Lesson VIII. The Ascent of Man
In our last lesson we led you by successive steps from the beginnings
of Life in living forms up to the creatures
closely resembling the family of vertebrates-the
highest family of living forms on this planet. In this present lesson we
take up the story of the "Ascent of
Man" from the lowly vertebrate forms.
The large sub-family of forms called "The Vertebrates"
are distinguished from the Invertebrates by reason
of the former possessing an internal bony skeleton, the most important feature of which is the vertebra
or spinal column. The vertebrates, be it remembered,
possess practically the same organs as the lower forms
of life, but differ from them most materially by the
possession of the internal skeleton, the lower forms
having an external or outside skeleton, which latter
is merely a hardening of the skin.
The
flexibility of the vertebra creates a wonderful strength
of structure, combined with an ease of movement
peculiar to the vertebrates, and which renders them the
natural forms of life capable of rapid development
and evolution. I?y means of this strength, and
ease, these forms are enabled to move rapidly in pursuit
of their prey, and away from their pursuers, and also
to resist outside pressure or attack. They are
protected in a way similar to the invertebrates having shells, and yet have the
additional advantage of easy movement. Differing in shape and appearance as
do the numerous members of the sub-family of
vertebrates, still their structure is easily seen to spring
from a single form-all are modifications of some
common pattern, the differences arising from the
necessities of the life of the animal, as manifested through the desire and
necessities of the species.
Science
shows the direct relationship between the Vertebrates,
and the Invertebrates by means of several connecting-links, the most
noticeable of which is the Lancelot, a creature
resembling the fish-form, and yet also closely
resembling the lower (invertebrate) forms of life. This creature
has no head, and but one eye. It is semi-transparent, and possesses cilia for forcing in the water containing its food. It
has something like gills, and a gullet like the lower forms. It has no heart, the blood being circulated by
means of contracting vessels or
parts. Strictly speaking, it has no
back-bone, or vertebra, but still Science has been compelled to class it among the vertebrates because is has a gristly cartilage where the
back-bone is found in the higher
forms. This gristlemay be called an "elementary spine." It has a
nervous system consisting of a
single cord which spreads into a broadened end near the creature's mouth, and
which may therefore be regarded as "something like a brain." This creature is really a developed
form of Invertebrate, shaped like a
Vertebrate, and showing signs of a
rudimentary spin and nervous system of the latter. It is a
"connecting-link." The lowest forms of the true Vertebrates are the great families of Fishes.
These Fish families include fishes of high and low degree, some of the higher
forms being as different from the lowest as they (the highest) are different from
the Reptile family. It is not necessary to go into detail regarding the nature
of the fish families, for every student is more or less familiar with them.
Some peculiar forms
of fish show a shading into the Reptile family, in fact they seem to belong nearly
as much to the latter as to their own general family. Some species of fish known as the Dipnoi or "double-breathers,"
have a remarkable dual system of breathing. That is, they have gills for
breathing while in the water, and also have a primitive or elementary
"lung" in the shape of an air-bladder, or "sound," which
they use for breathing on land. The Mud-fish of South America, and also other
forms in Australia and other places, have a modification of fins which are
practically "limbs," which they actually use for traveling on land
from pond to pond. Some of these fish have
been known to travel enormous distances in search of new pools of water,
or new streams, having been driven from their original homes by droughts, or
perhaps by instincts similar to the migrating instinct of birds." Eels
are fish (although many commonly forget this fact) and many of their
species are able to leave the water and travel on land from pond to pond, their breathing being performed by a
peculiar modification of the gills. The climbing perch of India are able
to live out of water, and have modified gills for breathing purposes,
and modified fins for climbing and walking. So you see that without leaving the fish family proper, we have examples of
land-living creatures which are akin to "connecting links."
