Rabbi Nachman of Breslev and Cognitive Therapy: A Short Comparison of Conceptual and Educational Similarities
Rabbi Nachman of Breslev, born in 1772, was the great-grandson of Rabbi Yisrael Baal Shem Tov (Master of the Good Name) and founder of the Chassidic movement. He grew up to be an outstanding and charismatic Chassidic master. During his lifetime he attracted a group of devoted followers who looked to him as their prime source of spiritual guidance in their quest for God. The teachings of Rabbi Nachman focused on a number of key concepts such as faith in God, simplicity, study of Jewish sources (bible, talmud, legal code) individual and private prayer, and joy. He taught his followers that deviant past actions result from perceiving illusions which contorted reality. In addition, these illusions which led in the past to transgressions and deviant religious and social behavior, need to be rationally understood in order to erase them. The individual needs to focus on the rational present in order to improve his or her perceptions and actions and to live according to God's will. Unlike classical depth psychology which dwells on problematic key personality issues linked to the individual's past and are usually embedded in the subconscious or the unconscious, cognitive therapy suggests that problematic issues affecting the individual can be dealt with by helping the individual to rationally overcome difficulties by identifying and changing dysfunctional thinking, beliefs, behavior, and emotional responses. Cognitive therapy consists of testing the assumptions which one makes and identifying how some of one's usually unquestioned thoughts are distorted, unrealistic and unhelpful on the one hand and what the individual needs to do in order to view life rationally on the other.The conceptual definitions used by Rabbi Nachman in his theological model expounded in the latter part of the eighteenth century and by those espousing the model underlying cognitive therapy in the 20th and 21st centuries are remarkably similar and seem to have evolved from the same psychological assumptions. The similarities between the principles underlying two theories are analyzed and discussed in the present paper.