Bava Batra 8

יֵשׁ נוֹחֲלִין וּמַנְחִילִין, וְיֵשׁ נוֹחֲלִין וְלֹא מַנְחִילִין, מַנְחִילִין וְלֹא נוֹחֲלִין, לֹא נוֹחֲלִין וְלֹא מַנְחִילִין. וְאֵלּוּ נוֹחֲלִין וּמַנְחִילִין, הָאָב אֶת הַבָּנִים וְהַבָּנִים אֶת הָאָב וְהָאַחִין מִן הָאָב, נוֹחֲלִין וּמַנְחִילִין. הָאִישׁ אֶת אִמּוֹ וְהָאִישׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וּבְנֵי אֲחָיוֹת, נוֹחֲלִין וְלֹא מַנְחִילִין. הָאִשָּׁה אֶת בָּנֶיהָ וְהָאִשָּׁה אֶת בַּעְלָהּ וַאֲחֵי הָאֵם, מַנְחִילִין וְלֹא נוֹחֲלִין. וְהָאַחִים מִן הָאֵם, לֹא נוֹחֲלִין וְלֹא מַנְחִילִין:

There are those [kin] who inherit [other kin] and bequeath inheritance [to them at their death]; inherit, but do not bequeath; bequeath but do not inherit; neither inherit nor bequeath. These inherit and bequeath: A father (inherits) his sons, [viz. (Numbers 27:8): "A man, if he die, and he have no son, then you shall pass his inheritance to his daughter" — Where the deceased has a daughter, you pass the inheritance from the father (of the deceased), but you do not do so where he has (no sons and daughters, but only) brothers.] And sons (inherit) their fathers, [viz. (Ibid.: "A man, if he die, and he have no son," the implication being that if he does have a son, the son takes precedence.] And brothers from the father (inherit each other), [viz. (Ibid. 11): "…by their families, according to the house of their fathers."] These (the above) inherit and bequeath. A man (inherits) his mother, [viz. (Ibid. 36:8): "And every daughter who receives an inheritance from the tribes of the children of Israel." How can a daughter inherit two tribes? She can, in an instance where he father is from one tribe and her mother from a different one, the daughter (in the absence of male heirs) inheriting them. And since it is written "tribes," the tribe of the mother is being likened to the tribe of the father, i.e.: Just as with the tribe of the father the son takes precedence to the daughter, so with the tribe of the mother.] A man inherits his wife, [viz. (Ibid. 27:11): "…his flesh" — this is his wife. The verse is understood as: "And you shall give the inheritance of his wife to him." (We "diminish, and add, and expound.") I might think that she, likewise, inherits him; it is therefore, written (Ibid.): "And he shall inherit it" (lit., "her") — He inherits her, but she does not inherit him.] And the sons of sisters (inherit the deceased where there are no closer kin.) These (the above) inherit, but do not bequeath. A woman, her son; a woman her, husband; and the mother's brothers, (her son) — they bequeath, but do not inherit. And brothers from the mother — they neither inherit nor bequeath (to each other.)

סֵדֶר נְחָלוֹת כָּךְ הוּא, (במדבר כז) אִישׁ כִּי יָמוּת וּבֵן אֵין לוֹ, וְהַעֲבַרְתֶּם אֶת נַחֲלָתוֹ לְבִתּוֹ, בֵּן קוֹדֵם לַבַּת, וְכָל יוֹצְאֵי יְרֵכוֹ שֶׁל בֵּן קוֹדְמִין לַבַּת. בַּת קוֹדֶמֶת לָאַחִין. יוֹצְאֵי יְרֵכָהּ שֶׁל בַּת, קוֹדְמִין לָאַחִין. אַחִין קוֹדְמִין לַאֲחֵי הָאָב. יוֹצְאֵי יְרֵכָן שֶׁל אַחִין, קוֹדְמִין לַאֲחֵי הָאָב. זֶה הַכְּלָל, כָּל הַקּוֹדֵם בַּנַּחֲלָה, יוֹצְאֵי יְרֵכוֹ קוֹדְמִין. וְהָאָב קוֹדֵם לְכָל יוֹצְאֵי יְרֵכוֹ:

