Humour - wrong speach?

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Humour - wrong speach?

Post by salayatananirodha » Sun Sep 08, 2019 6:15 pm

bhante: i don't think a metaphor is entirely comparable to satire
16. 'In what has the world originated?' — so said the Yakkha Hemavata, — 'with what is the world intimate? by what is the world afflicted, after having grasped at what?' (167)

17. 'In six the world has originated, O Hemavata,' — so said Bhagavat, — 'with six it is intimate, by six the world is afflicted, after having grasped at six.' (168)

- Hemavatasutta


links:
https://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/index.htm
http://thaiforestwisdom.org/canonical-texts/
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/wp-conte ... _Heart.pdf
https://www.dhammatalks.org/index.html

User avatar
zerotime
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Humour - wrong speech?

Post by zerotime » Mon Sep 09, 2019 3:21 pm

Aloka wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 10:55 am
It's worth noting that the Buddha was advising monks in your quote, and not lay people.

it seems this confussion on sila for the lay people is popular in these times.

Maybe just a personal perception. It is interesting the present obsession of some people with strict rules on sila. This is very different of previous generations who were attracted to Buddhism by the flexibility on this issue.

I don't know the reason for the emergence of this "patimokkha view" on sila for the lay people. Not sure if this can be only a cultural inheritance from the normative semitic religions, or perhaps more a psychological compensation because all the psychotic rubbish today spreaded inside societies. Who knows.

It seems clear a lay follower should take care of intentions according 5 precepts, and not much more. Goal on sila for lay people is getting protection in the world and avoid obstacles for the arising of wisdom, which can happens when there are fights, prison, personal remorses and similar. It is just to avoid problems and to keep clean the mind space, that's all

Just by looking the own intentions this is like paying a monthly rental for a humble flat. However, a patimokkha view on sila is like a mortgage to get a Palace of purification. Like bhikkhus do. The matter can be, building a patimokkha sila observance without living the monk's life can put more limits than the expected in the Buddha teaching for the lay people. And one should be ready to pay the own compromises. On the contrary, the Remorse debt-collection company maybe will appear to ask for those, and it can become an unnecessary obstacle. In the lay life, observing sila beyond the 5 precepts can be difficult or impossible to fulfill. We lack of the monk's environment. The Buddha was very wise in giving the 5 precepts so the the lay people can be able to follow this Path without leaving it.

"- And to what extent, venerable sir, is one a virtuous lay follower?
- Jivaka, when one abstains from taking life, from stealing, from sexual misconduct, from lying, and from fermented and distilled drinks that lead to heedlessness, then to that extent is one a virtuous lay follower."

AN 8.26


here is not included giving excuses to the boss, dodge suitors, lying in the job "our product is the best".. and a long etc needed to survive.



Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:
Wed Sep 04, 2019 4:36 pm
Sarchasm = the enormous gap between those who get it and those who do not.
yes, Sarcasm is always risky in the lay life. And everybody knows some bad result experience with this. Never there is total security if this can be "laugh with you" or "laugh at you". However, there are relations in where the sarcasm is shared with some apparent security, although never 100%. Same happens with insults, etc.. In some jobs or friendly relations this is the rule. All together are risky ways to establish relations.

Another kammically risky and unsafe aspect of the lay life.

It is pure logics it should be avoided by monks.
Bhikkhus live and do what we don't have the kamma and courage to do. :anjali:

User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Humour - wrong speach?

Post by salayatananirodha » Mon Sep 09, 2019 3:46 pm

i wanted to revise my last comment to say sarcasm instead of satire
like, i'm not saying if someone is presenting a stage play they are engaging in musāvādā (even though acting may be unwholesome)
anyway, i definitely have been part of the group that 'didn't get it' before and it's cruel, and it teaches me to distrust what people say because it's an acceptable practice. there's nothing wrong with trusting a person to say what is truthful and not what is false, at least deliberately, however naïve
zerotime wrote:
Mon Sep 09, 2019 3:21 pm
here is not included giving excuses to the boss, dodge suitors, lying in the job "our product is the best".. and a long etc needed to survive.
unpopular opinion: lying is flatly unacceptable for a lay person, even at the risk of one's life, and you won't find any qualifications or exceptions in the buddhadhamma for this rule

:arrow:
16. 'In what has the world originated?' — so said the Yakkha Hemavata, — 'with what is the world intimate? by what is the world afflicted, after having grasped at what?' (167)

17. 'In six the world has originated, O Hemavata,' — so said Bhagavat, — 'with six it is intimate, by six the world is afflicted, after having grasped at six.' (168)

- Hemavatasutta


links:
https://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/index.htm
http://thaiforestwisdom.org/canonical-texts/
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/wp-conte ... _Heart.pdf
https://www.dhammatalks.org/index.html

User avatar
Bhikkhu Pesala
Posts: 3839
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: Humour - wrong speach?

Post by Bhikkhu Pesala » Mon Sep 09, 2019 6:29 pm

Always remember that kamma is intention. If some people don't get it and take offence at satire that is their bad kamma, not yours. The target of the How to beat your wife skit, is the wicked teaching that says it is acceptable to beat your wife. Of course, if humour pokes fun at others in a cruel and bullying way, and that is the intention, then bad kamma is the result. The usual racist, sexist, homophobic, and profane comedy — the only purpose of which is to raise laugh — is that referred to in the Tālapuṭa Sutta, which leads to the hell realms.

The Buddha could be quite scathing at times. See the Soṇa Sutta. Hypocritical Brahmins might well have taken offence at that, but the target was the wicked doctrine of regarding their own caste as superior to those of low castes.

This evil caste doctrine persists in Indian today. There, Open Defecation is still a major public health problem, because some would not empty a cess-pit, which they regard as work only for "untouchables," if they did it themselves they would defile their own caste. Squat toilets are just as healthy for clearing the bowels properly as defecating in open fields, but providing toilets and cess-pits does not solve the problem.

In cases like the above, where deeply ingrained cultural bigotry is difficult to change, satire may be the most effective way to bring about change. People need to be made to understand that the caste system is stupid, and fruitless. Personally, I think monks have a leading role to play in changing social attitudes. Rightly directed satire ridicules the stupid practice, usually by ridiculing an imaginary person, not someone real.

The Brahmin and his goat
Last edited by Bhikkhu Pesala on Mon Sep 09, 2019 9:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
BlogPāli FontsIn This Very LifeBuddhist ChroniclesSoftware (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)

binocular
Posts: 6494
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Humour - wrong speach?

Post by binocular » Mon Sep 09, 2019 7:07 pm

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:
Mon Sep 09, 2019 6:29 pm
This evil caste doctrine persists in Indian today. There, Open Defecation is still a major public health problem, because some would not empty a cess-pit, which they regard as work only for "untouchables," if they did it themselves they would defile their own caste.
I've seen a documentary about the untouchables in India. In one example, some women were manually picking up human feces -- with bare hands -- from a squat toilet in an upper caste house.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

User avatar
zerotime
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Humour - wrong speach?

Post by zerotime » Mon Sep 09, 2019 9:47 pm

salayatananirodha wrote:
Mon Sep 09, 2019 3:46 pm
unpopular opinion: lying is flatly unacceptable for a lay person, even at the risk of one's life, and you won't find any qualifications or exceptions in the buddhadhamma for this rule
for sure an extreme view. Probably a confussion between what is unwholesome and sila. Not all actions with unwholesome elements are contrary to precepts.

I did not a compilation on that but in example Devadatta was deceived by Sariputta and Moggallana in order to rescue many monks from his new sect. One can think it was right to safeguard the Dhamma, although also it happened because they were alive and they should deal with the world and kamma.

The same Buddha appears (Apannaka Jataka) as a boddhisattva merchant who should haggling over prices as a common task in his job. Haggling contains apparent unwholesome elements because there is a succesion of falsehoods until fixing the price of the thing.

Such things like haggling, job excuses, selling "the best" to customers... are not against the precepts for the lay people. A real problem can arise when somebody is possesed by an obsession with morality beyond the 5 precepts, and then some real unwholesome factors can arise as an obstacle when those unnecessary limits he has built for himself cannot be accomplished.

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 5531
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Humour - wrong speach?

Post by Sam Vara » Mon Sep 09, 2019 10:20 pm

zerotime wrote:
Mon Sep 09, 2019 9:47 pm
A real problem can arise when somebody is possesed by an obsession with morality beyond the 5 precepts, and then some real unwholesome factors can arise as an obstacle when those unnecessary limits he has built for himself cannot be accomplished.
Good point. I'm reminded of this, from Ajahn Thanissaro:
The standards set by the precepts are simple — no intentional killing, stealing, having illicit sex, lying, or taking intoxicants. It's entirely possible to live in line with these standards. Not always easy or convenient, but always possible. I have seen efforts to translate the precepts into standards that sound more lofty or noble — taking the second precept, for example, to mean no abuse of the planet's resources — but even the people who reformulate the precepts in this way admit that it is impossible to live up to them. Anyone who has dealt with psychologically damaged people knows that very often the damage comes from having been presented with impossible standards to live by.

User avatar
zerotime
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Humour - wrong speach?

Post by zerotime » Tue Sep 10, 2019 9:17 pm

Sam Vara wrote:
Mon Sep 09, 2019 10:20 pm

Good point. I'm reminded of this, from Ajahn Thanissaro:
The standards set by the precepts are simple — no intentional killing, stealing, having illicit sex, lying, or taking intoxicants. It's entirely possible to live in line with these standards. Not always easy or convenient, but always possible. I have seen efforts to translate the precepts into standards that sound more lofty or noble — taking the second precept, for example, to mean no abuse of the planet's resources — but even the people who reformulate the precepts in this way admit that it is impossible to live up to them. Anyone who has dealt with psychologically damaged people knows that very often the damage comes from having been presented with impossible standards to live by.
thanks for this more clear quote :namaste:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests