Shivas Family

The work, titled Shivas Family (Uma-Maheshvara) is displayed in the

Minneapolis Institute of Arts. The sculpture was placed at eye level
with ambient light around it from the front and above, illuminating
the work and accentuating most of its crevices. This effectively
allows the viewer to perceive all its detail and fully appreciate the
intricacy and three-dimensionality of the work. This simulates the
initial site of the sculpture, as it most likely originates from a temple
in Khajuraho. Placed somewhere on a central niche on the exterior
west wall of a Shiva temple1, the artful integration of sculpture with
architecture must have produced a rhythmic effect as one of its
most distinguishing features.2 Hence, the viewer is able to view it as
closely as possible to the originally intended display.
While the museum label dates the sculpture to c.1000, other
experts3 have speculated its earliest possible date to be prior to the
second half of the 10th century AD, stemming from their
observation of the slow evolution of Indian architectural design, its
eventual culmination of central Indian architectural style revealed in
the Khajuraho temples, a grandeur that reserved it a place as a
UNESCO World Heritage Site.4 These were erected during the
Chandela dynasty, which reached its apex between 950-1050 AD.5
Hence, it is reasonable to conclude that these artworks of incredible
technique would have been erected in the prime of its dynastys rule
as a reflection of its prowess, resources and wealth. Furthermore,
the remaining temples have inscriptions dating from the 11th
century onwards, with no less than three large dated inscriptions in
the western group of temples. While two of them are contained in
one temple and it is doubtful if any of them are in their original
positions and therefore accurate as a reference for identification,
they undeniably comprise a consistent group, as all are observably
of approximately the same age, with the three inscriptions
containing a range of only 47 years, from 954-1001 AD, the almostidentical dates attributed to the zenith of the Chandela dynasty.
Hence, the mass of the western group may almost certainly be
assigned to the 10th and 11th centuries AD.6
The subjects of the work are stated to be Shiva and Parvati by the
museum display. The couple is shown seated on a lotus pedestal, a
symbol of the universe and a usual attribute of Shiva7, which in turn
is supported by Nandin, the vehicle of Shiva. Parvati is shown on her
1 https://collections.artsmia.org/index.php?page=detail&id=5369
2 Deva (1986). Khajuraho. Brijbasi Printers Private Ltd. New Delhi
3 La Narain (1982) Khajuraho: Ecstasy in Indian Sculpture. Roli Books
International. New Delhi
4 http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/240
5 Ibid
6 Deva (1986). Khajuraho. Brijbasi Printers Private Ltd. New Delhi

respective vehicle, a lion. The setting is shown to be Shivas home,

Mount Kailasa, which the exteriors of the towers of the Khajuraho
temples, constructed in the Nagera style8, appear to mimic. His right
hand holds his trident, another commonly featured accessory of
Shivas in that period,9 demonstrating his power. Shivas right foot
rests against the mountain in restraint of the warriors of Ravana, the
demon king of the underworld. In Parvatis left hand, she holds her
mirror to reflect the glory of Shiva, along with her own beauty. This
sculpture thus appears to encapsulate the story of Ravananugraha,
in which Shiva subdued Ravana. The name of the sculpture can be
called into question since the sculptures subject is not really Shivas
family, but Shivas subduing of the demon Ravana.
The sculpture serves as a tribute to Shivas all-encompassing power,
as Ravana had asserted himself as master of the three realms of
Hindu mythology (upon boons from Shiva), only to be defeated by
Shivas toe when trying to lift Mount Kailasa. One of the figures
under Shiva and Parvati is seen grasping a large sword, perhaps
alluding to the gift of Shivas sword Chandrahasa to Ravana after
Ravana eventually appeased Shiva. The family is surrounded by
various attendants, Skanda and Ganesh (Shiva and Parvatis sons),
celestial guardians, various forms of Shiva, symbolizing his lordship
over all the creatures of the universe, a form known as
Chandrasekhara10, with miniature temples containing manifestations
of Shiva to their left and right.11 Hence, it also seems to symbolize
the union of Shiva and Parvati, a reoccuring image in much of Indian
sculpture and art. One cannot exist without the other.
The inclusion of Shiva and Parvati in the Khajuraho temples is
significant as the divine couple is a symbol of complete unity12.
Renowned for its erotica, the Khajuraho temples seem to have been
heavily influenced by Tantrism, being within 80km proximity of its
centre Kalinjar, a town in central India. It contained doctrines
endorsed and promoted by the Chandela kings, who utilized royal
7 Parvati. [Sculpture] Retrieved from Mookerjee A. (1952) Art of India.
Calcutta. Oxford Book & Stationery Co.

8 http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/240
9 Chamba. Siva and Parvati. (10th Century) [Sculpture]Retrieved from
OFerrall M.A. and Tandan R. K. and Natesan K. (1984) The Spirit of India: A
survey of Indian art. Australia. The Art Gallery of Western Australia

10 Siva Sakti -Siva and Parvati- Alinganamurti. (14th Century)

[Sculpture]Ibid
11 http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/240
12 Shearer A. (1993) The Hindu Vision: Forms of the Formless. New York. Thames
and Hudson

monuments, including temples.13 Tantrism was an esoteric religion

whereby the sexual act was converted into a ritual, during which the
aspirant took on the identity of god and his partner the goddess,
transforming it into a sacred act.14 Similar to how sex unified the
flesh of both individuals to transcend their dual natures and the
world into a single divinity, ones consciousness therefore expands
to embrace all creatures in comprehensive love. In addition, just as
Shiva is totally united with his Sakti, the supreme Goddess, so must
the relationship between the couple be. Furthermore, just as Shiva
appears to the initiate as a teacher and human, so also does the
divine Sakti meet him in the personal figure of his own wife15. Thus
by identifying himself with the deity, the devotee becomes a deity
himself.16
Shiva is also depicted with his left hand holding his Parvatis left
breast, a gesture replicated more explicitly by the numerous other
erotic images in the temples, which are carved in a variety of sexual
positions. These stood as a reminder that sexual desires had to be
conquered before one could embark on attaining salvation, and
would have served as a means of testing devotees, with only those
who managed to remain unperturbed proving their worth of
attaining the Ultimate Reality.17 Sex was also ritualized with magical
powers, among which included the decorative use of the sexual
motif, as well as the ritual copulation and marriage of deities, which
were performed to increase fertility.18 Thus, the depiction of Shivas
family, along with the rest of the erotic images, would have been
objects of worship that worshippers could meditate on, and reflected
crucial aspects and desires of their lives. Sex was also believed to
be an important means of obtaining deliverance, the act seen as a
symbol of the union between the negative and positive aspects of
the universe. Hence, bhoga, the sensuous appreciation of life, was
seen as an easier and more enjoyable way to salvation in contrast to
yoga, or meditation.19

13 http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/240
14 La Narain (1982) Khajuraho: Ecstasy in Indian Sculpture. Roli Books
International. New Delhi
15 Zimmer H. (1984) Artistic Form and Yoga in the Sacred Images of India.
Princeton, N.J. Princeton University Press
16 La Narain (1982) Khajuraho: Ecstasy in Indian Sculpture. Roli Books
International. New Delhi
17 Ibid
18 Ibid
19 Ibid

Bibliography
Deva (1986). Khajuraho. Brijbasi Printers Private Ltd. New Delhi
La Narain (1982) Khajuraho: Ecstasy in Indian Sculpture. Roli Books
International. New Delhi
Mookerjee A. (1952) Art of India. Calcutta. Oxford Book & Stationery
Co.
OFerrall M.A. and Tandan R. K. and Natesan K. (1984) The Spirit of
India: A survey of Indian art. Australia. The Art Gallery of Western
Australia
Shearer A. (1993) The Hindu Vision: Forms of the Formless. New
York. Thames and Hudson
Zimmer H. (1984) Artistic Form and Yoga in the Sacred Images of
India. Princeton, N.J. Princeton University Press