Once upon a time, there were two men who were neighbours. One man had a cow and the other had none.

That year, a great famine hit the entire village. The harvest wasn't yet ripe for picking. There was nothing to eat. People were left with just their cows.

When famine struck, the man who had a cow decided to slaughter it for his family to eat. He didn't offer any of the meat to his neighbour.

His neighbour decided to look around the place where the cow had been slaughtered. He found the remains of the cow's chyme and ate it with his family. They survived until the harvest was ready.

When the harvest was ready, the man without a cow had a surplus harvest, but the other man had nothing.

The man who had killed his cow decided to take the man who had a surplus to court. They went through many courts and couldn't find a solution, until they came before a judge at the highest court.

The judge asked each man to present his case before the court.

The man who had killed his cow started, "During the famine, this man had nothing. His family were starving. When I killed my cow, he took the chyme from the carcass for his family to eat. If it wasn't for me, his family would have died of hunger."

The man concluded, "I want reparations so that my family and I can have a share of the grain from his abundant harvest."

The judge asked the other man to make his statement. The man said, "It's true, I took the cow's chyme, but only after my neighbour had discarded it."

The judge invited the jury to speak about who they believed had a right to reparations.

Some thought the first man had a right. If it weren't for his cow, the other man's family would have died.

Others thought the second man had a right. Nobody normally eats chyme. He did it to survive.

The judge didn't know what decision to make. Each man was right in his own way.

The judge decided to adjourn the court and resume it the next day.

The judge didn't know that his children were in the crowd listening to the court case.

That evening, the judge came home very tired. He decided to rest outside in the open air, because it was too hot inside the house.

His children were playing close by. He heard one of his sons say, "Let's play a game of court. I'll be the judge!"

The judge's ears perked up.

One child asked, "Which man from today's hearing would you say had a right?" The judge was listening.

The boy playing judge exclaimed, "Both men have a right, but the man with a surplus harvest does not owe the other man any of his grain. The man with the cow should wait for the wheat to be hulled. Then, he can take the husks as payback."

It was getting late, and soon the judge told his children to go to sleep. He pretended that he hadn't heard them playing.

The next day, he called the two men back to the court. Both men made their statements a second time. The jury members shared their views again, but they still disagreed about who had a right to reparations.

Finally, the judge made his ruling. He said, "Both men have a right, but the man with three bins full of wheat does not owe the other man any part of his grain.

The man who had a cow should wait for the other man's wheat to be hulled, then he can take the husks as payback for the cow's chyme."

The two men were surprised, but everyone agreed with the judge's resolution.

The judge concluded, "Go back to your homes, and stop holding grudges. The case is now resolved. Peace be upon you."