הלכות זכייה ומתנה
27 halachot · Hebrew + English
הַסוּמָא אוֹ הַפִּסֵּחַ. אוֹ הַגִּדֵּם. אוֹ הַחוֹשֵׁשׁ בְּרֹאשׁוֹ. אוֹ בְּעֵינוֹ. אוֹ בְּיָדוֹ אוֹ בְּרַגְלוֹ וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן הֲרֵי הוּא כְּבָרִיא לְכָל דְּבָרָיו בְּמִקָּחוֹ אוֹ בְּמִמְכָּרוֹ וּמַתְּנוֹתָיו:
A blind, lame or handless person, and similarly, one who feels pain in his head, his eye, his hand, his foot or the like, is considered to be a healthy person with regard to all matters that concern his purchases, his sales or gifts that he gives.
אֲבָל הַחוֹלֶה שֶׁתָּשַׁשׁ כֹּחַ כָּל הַגּוּף. וְכָשַׁל כֹּחוֹ מֵחֲמַת הַחֹלִי עַד שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהַלֵּךְ עַל רַגְלוֹ בַּשּׁוּק וַהֲרֵי הוּא נוֹפֵל עַל הַמִּטָּה. הוּא [הַנִּקְרָא] שְׁכִיב מֵרַע. וּמִשְׁפְּטֵי מַתְּנוֹתָיו אֵינָם כְּמַתְּנַת בָּרִיא. כֵּיצַד. שְׁכִיב מֵרַע שֶׁצִּוָּה וְאָמַר לִתֵּן לִפְלוֹנִי כָּךְ וְכָךְ בֵּין בְּחל בֵּין בְּשַׁבָּת. בֵּין כָּתַב בֵּין לֹא כָּתַב. זָכוּ הַכּל כְּשֶׁיָּמוּת בְּכָל מַה שֶּׁנָּתַן לָהֶם וְאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ קִנְיָן. שֶׁדִּבְרֵי שְׁכִיב מֵרַע כִּכְתוּבִין וְכִמְסוּרִין הֵן. וְדָבָר זֶה מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם עָשׂוּ אוֹתָהּ כְּשֶׁל תּוֹרָה. כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תִּטָּרֵף דַּעְתּוֹ עָלָיו כְּשֶׁיֵּדַע שֶׁאֵין דְּבָרָיו קַיָּמִים:
However, when a person becomes ill to the extent that he feels weak throughout his entire body - indeed, because of his illness, his strength has dwindled to the extent that he cannot walk on his feet in the market place, and he is confined to his bed - he is referred to as a sh'chiv me'ra. The laws applying to his gifts differ from those applying to the gifts given by a healthy person. What is implied? When a sh'chiv me'ra gives orders and says: "Give so and so such and such, and so and so such and such" the intended recipients acquire all the property apportioned to them when the sick person dies. This applies whether he issued his instructions during the week or on the Sabbath, and whether or not a written record was drawn up. Nor must his instructions be confirmed by a kinyan for the statements of a sh'chiv me'ra are considered as if they have been written down, and transferred. This is a Rabbinic decree. Nevertheless, although it is only a Rabbinic decree, our Sages conveyed upon this convention the power of Scriptural Law, so that a dying person will not become exasperated, knowing that his words are of no consequence.
לְפִיכָךְ אִם אָמַר קְנוּ מִמֶּנִּי. אֲפִלּוּ בְּשַׁבָּת קוֹנִין מִמֶּנּוּ, שֶׁזֶּה הַקִּנְיָן אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ:
Accordingly, if the dying man says: "Confirm my statements with a kinyan" we confirm his statements even on the Sabbath. For this kinyan is unnecessary.
וְאֵין שְׁכִיב מֵרַע צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר אַתֶּם עֵדַי. אֶלָּא כָּל הַשּׁוֹמֵעַ אֶת דְּבָרָיו הֲרֵי זֶה עֵד. שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מְשַׁטֶּה בִּשְׁעַת מִיתָה:
When apportioning his property, a sh'chiv me'ra does not have to say: "You are my witnesses." Instead, whoever hears his statements may serve as a witness. The rationale is that a person does not speak facetiously at the time of his death.
