human evolution according to hindu mythelogy

[nitesh 0]

Hare Krishna,

 

I have a ques and am looking for its answer for a while..Please help

 

Q. We all know that human beings were apes and gradually learned to walk straight, create fire, hunt, cook etc. Thats how human civilization started. In which yug did this happen because humans in satyug were not humans like us. They were a lot taller and stronger. If that evolution happened in any other yug after satyug that means that human civilization was finished in between four yugs. Please clarify.

[Nrsinghadev 0]

Q. How do you know for certain that human beings were apes and gradually learned to walk straight up, create fire, hunt, cook etc., and that that is how human civilization started?

Is it because they teach this in schools based on some scattered and convenient evidence, whilst sweeping inconvenient evidence under the rug? Try to get a copy of Forbidden Archeology and Human Devolution, that should satisfy your questions regarding this subject. Something is not true just because it is accepted by the ruling scholarly party.

 

Q. Why do you speak of hindu "mythology"? Is it all just a fairytale to you?

[nitesh 0]

 

Q. How do you know for certain that human beings were apes and gradually learned to walk straight up, create fire, hunt, cook etc., and that that is how human civilization started?

Is it because they teach this in schools based on some scattered and convenient evidence, whilst sweeping inconvenient evidence under the rug? Try to get a copy of Forbidden Archeology and Human Devolution, that should satisfy your questions regarding this subject. Something is not true just because it is accepted by the ruling scholarly party.

 

Q. Why do you speak of hindu "mythology"? Is it all just a fairytale to you?

[nitesh 0]

Dear Nrsinghadev...Looks like I've offended you in some way but that was not my intention it was probably because I'm not as learned as you.

 

You are right, whatever I know about Human Evolution is from schools etc., just like everyone else. If I would have believed what they teach in schools, I wouldn't have posted my question here to look for truth, i would have simply believed them. I'll definately try to get the copy of Forbidden Archeology and Human Devolution but if you can guide me where can I get that from, I'll be very grateful. I'll search for that on the net anyways.

 

As far as Hindu mythology is concerned, I probably should have used simply Hinduism and ofcourse its not a fairytale to me. I apologize for my mistakes and will be careful in future.

[Nrsinghadev 0]

Prabhu, I must apogolize back to you, because my questions were not meant to offend in any way. I am not learned, but a fool. I was just questioning the authority of the established learned section of human society. I'm sorry if it came across a bit crass, reading it back, I should have written my reply a bit differently, knowing the way the mood of a post can be easily misinterpreted on the internet. There are many atheists on this board propagating their speculative ideas in their attempted crusade against the devotional path, and they often use these terms. This thread was still free from their offenses so my response was rather brisk. So therefore it is not you who should apologize, but me. My sincere apologies to you, I hope you can forgive me.

 

As far as the two books are concerned, I do not know where you live, but there are many websites around the world selling these books. Forbidden archeology is a very voluminous book and also very expensive. Human devolution is not as big and therefore more cheap.

There are other authors who question the antiquity of mankind but they work outside of the Vedic perspective. One such author is Graham Hancock, who wrote a very interesting book called "Fingerprints of the gods". Some of his findings are very interesting indeed. Other works such as "Heaven's mirror" and "Underworld", involve his findings of ruins at sea bottom, such as the site in Japan and Dvaraka in India. As expected, the ruling archeological scholars scoff at his findings and try to ridicule him at every possibility, but his thorough work, which involves the help of many experts on the different subjects involved, cannot be denied by those with an intelligence untouched by a desire for pratishta. I hope I have been of service to you prabhu,

 

Haribol!

[nitesh 0]

Brother, no need to apologize. When I read your message I understood your point of view and all those things you pointed out in my message were true.

 

I know there are many atheists not only on this board but everywhere. I live in Sydney and often find many people asking questions about Hinduism and nothing is more embarrasing for me when I couldn't answer them. When I found this forum, I saw a bit of hope that I might get answers to some of my questions which will just bring me more closer to my religion. I've uploaded a couple of questions under Spritual Discussions as well but still haven't found the proper answers.

 

You are definately much more learned than me. All those books you've mentioned, I didn't even know that they existed. I'll try to get them asap.

 

I may not have got answer to my question yet but I'm very much pleased to know a soul like yours. You are one of the rare with pure heart.

 

Haribol

[matarisvan 0]

 

Hare Krishna,

 

I have a ques and am looking for its answer for a while..Please help

 

Q. We all know that human beings were apes and gradually learned to walk straight, create fire, hunt, cook etc. Thats how human civilization started. In which yug did this happen because humans in satyug were not humans like us. They were a lot taller and stronger. If that evolution happened in any other yug after satyug that means that human civilization was finished in between four yugs. Please clarify.

 

You are mixing two different streams. Science says humans evolved from primates over time. Religion generally says God created humans, the details varying from religion to religion. Mixing the two would be complete speculation and it is best we do not waste time on it. Pick one.

[Nrsinghadev 0]

In my opinion one doesn't cancel out the other. In the Vedas we find that Lord Brahma, and not God personally, created all the different bodies for our souls to inhabit. He decorated this universe after getting divine inspiration from God Himself. Who knows how Brahma got to creating the different species, it might as well be through evolution. While indeed speculation, it's also not obligatory to rigidly pick either one or the other. The prabhu asking the questions is confronted with these things by some people and has no clear answer, which is why he came here, because he wants to be able to give proper answers.

 

Personally I'm not denying evolution outright, I'm just saying that scientifical truths aren't as fixed a truth as they are generally accredited to be. Today's science is superceded by tomorrow's. By asking these questions I'm trying to point out that we shouldn't just accept everything they say at face value. Similarly I didn't accept this path of bhakti at face value, it wasn't some lame sentimental decision of a broken mind, I dug deep before accepting, and wanted and got results to verify it's validity. Of course, this is beyond proof so it has no value to anyone but me, but it means that in my worthless opinion we shouldn't accept anything on blind faith, and I believe that our dear acharya's have pointed this out many times.

 

Personally, I don' think the theory of evolution disproves the existence of God in any way, nor does it dislodge or debunk the knowledge contained in the Vedic literature. Rather, it shows us that a force is at work creating all these changes, and such a manipulating force does not appear out of the blue. The general scientist's explanations as to the reasons for these transformations are flimsy at best: "Nature is experimenting", "There is no reason for it, nature is just tinkering", are some of the answers they give, reminding us of Krishna's words in Bhagavad Gita 16.7 through 10, where He explains the nature of the demoniac. They provide nature as the source of tinkering, but deny the existence of the force behind nature. "Somehow", "by chance", "may have/ could have", "probably", and "most likely" still provide for most of the keywords stringing the chain of theories together.

 

So an atheist may challenge you, and basically you can never say anything that would appease them. If you give a counterargument it is a "lame excuse", and if you point out some of the many bonafide anomalous archeological findings, they are quick to label those as "crackpot inventions", and the author or discoverer handily receives a defamation and subsequently gets blackened and lobbed into the "wacko pseudo-science" section, so as to remove any credibility from that source. At this point we again are reminded of B.G. 16.7 through 10, but even more so of Lord Krishna saying in Bhagavad Gita 16.19 that: "Those who are envious and mischievous, who are the lowest among men, I perpetually cast into the ocean of material existence, into various demoniac species of life." In other words, no matter what you will say or do, the hardline atheist will never accept anything a theist says.

 

So I would probably answer as short as possible when asked about evolution, something along the lines of "As far as I know, the theory of evolution does not interfere with the Vedic teachings". I'm no teacher by any means, but I'd say that if you are sincere in your answers and about your own level of understanding of the path you are pursuing, you can do no wrong. This works for me. If there is a question I'm not sure of how to answer, I will refrain from doing so, and admit my own level of foolishness to that person, which is very liberating and helps to deconstruct my false ego. It is said that God helps those who help themselves, isn't it? So in order to help someone you should first help yourself, and if that means you cannot help that person, don't let it end there but appoint him/her to your guru, which is actually always and in any case the best possible service you can render to any person anyway. So after a long and fruitless rant, I'm coming to the conclusion that I have nothing of value to say, thereby revealing my own foolishness. That I am still posting this, is a sign of my false ego acting up, falsely thinking it may have some value somehow. I hope that others on this messageboard may provide you with some knowledgable answers Nitesh prabhu. The only valuable thing I can say is that you should send these persons to a bonafide guru to get their answers.

 

All glories to Sri Sri guru and Gauranga,

Haribol!

[nitesh 0]

 

You are mixing two different streams. Science says humans evolved from primates over time. Religion generally says God created humans, the details varying from religion to religion. Mixing the two would be complete speculation and it is best we do not waste time on it. Pick one.

 

Hare Krishna,

 

If I just had to pick one there would be no point in posting this question. Its clear now that one of the two things is right, either science or religion. But at this point of time its hard for me to believe that one of the two is totally wrong. Science may not have got all the answers but I don't think its 100% wrong, specially in this case. Same way I may not have got all the answers from my religion but I don't think it doesn't have my answer, I may not have just found them yet. I'll continue my search anyways because I'm sure there is a definite answer to this question and then will post it here .

[nitesh 0]

Dear Nrsinghadev, Thanks for your reply. Yes some athiests did came to me with some questions which I couldn't answer but this particular question was not asked by anyone, it just came to my mind. My second problem is I don't have a guru.

 

I'm researching other resources as well and will keep posting my findings here. Hopefully one thing will lead to another. Thanks for devoting your time brother.

 

Hare Krishna