Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses the method of acquisition known as “chatzer = courtyard”, where an object can be acquired by being placed in the person’s domain. A mobile courtyard, such as vessels to be acquired that are placed on one’s moving animal, cannot acquire the objects. However, a boat is not considered mobile despite moving on the water, as the subjective experience is one of relative stability and standing still. Therefore, one’s boat might acquire fish that jump inside.
Mei HaShiloach, (Volume I Shemos 1) and Tiferes Yosef (Tiferes Yosef, Nitzavim 5) both use this concept metaphysically. The verse in Mishle (30:19) states:
שְׁלֹשָׁ֣ה הֵ֭מָּה נִפְלְא֣וּ מִמֶּ֑נִּי וארבע [וְ֝אַרְבָּעָ֗ה] לֹ֣א יְדַעְתִּֽים׃
Three things are beyond me; Four I cannot fathom:
דֶּ֤רֶךְ הַנֶּ֨שֶׁר ׀ בַּשָּׁמַיִם֮ דֶּ֥רֶךְ נָחָ֗שׁ עֲלֵ֫י צ֥וּר דֶּֽרֶךְ־אֳנִיָּ֥ה בְלֶב־יָ֑ם וְדֶ֖רֶךְ גֶּ֣בֶר בְּעַלְמָֽה׃
How an eagle makes its way over the sky; How a snake makes its way over a rock; How a ship makes its way through the high seas; How a man has his way with a maiden.
The simple peshat in this verse is by listing three occurring subjects and objects in the world that seem to achieve a balanced relationship despite the tumultuous environment, it is an inspiration that it is possible to achieve a sense of peace between man and woman. This is itself an important reminder that it is intrinsic within relationships to have opposite tendencies and conflict. How you handle yourself and others within that encounter makes all the difference.
Tiferes Yosef suggests, by way of derash, that these different relationships hint at different challenges in maintaining proper middos, despite conflicting impulses and tendencies. Mei HaShiloach says that the boat being relatively stable amidst the turbulent water, is akin to the person who can find peace and contentment via appropriate yiras shamayim, fear of heaven. He goes on to say that fear of heaven is not like regular fear. Instead of inducing anxiety, it leads to serenity and fulfillment.
What does psychological research say about religion and anxiety? Is the religious lifestyle protective, or just the opposite, and the guilt and pressure of religious life creates more stress?
The Gemara itself (Shabbos 86b) observes that Jews, who are concerned about fulfilling mitzvos, may have a body temperature that is hotter than a gentile’s, and therefore, there may be different standards and timelines for the absorption and breakdown of various biological materials. Interestingly, the Gemara considers the opposite reasoning as well: “Perhaps, since gentiles eat detestable creatures and creeping animals, their body temperature is also hot?”
Researchers Malinakova et al, (“Religiosity and Mental Health: A Contribution to Understanding the Heterogeneity of Research Findings.” International Journal of Environmental and Residential Public Health. 2020 Jan; 17(2): 494.) reported the following:
Most studies report a positive association between religiosity and spirituality and aspects of mental health, a lower prevalence of anxiety and depression, suicidal tendencies, and substance abuse, and better cognitive functioning.
While that was the predominant finding, some studies indicated the opposite. The authors sought to hypothesize what accounts for when religion protects from anxiety versus increasing anxiety. They considered the possibility that:
“Associations may be different for those living in more secular countries. Some studies report that religious individuals show better subjective health only in countries in which religiosity is common and socially desirable.”
This makes sense, as being part of a community is an important form of support, status, and social reinforcement. Additionally, they suggested:
“Research shows that a believer’s perceived relationship with God meets the defining criteria for attachment relationships and can function psychologically—much like other attachments…relating to God also contributes to personal happiness and that it has a strong positive impact on spiritual well-being…Taking into account participants’ image of God may therefore represent another way of taking into account the heterogeneous nature of religiosity and spirituality.”
The implications are that we may make God in our image, that is to say based on one’s attachment style with early caregivers, one may see God, our Father, as literally a father, for good or bad. People who have contentious relationships with parents and loved ones may have similar mistrust, fear and avoidance in their relationship to God. However, most human behavior is systemic and circular. So perhaps if one develops a more stable and trusting attachment with God, it might assist in developing better relationships with others and vice versa.
Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation 
Do you like what you see? Please subscribe and also forward any articles you enjoy to your friends, (enemies too, why not?)