[a - 20 lines; b - 42 lines]

1)[line 1] HACHA TARTEI V'HACHA CHADA- here [in our attempt to prove that a son is a closer relative than a brother] there are two [proofs (namely, from Yi'ud and Sedei Achuzah)], and here [in our attempt to prove that a brother is a closer relative than a son] there is [only] one [proof (namely, from that which only a brother can perform Yibum)]

2)[line 2] KA KAIMA LEI L'TANA- the Tana established [that it is a son and not a brother whose redemption of the field allows it to return to its original owner at Yovel (see Erchin 25b)]

3)[line 4] MELAMED SHEHA'AV KODEM L'VAS- this teaches [us] that one's father [should inherit his estate] before his daughter. At this point, the Gemara suggests the following order of inheritance: son, father, brother, daughter. This is because there is no Torah law in which a daughter takes the place of her father, whereas a brother takes the place of his brother in the case of Yibum (RASHBAM as explained by the MAHARSHA).

4a)[line 6] KEIVAN DEL'INYAN YIBUM BEN U'VAS KI HADADEI NINHU- since regarding Yibum a son and a daughter are equal [in that the brother of one who dies having left only a daughter does not have a Mitzvah of Yibum (see Insights)]

b)[line 7] L'INYAN NACHALAH NAMI BEN U'VAS KI HADADEI NINHU- regarding inheritance a son and a daughter are equal [in that they both inherit before the father of the deceased]. The reasoning behind this is that just as that which there is no Mitzvah of Yibum when the deceased leaves a son demonstrates that a son is a closer relative than a brother (see Background to 108:21b), so too that which there is no Mitzvah of Yibum when the deceased leaves a daughter demonstrates that a daughter is a closer relative than a brother.

5)[line 11] ?MI'KO'ACH MAN KA ASU?- through whose influence do they come [to inherit]?

6)[line 12] , ?KA'I AV, KA YARSEI ACHEI HA'AV?- [is it therefore logical that if] the father [of the deceased] is alive, the father's brothers should inherit [him]?

7)[line 13] !V'HA KERA'EI LAV HACHI KESIVEI!- but the verses (Bamidbar 27:8-11) are not written in this [order, and we should therefore say that although it is illogical, the father inherits only after his own brothers since the Torah writes the word "She'ero" at the end of the order of inheritance]!

8)[line 14] KERA'EI SHE'LO K'SIDRAN KESIVEI- (the Gemara answers) the verses are written out of order [as evidenced by the derivation of "ha'Karov Karov Kodem (see Background to 108:15)]

9)[line 15] HAI TANA MAISI LEI ME'HACHA- that [other] Tana derives (lit. brings) [that which the father of the deceased inherits him before the brothers of the deceased do] from here (i.e., the following source, which differs from that of the Beraisa cited on 108b that we have been discussing until this point)

10)[line 17]"... - , [ - .]""... ISH KI YAMUS U'VEN EIN LO, [VEHA'AVARTEM ES NACHALASO L'VITO.]"- "If a man should die and he has no son, [then you shall pass his inheritance on to his daughter]" (Bamidbar 27:8). The word "veha'Avertem" - "then you shall pass on" - differs from the verb used in the subsequent verses. In those verses the verb "u'Nesatem" - "then you shall give" - is used (Bamidbar 27:9-11).

11)[line 17] B'MAKOM BAS ATAH MA'AVIR NACHALAH MIN HA'AV- in the place that a daughter [is in line to receive the inheritance] you should divert the inheritance from the father [and give it to the daughter]. Although according to this Tana the word "She'ero" does not refer to a father and the verses are written in order, it is still obvious that a father should receive his son's inheritance at some point. This can be inferred through the inverse of the logic expressed by the Gemara on lines 11-13, as follows: if the father's brothers are in line to receive the inheritance, which is clearly stated in the Torah (Bamidbar 27:10), then certainly a father should be in line to receive the inheritance (SIFRI to Pinchas #134, cited by the RASHBAM)!

109b----------------------------------------109b

12)[line 1] V'IY ATAH MA'AVIR NACHALAH MIN HA'AV AFILU B'MAKOM BAS- but you should not divert the inheritance from the father even when the daughter would otherwise be in line to receive the inheritance. This is not directly implied by the verse. Rather, the Gemara suggests that it is possible that the verse merely implies that the inheritance should be given to the daughter of the deceased in place of the brother of the deceased. We can then conclude on our own that the father should be in line to inherit before either of them, since he is the closest of the three to the deceased (RASHBAM; see also TOSFOS to 109a DH b'Makom and DH v'Iy, and DH v'Eima).

13)[line 4] ZO ISHTO- this refers to his wife. A wife is described as "Basar Echad" - "one flesh" - with her husband (Bereishis 2:24), which implies that she is a very close relative of her husband. Furthermore, the word "She'erah" is used in the description of a husband's duties toward his wife (Shemos 21:10).

14)[line 7] B'CHULAN NE'EMAR BA'HEN NESINAH- the term used in all of [the other verses in the discussion of inheritance (Bamidbar 27:9-11)] is "giving"

15)[line 9] EIN LECHA SHE'MA'AVIR NACHALAH MI'SHEVET L'SHEVET- you will not find any that pass an inheritance [that they received] from [a member of] one tribe to [the member of] another tribe [to whom they bequeath it]

16)[line 10] HO'IL U'VENAH U'VA'ALAH YORSHIN OSAH- since her son and her husband (who may well be from a different tribe than her father) inherit her. According to this opinion, the word "She'ero" teaches that one inherits his mother as well as his wife.

17)[line 11]"[ - ;] .""[ERVAS ACHOS AVICHA LO SEGALEI;] SHE'ER AVICHA HI."- "[Do not uncover the nakedness of your father's sister;] she is your father's relative" (Vayikra 18:12). This verse prohibits one from having an incestuous relationship with his paternal aunt. Although the term "She'er" does not directly refer to one's father, it is written in conjunction with the word "Avicha".

18)[line 11]"[ - ;] - .]""[ERVAS ACHOS IMCHA LO SEGALEI;] SHE'ER IMCHA HI."- "[Do not uncover the nakedness of your mother's sister;] she is your mother's relative" (Vayikra 18:13). This verse prohibits one from having an incestuous relationship with his maternal aunt. Although the term "She'er" does not directly refer to one's mother, it is written in conjunction with the word "Imcha".

19)[line 13]"[- , - ] , ...""[V'IM EIN ACHIM L'AVIV, U'NESATEM ES NACHALASO LI'SHE'ERO HA'KAROV EILAV] MI'MISHPACHTO, V'YARASH OSAH ..."- "[And if his father has no brothers, then you should give his estate to his relative who is closest to him] from his family, and he shall inherit it ..." (Bamidbar 27:11). From this verse it is clear that only those who are termed one's "family" inherit his estate.

20)[line 14] ; MISHPACHAS AV KERUYAH MISHPACHAH; MISHPACHAS EM EINAH KERUYAH MISHPACHAH- one's family on his father's side is termed "family" [for the purposes of inheritance]; one's family on his mother's side is not termed "family" [for the purposes of inheritance]

21)[line 15]"[, - - -] ...""[SE'U ES ROSH KOL ADAS BNEI YISRAEL] L'MISHPECHOSAM L'VEIS AVOSAM ..."- "[Take a census (lit. lift the heads) of all of the congregation of Bnei Yisrael] according to their families of their father's houses ..." (Bamidbar 1:2). From that which the verse stresses that the families referred to are those on the father's side, we see that only "Mishpachas Av Keruyah Mishpachah".

