INSTITUTE
FOR REWRITING INDIAN HISTORY (
Newsletter
No. 2 .
Dear Member,
We are very glad to send you this second newsletter. Our activities
during the last four months have been as follows:-
1. Mr. Godbole (0234 - 57388)
1.1 Two letters on Taj Mahal have now "been published by the Royal
Institute of
British Architects Journal (copies enclosed) This journal is circulated
to 20,000 members in the U.K. and 6,000
members overseas, in addition 3,000 copies are purchased by various institutions
throughout the World. Could you suggest names of other journals of similar
standing to whom we should write?
1.2 Annual Report 1980. Mr. Godbole informed Mr. Oak of the article on
Taj Mahal which appeared in the December 1977 issue of the RIBA journal. It has been reviewed on pages 85 to 88 of the
report.
Other information supplied by Mr. Godbole is printed on pages 14, 25,
26, 61, 84, 93 and 94. However certain important pieces of information are
missing: --
(a) Well known Persian Scholar and Historian Sir Yadunath Sarkar has
lied. His book " Anecdotes of Aurangzeb and other Historical Essays (1912),
contains an essay entitled 'Who built the Taj Mahal * In it he says "----.
A spacious trait of land south of
(b) Aurangzeb's letter of 1652 complaining about serious leakages in Taj
was translated and published by Archaeological survey of
“repairs to Taj " by Mr. M.S.Vats Superintendent of the
(c) Peter Mundy has recorded in 1632, “- - - the places of note in and around it (i.e.
1.3 The Agakhan has started an international competition for revival of
Islamic Archilecture. A prize of 500,000 Dollars will be awarded every five
years. A letter was sent to three judges of the competition pointing out the
falsity of Taj Mahal legend. Sir Hugh Casson has replied saying " I found
your analysis most interesting. It has been forwarded to Aga Khan Foundation
for comments.'
1.4 Encyclopaedia Britannica refuse to change information on Taj Mahal.
They say that Mr. Godbole's analysis must be classified as original research
and hence it must first be exposed to academic community and deemed noteworthy
by it, before they make any changes. A reply has been sent to them pointing out
to them that they cannot ignore Aurangzeb's letter and Badshahnama.
1.5 Mr. Oak's general letter was posted to Professors of Architecture of
20 important universities in the
1.6. The Planning and construction of Taj Mahal is entirely in accordance
with Hindu Architectural Texts. Detailed information is given by Prof. R. Nath
in the June 1969 issue of the magazine MARG published from
"- - in view of the evidence of the Persian sources and the
accounts of the foreign travellers, particularly Peter Mundy, Tavemier, Manuccii
and Bernier reinforced by the unmistakeable architectural evidence, the
assumption that the Taj was Originally a Rajput Palace and was converted into a
tomb appears to be completely absurd -
" (The same gentleman was awarded
Ph.D. in 1969 for re-hatching the usual legend, by the Agra University. The
ghosts of Shahjahan and Mumtaz still seem to haunt our professors!)
1.7 Regional editor of Fodor's Travel Guides has shown interest in our
findings. But like the usual initial reaction he suggests that Shahjahan built
the mausoleum after demolishing Raja Mansingh's Palace, and that Taj Mahal does
not become a Hindu Structure just because Hindu labourers worked on it. A reply
has been sent to him along with a copy of 1980 annual report.
1.8 A brochure is essential for our work. A draft copy is enclosed.
Please return it with your comments.
1.9 It is astonishing that Mr. Oak's work is strongly opposed by the
Rashtriya
Swayamsevak Sangh. (RSS) Full details are enclosed.
1.10 Friends of
analysis of the Taj Mahal legend in their newspaper..
1.11 Marathi -translation of the analysis is almost complete. Apart from
Maharastra Mandal (
1.12 Miss Dandeker, daughter of a former Director of Education of Goa
has been very much impressed by Mr. Godbole's Work. She will try to persuade
her father to help us.
1.13 Mr. Hansraj Kale has sent copies of the 1980 annual report to
various major libraries, as suggested by Mr.Godbole.
1.14 Dr Sapatanekar has joined us.
2. Mr. B.K.Patel (0I 203 2l8l)
2.1 Sanskrit as mother language of English
Mr. Oak has received a reply from the editor of Webster Dictionary
saying that they will take his research into account when bringing out their
next edition.
2.2 A letter was sent to Encyclopaedia Britannica pointing out the wrong
information on the Kutb Minar. The
2.3 He will visit
3 Prof. Chakrabarty
He has now left for
We have about 10 members in
4. Dr. P.B.Sharma
4.1 He met Mr. Godbole recently and had a long discussion with him. They
agreed that the public relations side of Mr. Oak's work needs quite a bit of
attention and improvements. The annual report also needs some editing. When Dr
Sharma goes back to
4.2 He also feels that Mr. Oak' should concentrate on the mediaeval
History of the Rajputs rather than try to cover all the subjects under the sun.
4.3 Mr.Godbole expressed his deep concern that despite Mr. Oak's
intelligence, endurance and tenacity his work is largely ineffective. It is
painful to see so much energy and efforts going to waste. This was mainly due
to his inability to express his thoughts properly. His language is neither that
of a lawyer nor that of a Historian. He shows no respect for the intelligence
of the readers. All of Mr. Oak's books need to drastically rewritten. Dr.
Sharma agreed but suggested that Mr. Godbole should now publish his own books
and for the present at least prepare an article on Taj Mahal for publication in
the RIBA Journal.
