sorry to say, u failed miserablybut i have no amusement as i know abt your “points” from a little earlier time. U can only repeat the same song again and againwith a third rate sms lingo “lol” at last. No answers were given by u to Giridhar’s questions, and it stinked when u said u have no time to waste replying to Giridhar’s questions…. So sad state.
@giridhar, hats off..
to RAVI..Please answer the following.
1.SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES THAT proves that the taj mahal was built to a vedic system of design..
2.why would islamic engineers employ a vedic system? ”In a paper published in Current Science, Balasubramaniam has shown that the modular plan of the Taj Mahal complex is based on use of grids of sides measuring 60 and 90 “vitasti”.He says the study has established that the design and architecture of the Taj is based on traditional Indian units codified in “Arthasastra” and that “there is nothing foreign” in its design”
3.Historical proof that islamic armies DID take hijack temples and building and convert them to an islamic structure…Hagia Sophia, an Eastern Orthodox church converted into a mosque.Zoroastrian temples converted into mosques in such a manner could be found in Bukhara, as well as in and near Istakhr and other Iranian cities, 1974 Turkish Invasion of Cyprus. Many of the Orthodox churches in Northern Cyprus have been converted, and many are still in the process of becoming mosques
4.You whole argument follows a pro colonial agenda that actually takes the right away to defend hinduism, or sikhism or buddism any dharmic faith as being fundamentalist.Ive taken a lot of time to understand this, and it all goes back to the previous 200years of christian rule. You might be so democratic that you might overlook this period i dont know, maybe your so democratic that you overlook the scientific data that provides conclusive data that the tak mahal follow a VEDIC system of design. You indian educaiton system itself is by product of christian colonialist, make no mistake this was a religous war, biblical scriptures, slave laws of america, restricting indians within india, having european only zones, not allowing indian to travel on railways, hijacking and diverting trade routes, undermining indian textile industies, again you might think your so democratic that such issues have had no impact on current ideologies. The question i ask myself is this, what was the biggest threat to British rule, and that answer was Indian rule, in order to maintain control of india, they employed divide and rule tactics, plundered a nation into poverty, taking indian gdp from 24% in 1700 to less than 4% in 1953. A relgious empire with aims of conversion and plunder. Now when india was destroyed, the christians rebuilt parts of it in their image, mainly the government, the education system and the civil soceity. So vast christian schools where built, an education was created by missionaries, with aryan tales imposed into the education itself, aryan story has a biblical link and that is this. Noah had three sons, shem ham and japeth, from shem and japeth you get europeans and arabs, but ham was cursed and was darkend for that betrayel and was condemed to be a slave forever. So when christians enterered into india they realised that these sons of ham, are superior in wealth and development, and naturally the devine right of the europeans inititated the aryan theory of how sons of japeth and shem civilised the sons of ham., its called the curse of ham. Rmeber this is fact not fiction. So right now 2011 we have had three generation oof indian who have been processed through this pro colonial racist education system, its more propganda than education. Where racist ideologies of aryan tales have become bedrock of education, what a disgrace. Your whole argument is one of trying to be of a higher moral position. How can you when you over look history that dictates t oday? in europe the genocide of jews is remebered, the slave trade is remebers, in india, the genocide of millions of dharmic people erased, forgotten hidden, by the exact same colonial education that YOU must have gone to. Which creates the ethos in the students to undermine and doubt indian unity. like i said before the greatest threat to colonial rule is indian unity, when the christians left , they left in place a congress party built on its ideology, an educaiton sysetm built on its ideology and graduates from that education are fastracked into media and mainstream industries… this is the TRINITY of colonial deception. And people like yourself ravi are a direct producy of that education , to doubt and undermine indian unity. So just like in the british raj or occupation, any threat to its existance was seen as terrorism, bhagat singh was a terrorist, ghandi was a terrorist, guru teghbadur was a terrrorist, and today the colonial congress, the colonial education, and the colonial civil soceity is now defending its colonial rule by branding BJP AND RSS as terrorist…..any indian union movement to displace congress and its colonial links will bran them as terrorist. Their is no history of dharmic religous campaings of war , slavery, occupation or forced conversion………But the western world to increase its integrity will demean others around the world, it was in the interest of christians colonialist to degenerate indain culture and people. It was churchill who said indians are a breastly people. Ravi here you talking about democarcy etc, truth, yet history SHOWS THAT TRUTH…and my friend its you that is thinking without a brain or logic…
5.tHE SLAVE TRADE of indian taken to ghana, kenya, south africa, jamaica, taken by the christians and left to fend for themselves, you have no problem accepting african wanting justice for the african slave trade, but when its indian who want justice for past crimes, you bring the old RSS comments out, which is beyond a joke…its your colonial education speaking..why are their no memorials to honor the millions of indian who died during christian occupation or islamic occupation??…african have recognition, jews also, why not indians???