The following is the order of inheritance: (Numbers 27:8): "A man, if he die, and he have no son, then you shall pass his inheritance to his daughter": A son takes precedence to a daughter, and all the offspring of a son take precedence to a daughter. A daughter takes precedence to brothers (of the deceased). The offspring of a daughter take precedence to brothers. Brothers (of the deceased) take precedence to the brothers of the father (of the deceased). The offspring of the brothers take precedence to the brothers of the father. This is the rule: All who take precedence in inheritance, their offspring (also) take precedence. [And if his offspring are not alive, their inheritance reverts to the father. How so? If Reuven died, Chanoch, Falu, Chetzron, and Karmi, his sons, inherit him. If one of the sons died before Reuven, leaving over a son or a daughter, or a son of a son or a daughter of a son, or a son of a daughter or a daughter of a daughter — until a hundred generations — he inherits in place of his father in the property of his father, Reuven, sharing as one of the sons of Reuven. And if Reuven has neither sons, nor sons of sons, and not even daughters of sons, then the daughters of Reuven inherit Reuven. And if Reuven has neither daughters nor sons of daughters, nor daughters of daughters until the end of all the generations, then Yaakov inherits Reuven, his son. And if Yaakov is not alive, then Shimon, Levi, Yehudah, Yosef, Binyamin, etc., Reuven's brothers, the sons of his father, inherit him. And if they are not alive, the sons of Shimon, Levi, etc. inherit Reuven. And if they have neither sons nor sons of sons, their daughters, or sons of daughters, or daughters of daughters inherit. For the male and his heirs always take precedence to the female. And if the brothers of Reuven died without children, or if he never had a brother, he is inherited by his sister, Dinah, the daughter of Yaakov, or her sons, or the sons of her sons, or her daughters or the daughters of her daughters, until the end of time. And if Reuven has neither sister nor children of sister, his inheritance reverts to his father's father, Yitzchak. And if Yitzchak is not alive, Reuven's inheritance reverts to Esav, Yitzchak's son, the brother of the father of Reuven. And if Esav is not alive, the inheritance reverts to Elifaz, the son of Esav, or his sons, or the sons of his sons, or his daughters, or the daughters of his daughters, until the end of all the generations. And if no brothers of Reuven's father nor descendants of theirs are alive, Reuven's inheritance reverts to his father's sister, or her sons, or the sons of her sons, or her daughters, in the aforementioned order. And if Reuven's father has neither brothers nor sons of brothers, nor sisters nor sons of sisters, then his inheritance reverts to Avraham, the father of the father of his father, and so on, until Adam.] And the father (of the deceased) takes precedence to all of his (the father's) offspring. [He takes precedence to the brothers of the father (i.e., the deceased) and their sons. And the brothers of the father take precedence to the sisters of the father, and the brothers of the father and the sisters of the father take precedence to the father of the father (of the deceased). And the father of the father takes precedence to the brothers of the father of the father. And the brothers of the father of the father and even the sister take precedence to the father of the father of the father, and so on, in perpetuum.]

בְּנוֹת צְלָפְחָד נָטְלוּ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֲלָקִים בַּנַּחֲלָה. חֵלֶק אֲבִיהֶן שֶׁהָיָה עִם יוֹצְאֵי מִצְרַיִם, וְחֶלְקוֹ עִם אֶחָיו בְּנִכְסֵי חֵפֶר. וְשֶׁהָיָה בְכוֹר נוֹטֵל שְׁנֵי חֲלָקִים:

The daughters of Tzelafchad took three portions in the inheritance [of Eretz Yisrael]: the portion of their father, who was one of those who left Egypt, his portion with his brothers in the property of Chefer, and his additional portion as a bechor (first-born). [This tanna holds that Eretz Yisrael was apportioned among those who left Egypt, it being written (Numbers 26:55): "According to the names of the tribes of their fathers shall they inherit." Tzelafchad and Chefer, his father, both took a portion in the land, both being among those who left Egypt. And the daughters of Tzelafchad took the portion in the land accruing to their father, the portion accruing to them from the inheritance of Chefer, his father, and the additional portion accruing to him as a bechor. And even though they had not yet inherited the land, and a bechor does not take a double portion of what is to come after death, Eretz Yisrael was regarded as (already) held.]

אֶחָד הַבֵּן וְאֶחָד הַבַּת בַּנַּחֲלָה, אֶלָּא שֶׁהַבֵּן נוֹטֵל פִּי שְׁנַיִם בְּנִכְסֵי הָאָב וְאֵינוֹ נוֹטֵל פִּי שְׁנַיִם בְּנִכְסֵי הָאֵם. וְהַבָּנוֹת נִזּוֹנוֹת מִנִּכְסֵי הָאָב וְאֵינָן נִזּוֹנוֹת מִנִּכְסֵי הָאֵם:

Both the son and the daughter (share) in the inheritance. But a son takes a double share in the property of the father and not in the property of the mother; and the daughters are fed from the property of the father and not from the property of the mother. [This is the intent: Both the son and the daughter are equal in the inheritance of the property of the mother as (they are) in the inheritance of the property of the father. And there is no difference between the inheritance of the property of the mother and the inheritance of the property of the father. It is just that a bechor takes a double share in the property of the father, but not in the property of the mother, etc.]

הָאוֹמֵר אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי בְנִי בְּכוֹר לֹא יִטֹּל פִּי שְׁנַיִם, אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי בְנִי לֹא יִירַשׁ עִם אֶחָיו, לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם, שֶׁהִתְנָה עַל מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה. הַמְחַלֵּק נְכָסָיו לְבָנָיו עַל פִּיו, רִבָּה לְאֶחָד וּמִעֵט לְאֶחָד וְהִשְׁוָה לָהֶן אֶת הַבְּכוֹר, דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִין. וְאִם אָמַר מִשּׁוּם יְרֻשָּׁה, לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. כָּתַב בֵּין בַּתְּחִלָּה בֵּין בָּאֶמְצַע בֵּין בַּסּוֹף מִשּׁוּם מַתָּנָה, דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִין. הָאוֹמֵר אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי יִירָשֵׁנִי בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁיֵשׁ בַּת, בִּתִּי תִירָשֵׁנִי בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁיֶּשׁ בֵּן, לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם, שֶׁהִתְנָה עַל מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה אוֹמֵר, אִם אָמַר עַל מִי שֶׁהוּא רָאוּי לְיָרְשׁוֹ, דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִין. וְעַל מִי שֶׁאֵין רָאוּי לְיָרְשׁוֹ, אֵין דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִין. הַכּוֹתֵב אֶת נְכָסָיו לַאֲחֵרִים וְהִנִּיחַ אֶת בָּנָיו, מַה שֶּׁעָשָׂה עָשׂוּי, אֲבָל אֵין רוּחַ חֲכָמִים נוֹחָה הֵימֶנּוּ. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, אִם לֹא הָיוּ בָנָיו נוֹהֲגִין כַּשּׁוּרָה, זָכוּר לְטוֹב:

If one says: "This man, my son, a bechor, shall not take a double portion," or "This man, my son, shall not inherit with his brothers," he has said nothing, for he stipulates against what is written in the Torah. [And he cannot divest him of the inheritance unless he gives his property as a gift to his other sons.] If one distributed his property among his sons by his word, [one's command in the face of death being regarded as "written and transmitted in the Torah," and not requiring a kinyan (an act effecting acquisition), (this being the thrust of "by his word")] and he accorded more to one and less to another, and made the bechor equal to them [by using an expression of "gift"], his words stand. [And this is not considered stipulating against what is written in the Torah. For one has the right to give his money as a gift to whomever he wishes.] And if he said "as inheritance," [i.e., If he gave more to one and less to another as inheritance, saying: "This man, my son, shall inherit a field of a beth-kor, and that man, my son, shall inherit a field of a beth-lethech," or of his son, a bechor, that he is to inherit equally with the others, he has said nothing, having stipulated against what is written in the Torah]. If he wrote "as a gift" either in the beginning, the middle, or the end, his words stand. [in the beginning: "Let this field be given to this one and let him inherit it." in the end: "Let him inherit it and let it be given to him." in the middle: "Let him inherit this field, and let it be given to him, and let him inherit it."] If one says: "Let this man inherit me," where he has a daughter, or "Let my daughter inherit me," where he has a son, he has said nothing, having stipulated against what is written in the Torah. R. Yochanan b. B'roka says: If he says this about one who is fit to inherit him, his words stand. And if about one who is not fit to inherit him, his words do not stand. [e.g., If he said it about one son among the other sons, or about one daughter among the other daughters, his words stand, it being written (Deuteronomy 21:16): "Then it shall be, on the day that he causes his sons to inherit" — The Torah granted the father authority to cause whichever of his sons he wishes, to inherit him. And R. Yochanan concedes that with a brother, where he has a daughter, or with a daughter, where he has a son, he has said nothing. For a daughter is not fit to inherit where there is a son; or a brother, where there is a daughter. Likewise, R. Yochanan concedes that if he made the bechor equal to the other brothers, he has said nothing, it being written (Ibid.): "He shall not be able to grant primogeniture, etc." The halachah is in accordance with R. Yochanan b. B'roka.] If one writes his property over to others, passing over his children, what he did is done, but the sages do not look favorably upon it, [even if his children to not deport themselves properly, for good children might issue from them.] R. Shimon b. Gamliel says: If his children did not deport themselves properly (and he disinherited them thus), he is "remembered for the good." [The halachah is not in accordance with R. Shimon b. Gamliel.]

