Verse 12: The younger son said to his father, "Give me my share of the property."  So the father divided his property between his two sons.

This verse sets up the entire parable, here the story gets in motion.  Behind this seemingly bare and even dry verse, there is a world of passion and heartbreak.

The son wishes his father was dead. In asking for his share of the property, the son in effect is saying to his father, "you are dead to me."  That is because the property is divided up only when the father dies.  And this father isn't even on his deathbed, he is active and running the farm (we can see this from the latter part of the parable).  To boldly ask for the property is astonishing.  In fact, some people aren't sure that it would ever been done, others think it might have been done on rare occasion, and caused a huge scandal.  See the digging deeper section for more information on the laws on inheritance that would have governed this situation and the roles of families.

The Father.  There is a second remarkable action in this verse.  That is how the father responds.  He would be expected to be outraged by the action of his son.  He would be expected to turn the request down in anger.  Instead, he grants the request.  Is this the actions of a compassionate Father who loves the son, or is the action of someone who is too weak?  Should he have imposed a little "tough love"?

Digging deeper

·        Greek text of the verse

kai. ei=pen o` new,teroj auvtw/n tw/| patri,( Pa,ter( do,j moi to. evpiba,llon me,roj th/j ouvsi,ajÅ o` de. diei/len auvtoi/j to.n bi,on

Many ancient Greek words have come into English.  Notice the last word of this verse, bion (bi,on).  It is the word that has come down to us in biology, biosphere, and related terms.  Then as now, it means life.  In this verse it could be translated as "living" in the sense that money and property are how we "make a living."  It is also used this way in verse 30.

Both sons are assigned their share.  The property is divided "between" them.  That's a logical necessity, you can't decide what one son gets without implicitly deciding that the other son gets what is left.  Later in the story, we see the father commanding servants and the elder son working away, so the elder son didn't separate his property from the father and take control of it.

·        Inheritance in the Ancient Near East  

Biblical texts about inheritance can be found at Numbers 27:8‑11 and 36:7‑9.

A warning to fathers against giving inheritance to their children is found in the book of Sirach.  This is a book in the Bibles of Catholics and the Orthodox, but not found in Bibles of Protestants or in Jewish scripture.  It illustrates attitudes (33:19-22): "Hear me, you who are great among the people, and you leaders of the congregation, pay heed!  To son or wife, to brother or friend, do not give power over yourself, as long as you live; and do not give your property to another, in case you change your mind and must ask for it.   While you are still alive and have breath in you, do not let anyone take your place.  For it is better that your children should ask from you than that you should look to the hand of your children." (New Revised Standard Version)

A problem of inheritance was put to Jesus in Luke 12:13-15.

·        The nature of younger sons.  We know that the birth order shapes the character of children.  The eldest is said to be responsible, and the younger a bit freer.  It may have been that way in the Ancient Near East as well.  A younger son is more likely to be thought irresponsible, or prone to that behavior.  Before (in verse 11) we pointed out that Jesus may have shaped the parable by his choice of characters.  So far the two sons are living up to convention.  We more readily accept that the eldest was responsible, and the youngest not so.  We are led along by this convention.  If we are elder (or just responsible) we're looking for the comeuppance of the younger.  If we are younger (or value freedom) maybe we're hoping that it all turns out well for the youngest, or that he decides that the journey was worth the price.  But we will have our expectations turned around as the parable progresses.

·        Deuteronomy on rebellious sons.  See chapter 21.18-21 of the book of Deuteronomy for the rule that a rebellious son should be stoned to death by the village.  A rebellious son would be violating the fifth commandment (Exodus 20.12, Deuteronomy 5.16).  Proverbs 28.7 also might apply to this parable.  The ancient Jewish writer Josephus also suggest the stoning of a rebellious son or daughter (in his work Antiquities of the Jews).  Various texts from rabbinic Judaism suggest that stoning was an extreme punishment done seldom if ever.  For example, both the mother and the father had to agree to it.