<p>Nyom, </p>

<p>Giving into something, associate (by body, signs (speech, gestures) and mind), nurishes the object, inwardlt outwardly, causing craving and arising of all kinds of unskilful minds, speeches and bodily actions, yet there are objects leading to and end of "holding on", (upadana), entertainment.</p>

<p>Thought, spoken, played around, done. Young dogs play to learn to harm. One playing killing games, speaks obout such, inclines to such, nourishes him to become an all around killer. Sensual pleasure alike...</p>

<p>If entertaining your self that is low, you nourish you inclination to it. Animal like entertaining (livelihood, gain of certain pleasure to walk on), leads to such existence... (for example <a href="http://sangham.net/index.php/topic,8467.0.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Association with pets - Associated rebith?</a>, or <a href="http://sangham.net/index.php/topic,8500.0.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Association with the Devas - associated Rebirth</a> ) entertaining oneself with the right topics, one increases inclination toward freedom from desire after entertaining: <a href="http://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/lib/study/conversation_en.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Noble Conversation: A Study Guide</a>.</p>

<p>Btw.: most beloved idle topic of "livingroom" Aharahats: whether things exist or not. :-)</p>

<p><em>[Note: this Dhamma gift is not thought for any commercial use, exchange, stacks, entertainmaint for worldly purpose and might be deleted is the sphere for such is not given here]</em></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-02-02T00:36:13.727Z
2019-02-02T00:43:59.327Z
2019-02-02T00:43:59.327Z
Samana Johann
<p><strong>So how should I interpret the Buddha's teachings on idle speech for lay followers?</strong> </p>

<p>Opening pleasantries are not idle talk; they frame a discussion by providing social context:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>He went by carriage as far as the terrain allowed, then descended and approached the Buddha on foot, <strong>and exchanged greetings with him.</strong> <a href="http://suttacentral.net/dn16/en/sujato" rel="nofollow noreferrer">--DN16</a></p>
</blockquote>

<p>And neither is talking about <a href="https://suttacentral.net/sn56.16/en/sujato" rel="nofollow noreferrer">suffering, its origin, its escape and the path to escape</a>.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>“Mendicants, do you remember the <strong>four noble truths</strong> that I taught?"</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Have you noticed that although people may idly brag about their wealth, good family and good fortune, what they often really wish to talk about is their...suffering? Indeed, there seems to be a high correlation between idle talk and suffering.</p>

<p>Therefore, from a practical point of view, I've found that we can all talk about our own suffering and its escape. Such talk is not idle and often leads to friendships and trust. </p>

<p>In terms of movies and shows as idle talk, even these are opportunities to discuss suffering. Movies and shows are all about suffering. </p>

<p>So when someone approaches with idle talk, gently listen and ask them about their suffering. Then listen and speak with an open heart. Become a quiet person known as a good listener and a good friend.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Good friends, companions, and associates are the whole of the spiritual life. --<a href="https://suttacentral.net/sn3.18/en/sujato" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SN3.18</a></p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-01-24T15:26:46.080Z
2019-02-02T00:22:06.193Z
2019-02-02T00:22:06.193Z
OyaMist
<p>According to the Suttas, "idle speech" is one of the ten unwholesome actions which generate bad karma. I understand why the other nine unwholesome actions would generate bad karma, but I have a lot of questions about the Buddha's claim that idle speech does the same. </p>