שְׁכִיב מֵרַע שֶׁצִּוָּה לָתֵת מַתָּנָה לְעֻבָּר שֶׁבִּמְעֵי אִמּוֹ. זָכָה הָעֻבָּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁדַּעְתּוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם קְרוֹבָה אֵצֶל בְּנוֹ כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:
When a sh'chiv me'ra orders that a gift be given to a fetus in its mother's womb, the fetus acquires the property. The rationale is that a person has unique feelings of closeness toward his son, as we have explained.
אָמַר אִם יָלְדָה אִשְׁתִּי זָכָר יִטּל מָנֶה וְאִם נְקֵבָה מָאתַיִם. וְיָלְדָה זָכָר. נוֹטֵל מָנֶה. יָלְדָה נְקֵבָה נוֹטֶלֶת מָאתַיִם. יָלְדָה זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה הַזָּכָר נוֹטֵל מָנֶה וְהַנְּקֵבָה מָאתַיִם. יָלְדָה טֻמְטוּם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוּס נוֹטֵל כַּפָּחוּת שֶׁבִּשְׁנֵיהֶם:
When a sh'chiv me'ra says: "If my wife gives birth to a boy he should receive a maneh, but if she gives birth to a girl she should receive 200 zuz," if she gives birth to a boy, he receives a maneh, and if she gives birth to a girl, she receives 200 zuz. If she gives birth to both a boy and a girl, the boy receives a maneh, and the girl, 200 zuz. If she gives birth to a tumtum or an androgynous, that child should be given the lesser of the two amounts.
שְׁכִיב מֵרַע שֶׁאָמְרוּ לוֹ נְכָסָיו לְמִי. וְאָמַר לָהֶם דּוֹמֶה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בֵּן אוֹ שֶׁאִשְׁתּוֹ מְעֻבֶּרֶת. עַכְשָׁו שֶׁאֵין לוֹ בֵּן אוֹ שֶׁאֵין אִשְׁתּוֹ מְעֻבֶּרֶת נְכָסָיו לִפְלוֹנִי. וְנוֹדַע שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בֵּן אוֹ שֶׁהָיְתָה אִשְׁתּוֹ מְעֻבֶּרֶת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִפִּילָה אוֹ מֵת הַבֵּן אַחַר כָּךְ. אֵין מַתְּנָתוֹ מַתָּנָה:
The following rule applies when a sh'chiv me'ra is asked: "To whom should your property be given?" and he replies: "I thought that I had a son or that my wife is pregnant; now that I know that I do not have a son and my wife is not pregnant, my property should be given to so and so." If it is discovered that in fact he had a son or his wife was pregnant - even if afterwards the wife miscarried or the son died - the gift is not binding.
מַתְּנַת שְׁכִיב מֵרַע אֵינָהּ קוֹנָה אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מִיתָה. וְאֵין אַחֵר זוֹכֶה בַּדָּבָר שֶׁצִּוָּה לוֹ בֵּין מְקַרְקְעִין בֵּין מִטַּלְטְלִין אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מִיתָה:
Ownership of a gift given by a sh'chiv me'ra is not transferred until after the death of the sh'chiv me'ra. No one acquires any of the landed property or movable property apportioned to him until after the death of the sh'chiv me'ra.
