would the daughters receive all of it!1 — But, said Raba, [the amount, required for] the maintenance of the daughters until they reach their majority is drawn [from the estate] and the balance is given to the sons.
[It is] obvious [that, if the estate was] large2 and it depreciated,3 the heirs have already acquired ownership thereof.4 What [is the law, however, if the estate was] small5 and it appreciated;6 does it remain in the possession of the heirs7 and, consequently, has appreciated in their possession8 or are the heirs,7 perhaps, entirely disregarded here?9 — Come and hear: R. Assi said in the name of R. Johanan [that] if orphans anticipated [the daughters] and sold the estate where it was small,10 their sale is valid.11
R. Jeremiah sat before R. Abbahu, when he addressed to him [the following question].. Does one's widow,12 reduce [the value of] an estate?13 Do we assume [that] since she receives14 maintenance she [thereby] reduces [its value]; or perhaps, since she would receive none15 if she married [she is regarded as if] she has none even now?16 If you would find [some reason] for saying [that] since she would receive none if she married [she is regarded as if] she has none even now, [the question arises] whether his wife's daughter17 reduces [the value of] the estate?18 Do we say [that] since she would receive [her maintenance] even if she married, she does reduce [the value of the estate]; or, perhaps, since she would receive none if she died,19 she does not reduce [its value]? And if you would find [some ground] for saying that since she would receive nothing if she died, she does not reduce [its value], [the question arises] whether a creditor20 reduces the [value of the] estate.21 Do we say that he reduces [its value] since he22 would receive [his debt] even If he died,23 or perhaps, he does not reduce [it] since the debt still requires collecting?24 (Others25 [report that he] put the questions in the reverse order:26 Does a creditor reduce [the value of] the estate?
Baba Bathra 140b
Does1 his wife's daughter2 reduce [its value]? Does3 his widow4 reduce [its value]?) [In the case of claims of] his widow and [her] daughter,5 who is to have the preference? — He said to him: Go away to-day and come to-morrow. When he came, he said to him: Solve at least one [problem]. For R. Abba said in the name of R. Assi [that] the relationship between6 a widow and [her] daughter, in the case of a small estate, has been put [on the same basis] as that of the relationship between7 a daughter and brothers. As [in the case of] the relationship between a daughter and brothers, the daughter is maintained [out of the estate] while the brothers have to go begging at [people's] doors, so [in the case of] the relationship of a widow and [her] daughter, the widow is maintained, and the daughter may go begging at [people's] doors.8
ADMON SAID, 'AM I TO BE THE LOSER BECAUSE I AM A MALE' etc. What does he mean?9 — Abaye replied: He means this: 'AM I TO BE THE LOSER BECAUSE I AM A MALE and am capable of engaging in the study of the Torah?' Raba said to him: Now, then, would he who is engaged in the study of the Torah be entitled to heirship, [and he who is not engaged in the study of the Torah not be entitled to be heir?10 — But, said Raba, he means this: 'AM I, BECAUSE I AM A MALE and am entitled to be heir in [the case of] a large, estate, TO BE THE LOSER [of my rights] in [the case of] a small estate?'
MISHNAH. [IF A MAN] LEFT SONS AND DAUGHTERS, AND ONE WHOSE SEX IS UNCERTAIN,11 THE MALES MAY, WHERE THE ESTATE IS LARGE,12 REFER13 HIM TO THE FEMALES.14 [IF] THE ESTATE, [HOWEVER], IS SMALL,15 THE FEMALES MAY REFER HIM TO THE MALES.16 IF A MAN SAID: SHOULD MY WIFE BEAR A MALE CHILD, HE SHALL RECEIVE A MANEH, [AND HIS WIFE] DID BEAR A MALE CHILD, HE RECEIVES A MANEH. [IF HE SAID: SHOULD MY WIFE BEAR] A FEMALE [SHE SHALL RECEIVE] TWO HUNDRED [ZUZ, AND] SHE BORE A FEMALE, SHE TAKES TWO HUNDRED [ZUZ]. [IF HE SAID]: SHOULD [SHE BARE] A MALE CHILD [HE SHALL RECEIVE] A MANEH [AND] IF A FEMALE SHE SHALL RECEIVE TWO HUNDRED [ZUZ], AND SHE GAVE BIRTH TO A MALE AND A FEMALE, THE MALE RECEIVES A MANEH [AND] THE FEMALE RECEIVES TWO HUNDRED ZUZ. [IF] SHE BORE A TUMTUM, HE17 RECEIVES NOTHING. IF, [HOWEVER], HE SAID: WHATEVER MY WIFE SHALL BEAR, SHALL RECEIVE [A CERTAIN PORTION]. HE17 RECEIVES [IT]. AND IF THERE IS NO [OTHER] HEIR BUT THIS ONE,17 HE INHERITS ALL [THE ESTATE].
GEMARA [How can it be said that the males] REFER HIM [to the females] and he [presumably] receives [maintenance] as a daughter. Seeing that in the latter clause it states: IF SHE BORE A TUMTUM, HE RECEIVES NOTHING! — Abaye replied: THEY REFER HIM [to the females] and he receives nothing. Raba, however, said: THEY REFER HIM and he does receive [maintenance]; and the latter clause [of our Mishnah]18 represents the view19 of Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel. For we learnt:20 [If an animal]21 gave birth to a tumtum or an androginos,22 Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel said that the sanctity does not extend to [either of] them.23
An objection was raised: A tumtum inherits like a son and receives maintenance like a daughter. According to Raba24 this statement may well be explained [as follows]: He inherits like a son in [the case of] a small estate,25 and receives maintenance like a daughter [in the case of] a large estate;26
- To Next Folio -