Temple desecration and indo-Muslim states
-Richard M Eaton
Hindu nationalists have represented whole sale temple destruction by muslims in this period. Evidence found in Persian material, especially influencial has been the eight volume history of India. As told by its own historians. First published in 1849 and edited by Sir Henry M eliiot. Eliot keen to contrast what he understood as the justice and efficiency of british rule and cruelty and despotism of the muslim rulers. He considers the English men had brought to Indians, in merely half a century far greater benefits, than muslims have brought in five centuries. Muhammad Habib-the peichaaceful indian musalman, descended beyond doubt from Hindu ancestors.
Select views of Eliot and Dowsons selective translations. Selective use of epigraphic data. Inscription dated 1455 found over the door way of the tomb shrine in Dhar, mentions the destruction of a Hindu temple by a one Abdullah Shah Changal, during the reign of Raja Bhoja. Raja Bhoja embraces Islam through wisdom, Abdullah Shah came broke the images of false deities and turned the temple into a mosque. Muslisms in mid 15th century Malwa, constructed that origins, by which a particular community at a particular time and place. Central to the story are the themes of conversion martyrdom and redemption.
Early instances of Temple desecration
Two centuries before 1192 persionies turks systematically raided and looted major urban centres in north India. The pattern commence in 986 when the Ghaznavid sultan Sabukitijin attacked and defeated Hindu Shahi Raja who controlled the region between Kabul and north west Punjab. Conquest serving to facilitate conversion and conversion to legitimize conquest. His son Mahmud of Ghazni undertook subsequent invasions for purely material reasons. To finance larger political objectives to the west in Kurasan. From mid 11th century, Mahmud’s successors cut off from their military man power in central asia, first by the seljuqs and then by the Ghurids became progressively more provincial. Ghaznavids continues predatory raids of the Indian interior, for booty, although these appeared to be less destructive. When the Guruks arrived from central Afghanistan towards the end of the 12th century, they swept aside the Ghaznavids and with their Turkish slaves ushered in a new sort of state, with the base in the middle of the indo-gangetic plain. Selective temple desecration to delegitimize and extirpate defeated Indian ruling houses.
Sufism and State building
Abd-al-Milik-Isami in 1350 wrote that in every country, there is man of piety who keeps it going well, conception of how of religion and politics interrelate. Isami’s view-Delhi sultanate was saved from Mongol conquest because of respect shown by sultan Muhammad bin Tughlaq for the memory of the founder of the Chishti order in India. Shaikh Mu-in-al-din Chisty. Among all South Asian Sufi orders, the Chisties were the most closely identified, with the political fortunes of Indo-Muslim states. Planting of such states in parts of South Asis previously not touched by Islamic rule.
Two principal persion poets in India at the time, Amir Hasan and Amir Khusrau diciples of Nizam al-din-aulaya, tomb signs of the greater sheiks of the order were located within South Asia. Ruling dynasties patronage of Chities signs could bolster its claims, to be in both legitimately Islamic and authentically Indian. Chisties Sheikhs regularly participated in launching of new Indo-Muslim states
Narrator of the passing of Prophet Muhammad John Mantle, from which the founder of the Bhamini sultanate, sultan Hassan Bhaman shah, had received his power and inspiration. In Begal another form of Tughlaq province asserted its independence from Delhi in mid-14th century. In the space of five years, founders of indo-muslim dynasties in Bengal and the Deccan patroniesed local Chisty sheiks, whose own spiritual masters had migrated from Delhi. This pattern did not cease the launching of Tughlaq successor states. On entering Delhi in 1526, Babur prayed at the shrine of India’s second greatest Chisty Sheikh Bhaktiyaar Kaki. Aurangazeb visited and made sizable contributions to Chisty tombs. Rulers of the entire Mughal dynasty believed that the blessings of Chisty sheikhs underpinned their worldly success.
Temple desecration and state building
Royal patronage of Chisty Shaikhs contributed positively to the process of indo-Muslim state building. Its negative counter part-the sweeping away of all prior political authority in newly conquered areas. Legitimacy associated with the royal temple. Temples that were not so identified, or temples formally so identified by their royal patrons and thereby rendered politically irrelevant, were normally left unharmed. Persion sources routeinly condemned idoltry on religious grounds. Attacks on images patronized by enemy kings, from about 6th century AD, thoroughly integrated into Indian, political behavior. Bonding between, king, God, Temple and Land. While dominant pattern here was one looting temples and carrying of images of state deities, we also hear of Hindu kings destroying the royal temples of the political adversaries, in short it is clear that the temples have the natural sites for the contestation fo the Kingly authority well before the coming of the Muslim talks. Not surprisingly Turkish invaders followed the established pattern. Some temples were desecrated, but the facts were never recorded. Sometimes attributes acts of temple desecration to such rulers even when no contemporary evidence supports the claims.
Several broad patterns-First temple desecration almost invariably carried out by military officers or ruling authorities. Second the chronology and the geography of the data indicate, that acts of temple desecration, typically occurred on the cutting edge of a moving military frontier.
Delhi’s initial raid on peninsular India, cause of Sultanates need for wealth to defend north India fdrom Mongol attacks. For a short times peninsular India stood in same relation to the north, as source of plunder for financing distant military operations as north had stood to Afghanistan three centuries earlier. In 1323 new North Indian dynasty the tughlaqs, saught permanent dominion in the deccan, which the future sultan Muhamad-bin-Tughlaq established by uprooting royaly patronized temples in Western Andhra. From 14 th century newly emerging successor states sought to expand their own political frontiers. Mid 15th century independent sultanate of Malwa contested, renewed Rajput power, in eastern Rajasthan. Absence of firm evidence of temple desecration by any of the early Mughals as they never shared sovereignty with deities, patronized in royal temples.
All these instances of temple desecration occurred in the context of military conflicts, when indo-Muslim states expanded into the dominion of non-muslim rulers. Occasionally temples were converted intio Mosques, which more visibly conflated the de-establishment of former sovereignity, with the establishment of a new one. The form of desecration that showed the greatest continuity with pre-turkish practice was the seizure of the image of a defeated kings state deity and its abduction to the victors capital as a trophy of war. Example 1299 Ulugh Khan sacked Gujrat’s famous temple of Somnath and sent its largest image to the sultan in Delhi. The delty transformed from a living to a dead image.
Two priniciple concerns the first was to destroy the image of the state deity and the second was to prevent Mughal troops from looting or in any way harming the general population.Nobody was to touch the cash and property of the people. In newly annexed areas, Mughal officers took appropriate measures to secure the support of the common people, who after all created the material wealth.
Temple protection and state maintenance
What happened once the land and the subjects became successfully integratd into an indo-muslim state? Temples lying within such areas be left untouched. A Sanskrit inscription shows that sultan Muhammad bin tughluq appointed muslim officials to repair a siva temple in kalyana. About a century later, muslim jurists advised the future sikander lodi of delhi that was not lawful to lay waste ancient idol temples. Mahmud of ghazni vary destructive attacks on the region. His career soon became a legend and a model for others to follow. But the ghaznavid sultan never undertook the responsibility of actual governing any part of the subcontinent whose temples he so wantonly plundered.
From akbars time, mughal rulers treated temples lying within their sovereign domain as state property and they undertook to protect both the physical structures and their Brahman functionaries. Aurangazeb- temples should not be torn down nor should new ones be established.
Temple desecration and state maintenance
It seems certain that the indo-muslim rulers were well aware of the highly charged political and religious relationship between a royal hindu patron and his client temple. Even when former rulers had been assimilated into the states ruling class, there remained the possibility and hence the occasional suspicion that a temples’ latent political significance might be activated and serve as a power base to father is patrons political aspirations. This might explain why when subordinate non-muslim officers showed disloyalty especially if he engaged in open rebellion, the state often desecrated the temples. Treating the temple as an extension of the officer and hence liable for punishment. In 1478, when the bahmanis’ garrison in kondapalle mutinied, murdered its governor and entrusted the fort to brimraj oriyya, the sultan personally marched to the site and after laying siege to it for six months, stormed the fort and destroyed the temple and built a mosque on the site.
Same pattern with the mughals. Jahangir ordered the desecration of an image of varaha that had been housed in a temple belonging to an uncle of rana amar. Ringleaders of rebellions had been captured near mathura, aurangazeb ordered the destruction of the city’s keshava desa temple.
Considerable misunderstanding from a passage in the ma’athir-I alamgiri concerning an order on the status of hindu temples. This order did not state that schools or place of worship be demolished, rather it said that they were subject to demolition, implying that local authorities were required to make investigation before taking action. Aurangazeb and indo-muslim rulers punished disloyal hindu officers in their service by desecrating temples with which they were associated. Monuments were not desecrated when one indo-muslim state conquered another.
Temples and mosques contrasted
For indo muslim rulers, building mosques was considered an act of piety, even a duty. Mosques or shrines had no personal connection with a muslim monarch. As such their desecration could have had no such relevance to the business of disestablishing a regime that had patronized them. When hindu rulers established their authority over territories of defeated muslim rulers, they did not as a rule desecrate mosques or shrines.
Temple desecration and the rhetoric of state building
Temple desecration necessary and even meritorious constituent of state formation. All this due to glory of Mahmud. A third activity other than temple desecration and patronage of chisti shaikhs, the use of explicitly Indian political rituals occupied no place whatsoever in that rhetoric.eg. The political symbolism of the Ganges river. Cholas transported pots of Ganges water and so did Muhammad bin tughluq in the years after 1327 for his own personal use, so we are told. The sultan was conforming to an authentically Indian imperial ritual. Several centuries later, the sultans of Bengal on their occasion of their coronations, would wash themselves with holy water from the Ganges.
No indo muslim chronicle or contemporary inscription associates the use of ganges water with the establishment or maintenance of indo muslim states. We hear this only from foreign visitors: an arab traveler in the case of bin tughluq, a Portuguese friar in the case of the sultans of Bengal.
Selective operation actually taking place. Rather the original data associates the instances of temple desecration with the annexation of newly conquered territories held by enemy kings whose domain lay in the path of the moving military frontiers. Temple desecration also occurred as punishments for disloyalty or treason. The Turks were exploiting indigenous notions of royal legitimacy by the temple desecrations of the defeated kings. B.D. Chattopadhyaya- essential urge to legitimize.
Tyranny of labels- romila thapar
Packaging our past and identifying it with labels. Force interpretations into a single category, infinite shades within them, disappear.. two major labels—hindu and muslim community. The viewing of these two monolithic religious communities has its origins in he 19th century interpretations of Indian history, where they are also projected as static. Representation of multiple new communities which came to be established. Newness not only coz they were alien but also coz of departure from existing patterns of communities.
The definition of muslim community extends to all those who clam adherence to islam. The perspective of court chronicles of sultans and mughals was that of the ruling class, broadly endorsing the above definitona perspective in which the hindu is seen as he counterpart.
The notion of hindu community evolves from a geographic and ethnic description gradually giving way to religious association. Hindu community is more difficult to define with its large diversity in the subcontinent. The idea of two distinct ,segregated civilization was the assumption that those who came with islam had been regarded even by earlier Indians as alien. This however was an erroneous perception as islam had come through various avenues, as traders, as sufis and as attachment to conquerors. Their coming was viewed in part as a historical continuity for a long while. Linked by trade settelement and conquest.
Persian contact with india were initially through the achaemenids who were contemporaries of the mauryas and late through the sassanids. Trading links were tied to political alliances. There is therefore an immense history of exchange between the subcontinent and the central and western asia. Islam of these areas not uniform for there were strong cultural and sectarian differences among the muslims of central asia, peria and the arab world. Contagious people, were sometimes competitive and hostile and at other times friendly, but were well recognized. Many had settled in india and married locally. Such marriages doubtless gave rise to mixed communities of new castes and practices.
The dialogue between Indians, central asian turks, Persians and arabs was a continuing one, irrespective of changes of dynasties and religions or of trade fluctuations. Greek and Arabic texts relating to astronomy, medicine, philosophy.
The coming of Europeans was a totally different experience as they were physically different as spoke a different language and were entirely alien. Exploitation of labour and land exceeded that of the previous period. Colonial interpretations of the Indian past were often contested by Indian historians but the periodization was accepted.