הָאוֹמֵר זֶה בְּנִי, נֶאֱמָן. זֶה אָחִי, אֵינוֹ נֶאֱמָן וְנוֹטֵל עִמּוֹ בְּחֶלְקוֹ. מֵת, יַחְזְרוּ נְכָסִים לִמְקוֹמָן. נָפְלוּ לוֹ נְכָסִים מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר, יִירְשׁוּ אֶחָיו עִמּוֹ. מִי שֶׁמֵּת וְנִמְצֵאת דְּיָתֵיקֵי קְשׁוּרָה עַל יְרֵכוֹ, הֲרֵי זוֹ אֵינָהּ כְּלוּם. זִכָּה בָהּ לְאַחֵר, בֵּין מִן הַיּוֹרְשִׁין בֵּין שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִן הַיּוֹרְשִׁין, דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִין:

If one says: "This is my son," he is believed, [to cause him to inherit and to exempt his (own) wife from yibum (levirate marriage)]. (If one says:) "This is my brother," he is not believed, [to cause him to inherit with his brothers, for they do not recognize him.] And he (the one called "my brother") takes (i.e., shares) with him (the one who calls him his brother) in his portion. [So that if there were two brothers aside form the safek (the "doubtful" one), and there were three fields for them to divide, one takes one and a half, and the other takes one and a half, and the one who calls the safek his brother gives him half the field, and the other gives him nothing, saying: "Bring proof and take."] If he [the safek] dies, the property [given to him by his brother] returns to its place, [i.e., to the one who gave it to him; but the other brothers do not inherit him.] If property fell to him [the safek] from elsewhere [in his lifetime, or if he bought property and then died], his brothers inherit with him [the one who testified about him. For he (the safek) admitted to them that he is their brother. This, when the other brothers do not absolutely deny that he is their brother, but only say that they do not recognize him. But if they do deny it, only the one who testified for him inherits him.] If one died, and a daitiki [a deathbed will ("daitiki" - "da tehei lemeikam ulemehevei" — "This shall be to establish and to confirm")] were found tied to his thigh, [in which instance it cannot be maintained that another wrote it and placed it there, even so], it is nothing, [for acquisition is effected only with transference of the writ, and "there is no writ after death."] If he invested another with it, whether one of the heirs, or one not an heir, his words stand.

הַכּוֹתֵב נְכָסָיו לְבָנָיו, צָרִיךְ שֶׁיִּכְתֹּב מֵהַיּוֹם וּלְאַחַר מִיתָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ. הַכּוֹתֵב נְכָסָיו לִבְנוֹ לְאַחַר מוֹתוֹ, הָאָב אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִמְכֹּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן כְּתוּבִין לַבֵּן, וְהַבֵּן אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִמְכֹּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן בִּרְשׁוּת הָאָב. מָכַר הָאָב, מְכוּרִין עַד שֶׁיָּמוּת. מָכַר הַבֵּן, אֵין לַלּוֹקֵחַ בָּהֶן כְּלוּם עַד שֶׁיָּמוּת הָאָב. הָאָב תּוֹלֵשׁ וּמַאֲכִיל לְכָל מִי שֶׁיִּרְצֶה. וּמַה שֶּׁהִנִּיחַ תָּלוּשׁ, הֲרֵי הוּא שֶׁל יוֹרְשִׁין. הִנִּיחַ בָּנִים גְּדוֹלִים וּקְטַנִּים, אֵין הַגְּדוֹלִים מִתְפַּרְנְסִים עַל הַקְּטַנִּים וְלֹא הַקְּטַנִּים נִזּוֹנִין עַל הַגְּדוֹלִים, אֶלָּא חוֹלְקִין בְּשָׁוֶה. נָשְׂאוּ הַגְּדוֹלִים, יִשְׂאוּ הַקְּטַנִּים. וְאִם אָמְרוּ קְטַנִּים הֲרֵי אָנוּ נוֹשְׂאִים כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁנְּשָׂאתֶם אַתֶּם, אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לָהֶם, אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁנָּתַן לָהֶם אֲבִיהֶם נָתָן:

