Why Do We Feel Disappointed After Giving?

March 20, 2025 – Day 32 of 100 Day Dharma Talk , Sutra Lecture 4, Buddhist Social Studies Course Lecture 4

Hello. This is the 32nd day of Venerable Pomnyun Sunim’s 100-Day Dharma Talk. Today is the spring equinox, when day and night are of equal length. The long winter is fading, and warm spring has arrived. It’s a cozy morning with the scent of spring carried by gentle breezes.



After completing his morning practice and meditation, Sunim headed to The Peace Foundation. Today is the monthly meeting with North Korea experts to assess the current situation in North Korea and discuss peace on the Korean Peninsula. After sharing a meal thoughtfully prepared by the Peace Foundation staff, they discussed the political situation and public opinion in the United States before and after the presidential election, as well as recent economic conditions in North Korea and prospects for improving North Korea-US relations.



After seeing off the North Korea experts, Sunim headed to the third-floor Dharma Hall for his sutra lecture. In the Dharma Hall, preparations were being made to welcome the attendees after the 9 a.m. morning service was diligently performed.

About 120 people attended in person, while approximately 550 joined the online live broadcast, and 17 participated from the Haeundae Dharma Center, totaling around 680 attendees. After the audience requested the Dharma talk with three bows, Sunim ascended to the Dharma seat.



Today is the fourth session of the sutra lecture series. Sunim continued his explanation of chapters 4, 5, and 6 of the Diamond Sutra from the previous session.





“Chapter 4 of the Diamond Sutra, ‘Wondrous Practice Without Abiding,’ contains the meaning that the practice of those who cultivate according to the perspective of the ‘True Doctrine of the Great Vehicle’ learned earlier is subtle. It means that because it is truly subtle, it is difficult for us to understand this practice in our everyday lives.

‘World-Honored One! How should good men and good women who have awakened to the mind of Anuttara Samyak Sambodhi abide, and how should they subdue their minds?’

If the first answer to Subhuti’s question was the chapter on the ‘True Doctrine of the Great Vehicle,’ then the second answer is the chapter on ‘Wondrous Practice Without Abiding.’ For bodhisattvas seeking supreme enlightenment, first, they should generate the mind to save all sentient beings without exception, as taught in the ‘True Doctrine of the Great Vehicle.’ Second, they should generate this mind without abiding in appearances, as taught in ‘Wondrous Practice Without Abiding.’ In other words, generate this mind without attachment.

‘Practice giving without abiding in dharmas,’ ‘Practice giving without abiding in appearances.’ These statements don’t mean not to give; they mean not to be attached to appearances when giving.





So why did the term ‘giving’ suddenly appear? It’s because the third section first mentioned saving sentient beings. In Mahayana Buddhism, there are six practices for bodhisattvas: giving, patience, precepts, diligence, meditation, and wisdom. These are called the ‘Six Paramitas.’ Among them, giving is a practice that encourages having a mind of giving to others rather than receiving. As explained in the section on Mahayana Buddhism, to eliminate one’s suffering, one should give to others rather than seek to receive. The section on Wonderful Practice Without Abiding explains the mindset when practicing giving. It teaches to give to sentient beings without dwelling on form, sound, smell, taste, touch, or dharma. Simply put, when giving, one should not have expectations. This is because having expectations leads to suffering again.

Why Do We Feel Disappointed After Giving?

When we give to others, we often unconsciously create a notion about it. Thinking “I helped you” is what’s meant by “creating a notion.” When we create such notions, expectations toward the other person naturally arise.

So why should we give without expectations? According to the Diamond Sutra, “When a bodhisattva gives without dwelling on notions, the merit is immeasurable.” This part might confuse you. It seems contradictory because on one hand, it says not to create notions like “I saved sentient beings” or “I accumulated merit” when giving, but on the other hand, it says not creating notions actually brings greater merit. You might wonder whether this means you receive merit or not. Many readers of the Diamond Sutra misunderstand this part. However, this confusion arises from trying to understand the Diamond Sutra by clinging to the literal words. The key point here is not that the merit is greater, but rather the emphasis on giving without attachment to notions.



