Kundalini and Evolving Human Nature

by Paul Pond and Eileen Holland

"An enlightened consciousness is never possible without a biological transformation."
Gopi Krishna in The Awakening of Kundalini

As John White so astutely expresses it, "The grand theme of history is the evolution of consciousness—a story of ever more complex forms of life coming into physical being in order to express more fully the consciousness behind existence itself." But instead of scientific knowledge and spiritual knowledge combining to propel the race to its magnificent destiny, the gulf between the two has widened. We believe that Kundalini is the bridge that joins these two processes, that it is the bridge to understanding.

This paper will examine the various theories of evolution attempting to show that biological and spiritual evolution are not necessarily incompatible. Many theories allude to an inner "urge" or force propelling human beings, in particular, forward and upward. We suggest that this "urge" or force is consistent with the ancient concept of Kundalini.

The Kundalini hypothesis holds that there is a biological transformation effected through a rejuvenating activity of the reproductive system which then refines the nervous system and ultimately the brain. This differs from Darwinian theory that genes are transmuted randomly through external environmental selection.

The Kundalini hypothesis also implies that the human brain has a pre-determined goal, i.e., higher consciousness. Once such a process is proven scientifically, current theories on evolution will have to be revised. The Darwinian concept of the struggle for existence or the survival of the fittest is not in accord with spiritual ideals and it is the belief that this concept applies to humans in the same way it applies to animals that has brought the world to its present crisis. Evolution has proceeded to its present level and man has become a self-conscious being. For human evolution to continue, man must now become a willing participant in this process.

The requirements necessary for the healthy evolution of the human race, according to the Kundalini hypothesis, will be examined in detail in this paper. As Ouspensky observes, "man must acquire qualities which he thinks he already possesses." The quest for these qualities is not a new phenomenon. It has been the recommendation of all schools of thought through the ages, i.e., self-discovery, moderation in thought and action, honesty, restraint, kindness, dedication to truth and love.

The need for humans to be conscious participants in the evolution of the race is essential. A deeper understanding of Kundalini and its influence on consciousness is equally essential.


In scientific circles, evolution, including that of the human race, stands an established fact. Yet the driving force or "how" of this evolutionary process remains empirically unsolved. It is this "how" that is not satisfactorily explained by the currently accepted theory of evolution. To say that man’s rise from the animal kingdom was due to random mutations and "natural selection" still provides no answer. John White has expressed the viewpoint of many scientists and scholars of the 19th and 20th centuries. "The grand theme of history is the evolution of consciousness—a story of ever more complex forms of life coming into physical being in order to express more fully the consciousness behind existence itself."[1]

The currently held theory of evolution, a synthesis of Darwin’s theory and genetics, has nothing to say about consciousness. Yet the most highly evolved of creatures is distinguished from other animals more by its consciousness than its physical attributes. Further, current evolutionary theory has nothing to say about the goal or direction of human evolution. It lacks the predictive power required of "good" scientific theories.

The shortcomings of Darwinism aside, it seems to be the best we have so far. But there are other perspectives on how our world and species came into being. Many of these have religious underpinnings and, if taken literally, share no common ground with other scientific approaches. For example, creationist type theories explain away the "how" of evolution by saying a spiritual God outside this world brought the whole of creation into being from nothing in a few "days." Some form of this view was held by natural science into the 18th century. Today this view conflicts with fossil and other scientific evidence. To say the least, the creationist view appears as an oversimplification to the empirical scientist.

In the extreme we have two points of view—scientific and religious. The scientific ignores consciousness, ascribes human advance in evolution to random mutation and some "magical" missing link, and has nothing to say about our future. The religious view that we accept things on faith alone is inconsistent with empirical evidence, and does not explain "how" we evolved. It relies on knowledge available from subjective states of consciousness, and the interpretation over time of ancient scriptures handed down by those claiming "mystical experience."

In the present work we will focus on the evolution of human consciousness—for it is our consciousness that differentiates us and makes us human. This process has not been satisfactorily explained by either science or religion, although both have elements of appeal. Science gives us verifiable evidence while religion gives us the comforting idea of an intelligence and purpose behind creation.

