Right Speach

I have taken from three main sources: Neturism (ancient egyptian) Hinduism and Buddhism.

Djehuti (thoth) gave us language/words. For this reason Mdu Ntr (oh loosly translated its holy writing) is *sacred* words are vibrational in nature and cary power. If you dont believe me how many times has someone said somthing that 'rubbed' you the wrong way? How many times has someone said "I love You" and you 'melt' ?

More strictly translated we see that Ntr is there. This word has several meanings and its usually easier to say God than divine principle, universal truth, active function, spirit..... Words of God.

Words, Language are sacred.
One prevalant theeme that crosses the boundries of Neturism, Hinduism and Buddhism is Right Speach.

The original Neturians, the Kemites (kem = the black land, its how the anicent egyptians reffered to themselves and thier country, they also used Tamery =the blessed land) had very strong opinions and beliefs regarding ethics and proper speach.

Lets take a look at the "negitive confession"/ 42 Tennants of Ma'at as translated by Dr. Muata Ashby
you will notice the variants, that is because this text was not only found in the Book of Going forth by Day, but scrolls were found with the deceased. They varried. Originally the number of tennants were a smaller number, but most practicioners of Neturism keep up with the accepted 42 in order to be more concurant with the Noms (province) There were 42 Noms each with its own guardian. I left out the gardian names, since they are not esp relevant rt now.
Each Declaration begins with a greeting to a Nom spirit and I have not...

(Hail, Usekh-nemmt, who comes forth from Anu, I have not committed sin) -Faukner

11. uttered evil words / variant: allowed myself to become sullen, to sulk or become depressed

Ever notice that someone can say just a tiney statement with huge negitive connotations, or something thoughtless if not down right cruel an it ruines your whole day or gives you weirdo psychological issues? This particular tennant first focuses on 'evil' words. Isfet - that which is against Ma'at (order of the universe, justice, truth) Isfet is evil, plain and simple, but what is evil the exteremely confused person may ask... anything that is malicious and damaging to one self and others.

When we utter 'evil' words, blasphemy, insults, threats, hurtful concepts we are not only creating this nasty vibration, not only are we poisoning the very air which sustains our lives, but we curse that person and ourselves.

I like the variant as well. Who wants to be around a sullen, sulkey depressed person. When you feel a mood intensely it influences others. Your energetic field infects the breathing air. Im sure we have all experianced being around someone who, just by walking in the room charges the air with dpression and or hopelessness.

When we are sulkey, sullen and depressed we infect our own heart. We create our own mental dis -ease. This of course removes our logic center and causes us to act in pretty horrid, anoying if not horrific ways.

17. spoken against anyon / variant: babbled, gossiped

When you speak against someone , again you are cursing them and yourself. You are tainting them and yourself. Its like throwing psychic bricks in their faces. Flinging negitive vibraitions all over the place. Babbling and gossiping are useless things with no redeaming charactoristics and usually stems from malice and jelously or anger. (IGNORANCE)

25. stirred up strife (disturbance) cause terror. not struck fear into any man

I think this is a no brainer. He said She said ... then somethng else was said, and maybe we didnt think before we allowed something hurtful to fall out of our mouths. When you speak without thinking, you may say something offensive or hurtfull. One can always temper the truth with compassion.

I braught that up because how many of us have heard, Im not trying to be mean, and no offense or lol.... and then something nasty rolls out of thier mouths and splatters all over your energy/FACE

Causing strife, disturbance, terror ect ect is an incredably negitive act stemming from several psychological issues. Control, self concept issues, arogance, mischeviousness, in short dis eased thinking. Its a form of dominance, atempting to removes someones will if not dammage thier spirit or psyche.


29. Worked grief, abused anyone / cultivated a quarrelsome nature

Ah psychological abuse ..... Im pretty sure I dont nedd to get into that one...
Quarlaling is more of an energetic vampiric activity than anything else. It allows that person to raise a neg energy level so that that poor guy can be drained of healthy things. This is relitively simalar to poisoning some one.

37. spoken scornfully / variant: yelled unnecessarily or raised my voice

"Do not raise your voice, for god abhors loud speaking."
I missquoted that, and I dont even remember which wisdom text it comes from.
Speaking scornfully or yelling is a good way to psychologically and psychically beat the snott out of someone.

39. behaved with arrogance / variance: been boastfull
Of course this doesnt necessarly belong in this catagory untill you think about what it means to behave with arrogance. There is usually boasting involved. As if you are atempting to capture and captivate people so you can drain them with the oh Im better than you thing. Not only that but it usually leads to some of the ones from above, speaking scornfully, causing strife, all maner of things can bounce of this one. Boasting decreases your merit.


40. been overwhelmingly proud or sought for distinctions for myslef
here we go back to arogance. Usually pride and seeking distinction folows on the heels of 39. If you are seeking distinction then all you have done amounts to nothing. You were not acting with love or compassion, you were self seeking, seperating yourself from the whole of humanity insted of assisting it.

Now, because speach was so very important, sacred and holy, you know the sages had to have thier say as well.

