Sincerity and Honesty has no place in this world!

According to the sutta , being sincere , honest and truthful is considered something wholesome . However , to be sincere in this world mean to get into trouble far more than being remains silent .Therefore , the wise approach is to remain distant at most of the time or at all times .
I wonder how would the Buddha and arahants in the ebt has to say about this ?!

They say that honesty must be tempered by a sense of timing.


What can be observed in the SC is , there is a constant feeling of animosity !

SC forum is fine and fair. If you see a topic you don’t like, ignore it and move on. No point in informing others that they are discussing the wrong topic or that they are bad people. Respect for others should not be conditioned by agreeing with them.


This fairness always according to someone therefore it is unfair ! In this world , every where is unfair ! If not , then you don’t have to talk about equality in genders in this forum !

Why is this sort of Vinaya fundamentalism being touted as “respect”? The Buddha himself said that Vinaya issues were trifling, so this looks to me like making a misogynist mountain out of a molehill.


You must pick the right time to express the truth, but also other factors come into play, IMO.

unpleasant truth 1) check you motivations for revealing it- are they pure?
2) is the other person in a receptive state (not tired, not intoxicated) to receive it?
3) is there evidence that the other person is capable of using feedback, or will it have a negative reaction?

pleasant truth 1) check your motivation for telling it-is it pure?
2) How will saying it to one person, affect others around them?
3) is it beneficial?

So it seems choosing the right time to say it, to the right person, who is in the right frame of mind to hear it is useful. Other factors include watching the reaction of the person who you are telling it to- are they developing a negative reaction to it; is it just frivolous talk, is it divisive talk, is it abusive etc must be followed as well. It takes a lot of reflection and mindfulness, the latter, while talking or typing, as the case may be.

with metta


No monastic here has shown a lack of regard for the Vinaya. Quite the opposite, due to their efforts to keep it viable and helpful.

Your own harsh speech: is that a new type of respect I don’t know about?

One more thing about telling the truth: be careful when assuming you have it.


Censorship regarding issues of feminism and other PC politics topics is a problem on SC that I have complained many times about. Many have even left the forum because of this, even long term members. The good thing about SC is that there is no censorship of views regarding buddhism, which is quite unique for a buddhist forum, being the only one like that that ever existed. This is because most here are either sutta followers or novices who follow Sujato (who is a sutta follower) and, being a sutta follower, there is no need to censor views and criticism since you happen to be the one in the right and are not afraid of any sutta being brought up. Being a sutta follower is also different than being a Goenkaji, a Nanavarian, etc. because there is no cult leader that you’ll fall off your chair when you see him being criticized.

No buddhist forum is perfect. Certainly the PC issues here on SC are very annoying at times, they have been for me too. But that fact that criticism of views regarding buddhism is not censored is a big plus for this forum.

So there is honesty on SC, at least when it comes to views.


This is hypocrisy in action. Look who’s playing that passive-aggressive game now!

Isn’t it also a lack of respect for the Buddha to speak favorably of military men and the military career, since people engaged in such ways of life are practicing wrong livelihood and violating the first precept?

1 Like

Many have left?

The Buddha has earned his right to criticize anyone as He sees fit. What have you done to your country to earn the right to criticize men and women in uniforms?

1 Like

And some others, including me taking a big break and posting only ocasionally.


I have spent a lifetime training my intellect.

But in fact, I didn’t criticize anyone engaged in military pursuits. I just pointed out the Buddha did. And so if we are going to be criticizing people for disrespecting the Buddha because they some of the rules that have been handed down, we should make sure we apply those criticisms evenly.


So when you said “many” you didn’t actually mean “many”. Perhaps you need to correct your post.

I think it’s worth taking into consideration the Buddha’s six criteria for determining Right Speech:

(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.

MN 58, trans. Thanissaro

Thus, the Buddha makes it very clear that every condition of compassion must be in place before one utters a statement, even if that statement is the truth.


Well, I’m glad that at least you have clarified that you did not criticize men and women in uniforms. All is good then.

Dear friends,

I’ve close this topic because it very clearly goes completely against the community guidelines. Because some users seem still don’t seem to understand what the Watercooler is for, despite several reminders, I will repost the relevant guideline yet again:

The Watercooler Category

If posting to the Watercooler category please take particular care to make sure your post belongs there. As noted above, this forum is about Early Buddhist Texts. We do, nevertheless, have a Watercooler category for more informal, relaxed, light-hearted exchange. We still encourage that posts to this category are related to the Dhamma, but this is not a fixed rule and an amount of leeway is allowed for other topics. However, there is no leeway with regards to the guideline that all posts to the Watercooler must be of a friendly, light-hearted and harmony-promoting nature. The Watercooler is a place to support each other and make connections, not to prove a point or for heated debate. Threads that stray from this category’s purpose will be moved, closed or deleted.

Unfortunately, there seems to be some amount of confusions with regards to the management of this forum in some quarters and I’d like to take this opportunity to clear up a couple of points:

Above (in a post that was eventually hidden) it was claimed that:

SC admins already removed 2 of [a user’s] posts

This, is in fact untrue, the user’s posts were automatically hidden because they received three or more flags from Trust level 3 (or above users) - that it was to say it was the community who rejected the posts in question as inappropriate.

This is not a feature of SC this is a feature of the Discourses platform which is ‘generic’ forum software. As you can read via the given link Discourses was designed with civilized discussion in mind and its features (such as trusted members of a community being able to hide posts) aim to support that end with full recognition of the fact (disappointingly manifest here) some are less able to be civilized than others.

This brings us on to the issue of censorship that has been raised. It would seem as though some hold the idea that this is a space in which anyone is free to post anything irrespective of how ill-mannered, unbeneficial or downright odious a post might be. This is a misconception. Discuss & Discover is a managed forum that is governed by this set of guidelines that the whole community was invited to contribute to.

In its opening section it states:

We are delighted to have you participate in this forum, but if you choose to do so please note that we will understand your participation as a commitment to adhere to the simple principles given in these guidelines.

For those not interested in participating in a supportive, friendly community forum (and minding their posts inline with this aim), I’d suggest finding an alternative more suitable arena to share your ideas.