Demystifying Hanuman

[Guest guest]

!! Sri Rama Jayam !!

--\

-------------------

Demystifying Hanuman - Shreekumar Vinekar (Aug 9, 2005)

http://www.swaveda.com/articles.php?action=show & id=116

 

Recognizing Srimad Ramayanam as essentially conceived by Rishi Valmiki many

decades prior to the birth of Shri Rama, it is viewed as a supernormal

clairvoyant sage's vision of the future " historical " events which he could weave

into a poetry that was even proactively " envisioned " as " sung " by Shri Rama's

twin sons (identical twins) captivating the hero of the story of Ramayana, Shri

Rama, himself by the splendor of the Mahakavya and its beauty in the musical

composition and melody presented by the " babe " vocal musicians, as yet

unidentified by Shri Rama, who was depicted as seated in the audience, as his

own sons. They are then introduced to Shri Rama by no one else but Rishi Valmiki

himself from whose " pratibha " they originally originated but were also fostered

in " real " life, educated, and trained in every way by the same sage. Such back

and forth travel through time is almost a dream like experience but the

difference for those who can appreciate the similarity between a dream and a

creative writing or poetry, the former (the dream) is tinged with " tamas " while

the latter (Mahakavya) is enriched with the " satva " guna. It is important to

grasp this difference in quality and appreciate how dreams are analyzed and how

the same method may need to be applied in analyzing the mahakavyas which are by

nature very complex creations of the genius. Having said that, we can now

venture to take a closer picture of Shri Hanuman almost using the same method

used in the analysis of a dream without looking for a deep seated wish and dream

as a wish fulfillment.

The main thesis of this interpretation rests on the premise that Ramayana is an

illustration of yogic insights Rishi Valmiki consciously attained and attempted

to communicate to his readers in a creative and somewhat cryptic manner to reach

the unconscious minds of his readers. He grasped some of the new " Tatvas " which

he illustrated through his poetry. Sometimes the listener is so fascinated by

the stories that he/she gets lost in the concrete meaning of the stories. These

are only tentative and indicative attempts to take the minds of the listeners

closer to grasping the tatva. However, like the " tail wagging the dog " sometimes

these stories become so enchanting and become such strong cultural influences

that the tatva behind the stories is forgotten and only the stories are

remembered and analyzed as if they are a reflection of the cultural unconscious

amenable to psychoanalytic interpretations. " Gravity " is a tatva that needs to

be grasped by the students of physics (bhoutika-shastra) and Purusha and

Prakriti are tatvas to be viewed as subject matter of " meta-physics "

(aadhibhoutika-shastra), Atma and Paramatma are tatvas to be studied and

discussed in the " adhyatma " shastra of the Vedanta.

Rishi Valmiki makes it clear that Valmiki Ramayana (V.R.) is his yogic insight

into the nature of Man (Nara) or the Man with the highest potential (with

qualities of Narayana himself). He poses that very question to Narada and asks,

in the same vein as Arjuna asking Shri Krishna,(Sthithadhi kim prabhasheta,

kimaseeta vrajeta kim?). Refer Balakanda Canto I. " Who in this present world is

full of good qualities (gunas) or virtues, full of courage, cognizant of Dharma,

full of gratitude and humility, whose vak (speech) emanates Satya, whose resolve

is unshakable, whose character illustrates that he is engaged in caring for the

well-being of all living beings, etc.,etc. " Here the reader is referred to the

original V.R. and the section on discussion of this article if one wants to seek

the full quote. Rishi Valmiki has raised the bar for defining the ideal " Nara "

for Narada who is in constant communication with Narayana. The reader is asked

to remember a famous phrase from Mahabharata here : " Naro va, Kunjaro va. "

( " Could it be Nara, man or could it be an Elephant? " ) The word " va " means " may

be " or " could it be? " That is where after defining Rama as " jnatum evamvidham

naram, " recognized to have so many splendid fulfilled potentials of mankind in

one man, the entire human race in a manner of speaking becomes " Vanara "