When communalism becomes visible, the separation of the indigenous and the foreign emerges as a contentious issue and is taken back to the beginnings of Indian history. Hindu and muslim, the former being indigenous and the latter foreign and projected as generally hostile to each other.
Objection to the use of blanket terms such as hindi and muslim, erases precision with reference to social groups and is therefore methodologically invalid and historically inaccurate. Many studies hve encouraged a diversified view of the past identities. Caste as varna, identities of language, sect and occupation.each individual therefore had varied indenttites of which some moght overlap. Construction of Hinduism was a challenge to orientalist scholars being different from the familiar perspective of religions.
Religious identity was frequently closely allied to caste identities. The term hindu as referring to a religion was initially absent in the vocabulary of Indian languages and only slowly gains currency. Use of single term to include the diversity would have been bewildering. Variety of other terms and an attempt tp associate the new entrants with existing categories. The use of these terms at one level is a continuation from the earlier past but initially none of them had a religious connotation. inscriptions from the 8th century, the arabs are referred to as tajikas . rashtrakuta kings of 9-10century had appointed a tajika as governor of the sanjan area of thane district on the west coast. Arab writers of this period refer to arab officers employed by the rajas.
The term yavana originally used for Greeks and later for those coming from west asia. It is derived from the west asian yauna, referring to the Ionian greeks. It was used in an ethnic and geographical sense. The brahmanas were initially antagonistic and represent them as unfriendly.. later they were not only accommodated but also accepted as rulers. They were however given the status of vratya ksatriya or degenerate ksatriya. Mahabharata- yavanas fell from status because they disregarded the Brahmanas and th revenge of the latter led to them calling them vratya. Turks and afghans are referred to as yavana in multiple inscriptions.
Vamsavali tradition-linked contemporary rulers genealogically to ancient heroes of the puranas. Something similar done for the yavanas. A certain text which was first recuted by siva to parvati and then through skanda, narasda and bhrgu to sukra, the last of ho told it to the yavanas. They are thus located in time and space and provided with links to the past. The prime mver in this history is the deity siva and this makes any other legitimization unnecessary.. this kind of adjustment which emerges out of the uuper caste interest.. a glimpse of how a historical situation was being manipulated.
The term saka was the sankskrit for the Scythians, a people from central asia, the reference to Turkish and afghan dynasties as sakas . a sansrit inscription of 1276 a.d. composed by pandit yogeshvara begins with a saluatation to siva and ganapati. It then refers to the ruler of delhi and Haryana as the tomars, chauhanas and sakas. The earlier two having been recognized rajput dynasties and the last being a reference to the sultans.
Another term is turuska and was originally a geographical and ethnic name. when kalhana uses the term retrospectively, he refers to the kusanas of the early centuries as turuskas. The reference to a 12th century inscription to a woman replacing an image broken by the turuskas. Kalhana writes of the kashmiri king harsadeva ruling in the 11th century who employed turkasa mercenaries, horsemen in the main in his campaign against local rulers..
Alberuni writing soon after the raids of mahmud of ghanzi, states that Mahmud destroyed the economy of the areas where he looted and this accounts for the antagonism of the local towards the muslims. An inscription from veraval, during the reign of chalukya- vaghela king a substantial grant was made in somnatha for the construction of a mosquein 1264 to the owner of shipping company called nur-ud-din firuz. Were memories short lived or were mahmuds destruction of the temple highly exaggerated
Or were the turkasas seen as different from the muslim traders from the gulf?
Mleccha- history going back to around 800bc and occurs originally in the vedic text and is used for those who could not speak Sanskrit correctly. Language was a frequent social marker. It later came to denote those outside the pale of the varna society. When n used in a pejorative sense it included a difference of language and ritual impurity. In later centuries reference to muslims as mlecchas to include them among the mnay whowere denied varna status. Marked ambivalent use of the term. Reference made to a mleccha sahavadina seizing delhi and he is praised for his great valor.
