Forgotten craftsmen who built Taj Mahal

Originally posted by Vedam Originally posted by AP Singh Hi Vedam, Probably you must have have been very closely associated with these Rajput relatives of Mughals and I can not challenge your knowledge about the subject related to them. There are many such false stories of this kind can be found in the poems written by their bards but without any authentic evidence and without any logic to support and are not trusted. I would like to ask you why these Chattris and Hindu Architecture taken by Mughals from their mother's side and not used at all in other Buildings like Lal Kila in Delhi and a Memorial of Mumtaz Mahal built by Shaha jajan at Burhan Pur where Mumtaz actually died and was buried.      "Probably......" So not only are you putting words in my mouth (see post above)�but you also seem to be very presumptuous. To answer your question�no i am not closely associated with these Rajput relatives of Mughals, and i am not from the Bard community. If�anything by the name that you choose to call yourself� i would say you wish to proclaim you are closely��associated to these Rajput relatives of Mughals

QUOTE=Vedam]

Originally posted by AP Singh Hi Vedam, Probably you must have have been very closely associated with these Rajput relatives of Mughals and I can not challenge your knowledge about the subject related to them. There are many such false stories of this kind can be found in the poems written by their bards but without any authentic evidence and without any logic to support and are not trusted. I would like to ask you why these Chattris and Hindu Architecture taken by Mughals from their mother's side and not used at all in other Buildings like Lal Kila in Delhi and a Memorial of Mumtaz Mahal built by Shaha jajan at Burhan Pur where Mumtaz actually died and was buried.

[/QUOTE]

Yes I am closely associated with these Rajputs in a different sense. These all were our fuedatory kings before they shifted their loyalties to their new overlords, the Mughals since I belong to the clan of Gurjar pratihar samrat Mihir Bhoj Mahan who built the Shiva temple a Agra which is the present day taj Mahal.
In one of your postings you have written Chuadhary Muhammad Ashraf Bhatti, a Supreme court lawyer of Pakistan a low caste and you are aware that Bhatti is one of the most celebrated tribe and one of the complete regiment of Bhattis under the Gurjar Pratihars was posted under the King Raja Ram Bhatti at the place which the present day NWFP in pakistan and bordering Afghanistan to repulse the Muslim attack which they were able to control for three hundred years.So I thought that you may be a bard of the rival tribe of the rajputs who were the relatives of Mughals. If that is not so I am reallyu very sorry to hurt your sentiments but at the same time please note that you also have no right to hurt the sentiments of a great clan like the Bhattis.

    
    
    

Edited by AP Singh - 07-Nov-2006 at 05:19

Look at the contrasts between the tomb of mumtaz at taj mahal, the difference is obvious.

Edited by Vivek Sharma - 07-Nov-2006 at 06:30

Unfortunately the historical records of the Gujjar empire has been lost during the Constant raids of Arabs and Turks (After conversion to Islam), and whatever records are available are with the Stone Inscription found at various places or the Historical records of Arab scholars. The Arab scholars made the following proverb about the Indian armies based on their experience with the Gujjar armies since as per the records of Abu Zaid the size of the army of Mihir Bhoja Mahan was 80 lakhs. This figure is twice of the size of the army of Mughals at the time of akbar.

The Arab proverb about the Indian armies (Gurjara Pratiharas armies since Arabs were greatly exposed to this army only).

The Persians are famed for their archers, the Turks for their horsemen, and India for its armies.
    

Edited by AP Singh - 07-Nov-2006 at 07:45

Hi Vedam,
You are right. Somebody has mis-quoted you and I thought that you may have edited your original postings later.
I am really very sorry and will be carefull next time.
With best regards.
AP Singh

It is here you have been misquoted.


Joined: 07 March 2006
Location: Paraguay
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 613
   Posted: 12 October 2006 at 10:03am
Originally posted by Vedam

I don't believe in the caste system, and caste atrocities are truely disgusting but TeldeInduz to say that the caste does not exist in Pakistan, and exists amongst muslims only in India is simply not true. You need to read current affairs more. There was a recent case in September of Gazala Shaheen, a graduate from near Multan who was raped because "her Uncle was seen with someone of a higher caste." The police said there are hundreds of cases like this in Southern punjab.
This is just false. These are NOT castes..these are family names. I don't know of this case, but I had a quick look and it seems that they're referring to "Bhattis" and "Miralis". These are NOT castes. If you don't believe me look at politicians, judges, lawyers, doctors in Pakistan. The "low caste Bhatti" occupies positions of power in all of these jobs. Here is the Rawalpindi chief judge..note he is clearly not lower caste.
9. Rawalpindi and Capital Teritory Islamabad
Mr. Muhammad Ashraf Bhatti
District and Session Judge
Chairman, Drug Court
Rawalpindi and Capital Teritory Islamabad.

http://www.dcomoh.gov.pk/courts/



    
    

