Darwinism and the Displacement of Vedānta: A Civilizational Crisis in Indian Education

[Bhakti Niskama Shanta]

Darwinism and the Displacement of Vedānta: A Civilizational Crisis in Indian Education

Bhakti Niṣkāma Śānta, Ph.D.

President-Sevāite-Āchārya

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math, Nrisimha Palli, Sri Nabadwaip Dham, West Bengal, India

www.scsmathworldwide.com

📲 Stay Updated:   https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vaz1goS5EjxsmbIcVh00

 

Introduction: A Clash of Ontologies

India has always conceived of life as sacred, conscious, and eternally existing. In the Vedic tradition, human origins are traced to the divine progenitor Manu and to ṛṣis (saints) who are not merely biological ancestors but spiritual archetypes. Human beings are amṛtasya putrāḥ—“children of immortality”—not animals evolved by chance.

Yet modern Indian education, largely shaped by colonial legacy, teaches young minds that life is a by-product of matter, that humans evolved from apes by accidental mutations, and that consciousness is an illusion produced by neurons. This worldview—Darwinian materialism—is not neutral science; it is a metaphysical narrative with deep implications for how we view life, society, and our own identity.

The Inadequacy of Darwinism to Explain Consciousness

One of the gravest scientific shortcomings of Darwin’s theory is its complete silence on consciousness, which is the defining feature of human life.

a. Consciousness Is Irreducible

Human beings are not simply walking machines composed of flesh and bone. They are conscious agents who experience subjectivity—feelings, intentions, aspirations, and awareness of the self.

No Darwinian mechanism—natural selection, mutation, or genetic drift—can explain how unconscious matter gives rise to the “hard problem” of consciousness, as termed by philosopher David Chalmers. Darwinian evolution, even in its modern neo-Darwinian synthesis, operates entirely at the level of physical traits and reproductive fitness. But consciousness is not a physical trait; it is an inner reality.

Vedānta declares: Consciousness is the essence of all living beings.

Darwinism says: Consciousness is a by-product of brain chemistry.

This is not just a gap—it is a chasm.

b. No Evolutionary Advantage for Subjectivity

Even if one attempts to explain the origin of consciousness by Darwinian logic, it fails. Why would inner experience—the ability to enjoy music, feel beauty, or contemplate death—evolve? None of these experiences increase reproductive success in any measurable way. The Darwinian model cannot account for art, ethics, language, or transcendence.

c. Apes vs. Humans: The Consciousness Divide

Darwin’s theory claims that humans evolved from primates through gradual changes. But the phenomenological gap between humans and apes is vast:

1. Apes do not compose research papers, write poetry, or seek liberation.
2. Apes do not form civilizations, meditate, or reflect on their mortality.
3. Apes do not show moral remorse, philosophical inquiry, or religious yearning.

To explain these monumental differences as the result of a few genetic mutations is not science—it is storytelling.

Vedāntic Anthropology: Human as Conscious, Not Just Bipedal

In Gauḍīya Vedānta, a human being is defined not by genes or bones, but by their capacity for God-consciousness. The transition from animal to human is not about walking upright, using tools, or social structure—it is about the awakening of the soul to higher meaning.

This is affirmed in the Hitopadeśa:

āhāra-nidrā-bhaya-maithunaṁ ca

samānam etat paśubhir narāṇām

dharmo hi eṣām adhiko viśeṣo

Translation: While both animals and humans engage in the basic activities of eating, sleeping, mating, and defending, the distinctive quality of human life lies in its capacity for spiritual inquiry and realization. Without engagement in spiritual life, human beings merely function on the same level as animals, despite their higher intelligence. (Hitopadeśa 25)

Darwinism collapses this distinction and reduces humans to hairless apes. But Vedānta elevates the human being as a seeker of sat (truth), cit (consciousness), and ānanda (bliss).

Biohylogenesis: Matter Comes from Life, Not the Other Way Around

As per Gauḍīya Vedānta, the origin of life is not chemical—but Supreme Personality of Godhead. This is termed Biohylogenesis: the principle that matter emerges from life, just as nails and hair grow from the living body.

• A seed becomes a tree through the organizing principle of the living soul.
• A fertilized egg becomes a human not by external design, but inner vitality.
• DNA is not a plan—it is a medium responding to a higher intelligence.

Modern biology cannot explain how cells self-organize into a human. It merely describes what happens after life is already present.

oṁ pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idaṁ — “From the complete whole, the complete manifest.” (Īśopaniṣad)

From Manu to Mutation: A Civilizational Usurpation

In Indian tradition:

• Humans originate from Manu, not from apes.
• Lineages (gotras) are traced back to ṛṣis, not primates.
• Every being is an eternal soul (ātmā), not a product of random evolution.

Replacing this sacred narrative with Darwin’s theory is not scientific progress—it is an act of civilizational colonization. It distorts India’s historical self-understanding, undermines the teachings of its saints, and trivializes the depth of its metaphysical traditions.

Darwinian evolution, when introduced to Indian children, subtly teaches them to:

1. Dismiss their spiritual heritage as superstition.
2. View morality as evolutionary convenience.
3. Consider consciousness an illusion.

This is not education. It is indoctrination.

The Political and Racial Instrumentalization of Darwinism

History shows how Darwin’s theory was used to justify:

• Eugenics (Francis Galton): eliminating the “unfit.”
• Colonialism: portraying Indians and Africans as “less evolved.”
• Racism: using anthropometry to classify races as primitive or advanced.
• Class Stratification: recast as biological superiority.

Ironically, many descendants of colonized people today uphold Darwinian ideology, unaware of its use in legitimizing their ancestors' oppression.

This is no accident—it is the logical consequence of reducing humans to animals in a struggle for survival.

Toward a Consciousness-Centered Science

Science must evolve from matter-based models to consciousness-centered frameworks. This includes:

1. Adopting Vedāntic ontology: consciousness is foundational.
2. Understanding karma: behavior, genes, and biology reflect the soul’s past.
3. Recognizing Paramātmā: the Supreme Guide orchestrates all life development.

