Mishnah.org Logo

Today's Mishnah Yomi

Bava Basra 9:7 - 9:8

The Mishnah Yomi for Friday, December 13, 2024 is Bava Basra 9:7 - 9:8

＜ Previous DayTodayNext Day ＞

Mishnah 1

Mishnayos Bava Basra Perek 9 Mishnah 7

בבא בתרא פרק ט׳ משנה ז׳

7
With regard to one who divides his property between various recipients by means of verbal instruction, Rabbi Elazar says: Both in the case of one who is healthy and in the case of one who is dangerously ill, the halakha is as follows: Property that serves as a guarantee, i.e., land, is acquired by means of money, by a deed of transfer, or by taking possession of it. And that which does not serve as a guarantee, i.e., movable property, can be acquired only by pulling. The Rabbis said to Rabbi Elazar: There was an incident involving the mother of the sons of Rokhel, who was sick, and who said: My brooch shall be given to my daughter, and it is valued at twelve hundred dinars. And this woman subsequently died, and the Sages upheld her statement. This indicates that a person on his deathbed can gift property without an act of acquisition. Rabbi Elazar said to them: That case was different; the sons of Rokhel should be buried by their mother, i.e., he cursed them. It is not possible to bring a proof from this incident, as these sons were wicked people. Consequently, when ruling in this matter the Sages did not act in accordance with the halakha, but allowed the mother of the sons of Rokhel to give this valuable piece of jewelry to their sister without an act of acquisition having been performed. Rabbi Eliezer says: On Shabbat, the verbal statement of a person on his deathbed stands, as he cannot write, and the Sages instituted that he can effect the transaction verbally lest the inability to do so exacerbate his condition. But a verbal instruction does not stand if stated on a weekday. Rabbi Yehoshua says: With regard to Shabbat, the Sages stated that his verbal instruction is sufficient, even though writing is prohibited. One can infer a fortiori that the same applies with regard to a weekday, when writing is permitted. Similarly, one can acquire property on behalf of a minor, but one cannot acquire property on behalf of an adult, since he can perform the act of acquisition himself; this is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Yehoshua says: The Sages stated this halakha with regard to a minor, and one may infer a fortiori that this also applies with regard to an adult, who is able to perform the act of acquisition himself.
הַמְחַלֵּק נְכָסָיו עַל פִּיו, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, אֶחָד בָּרִיא וְאֶחָד מְסֻכָּן, נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן אַחֲרָיוּת נִקְנִין בְּכֶסֶף וּבִשְׁטָר וּבַחֲזָקָה, וְשֶׁאֵין לָהֶן אַחֲרָיוּת אֵין נִקְנִין אֶלָּא בִמְשִׁיכָה. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, מַעֲשֶׂה בְאִמָּן שֶׁל בְּנֵי רוֹכֵל שֶׁהָיְתָה חוֹלָה וְאָמְרָה תְּנוּ כְבִינָתִי לְבִתִּי וְהִיא בִשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר מָנֶה, וָמֵתָה, וְקִיְּמוּ אֶת דְּבָרֶיהָ. אָמַר לָהֶן, בְּנֵי רוֹכֵל תְּקַבְּרֵם אִמָּן. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, בְּשַׁבָּת, דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִין, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִכְתּוֹב. אֲבָל לֹא בְחֹל. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, בְּשַׁבָּת אָמְרוּ, קַל וָחֹמֶר בְּחֹל. כַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ, זָכִין לַקָּטָן, וְאֵין זָכִין לַגָּדוֹל. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, לַקָּטָן אָמְרוּ, קַל וָחֹמֶר לַגָּדוֹל:
ז׳

ר' אליעזר אומר אחד בריא ואחד מסוכן – Rabbi Eliezer does not hold by [the statement] that the words of a person on his deathbed are as if they are written and transmitted, and even if one issues directives due to [his imminent] death, he holds that his gift is not a gift, other than through an acquisition, like the gift of a health individual. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eliezer.

כבינתי – it is the Aramaic translation of a brooch of hammered metal.

תקברם אמם – meaning to say, they don’t bring a proof from them because they were wicked, and the Rabbis fined the sons to fulfill for the daughter the gift of their mother, even though it was not according to the law.

אבל לא החול – if the person on his deathbed distributed his possessions on a weekday.

