As a keen watcher of golf, I am relishing four days glued to my TV to watch sportsmen at the top of their game exhibit their prowess (and see how they fare against the legendary Scottish deep rough, which is sure to yield plenty of shankers), as well as beautiful scenery of Turnberry with its coastal views, especially of Ailsa Craig.

I checked out the official Open Golf website and was bowled over by the video content available portraying The Open Championship; and the tournament hasn’t even started yet!

They’ve got online videos of press conferences with the golfers, the organisers, helpers such as the Met Office, the course and its environment. Now that’s what I call not just a service to golf fans, but to the web.

Of, course, I’m aware of the phrase “too much information”, but if the information’s available, it’s open to people to provide it, then for individuals to find what is useful to them whilst filtering through the junk. That’s the beauty of the internet, and also the human mind.

Unbeknownst to most web surfers, the world’s most powerful search engine, Google, has the ability to search audio content embedded within online videos. When you search for current events topics on Google, Youtube almost always appears on the first page of search results. Ever wondered why? Well, now you know why: Google not only indexes Youtube’s (and most online video providers’) video’s titles, they search through their audio content to identify keywords and phrases and match them to their users search terms. The most popular and relevant search words and search terms appear higher in the search rankings. So, whoever is responsible for the Open Golf’s website has set the site up well for search engines to recognise and rank highly key golfing terms, either within text content or video content.

I like Tiger Woods and wood (sorry!) love to see him smash some records, but I also love it when a rank outsider bags the most prestigious of golf tournaments in spite of the bookie’s odds. Golf’s an awesome pursuit and like a true neutral I’d always say that golf’s the winner. But…

…Go Padraig Harrington! 3 in a row. It’s never done before!

Having been to the Scottish Open at Loch Lomond a few tmes I know how exciting (and sometimes relaxing) attending live golf tournamant can be. However, I’ll be glued to my TV or watch the highlights online. Even though it’s only 60 miles down the road from me, I can’t face the traffic or the parking.

“See it all, till tomorrow”

Pork and Veg Leftovers Stirfry

This is a delicious, filling, incredibly quick stir fry I made today from fridge and freezer leftovers that’ll satisfy for lunch, dinner, coming in from the pub, or (if you’re as twisted as me) for breakfast (next-day curries are WAY better though).

Total time spent, including raking about in the fridge and freezer was 10 mins and if I was to guess the cost it’d be £2 at an absolute maximum.

What I Had As Leftovers

1 pork loin chop
A handful of beansprouts
1/4 onion
2 spring onions
1 red birds eye chili
3 slices sandwich ham
1 takeaway-sized portion boiled long grain rice (I make mine in batches using my awesome microwave rice steamer from Lakeland. No fuss, 10 min perfect rice every time).

How To Do It

Prep Work (2 mins)

Cut (forget knives, kitchen scissors are better) pork loin chop (or any leftover fresh meat) into 1 inch strips. HINT: cut the strips perpendicular to the grain of the muscle as the meat’ll turn out more tender.
Wash beansprouts
Roughly chop onion, spring onions and ham
Finely chop chili (I kept the seeds in to add more heat)

How To Cook It (4 mins)

Heat a little olive or ground nut oil (I added a dash to a bit of fat and juices from some sausages I’d just cooked a minute earlier) in a large frying/sauté pan or wok.

Once the oil is smoking, add all prepped ingredients except the rice.

Stir fry for 2 mins.

Add rice.

Stir fry for two mins.

Add a dash of dark soy sauce (optional), serve and enjoy.

“See it all, till tomorrow”

A colleague of mine once uttered these words. I don’t believe he intended them to become legendary, but within my circle of friends they most certainly are and, I think, rightly so.

What is a word anyway?

Words are abstract constructs. Their substance has no relevance to their meaning. By that I mean that a sound, letter, phoneme, morpheme or word has no intrinsic meaning attached to it save that which the human mind attributes to it. “Walk” could mean the same as “run”, but why doesn’t it? It’s because we have created a different meaning for each. As we grow up from childhood, we learn that different sounds have different meanings, and so we accept these sound-meaning relationships without question. When we learn a language, we are conditioned to associate certain sounds with certain meanings.