Present day science has no clearly defined way to study subjective states of consciousness such as those experienced by the mystic or genius. We believe that the study of Kundalini offers a way of bridging the objectivity gap between empirical science and the variety of historical spiritual experience. We will be able to develop a better understanding of how our human nature evolved. Consequently, the gulf between science and religion can be reduced and combining these now disparate disciplines can help propel the human race to its evolutionary destiny.

Evolution: Ideas and Theories

We will begin by outlining various ideas on the evolution of human nature. Within this framework our purpose is to review the highlights of these concepts. We find that the general trend of ideas concerning the evolution of man is more than materialistic. Ever since Darwin’s time, it has been attributed to some unknown or unknowable driving force.

Darwin was not the lone 19th century proponent of the continuous evolution of living beings, although his theory has been the most empirically satisfying so far. On the Origin of Species contained three important aspects: it recognized evolution as a fact; presented data demonstrating the fact; and developed a theory of the way evolution took place.[2] Darwin took as fact that all organisms exhibit variability and reproduce many more offspring than survive. He concluded that the environment "selects" those individuals best suited to survive (natural selection), and that the characteristics favored by natural selection are passed on to the next generation. How these characteristics were passed on was left to Mendel to describe in his work on heredity. The concepts of natural selection and heredity have been combined to form the generally accepted theory of evolution in use today. Although this synthetic theory reasonably describes the material aspect of the evolutionary process, it has nothing to say about how humans developed and in what way they could be evolving. The qualities of morality and ethics—those that make us "human" are excluded from our currently accepted theory. In addition, the theory seems to describe where we have been but does not tell us where we are going—it has nothing to say about the future of the human race.

The concept of the continuous evolution of living beings apparently dates back to Lucretius and classical times. The idea was mentioned during the Renaissance by Spinoza and Leibnitz and in 1790 by Kant. Among the first scientists to propose an evolutionary type theory was Louis Moreau de Maupertuis in his System de la Nature, 1751. In fact, de Maupertuis anticipated the concept of natural selection in his Essai de Cosmologe: "In the fortuitous combination of the products of nature . . . only those with certain adaptive relationships could survive . . . and the blind destiny produced."[3] In 1809 Jean Baptiste Lamarck published his views on evolution in Philosophic Zoologique Lamarck’s theory consisted of two main points. The first is that new structures appear in organisms because of an "inner want." The second is that these new structures are acquired in response to need and then inherited by later generations. While Lamarck’s hypothesis seemed reasonable at the time, it failed to overcome several objections. For example, there was no known way by which somatic cells pass characteristics on to reproductive cells and the inheritance of acquired characteristics has not been generally validated by experiment. Lamarck seemed to have good insight into the concept of evolution but not the theory to explain it.[2] It should be noted that Lamarck tried to explain one of Darwin’s observed facts, i.e., the variability within species. This would be like trying to explain why the speed of light is constant.

Alfred Russell Wallace, a contemporary of Darwin, independently developed a similar theory of evolution based on natural selection and "survival of the fittest." Darwin won public recognition with his masterly presentation and enormous body of facts in support of his theory. In 1864 Wallace wrote about a fundamental change in the nature of the evolutionary process as it related to the evolution of man. He appears to be one of the first to realize that a fundamental change had taken place in the nature of the evolutionary process with the coming of man. In the second volume of his autobiography, My Life, Wallace sums up the difference between Darwin’s view and his own. Darwin’s concept was that there was no difference in kind between man’s nature and animal nature—only a difference in degree. Wallace’s view was "that there is a difference in kind, intellectually and morally, between man and other animals; and while his body was undoubtedly developed by the continuous modification of some ancestral animal form, some different agency, analogous to that which first produced organic life and the originated consciousness, came into play in order to develop the higher intellectual and spiritual nature of man."[3] It is the concept of this "agency" related to man’s intellectual, moral and spiritual development that we will come back to later.

