{"collection":"Buddhism","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/bud/tib/drshen1.htm","path":"bud/tib/drshen1.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/bud/tib/drshen1.htm","text":"BUDDHISM IN OUR DAILY LIFE\nChina Academic Lectures\nSponsored by\nChina Institute in America, N.Y. USA\nBy Dr. C. T. Shen\nLECTURE 1:\nTHE CONCEPT OF BIRTH AND DEATH\nIn the Christian Bible, in the Book of John, Chapter XVI, Verse\n12, Jesus Christ tells his disciples, \"I have yet many things to say\nunto ye, but ye cannot bear them now.\" That is to say, what Christ did\nteach his disciples was only a small part of what he knew, because the\nlevel of understanding of his disciples at that time was such that\nthey could only absorb so much. Unfortunately, Jesus died at the age\nof 33. Time did not allow him\nto give his disciples a complete course of teaching. What Christ knew\nand did not say remains an unanswerable question.\nOn the other hand, Buddha lived for 80 years. He had 45 full\nyears from the time of his enlightenment to teach his disciples: long\nenough to gradually lead his disciples to learn and practice various\nstages of teaching, from a self-centered liberation from human\nsuffering to the most profound supramundane doctrine.\nIf we assume that these founders of two of the greatest religions\non earth were both persons possessed of profound wisdom, then many\nteachings expounded by Buddha could be those which Christ knew but did\nnot have time to teach.\nWith this view in mind, it seems to me that the study of Buddhism\nby Christians can have a special significance, that is, the search for\nwhat Christ knew but did not say.\nThe Buddhist concept of birth and death could be a good example\nof just such an area of thought. That is why I have said these few\nwords first.\nNow, let me go to the mysterious question which has hung over the\nhuman mind for thousands of years. The question is, \"What happens to\none after death?\" Practically all systems of political thought and\nphilosophical ideas, such as Confucianism, deal in\ntheir teaching only with the living. Confucius said, \"eve do not even\nknow the living, how can we know the dead?\" From a practical point of\nview, it is true that problems concerning the living are more\nimportant and intimate to us, but such an approach evades the search\nfor a real answer to the question. The fact of death, and the question\nas to what happens afterward, remain. Furthermore, it could very well\nbe that the attitude toward the living could be very much changed if\nwe knew what happen ed to one after death.\nIt should be noted that Confucius did not say that death is\nextinctions nor did he say that there is no future life after death.\nHe meant that to live as a decent person on earth is more important\nthan to search for the answer to life after death.\nMost religions, however, have a teaching about life after death.\nTwo teachings predominate among world religions: one is the one-life\ntheory and the other is the multi-life theory. The one-life theory\nsays that birth begins the life of a physical body, wherein a\nspiritual entity called the \"soul\" abides, and death is the\ndestruction of that body, but of the soul. After death, the soul,\ndepending upon the judgment of the creator, will ascend to heaven or\ndescend to hell. Christianity represents this theory. This teaching\nends here, somehow,- and goes no further. The implication is that each\nperson has only this one life on earth and will thereafter remain\neternally either in heaven, in bliss, or suffering in hell with no\nchance of ever leaving. Whether or not this implication represents a\ncomplete understanding of Christ's teaching is unclear. It could be\nthat Christ had much more to teach about birth and death, but, in his\ntime, even this limited concept of birth and death was not easy for\npeople to understand. He did not have time to teach them more and to\nbring them to a higher level understanding.\nThe multi-life theory says that the birth and death of a being is\nonly one segment of a chain of infinite lives of a being, who wanders\namong five major kinds of existence. The five existences are: heaven-\ndweller, human being, animal, ghost, and hell-dweller. After death a\nhuman being is reborn into another existence. He or she could again be\na human being or perhaps would be a heaven-dweller, or an animal, or a\nghost, or a hell-dwelIer. by extension, a dweller in hell can also be\nreborn as an animal, a human beings etc., and a heaven-dweller can\nalso die and be reborn as a human being, hell dweller, and so forth.\nThis change of life form, or existence, goes on indefinitely until and\nunless the chain breaks, which occurs when this concept of birth and\ndeath becomes no longer significant to a being.