Popular Countries

TAJ MAHAL, A TEMPLE OR A TOMB? FINALLY REVEALED!

By Gagan Bhullar . 21st February 2018 08:30pm
TAJ MAHAL, A TEMPLE OR A TOMB? FINALLY REVEALED!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9dLuVnelbg A self-styled historian PN Oak wrote a book and all our history lessons went topsy-turvy. According to this book, Taj Mahal was actually a Shiva temple 'tejomahalay'. Ever since this claim was put in print, the controversy rears its head time and again and political fronts use it to there benefit. Well, Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has put the whole discussion to an end. Filing a response affidavit to the case filed by advocate Rajesh Kulshreshtha in an Agra Court, ASI lawyer Anjani Sharma reiterated our history lessons. According to this affidavit, Taj Mahal had indeed been constructed by emperor Shah Jahan in the memory of his beloved wife Mumtaz. The advocate added that the claims that Taj Mahal was a temple are imaginary. One of the most coveted wonders of the world, Taj Mahal, has always been India's pride and attracts more than three million tourists every year. While around the globe, the mausoleum is seen as a symbol of undying love, Indian political fronts stage regular demonstrations demanding it be declared as 'tejomahalay'. In fact, the Shiv Sena holds aartis at the ghats of Yamuna beside Taj. Several Hindu organizations had also demanded that the regular namaaz at the mosque inside the Taj premises be stopped considering it is a Hindu shrine. Earlier, in 2005, ASI had also contested the claim filed by the UP Sunni Central Waqf Board, in which the organization had tried calling their dibs on the monument. In the latest civil suit, the petitioners have demanded renaming the Taj as 'tejomahalay' and also requested that the out-of-bounds parts of the masterpiece tomb be opened to reveal the 'truth' that it was indeed 'shiva temple' and every investigation be documented. The same demands have been snubbed by the Supreme Court that there is no need reviewing a matter that is pre-decided and in place. The petitioner, Rajesh Kulshreshtha has objected that the reply filed by ASI is incomplete and further hearing in the matter has been postponed to 11th September.