Torah Study > Chapter 6: Truth and Peace > Text 3
What kind of debate might be considered to be “for the sake of
heaven?”
If we generally believe in pursuing peace, why would we want a
debate to endure?
What can it mean for an argument to endure and be good? How can
an argument that endures contribute to peace?
How would you describe a “good” argument?
What are the benefits of engaging in such an argument?
Under what circumstance is it helpful to have the various sides of a
position continue to hold onto their positions?
This seems like a very odd Mishna. However, it is worthwhile to point out
to participants that most arguments in the Talmud and Mishna are not
resolved. The Talmud, despite common misperception, is less a book of
laws than a catalogue of conversations about law. The Talmud takes pains
to present the various views of competing opinions and to preserve them
for posterity. A similar practice is followed by the United States Supreme
Court, which publishes both majority and minority opinions when the
majority opinion is sufficient to know the ruling.
The Talmud even says, in the midst of an argument between the school
of Hillel and the school of Shammai—two premier contending legal schools
of thought—that “Both these and those are the words of the words of the
living God.” That is, there is merit and truth to both sides of the argument.
The rabbis understand that a “debate for the sake of heaven” is one in
which the position of each side contains some truth. If this is the case
though, how can we make peace between them?
Retaining both sides of an argument, publicizing both of them even though
one side lost, says to the defeated side: “You did not really lose. You were
heard and your position is honored. Now, at this juncture in time and
place, it was not the position followed. But who knows how things will be
tomorrow. So we preserve your wisdom for future generations who will
face similar decisions.” To preserve and honor the minority view indeed
brings greater peace -both now and in the future—than ignoring, burying,
and seemingly belittling the argument and hence the one who argued it.
TOP OF PAGE
How do you engage in arguments? When do you give up and say, I
have said enough? How should you accept success or defeat in an
argument?
You may choose to share one particularly insightful answer with
participants:
A medieval rabbinic commentator, the Sefat Emet, takes this Mishna
one step further:
Voicing one’s own opinion, even when it may be at odds with others,
causes people to rethink what they believe is correct. As such, it may
disturb peace. It is however a particularly effective means of achieving one’s potential…each of us was created for the purpose of accomplishif
ing something distinctive and special…however, participants in such a
dispute must always bear in mind that one’s individual contribution is
only truly significant if it benefits the community.
Sefat Emet commentary on Pirkei Avot 5:17
TOP OF PAGE
