## Bava Batra Daf 136a

###### Bava Batra 136a:1
[Bava Batra 136a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:1)

כִּדְאָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: ״וּקְנֵינָא מִינֵּיהּ מוֹסִיף עַל מַתַּנְתָּא דָּא״; הָכָא נָמֵי – דְּאָמַר: ״אַף כְּתוֹבוּ וַחֲתוֹמוּ וְהַבוּ לֵיהּ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It is **as Rav Ḥisda says** that if it is written in the will: **And we acquired it from him** through an act of acquisition **in addition to this gift,** this formulation does not cancel the will’s power to take effect after the person’s death, as the intention of referring to it as a gift is merely to enhance the legal power of the recipient by confirming the transfer through an act of acquisition. **Here too,** in a case **where** he **says: Write and sign** a document **as well, and give** it **to him,** it is apparent that his request is to enhance the legal power of the recipient by writing a document in addition to transferring the gift itself.


###### Bava Batra 136a:2
[Bava Batra 136a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:2)

אִיתְּמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל, הֲלָכָה: כּוֹתְבִין וְנוֹתְנִין. וְכֵן אָמַר רָבָא אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן, הֲלָכָה: כּוֹתְבִין וְנוֹתְנִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It was stated** that **Rav Yehuda** says that **Shmuel says** that the ***halakha*** is that **one writes** a document **and gives** the money in this case. **And Rava says similarly** that **Rav Naḥman says** that the ***halakha*** is that **one writes** a document **and gives** the money in this case.


###### Bava Batra 136a:3
[Bava Batra 136a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:3)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַכּוֹתֵב נְכָסָיו לְבָנָיו, צָרִיךְ שֶׁיִּכְתּוֹב ״מֵהַיּוֹם וּלְאַחַר מִיתָה״, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** A healthy person **who writes** a document granting **his property to his sons** in his lifetime, but wishes to continue to derive benefit from it until his death, **must write:** I give the property **from today and after** my **death.** This is **the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei says: He need not** write: From today and after my death; it is sufficient for him to write that the transfer will take effect after he dies.


###### Bava Batra 136a:4
[Bava Batra 136a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:4)

הַכּוֹתֵב נְכָסָיו לִבְנוֹ לְאַחַר מוֹתוֹ – הָאָב אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִמְכּוֹר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן כְּתוּבִין לַבֵּן; וְהַבֵּן אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִמְכּוֹר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן בִּרְשׁוּת הָאָב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **one writes** a document granting **his property to his son** from today and **after his death, the father cannot sell** the property **because it is written** as granted **to the son, and the son cannot sell** it **because it is** still **in the possession of the father** with regard to using the property and consuming its produce.


###### Bava Batra 136a:5
[Bava Batra 136a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:5)

מָכַר הָאָב – מְכוּרִים עַד שֶׁיָּמוּת. מָכַר הַבֵּן – אֵין לַלּוֹקֵחַ בָּהֶן כְּלוּם עַד שֶׁיָּמוּת הָאָב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **the father sold** the property, **it is sold** to the purchaser inasmuch as he may use it and consume its produce **until** the father **dies,** at which point it belongs to the son. If **the son sold** it during his father’s lifetime, **the purchaser has no** right to use it **until the father dies.**


###### Bava Batra 136a:6
[Bava Batra 136a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:6)

**גְּמָ׳** וְכִי כָּתַב ״מֵהַיּוֹם וּלְאַחַר מִיתָה״, מַאי הָוֵי? הָא תְּנַן: ״מֵהַיּוֹם וּלְאַחַר מִיתָה״ – גֵּט וְאֵינוֹ גֵּט; וְאִם מֵת, חוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **And if he wrote:** I give the property **from today and after** my **death, what of it? Didn’t we learn** in a mishna (*Gittin* 72a): If a husband said to his wife: This is your bill of divorce from **today and after** my **death,** it is **a bill of divorce but not** a complete **bill of divorce, and** therefore **if he dies** without children his wife **performs the ritual through which a woman is freed of her levirate bonds [*ḥalitza*],** as perhaps the bill of divorce is invalid and she is bound by the levirate bond and may not remarry without first performing *ḥalitza*. **But she does not enter into levirate marriage,** as perhaps the bill of divorce is valid, and it is forbidden for a divorcée to marry her former husband’s brother.


