Understanding Change in Vastu Shastra in Temples within India.

What is vastu?
According the def. it is "science of construction", "architecture") is an ancient doctrine which consists of precepts born out of a traditional and archaic view on how the laws of nature affect human dwellings. The designs are based on directional alignments or in simple words the art of construction according to the natural habitat and surrounding with some basic principles and then principles of Vastu were obviously formulated keeping in view, the consim influence of the Sun, its light and heat, the direction of wind, the earth s magnetic field & the influence of cosmos on our planet earth. In Vastu east & west directions are given great importance. The East as we all know is the gateway to the Sun s rays. The north identified with the help of pole star is the roof of the world. The principles of the vastu remains the constants all over the world but its manifestation in the architecture changes according to the geographic location, topography and climatic consideration of the place, for e.g. the temples constructed on the hills will be different than the temples in the plains and the temples on the seacoast. From the readings of the Indian temples form by M.A. Dhakey where the author has compared the two medieval temples the first one from the Amrtesvara temple at Holal and second one from the temple of Kotisvara in Kapputur. According to his understanding and interpretation the Karnata architects understood the form such as Nagra , Dravida & Bhumija exactly in the manner comprehended by the writers of the vastushastra of medieval northern India & not like that of text of lower Dravidesa or lower south. The definaition of the form Nagra, Dravida pertains only to the various shapes of dravidian building itself & having no relationship to the Nagra form of Northern India.according to his research the confusion in the comprehension of the term Nagra, Dravida & Vesara is creation of contemporary architects, taking south Indian definition meant first and last for local shapes, to the temple from the northern India, not taking Into account the opinion of the North indian text in that regard. He describes the holal inscription in which By Nagra = North Indian latina & more particularly Shikhra of Decan & Malva. By Dravida= Upper Dravidians By Bhumija= main temple type of Malava & seunadesa By vesara= Their own By Kalinga=posibilly Phamsana- roof temples of the kind met within the Kalinga territory According to his research the architectural style or elements changed because of the distintion between builders for e.g. builders of the kuntala proper,- the country of Calukyas, the

Kadambas (and the Guptas ), where the representation of non-indigenous forms reflect familiarity with them which is close & their understanding of these are thorough, and the builders in the Hoysalanad whose representation, through is not incorrect, have been guided more by fancy than actuality. North Indian temple builders, though aware of the Dravidian temple forms, as in evidence by their vastusastras, never were interested in repeating or actually manipulating these forms. Similarly in south too, the architects in Tamilnadu did not try any other form excepting the traditional local. But Karnatadesa was acquainted with the styles and culture of the Upper Deccan & Central India from the sixth century and no of examples of early Northern Indian Latina were built in the AIhole, Mahakuta, Alampur & many other places during the period of Chalukyas in the seventh & eighth centuries. The northern influence & close political relation & cultural ties returned in the medieval period and the tenth century. It is at time that the buildings of Northern affiliation again began to be known, represented, & even built in the Karnata territory. Similarly the architects and masons in the different regions of the country tried to use and incorporate their needs and requirements in the structures according to their style, they also used the vernacular styles of decoration, material and building techniques which they have evolved during the years of time and putting them in the frame of the temple vastu. Actually vastu acted just as a set of guidelines for temple construction and amendments were made in those guidelines according to the use & need of the temples. These amendments actually make the vastu different from one place to the other. So according to my understanding the change in vastu is not exactly deviating from the principles or not following them, but just molding them according to their styles, architecture and needs. This actually also help them to develop unique architectural style following the same principles.