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