The practice of truthfulness

1. DEFINITION

Being truthful means not telling lies. Before understanding why we must be truthful, we should look into lying.

Lying is in the first place a matter of the precepts. When we take the five lay precepts, we are told not to lie. Later, when we take the ten novice precepts, we are again taught not to lie. When we take the Bhikkhu (monk's) precepts, the precept on lying is divided into two: a grave precept and a minor precept.

The grave precept concerns the lie of claiming to have attained the Path when in truth one has not. Although the liar knows this very well, they do it deliberately. That is an extremely grave precept, and one who breaks it bears an extremely evil offence and, at death, will fall into the evil realms. It is also called the Parajika precept.

The minor precept concerns lying at a lighter level, where the offence is not so heavy. But from the viewpoint of Ethics, a mind that likes to lie is an unwholesome mind that makes practice hard for us and cannot enter concentration. So, judged by the Vinaya, a minor precept is counted by wrongdoing and merit and is a prohibition, but in terms of Ethics it too is a serious injury.

Among the four grave precepts of a Bhikkhu, though the others are heavy, none is as heavy as the precept against lying by claiming to have attained the Path. For when we have not attained the Path, our understanding is still shallow and our grasp of truth still poor. If someone, trusting our declaration, follows us to learn, there will surely be many subtle truths that we do not understand, or misunderstand, or understand incompletely. Then we explain wrongly, guide wrongly and lead people into danger. The consequences are truly immeasurable.

That is not to mention those who, out of ambition and a thirst for illusory fame and gain, want to be revered by everyone. Such a person knows clearly that he has not attained the Path, yet still lies and claims to have attained it. It cannot be accepted that someone seeks personal glory in this way. Moreover, in lying they sow wrong views in others by explaining many points of doctrine carelessly. People with such ambition are generally unworthy of being practitioners of Buddhism, for a follower of Buddhism always aims at liberation, giving up all personal desires, even one's own ego.

We probably remember the story of the Old Fox and Venerable Baizhang (Bá Trượng). The story goes that there was an old man who often came to hear Venerable Baizhang teach in the Dharma hall. Once, after the teaching had ended, the old man still would not leave. Venerable Baizhang thought this was no ordinary person and asked: "Who are you?" The old man answered: "Venerable, I am not a human being. I am a fox from the mountain behind. Five hundred lives ago, in the time of the Buddha Kasyapa, I was a monk practising. One day someone asked me: 'Is a person who has attained the Path still governed by the law of cause and effect?' I answered: 'No.' From then on I was condemned to live in a fox's body for five hundred lives without knowing what fault I had committed. Now I hope the Venerable will give me an explanation so that I may understand the truth and escape this fox's body." Venerable Baizhang said: "Ask me again." The old man solemnly asked: "Venerable, is a person who has attained the Path still governed by the law of cause and effect?" Venerable Baizhang answered: "A person who has attained the Path no longer misunderstands the law of cause and effect (meaning they understand it very deeply)." Hearing this, the old man was greatly awakened at once. He said to Venerable Baizhang: "So I have escaped the fox's body. Please, Venerable, bury me with the rites for a monk." Having said this, the old man vanished.

At noon that day, Venerable Baizhang gathered the assembly to announce preparations for a funeral for a monk. Everyone was very surprised, because nobody in the temple had just died. He told everyone to follow him. Going round behind the mountain to a cave, they saw the corpse of a fox lying out, and they brought it back, cremated it and buried it properly as a monk.

We see that in this case, the Old Fox was not a person who lied by claiming to have attained the Path. It was only because of a misunderstanding, an answer given without due consideration, that he fell into a grave wrong view and was condemned to a fox's body. So if we have not attained the Path yet consider ourselves to have attained it and explain the teachings wrongly, we will surely fall into the evil realms even more heavily. For a practitioner, to let this happen is truly heartbreaking.

In ancient times, some hundreds of years after the Buddha entered Nirvana, there was a Bhikkhu named Mahadeva (Đại thiên) who, having practised only for a while, announced to everyone that he had realised arhatship. Hearing this, many people believed. But those close to him noticed that he still had many lapses in his daily life. Someone asked: "Master, why does an Arhat still have such lapses?" (there are five points, which are not convenient to present here). He answered: "Yes, an Arhat still has five such lapses." From then on, following his answer, a new understanding appeared among the monastics: that Arhats still have limitations and lapses in life. And because of this, Mahayana reasoning arose. This reasoning belittles the status of Arhat and praises the Bodhisattva path, practising to become a Buddha. Later, that view appeared in the sutras. In recent times, when we study Buddhist teachings, we see that there is a division into Vehicles. Among them, the Sravaka Vehicle, the Arhat, is not respected. In the Buddha's time, however, Arhats were honoured as equal to the Buddha. So there are cases where, through shallow understanding and incorrect explanation, some people have caused division and misunderstanding of Buddhism.

In recent times, in some treatises we meet many teachings that are not standard yet are praised as lofty teachings of Buddhism. Some people even lower the Buddha's realisation to the level of a philosopher. They hold that the Buddha sitting under the Bodhi tree and attaining the Path was merely sitting and thinking. Such an understanding of the Buddha is truly superficial. This understanding leads many people who study Buddhism to think that Buddhism is shallow. These are truly harmful wrong views. With such misunderstanding, unless other merit restrains it, they themselves must bear very heavy karmic results, and they also contribute to the swift decline of Buddhism.

In the world, cases of lying by claiming to have attained the Path are not just one or two but very many. The case of the leader Shoko Asahara in Japan, who founded the cult Aum, is an example. He proclaimed himself to be someone who had realised awakening in Buddhism and built a hybrid of Zen Buddhism with some Shinto-like religion. Yet it still had the power to attract a great many followers, including intellectuals. Many Doctors of Philosophy, physicians, engineers and so on joined that religion. In truth, he was not a genuine practitioner. His ambition was to seize power in Japan. So he accumulated chemical and biological weapons, accumulated poison gas... When he was discovered, he released poison gas in the subway, killing and wounding very many people. We should not think that people with high education and wide knowledge will have the wisdom to distinguish right from wrong. That is not necessarily so.

From that case we can draw one conclusion. Once people feel a lack of spiritual values, they thirst for them endlessly. So when some figure meets their need in the spiritual and inner dimension, people will not hesitate to follow. Japanese society is civilised and wealthy, with a surplus of material goods, but Buddhism there did not have enough authority to be a refuge for the masses. So when he founded a new religion speaking about the spirit, people were easily drawn in. They did not realise that it was a false path.

In the West too, quite a few people have lied by claiming to be messengers, or sons, of God and have founded new sects. They too did many wrong things in their sects. They were not true Saints at all. Jesus was a person of wonderful mettle, so he declared with certainty that he was the son of God. Many people without such mettle claimed the same. As a result they did wrong things in their sects. When discovered and surrounded by the police, they killed all the followers inside the church and then took their own lives. It is heartbreaking that such things have actually happened.

Some sects are very strange, such as Heaven's Gate in Texas. Relying on scientific knowledge about extraterrestrials, they invited one another to dress properly and then commit suicide together so that their souls could follow a flying saucer or some comet to another planet and live a more peaceful life. Those are very bizarre ideas, without basis, but very many people, including educated ones, still believed in them. So we learn one thing: worldly education is not enough to free people from wrong views. So, although knowledge is much needed, and we must study without stopping, study English and Chinese well, understand some scientific knowledge and so on…, we must never think that such knowledge is the support for our life and practice. It is Ethics, meditation (Thiền định), cause and effect and so on that are the factors that help us stand firm in right view.

Those who break the precept of grave false speech bear a very heavy offence. For they have exploited and enjoyed others' reverence while being entirely unworthy of it. So, according to the law of cause and effect, later they will be in very base positions: in the depths of hell, as hungry ghosts or as animals.

The minor precept concerns lying that is lighter and more ordinary. But it too is an expression of an unwholesome mind. We know that to settle the mind into concentration, a person needs many factors. It requires past merit and also very deep and thick Ethics. A mind of loving kindness and compassion and a mind of humility must be cultivated very firmly, and the method of practice must be truly correct and fundamental.

However, apart from these factors, we must pay attention to one more important factor: a truthful mind. A truthful person is one who dares to look squarely at the truth. They objectively seek the truth, so they dare to admit their own faults. From there, they look straight into their own mind to judge objectively whether it is right or wrong, agitated or still.

People who live untruthfully usually defend themselves when they have a fault. For instance, when cooking rice, someone through carelessness or inexperience leaves the rice both undercooked and scorched. That person defends himself by blaming external things: the water, the rice, the firewood… Such people usually do not dare to admit the truth and always excuse their mistakes.

In some cases, in the mind people are defending themselves and not admitting a fault, but it does not show outwardly. In life, we often meet people who argue when angry. A truthful person will recognise that they are being angry and find a way to overcome it. An untruthful person will never recognise it and always blames others (saying that it was because others were stubborn, others offended them, so they flared up…). A person who always justifies themselves is not truthful. Such a person cannot practise for long.

Because they dare to look at the truth and admit their own faults, truthful people gradually gain control of their minds and grow in ethics. A truthful mind and a wholesome mind usually go together. A person who does good has nothing to hide or falsify. In whatever they do, they control and weigh right and wrong, correct and incorrect.

Truthful people usually do what is right and good. When they have a fault, they know their fault, and if someone points it out, they sincerely accept it at once. A person who does not lie also never wants to do evil. That is why we say that a truthful mind and a wholesome mind go together.

A liar is someone who does not tell the truth. If a truthful person tells things as they happened, just as they were, and always feels the mind at ease, a liar by contrast must apply intention, must stir the mind, fabricate a story to fit and try to remember it so as not to say otherwise another time. That is why their mind is very tired. It is also the reason that the mind cannot enter concentration. A mind entering concentration is a mind that does not stir delusive thoughts. Meanwhile, a liar always has to invent, stir intentions and imagine, so delusive thoughts will keep arising. Thus that person's path of practice does not last.

