Bava Metzia 39b — the Talmud in English

, who said: They do not lower a relative to the property of a minor. It follows: A foreign man they do lower, and we are not concerned that he will claim and say: “The minor's father sold it to me,” and request that he be believed according to the law of one who has established possession of land for three years, who is believed to say, “I bought it”: Possession is not established with regard to the property of a minor, that is to say: one who eats [the produce] for three years in the presence of a minor does not thereby establish possession in his presence so as to make him believed with the claim, “I bought it from his father”— And even if he grew up

the minor after this one had already sat upon the land, and added to hold it for another three years before them, this is not possession.

And this detail too is proven from the words of Rav Huna, for if not, how do they bring a gentile down to the land of a minor? For surely there is concern that it will be in his possession when he grows up, and he will claim, “You sold it to me after you grew up, and I ate its produce for the years of possession.” And Rava added and said:

a.

And we said this only

that they do not bring a relative down to a minor’s property

with regard to paternal brothers

[a brother from the father] who comes to descend to the minor’s property, in a field that had been presumed to belong to his father until he died,

but with regard to maternal brothers

[a brother from the mother]

we have no concern

about bringing him down to land that had been presumed to belong to his father before he died, because he cannot claim an inheritance in the land, since he is not a relative of the father.

b.

And with regard to paternal brothers too, we said this

that they do not bring down a relative

only with regard to lands

[real estate],

but with regard to houses

[houses]

we have no concern,

because regarding a house he cannot claim that he came to take his share, since the neighbors know that they came for the minor’s share.

c.

And with regard to lands too, we said this

that they do not bring down the relative

only when no division-document was made

[when no deed of division was made when the father died],

but when a division-document was made, it has a public voice,

there is publicity to a division made in a document, and everyone knows that they came for the minor’s share, and not for his brother’s property.

However, the Gemara rejects Rava’s words:

That is not so

as Rava said! Rather:

It makes no difference whether paternal brothers or whether maternal brothers

they are not brought down, and although this land came to the minor from his father, and this one cannot claim that they came for his share, since he is not the father’s relative, nevertheless perhaps he will claim that it belonged to my mother, and my father, who was in possession of it, did this because of his right to consume the produce of property acquired by a woman through marriage; but when he died, the land returned to my mother, and I inherited it.

And likewise,

it makes no difference whether lands or whether houses, whether a division-document was made or whether a division-document was not made—we do not bring him down

[we do not bring him down].

An incident involving

a certain old woman who had three daughters,

who

was captured, she and one daughter;

and

the other two daughters: one of them died and left a minor child.

An incident involving an old woman who had three daughters, and she and one of her daughters were captured; and of the two remaining daughters: one died and left a minor son, and the third is here.

Abaye said: What shall we do

[how shall we deal] with the old woman’s property?

Let us place the property

of the old woman

in the hands of the sister

[let us bring down the sister who is before us to the property], in accordance with the view of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who says that they bring a relative down to the property of a captive. This is impossible, for there is concern:

perhaps

the old woman died

[perhaps the old woman died] and the captive daughter is still alive, and the minor inherits one-third of her property [together with his two aunts], or perhaps even the daughter who was captured with her died, and he inherits her together with his aunt, [with the result that he has, altogether, half of the old woman’s property],

and

thus

one does not bring a relative down to a minor’s property.

You might say:

Let us place the property in the hands of the minor

[let us place the property in the minor’s hands]?

This, too, is impossible, because

perhaps the elderly woman did not die

[perhaps the elderly woman is still alive], and the property belongs to her;

and one does not place a minor on the property of a captive.

Abaye said, therefore

we shall do as follows:

We give half to the sister

[for half of the property we bring down the sister who is before us], because in either event she may descend to it: If the old woman and the daughter died, she inherits half of the old woman’s property; and if neither of them died, or only one of them died, we bring a relative down to the property of a captive.

And

with regard to

the other half

[the second half of the property], regarding which there is concern that perhaps it belongs to the minor, since perhaps both the old woman and the daughter died,

we appoint a guardian for the minor

[we appoint a guardian for the minor].

Rava said: Since we appoint a guardian for half, we appoint a guardian for the other half as well

Rava said: Since we appoint a guardian for half, we appoint a guardian for the other half as well

[since in any event we appoint a guardian for half the property, he shall also stand over the second half of the property].

Eventually they heard that the old woman had died

[after some time they heard that the old woman had died], but they heard nothing about her daughter who had been captured with her.

Abaye said,

let us do as follows:

We give one-third to the sister

[one-third of the old woman’s property is to be given to the sister who is present before us], because it belongs to her, since she inherits one-third of the old woman’s property.

