Commentary for Bekhorot 104:6

והמתנה דברי ר"מ וחכמים אומרים

This brings as under the rule the grandfather's estate.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If their grandfather was alive when their father died and the former's estate was coming to them eventually, for even if he had another son, their father would ultimately receive his share, I might have thought that this is counted as having the estate in one's possession. The last clause in the Mishnah by repeating: NOR WHAT IS TO FALL DUE etc, thus informs us that this is not so. For, from the previous clause in the Mishnah which says that a first-born does not take a double share etc., I might have thought that the expression 'WHAT IS TO FALL DUE TO THE ESTATE' referred only to a case where there fell to them the estate of their father's brother, the latter having children at the time of their father's death, so that it did not appear coming to them on their father's death, but both he and his sons died before the division (Rashi) ; or the latter having no children when their father died but yet as he might still have heirs there was no certainty that the property was coming to them (Sh. Mek.) .');">⁵</span>

Explore commentary for Bekhorot 104:6. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.