Some words are spelled and pronounced the same but can have many different meanings, for example, the word “bank”. How we differentiate contextual meanings with multi-meaning words is an on-going hot topic amongst linguists and lexicographers, but that’s for another post…

Although words are abstract constructs, the association between the sound of a letter or mixture of letters (words), has become entrenched in our understanding of words and how they are used in conjunction with each other to form meaningful sentences, which in turn help us to convey ideas and concepts, although the extent of how much we can convey meaning is extremely limited. This process forms the basis of all our written and oral communication.

Certain words, regardless of language, are similar in different languages.

How can this be? All languages are categorised into families and hence, have hereditary traits. For millennia, people have migrated from country to country, continent to continent. During this, cultures mingled and languages merged. There is no such thing as a pure race. We are all of each other.

Because of this migration, neighbouring cultures share similar language traits. The scale of this is huge. For example, some members of Siberian tribes crossed over the ancient land bridge between far Eastern Russia and Alaska and migrated to South America, and now some South American cultures share some language traits with those still spoken in Russia.

However, this epic fact doesn’t negate the fact that words are dodgy things. What does dodgy mean? Well, it can mean “deceiving”. We may not mean to deceive when we use words, but it is often an un-meant and un-desired side-effect, even when we think we have chosen our words with care. Like it or not, this is inevitable, so it means we have to take special care in choosing the words we use.

As I see it, every human being likes and deserves to be treated with decency. Isn’t this a basic human right? The words we use go a long way, and their impact is vastly underestimated by many people. We shouldn’t think just of how we think we would like to be spoken to, but, more importantly, how we think someone else would like to be spoken to. To achieve this demands supreme concentration and dedication. This one of the reasons why Gautama Buddha rated Right Speech as one of the most important things a human being must pay special attention to and try to master. Try it for just one day and you’ll soon see how difficult it is. You will feel a sense of achievement even in trying. But, persevere: you and those around you will benefit enormously. For my partial take on Right Speech see Part 2 of my article The Unfolding Script of Speech and Language.

One problem with words is that once we crystallise our thoughts into words, the subtleties of meaning become lost or distorted very easily. When we speak or write, how often are we happy that what we have communicated is what we were really thinking? Once we communicate via words, we are, to a degree, at the mercy of the listener or reader’s understanding and perception.

From my point of view, this goes right to the heart of the problem of language: language, written or spoken, plays second fiddle to thought. Thoughts are far superior in accuracy, potency and meaning compared to written or spoken language.

So how is all this relevant in our daily lives?

For most of us, not a day passes when we don’t use either the written word or spoken word. Imagine you had only 100 words (it may seem a lot, but it really isn’t) to use, either written or spoken, each day.

You’d soon learn to choose them pretty carefully.

“See it all, till tomorrow”

An English professor wrote the words:

‘A woman without her man is nothing’ on the chalkboard and asked his students to punctuate it correctly*.

All of the males in the class wrote:

‘A woman, without her man, is nothing.’

All the females in the class wrote:

‘A woman: without her, man is nothing.’

I’ve been planning to write a post on the importance of spelling and punctuation for a while, and this has spurred me on to get it written and posted, so stay tuned!

But until then…

As I read and re-read this anecdote, I got thinking about how we punctuate not just our writing, but also our speech. How would you speak both of the above lines to convey the meaning of their written punctuation? Try speaking both out loud to someone and see if they can grasp the different meanings you’re trying to get across.

OK! Technical stuff coming up!

The key lies in emphasising specific morphemes**,  where to put pauses and how long to pause. It’s got to be perfect, like comic timing, for it to work.

When we speak a polysyllabic word, we can emphasise whatever morpheme or syllable we choose to change the importance of what part of the word we are speaking. It can even change the meaning of an entire phrase, sentence, or diatribe.

The simplistic beauty of this is that the meaning of the word as a whole remains intact, but that meaning is altered subtly but powerfully by what morpheme we choose to emphasise.

This is a very strong force in speech. Whether we write or speak, to quote Obi Wan Kenobi in Star Wars when about to enter a dangerous scenario, “we must be cautious.”

*The use of the word “correctly” in this anecdote is interesting. There is no correct punctuation unless we know the context of the sentence. Without context, it’s entirely open to interpretation.

