False speech, particularly lies and slander, can undo even a great measure of good deeds and destroy communities, which is why it is regarded as a grave sin in Buddhist teaching.
The text tells the story of Prince Lāhuna, who after the ordination of his father Prince Sīsatthacāsa himself entered the monastic order. The Buddha taught him with the similes of earth, water, fire, and wind to keep the mind equanimous and unshakable, regardless of pleasant or unpleasant experiences. The text emphasizes that these teachings are easy to understand but difficult to put into practice. Subsequently, the story of Queen Mārikā is told, who despite many good deeds fell into hell because of a final lying thought before her death, which underscores the gravity of lying in Buddhist teaching. The text then lists the four types of false speech and illustrates the destructive power of slander through the story of the monastic community in Klossampi. There, a small dispute over leftover water in a bowl led through slander and retelling to the splitting of the community. The central message is that false speech, particularly lies and slander, can cause the mind to lose its way even when much good has been done, and can destroy communities.
Analysed with qwen3.8-27b, version v3.
The same standards apply to every tradition, see Values.
Full text in English
For when we were still young, at the time when Prince Siddhattha went forth to become a monk, he came to visit his elder brother in Sakka. There was one son, named Lahun, who was sent away. It is said that, according to the narrative, Prince Siddhattha did not know of the existence of this son until after he had gone forth. When he truly realized it, he cut off the ties of attachment and departed. It was after several years, six or seven years, that he had severed those ties. One day, he was resting with the monks in the forest. The Lord, the Buddha, along with Queen Vibha and Prince Lahun, who at that time was living in a household of seven, was present. At that time, the monks, including the Buddha, still had the right to the throne, succeeding King Suddhodana. However, it was known that the Buddha had no intention of renouncing his monastic status to claim the royal inheritance. Queen Vibha, therefore, encouraged Prince Lahun to come and request the royal inheritance from the Buddha. The Buddha then spoke to Prince Lahun, informing him that this was because the Buddha possessed the wealth of the Dhamma, which is superior to royal wealth. After finishing, he encouraged Prince Lahun to go forth to become a monk. It is unclear whether this was encouragement or a gentle nudge. In the end, Prince Lahun went forth and became a monk. King Suddhodana, who had only one grandson, was deeply grieved that he had gone forth. He therefore pleaded with the Buddha, saying that in the future, if anyone wished to ordain a child, the parents and grandparents should be consulted first. The Buddha agreed. This became the origin of the rule regarding the ordination of children in the Buddha’s dispensation: the parents and grandparents must give their consent first. Or, if the person seeking ordination had previously been married, the spouse must also be consulted. One should not ordain based on a momentary impulse. When the Buddha spoke of this, he explained that after going forth and becoming a monk, one should continue to practice until attaining the fruit of arahantship, receiving the title of Arahant, which is superior to royal wealth. An interesting aspect is the teaching of the Buddha, which was imparted to Prince Lahun, because it was not profound or difficult to understand, but rather easy to comprehend, though difficult to put into practice. The Buddha used examples as a medium for teaching. For instance, regarding steadfastness, he taught Prince Lahun, who had already gone forth, to make the mind steady like earth, water, fire, and wind. He instructed Prince Lahun to make the mind steady like earth. Earth does not become agitated, disturbed, or shaken by anything, whether it is pure or impure. This means that one should make the mind steady like earth, water, fire, and wind. No matter what impact comes, whether it is good or bad, pleasant or unpleasant, one should keep the mind steady and normal. Then he spoke of water, saying, "Make the mind steady like water." Water does not discriminate; whether it is clean or unclean, it accepts all without distinction. This is an analogy for making the mind calm and cool, regardless of what impacts it, remaining peaceful and steady, observing the objects that impact the mind, including those that are not pleasing. He then spoke of fire, saying, "Make the mind steady like fire." Fire does not discriminate; whatever is burned, whether it is pure or impure, fire performs its function steadily, from beginning to end. This can be seen as an analogy, teaching that there is a mind that is ready to accept and digest all experiences. And then wind: "Make the mind steady like wind." Wind does not discriminate as it passes through things, whether they are foul or fragrant; wind does not discriminate. This means to let go, to be equanimous, no matter what impact comes. Prince Lahun listened and understood, because the Buddha’s words were clear and precise, using analogies to illustrate the point of making the mind steady, both in sitting meditation and in daily life, without being overwhelmed by power or passion, and letting go with equanimity. The essence is having a steady mind, not wavering, not fluctuating, not being affected by what is encountered. When Prince Lahun was young, as a monk, the Buddha taught him in a simple way first, but in a manner that clearly demonstrated the power of the teaching. The story is that when Lahun was born, he was under the protection of communion with the Buddha. People would come to visit, both monks and laypeople. Many would come to the monks in Lahun’s vicinity. The monks in Lahun’s area liked to play pranks, giving wrong directions, telling people to go left or right. The people who came to visit the monks would follow the wrong path. The monks in Lahun’s area were happy and amused, joking with each other. Did the monks in Lahun’s area come? There was an indication that the Buddha would send a message to the monks in Lahun’s area. We had a little water left in the pot. We asked the monks, and we saw the water in the pot. The remaining water in the pot was very little. Then he said, "The mind of one who likes to lie, who speaks falsely knowing it to be false, is like a fish in a small amount of water. When the water in the pot is heated, it does not remain in the pot, because it evaporates from the mind, leaving only a tiny amount, just like the little water remaining in the pot. After being heated, it is gone, leaving nothing. If you heat the pot, the water will evaporate, and there will be no water left. When the pot is empty, no water remains. The goodness of a person, whether it is maintained by keeping the precepts..."
