POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Bava Basra 144
1) POSTHUMOUS IMPROVEMENTS (cont.)
(a) (Mishnah): If the adults said 'this is what father left;
we want to divide, we will improve our share' - they keep
2) A SON ACQUIRES THE HOUSE IN WHICH HE IS MARRIED
(b) Rav Safra's father died, leaving money; Rav Safra
invested it, his brothers took him to Beis Din.
1. Rava: Rav Safra is a great Chacham, he would not
take time from learning for the sake of others! (It
is as if he said 'I will improve my share.')
(c) (Mishnah): Similarly: If his widow improved the property,
the children share the improvements...
(d) Question: A widow does not share the property!
(e) Answer (R. Yirmeyah): The Mishnah discusses a widow that
inherits (her husband stipulated that she will get a
share with his children; alternatively, Reuven married
Sarah, the daughter (the only child) of his brother
Shimon, Reuven and Shimon died, and then their father
died - Sarah inherits her father's share).
(f) Question: If so, obviously the law is like the case of
adult and minor brothers!
(g) Answer: One might have thought, since a woman normally
does not deal with property, she did not do so for the
sake of others, it is as if she said 'I will improve my
share' - the Mishnah teaches, this is not so.
(f) (Mishnah): If she said 'This is what my husband left; I
will improve my share', she keeps her improvements.
(g) Question: This is obvious!
(h) Answer: One might have thought, because people would
praise her for toiling on behalf of the orphans, she
retracts from her stipulation and toils on behalf of them
- the Mishnah teaches, this is not so.
(a) (R. Chanina): If Levi marries off his oldest son (Kehas)
in a house (in which Levi does not live), Kehas acquires
1. This only applies to his oldest son, and only if he
marries a virgin, and only if this is his first
marriage, and only if he is the first son he marries
(b) The following is obvious: if Levi designated for him a
house that has an upper story, he acquires the house, not
the upper story.
(c) Questions: If Levi designated for him a house that has an
Achsadra (a hall in front of a house), does he acquire
the Achsadra? If he designated an outer house and an
inner house, does he also acquire the outer house?
(d) These questions are unsettled.
(e) Question (Beraisa): If Levi designated a house and house
vessels, he only acquires the vessels.
(f) Answer #1 (R. Yirmeyah): The case is, Levi used the house
as a storehouse.
(g) Answer #2 (Chachamim of Neharda'a): Even if Levi had a
dovecote there, Kehas does not acquire.
(h) Answer #3 (Rav Yehudah and Rav Papi): Even if he had a
vessel of fried fish there, Kehas does not acquire.
(i) Mar Zutra hung his sandal in the house in which he
married off his first son (so the son would not acquire);
Rav Ashi hung a cup of oil.
(j) (Mar Zutra): Chachamim made three enactments without
explaining (how they work): this is one;
1. (The second - Rav Yehudah): If a man wrote a
document giving all his property to his wife,
(surely he did not deprive his sons from inheriting,
he merely wants to ensure that his sons honor her,)
he only made her an overseer.
2. (The third - Rav): If Reuven tells Shimon in front
of Levi 'You have money of mine - give it to Levi',
Levi acquires it.
3) WHEN BROTHERS SHARE INCOME AND EXPENSES
(a) (Mishnah): If brothers inherited together and one of them
received a well-paying position, the brothers share the
(b) If a brother fell sick, he pays for his own cure.
(c) (Gemara - Beraisa): The Mishnah refers to a son
conscripted for the king's service (since normally, one
person per house is taken for this for a certain period
of time, the brother did not receive it because of his
(d) (Beraisa): One of the brothers was appointed to be tax
collector or officer: if a person from each house is
normally appointed for a certain time, they share the
1. If he got it on account of himself, he keeps the
(e) Question: The first clause is obvious!
(f) Answer: The case is, he is very sharp. One might have
thought, he got the position on account of himself - the
Beraisa teaches, this is not so.
(g) (Beraisa): If one of the brothers took 200 Zuz (of his
share of the estate) to learn Torah or a trade, the
others can say 'You will not receive food from the estate
unless you are with us'.
(h) Question: Why isn't he fed wherever he is?
(i) Answer: The reason is as Rav Huna taught, the Beraisa
1. (Rav Huna): There is a bigger blessing in the house
when more people are there (Rashbam; R. Chananel -
it is more economical when more people live
together, e.g. one lamp suffices for everyone).
(j) Question: Even after taking this into account, he should
(k) Answer: Indeed, he receives accordingly.
(l) (Mishnah): If a brother fell sick, he pays for his own
(m) (Ravin): This is only if he got sick through negligence,
but if it was Ones, they share the cost.
(n) Question: What is the case of negligence?
(o) Answer: A case like R. Chanina taught.
1. (R. Chanina): "Tzinim Pachim...Shomer Nafsho Yirchak
Mehem" - whatever befalls a person is decreed by
Heaven, except for chills and fevers (which is from
his lack of caution).
(a) (Mishnah): If the father sent Shushvinus (gifts that one
brings to a Chasan) with some of his sons, and the Chasan
returned Shushvinus (when the one who brought to him gets
married, as is the custom) after the father died, all his
sons share them, for Shushvinus can be collected in Beis
Din (like a debt);
(b) If a man sends wine and oil to his friend (who is not a
Chasan), Beis Din does not force the friend to
reciprocate, for this was mere Chesed.
(c) (Gemara) Contradiction (Beraisa): If the father sent
Shushvinus with a son, and the Chasan returned Shushvinus
after the father died, that son keeps it;
1. If Shushvinus was sent to the father, and the giver
got married after the father died (and the heirs
must return Shushvinus), they all pay for it.
(d) Answer #1 (R. Asi citing R. Yochanan): Also our Mishnah
means that the Shushvinus was sent to the father, and all
his sons must return it.
1. Objection: But the Mishnah says 'If some of the sons
Asu (i.e. were sent with Shushvinus)'!
(e) Answer #2 (Rav Asi): The Mishnah is when the father did
not stipulate, the Beraisa is when he stipulated that the
Shushvinus will return to the son who brought it (the
father gave it to him like a gift).
2. Answer: It should say, if Shushvinus *was done* to
some of the sons.
3. Question: But the Mishnah says 'And Shushvinus was
returned (to the heirs)'!
4. Answer: It means, if the *obligation* reverted to
the heirs, they all pay.
1. (Beraisa): If the father sent Shushvinus with a son,
and Shushvinus was returned (after the father died),
that son keeps it;
(f) Answer #3 (Shmuel): The Mishnah is when the son (Reuven)
who brought Shushvinus died, a brother (Shimon) did
Yibum, and Shushvinus was returned;
2. If the father sent Shushvinus without specifying,
and Shushvinus was returned, the heirs share it.
1. (Even though the Shimon inherits Reuven by himself,)
since (Shushvinus is Ra'uy, like a debt, and) a
Yavam does not inherit Ra'uy, all the brothers share
(g) Question: This implies that the one who received
Shushvinus (Ploni) must return it to the Yavam;
1. Ploni should be able to say, 'I will only return it
to rejoice with Reuven (- since he died, I am
(h) Answer (Rav Yosef): The case is, Ploni rejoiced with
Reuven for the seven days of celebration, and before he
returned the Shushvinus, Reuven died.
2. (Beraisa): In a place where the custom is to return
Kidushin money (this will be explained), we return
it; where it is not returned, we do not return it.
3. (Rav Yosef bar Aba): It is only returned when she
died (during Eirusin), not if he died.
4. Question: What is the reason?
5. Answer: She can say, 'Give me my husband, I will
rejoice with him (have Nisu'in - it is not my fault
that he died)'!
6. Likewise, Ploni should be able to say, 'I would like
to rejoice with Reuven'!