top of page
  • Facebook
  • Instagram

Do I Have to be Neutral to Make Peace?

2 days ago
2 min read

No. Maybe it’s more accurate to say that you can’t make peace if you’re neutral. You may be able to play a role in the peace process, you may be able to bring the warring parties together to talk, but only the parties to the hostilities can make peace. What’s required is not neutrality. It’s openness. To be a peacemaker requires an open heart and an open mind but not an empty mind.

 

This insight is prompting me to relook at a wonderful Zen story. A university professor visits a Zen master seeking something. The master pours tea in the professor’s cup, pouring until the tea is overflowing. “Stop,” says the professor. “How can I show you anything new before you empty your cup?” responds the master. This story embodies a powerful teaching. I’ve learned to let go of what I think I know to allow room for new experience. I’ve let go of old jobs, even an old career, to make room for a new path. I’ve let some old relationships go to make room for new ones, but today, I’m thinking “empty” is not the right word for peacemaking practice. All these years, I’ve pictured turning my cup upside down to make room for the teaching. Today, I’m thinking emptying points toward neutrality and neutering.

 

Maybe I don’t need to empty to make peace.

 

Perhaps the peacemaker enters a situation with opinions intact. Maybe I just need to make some room in the cup, knowing what I believe, with room in the cup for something new, for other views of the world. Can I meet with someone who sees things so differently that he frightens me and still have room in my cup to appreciate his very different view of things? Can I allow my understanding to broaden?

 

If I am ready to answer “yes” to these questions, I can enter the peacemaking process. I don’t have to empty my cup. In fact, it’s essential that I don’t. If my cup is empty what can the other learn from me? Peacemaking is not a one-sided process.

1 Comment


Andrew Schwartz
Andrew Schwartz
2 hours ago

This goes back to our question of advocacy versus peacemaking.


Can healing action, peacemaking action-actions that arise out of (not knowing and) bearing witness also be advocating for certain convictions-opinions?


I acknowledge that it's just my opinion. I make room for another opinion and I invite the "other" in. Is it not still peacmaking if the bearing witness action that arises is an advocacy of some form?

Like
bottom of page