Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: "Human" Is A Level Of Consciousness

  1. #1

    "Human" Is A Level Of Consciousness

    Our notions of order throughout the ages have generally been quite abstract and have been manifested in particular forms which have developed gradually over the centuries in a somewhat fortuitous way. These latter have, in turn, come out of intuitive forms and common experience. For example, there is the order of numbers (which is in correspondence to that of points on a line), the order of successive positions in the motion of objects, various kinds of intensive order such as pressure, temperature, colour etc. Then there are more subtle orders such as the order of language, the order in music, the order of sensations and thought etc. Indeed, the notion of order as a whole is not only vast, but it is also probably incapable of complete definition, if only because some kind of order is presupposed in everything we do, including, for example, the very act of defining order.
    If there is indeed order everywhere and to everything, then it only makes sense that there is order to consciousness itself. I have pondered this idea for many years and reached the conclusion that there is a continuum to the flow of consciousness. To facilitate this continuum, living beings in our universe are arranged in a hierarchical order. This hierarchy exists to allow a soul, a wave of life-energy, to develop and subsequently expand its inherent consciousness.
    An individual soul, I believe, must first pass through bodies of highly rudimentary levels of consciousness. As it incarnates through these bodies, its consciousness gradually becomes increasingly refined. Therefore, a soul is indeed evolving, but it is not so much any particular species that is 'evolving', it is consciousness that is evolving. Evolution I admit, but not the theory of evolution that modern mainstream science unquestioningly adheres to.
    Darwin himself admitted there was no proof for his theory of one species gradually evolving into another species in the fossil record at the time of writing his thesis, but he was sure as time went on the 'missing links' would be found. The subsequent fossil evidence has done nothing to support his theory. Darwin surmised that humans share a common ancestor with apes and that fossils of these ancestors would ultimately be found to validate this theory. Over a century has elapsed now and yet even with our apparently more 'advanced' technology and scientific knowledge, there is still not even a single iota of evidence that 'transitional forms' once existed but no longer do. There are unlimited specimens which contradict the idea of natural selection altogether and no proof to support a continuous chain of slightly different species evolving from one form to another. It simply isn't there in the fossil record. The fossil record clearly indicates that there are no transitional or intermediate forms between one species and another. If I receive undeniable proof of intermediate forms, then I will gladly change my mind and accept the validity of Darwin's interpretation of the concept of evolution.
    As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I believe that there is an evolutionary hierarchy of lifeforms in our universe. According to my limited understanding, this universal evolutionary hierarchy has a sequence roughly like this:
    microbe -> mineral -> plant -> animal -> human
    Whether or not there exist rungs on the evolutionary ladder of consciousness that are placed higher than the human rung, I cannot say. Please understand that when I say 'human', I am NOT referring only to a being with two eyes, two nostrils, two ears, two arms and two legs. I am referring to something MUCH broader than that; I am referring to a level of consciousness. I wish I could use another word other than 'human', but languages are inherently limited and restrictive. I simply use the word 'human' to refer to a certain level of consciousness for want of a more descriptive term. Also, I'm not advocating that the human level of consciousness is 'better' in any way whatsoever to any other level of consciousness held by any other form of life in our cosmos. I do not think that the human level of consciousness is 'better', but I do think that at that level of consciousness, a soul becomes more capable of realising its inherent divine potential (not as a body, but as a soul housed within a body). Notice that I said the word 'capable', because the majority of homosapiens sapiens (that's us) on Earth are certainly not realising their inherent divine potential, they are only realising their potential to steal, rape, speak lies and kill their fellow living beings. They are wasting the precious golden opportunity of having a human form that has been bestowed on them by Divinity. But that doesn't mean that they can't realise the divinity that is inherently within them (and that is within ALL living beings in general). The potential is still there. Homosapiens sapiens (again, that's us) will soon be extinct, but I think humanity (as well as every other level of consciousness) has and will endure forever. I think that only at the human level of consciousness and beyond can a soul actually achieve Self-realisation/God-realisation, which is the supreme goal and the meaning of life (because I ultimately think that God and our one true Self are completely identical). Only once a soul reaches the consciousness level of a human can it actually ask itself the greatest question that can possibly be asked: Who/what am I?
    If a soul's consciousness at the 'human' level has been perfected, it will be aware of the answer to this pivotal question. It will know that a soul is who it is and pure consciousness is what it is.
    But it will not know this answer merely in words, but through personal experience due to samadhi (a non-dual state of super-consciousness in which the illusory distinctions between an experiencing subject and his or her experienced objects completely dissolve).
    My inspiration for considering the notion that we might belong to a certain level of consciousness comes from very ancient Vedic writings. In the ancient book called Padma Purana, the different species of our universe are explained. It is stated that there is a total of 8.4 million species in our universe. The Vedic texts actually state very precisely that there are 8.4 million species in our universe. At first, this will seem like an extremely small number to the typical Western mind. However, the Vedic definition of 'species' is different to the modern biological definition of 'species'. The Vedic definition of 'species' is centred on a soul's quality of consciousness in the form in which it has become embodied. So, for example, according to the modern biological definition of 'species', there are many 'species' of beetles. One beetle is claimed to be part of a different species from another beetle simply because that beetle has different wings and longer antennae than other beetles. But I think these are mere physiological differences and are of no great importance in the grand scheme of things. According to the Vedic definition of 'species', every species of beetle would be classified as one 'species', as belonging to one distinct level of consciousness. If I remember correctly, all the millions of varying types of micro-organisms are also classed as belonging to one distinct level of consciousness too. So I think '8.4 million species' is a truly VAST number when looking at it from that accurate angle.
    What I do know for certain is that, according to the Vedic understanding of evolution, there is a hierarchy of consciousness that exists throughout our entire universe and the individual soul is directly involved in this hierarchy. The hierarchy starts out with micro-organisms (creatures too small to be seen with our naked eyes and don't ask me how it was known that micro-organisms existed thousands of years ago, I really don't know), then it moves onto minerals, then plants/vegetables, animals, humans, superhumans (the devas), cosmic beings (higher up the proverbial ladder than even the devas) and finally, the Divine Itself. So according to the Vedic understanding of life, 'animals' are not 'humans' in the sense that 'animals' do not have their consciousness as refined as the consciousness of humans. There is a popular saying in India and it goes like this:

    "God sleeps in the rock,
    Stirs in the plant,
    Dreams in the animal,
    And awakens in man."

    It is believed that only at the human level and beyond can the soul actually attain liberation (even while still physically embodied!) and melt into the bliss of God. Admittedly, it might not seem as though humans have more refined consciousness than animals due to our often barbaric and violent ways, but the Vedic texts say that ONLY once a soul reaches the human level of consciousness can it actually ask the pivotal question 'Who am I?' and then realise its true, eternal Self. There are many sub-divisions mentioned in the Vedic texts of each of the different stages of consciousness that an individual soul passes through (so, for example, there are many different 'species' of plants and animals as far as the evolutionary journey of a soul is concerned). The Vedic texts even state that there are 400,000 different species of humans scattered throughout our universe, most of them higher-dimensional!
    One truly important trait I think a being with human consciousness has that I don't think a being with plant consciousness or animal consciousness has is sapience: the ability to consciously be WISE. The word 'homosapien' itself means 'wise man' in Latin. We can ask questions and we can be inquisitive, which I truly consider to be a blessing that I don't take for granted.
    In the Vedic book called Brahmavaivarta Purana, it's told that across our universe, there are 900,000 species originating in liquid; 2,000,000 species of plants and trees; 1,100,000 species of reptiles and insects; 1,000,000 species that fly or float in air; 3,000,000 species of beasts, and 400,000 species of humans. Biologists say that all human beings belong to one species, whereas the Vedic literature lists 400,000 species. In other words, there are 400,000 grades of human beings at varying levels of consciousness. The Brahmavaivarta Purana further elaborates upon this information by sub-dividing 'humans' into two main categories: civilised humans and uncivilised humans or tribes
    There are numerous additional sub-divisions of humans within those two main categories. I neither believe nor disbelieve the numerical figures of species given in the vast Vedic literature. I remain uncertain as to their authenticity, yet I feel as though those ancient writings are at least somewhere on the right track. Celestial beings called devas are placed higher up on the proverbial 'ladder' than we humans, not so much for their spiritual potential but due to their heightened senses. The devas are said to have their senses thousands of times more acute than ours, hence their capacity for material enjoyment is much larger than our own.
    Why do the VAST majority of extraterrestrial abduction stories I've read over the years describe beings that are distinctly humanoid in appearance? And even going beyond their outer appearance, they seem to exhibit similar traits that we humans do: they wear clothes, they have seemingly 'human' objects like seats and tables inside their crafts and they seem to have emotions comparable to our own such as frustration, disappointment, elation, curiosity, fascination and even a sense of humour! I have yet to read more than about 4 or 5 abduction accounts or accounts of extraterrestrial sightings where the extraterrestrial being in question is NOT humanoid in appearance! It would seem as if the ancient Vedic texts are being vindicated. I also think NASA has found microbes on the surface of Mars, but that information hasn't been publicly released. However, I won't get into that conspiracy theory in this thread. lol
    The point I wish to make, however, is this: we are NOT alone in our universe, but furthermore, there is also a definite order to the life that exists throughout our universe; a cosmic hierarchy.
    If it is possible for consciousness to evolve in a forward direction, it only seems logical to me that it should also be able to evolve in a backward direction, to devolve. After all, we live in a relative world permeated by poles or opposites such as up and down, good and evil, positive and negative, west and east, south and north, chaos and order, birth and death, knowledge and ignorance, gravity and anti-gravity, darkness and light, matter and dark matter, joy and sorrow, high and low, below and above, hate and love etc.
    This being the case, why should the evolution of consciousness not be subjected to duality as well? I do not know what could cause a soul in a human form to revert to an inanimate form (such as a tree, for example) though it seems most likely that it would be due to extremely negative karmic effects. Of course, it could even be due to a soul expressing an explicit desire to be born in an inanimate form.
    All species of life throughout our universe had their beginningless source as a thought in the mind of God (just like everything else, from a sub-atomic particle to an entire universe). As a thought becomes denser and denser, it eventually manifests into our physical plane. The law of conservation described in modern science informs us that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it can only change from one form to another without beginning or end. What is thought if not energy?
    An organism on another planet could have two eyes, two nostrils, two ears, two arms and two legs just like we do, yet it could still belong to an animal level of consciousness. Similarly, an organism could have an appearance so utterly bizarre as to be completely unrecognisable even as an organism if most humans glanced upon it..... yet that same organism could belong to a human level of consciousness. Furthermore, plant-like beings, even if they are not completely inanimate, might also have almost unbelievable and unrecognisable appearances yet still belong to a plant level of consciousness. You probably get the idea now. I doubt that the basic plant-animal-human hierarchy would exist on each and every planet in our inconceivably colossal universe. On Earth, I think I can confidently state that the entire hierarchy can be found. However, in other solar systems, different organisms from different stages of the universal hierarchy might live exclusively on certain planets, moons and stars. For example, in our very own solar system, Jupiter's moon Europa is widely believed by many astrobiologists to contain liquid water under the vast sheets of ice that cover its entire surface. Not only this, but they also believe that aquatic lifeforms might exist in this liquid water! So perhaps one planet/moon/star in a solar system or galaxy could contain only 'plants', while one might contain only 'humans', while yet another one might contain only 'plants' and 'humans'... and so on. Or maybe each and every planet, moon and star in our universe contains beings belonging to each rung on the evolutionary ladder of consciousness, but some beings might live at a lower or higher rate of vibration on their world than the rate of vibration we're all accustomed to. They may very well exist in another 'dimension'. I also think that as a soul passes from one level of consciousness to another, it retains the qualities it gained from that level it was once embodied at. For example, when a soul immersed in the plant level of consciousness makes the quantum leap from the plant to the animal level of consciousness, it still retains the ability to be inanimate but it is now capable of even greater expression through the ability to hunt for food and defend its life against predators. And when a soul immersed in the animal level of consciousness makes the quantum leap from the animal to the human level of consciousness, it still retains the ability to hunt for food and defend its life against predators, but it is also capable of even greater expression through a wider range of emotions. I also believe that all beings contain a system of chakras in their subtle astral bodies which regulate the general functioning of their physical bodies, but only beings at a human level of consciousness and beyond can knowingly control and manipulate their own chakras at will. In any case, I have no doubt in my mind that there are beings in our universe which have consciousness that is extremely similar to ours. These beings are able to express themselves through all sorts of behavioural nuances most of us have been led to believe are uniquely 'ours', such as telling hilarious jokes to their other fellow beings and bursting into laughter as a result. Perhaps as we look at the stars in our sky at night and wonder if there are other beings similar to us out there in our universe, there are also beings out there looking at their stars in their sky during their night and wondering if beings similar to THEM exist out there in our universe. Everything is interconnected.
    In conclusion, I do believe that we were once apes. But it was us, as the souls we eternally are, that were once in ape bodies but eventually transmigrated into human bodies, perhaps through the passing of many eons.

    Last edited by Rishi; 12 December 2007 at 11:41 PM. Reason: correction

  2. #2

    Re: "Human" Is A Level Of Consciousness

    Interesting first post and evolutionary theory of consciousness is central to som hindu darshanas. I believe in one too.

    Not only are humans a level of consciousness, but there are many levels of humans too and according to my belief perfection is not a sudden burst of god consciousness but gradual evolution to our higher nature thorough many births (may be accelerated by sadhna and karma).

    ******************************************************

    The question of physical evolution from Apes may be best left to science.

    On the other hand there is no doubt that a man can share many of his feelings even with his dog.
    What is Here, is Elsewhere. What is not Here, is Nowhere.

  3. #3

    Re: "Human" Is A Level Of Consciousness

    Quote Originally Posted by sm78 View Post
    Not only are humans a level of consciousness, but there are many levels of humans too and according to my belief perfection is not a sudden burst of god consciousness but gradual evolution to our higher nature thorough many births (may be accelerated by sadhna and karma).
    I mostly agree with you. The innate perfection of our Atman is realised when a jiva completes its spiritual journey of evolution (the 'evolution' being referred to here is of the soul/consciousness). Our journies are individual and unique to us, but the ultimate purpose and goal is the same for any and all jivas everywhere (realisation of Atman). The journey of repetitive birth and death that we each undertake usually continues for eons and eons, but we can end the cycle of repetitive birth and death more quickly through the methods you have mentioned.

    Quote Originally Posted by sm78 View Post
    The question of physical evolution from Apes may be best left to science.
    That may be so, but who knows when we shall receive a correct answer to the question of physical evolution?

    Quote Originally Posted by sm78 View Post
    On the other hand there is no doubt that a man can share many of his feelings even with his dog.
    I wholeheartedly agree. Affection, discontentment, satisfaction etc. are universal sentiments, I have no doubt of that.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,193
    Rep Power
    369

    Re: "Human" Is A Level Of Consciousness

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi View Post
    --An individual soul, I believe, must first pass through bodies of highly rudimentary levels of consciousness. As it incarnates through these bodies, its consciousness gradually becomes increasingly refined. Therefore, a soul is indeed evolving, but it is not so much any particular species that is 'evolving', it is consciousness that is evolving. Evolution I admit, but not the theory of evolution that modern mainstream science unquestioningly adheres to.
    Namaste Rishi,

    Your post is nice and well written. I have just one point. Consciousness is one and unchangeable. It is the conscious subject, who though being essentially consciousness, may go through many stages of awareness.

    VA proponents, however, hold that consciousness gets colored.


    Om
    That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Sahasrarkadyutirmatha
    Posts
    1,802
    Rep Power
    191

    Post Re: "Human" Is A Level Of Consciousness

    Namaste Rishi,

    It is manas which evolves, while buddhi remains fixed.

    It is buddhi which inspires the universal order, although buddhi itself remains undivided and beyond particular classification.

    The evidence of paleontology certainly does support the idea of natural evolution! Can you point to any fossil evidence that actually denies evolution?

    Homo sapiens IS a Primate ~ http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...=2108#post2108

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    There are unlimited specimens which contradict the idea of natural selection altogether.
    Such as?

    See also: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...8575#post18575

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    According to my limited understanding, this universal evolutionary hierarchy has a sequence roughly like this:
    microbe -> mineral -> plant -> animal -> human
    How could microbes have existed before there were any minerals?
    And how would you say that “microbes” actually differ from plants or animals?

  6. #6

    Re: "Human" Is A Level Of Consciousness

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    Namaste Rishi,

    It is manas which evolves, while buddhi remains fixed.

    It is buddhi which inspires the universal order, although buddhi itself remains undivided and beyond particular classification.
    I always thought both buddhi and manas were subject to variation. I suppose I have gotten my terminology and understanding confused. Nonetheless, Sri Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita:

    "Earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, reason and egoism — these constitute the eight-fold division of My Nature" - (Gita, VII-4)

    It is my understanding that of these eight material elements, the first four (earth, water, fire and air) are referring to the four states of matter - solid, liquid, plasmic and gaseous respectively. It is certainly known that matter is in a constant state of flux and is ever-changing, so why wouldn't manas, buddhi and ahamkara experience differentiation as well? As I have been told, buddhi is subtler than manas and is thus the basis of manas. So manas and buddhi are interconnected. How could manas evolve while buddhi remains constant?

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    The evidence of paleontology certainly does support the idea of natural evolution! Can you point to any fossil evidence that actually denies evolution?
    Admittedly, I am not extremely knowledgeable about the Darwinian theory of evolution. However, I do know some basic aspects of it. My greatest objection to the Darwinian theory of evolution is its assertion that consciousness is a product of matter, that it is merely a byproduct of our brains. Personal experiences of mine as well as my own convictions state that consciousness is not a product of matter, but rather that it is EXACTLY the opposite. Matter is a product of consciousness. As far as human evolution is concerned, the Darwinian timeline places the origin of anatomically modern humans such as us at approximately 200,000 years ago in Africa. However, over the last couple of centuries, there are HUNDREDS of archaeological discoveries that have been made which have uncovered bones and artifacts suggesting the presence of anatomically modern humans at dates FAR earlier than the paltry 200,000 years commonly believed by the mainstream scientific community. Here are merely SOME of the archaeological discoveries which CLEARLY indicate that Homo sapiens sapiens have existed on this planet for FAR longer than what is usually taught in our textbooks (you can find these discoveries mentioned in greater detail in the book Forbidden Archaeology by Michael Cremo and Richard Thompson):

    * A human skull fragment from Hungary dated between 250,000 and 450,000 BC
    * A human footprint with accompanying paleoliths (stones deliberately chipped into a recognisable tool type), bone tools, hearths and shelters, discovered in France and dated 300,000 to 400,000 years BC
    * Paleoliths in Spain, a partial human skeleton and paleoliths in France; two English skeletons, one with associated paleoliths, ALL at least 300,000 years old
    * Skull fragments and paleoliths in Kenya and advanced paleoliths, of modern human manufacture, in the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania, dated between 400,000 and 700,000 BC
    * Neoliths (the most advanced stone tools and utensils) in China of a type that indicate full human capacity, dated to 600,000 BC
    * Hearths, charcoal, human femurs and broken animal bones, all denoting modern humanity, in Java, dated to 830,000 BC
    * An anatomically modern human skull discovered in Argentina and dated between 1 million and 1.5 million years BC (eoliths -chipped pebbles, thought to be the earliest known tools- at Monte Hermoso, also in Argentina, are believed to be between 1 and 2.5 million years old).
    * A human tooth from Java yielding a date between 1 and 1.9 million years BC
    * Incised bones, dated between 1.2 and 2.5 million BC, have been found in Italy
    * Finds of paleoliths, cut and charred bones at Xihoudu in China and eoliths from Diring Yurlakh in Siberia dated to 1.8 million BC
    * Eoliths in India, paleoliths in England, Belgium, Italy and Argentina, flint blades in Italy, hearths in Argentina, a carved shell, pierced teeth and even two human jaws all bearing a minimum date of 2 million years BC
    Curiously enough, several of the very earliest artifact finds display a truly extraordinary level of sophistication. In Idaho, for example, a 2-million-year-old clay figurine was unearthed in 1912. But even this find does not mark an outer limit. Bones, vertebrae and even complete skeletons have been found in Italy, Argentina and Kenya. Their minimum datings range from 3 million to 4 million BC. A human skull, a partial human skeleton and a collection of neoliths discovered in California have been dated in excess of 5 million years. A human skeleton discovered at Midi in France, paleoliths found in Portugal, Burma and Argentina, a carved bone and flint flakes from Turkey all have a minimum age of 5 million years.
    How far back can human history be pushed with finds like these? The answer seems to be a great deal further than orthodox science currently allows. As if the foregoing finds were not enough, we need to take account of:
    * Paleoliths from France dated between 7 and 9 million BC
    * An eolith from India with a minimum dating of 9 million BC
    * Incised bones from France, Argentina and Kenya no less than 12 million years old
    * More paleolith finds from France, dated at least 20 million years ago
    * Neoliths from California in excess of 23 million years
    * Three different kinds of paleoliths from Belgium with a minimum dating of 26 million BC
    * An anatomically modern human skeleton, neoliths and carved stones found at the Table Mountain, California and dated at least 33 million years ago
    But even 33 million years is not the upper limit. A human skeleton found in Switzerland is estimated to be between 38 and 45 million years old. France has yielded up eoliths, paleoliths, cut wood and a chalk ball, the minimum ages of which range from 45 to 50 million years.
    There's still more.
    In 1960, H. L. Armstrong announced in Nature magazine the discovery of fossil human footprints near the Paluxy River, in Texas. Dinosaur footprints were found in the same strata. In 1983, the Moscow News reported the discovery of a fossilised human footprint next to the fossil footprint of a three-toed dinosaur in the Turkamen Republic. Dinosaurs have been extinct for approximately 65 million years.
    In 1983, Professor W. G. Burroughs of Kentucky reported the find of three pairs of fossil tracks dated to 300 million years ago. They showed left and right footprints. Each print had five toes and a distinct arch. The toes were spread apart like those of a human used to walking barefoot. The foot curved back like a human foot to what appeared to be a human heel. There was a pair of prints in the series that showed a left and right foot. The distance between them is just what you'd expect in modern human footprints.
    In December 1862, The Geologist carried news of a human skeleton found 27.5 m (90 ft) below the surface in a coal seam in Illinois. The seam was dated between 286 and 320 million years BC. It's true that a few eoliths, skull fragments and fossil footprints, however old, provide no real backing for the idea of advanced prehistoric human civilisations.
    But some other finds do.
    In 1968, an American fossil collector named William J. Meister found a fossilised human shoe print near Antelope Spring, Utah. There were trilobite fossils in the same stone, which means it was at least 245 million years old. Close examination showed that the sole of this shoe differed little, if at all, from those of shoes manufactured today.
    In 1897, a carved stone showing multiple faces of an old man was found at a depth of 40 m (130 ft) in a coal mine in Iowa. The coal there was of similar age.
    A piece of coal yielded up an encased iron cup in 1912. Frank J. Kenwood, who made the find, was so intrigued he traced the origin of the coal and discovered it came from Wilburton Mine in Oklahoma. The coal there is about 312 million years old.
    In 1844, Scottish physicist Sir David Brewster reported the discovery of a metal nail embedded in a sandstone block from a quarry in the north of England. The head was completely encased, ruling out the possibility that it had been driven in at some recent date. The block from which it came is approximately 360 million years old.
    On 22 June 1844, The Times reported that a length of gold thread had been found by workmen embedded in stone close to the River Tweed. This stone too was around 360 million years old.
    Astonishing though these dates may appear to anyone familiar with the orthodox theory of human origins, they pale in comparison with the dates of two further finds.
    According to Scientific American, dated 5 June 1852, blasting activities at Meeting House Hill, in Dorchester, Massachusetts, unearthed a metallic, bell-shaped vessel extensively decorated with silver inlays of flowers and vines. The workmanship was described as 'exquisite'. The vessel was blown out of a bed of Roxbury conglomerate dated somewhat earlier than 600 million years BC.
    In 1993, Michael A. Cremo and Richard L. Thompson reported the discovery 'over the past several decades' of hundreds of metallic spheres in a pyrophyllite mine in South Africa. The spheres are grooved and give the appearance of having been manufactured. If so, the strata in which they were found suggest they were manufactured 2.8 billion years ago.
    What are we to make of these perplexing discoveries? They cannot be simply brushed off and forgotten. If the date given to even ONE of these highly numerous discoveries is 100% accurate, then how can that be reconciled with Darwin's theory of evolution? It can't. Our idea of evolution would need to be immensely revised. Also, the vanaras in Valmiki Ramayan (like Hanuman and Sugriva) are hairy ape-like people who are bipedal, apparently able to communicate fluently in a human language (Sanskrit) and perhaps even capable of abstract thought. Could they have actually been one of the predecessors of Homo sapiens sapiens described in Darwinian theory, perhaps a species of Homo erectus or neanderthals? What do you think, Sarabhangaji? Rupa Gosvami mentions in Laghu Bhagavatmrta that the events of Valmiki Ramayan occurred on Earth during the Treta Yuga of the 24th chaturyuga whilst we are currently living during the Kali Yuga of the 28th chaturyuga. The time difference between the Treta Yuga of the 24th chaturyuga and the present day is just slightly over a staggering 19 million years. The idea of ape-men is not something that was invented by Darwinists of the nineteenth century. Long before that, the ancient Sanskrit writings were speaking of creatures with ape-like bodies and a human-like level of intelligence. However, humans similar to us existed alongside these hominids. Their relationship was described as being one of co-existence rather than Darwinian evolution. You might have noticed that the Klerksdorp Spheres which Michael Cremo and Richard Thompson reported in 1993 and which were found in rock strata dated to 2.8 billion years ago closely parallels the Vedic conception of time which states that the current day of Brahma began approximately 2 billion years ago. This means that, if the Vedic conception is accurate, we should expect to see signs of life going as far back in time as 2 billion years.
    In fact, that is what we do see, as documented in the book Forbidden Archeology. It's intriguing that the oldest undisputed fossil evidence for life on Earth recognised by paleontologists is also about 2 billion years old. I'm talking about the oldest undisputed fossils of single-celled lifeforms.