Vedānta affirms not just intelligent guidance, but divine immanence—the Paramātmā within each being, who governs evolution, form, and function.

īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāṁ hṛd-deśe ‘rjuna tiṣṭhati

Translation: The Lord is seated in the hearts of all beings. (Bhagavad-gītā 18.61)

Conclusion: Let the Indian Child Be Free

Every Indian child is born with a rich metaphysical heritage—a sacred cosmology where life is divine, purposeful, and joyful.

To tell that child that he or she is a product of random mutations, descended from monkeys, existing only to compete for survival—is a violation of truth, dignity, and spirit.

It is time to decolonize the Indian mind. To replace Darwinian indoctrination with Vedic enlightenment. To restore consciousness as the foundation of science.

Let us not raise another generation of confused, alienated youth. Let us raise real humans—who know who they are, where they come from, and what they are meant to be.

na jāyate mriyate vā kadācin

“The soul is never born, nor does it die.” (Bhagavad-gītā 2.20)

Let Indian education be reborn—from Darwin to Dharma.

http://youtube.com/post/UgkxNM0ZBHRqi9n7jMmG6ZzSQyo0ImdmgVLX?si=eh733ypHj7cLa9jn

[Henry José Arámbulo Urdaneta]

ALL GLORIES TO SRI GURU AND GAURANGA

Beloved Srila Bhakti Niskama Shanta Maharaj:

 I am very grateful for your beautiful dissertations filled with wisdom, justice, and sweetness. It is time for science to evolve toward consciousness-based models that recognize the importance of spirituality and subjective experience in defining humanity. The Vedic view offers an alternative perspective that can help restore the dignity and self-respect of Indian culture. Years ago, a French mathematician, philosopher, and esotericist, René Guénon, wrote about these topics:

 The Limitation of Science in the Interpretation of Spiritual Matters

René Guénon wrote in his work "The Crisis of the Modern World" (1927): "Profane science, as it has been understood in the West for several centuries, cannot have access to traditional and spiritual knowledge, because the latter are situated on a plane beyond the reach of its methods and means of investigation. Profane science is limited to the observation of sensible phenomena and the formulation of laws that govern their relationships, but it cannot penetrate the very essence of things, nor reach the metaphysical principles that are the basis of all reality." Guénon argues that modern science is limited to the observation and description of physical phenomena and cannot access spiritual and metaphysical knowledge that lies beyond its scope. This is because modern science is based on empirical observation and experimentation, while spiritual and metaphysical knowledge require a deeper understanding and a different approach.

 

 The Importance of Metaphysics Guénon emphasizes the importance of metaphysics in understanding reality and argues that modern science cannot replace metaphysics in this regard. Metaphysics deals with the fundamental principles of reality and is not limited to the observation of physical phenomena.

 

The Difference Between Science and Metaphysics

The difference between science and metaphysics is fundamental to understanding the limitations of science in interpreting spiritual matters. While science deals with the description and explanation of physical phenomena, metaphysics deals with understanding the fundamental principles of reality.

Returning to the topic of the perverse influence of Darwinism as an instrument of oppression by British imperialists, the issue is not only present in India; in my home country, Venezuela, we have also suffered from this nefarious tendency even today.

 A Similar Case in Venezuela

Similarly, in Venezuela, the influence of imperialism and Darwinism has had a negative impact on the cultural and spiritual identity of the people. The imposition of a materialistic and reductionist worldview has led to the marginalization of the spiritual traditions and beliefs of Indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples. This has had a negative impact on the self-esteem and cultural identity of many Venezuelans. It is time to make a decision about what kind of education we want to provide to students. Do we want to continue teaching a materialistic worldview that reduces human life to a product of random evolution, or do we want to adopt a more holistic perspective that recognizes the importance of consciousness and spirituality? The answer is clear: it is time to decolonize the mind and restore consciousness as the foundation of education. The influence of imperialism and Darwinism has had a negative impact on the cultural and spiritual identity of many peoples, including India and Venezuela. It is time to recognize the importance of consciousness and spirituality in defining humanity and adopt a more holistic perspective in education. Only in this way can we restore the dignity and self-esteem of our people and offer an education that is truly holistic and transformative. The crisis of consciousness in India, Venezuela, and other countries, especially in Africa and South America, is a challenge that requires a response. Do we want to continue teaching a materialistic worldview that reduces human life to a product of random evolution, or do we want to adopt a more holistic perspective that recognizes the importance of consciousness and spirituality? The answer is clear: it is time to decolonize the minds of India and other peoples of the planet and restore consciousness as the basis of science.

With love and sincerity, your student,

 Hariananda das from Spain

[Bhakti Niskama Shanta]

Dear Professor Fitch,

Thank you for your thoughtful response and engagement with my message. I appreciate the intellectual openness with which you addressed a topic that often generates more heat than light.

Your reply makes several important distinctions—particularly between Darwinian evolution and materialistic reductionism, between randomness and natural selection, and between scientific inquiry and philosophical misappropriation. These are welcome clarifications. Yet I believe that the heart of the disagreement lies not in scientific data, but in ontological commitments. I would like to address further concerns regarding the foundational assumptions within Darwinian theory, particularly as it has evolved into the modern synthesis of evolutionary biology. These concerns are not rhetorical but philosophical, linguistic, and scientific—touching upon the ontology of life, the nature of individuality, and the limits of population-level models in capturing the essence of living beings. 

Allow me, therefore, to respectfully respond point by point and clarify my position.

1.On Evolution as a Straw Man

The term “selection,” central to Darwinian theory, is semantically and philosophically problematic. To “select” implies a subject capable of choice—an entity with agency, discernment, and intentionality. In Darwin’s own writings, “natural selection” served as a metaphor, likening nature to a breeder or selector—thus subtly personifying an otherwise blind, impersonal process.