\nHinduism and Buddhism hold this multi-life theory, but with a\nmajor difference in their views, Hinduism sustains the belief that the\nconcept of birth and death becomes insignificant when the being is\nmerged with the Brahman--Almighty God. Buddhism says that it becomes\ninsignificant upon enlightenment, because the concept of birth and\ndeath is no longer applicable. To understand this Buddhist concept, we\nmust first understand that Buddhism explains world phenomena at two\nlevels: one is called the enlightened level, that is, realization of\nthe ultimate truth by the enlightened ones, and the other is called\nthe mundane level. which can be further divided into the intellectual\nlevel, where most of us here find ourselves, and the common level, to\nwhich the majority of the people on earth belong.\nAt the enlightened level, the concept of birth and death is no\nlonger applicable. I shall explain this later. At the mundane level,\nhowever, Buddhism holds the multi-life theory and recognizes the\nindividuality of a being, which can then be compared with the \"soul\"\nas taught in Christianity and Hinduism. The soul can therefore\nmaintain its individuality and appear in the form of a human being, or\nheaven-dweller, some kind of animal, a ghost, or a hell-dweller in\nconsecutive lives.\nI should point out, however, that the continuation of\nindividuality does not mean that a physical body will be transported\ninto the next life, or that everything stored in one's brain, which is\na part of the physical body, will pass into the next life. As a matter\nof fact, the physical body changes from moment to moment. Just look at\nphotographs taken some time ago and you will agree with me. What do\npass into the next life or future lives, and constitute the\ncontinuation of individuality, are the effects of what one's actions\nin this present life. This is called, in Buddhism and Hinduism, the\nlaw of karma, which I shall explain in my next talk.\nAt this point you might like to say, \"That is fine, but\n(1) please show me the heaven and hell where dwellers in those\nexistences may be found, and\n(2) please prove to me that I existed before my birth and will still\nbe in existence after my death.\"\nTo answer the first question, may I ask, \"Do you believe that\nyour own eyes are capable of seeing heaven or hell?\" If someone did\nshow us heaven or hell, would we not say that it was just an\nhallucination, or magic, and therefore not believe it? If you\nhave studied the electromagnetic spectrum, you may agree with me that\nour human eyes can only see an infinitesimal part of the universe. and\nthat there are so many things our eyes cannot see. A few hundred years\nago, no one could see the whole bone structure of a living human body,\nbut now we can see it by means of x-rays. We are advancing very\nrapidly in the investigation into the microscopic universe and also\ninto outer space. Who knows? Maybe a number of years from now, some\nnew detective instrument will be invented that will enable human\nbeings to see a different wave length from the presently visible light\nwave, and human beings may discover that the so-called hell is right\nhere on earth; or, space instruments will send back some picture of\nouter space that could turn out to be one of the heavens or worlds\npostulated by Buddha.\nWith respect to the second question, sporadic records all over\nthe world have reported that someone, an ordinary person, remembered\nhis past life, or that others. like certain Tibetan high lamas. could\ntell where they would be reborn. But all of these reports do not have\nenough scientific proof to convince us conclusively that rebirth does\nexist.\nI am, therefore, using another approach to see if there are some\nphenomena in the universe in which we live that can explain the\nconcept of birth and death and that may give some clues to this\nmysterious question. The ample reason that convinced me that this\napproach has merit is that we human beings are no more than a product\nof nature and are entirely governed by all the natural laws such as\ngravitational force. Therefore, the phenomena that apply to other\nnatural creations may very well be applicable to human beings.\nAs I studied the question, interestingly enough, I found a number\nof phenomena in the universe which provide good analogies to the\nmulti-life theory of human existence. The simplest and easiest for us\nto comprehend is the multi-form of H2O.\nDo we all know. H2O? Yes.\nH2O is the chemical formula for water, signifying two parts of\nhydrogen to one part of oxygen. The chemical formula H2O does not\nchange when water turns into vapor - at the boiling point or into ice\n- at the freezing point. Nor is H2O different when it appears in a\nbeautiful, white, crystallized form, which people give the name of\nsnow, or in minute liquid particles suspended in the air, called fog.