It is Thursday – Thor’s Day via the familiar late-Germanic reckoning, although in truth and per the older Indo-European schema a Day of the Sky Father: Jupiter (Dies Jovis), Zeus (Hemera Dios), and Brihaspati.

This double-linkage of affiliation makes our subject for this post rather apt – a textual concordancy of material pertaining to both deifics, which help to clarify that these figures (Hanuman and Shiva) are in fact the deifics in question.

But why is this necessary? Well, frequently when I have touched upon these matters in the past – I have been met with some dismissal. Either in terms of Hanuman as Son of Shiva, or in terms of the situation of Shiva and Vayu relative to Dyaus Pitar (the Sky Father).

So let us see what the scripture actually has to say upon the subject. And, once again, demonstrate how the post-Vedic Hindu mythology is quite orthodox in its presentation and carrying forth of the archaic (P)IE mythic perspective.

Now, as many shall no doubt know – the Striker/Thunderer deific is fathered by the Sky Father. Odin fathers Thor, Zeus fathers Herakles, Jupiter fathers Hercules, Dyaus Pitar fathers Indra. As we covered in our Hanuman Jayanti (A)Arti-cle earlier this year, there are a suite of concordancies between Hanuman (Bajrangi) and Indra – and, for that matter, the broader underpinning Striker/Thunderer deific. This is entirely as expected. We could therefore almost just ‘take it as read’ that the Father of Hanuman should be the Sky Father deific – and whether we are ascribing this to Shiva or to Vayu, that this would therefore confirm that the Sky Father was in fact He.

But that wouldn’t satisfy many, now, would it.
Per the most popular understanding of Hanuman and His Parentage – Hanuman is the Son of Vayu, as well as Kesari (a situation I have addressed in an array of prior works). Although Hanuman is also understood as either an Avatar of Rudra, or a Rudra (one of the Eleven) Himself.

Hanuman as Son of Vayu is not an incompatible understanding to Hanuman as Son of Shiva. Firstly, due to the mythological presentation of the scenario – wherein Vayu carries the essence from Shiva to Anjani (Hanuman’s Mother – and c.f the directly comparable schema encountered in the Volsung Saga wherein Odin has an emissary bring the relevant apple to Rerir afore Volsung’s conception; as covered in my previous works – “The Apple of Odin to Rerir, The Fire-Seed of Agni, The Egg of Nemesis, The Paternity of Alexander, And The Asvamedha of Dasharatha – On The Equine Investiture Of The Divine Essence In A King’s Heir-To-Be In The Indo-European Mytho-Religious Sacro-Political Tradition” and “Perseus , Krishna , Karna – Three Perspectives Upon The Origin Myth Of The Indo-European Striker/Thunderer”). And second, due to the observable concordancy of Vayu with Shiva.
The latter is not merely a mythological nor theological deduction – it is quite directly stated within the Shruti canon.
To quote from my earlier work, “Proof For Parjanya – The Sky Father Roars Through Scriptural Force!’ –

“SB VI 1 3 sets out eight elemental-associated Forms or Aspects of the Sky Father – these being possessed of well-known Roudran theonyms, and designations for Their nature that are also familiar to us as Facings of the Sky Father. For example, the First of these is declared ‘Rudra’ – and stated to be ‘Agni’ (Fire); the Fourth of these is declared ‘Ugra’ – and stated to be ‘Vayu’ (Wind); the Seventh of these is declared ‘MahanDeva’ – and stated to be ‘Chandra’ (Moon) [interestingly, another Brahmana – the Sankhayana Brahmana – presents the same basic format and broad outline to the rite and ritual understanding in question, yet also changes the associations of several of these theonyms in subtle, yet important ways – for instance, Mahandeva in that schema represents Aditya, the Sun, rather than Chandra, the Moon;]. This – broadly speaking – also accords with the understanding of the Eight Vasus [‘Radiances’, ‘Lights’ (or ‘Highs’, running on a somewhat different PIE derivation) – the purport with regard to Dyaus Pitar, the Lord of the (Day)Light Sky, being shiningly apparent]; wherein we once again see the Sky Father deific ‘refracted’ out into eight ‘elemental’ keyed Aspects.

[…]

Each of these Eight Forms is one of the essential qualities or characteristics which renders existence within this universe of ours to be possible. These are therefore not only ‘elemental’ expressions in the sense that, say, Vayu is equated to the Air which exists in our atmosphere … but also the manner, the mode in which Vayu as the essential air, the Breath of Life Itself, acts to animate – hence, in part, the association with Ugra for Vayu: as the swift movement, indeed even the speaking (with RV X 125 5 , where ‘Ugra’ is utilized to refer to the investiture of the power of the Rsi, the Poet, the Prophet, very much in mind) of this characteristic would not be possible in the absence of that ‘Wind’ and ‘Air-Motion’ represented by ‘Vayu’.”

‘Ugra’, as we know, is a prominent attribute and epithet of Rudra – as, of course, are various of these other theonyms thusly invoked. The Brahmana ritual commentary in question follows Rudra through a succession of transformations correlate with those ‘elemental’ or perhaps ‘dimensional’ qualities.