**A morpheme is a part of a word, often a syllable, that has meaning and also forms a part of a word. I couldn’t be bothered thinking up my own example, so here’s an explanation I’ve adapted from Wikipedia:

The word “unbreakable” has three morphemes: “un”, “break”, and “able”. Each one has a different meaning, but when put together in this order forms a new word.

“See it all, till tomorrow”

I was trying to get across the idea that personal connections and communications in real life are a very important but perhaps dwindling phenomenon, and it tends to get left by the wayside if internet communication takes over.  Locked away in our houses, so many of us habitually “plug in” to the internet and close the doors to the outside world and our fellow man. Oft-times, internet communication can be a fairly inhuman, unemotional affair.

However, that is not always the case.

I hate the internet. But, I also love it. Why?

I hate it because it can be so impersonal; meanings get distorted, it’s a melée of irrational, irrelevant information (a bit like our everyday thought processes actually), and it’s addictive.

I love it because it’s a wealth of information available in seconds, it avails us details not covered in the mainstream, and it helps brings people together.

So, what has this got to do with the fellow that said “hello” to me?

I have friends that live many thousands of miles away from me. But when I get an e-mail from them I rejoice. An e-mail, or instant message can be just as powerful emotionally as a face-to-face encounter. They can uplift us, inspire us, or just simply make us feel connected.

Of course, I’m not alone in this as most of us who have internet connections are used to it now (believe it or not, there are those in the world who don’t!). But, I still get a tingle sometimes when I get an e-mail from a friend in California or New Zealand (I’m in Scotland.)

So, I’m not dissing internet communication or advocating ditching it in favour of going out for a walk and saying “hi” to everyone you meet.

Anything goes!

The key is striking a balance.

“See it all, till tomorrow”

The written equivalent is the simple question mark? However, there is a world of difference between upspeak and a question mark.

Upspeak forms part of “Valley Speak” or “Valspeak“, which is the colloqiual language or sociolect originally spoken by residents (mainly teenagers and 20-somethings) of California’s San Fernando Valley. It originated in the upper-middle class, yet now it is a worldwide speech inflection.

Language constantly evolves, and so it should. We use it to express both our deep and surface thoughts. California rides the crest of a wave in that it is one of the most cosmopolitan regions of the world and hence, is prone to many changes.

What interests me is how a spoken sentence can be changed from a statement into what seems like a question. An upspoken sentence is not really a question (at least not consciously), nor is there any questioning intent (or is there?). There is a discrepancy between word order and meaning and how the words are delivered vocally.

Here’s an example.

Let’s take the phrase “so I said I would do it” (”so” is so a Valspeak word). This written sentence is not a question. But in Valspeak it can be. Just raise the pitch of your voice at the end. This is actually a common verbal tool. This technique has been appropriated by proponents of Valspeak and integrated into popular culture. So why do it?

If you want to make a verbal statement, why not just make the statement? Why turn it into what sounds like a question? Well, I think the upspeak part of Valspeak may be an exaggeration of the ancient art of rhetoric, which is commonly used by modern politicians and speakers. It has been used since ancient Grecian times as a form of oratory persuasion; a subtle way of making a statement and asking a question at the same time, as well as being a tacit call to action.

Spoken rhetoric and upspeak illustrates the versatility of language in that its spoken form, it can negate the use of the 5Ws (and 1H (although I would add in another W: which)) who, what, why, where, when, and how, that are the classic precursors to a question and used for gathering information. The 5ws were made most famous by Rudyard Kipling in his poem “The Elephant’s Child.”

Nobody deliberately decides that they are going to create a way of speaking. It is a natural emanation of human needs and expression. That’s why I think that upspeak is ok, even though I don’t use it or like hearing it (I think it’s cheesy).

However, I think the key to understanding the difference between upseak and political rhetoric lies in intent. Rhetoric is designed to ask questions and provoke a response, whereas, to me, upspeak just makes the speaker sound like they are either unsure of what they are saying or beause they are, consciously or unconsciously, following a vocal fashion.

Am I opposed to upspeak? Absolutely not. It’s a part of modern speech, and I embrace change.

I’ll sign off by saying simply “Upspeak is ok?”

“See it all, till tomorrow”

Zen Buddhism doesn’t have any formal sacred texts. It has no equivalent of the Bible or Qur’an. So how do Zen Buddhists learn? Well, Zen is about experience.

When ideas are written down, they immediately lose their power. That’s not to say that the written word isn’t powerful; it is. But the initial idea, the spoken word and hearing it is more powerful.

Traditionally, Zen monks travelled the countryside in search of masters. This was a main part of a Zen student’s path. Like a tumbleweed, once a source of nutrition (or wisdom in the case of the Zen monk) was found, he would put down roots and stay a while.

In modern society, this rustic, nomadic type of searching for knowledge is rarely possible. But, thanks to intuitive, resourceful people we now have the internet. I think the internet is a natural evolution for us homo sapiens, in that it is a device to compensate for means of learning, experience and communication we used to have in ages past, but are unable to use presently. We constantly adapt and find ways to push ourselves on in areas that need a bit of work. On the internet, we find websites that nourish us intellectually, add to our bookmarks, and peruse them as part of our daily routine.

The internet’s great! But there’s more to life than plugging ourselves into the Matrix. By all means, use it. You’ll learn a lot and it’s an exciting feeling being part of a global community.

But it is habit forming, and real life social networks, especially the family, can break down if surfing the web becomes a barrier to communication.

Yesterday evening my wife and I took our kids and the dog for a walk at a local beauty spot. Fatigue set in and I said “you walk ahead, I’ll wait here and catch you on your way back.” So, I sat by the river’s shoreline and enjoyed the peaceful ebbing sunlight reflecting off the flat calm salt water and listened to the newborn lambs bleating vociferously in the field behind me. It was a pleasant mix of rhythmic, lapping water and changing light, with commentary from little fluffy sheeplings.

I saw a couple walking towards me on the path. I continued to enjoy the tranquility. As they passed me, the fellow said “hello” so I returned the pleasantry, and sensed he was enjoying his walk, free for a while from mundane anxieties. I felt a warm feeling in me. That chap was relaxed and open enough to extend a greeting to a stranger, and I felt privileged that he should.

I’ve had this simple, spontaneous thing happen to me many times, but every time it happens, it reinforces to me the beauty of friendly connectivity and communication between people.

It’s makes me feel alive, free and happy.

This is what Zen is all about.

“See it all, till tomorrow”

I’d just casted out and was reeling in when a seagull swooped down. I knew what was about to happen and shouted out “Oh NOOOOO!” I felt a tug on the line and thought the worst. It thought my lure was bona fide food. But, as the gull lifted into the air, minus my treble-hooked spinner attached to it, so did my heart.

I didn’t relish the thought of having to wrestle a “live kite” to the ground with a fishing rod, then have to put the poor bird out of its misery in front of my young son.

So, now when we see gulls or gannets circling overhead, or shags, guillemots or eider ducks diving, we just take a breather from fishing and watch the birds show us how it’s really done.

“See it all, till tomorrow”

His reply: “a writer writes.”

That, to me, is pure genius. Genius most often lies in taking a complex idea and making it simple. It’s all about attitude, in my opinion. If you want to write, start writing. It doesn’t have to be earth-shattering stuff. Above all, be yourself and just put something down. If you’re not happy with it, change it. If you think your story, article or blog is going nowhere, just take a break and revisit it when you’re in the mood. Don’t force it. Do it when you want to, you’ll enjoy it more, and the result will be more pleasing to you and your readers.

“See it all, till tomorrow”

Thoughts can inspire not just generations but cultures, individually and collectively, to achieve the most noble aspirations. Some of humanity’s greatest figures have soared to realms of experience deep within the heart of nature and have perceived with their own minds the truth of what binds the universe together. Some, who can choose words that convey those mighty spiritual concepts with sufficient accuracy and potency, share this light on their return. These able ones have left us the world’s great spiritual, religious, and philosophical texts and teachings. Great poets and writers flesh out the world’s library of inspiring works. As we enter new realms of experience in these interesting and unpredictable days, the unrecognized mass of human beings are also, by our speech and writing, adding to the ever-changing richness of the “language legacy.”

What effect does the human voice have on us and our surroundings? Can it affect physical health, for example? Speech is the physical emanation of thoughts modified by emotions, hence it would be incorrect to say that speech itself affects the body, as ultimately thought and emotion are the motivating cause. However, once we vocalize thoughts, their corresponding vibrations resonate throughout the body, affecting every atom while being attracted to specific areas. The human voice and sound in general have been used through the ages in healing practices and ritual.

