Cannabis Indica

thcscience_admin
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Undid revision 418432270 by HotWinters (talk) hyperlink is totally uncited
HotWinters (talk | contribs)
503 edits
Undid revision 418493391 by Paul Barlow (talk)
Line 39: Line 39:
Oak petitioned demanding that the Taj be declared a Hindu monument and that [[cenotaph]]s and sealed apartments be opened to determine whether Shivalingam or other temple remains were hidden in them.<ref name=Oak3/> According to Oak, the [[Indian government]]'s refusal to allow him unfettered access amounts to a [[Conspiracy theory|conspiracy]] against Hinduism. The Indian government has maintained that unnecessary openings of cenotaphs (tombs) cannot be allowed out of respect for the dead.
Oak petitioned demanding that the Taj be declared a Hindu monument and that [[cenotaph]]s and sealed apartments be opened to determine whether Shivalingam or other temple remains were hidden in them.<ref name=Oak3/> According to Oak, the [[Indian government]]'s refusal to allow him unfettered access amounts to a [[Conspiracy theory|conspiracy]] against Hinduism. The Indian government has maintained that unnecessary openings of cenotaphs (tombs) cannot be allowed out of respect for the dead.


Oak's denial of Islamic architecture in India has been described as one of the "more extreme manifestations of anti-Muslim sentiment" in [[Maharashtra|Maharashtrian]] popular culture.<ref name=ErnstShimmel1992 /> [[K. N. Panikkar]] locates Oak's work in the [[Hindutva]] movements attempt to foster a [[Communalism (South Asia)|communal]] understanding of Indian history.<ref name=Panikkar1 /> [[Tapan Raychaudhuri]] has referred to him as "a 'historian' much respected by the [[Sangh Parivar]]."<ref name=Raychaudhuri2000 />
Oak's denial of Islamic architecture in India has been described as one of the "more extreme manifestations of anti-Muslim sentiment" in [[Maharashtra|Maharashtrian]] popular culture.<ref name=ErnstShimmel1992 /> [[K. N. Panikkar]], who is associated with the [[Marxist historiography (India)|"Marxist school" of historiography]] <ref>http://www.hindu.com/2008/12/29/stories/2008122955461100.htm</ref>, locates Oak's work in the [[Hindutva]] movements attempt to foster a [[Communalism (South Asia)|communal]] understanding of Indian history.<ref name=Panikkar1 /> [[Tapan Raychaudhuri]] has referred to him as "a 'historian' much respected by the [[Sangh Parivar]]."<ref name=Raychaudhuri2000 />


The Belgian writer [[Koenraad Elst]] sees Oak's claim as an example of "funny attempts at compensation" within a "Hindu inferiority complex" arising from what he describes as a crackdown by "arrogant Leftists" on Hindutva following the murder of Gandhi.<ref name=Elst1991 />
The Belgian writer [[Koenraad Elst]] sees Oak's claim as an example of "funny attempts at compensation" within a "Hindu inferiority complex" arising from what he describes as a crackdown by "arrogant Leftists" on Hindutva following the murder of Gandhi.<ref name=Elst1991 />

Revision as of 07:11, 13 March 2011

Purushottam Nagesh Oak (March 2, 1917 - December 4, 2007), commonly referred to as P. N. Oak, was an Indian writer, notable for his historical revisionism. Oak's "Institute for Rewriting Indian History" issued a quarterly periodical called Itihas Patrika in the 1980s.

Oak's claims, e.g. that Christianity and Islam are both derivatives of Hinduism, or that the Kaaba and the Taj Mahal were once Hindu temples to Shiva,[1] and their reception in Indian popular culture have been noted by observers of contemporary Indian society, who variously characterized Oak as a "mythistorian"[2] or more directly as a "crackpot".[3].

