Normally, any time a person wants to sell or give an item to another person the recipient must formally accept this item. There are about a half dozen ways to do this (called kinyanim). In the case of a tennis ball one can acquire it by picking it up, pulling it near, bouncing it, taking it from the other person (with their permission), or writing a contract that says that he owns the ball.
However, in the case of a sick person on their death bed, they don't need to do any of those things. The Talmud explains:
דברי שכיב מרע ככתובין ובמסורין דמי
The words of a seriously ill person is just as good as any act of acquisition (in this case writing a contact or handing the item over).
Therefore, the brothers did not have a leg to stand on. Amram got to keep the documents because his mother's words stood. She was terminal and we were to act on her words no matter what.
This is a powerful idea. The Rabbis took away all the red tape of "proper" modes of acquisition (kinyanim) because they knew it would cause distress to the sick person if they had to wait until contracts were written or acts were performed before giving away property. For them, easing the last moments of a person's life was paramount.
The power in this teaching, however, comes if we divorce it from its monitory context. In doing so we get a wonderful teaching about our obligations to the sick. Those who are terminally ill need closure. Yes, many need to give away property and settle life insurance. But many more want to thank, apologize, and confess. The concept that we need to make these acts easy for our sick loved ones and that we must take their words at face value, without asking for proof is important. What a gift if we accept a distant father's apology or an aloof mother's love without question and without delay!
This is great stuff. It reminds me of something that happened in the book I just read, Zadie Smith's On Beauty. A dying woman who managed to hide her illness from her entire family writes a deathbed note, bequeathing a painting she loves to a dear friend of hers. Because the painting is of great monetary value and the woman's family don't like her friend, they dismiss her dying wishes, telling themselves that she must not have been sound of mind at the time of her death. This dismissal of her dying wish strikes me as the deepest kind of disrespect.
ReplyDelete