Jump to content

Talk:Kamakhya Temple: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Padmanlp (talk | contribs)
Padmanlp (talk | contribs)
Line 32: Line 32:
http://www.assamtribune.com/sep2709/sunday.html
http://www.assamtribune.com/sep2709/sunday.html


Since Naranarayan(1540-1587) was not under the Ahoms, it makes no sense if you write "The current structure has been built during the Ahom times". As you pointed out, Benarjee might be wrong in giving historical data such as during whose reign the temple was built(I already pointed out such mistakes) or may be we are misinterpreting his writings(like I suggested one alternative explanation). Books can be wrong like you removed * {{cite book|author=Sukhabilāsa Barmā|title=Bhāwāiyā: Ethnomusicological Study|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=Yl_t8Ffy3rgC&pg=PA74|accessdate=30 May 2013|year=2004|publisher=Global Vision Publishing Ho|isbn=978-81-8220-070-8|pages=74–}} considering it a terrible book in the article[[Sankardev]].
Since Naranarayan(1540-1587) was not under the Ahoms, it makes no sense if you write "The current structure has been built during the Ahom times". As you pointed out, Benarjee might be wrong in giving historical data such as during whose reign the temple was built(I already pointed out such mistakes) or may be we are misinterpreting his writings(like I suggested one alternative explanation). Books can be wrong like you removed * {{cite book|author=Sukhabilāsa Barmā|title=Bhāwāiyā: Ethnomusicological Study|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=Yl_t8Ffy3rgC&pg=PA74|accessdate=30 May 2013|year=2004|publisher=Global Vision Publishing Ho|isbn=978-81-8220-070-8|pages=74–}} considering it a terrible book in the article [[Sankardev]].


One more thing, can you please give me an account as to why and how the Ahom king had to come into construction of the temple? (eg. Naranarayan re-built it because it was destroyed, like that what reasons made Ahom king to do the construction as you told.)
One more thing, can you please give me an account as to why and how the Ahom king had to come into construction of the temple? (eg. Naranarayan re-built it because it was destroyed, like that what reasons led Ahom king to do the re-construction as you told.)


Last but not the least, the very inscription inside the temple itself mentions that the temple was built by Chilarai during Naranayan's reign; so, does it really need a debate?!?
Last but not the least, the very inscription inside the temple itself mentions that the temple was built by Chilarai during Naranayan's reign; so, does it really need a debate?!?

Revision as of 18:54, 6 June 2013

WikiProject iconLower Assam C‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Lower Assam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lower Assam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconHinduism: Shaktism B‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Shaktism task force (assessed as High-importance).
WikiProject iconIndia: Assam B‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Assam (assessed as Low-importance).
WikiProject iconReligion Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.



Ahom builders

The report by Banerji is available on the web. Please read it before contesting the claims, as done here.

Banerji mentions constructions and structures between the 8th and the 17th century. The Koch kingdom broke up by the end of the 16th century, and Kamakhya was under the control of the Ahoms/Mughals in the 17th century. The report mentions 3 successive constructions. The first is attributed to the 8th century. The second is to the Koch, and the third to the Ahoms. He writes, "the lower part of the sanctum is in good preservation and was used by the Ahom builders".

Chaipau (talk) 11:46, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

/* The current structure has been built during the Ahom times,[4] in "Kamakhya Temple" */

Dear Chaipu, In the book "The Mother Goddess Kamakhya" by the noted scholar Dr. Banikanta Kakati, in page 37 it is clearly mentioned that the present temple was re-built in 1565 A.D. by king Naranarayan of koch kingdom after the destruction of the original Temple under Moslem invasion. You can also refer to this in the following link

http://www.assamtribune.com/sep2709/sunday.html

Since Naranarayan(1540-1587) was not under the Ahoms, it makes no sense if you write "The current structure has been built during the Ahom times". As you pointed out, Benarjee might be wrong in giving historical data such as during whose reign the temple was built(I already pointed out such mistakes) or may be we are misinterpreting his writings(like I suggested one alternative explanation). Books can be wrong like you removed * Sukhabilāsa Barmā (2004). Bhāwāiyā: Ethnomusicological Study. Global Vision Publishing Ho. pp. 74–. ISBN 978-81-8220-070-8. Retrieved 30 May 2013. considering it a terrible book in the article Sankardev.

One more thing, can you please give me an account as to why and how the Ahom king had to come into construction of the temple? (eg. Naranarayan re-built it because it was destroyed, like that what reasons led Ahom king to do the re-construction as you told.)

Last but not the least, the very inscription inside the temple itself mentions that the temple was built by Chilarai during Naranayan's reign; so, does it really need a debate?!?

Hope, you will consider the matter with due care and take necessary steps.