Si l'on dit: "Cet homme, mon fils, un bechor, ne prendra pas une double part", ou "Cet homme, mon fils, n'héritera pas avec ses frères", il n'a rien dit, car il stipule contre ce qui est écrit dans la Torah. [Et il ne peut pas le dépouiller de l'héritage à moins qu'il ne donne ses biens en cadeau à ses autres fils.] Si quelqu'un a distribué ses biens parmi ses fils par sa parole, [notre commandement face à la mort étant considéré comme "écrit et transmis dans la Torah, "et n'exigeant pas de kinyan (un acte effectuant l'acquisition), (ceci étant la poussée de" par sa parole ")] et il accordait plus à l'un et moins à l'autre, et rendait le bechor égal à eux [par utilisant une expression de «cadeau»], ses mots tiennent. [Et cela n'est pas considéré comme stipulant contre ce qui est écrit dans la Torah. Car quelqu'un a le droit de donner son argent en cadeau à qui il veut.] Et s'il a dit «comme héritage», [c'est-à-dire, s'il a donné plus à l'un et moins à un autre comme héritage, en disant: «Cet homme, mon fils, héritera d'un champ d'un beth-kor, et cet homme, mon fils, héritera d'un champ d'un beth-lethech, "ou de son fils, un bechor, qu'il doit hériter également avec les autres, il a n'a rien dit, ayant stipulé contre ce qui est écrit dans la Torah]. S'il a écrit «comme cadeau» au début, au milieu ou à la fin, ses paroles tiennent. [au commencement: "Que ce champ soit donné à celui-ci et qu'il en hérite." à la fin: «Qu'il en hérite et qu'il lui soit donné». au milieu: "Qu'il hérite de ce champ, qu'il lui soit donné, et qu'il en hérite."] Si l'on dit: "Que cet homme m'hérite", là où il a une fille, ou "Que ma fille hérite de moi, «là où il a un fils, il n'a rien dit, ayant stipulé contre ce qui est écrit dans la Torah. R. Yochanan b. B'roka dit: S'il dit ceci à propos de celui qui est apte à hériter de lui, ses paroles tiennent. Et s'il s'agit de quelqu'un qui n'est pas apte à hériter de lui, ses paroles ne tiennent pas. [Par exemple, s'il l'a dit à propos d'un fils parmi les autres fils, ou d'une fille parmi les autres filles, ses paroles tiennent, il est écrit (Deutéronome 21:16): "Alors il arrivera, le jour où il causera hériter de ses fils "—La Torah a accordé au père le pouvoir de faire hériter celui de ses fils à celui de ses fils. Et R. Yochanan concède qu'avec un frère, où il a une fille, ou avec une fille, où il a un fils, il n'a rien dit. Car une fille n'est pas digne d'hériter là où il y a un fils; ou un frère, là où il y a une fille. De même, R. Yochanan concède que s'il a rendu le bechor égal aux autres frères, il n'a rien dit, étant écrit (Ibid.): "Il ne pourra pas accorder la primogéniture, etc." La halakha est conforme à R. Yochanan b. B'roka.] Si l'on écrit sa propriété à d'autres, en passant sur ses enfants, ce qu'il a fait est fait, mais les sages ne le considèrent pas favorablement, [même si ses enfants ne se déportent pas correctement, car de bons enfants pourraient de leur part.] R. Shimon b. Gamliel dit: Si ses enfants ne se sont pas déportés correctement (et il les a ainsi déshérités), on se souvient de lui "pour le bien". [La halakha n'est pas conforme à R. Shimon b. Gamliel.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Batra
לא אמר כלום – and he is not able to remove hm from the inheritance, other that via that he would give his property to the rest of his sons through a gift.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Batra
Introduction
Mishnah five deals with a father’s ability to decide which of his inheritors will inherit.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Batra
על פיו – because it is a Mitzvah in the consequence of a death and a person on his deathbed, his words are like they were written and transmitted and they don’t require an [act of] acquisition, and because of this it is taught “by his mouth”/על פיו.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Batra
Our mishnah deals with a father who does not want to simply let the inheritance fall in its proper order (as learned in the first two mishnayoth of the chapter) but rather wants to divide his property in another fashion.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Batra
והשוה להן את הבכור – in the language of a gift.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Batra
If a man says, “So and so, my firstborn son, shall not receive a double portion”, or “So and so, my son, shall not inherit with his brothers”, he has said nothing, for he has made a condition contrary to what is written in the Torah. The Torah demands that the eldest son receive a double portion and each of the other sons divide the money equally. A father’s attempt to lessen the portion of the eldest son or increase the portion of the other sons would be, therefore, a condition that goes against Torah law, and such a condition is invalid.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Batra
דבריו קיימין – and we don’t have here [the case] of a person making a condition against what is written in the Torah because it is within the power of an individual to give his money as a gift to whomever he desires.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Batra
