A gentle reminder about right speech

[Hoo]

....Intention is more important than how skillfully they speak. It's nice to get a gentle reminder but sometimes that isn't enough to get through our self-delusion and we need it a little "plainer".

Even if the speaker's intention is to hurt, we could look to see if there is any truth in it that we could learn from. But even if the intention is to hurt and there is no truth to learn from, we can (at least attempt to ) practice equanimity.

If one is talking to accomplished practicing Buddhists, I'd agree. But forums attract beginners, and those who have questions that haven't even begun yet. Sometimes it is the ninth time this month that the same question came up. Sometimes it is so far from Buddhist understanding that it's hard to come up with a kind answer. Sometimes I wonder if the OP is just being provocative on purpose.

Skillfullness and content become as important as intention, IMHO. Even those who intend to speak plainly can do it politely and with kindness. In my perception, a harsh lesson from a kind teacher can be remembered for a long time and stands a chance of being retained. A valuable lesson delivered by a harsh person risks being discarded as just harsh words from a (xxxxxx - insert your own comment).

For myself, I try to ask, 'Which Brahma-Vihara" is my post. Am I being kind and gentle, compassionate, joyful for the accomplishments of another, and/or equanimous? Sadly, I don't do as well as I could and need to. Gladly, at least now I see it and can try to correct it before hitting the SEND button

But these are just my views, as valuable as any others and as elegible for being just ignored I think a better source would be at the link Anna posted above http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Hoo...who talks a good line but stuggles every day with about all of it

[SDC]

...a harsh lesson from a kind teacher can be remembered for a long time and stands a chance of being retained. A valuable lesson delivered by a harsh person risks being discarded as just harsh words from a (xxxxxx - insert your own put-down).[/url]

This is good point. When the harshness is coming from someone a person deeply respects, there is a good chance the words will hit home.

As opposed to someone we do not know well enough, those words will mean far less. Should this be the case? No. Shouldn't we all be able to head advice no matter who it comes from and in whatever manner of speech? It would be nice, but it is not always going to be the case.

[octathlon]

My comments, as a reply to the post I quoted, were my opinion on the best way for the listener to react (i.e., not overreact). Of course I agree with everyone about practicing right speech and avoiding speaking with wrong intention.

[BubbaBuddhist]

Not possible to know ANYONE on internet forums. Everyone could be a total construct and I just assume they are. I know I am. I'm nothin like this in real life. In real life I'm actually a fifteen your old girl.

J

[Annapurna]

In my opinion, a good friend is one who isn't afraid to call you on your BS. But this does require a certain level of confidence that the friendship will survive. And it also requires plain and direct speech. what I mean by this is if I'm about to screw up, get myself in trouble, or just make a bad decision, a good friend to me is someone who isn't afraid to tell me I'm acting like an idiot to get my attention. Even if it might hurt my feelings or make me angry at the time. Like when Buddha told the Bhikkhu who was yearning for sex:

"'Worthless man, it is unseemly, out of line, unsuitable, and unworthy of a contemplative; improper and not to be done... Haven't I taught the Dhamma in many ways for the sake of dispassion and not for passion; for unfettering and not for fettering; for freedom from clinging and not for clinging? Yet here, while I have taught the Dhamma for dispassion, you set your heart on passion; while I have taught the Dhamma for unfettering, you set your heart on being fettered; while I have taught the Dhamma for freedom from clinging, you set your heart on clinging."

Wrong speech? Not from the Buddha. He had to get the guy's attention.

J

Well, he was a voluntary follower of the Buddha. They had a teacher -disciple relationship.

I agree a teacher has to be that way with someone who is not paying heed, or forgetful.

But here in forums, it's different.

Like, I'm nobody's disciple here, and I don't like it when people put themselves above me and act as if they were.


I agree with you that a good friend can tell you when you err, and should tell you, but my friends still expect of me that I am respectful when I do it, or I can hit the road, I know it.

[SDC]

Not possible to know ANYONE on internet forums. Everyone could be a total construct and I just assume they are. I know I am. I'm nothin like this in real life. In real life I'm actually a fifteen your old girl.

J

I would never know for sure!



Even if someone I am talking to is misrepresenting themselves, and behaving far different from what they consider their "true self", it is irrelevant to me. It has to be - it would be too hard of a task to have to be concerned about that all the time. I look to regard any person here as they have represented themselves. I see no harm in that, unless I were depending on people for consistency, which would be foolish.

[SDC]

My comments, as a reply to the post I quoted, were my opinion on the best way for the listener to react (i.e., not overreact). Of course I agree with everyone about practicing right speech and avoiding speaking with wrong intention.

I agree with you that it would be a good way for the listener to react.

Yet, not all are not capable of such wise behavior. I think right speech is knowing the words to use depending on the people you are speaking with, as not to put them in a position in which they could react negatively and possibly not heed your words.

Sometimes the right words are difficult to find and in that case perhaps we should choose not to speak.

[BubbaBuddhist]

Not possible to know ANYONE on internet forums. Everyone could be a total construct and I just assume they are. I know I am. I'm nothin like this in real life. In real life I'm actually a fifteen your old girl.

J

I would never know for sure!



Even if someone I am talking to is misrepresenting themselves, and behaving far different from what they consider their "true self", it is irrelevant to me. It has to be - it would be too hard of a task to have to be concerned about that all the time. I look to regard any person here as they have represented themselves. I see no harm in that, unless I were depending on people for consistency, which would be foolish.

I just avoid investing emotion of any kind on online "relationships". All just words on a screen to me. Idea of my "feeling" being hurt or involved on any level seems foolish to me.

J

J

[Kim OHara]

Even if someone I am talking to is misrepresenting themselves, and behaving far different from what they consider their "true self", it is irrelevant to me. It has to be - it would be too hard of a task to have to be concerned about that all the time. I look to regard any person here as they have represented themselves. I see no harm in that, unless I were depending on people for consistency, which would be foolish.

I just avoid investing emotion of any kind on online "relationships". All just words on a screen to me. Idea of my "feeling" being hurt or involved on any level seems foolish to me.

J

There's a quote I half-remember which goes something like:
"We should always treat treat others as though they are real. Perhaps they are."
It seems peculiarly appropriate to an online discussion board where we should be constantly aware of our own intentions - we're good Right-speaking Buddhists, right? - but can, as you say, be certain of nothing about the people we are talking to.

Being a good little verify-your-quotations writer in the age of google, I tried to track the quote down online.
I failed. Either I have remembered it a bit wrong, or there are still one or two Oscar Wilde lines not on the net.


Kim

[Annapurna]

I just avoid investing emotion of any kind on online "relationships". All just words on a screen to me. Idea of my "feeling" being hurt or involved on any level seems foolish to me.

J

J

I thought I remember you saying that you met your wife online, in e sangha...

[Annapurna]

Why does it have to be so complicated and we have to engage in thoughts like:

Are those posters 'real' or not?

Of course they are!

Behind each 'persona', nick and avatar is someone who just wants to be treated nicely and with respect, just like you do, admit it.

Why not just start giving this kindness and respect, and see what happens?

Except for a few really angry people, you will get the same echo.

[Vardali]

Why does it have to be so complicated and we have to engage in thoughts like:

Are those posters 'real' or not?

Of course they are!

Behind each 'persona', nick and avatar is someone who just wants to be treated nicely and with respect, just like you do, admit it.

Why not just start giving this kindness and respect, and see what happens?

I agree with that. But then I have been called - some time ago in a different forum - a member of the puppy & rainbow brigade, because I suggested that criticisms could be phrased in a constructive and polite way instead of browbeating and dismissing a poster based on his/her views and experiences

I think the key is to address what is "wrong" in one's speech (i.e. content) without dismissing/belittling the person. So far I think this site here has been pretty good in that respect (at least I have seen worse and I don't know any specific instance that would indicate otherwise here).

[Hoo]

Daily Words of the Buddha for September 12, 2010

Kāyamuniṃ vācāmuniṃ,
manomunimanāsavaṃ,
muniṃ moneyyasampannaṃ.
Āhu ninhātapāpakaṃ.
Listen: http://host.pariyatti.org/dwob/itivuttaka_3_67.mp3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Silent in body, silent in speech,
silent in mind, without defilement,
blessed with silence is the sage.
One is truly washed of evil.

Itivuttaka 3.67

Silence as right speech?

A friend of mine once commented that it was amazing how sometimes the right book would appear just when it was relevant. I think it's a modern version of "When the student is ready, the teacher will come." I have a similar experience sometimes on the internet - like today when the above quote came in email, and I thought I'd share it.

It's a concise statement of something I need to do often. I need to look at body, speech, mind and defilements. If I am not silent, I find I am frequently serving my "self." Not always, but often enough that it warrants looking at when my mouth (or keyboard) is in operation. My self-serving words usually don't come up as right speech and sometimes are just harmful.

The quote also confirms a couple of very brief experiences I've had. They were "Aha" experiences when I finally understood something. When it sank in, I found there wasn't really a way to describe it. Words could dance around it, but not really convey it. If one has had the experience or a similar one, the words make sense. Otherwise they are just a vague description that point to something that's not quite visible.

Lastly, there's been a recent post or two asking why there is little happening on Theravada forums. On another forum, someone asked a question like, 'Why do the Noble Ones seem to say nothing? Why don't they come out of the cave and talk about their experience? Why don't they just teach us what needs to be done?'

An answer dawned on me when I read the quote. They teach the silence and I'm not silent enough to hear it. That doesn't mean I have to take a vow of silence - chuckle - more like choosing not to keep building up my ego with words.

Hoo...my views are free so feel fre to disregard them

[BubbaBuddhist]

I just avoid investing emotion of any kind on online "relationships". All just words on a screen to me. Idea of my "feeling" being hurt or involved on any level seems foolish to me.

J

J

I thought I remember you saying that you met your wife online, in e sangha...

I did.

Then we spoke by telephone several times.

Then met in person several times.

Then courted for a while.

Then were married.

Found out quite early she was nothing like the person she presented herself to be online.

J

[octathlon]

Why does it have to be so complicated and we have to engage in thoughts like:

Are those posters 'real' or not?

Of course they are!

Behind each 'persona', nick and avatar is someone who just wants to be treated nicely and with respect, just like you do, admit it.

Right! The same thing happens with road rage. Face to face, (most) people control themselves, but put them behind the wheel where they don't see the other drivers' faces and somehow self-restraint is lost.

Another point is that when we post a message on the internet, it is not going to be read just by the person we are addressing. It will also be seen by other forum members and will even pop up on google searches and be seen by who knows how many people, of different ages and situations. So we should keep that in the back of our minds as well.