Right Speech

[Sky Dancer]

In a discourse with one of his disciples, the Buddha says the following:
"Potaliya, four kinds of people exist and can be found in the world. What four kinds?

1) Some people blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, but do not praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.
2) Some people praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time, but do not blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time.
3) Some people do not blame those who should be blamed, [...], and do not praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.
4) Some people blame others who should be blamed, [...], and praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.

Potaliya, of those four kinds of people, whichever blames those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, and praises those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time, this kind of person is the most beautiful and refined of these four kinds of people."

The Buddha, contrary to what some believe, does not teach pleasing, truthful speech to the exclusion of disagreeable speech. To the contrary, he makes it clear that "whistle-blowing" is important, if done truthfully and at the appropriate time. He indicates that silence in the face of wrong-doing is not an acceptable option. In this context, silence could be regarded as "wrong speech". If we knowingly withhold information about wrong-doing, we become complicit in those wrongful acts, we become enablers of those committing wrongful acts.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWnmCu3U09w"]Also Sprach Zarathustra![/ame]

 

[Sky Dancer]

If someone puts themselves in harm's way, are we not morally obligated to warn the innocent? In such cases, maintaining silence could lead to others' extreme suffering.

One should be civil and polite, but never afraid to speak "truth to power" or say with sincerity what may need to be said. To do otherwise than speak truth is to "speak untruths." Sometimes a whistle needs to be blown, and with some energy behind it. Be sarcastic or make parody or satire when called for. These days, folks like their "Zen Masters" wimpy and soft spoken, more "Zen Mouses". Well, "mice" aside, in my view, a good teacher is usually a pussycat, but sometimes needs to growl like a tiger and show some claw.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

In American politics, ‘the truth’ is considered optional, subject to debate, and rarely though highly of.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Buddhism is a powerful spur to political activism. The faith has taken the lead in often noisy campaigns for change.

The phenomenon extends from Tibet, where Buddhist monks have doggedly resisted Chinese rule, to Myanmar and several other countries of Southeast Asia, where monks have become a significant political force. Monastic activism has taken on a sinister tone in some places, particularly in Sri Lanka, where hard-line nationalist monks have formed a political party that wants all-out war against rebels of the mostly-Hindu Tamil minority.

In China, meanwhile, a Buddhism-tinged group called Falun Gong has emerged a pro-democracy movement as the Communist Party's most determined foe.

Buddhism should "not run away from society but reform society," Focusing on just meditation and the next life, is not Buddhism but escapism.

 

[whitehall]

They are wonderful people but it seems that Buddhism is a passive peaceful religion and hardly suited to "political activism" but rather the opposite of political activism.

 

[editec]

They are wonderful people but it seems that Buddhism is a passive peaceful religion and hardly suited to "political activism" but rather the opposite of political activism.

Ya think?

I'm not sure about that. This Buddhist's peaceful, passive political activism helped topple the Diem regime in Viet Nam, ya know?

 

[Si modo]

In a discourse with one of his disciples, the Buddha says the following:
"Potaliya, four kinds of people exist and can be found in the world. What four kinds?

1) Some people blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, but do not praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.
2) Some people praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time, but do not blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time.
3) Some people do not blame those who should be blamed, [...], and do not praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.
4) Some people blame others who should be blamed, [...], and praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.

Potaliya, of those four kinds of people, whichever blames those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, and praises those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time, this kind of person is the most beautiful and refined of these four kinds of people."

The Buddha, contrary to what some believe, does not teach pleasing, truthful speech to the exclusion of disagreeable speech. To the contrary, he makes it clear that "whistle-blowing" is important, if done truthfully and at the appropriate time. He indicates that silence in the face of wrong-doing is not an acceptable option. In this context, silence could be regarded as "wrong speech". If we knowingly withhold information about wrong-doing, we become complicit in those wrongful acts, we become enablers of those committing wrongful acts.

I've seen you take none of that advice on a consistent basis. Are you sure you are Buddhist?

 

[alexa]

They are wonderful people but it seems that Buddhism is a passive peaceful religion and hardly suited to "political activism" but rather the opposite of political activism.

Ya think?

I'm not sure about that. This Buddhist's peaceful, passive political activism helped topple the Diem regime in Viet Nam, ya know?

Were buddhist monks actually supportive of burning people alive in Vietnam? I had not heard of it and would be surprised.

However there is no question that in Sri Lanka Buddhism has been used in a similar way to religion has throughout the centuries. Sad and goes completely against Buddhist ethics.

 

[Si modo]

They are wonderful people but it seems that Buddhism is a passive peaceful religion and hardly suited to "political activism" but rather the opposite of political activism.

Ya think?

I'm not sure about that. This Buddhist's peaceful, passive political activism helped topple the Diem regime in Viet Nam, ya know?

Were buddhist monks actually supportive of burning people alive in Vietnam? I had not heard of it and would be surprised.

However there is no question that in Sri Lanka Buddhism has been used in a similar way to religion has throughout the centuries. Sad and goes completely against Buddhist ethics.

The monks burned themselves in protest.

 

[alexa]

In a discourse with one of his disciples, the Buddha says the following:
"Potaliya, four kinds of people exist and can be found in the world. What four kinds?

1) Some people blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, but do not praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.
2) Some people praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time, but do not blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time.
3) Some people do not blame those who should be blamed, [...], and do not praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.
4) Some people blame others who should be blamed, [...], and praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.

Potaliya, of those four kinds of people, whichever blames those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, and praises those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time, this kind of person is the most beautiful and refined of these four kinds of people."

The Buddha, contrary to what some believe, does not teach pleasing, truthful speech to the exclusion of disagreeable speech. To the contrary, he makes it clear that "whistle-blowing" is important, if done truthfully and at the appropriate time. He indicates that silence in the face of wrong-doing is not an acceptable option. In this context, silence could be regarded as "wrong speech". If we knowingly withhold information about wrong-doing, we become complicit in those wrongful acts, we become enablers of those committing wrongful acts.

I understand Buddhism to believe in a person being true to themselves. That requires honesty because each time we are dishonest, we loose touch with ourselves a bit. So honesty is extremely important in Buddhism. I also remember hearing that the Buddha said 'put no truth above the deepest truth you know within yourself' - in other words never put anyone above yourself. Learn to trust yourself. Don't believe anything which you yourself have not experienced or believe to be true.

I remember reading one dead Buddhist's writings. I think he was a shin and he had gathered a group of followers and so had started his own sect. I cannot remember his name. Anyway he brought up the importance of being truthful and trusting yourself and started considering this with respect to non harming.

He had faith and trusted in the buddha nature within himself and he trusted that if he was honest and true to himself, not deliberately harming, that was the best thing to do. However he understood that if he did this there was no way whereby he would not, without any intention harm someone or at any rate hurt their feelings. Not being true to himself and honest would however result in him also harming people by giving them dishonest feedback.

Being true to himself despite the reaction from others became to him an issue of faith. A person of faith trusts their inner being - to buddhists, buddha nature..

 

[midcan5]

In American politics, ‘the truth’ is considered optional, subject to debate, and rarely though highly of.

I think you hit it on the head, in our culture the truth is no where to be found. Americans must never say this is wrong because to say that is to challenge the assumptions of American exceptionalism. Americans instead look to the starry nirvana of freedom and say all is good as they struggle to make ends meet, and hope their children are OK in a country that no longer cares for its own people.


"What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley wrote in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984 Huxley added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we love will ruin us...This book is about the possibility that Huxley, not Orwell, was right." Neil Postman 'Amusing Ourselves to Death'

 

[AmericanFirst]

In a discourse with one of his disciples, the Buddha says the following:
"Potaliya, four kinds of people exist and can be found in the world. What four kinds?

1) Some people blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, but do not praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.
2) Some people praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time, but do not blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time.
3) Some people do not blame those who should be blamed, [...], and do not praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.
4) Some people blame others who should be blamed, [...], and praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.

Potaliya, of those four kinds of people, whichever blames those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, and praises those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time, this kind of person is the most beautiful and refined of these four kinds of people."

The Buddha, contrary to what some believe, does not teach pleasing, truthful speech to the exclusion of disagreeable speech. To the contrary, he makes it clear that "whistle-blowing" is important, if done truthfully and at the appropriate time. He indicates that silence in the face of wrong-doing is not an acceptable option. In this context, silence could be regarded as "wrong speech". If we knowingly withhold information about wrong-doing, we become complicit in those wrongful acts, we become enablers of those committing wrongful acts.

I understand Buddhism to believe in a person being true to themselves. That requires honesty because each time we are dishonest, we loose touch with ourselves a bit. So honesty is extremely important in Buddhism. I also remember hearing that the Buddha said 'put no truth above the deepest truth you know within yourself' - in other words never put anyone above yourself. Learn to trust yourself. Don't believe anything which you yourself have not experienced or believe to be true.

I remember reading one dead Buddhist's writings. I think he was a shin and he had gathered a group of followers and so had started his own sect. I cannot remember his name. Anyway he brought up the importance of being truthful and trusting yourself and started considering this with respect to non harming.

He had faith and trusted in the buddha nature within himself and he trusted that if he was honest and true to himself, not deliberately harming, that was the best thing to do. However he understood that if he did this there was no way whereby he would not, without any intention harm someone or at any rate hurt their feelings. Not being true to himself and honest would however result in him also harming people by giving them dishonest feedback.

Being true to himself despite the reaction from others became to him an issue of faith. A person of faith trusts their inner being - to buddhists, buddha nature..

FALSE RELIGION! You cannot save yourself. Yourself leads to destruction. Buddha was a false prophet.

 

[alexa]

In a discourse with one of his disciples, the Buddha says the following:
"Potaliya, four kinds of people exist and can be found in the world. What four kinds?

1) Some people blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, but do not praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.
2) Some people praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time, but do not blame those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time.
3) Some people do not blame those who should be blamed, [...], and do not praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.
4) Some people blame others who should be blamed, [...], and praise those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time.

Potaliya, of those four kinds of people, whichever blames those who should be blamed, according to the truth, at the proper time, and praises those who should be praised, according to the truth, at the proper time, this kind of person is the most beautiful and refined of these four kinds of people."

The Buddha, contrary to what some believe, does not teach pleasing, truthful speech to the exclusion of disagreeable speech. To the contrary, he makes it clear that "whistle-blowing" is important, if done truthfully and at the appropriate time. He indicates that silence in the face of wrong-doing is not an acceptable option. In this context, silence could be regarded as "wrong speech". If we knowingly withhold information about wrong-doing, we become complicit in those wrongful acts, we become enablers of those committing wrongful acts.

I understand Buddhism to believe in a person being true to themselves. That requires honesty because each time we are dishonest, we loose touch with ourselves a bit. So honesty is extremely important in Buddhism. I also remember hearing that the Buddha said 'put no truth above the deepest truth you know within yourself' - in other words never put anyone above yourself. Learn to trust yourself. Don't believe anything which you yourself have not experienced or believe to be true.

I remember reading one dead Buddhist's writings. I think he was a shin and he had gathered a group of followers and so had started his own sect. I cannot remember his name. Anyway he brought up the importance of being truthful and trusting yourself and started considering this with respect to non harming.

He had faith and trusted in the buddha nature within himself and he trusted that if he was honest and true to himself, not deliberately harming, that was the best thing to do. However he understood that if he did this there was no way whereby he would not, without any intention harm someone or at any rate hurt their feelings. Not being true to himself and honest would however result in him also harming people by giving them dishonest feedback.

Being true to himself despite the reaction from others became to him an issue of faith. A person of faith trusts their inner being - to buddhists, buddha nature..

FALSE RELIGION! You cannot save yourself. Yourself leads to destruction. Buddha was a false prophet.

You may be correct. There are people who believe Buddhism is a psychology with ethics rather than religion.

However with respect to the actual issue you raise that of self. You may know the buddha spoke of no self. That was the place where people were to get to....

and where is that found - wherever ego is not. In our inner feeling self.

In this way Rogerian counselling is similar in it's intent which is to help people let go of the 'false self' they have created due to their experiences in life and get in touch with their own resources within their inner feeling self which is not ego. It gets one into the same state of consciousness with no dogma at all.

There is a Buddhist book, Buddhism without Beliefs by Stephen Batchelor. The Buddha believed in practical discovery. He was not so keen on dogma.

 

[Avatar4321]

In American politics, ‘the truth’ is considered optional, subject to debate, and rarely though highly of.

The politics our politicians play is merely a reflection of the way the people interact. The problem is the population at large doesnt think of the truth highly. What we need to do is start working to be honest people. Some of us don't realize when we arent.

I always considered myself an honest person. And I've always rated honesty and truth highly. And then I tried to keep better track of what I said and did and i realized that Im not as honest as I thought I was. Needless to say I didn't like that. Since then I have had a policy to keep track of my honesty. If I say anything dishonest, i keep track of it so I can correct it.

It's interesting to keep track of it. Im not generally disposed to be intentionally dishonest. But I will often find myself saying something and then thinking, wait... that wasnt right why did I say that? And so I've made it a priority to focus on it more. I hope that if I make it enough of a conscious habit, I can consider myself a person who values integrity in both word and deed.

I have no hard evidence, but Im willing to bet that alot of people say things that are less than honest, not because they are trying to lie, but because they aren't thinking about what they are saying. So I think if we want to fix politics, we need to start with ourselves. We should eliminate lies in our life. We should seek the truth in all matters. If we put out the effort, I think we will be rewarded, even if we don't see the results immediately.

Being mindful of ourselves will change our culture, because culture is merely the collective actions/attitude of the individual. If we seek to eliminate dishonesty in society it must start with self. We can't end corruption in society until we end it in ourselves.

If we are going to be good, we have to work at it because we won't just fall into it.

 

[Avatar4321]

Buddhism is a powerful spur to political activism. The faith has taken the lead in often noisy campaigns for change.

The phenomenon extends from Tibet, where Buddhist monks have doggedly resisted Chinese rule, to Myanmar and several other countries of Southeast Asia, where monks have become a significant political force. Monastic activism has taken on a sinister tone in some places, particularly in Sri Lanka, where hard-line nationalist monks have formed a political party that wants all-out war against rebels of the mostly-Hindu Tamil minority.

In China, meanwhile, a Buddhism-tinged group called Falun Gong has emerged a pro-democracy movement as the Communist Party's most determined foe.

Buddhism should "not run away from society but reform society," Focusing on just meditation and the next life, is not Buddhism but escapism.

Reforming society starts with reforming self

 

[Avatar4321]

FALSE RELIGION! You cannot save yourself. Yourself leads to destruction. Buddha was a false prophet.

Forgive me, where is anything she said does she mention saving oneself?

 

[Sky Dancer]

Buddhism is a powerful spur to political activism. The faith has taken the lead in often noisy campaigns for change.

The phenomenon extends from Tibet, where Buddhist monks have doggedly resisted Chinese rule, to Myanmar and several other countries of Southeast Asia, where monks have become a significant political force. Monastic activism has taken on a sinister tone in some places, particularly in Sri Lanka, where hard-line nationalist monks have formed a political party that wants all-out war against rebels of the mostly-Hindu Tamil minority.

In China, meanwhile, a Buddhism-tinged group called Falun Gong has emerged a pro-democracy movement as the Communist Party's most determined foe.

Buddhism should "not run away from society but reform society," Focusing on just meditation and the next life, is not Buddhism but escapism.

Reforming society starts with reforming self

Yes, it does. Both are necessary. Intense navel gazing isn't Buddhist practice.

 

[Sky Dancer]

They are wonderful people but it seems that Buddhism is a passive peaceful religion and hardly suited to "political activism" but rather the opposite of political activism.

Ya think?

I'm not sure about that. This Buddhist's peaceful, passive political activism helped topple the Diem regime in Viet Nam, ya know?

Were buddhist monks actually supportive of burning people alive in Vietnam? I had not heard of it and would be surprised.

However there is no question that in Sri Lanka Buddhism has been used in a similar way to religion has throughout the centuries. Sad and goes completely against Buddhist ethics.

Some Buddhist monks self-immolated during the Vietnam war.

 

[alexa]

We have spoken about right speech in connection to honesty and being true to oneself. However I think in fairness to Buddhism we should also mention the other aspects of it

There are many explanations on the net. This is just a simple one I found.

Right Speech is not just a personal virtue.
Modern communication technology has given us a culture that seems saturated with "wrong" speech -- communication that is hateful and deceptive. This engenders disharmony, acrimony, and physical violence.

We tend to think of violent, hateful words as being less wrong than violent action. We may even think of violent words as being justified sometimes. But violent words, thoughts and actions arise together and support each other. So to do peaceful words, thoughts and actions.

Beyond cultivating beneficial or harmful karma, Right Speech is essential to personal practice. Abbess Taitaku Patricia Phelan of the Chapel Hill Zen Group says "Right Speech means using communication as a way to further our understanding of ourselves and others and as a way to develop insight."

The Basics of Right Speech

As recorded in the Pali Canon, the historical Buddha taught that Right Speech had four parts:

1. Abstain from false speech; do not tell lies or deceive.
2. Do not slander others or speak in a way that causes disharmony or enmity.
3. Abstain from rude, impolite or abusive language.
4. Do not indulge in idle talk or gossip.

Practice of these four aspects of Right Speech goes beyond simple "thou shalt nots." It means speaking truthfully and honestly; speaking in a way to promote harmony and good will; using language to reduce anger and ease tensions; using language in a way that is useful.

If your speech is not useful and beneficial, teachers say, it is better to keep silent.

Right Speech - Right Speech Is Part of the Buddhist Eightfold Path

With regard to that last line I remember a Buddhist friend saying to me years ago 'I never criticise someone if I cannot offer them a different way to deal with the issue'.