## Bava Batra Daf 119a

###### Bava Batra 119a:1
[Bava Batra 119a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/119a:1)

לְעוֹלָם בָּתֵּי אָבוֹת קָא חָשֵׁיב, וְהָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן – דִּבְנוֹת צְלָפְחָד נָטְלוּ חֵלֶק בְּכוֹרָה; אַלְמָא אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל מוּחְזֶקֶת הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Actually,** the verse **is counting fathers’ houses. And** by also counting the inheritance of Zelophehad’s daughters, the verse **teaches us this: That** the **daughters of Zelophehad took** the **portion of the firstborn** due their father. **Evidently, Eretz Yisrael is** considered already **in possession** of one who was entitled to his portion of the land, even before the land was assigned. Although a firstborn son does not take a double portion of the property due to his deceased father as he does the property his father possessed, it is considered that Hepher possessed the portion that would eventually be assigned to him, and that Zelophehad was entitled to a double portion.


###### Bava Batra 119a:2
[Bava Batra 119a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/119a:2)

אָמַר מָר: וְהַבָּנִים נָטְלוּ בִּזְכוּת אֲבִי אֲבִיהֶם, וּבִזְכוּת אֲבִי אִמּוֹתֵיהֶן. וְהָתַנְיָא: בִּזְכוּת עַצְמָן! לָא קַשְׁיָא; הָא כְּמַאן דְּאָמַר לְיוֹצְאֵי מִצְרַיִם, הָא כְּמַאן דְּאָמַר לְבָאֵי הָאָרֶץ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara continues its discussion of the *baraita*. **The Master says: And the sons** of the spies and of the protesters **took** portions of the land **in the merit of their paternal grandfathers and in the merit of their maternal grandfathers** if those grandfathers were among those who left Egypt. The Gemara asks: **But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita* (*Tosefta* 7:10): The sons of the spies and of the protesters took portions **in their own merit?** The Gemara answers: This is **not difficult: This** *baraita*, which states they took portions in the merit of their grandfathers, is written **in accordance with** the opinion of the **one who says** that Eretz Yisrael was divided **among those who left Egypt;** and **that** *baraita*, which states that they took portions in their own merit, is written **in accordance with** the opinion of the **one who says** that Eretz Yisrael was divided **among those who entered Eretz** Yisrael.


###### Bava Batra 119a:3
[Bava Batra 119a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/119a:3)

וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: הָא וְהָא לְבָאֵי הָאָרֶץ, וְלָא קַשְׁיָא; הָא דַּהֲוָה בֶּן עֶשְׂרִים. הָא דְּלָא הֲוָה בֶּן עֶשְׂרִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests another answer. **And if you wish, say** instead: **This** *baraita* **and that** *baraita* are written in accordance with the opinion that asserts that Eretz Yisrael was divided **among those who entered Eretz** Yisrael, **and** it is **not difficult: This** *baraita* is discussing one **who was twenty** years **old** when the Jewish people entered Eretz Yisrael, and therefore he took a portion in his own merit, and **that** *baraita* is discussing one **who was not twenty** years **old.**


###### Bava Batra 119a:4
[Bava Batra 119a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/119a:4)

וְשֶׁהָיָה בְּכוֹר נוֹטֵל שְׁנֵי חֲלָקִים. וְאַמַּאי? רָאוּי הוּא, וְאֵין הַבְּכוֹר נוֹטֵל בָּרָאוּי כִּבְמוּחְזָק! אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: בְּיִתְדוֹת אֹהָלִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **And** Zelophehad took an additional portion that he received from Hepher, **because he was a firstborn,** and a firstborn **takes two portions** of inheritance from his father. The Gemara asks: **But why** was he entitled to the double portion of the firstborn? His portion of land **is** property merely **due** to Hepher, as Hepher never actually possessed the land, **and** the *halakha* is that **a firstborn does not take** a double portion **of** property **due** to the deceased **as** he does **of** property the deceased **possessed. Rav Yehuda says** that **Shmuel says:** This clause of the mishna is stated **with regard to tent pegs** and other assorted movable property that Hepher possessed.


