The reality of the Somnath temple and the false tricks of the British
 |
| The reality of the Somnath temple and the false tricks of the British Best urdu article 2021 |
Sultan
Mehmood Ghaznavi is a Muslim king in history who became famous for 17 attacks
on India. There are many traditions regarding the attack on the temple of
Somnath of Sultan Mehmood Ghaznavi. There is also a tradition that when
Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni wanted to break the idol of Somnath, the Hindus offered
him rich treasures in his service and said that this idol should not be broken,
but the Sultan said that he was an idol seller in history. No, he wants to live
as an idol-breaker, at the same time he smashed the idol of Somnath.
There
is another incident in history with reference to the idol of Somnath. When
Mahmud Ghaznavi entered the temple after conquering "Somnath",
he saw that the idol of Somnath was hanging in the air in the temple. Everyone
would recognize his superiority by seeing him suspended in style. And even
those who did not recognize his superiority would be forced to think once and
for all how this weighty idol is suspended in the air without any chain, no
visible support. Al-Biruni, a well-known Muslim intellectual and
scientist, was also present with Satan at that time. Mahmud Ghaznavi was
astonished and asked Al-Biruni ... "What is the matter? How does this idol
hang in the air without any support?" Al-Biruni thought for a
moment and then said to Adab: Sultan! A few bricks were taken out from this
side. At the order of the Sultan, some bricks were taken out. Al-Biruni
explained in literature ...! Sultan Moazzam! This is the cunning
and cunning of these Hindu priests and Pandits. This idol is made of
iron and very large magnets have been installed on the roof of the temple.
These magnets keep pulling the iron idol towards it and thus this idol stays
still. Since these big magnets are firmly installed and do not move from their
place, this idol also hangs in the air. When it was uprooted, the idol also
fell to the ground with a bang! Then the bricks were inspected and Al-Biruni's
analysis turned out to be correct.
Referring
to the Somnath Temple, renowned Indian historian Romela Thapar wrote a
book in 2005 titled "Somnata, Many Voices of a History" in which she
details the attack on the Somnath Temple by Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni. According
to Romela Thapar, the attack on the Somnath Temple and the smashing of its
large idol is said to be a key moment in the Hindu-Muslim divide in India, when
in fact it may not have been so important and significant at the time. The
first treacherous British in the British Raj presented this incident as a
Hindu-Muslim distinction. Since then, people with conflicting ideologies have
given it their own meaning.
According
to Romela Thapar, the incident had no significant significance until two or
three centuries after the eleventh century, and there is little mention of it
in local sources or documents. This information gives the impression that the
destruction, looting and then repairing of temples was common in this time and
environment.
Romela
Thapar, with reference to hundreds of books, articles
and ancient stone books, has discovered the fact that Somnath, also known as
Somnath Pattan, Som Shawar Pattan and Dev Pattan. Mahmud never ruined. Thapar
says that in those days there were estates of big and important temples and
inside them there was immense wealth accumulated in the form of offerings. Even
when a Hindu king invaded these regions, he would return to these temples and
often take with him an idol standing there as a sign of his victory. Mahmud did
the same thing as the Hindu kings before him. Used to But not everything
happened as it is being distorted and hated today. There is no inscription on
any of the manuscripts or discovered stones of this period that Somnath fell
into disrepair after Mahmud's invasion, but it is recorded that after his
invasion Somnath continued to be inhabited and worshiped there.
On
the history of Pakistan and India, whites have spread hatred by telling lies.
And
tried to distort every character of the Muslims that reflected the slightest
religiosity. Even so, India was a region divided into several states before the
Muslims, so in order to delve into the depths of its history; you need an age
that lives only in books. One such thing I did while preparing for the civil
service exam. It became clear to the historian that there was no such thing as
prejudice.
His
book (A History of India) was an amazing experience for me. It was printed by
the Penguins in 1966. The author was a professor of history at Delhi University
at the time. Born in 1931, Romila Thaper received her MA from the University of
the Punjab and later a doctorate from the University of London. She has
taught at universities in the United States, the United Kingdom, France and
other countries.
When
he was awarded the Padma Bhushan in 2005, he refused, saying he did not
want government patronage for his scholarly work. Romela Thapar has given a
great example of white dishonesty and cunning in the history of the Indian
subcontinent in her book Somantha: The Many Voices of History.
In
this book, he has proved from the historical evidence of ancient Sanskrit
and Persian that the destruction of the great temple of Mahmud Ghaznavi at
Somnath, the breaking of its huge idol, the extraction of gold and wealth from
it and the looting of this wealth. Taking Ghazni, this whole story was
fabricated during the British rule. In the British era itself, Mahmud Ghaznavi
was given the title of idol-breaker and the greatness of his character was
discredited by the Muslims and by the Hindus. That is, it is remembered as the
doorway.
The
debate erupted after Governor General Lord Ellen Brough announced that
the historic sandalwood gates of Mahmud Ghaznavi's great temple at Somnath had
been uprooted and installed in Ghazni. Doors are an asset of India and they
should be brought back. During the debate in Parliament, it was proved that the
destruction of Somnath temple is in fact a great insult to the Hindu nation, so
bring back the doors and restore their dignity.
The
only purpose of the British in this debate was to unite the Hindu nation in the
war in Afghanistan and to prove to the whole of India how much control the
British have over Afghanistan. Thus, Afghanistan was invaded with the
recruitment of a local army. The gates in Ghazni were torn down. When he was
brought to India, the Qur'anic verses on him revealed that his Somnath had
nothing to do with Hinduism. These doors still lie in the storeroom of Agra
Fort. The British did not spare any effort to turn the Hindus against the
Muslims by spreading their cunning and false anarchy
After
the partition of the subcontinent, the fanatical Hindus made this
British lie a beacon for themselves and immediately after the partition, they
started a movement to rebuild the temple of Somnath. Its leader was KM Munshi,
who wrote a history of Gujarat in which he described Somnath as a great
symbol of Hinduism throughout the subcontinent and the site of India's struggle
against foreign invaders.
For
all Hindu nationalists, rebuilding it would be a historic response to Mahmud
Ghaznavi's attacks. On the basis of the same history written by the British,
the passionate Muslims also gave the title of idol-breaker to Mahmud Ghaznavi
and joined hands in defense of an event which had a very minor status.
Romela
Thapar says that when I started studying the historical sources written in the
original Sanskrit, I was amazed that there is a city called Somnath but
there is no mention of any big temple. However, long before Mahmud Ghaznavi's
arrival in India, the historical material of Jainism shows that he attacked
Somnath and destroyed a temple.
He
describes the destruction of this temple as a symbol of victory over Mahaviraki
Shiva. Romela writes with astonishment that I have examined and examined in
great detail the genealogical history and the historical material of Sanskrit
and tried to find that found mention of the attack on Mahmud Ghaznavi's temple
and it’s looting, but I did not even mention it at all.
While
today's Hindus narrate this incident with such pain and anguish as if it is the
worst story in their history. The arrival and battle of Mahmud Ghaznavi is
considered by the historical sources of Jain and Sanskrit as a small event, but
a hundred years after this event they become completely silent, as if it were
not an event at all. Jain and Sanskrit historians write a great deal about the
decoration of this temple as well as the construction of a mosque.
The
city of Somnath was a city of Hindu population and Muslim merchants, where the
Hindu king also gave land to Arab merchants to build a mosque. Romela says she
found an inscription about a deaf Muslim businessman from Somnath, who was
killed defending the city of Somnath.
When
did this historical dishonesty begin? In 1872, under the auspices of the
British government, two historians, H. M. Elliot and Ed.John Dowson, compiled a
history entitled (History of India as told by its own historians). The
aim was to prove that India is a divided country, these people are always at
loggerheads with each other, and they cannot defend themselves against attacks.
The
Muslim aggressors are bloodthirsty, religious extremists and only India can
keep the British peaceful and stable. False stories of the same book still
resonate in every textbook of the Indo-Pakistan subcontinent, in the
conversations of intellectuals and in the stories of ordinary people. Mahmud
Ghaznavi was a looter, Aurangzeb was a tyrant, Muslims oppressed Hindus,
their temples were destroyed, Anar Kali was a living character, Akbar was very
tolerant, there are so many stories circulating in this subcontinent.
But
no one in the history of the subcontinent teaches that the destruction and
looting of temples has been the custom of the Hindu kings of India for
centuries. The Chhola and Chaluka families who ruled over different parts of
the subcontinent. Their epigraphic account tells us that they attacked and
looted and destroyed temples in order to establish their dhak. In 642 AD,
Narasimhauman, the king of Palwa, "activated" them. When he
conquered Vapti, the capital of India, he destroyed the temple of Ganesha and
took the idol from there.
Fifty
years later, Vanaditya, the king of Chalu Ka, conquered various regions,
brought back the idol of Ganesha and destroyed other temples and brought many
idols of Ganga and Jumna to Deccan. A similar catastrophe was wrought by Gonda,
the king of Rashtra Kota, a staunch Hindu who conquered Kanchipuram in the
ninth century AD and removed the idols of all the temples from Sri Lanka and
placed them in the temple of Shiva. The Buddhist shrines of Ajanta and Alora
were demolished and turned into temples with idols of Shiva and Ganga. No one
says that in history, Alexander the Great started destroying the places of
worship of others by destroying the places of worship of Perseus Paul in Iran.
The
story of the destruction of Somnath is similar to that of the British
historians who wrote in history that the world's oldest library in Alexandria
was burnt down in the time of Hazrat Omar. However, the library was burned down
600 years before their arrival in Christ and was ordered by the Romanemperor.
The
British historians wrote this lie and then anyone who hated and envied Hazrat
Umar made this incident a part of history. Similarly, anyone who hated Islam
wrote the story of Mahmud Ghaznavi and Somnath in such a way that even a lie
felt true. He lied so much, he lied so much that it seemed to be true...
special thanks for reading this historical article.
Related Articles:
01-SultanMustafa I | 15th Sultan of Ottoman Empire Short bio in urdu.
02- Fasting: Corona 'heart attack' free operation without
incurable diseases.
03- Deadly epidemics, the most important discoveries andMuslim scientists!