Re: Is It Worthwhile Discussing Darwin's Theory? (refined and resent)
From the Bhakti List Archives
• May 23, 1999
>Given the above, how is Darwin's theory relevant to an >aspirant of mokshA, who's prarabdha karma is such that he >or she is in a field that does not involve the study of Darwin's >theory ? > >Please note, I am not trying to argue that mundane >knowledge is totally useless; I am merely arguing that it is >only useful in the sense that it may help in the cultivation of >BrahmajNAna. Generally, I don't get too worked up over accounts of creation or astronomy as they are given in scripture. What does concern me, however, is the perceived conflict between what is described in scripture and what can be verified by empirical evidence. Obviously, if empirical evidence really contradicts something given in scripture (even if it is only mundane knowledge), then that calls into question the validity of the scriptures themselves. To put it another way, if the scriptures can't even get the mundane knowledge right, why should we trust them when it comes to spiritual knowledge? One can give so many arguments such as, "the ancient rishis were more concerned with brahmagyaana..." and so on (to which I would agree). However, none of these give satisfactory explanations as to the existence of falsehoods in the same scriptures. Calling them exaggerations or allegorical are simply polite ways of saying they are factually incorrect. Therefore, my own $0.02 on this (others feel free to disagree), is that such discussions are only important in as much as they are relevant to how we accept shaastra. And our attitude towards shaastra is important in cultivating brahmagyaana. Once again, I can point out that in the community of brahmin caste members to which I have been exposed, all the elders compromise with shaastra in regards to scientific details. And I can hardly think of one among the next generation who are even attempting to cultivate brahmagyaana. The conversations that I have had with them often revolve around disbelief at various Puraanic narratives (such as the idea of Ganesha being created from an elephant's head and a decapitated body), which then leads them to hold the entire body of Vedic literature under scrutiny. With the idea in mind that their scriptures contain superstitious ideas mixed in with some philosophical points, I have even observed some among them looking with admiration at other religions like Christianity or Islam. Obviously, this is a gross generalization, and it is hard to do justice to this complicated social issue that has its roots in a basic lack of faith in the Vedas. But anyway, these are my views, for whatever they are worth. I personally would not like to see this same kind of degeneration going on in the Sri Vaishnava community, but sadly I have seen it to some extent. namo naaraayaNaaya, -- Krishna
- Next message: Sampath Rengarajan: "thoo nilA muRRam - part 9 - kOyil Ay koNdu"
- Previous message: Krishna Susarla: "Re: Vedic evolution"
- Maybe in reply to: Venkat Nagarajan: "Is It Worthwhile Discussing Darwin's Theory? (refined and resent)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]