...Contd(2) the REPRESENTATION OF SHIVA IN AN EARTHLY FORM. If Lingam/Yoni are DEITIES then Govt of India is bound by its own pleading in the Supreme Court in London when a QC instructed by Indian Solicitor Zaiwalla served a writ on the owner of a Stolen South Indian Chola Dynasty Natraja for the return of the nataraja 2 its rightful and original owner - the temple Pather something. The judgment was given by SC Judge Ian Kennedy (b4 whom I have appeared in chambers 3times in my own libel dispute with a US Finance House when the Natraja case was progressing). Kennedy said in his judgment (Reported in India Today in June 1988) "I am totally convinced by the argument that a Deity is a Juristic Entity and its juristic authority remains in tact even if its earthly form is totally destroyed"   The Nataraja BOUGHT LEGALLY in good faith as NOT STOLEN and worth a million GBP was returned to India.

Legally, V have "Beyond Reasonable Doubt" and "Balance of Probabilities" . Bal o Prob= "Concept in the law of evidence relating 2 the standard of proof whereby the party upon whom the legal burden of proof rests is entitled to a decision in his favor if he has established some preponderance of probability in his favor". If Mansing sold the palace in question for any valid consideration then Indian Govt is the legal owner by transfer from the Brits subject 2 the DEITY issue. So V wait on the courts.

Some more facts about Shahjahan and his Taj Mahal :

The plaque put the archealogy department outside the Tajmahal describes the edifice as a mausoleum built by Shahjahan for his wife Mumtaz Mahal , over 22 years from 1631 to 1653. That plaque is a specimen of historical bungling. Firstly, the plaque sites no authority for its claim. Secondly the lady's name was Mumtaz-ulZamani and not Mumtazmahal. Thirdly, the period of 22 years is taken from some mumbo jumbo noting by an unreliable French visitor Tavernier, to the exclusion of all muslim versions, which is an absurdity. There would have not been any scope for guesswork had the building construction been on record in the court papers. 

The designer of the Tajmahal is also variously mentioned as Essa Effendy, a Persian or Turk, or Ahmed Mehendis or a Frenchman, Austin deBordeaux, or Geronimo Veroneo, an Italian, or Shahjahan himself. 

Twenty thousand labourers are supposed to have worked for 22 years during Shahjahan's reign in building the Tajmahal. Had this been true, there should have been available in Shahjahan's court papers design drawings, heaps of labour muster rolls, daily expenditure sheets, bills and receipts of material ordered, and commisioning orders. There is not even a scrap of paper of this kind.

Contd.

Shahjahan was a stingy, usurious monarch. He came to throne murdering all his rivals. He was not therefore, the doting spendthrift that he is made out to be. He was a cruel tyrant ,a great womaniser with a harem teeming with 5000 women and an alchoholic.

A Shahjahan disconsolate on Mumtaz's death is suddenly credited with a resolve to build the Taj. This is a psychological incongruity. Grief is a disabling, incapacitating emotion.

A infatuated Shahjahan is supposed to have raised the Taj over the dead Mumtaz, but carnal, physical sexual love is again an incapacitating emotion. A womaniser is ipso facto incapable of any constructive activity. When carnal love becomes uncontrollable the person either murders somebody or commits suicide. He cannot raise a Tajmahal. A building like the Taj invariably originates in an ennobling emotion like devotion to God, to one's mother and mother country or power and glory.

A tiny mirror glass in a gallery of the Red Fort in Agra reflects the Taj mahal. Shahjahan is said to have spent his last eight years of life as a prisoner in that gallery peering at the reflected Tajmahal and sighing in the name of Mumtaz. This myth is a blend of many falsehoods.

Firstly,old Shajahan was held prisoner by his son Aurangzeb in the basement storey in the Fort and not in an open,fashionable upper storey.

Secondly, the glass piece was fixed in the 1930's by Insha Allah Khan, a peon of the archaelogy dept.just to illustrate to the visitors how in ancient times the entire apartment used to scintillate with tiny mirror pieces reflecting the Tejomahalay temple a thousand fold.

Thirdly, a old decrepit Shahjahan with pain in his joints and cataract in his eyes, would not spend his day craning his neck at an awkward angle to peer into a tiny glass piece with bedimmed eyesight when he could as well turn his face around and have full,direct view of the Tjamahal itself. But the general public is so gullible as to gulp all such prattle of wily, unscrupulous guides

The contents of post #s 35-36-37 illustrate how ppl get emotionally involved in a dispute regarding a Historical Building which is currently believed to be the subject of legal proceedings. In all probabbility the court will throw out any witness who wishes 2 recite any such details 2 support or oppose what is before the court.

The question of Shah Jehan loving Mumtaz "Mahal" is not a matter in dispute. All sorts of "myths" originate regarding buildings and what ppl believe in or disbelieve is a matter concerns only those whose lives are governed by "hearsay" or willingness 2 believe what suits their arguments. Let me illustrate how the "system" works from an actual proprietary title "cooked up by me". A property in England I was living in was quite fraudulently made the subject of a court possession order by a bank by using corrupt methods and claiming I was the "beneficil owner". That order is still IN FORCE. The deeds to the property were then manipulated by me without committing any fraud so that I could not be the owner. The court order was fraudulently AMENDED 2b enforceable against the overseas owner shown on the deeds. Property was forcibly occupied while I was in india. Property could NOT B SOLD even by force of a court order. I kicked the bank out by forcible entry and possession. Title was in dispute for 8 years. Eeventually I sold the property IN MY NAME ..Contd(2)

Contd(2)..by tearing up the deeds in the other name by notice 2 the court. It is a criminal offence 2 sell a property in England by concealing anything in its pedigree. Only the Attorney General can insitute those proceedings. I invited the Attorney General's Office 2 institute proceedings or allow me to sell the property in my name as the lawful owner. No action was taken - DO YOU KNOW WHY? coz you cant go to court 2 prove that both sides are engaged in what is known as "constructive fraud". Cosntructive fraud means "a person has availed himself of a legal advantage which he has obtained". The ownership of that property has now changed TWICE by relying on my sale AND REGISTERED by depositing those deeds.

So rest assured, what has been going on regarding the Taj is nothing less than "Constructive fraud". In this instance - the "system" in India being rather peculiar though Brit inherited - the evidence on BOTH sides stinks so the court - if it wishes 2 make any decisions rather than preserve the 'status quo', will have to make a decision on the BALANCE OF PROBABILITIES" described in my post.

If anyone thinks that any decisions of importance in any "system" are made to bring in RAM RAJYA by MARYADA PURSHOTTAMS sitting as judges then they should have their heads examined. Unfortunately, in India V expected Ram Rajya 2 descend as soon as the Brits left. V have only ourselves 2 blame.

Copy of Press Report available on the net: "Taj Mahal not Waqf property: Records
April 04, 2005 20:44 IST

Revenue records pertaining to the Taj Mahal does not show that the historic monument as a Waqf property, official sources said on Monday.

This disputes the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Waqf Board's claim that the Taj is waqf property and that it should get the right to control and manage it.

A report prepared by the Tehsildar, in whose area the monument is located, said land records show that the Taj is Shahi Imarat (royal building), the sources added.

The Agra district magistrate is expected to send the required information to the waqf authorities after more investigation.

The magistrate had issued notices to the Archaelogical Survey of India and the Centre stating that it had received applications for the registration of

Maqbara Shahjehan and Mumtaz Mahal

property known as 'Taj Mahal' at Agra under the provision 36 of the Waqf Act, 1995.

New Delhi: The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) yesterday (Aug 12, 2005) questioned before the Supreme Court the controversial order of the U.P. Sunni Wakf Board declaring the 17th century Mughal monument Taj Mahal as Wakf property contending that it stands vested in the Union Government.

