If a Shechiv MeRa wrote over his property to one person and then retracted and wrote it over to another person - Rav said that he cannot retract; R. Abba bar Chuna and R. Yochanan said that he can retract.

What is the law? (The Gemara now brings a further Halacha related to this dispute.)

If a slave's first master (the deathly ill person) and second master (the original recipient of his gifts) were Kohanim and the third (the second recipient) was a Yisrael - according to Rav, he can eat Terumah; according to R. Abba bar Chunah and R. Yochanan, he cannot eat Terumah. All agree that if his first master was a Yisrael, he cannot eat Terumah, lest the master recuperate.

(R. Yosi b' R. Bun citing Rav Huna): There is a Baraisa that supports R. Abba bar Chuna and R. Yochanan - If a healthy person wrote a Daitiki (a will; but he did not write that it should be valid 'immediately and after death') or a deathly ill person who wrote over a gift; both can retract.

The Gemara comments: 'If a healthy person wrote a Daitiki...he can retract' - isn't he still healthy? (and he can nevertheless retract!); similarly, 'if a deathly ill person wrote over a gift...he can retract' - isn't he still deathly ill (and he can nevertheless retract!).

What is a Daitiki? 'Da Tehei Lekayem VeLa'amod' - 'this should be to establish and stand' that if he dies, his property should be given to Ploni.

What is considered a gift? 'From today, all of my property is given to Ploni as a gift.'

R. Gurian's sister wrote over all of her property to her brother (as a healthy person's gift). Her older brother then went and appeased her and she then wrote over all of her property to him instead. The case came to court and R. Imi quoted from R. Yochanan that one may retract. R. Zeira objected, saying that R. Yochanan certainly agreed that if the first gift document contained the words 'from today', that he can no longer retract. This objection was also upheld by R. Abahu and R. Ila. R. Imi then remembered this and changed his ruling.

(The Mishnah taught - If a person writes over his property to his children and he wrote over any piece of land to his wife, she loses (any other claim to) her Kesubah.) Rav says that he gave it to his children through his wife. (Because she acquired it on their behalf through a Kinyan Sudar , which is an acquisition made through transferal of an object, and she accepted a piece of land for herself, she therefore loses her Kesubah.) Shmuel said that even if it was not done through her, but she was present and remained silent, she loses her Kesubah.

(R. Yosi b' R. Chanina): This is a special leniency (for the husband) in Kesubah, that she loses any other claim if she accepted this (even though in other cases of a debt, the creditor does not lose the rest of the claim if he accepted partial payment).

Bar Kapara also taught this.

(R. Ba): According to R. Yosi b' R. Chanina's reasoning, she doesn't only lose her claim on the primary part of her Kesubah (100 or 200 zuz) but she also loses her claim on any additional amount (known as the Tosefes) promised.