Taj Mahal belongs to Lord Shiva; rename it as Taj Mandir: BJP MP Vinay Katiyar

News Network
October 24, 2017

Ayodhya, Oct 24: The controversy over Taj Mahal refuses to die down any time soon, and now BJP leader Vinay Katiyar has asked the authorities to rename the iconic historic monument located in Agra as Taj Mandir.

The firebrand BJP MP on Tuesday said that nothing is wrong in it as the whole compound belongs to Lord Shiva.

It was a temple earlier, Katiyar added.

Katiyar made these remarks after some activists belonging to Hindu outfit Hindu Yuva Vahini were arrested for reciting 'Shiv Chalisa' inside the premises of the Taj Mahal on Monday.

The incident triggered tension and the activists were formally arrested by the local police. They were released only after they submitted a written apology.

The MP had last week claimed that the Mughal mausoleum was actually a Hindu temple.

Kaityar said that the Taj Mahal was known as 'Tejo Mahal' and had a shivling, which was later removed from the monument.

“It was Tejo Mahal, Lord Shiva’s temple, where Shahjahan buried his wife and turned it into a mausoleum,” Katiyar, who had been in the forefront of the Ram temple movement of Ayodhya, had claimed.

“It was constructed by Hindu kings, the rooms and carvings there prove that it was a Hindu monument… it has also been termed as one by historian PN Oak,” he claimed.

The firebrand BJP lawmaker said like a Shiva temple, water drips from the ceiling in the Taj Mahal, which is not a case in any mausoleum anywhere and is like that only on a Shivlinga.

“It was a famous monument and was grabbed by Shahjahan,” Katiyar said.

“It was our temple but was made a mausoleum as they had more power. But it is a grand monument and national heritage… people come to see it and so it should be kept safe and secure,” he said.

Last week, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath gave a clear snub to his BJP colleague and MLA Sangeet Som for stirring the Taj Mahal controversy, stating that "it does not matter who built it and for what reason; it was built by blood and sweat of Indian labourers".

Som had courted controversy on Sunday, stating that the iconic Taj Mahal was built by traitors and hence, cannot be included in the Indian history.

Taj Mahal was also recently omitted from the UP Government's Tourism Booklet. However, the Taj Mahal later found a place of pride in the 2018 calender brought out by the Uttar Pradesh government.

Comments

khasai Khane
 - 
Wednesday, 25 Oct 2017

Tajmahal is a diversion topic. Look for what they're actually trying to hide with this.

 

BTW, 

 

Tajmahal is a grave of Mumtaz, wife of Shajahan. Islamic ruling is to level the graves to the ground/one hand span, regardless of who the person is - a prophet, a sahaba, or any modern day jaahil. Now this Tajmahal is basically a grave, a dargah, and a dargah not of auliya allah!

We should take this suggestion of BJP/Sangh parivar seriously and appreciate it coz any such durga/dargah should be demolished, or would have been demolished if the Sahaba were ruling us.!

 

 

If you think this is only an attack on Muslim history, well this shouldn't have been a part of a true islamic empire in the first place. Secondly, we show our strength in knowledge, education, serving the people etc.. 

 

Thafseer
 - 
Wednesday, 25 Oct 2017

This is just their propaganda to divert people mind from Shah Company issue to Taj Mahal. This is their plan people can forget Shah Company scam, But We don’t.

Imran
 - 
Wednesday, 25 Oct 2017

who is Vinay katiyar ? he is  just  barking but nothing will happen.

Indian
 - 
Tuesday, 24 Oct 2017

There it comes!!!!

 

 

shameless Fellows

 

shareef
 - 
Tuesday, 24 Oct 2017

This belongs to his father.

Junc rotten egg of BJP circus.

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 18,2020

Ayodhya, Feb 18: A senior Supreme Court lawyer has written to the Ram temple trust on behalf of a group of Muslims in Ayodhya, asking that five acres of land around the demolished Babri Masjid where a graveyard is situated be spared for the sake of 'sanatan dharma'.