<p>First, let's take a look at some relevant suttas to determine what the Buddha meant by "idle speech". An oft-quoted passage, found in <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.02.0.than.html" rel="noreferrer">DN 2</a>, suggests that practitioners should only talk about dharma-related topics and nothing else:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Whereas some brahmans and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, are addicted to talking about lowly topics such as these — talking about kings, robbers, ministers of state; armies, alarms, and battles; food and drink; clothing, furniture, garlands, and scents; relatives; vehicles; villages, towns, cities, the countryside; women and heroes; the gossip of the street and the well; tales of the dead; tales of diversity [philosophical discussions of the past and future], the creation of the world and of the sea, and talk of whether things exist or not — he abstains from talking about lowly topics such as these. This, too, is part of his virtue.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>This passage, however, describes the behavior expected from buddhist <em>monastics</em>, not ordinary lay buddhists. So where do the suttas talk about idle speech for laypeople? One example is <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.041.than.html" rel="noreferrer">MN 41</a>, in which the Buddha explains to a group of laypeople which actions lead to bad rebirths. About idle speech, the Buddha tells his audience the following:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>He engages in idle chatter. He speaks out of season, speaks what isn't factual, what isn't in accordance with the goal, the Dhamma, &amp; the Vinaya, words that are not worth treasuring.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The words "what isn't in accordance with the goal, the Dhamma, &amp; the Vinaya" seem to imply that just like monastics, lay followers should restrict their speech to topics related to the practice of buddhism. I have two issues with this idea.</p>

<p>First, it's impractical. Laypeople lead social lives, and in <a href="https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.31.0.nara.html" rel="noreferrer">DN 31</a> the Buddha himself talks about the importance of good friendships. It would be practically impossible to establish and reinforce social bonds without engaging in any conversations about worldly topics.</p>

<p>Second, the reasons buddhist teachers usually give for avoiding idle speech are <em>practical</em> rather than <em>moral</em>. Teachers generally tell their followers that by engaging in idle speech, they are wasting their time and distracting themselves from the study and practice of the dharma. While these are undoubtedly good reasons to cut down on idle speech, it doesn't explain why idle speech creates bad karma. If distracting yourself from studying and practicing the dharma creates bad karma, why aren't other distracting activities included in the Buddha's list of unwholesome actions? Engaging in idle speech isn't inherently more distracting than other leisure activities, such as consuming entertainment (i'm aware that in DN 31, the Buddha discouraged his lay followers from attending public spectacles. However, the reason given for this rule is that frequenting public spectacles has negative consequences <em>in this life</em>, not that it generates bad karma).</p>

<p>So how should I interpret the Buddha's teachings on idle speech for lay followers? I'd like to hear what prominent teachers have to say about this topic, but everyone's perspective will be appreciated as long as it's well substantiated.</p>

<p>Thanks in advance for your answers!</p>

<karma><ethics><lay-buddhism>
Why is "idle speech" one of the ten unwholesome actions?
# Why is "idle speech" one of the ten unwholesome actions?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-01-24)

According to the Suttas, "idle speech" is one of the ten unwholesome actions which generate bad karma. I understand why the other nine unwholesome actions would generate bad karma, but I have a lot of questions about the Buddha's claim that idle speech does the same.

First, let's take a look at some relevant suttas to determine what the Buddha meant by "idle speech". An oft-quoted passage, found in [DN 2](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.02.0.than.html), suggests that practitioners should only talk about dharma-related topics and nothing else:

> Whereas some brahmans and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, are addicted to talking about lowly topics such as these — talking about kings, robbers, ministers of state; armies, alarms, and battles; food and drink; clothing, furniture, garlands, and scents; relatives; vehicles; villages, towns, cities, the countryside; women and heroes; the gossip of the street and the well; tales of the dead; tales of diversity [philosophical discussions of the past and future], the creation of the world and of the sea, and talk of whether things exist or not — he abstains from talking about lowly topics such as these. This, too, is part of his virtue.

This passage, however, describes the behavior expected from buddhist *monastics*, not ordinary lay buddhists. So where do the suttas talk about idle speech for laypeople? One example is [MN 41](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.041.than.html), in which the Buddha explains to a group of laypeople which actions lead to bad rebirths. About idle speech, the Buddha tells his audience the following:

> He engages in idle chatter. He speaks out of season, speaks what isn't factual, what isn't in accordance with the goal, the Dhamma, & the Vinaya, words that are not worth treasuring.

