Our Gemara on amud aleph uses an interesting idiom to refer to “older” orphans, “Diknanei”, meaning they have beards. Rashi adds, “They are no longer considered orphans.”  What does Rashi mean?  A beard does not add or detract from the status of an orphan!

To understand this, we need to appreciate the special status that orphans occupy in halacha and Jewish ethics.  There are specific prohibitions and damnations that befall one who mistreats an orphan. The verse (Shemos 22:21-23) states:

כָּל־אַלְמָנָ֥ה וְיָת֖וֹם לֹ֥א תְעַנּֽוּן׃

You shall not ill-treat any widow or orphan.

אִם־עַנֵּ֥ה תְעַנֶּ֖ה אֹת֑וֹ כִּ֣י אִם־צָעֹ֤ק יִצְעַק֙ אֵלַ֔י שָׁמֹ֥עַ אֶשְׁמַ֖ע צַעֲקָתֽוֹ׃

If you do mistreat them, I will heed their outcry as soon as they cry out to Me

וְחָרָ֣ה אַפִּ֔י וְהָרַגְתִּ֥י אֶתְכֶ֖ם בֶּחָ֑רֶב וְהָי֤וּ נְשֵׁיכֶם֙ אַלְמָנ֔וֹת וּבְנֵיכֶ֖ם יְתֹמִֽים׃

and My anger shall blaze forth and I will put you to the sword, and your own wives shall become widows and your children orphans.

Rambam (Deos 6:10) elaborates:

A person is obligated to show great care for orphans and widows because their spirits are very low and their feelings are depressed. This applies even if they are wealthy. We are commanded to [show this attention] even to a king's widow and his orphans as [implied by Exodus 22:21]: "Do not mistreat any widow or orphan."

How should one deal with them? One should only speak to them gently and treat them only with honor. One should not cause pain to their persons with [overbearing] work or aggravate their feelings with harsh words and [one should] show more consideration for their financial interests than for one's own. Anyone who vexes or angers them, hurts their feelings, oppresses them, or causes them financial loss transgresses this prohibition. Surely this applies if one beats them or curses them…There is a covenant between them and He who spoke and created the world that whenever they cry out because they have been wronged, they will be answered as [ibid.:22] states: "When they cry out to Me, I will surely hear their cry."  (Look at tomorrow’s blogpost, Psychology of the Daf, Bava Metzia 71, for even more surprising rules regarding an orphan from Ibn Ezra.)

There is an exception to this rule, when done with great care and sincerity (ibid):

When does the above apply? When one causes them suffering for one's own purposes. However, it is permitted for a teacher to cause them suffering while teaching them Torah, or a craft, or in order to train them in proper behavior. Nevertheless, he should not treat them in the same manner as he treats others, but rather make a distinction with regard to them and treat them with gentility, great mercy, and honor for [Proverbs 22:22] states: "For God will take up their cause."

What is the definition of an orphan? Rambam (ibid) clarifies:

This applies to both those orphaned from their father and those orphaned from their mother. Until when are they considered orphans in the context [of this mitzvah]? Until they no longer need a mature individual to support, instruct, and care for them and are able to see to all their own needs by themselves, like other adults.

Therefore, we see that Rashi’s point about being old enough to have a beard roughly corresponds with the age of self-sufficiency in the economic realities of the Talmudic era..

One question remains. If self-sufficiency is the criterion, why then does the earlier halacha rule as follows:

“This applies even if they are wealthy. We are commanded to [show this attention] even to a king's widow and his orphans.”

The answer to this shows how the Torah often considers subjective emotional states as worthy of consideration. The wealthy orphan, though in no financial straits, FEELS poor and helpless, and that is enough. This is why the Rambam prefaces this ruling with the following observation (ibid); “A person is obligated to show great care for orphans and widows because their spirits are very low and their feelings are depressed.” Another area in halacha where the subjective emotions are primary is the obligations of tzedakah, which extend to restoring a wealthy person back to his standard of living: “This includes even a horse upon which to ride and a servant to run in front of him.” (Kesuvos 67b).

We do not say, “It is all in your head, grow up.”  The issue is their feelings, not the facts. 

Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation

Do you like what you see? Please subscribe and also forward any articles you enjoy to your friends, (enemies too, why not?)