6.Indian are a proud people always have been. Genetics prove on every level that india as the place where modern man had most of its development this is fact.not rss..genetics also prove that from india, indian migrated out into central asia, and that the genome type M1 is in fact indian in origin and that proves a BACK MIGRATION INTO NONORTH AFRICA…to go further…the genome of all african cows, take them back to north india…this is not RSS..this is genetics that goes against a colonial educaiton and ideology which YOU ARE RESISTING TO ACCEPT AS NOT THE TRUTH……
read my other posts which define the genetic markers that confirm first aryan theory was a racist lie, and second it was indain who migrated out of india..not BECAUSE OF RSS..but because india is the land which has been populated by modern man the longest..after out of africa….LOGIC would determine then man had most of its civilisation developed from that era..
You have a hard time in acceptng that the western world is based on shallow foundations and that genetics not RSS show that aryan went out of india, and also science PROVES that the taj mahal FOLLOWS a vedic system..not an islamic…now for the same of democracy and truth DO WE DENY THIS?? do we overlook this?? do we not credit the work of the taj mahal WHO ACTUALLY BUILT IT…no one is sayin give it back to the hindus but at least at the decent to see who created it, who built it, who desgined it, lets give credit to the people who acutally built it. is it not amazing that the taj majal is least researched buildings in the world…….becaues of intolerance and deceit the true origins of the taj ARE BEING hidden to save demoracy …now tell me where is the logic in that????
to RAVI..Please answer the following.
1.SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES THAT proves that the taj mahal was built to a vedic system of design..
2.why would islamic engineers employ a vedic system? ”In a paper published in Current Science, Balasubramaniam has shown that the modular plan of the Taj Mahal complex is based on use of grids of sides measuring 60 and 90 “vitasti”.He says the study has established that the design and architecture of the Taj is based on traditional Indian units codified in “Arthasastra” and that “there is nothing foreign” in its design”
3.Historical proof that islamic armies DID take hijack temples and building and convert them to an islamic structure…Hagia Sophia, an Eastern Orthodox church converted into a mosque.Zoroastrian temples converted into mosques in such a manner could be found in Bukhara, as well as in and near Istakhr and other Iranian cities, 1974 Turkish Invasion of Cyprus. Many of the Orthodox churches in Northern Cyprus have been converted, and many are still in the process of becoming mosques
4.You whole argument follows a pro colonial agenda that actually takes the right away to defend hinduism, or sikhism or buddism any dharmic faith as being fundamentalist.Ive taken a lot of time to understand this, and it all goes back to the previous 200years of christian rule. You might be so democratic that you might overlook this period i dont know, maybe your so democratic that you overlook the scientific data that provides conclusive data that the tak mahal follow a VEDIC system of design. You indian educaiton system itself is by product of christian colonialist, make no mistake this was a religous war, biblical scriptures, slave laws of america, restricting indians within india, having european only zones, not allowing indian to travel on railways, hijacking and diverting trade routes, undermining indian textile industies, again you might think your so democratic that such issues have had no impact on current ideologies. The question i ask myself is this, what was the biggest threat to British rule, and that answer was Indian rule, in order to maintain control of india, they employed divide and rule tactics, plundered a nation into poverty, taking indian gdp from 24% in 1700 to less than 4% in 1953. A relgious empire with aims of conversion and plunder. Now when india was destroyed, the christians rebuilt parts of it in their image, mainly the government, the education system and the civil soceity. So vast christian schools where built, an education was created by missionaries, with aryan tales imposed into the education itself, aryan story has a biblical link and that is this. Noah had three sons, shem ham and japeth, from shem and japeth you get europeans and arabs, but ham was cursed and was darkend for that betrayel and was condemed to be a slave forever. So when christians