Question: If there is less than this, do the girls get everything?!

Answer (Rava): No. We separate enough money to feed the girls until Bagrus, and the boys are fed from the rest.

The following is obvious. If there was 'much' property, and then it became 'little', the boys already inherited (Rashbam - we calculate how much everyone should have received (at the time of death), and everyone receives (proportionally) according to this. The boys will still have money after the girls consumed their portion; Rosh - all are fed until the property runs out);

Question: If there was 'little' property, and then it became 'much', what is the law?

Perhaps the profit goes to the heirs (the girls are fed until Bagrus, and the boys get the rest);

Or, perhaps inheritance does not apply here. (We calculate what everyone should have received at the time of death, and all receive accordingly. The girls keep the excess above what they will eat.)

Answer (R. Asi): If there was little property and the boys sold it, the sale stands. (This shows that they inherited.)

Version #1 - Question #1 (R. Yirmeyah of R. Avahu; also, all the coming questions): In calculating whether there is much or little property, do we consider that also the widow is fed from the estate?

Since also she is fed, this enters the calculation;

Or, since if she will remarry, she will no longer be fed, it does not enter the calculation.

Question #2: If it does not enter the calculation, if the husband accepted to feed his wife's daughter (e.g. from a prior husband), does this enter the calculation?

Since she is fed even if she will remarry, it enters the calculation;

Or, since perhaps she will not be fed the entire time (she might die), it does not enter the calculation.

Question #3: If it does not enter the calculation, if the husband left a creditor, does it enter the calculation?

Since even if he dies, the debt will be collected (by his heirs), it enters the calculation;

Or, since he has not yet collected the debt, it does not enter the calculation.

Version #2 - Question #1: If the husband left a creditor, does it enter the calculation? (The sides of the question are like above.)

Question #2: If the husband accepted to feed his wife's daughter, does it enter the calculation?

Question #3: If the widow is also fed from the estate, does it enter the calculation? (end of Version #2)

Question: If there is not enough food to feed the widow and the daughter, which has precedence?

Answer (to this last question - R. Avahu): A widow with respect to a daughter is like a daughter with respect to a son: if there is little property, the daughters are fed and the sons beg;

Likewise, the widow is fed and the daughter begs for her food.

(Mishnah): Admon says, why should I lose, because I am a male?!

Question: What does this mean?

Answer #1 (Abaye): Because I am a male, and it is proper that I learn Torah, should I lose?!

Objection (Rava): Will you say that only one who learns Torah should inherit?!

Answer #2 (Rava): Rather, because I am a male and I inherit when there is much property, should I lose when there is little property?!

(Mishnah): If a man died, and left sons, daughters, and a Tumtum (one whose genitals are covered; we do not know his or her gender), if there is much property, the Tumtum does not inherit. The boys say 'you are with the girls';

If there is little property, the Tumtum is not fed (with the girls). They say 'you are with the boys'.

If Levi (a Shechiv Mera, or he is healthy and he asked someone else to acquire on behalf of his child to be born) said 'if my wife will give birth to a male, he should receive 100 Zuz', we fulfill his words;

If he said 'if she will give birth to a female, she should receive 200', we fulfill this;

If he said 'if she will give birth to a male, he should receive 100. If she will give birth to a female, she should receive 200', if she gave birth to both, each receives like the stipulation;

If she gave birth to a Tumtum, he does not receive.

If he said 'whatever she will give birth to, the baby should receive', even a Tumtum receives.

If there are no other children, a Tumtum inherits his parents.

(Gemara) Inference: (If there is much property,) the Tumtum does not inherit. The boys say 'you are with the girls', and he is fed like a girl.

Contradiction (Seifa): If she gave birth to a Tumtum, he does not receive (because a Tumtum is neither male nor female)!

Answer #1 (Abaye): The boys say 'you are with the girls', but the Tumtum does not receive like a girl.

Answer #2 (Rava): Indeed, the Tumtum is fed like a girl;

The Seifa is like R. Shimon ben Gamliel.

(Mishnah): (An animal was about to give birth for the first time. The owner said 'if the fetus inside is a male, it is an Olah. If it is a female, it is a Shelamim.') If it gave birth to a Tumtum or Androginus, it has no Kedushah.

Question (Beriasa): A Tumtum inherits like a son and is fed like a daughter.

This is not difficult for Rava. A Tumtum inherits like a son when there is little property, and he is fed like a daughter when there is much property.

According to Abaye, he is never fed like a daughter!

Counter-question: Even according to Rava, what does it mean 'a Tumtum inherits like a son'? (This implies even a large amount. According to Rava, he never receives more than the cost of food until Bagrus!)

Answer: We must say that it means that he should inherit like a son, but he does not;

Answer: Also here, he should be fed like a daughter, but he is not.