Bava Kamma 88b

בבא קמא פ״ח ע״ב

Learn Bava Kamma 88b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Kamma 88b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Can a married woman's sale or gift of her נכסי מלוג hold up against her husband after she dies? A real case involving רב שמואל בר אבא, and רבי ירמיה בר אבא's proof from a משנה about a father who writes his property to his son.

Overview

רב שמואל בר אבא claims property his mother wrote over to him, and רבי ירמיה בר אבא rules that it is his. Her husband, רבי אבא, brings the case to רב יהודה. רב יהודה quotes שמואל: if a wife sells her נכסי מלוג and then dies, the husband takes the property back. רבי ירמיה answers with a משנה about a father who writes his property to his son 'after death.' He reads it the way ריש לקיש does, against רבי יוחנן, to show that קנין פירות is not like קנין הגוף, so the mother's transfer should hold. רב יהודה replies in the name of שמואל that the wife's case is not like that משנה. רב יוסף explains the difference as the son being an heir, but אביי rejects that explanation. אביי says the real reason is the תקנת אושא, a special rabbinic rule that lets a husband take back his wife's sold נכסי מלוג. רב אידי בר אבין then begins quoting a teaching about divorce witnesses to support the תקנת אושא, and the proof continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (20)

1. Statementרבי ירמיה gives the property to the son
2. Challengeשמואל rules that the husband takes the property back
3. ProofRabbi Yirmeya cites a משנה about a father writing property to his son
4. ProofThe son's sale holds even if the son died first
5. StatementThis reading follows ריש לקיש
6. StatementThe dispute: the son sold and then died before his father
7. StatementHow רבי יוחנן reads the משנה
8. Conclusionרבי יוחנן's reason: owning the produce is like owning the item
9. StatementHow ריש לקיש reads the משנה
10. Conclusionריש לקיש's underlying view: owning the produce is not owning the item
11. StatementBoth רבי ירמיה בר אבא and רב יהודה follow ריש לקיש
12. Proofרבי ירמיה בר אבא proves the point from the case where the son died first
13. ConclusionThe proof's conclusion: owning the produce is not owning the item
14. Rejectionרב יהודה answers in the name of שמואל: this case is not like our משנה
15. QuestionWhy is the woman's case different?
16. Responseרב יוסף: the son can sell because he is fit to inherit
17. Challengeאביי: a father inherits a son just as a son inherits a father
18. Responseאביי's own reason: the תקנת אושא
19. ProofThe תקנת אושא about a wife's נכסי מלוג
20. Proofרב אידי בר אבין begins bringing support from witnesses about a divorce