When the Gemorah says that the kinyan is written in the shtar does that mean that the shtar is just a raya that the kinyan sudar took place or that the kinyan is taluy in the mesiras hashtar?
The lashon is mashma its just a raya, however if so why would shmuel say later on that he doesn't know how to analyze the case because "Ain SHTAR leachar misa" he should say ain KINYAN leachar misa - the shtar is just agav!
Also its stam azoy its a chidush to say that that a kinyan sudar is taluy in the mesiras hashtar.
Yaakov Preiser, Baltimore,MD
The commentaries (Rashbam, Tosfos) explain that this is whether the Shtar is the Kinyan itself, or whether a separate Kinyan was expected to be made by the Shechiv Meira. The point is that the Shechiv Meira possibly expected a Kinyan to be done, and it was not done before he died, making it a problem l'Achar Misah.
The simple explanation of the wording of the case (Kosvin v'Nosnin), however, involves a Kinyan with the Shtar itself (as no other Kinyan is mentioned and Shtar is certainly viable), which is why the Gemara used the wording "Ain Shtar l'Achar Misah."
All the best,
I though matnat shechiv mei'Ra does not require any kinyan
And that is the maala of this kind of matana
Matnas Shechiv Meira indeed does not require a Kinyan. However, if the Shechiv Meira chooses to use a Kinyan, this indicates that he does not want his word alone to be the Kinyan, and specifically wants another Kinyan. As the Rashbam explains, it is very common and beneficial for a Shechiv Meira to insist that everything be written down clearly, and not to rely on his word alone, as this is the best proof of division of property. While a person who is dying imminently (i.e. any second) at least has Matnas Shechiv Meira to rely upon with his speech alone, it is not the optimal way to divide one's property.
All the best,