\nNow a very interesting concept arises. When water disappears and\nis changed into vapor or ice, would you not say that at that very\nmoment, when the concept of birth and death is applied, that water is\ndead and vapor or ice is born? Or when snow or ice melts and becomes\nwater, would you not say that at that instant, snow or ice is dead and\nwater is born? This is not only true from your point of view, as an\noutside observer; it is also true from the point of view of water, if\nwater is identified only as water. However, if water is not\nidentified only as water, but also as H2O, then the concept of birth\nand death does not apply. H2O remains unchanged when its appearance\nchanges from water to vapor or ice or vice versa. H2O has not really\nundergone \"death and rebirth,\" although its appearance and physical\ncharacteristics may have changed an infinite number of times and\npeople may have given it many different names. H2O will not undergo\ndeath and rebirth in the future, although its appearance and physical\ncharacteristics will change numerous times until H2O disintegrates\ninto hydrogen and oxygen, which phenomenon I will explain later.\nFrom this analogy we can see that the multi-life theory as\nsuggested by Hinduism and Buddhism makes more sense and could be\ncloser to the truth than might have been apparent at first. I\ntherefore draw the following conclusions:\n1) Equivalent to H2O and its manifestations, such as water,\nvapor, snow, fog, or ice, there is something in the universe, which I\nrefer to as \"X', which is manifested in the five forms of\nheaven-dweller, human being, animal, ghost, and hell-dweller. In\nChristianity and Hinduism, \"X\" is called the soul. In Buddhism, at the\nmundane level, \"X\" can also be called the soul.\n2) The five forms of existence are interchangeable. Thus, a human\nbeing can be reborn as a heaven-dweller, or a ghost, or a\nhell-dweller. A heaven dweller can also be reborn as a human being, or\nan animal, or a ghost, or a hell-dweller. By the same token, a\nhell-dweller can also be reborn into other forms, --including that of\na human being.\n3) According to Buddhism, one cannot live in heaven eternally,\nnor will one stay in hell indefinitely. Life goes on, with its form\nchanging continuously. This phenomenon of the continuous flow of death\nand rebirth among the five existences is called 'samsara'.\n4) The concept of birth and death is only meaningful if one\nrefers to a specific object. If the reference is shifted to a more\nfundamental nature of that object, the concept of birth and death is\nnot applicable. Water and H2O are an example: water is the specific\nobject, H2O the more fundamental nature. A golden ring, which is a\nspecific object, and the raw gold, which is a more basic material,\nconstitute another good example.\n5.) This is important: If one identifies oneself as a human\nbeing, then one does undergo death and rebirth. The same applies to\nwater if water is identified as water or a golden ring if it is\nidentified as a golden ring. But, if one identifies oneself as \"X\",\nthen here is no death, even when the form of \"X\" appearing as a human\nbeing is destroyed. From the point of view of \"X\", there is only a\ncontinuous change of form, while \"X' remains unchanged. Again, the\nsame applies if water is identified as H2O or a golden ring as gold.\nTherefore, if we wish to be rid of death; or samsara, the first thing\nwe should avoid is to identify ourselves as human beings.\nUnfortunately, this goes entirely against our will. We are strongly\nattached to our identity as human beings, and that is why we are in\nsamsara.\nNow the basic purpose of Buddhist teaching is to enable one to\nremove oneself from samsara. Therefore, the essence of Buddhism is to\nteach how one can identify oneself with \"X'. Furthermore, Buddhism\ndoes not teach us to treat \"X\" as the soul. because the soul is not\nthe ultimate and is still subject to death and rebirth, just as H2O is\nsubject to disintegration into hydrogen and oxygen and reintegration.\nBuddhism teaches us to identify ourselves with \"X\" as interpreted at\nthe enlightened level. At the enlightened level we are told that \"X\"\nis something incomprehensible to the human mind and that it can only\nbe realized and recognized by the enlightened ones. If that is so,\nthen how can we comprehend and explain it? Luckily, in modern science\nI do find something that can probably help us immensely to understand\nthe interpretation of \"X\" at the enlightened level. This is energy.