Bava Batra 316

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> בחזקת מי ר' יוחנן אמר בחזקת יורשי הבעל ור' אלעזר אמר בחזקת יורשי האשה

<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. In whose established right of ownership?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Do the possessions to which Beth Hillel referred in our Mishnah, remain? ');">¹</span> — R. Johanan said: In the right of the ownership of the heirs of the husband.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the husband is entirely responsible for loss or profit and is also entitled to sell it, it is regarded as his possession and, consequently, on his death, it passes over into that of his heirs, ');">²</span> R. Eleazar said: In the right of ownership of the heirs of the wife;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since it was she who brought it to him from her father's house. ');">³</span>

ור' שמעון בן לקיש משום בר קפרא אמר יחלוקו וכן תני בר קפרא הואיל והללו באין לירש והללו באין לירש יחלוקו:

and R. Simeon b. Lakish in the name of Bar Kappara said: [The estate in dispute] is to be divided.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Between the heirs of the husband and those of the wife. ');">⁴</span> And so did Bar Kappara teach: Since these appear as heirs and those appear as heirs, [the estate] is to be divided [between them]. <b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. IF THE HOUSE COLLAPSED UPON A MAN<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'upon him'. ');">⁵</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> נפל הבית עליו ועל אמו אלו ואלו מודין שיחלוקו אמר ר"ע מודה אני בזו שהנכסים בחזקתן אמר לו בן עזאי על חלוקין אנו מצטערין אלא שבאת לחלק עלינו את השוין:

AND HIS MOTHER,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In her widowhood. Her heirs (e.g.. her brothers) plead that the son died first and that, consequently, his mother inherited his estate before she died, and they now inherit it from her, while his heirs (e.g., his paternal brothers) plead that the reverse had happened and that they, therefore, are entitled to the inheritance. ');">⁶</span> BOTH<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'these and these', Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel who are in disagreement on the cases in the Mishnah, supra 157a and 158a. ');">⁷</span> AGREE THAT [THE ESTATE IN DISPUTE] IS TO BE DIVIDED.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Unlike the case of a father and son (Mishnah supra 157a), where one party claims possession as heirs and the other as creditors, or the case of a husband and wife (Mishnah. supra 158a), where certain kinds of property are in the legal ownership of the husband while others are in that of the wife, the case in our Mishnah deals with claims both of which are of equal strength, both being based on the right of inheritance, the widow being acknowledged as the undisputed possessor of the estate, the only point in doubt being whether the one party or the other is to be heir. As the equality of the claims leaves the question of ownership in equal doubt on either side, both schools are of the unanimous opinion that the estate in dispute must be divided. ');">⁸</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> בחזקת מי ר' אילא אמר בחזקת יורשי האם ר' זירא אמר בחזקת יורשי הבן כי סליק רבי זירא קם בשיטתיה דרבי אילא קם רבה בשיטתיה דרבי זירא אמר רבי זירא שמע מינה אוירא דארץ ישראל מחכים

R. AKIBA SAID: I AGREE IN THIS [CASE] THAT THE ESTATE [IS TO REMAIN WITH THOSE WHO ARE] IN ITS ESTABLISHED RIGHT OF OWNERSHIP.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., even in this case, the School of Hillel maintain the view they had advanced in the previous cases. 'I agree' may be paraphrased 'I agree to differ' (cf. Rashb.) ');">⁹</span> BEN AZZAI SAID TO HIM: [IS IT NOT ENOUGH THAT] WE ARE SUFFERING FROM THE EXISTING DIVISIONS OF OPINION<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which are an obstacle to the formulation of the authoritative law. ');">¹⁰</span> THAT YOU [MUST] COME TO CREATE DIFFERENCES FOR US WHERE UNANIMITY WAS DECLARED?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since It was generally agreed that in the case spoken of in our Mishnah Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel are in agreement, why should R. Akiba introduce a note of discord by asserting that even here they are in dispute? ');">¹¹</span>

וטעמא מאי אמר אביי הואיל והוחזקה נחלה באותו שבט:

<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. In whose established right of ownership?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Does the estate remain according to R. Akiba? ');">¹²</span> — R. Elai said: In the established right of the ownership of the heirs of the mother. R. Zera said: In the established right of the ownership of the heirs of the son. When R. Zera went up [to Palestine] he adopted<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'stood'. ');">¹³</span> the principle of R. Elai.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Rabbah adopted the principle of R. Zera', which follows in current editions is to be deleted. (V. BaH, R. Gersh. and R. Han, a.l.) — [It is, however, well to remember that R. Elai was a Palestinian and that R. Zera must have become aware of R. Elai's view only after he came to Palestine when he was led to abandon his own opinion, whereas Rabbah, who still remained behind in Babylon, retained the view of his colleague, R. Zera. Considered in this light, the reading in our current editions is quite in order.] ');">¹⁴</span>

אמר לו בן עזאי על החלוקין אנו מצטערין וכו': אמר ר' שמלאי עדא אמרה בן עזאי תלמיד חבר דרבי עקיבא הוה דקאמר ליה שבאת

R. Zera said: From this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That in Palestine he was able to see the wisdom of R. Elai's decision. ');">¹⁵</span> one may deduce that the climate of the land of Israel makes one wise. And what is the reason?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' for R. Elai's decision that the heirs of the mother are entitled to the estate. ');">¹⁶</span> — Abaye replied: Because the inheritance<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The possessions of the widow from the moment her husband died. ');">¹⁷</span>

שלחו מתם בן שלוה בנכסי אביו בחיי אביו ומת בנו מוציא מיד הלקוחות וזו היא שקשה בדיני ממונות לוה מאי מפיק ועוד לקוחות מאי עבידתיה אלא אי איתמר הכי

has become the established possession of that tribe.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To which the mother belongs. Hence it must not be taken away from her heirs, who naturally belong to the same tribe, in favour of the son's heirs who may belong to another tribe and who would, consequently. alienate the property from the tribe the ownership of which had been established. ');">¹⁸</span> BEN AZZAI SAID TO HIM: [IS IT NOT ENOUGH THAT] WE ARE SUFFERING FROM EXISTING DIVISIONS OF OPINIONS etc. R. Simlai said: This implies [that] Ben Azzai was disciple [and] colleague of R. Akiba [seeing] that he said to him, 'That you come'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And not, 'that our Master comes'. ');">¹⁹</span> [The following statement] was sent from Palestine:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'there'. v. supra p. 687, n. 12. The statement is unintelligible and is explained in the Gemara infra. ');">²⁰</span> '[If] a son borrowed on [the security of] the estate of his father, during the lifetime of his father, and he died, his son may take away from the buyers; and this it is that presents a difficulty in civil law.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'laws of monies or money matters'. ');">²¹</span> [If] he borrowed, [it may be asked.] what [is he to] take away? And, furthermore, what has he to do with buyers?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the statement no sale but a loan was mentioned! ');">²²</span> — But, if that statement was made, thus