But there are real
"connecting-links" between the Fish and the Reptiles. Passing over
the many queer forms which serve as links between the two families, we have but
to consider our common frog's history for a striking example. The Tadpolehas gills, has no limbs, uses its tail like a fish's fin, cats
plants, etc. Passing through several interesting stages the Tadpole reaches a stage in which it is a frog with a
tail- then it sheds its tail and is a full fledged Frog, with four legs;
web-feet; no tail; and feeding on animals. The Frog is amphibious, that
is, able to live on land or in water-and yet it is compelled to come to the
surface of the water for air to supply its lungs. Some of the amphibious
animals possess both lungs and gills, even when matured; but the higher vertebrates living in the water breathe through lungs
which are evolved from the air-bladder of fishes, which in turn have
been evolved from the primitive gullet of the
lower forms. There are fishes known which are warm-blooded. Students
will kindly remember that the Whale is not
a fish, but an aquatic animal-a mammal, in fact, bringing forth its
young alive, and suckling it from its breasts.
So we readily sec
that it is but a step, and a short step at
that, between the land-traveling and climbing fishes and the lower forms
of Reptiles. The Frog shows us
the process of evolution between the two families,
its life history reproducing the gradual evolution
which may have required ages to perfect in the case of the species. You will
remember that the embryo stages of all
creatures reproduce the various stages
of evolution through which the species has passed-this is true in Man as
well as in the Frog.
We need not tarry long in considering the Reptile family of living
forms. In its varieties of serpents. lizards,
crocodiles, turtles, etc., we have studied and observed its forms. We see the limbless snakes; the lizards with active limbs; the huge, clumsy, slow
crocodiles and alligators-the armor-bearing turtles and tortoises-all
belonging to the one great family of
Reptiles, and nearly all of them being degenerate descendants of the mighty Reptile forms of the
geological Age of Reptiles, in which
flourished the mighty forms of the
giant reptiles-the monsters of land and water. Amidst the dense
vegetation of that prehistoric age,
surrounded by the most favorable conditions,
these mighty creatures flourished and lived, their fossilized skeleton forms evidencing to us how far their descendants have fallen, owing to less
favorable conditions, and the development of other life-forms more in harmony with their changed environment.
Next comes the great family of Birds. The Birds ascended from the Reptiles.
This is the Eastern Teaching, and this is
the teaching of Western Science It was formerly taught in the text-books
that the line of ascent was along the family of
winged reptiles which existed in the Age of Reptiles, in the early days of the
Earth. But the later writers on the subject, in the Western world, have
contradicted this. It is now taught that these ancient winged-reptiles were featherless, and more closely resembled the
Bat family than birds. (You will remember that a flat is neither a reptile nor a bird-it is a mammal,
bringing forth its young alive, and suckling them at its breast. The Batis
more like a mouse, and its wings are simply membrane stretched between its
fingers, its feet, and its tail.)
The line of ascent from Reptile to
Bird was along the forms of the Reptiles that walked on land. There are close
anatomical and physiological relations and correspondences between the two
families (Reptiles and Birds) which we need not refer to here. And, of course, many modifications have occurred since
the "branching-out." The scales of the reptiles, and the
feathers of the birds, are known to be but mollifications of the original
outer skin, as are also the hair, claws, hoofs, nails, etc., of all animals.
Even teeth arose in this way, strange as it may now seem-they are all secreted
from the skin. What a wonderful field for thought-this gradual evolution from
the filmy outer covering of the lowest living forms to the beautiful feathers,
beaks, and claws of the bird!
The evolving of wings meant much to
the ascending forms of life. The Reptiles were compelled to live in a narrow
circle of territory, while the Birds were able to travel over the
earth in wide flights. And travel always
develops the faculties of observation, memory, etc., and cultivates the senses
of seeing, hearing, etc. And the
creature is compelled to exercise
its evolving "thinking" faculties to a greater extent. And so the Birds were compelled by
necessity of their travels to
develop a greater degree of thinking organism.