The French philosopher, Henri Bergson, proposed that the source of ultimate reality was ‘elan vital’ (vital impulse) and that this reality can be grasped only by metaphysical intuition. In his work Creative Evolution he treats "evolution as a continuous creation in which the ‘elan vital’ pushes outward from inside every living organism in an effort to achieve perfection and freedom. This impulse is the source of energy which impels a being to improve himself and to push over any obstacle which bars the way. The ‘elan vital’ is the source of all evolutionary change although this process may be stopped or diverted."[4]

Bergson saw in the "evolution of life . . . a crossing of matter by creative consciousness, an effort to set free, by force of ingenuity and invention, something which in animals still remains imprisoned and is only finally released when we reach man."[5]

The principal objection to the theory of creative evolution was that its use of a mysterious vital impulse and its substitution of intuition for intellect lead to mysticism.[4] Bergson objected to the usual Darwinian concept of evolution because it dealt with the products of evolution, mistaking them for the evolutionary process itself. It will be of interest to us later to note how Bergson related reproduction and evolution. "Both are the manifestation of an inward impulse . . . of two instincts which make their appearance with life and later become the two great motives of human activity, love and ambition."[5]

Even before he had distinguished himself as an accomplished paleontologist, Teilhard de Chardin[6]was deeply affected by Bergson’s concept of ‘elan vital.’ He separated himself from the traditional dualistic attitudes toward mind and matter. Teilhard became convinced that mind and matter are not two antagonistic substances but two aspects of the same cosmic stuff. He felt it was fallacious to confine consciousness only to higher forms of life and believed the "within" or "consciousness" is a dimension that pervades all cosmic matter, although at different intensities. In this view, matter is more than just lifeless atoms and particles. Teilhard believed that even at an apparently mechanical level some slight form of consciousness is concealed—so called inanimate matter has this ‘conscious within’ adhered to it at some subtle level. Further, the increasingly developed ‘conscious’ is always accompanied by a correspondingly better and more complete material framework. According to Teilhard, the higher development of life cannot be explained by the accepted realities of natural selection, a struggle for existence and random mutations. He postulates the existence of a force intrinsic to cosmic matter which systematically makes life more complex.

Thus "evolution possesses a definite direction, progressing on a chosen axis" with an upward development from one zoological stratum to another, marked by two common features. First, the nervous system becomes notably more refined and concentrated. Second, the brain becomes larger and more convoluted. Teilhard considered these external features as proof of the `conscious within’s’ determination to have the human species attain its evolutionary goal—the Omega Point of Infinite Consciousness. He believed that "the living world consists intrinsically of consciousness clothed in flesh," consequently the axis on which evolution drives ahead is of a spiritual and not a material nature.[6]

Teilhard emphasized some important differences with purely mechanistic concepts of evolution. One point was that man is not comparable with his antecedents because his thinking enables him to intervene in the course of his own evolution. Another point was that man must develop intellectually, spiritually and morally as well as biologically.[7]

Finally, as human development approaches the Omega Point, Teilhard foresaw an alliance of science and religion. He considered science and religion not as opposites but two sides or two phases of a single act of knowledge.[6]

R. M. Bucke[8] makes the case that the human race is in the process of evolving toward a new kind of consciousness—which he calls cosmic consciousness. This cosmic state is a higher form of consciousness than the self consciousness now possessed by mankind. In his analysis Bucke classifies consciousness into three grades. One is simple consciousness possessed by the upper half of the animal kingdom which has an awareness of things around them and that their limbs are part of themselves. Two, self consciousness as possessed by human beings—an awareness of themselves as distinct entities with the capacity to develop language. Three, cosmic consciousness marked by an awareness of the life and order of the universe. According to Bucke, this cosmic sense is characterized by a number of distinct features including: subjective light, moral elevation, intellectual illumination or genius, loss of fear of death, feelings of indescribable elation and joy, the suddenness of the awakening, change in personality. These characteristics were gleaned from an examination of the lives and writings of a number of great mystics and geniuses. Bucke believed that these individuals were forerunners of the men and women of the future, i.e., that as individuals the race was evolving toward this higher state of cosmic consciousness. He was quick to point out that possession of the cosmic sense did not imply omniscience or infallibility.

