How should one Buddhist sign off on an email to another Buddhist? It’s no big deal, right? Wrong. It is way more complicated than you might imagine.

Are you SURE about that?
You see, when I was an administrator at a dharma center, I wrote between 20 and 40 emails a day, many of which were navigating complex issues of a sensitive and personal nature. The standard sign-off from one Buddhist to another in the vipassana/Theravada lineage in the West is “metta,” the Pali word for the brahma vihara of loving-kindness. The problem is that “metta” has become used so frequently-in fundraising letters, in memos, etc.– that it has become the equivalent of “sincerely.” The reader (at least this reader!) doesn’t necessarily expect that the writer really has taken a moment to send loving-kindness to all 20,000 people on the mailing list. Perhaps we intend it more as a dharma-insiders’ handshake.
But because “metta” is over-used, at some point staff people, teachers, and even students began using “love.” This really bothers me because some people sign “love” when I cannot imagine they love me. How could they? All I did was help them register for a course, or something similarly administrative. But then I am stuck: they signed love, if I don’t write “love” back, then am I giving them a cold shoulder? And if I do write “love”, then am I validating something I am not sure I agree with?
And believe it or not, because “love” is used so much, if you use “metta” you are being pretty chilly. For example, one of my dearest, bestest friends also worked in this dharma organization. However, I didn’t always agree with her ideas and from time to time we would get a bit worked up about things. Naturally, some of our emails were tense. I always try to be sincere in my signoffs, so while I normally would sign “love” to her, if I was aggrieved, I would sign “metta.” Signing “metta” meant that I did NOT sign “love” and that meant that I was actually pretty pissed off and that meant that when I wrote “metta” I did not mean metta. I was just trying to see if I could conjure it.
There’s one signoff that is between “metta” and “love,” and that is “with love.” “With love” means that you are just sending the letter with love but you are not making a statement about the whole relationship. I like to use “with love” when there’s something difficult for the other person and I want them to know I empathize.
The dear friend I mentioned before has found a good solution for signoffs among close dharma friends. She does “xo” for “hugs and kisses.” The problem is that when she’s really pleased with something or with me, she does more x’s and o’s. “Oh, I loved the birthday card you sent me! Xxxxxoooooo.” So if she uses just one xo, I am not sure if she’s feeling peeved or in a hurry or what. I will actually take a moment to notice if it’s xo or xxoo or xxxooo. I use “xo” myself now, but sometimes people for whom English is not a first language are left a bit baffled (I tried explaining it to my Korean husband, only to realize I had no idea why x=kiss and o=hug). And, it is also a tricky signoff if I am writing to a man who isn’t my husband!
My Zen friend Josh uses emoticons [or, "graticons,"] which is also a good solution. Here’s a bow: /|\. Bows are a nice way of ending a letter. The students from the Zen tradition often do “Gassho”, which is a bow, but like “metta” you run into all kinds of nuances with that, too. Since “gassho” is commonly used, I wonder if the Zennies too are using “love” among themselves!
Personally, I have settled on two solutions. One is to simply mirror the signoff the other person did, with the exception of “love.” I always feel relief when the person doesn’t do any signoff or does the beautifully simple “Best.” The Protestant New Englander in me really appreciates restraint, so that when something is really worth expressing a feeling about, it’s all the more meaningful. If someone has been using “best” for a long time and then shifts to “with love” I am gratified by the deepening of our relationship. My other preference is to sign off with “Gratefully.” Before I do, I check with myself to see if I really am grateful. Many of my emails are about needing something, asking something, and I truly will be grateful if the person can write back with the something that I need. My only worry with “Gratefully” is that it might seem like I’m trying too hard to be humble. No one likes pretentiousness.
Some of my least favorite signoffs are “take care” and “peace.” I think “take care” implies that the person has forgotten to take care of themselves and you, who knows better, are reminding them. “Peace” feels too 60s and I am not one to imitate. The one signoff that truly gratifies me is from a monk I know who signs with “Peace and Joy.” I like it because he greets me (and all others) with “Peace and Joy, Sumi!” and you can tell he really means it. So when he signs his letters, it’s like he’s really there beaming peace and joy at me.
You are probably thinking that I am insane or obsessive or have too much time on my hands. Perhaps. But the signoff is a statement of where you think the receiver stands in your pecking order of acquaintances, colleagues, friends, dear friends, and dearest friends. That matters. Moreover, we all know that email tends to intensify or misconstrue what people really mean. The signoff, which we often notice, is like the aftertaste of a letter. If the taste is nice, that can change the interpretation entirely. So, bon apetite, dear dharma friends, and, as my characteristically irreverent Zenophile friend Josh recently signed off,
Boogers,
Sumi
Sumi Loundon Kim is the spawn of Zen nuts and spent a good portion of her childhood in a Zen commune. Bewildered by normal people, she went on a search for her identity, which resulted in two books, Blue Jean Buddha: Voices of Young Buddhists and The Buddha’s Apprentices: More Voices of Young Buddhists. She has a Master’s degree in Buddhist Studies from Harvard Divinity School, and was until recently the associate director at the Barre Center for Buddhist Studies in Barre, MA. Sumi teaches mindfulness practice to young people in Asia and America, and writes often on young adults’ encounters with Buddhism and meditation.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
December 20th, 2008 at 8:51 am
Whenever I see Buddhist end messages with Metta or whatever fill in the blank Buddhist term, I just feel like they are putting on their Buddhist name tag or something. It feels like the written equivalent to practitioners pretending to be peaceful because “that’s what Buddhists do” when you can tell they’re just bottling up everything to put on a good face. I don’t want to come off as being cynical because I’m sure some people are sincere when they type metta or emote a bow. I tend to be a traditionalist and end most of my messages with sincerely.
