At Avot 2:1 Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi opens with a piece of advice that accurately reflects the impossibility of defining in real terms what it means to do the right thing:
אֵיזוֹ הִיא דֶֽרֶךְ יְשָׁרָה שֶׁיָּבוֹר לוֹ הָאָדָם,
כָּל שֶׁהִיא תִּפְאֶֽרֶת לְעֹשֶֽׂיהָ וְתִפְאֶֽרֶת לוֹ מִן הָאָדָם
Which is the derech yasharah,
the right path that one should choose for oneself? Any that is considered
praiseworthy by the person who acts upon it and also gains him the praise of
others.
For those who like to know where they stand, who enjoy the
binary features of halachah (“Is it permitted or forbidden?”, “Is it
pure or impure?”) and who appreciate the formal, predictable structure of
prayer and Temple services, the pursuit of the right path in Avot epitomises the vague,
amorphous nature of middot. Not everyone is comfortable with the thought that getting things right in one’s real
life is so often a question of “it all depends”.
Here’s an example drawn from real life of the uncertainty of
best behavioural practice, one that highlights the need to get things right.
Let me introduce you to two fine Jewish women. We shall call
them Wendy and Mabel. Both care deeply for their fellow humans and are actively
involved in providing help and support for those who are ill or recovering from
illness. But their perspectives on this noble task are quite different.
Wendy is a firm advocate of ‘tough love’. She believes that,
even if a person is unwell or in recovery, they should be expected to do as
much as possible to help themselves, particularly in terms of feeding, washing
and dressing themselves. In her view, this enables the people for whom she cares
to retain their human dignity. She respects their autonomy and treats them as
adults, only substituting her own effort for theirs when she sees that they are
in difficulty. This approach, she feels, also speeds their recovery and makes
it easier for them to regain their position in the world once they are fully
functional.
Which approach is the right one, the derech yasharah?
A serious student of best Jewish conduct
might well ask this question. But anyone who does so will be demonstrating a
failure to understand the difference between halachah and middot.
The truth is that both approaches are potentially correct, but
the facts of each situation will determine which one should be adopted. Some patients resent being nannied while
others need and even crave it. The same
applies to non-patients too, in many social scenarios. For example, some women
appreciate and enjoy a spot of old-fashioned courtesy when a man holds a door
open for them, while others regard it as behaviour that is sexist, patronising
and insulting.
Whether one or other approach is the right one is decided by
the recipient of the care. For some, Wendy will be harsh and inconvenient,
while others will feel that Mabel is suffocating them with kindness. It can
also be the case that a person is a Mabel-style maximalist when giving help and
support to another, but a Wendy-type when it comes to receiving it.
Ultimately, before performing any putatively good act on or
on behalf of another person, it pays to know one’s ‘victim’.
For comments and discussion of this post on Facebook click here.