Exploring the Path - Pāli Course

Upālisutta refers to a situation where the Buddha teaches the Thera Upāli. It is taken from the ‘Section of Ten’ (Dasakanipātapāḷi) from the Aṅguttaranikāyo. These ‘ten’ highlight ten wholesome constituents of proper ethical conduct of someone having taken the okre robes,¹ including those refering to right action² and right speech.

Thera Upāli had expressed his desire to retire into the woods for solitude. The Buddha replied that forest life was not easy, and could only be mastered by someone who had attained sufficient tranquility through full mastery over the mind.³ Then he gave his admonition about all the steps that needed to be performed to reach the stage of someone who could withdraw in the forests successfully.

It should be someone who has conquered all the hindrances, transcended all different stages of concentration, gone beyond perception and feeling, and has already realized, by his insight, that all deep planted impurities have been destroyed:

… samatikkamma⁴ saññāvedayitanirodhaṃ upasampajja viharati; paññāya cassa disvā āsavā parikkhīṇā⁵ honti.

Only when a Bhikkhu is comfortably able to dwell in the vastness of the wide forest in solitude should one do so; otherwise, not:

Imampi kho, upāli, mama sāvakā attani dhammaṃ sampassamānā araññavanapatthāni pantāni senāsanāni paṭisevanti, no ca kho tāva anuppattasadatthā⁶ viharanti.

At the end of this admonition the Buddha pleads with Upāli to stay with the order:

Iṅgha tvaṃ, upāli, saṅghe viharāhi. Saṅghete viharato phāsu bhavissatī.

Come here, Upāli, stay with the Saṅgha! By living with the Saṅgha you will develop at ease.

One reason for this was that Upāli might not only develop his meditation at ease, but also, while staying amongst men, he might gain perfect insight into the world of the Saṅgha and understand the rules established for their interaction and for the benefit of their development and progress.⁷ Upāli later became the Vinayadharānaṃ, the one most proficient in the Vinaya.⁸ He was the one who presided over the first council, the Paṭhamadhammasaṅgīti, that was initiated under Mahā Kassapa in regards to the Bhikkhu vinaya.⁹

Maintaining all factors of sammāvācā seems to be not so easy, and one may find various good reasons to slip. Leaving behind all components of micchāvācā is a daily struggle, thusdetailed commentarial explanations are hoped to aid in proper comprehension, awareness, and establishment in this difficult factor of the Noble Eightfold Path.

The commentarial exposition¹⁰ of musāvādo highlights that a mental disposition and intention to speak a falsehood, along with the volition to deceive others, must precede such a verbal act. Such volition, as a precondition to disturb the mental calm of others or to waste their time, precedes wrong speech that is accompanied by the effort to put it into effect:

Musāti visaṃvādanapurekkhārassa¹¹ atthabhañjako¹² vacīpayogo kāyapayogo vā. Visaṃvādanādhippāyena¹³ panassa paravisaṃvādanakakāyavacīpayogasamuṭṭhāpikā ¹⁴ cetanā musāvādo.

‘False’ is the effort by speech or body to destroy welfare by one determined on deceiving. ‘False speech’ is the intention to put forth effort by speech or body to deceive another by one determined on deceiving.

It is qualified through this volition:

Lakkhaṇato pana atathaṃ vatthuṃ tathato paraṃ viññāpetukāmassa¹⁵ tathāviññattisamuṭṭhāpikā¹⁶ cetanā musāvādo.

The characteristic of ‘false speech’ is the volition of one desiring to communicate to another something untrue as being true, it is this volition that causes such an act of communication.

The commentary makes a differentiation of the effect that occurs by making a comparison with the respective intention preceding the performance of false speech.

It defines it as less blameworthy when the welfare destroyed is slight and more blameworthy when the welfare destroyed is great. In the same way, it is defined as less blameworthy when the intention is dominated by the desire to maintain one’s own possessions and resistance to part with them. But when another's wellbeing is destroyed as result of speaking false witness, it is more blameworthy.

The same is said about the kammic results for the speaker of such a falsehood.

Likewise if one's volition leads to the effort to deceive another person through body or speech, and that person understands the deceit, the perpetrator will be "imprisoned" by kammic consequences arising from the very moment of that intention to deceive:

Tāya ce kiriyāya paro tamatthaṃ jānāti, ayaṃ kiriyāsamuṭṭhāpikacetanākkhaṇeyeva¹⁷ musāvādakammunā bajjhati.¹⁸

Thus there are four components that have to be fulfilled so that musāvāda takes its full effect and produces kammic result for the speaker.

Tassa cattāro sambhārā honti – atathaṃ vatthu, visaṃvādanacittaṃ, tajjo vāyāmo, parassa tadatthavijānananti. Eko payogo sāhatthikova.

These are: an untrue situation, the mental intention to deceive, the respective effort to do so, and the communication of the falseness to others. The single means are one's own person only.

May all remain aware of any wholesome volition behind every sentence one intends to utter—so right speech (sammāvācā) can be maintained successfully!