Can you give examples of settling for tolerable tradeoffs instead of seeking perfect solutions?

Podcast:

Tolerable Trade-Offs and the Absence of Perfect Solutions

Can we talk about situations where tolerable trade-offs are necessary and perfect solutions are unavailable? Certainly. In fact, such situations are quite common.

Let’s begin with a contemporary example and then look at one from scripture. When Srila Prabhupada went to the West, he had no resources. Practically, he had nothing. Yet, he still wanted to build a temple. Some people in India were willing to help, including a well-to-do gentleman named Padampat Singhania ji.

Singhania ji wanted to sponsor the construction of a temple. However, during that time, the Indian government had very rigid restrictions on foreign exchange, making it nearly impossible to send money abroad. Prabhupada requested his godbrothers—who were in Mathura—to go to Delhi, meet the political authorities, and try to facilitate the transfer. But they were not willing to do so.

Prabhupada had also hoped to meet Lal Bahadur Shastri, the Prime Minister of India at that time. He had met him once in India, and Shastri was supposed to visit America after a trip to Moscow. Unfortunately, Shastri passed away—possibly poisoned—while in Moscow. That hope was dashed.

So Prabhupada wrote to Singhania ji and said that it was unlikely they would get permission to transfer the full amount. He requested partial support, saying he would start a small center with it and later build a temple. However, Singhania ji, though pious, had a certain pride. He wanted the satisfaction of having built a grand temple—not merely supported a storefront center. So he declined to help.

Undeterred, Prabhupada rented a small storefront and converted it into a temple. There was no spire on the top, no grand gateway, not even the altar facing the traditional direction. He did what was possible with what he had. Later, when ISKCON gained funds and influence, Prabhupada ensured that the temples in India followed many traditional architectural and ceremonial standards. For example, in Vrindavan, he invited local brahmanas for proper deity installations.

So, in this case, Singhania ji’s unwillingness to accept a tolerable trade-off cost him the opportunity to be the pioneer sponsor of ISKCON’s first center. Prabhupada succeeded because he was willing to start small. He didn’t insist on perfection—he accepted what was doable and moved forward.

Tolerable trade-offs often mean choosing something functional over something ideal when the ideal isn’t realistic. In this case, the options were either build a magnificent temple (which was not possible) or do nothing. Prabhupada chose a third option: do something simple, and grow from there.

We find similar examples in the scriptures. When the Pandavas returned to Hastinapura after their father Pandu’s death, they were newcomers in the royal court. Duryodhana, envious especially of Bhima, attempted to poison and kill him. Bhima survived and told Yudhishthira. But Yudhishthira advised restraint. He said it was not the right time to confront Duryodhana. They were new, lacked alliances, and didn’t know who would support them. Raising a conflict then could have led to disaster. So they chose to remain silent and act as if nothing had happened.

Now, one could say the Pandavas should have taken immediate action. But would that have worked? Perhaps not. They were still young, not yet fully trained, and politically vulnerable. Instead, they waited. Later, after marrying Draupadi and allying with King Drupada, their position strengthened considerably.

Sometimes life doesn’t present clear-cut rights and wrongs—only various shades of grey. The best solution may be impractical, and among the available options, we must choose the least harmful or the most tolerable.

Yudhishthira’s ultimate decision to fight in the Kurukshetra war is another example. He never wanted to go to war, even when Draupadi was dishonored and he himself was mocked. But when Duryodhana showed no remorse after the Pandavas’ 13-year exile—and even tried to arrest Krishna, the peace envoy—it became clear that Duryodhana’s power had to be checked.

War was a bad option. It involved fratricide and massive bloodshed. But the alternative—allowing a tyrant like Duryodhana to rule unchallenged—was worse. If he could insult a queen in public without consequence, imagine what he could do with unchecked power.

So the war was a tolerable trade-off—fighting a terrible battle to prevent something even more terrible.

In conclusion, tolerable trade-offs arise when the ideal is impossible, and we are left to choose between flawed options. It’s not about choosing perfection—it’s about choosing progress. It’s about choosing “something” instead of “nothing,” or choosing the lesser evil when both choices are painful. In both Prabhupada’s life and the Mahabharata, we see that wisdom lies in adapting to reality while staying true to our higher purpose.