Bava Basra 112b
בבא בתרא קי״ב ע״ב
Bava Batra 112b
Learn Bava Basra 112b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.
Open Bava Basra 112b in Gemara Clarity
Topic
How the פסוקים about a daughter who inherits land keep the inheritance from moving to another tribe: the challenge about 'her father's tribe', and the ברייתא about inheritance moving through the son versus through the husband.
Overview
The גמרא finishes a discussion about a daughter who inherits land from both parents. The earlier teaching was that she must marry a man whose father is from her father's tribe and whose mother is from her mother's tribe. The גמרא asks why the פסוק did not simply say 'her father and her mother'. It answers that such wording would have allowed the reverse match, so the actual wording shows that the order matters. Then the גמרא opens a related topic: two ברייתות about how land could leave a tribe, either through her son (סבת הבן) or through her husband (סבת הבעל). The first ברייתא is quoted in full. It proves that במדבר 36:7 is about the son, because במדבר 36:9 already covers the husband. The second ברייתא, about the husband, comes on the next amud.
Opening lines
אִי הָכִי,
If so,
הַאי ״לְאֶחָד מִמִּשְׁפַּחַת מַטֵּה
this [verse]: "to one of the family of the tribe
אָבִיהָ וְאִמָּהּ״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ!
of her father and her mother" — it should have said!
אִי כְּתִיב הָכִי,
If it were written like this,
The steps (6)
- ChallengeWhy didn't the verse say 'her father and her mother'?
- ResolutionThat wording would have allowed the reverse match
- StatementTwo teachings: inheritance moving through the son and through the husband
- StatementThe first ברייתא: this verse is about the son
- QuestionMaybe this verse is about the husband instead?
- ResponseA different verse covers the husband, so this one is about the son