Navigating Conflict (Bava Batra 153a)

I've always liked the quote by Thomas Mann: "Everything is politics." The more I understand what it means to be a Rabbi (or a human) the more I understand that politics pervades every aspect of life. Thursday's Daf shows just how important the Rabbis considered the political game.

The Talmud present two stories that give us models for political decision making. These images are found back to back, however, one of them is smart and careful (and in a way courageous) while the other is cruel and cowardly.

In the first account we learn that a certain person has a question about his will. The man had been sick and was ready to give away him money. However, his prayers were answered and he got better. Normally, if one is fatally ill and he gets better, he is allowed to take back his deathbed words ("When I thought I was going to die I said you could have my Radio but now that I'm better I don't want to live without my z100.") For more on this see a previous blog post.

Unfortunately for the man he used an ambiguous phrase in his will (I'll give you my money in "life and in death"). Trying to make sense of these words the Rabbis ask the question: does this phrase show that the man really thought he was going to die? If the answer is yes, he can take his possessions back. If no, then he out of luck.  Rav Nachman felt that the man deserved the money. He believed that the phrase showed that it was a legitimate gift from a man who though he was legitimately going to die.  However, Rav Nachman lived in the town of a famous Rabbi (Shmuel) who felt that the phrase meant that the man deserved nothing. So what did Rav Nachman do?

He played the political game. He knew that living in the great Shmuel's town he couldn't rule against him. So instead, he did what any good rabbi / doctor / lawyer would do--he referred the case. He told the man to visit a judge in a nearby city who would let the man take back the money. In essence he played the political game, knowing where his boundaries were and sticking to them. In essence, Rav Nachman figured out a way for everyone to win. He retained his integrity, the man got the money, and Shmuel was not undermined.

The second account differs greatly. Here a women approaches Rava with the same concern. She was also sick. She also gave away her money via a will. Her will also has this strange phrase and she wants to know whether she can ask for the money back now that she is healthy. Rava however rules with Shmuel. He doesn't think she can get the money back. After badgering him for some time, Rava can't take it anymore. He commissions a scribe to write her a document that says that she can get the money back but asks him to include a cryptic phrase at the end to signal to any judge who might read it that the document is invalid. In essence, it's the Talmudic equivalent including the words "Psych!" at the end of the document.

After the women tries to claim her money and realizes Rava's trick she curses him saying, "let Rava's ship sink" (Ironically, Rava's triggers a catastrophic flooding of the Tigris River). Here Rava does not play the political game well. I love Rava but here he is a coward. He does not stand up to the women, nor does he adequately explain why he cannot help her. He comes off as a scheming "yes man," too proud to help her, but to afraid to teach her his legal reasoning.

As we are faced with political conundrums we can choose who to be. We can try to emulate Rav Nachman, who stands up for what he believes, working within the political system with an eye toward doing what he believes is right or Rava who is too afraid of conflict to stand his ground.