Speech

[huli]

I find right speech to be a deep subject to consider. In the first post something was said about speaking was for the benefit of the listener, but as I am fighting an uphill struggle (not always successfully) to maintain right speech it requires mindfulness and knowledge, the aquisition of which are beneficial to me.

Also there is difficulty with speaking pleasantly and truthfully at the same time. Living in a small monastery exposes one to others who can be immature, selfish and socially myopic. The quiet word won't cross the language barrier and saying nothing will not improve matters for either party.

And there is a major conundrum for me when a senior monk is making totally inaccurate assumptions and advising action completely against the teachings. How do you tell him he is wrong?

Right speech, therefore, is a work that will only be perfected with enlightenment as was said in another post. But it is a work we cannot neglect regardless. It must come from right thought, right view and right effort. Ours IS to reason why and to do or die.

I hope I said that right.

Well said, and I think you have described the main difficulty with Right Speech quite well. It is not that difficult to limit ourselves to true and useful speech, at least in our perception of what is true and useful. But to say only what is pleasant to hear?

I think that perhaps it is good to consider that if the listener finds our speech to be unpleasant, or very unpleasant especially, they are not usually going to listen to what we have to say. And why bother with speech that creates only antagonism, and then nothing useful?

There are a lot of selfish people out there, but that is part of this life to figure out how to deal with them and not disturb our own tranquility.

So, basically, we have no choice but to try to figure out how to get our point across sweetly. It is interesting that this kind of communication is embedded in Thai culture and, who knows, maybe it has it's roots in Buddha's admonition about Right Speech.

If we can't do it sweetly, I would suggest we might as well look at the problem as unsolvable.

There is also the fact that sometimes we feel a strong urge to tell someone off. Until, I suppose we are enlightened, as you say.

I commend you for living in a monastery. I hope you can find a way to overcome or cope with the problems you describe. I see you haven't made many posts. I hope you will keep posting. I enjoyed your post.

[Xangsamhua]

So, basically, we have no choice but to try to figure out how to get our point across sweetly. It is interesting that this kind of communication is embedded in Thai culture and, who knows, maybe it has it's roots in Buddha's admonition about Right Speech.

If we can't do it sweetly, I would suggest we might as well look at the problem as unsolvable.

There is also the fact that sometimes we feel a strong urge to tell someone off. Until, I suppose we are enlightened, as you say.

Not so sure about being admonished "sweetly". I remember well one instance, as a young air force (reservist) officer, having been "unmindful" on parade and being told later by a senior officer, over drinks, that if I did it again he'd "kick [my] #$%$$ ass".

I didn't lapse again. I also understood that the admonition, though delivered a bit brutally, was meant well and culturally acceptable.

Did he engage in "right speech"? It was for my benefit and it had that effect. It was well-meant, and the man was always tough but also kind. No one in that context would have taken offence.

[camerata]

There are many examples of Ajahn Man's "fierce" teaching style in his biography. Both he and Ajahn Chah could be pretty harsh on their monks at times, but as the latter said, he did it "out of compassion."

[Several]

Thank you Huli. Yes it is hard sometimes but I am resolved to make the best I can of this time here. Its all a learning experience. And I will consider what you wrote. I'll post more if I think of anything right to say.

[huli]

There certainly seem to be a lot of occasions where rough or unpleasant speech seems acceptable in society. Parents, military officers, and Buddhist abbots (as previously mentioned) make their points unpleasantly and emphatically, but it is acceptable to all concerned, largely because of the superior role of the speaker. In all of these cases, the speaker has a right to expect some action of the listener.

In normal conversation, we don't have any right to expect another to follow our lead, even if we think they would be better off to do so. We can only say what is true and useful in a pleasant way, and they will do what they will do.

The situation of a married couple, or common-law situation, I think, falls somewhere in between. Certainly a husband or wife has some right to expect standards of behavior of the other. Should such expectations be spoken nicely, and then not effective, typically it is repeated in a loud voice for emphasis, and then may be taken as offensive/unpleasant on that account by the other. It boils down to, do you have the right to tell me what to do?

[rockyysdt]

There certainly seem to be a lot of occasions where rough or unpleasant speech seems acceptable in society. Parents, military officers, and Buddhist abbots (as previously mentioned) make their points unpleasantly and emphatically, but it is acceptable to all concerned, largely because of the superior role of the speaker. In all of these cases, the speaker has a right to expect some action of the listener.

In normal conversation, we don't have any right to expect another to follow our lead, even if we think they would be better off to do so. We can only say what is true and useful in a pleasant way, and they will do what they will do.

The situation of a married couple, or common-law situation, I think, falls somewhere in between. Certainly a husband or wife has some right to expect standards of behavior of the other. Should such expectations be spoken nicely, and then not effective, typically it is repeated in a loud voice for emphasis, and then may be taken as offensive/unpleasant on that account by the other. It boils down to, do you have the right to tell me what to do?

Ego (conditioning) will get in the way every time, even when speech is delivered sweetly or harshly.

Severals is a good example of attempting communication with a senior who was incorrect, but who is not only conditioned to believe he was right, his ego blinds him to his need for humility and openness of thought.

As difficult as it is, overcoming ones own conditioning is overshadowed by the difficulty of influencing another to overcome theirs.

Most of us are blind to the majority of our own conditioning.

The conditioned Ego is extremely powerful.

I've communicated with a Monk of 30 years, very serious in his commitment, who continues to display considerable conditioning (early habits, desires).

Until one is very advanced on the path, our conditioning will play its part until close to the end.

One way I deal with it is to "observe myself" without attachment.

My observer, observes my conditioned self.

I think of my neutral observer as the entity I wish to grow and the observed conditioned self as the one to be diminished over time.

This, coupled with practice of the eightfold path will diminish the conditioned and grow the neutral.

I observe myself communicating, behaving and thinking incorrectly.

When I recognise this, it allows me to back down from a cluster/escalation, and/or allows me to resolve not to repeat future instances.

Observing, as a third party, I watch my colored (conditioned) self act out my conditioning.

The more I observe my conditioned responses, coupled with their impact on others, the more awareness helps me to change.

My observation, so far, confirms the deep rooted nature of my conditioning.

Edited June 28, 2012 by rockyysdt