In terms of the world, to trust or not trust, it is better to trust than not to trust. In God you trust. Next to God, in yourself, you trust. It is no favor for you to give too much responsibility of yourself over to another.
 
Good partners do not always agree. You can have good trust in each other, and yet know that you will not always agree. Did you really think you would? Sometimes life itself is disagreement meeting disagreement.
 
Everyone sees out of his own eyes. In that sense, everyone is right, including the partner who sees the opposite to the way you do.  
 
In marriage or the like, what did you think? Did you think that the prince and princess would forever see eye to eye? The time comes when disillusion comes in. In marriage, you may not have grown to become King and Queen of your one realm. You may have become dissidents.
 
How you want harmony, and how it seems to elude you. Is harmony an illusion? Can harmony be created when agreement is not?
 
Can it not be all right for someone to not agree with you, and for you to not agree with someone else? Who says that agreement has to come before harmony? What is harmony anyway? Can agreement be to care and respect one another, including all those who think differently from you? Can you not leave the subject of agreement alone? Decisions have to be made, yet perfect agreement does not have to be.
 
Agreement cannot always be sought, nor bought, nor thought. Agreement is, or it is not. No one is to bear false testimony.
 
You can, however, let agreement go. How important is it that another sees as you see and does as you like? No one is to exist in your heart and life as your agreer. Only when there is agreement is that possible. No one is to agree under protest. No one is to exact agreement from another. No one is to control another. No one is to fly totally under the mast of another. Yet decisions have to be made.
 
Agreement or disagreement cannot be the issue. So what if you agree or disagree? Let go of attachment to agreement. Shake hands and don’t agree. Yet decisions have to be made.
 
Is disagreement something to atone for? Must everyone speak the same language? Not at all. There is room for all languages. Others’ languages can be understood. This is a given. This is acknowledged, yet the language of agreement tends to be enforced.  
 
No one says that every language must follow the grammar of Russian or Chinese. Each language is its own language. Every language can be understood.  One can learn another language. Is it not easier to learn another language than it is to insist on agreement between two people?
 
The idea that anyone has to agree with you is a call to arms. Battles come from this idea, battles between husbands and wives, battles between one nation and another. And then one nation tries to rally another nation to take its same side, and so wars are born.
 
Is the disagreement issue really an issue of disagreement, or is it a an issue of control and not really disagreement at all? If the issue is control, you are fighting a losing battle. You may exact loyalty, yet subduing another’s free will is not the same as agreement. If you see yourself winning something by subduing another, you win nothing. Yet decisions have to be made.
 
No matter how expert you may be, you are learning just like everyone else. It is yours to grant to everyone freedom of thought. This is the sovereign right of all. I bequeathed free will. I gave it to everyone, and so must you.
 
Someone who disagrees with you is not your foe. Where did you get that idea? Nor are you to consider yourself another’s foe because you do not see eye-to-eye with him. Who is to say which one of you has to see eye-to-eye with the other, or why?