Bucke presents a model of how the intellect evolves, indicating percepts (registration of sense impressions), recepts (composite image of hundreds/thousands of percepts), concepts (a named recept, implies possession of a language), and intuition. Bucke does not attribute this evolutionary process to any mechanism or driving force. Nor does he suggest any physiological changes that might accompany this evolution. He does, however, give the evolution of consciousness a quantifiable goal or direction—that of mystical experience. We shall explore the importance of his idea later.

The mathematician and philosopher P. D. Ouspensky[9] studied man from the point of view of what he may become—his "possible" evolution. He attempted to understand what the evolution of man meant and looked for any special conditions for it. His fundamental premise was that "man as we know him is not a completed being; that nature develops him up to a certain point;" after that any further development must come from man’s own effort. In a sense, then, man chooses to develop, remain static or degenerate. Thus the evolution of man means the development of certain inner qualities which would otherwise remain undeveloped and cannot be developed by themselves. He also maintained that this inner development can only occur under certain definite conditions with the aid of inner effort and knowledge of certain methods. For Ouspensky, without personal effort and help, evolution is impossible. "With right methods and the right efforts man can acquire control of consciousness and become conscious of himself with all that it implies."

Some other aspects of Ouspensky’s approach should be mentioned here for later comparison. He discusses four mind centers in the body related to the brain and spinal column and which control our ordinary actions. These centers must be working right for man to develop and this development requires certain necessary conditions. He must understand his present position and difficulties and must have a strong desire to get out of his present state. His external conditions must be right—sufficient free time to study and an environment suitable to study. A school would also be necessary with an ordered life accompanied by sufficient personal freedom, i.e., the right political conditions. Ouspensky talks about the necessary desire to improve but does not discuss or explain what gives rise to this desire.

Recently, Alistair Hardy[3] has attempted to expand Darwinism by arguing that the science of evolution can no longer be fundamentally materialistic. He acknowledges the fact that "a great deal of the process of evolution can be reduced to physical and chemical processes; but that this reductionism will not explain the more important part of life." His view parallels those of Wallace and Teilhard, that evolution is also of a spiritual nature.

Present day research on the brain and the study of consciousness is also coming to the conclusion that material reductionism is not enough to explain how the brain/mind complex works, let alone the phenomena of creativity and genius.

In this section we have considered the theories of Darwin, Lamarck, Wallace, Bergson, Bucke, Teilhard, Ouspensky, and briefly Hardy in relation to the evolution of ‘human nature.’ All but Darwin, it seems, had something to say about an inner desire, impulse or agency driving mankind forward/upward toward a particular goal. Often, when the target of evolution was clearly defined, the impulse or mechanism was left unexplained or vice versa. None of these ingenious theories discuss the physiology of the mechanism or root of the driving force within the human frame. Consequently, most of these ideas seem unverifiable and are dismissed as mystical—reinforcing the schism between science and religion. We believe that we can bridge this disparity and come to a better understanding of the evolutionary process in human beings by investigating the ancient concept of Kundalini and approaching evolution from the perspective suggested by Gopi Krishna.[10]

The Concept of Kundalini

According to Hindu tradition and Yoga, Kundalini is a latent force/energy in the human organism responsible for mystical experience. In the Serpent Power, Arthur Avalon describes Kundalini-Shakti as the "Supreme Power in the human body by the arousing of which Yoga is achieved . . . Kundalini is in fact the cosmic energy in bodies and as such the cause of all and though manifesting as, is not confined to, any of her products."[11] In this way Kundalini is seen as a force dormant in human beings that can be aroused to activity through certain disciplines such as the various forms of Yoga. Traditionally one who has some success at yoga may gain talents relating to creativity, genius, psychic ability and mystical experience. It was known in India that the awakening process has the possibility of a morbid outcome in the form of mental illness or insanity.

