Inheritances Chapter 5

זֶה הַכְּלָל בְּיוֹרְשִׁין. כָּל שְׁנֵי יוֹרְשִׁין שֶׁאֶחָד מֵהֶן יוֹרֵשׁ וַדַּאי וְהַשֵּׁנִי סָפֵק אֵין לַסָּפֵק כְּלוּם. וְאִם הָיוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם סָפֵק שֶׁמָּא זֶהוּ הַיּוֹרֵשׁ אוֹ שֶׁמָּא זֶה הַיּוֹרֵשׁ חוֹלְקִין בְּשָׁוֶה. לְפִיכָךְ מִי שֶׁמֵּת וְהִנִּיחַ בֵּן וְטֻמְטוּם אוֹ אַנְדְּרוֹגִינוּס הֲרֵי הַבֵּן יוֹרֵשׁ אֶת הַכּל שֶׁהַטֻּמְטוּם וְהָאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוּס סָפֵק. הִנִּיחַ בָּנוֹת וְטֻמְטוּם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוּס יוֹרְשׁוֹת בְּשָׁוֶה וַהֲרֵי הוּא כְּאַחַת מִן הַבָּנוֹת:

The following principles apply with regard to questions concerning the right of inheritance: Whenever there are two prospective heirs, one who is definitely an heir and one whose right to inherit is a matter of question, the person whose right is in doubt does not receive anything. If there are two claimants whose rights are a matter of question, perhaps this one is an heir or perhaps the other is an heir, they divide the estate equally. Accordingly, if a person died and left a son and a tumtuni or an androgynous? the son inherits the entire estate. For the status of the tumtum or the androgynous is a matter of question. If he left daughters and a tumtum or an androgynous, they share equally in the inheritance. The tumtum or androgynous is considered as one of the daughters.

כְּבָר בֵּאַרְנוּ בְּהִלְכוֹת אִישׁוּת דִּין הַבָּנוֹת עִם הַבָּנִים בִּמְזוֹנוֹתֵיהֶן וּבְפַרְנָסָתָן וְשָׁם בֵּאַרְנוּ שֶׁהַמְּזוֹנוֹת מִתְּנָאֵי כְּתֻבָּה. בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַנְּכָסִים מְרֻבִּין אֵין לַבָּנוֹת אֶלָּא מְזוֹנוֹתֵיהֶן וְהַבָּנִים יִירְשׁוּ הַכּל וְיִתְפַּרְנְסוּ הַבָּנוֹת בְּעִשּׂוּר נְכָסִים כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּנָּשְׂאוּ בּוֹ לְבַעְלֵיהֶן. וּבִזְמַן שֶׁהַנְּכָסִים מוּעָטִין אֵין לַבָּנִים כְּלוּם אֶלָּא הַכּל לִמְזוֹן הַבָּנוֹת. לְפִיכָךְ מִי שֶׁמֵּת וְהִנִּיחַ בָּנִים וּבָנוֹת וְטֻמְטוּם אוֹ אַנְדְּרוֹגִינוּס. בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַנְּכָסִים מְרֻבִּין הַבָּנִים יוֹרְשִׁין וְדוֹחִין הַטֻּמְטוּם אֵצֶל הַבָּנוֹת וְנִזּוֹן כְּמוֹתָן. וּבִזְמַן שֶׁהַנְּכָסִין מוּעָטִין הַבָּנוֹת דּוֹחוֹת אֶת הַטֻּמְטוּם אֵצֶל הַבָּנִים וְאוֹמְרוֹת לוֹ זָכָר אַתָּה וְאֵין לְךָ עִמָּנוּ מְזוֹנוֹת:

In Hilchot Ishut, we explained the laws pertaining to the portions of an estate given to daughters from the sons' share to provide for the daughters' sustenance? and for their livelihood. There' we explained that the sustenance of the daughters is one of the provisions of the ketubah. When the estate is ample," the daughters receive only their sustenance. The sons inherit everything, and they should give dowries to the daughters of a tenth of the estate each so that men will desire to marry them as husbands. When the estate is limited, the sons do not receive anything. Instead, everything is set aside for the daughters' sustenance. Accordingly, the following rules apply when a person died and left sons, daughters and a tumtum or an androgynous. If the estate is ample, the sons inherit the estate and compel the tumtum to be treated as one of the daughters. He is given only his sustenance as they are. If the estate is limited, the daughters compel the tumtum to be treated as one of the sons. They tell him: "You are a male and hence you are not entitled to receive your sustenance as we are."

מִי שֶׁלֹּא שָׁהֲתָה אַחַר בַּעְלָהּ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים וְנִשֵּׂאת וְיָלְדָה בֵּן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אִם בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה לְרִאשׁוֹן אוֹ בֶּן שִׁבְעָה לְאַחֲרוֹן אֵין זֶה הַבֵּן יוֹרֵשׁ אֶת אֶחָד מִשְּׁנֵיהֶם מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא סָפֵק. וְאִם מֵת הַבֵּן שְׁנֵיהֶן יוֹרְשִׁין אוֹתוֹ וְחוֹלְקִין בְּשָׁוֶה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם סָפֵק שֶׁמָּא זֶה אָבִיו אוֹ זֶה אָבִיו:

The following rules apply when a woman did not wait three months after parting from her husband, but instead, married within that time and gave birth to a son. We do not know if the son was born after nine months and is her first husband's child or was born after seven months and was her second husband's son. This son does not inherit the estate of either father, because his claim is doubtful. If this son dies, both of them inherit his estate, sharing it equally, because both of their claims are doubtful. Maybe this one is his father? Or maybe the other one?

יְבָמָה שֶׁלֹּא שָׁהֲתָה שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים וְנִתְיַבְּמָה בְּתוֹךְ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים וְיָלְדָה בֵּן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אִם בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה לָרִאשׁוֹן אוֹ בֶּן שִׁבְעָה לָאַחֲרוֹן. זֶה הַסָּפֵק אוֹמֵר שֶׁמָּא בֶּן הַמֵּת אֲנִי וְאִירַשׁ אֶת נִכְסֵי אָבִי כֻּלָּן וְאֵין אַתָּה רָאוּי לְיַבֵּם אוֹתָהּ שֶׁאֵין אִמִּי בַּת יִבּוּם וְהַיָּבָם אוֹמֵר שֶׁמָּא בְּנִי אַתָּה וְאִמְּךָ רְאוּיָה לְיַבֵּם וְאֵין לְךָ בְּנִכְסֵי אָחִי כְּלוּם. הוֹאִיל וְגַם זֶה הַיָּבָם סָפֵק שֶׁמָּא יָבָם הוּא אוֹ אֵינוֹ יָבָם חוֹלְקִין בְּשָׁוֶה. וְכֵן דִּין זֶה הַסָּפֵק עִם בְּנֵי הַיָּבָם בְּנִכְסֵי הַמֵּת שֶׁנִּתְיַבְּמָה אִשְׁתּוֹ חוֹלְקִין בְּשָׁוֶה הַסָּפֵק נוֹטֵל מֶחֱצָה וּבְנֵי הַיָּבָם מֶחֱצָה. מֵת הַיָּבָם אַחַר שֶׁחָלַק עִם זֶה הַסָּפֵק וּבָאוּ בְּנֵי הַיָּבָם הָרְאוּיִים לִירַשׁ אֲבִיהֶם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לְזֶה הַסָּפֵק לוֹמַר אִם אֲחִיכֶם אֲנִי תְּנוּ לִי חֵלֶק בִּירֻשָּׁה זוֹ וְאִם אֵינִי אֲחִיכֶם הַחְזִירוּ לִי הַחֵצִי שֶׁלָּקַח אֲבִיכֶם אֵין לְזֶה הַסָּפֵק בְּנִכְסֵי אֲבִיהֶן עִמָּהֶן כְּלוּם וְאֵין מוֹצִיא מִיָּדָן:

The following laws apply when a childless widow did not wait three months after her first husband's death, married her husband's brother and bore a son. We do not know if the son was born after nine months and is her first husband's child, or was born after seven months and was her second husband's son. With regard to the inheritance of the estate of the woman's first husband, the son whose parentage is doubtful says: "Perhaps I am the son of the deceased, in which instance I would inherit my father's entire estate. You would not be fit to marry my mother, for she would not be required to perform the rite of yibbumP The brother who married her says: "Perhaps you are my son and thus your mother was required to perform the rite of yibbwn. You have no right to my brother's estate." Since not only the status of the "son," but also that of the brother who married the widow is doubtful, they share the estate equally. The same laws apply when this "son" whose status is doubtful and the other sons of the brother who married the widow come to divide the estate of the brother whose widow was married. They divide the estate equally. The "son" whose status is doubtful receives half, and the other sons of the brother who married the widow receive half. If the brother who married the widow died after dividing the estate of his deceased brother with the son whose status is doubtful, the sons of that brother who are fit to inherit his estate are granted it. The son whose status is doubtful may feel entitled to claim: "If I am your brother, give me a share in this estate. And if I am not your brother, return to me the half of my father's estate that your father took." This claim is not accepted. Instead, the son whose status is doubtful is not given any share in the estate of the brother who married the widow; he does not expropriate property from them.

סָפֵק וְהַיָּבָם שֶׁבָּאוּ לַחְלֹק בְּנִכְסֵי הָאָב הֲרֵי הַיָּבָם יוֹרֵשׁ וַדַּאי וְזֶה הַסָּפֵק אִם הוּא בֶּן הַמֵּת יֵשׁ לוֹ חֲצִי הַמָּמוֹן וּלְזֶה הַיָּבָם חֲצִי. וְאִם הוּא בֶּן הַיָּבָם אֵין לוֹ כְּלוּם. לְפִיכָךְ הַיָּבָם יוֹרֵשׁ וְיִדָּחֶה הַסָּפֵק. הִנִּיחַ הַיָּבָם שְׁנֵי בָּנִים וַדָּאִין וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת הַיָּבָם הֲרֵי הַסָּפֵק אוֹמֵר אֲנִי בֶּן הַמֵּת וְיֵשׁ לִי מֶחֱצָה וְלִשְׁנֵיכֶם מֶחֱצָה וְהַשְּׁנַיִם אוֹמְרִים אַתָּה אָחִינוּ וּבֶן הַיָּבָם אַתָּה וְאֵין לְךָ אֶלָּא שְׁלִישׁ בְּנִכְסֵי הַזָּקֵן הַחֵצִי שֶׁמּוֹדֶה לָהֶם בּוֹ נוֹטְלִין וְהִשְׁלִישׁ שֶׁמּוֹדִין הֵן לוֹ נוֹטֵל וְהַשְּׁתוּת הַנִּשְׁאָר חוֹלְקִים אוֹתוֹ בְּשָׁוֶה הוּא נוֹטֵל חֶצְיוֹ וּשְׁנֵיהֶם חֶצְיוֹ. מֵת הַסָּפֵק הֲרֵי הַיָּבָם אוֹמֵר שֶׁמָּא בְּנִי הוּא וַאֲנִי אִירָשֶׁנּוּ וַאֲבִי הַיָּבָם אוֹמֵר שֶׁמָּא בֶּן בְּנִי הַמֵּת הוּא וַאֲנִי אִירָשֶׁנּוּ חוֹלְקִין בְּשָׁוֶה (מֵת הַיָּבָם הַסָּפֵק אוֹמֵר בְּנוֹ אֲנִי וְאִירָשֶׁנּוּ וַאֲבִי הַיָּבָם אוֹמֵר שֶׁמָּא בֶּן בְּנִי הָאַחֵר אַתָּה וְזֶה אֲחִי אָבִיךָ הוּא וַאֲנִי אִירָשֶׁנּוּ חוֹלְקִין בְּשָׁוֶה):

The following rules apply when the son whose status is doubtful and the brother who married the widow come to divide the estate of the father of the family. The brother who married the widow is definitely an heir. In this instance as well, there is a question concerning the rights of the son whose status is doubtful. If he is the son of the deceased brother, he receives half; if he is the son of the brother who married the widow, he does not receive anything. Therefore, the estate should be given to the brother and the son whose status is doubtful should be overlooked. The following principles apply with regard to the inheritance of the grandfather's estate if the brother who married the widow left two sons whose lineage is definite and died. The son whose status is doubtful claims: "I am the son of the deceased brother. Hence, I should receive half and you two should receive half." The two sons say: "You are our brother and the son of the brother who married the widow. Hence, you deserve only one third of the estate of our grandfather." ? The two sons receive the half that the son whose status is doubtful acknowledges as belonging to them. The third that they acknowledge as belonging to him is given to him, and the remaining sixth is divided equally: he receives half of it and they receive half of it. ? If the son whose status is doubtful dies, the brother who married the widow may claim: "Perhaps he is my son and I have the right to inherit his estate." His father may say: "Perhaps he is the son of my deceased son and I have the right to inherit his estate." In such a situation, they should divide the estate equally. (If the son who married the widow died, the son whose status is doubtful may claim: "He is my father and I have the right to inherit his estate." His father may say: "Perhaps you are the son of my other son and this is your father's brother. Thus, I have the right to inherit his estate." In such a situation, they should divide the estate equally.)

מִי שֶׁנָּפַל הַבַּיִת עָלָיו וְעַל אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אִם הָאִשָּׁה מֵתָה תְּחִלָּה וְנִמְצְאוּ יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבַּעַל יוֹרְשִׁין כָּל נְכָסֶיהָ אוֹ הַבַּעַל מֵת תְּחִלָּה וְנִמְצְאוּ יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאִשָּׁה יוֹרְשִׁין כָּל נְכָסֶיהָ כֵּיצַד דִּינָם. מַעֲמִידִין נִכְסֵי מְלוֹג בְּחֶזְקַת יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאִשָּׁה וְהַכְּתֻבָּה עִקָּר וְהַתּוֹסֶפֶת בְּחֶזְקַת יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבַּעַל וְחוֹלְקִין בְּנִכְסֵי צֹאן בַּרְזֶל יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאִשָּׁה נוֹטְלִין חֶצְיָן וְיוֹרְשֵׁי הַבַּעַל חֶצְיָן. אֲבָל אִם נָפַל הַבַּיִת עָלָיו וְעַל אִמּוֹ מַעֲמִידִין נִכְסֵי הָאֵם בְּחֶזְקַת יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאֵם שֶׁהֵם יוֹרְשִׁין וַדָּאִין אֲבָל יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבֵּן סָפֵק הֵם שֶׁאִם מֵת הַבֵּן תְּחִלָּה אֵין לְאֶחָיו מֵאָבִיו בְּנִכְסֵי אִמָּן כְּלוּם כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

The following rules apply when a house fell on a person and his wife and they both died. It is not known if the woman died first, in which instance the heirs of her husband inherit her entire estate, or the husband died first, and the woman's heirs inherit her estate. How is the issue resolved? We consider the nichsei m'log to be in the possession of the woman's heirs. The money due her by virtue of her ketubah - both the essential obligation and the additional amount - are considered to be in the possession of her husband's heirs. Her nichsei tzon barzel are divided, half are given to the woman's heirs and half to the husband's heirs. If a house fell on a person and his mother, the estate of the mother may be retained by her heirs from her father's household, for they are definitely heirs. The status of the heirs of the son, by contrast, is doubtful. For if the son died first, his paternal brothers do not have a share in the inheritance of his mother, as we have explained.

