TAJ MAHAL, one of the seven wonders of the world, is one of the major markers for India on the global map. It is a poem on marble; Rabindranath Tagore described it as ‘drop of tear on the cheek of time’. Its beauty and fascination as a symbol of love is remarkable. It is a UNESCO heritage site and is maintained by the Archeological Survey of India (ASI). It is a marvel on marble and its replicas were gifted to the visiting heads of state.
Constructed by Mughal ruler Shahjahan in memory of his wife Mumtaz Mahal, it has been an eyesore to the Hindu right-wing. Though its history has been settled by the ASI and in 2017, Mahesh Sharma, Minister of State for Culture and Tourism in the Narendra Modi Cabinet, acknowledged that it was not Shiv Temple as claimed by some Hindutva zealots. The controversies are deliberately raised to boost the communal divides by the right-wing leaders and ideologues, time and again. Even ASI has clarified several times that the Taj Mahal was a mausoleum and not a temple.
The first major controversy around it was created with Yogi Adityanath becoming the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh. His tourism department published a booklet about sites of tourist attractions in the state. This booklet did not mention Taj, despite nearly 12,000 visitors being attracted to this marvel on a daily basis. It attracts 23% of tourists to India. When questioned, the chief minister brazenly said the Taj does not reflect Indian culture.
Now trailer of The Taj Story film by Paresh Raval shows Lord Shiva appearing as the monument’s dome is opened. The forthcoming film, as it appears from its trailer, is an attempt to propagate the Taj as Tejo Mahalay, which was converted into a tomb by Shahjahan.
The argument of the forthcoming film is that Taj was a Hindu temple, Tejo Mahalay, built in 4th century (Later revised to 12th century) and converted into a mausoleum by Shahjahan. It being 4th century temple was put forward by a lawyer PN Oak. Historian Ruchika Sharma rubbishes Oak on the basis of historical evidence, “But Oak, who did not know Farsi, perhaps missed this vital detail that rubbishes his theory of the Taj being a reused 4th century palace. Historians such as Giles Tillotson also challenged Oak’s theory by asserting that the “technical know-how to create a building with the structural form of the Taj simply did not exist in pre-Mughal India”. The mystery of 21 empty rooms at bottom was also clarified by ASI. Architecturally it was to give stability to the structure and they are empty rooms, and used for maintenance purposes. This was clarified during the Modi regime itself.
Once the 4th century theory did not work, Oak revised it to say that it was a 12th century temple. Sharma continues “Yet, Oak armed himself with make-believe and propaganda and petitioned the Supreme Court of India in July 2000, that the Taj was constructed by Raja Paramar Dev’s chief minister Salakshan in the 12th century and was therefore a Hindu structure “Tejo Mahalaya” and not made by Mughals.
Oak went up to the Supreme Court to make his point; the highest court rebuffed his fantasy bereft of historical evidence. His major argument was related to architectural aspects of the tomb; the dome, the inverted lotus at the top and the 21 empty rooms at the bottom. Similarly, later one Amarnath Mishra approached the Allahabad High Court to petition that this was built by Chandela King Parmadi, (It was also dismissed by the court in 2005)
There are detailed accounts available about the construction of Taj which are from immaculate historical sources. Peter Mundy and Tavernier, two travellers, mention that during their visit to India they came to know of Shahjahan’s grief and his determination to build a grand structure in memory of his wife, Mumtaz Mahal. Shahjahan made grand plans by involving renowned architects, the chief one being a Muslim (Ustad Ahmad Lahori) and his major associate being a Hindu. Badshah Nama the biography of Shahjahan gives a detailed account of the whole process. The group of people put together to plan and execute it.
The land chosen for Taj belonged to Raja Jaisingh. There are two versions of the process of acquiring the land. One says that it was procured by giving due compensation, the other mentioning that Raja Jaisingh gifted it to the emperor as they were on friendly terms.
The architecture of Taj is a great reflection of the syncretic traditions which prevailed here. The double dome structures were introduced by Mughal architects, Lal Qila (Red Fort) and Humayun’s tomb being another example of this.
Architecture is not an exclusive process and the mixture of architectural styles is part of the process of civilisations.
About 20,000 artisans were hired to build the Taj. As the Mughal administration used to have a construction division, the marvellous structures of North India are not a flash in the pan. Somehow the rumour is making rounds that the hands of these workers were cut. There is no source to substantiate this in any way. The account books and documents of Shahjahan’s time amply tell us the detailed accounts of expenditure done to build the Taj.
The account books mention the amounts spent to buy marble from Makrana and wages paid to the workers. Some prevalent Hindu motifs were made part of the structure as Hindu architects and workers were part of the process of construction.
In a lighter vein one should mention PN Oak’s fertile and banal imagination which puts the whole world civilisation having roots in Hindu culture. For him Christianity is Krishna Niti; Vatican comes from Vatika and Rome from Ram! Despite his things based on such superficialities devoid of any historical evidence, he kept publishing books and small booklets which were circulated in RSS shakhas to propagate his theories to become part of social understanding.
Most of the points raised in the film (as shown in the trailers) on Taj Mahal were clarified a decade ago, still the idea of reviving all this is a political one as it helps the Hindu nationalist agenda of spreading hate against Mughal rulers and thereby reflected on today’s Muslims.
This film is yet another propaganda film in the series of Kashmir Files, Bengal Files, Kerala Story and so many like these whose aim is to intensify right-wing propaganda. This film adds on to that and will be yet another tool for the divisiveness and hate ruling roost in contemporary India.
______________________
Ram Puniyani is an eminent author, activist and a former professor at IIT Mumbai. The views expressed here are author’s personal and Clarion India does not necessarily share or subscribe to them.