Yet this metaphor has misled generations into believing that a coherent, directional force operates within biological evolution. In reality, there is no subject that selects—only differential survival and reproduction shaped by environmental contingencies and inherited variation. Still, the language of “selection” persists, covertly importing the semantics of subjectivity into a theory that denies the presence of any subject—no soul, no self, no mind.

This contradiction is not merely linguistic—it is ontological and philosophical. Evolutionary theory adopts the language of agency while denying the metaphysical reality of agency. From a Vedāntic perspective, this renders the framework internally inconsistent and conceptually incoherent.

Furthermore, modern biology increasingly defines life in population-level terms, systematically marginalizing the individual. Evolution, behavior, and even morality are interpreted as emergent properties of statistical aggregates: gene frequencies, fitness landscapes, and reproductive success. Yet this approach overlooks the most essential feature of life: the conscious individuality of living beings.

In physics, all electrons are treated as indistinguishable; in chemistry, one carbon atom is functionally equivalent to another. But life defies such interchangeability. No two individuals—whether cells or sentient beings—are truly identical. Life exhibits qualitative uniqueness at the individual level, rooted not in genetic variation alone, but in inner subjectivity. Statistical models may capture patterns, but they cannot grasp the lived experience of the conscious self.

From the standpoint of Vedānta, this is because living beings are not simply arrangements of molecules; they are individual conscious agents (jīvas), eternal and irreducible, each bearing distinct karmic histories and inner intentionality. To study life purely through population dynamics is akin to studying music by analyzing air pressure—technically informative perhaps, but spiritually blind and qualitatively tone-deaf.

You suggest I have mischaracterized evolution as “accidental” or “random,” and argue that natural selection is a non-random process shaped by heredity. I accept that selection is not random in a subjective sense, but I submit that the variation upon which it acts—namely, mutation, recombination, and genetic drift—is intrinsically random in the Darwinian framework. Furthermore, no teleological guidance is posited in standard evolutionary theory.

From the Vedāntic lens, where life is inherently purposeful, hierarchical, and guided by consciousness, this randomness at the heart of evolutionary theory makes it fundamentally inadequate to explain the origin or evolution of life. Even when updated by molecular biology, the modern synthesis—along with its post-synthetic expansions—remains materially reductionist at its core. It is built on the metaphysical assumption that life and consciousness emerge from non-living matter. This is not just a scientific claim—it is a philosophical premise, and it is precisely this materialist metaphysics, not merely the mechanism of evolution, that I challenge.

 

2. On Consciousness as an Emergent Property

You suggest that I am “ranting” against materialist reductionism, not evolution per se, and propose that emergence offers a better paradigm. But respectfully, emergence too remains an attempt to explain conscious agency as an outcome of non-conscious substrates. Whether by linear causality or complex systems, emergence fails to bridge what David Chalmers rightly termed the “hard problem” of consciousness.

From the standpoint of Vedānta, consciousness is not an emergent property of matter, but the reverse: matter is a derivative expression of consciousness (cit). This is not mysticism—it is an alternative ontology, rooted in the observation that awareness cannot be objectified or reduced to its correlates.

In fact, as you point out, evolution itself is an emergent phenomenon, but emergence does not explain origin. To say that life and mind “emerged” from non-life and non-mind without identifying a causal agency is to assert an effect without an intelligible cause—something no rigorous science would accept in other domains.

3. On Harmonizing Science and Religion

I fully agree that science and religion need not be in conflict. But a genuine dialogue requires more than cohabitation; it demands ontological clarity. In the Gauḍīya Vedāntic tradition, “religion” is not about dogma or ritual alone—it is a science of consciousness (caitanya-vijñāna), rooted in experience, logic, and testimony (śruti).

We reject not science, but scientism—the view that all truths must be empirically measurable or physically explainable. A purely third-person account of life, however sophisticated, will never yield the first-person reality of “I am.”

Thus, the call is not for faith-based rejection of evolution, but for a consciousness-based re-evaluation of life—a “biology of the observer,” as physicist Schrödinger once envisioned.

4. Darwinian Evolution and the Legacy of Racial Ideology

It is also imperative to critically evaluate Darwinism’s historical entanglement with colonialism, racism, and eugenics, which has had real-world consequences, especially in formerly colonized societies like India. Far from being a neutral biological theory, Darwin’s own writings reflect a disturbing worldview that justified racial hierarchy and extermination in the name of natural progress.

In an 1881 letter, Darwin wrote:

❝more civilised so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilised races throughout the world.

[Charles Darwin to William Graham, July 3, 1881, Darwin Correspondence Project, Letter no. 13230, University of Cambridge, https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/?docId=letters/DCP-LETT-13230.xml. Letter quoted in Francis Darwin, Charles Darwin: His Life Told in an Autobiographical Chapter, and in a Selected Series of His Published Letters (London: Murray, 1902), 64.]

Similarly, in The Descent of Man (1871), Darwin predicted:

❝ At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races.

[Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, 2 vols. [1871] (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981), 1:201.]

These are not incidental remarks but integral to Darwin’s anthropological vision. As Desmond and Moore, leading Darwin biographers, point out:

❝‘Social Darwinism’ is often taken to be something extraneous, an ugly concretion added to the pure Darwinian corpus after the event, tarnishing Darwin’s image. But his notebooks make plain that competition, free trade, imperialism, racial extermination, and sexual inequality were written into the equation from the start — ‘Darwinism’ was always intended to explain human society.

[Adrian Desmond and James Moore, Darwin. London: Michael Joseph, 1991. Pp. xxi, ISBN 0-7181-3430-3]

In their further analysis:

❝By biologizing colonial eradication, Darwin was making ‘racial’ extinction an inevitable evolutionary consequence…. Races and species perishing was the norm of prehistory. The uncivilized races were following suite [sic], except that Darwin’s mechanism here was modern-day massacre…. Imperialist expansion was becoming the very motor of human progress. It is interesting, given the family’s emotional anti-slavery views, that Darwin’s biologizing of genocide should appear to be so dispassionate…. Natural selection was now predicated on the weaker being extinguished. Individuals, races even, had to perish for progress to occur. Thus it was, that ‘Wherever the European has trod, death seems to pursue the aboriginal’. Europeans were the agents of Evolution. Prichard’s warning about aboriginal slaughter was intended to alert the nation, but Darwin was already naturalizing the cause and rationalizing the outcome.