Drawing upon his own personal experience and the Indian esoteric tradition, Gopi Krishna has postulated that Kundalini represents a specific psychosomatic power centre in human beings and that human evolution has proceeded by the action of this mechanism in the human body and brain. He claims that human evolution is irresistibly proceeding toward a predetermined target—mystical consciousness. In this framework the reproductive system is also the somatic mechanism by which evolution proceeds. Gopi Krishna describes the process of a Kundalini awakening in terms of the amount and strength of bioenergy (for our purpose here we shall take the term bioenergy to be interchangeable with the esoteric concept of prana) stored in the cells and tissues as a consequence of  the heightened activiity of the reproductive and nervous systems. He maintains that the "enhanced flow of a more potent form of bioenergy into the brain" is responsible for the blissful visions of the mystic, the creations of the genius, the bewildering performances of the psychic, and the mental torment of the insane. He stresses that this bioenergy is intelligent in its operation and performs every function and activity in the body in an extremely subtle manner. The flow of bioenergy is imperceptible to the average individual. But upon the awakening it assumes a more radiant form that is internally discernible. It is this change in the bioenergy that is responsible for the splendor and luminous phenomena associated with mystical experience.[12] Gopi Krishna’s hypothesis links the experience of the mystic, genius, psychic and mentally ill. He proposes that a sustained experience of mystical consciousness must be accompanied by changes in the brain and nervous system. Accordingly, "Kundalini is . . . a very definite quantifiable force, which when it reaches the brain, has definite physical and chemical impact upon it which in turn causes a change in the level of consciousness."[10] In other words, it is the 'missing link’ of human evolution—the psycho-physiological linkage between sexual and mystical experience. Kundalini then provides a bridge between the inner experience of the mystic and the outer experience of the physical senses—an empirically verifiable relationship between religion and science.

Interpreting Kundalini as the evolutionary energy provides us with a framework in which to examine the ideas and theories of evolution presented earlier and to see their common thread. The ‘inner need’ of Lamarck, the 'agency’ of Wallace, the 'elan vital’ of Bergson, the 'conscious within’ of Teilhard de Chardin are all partial descriptions of the Kundalini process.

For example, Teilhard pointed out that changes in the brain and nervous system occur as evolution progresses. He referred to the grosser changes such as the size and convolution of the brain. Now the changes wrought by Kundalini are at a more subtle level.[10] Teilhard has also argued that evolution possesses a definite direction. This idea is consistent with the concept of a predetermined target—mystical experience. The concept of a directed evolutionary process has also been shown to be consistent with extensions of Neo-Darwinism.[13]

The mysterious ‘elan vital’ of Bergson, the source of evolutionary change, becomes the less mysterious Kundalini. All the esoteric literature now becomes available for us to study and interpret. This evolutionary change now has a direction and purpose. As Kundalini relates the evolutionary process with the reproductive system, Bergson also related reproduction and evolution as "manifestations of an inward impulse." The awakening of Kundalini is a re-starting of the mechanism working in the womb from conception onward. It is in fact a rebirth (the same rebirth referred to in the Christian scriptures).

Wallace suggested a different agency coming "into play in order to develop the higher intellectual and spiritual nature of man." These higher natures are the targets of evolution and the ‘different agency’ is Kundalini.

We have related the ideas of other scholars to the Kundalini hypothesis to show the beauty and profundity of the idea. In one conceptual step Gopi Krishna has related apparently independent states of consciousness and found the lever or mechanism by which they may be obtained. Thus, he has linked them somatically in a way that lends itself to establishing an empirical relationship to subjective states of higher consciousness. Without Kundalini—the link—the phenomena of creativity, genius, mystical experience, psychic ability and morbid states of consciousness are destined to be viewed as capricious and mysterious. This Kundalini hypothesis also gives us direction for understanding the evolutionary process and the proper code of conduct that the human race must observe.

Darwinism, Yoga, and Kundalini

Yoga was developed as the science of its day. To understand its true significance we must view it as a complete system with a specific purpose. According to Gopi Krishna, "the disciplines of Yoga are aimed at accelerating the evolutionary process in human beings with the help of the organic lever known as Kundalini."[14] Yoga is not just a system for personal salvation. It is "merely the first step of a long process aimed to enlarge the capacity of the human encephalon, ultimately resulting in the establishment of a Super-science for the exploration of transcendental realities."[14] The methods and disciplines of yoga are there to provide for a healthy attainment of the target of the evolutionary process—mystical consciousness.

