Previous Folio /
Baba Bathra Contents /
Tractate List / Navigate Site
Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Baba BathraIt was stated: [As to] the gift1 of a dying man [in the deed of] which was recorded [symbolic] acquisition. the school of Rab in the name of Rab reported [that the testator] has [thereby] made him2 ride on two harnessed horses;3 but Samuel said: I do not know what decision to give on the matter. The school of Rab reported in the name of Rab, that he made him ride on two harnessed horses, for it is like the gift of a man in good health4 [and] 'it is [also] like the gift of a dying man. 'It is like the gift of a man in good health', in that, if he recovered, he [can] not retract, [and] 'it is like the gift of a dying man' in that, if he said [that] his loan5 [shall be given] to X, his loan [is to be given] to X.6 Samuel, however, had said, 'I do not know what decision to give on the matter' since it is possible that7 he decided not to transfer possession to him8 except through the deed,9 and no [possession by means of a] deed [may be acquired] after [the testator's] death.10 A contradiction was pointed out [between one statement] of Rab and another statement of his,11 and [between one statement] of Samuel and another statement of his.12 For Rabin sent in the name of R. Abbahu: Be [it] known to you that R. Eleazar had sent to the Diaspora in the name of our Master13 [that] where a dying man said, 'Write14 and deliver a maneh to X', and he died,15 they must neither write [the deed] nor deliver [the maneh], because it is possible that [the testator]16 had decided not to transfer possession to him17 except through the deed,18 and no [possession by means of a] deed [may be acquired] after [the testator's] death.19 And Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel [that] the law is that one may both write and deliver.20 [Does not this present] a contradiction [between one statement] of Rab and another statement of his [and between one statement] of Samuel and another statement of his?21 — There is no contradiction between the two statements of Rab.22 One23 [deals with the case] where symbolic acquisition took place;24 the other23 where no symbolic acquisition took place.25 There is [also] no contradiction between the two statements of Samuel,26 [because in the latter case the reference is to one] who [specifically] strengthened his27 claims.28 R. Nahman b. Isaac sat behind Raba while Raba was sitting before R. Nahman when he addressed to him the [following] enquiry: Did Samuel say. 'since it is possible that he decided not to transfer possession to him except through the deed, and no [possession by means of a] deed [may be acquired] after [the testator's] death'? Surely Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel, 'If a dying man gave all his property, in writing, to strangers. although [symbolic] acquisition took place. he may retract if he recovered
Baba Bathra 152bbecause it is known that the [symbolic] acquisition took place1 only on account of [his expectation of] death'!2 He answered him3 by [a wave of] his hand and remained silent.4 When he rose, R. Nahman b. Isaac asked Raba, 'What did he indicate to you?' [Raba] replied to him,' That Rab Judah's report refers to the case] where [the testator] strengthened the donee's claims.'5 In what manner [is it indicated that one wished to] strengthen the donee's claims? — R. Hisda replied: [By including in the deed the formula]. 'And we6 acquired from him7 in addition to this [presentation of the] gift.'8 [It is] obvious [that where a dying man] gave [all his estate] in writing to one man9 and [subsequently] to another10 the [law is the] very same as [that which] R. Dimi enunciated when he came, [vis., one] will annuls [another] will.11 [If. however.] he wrote [a deed of the gift] and handed1 it12 to one13 and [subsequently] wrote [a deed of the gift] and handed1 it2 to another,13 Rab said: The first acquires [its] ownership; while Samuel said: The second acquires [its] ownership. Rab said, 'the first acquires [its] ownership' for14 it is like the gift of a person in good health;15 while Samuel said, the second acquires [Its] ownership', for it is like the gift of a dying man.16 But surely their17 difference of opinion on the [principle] has [already] once been expressed in [the case of] the [deed of a] gift of a dying man, in which symbolic acquisition was entered!18 [Both are] required. For if [their dispute] had been stated [in connection] with the first case,19 [it might have been assumed that] in that [case only] Rab adheres20 to [his opinion], because symbolic acquisition took place;21 but in this case,19 where no symbolic acquisition took place, it might have been suggested [that] he agrees with Samuel.22 And if [their dispute] had been stated [in connection] with the second case,19 [it might have been assumed that] in that [case only] Samuel adheres20 to [his opinion];23 but in that [case]'24 it might have been suggested [that] he agrees with Rab. [Hence both were] required. At Sura they taught as above.25 At Pumbeditha they taught as follows.25 R. Jeremiah b. Abba said: [The following enquiry] was sent from the academy26 to Samuel. 'Will our Master instruct us [as to] what [is the law in the case where] a dying man gave all his estate to strangers, in writing; and symbolic acquisition [also] took place,27 [but was not entered in the deed]?'28 He replied29 to them: 'After [symbolic] acquisition no withdrawal is of any avail'.30 - To Next Folio -
|
||||||