And

one

third we give to the minor

[one-third of the property is given to the minor through a guardian], since one-third of the old woman’s property belongs to him.

And the other third

[the additional third], regarding which it is uncertain whose it is—whether it belongs to the captive daughter, because she did not die, or perhaps she too died, and the third is divided between the minor and the daughter who is present—we deal with it as follows:

We give a sixth to the sister

[we bring down the sister who is present to partake of all the property, which is half of the third], because in either event she may descend to it: If her sister died, it belongs to her; and if she did not die, she is the relative fit to inherit it, whom they bring down to the property of a captive.

And

with regard to

the other sixth

[the additional sixth, which is half of the remaining third], regarding which it is uncertain whether it belongs to the minor, and one does not bring a relative down to a minor’s property,

we appoint a guardian for the minor

[we bring down a guardian for him on behalf of the minor].

Rava said:

Since we appoint a guardian for one sixth, we also appoint a guardian for the other sixth,

in accordance with Rava’s reasoning above. An incident involving

Mari bar Isak,

who

had a brother come to him from Bei Hozai

[a man came to him from the place called “Hozai,” and claimed that he was Mari bar Isak’s brother].

He said to him

that man said to Mari bar Isak:

Divide with me

[give me half of our father’s inheritance].

He said to him

Mari bar Isak to that man:

I do not know you,

I do not recognize whether you are my brother.

He came

the man came

before Rav Hisda

to ask about his judgment.

Rav Hisda said to him

Rav Hisda said to that certain man:

He has spoken well to you

Marei has spoken well to you; that is to say: there is no deceit in his words, for indeed it is possible that he does not know whether you are his brother or not, because when he departed from you, you did not yet have a seal of the beard, whereas now you do —

And similarly to

that which is stated

when Joseph’s brothers came to Egypt and stood before Joseph: “

Joseph recognized his brothers, but they did not recognize him,”

this teaches that Joseph departed

Joseph from the house of Jacob

without a seal of the beard

for he was seventeen years old,

and he came

that is to say: when Joseph’s brothers came to him, he was

with a seal of the beard;

and therefore they did not know that he was Joseph, whereas Joseph recognized his brothers, who had seals of the beard when he departed from them.

And therefore

Rav Hisda said to him

Rav Hisda said to that man:

Go, bring witnesses that you are his brother

go and bring witnesses that you are his brother.

That man said to him

that man said to Rav Hisda:

I have witnesses, but they fear him, for he is a violent man

I have witnesses who testify to our brotherhood, but unfortunately they are afraid to testify against Mari, for he is a violent man.

When Rav Hisda heard this,

Rav Hisda said

Rav Hisda

to him

to Mari: If so,

go, you, bring

those

witnesses

whom the brother brought, so that they should testify

that he is not your brother

go, you, and bring those witnesses whom your brother says testify about your brotherhood; go and bring them so that they testify as you do—or bring other witnesses.

Mari said to him

Mari said to Rav Hisda: But is

the law so,

and is it not established for us:

the one who seeks to extract from his fellow bears the proof,

and according to the law, this man who comes to extract from me should bring proof that he is my brother; why, then, are you placing the obligation of proof upon me!?

Rav Hisda said to Mari

Rav Hisda said to Mari:

Thus do I judge you and all the violent men like you

thus do I judge you and all the violent men like you!

Mari said to him

Mari said to Rav Hisda—and if I am violent and control the witnesses whom my brother brought—

ultimately,

is it that

the witnesses will come but will not testify

like me [will the witnesses not come to testify like me because of their fear of me]? And if so, what benefit is there in bringing witnesses who will testify like me!?

Rav Hisda said to him

Rav Hisda said: I am not concerned about this, for

they will not do two things

they will not do two things: refrain from testifying for the one who asks them to testify for him, and additionally testify in the opposite manner for the benefit of the defendant.

In the end, witnesses came that he was his brother

after some time, witnesses came who testified to that man’s brotherhood; and the judgment was issued to give him half of the property.

Mari’s brother said to him

Mari’s brother said to Rav Hisda:

Let him also divide with me the orchards and plantations that he planted

let my brother also give me half of the vineyards and the groves of trees that he planted in the field jointly belonging to the two of us.

Rav Hisda said to Mari

Rav Hisda said to Mari:

Your brother has spoken well to you

your brother,

for

this

we learned

in Bava Batra:

If he left

the father

adult sons and minor sons, and the adults improved the property, they improved it for the middle

the improvement is divided between the adults who worked and the minors who did not work.