22)[line 17]"- , ; , -.""VA'YEHI NA'AR MI'BEIS LECHEM YEHUDAH, MI'MISHPACHAS YEHUDAH; V'HU LEVI, V'HU GAR SHAM." (PESEL MICHAH - The Idol of Michah)

(a)Michah was a Jew who left Mitzrayim and arrived in Eretz Yisrael. Chazal teach that he carried through the Yam Suf either an actual Pesel - an idol - that he had had in Mitzrayim, or the golden plate with the name of Hash-m inscribed upon it that Moshe had used to raise the coffin of Yosef from the Nile River that Michah later used to animate the Golden Calf (Sanhedrin 103b). (In Shoftim 17 it appears that Pesel Michah was smelted and formed in Eretz Yisrael from coins that Michah had first stolen from and then returned to his mother. The VILNA GAON suggests that according to the suggestion in Sanhedrin that Michah carried an idol with him through the Yam Suf, it was not an actual idol but rather a spiritual defect that would later cause him to construct an idol.)

(b)At first, Michah's son served as the priest for his idol. Michah subsequently recruited another priest, however. "There was a youth from Beis Lechem of Yehudah, from the family of Yehudah; he was a Levi, and he lived there" (Shoftim 17:7). This youth agreed to serve as the priest for Pesel Michah. Chazal teach that the youth, whose name was Yehonasan, was none other than the grandson of Moshe Rabeinu. He took the job only because he desired wealth; he did not actually believe in or serve the idol itself.

(c)The city of Layish, where Pesel Michah was set up, was eventually conquered by the tribe of Dan, who renamed the city Dan. They retained the idol, however, along with the services of Yehonasan and his sons as priests. The situation remained thus until Sancheriv (see Background to Gitin 57:114) sent the Ten Tribes into Exile (Shoftim 17-18).

(d)The SEDER HA'DOROS maintains that it was Pesel Michah that Menasheh (see below, entry #28) set up in the Beis ha'Mikdash.

23)[line 19] ALMA MI'LEVI ASI- we see that he came from [the tribe of] Levi

23)[line 23]; LO; GAVRA DI'SHEMEI LEVI- no; he was a man whose name was Levi

24)[line 24]"[VA'YOMER MICHAH,] 'ATAH YADATI KI YEITIV HASH-M LI, KI HAYAH LI HA'LEVI L'CHOHEN.'"- "[And Michah said,] 'Now I know that Hash-m has favored me, for I have a Levi to act as a priest" (Shoftim 17:13). Our Gemara contends that it does not seem likely that Michah would have been pleased with his new priest simply because his name was Levi.

25)[line 25] IN; D'ISRAMI LEI GAVRA D'SHMEI LEVI- (the Gemara answers) indeed; [he was pleased] that he chanced upon a man whose name was Levi

26)[line 27]"[ - -,] - - [- .]""[VA'YAKIMU LA'HEM BNEI DAN ES HA'PASEL,] VI'HONASAN BEN GERSHOM BEN MENASHEH HU U'VANAV HAYU CHOHANIM L'SHEVET HA'DANI [AD YOM GELOS HA'ARETZ.]"- "[And the sons of Dan erected the idol for themselves,] and Yehonasan son of Gershom son of Menasheh and his sons served as priests for [the idol of] the tribe of Dan until the day that the land was exiled" (Shoftim 18:30). See above, entry #22.

27)[line 31] MA'ASEH MENASHEH - The Wicked King Menasheh

(a)Menasheh was the son of the righteous King Chizkiyah. A direct descendant of David ha'Melech, he was the longest reigning king of Yehudah; his reign lasted for fifty-five years. His reign was marked by evil and terror. He murdered so many innocent Jews that "he filled Yerushalayim from one end to the other [with blood]" (Melachim II 21:16). Among those murdered by Menasheh was his own grandfather, Yeshayah ha'Navi. Menasheh actively caused idolatry to spread throughout Yehudah and went so far as to place an idol in the Beis ha'Mikdash. This was among the chief reasons why Hash-m destroyed His temple four generations later.