PtahHotep
1. Be not proud because thou art learned; but discourse with the ignorant man, as with the sage. For no limit can be set to skill, neither is there any craftsman that possesseth full advantages. Fair speech is more rare than the emerald that is found by slave-maidens on the pebbles.

*THOSE* people. The ones who think they know *EVERYTHING* and are so busy on their soap train (as apposed to a soap box) that they can't hear anyone else. Here, when PtahHotep says ignorant man I dont think he is just talking about 'people who dont know any better' Im more inclind to think he is discussing the 'uneducated'. For example. I graduated Highshool, took some psych classes. In all other arias Im self taught. I have no 'formal' schooling. That asside, *EVERYONE* is our teacher. You meet every single person for a reason, whether or not the reason is clear. We all learn from eachother, whether we learn that we need more compassion and patiance in order to deal with the idiot we are talking to, or understanding why we become angry at another (who just happens to be reflecting our own issues back at us)

Simply, talk politely to everyone. Treat every person with the same amount of respect. Whether it is a child, an anoying teen ager, the unleared, the scholler, the priest, the holy person.

I remember asking The Historian (Japanise history and politics of some era I cant recall, though his pet project is the Aizu Clann) what honorific should a priest use? Just in case I get to go to Japan tomorow, I would like to make sure I can act somewhat apropriately for my 'office' so to speak. Im always paranoid that Im going to use the wrong honorific and make a gross social error. He told me to just use san to everyone. This makes a certain amount of sense, holy people dont need to be egoistic and or proud. May as well make sure to learn the polite form of speach as well.....

Certain words, and behaviors with speech keep the ego in check, you know how it likes to take over and make and idiot out of you.


2. If thou find an arguer talking, one that is well disposed and wiser than thou, let thine arms fall, bend thy back, 1 be not angry with him if he agree (?) not with thee. Refrain from speaking evilly; oppose him not at any time when he speaketh. If he address thee as one ignorant of the matter, thine humbleness shall bear away his contentions.

I have actually seen this, and used this device. Its surprising how speaking softly and humbly remove contention from angry/arogant people. Of course there are some (ex husbands) who just wont be pascafied not matter what because they *like* raising their voice and hurting others with thier words...

This also reminds me of a concept I learned from my friend and teacher Tazima Hatchepsut. AND my black feet freind (no no its not black FOOT, they have TWO feet !!! ) this can be a harsh lession for a westerner to learn because we are not raised with the concept of RESPECTING elders. Of course I thought I was, but it turns out that RESPECTING elders in Native American Tradition and Kemetic tradition is a serious, serious matter.

If an elder talks to you, you are truely *HONORED* and should act with apropriate humbleness. You do not talk back. You do not argue. Always say please and thank you. ect ect (manners) I dont care how wrong you think they are or how much what they said pisses you off. There is no arguing or discussion on the matter untill you go and learn a few things and become an *elder* yourself.

3. If thou find an arguer talking, thy fellow, one that is within thy reach, keep not silence when he saith aught that is evil; so shalt thou be wiser than he. Great will be the applause on the part of the listeners, and thy name shall be good in the knowledge of princes.

"There is no such thing as evil... or free will everything is predetermined" Those are two phrases that crawl under my skin. or "what is evil" *sigh* I am not sure why people want to deny good and evil. Positive and negitive. Im sure you can say it like that. evil is that which is disruptive and harmfull to the self and others. *there is no black and white* oh yeah there is.... the guy who takes and tortures a child, in the literal sense, an abusive person, child molesters. I think those things are pretty cut and dry. One who works in ways to be harmfull to others in any way. Dominating by fear or physical violence.

The most insidious nature of evil is to convince you that it doesnt exsist.
and then
"oh but they have a mental illness."
Look, I dont care, if someone goes around stabbing people in the face they need to be sequestered or killled. I can not tolerat the idea that humans as a race are so afraid of thier own mortality, and thier own negitive issues that they dont see that harmfull people need to go to an elsewhere so that we can protect our children, friends and loved ones. To allow an evil to exsist is just as bad as the evil itself. Make all the excuses you want, you can even bring compassion and love into the picture but I will never be convinced that having love and compassion means I should allow others to be harmed at the hands of a person who does violance of any kind, verbal or not. That in itself is not only irresponsible, but the insidious creeping nature of evil.

Christians say that Satan wins and succeds because he convinces people he isnt real and then he can go run amock. Though I do not believe in satan, I believe completely in the above statement if we take Satan as a personification of evil, much like APEP. (apophis)

If you want to defend the child molester and rapist and abuser, thats fine, you live with them in a gated community. Actually that isnt a bad idea. put them in one place with some nice councelors and what ever kind of holy people to help fix thier issues and heal thier soul, but for love of crap keep a tranqalizer gun around.

Lovely rant. ...
I like to think that what I just did was obvious, but as I learned from Tazima, not everyone is on the same waveleight as far as communication and understanding goes. Her idea of 'common' sense is a bit differant from mine, so occasionally we baffle eachother.

