“If something is true and beneficial, I would say it even if it is unwelcome and disagreeable to others. Why? Because I have compassion for beings.” –Shakyamuni Buddha to Prince Abhaya
“Being honest may not get you many friends, but it will always get you the right ones.”–John Lennon
Abandoning negative or unwholesome speech is an important aspect in Buddhist ethics. Without ethical foundations and merit, it does not matter how many Tantric empowerments we take, or Dzogchen or Mahamudra teachings we attend, there will not be any great result. The reason for that is that unless one has merit (and wisdom) and worse behaves unethically and breaches the five main precepts regularly, the karma is not there to bring the desired result. This is why one should never forget about the foundations and karma.
The Shakyamuni Buddha emphasized Right Speech (Sammā Vācā) is a key component of the Buddha’s Noble Eightfold Path, along with Right View, Right Intention, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration. Here a better word than “right” is “beneficial” I think. In any case, it involves abstaining from four types of harmful communication—lying, divisive speech, harsh words, and idle chatter—and instead practicing truthful, kind, and purposeful or beneficial speech.
Refraining from Four Types of Unwholesome Speech (Vacīduccarita)
The Buddha identified four specific types of speech to avoid as being unwholesome/negative (vaci-duccarita):
1) Lying (Musāvāda): Dishonesty that destroys trust and character.
2) Divisive/Slanderous Speech (Pisuṇā vācā): False words that create conflict, cause disunity, or break friendships or relationships (this is particularly serious when false accusations and malicious gossip/smear campaigns cause the break of a genuine and pure Vajrayana connection, as has happened to me recently).
3) Harsh Speech (Pharusavācā): Rudeness, insults, or abusive language that causes pain. This is not the same as disagreeing with someone, speaking truth to power, and politely pointing out faulty conduct or false speech.
4) Idle Chatter (Samphappalāpa): Meaningless, vain, or gossip-filled talk that lacks purpose, for example, talking about worldly politics, football, clothes, food and so on.There is also mention of “untimely” speech, such as waiting too long to say something, or saying things at an inappropriate time or a wrong occasion, because it is not good enough to just be right.
As I have written and spoken about (see reel) before, one of the main Buddhist precepts (for monastics and laypeople) is not lying/dishonesty, and actively telling or spreading lies are considered to be negative speech. However, being honest all the time may not get us many friends either, as I have discovered ha ha. So we have to be honest when it is necessary without engaging in the four types of unwholesome speech.
- Gossip,defamatory and divisive speech and how it is different from speaking truthfully or exposing corruption/lies
For a new reel I made about gossip and how to transform/refrain from it, see here:
Gossip, or slander, generally is done behind the person’s back when they are not present, and have no opportunity to hear the accusations and/or defend themselves.
Gossip is also talking about something which is trivial or meaningless (such as football, cricket, celebrities, clothes, food etc,) or causes harm. It is generally based on hearsay, and has not been directly heard or seen by the person communicating it. Even if it was directly seen or heard by them, they may have exaggerated it, or added in some lies to it, or be motivated by jealousy, anger, and aversion etc.
It is not necessarily insulting and harsh speech, such as calling people derogatory names like “bitch”, “demon”, “excrement” etc. But they are often combined together, when the gossip is aimed at a particular person.
Gossip is not the same as speaking truth to power, or exposing corruption, dishonesty, discrimination, and/or bullying or falsehoods that cause oneself or others harm. Self-defence is also not gossip. However, that speech should be based on facts, with supporting evidence, and not be spoken behind people’s backs, so that person has no idea what is being said by them and by whom. Transparency, accountability and lack of anonymity are essential when speaking truthfully about such legitimate concerns.
So, there can be a “thin line” between what is gossip or divisive speech and what is genuinely seeking truth, justice and exposure of wrongdoing, corruption and correction of defamation/slander.
The energy of the speech is different though. As Shakyamuni Buddha himself taught (according to the 17th Karmapa), truth and sincere motivation has a resonance and power that lies, or distorted truths with malicious or jealous intentions do not have. Energy never lies as they say. So no matter how many people spread gossip and lies, it will feel “nasty” and “off”. Whereas a person who speaks truth and stands alone in that truth, may not have “many friends” or public supporters, but the energy of who they are and their speech resonates differently.
In sum, as someone who has been subjected over the past few years to such gossip and negative speech (often by anonymous people online, or people I have never met or know), including recently when a small “gossip gang” group of people (most of whom I have never met or do not know) maliciously disrupted and interfered with my attending months of teachings in Europe in particular, with a new teacher, 9th Gyalton Rinpoche. That gossip and harsh speech sadly continued even when I was staying at the Sherab Ling monastery, India where in my final week of staying one month there, I personally verbally abused, insulted and harassed (no calm, kind conversations) by one woman in particular (whom I do not know). So, even though I use it as a tool for practice, I can personally vouch how distressing, damaging, time-wasting, negative and divisive it is.
Ideally, the teachers themselves who lead communities who are engaging in such gossip and negative speech, should be leading by example and/or directly telling them not to speak about others in such ways. The teachers should not be joining in and also sharing and spreading negative, and divisive speech about their own students/followers while they are not present! Recently, a teacher I was following I heard speak negatively about me behind my back (when they thought I could not hear them) even though the teacher themselves had never said such a thing, or raised such concerns with me personally. It is hardly inspiring, beneficial or kind is it?
Avoiding harsh words/insults and “ad hominem” attacks
Another form of negative speech is speaking harsh words, such as insults. Fortunately, this is something I find easy to refrain from, but I know many people do not. In any case, as I speak about on this new reel, it means calling people derogatory or bullying names, calling a woman a “bitch” or a “demon” or even like a piece of excrement. The intention behind the words is to cause harm and hurt the person and make them think they are worthless and should be disrespected.
This is very different from disagreeing with someone, or pointing out valid faults and so on. For example, if someone is persistently late, or never responds to messages that are part of their role, a person can point that out and say they find it rude and lacking manners, without name-calling and labelling a person as if they are a piece of dirt on the ground not worthy of a response, or even eye contact! Hurling insults during a debate or disagreement is considered ad hominem attack and one is considered to have lost the debate when doing that, because they have lost focus on the main point and content of the discussion at hand.
Conclusion
It is clear judging by recent events in the Tibetan and Himalayan Buddhist communities, that teachers and the community members need to learn to refrain from unwholesome speech, and reacting emotionally and aggressively when someone disagrees with them about something or someone. Also to not regard accountability for speech and actions, as an attack, or a “demon”. The only “demon” is what is controlling your mind!
They say that an honest man is always willing to answer questions, whereas a dishonest man will try to avoid questions that he cannot control at all costs. After all the Buddha lived like a pauper, on the move with his monastic sangha and reliant on laypeople for sustenance and lodging.
Nowadays, it seems more as if laypeople are reliant on monastics, who hold the worldly power and money and land so on. And this has led to more monastics have a derogatory view of laywomen in particular, rather than see them as a source of their sustenance and support, they regard laywomen like bodies, and laymen like people to be avoided unless they like them or they are paying huge amounts of money.
