I am leaving town, so here's a twofer:

4. Not replying to others.
If someone greets us in a friendly and courteous manner, and without a good reason we give no reply, we incur a secondary downfall. This commitment advises us that we should try to make others' minds happy by giving suitable answers and advice.

The first time I read that, I thought it seemed a bit out of place. Sure, shouldn't we be polite and reply to a greeting? But should not doing so be considered a lapse in our vows?

But the second sentence is the key. By taking the Boddhisattva vows, one is agreeing to achieve enlightenment for the purpose of helping others to also acheive enlightenment. Not receiving a reply to a greeting is the slightest relative to being cut off in traffic. The act itself is so brief and thoughtless as to be insignificant. It is in fact the thoughtlessness of it that affects us, that occupies our minds and concerns us.

So by acknowledging and appreciating a greeting, especially a friendly greeting, we are not only maintaining a connection (potentially condusive to "spreading the wealth"), (because, really, if we were to leap at every chance to introduce and demonstrate dharma, we would never make it out of a supermarket parkinglot). By replying to others we are, more importantly, taking a very simple action to (at least) be friendly (and what is the harm in that?) and potentially to avoid the greeter feeling slighted and possibly affecting that persons day in a negative way.

... and ...
5. Not accepting invitations.

I actually consider numbers four and five to be connected, because I have to admit that I am guilty of both downfalls, typically in conjunction with each other.

I have a friend that I have spent some time avoiding, because I disagree with some of the choices he has made in life, and I feel dissonant when I am talking to him, or visiing him. So when he calls, I usually do not answer. When he IMs me, I do not respond. When he invites me to visit, my first response is to find an excuse to duck out.

Of course, this is wrong on multiple levels. It certainly seems like I am judging him, and I am sure on some level I probably am. But really the major factor is that A) I shrink from confrontation, and B) he is and always has been a good friend, and I feel that I should explain to him what I see resulting from his decisions. This paradox is what disturbs me most, and when broken down, both elements describe my own failures -- which meens ultimately he is looking for a friend and, surprise surprise, I am failing him in that respect.

It would be good of me to receive him gladly as a friend. When I read these two downfalls, that's always my first thought. But of course that's not the only thing I think.

These two are tied directly to the intention of bringing the dharma to others. I don't like to preach and I even believe that being particularly preachy works against the dharma. I have always believed in teaching by example... and interacting with people, sharing yourself (for lack of a less-arrogant phrase) is of course enabled by accepting invitations.

Besides, if you don't have a good reason to decline an invitation, then you're not working towards the goal -- which is my definition of "wrong."

I don't know.. these are such straight-forward ideas, and yet I feel like so much is implied by them... but the more I type, the more I seem to say the same thing. So, I imagine you get the idea.

Miss me, and leave an address if you'd like a postcard from DisneyWorld.