The result is that among birds we find many
instances of intelligent thought, which cannot be dismissed as "mere instinct." Naturalists place the Crow at the head of the family of Birds, in
point of intelligence, and those who
have watched these creatures and
studied the mental processes, will agree that this is a just decision. It has been proven that Crows are capable of counting up to several
figures, and in other ways they
display a wonderful degree of almost human sagacity.
Next above the Bird
family comes the highest form of all-the
Mammals. But before we begin our consideration
of these high forms, let us take a hasty glance at the "connecting-links" between the Birds and the Mammals. The lowest forms of the Mammals
resemble Birds in many ways. Some of them are
toothless, and many of them have the same primitive intestinal arrangements possessed by the birds, from which arises
their name, Monotremes. These Monotrernes may be called
half-bird and half-mammal. One of the most characteristic of their
family is the Ornithorhynchus, or
Duck-bill, which the early naturalists
first thought was a fraud of the taxidermists, or bird-stuffcrs, and then, when finally convinced, deemed it a "freak-of-nature." But it is not a
freak creature, but a "connecting-link" between the two
great families of creatures. This animal presents a startling appearance to the observer who witnesses it for the first
time. It resembles a beaver, having a soft
furry coat, but also has a horny, flat bill like a duck, its feet being webbed, but also furnished
with claws projecting over the edge of the web-foot It lays eggs in an
underground nest-two eggs at a time, which
are like the eggs of birds, inasmuch as they contain not only the protoplasm from which the embryo is formed, but also the "yolk," on
which the embryo feeds until hatched. After the young Duckbill is hatched, it feeds from teatless glands in
the mother's body, the milk being
furnished by the mother by a
peculiar process. Consider this miracle-an animal which lays eggs and then when her young are hatched nourishes them with milk. The milk-glands in the mother are elementary "breasts."
The above-mentioned animal is found in Australia, the land of many strange forms and "connecting-links," which have survived there while in other parts of
the globe they have vanished gradually from existence, crowded out by the more perfectly evolved forms. Darwin has
called these surviving forms "living
fossils." In that same land is also found the Echdina or
spiny ant-cater, which lays an egg and then
hatches it in her pouch, after which she nourishes it on milk, in a
manner similar to that of the Duck-bill. This animal, like
the Duck-bill, is a Monotreme.
Scientists are
divided in theories as to whether the Monotremes
are actually descended directly from the Reptiles or Birds, or whether
there was a common ancestor from which Reptiles and Birds and Mammals branched off. But this is not important, for
the relationship between Reptiles, Birds and Mammals is clearly proven.
And the Monotremes are certainly one of the surviving forms of the intermediate
stages.
The next higher step in the ascent of Mammal life above the Monotreme
is occupied by the Marsupials, or milk-giving,
pouched animals, of which family the opossum and kangaroo are well
known members. The characteristic feature of this family of creatures is the
possession of an external pouch in the female, in which the young are kept and
nourished until they can take care of themselves as the young of other animals
are able to do. The young of the Marsupials are brought forth, or born, in an
imperfect condition, and undeveloped in size and strength. There are fossil
remains of Marsupials showing that in past ages creatures of this kind existed
which were as large as elephants.
In the more common
form of Mammals the young are brought forth
fully formed, they having received nourishment, before birth, from the
mother's body, through the placenta, the appendage which connects the
fetus with the parent. The Placental Mammals were the best equipped of all the
life-forms for surviva!
and development, for the reason that the young were
nourished during their critical period, and the care that the mammal must of
necessity give to her young operated in the direction
of affording a special protection far superior to that of the other forms. This and other causes acted to place the
Placentals in the "Royal
line" from which Man was evolved.