(doubtfully " Man " ). Rishi Valmiki has great empathy and respect for the human

race and wants to only tentatively suggest that " in comparison to Shri Rama all

other human beings are Vanaras. " Curiously Vanara is also a term used for the

species of primates variously described as apes, monkeys, etc. Vanara thus has

two different meanings. Here not to insult his audience and readers, he is

making a pun on this term Vanara and even attributes the characteristics of the

other species to this large class of human beings who leave a doubt about their

deserving to be called human beings. It is always palatable if the

non-acceptable qualities of one's self or one's society are projected on another

race or another society. (For example, Rakshasas may be symbolic representations

of the undesirable and misguided primitive aggressive qualities, or terroristic

tendencies of mankind but viewed as a different race in the same vein as Vanaras

in this Mahakavya). In this manner human beings live in comfort with the social

evils in their own society or undesirable qualities in themselves by projecting

them on others or other societies and focusing on them on far way objects, far

way from themselves. For example, this is the main psychological benefit for the

Western societies in funding the anal sadistic Western " Indologists " who are the

cultural proctologists of the Hindu culture. In creating " the Vanara, " Sugreeva

and Hanuman, Rishi Valmiki shows his creative genius and enormous empathy for

the plight of the human race that has a long way to achieve and realize the full

human potential although it has evolved to be the wisest and most gentlemanly

amongst the species of primates. The human race has yet to evolve above the

level of Vanaras and conquer and sublimate its own Rakshasi vrittis without

blatantly acting them out in the real world.

 

This brings us to the Hanumat tatva. Rama is described as " Mahahanuh. " A

resolute character with a stout chin. Mat stands for " thought. " One who is

recognized (mat) by his Hanu (Chin). " Mana " is an expression to make adjective

of " mat. " For example Shreemat and Shreeman. It is also a " measure " and

" respect. " Hanumat thus becomes Hanumaan: One who is measured by his Hanu or

respected and recognized for his Hanu.

 

We shall come back to " Hanu " and its esoteric significance but just to raise

your curiosity, it would be intriguing to recognize that Shri Rama meets

Sugreeva and through him meets Hanumana. Both of these names are referring to

anatomical parts of the human body. Sugreeva means beautiful or good neck and

Hanu clearly refers to the Chin. Is it purely accidental that Rishi Valmiki

names two best friends of Shri Rama with anatomical parts? What is he trying to

say? We can read into it. May be the Hindus have forgotten that the manner in

which one holds one's chin and neck reflects " PRIDE " and " HUMILITY. " Nara and

Vanara (not monkeys) both need to have these qualities. This is just scratching

the surface of the symbolism. The reader has already figured out that " Pavana "

is an apabhramsha of " Prana " and Pavana-suta means nothing different than

Prana-suta. Here again we see how the homonyms have caused confusion and the

usage of the word pavana in Hindi for wind and the synonyms " Vayu " " Maruta "

standing for prana have " made " Hanuman the " son of Maruta, " or " Maaruti. " The

Hanuman tatva or Maaruti tatva exists and will eternally exist (chiranjeevi) in

the make up of the human race. It is not a reflection of another " race " as would

be interpreted by those who were influenced by the Aryan Invasion Theory. For

them every culture reminded them of the White Christian culture than sends the

missionaries first with their Bible followed by the state of the art weaponry

and armies that invaded to take control of the land first scouted by the

missionaries. For this paradigm the quote from another place that reflects the

Christian missionary empire building strategy can be described as " Puratasvedah

paschat dhanuh. " Viewing Ramayana in this light Rama is depicted as the " Aryan "

prince who follows the Vedic missionaries into the unexplored land to discover

the new " races " who are to be enslaved or made into dasas or dasyus. This wild

imagination has corrupted the sublime humility or " dasa vritti " of the bhakti

yogi into an abominable obsequious servitude or dasyu vritti of another

subjugated race. Curiously, Shri Hanuman is deified and worshipped all over

India, and therefore, this interpretation is even on the surface seems quite

absurd even if glorified as an attitude of a true bhakta (of a different race,

or different species, etc.) Such interpretations became very popular amongst the

politicians and demagogues who always loved to divide and rule as well as create

rifts in societies. No wonder some American " Indologists " with ill-will saw in

Ramayana, a Mahakvya that was composed at least one and a half millennium before

the birth of Islam, a reflection of the Hindu prince attempting to subjugate

Muslims!! This was a total projection of " junk " in the conscious and unconscious

minds of the so-called politically motivated Western or American " Indologists "

given to denigrating attitude towards another culture and reflecting nothing but

cross-cultural intellectual violence or vandalism by teaching this perverted

version of Ramayana in the American Public Schools. Such stupidity is not to be

condoned as " academic freedom. " The Hindu Americans (tax paying American

citizens) need to be alert to such defamation of the Hindus in the American

public schools and resort to all available legal channels to ensure that their

children as well as all other children are not imparted such perverted

mis-education in the American public schools. The " adhyatmic " Ramayana is not to

be reduced into a mundane history of " racial politics " and Shri Hanuman is not

to be reduced into a " dasyu " of another implied inferior race nor Rama into an

imperialist of a superior race or a chief of Homeland Security protecting the

victims of Islamic terrorists. Hanuman is not be viewed as a symbol of the chief

of the commando counter-terrorist force invading Ravana's Sri Lanka. Such

interpretations are nothing but projections of the viewers on the Rorschach card

of Ramayana. As ridiculous, absurd, and unrealistic as these characterizations

of Ramayana sound in this context, one is to remind oneself that there are many

such politically motivated interpretations, be they Aryan-Dravidian rift

motivated, or Sanskrit-Tamil rift motivated. All are based on " avidya. " The

authors of such interpretations have lost sight of the basic cultural context in

which the Mahakavya was inspired and composed. Let Hindus recognize that Shri

Hanuman was the General of Prince Rama's army. He was PROUD, BRAVE, FEARLESS,

STRONG AS STEEL (DIAMOND), AND NAMRA AT THE SAME TIME. These are all qualities

befitting a superior human being, although Shri Hanuman is addressed as

Kapeendra or kapi. This poetic description needs to be deciphered and is not to

be taken literally if one has to understand what Rishi Valmiki saw when he said,

" tat sarvam tatvato drishtva. "

 

Now some bold statements to arouse controversy. First, the translation of Vanara

as Monkey misses the poetic meaning of the word Vanara. It is true that Sugreeva

and other kapis are given the characteristics of monkeys by the poet including

the tail but the very first meeting of Shri Hanuman with Shri Rama in canto III

of Kishkindhakanda very clearly shows that Hanuman appeared in Human form as a

Bhikshu. He was well versed in the Vedas, eloquent in Sanskrit and civilized.

Nara is afflicted with a basic klesha (drive) to assume an identity or role play

(abhinivesha). Such " Human Being " afflicted by abhinivesha is a " va-nara. " Man

assumes many such roles in his life time. Hanuman depicts symbolically this

plight of mankind. He is an emissary between Sugreeva and Rama who is described

as " Sushira. " These terms reflect an alliance between the pranic impulses

between the body, " neck down, " with the superior consciousness or supreme

consciousness reflected by Rama which rests in the higher cerebral centers.

These tatvas have an interplay in rescuing Seeta (microcosmic representation of

Prakriti - fully represented as a total product of everything derived from the

Earth, and therefore, " Bhumisuta " ). The yogic insight Rishi Valmiki has been

attempting to communicate through Ramayana seems to revolve around three

principal tatvas, namely Rama, Seeta and Hanuman. It is the Prana-suta whose

domain is measurable by the landmark of the Hanu, that is the original

representative of the body not fully integrated " neck down " with the domain of

Shri Rama. It is Shri Hanumana (Marutatmaja or son of Prana) that can truly

connect Seeta (Bhumisuta) with Ramatatva. This is an esoteric concept and may be

difficult for some to comprehend and may even sound rather autistic to them.

However, all Ramabhaktas have realized the importance of Hanumana tatva. Even

though Shri Hanuman is depicted as a supreme bhakta, a true devotee of Rama

realizes that there is no access to Rama without the awakening of the Hanuman

first. When born He rushes upwards as if to catch the Sun (Savitru) and is

struck down and has to serve Rama with sincere devotion before attaining Rama.

 

There is no better artistic depiction of " internalization " " internalized object

representation " of the " loved object " than that of Shri Hanuman splitting his

chest open to show the image of Rama, Lakshmana and Seeta in his " heart. " This

is an ideal representation of a bhakta (devotee) who has kept the " lord " in his

heart (at least as old as 1500 B.C.). It has nothing to do with a tattoo on the

chest of Shri Hanuman as is misinterpreted by some Western journalists.

 

I am sure the arcane nature of this aspect of Ramayana is difficult to fully

expound in an article on the Internet, and therefore, some cryptic expressions

are deliberately used but the astute reader will get the gist of what is said

and will now view Shri Hanuman in an entirely different light, and once for all,

give up the notion of a " Monkey God. " Hope this discussion of Shri Hanuman's

true swaroopa (Tatva) will inspire the readers to resonate with some new ideas

or questions to clarify the intent of Rishi Valmiki and the richness of his

Mahakavya.

-------------------

Hare Krishna

Hare Rama