קל וחומה בחול – and such is the Halakha, that whether it is a weekday or Shabbat, the words of a person on his deathbed are as if hey are written and transmitted, and there is no need for an acquisition. But if he asked tha they should acquire it from his hand, they acquire it from it, whether on weekdays or on Shabbat in order that his mind should not be troubled by it.

ר׳ אליעזר אומר אחד בריא ואחד מסוכן. ר׳ אליעזר לית ליה דברי שכיב מרע ככתובין וכמסורין דמו, ואפילו מצוה מחמת מיתה סבירא ליה דאין מתנתו מתנה אלא בקנין, כמתנת בריא. ואין הלכה כרבי אליעזר:

כבינתי. תרגום רדידים כבינתא:

תקברם אמם. כלומר אין מביאין ראיה מהם שרשעים היו וקנסא קנסו רבנן לבנים לקיים לבת מתנת אמן, אע״פ שלא היה מן הדין:

אבל לא בחול. אם חילק השכיב מרע נכסיו בחול:

קל וחומר בחול. וכן הלכה דבין בחול בין בשבת דברי שכיב מרע ככתיבי וכמסירי דמו, ואין צריך קנין. ואם שאל שיקנו מידו, קונים ממנו בין בחול בין בשבת כדי שלא תטרף דעתו עליו:

Mishnah 2

Mishnayos Bava Basra Perek 9 Mishnah 8

בבא בתרא פרק ט׳ משנה ח׳

8
A house collapsed on a son and upon his father, or upon a certain person and upon those from whom he stands to inherit, and it is unknown who died first. If the son bore the responsibility to pay the marriage contract of his wife and to pay a creditor, and the son had no money with which to pay them except that which he might inherit from his father, and the father’s heirs say: The son died first and afterward the father died, and therefore the son did not inherit property from his father, and the creditors say: The father died first and afterward the son died, resulting in the son’s inheriting his father’s property, enabling the creditors to collect payment from the property even after the son’s death, there is a dispute with regard to how to rule. Since it cannot be determined who died first, Beit Shammai say: They divide the property between them so that the father’s heirs receive half of his property and the son’s creditors receive the other half. And Beit Hillel say: The property retains its previous ownership status. Since the last known owner of the property was the father, the property is given to the father’s heirs.
נָפַל הַבַּיִת עָלָיו וְעַל אָבִיו אוֹ עָלָיו וְעַל מוֹרִישָׁיו, וְהָיְתָה עָלָיו כְּתֻבַּת אִשָּׁה וּבַעַל חוֹב, יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאָב אוֹמְרִים, הַבֵּן מֵת רִאשׁוֹן וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת הָאָב, בַּעֲלֵי הַחוֹב אוֹמְרִים, הָאָב מֵת רִאשׁוֹן וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת הַבֵּן, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, יַחֲלֹקוּ. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, נְכָסִים בְּחֶזְקָתָן:
ח׳

יורשי האב אומרים הבן מת ראשון – and the creditor cannot collect from these properties for the son never took possession of them.

ובעלי החוב אומרים האב מת ראשון – and the properties fell one hour before the son and they are mortgaged to the marriage contract of his wife and the creditors.

בית שמאי אומרים יחלוקו – the School of Shammai holds that the document that stands to be collected is considered as collected, and the inheritors of the father and the creditors, both of them are in possession. Therefore, they divide it.

ובית הלל אומרים – the property is in the possession of the inheritors and is seen as possessed, and the creditor comes to take it from their hands, and he has to bring proof that the father died first.

יורשי האב אומרים הבן מת ראשון. ואין בעל חוב יכול להפרע מנכסים אלו שהרי לא זכה בהן הבן מעולם:

ובעלי החוב אומרים האב מת ראשון. ונפלו הנכסים שעה אחת לפני הבן. והם משועבדים לכתובת אשה ובעלי חוב:

בית שמאי אומרים יחלוקו. דקסברי בית שמאי שטר העומד לגבות כגבוי דמי, ויורשי האב ובעלי חוב תרווייהו מוחזקים הוו, לפיכך יחלוקו:

ובית הלל אומרים. הנכסים בחזקת יורשים וכמוחזקים דמו ובעל חוב בא להוציא מידם ועליו להביא ראיה שהאב מת תחילה:

Mishnah Yomi FAQ

Still have a question? Contact Us