The first two limbs of the classical Yoga system described by Patanjali[15] relate to developing the proper codes of conduct and thought required before any spiritual (evolutionary) advancement can occur. The next three limbs lead the seeker to gain the necessary control of the physical senses. The final three stages— concentration (dharana), meditation (dhyana), complete absorption (samadhi) are meant to bring about control of consciousness.

Patanjali refers to the first two limbs as the Commandments and the Rules. Simply stated, the Commandments are non-injury, truthfulness, and abstention from stealing, impurity and covetousness. The Rules are austerity, charity, worship, spiritual reading and adherence to scriptural ordinances. It doesn’t take much to see that these are analogous to the basic tenets of the Judeo-Christian tradition as well as the Buddhist Commandments among others. At some point we must ask ourselves why these various traditions having different founders would have analogous guidelines for behavior. The answer is fundamental to the process of evolution and is explained by considering the mystic/genius to be a forerunner of the future man as suggested by Bucke.

When viewed from an evolutionary perspective these ordinances have profound meaning for human behavior. They imply that in order to evolve, mankind must obey certain rules and that evolutionary progress cannot be made without an advancement in man’s moral nature. The adherence to or violation of the basic tenets of religion carries with it definite physiological consequences for human beings. These basic principles espoused by religion are not just whimsical attitudes of mind but affect the entire human organism. Yoga and, in effect, all religious traditions, are founded on the principle of continually building man’s moral nature to eventually allow for the healthy evolution of the species. It is really on this point that religion and materialistic sciences differ. The greater our advancement in science, the greater the need for the development of our moral nature and hence our proper evolution. We need only observe the stockpiles of nuclear weapons to know the importance of this moral development.

Bergson, Bucke, Teilhard and others have referred to the development of a moral nature in human beings as a part of the evolutionary process. Professor J.B.S. Haldane has argued in Causes of Evolution that it is fallacious to assume that natural selection always makes a race of animals and plants better suited to survive.[3] The Kundalini hypothesis also breaks with Darwinism on this point. The concept of the "survival of the fittest" needs reinterpretation as it applies to human nature and moral development. Our struggle is not only one of physical strength. The length of limb, size of body, or speed of foot may still be important for survival in the animal kingdom. But it is no longer a critical factor for human survival. The amenities made available through the discoveries of science have changed that. In fact, according to the Kundalini hypothesis, these amenities have been provided to allow human beings the energy and time to evolve; that is, to make the struggle for existence less brutal.

To evolve properly man’s ‘struggle’ takes on an inner aspect. Ouspensky and Teilhard have pointed out that man must be a conscious participant in the evolutionary process. The problems faced by the very creative and talented often result from the fact that they are unaware of the source of their genius and are thus unaware of basic Commandments and Rules they must follow. The Kundalini hypothesis suggests that there is a law of evolution just as there is a law of gravity. The principles of basic operation of the law are contained in the spiritual and religious traditions of mankind and apply to the development of our moral nature. This Law is incompatible with our current understanding of the Darwinian concept of a struggle for existence.

Requirements for Healthy Evolution

As we have suggested, the disciplines of Yoga and the basic tenets of the major religious faiths are in fact necessary prescriptions for the healthy evolution of the human race. These traditions provide an established framework that may be used with minor changes over time to ensure our proper development. Simply put, we need to foster love, compassion and charity while subduing any tendency toward greed, aggression, hate, malice. We need to live in the world in a moderate way, controlling ambition, fostering detachment, keeping our body healthy with the proper diet and exercise. A healthy body is required to support the stronger demands of Kundalini activity. We need to set aside time for us to evolve. Our leisure time needs to be spent in a useful way toward this end. The amenities provided by science came to provide us the time and energy to do this.

Society must be structured to support the individual’s need to evolve. We must be able to provide sufficient food, shelter and comfort. No doubt major changes in the economic and political structure of all societies will have to occur. These changes should be brought about in a peaceful, harmonious way in tune with the evolutionary needs of the race.

Our religious institutions must change as well. Practitioners of all faiths need to realize what they have in common with other religious traditions. From an evolutionary perspective, the founders of the major faiths were the forerunners of future men and women. Dr. Bucke pointed out an illuminated individual is not, therefore, omniscient or infallible. Each faith should be able to practice its own traditions while recognizing the validity of others. In a sense the intelligence behind the universe has chosen us all and has exercised this choice in ways compatible with different cultures and climates. Religious intolerance is at the root of most of the strife in the world today. The hatred and aggression being fostered needs to be replaced by love and co-operation.

There are a number of critical points that should be understood in light of the Kundalini hypothesis if we are to evolve properly. The first is that the evolutionary impulse continues whether or not we are aware of it. Thus, if the life is not "balanced" in the proper way, an abortion of the process may take place. Accordingly, this abortive procedure takes place in the nervous system, brain and "mind". Nature has its own fail-safe device to ensure that its goals are attained. This also explains the often sudden or spontaneous occurrence of Kundalini related experiences. The driving force continues and when the system is ripe, the evolutionary impulse acts. The 'ripeness’ of the system is determined in part by heredity and has been discussed by both Bucke and Gopi Krishna.

A second point is that the Kundalini mechanism can be triggered by application of the mind or concentration. This is a very important point. Prayer, meditation, study, reading, watching television are all forms of mental application and thus stimulate the organic evolutionary mechanism. It is for this reason that too much concentration can be detrimental to our mental and physical well being. The Yogic system was devised for an agrarian society and should not be transferred wholesale to our present way of life. Our way of life must be balanced between physical effort and mental application.

Thirdly, the Kundalini hypothesis offers a reason for the idea of God. It is not a pathological condition of mind or a search for a father/mother figure. It is the ideal to which we are evolving, and serves as an anchor for the human mind. Our purpose is not to achieve great wealth or attain to power but to evolve to a higher state of consciousness in concert with the experience of mystics of the past. It is absolutely mandatory that our children come to know of the real purpose of their existence.

Finally, proper evolution requires that we be conscious participants in the process. We do have ‘free will’ to an extent. We can choose whether or not to evolve.


  1. ^ J.White, Human Being, Human Becoming, Chimo, Vol. 7, No. 5, Toronto, 1981
  2. ^ J. M. Savage, Evolution, 2nd Edition, Modern Biology Series, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston Inc., New York,
  3. ^ A. Hardy, Darwin and the Spirit of Man, William Collins & Sons, London, 1984
  4. ^ The Encyclopedia Americana, Vol. 8. The Americana Corp., 1980
  5. ^ H. Bergson, Mind Energy, Henry Holt and Company, New York 1920
  6. ^ J. Kopp, Teilhard de Chardin, A New Synthesis of Evolution, Paulist Press, Paramas, N.J., 1964
  7. ^ B. Delfgaauw, Evolution—The Theory of Teilhard de Chardin, English language version published by
    Fontana Books, London, and Harper and Row, New York, 1964
  8. ^ R.M. Bucke, Cosmic Consciousness, E. P. Dutton & Co. Inc., New York, 1969
  9. ^ P.D. Ouspensky,The Psychology of Man's Possible Evolution, Bantam Books Inc., New York, 1968
  10. ^ G. Krishna, Kundalini—The Evolutionary Energy in Man, Shambhala, Colorado, 1971 and
    The Awakening of Kundalini, F.I.N.D./KRF, Flesherton, Canada, 1989
  11. ^ A. Avalon, The Serpent Power, Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1974
  12. ^ G. Krishna, Autobiography, Part III, Chapter 4, Unpublished
  13. ^ G.P. Menos and K. Jones Menos, Revelation and Inspiration: Paranormal Phenomena in Light of the Kundalini Paradigm, Academy of Religion and Psychical Research, 14th Annual Conference 1989
  14. ^ G. Krishna, Yoga, A Vision of Its Future, Kundalini Research and Publication Trust, New Delhi, 1978
  15. ^ C. Johnston, The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, Brotherhood of Life, Albuquerque, 1983