enterered into india they realised that these sons of ham, are superior in wealth and development, and naturally the devine right of the europeans inititated the aryan theory of how sons of japeth and shem civilised the sons of ham., its called the curse of ham. Rmeber this is fact not fiction. So right now 2011 we have had three generation oof indian who have been processed through this pro colonial racist education system, its more propganda than education. Where racist ideologies of aryan tales have become bedrock of education, what a disgrace. Your whole argument is one of trying to be of a higher moral position. How can you when you over look history that dictates t oday? in europe the genocide of jews is remebered, the slave trade is remebers, in india, the genocide of millions of dharmic people erased, forgotten hidden, by the exact same colonial education that YOU must have gone to. Which creates the ethos in the students to undermine and doubt indian unity. like i said before the greatest threat to colonial rule is indian unity, when the christians left , they left in place a congress party built on its ideology, an educaiton sysetm built on its ideology and graduates from that education are fastracked into media and mainstream industries… this is the TRINITY of colonial deception. And people like yourself ravi are a direct producy of that education , to doubt and undermine indian unity. So just like in the british raj or occupation, any threat to its existance was seen as terrorism, bhagat singh was a terrorist, ghandi was a terrorist, guru teghbadur was a terrrorist, and today the colonial congress, the colonial education, and the colonial civil soceity is now defending its colonial rule by branding BJP AND RSS as terrorist…..any indian union movement to displace congress and its colonial links will bran them as terrorist. Their is no history of dharmic religous campaings of war , slavery, occupation or forced conversion………But the western world to increase its integrity will demean others around the world, it was in the interest of christians colonialist to degenerate indain culture and people. It was churchill who said indians are a breastly people. Ravi here you talking about democarcy etc, truth, yet history SHOWS THAT TRUTH…and my friend its you that is thinking without a brain or logic…
5.tHE SLAVE TRADE of indian taken to ghana, kenya, south africa, jamaica, taken by the christians and left to fend for themselves, you have no problem accepting african wanting justice for the african slave trade, but when its indian who want justice for past crimes, you bring the old RSS comments out, which is beyond a joke…its your colonial education speaking..why are their no memorials to honor the millions of indian who died during christian occupation or islamic occupation??…african have recognition, jews also, why not indians???
6.Indian are a proud people always have been. Genetics prove on every level that india as the place where modern man had most of its development this is fact.not rss..genetics also prove that from india, indian migrated out into central asia, and that the genome type M1 is in fact indian in origin and that proves a BACK MIGRATION INTO NONORTH AFRICA…to go further…the genome of all african cows, take them back to north india…this is not RSS..this is genetics that goes against a colonial educaiton and ideology which YOU ARE RESISTING TO ACCEPT AS NOT THE TRUTH……
read my other posts which define the genetic markers that confirm first aryan theory was a racist lie, and second it was indain who migrated out of india..not BECAUSE OF RSS..but because india is the land which has been populated by modern man the longest..after out of africa….LOGIC would determine then man had most of its civilisation developed from that era..
You have a hard time in acceptng that the western world is based on shallow foundations and that genetics not RSS show that aryan went out of india, and also science PROVES that the taj mahal FOLLOWS a vedic system..not an islamic…now for the same of democracy and truth DO WE DENY THIS?? do we overlook this?? do we not credit the work of the taj mahal WHO ACTUALLY BUILT IT…no one is sayin give it back to the hindus but at least at the decent to see who created it, who built it, who desgined it, lets give credit to the people who acutally built it. is it not amazing that the taj majal is least researched buildings in the world…….becaues of intolerance and deceit the true origins of the taj ARE BEING hidden to save demoracy …now tell me where is the logic in that????
