Somnath Hindu Temple in Gujarat

History of destruction and reconstruction

In 725 Junayad, the Arab governor of Sind, sent his armies to destroy the second temple. The Gurjara Pratihara king Nagabhata II constructed the third temple in 815, a large structure of red sandstone.

In 1024 A.D., the temple was once again destroyed by Mahmud Ghazni who raided the temple from across the Thar Desert. Ghazni was challenged by the king, Ghogha Rana, who at the ripe age of 90, sacrificed his own clan fighting against Ghazni. The temple was rebuilt by the Paramara King Bhoj of Malwa and the Solanki king Bhima of Gujarat (Anhilwara) or Patan between 1026 and 1042. The wooden structure was replaced by Kumarpal (r.1143-72), who built the temple of stone.[6].

In 1296 A.D., the temple was once again destroyed by Sultan Allauddin Khilji's army. According to Taj-ul-Ma'sir of Hasan Nizami, Raja Karan of Gujarat was defeated and forced to flee, "fifty thousand infidels were dispatched to hell by the sword" and "more than twenty thousand slaves, and cattle beyond all calculation fell into the hands of the victors". The temple was rebuilt by Mahipala Deva, the Chudasama king of Saurashtra in 1308 A.D. and the Linga was installed by his son Khengar sometime between 1326 and 1351 A.D.

In 1375 A.D., the temple was once again destroyed by Muzaffar Shah I, the Sultan of Gujarat. About 1400 A.D. it was reconstructed by the local public.

In 1451 A.D., the temple was once again destroyed by Mahmud Begda, the Sultan of Gujarat. It was reconstructed again.

In 1701 A.D., the temple was once again destroyed by Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb. Aurangzeb built a mosque on the site of the Somnath temple, using some columns from the temple, whose Hindu sculptural motifs remained visible.

Queen Ahilyabai Holkar of Indore rebuilt the temple in 1783 A.D at a site adjacent to the ruined temple which was already converted to a mosque.

The present temple was built by the government of India, after independence. This reconstruction created a serious rift between the then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, who saw in movement for reconstruction of the temple an attempt at Hindu revivalism and the President Rajendra Prasad and Union Minister K. M. Munshi, saw in its reconstruction, the fruits of freedom and the reversal of injustice done to Hindus.

The Sack of Somnath by Mahmud Ghazni in 1024

The sack of Somnath in particular came to be considered a specially pious exploit because of its analogy with the destruction of idol of Al Manat in Arabia by the Prophet. This explains the lavish panegyric of Mahmud by Nizam-ul-Mulk Tusi, and especially the early Sufi poets like Sanai and Attar, or narrators as Awfi. After the Somnath expedition (1026 C.E.), “a deed which had fired the imagination of the Islamic world”, Caliph al-Qadir Billah himself celebrated the victory with great pomp and ceremony and sent Mahmud a very complimentary letter giving him the title of Kahf-ud-daula wa al-Islam, thereby formally recognizing him as the “ruler of Hindustan”. Mahmud for the first time issued his coins from Lahore only after this second commendation from the Caliph in connection with the “destruction of Somnath”.

Mahmud extracted 2,50,000 dinars as ransom from Jayapal (1001-02 C.E.). Jayapal?s necklace worth 2,00,000 gold dinars was appropriated by Mahmud, and twice that value extracted from the necklaces of his imprisoned or executed relatives. All the wealth of Bhera which was “as wealthy as imagination can conceive”, was captured in (1004-05 C.E.). In 1005-06 the people of Multan were forced to pay an indemnity of the value of 20,000,000 silver dirhams. When Nawasa Shah, who had reconverted to Hinduism, was deposed (1007-08), the Sultan confiscated his wealth amounting to 400,000 dirhams. Mahmud seized coins of the value of 70,000,000 Hindu Shahiya dirhams, from the fort of Bhimnagar in Kangra, and gold and silver ingots weighing some hundred maunds, jewellery and precious stones. There was also a collapsible house of silver, thirty yards in length and fifteen yards in breadth, and a canopy (mandapika) supported by two golden and two silver poles. This vast treasure could not be shifted immediately, and Mahmud left two of his “most confidential” chamberlains, Altuntash and Asightin, to arrange for its gradual removal to Ghazni. In subsequent expeditions (1015-20) Punjab and the adjoining areas were sucked dry. Over and above the looting by Mahmud, there was additional looting by his soldiers. From Baran Mahmud obtained, 1,000,000 dirhams, from Mahaban a large booty, from Mathura five idols which when melted alone yielded 98,300 misqals (about 390 kg) of gold, and two hundred silver idols. Kanauj, Munj, Asni, Sharva and some other places yielded another 3,000,000 dirhams. Somnath yielded 20,000,000 dinars.

Archaeologically there is a significant absence of Indian coins or artefacts made of precious metal from this entire period in the Punjab and Sind area. [The Thaparite school of Indian history typically remains silent on this or jokes that this could be a possible pointer that the stories of these Hindu kingdoms with fabulous riches are simply stories and fantasies and they probably never existed. In this sense nothing contemporary specifically archaeologically associated with the early founders of Islam including its Prophet has been found in Arabia. However the Thaparite school will never dare raise a similar joke in the Arabian context. This also helps the Thaparite school in trying to prove that "Hinduism" did not exist in general before the pre-Islamic period. However it is a general principle of the Thaparite School to accept archaeology only if it supports the Schools hypothesis and it very angrily reacts and disparages archaeology if it dares to differ from its diktats] The flow of bullion outside India stablized Ghaznavid currency and debased the Indian. The gold content of millenial north Indian coins reduced from 120 to 60 grams with a similar reduction in the weight and content of the silver coin. This in turn reduced credit of Indian merchants in the international market.

India had always been an exporter against bullion and had accumulated bullion from domestic sources as well mines of Tibet and Central Asia. Removal of skilled artisans as slaves, decimation of adult male populations, destruction of the social productive structures including removal of women and reproductive resources of the populations, destroyed internal production and the domestic market, and trade networks. One reason prompting Anandpal to send an embassy to Mahmud at Ghazni with favourable terms to the Sultan (C. 1012) was to try to normalize trade facilities, and after an agreement “caravans (again) travelled in full security between Khurasan and Hind.”

Mahmud collected in loot and tribute valuable articles of trade like indigo, fine muslins, embroidered silk, and cotton stuffs, and items and raw ingots of famous Indian steel, lavishly praised by Utbi, Hasan Nizami, Alberuni and others. [this is the source of the famous Damascus steel coveted by both by Europe and the Muslim world. As is typical with the Muslims, they never acknowledged the debt they owed Indians for technology and intellectual achievements such as mathematics which they are usually most careful in claiming as their own inventions - leading to the so called nomenclature of Arabic numerals in the West] One valuable commodity taken from India was indigo. From Baihaqi, who writes the correct Indian word “nil” for the dye, it appears that 20,000 mans (about 500 maunds) of indigo was taken to Ghazna every year. According to Baihaqi, Sultan Masud once sent 25,000 mans (about 600 maunds) of indigo to the Caliph at Baghdad.

Tags: Somnath Hindu temple, Hindu holy places, Hindu shrines, famous Hindu temples, Hindu temples ,Hindu religion, Somnath temple, Hindu pilgrimage, Hindu beliefs, hindu faith, Indian, India, Religion, Religious, Spiritualism