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    I know and I'm also aware that Darwinian theory states that anatomically modern humans and primates have a common ancestor.

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    Such as?
    One of the major reasons why I consider the modern scientific theory of evolution to be strongly flawed is because of the sheer frequency of accounts of 'hairy ape-like people' from all over our planet that seem to be referring to either apes or humans, but neither completely an ape nor completely a human yet a cross between the two. This indicates to me that it could be one of our so-called 'predecessors' such as Homo erectus or neanderthals that the modern scientific theory of evolution states died out many hundreds of thousands of years ago. I do not think they ever became extinct as the concept of natural selection would lead us to think, but have continually CO-EXISTED with humans for a duration of time far longer than many of us are able to comprehend. As I said earlier in this post, there are widespread accounts of 'hairy ape-like people' from geographically distant regions of our planet and such accounts have been around since time immemorial. To modern North Americans, the name given to such a creature is 'Bigfoot'. To native Americans, the name given is 'Sasquatch'. In Southern Mexico's tropical forests, there are accounts of similar beings called 'Sisimites'. In the Himalayan region of the Indian subcontinent, these kinds of beings are called 'Yetis'. In Mongolia and the Caucasus region, they're called 'Almas'. In China, such a creature is called 'Maoren'. In Borneo, it is named 'Batatut'. In Malaysia, 'Orangpendek'. In Sumatra, 'Sedapa'. In East Africa, 'Agogwe'. In the Congo region of Africa, there are reports by the native people living there of two types of very hairy humans called the 'Kakundakari' and the 'Kilomba'. And it goes on and on and on and on and on and... you get the idea. lol
    So I think there is certainly an immense number of variations between any one species and that such variations continue to manifest within that species over the passing of many eons of time, but I remain doubtful as to the notion of one species physically becoming another. There are many people who claim that there is an obvious parallel between the sequential order of the 10 avatars of Vishnu and Darwinian evolution. At first, this parallel seemed reasonable to me. However, I quickly recalled that humans are described during the appearance of EACH and EVERY one of these 10 avatars. Even with Matsya, the first of the dasavatars, we find descriptions of humans co-existing with other organisms during that time in the extremely distant past. Satyavrata was said to be the Emperor of Dravida during those times and was later given the title of Manu. He interacted with Matsya, who warned Satyavrata of a pralaya that would devastate our planet. The timeline given for when these events occurred is a bizarre 2 billion years. This is all described very thoroughly in Matsya Purana. 2 billion years is obviously a mind-boggling duration of time for a human presence according to orthodox views of human antiquity, yet the Klerksdorp Spheres, which CLEARLY display signs of artificial intervention, have also been dated to a similar amount of time in prehistory.

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    How could microbes have existed before there were any minerals?
    And how would you say that “microbes” actually differ from plants or animals?
    To be honest, I'm not sure what you mean by your questions. I believe that there is a hierarchical system in our universe and that jivas are associated with this cosmic hierarchy. A jiva evolves from one level of consciousness (or awareness, as someone on this thread has suggested) to another. It might even be possible for a jiva to regress to simpler grades of awareness. If the awareness of a jiva corresponds to a particular type of body, then it is given that particular type of body (by cosmic law) to express itself. That hierarchical sequence I posted was mentioned in a book specifically about the spiritual evolution of jivas. I have forgotten the author of that book because I can't find that book at the moment, but I'm looking for it and hopefully I'll find it soon and mention more things from it here. I agreed with that particular sequence at the time I first read about it because it made sense to me, but having just read an encyclopedia entry about minerals and knowing more about them now, I now don't think micro-organisms existed before there were minerals. As for your question about how 'microbes' actually differ from plants and animals, I think microbes differ from plants and animals in their capacity for self-expression. The capacity for a microbe to express itself is extremely limited, but it is less limited for plants and animals.

    "God sleeps in the rock,
    Stirs in the plant,
    Dreams in the animal,
    And awakens in man."
    Last edited by Rishi; 20 December 2007 at 07:53 AM. Reason: correction

  7. #7
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Sahasrarkadyutirmatha
    Posts
    1,802
    Rep Power
    191

    Post "Hanuman" is a level of Consciousness

    Namaste Rishi,

    It is manas which evolves, while buddhi remains fixed.

    It is buddhi which inspires the universal order, although buddhi itself remains undivided and beyond particular classification.

    The manas of man (the mind of nAra) is directly derived from (and potentially equivalent with) the buddhi of God (the intellect of nara).

    The guNa of buddhi (jñAna ~ understanding or knowledge) is strictly a quality of prAkRti, and as such it may be said to evolve.

    om tat saviturvarenyam bhargo devasya dhImahi dhiyo yo nah pracodayAt

    We meditate upon the adorable light of that shining Creator, who incites our buddhi.

    And the evolution (pracodana) of the intellect or buddhi (dhi) is facilitated by meditation on this sacred mantra.

    Regarding the locus of buddhi: Where is Wisdom?

    buddhi tattva is the pure faculty of intellect, the ability to form perfect conceptions, or absolute intelligence.

    buddhi (mahat) existed even before manifestation, and nArAyaNa was conceived in avyakta before any manifestation of his subsequent creation.

    nirguNa brahma is pure avyakta, with buddhi arising together with the very first conception of diversity or multiplicity (i.e. mahat).

    mahat arises from nara, the turya brahma, as the source of nArAyaNa and ahaMkAra; but cit (as “consciousness”) is not exactly equivalent with turya, which remains absolutely humble and without any accumulation.

    turya is the basis for mahat or cit ~ as “absolute cit”. And cit (or buddhi) is the basis for ahaMkAra ~ as “absolute Self consciousness”.

    mahat (the conception of multitude) is the infinite cause of nArAyaNa; and ahaMkAra (the conception of individuality) arises from nArAyaNa as the finite cause of nAra.

    avyakta mahat = brahman
    vyakta mahat & ahaMkAra = mAyA


    and

    Consciousness = avyakta = turya
    Knower = ahaMkAra = prAjña
    Knowing = indriya = taijasa
    Known = bhUta = vaishvAnara


    The turya alone is unborn and eternal; and the apparent difference between turya and prAjña is only due to the mAyA of ahaMkAra.

    And shrI kRSNa declares: “The earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, wisdom, and individualization (the conception of individuality or self), are the distinguished parts of my eightfold nature”.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    How could manas evolve while buddhi remains constant?
    How could the prapañca evolve while the pañca remains constant?
    How could nArAyaNa evolve while nara remains constant?
    How could brahmA evolve while brahma remains constant?

    The answer is mAyA!

    True wisdom is fixed and eternal, while the mind is fickle and passing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    My greatest objection to the Darwinian theory of evolution is its assertion that consciousness is a product of matter, that it is merely a byproduct of our brains.
    Darwin never mentioned “consciousness”, speaking only of habit and instinct!