Life

Oak was born in Indore, Madhya Pradesh. During World War II, he was with the Indian army, and was in Malaya. He joined the Indian National Army[4] after Singapore fell to the Japanese, and thereafter was involved in Radio bulletins. "From 1947 to 1974 his profession has been mainly journalism having worked on the editorial staffs of the Hindustan Times and The Statesman, as a Class I officer in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, and as editor in the American Embassy's Information Service." [4]

Dozens of blogs and websites refer to him as "Professor" P. N. Oak,[5][6][7] but he never was a professor, nor was he a PhD. According to his own account,[4] he did M.A. (Agra) and L.L.B (Mumbai), and was an official in the Ministry for Information, and wrote various journalistic pieces.

Revisionist theories

Intent on rectifying what he believes to be "biased and distorted versions of India's history produced by the invaders and colonizers", Oak has written several books and articles on Indian history and founded an "Institute for Rewriting Indian History" in 1964. According to Oak, modern secular and Marxist historians have fabricated "idealized versions" of India's past and drained it of its "Vedic context and content". Srinivas Aravamudan noted that Oak's work typically resorts to "deep punning"[2] associating Sanskrit sound-alikes with non-Sanskrit religious terms (such as Vatican=vatika "hermitage", Islam=ishalayam "temple of God" and George as an aberration of Garg[8]. Based on this, Oak claims that both Islam and Christianity originated as distortions of "Vedic" beliefs. He thus alleges that the Kaaba in Mecca was originally a shrine to Shiva[1] and that the Papacy was "a Vedic priesthood" until Constantine the Great killed the "Vedic Pope" and replaced him with the head of the hitherto unimportant Christian sect.[9]

Academic response

Oak finds some mention in passing as an eccentric in academic literature on the Hindutva wing of Hindu nationalism. Aravamudan (2005) calls him a "mythistorian"[2] whose life's work may be summarized by the title of his work World Vedic Heritage: A History of Histories, Presenting a Unique Unified Field Theory of History that from the Beginning of Time the World Practised Vedic and Spoke Sanskrit. Edwin Bryant writes that most academics would consider him a 'crackpot'.[3] Giles Tillotson describes his work as a "startling piece of pseudo-scholarship".[10]

While Oak's theories have been summarily rejected in academia, they have found a popular following among some members of India's Hindu right[11] (Narasimhan Ram, editor of The Hindu newspaper, calls him a "Sangh historian"[12]) and Indocentrists. Art historian Rebecca Brown describes Oak's books as "revisionist history as subtle as Captain Russell's smirk" (referring to a character in the Hindi movie Lagaan).[13]

Taj Mahal Theory

In his book Taj Mahal: The True Story, Oak claims that the Taj Mahal was originally a Shiva temple or a Rajput palace seized by Shah Jahan and adopted as a tomb.

The Taj, Oak says, is a "typical illustration of how all historic buildings and townships from Kashmir to Cape Comorin though of Hindu origin have been ascribed to this or that Muslim ruler or courtier".[14] He goes on to propose Hindu origins for the tombs of Humayun, Akbar and Itmiad-u-Dallah and "all historic buildings" in India as well as the Vatican,[9] the Kaaba and Stonehenge.

Oak claims that Hindu ornaments and symbols were effaced from the Taj, whose sealed chambers hold the remnants, including a Shiva Lingam, of the original temple and that Mumtaz Mahal was not buried at her cenotaph.

In support of these claims, Oak presents carbon dating results of the wood from the riverside doorway of the Taj, quotes from European travellers' accounts and the Taj's Hindu architectural features. Oak further alleges that eyewitness accounts of the Taj Mahal's construction as well as Shah Jahan's construction orders and voluminous financial records are elaborate frauds meant to hide its Hindu origin[citation needed].

Oak petitioned demanding that the Taj be declared a Hindu monument and that cenotaphs and sealed apartments be opened to determine whether Shivalingam or other temple remains were hidden in them.[14] According to Oak, the Indian government's refusal to allow him unfettered access amounts to a conspiracy against Hinduism. The Indian government has maintained that unnecessary openings of cenotaphs (tombs) cannot be allowed out of respect for the dead.