The words "what isn't in accordance with the goal, the Dhamma, & the Vinaya" seem to imply that just like monastics, lay followers should restrict their speech to topics related to the practice of buddhism. I have two issues with this idea.

First, it's impractical. Laypeople lead social lives, and in [DN 31](https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.31.0.nara.html) the Buddha himself talks about the importance of good friendships. It would be practically impossible to establish and reinforce social bonds without engaging in any conversations about worldly topics.

Second, the reasons buddhist teachers usually give for avoiding idle speech are *practical* rather than *moral*. Teachers generally tell their followers that by engaging in idle speech, they are wasting their time and distracting themselves from the study and practice of the dharma. While these are undoubtedly good reasons to cut down on idle speech, it doesn't explain why idle speech creates bad karma. If distracting yourself from studying and practicing the dharma creates bad karma, why aren't other distracting activities included in the Buddha's list of unwholesome actions? Engaging in idle speech isn't inherently more distracting than other leisure activities, such as consuming entertainment (i'm aware that in DN 31, the Buddha discouraged his lay followers from attending public spectacles. However, the reason given for this rule is that frequenting public spectacles has negative consequences *in this life*, not that it generates bad karma).

So how should I interpret the Buddha's teachings on idle speech for lay followers? I'd like to hear what prominent teachers have to say about this topic, but everyone's perspective will be appreciated as long as it's well substantiated.

Thanks in advance for your answers!

**Tags:** karma, ethics, lay-buddhism


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2019-01-24. Score: 5

**So how should I interpret the Buddha's teachings on idle speech for lay followers?**

Opening pleasantries are not idle talk; they frame a discussion by providing social context:

> He went by carriage as far as the terrain allowed, then descended and approached the Buddha on foot, **and exchanged greetings with him.** [--DN16](http://suttacentral.net/dn16/en/sujato)

And neither is talking about [suffering, its origin, its escape and the path to escape](https://suttacentral.net/sn56.16/en/sujato).

> “Mendicants, do you remember the **four noble truths** that I taught?"

Have you noticed that although people may idly brag about their wealth, good family and good fortune, what they often really wish to talk about is their...suffering? Indeed, there seems to be a high correlation between idle talk and suffering.

Therefore, from a practical point of view, I've found that we can all talk about our own suffering and its escape. Such talk is not idle and often leads to friendships and trust.

In terms of movies and shows as idle talk, even these are opportunities to discuss suffering. Movies and shows are all about suffering.

So when someone approaches with idle talk, gently listen and ask them about their suffering. Then listen and speak with an open heart. Become a quiet person known as a good listener and a good friend.

> Good friends, companions, and associates are the whole of the spiritual life. --[SN3.18](https://suttacentral.net/sn3.18/en/sujato)


---

### Answer by username_1 on 2019-02-02. Score: 0

Nyom,

Giving into something, associate (by body, signs (speech, gestures) and mind), nurishes the object, inwardlt outwardly, causing craving and arising of all kinds of unskilful minds, speeches and bodily actions, yet there are objects leading to and end of "holding on", (upadana), entertainment.

Thought, spoken, played around, done. Young dogs play to learn to harm. One playing killing games, speaks obout such, inclines to such, nourishes him to become an all around killer. Sensual pleasure alike...

If entertaining your self that is low, you nourish you inclination to it. Animal like entertaining (livelihood, gain of certain pleasure to walk on), leads to such existence... (for example [Association with pets - Associated rebith?](http://sangham.net/index.php/topic,8467.0.html), or [Association with the Devas - associated Rebirth](http://sangham.net/index.php/topic,8500.0.html) ) entertaining oneself with the right topics, one increases inclination toward freedom from desire after entertaining: [Noble Conversation: A Study Guide](http://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/lib/study/conversation_en.html).

Btw.: most beloved idle topic of "livingroom" Aharahats: whether things exist or not. :-)

*[Note: this Dhamma gift is not thought for any commercial use, exchange, stacks, entertainmaint for worldly purpose and might be deleted is the sphere for such is not given here]*


---

