Qutub Minar – one of the most visited monuments of the country. Built at the start of medieval Islamic rule in India by Mohammed Ghori’s slave Qutubuddin Aibak, the Qutub Minar complex is one of the prime attractions of New Delhi. It is 73 meters tall and is the world’s tallest brick minaret.
But like many other historical Islamic sites in India, the Qutub, too, has a dark spot behind which it apparently hides the truth that it was built on a destroyed Hindu structure.
It has been established by many credible (the word is being added to satiate the Leftists) sources that the Qutub Complex which has many Hindu structures and symbols. In fact, the Quwwat ul-Islam mosque stands on pillars which once were part of a Hindu structure.
The Quwwat ul-Islam (Might of Islam) mosque was actually built using the material from 27 Hindu and Jain temples. The ornate pillars of the mosque are testimony to that fact!
Some are now claiming that even the minaret is the ancient Dhruva Stambha.
Just in case you didn’t know, a Dhruva Stambha was used in ancient India for astronomical observations. The 27 temples destroyed (and admitted by Aibak himself) were in fact pavilions raised for the 27 constellations of the Hindu zodiac.
While Aibak destroyed the temples, what happened to the pillar?
Some claim that the minaret is actually the pillar itself. Modifications were made on the pillar to make it look like an Islamic structure. Their contention is that the pillar has the symbol of lotus all over it, including its outline when viewed from the top from a helicopter.
So was it not a Muzein’s tower as some Colonial historians and their followers in Leftist circles claim?
Those who say that the minaret was the Dhruva Stambh also point out that no Islamic pillar has ornate style as is in the Qutub Minar. Every Islamic pillar, especially those constructed for Muzzein’s call, had plane surfaces with only calligraphy on it.
They also state that the Arabic word ‘Qutub’ means ‘zenith’ or ‘pole’, which is a hint that the tower was actually used for astronomical purposes. It was only because of the Colonial and Leftist historians that the tower came to be associated with Aibak, whose first name was coincidentally Qutubuddin.