Yogi says “Lord Hanuman was a Dalit”

[prasad1]

A right-wing group in Rajasthan has sent a legal notice to Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath asking him to apologise within three days for his remarks, calling Lord Hanuman a “Dalit”.

During a poll rally in Malakheda of Alwar district on Tuesday, November 27, Adityanath remarked, “ Bajrangbali ek aise lok devta hain, jo swayam vanvasi hain, nirvasi hain, Dalit hain, vanchit hain. Bharatiya samudaye ko Uttar se leke Dakshin tak, purab se paschim tak, sabko jodne ka kaam Bajrangbali karte hain."

“Hanuman is a folk god who himself was a forest dweller, deprived and a Dalit. Bajrang Bali worked to connect all Indian communities together, from north to south and east to west,”Adityanath had said.

Earlier this month, he had claimed that Hanuman was a Dalit tribal as he sought to forge a direct connection with voters in tribal dominated state of Chhattisgarh

Rajasthan Sarv Brahmin Mahasabha president Suresh Mishra has now sent a notice to Adityanath, accusing him of dragging Lord Hanuman's caste for political gain for the BJP in the state where Assembly polls will be held on 7 December.

The notice reads, "I am saddened that Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister called Lord Hanuman deprived. His statement has hurt religious sentiments of several devotees. Those who are deprived they get strength to fight the odds. It is a sheer attempt to take political mileage during elections".

Many other sections of Saints and Sadhus have also been enraged by Yogi’s comments and have expressed their displeasure.

Saint-Mahants of Lucknow also said this statement of Yogi wrong. Everyone denies Hanumanji's dalit and disadvantage. They say that “Hanuman was Brahmin, He has also been designated as Kshatriya”

On the other hand, Swami Awadach Acharya of Galata Peetha said that as we have seen, read and heard about Hanumanji, till date there are no accounts of Hanumanji’s caste or varna.. It is inappropriate to divide God into any class, character etc. Hanumanji was not a Dalit

Mahant Radheshyam Tiwari of Chandrapole Bazar Thikana Temple Shri Ramchandraji said, "Hanuman Bahuk suggests that he was given the title of Rajput. he was not deprived either. Hanumanji is Kesari Nandan. Kesari i.e. king. He said - "There is no mention of Bajrangbali being Dalit anywhere in the scriptures." Hanumanji is a tribe of ape, not a dalit The Yogi said this either unknowingly or in the electoral atmosphere.

https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/india/yogi-says-lord-hanuman-was-a-dalit-gets-legal-notice-from-rajasthan-group

 

[prasad1]

The most obvious counter to the CM’s claims is that Hanuman was a divine being, and hence, human caste distinctions don’t apply to him.
But matters are not that simple — there are far too many legends behind Hanuman’s birth. Also, he did indeed belong to the Vanar (monkey) race, who were forest dwellers, as Yogi ji said.

But that seems to be the only accurate part of his statement.

Hanuman was definitely not deprived — his father Kesari was a brave Vanar chieftain. His 'caste', however, can be the subject of a longer debate.
There are three ways of determining caste — birth, upbringing and conduct.

Thus, Karna, a Khastriya prince, was brought up by a horse rearer, and lived out the identity of a shudra. Ravan, the son of a Brahmin sage and a very learned man, due to his conduct, is counted among asuras.

Hanuman’s 'caste' is more difficult to determine.

The world of mythological legends and fables can be a murky one. But let’s start with the most popular text available on Hanuman — the Hanuman Chalisa.
At one place, it says:
Hath Bajra O Dhwaja Biraje,
Kandhe moonj janeu saje
(There is a flag and a bajra — weapon — in your hand, the sacred thread on your shoulder).
At another:
Shankar Suvan Kesari Nandan
Tej pratap maha jagvandan
(The avatar of Shiva, the son of Kesari, your bravery and divine strength is worshipped by the world).
At yet another:
Raama-Duut Atulit Bala-Dhaamaa
Anjani-Putra Pavan-Sut Naamaa
(You are the messenger of Ram, possessor of unequalled strength. Your names are Anjani-putra — son of Anjani — and Pavan-Sut — son of Pavan).

Thus, about Hanuman’s birth, we learn that he is the avatar of Shiva, the son of Kesari, the son of Anjani, and the son of Pavan, the god of wind.
None of this adds up to the canonical idea of the birth identity of a Dalit.

There are many stories about Hanuman’s parents.

Anjana, his mother, was a Vanara woman. But according to legends, she was an Apsara who was cursed to be born as a monkey. In one story, it is God Indra who curses her for resisting his sexual advances. In another, it’s a sage whose meditation she disturbed. But in both stories, it is later commuted — if, through her prayers and devotion, she could convince Lord Shiva to be born as her son, she would be free of the curse.


https://www.dailyo.in/arts/yogi-adityanath-hanuman-dalit-ramayana-hanuman-chalisa/story/1/28050.html

 

[renuka]

Ok...so its insulting if Hanuman is a Dalit but if Hanuman is a Brahmin or Kshatriya then its ok?

So this shows Dalits are still looked down upon in Hindutvaism?

 

[natkan]

Hanuman wears a Sacred thread, Received Knowledge of Vedas from Lord Surya, Is a Pure Vegetarian, Reliever of Miseries . These are the attributes of only Brahmins.
He Of course is Divine and is to be revered only as God: Beyond Distinctions of Caste and Creed. which is why the people of all castes and religions want to adopt him and worship him.

