Study Bava Batra folio 147A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
דומה שיש לי בן, עכשיו שאין לי בן – נכסי לפלוני; היה חולה ומוטל במטה, ואמרו לו: נכסיו למי? אמר להן: דומה שאשתי מעוברת, עכשיו שאין אשתי מעוברת – נכסי לפלוני; ונודע שיש לו בן או שהיתה אשתו מעוברת – אין מתנתו מתנה.
Previously, I thought that I had a son. Now that I have been informed that I do not have a son, my property should be given to so-and-so. Or if he was ill and bedridden, and those present said to him: To whom should his property be given? And he said to them: Previously, I thought that my wife was pregnant. Now that I have been informed that my wife is not pregnant, my property should be given to so-and-so. And if it then became known, in either of those cases, that he had a son or that his wife was pregnant, his gift is not a valid gift, since he clearly indicated that he bestowed the gift on that recipient only because he thought he had no heir.
לימא רבי שמעון בן מנסיא היא, ולא רבנן? אפילו תימא רבנן, ״דומה״ שאני.
The Talmud asks: should we say that this is the opinion of R' Shimon ben Menasya and not the opinion of the Rabbis? The Talmud rejects this: You can even say that this is the opinion of the Rabbis, as the case where he said: I thought that I had a son, is different, since he stated the reason for his actions.
ודקארי לה – מאי קארי לה? מהו דתימא: צעריה הוא דקא מדכר, קא משמע לן.
Since the difference between the cases is obvious, the Talmud asks: He who asked it, why did he ask it? The Talmud replies: Lest you say that when the bedridden man mentioned that he does not have a son, he is mentioning it only as an expression of his sorrow, since the matter of the disposal of his estate brings it to mind, but he is not mentioning this as the reason for the gift, the baraita therefore teaches us that the reference to his son indicates that had he known that he had a son, he would not have given his property to others.