## Bava Batra Daf 158b

###### Bava Batra 158b:1
[Bava Batra 158b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/158b:1)

**גְּמָ׳** בְּחֶזְקַת מִי? רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: בְּחֶזְקַת יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבַּעַל, וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אָמַר: בְּחֶזְקַת יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאִשָּׁה,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches that according to Beit Hillel, the guaranteed property that the wife brought with her to the marriage retains its previous ownership status. The Gemara asks: **In whose possession** does the guaranteed property remain? **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** It remains **in the possession of the husband’s heirs,** since the husband is liable to compensate his wife for guaranteed property in the event of loss. **And Rabbi Elazar says:** It remains **in the possession of the wife’s heirs,** as the property came from her father’s house and belongs to her.


###### Bava Batra 158b:2
[Bava Batra 158b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/158b:2)

וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ מִשּׁוּם בַּר קַפָּרָא אָמַר: יַחְלוֹקוּ. וְכֵן תָּנֵי בַּר קַפָּרָא: הוֹאִיל וְהַלָּלוּ בָּאִין לִירַשׁ וְהַלָּלוּ בָּאִין לִירַשׁ, יַחְלוֹקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says in the name of bar Kappara: They divide** the property between them. **And likewise bar Kappara teaches** in a *baraita*: **Since these** heirs **come to inherit and those** heirs **come to inherit,** and neither can prove his claim, **they divide** the property between them.


###### Bava Batra 158b:3
[Bava Batra 158b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/158b:3)

**מַתְנִי׳** נָפַל הַבַּיִת עָלָיו וְעַל אִמּוֹ, אֵלּוּ וָאֵלּוּ מוֹדִין שֶׁיַּחְלוֹקוּ. אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא: מוֹדֶה אֲנִי בָּזוֹ, שֶׁהַנְּכָסִים בְּחֶזְקָתָן. אָמַר לוֹ בֶּן עַזַּאי: עַל [הַ]חֲלוּקִין אָנוּ מִצְטַעֲרִין; אֶלָּא שֶׁבָּאתָ לְחַלֵּק עָלֵינוּ אֶת הַשָּׁוִין?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** If **the house collapsed on** a son **and upon his mother,** and it is unknown who died first, the following claims arise: The mother’s paternal family claims that the son died first, and therefore they inherit from the mother, and the son’s heirs claim that the mother died first and her son inherited from her, and therefore they inherit from the son. In this case, both **these** Sages **and those** Sages, Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, **concede that they divide** the property between them. **Rabbi Akiva said: In this** case **I concede that the property** retains **its** previous ownership **status. Ben Azzai said to** Rabbi Akiva: **We are** already **troubled by** those cases where Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel **are in disagreement. But** do **you come to bring upon us a disagreement** with regard to **the** case where they **agree?**


###### Bava Batra 158b:4
[Bava Batra 158b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/158b:4)

**גְּמָ׳** בְּחֶזְקַת מִי? רַבִּי אִילָא אָמַר: בְּחֶזְקַת יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאֵם. רַבִּי זֵירָא אָמַר: בְּחֶזְקַת יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבֵּן. כִּי סָלֵיק רַבִּי זֵירָא, קָם בְּשִׁיטְתֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי אִילָא. קָם רַבָּה בְּשִׁיטְתֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי זֵירָא. אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ – אַוֵּירָא דְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל מַחְכִּים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna states that according to Rabbi Akiva, the property retains its previous ownership status. The Gemara asks: **In whose possession** does the property remain? **Rabbi Ila says:** It remains **in the possession of the mother’s heirs. Rabbi Zeira,** when he was still in Babylonia, **said:** It remains **in the possession of the son’s heirs. When Rabbi Zeira ascended** to Eretz Yisrael, **he adopted the opinion of Rabbi Ila,** whereas **Rabba,** in Babylonia, **adopted the opinion** stated **by Rabbi Zeira. Rabbi Zeira said: Conclude from** this incident **that the air of Eretz Yisrael makes** one **wise,** as when I ascended to Eretz Yisrael I accepted the opinion of Rabbi Ila, who was also from Eretz Yisrael, whereas Rabba, who remained in Babylonia, accepted my former opinion.


###### Bava Batra 158b:5
[Bava Batra 158b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/158b:5)

וְטַעְמָא מַאי? אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: הוֹאִיל וְהוּחְזְקָה נַחֲלָה בְּאוֹתוֹ שֵׁבֶט.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And what is the reason** that the property remains in the possession of the mother’s heirs? **Abaye says: Since the inheritance was** initially **in the possession of that tribe** of the mother, it is not removed from their possession in order to transfer it to the son’s heirs, who are from a different tribe.


###### Bava Batra 158b:6
[Bava Batra 158b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/158b:6)

אָמַר לוֹ בֶּן עַזַּאי: עַל הַחֲלוּקִין אָנוּ מִצְטַעֲרִין וְכוּ׳. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׂמְלַאי, עֲדָא אָמְרָה – בֶּן עַזַּאי תַּלְמִיד חָבֵר דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא הֲוָה, דְּקָאָמַר לֵיהּ ״שֶׁבָּאתָ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches: **Ben Azzai said to** Rabbi Akiva: **We are** already **troubled by** those cases where Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel **are in disagreement.** But do you come to bring upon us a disagreement with regard to the case where they agree? **Rabbi Shamlai said: That is to say** that **ben Azzai was a disciple-colleague of Rabbi Akiva** and not just a disciple, **since he said to him:** Do **you come,** in the second person, rather than using the more formal third person.


###### Bava Batra 158b:7
[Bava Batra 158b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/158b:7)

שְׁלַחוּ מִתָּם: בֵּן שֶׁלָּוָה בְּנִכְסֵי אָבִיו בְּחַיֵּי אָבִיו, וָמֵת – בְּנוֹ מוֹצִיא מִיַּד הַלָּקוֹחוֹת. וְזוֹ הִיא שֶׁקָּשָׁה בְּדִינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת. לָוָה – מַאי מַפֵּיק? וְעוֹד, לָקוֹחוֹת מַאי עֲבִידְתֵּיהּ? אֶלָּא אִי אִיתְּמַר, הָכִי

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Sages **sent** a ruling **from there,** Eretz Yisrael: With regard to **a son who borrowed** money based **on** the security of **his father’s property during his father’s lifetime, and** whose father subsequently **died, his son repossesses** the property **from the buyers. And this is the** most **difficult** *halakha* to understand **with regard to monetary law.** The Gemara clarifies the ruling: If the son **borrowed, what does he repossess?** He needs to repay a debt, not to collect payment. **Moreover, what is the relevance of the buyers** in this matter? There is no mention of them in the premise. **Rather, if** this matter **was stated,** it is in **this** manner