Taj Mahal - Tomb or a Temple?

Prof.P.N.Oak of New Delhi, put forward a theory in 1965 that the Taj Mahal was not a mausoleum built by Shahjahan, but by Rajputs. In 1968 he found a confession to that effect in Shahjahan's official chronicle Badshahnama* and in 1974 he came across Aurangzeb's letter of 1652 [the year when Taj Mahal is supposed to have been just completed] complaining that Taj Mahal was leaking all over.

Mr V.S.Godbole, who was intent on cross referencing stated:
"For the next two years I went through all the references and was convinced of his assertion. My paper Taj Mahal- Simple Analysis of a Great Deception was appreciated by some prominent European scholars in 1980."

Professor P.N. Oak, who believes the whole world has been duped. In his book Taj Mahal: The True Story, Oak says the Taj Mahal is not Queen Mumtaz Mahal's tomb but an ancient Hindu temple palace of Lord Shiva (then known as Tejo Mahalaya). In the course of his research, Oak discovered the Shiva temple palace was usurped by Shah Jahan from then Maharaja of Jaipur, Jai Singh. Shah Jahan then remodeled the palace into his wife's memorial. Today we can see the fact that captured temples and mansions, as a burial place for dead courtiers and royalty was a common practice among Muslim rulers. For example, Humayun, Akbar, Etmud-ud-Daula and Safdarjung are all buried in such mansions.

In his book he continues to say:
"The term "Mahal" has never been used for a building in any of the Muslim countries, from Afghanistan to Algeria. "The unusual explanation that the term Taj Mahal derives from Mumtaz Mahal is illogical in at least two respects. Firstly, her name was never Mumtaz Mahal but Mumtaz-ul-Zamani," he writes. "Secondly, one cannot omit the first three letters 'Mum' from a woman's name to derive the remainder as the name for the building."

So after reading all these quips, I was perturbed. Today, we pride ourselves in drawing hypothesis more sensibly, we have techniques right form Carbon dating to what-nots which can determine the age of any material. So why do the authorities who agree with Prof.P.N.Oak, wait? Why not find a means to clarify the ambiguity and give the world the truth.

Then I found more articles (including ones about Carbon dating) saying:

• Marvin Miller of New York took samples from the riverside doorway of the Taj. Carbon dating tests revealed that the door was 300 years older than Shah Jahan.
• European traveler Johan Albert Mandelslo, who visited Agra in 1638 (only seven years after Mumtaz's death), describes the life of the city in his memoirs, but makes no reference to the Taj Mahal being built.
• The writings of Peter Mundy, an English visitor to Agra within a year of Mumtaz's death, also suggest that the Taj was a noteworthy building long well before Shah Jahan's time.

Don't we deserve to know the truth?
At least tell us which story we should believe, please.

*Badshahnama - Shah Jahan admits that an exceptionally beautiful grand mansion in Agra was taken from Jai Singh for Mumtaz's burial