1)

(a)What does the Tana Kama in the Beraisa extrapolate from the word "mi'Matos" (in the Pasuk in Mas'ei "ve'Chol Bas Yoreshes Nachalah mi'Matos B'nei Yisrael")?

(b)Why does the Isur of 'Hasavah' (moving the inheritance from one tribe to another) not apply in this case?

(c)And from where does the Tana learn that a son ...

1. ... inherits his mother too?

2. ... takes precedence over a daughter in his mother's inheritance?

(d)On what basis do we need a Pasuk to teach us that a son inherits his mother? Why might we have thought otherwise?

1)

(a)The Tana Kama in the Beraisa extrapolates from the word "mi'Matos" (in the Pasuk in Mas'ei "ve'Chol Bas Yoreshes Nachalah mi'Matos Bnei Yisrael") that a daughter inherits from two tribes which means that, assuming her father is from one tribe, and her mother, from another, she inherits them both.

(b)The Isur of 'Hasavah' (moving the inheritance from one tribe to another) does not apply in this case because it was confined to the generation that entered Eretz Yisrael, which affected no-one other than the daughters of Tzelofchad, as we will learn later]).

(c)The Tana learns that a son ...

1. ... inherits his mother too from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from a father, whom the son inherits even though the daughter (his sister) does not; certainly, there where a daughter does inherit, he will inherit, too.

2. ... takes precedence over a daughter in his mother's inheritance from the same source, because just as there, he takes precedence, so too, will he take precedence here.

(d)We need a Pasuk to teach us that a son inherits his mother, because we would otherwise have thought that it is a 'Gezeiras ha'Kasuv' (a Torah decree) for a son to inherit his father, and a daughter, her mother.

2)

(a)Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Yosi, quoting Rebbi Zecharyah ben ha'Katzav disagree with the Tana Kama. What does he say?

(b)Why does he not extend the 'Kal va'Chomer' from the property of a father to this point too?

(c)We learn the principle of 'Dayo' from the episode in Beha'aloscha, concerning the Tzara'as of Miriam, who was sent out of the camp for seven days. What is the source for the seven days?

(d)What makes us think that she ought to have been sent out of the camp for fourteen days?

(e)So what does 'Dayo' teach us?

2)

(a)Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Yosi quoting Rebbi Zecharyah ben ha'Katzav, disagree with the Tana Kama. He rules that when it comes to a mother's property, a son and a daughter are equal.

(b)He does not extend the 'Kal va'Chomer' from the property of a father to this point too because of the principle 'Dayo', which teaches us that since we learn a son inheriting his mother from a daughter, he can only be like her, but not better than her.

(c)We learn the principle of 'Dayo' from the episode in Beha'alosha, concerning the Tzara'as of Miriam, who was sent out of the camp for seven days based on a 'Kal va'Chomer' from her father, before whom she would have been in disgrace for seven days (had she angered him).

(d)We think that she ought to have been sent out of the camp for fourteen days because if before a father (who only puts five of the basic physical features that form a person) one would be disgrace for seven days, then surely before Hash-m, who supplies a person with ten spiritual features, one ought to be in disgrace for fourteen days.

(e)'Dayo' therefore teaches us that since the source of the 'Kal va'Chomer' is her father, Miriam could only be sent out of the camp for seven days, like the source, and not more.

3)

(a)How did Shmuel react when Rav Nitai wanted to rule like Rebbi Zecharyah ben ha'Katzav?

(b)What did Rav Nachman say when ...

1. ... Rebbi Tivla attempted to do likewise, quoting Rav Chinena bar Shalmaya Amar Rav?

2. ... Rav Huna bar Chiya too, tried to rule like Rebbi Zecharya, quoting Rav Huna Amar Rav (see Rabeinu Gershom)?

(c)Why did this cause Rav Huna bar Chiya embarrassment (see Rabeinu Gershom)?

3)

(a)When Rav Nitai wanted to rule like Rebbi Zecharyah ben ha'Katzav, Shmuel declared 'Efes Zecharyah' (meaning that the Halachah is not like him).

(b)When ...

1. ... Rebbi Tivla attempted to do likewise, quoting Rav Chinena bar Shalmaya Amar Rav Rav Nachman ordered him to retract, or he would place him in Cherem (in spite of Rav Chinena bar Shalmaya).

2. ... Rav Huna bar Chiya too, tried to rule like Rebbi Zecharya, quoting Rav Huna Amar Rav (see Rabeinu Gershom) Rav Nachman told him that he would ask Rav Huna whether he had really said that.

(c)This caused Rav Huna bar Chiya embarrassment because he had not really heard it from him (and quoted him only in order to lend weight to his ruling [Rabeinu Gershom], which is permissible).

4)

(a)What was Rav Nachman's final word on the subject?

(b)On what basis was Rav Nachman so sure of himself?