[Adrian Desmond and James Moore, Darwin’s Sacred Cause: How a Hatred of Slavery Shaped Darwin’s Views on Human Evolution (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2009), 149–151.]

Thus, Darwin's theory was not merely co-opted by racists—it embodied a framework that lent scientific legitimacy to colonial violence and racial extermination. This is not to deny Darwin's opposition to slavery, but to highlight the conceptual dissonance in his views: a moral opposition to bondage coexisting with a cold biological rationalization of genocide as evolutionary necessity.

❝It is very true what you say about the higher races of men, when high enough, will have spread & exterminated whole nations.” Desmond and Moore then provide this explanation of Darwin’s sentiments that he expressed in that letter: “While slavery demanded one’s active participation, racial genocide was now normalized by natural selection and rationalized as nature’s way of producing ‘superior’ races. Darwin had ended up calibrating human ‘rank’ no differently from the rest of his society.

[Charles Darwin to Charles Kingsley, February 6, 1862, Darwin Correspondence Project, Letter no. 3439, University of Cambridge, https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letter/DCP-LETT-3439.xml. Letter quoted in Desmond and Moore, Darwin’s Sacred Cause, 318.]

5. The Civilizational Displacement in Indian Education

Today, in Indian classrooms, children are taught they are descended from apes, the result of random mutations, and that consciousness is a neuronal illusion—ideas that originated in 19th-century Europe, heavily shaped by colonial ideologies and alien to the Indian spiritual wisdom.

In contrast, India’s indigenous knowledge systems declare:

na jāyate mriyate vā kadācin — “The soul is never born, nor does it die.” (Bhagavad-gītā 2.20)

amṛtasya putrāḥ — “You are children of immortality.” (Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad)

Replacing these deeply rooted conceptions with a mechanistic, racially tinted, and spiritually barren narrative constitutes civilizational erasure—not scientific enlightenment.

Let us be clear: this is not science versus religion, but colonial ontology versus civilizational self-understanding.

6. Toward a Consciousness-Centered Biology

You mention that “emergent properties are no less real than the entities from which they emerge.” I would humbly propose the inverse: consciousness is more real than matter, because it is that by which all entities, including matter, are known.

In this view, the ultimate substrate of life is not the gene, but the jīva (individual soul), and evolution is not driven by genetic fitness, but by karmic progression under the guidance of the Paramātmā (the Supreme Conscious Witness). This is not an abandonment of science, but its re-rooting in a deeper metaphysics.

7. Conclusion: From Conflict to Integration

Let us agree on this: the human quest for truth demands both rigorous inquiry and ontological humility. Science can describe many things, but it cannot explain why truth matters, why love uplifts, or why the self refuses to be reduced to matter.

Vedānta does not fear evolution; it simply asks: Who is evolving, and under whose guidance?

I remain hopeful that future biology will be brave enough to go beyond matter—not in opposition to science, but as its natural culmination.

With respect and openness for continued dialogue,

Sincerely,

Bhakti Niskama Shanta, Ph.D.

President-Sevāite-Āchārya

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math

Nrisimha Palli, Sri Nabadwaip Dham, West Bengal, India

www.scsmathworldwide.com

📲 Stay Updated:    https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vaz1goS5EjxsmbIcVh00

Dialogue between Vedanta & Science ��亂�� | WhatsApp Channel Dialogue between Vedanta & Science ��亂�� WhatsApp Channel. The British exploited Darwin's theory to justify t...

On Friday 11 July, 2025 at 12:35:15 am IST, David Fitch <d...@nyu.edu> wrote:

Hi Bhakti,

Thank you for reaching out about what you perceive as a conflict between evolution and religion. Many religious sects—not only Hinduism—reject evolution because they feel (I think wrongly) that evolutionary theory somehow threatens religion. In actual fact, evolution and religion can and should exist side-by-side to support the search for meaning and understanding, both materially and spiritually.

I think one of the reasons you may find such a conflict is that you have mischaracterized evolution and then use this mischaracterization as a straw man to knock down. Once you understand the true facts of evolution, you will see how religion and science actually do NOT conflict, but instead can work in harmony toward a comprehensive philosophy.

Specifically, you characterize evolution as "accidental", that we appeared somehow "by chance", that "life is a by-product of matter", that "humans evolved from apes by accidental mutations", and that "consciousness is an illusion produced by neurons". You also apply Darwin's name to this mischaracterization. These are mischaracterizations because:

(1) The science of evolution (and related topics like genetics) has changed substantially since Darwin's day. Although Darwin was mostly correct about the pattern of evolution (descendents come from common ancestors) and was mostly correct about the mechanism of selection, he had a pretty poor understanding of inheritance (now included in the science of genetics). So we really should not be applying his name to modern concepts of evolution. (Also, it was Herbert Spencer who coined the phrase lay people often mis-ascribe to Darwin, i.e. "Survival of the Fittest", and he coined "Social Darwinism" as a classist, supremicist, eugenics notion that is now highly discredited.) 

(2) Darwin's mechanism of natural selection is very far from random or "accidental"! Of COURSE highly complex organisms could not possibly be built on the basis of random chance alone! And evolutionary biologists of COURSE recognize this! It is more than obvious. But this is NOT the mechanism by which complex and highly adaptive organisms are built. In particular, the mechanism that Darwin called "Selection" (a word we still use) absolutely requires heredity. Nobody thinks that heredity is random...in fact, it is highly NON-random. There are lots of proofs showing that evolution by selection is nonrandom because of this process. Mischaracterizing evolution as "accidental", "chance", "random", etc. is promoting a lie. Please do not do this. It only hurts your cause.

(3) Really what you are ranting against, what you are afraid of, is "materialistic reductionism", the view that all aspects of reality, including mental phenomena, can be explained by physical matter and its interactions and that consciousness itself can somehow be understood by analyzing the fundamental physical properties and interactions of matter. This has very little to do with evolution per se and has been strongly criticized by many scientists. Importantly, it ignores the principle of emergence. A different philosophy, fully compatible with biology, is that emergent properties (like consciousness and culture and religion) are not "illusions", but are real. Emergent properties are called "emergent" because very often they cannot be predicted solely from the physical laws governing atomic particles. Note that evolution is itself an emergent property of genetics! Again, emergent properties are no less real than the entities from which they emerge.

(4) From the premise that emergent properties are real, you can start to formulate a much more comprehensive and enlightened philosophy that supports BOTH religion and science. On such a path to enlightenment I am sure you will find that science and religion act synergistically to support a greater understanding of spirituality, creation and the universe. Single lifetimes are too short to engage in constant conflict where it is unnecessary and in any case counter to productive progress in understanding and the search for meaning.

Sincerely,

David H. A. Fitch, PhD

Professor of Biology

New York University

951H Brown Building

29 Waverly Place

New York, NY 10003

(212) 998-8254

david...@nyu.edu

fitchlab.org

rhabditina.org

[Bharath cherukuri]

Hare Krishna, 

Please accept my humble obeisances 

I wish to share some interesting thoughts on evolution from the book, Jaiva Dharma by Sri Bhaktivinoda thakur. 

In the Sixteenth Chapter of this book, there is a minute analysis, consistent with modern science, of the systematic development of consciousness. 

Conscious beings who are bound by illusion are found in five conditions: 1) acchadita-cetana (covered consciousness), 2) sankucita-cetana (stunted consciousness), 3) mukulitacetana (budding consciousness), 4) vikasita-cetana (blossoming consciousness), and 5) purna-vikasita-cetana (fully blossomed consciousness).

 Such conscious beings are known as jivas, or prani. These five stages of living beings are divided into two categories:

non-moving entities (sthavara); and moving entities (jangama).

Trees, creepers, shrubs, stones and other non-moving beings are said to have covered consciousness (acchadita-cetana). The other four types of conscious beings are moving, whereas these entities are not, because their consciousness is fully covered. Animals, birds, insects and aquatics have stunted consciousness (sankucita-cetana). Jivas born in species other than human beings are found in the covered and stunted states of consciousness. Jivas in human species are found in the budding, blossoming and fully blossomed stages of consciousness. Although sentient beings in these last three states of awareness are all human by physical appearance, they are graded according to their development of consciousness. 

Bearing this gradation in mind, human consciousness is considered to be in the preliminary, intermediate or advanced stage of development. Nonetheless, trees, creepers, shrubs, animals, birds and human beings are all jivas, and their only dharma is to worship Bhagavan. Still, out of all of them, human beings are superior by dint of developed consciousness, and their special dharma is known as jaiva-dharma, which consists of the worship of Bhagavan.

The function of consciousness is graded according to the degree to which knowledge or awareness is covered. There is no doubt that human beings are superior to all other earthly life forms, yet it is essential to understand whence this superiority stems. It cannot be said that human beings are superior to trees, creepers, insects, animals, birds and aquatics from the point of view of form and appearance, strength and prowess, and beauty and charm. However, human beings are superior in every way to all other species with regard to the mental faculty, the development of the intellect, and the expansion of consciousness.

 It is this special dharma that is being analyzed in Jaiva-Dharma. Although in a general sense, jaiva-dharma is the dharma of all living beings, it should be understood as the specific dharma of the human species, because the special qualification for the highest dharma is found only among those jivas with highly developed awareness.

From the above description it is clear that evolution does not necessarily means change in the body,rather change in the consciousness.

One unaddressed issue with evolution theories is, they speak only of species on earth,but what about the living entities on other planets  ? We had a clue from Bhagavad-gita that there could be life on other planets, " The Blessed Lord said: I instructed this imperishable science of yoga to the sun-god, Vivasvān, and Vivasvān instructed it to Manu, the father of mankind, and Manu in turn instructed it to Ikṣvāku. " BG 4.1

Another problem with the modern evolution theories is,how species are defined. The meaning used by biologists applies to the gross physical appearance or the gross morphological feature of the living material bodies. The Vedic meaning, however, which is derived after thorough and careful analysis, is based on the level of consciousness of the living being. For example, biologists say that all human beings belong to one species, whereas the Vedic literatures list 400,000 species. In other words, there are 400,000 grades of human beings on different levels of consciousness. Thus, here, species should be understood as grade.

Padma purana classifies living entities into 84 lakh species. 

Of the 84 lakhs species :

9,00,000 species are aquatics;

20,00,000 species are plants and trees;

11,00,000 species are insects;

10,00,000 species are birds;

30,00,000 species are beasts, and

4,00,000 'species' are human beings.

Additionally in Bhagavad-gita, Arjuna shares his experience of seeing the demigods, " Arjuna said: My dear Lord Kṛṣṇa, I see assembled together in Your body all the demigods and various other living entities. I see Brahmā sitting on the lotus flower as well as Lord Śiva and many sages and divine serpents. " BG 11.15. This gives us a clue regarding the possibility of existence of extra terrestrial  living entities, which the evolution theories has not addressed. 

Ancient Indian scriptures step ahead and classifies the extra terrestrial living entities, 

Eight Vasus: Deities associated with elements of nature, such as earth, water, fire, and wind. 

Eleven Rudras: Aspects of Lord Shiva, often associated with destruction and transformation. 

Twelve Adityas: Solar deities, embodying various aspects of the sun. 

Indra: The king of the gods, associated with thunder and rain. 

Prajapati: The creator god, associated with procreation and fertility. 

Totally 33 types of extra terrestrial species are identified as classified above. 

So,to conclude, the unaddressed questions are,

1) How the term  species should be defined  ?

2) Possibility of extra terrestrial living entities 

3) Did the evolution proceeds from terrestrial to extra terrestrial or vice versa ?

