1)THE DIVISION OF THE LAND
(a)Question: Was Eretz Yisrael divided among the tribes, or among the people?
(b)Answer #1: "Bein Rav li'M'at (each tribe will receive an equal portion)".
(c)Answer #2 (Beraisa): In the future, Eretz Yisrael will be divided among 13 tribes. Originally, it was divided only among 12;
1.It was divided only according to the value of the land - "Bein Rav li'M'at".
i.R. Yehudah says, a field in Yehudah (big enough to sow) one Se'ah is equal to a five Sa'os field in Galil.
2.It was divided only by lottery - "Ach b'Goral".
3.It was divided only with the Urim v'Tumim (stones on the Kohen Gadol's garment on which letters would light up to answer questions) - "Al Pi ha'Goral"
i.Elazar was wearing the Urim v'Tumim. Yehoshua and all of Yisrael were in front of him. One box contained the names of the tribes. Another box contained the names of the portions of Eretz Yisrael.
ii.With Divine inspiration, Elazar predicted which tribe would be selected, and which portion, e.g. Zevulun, and the portion by Ako. He then pulled these from the respective boxes.
4.The division in this world is unlike the division in the world to come.
i.In this world, one who gets a grain field does not get an orchard, and vice-versa. In the world to come, everyone will receive a share in the mountain, plain and valley - "Sha'ar Reuven Echad Sha'ar Yehudah Echad...";
ii.(In the world to come), Hash-m will make the division himself - "v'Eleh Machlekosam Ne'um Hash-m".
(d)(Summation of answer): The Beraisa says that it was divided only among 12. This shows that it was divided to the tribes.
(e)Question: The Beraisa says that Eretz Yisrael will be divided among 13 tribes. To whom is the extra portion?
(f)Answer (Rav Chisda): It is for the Nasi - "veha'Oved ha'Ir Ya'avduhu (they will give to him an inheritance) mi'Kol Shivtei Yisrael".
(g)Question (Rav Papa): Perhaps they just temporarily allow him to use their land!
(h)Answer (Abaye): "Veha'Nosar la'Nasi ..."
(i)(Beraisa): It was divided only according to value - "Bein Rav li'M'at".
(j)Question: Regarding what was this taught?
1.Suggestion: It refers to the different qualities of land.
2.Rejection: We do not discuss fools (who accept money in place of the proper amount of land)!
(k)Answer: Rather, a field closer (to the Mikdash) is worth more. (Chasam Sofer 1:29 DH v'Ye'ayen - at first, the Mishkan was in Shilo, and whoever was closer to Shilo compensated those further away. When Yerushalayim was chosen over 400 years later, those closer to Yerushalayim compensated those further away.)
(l)Tana'im argue about this.
1.(Beraisa - R. Eliezer): Those who received closer portions gave monetary compensation to those that received distant portions.
2.R. Yehoshua says, compensation was given in land.
3.R. Yehudah says, a field in Yehudah (big enough to sow) one Se'ah is equal to a field of five Se'im in Galil.
(m)(Beraisa): It was divided only by lottery - "Ach b'Goral."
(n)(Beraisa): "Ach b'Goral" excludes Kalev and Yehoshua.
(o)Question: In what sense are they excluded?
1.Suggestion: They did not receive anything.
2.Rejection: They received even portions of others (the Meraglim), and all the more so they received what was due to them!
(p)Answer: Rather, they did not receive according to the lottery. Rather, Hash-m declared what they received.
1."Al Pi Hash-m Nosnu Lo Es ha'Ir... Timnas Serach."
i.Contradiction: Elsewhere, it is called "Cheres"!
ii.Answer #1 (R. Elazar): At first, its fruits were as hard as earthenware (Cheres). After Yehoshua received it, they were so juicy that they could spoil (Masri'ach).
iii.Answer #2: At first, its fruits were juicy, and would spoil. After Yehoshua received it, they would never spoil, like earthenware.
2."Va'Yitenu l'Chalev Es Chevron..."
3.Question: Chevron is a city of refuge (it belongs to the Leviyim)!
4.Answer (Abaye): Kalev received the surrounding towns - "v'Es Sede ha'Ir v'Es Chatzereha Nosenu l'Kalev."
2)SONS INHERIT MORE THAN DAUGHTERS
(a)(Mishnah): A son and a daughter inherit the same way, except that a (firstborn) son receives a double portion in his father's property, but not in his mother's property;
(b)Daughters are fed from the father's property, but not from the mother's property.
(c)(Gemara) Question: What does it mean 'a son and a daughter inherit the same way?'
1.Suggestion: They split the inheritance.
2.Rejection (Mishnah): A son inherits before a daughter.
(d)Answer #1 (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): A son and a daughter both inherit property that is Ra'uy (destined) to come, just like they inherit property owned by the parent at the time of death.
(e)Objection #1: We already learned that in a Mishnah! Tzelafchad's daughters received three portions: Tzelafchad's own portion, his share of his father's portion (even though it was only Ra'uy)...
(f)Objection #2: Why does our Mishnah say 'except'? (This is unrelated to what came before!)
(g)Answer #2 (Rav Papa): Both a son and a daughter (i.e. when there are no sons and she inherits) inherit the extra share of the firstborn (if their father was a firstborn).
(h)Objection #1: We already learned that in a Mishnah! Tzelafchad's daughters received... and Tzelafchad's extra share of his father's portion, for he was a firstborn.
(i)Objection #2: Why does it say 'except'? (Also daughters do not receive a double portion in the mother's property, just like sons!)
(j)Answer #3 (Rav Ashi): A son among sons is like a daughter among daughters. If the parent said that he/she should inherit everything, this takes effect.
(k)Objection #1: This is like R. Yochanan ben Brokah. A coming Mishnah teaches this!
1.(Mishnah - R. Yochanan ben Brokah): If Reuven said 'Shimon should inherit me', if Shimon could inherit him, it takes effect; if not, not.
2.Suggestion: Perhaps our Mishnah teaches it Stam (anonymously), to teach that this is the Halachah.
3.Rejection: If a Stam Mishnah is followed by a Mishnah in which Tana'im argue, the Halachah does not (necessarily) follow the Stam Mishnah.
(l)Objection #2: Why does it say 'except'?
(m)Answer #4 (Mar bar Rav Ashi): A daughter (when there are no sons) inherits like a son would in the property of the mother and father, except that a (firstborn) son receives a double portion in the property of the father, and not in the property of the mother.