Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Right Speech
buddhafoot
Veteran
What is Right Speech? How do we intermingle Right View with Right Speech?
Obviously, people are not going to agree on everything all the time. We can see the evidence of this while reading through the short amount of communications on this very website. Not to mentiona ALL the converstations and dialogue that take place in the world each and every day.
How does debate and dispute come into play when we don't see eye-to-eye with our fellow man? How does Right View allow us to actually "hear" what the other person is saying?
I know that "hearing" what someone says does not necessarily mean that what they're saying is truly correct. If we had someone today telling us, in all sincerety that "The Earth is flat!" - we would know that what they say is true.
Now it's up to us to let our Buddha nature take over in finishing out discourse with this person. What would Right View and Right Speech tell us to do?
How do you do it? Or do you even try?
-bf
Obviously, people are not going to agree on everything all the time. We can see the evidence of this while reading through the short amount of communications on this very website. Not to mentiona ALL the converstations and dialogue that take place in the world each and every day.
How does debate and dispute come into play when we don't see eye-to-eye with our fellow man? How does Right View allow us to actually "hear" what the other person is saying?
I know that "hearing" what someone says does not necessarily mean that what they're saying is truly correct. If we had someone today telling us, in all sincerety that "The Earth is flat!" - we would know that what they say is true.
Now it's up to us to let our Buddha nature take over in finishing out discourse with this person. What would Right View and Right Speech tell us to do?
How do you do it? Or do you even try?
-bf
0
Comments
Something that I've been trying to do is seeing why I say things when I do. I don't know if you've ever done this, but wondering why you said what you did. If you don't know why you're saying something, most often it is best not to say it. I don't know how many times I've been typing a post out here at NB and realize that it isn't what I really want to say. This has been great training in learning how to do a double take on what I say. That way it is helpful, I hope.
Since we're doing the chapter on Right Speech next week, you'll find out TNH's thoughts on it. But I plan on rereading that chapter a few times before I post. Fantastic stuff!
I can't help but be shocked sometimes when I read through various posts here. I find I am hit by the idea about how many things are said that seem to leave Right Speech lying on the side of the road - or that anger is more the mode of response than compassion or understanding.
I know many of you will say, "But Buddhafoot - YOU'RE such a smart ass." And I would have to say, "Yes. Yes I am." And in even writing this post - I find myself looking at me and the things that I do.
I would really like to know what others think about some of the maliciously sarcastic or condescending comments that are made on this site.
Even if it's about me - let me have it. Both barrels.
-bf
We can try to not taint what we see with our own perceptions of what is happening, but in most cases it is impossible to be truly impartial.
That is why it is important to remember that not everyone sees things the same way and to be respectful with our speech because of it.
"Buddha makes it clear that one should do that which is skillful, and abandon that which isn't. In the case of lying,I]for example[/I the Buddha makes the point that a person who has no shame in telling a deliberate lie is empty and hollow. Now, in most cases this would teach us not to lie. Lying is certainly unskillful and should be avoided. However, if lying can be skillful, the person feels shame in the telling, and it serves a very important purpose--what's the problem? The Buddha also states in this particular Sutta:
"Whenever you want to perform a verbal act, you should reflect on it: 'This verbal act I want to perform — would it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Is it an unskillful verbal act, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it would lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it would be an unskillful verbal act with painful consequences, painful results, then any verbal act of that sort is absolutely unfit for you to do. But if on reflection you know that it would not cause affliction... it would be a skillful verbal action with happy consequences, happy results, then any verbal act of that sort is fit for you to do."
I would have to say that based upon the Buddha's teachings, our actions should be based upon what will not lead to self-affliction, or to the affliction of others."
This is the link to the sutra he gave, and you can see it here
So We not only have to consider our intentions, Views and be constantly Aware of what our effect on the situation would be, but we must also decide that what we are going to do - or say - will be 'Skillful'. If, even with the intention of putting our viewpoint over clearly and honestly, we end up by adversely affecting the situation, the Truth was not Skillful.
So you are absolutely right.
Windwalker...
You make a good point that I still struggle with.
I contribute to my community. I have done charity for a local women's shelter, donate goods and clothing and money. It's nothing great - I don't want it to sound like I'm tooting my own horn. But ...
Can you really blame someone for trying to make a few extra rupees now and again?