The essence is to give without attachment to form. However, when people hear this, they think, ‘If I give without expecting anything in return, I’ll receive more blessings.’ They keep clinging to the idea of receiving more blessings. Of course, it’s better to give without showing off than to make a display of it. But going one step further, practicing ‘giving without expecting anything in return’ (無住相布施) – not only avoiding outward display but also not harboring expectations in your mind – is even better.

Why Love Becomes the Seed of Hatred

Whenever we give to others, expectations naturally arise. Even when it doesn’t seem so, if you look deep into your heart, there’s always an underlying feeling of “I helped you.” Because of this, we want the other person to express gratitude or at least acknowledge what we’ve done. When they don’t, we feel disappointed. If we hadn’t given anything in the first place, these feelings wouldn’t arise. But by giving, we create the conditions for these emotions to emerge. That’s why what begins as love can later turn into hatred. If there is no love, hatred doesn’t arise either.

If I expect something from others without giving anything myself, the chances of my expectations being met are very low. In this case, when things don’t go as I wish, great suffering arises in my mind. On the other hand, if I give something while expecting something in return, the likelihood of my expectations being fulfilled increases. However, this is just an increase in probability, not a 100% guarantee. So the seeds of suffering still remain. In fact, the suffering might be even greater because the expectations are higher. Haven’t you often regretted helping someone you liked? Why is that? Initially, you helped with good intentions, but afterward, thoughts like “I helped you this much, so you should at least do this for me” remain. When these residues remain in your mind, they become the cause of suffering again. You must let go of even these residues to prevent suffering from arising.



Let me explain this mathematically so it’s easier for you to understand. In school, you learned about ‘probability,’ right? Probability refers to the number of possible outcomes in a single event. When I help someone, there are four possible scenarios. First, I can have two different mindsets when helping others. I can help with expectations, or I can help without any expectations. From the recipient’s perspective, they may express gratitude, or they may not. So I have two possible mindsets, and the other person has two possible responses. Multiplying 2 by 2 gives us 4 possible scenarios.

When I have expectations and the other person expresses gratitude as I hoped, that’s fine. But if they don’t acknowledge my help at all, I feel bad. On the other hand, when I have no expectations, I don’t feel bad even if they don’t express gratitude, and I feel happy if they unexpectedly thank me. With expectations, the outcome is either zero or negative; without expectations, the outcome is either zero or positive. Realistically, which approach is more advantageous?”

“Not having expectations is more advantageous.”



“When I help someone, does saying ‘Please recognize my efforts’ make them recognize it, or does saying ‘You don’t need to recognize my efforts’ make them ignore it? The other person will respond in their own way regardless of my mindset. My mindset and their response are completely unrelated. My expectations don’t make them grateful, nor does my lack of expectations make them ungrateful. Therefore, having no expectations means there’s only potential gain and no loss, while having expectations means there’s only potential loss and no gain. So which approach is clearly better?”

“Yes.”

“However, even though we understand this intellectually, our minds don’t easily comply. Even though it’s clearly better not to have expectations, our minds keep creating them. Even when making an anonymous donation at a temple, the thought ‘I made this donation’ remains in our mind. This is attachment to the idea that ‘I did something.’ This attachment to ‘I did something’ creates a desire for something in return, which becomes the cause of suffering.

Regardless of my expectations, the other person may or may not reciprocate. First, when they do reciprocate, the joy I feel without expectations is greater than the joy I feel with expectations. Second, when they don’t reciprocate, I develop resentment if I had expectations, but I feel no resentment if I had no expectations. That’s why the merit gained when I have no expectations is inevitably greater than the merit gained when I have expectations. This is explained by the phrase ‘immeasurable’ (不可思量). It means ‘The merit of giving without dwelling on appearances is immeasurably great.'”

Next, Sunim and the group recited the fifth section of the Diamond Sutra together. Sunim continued his explanation.





“The fifth section, ‘The True View According to Reality,’ discusses the physical body. In ancient India, people believed that the Buddha’s body had thirty-two special characteristics. In addition, the Buddha’s body was said to have 80 minor marks, collectively called ‘the 32 major and 80 minor marks of the Buddha’s sacred body.’ Earlier in the section on ‘Wonderful Practice Without Abiding,’ the Buddha said, ‘Bodhisattvas should not be attached to form and should give without expectation.’ This raised a question in Subhuti’s mind about how to view the Buddha’s physical form with its 32 major and 80 minor marks.

Traditionally, it was thought that the Buddha had accumulated countless bodhisattva practices in past lives and received his body as a result of those merits. But this seems contradictory when he says not to expect any merit. When the Buddha said, ‘Don’t expect merit,’ Subhuti must have wondered, ‘Then how did the Buddha receive his sacred body?’ The Buddha then pointed to his body and asked, ‘Is this body with its 32 major and 80 minor marks the Buddha?’ In other words, ‘Is this physical body the Buddha?’ Subhuti was startled and immediately realized the truth, answering, ‘No, it is not.’

The physical body cannot be the Buddha. If we were to take one cell from the Buddha’s body and clone it, the form might look identical to the Buddha. Would that person be the Buddha? If there were someone who looked exactly like the Buddha, would that person be the Buddha? No. One becomes a Buddha through enlightenment, not through physical form. We mistake the Buddha’s body for the Buddha because the enlightened Buddha appears sacred, but in reality, that body is not the Buddha. When we go to a temple, we bow to a Buddha statue thinking it’s the Buddha, but the statue itself is not the Buddha.



Continuing, there is a verse that contains the entire content of the Diamond Sutra. This is called the “Four-Line Verse” (saguge). Let’s read one line of it together.

This sentence means not to create any form. It means that in any form, there is no substance or self (我), and nothing that remains unchanging. This is expressed as “non-form” (bisang). In other words, it is “emptiness” (空). Since the Diamond Sutra was created in the early days of Mahayana Buddhism, it does not yet explicitly discuss emptiness. Instead, it uses characters like “not” (不), “non” (非), or “without” (無) to express that “there is no form” or “it is not form.” Later, in the Heart Sutra, there is an expression that “understanding the principle that all dharmas are empty leads to enlightenment,” which is consistent with this teaching. While “即見如來” literally means “to see the Buddha with one’s eyes,” seeing the Buddha actually means attaining enlightenment. In essence, enlightenment is achieved when one does not create any form.”

Finally, we recited the sixth section together, followed by Sunim’s explanation.

“In the final part of the ‘Section on True Faith Being Rare,’ the Buddha uses the metaphor of a raft to explain his teachings. A raft is necessary when crossing a river. After struggling to find a raft and successfully crossing the river, one would naturally feel grateful for it. But what if someone carried the raft on their shoulders afterward? Once you’ve crossed the river, the raft is no longer needed. Anyone who can’t let go of the unnecessary raft and continues to carry it on their shoulders is foolish. So even though you relied on the raft to cross the river, once you’ve crossed, you should leave it behind. And if even the raft should be left behind, what about things that aren’t even rafts? That’s why the Buddha said, ‘Even the Dharma should be abandoned, let alone what is not the Dharma!'”

The lecture concluded with an announcement that the explanation of the seventh section of the Diamond Sutra would continue in the next session.

Participants gathered in groups to share their thoughts, while Sunim had lunch with the Sangha in the basement dining hall. In the afternoon, Sunim met with long-time volunteers of JTS Philippines who had come to Korea for discussions.

As the sun set, at 7:30 PM, Sunim gave the fourth lecture of the Buddhist Social Studies Course in the main hall of the Jungto Social and Cultural Center. Today’s topic was “The Origin of the Universe and Matter,” focusing on the Buddhist view of the cosmos.

About 200 students attended in person in the basement hall, while approximately 1,900 participated in the online live broadcast. Before beginning the lecture, Sunim collected and responded to preliminary questions from the students. After watching a video summarizing these responses, the lecture began.

Sunim began the lecture by explaining why it’s important to understand the origin of matter and the beginning of the universe.

Human beings are based on matter, maintain life phenomena upon that foundation, and perform mental functions on top of that. We need to have an objective view of human existence. When we recognize existence in this way, we naturally become curious about ‘what is matter?’ This ultimately asks about the origin of matter. If we keep breaking down matter, wouldn’t there eventually be some fundamental particle? We’re asking what the origin of matter is.

From another perspective, we become curious about the universe we live in. There are many scientific theories supporting the idea that this universe wasn’t always here but was formed due to some cause. Even at this moment, the universe is constantly changing. When we recognize the world this way, the question arises: ‘How did the universe begin?’

The two questions—’What is the origin of matter?’ and ‘How did the universe begin?’—may seem separate, but in modern science, they are almost the same question. When we have a fundamental understanding of the origin of matter and the beginning of the universe, our thinking becomes balanced. We should first correctly recognize the world we live in before deciding what occupation to pursue, what religion to believe in, or what convictions to hold. Without this process, if we focus solely on studies or work, we may lack the perspective to see the whole and easily become trapped in a narrow viewpoint. In other words, we can easily become biased. Therefore, even if you’re not a researcher, everyone needs a basic understanding of the origin and beginning of matter and the universe, the origin and beginning of life, and the origin and beginning of mental functions.”

Continuing, Sunim explained the references to the universe and matter found in various Buddhist scriptures. He provided detailed explanations about how Buddhism views a single world, including concepts such as the nine mountains and eight seas, the four continents, the six realms of rebirth, the Four Heavenly Kings, the Thirty-Three Gods, and the realms of desire, form, and formlessness.



“When you read various sutras, you’ll find that the Buddhist cosmology has two distinctive features. First, compared to other religions, its scale is incredibly vast. Second, it views the universe not as static but as constantly changing.

In Buddhism, a collection of one thousand worlds is called a ‘small chiliocosm.’ One thousand small chiliocosms together form a ‘medium chiliocosm,’ and one thousand medium chiliocosms together form a ‘great chiliocosm.’ This is also referred to as a ‘trichiliocosm.’ According to Buddhist cosmology, there are as many trichiliocosms as there are grains of sand in the Ganges River. In each world throughout the universe, countless sentient beings live, and in each world, a Buddha appears to teach and guide them. This means there are innumerable Buddhas.

Are the living conditions similar in each world? No. There are places as difficult to live in as hell, places as pleasant as paradise, and places like our Saha world where both good and bad coexist. Buddhism views these various types of worlds as existing in countless numbers.

Furthermore, these worlds not only exist infinitely in the vast universe but also go through cycles of ‘formation, existence, destruction, and emptiness.’ When matter gathers to form a world, life emerges during the world’s existence. Within that life, humans appear, and Buddhas also appear. These worlds don’t exist forever—after life spans increase and decrease repeatedly, life eventually becomes extinct, and the world gradually collapses until it disappears. The formation period is called ‘Kalpa of Formation.’ The period when the formed world remains stable is called ‘Kalpa of Existence.’ During this relatively stable period, life emerges. After maintaining stability for a time, the world enters the ‘Kalpa of Destruction.’ No life exists during this period. Eventually, the world explodes and vanishes without a trace, entering the ‘Kalpa of Emptiness.’ This cycle of formation, existence, destruction, and emptiness is how the universe operates.



Another example can be found in the Small Heart Sutra, which is recited during Barugongyang (formal Buddhist monastic meal).

吾觀一滴水八萬四千蟲 若不念此呪 如食衆生肉

I observe that in a single drop of water, there are 84,000 microorganisms.

If I eat without reciting this mantra, it would be like consuming the flesh of living beings.

When we closely examine a drop of water, we can see that there are 84,000 microorganisms in it. This means that if I drink water without mindfulness, it’s equivalent to killing all the life forms in that water. That’s why in Buddhism, practitioners recite mantras before meals, considering even those beings that are unknowingly killed. Today, with advanced science, we already know this fact, but Buddhism has recognized this reality since ancient times.

These teachings show that Buddhism considers not only the vast, infinite universe but also the tiniest microscopic world. In other words, Buddhist teachings encompass both the infinitesimal microcosm and the infinitely large macrocosm. With this understanding as a foundation, Buddhism teaches us how we should live in the present moment.



The Macroscopic World Revealed by Modern Science

So how does modern science understand the macroscopic world? First, let’s examine how the macroscopic world is structured. There are various celestial bodies around Earth where we live. Celestial bodies that orbit around the Sun at the center are called planets. These are bodies that reflect sunlight to shine. Earth is also classified as a planet. The Sun is a star, which means it produces its own light. Celestial bodies that orbit around planets like Earth are called satellites. The Moon orbits around Earth. So in our solar system, the Sun is at the center, with Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune orbiting around it in that order.

The galaxy to which our solar system belongs is called the Milky Way. The Milky Way contains about 100 to 200 billion stars like our Sun. So its scale is tremendously large. The speed of light is 300,000 kilometers per second, and it takes about 8 minutes for light to travel from the Sun to Earth. The distance that light travels in one year is called a light-year. The diameter of the Milky Way is about 100,000 light-years. Our solar system is located about 25,000 light-years away from the center of the Milky Way. This means that the solar system is positioned not at the center of the galaxy but rather toward its edge.

The shape of the galaxy is like a convex lens, thicker in the middle with a thickness of about 15,000 light-years. When viewed from above, it looks like a spiral, and from the side, it resembles a convex lens. However, if you were to get close enough, you would see nothing but empty space. This is because the stars are incredibly far apart from each other. It’s similar to how when you quickly spin a torch or light, it appears to form a circle of light, but in reality, it doesn’t. This is the true nature of the universe—it appears to exist, but upon closer inspection, it doesn’t.

And there isn’t just one galaxy like this—there are countless many. According to current scientific discoveries, there are approximately 2 trillion galaxies. As science advances, even more will be discovered. A collection of one hundred billion solar systems is called a small universe, and a trillion small universes together form a large universe. This isn’t speculation but scientific fact based on observations. This aligns with the Buddhist worldview that states, “There are as many rivers as there are grains of sand in the Ganges River, and as many worlds as there are grains of sand in all those rivers.”

From a cosmic perspective, issues such as how many years we live, our social status, our appearance, or our conflicts with others seem completely meaningless. When viewed through the lens of cosmic time, what we consider as time doesn’t even seem like time at all, and from the perspective of the universe’s size, what we consider as size doesn’t even seem like size.

However, this universe is not static; it continuously repeats the cycle of creation and extinction. Microscopic particles in the universe gather to form protostars, and when nuclear fusion begins within them, they become main sequence stars. As they reach the end of their lifespan and expand, we call them “giant stars.” Interstellar matter gathers to form main sequence stars, and these stars eventually become giant stars. When a giant star collapses, it becomes a white dwarf, but stars with much greater mass than our sun explode as supernovae, leaving behind neutron stars or becoming black holes. The oxygen, carbon, iron, calcium, and other elements scattered throughout the universe when stars die are the very elements that make up our bodies.

Even now, countless stars in the night sky are repeating this cycle of creation and extinction. It’s like a fireworks display. When fireworks burst at night, the light spreads out and then disappears after a while. That phenomenon takes about ten billion years in cosmic terms. Of those ten billion years, Earth’s history spans 4.5 billion years, and human history, even starting from our ape-like ancestors, is only about 7 million years. Human civilization is merely about 10,000 years old. Human lifespan is at most a little over a hundred years, which is incredibly brief compared to cosmic time.

So what meaning does human life have amid the creation and extinction of the universe? When I say this, you might think, “Then there’s not much reason to live,” or “There’s no difference between living and dying,” and fall into nihilism, but that’s not what I’m trying to say. The point is that there’s nothing in our lives to which we should become attached.



The Microscopic World Revealed by Modern Science

When we continuously divide any substance, it becomes incredibly small, beyond comparison even to a speck of dust. When we divide it one more time from the state where it seems indivisible, the unique properties of that substance disappear. If we keep dividing a water droplet and divide it once more, it ceases to be water. The smallest unit that still maintains the properties of water is called a molecule. In the past, molecules were thought to be indivisible, but we later discovered that molecules are combinations of atoms. Since molecules break down into atoms, atoms were considered the foundation of all matter. Different atoms are called elements, and we discovered that there are 92 elements on Earth. Of course, more can be created artificially. The size of an atom is approximately 10⁻¹⁰m, or one hundred-millionth of a meter. Dalton’s atomic theory claimed that atoms were indivisible. Under this premise of indivisibility, various chemical laws were established, such as the law of conservation of mass, the law of multiple proportions, and the law of definite proportions.

Scientists discovered that atoms, once thought to be the fundamental building blocks of matter, are actually composed of something else. After establishing all academic systems and chemical laws on the belief that atoms were the smallest particles, they discovered electrons within atoms. If an atom was like a loaf of bread, electrons were like raisins embedded in it. This was Thomson’s first atomic model. Further research revealed that atoms have a nucleus at the center with electrons orbiting around it. Scientists thought this resembled our solar system, with the nucleus corresponding to the sun and electrons orbiting like planets. This was Rutherford’s planetary model of the atom. However, new contradictions emerged when they discovered that multiple electrons orbit at different layers and trajectories. This led to a revised model, Bohr’s discontinuous orbital model. When I was in high school, we learned Bohr’s atomic model. Now, it’s understood that electrons exist like a fog around the nucleus, with varying densities—this is the electron cloud model, which shows electrons distributed according to probability. Scientists also discovered protons and neutrons inside the nucleus. As a result, the periodic table, once organized by atomic weight, is now arranged according to the number of protons.

The size of a nucleus is 10⁻⁸ times the size of an atom. If a nucleus were the size of a coin, an atom would be as large as the Earth. So although atoms are considered tiny particles, they are actually mostly empty space. The mass of an electron is negligible compared to the nucleus, and most of an atom’s mass is concentrated in the nucleus. This means that even the microscopic world is essentially empty.



What if you were to look at a person from a microscopic perspective? You could say they are empty. Just as the universe appears empty to the naked eye, when you look at a human being from a microscopic perspective, they appear empty as well. Even solid gold is empty inside. If you were to remove all the electrons and gather only the nuclei, the weight would remain the same, but the Earth would shrink to the size of a basketball. The density would be enormous then. This is what causes light to be drawn in.

Electrons, protons, and neutrons are called “elementary particles.” However, in the world of elementary particles, there are forces at work that cannot be explained. Until now, science has identified two representative forces: gravity, which constitutes the macroscopic world, and electromagnetic force, which constitutes the microscopic world. Gravity is the force that attracts matter to matter. Electromagnetic force includes magnetic force, where north and south poles attract or repel each other, and electric force, where negative and positive charges attract or repel each other. The discovery that electric force and magnetic force are the same is the basis of the electromagnetic field. This was discovered by Coulomb, so it’s called Coulomb’s force or Coulomb force. Interestingly, the formulas for calculating gravity and electromagnetic force are identical. Gravity is inversely proportional to the square of the distance and proportional to the product of two masses, with the universal gravitational constant G in front. The formula is F=G·(m1m2)/r². Similarly, electromagnetic force is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between two charges and proportional to the product of the charges, but with the Coulomb constant K. The formula is F=K·(q₁q₂)/r². Until now, this is as far as we’ve discovered about forces.

However, this alone cannot explain the atomic nucleus. Why is that? For example, an oxygen nucleus has 8 protons. If these 8 protons were tightly packed together, they would break apart due to the repulsive force between them. So, with the forces we currently understand, we cannot explain how the atomic nucleus holds together. The person who researched and hypothesized about the force that constitutes the atomic nucleus was Hideki Yukawa from Japan. He theoretically proposed the existence of a negatively charged pi meson. Let’s say I throw a ball back and forth with one of you. I throw the ball, someone catches it and throws it back to me. Imagine we do this very quickly. If the speed increases enough, the ball would appear to form a line. This hypothesis was later proven correct, and Yukawa received the Nobel Prize in Physics for it. When we say there are 8 protons and 8 neutrons, it doesn’t mean that protons and neutrons exist separately. When a negatively charged meson shoots out from a neutron, that neutron becomes a proton, and when that meson attaches to a proton, that proton becomes a neutron. If it shoots out again, it becomes a proton again. This action occurs in an incredibly short time—about 10⁻²³ seconds. While it’s true that there are 8 protons and 8 neutrons, they are not fixed as “this is a proton” and “this is a neutron.” The force that binds protons and neutrons together within the atomic nucleus is called the nuclear force.

However, further research revealed a new nuclear force that emerges during radioactive decay. So, the force that binds the atomic nucleus together is called the strong nuclear force, and the force that acts during radioactive decay and particle transformation processes is called the weak nuclear force.



There are four forces discovered so far that operate in the universe: gravity, electromagnetic force, strong nuclear force, and weak nuclear force. The unified field theory (UFT) attempts to explain these forces as one. Current research has revealed that the weak nuclear force shares the same principles as the electromagnetic force.

When we examine these scientific facts, we can understand how incredibly small the microscopic world is. So, are subatomic particles the source of matter? Not quite. Then quarks appear. However, quarks cannot exist independently; they must be bound together in groups of three or more to form subatomic particles. The study of laws governing this microscopic world is called quantum mechanics. Meanwhile, the study of laws governing the macroscopic world is the theory of relativity. Modern science centers around the theory of relativity, which explains the macroscopic world, and quantum mechanics, which explains the microscopic world. In this way, modern science is gradually uncovering the origins of the material world.

The universe began with a massive explosion from what could be called a singularity, a single point. After that, from the combination of quarks to the gradual progression to the combination of elementary particles, atoms emerged. The current universe continues to expand after the Big Bang. When measuring the distance between stars, we find they are continuously moving away from each other. For example, let’s say there’s one point here and another point there. If the size of the universe remained constant, when one point moves toward another, the distance between them should decrease. However, scientists discovered that the distance between them is actually increasing. It’s like drawing several dots on a rubber balloon and then inflating it—each dot moves farther away from the others. And in this expanding universe, I exist right now.

The beginning of matter follows a similar pattern. From what could be considered “nothing,” matter formed through increasingly complex combinations. Life is the result of an even more complex process, and the mental world has even more complex connections. Human existence consists of these multiple layers of interconnections.



When You Understand the Origin of Matter and the Universe, There Is Nothing to Cling to in Life

Modern scientific discoveries align significantly with Buddhism’s interdependent worldview. From a microscopic perspective, human existence is larger than the universe, while from a macroscopic view, we are smaller than a speck of dust. In cosmic time, a human lifespan of 100 years is merely an instant. Yet from a subatomic particle’s perspective, one human second is an enormously long time. I exist within this space-time continuum. We should neither call this nihilistic nor eternal. When we first understand the scientific fact that humans exist on this foundation and then look at Buddhism’s worldview, we can see how similar they are. The Buddha’s teaching that everything is interdependent corresponds with all these scientific facts.”

Today was a time to understand Buddhism’s interdependent worldview from a scientific perspective. We concluded the fourth lecture, agreeing to learn about the nature of life and evolution in the next session.



Participants gathered in groups for a heart-sharing session. During this sharing, they had an opportunity to reflect once more on what they had learned today.





Tomorrow will be the 33rd day of the 100-Day Dharma Talk. In the morning, Sunim will conduct the Friday Dharma Q&A for the daytime session in the main hall of the Jungto Social and Cultural Center basement, followed by the evening session’s Friday Dharma Q&A.