this blog is about the taj mahal. indians consider the taj mahal to be the 'symbol of love' - a tomb constructed by a husband for his wife when he was devastated by her death. the iwans, pishtaqs, minarets, chattris, guldastas, finial - theres a lot to brag about and i dont intend to. i have read some interesting facts about the taj mahal and i am jotting it down here. now, as to if they are true, it all depends on the perimeters of imagination that can draw a fine line between myths and legends....
for the basic all-known facts:
the taj mahal is the most photographed mausoleum in the world, built by mughal emperor shahjahan in memory of his third wife, mumtaz mahal who died while giving birth to his 14th child. the construction began in 1632, a year after mumtaz's death and was completed in 1653 (a total of 22 years) employing thousands of artisans and craftsmen under the supervision of principal designer ustad ahmed lahauri and architects abdul karim ma'mur khan and makramat khan. mumtaz's body was stored at burhanpur (modern madhya pradesh) where she had died and it was after the completion of the taj mahal that her remains were shifted to the mausoleum. the taj mahal was an epic of persian and mughal architecture.
now, for the meatier ones:
1. 'badshahnama' (the chronicles of an emperor) written by shahjahan's court historian has recorded that: a) mumtaz's birth-name was arjumand banu begum and upon her marriage at the age of 19 to prince khurram (the later shahjahan), she became mumtaz-ul zamani. b) shahjahan took over the 'raja mansingh palace', a grand mansion of unique splendor (imaarat-e-aalishaan) with a dome on top, from maharajah jaisingh of jaipur in 1632.
2. 'aadaab-e-alamgiri', 'yadgarnama' and 'muruqqa-i-akbarabadi' are three letters that prince aurangzeb wrote to his father, emperor shahjahan during 1652. in those letters, the prince has described the delapidated condition of the mausoleum (water leaks and cracks on the dome) and that he was going to renovate them on his expense. this proves that either the taj mahal was not a recent construction or that a really bad job had been done.
3. 'kapad-dwara', the secret collection of entries by the maharajahs of jaipur records a request that shahjahan made to the jaipur princes for a building complex on the banks of yamuna river (taj mahal of course). the entry also records that, in 1634, shahjahan demanded immediate provision of marble from maharajah jaisingh for the three firmans; just two years after mumtaz's death. if shahjahan had really built the taj mahal in a span of 22 years, why the urgency just after 2 years when the initial frame construction would have anyhow taken 4-5 years.
- the above three historical evidences reveal that shahjahan had never built the taj mahal. it was already there as the 'raja mansingh palace'. shahjahan converted it into the taj mahal and used it as the mausoleum of mumtaz-ulzamani, as per her last wish.
4. jean-baptiste tavernier (1605-1689) the french jeweller who visited agra, has recorded in his travel memoirs that shahjahan buried mumtaz near the 'taj-i-makan' (the taj building) and he was the first to record that the construction of taj mahal took 22 years and that most of the work was of scaffolding.
5. english traveller peter mundy who visited agra in 1632 (the year of mumtaz death) has recorded the presence of the taj-e-mahal with its tombs, gardens and bazaars. so, it means the taj mahal was there earlier.
6. german traveller johan albert de mandelslo visited agra in 1638 and has made interesting observations of the mughal empire but suprisingly, he has made no mention of the taj mahal, which was supposedly in its sixth year of construction.
7. an american laboratory conducted carbon 14 test on a piece of wood that formed the riverside doorway of the taj mahal. the test revealed that the door had its origins in 1335 (300 years before shahjahan).
- the above foriegn travelogues reveal that that taj mahal was not a new construction but a renovation on an already constructed structure, which could be the 'raja mansingh palace'.
8. it is necessary to remove the shoes at a hindu temple whereas it is necesary to wear them at a cemetary. if the taj mahal was indeed a tomb, why is there the tradition of removing the shoes?
9. the term taj mahal was never recorded in the mughal chronicles. 'mahal' is not a word used for buildings constructed by the muslims. its is a word synonymous with hinduism meaning 'mansion'. how could a tomb be called a 'mansion'. since the taj mahal was the renovated 'raja mansingh palace', it means 'taj' and 'mahal' are words having sanskrit connections. the taj mahal is a corrupt form of the sanskrit term 'tejo mahalay' signifying a shiva temple.
10. agra is an ancient centre of shiva worship through ages and traditions. there were five shiva dieties in five temples in agra that the shiavites were supposed to worship. presently there are four - balkeshwar, prithvinath, manakameshwar and rajarajeshwar. the fifth was the agreshwar mahadev nagnateshwar which was destroyed centuries ago. the agreshwar mahadev nagnateshwar (the great god of agra; the deity of the king of cobras) was consecrated in the tejo mahalay (the great abode of the tej) temple. from the 12th to the 18th centuries, the agra region was dominated by the jats who invoked lord shiva with the name 'tejaji'.
