Aurangzeb's reputation as a temple destroyer and as an intolerant Muslim ruler have been far too exaggerated. It's important to realise that he actually sponsored the construction of more temples than he destroyed.

Regarding temple destruction in India, it was almost always a political rather than a religious act. Non-Muslim Indian rulers (Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, etc) patronised and built temples as an expression of their power, both spiritual and material. These temples usually became associated with that dynasty, who would continue to fund and protect these temples. In the earlier Indo-Islamic period Muslim rulers destroyed temples to loot their wealth. However as the Muslim rulers became native to India, they realised that temples were powerful political symbols that were tied to dynasties. Therefore the best way to damage a rival non-Muslim dynasty's reputation was by destroying their temple. Obviously though, the Muslim court chroniclers depicted this destruction as the righteous iconoclasm of the pagan idols.