The following families of Placental Mammals are recognized by Science,
each having its own structural peculiarities:
The
Edentata, or Toothless creatures, among which are
the sloths, ant-eaters, armadillos, etc. These animals seem to be closer to the Monotremes than they are to the
Marsupials;
The Sirenia, so called by reason of their fanciful resemblance
to the sirens of mythology, among which are the sea-cows, manatees, dugongs,
etc., which are fish-like in structure and
appearance, the fore-limbs being shaped like
paddles, or fins, and the hind-limbs being absent or rudimentary;
The
Cetacca, or Whale Family, including whales, porpoises, dolphins, etc., which are quite fish-like in appearance and structure, their forms being adapted for
life in the sea, although they are. of course, Mammals, bringing forth matured young which are suckled at the breast;
The Ungulata, or Hoofed Animals, which comprise many
varied forms, such as the horse, the tapir, the rhinoceros,
the swine, the hippopotamus, the camel, the deer, the sheep, the cow,
etc., etc.;
The Hyracoidea, which is a small family, the principal
member of which is the coney, or rockrabbit, which has teeth resembling those
of the hoofed animals, in some ways, and those of
the gnawing animals in the others.
The Proboscidea, or Trunked Animals, which family is
represented in this age only by the families of elephants,
which have a peculiar appendage called a "trunk,"
which they use as an additional limb;
The Carnivora,
or Flesh-eaters, represented by numerous
and various forms, such as the seal, the hear,
the weasel, the wolf, the dog, the lion, the tiger, the leopard, etc. The wolf and similar forms belong to
the sub-family of dogs; while the lion, tiger, etc., belong to the
sub-family of cats;
The
Rodentia, or Gnawers, comprising the rat, the hare,
the beaver, the squirrel, the mouse, etc., etc.;
The
Insectivora, or Insect Feeders, comprising the mole, the shrew,
the hedgehog, etc.;
The
Cheiroptera, or Finger-Winged Animals, comprising the great family of Bats, etc., which are very highly developed
animals;
The Lemuroidea, or Lemurs, the name of which is derived from the
Latin word meaning a "ghost," by reason of
the Lemur's habits of roaming about at night.
The Lemur is a nocturnal animal, somewhat resembling
the Monkey in general appearance, but with a
long, bushy tail and sharp muzzle like a fox. It is
akin to a small fox having hands and feet like a monkey,
the feet being used to grasp like a hand, as is the
case with the true Monkey family.
These creatures are classed by some naturalists among the Monkeys by reason of
being "four-handed," while others are
disposed to consider as still more important their marked relationship
with, and affinity to, the marsupials,
gnawers and insect-feeders. On the whole, these creatures are strangely
organized and come very near to being a "connecting-link" between
other forms. One of the Lemurs is what is
known as the colugo, or "flying
lemur," which resembles a squirrel in many particulars, and yet has a membranous web extending from its hands,
which enables it to make flying leaps over great distances. This last
named variety seems to furnish a link between the insect-feeders and the
P'rimates;
The Primates, which
is a large family comprising the various forms of monkeys, baboons, man-apes,
such as the gibbon, gorilla, chimpanzee, orangoutang, etc., all of which have
big jaws, small brains, and a stooping posture. This family also includes MAN,
with his big brain and erect posture, and his many races depending upon shape
of skull, color of skin, character of hair, etc.
In considering the
Ascent of Man (physical) from the lowly
forms of the Monera, etc., up to his present high position, the student
is struck with the continuity of the ascent, development and unfoldment. While
there are many "missing-links," owing to the disappearance of the
forms which formed the connection, still there is sufficient proof left in the
existing forms to satisfy the
fair-minded inquirer. The facts of embryology alone are
sufficient proof of the ascent of Man from
the lowly forms. Each and every man today
has passed through all the forms of the ascent within a few months, from single cell to the new-born, fully
formed infant.
Embryology teaches
us that the eggs from which all animal forms
evolve are all practically alike so far as one can ascertain by microscopic examination, no matter how
diverse may be the forms which will evolve
from them, and this resemblance is maintained even when the embryo of the higher forms begins to manifest
traces of its future form. Von Baer, the German
scientist, was the first to note this remarkable and suggestive fact. He
stated it in the following words: "In
my possession are two little embryos, preserved
in alcohol, whose names I have omitted to attach, and at present I am
unable to state to what class they belong. They may be lizards, or small
birds, or very young mammals, so complete is
the similarity in the mode of the formation of the head and trunk in
these animals. The extremities, however, are still absent in these embryos.
