Bava Batra 133B

ההוא דאמר ליה לחבריה: ״נכסי לך, ואחריך לפלוני״, וראשון ראוי ליורשו הוה. שכיב ראשון, אתא שני קא תבע.

There was a certain person who said to another: My property is given to you, and after you, to so-and-so, and the first one was fit to inherit from him. After the first died, the second came and claimed the property.

סבר רב עיליש קמיה דרבא למימר: שני נמי שקיל. אמר ליה: דייני דחצצתא הכי דייני! לאו היינו דשלח רב אחא בר רב עויא?

Rav Ilish, who was in the presence of Rava, thought to say that the second also takes a share of the property; he divides it with the heirs of the first. Rava said to him: Judges of compromise, who as a matter of course divide disputed property between the parties, rule in this manner. But isn’t this identical to the case concerning which Rav Aḥa bar Rav Avya sent a ruling that the second receives nothing?

אכסיף. קרי עליה ״אני ה׳ בעתה אחישנה״.

Rav Ilish was embarrassed by his mistake. To comfort him, Rav read the following verse about him: “I, YHWH, will hasten it in its time” (Isaiah 60:22), as if to say: It was due to Divine Providence that I was here to correct you before your mistaken ruling was implemented.

מתני׳ הכותב את נכסיו לאחרים והניח את בניו ⁠– מה שעשה עשוי, אלא אין רוח חכמים נוחה הימנו. רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר: אם לא היו בניו נוהגים כשורה ⁠– זכור לטוב.

Mishnah: With regard to one who wrote a document granting his property to others as a gift and left his sons with nothing, what he did is done, i.e., it takes effect; but the rabbis are displeased with him. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: If he did so because his sons were not acting properly, he is remembered positively.

גמ׳ איבעיא להו: מי פליגי רבנן עליה דרבן שמעון בן גמליאל, או לא?

Talmud: A dilemma was raised before the rabbis: Do the Rabbis disagree with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, maintaining that depriving one’s children of their inheritance is inappropriate in any event, or not?