## Bava Batra Daf 112a

###### Bava Batra 112a:1
[Bava Batra 112a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/112a:1)

וְכִי מִנַּיִן לְיָאִיר שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה לוֹ לִשְׂגוּב? מְלַמֵּד שֶׁנָּשָׂא יָאִיר אִשָּׁה וּמֵתָה, וִירָשָׁהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And from where** did **Yair have** land **that** his father, **Seguv, did not have?** Rather, this **teaches that Yair 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 112a:2
[Bava Batra 112a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/112a:2)

מַאי ״וְאוֹמֵר״? וְכִי תֵּימָא, בְּסִבַּת הַבֵּן קָא קָפֵיד קְרָא, אֲבָל בַּעַל לָא יָרֵית – תָּא שְׁמַע: ״וְלֹא תִסֹּב נַחֲלָה לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִמַּטֶּה לְמַטֶּה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara proceeds to explain this *baraita*. **What** is the meaning of: **And it states?** Why is it necessary to provide additional proofs beyond the first verse? The Gemara explains: The first verse seems to prove the *halakha* that a husband inherits from his wife. **And if you would say** that the **verse** that rules that a woman who inherited land from her father cannot marry a man from another tribe is not concerned that he will inherit from her, but rather the verse **is concerned about a transfer** of inheritance from one tribe to another by means of **the son** who will inherit from his mother, as he belongs to his father’s tribe, **but a husband does not inherit** from his wife; therefore, **come** and **hear** another verse that is seemingly superfluous: **“So shall no inheritance of the children of Israel transfer from tribe to tribe”** (Numbers 36:7). This teaches that a transfer of land could occur by means of the husband inheriting from her.


###### Bava Batra 112a:3
[Bava Batra 112a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/112a:3)

וְכִי תֵּימָא, לַעֲבוֹר עָלָיו בְּלָאו וַעֲשֵׂה – תָּא שְׁמַע: ״לֹא תִסֹּב נַחֲלָה מִמַּטֶּה לְמַטֶּה אַחֵר״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you would say** that this verse is also concerned with the transfer of the inheritance by means of the son, and that the seemingly superfluous verse is stated for another purpose, i.e., in order to establish that a woman who inherited land from her father and marries a man from another tribe **will violate for that** act **a prohibition,** namely: “So shall no inheritance of the children of Israel transfer,” **and a positive mitzva,** namely: “Shall be wife to one of the family of the tribe of her father”; therefore, **come** and **hear** another verse that is seemingly superfluous: **“So shall no inheritance transfer from one tribe to another tribe”** (Numbers 36:9), which teaches that a transfer can occur by means of the husband inheriting from his wife.


###### Bava Batra 112a:4
[Bava Batra 112a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/112a:4)

וְכִי תֵּימָא, לַעֲבוֹר עָלָיו בִּשְׁנֵי לָאוִין וַעֲשֵׂה – תָּא שְׁמַע: ״וְאֶלְעָזָר בֶּן אַהֲרֹן מֵת וְגוֹ׳״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you would say** that this verse is also concerned with the transfer of the inheritance by means of the son, and that the seemingly superfluous verse is stated for another purpose, i.e., in order to establish that a woman who inherited land from her father and marries a man from another tribe **violates for that** act **two prohibitions and a positive mitzva;** therefore, **come** and **hear** another proof that a husband inherits from his wife, from the verse: **“And Elazar, the son of Aaron, died”** (Joshua 24:33).


###### Bava Batra 112a:5
[Bava Batra 112a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/112a:5)

וְכִי תֵּימָא, אֶלְעָזָר הוּא דִּנְסֵיב אִיתְּתָא וּמֵתָה, וְיַרְתַהּ פִּנְחָס – תָּא שְׁמַע: ״וּשְׂגוּב הוֹלִיד אֶת יָאִיר וְגוֹ׳״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you would say** that Pinehas did not inherit this land from his wife, but from his mother, as **it was Elazar,** his father, **who married a woman** who inherited land, **and she** subsequently **died, and** her son **Pinehas inherited** from **her** so that this verse proves the inheritance of a son and not that of a husband; therefore, **come** and **hear** a proof from the verse: **“And Seguv begot Yair”** (I Chronicles 2:22).


###### Bava Batra 112a:6
[Bava Batra 112a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/112a:6)

וְכִי תֵּימָא, הָתָם נָמֵי הָכִי הוּא – אִם כֵּן, תְּרֵי קְרָאֵי לְמָה לִי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you would say: That is** the case **there as well,** that it was Yair who inherited it from his deceased mother, **if so, why do I** need **two verses** to teach the same *halakha*? This concludes the Gemara’s explanation of the *baraita*.


###### Bava Batra 112a:7
[Bava Batra 112a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/112a:7)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב פָּפָּא לְאַבָּיֵי: מִמַּאי? דִּלְמָא לְעוֹלָם אֵימָא לָךְ: בַּעַל לָא יָרֵית; וּקְרָאֵי – בְּסִבַּת הַבֵּן, כִּדְשַׁנִּינַן; וְיָאִיר, דִּזְבַן מִיזְבָּן; וּפִנְחָס נָמֵי, דִּזְבַן מִיזְבָּן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Pappa said to Abaye: From where** do you know that this is how the verse should be understood? **Perhaps I** could **actually say to you: A husband does not inherit** from his wife, **and the verses are** concerned **about a transfer** of inheritance from one tribe to another by means of **the son, as we explained,** teaching that one who does so violates two prohibitions and a positive mitzva. **And** with regard to **Yair,** one could say **that he purchased** it from a third party and did not inherit it. **And** with regard to **Pinehas as well,** one could say **that he purchased** it from a third party.