The American President Abraham Lincoln, who fought to abolish slavery in America, once said something very wise: You can deceive one person for a time, you can deceive everyone for a time, but you cannot deceive everyone forever. He said this because he held that truth has power, reality has power, and in the end it comes to light. So the best thing for a person who lives in this world and knows how to do great things is not to do anything dishonest. For a President to understand this and take it as the compass for all his actions is very precious. Such a person will live very truthfully and, doing politics, never use tricks.

In the biography of Washington, the first American President, there is a sentence that surprises many people: "He never told a lie in his whole life." For us, practitioners who understand the Path, not lying or lying little is easy to understand. But for a President, and the famous President of a great power, who must always deal with awkward situations on a complex political stage, never to lie is very surprising and admirable. How deep and thick must the ethics of such people have been to live like that.

We see that great figures usually live with great truthfulness. The higher a position in society, the more conscious people are of keeping their word. Why? Because they understand that truth has a very strange power. Even when covered up, truth is still in the end truth. If, for some small gain or fame, they lie, when exposed to the light by others, their credibility will be gone. So it is best to live a truthful life.

So, for what purposes do people usually lie?

For the most part, people lie for two purposes: for their own benefit, and to slander in order to harm others.

Lying to benefit oneself has many situations. For example, lying to cover up one's own wrongdoing (because one does not want others to look down on one, or so as not to be punished), lying to cheat one another and take money and property, or a student lying to the teacher that his parents are ill in order to be excused from school…

For practitioners, lying usually has a very simple purpose: to cover up one's own faults. For worldly people, lying is more complex and more dangerous. People lie mainly for their own benefit. In some cases, because they hate someone, they speak ill of that person so that others will hate them too. Our grandparents often said: When we love, we love the whole household. When we hate, we borrow others to hate for us; it is just like this. This is also a kind of lying to harm others. In some cases lying is far heavier. That is lying to slander and harm people, causing others to be arrested, imprisoned or made to pay with their lives, and so on… Thus a liar is a person with a very malicious mind.

The story of a nun in charge of the community is also worth reflecting on. There were thirty-two people in the community. One day a lay Buddhist came to make an offering and asked her how many people were in the community so that the offering would be enough for everyone. The nun answered: "Thirty-five." After the lay Buddhist left, someone in the community asked: "Sister, there are thirty-two of us; why did you say thirty-five?" The nun explained: "It's an expedient; if I say three more and some visitors arrive, we can give it to them."

In truth, the nun was not being greedy for herself; she was just thinking ahead. But lying like that also diminishes merit and fails to keep ethics. If visiting monastics come, we can accept sharing part of the community's portion with them; there is no need to do that. From then on, every time the nun went up to the teaching seat, the community doubted whether what she said was true. With just one lie, the nun lost the trust of the community. So it is best to live a truthful and open life.

Sometimes we also lie to bring benefit to others, but this case is very rare. For example, someone wants to apply to study basic Buddhist studies. Out of sympathy for their situation and out of zeal, we speak to the teachers on the board. When the teachers ask, we say only good things about the person: how well they study, how determined they are, how difficult their circumstances are and so on… Meanwhile, in truth we do not know clearly what their academic ability is. So we have lied, but with the purpose of helping someone else. That is the case of lying that benefits others.

Later, when teaching disciples or lay Buddhists, we should remember one principle: do not lie to others for our own benefit. We accept disadvantage, seriously safeguard our credibility and keep the truthful conduct of a practitioner so that the Path may endure. If we live crookedly, evasively or by lying, we will lose others' trust. The ancients had a saying: "Nhất sự bất tín, vạn sự bất tin": once one matter is not trusted, nothing is trusted. Once credibility is lost, for the thousand things afterwards, even when we speak truly, people no longer believe us.

2. CLASSIFICATION

When someone asked the Buddha: Venerable World-Honoured One, must we always tell the truth? The Buddha answered No. Why? The Buddha divided lying and truthful speech into four kinds.

• First is truthful speech that brings wholesome states to the listener.

• Second is truthful speech that brings unwholesome states to the listener.

• Third is lying that brings wholesome states to the listener.

• Fourth is lying that brings unwholesome states to the listener.

Considering each case, we will see in which cases we should tell the truth and in which cases we should lie.

The first case: truthful speech that brings wholesome states to the listener.

For example, we tell everyone that in life there is the law of cause and effect. It is a very fair law that governs all our thoughts and actions. Whoever sows a particular cause receives that effect. Whoever gives will become wealthy, whoever is humble will gain position. Whoever lives a life of altruism and rich in the spirit of sacrifice will attain the Path. Or we tell everyone that this life is impermanent and changing, and that each person should live freely like a floating water hyacinth and not cling to or chase after petty fame and gain. In saying these things we are telling the truth, benefiting the listeners and letting them absorb a principle for life. That is truthful speech that brings wholesome states.

Another example: when we know that a certain Teacher or nun practises very genuinely, has spiritual attainment and keeps the precepts strictly, we tell others about it. If lay practitioners hear good things about those people, their faith in the Path will increase. That is when we have told the truth that brings wholesome states to the listener.

The second case: truthful speech that brings unwholesome states to the listener. For example, two people do not like each other. One speaks ill of the other, sometimes in very harsh words. We hear it and honestly repeat it to the other, without adding or omitting a word. The other is furious and goes looking for the first. The two sides "blow their tops", frightening everyone. So our truthful words have unintentionally increased the division and rupture in the relationship between the two. That also means increasing division and sowing hatred between people in life. That is the case where we tell the truth and it brings unwholesome states to the listener.

In the French colonial period there was a story that people often told one another for a laugh about people's naivety and honesty. But in truth, it is a lesson everyone must note in how to behave. At that time, the French colonialists terrorised and hunted down those who supported the resistance very savagely. Someone ran into the house of a highlander and hurriedly said: "Let me hide in the water jar. If they come to search, don't tell." A little later, French soldiers arrived and asked: "Did anyone run in here to hide?" The man said honestly: "No! He's hiding in the jar and told me not to say." The French soldiers lifted the lid of the jar, dragged the man out and shot him. That too was telling the truth but it brought unwholesome states and caused harm to a person.

The third case: lying that brings wholesome states to the listener.

For example, at noon, everyone is lying down to sleep in the rest period, and a companion intends to sneak out. Seeing this, we say: The Master is out there; take care or the Master will punish you. The other is so frightened that he has to lie down and go on sleeping. In truth, we have lied so that our companion does not break the temple rules. That lie brings a wholesome state, but not a lasting one. For sooner or later that companion will learn the truth and resent it. Next time, if we threaten again, he will not be afraid, or sometimes even when we tell the truth he will not believe us.

There are many more cases that make us lie. For example, when someone asks: Buddhism makes people attain the Path, have supernormal powers and wisdom. So has anyone attained the Path? Wanting people to believe in and follow the Path, we spare no words in speaking of Buddhism, all praise. Hearing us speak so well of Buddhism, that person takes refuge and becomes a Buddhist. Afterwards, seeing that our words were not entirely true, that there are still people who follow Buddhism yet are greedy, angry and jealous, they are dissatisfied and leave the Path. So lying that brings wholesome states is usually not lasting; it is only temporary.

In Buddhism such cases exist in great number. In ancient times, someone discovered a few good ideas in the teaching and wanted to spread them but feared nobody would believe him, so he composed them into sutras and said they were spoken by the Buddha. When writing, they too began: "Thus have I heard, at one time the Buddha was in Savatthi city…" Reading those sutras, people supposed they were spoken by the Buddha, so they believed strongly and accepted those people's teachings. Judged as teaching, those sutra words are also good and beneficial to practitioners. But judged by Ethics, they are completely without truthfulness, because they were not spoken by the Buddha but created by later people. In Buddhism there are very many scriptures not spoken by the Buddha. Here it is not convenient to say clearly which sutras, but in the course of study each person must recognise this.

Recently in America a conference took place. Many scholars who study Buddhism, famous around the world, took part. They discussed the question of determining which sutras were spoken by the Buddha and which were not. The Dalai Lama also took part that time. Relying on ideas and language, they demonstrated very rigorously and persuasively that these sutras appeared after the Buddha's time. For example, they chose from within the sutras words that did not exist in the Buddha's time to prove that the sutra appeared very long after the Buddha's teaching.

For example, the term "socialism" appeared around the nineteenth to twentieth centuries, since Lenin's time. If a book is claimed to have been written in the thirteenth century and uses that word, we know at once that it is not true. It must surely have been written after the twentieth century and could not have appeared earlier.

Or another phrase, "protecting the ecological environment". This phrase must have appeared from the end of the twentieth century. If now some book discusses the ecological environment and people claim it was written in the fifth century, we know it is not genuine. The book surely came into being in the twentieth century or later. In the same way, there are some sutras whose ideas are also very good, but researchers recognised some words that did not exist in the Buddha's time. From that, they concluded that in Buddhism there are many sutras written by later people. Those people proved the matter very rigorously and nobody could deny it. At the end of the conference, the Dalai Lama said: Your research is very good and very reasonable, but I still believe those sutras were all spoken by the Buddha. He said only that, only out of faith and not by reason or argument. He simply believed and proved nothing. So now whoever wants to believe may believe, and whoever wants to seek the truth may go and seek the truth.

If we take the trouble to research and study, gradually we will understand this. The truth is that there are sutras not spoken by the Buddha but which we have long thought were spoken by the Buddha and so have always revered. The authors of those sutras usually exalt their own sutras, calling them the king of sutras. The Buddha never spoke like that. He only taught the Way, and everything was recorded; he never praised his own scriptures.

The fourth case: lying that brings unwholesome states.

Precisely through lying, we cause consequences: dividing people and making them hate one another. Things that did not happen, we say did, throwing everything into confusion, or we make up slanders to harm others. That is not good.

So among those four ways, a practitioner should use the first (truthful speech that brings wholesome states). Besides, there are truths that should not be told. We tell only truths that we are sure are beneficial to people. Truths that cause confusion, division or make people lose heart, we should not tell.

The last two cases a practitioner should not use. Even lying that brings wholesome states to people, we should not. That is not a way to bring lasting benefit to others. If we are not careful, we will lose credibility through those well-intentioned lies.

3. REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ORDAINED

The ordained should avoid lying in every situation, for the following reasons:

a. Truthfulness is an expression of Ethics:

A person with Ethics who lies will lose the faith of lay Buddhists. Sometimes there are lies over trivial matters that we think harmless and so do not worry about, but in truth the consequences are very heavy.

For example, when we need to go out, we must ask permission to leave the temple. As we reach the gate, someone meets us and asks where we are going. Not wanting any fuss and delay while in a hurry, we answer cursorily to be done with it: "Oh, the Master sent me to buy some medicine." Surely, hearing that the Master sent us, nobody dares to question anything. In truth, at that time we were going out on private business. Clearly that lie is very trivial and harmless. But if we keep lying like this, over time it will become a bad habit that is very hard to correct and we will no longer have moral authority.

We know that a practitioner's moral authority is created by speech. If we live a truthful life and do not know how to speak falsehood, we will have very great authority. Then each word we speak is a mantra. Each of our blessings brings good things to others. The reason people who recite mantras are often very effective is that they concentrate their minds and know how to borrow the Buddha's power. This is very strange; the more we test it, the more we find it true. When we study Meditation, we will look more closely at the benefits and harms of mantras. A mantra has its own spiritual power. A practitioner with ethics who lives truthfully will have words with that same power.

There was an incident in a state in America which to this day people have still not been able to explain. In a court, as a serious case was about to be tried, it suddenly began to rain. The rain poured down in torrents so that the trial could not proceed and had to be postponed to the next day. Unexpectedly, the next day it rained again, very hard. While waiting, the presiding judge, a Black man, wrote on a piece of paper a half-joking, half-serious line: "It must not rain any more", signed it and tossed it aside. The rain suddenly stopped. And so the case was tried. Everything was expected to sink into oblivion.

But strangely, afterwards the rain stopped for a long time. Drought struck everywhere. Until one day the clerk suddenly remembered what had happened at the earlier trial; he was struck by a doubt and said to the judge: "Your Honour, please sign another order." The judge looked at the paper, suddenly remembered something and wrote: "All right! Let it rain again!" and signed. Afterwards it really did rain again.

This is a strange story. The newspapers once reported it, but it could not be explained. It seems like a coincidence. But the matter happened so fast and was so effective that nobody dared to conclude anything. In truth, it may be that this person had power that stirred heaven and earth. Having such power comes from having great virtue, living truthfully and judging everything accurately. So we can understand that during his working life that judge was very fair and wise and never wrongly convicted others. Hence his moral authority rose higher and higher. At some point, his voice could move heaven and earth.

We must live a holy life, open and upright, so that we have nothing to hide. Then our words will have power and be effective. More important still, we will bring wholesome states to others. That is the happiest thing and also the most ethical. That is why a wholesome mind and a truthful mind always go together.

Often we accept a little loss to ourselves in order to tell the truth and to live truthfully. This is a great test for us. If each time we must suffer a loss because of telling the truth and we still do not mind, then later our virtue will be very great. The greater the virtue, the more easily we can influence others.

b. When expounding the sutras and teaching the Dharma, we should cite only true stories so that the Dharma talk has lasting value.

We must never tell stories that are not real, invented stories. There are many ancient Buddhist stories that are very hard to use because they are not very truthful. We should not be too enthusiastic in telling those stories to prove that our teaching is right. Because by citing untrue stories, we will not give the talk lasting value. If we tell stories from the Buddha's time to illustrate a talk, we must weigh them carefully and assess how truthful they are.

Reading the Sutra of One Hundred Parables (Kinh Bách dụ), we will meet many made-up stories, all imaginary. In the sutra there is a story of two disciples massaging their Teacher's legs. The story goes that, while massaging, for some reason the two fell out. One took a stick and hit the leg of his Teacher that the other was massaging. The other, furious, took revenge by taking a stick and beating the leg that this one was massaging. So the Teacher was beaten back and forth until he was nearly dead.

In truth, the story has its own meaning. Through the deeds of the two disciples, the intent is to say: in Buddhism, if it keeps dividing into many schools and sects attacking one another, in the end Buddhism itself will be severely wounded. The principle is very good but the story is entirely unreal. That is the Sutra of One Hundred Parables. So the stories in it we may tell for entertainment, but should not tell as evidence to prove our teaching.

At present, many such "fairy tale" stories are still in circulation. If we keep relying on them to prove our teaching, that teaching will not be firm. This is something we need to note. As society becomes more civilised, people increasingly need to review and test everything. They only want to hear and believe what has been tested in experience.

So if we speak about the law of cause and effect, sowing a cause and reaping its effect, and merely illustrate with fairy tales in which a Buddha or fairy appears to help the poor and kind-hearted and punish the wicked, surely we will only persuade children.

Because the stories drawn from Buddhism are not many, and some are not true, in life we must accumulate real stories about principles of life as material for Dharma talks. For example, the story of a nun who enjoyed an excellent preferential policy when she went to America is worth telling everyone when teaching the Dharma. While in Vietnam, she used to prepare medicine to treat the poor and regarded this as the joy of her life despite much hardship. When she went to America, she was naturally placed on the list of those who enjoy preferential treatment, receiving medical care without paying fees. Meanwhile, others, even disabled people, had to go through very difficult procedures to get the same. In telling the nun's story, we aim to demonstrate the karmic result she gained from the merit she made while still in Vietnam. Such stories are more persuasive to listeners. Living in a civilised age with a high level of knowledge, people do not like hearing imaginary stories.

However, there are also many anecdotes about Saints that sound mystical but are very true. We need to tell them to confirm the spiritual value of Buddhism.

For example, the story of Venerable Đặng Ẩn (Dengyin) flying into the sky. He was a meditation practitioner who had attained the Path and had supernormal powers. One day he and his disciples were crossing a field. Meeting soldiers fighting fiercely, he said: "I must save them from this disaster." Having said this, he flew up into the sky and pointed his staff down. Seeing this, the soldiers on both sides were so afraid that they withdrew and stopped fighting.

The story seems fantastic but it is true. Many scholars may not believe such things. But as people within Buddhism, knowing the profound and lofty spiritual value of Buddhism, we believe it strongly. Such stories help us confirm one thing: besides the ethics in life, Buddhism has very high spiritual values, especially when practitioners reach a certain level. These are true stories; we must use and spread them widely, the more the better.

Around the 1980s, when the socialist system had not yet collapsed, in the Soviet Union people began to research supernormal powers, extrasensory perception and spiritual abilities in Buddhism. They came to Vietnam to gather documents related to people with supernormal powers kept in Buddhism or in folk tradition. But unfortunately, Vietnam had not collected such documents and could provide nothing. They studied this matter very carefully. They believed in it and drew on all materials and rumours about the supernormal powers of Vietnamese Buddhism for their research.

Meanwhile, many scholars of our country do not believe there are such miracles and supernormal feats. For example, reading the books on Buddhism by the author Nguyễn Hiến Lê, we will be very saddened though he was a well-known researcher. Or consider the case of Will Durant and his wife, for example, who were English. They produced books researching world history but only in the capacity of scholars, not acknowledging the truth that spiritual powers exist. So the deep spiritual issues are not addressed by such people. If they are, they are only superficial, shallow comments that cannot express the truth. Because it is not the truth; it is still a covering up of the truth.

In saying this, we cannot help connecting it with the so-called invisible world, the world of ghosts and spirits of the dead, which still exists though ordinary eyes cannot see it. Many people hold that we should not speak of the invisible world, thinking this runs contrary to science. In doing so, those people show that they are afraid of science. Meanwhile, science has not yet reached its final level; there are many things science does not yet know and cannot yet explain. Our duty is to defend the truth and speak the truth. The existence of the invisible world, of the spirits and ghosts around us, is a reality. Saying so is not superstition but telling the truth. Once we tell the truth, we have nothing to fear.

In life there are absurd legends, but there are also legends that are true. What matters is that we must be able to distinguish what is true and what is not.

c. A false cause cannot lead to the effect of truth.

We practise in order to seek the truth, to seek what is real, to seek what is right, but if the mind is covered by a tendency to dishonesty, we will not have the Wisdom to see what is right.

For example, when we hear a story told, we cannot judge which part is right and which wrong. Or when conflict and quarrels arise in the community, we should distinguish who is right and who is wrong in order to reconcile them, but we fail to recognise it. The reason is that formerly we often lied, so we received the karmic result of now not understanding the truth. That is cause and effect.

More deeply, someone who often lies will not have the merit to awaken to the truth.

For example: the Buddha said no-self, that the self is not real. Hearing this, if we live truthfully, we will understand that the Buddha speaks rightly. Although at first we have the feeling that we have a self different from everyone else, that is only an illusion. When we practise to a certain level, the illusion will dissolve, and in truth we will have realised no-self. The reason we believe the Buddha's teaching is that we know how to live a truthful life and know how to create the merit to understand the truth, to understand lofty principles. But a person who lives untruthfully, always deceitful, when hearing the Buddha say this, cannot possibly understand it. They do not have the merit to perceive it.

Likewise, a person with merit from living a truthful life understands that this life is impermanent and illusory, and that nothing lasts for ever. With this understanding, they themselves will not be attached and will not crave anything. A deceitful person does not see the truth because they do not have merit. So understanding the principle is not at all simple.

In some cases, a practitioner develops intuition and knows strange things, which also comes from the practice of truthfulness. Before such a person, if there is something hidden or dishonest in our mind, we cannot conceal it. For once they have sown the cause of truthfulness, no truth can escape them.

A person who often lies also suffers the karmic result of misunderstanding cause and effect and so easily slips into unwholesome acts by mistake.

In the Chan Forest Treasured Admonitions (Thiền Lâm bảo huấn), there is this story: Once, a Zen master was sitting in meditation. In a state of concentration, he suddenly saw the ghost of a person wearing a cangue, his body burned by fire, standing leaning at the door. He asked: "Who are you, and why have you fallen into this state?" The ghost answered: "Master, formerly I was the administrator of this temple. When people made offerings of money to the Sangha, I took that money and used it to build the monks' hall. I broke the rules and so received the karmic result of falling into hell. Now, please, Master, take an amount equal to the money used for the monks' hall and offer it back to the Sangha to pray for my deliverance." Having said this, the ghost vanished. The Zen master did exactly so, taking funds equal to the amount spent on building the monks' hall, arranging a vegetarian feast for the Sangha and offering robes and goods in full. That same night, he saw the ghost appear again, this time with quite a handsome face, and say: "Thanks to your merit, I have been reborn in the heavens; three lives from now I will come back down to be a monk again."

From this story, we see that the administrator was someone who looked after the community and did not think of himself. But using money offered to the Sangha to build a monks' hall is not right. If we misunderstand or do not fully understand cause and effect, we will easily go wrong, slip into unwholesome acts by mistake and have to bear such karmic results. So we must take care to understand cause and effect accurately so as not to go wrong and not to do unwholesome things. Often we think we are doing good but in truth we have done what is unwholesome (as in the case of that administrator), precisely because we do not rightly understand the law of cause and effect.

A person with the habit of lying also suffers the karmic result of not seeing the greatness of the Saints and therefore cannot give rise to a mind of reverence. That too is a great loss. To realise sainthood, we must revere the Saints. That is a very clear and firm cause and effect, a cause and effect that cannot be denied. In the past, when someone attained the Path, the Buddha would always let them know the cause and effect, that is, he would tell them in which life they had revered and made offerings to the Buddha or some Arhat, so that now they could attain the Path.

Accumulating the merit of reverence for the Saints is very important. So it is no accident that we hold that the first foundation of every ethical conduct of mind is reverence for the Buddha.

A person with the cause of deceit usually does not fully understand the Buddha. So their reverence for the Buddha is very superficial. The result is that they lack merit and their character will not grow. If they practise all their lives, they will be only an ordinary monk. Those whose reverence for the Buddha is truly immeasurable and boundless will become eminent monks, their authority shining and everyone respecting them.

Often, around us there are Saints who conceal themselves and live simply. If we do not know and look down on them, we will not benefit either. Conversely, if we understand and respect them, we will have merit.

One more point to note is that a deceitful person does not correctly assess the state of their own mind and so cannot master the mind. And so they cannot reach meditative concentration.

Because they cannot assess their own mind, liars often justify, defend and cover up their faults. That is deceiving oneself. People who deceive themselves will have no awareness of correcting the mind and cannot master the mind. Once one cannot master the mind, one cannot reach meditative concentration.

That is the cause and effect of lying. When we lie, the mind is stained and we suffer many losses: we lack the wisdom to see the truth and cannot see our own mind; we lack the merit to judge external circumstances… and often we even do unwholesome things. For a person who lives a truthful life, those things do not happen.

We probably remember the story of the Bhikkhu and the goose that swallowed the ring. The story is a shining example of the practice of truthfulness. Once, a Bhikkhu, dignified and proper, went on alms round in the morning. Arriving at a wealthy household, he was respectfully offered food by the householder, who put it into his bowl. While she was ladling it into the bowl, her ring, which was loose, fell to the ground. Seeing this, the Bhikkhu thought he would tell the householder at leisure. Because he spoke little and was keeping his deportment while on alms round, he did not speak in haste. Unexpectedly, a goose ran up from somewhere and swallowed the ring. He did not know what to do. When the householder had turned back inside, he was still standing there. The householder was very surprised. Only then did she discover that the ring was missing from her hand. She hurried out and asked: "Master, did you see my ring?" The Bhikkhu was silent and did not answer. For he feared that if he told the truth, the goose would be killed. And he was a person who lived very truthfully and never lied.

He stood there, not knowing how to resolve it. The householder went on asking: "Did you see it? My ring just fell here, when I was ladling into your bowl." Though suspected of taking the ring, he stayed silent. The householder was furious, grabbed his robe and said: "You took it, who else? There was only you and me here." Not satisfied with harsh words, she also beat the Bhikkhu until his face was bruised. At that moment, perhaps his karma had just run out, the goose suddenly writhed and fell dead. Only then did he say faintly: "I saw the goose swallow it…" The householder cried out in terror: "Heavens! Why didn't you tell me, Master?" The Master answered: "If I had told you, and you killed the goose, what then?"

The story ends. We do not know what the truth is, but we believe it is a true story. In this world there are people who are resolute in not lying, who would rather be beaten than lie, and who also cannot bear to tell the truth if it would harm a person or a creature. That is the truthful practice of a practitioner. They do not tell the truth because telling it would harm others and violate compassion, but they also do not want to lose the practice of truthfulness, so they stay silent and endure.

