• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

[Virtue] Talking about right speech and purification

Samana Johann

Restricted by request
Here's another example, of two opposing presidential candidates taking friendly jabs at each other.

If it's not for the future sake of one time harming each other, those used to play harming will do it for the sake of harming former parents, siblings, friends... as it is not easy to find one being not having been ones dear and near one time. Believe it or not, young householder, if she wouldn't have actually near relation she woyldn't be able to take part on this topics, would not be touched and give into. That is not said for a favor and one used to criticise blameworthy does also not avoid praise of praiseworthy for what ever gain.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
If it's not for the future sake of one time harming each other, those used to play harming will do it for the sake of harming former parents, siblings, friends... as it is not easy to find one being not having been ones dear and near one time. Believe it or not, young householder, if she wouldn't have actually near relation she woyldn't be able to take part on this topics, would not be touched and give into. That is not said for a favor and one used to criticise blameworthy does also not avoid praise of praiseworthy for what ever gain.
I think the system hiccuped on you, as that was posted three times.
 

Samana Johann

Restricted by request
I think the system hiccuped on you, as that was posted three times.
It's raining permanent since days and it's actually the only spot in the area where there is any connection, yet even if so that more connectivity given in this remote cave in remote land than in the capital under this conditions, it would not work always well from the small tablet. That might be a valid excuse from not appearing pleasant from time to time.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
Every gone path is ones own path. Nevertheless there are path leading to long term happiness, and paths leading to suffering and pain, householder. Does she think that it's compassionate to stay silent if knowing where another ones way leads, for the sake of giving favors?
Only the enlightened can truly know where someone's path lies and how best to walk it.

And even if someone, for the sake of argument, had gone to Siddhartha Gautama when he was living the life of a prince and told him to renounce the world, would he have listened? It was only after his life experience of suffering that he started down the path that would result in him becoming the Buddha.

Milarepa followed a dark path in the early part of his life until his life experience caused him to turn around and speed to the goal.

I've learned that I have no way of knowing what's best for someone. I might offer advice if asked. And I've asked for advice from people who I believe are qualified to give it. But I've also learned from personal experience, both ways, that giving advice when not asked for or being told something I don't want to hear is not productive.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
Why is such off-putting for one holding on house, cherishing house, to be addressed as householder by a homeless, by a beggar? It would be understandable if addressing householder as beggar, wouldn't it?
Would it be off-putting when householders child addresses here with mother or mum? If so, there would be less aid to let householder dwell at proper position. There are, my person does not say there aren't mother being ashamed if called mother by there childs, householder being called householder by homeless.
Many years ago I visited a Zen center to try to understand that path and to decide if it was for me. I found that they had discarded the traditional begging as not appropriate for the West and had substituted picking up litter instead.

That's just one illustration of how the sannyasi, an integral part of culture in India, does not fit in a Western context. The word "homeless" and especially "beggar" in a Western context is pejorative while in India it has traditionally been the mark of those with spiritual aspirations.

That was the context of my remark.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
I've learned that I have no way of knowing what's best for someone. I might offer advice if asked. And I've asked for advice from people who I believe are qualified to give it. But I've also learned from personal experience, both ways, that giving advice when not asked for or being told something I don't want to hear is not productive.
Too bad that isn't promoted in more religions and philosophies. It's human nature to be repulsed at certain things, and think this-and-that has to be damaging and destructive. But even in ourselves our perspective and understanding can be astoundingly limited, so we truly do have an uphill struggle if we are to access the position of others. If someone says they use meth, there is a gut reaction to assume street meth and a potential for problems. But that is an assumption, is someone could have a prescription for methadrine for medical purposes. So with that in mind, it would be unethical and destructive to tell this person they need to kick the meth habit. If someone is a fighter, are they picking fights in bars or participating in organized sport? If they are angry, it's far better to learn and at least attempt to understand why than outright reject and criticize it.
And I see this problem everywhere, regardless of profession, religion, politics, or whatever else.. So frequently we'd rather assume than try to understand. It is easier, and often times we want to take action, but sometimes the reasonable course is to just let things flow as a river flows to its natural path and conclusions. Their life isn't our life, after all.
 

Samana Johann

Restricted by request
Going into this off-topic by possible correcting not so truth speech:

Only the enlightened can truly know where someone's path lies and how best to walk it.
Starting from the first stage, stream enter, good householder.

And even if someone, for the sake of argument, had gone to Siddhartha Gautama when he was living the life of a prince and told him to renounce the world, would he have listened?
Since the times the Buddha had started the turning of the Wheel of Dhamma, wanderer, householder, kings, beggars, with various intention before, left home under the tripple gems after hearing the Dhamma by him or his disciples.

