Bava Kamma 19
Our Gemara on Amud Bais states that while it’s expected for an animal to eat, if it eats from a table, this unusual behavior results in categorizing the damage as non-usual, subject only to half-damages. This observation of an animal’s atypical behavior brings to mind the well-known Rav Nachman story (found in Sippurei Ma’asiyos).
The story, available on the Breslov.org website (https://breslov.org/rebbe-nachmans-story-the-turkey-prince/), recounts a prince who descended into madness, believing himself to be a turkey. He felt compelled to sit naked under the table, pecking at bones and pieces of bread like a turkey. Despite all efforts, the royal physicians despaired of curing his madness, leaving the king in profound grief.
A sage arrived, declaring, “I will undertake to cure him.” He undressed and joined the prince under the table, adopting the behavior of picking crumbs and bones. “Who are you?” asked the prince. “What are you doing here?” The sage replied, “And you? What brings you here?”
“I am a turkey,” said the prince. “I’m also a turkey,” responded the sage.
They sat together in this manner until they forged a strong bond. One day, the sage signaled the king’s servants to bring them shirts, suggesting to the prince, “What makes you think a turkey can’t wear a shirt? You can wear a shirt and still be a turkey.” With that, they both put on shirts.
Continuing this approach, the sage encouraged the prince to wear pants when they were provided, questioning, “Why can’t a turkey wear pants?” Gradually, they both dressed entirely. Then, signaling for regular food from the table, the sage prompted the prince, “What makes you think you’ll stop being a turkey if you eat good food? You can eat whatever you want and still be a turkey!” They both partook of the food.
Finally, the sage suggested, “What makes you think a turkey must sit under the table? Even a turkey can sit at the table.” Continuously guiding the prince, the sage eventually cured him.
While various mystical interpretations exist, I perceive a psychological relational truth in this story. The prince, trapped in his delusion, “identified as a turkey,” impervious to persuasion. The only influence came from the wise man who initially respected him and immersed himself in the prince’s world. Living as a turkey, they built trust, enabling the sage to guide the prince towards more adaptive behaviors. Crucially, the sage didn’t attempt to disprove the prince’s belief; rather, he encouraged the consideration of a turkey coexisting with human behavior.
Carl Jung once remarked that our ability to influence others correlates with their perception of our openness to being influenced by them. This aligns with the imperative to respect subjective feelings and beliefs, even when evidently wrong – especially in such cases. Acknowledging motivations and experiences differs from agreeing with them. Authentic curiosity and interest in understanding others foster openness to persuasion and alternative perspectives. This authenticity cannot be feigned or employed as a strategy. Genuine respect and curiosity to see individuals as they perceive themselves present a significant challenge, particularly when disagreements or frustrations arise. Nonetheless, it’s an endeavor of immense value.
21: The Devil Within
Our Gemara on Amud Aleph observes that a desolate, abandoned home seems to deteriorate more rapidly, offering a squatter a rationale for how they benefit the owner. What causes an abandoned structure to become decrepit? The Gemara offers a concrete reason: the occupant makes small repairs on the spot, thereby mitigating larger damage. Consider a home with a small leak: if repaired, the damage is contained. However, if left unchecked, the leak can ruin other parts of the home, leading to mold and pest infestation. Yet, the Gemara presents another reason as well: there’s a special demon that enters an abandoned home and destroys its gate.
What does this demon signify? As highlighted in other Psychology of the Daf posts, both spirituality and psychology focus on the soul, often referring to similar ideas from different perspectives.
Be’er Mayyim Chayyim (Shemos 1:19 and 31:15) explains that demons and destructive forces are drawn to wilderness and desolation because kelippos are attracted to emptiness and avoid civilization. (Kelippos, literally shells, represent aspects of the physical world far from G-d’s spiritual influence; empty husks.) Why? Because godliness involves creation, filling, and nurturing life. Constructiveness, civilization-building, and especially performing mitzvos – where the Torah for a Jew serves as the foundation for civilization – align with this notion. Rambam (Moreh 3:22) delves into the etymology and metaphysicality of Satan, rooted in deviating or veering off course from attachment to G-d (see Bamidbar 22:32).
Reish Lakish tells us (Bava Basra 16a): “Satan, the evil inclination, and the Angel of Death are one.” That is, they are three aspects of the same essence.
Sin represents a deviation from this attachment, an entropic force in the physical world, prone to deteriorate without the divine life-giving, organizing force (see Psychology of the Daf, Bava Kamma 4). Thus, empty spaces metaphorically attract the demonic due to their chaotic nature, contrary to the divine order.
Finally, Maharsha notes that this demon targets the gate, signifying that destruction commences there. Neglecting boundaries invites chaos and the demonic into one’s life.