The letter, written by advocate M R Shamshad, is addressed to all 10 trustees of Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teertha Kshetra.

Shamshad said according to Muslims, there is a graveyard known as 'Ganj Shahidan' around the demolished Babri Masjid where 75 Muslims who lost their lives in the 1885 riots in Ayodhya were buried.

"There is a mention of this in Faizabad Gazetteer also," he said.

"The central government has not considered the issue not using the grave-yard of Muslims for constructing the grand temple of Lord Ram. It has violated 'dharma'," the letter stated.

"In view of religious scriptures of 'sanatan dharma', you need to consider whether the temple of Lord Ram can have foundation on the graves of Muslims? This is a decision that the management of the trust has to take," it said.

"With all humility and respect to Lord Ram, I request you, not to use the land of about four to five acres in which the graves of Muslims are there around the demolished mosque," the letter added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 3,2020

Mumbai, Feb 3: Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray, whose party severed ties with the BJP after the state elections, on Monday said that if somebody breaks a promise, "pain and anger is obvious".

"No, I did not get any shock," Thackeray said in an interview with Shiv Sena mouthpiece Saamana while talking about forming an alliance with NCP and Congress, and becoming the Maharashtra Chief Minister.

"I am a son of Shiv Sena Pramukh (Balasaheb Thackeray), several people tried to give a shock to me but they didn't succeed. This is a field where you have to accept in the beginning that there will be a bit pushing and pulling," Thackeray said.

He added that accepting the Chief Minister's post was not a shock for him and neither was it his "dream at any point of time".

"But I can say one thing for sure that I had decided to go to any level to fulfil the promise which I made to Balasaheb Thackeray. I want to further clear it that me becoming Chief Minister is not the fulfilling of the promise made to Shiv Sena Pramukh but it's just a step towards that. I will fulfil every promise which I made to my father," Uddhav Thackeray said.

"There are several types of shock. Did people like it or not, it is the important part. I have spoken on this issue (alliance with NCP and Congress) several times and even people have understood this. Making promises and keeping them are two different things. If someone breaks a promise, pain and anger is obvious," he added.

The Chief Minister said that he does not know if BJP "has come out their shock till now or not."

"But I have to say if they had kept their promise what would have happened, what a big deal had I asked for? Did I ask for stars and moon? I only asked for what was decided before Lok Sabha polls, when we decided seat distribution," he said.

He further said, "Maharashtra and the country are watching (who betrayed/shocked whom), I don't need to say much on this."

Soon after the Assembly election results, Shiv Sena demanded rotation of the chief minister's post and equal power-sharing in the state government, which was rejected by then ally BJP. The weeks of political stalemate led to the imposition of President's rule on November 13.

Firm on its demands, Sena, the second-largest party in the state, did not hesitate to cobble up with the ideological opponents -- NCP and Congress -- and was given the chief minister's post.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 4,2020

New Delhi, Mar 4: The Supreme Court on Wednesday revoked the ban of cryptocurrency imposed by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) in 2018.

Pronouncing the verdict, the three-judge bench of the apex court said the ban was 'disproportionate'.

The bench included Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, Justice S Ravindra Bhat and Justice V Ramasubramanian.

The Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI), whose members include cryptocurrency exchanges, and others had approached the top court objecting to a 2018 RBI circular directing regulated entities to not deal with cryptocurrencies.

Advocate Ashim Sood, appearing for IAMI, submitted that Reserve Bank of India lacked jurisdiction to forbid dealings in cryptocurrencies. The blanket ban was based on an erroneous understanding that it was impossible to regulate cryptocurrencies, Sood submitted.

The petitioners had argued that the RBI's circular taking cryptocurrencies out of the banking channels would deplete the ability of law enforcement agencies to regulate illegal activities in the industry.

IAMAI had claimed the move of RBI had effectively banned legitimate business activity via the virtual currencies (VCs).

The RBI on April 6, 2018, had issued the circular that barred RBI-regulated entities from "providing any service in relation to virtual currencies, including those of transfer or receipt of money in accounts relating to the purchase or sale of virtual currencies".

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.