    Perhaps Darwin’s own words (from The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life ~ a.k.a. The Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection) might provide a better understanding of his views:

    Authors of the highest eminence seem to be fully satisfied with the view that each species has been independently created. To my mind it accords better with what we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator, that the production and extinction of the past and present inhabitants of the world should have been due to secondary causes, like those determining the birth and death of the individual. When I view all beings not as special creations, but as the lineal descendants of some few beings which lived long before the first bed of the Cambrian system was deposited, they seem to me to become ennobled. Judging from the past, we may safely infer that not one living species will transmit its unaltered likeness to a distant futurity. And of the species now living very few will transmit progeny of any kind to a far distant futurity; for the manner in which all organic beings are grouped, shows that the greater number of species in each genus, and all the species in many genera, have left no descendants, but have become utterly extinct. We can so far take a prophetic glance into futurity as to foretell that it will be the common and widely-spread species, belonging to the larger and dominant groups within each class, which will ultimately prevail and procreate new and dominant species. As all the living forms of life are the lineal descendants of those which lived long before the Cambrian epoch, we may feel certain that the ordinary succession by generation has never once been broken, and that no cataclysm has desolated the whole world. Hence we may look with some confidence to secure future of great length. And as natural selection works solely by and for the good of each being, all corporeal and mental endowments will tend to progress towards perfection.

    It is interesting to contemplate a tangled bank, clothed with many plants of many kinds, with birds singing on the bushes, with various insects flitting about, and with worms crawling through the damp earth, and to reflect that these elaborately constructed forms, so different from each other, and dependent upon each other in so complex a manner, have all been produced by laws acting around us. These laws, taken in the largest sense, being Growth with Reproduction; Inheritance which is almost implied by reproduction; Variability from the indirect and direct action of the conditions of life and from use and disuse: a Ratio of Increase so high as to lead to a Struggle for Life, and as a consequence to Natural Selection, entailing Divergence of Character and the Extinction of less-improved forms. Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    Matter is a product of consciousness.
    And I am sure that Charles Darwin would agree!

    The first human to make stone tools (Homo habilis) appeared almost 3 million years ago; the first human to control fire (Homo erectus) appeared almost 2 million years ago; and the first “modern” human (Homo sapiens) appeared about 200,000 years ago.

    In 1907, a workman dug a jaw bone out of a sand pit, from an approximate depth of 82 feet. The jaw was identified as “Homo heidelbergensis”, but the dating (somewhere between 250,000 and 450,000 years) is doubtful and the identification still disputed.

    The French anthropologist Henry de Lumley found post holes and stone circles indicating that hominids (not particularly Homo sapiens) erected temporary shelters, and also evidence that they built fires, and used bone and stone tools, about 400 thousand years ago. And since hominids are well known to have made stone tools for at least 2.5 million years and controlled fires for at least 1.5 million years, this is an interesting find, but exactly what one might expect from Homo erectus. And the associated 9.5 inch foot-print in the sand could easily belong to Homo erectus, for H. erectus and H. sapiens are not particularly distinguished by their feet!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    Paleoliths in Spain, a partial human skeleton and paleoliths in France; two English skeletons, one with associated paleoliths, ALL at least 300,000 years old
    Skull fragments and paleoliths in Kenya and advanced paleoliths, of modern human manufacture, in the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania, dated between 400,000 and 700,000 BC
    Neoliths (the most advanced stone tools and utensils) in China of a type that indicate full human capacity, dated to 600,000 BC
    Hearths, charcoal, human femurs and broken animal bones, all denoting modern humanity, in Java, dated to 830,000 BC
    Again, unless the tools and the hearths are more than 1.5 million years old, their association with hominid remains is unremarkable, showing no more than the presence of Homo erectus (who was spreading throughout Asia around 800,000 years ago).

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    An anatomically modern human skull discovered in Argentina and dated between 1 million and 1.5 million years BC (eoliths -chipped pebbles, thought to be the earliest known tools- at Monte Hermoso, also in Argentina, are believed to be between 1 and 2.5 million years old).
    A human tooth from Java yielding a date between 1 and 1.9 million years BC
    Incised bones, dated between 1.2 and 2.5 million BC, have been found in Italy.
    Finds of paleoliths, cut and charred bones at Xihoudu in China and eoliths from Diring Yurlakh in Siberia dated to 1.8 million BC
    Eoliths in India, paleoliths in England, Belgium, Italy and Argentina, flint blades in Italy, hearths in Argentina, a carved shell, pierced teeth and even two human jaws all bearing a minimum date of 2 million years BC
    In Idaho, a 2-million-year-old clay figurine was unearthed in 1912. But even this find does not mark an outer limit. Bones, vertebrae and even complete skeletons have been found in Italy, Argentina and Kenya.
    By the late 1930s, it was generally accepted that eoliths are naturally produced geofacts and are not evidence for Pliocene hominids. And a single hominid vertebra was found on the coast of Argentina in 1887, but it has been classified as belonging either to Homo neogaeus or to a separate hominid genus Tetraprothomo (as a possible progenitor of Homo pampaeus). This is certainly not “an anatomically modern human skull” !

    Hominoids have existed for about 23 million years, and Homo has existed as a genus distinct from Gorilla and Pan for about 6 million years. And unless the incised bones and stone tools are more than 2.5 million years old, their association with hominid remains is unremarkable.

    The work of Carlos Ameghino in South America (1912-1914) is interesting, with an early date for the use of both fire and stone tools by a hominid (2-3 million years ago).

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    A human skull, a partial human skeleton and a collection of neoliths discovered in California have been dated in excess of 5 million years.
    A report published in 1880 listed hundreds of stone tools and weapons, and numerous hominid skeletal remains discovered in various Californian gold mines, dated from between 5 million and 55 million years ago. But the dating of these objects is doubtful, and likewise some of the objects, which include an infamously faked hominid skull!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    A chalk ball, the minimum ages of which range from 45 to 50 million years.
    A chalk ball was discovered in 1857, in a bed of lignite dated up to 55 million years, but there is no evidence that the rough sphere was made by man!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    In 1983, the Moscow News reported the discovery of a fossilised human footprint next to the fossil footprint of a three-toed dinosaur in the Turkamen Republic. Dinosaurs have been extinct for approximately 65 million years.
    In 1983, Professor W. G. Burroughs of Kentucky reported the find of three pairs of fossil tracks dated to 300 million years ago.
    Such claims of humans walking with dinosaurs are plainly false: http://paleo.cc/paluxy.htm

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    In 1968, an American fossil collector named William J. Meister found a fossilised human shoe print near Antelope Spring, Utah. There were trilobite fossils in the same stone, which means it was at least 245 million years old. Close examination showed that the sole of this shoe differed little, if at all, from those of shoes manufactured today.
    It is only an iron-stone concretion, a completely natural formation!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    In 1897, a carved stone showing multiple faces of an old man was found at a depth of 40 m (130 ft) in a coal mine in Iowa.
    According to The Daily News of Omaha (Nebraska), on April Fool’s Day in 1897, an object covered in an incised diamond pattern had been found in an anthracite mine at Lehigh (Iowa). Each diamond was supposedly marked with the face of an old man with an indented forehead. But there is no illustration, and little more description, and (conveniently) the object has been lost!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    A piece of coal yielded up an encased iron cup in 1912. Frank J. Kenwood, who made the find, was so intrigued he traced the origin of the coal and discovered it came from Wilburton Mine in Oklahoma. The coal there is about 312 million years old.
    This anecdote relies entirely on the word of Frank Kenwood and a co-worker (Jim Stall, of whom nothing is known), and neither the original cup nor the lump of coal is now available for investigation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    In 1844, Scottish physicist Sir David Brewster reported the discovery of a metal nail embedded in a sandstone block from a quarry in the north of England. The head was completely encased, ruling out the possibility that it had been driven in at some recent date. The block from which it came is approximately 360 million years old.
    The head of the nail was actually the only part imbedded in the stone (the rest was merely laying against the surface of the stone in the overlying boulder clay). And there are no photographs and no remaining evidence, so little more can be said of this old (otherwise unsupported) anecdote.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    On 22 June 1844, The Times reported that a length of gold thread had been found by workmen embedded in stone close to the River Tweed. This stone too was around 360 million years old.
    A supposed ‘gold thread’ was found by Scottish quarrymen in 1844, but again this story is purely anecdotal, with no evidence of the thread nor its discovery (other than the Kelso Chronicle, a 19th century local newspaper).

