Search This Blog

Loading...

Buddhism in the News

Loading...

Friday, July 29, 2005

Change and Compromise

In true dialogue, both sides are willing to change.

~Thich Nhat Hanh

James's Comment: I am always amazed at how many people are unwilling to compromise. A lot of us cling to our own agenda so much that we are unwilling to bend in any way and that is dangerous i think.

-Peace to us all-

Stumble Upon Toolbar

12 comments:

ash said...

foresight can be more than a full time job

Amadeus said...

Much truth in this. Compromise is something of an odity in America today. Most people like the macho like it their way and only thier way--ideas and action.

What can we do to promote compromise? Is it really possible to get people to even agree to disagree? Even on the buddhist blogs we see individuals visiting other's blogs, grinding axes and insulting them because they don't agree about some obscure idea. If American buddhists can't compromise--what hope is there? ;)

~God's Beloved

Zen Unbound said...

TNH's statement isn't about comprimise. He is saying both sides should be so open that they could completely come to the other side's point of view.

I think the point is that we *must understand* the other side. THIS is something bloggers are in deficit on, IMHO: An absense of willingness to *understand* the other side.

In any case, I think we are obligated to be genuine/authentic. We cannot command that people behave in this way or that, but can expect honest dialogue.

-- Tom

Amadeus said...

TNH's statement isn't about comprimise. He is saying both sides should be so open that they could completely come to the other side's point of view.

Not comprimise, we meant compromise.

The term is "change". Both sides have a position that they are not willing to budge from. Changing could mean compromise or it could mean coming to the understanding of a view of another. Or it could even meaning changing your view completely and adopting another's viewpoint.

Dictionary:
Change-To give a completely different form or appearance to; transform, To lay aside, abandon, or leave for another; switch

So, "change" could even mean getting rid of our notions all together.

We can talk all day about what Thay meant by the term “change”, but the fact is, most often none of us have the willingness to budge from our positions. We neither have the willingness to compromise, to modify, to get rid of or adopt the view of another.

~Amadeus

Zen Unbound said...

Amadeus,

The willingness to change has to be wide open -- thus the attitude should specifically not be one of compromise.

I do not think that TNH is talking about 'grabbing for one's own a full half a loaf.'

The idea is that one's mind be so open that you might come to be a believer in the other's position and the other might come to argue for what you had believed.

Compromise, after all, has NOTHING TO DO WITH CHANGE. Comprimise has only to do with giving in such that things can get done. Compromise is always begrudged.

Willingness to change can [and should!] include wanting what is best for the perceived enemy. If BOTH SIDES are wise, then a solution will be found since both sides are interested in the fairest, most-just solution that best meets everybodies' needs.

Amadeus, let us not fight! Instead, you should be willing to change and come over completely to my way of seeing this matter.

I, alas, am fulling willing to change, but after some consideration, find I will not compromise because I am completely right.

Humbly,

Tom

James said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
"James" said...

Tom,

First off, "Amadeus, let us not fight! Instead, you should be willing to change and come over completely to my way of seeing this matter.

I, alas, am fulling willing to change, but after some consideration, find I will not compromise because I am completely right."

Is this sarcasm or how you honestly feel? Sometimes sarcasm is hard to read in print. Also, as for compromise and change-Did not the Buddha teach that change is in everything and change is inevitable? Or at the very least that compromise leads to change?

Personally I think there is no such thing as being 100% right. I think that there are right points on any side of a discussion. Yin in yang and yang in yin so to speak. I am by no means perfect and have much practice still ahead of me but those are my thoughts.

Just thought I'd ask. I'm not trying to fight here rather I'm trying to be the moderator of this discussion since it is on my blog.

Peace to you.

Amadeus said...

Amadeus, let us not fight! Instead, you should be willing to change and come over completely to my way of seeing this matter.

I, alas, am fulling willing to change, but after some consideration, find I will not compromise because I am completely right.


I agree, let us not fight. I will make a deal with you, you come over to my way of thinking and I will go to yours. Now we can see what kind of Buddhist we are.

Also, as for compromise and change-Did not the Buddha teach that change is in everything and change is inevitable? Or at the very least that compromise leads to change?

James, this is great you posted this. My point exactly. On more than one occasion Rimpoche has discussed this idea--I just didn't do as good of job of asking the question the way you did. Thanks for clarifying.

Finally, James seems to have raised a great point on sarcasm. I will be respectful and retreat from my usage of it. I apologize for trashing your house James.

I likewise agree myself that I have much to learn and this constant back and forth sarcastic exchange to no avail seems pointless. Besides it seems to violate the Noble Eight Fold Path anyways. Debate definitely should be best done non-sarcastically in the spirit of reason and calm thought.

~Amadeus

andi said...

I have to say I thought the sarcastic comment was pretty funny - worth a snort, at least.

One of the hardest things (for me)to deal with these days is being open to ideas from points of view that I see as destructive or dangerous. I realize that's a judgement call on my part (and probably destructive and dangerous in itself), but it's hard to embrace intolerance or ignorance, even in order to understand where they comes from. Dark places *shiver*

I have noticed, though, that when my husband and I start getting into "political" discussions, once we both drop the overheated emotions, we generally meet somewhere in the middle and discover that our points of view aren't that different to begin with.

I know that isn't the case all the time - hardly. But at least it works that way in my house, for which I am supremely grateful.

It's yet another something that I work on daily.

Genevieve said...

Sarcastic comments are not worth anything but a strike of the delete button.

A person should make their ideas known clearly and not hide cowardly within a mocking comment.

Zen Unbound said...

Y'all,

My comments weren't sarcastic or mocking -- except to the extent that it was self mocking and ironic.

I *believe* I was making fun of my own position as much as anything. I certainly don't feel hostile.

The first 5 paragraphs of my last post were a careful statement of my position; the last two where meant as humor, worthy of a snort.

Sorry that I don't feel terribly apologetic. Perhaps I should read my post a few more times, but for now I truly think it is clear I was jesting.

-- Tom

J_A said...

I never compromised anything, so I don't know, don't think, if I can fail to tell you that there IS good
news with & from me, whatever God exists or not, for your own sake, please receive a few more mails of mine, e.g. about, what true ↔ hap-piness means to me, though & since that money ideal still exists as no
true ↔ h., so that I can of course tell & e.g. help us both etc. find out &, whoever's who, our best answers to, what's our just as good future, all about & forever to be, why & when, greetings, arentved@in.com, there to be continued.

ShareThis Option