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.
Regarding Right Speech
yagr
Veteran
We've been taught that right speech asks, is it true, beneficial and timely. Which, ironically, begs the question: How can a question meet those requirements?
0
Comments
Don't ask!
Motive, tone, civility.
"Excuse me, could I just get past?"
as opposed to -
"yo, fat-ass, move your butt, can't you see we're walkin' here...?!"
I was thinking perhaps he meant a straight forward inquiry that may or may not fall into the category of skillful speech...? I wondered what scenario he might be thinking of when he asked that question.
In situations where there is an indeterminate motivation, as far as I am concerned, the universally-applicable adage of -
"If it feels good, do it -
When in doubt - don't."
is appropriate, here.....
I think "right" should result in something that does not cause suffering to oneself or others, or maybe something similar.
What I think he meant, and mind you, I'm not completely certain of this, is this:
Is it possible that questions are, by their very nature, unskillful? i.e. What kind of tree is that?
Cool. Elm. I now know, more or less, nothing of value. In fact, because I know something's name, I might make the mistake of thinking I know something about the tree, when all I know is the name someone gave to this type of tree when they started naming things back long before the Buddha's time.
Or maybe I could ask a more pertinent question such as, "What is enlightenment?" which will get me more or less no where.
I just can't think of a question that leads to an objective answer - just another's perspective. i.e. What's the best band ever? Where's a nice place to live? Is there a God? Who's on first?
Or, since it's a question ( the reverse of a statement), you could reverse the screening. For a statement:
Is it kind?
Yes = OK to say it.
For a question:
Is it unkind?
No = OK to say it.
Most people are liars and hypocrites. They wish to be treated as honest alcoholics, sincere practitioners, simple truth seekers, astute, insightful, clear thinkers etc. etc.
It is collusion in this self charade that passes for good company. The blind leading the blind. Asking questions we know the answer to, are easily available or completely irrelevant.
It is only beneficial to point this out as speaking personally, to attribute it to anyone apart from me would be unskilful.
When is it timely to point this out? When it can be assimilated rather than seen as an unkind attack.
Just off the cuff I can think of one question, that when I use it, I mean it, in other words it's not used just as a form of "Hello" or "Hi"
(I guess this is why I prefer using the Maori greeting of "Kia Ora" = "May you be well" which is an expression of sincere well wishes )
Anyhow this is the question:
How are you today (insert name) ?
Is it true? Yes....Out of concern, I genuinely would like to know..
Is it beneficial and timely ? If they are feeling poorly and in need of somebody to talk to-I'm genuinely there for them,(even strangers) and if things are going well for them, I'm genuinely happy for them...I share in their happiness and wish for them to have more of it....
What answer provides the right question?
It's all a matter of how proficient you are in the Right Speech department, actually, @yagr.
If you ask me, of course, a question never meets those requirements.
It's the answer that should...
Give me a couple more rounds in Samsara and I'll be an expert...
It's all a matter of how proficient you are in the Right Speech department, actually, @yagr.
If you ask me, of course, a question never meets those requirements.
It's the answer that should...
My question has been taking up some real estate for two weeks but serendipitously arrived at the same time as lobsters thread, "Does that work for you?" With changing perspectives, insights, delusions and assumptions...who would one ask? And how would we know if the answer is right until we know?
contemplative hrrumph
Depends whose standards you are using to define timely, helpful, and true. It is difficult but not impossible to meet with your own standards depending on where you set the bar but meeting everyone else's standards at the same time is impossible.
Maybe there are Buddhist standards for timely, helpful, and true that should take precedence over opinion but even then I can barely be certain of what is true let alone timely and helpful. I can only monitor the outcomes to verify that I am on the right path and whether to change or deviate from the current standards I have set.
As a whole I think it is only meant to provide direction but the path is never-ending and the goal unreachable. You can view that as disheartening but I veiw it as an opportunity to grow and grow without end. It is the story that is the best part. I never like to see a good story end.
We are always on the right path but sometimes in the wrong way. In other words we question where we are rather than knowing/accepting why we are there.
If we think of speech in the wider context of 'expression' we realise that everything is an answer to its nature/being but we are constantly asking it to conform to our current filtering.
That is why we are deluded. When we listen to the answers we have or find manifest all around, we no longer require 'right speech' in external expression/being. Wisdom is often silent and when we hear that, for example in meditation, we know right speech is heard not spoken.
Objectivity is a fiction created by a collective of subjectives mutually agreeing values.
Why would a question be inherently not 'right speech' by reason of it being a question? I ask because I don't think I see the irony.
Right - re: Objectivity is a fiction... couldn't agree more. Knew I was going to regret using that word but couldn't think of another. Love the way you phrased it though - very succinct; apparently I like succinct.
As for why would a question be inherently not 'right speech'? Because, for starters, a question is neither true nor false. It has no numerical value to it (i.e I'm a mathematician thinking of proofs).
Since everything is subjective to the observer, then until the observer is transcended, each answer is wrapped cozily in samsara. Look, I have no idea, or at least very little idea, what I'm talking about. But I am trying to question my programming that tells me that if I wish to learn something, I should ask questions. I'm trying to consider whether or not asking you to share your programming has any real, lasting value.
When the Buddha said, "Believe nothing, o' monks...", it seemed to me that he was making a strong case for a questionless quest. If we're not to believe anything until we've examined it ourselves and found it to be conducive to the good of all sentient beings, then what value is a question? Don't get me wrong. I like asking questions. I'm confident that I ask too many. How preposterous that I'm considering that perhaps I shouldn't ask any. Which is why I'm asking - I've found that lots of preposterous things are true.
Hence the irony. I'm asking a question about whether a question should be asked.
As stated earlier - Motive, tone, civility....
I'm thinking that, rather than a question being skilful/appropriate, the motive behind the question needs clarification.
It's not so much what you ask, or how; it's got a lot to do with the 'why'.
Politeness goes a long way.
I think a question can be right speech if it provokes insight. Sometimes the right question can turn the pre-formed answer on its head.
I've always liked koans though.
OP, I don't understand your inquiry. Are you asking how can any utterance phrased as a question be beneficial, timely, and true? A question doesn't inherently have truth or untruth, but it can helpfully point people toward the truth, and get them thinking about an issue from a new perspective.
That a question is inherently neither true nor false does not preclude it from being right speech.
The definition is expressed as: Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter.
5 factors to consider: 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.
It follows therefore that in determining the issue, context and content seem paramount as opposed to the inherent nature of a question.
I'm not sure if it has or could have any real, lasting value - those three words are loaded and together, forget about it!
For example, if we are engaged in a task requiring a skill that I possess, that you do not then even with instruction, there seems to be 'value' in honest questions to fill the gaps - I suppose in this context, the parameters of the outcome (the result of the task) are agreed.
In that sense, your consideration of real, lasting value may be akin to asking questions where the outcome is not agreed.
For example, if we were engaged in a task where neither of us possessed the required skill and we had no agreed outcome then I suppose it would not be certain that each question would have a corresponding value.
I suppose the subjective is no more supreme than the objective it creates.
I think it's healthy to question and to question questioning too - to contemplate.
Best of luck on your journey and if I've learnt anything, that is definitely ask someone who knows before unscrewing a nut on a live water main... all other questions of questionable value.
... and only so far ...
Being civil on a public forum is correct. In a more intensive requirement, the need for social conventions is often required only by the superficial. My teacher was not polite. Most people could not tolerate his incessant 'direct pointing' ...
... and now back to the always right ...