    “Those who use this type of curiosity often have vague agendas, which may include attempts to undermine our understanding of geological chronology, with evidence that humanity has existed on earth for much longer than is usually believed used as evidence for alien visitors and so on.” ~ Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews on “Bad Archaeology

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    According to Scientific American, dated 5 June 1852, blasting activities at Meeting House Hill, in Dorchester, Massachusetts, unearthed a metallic, bell-shaped vessel extensively decorated with silver inlays of flowers and vines. The workmanship was described as 'exquisite'. The vessel was blown out of a bed of Roxbury conglomerate dated somewhat earlier than 600 million years BC.
    The object was found amongst rubble after blasting, with no proof that it was ever inside the surrounding conglomerate rock. It is a Victorian-style candle-stick holder, not a 600 million year old bell-shaped vessel!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    In December 1862, The Geologist carried news of a human skeleton found 27.5 m (90 ft) below the surface in a coal seam in Illinois. The seam was dated between 286 and 320 million years BC.
    This, and all of the above, unsupported anecdotes from the 1800s should be taken with a grain of salt, and not as serious evidence for anything other than human credulity!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    What are we to make of these perplexing discoveries? They cannot be simply brushed off and forgotten. If the date given to even ONE of these highly numerous discoveries is 100% accurate, then how can that be reconciled with Darwin's theory of evolution? It can't.
    There is absolutely nothing here that casts any doubt on the principle of evolution by natural selection! There may be some argument about the exact pathways and time periods, but there is no doubt about natural selection and its logical consequences.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    Also, the Vanaras in Valmiki Ramayan (like Hanuman and Sugriva) are hairy ape-like people who are bipedal, apparently able to communicate fluently in a human language (Sanskrit) and perhaps even capable of abstract thought. Could they have actually been one of the predecessors of Homo sapiens sapiens described in Darwinian theory?
    A vAnara is a “forest-animal”, especially a primate, and (in old Tamil) AN-manti is a “male primate”.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    Long before that, the ancient Sanskrit writings were speaking of creatures with ape-like bodies and a human-like level of intelligence. However, humans similar to us existed alongside these hominids. Their relationship was described as being one of co-existence rather than Darwinian evolution.
    Homo has coexisted with Pan (and other Primates) ever since they began to diverge genetically (about 5 million years ago). And the Ramayana does not deny that Hanuman and Rama are ultimately descended from the same essence.

    The coexistence of related species, and the exact times of speciation or extinction, have no bearing on the principle of evolution by natural selection.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    Vedic conception of time which states that the current day of Brahma began approximately 2 billion years ago.
    One mahAyuga lasts for ten kaliyuga, which is 4.32 million years (about the same time that Homo has existed as distinguished from Pan). And one kalpa (day of brahmA) is 1,000 mahAyuga (10,000 kaliyuga, or 4.32 billion years), which is about the same time that the Earth has existed.

    So it seems that modern Science and traditional Hinduism are fundamentally in agreement, with the present kalpa comprising the whole history of the Earth, and the present mahAyuga representing the entire history of the genus Homo (i.e. “human”).

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    I remain doubtful as to the notion of one species physically becoming another.
    The sequential origin of not only new species but also new families and even whole classes is well attested from fossil evidence. Perhaps not every “missing link” has actually been found, but how could this changing diversity occur if not by evolution. Unless the well-supported evidence of paleontology (and related disciplines) is completely discarded, without the concept of evolution we would have to assume a myriad of independent creation events!

    A species as an isolated self-breeding group, and at any one time the situation is clear ~ the individuals are either reproductively compatible (truly interbreeding) and of the same “given kind”, or reproductively incompatible (not truly interbreeding) and different “forms of life”. But over time, geographically isolated subspecies can develop behavioral, physical, and physiological, incompatibilities (all of which assume genetic variation) making subsequent cross-breeding impossible.

    Thus, with only natural genetic variability, the pressure of natural selection, and time, two subspecies can easily become different species. And once distinguished as species, there is little chance of return, and the natural divergence continues.

    If all dogs, except for Chihuahuas and Irish wolfhounds, were lost, then these two varieties would be reproductively isolated and only breeding among their own kind (i.e. among their own species). And they would have to be considered as different species (albeit closely related).

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    There are many people who claim that there is an obvious parallel between the sequential order of the 10 avatars of Vishnu and Darwinian evolution. At first, this parallel seemed reasonable to me. However, I quickly recalled that humans are described during the appearance of EACH and EVERY one of these 10 avatars.
    The manifestation of nArAyaNa has evolved through time, so that viSNu himself (long before Darwin) provides a perfect archetype for evolution, mapping a fairly close approximation to the sequence observed by modern evolutionary science. And the evolutionary plan for divine incarnations (life-forms) has been summarized in ten essential stages: the fish, the reptile, the ‘low’ mammal, the ‘high’ mammal, the primate, the wild man, the heroic man, the contemplative man, the perfect man, and the ‘son of man’. It is a summary of sequential life-forms, and an archetype for the whole history of creation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    The Klerksdorp Spheres, which CLEARLY display signs of artificial intervention.
    This fantasy is well explain in wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klerksdorp_Spheres

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    I think microbes differ from plants and animals in their capacity for self-expression. The capacity for a microbe to express itself is extremely limited, but it is less limited for plants and animals.
    There are very many microscopic and/or unicellular plants and animals, and if these are not “microbes” then I assume that you are distinguishing the prokaryotic bacteria from other eukaryotic life-forms. There are actually some quite advanced unicells, which hunt and have well developed eye-spots, even with a lens, and apparently with the ability to recognize form and movement.

    God sleeps in the rock, which is turya,
    God stirs in the plant, which is prAjña,
    God dreams in the animal, which is taijasa,
    And God awakens in the man, which is vaishvAnara.

    For man, however, the truth is reversed:

    Man truly sleeps in vaishvAnara,
    Man truly stirs in taijasa,
    Man truly dreams in prAjña,
    And Man truly awakens in turya.

  8. #8

    Re: "Hanuman" is a level of Consciousness

    Namaste Sarabhanga!

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    A vAnara is a “forest-animal”, especially a primate, and (in old Tamil) AN-manti is a “male primate”.
    The syllable 'va' in Sanskrit means 'is it?' or 'could it be?' and 'nara' means 'man'. So 'vanara' means that it is uncertain that such a creature is a man. Alternatively, the word 'vanara' also carries the meanings 'forest man' and 'human having the tail of a monkey'. The word 'vanara' is thus a symbolic and multi-layered word.

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    And the Ramayana does not deny that Hanuman and Rama are ultimately descended from the same essence.
    The Ramayan does not deny such a thing. That I already know.

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    The coexistence of related species, and the exact times of speciation or extinction, have no bearing on the principle of evolution by natural selection.
    So the existence of hominids strikingly similar to anatomically modern humans, that are bipedal, hairy and ape-like, that have been given the same basic anatomical descriptions about their appearance by the many people who have seen them for centuries upon centuries, that have been given different names by different tribal cultures, that have been associated with Tibetan artwork depicting a cosmic hierarchy of beings, that have been witnessed for thousands of years in geologically distant regions of our world (and are STILL being occasionally witnessed in these geologically distant regions of our world) have absolutely NO bearing on the principle of evolution by natural selection? Even though such creatures, although regarded as our 'predecessors' and were supposed to have become extinct thousands of years ago according to Darwinists, still walk upon Earth today and are an observable reality to the numerous cultures of the native Americans, the Southern Mexicans, the Tibetans, the Mongolians, the Chinese, the Borneons, the Malaysians, the Sumatrans, the East Africans, the Africans of the Congo region etc etc etc?

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    One mahAyuga lasts for ten kaliyuga, which is 4.32 million years (about the same time that Homo has existed as distinguished from Pan). And one kalpa (day of brahmA) is 1,000 mahAyuga (10,000 kaliyuga, or 4.32 billion years), which is about the same time that the Earth has existed.
    A kalpa is 4.32 billion years in duration and that is indeed approximately the same length of time that Earth has existed... in this particular kalpa. During the night of Brahma, there is a pralaya which causes the first three of the seven planetary systems (Bhuloka, Bhuvarloka and Swarloka) to become uninhabited. In that sense, modern science is in harmony with the knowledge of the ancient Vedic rishis immersed in samadhi.

