At the time of his death he said to his son: "My son, retract the four things that I said [re: "a deposited hair," "'green' blood," the torn-off wool of a first-born animal, and the draught of a proselytess and an emancipated maidservant.] He (the son): "Why did you not retract them?" Akavya: "I heard it from the majority and they heard it (the opposite) from the majority. I upheld what I had heard, and they upheld what they had heard. But you heard it from an individual [i.e. from me] and from a majority [against me]. It is better to forsake the words of the individual and to adopt the words of the majority." [For he (Akavya), too, had also received it from a majority, so that his words were like those of the majority — wherefore he told him "Better to forsake, etc." For if not so, why "it is better"? Is it not explicitly written (Exodus 23:2): "After the many to incline (the judgment)," so that it is perforce mandated to forsake the words of the individual? But (in this instance) the reason for saying "'Better', etc." rather than "One must, etc." is that he (Akavya), too, had heard it from a majority. (The halachah is not in accordance with Akavya ben Mahalalel in all of these four instances.)] He (the son): "Father, commend me to your friends." Akavya: "I will not do so." The son: "Have you, perhaps, found some fault in me?" Akavya: "No — your deeds will draw you near (to them), and your deeds will distance you."
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
בד' דברים – hair of a leprous spot which remains after the inflammation has partly receded (see Tractate Negaim, Chapter 5, Mishnah 3), and greenish blood and the detached hair of a firstling animal, and the handing of the bitter water to the suspected converted wife and a freed slave-woman.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Eduyot
Introduction This mishnah concludes the story of Akavia ben Mehalalel.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
מוטב להניח דברי היחיד – because he also received [his tradition] from a majority, and his words are like the words of the majority, and because of this, it is stated, better to set aside, etc. and if not for this, what is “better” that is stated? Is it not from the Torah as it is written (Exodus 23:2): “you shall not give perverse testimony in a dispute so as to pervert it in favor of the mighty,” and it is obligatory to set aside the words of the individual against his will, but the reason that he (i.e., Akavyah ben Mehalalel) said “better” and he did not say, “it is better,” because that even he received [his tradition] from a majority, as has been explained, but the Halakha is not according to Akavyah ben Mehalalel in all four of these things.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Eduyot
At the time of his death he said to his son, “Retract the four opinions which I used to declare.” He (the said to him, “Why did not you retract them?” He said to him, “I heard them from the mouth of the many, and they heard [the contrary] from the mouth of the many. I stood fast by the tradition which I heard, and they stood fast by the tradition which they heard. But you have heard [my tradition] from the mouth of a single individual and [their tradition] from the mouth of the many. It is better to leave the opinion of the single individual and to hold by the opinion of the many.” As Akavia is about to die, he offers some conciliation to the Sages, by telling his son to retract the statements to which he had previously clung. His son is perplexed by this request of Akavia. After all, Akavia was willing to be put into permanent excommunication, to lose his entire standing in the Rabbinic community, in order to stand up for the statements which he had made. Why now was he all of a sudden willing to change his mind? Akavia’s answer returns us to the principle which we had learned in chapter one, mishnah five. When there is a dispute between many Sages on one side and a singular Sage on the other, the halakhah is like the many. Here Akavia teaches that a tradition that was learned from many Sages is stronger and more accepted as normative halakhah than a tradition that was learned from a singular Sage. His son had learned them only from him, and therefore their weight was less than the rulings of the Sages, who in the time of Akavia were considered the many.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Eduyot
He said to him, “Father commend me to your colleagues.” He said to him, “I will not commend you.” He said to him, “Have you found in me any wrong?” He said, “No; your own deeds will cause you to be near, and your own deeds will cause you to be far.” Akavia’s son’s final request of his father was that he put in a good word about him with his colleagues. Evidently, although Akavia had been put in excommunication, he retained some ties with other Sages. Akavia’s final words teach a lesson to all children of leaders. Although Akavia’s son was the child of a great teacher, one who was almost appointed to be the head of the court, the son will have to earn his own way into a position of leadership. If he is worthy, he will have the opportunity to achieve high positions as a Rabbi; if he is unworthy, a good word from his father will not help him.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Eduyot
Questions for Further Thought: • According to Akavia, what gives a halakhah its authority? In other words, why did he not retract the things which he had stated? Did he believe that these were the necessarily “true” statements? • As a piece of literature, what is the function of the final piece of the story? Why does this story end with Akavia’s telling his son that his own merits are what will earn him status in the world? Has Akavia somehow changed due to his excommunication?
