Commentary for Bava Batra 231:4

אמר רבי יוחנן משום ר' שמעון בן יוחאי כל שאינו מניח בן ליורשו הקדוש ברוך הוא מלא עליו עברה כתיב הכא (במדבר כז, ח) והעברתם את נחלתו וכתיב התם (צפניה א, טו) יום עברה היום ההוא

that a tribe be not blotted out from Israel',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Judges XXI, 17. ');">⁶</span> R. Isaac of the school of R. Ammi said: [This] teaches that a stipulation was made concerning the tribe of Benjamin that a son's daughter is not to be heir [together] with [his] brothers.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the estate of their father; but the surviving brothers are to inherit all the estate, including the share of their dead brother, though he is survived by a daughter. This provision had to be made at a time when only six hundred men of the tribe of Benjamin survived (Judges XX. 47) all of whom had married wives from other tribes (Ibid. vv. 14, 23). The entire possessions of the tribe having been divided and distributed between six hundred men only, the share of each individual was considerable, being a six hundredth part of all the property of the tribe. Should any daughter have inherited such a share, and then have married a member of another tribe, a large portion of the lands of the tribe would have passed over to those of another tribe. Hence the provision that a son's daughter is to have no share in the inheritance. The law enjoining a daughter to marry within the tribe of her father is held to have been only a temporary measure and not binding upon subsequent generations; v. infra 120a. ');">⁷</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Batra 231:4. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.