To this we may add further Shruti materials setting out the concordancy of Rudra with Dyaus Pitar. I shall not run through the full explication (there’s a longer examination in “On The Still Active Dyaus Pitar Of The Indo-Europeans – The Sky Father Still Roars Supreme”), but these quotes should suffice:

“To start with, we have Griffith’s translation of RV II 1 6:
“6 Rudra art thou, the Asura of mighty heaven: ” – which, in the original, is “tvam aghne rudro asuro maho divas” ; or, phrased another way, we have Agni identified with Rudra, the Heavenly Sire [it is important to note that this is ‘Asura’ in the older sense – meaning ‘Sire’ / ‘Powerful’, inter alia; not ‘A’Sura’, the latter term for an ‘Anti-Shining’ Demon] […] The Asuro Maho Divas in question is that great generative power of the Bright Sky – known as Rudra.

[…]

Griffith’s translation of RV I 129 6 – “Indra, to thee I sing, to Dyaus, to Rudra glorious in himself,” which, in the original is “indrota tubhyaṃ tad dive tad rudrāya svayaśase”.

Now, some may choose to interpret this as there being three deities hailed here. But this is not the case (dative, in case you were wondering). Rather, it is a situation wherein the number of deities is two – Indra and His Father. The Father being hailed by (in this line at least) two prominent theonyms for the same God – Rudra and Dyaus.

How do we know this? Because it happens elsewhere in the Vedas as well – RV VIII 20 17 [Griffith Translation]:
“17 Even as Rudra’s Sons, the brood of the Creator Dyaus, the Asura, desire, / O Youthful Ones, so shall it be:” – which, in the original reads “yathā rudrasya sūnavo divo vaśantyasurasya vedhasaḥ / yuvānastathedasat ” .

Now, it is clearly not the case that there are two Fathers here … instead, it is one Father hailed by, again, two names.

And, to further strengthen this most interesting point … the Sons, the ‘Brood’ being referred to here – are the Asvins. Otherwise known as the Divo Napata or Divah Kumarau – the Sons of Dyaus … or, in Greek, the Dioscouri – the Sons of Zeus. And it should also be noted that the hailing of the Horse-Twins as the Sons of Rudra is exactly what we should expect – given the Germanic tradition’s emphasis upon Hengist and Horsa as being the Descendants of Odin [although it should be noted that the major source material attesting these figures is … rather removed from the Germanic tradition itself, and euhemerizes or otherwise distorts matters, as we explored in the previous article upon the subject. Hence why Hengist and Horsa are presented as descendants of Odin (here reduced in status to a human tribal chief) rather than as direct Sons).”

In short – Vayu is Rudra, Rudra is Dyaus, and our Indo-European reconstructive typology has the Striker/Thunderer as Son of the Sky Father. Exactly what we observe when it comes to Hanuman as Son of Vayu / Shiva.

And therefore helping to explicate why in the Shiva Purana [3 20] we have … exactly as we should expect … the direct attestation for Hanuman’s Shaivite divine-parental origins.

To quote in the Sanskrit :

चक्रे स्वं क्षुभितं शम्भुः कामबाणहतो यथा। स्वं वीर्यमपातयामास रामकार्यार्थमीश्वरः॥ ४॥
तद्वीर्यं स्थापयामासुः पत्रे सप्तर्षयश्च ते। प्रेरिता मनसा तेन रामकार्यार्थमादरात्॥ ५॥
तैर्गौतमसुतायां तद्वीर्यं शम्भोर्महर्षिभिः। कर्णद्वारा तथाञ्जन्यां रामकार्यार्थमाहितम्॥ ६॥
ततश्च समये तस्माद्धनूमानिति नामभाक्र। शम्भुर्जज्ञे कपितनुर्महाबलपराक्रमः॥७॥

Or, in translation:

“Like a person suffering from lust, Siva at the instance, the saptarsis, (the Seven sages) carried the semen of Siva, for the purpose of Sri Rama, with respect, over the tree leaf and inserted the same in the ear of Anjani the daughter of Gautama, through ear to her Womb. Then after some time, Siva appeared in the form of a monkey by name of Hanuman who was quite valorous.”

Or, in another translation:

“4 As if hit by the arrows of Cupid, Siva let fall his semen dislodged from its seat, for Rama’s work.
5 Eagerly urged by him mentally for Rama’s work, the seven celestial sages retained that semen in a leaf.
6 For Rama’s work that semen was poured through the ears of Anjani, the daughter of Gautama, by those sages.
7 In due course Siva was born of it in the form of a monkey named Hanumat. He had great strength and exploit.”

So, as we can see – Hanuman as an incarnation of Shiva, Hanuman fathered (in that complicated, ritualine way which occurs at various points in the IE theology, including interestingly enough via Alexander the Great) by Shiva.

The Striker/Thunderer as Son of the Sky Father … yet also, via Patrilineal Incarnation, evidently in this case as the Sky Father – an apt commentary for Thorsday … which is actually Dyaus Pitar’s Day.

Hail to the Sky Father – And Also To His Striking/Thundering Son.

Bajrang Bali Ki Jaye !
Jai Ishvara !
ॐ नमः शिवाय !