The avatars of Vishnu, Darwinism and evolution - Page 2

niranjan · 03-27-2007, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lauraclay

If Darwin didn't invent evolution, if he in fact just discovered it, why should he be the only one allowed to notice it? Maybe he was the first to notice it at the level he did, but why can't other cultures notice? And if their way of documenting it was to integrate it into their religion, the ultime truth, wouldn't that be just what they did?

In India, we have seperate departments for indigenous science and medicine , and our indigenous medicinal system Ayurveda is world famous.

If you are suggesting that Indian scientists are the first to observe the theory of evolution, I must say I am flattered by that.
It could be, however to my knowledge there are no Indian texts to prove this.

And also it should be remembered that the first avatar of Vishnu is Matsya or fish which reprsents the scientific fact that life originated in water , and which evolves into the amphibean tortoise Kurma and then Varaha the boar, the strictly land animal.

To have such kind of precision in depicting sequentially the origin and evolution of life by ancient Indian scientists without the aid of modern scientific technology , to tell the truth, is a bit hard to imagine.

niranjan · 03-27-2007, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hindweb

I feel the Vanar sena or Monkey army in Ramayana must be one particular phase of evolution. If you look at Darwins theory, it does make sense.

Yeah, I agree with that. I have also been fascinated by Hanuman , Sugriva, Angada and the others, who are man-apes, with the features of both human beings and apes. I believe that Hanuman must be the missing link ,which the theory of evolution is pointing out.

If we can dig up his skeleton or the skeletons of the other man-apes, we may be able to unravel the mystery of the missing link.

lauraclay · 03-27-2007, 04:23 PM

Obviously I don't really know what I'm talking about, seeing as I haven't really studied much about either topic, but I'm just thinking that maybe the parallels of the avatars and evolution validate something. I mean, Indians were renowned for their studies, especially in the sciences. I think there was a reason.

niranjan · 03-28-2007, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lauraclay

Obviously I don't really know what I'm talking about, seeing as I haven't really studied much about either topic, but I'm just thinking that maybe the parallels of the avatars and evolution validate something. I mean, Indians were renowned for their studies, especially in the sciences. I think there was a reason.

Perhaps , it could be as you say .

And perhaps , it could be as I have said as well, that this knowledge was obtained by accessing the superconscious mind by yogis or scholars.

I think we should consider all the options pragmatically, before prejudging anything.

lauraclay · 03-28-2007, 03:25 PM

Which is why we're agnostic and will probably never come to a conclusion. Lol, I love thinking about it though.

niranjan · 03-29-2007, 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lauraclay

Which is why we're agnostic and will probably never come to a conclusion.

I think your statement that "will probably never come to a conclusion" depicts a defeatist mentality. I think we should exert ourselves to obtain knowledge and arrive at the truth like Buddha or Newton or Einstein did.

The very fact that we are agnostics and do not believe blindly like the people in medieval ages did, is in itself , a great achievement. And I believe that greater achievements will come about in the future.

lauraclay · 03-29-2007, 07:06 AM

Even if I 99% believe something, I still admit the possibility that I'm wrong. Hence, I can never come to a real conclusion.

niranjan · 03-29-2007, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lauraclay

Even if I 99% believe something, I still admit the possibility that I'm wrong. Hence, I can never come to a real conclusion.

I don't mean to offend you, but I must ask you this question.

Do you 99% believe that 2+2 = 4 ?

lauraclay · 03-29-2007, 01:52 PM

Have you ever seen the random proofs in math that prove crazy things that aren't true?
Invalid proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
These proofs aren't true. But there are some that are. I have a couple calculus major friends, but I can't find what I'm looking for online atm.

niranjan · 03-30-2007, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lauraclay

Have you ever seen the random proofs in math that prove crazy things that aren't true?
Invalid proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
These proofs aren't true. But there are some that are. I have a couple calculus major friends, but I can't find what I'm looking for online atm.

Thanks for the info. I see your point. But even in the proofs you mentioned , there are Q.E.D.s that explain the errors and the correct procedures.

So, here again, we see the infallibility of mathematics.