Just because you are aware of those things does not imply you’re using that attention beneficially. Especially if you are using them as a gauge for what “feels good” (or not), you would be using that attention to identify why is unwanted. You should read some suttas about “delight” because that is exactly the criteria you operate according to. As usual, you seem to be describing an ordinary world view.thepea wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 6:42 pm If we are practicing dhamma then we are aware of feelings, emotions, thoughts arising, the entire time we are conversing.
When you speak and nobody agrees with you and that feeling arises, this is most commonly aversion. And when you speak and you get thumbs up the feeling that usually arises is craving. The news flash is that you created both of these through your reactions to sensory perception. This is 100% your responsibility as is the associated kamma.
Right speech
Re: Right speech
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
Re: Right speech
It says pleasant conversation, but you call it polite chit chat. I wonder how you know? And Charles defers to his gillie, groom, tailor, security staff and Welsh Language tutor when he needs to. They have as little to tell him about being a king, though, as the Buddha's associates had to tell him about enlightenment.
Evidence? The suttas generally have devas standing to one side, and humans seated to one side. To stand while he was talking would have been considered disrespectful. You might well be right, but where are your sources?2. Sure, the Buddha sat and talked with kings and brahmans, and the occasional bigmouth sadhu gone rogue. But mostly the folks of poorer background quietly stood at a polite distance from the Buddha while he talked.
Let's test this one against reality, shall we? I offered you, in your previous incarnation, a zoom meeting with monks and lay supporters where you could ask them questions and discuss things. Easily arranged, as the time difference is not important. I could watch or participate, and we would see if anyone imposed an "etiquette" such as you describe. After I made the offer, you disappeared from the forum for a few months; but the offer is still there, and the Zoom is even better.3. There is an etiquette for talking to monks and one's seniors, and this etiquette makes it impossible to have a conversation on equal terms. If you don't respect this etiquette, your seniors will do it for you.
Re: Right speech
I see you as the one describing an ordinary collective view vs swimming against the current. You seem to have a go with the flow attitude. Whatever the worldly view is you parrot that.SDC wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 10:19 pmJust because you are aware of those things does not imply you’re using that attention beneficially. Especially if you are using them as a gauge for what “feels good” (or not), you would be using that attention to identify why is unwanted. You should read some suttas about “delight” because that is exactly the criteria you operate according to. As usual, you seem to be describing an ordinary world view.thepea wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 6:42 pm If we are practicing dhamma then we are aware of feelings, emotions, thoughts arising, the entire time we are conversing.
When you speak and nobody agrees with you and that feeling arises, this is most commonly aversion. And when you speak and you get thumbs up the feeling that usually arises is craving. The news flash is that you created both of these through your reactions to sensory perception. This is 100% your responsibility as is the associated kamma.
You seem to be disconnected to the teacher within which teaches through mental suffering. If it feels good why not keep doing it? This is not simply the physical indulgence but a combination of both mental and physical faculties.
If giving to others feels good then do this. If taking drugs feels good but then after the high you don’t like the low, then strive to get off the rollercoaster and seek out level ground.
If I speak my mind and it feels good but then afterwords I feel bad after reflecting on what I’ve said then same rules apply, get off the rollercoaster.
We are each responsible for our own carnival experience, I cannot force you onto the rollercoaster without your active consent.
Re: Right speech
I’ll take you up on that zoom meeting.Sam Vara wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 10:34 pmIt says pleasant conversation, but you call it polite chit chat. I wonder how you know? And Charles defers to his gillie, groom, tailor, security staff and Welsh Language tutor when he needs to. They have as little to tell him about being a king, though, as the Buddha's associates had to tell him about enlightenment.
Evidence? The suttas generally have devas standing to one side, and humans seated to one side. To stand while he was talking would have been considered disrespectful. You might well be right, but where are your sources?2. Sure, the Buddha sat and talked with kings and brahmans, and the occasional bigmouth sadhu gone rogue. But mostly the folks of poorer background quietly stood at a polite distance from the Buddha while he talked.
Let's test this one against reality, shall we? I offered you, in your previous incarnation, a zoom meeting with monks and lay supporters where you could ask them questions and discuss things. Easily arranged, as the time difference is not important. I could watch or participate, and we would see if anyone imposed an "etiquette" such as you describe. After I made the offer, you disappeared from the forum for a few months; but the offer is still there, and the Zoom is even better.3. There is an etiquette for talking to monks and one's seniors, and this etiquette makes it impossible to have a conversation on equal terms. If you don't respect this etiquette, your seniors will do it for you.
When I bring up the Covid mandates and segregation of dhamma practitioners to the most senior monastics. They get so uncomfortable and terminate the calls without even saying good-bye.
The dhamma is for all and segregation has no part.
Segregation is adhamma. When I speak these truths to monks and how they operated over past three years they cannot look at this.
Set it up and let me know.... happy to inquire about the truth with any monastic. And I will continue until they answer to this. This is the duty of the noble.
Re: Right speech
Well when you are ready I’ll show you some very uncomfortable monastics. So much so that they literally stutter and cannot carry a calm rational discussion when asked only a couple of basic questions.overcome with aversion they terminate the conversation.
I make certain to call monthly looking for a simple answer.
This is right speech.
Re: Right speech
It’s not mind reading. You’re making sure your words aren’t going to cause problems, and you have an idea of what reactions you might get and how to resolve it.thepea wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 9:43 pmI think that’s mind reading which might be a siddhi power but I’m limited in this.
If my volition is not to offend and I’m mindful how am I to know how someone is going to respond?
I can guess but I can never be 100% certain.
Also sometimes people need to hear difficult truths. Or are you suggesting walking on eggshells around others avoiding any contentious topics?
Re: Right speech
My wife pointed out to me a characteristic that I should work on. It related towards forgiveness.Tl21G3lVl wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 11:40 pmIt’s not mind reading. You’re making sure your words aren’t going to cause problems, and you have an idea of what reactions you might get and how to resolve it.thepea wrote: ↑Mon Oct 03, 2022 9:43 pmI think that’s mind reading which might be a siddhi power but I’m limited in this.
If my volition is not to offend and I’m mindful how am I to know how someone is going to respond?
I can guess but I can never be 100% certain.
Also sometimes people need to hear difficult truths. Or are you suggesting walking on eggshells around others avoiding any contentious topics?
I mentioned this on a Facebook post how she pointed this out to me. I meant this post to show her in a positive light, expressing my gratitude to her for pointing this out to me.
She read this and took it as, her criticizing me, and her looking like the villain. I never felt anything but gratitude with her words and our conversation, and wrote the post to reflect her in this light. I had no control over her response, perhaps she felt guilty pointing this trait out to me???
IDK ultimately what she is thinking or the depths of her emotion. I can’t take responsibility for something I have no control over. Other than absolute silence but then that doesn’t benefit him as as they are social creatures.
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Right speech
You are placing self in the center of the universe
Like everyone does
Re: Right speech
Yes, but I consider dhamma a selfish practice.cappuccino wrote: ↑Tue Oct 04, 2022 12:01 amYou are placing self in the center of the universe
Like everyone does
Everything required is within the framework of your body.
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12876
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Right speech
Yes it’s a paradox
Re: Right speech
Yup.
Re: Right speech
I think not exactly the same .
≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈≈
No bashing No gossiping