Bava Basra 55
Our Gemara on amud aleph refers to a pardachas, which is an idle person. Rashbam describes this type as follows: a person who is idle from work, learning, derech eretz, and is not involved with settlement of the world at all.
In the style of the Gemara at times, there is no commentary or moral assessment about this person. The focus is the practical halacha, no judgements. Yet, what are we to make of this person? Is he depressed, or is he lazy? This is often the conundrum of friends and family of individuals who seem to be in a cycle of disengagement from life. Should we show compassion, because the person is unwell? Even if the person is depressed but refuses treatment, should we remain empathic and supportive because, after all, it’s the depression talking, or should we come down hard with tough love?
According to researchers Monaro et. al. in an article entitled “The Detection of Malingering: A New Tool to Identify Made-Up Depression” published in Frontiers in Psychiatry:
- Major depression symptoms can be faked. Individuals who want to feign a depressive disorder do not require any particular knowledge or specific training to produce clinically reliable depressive symptoms and signs. Furthermore, a large majority of both symptoms and signs are easy to fake: lack of concentration, restlessness, lack of interest for daily life activities, feelings of guilt, and so on are easy to fake if one wanted and planned to.
- Although it is hard to define it reliably, literature reports an estimate of the prevalence of malingering in a forensic setting as ranging from 20 to 40%. In regards to depression, Mittenberg et. al. reported that 16.08% of depressive syndromes which are diagnosed in litigation or compensation cases are feigned.
The researchers were discussing the prevalence of faking when there were financial or legal benefits, and so the percentages in private, individual circumstances may be lower.
There is a clinical questionnaire known as the SIMS (Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology), which employs a number of strategies to flush out fraudulent claims of depression and other mental conditions. The questionnaire uses intermittent trick questions, such as ones that sound like they would be symptoms but are rarely experienced by truly depressed or mentally ill persons. The liars would reply affirmatively while the truly depressed would not.
In any case, it is notoriously difficult to fully prove or disprove the level of helplessness and depression the person has versus possible laziness and avoidance. Because of this, and the frustration, embarrassment, and confusion, it is difficult for loved ones to respond objectively. Often, family members are at odds with each other, with one seemingly overprotective while the other seeming too harsh. A balanced approach is required, and when motivation is lacking, family sessions may be more helpful than individual sessions. The family sessions could allow the family members and the identified patient to discuss and mediate the concerns and/or possible consequences with the identified patient. For example, if the patient is not taking any steps toward recovery, it could be a legitimate response to cut off support, internet access, and the like. However, that also may increase conflict or distress to the point of danger.
Family sessions discussing collaboratively what to do about this serve multiple purposes: (1) They allow for warning and discussion of alternative consequences and/or benchmarks or definitions of what is considered progress and/or what is considered beyond the person’s ability; (2) The clinician can offer more objective feedback and assessment; (3) By virtue of the sessions themselves, at least there is basic accountability and dialogue.
When a family member seems to be lazy and unmotivated, it is frustrating and confusing, and most difficult to know what is fair to expect. However, patience, love, and professional guidance can make a difference in navigating this personal and familial challenge.
Maintaining Boundaries
Bava Basra 56
Our Gemara on amud aleph discusses a certain kind of plant known as chatzuva, which was used by Yehoshua to mark property boundaries in Israel. This plant has a root structure that extends straight downward, making it a natural, long-lasting, and reliable boundary marker.
This unique herbage makes an appearance in Gemara Beitzah (25b), where it sets a different kind of boundary:
Rami bar Abba also said: The sea squill, a plant from the lily family whose roots project deep into the ground, will cut off the feet of the wicked in the future on the Day of Judgment. It was customary to plant sea squill on the edges of fields as boundary markers because their roots grow straight down without spreading out. Those who overstepped boundaries and infringed upon their neighbor’s property should have heeded the markers and desisted.
Similarly, young trees will cut off the feet of butchers and those who have relations with menstruating women. After a tree is planted, one must wait three years before eating its fruit. This serves as a lesson for those butchers who hasten to eat of the animal’s meat before removing its hide, and for those who have relations with their menstruating wives and do not wait for them to achieve ritual purification.
The lupine [turmus], an extremely bitter legume that is edible only after an extensive process, will cut off the feet of the enemies of the Jewish people, a euphemism for the Jewish people themselves. As it is stated: “And the Children of Israel continued to do evil in the eyes of the L-rd, and served the Baalim and the Ashtaroth, and the gods of Aram and the gods of Zidon and the gods of Moab and the gods of the children of Ammon and the gods of the Philistines, and they forsook the L-rd and did not serve Him” (Judges 10:6).
By inference from that which is stated: “And they forsook the L-rd,” do I not know that they did not serve Him? Rather, for what purpose does the verse state the seemingly unnecessary words “and did not serve Him”? Rabbi Elazar said: “The Holy One, Blessed be He, said: ‘My children did not treat Me even like this lupine, which, because it is inedible as it is, must be cooked in water seven times in order to temper its bitter taste and is eventually made so sweet that one eats it as a dessert after a meal. They worshipped all seven types of idolatry listed in the verse, and even after I punished them for each and every one of them, they still refused to repent from their evil ways. Instead, they remained rebellious and did not serve Me.’”
The Maharal (Nesivos Olam, Nesiv Hatzedek 3) explains this aggadah:
The wicked might try to excuse themselves by claiming that self-interest and treachery are natural responses. However, their claim is invalidated because even in nature, we see a capacity to discern straight from crooked.
Likewise, the fruit of the fourth year and on is of superior quality; this ought to serve as a lesson that some things are well worth the wait.
The turmos bean, which goes through many iterations of cooking until it becomes edible, also serves as a rebuke for the Jews who chose to serve lesser gods and spirits instead of G-d himself. Even if they were to argue that G-d is remote and it is reasonable to direct the majority of our prayers to the local spirits, at the end of the day a small concentrated portion of prayer ought to be directed toward G-d. This is just like after all the processing, a small but tasty portion is left from the turmos bean, which is a delicacy.
Of course, the chatzuva does not really possess morality any more than the frogs of Midrashic fame, who made a decision to martyr themselves. Gemara Pesachim (53b) says that Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah inferred a kal v’chomer from the plague of frogs in Egypt: Frogs, which are not commanded concerning the sanctification of the name of G-d, entered the burning ovens of the Egyptians to fulfill G-d’s directive. All the more so, we, who are commanded concerning the sanctification of the name of G-d, should deliver ourselves to be killed in the fiery furnace for that purpose instead of bowing to Nebuchadnezzar’s idol. Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah drew strength from the idea that a frog can follow instinct and its purpose; so too must they. Similarly, the chatzuva shows that even within nature, there is an ability to remain steadfast in the boundaries of right and wrong.
