Our Gemara on the bottom of Amud Aleph through Beis uses an interesting phrase to tell us that neither Acheshveurosh, nor Vashti, were innocent. In other words, they deserved each other. The phrase is:

אִיהוּ בְּקָרֵי וְאִתְּתֵיהּ בְּבוּצִינֵי

Which roughly translates as he is with pumpkins and she is with zucchini.

The Gemara quotes it as a common saying amongst people. What does that phrase really mean, notwithstanding the sefaria translation? Rashi (Sotah 10a) tells us the “Kari” is some kind of large melon and the “botzini” is some kind of small melon. The implication is kind of like, “iceberg, Goldberg, it’s all the same.” That is, both Achashveirosh and Vashti made their parties with immoral intent for sexual improprieties (Rabbenu Chananel Megillah). The Gemara Sotah (10a) uses it to explain that if one spouse commits sexual immorality, the other may be doing so as well. Once again, they deserve each other.

Now, I am not sure if this is a coincidence of language or the meforshim were deliberately cleaning up a vulgar popular phrase. However, the reference of the husband and wife using, respectively, a large vegetable and a small vegetable, could imply substitute anatomical parts.  Please use, or rather don’t use your imagination, as I will not explain it explicitly.  I have my limits.  I should add this is not the only time the Talmud uses a vulgar phrase. We have for example in Bava Metzi’a 101b, Rav Nachman exclaiming in regard to someone who was at a legal disadvantage, that he was caught by his testicles. But in our case, it could be that the rabbis, in their innocence, did not even realize the more vulgar meaning in the popular phrase.

In any case, the rabbis are describing a common phenomenon in marriage and that is called circularity or reciprocity. In order for patterns to remain, there needs to be some kind of force or compulsion holding it in place. Therefore, often times in marriages, people settle into patterns where each person’s behavior reinforces the other. It reaches a point where it’s difficult to tell who started it. It is futile to even try to figure out who started, because it has a little influence on the final outcome. At this point a deep pattern is set.

Here are two examples of the worst and typical patterns where couples get caught in mutually reinforcing dysfunctional patterns:

1. Demand - Withdraw 
2. Passive Aggressive - Assertive Controlling

The Demand - Withdraw pattern happens where one person is seeking, sometimes craving, connection and intimacy and the other person is overwhelmed and frightened of emotional connection and intimacy. They are subsets of this pattern such as when one or the other becomes hostile and aggressive, which doesn’t always happen. Sometimes there is just chasing and retreat. Other times, the chaser can become aggressive and hostile, and sometimes the retreater could become defensive, harsh, critical and demeaning.  

The passive aggressive pattern happens where one spouse is assertive, direct, and the other spouse Who fears confrontation, avoids, withdraws, or offers bland assurances. Again, like the example before, they are subsets which become more complex. The more assertive spouse can cross the line into being controlling. The avoidant spouse can cross the line into clinical passive aggressiveness, where basic needs and responsibilities are ignored.

The pattern itself is not necessarily a sign of either person’s pathology. It could have originated with natural non-pathological differences, and then escalated into pathology. One partner may have had more psychological issues in regard to the problematic pattern and only later induced and drew the other into a dysfunctional pattern. After years of intense dysfunctions, both spouses may be pathologically reactive.

Both of these examples show how each person's behavior reinforces the pattern. Assertiveness without good collaboration can lead the other into passive aggressiveness. Passive aggressiveness without direct communication can lead the other person to becoming aggressive and controlling. The same is in regard to intimacy. Someone who pushes the other person's personal safety and boundaries too far for their comfort causes them to become overwhelmed and they will retreat. On the other hand, if you have a person whose baseline is to retreat and withdraw and not reach out, it will naturally cause the other person to become insecure and chase.

How do you break patterns? It requires honesty and collaboration. Each person cannot work harder or less hard than the other. Sometimes a good question to ask, is what behavior or behaviors am I doing that reinforce this pattern? What behavior or behaviors can I take upon myself to do or not do that would change the pattern? If couples get into these collaborative discussions and hold each other gently and warmly accountable, as if this is a discovery and adventure of learning, instead of a blame game, they can make progress.

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?)