Using the rational mind to defeat destructive
irrational emotions (such as fear& despair)
A)
Fear
can be ignored, it need not be defeated. If a rational mind knows the fear is
irrational, not reflective of true danger, one can simply ignore the trembling.
And what an accomplishment that is. No matter that the fear was not banished –
it was overcome and that is terrific. And if the fear is reflective of a
rational danger, as for a soldier at war or coming to the aid of a person in
danger (rescue in a fire, drowning, being attacked etc), one can steel oneself
to simply ignore the danger and fear and do what has to be done because one’s
agenda is not avoiding danger but rather accomplishing a certain dangerous
task.
So the first step is a rational analysis of the emotion, to see if it
is reflective of an actual danger, and also to determine what one’s overriding priority
is.
Personal example: Fear of the dark, of ‘the boogeyman’, can exist even
in someone who absolutely knows that there’s no rational reason to be
afraid. I’ve felt it myself, so I know. The fear can be just as paralyzing as
the fear of an actual true danger. But I learned as a child that I could simply
ignore it. [I once sat in the dark closet that terrified me, and closed the
door from the inside, in order to challenge the ghosts. When they didn’t appear
after a while, I went back to bed. I was terrified all the time sitting there
and even afterwards on the journey back to my bed, and while in it I still
wanted to cover my head to protect me, but I didin’t, and ever afterwards I was
able to rationally dismiss the danger and ignore any such fear.]
A rational
person who is paralyzed by irrational fear is therefore advised to develop the
following awareness: The body’s
nervous system, or the brain, is likely wired to produce a certain fear
reaction in specific circumstances: maybe it was a rational way of ensuring
fear of the dark among people in primitive societies where danger did indeed
lurk in the dark. A modern person in their dark apartment can feel fear of that
dark as a result of sharing the same genes as their ancestor from a primitive
society, since it is wired into their nervous system, but at the same time they
should of course be aware that the fear they are experiencing is not reflective
of an actual danger. That is, whereas there’s some
rational basis for the existence of the brain wiring which gave rise to the
emotion of fear, for some very rational reason some or all humans are wired to
react with this emotions when encountering the situations they encountered,
nevertheless the feelings being experienced are not necessarily reflective of an
actuality.
Of course
the recognition that the fear has no basis in the reality or logic of the
situation at hand will not immediately dispel the fear itself but it can help
in dealing with the fear, for example one can decide to simply ignore it as
much as possible, as one would ignore a cough or a limp, and go on with things.
B) Despair & Guilt: To dispel these
it’s useful to be able to separate reality from imagination.
C) As a child, sometimes when I used
to see my image in the mirror I would imagine that there is actually another
world “in there” with another “me”. Of course I know that it is all simply an
image[1].
Imagining another world was exciting, but it is useful to be able to separate
imagination from reality, otherwise one might try to actually ‘enter’ this
other world and be both disappointed/frustrated and also cut by glass.
Amputees often
experience “phantom limb” pain: their brain interprets the pain signals coming
in as though they originated in the amputated limb. A rational person does not
conclude that indeed their non-existent limb is causing pain; the pain is real
but the source is illusion, and knowing this can help to deal with it.
Like the
situation with the phantom limb pain, or the image in the mirror or fear of the
dark, a person who experiences numbing despair or overwhelming guilt may be
feeling these emotions not as a reflection of an actuality but rather due to
other considerations again perhaps the wiring of their brain, or how the wiring
of their brain interacts with the programming from their culture. A rational
person who is paralyzed by fear, despair, guilt or other emotion is therefore
advised to develop the following awareness: of course there’s some rational
basis for the existence of the brain wiring which gave rise to the emotion, for
some reason some or all humans are wired to react with those emotions when
encountering the situations they encountered, nevertheless the feelings being
experienced are not necessarily reflective of an actuality. Feeling that there
is no hope does not mean there isn’t hope, it is simply a feeling, it is not to
be taken as a reflection of an actuality. The feeling is quite real, powerful,
but it is a feeling, not an indication of a reality.
Example of rational analysis:
Harsh self-judgment: A person can be judged only
relative to what they were capable of achieving or deciding, after factoring in
all genetic and environmental (upbringing etc) factors[2].
Obviously only God can do this fairly (perhaps even the person themselves is
not capable of full impartiality; certainly no one is as forgiving – even of
themselves – as God could be.)
Anyone who
does everything they could possibly do is completely righteous in God’s eyes (‘a
tzadik’); even a murderer can be righteous - if they were raised to be a mass
murderer and fought their nature and nurture to the point where they committed
only isolated acts of murder not mass murder.
Most
people do not do all they can, and are in an intermediate category [‘baynoni’].
In Jewish
thought, Despair, the giving up of hope, is often considered as the weapon of ‘the
evil inclination (yetzer hara), to stymie a person’s further self-development.
The Rabbis
point out that sadness impedes the ability to receive the presence of God (the ‘shechinah’,
as with Yakov avinu re Yosef).
It is
simply not true that a person can be beyond redemption (teshuva).
Guilt too is
the work of the evil inclination if it isn’t part of a positive process of
growth.
So one who
experiences despair, paralyzing guilt or other such emotion must first develop
the philosophical intellectual awareness that there is no basis for the
feeling, it is simply an autonomous body or brain reaction (or ‘yetzer hara’).
This does not necessarily lessen the intensity of the feeling, but it may allow
the person to develop mechanisms to cope with the feelings, and simply ‘ignore’
them in the way one ‘ignores’ or works around any disability as much as one can.
Actions
can affect feelings: We are commanded to love and have awe of God. How can we
be commanded to feel an emotion? Rambam states that one should study nature,
and this will induce the appropriate emotions. So we are not commanded to feel
an emotion, we are commanded to do those actions which will bring on the
required emotions.
Smiling
for no reason at all, simply stretching the appropriate facial muscles, has
been said to cause the release in the brain of neurotransmitters which bring
some feelings of joy: the same is true for laughter, particularly for a good
reason – clearly if one hears a great comedian who manages to get one to really
laugh, then at least for those moments the despair has been replaced as the
dominant emotion. Spending time with friends, or family, or open conversation,
or deliberately watching a comedian, or taking a brisk walk around the block,
or jogging, exercise, can have beneficial effect. So even if one cannot on one’s
own overcome an emotion, one can decide to place oneself in a situation in
which the emotion will be overcome by another emotion.
One
mechanism involves trickery to get oneself to engage in a therapeutic activity.
A few times when I was exhausted and decided to turn over and ignore the alarm clock
I used the trick of telling myself that I’m getting up for only 5 minutes and
then will allow myself to get back into bed if I wish, knowing full well that
once I’m up I won’t go back to bed. Also, I’ve tricked myself into starting to
work on a project I was totally sick of that day, by agreeing to work on it
“only 5 minutes AND THAT”S ALL”! Knowing of course that there was a good
possibility that once I was into it I would be able to continue.
Waiting a
few seconds before answering in anger, in order to figure out an even more
scathing reply is a similar form of trick to gain time, knowing that this will
lead to diminishment of the anger and the disappearance of the need to reply at
all. Feeling sorry for someone who is obnoxious rather than feeling angry is a
technique. People wear watches set 10 minutes fast to trick themselves. And so
on.
For
example: I was once in a bad mood, I knew that watching a video of Jackie Mason
would make me feel better, so I tricked myself saying “who wants to watch that
stupid idiot anyway, and why should I feel better, after all I’m an #$%&*! I’ll
watch Jackie Mason for a few minutes to prove how stupid he is, how his jokes
are so dumb”, hoping that actually it’ll work on me and get me laughing.
A person
has to devise tricks that work for them to achieve what needs to be achieved.
We have to
focus on real goals, not imaginary ones, and judge things based on real
benchmarks not the impossible. For example, there is no ‘complete altruism’,
since whatever one does, one does because one decided/chose/preferred to do it.
One does good deeds because they make one feel good, or push away guilt, or to
gain brownie points (with society, family, God etc). Even self-sacrifice is
done for non-altruistic reasons: because one feels one ought to, or one feels
obligated etc, and thus the action is carried out due to one’s own desires, or
to fulfill a sense of duty or obligation or to get divine reward (olam haba)
and so on.
But this
does not mean that altruism is therefore tainted, or worthless. Not at all.
There’s simply no meaning to “full altruism”: it is self-contradictory to want
a person to consciously choose to do an action that they don’t actually want to
do (anytime a person has choices, even if all the available options are bad
choices, the option they choose is by definition the option they wanted to
actualize). So there’s no meaning to the term “full altruism” and so the
meaning of ‘altruism’ if it is to be a real word with meaning, must refer to
the altruism that is possible - It’s absurd to insist that altruism refer only
to that which is self-contradictory and non-existent. Therefore it would also
be absurd to denigrate our universe, our existence, ourselves, our good actions
and intent with the supposed excuse that “full altruism” is impossible; is
somehow self-indulgent to disparage altruism of ‘the real sort’ out of despair
of a world in which the self-contradictory altruism is impossible – such disparagement
it may be simply a means of attempting to absolve oneself of the need to engage
in moral behavior. One should pursue the good for whatever reasons one is motivated
to, and this is perfection.
What is our
life challenge or goal and what is an impediment to accomplishing our life
goals? When is that which seems like the latter (an impediment) actually the
path to the former (achieving a true life goal). Did Christopher Reeve end up
with a wasted life? After all, he was a famous and wealthy actor who now
couldn’t act anymore, and had to spend all his money on research for a cure. Or
did he rise to the true challenge of his life?[3]
Redefining
Success: We are
not in charge of our life’s situation, we are in charge of how we deal with it.
We are not always in charge of setting our tasks in life, or choosing the
specific goal, only dealing with the situations we are confronted with.
"Lo alecha hamlacha ligmor, velo ata ben chorin lehibotel mimenu”: We are
not responsible to complete any given task, the success of a mission is up to
God. Of course we have to engage in it in a rational manner; if we then do our
best but it doesn’t work, this is as perfect a result as when it DOES work.
In fact,
if our attempt does not work as we had hoped, this does NOT mean that God
wanted us to fail; no, because we did NOT fail; the task was to make the
attempt with maximum diligence - expending the effort, making the sacrifice was
the task, NOT the success. Whether or not the project turns out as intended is
not our business, that’s God’s business. If we did what we could then by
definition we have succeeded!
Some very
bright people have dyslexia, and they CANNOT spell correctly. Some other bright
people lack a sense of spatial orientation, they CANNOT draw 3-dimensional
figures, some cannot tell left from right. It is not possible that a
compassionate God would actually penalize people for what they COULD NOT do as
a result of God’s actions.
Some
people have difficulty undertaking actions that others find natural; I can do
mathematics some people find impossible to understand, while they can find
their way unerringly in a certain direction through an underground subway
station maze in a way I find incomprehensible. One cannot assume that what one
does easily and naturally is something that everyone else can do, and vice
versa. It is important to understand that emotional issues fall in the same
category: if someone is painfully shy or paralyzed by fears and cannot leave
their apartment this means that in their present state THEY CANNOT, not that
they ‘don’t want to’ or ‘are not trying enough’. Their responsibility lies in
dealing with that situation and trying to overcome, they should judge
themselves compassionately taking into consideration their limitations, and consider
themselves successful for achievements relative to what they could have
accomplished, not relative to what was impossible for them.
Religiously,
if someone tries to the best of their ability, that is all that can possibly be
required of them, and if they succeed in grappling and attempting and not
giving up on their attempts then THAT IS SUCCESS, THAT IS FULFILLMENT OF THEIR
OBLIGATION.
1
If
we truly cannot overcome and accomplish the goal we had set for ourselves then
this was not the true challenge by God;
2
To
the extent that we did indeed rise to a challenge and to whatever extent we did
indeed succeed (eg we succeeded in struggling, attempting – and we know that we
truly tried to the utmost of our abilities) then by definition THIS was the
challenge that God sent us, since God only sends challenges that we can
fulfill.
This is
the only rational approach; we need to heighten our awareness of this
principle, keep it clearly in mind, and internalize it to the extent that it
can affect our emotions, so that when our emotions fill us with a sense of
failure when we succeeded in attempting, not only will the rational part of us
know, but even our emotions can be affected as well, at least to the extent of
giving us the strength to go on attempting.
Rather
than acting on our instincts as would lower beings, or simply repressing them,
we can act as higher beings by channeling our instincts towards the good. This
is however the lower end of high-level action. At the highest levels we are
perhaps challenged to totally overcome our nature for higher purposes.
Avraham’s
culture was known for hospitality to travelers; Avraham was the symbol of
chesed, not simply waiting for guests to arrive, but actually running out to
them to offer water. He was asked therefore to do the complete opposite, to
cast his wife Hagar and son Ishmael in to the desert without water, an act that
must have humiliated him to all neighboring peoples. He longed for a son and
the elder son has a privileged place in that society, and he cast him out
instead. He was given a son to continue his heritage and was expected to kill
him. He was campaigning to bring people close to God, away from paganism, and
was asked to perform the abomination of child sacrifice. He wanted to be a man
of chesed, reaching out to others, and instead he had to wage wars against
them. He wanted to be close to God, and was asked for the ultimate
self-sacrifice: to do the act (bringing Isaac to be sacrificed) after which
there is no record of communication between
him and God.
Yitschak:
was the brother who was favored over the other, Yishmael, who was cast out,
with an eternal enmity of Yishmael’s family to Yitchak as a result, through no
fault of Yitscahk himself. He wanted nothing better than to enfranchise his own
son Esav, to ensure that Esav felt close, and wanted to give him the blessings
to strengthen him in his way. He could see the positive in Esav, and blind
himself to the negative, his strength was this blindness, the love for the one
who was so different than him. But he was forced to cause Esav the ultimate
anguish and alienation, and to see his two sons locked in eternal enmity as a
result, just as he and his brother.
Yakov was
“a simple man, a man of the tent” (to sit in the tent = to study Torah). He had
to be a liar and cheat all his life: to connive against his brother at the
behest of his mother, who was following God’s message to her to ensure that the
blessings would go to Yakov not Esav), and to deal with the cheating Lavan.
Yosef
started as a vain and arrogant boy, tattling on his brothers. And when he
received dreams which he felt were prophetic, he didn’t involve God at all. At
the end he changed and was operating at the highest level. His total focus on
matters at this high level was usually interpreted as arrogance by those around
him. Paradoxically it was the two Egyptians, the jailer who elevated him and
later Pharaoh, who did not see him thus. Yosef received dreams which he knew to
be prophecy but was totally oblivious to the effect the telling would have on
his brothers, he was aware of the higher level, but was arrogant as well. He
was also oblivious to the effect his dream interpretation of the minister to be
executed would have on that man, but he attributed his power to God. And his
chutzpah at telling Pharaoh what to do when all he was asked was to interpret
is an act that should have earned him execution. And Pharaoh could easily have
suspected Yosef of ambitions to overthrow him. But Pharaoh also operated at the
highest level and recognized Yosef as a peer in this sense and knew he was not
a threat, not a man after power or wealth or fame, simply a man above others,
operating at that level, uninterested in vanities of power and wealth. The
brothers at the end still did not “recognize Yosef”: he told them that he could
not harm them for their deeds since he could not hold them responsible for
those deeds since these were not their own actions but rather God acting
through them to place him in his pre-destined role of savior of the world
[45:5-8 , 50:19-21]: a supreme arrogance to those operating at the usual human
level, but an indication of his superior level to those capable of recognizing
this.