But even if they had existed in the earliest
stage of their development, we should learn nothing, for the feet of lizards and mammals, the wings and feet of birds,
no less than the hands and feet of man, all arise from the same
fundamental form."
As has been said by
Prof. Clodd, "the embryos of all
living creatures epitomize during development the series of changes
through which the ancestral forms passed in their ascent from the
simple to the complex; the higher structures
passing through the same stages as the lower structures up
to the point when they are marked off from them,
yet never becoming in detail the form which they represent for the time being. For example, the embryo of man has at the outset
gill-like slits on each side of the neck, like a fish. These give place to a membrane like that which supersedes gills in the development of birds and
reptiles; the heart is at first a
simple pulsating chamber like that
in worms; the backbone is prolonged into a movable tail; the great toe is extended, or opposable, like our thumbs, and like the toes of apes; the
body three months before birth is covered all over with hair
exceptt on the palms and soles. At birth the head
is relatively larger, and the arms and legs relatively longer than in the
adult; the nose is bridgeless; both
features, with others which need not be detailed, being distinctly
ape-like. Thus does the egg from which man
springs, a structure only one hundred and twenty-fifth of an inch in size, compress into a few weeks the results
of millions of years, and set before us
the history of his development from fish-like and reptilian forms, and of his more immediate descent
from a hairy, tailed quadruped. That
which is individual or peculiar to
him, the physical and mental character
inherited, is left to the slower development which follows birth."
This, then, in brief is the Western theory of Evolution-the Physical Ascent of Man. We have given it as
fully as might be in the small space at our disposal in
these lessons on the Yogi Philosophy. Why? Because
we wish to prove to the Western mind, in the Western way, that Western
Science corroborates the Ancient Yogi Teachings of the
Unfoldment of Living Forms, from Monad to Man. The
Eastern teachers scorn to "prove" anything to their pupils, who sit
at the feet of teachers and accept as truth that which is
taught them, and which has been handed down from the dim ages long past. But this method will never do
for the Western student-he must have it "proven" to
him by physical facts and instances, not by keen, subtle, intellectual reasoning alone. The Eastern student wishes to be
"told"-the Western student wishes to be
"shown." Herein lies the racial differences of method of imparting
knowledge. And so we have recognized this fact and have heaped up proof after proof from the
pages of Western Science, in order to prove
to you the reasonableness, from the Western point of view, of the
doctrine of Physical Unfoldment as taught
for ages past by the Yogi gurus to their chelas. You have now the Eastern Teachings on the subject, together with
the testimony of Western Science to the
reasonableness of the idea.
But,
alas! Western Science, while performing a marvelous work in piling up fact
after fact to support its newly-discovered theory of
Evolution, in a way utterly unknown to the Oriental thinker who seeks after
principles by mental concentration-within rather than
without-while actually proving by physical facts the mental
conceptions of the Oriental Teachings, still misses the vital point of the subject-thought. In its materialistic tendencies it has failed to recognize the mental cause of the
physical unfoldment. It is true that
Lamark, the real Western discoverer of Evolution, taught that Desire and Mental Craving, was the real force behind
Evolution, but his ideas were jeered at by his contemporaries, and are not
regarded seriously by the majority
of Evolutionists even today. And yet
he was nearer to the truth than Darwin or any other Western Evolutionist. And time will show that Science has overlooked his genius, which
alone throws the true light upon the subject.
In order to see just this difference between the Darwinian school and
the Yogi Teachings let us examine into what causes
the Western Evolutionists give for the fact of Evolution itself. We shall do
this briefly.