It was only after his life experience of suffering that he started down the path that would result in him becoming the Buddha.
Actually it was conceit, if we investigate the teachings, that lead him to disgust of the homelife.

Milarepa followed a dark path in the early part of his life until his life experience caused him to turn around and speed to the goal.
There is less evidence that he ever found refuge under the Gems. Neither was he not well taught or addopted ideas of other sects.

I've learned that I have no way of knowing what's best for someone. I might offer advice if asked. And I've asked for advice from people who I believe are qualified to give it.
The Buddha thought not so hypocratical while giving advices... (if believing such, why posting) in regard of sick people and why even those not to heal get the Dhamma heared.

But I've also learned from personal experience, both ways, that giving advice when not asked for or being told something I don't want to hear is not productive.
It's not so that one likes to remember all. Conceit loves to block gratitude. Householder only needs to remember the many things addopted even still a stubborn child. Surely, only after seeing for oneself things leave the level of ritual and become naturally.
 

Samana Johann

Restricted by request
Many years ago I visited a Zen center to try to understand that path and to decide if it was for me. I found that they had discarded the traditional begging as not appropriate for the West and had substituted picking up litter instead.
A beggar is a beggar, homeless, a homeless. Zen seldom has even ordinary beggars, it's a householder sect, having given up the Buddhas disciples ways life hundreds of years ago, modified to fit for the worlds sake. And begging and litter collecting householder (still after things in the world) are surely most annoying, yet be called beggar as well.

That's just one illustration of how the sannyasi, an integral part of culture in India, does not fit in a Western context. The word "homeless" and especially "beggar" in a Western context is pejorative while in India it has traditionally been the mark of those with spiritual aspirations.
The is no different of different perceiving of different standsstands because of country or birth. Of course some places are more conductive to meet real wanderer, or even wanderer. And not at least to let someone perceive "oh, not someone of ours" a homeless might address an householder, speaking as perceived, householder.

That was the context of my remark.
That might have been the explaining of why there was annoying, off-putting, for householder. May good householder have overcome that stage. At least it hard to meet, perceive the first three heavenly messengers, not to speak of the fourth.

If good householder likes to do something on topic, such is surely not for a bad.
 

Samana Johann

Restricted by request
Too bad that isn't promoted in more religions and philosophies.
Who forced young householder to become in an re-ligion (about binding to some ways) forum? Who to read, to go into a topic? Maybe householder is to much used to easy seeming consuming, yet might know that even after the long trace through the marked at the end is the cashier, at the "end" a bill would follow, at the "end" debts pull toward good or bad, depending on what one has consumed. There is nothing free in this world, so good to consume that, give into that, headed to higher and beyond.

Speech is not free (without effects, debts). If not well spoken it binds heavy. One reason why the unattentive not easy is able to stop, indebted everywhere.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Who forced young householder to become in an re-ligion (about binding to some ways) forum?
It's been so long I don't remember. I was a neo-Pagan at the time though.
Maybe householder is to much used to easy seeming consuming, yet might know that even after the long trace through the marked at the end is the cashier, at the "end" a bill would follow, at the "end" debts pull toward good or bad, depending on what one has consumed.
Nah. I grew up poor. Still today, though I'm not poor, I don't like spending more than I have to.
There is nothing free in this world
The breath of air I just took was free.
And, even chit-chat just for the sake of chit-chat isn't inherently "not well spoken."
 

Samana Johann

Restricted by request
It's been so long I don't remember. I was a neo-Pagan at the time though.
This change according ones decisions. Good it learning to remember well to get more understanding of cause and effect, to make more and more good choices, young householder. Remembering former states, existances, long, long time ago, is a possible side-effect of awakening.

Nah. I grew up poor. Still today, though I'm not poor, I don't like spending more than I have to.
That's wise and a result of good choices, yet it's even possible to spend lesser as one gains to gain even more freedom. The Buddha gave a lot a good advices to trade upwardly. After material freedom there is the freedom from remorse, more sublime. Something that comes from purification, starting by speech:

AN 4.62: Anana Sutta — Debtless {A ii 69}[Ven. Thanissaro].
The Buddha tells the wealthy lay-follower Anathapindika about four kinds of happiness that a householder may enjoy. Some require wealth, but the best is free of charge.


The breath of air I just took was free.
And, even chit-chat just for the sake of chit-chat isn't inherently "not well spoken."
Useless talk is useless talk, that is why it is called useless talk. That not all talk, even if much, is inherently useless, that should be clear. Much, or less: the aim of it and quality makes the different.

