## Bava Batra Daf 135b

###### Bava Batra 135b:1
[Bava Batra 135b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/135b:1)

לְעוֹלָם אֵימָא לָךְ חַיָּיב; וְשָׁאנֵי הָכָא, דִּכְ״מָנֶה לְאַחֵר בְּיָדְךָ״ דָּמֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Actually, I will say to you** that one who responds to a claim that he does not know if he owes the one hundred dinars is **obligated** to pay; **but here,** in the case of the brothers, it **is different.** The brothers are not obligated to share their portion with the man in question **because** the brother who testified **is like** one who claims: **Another** person **has one hundred dinars in your possession.** Since the claimant is not the one who is owed the money, the other party can reject his claim by merely answering that he does not know whether he owes him.


###### Bava Batra 135b:2
[Bava Batra 135b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/135b:2)

מֵת – יַחְזְרוּ נְכָסִים לִמְקוֹמָן. בָּעֵי רָבָא: שֶׁבַח שֶׁשָּׁבְחוּ נְכָסִים מֵאֲלֵיהֶם, מַהוּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: If the man in question **dies,** the **property** he received from the father’s inheritance **shall return to its place,** i.e., to the possession of the brother who testified on his behalf, and if the man in question received property from elsewhere, it is inherited by all the brothers equally. **Rava raises a dilemma:** With regard to **the enhancement of the property** received by the man in question from the portion of the brother who testified, **where** its **enhanced** value was the result of an enhancement that **happened naturally,** as opposed to one that resulted from exertion, **what is** the *halakha*? Who inherits it?


###### Bava Batra 135b:3
[Bava Batra 135b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/135b:3)

בְּשֶׁבַח הַמַּגִּיעַ לַכְּתֵפַיִם – לָא תִּיבְּעֵי לָךְ, דְּכִי נָפְלוּ לוֹ נְכָסִים מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר דָּמֵי. כִּי תִּיבְּעֵי לָךְ – בְּשֶׁבַח שֶׁאֵינוֹ מַגִּיעַ לַכְּתֵפַיִם; כְּגוֹן דִּיקְלָא וַאֲלֵים, אַרְעָא וְאַסְּקָא שִׂרְטוֹן; מַאי? תֵּיקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates: **With regard to enhancement that reaches shoulders,** i.e., ripe produce that needs only to be harvested from the field, **do not raise the dilemma, as it is** considered **like property that came into his possession from elsewhere.** It is not considered part of the land that was given to him by the brother who testified, and it is therefore divided among all the brothers. Rather, **let the dilemma be raised with regard to enhancement that does not reach shoulders,** and is not considered separate from the ground, **such as a palm tree that thickened,** or **land that yielded silt. What** is the *halakha* in this case? Is the enhancement included in the property itself, or is it considered separate property? The Gemara comments: The dilemma **shall stand** unresolved.


###### Bava Batra 135b:4
[Bava Batra 135b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/135b:4)

**מַתְנִי׳** מִי שֶׁמֵּת וְנִמְצֵאת דְּיָיתֵיקֵי קְשׁוּרָה עַל יְרֵיכוֹ – הֲרֵי זוֹ אֵינָהּ כְּלוּם. זִיכָּה בָּהּ לְאַחֵר – בֵּין מִן הַיּוֹרְשִׁין, בֵּין שֶׁאֵינָן מִן הַיּוֹרְשִׁין – דְּבָרָיו קַיָּימִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **one who died, and a will written by a person on his deathbed [*dayetikei*] is found bound to his thigh,** which clearly indicates that it was written by him and was not forged, **this is nothing.** The will is not valid, as he did not give it to anyone, and he may have reconsidered. If **he transferred ownership of** the will to the designated recipient **through another** person, **whether one of the heirs** or **whether not one of the heirs, his statement stands.**


###### Bava Batra 135b:5
[Bava Batra 135b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/135b:5)

**גְּמָ׳** תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אֵיזֶה הִיא דְּיָיתֵיקֵי? כֹּל שֶׁכָּתוּב בָּהּ: ״דָּא תְּהֵא לְמֵיקַם וְלִהְיוֹת״. וְאֵיזֶה הִיא מַתָּנָה? כֹּל שֶׁכָּתוּב בָּהּ: ״מֵהַיּוֹם וּלְאַחַר מִיתָה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **The Sages taught** (*Tosefta* 8:10): **Which** deed **is** considered **a *dayetikei*,** and is collected by the designated recipient after the death of the giver? **Any** deed **in which it is written: This will be to stand and exist** after my death. **And which** type **is** considered a deed of **gift? Any** deed **in which it is written: From today and after** my **death.**


###### Bava Batra 135b:6
[Bava Batra 135b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/135b:6)

אֶלָּא ״מֵהַיּוֹם וּלְאַחַר מִיתָה״ – הוּא דְּהָוְיָא מַתָּנָה, ״מֵעַכְשָׁיו״ – לָא הָוְיָא מַתָּנָה?! אָמַר אַבָּיֵי, הָכִי קָאָמַר: אֵיזוֹ הִיא מַתְּנַת בָּרִיא שֶׁהִיא כְּמַתְּנַת שְׁכִיב מְרַע – דְּלָא קָנֵי אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מִיתָה? כֹּל שֶׁכָּתוּב בָּהּ: ״מֵהַיּוֹם וּלְאַחַר מִיתָה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Is it** considered a deed of **gift only** if the expression: **From today and after** my **death,** is written, whereas if it is written only: **From now, it is not** considered a deed of **gift? Abaye said** that **this** is what the *baraita* **is saying: Which** deed of **gift of a healthy person is** considered **like** the deed of **gift of a person on his deathbed,** in **that** the recipient **acquires** it **only after** the **death** of the giver? **Any** deed **in which it is written: From today and after** my **death.**


###### Bava Batra 135b:7
[Bava Batra 135b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/135b:7)

יָתֵיב רַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא בְּאַכְסַדְרָא דְּבֵי רַב, וְיָתֵיב וְקָאָמַר מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: שְׁכִיב מְרַע שֶׁאָמַר ״כִּתְבוּ וּתְנוּ מָנֶה לִפְלוֹנִי״, וּמֵת – אֵין כּוֹתְבִין וְנוֹתְנִין; שֶׁמָּא לֹא גָּמַר לְהַקְנוֹתוֹ אֶלָּא בִּשְׁטָר, וְאֵין שְׁטָר לְאַחַר מִיתָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rabba bar Rav Huna was sitting in the balcony of Rav’s study hall, and sat and said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan:** If there is **a person on his deathbed who says: Write** a deed of transfer, granting property of mine to another, **and give** with it **one hundred dinars to so-and-so, and** he then **died, one does not write and give** it. This is because **perhaps he resolved to transfer it** to him **only with a deed** of transfer, **and** since the deed was not written in his lifetime it cannot be written after his death, as **a deed** of transfer is **not** effective **after the death** of the owner.


###### Bava Batra 135b:8
[Bava Batra 135b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/135b:8)

אֲמַר לְהוּ רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: אִיזְדְּהַרוּ בַּהּ. רַב שֵׁיזְבִי אָמַר: רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אָמְרָה, וַאֲמַר לְהוּ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אִיזְדְּהַרוּ בַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabba bar Rav Huna continued that when Rabbi Yoḥanan stated this *halakha*, **Rabbi Elazar said to** the other Sages: **Heed this** *halakha*; it is correct. **Rav Sheizevi said:** That is not what happened; **Rabbi Elazar** is the one who **said this** *halakha*, **and** it was **Rabbi Yoḥanan** who **said to them: Heed this** *halakha*.


###### Bava Batra 135b:9
[Bava Batra 135b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/135b:9)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: כְּוָתֵיהּ דְּרַב שֵׁיזְבִי מִסְתַּבְּרָא. אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אַמְרַהּ, אִצְטְרִיךְ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לְאַסְהוֹדֵי עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אַמְרַהּ, אִצְטְרִיךְ רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר לְאַסְהוֹדֵי עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן רַבֵּיהּ?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said:** It **is reasonable** to say that the incident was **in accordance with** the version presented **by Rav Sheizevi. Granted, if you say** that **Rabbi Elazar said** the *halakha*, **Rabbi Yoḥanan needed to affirm** the ruling **of Rabbi Elazar. But if you say** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan** was the one who **said it, did Rabbi Elazar need to affirm** the ruling **of Rabbi Yoḥanan, his teacher?**


