Introduction This mishnah concludes the story of Akavia ben Mehalalel.
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.
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.
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?