If one writes over his property to his sons, he must write: "from today and after death," [connoting: The land itself is acquired by you from today, and you shall not eat its fruits until after (my) death. And if he does not write "from today," he gives him nothing, for there is no giving after death.] These are the words of R. Yehudah. R. Yossi says: He need not [write "from today." For since it is written in the deed: "On this and this day of the week, so and so said to us: 'Be witnesses for me, etc.'", the date indicates that the gift "began" on that day. For if this is not so, why need the date be written at all? The halachah is in accordance with R. Yossi.] If one writes over his property to his son after his death, [i.e., "from today and after death"], the father cannot sell it [without the son], for it is written over to the son, [i.e., the land itself is owned by the son], and the son cannot sell it [without the father], for it is in the father's domain [i.e., the fruits are owned by the father.] If the father sold it [without qualification], they [the fruits] are sold (to the buyer) until he [the father] dies. If the son sold it [in the father's lifetime], the buyer does not have them [the fruits] until the father dies. The father [who wrote over his property to his son "from today and after death"] tears off and feeds [the fruits] to whomever he wishes [in his lifetime. But as to what was left in the ground at the time of his death, even though it stands to be torn out, it belongs to his son, the receiver of the gift. However, if one writes over his property to another, even what is left in the ground at the time of his gift belongs to the heirs. For a man is more favorably disposed towards his son than towards another.] And what was left over, torn (from the ground) belongs to the heirs. If he left sons, grown and small, the grown ones are not clothed at the expense of the small [(The clothing expenses of the grown ones are greater than those of the small)], and the small ones are not fed at the expense of the grown ones. But they share equally. [(The food expenses of the small ones are greater than those of the grown, for they eat more often and leave over more.) Therefore, the small ones keep the grown ones from being clothed by the estate, and the grown ones keep the small ones from being fed by it, but each is clothed and fed from his own share.] If the grown sons married [and took their wedding expenses from the estate after the death of their father], the young ones may also marry [i.e., they may also take their wedding expenses from the estate.] And if the younger ones said [after the death of their father]: "We shall marry as (i.e., in the same style that) you did" [in our father's lifetime], they are not heeded, but whatever their father gave them [in his lifetime], he gave.

הִנִּיחַ בָּנוֹת גְּדוֹלוֹת וּקְטַנּוֹת, אֵין הַגְּדוֹלוֹת מִתְפַּרְנְסוֹת עַל הַקְּטַנּוֹת וְלֹא הַקְּטַנּוֹת נִזּוֹנוֹת עַל הַגְּדוֹלוֹת, אֶלָּא חוֹלְקוֹת בְּשָׁוֶה. נָשְׂאוּ גְדוֹלוֹת, יִשְׂאוּ קְטַנּוֹת. וְאִם אָמְרוּ קְטַנּוֹת, הֲרֵי אָנוּ נוֹשְׂאוֹת כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁנְּשָׂאתֶם אַתֶּם, אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לָהֶן. זֶה חֹמֶר בַּבָּנוֹת מִבַּבָּנִים, שֶׁהַבָּנוֹת נִזּוֹנוֹת עַל הַבָּנִים וְאֵין נִזּוֹנוֹת עַל הַבָּנוֹת:

If he left over daughters [and not sons], the grown ones are not clothed at the expense of the small, and the small are not fed at the expense of the grown, but they share equally. If the grown daughters married, the young ones may also marry. And if the younger ones said: "We shall marry as you did," they are not heeded. This is a stringency of daughters over sons: Daughters are fed [as a condition of the kethubah] at the expense of the sons, whereas they [small daughters] are not fed at the expense of the [grown] daughters. [For where sons do not inherit, the daughters are not fed by condition of the kethubah, but they share equally, and each is fed from her own portion.]