###### Bava Batra 136a:7
[Bava Batra 136a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:7)

הָתָם – מְסַפְּקָא לַן אִי תְּנָאָה הָוֵי, אִי חֲזָרָה הָוֵי; אֲבָל הָכָא – הָכִי קָאָמַר לֵיהּ: גּוּפָא קְנִי מֵהַיּוֹם, פֵּירָא לְאַחַר מִיתָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **There, we are uncertain if** the expression: And after my death, **is** meant as **a condition,** i.e., if I die you will be divorced retroactively from today, **or if it is a retraction** of the statement: From today, meaning that the divorce would take effect only after his death, which would render it invalid. **But here,** in the case of a deed of gift, there is no contradiction in the statement, as **this is what** the father **is** presumably **saying to him: Acquire** the property **itself today,** and **the produce after** my **death.**


###### Bava Batra 136a:8
[Bava Batra 136a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:8)

רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ. רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ חֲלַשׁ, עָל לְגַבֵּיהּ רַב הוּנָא וְרַב נַחְמָן. אָמַר לֵיהּ רַב הוּנָא לְרַב נַחְמָן, בְּעִי מִינֵּיהּ: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, אוֹ אֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי? אָמַר לֵיהּ: טַעְמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי לָא יָדַעְנָא, הֲלָכָה אֶיבְעֵי מִינֵּיהּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אַתְּ בְּעִי מִינֵּיהּ אִי הֲלָכָה אִי לָא, וְטַעְמֵיהּ אֲנָא אָמֵינָא לָךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **Rabbi Yosei says** that **he need not** write: From today and after my death. The Gemara relates: **Rabba bar Avuh was sick,** and **Rav Huna and Rav Naḥman entered to** visit **him. Rav Huna said to Rav Naḥman: Ask him** whether the ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei or** the ***halakha*** is **not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei.** Rav Naḥman **said to** Rav Huna: **I do not know Rabbi Yosei’s reasoning;** can **I ask him** about the ***halakha*?** Rav Huna **said to** Rav Naḥman: **You ask him if** the ***halakha*** is in accordance with his opinion **or not, and I will tell you his reasoning** afterward.


###### Bava Batra 136a:9
[Bava Batra 136a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:9)

בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ, הָכִי אָמַר רַב: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי. בָּתַר דִּנְפַקוּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הַיְינוּ טַעְמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, דְּאָמַר: זְמַנּוֹ שֶׁל שְׁטָר מוֹכִיחַ עָלָיו. תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁזְּמַנּוֹ שֶׁל שְׁטָר מוֹכִיחַ עָלָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Naḥman **asked** Rabba bar Avuh. Rabba bar Avuh **said to him** that **this** is what **Rav says:** The ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei. After they left,** Rav Huna **said to** Rav Naḥman that **this is Rabbi Yosei’s reasoning: He says** that writing: From today and after my death, is unnecessary because **the date** written **in a document proves** when **it** takes effect. The Gemara adds: **That is also taught** in a *baraita* (*Tosefta*, *Ketubot* 8:4): **Rabbi Yosei says** that **he need not** write: From today and after my death, **because the date** written **in a document proves** when **it** takes effect.


###### Bava Batra 136a:10
[Bava Batra 136a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:10)

בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רָבָא מֵרַב נַחְמָן: בְּהַקְנָאָה, מַהוּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: בְּהַקְנָאָה – אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rava asked Rav Naḥman: In** a case where the father performed an act of **transfer,** transferring his property to his son after his death, **what is** the *halakha*? Is it still necessary to write: From today and after my death? Rav Naḥman **said to him: In** a case where he performed an act of **transfer, he need not** write: From today and after my death.


###### Bava Batra 136a:11
[Bava Batra 136a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:11)

רַב פַּפֵּי אָמַר: אִיכָּא אַקְנְיָתָא דִּצְרִיךְ, וְאִיכָּא אַקְנְיָתָא דְּלָא צְרִיךְ. ״אַקְנְיֵיהּ וּקְנֵינָא מִינֵּיהּ״ – לָא צָרִיךְ. ״קְנֵינָא מִינֵּיהּ וְאַקְנְיֵיהּ״ – צְרִיךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Pappi said: There is** a case of **transfer where** he **needs** to write: From today and after my death, **and there is** a case of **transfer where** he does **not need** to do so. If it is written in the deed that **he transferred** it **to him and we,** the witnesses, **acquired** it **from him,** he does **not need** to write: From today and after my death. But if the statement is written in the opposite order: **We acquired** it **from him and he transferred** it **to him,** he still **needs** to write: From today and after my death.


###### Bava Batra 136a:12
[Bava Batra 136a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:12)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב חֲנִינָא מִסּוּרָא: מִי אִיכָּא מִידֵּי דַּאֲנַן לָא יָדְעִינַן, וְסָפְרֵי יָדְעִי? שְׁאֵלוּנְהוּ לְסָפְרֵי דְאַבָּיֵי – וְיָדְעִי, וּלְסָפְרֵי דְרָבָא – וְיָדְעִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ḥanina of Sura objects to this** distinction: **Is there anything that we,** the Sages, **do not know, and the scribes know?** The distinction between the two opposite orderings of the above statement was unknown to the Sages. The Gemara relates that the Sages **asked Abaye’s scribes and they knew** the distinction, **and** they asked **Rava’s scribes and they** also **knew** the distinction.


###### Bava Batra 136a:13
[Bava Batra 136a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:13)

רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אָמַר: בֵּין ״אַקְנְיֵיהּ וּקְנֵינָא מִינֵּיהּ״, בֵּין ״קְנֵינָא מִינֵּיהּ וְאַקְנְיֵיהּ״ – לָא צְרִיךְ; וּבְ״דוּכְרַן פִּתְגָמֵי דַּהֲוֵי בְּאַנְפַּנָא״ פְּלִיגִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: Whether** the wording is **he transferred** it **to him and we acquired** it **from him,** or **whether** it is **we acquired** it **from him and he transferred** it **to him,** he **need not** write: From today and after my death, as the act of transfer is mentioned in any event. **And** Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei in the mishna **disagree** whether the phrase: From today and after my death, is necessary only **with regard to** a case where the deed merely states: This is **a record of the proceedings that took place in our presence,** without any mention of an act of transfer.


###### Bava Batra 136a:14
[Bava Batra 136a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:14)

אָמַר רַב כָּהֲנָא: אַמְרִיתַהּ לִשְׁמַעְתָּא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב זְבִיד מִנְּהַרְדְּעָא, וַאֲמַר לִי: אַתּוּן – הָכִי מַתְנִיתוּ לַהּ; אֲנַן – הָכִי מַתְנֵינַן לָהּ: אָמַר רָבָא אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן, בְּהַקְנָאָה, אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ – בֵּין ״אַקְנְיֵיהּ וּקְנֵינָא מִינֵּיהּ״, בֵּין ״קְנֵינָא מִינֵּיהּ וְאַקְנְיֵיהּ״ – לָא צְרִיךְ. בְּ״דוּכְרַן פִּתְגָמֵי דַּהֲווֹ בְּאַנְפַּנָא״ – פְּלִיגִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Kahana said: I stated** this ***halakha* in the presence of Rav Zevid of Neharde’a, and he said to me: You teach it like this,** i.e., as a question and answer followed by a dispute; **we teach it like this,** i.e., as a single, unbroken statement: **Rava says** that **Rav Naḥman says** that **in** a case where **transfer** is mentioned in the deed, the owner **need not** write: From today and after my death. This is the *halakha* **whether** the wording is **he transferred** it **to him and we acquired** it **from him,** or **whether** the wording is **we acquired** it **from him and he transferred** it **to him;** he **need not** write: From today and after my death. They **disagree** only **with regard to** a case where the wording is: This is **a record of the proceedings that took place in our presence.**


###### Bava Batra 136a:15
[Bava Batra 136a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/136a:15)

הַכּוֹתֵב נְכָסָיו לִבְנוֹ לְאַחַר מוֹתוֹ. אִיתְּמַר: מָכַר הַבֵּן בְּחַיֵּי הָאָב, וּמֵת הַבֵּן בְּחַיֵּי הָאָב –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that if **one writes** a document granting **his property to his son** from today and **after his death,** neither he nor the son can sell the property. It **was stated** that in a case where **the son sold** the property **during the father’s lifetime, and** then **the son died during the father’s lifetime,** after which the father died as well,