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    The manifestation of nArAyaNa has evolved through time, so that viSNu himself (long before Darwin) provides a perfect archetype for evolution, mapping a fairly close approximation to the sequence observed by modern evolutionary science. And the evolutionary plan for divine incarnations (life-forms) has been summarized in ten essential stages: the fish, the reptile, the ‘low’ mammal, the ‘high’ mammal, the primate, the wild man, the heroic man, the contemplative man, the perfect man, and the ‘son of man’. It is a summary of sequential life-forms, and an archetype for the whole history of creation.
    First of all, you referred to a ‘low’ mammal and a ‘high’ mammal. Darwinism does not accept designations such as 'low' and 'high'. Life is life. You also have not addressed the issue of humans described in the leelas of each of those 10 prominent avatars. Also, each kalpa is sub-divided into 14 manvantaras (each manvantara is 306,720,000 Earth years in length) and each manvantara consists of 71 rotations of the four yugas. And guess what? Human life is described in the Vedic literature in EACH and EVERY one of the manvantaras, just as it is described in the Vedic literature in EACH and EVERY one of the mahayugas. At the end of not only each mahayuga, but each manvantara, there are devastations of differing intensities and after these devastations have occurred, Earth becomes repopulated with humans by the Manus. The 14 Manus of a kalpa are the progenitors of humankind. You said earlier that 'traditional Hinduism' and modern science are fundamentally in agreement about the age of Earth. Now here's something else you can agree on: modern paleontology informs us that there have been 6 major extinction events since the beginning of life on Earth approximately 2 billion years ago. This much I do know, Sarabhangaji. However, the Vedic texts also state that life began on Earth approximately 2 billion years ago as well (during this particular cycle). And since we are supposedly in the 7th manvantara, this means that 6 manvantaras have already elapsed. It is said that a global cataclysm wipes out much of the life on Earth at the end of each manvantara. So I think that's an incredible so-called 'coincidence' between what modern paleontology tells us and what the ancient Vedic texts are saying. The major difference between what modern paleontology is saying and what the ancient Vedic texts are telling us is that in the ancient Vedic texts, humans (and, by extension, human civilisations) have existed in each of the 6 previous manvantars before the 6 major extinction events occurred. The Vedic texts are NOT ambiguous in this regard. They are unambiguous, clear and precise. For example, during the Matsyavatar, Satyavrata (a HUMAN who later had the title of 'Manu' bestowed upon him) was the then Emperor of Dravida. An Emperor of a land with no people to rule over? Exactly. As I have previously mentioned, the timeline given from the first manvantara to this current manvantara, which is when Satyavrata reigns (known as Sraddhadeva Manu), is 2 billion Earth years. That's the number of years that have elapsed since the reign of the first Manu of this current day of Brahma (Svayambhuva Manu). There are other humans are associated with Svayambhuva Manu, such as Anga (a king descended from the line of Svayambhuva Manu), Sunitha (Anga's wife) and Vena (the son of Anga and Sunitha) to mention but a few. Though the names of the 14 Manus and their kingly descendants of this kalpa occasionally vary in different Sanskrit writings, the basic descriptions of human life on EARTH during EACH of the manvantaras remains the SAME. Furthermore, both the Vishnu Purana and Laghu Bhagavatmrta inform us that the events that took place in Valmiki Ramayan occurred on Earth during the Treta Yuga of the 24th chaturyuga whilst we are currently living during the Kali Yuga of the 28th chaturyuga. Sri Krishna and Chaitanya both appeared during the 28th chaturyuga, which is the current chaturyuga. And this is just one instance out of MANY in which anatomically modern human life has been described in previous chaturyugas.

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    “Those who use this type of curiosity often have vague agendas, which may include attempts to undermine our understanding of geological chronology, with evidence that humanity has existed on earth for much longer than is usually believed used as evidence for alien visitors and so on.” ~ Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews on “Bad Archaeology
    It is also 'bad archaeology' for those who have an agenda solely to prove the validity of Darwinian evolution. Any truly anomalous evidence that appears to contradict their pre-conceived notions is either conveniently forgotten, dismissed as a hoax (even when the bottom line is that it isn't a hoax) or distorted in such a way that it fits with the Darwinian theory of evolution. And it is a complete myth that scientists NEVER 'cheat'. They do. The case of the Piltdown man is a good example of this and is, indeed, one of the most famous archaeological HOAXES of all time. Whoever was responsible for the forgery was no doubt very knowledgeable about the Darwinian theory of evolution and wished to provide some validity for that theory. But such an act is adharmic and misleading. Read about the disgusting Piltdown man hoax here:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man

    As for the artifacts I mentioned, I typed them here as I read them from Michael Cremo's worldwide best-selling (and highly controversial) book Forbidden Archaeology. Which archaeological discoveries are anecdotal or outright false are not entirely known to me, but I can tell you that in Forbidden Archaeology, exactly 914 pages in length, he cites scholarly references for ALL of the archaeological findings that are mentioned in his book. In fact, the MAJORITY of his book consists of all the sources and references he received for the information about the odd findings described in Forbidden Archaeology. There are dozens of GENUINELY anomalous discoveries mentioned in Forbidden Archaeology and VERY few (if any) of them are hoaxes. I trust Cremo entirely and Forbidden Archaeology was and STILL is my favourite book of all time. Until Forbidden Archaeology 2 is released, that is! Satyameva jayate!
    Last edited by Rishi; 22 December 2007 at 10:29 PM. Reason: additions

  9. #9
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Sahasrarkadyutirmatha
    Posts
    1,802
    Rep Power
    191

    Post Re: "Hanuman" is a level of Consciousness

    Namaste Rishi,

    vAnara has various complimentary interpretations: vA na ra indicates an equivocal nature, and vA nara is equivocally human (an homunculus, equivalent with vAmana), and vAna ra refers to dwelling in the forest. And vAnara is an exact synonym for hominid, and ultimately also Homo ~ but perhaps not exactly Homo sapiens, for otherwise the unprefixed term nara would normally be used.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    So the existence of hominids strikingly similar to anatomically modern humans, that are bipedal, hairy and ape-like, that have been given the same basic anatomical descriptions about their appearance by the many people who have seen them for centuries upon centuries, that have been given different names by different tribal cultures, that have been associated with Tibetan artwork depicting a cosmic hierarchy of beings, that have been witnessed for thousands of years in geologically distant regions of our world (and are STILL being occasionally witnessed in these geologically distant regions of our world) have absolutely NO bearing on the principle of evolution by natural selection?
    NO! Hominids are, by definition, “similar to humans”, and members of the genus Homo are all “strikingly similar to anatomically modern humans”.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    Even though such creatures, although regarded as our 'predecessors' and were supposed to have become extinct thousands of years ago according to Darwinists.
    The coexistence of related species has NO bearing on the principle of evolution by natural selection.

    There may be some argument about the exact pathways and time periods, but there is no doubt about natural selection and its logical consequences.

    Homo has coexisted with Pan (and other Primates) ever since they began to diverge genetically (about 5 million years ago). And Homo sapiens has certainly coexisted with other species of Homo in the past ~ and, although other species of Homo are generally considered to be extinct, even if a living population of Homo erectus was discovered hidden somewhere in a remote jungle or inaccessible mountain region, it would not make one iota of difference to the principle of evolution by natural selection!

    Verifiable evidence of living Homo erectus is completely absent, so most scientists currently assume that H. erectus (which is only known scientifically from fossil remains) once lived but is now extinct. But if such a relic was found alive and well today, ALL true “Darwinists” would rejoice!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    First of all, you referred to a ‘low’ mammal and a ‘high’ mammal. Darwinism does not accept designations such as 'low' and 'high'.
    What rubbish! Evolution REQUIRES the idea of primitive characteristics (nearest to the original condition) and advanced characteristics (most derived and distant from the original condition).

    The pig is used as a figurative exemplar of a “lower” or more primitive mammal, while the regal lion is used as the exemplar of a “higher” or more advanced mammal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    You also have not addressed the issue of humans described in the leelas of each of those 10 prominent avatars.
    The manifestation of nArAyaNa has evolved through time, so that viSNu himself provides a perfect archetype for evolution, mapping a fairly close approximation to the sequence observed by modern evolutionary science. And the evolutionary plan for divine incarnations (life-forms) has been summarized in ten essential stages: the fish, the reptile, the ‘low’ mammal, the ‘high’ mammal, the primate, the wild man, the heroic man, the contemplative man, the perfect man, and the ‘son of man’.

