Chasidut for Bava Batra 316:1
<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> בחזקת מי ר' יוחנן אמר בחזקת יורשי הבעל ור' אלעזר אמר בחזקת יורשי האשה
<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. In whose established right of ownership?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Do the possessions to which Beth Hillel referred in our Mishnah, remain? ');"><sup>1</sup></span> — R. Johanan said: In the right of the ownership of the heirs of the husband.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the husband is entirely responsible for loss or profit and is also entitled to sell it, it is regarded as his possession and, consequently, on his death, it passes over into that of his heirs, ');"><sup>2</sup></span> R. Eleazar said: In the right of ownership of the heirs of the wife;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since it was she who brought it to him from her father's house. ');"><sup>3</sup></span>
Kedushat Levi
Since the generation who left Egypt as adults did not get to the land of Israel, only their sons, it follows that the parents did not achieve their שלימות, “maturity” until their sons had made the Land of Israel their ancestral heritage. This is the meaning of “the dead inherited the living.”
This statement in the Talmud about the dead inheriting the living, also explains another statement in the Talmud Sanhedrin 104, according to which a son [while alive Ed.] can confer spiritual merits on his [deceased] father, whereas his deceased father cannot confer merits on his surviving son. The Talmud bases this on the example of the second generation of the Israelites bestowing merits on their fathers after they carried out the task set by G’d for this people of settling in the Holy land and observing the Torah there. Avraham after his death, or Yitzchok, after his death, could not confer merits on their respective sons that these had not acquired during their respective lifetimes.