If a man apportioned his property to his sons by word of mouth, and gave much to one and little to another, or made them equal to the firstborn, his words are valid. But if he had said [that it should be so] “by inheritance”, he has said nothing. If he had written down, whether at the beginning or in the middle or at the end [of his will] that it should be as a gift, his words are valid. However, the fact that a man cannot make a change in the inheritance law does not mean that he cannot apportion his money as a present to his children while he is still alive. As long as the document or his verbal contract states that the money is being passed to his children as a present while he is still alive and not as an inheritance after his death, the transaction is valid. The Torah’s laws govern inheritance, the transfer of money after death and not presents given during life.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Batra
ואם אמר משום ירושה – and if he increased [the monies] to one and lessened them to another in the designation of inheritance as he said: “So-and-so my son will a field that is an area requiring a Khor of seed, and so-and-so my son will inherit a field that is in an area requiring a one-half Khor of seed. But regarding his first-born son he said that he would inherit like that of his fellow, he did not say anything, for he made a condition that is against what is written in the Torah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Batra
If a man said, “So and so a man shall inherit from me” and he has a daughter; or “My daughter shall inherit from me”, and he has a son, he has said nothing, for he has made a condition contrary to what is written in the Torah. Rabbi Johanan ben Baroka says: “If he said [that so and so shall inherit from me] of one that was qualified to inherit from him, his words are valid, but if of one that was not qualified to inherit from him his words do not remain valid.” Similar to the law in section one, here too a person attempts to change the laws of inheritance from the Torah, by saying that a stranger will inherit when he has a daughter or that his daughter will inherit when he has a son. Again, we learn that such a stipulation, contrary to the laws of the Torah, is invalid. Rabbi Johanan ben Baroka disagrees. He says that as long as the intended inheritor is a legal inheritor, meaning one of those on the list in mishnah one and two, then a person can bypass the primary inheritor and give to the secondary one. In other words Jacob could state that instead of his sons inheriting his property his daughter Dina could inherit, since she is on the lines of inheritance. He could not however, state that a stranger to the family would inherit in place of his sons.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Batra
כתב בין בתחלה וכ' – “You will give such-and-such a field to son-and-so, and he will inherit it.” This is at the beginning. “He will inherit it and you will give it to him.” This is at the at the end. “He will inherit such-and-such a field and you will give it to him and he will inherit it. This is a gift in the middle.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Batra
If a man wrote away his property to others and passed over his sons, what he has done is done, but the Sages are not comfortable with it. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: “If has sons did not behave properly, it should be counted to his credit.” Finally, the mishnah states that although a person can give away his property to strangers before he dies, thereby leaving no inheritance for his sons, the Rabbis were not happy with such an action. The laws of inheritance in the Torah are not just guidelines for inheriting should the situation arise, they are the proper way in which property would be transferred from generation to generation. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel lastly notes, that if the sons were engaged in improper behavior, it is meritorious for the father to ensure that they receive no inheritance.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Batra
אם אמר על מי שראוי ליורשו – as for example, regarding a son among the sons, or regarding a daughter among the daughters, so-and-so will inherit me, his words are fulfilled, as it is written (Deuteronomy 21:16):”When he wills his property to his sons [he may not treat as first-born the son of the loved one in disregard of the son of the unloved one who is older].” The Torah gave permission to the father to bequeath to the sons to whomever he desires. And Rabbi Yohanan [Ben Beroka] agrees regarding a brother in place of a daughter, and regarding a daughter in place of a son, he has not said anything for the daughter is not worthy of inheriting in place of a son nor is the brother [worthy of inheriting] in place of a daughter. And similarly, Rabbi Yohanan [ben Beroka] agrees that if he made the first born equivalent to the [other] sons, he has not said anything, as it is written (Deuteronomy 21:16): “he may not treat as first-born the son of the loved one.” And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Batra
אין רוח חכמים נוחה הימנו – The Sages have no pleasure from his actions, and even if his sons did not conduct themselves appropriately. Perhaps, there will arise from them a higher-level seed. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon ben Gamaliel.
