Masrur is a puzzle! A puzzle standing majestically in the lap of Himalayas!
Who built Masrur temple? When was Masrur temple built? No one is yet able to say anything with certainty about it. Every suggestion put forward is a suggestion, as yet. Such a grand excavated temple and yet no inscription to give any clue about the dynasty or the time period or the king or the patrons.
What is the plan of the Masrur temple complex? Again, many suggestions and guesses. The temple complex, still able to stand after neglect and earthquakes is a wonder and blessing for us. To a visitor, it appears like a giant monolith excavated temple, of which, he cannot make a head or tail. Everything is so jumbled and folded up that it is now a heaped mass of puzzle pieces. It is difficult to even make a rough idea of its architectural plan.
Unless one studies about it and studies with patience, it is beyond even slightest comprehension. Hours and hours of reading of the available material and yet I am hesitant to write a post on it. Pardon me if you find this post equally jumbled up!!
Where are Masrur temples?
Someone having really a discerning eye selected this mass of sandstone hill in the mighty Himalayas, some 60 kms away from present day Dharmshala for the construction of this temple. Standing upon this hill, he might have seen the Dhauladhar range, enjoyed the views and found it to be the perfect place for his dream temple.
Today it is an offbeat destination literally as it is not on any major business or tourist route. But it must not have been so at that time. Such a grand temple – why would anyone build it where not many would be able to praise it?
What do we know about Masrur temples?
Before I confuse it further, first a few things which are certain about it.
- It is neither a cave temple nor a stone temple – i.e. a constructed temple. Masrur is a rock cut temple. It was excavated by scooping out the solid mass of rock from a hill, at an altitude of 2500 feet. Kailash temple in Ellora and Rath temples in Mahabalipuram are few other rock cut temples in India. Further, both Ellora and Mahabalipuram rock cut temples follow Dravidian style, but this temple is distinctly in the North Indian Nagara style.
- It is a Shiva temple as the temple lintel has Shiva images on it. Although today one finds statues of Lord Rama, Laxman and Sita. Thus, now it is known as Thakurdwara. These statues were definitely placed in later years. There is a temple pond in front of the temple, which too was constructed by scooping out the hill.
- Originally this complex had 19 shrines, but four were seriously damaged in the 1905 earthquake.
Why Masrur temples get destroyed so badly?
Kangra region has witnssed the most devastating earthquack in 1905, when many of the ancient temples were destroyed. Masrur suffered badly and crumbled. However, a few like the Baijnath Temple survived unharmed.
The main reason for such awful destruction of Masrur temple is not just the devastating earthquake of 1905 but also the nature of rock on which it is constructed. The rock is sandstone with varying grain density. Since the density or compactness is not uniform, it brings the inherent instability in the structure causing more weathering. Not just that, the stratification of the rock is diagonal, not horizontal, which makes it crumble badly in any earthquake, along the vertical faults.
History of discovery of Masrur Temple
We find the first reference of Masrur temples in 1875 CE as monuments of antiquity in journal Objects of antiquarian interest in the Punjab and its dependencies, Lahore, 1875.
It goes into the ASI annals in 1914-15 CE only. Powerful earthquack in 1905 damaged Masrur temples badly, folding the priceless antiquity upon itself. As with many other monuments, a British officer – one Mr Henry Lee Shuttleworth discovered it in 1913. He reported his find to an officer in ASI – Mr Hargreaves who then published a written account of it.
Dating of the Masrur temples
All the suggestions and opinions about the dating of the Masrur temples is based entirely on its architectural style and elements. We all know that temple architectural development across India has an assessable time period and its geographical prevalence based on the architectural style.
The characteristic features of the Nagara temples in Himachal are similar to those in North India. There is a pillared hall and a garbhgrih. The sanctum has three elements – chamber, wall and the tower (Shikhar). The Shikhara rises multiple storeys till it reaches the Griva – the neck. Above the griva (neck), the shikhara has three parts: amalaka, chandrika, and kalasha.
Nagara style shikhara has three distinctive styles: Latina, Phamsana and Valabhi. Latina style is most common and has walls of Shikhara curve in-wards. Phamsana shikhars are shorter and broader; these do not curve inward, instead they slope in a straight incline as they move upward. Valabhi style has the vaulted chamber (like the wagon of bullock carts) as Shikhra.
Masrur temple has a sanctum, a pillared hall of which only pillar fragments survive and Latina Nagara style Shikhara.
