The Wayward Son Who Never Was

 In Jewish law, there's debate about whether certain things actually happened. 

Was a city ever put to death for idol worship (Ir ha'nidachat)? 

Was there ever a son so wayward that his parents had no choice but to get rid of him? 

The Talmud goes back and forth, from logical arguments to the anecdotal. Those rabbis who avow to having seen the above with their very own eyes, are countered by those who say, and I'm paraphrasing, "Even it was, it never should have happened!" 

When it comes to the wayward son, the camp who says it never should have come to be, make one operative point: besides the fact that no one in their right mind would put their own child to death because of a trifling amount of wine and meat, a child is pure at heart. There has to be an extenuating circumstance, some reason to judge the child favorably, no child deserves to die for a lack of obedience. It's fascinating though, how this argument manifests itself. The Mishna says the parents have to be of one view, and one voice, and the Gemorah, then adds that even if they had different body types and thereby had different voices, that would undoubtedly confuse the child. One parent speaks with this voice, the other, with another, one has this intonation, the other, another. 

That enough is cause to exonerate the child, to see the good in him. May the lesson we learn here re-instill us with renewed belief in our children, our own students, and anyone we might find ourselves a little bit, just a little bit, at odds with.