by Evelyn Ruut
The fifth precept of the Eightfold Path, Right Speech (samma vaca), is among the most practical teachings the Buddha left us — and among the most difficult to practice. Evelyn Ruut posted this essay to talk.religion.buddhism in November 2005, during a period of heightened conflict in the group. What she wrote was not a scolding but a synthesis: the Rotary Club's "four-way test," the Abhaya Sutta's sixfold framework, Ayya Khema's condensation of it into four lines, and the Dhammapada's ancient verses on hate and love.
The essay's insight is not the standard reminder to "speak kindly." It is the recognition that right speech is interdependent: there is no speaking without a listener, and the way we are heard is part of our responsibility. Evelyn holds both sides of this without collapsing them — responsibility for our own reactions does not excuse the speech that provoked them. "Sometimes being abusive is simply being abusive."
Evelyn Ruut was a practitioner of Tibetan Buddhism in the Karma Kagyu lineage, a student at Karma Triyana Dharmachakra, and one of the most respected regular voices on talk.religion.buddhism and alt.religion.buddhism.tibetan through the 2000s. This post captures her characteristic mode: personal, grounded in scripture, honest about where the practice fails, and warm toward the community she was addressing.
Dear Friends,
I have been thinking a lot lately on the issue of "right speech." It seems appropriate now on the list to perhaps share some thoughts on this issue with you all.
I don't know if I have mentioned it before, but I am a member of the Rotary Club for almost 10 years now. We have what we call the "four way test of everything we say think and do." It is quite similar to the Buddhist sutra quote I provide below. It is also probably the single best and easiest way I have ever seen to evaluate our speech and actions and thoughts and ethics in perfect keeping with Buddhist values.
The four-way test of everything we say, think and do:
- Is it the truth?
- Is it fair to all concerned?
- Will it build good will and better friendships?
- Will it be beneficial to all concerned?
In studying this, you can quickly see that there are all sorts of variables. The trick is that what we say think and do must come the closest possible to "passing" all four questions affirmatively.
This compares very well with Majjhima Nikaya 58 (Abhaya Sutta):
(1) In the case of words that the Tathagata 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.
These have also been presented more succinctly in four lines by Ayya Khema:
If it is not truthful and not helpful, don't say it.
If it is truthful and not helpful, don't say it.
If it is not truthful and helpful, don't say it.
If it is both truthful and helpful, wait for the right time.
Right Hearing
Why do we find it so hard to follow right speech? Partly it is because speech is a two-way exchange — part of right speech must include some "right hearing" by the other party. Right speech and right hearing seem to exist interdependently.
Thus, if we want to practice right speech, we can only do this if the way others hear it is part of our considerations as well. From our own perspective, we often tend to see ourselves and our own experiences and aims as the center of the universe. Remembering that factor of "right hearing" may be a big help towards clarifying right speech.
Remember too, that offense may be given, but it is our prerogative whether we take offense at what they say. How we take it is totally ours.
A friend of mine said once:
"My lama said something that fits in with people who say incorrect things or tell lies about you. He says if someone says something false about you, but you chew on it and mull it over and get angry about it, it is like someone shot an arrow at you but it missed. So you ran over, picked it up and stabbed yourself with it!"
On the other hand, it has been very clear to me, having participated in newsgroups for some time, that abusing that principle above, we too often place the onus on the abused and not the abuser. This is NOT the same thing as taking responsibility for our own reaction to aggression.
If a person feels abused and hurt, we say things like "If you feel abused, this means that you are not mature enough and have a lot of growing up to do." This is trivialising others' pain. We have no way to measure its severity to them. If we do not generate sensitivity to others' pain, then even from a selfish perspective, we don't learn about unhappy states that may well befall us too sometime.
We are not Buddhas, we are not awake. And yet, the Buddha was quite clear about Right Speech — abusive and harsh speech is not part of it.
What the Dhammapada Says
Another quote from the Dhammapada, which covers this from both sides:
"Look how he abused me and beat me,
How he threw me down and robbed me."
Live with such thoughts and you live in hate.
"Look how he abused me and beat me,
How he threw me down and robbed me.
Abandon such thoughts, and live in love."
"In this world
Hate never yet dispelled hate.
Only love dispels hate.
This is the law,
Ancient and inexhaustible.
You too shall pass away.
Knowing this, how can you quarrel?"
So we are responsible for ourselves and our own feelings, but that was never meant to be a license to abuse others, or to later turn and claim that our "real" motive was to be their "teacher" as an excuse for our behavior. Sometimes being abusive is simply being abusive.
For most of us, this is our recreation. We post for fun, but when it ceases to be fun we feel invaded and soiled — and yes, we have a right to those feelings, but the Buddha was quite clear that we can abandon those feelings of being offended. It takes a real effort to continue to generate anger and hurt over some attitude or some person, whereas it is a lot easier to just let it go, exactly the way your last breath was let go a moment ago.
Most of us spent a lot for our computers and internet service, and put a lot of effort into them as our window to the world and more particularly, our window to other people who love the things we love. We need to nurture realistic expectations. Being realistic means that nobody is going to agree with us all the time. It is not a crime to disagree or to see the world through different eyes. Let them live for goodness sake!
One thing more: we need to make an effort to understand the reciprocal nature of all human relationships. Love, friendship, loyalty — all of these have meaning in our minds and in our society. Understand that we are all posting here by consent, and that means hearing different points of view. It goes with the territory.
A couple of goodies from the Seven Points of Mind Training:
Be indifferent towards malicious jokes.
Do not lie in ambush.
Never strike at the heart.
Do not load an ox with the load of a dzo.
Do not be treacherous.
Do not retaliate.
Colophon
Written by Evelyn Ruut and posted to talk.religion.buddhism and alt.religion.buddhism.tibetan, November 7, 2005. Evelyn was a practitioner of more than two decades in the Karma Kagyu tradition, a student at Karma Triyana Dharmachakra in Woodstock, New York. This essay was posted during a period of sustained conflict on the group, when she chose synthesis over reproach. The scriptural references are: Majjhima Nikaya 58 (Abhaya Sutta), the Dhammapada (verses 1–5 translated by Buddharakkhita), and a four-line condensation of the Abhaya Sutta criteria by Ayya Khema. The Seven Points of Mind Training slogans follow the Atiśa lineage as transmitted through Tibetan Vajrayana.
Preserved from the Usenet archive for the Good Work Library by the New Tianmu Anglican Church, 2026. Original Message-ID: [email protected].
🌲