Managing Disagreements: Texts from the Talmud
Below are two texts from different parts of the Talmud, the major corpus of Rabbinic law and culture in the Jewish tradition, edited around 500 C.E. (the first text) and 200 C.E. (the second text), respectively.
They tell the story of the academies of Hillel and Shammai, two different schools and ideological camps that thrived in the first century of the Common Era. Though they disagreed, at times profoundly, about how Jewish law should be decided, they managed those disagreements in fruitful ways.
Rabbi Abba said in the name of Shmuel:
For three years the academy of Shammai and the academy of Hillel argued. One group asserted, “The law follows our views,” and the other asserted, “The law follows our views.”
A Heavenly voice came down and announced, “They are both the words of the living God, but the law follows the academy of Hillel.”
Since both were the words of the living God, what entitled the academy of Hillel to have the law agree with them?
Because they were kind and modest, they studied their own rulings and those of the academy of Shammai, and not only that, they mentioned the rulings of the academy of Shammai before their own.
Talmud Eiruvin 13b | Also see: The Open Canon: On the Meaning of Halakhic Discourse
Even though the academy of Shammai declares one thing kosher while the academy of Hillel declares the same thing not kosher, even though one forbids while the other permits, the academy of Shammai did not refrain from marrying the women of the academy of Hillel, nor did the academy of Hillel refrain from marrying the women of the academy of Shammai.
Even though one side declares things to be pure while the other side declares the same thing to be impure, nonetheless they did not refrain from preparing things requiring a state of purity by using things from the other side.
icons on the left to see existing comments.
0 General Document comments
0 Sentence and Paragraph comments
0 Image and Video comments
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
That’s a long time to be disagreeing! There aren’t many details here. I wonder what it was really about, how it mattered materially or emotionally to the people in each of these schools.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
I have never been in a feud with someone for years, but I often wonder what leads people to this point. We see it in various literature (we’re reading Romeo and Juliet right now and the two lover’s families hate one another and no one even knows why). Why do people feud for years? Is this just about being upset or real issues?
I do realize that this is more than a feud for this text. It makes me wonder, what topics need to be hashed out with disagreement over years. Here I wonder if it is religious law? I also recognize this as part of knowledge advancement such as in the TED talk referenced here: http://youthvoices.net/howdowedisagree
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
This reminds me of how I used to try to settle disputes between my two sons. I’m not sure either of them were happy when I would say something like this. But I like that it is settled. Maybe that’s the message: it’s not worth arguing about.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
I agree that many things are not worth arguing about, but I think it’s a matter of personal style whether one can set aside the issue and emotion involved. I have been involved in disputes where one side or the other has suggested a “settlement” or even given in completely, only to have the other refuse to accept that. I think that is sometimes how arguments turn into long-lasting feuds.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
To me this also speaks of the importance of recognizing that conversations and arguments are sometimes ongoing and we need to have background information and respect to enter them.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
I’m the Tech Liaison for the New York City Writing Project. I… (more)
This takes a lot of, oh what’s the word… maturity? experience… trust? It would be easy to consider both sides hypocritical, but this arrangement preserves the local beliefs without imposing them on other people. How to have your own clear beliefs without asking others to share them is not easy — least not easy for me, having been raised an evangelical Christian.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
General Document Comments 0
I find a lot of value when disagreeing. In this case, I recognize that the two groups had different opinions. When can we agree to disagree and when is compromise the right choice? I do think there are times when dispute and a resolution need to happen. I see that happening in this conversation.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment