thoughts on speech

i start with the premise that what we think, speak, and do affects the lives of those around us - in perceptible and imperceptible ways. it is good to do no evil and speak no evil, that is, to not hurt or offend others by our speech and action, but the source of all our words and actions is our thoughts, our mind. if we can purify our mind, we purify our speech, and when we purify both, our action too is purified. to me, this goal of self-purification is a goal for daily living. indeed, everything else comes second.

talking is a difficult beast to conquer, in some ways. we've been talking all our lives, and god knows, we've been talking meaninglessly, destructively even, much of this time. i am certain i have. a while ago, i had posted gibran's words on talking and my own views on the practice of email. sometime ago, i read a quote by someone about the three gates we should pass our speech through, before it leaves us and enters the external physical world - "is it true?", "is it kind?", and "is it necessary?". he also added that while the first two are absolutely essential, the third may be by-passed for the sake of company/conversation :).

having said that, i return to the topic of my previous post - boring-ness. to clarify what i meant, in the first place - i find that i indulge in a lot less talking (in general) than before. there doesn't seem to be very much that i *have* to say, most times. when the desire is to touch base with someone, meet them for coffee and dinner, i find it far more fulfilling to hear them talk themselves out. negative speech has been out the window for a while, and i find myself unresponsive to negativity that is not constructive. responding negatively to destructive negativity (if even just within) is also undesirable, and calm indifference and compassion appear to be the only solution. arguing incessantly because i firmly believe in a point of view seems rather pointless. the ego (thus fed) is best laid to rest. overall, i end up talking less and about fewer topics, but feeling most of what i say (out of desire for mindful speech). the change is markedly positive for me, i am convinced. from an audience standpoint though, i wonder. am i less 'interesting' than i used to be?

the comments (both bb's and nikhil's) were thought-provoking, and i do believe that societal norms play their role in deciding what we consider 'interesting'. as i try to integrate new ways of thinking into my speech, and try to eliminate negativity from it, i feel it is enough to do all it takes for the inner lamp to glow. 'interesting' or not, the light will find its way to souls that will receive. and can speech serve a larger purpose than allowing a channel for this light to travel?