Shamans use sound and rhythm to enter altered states and vocal intonations to create conditions favorable to restoring balance. Silent as well as vocal prayer, especially singing, can have powerful effects on the mind and body. Vocal affirmation of inner beliefs and aspirations not only strengthens resolve but can vitalize the body. Some techniques of “vibrational medicine” involve using the human voice to disperse blockages within the physical or astral body. Modern medicine acknowledges to a degree the power and benefits of sound as a healing aid, although at present not the human voice. For example, physiotherapists are using ultrasound in the treatment of damaged muscle tissue.

Despite penetrating insights into the mechanics of language by modern linguistics, the ethics of speech seem to belong more in the realm of spirituality than of linguistic philosophy. Our daily speech follows distinct patterns, using our own habitual palette of words. Our motive, often unspoken, is more powerful than our words in its effect, and therefore more care should be taken in controlling motive than controlling the words we choose to speak. For example, in “vibrational medicine” do we primarily want to heal or to develop personal powers?

The ability to speak, then, carries with it a certain responsibility. Sometimes we don’t put our brains into gear before we speak and what comes out is either a load of nonsense or not a true reflection of what we were thinking. Our voices are physical emanations from inner planes. In The Language Instinct, Steven Pinker explains one theory of this concept — mentalese:

“We have all had the experience of uttering or writing a sentence, then stopping and realizing that it wasn’t exactly what we meant to say. To have that feeling, there has to be a “what we meant to say” that is different from what we said. Sometimes it is not easy to find any words that properly convey a thought. When we hear or read, we usually remember the gist, not the exact words, so there has to be such a thing as a gist that is not the same as a bunch of words”. — pp. 57-8

Concluding, he says:

“People do not think in English or Chinese or Apache; they think in a language of thought [mentalese]. The language of thought probably looks a bit like all these languages . . . to get these languages of thought to subserve reasoning properly, they would have to look much more like each other than either one does to its spoken counterpart, and it is likely that they are the same: a universal mentalese”. — pp. 81-2

Thoughts are so complex, and the languages we use so limited in their ability to convey what we are really thinking or our motives, that only a very small amount of our inner life ever reaches the physical plane. This means that what we do say carries enormous weight in characterizing ourselves. How then can we best use our voices to fully articulate what we are thinking? Should we bother to care what we say or how we say it? H. P. Blavatsky’s opinion was that we should because:

“…the spoken word has a potency unknown to, unsuspected and disbelieved in, by the modern “sages.” Because Sound and Rhythm are closely related to the four Elements of the Ancients; and because such or another vibration in the air is sure to awaken corresponding powers, union with which produces good or bad results, as the case may be”.  — The Secret Doctrine 1:307

Uttering certain words in certain ways, producing certain sounds and resonances within the vocal chords and cranium, have long been known to produce occult effects. Used correctly these can have beneficial effects, but used unwisely this can be very dangerous and it is with good reason that many “magic” words, mantrams, and methods of vocalizing are closely guarded. Even everyday, conversational speech causes occult effects which can influence those in the vicinity. This is simply karma in operation and as such is neutral. What determines the polarity of these causes — harmful or harmless, beneficial or detrimental — is the motive and emotion behind the words.

Once a word is spoken, its effects on our environment and within the mind of another are difficult to change. If we keep our thoughts to ourselves, however, we can manipulate them as far as our imaginations can soar, and perhaps if the circumstances are right we can speak with truth and beauty and avoid regretting what we said. On the nature of words, William Quan Judge wrote:

“Words are things. With me and in fact. Upon the lower plane of social intercourse they are things, but soulless and dead because that convention in which they have their birth has made abortions of them. But when we step away from that conventionality they become alive in proportion to the reality of the thought — and its purity — that is behind them. . . . Let us use with care those living messengers called words”. — Letters That Have Helped Me 1:14

On a practical level he further advises:

