The Complexity of Self Esteem and Humility – Nadab and Abihu Acharei Moss 2024

There is no simple formula for navigating self-esteem and humility.

Creative Commons license -2.0 

Judaism mandates humility, and psychology promotes self-esteem. I am not satisfied with the synthesis that humility and self-esteem are simply two sides of the same coin.  Instead, I suggest that to live virtuous lives we need to see ourselves as being of limited importance, and we also need to appreciate our worth. These virtues sometimes compete, and at other times complement each other. Let us begin with a scenario.  

“Name drop”
At the Passover Seder last week, I made a point that compassion for refugees is one implication of retelling the Exodus story. In illustrating this point, I mentioned that I met a past Australian Prime Minister who was vocal about refugees. “Name drop!” one guest called out.

Neither humble nor esteemed

It was light-hearted banter, but assuming that it was a “name drop” and not an innocent legitimate comment, it contravenes the requirement, to “walk humbly with your God”   [i] or, more precisely, to “walk in a hidden manner”. Jews are also urged to be of “very, very lowly spirit, as the hope of man are the maggots (that will consume his/her corpse when buried) [ii] ”. But according to a popular understanding of psychology, my problem was not actually regarding myself too highly, but a lack of self-esteem (iii). The name drop would be interpreted as an attempt to overcompensate for my low self-esteem. While this explanation is sometimes true for some people, I am sceptical of it as an explanation for everyone, all of the time.    

The Lure of the Synthesis
The synthesis between the virtues of humility and self-esteem is attractive to the modern Jew. Our generation is a generation of psychology rather than philosophy.  Psychology, or at least pop psychology, is what determines the essence of the human experience in the world [iv].  For the religious Jew to insist on humility as a stand-alone virtue is to sound like a flat earther. It seems easier to conform to the norm of emphasising self-esteem. Yet, to hold humility and self-esteem as separate virtues is to have a fuller spiritual toolbox for navigating our lives.

Humility and Nadab and Abihu
For the person of faith, humility is essential. We are invited to be of lowly spirit before every person [v] and never see ourselves as superior to anyone else.  Humility also enables us to truly worship God, on God’s terms, rather than our own terms. Nadab and Abihu were two men who lacked such humility [vi]. Rather than obey God, they brought fire to God’s temple that God did not command [vii]. They failed to respect that there are special times when God invites a select person into the temple [viii]. In their self-directed, overly entitled, drunken [ix], exuberant religious ecstasy, they displayed their arrogance. They were overheard saying that soon their elders, Moses and Aaron, would die and they would replace them to lead the Israelites[x].

For me, the lesson from this story is if I think too highly of myself, it can make it harder to restrain my desires. However, when I see myself as of low status, this can help me regulate my impulses to comply with the will of God and ethical imperatives.

Self-Esteem required for Moral Conduct
Sitting on a plane flying to Perth, I was surprised to read a Fifteenth Century Torah text that argued that regarding ourselves highly is essential for virtuous living or self-regulation. If we see ourselves as valuable, we will behave as befitting someone of high status; conversely, if we see ourselves as lowly, this could lead us not to bother doing what is right [xi]. The example of King Saul is cited. He failed to appreciate the importance of his office as King, and humbly followed the will of the people. The prophet reprimanded him for his humility with the words “If you are small, from your perspective, [don’t be] you are the head of the tribes of Israel, God has anointed you as a King over Israel!” [xii]. 

 

Conclusion

Every human, regardless of ethnicity, beliefs, achievements, or virtues is intrinsically valuable. We are cherished by God in whose image we were all created [xiii]. We never deserve to be hated by anyone, including ourselves. It is ok to be temporarily shamed when our choices fall short of our ideals. Like an email delivering a message, once the shame delivers the message about the gap, it can be deleted. And, at the same time, each of us is profoundly insignificant. We are mere mortals making some noise and doing a few meaningful things that are not such a big deal, as we are only doing what we were created to do [xiv]. Does this all fit neatly? Of course not, because life is complex, not neat.

---

[i] Micah 6:8

[ii] Pirkey Avot, 4:4

[iii] Lieberman, D. J. (2022), Mindreader: The New Science of Deciphering What People Really Think, What They Really Want, and Who They Really Are. Harmony/Rodale

[iv] https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/5099355/jewish/Can-Kosher-Make-Sense.htm

[v] Pirkey Avot, 4:10

[vi] Leviticus, 10:1-2 and 16:1-2

[vii] Leviticus 10:1

[viii] Leviticus 10:2

[ix] Midrash Tanchuma, Acharei Mot.

[x] Torah Cohanim, in Kasher, Rabbi M., (1978) Torah Shlaima, volume 27, p. 2

[xi] R. Yitchak Arama, Akedat Yitzchak, gate 64

[xii] I Samuel, 15:17

[xiii] Pirkey Avot, 3:14

[xiv] Pirkey Avot, 2:8

Tolerance of Real Differences in Approach and the Cohens Contentious Belt

No! It is not true that diversity is always delightful. Some diversity of belief and approach is highly concerning, sometimes dangerous and infuriating. There are instances where differences in approaches and beliefs are highly concerning, infuriating, and sometimes even dangerous. Australians don’t kill each other over religious differences these days, but there are other matters about which Australians are prepared to inflict harm, not with physical violence, but in other harsh ways. This post is a religious argument for tolerance – at least of people- in situations involving real differences. To fight fairly about things worth fighting for – playing the ball not the man - while also acknowledging common ground with one’s opponent.

I am reminded of a passionate woman I will call Esther, standing at a polling booth handing out ‘how to vote cards’ for a progressive candidate on election day. Standing a few meters away were some women handing out ‘how to vote’ cards for (Australian Politician) Pauline Hanson and her One Nation party. Esther was curious about her opponents and engaged them in an honest, curious conversation. She learned that they were motivated not by raging hatred, but by love and concern for their families and their own understanding of what was right. Neither she nor they changed their positions, and Esther continued to advocate for what she thought was right, while also acknowledging that there was common ground.

I was inspired to write this by some teachings about the Torah reading this week. The priest or Cohen was required to wear garments with very specific requirements (i) These included a belt that was made of wool and linen (ii) This mixture is normally strictly forbidden for Jews (iii) . When I buy a new wool suit, I need to send the jacket to a Shatnez inspector in Melbourne to tear open the collar to see if there is any linen in it that would make the suit forbidden to me.    

This will all sound ridiculously technical to people unfamiliar with these matters. Trust me, I am not interested in technicalities. This is going somewhere interesting.

One explanation for the prohibition of mixing wool linen is that doing so messes with God’s vast eternal plan (iv). Every object on earth is linked to heavenly energies. Every blade of grass has a dedicated angel (v). Wool is linked to kindness and linen is linked to severity or judgement (vi) and these two should not be mixed (vii). One prominent occasion of mixing these was when Abel brought an offering of wool and Cain brought linen and a short time later it ended in murder (viii). A literal version of what figuratively happens every day on social media between the “woke” and their “enemies”.

Yet, difference does not need to end in fratricide. Those of us inclined towards softer and kinder approaches don’t need to regard those with harsher approaches as our enemies. This is the message of the priest’s mixed belt. That the same elements that can tear us apart, that are like fire and water, can coexist in humble recognition of that which is greater than all of us (ix). In the case of the priest in the presence of God in the holiest place on earth, the submission to God enabled fire and water to co-exist. In our families and societies, let us advocate for all that we perceive to be good, and against all that we perceive to be evil, but let us be humble enough to recognise that there is usually common ground between us. As religious people, it could be that we are subjects of God, and otherwise, simply that we are all people.

Image: Jesslee Cuizon from Fujisawa, Japan, CC BY 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

---

^[i] Exodus 28

^[ii] Talmud, Yoma 69a, Maimonides, book of service, laws of the vessels of the sanctuary, 8:11,  

^[iii] Leviticus 19:19

^[iv] Fiddler on the roof reference

^[v] Zohar Vol 3, chapter 18

^[vi] Benayahu Ben Yehoyada, Shabbat 11a

^[vii] Rabbenu Bchaya on Leviticus 19:19

^[viii] Genesis 4:4-4:8 as interpreted by the Zohar and Bchaya.

^[ix] The Lubavitcher Rebbe, Likutei Sichos Vol 36, pages 153-160