## Bava Batra Daf 115b

###### Bava Batra 115b:1
[Bava Batra 115b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/115b:1)

הָא כֵּיצַד? נַחֲלָה מְמַשְׁמֶשֶׁת וְהוֹלֶכֶת, עַד רְאוּבֵן. וְלֵימָא עַד יַעֲקֹב! אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: גְּמִירִי דְּלָא כָּלֵה שִׁבְטָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **How so,** i.e., how is the investigation performed when he has no offspring at all? The Gemara answers: The family lineage that determines the **inheritance is successively examined up to Reuben,** son of Jacob, i.e., the heirs are determined by investigating the family genealogy, and that investigation can extend all the way to Reuben, son of our forefather Jacob. The Gemara asks: **And let** it **say: Until Jacob** himself, rather than until Reuben, since if none of Reuben’s descendants survive, one would have to examine Jacob’s descendants. **Abaye said** in reply: It **is learned** as a tradition **that a tribe will not be eliminated** entirely, and some descendants will always remain.


###### Bava Batra 115b:2
[Bava Batra 115b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/115b:2)

אָמַר רַב הוּנָא אָמַר רַב: כׇּל הָאוֹמֵר תִּירַשׁ בַּת עִם בַּת הַבֵּן, אֲפִילּוּ נָשִׂיא שֶׁבְּיִשְׂרָאֵל – אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ, שֶׁאֵינָן אֶלָּא מַעֲשֵׂה צָדוֹקִין. דְּתַנְיָא: בְּאַרְבָּעָה וְעֶשְׂרִים בְּטֵבֵת תַּבְנָא לְדִינַנָא. שֶׁהָיוּ צָדוֹקִין אוֹמְרִין: תִּירַשׁ הַבַּת עִם בַּת הַבֵּן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rav Huna says** that **Rav says:** With regard to **anyone who says** that **a daughter** of the deceased **should inherit** the estate of her father along **with the daughter of the son** of the deceased, **even** if he is **a prince of the Jewish people,** one **should not listen to him, as this is nothing other than an act of the Sadducees,** and runs counter to the ruling of the mishna that the descendants of a son inherit before a daughter. **As it is taught** in a *baraita* in *Megillat Ta’anit*, which describes various minor holidays on which it is forbidden to fast or eulogize: **On the twenty-fourth of Tevet, we returned to our law,** i.e., the *halakha* was reestablished in accordance with the opinion of the Sages after having been dictated by the Sadducees. **As the Sadducees would say: A daughter should inherit** the estate of her father along **with the daughter of the son** of the deceased.


###### Bava Batra 115b:3
[Bava Batra 115b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/115b:3)

נִטְפַּל לָהֶן רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, אָמַר לָהֶם: שׁוֹטִים, מִנַּיִן זֶה לָכֶם? וְלֹא הָיָה אָדָם שֶׁהֶחְזִירוֹ דָּבָר, חוּץ מִזָּקֵן אֶחָד שֶׁהָיָה מְפַטְפֵּט כְּנֶגְדּוֹ, וְאוֹמֵר: וּמָה בַּת בְּנוֹ הַבָּאָה מִכֹּחַ בְּנוֹ – תִּירָשֶׁנּוּ; בִּתּוֹ הַבָּאָה מִכֹּחוֹ – לֹא כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai joined them** to discuss their ruling, and **said to them: Imbeciles, from where** do **you** derive **this** ruling? **And there was no person that answered him anything, except for one old** man **who was chattering at him and saying** that it is an *a fortiori* inference: **And just as a daughter of** the deceased’s **son, who comes** to claim her inheritance from her grandfather **by virtue of his son, inherits** her grandfather’s property, so too, with regard to the deceased’s own **daughter, who comes** to inherit **by virtue of** the deceased, **all the more so** is it **not** clear that she should inherit his property?


###### Bava Batra 115b:4
[Bava Batra 115b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/115b:4)

קָרָא עָלָיו אֶת הַמִּקְרָא הַזֶּה: ״אֵלֶּה בְנֵי שֵׂעִיר הַחֹרִי יֹשְׁבֵי הָאָרֶץ: לוֹטָן וְשׁוֹבָל וְצִבְעוֹן וַעֲנָה״, וּכְתִיב: ״אֵלֶּה בְּנֵי צִבְעוֹן, וְאַיָּה וַעֲנָה״! אֶלָּא מְלַמֵּד שֶׁבָּא צִבְעוֹן עַל אִמּוֹ, וְהוֹלִיד עֲנָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai **recited this verse about him: “These are the sons of Seir the Horite, the inhabitants of the land: Lotan and Shobal and Zibeon and Anah”** (Genesis 36:20), **and it is written: “And these are the children of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah”** (Genesis 36:24). The first verse portrays Zibeon and Anah as brothers, while the second states that they are father and son. **Rather,** this **teaches that Zibeon engaged in sexual intercourse with his mother and begot Anah,** so that he was both Anah’s father and his brother. From the fact that the first verse equates Zibeon and Anah by referring to both of them as Seir’s sons despite Anah being a grandson of Seir, it is clear that grandchildren are equal to children, contrary to the Sadducees’ assertion.


###### Bava Batra 115b:5
[Bava Batra 115b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/115b:5)

וְדִלְמָא תְּרֵי עֲנָה הֲווֹ! אָמַר רַבָּה: אָמֵינָא מִלְּתָא דְּלָא אַמְרַהּ שַׁבּוּר מַלְכָּא; וּמַנּוּ? שְׁמוּאֵל. אִיכָּא דְאָמְרִי, אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: אָמֵינָא מִלְּתָא דְּלָא אַמְרַהּ שַׁבּוּר מַלְכָּא; וּמַנּוּ? רַבָּה. אָמַר קְרָא: ״הוּא עֲנָה״ – הוּא עֲנָה דְּמֵעִיקָּרָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara interrupts the recounting of the *baraita* and questions Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai’s inference: **But perhaps there were two** people named **Anah,** so that one Anah was Zibeon’s son, and the other his brother? **Rabba said: I will state a matter** that even **King Shapur did not state. And who is** this King Shapur? This cannot be a reference to Shapur, king of Persia; rather, it must be a moniker for someone else. He is **Shmuel,** whose legal rulings were accepted by the public like the edicts of a king by his subjects. **Some state** a different version, that it was **Rav Pappa** who **said: I will state a matter** that even **King Shapur did not state. And who is** this King Shapur? He is **Rabba. The verse** goes on to **state: “This is Anah”** (Genesis 36:24), indicating that **he is** the same **Anah** mentioned **initially,** earlier in the verse. Accordingly, there was only one Anah, who was both Zibeon’s brother and Zibeon’s son.


###### Bava Batra 115b:6
[Bava Batra 115b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/115b:6)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: רַבִּי, בְּכָךְ אַתָּה פּוֹטְרֵנִי?! אָמַר לוֹ: שׁוֹטֶה,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: The Sadducee **said to** Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai: **My teacher, you dismiss me with this** retort? I agree that the son of a son precedes a daughter, as the verse you quoted suggests; I am asserting that a daughter inherits together with the daughter of a son, and the verse you quoted has no bearing on that claim. Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai **said to him: Imbecile,**