If for example seeking unification, seeking after assosiation with more sublime, socializing is well put. Asking, talking to get clearancy, even much, is well put, if not seeking it under fools. and so on.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Useless talk is useless talk, that is why it is called useless talk. That not all talk, even if much, is inherently useless, that should be clear. Much, or less: the aim of it and quality makes the different.
It's talk just to acknowledge "I am here, you are here," so with that in mind "how's the weather?" We're social animals. It's what we do. It's not useless. Talk doesn't have to have a purpose, point, or goal. That tends to be how men communicate and talk. Women, however, are more apt to talking just to talk. That doesn't mean it's "useless," however.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
The use of colors, i.e. mindful "chatter", btw., is not a foolish training householder @Shadow Wolf . One can gain a lot of insight doing vipassana:
I'm pretty sure I've already stated I'm not interested in adopting your ways. They aren't for me. My path is one of embracing life, not denying it, shunning it, and insisting I can only appropriately feel certain emotions and have to talk this way but not that way.
 

Samana Johann

Restricted by request
It's talk just to acknowledge "I am here, you are here," so with that in mind "how's the weather?" We're social animals. It's what we do. It's not useless. Talk doesn't have to have a purpose, point, or goal. That tends to be how men communicate and talk. Women, however, are more apt to talking just to talk. That doesn't mean it's "useless," however.
Householder is right when saying "even the Arahats (perfect one) use to exchange courtesies and friendly greatings", and yes, it's not useless, like formal adressing, formal politness, yet if done for simply the sake of it self and not just as starter for refined, it's useless.
And yes, woman are by nature more addicted to "sex" (unification, socializing...). It's praiseworthy and seldom to recognize, since recognizing an addiction is the first step to go beyond ad gain independency.
 

Samana Johann

Restricted by request
I'm pretty sure I've already stated I'm not interested in adopting your ways. They aren't for me. My path is one of embracing life, not denying it, shunning it, and insisting I can only appropriately feel certain emotions and have to talk this way but not that way.
And my person repeats that young householder is actually related, althought wishing to deney it. No problem at all. It wouldn't change matters.
Knowing feeling when arising, observing them arising and decay,... that's smart and not at all said to make a favor. For simply checking whether a favor or known, a link was provided.

Desire for not-being, btw., is also an effect of desire for being. "Love" and hate is just a wheel.
As told, one not freed from sensual desires is still capable to kill parent, holly, whom ever is much owed. Nothing kills more than desire for "sex".

Just observe it well. The arising, decay...
 

Samana Johann

Restricted by request
I disagree.
Once corrupted one is of course able to even slander the Buddha and Noble ones. This trading approaches have nothing to do with wise, householder. (And it's not wise to relay on google as a teacher.., as it is with traders general.)

Yet it is surely good if one, from time to time, is able to "laught" a bit about ones previous foolishness to get ride of useless remorse once understood.

Laughing is always an expression of greed. Making even ones livelihood in bringing others in such stages, may easy lead one far downwardly.

..."I'm not crying, lord, because of what the Blessed One said to me, but simply because I have been deceived, cheated, & fooled for a long time by that ancient teaching lineage of actors who said: 'When an actor on the stage, in the midst of a festival, makes people laugh & gives them delight with his imitation of reality, then with the breakup of the body, after death, he is reborn in the company of the laughing devas.'...​
 
Last edited:

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
althought wishing to deney it.
Again - you are telling me what so many other religious people tell me. That without their ways and their god and dogma I'm miserable, suffering, depressed, have no meaning or purpose in my life, and have no capability or hope of a good life unless I give myself to their ways. But that's just not how it is. They need me to be like that so their beliefs "work," it is imperative I be like that so I don't disprove their dogma, but I'm not.
And yes, woman are by nature more addicted to "sex" (unification, socializing...). It's praiseworthy and seldom to recognize, since recognizing an addiction is the first step to go beyond ad gain independency.
Talking more isn't an addiction. It's a general trend in how men and women communicate. An addiction is when you have to have something, and it becomes consuming when you don't and has wants driven by compulsion.
Paul said roughly the same thing when he declared a woman is to keep quiet in church, hang her head in humility, and she has a question to shut up and ask her husband after services.

As told, one not freed from sensual desires is still capable to kill parent
If I was capable of killing my parents I would have killed my dad for stepping out on his marriage again, for rubbing it in my face and bragging about it, and for upsetting my mom. But he's still alive.
Nothing kills more than desire for "sex".
The desire for sex is what keeps life around and going. Without sex, life comes to a screeching halt.
Laughing is always an expression of greed.
Or it could be that something funny happened, someone told a joke without there being any chance of monetary gain, and some people just like making people laugh. And laughing is wonderful. It's great for our health and mood. And even Buddhist monks laugh and tell jokes. From what I've gathered, a good many of them would find it very odd, peculiar, tragic even if someone tried to deny laughing.
 
Top