Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 14, scan section 40

R. Jeremiah was sitting before R. Abuhu, and questioned him as follows: If the estates were of great worth, but there was a promissory note in the hands of a creditor, which ought to be collected from the estates, should the estates, because of the note, be considered moderate, so that the support should be for the daughters and the sons should go a-begging? Or, until collected, should all of them be supported, without tak- ing into consideration that after collecting nothing might re- main for the support of the daughters? And should you de- cide that the promissory note, although not yet collected, diminishes the value of the estates, for the reason that the amount due will be collected in any event, even should the creditor die, how is it if the deceased left a step-daughter whom he has to support, according to the marriage contract of his wife, until she shall become of age, and the amount of her support diminishes the estate from being of great worth, and stamps it moderate? How, then, should the inheritance be considered, should the step-daughter die, and then, the obliga- tion being gone, the estates remain of great worth. There is still another question. If the deceased left a widow and a daugh- ter, and the estates left couM support only one of them, who 314 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. has the preference ? And R. Abuhu answered : Go to-day, and come to-morrow. And when he came he said to him: Of all the questions, I can decide the last one. As R. Aba said in the name of R. Assi: The sages have enacted that when there is a widow with a daughter she shall have similar treatment to that of a sister who remains with her brother. As in the latter case, if the estate is moderate she must be supported, although her brothers remain beggars, so also the widow as against a daughter — the widow must be supported and the daughter may go a-begging. " Admon, however, said: Because I am a male," etc. How is this to be understood? Said Rabha: He means to say: Be- cause I am a male, and ought to inherit all the estates where the inheritance is of great worth, leaving for my sister only the support for her livelihood until of age, shall I remain a beggar when there is a moderate estate? MISHNA //. : If one leave sons, daughters, and an her- maphrodite (if it is doubtful whether male or female), and the inheritance is of great worth, the males may count same among the females; but when the inheritance is moderate, the females may count same among the males. If one say : " If my pregnant wife should bear a male, he shall take a mana," and she bears a male, the mana is to be given to him; " If a female, she shall take two hundred zuz," she takes two hundred. If a male a mana, and a female two hundred zuz, and she had born a male and a female? The male takes one hundred and the female two hundred zuz. But if she bears an hermaphrodite, he takes nothing. If, however, he said: " What she shall bear shall take," then he takes accordingly. And the same is the case if there were no heirs but he — he in- herits all. GEMARA : The Mishna states : They count same among the daughters, which means he shall be treated like them. But does not the later part state: If she bears an hermaphrodite, he takes nothing? Said Abayi : It means that the males counted him among the females; but the latter have the right not to accept him, and he remains without any support. Rabha, however, maintains: They pass him and he must be similarly supported. And the latter part of our Mishna is in accordance with Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel of the following Mishna: If TRACT BABA BATHRA (LAST GATE). 315 she bears an hermaphrodite or an androgyn, which is at times a male and at times a female, R. Simeon b. Gamaliel said : No sanctity rests upon them. (The cited Mishna treats : If one made a vow for the offspring of a gravid cow — if a male, it shall be a burnt-offering; and if a female, a peace-ofifering.) An objection was raised from the following : " An hermaph- rodite inherits like a son, and is supported Hke a daughter." And this can be correct only according to Rabha: That he is considered an heir, like a son, in a moderate inheritance ; and is supported, like a daughter, in one of great worth. But ac- cording to Abayi, who said above that he takes nothing, how do you find that he shall be supported like a daughter? Even according to your theory, how do you explain Rabha's state- ment, that as an heir, like a son, he takes something of a moderate inheritance? In such a case the sons take nothing; hence he means to say that he is considered an heir like a son — to be a beggar. So also you can explain the Mishna: He is in condition to have support like a daughter, but, nevertheless, he does not get any. " // one says: If my pregnant wife shall bear a male," etc. Shall we assume that a daughter is better to him than a son (as the Mishna says, " If a male one hundred, and a daughter two hundred ") ? Concerning inheritance, a male is better to him, as he bears his name; and concerning a gift, a daughter is better to him, as it is more difficult for her to make a living than for a male. Samuel, however, maintains that the Mishna treats of when his wife was pregnant with her first child ; and it is in accordance with R. Hisda, who said elsewhere: If the first child is a female, it is a good sign for future sons, accord- ing to some because she will educate the sons; and according to some, that she should not be afiflicted by a covetous eye. Said R. Hisda : As for me, I always give preference to females over males. And if you wish, it may be said that our Mishna is in accordance with R. Jehudah In the following Boraitha: It is a meritorious act for one to support his daughters, and so much the more his sons who occupy themselves with the Torah. So is the decree of R. Meir. R. Jehudah, however, said : It is a meritorious act to support the sons, and so much the more to support the daughters, because of their humiliation (if they should have to beg). 3i6 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. There was one who said to his wife : I bequeath my estate to the child with which you are pregnant. Said R. Huna: This means that he designed to give title to an embryo, and an embryo cannot acquire title, R. Na'hman objected to R. Huna from our Mishna, which states: If my wife shall bear a male, he shall take a mana, etc. And he answered him: I do not know who has taught our Mishna (i.e., I do not find our Mishna to be in accordance with the majority, nor a single one of the sages). But let R. Na'hman say that the Mishna treats of when the bequeather said : I bequeath the estate to the child after my wife has borne it ? R. Huna is in accordance with his principle that the child does not acquire title even after birth. (As it was