Sweet Speech

Right Speech

सत्यं ब्रूयत्प्रियं ब्रूयन्न ब्रूयात्सत्यमप्रियम्

प्रियम् च नानृतम् ब्रूयादेश धर्मः सनातनः

satyaṁ brūyatpriyaṁ brūyanna brūyātsatyamapriyam

priyam ca nānṛtam brūyādeśa dharmaḥ sanātanaḥ

Shankar Acharya: Expert in rhetoric

Śankarācārya here has given us some advice about dharma: “Speak the truth that is sweet,” he says. “Speak the truth in a pleasing way. Don’t speak the truth which is not sweet. Never speak untruth, even if it might be pleasing. This is sanātana dharma.”

There is a paradox here. Everyone likes pleasing words, “Speak the truth that is sweet.” We all agree that honesty is best: “Avoid speaking untruth.” But what happens when the truth is not pleasing? Sometimes we must speak truths that are not pleasing. In the world of exploitation we are surrounded by lies. Worst of all, we are constantly lying to ourselves.

Once Buddha was asked, “What is the most amazing thing?” He replied, “The most amazing thing is that while everyone is mortal, no one believes that he is going to die.” We lie to ourselves about the most fundamental things in life. And yet the truth is often painful.

When he was living at Gaya with a thousand of his followers, Buddha pointed out that this entire world is on fire.

In his famous Fire Sermon, he said, “All is burning: the eyes and ears are on fire with visual and sound sensations. Your consciousness is burning; burning with the fire of lust, with the fire of hate, with the fire of delusion."

Your body is burning in the fire of birth, age and death, burning with sorrows, and lamentations, with pains, with griefs and despairs. Your senses are on fire: the nose is burning with fragrance and aromas, pleasant or painful; the tongue is burning with flavours and the stomach burns with digestion. Everything is burning, and it will burn to death. You are all burning to death in the fire of lust and desire.”

Buddha is known for gentleness, and yet his speech here is anything but gentle. These are harsh words. But if a man is asleep in a burning house we may use sharp words to awaken him. And in an important sense, as we live in self-denial and pretend that we will live forever, we are all like that man in the burning house; we refuse to wake up to our mortality.

Śrīla Prabhupāda questioned the value of Śaṅkara’s advice on social conventions in speaking the truth. Commenting on the above verse, satyaṁ brūyatpriyaṁ brūyanna brūyātsatyamapriyam, he often pointed out that it is necessary to speak plainly: "According to social conventions, if you want to speak truth, you must limit yourself to truths that are palatable and flattering. Don't speak unpalatable truths. But we are not meant to merely follow social conventions. We are preachers and servants of God." (A.C. Bhaktivedanta Svami Prabhupada, Bombay, January 3rd 1977)

Prabhupad spoke plainly, but with great personal charm and compassion

And yet, if the goal of “preaching” is to convince someone through argument that he needs help, we cannot merely shout at people. While preachers may feel urgency to spread their message, social conventions can be ignored only at great peril to the mission they hope to advance.
Truth told gently is persuasion. Fire and brimstone is usually effective only when preaching to the choir. Strident preaching defeats its own purpose when people turn a deaf ear. To scream “fire” in a crowded theater is an act of speech punishable by law even in a society where free speech is valued. To accost others and argue the superiority of one’s faith is offensive in any society.

Prabhupāda himself spoke with such charm and erudition that he was forgiven his frank and candid speech. Extremists who have adopted his style without his charm often find that their preaching falls on deaf ears. And yet many religious extremists feel that all they need to do is to scream louder. Perhaps if people would lower their voices they would be able to listen.

Śaṅkara traveled around India for years defeating the sādhus of the Buddhist school. When he gives us advice on rhetoric, we may take it as coming from one the most successful debate experts of rhetorical history. He tells us to avoid extreme speech; to be convincing without offending. In an age where one’s shoes and socks are scrutinized for explosive materials every time one travels on an airplane, one would do well to heed such timeless advice.