However, if one speaks lies, the good deeds that have been accumulated will not remain. As you understand, this speech does not teach much, but it merely uses water as a tool to teach and show the harm of lying. Lying is considered a violation of the precepts. In the Buddhist religion, it is considered important, whether it is in the fourth rank, but it can also cause the mind to become deluded. When deep delusion arises, it can cause the mind to fall into hell. For example, Queen Mallika had a husband, King Pasenadi of Kosala, who was very devoted. Queen Mallika was a good person, a practitioner, and she was able to please the Buddha. King Pasenadi of Kosala stopped doing many things that were violations of the precepts, such as killing animals for meat, like a butcher. Queen Mallika persuaded King Pasenadi of Kosala to stop killing animals for meat. However, Queen Mallika, in her old age, died suddenly. At the time of her death, although she had much merit, the thing she thought of last was the lie she had told to King Pasenadi of Kosala. King Pasenadi of Kosala wanted to see her, but due to the delusion caused by the lie, she fell into hell. The good deeds she had done were great, but they could not help her attain happiness; she remained in hell for seven days. After seven days, the merit of the good deeds she had truly done sent her to be reborn in heaven. It is said that this is a grave sin that the Buddha did not overlook. It is part of the unwholesome speech that we, as Buddhists, should avoid. But unwholesome speech is not only about lying; there are three or four other types. One of them is slander. This is also very important. We often do not pay much attention to this, because when we slander, we slander people who are bad in our eyes. However, slandering with a mind that is accompanied by harmful intent is also a problem. It can even cause a schism. In this Buddhist context, as we have heard the story of the monks in Kosambi who quarreled. They quarreled with each other. In the city of Kosambi, they separated, but they separated into two groups. What was it? It was because of a small matter, namely water in a bowl. But in reality, it did not become a big issue if the monks had not engaged in slander and mutual defamation. The story is that the monks in Kosambi had two teachers. One teacher was very strict, a teacher who taught strictly. One day, a monk went to the bathroom and defecated. When he finished, in the old days, they used water. It was said that a little water was left in the bowl. When he came out of the bathroom, the monk Vinayadharin, who was a senior monk with hundreds of disciples, came out. Or perhaps he had just finished defecating and came out. The novice monk said, "You left some water in this bowl, didn't you?" The monk Vinayadharin, who was a senior monk, did not consider it a fault at first. When the novice monk intended to point out the fault, but the monk Vinayadharin did not acknowledge the fault regarding the water, the monk Vinayadharin came out of the bathroom and told his disciples, "This is a lie." But this matter was not known to be a fault. The disciples heard it and kept it to themselves, but then they told others. They slandered the monk Vinayadharin, saying that he was a liar. This matter was not known to be a fault. The friends heard the slander and told others, and so it spread. It seemed like sharing information, but it was actually slander. Then, one person went and whispered to the disciples of the Dharma teacher. The Dharma teacher spoke in a mocking tone. Those who heard it then told others, saying that the monk Vinayadharin had said that our bowl was not a fault because it was not intentional. But now, going back to tell the monk Vinayadharin, it is a fault. They said, "Don't interfere, we will handle it ourselves." They insulted each other, they defamed each other. It was just a small matter, the water left in the bowl in the bathroom, because they did not pay attention. This led to the destruction of the Sangha. But love returned to the non-attachment. This is a teaching that we have heard often. It originates from the fact that they slandered each other. In the end, the villagers left, perhaps to the forest or to other villages, because of the monks. They left the forest, some stayed in the city, some stayed in the village, so they all did not support the monks. These two groups of monks, because no villagers supported them, were distressed. They realized their mistake and came to apologize to the villagers. It would have become a big issue. All of this had its origin in a small point, namely the water left in the bowl. In truth, it was not a matter if the monks had not been attached, had not slandered.
You, too, have never clicked to change; things are different now. This is another form of fleeing. On the other side, when we flee from the Qianen directly, we do not know. Frang over, they speak two things, but they do not speak of slander either. However, most people do not take it very seriously. They give importance only to the matter of the mouth, to lying, but regarding slander, they do not see its fault. This matter is still considered that the Buddha and the Dharma must be on two sides. One side is good for both; it must be two sides. It is not a matter of mere competition or rivalry. However, what is the occupation in correctness, the center in one’s own kind of correctness, if one proves in correctness, then in the side of alung, it is not correct, because in the side of collapsed, one must use words to manage fitsok. There is a leaning of the Dharma, which is a form of speaking, and it is said that even if the teacher comes to teach, to warn, to guide, they do not listen. They invite the teacher to go away, to keep a distance. It is said that people do not listen to the teacher. In reality, it is not anyone else; they are all hiding in their bellies, in their own tiu. They are the rudsit, those who are used, the servants who do things. One person does it, does it for whom? It is said that both are good monks. One must be essoils, must be pushed to the correct self. Push hello hello you. This is also like the data in the club, there is a lead as a surrounding, a tos. It comes in to obscure the mind and consciousness. This goes to the matter of us, the doers, or the morning. And then one must keep a distance, because this matter happens often, not just in the time of the Buddha, but even in one day like today, there are still such matters. Use other methods. For example, if the mind is good, it reaches the value of using violent methods, not acting, doing in the water of the mind, but in the end, it becomes a tool of greed, a tool of harm and of hatred. This club, these few, return to the Buddha together.