A group of friends went lunching together at a food court. As they sat to eat, as if it’s the most natural thing in the world, everyone’s tongue begins wagging, instead of mindfully munching their food. A bonding session some would say this is, where the like-minded gather to often vent their displeasures on particular subjects or someone.
In the Noble Eightfold Path, I would think Right Speech is the easily to uphold and to ‘break’. What is Right speech?
[1] Do I speak at the right time, or not?
Sensitivity of timing is crucial. E.g. Don’t tell a recently bereaved mother how wonderful other kids are.[2] Do I speak of facts, or not?
Speculations and exaggerations are not facts.[3] Do I speak gently or harshly?
Harsh speech can hurt, though gentle devious speech can too.[4] Do I speak profitable words or not?
Speech that does not benefit anyone is basically useless.[5] Do I speak with a kindly heart, or inwardly malicious?
Speech spoken out of spite furthers hate.— AN V (From The Patimokkha, Ñanamoli Thera, trans.)
Most of us are probably guilty of failing one or more of the above once in a while. When untimely, untrue, unbeneficial and unkind speech is spoken it is as good as a terrorist planting a time bomb. When a matter is being blown out of portion, it could even cost lives in the worst case scenarios. Malicious speech can KILL, even if one might not have that intention.
There’s a cautionary Chinese idiom that made a great impression on me since young… The famous actress Ruan Lingyu was herself a victim of gossip. She was hounded by tabloids and under severe pressure, she finally decided to take her own life to prove her innocence – by overdosing on sleeping pills on the early morning of 8th March 1935. She left a suicide note that made this idiom famous – 人言可畏 – ‘Human speech is a fearful thing’. Thank goodness, on the other side of the spectrum, human speech can be made with compassion and wisdom.
A slip of the tongue can lead to much misunderstanding. A mouthful of gossip can indirectly lead to the breaking of the first precept of not killing. Imagine a girl, who decided to fill her balcony with dandelions. Every day, she takes great care of them, ensuring she waters and fertilises them well. One day, a strong gush of wind sweeps by, causing her fully blossomed dandelions to float away. She was upset, but she could not do much. The petals were carried far and away, drifting towards various directions. Some land on fertile soil and blossom aplenty. Every seed of wrong speech can grow into more seeds. That, is the nature of gossip!
To see another great analogy, please see: https://moonpointer.com/new/2009/03/how-to-handle-gossip-gals-guys
Indeed, ‘every seed of wrong speech can grow into more seeds’. The possible short and long-term effects can be quite conspicuous at times; especially in our modern setting, where the mass media has the power to spread both wholesome and unwholesome content effectively and efficiently to the world in a matter of seconds.
As a Buddhist and a human being, I am very concerned as to the real life application of Right Speech.
Let me share my thoughts on some elaborations on Right Speech by Ñanamoli Thera, as posted above.
[1] Do I speak at the right time, or not?
Sensitivity of timing is crucial. E.g. Don’t tell a recently bereaved mother how wonderful other kids are.
There are many examples for this. Speaking on the example quoted above, one should not only avoid mentioning how wonderful other kids are, advice like ‘your son (or daughter)’s karma as a human being has now ended, there is nothing really to be sad about, etc’ should not be dispensed even if the listener comes from a devout Buddhist background.
[3] Do I speak gently or harshly?
Harsh speech can hurt, though gentle devious speech can too.
This can be quite contentious or vague in my personal experience. What is considered harsh speech can be deemed to be educational or a wake-up kind of scolding by the speaker.
This can also apply to what is considered gentle devious speech by observers or witnesses as well; as in this kind of speech can be deemed to be helpful by others if some form of perceived positive change comes later at any time. Note: perceived, means it can be true or untrue. It is up to the individual and collective wisdom to discern.
So my question: Do the ends justify the means used; even if it can be harsh speech or gentle devious speech from a Buddhist or non-Buddhist perspective?
[4] Do I speak profitable words or not?
Speech that does not benefit anyone is basically useless.
Strictly speaking, some words when spoken, do not have the effect of benefitting someone immediately or even for the foreseeable future. Such words may even elicit a defensive response by the listener, for certain cases.
Some words, believed and accepted by the general public to be profitable can turn out to be useless for a particular listener if proper timing, tone of voice and type of body language expressed when using those words are not being observed.
