Bava Basra - Daf 129
- Where a "מתנה" phrase can validate a redistribution of one’s estate: four opinions
The Mishnah on Daf 126b taught that if one instructed to divide his estate differently than the Torah’s laws of inheritance, his instructions are ignored. However, if he added an expression of מתנה – giving, whether “at the beginning, the middle, or the end,” it is valid. There are four opinions about the extent of this law: (1) Rav Dimi quoted Rebbe Yochanan saying: ודוקא באדם אחד ושדה אחת – this is only true when the instructions were about one person and one field (e.g., “Field A shall be given to Reuven, and he shall inherit it”). But if it involved one person and two fields (e.g., “Reuven shall inherit Field A, and Field B shall be given to him), or two people and one field, the "מתנה" phrase of one does not validate the other, separate designation. (2) Rebbe Elazar says these cases are valid (because we assume both were intended as gifts), but not if it involves two fields and two people. (3) Ravin says Rebbe Yochanan validates even a case of two fields and two people. (4) Reish Lakish holds a “מתנה” phrase only validates a case of two fields and two people if he used two phrases of מתנה, such as: “Reuven and Shimon shall inherit Field A and Field B (respectively), which I am giving them as gifts, and they shall inherit them.”
- Proof from נכסי לך ואחריך יירש פלוני
Rav Ashi disproves the first two opinions cited above, from a Baraisa discussing one who says, נכסי לך – “My properties shall be given to you when I die, ואחריך יירש פלוני – and after you die, Ploni should inherit it, ואחרי אחריך יירש פלוני – and after [the one] after you dies, Ploni should inherit it.” The Baraisa teaches that after the first recipient dies, the second person acquires it, and when the second person dies, the third person acquires it. If the second person dies before the first, the first person’s heirs inherit it. Now, this case is like designations to two fields and two people (since the second person does not receive anything while the first is alive), where the first expression was one of "מתנה", and the second was “inheritance,” yet even the second recipient acquires the property!? The Gemara concludes that this Baraisa does indeed refute the opinions that do not validate the inheritance clause in a case of two fields and two people.
- Reish Lakish agrees one מתנה phrase is sufficient when it is תוך כדי דיבור
The Gemara asks that the above Baraisa should also refute Reish Lakish, who only validates a case of two fields and two people when two phrases of מתנה were used, since this Baraisa validates such a case with only one phrase of מתנה. The Gemara first responds that it cannot be that it refutes Reish Lakish, because this is one of three instances where Rava paskens like Reish Lakish. Rather, Reish Lakish can answer that in this Baraisa, both expressions were said בתוך כדי דיבור – within the time required for speaking (i.e., the time required to say, "שלום עליך רבי"). Since the statements were said together, the single expression of מתנה is assumed to also refer to the inheritance clause. Reish Lakish is discussing a case where the second statement was made לאחר כדי דיבור – after the time required for speaking, and in such a case, he holds two expressions of מתנה are required to validate the inheritance clause.
