POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf
Bava Basra 131
|
BAVA BASRA 131 - sponsored by Mr. and Mrs. Avi Berger of Queens, NY.
Despite the passage of time, let us not forget the tragic deaths of
Mordechai Refael and Tzirel Schivschuurder and their three youngest
children, Hashem Yikom Damam, in the Sbarro bombing last year. May the
father of all orphans give strength to the remaining children to continue in
their parents ways. Mazel Tov to the two sons who have since found spouses.
May Hashem protect them from all harm as well as the third brother, who
insisted on joining an active combat unit in the army, and the younger
sisters.
|
1) CAN A HEALTHY PERSON TRANSFER INHERITANCE?
(a) Question (Rava): If a healthy person transferred
inheritance, does R. Yochanan ben Berokah say that it
takes effect?
1. Perhaps his law only applies to a dying person, for
he can bequeath - but a healthy person cannot!
2. Or, perhaps his law even applies to a healthy
person.
(b) Answer (Rav Mesharshiya): We learn from the following
episode.
1. R. Noson: You taught an unauthored Mishnah according
to R. Yochanan ben Berokah!
i. (Mishnah): If a husband did not write Kesuvas
Benin Dichrin (a stipulation in the Kesuvah,
'Sons you will have from me will inherit your
Kesuvah, above their share with their brothers
(from my other wives))', he must give them in
any case, because it is an enactment of Beis
Din.
2. Rebbi: The Mishnah (does not say inherit, rather it)
says it will be given to them, it is even like
Chachamim.
3. Rebbi later retracted: I did not answer him
properly! The Halachah is, sons cannot collect
Kesuvas Benin Dichrin from property that the father
sold;
i. If it was a gift, it would be collected - we
are forced to say, it is considered an
inheritance.
4. Conclusion: Kesuvas Benin Dichrin is based on R.
Yochanan ben Berokah's law that a father can
stipulate how much each son will inherit, and it
applies in all cases, even when the father is
healthy!
2) WHOSE OPINION IS REFLECTED IN OUR MISHNAH?
(a) Question (Rav Papa): (Why did Rebbi later admit that the
Mishnah is like R. Yochanan ben Berokah?)
1. Whether the text is 'inherit' or 'will be given', a
person cannot transfer ownership of something that
is not yet in the world!
i. Even R. Meir, who says that a person can
transfer ownership of something not yet in the
world, requires that the recipient is already
here, but one cannot transfer ownership to
something that is not yet in the world!
ii. You must say, enactments of Beis Din are
different (Chachamim are empowered to transfer
ownership as they wish) - also regarding
inheritance, enactments of Beis Din are
different! (Ra'avad - for the same reason, we
have no proof that a healthy person can
transfer inheritance; Rashbam - Rav Papa does
not dispute this point.)
(b) Answer (Abaye): The choice of the language inherit in the
Mishnah teaches like R. Yochanan ben Berokah, that
inheritance can be transferred.
(c) Retraction (Abaye): What I said is wrong!
1. (Mishnah): If a husband did not write in the
Kesuvah, 'Daughters you will have from me (after my
death) will dwell in my house and be fed from my
property until they get married', the daughters are
entitled in any case, because it is an enactment of
Beis Din.
2. Even Chachamim agree that if two gifts are given
together, one in a language of inheritance and the
other in a language of a gift, that both take
effect. (Chachamim made these enactments at the same
time.)
131b---------------------------------------131b
(d) Question (Rav Nechumi): How do we know that one Beis Din
made both these enactments?
(e) Answer (Abaye - Mishnah - R. Elazar ben Azaryah): The
sons inherit and the daughters are fed - just as the sons
only inherit after the father dies, the daughters are fed
only after the father dies.
1. It is reasonable to learn from one enactment to
another only if one Beis Din made both enactments!
(f) Rejection: Perhaps a different Beis Din made the second
enactment, and they were careful to enact like the first
Beis Din, in order that the enactments will not
contradict each other!
3) WHEN A GIFT IS NOT A GIFT
(a) (Rav Yehudah): If a man wrote a document giving all his
property to his wife, (surely he did not deprive his sons
from inheriting, he merely wants to ensure that his sons
honor her,) he only made her an overseer.
(b) Obviously, if wrote a document giving all his property to
his oldest son, he only made him an overseer (because he
wants to ensure that the brothers honor him, as the Torah
commands).
(c) Question: What if he wrote all his property to a younger
son?
(d) Answer (Rav Chanilai bar Idi): Even if he wrote to an
infant in a crib, the father is concerned for the son's
honor, the son is only an overseer.
(e) The following are obvious: if he wrote all his property
to a son, he only made him an overseer (as above);
1. If he wrote all his property to a stranger, it is a
gift (he is not concerned that the sons honor a
stranger),
2. If he wrote to his Mekudeshes or divorced wife, it
is a gift (he is not concerned that the sons honor
her).
(f) Questions: What if he wrote to a daughter and he has sons
(we know that a man is concerned for his daughter's honor
(that she not have to beg for food), is he concerned that
his sons honor her)?
1. What if he wrote to his wife and his only heirs were
his brothers (is he concerned that they honor his
wife, even though they are not commanded)?
2. What if he wrote to his wife, and all his sons were
from other wives (they are not commanded so strongly
to honor her)?
(g) Answer #1 (Ravina): The only case (when he writes to a
woman) in which the gift stands is regarding his
Mekudeshes or divorced wife.
(h) Answer #2 (Rav Avira): In all cases she acquires, except
for his wife in two cases: when his heirs were his
brothers (R. Gershom's text - when her sons inherit him),
and when he left sons (even) from other wives.
Next daf
|