(c)Why was Rebbi Yanai leaning on the shoulders of Rebbi Simlai? Who was Rebbi Simlai?

(d)What did the latter comment, when he spied Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'ah coming towards them?

4)

(a)Rav Nachman's final word on the subject was that if Rav had no longer been alive, Rav Huna bar Chiya would have stood up to him and would not have relented.

(b)Rav Nachman was so sure of himself because Rav and Shmuel had both ruled against Rebbi Zecharyah ha'Katzav.

(c)Rebbi Yanai was leaning on the shoulders of Rebbi Simlai his Shamash, because he was already old and frail.

(d)When the latter spied Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'ah coming towards them, he commented that an important man wearing an important-looking cloak was approaching them.

5)

(a)What did Rebbi Yanai mean when, after feeling Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'ah's cloak, he commented 'Dein Shi'ureih ke'Sak'? What is the Shi'ur Tum'ah of sack-cloth?

(b)What did Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'ah ask Rebbi Yanai about the portion of a Bechor, after the latter had taught him that a son precedes a daughter in his mother's property, from "Matos" (like the Tana Kama)?

(c)What was Rebbi Yanai's reaction to Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'ah's question?

5)

(a)When, after feeling Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'ah's cloak, Rebbi Yanai commented 'Dein Shi'ureih ke'Sak', he meant that it was made of a coarse (inferior) fabric whose Shi'ur Tum'ah is four Tefachim (like sack-cloth, and not three finger-breadths, like a cloth garment [see also Mitzpeh Eisan]).

(b)After Rebbi Yanai had taught Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'ah's that a son precedes a daughter in his mother's property from "Matos" (like the Tana Kama), the latter asked him whether a Bechor also receives a double portion of his mother's inheritance (like he does of his father's).

(c)Rebbi Yanai reacted to Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'ah's question by instructing Rebbi Simlai to lead him away (because he was asking questions which had obvious answers).

111b----------------------------------------111b

6)

(a)What does Abaye initially learn from the word "Lo" (in the Pasuk in Ki Setzei "be'Chol Asher Yimatzei Lo")?

(b)On what grounds do we try to confine this to a case where a Bachur marries an Almanah?

(c)What does Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak subsequently learn from the same Pasuk "Ki Hu Reishis Ono"?

(d)We object to this Derashah however, on the grounds that this Pasuk is needed to include 'ha'Ba Achar Nefalim'.

(e)What does this mean? How do we learn it from this Pasuk?

6)

(a)Abaye initially learns from the word "Lo" (in the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "be'Chol Asher Yimatzei Lo") that a Bechor does not receive a double portion in his mother's property ("Lo" 've'Lo Lah').

(b)We try to confine this to a case where a Bachur marries an Almanah, who already had children from a previous marriage, in which case their first baby is indeed his Bechor but not hers. But we suggest, if it would be her Bechor, perhaps he would inherit her too.

(c)Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak subsequently learns from the same Pasuk "Ki Hu Reishis Ono" that in the current case, the Bechor will not inherit his mother, even if she was a Besulah (and he is therefore her first-born too).

(d)We object to this Derashah however, on the grounds that we need "Reishis Ono" to exclude 'ha'Ba Achar Nefalim' meaning that a Nefel (who is considered a firstborn with regard to Pidyon ha'Ben [since he is a "Peter Rechem"]) is not considered a firstborn as regards the Dinim of Yerushah ...

(e)... since "Reishis Ono" implies that the father is concerned about his survival.

7)

(a)How do we now try to learn both current Derashos from "Reishis Ono"?

(b)What objection do we raise to this Derashah? How might we establish the Pasuk and still not know that if a Bachur marries a Besulah, the Bechor will not receive a double portion in his mother's inheritance?

(c)So what does Rava finally learn from the word "Lo" (in the Pasuk there "Lo Mishpat ha'Bechorah")?

7)

(a)We now try to learn both current Derashos from "Reishis Ono" because, to teach us the latter Derashah alone, it would have sufficed to write "Ki Hu Reishis On"; "Ono" implies "Ono" 've'Lo Onah').

(b)We object to this Derashah however, by suggesting that the extra Pasuk comes to preclude the Bechor of an Almon and a Besulah, who is only his mother's firstborn, but not his father's; The Bechor of a Bachur who marries a Besulah however, will perhaps receive a double portion in his mother's inheritance.

(c)Rava finally learns from the word "Lo" (in the Pasuk there "Lo Mishpat ha'Bechorah") that a Bechor only inherits a double portion of his father's property, but not of his mother's (see Tosfos DH 'Lo').

8)

(a)What does the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk in Pinchas (in connection with the Din of Yerushah) "She'ero"?

(b)How do we know that this applies even to where they have a son?

(c)The Lashon "u'Nesatem es Nachalaso li'She'ero ha'Karov Eilav" implies that it is the woman who inherits her husband. From where does the Tana know that she does not?

(d)What would the Torah have written had it wanted to teach us that a husband and wife inherit each other?

(e)What problem do we have with the current Derashah?

8)

(a)The Beraisa learns from the Pasuk in Pinchas (in connection with the Din of Yerushah) "She'eiro" that a man inherits his wife ("She'eiro" 'Zu Ishto').

(b)We know that this applies even to where they have a son because in any event, a husband, who is not a blood-relative, is less of a relation than any regular heir. Consequently, once the Torah gives him the status of an heir, it obviously places him first in line.

(c)The Lashon "u'Nesatem es Nachalaso li'She'ero ha'Karov Eilav" implies that it is the woman who inherits her husband. The Tana knows that she does not from the Pasuk "ve'Yarash Osah", implying that it is he who inherits her, but not vice-versa.

(d)Had the Torah wanted to teach us that a husband and wife inherit each other, it would have written "u'Nesatem es Nachalaso li'She'ero ... ve'Yarash" (omitting the word "Osah").

(e)The problem with the current Derashah is how we can simply ignore what the Torah specifically writes ("u"Nesatem es Nachalaso li'She'ero", implying that a woman inherits her husband).

9)

(a)Abaye therefore 'amends' the Pasuk to read "u'Nesatem es Nachalaso le'Hakarov Eilav li'She'ero ve'Yarash Osah". On what grounds does Rava object to this?

(b)How does Rava then amend the Pasuk "u'Nesatem es Nachalaso li'She'ero" on the basis of the Derashah 'Gor'in u'Mosifin ve'Dorshin'?

(c)How does this differ from Abaye's change of order, to which Rava himself objected?

(d)The current source for a man inheriting his wife is the opinion of Rebbi Akiva in a Beraisa. In which point does Rebbi Yishmael disagrees with Rebbi Akiva?

9)

(a)Abaye therefore amends the Pasuk to read "u'Nesatem es Nachalaso le'Hakarov Eilav li'She'ero ve'Yarash Osah", to which Rava objects on the grounds that one cannot just take words and mix them at will (like Abaye has done with "She'ero" and "ha'Karov Eilav").

(b)Rava holds 'Gor'in u'Mosifin ve'Dorshin', so he amends the Pasuk "u'Nesatem es Nachalaso li'She'ero" to read "u'Nesatem es Nachalas She'ero Lo (having moved the 'Vav' from the end of "Nachalaso" and the 'Lamed' from the beginning of "li'She'ero", to form the word "Lo").

(c)This differs from Abaye's change of order to which Rava himself objected inasmuch this is only a change of letters, which is feasible, whereas Abaye changed the order of words, which is not.

(d)The current source for a man inheriting his wife is the opinion of Rebbi Akiva in a Beraisa. Rebbi Yishmael argues with Rebbi Akiva inasmuch as he does not Darshen 'Gor'in, Mosifin ve'Dorshin'.

10)

(a)How does Rebbi Yishmael interpret the Pasuk in Masei "ve'Chol Bas Yoreshes Nachalah mi'Matos Bnei Yisrael, le'Echad mi'Mishpachas Mateh Avihah Tih'yeh le'Ishah"?

(b)After citing two more Pesukim (which will be discussed shortly), the Beraisa quotes the Pasuk in Yehoshua "ve'Elazar ben Aharon Meis va'Yikberu oso be'Giv'as Pinchas Beno". How does the Tana explain the fact that ...

1. ... Pinchas owned property that he had not inherited from his father?

2. ... a similar Pasuk in Divrei Hayamim, which relates how Ya'ir (son of Menasheh,) owned twenty-three cities in the land of Gil'ad that he had not inherited from his father, S'guv?

10)

(a)Rebbi Yishmael interprets the Pasuk in Masei "ve'Chol Bas Yoreshes Nachalah mi'Matos Bnei Yisrael, le'Echad mi'Mishpachas Mateh Avihah Tih'yeh le'Ishah" in connection with Hasavas ha'Ba'al (a woman who has no brothers, and who therefore transfers the Yerushah from her father's tribe to that of her husband, assuming that first her father and then she, dies, and her husband inherits her).

(b)After citing two more Pesukim, which will be discussed shortly, the Beraisa quotes the Pasuk in Yehoshua "ve'Elazar ben Aharon Meis va'Yikberu oso be'Giv'as Pinchas Beno". The Tana ascribes the fact that ...

1. ... Pinchas owned property that he had not inherited from his father to his having inherited them from his wife when she died.

2. ... a similar Pasuk in Divrei Hayamim, which relates how Ya'ir, (son of Menasheh,) owned twenty-three cities in the land of Gil'ad that he had not inherited from his father, S'guv to his having inherited them from his wife when she died.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES ON THIS DAF