Sometimes we are in situations where the cost of publically standing tall and defending our beliefs are great. What does it take to be steadfast and consistent in your beliefs, despite all social pressures?  Who in Jewish history can we draw strength as role models?

Our Gemara (amud beis) in passing alludes to the remarkable story of Akvaya ben Mehallal-El, as described in more detail in Mishna Eduyos (5:6-7).

It begins with a dispute between the sages and Akavya over four matters, including whether a Sotah who is a convert can be subjected to the oath and bitter waters ordeal used to test an accused adulteress as described in Bamidbar chapter 5. 

Akavya provided testimony of his tradition that he learned under his masters, Shemaya and Avtalyon, who were converts or descendants from converts (Gittin 57b). The rabbis proposed to Akavya that if he would retract his opinion, he would be appointed the head of the national Beis Din. Avtalyon said he cannot retract even if only to accept the alternate tradition of the rabbis in practice (see commentaries), as it would appear as if he was renouncing the truth for personal gain. He declared, “It is better that I be called a fool all my life than to be evil for even a moment before the Omnipresent.” Such a statement is an inspirational battle cry for those who state the truth despite social or financial pressures.

The Mishna then discusses an incident that our Gemara referred to: The rabbis argued against  Akavya’s position via a matter of historical knowledge that Shemaya and Avtalyon had a known convert engage in the Sotah ritual. Akavya dismissed this proof by stating, “Their actions were merely a simulated ritual”, or according to an alternate reading,  “As they were converts, they behaved with her similarly.” 

There is disagreement amongst the commentaries as to what Akavya meant. Either he meant that Shemaya and Avtalyon performed the ritual because they were converts themselves. Or he meant they attempted to bluff her with counterfeit bitter waters hoping she would confess out of fear.

The latter explanation, and certainly the former was most disrespectful of Shemaya and Avtalyon, and so according to one account they excommunicated Akavya. Our Gemara quotes the reaction to this account, denying the possibility that a man as G-d fearing as Akavya could have been excommunicated.  Here too, we find some disagreement amongst the commentaries:

Some understand it simply that the entire account was rejected as factually impossible, as how could such a great man speak in a dismissive manner about Shmaya and Avtalyon. Akavya never could have suggested that they would have performed an incorrect or fake ritual, and certainly not because they were converts. Others do not understand the Mishna as disputing that Akavya suggested these as defenses to his position. Rather, the Mishna rejected that Akavya could have been excommunicated given his great and G-d fearing stature. This would be similar to what we saw earlier in this masechta (53a) where the great Todos was spared from excommunication due to his general character but not because he didn’t deserve it. (See Tosafos Yom Tov.)

One final part of the story involves Akavya and his son. As Akavya was on his deathbed, he asked his son to follow the opinion of the Sages. His rationale was that though he still stood by his tradition, the Sages also had a valid tradition.  Regarding himself, since he heard it straight from Shemaya and Avtalyon, it was equal in authority to the majority of the Sages who maintained a different tradition.  However, in regard to his son’s perspective, it is a minor opinion against the majority, as his son only heard his father’s single testimony as opposed to the Sages’ majority testimony.  

Then Akavya’s son asks for his father to intercede between him and the Sages, so that he would be accepted as part of their caucus.  (By the way, this does give some credence to the version of the story that Akavya was excommunicated, or at least fell out of their good graces. Otherwise, why would Akavya’s son be worried about how the Sages would receive him.)

Akavya refuses to interpose himself. His son asked, “Is it because you have found in me something unfit?” Akavya’s response is striking and memorable: “Not at all. Rather, you must stand on your own merits. Your deeds alone will bring you closer to the Sages and your deeds alone will push you further from them.”

Akavya’s integrity and self-consistency are noteworthy. On the one hand, he refuses to concede the halakha, even if only to allow the Sages’ majority opinion to be promoted, So no one should think that he was “bribed“ by the offer of being the head of the national Beis Din. He would rather appear a fool his whole life then to have it done even a momentary evil act. On the other hand, in the very same dispute, he encourages his son to concede without any pride or demanding his son's loyalty. Finally, he drives home the message of integrity to his son by refusing him nepotistic advantage. Instead, he counsels his son that his successes or failures in relationships are due to his deeds alone.

Perhaps, the thread that runs through Akavya’s courageous and incorruptible personality comes from his famous principle quoted in Pirke Avos (3:1):

⁦Akabyah ben Mahalalel said: mark well three things and you will not come into the power of sin: Know from where you come, and where you are going, and before whom you are destined to give an account and reckoning. From where do you come? From a putrid drop. Where are you going? To a place of dust, of worm and of maggot. Before whom you are destined to give an account and reckoning? Before the King of the kings of kings, the Holy One, blessed be he.