(Tosefta Sotah Sixth Perek)
Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai says, “there are four Drashos of Rabbi Akiva with which I differ” (usually Rabbi Shimon agrees with his Rebbe, Rabbi Akiva):
1. “And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian which she bore to Avrohom מצחק playing” (Bereshis 21,9). Rabbi Akiva says this implies Yishmael was engaged in Avodah Zarah. Sarah saw him building an altar, catching grasshoppers and offering them to Avodah Zarah. (Rabbi Eliezer says she saw illicit sexual relationship; Rabbi Yishmael says she saw murder). Rabbi Shimon differs with Rabbi Akiva and says Heaven forbid that Avodah Zarah (or illicit relations or murder) took place in the house of the Tzadik. Rather at the birth of Yitzchak all proclaimed he would inherit the world taking two portions (heaven and earth). Yishmael laughed and proclaimed that he was the first born and entitled to two portions and not the one born to a hundred-year old.
2. “Can the flock and cattle be slaughtered for them and suffice for them?” (Bemidbar 11,22). Rabbi Akiva says everything according to its literal meaning. “Would it suffice for them?” literally as if to say he find enough for his redemption. Nor which is more severe a sin – this one or later when Moshe says “listen now rebels”? But since Moshe did say this current negative remark in public, the Chumash does not say that he was punished. But by the waters of strife, which Moshe spoke in public, the Chumash does not spare him (embarrassment and does mention his punishment). Rabbi Shimon says Heaven forbid that such a thing would enter the mind of the Tzadik to question the abilities of HaShem. Rather Moshe says would this eating meat for a month suffice for them unto eternity? Would this be praiseworthy of Hashem? Do they tell a donkey to take a kor of barley and we will cut off your head? HaShem responded would it be proper not to give them what they ask for and let them think that I lack the ability to provide. Rather let them and a hundred like them perish but may My hand not be short before them even for one moment.
3. “Son of man, they inhabit waste places of the land of Yisrael, say ‘Avrohom was one man, and yet he inherited the land; but we are many; the land was given to us for inheritance’.” (Yechezkel 33,24) Rabbi Akiva explains they mean to say just as Avrohom served one G-d and inherited the land, certainly we who serve many gods should certainly inherit the land. Rabbi Shimon disagrees and explains the people said Avrohom who was commanded one Mitzvah and inherited the land, we who were commanded all the Mitzvos surely inherit the land. From the response of the Navi we see the reverse. You did not even do the seven Mitzvos of Bnai Noach (who do not inherit the land), why should you inherit the land?
4. (Also cited Rosh Hashana 18b) Rabbi Akiva says: "The fast of the fourth" is the ninth of Tamuz, when Jerusalem was split, because it is in the fourth month. "The fast of the fifth" is Tishah b'Av, when the Beis haMikdash was burnt, because it is in the fifth month. "The fast of the seventh" is the third of Tishrei, when Gedalyah ben Achikam was killed by Yishmael ben Netanyah. (This teaches us that the death of the righteous is as significant as the burning of the Beis haMikdash.) It is so called because it is in the seventh month. "The fast of the tenth" is the tenth of Teves, when the King of Bavel laid siege to Jerusalem, because it is in the tenth month (even though this event occurred prior to the other three events). It is more important to list the months in the correct order (than list the events chronologically). Rabbi Shimon disagrees; "The fast of the tenth" is the fifth of Teves, when news of the attack on Jerusalem reached the Diaspora (which places the event after the previous three events). It is better that the fasts are listed in the chronological order of the events.