“Begin by trying to conquer the habit, almost universal, of pushing yourself forward. This arises from personality. Do not monopolise the conversation. Keep in the background. If someone begins to tell you about himself and his doings, do not take first chance to tell him about yourself, but listen to him and talk solely to bring him out. And when he has finished suppress in yourself the desire to tell about yourself, your opinions and experiences. Do not ask a question unless you intend to listen to the answer and inquire into its value. Try to recollect that you are a very small affair in the world, and that the people around do not value you at all and grieve not when you are absent. Your only true greatness lies in your inner true self and it is not desirous of obtaining the applause of others. If you will follow these directions for one week you will find they will take considerable effort, and you will begin to discover a part of the meaning of the saying, “Man, know thyself.” — Ibid. 2:63

Because speech is a physical ability with its roots in the spiritual part of us, it would make sense that spiritual laws are attached to it to which we must adhere if we are to fulfil our destiny and live consciously as spiritual beings. The way to do this has been outlined by many of the world’s teachers, one method being the Buddha’s teaching of right speech, a part of the Noble Eightfold Path. Right speech is part of the dharma or the dutiful way a human being should live, daily and through the course of evolution.

In Buddha’s Noble Eightfold Path, the first step is to have the right view, an attitude or understanding that empowers one to act wisely in all spheres of life and in harmony with the world. Right speech naturally follows: the intention to refrain from false speech, from slanderous or divisive speech, from crude, harsh, or frivolous speech. If our minds are idle, we say the first thing that comes into our heads, and it usually communicates nothing of lasting value. Right speech encourages us to reflect on our speech, before, during, and after, and to examine why we want to speak at any given moment. Speech uttered rightly should be carefully weighed for meaning, said at the right moment, and be logical, moderate, and full of sense.

The Tipitaka contains some beautiful examples of the Buddha’s use of right speech together with its theory. The Abhaya Sutta gives a short but comprehensive list of how a Buddha uses speech:

1. In the case of words that the Tathagata [Buddha] knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial (or: not connected with the goal), unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.

2. In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.

3. In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them.

4. In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.

5. In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.

6. In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, and endearing & agreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them. Why is that? Because the Tathagata has sympathy for living beings.

This seems like a lot to remember. However, the lines “he has a sense of the proper time for saying them” and “Because the Tathagata has sympathy for living beings” imply that Gautama didn’t have to remember a formula to use on demand. One of the differences between a higher being, such as a Buddha, and ourselves is that while a buddha always knows and speaks the truth, we are often placed in the position of knowing the truth and choosing not to speak it, such as admitting guilt. Honesty, conscience, and intuition are powerful allies on the road to achieving right speech, and courage is needed if mastery is the goal. Effective practice of right speech relies not on education or clever wordplay, but on saying what we feel we should say, always trying to feel sympathy for what might cause suffering to others or what may go against the truth.

Slander, ridicule, malicious sarcasm, and gossip, besides damaging the speaker, can cause emotional scars to the recipient which last a lifetime. Sometimes there is a fine line between the listener or subject perceiving such speech as harmless fun (laughing with) and harm itself (laughing at). If there is the slightest doubt that someone would be hurt by the words, keep quiet. Think. Put yourself in the frame of mind of the other person and choose new words if need be. The reflexive nature of much of our everyday speech means we often say what we don’t truly mean. Constant sensitivity to those around us is very difficult to maintain, but worth trying.

Despite the fact that no sane person would want to be the cause of another’s lifelong emotional scarring, there are other more far-reaching reasons not to create wounding speech. Judge lays these out in an article entitled “How Should We Treat Others?”:

“The fact that the person whom you condemn, or oppose, or judge seems now in this life to deserve it for his acts in this life, does not alter the other fact that his nature will react against you when the time comes. The reaction is a law not subject to nor altered by any sentiment on your part. He may have, truly, offended you and even hurt you, and done that which in the eye of man is blameworthy, but all this does not have anything to do with the dynamic fact that if you arouse his enmity by your condemnation or judgement there will be a reaction on you, and consequently on the whole of society in any century when the reaction takes place.

. . .

“. . . As affecting you there may be various effects. If you have condemned, for instance, we may mention some: (a) the increased tendency in yourself to indulge in condemnation, which will remain and increase from life to life; (b) this will at last in you change into violence and all that anger and condemnation may naturally lead to; (c) an opposition to you is set up in the other person, which will remain forever until one day both suffer for it, and this may be in a tendency in the other person in any subsequent life to do you harm . . . , and often also unconsciously. Thus it may all widen out and affect the whole body of society. Hence no matter how justifiable it may seem to you to condemn or denounce or punish another, you set up cause for sorrow in the whole race that must work out some day.

