Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Fred Nerks
The Taj edifice is much more older. It belongs to 1155 A.D, i.e., almost 500 years anterior to Shahjahan.

Makes more sense than 1600s mentioned in wikipedia. A Hindu (Shiva) Temple is also logical; Indians were Hindu before islam was brought to India. Nor is the architecture Islamic, which was my point. But, I still can't find a photo of a Hindu Temple (or remains of one) similar to Taj Mahal's design (at least from the outside), which also predates Taj Mahal.

60 posted on 04/02/2012 11:21:32 PM PDT by odds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]


To: odds

Just a thought, but there isn’t an example of the Sydney Opera House anywhere either. Some ‘things’ are simply originals?


61 posted on 04/03/2012 12:04:24 AM PDT by Fred Nerks (fair dinkum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: odds
HINDU TEMPLES WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM

islam destroyed them...

Excerpt:

Places taken by assault: If a place was taken by assault-which was mostly the case because it was seldom that the Hindus surrendered-it was thoroughly sacked, its surviving population slaughtered or enslaved and all its buildings pulled down. In the next phase, the conquerors raised their own edifices for which slave labour was employed on a large scale in order to produce quick results. Cows and, many a time, Brahmanas were killed and their blood sprinkled on the sacred sites in order to render them unclean for the Hindus for all time to come. The places of worship which the Muslims built for themselves fell into several categories. The pride of place went to the Jãmi‘ Masjid which was invariably built on the site and with the materials of the most prominent Hindu temple; if the materials of that temple were found insufficient for the purpose, they could be supplemented with materials of other temples which had been demolished simultaneously. Some other mosques were built in a similar manner according to need or the fancy of those who mattered. Temple sites and materials were also used for building the tombs of those eminent Muslims who had fallen in the fight; they were honoured as martyrs and their tombs became mazãrs and rauzas in course of time. As we have already pointed out, Hindus being great temple builders, temple materials could be spared for secular structures also, at least in the bigger settlements. It can thus be inferred that all masjids and mazãrs, particularly the Jãmi‘ Masjids which date from the first Muslim occupation of a place, stand on the site of Hindu temples; the structures we see at present may not carry evidence of temple materials used because of subsequent restorations or attempts to erase the evidence. There are very few Jãmi‘ Masjids in the country which do not stand on temple sites.

62 posted on 04/03/2012 12:36:57 AM PDT by Fred Nerks (fair dinkum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson