Commentary for Bava Batra 259:4

וכי תימא רבי יוחנן בן ברוקה אפילו אחר במקום בת ובת במקום בן קאמר והתניא רבי ישמעאל בנו של רבי יוחנן בן ברוקה אומר לא נחלקו אבא וחכמים על אחר במקום בת ובת במקום בן שלא אמר כלום

[had he appointed,] however, a son among the [other] sons or a daughter among the [other] daughters, his instructions would, [accordingly], have been valid; tell [me, then, what you understand by] the latter clause [which reads], R. JOHANAN B. BEROKAH SAID: IF [A PERSON] SAID [IT] CONCERNING ONE WHO IS ENTITLED TO BE HIS HEIR, HIS INSTRUCTIONS ARE VALID, surely this [represents] the same [view as that of] the first Tanna!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Wherein, then, lies the difference between them? ');">⁶</span> And if it be suggested [that] R. Johanan b. Beroka maintains [that] even another [legal heir may be appointed] where there is a daughter, and [that] a daughter [may be appointed as heir] where there is a son;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And that it is on this point that he differs from the first Tanna. ');">⁷</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Batra 259:4. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.