Bava Batra 141A

אלא לאביי, מאי ״ניזון כבת״? ולטעמיך ⁠– לרבא מאי ״יורש כבן״? אלא ראוי לירש ⁠– ואין לו; הכא נמי, ראוי לזון ⁠– ואין לו.

But according to the opinion of Abaye, what does it mean that the tumtum is sustained as a daughter, since Abaye maintains that the tumtum does not have the rights of a daughter? The Talmud responds: And according to your reasoning, even according to Rava, what does it mean that a tumtum inherits as a son, since Rava concedes that the tumtum and sons do not actually inherit anything? Rather, the baraita means that it is fitting for the tumtum to inherit but he does not actually inherit. Here too, with regard to sustenance, according to Abaye, the baraita means that it is fitting for the tumtum to be sustained, but he is not actually sustained.

האומר: אם ילדה אשתי זכר וכו׳. למימרא דבת עדיפא ליה מבן? והא אמר רבי יוחנן משום רבי שמעון בן יוחאי: כל שאינו מניח בן ליורשו ⁠– הקדוש ברוך הוא מלא עליו עברה, שנאמר: ״והעברתם את נחלתו לבתו״⁠ – ואין ״העברה״ אלא עברה, שנאמר: ״יום עברה היום ההוא״!

§ The Mishnah teaches: With regard to one who says: If my wife gives birth to a male the offspring should receive 100 dinars, if she in fact gave birth to a male, the offspring receives 100 dinars. If he says: If my wife gives birth to a female the offspring should receive 200 dinars, if she in fact gave birth to a female, the offspring receives 200 dinars. The Talmud asks: Is this to say that for him a daughter is preferable to a son? But this seems to contradict what R' Yoḥanan says in the name of R' Shimon ben Yoḥai: With regard to anyone who does not leave behind a son to inherit from him, God is filled with anger upon him, as it is stated: “If a man dies, and has no son, then you should cause his inheritance to pass [veha’avartem] to his daughter” (Numbers 27:8). The term ha’avara means nothing other than anger, as it is stated: “That day is a day of anger [evra]” (Zephaniah 1:15).