(Mishnah): If the adults said 'this is what father left. We want to divide, and we will improve our share', they keep their improvements.

Rav Safra's father died, and left money. Rav Safra invested it. His brothers took him to Beis Din.

Rava: Rav Safra is a great Chacham. He would not take time from learning for the sake of others! (It is as if he said 'I will improve my share.')

(Mishnah): Similarly, if his widow improved the property, the children share the improvements...

Question: A widow does not share the property!

Answer (R. Yirmeyah): The Mishnah discusses a widow who inherits (her husband stipulated that she will get a share with his children. Alternatively, Reuven married Sarah, the only child of his brother Shimon. Reuven and Shimon died, and then their father Yakov died. Sarah inherits her father's share, and divides Yakov's property with her children from Reuven).

Question: If so, obviously the law is like the case of adult and minor brothers!

Answer: One might have thought that since a woman normally does not deal with property, she did not do so for the sake of others, and it is as if she said 'I will improve my share.' The Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

(Mishnah): If she said 'this is what my husband left. I will improve my share', she keeps her improvements.

Question: This is obvious!

Answer: One might have thought that because people would praise her for toiling on behalf of the orphans, she retracts from her stipulation and toils on behalf of them. The Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

(R. Chanina): If Levi marries off his oldest son (Kehas) in a house (in which Levi does not live), Kehas acquires the house.

This applies only to his oldest son, and only if he marries a virgin, and only if this is his first marriage, and only if he is the first son that Levi marries off.

The following is obvious. If Levi designated for him a house that has an upper story, he acquires the house, and not the upper story.

Questions: If Levi designated for him a house that has an Achsadra (a hall in front of a house), does he acquire the Achsadra? If he designated an outer house and an inner house, does he acquire also the outer house?

These questions are unsettled.

Question (Beraisa): If Levi designated a house and house Kelim, he only acquires the Kelim.

Answer #1 (R. Yirmeyah): The case is, Levi used the house as a storehouse.

Answer #2 (Chachamim of Neharde'a): Even if Levi had a dovecote there, Kehas does not acquire.

Answer #3 (Rav Yehudah and Rav Papi): Even if he had a Keli of fried fish there, Kehas does not acquire.

Mar Zutra hung his sandal in the house in which he married off his first son (so the son would not acquire). Rav Ashi hung a cup of oil.

(Mar Zutra): Chachamim made three enactments without explaining (how they work). This is one of them;

(The second - Rav Yehudah): If a man wrote a document giving all his property to his wife, (surely he did not deprive his sons from inheriting. He merely wants to ensure that his sons honor her,) he only made her an overseer.

(The third - Rav): If Reuven tells Shimon in front of Levi 'you have money of mine. Give it to Levi', Levi acquires it.

(Mishnah): If brothers inherited together and one of them received a well-paying position, the brothers share the income.

If a brother fell sick, he pays for his own cure.

(Gemara - Beraisa): The Mishnah refers to a son conscripted for the king's service. (Normally, one person per house is taken for this for a certain period of time. The brother did not receive it due to his efforts).

(Beraisa): If one of the brothers was appointed to be tax collector or officer: if a person from each house is normally appointed for a certain time, they share the income;

If he got it due to himself, he keeps the income.

Question: The first clause is obvious!

Answer: The case is, he is very sharp. One might have thought that he got the position due to himself. The Beraisa teaches that this is not so.

(Beraisa): If one of the brothers took 200 Zuz (of his share of the estate) to learn Torah or a trade, the others can say 'you will receive food from the estate only if you are with us'.

Question: Why isn't he fed wherever he is?

Answer: The reason is as Rav Huna taught (and the Beraisa supports him).

(Rav Huna): There is a bigger blessing in the house when more people are there. (R. Chananel - it is more economical when more people live together, e.g. one lamp suffices for everyone.)

Question: Even after taking this into account, he should receive something!

Answer: Indeed, he receives accordingly.

(Mishnah): If a brother fell sick, he pays for his own cure.

(Ravin): This is only if he got sick through negligence. If it was Ones, they share the cost.

Question: What is the case of negligence?

Answer: It is a case like R. Chanina taught.

(R. Chanina): "Tzinim Pachim... Shomer Nafsho Yirchak Mehem" - whatever befalls one is decreed by Heaven, except for chills and fevers (which is from his lack of caution).

(Mishnah): (The custom is, if David brings Shushvinus (gifts that one brings to a Chasan) to Levi, when David marries, Levi brings such gifts to David.) If the father sent Shushvinus with some of his sons, and the Chasan returned Shushvinus after the father died, all his sons share them, for Shushvinus can be collected in Beis Din (like a debt);

If Reuven sent wine and oil to Moshe (who is not a Chasan), Beis Din does not force Moshe to reciprocate, for this was mere Chesed.

(Gemara) Contradiction (Beraisa): If the father sent Shushvinus with David, and the Chasan returned Shushvinus after the father died, David keeps it;

If Ploni sent Shushvinus to the father, and Ploni married after the father died (and the heirs must return Shushvinus), they all pay for it.

Answer #1 (R. Asi citing R. Yochanan): Also our Mishnah means that the Shushvinus was sent to the father, and all his sons must return it.

Question: The Mishnah says 'if some of the sons Asu (did, i.e. brought Shushvinus)'!

Answer: It should say (or means) 'if Shushvinus was done to some of the sons.'

Question: The Mishnah says 'and Shushvinus was returned (to the heirs)'!

Answer: It means, if the obligation reverted to the heirs, they all pay.

Answer #2 (Rav Asi): The Mishnah discusses when the father did not stipulate. The Beraisa discusses when he stipulated that the Shushvinus will return to the son who brought it (the father gave it to him for a gift).

(Beraisa): If Yakov sent Shushvinus with his son Yosef, and Shushvinus was returned (after Yakov died), Yosef keeps it;

If Yakov sent Shushvinus without specifying, and Shushvinus was returned, his heirs share it.

Answer #3 (Shmuel): The Mishnah discusses when the son (Reuven) who brought Shushvinus died, a brother (Shimon) did Yibum, and Shushvinus was returned;

(Even though the Shimon inherits Reuven by himself,) since (Shushvinus is Ra'uy, like a debt, and) a Yavam does not inherit Ra'uy, all the brothers share it.

Question: This implies that Moshe (one who received Reuven's Shushvinus) must return it to the Yavam;

Moshe should be able to say 'give to me Reuven, and I will (return the Shushvinus and) rejoice with him!' (Since he died, I am exempt.)

(Beraisa): In a place where the custom is to return Kidushin money (this will be explained), we return it. Where it is not returned, we do not return it.

(Rav Yosef bar Aba): It is returned only when she died (during Eirusin), but not if he died.

Question: What is the reason?

Answer: She can say 'give to me my husband, and I will rejoice with him (have Nisu'in. It is not my fault that he died)!'

Likewise, Moshe should be able to say 'give to me Reuven, and I will rejoice with him!'