|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Alvin Chan
Hong Kong
407 Posts |
 Posted - May 12 2007 : 2:02:37 PM
|
I have been pondering about the evolutionary basis of enlightenment and yoga for some time. But since such considerations presuppose that enlightenment is achievable for everyone (which I doubt), I didn't give it too much thoughts. Trying hard to reason for something that I doubt seems too much a luxuary for me right now. But anyway, I still would like to see if any scientifically-oriented yogi here could answer this question satisfactorily. And I consider the evolutionary basis, which lies deep under virtually everything about animals including us, an essential piece that has to fill if we are to seek a complete and coherant "science of yoga".
Not much time to organize now and I'll edit the post when I've time, but here's my few points:
- My concern is to set up a satisfactory explanation that could fit into the theory of evolution, rather than to dismiss the need to do so altogether. I understand that many yogi will simply stick to various religious viewpoints of our world, and will try to explain the process of yoga in a religious way (God, higher beings, etc). If this is so I hope we are trying to explain things in the light of reasons and facts, rather than through the extremely vague philosophical remark.
- I admit that some human activities, like the ability to appreciate higher form of music (and some other form of art) that encompass a deep range of emotions for the trained ear, are not easily explanable by evolution. But most can be partially explained by the fact that we've developed a relatively strong reasoning power (for problem solving which increase our chance of survival under difficult times) and wide range of emotions (for the social structures which invariably give rise to family units which protect the youth better than the individuals. The complexity of our relations also make mating a more complicated and unpredictable event, giving more variety of the offsprings). When we direct our reasoning mind to some forms and structures as in music(the language of which usually has to be learnt in childhood), these two factors mix up and create an effect that is emotionally rich. |
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - May 12 2007 : 3:42:05 PM
|
I think this is a very difficult thing to connect because 1) The theory of evolution is based upon science and the scientific method, which doesn't mix well with spirituality because the method requires repeatable results, and science hasn't even begun to understand karma, and the unique spiritual makeup of each person, and so has no basis for establishing a "double blind" experiment which would be necessary for the scientific method.
and
2) Science has no basis for understanding God, or at the very least an unknown source of a divine plan, which is behind the spiritual evolution of mankind.
I believe in an evolution of mankind that was destined by a divine plan, but mostly science has only so far theorized that evolution is accidental based upon the survival of the fittest.
So even though your idea that spiritual evolution is a scientific reality IMHO, you are quite a few years ahead of your time in trying to theorize, let alone prove it.
P.S. I strongly believe that enlightenment is achievable for everyone, but not all in this lifetime. It has to do with free choice, and everyone could achieve it in this lifetime, but has to have sufficient desire. |
Edited by - Etherfish on May 12 2007 3:44:41 PM |
 |
|
|
Alvin Chan
Hong Kong
407 Posts |
Posted - May 13 2007 : 01:23:41 AM
|
quote:
I believe in an evolution of mankind that was destined by a divine plan, but mostly science has only so far theorized that evolution is accidental based upon the survival of the fittest.
quote:
P.S. I strongly believe that enlightenment is achievable for everyone, but not all in this lifetime.
This is what I consider a vague idea, based upon beliefs that are passed on to us by traditions. To consider the evolutionary basis, I don't expect we are able to "prove" our conjecture, but it doesn't mean our considerations can't be more rational and reasonable. One possible line of thought is as follows:
The reward that we have in mating (the impulsive force that finally leads to orgasm) is obviously a evolutionary product to drive us towards reproduction, and this is present in all animals, albeit with different expressions. Having a much more complicated brain and reasoning power (comparatively!!) and range of emotions, we attach a wide range of emotions in the processes BEFORE mating. For women, who from the evolutionary point of view are always looking for men with the best constitutions, prefer men who use more complicated expressions in love as a "test" or "proof" of the reasoning power of the men, as well as future commitment to her offspring(--this part very often fail since men has very little guarantee about whether those are his offsprings......) So gradually this favours the development of art (which, at least in the old days, very often centered around love) in the natural selection process.
This so far is only an attempt to explain our how we become so lengthy and artistic and romantic about such a ultimately simple and quick act--loving making, as well as why we would dare to explore art in the first place, since art is at first glance a much less useful endeavours than science in the old days.
Now for yoga, which is where I need more input from you guys: it seems plausible that in the process of spiritual journeys (the evolutionary basis of which is: an extended curiosity towards our source, which may be religious and shaky but will lead to something concrete!), someone of our ancestor find a way to blend this two things together inside our body, especially when mating become so complicated and strong. Our ancestors might have accidentally found a way to taste the ecstasy originally developed due sololy out of natural selection.
Just as we can now train our hands to play piano even though it is not very much related to our survival (even though all the elements in piano playing can be tranced back to an evolutionary source)
The shiva component, under such consideration, is then a quality one has to cultivate in order to master this ecstatic state without getting run-over by the sexual drive.
Something is missing and vague, of course. But that is something like a framework which could be developed. And we may be able to deduce some facts about spirituality if we find its evolutionary basis. |
Edited by - Alvin Chan on May 13 2007 11:18:26 PM |
|
|
|
Alvin Chan
Hong Kong
407 Posts |
Posted - May 30 2007 : 07:14:19 AM
|
I seem to be the only one who are interested in this topic... Anyway, the previous line of thought I provided, as I realize later, is (at most) only enough to explain the experience or change of consciousness in a evolutionary view. That is, why such a seeminly useless ability might have been developed by natural selection.
BUt that doesn't explain why such ability, when developed, is for the good of us (or even the mankind as claimed by some) morally. Indeed there are enough examples of fallen teachers who may be "enlightened" in the sense of being able to fully experience the esctatic conductivity and may be inner silence, but who is obvious bad morally. I suspect, therefore, we do need to have a bhati for being good, and that enlightenment in the broader sense is a function of sitting practices, genetic constitution, and a keen desire to be good. In other words, the sitting practices will not lead to a good behaviour automatically. |
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - May 30 2007 : 08:00:06 AM
|
It's not lack of interest on my part, but I don't see any connection between evolution and enlightenment, other than the predisposition of the nervous system for it, and that seems more likely creationism than evolutionism.
For myself I don't so much have a desire to be good so much as a desire to contribute to that which works. This may be a difference in cultures, but in ours, to "be good" has more of a connotation of a child obeying his parents, or a citizen obeying the law.
But the example you brought up of fallen teachers is why my sister says "There are no enlightened people; only enlightened acts". No amount of enlightenment guarantees we will make good choices. |
Edited by - Etherfish on May 30 2007 08:02:33 AM |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
The evolutionary basis of enlightenment and yoga
