Bright Side of Anger — BT Megillah 13b — #29

At that time, when Mordecai was sitting in the palace gate, Bigthan and Teresh, two of the king’s eunuchs who guarded the threshold, became angry, and plotted to do away with King Ahasuerus. (Esther 2:21) R. Chiyya bar Abba said in the name of R. Yochanan: The Holy One Blessed be God caused a master to become angry at his servants in order to fulfill the will of a righteous man.Who is that? Joseph, as it says, A Hebrew youth was there with us… (Genesis 41:12). [And conversely, God caused] servants [to become angry] at their master in order to perform a miracle for a righteous person. Who? Mordecai, as it is written, And the matter became known to Mordecai… (Esther 2:22).

INTRODUCTION

I recently ran across the website of the “American Humanist Association.” I don’t know anything about them other than their motto, “GOOD WITHOUT A GOD,” with which I have no quarrel: belief in God is certainly not a prerequisite to being a moral person, any more than claims to religiosity guarantee honest and decent behavior. An essay entitled, “Some Reasons Why Humanists Reject the Bible” begins: “Humanists reject the claim that the Bible is the word of God. They are convinced the book was written solely by humans in an ignorant, superstitious, and cruel age…” I’ll give them human authorship, too. But an “ignorant, superstitious, and cruel age?” Has he opened a newspaper to world news recently? Or national news? In the current presidential campaign we see droves of people flocking to support a racist, misogynistic, classist, xenophobic, homophobic, vulgar candidate whose campaign is fueled by hate and fear, rather than hopes and aspirations. But most of all, his run for the White House is turbocharged by anger. And anger, a dangerous  emotion, can be a high-powered weapon.

Come to think of it, “GOOD WITHOUT A GOD” is a great subtitle for the Book of Esther, which doesn’t mention God even once. It’s still a great book, especially for thoughtful humanists who appreciate literature (and, in particular, satire) as social commentary. What is more, I suspect that if committed humanists took a look, they’d realize how valuable it is.

COMMENTARY

R. Chiyya bar Abba makes an interesting observation: Although we usually think of anger as negative and dangerous, it sometimes facilitates a good turn of events. He provides two examples. The first concerns Joseph, whose angry brothers sell him to traders heading for Egypt, where he  becomes a slave in Potiphar’s house. When Potiphar’s wife becomes enraged because Joseph’s rejects her, he is tossed in the dungeon, presumably to rot there forever. In prison, Joseph meets Pharaoh’s baker and butler. In his anger, Pharaoh has them tossed into the dungeon, as well (Genesis 40:2). In their time with him, the butler and baker come to appreciate Joseph’s skill as an interpreter of dreams. When Pharaoh becomes angry that none of his advisors or magicians can explain his dreams, the butler—by this time restored to his post—recommends Joseph to interpret Pharaoh’s dreams. As a result, Joseph is brought up from the dungeon, performs his interpretive magic, and is made viceroy over all Egypt. 

R. China’s second example is from the Book of Esther: The eunuchs guarding the haram become angry and as a result they are careless when discussing their plan to kill the king and fail to conceal it from Mordecai, who overhears and saves the king’s  life. A notation is made in the chronicles of the kingdom concerning this event. Sometime later, on a sleepless night, the king reviews the chronicles and realizes that the man who saved his life was never properly rewarded. That is when the king summons Haman to ask his advice, and Haman suggests an honor that he feels sure the king will bestow on himself.

Aristotle

Anybody can become angry, that is easy. But to be angry with the right person and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose and in the right way—that is not within everybody’s power, nor is not easy.

Aristotle (Nicomachean Ethics, Book II, 1109.a27)

Yes, anger can be dangerous. But R. Chiyya is telling us that even anger can have constructive consequences. We need not subscribe to the notion that God is the invisible choreographer behind every event to recognize the great insight and value in R. Chiyya’s observation. (Nor could God micromanage the world if we believe in our own free will.) The intricate weave of events and emotions that describe and influence other events and emotions in the rolling, roiling, raging flow of human history is far too complex to reduce to a simplistic equation: “He got angry and therefore all these many things happened in this way…” Every situation can spawn a multitude of possible outcomes. We cannot hope to control it all, but neither must we be entirely passive to the flow of events. We can seek to channel even negativity in a constructive manner, as (according to R. Chiyya) God did.

QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER AND DISCUSS

1. Can you recall a time when something you considered bad or worrisome happened, but the consequences were surprisingly positive?
2. A famous saying attributed to Gautama Buddha is: “Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned.”
3. In an article published by the American Psychological Association, Tori DeAngelis writes: “In studies and in clinical work, [psychologists] find anger can help clarify relationship problems, clinch business deals, fuel political agendas and give people a sense of control during uncertain times. More globally, they note, it can spur an entire culture to change for the better, as witnessed by the civil rights movement of the 1960s and the earlier women's suffrage movement.” Do you agree? Does this apply to the current presidential campaign?