 

[natkan]

Recently came across a news item wherein a company in chennai had advertised for vacancies with a rider of (For Bramins Only). This has raised a huge furore in the electronic media with many pouncing and denouncing the advertisement and the company forcing it to apologize and issue clarifications of this being an error of the H.R. department. I also found it interesting that a few of the people threatened the company with legal action as it was discriminatory and of casteist nature.
We often come across advertisements especially for government jobs and even other companies which often specify the jobs as being offered exclusively for those belonging to Scheduled castes or Scheduled Tribes. Does the government have the right to discriminate based on the caste? They say social justice for the underprivileged!!! However Even when there are no applicants from these castes, the post remains vacant even though other caste persons qualified for the job are available and JOBLESS !!!. Is this not Discrimination??
Can a Case Not be filed against the Government for creating Discriminatory Policy of Reserving Jobs and Keeping Vacancies for Interminable Period of Time?? These Vacancies also result in trouble for the people as there is No one available to do the jobs that were intended to be done by the persons in those posts
I request the People who have deeper knowledge of Legal Aspects to look into these matters and see if the Brahmin Community and the entire Country can be benefited

 

[v.parasuraman]

Ok...so its insulting if Hanuman is a Dalit but if Hanuman is a Brahmin or Kshatriya then its ok?

So this shows Dalits are still looked down upon in Hindutvaism?

Just all vote catching policy. Hanuman is an avatar of Rudra, as many of us know.

 

[ashoktwinn]

God is omniresent. Aham Brahma asmi. God is there in every person. So Nothing wrong in calling Hanuman a Dalit. What matters most is sincerety, devotion and purity of mind. Dividing people is human creation.

A right-wing group in Rajasthan has sent a legal notice to Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath asking him to apologise within three days for his remarks, calling Lord Hanuman a “Dalit”.

During a poll rally in Malakheda of Alwar district on Tuesday, November 27, Adityanath remarked, “ Bajrangbali ek aise lok devta hain, jo swayam vanvasi hain, nirvasi hain, Dalit hain, vanchit hain. Bharatiya samudaye ko Uttar se leke Dakshin tak, purab se paschim tak, sabko jodne ka kaam Bajrangbali karte hain."

“Hanuman is a folk god who himself was a forest dweller, deprived and a Dalit. Bajrang Bali worked to connect all Indian communities together, from north to south and east to west,”Adityanath had said.

Earlier this month, he had claimed that Hanuman was a Dalit tribal as he sought to forge a direct connection with voters in tribal dominated state of Chhattisgarh

Rajasthan Sarv Brahmin Mahasabha president Suresh Mishra has now sent a notice to Adityanath, accusing him of dragging Lord Hanuman's caste for political gain for the BJP in the state where Assembly polls will be held on 7 December.

The notice reads, "I am saddened that Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister called Lord Hanuman deprived. His statement has hurt religious sentiments of several devotees. Those who are deprived they get strength to fight the odds. It is a sheer attempt to take political mileage during elections".

Many other sections of Saints and Sadhus have also been enraged by Yogi’s comments and have expressed their displeasure.

Saint-Mahants of Lucknow also said this statement of Yogi wrong. Everyone denies Hanumanji's dalit and disadvantage. They say that “Hanuman was Brahmin, He has also been designated as Kshatriya”

On the other hand, Swami Awadach Acharya of Galata Peetha said that as we have seen, read and heard about Hanumanji, till date there are no accounts of Hanumanji’s caste or varna.. It is inappropriate to divide God into any class, character etc. Hanumanji was not a Dalit

Mahant Radheshyam Tiwari of Chandrapole Bazar Thikana Temple Shri Ramchandraji said, "Hanuman Bahuk suggests that he was given the title of Rajput. he was not deprived either. Hanumanji is Kesari Nandan. Kesari i.e. king. He said - "There is no mention of Bajrangbali being Dalit anywhere in the scriptures." Hanumanji is a tribe of ape, not a dalit The Yogi said this either unknowingly or in the electoral atmosphere.

https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/india/yogi-says-lord-hanuman-was-a-dalit-gets-legal-notice-from-rajasthan-group

 

[mraghavan]

Interesting that no one in this forum, albeit even the yogi, reads Ramayana. Rama addresses Hanuman as a knower of the three Vedas.

 

[natkan]

Dear Sir,
In my post I have already mentioned Hanuman as having received Knowledge of the Vedas from Surya Bhagawan as mentioned in the Ramayana. We have read Ramayana. You have not read my post

 

[S Narayanaswamy Iyer]

Am not quite sure the Raamaayanam confirms anywhere that the monkey hanuman "received knowledgve of the vedas from surya bhagavan".

Valmiki's version of the great ithihaasam says that on meeting the princely bark-clad raama-lakshmana pair, hanuman claimed that he was a monkey (vaa-naran, or forest-man) sprung from the loins of the wind-god (maaruthi, or vaayu), was disguised as a bikshu (beggar) and was a minister to exiled refugee Prince Sugriva (who was also a vaa-naran). He also claimed that he could take on any dsiguise, go anywhere he pleased and act as he pleased.

Raama thereupon observes to his step-brother lakshmana that from the soft words so skilfully spoken at such great length and so persuasively as to turn away the wrath of any potential enemy, this was not possible unless hanuman the tamer of foes had studied rig-veda, memorised yajur-veda and knew saama-veda.

In other words, hanuman was NOT a human. Therefore he neither was nor could possibly be a Brahmin, a kshathriyan, a vaishyan nor a shoodran. Least of all was he a "dalit".

S Narayanaswamy Iyer