\nIn modern science we learn that everything in the universe is a\nmanifested form of energy. Electricity. heat, light, fire, sound,\nchemical reaction, matter, all are different manifested forms of\nenergy. Energy itself cannot be seen, heard, smelled, tasted, or\ntouched, but all over the universe its manifested forms, infinite in\nnumber, can be seen, heard, smelled, tasted, touched, or otherwise\ndetected by human organs. Energy, therefore, can be considered as the\nultimate existence of the universe. It should be noted, however, that\nenergy is only a name arbitrarily chosen by human beings. The\ndefinition of energy has, in fact, been modified since the word was\nfirst used. So please do not adhere strictly to the dictionary\ndefinition of the word. I may interpret the word differently than do\nsome scientists. The word energy, as I use it here, is given to\nsomething in the universe that comprises the entire universe and that\ncannot be seen, heard, smelled, tasted, or touched by human organs,\nbut that can manifest itself in numerous forms that can be detected by\nthe senses. Since it fully comprises the entire universe. it cannot be\nincreased or decreased, it has no motion. In short, energy is the\nuniverse and the universe is energy.\nIf you are able to comprehend what I have described above as\nenergy, then you should have less difficulty in understanding \"X\" as\nexplained in Buddhism at the enlightened level. Upon enlightenment,\naccording to Buddhism, one realizes that one's \"X\", and only that \"X\",\ncomprises the entire universe; that \"X\" is the universe and the\nuniverse is \"X\"; that \"X\" cannot be increased or decreased; that \"X\"\nhas no motion, and that \"X\" can be neither defiled nor purified.\nBecause \"X\" is so difficult to explain and to comprehend, Buddhists,\nfor over 2500 years, have given it many different names, in the\nattempt to clarify the concept. The simplest term, in my opinion, is\nOriginal Nature. The word \"original\" signifies that all world\nphenomena are derived from Original Nature, rather than being separate\nfrom it. Unlike the concept of \"soul\", Original Nature implies no\nisolation of the individual. There can be no other entity. This \"X\"\ntherefore, is I, myself, is you, is everyone, and is everything. If\n\"X\" is like that, then how can \"X\" die? How can the concept of death\nand rebirth be applicable to \"X\"? This Original Nature, therefore, is\nwhat one should identify with.\nOn the other hand, Buddhism males it clear that unless one is\nenlightened and becomes Original Nature, one is always subject to the\nchain of multi-life and undergoes the endless death and rebirth that\nis samsara. Buddhism, therefore, is a teaching that we should look\ninto seriously because it provides ways and means for us as human\nbeings to realize and recognize our Original Nature, whereby we can\nrid ourselves of the endless and uncontrollable death and rebirth,\nwhich in most cases is the source of suffering.\nAt the same time I wish to emphasize that in our daily life the\nmulti-life theory is even more important than the enlightened vision\nof \"X\", because we are not all enlightened and are still subject to\nsamsara. It can be a terrible mistake if we neglect this multi-life\ntheory and simply think, \"I am the universe and there is no death,\"\nfor when death comes, one will still be horrified.\nAs a conclusion to today's talk, I wish to introduce the\nfollowing views of two of the most important sociological phenomena in\nour daily lives. They are:\n1) Killing does not mean the elimination of an opponent or enemy,\nand the achievement of victory, as one usually thinks. On the\ncontrary, since only the physical human form is destroyed, the victim\nstill exists. It is therefore not one's victory, and it could be the\nbeginning of one's troubles.\n2) Suicide does not mean the end of suffering. The physical human\nform may be destroyed, but life goes on. The problem could become much\nmore complicated and serious as a result of this self-killing.\nThat is why I said in the beginning of this talk that the\nattitude of the living could be very much changed if we knew what\nhappened after the so-called death that we observe. Political\nscientists, politicians, and philosophers who ignore this important\nquestion could be making a serious error out of shortsightedness. We\nlook into this subject more penetratingly in my second talk, The Truth\nof Karma.\n---------------------------------------------------------------------\nThis lecture converted from printed to digital format and included in\nthe MOUNT KAILAS BBS TEACHING Library with permission from\nDr. C. T. Shen\nCopyright and all rights reserved by Dr. C. T. Shen","title":"Buddhism In Our Daily Life Lecture 1","type":"page"}