What's new

Was the Taj Mahal originally an ancient Hindu temple?

May be , May be Not .

Taj is Indian heritage , that is more important to me .
Vedas were developed in Punjab . SO Punjabi's were Vedic Aryans :hitwall::devil:
Yes, Turks are Greeks, North African Arabs are black, Australians are aboriginals, Russians are Mongols, all of Humanity are Africans. Things change, bro - nothing stays the same.
 
I don't understand why pakis having gaandburn here,its our property those turks used our money to build/modernize that temple. it's not your concern.

also what happened to everything inside Pakistan is **** history? just like @Atanz stay with your IVC dust sites :lol:
 
Indians have preserved these islamic monuments for centuries,but Pakistanis have destroyed numerous Hindu temples in Pakistan and have used mosques in Pakistan for spreading Islamic terrorism...shame on fanatic Paaki mulims and shame on Islamic terrorist state of Pakistan
Are you being sarcastic? There is a Hindu temples and Gurdawras in every city; even though nobody visits them any more - stupidedly the Government spends hundreds of millions rebuilding and maintaining them.

I don't understand why pakis having gaandburn here,its our property those turks used our money to build/modernize that temple. it's not your concern.

also what happened to everything inside Pakistan is **** history? just like @Atanz stay with your IVC dust sites :lol:
Our History is more rich and diverse than India's history could ever be. The only time when India's hertiage became relevant was the thousand years of MUSLIM rule; before that Indians were primitive people who lived in huts made out of cow dung.

If you have no idea about history better keep it shut otherwise you will look stupid.

so which province in pak are you from ?
I'm originally Kashmiri, but i lived in Sialkot Punjab.

It's fact not propaganda.
Maybe in Hinduvadi Schools but not in the rest of the civilized world.
 
There is a Hindu temples and Gurdawras in every city; even though nobody visits them any more - stupidedly the Government spends hundreds of millions rebuilding and maintaining them.
Then you should convert them to mosque's like your ancestors.
 
For sake of argument if Taj Mahal was actually built on a Hindu Temple and it is proved what would Indian state do? Demolish it and rebuild the Temple or just let it the way it is, or demolish the mosques attached with the Taj and build a temple there?
 
Then you should convert them to mosque's like your ancestors.
We already have too many Mosques;

For sake of argument if Taj Mahal was actually built on a Hindu Temple and it is proved what would Indian state do? Demolish it and rebuild the Temple or just let it the way it is, or demolish the mosques attached with the Taj and build a temple there?
They would demolish and rebuild the temple just like they demolished Babri Mosque.
 
If you are kashmiri than it's definite that you have hindu lineage not buddhist if you don't belong to leh.Hindusism have a deep rooted history in kashmir even before Buddhism.

First shiv sukta are only found in kashmir written on stones.The state still has 30% ~ hindu/sikh/buddhist population.

Are you being sarcastic? There is a Hindu temples and Gurdawras in every city; even though nobody visits them any more - stupidedly the Government spends hundreds of millions rebuilding and maintaining them.


Our History is more rich and diverse than India's history could ever be. The only time when India's hertiage became relevant was the thousand years of MUSLIM rule; before that Indians were primitive people who lived in huts made out of cow dung.


I'm originally Kashmiri, but i lived in Sialkot Punjab.


Maybe in Hinduvadi Schools but not in the rest of the civilized world.
 
If you are kashmiri than it's definite that you have hindu lineage not buddhist if you don't belong to leh.Hindusism have a deep rooted history in kashmir even before Buddhism.

First shiv sukta are only found in kashmir written on stones.The state still has 30% ~ hindu/sikh/buddhist population.

Kashmir was mostly Buddhist by the time Islam had arrived.

If you are kashmiri than it's definite that you have hindu lineage not buddhist if you don't belong to leh.Hindusism have a deep rooted history in kashmir even before Buddhism.

First shiv sukta are only found in kashmir written on stones.The state still has 30% ~ hindu/sikh/buddhist population.

Even so, Hinduism is not a race but an ideology and religion.
 
Pakistan has no claim in our heritage be it islamic or otherwise may be pashtuns can but their historic parent country is afghanistan mot pak while no punjabi, sindhi, baloch can claim avhievement of mughals since they weren't even 1% in nobility.Its the resources of india and indians which helped created mughal empire.

And for us taj has no cultural value only economical,its ddesign may have some hindu inputs but its a persian architecture,i have seen some foolish indian muslims doing grave worship there along with some hindus.

Our architectural heritages are rock cut caves, temples pillars and stupas not a mughal graveyard.



I don't understand why pakis having gaandburn here,its our property those turks used our money to build/modernize that temple. it's not your concern.

also what happened to everything inside Pakistan is **** history? just like @Atanz stay with your IVC dust sites :lol:

Wrong again Buddhism was never a dominant religion except the upper reaches which had historical ties with buddhist tibet.

There are conversion even 100 years back,The valley and jammu was a hindu dominated regions before islam.

Iqbal ancestors were hindu pandits, Shaiqh Abdullah/farrukh abdullah had hindu Kaul ancestry who converted in 1897 ~.

There are several hindu caste names still retained by converted muslims like matto.

If kashmir valley or jammu was buddhist majority then there would be buddhist archeological remains not hindu which are still dotted the landscape of kashmir.
Kashmir was mostly Buddhist by the time Islam had arrived.



Even so, Hinduism is not a race but an ideology and religion.

Here we are taking india as subjective term or rather a political entity so off course majority of indians have nothing in common with punjabis.

Just like a pakistani kashmiri has nothing to do with sindhi both racially and culturally except for the religion.
Punjabis look and behave nothing like Indians; although they have SLIGHT resemblance to Sikhs - that doesnt mean much.
 
Last edited:
Pakistan has no claim in our heritage be it islamic or otherwise may be pashtuns can but their historic parent country is afghanistan but no punjabi, sindhi, baloch can claim avhievement of mughals since they weren't even 1% in nobility.Its the resources of india and indians which helped created mughal empire.

And for us taj has no cultural value only economical,its ddesign may have some hindu inputs but its a persian architecture,i have seen some foolish indian muslims doing grave worship there along with some hindus.

Our architectural heritages are rock cut caves, temples pillars and stupas not a mughal graveyard.





Wrong again Buddhism was never a dominant religion except the upper reaches which had historical ties with buddhist tibet.

There are conversion even 100 years back,The valley and jammu was a hindu dominated regions before islam.

Iqbal ancestors were hindu pandits, Shaiqh Abdullah/farrukh abdullah had hindu Kaul ancestry who converted in 1897 ~.

There are several hindu caste names still retained by converted muslims like matto.

If kashmir valley or jammu was buddhist majority then there would be buddhist archeological remains not hindu which are still dotted the landscape of kashmir.


Here we are taking india as subjective term or rather a political entity so off course majority of indians have nothing in common with punjabis.

Just like a Pakistani kashmiri has nothing to do with sindhi both racially and culturally except for the religion.
There are more Pashtuns in Pakistan than the entire population of Afghanistan. Pashtuns regard Pakistan as their homeland, and Pakistan has always supported Pastshuns in Afghanistan. Secondly, Indians (liked) never liked nor supported the Mughal Empire; during the Indian revolt majority of the people within Modern day Pakistan fought for the reestablishment of the Mughal Empire while Hindus fought for the reestablishment of the Maratha Empire. The only thing you Indians have contributed to the Mughal Empire was its fall.

All of Delhi has no cultural value to Indians. Yes, it has economic value, because people around the world come to see MUSLIM architecture and wonders, not rustic scrony wannabe pyramids you call "temples" - people come to see the Muslim culture left behind.

Your Architectural heritage and culture are all primitive, what is there to be proud in caves, pillars and "stupas" ? When you see a advertisement of Indian tourism you dont see caves, pillars and stupas; you see Mosques, Taj Mahal, and various forts built by the Mughal Empire.

It doesnt matter if Iqbal's ancestors were Hindu or Pindu - i don't get how you see pride in how Hindus saw the truth and abandoned their primtive ways and adopted Islam, the religion of light. You should be ashamed that your Hindu bretheren left their religion, and you should not publicly announce it as if your are proud that they did leave their religion.

A Kashmiri has more in common with a Sindhi than a Indian.
 
Yes come on Modi, burn it down and build a Hindu temple over there. I would love to see that !
 

Back
Top Bottom