Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) HOW "MATNAS SHECHIV ME'RA" WORKS (cont.)

(a) Question: But Rava cited Rav Nachman to say that if a dying man said 'The debt owed to me should be to Ploni', this takes effect, even though a healthy person cannot do this!
(b) Answer #1 (Rav Papa): Since Matnas Shechiv me'Ra makes Ploni the heir (and heirs acquire debts), he acquires the debt.
(c) Answer #2 (Rav Acha brei d'Rav Ika): A healthy person can transfer a debt, as Rav Huna taught.

1. (Rav Huna): If Reuven tells Shimon in front of Levi 'You have money of mine - give it to Levi', Levi acquires it.

(a) Version #1 - Question: If a dying man gave a date tree to Yehudah and its fruits to Moshe, what is the law?

1. Version #1A (Rashbam): Do we say that he left the place the fruits grow from (the branches) for Moshe, therefore he did not give all his land to Yehudah, it is not considered a Matnas Shechiv me'Ra?
2. Or, do we say that he gave all his land to Yehudah, it is a Matnas Shechiv me'Ra?
3. Version #1B (Tosfos): Do we say that he left the place the fruits grow from for Moshe, therefore Moshe acquires something already here (and what grows from it), the gift is valid?
4. Or, did he only leave the fruits that will grow for Moshe, one cannot transfer ownership of something that is not yet in the world, the gift is invalid? (End of Version #1B)

(b) Question: If you will say that he did not leave (place on the tree) for Moshe, what if he left the fruits for himself?
(c) Answer (Rava citing Rav Nachman): He left place on the tree for himself.
(d) Question: What is the reason?
(e) Answer: A person leaves for himself generously.
(f) Version #2 - R. Aba: These questions were asked according to Reish Lakish!

1. (Reish Lakish): One who sells a house and stipulates 'on condition that the top is mine', the roof is his.

1. Question: If he gave a house to Yehudah and the roof to Moshe, what is the law?

i. (Rashbam): Do we say that he left rights for Moshe to extend ledges from the roof, or not?

2. Question: If you will say that he did not leave rights for Moshe, what if he left the roof for himself?
3. Answer (Rava citing Rav Nachman): He left place on the tree for himself.

i. This is according to Rav Zvid, who says that (a roof (surrounded by a 10-Tefachim wall) is not included when a house is sold even if no stipulation was made, therefore, when he stipulates to keep the top,) he reserves the rights to extend ledges).

(g) (Rav Yosef bar Minyomi): If a dying man wrote all his property to others: if he intended from the beginning to give away all his property, they all acquire after he dies (even though no acquisition was made); if he recovers, he can retract the whole gift;

1. If he originally intended to keep some of his property, and (after giving some) later decided to give the rest, (if they made acquisitions) they all acquire after he dies (our text, Rambam; Me'iri - they acquire immediately); if he recovers, he can only retract the last gift.

(h) Question: (Why can't he retract from the first gifts? Even if he paused in the middle, perhaps) he intended from the beginning to give away everything, he paused to think about what was left to give!
(i) Answer: Presumably, a dying man first thinks about everything he has to give before he starts giving it.
(j) (Rav Acha bar Minyomi): If a dying man wrote all his property to others and he recovers, he cannot retract - we are concerned that he has property abroad (that he did not give, therefore it is like the gift of a healthy person).
(k) Question: The Mishnah says, if he did not keep property for himself, he can retract - why are we not concerned?
(l) Answer #1 (Rav Chama): The case is, he said 'I give all my property'.
(m) Answer #2 (Mar bar Rav Ashi): The case is, we are Muchzak that he has no other property.

(a) Question: (When he may retract,) if he retracted part of the gift, is this a retraction of the entire gift?
(b) Answer (Beraisa): 'I (Reuven) give all my property to Ploni, I give some of it to Almoni' - Almoni acquires, Ploni does not.

1. Suggestion: Almoni acquires after Reuven dies, but Ploni does not - retracting part of the gift to Ploni (i.e. what he gave to Almoni) is a retraction of the entire gift.

(c) Rejection: No, the case is that Reuven recovered (the gift to Almoni was partial, therefore Reuven cannot retract from it).
(d) Support: (end of the Beraisa): 'I give some of my property to Ploni, I give all of it to Almoni' - Ploni acquires, Almoni does not.

1. We understand why if Reuven recovered he can retract;
2. But if Reuven died, both should acquire (Reuven gave all his property - 'I give *all* of it to Almoni', he meant, the rest)!

(e) Objection (Rav Yemar): Even if the entire Beraisa is when he recovered, we see that a partial retraction is a full retraction!

1. If it is a full retraction, this explains why Almoni acquires;
2. But if it is not a full retraction, Reuven gave all his property, he can also retract from the gift to Almoni!

(f) The Halachah is, a partial retraction is a full retraction.

1. We can explain the first clause whether Reuven died or recovered; the second clause must be when he recovered.

(g) Question: If Shimon made all his property Hekdesh, and recovered, what is the law?

1. Do we say, regarding Hekdesh, a person decides absolutely to give it (even if he will recover)?
2. Or, do we say that a person never abandons himself (that he will be left without anything if he recovers)?

(h) Question: If Shimon made all his property Hefker (and recovered), what is the law?

1. Do we say, since also poor people can take Hefker, he decided absolutely to give it?
2. Or, do we say that a person never abandons himself?

(i) Question: If Shimon gave all his property to the poor, what is the law?

1. Do we say, regarding the Mitzvah of Tzedakah, surely he decided absolutely to give it?
2. Or, do we say that a person never abandons himself?

(j) These questions are unsettled.