###### Bava Batra 135b:10
[Bava Batra 135b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/135b:10)

וְעוֹד, תָּא שְׁמַע דְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אַמְרַהּ, דִּשְׁלַח רָבִין מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: הֱווּ יוֹדְעִים שֶׁשָּׁלַח רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר לַגּוֹלָה מִשּׁוּם רַבֵּינוּ: שְׁכִיב מְרַע שֶׁאָמַר ״כִּתְבוּ וּתְנוּ מָנֶה לִפְלוֹנִי״, וּמֵת – אֵין כּוֹתְבִין וְנוֹתְנִין; שֶׁמָּא לֹא גָּמַר לְהַקְנוֹתוֹ אֶלָּא בִּשְׁטָר, וְאֵין שְׁטָר לְאַחַר מִיתָה. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: תִּיבָּדֵק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And furthermore, come** and **hear** proof **that Rabbi Elazar** was the one who **said** this *halakha*, from another statement of his, **as Ravin sent** a message **in the name of Rabbi Abbahu: Know that Rabbi Elazar sent** a ruling **to the exile in the name of our teacher,** stating that if there is **a person on his deathbed who says: Write** a deed of transfer **and give** with it **one hundred dinars to so-and-so, and** he then **died, one does not write and give** it. This is because **perhaps he resolved to transfer it only with a deed** of transfer, **and** since the deed was not written in his lifetime it cannot be written after his death, as **a deed** of transfer is **not** effective **after the death** of the owner. **And Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** This ruling is correct; however, the wording of the deed **should be examined.**


###### Bava Batra 135b:11
[Bava Batra 135b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/135b:11)

מַאי ״תִּיבָּדֵק״? כִּי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי אָמַר: דְּיָיתֵיקֵי מְבַטֶּלֶת דְּיָיתֵיקֵי. שְׁכִיב מְרַע שֶׁאָמַר: ״כִּתְבוּ וּתְנוּ מָנֶה לִפְלוֹנִי״, וּמֵת – רוֹאִין; אִם כִּמְיַפֶּה אֶת כֹּחוֹ – כּוֹתְבִין, וְאִם לָאו – אֵין כּוֹתְבִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What** did Rabbi Yoḥanan mean by saying that the wording **should be examined?** The Gemara answers: **When Rav Dimi came** from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he **stated** two *halakhot*. The first was that **a *dayetikei* cancels** a previous ***dayetikei*.** The second explains the examination to which Rabbi Yoḥanan was referring: If there is **a person on his deathbed who said: Write** a deed of transfer **and give** with it **one hundred dinars to so-and-so, and** he then **died,** the court must **see** what his intention was in instructing the other person to write a deed of transfer; **if** it was **to enhance** the recipient’s **power** by writing a document proving that he was given the gift, **one writes** the document even after his death, as he intended to give the money anyway. **But if not,** rather it was the giver’s intention to transfer the gift specifically through a deed of transfer, **one does not write** it and give the money, as a deed of transfer is not effective after the death of the owner.


###### Bava Batra 135b:12
[Bava Batra 135b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/135b:12)

מֵתִיב רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר מֶמֶל: בָּרִיא שֶׁאָמַר ״כִּתְבוּ וּתְנוּ מָנֶה לִפְלוֹנִי״, וּמֵת – אֵין כּוֹתְבִין וְנוֹתְנִין. הָא שְׁכִיב מְרַע – כּוֹתְבִין וְנוֹתְנִין! הוּא מוֹתֵיב לַהּ וְהוּא מְפָרֵק לַהּ – בִּמְיַפֶּה אֶת כֹּחוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Abba bar Memel raises an objection** from a *baraita*: If there is **a healthy person who said: Write** a deed of transfer **and give** with it **one hundred dinars to so-and-so, and** he then **died, one does not write and give** it. Rabbi Abba bar Memel inferred: **But** if **a person on his deathbed** states this request, **one writes and gives** it. **He raises the objection and he resolves it:** The ruling of that *baraita* is **in** a case where **he was enhancing** the recipient’s legal **power** by writing him a document of proof.


###### Bava Batra 135b:13
[Bava Batra 135b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/135b:13)

הֵיכִי דָּמֵי מְיַפֶּה אֶת כֹּחוֹ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **What are the circumstances** under which it is apparent that **he was enhancing his** legal **power?**