I really sat here and thought about that statement. Can you blame someone for not using Right Mindfulness, Right Intention and Right Livelihood?
I guess I can. I mean, I don't have a problem helping people - I just have this attachment to someone else not being honest with me. What "they" are doing does not follow along the path of Buddha's teachings - so do Buddhist's just let people walk all over them?
Should we, as Buddhist's, put everyone elses needs over our needs and the needs of our family? Should we take the food and clothing from our own children to feed and clothe other children? Ultimately, there is still a child hungry and lacking clothing.
I know this sounds harsh - but it is something I do have a hard time with. I don't mind helping other - and actually enjoy it - I just don't like to be dealt with deception.
-bf
I find that the older I get - the less tact I have.
I was at a retirement party a couple of weeks ago - and I remember I was talking with a couple of guys and said something.
Then I remember thinking "WTF!?!?!!? What did you say that for!?!?!?!" :banghead:
It wasn't mean. I can't even remember what it was now - but I remember thinking that just an off handed question might make this other person uncomfortable about his current situation.
Just completely tactless.
Gotta keep working on things.
-bf
Like riding a bike, or starting any new skill, you just have to keep practising, until it comes naturally.... One day you're struggling and wobbling along the sidewalk, just praying your knees won't get grazed, or that you won't chip the paintwork on the new bike... the next, you're breezing down the avenue, just delighting in the wind through your hair.... But between those two times lies a lot of tumbles....
Just keep getting back on, and trying again....
Like I know all about it, 'cos' I'm the expert.....:rolleyesc ...Right??
The thing is, in this huge, confusing world we share, too many people get carried away with things that harm themselves and other people, but we are to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. And just maybe, the more we move around grasping at things, the more we incur harm. Maybe there's safety in curbing our appetite for greater mobility and having things just-so.
YogaMama (I stole your signature.), Buddhafoot, and Federica: Working in a nursing home is very good training in right speech. You are quoted if you "toot," so to speak, and therefore have to have the kindest disposition, both in words and intonations. Otherwise, YOU'RE FIRED!!!!
Elohim, quoted by Federica, Jan. 10:
..."I would have to say that based upon the Buddha's teachings, our actions should be based upon what will not lead to self-affliction, or to the affliction of others."
In other words, be kind to yourself, and be kind to yourself by being kind to others, and, by the way, don't forget to be kind to others, too.
What's all this talk about saving otters? I never even met an otter.
A point of crucial importance, BF!
1. Should we, as Buddhists, put everyone else's needs over our needs?
This is not really a matter of 'Buddhism' but of sheer humanity. There is an ancient Christian legend about a Roman soldier, Martinus, who was caught in a terrible storm. He meets a beggar who is dying of exposure in the weather. Martinus draws his sword and cuts his warm cloak in half, giving one half to the beggar and keeping the rest. In this way, both of them survive the storm. Had Martin given the beggar the whole cloak or kept it all himself, one of them would have died.
If my family, my community or I, alone, have food and shelter but you have none, a simple twist of mindset brings us to see that sharing what we have fed and housed those without. If I have food and you don't, we have food.
2. The 'deceit' can only harm you if you allow resentment to arise. In that case, two people, deceiver and deceived, have been hurt. By maintaining a calm and compassionate mind, irrespective of the other's behaviour or intention, there will only be a single casualty. (cf. The Pairs in the Dhammapada)
Love,
Brigid.;)
However, imagine that you buy your children many expensive presents for Christmas and then find out that the children next door have none after their house was burned down. Would it be wrong to take presents from your children to give to them? Your children will cry and complain but, when they are older, they will remember your example of kindness and thank you for it. So then you have given twice.
Think about it, eh?
Oh, and Nirvana...I don't mind that you stole my signature. Glad you liked it!
You know, I completely agree with everything that being said.
Simon's story of the Roman soldier is an excellent point. He took what he had and shared it. He didn't place the importance of the other man's suffering above his own will or desire to live. But, by sharing and helping he was able to keep himself and the other man from dying.
Is that not compassion at it's finest? Truly, what greater joy is there to give to someone who needs it? In helping our fellow man.
Now, what Simon's story didn't tell was that this same soldier took his cloak and cut a piece for this suffering man, and that suffering man, and yet another suffering man, and then a whole bunch of pieces for people in another country that he didn't even know - and then end up dying along with everyone else.
Or that the Roman soldier came across TWO suffering men and had to choose between one of the men (who was truly suffering) and the other man (who was not, but did this to get people's clothing to sell for profit). Now, the Roman soldier ends up either giving up his cloak entirely - and dying. Or, makes a decision to giving one half to the faker and letting the man truly in need die.
And Windwalker (I'm not being sarcastic here... I completely agree with you) you don't take ALL of your children's presents and give them away to all the other children that have gone without. Actually, this is a bad example, because I can actually see doing something like this. Not all the time, but sometimes extreme measure are required by Compassion. Truly, if your children have health, warmth, food, shelter - and there are children that don't - do Christmas presents really amount to that much?
And I guess it really does come down to our perception and views. If we are deceived and have an aversion to being deceived - it does cause us harm. I would have to be the first one to say that I do not like being deceived. It's happened far too often in my life and it does bother me - so that's something that I need to work on.
But, on the other hand, there are people in this world who are deceivers. Whether or not you want to believe it - it's true. There are people in this world that hold none of Buddha's teachings or "compassion for our fellow man" teachings. They are takers and deceivers. So, do we as Buddhists continue to be abused by these sort of people?
It is compassion to give a drunk money for a fix? Or is it more compassionate to give that same money to a hungry man, woman or child? Which is Right Compassion?
Someone quoted the Bible that we be "wise as serpents and harmless as doves". I think this places well into Right Compassion.
I actually had this incident happen to me about 1 month ago.
I had just met with my friend for dinner. We had a nice dinner. Good food, good conversation - I was in need of nothing.
Then walking through downtown to get back to my car, another car pulls up. A nice car - woman driving - man sitting in the passenger side with an open bottle of beer between his legs (which is illegal in my state) and two little girls in the back seat. The guy was looking here and there - and the woman wouldn't even meet my eyes.
"Hey mister...can you help us out? All we have is this Canadian $20 and there aren't any banks open. Can you give us an American $20 for this Canadian $20 so we can finish paying for our room tonight? Please? We're God-fearing Christians and could you help us out?"
"I don't have any money on me - just plastic. But, if you follow me to my car, I'll see what I have in there."
So... I started walking while this couple followed me in their car, smoking their cigarettes - him drinking his beer - and was thinking...
What if this is just bullshit? I've been taken before by people asking for money JUST to find out it was so they could buy smokes or more beer. But there were those two little girls sitting in the back seat. What if they were going to have to sleep in the car?
I did make it to my car - and they sat right there waiting for me.
What would you have done?
-bf
NOOOOO! Windwalker! You didn't do anything wrong! Come back and play with me!!!!!
I didn't take what you said in a bad way - in fact, I completely agreed with you and even took it a step further
I'm sorry my ramblings don't always come across as clear as they seem in my head!!!!
-bf
Simon you are indeed a Socialist.
I must admit if I said that I would some get smart arse response. It's very frustrating.
Sammadicci, (Pali) "Complete View", or "Shoken" (Japanese).
Samasamcappa, "Complete Thought" or "Shoshi".
Samavacha, "Complete Speech", or "Shoku".
Samacamanta, "Complete Activity", "Shogu".
Sama-ajiva, "Complete Livelihood", or "Shomyo".
Samavayama, "Complete Effort" or "Shonin"
Samasati "Complete Mindfulness" or "Sho-shojin"
Samasamadhi, "Complete Practice" or "Shojo"
Here, "complete" is how I prefer to translate this word "sama", which has also been translated as "right" or "true". So, Right View, Right Thought, Right Speech. But it is characteristic of our practice to realize that what is needed is not to be "right", but to be complete and to look into how we might realize this completeness, this wholeness through seeing and developing insight into how we scatter and break this wholeness into fragments of hope and fear. And so we say "complete", which means unbiased, thorough, whole...
When our lives are based upon self-deception, our communication with our world, our sense of meaning and the meanings that the world presents to us even in terms of colours, even in terms of breath, are all incomplete, are all deceptive. "Speech", I believe, can refer to not only words but our basic communication, our basic interaction, our basic inter-dependence.
When our lives are not lived, when they do not emerge from and vanish into Things as They Are [3] -- Things as They Are meaning directly seeing, directly hearing, feeling the floor when you step, feeling the tongue against teeth when you talk, really listening to someone when they speak, really speaking to the person that you are speaking to, then this is Things as They Are. But Things as They Are as well, means that which is present when you penetrate into the formlessness of forms and realize that the person that you are speaking to, the act of speaking, the act of hearing, the looking, the floor, the wall, are simply Buddha dressed up as the person that you are speaking to; Buddha dressed up as you; the universe expressing itself as this wall. Then you enter yet more deeply into Things as They Are. Then your activity, your speech, emerges from Things as They Are.
Once more, to understand the completeness of Complete Speech we must also understand the incompleteness of deceptive speech, of being deluded with our speech, lying to ourselves and to others, distorting our world, editing it, reframing it in various ways, framing it and holding on to it, pretending that words are things or that things are just what we name them and are just what they mean to us. When our speech is self-centred, then it is a lie. When our speech is slanderous, that is to say, when it is based or rooted in ignoring the basic dignity of all beings, of each and every being, when it is speech that emerges from a separation between self and other, speech that emerges from isolating oneself from the object of slander, then this is a very grave distortion indeed. "Double-tongued speech," as it is called, "creating discord between members of Sangha" - that is to say, between beings - and so, disrupting, damaging, the harmony of the community of all beings throughout all times in all directions. [4] This is very grave indeed.
Once more we can see that incomplete Speech is based upon ignoring Things as They Are, distorting Things as They Are and distorting it in terms of the three klesas (once more: passion, aggression and stupidity). Understanding this we must also understand that no matter how fully the three klesas might distort a situation, the situation is still as it is. It is this moment and the accuracy, the vibrancy, the sheer dignity of this moment is always available in the midst of each and every moment of incompleteness. This complete moment, this whole moment expresses itself and is completely available. It embraces you, it embraces your self-deceptions. Completely.
Seeing this, your view becomes yet more complete. When we realize Complete Speech then everything that we hear, everything that we speak is Buddha-vachana, the word of Buddha. Everything that expresses itself is Dharma, presentation of truth, presentation of Things as They Are. And when we become most intimate with this truth we realize that it is the expression of the Actual Nature, the expression of the Unborn or of this Deathlessness, the Unconditioned. When our lives are lived incompletely, based upon striving for certain meanings, based upon striving for certainty, based upon self-centred meaning, then nothing means anything, truly. But what does this breath mean? What does this wall mean? What does this morning mean? To find this is to understand the meaning of the Buddhas and Dharma Ancestors and to Transmit this very body and mind, this very moment, to yourself, most intimately and realize this body to be the body of Buddha, stretching in all directions and in all times.
I've said enough.
From The Eightfold Path Presented by Ven. Anzan Hoshin roshi
Our divine spark, that "truth...that...is the expression of the Actual Nature, the expression of the Unborn or of this Deathlessness, the Unconditioned," has to be nourished daily and hourly by a freshness of spirit that can only come from a complete view, as you call it.
Resentment is a poison that "distort our world, editing it, reframing it in COLOR=Black]selfish[/COLOR ways, framing it and holding on to it, pretending that words are things or that things are just what we name them and are just what they mean to us."
Resentment, not an expression of the Actual Nature, just serves for our own selfish delusions, and for no good purpose. Right Speech and Right View are closely knitted together, and both should be governed by KINDNESS. To resent is to think unkind thoughts and have an unkind, unaccepting view. Wisdom and kindness go together, hand in hand. Truth is, we need each other, every Otter.
Bravo, well-said, Simon. We have to keep a spiritual cool that accepts everybody. People AND PLACES tend to be pretty-well STUCK in their given mentality. One just has to accept that fact and move on. But although "stuck" to a certain way of thinking, believing, acting, or refraining from action, everybody and everything has his or her or its good points. We ought to LOOK FOR THE GOOD, and engage people to let them know we value them as fellow human beings. This engagement will bring them a little away from their "position," and that's a good thing.
The main trouble with the world and with everyday problems in it is that people are always forgetting just how precious they are and how precious every other human being is.
I was thinking about you today as I was reading Lama Surya Das' "Awakening the Buddha Within". He was talking about the Five Hindrances and how it applied to daily life. First time I had heard about it related to every day living. For a quick reminder they are
1.Desire, clinging, craving
2. Aversion, anger, hatred
3, Sleepiness, sloth
4. Restlessness
5. Doubt
The whole idea of Right Speech came to mind. When one is being sarcastic (such as BF or I) what is the purpose of doing so. Is the person just being funny? Sarcasm is a form of anger from what a therapist of mine had pointed out. This was long before I ever checked out anything about Buddhism and my response was "So how many years of college did it take to figure out that one?". I couldn't let go of the anger then. But I realize that isn't the only reason for sarcasm. Sometimes I want to make people laugh (desire to be liked) or not sure what to say during the quiet moments (restlessness with the quiet). I've been sarcastic for so long that I don't know what to say at times during conversations so I get smart alecky (doubt of myself).
I was amazed at hoe the Five Hindrances could be applied to more than just meditation. The book is fascinating and I've read about a quarter of it (100 pages) in about 2 days. Well worth the read.
I believe I will have to disagree on some of these points.
If a therapist told me that "sarcasm is a form of anger" I would wonder if he got his degree from the back of a book of matches - yes, more sarcasm.
But, it's not anger that makes me say this sarcastic remark. It's more of disbelief. Disbelief in a way that a person, who is a trained professional, can make a blanket statement that "this always means that" - when we know that isn't true.
Sometimes sarcasm is taking what happens in reality - or whatever this moment is that we're currently a part of - and making is something humorous. Maybe in a dark way, maybe completely off the mark from what is currently happening - but I don't believe it's root is always in anger.
I think, from our conversations both private and public, that you have stated things that are very serious - and there has been no sarcasm involved with those statements. Then, there have been other statements you have made publicly that were sarcastic but were drawing the humor from the topic at hand. Or, making a sarcastic statement to me when - I hope - you know I would find the humor of it. As more of a bonding experience.
While it is true that we should use Right Mindfulness when we speak - I think if Right Mindfulness is used when attempting sarcasm, knowing the person to which you speak, bearing no ill-will but only wish to bring happiness - I don't think it's a bad thing. I know my g/f really loves it when I call her my "biatch" - and truly, isn't that a derogatory term? But not to her - because she knows the intention with which it is meant.
I think my Right Speech issue dealt more with making retorts in anger, defending our views of our own selfs by degrading or humiliating others.
Make sense?
-bf
Also the therapist that told me that actually was a good one. She helped me overcome some of the most painful things that ever happened to me. So, if she got it her education from the back of the matchbook cover, send me a dozen. LOL!
Perhaps you are right, but I think that what Jerry said is quite often the case. Are you sure that the "disblief" you feel isn't a mild form of "aversion" to the way people are acting instead? Sarcasm often arises when a person doesn't say or do what another person wants or expects them to. This causes one to then react with a verbal "poke". This "poke" may contain a humorous overtone, but beneath that... Even this mild verbal "poke" that we call "sarcasm" can still be considered a subtle form of violence. I don't believe that this is always the case, but I do believe that it is the majority of the time. So, I would have to agree with Jerry's therapist on this one. Just my thoughts anyway.
Jason
I still wouldn't agree with his therapist saying that sarcasm = anger. I don't believe that all sarcasm is a subtle form of violence either.
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'll change my mind
-bf
And, just going out on a tangent here, maybe sarcasm is good in a way. If sarcasm is something being said that people aren't expecting - because they're expecting something else - because of their own perception and attachment and desires and labels - maybe sarcasm is helping broaden their inner thinking.
Is that a load of crap or what!?!?!?
-bf
I must say that it was me making a generalization. The therapist told me that I used sarcasm when I was angry. It doesn't mean that everyone does. You told us to go at it with both barrels. Those are just my insights to my problems with wrong speech. If I generalized it, my apologies.
This converstaion got me thinking about how we act, as well as how we react to others. I know that personally, I often do things that are not very skillful, but I can still find ways to "fool" myself into thinking that it was the "right" thing to do. My girlfriend can certainly vouch for this.
But, to be serious, we might all be a little surprised at the amount of unskillful actions that we actually perform. We often overlook, ignore, excuse, or defend our actions when in reality, there isn't much to there to defend besides our greed, hatred, and delusion. Our mana (pride/conceit), which arises from our sakkaya-ditthi (self identity view), blinds us to how much harm we truly cause. It is almost like a self-imposed ignorance And, because of this "blind-fold", we as human beings can justify almost anything.
It is the beginning of the Buddha's Path to notice this, and to make a serious determination to change it. Many of the things we do, say, and think are merely ingrained habits due to our past kamma (previous intentional actions). Our minds become "obsessed" with these over and over again. There are seven major "obsessions" to which the mind returns over and over again: obsession with sensual passion (kama-raganusaya), with resistance (patighanusaya), with views (ditthanusaya), with uncertainty (vicikicchanusaya), with conceit (manusaya), with passion for becoming (bhava-raganusaya), and with ignorance (avijjanusaya).
How easy it may be for us to forget that even our subtle actions [done with barely even a thought at all] still have an enormous impact on our future. An important Sutta that reflects this point is the Cetana Sutta. Something we have done our whole lives may apear to be perfectly fine and completely justifiable, when in reality it is perfectly unskillful and completely unwholesome. How could we miss something so seemingly obvious? It feels good, it makes us happy, it temporarily satisfies a desire, or it achieves a specific result, etc...
So, when we look at our actions, we must not only look at them objectively, but we must look at them with discernment. We must pry deep into their very roots, into the intentions that lie behind them, to determine if they are truly skillful and wholesome. Skillful and wholesome in this context means that they take us further along the Path. This is the exact same advice that the Buddha gave to his only son, Rahula:
Whenever you want to perform an act, you should reflect on it: 'This act I want to perform -- would it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Is it an unskillful act, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it would lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it would be an unskillful act with painful consequences, painful results, then any act of that sort is absolutely unfit for you to do. But if on reflection you know that it would not cause affliction... it would be a skillful action with happy consequences, happy results, then any act of that sort is fit for you to do.
Jason
But when he comes in and engages personally, and puts forward his views in his own words....
Well, personally.......
I love that....
But...I do have some questions...and federica knows my situation best....what if someone you know has done something awful to you, and that person needs to be confronted, and other people need to be told about what happened, so that those same awful things don't happen to other people in this world?? I know I am being a little vague, but I need to be!
Whenever I do, Elohim always puts out some interesting and thought-provoking posts!
-bf
Oh ... my bad
I guess I would have to agree then - if a person uses sarcasm when they're angry and they use it to lash out, demean, punish or hurt someone - then yeah, I would have to say that the person in question is using sarcasm to hurt.
Which can also be said of many different forms of communication - including "truth".
As Jason has pointed out so well, there are many things, many teachings and many lessons we will learn on our journey of the Eightfold Path.
Awww... I love how we all get along in here. Can anyone else feel the love? Show of hands?
-bf
I understand. This is what has helped me. I constantly reminded myself that the person in question also had Buddha-nature and regardless of their actions, was as deserving of respect and kindness as were those they made suffer. I used compassion, compassion, compassion. I also used future compassion, by which I mean I thought about the karmic hell they were planting for themselves and this went a long way in tempering my tongue and making my speech more skillful when the confrontation arrived. I also got rid of any expectations of apology or change on the other's part. I just needed to say my piece and ensure that the cat was let out of the bag so others could be protected. There was denial and there still is. But that was not my issue. Know what I mean? The painful consequences you talk about don't have to be your concern. If you speak with compassion in your heart you will have done more than enough.
Go Yoga, Go Yoga, Go Yoga! You're a brave and beautiful being. We are all behind you.
With love and great respect,
Brigid
Yoda,
Being someone that has discussed this issue with you a little bit - I still have no good advice to give you. As I believe I have mentioned before, I believe that if you honestly feel you need to bring this issue up - I would bring it up in a "one on one" situation - or possibly recruit your brothers to help address this issue.
Whatever you end up doing - I wish everyone involved the best and that it somehow brings peace and harmony and safety to all
-bf
:cheer:
— AN X.69
Thank you. I've been concentrating so much on what not to do with speech that I forgot to look for the topics of proper conversation. This clarifies things so well.
I saved this passage to my wordpad collection and I typed "AN X.69" into Google and came up with the Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation of the Kathavatthu Sutta at the "Access to Insight" website. I have a lot of stuff saved from there, but I didn't have this.
Thanks again.
Brigid