@Ravi : I think you need a psychiatric check up. What does the number of comments have to do with article 1 or article 2? If people have not commented on other article of Elst, then it may also mean the approval of Hindus. If this article has more comments, then it can also mean dissent of the people. When the government works correctly, people do not shout much, but when it doesn’t people do shout. So stop living in your disney land, just to please your boss a.k.a Arjun. He is pleasing Elst and you are pleasing him. Funny indeed!
I guess, you jumped in between the discussion without even knowing the gist of it. My points are not about being the “same”, but the ‘far reaching effects’ of the Vedic knowledge, civilization and designs based on it. It seems @Arjun called you, and you came running like an emotional sycophant, just to make a fool of yourself.
And for your information, Sikhism is considered as another sect of Hinduism by many like Vaishnavism, Shaivism etc. Many sikhs do visit Hanuman temple and many hindus visit Gurudwara. Start educating yourself with the history of Sikhism first. “Ram nam jaap” and gayatri mantra are one of the cores of Sikhism and other cores are based on the Veda only! This is exactly what happens when you do not understand the Indian History and vedic wisdom and go on yelping about politics, you distort and you end up dividing!
Its a close resemblance between you and @Arjun, both yelp about politics and both don’t understand Indian history and Vedic wisdom, thinking anyone who questions your masters be it Elst in Arjun’s case and Arjun in your case, is an enemy. Arjun follows Koenraad-Elstism and you blindly follow Arjunism.
@Arjun : No such records exist for Qutub Minar as well. Now would you rant that it is also made by Mughals? Grow up, your logic seems to getting as fragile as your age. Calm down or you might get a heart attack. I think you should go back to your boss Elst to get some baby sitting on the questions I asked you instead of whining again and again and humouring me when someone questions you.
@Ravi and @Arjun, what do you do in your free time? Bitch about people? How cute!
@Jayesh : Thank you. It seems we both know of his “points”, from a little earlier time.
Koenraad Elst may be a great political journalist or scholar. But I doubt he knows authentic ancient Indian History,Culture, Architecture, Philosophy or Tradition from a deeper or inside perspective and hence should not be believed blindly. I have read P.N Oak’s books too. Some of his claims may be far fetched and some may be wrong but not all of it is worth dismissing. In fact it was P.N Oak who inspired me to explore the connections between the Vedic and Egyptian civilizations which provided me with a lot of mettle. P.N Oak merely points to a lot of information that needs to be researched further. And hez a greater pointer or director for that matter but its upto you to research and dig further and then find out whether what he’s pointing to has more substance lying beneath or not. So maybe he was a fanatic… but some of his claims are certainly worth exploring by research scholars as it would lead them to discover more things. Then they can either refute his information or confirm it. But i agree that before studying his work personally one cant blindly believe others either. Those who blindly believe Koenraad are no different from those who blindly believe P.N Oak. If you’re really interested in the truth dig deeper, rather than quoting what other authors have said about P.N Oak, no matter who those authors are. That would be true objectivity and not just opinionated or borrowed nonsense all over again. And by studying his work I dont mean just reading his books, but going out there in the field and exploring the truth of the connection between the vedic and other civilizations and their culture.
An excerpt from a research paper “The Question of the Taj Mahal” By P. S. Bhat and A. L. Athawale
(from the Itihas Patrika, Vol. 5, pp 98-111, 1985)
Hindu Symbolism
In addition to the lotus canopy over the dome, there are many other symbolic and sculptural details in the Taj Mahal which are quite appropriate in a Siva temple.14 Some of them are quoted below:
(i) Recess above the entrance: In the southern entrance to the outer precincts of the Taj Complex (i.e., the Taj Gunj gate facing the main gateway), above the door arch, there is a small arched recess. It is customary in Hindu Forts (for example, the Nagardhan Fort, Nagpur) to place an idol of Lord Ganesa in a similar recess above the main entrance. Could it be that the recess above the Taj entrance also contained a similar idol, which was subsequently removed by the iconoclastic invaders?
(ii) The Rajput Welcome Signs: The walls of the main gateway and the “kitchen” in the great courtyard are marked with typical Rajput welcome signs, such as the “gulab-dani” (rose-water cans) and “ilaichi-dani” (cardamon pots). The Rajput palaces at Deeg (Bharatpur) and Jaipur also contain similar welcome signs.
(iii) Ganesa Torana: On the main gateway, the entire border at waist-height is decorated with what is called the “Ganesa Torana” (the elephant trunk and the crown can be clearly identified). It is noteworthy that animate decorations are taboo in Islam.
(iv) Other sculptural details: Upon the marble walls of the central edifice, there are sculptural details of flowers in the shape of OM and bell flowers which is of great significance in the worship of Lord Shiva.
(v) The pinnacle: On top of the central dome of the Taj Mahal, there is a copper pinnacle which measures a height of 32′ 5 ½”. On the eastern red-stone courtyard, in front of the community hall, there is a figure of the pinnacle inlaid in black marble which measures a length of only 30′ 6″.
There is reason to believe that the copper pinnacle is not the original one. The Shahjahannama of Muhammad Salah Kumbo mentions that the pinnacle was pure gold15. But by 1873-74 it was already of copper and when it was taken down for regilding, the words “Joseph Taylor” were found engraved on the copper16. Captain Taylor was the British official who carried out the repairs to the Taj Mahal in 1810 AD. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the original gold pinnacle was removed by either Joseph Taylor or his predecessors. The discrepancy between the lengths of the pinnacle and its figure in the courtyard supports this conclusion. However, because of the similarity between the copper pinnacle and its figure in the courtyard, it can be assumed that the original shape remains unaltered.
The end of the pinnacle branches into a trident, its central tongue extending farther than that of the other two. On closer observation, the central tongue appears to be in the shape of a “Kalasha” (water pot) topped with two bent mango leaves and a coconut. This is a sacred Hindu motif. Could it be that the trident pinnacle was symbolic of the deity Lord Shiva worshipped inside?
The symbols listed above are directly Hindu and some of them–the animate decorations such as the cobra twins and Ganesha–“torana” are toboo in Islam. It is likely that these details, not being very obvious, are only those that have survived the alterations in the building.
An alternate explanation attributes the Hindu symbolism to the benevolent religious tolerance of Shah Jahan, under whom the Hindu craftsmen enjoyed complete freedom to express their talent in their own traditional style. However, regarding his religious tolerance, his own court journal Badshahnama has an altogether different commentary to make: “It has been brought to the notice of His Majesty that during the late region many idol temples had begun, but remained unfinished at Benaras, the great stronghold of infidelity. The infidels were now desirous of completing them. His Majesty, the defender of the faith, gave orders that at Benaras and throughout all his dominions at every place, all temples should be cast down. It was now reported from the province of Allahabad that 76 temples had been destroyed in the district of Benaras.”17
12. General Layout And Plan
(i) Numerous rooms in the edifice: It has been discussed in an earlier section that there are two floors below the real grave containing numerous rooms. Obviously, these rooms did not have any utility in a mausoleum, and their presence is not explicable unless it is accepted to be an ancient edifice built for an altogether different purpose. They do not appear to have been living rooms, but were they meant for storing provisions and other materials of a vast temple complex?
(ii) The Nagar Khanas: Midway between the main gateway and the marble edifice, on either side of the courtyard, there are two identical buildings known as the “Nagar-khanas” (Drum Houses).
Is it plausible that Shah Jahan, who was very “scrupulous…in the matters of bereavement and religious sanctity” (Section 2) built these drum houses? Music is taboo in Islam–there is a mosque nearby. And a mausoleum is certainly not a place for festivity!
On the other hand, drums are important accompaniments in the worship of Lord Shiva.
(iii) The Gow-Shala: within the precincts of the Taj Mahal, to the east of the Main Gateway, at the extreme end of the courtyard, there is a cow-shed known as the “Gow-Shala”. What could have been the purpose of a cow-shed in a mausoleum? Or was it part of the temple complex?
It is possible that it was not part of the original plan–as it disturbs the symmetry of the complex–but because of its Sanskrit name, the “Gow-Shala” appears to have been introduced by the Hindu rulers, who were using the edifice as a palace or temple.
To Sum Up: The arrangement of the domes, the lotus canopy, the trident pinnacle, the numerous rooms in the building, the direction of the mosque and its triple domes, the “Gow-shala”, the “Nagar-khanas,” and the surviving Hindu symbolism indicate that it was originally built as a temple complex. The purpose of the minarets is not functional but decorative, and the inspiration behind them does not appear to be Saracenic. The graves and the Koranic inscriptions upon the marble wall, of course, should be attributed to Shah Jahan.
