We’ll all have quarrelled at some time, and we’ll all know how stupid that is, an argument far too quickly taking on a life of it’s own and ending in us saying, and even doing, things that we regret afterwards. Of course, we won’t always agree on everything, not even with our nearest and dearest, but the advice of the following reflection, taken from my book The Teacher, is simple: whatever it may be about, end that quarrel before it’s too late, and the damage is done.
Quarrelling
I watched the quarrel unfold, and it was all so unnecessary, so foolish, for it was just a disagreement to begin with, nothing more – a mere difference of opinion – and that should have been an end to it, each putting the incident behind them and moving on. But both, feeling piqued, were determined to prove a point, so they dug their heels in and refused to give ground, until that little dispute became a raging argument – dividing, undermining, estranging.
Then I said to the Teacher, ‘Instruct me concerning quarrels and how to avoid them.’
And the Teacher answered, ‘Starting a quarrel is like springing a leak. Stop, then, before a dispute turns nasty. Avoid arguing with someone unless you have very good reason, and especially if no harm has been done to you.’
And I saw that though a quarrel may be justified it is rarely helpful, and even where it is helpful it is rarely worth prolonging, for instead of bringing together it drives people apart, instead of fostering agreement it engenders discord, instead of encouraging debate it stifles discussion, each protagonist ending up saying things they didn’t mean in a way they never meant to say them.
Then I asked the Teacher, ‘Why do quarrels so quickly get out of hand?’
And the Teacher replied, ‘Fools are invariably swift to quarrel; by far the more honourable course is to avoid discord. A fire short of wood soon dies. Likewise a quarrel swiftly ends where there is no one to stoke it up. In much the same way as smouldering embers respond to charcoal and fire to wood, so is an argumentative person in terms of kindling strife.’
And I saw that the fiercer the argument, the more the cause of it is forgotten, most quarrels becoming about standing one’s ground, saving face and proving oneself to be the stronger, never mind the rights or wrongs.
I saw also that though it may take two to start an argument, it needs only one to keep it going.
And though some points are sufficiently important to defend, they are fewer than we might think, not many being worth quarrelling about, still less falling out over.
The lesson I have learnt is this: better to be thought wrong than to insist on your rightness. Better to douse a quarrel than to fan the flames. Better, above all, to lose a quarrel than lose a friend.