How to decide which stage Masrur Latina Shikhara belong to?
For this, we must dig a little to understand the evolution of Nagara style. Nagara style temple developed over a time, changing the style and pattern.
The history of Nagara style temples begins with the Guptas and their successors from 5th to 7th century. This temple style then passes through various dynasties in different centuries and different regions- like to Early Chalukyas (7th to 8th century) , the Kalingas and the Eastern Gangas ( 8th to 13th century), the Pratiharas and the Chandelas (8th to 11th century), Maitrakas and the Solankies ( 8th to13th century) and the Rajputs (8th to 12th century).
The earliest temples from 5th CE has a sanctum and a hall but no curvilinear shikhara. We first get to see the shikhra in Dashavtar Temple in Deogarh (dated 6th CE). Through 7th to 8th CE, pillared mandap and longer shikhra become characteristic of this style.
During 7th CE, we see the distinctive Latina Shikhara.
What is a Latina Shikhara in Hindu temples?
The Latina shikhara is composed of a series of horizontal roof slabs gradually receding and bending inwards towards the top. The surface of shikhara is covered with vine like tracery, composed of diminutive chandrasalas. Then the structure truncates at the top, above which sits a neck. The griva has an Amalaki and then a Kalash at the top.
The Shikhara of Masrur temple have this evolved Latina Shikhara style.
After reading what is available in papers and books, which give wild swinging assumptions about its date, I found the paper by Mr Michael W. Meister the better among all.
According to Meister:
Dating of the Masrur temple to the eighth century has on the whole followed the suggestions of Hargreaves and Shuttleworth, but with little further investigation. Its sculptural decoration strongly resembles that of the wood temple at Chatrari, usually dated to the early eighth century, based on the epigraphy of bronze inscriptions from the time of Meruvarman, a local ruler.
A crucial architectural element for my estimation of the temple’s dating is the presence of a well-formed balapanjara (the string of pillared pavilions in the recess) in some of Masrur’s latina sikharas. This element is a critical and defining remnant of Nagara formation of the seventh century, found at widespread sites from Mahua in Madhya Pradesh to Alampur in Andhra, that disappeared in middle India by late in the eighth century.
While it may never be possible to determine the duration of excavation and carving at Masrur, I would suggest the second and third quarters of the eighth century, overlapping the reigns of both Yasovarman (ca. 725-754) and Lalitaditya (ca. 724-760).
Mountain Temples and Temple-Mountains: Masrur
Author(s): Michael W. Meister
Source: Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 65, No. 1 (Mar., 2006), pp. 26-49
What is Balapanjara?
It took me a whole lot of time to find what it is!
Balapanjara is miniature front of an apsidal shrine used as a decorative motif; a vertical chain of such motifs in the recesses between corner and flanking bands of the Latina superstructure; sikhara-salient showing a vertical sequence of miniature panjara-frontons.
“Such a band of Panjaras, sometimes peopled with inhabitants of the place (such are found in North India only in Orissa), can be found in the Eastern India in Bhubaneswar in Parsurameswara temple (AD 600-650) and other temples, Alampur (AP), Pattadakal (Karnataka), Mahua, Amrol, Naresar, Batesar (Central India), Osian and Lamba in Rajasthan.
This broad ornamentation recession on early latina temples, elaborated by a chain of such Panjara niches, loses its ornamentation in most temples by the end of 8th CE, becomes merely a shadow recess, accenting the tower’s verticality. The more, fully articulated form appears once again as late as 10th CE in Muktesvara temple in Orissa.”
So, in nut shell, based on the latina shikharas of the mature Nagara style, Masrur temple is dated to the middle to late 8th CE.
Who built Masrur Temples?
There is no inscription found till date about this temple. Nor do any literature mentions anything about this temple complex. However, the grandeur and scale of the complex required ample funds, which could not be commissioned other than by some wealthy and powerful ruler or some wealthy trader.
What makes the puzzle more complex is that this is the one of its kind of temple in the entire Himalayan region. It has characteristic late matured Nagara style of architecture, which developed in North India. As it owns the Nagara style, the sculptors and artisans must have come from the plains of India, where this Nagara style was already in vogue since 5 CE onwards.
After having guesstimated the broader timeline of the Masrur temples, now the guess-work goes to possible kings or dynasties who were prosperous enough to build such a grand temple complex.
Again, not only the date-line but the possible artisans, we guess the anwer to these from the Nagara style Latina Shikhara. To build this grand scale temple in Nagara style, artisans must have come from plains where this was an established style by then.
Why King Yashovarman of Kannauj is believed to be the possible patron of Masrur temple ?
A little search into the history of this timeline throws two names who were rich and powerful – King Lalitaditya of Kashmir and King Yasovarman of Kannauj. Remember, we are making guesses about patrons based on guess estimated time-line, which in turn is based solely on the architectural elements and style.
Yashovarman of Kannauj and King Lalitaditya of Kashmir rivalled for glory of sprawling empires during 8th CE. Poet Kalhana (12 th CE) in his epic Rajatarangini, writes about both kings, but as he was a poet in the court of Kashmir kings, his leaning towards Lalitaditya is understandable. The poet in Yasovarman court – Vakapatiraja gives a detail account of the land of Himalayas that Yasovarman conquered in his 8th CE poem “Gaudavaho“.
Meister’s Analysis for Yashovarman vs Lalitaditya
Architectural remains may provide evidence of Yasovarman’s importance relative to Lalitaditya that is more convincing than Kalhana’s twelfth century panegyric. Nagara stone architecture in the lower Himalayas in the eighth century suggests a movement of power and patronage from the plains to the hills. …
At Masrur and Bajaura, two mature and developed Nagara stone temples, both commissions requiring significant patronage and political stability, had been constructed by the end of the century.
These temples demonstrate, in contrast to Kalhana’s catalogue of Kashmir valley’s many pyramidal temple sites, that patronage in the hill states had, by the eighth century, incorporated Nagara forms then dominant in Yasovarman’s India.
Mountain Temples and Temple-Mountains: Masrur
Author(s): Michael W. Meister
Source: Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 65, No. 1 (Mar., 2006), pp. 26-49
The sub-Himalayan hill state was not under any notable powerful dynasty of its own. It kept falling under Kashmir and middle Indian kingdoms just as its location is – between Kashmir and Gangetic plains. Who conquered and ruled over these areas at a particular time is not so very clear in the history.
But there is no denying that the kingdoms of northern plains have reached Himalayas as early as Mauryans and Kushanas. The significant point is – Kashmir had mainly Pagoda / pyramidal style architecture in temples by then and Nagara style firmly belonged to kingdoms of plains.
Further Yasovarman vs Lalitaditya discussion
Many stone temples in the Himalayas, most typically in Kashmir have pyramidal towers with pent-roof gables. Under King Lalitaditya in Kashmir in the eighth century, this stone typology took on an exemplifying role, characterizing that kingdom and distinguishing it from all others.
Yet as early as the beginning of the eighth century a distinctive type of curvilinear tower, with offset planes and vertical bands (lata) the “latina Nagara” temple of middle India was introduced into the hill regions of the lower Himalayas (the states of Himachal and Uttaranchal).
The Nagara formula had most often a single sanctum with tower and an axial entry hall or portico. It evolved in the sixth century in the Gangetic valley and central India, establishing itself widely in the next century from Saurashtra and the Salt Range in the west and the northwest to Orissa and Bengal in the east, and from the hill states of the lower Himalayas to the Deccan in the south.
The introduction of a Nagara stone-temple formula in the hill states early in the eighth century may represent political inroads made by Yasovarman, king of middle India, ruling from Kanauj. Monuments in some cases offer more solid data than texts, and I argue that in this case they do.
Mountain Temples and Temple-Mountains: Masrur
Author(s): Michael W. Meister
Source: Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 65, No. 1 (Mar., 2006), pp. 26-49
With all these facts and analysis and many more conjectures, King Yashovarman seems to be the most suitable patron of the temple for now, till we find some other inscriptions or plate or some othe concrete evidence.
My doubts and questions on who built Masrur?
Kangra was a prosperous region, lying on the busy trade route from Tibet, Kashmir going towards trading centres of Punjab. There must have been many wealthy merchants settled in Kangra valley, who might have been originally from Northern Plains. Even if they were not from plains, they definitely had well oiled connections with business community in plains.
Further, Baijnath temple inscription ( Baijnath temple in Kangra valley), tells us specifically that Baijnath temple was built by a well known merchant Ahuka in 1205 AD.
There lived here, the two sons of the merchant called Siddha, who were inclined towards righteousness and were blessed. Elder was Manuhka and they called younger as Ahuka…..
The two, seeing the phallus symbol of Vaidyanatha, without a home, furnished it with a temple and in front of it constructed a porch…..
There is in Kiragrama, a machine for tracting oil, belonging to Manuka and Ahuka. That too has been donated by them to Siva, for providing oil for the lamps in the temple.
http://baijnathtemple.com/archaeology.htm
That makes me think, Masrur could as well have been built by some wealthy merchant just as Baijnath.
Architectural plan of Masrur temple
At first, it seems an extravagant and confused mass of spires, doorways and ornament. The perfect symmetry of the design, all centering in one supreme spire, immediately over the small main cell, which together form the vimana, can only be realized after a careful examination of each part in relation to the other.
—Henry Shuttleworth, 1913
What we see in the temple today is the destroyed shrine cluster. When we reach to the end of this article, we will see that is is not just destroyed, it was left unfinished to a great extent.
Let us first understand the surviving and finished structures by taking a tour of the temple.
Masrur Temple Tour
As I said above, it is impossible to understand the temple plan by visiting it, unless you study about it. All that one can figure out on first unread visit is its main cella or Garbhgrih, that there are subshrines in the complex, but how many and on what plan is not easily understood. There are stairs that take one to the upper floor and it could be easily made that the complex did have an upper floor.
The temple has one entrance in front of the pool, taking us to the main shrine. It also has two other incomplete entrances from the sideways in north and south.
Let me give you the simplest possible idea of the temple plan.
The main sanctum
The main sanctum-called Thakurdwara now, these days houses Lord Ram, Sita and Laxman murtis, had a mandapa and an Antarala. The central image of Shiva in the lintel of the main sanctum proves it as a Shiva temple.
Mandapa is all collapsed and you can only imagine it. However, Anatarala is there. The ceiling in the anatarala is well preserved and we see the lotus and diamond carving on the ceiling.
The four massive pillars that supported the mandap of main shrine are still there, though in fragments. These were not scooped from monolithic mass of hill, these were seperate. The square bases of these pillar had elaboarate carvings which is still well preserved.
Subshrines
Various article say that the besides this central shrine, there are seven sub shrines on its each side, thus 14 subshrines in all. I can not recall it exactly. Maybe, when you visit, you can give me a practical update! (I can only presume things now, having forgotten the fine details by now).
Only this central shrine is cut from inside giving it a sanctum, antaral and Mandap. Other shrines are only cut from outside, like a niche in the wall.
The door to the central shrine has five receding jambs and lintels, the lintel in its third layer has Shiva image in the center, confirming that it was a Shiva temple. River goddess Ganga and Jamuna stand on both side of the door.
Staircase Shrines
On either side of the Mandapa, a staircase leads to the upper floor. When we went there in 2015, the left stairway was open for viewers. The right staircase is already destroyed.
Entrance to the staircase also has the carved doorjambs, as if it is a shrine. Climbing up this staircase, we reach to the upper floor, which gives a wonderful panoramic view of the surroundings. It also allows us to have closer look of the Latina Shikharas.
The horse hoofed patterns/chandrasalas dot the rising Shikhara. Shikharas have three successive medallions with Trimurti Shivamukhas in them.
Other Shrines
Coming back to the ground floor, when you face the main shrine, you will find that its left side is in much better condition than the right. Mandapa hall is now lost so what we see on left side, is more or less in a straight line with main shrine.
The front view of the left side to main shrine give us a stair shrine and a Latina shikhara above it, then a rectanguler shrine with a Valabhi shikhara, then the corner most shrine with a latina shikhara. Same was on the right side, but now destroyed.
Other Mandapa entrances
Now, turn the corner, and there are two chambers on either side of this complex, in the north and south direction. We can still see the unfinished rectangular door jambs of the possible entry to the planned but unexecuted Mandapa on the sides.
Besides, there are two free standing, cruciform, monolithic shrines on both sides of the front Mandap.
Visualizing Masrur
The below picture shows the front view of the temple complex, where you can easily see the central shrine and central Shikhara, sideway shrine to the fallen Mandapa of which left one has a Shikhara remnant also, two flanking side Shikhara to the central Shikhara, a Valabhi Shikhara and another latina shikhara on the cornermost shrine.
The free standing monolithic shrines on the two corners in front, where left one only has the base remaining, and right one has the partially damaged shrine as well as shikhara.
But what was the actual plan or the possible plan of the Masrur temples?
As you have seen from the above tour, that the current temple is difficult to give a good idea of the plan. Again, we go the Meister paper and other discussions.
Shuttleworth and Haregreavs’ drafts
Below picture, borrowed from the Meister paper, shows Shuttleworth’s rough index and Haregreaves’ published ground plan of Masrur temple.
- 1 and 2 – the shrines frame the entrance to the Mandapa,
- 3 and 4 – independent shrines,
- 5 and 6 – stairways not shrines,
- 7- central Shikhara,
- 8 and 9 – two flanking shikharas,
- 10 to 13 – these four structures frame two large entrances to the planned but unfinished courts
- 5-6-14-15 – barrel vault valabhi structures.
Current elements and guess work
Today, the Central Shikhara has two flanking shikharas in the north and south, though there are no Mandapas below. The Shikhara over the existing destroyed Mandapa on the east is no more. This suggests that architects planned two more entries to the main sanctum through north and south (left and right to the current cella). They could not finish these on the ground floor though Shikharas were scooped and sculpted out.
Then by various conjectures, Meister goes on to suggest that there was to be a fourth Mandapa and entrance also from the west side( back of the temple complex). The whole complex was to have one Sanctum Santorum, approached form all the four sides through well planned Mandapa, thus making it an integrated four Mandapa temple.
Not just that, today we see two stairway shrines ( of which one is destroyed and inaccssible), one of which takes us to the first floor of the temple. Meister, giving various assumptions and drafts by Shuttleworth and Haregreaves, goes on to assert that there were to be four more diagonally flanking Shikharas to the central Shikhara, above the possible four stairway shrines in the original artistic plan by the architects.
That makes the plan now extremely complex and exquisite. Thus it was to have a splendind bouquet of Shikharas – one Central the largest, 8 flanking shikharas to the central one, 8 more shikharas – two each on the sides of the planned four Mandapas, 4 Valabhi shikharas on the east-west side. It was thus, very much similar to Angkor Wat, though on a very small scale. Any connection between this temple design and the later built Angkor is still unknown.
What type of temple plan is followed in Masrur?
Meister cited Stella Kramrisch to validate his four Mandapa plan, which we do not get to see in temples of that timeline.
In her study of the “hundred-and-one temples” listed in the important eighth-century text, the Visnudharmottara Purana(VDhP), Stella Kramrisch identified one category “whose Mandapas are essentially part of their plan “that seems particularly relevant to what we find at Masrur: “The temple [type called] Kailasa heads the list. It has 5 Sikharas, 4 Mandapas and 4 doors. The Mandapas being in the four directions, the entrances at the cardinal points, this cross shaped temple would have one central Sikhara and each Mandapa would have a lesser Sikhara of its own.” This is a crucial and definitive description of the temple we find at Masrur.
Mountain Temples and Temple-Mountains: Masrur
Author(s): Michael W. Meister
Source: Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 65, No. 1 (Mar., 2006), pp. 26-49
All this reading and discussion only helps to understand the temple better. Whether you know these details or not, you will still like the temple and the surroundings.
The beauty of the Masrur is visual, even in its impossibly jumbled form. Arguments, suggestions, theories – all are necessary to establish the antiquity and the history. The appreciation of its art and its magnificent architecture need only a leisure visit, curious eyes and a pulsating heart! You can read and read but its existential charm is not expressed in ink.
Exploring the Iconography of Masrur Temples
When we visited the temple, we had limited knowledge of the iconography. (Even now it is very limited, but better than before). So I do not have many pics from its sculpture treasure.
I am putting some pics from Meister’s paper and some from google. Please refer these if you plan a visit and want to look at the iconography in detail.
commons.wikimedia.org
What a skilled and well thought-out conception for such a complex and ambitious architectural plan, that too for a rock cut temple! Add further the elaborate carving decorations, sculptural wealth. Masrur is just not a puzzle! It is an enigma!
Visitor Facility at Masrur temple complex
- There is no dedicated parking lot as such, but there is ample space to park your vehicle on road.
- Restrooms are there.
- A small canteen is there.
- It is safe to roam around the complex. There is a school and a Panchayat Ghar near the pond, which gives a lively atmosphere to the whole complex.
Sources
Mountain Temples and Temple-Mountains: Masrur
Author(s): Michael W. Meister
Source: Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 65, No. 1 (Mar., 2006), pp. 26-49
Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Society of Architectural
Historians
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25068237
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masrur_Temples
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302292981_Architecture_of_the_Rock-Cut_Temples_of_Masrur