The Darwinians
start out to explain the causes of the
"Origin of Species," with the statement that "no two individuals of the same species are
exactly alike; each tends to
vary." This is a self-evident fact. and is very properly used as a starting point for Variation. The next step is then stated as
"variations are transmitted,
and therefore tend to become permanent," which also is self-evident, and
tends to prove the reasonableness of
the gradual evolution of species. The
next step in the argument is "as man produces new species and forms, by breeding, culture, etc.,
so has Nature in a longer time
produced the same effect, in the
same way." This also is reasonable, although it tends to personify Nature, and
to give it a mind before the evolutionists admit "mind" was
evolved.
It will be as well to quote
Darwin himself on this point. He says: "As man can produce, and certainly
has produced, a great result by his methodical and unconscious means of
selection, what may not natural selection effect? Man can act only on external
and visible characters, while Nature, if I may be allowed to personify the
natural preservation or survival of the
fittest, cares nothing for appearances except in so far as they are
useful to any being. She can act on every
internal organ, on every shade of constitutional difference, on the
whole machinery of life. Man selects only for his own good; Nature only for the good of the being which she tends. Every
selected character is fully
exercised by her, as is implied by the fact of their selection. Man keeps
the natives of many climates in the
same country; he seldom exercises
each selected character in some peculiar and fitting manner; he feeds a
long-beaked and a short-beaked pigeon on the same food; he does not exercise a long-backed or long-legged quadruped in any
peculiar manner; he exposes sheep with long hair and short wool in the
same climate. He docs not allow the most vigorous males to struggle for the
females. He does not rigidly destroy all
inferior animals, but protects during each varying season, so far as
lies in his power, all his productions. He often begins his selection by some
half-monstrous form, or at least by some
modification prominent enough to catch the eye or to be plainly useful to
him. Under Nature the slightest differences
of structure or constitution may well turn the nicely balanced scale in the
struggle for life, and so be preserved. How fleeting are the wishes and efforts of man! how short his time! and consequently how poor will be his results, compared
with those accumulated by nature
during whole geological periods !
Can we wonder, then, that Nature's productions should be far 'truer' in character than man's productions; that they should be infinitely
better adapted to the most complex
conditions of life, and should
plainly bear the stamp of far higher workmanship ?"
Darwin's theory of survival of the fittest is begun by the statement of the fact that the number of organisms that survive are very small compared with the number that are
born. To quote his own words, "There
is no exception to the rule that every organic being naturally increases at so high a rate that, if not destroyed, the earth would soon be covered by the progeny
of a single pair. Even slow-breeding man has
doubled in twenty-five years, and at this rate in less than a thousand years there would literally
not be standing room for the
progeny." It has been computed
that if the offspring of the elephant, which is believed to be the slowest breeding animal known, were to survive, there would be about 20,000,000
elephants on the earth in 750
years. The roe of a single cod contains eight or nine millions of eggs,
and if each egg
were to hatch, and the fish survive, the sea would
shortly become a solid mass of codfish. The house fly
is said to have 20,000,000 descendants in a season, counting several
generations of progeny, from its several broods. And
some scientist has computed that the aphis, or
plant-louse, breeds so rapidly, and in such
enormous quantity, that the tenth generation of one
set of parents would be so large that it would contain
more ponderable animal matter than would the
population of China, which is estimated at 500,-000,000!
And this without counting the progeny preceding the tenth
generation!
The
result of the above conditions is very plain. There
must ensue a Struggle for Existence, which necessitates the Survival of the
Fittest. The weak are crushed out by the strong; the
swift out-distance the slow. The individual forms or
species best adapted to their environment and best
equipped for the struggle, be the equipment physical or
mental, survive those less well equipped or less well
adapted to environment. Animals evolving variations in
structure that give them even a slight advantage over
others not so favored, naturally have a better
chance to survive. And this, briefly, is what
Evolutionists call "The Survival of the Fittest."
