Study Bava Batra folio 135B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
לעולם אימא לך חייב; ושאני הכא, דכ״מנה לאחר בידך״ דמי.
Actually, I will say to you that one who responds to a claim that he does not know if he owes the 100 dinars is obligated to pay; but here, in the case of the brothers, it is different. The brothers are not obligated to share their portion with the man in question because the brother who testified is like one who claims: Another person has 100 dinars in your possession. Since the claimant is not the one who is owed the money, the other party can reject his claim by merely answering that he does not know whether he owes him.
§ The Mishnah teaches: If the man in question dies, the property he received from the father’s inheritance should return to its place, i.e., to the possession of the brother who testified on his behalf, and if the man in question received property from elsewhere, it is inherited by all the brothers equally. Rava raises a dilemma: With regard to the enhancement of the property received by the man in question from the portion of the brother who testified, where its enhanced value was the result of an enhancement that happened naturally, as opposed to one that resulted from exertion, what is the halakha? Who inherits it?
בשבח המגיע לכתפים – לא תיבעי לך, דכי נפלו לו נכסים ממקום אחר דמי. כי תיבעי לך – בשבח שאינו מגיע לכתפים; כגון דיקלא ואלים, ארעא ואסקא שרטון; מאי? תיקו.
The Talmud elaborates: With regard to enhancement that reaches shoulders, i.e., ripe produce that needs only to be harvested from the field, do not raise the dilemma, as it is considered like property that came into his possession from elsewhere. It is not considered part of the land that was given to him by the brother who testified, and it is therefore divided among all the brothers. Rather, let the dilemma be raised with regard to enhancement that does not reach shoulders, and is not considered separate from the ground, such as a palm tree that thickened, or land that yielded silt. What is the halakha in this case? Is the enhancement included in the property itself, or is it considered separate property? The Talmud comments: The dilemma should stand unresolved.