## Bava Batra Daf 111b

###### Bava Batra 111b:1
[Bava Batra 111b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:1)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ לְשַׁמָּעֵיהּ: גּוּד, לֵית דֵּין צָבֵי לְמֵילַף. וְטַעְמָא מַאי? אָמַר אַבָּיֵי, אָמַר קְרָא: ״בְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר יִמָּצֵא לוֹ״; ״לוֹ״ – וְלֹא לָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**He said to his attendant: Take** me away from here, as **this** man, Rabbi Yehuda Nesia, **does not desire to learn** but is instead raising difficulties that are easily resolved. **And what is the reason** he does not receive a double portion? **Abaye said: The verse** concerning the double portion received by a firstborn son **states:** “By giving him a double portion **of all that he has”** (Deuteronomy 21:17), indicating that he receives a double portion in all that **he** has, **but not** in all that **she** has.


###### Bava Batra 111b:2
[Bava Batra 111b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:2)

וְאֵימָא: הָנֵי מִילֵּי בָּחוּר שֶׁנָּשָׂא אַלְמָנָה, אֲבָל בָּחוּר שֶׁנָּשָׂא בְּתוּלָה – הָכִי נָמֵי דְּשָׁקֵיל!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** why not **say** that **this statement** applies in the case of **a bachelor who married a widow,** i.e., a man who marries a woman who already has children from another man, so that the firstborn son is his firstborn but not hers, **but** in the case of **a bachelor who married a virgin, so too** the *halakha* will be **that** their firstborn son **will take** a double portion of his mother’s inheritance?


###### Bava Batra 111b:3
[Bava Batra 111b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:3)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק, אָמַר קְרָא: ״רֵאשִׁית אֹנוֹ״; ״אוֹנוֹ״ – וְלֹא אוֹנָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said:** There is a different derivation teaching that *halakha*, as the same **verse states:** “For he is **the first fruits of his strength [*ono*]”** (Deuteronomy 21:17), indicating that the *halakha* of the double portion is stated with regard to **his strength, but not her strength,** thereby excluding a son who is the firstborn of his mother alone.


###### Bava Batra 111b:4
[Bava Batra 111b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:4)

הָהוּא מִבַּעְיָא לֵיהּ לַבָּא אַחַר נְפָלִים, דְּלֶהֱוֵי בְּכוֹר לְנַחֲלָה – מִי שֶׁלִּבּוֹ דָּוֶוה עָלָיו, יָצָא זֶה שֶׁאֵין לִבּוֹ דָּוֶוה עָלָיו!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: But **that** verse **is required to** derive the *halakha* of a child who **came** into the world **after** his mother gave birth to **non-viable newborns** who did not reach the full term of nine months. This verse teaches **that** such a firstborn son **should be a firstborn with regard to inheritance,** even though he is not a firstborn with regard to the mitzva to redeem one’s firstborn son. How is this *halakha* derived from the verse? The term “his strength [*ono*]” is understood as referring to acute mourning [*aninut*], in the following manner: A firstborn son for the purpose of inheritance of land is only **one whose** father’s **heart is pained about him** when he dies, i.e., a son who lives beyond birth, **excluding this** non-viable newborn **whose** father’s **heart is not pained about him** when he dies. Therefore, the next viable son to be born after a non-viable newborn is considered the firstborn.


###### Bava Batra 111b:5
[Bava Batra 111b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:5)

אִם כֵּן, לֵימָא קְרָא: ״כִּי הוּא רֵאשִׁית אוֹן״ – מַאי ״אוֹנוֹ״? שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ תַּרְתֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **If so,** that the sole purpose of the term: “His strength” is to teach that *halakha*, **let the verse say: For he is the first fruit of strength [*on*],** omitting the possessive “his,” represented by the letter *vav*. **What** is derived from the more expanded term: **“His strength [*ono*],”** which indicates specifically the father’s strength? **Conclude two** conclusions **from it,** both with regard to mourning and with regard to the status of the firstborn as the father’s heir specifically.


###### Bava Batra 111b:6
[Bava Batra 111b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:6)

וְאַכַּתִּי, אֵימָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי אַלְמוֹן שֶׁנָּשָׂא בְּתוּלָה, אֲבָל בָּחוּר שֶׁנָּשָׂא בְּתוּלָה – הָכִי נָמֵי דְּשָׁקֵיל!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty: **But** one can **still say** that **this statement** applies in a case of **a widower who married a virgin,** so that he already has a firstborn from his previous marriage who is the first fruit of his strength. And the son born to him and his second wife is not the first fruit of his strength, and it is this type of firstborn who does not inherit a double portion of his mother’s estate. **But** in a case of **a bachelor who married a virgin, so too** the *halakha* will be **that** their shared firstborn son **will take** a double portion of his mother’s inheritance.


###### Bava Batra 111b:7
[Bava Batra 111b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:7)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא, אָמַר קְרָא: ״לוֹ מִשְׁפַּט הַבְּכֹרָה״ – מִשְׁפַּט הַבְּכוֹרָה לָאִישׁ, וְלֹא מִשְׁפַּט הַבְּכוֹרָה לָאִשָּׁה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rava said:** There is a different derivation teaching that *halakha*, as the same **verse states: “The right of the firstborn is his”** (Deuteronomy 21:17). The emphasis on “his” indicates that **the primogeniture** applies specifically **to a man, and the primogeniture does not** apply **to a woman,** whether the woman is the one inheriting or is the legator.


###### Bava Batra 111b:8
[Bava Batra 111b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:8)

וְהָאִישׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְכוּ׳. מְנָהָנֵי מִילֵּי? דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״שְׁאֵרוֹ״ – זוֹ אִשְׁתּוֹ, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהַבַּעַל יוֹרֵשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ. יָכוֹל אַף הִיא תִּירָשֶׁנּוּ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְיָרַשׁ אוֹתָהּ״ – הוּא יוֹרֵשׁ אוֹתָהּ, וְאֵין הִיא יוֹרֶשֶׁת אוֹתוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **And a man** with regard to **his wife** inherits but does not bequeath. The Gemara asks: **From where are these matters** derived? The Gemara explains: **As the Sages taught** in a *baraita*: The verse concerning inheritance states: “And if his father has no brothers, then you shall give his inheritance to **his kinsman [*she’ero*]** who is next to him of his family, and he shall inherit it” (Numbers 27:11). **This** kinsman is **one’s wife,** and the Torah **teaches that a husband inherits** from **his wife,** as the Gemara will explain later. One **might** have thought that **she would also inherit** from **him;** therefore, **the verse states: “And he shall inherit it,”** with the word “it” written in the feminine “*otah*,” which can also be translated as: Her. This teaches that it is **he who inherits** from **her, but she does not inherit** from **him.**


###### Bava Batra 111b:9
[Bava Batra 111b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:9)

וְהָא קְרָאֵי לָאו הָכִי כְּתִיבִי! אָמַר אַבָּיֵי, תָּרֵיץ הָכִי: ״וּנְתַתֶּם אֶת נַחֲלָתוֹ לַקָּרוֹב אֵלָיו, שְׁאֵרוֹ וְיָרַשׁ אֹתָהּ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara questions this explanation: **But the verses are not written like this.** The verse states that “his kinsman” inherits from the deceased, so that if that term is referring to one’s wife, a wife should inherit from her husband. **Abaye said: Answer like this,** i.e., as if the verse were split into two parts. The first part is: **Then you shall give his inheritance to he who is next to him,** which is a general statement with regard to the inheritance of relatives. The second is: **His kinsman, and he shall inherit it,** meaning that a husband inherits from his kinsman, referring to his wife.


###### Bava Batra 111b:10
[Bava Batra 111b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:10)

אָמַר רָבָא: סַכִּינָא חֲרִיפָא מַפְסְקָא קְרָאֵי?! אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא, הָכִי קָאָמַר: ״וּנְתַתֶּם אֶת נַחֲלַת שְׁאֵרוֹ לוֹ״ – קָא סָבַר גּוֹרְעִין וּמוֹסִיפִין, וְדוֹרְשִׁין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said:** Does **a sharp knife cut verses?** How can you split the verse, rearrange it and omit letters from its words? Abaye’s derivation rearranges the words and omits the letter *lamed* from the term “to his kinsman [*leshe’ero*].” **Rather, Rava said: This** is what the verse **is saying: And you shall give the inheritance of his kinsman [*she’ero*] to him.** The letters should be arranged differently, removing the letter *lamed* from the word *leshe’ero* and the letter *vav* from the word *naḥalato* and combining them to form the word *lo*, meaning: To him. Accordingly, the verse teaches that a husband inherits from his wife. The Gemara explains that Rava **holds that** the Sages **subtract and add and interpret homiletically,** meaning that letters can be removed from words and appended to each other, and a *halakha* can be derived from the new word formed by the combination of letters.