Many of my adolescent students refine their argument to one word: “No!” They seem to feel that by repeating this argument louder and louder they can win all debates through shouting. But as Dale Carnegie once said, “The man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.” Rhetorical argument, as conversation, is still an art.

The Great Conversation between King Pariksit  and Shukadev 

Those who would insist on constant and charmless argument to push their ideas run the risk of being identified as extremists. Religious extremists especially are being criminalized everywhere around the planet these days, so especially strident preachers might take this into consideration to moderate their style.

And yet, loud and aggressive fanatics continue advocate an agressive spirituality. They feel that the only remedy to counteract the belligerent spirit of the times is a still more aggressive spirituality. Where politicians have declared a war on drugs and a war on terror, these acolytes would declare a “war on māya.”

So should we speak truth boldly, whatever the consequences? Or should we sugar the pill, honey the medicine, and speak sweetly? Sometimes it is impossible to honey the truth. Truth is often painful and cutting. In India holy men are called “sādhus.” Some afficionados of yoga teach that “sādhu means one who cuts.” They follow the preaching style of Prabhupāda in “plain speaking.”

But the true meaning of sādhu to be found is speaking “cutting” words? Perhaps. A sādhu or holy man may heal as does a surgeon, by cutting removing the cancer of materialism, by severing the falsehoods and denial of illusion. But I think the meaning of this word sādhu is deeper. A sādhu is one who reveres the truth (sat). Truth-tellers defy social conventions by acting as gadflies and telling uncomfortable truths, as did Socrates in the Greece of Alcibiades. But Socrates paid with his life for his truth-telling.

But sādhus are not merely tellers of painful truths. Sādhus live by a code. Honesty may be a part of that code, but so are gentleness and compassion, nonviolence, charity, and kindness.



If people are suffering physically and mentally, why should a holy man cause them more physical and mental suffering in the name of giving them “spiritual” relief? One may argue that spiritual relief is everything, that the absolute consideration trumps the relative consideration. In that case anything can be justified as “spiritual” and sādhus are not bound by any social conventions.

There are many pseudo-sadhus who defy all social conventions in the name of their precious spiritual “truth.” Oddly, many of them end by leading lives whose practice is contrary to their principles.

Cannabis-smoking "Sadhus"

If we look through the history of spiritual teachers, the best of them had a particular gift for speaking not only clearly, but sweetly. From Buddha to Christ to Shankara to Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, we find that they are not only expert in speaking the truth, but in speaking sweetly.

What exactly is a sādhu? The term sadhu (Sanskrit: साधु) appears iin the ancient Vedas, where it means "straight, right, leading straight to goal", according to the Sanskrit dictionary of Monier Monier-Williams. The traditional meaning of sādhu or “holy man” in India is one who is "well disposed, kind, willing, effective or efficient, peaceful, secure, good, virtuous, honorable, righteous, noble." References to sādhu in Mahābhārata describe a "saint, sage, seer, holy man, virtuous, chaste, honest or right."

Nārada and Vyāsa

The word sādhu derives from the root sādh, which means "reach one's goal", "make straight"The word Sādhu in a more literally may mean one who practises ″sadhana,″ one trained in the path of spiritual discipline. This discipline includes humility and tolerance as a matter of course; not agression and violence.

Conversations in Kyiv with Asutosh Krishna

So while a holy man may sometimes speak plainly and cut to the truth, the true sādhu rarely takes to the sword. While in ancient times, the brahmin son of Jamadagni took up arms to punish the fierce Kartavirya Arjuna, I find no examples of violence by sādhus against others in any of the histories of Bengali Vaishnavism that flow from the Chaitanya Charitamrita.



In conclusion, I think it is important to choose our words carefully, to do our best to avoid offending others by our speech, but to try to speak correctly. Sweet discourse is not always possible, but will be especially esteemed and may even lead to persuasion when it is to the benefit of all.