December 20th, 2008 at 10:26 am
If it’s Buddhist and a bit formal, I use “In the Dharma” or “Yours in the Dharma”; if it’s less formal, I use “All the best”; if it’s a bud, it’s “Rock on”
December 20th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
To the sangha I also use “Yours in the Dharma,” or “Yours in the Vision,” or just “Yours.” But mostly with friends I use xx~ double smooches with a tilde (affectionate vibes).
December 21st, 2008 at 12:26 pm
I always liked “metta” because it communicated something sincere and yet not too personal (even though I may not have always meant it). Recently I’ve picked up “mettaya” from people who are more proficient in Pali than I am — this is the instrumental case, so: “with metta.” I think this means I’ve joined a gang of Pali snobs.
My favorite valediction is the one I picked up in a lab in France. My lab director would always sign her emails with a celebration of the day of the week: Bon Dimanche! Happy Sunday
December 21st, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Thanks for this view. I’ve always used “With Metta” to close among my fellow community practitioners, but have struggled with non buddhist associates, professional associates, etc, so I have used “Warmest.” That feels comfortable and real. If I have to question what to use, say in a response to a letter from a person I do not know, quite frankly, I either write nothing or use some traditional close, like sincerely. With metta, Nanette
December 21st, 2008 at 1:19 pm
I am not a buddhist, but I am always on the lookout for any help getting through this life. That I (or frankly millions here and around the world) should have such worries as articulated in this story!
December 21st, 2008 at 3:09 pm
When I first began practicing with a sangha I flirted with the idea of ending in “gassho” and the like…but ultimately I felt like an impostor.
I came to the realization that “sincerely” was the best for me because, rather than trying to realize a particular external goal associated with another person, it reinforced my own attitude in writing the text. As you say with “gratefully”, when writing “sincerely” I reflect on whether what I have written is fair, honest, and crafted with skillful speech.
In Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind Shunryu Suzuki says that the one-thousand mile long railroad track along which the bodhisattva vows to travel is nothing more than acting with utmost sincerity.
December 22nd, 2008 at 9:07 am
Someone I once worked for had a continuum of closings, depending on the recipient (I did a lot of her correspondence, so I was tempted to make a spreadsheet or database of these, but she always remembered who was what level). Anyway, they were “sincerely” for strangers or acquaintances, “warmly” for friends or closer associates, “fondly” for people that she really knew well (and really liked), and “love” was reserved for family. I always wondered if someone would notice if she downgraded them from “fondly” to “warmly”…but I like those two closings pretty well. “Best” is also good.
December 22nd, 2008 at 9:51 am
My sweet lord! This was an incredibly neurotic article.
December 22nd, 2008 at 9:53 am
Hi Benji… I kinda thought of it as more playful than that…
December 22nd, 2008 at 11:34 am
Looks like one person’s “neurotic” is another’s mindfulness!
Great post Sumi. I also have pondered this question-every day, now that I think of it. I don’t use metta so much anymore and rely on the old xxoo more often than not, but sometimes wonder if my more serious dharma-student friends see this sign off as a bit flip. In which case I use All the best.
Boogers to all,
j
December 22nd, 2008 at 2:38 pm
[...] My e-Dharma dilemma [...]
December 23rd, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Hi, Sumi.
Many people in the sangha I recently left (long story) use “palms together.”
There are two reasons for this.
First of all, people who don’t follow a Japanese traditon (Zen or Shin or Nichiren or whatever), don’t necessarily know what “gassho” means. One person mistook it for a sneeze. Another got totally pissy about my using “esoteric” words.
The second reason is that our sensei began closing his missives with “palms together.” Monkey mind see, monkey mind do. (Not a put-down. I am unduly fond of monkeys.)
What I like best is a Hinglish phrase I picked up from Bollywood films: “Ok, bye.”
So, happy holidays. I MISS YOU! Ok, bye.
December 23rd, 2008 at 5:11 pm
[...] “How should one Buddhist sign off on an email to another Buddhist? It’s no big deal, right? Wrong. It is way more complicated than you can imagine,” says Sumi Loundon Kim in a guest post over at the ever-hip Buddhist pop- and sub-culture site The Worst Horse. [...]
December 24th, 2008 at 6:43 am
Forgot to mention, for my impossibly het, macho male friends, I always use “xxoo”.
December 24th, 2008 at 11:09 am
[...] made signing off in her emails “way more complicated than you might imagine.” Click here for her proposed [...]
December 24th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
In Korean temples, at the end of the evening ceremonies, people turn to one anther and softly speak, “Seong Bul Hashipshi-yo.” (May you become a Buddha)
I enjoyed using that one for a while, although I only used it written in Korean.
My monk friend usually signs out, “With palms together,” there are many as such that my friends play around with. I don’t think any of us have one that we stick to~
January 3rd, 2009 at 2:32 pm
[...] can try to read the post (and comments) in its original context here. Otherwise, I’ve taken the liberty of re-posting Sumi’s entertaining (and [...]
January 7th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
namaste.
September 20th, 2009 at 7:37 am
My sweet lord! This was an incredibly neurotic article.