Thanksgiving is quite the time. Family gathers. And, of course, things happen. This is a holiday near unique in its potential conflicts. Perhaps it comes with such a complicated history, a harvest festival with a mythic story attached that many find more than slightly problematic.
The issues that possibly will come up can be small. And they can be large. Some are as predictable as the sun rising. I was watching a news program yesterday where two of the reporters mentioned the pressure they would get for neither being married, nor having children. Other more ominous divisions are also present in many families, brokenness, resentments, past actions that will never be spoken of. And will not be, perhaps cannot be forgiven. Along with, of course, many, many good things. It is good for family to gather. Particularly in our times where we possibly have scattered to the winds and this is a rare event. For the most part, even with all its attendant difficulties, a few like adding in the Pilgrims and Native Americans as the pivot for it, I really wish we would fix; even with all that, I really like Thanksgiving, the harvest festival, the gathering of the clan.
And. In the wake of this recent presidential election here in the United States, where we are divided at levels rarely experienced in our recent history, it seems even more difficult, or, might well be. People feel a need to speak. Me, I feel a neo-fascist was just elected president. Others who will be at our family gathering voted for him. We all have things we want to say.
As it happens, recently the Zen teacher Domyo Burk wrote a compelling article on when and how to speak of politics. I recommend it to all. What she did was draw on the Buddha’s famous Vaca Sutta as her starting point. It is, of course, about a lot more than politics. But, as Burk Osho pointed out, it really does fit the situation. The Vaca Sutta is one of the collections within the Anguttara Nikaya, and is concerned with proper speech. It is brief and to the point. The full text in Bhikkhu Thanissaro’s translation states:
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. A statement endowed with these five factors is well-spoken, not ill-spoken. It is blameless & unfaulted by knowledgeable people.
And here’s a paraphrase that I hope will be helpful:
Seekers of truth, the wise recognize there are five factors that make our words worthy of our way. They must be timely. They must be truthful. They must be said with genuine affection for the hearer. They must be said with the intention of being helpful. They must be said with genuine good-will.
It is pretty straight forward, wise counsel for speaking in any situation. But not completely so. There were angles that seemed to call for further reflection. So, I decided to dig into this a bit more, and googled the Vaca Sutta. And with that I stumbled on a really interesting article from a few years back by P.B. Morton at Philosophical Percolations, “The Three Gates of Speech.” In fact her intent was similar although not exactly on my point of digging into the Buddha’s advice. She was interested in the well known three steps for speaking. Perhaps you know it. The points are: Is it true? Is it necessary? Is it kind? I’ve actually cited this in the past. I think it really is a Western version of the Buddha’s five steps. Certainly its not hard to see similarities.
Who exactly presented that three fold list first is just not clear, as Dr Morton noted, the litany of candidates is quite long. The earliest citation she can find is a caution from a Reverend Mr Steward in 1848, although formed as cautions before speaking “evil” of someone, and including the ordering I personally prefer, is it true, is it kind, is it necessary. “Kind” for me a fluid thing, often found in the eye of the beholder, or, perhaps whose ox is being gored. But, important, and I notice firmly part of the Buddha’s admonition.
At the same time I began to feel we’re speaking of ancient wisdom here. In various cultures and at various times people have presented ways to speak of important matters, maybe of any matter under the sun. And, there are some aspects to that guidance from so many places that are common to all. Together with an occasional unique point that, for me, when taken together, become something rich. And, maybe of real help to us all.
Dr Morton actually leads her article with a quote attributed to the Sufi sage and poet Jallaludin Rumi. She in fact doesn’t find that particular quote she cited, which was the three fold advice, at all likely. Instead, she suggested the old spiritual master would advise, “if you’re going to mess with speech at all, it should be beautiful, and from the heart, and aware of its own imperfections, rather than scrupulously careful. A very interesting variation on the themes of right speech, and one I find very important. After all the times we actually get to know something is true beyond any doubt are very, very rare. So, beautiful and from the heart, aware of limitations and, as I hear this, more generous than scrupulous.
In her article she gives some concrete examples. Go read them if you want, they’re worth the visit. Dr Morton goes on to find analogs in the Rotary four-way test, is it the truth, is it fair to all concerned, will it build goodwill and better friendships, and will it be beneficial to all concerned. Interesting, if for me, a bit too dilute for truly thorny issues.
Dr Morton’s conclusion actually draws upon Confucius, or, at least the Confucius who is a character in the Daoist master Zhuangzi’s stories, where in this one he advises someone who wishes to speak, to first undergo a “fast of the heart.” And then, and only then,
“You are capable of entering and roaming free inside his cage [the prospective employer/ruler/tiger], but do not be excited that you are making a name for yourself. When the words penetrate, sing your native note; when they fail to penetrate, desist. When there are no doors for you, no outlets, treating all abodes as one, you will find your lodgings in whichever is the inevitable, you will be nearly there.”
Which takes us back to the Buddhas’ admonition.
And with all that other counsel hanging in the air I find these five points deeply worth digging into.
First, timeliness. I’ve long noticed that if the time isn’t right, it really doesn’t matter what we say. If the time is right, even words that are poorly formulated can get a positive response. So, knowing when to speak really is critical. Holding one’s peace until that time can be hard. In fact it can be very hard. But, this seems to be critical to us, if we’re really interested in being useful.
Personally I think the second point, that the statement is truthful should be the first of all these points. If it isn’t the most accurate statement one can achieve, the whole thing is worthless. To be worthy it has to be truthful. And truthful in a bigger sense than “my truth.” Or, it “feels right.” It has to be recognizable as true by reasonable people with adequate access to accurate information. Steps too many of us are too willing to skip.
Third is quite interesting. It is a call to speak only from a sense of positive regard for the hearer. This is one I admit to having more trouble with than wishing to be truthful, and trying to be timely. When people hold views that seem contrary to common sense, and sometimes that are even dangerous, I find it difficult to separate out the person from the view. But, I also believe the Buddha is right. What is it we’re about if we don’t care for that other person? Genuine positive regard is so important. It makes everything else worth while.
Fourth, we need to say something because we think it will be helpful. If it isn’t, then we’re using our view, even if it is spot on correct, as a weapon. The truth, hard as it is to obtain, isn’t a stick to beat people with. This devalues the very issue we wish to put forward. It isn’t worthy of us or the position we’re trying to get someone else to adopt. We must be doing this to help that person and the larger point.
And, finally, in order to do this we must have a sense of wanting to do good for other people. We must care. We must want the best for all involved. This is quite similar to that third admonishment, but subtly different. Slicing into the differences of shade can be very valuable. Finding our desire to be of use in this world, knowing both the higher and more base motives that are involved are critical if we’re to win through.
We fail in any of these points, then we’re not likely to succeed in our hope for others to agree with us, and perhaps act on that view. I suggest looking at this admonition through the lens of those other guidelines, as well, can be particularly helpful. Our journey is continuous, and there is always more to learn. Recall beauty. Recall uncertainty.
And I suggest Zhuangzi’s Confucius’ suggestion is critical. We need to start by that fast of the heart, searching our own depths and digging deeply into the assertion we want to put forward. Perhaps it is the truth. Perhaps our motive is clean. But, we need to know those are in fact so, and not simply the advancing of some prejudice or appetite slightly or deeply hidden from our consciousness. Sadly, I know my capacity for self-deception is near endless. And, I’ve observed similar traits in my friends. So, if we’re particularly lucky, seeing that we always see through that famous glass darkly, and what we know is only in part, can be a great gift.
We do this, and while we may not prevail, after all the only certain thing is uncertainty, and all things made of parts will in fact at some point come apart; at least we will be standing with the wise.
And that’s worth something…
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In