P. N. Oak

Academic and government response

Oak finds some mention in passing as trustworthy in academic literature on the Hindutva wing of Hindu nationalism. Aravamudan (2005) calls him a "mythistorian"^[9] whose life's work may be summarised 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 in his work on Indo-Aryan theory says "The various scholars whose work I have examined here are a disparate group. They range from brilliant intellectuals like Aurobindo, to professional scholars like B. B. Lal, to what most academics would consider “crackpots,” like P. N. Oak. 1 The primary feature they share is that they have taken it upon themselves to oppose the theory of Aryan invasions and migrations—hence the label Indigenous Aryanism."^[12] Giles Tillotson describes Oak's work as a "startling piece of pseudo-scholarship".^[13]

While Oak's theories have been rejected by some, they have found a popular following among others, specially among some members of India's Hindutvas,^[14] (N. Ram, editor of The Hindu, calls him a "Sangh historian"^[15]), Indocentrists and the Hare Krishnas mainly but not only represented by author Stephen Knapp. 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).^[16]

Although not anti-government in nature, Oak's book "Some Blunders in Indian Historical Research" was banned from the Parliament's library by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha (lower House) as noted in news archives.^[17] There are also other claims of government suppression, e.g. "Allegedly, Indira Gandhi's government tried to ban [Oak's book on Taj Mahal] and some would say the Indian government has been politically motivated in suppressing this theory".^[18]

Christianity as Vedic Chrisn-nity or Krishna-neeti Theory

Oak claims that Christianity was originally a Vedic religion following Krishna and claims that Christianity was originally known by either the names Chrisn-nity or Krishna-neeti (with Oak alleging these meant "The way of Krishna" or "The Justice of Lord Krishna") these generally follow in line with Oak's other theories and claims that the Vatican was allegedly originally called Vatika and that the Papacy was originally a "Vedic Priesthood" until Constantine the Great around 312 A.D killed the "Vedic pontiff" and installed in his place a representative of the tiny Christian sect.^[19] Specifically, Oak's followers make the following claims about what they claim as alleged Krishna-neeti. "Jesus went to India between ages 13 and 30 to learn Krishna-neeti (Christianity) from sages."^[20]

Taj Mahal Theory

In his book Taj Mahal: The True Story, Oak claims that the Taj Mahal was originally a Shiva temple and a Rajput palace named Tejo Mahalaya seized by Shah Jahan and adopted as a tomb. He argues that may be this temple was built by Indian King Jai Singh I. He says that Mahal is a word to describe a royal palace and not a tomb and after seizure by Shah Jahan, the name was changed to Taj Mahal.^[21]

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".^[21] He goes on to propose Hindu origins for the tombs of Humayun, Akbar and I'timād-ud-Daulah and "all historic buildings" in India as well as Vatican City,^[22] the Kaaba and Stonehenge.

Oak says that well-known western authorities on architecture including Ernest Binfield Havell, Mrs. Kenoyer and William Wilson Hunter have written that the Taj Mahal is built in the Hindu temple style,^[21] asserting that Havel says the plan of the ancient Hindu temple of Java, the Prambanan, is identical with that of the Taj Mahal.^[21] Also, he argues out that the octagonal shape of the Taj Mahal has a special Hindu significance, because Hindus alone have special names for the eight directions and the celestial guards assigned to them.^[21] He argues that the finial of the Taj Mahal is a trishula with a Kalasha, holding two bent mango leaves and a coconut, which is a sacred Hindu motif.^[21]

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

In support of these claims, Oak presents radiocarbon 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.^[21]

Oak petitioned the Indian parliament demanding that the Taj be declared a Hindu monument and that cenotaphs and sealed apartments be opened to determine whether lingams or other remains were hidden in them.^[21] According to Oak, the government of India's refusal to allow him unfettered access amounts to a conspiracy against Hinduism. The Indian government has maintained that out of respect for the dead, unnecessary openings of cenotaphs and sealed rooms cannot be allowed.

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.^[23] K. N. Panikkar locates Oak's work in the Hindutva movement's attempt to foster a communal understanding of Indian history.^[24] Tapan Raychaudhuri has referred to him as "a 'historian' much respected by the Sangh Parivar."^[25]

In 2000 India's Supreme Court dismissed Oak's petition to declare that a Hindu king had built the Taj Mahal by saying he had a "bee in his bonnet" about the Taj.^[26] Till date, as of 2017, several court cases about Taj Mahal being a Hindu temple have been inspired by Oak's theory.^[4][5] In August 2017, Archaeological Survey of India stated there was no evidence to suggest the monument ever housed a temple.^[27]

Giles Tillotson calls Oak's claims as a "desperate bid to assign a new meaning to the Taj" and "pseudo-scholarship". He states that Oak interprets the statements of Padshahnama about Shah Jahan's purchase of the land for the Taj from Jai Singh I upon where a mansion built by an ancestor of the Raja earlier existed, to claim that Taj Mahal was a wonder of ancient Hinduism. Tillotoson adds that no evidence is offered by Oak to redate it to thirteen centuries earlier. He adds that the technical know-how to construct structural buildings didn't exist in pre-Mughal India, the only surviving architecture being rock-cut or monolithic. He points that Oak later dropped this claim and claimed it to be from 12th century. He adds that Oak claims Mughals built nothing and only converted Hindu buildings. In relation to similarity with buildings of West Asia, Oak also claims them all to be "products of Hindu architecture".^[28]

Kaaba Theory: Vedic origins

In a 13-page pamphlet titled Was Kaaba a Hindu Temple?, Oak derives a claim of a "Vedic past of Arabia" based on an inscription mentioning the legendary Indian king Vikramāditya that Oak claims was found inside a dish inside the Kaaba. According to Oak, the text of the alleged inscription is taken from the page 315 of an anthology of poetry entitled Sayar-ul-Okul (Se’-arul Oqul meaning the memorable words),^[29] compiled in 1742 on the orders of a "Sultan Salim" (the actual Sultan at the time being Mahmud I, sultan Selim III lived from 1761 to 1808) from the earlier work of prophet Muhammed's uncle Amr ibn Hishām (poetic name "Abu al-Ḥakam" or ابوالحكم meaning the "Father of wisdom") who had refused to convert to Islam, and, first modern version published in 1864 in Berlin and a subsequent edition was published in Beirut in 1932.^[30] Oak goes on to state that the anthology is kept in the "Makhtab-e-Sultania Library" (Galatasaray Mekteb-i Sultani or Galatasaray Imperial School) in Istanbul in Turkey, which is now also known as Galatasaray Lisesi school.^[31]