    It is a SUMMARY of sequential life-forms, and an ARCHETYPE for the whole history of creation.
    I have NOT suggested that the “fish lord” (for example) was actually an enlightened fish ruling over a world populated only with fishes, and you must understand the scriptures are often highly symbolic and multi-layered. The idea reappears in the story of Jesus, who is remembered as the “fisher lord” (which certainly does not suggest that his flock was actually a school of fish).

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    I think that's an incredible so-called 'coincidence' between what modern paleontology tells us and what the ancient Vedic texts are saying.
    If this is the seventh manvantaram, then about 2 billion years must have passed since the first dawning of this kalpa, and during the last 306,720,000 years (just one manvantaram) there have been three or four major extinction events here on earth. So the recorded extinctions cannot be related exactly to the conclusion of a manvataram.

    In the svAyambhuva manvantaram the saptaRSi dwelled in the stars, and in the vaivasvata manvantaram their abode is in the daNDakAraNya ~ and you must understand the scriptures are often highly symbolic and multi-layered.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    It is also 'bad archaeology' for those who have an agenda solely to prove the validity of Darwinian evolution.
    Has any archaeologist in the last hundred years actually approached their work with the sole intent of proving the validity of evolution itself? I don’t think so. Rather, it is creationists (posing as scientists) who are bent on DIS-proving the validity of evolutionary theory!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    Any truly anomalous evidence that appears to contradict their pre-conceived notions is either conveniently forgotten, dismissed as a hoax (even when the bottom line is that it isn't a hoax) or distorted in such a way that it fits with the Darwinian theory of evolution.
    What verifiable evidence has been wrongly dismissed (by scientists) as a hoax? It is creationists who dismiss the whole of science by ignoring a myriad of well supported evidence (and natural logic itself) or distorting it in such a way that it fits with their own pre-conceived notions!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    And it is a complete myth that scientists NEVER 'cheat'. They do.
    Who has ever suggested that “scientists never cheat” ?? Of course there are imperfect scientists, but the scientific community is always looking out for false evidence, and anyone who deliberately falsifies evidence will eventually be discovered (unless the evidence is conveniently lost, as is common in your list of supposedly “genuine anomalies”).

    The Piltdown hoax (1912) was never universally accepted and, although it took 40 years to finally expose the deception, true scientists pursued the issue and rooted the falsehood out.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    Whoever was responsible for the forgery was no doubt very knowledgeable about the Darwinian theory of evolution and wished to provide some validity for that theory.
    How was this fake skull possibly supposed to “provide some validity” for the principle of evolution by natural selection? Perhaps to support someone’s theory of the exact branching pattern of the family tree, but certainly not to support the existence the tree itself, which is generally assumed (by all sane scientists) to exist!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    the adharmic, misleading, disgusting, Piltdown-man hoax
    Why does one stupid controversy from almost 100 years ago upset you so much? And how does it have any bearing on the general truth of evolution by natural selection?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    Which archaeological discoveries are anecdotal or outright false are not entirely known to me.
    Perhaps you should re-read my last post, where your list was closely examined for unverifiable anecdotes and blatant untruths.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rishi

    He cites scholarly references for ALL of the archaeological findings that are mentioned in his book. In fact, the MAJORITY of his book consists of all the sources and references he received for the information about the odd findings described in Forbidden Archaeology.
    Yes, the book is little more than a long list of anomalies, but an academic reference to something that is no more than an anecdote in a 19th century local newspaper does not carry much weight!

  10. #10

    Re: "Himavan" is a level of Consciousness

    Namaste Sarabhanga

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    What rubbish! Evolution REQUIRES the idea of primitive characteristics (nearest to the original condition) and advanced characteristics (most derived and distant from the original condition).
    Not rubbish. Fact! There is absolutely NO notion of 'lower' and 'higher' in the Darwinian theory of evolution by natural selection. Darwinian Evolution by natural selection is NOT progressivistic. It merely relates to adaptations made in varying environments and the process through which these adaptations occur is held to be ENTIRELY random and WITHOUT PURPOSE. To say that Darwinian evolution by natural selection is progressive from 'lower' to 'higher' is simply an erronenous extrapolation made on teleological grounds. As popular science writers like Stephen Jay Gould have explained, all that Darwinian selection means is that no organism becomes better fitted to survival in its environment. A nematode parasite is just as valid an example of supposed evolution as a graceful gazelle. Darwinism is NOT about progress! It is about adaptations that are both natural and purposeless. This page explains what I have just said but with greater eloquence (it's mentioned in the section entitled 'evolution and religion'):

    http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    I have NOT suggested that the “fish lord” (for example) was actually an enlightened fish ruling over a world populated only with fishes, and you must understand the scriptures are often highly symbolic and multi-layered.
    I am well-aware of the often symbolic and multi-layered nature of the scriptures. I am also well-aware of the precision and unambiguity that exists in the scriptures. The Puranas state very clearly that the SAME 10 avatars of Vishnu descend on EARTH (not some other planet) during each kalpa at their specific appointed times. For example, Rama descends in every treta yuga and Sri Krishna descends in every dwapar yuga. There are even descriptions of Ramavatars from previous treta yugas recorded in the Puranas. There is even a conversation between Sita and Rama, where Rama is refusing to allow Sita to enter the forest with Him. In response Sita says "If you don't let me come, You will be the first Rama who doesn't allow His wife to accompany Him into the forest". Such statements are NOT merely symbolic! They have literal meanings as well. The events of previous kalpas are also mentioned. For example, it is described in Srimad Bhagavatam that Varaha actually descended just before the beginning of this current kalpa over 2 billion years ago and saved Earth from the previous devastation. That was the first appearance of Varaha out of two in this kalpa and, once again, there were humans described during BOTH appearances of Varaha. He had a white (sveta) complexion and since he appeared at the very beginning of this kalpa, this kalpa is called Sveta Varaha Kalpa.

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    If this is the seventh manvantaram, then about 2 billion years must have passed since the first dawning of this kalpa, and during the last 306,720,000 years (just one manvantaram) there have been three or four major extinction events here on earth. So the recorded extinctions cannot be related exactly to the conclusion of a manvataram.
    There are several types of devastations that occur. Though pralayas occur when the night of Brahma begins, layas occur after the completion of mahayugas. During a pralaya, Earth itself is dissolved. But during a laya, Earth is cleansed of life. Even if the 6 major extinction events described by paleontologists do not exactly coincide with the completions of the 6 previous manvantaras, they are still easily accommodated with the layas that occur at the end of each mahayuga (4.32 million years) since the major extinction events occurred over a spread of several millions of years. Furthermore, Carbon 14 dating is known to contain inaccuracies. Many scientists are thinking about Uranium dating now.

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    In the svAyambhuva manvantaram the saptaRSi dwelled in the stars, and in the vaivasvata manvantaram their abode is in the daNDakAraNya ~ and you must understand the scriptures are often highly symbolic and multi-layered.
    The saptarishi are not 'humans' as we understand them, they are UNIVERSALLY mentioned as 'celestial sages'. So their abode in any case is NOT the gross physical Earth that strikes our senses on a daily basis. And I already know that the scriptures are often highly symbolic and multi-layered, even before you told me that twice. The scriptures are also very obvious and accurate in details and measurements as well (33,750th of a second is called a 'truti' in Sanskrit and was the smallest known division of time in the ancient Vedic civilisation). There are also great human individuals such as Mrityu, Vena, Prithu etc. who lived millions of years ago in previous manvantaras. Srila Prabhupada, the world's most renowned Vedic scholar of the modern era, had this to say about human antiquity:

    "The Vedic histories, the Puranas and Mahabharata, relate human histories which extend millions and billions of years into the past."

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    Why does one stupid controversy from almost 100 years ago upset you so much?
    It didn't upset me 'so much', you are mistaken. That was actually me in one of my most pleasant moods!

    Quote Originally Posted by sarabhanga View Post
    Yes, the book is little more than a long list of anomalies, but an academic reference to something that is no more than an anecdote in a 19th century local newspaper does not carry much weight!
    Have you read the entire book or at least most of it? Many of the archaeological anomalies (such as various bones and artifacts) described are not limited to mere anecdotes in local newspapers and journals, but are actually on display even today in museums and exhibitions.
    Last edited by Rishi; 23 December 2007 at 12:15 PM. Reason: additions
    <a href=http://geocities.com/dragon1077au/truthsz.JPG target=_blank>http://geocities.com/dragon1077au/truthsz.JPG</a>

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •