Bava Batra 134b-135

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
Jun 062017
 

With what claims is one believed to exempt one’s wife from levirate marriage.  On what basis is he believed?  Can we split one’s testimony and believe part of what one said but not the other part?  What is the case in the mishna where the brothers disagree about whether they have another brother?  Is the other brother’s claim a definitive one or are they unsure whether or not he’s there brother?  Can we learn from here regarding other cases where one has a confident claim (bari) and the other is unsure (shema)?  If one has a will wrapped around his leg when he dies, it is invalid.  But if he passed it one to someone else, it is valid.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 133b-134a

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
Jun 052017
 

Is it OK to bypass one’s son’s inheritance?  Does it make a difference if the son does not behave appropriately either toward God or toward the father?  Yosef ben Yoezer bypassed his son and a story is told about the aftermath.  However the story is inconclusive regarding this question.  Another story is told of one who bypassed his sons and passed his inheritance to Yonatan ben Uziel who in turn returned a third of it to the sons.  Shamai attacks him for doing it but he proves to Shamai that he was correct.  It is unclear from the details of the story whether the father was hoping Yonatan would give his sons something or not.  The greatness of the students of Hillel the Elder are brought as Yonatan ben Uziel was the greatest among them.  Is one believed for the purposes of inheritance and levirate (yibum) marriage to say that one has a son or a brother (if there are no brothers, there is no obligation of levirate marriage)?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 132b-133a

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
Jun 042017
 

Study Guide Bava Batra 132

A mishna in Peah is quoted: If a husband writes all of his possessions to his son and gives his wife a small portion of land, she loses her rights to her ketuba.  Several explanations are given for this opinion among the amoraim.  A second opinion is brought in the mishna by Rabbi Yossi that if the woman accepts it even if the husband doesn’t write it, she gives up her rights.  Various cases are brought relating to issues of women in situations similar to this and it was decided in each case whether or not she has given up all her rights to receive her ketuba or not.  Rav Huna says that if one on one’s deathbed says “all my possessions will go to so and so” – if the person is one of his inheritors, it is passed on as inheritance and if not, it is passed down as a gift.  In what situation he meant this and what is the relevance of whether it is inheritance or a gift is discussed.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 131-132a

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
Jun 022017
 

Rava wants to know if Rabbi Yochanan ben Broka’s allowance for the father to favor one child over the others is only when one says so on one’s deathbed or even when healthy.  A proof is brought from a tannaitic source where Rabbi Natan the Babylonian question Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi about his Mishna following only Rabbi Yochanan ben Broka.   Since the case related to a healthy person, it is clear Rabbi Yochanan ben Broka held his opinion also for a healthy person.  There is a further discussion regarding the content of the braita and question why Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi specifically answered the way he did and didn’t suggest a different answer.  If one writes that one is selling all of his possessions to his wife or to his oldest son or to his youngest son or to some random person, is this viewed as an actual gift that would affect a kinyan to that person or is there an assumption that can be made that the man wants to appoint them as an executor of his will and wants the others to respect them and therefore wrote it in that way?  And if that is assumed to be appointing them as an executor, would that be the case only on one’s deathbed or even earlier in their lifetime?  An attempt to answer this question is brought from a tannaitic source.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 130

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
Jun 012017
 

The mishna brings two opinions relating to one who wants to bequeath to one’s children in a way different than the Torah law – is it allowed and if so, in what cases is it allowed?  It seems there are two opinions, however the gemara raises a problem with stating there are two opinions based on the simple reading of the mishna.  Two solutions are suggested.  The halacha is concluded like Rabbi Yochanan ben Broka who allows one to favor one son over the others or one daughter over the others (in a case where there are no sons).   There is a debate regarding Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi’s psak – whether he said “The halacha is like Rabbi Yochanan ben Broka” or whether he ruled in a case like Rabbi Yochanan.  This leads to a discussion regarding what the best way to learn a halacha is – by what someone says or by case law?  What are the pros and cons of each approach?  There are those who say neither is good enough – one must say “This is the halacha and you can act upon it.”

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 127

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
May 292017
 

There are various halachot that do not apply to a tumtum (one whose genitals are covered up and it is unclear if there are male or female) who is then “opened up” and found to be a male.  One cannot be a firstborn if it is doubtful whether or not he is the firstborn.  The exact situation that this halacha refers to is discussed.  A father is believed to say a particular son is the firstborn but what if there is reason to believe that is not the case (evidence or circumstantial evidence shows otherwise)?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 126

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
May 282017
 

A firstborn that protests, his protest is valid.  There is a debate among the Rashbam and Rabbeinu Chananel, what he is protesting.  Limitations are put on this halacha by Rabba.  If a firstborn gives up his rights to a double portion when dividing a particular property, Rav Pappa and Rav Pappi debate (based on a situation where Rava gave a psak about in a different case) whether Rava held that he gave up rights to the double portion of all the properties or only of that particular property?  This debate is based on whether one holds that the firstborn gains rights to his double portion immediately upon the death of the father, even before the land is divided or whether that he gains rights to it only once the property is divided.  The mishna differentiates between a person who says that he will not bequeath the double portion to his firstborn to a person who says he will equally divide his portion.  The first is not allowed as it goes against what it says in the Torah and the second is allowed because it is viewed as a gift.  One needs to use the language of a gift in order to bypass Torah laws of inheritance.  What type of proof can be used to prove one is the firstborn in order to get the double portion?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 124-125

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
May 262017
 

Study Guide Bava Batra 124-125

Does the firstborn get the double portion of the increased value of possessions that belonged to the father but were not in the hands of the father at the time of death (they were on loan or had wandered off)?  What is a loan is returned from a non Jew – does he get double from the loan and from the interest?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Bava Batra 123

 Bava Batra  No Responses »
May 252017
 

How is the double portion calculated – two times a portion that all the other brothers get or two-thirds of the whole property?  The answer is derived from several verses and the gemara explains why all are necessary.  Mist of the proofs are from Joseph’s double portion.  The gemara then diverges into the details of how Joseph got the firstborn inheritance and other details of the Jacob/Leah/Rachel/Lavan/Esau narrative are brought.  A braita describes various things of which the firstborn receives a double portion and the gemara explains each case.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

 Older Entries  Newer Entries