Bava Batra 266:1

ההוא דאמר ליה לחבריה נכסי לך ואחריך לפלוני וראשון ראוי ליורשו הוה שכיב ראשון אתא שני קא תבע

Once a certain man said to his friend, 'My estate [shall be] yours and after you [it shall pass over] to X'. The first [was one] entitled to be his heir.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The testator's. ');">¹</span> [When] the first died, the second came to claim [the estate]. R. 'Ilish proposed in the presence of Raba to give his decision<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'to say'. ');">²</span> that the second also is entitled to receive the bequest.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the rights over the estate were given to the first during his lifetime only, they cease with his death. ');">³</span>

סבר רב עיליש קמיה דרבא למימר שני נמי שקיל א"ל דייני דחצצתא הכי דייני לאו היינו דשלח רב אחא בר רב עויא

[Raba, however], said to him, 'Such decisions are given by arbitration judges,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., judges whose knowledge of the law is not extensive enough to enable them to give legal decisions, and they consequently have recourse to arbitration (Rashi. and R. Gersh.). 'Graveyard judges' (R. Han.). ');">⁴</span> [is] not [the case exactly] the same as [that] which [was] sent [by] R. Aha son of 'Awya?'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the first was entitled to be legal heir, the succession cannot be terminated. ');">⁵</span> As he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. 'Ilish. ');">⁶</span>

אכסיף קרי עליה (ישעיהו ס, כב) אני ה' בעתה אחישנה:

became embarrassed, [Raba] applied to him the Scriptural text. I, the Lord, will hasten it in its time.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Isa. LX, 22, i.e., he need not worry too much about the slip he had made, since he was saved in time from giving effect to a wrong decision. ');">⁷</span> <b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. IF A PERSON GIVES HIS ESTATE, IN WRITING, TO STRANGERS, AND LEAVES OUT HIS CHILDREN, HIS ARRANGEMENTS ARE LEGALLY VALID,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'what he has done is done'. ');">⁸</span> BUT THE SPIRIT OF THE SAGES FINDS NO DELIGHT IN HIM.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though his action is strictly legal, it is not human. ');">⁹</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> הכותב את נכסיו לאחרים והניח את בניו מה שעשה עשוי אלא אין רוח חכמים נוחה הימנו רשב"ג אומר אם לא היו בניו נוהגים כשורה זכור לטוב:

R. SIMEON B. GAMALIEL SAID: IF HIS CHILDREN DID NOT CONDUCT THEMSELVES IN A PROPER MANNER HE WILL BE REMEMBERED FOR GOOD.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' His action will serve as a warning to wicked children. ');">¹⁰</span> <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. The question was raised whether the Rabbis<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The authors of the first part of our Mishnah. ');">¹¹</span> were in disagreement with [the view of] R. Simeon b. Gamaliel<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., do they object to the disinheritance of bad children? ');">¹²</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> איבעיא להו מי פליגי רבנן עליה דרשב"ג או לא

or not. — Come and hear, Joseph b. Joezer,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Identified by Weiss, Dor, I, 107, with Jose, the first of the Pairs (v. Aboth I, 5) who had been put to death by the renegade High-Priest Alcimus. Buchler, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem Inauguration, Hebrew part, 79, shows the untenability of this view, and suggests Jose b. Joezer, the Priest (v. Hag. II, 7) who lived in the days of Agrippa II.] ');">¹³</span> had a son who did not conduct himself in a proper manner. He had a loft [full] of <i>denarii</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., a large sum of money. ');">¹⁴</span> and he consecrated it [for the Temple]. He, [the son], went away and married the daughter of King Jannai's<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Identified variously either with Jonathan, son of Mattathias, or Agrippa who appears elsewhere in the Talmud under this name. (V. Buchler, ibid.)] ');">¹⁵</span>

ת"ש דיוסף בן יועזר היה לו בן שלא היה נוהג כשורה הוה ליה עיליתא דדינרי קם אקדשה אזיל נסיב בת גאדיל כלילי דינאי מלכא אולידה דביתהו זבין לה ביניתא קרעה אשכח בה מרגליתא

wreath-maker. [On the occasion when] his wife gave birth to a son he bought for her a fish. Opening it he found therein a pearl. 'Do not take it to the king', she said to him, 'for they will take it away from you for a small sum of money.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'for light money'. ');">¹⁶</span> Go take it rather<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'go bring it.' ');">¹⁷</span> to the Treasurers [of the Temple], but do not you suggest its price, since the making of an offer to the Most High<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., Temple of God. ');">¹⁸</span>

אמרה ליה לא תמטייה למלכא דשקלי לה מינך בדמי קלילי זיל אמטייה לגבי גזברי ולא תשיימה את דאמירתו לגבוה כמסירתו להדיוט אלא לשיימוה אינהו

is [as binding] as [actual] delivery in ordinary transactions.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'to an ordinary person.' Once the seller made an offer in a Temple transaction, the price can no more be raised, however much the object may have been undervalued. ');">¹⁹</span> But let them fix the price'. On being brought [to the Temple]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'he brought it'. ');">²⁰</span> it was valued at thirteen lofts of <i>denarii</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. p. 560, n. 8. ');">²¹</span>

אמטייה שמוה בתליסרי עליאתא דדינרי אמרי ליה שבע איכא שית ליכא אמר להו שבע הבו לי שית הרי הן מוקדשות לשמים

'Seven [of them]', they said to him, 'are available, [but the remaining] six are not available'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the Treasury had no funds wherewith to pay the full amount of its value. ');">²²</span> He said to them, 'Give me the seven; and the six<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The balance of the price. ');">²³</span> are, [hereby]. consecrated to the Temple'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'heaven'. ');">²⁴</span>

עמדו וכתבו יוסף בן יועזר הכניס אחת ובנו הכניס שש ואיכא דאמרי יוסף בן יועזר הכניס אחת ובנו הוציא שבע

Thereupon it was recorded,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'they stood and wrote'. ');">²⁵</span> 'Joseph b. Joezer brought in one, but his son brought to six others say, [the record read as follows]: 'Joseph b. Joezer brought in one, but his son took away seven'. Now, since the expression used [in the record<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to the first version. ');">²⁶</span> was], 'he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The son. ');">²⁷</span>

מדקא אמרי הכניס מכלל דשפיר עבד אדרבה מדקא אמרי הוציא מכלל דלאו שפיר עבד אלא מהא ליכא למשמע מינה

brought in', it may be inferred that [in their opinion] he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The father. ');">²⁸</span> acted rightly.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Brought in', is all expression of approval, and it implies that the father's act was meritorious and resulted in the moral improvement of the son. Since, also, the wording if the record met with general approval, as evidenced by the statement 'they (1.e. all) stood and wrote', the Rabbis are obviously of the same opinion as R. Simeon b. Gamaliel. ');">²⁹</span> On the contrary! Since the expression used<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to the second version of the record. ');">³⁰</span>

מאי הוי עלה ת"ש דאמר ליה שמואל לרב יהודה שיננא לא תיהוי בי עבורי אחסנתא ואפילו מברא בישא לברא טבא וכ"ש מברא לברתא

was, 'he took out', it may be inferred that he did not act rightly.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Took out', is an expression of disapproval of the act of the son which reflects also on the action of the father. The fatherly act was, accordingly, regarded by the Rabbis with disfavour. (Cf. n. 10). Hence they must be in disagreement with R. Simeon b. Gamaliel. ');">³¹</span> But [the fact is that] from this [record] nothing may be inferred. What, then, is the answer to the enquiry?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'what is about it'. ');">³²</span>

ת"ר מעשה באדם אחד שלא היו בניו נוהגין כשורה עמד וכתב נכסיו ליונתן בן עוזיאל מה עשה יונתן בן עוזיאל מכר שליש והקדיש שליש והחזיר לבניו שליש

— Come and hear: Samuel said to Rab Judah. 'Shinena'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] (root [H], 'sharp'); (i) 'keen witted', [(ii) 'long-toothed', denoting some facial characteristic; (iii) 'man of iron endurance' (Bacher).] ');">³³</span> Keep away from<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'be not among.' ');">³⁴</span> transfers<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., from one who is legally entitled to be heir. ');">³⁵</span>

בא עליו שמאי במקלו ותרמילו א"ל שמאי אם אתה יכול להוציא את מה שמכרתי ומה שהקדשתי אתה יכול להוציא מה שהחזרתי

of inheritance even [if they be] from a bad son to a good son, much more [when they are] from a son to a daughter'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since Samuel's opinion (being that of an Amora) must be in agreement with one at least of the Tannaim, and since his opinion is clearly in direct contradiction to that of R. Simeon h. Gamaliel, it is obvious that Samuel must have had as his authority the view of the Rabbis (the authors of the first part of our Mishnah). Thus it follows that the Rabbis are in disagreement with R. Simeon b. Gamaliel in maintaining, like Samuel, that even a bad son must not he disinherited. ');">³⁶</span> Our Rabbis taught: Once it happened with a certain person whose sons did not conduct themselves in a proper manner [that] he took the definite step of assigning his estate, in writing,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'he stood and wrote his estate'. ');">³⁷</span> to Jonathan b. Uzziel. What did Jonathan b. Uzziel do? — He sold a third,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The proceeds of which he retained for himself. ');">³⁸</span> consecrated a third, and returned a third to his<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The testator's. ');">³⁹</span> sons. [Thereupon], Shammai came upon him with his staff and bag.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., he objected vehemently to his return of the one third to the sons, maintaining that, though he did not say it explicitly, the deceased gave his estate to Jonathan for the express purpose of depriving his sons from any share in it; and since it was the duty of Jonathan to carry out the dead man's wishes, his gift of one third to the sons is invalid, and must be taken from them. ');">⁴⁰</span> He<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Jonathan. ');">⁴¹</span> said to him, 'Shammai! If you can take back what I have sold and what I have consecrated, you can [also] take back what I have returned;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To the sons. ');">⁴²</span>