Hopefully the scientists come up with some solutions to the above problems of evolution theories 

Dandavats, 

Dr.Bharath Cherukuri ( Braja Kishore Das)

Professor of Critical Care Medicine, 

NRI Medical college & General Hospital, 

Guntur,Andhra Pradesh, India.

--
---------------------------
Join Dialogue between Vedanta and Science Channel: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vaz1goS5EjxsmbIcVh00
 
If you would like to support our efforts and activities, you may kindly do so through the following link: https://scsmathworldwide.com/donation.html
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math, Narashimapalli, Nabadwip Dham, West Bengal, India
https://scsmathworldwide.com
 
Contact Us: https://scsmathworldwide.com/contact.html
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sādhu-Saṅga of Higher Thought" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/2069627981.523687.1752225253864%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Bhakti Niskama Shanta]

All glories to Śrī Guru and Śrī Gaurāṅga.

Dear Dr. Braja Kishore Prabhu (Dr. Bharath Cherukuri),

Dandavat praṇāms.

Thank you sincerely for your thoughtful and enriching reflections drawn from Jaiva Dharma by Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura. You have eloquently highlighted a foundational point that is often missed in contemporary discussions on evolution—that evolution is fundamentally a progression of consciousness, not merely a modification of bodily forms.

Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura’s classification of acchādita, saṅkucita, mukulita, vikāsita, and pūrṇa-vikāsita cetanā offers a far more coherent and purpose-centered model of development than Darwinian evolution, which remains trapped in external morphology and neglects the inner self. In Vedāntic ontology, the jīva traverses through various species not randomly, but as part of a karmic and spiritual journey toward the full awakening of divine consciousness (pūrṇa-vikāsita cetanā). This, indeed, is the true evolutionary arc.

You have also astutely pointed out that the modern evolutionary paradigm ignores extraterrestrial and higher planetary life, despite explicit references in śāstra such as Bhagavad-gītā 4.1 and 11.15. Modern evolutionary theory is entirely anthropocentric and Earth-bound, unable to account for beings such as the Vasus, Rudras, Adityas, Prajāpati, or even Gandharvas and Siddhas—entities that the Vedic cosmology not only acknowledges but deeply integrates into a spiritual ecology. The fact that Darwinian science cannot even begin to address such multidimensional life forms reveals the limits of its epistemology.

You have rightly questioned the definition of "species". Modern biology defines species in terms of interbreeding and genetic boundaries, which ignores gradations of consciousness. In contrast, śāstra speaks of 84 lakṣa yonis—each yoni reflecting a distinct mood or psychological nature and cetanā (consciousness). The 400,000 human species do not refer to physical differences alone but to subtle distinctions in intellect, tendencies, and degrees of spiritual readiness. This qualitative depth is absent in biology's crude taxonomies.

Thus, your observation is spot on: modern evolution is reductionistic, lacking ontological clarity. It mistakes the symptom (the body) for the substance (the conscious self). The spiritual evolution explained in Jaiva Dharma and corroborated by śāstra places the jīva’s awakening at the center—not genetics, not mutation, not survival-of-the-fittest.

In our critique of Darwinian materialism, we have tried to emphasize this: that life evolves not from chemicals, but through karma, under the supervision of Paramātmā (Bhagavad-gītā 9.10), and according to the jīva's own saṁskāras and innate disposition toward divine love. As such, what Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura presents is not mythological poetry, but a robust science of consciousness—a science that modern biology must one day evolve into, if it is to remain relevant.

Your contribution is deeply appreciated, and we encourage further discussion and elaboration in scholarly and devotional circles. May Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura's insights continue to inspire others to investigate Jaiva-dharma as the true framework of life’s origin and destination.

humbly in service,

Bhakti Niskama Shanta, Ph.D.

President-Sevāite-Āchārya, Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math, Nrisimha Palli

Sri Nabadwaip Dham, West Bengal, India: www.scsmathworldwide.com

📲 Stay Updated: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vaz1goS5EjxsmbIcVh00

--
---------------------------
Join Dialogue between Vedanta and Science Channel: Dialogue between Vedanta & Science ��亂�� | WhatsApp Channel

 
If you would like to support our efforts and activities, you may kindly do so through the following link: https://scsmathworldwide.com/donation.html
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math, Narashimapalli, Nabadwip Dham, West Bengal, India
https://scsmathworldwide.com
 
Contact Us: https://scsmathworldwide.com/contact.html
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sādhu-Saṅga of Higher Thought" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/2069627981.523687.1752225253864%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Bhakti Niskama Shanta]

All Glories to Śrī Guru and Śrī Gaurāṅga

Dear Sriman Hariananda Prabhu,

Dandavat praṇāms.

Please accept my heartfelt appreciation for your thoughtful and deeply reflective message.

Your kind words and the spirit of sincerity with which you express them are a great source of encouragement to me. It is indeed heartening to see how the message of Vedānta—rooted in consciousness, dignity of life, and transcendental wisdom—resonates with sincere seekers across cultures and continents. Your reference to René Guénon was particularly relevant and well-placed. His critique of profane science and emphasis on metaphysics as the true axis of understanding aligns closely with the Gauḍīya Vedāntic view: that the origin, purpose, and essence of life lie beyond empirical formulations, in the eternal realm of cit (consciousness).

You have rightly pointed out that modern science, shaped by colonial ideologies and grounded in reductionist assumptions, has systematically excluded metaphysical inquiry. This exclusion has not just limited the scope of science—it has disoriented entire civilizations. When science amputates the question of the self from its framework, it may describe phenomena, but it can never answer why we exist, what life means, or what constitutes truth.

Your insight into the shared cultural and spiritual struggles faced by Venezuela, India, and other colonized nations is profound. Indeed, what we witness today is not merely an academic issue—it is a civilizational trauma. Darwinism, packaged as objective science, was historically a tool for imperialist domination. Its materialist worldview was deployed not just to undermine religious faith, but to fracture indigenous cultures, degrade human self-worth, and reframe spiritual identity as superstition. That such ideas are still taught in schools across the world is not a sign of progress—it is a sign of unquestioned intellectual slavery.

Gauḍīya Vedānta offers the world a luminous alternative. It teaches us that the jīva is not a machine, not a gene, not a primate—but an eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa, endowed with agency, love, and destiny. The Supre Absolute is not a detached watchmaker, but an immanent and personal reality—Bhagavān—guiding every soul with grace. Evolution, from this perspective, is not biological accident, but an ascent of consciousness orchestrated by divine will and karmic causality.

As you so beautifully emphasized, it is time for education to be reborn. Not by rejecting the utility of empirical science, but by anchoring it in consciousness-centered metaphysics. Only then can education be transformative, restoring to students a sense of sacred identity, responsibility, and divine connection. When we teach children that they are amṛtasya putrāḥ—children of immortality—they will not only recover cultural dignity, but also become fearless seekers of truth.

Let India, Venezuela, Africa, and the whole world awaken to this renaissance—not of old dogmas, but of perennial wisdom and scientific humility.

With deep affection and appreciation for your commitment to this cause,

Bhakti Niskama Shanta, Ph.D.

President-Sevāite-Āchārya

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math

Nṛsiṁha-palli, Śrī Nabadwīp Dhām, West Bengal, India

🌐 www.scsmathworldwide.com

📲 WhatsApp Channel: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vaz1goS5EjxsmbIcVh00

Dialogue between Vedanta & Science ��亂�� | WhatsApp Channel Dialogue between Vedanta & Science ��亂�� WhatsApp Channel. The British exploited Darwin's theory to justify t...

On Thursday, July 10, 2025 at 6:07:20 PM UTC+5:30 hariana...@gmail.com wrote:

ALL GLORIES TO SRI GURU AND GAURANGA

Beloved Srila Bhakti Niskama Shanta Maharaj:

 I am very grateful for your beautiful dissertations filled with wisdom, justice, and sweetness. It is time for science to evolve toward consciousness-based models that recognize the importance of spirituality and subjective experience in defining humanity. The Vedic view offers an alternative perspective that can help restore the dignity and self-respect of Indian culture. Years ago, a French mathematician, philosopher, and esotericist, René Guénon, wrote about these topics:

 The Limitation of Science in the Interpretation of Spiritual Matters

René Guénon wrote in his work "The Crisis of the Modern World" (1927): "Profane science, as it has been understood in the West for several centuries, cannot have access to traditional and spiritual knowledge, because the latter are situated on a plane beyond the reach of its methods and means of investigation. Profane science is limited to the observation of sensible phenomena and the formulation of laws that govern their relationships, but it cannot penetrate the very essence of things, nor reach the metaphysical principles that are the basis of all reality." Guénon argues that modern science is limited to the observation and description of physical phenomena and cannot access spiritual and metaphysical knowledge that lies beyond its scope. This is because modern science is based on empirical observation and experimentation, while spiritual and metaphysical knowledge require a deeper understanding and a different approach.

 

 The Importance of Metaphysics Guénon emphasizes the importance of metaphysics in understanding reality and argues that modern science cannot replace metaphysics in this regard. Metaphysics deals with the fundamental principles of reality and is not limited to the observation of physical phenomena.

 

The Difference Between Science and Metaphysics

The difference between science and metaphysics is fundamental to understanding the limitations of science in interpreting spiritual matters. While science deals with the description and explanation of physical phenomena, metaphysics deals with understanding the fundamental principles of reality.

Returning to the topic of the perverse influence of Darwinism as an instrument of oppression by British imperialists, the issue is not only present in India; in my home country, Venezuela, we have also suffered from this nefarious tendency even today.

 A Similar Case in Venezuela

Similarly, in Venezuela, the influence of imperialism and Darwinism has had a negative impact on the cultural and spiritual identity of the people. The imposition of a materialistic and reductionist worldview has led to the marginalization of the spiritual traditions and beliefs of Indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples. This has had a negative impact on the self-esteem and cultural identity of many Venezuelans. It is time to make a decision about what kind of education we want to provide to students. Do we want to continue teaching a materialistic worldview that reduces human life to a product of random evolution, or do we want to adopt a more holistic perspective that recognizes the importance of consciousness and spirituality? The answer is clear: it is time to decolonize the mind and restore consciousness as the foundation of education. The influence of imperialism and Darwinism has had a negative impact on the cultural and spiritual identity of many peoples, including India and Venezuela. It is time to recognize the importance of consciousness and spirituality in defining humanity and adopt a more holistic perspective in education. Only in this way can we restore the dignity and self-esteem of our people and offer an education that is truly holistic and transformative. The crisis of consciousness in India, Venezuela, and other countries, especially in Africa and South America, is a challenge that requires a response. Do we want to continue teaching a materialistic worldview that reduces human life to a product of random evolution, or do we want to adopt a more holistic perspective that recognizes the importance of consciousness and spirituality? The answer is clear: it is time to decolonize the minds of India and other peoples of the planet and restore consciousness as the basis of science.

With love and sincerity, your student,

 Hariananda das from Spain

El miércoles, 9 de julio de 2025 a las 13:07:16 UTC+2, Bhakti Niskama Shanta escribió:

[Henry José Arámbulo Urdaneta]

ALL GLORIES TO SRI GURU AND GAURANGA

Beloved Srila Bhakti Niskama Shanta Maharaj:

I find it very interesting to reflect on how imperial power has attacked and culturally and spiritually decimated our peoples. They don't just conquer lands, they also steal culture, and it's easy to see in European museums, like the British Museum, where there are more artifacts from ancient Egypt than in Egypt itself. Well, they didn't take the Pyramids because they weigh a lot , but they did take many other valuable and significant artifacts. The same thing happens in museums in the United States, where they've stolen valuable cultural artifacts from Iraq and other peoples. The Spanish cathedrals decorated with tons of gold stolen from the indigenous peoples of Venezuela, Mexico, and several South American countries are another example of this. Furthermore, they not only steal material goods and artistic productions, but they also try to silence and supplant the cultural roots of these peoples, replacing them with their religion and ways of thinking, believing themselves to be superior.