Edited by AP Singh - 07-Nov-2006 at 08:17

Originally posted by AP Singh Hi Vedam, You are right. Somebody has mis-quoted you and I thought that you may have edited your original postings later. I am really very sorry and will be carefull next time. With best regards. AP Singh It is here you have been misquoted. Joined: 07 March 2006 Location: Paraguay Online Status: Offline Posts: 613    Posted: 12 October 2006 at 10:03am Originally posted by Vedam I don't believe in the caste system, and caste atrocities are truely disgusting but TeldeInduz to say that the caste does not exist in Pakistan, and exists amongst muslims only in India is simply not true. You need to read current affairs more. There was a recent case in September of Gazala Shaheen, a graduate from near Multan who was raped because "her Uncle was seen with someone of a higher caste." The police said there are hundreds of cases like this in Southern punjab. This is just false. These are NOT castes..these are family names. I don't know of this case, but I had a quick look and it seems that they're referring to "Bhattis" and "Miralis". These are NOT castes. If you don't believe me look at politicians, judges, lawyers, doctors in Pakistan. The "low caste Bhatti" occupies positions of power in all of these jobs. Here is the Rawalpindi chief judge..note he is clearly not lower caste. 9. Rawalpindi and Capital Teritory Islamabad Mr. Muhammad Ashraf Bhatti District and Session Judge Chairman, Drug Court Rawalpindi and Capital Teritory Islamabad. http://www.dcomoh.gov.pk/courts/

Edited by Vedam - 07-Nov-2006 at 10:25

These are the Historical records that How the Gujjars moved from Malwa to Kannauj and then to Sindh to defeat the arab invaders. In the process the number of their fuedatory kings and size of their armies were continiously kept multiplying.

Gwalior Inscriptioon of Mihira Bhoja (verse 4).

1: About Naga bhatta 1: The Gwalior inscriptions announces Nagabhata's victory in the following manner:

He crushed the mighty hosts of the mlechchhas
Those foes of godly deeds.
With terror-striking weapons as he stood
He looked like
Him of the four-arms.

Nagabhata I founded the Gurjara power which held imperial sway at Kanauj for well-high Three Hundred years. About A.D. 780 his grandson Vatsaraja ruled at Jhalor while Varaba or Jayavaraha ruled over the kingdom of Sauryas, which may perhaps be identified with, Saurashtra.


Gwalior Inscription about Nagabhatta II, the Grand father of Samrat Mihir Bhoj Mahan: (3 Ibid. (Verse 8)

About A.D. 792 Nagabhata II, son of Vatsaraja, came to the throne of Gurjaradesha, then growing from strength to strength. His popular name was Ama. His mother, Sundaridevi, was a princess of the family of Yashovarman, who is described as belonging to the Maurya family. He is described as the Primeval Man born again, as once he was born as Nagabhata I, 3 for he I restored the fortunes of Gurjaradesha which had fallen low at the time of his accession.

Immediately on coming to the throne, Nagabhata II proceeded to conquer the 'kings of Sindhu',.

While moving from Ujjain (Malwa), which was left to another Gujjar clan (Parmars), to Sindh to check the invaders in their own space these Gujjars were called the Pratihars (The Protectors of the Nation) and the style to beat the enemy at his own place is particularly called the Pratihar Style. Here are some views of historians about the style of fighting of Gujjar Pratohars and Gujjar Parmars.

Garud shakti Style of Gujjar Pratihars taken from the inscription of their one of the fuedatory king Gujjar Parmars:

1.Since the Gujjars were aware about the menace of these people they evolved a policy to end this menace and to safeguard the prosperity of their country. This was known as Garud shakti. In a Parmar (a clan of Gujjar tribe), copper plate we find �the flying figure of Garud holding a snake in its left claw�. This was a representation of Garud shakti for the liberation of the country from the clutches of Kali bhujangas (H.C. Roy, Dynastic history of North India, Vol. II, pp. 844)


2.Gurjar-Pratihar Style of fighing the enemy:

The Pratiharan vidhi or giving battle to the enemy in his own state has been associated with the Gujjar Pratihar rulers. This policy proved to be the panacea for exterminating the invaders. If the Mandsor inscription of Yashodharman (6th century a.d.), is to be believed, the country was at that time ruined by Pakshaniti (factition politics). The earth was afflicted by the kings who manifested pride, who were cruel, through want of proper training, who from delusion transgressed path of good conduct and were destitute of virtuous delight� (Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarun (Vol III, pp. 146). During this adverse situation, Gurjar Pratihars emerged as the protectors of the nation. Hailing from Ujjain at first, they carried on ceaseless fight against Tajiks and Turuskas and battled with them in the Pamir region. They established their military camps in Kashmir, Gujrawala (Frontier Provinces). The grateful generations acknowledged their great contribution. It was accepted that Gujjar Pratihars, especially Mihirbhoj converted the age of vice into the age of virtue. These kings were endowed with 36 qualities. And the region (Kshetra), where the earlier Pratihars ruled was sanctified in literature especially Puranas as the Punya Avantika bhand (Sanctified Ujjain region)






    
    
    
    
    

Edited by AP Singh - 08-Nov-2006 at 02:45

AP Singh, now you're just spamming.  Stick to the topic at hand thanks. 