Therefore in that respect, it can be hard to judge whether one’s words are indeed profitable or useless at all times.
[5] Do I speak with a kindly heart, or inwardly malicious? Speech spoken out of spite furthers hate.
Those who have the gift of the gab and an expert masterly of any one kind of human language, can actually disguise their malicious intentions with politically correct speech, so as to appear to be speaking with a kindly heart.
It can be done, had or has been done and will continue to be done. And this is evident in many historical biographies and documentaries available from various trusted media sources which suggest or point out clearly to us the power of language in masking subtle unwholesome intentions.
As long we are not enlightened, we can’t possibly be aware of every subtle unwholesome thoughts and intentions inside our mind, let alone purely malicious or spiteful ones.
We can continue to practise mindfulness of course, no matter how hard it can be. There is no excuse for that at all. However, just don’t forget that no matter how mindful you think you are (unless you are a stream winner and above), the inherent qualities of deceitfulness in the depths of our ego will continue to influence us unconsciously or sub-consciously, with each arising thought.
1) That is why right timing is crucial, which also mean sharing teachings at the right time. For further understanding of right timing please see the below quote: “In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, and endearing & agreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them. Why is that? Because the Tathagata has sympathy for living beings.”
3) Which is why intention of the deliverer is crucial here. For example, do we use harsh speech with ill intention or good intention? Do we use gentle speech spoken with ill intention or good intention?
4) If one does not know if one’s speech benefit or not, i guess it’s best we do not speak. What makes beneficial speech would require right timing, truthfulness, good-will affection.
5) You might have read too much into the article? It was written for self-reflection on our speech; no others’. As we are all not mind-readers, whether others deliver their speech with ill intentions or not, we have no idea. It’s not necessary to speculate on the intention every single word of others’ speech. Even if there’s ill intention, what matters is that we don’t. What’s important is that we take care our mind, by checking if we have spoken in a right way or not? I shall conclude with the below quote which clearly illustrates what Buddha meant by 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.” — AN 5.198
Amituofo
Perhaps the author, like myself, has read too much into my comments. I was sharing my self-reflection and personal experiences based on the article presented here and not criticising anyone here or the article itself.
My intention is to get people thinking not just from a practitioner’s perspective, but from others as well.
I’m afraid to say that the only groups of people who can be truly faultless in their speech at all times are stream-winners and above.
This means in real life, Buddhists or not; there are possibilities like – even when certain statements are spoken in truth, they might not necessarily spoken at the right time. And when some are spoken with a mind of good-will, they might not necessarily be the complete truth. Hence what one perceives to be beneficial might not be really beneficial for the simple reason that we are not truly enlightened.
If you know anyone or someone who can achieve and maintain all the five factors of speech preached by the Buddha at all times, then it’s very likely that he or she is approaching the stage of attaining sainthood in this life or the next most nearest lifetime.
Only the kind of wisdom attained through various life experiences and the practice of self-reflection under the guidance of Buddhist teachings, will one truly be able to make sure that their speech is perfect and blameless at any moment.
So in that respect, speaking for myself only – I will always be imperfect in thoughts, actions and speech till I attain Buddhahood.
Hopefully this sharing will encourage others to guide themselves and encourage fellow humans in the following:
1) It’s ok to make mistakes. It’s ok to even know and admit towards youself that you had acted with maliciousness. At least you are aware that that feeling or intention was not good-will in any way. Whether one wants to take any corrective action after that is really up to the individual and his or her unique karmic conditions.
2) So go on. Don’t just maintain silence all the time, out of fear or lack of confidence in not being able to make any beneficial speech. Cultivate the motivation and will to pick yourself up again even when you are perceived to have become or have really become lazy or negligent in their Dharma practice.
3) Buddhist practitioners shouldn’t really give the impression of becoming verbally handicapped when they get to learn Dharma teachings on what is right and beneficial speech.
The best way to cultivate wisdom on developing and maintaining right speech is to keep making mistakes in interaction with others and be willing to embrace the pain of at least recognising your mistakes quietly in your mind.
I had made and are still making mistakes in my speech towards others. Sometimes, it’s the wrong timing. Sometimes, I sound as if I’m imposing my advice of self-reflection on others. Sometimes, I really believe I’m telling the truth with good-will, but the listener still thinks otherwise.
So again the above is open to everybody’s interpretation.
If I got you thinking about how we affect one another in many subtle ways – with or without practising self-reflection; with or without hearing any guidelines about right speech from any kind of respected source, then it will be work done for me.
Perhaps the author, like myself, has read too much into my comments. I was sharing my self-reflection and personal experiences based on the article presented here and not criticising anyone here or the article itself.
Likewise, we are all here to share what is beneficial, i in no way think that answering comments means criticising 🙂
My intention is to get people thinking not just from a practitioner’s perspective, but from others as well.
As mentioned, it’s for self-reflection, as we are not mind-readers, how do we interpret others’ perspective?
I’m afraid to say that the only groups of people who can be truly faultless in their speech at all times are stream-winners and above.
This means in real life, Buddhists or not; there are possibilities like – even when certain statements are spoken in truth, they might not necessarily spoken at the right time. And when some are spoken with a mind of good-will, they might not necessarily be the complete truth. Hence what one perceives to be beneficial might not be really beneficial for the simple reason that we are not truly enlightened.
That’s why Buddha had mentioned the five conditions for right speech. Yes, not all can fulfill all now, but we should practise to be on the way.
If you know anyone or someone who can achieve and maintain all the five factors of speech preached by the Buddha at all times, then it’s very likely that he or she is approaching the stage of attaining sainthood in this life or the next most nearest lifetime.
The key here is try our best, rather than focusing that we are not Buddhas or not attaining sainthood yet.
1) It’s ok to make mistakes. It’s ok to even know and admit towards yourself that you had acted with maliciousness. At least you are aware that that feeling or intention was not good-will in any way. Whether one wants to take any corrective action after that is really up to the individual and his or her unique karmic conditions.
Yes, it’s ok to make mistakes, but if one knows one’s mistakes, one ought to repent and change.
2) So go on. Don’t just maintain silence all the time, out of fear or lack of confidence in not being able to make any beneficial speech. Cultivate the motivation and will to pick yourself up again even when you are perceived to have become or have really become lazy or negligent in their Dharma practice.
Remaining silent does not mean has to be for the rest of one’s life. One ought to buck up on their Dharma knowledge and practice in order to benefit more later.
3) Buddhist practitioners shouldn’t really give the impression of becoming verbally handicapped when they get to learn Dharma teachings on what is right and beneficial speech.
The best way to cultivate wisdom on developing and maintaining right speech is to keep making mistakes in interaction with others and be willing to embrace the pain of at least recognising your mistakes quietly in your mind.
I disagree that we have to make mistakes by speech to cultivate wisdom. If we keep making mistakes, we might unwittingly broken the affinity we have with other beings. And I don’t not think Buddha had taught cultivating wisdom via pain. What I would see as verbal handicapped would be not knowing the right time, right word, right method and right tone to speak. Hmmm, what’s the use of recognising mistakes quietly, and not repenting to change? How does that benefit oneself and others? One should apologise when unskilful words were spoken and make sure not to repeat.
I had made and are still making mistakes in my speech towards others. Sometimes, it’s the wrong timing. Sometimes, I sound as if I’m imposing my advice of self-reflection on others. Sometimes, I really believe I’m telling the truth with good-will, but the listener still thinks otherwise.
Yes, we are still learning and making mistakes. That’s why knowing the right time and right words to use is very crucial. Just because we think something is beneficial does not mean others would… We should always put others at ease first before we share and not impose our good-will.
If I got you thinking about how we affect one another in many subtle ways – with or without practising self-reflection; with or without hearing any guidelines about right speech from any kind of respected source, then it will be work done for me.
We should always influence one and other in skilful ways. If one is unsure whether one’s way is skilful or not, one can always turn to the Buddha for examples, for he is truly the blameless one.
“As mentioned, it’s for self-reflection, as we are not mind-readers, how do we interpret others’ perspective?”
We don’t have to be mind-readers. But through careful observation of behaviour of others, we can usually arrive at a fairly accurate intepretation of others’ perspectives. That is why interviews are also needed. That is why dialogues, meetings and camps, etc are organised.
“The key here is try our best, rather than focusing that we are not Buddhas or not attaining sainthood yet.”
I don’t dispute the common refrain of trying our best in our practice. However, we may be too engrossed in trying our best to realise that ultimately however best we think we are or have become, we are never the best. If you think this is being pessimistic or an excuse for being lazy in dharma practice, then readers would have missed the point I am trying to say here..
By bringing the example of Buddhas or Arahants, I’m trying to encouraging readers to think for themselves; how high do you wish to aim? What do you want to become? Some say as long as I’m like Confucius I will be contented. Why should I look up to the Buddha who is obviously perfect? That’s too high and unrealistic a goal, isn’t it? Some might even say Confucius is too saintly to emulate from too.
If one says, just continuing doing or thinking good, then by what guidelines do you use to discern what is good? Your own guidelines of what is good may be just something self-serving at the core.
“I disagree that we have to make mistakes by speech to cultivate wisdom. If we keep making mistakes, we might unwittingly broken the affinity we have with other beings. And I don’t not think Buddha had taught cultivating wisdom via pain. What i would see as verbal handicapped would be not knowing the right time, right word, right method and right tone to speak. Hmmm, what’s the use of recognising mistakes quietly, and not repenting to change? How does that benefit oneself and others? One should apologise when unskilful words were spoken and make sure not to repeat.”
If we do break the affinity with others through our mistakes, we will learn to make the right choices cos it would be a painful remainder; a lifelong one for some.
Seriously no situation in life is always the same; therefore we can make similar mistakes in speech, but hardly the same ones.
The Buddha definitely not teach cultivating wisdom through pain. That is absolutely not my point here. I admit I have only a rudimentary mastery of language and the Dharma, and hence what I had said does sound misleading.
The pain I’m talking about is Dukkha. We can be too complacent with our conduct in speech or become too tense in maintaining that conduct. Neither works out for any Buddhist; especially beginners.
Through understanding that no matter how nice we think we have said something, others will interpret it with their own minds based on their individual values and experiences, we will not have to feel too guilty in making others unhappy, but neither should we think we are beyond reproach, beyond further improvement.
There are many levels of repentance. However, such levels are not being properly reflected upon, discussed and clarified by Buddhists around the world.
The most basic form of repentance, in my opinion, starts from recognising even for a small little bit, your words or actions have done harm in one way or another.
For those who have greater control over their mind and greater understanding of Buddhist teachings like karma, compassion and skilful means, would proceed to make concrete steps to change their behaviour.
However, note that, everything starts from the mind. It cannot be seen that easily. The slightest positive thought in one’s mind is not easily observed by others, unless one does something quite different and significant (as perceived by the groups of people present) in the light of a negative situation.
It is of course common sense and proper human etiquette to apologise when one’s speech is given feedback as harmful. That has nothing much to do whether one is a Buddhist practitioner or not.
However, being humans, ignorance, ego and habits are very powerful forces. To expect one to never repeat mistakes can be very hard for some. It’s like hoping a lion would turn vegetarian or eat others, but never a human.
The purpose of and methods in cultivating Compassion and Wisdom taught in Buddhism allows us to understand that there will be some beings who are so entrenched in negative habits over countless lifetimes, that one day they apologise for their mistakes, they commit similar ones a few days later.
Furthermore, apologising has no purpose, if it’s not done willingly, sincerely, and with the right understanding of what’s truly beneficial for one and others; other than to soothe the displeasure of the ones affected.
In other words, don’t apologise out of fear of breaking affinity with others. That is not true repentance. You will find yourself changing superficially to gain acceptance among fellow humans, and not out of insightful understanding of what it means to behave like a human and perhaps in addition, as a Buddhist too for some.
To sum up, other than making sure that we do not encourage the arising of maliciousness in our actions and speech, we also should refrain from apologising out of fear – cos to me that’s mere foolishness, not mindfulness.
Don’t apologise for the sake of apologising. Don’t apologise for every mistake you have made if you don’t mean it in your heart. It will totally defeat the purpose of an apology and the ones affected will soon see no value in the words which you use to apologise with; be it for the same or different types of mistakes.
“We should always influence one and other in skilful ways. If one is unsure whether one’s way is skilful or not, one can always turn to the Buddha for examples, for he is truly the blameless one.”
It’s ideal and indeed beneficial that as both humans and Buddhists we should influence one another in skilful ways. It’s also true we can always turn to the Buddha for examples.
However, do take note that the Buddha is the perfectly awakened one, therefore He would always know whether his speech and actions have been skilful in any kind of difficult situation, at any moment.
Unless one is approaching sainthood, one’s conduct can never be faultless and/or considered as completely skilful. This is a fact that can be viewed as telling ourselves not to feel overly guilty or pressurised, and yet for some it can be viewed as sounding lazy or arrogant.
My intention comes nearer to the former statement, than the latter. Though being imperfect, I do admit ego has arisen in me in my above comments.
1. Even through careful observation, it is still with our speculation and interpretation that we draw conclusions. It’s best to be open and interact before making speculations and interpretations, rather than having prefixed notions, as they are not always true or useful. Also, one form behaviour might mean two different things for two people.
2. If we cannot be the best, there won’t be any Buddhas. For they are the best examples of the best and as taught in the Lotus Sutra, we can all be like the best – Buddhas. The point is not that we can be instant Buddhas, but that we do our best in the instant. Without endeavouring, Buddhahood will always be far away.
3. Why would anyone want to settle for second best when one already has a perfect model to emulate? Buddhahood is not unrealistic if one follows the Buddha’s teachings accordingly and diligently. It may not be instant but practice makes perfect. It’s only too high and unrealistic if we are unwilling to try hard enough? Let’s not forget there are countless Buddhas and Bodhisattvas who were once like us, and that we in turn can become like them.
4. As mentioned, if one does not know who to follow, follow the perfect being – the Buddha
5. Wouldn’t it be better if we don’t break the affinity and keep the relationship? This requires apology and tactfulness.
6. I too apologise by lack of mastery in language for any wrong interpretion. We should learn from mistakes and make adequate adjustments to improve.
7. Unless one speaks just to be heard and not interact, why can’t two persons come to an understanding? To agree to disagree is an understanding outcome too, though not perfect.
8. Repentance with utmost sincerity for mistakes and resolving to turn over a new leaf – this is the most important.
9. That is why the Buddha strongly emphasised on purifying our minds. And through constant practice, we can sharpen the mind to prevent the slightest ill thoughts from forming.
10. The point is not how hard it is but whether we should. This is where Right Effort comes in. We have to put in effort to make changes. Half-heartedness gets us nowhere. A lion can be vegetarian if it has a determined, strong and compassionate mind, please see : http://bit.ly/13DBdc for example. And the Buddha as a Bodhisattva lion king in the Jakata tales did not harm any sentient being for food, feeding only on on dead carcasses.
11. Making similar mistakes countlessly, that one had profusely apologised for only means that the person is either not sincere in repenting and/or s/he lacks mindfulness. Yes, some are like that. And they ought to practise harder, and we ought to urge them to do so too.
12. To know the need to apologise is keep us humble and helps to rid ego. To sincerely apologise is compassion and wisdom at work. It’s still better to keep the affinity by apologising if one is wrong rather than not doing anything about it.
13. I don’t think anyone is policing the fact that we make mistakes. The whole point of cultivation is to work towards Buddhahood and become like him.
Amituofo.
1. Even through careful observation, it is still with our speculation and interpretation that we draw conclusions. It’s best to be open and interact before making speculations and interpretations, rather than having prefixed notions, as they are not always true or useful. Also, one form behaviour might mean two different things for two people.
>>I mean careful observation through interactions. I also said fairly accurate, not totally accurate.
No matter how open we think we are or have become, there will always be prefixed notions in our mind, until we realised no-self or emptiness on insight-meditation level.
And when we say interactions, it can mean many things. Some people like to keep silent so we can’t really ask or talk with them; we can only observe from a distance.
2. If we cannot be the best, there won’t be any Buddhas. For they are the best examples of the best and as taught in the Lotus Sutra, we can all be like the best – Buddhas. The point is not that we can be instant Buddhas, but that we do our best in the instant. Without endeavouring, Buddhahood will always be far away.
>> Again there is no mention in my comments we can’t be the best or that we can’t do our best in the instant. I’m saying our best in the instant as you pointed out is pretty subjective and complex due to the various karmic inclinations and also unique personalities and life experiences of every single person.
Endeavouring is something very vague to describe in words to cater to different levels of understanding for each type of Dharma practitioner. In Buddha’s time, many ascetics think they were endeavouring until Buddha found out for himself that what they had achieved didn’t exactly lead to true liberation.
Even with what we call dharma heard from books and talks, unenlightened beings cannot really guide one another too far, no matter how best we try at any instant.
I’m talking about limitations, not absolute hopelessness or laziness.
3. Why would anyone want to settle for second best when one already has a perfect model to emulate? Buddhahood is not unrealistic if one follows the Buddha’s teachings accordingly and diligently. It may not be instant but practice makes perfect. It’s only too high and unrealistic if we are unwilling to try hard enough? Let’s not forget there are countless Buddhas and Bodhisattvas who were once like us, and that we in turn can become like them.
>> Middle way preached in Buddha’s teachings means not trying too hard nor slacking. What appears to be trying hard to one person may appear to be slacking to another. However we seldom wish to acknowledge that as part of human nature, even among the Buddhist community.
We should not forget that other than Buddha and Bodhisattvas, there are enlightened beings like Arahants and Paccebuddhas.
You can in a way say they are second best to Buddhas and Bodhisattvas in terms of compassion and wisdom, but they definitely did not have the concept of wanting to be second best at all when they started practising.
To them, gain Arahantship or Paccebuddhahood is sufficient for them, and that to me is already a great feat to achieve.
10. The point is not how hard it is but whether we should. This is where Right Effort comes in. We have to put in effort to make changes. Half-heartedness gets us nowhere. A lion can be vegetarian if it has a determined, strong and compassionate mind, please see : http://bit.ly/13DBdc for example. And the Buddha as a Bodhisattva lion king in the Jakata tales did not harm any sentient being for food, feeding only on on dead carcasses.
I do not dispute the importance of Right Effort. I am thinking aloud the underlying reasons for half-heartedness.
The fact is anyone can become a Bodhisattva or any level of enlightened being if they are truly diligent, motivated and wise in their practice; just to point out that I do not disagree at all on this point.
I’m pointing out what we can really observe with our eyes, in our daily lives. In many sutras, the Buddha said our saha world (earth), has more evil people than good people at any one time. He also said there are many people who are half-hearted, weak-willed, stubborn and so on. And that was during the True Dharma Age when the Buddha said it.
11. Making similar mistakes countlessly, that one had profusely apologised for only means that the person is either not sincere in repenting and/or s/he lacks mindfulness. Yes, some are like that. And they ought to practise harder, and we ought to urge them to do so too.
>>How do we urge when we lack wisdom and compassion ourselves? And at what level of wisdom and compassion do we feel safe and confident enough to urge others? Do we continue to pray and wait for someone who we consider to be wiser to urge these people if we feel we aren’t good enough?
There is something that is not really pointed out in the emphasis on cultivating wisdom and compassion to help oneself and others.
Let me point out an example quoted in the sutras.
There was an old lady who the Buddha tried to preach Dharma too. He used many ways, including supernatural powers to manifest in all directions. However, the old lady was so disturbed by this that she cried. Then the Buddha asked Venerable Ananda to try. Venerable Ananda succeeded. Why? Cos the Buddha explained that both the old lay and Venerable Ananda had close karmic affinity during one of their past rebirths.
So my point is: even someone with perfect wisdom and compassion like the Buddha, cannot help someone with weak affinity with him, but not necessarily having weak affinity with another indiviudal or Dharma understanding.
12. To know the need to apologise is keep us humble and helps to rid ego. To sincerely apologise is compassion and wisdom at work. It’s still better to keep the affinity by apologising if one is wrong rather than not doing anything about it.
The fact is, in real life, not everything can be instantly judged as wrong or right. It is really very dynamic, even with dharma as our main guide.
At times, it is ok to keep quiet than apologise without understanding or really accepting that one has indeed made a mistake. Not doing anything about it may hurt affinity with others, however, we cannot dictate the choices made by others in interpreting how grave our transgressions against them right.
There are people who I had offended in the past and I tried to apologise as sincerely as possible. They appear to have accepted my apology but they distanced themselves away from me in many direct and subtle ways. What I could do was to accept their choices and not complain about it.
There is a real danger in apologising for the sake of apologising in order to maintain affinity with others at all costs. Caution!
13. I don’t think anyone is policing the fact that we make mistakes. The whole point of cultivation is to work towards Buddhahood and become like him.
>> I didn’t say anyone is policing anything about making mistakes. Our minds make use of different biases and interpretations of human behaviour to influence our body language and verbal behaviour towards others.
Actually the whole point of cultivation is not really to work towards Buddhahood per se, at least not for all. In some sutras, the Buddha does not mention anything about working towards Buddhahood as the whole point of cultivation towards every lay person who takes refuge in the Triple Gems.
And He also does not stress the basic goal of achieving liberation from rebirths for some too; even though this is a very fundamental goal that many Mahayana and Theravada practitioners share.
Why? The answer is simple. Those lay people were just not ready yet to set even basic goals of liberation from future rebirths, much less to even achieve Buddhahood; the Buddha could see with his psychic powers into their countless past lives on their levels of understanding, ambitions in dharma practice, etc..
So as long they say they sincerely wish to take refuge in the Triple Gems, the Buddha seldom refuses. And at that time, most would undertake the Five precepts together with the Triple Gem refuge as well. It is quite different for Buddhists these days throughout the world where some might only undertake one or a few, or maybe none at all.
I also said fairly accurate, not totally accurate.
Since it’s not totally accurate, why do we even want to speculate or form a notion of the person that might be not the whole truth in the 1st place? It is really unnecessary. Everything changes and prefixed notions are not very useful.
No matter how open we think we are or have become, there will always be prefixed notions in our mind, until we realised no-self or emptiness on insight-meditation level.
The key is train to be less attached to notions because everything changes, other than the truth.
And when we say interactions, it can mean many things. Some people like to keep silent so we can’t really ask or talk with them; we can only observe from a distance.
Interaction means two-way communication. Keeping silent is not interaction, unless one is using sign or body language. The latter can be misleading.
I’m saying our best in the instant as you pointed out is pretty subjective and complex due to the various karmic inclinations and also unique personalities and life experiences of every single person.
Yes, that’s why we shouldn’t lose focus of the goal. The point is just to do our best.
I’m talking about limitations, not absolute hopelessness or laziness.
Yes, we have limitations but they can be broken if we strive hard enough. An athletic will not break records if s/he does not try to stretch limitations. Likewise, if a person is diligent enough, I don’t see why s/he cannot have breakthroughs – one after another. If not, there’s no point of cultivating at all.
Middle way preached in Buddha’s teachings means not trying too hard nor slacking. What appears to be trying hard to one person may appear to be slacking to another.
Middle Path means to try your very best and not be too concerned about what others think.
You can in a way say they are second best to Buddhas and Bodhisattvas in terms of compassion and wisdom, but they definitely did not have the concept of wanting to be second best at all when they started practising.
Arahants, Paccekabuddhas or even Streamwinners are not to remain second best as long as they are on the path of becoming the very best – Buddhas. Which, they will eventually be.
In many sutras, the Buddha said our saha world (earth), has more evil people than good people at any one time. He also said there are many people who are half-hearted, weak-willed, stubborn and so on.
I guess that would depend on the individual – do we want to be the half-hearted, weak-willed or stubborn? Even if we are that, we can change if we want to. Others might have a thousand excuses, but we shouldn’t.
How do we urge when we lack wisdom and compassion ourselves? And at what level of wisdom and compassion do we feel safe and confident enough to urge others? Do we continue to pray and wait for someone who we consider to be wiser to urge these people if we feel we aren’t good enough?
If we keep emphasising the lack rather than to fill the lack, we can never get to the goal. Do we need to be perfect in compassion or wisdom to urge people to be so? Just do what we can in the moment. If we have to depend on other wiser ones, they might not appear in time. “Do your best in the moment, even if it’s not perfect, because this is the only path to perfection in the moment.” – Stonepeace
There was an old lady who the Buddha tried to preach Dharma too. He used many ways, including supernatural powers to manifest in all directions. However, the old lady was so disturbed by this that she cried. Then the Buddha asked Venerable Ananda to try. Venerable Ananda succeeded. Why? Cos the Buddha explained that both the old lay and Venerable Ananda had close karmic affinity during one of their past rebirths. So my point is: even someone with perfect wisdom and compassion like the Buddha, cannot help someone with weak affinity with him, but not necessarily having weak affinity with another indiviudal or Dharma understanding.
The point is, the Buddha exemplified trying his best, before “giving up”. This, we need to learn. Though the Buddha with perfect compassion and wisdom cannot help in person, he still had the compassion and wisdom to ask Ananda to help the old lady, and not others.
At times, it is ok to keep quiet than apologise without understanding or really accepting that one has indeed made a mistake. Not doing anything about it may hurt affinity with others, however, we cannot dictate the choices made by others in interpreting how grave our transgressions against them right.
When no apology is offered and one knows one is wrong, it’s pride. When no apology is offered because one does not know one is at wrong, it’s ignorance. Either is not good. It is exactly that we do not know how grave our transgressions against others are that we should apologise the very minute we realise it’s our mistake, and not just keep quiet. Silence in such situations would only make things worse. Apologising without acknowledging one’s mistakes or without sincerity in of course discouraged. It is a form of lying. That would be just lip service and not real apology.
There are people who I had offended in the past and I tried to apologise as sincerely as possible. They appear to have accepted my apology but they distanced themselves away from me in many direct and subtle ways. What I could do was to accept their choices and not complain about it.
Just because people are keeping a distance from you doesn’t mean your apology was useless. Imagine if you did not apologise at all, it could be worse. Perhaps they just need time to get over it.
There is a real danger in apologising for the sake of apologising in order to maintain affinity with others at all costs. Caution!
The thing is by keeping silent instead of apologising would only make the matter worse and not better.
Our minds make use of different biases and interpretations of human behaviour to influence our body language and verbal behaviour towards others.
That is why mind training is crucial, to rid of biases and untrue interpretations if any.
Actually the whole point of cultivation is not really to work towards Buddhahood per se, at least not for all. In some sutras, the Buddha does not mention anything about working towards Buddhahood as the whole point of cultivation towards every lay person who takes refuge in the Triple Gems.
Why did Prince Siddhartha renounced his kingdom and go forth to seek the truth? Because he saw suffering in life and wanted to find a solution to end it for himself and all beings. If Buddhahood is not the ultimate aim, what is? Maybe it’s not be everyone’s aim right here right now, but it should be eventually. The Buddha in the Lotus Sutra revealed that his real intention is to guide all towards full enlightenment – Buddhahood – in good time. Even those who fall short of the aspiration, the Buddhas will try to influence them to change their minds.
And He also does not stress the basic goal of achieving liberation from rebirths for some too; even though this is a very fundamental goal that many Mahayana and Theravada practitioners share.
Whether one wants to seek liberation or not it’s one’s choice. Why do Buddhists encourage each other to work towards liberation? It is compassion at work as we do not wish each other to suffer a minute longer in Samsara.
Those lay people were just not ready yet to set even basic goals of liberation from future rebirths, much less to even achieve Buddhahood; the Buddha could see with his psychic powers into their countless past lives on their levels of understanding, ambitions in dharma practice, etc..
Just because we are not ready, we shouldn’t try? The Buddha can see the differences in the capacity of each individual being – some need more time, some needs less, but he was clear that ALL can become Buddhas like him. Doing our best to help others includes doing what we can to urge them to upgrade their aspirations in good time.
So as long they say they sincerely wish to take refuge in the Triple Gems, the Buddha seldom refuses. And at that time, most would undertake the Five precepts together with the Triple Gem refuge as well. It is quite different for Buddhists these days throughout the world where some might only undertake one or a few, or maybe none at all.
We certainly have digressed far from the blog’s original subject. For further discussion, it’s better to email info@moonpointer.com – cos the blog comments are stretching longer in a forum-like way. Thank you for your understanding. Amituofo
‘We certainly have digressed far from the blog’s original subject. For further discussion, it’s better to email info [at] moonpointer [dot] com – cos the blog comments are stretching longer in a forum-like way. Thank you for your understanding. Amituofo’
Sure, but it would defeat the purpose of my sharing here; which is for online readers, especially Buddhists, to understand human weaknesses and flaws in thinking and possibly iron out those flaws, etc.
Nevertheless, I would still email to the address you have given here. I hope you would be the one still addressing me on the issue.
Yes, but that would defeat the purpose of commenting on the post. Maybe you can look into creating a focused blog and invite people to comment. :sideways: