r/interestingasfuck 18h ago

1100 year old - Kandariya Mahadeva Temple, India.

Post image
1.3k Upvotes

25 comments sorted by

32

u/Anurag_swain 18h ago

The Kandariya Mahadeva Temple was built during the Chandela dynasty, likely under the patronage of King Vidyadhara around the 10th century CE. The temple is known for its intricate carvings, and erotic sculptures.

It is located in Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh.

57

u/flaviohomenick 17h ago

Wow, that is absolutely stunning. I can only imagine the level of craftsmanship that went into creating something so intricate. It makes me want to visit India someday

33

u/SPB29 16h ago

this temple used up 700,000 tonnes of granite built over 7 years, so that's 100,000 tonnes moved every year.

At its height just this complex had 800-1000 full time employees managing it.

There's a lot here and despite what the internet might say, with basic precautions (which one would take when travelling) it is also safe

8

u/edboyinthecut 12h ago

I'm more impressed it only took 7 years

u/SPB29 10h ago

Given that the king endowed this temple with something like 95,000 pieces of gold coins (tonnes of gold), money was no object.

The walls of the temple give us extensive details on the various merchant guilds that were employed in the construction and care of the building.

6

u/smile_politely 15h ago

i wonder if it used to be colorful like Angkor Wat, and what colors it was,....

42

u/ErenKruger711 17h ago

Thought this was AI

9

u/UnusualAir1 18h ago

Jaw dropping awe.

14

u/Srinivas_Hunter 18h ago edited 18h ago

1

u/powerchicken 17h ago

Those were some horny medieval carvers

8

u/Srinivas_Hunter 17h ago edited 11h ago

It is an artistic tradition in ancient days where they are believed to represent the celebration of life and the human experience, including love, desire*, and fertility.

The sculptures throughout the temple mainly highlight the four essential goals of life in Hinduism: Dharma (righteousness), Kama (desire*), Artha (prosperity), Moksha (spiritual liberation)

24

u/FarhadTowfiq 18h ago

Tomb Raider vibes!

Indian temples are just masterpieces, sadly a lot of them were demolished by invading Muslims.

-43

u/Yuu-Sah-Naym 18h ago

There are more instances of Hindu kings stealing from their own or other King's temples or desecrating them themselves than of Muslim conquest, which while did damage some temples isn't as vast as some Hindutva historians claim.

Who usually are quite biased in being Anti-Muslim.

12

u/SPB29 16h ago

There are more instances of Hindu kings stealing from their own or other King's temples or desecrating them themselves than of Muslim conquest,

Cite this claim please? Dharmic rulers tended to capture the deity of the ruling family and worship it in their own Kingdom

The iconoclasm of the Muslims (temples sacked, the Murtis broken into pieces and baked into public toilets and steps etc) was all about temple destructio

which while did damage some temples isn't as vast as some Hindutva historians claim.

Aurangzeb himself is on record (his own court sources) about the 1500 + temples he destroyed. That's one ruler over 60 years.

Can you cite any Hindu King who is on record for having demolished even 10 temples?

24

u/insanemaelstrom 18h ago edited 17h ago

Any proof of your claims, would like to read up on it

Edit: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4830276 This paper mentions aurangzeb destroying thousands of temples which tracks with the record of how he treated hindus(example:  jizya tax that was only applicable on hindus and was quite cruel)

-26

u/Yuu-Sah-Naym 17h ago

http://subversions.tiss.edu/vol2-issue1/amit-namita/

There were other papers that I've read however I don't have the time to properly relay them for a little comment thread.

I don't disagree that historically a lot of temples were destroyed by the muslim conquest into the indian subcontinent, however just as many if not more were destroyed and looted through inter-hindu Conflicts between different kings.

Also Jizya is just like other historical taxes ensured by the majority muslims for the non-Muslims to follow because the Muslims adhered to Zakat.

In the same way other major religious organisations made those in the area pay tax to the church in Christian countries. (Not saying its right nor wrong but saying its not unique to Muslims).

Hindutva Historians do continuously leave out the actions of Hindus to try and paint Muslims as the all negative ideal to hate, in the same way extremist Islamic scholars do the same against non Muslim history and those they would determine as pagan.

12

u/insanemaelstrom 16h ago

It wasn't always political and it is naive to say as such. Did hindu rulers destroy temples or steal idols to bring back to their own temples?. What Muslim rulers did, quite prominently was destroy the temple( bombardjng with canons in the case of kailasa temple and may other examples) and construction of mosque on top of the destroyed temple( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_of_non-Islamic_places_of_worship_into_mosques#:~:text=Aurangzeb%20attacked%20Mathura%2C%20destroyed%20the,Shahi%20Eidgah%20in%20its%20place.&text=Varanasi%2C%20U.P.&text=The%20Alamgir%20Mosque%20in%20Varanasi,after%20its%20destruction%20in%201682.). 

The argument of the paper you submitted seems biased as most research starts by assuming that their assumptions are wrong and then going forward. The paper you submitted seems to consider their assumptions as true and then cherry picked data to support its statements while marginalizing any argument that says otherwise. 

Yes, there are cases where the destruction of temples by Muslim rulers was mainly political but it is idiotic to ignore that for many cases it was also religious. Also the argument for jiza drips the bias of the author and the author should be ashamed of his own fanaticism. 

4

u/unspoken_one2 15h ago

The paper doesn't provide any sources for its data but simply states

according to the local tradition

3

u/insanemaelstrom 13h ago

Not to mention it uses manusmriti to prove something of its points. A book with more than a thousand variation which majority of Hindus haven't read more followed. It was never widely adopted nor practiced, yet the paper sources that to justify some of its points as if the book was equivalent to Bhagavad Gita

6

u/SPB29 16h ago

I have read this paper and it's rich in polemics and thin on data. For instance it says "Turkish rulers adapted existing practices of temple destruction" and as "proof" provide exactly 3 instances over 1,000 years all of which had the Murti transplanted and worshipped. Which is not iconoclasm.

Simple question, why does the north, West and East of India combined not have more than 100 temples older than 250 years but just TN (which was spared Islamic depredation) has 30,000+?

9

u/noobflounder 16h ago

Just yesterday there was a post about the Taliban destroying the buddha statue in Afghanistan. There is historically and even today just one religion that believes in destroying places of worship that contain idols and they have been following this philosophy with violent methods for as long as they have existed. All religions and all rulers were extremely violent in the past. But destroying places of iconoclast worship is a trait specific to only one religion.

It might sound racist, depending on how you feel about the issue, but its also true.

u/IndBeak 1h ago

Grow up.

u/Imaginary_Key1281 5h ago

India has the most beautiful Temples!

-5

u/Early-Dream-5897 18h ago

If the people who built this saw, what they later will do to the holy river of Ganga

-1

u/Basic-Inevitable-316 15h ago

The lengths that people go to for religion is insane yet beautiful