Social markers are frequently forged by those who demarcate themselves sharply from others and this tends to be characteristic of the upper levels of society. References to the coming of the mleccha creating a social catastrophe of a kind expected in the kali age described in the puranas, was frequently invoked when there was a political crisis. Some uses of these terms were mechanisms for reducing social distance others for enhancing it. A major indicator sf social distance was caste.. it was an effective barrier. At the level of the ruling class, the culture of the court influenced all those who had pretensions to power, irrespective of their religion. Further down the social scale, caste identities often controlled appearance and daily routine. Caste identity derived so heavily from occupation and control over economic resources.
Those from across the Arabian sea who settled as traders along the west coast married into local communities and assumed many of the customary practices of these communities. Such marriages would have had tension and confrontation in the initial stages. The concept of conversion was alien to india and even converts have to negotiate a change. Continuing role of caste even after conversion. Belief and worship across the subcontinent even when focusing on a single deity was often formulated differently. Range of dialogues between isalm and various indegeneous religions. Pointing out the differences between facets of what were seen as hindu and muslim belief and worship, but arguing for an adjustmmetn. Perception at elite levels being dfferent from those at other levels and largely conditioned by factors of statecraft and political olicy.
Common cultural codes symbolizing an althogether different level of communication. Eg. Imagery and meaning of the depiction of riding a tiger and who rides a tiger. For those who live in the forests, the tiger is the mount of the forest deity such as dakhin rai. For caste hindus, the goddess durga rides a tiger. The existence of parallel religios forms some conflicting, others cohering, has characterized Indian society. Some of these distanced themselves from all orthodoxies and attracted those who participated in what might be called forms of counter cultures, preferring the openness of heterodox. The absence of sharply etched religious identities among such groups, gave them a universality, but was also responsible for history neglecting to recognize their significance.
Syncretism is often a transitory phase from what might in the end become the continuation of two t traditions in a n unequal relationship, although sometimes it may locate a new religion within the existing range. Concepts such as those of composite culture or syncretism are only partial explanations and refer to particular situations.
Many other aspects evolving over time and through a mixture of various elements, gave an identity to social groups which needs to be investigates. Causes- political expediency, economic control, ideological support, social associations etc. Not just hindu and muslim, but a variant articulations among the many constituent units of society. Competing claims to patronage and resources. The relationship between segments of society involved diplomacy and management or on occasion conflict of a violent kind, but conflicts at levels other than those of the ruling class was localized. Friends and enemies demarcated less by religion and more by the concerns of social and economic realities. Understanding how identities may have been perceived at different points of time. Inherent in the process of historical change is the invention and mutation of identities. Important to explore as construction of current identities based on them.
Images overthrown –Richard davies
At the onset of the 11th century, Mahmud of ghazna in present day Afghanistan, launched a series of military campaigns into the Indian subcontinent. He conquered and incorporated the fertile Punjab into the ghanznavid state and made Lahore his provincial capital. He was an observant sunni muslim and ghaznavid polity was an Islamic state. The campaigns of Mahmud in many ways set the stage for later Turkic and central asian muslim warriors.
For mullims who worshipped a god they considered unique, absolute, transcendent and exclusive, these hindu practices appeared as idolatory and polytheism. Temple cult was closely tied to the political order. It was important for muslim conquerors not only to denounce hindu images for theological reasons but also to act gisnt them as a statement of conquest. Destruction of politically significant images and temples. . equally important for Indian elites to reassert the longevity and miraculous capacities of images destroyed.hindu rulers repeatedly reconsecrated temples as statements of political automony. Both cultures developed narratives around the disputes over the satus and power of religious icins.
Medieval epic and counter epic
Entry into the subcontinent of new warrior elites affiliated with islam was a reflected in new litereary productions. Aziz ahmed identified two paired genres- Islamic epics of conquest- written mainly in persian and hindu epics of resistance- composed in hindi and other Indian vernaculars.
The Islamic works stress the destiny of the Turkish warriors to subjugate india, celebrate their victories over hindu opponents. Interweave elements of romance, romance across religious boundaries.
Hindu epics of resistance focus on chivalry and heroism of rajput warriors like prithviraja, the cahamana ruler and raja hammir dev, the king of ranthambore. Women called upon to display their power by rejecting the other.