This statement is allong the lines of not allowing people to spread poisonous unethichal words. If someone of your particular rank and stature is 'talking shit' politely difiuse them. Do not allow a lyer to propogate thier false reality and cause harm in such a way.

23. Repeat not extravagant speech, neither listen thereto; for it is the utterance of a body heated by wrath. When such speech is repeated to thee, hearken not thereto, look to the ground. Speak not regarding it, that he that is before thee may know wisdom. If thou be commanded to do a theft, bring it to pass that the command be taken off thee, for it is a thing hateful according to law. That which destroyeth a vision is the veil over it.

So at first Im looking at this going hu? extracvigant speach hu? Is that like purple prose????? Then we see the word 'wrath' So this passage is talking about bitching and complaining excessively. I do not speak in anger.... ( a variant of one of the 42 Tennants/neg confession) this kind of intereaction has not much positive merit. Oh yeah your friends and probably even your shrink will tell you to get it all out because you need release and what not. however wouldnt it be nicer if you meditated and pulled your center in enough so that you dont feel this wrathfullness anymore?

I also like this one as it covers what to do if your higher ups give you an unethical order.

24. If thou wouldest be a wise man, and one sitting in council with his overlord, apply thine heart unto perfection. Silence is more profitable unto thee than abundance of speech. Consider how thou may be opposed by an expert that speaketh in council. It is a foolish thing to speak on every kind of work, for he that disputeth thy words shall put them unto proof.

25. If thou be powerful, make thyself to be honoured for knowledge and for gentleness. Speak with authority, that is, not as if following injunctions, for he that is humble--when highly placed--falleth into errors. Exalt not thine heart, that it be not brought low. Be not silent, but beware of interruption and of answering words with heat. Put it far from thee; control thyself. The wrathful heart speaketh fiery words; it darteth out at the man of peace that approacheth, stopping his path.

28. If thou be the son of a man of the priesthood, and an envoy to conciliate the multitude. . . . 2 speak thou without favouring one side. Let it not be said: "His conduct is that of the nobles, favouring one side in his speech." Turn thine aim toward exact judgments.

Be wary of speech when a learned man hearkeneth unto thee; desire to be established for good in the mouth of those that hear thee speaking. If thou have entered as an expert, speak with exact (?) lips, that thy conduct may be seemly.

42. Be thine heart overflowing; but refrain thy mouth. Let thy conduct be exact while amongst nobles, and seemly before thy lord, doing that which he hath commanded. Such a son shall speak unto them that hearken to him; moreover, his begetter shall be favoured. Apply thine heart, what time thou speakest, to saying things such that the nobles who listen declare, "How excellent is that which cometh out of his mouth!"

Ankheshoq
-Do not speak your heart immediately.

-Do not speak quickly, least you offend.

-Don't speak in two voices.

-Don't instruct a fool, least he hate you. Don't instruct a person who doesnt listen.


Domestic Instruction of Papyrus Insinger 1

The foolish tongue of a stupid man acts like a knife that cuts his life.

Do not permit your tongue to advise when you haven't been asked.

Do not let your speach be differant from your heart in advise when you are asked.

Amenemope:




http://www.hinduwebsite.com/buddhism/right_speech.asp
By Thanissaro Bhikkhu

As my teacher once said, "If you can't control your mouth, there's no way you can hope to control your mind.' This is why right speech is so important in day-to-day practice.

Right speech, explained in negative terms, means avoiding four types of harmful speech: lies (words spoken with the intent of misrepresenting the truth); divisive speech (spoken with the intent of creating rifts between people); harsh speech (spoken with the intent of hurting another person's feelings); and idle chatter (spoken with no purposeful intent at all).

Notice the focus on intent: this is where the practice of right speech intersects with the training of the mind. Before you speak, you focus on why you want to speak. This helps get you in touch with all the machinations taking place in the committee of voices running your mind. If you see any unskillful motives lurking behind the committee's decisions, you veto them. As a result, you become more aware of yourself, more honest with yourself, more firm with yourself. You also save yourself from saying things that you'll later regret. In this way you strengthen qualities of mind that will be helpful in meditation, at the same time avoiding any potentially painful memories that would get in the way of being attentive to the present moment when the time comes to meditate.

In positive terms, right speech means speaking in ways that are trustworthy, harmonious, comforting, and worth taking to heart. When you make a practice of these positive forms of right speech, your words become a gift to others. In response, other people will start listening more to what you say, and will be more likely to respond in kind. This gives you a sense of the power of your actions: the way you act in the present moment does shape the world of your experience. You don't need to be a victim of past events.

For many of us, the most difficult part of practicing right speech lies in how we express our sense of humor. Especially here in America, we're used to getting laughs with exaggeration, sarcasm, group stereotypes, and pure silliness — all classic examples of wrong speech. If people get used to these sorts of careless humor, they stop listening carefully to what we say. In this way, we cheapen our own discourse. Actually, there's enough irony in the state of the world that we don't need to exaggerate or be sarcastic. The greatest humorists are the ones who simply make us look directly at the way things are.

Expressing our humor in ways that are truthful, useful, and wise may require thought and effort, but when we master this sort of wit we find that the effort is well spent. We've sharpened our own minds and have improved our verbal environment. In this way, even our jokes become part of our practice: an opportunity to develop positive qualities of mind and to offer something of intelligent value to the people around us.

So pay close attention to what you say — and to why you say it. When you do, you'll discover that an open mouth doesn't have to be a mistake.



http://www.hinduwebsite.com/buddhism/rightspeech.asp
Right Speech, Meaning And Significance On The Eightfold Path


Search Hinduwebsite





"And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech." — Samyutta Nikaya XLV.8
Right Speech Means

Right Speech means to abstain from lying, tale-carrying, use of harsh language and vain talk. The person who follows right speech speaks the truth, is devoted to it, is reliable and does not deceive men. Whenever he was asked to be a witness, he tells only the truth he knows or admits his ignorance of it honestly.

He never speaks a lie either for his own benefit or for that of others. He refrains from carrying tales. He never repeats what he heard at one place so as to cause differences among men. Thus he reunites the people who are divided or strengthens the unity of those that are united.

He is happy to see agreement and harmony among people and these are the qualities which he spreads among people through his words. He does not speak harsh language. He speaks words that are gentle, soothing to hear, loving, touching the heart, courteous, affectionate and agreeable to many.

He does not indulge in vain talk. He speaks at the right time, the facts he knows, only that which is useful, about the Dhamma and the discipline. His speech is very precious like a treasure, coming at the right moment followed by moderate and sensible arguments.

This is the right speech.
Two Kinds of Right speech

1. The Mundane Right Speech which is to abstain from lying, tale-carrying, harsh language and vain talk. It leads to worldly gains and brings good results.

2. The Ultra Mundane Right Speech is abhorrence of the four-fold wrong speech and abstaining from it, practising it mentally and keeping the mind holy, to remain other worldly and to follow the holy path in conjunction with the Eightfold path. This path is not of this world, but ultra mundane
Five keys to right speech

"Monks, a statement endowed with five factors is well-spoken, not ill-spoken. It is blameless & unfaulted by knowledgeable people. Which five?

"It is spoken at the right time. It is spoken in truth. It is spoken affectionately. It is spoken beneficially. It is spoken with a mind of good-will." Anguttara Nikaya 5.198
What words you should speak

"One should speak only that word by which one would not torment oneself nor harm others. That word is indeed well spoken.

"One should speak only pleasant words, words which are acceptable (to others). What one speaks without bringing evils to others is pleasant."
Putting Right Speech to Practice

"And how is one made pure in four ways by verbal action?

"There is the case where a certain person, abandoning false speech, abstains from false speech. When he has been called to a town meeting, a group meeting, a gathering of his relatives, his guild, or of the royalty, if he is asked as a witness, 'Come & tell, good man, what you know': If he doesn't know, he says, 'I don't know.' If he does know, he says, 'I know.' If he hasn't seen, he says, 'I haven't seen.' If he has seen, he says, 'I have seen.' Thus he doesn't consciously tell a lie for his own sake, for the sake of another, or for the sake of any reward. Abandoning false speech, he abstains from false speech. He speaks the truth, holds to the truth, is firm, reliable, no deceiver of the world.

"Abandoning divisive speech he abstains from divisive speech. What he has heard here he does not tell there to break those people apart from these people here. What he has heard there he does not tell here to break these people apart from those people there. Thus reconciling those who have broken apart or cementing those who are united, he loves concord, delights in concord, enjoys concord, speaks things that create concord.

"Abandoning abusive speech, he abstains from abusive speech. He speaks words that are soothing to the ear, that are affectionate, that go to the heart, that are polite, appealing & pleasing to people at large.

"Abandoning idle chatter, he abstains from idle chatter. He speaks in season, speaks what is factual, what is in accordance with the goal, the Dhamma, & the Vinaya. He speaks words worth treasuring, seasonable, reasonable, circumscribed, connected with the goal.

"This is how one is made pure in four ways by verbal action."

- Anguttara Nikaya X.176
Self-purification through well-chosen speech

"And how is one made pure in four ways by verbal action?

"There is the case where a certain person, abandoning false speech, abstains from false speech. When he has been called to a town meeting, a group meeting, a gathering of his relatives, his guild, or of the royalty, if he is asked as a witness, 'Come & tell, good man, what you know': If he doesn't know, he says, 'I don't know.' If he does know, he says, 'I know.' If he hasn't seen, he says, 'I haven't seen.' If he has seen, he says, 'I have seen.' Thus he doesn't consciously tell a lie for his own sake, for the sake of another, or for the sake of any reward. Abandoning false speech, he abstains from false speech. He speaks the truth, holds to the truth, is firm, reliable, no deceiver of the world.

"Abandoning divisive speech he abstains from divisive speech. What he has heard here he does not tell there to break those people apart from these people here. What he has heard there he does not tell here to break these people apart from those people there. Thus reconciling those who have broken apart or cementing those who are united, he loves concord, delights in concord, enjoys concord, speaks things that create concord.

"Abandoning abusive speech, he abstains from abusive speech. He speaks words that are soothing to the ear, that are affectionate, that go to the heart, that are polite, appealing & pleasing to people at large.

"Abandoning idle chatter, he abstains from idle chatter. He speaks in season, speaks what is factual, what is in accordance with the goal, the Dhamma, & the Vinaya. He speaks words worth treasuring, seasonable, reasonable, circumscribed, connected with the goal.

"This is how one is made pure in four ways by verbal action."

— Anguttara Nikaya 10.176
Kinds of speech to be avoided by contemplatives

"Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, are addicted to talking about lowly topics such as these — talking about kings, robbers, ministers of state; armies, alarms, and battles; food and drink; clothing, furniture, garlands, and scents; relatives; vehicles; villages, towns, cities, the countryside; women and heroes; the gossip of the street and the well; tales of the dead; tales of diversity [philosophical discussions of the past and future], the creation of the world and of the sea, and talk of whether things exist or not — he abstains from talking about lowly topics such as these. This, too, is part of his virtue.

"Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, are addicted to debates such as these — 'You understand this doctrine and discipline? I'm the one who understands this doctrine and discipline. How could you understand this doctrine and discipline? You're practicing wrongly. I'm practicing rightly. I'm being consistent. You're not. What should be said first you said last. What should be said last you said first. What you took so long to think out has been refuted. Your doctrine has been overthrown. You're defeated. Go and try to salvage your doctrine; extricate yourself if you can!' — he abstains from debates such as these. This, too, is part of his virtue."

— Digha Nikaya 2
Ten wholesome topics of conversation

"There are these ten topics of [proper] conversation. Which ten? Talk on modesty, on contentment, on seclusion, on non-entanglement, on arousing persistence, on virtue, on concentration, on discernment, on release, and on the knowledge & vision of release. These are the ten topics of conversation. If you were to engage repeatedly in these ten topics of conversation, you would outshine even the sun & moon, so mighty, so powerful — to say nothing of the wanderers of other sects."

— Anguttara Nikaya 10.69
How to admonish another skillfully

"O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu who desires to admonish another should do so after investigating five conditions in himself and after establishing five other conditions in himself. What are the five conditions which he should investigate in himself?

[1] "Am I one who practices purity in bodily action, flawless and untainted...?

[2] "Am I one who practices purity in speech, flawless and untainted...?

[3] "Is the heart of goodwill, free from malice, established in me towards fellow-farers in the holy life...?

[4] "Am I or am I not one who has heard much, who bears in mind what he has heard, who stores up what he has heard? Those teachings which are good alike in their beginning, middle, and ending, proclaiming perfectly the spirit and the letter of the utterly purified holy life — have such teachings been much heard by me, borne in mind, practiced in speech, pondered in the heart and rightly penetrated by insight...?

[5] "Are the Patimokkhas [rules of conduct for monks and nuns] in full thoroughly learned by heart, well-analyzed with thorough knowledge of their meanings, clearly divided sutta by sutta and known in minute detail by me...?

"These five conditions must be investigated in himself.

"And what other five conditions must be established in himself?

[1] "Do I speak at the right time, or not?

[2] "Do I speak of facts, or not?

[3] "Do I speak gently or harshly?

[4] "Do I speak profitable words or not?

[5] "Do I speak with a kindly heart, or inwardly malicious?

&"O bhikkhus, these five conditions are to be investigated in himself and the latter five established in himself by a bhikkhu who desires to admonish another."

— Anguttara Nikaya V (From The Patimokkha, Ñanamoli Thera, trans.)


http://zbohy.zatma.org/Dharma/zbohy/Literature/7thWorld/c13p1.html

A word is dead when it is said, some say.
I say it just begins to live that day.

- Emily Dickinson

Speech does our dirty work for us. In our quest for status, we are all confidence men. We lie, make promises, flatter, exaggerate, gossip, insult, twist truth or omit it, and employ speech in whatever way we can to further our ego's ambitions. No one should find it surprising that all religions prescribe silence in rather large doses when treating the maladies of speech.

Silence, however, is not an antidote to poisonous speech. Just as we don't control anger by counting to ten when we feel anger rise, but merely use this 10count demilitarized time-zone as an opportunity to reconsider the situation, thereby destroying anger at its roots, so we don't use silence to control the problems of speech. Silence merely gives our tongue a sabbatical which our brain can put to good use. Analyzing the reasons we feel so compelled to contribute our thoughts, vocally or in script, privately or to the world at large, is the way we use Right Speech to achieve non-attachment. Usually, when we examine our desire to speak, we discover our ego's intention to gain status for itself.

Some speech transgressions are easy to spot.

In the January 1981 edition of Ten Directions, a publication of the Zen Center of Los Angeles and the Institute for Transcultural Studies, an unsigned cartoon strip titled 'Zen Living' appears.

Four figures are in each frame: Two young, black-robed Buddhist priests who are speaking to a longhaired layman, and a man who is sitting nearby reading a newspaper.

One priest says to the layman, "I've really been seeing how my ideas and preconceptions are just the attempts of the ego to assert itself... I mean, the ego is just SO insignificant!"

The second priest continues, "Yeah, I know what you mean! And what gets me is that I spend so much energy on these trivial concerns that are all based on this false sense that the ego is so important." The layman, looking at his watch, responds, "Yea, same here! I've been seeing that the ego's concerns are so petty, in fact the ego, itself, is so petty... Hey! Gotta go - I'm late for the New Trainee meeting."

As he departs, one priest says to the other, "Would ya getta load of that! He hasn't been here two months and he thinks he understands how petty the ego is already."

And the man reading the newspaper chimes in, "The nerve..."

The cartoon strip illustrates some of the Right Speech problems people on the Path should avoid. That the priests are gossipy and snipe at the layman is an obvious error. That they are casually discussing their intellectual insights into Buddhism is another. And that they are engaged in a kind of one-up competition with each other is a third. That they are trying to impress the layman is a fourth. And the eavesdropping bystander commits yet a fifth error in Right Speech.

There are many other ways to err.

Many people think that Right Speech has something to do with Free Speech and its related Constitutional rights and responsibilities. This confusion frequently allows political activism to contaminate religious life; and, unfortunately for the heroic crusaders who dwell within our breast, few things are as harmful to a person's spiritual practice than political activism.

When government is immoral, society looks to its religious leaders to promote change. Sometimes, as is often the case in undeveloped countries, a religion is the only organization available to form an opposition. Sometimes, ironically, it was the unwarranted intrusion into secular matters by the religion, itself, which engendered the poverty, oppression and corruption which the people are engaged in opposing. But no matter, whether trying to change conditions for which they are largely responsible or whether trying to change conditions for which they are entirely blameless, religions seem always to get involved in politics.

Unripened religious professionals, believing it incumbent upon themselves to set society straight on moral issues, frequently can be found marching in protest lines or parades. They do not realize that by publicly protesting injustices of one sort or another they are practicing Six-Worlds' Chan. Don't warn them that if they expend all their energy correcting the misconduct of others, they'll have no strength left to root lust or greed out of their own hearts. They are prepared to make the sacrifice.

Charge that their devotion to the issue far exceeds their understanding of the issue and they will rebuke you, gnashing their teeth in vehement denial. They are authorities on Good and Evil. They have studied the issue (nuclear energy, alien rights, ozone depletion, military draft, toxic waste, abortion, endangered species, organized labor strikes, offshore drilling, etc.) and they know that they are on the side of Good.

How do religious organizations really determine which side of an issue is the good one? Do they automatically assume that the good side is the side the government is not on? No. They do not study issues that carefully. If we interview the protesters, we usually learn that they determined the good side by having it described to them by the administrators of their temples at whose instigation they also picked up their placards. And how did those astute beings arrive on the side of Good? Either they found in the 'evil' side a fit receptacle for their congregation's collective hate (common enemies being the nutritive umbilical cord of fellowship) or, what is more frequently the case, they simply differentiated good from evil according to the quid pro quo, "I'll march in your protest if you'll march in mine" accommodations which religious groups make with each other.

According to this arrangement, one religious group calls another to solicit help in protesting the deployment of Multiple Warhead Intercontinental Nuclear Missiles (their Roshi's pet peeve). The solicited organization complies and contributes a few dozen bodies to the march. Then, a month later when this organization wants to protest Offshore Drilling (the bane of their Guru's existence), they call upon the first which reciprocates. Often, the people on the line don't know anything at all about the issue except what they have been told by their religious leaders. Not exactly a think-tank operation.

People who have spent some time in the Swamp are usually appalled by this unseemly interest in society's problems. They believe that they have earned the right to simplify their lives, to discard all their Six-Worlds' junk which includes flaunting half-baked political opinions. They know that salvation has nothing to do with ozone depletion and that however urgent the ozone problem is, they must allow others the privilege of dealing with it. (That is why God made a younger generation.) When a man is standing amid the smoking ruins of his life he does not particularly care how big the hole in the ozone layer gets. In fact, if he cares at all, it is to wish that the hole gets big enough for the earth to fall through it. In his wretched way, he cheers the hole on. Once saved, the man calmly supports with his vote or his money, or his choice of refrigerants, efforts to remedy the ozone loss. But he does not worry about the hole because he understands that ultimately the hole does not matter. Nothing except knowing God matters. He takes refuge in the Buddha. And it is the Buddha's name that is on his lips... not the name of the Secretary of the Interior.

Further, people on the path should know that unless they are prepared quietly to offer an alternative 'something of value' to replace that which is being decried, they should not protest society's solution to any problem.

The Seventh World of Chan Buddhism
Chapter 13: Right Speech, Page 1 of 2

http://www.dharmabliss.org/elders.htm
Right Speech (samma vaca)

The Buddha divides right speech into four components: abstaining from false speech, abstaining from slanderous speech, abstaining from harsh speech, and abstaining from idle chatter. Because the effects of speech are not as immediately evident as those of bodily action, its importance and potential is easily overlooked. But a little reflection will show that speech and its offshoot, the written word, can have enormous consequences for good or for harm. In fact, whereas for beings such as animals who live at the preverbal level physical action is of dominant concern, for humans immersed in verbal communication speech gains the ascendency. Speech can break lives, create enemies, and start wars, or it can give wisdom, heal divisions, and create peace. This has always been so, yet in the modern age the positive and negative potentials of speech have been vastly multiplied by the tremendous increase in the means, speed, and range of communications. The capacity for verbal expression, oral and written, has often been regarded as the distinguishing mark of the human species. From this we can appreciate the need to make this capacity the means to human excellence rather than, as too often has been the case, the sign of human degradation.

(1) Abstaining from false speech (musavada veramani)

Herein someone avoids false speech and abstains from it. He speaks the truth, is devoted to truth, reliable, worthy of confidence, not a deceiver of people. Being at a meeting, or amongst people, or in the midst of his relatives, or in a society, or in the king's court, and called upon and asked as witness to tell what he knows, he answers, if he knows nothing: "I know nothing," and if he knows, he answers: "I know"; if he has seen nothing, he answers: "I have seen nothing," and if he has seen, he answers: "I have seen." Thus he never knowingly speaks a lie, either for the sake of his own advantage, or for the sake of another person's advantage, or for the sake of any advantage whatsoever.[21]

This statement of the Buddha discloses both the negative and the positive sides to the precept. The negative side is abstaining from lying, the positive side speaking the truth. The determinative factor behind the transgression is the intention to deceive. If one speaks something false believing it to be true, there is no breach of the precept as the intention to deceive is absent. Though the deceptive intention is common to all cases of false speech, lies can appear in different guises depending on the motivating root, whether greed, hatred, or delusion. Greed as the chief motive results in the lie aimed at gaining some personal advantage for oneself or for those close to oneself -- material wealth, position, respect, or admiration. With hatred as the motive, false speech takes the form of the malicious lie, the lie intended to hurt and damage others. When delusion is the principal motive, the result is a less pernicious type of falsehood: the irrational lie, the compulsive lie, the interesting exaggeration, lying for the sake of a joke.

The Buddha's stricture against lying rests upon several reasons. For one thing, lying is disruptive to social cohesion. People can live together in society only in an atmosphere of mutual trust, where they have reason to believe that others will speak the truth; by destroying the grounds for trust and inducing mass suspicion, widespread lying becomes the harbinger signalling the fall from social solidarity to chaos. But lying has other consequences of a deeply personal nature at least equally disastrous. By their very nature lies tend to proliferate. Lying once and finding our word suspect, we feel compelled to lie again to defend our credibility, to paint a consistent picture of events. So the process repeats itself: the lies stretch, multiply, and connect until they lock us into a cage of falsehoods from which it is difficult to escape. The lie is thus a miniature paradigm for the whole process of subjective illusion. In each case the self-assured creator, sucked in by his own deceptions, eventually winds up their victim.

Such considerations probably lie behind the words of counsel the Buddha spoke to his son, the young novice Rahula, soon after the boy was ordained. One day the Buddha came to Rahula, pointed to a bowl with a little bit of water in it, and asked: "Rahula, do you see this bit of water left in the bowl?" Rahula answered: "Yes, sir." "So little, Rahula, is the spiritual achievement (samañña, lit. 'recluseship') of one who is not afraid to speak a deliberate lie." Then the Buddha threw the water away, put the bowl down, and said: "Do you see, Rahula, how that water has been discarded? In the same way one who tells a deliberate lie discards whatever spiritual achievement he has made." Again he asked: "Do you see how this bowl is now empty? In the same way one who has no shame in speaking lies is empty of spiritual achievement." Then the Buddha turned the bowl upside down and said: "Do you see, Rahula, how this bowl has been turned upside down? In the same way one who tells a deliberate lie turns his spiritual achievements upside down and becomes incapable of progress." Therefore, the Buddha concluded, one should not speak a deliberate lie even in jest.[22]

It is said that in the course of his long training for enlightenment over many lives, a bodhisatta can break all the moral precepts except the pledge to speak the truth. The reason for this is very profound, and reveals that the commitment to truth has a significance transcending the domain of ethics and even mental purification, taking us to the domains of knowledge and being. Truthful speech provides, in the sphere of interpersonal communication, a parallel to wisdom in the sphere of private understanding. The two are respectively the outward and inward modalities of the same commitment to what is real. Wisdom consists in the realization of truth, and truth (sacca) is not just a verbal proposition but the nature of things as they are. To realize truth our whole being has to be brought into accord with actuality, with things as they are, which requires that in communications with others we respect things as they are by speaking the truth. Truthful speech establishes a correspondence between our own inner being and the real nature of phenomena, allowing wisdom to rise up and fathom their real nature. Thus, much more than an ethical principle, devotion to truthful speech is a matter of taking our stand on reality rather than illusion, on the truth grasped by wisdom rather than the fantasies woven by desire.

(2) Abstaining from slanderous speech (pisunaya vacaya veramani)

He avoids slanderous speech and abstains from it. What he has heard here he does not repeat there, so as to cause dissension there; and what he has heard there he does not repeat here, so as to cause dissension here. Thus he unites those that are divided; and those that are united he encourages. Concord gladdens him, he delights and rejoices in concord; and it is concord that he spreads by his words.[23]

Slanderous speech is speech intended to create enmity and division, to alienate one person or group from another. The motive behind such speech is generally aversion, resentment of a rival's success or virtues, the intention to tear down others by verbal denigrations. Other motives may enter the picture as well: the cruel intention of causing hurt to others, the evil desire to win affection for oneself, the perverse delight in seeing friends divided.

Slanderous speech is one of the most serious moral transgressions. The root of hate makes the unwholesome kamma already heavy enough, but since the action usually occurs after deliberation, the negative force becomes even stronger because premeditation adds to its gravity. When the slanderous statement is false, the two wrongs of falsehood and slander combine to produce an extremely powerful unwholesome kamma. The canonical texts record several cases in which the calumny ofan innocent party led to an immediate rebirth in the plane of misery.

The opposite of slander, as the Buddha indicates, is speech that promotes friendship and harmony. Such speech originates from a mind of lovingkindness and sympathy. It wins the trust and affection of others, who feel they can confide in one without fear that their disclosures will be used against them. Beyond the obvious benefits that such speech brings in this present life, it is said that abstaining from slander has as its kammic result the gain of a retinue of friends who can never be turned against one by the slanderous words of others.[24]

(3) Abstaining from harsh speech (pharusaya vacaya veramani).

He avoids harsh language and abstains from it. He speaks such words as are gentle, soothing to the ear, loving, such words as go to the heart, and are courteous, friendly, and agreeable to many.[25]

Harsh speech is speech uttered in anger, intended to cause the hearer pain. Such speech can assume different forms, of which we might mention three. One is abusive speech: scolding, reviling, or reproving another angrily with bitter words. A second is insult: hurting another by ascribing to him some offensive quality which detracts from his dignity. A third is sarcasm: speaking to someone in a way which ostensibly lauds him, but with such a tone or twist of phrasing that the ironic intent becomes clear and causes pain.

The main root of harsh speech is aversion, assuming the form of anger. Since the defilement in this case tends to work impulsively, without deliberation, the transgression is less serious than slander and the kammic consequence generally less severe. Still, harsh speech is an unwholesome action with disagreeable results for oneself and others, both now and in the future, so it has to be restrained. The ideal antidote is patience -- learning to tolerate blame and criticism from others, to sympathize with their shortcomings, to respect differences in viewpoint, to endure abuse without feeling compelled to retaliate. The Buddha calls for patience even under the most trying conditions:

Even if, monks, robbers and murderers saw through your limbs and joints, whosoever should give way to anger thereat would not be following my advice. For thus ought you to train yourselves: "Undisturbed shall our mind remain, with heart full of love, and free from any hidden malice; and that person shall we penetrate with loving thoughts, wide, deep, boundless, freed from anger and hatred."[26]

(4) Abstaining from idle chatter (samphappalapa veramani).

He avoids idle chatter and abstains from it. He speaks at the right time, in accordance with facts, speaks what is useful, speaks of the Dhamma and the discipline; his speech is like a treasure, uttered at the right moment, accompanied by reason, moderate and full of sense.[27]

Idle chatter is pointless talk, speech that lacks purpose or depth. Such speech communicates nothing of value, but only stirs up the defilements in one's own mind and in others. The Buddha advises that idle talk should be curbed and speech restricted as much as possible to matters of genuine importance. In the case of a monk, the typical subject of the passage just quoted, his words should be selective and concerned primarily with the Dhamma. Lay persons will have more need for affectionate small talk with friends and family, polite conversation with acquaintances, and talk in connection with their line of work. But even then they should be mindful not to let the conversation stray into pastures where the restless mind, always eager for something sweet or spicy to feed on, might find the chance to indulge its defiling propensities.

The traditional exegesis of abstaining from idle chatter refers only to avoiding engagement in such talk oneself. But today it might be of value to give this factor a different slant, made imperative by certain developments peculiar to our own time, unknown in the days of the Buddha and the ancient commentators. This is avoiding exposure to the idle chatter constantly bombarding us through the new media of communication created by modern technology. An incredible array of devices -- television, radio, newspapers, pulp journals, the cinema -- turns out a continuous stream of needless information and distracting entertainment the net effect of which is to leave the mind passive, vacant, and sterile. All these developments, naively accepted as "progress," threaten to blunt our aesthetic and spiritual sensitivities and deafen us to the higher call of the contemplative life. Serious aspirants on the path to liberation have to be extremely discerning in what they allow themselves to be exposed to. They would greatly serve their aspirations by including these sources of amusement and needless information in the category of idle chatter and making an effort to avoid them.