" ...Shahjahan is wrongly credited as a great builder, lover etc etc." I hope ppl watched the news channels on Indian tv during last three days. What went on there would explain Y Shah Jahan is credited 4 being ba gr8 builder and lover. However, Having 5000 concubines dones not prevent a man from loving just ONE woman or loving her MORE than the other 5,000. Unless someone has been fortunate enuf 2 hav that experience one is in no position to comment - in my belief. 

" Dont know how the Courts and Wakf Board came into the picture ": I expect Mukesh Ambani's highly paid lawyers must have claimed the same in the Mumbai High Court but the Court seems to have ruled in favor of the Waqf Board. If a party makes a claim against U in court andn u dont appear 2 DEFEND urself then I am certain even in India the party will GET JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT. The simple rule in such court proceedings where ANY claim is made that if it is NOT DENIED then it is deemed 2 b true and the party is entitled to a judgment in its favor.

The Babri Masjid case has not been settled coz I believe neither side can put any admissible evidence 2 support or deny the claoim/counterclaim save that NO MATTER WHAT IS DONE 2 DISTURB THE STATUS QUO the result will be public unrest of one kind or another.

AS regards English Courts and Churches there is a relevance ..Contd(2)

...Contd(2) for the reasons set forth in my previous post. The Christian 'faithful' opposed the sale as I suppose ppl must have done IF Raja Mansigngh? decided 2 sell the edifice alleged to be TEJO MAHALYA. I expect Mansingh sold (if it was sold) 4 the same reasons as the Church authorities in England did. So what is to stop the Christian Diehards in England making the same kinds of claims/counterclaims made in India in say 60 years from now?

I have already explained tne relevance of the LANDMARK judgment of Mr. Justice Ian Kennedy in the Indian Natraja Case. Judgments of the English Supreme Court, Courts of Appeal, House of Lords and Privy Council ARE ADMISSIBLE in all legal arguments in Indian courts - this is known as citing a PRECEDENT - helps a judge 2 "Pass the buck" 2 another judge. If U go into the chambers of any decent lawyer/barrister in India U will find at least the ALL ENGLAND LAW REPORTS on his shelf if not any other.

Lawyer in England gave me this advice: "Dont b too idealistic - the 'system' is CRUDER than u think or expect it to b". same applies in India. I discovered it when I had to fend for myself in England coz of the 'politics' involved. Govt of India must have spent MILLIONS of POUNDS on the 45 day long Natraja cae in the English Supreme Court in 1988 Solicitors like Zaiwalla must have charged 100-150 GBP AN HOUR-junior counsel 1500-2000 GBP per day in court-QC at least 3000 GBP per day in court.

 one cannot understand Hiroshima and Nagasaki --  
This is happening because we have not allowed man's intelligence to flower. And whenever it has happened in any society that intelligence was allowed a little freedom, that society becomes weaker than other societies. It happened in India: India remained a slave for two thousand years for many reasons. One of the reasons was the great revolution that was brought by Krishna, Patanjali, Saraha, Mahavira, Buddha.
These people brought such a great revolution, such a radical change in the consciousness of this country that many people were released from the bondage of stupidity; a great intelligence was released. The result was this: that the intelligent people stopped killing, they became non-violent; they refused to be recruited in the army. Buddhists and Jains refused to be recruited in the army, the BRAHMINS refused to be recruited in the army. Now, this was the cream, and the cream refused to fight. Then very stupid countries and very ordinary people -- Hunas, Turks, Moghuls, who were far backward in every possible way -- ran over the country. And because the most intelligent part of the younger generation was no more interested in killing and violence there was no resistance, no fight. They conquered the country. A big country was conquered by very small countries. For two thousand years this country remained in slavery for the simple reason...

- tao , the golden gate vol 2