As I’ve been working on patience a lot lately (okay, always), I’ve had occasion to think about it quite a bit as well. And I realized that I don’t always know what patience is.
I’ve been surprised to find that there was actually a lag between losing my temper and losing my patience. I think that having a lag there is a big improvement over going to straight to losing my patience!
Okay, I know that sounded a little esoteric, so here’s a more concrete explanation: I’ve realized that the more I work on patience, I have still gotten angry or frustrated (lost my temper)—but I hadn’t yet acted on that to “lose my patience.”
I’ve been disappointed with myself for losing my temper as I’m working on developing patience. But when I lose my temper, if I haven’t yet acted in anger, I don’t think I’ve lost my patience. If I recognize how I’m feeling, and stop and make an effort not to act in anger, I can calm down and keep my patience.
Does that sound like an artificial distinction? I thought it was, especially when I lost my temper and my patience happened in the same instant. But the more I think about it, and the more of a gap I can create between losing my temper and losing my patience, the more I believe that this is a sign of progress. As long as I keep choosing to calm myself down, anyway.
Of course, that’s the thing with patience—it’s something you get to work on forever, since it can be so easy to lose! And once I start getting better about being patient (you know, in ten or fifteen years) (only half joking), I can work on not getting angry, either.
2 replies on “What is patience?”
I do think it is an important distinction. Good job.
Good for you! And I don’t think that’s an artificial distinction at all — I completely agree. In fact, my latest post is on this exact same subject. I was so surprised that it actually kind of works to *choose* not to indulge in the feelings of frustration, anger, etc. when they come. I always assumed it was something beyond my control.