נָפַל הַבַּיִת עָלָיו וְעַל בֶּן בִּתּוֹ אִם הָאָב מֵת תְּחִלָּה בֶּן בִּתּוֹ יִירָשֶׁנּוּ וְנִמְצְאוּ הַנְּכָסִים שֶׁל יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבֵּן. וְאִם בֶּן בִּתּוֹ מֵת תְּחִלָּה אֵין הַבֵּן יוֹרֵשׁ אֶת אִמּוֹ בַּקֶּבֶר כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ וְנִמְצְאוּ הַנְּכָסִים שֶׁל יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאָב. לְפִיכָךְ יַחְלְקוּ יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאָב עִם יוֹרְשֵׁי בֶּן הַבַּת. וְכֵן אִם [נִשְׁבָּה] הָאָב וּמֵת בֶּן בִּתּוֹ בַּמְּדִינָה אוֹ שֶׁנִּשְׁבָּה הַבֵּן וּמֵת אֲבִי אִמּוֹ בַּמְּדִינָה יַחְלְקוּ יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאָב עִם יוֹרְשֵׁי בֶּן הַבַּת:

The following rules apply if a house fell on a person and his daughter's son. If the father died first, his daughter's son would inherit his estate, and thus the estate would be given to the son's heirs. If his daughter's son died first, the son does not inherit his mother's estate after his death as we have explained. Thus, the estate would be given to the father's heirs. Since we do not know who died first, the father's heirs should divide his estate with the heirs of his daughter's son. Similar rules apply if the father was taken captive and died while in captivity, and his daughter's son died in his city, or conversely, the son was taken captive and died while in captivity and his mother's father died in his city. Since we do not know who died first, the father's heirs should divide his estate with the heirs of his daughter's son.

נָפַל עָלָיו הַבַּיִת וְעַל אָבִיו אוֹ שְׁאָר מוֹרִישִׁין וְעָלָיו כְּתֻבַּת אִשָּׁה וּבַעֲלֵי חוֹב. יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאָב אוֹמְרִין מֵת הַבֵּן תְּחִלָּה וְלֹא הִנִּיחַ כְּלוּם וְאָבַד הַחוֹב וּבַעֲלֵי חוֹבוֹת אוֹמְרִים הָאָב מֵת תְּחִלָּה וְזָכָה הַבֵּן בִּירֻשָּׁתוֹ וְיֵשׁ לָנוּ לִגְבּוֹת מֵחֶלְקוֹ. הֲרֵי הַנְּכָסִים בְּחֶזְקַת הַיּוֹרְשִׁין וְעַל הָאִשָּׁה וּבַעֲלֵי חוֹבוֹת לְהָבִיא רְאָיָה אוֹ יֵלְכוּ לָהֶם בְּלֹא כְּלוּם:

The following rules apply if a house fell on a person and his father or on other person whose estates he would acquire, and the son was responsible for the money due his wife by virtue of her ketubah and other debts. The father's heirs claim that the son died first without leaving an estate. Hence, the debts will remain unpaid. The creditors maintain that the father died first, and thus the son acquired the inheritance. Hence, they have a source from which they can collect the debts owed them. The estate is considered to be in the possession of the heirs. The son's wife or the creditors must prove that the father died first, or they must depart without receiving anything.

דִּין אֵלּוּ שֶׁמֵּתוּ תַּחַת הַמַּפּלֶת. אוֹ שֶׁטָּבְעוּ בַּיָּם. אוֹ שֶׁנָּפְלוּ לָאֵשׁ. אוֹ שֶׁמֵּתוּ בְּיוֹם אֶחָד וְזֶה בִּמְדִינָה זוֹ וְהָאַחֵר בִּמְדִינָה אַחֶרֶת. דִּין אֶחָד הוּא. שֶׁבְּכָל אֵלּוּ וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן אֵין יוֹדְעִין מִי הוּא שֶׁמֵּת תְּחִלָּה:

The same laws apply to people who die in a landslide, were drowned at sea, fell into a fire, or died on the same day in different countries. For in all these and other analogous situations, we do not know who died first.