(b)Our Gemara equates the actions of Yehonasan, who served as a priest to an idol, with those of the wicked Menasheh.

28)[line 31] TELA'O HA'KASUV BI'MENASHEH- the verse attributes (lit. hangs) his [lineage] to Menasheh (and the "Nun" is "hanging"). Although Menasheh would not yet be born for many centuries, the verse was clearly written with Ru'ach ha'Kodesh (Divine Inspiration). It is fascinating to note that according to the SEDER HA'DOROS, the idol erected by Menasheh in the Beis ha'Mikdash was none other than Pesel Michah.

29)[line 33] TOLIN ES HA'KALKALAH B'MEKULKAL- we attribute corruption (in this case, that which Yehonasan served as the priest to an idol) to he who is corrupt (in this case, Menasheh)

31)[line 34]"[- , ' ?'] - - , .""[V'LO ATZAVO AVIV MI'YAMAV, LEIMOR, 'MADU'A KACHA ASISA?'] V'GAM HU TOV TO'AR ME'OD, V'OSO YALDAH ACHAREI AVSHALOM." (The Rebellious Sons of King David)

(a)Avshalom was the son of David ha'Melech. He rebelled against his father and drove him from Yerushalayim. The rebellion was subsequently quashed and Avshalom killed. David, who never lost his love for Avshalom, mourned the loss of his son bitterly (Shmuel II 15-19).

(b)Adoniyahu was a younger son of David ha'Melech. When David became old and neared death, Adoniyahu felt that he was the logical successor to the throne. The verse gives us additional information about Adoniyahu: "[And his father had never rebuked him, saying, 'Why have you acted in this way?'] And he too was very handsome, and his mother bore him after Avshalom" (Melachim I 1:6). Adoniyahu gathered great public support for his bid to become the next king of Yisrael.

(c)Nasan ha'Navi and Bas Sheva, mother of Shlomo, informed David ha'Melech of Adoniyahu's plans. David responded by publicly crowning Shlomo as his successor. After David's death, Shlomo sensed that Adoniyahu was attempting to regain a claim to the crown in a roundabout manner, and he had him put to death (Melachim I 1-2).

32)[line 35] , !VA'HALO ADONIYAH BEN CHAGIS, V'AVSHALOM BEN MA'ACHAH!- [why does the verse imply that the same woman birthed both Avshalom and Adoniyahu?] Adoniyahu was the son [a woman by the name of] Chagis, and Avshalom was the son of [a woman by the name of] Ma'achah!

30)[line 37] L'OLAM YIDBAK ADAM B'TOVIM- one should be sure to marry into a family of those who have displayed fine qualities (lit. attach himself to good people)

31)[line 38]NASA- he married

32)[line 38]YISRO- the father-in-law of Moshe, who, prior to his conversion to Judaism and full acceptance of Hash-m, had served as a priest to idols for many years

33)[line 39]AMINADAV- a distinguished great-great-grandson of Yehudah; his son, Nachshon, served as the Nasi (leader) of Yehudah and was the first to enter the Yam Suf, causing it to split

34)[line 39] ?PINCHAS LAV MI'YISRO ASI?- did Pinchas not descend from Yisro [as well]?

35)[line 39]" - - , [ - ...]""V'ELAZAR BEN AHARON LAKACH LO MI'BNOS PUTI'EL LO L'ISHAH, [VA'TELED LO ES PINCHAS ...]"- "And Elazar son of Aharon took a wife for himself from the daughters of Puti'el, [and she bore him Pinchas ...]" (Shemos 6:25).

36)[line 40] "PITEM AGALIM L'AVODAH ZARAH- he fattened calves [as sacrifices] to idols

37)[line 41] PITPET B'YITZRO- he belittled [and conquered] his [evil] inclination [when the wife of Potifar attempted to seduce him]

38)[line 41] SHEVATIM MEVAZIM OSO- the tribes humiliated him

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES ON THIS DAF