02 Life and the Realms of Existence

8 How and when life began is a mystery and perhaps will always remain so. The theistic religions all claim that their respective gods created life. But saying that a god created life does not really answer the question of how life began, because God is living and thus we still have the idea of life coming from life. The theist still cannot explain how God's life began.

But apart from legends, there are two scientific theories that attempt to explain how life began on earth. The first, called the Haldane-Oparin Hypothesis after the two scientists who first presented it, says that organic matter came from inorganic matter. According to this hypothesis, a mixture of simple inorganic gases dissolved in the ocean and energized by ultraviolet light from the sun resulted in the first pre-historic molecules, such as might be required for the start of life. This is the most widely accepted hypothesis on the origin of life.

Recently, Sir Fred Hoyle and Professor Chandra Wickramasinghe have presented an entirely different hypothesis. They suggest that simple life forms evolved in space and were transmitted to earth on meteorites and in the tails of passing comets. But however it began, the earliest evidence of life on earth consists of fossils of rod-shaped structures resembling modern forms of primitive algae and bacteria thought to be about 2.7 billion years old. Almost all scientists believe that these first life forms developed while floating on the surface of the ocean.

9 Buddhism says that, as in the case of the universe, the ultimate origin of life cannot be known. But the Buddha does explain how life on earth began. At the time when the universe is expanding, he explains, beings exist only in a heaven realm.

And there they dwell, made of mind, feeding on joy, self-luminous, moving through the air and glorious, and there they abide for a long, long time. During that period the world was one mass of water and all or stars could be seen, there were no months or fortnights, no years or seasons, nor was there male or female - beings were just beings.

And after a long, long time, a savoury scum formed over the surface of the waters those beings were. It looked like the skin that forms on hot milk as it cools. It had the colour of quality ghee or butter, and it was sweet like the taste of pure wild honey. Then some being of a greedy nature said: "I say, what can this be ?" and tasted the scum with its finger. When it did this, it liked the taste, and a craving arose. Then the other beings did the same thing, and craving arose in them too. So they began to break off pieces and eat them.

And as a result of this, their self-luminosity disappeared, and as a result of that, the moon and the sun, night and day, months and fortnights, years and all seasons all came into being.

The Buddha then goes on to explain how the bodies of these beings become grosser as they ate, and how eventually sexual characteristics arose. And all of these changes, he says, took place "over a long, long time". Another familiar with scientific speculation about the early evolution of life on the planet cannot fail to see how similar it is to what the Buddha says.

Both scientific speculation and Buddhist thought agree that the surface of the earth was originally covered with water. Both agree that the first life floated on the surface of the water where it absorbed nutrients. Both agree that early life forms were asexual, and both agree that the evolution from simple organism into complex ones took place over an immense period of time.

10 Science categorizes life into types according to the structure of the body, while the Buddha categorized life into types according to the quality of experience. The Buddha says that there are six realms of existence, differentiated from each other by the types of experience that the beings in those realms have. There is the deva realm, the human realm, the realm of animals, the realm of hungry spirits, the realm of jealous spirits, and the hell realm. Let us have a look at each of these realms.

11 Devas are sometimes called gods and their realm is sometimes called heaven, but both these terms are somewhat misleading.

The word `God' suggests the theistic idea of an all-loving, all-powerful deity who creates and controls everything and who is utterly different from man. e words `heaven' suggests the naive theistic concept of an eternal afterlife not unlike life on earth but where nothing ever goes wrong, where people in white robes sing songs, and where angels play trumpets.

Devas are not perfect or eternal, and when their lifespan is over they can be reborn in the human realm just as a human can be reborn as a deva. The main characteristic of the devas is that they experience a great deal of happiness.

Likewise, heaven is not a place completely separate from the other realms of existence; heaven is not `up there' any more than`hell' is down there. A deva might dwell right next to a human being or a hungry spirit. What separates them is their differences, not their position in space. Because devas might well have been humans before being reborn in the deva realm, they often retain an interest in what human do. They might answer prayers, protect particular people from danger, or even create problems.

12 While discussing the differences between devas and gods, it will be useful to see what Buddhism says about the idea of a single perfect creator God. The existence of such a God was denied by the Buddha because he believed the idea to be illogical, without evidence to support it, and unnecessary. There are several arguments used to try to prove the existence of a God, and Buddhism successfully shows that none of these arguments are satisfactory.

The first argument for the existence of God goes like this; everything has a cause, so there must be a first cause, and that first cause is God. There are several objections to this argument. Firstly, this argument contradicts itself. If everything must have a cause then the first cause must have a cause also.

