Thursday, 1 June 2017

Bava Batra 130: Choosing an Heir; Choosing a Ruling

We begin with a new Mishna: if a person says that someone will inherit from him but he has a daughter, or if a person says that his daughter will inherit from him but he has a son, he has said nothing.  Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka clarifies: If one names a valid heir as his inheritor, his word stands.  If one names someone as his inheritor who is not fit to inherit from him, then his statement is void.

The rabbis discuss the ins and outs of bequeathing one's possessions to one's children.  How would these words help us to understand what to do if one had many sons or many daughters?  Where does the firstborn status come into this conversation?  The rabbis speak over and over of the importance of favouring one's actual first born child over the first born of one's beloved.  Having multiple wives suggests multiple lines of dependence as well as multiple possible inheritors.  Perhaps the rabbis noticed fathers choosing their 'first born sons' based on ensuring a line of sustenance for their favoured wives.

We learn about rabbis who argue about how to create halacha.  Rabbi Zerika states that ruling based on a principle is more important than ruling based on a specific incident.  Rabbi Abba states that it is preferable to rule based on a specific incident as described by a particular Sage.  As an example of how rulings are made, the rabbis discuss whether or not it is permitted to compare one of these rulings to another.  They then discuss when it is not permitted to compare at all - mostly regarding animals that are not fit for consecration.

We end today's daf with an interesting statement made by Rava.  He says that if rabbis come across one of his rulings that is in dispute, they should bring the ruling to him.  He will either provide an explanation for his decision or he will tear up the ruling.  If such a thing should happen after he dies, then rabbis are permitting to disregard his ruling but they are not permitted to rip it up.  This is because if he were still alive, he might have offered an explanation for his decision.  

No comments:

Post a Comment