Bava Batra 112b (קיב:) — the Talmud in English

The Gemara raises an objection:

If so,

a woman who inherits portions from two tribes would have to marry a man whose father is from her father's tribe and whose mother is from her mother's tribe. Why, then, is it stated in the Torah, “to one of the family of the tribe of her father,”

is this “to one of the family of the tribe of her father and her mother” needed?

The Gemara answers:

If it were written in this manner, I would say even the reverse,

[that his father is from her mother's tribe and his mother is from her father's tribe],

it teaches us

that we require him to be affiliated with her father's tribe—that is, his father's tribe must be the same as her father's tribe. And from the fact that it is written, “and he shall not transfer,” we also infer that his mother must be from her mother's tribe. This is as above.

The Gemara explains that although we established the verses, “And inheritance shall not pass from tribe to tribe,” and “And inheritance shall not pass ... to another tribe,” as referring to the son's transfer of the inheritance, thereby making him liable for two prohibitions, nevertheless we still find beraitot in which

it was taught

[that they expounded] the first verse

in

the

transfer

of the inheritance through the inheritance of

the son, whereas it was taught

the second verse

in

the

transfer

of the inheritance through the inheritance of

the husband.

For it was taught in a beraita:

“And inheritance shall not pass to the children of Israel from tribe to tribe,” in

the

transfer

of the inheritance through the inheritance of

the son the verse is speaking.

We examine this:

You say that this refers to the transfer through the son; or is it instead in

the

transfer

of the inheritance through the inheritance of

the husband?

Rather,

when it says, “And inheritance shall not pass from tribe to another tribe,” it is referring to the transfer through the husband ,

And if so,

how do I understand “And inheritance shall not pass to the children of Israel from tribe to tribe”? The verse is speaking of the transfer through the son.

But he does not find it satisfactory to say that Scripture changed its wording in order to make him liable for two prohibitions, as above, since wherever there is an opportunity to expound, we expound, and we do not establish the verse as referring to redundant prohibitions.