"The Truth About Mahmud of Ghazni Looter or Misunderstood Hero?"

This story dates back over a thousand years but took a significant turn when the British army faced its first defeat and humiliation in Afghanistan.

On November 2, 1841, during a council of Afghan tribal leaders, a rebellion against the British army was declared. This date coincided with the 17th of Ramadan, the anniversary of the Battle of Badr, and the uprising was thus termed a jihad. Afghan tribes began dismantling the arrogance of the British forces stationed in various parts of Afghanistan, sparking fears that a similar rebellion might ignite in India against the British Empire.

To counter this, the Governor-General of India, Lord Ellenborough, issued an order on November 16, 1842. According to the order, the gates of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni’s tomb in Ghazni were to be removed and brought to India. Ellenborough claimed that Mahmud of Ghazni had stolen these gates from the Somnath temple in 1026 and taken them to Ghazni.

Ellenborough labeled Mahmud of Ghazni a looter who had desecrated the Somnath temple, vowing to avenge this centuries-old insult. However, when the British forces occupying Afghanistan brought the gates to India, it was revealed that they were made of deodar wood, which is abundant in Afghanistan but had never been used in the construction of the Somnath temple.

Ellenborough's attempt to create misunderstandings between the people of India and Afghanistan by portraying Mahmud of Ghazni as a looter ultimately failed. When the truth was revealed, the British Parliament held a detailed debate on March 9, 1843, exposing the deceit of the Governor-General of India.

Despite this, in 1857, a rebellion broke out in India against the British occupation. Following the rebellion, several British authors, through various narratives, portrayed Mahmud of Ghazni as a plunderer. Their objective was to create divisions between Hindus and Muslims. These authors also propagated the idea that Islam was spread in the Indian subcontinent through the sword.

This British-influenced history was later adopted by some Hindu extremists, who further vilified Mahmud of Ghazni. Ironically, some Muslim historians also exaggerated Mahmud’s attack on Somnath, causing the truth to be obscured amidst myths and fabrications.

Even today, when Hindu extremists deliver speeches justifying their hostility toward Muslims or actions like the demolition of the Babri Masjid, they do not miss an opportunity to label Mahmud of Ghazni as a plunderer. Recently, Pakistan’s Defense Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif also referred to Mahmud of Ghazni as a looter, sparking debates not only in Pakistan but also in India.

In Pakistan, an important question arises: if Mahmud of Ghazni was indeed a looter, why did Pakistan name one of its missiles after him? Should this name now be changed? When asked this question, the defense minister deflected, saying he was not responsible for naming the missile.

Interestingly, the development of the Ghaznavi missile (Hatf III) began in 1993 during Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto’s tenure. During her term, work also commenced on the Abdali (Hatf II) and Ghauri (Hatf IV) missiles. It was Benazir Bhutto who approved the names of these missiles. The missiles were named after Afghan warriors who had defeated various Indian rulers in the past. This naming strategy was meant to signify that Pakistan’s missile program was directed against India, not any other country.

It is noteworthy that before Mahmud of Ghazni, Muhammad bin Qasim had invaded India. However, no Pakistani missile bears his name. Some Sindhi nationalists also consider Muhammad bin Qasim a looter, but Khawaja Muhammad Asif did not call him one, possibly because he was Arab. Criticism of Afghans appears to be a current trend, which is why Mahmud of Ghazni has been labeled a looter.

Indian historian Romila Thapar, in her book Somnath, writes that Mahmud of Ghazni’s army included many Hindus, while Raja Bhima’s army defending Somnath included several Ismailis. She notes that attacking temples was not exclusive to Muslims; Hindu kings also did so to assert dominance. According to some accounts, the attack on Somnath was encouraged by a Sufi elder, Masud Ghazi, because Muslims were being persecuted there. It is said that a Muslim widow from Gujarat, whose only son was captured by the Hindu king, approached Mahmud of Ghazni in Ghazni with her plea and a letter from Masud Ghazi.

If these accounts are true, it suggests that Muslims were already present in Somnath before Mahmud’s arrival. History shows that Islam reached the Indian subcontinent long before Mahmud of Ghazni or Muhammad bin Qasim. The first mosque in the subcontinent was established in 629 CE in Cheraman, Thrissur district, Kerala, by Arab traders.

According to Muhammad Ishaq Bhatti’s book Islam ke Awaleen Naqoosh in Bar-e-Sagheer (Early Traces of Islam in the Subcontinent), published by the Institute of Islamic Culture, Lahore, Arab military campaigns in India began during the caliphate of Umar ibn al-Khattab (RA). Bhatti’s research reveals that 25 companions of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) came to India. Twelve arrived during the caliphate of Umar (RA), five during Uthman’s (RA), three during Ali’s (RA), and five later. Abd al-Rahman ibn Samura (RA) conquered Gujarat and Kathiawar, while Mujashi ibn Masud Salami (RA) conquered Kabul.

Despite this rich history, our textbooks mostly highlight Muhammad bin Qasim and Mahmud of Ghazni. Whatever Mahmud of Ghazni’s shortcomings, he respected scholars and mystics. Ali Hujwiri, also known as Data Ganj Bakhsh, was his contemporary, and Mahmud held him in high regard. Hujwir is actually a region in Ghazni, and Ali Hujwiri came to Lahore during the reign of Mahmud’s son, Masud Ghazni, where he spread Islam.

It is worth noting that Afghanistan has not only produced figures like Mahmud of Ghazni but also saints like Ali Hujwiri. Therefore, harboring animosity toward Afghans is unwarranted. If someone strongly dislikes Afghans, they might as well rename the missiles named after Afghan figures.

If the defense minister’s criticism of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni is unrelated to the current Pakistan-Afghanistan tensions, why has the government of Pakistan not yet clarified his statement?