5 Mr. Chauhan ( Bilston 42751 )
5.1 Efforts to enlist new members continue .
6 Action
6.1 Mr.Godbole writes a large number of letters every year. At times he
needs some one who is prepared-just to sign letters so as not to make an
impression of a one man show. Would you please help ? He would of course
welcome any financial assistance, especially in the form of Postage Stamps. There
are also various other ways in which you can help. For example:-
6.2 Request your local public librarian to obtain Mr. Oak's books for
you. As they are not expensive, he will probably buy them. We can thus make the
library staff aware of the existence of our institute.
6.3 write to Indian High Commission,
6.4 send us various pieces of useful information. This may occur in the
most unsuspected places. e.g. The September issue of the Readers Digest
contains an article on recent Archaeological excavation in
6.5 Tell us the names and addresses of well known authors and publishers
whom we should contact.
6.6 Contribute say £5 per year (
less than 10pence a week ! ) We can send yearly contribution to Mr. Oak.
7 Your Opinion
Whatever you think of our efforts, please pick up your telephone NOW
and. Tell us your opinion - good. or bad. we want to hear it.
Yours Sincerely
s/d B.K.Patel.)
Mr. Godbole,
54, Sudeley Walk,
Mr. B K.Patel
272,
Mr. K.Chauhan
293
TAJ MAHAL: - MR. P.N. OAK AND R.S.S.
Many people naturally believe that Mr.Oak must be getting quite a
substantial support from the R.S.S. The truth is however quite different.
R.S.S.. is just as bitterly opposed, to Mr.Oak as the Muslims from
(1) You may recall that 13 years ago India Book House published Mr. Oak's
book
" Taj Mahal is a
(2) Balasaheb Deoras, Eknath Ranade and other leaders do not make even a
passing remark about Mr. Oak and his work in their speeches.
(3) Mr. M. W. Palnitkar a sincere RSS worker met Balasaheb Deoras on his
tour of Jaipur. He gave Mr Deoras copies of the books " Taj Mahal is a
(4) Bhausaheb Deoras met Mr. Oak at Chandausi U.T.C., camp. He said
" Mr. Oak, if what you say is right, how come Mr. D. Y. Potdar,
Mr.G.H.Khare and other historians do not accept it ? (i.e. as long as they do
not accept your views we will not accept them either, no matter how thick
headed we may look.)
(5) RSS chief of Delhi Lala Hansraj Gupta says "The land may belong
to Hindus but
Shahjahan' most certainly built the Taj."
(6) Prof. Balraj Madhok says " We may accept Mr. Oak's views on
other buildings but not on the Taj Mahal. It was definitely the work of
Shahjahan."
(7) Once at a party Mr. Oak was talking to a friend about Taj Mahal. Mr.
Jagdish Prasad Mathur, secretary of All India Jansangh said laughingly " Mr.
Oak can keep on saying ‘Taj Mateal is
(8) Organiser used to publish Mr. Oak's articles and review his books.
But since 1967 it has all been stopped. Mr. Oak's letters to editor are not
printed. If Mr. Oak is mentioned in any article or letter to the editor, the
editor will exclude Mr. Oak’'s name without fail.
The Reasons? Historian R.C.Mujumdar wrote to Mr K.R.Malkani the editor
of organiser " Don't publish such idiotic articles that Shahjahan' did not
built Taj."
Some friend of Mr.Malkani says "Badshahnama Volume I page 403 does
say that Shahjhan built the Taj Mahal."
(9) Last year the director of RSS exhibition at Kumbh Mela (Prayag)
purchased 70 enlarged mounted photos for 1800 Rs. But at the last moment the
photos were not exhibited due to opposition from the high authorities. One of
the opponents was Mr.V.S.Vakarikar, head of the Archaeology Department at
(10) Late Madhavrao Achawal, head of Department of Architecture at
(11) Late Mr. Dattubhayya Mule told Mr.Palnitkar -another RSS worker
" I am not a
Historian but whenever we discuss Mr.Oak's findings, those who have
studied History at M.A and Ph. D Level do not support Mr. Oak."
(12) RSS runs a chain of schools called " Sarswati
Vidyalayas." Headmaster of one such school at
(13) RSS runs a publishing company called "Suruchi Sahitya". It
refused to publish
Mr.Oak's book " Agra Red Fort is a
(14) RSS has asked Mr. Moropant Pingle to rewrite Indian History. He
never showed any interest in seeing Mr. Oak. However at the insistence of Mr. Palnitkar
Mr. Oak
met him, talked to him for one and a half hour and showed him
photographs. Years passed by. No word from Mr. Pingle about Mr. Oak.
(15) RSS have started Deendayal Upadhyaya Research Institute. Again its
researchers refuse to study Mr. Oak's work. They have never invited Mr. Oak for
delivering a lecture or participating in any discussion.
(16) Nanaji Deshmukh has started “History and Culture Society of India.”
Its president is a Muslim from
(17) Prof.V.S.Athavale of Pune brought the question of inviting Mr Oak for
delivering a series of lectures, before the executive committee of Vishva Hindu
Parishad. He was met with total opposition.
The situation is unbelievable! Can you help by expressing your deep
concern to the RSS chiefs and convince them of their folly? Surely they can ask
their colleagues who are historians and architects to come out in open, say why
they think that Mr. Oak's findings are wrong and unacceptable and at least not
to join the great conspiracy of silence! Some feel that support for Mr. Oak may
split the organisation. Why should it? RSS has always loathed hypocrisy and
cowardice. If there are any difficulties in openly supporting Mr. Oak, the
chiefs can at least allow other members to support him if they wish.
Whatever the outcome of our efforts to win over the RSS chiefs, one
thing should become clear to us that Mr. Oak needs our support, at least
financially. Can you set aside the cost of a loaf of bread every week? or even every
month? and send it to us once a year? We cannot work effectively without money.