###### Bava Batra 111b:11
[Bava Batra 111b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:11)

וְהַאי תַּנָּא מַיְיתֵי לַהּ מֵהָכָא – דְּתַנְיָא: ״וְיָרַשׁ אוֹתָהּ״, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהַבַּעַל יוֹרֵשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ; דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **And this *tanna* cites** the *halakha* that a husband inherits from his wife **from here, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **“And he shall inherit it,”** with the word “it” written in the feminine “*otah*,” which can also be translated as: Her. This **teaches that a husband inherits** from **his wife;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Akiva,** similar to the derivation cited in the *baraita* above.


###### Bava Batra 111b:12
[Bava Batra 111b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:12)

רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר: אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ, הֲרֵי הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״וְכׇל בַּת יֹרֶשֶׁת נַחֲלָה מִמַּטּוֹת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, לְאֶחָד מִמִּשְׁפַּחַת וְגוֹ׳״ – בַּהֲסָבַת הַבַּעַל הַכָּתוּב מְדַבַּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* quotes another *tanna*. **Rabbi Yishmael says:** This derivation **is not necessary, as** the verse **states: “And every daughter who possesses an inheritance from the tribes of the children of Israel** shall be wife **to one of the family** of the tribe of her father” (Numbers 36:8). The purpose of this mitzva was so that the land she inherited from her father’s tribe will not be transferred to another tribe upon her death. **The verse speaks of a transfer** of inheritance from one tribe to another **by means of the husband,** i.e., she must not marry a man from another tribe so that the land will not be transferred to that tribe when her husband inherits from her upon her death. This indicates that a husband inherits from his wife.


###### Bava Batra 111b:13
[Bava Batra 111b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:13)

וְאוֹמֵר: ״וְלֹא תִסֹּב נַחֲלָה לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִמַּטֶּה אֶל מַטֶּה״. וְאוֹמֵר: ״וְלֹא תִסֹּב נַחֲלָה מִמַּטֶּה לְמַטֶּה אַחֵר״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Yishmael continues: **And** another verse **states: “So shall no inheritance of the children of Israel transfer from tribe to tribe”** (Numbers 36:7), **and** another verse **states: “So shall no inheritance transfer from one tribe to another tribe”** (Numbers 36:9), also indicating that a husband inherits from his wife.


###### Bava Batra 111b:14
[Bava Batra 111b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:14)

וְאוֹמֵר: ״וְאֶלְעָזָר בֶּן אַהֲרֹן מֵת, וַיִּקְבְּרוּ אֹתוֹ בְּגִבְעַת פִּנְחָס בְּנוֹ״ – וְכִי מִנַּיִן לְפִנְחָס שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה לוֹ לְאֶלְעָזָר? אֶלָּא מְלַמֵּד שֶׁנָּשָׂא פִּנְחָס אִשָּׁה וּמֵתָה, וִירָשָׁהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Yishmael continues: **And** the verse in the Prophets **states: “And Elazar, the son of Aaron, died; and they buried him in the Hill of Pinehas his son,** which was given him in Mount Ephraim” (Joshua 24:33). **And from where** did **Pinehas have** land **that** his father, **Elazar, did not have? Rather,** this **teaches that Pinehas married a woman** who inherited her father’s land, **and she died and he inherited** from **her** so that he had his own land. This also indicates that a husband inherits from his wife.


###### Bava Batra 111b:15
[Bava Batra 111b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/111b:15)

וְאוֹמֵר: ״וּשְׂגוּב הוֹלִיד אֶת יָאִיר, וַיְהִי לוֹ עֶשְׂרִים וְשָׁלֹשׁ עָרִים בְּאֶרֶץ הַגִּלְעָד״ –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Yishmael continues. **And** the verse in the Writings **states: “And Seguv begot Yair, who had twenty-three cities in the land of Gilead”** (I Chronicles 2:22).