Vishnu's Avatars and Theory of Evolution

[Sephiroth 0]

Anyone sees similarities between both or is it just me?

 

Darwin's Theory of Evolution stated that Life began in the Earth's Oceans. It evolved slowly and comes to the Land and from there, evolved to the present day diversity.

 

The 8 Incarnation of Vishnu - 1st itself is a Fish, followed by a Turtle - both which is a lifeform of the Sea.

 

Later, the gap stopped in form of water lifeform and continued with Boar, Man-like and human-like lifeforms.

 

[Sephiroth 0]

The human-like incarnations also are not similar in characteristics either.

 

Boar Avatar - purely animalistic characteristics - violent and hunter-like characteristics which uses its body parts (turks and hands). Early humans comes with such features, using hands and teeth to gather food.

 

Man-lion Avatar - semi-animalistic, semi-intelligent characteristics. Still have that violent and hunter-like characteristics but this time, it tops up with intelligence. Early humans (around 3.1 million years) have such features.

 

Drawf Avatar - more human, more intelligence, capable of using tools. Humans - hunter, gatherers, following the herds and developing tools such as hunting tools, cutting, fire and etc.

 

Pasurama - same as above, but this time, has dimension of Spiritualism, capability to use complex tools and maybe even toiling the land. Probably the 1st generation to toil the land and settle in a spot as shown by the Avatar when He took out 21 Kyastria in fields of Kuruskestra.

 

Rama and Krishna - Very intelligence, refined spiritualism, highly socialized structures, Law, etc.

[Sephiroth 0]

Now, here's the 1 Million dollar question:

 

IF the Purana stories about the Avatars is just myth (like claimed by MANY Hindus themselves), how was it possible for Sages in the past to correctly put such sequence in proper order and according to the Theory of Evolution AND History, 5,000 years ago?

 

Sure, I can accept explaination that they were very smart and therefore, could predict the behaviors of early humans.

 

There was report of finding remains of a small drawf-like humans in an island in Philliphines so early Sages could predict Homo Sapien began in such way as well.

 

But notion that Life began in the Sea and evolved forward to the land is something the Sages cannot possibly predict.

[jayan008 0]

It is really debatable. Whether it is your own idea or somebody elses, it surely is interesting.......

 

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

Sure, I can accept explanation that they were very smart and therefore, could predict the behaviors of early humans....

But notion that Life began in the Sea and evolved forward to the land is something the Sages cannot possibly predict.

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

 

Possibly, since they were smart enough, they might have delved into intensive research and found that earlier human beings, may be their ancestors, were referred to have had physical features which related much like that in marine creatures, which were more commonly found and the number of such features increased as they dug more into the past history, while such features were becoming less and less as they moved forward i.e., close to their own generation......also combined with these physical features, their way of living, like staying close or in proximity to water, (while no traces of history of habitation on more interior lands), their dual capability of adapting to the marine as well as land life more in past...etc., could have lent credence to their belief, just like Darwin arrived on the theory of evolution....

 

[Sephiroth 0]

It is not my idea, it is something which made sense.

 

I doubt they did such extensive research to the point that they could derive such conclusion.

 

Even with Aryans (white skinned) people comes to contact with Shivattes (dark-skinned people), the Hindus concluded that there were two race of Human-like beings on the planet at that time and in the past.

 

The idea of Life comes from the Sea and from a single point in origin is something I don't think the Hindus could have thought.

 

Darwin comes to such conclusion after collecting samples from species all over the world and compare similarities and differences between them. To do that, he travelled across the globe for years.

 

Sages could collect samples as well, but many of the species which exists in India, Africa and Asia were similar in appearance but differ in shape.

 

Furthermore, Science at that time had established that the World is billions of years old. The Sages could not have known how old the Planet was and therefore, couldn't have guessed that Evolutions could have taken place.

 

Lastly, the fact that Life began in the sea is not something you could cook out without facts. There is fossils of sea animals in rocks which Sages can find, however, it could easily be brushed asided as the land submerged in water in some period of time and has nothing to do with Evolution or Man.

[jayan008 0]

it has now proved by science that human beings first originated in Africa and then they migrated to other lands...

 

People who concluded white skinned and dark skinned as two races, must not have had much access to history and hence their conclusion fell short.

 

Since people were spread out in India, the above idea may not necessarily be of the same sages or hindus who came to the idea of life from sea.

 

The people who came to this conclusion or idea of life from sea, must have had good insight into the history, of the period it all started, from their ancestors who referred the past events (just like most of events in the scriptures are passed on to the next generation by way of story narration etc.,) and also may be from the many travellers who visited/migrated to india from africa from time to time.....obviously people must have also travelled to these remote land of africa and some who had returned must have thrown light on the past events that has occured....

 

Collecting all these information from time to time and comparing it with the information available with them, which must have gone on for years, with comments and counter-comments, interpretation, deletion and adittion the sages must have come finally come to the conclusion of Life from Sea.

 

[Sephiroth 0]

You don't know much about Out Of Africa Theory, do you? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

Ist migration of Humans started at 250,000 years ago. No detail about this people. The 2nd one 200,000 year ago (50,000 years later).

 

This people moved across Afica's plains, to present day Kuwait, then to Iraq in the place of Mesotapmia region, and then moved East. In each spot they stopped, a human settlement is established.

 

By 180,000 years ago, Humans reached India and a settlement is established there. They continued to Malaya, Indo-China, China and Japan, across the Bering Seas and into America.

 

Settlements of Humans in India grew into dark-skinned people who later classified as Shaivettes.

 

In 4,600 B.C, a massive flood in Mesotapmia region caused a group of people to move to other parts of the world. They moved to Egypt and some reached India. This were people known as Aryans.

 

So, no where in history did any of this two races (Shavittes or Aryans) brought any records of Life beginning in the Sea.

[jayan008 0]

I have read about the "Out of Africa Theory" and hence i wrote that the first human beings, or the modern human beings, came from Africa...

 

-----

So, no where in history did any of this two races (Shavittes or Aryans) brought any records of Life beginning in the Sea.

------

 

History changes as new evidences are found. When the early migration occured, not all human beings migrated from africa, so there is a certainty that these people who stayed there were contacted by the next generations of the earlier migrated people, who settled in India.

 

Just a century or so back people in west believed earth was flat and is the centre of universe,,,,while many centuries back, scholars in india and other eastern regions came to a conclusion that earth was round and Sun is the centre of Universe and earth and other planets revolve around it..........

 

[Sephiroth 0]

Alright, you know Out of Africe Theory and understood where Aryans and Shivattes comes from.

 

Now, where does the knowledge of Life beginning in the Sea comes from?

 

I want acceptable hipothesis, thank you.

[jayan008 0]

i accept that my idea seems farfetched....

 

but, i guess the person or the group who came up with this linking of evolution theory with that of avataars would surely had/would come up with much believable ideas, or someone in future would surely get into deep researching and find some valid evidences,,, but such posting is really good so that the possibility of such a linkage is kept alive with debates and discussions.........as the linkage does not seems to be only a mere work of fantasy......

 

thank you.....

[Sephiroth 0]

It is not far-fetch, it is just empty. While my theory seems to be based on logic, your theory (that sages had taught it out) is far-fetch and has no basis.

 

And furthermore, Indians (especially in the South) who probably never heard of Darwin or his theory have been referring the Sea and the Land as Mother for generations.

 

And, if you see Discovery and National Geography channels, you will notice that uneducated Indians, living in rural villages and never knew any scientific theories and such, are better environmentalist in protecting the animals and nature, simply because they accept that Man comes from nature itself.

 

It is not something Science could teach people (especially Westerners) to feel, no matter how high their Scientific development becomes.

[jayan008 0]

with your views that indians (esp. south indians) have not heard about Darwin or his theory.......infact south indians are the most educated lot in india, and of the four south indian states, Kerala, has got 100% literacy, while the other three states are having more than 60% literacy rate....if you visit to Kerala, you would hardly find people who do not know about Darwin and his theory.....south indians are more into education......while in contrast you will find many people in north india who don't even know the name of the Indian Prime Minister, let alone Darwin,,, even though majority of them are into active politics, rather to serve their own purpose.......your reference of uneducated village indians are majorly in the north.....please do not make any statements on the basis on what is potrayed in one media channel, which is never entirely true.....any statement should be made only after making thorough research....

 

I have already accepted that my reasoning of linking of darwin theory and vishnu avataar may be farfetched or even false....but then that's my own idea/imagination of how somebody could have come up with this linkage, i am not the one who proposed the linkage theory in the first place.........and for considering your theory to be logic, your never proposed any theory, but only opposed it.....you were the one who put somebody elses idea, saying that it make sense, in the first place....