Bava Basra - Daf 146
- When סבלונות are not refunded
The next Mishnah states: השולח סבלונות לבית חמיו – one who sends bridal gifts to his father-in-law’s house while his arusah lives there, even if they were one hundred maneh, ואכל שם סעודת חתן אפילו בדינר – and he ate a groom’s meal there, even as little as a dinar’s value, the סבלונות are not refunded if the marriage is not completed (because of a divorce or death). The happiness he experiences at the meal causes him to waive his claim on the סבלונות. If he did not eat a meal there, the סבלונות are refunded. If he sent many gifts and specified that they return with her to her husband’s house, they are refunded. If he sent few gifts and specified that she use them in her father’s house, they are not refunded. A Baraisa teaches that these laws apply only to סבלונות העשוין ליבלות – bridals gifts which are normally used up, such as food, but סבלונות which are not ordinarily used up, such as silver utensils, are always returned. Rava inquired about the halachah of סבלונות which are normally used up, ולא בלו – but were not used up.
- A שכיב מרע who gave away all his property, and then recovered
The next Mishnah states: שכיב מרע שכתב כל נכסיו לאחרים – a gravely ill person who wrote away all his property to others, ושייר קרקע כל שהוא – but he retained land of even a minimal size, מתנתו קיימת – his gift stands even if he later recovers from his illness. By retaining some property, he indicated that this is an ordinary gift, and not given because he expected to die, so it is effective even if he does recover.
לא שייר קרקע כל שהוא – If he did not retain land of even minimal size, אין מתנתו קיימת – his gift does not stand if he recovers. Since he did not keep anything for himself, he indicated that he gave away his possessions because he expected to die and had no need for them. Therefore, the gift is void if he recovers. The Rashbam adds that this gift would be effective even without a kinyan (if he did die).
- Following אומדנא (e.g., a מסוכן who gave insufficient instructions to write a get)
The Gemara asks who the Tanna is that follows אומדנא – the assessment of a person’s mindset, which is why a מתנת שכיב מרע is void if he recovers. Rav Nachman says it is Rebbe Shimon ben Menasya: if a father heard his son died while abroad, and wrote his entire estate to others, after which his son returned, the Tanna Kamma says the gift remains valid. Rebbe Shimon ben Menasya says it is void, שאילו היה יודע שבנו קיים – for had he known his son would return, לא היה כותבן – he would not have written [his possessions] away. Rav Sheishess says the Tanna is Rebbe Shimon Shezuri: originally, if one was going out in chains to be executed, and said, כתבו גט לאשתי – “Write a get for my wife,” they would write it for him, although he did not say ותנו – “and give it,” because he lacked the presence of mind to say it. Later, they applied the same to someone setting out on a dangerous journey. Rebbe Shimon Shezuri said: אף המסוכן – it applies even to a dangerously ill man, proving he follows the אומדנא of the man’s intentions. The Gemara explains why each Amora did not cite the Tanna brought by the other.
