Bava Batra 139A

והא תניא: שמין את המחוברין ללוקח!

But isn’t it taught in a baraita (Tosefta, Ketubot 8:5) that in a similar case, the court appraises the produce still connected to the ground for the purchaser of the land, who must pay the seller’s heirs for it? Accordingly, the connected produce also belongs to the heirs.

אמר עולא: לא קשיא; כאן בבנו, כאן באחר; הואיל ודעתו של אדם קרובה אצל בנו.

Ulla said that this is not difficult; here, in the Mishnah, the halakha is stated with regard to his son, who receives the connected produce after the father’s death. There, in the baraita, the halakha is stated with regard to another person who purchased the land from the son. Since a person’s disposition is favorable toward his son, the father certainly intended to bequeath the connected produce to his son together with the property itself. When the son sold it to another person, there was no such intention.

מתני׳ הניח בנים גדולים וקטנים ⁠– אין הגדולים מתפרנסין על ידי הקטנים, ולא הקטנים נזונין על הגדולים, אלא חולקין בשוה.

Mishnah: If a person died and left adult and minor sons, the adults are not provided for by using funds of the minors, and the minors are not sustained, i.e., they do not receive food, by using funds of the adults. Rather, they receive a share of the inheritance equally, and each son sees to his needs from his own share.

נשאו הגדולים ⁠– ישאו הקטנים. ואם אמרו קטנים: הרי אנו נושאין כדרך שנשאתם אתם ⁠– אין שומעין להם; אלא מה שנתן להם אביהם, נתן.

If the adults married, the minors marry, as the Talmud will explain. But if the minors say: We are marrying in the same manner that you adults married during our father’s lifetime, the court does not listen to them. Rather, whatever their father gave the adults in his lifetime he gave them, and the minors do not have the right to receive more than their share of the inheritance.