The Misconception of Codependency-Ruth: A woman of love or codependency?

By Ashrei (Ima Sari Wisenthal)

There is a common saying that teaching a poor man to fish is better than giving the poor man fish. It is better to teach someone how to work, than to have them get accustomed to receiving your help. This is rightfully taught by many sages, across cultures and religions, for thousands of years.

Teaching a poor man how to fend for himself and make his own way in the world might be the longer and more frustrating route, but the end result is one of a fortified individual, able to better withstand whatever storms might come his way. 

When a person goes through difficult times, the lessons of how to be resilient, independent, and how to grow in self reliance, is a critical step to be able to heal from trauma and mental residues that infiltrated the mind during those hard times. 

The Bible, repeatedly, says we should ensure to take care of the poor and needy. What exactly that means can change based on the situation. 

We might be willing to provide guidance, but overall, today’s overall cultural preferences are to teach how to fend for yourself, rather than take someone under your wing; we rather teach to swim with the sharks rather than have you join a pleasant dolphin swim. Before you judge this analogy, please consider, you would learn how to eat fish in both scenarios - the difference is, the former is confrontational, the ladder is cooperative and gentle.  

So which one is it? Did the Torah get it wrong, or are we not seeing the full picture?

In case such as recovery from abusive relationships and other situations when an individual seems to not have matured to the point of being able to take response for their actions, it would make sense that it is wise to use this painful opportunity and support the learning of a priceless life lesson- you do not need to depend on anyone, you can do this. We expect that you step out of your comfort zone, initiate your next action and start building yourself up; this, we tell ourselves, is the way you earn respect. Not only will others respect your process and effort, but you will gain the positive psychological benefit of attaining a difficult goal through your own efforts. You get a “win” and all the accolades that go along with it. 

Yet I am left to wonder, is this just another illusion of modern culture? Is this not just another way of mixing up the ego's desire to feel like a “winner” with best practice? Consider that both the person seeking help and the one teaching end up getting an ego boost; however, this ego boost can only be available if the person looking for help is actually succeeding. What happens when they fail? Does the teacher hold any accountability? 

Those working in the mental health industry, such as psychologists and counsellors, can often reach a point where the client appears to be resistant to change. Rather than admitting that the service provider was not able to do their job well, we tend to say “the client is resistant to change” or “the client did not follow up with the practices we discussed in our meetings.” While the person seeking help bears the responsibility to take initiative and work towards fixing their own life, is it true that the person giving counsel did all they could? 

Many do face the challenges of facing resistance to change. Change is hard. Facing your shortcomings can be extremely difficult. Fighting against your demons can be brutal. Many, consciously or subconsciously, choose to avoid this internal battle for as long as they humanly can, even if the cost to their lives is extremely high. In such cases, yes, the individual needs to learn to face the challenge, to own up for mistakes, to take responsibility, and initiate actions in their own life. 

Though it might be a smaller group, there are some who have matured, functioned as effective adults, faved their demons and fears, and learned how to be resilient and strong despite life's challenges. For these individuals, life can still throw a curveball, hitting them in speeds and ways they could not have previously conceived. How would you approach helping such a person? Would you try to “teach them to fish” if they already know how to? Would you let them walk for days in the desert for the sake of them finding their own oasis, or would you give them a lift so they can start fishing sooner? 

When the bible speaks about helping the poor, the widow and the stranger, would we help all of them in the exact same way, or would we examine the specific reasons this person needs help? 

The biblical story of Ruth can help us figure out this modern day conundrum. Elimelech and Naomi had two sons, one married Ruth, one married Urpa. In a series of unfortunate events, all three men died and the women were all widowed. Since both daughter-in-laws have yet to have children, Naomi released them from any commitment to join her as she heads back to her hometown. Urpa (literally meaning “the back of your neck” in Hebrew), turned the back of her neck - and left. Ruth, however,  said one of the most memorable lines of the entire Biblical canon; “wherever you go, I shall go.” 

When Ruth arrived with her mother-in-law at Beit Lechem, poor and with no ability to fend for themselves, Ruth took initiative and went to collect wheat from the fields. So far in the story, we can see that Ruth is a mature and caring woman that can initiate actions for her growth and prosperity. The story continues, as Naomi, her mother-in-law, comes up with a plan to have Ruth tempt Boaz so that he might marry her. Ruth, as the story paints her, appears to be a woman of virtue, yet she agrees to go with Naomi’s plan. 

There are different ways to understand this contradiction between Ruth’s character and her willingness to attempt to manipulate Boaz. One option is that Ruth wasn't virtues at all, she was just ‘virtue signalling’ - she apears to be a woman of value only because she was codependent and had a hard time letting go of her dependency on Naomi. Alternatively, it is possible that Ruth was indeed a woman of great maturity and high ethical standards, which lead her to respect her mother-in-law and the Jewish traditions she lived by (which were not the traditions Ruth the Moabite was raised on). This perspective suggests that Ruth was willing to even bend her own standards for the sake of respecting her mother-in-law and the traditions of her heritage; after all, she did abandoned her childhood believe systems to follow that of Naomi’s, would it be such a stretch for Ruth to assume that manipulating Boaz was in some way also part of the higher and more ethical way of living? 

Boaz was able to demonstrate great moral strength and despite the misplaced temptation he was tested with, he was able to control himself and even teach Ruth instead. He was able to take a very challenging situation and turn it into a positive experience of growth for both of them. The morning after, he was able to make all the needed arrangements and legally marry Ruth. 

Commentators tend to choose to see Ruth not as the codependent, manipulative and weak woman modern psychology might see, rather they saw a woman of great commitment, strength and value. Why? Because she was reworded to have King David come from her lineage; a testament to her greatness. 

Yet, if Ruth would share this story in therapy today, I suspect she would be told that she needs to learn to be independent, not try to reach out to receive handouts from others. She could set up her own field, or offer to clean other people's houses for a few extra bowels of wheat. We would wait on the sideline, measuring her ability to achieve independence independently. This demeaning approach is similar to gymnastics competitions, when you wait at the end of your routine to see how well you were scored and if you finally passed to the next step. 

This type of cold and impersonal approach can be highly damaging for individuals who already contain strength, life experience, have proven they can take invitave, face their demons, and push themselves to do difficult things. Yet we still hold it against them when they show signs of codependent relationships. And here is where I, personally, believe the world is facing one of their greatest delusional sins.

Our culture promotes independence, do it yourselves, move out of your parents house, prove to others you can manage and survive alone, that you can reach a certain level of success without other people's help. And while this might all be needed experiences for most of us to go through at some point of our lives, there are situations when pushing someone towards greater independence is the wrong thing to do. 

For example; there is a growing number of parents, in their 40s, that have suddenly discovered they either have ADHD or are neurodiverse in some way. This is usually discovered because life was manageable for them up until a certain level. When kids were added to the mix, financial challenges, health complications, relationship struggles- there are different reasons that life becomes more difficult to manage around those ages, and if you have an undiagnosed cognitive diverse challenge, it might just mean that the way the rest of the world is managing this struggle, will not work for you. So, these individuals find themselves sinking. Life piles up complexity and challenges while they don't have the tools to manage the “normative” way of living. 

Would you expect the same level of independence from someone that has the capacity to manage smoothly within the normative society and one that goes through life using an entirely different operating system? 

Would you expect an android phone to function well after trying to install it with Iphone software? These are not operating systems that function in the same way. Similarly, for some individuals who, for whatever reason, found themselves on the margins of society, trying to function within the constraints and social rules of the “normative” world can be extremely difficult. The key is, to learn to differentiate between the ones who are not really taking responsibility for their lives, and those, who like Ruth, have the potential for greatness and just really need someone to take them in.

Just consider, what would have happened if Ruth was not taken in by Boaz? How much longer would she have needed to collect wheat from the fields or attempt to manipulate men just so that she could stop living in the margins of society? Unfortunately, our society, including some of our leaders and therapists, tend to miss this point entirely. 

To make things worse, our society neglects the fact that there are those times, even if they appear to be rare, that taking someone in under your wing, in a direct, open and loving way, will feed the person with love and confidence far more than any accomplished goal or “win” will ever achieve. 

It is true that in some cases, such as severe addictions, refusing to help places the responsibility for change on the addict and not on the family and friends around them. This will be the case for those who are refusing to take responsibility for their life in a myriad of ways.  

Nonetheless, if you ever find that someone who appears to have no fear of facing life’s challenges, if they are showing their are willing to push themselves and grow despite living through extremely difficult circumstances - and this person reaches out for help, guidance and support; ask yourself is the reason you refuse to help, if the reason you keep placing the responsibility for their advancement and growth is more a reflection of who you are and less of whether they are too codependent or hurt. 

Not being able to make this distinction can have a devastating impact on those who’ve been repeatedly crushed by life.  Love and collaboration, support and direct communication can be a far more powerful source for healing and advancement than trying to manipulate someone into action.

Naomi’s plan to try and manipulate Boaz into marrying Ruth was an ethically questionable choice of action. Trying to influence someone from behind the scenes can only be ethical if the individual is actually ‘in on it’; is aware of what is happening and is allowing for this ‘game’ to proceed. Yet this is a very dangerous path to walk on, as the lack of direct communication can lead to misunderstanding, miscommunication, and a lot of frustration on the side of the person being manipulated (‘helped’). 

If you ever choose to take the road of manipulating those who reach out for help, remember that every game comes to an end, and if you are paying this type of game with someone like Ruth; not Ruth the codependent and weak person, rather Ruth the strong, faithful and loving person - remember that it was she who birthed a density of kings, and ask yourself - are you sure you are doing the right thing? 

In contradiction to the manipulative way Naomi chose to work through, Boaz’s decision to confront the situation in a direct way, buying the field along with ‘the right to marry Ruth,’ was an action of virtue and of the highest ethical degree, and is only elevated due to the uncomfortable situation that he had to face, and the loose (financial) he had to encounter. Boaz saw the potential and tried to offer help and support in the most direct and effective way possible. He, as it would be, ended up becoming the father of a dynasty of kings. 

While those we try to help on a daily bases are not destined to be kings and queens (or the parents of kings and queens), it is still important to remember that what we see as codependence might just be a strong and extremely capable individual struggling with very real life problems. When such a person reaches out for help, think very well before you decide to ignore, manipulate or offer help back face to face. 

May we all know how to spot the differences between those who have genuinely faced setbacks and might need more than just one, or two, helping hands and pushes to place them back on the path, compared to those who genuinely need to learn what the path is, how to walk it, and how to build yourself back up again when you fall from it. 

And may we always be able to show love out in the open and not behind screens and closed doors. We are all so much better than lies and manipulations and hacking, and snooping through other people’s things. 

If someone like Ruth asked for your help today - would you help her, or would you send her on her way? Would you tell her “learn to fish your own fish” or “find a sofa at a friends house” or “learn to get yourself out of this situation” or would have the capacity within yourself to admit that maybe, just maybe, Ruth is on an entirely different type of journey that has nothing to do with learning to fish - in fact, codependency, something our culture does not see in a positive way, for her, is a healthy thing to have and is part of the normative functioning of the human race. We are all dependent on one another to some degree; yet, unlike everyone else, Ruth had the guts to see it for what it means, admit it to herself, and follow Naomi to new places. Ruth new that for her to thrive in this new culture, in that new environment, she needed guidance and support from those around her. And those around her helped. 

If Ruth came up to you today, and you saw the potential of her greatness - how would you judge her? How would you help her?  Would you tell everyone to ignore her and let her clean up her own mess - to ‘force her’ to face the next step? Or would you be able to see that she was stepping into foreign lands, and playing hide and seek can only lead her to confusion or wrong results. 

I would hope that if Ruth would come up and ask for my help, even if I am not the person to help her - I would answer her emails, set with her the meetings and discussions she was asking for, perhaps listen to what is actually on her mind and not just assume I know what she needs. I would hope I would be able to speak to her face to face, offer helpful advice, or a listening ear, and connect her to the people that I know can help her.

Alternatively, I would see a confused and needy stranger that has potential to grow, but ultimately, I would leave her to do her thing - just because I follow the common social idea that I would not want her to become dependent on me. And how easy it is to confuse true care, kindness and love with the illusion of codependency. 

Now it is your turn to decide.

---

Join me; spread ideas that will bring us back to true peace and deep love, and together, we will turn this dream into a reality. The time is now, and \your efforts to be peaceful and spread kindness and love are needed. Even the smallest act of kindness, a smile or one nice word, can make a world of difference to someone that is at their worst - and you never really know who has reached their worst moment - so always - be kind and peaceful, and we will create a world of peace.