In life, we too often fall into such situations. At times we are misunderstood or misjudged by others and must endure it, accepting loss so as not to have to lie about anything. Perhaps if we explained the truth then, we would recover our innocence, but others would be harmed. Believe that this very endurance and acceptance of loss will make our merit grow many times over. For cause and effect and the results of merit do not come about by themselves. People must pass through trials, hardships and the bitterness of life to attain them.

d. Loving the truth is the spirit of scientists.

Because scientists love the truth and seek the truth, they have discovered countless laws of the world, of nature, of social history and of human beings. They do not accept groundless explanations and conclusions, nor do they ever accept backwardness. Thanks to this, today we enjoy the achievements of their science and technology and live in a society full of conveniences.

In the past, our ancestors explained the yearly floods with a very attractive myth: Sơn Tinh and Thủy Tinh. And for a time, people believed it to be true. But today there are people who do not believe and do not accept that explanation, and so make an effort to seek the truth. Thanks to this, they have found the cause and explained it in a very scientific way.

In history, they have also found many truths that were hidden or distorted. Archaeologists and historians have found truths covered by the dust of time in the history of ancient Egypt that we could not otherwise know.

However, there are also some religions that conflict with science because they lack the spirit of loving the truth. They like to imagine and embroider fantastic and divine stories to explain everything superficially. For example, in the Old Testament people hold that God created heaven and earth in six days and rested on one day. Hence today we have a day of rest in the week on Sunday. Only now has humanity discovered that what is stated in the scripture is not real. People know for certain that no God created heaven and earth in six days. Or the story of God creating heaven and earth and all creatures is completely childish, yet for a long period of several thousand years people believed it to be true. How could there be a God who created heaven and earth and all things, created the sun to revolve around the earth and lit fine rows of candles in the sky at night? Afterwards, God took earth, moulded a human form and breathed into it to create a human being to rule over the animals. God created Adam. That man lived lonely and, very sad, took out one of his ribs to create Eve, and so on…

Jesus can be regarded as a "manifested Bodhisattva", who went to the Jews to reform Judaism from the mistaken Old Testament. At that time some Christians also opposed Jesus, so he was arrested by them and nailed to the cross. If we separate out Jesus's teachings alone, we will see that they are very much like Buddhism. But the Vatican did not understand and combined the Old Testament, full of absurdities, with the teachings in Jesus's Gospels, creating Christianity as it is now. The Old Testament has many absurdities. Now, quite a few progressive intellectuals have acknowledged that the Old Testament is wrong at its foundation.

Buddhism has a scientific character, shown in its love of truth. So not only are there many points consistent with science, but Buddhism also offers suggestions to science. For example, Buddhism holds that the universe, heaven and earth, comes about through many causes and conditions, formed of many factors, among which the wholesome and unwholesome karma of sentient beings plays a part.

So what Buddhism says is not wrong in terms of science. And according to science, everything in this world has a cause and is formed of many factors. However, there is one thing science has not yet seen, which is that among those causes, the karma of sentient beings has a very great influence. This is the point on which Buddhism offers a suggestion to science, including the matter of cause and effect.

The reason that in recent times terrorist bombings by Muslims have occurred one after another around the world is that according to their teaching, killing is not a sin. They do so to defend Allah, their God. This is an extremely dangerous teaching. So we cannot practise carelessly; we must be concerned about this issue. Our responsibility is to take care to protect the Dharma, not letting Islam invade and spread everywhere, crushing us with violence and a teaching that is not truth.

In their occupations, lay practitioners must know how to respect the truth. Especially those who work as lawyers should never, for their own interests, distort the truth and defend clients excessively. We must teach lay practitioners this.

One more point to note: in our Buddhism, we should also re-examine some historical sources and the origins of some teachings.

For example: the history of the 33 Patriarchs. According to historians, before Venerable Shenhui there is no source that speaks of the Patriarchs; Vasumitra and Prajnatara also do not appear; sources exist only from Venerable Shenhui. From this they conclude that the history of the 33 Patriarchs was composed by Venerable Shenhui.

Or Venerable Zhiyi's account of the five periods of the Buddha's teaching, for example. He held that for the first 12 years the Buddha taught the Agamas, the next 9 years the Vaipulya, 21 years the Prajna, and 6 years the Lotus and Nirvana. Historians also reject this. For they hold that in the Agama sutras there are sutras the Buddha taught in old age, and some the Buddha taught shortly before entering Nirvana. So how can it be asserted that the Buddha taught the Agamas in the first 12 years? In truth, we must understand that the Buddha taught the Agamas throughout his entire life.

So the doubtful points in the history of Buddhism we need to re-examine. Or where what the ancients handed down is not true, we have the responsibility to correct it, and must boldly do so without fear that we are disrespecting or offending the Patriarchs.

In the process of seeking the truth, historians sometimes fail to perceive the wondrous matters and so pass over them. So although we love the truth greatly, we should not trust historians too much but must research, investigate and know how to distinguish what is true.

In sum, lying has very serious consequences. It affects not only our own practice but also the credibility of the Path and the benefit of sentient beings. So we must love the truth, strive in practice and spread the Path to everyone so that Buddhism flourishes ever more in the future.