Parinama-A Vedic concept of evolution?

One cannot deny the fact of evolution which is scientifically tested, abundantly evidenced and even demonstrable by documentation . Not without sounding silly, living in a well of dogmas and dying an ignorant man.

Yet why does it face such strong opposition? Because naturally, it throws all kinds of creationist ideas to their death kneels, challenging the vast majority of belief systems on the most fundamental of beliefs- of creation itself.  The tug of war between the two sides rages on in the west, not really for victory(because as already said, there's really no scope for debate about the fact of it but perhaps only in the details) but rather for public space, adequacy or absence of textbook representation and the like.

However there are some extant belief systems which are not at such complete, ireeconcilable odds with evolutionary biology. Namely the Dharmika systems of south Asia, and specifically, the Vedic philosophical system which forms the elite core of what is today the 'religion' Hinduism.

The reason for it's uniqueness no doubt was because the Vedic philosophy was not the result of any one man's dictats or personal predilections, nor was it codified with dogmatic effect in one single text for all eternity. It had hundreds of contributing philosophers whose work spans many thousands of years. Many of these men(rishis as the modern Hindu calls them fondly) were devoted to more ritualistic aspects of their tradition but some of them were given to varying extents and depths of rationalism, observation, philosophy and some the seminal discoveries in mathematics and astronomy.

One of them was Mahidasa Aitareya, to whose authorship tradition ascribes all the Aitareya texts- Brahmana, Aranyaka and Upanishad- which is too vast a corpus for any one man to have composed, but let us not go there now. He was named after his mother Itara. Not much more is known about his life other than what later commentators no doubt cooked up.

What is special about this rishi is that he is probably one of the earliest on whom we may confer the title 'philosopher'. Indeed passages in the texts ascribed to him are possibly the first to ponder over phenomenal things. While earlier Rig Veda devotes itself to the awe and extolling of the forces of nature, it is in the Aitareya that the outward tendencies of Vedic thought is begun to be reined in, tempered and whetted into a mighty philosophical tradition of the later Vedic age. And Mahidasa, no doubt, stands apart as one of the fathers of Vedic philosophy, if not the father.

When did he live? As cursorily explained here , and as will be dealt with in later posts, the Aitareya Brahmana belongs to a conservative date of 2500-2000 BCE. That could mean, he may one day be recognized as one of the world's oldest philosophers. But that hinges on a fresh, detailed and rigorous reappraisal of the Vedic literature, which as of now, is mired inescapably in the colonial dating scheme formulated by Max Mueller.

So let us read what he has to say in Aitareya Aranyaka II.2.5, amongst many other beautiful passages in the Aitareya texts..

Mahidasa sees something fishy going on in nature. And he explains it as best as that primitive bronze age would permit him.

So there! This early teleological outlook on the progression in nature from Mahidasa along with the  Sankhya philosophy wherein the entire phenomenal universe is posited to have evolved from the Pradhana, the sum total of all matter, we get Parinama, the Vedic opinion on the origin of species.

Of course, this is still at considerable odds with evolutionary biology. Evolution is directionless. There is no aim or goal in the intricate deltas of speciation. It proceeds by random mutations that get naturally selected.  Consciousness or higher intelligence is none of it's concern. Man gained self consciousness by dumb luck that piled up over millions of years. He is not the product of any grand scheme. He is still only a cog in the wheel.

 But still, it is interesting to know the brilliant mind of such an ancient man, whose fault was that he belonged in the wrong millennium.