. . .

“The opposite conduct, that is, entire charity, constant forgiveness, wipes out the oppositionfrom others, expends the old enmity and at the same time makes no new similar causes. Any other sort of thought or conduct is sure to increase the sum of hate in the world, to make cause for sorrow, to continually keep up the crime and misery in the world. Each man can for himself decide which of the two ways is the right one to adopt”. — Echoes of the Orient 1:480-2

“When the time comes” — we so often do not recognize it for what it is. Yet armed with the knowledge that karma provides, we can at least have the opportunity in many situations to wipe the slate clean.

Buddha’s reason for renouncing his just reward of entering nirvana was to help humanity ease its suffering. Indeed, the gift of all the Great Ones and their helpers is that of empowerment so that the veil of ignorance may be lifted by our own actions, that the light of truth might shine within us all. When we think of the wider implications of our words, we can see why the Buddha is not alone in including speech in his teachings. The Hindu Vedas mention different grades of speech, indicating levels of spiritual teaching meant only for those who can understand the language in which they are communicated. Socrates asks in Plato’s Phaedrus, “Do you know how you can speak or act about rhetoric in a manner which will be acceptable to God?” and later expounds the noble virtues of the “serious pursuit of the dialectician” which can lead to the “utmost extent of human happiness.” In the Christian Gospels when Jesus sent his disciples out to spread his teachings he said they need only have faith in him and they would find the right words to use that could reach people’s hearts. Faith in the Christos principle within us, the part which intuitively understands, might illumine with wisdom the brain-mind which would ensure spontaneous, truthful, spiritually inspiring speech. Native American tradition teaches that each person should regulate his or her own life. “Give your word and live up to your word,” is one medicine man’s advice. Perhaps in trying to adopt the Buddha’s frame of mind of “sympathy for living beings,” our words would simply flow from our more altruistic motives.

Since writing can be spoken and conveys thoughts and intentions, it would follow that the ethics that apply to speech should also apply to writing. But the quality most prized by the true seeker — wisdom — is acquired through living, not by reading or writing. Nature, in offering the chance to learn her secrets, does not distinguish between the literate and illiterate, nor between those who can speak and the mute. Many spiritual teachers leave no written record. The power behind their spoken words, actions, and influence are recorded by their followers and over time the once living message becomes almost lifeless. For this reason the Great Ones continue their regular appearance at appropriate times in history and embrace the oral teaching tradition, though of course there are always exceptions.

Although it is a virtue we can all adopt, right speech can be relative: what is right for one person to say may not be right for another. It isn’t about being so concerned with what we say that we become rigid at the expense of spontaneity. Ultimately, what is most important in speaking and writing is getting the meaning or intention across. In listening and reading what is most important is trying to understand what is truly meant. We each rely heavily on our intuition to decipher the melee of information and stimuli we encounter every day in order to discern the true from the false. The intuition appeals to us to try to understand the language of spirit which speaks through all of nature. This is a reflection of our innate and constant unspoken desire to realize truth, an inheritance from our spiritual ancestors, the creative gods or forces of the universe. And we do this without recognizing that we do so. We learn when we don’t think we are learning, and yet surely there is a responsibility to meet this unseen, inner impulse halfway by making ourselves as receptive to it as we can. The practicing of ethics and the daily willing of the mind to do the bidding of one’s conscience and intuition is a difficult but tried and trusted way of sharpening and strengthening our awareness.

The magic of these spiritual teachings of right speech can come alive only when put into practice. It is something we can start doing immediately and which is free and relatively easy to begin with. It is heartening to know that despite the fact that there are thousands of languages, there is a deep-seated universal quality present within enabling each to be used in the “right” way. If we try to practice right speech all the time, every word that passes our lips will take on greater significance. Despite it being a rule of conduct, right speech also carries with it total freedom of action. Indeed, it gives us greater scope for creativity because it encourages us to say things we may not usually say, or not say anything at all, and to think more about the meaning and effects of the words we use, so that hopefully what we say and write will lose the power to wound and instead add much needed weight to the compassionate forces at work relieving suffering in the world.

“See it all, till tomorrow”