Secondly, there is no logical reason why everything must have a single first cause. Most things we see are produced by multiple causes, so it is just as logical to say that everything had ten, twenty, a hundred or even a thousand first cause.

Thirdly, even if there was a single first cause, there is no evidence that the first cause was God. It could just as possibly have been a dinosaur, an old boot or a flash of lightning.

And fourthly, it is logically impossible to have a first cause or a beginning of the universe. A beginning is an event, must take place in time. Time consists of past, present and further. For any event to take place, there must be a time before it occurred (past), a time in which it occurred (present) and a time after its occurrence (future). Before the supposed creation of everything by God, there could have been no time because nothing existed. And it is clearly impossible for the timeless to give rise to time any more than darkness can give rise to light or wetness can give rise to dryness.

13 The argument for the existence of God goes like this: everything in nature seems to have an order and purpose. This could not happened accidentally, it must have been designed. If nature exhibits design, there must be a designer, and that designer is God. There are several objections to this argument.

Firstly, even if it is admitted that nature displays design, there is no evidence that the designer is God or even that there is a single designer. In fact, as nature is so intricate and complex, we would expect it to require many designers. Thus, if anything, nature's apparent design indicates that there are many creator gods.

Secondly, although nature does not exhibit design, there seem to be many aspects of cruelty in that design. For example, tuberculosis germs have been designed to rot human lungs. The mouth of the lamprey has been designed to latch on to the bodies of fish and then slowly and painfully eat them alive. Leprosy germs are designed to kill human flesh so that extremities drop off the body, causing hideous deformitities. So although nature does exhibit design, much of its causes extreme suffering, thus indicating that an all-loving God could not have designed it.

The third objection is that although nature does exhibit design, it does, at the same time, often go wrong. If God the designer is perfect, his creation must be perfect also.
But nature is far from perfect. Rain waters the crops but the rain often fails to come and millions die of starvation, or sometimes it rains too much and thousands lose their homes and their lives in floods. Every year millions of babies are born with terrible deformities or mental retardation. The production of cells in the body is sometimes faulty, causing tumors and cancers. The fact that nature's design is imperfect creator God could not have designed it.

14 Buddhism can also offer several well-reasoned arguments as to why there cannot be an all-powerful, all-loving creator God. The first argument goes like this: If God is all-knowing, he must know all the past, all the present and all the future. God must know every choice a person will make, every thought a person will have, and every act he will do long before they happen. Thus a person can only act in the way God has already foreseen; his whole life must be fixed and predetermined. So the idea of an all-knowing God makes freewill impossible, and if man has no freewill, he cannot be held responsible for any of his acts and the idea of trying to do good or avoid evil becomes meaningless.

Related to this, another argument runs thus: if God really created and controls everything, there is no point in man doing anything, because he is only a puppet of God's desire and God, not man, is responsible for any evil that man does. The Buddha states the argument like this:

There are some ascetics and Brahmins who teach and believe that whatever a person experiences, be it pleasant, painful or neutral, all that is caused by God's will. I went to them and I asked if they did teach such an idea, and they said they did, and I said:

"If that is so, venerable sirs, then people must commit murder, theft and adultery because of God's will. They must lie, slander and use harsh and idle speech because of God's will. They must be greedy, hating and full of false views be cause of God's will."

Those who fall back on God's will as the decisive factor will lack the desire and effort to do this or not do that.

The Buddhist poet, Santideva, puts the idea simply when he says: If God really is the cause of all that happens, then what is the use of man's striving?"

15 Another argument againsts the idea of God runs thus: the existence of a great deal of evil and suffering in the world is proof that an all-loving, all-powerful God does not exist, for if such a God did exist, surely he would act to stop evil and suffering. Even most ordinary, imperfect people would relieve sickness, famine and distress if they had the power. So why doesn't God, who is supposed to be perfect and all-powerful?

Theists will say that suffering is God's punishment for evil-doers. But this cannot be so, because good people are sometimes seen to suffer accidents, sickness and premature death, while evil people are sometimes successful, healthy and happy. The theist will then say that suffering is caused by man's sinfulness. But although man must be held responsible for some suffering, he can hardly be blamed for the suffering that is caused by diseases like cancer, disasters like
earthquakes, famines and droughts or terrible things like birth defects.

Finally, the theist will sat that evil and suffering are caused by devils. But even is this is so, it still doesn't explain why an all-loving God does not save innocent people from unnecessary suffering. Thus the theist cannot explain why an-all God allows suffering to happen. In fact, the terrible and apparently meaningless suffering that does exist is convincing proof that an all-loving does not exist. As the Buddha says:

One with eyes can see the sickening sight;
Why does not God set his creatures right?

If his wide powers no limit can restrain,
Why is his hand so rarely spread to bless?
Why does he not to all give happiness?
Why do fraud, lies and ignorance prevail?
Why triumphs falsehood, while truth and justice fail?
I count you God, one of the unjust among,
Who made a world in which top shelter wrong.

16 Another argument Buddhism puts against the God idea is that the belief in God does not seem to be necessary. Theist are often heard to say that a happy, meaningful life can only be had by believing in God, or that only the belief in God can give strength enough to overcome personal problems.
But this is not true. There are millions of people who lead happy, productive and virtuous lives without such a belief. There are just as many who have overcome great handicaps, disabilities and hardships through their own strength and resolution and without belief in God.

If a person can be moral, happy and compassionate to his fellows, and have a purpose in life without belief in God, then belief in God is simply not needed. However, it is important to remember that some people do find belief in some form of God meaningful and necessary in their lives. Therefore, while not subscribing to it themselves, Buddhists should respect theism and those who adhere to it.

17 The human realm (manussa loka) is the best of all realms of existence because it offers the best opportunities to spirally develop and to attain Enlightenment. The devas experience so much happiness that they have no motivation to develop their minds, while the beings in the lower realms experience so much suffering that they are unable to. Humans experience about equal proportions of happiness and suffering. The size and structure of the human brain gives consciousness a very wide expression, allowing humans to think, reason and remember.

In fact, the anient Buddhists used to think that the word `man' (manussa) was derived from the term `prominence of mind' ( mana ussannata ). Humans also have highly developed language, making the clear communication of the Dhamma possible. But although the human realm is the best of all realms, to be born human is a rare privilege indeed, and we should make full use of the opportunities it offers us.
The Buddha asks:

"Which is greater - the little bit of sand on
my finger nail, or the great earth?"

"Lord, greater by far is the great earth.
Tiny is the sand on your fingernail. The two cannot be compared."

"So too, beings who are born as humans are few in number. Far greater are those who are reborn in non-human realms. Therefore you should train yourself, thinking: "We will live earnestly"

18 Not only does the human state offer the best opportunities for Enlightenment, but all human beings can attain Enlightenment. The reason for this is that mankind is one. It is important to mention this because some religions and political ideologies claim that different races, castes or classes have different intellectual capacities, and that they should be treated differently and given different opportunities.

Hinduism in ancient India taught such as idea, dividing humans into four castes and excluding the lowest, the sudras, from all social and religious life, claiming that they had no intellectual abilities.

The Buddha opposed such ideas most strongly. In dozens of his discourses he used reason and common sense to attack the caste system and to uphold human equality and dignity. He says:

If you observe the trees or the grass,
Without knowing it,
They exhibit different type and kinds.
There are many different species.

Then observe beetles and moths
Or small insects like ants;
They exhibit different types and kinds;
There are many different species.

They exhibit different types and kinds;
There are many different species.

Observe creatures that crawl on their bellies,
Snakes and reptiles,
They exhibit different types and kinds;
There are many different species.

Observe fish,
And those that have the water as their homes;
They exhibit different types and kinds;
They are many different species.

Observe birds on the wind,
Those that travel through the sky.
They too exhibit different types and kinds;
There are many different species.

In these creatures,
Types and kinds can be seen;
In humans no such types or kinds can be seen.
Not in hair or head, not in ears or eyes,
Not in mouth or nose, lips or eyebrows
Is there any great difference.

Not in neck or shoulder,
Not in abdomen or chest.
Not in genitals is there any great difference.
Not in hands or feet, not in fingers or nails,
Not in calves, thighs or complexion
Are there different types or kinds As there are with other creatures.
Human types do not differ greatly
As other species do.
The difference between humans
Are only differences of convention.

19 Again, there are some who believe that women have less ability to develop spiritually than men do. But in Buddhism masculinity and femininity are characteristics of matter, no mind. Enlightenment is attained by developing wisdom and compassion, and anyone, no matter what their gender, can develop these qualities. The Buddha says:

Woman, having gone forth from home into homelessness in the Dhamma and discipline taught by the Tathgata, are able to realize the fruits of Stream-Winning, Once-Returning and Arahantship. Being equal in this respect, women should be treated the same and given the same opportunities as men. The Buddha's attitude to women's capacity for Enlightenment is best summed up by his female disciple Soma.

A woman's nature is unimportant
When the mind is still and firm,
When knowledge grows day by day,
And when she has insight into Dhamma.

One who thinks such thoughts
As `I am a woman' or `I am a man'
Or any other tought of `I am...'-
Mara is able to address that one

Some religions teach that women have a God-given role, usually as a mother and a wife, and that they are obliged to fulfill that role. Buddhism does not accept this idea. Women as much as men are free to take on any role, as a mother, wife, businesswoman, nun, and so on, if they think it will give them fulfillment and happiness.

Knowing that all human beings could attain Enlightenment, the Buddha taught his Dhamma to all, and expected them all to learn the Dhamma, practise it and share it with others. When Mara urged him to die early, the Buddhas replied:

I shall not die until the monks, the nuns, the laymen and the laywomen have become deeply learned, wise and well-trained, remembering the teachings, proficient in the lesser and greater doctrines and virtuous; until, having earned the teachings themselves, they are able to tell it to others, teach it, make it known, establish it, open it up, explain it and make it clear; until they are able to refute false doctrines taught by others and are able to spread the convincing and liberating truth abroad. I shall not die until the holy life has become successful, prosperous, undespised and popular; until it has become well proclaimed among both gods and men.

20 The animal realm (tiracchana yoni)includes all non-human animals - mammals, birds, fish, reptiles and insects. In animals, qualities like loyalty, compassion, self-sacrifice and the like are only very rudimentary, the main motivating factors in their lives being the lower instincts of hunger, sex and survival. Because of this, animals prey on each other without either mercy or compassion, and they can expect little help or sympathy from their fellows. The Buddha says of the animal realm:

There is no living by Dhamma there, no balanced living, no doing what is good or skillful; there is only devouring of one another and feeding on the weak.

21 Hungry spirits (peta ) are beings whose minds are constantly tormented by longing, wanting and the frustration of not getting what they want, and they wander about trying to relieve their hunger.

22 Jealous spirits (asura) are given that name because they are tormented by jealousy and covetousness. The happiness of others, especially of the devas, makes them rage with envy.

23 Beings whose experience is mainly painful are said to be in Hell (niraya). The pain they feel is not physical, but rather the pain of anxiety, fear, remorse and depression.

24 Although the realms of existence are places, they are more than that, they are primarily states of mind. A human who has beauty, power and happiness can be said to be in a deva realm just as much as a deva is. Likewise, a human who experiences great emotional suffering can be said to be in hell just as much as a hell being is. The Buddha makes it clear when he says:

When the average ignorant person says that hell is under the sea, he is saying something that is false and without basis. The word `hell' is a name for painful feelings.

Most theists accept the reality of the heaven realm and the hell realm, but mistakenly believe them to be eternal. The Buddha teaches that when a being's life span in one realm is over, that being might well be reborn in another realm. The beginningless process of being born and dying, of moving on from one realm of existence to another, is called samsara.

The Buddha's teachings help us to be happy in this life and to be reborn in happy circumstances in the next life. But complete happiness can only be achieved by being free from samsara and by attaining Nirvana, and this is the ultimate purpose of the Buddha's teachings.

25 Imagine that a scientist goes to live with a tribe of natives in order to study their culture. One day he observes them involved in playing some form of game. He watches carefully in order to understand what is going on, but because he doesn't know the rules of the game or what distinguishes one team from another, he cannot make sense of all the activity. Eventually the rules and rationale of the game are explained to the scientist, and behaviour which before seemed meaning-less suddenly becomes meaningful.

Life presents us with a similar situation. Things are happening around us and to us but because we don't know why they are happening, we are not sure what is going on, and it all seems meaningless and confusing.

In an effort to make sense out of it all we invent religious beliefs, but there are always anomalies that the beliefs can't explain, which don't fit into the belief, for which excuses have to be made, and which have to be explained away by saying that they are `mysteries'. But when the Buddha explains how and why things happen, suddenly life makes sense and has a meaning. And the purpose of life is to disentangle ourselves from samsara, and by freeing our minds to attain the peace of Nirvana.

The Buddha says:

The holy life is not lived for the advantages that come from gains, honours or fame; it is not lived for the advantages that come from morality; it is not lived for the advantages that come from concentration, nor is it lived for the advantages that come from knowledge and vision. But what which is unshakable freedom of mind - that is the aim of the holy life, that is the goal, that is the culmination.