They implement a Eurocentric educational system, where everyone knows European painters, singers, musicians, scientists, and literary works, but no one talks about the exploits of India, for example. Everyone knows Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, epic poems dating from approximately the 8th century BC. However, much less well-known is the Mahabharata, the great epic poem of India, which Europeans conveniently date as being written in the 3rd century BC, which we know is false because it is much older.

The Iliad and Odyssey together do not reach the length of the Mahabharata, which is about eight times longer. And there are many such cases, such as the theme of the atom, which is attributed to Democritus in Greece, but Indian scholars had already been using this concept hundreds of years earlier.

However, Eurocentric education doesn't mention these topics. I would like to recommend reading René Guénon's books, such as "The Crisis of the Modern World" (1927) and "The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times" (1945), which offer a profound critique of modern materialism and a defense of spiritual traditions. It is also important to highlight his work "General Introduction to the Study of Hindu Doctrines" (1921), which is an excellent introduction to Indian philosophy and spirituality. Furthermore, the work of Ananda Coomaraswamy, such as "The Door in the Sky: Coomaraswamy on Myth and Metaphor" (1997), is essential for understanding the relationship between myth and metaphor in Indian culture and religion. Coomaraswamy argues that myths and metaphors are fundamental to understanding the essence of spiritual traditions and that they can be used to convey deep and universal meanings. In this work, Coomaraswamy explores how myths and metaphors are used in Indian culture and religion to convey philosophical and spiritual meanings.

 I would also recommend reading George Orwell's 1984, published in 1949. This dystopian novel is a classic critique of totalitarianism and information manipulation, and offers a terrifying vision of a future in which the government exercises totalitarian control over the population. Orwell's work is relevant to understanding how empires operate and dominate the masses, rendering us dumb and treating us like farm animals. Orwell's description of information manipulation and propaganda is especially relevant in the current era, where mass media and social media play a pivotal role in shaping public opinion. Unfortunately, this isn't widely known because the system isn't interested in people reading. Nowadays, all people read are TikTok shorts; that's the extent of their culture. People are stunned by social media and mass media, whose owners are pawns of large imperialist corporations. These corporations are controlled by a few elite families and vulture funds that rule the world. Scientists, in general, work for the interests of these corporations, as they are the ones who fund research projects. Therefore, we are faced with the image of the snake biting its tail, an endless cycle of exploitation of man by man.

 

References:

 - Guénon, R. (1921). General Introduction to the Study of Hindu Doctrines.

- Guénon, R. (1927). The Crisis of the Modern World.

 - Guénon, R. (1945). The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times.

- Coomaraswamy, A. K. (1997). The Door in the Sky: Coomaraswamy on Myth and Metaphor.

- Orwell, G. (1949). 1984.

[Henry José Arámbulo Urdaneta]

ALL GLORIES TO SRI GURU AND GAURANGA

Beloved Srila Bhakti Niskama Shanta Maharaj:

 A side note:

 René Guénon and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel are two philosophers with very different perspectives and approaches to philosophy, history, and culture. Below are some of the main differences between the two:

1.       Philosophical Perspective:

 -      Hegel: He was a German idealist philosopher who developed a philosophical system encompassing logic, metaphysics, epistemology, and the philosophy of history. His thought centers on dialectics and the process of self-knowledge of the Absolute Spirit. - Guénon: He was a French philosopher and writer who focused on metaphysics and traditional spirituality. His thought focuses on the search for universal truth and the understanding of the spiritual traditions of both East and West

2.       . 2. Attitude Toward Tradition:

 -     Hegel: He believed that history and culture were dynamic and evolutionary processes, and that truth was revealed through historical dialectics. - Guénon: He believed in the importance of tradition and the preservation of universal wisdom. He believed that the spiritual traditions of both East and West possessed an eternal and universal truth that must be preserved and transmitted.

3.        3. View of History:

 -     Hegel: He saw history as a dialectical and progressive process, in which humanity increasingly approaches absolute truth. - Guénon: He considered history to be a process of decline and degeneration, and that humanity was increasingly moving away from universal truth and traditional spirituality.

4.        4. Influences and Sources:

       Hegel: He was influenced by Greek philosophy, the Enlightenment, and German Romanticism. - Guénon: He drew inspiration from the spiritual traditions of both East and West, including Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, and Sufism.

5.        5. Style and Approach:

 -     Hegel: His style is dense and systematic, focusing on the construction of a rigorous philosophical system. - Guénon: His style is more intuitive and synthetic, focusing on understanding spiritual traditions and the search for universal truth. In short, while Hegel focused on historical dialectics and the search for absolute truth through reason, Guénon focused on the preservation of tradition and the search for universal truth through understanding the spiritual traditions of both East and West.

 To conclude:

 Initiation and Death of René Guénon

René Guénon was initiated into the Sufi tradition, a current of mystical spirituality within Islam, and converted to Islam in 1912, taking the name Abd al-Wahid Yahya. His initiation into Sufism was through the Shadhiliyya order, one of the leading Sufi orders in the Islamic world. Sufism, with its focus on mystical experience and the search for union with God, resonated deeply with Guénon, and his conversion to Islam marked a turning point in his life and work.

The Death of Guénon

Guénon died on January 7, 1951, in Cairo, Egypt, after choking on a bone while eating. His last words were reportedly "Allah" (God), reflecting his deep devotion and faith in the Islamic tradition he had embraced. This cause of death is widely reported and considered a tragic event that ended the life of an influential thinker and writer in the history of philosophy and spirituality. Guénon's death was a blow to his followers and admirers, who had found in his work a source of inspiration and spiritual guidance. Despite his death, Guénon's influence on philosophy and spirituality remains significant, and his work continues to be studied and debated today.

 With love and sincerity, your student, Hariananda das from Spain