As
appertaining to the Struggle for Existence, color and
mimicry are important factors. Grant Allen, in his work
on Darwin, says concerning this, and also as
illustrating "Natural Selection": "In the desert with
its monotonous sandy coloring, a black insect or a
white insect, still more a red insect or a blue insect, would be immediately
detected and devoured by its natural enemies, the birds and the lizards. But any
greyish or yellowish insects would be less likely to attract attention at first
sight, and would be overlooked as long as
there were any more conspicuous individuals of their own kind about for the
birds and lizards to feed on. Hence, in a very short time the desert
would be depopulated of all but the greyest and yellowest insects; and among
these the birds would pick out those which
differed most markedly in hue and
shade from the sand around them. But those which happened to vary most
in the direction of a sandy or spotty color would be more likely to survive, and to become the parents of future
generations. Thus, in the course of
long ages, all the insects which inhabit
deserts have become sand-colored, because the less sandy were
perpetually picked out for destruction by
their ever-watchful foes, while the most sandy escaped, and multiplied and
replenished the earth with their own likes."
Prof. Clodd, remarking upon this fact, adds: "Thus, then, is explained
the tawny color of the larger animals that inhabit the desert; the stripes
upon the tiger, which parallel with the vertical stems of bamboo, conceal him as he stealthily nears his prey;
the brilliant green of tropical birds; the leaf-like form and colors of certain insects; the dried,
twig-like form of many caterpillars;
the bark-like aperearance of tree-frogs ; the harmony of the ptarmigan's
summer plumage with the
lichen-colored stones upon which it sits; the dusky color of creatures that
haunt the night; the bluish transparency of animals
which live on the surface of the sea; the gravel-like color of flat-fish
that live at the bottom; and the gorgeous
tints of those that swim among the coral reefs."
All
this does not run contrary to the Yogi Philosophy,
although the latter would regard these things as but the
secondary cause for the variation and survival of species, etc. The Oriental
teachings are that it is the desire of the animal that causes it
to assume the colors and shapes in
accordance with its environment,
the desire of course operating along sub-conscious lines of physical manifestation. The mental influence, which is the real cause of the
phenomena, and which is taught as such by the Yogis, is almost lost
sight of by the Western Evolutionists, who are apt to regard Mind as a
"by-product" of matter. On the contrary, the Yogis regard Matter
as the product of Mind. But there is no conflict here as far as regards
the law of the Survival of the Fittest. The insects that most desired to become sand-colored became so. and were thus protected, while their less
"desireful" brethren were
exterminated. The Western scientist explains the outward phenomena, but
does not look for the cause behind
it, which is taught by the Oriental sages.
The doctrine of "Sexual Selection" is another of the leading
tenets of the Darwinists. Briefly, it may be expressed as the theory that
in the rivalry and struggle of the males for the females the strongest males win the day, and thus transmit their particular qualities to their
offspring. Along the same lines is that of
the attraction exerted by bright colors in the plumage of the males of birds, etc., which give them an advantage in the eyes of the females, and thus,
naturally, the bright colors are
perpetuated.
This, then, is the brief
outline of the Story of Man's Physical
Evolution, as stated by Western Science,
and compared with the Yogi Teachings. The student should compare the two ideas, that he may harmonize and reconcile them. It must be remembered, however, that Darwin did not teach
that Man descended from the monkeys,
or apes, as we know them now. The
teaching of Western Evolution is that the
apes, and higher forms of monkey life descended from some common ancestral form, which same ancestor was also the ancestor of Man. In other
words, Man and Apes are the
different branches that emerged from
the common trunk ages ago. Other forms doubtless
emerged from the same trunk, and perished because less adapted to their
environments. The Apes were best adapted to
their own environments, and Man was best adapted to his. The weaker
branches failed.
One
must remember that the most savage races known to
us today are practically as far different from the
highest American, European or Hindu types of Man as from the highest Apes.