In many respects though they are quite similar. Muslim epics of conquest portray their destruction as a necessary feature and symbol of conquest. Amir khusraw’s comment- Satanism has prospered, the devil in the course of ages had hatched his eggs. Islamic epics depict the destruction of idols and the replacement of temples with mosques as unmistakable signs of purification. Hindu images are not passive victims in this literature. They move to less vulnerable areas and hide in forests or underground. When danger has passed they emerge again. Islamic epics and hindu counter epics present the views o the elite courtiers who defend conservative ideologies..
The main characters
Mahmud’s successful raid of somnatha temple in Gujarat in 1026 where he destroyed the famous siva linga. Archaeological excavation led by b.k. thapar in 1950 found evidence of deliberate breakage on the entrance steps, the pavilion floor. The details of the evnt itself prove to be itractable.
Somanatha as the world center of idolatory
Muslim narratives elevated somnatha to be the cultic center of Hinduism. It was a fairly large temple and it stood a t an old pilgrimage site. Mahabharata describes it as the place where soma, the moon god, periodically recovers from king daks’s curse by bathing each new moon light. Other versions of local myth require the moon to worship siva as his lord in order to recover his brilliance. Hence the place and the form of siva worshipped there became somanatha, siva as lord of the moon. No evidence that Indians of the early 11th century recognized somanatha as anything more than an important regional holy site. But the muslism when confronting the polycentric Indian political and religious order needed to identify a center, an indian equivalent of mecca or the caliphal Baghdad.
Muslim accounts claimed that hindus considered somanatha to be the lord of all idols. All other idols in india heldthe position of attendants and deputies of somnat. Muslim observers took delight in relating the oze and grandeur of the remple. They reported various religious beliefs they were told about somanatha- the idol giveth life, inflicteth death, worketh what it willeth and decideth what it pleaseth”. It was not only the preeminent religious image in india in muslim accounts, but also its political center. Some muslim narratives portrayed india as the original home off all idolatory. Adam after leaving paradise descended onto an Indian mountain and the children of seth came to worship his deceased body. One of cains sons subsequently carved an idol so that they too would have an object of worship. By taking the battle against idols to its vey source in india, mahmuds victory became a symbolic defeat of polytheism itself.. other observers claimed that somanatha was in fact manat, an idol worshipped near mecca before muhammads time. Muhammad had dispatched ali to destroy it, but the idol was secretly transported to the Gujarat coast. Muhammad had felt anxious since one escaped idol still esxisted in Gujarat. The divine messenger Gabriel quikyl brought Muhammad a prophecy that a king by the name Mahmud would destroy it. So Mahmud not inly reenacted muhammads destruction of idols but also carried out the prophets direct order.
Mahmud as exemplary Islamic warrior
Muslim literature was reconstructing the image of Mahmud himself. When Mahmud succeeded his father as ruler of the kingdom of ghazna, the caliph of Baghdad sent him a robe of honor. He undertook the first 17 campaigns into india. By 1018 mahmud was able to march on kanyakubja, which was still the political center of northern india. Mamud took the city in a single day. He was frustrated in his eastward advance and so turned his attention south toward Gujarat and the temple of somanatha. He defeated the solanki ruler bhimadeva and sacked the temple in 1026. This was the first major increase in the boundaries of islam in over 2 centuries. Mahmuds reputation as an exemplary orthodox sunni ruler became still greater in the centurirries aftert his death.
He was set forth as a model for other rulers. Anecdotes originally told of other rulers were now ascribed to him. Farid al-din attar, in his work praises Mahmud as destroyer of Indian idols and at the same time criticized his pride. He also wrote of mahmuds romantic relationship with his young lover and slave.
In mid 14th century two important indo muslim works by diya al din barani and fakhr al-din isami advanced Mahmud more than ever. Carl Ernst has argued, mongol invasion and destruction of Baghdad led the Turkish sultanate of delhi to view india as a bastion of islam. And pagan hindus in their dominion were viewed as the threatening other. Barani who was imprisoned during the reign of firuz shah used Mahmud as his mouthpiece for his own cranky political philosophy. Barani considered contemporary Islamic rulers in india far too lenient toward hindu practitioners. Isami composed he first literary epic of muslim India and advanced Mahmud as the exemplary hero of this epic. Isami also stressed that Mahmud should serve as a model.