Moshe was
the most humble of men, and was asked to be a powerful leader. He wanted
nothing better than to give honor to his older brother, but was asked, even
forced, to assume the role of his brother’s leader and authority. He wanted
nothing more than to enter into the Land, towards which he had faithfully led
the Jewish People for 40 years, and was denied this, he had to accept dying
just before his people would enter.
Redirecting Life
Goals
A person
who struggles with deep challenges, achieves self-understanding, and acquires a
compassion for themselves has the potential to develop into a great person (especially
if as a result they develop empathy for - and acceptance of - others). It is
clear that such development can be more significant than the mere memorization
of information – even that from holy books – and more even than the
intellectual understanding acquired from intellectual study.
It can in
some cases be of equal significance to the spiritual development of a saintly
individual, or the ethical development of one who engages exclusively in acts
of chesed etc.
It is not
for us to decide what the fundamental circumstance of our lives will be, only
what we do with those circumstances. A person who intended in 1939 to be the
biggest lamdan in
It is
possible also for a person to actually get to their original goal despite
having to refocus those goals: let’s imagine that Christopher Reeve desired to
be president as Ronald Reagan was or Arnold S might be, at some time before the
accident he intended to start his campaign, he would have had to convince
people he was worthy, not simply a wealthy movie star, and he’d have had an
uphill fight, trying to cash in on the image of him in a superman costume.
However he redirected his energies after the accident, gave up on his political
ambitions.
He became
a very unusual individual; imagine he continues to grow, and that people in 10
years from now appeal to him to run for president - without ever knowing that
this was his secret ambition – because he is an extraordinary person by then;
he will have ‘lost’ 15 years, but he would be a much more appealing candidate, and
possibly much more likely to achieve his original goal. And he’d be such a
better leader, so much more valuable to his country and to the world.
So it is
possible sometimes – not always (the 1939 aspiring lamdan had no chance) – to
change focus and then discover that one has in the end actually achieved the
original goal.
For
example, growing via struggle and self discovery, compassion for self and
eventually compassion for others, can lead one to greatness, and if one is also
intellectually gifted and can apply the insight gained in self-exploration and
development to help others, it can even result in one becoming seen as a
leader, not the greatest posek or knowing shas b’al peh etc, but the deepest
seer into the human heart, maybe a person to whom others, even the poskim and
shas-memorizers would come for advice or even a brocho.
</ul> <strong><br /><a
href="http://www.pages.nyu.edu/%7Eair1/">Back to Home Page:
Physics, Philosophy, Politics, Biblical Studies</a></li>
....
NOTE: I wrote this
for Yeshivish-speakers, I intend to
translate it into English IY"H
[1] created by light bouncing off the mirror surface, there is no light coming from behind the mirror, all the light coming in to my eyes from the mirror only seems to be coming from behind the mirror, my brain is fooled by the reflected light; the “behindness” aspect of the image is an artifact of my nervous system (optic nerve and signal processing in the brain) not of the actual external world.
[2] Eg the concepts of “tinok shenishba” and “nekudat bechira” (Rav Dessler)
[3] morality tales (‘chasidishe meises’)
of this genre; someone thinking they are meant to learn, and they consequently
ignore some person who asks for help because it involves bitul torah and it
turns out that helping that person was their life’s mission (oy, is that
anti-Litvak propaganda?). Or one can think that developing into a talmid
chochom was the challenge, and then one gets into an accident and needs to
spend all the time on physical therapy, and so waste all one’s time, not
realizing that it was the dealing with that situation which was the challenge
they were meant to face.