March 15, 2005
Let sleeping Moghuls lie...PLEASE.News
My initial reaction was, "you have GOT to be kidding me."
An Indian Muslim charity has laid claim to the ownership of the world's most famous monument to love, the Taj Mahal.
The Sunni Waqf Board controls all Muslim graveyards in the state of Uttar Pradesh, where the spectacular marble monument is located.
Since Muslims who AREN'T royals are buried at the Taj AND it contains a Mosque, the Sunni Waqf Board has a reason to pursue this obviously innocent and well-intentioned claim.
Whom can we blame for this latest bit of eye-roll-inspiring controversy? Wait for it...
The Sunni Waqf Board (SWB), a Muslim trust, was given ownership of Uttar Pradesh's Muslim graveyards by the Indian government itself.
Right.
There wouldn't be some financial motivation for this surprising development, would there? Noooo. Couldn't be.
Mr Usman said once the ownership issue had been decided, the board would demand that 7% of the total earnings from tickets should be transferred to its coffers.
Here's my favorite part:
He said the board did not stake a claim to the monument earlier as it had not wanted to enter into any controversy.
They were correct! There is no controversy at all. My ocular muscles (and my potential for disbelief) are taxed. Oh, Shah Jahan...what has your legendary love wrought?
anna on March 15, 2005 10:40 AM in News · T·r·a·c·k·b·a·c·k address · Direct link · Email post
One might say that the Congress party is going overboard with its anti-BJP secularism. A happy medium is so hard to find these days.
Wait a minute, I thought tha Taj Mahal was the jewel that belonged to all Indians? If this group claims some right to the Taj, are we going to see the Hindu nationalists start claiming Ayodhya again?
How about a compromise - let them have that crappy casino in Atlantic City.
Its a good thing the Taliban is not in power anymore. In their Wahabi brand of Islam all tombs are unislamic and need to be taken down. Whew.
Notice that this group went forth with claiming ownership of the Taj Mahal only because it "was given ownership of Uttar Pradesh's Muslim graveyards."
You know, if the Sunni Waqf goes about burying their dead all over India, they can lay claim to all of it (yes, this is a purposefully absurd comment).
"secularism" ????
Classical plagiarism: (Must see photos)
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/index.htm
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/was_the_taj_mahal_a_vedic_temple.htm .
also see other photos... Follow the link at bottom of the page where it says "click here".
This is not an issue of secularism but an issue of arcane legal principles and the governance of religious trusts in India.
Almost all masjids and graveyards in North India were already properties of the Sunni Waqf Board (a waqf is usually an irrevocable trust with private beneficiaries incorporated by and under guidelines set by the Sunni Waqf Board)
Waqf properties are usually built by private people who waqf their properties so that they cannot be sold and the fruits of the property can be enjoyed by the children of the property builder and their posterity.
Disputes on Waqf properties, claims etc., are settled by the Sunni Waqf Board which is a quasi judicial body.
Graveyards are generally private properties, waqfed by their owners so that others can also bury their dead there. The graveyards may or may not charge a fee depending upon the waqf deed under which they were signed.
Most of the ancient Muslim tombs in India are also governed by the Waqf board because their builders usually resort to Waqfing these properties so that their children may not sell them and squander the money.
As I understand after partition the All India Muslim Sunni Waqf Board was formed so as to have uniform rules and procedures for millions of Waqf properties and also to adjudicate disputes so as not to saddle the common law courts with these disputes.
I am just impressed at the used of the word "waqf" and "waqfed" as verbs in English. We totally have to propagate the use of this word in every day English.
It seems that Aurangzeb probably preempted any Waqfing(!) by Shah Jahan, claiming said graveyard for the state, which now is India.
Hahaha ....The Waqf should go waqf itself. This is waqfing ridiculous. I mean do the Sunni Waqfs really think they have a waqfing chance in hell of waqfin' winning this motherwaqfing frivolous lawsuit. They'll end up WOL, waqf outta luck.
May the Waqf be with you.
well done, joe. you would've made a great smurf. ;)
Saheli,
Waqfed is a proper verb used in legal documents. I might have pushed it with 'waqfing' though ;)
Joe,
You are hereby Waqfed from Waqfing on issues of Waqf because of your Waqfiness to Waqf Waqf.
Waqf.....
How do you pronounce that?
Is it like 'smurf,' another word in the English language that is quite as versatile?
Waqf is pronounced in Urdu as wuf with u as in thus.
I love it when the desis get silly. Waqf!
Waqf the fqaw?
There is in existence a separate Shia Waqf Board, which may have an equally legitimate claim to the place (meaning of similar dubious legitimacy). Mumtaz was definitely a Shia, and the tomb's in her name.
Even with the legal tangle, the potential for damage by the Sunni Board is very limited, all the Indian government has to do is pass a law and confer special status to the Taj Mahal, which is how the Ajmer Sharif Dargah was taken out of the grasp of the local Waqf Board. There have been some rumblings about funds mismanagement at the Dargah Nizamuddin in Delhi as well.
Any opinions on Prof. Oak ? Who is this chap ? Serious
investigator or completely waqfed out of his head ?
If his evidence is verifiable then what ?
Is he the same fellow who claimed that the Kaaba in Mecca was once a Hindu temple ?
I dunno. Truth is often stranger than fiction.
Please enlighten me .
Thanks. M.