Bava Batra 116a — the Talmud in English

He said to him: Fool! ![](pamud.bmp "

Exact page location")

Shall our complete Torah not be like your idle conversation:

for your kal va-chomer can indeed be easily rejected!

What is there concerning his son’s daughter, whose power is stronger

to inherit her grandfather? Even

in the place of the brothers ,

would you say this of his daughter, whose power is weaker

and who does not inherit her father

in the place

where there are

brothers?

And they defeated them.

And that day

on which they defeated them was the twenty-fourth of Tevet, and

they made it a holiday.

Further concerning the inheritance of a son’s daughter:

It is stated in the section of the concubine at Gibeah (Judges 21:17):

“And they said: An inheritance of survivors for Benjamin, and a tribe shall not be blotted out from Israel.”

Rabbi Isaac of the house of Rabbi Ami said: This teaches that they stipulated concerning the tribe of Benjamin that a son’s daughter should not inherit together with the brothers [the son’s brothers],

but rather the brothers inherit all the property of their father, and even the portion of their deceased brother.

And they instituted this arrangement because after the incident of the concubine at Gibeah, only six hundred men remained from the tribe of Benjamin; and if a woman were to come to inherit and marry a son of another tribe, it would turn out that much of the inheritance of the tribe of Benjamin would be diminished . Therefore they instituted that the son’s daughter should not inherit according to her law. For the abandonment of the court is abandonment .

Rabbi Yohanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yohai: Anyone who does not leave a son to inherit from him, the Holy One, blessed be He, is filled with wrath against him. [That is, He hates him] .

That is, He hates him.

And from where do we know this?

It is written here, “And you shall pass over his inheritance,” and it is written there,

(Zephaniah 1:15)

“A day of wrath is that day,”

(Psalms 55:20)

“for there are no changes

[the expression is from “changes,” meaning one who fills his place]

for them, and they do not fear God.”

That is to say, one who has no son who fills his place, and with whom “and you shall pass over his inheritance” cannot be fulfilled, his day of death is a “day of wrath.”

Now, they disagreed concerning this statement:

Rabbi Yohanan and Rabbi Joshua ben Levi. One said: Anyone who does not leave a son; and one said: Anyone who does not leave a student.

But we did not know which of them said this, and which of them said that.

And we resolve it:

Conclude

that

Rabbi Yohanan

is the one

who said

“a student” ,

For Rabbi Yohanan said: “This is the bone of my tenth son” [When Rabbi Yohanan would go to comfort bitterly bereaved mourners, he would bring with him a tooth

that had remained to him from one of his sons who had died, and show it to the mourner and say to him, “This is what remained to me from my ten sons” ] ], that is, he did not leave behind him a son to inherit from him.

And if he had held that one who did not leave a son to inherit from him is called “one who does not fear God,” he would not have said this, so as not to publicize his sins. For it is written: “Fortunate is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.”

And from here

conclude that Rabbi Yohanan is the one who said “a student.”

And since Rabbi Yohanan said “a student,” Rabbi Joshua ben Levi said “a son.”

And the Gemara raises an objection:

But Rabbi Joshua ben Levi did not go to the house of mourning, but only to the house of one who had died without

sons,

[Rabbi Joshua did not go to the house of the dead to mourn for him, in order not to interrupt his study, but to one who had died without sons],

as it is written, “Weep bitterly for the one who departs,” and Rav Judah said in the name of Rav: For one who departs without a male son,

and if he were considered “one who does not fear God,” he certainly would not have grieved for him more than for other dead people?

Rather, Rabbi Joshua ben Levi is the one who said “a student.”

And since Rabbi Joshua ben Levi is the one who said “a student,” Rabbi Yohanan said “a son.”

And if so,

there is a difficulty from Rabbi Yohanan against Rabbi Yohanan,

as above?

And the Gemara answers:

It is not difficult. This

that he said, “This is the bone of my tenth son,”

was his own

view; that is, he himself held like Rabbi Joshua, who said “a student.”

This

that he said “son,”

was the

words of

his teacher.

But he himself did not hold like him.

(A mnemonic: the hadad, the poor man, and the sage ):

Rabbi Pinhas ben Hama expounded: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And Hadad heard in Egypt that David had slept with his fathers, and that Joab the commander of the army had died”?

Why was “sleeping” said concerning David, while “death” was said concerning Joab?

And Rabbi Pinhas explains:

David, who left a son, was described with sleeping. Joab, who did not leave a son, was described with death.

And the Gemara raises an objection: But

did Joab not leave a son?

For it is written, “Of the sons of Joab, Obadiah son of Jehiel,”

apparently, he had sons?

Rather, David, who left a son like himself, was described with sleeping. Joab, who did not leave a son like himself, was described with death .

Incidentally, additional expositions of Rabbi Pinhas ben Hama were brought here:

Rabbi Pinhas ben Hama expounded: Poverty is difficult within a person’s household

more than fifty blows.

As it is stated

in Job,

“Have pity on me, have pity on me, you my friends, for the hand of God has touched me.”

That is to say, Job complained that the hand of God had struck him. And “hand” means fifty blows, for concerning Egypt, where it is written “the finger of God,” there were ten blows; therefore, “the hand of God,” which has five fingers, means fifty blows.

And his friends said to him, “Beware, do not turn to iniquity, for you have chosen this over poverty.”

That is to say, do not question the attribute of justice, for there are those who suffer more than you; for these fifty blows are better for you than poverty. For you have silver, gold, and land, and nevertheless the Holy One, blessed be He, still has more mercy on you than on many people who are poor .

And from here there is proof that poverty is more difficult than fifty blows.

Further,

Rabbi Pinhas bar Hama expounded: Whoever has

distress or

a sick person within his household should go to a sage and request mercy for him.

As it is stated: “The wrath of a king

[distress that came to him as anger from the Omnipresent]

is messengers of death

[a sick person inclined toward death],

but a wise man

will atone for it

[wipe it away] .”

We learned in the Mishna:

“This is the rule: Whoever precedes in inheritance, his descendants precede, and the father precedes all his descendants.”

Rami bar Hama asked: The father’s father and the father’s brother, such as Abraham and Ishmael,

who come to inherit

Esau’s property ,

which of them precedes ?

Rava said: Come and hear: The father precedes all his descendants.

And

we find it difficult: Did Rami bar Hama not know an explicit Mishna?