The whole argument about the Taj Mahal being a Mogul construction hinges solely upon the assumption about the origin of the bulbous dome, which certainly is debatable. Havell had emphatically asserted (pp.1-38) that the prototype of bulbous dome existed in the Buddhist stupa and the carvings of Ajanta several centuries before the Mogul invasion. He did not question the claim of Shah Jahan building the Taj Mahal, but asserted that from purely architectural considerations, the inspiration behind the edifice was neither Arab, nor Persian, nor European but Indian–“more Indian than St. Paul’s cathedral and Westminster Abbey are English”. (p. 13)
I honestly dont care whether the taj mahal was an ancient vedic temple complex that was rebuilt by the mughals. If it was or wasnt doesnt make a difference. But blindly believing others opinions is not going to help the hindu cause no matter how great those opinion-makers were. You’d rather take a more neutral and objective stand on it and see both sides of an argument before rushing into conclusive claims if you really wanna get more intelligent people into your cause.
“Sorry to say, u failed miserablybut i have no amusement as i know abt your “points” from a little earlier time. U can only repeat the same song again and againwith a third rate sms lingo “lol” at last. No answers were given by u to Giridhar’s questions, and it stinked when u said u have no time to waste replying to Giridhar’s questions…. So sad state.”
@giridhar, hats off..
Jayesh or is it Girdhar..you still suffering from schizophrenia ?
@Arjun : No such records exist for Qutub Minar as well. Now would you rant that it is also made by “Mughals? Grow up, your logic seems to getting as fragile as your age. Calm down or you might get a heart attack. I think you should go back to your boss Elst to get some baby sitting on the questions I asked you instead of whining again and again and humouring me when someone questions you.”
You really like reflecting yourself dont you ? you inferiority complex must be getting even worse its no wonder you have to beg people to get you articles published by the very people who condemn because thats your so called Vedic Wisdom is it ? If You are so intellectually astute and knowledgeable then im not seeing anyone around the world including in india contacting you for the advice or wanting to work with you ? Anyway start begging to me for your next article to get published like you always do and i might throw a few pennies in lol
Gia , Have you gone there and done the research yourself ? have you also looked at what the mughal records also say about the construction ? You cant just look at one side of the story just because you want to prove its Hindu..And if this was an important hindu temple as it would be then where’s the hindu side of the story like we have with ram janambhoomi or somnath and many other temples where the evidence is well documented.If their was so much proof that the taj is a hindu temple than how comes all the well established hindu scholars have not taken it up ? Work by people like Sita Ram Goel on the 2 thousand temples is well documented but ignored by secularists and other anti hindus because they cant dispute them but they love bringing up PN oak to ridicule hindus .When you dont know the poltics like the beggar Ghirdhar then you are falling into same trap of the loony fringe that is being used against hindus all the time who present their facts with evidence.No wonder PN oak was used by secularists against hindus when they presented their evidence on the Ram Temple to the courts but of course beggars like Ghirdhar are too intelligent to notice that because they are busy measuring the giant pyramid with a measuring tape to see if its done to vedic science or not lol
Arjun I told you I dont care if its hindu or vedic or mughal. I dont care about what anyone says (neither Elst nor Oak) or their opinions even if they’re big scholars. Moreover I could ask you the same question about whether you have gone there and done the research to make the claims you’re making.But you completely ignored my point in my post. Nevertheless i expected that and even expected you to throw accusations on me being ‘looney’, Which is what my post was all about- Emotion verses Research. I neither side with Elst nor with P.N Oak. I like to see all sides. If P.N Oak was used by secularists against Hindus, so was Koenraad Elst with his claims abt yoga not being hindu. I’m only interested in information and research and not in emotional obsessions or borrowed opinions that is often the cause of accusing one another with labels such as looney rather than dispassionately observing and investigating the matter.