Vivek, look at  even Delhi Sultanate architecture and the Taj Mahal, the similarities are obvious. 

Originally posted by AP Singh Hi Jayeshk, I am not spamming but providing the authentic details about the Gujjar empire whose Emperor Mihir Bhoja Mahan built the Shiva temple and a big garden where Taz Mahal is raised later.These posts were required to prove that the size of army and the empire under Mihir Bhoja the Great was twice of the size Mughal empire when it was at its peak during the days of Akbar.Since in Historical records it is mentioned that the palace belonged to the Emperor Bhoja of Malwa and hence I had given the authentic detail that how the Gujjar Pratihars the ancestors of Samrat Bhoja or Samrat Mihir Bhoja Mahan moved from Malwa to Kannauj and ruled the entire undivided India from that place. Please specify where I have written an unrelated information about the topic or anything different than what is asked by other forum members?

How do your last two posts have anything to do with the Taj Mahal?  It's like if I started a topic about the Sydney Opera House and began with a thorough recap of how Captain Cook discovered Australia. 

Now I would ask you that in Muslim religion the memorial tomb is made where the person is actually buried or elsewhere where already a suitable palace already exists.

That's the entire argument. A 'suitable palace' didn't exist.  It was made after she died so either way, the tomb was made for her regardless of whether there was a Hindu temple or whatever in the Taj Mahal's location already

Also please specify where in entire Muslim history more than one tombs are built in the name of a single person?

That's supposed to be part of the romantic story (that Shah Jahan wanted to give her a better resting place) and it's bizarre that you'd expect all Muslims everywhere who have ever lived to all agree to the same thing. 

also Why in BurhanPur where Mumtaz is died and buried a small monument is made which is truly the Muslim architecture? In that monument none of the 22 contrasts appears which are pointed out by BBC about the Taz Mahal?

I'm surprised you're basing your whole argument on the small monument in Burhanpur.  It's absurd to just look at that and totally ignore the hundreds of Islamic structures before Shah Jahan's time that have so much in common with the Taj Mahal.  It's even more absurd to ignore the Islamic architecture in India itself even before the Mughals that is obviously related and connected to the design of the Taj Mahal. 

I have given 22 points raised by BBC in one of my earlier post. As far as the similarity of the Delhi Sultanate architecture and the Taj Mahal is concerned we are not arguing that the existing Shiva temple was not renovated before it was named as taj Mahal.

No, but what you seem to be doing is minimizing the construction by using words like 'renovating' or 'retrofitting' when in fact it's hard to see how it could be anything other than a massive rebuild of any pre-existing structure.  That said, if I've misunderstood you then I apologize. 

Dear learned friends, kindly clarify the following points:

Edited by M. Nachiappan - 10-Nov-2006 at 06:11

Originally posted by AP Singh 1. My last two posts are related to taz mahal since a comparison of the armies of the Gurjar Emperor,Mihir Bhoja Mahan who bulit the Shiva temple and the Mughal emperor Akbar, when this empire was its peak, the dynasty, which rebuilt Taz Mahal on Shiva temple was questioned by one of the forum member. The information was provided for him. Probably you may not have read the earlier posts and called it a spam.

It really was spam, almost every one of your posts finds some abstract way to reference some Gujjar person.  Anyhow, it's besides the point.

2. I have seen many tombs but only one in the name of one person where the person is buried. Mumtaz Mahal was certainly not Saint Kabir Das where there was a dispute between his Hindu disciples and Muslim disciples to get control of his dead body and perform the lasts rites according to their own customs.

Yes it is supposed to be unique, that's why it's special

So there is no question of using names of Hindu Gods like OM in her memorial which can still be seen in Taz mahal.So it was a Hindu temple. 3. No, You have taken me wrong. I dont expect all Muslims and for that matter any body irrespective of the the religion, to do the same but would expect that a new memorial tomb should be built where the person is actually buried since that is actual the resting place and certainly not to use an existing structure and that too a place of worship. In no manner you can call an existing place a memorial of the person, which was built 100s of years ago before the death of the person even after its renovation/alteration.

You mean rebuilding?

4. Now you are deviating from the point. Discuss only taz mahal and not hundreds of other buildings. 5.In a new constrution the old building is completely demolished. If it is not done the structure can not be called as newly constructed structure irrespective of the volume of renovations/alterations. Here are views of various scholars to support that it was an existing structure. i. Prof. Marvin Miller of New York took a few samples from the riverside doorway of the Taj. Carbon dating tests revealed that the door was 300 years older than Shah Jahan. ii. European traveler Johan Albert Mandelslo,who visited Agra in 1638 (only seven years after Mumtaz's death), describes the life of the city in his memoirs. But he makes no reference to the Taj Mahal being built. iii. The writings of Peter Mundy, an English visitor to Agra within a year of Mumtaz's death, also suggest the Taj was a noteworthy building well before Shah Jahan's time.

Ok answer me this then.  What part of the Taj was a Hindu temple and what part was 'renovated' as you keep implying?  A couple of stories about an om here and there don't exactly explain away everything else in the structure that is so obviously Muslim.