Bava Batra 222:1

אמר ליה לשמעיה גוד לית דין צבי למילף וטעמא מאי אמר אביי אמר קרא (דברים כא, יז) בכל אשר ימצא לו לו ולא לה

— He<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Jannai. ');">¹</span> called to his attendant: Lead on! This [man] does not desire to learn.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He only wishes to argue. ');">²</span> What, then, is the reason?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Why, indeed, does a firstborn son take a double share in his father's, and not in his mother's estate? ');">³</span>

ואימא הני מילי בחור שנשא אלמנה אבל בחור שנשא בתולה ה"נ דשקיל

— Abaye replied: Scripture says: <i>Of all that</i> he <i>hath</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXI, 27. viz., the firstborn takes a double portion of all that he, (his father) hath. ');">⁴</span> implying he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The father. ');">⁵</span> and not she.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The mother. ');">⁶</span>

א"ר נחמן בר יצחק אמר קרא (דברים כא, יז) ראשית אונו אונו ולא אונה

Might it not be suggested that these words<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That a firstborn son takes a double portion only in the estate of his father. ');">⁷</span> [apply to the case where] a bachelor married a widow;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who had children from her first marriage. In such a case, the father's firstborn son is not that of the mother. ');">⁸</span> but [where] a bachelor married a virgin<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In which case the firstborn son of the father is also the firstborn son of the mother. ');">⁹</span>

ההוא מבעיא ליה לבא אחר נפלים דלהוי בכור לנחלה מי שלבו דווה עליו יצא זה שאין לבו דווה עליו

he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The firstborn son. ');">¹⁰</span> takes [a double portion] also [in the estate of his mother]? — R. Nahman h. Isaac replied: Scripture said: <i>For he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The firstborn son. ');">¹¹</span></i> is the first-fruits of his strength.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXI. 17. ');">¹²</span>

אם כן לימא קרא כי הוא ראשית און מאי אונו שמע מינה תרתי

[from which it is to be inferred that the law applies to the first fruits of] his<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The father's. ');">¹³</span> strength and not of her strength. [Surely] that [word]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] his strength. ');">¹⁴</span> is required for [the law that though one was] born after a miscarriage<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though he did not 'open the womb', and is not regarded as a firstborn son in respect of 'sanctification to the Lord' and 'redemption from the priest' (v. Ex. XIII, 2). ');">¹⁵</span>

ואכתי אימא הני מילי אלמון שנשא בתולה אבל בחור שנשא בתולה הכי נמי דשקיל

he is, [nevertheless, regarded as the] firstborn son [in respect] of inheritance, [the text implying that only] he for whom [a father's] heart grieves<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] may be rendered 'grief' as well as 'strength'. ');">¹⁶</span> [is included in the law, but that a miscarriage], for which it does not, is excluded!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How, then, could this deduction as well as the one previously mentioned, he made from the same text? ');">¹⁷</span> — If so,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That only the latter deduction is to be made. ');">¹⁸</span>

אלא אמר רבא אמר קרא (דברים כא, יז) לו משפט הבכורה משפט הבכורה לאיש ולא משפט הבכורה לאשה:

the text should have read, 'For he is the first-fruits of strength';<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] without the suffix' would have been sufficient. ');">¹⁹</span> why his strength?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] ');">²⁰</span> Two [laws, therefore,] are to be deduced from it. But still, might it not be suggested that these words<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'His strength, and not her strength', excluding a firstborn from the right to a double portion in the mother's estate. ');">²¹</span>

והאיש את אשתו וכו': מנהני מילי דתנו רבנן (במדבר כז, יא) שארו זו אשתו מלמד שהבעל יורש את אשתו יכול אף היא תירשנו תלמוד לומר (במדבר כז, יא) וירש אותה הוא יורש אותה ואין היא יורשת אותו

[apply only to the case of] a widower<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who had children from his first wife. ');">²²</span> who married a virgin,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the first son from the second marriage is only the wife's firstborn, not his. ');">²³</span> but [where] a bachelor married a virgin<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the son is firstborn on both sides. ');">²⁴</span>

והא קראי לאו הכי כתיבי אמר אביי תריץ הכי ונתתם את נחלתו לקרוב אליו שארו וירש אותה

the firstborn son takes [a double portion] also [in the estate of his mother]! — But, Raba said, [this is the proper reply]: Scripture states, The right of the firstborn is his,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXI, 17. The whole clause being superfluous. [H] 'his' is interpreted as referring to the father. ');">²⁵</span> [and this indicates that] the right of the firstborn [is applicable] to [the estate of] a man and not to [that of] a woman. AND A MAN [INHERITS FROM] HIS WIFE etc. Whence is this derived?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'whence these words?' ');">²⁶</span>

אמר רבא סכינא חריפא מפסקא קראי אלא אמר רבא הכי קאמר ונתתם את נחלת שארו לו קא סבר גורעין ומוסיפין ודורשין

— Our Rabbis taught:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Suprann 109b. ');">²⁷</span> His kinsman,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XXVII, 11. ');">²⁸</span> refers to his wife; [and this] teaches that the husband is heir to his wife. One might [say that] she also is heir to him, it is therefore expressly stated, And he shall inherit her,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit. rendering of the clause translated in the versions, 'and he shall possess it' (ibid.). V. following note. ');">²⁹</span>

והאי תנא מייתי לה מהכא דתניא וירש אותה מלמד שהבעל יורש את אשתו דברי ר"ע

meaning he is heir to her<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The pronoun [H] is taken here to refer to 'his kinsman', denoting 'wife'. ');">³⁰</span> but she is not heir to him. But, surely, the Scriptural verses are not written like that!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Pentateuchal text does not read, 'ye shall give her inheritance to her husband', but, ye shall give his inheritance unto his kinsman, and 'kinsman' has been interpreted as 'wife'. This, therefore, implies that the wife is heir to her husband ');">³¹</span> — Abaye said: interpret thus, 'Ye shall give his inheritance unto one that is next to him; [as to] his kinswoman, he shall inherit her'. Raba said: A sharp knife is dissecting the Biblical verses!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to Abaye's exposition the text is broken up words are transposed. and a wholly, unnatural and arbitrary interpretation is the result. ');">³²</span>

רבי ישמעאל אומר אינו צריך הרי הוא אומר (במדבר לו, ח) וכל בת יורשת נחלה ממטות בני ישראל לאחד ממשפחת וגו' בהסבת הבעל הכתוב מדבר

But, said Raba, this is what the text implies: 'Ye shall give the inheritance of his kinswoman into him';<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Reading, [H] instead of [H] ');">³³</span> [Raba] holding the view [that prefixes and suffixes] may he detached from [words] and added to [others], and [a new] interpretation may [then] he given [to the Biblical text].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A [H] is detached from [H] and a [H] from [H] to form a new word, [H], thus obtaining the required reading and interpretation. V. previous note. ');">³⁴</span> The following<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'this'. ');">³⁵</span>

ואומר (במדבר לו, ז) ולא תסוב נחלה לבני ישראל ממטה אל מטה ואומר (במדבר לו, ט) ולא תסוב נחלה ממטה למטה אחר

Tanna derives it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The law that a husband is heir to his wife. ');">³⁶</span> from the following<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'from here'. ');">³⁷</span> [text]: For it was taught: And he shall inherit her,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XXVII, 11. ');">³⁸</span>

ואומר (יהושע כד, לג) ואלעזר בן אהרן מת ויקברו אותו בגבעת פנחס בנו וכי מנין לפנחס שלא היה לו לאלעזר אלא מלמד שנשא פנחס אשה ומתה וירשה

teaches that the husband is heir to his wife; these are the words of R. Akiba. R. Ishmael, [however], said: This is not necessary,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' There is no need to infer the law from Num. XXVII, 11, and thus to subject the Biblical text to forced interpretation. ');">³⁹</span> for it is said, And every daughter that possesseth an inheritance in any tribe of the children of Israel, [shall be wife] unto one of the family etc.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XXXVI, 8. ');">⁴⁰</span> This text speaks of a transfer [from one tribe to another that may be occasioned] through the husband.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Scripture is warning a daughter, who has inherited an estate, that she must marry one of her own tribe, for, if she marry into another tribe, her estate, on her death, will be inherited by her husband and thus pass over from the estates of her own tribe to those of another. This clearly proves that a husband is heir to his wife; for, otherwise, a daughter inheriting an estate would be free to marry into any other tribe. ');">⁴¹</span>

ואומר (דברי הימים א ב, כב) ושגוב הוליד את יאיר ויהי לו עשרים ושלש ערים בארץ הגלעד

Furthermore, it is said. So shall no inheritance of the children of Israel remove from tribe to tribe.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 7. ');">⁴²</span> Furthermore, it is said. So shall no inheritance remove from one tribe to another tribe.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 9. ');">⁴³</span> Furthermore it is said, And Eleazar the son of Aaron died; and they buried him it, the Hill of Phinehas his son.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Josh. XXIV, 33. ');">⁴⁴</span> Whence could Phinehas possess [a hill] which did not belong to Eleazar?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Phinehas was the son of Eleazar from whom he would presumably inherit after his death. How, then, did Phinehas possess a hill at the very moment his father died? ');">⁴⁵</span> But this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The mention of a hill that belonged to Phinehas. ');">⁴⁶</span> teaches that Phinehas took a wife who died, and he was her heir. Furthermore it is said, And Segub begat Jair, who had three and twenty cities in the land of Gilead.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I Chron. II, 22. ');">⁴⁷</span>