Theory of evolution

Haribol to all devotees!


I'm a Neophyte who is just up to 8 rounds of chanting. I am off meat and onion/garlic for the last 8 months and I'm feeling absolutely great. I regularly visit IDT just to read through the wonderful answers from senior devotees. There is no ISKCON temple near my place, but thankfully I live alone and don't have many friends - so I can go about my sadhana without distraction.

I think that in one of the myriad questions/responses on this forum, I read that the theory of evolution as propounded by modern science is nothing but a sham, and doesn't adhere to scriptures. However, I'm unable to understand why it is considered a lie, and seek guidance from someone who can enlighten me.

All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

You need to be a member of ISKCON Desire Tree | IDT to add comments!

Join ISKCON Desire Tree | IDT

Email me when people reply –


    • PAMHO Mataji, AGSTP.

      I believe that you are mistaken in your understanding of evolution. Evolution doesn't say that monkeys are evolving into human beings. Monkeys and Humans share a common ancestor. Modern Humans - Homo sapiens - are a specific species of the genus Homo, who were equipped with faculties that helped them survive into the modern time.

      Other species of Homo - for eg. H. erectus, H. habilis, H. ergaster, H. neanderthalensis etc. have  been unable to survive due to the lack of important faculties necessary for survival into the modern age - they suffered from drawbacks like inability to make swift movements, keep an upright posture, smaller brain capacity, susceptibility to certain diseases etc. It is also a fact that some of these species predate H. sapiens, whereas some of them had lived side by side. It has been speculated that modern humans hunted H. neanderthalensis to extinction.

      H. sapiens share almost 97% of the DNA that Neanderthal man had - but the other 3% made all the difference.

      Monkeys too have branched out from the same ape-like ancestor (primate) of modern humans. There have been thousands of primate species, but those who have had the evolutionary edge were naturally selected to survive. 

      All creatures are still evolving - but it is imperceptible due to the vast scale of planetary time and the tiny footprint of human lifespan. One example of evolution can be easily seen nowadays in India - people in general nowadays are taller than people from previous generations. This is basically an adaptation to help people breathe better - as polluted air is heavier, it tends to come near the ground - so the taller you are the better you will breathe. I'm not sure if there are any scientific studies done on other animals as well, but as with everything - if you cannot evolve or adapt, you will be wiped out. So humans are evolving to become better humans, monkeys are evolving to better monkeys - so on and so forth.

      Most creatures on this earth have several species mataji. Some species can be visually identified as similar to each other but with subtle changes - eg. the Indian elephant (Elephus maximus indicus) and the African elephant (Elephus maximus) where they are sub-species of each other. There are trace chances of other surviving species of humans as well - but unfortunately till now, whatever has been found have been long dead. Homo sapiens idaltu is one subspecies of modern humans that survived till about 100,000 years ago.

      Even tulasi rani has several species - eg. Ocimum basillicum, O. americanum, O. minimum etc.


      • Scientists Confirm: Darwinism Is Broken

        By Paul Nelson and David Klinghoffer | December 13, 2016 | 2:37 PM EST
        (Wikimedia Commons Photo)

        Darwinian theory is broken and may not be fixable. That was the takeaway from a meeting last month organized by the world's most distinguished and historic scientific organization, which went mostly unreported by the media.

        The three-day conference at the Royal Society in London was remarkable in confirming something that advocates of intelligent design (ID), a controversial scientific alternative to evolution, have said for years. ID proponents point to a chasm that divides how evolution and its evidence are presented to the public, and how scientists themselves discuss it behind closed doors and in technical publications. This chasm has been well hidden from laypeople, yet it was clear to anyone who attended the Royal Society conference, as did a number of ID-friendly scientists.

        Maybe that secrecy helps explain why the meeting was so muffled in mainstream coverage.

        Oh, there were a few reports. In the Huffington Post, science journalist Suzan Mazur complained of a lack of momentousness: "[J]ust what was the point of attracting a distinguished international gathering if the speakers had little new science to present? Why waste everyone's time and money?" On the other hand, a write-up in The Atlantic by Carl Zimmer acknowledged a sense of strain between rival cliques of evolutionists: "Both sides offered their arguments and critiques in a civil way, but sometimes you could sense the tension in the room – the punctuations of tsk-tsks, eye-rolling, and partisan bursts of applause."

        Mild drama notwithstanding, why should anyone care?

        For one thing, the Royal Society, dating back to 1660, is a legend in the science world. Its founders included the great chemist Robert Boyle, and it was later headed for 24 years (1703-1727) by Isaac Newton – a fact that is hard to forget with Newton's death mask on prominent display in a glass case. Portraits of Boyle and Newton look down from the walls above. So the historical connections lend a certain weight by themselves.

        Hare Krishna Prabhuji pamho,

        Sooner or later , its just a matter of time that all these scientific theories will proved to be broken.

        All the parameters and terminologies and evidences on the basis of which today's scientists prove their point will be negated by future researchers with the proof of their rock solid evidences which will also be considered as truth at that point of time, only to be outruled again in future. so i think we should not be overwhelmed by these highly impressive technical data's and just trust our scriptures which are the ultimate revelation - even if apparently they appear contradictory to our day to day experience or seems irrational to our intelligence. 

        Kindly forgive me if i have hurt someone with my comments. Yas


        • To me the evolutionary theory seems like one-way ticket from nothing to everything, like a mathematical vector. We know, Mathematic explains a lot about the universe, but not everything. Probably everything in the universe [including human development [not'' evolution''] goes in spirals. Those  spirals go in spirals of another dimensions, we can't sense, and so on.

          On NHK World there was a news about artificial intelligence who won a game ''Bo'' against human  intelligence. But this artificial intelligence is created from another human. So nothing  comes from nothing.  

    • Mataji,

      Please accept my humble obeisances.

      It seems your understanding of Darwin's theory of evolution is incomplete. It is a common misunderstanding that the theory states man came from ape. However, in fact the theory states that both modern man and modern apes came from a common ancestor - like a great-great-great grandfather, only much farther back in time, many, many hundreds and thousands of generations ago. We have actually found many skeletons from long ago which look like humans, but smaller and more ape-like.

      And we have seen many species going extinct recently, mostly because of humans polluting and destroying natural habitats. When animals die, they tend to be the weaker ones - not always, but more often than not. So, the strongest ones survive. This "survival of the fittest" means that the ones with the best genetic information can pass down their DNA to their kids, which over time is called evolution.

      Evolution can be seen happening today. Humans bred dogs from wolves into so many different breeds of dogs we see today, which did not exist before.

      This theory cannot really be called a lie, since it is only a "best guess" from all the evidence scientists have collected. In the end it is just mental speculation, which may certainly have truth to it, but it is also tinted with falseness; and the ultimate truth is Krsna, who is far beyond any possibilities for mental speculation.

      Science is wonderful and has helped us to attain comfortable living and good health, but now we must transcend that life for a spiritual life in blissful love with Krsna.

      Please, please forgive me if I have offended you.
      Hare Krishna
      Peace and love
      • All glories to you prabhuji. May all of life be ensconced in the light of knowledge.

This reply was deleted.