“RABBI’S MUSINGS (& AMUSINGS)”
Erev Shabbos Kodesh parshas Eikev
17 Menachem Av 5786/ July 31, 2026
Avos perek 5
HORSEMEN BEWARE
It’s one of the most important concepts for newlyweds to internalize and oldyweds need to remember: It’s not about if you argue/disagree, but how you argue/disagree. Disagreements and squabbles are inevitable in marriage. Two people with different perspectives, personalities and desires are bound to disagree on any variety of topics. Learning how to fight and how not to fight is a vital component of a healthy marriage.
Noted relationship expert John Gottman asserts that he has an over 90% success rate assessing whether a marriage will last or end in divorce. His research is based on analysis of 130 newlywed couples.
During their research study, Gottman and his team asked the couples to spend fifteen minutes in his lab trying to resolve an ongoing disagreement they were having while they were being videoed. As the couple spoke, sensors attached to their bodies gauged their stress levels based on various measurements of their circulatory system.
While his research is worthy of further reading and is beyond the scope of this article, following are just a few of the important points he shares.
The most obvious indicator that a conflict is not going to go well is how it begins. When a discussion leads off with criticism and/or sarcasm (a form of contempt), it has begun with a “harsh startup.” Research shows that if a discussion begins with a harsh startup, it will inevitably end badly. 96% of the time, you can predict the outcome of a conversation based on the first three minutes of the interaction.
One of the most fundamental points Gottman shares is about what he refers to as the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, a metaphor depicting the end of time. Gottman uses this analogy to describe communication styles that often lead to the dooming of a relationship.
The first of the horsemen is criticism, an attack on the core character of the spouse. There is a world of difference between expressing a complaint and criticizing.
Criticism can become lethal when it’s pervasive and becomes the gateway for the subsequent three horsemen.
The second horseman is contempt. Feeling contempt for another leads to treating that person with disrespect, mocking sarcasm, ridicule, name calling, and using body language, such as eye-rolling or scoffing. The target of contempt is made to feel despised and worthless.
Contempt goes far beyond criticism. While criticism attacks one’s character, contempt brings a person to lord himself over the other. Contempt is the single greatest predictor of divorce.
The third horseman, defensiveness, is generally a response to criticism. When we feel unjustly accused, we fish for excuses and play the innocent victim so that our spouse will back off.
The problem is that it generally backfires. Our excuses unwittingly conveys to our spouse that we don’t take their concerns seriously and we won’t take responsibility for our mistakes.
The final horseman is stonewalling, when the listener withdraws from the interaction, shuts down, and simply stops responding. Rather than confronting the issues, people who stonewall tune out, turn away, act busy, or engage in obsessive or distracting behaviors.
Another important indicator of failing marriage has to do with negative memories and thoughts.
Gottman notes that when he interviews couples, he always asks them about the history of their relationship. In a happy marriage, couples tend to look back on their early days fondly. They remember how positive they felt early on, how excited they were when they met, and how much admiration they had for each other. When they talk about the tough times they’ve had, they glorify the struggles they’ve been through, drawing strength from the adversity they weathered together. But in a failing marriage they are quick to reflect back on negative experiences.
These points are always good to review, regardless of how long one has been married. But I was reflecting on them particularly during the days prior to and during Tisha b’Av.
The Gemara (Yoma 9b) notes that the second Beis Hamikdash was destroyed because of baseless hatred. It’s often noted that the road towards redemption and salvation passes through the gates of peace and unity.
But, at the same time, the Jewish people are a tough people. We aren’t convinced easily and we have a hard time changing our minds. That deficiency has also been one of our greatest strengths and is part of the reason we have endured centuries of exile. However, it also is at the root of our feelings of enmity and disdain for each other. We have a hard time dealing with our differences.
I was wondering if perhaps the same fundamental concept regarding marriage applies to our national unity as well: It’s not about whether we will or won’t fight. Rather it’s about how we fight.
In moments of pain and tragedy we unite and put aside all differences. It makes us feel empowered and we lull ourselves into thinking that this time it will last. But that is not sustainable, because when the tragedy fades and life begins to return to normalcy, the differences return. If we don’t know how to handle differences then we cannot attain lasting unity.
Unity does not mean everyone agrees, just as in a good marriage spouses often do not agree. But there are rules and guidelines which must be adhered to in order to preserve the fabric of the marriage. So too, there are rules and guidelines needed to persevere the union of our nation.
We can disagree, and frankly, sometimes it is our duty to vehemently disagree with others. At times we may feel deeply and justifiably pained by the actions and words or other Jews. However, when those disagreements lead to hateful and unproductive criticism, vilification, contempt, and stonewalling, the divisiveness becomes irreparable. It then becomes an unbreachable barrier of us versus them. When there can be no respect for the person or group (which is far different than not respecting an opinion or belief) there can never be true unity.
At the funeral of Rebbetzin Chaya Rivka Auerbach, her husband, Rav Shlomo Zalman Aurebach, announced that he does not need to ask mechilla from his deceased wife, because he never did anything to her for which he needs to ask mechilla.
Sometime afterwards, Rav Sholmo Zalman met a student who had recently gotten married. When Rav Shlomo Zalman asked the student how things were, the student replied that everything was great and they never argued. Rav Shlomo Zalman asked the student if his wife was feeling well. The student was surprised and said that she was feeling fine. Rav Shlomo Zalman replied that it is impossible for two people to live together in the same house and never argue. He was concerned that the reason they never argued why because she wasn’t feeling well enough to argue.
The talmid then questioned Rav Shlomo Zalman: “But Rebbe, you yourself said at your Rebbitzen’s funeral that you had nothing to ask mechilla for from your wife, despite your decades of marriage to her.” Rav Shlomo Zalman explained: “I didn’t say that we didn’t have arguments. We had many disagreements. But we never slighted each other, and our arguments never became personal. Peace does not mean that there are never disagreements. Rather, peace is the ability to work through things and to maintain respect even when there are disagreements.”
At the end of kaddish we state, “Oseh Shalom b’Meromav” – He makes Peace on High, He should make peach upon us. Peace on high refers to the creation of heaven from fire and water. Fire and water are opposites, yet they coexist. Similarly, shalom does not mean the lack of difference of opinion. It is the ability for people, even those who have strong disagreements, to maintain atmosphere of personal respect, admiration and even love, even when they strongly reject the other’s viewpoint. That is a very precarious balance, but it is the gateway towards redemption.
The recent initiative, shalom for Charlotte (shalomforcharlotte.com), that has swept our community is reflective of this idea. People who have been hurt, some badly, have magnanimously decided to forgive their aggressor for the sake of peace. It’s not that they weren’t deeply hurt. But they are trying to live by a greater ideal because they understand that there is a union that must be preserved.
The greatness of the leadership of President Lincoln was that he was committed to preserving the union at all costs. A house divided against itself cannot stand. He went to war over that ideal. There were rancorous feelings and strong disagreements on both sides. Yet Lincoln declared that they would seek to have “malice towards none and charity to all.” The odds were against him, and it cost him his life. But – as of this writing at least – the union still stands 8 score and 8 years after Lincoln uttered those worlds.
The must be our attitude as well. There is a lot of disagreement, and much is justified. But above all we must be committed to the preservation of the union, now and always.
Shabbat Shalom & Good Shabbos,
R’ Dani and Chani Staum
STRIVINGHIGHER.COM