Question: How is Darwin’s theory of evolution different from what you have proposed?
Answer: Darwin has tried to explain biological evolution of species based their bodily structure. For example - body of an insect, leech, horse, cow, and in the same way human body. He made bone structure (skeleton) as basis of his study. He tried to explain biological evolution in terms of how the bones have became longer, stronger, wider across species - considering human body as reference (most evolved) and linking species before that one after another in a chronological sequence. Darwinian narrative about body has some difficulties but about human nature it is all wrong. According to him apes gradually transformed (through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual’s capability to compete, survive and reproduce) and resulted in evolution of human body, and in this process a number of intermediate body forms came about which perished eventually in their struggle for survival. However, according to me human being emerged from womb of some animal with enriched brain, wherein pran-sutras had the purpose of anusandhan to establish a specie tradition where jeevan could evidence its awakening. This is different from Darwin’s theory which claims a number of indefinite body forms evolved from one specie due to variation in their environment and habitat, and the fittest among them survived. Darwin didn’t know about jeevan. He hasn’t postulated anything based on consciousness. While human being is a combined from of jeevan and body. They are still searching for traces of evolution by studying body and bones; and they give noble prizes, award degrees and jobs for these! They consider human body as reference of evolution. If biological evolution is all there is, then success in evolution of human body should have been enough for achievement of all human potential, but that didn’t happen as is evident. Human being doesn’t get fully defined in the purview of body or bone structure. Darwin himself has written that he cannot describe himself based on his own theory. He failed to describe human being in totality. You are calling betterment in rachna vidhi (in pran-sutra) as development – while it is jeevan that is the reference of development. Body cannot function without jeevan. It is jeevan that keeps the body alive. Human being is neither just body nor is it just jeevan – human being is a combined expression of jeevan and body.
The development in atom is for the purpose of achieving constitutional completeness. Every atom is a constitution of two or more atomic particles. Atoms are a natural occurrence in existence. Every atomic constitution has a nucleus and a number of particles orbiting it. There are many kinds of atoms, and jeevan too is a kind of atom. Jeevan atom’s constitution remains constant - it doesn’t have increase or decrease of particles from its constitution - therefore its forces and powers are inexhaustible. This is called as ‘development’ - which takes place in an atom. Once atom achieves development it begins its progression towards awakening. The evidence of awakening is achieved in human being as coherence in intelligence (knowing and believing) and sensitivity (recognizing and responding) – which collectively manifests as undivided society and universal order. Mutual recognition and response begins from atomic particles itself, which is how atomic particles maintain definite distance with one another and exhibit an orderly conduct. The same orderly conduct of atoms collectively manifests in the form of activities of physiochemical world. The highest form of physiochemical activities is evident on this Earth as human body. Illusion is in jeevan’s assuming that it is the body.
- Excerpt from English Translation of Jeevan Vidya - Ek Parichaya