Somanatha’s supposed powers
Muslims consider it as foolish attribution of animate powers to inanimate objects. Miracles performed by somanatha, the idol flying, raising its hand etc. But it was all human deception and was controlled by mechanical works. Mahmuds own letter of victory to the caliph- sick pilgrims on visiting were cured by the goodness of the air and exercise which increased their delusions and if they were not cured they attributed it to their sins. Hindu worshippers deceive themselves by attributing supernatural causes to natural effects and by explaining away divine failures as the result of their own shortcomings.
Islamic miracles and others
Many were deeply interested in the marvels of creation and viewed india ass possessing an overabundance of the miraculous. Persian mariner, buzurg ibn shahriyar- god created ten marvels, attributed nine of them to the eastern quarter and only one for the other three. Within Islamic ontology, extraordinary objects were manifestations of allah’s creative omnipotence. Islamic authors generally recognized the possibility of miracles performed by human beings. They viewed extraordinary human acts as signs by which allah singles out those he has chosen for special roles. Mahmud appeared singled out to play an extraordinary role. Many recognized mahmud’s greatest miracle to be his defeat of somanatha. It was necessary to distinguish between true miracles of allah and false wonders from human acts of sorcery and deceit.
The breaking of somanatha
The most famous anecdote of Mahmud at somanatha involved the priests attempt to ransom their idol. The story goes that the temple Brahmins offered him vast wealth if he would pare their god. Mahmuds advisers counseled him to accept and they argued that destroying one idol would not do away with idolatry. Mahmud refused and took a powerful blow at the belly of the statue and it burst open. Out came a jackpot of jewels greater in value than what the Brahmins had offered. Were his campaigns primarily concerned with economic motives? Mahmud insisted that as a muslim it was his duty firstly to destroy it.
Whatever the actual reasons, Mahmud and the ghaznavid state did realize great economic gains through the Indian campaigns. They considered looting their defeated opponents a legitimate and productive part of war. Conditions necessary for the acquisition of spoils- they had to secure the permission of the imam and also had to secure victory before any discussion on the topic. When it came to distributing the loot, one fifth went to the state and the remaining four fifths went to the troops in proportion to their ranks.
The relocation of somanatha
The gold, silver and jewels that often constituted or covered Indian images were valuable materials and could be redeployed as Mahmud did to decorate his palace and gild the great mosque of ghazna. Images of stone and less valuable items were simple knocked over, defaced and left behind. Islamic chronicles reduced the complex world of Indian images to a single group- general rubic of idols. Somanatha however appears as an exception and received special treatment. Contemporary observer al-biruni explained that Mahmud ordered the upper part to be broken and the remaining to be transported to his residence. The other idol mahmud singled out public humiliation was a large bronze image of visnu chakrasvamin. Later writers as badauni stated more clearly that places at the entrance of the jami masjid, the broken idol of somanatha was to be trodden underfoot by the faithful. According to isalmi, Mahmud had the idol ground into lime and then served betel leaves spread with the lime paste to the unsuspecting temple Brahmins. When they asked for the idol, Mahmud laughed and replied that he had already given it back to them. This deceit enables mamud to honor his word while avoiding any charge of selling or ransoming the idol.
Reappearances miraculous and otherwise
Hindu images had a way of reappearing. By dreams location of long items were revealed to holy men. After mahmuds destruction of the somanatha idol, isami relates that a temple priest secretly buries a stone idol just like the one destroyed in the forest. He trained a calf using bait to go every day to the spot where it was buried. When the calf was properly trained, he called the people and told them that he had had a dream that a calf would lead them to the idol.. Another version, it was siva himself who ordered the reconstruction after the passing of kali yuga. He commanded his devoted bull nandi to incarnate himself as a human in order to carry out the necessary renovations. Hindu narrative describes it as the consequence of evil times rather than human actions. Due to exemplary fame of mahmud’s victory and the diligence of the solanki rulers to rebuild the temple, somanatha subsequently became a primary site of regional contention, a marker of political control over the Gujarat area.
Isami’s depictions of the hapless hindu deity soamnatha were meant to lead their audiences to reflect on the god who was the complete opposite , allah.
Surely he would never enter into material objects fabricated by humans.