This is in relation to Lam's A first course in noncommutative rings Chpt 1, Sec 3, Thm 3.3 proof to demonstrate $M_n(D)$'s simple module is $D^n$ where $D$ is division ring.
Clearly $M_n(D)\to End_D(D^n_D)$ is isomorphism where $D^n$ is treated as right $D$ vector space but matrix multiplication is on the left. Furthermore, it is clear that any $v\in D^n-0$, $M_n(D)v=D^n$.
$\textbf{Q:}$ The book says "$M_n(D)$ can be identified with $End(V_D)$ where $V_D=D^n$ treated as right $D$ vector space. $V_D$ is faithful module and facts in linear algebra over division ring imply that it is simple $R-$module." What are the facts being used here? The methods I mentioned above is the alternative method mentioned in the book which is clear. It is basically showing there is no more invariant subspace of $D^n$ under $M_n(D)$ action and thus there is no smaller non-trivial submodule.
$\textbf{Q':}$ What is a non-trivial example of $M_n(D)$'s not faithful representation? One could imagine a ring homomorphism $M_n(D)\to M_n(D)/m$ with $m$ any maximal ideal of $M_n(D)$ but this quotient may not be representation of anything.
$\textbf{Q'':}$ The book says $End_D(_RD^n)\cong D$. Since $D^n$ is simple, by schur lemma one deduces $End_D(_R D^n)$ is $D$ itself but not some larger division ring. Why do I expect it being $D$? Clearly $D\to End_D(_R D^n)$ is division ring embedding.