###### Bava Batra 119a:5
[Bava Batra 119a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/119a:5)

מֵתִיב רַבָּה, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: בְּנוֹת צְלָפְחָד נָטְלוּ אַרְבָּעָה חֲלָקִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיִּפְּלוּ חַבְלֵי מְנַשֶּׁה עֲשָׂרָה״! אֶלָּא אָמַר רַבָּה: אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל מוּחְזֶקֶת הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba raises an objection** from a *baraita*: **Rabbi Yehuda says:** The **daughters of Zelophehad took four parts, as it is stated: “And ten parts fell to Manasseh”** (Joshua 17:5). Clearly, this is referring to portions of land, and not simply movable property. **Rather, Rabba says: Eretz Yisrael is** considered already **in possession** of one who was entitled to his portion of inheritance land, even before the land was assigned.


###### Bava Batra 119a:6
[Bava Batra 119a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/119a:6)

מֵיתִיבִי, אָמַר רַבִּי חִידְקָא: שִׁמְעוֹן הַשִּׁקְמוֹנִי הָיָה לִי חָבֵר מִתַּלְמִידֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, וְכָךְ הָיָה רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הַשִּׁקְמוֹנִי אוֹמֵר: יוֹדֵעַ הָיָה מֹשֶׁה רַבֵּינוּ שֶׁבְּנוֹת צְלָפְחָד יוֹרְשׁוֹת הֵן, אֲבָל לֹא הָיָה יוֹדֵעַ אִם נוֹטְלוֹת חֵלֶק בְּכוֹרָה אִם לָאו;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** from a *baraita*. **Rabbi Ḥideka said: Shimon HaShikmoni was my colleague among the students of Rabbi Akiva, and so would Rabbi Shimon HaShikmoni say:** Even before turning to God for guidance, **Moses our teacher knew that the daughters of Zelophehad were inheritors** and that they were entitled to their father’s portion, as well as his share in Hepher’s portion. **But he did not know if they** were entitled to **take a portion of the firstborn** of Hepher’s portion **or not.**


###### Bava Batra 119a:7
[Bava Batra 119a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/119a:7)

וּרְאוּיָה הָיְתָה פָּרָשַׁת נַחֲלוֹת לִיכָּתֵב עַל יְדֵי מֹשֶׁה, אֶלָּא שֶׁזָּכוּ בְּנוֹת צְלָפְחָד וְנִכְתְּבָה עַל יָדָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Ḥideka continues citing Rabbi Shimon HaShikmoni: **And** the Torah **portion** concerning the laws **of inheritances was fit to have been written through** God initiating a commandment to **Moses,** without mentioning Zelophehad’s daughters. **But** by demonstrating their desire for land in Eretz Yisrael the **daughters of Zelophehad merited** that the portion was **written through** a response to **them.**


###### Bava Batra 119a:8
[Bava Batra 119a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/119a:8)

וְיוֹדֵעַ הָיָה מֹשֶׁה רַבֵּינוּ שֶׁהַמְקוֹשֵׁשׁ בְּמִיתָה – שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״מְחַלְּלֶיהָ מוֹת יוּמָת״, אֲבָל לֹא הָיָה יוֹדֵעַ בְּאֵי זוֹ מִיתָה הוּא יָמוּת; וּרְאוּיָהּ הָיְתָה פָּרָשַׁת מְקוֹשֵׁשׁ שֶׁתִּכָּתֵב עַל יְדֵי מֹשֶׁה, אֶלָּא שֶׁנִּתְחַיֵּיב מְקוֹשֵׁשׁ וְנִכְתְּבָה עַל יָדוֹ. לְלַמֶּדְךָ,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Ḥideka continues citing Rabbi Shimon HaShikmoni: **And Moses our teacher** similarly **knew that the** wood **gatherer,** who gathered wood on Shabbat (see Numbers 15:32–36), was to be punished **by death, as it is stated: “Every one that profanes it shall be put to death”** (Exodus 31:14), **but he did not know by which death** penalty the wood gatherer **must die. And the** Torah **portion** concerning the punishment **of** the wood **gatherer was fit to have been written through** God initiating a commandment to **Moses,** to teach which form of court-imposed capital punishment is administered to one who violates Shabbat. **But** the wood **gatherer was** found **guilty, and** the portion was **written through** the incident involving **him.** This is **to teach you**