Oak's denial of Islamic architecture in India has been described as one of the "more extreme manifestations of anti-Muslim sentiment" in Maharashtrian popular culture.[15] K. N. Panikkar, who is associated with the "Marxist school" of historiography [16], locates Oak's work in the Hindutva movements attempt to foster a communal understanding of Indian history.[17] Tapan Raychaudhuri has referred to him as "a 'historian' much respected by the Sangh Parivar."[18]

The Belgian writer Koenraad Elst sees Oak's claim as an example of "funny attempts at compensation" within a "Hindu inferiority complex" arising from what he describes as a crackdown by "arrogant Leftists" on Hindutva following the murder of Gandhi.[19]

In 2000 India's Supreme Court dismissed Oak's petition to declare that a Hindu king had built the Taj Mahal and reprimanded him for bringing the action, saying he had a "bee in his bonnet" about the Taj.[20][21] In 2005 a similar petition was dismissed by the Allahabad High Court. This case was brought by Amar Nath Mishra, a social worker and preacher who says that the Taj Mahal was built by the Hindu King Parmar Dev in 1196.[21]

Kaaba Theory: Vedic origins

In a 13 page pamphlet headed 'WAS KAABA A HINDU TEMPLE?', Oak derives a claim of a "Vedic past of Arabia" based on an alleged inscription mentioning king Vikramāditya found at the Kaaba. He further claims Muhammad was born to a Hindu family.[22] The text of the inscription Oak quotes from is said to be taken from a manuscript he identifies as Sayar-ul-Okul,[23] allegedly an anthology of Arabic poetry kept in the Makhtab-e-Sultania Library in Istanbul, Turkey. Oak claims the anthology was compiled in 1742 on the orders of a "Sultan Salim" (the actual Sultan at the time being Mahmud I), and alleges it was first edited in 1864 in Berlin. The Sayar ul-Okul has since been propagated by fringe Vedic mysticist Stephen Knapp,[24] but is unknown to the pertinent Arabist reference works.

Bibliography

  • Christianity is Chrisn-nity,
  • Islamic Havoc in India (A. Ghosh Publisher, 5740 W. Little York, Houston, Texas, 77091)
  • The Taj Mahal Is a Temple Place (Alternate title, The Taj Mahal is a Hindu Palace), Hindi Sahitya Sadan, New Delhi (online version: hindusarise.com)
  • Who Says Akbar Was Great? (Hindi Sahitya Sadan, New Delhi)
  • Agra Red Fort is a Hindu Building (Hindi Sahitya Sadan, New Delhi)
  • Some Blunders of Indian Historical Research (Hindi Sahitya Sadan, New Delhi)
  • Some Missing Chapters of World History (Hindi Sahitya Sadan, New Delhi)
  • World Vedic Heritage—A History of Histories (Hindi Sahitya Sadan, New Delhi)
  • Taj Mahal — The True Story (ISBN 0-9611614-4-2)

