Mishlei 16:18 - Two Types of Arrogance
Click here for a printer-friendly version of this blog post.
Artwork: Tragic Slip, by Christopher Moeller
(color-adjusted using Google Photos)
Mishlei 16:18 - Two Types of Arrogance
משלי טז:יחלִפְנֵי שֶׁבֶר גָּאוֹן וְלִפְנֵי כִשָּׁלוֹן גֹּבַהּ רוּחַ:Mishlei 16:18 Arrogance comes before breaking, and haughtiness comes before stumbling.
The questions I had this time around are very straightforward:
What is the difference between gaon (arrogance) and govah ruach (haughtiness)? It's possible that the two halves of the pasuk are saying the same thing in different words, but the next question makes that assumption unlikely.
What is the difference between shever (breaking) and kishalon (stumbling)? These two terms seem quite different, but what do they mean? "Breaking" seems worse than merely "stumbling," but in what sense?
How does gaon cause "breaking," and govah ruach cause "stumbling"? The implication is that gaon leads to "breaking" specifically, as opposed to "stumbling," whereas govah ruach leads specifically to "stumbling" but not "breaking."
[Time to think! Read on when ready.]
Here is my four-sentence summary of the main idea. Because I am not 100% clear about my answer to Question #1, I've erred on the side of wordiness:
Govah ruach (“haughty spirit”) is the opposite of “shfal ruach” (“lowly spirit”), and refers to arrogance as a character disposition (i.e. an accidental quality of the personality) – a psychological tendency to overestimate one’s own abilities and relative superiority; like other dispositions, the degree of govah ruach may fluctuate based on external circumstances or internal moods.
Gaon (“arrogance”) is the opposite of “anavah” (“humility”) and refers to arrogance as a fundamental temperament (i.e. an essential quality of the personality) – a view of oneself as intrinsically superior and inherently deserving of success; the quality of gaon is so deeply rooted in the individual’s character that it tends to remain at a constant heightened level, which only grows more severe with each accomplishment.
Govah ruach will result in “stumbling” – bad decisions from which the individual can recover; since govah ruach is merely an inclination towards overestimation of the self, it is possible (albeit unlikely) for the individual to experience a “wake-up call” after suffering the consequences of his misstep, provided he recognizes his hubris as the cause.
In contrast, gaon will ultimately lead to “breaking” – total destruction; the baal gaon’s unshakable conviction that he is destined for greatness will render him blind and deaf to anything which might lead him to question this fundamental egocentric premise, and he will continue to march forward in his megalomaniacal pursuits until he is utterly destroyed by the harsh reality which refuses to show him the favoritism to which he feels entitled.
The question I haven't answered is how to determine whether a particular individual suffers from gaon or merely govah ruach. In certain cases it seems pretty clear that a person suffers from a terminal case of gaon, but it other cases it will take a lot of data (i.e. instances of arrogant decisions and their aftermath) to be able to make this determination with any degree of certainty - and even then, I'm not sure whether it's possible to know for sure.
A Note on Methodology: Reviewing Without Reviewing
Readers of this blog might have seen this post and thought to themselves, "Wait a minute - didn't he already write a post about this pasuk?" Yes, I did! I called it Mishlei 16:18 - Pride Goeth Before the Fall, published in June 2017.
I learn with my Mishlei rebbi almost every Friday. A few years ago we started Mishlei Chapter 12, and have continued pasuk by pasuk. This past Friday we arrived at Mishlei 16:18. If I know I've written about a pasuk before or learned or taught it within the past few years, I'll usually remember the idea I came up with. This time, however, I couldn't remember. This afforded me the valuable opportunity to relearn it from scratch, and possibly arrive at a different idea.
After I learned through this pasuk again with my Mishlei rebbi, I went back and reread my old post. I was delighted by the fact that not only did we come up with a different idea this time, but the questions we asked were quite different. Last time I was most bothered by the phrasing and ordering of the clauses in the pasuk, but that question didn't even occur to me this time around. This time my mind seized upon the differences between the first and second half, and viewed that as the primary question, whereas last time I was more bothered by the question of "Duh! This idea seems obvious!"
I am fortunate to have had a Mishlei rebbi who has a terrible memory, who almost never recalls ideas and explanations we've come up with in the past. Consequently, no matter how many times we've learned a pasuk in the past, we always learn it from scratch with him. This has shown me how valuable it is to approach the material with fresh eyes and a fresh mind. Sometimes this takes me to the same conclusions as before, but most often, it leads to new discoveries and deeper insights that I missed the first time around. This pasuk was a nice reminder of that, especially since I have a written record of my thought process the last time around!