- Wednesday, 11 May 2016
- Last Updated on Thursday, 12 May 2016 02:59
- Published Date
- Written by Dhiraj Kumar 'Bhardwaj'
By- Dhiraj Kumar
Ever thought how much wrong facts our children being taught in the schools and colleges, specially about our cultural history? What you are showing them is also improper and incorrect, courtesy to our government. Take an example.
"In 1638 Shahjahan transferred his capital from Agra to Delhi and laid the foundations of Shahjahanabad, the seventh city of Delhi. It is enclosed by a rubble stone wall, with bastions, gates and wickets at intervals. Of its fourteen gates, the important ones are the Mori, Lahori, Ajmeri, Turkman, Kashmiri and Delhi gates, some of which have already been demolished. His famous citadel, the Lal-Qila, or the Red Fort, lying at the town's northern end on the right bank or the Yamuna and south of Salimgarh, was begun in 1639 and completed after nine years," says Archaeological Survey Of India (ASI).
Text books and government historical records also elaborate the same words as described by ASI, but we have got many evidences that show these agencies are putting wrong facts. The evidences collected by few historians and published in a portal 'Krishapath' are in pictorial form and can not be denied. You can also see and decide.
Photo # 1: This tablet raised inside Delhi’s Red Fort by modern archaeologists proclaims that Shahjahan (who ruled from 1628 to 1658 A.D.) built this fort from 1639 to 1648 A.D. As against this see the (next) photo of the painting of Shahjahan’s time preserved in the Bodleian Library, Oxford. It depicts Shajahan receiving the Persian ambassador inside the fort in 1628, the very year of Shahjahan’s accession. Obviously the fort existed much before Shahjahan.
Photo # 2: The 5th generation Moghul emperor Shahjahan is credited with having built the Red Fort in Delhi. Shahjahan ascended the throne in 1628 A.D. This contemporary painting shows him receiving the Persian ambassador in 1628 itself, in the Diwan-e-Aam (Common Room) of the Red Fort itself. This painting preserved in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, was reproduced in the Illustrated Weekly of India (page 32) of March 14, 1971. Since Shahjahan was in the fort in the year of his accession, this documentary evidence disproves the notion that he built the fort. Compare with this the photo of the tablet in English raised inside the fort by the Govt. of India’s archaeology department asserting that Shahjahan built the fort during 1639-48. This is emphatic proof of Indian history having been thoroughly falsified during Muslim rule in India.
Photo # 3: The Red Fort in Delhi has in its Khas Mahal, alias the King’s apartment, the royal emblem of its builder King Anangpal. It consists of a pair of swords laid hilt to hilt curving upwards, the sacred Hindu pot (kalash) above the hilts, a lotus bud and a pair of scales of justice balanced over it. Dotted around are representations of the sun from whom Indian ruling dynasties claimed descent. At the sword points are two small conches considered sacred in Hindu tradition. Bigger conches may be seen at the left and right corners at the base. This royal Hindu insignia of the Hindu king who built Delhi’s Red Fort, is still there in the Khas Mahal pavilion. But even this visual symbol has been blatantly misinterpreted. The two swords laid hilt to hilt, curving upward are being inadvertently styled by ignorant guides, archaeologists and historians as an Islamic crescent. The sacred Hindu Kalash (water pot) on the hilts is never noticed. The lotus bud on the kalash represents royal wealth. The pair of scales is symbolic of impartial justice.
Photo # 4: This perforated marble screen inside the Khas Mahal (i.e. the King’s own chamber) in Delhi’s Red Fort, is a Hindu specialty. Such grills (jhiri) are mentioned even in Ramayanic descriptions of palaces. Therefore some buildings claimed to be mosques in Ahmedabad which boast of such exquisite jalees (lattices) are Hindu edifices. The Hindu royal emblem mounted on the upper part of the jalee, disproves that the Moghul Shahjahan built the fort.
Photos # 5 & 6: The resplendent Hindu midday sun (from whom Hindu rulers claim descent) in the arch above flanked by the sacred Hindu letter OM. Below it is the royal Hindu insignia. This proves the hollowness of the claim that Shahjahan commissioned the Red Fort.
Photo # 7: It is entirely false that the Red Fort of Delhi was built by Shahjahan in 1639-48 A.D. Muslims were the destroyers of statues. Then why should they have constructed statues? But there are statues of Hindu Mahavants riding the elephants of the doors of each interior room of “Khas Mahal” in the Red Fort. On the main gate of the Fort named “Delhi Darwaja,” there are huge statues of elephants. The curtain of building statues of elephants on forts and palace gates can be well judged by examining the palaces at Gwalior, Udaipur and Kota. Decorating homes, forts, palaces and temples with elephants is a hoary Hindu tradition. To the Hindu an elephant symbolizes might, power, glory and wealth. The Red Fort in Delhi has life-size elephants at its gate and elephants with riders atop its door knobs in the Khas Mahal pavilion. Had Shahjahan built the fort, such Hindu motifs should not have been there.
Photo # 8: A close up of the elephant and rider door knob in the Khas Mahal of the Red Fort in Delhi. This is a typically Hindu motif. Other big life-size stone elephants decorating the Naqqar Khana (Music House) gate were slaughtered by Islamic invaders. The chopped up pieces may still be seen stored in the Khas Mahal basements. The public must insist on these being joined and displayed.
Photo # 9: Inner view of the entrance to the so-called Moti Masjid inside Delhi’s Red Fort. The archaeological tablet outside claims that the mosque was built by Aurangzeb, son and successor of Shahjahan. That claim is baseless because (1) The entrance is of a temple design. (2) The arch between the domes is made of banana bunches used in Hindu worship. (3) On either side above the arch are fruit trays. (4) Naming buildings after gems (Moti means pearl) is a Hindu custom. (5) If Shahjahan built the fort why didn’t he provide it with a mosque? (6) The truncated Hindu perambulatory passage may still be seen to exist on the building’s left flank. (7) The back of the wall shows signs of tampering.
Photo # 10: A close-up of the interior top of the entrance arch of the so-called Moti Masjid (which was Hindu Moti Mandir) inside Delhi’s Red Fort. The arch at the bottom may be seen to be made of banana bunches. On either side above the arch are trays holding five fruits each as holy Hindu offering. Fruit is taboo inside Muslim mosques.
Photo # 11: This temple-front design of ribbed gourd-like domes on either side with a pinnacle surmounted by a canopy in the centre, embossed on the riverside wall of the Rang Mahal apartment inside Delhi’s Red fort is emphatic proof that the fort is a pre-Shahjahan Hindu fort. Even the name Rang Mahal is Hindu. In this same pavilion is carved on the floor an exquisite lotus in full bloom as a fountain trough. Muslim walls and floors are plain. The canopy in the photo may be seen at several Hindu altars. The kalash (pot) under it represents divinity in Hindu tradition.
Shop n Buy
Follow Indiatomorrow on Twitter
Buy it now
- Most read
- Top stories