11. 'vishwakarma vaastushaastra' mentions that the 'tej-linga' was one of the shiva-lingas. such a tej-linga was consecrated at the agreshwar mahadev nagnateshwar thereby becoming the tejo mahalay.
12. the taj mahal has a trident pinnacle over the dome. a full scale of the trident pinnacle is inlaid in the red stone courtyard to the east of the taj. the central shaft of the trident depicts a kalash (sacred pot) holding two bent mango leaves and a coconut which is a sacred hindu motif. identical pinnacles have been seen over hindu and buddhist temples in the hamalayas. tridents are also depicted against a red lotus background at the apex of the stately marble arched entrances on all four sides of the taj. it was believed all these centuries that the taj pinnacle depicts an islamic cresent and star was a lighting conductor installed by the british. on the contrary, the pinnacle is a marvel of hindu metallurgy since the pinnacle made of non rusting alloy, is also perhaps a lightning deflector. that the pinnacle of the replica is drawn in the eastern courtyard is significant because the east is of special importance to the Hindus, as the direction in which the sun rises.
13. the two buildings facing the taj mahal in the east and west directions have identical design, shape and size but have but have been deemed as a community hall and a mosque. how could similarity constructed buildings have different purposes? the 'nallar khana' is indeed a drumhouse which is a necessity in a hindu temple but not in a musilm cemetary. between the mosque and the drumhouse are a flight of stairs leading to a traditional treausry well, common in hindu temples of the 17th century. such an elaborated, multistoried treasury chest is unnecessary in a muslim tomb.
14. mughal chroniclers recorded dates of all important events - the birth of princes, marriages, ascension to throne, battles, deaths etc. but the burial date of mumtaz has not been recorded. was it because it never took place? the court papers have no records about the contruction of the tajmahal - no accounts of the materials or manpower used. the plants grown in the gardens of the taj mahal during its construction were those which were used exclusively for the worship of lord shive. consider this, who would want to grow fruits or flowers in a cemetary? would an emperor visit his beloved's resting place to have fruits?
- the above reveal that shahajahan had spent 22 years in converting a hindu temple dedicated to lord shiva into a muslim mausoleum for his wife.
15. the limestone walls and marble basements seem to cover up all the idols. jean-baptiste tavernier's travelogue states that shahjahan had plundered the tejo mahalaya shiva temple, uprooted the shiva idols, planted the cenotaphs, inscribed the holy quran along the arches and walled six of the seven stories. the french traveller, francois bernier who was emperor aurangzeb's physician for 12 years, has stated in his work, 'travels in the mughal empire' that initially, non-muslims were denied entry into the basement when shahjahan had taken over the 'raja mansingh palace' because the basement was a treasure house of gold, silver and gems dedicated to lord shiva. it seems mumtaz's cenotaph was grafted in place of the shiva-linga.
16. prophet muhammed has ordained that the burial spot of a muslim should not be marked by a single tombstone, but ironically, the taj mahal has two graves, one in the basement and another on the first floor chamber, both for mumtaz. the two cenotaphs were erected to cover up the two shiva-lingas, since hindus install two shiva-lingas on two stories, as can be seen in the mahankaleshwar temple in ujjain or the somnath temple. the closed-up rooms and walls of the taj mahal have sanskrit inscriptions and idols of shiva.
17. the eastern and southern pavilions of the taj mahal have several graves cluttered together mostly of queens and maids. like his predecessors, shahjahan finally used the mausoleum to bury his other queens and maids which means...is it indeed the symbol of love? shahjahan is one mughal emperor who had a thousand concubines and fifteen wives in his harlem. his court chronicles even gives space to imagine that he had an affair with his daughter jahanara. so the fact that the loss of one of his beloved's would inspire him to build a grand mausolem is highly far-fetched. the entire taj mahal complex has 400-500 rooms, too many for a dead woman or alive for that matter.
18. above mumtaz's centotaph hangs a chain by which now hangs a lamp. before capture by shahjahan the chain used to hold a water pitcher from which water used to drip on the shivalinga. it is this earlier hindu tradition in the taj mahal which gave the myth of shahjahan's love tear dropping on mumtaz's tomb on the full moon day of the winter eve. it was of this incident that rabindranath tagore said - teardrops on the cheek of time.
the archaelogical survey of india should be applauded for not bringing such 'explosive' truths to the forefront. because, i personally, would not want the taj mahal to be another babri masjid... in an india where everyone is waiting for a chance to lift arms against one another, if that hindu temple was pulled down to form a muslim tomb, let history lay rest, let us dream of shahjahan-mumtaz on the same track as that of romeo-juliet...let the beauty of the taj mahal stand as a beacon to beauty itself.
