When you hear the term “rage,” you probably think of someone screaming, pounding on the table, stomping with his foot or breaking things.

But I’ve defined rage as “reaction to anger,” and a reaction need not necessarily be of a violent nature.

In psychology we speak of a “passive-aggressive” reaction. This means that it is possible to be aggressive in a passive way. This is also true of rage. You can give someone the “silent treatment,” which is essentially saying, “I’m ignoring you.”

There is a fine line between walking away from an altercation and avoiding responding to a personal attack, which the Talmud says is most virtuous, as compared to the “silent treatment,” which can be very aggravating and is a rage reaction. You will feel the difference between the two. When you walk away from an altercation, you generally feel good about doing so, but when you give someone the “silent treatment,” you feel the anger percolating inside yourself.

There is a rage reaction that is permissible. When the Chazon Ish was a young man, he was in a shul in Vilna, and took a chumash (Bible volume) from the bookcase to learn. The gabbai (sexton) shouted at him, “What right do you have to take sefarim (books) here! Are you a balaboss (member) here?”, and took the chumash away from him.

The following day, the Chazon Ish came to that shul, and when the gabbai came around collecting pennies, which was all the people could afford, the Chazon Ish put a few large coins into the pushka (charity box). The gabbai looked up to see who was the wealthy person who gave such tzedaka, (charity) and saw that it was the person whom he had humiliated the day before.

The following day, when the Chazon Ish entered the shul, the gabbai handed him the finest chumash in the bookcase.

This was the Chazon Ish’s “rage reaction.”  It was certainly not intended as sweet revenge, but rather to give the gabbai an opportunity to do teshuva. It can be assumed that after this, when a stranger took a sefer from the bookcase, the gabbai did not reprimand him.

The Chazon Ish’s reaction was constructive. Giving someone the “silent treatment” does not lead to the aggressor correcting his behavior.

Ramban begins the letter to his son by instructing him to control rage, and explains all the evils of rage. He then says that control of rage will lead to anivus (humility), which is the finest of all traits. The obvious question is, if anivus is the finest of all traits, why did Ramban not begin his letter by telling him to develop anivus? Why take a detour, to control rage in order to reach anivus?

Ramban knew human nature well. Anivus is a feeling, and it is very difficult to develop feelings. We have direct control of our actions, but not of our feelings. However, Mesilas Yesharim and Tanya both say that our actions can affect our feelings. Therefore, Ramban began with control of rage, which is an action that is amenable to control, and when we succeed in controlling rage, that can result in improvement of our feelings, and anivus will result.

A woman decided that the lounge chair in the living room was shabby, so she bought a new one. But now the sofa appeared out-of-place, so she bought a new sofa, Now the carpets did not match, so she got new carpets, then came new drapes, new picture, new lamps, and new wallpaper. It all started with a new chair.

This is also true of middos (character traits). There are some middos that are incompatible with others. If we refine one middah, that can lead to refinement of many others.

Controlling one’s rage is not easy, and a person who succeeds in this is well on the way to improvement of other middos.

Ramban assures us that on the day we read his letter, our tefillos will be answered. Someone said that he tried this, prayed to win the lottery, and it did not work. It did not occur to Ramban that a person might pray to win the lottery. He assumed that a reasonable person would pray for siyatta dishmaya (Divine help), and if one prays for this, he will indeed be answered.