Indeed, it would seem far easier for a high
Ape to evolve into a Kaffir, Hottentot, or Digger Indian, than for the
latter to evolve into an Emerson, Shakespeare, or Hindu Sage. As Huxley has
shown, the brain-structure of Man compared with that of the Chimpanzee shows
differences but slight when compared with the difference between that of the Chimpanzee and that of the
Lemur. The same authority informs us that in the important feature of the deeper brain furrows, and intricate
convolutions, the chasm between the highest civilized man and the lowest
savage is far greater than between the lowest savage and the highest man-like
ape. Darwin, describing the Fuegians, who are among the very lowest forms of
savages, says: "Their very signs and expressions are less intelligible to
us than those of the domesticated animal. They are men who do not possess the
instinct of those animals, nor yet appear to boast of human reason, or at
least of arts consequent upon that reason."
Professor
Clodd, in describing the "primitive man," says: "Doubtless he was lower
than the lowest of the savages of today-a powerful, cunning biped, with keen
sense organs always sharper, in virtue of constant exercise, in the savage
than in the civilized man (who supplements them by science), strong instincts,
uncontrolled and fitful emotions, small faculty of wonder, and nascent
reasoning power; unable to forecast
tomorrow, or to comprehend yesterday, living from hand to mouth on the
wild products of Nature, clothed in skin and bark, or daubed with clay, and
finding shelter in trees and caves; ignorant of the simplest
arts, save to chip a stone missle, and perhaps to produce fire; strong in his
needs of life and vague sense of right to it and to what he could get, hut
slowly impelled by common perils and passions to form ties, loose and haphazard at the outset, with his kind, the
power of combination with them depending on sounds, signs and gestures."
Such was the
ancestral man. Those who are interested in him are referred to the two wonderful
talcs of the cave-man written in the form of
stories by two great modern novelists. The books referred to are (I) "The Story of Ab," by
Stanley Waterloo, and (2) "Before Adam," by Jack
London. They may be obtained from any
bookseller. Both are works of fiction. with
the scientific facts cleverly interwoven into them.
And now in conclusion before we pass on the subject of
"Spiritual Evolution," which will form the subject of our next lesson, we would again call your attention to the
vital difference between the Western and
the Eastern Teachings. The Western holds to a mechanical theory of life, which works without the necessity of antecedent Mind, the latter
appearing as a "product" at a certain stage. The Eastern holds
that Mind is back of, under, and
antecedent to all the work of Evolution-the cause, not the
effect or product. The Western claims that
Mind was produced by the struggle of Matter to produce higher forms of
itself. The Eastern claims that the whole process of Evolution is
caused by Mind striving, struggling and pressing
forward toward expressing, itself more fully-to liberate itself from the
confining and retarding Matter-the
struggle resulting in an Unfoldment which causes sheath after sheath of the
confining material bonds to be thrown off and
discarded, in the effort to release
the confined Spirit which is behind even the Mind. The Yogi
Teachings are that the Evolutionary Urge
is the pressure of the confined Spirit striving to free itself from the
fetters and bonds which sorely oppress it.
The struggle and pain of Evolution is the parturition-pangs
of the Spiritual deliverance from the womb of Matter. Like all birth it
is attended by pain and suffering, but the end justifies it all. And as the
human mother forgets her past suffering in the joy of witnessing the face, and form, and life, of her loved child, so will the soul forget the pain of the
Spiritual birth by reason of the beauty and nobility of that which will Ik born to and from it.
Let us study well
the story of Physical Evolution, but let us not lose ourselves in it, for it is
but the preliminary to the story of the Unfoldment of the Soul.
Let us not despise
the tale of the Body of Man- for it is the story of the Temple of the Spirit
which has been built up from the most
humble beginnings. until it has reached the present high stage. And yet even this is but the beginning,
for the work will go on, and on, and on, in the spirit of those beautiful
lines of Holmes:
"Build thee mora stately
mansions, oh, my soul ! As the swift seasons roll! Leave the low-vaulted past!
Let each new temple, nobler than the last, Shut thee from heaven with a dome more
vast, Tillthou, atlast art free. Leaving thine outgrown shell by life's unresting
sea.
|