There is one important difference between evolution debate in Christian context and in Hindu context that there isn’t much evolution debate in Hinduism. I guess Hindus are so deeply buried in following their regular rituals that they don’t have time and will to read and refute scientific ideas like evolution. As far as I recollect there is no significant incidence of opposition to teaching theory of evolution in schools and colleges.
One notable exception – ISKCON – and largely because of opposition to evolution by its founder Srila Prabhupada. Had he not been so vocal about it, they also wouldn’t have cared much about evolution. Religious cults don’t generally have their independent thinking, they just repeat the words of their founder *guru* for years and years until the cult cease to exist.
So here New Vrindavan declares Darwin is dead.
To begin our “celebration” of the 200th anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin, we here at Club 108 offer you and yours a special bit of katha from Srila Prabhupada, from the excellent book “Life Comes From Life”
4-19-73, Cheviot Hills Park, Los Angeles
“The Missing Link”
Dr.Singh (His Holiness Bhakti Swarup Damodar Maharaj): In fact, there are several theories explaining how life originated from matter, how living matter came from the non-living
Prabhupada: (casting Dr. Singh in the role of a materialistic scientist) All right, scientist, why is life not coming from matter now? You rascal. Why isn’t life coming from matter now?
Actually such scientists are rascals. They childishly say that life came from matter, although they are not at all able to prove it. Our Krsna consciousness movement should expose all these rascals. They are only bluffing. Why don’t they create life immediately? In the past, they say, life arose from matter, and they say that this will happen again in the future. They even say that they will create life from matter. What kind of theory is this? They have already commented that life began from matter. This refers to the past-“began”. Then why do they now speak of the future? Is it not contradictory? They are expecting the past to occur in the future. This is childish nonsense.
(aniket here) What do you think of a Swami who calls scientists ‘Rascals’? His Holiness?
Karandhar Prabhu: They say that life arose from matter in the past and that they will create life this way in the future.
P: What is this nonsense? If they cannot prove that life arises from matter in the present, how do they know life arose this way in the past?
Is this even a logical argument?
Science is continuous quest for knowledge. Yes, there are unknowns. There is a reasonable assumption that first cell must have evolved as a result of some chemical evolution, but science doesn’t have definite answer to that yet and science does not want to make stuff up like P’s gang would. Having said this, science does have a very elegant theory supported with enormous evidence for evolution of life from evolution of first cell.
How does above P’s statement refute argument of biological evolution? You can not point to lack of evidence for chemical evolution to disprove biological evolution, can you?
Dr.S: They are assuming…
P: Everyone can assume, but this is not science. Everyone can assume something. You can assume something, I can assume something. But there must be proof. We can prove that life arises from life. For example, a father begets a child. The father is living, and the child is living. But where is there proof that a father can be a dead stone? Where is their proof? We can easily prove that life begins from life. And the original life is Krsna. That can also be proven. But what evidence exists that a child is born of stone? They cannot actually prove that life comes from matter. They are leaving that aside for the future. (Laughter)
(aniket) Random assumption is not science, reasonable assumption is.
and stones? seems like someone was stoned while saying this …
Presumably, someone with 16108 wives can potentially make many babies. But origin of entire life is Krsna? Where is the proof for that? Why just say ‘That can also be proven’? Prove it.
K: The scientisis say that they can now formulate acids, amino acids, that are almost like one-celled living organisms. They say that because these acids so closely resemble living beings, there must be just one missing link needed before they can create life.
P: Nonsense! Missing link. I’ll challenge them to their face! (Laughter) They are missing this challenge. The missing link is this challenge to their face.
(aniket here) Yes, and you are making a lot of sense swami.
If you would like to contribute to our year-long “celebration” of Darwin’s 200th birthday, please send your articles, editorials, or any other creative and informative pieces to email@example.com
So that is that about some more bullsh!t (cow dung may be) arising out of ISKCON.