References

  1. ^ a b P. N. Oak. "Was the Kaaba Originally a Hindu Temple?". hinduism.co.za.
  2. ^ a b c Srinivas Aravamudan, Guru English: South Asian Religion in a Cosmopolitan Language Princeton University Press (2005), ISBN 0691118280, p. 36.
  3. ^ a b Edwin Bryant (2001). The Quest for the Origins of Vedic Culture: The Indo-Aryan Migration Debate. Oxford University Press. p. 4.
  4. ^ a b c P. N. Oak. "About The Author Prof P.N.Oak 19/20".
  5. ^ "The Real Story Of Tajmahal". blog. November 22, 2005. Retrieved 2007-09-02.As of 2 September 2007, Googling with the quoted string "Professor P. N. Oak" (with quotes) finds 328 webpages.
  6. ^ "The Taj Mahal and the Controversy Surrounding Its Origins". h2g2. BBC. 2000-02-08. Retrieved 2007-09-02.This website, a BBC Blog (h2g2) page that can be created by any user, is often referred to as BBC's having accepted the Oak claims. See the sulekha.com and garysellers citations.
  7. ^ Gary (2005-03-29). "Taj Mahal - Not made by Shahajahan!!! BBC". The Indian.
  8. ^ P. N. Oak (2003). Some missing chapters of world history. Hindi Sahitya Sadan. p. 15.
  9. ^ a b Oak, P.N. (1999-06-04). "Cities And Regions Since". Vaishnava News Network.
  10. ^ Peter Parker (2008-09-13). "Review: Taj Mahal by Giles Tillotson". The Daily Telegraph.
  11. ^ Akbar S. Ahmed (May 1993). "The Taj Mahal". History Today, vol. 43. The Taj has recently entered a controversy which reflects the politics of modern India. Hindu fundamentalists, wishing to deny any positive role of Muslims in India, argue that it was not built by Shah Jahan. They claim Hindu rulers in the fourth century built it. Books with titles such as Taj Mahal Was a Rajput Palace (P.N. Oak, 1965; online version) further argue this position. There is no merit in the argument, but it has acquired something of a popular following in India. {{cite news}}: External link in |quote= (help)
  12. ^ "HRD Ministry — its master's voice". The Hindu. 2001-04-29.
  13. ^ Rebecca Brown (2004). "Lagaan: Once Upon a Time in India". Film & History: an Interdisciplinary Journal of Film and Television Studies. 34 (1): 78–80. doi:10.1353/flm.2004.0008.
  14. ^ a b P. N. Oak. "The Tajmahal is Tejomahalay—A Hindu Temple". Dharma Universe.
  15. ^ Carl W. Ernst, Annemarie Schimmel (1992). Eternal Garden: Mysticism, History, and Politics at a South Asian Sufi Center. State University of New York Press. p. 36.
  16. ^ http://www.hindu.com/2008/12/29/stories/2008122955461100.htm
  17. ^ K. N. Pannikar. "OUTSIDER AS ENEMY: POLITICS OF REWRTING HISTORY IN INDIA (address to the Stanford India Association)" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2006-01-09. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  18. ^ Tapan Raychaudhuri (2000). "Shadows of the Swastika: Historical Perspectives on the Politics of Hindu Communalism". Modern Asian Studies. 34 (02): 259–279. doi:10.1017/S0026749X00003310.
  19. ^ Koenraad Elst (1991). "The Hindu movement after Ayodhya". Ayodhya And After. New Delhi, India: Voice of India. {{cite book}}: External link in |chapterurl= (help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl= ignored (|chapter-url= suggested) (help)
  20. ^ PTI (2000-07-14). "Plea on Taj history dismissed". The Tribune.
  21. ^ a b [1]
  22. ^ Gopal, Ram (1998). Islam, Hindutva, and Congress quest. New Delhi: Reliance Publishing House. p. 195. ISBN 8175100729.
  23. ^ Muslim Digest, July to Oct. 1986 pages 23-24;[2] Purushottam Nagesh Oak, Indian Kshatriyas Once Ruled from Bali to Baltic & Korea to Kaba (1966)
  24. ^ Proof of Vedic Culture's Global Existence. 2001. pp. 123f. ISBN 0961741066.

Further reading

  • Garg, Ganga Ram (1992). Encyclopaedia of the Hindu world. South Asia Books. {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Check date values in: |accessdate= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  • Gopal, Ram (1998). Islam, Hindutva, and Congress quest. New Delhi: Reliance Publishing House. ISBN 8175100729. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)

See also

Template:Persondata

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Purushottam_Nagesh_Oak&diff=418579488&oldid=418493391

Leave a Reply