Osho - When Charles Darwin first said, looking at man's physical frame, that it seems he has evolved from some species of monkeys, we were shocked and could not easily take it. How could man, who believed God was his father, suddenly come to replace God with the monkey? It came as a great blow to our egos, but there was no way out. Darwin backed his theory with powerful evidence. and the whole scientific discipline supported him. That is why, in spite of tremendous opposition, it had to be accepted. There was no way out.



There is so much similarity, both physical and mental, between man and monkey that it is difficult to deny Darwin. Even the ways of their being and living are so strikingly similar that we had to accept that man is very much linked with the monkey. Even today, when we walk our hands move rhythmically with our moving legs -- the left hand with the right leg and vice versa -- although it is not at all necessary for our hands to move. We can walk very well without moving our hands; those whose hands are amputated walk as easily. Evidently Darwin thinks that this movement of the hands is only a habit, a hangover from out old life as monkeys millions of years ago when we walked on all fours. Even the little opening where a monkey has its tail is discernible on man's body as a linkage. It indicates that man had a tail when he was a monkey.



In this context Hanumana is very significant. Had he known about Hanumana, Darwin would have been greatly pleased. Darwin was searching for the missing link between monkey and man; he believed that there must be some species in the evolution of man from monkey who was halfway between the two, neither a full monkey nor a complete man. Between the two there must be a transitory period which the monkey took to evolve into man; it is impossible that a monkey was all of a sudden transformed into a man. It should have been over millions of years when some monkeys became men and others remained monkeys.



Biologists and anthropologists are still wondering what happened to the missing link. A worldwide search is still underway to discover the skeleton of that intermediary between monkey and man. Hanumana seems to be, in many ways, related to that missing link, and it would be great if his skeleton were found. Darwin's theory met with stiff opposition, and it took a long time to be accepted. It was accepted because it was supported by proof.

I say yet another thing which is concerned with the evolution of man. I say that as man has evolved from the monkey at the level of his body, similarly, he evolved from the cow at the level of his soul. If the monkey is his predecessor on the physical side, the cow is his predecessor on the spiritual side. While man's physical frame has evolved from the monkey's body, his soul has evolved from the soul of the cow. Of course, in support of this theory we cannot advance proofs as direct and strong as Darwin's in support of his. But there are many other kinds of evidence in support of what I am saying: man as a soul has evolved from the cow.

It is not reason enough to call the cow our mother because we are an agricultural community and the cow has great use and importance for us. If it were so, we should have called the bull our father, which we did not. And we don't turn every utilitarian object into our mother. There is no reason to do so. The railway train has great utility for us and we cannot do without it, but we are not going to give it the status of a mother. No community calls the airplane mother, although it is so important to modern life. Never and nowhere has an object of utility been called mother, despite the fact that there are any number of things that have utility. And there is no relationship between motherhood and utility. There must be some other reasons for regarding the cow as our mother.

In my view, the cow is man's mother exactly in the same way as the monkey, according to Darwin, happens to be his father.

Excerpts by osho on Cow.

Gandhi, the father of the nation made a passionate appeal to ban cow slaughter in India. He wrote with great depth of feeling for the cow and called it a "poem of compassion". He said that the cow is the representative of the mute world of animals. With the language of its eyes the cow seems to be saying to Man that "God has not made you our master so that you could kill or eat or mistreat us. Instead He made you to be our friend and protector". Such a fine thought can only emerge from this land where the cow is a symbol of its civilization. The songs of glory of the cow is a priceless gift of India to the rest of the world.

Lord Krishna states in Srimad Bhagavad-Gita: chapter 10, verse 28

dhenunam asmi kamadhuk

dhenunam-among cows, asmi-I am, kamadhuk-the wish fulfilling cow

Among cows I am the wish fulfilling cow.

Cows are the foremost of all creatures in all the worlds. It is from cows that the means for sustaining the worlds has established. Cows are auspicious and sacred and the bequeathers of every blessing. Cows benefit humans with milk, yoghurt, cheese, butter and ghee. The Vedas have stated that the milk of a cow is equivalent to ambrosial nectar and that ghee derived from cows milk is the best of all libations poured onto the sacred fires of brahmins

Cow milk is the most compatible with human mothers milk then any other species in existence. This is because the DNA of the cow was specifically constructed to be harmonious with mammalian human DNA. So it can be clearly understood that cow DNA was designed so humans could benefit from cows products being milk, cheese, butter, cream and yoghurt.

There is much hue and cry for saviour of cow in India but let us ask ourselves two three questions crucial for welfare of cow

1.WHEN IN INDIA, FUNDS ISSUED AND RELEASED FOR POOR AND NEEDY DO NOT REACH THE DESTINED END i.e. TO MEN, THEN HOW CAN WE PRESUME OF SUCH FUNDS REACHING IN TOTALITY TO THE COWS WELFARE,

2. SECONDLY IN INDIA WHEN A POOR PEASANT IS CONFRONTED WITH A SITUATION THAT HIS COW HAS BECOME MILKLESS AND IS NOW OF NO USE TO HIM, AND THAT IF HE SELLS HIS COW MAY BE TO A BUTCHER THEN ONLY HE WILL BE ABLE TO PURCHASE A NEW ONE MILKING, THEN WHAT OPTIONS DO HE HAVE, IF NOT TO SELL HIS DEAR COW.



Therefore we at margdarshak are into a different project of funding the poor peasants so that cows do not reach the slaughter hoses and secondly of purchasing the non milking cows from poor man on the rates being so given to him by killers and further getting these cows treated so that they again begin lactating and then return them to poor at large.