Actually i have been there and there was nothing hindu about that place than a graveyard.Its an over rated place because secularists want to promote it as sign of composite Indian culture where everyone lived in peace together..How was koenraad elst used by secularists against yoga not having hindu origins ? Where was their a long courtcase over that like in the case of the Ram Janambhoomi ? Yoga is hindu so hes mistakened about it and i dont see anyone using that against hindus but hes not wrong on this issue of taj mahal because this issue has been going on long before elst came on the picture.Sita ram goel and ram Swarups who are the forerunners of modern day Hindu scholarship who anti hindus have never dared to take on never even mentioned the Taj Mahal at all because if it was that obvious with evidence they would have gone for it..Instead particularly Sita Ram Goel called Pn oak in his face a big black spot on indian history.. That link i put is from Surinder Paul Attri a well known and respected hindu actvist who knew both Sita Ram Goel and Pn oak so you can see the comments..
@Arjun : Agra is hardly 2 hours away from my place and I’ve been to Taj Mahal and that is why I can assert from my memories, that much of the research done by “P. S. Bhat and A. L. Athawale” is indeed correct.
Unfortunately, such privilege cannot be enjoyed by people like you who live outside of India and think they know India from some secondary books, TV news channels and journalists like Elst. I bet tomorrow if Elst feeds you with some new dogfood, then woahhh, you’ll change your tone vibrating your tail to the echoes of your master.
Its funny to see how everyone becomes a victim of your massive ammunition of 3rd grade abuses when one disagrees with you. Atleast, you could’ve been a man enough to spare a woman who just tried to talk objectively and intellectually. Let alone my questions and other points in @Gia’s reply, it seems your only expertise is abuses and emotional rants. Come to India and I bet your massive ego would be reduced to smithereens within a few days. BTW, in the below link, you can find all the images of Tajmahal : wwwDOTstephen-knappDOTcom/was_the_taj_mahal_a_vedic_temple.htm
Hindu scriptures prescribe meditations and detachment from life in old age. @Arjun, perhaps you should do the same instead of venting your frustration and emotional rigmaroles.
@Gia : Please don’t waste your time on people who can’t even respect women.
Girdhar the begger, you planning to beg to me to put more articles up like the beggers in Agra soon. And as Arga s it so close to you then why you relying on PN Oaks works and instead why dont you go and provide the evidence yourself ? Elst wrote that article because i told him to write that article so get your facts right mate..If you are now dreaming of dogfood then maybe your Italian supreme leader Sonia Gandhi who rules you country from your city Delhi can feed you some because you like a billion others are already her dogs lol
“Come to India and I bet your massive ego would be reduced to smithereens within a few days”
by who you ? lol Good we will definitely have to see what happens when you come up face to face to me.I might just chuck a couple of pennies afterwards as you will be begging like you always do
“@Gia : Please don’t waste your time on people who can’t even respect women.”
Thats how desperate you are ..where this disrespect for women ? ? or is it in your fantasy again like PN oaks ?
@Girdhar, Sit like a like a good boy and i’ll give you a few dog biscuits later as you seem to continue to bark all through this thread lol
@Arjun : Your sense of humor is indeed deteriorating with your fragile old age. Go read my post dated “September 5, 2011 at 10:34 am” which seems to have been missed by your highly scrutinizing eyes. 😀
I’m neither promoting nor questioning PN Oak as I already said, but solely and only questioning this naive article by Elst which ignore too many facts like @Gia showed, like shown in Stephen-Knapp’s website and like I questioned much before. But amusingly, the master is observing a ‘maun vrat’ even on his own blog while the dogs are out in open thinking the master would be amused. Oh well, I’m indeed sitting like good boy enjoying your standup comedy circus, but you are shitting like an old eunuch as if someone inserted a burning cactus in your emotional, whiny and sorry rear, jumping like aged baboon thinking the world would be amused.
Keep abusing and calling PN Oak’s work a fantasy as if your expert judgments and abuses are going to change the world.
If you are jobless, and need some job, then do call me up. There are plenty of circus in India. Man, I feel like a snake charmer now. So you told Elst to write that article. It makes sense. Blind old ailing dogs can’t do much themselves anyways but bark emotionally in their own aphasia! Anyways, keep it coming, Elst would be surely pleased with you. 😀