Maimonides wrote that anger is sometimes appropriate but,
apparently, also that anger is always wrong.
I will argue that, despite Maimonides cautioning us about the dangers of
excessive anger, he permitted real anger when it is warranted, on condition
that one does not lose control.
Chapter 1 - Anger is appropriate only when warranted.
In chapter 1,[i]
Maimonides taught that one should follow the middle path. “Do not be an angry person, easily
angered; nor be like the dead, without feeling; rather one should be
in between these extremes. Be angry[ii]
only about big matters that warrant anger, to prevent the matter from recurring.”
Chapter 2 - Don’t get angry even when warranted.
In chapter 2,[iii]
Maimonides wrote that “it is forbidden to follow the middle path” regarding
anger. “Anger is an exceptionally bad quality. A person must teach himself
not to become angry even when anger is warranted.” This appears to be the
exact opposite of his guidance in chapter 1.
Aristotle vs the rabbis
One academic perspective on this apparent
contradiction is that, in chapter 1, Maimonides was following the teachings of
Aristotle, who advocated the middle way of being good-tempered – to get angry
only in the appropriate manner on the appropriate occasion[iv].
In chapter 2, Maimonides rejected Aristotle and followed the teachings of the rabbis[v].
In the Abbreviated Code of
Jewish Law (the Kitzur), these chapters of Maimonides are quoted verbatim,
except for the permission to get angry when it is warranted in chapter 1, which
is omitted[vi].
This makes sense if the author of the abbreviated code thought that chapter 2
is rabbinic and chapter 1 is Aristotelian.
This reflects a broader disagreement between the
Torah’s approach and that of Aristotle. In Aristotle’s worldview, pride is a
virtue, and a slight to one’s honour is seen to justify anger; in contrast, the rabbinic
attitude sees pride as a vice and humility as a virtue, which makes anger about
slights to honour
unacceptable[vii].
Maimonides wrote elsewhere that authors might
contradict themselves in this way, first quoting one authority, then quoting
another with a different view[viii].
However, this approach does not completely explain Maimonides’ approach to anger
as it is reflected in his various writings.
Other texts show that anger, when warranted, is
appropriate.
Maimonides’ writings contain quite angry and scathing
comments about wrongdoers whose offences warranted anger[ix].
One target of his anger was a man, who condemned Jews who made a statement of
faith in the basic tenets of Islam under the threat of death. Maimonides was indignant
and scathing in his rejection of this man’s work, declaring that he had “darkened the hearts of people[x]”.
Maimonides wrote about the case of Moses being angry with the Israelites
for demanding water when they had none to drink, followed by Moses hitting a
rock and being punished by God[xi]. Maimonides
explained that Moses was punished for being angry in a situation that did not
warrant anger[xii].
The inference I draw from this explanation is that there are some situations
that warrant anger, in which anger is appropriate, just as there are other
situations that do not warrant it.
Only feigned anger is permitted
Some interpret Maimonides permission to be angry in
chapter 1 to mean feigned anger[xiii].
This approach is based on Maimonides’ comment in chapter 2: if a parent or a
community leader wants to arouse fear in their children or the community to
motivate them to proper behaviour,
“he should show them that he is angry[xiv],
but he should be inwardly calm, like a person who pretends to be angry, but is
not really angry.”
A careful reading of Maimonides’ words does not
support this interpretation[xv]. Real anger is implied by Maimonides’
statement: “nor should one be like the dead, without feeling[xvi]”.
Instead, one can take Maimonides’ comment about feigned anger not as a rule but
merely advice about how to limit one’s exposure to the vice of anger, even
though anger - in some cases - is permitted by Jewish law[xvii].
Genuine anger is an appropriate educational tool.
The Lubavitcher Rebbe wrote that genuine – not feigned – anger is
legitimate when teaching children. A teacher who seeks to correct their
students’ failings, is instructed to be angry with them[xviii].
The teacher must not just pretend to be angry as it is impossible to fool the
students and influence their behaviour; instead, the teacher should feel
genuinely angry[xix].
Anger only over big things?
An alternative attempt at reconciling the
contradiction between Chapters 1 and 2 recalls the self-help book titled,
“Don’t Sweat the Small Stuff[xx]”.
In chapter 1, two conditions are set for anger to be acceptable. A. something
‘big’ and B. a matter that warrants anger. Chapter
2 forbids anger where only one condition is met – ‘anger is warranted’; however
anger is not justified unless the second condition is also met that it is a “big
matter". [xxi].
The idea that “big matters” justify anger, aligns with
the Torah’s praise for Phineas’ indignation over Zimri’s public disregard for
the Torah’s morality[xxii].
Another example of anger in the Torah is Jacob’s anger at Rachel when she demands
that he be God-like to solve her infertility[xxiii].
Also, a big issue.
Another Jewish authority wrote that there are times
when anger is obligatory, and it is about such situations that the moralists
taught: “Don’t be sweet, lest they swallow you[xxiv]!”.
One who only gets angry rarely – with
difficulty - and is easily reconciled, is called pious by the Mishna[xxv].
Be angry but don’t become an angry person or lose
control.
An approach that resonates with me is Rabbi Elchanach
Samet’s[xxvi]. He cites Maimonides’ other work where he
defined anger as having two components - behavior and character. A person is
encouraged to develop a patient or tolerant character, as well as be moderate
in one’s behavior[xxvii].
In chapter 1, Maimonides is focused on behavior[xxviii]:
feeling anger is appropriate when warranted. Chapter 2 is mainly[xxix]
about character. Maimonides warns us that the angry person cannot think clearly[xxx]. It is this kind of angry character that
Maimonides urges us to avoid developing. We should not allow ourselves to get
so angry that we lose control, which would impact on our character.
When Maimonides wrote about showing family or
community members that one is angry[xxxi],
Maimonides meant to be genuinely angry, not pretending[xxxii].
But this anger should be controlled anger rather than one in which one has lost
control. This aligns with Maimonides’ writing elsewhere that God does not act
out of emotion, and that human leaders should aspire to the same[xxxiii].
Samet focuses on one important word, the word “like”[xxxiv]
in chapter 2, where Maimonides mentioned pretending to be angry. Maimonides’ concern
is that if one expresses controlled anger, it might not be taken seriously by
others. They might mistake the calm manner as a signal that the offence was not
serious. Therefore, it is ok to act similar to – but not exactly
the same as – an actor who is not angry at all but pretends to be so angry that
they have lost control. In fact, one is called to be more nuanced than the
actor whose anger is completely fake: we are advised to combine genuine anger
and calm, with exaggerated expression.
Acting like I lost it, roused a half-drunk actor.
I experienced this kind of mixture of controlled anger
and pretending to “lose it” on the morning after some of my Sydney Yeshiva peers
had been drinking on Purim night in 1991.
A group of Yeshiva students were scheduled to perform the story of Purim
in a play at Bellevue Hill Public School, at 8 am the following morning. One of
the young scholars with a minor part in the play, was too hung-over to get out
of bed. I was moderately annoyed with him because he was part of the team, but
not too worried because we could manage without him. Despite my confidence and
calm, I pretended to be extremely angry. I screamed and yelled at him, not for
his benefit but for his more crucial friend, half asleep in the next room, who
was meant to play the king in the Purim play. “His royal highness” appeared
moved by my acting and dragged his half-drunk body out of bed - the show could
go on!
Maimonides' guidance on anger – although contested – appears
to balance social utility and the recognition that anger is sometimes
appropriate, with restraint that ensures we don’t lose control and supports
virtuous character development.
[ii]
The Hebrew word isיכעס which is most accurately translated as to be
angry -but the Hebrew word is a verb.
[iii]
Mishne Torah, Hilchot Deot – Human Dispositions, 2:3
[iv] Aristotle,
Nichomachean Ethics, IV.5, in Frank, D., H., (1990), Anger as a vice:
Maimonidean Critique of Aristotle’s Ethics, History of Philosophy Quarterly,
Vol 7, No 3, pp. 269-281, University of Illinois Press
[v]
Frank, D. H. (1990), Anger as a vice: Maimonidean Critique of Aristotle’s
Ethics, History of Philosophy Quarterly, Vol 7, No 3, pp. 269-281, University
of Illinois Press
[vi]
Rabbi Shlomo Ganzfried, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch, Chapter 29, 2 and 4 where he
only quotes Maimonides teachings in chapter 2 but omits his teaching about
anger in chapter 1
[vii]
Frank, D.H. (1990). Ibid, page 272-273
[viii]
Maimonides, Maimonides, Guide for the perplexed, introduction.
