Language creates the difficulty. Maybe because of this particular structure in certain languages, Buddha became important and significant and became rooted only in Japan, China, Burma – because they have a totally different language. It is very significant to understand why he became so important in the Chinese mind, why China could understand him and India could not. China has a different language which fits with Buddhist ideology absolutely. The Chinese language does not divide in two. In the Chinese language, or in Korean, or in Japanese or Burmese, a totally different structure exists than in Sanskrit, Hindi, English, Greek, Latin, French, German – a totally different structure.
When for the first time the Bible was being translated into Burmese there was much difficulty, because a few sentences could not be translated at all. The moment you translate, their whole meaning is lost. For example, a simple sentence, “God is”; you cannot translate it into Burmese. If you translate it, it becomes “God becomes.” “God is” cannot be translated because there is no equivalent term for “is,” because “is” shows staticness.
We can say “the tree is,” but in Burmese you have to say “the tree is becoming,” not “is.” There is no equivalent for “is.” The tree “becomes.” By the time you say “the tree is,” it is no more the same, so why do you say “is?” “Is” gives a staticness. It is a riverlike phenomenon – “tree is becoming.” I have to say “tree is becoming” but in Burmese it will be simply “tree becoming,” the “is” will not be there. “The river is” – if you want to translate – will be “river moving.” “River rivering” will be the exact translation in Burmese.
But to say “God becoming” is very difficult, because Christians cannot say that. God is perfect, he cannot become. He is not a process, he has no growth possibility – he has already arrived. He is the absolute – what do you mean by “becoming?” Becoming is possible if somebody is imperfect. God is perfect, he cannot become. So how to translate it? Very difficult.
But Buddha immediately penetrated the Burmese, Chinese, Japanese, Korean mind; immediately penetrated. The very structure of the language made it possible; they could understand Buddha very easily.
In life there are only events. Eating is there but there is no eater. Just watch eating. Is there really an eater? You feel hungry, right – hunger is there, but there is nobody who is hungry. Then you eat – eating is there, but there is nobody who is an eater. Then hunger is satisfied, then you feel satiation – this satisfaction is there but there is nobody who is satisfied.
Buddha says life consists of events. Life means living. Life is not a noun, it is a verb. And everything is a verb. Watch and you will be able to see: everything is becoming, nothing is static.
Eddington has said that in the English language there are a few words that are absolutely false: for example, rest. Nothing is ever in rest, the very word is wrong, because there is no equivalent in reality. Have you ever seen anything at rest? Even when you are at rest, it is resting, it is not rest. It is a process: something is happening, you are still breathing.
Lying down, relaxing – but it is not rest; many things, a thousand things are happening. Have you ever seen anything at rest? It is impossible, rest does not exist. Even when a person is dead, then the body continues its processes.