Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) TRANSFERRING INHERITANCE

(a) (Mishnah): Reuven said 'Ploni (a stranger) will inherit me', and he has a daughter, or Reuven said 'My daughter will inherit me', and he has a son, this does not take effect;
(b) R. Yochanan ben Brokah says, it takes effect if he gives to someone fitting to inherit him.
(c) (Gemara) Inference: It does not take effect because he chose a stranger when he has a daughter, or a daughter when he has a son - but had he chosen one of his daughters (when he has no sons) or one of his sons to inherit everything, it would take effect!
(d) Question: (end of the Mishnah - R. Yochanan ben Brokah): It takes effect only if he gives to someone fitting to inherit him;

1. This is like the first Tana!
2. Suggestion: Perhaps R. Yochanan ben Brokah says it takes effect even regarding a (more distant) relative to inherit in place of a daughter, or a daughter in place of sons.
3. Rejection (Beraisa - R. Yishmael, son of R. Yochanan ben Brokah): Chachamim and my father did not argue regarding a relative in place of a daughter, or a daughter in place of sons - all agree that the stipulation does not take effect;

i. They argue when he stipulates that one daughter will inherit in place of all the daughters, or one son in place of all the sons: my father say that it takes effect, Chachamim say that it does not.

(e) Answer #1: Since R. Yishmael says that they did not argue, we infer that the first Tana (of the Beraisa) says that they did argue (and the Tana of our Mishnah also says so).
(f) Answer #2: R. Yochanan ben Brokah taught the entire Mishnah, it is abbreviated, it means as follows: 'Ploni will inherit me', and he has a daughter, or 'My daughter will inherit me', and he has a son, this does not take effect;

1. Inference: Had he said 'This daughter will inherit in place of all the daughters', or 'This son in place of all the sons', it takes effect;
2. This is R. Yochanan ben Brokah's opinion, if he bequeaths to someone fitting to inherit him, it takes effect.

(g) (Rav Yehudah and Rava): The Halachah follows R. Yochanan ben Brokah.
(h) (Rava): R. Yochanan ben Brokah learns from "B'Yom Hanchilo Es Banav" - the Torah allows the father to bequeath to anyone he wants.
(i) Question (Abaye): We learn that from "Lo Yuchal Levaker" (he cannot give a regular son the law of the firstborn, but he can bequeath as he wishes (among his sons))!
(j) Answer: We need that verse for the following law.

1. (Beraisa - Aba Chanan): We know that the inheritance of a regular son is stronger than the extra portion of a firstborn, the former is collected from Ra'uy (property that was likely to come to the father), the latter only applies to Muchzak (what the father had when he died);

i. "B'Yom Hanchilo Es Banav" - a father can bequeath to any son he wants, one might have thought all the more so, he can give the extra portion of the firstborn to another son!
ii. "Lo Yuchal Levaker" teaches, he cannot.

2. Question: The Torah should have said only "Lo Yuchal Levaker", we would have inferred, he cannot give the extra portion to another son, but he can bequeath the regular portions as he wishes!
3. Answer: We would have learned a Kal va'Chomer: inheritance of the extra portion is weaker than that of a regular portion (as we said above), the father cannot transfer it - all the more so, he cannot transfer a regular portion!

i. Therefore, we need "B'Yom Hanchilo Es Banav".

(k) (R. Zerika citing Rav): The Halachah follows R. Yochanan ben Brokah.
(l) R. Aba: (A case occurred,) Rav ruled like R. Yochanan ben Brokah.
(m) Question: On what do they argue?
(n) Answer: They argue which is preferable (to rely on): if the Halachah was taught, or from a ruling given in an actual case.

(a) (Beraisa): We do not learn the Halachah from what was taught, or from a ruling, unless the Rebbi says 'this is the Halachah in practice'.

1. If he asked and was told 'this is the Halachah in practice', he may apply it, but he may not compare one case to another.
2. Question: What does it mean 'he may not compare one case to another'? We always learn from other cases!
3. Answer (Rav Ashi): It means, he may not compare Treifos.

i. (Beraisa): In Treifos, we do not compare similar cases, for if an animal is cut in one place, it can live; in another place, it will die.

(b) Rav Asi (to R. Yochanan): When you tell us the Halachah, may we act on it?
(c) R. Yochanan: Not unless I say 'this is the Halachah in practice'.
(d) Rava (to Rav Papa and Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua): If my rulings come before you (in cases) and you have questions against them, do not tear them up until you come to me - if I cannot answer, then I will retract.

1. If my rulings come before you after my death and you have questions, do not tear them up - perhaps I could have answered them;
2. Do not learn from them to other cases - a judge can only rule according to what he sees (and understands).