[ix]
In addition to the example that I cite from Maimonides’ letters, see also his Introduction
to Perek Helek where he wrote about the accursed second group of
scoffers, who are so pretentiously stupid that they can never attain genuine
wisdom.
[x]
Maimonides, Iggeres
HaShmad - letter on destruction written between 1160 or 1162
[xi]
Numbers 20:12, Deuteronomy 32:51
[xii]
Maimonides, Introduction to Pirkey Avot, Shemona Perkaim, chapter 4
[xiii]
Knesset Hagdola, and E. Tauger’s translation of Hilchot Deot. Moznaim
publishers HaGedolah. Tauger’s translations renders chapter 1 in which
Maimonides says it is appropriate to be angry about big matters as “to display”
anger. In other words, to fake it. The
Hebrew verb used by Maimonides to convey ‘being angry” is Yich’os - יִכְעֹס,
which is hard to translate into English. Tauger boldly translated it as ‘to
display anger. See also the conclusion of Shaarei Chinuch, p. 245-246, Likutei
Sichos vol 22, p. 401 which seems to support this approach in cases not
involving a teacher and students.
[xiv]
The Hebrew text reads: יראה עצמו בפניהם
שהוא כועס כדי לייסרם
[xv]
Mirkevet Hamishneh, Aaron Ben Moshe Alfandri
[xvi]
Hilchot Deot chapter 1 cited above
[xvii]
Bigdey Yom Tov, Shlomo ben Yehuda Aharon Kluger, (1783-1869)
[xviii]
Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 246:11
[xix]
The Lubavitcher Rebbe, in Shaarei Chinuch, p. 245-246, Likutei Sichos vol 22,
p. 401
[xx]
Richard Carlson, (1997), Don't Sweat The Small Stuff and it's all small stuff,
Bantham Books
[xxi]
Abraham Ḥiyya de Boton (1560 – c. 1605) in Lechem Mishna on Mishne Torah,
Hilchot Deot 1:4-5, Knesset Hagdola also offers a similar interpretation in one
of his answers
[xxii]
Numbers 25:7-8, and 25:11-13, See Rabbenu Yona on Avot 5:11
[xxiv]
Rabbenu Yona on Avot 5:11, Rabbenu Yona lived 1180-1263
[xxvii]
Maimonides, Introduction to Pirkey Avot, Shemona Perkaim, chapter 4
[xxviii]
In 1:1 Maimonides mentions many behaviours including frequently being angry, or
never being angry, along with other behaviours such as self-torment with
hunger, gathering possessions or money, avoiding spending even a penny and when
spending feeling great pain, or wasting all of one’s money etc.
[xxix]
This resolution fits with a lot of the text of Maimonides but does not fit all
of it. In 2:3 it states “one should conduct oneself in such a way that he
should not ever feel at all for matters that make one angry, שינהיג עצמו שלא ירגיש אפילו לדברים המכעיסין which
is about behaviour, not character. I don’t think there is any explanation that
will perfectly resolve the contradictions arising from all that Maimonides
wrote in these two chapters that also fits with Maimonides other writings.
[xxx]
Deot 2:3 based on Talmud, Pesachim 66b כל אדם שכועס – אם חכם הוא חכמתו מסתלקת ממנו
[xxxi]
The Hebrew text is יראה עצמו בפניהם
שהוא כועס כדי לייסרם, ותהיה דעתו מיושבת בינו לבין עצמו,
which I think is best translated as he should show himself, before them that he
is angry. The Hebrew text can reasonably be translated in either of two ways,
either showing them that he is actually angry, or pretending to be angry.
[xxxii]
This phrase יראה עצמו בפניהם
שהוא כועס might be part of
what was troubling the author of Mirkevet Hamishneh about the suggestion that
only feigned anger was allowed – which he said did not fit with the לשון (literally the tongue, figuratively the exact words) of
Maimonides.
[xxxiii]
Maimonides, Guide for the perplexed, part 1, chapter 54
[xxxiv] the Hebrew
letterכ כאדם שהוא מדמה
