Bava Batra 152a — the Talmud in English

It was stated: A deathbed gift in which an acquisition is written -

In the preceding sugya it was explained that a deathbed gift of all [his property]

does not require an acquisition. And the amoraim disagreed whether, nevertheless, if he was not satisfied with a statement alone but added an acquisition—whether in a document or an acquisition without a document—how to interpret his intention:

At Rav's academy,

the students of Rav's beit-midrash,

in Rav's name, say: He mounted it on two acquisitions!

His intention was to give the gift two powers, as will be explained below.

And Shmuel said: I do not know what I should decide concerning it.

I have a doubt whether his intention was to transfer it by a statement or by an acquisition.

And the Gemara explains their disagreement:

At Rav's academy, in Rav's name, they say: He mounted it on two acquisitions.

His intention was to give his gift two powers, so that, on the one hand,

it is like a gift of a healthy person,

that it has the power of a gift of a healthy person, as will be explained,

and it is like a deathbed gift,

that it also has the power of a deathbed gift -

It is like a gift of a healthy person -

for if he recovered, he cannot retract.

Even though with every deathbed gift he can retract, here he wants the acquisition to take effect during his lifetime, and he cannot retract.

It is like a deathbed gift -

it has the power of a deathbed gift,

for if he said, “His loan to so-and-so,” it is his loan to so-and-so.

For he can transfer a loan debt to another person, even though by an ordinary acquisition it is impossible to transfer a debt to another person and as was explained above, 148a].

And Shmuel said: I do not know what I should decide concerning it.

For the donor's intention is not clear:

perhaps he completed the transfer to him only through a document,

perhaps the donor wants the acquisition to take effect after death, through the acquisition of a document or any other acquisition,

and there is no document after death.

That is, ordinary acquisitions cannot take effect after death, since at that time the donor's power over the gift lapses. Only with a deathbed gift was there a special enactment that he can transfer it after death. Therefore, Shmuel holds that he does not acquire at all, since perhaps he intended to transfer it through the acquisition of a healthy person after death.

And they raise a contradiction between Rav and Rav, and between Shmuel and Shmuel.

The Gemara asks that Rav and Shmuel contradict their statements.

For Ravin sent in the name of Rabbi Abahu: Know that Rabbi Elazar sent to the Exile in the name of our teacher,

who is Rav:

A dangerously ill person who said, “Write and give one hundred dinars to so-and-so,” and died—they do not write and give, lest he completed the transfer to him only through a document, and there is no document after death.

And it is proven that Rav holds that if there is an acquisition, his intention is that it should take effect after death. Yet here Rav holds that his intention is that it should be like a gift of a healthy person with regard to retraction.

And Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel: They write and give.

For his intention is to improve its power, whereas above he said that it is ineffective, lest he transferred it after death.

The contradiction between Rav and Rav is difficult. The contradiction between Shmuel and Shmuel is difficult.

The Gemara answers:

The contradiction between Rav and Rav is not difficult.

This

is where they acquired it from him during his lifetime, and therefore certainly his intention was to strengthen the gift.

This

is where it is speaking of a case

where they did not acquire it from him,

but he only said, “Write and give,” and therefore it is possible that his intention was that the acquisition should be after death.

The contradiction between Shmuel and Shmuel is not difficult: it is when he improves its power.

What Shmuel said, “They write and give,” is speaking of a case where he writes language that improves its power and adds to the deathbed gift. In truth, he intends to transfer it in accordance with the enactment of the Sages, by a statement, but he adds an acquisition in order to reveal that he is giving wholeheartedly.

And the Gemara continues to ask about Shmuel:

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak sat behind Rava, and Rava sat before Rav Naḥman,

Rava was sitting before Rav Naḥman,

he was asking him,

and asked him:

Is it so,

that

Shmuel said, “Perhaps he completed the transfer to him only through a document, and there is no document after death”?