###### Bava Batra 112a:8
[Bava Batra 112a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/112a:8)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: פִּנְחָס דִּזְבַן מִיזְבָּן לָא מָצֵית אָמְרַתְּ; דְּאִם כֵּן, נִמְצֵאת שָׂדֶה חוֹזֶרֶת בַּיּוֹבֵל, וְנִמְצָא צַדִּיק קָבוּר בְּקֶבֶר שֶׁאֵינוֹ שֶׁלּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Abaye **said to him: You cannot say that Pinehas purchased** the land where he buried his father, **as if so,** the **field would return** to its original owner **in the Jubilee** Year (see Leviticus, chapter 25), **and it would be found** that this **righteous man,** i.e., Elazar, **is buried in a grave** in land **that is not his.**


###### Bava Batra 112a:9
[Bava Batra 112a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/112a:9)

אֶלָּא אֵימָא דִּנְפַלָה לֵיהּ מִשְּׂדֵה חֲרָמִים!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Pappa asked further: **Rather, say that** in his capacity as a priest **he came into** possession of this land **as a dedicated field.** Pinehas, as a priest, may have owned the land by that means. Therefore, one can still say that a husband does not inherit from his wife, and the verses are concerned about a transfer of inheritance from one tribe to another by means of the son.


###### Bava Batra 112a:10
[Bava Batra 112a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/112a:10)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: סוֹף סוֹף, הָא קָא מִתְעַקְרָא נַחֲלָה מִשִּׁבְטָא דְאִימָּא לְשִׁבְטָא דְאַבָּא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said:** Even if you say that her son and not her husband inherits from her, **ultimately** the **inheritance is uprooted from the tribe of the mother and is moved to the tribe of the father,** and the prohibition against her marrying a man from another tribe is not effective in achieving its goal. The verse speaks of a woman who inherited the land from her mother who is of a different tribe from her father (see 111a). Even if she marries a man from her own tribe, the inheritance will be transferred from her mother’s tribe to that of her, the woman’s, husband, as even if the woman’s son inherits, he is of his father’s tribe.


###### Bava Batra 112a:11
[Bava Batra 112a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/112a:11)

וּמִמַּאי? וְדִלְמָא שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, שֶׁכְּבָר הוּסַבָּה! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״שֶׁכְּבָר הוּסַבָּה״ לָא אָמְרִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Pappa rejects this: **And from where** do you raise your challenge? **But perhaps** it **is different there, as** the inheritance **had already been transferred** by the mother of the woman when she married the father, so that the Torah is no longer concerned with the continued transfer. When the parents of this now-deceased woman married, the land that her mother would eventually inherit was already thought of as being transferred away from the ownership of her mother’s tribe. Therefore, the fact that even if this woman’s son inherits from her, the fact that the land will permanently belong to a member of her husband’s tribe is of no concern. Abaye **said to him: We do not say,** i.e., employ, the logic of: **As it had already been transferred,** since as long as this woman owned it, it still belonged to a person of the first tribe.


###### Bava Batra 112a:12
[Bava Batra 112a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/112a:12)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב יֵימַר לְרַב אָשֵׁי: אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא שֶׁכְּבָר הוּסַבָּה, הַיְינוּ דְּמִתּוֹקְמָא קְרָא בֵּין בְּסִבַּת הַבֵּן, בֵּין בְּסִבַּת הַבַּעַל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yeimar said to Rav Ashi:** Even according to Abaye, who holds the verses teach that the husband inherits, there is still a difficulty. **Granted, if you say** the logic of: **As it has already been transferred, this is** how it can be understood **that the verse is established** as referring to both scenarios: The verse can be understood **either with regard to a transfer** by means of **the son** or **with regard to a transfer** by means of **the husband.** In both of these scenarios, the daughter’s marriage to a man from her father’s tribe is effective in ensuring that land she will inherit will not leave the tribe, because if she inherited it from her father it remains within the same tribe, and if she inherited it from her mother it had already been transferred when her mother married her father.


###### Bava Batra 112a:13
[Bava Batra 112a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/112a:13)

אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ לָא אָמְרִינַן שֶׁכְּבָר הוּסַבָּה, כִּי מִינַּסְבָא לְאֶחָד מִמִּשְׁפַּחַת מַטֵּה אָבִיהָ, מַאי הָוֵה? הָא מִתְעַקְרָא נַחֲלָה מִשִּׁבְטָא דְאִימָּא לְשִׁבְטָא דְאַבָּא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But if you say** that **we do not say** the logic of: **As it has already been transferred,** then even **when she gets married to one of the family of the tribe of her father, what of it? But an inheritance is uprooted from the tribe of** her **mother,** who had inherited land from her, the mother’s, father, **to the tribe of** her **father,** as her husband is from her father’s tribe.


###### Bava Batra 112a:14
[Bava Batra 112a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/112a:14)

דְּמַנְסְבִינַן לַהּ לְגַבְרָא דַּאֲבוּהִי מִשִּׁבְטָא דַאֲבוּהָ וְאִימֵּיהּ מִשִּׁבְטָא דְּאִימֵּיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Ashi said to him: There is a way that the transfer to another tribe can be avoided: **Where we marry her to a man whose father** is **from her father’s tribe and his mother is from her mother’s tribe,** the transfer is avoided as the land retains the exact status as it had when it was in the woman’s possession.