Ki Teitzei: Bad Boys

“A question is due to knowing too little, to a desire to know more; a problem is often due to knowing too much.”

Abraham J. Heschel

The Torah’s controversial “bad boy” passage in the Portion Ki Teitzei fortuitously came. Within the past month, I had began reading two books on point. Abraham J. Heschel’s “Who Is Man?” and Martha Stout’s “The Sociopath Next Door” provide enlightenment to the perplexing punishment; the portion’s pragmatic solution to pathologically problematic youth.

The topic’s initial queries are: “Who are “bad boys”?” and “what should be done with them?” To address both questions, modern thought applies. Can some answers be distilled through a scientific lens?

Ten Commandments‘ Connection

Ki Teitzei’s controversial law ventures down a Ten Commandments of rabbit hole. The portion partially answers the question: “what is to be done to a child who fails to honor their mother and father.” See Exodus 20:12. More specifically, the portion addresses the impossible child; the really, really “bad boy.”

The Passage

Ki Teitzei’s “bad boy” solution is as follows:

“When a man will have a stubborn and rebellious son, not listening to his father’s voice and his mother’s voice, and they will discipline him, but he will not listen to them, then his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to his city’s elders and to the gate of his place.

And they shall say to his city’s elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he doesn’t listen to our voice, a glutton, and a drunk.” And all the city’s people shall batter him with stones so he dies. So you shall burn away what is bad among you.” Deuteronomy 21:18-21.

Lens Craft

Applying a modern lens to the “bad boy”, are we in fact dealing with the trappings of a sociopath?

A sociopath is defined as “a person with a personality disorder manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behavior and a lack of conscience.” Oxford.

Dr. Martha Stout finds these individuals as not having a conscience. They feel no guilt or remorse no matter what they do. They have no sense of well being of others. They do not struggle with shame. “The Sociopath Next Door” at P. 1.

Later in her book, she raises the question: “[a]nd if someone has clearly been identified as a sociopath, what, if anything, can society do with that information? ” Supra at P. 13.

Guilt’s Religious Significance

Within the Torah’s landscape, guilt is central to humanity. Adam and Eve’s acquisition of knowledge of good and bad evidences its centrality. Adam and Eve’s newly appreciated consciousness transformed their existing and unproblematic state of nakedness into one of shame. Genesis 3:10.

Moving forward, Israelite religious practice was anchored to guilt. Richard Elliott Friedman noted that “sacrifice is the only mechanism for forgiveness in the book of Leviticus.” Commentary on the Torah, P. 322. He noted that “[n]ow, in the absence of sacrifice, other means of atonement have risen in importance. Notably, the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) has become the most sacred and widely observed holiday.” Supra at P. 323.

Thus, despite religious practice adjustments from establishment to present day, theologically, guilt remains a paramount factor within Judaism.

The Problem

As Stout indicated, sociopaths possess no sense of guilt. She indicates that it is believed that the current population contained approximately four percent of this noncorrectable disfigurement of character. In essence, one of twenty-five people possess are immune from guilt’s power. “The Sociopath Next Door”, P. 6.

Thus, the dilemma is how can someone with no sense of guilt function within a theology that is guilt driven? Is a sociopath incapable of participating in a Torah-based system?

The Ten Commandments’ Community

In a prior post, the Ten Commandments’ “Community Core Values” concept was advanced. Within that concept, the Decalogue should not merely be considered as individual’s code of conduct. Rather, it represents a community standard that requiring community compliance.

In antiquity, per Richard Elliott Friedman, it was believed that widespread non-compliance with the commandments (covenant) placed their nation at risk.

Thus, the Ten Commandments’ provision to honor one’s father and one’s mother constituted a community concern. Thus, a child’s patent failure to comply enabled the parents to seek societal intervention.

The Commandment, itself, evidences this greater community value. “Honor your father and your mother, so that your days will be extended on the land that the Lord, your God, is giving you.” Exodus 20:17. This confirms the belief that widespread non-compliance with this specific provision by implication would lead to the nation’s collapse.

A Modern Takeaway

While Ki Teitzie’s solution of “bad boy” elimination is not compatible with modern sensibilities, the passage’s other parts worthy of contemporary consideration.

They are as follows. First, the parents’ role in raising their children should be considered as sacred. They should be provided community support and assistance. Friends, family and others should help them learn effective child rearing skills. Second, the government should avoid injecting themselves into these relationships when it is not warranted or invited. Third, parents, just as in the case of children who may have developmental or cognitive issues, should have access to authorities to deal with the process to address what might be a seemingly noncorrectable problem. Fourth, once the parents have raised this issue, these children must be addressed as a a “community” problem. Fifth, research should address sociopathy’s role in society. How do people with no sense of guilt function? And, how harmful are they to society?

Conclusion

Considering modernity, did Ki Teitzei’s “bad boy” provision of antiquity in reality recognize that there were some irredeemable individuals?

If so, were these biblical “bad boys”, in modern terminology, actually sociopaths? Assuming that these individuals have an incorrectable problem, how should society handle them?

Finally, beyond this troubling topic, does this provision evidences how the Ten Commandments operates on two levels of morality? Does it make the case that the Commandments are intended to provide “Core Community Values” as much they serve as an individual’s moral code?

Be well!!

Please like, follow, comment or share.