Surely it was taught:1 the fruit attached [to the ground].2 is valued3 for the buyer!4 — 'Ulla replied: There is no difficulty Here5 [the law deals] with one's [own] son;6 there7 [it deals] with a stranger.8 [In the former case, attached fruit belongs to the son] because a person is favourably disposed towards his son.9
MISHNAH. [IF] ONE LEFT SONS10 [WHO WERE] OF AGE, AS WELL AS MINORS, THOSE WHO ARE OF AGE ARE NOT TO BE SUPPORTED11 AT THE EXPENSE OF12 THE MINORS,13 NOR ARE THE MINORS TO BE FED AT THE EXPENSE OF14 THOSE WHO ARE OF AGE,15 BUT ALL RECEIVE EQUAL SHARES] IN THE ENTIRE ESTATE].16 [IF] THOSE WHO WERE OF AGE MARRIED,17 THE MINORS [ALSO] MAY TAKE [A SIMILAR SUM TOWARDS THEIR MARRIAGE EXPENSES].18 IF THE MINORS, HOWEVER, CLAIMED,19 'WE DESIRE TO TAKE AS MUCH AS YOU HAVE TAKEN',20 THEIR REQUEST IS DISREGARDED21 BUT WHAT THEIR FATHER HAD GIVEN THEM22 IS REGARDED AS A GIFT.23 [IF] ONE LEFT DAUGHTERS [WHO WERE] OF AGE, AS WELL AS MINORS THOSE WHO ARE OF AGE ARE NOT TO BE SUPPORTED24 AT THE EXPENSE25 OF THE MINORS,26 NOR ARE THE MINORS TO BE FED AT THE EXPENSE27 OF THOSE WHO ARE OF AGE.28 BUT ALL RECEIVE EQUAL SHARES [IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE ESTATE]. [IF] THOSE [WHO WERE] OF AGE MARRIED,29 THE MINORS [ALSO] MAY TAKE [A SIMILAR SUM TOWARDS THEIR MARRIAGE EXPENSES].30 IF THE MINORS, HOWEVER, CLAIMED,31 'WE DESIRE TO TAKE AS MUCH AS YOU HAVE TAKEN',32 THEIR REQUEST IS DISREGARDED.33 IN THE FOLLOWING RESPECT34 DAUGHTERS35 ARE OF GRATER IMPORTANCE THAN SONS.36 FOR DAUGHTERS ARE FED AT THE EXPENSE OF THE SONS37 BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF [OTHER] DAUGHTERS.38
GEMARA. Raba said: If39 the eldest of the brothers40 drew upon the general funds of the estate for his dress and outfit,41 his action cannot be disputed.42 But surely, we learnt, THOSE WHO ARE OF AGE ARE NOT TO BE SUPPORTED AT THE EXPENSE OF THE MINORS! — Our Mishnah [refers] to [those who are] without a calling.43 [In the case of] one without a calling, [is this not] obvious!44 — [Since] it might have been assumed that [the brothers] desire that he should not be disgraced45 it was necessary to teach us [that this is not so].
IF THOSE WHO WERE OF AGE MARRIED, THE MINORS ALSO MAY TAKE. What does this mean?46 — Rab Judah replied, it is this that was meant: IF THOSE WHO WERE OF AGE HAD MARRIED after the death of their father, THE MINORS [ALSO] MAY TAKE47 after the death of their father; if, however, those who were of age had married during the lifetime of their father, and the MINORS after the death of their father, CLAIMED, 'WE DESIRE TO TAKE AS MUCH AS YOU HAVE TAKEN', THEIR REQUEST IS DISREGARDED BUT WHAT THEIR FATHER HAD GIVEN THEM IS REGARDED AS A LEGAL GIFT.
[IF] ONE LEFT DAUGHTERS [WHO WERE] OF AGE, AS WELL AS MINORS. Abbuha b. Geniba sent to Raba: Will our Master teach us, [in the case of a woman who] took a loan and spent it, and thereupon48 married,49 [whether] the husband has [the legal] status of a buyer50 or that of an heir? Is he [regarded as] a buyer [and consequently he need not repay her debt] since a verbal loan cannot be collected from a buyer; or is he, perhaps, regarded as an heir, [who must pay her debt], since a verbal loan may be collected from heirs? — He replied to him: We have learned this in our Mishnah, [IF] THOSE [WHO WERE] OF AGE MARRIED, THE MINORS [ALSO] MAY TAKE; does not [this mean that] IF THOSE WHO WERE OF AGE [WERE] MARRIED to husbands, THE MINORS MAY TAKE [towards their marriage expenses] from the husbands?51 — No; [this may mean that] IF THOSE [WHO WERE] OF AGE [WERE] MARRIED to husbands, THE MINORS [ALSO] MAY TAKE52 [a similar sum towards the expenses of their marriage] to husbands. [But] this is not [so];53 for, surely, R. Hiyya taught: [If] those who were of age had married husbands,54 the minors may take [their due] from [those] husbands!55 — It is possible that maintenance56 is different,57 since such [an obligation] is generally known.58
R. Papa said to Raba:59 Is not this60 the very [case] which Rabin had sent in his letter?61 If a person died, [he wrote], and left a widow and a daughter, his widow is to receive her maintenance out of his estate.62 [If] the daughter married,63 his widow is [still] to receive her maintenance out of his estate. [If] the daughter died?64 Rab Judah, the son of the sister of R. Jose b. Hanina, said: I had [such] a case, and it was decided65 [that] his widow is to receive her maintenance out of his estate. [Now,] if it be granted66 that he67 is [regarded as] an heir,68 it is quite correct that his widow should be maintained out of his69 estate;70 if, however, it is held66 that he67 is [regarded as] a buyer, why should she be maintained out of his estate!71
Abaye said: Would we not have known [this]72 if Rabin had not sent [his letter]? Surely we learnt:73 The following do not return in the Jubilee year:74 The [portion of] the birthright,
Original footnotes renumbered. See Structure of the Talmud Files
- Tosef. Keth. VIII.
- In a field that was sold by a son to whom his father had assigned it during his lifetime.
- After the death of the father.
- I.e., the buyer must pay the price, at which the fruit was valued, to the heirs. This proves that even attached fruit does not belong to him to whom the soil belongs but to the heirs. In the case, then, of our Mishnah also, attached fruit should belong to all the heirs.
- In our Mishnah.
- Where the estate was assigned by a father to a son, and the latter did not sell it to another person.
- Lit., 'here', i.e., the cited Tosefta of Kethuboth.
- When the son had sold the estate to a stranger, or the father had assigned it to a stranger as a gift, reserving the usufruct for himself during his lifetime.
- Hence he allows him not only the ground itself but also the fruit attached to it.
- And did not provide in a will for the disposal of his estate.
- I.e., provided with clothing and the like.
- Lit., 'through the hands of'.
- I.e., out of the general proceeds of the estate before it had been divided between the heirs. Sons who are of age require a greater allowance for their clothing than minors; and this they must provide out of their own shares.
- Lit., 'by'.
- Cf. n. 10, supra. Minors require less for clothing but more for food.
- I.e., before the estate has been divided, neither the minors, who require a greater allowance for food, nor those of age, who require more for their clothing, though less for their actual food, may draw for their extra requirements upon the common funds, which must be equally divided between all of them.
- After their father's death, defraying the marriage expenses out of the undivided estate.
- Out of the common funds of the estate.
- After their father's death.
- I.e., if the minors wish to spend on their marriages, out of the general funds of the estate, as much as the older brothers had spent on their marriages during their father's lifetime.
- Lit., 'they do not listen to them'.
- To the older brothers during his lifetime.
- Lit., 'given'.
- V. p. 588, n. 8.
- Loc. cit, n, 9.
- Loc. cit. n. 10.
- Loc. cit. n. 11.
- Loc. cit. n. 12.
- Loc. cit. n. 14.
- Loc. cit. n. 15.
- Loc. cit. n. 16.
- Loc. cit. n. 17.
- Loc. cit. n. 1.
- Lit., 'this'.
- Who inherited their father's estate in the absence of sons.
- Where there are born sons and daughters.
- in the case where the sons inherited a large estate, v. infra 139b.
- I.e., if older and younger daughters, in the absence of sons, inherited the estate, the latter are not to be fed from the general funds of the estate.
- Lit., 'This'.
- Who manages the estate.
- Lit., 'dressed and covered himself out of the house'.
- Lit., what he has done is done'. Though it is not proper for him to make personal expenses out of the common funds, the brothers cannot, after the amount had been spent, claim its return; since it is important for him, as the manager of the estate, to dress well.
- [H] (edd. [H]), 'a man at ease'; one who is not in any way engaged in the improvement of the estate or in the increase of its value.
- If he is of no use to the management or maintenance of the estate, what possible claim can he have upon the general funds in respect of his personal dress?
- Through the wearing of unbecoming clothes, and would thus agree to beat the expense.
- This, surely, seems to be in contradiction to the following clause, 'If the minors, however, claimed "we desire to take as much as you have taken", their request is disregarded'.
- A similar sum towards their marriage expenses.
- Lit., 'and ate it and stood up'.
- And thus transferred all her possessions to her husband.
- Of the property brought to him by his wife.
- Of the married sisters; which proves that the husbands are regarded as heirs, not as buyers. The claim of the minors is now assumed to have the same force as that of a verbal loan which cannot be collected from a buyer.
- Out of the residue of the estate; not from their sisters' husbands who are regarded as buyers, not as heirs.
- I.e., the husbands cannot be regarded as buyers.
- V. p. 590. n. 5.
- Had these been regarded as buyers, the minors who have the status of a creditor of a verbal loan, could not have taken anything from them.
- The right of the minors to be maintained out of their father's estate.
- From a verbal loan.
- Lit., 'it has a voice', i.e., people well know the fact that the deceased had left minors who are entirely dependent on his estate for their maintenance. Hence the husbands of the elder daughters are assumed to have known the fact. Consequently, the claim of the minors is not to be compared to that of a verbal loan but to one given under a written note of indebtedness, in which case it may be collected even from a buyer of the estate, v. infra 175a.
- Who had attempted to prove above, from R. Hiyya's statement, that a husband is regarded as an heir.
- That a husband has the status of an heir.
- From Palestine to Babylon
- in accordance with his undertaking in the kethubah which is given to one's wife.
- And thus transferred the estate into her husband's possession.
- And her husband inherited her possessions.
- Lit., 'they said'.
- Lit., 'you said'.
- The husband of the daughter, and so every husband.
- Of the property that his wife had brought to him; even during her lifetime.
- Her dead husband's, even if it passed into the possession of her daughter's husband.
- Since the amount required for the maintenance of a widow, may be collected from her husband's heirs.
- Surely a widow's maintenance cannot be collected from the buyers of her husband's property (Cf. Git. 48b)
- That a husband is regarded as an heir.
- Bek. 52b.
- When all landed property that has been sold returns to its original owner. V., Lev. XXV, 28, 31.
Baba Bathra 139b
and that [which a husband] inherits [from] his wife!1 Raba said to him: And now that he did send [his letter] do we know [this]?2 Surely R. Jose b. Hanina stated:3 At Usha4 it was ordained [that if] a woman had sold during the lifetime of her husband, usufruct property,5 and died, the husband may seize them from the buyers?6 — But, said R. Ashi, the Rabbis have given a husband the status7 of an heir and [also the status of] a buyer; and whichever was better for him they gave him.8 In respect of the Jubilee year, the Rabbis gave him the status of an heir, in order [to prevent] loss to him.9 In the case of [the statement of] R. Jose b. Hanina, the Rabbis gave him the status of a buyer [also] in order [to avert] loss to him.10 In respect of [the statement of] Rabin, [however], in order [to avert] a loss to the widow, the Rabbis gave him the status of an heir.11 But, surely, in the case of R. Jose b. Hanina, where the buyers suffer12 loss, the Rabbis had yet given him the status of a buyer!13 — There,14 they15 caused the loss to themselves; for since [it was known that] a husband was involved,16 they should not have bought from a woman who is subject to a husband's jurisdiction.17
MISHNAH. [IN THE CASE OF] ONE WHO DIES AND LEAVES SONS AND DAUGHTERS, IF THE ESTATE IS LARGE,18 THE SONS INHERIT [IT], AND THE DAUGHTERS ARE MAINTAINED [FROM IT].19 [IF] THE ESTATE IS SMALL, THE DAUGHTERS ARE MAINTAINED [FROM IT], AND THE SONS SHALL GO BEGGING.20 ADMON SAID, 'AM I TO BE THE LOSER BECAUSE I AM A MALE!' R. GAMALIEL SAID: ADMON'S VIEW HAS MY APPROVAL.21
GEMARA. What is considered a large estate?22 — Rab Judah said in the name of Rab: Out of which both23 may be maintained for twelve months. When I recited this before Samuel,24 he said, 'This is the view of R. Gamaliel b. Rabbi, but the Sages say that [the estate must be large enough] to provide for the maintenance of both23 until they reach their majority'. [So] it was also stated [else. where]: When Rabin came,25 he said in the name of R. Johanan, (others say [that it was] Rabbah b. Bar Hanah [who] said it in the name of R. Johanan): When [the estate is large enough] to provide for the maintenance of both until they have reached their majority, It is [considered] large; if less, it is regarded as small. And if [the estate] does not suffice for both until they have reached their majority,
Original footnotes renumbered. See Structure of the Talmud Files
- This clearly proves that a husband is regarded as heir. For had he been regarded as a buyer of the property that was brought to him by his wife, he would have retained that status even after her death; and all her landed possessions, as all landed property bought, would have had to be returned in the Jubilee year to their original owner.
- V. note 2.
- Keth. 50a, 78b; B.K. 88b; B.M. 35a; 96b; supra 50a.
- V. p. 207, n. 3.
- Property which belongs to her, while the right of usufruct is enjoyed by the husband, v. p. 206, n. 7.
- Which proves that a husband has the status of a buyer. An heir could not seize property sold.
- Lit., 'they made him'.
- Lit., 'and they did as it was better for him'.
- That he shall not be compelled to return what he inherited from his wife to her family.
- So that he shall be entitled to seize the property from anyone who bought it.
- The husband's undertaking to provide for his wife's maintenance preceded the marriage. Hence her claim must receive priority.
- Lit., 'there is'.
- Why were not the interests of the buyers taken into consideration as much as those of the widow?
- In the case of R. Jose.
- The buyers.
- Lit., 'there is'.
- Lit., 'who dwells under a man', i.e., whose property is subject to the claims of a husband to whom it will finally pass over after her death. These buyers contrived to deprive him of his right by purchasing the property during her lifetime, hence they must stand the loss.
- Lit., 'possessions are many'.
- Until they marry or become of age.
- Lit., 'begging at the doors'.
- Lit., 'I see the words of Admon'.
- Lit., 'and how much (are) many'.
- Lit., 'these and these', the sons and the daughters.
- When, after the death of Rab, he joined for some time Samuel's academy.
- From Palestine to Babylon.