לְפִיכָךְ מוֹצִיאִין לִכְתֻבַּת הָאִשָּׁה וּמְזוֹן הָאַלְמָנָה וְהַבָּנוֹת מִיַּד אֵלּוּ שֶׁצִּוָּה לָתֵת לָהֶם. שֶׁהֲרֵי בְּמִיתָתוֹ נִתְחַיְּבוּ הַנְּכָסִים בִּכְתֻבָּה וּבִמְזוֹנוֹת. וְאֵלּוּ שֶׁנָּתַן לָהֶם לֹא יִקְנוּ אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מִיתָה:
For this reason, we expropriate money to pay the ketubah, and the living expenses for the deceased's wife and his daughters from the property that the sh'chiv me'ra apportioned to the intended recipients. The rationale is that with his death, his estate became obligated to pay his wife the money due her by virtue of her ketubah and her living expenses, and the recipients of the gifts did not acquire what was given to them until after the death of the sh'chiv me'ra.
מַתְּנַת שְׁכִיב מֵרַע שֶׁכָּתוּב בָּהּ קִנְיָן. בֵּין שֶׁהָיְתָה בְּמִקְצָת נְכָסָיו בֵּין שֶׁהָיְתָה בְּכָל נְכָסָיו. חוֹשְׁשִׁין לָהּ שֶׁמָּא לֹא גָּמַר לְהַקְנוֹתוֹ אֶלָּא בִּשְׁטָר. וְהוֹאִיל וּמַתָּנָה זוֹ לֹא תִּקָּנֶה אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מִיתָה. אֵין שְׁטָר לְאַחַר מִיתָה וַהֲרֵי הַמַּתָּנָה בְּטֵלָה:
When a document recording a gift given by a sh'chiv me'ra mentions a kinyan - whether it involves a portion of the deceased's estate or his entire estate - there are doubts about the matter. Perhaps he did not make up his mind to transfer ownership except via a legal document. In such an instance, the gift would not be effective. For a gift given by a sh'chiv me'ra takes effect only after the principal's death, and a legal document cannot transfer property after the principal's death.
וְאִם קָנוּ מִמֶּנּוּ כְּדֵי לְיַפּוֹת כֹּחַ הַמְקַבֵּל. כְּגוֹן שֶׁכָּתוּב וְקָנִינוּ מִמֶּנּוּ מוֹסִיף עַל מַתָּנָה זוֹ. הֲרֵי הִיא קַיֶּמֶת:
If, however, the kinyan was made solely to augment the legal power of the recipient - e.g., it was written: "And a kinyan was performed to amplify this gift" - the gift is binding.
שְׁכִיב מֵרַע שֶׁאָמַר כִּתְבוּ וּתְנוּ לִפְלוֹנִי מָנֶה. וּמֵת קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּכְתְּבוּ וְיִתְּנוּ לוֹ. אֵין כּוֹתְבִין וְאֵין נוֹתְנִין. שֶׁמָּא לֹא גָּמַר לְהַקְנוֹתוֹ אֶלָּא בִּשְׁטָר וְאֵין שְׁטָר לְאַחַר מִיתָה:
When a sh'chiv me'ra says: "Compose a record and give to so and so a maneh," but he dies before the record was composed and the gift was given to him, the record should not be composed, nor should the gift be given. We suspect that perhaps the sh'chiv me'ra made up his mind to transfer the gift to the recipient via a legal document, and a legal document cannot effect a transfer after the principal's death.
וְאִם אָמַר כִּתְבוּ. כְּדֵי לְיַפּוֹת כֹּחַ הַמְקַבֵּל. כְּגוֹן שֶׁאָמַר תְּנוּ מָנֶה לִפְלוֹנִי וְאָמַר וְאַף כִּתְבוּ וּתְנוּ לוֹ. הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כּוֹתְבִין וְחוֹתְמִין וְנוֹתְנִין לְאַחַר מִיתָה:
If, however, he said "Compose a record" solely to augment the legal power of the recipient - e.g., he said; "Give so and so a maneh" - and then he added, "and compose a record and give it to him" - a legal record should be composed, signed and given even after the death of the sh'chiv me'ra.
שְׁכִיב מֵרַע שֶׁכָּתַב כָּל נְכָסָיו מַתָּנָה סְתָם וְלֹא שִׁיֵּר כְּלוּם. אִם עָמַד חוֹזֵר. וַאֲפִלּוּ קָנוּ מִיָּדוֹ כְּדֵי לְיַפּוֹת אֶת כֹּחוֹ. בֵּין שֶׁהִקְנָה כָּל נְכָסָיו לְאֶחָד בֵּין שֶׁכְּתָבָם לִשְׁנַיִם. שֶׁאֹמֶד דַּעַת הוּא שֶׁלֹּא נָתַן זֶה הַכּל אֶלָּא שֶׁנִּתְכַּוֵּן שֶׁלֹּא יִקְנוּ כְּלוּם אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מוֹתוֹ:
The following rule applies when a sh'chiv me'ra apportions all his property unconditionally, without retaining anything for himself: If he recovers, the gift is retracted. This applies even if he confirmed his statements with a kinyan to augment the legal power of the recipient. Similarly, it applies whether he apportioned all his property to one individual or to two individuals. The rationale is that we assume that he did not want to give all his property to that persons as a gift, and his intent was that the recipient should not acquire anything until after he died.
שִׁיֵּר כְּלוּם לְעַצְמוֹ בֵּין קַרְקַע בֵּין מִטַּלְטְלִין. הֲרֵי זוֹ מַתָּנָה בְּמִקְצָת וּסְתָמָהּ כְּמַתְּנַת בָּרִיא שֶׁקּוֹנֶה מִזְּמַן הַכְּתִיבָה. לְפִיכָךְ אֵינוֹ חוֹזֵר. וְהוּא שֶׁקָּנוּ מִיָּדוֹ. שֶׁמַּתְּנַת שְׁכִיב מֵרַע בְּמִקְצָת צְרִיכָה קִנְיָן. בֵּין עָמַד בֵּין לֹא עָמַד:
If he retains anything for himself - either landed property or movable property - he has given only part of his property as a gift. If such a gift is given without an explicit statement of intent, it is considered to be a gift given by a healthy man, and it is effective from the time it was written. Therefore, it is not retracted upon the recovery of the sh'chiv me'ra. This applies provided he confirms the gift with a kinyan. For a gift given by a sh'chiv me'ra that transfers only part of his property requires a kinyan whether he recovers or does not recover.
בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּשֶׁנָּתַן סְתָם. שֶׁהֲרֵי אָנוּ אוֹמְדִין דַּעְתּוֹ וְאוֹמְרִין הוֹאִיל וְשִׁיֵּר לֹא נִתְכַּוֵּן אֶלָּא לְהַקְנוֹת לוֹ מֵחַיִּים בְּמַתְּנַת בָּרִיא:
When does the above apply? When the person gave the gift without making any explicit statement. In such an instance, we assess his intent and presume that since he retained property, his intent was to transfer the property during his lifetime, like a gift given by a healthy man.
אֲבָל אִם נָתַן לוֹ הַמִּקְצָת בְּפֵרוּשׁ בְּמַתְּנַת שְׁכִיב מֵרַע שֶׁאֵינוֹ אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מִיתָה אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ קִנְיָן. וְאִם עָמַד חוֹזֵר. וְאִם לֹא עָמַד קָנָה זֶה הַמִּקְצָת. וְאִם הָיָה בָּהּ קִנְיָן לֹא קָנָה אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הָיָה מְיַפֶּה כֹּחוֹ כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:
If, however, the dying man explicitly states that he is giving the portion of estate as a gift of a sh'chiv me'ra, which takes effect only after his death, there is no need to confirm it with a kinyan, and if he recovers it is retracted. If, however, he does not recover, the intended recipient acquires that portion of the estate. If such a gift was confirmed by a kinyan, the intended recipient does not acquire the property apportioned to him unless the kinyan was intended to amplify the legal power of the recipient, as explained above.
אַל תִּטְעֶה בִּשְׁכִיב מֵרַע שֶׁכָּתַב כָּל נְכָסָיו וּפֵרֵשׁ שֶׁנָּתַן הַכּל מֵעַכְשָׁו וְהִקְנָה מֵחַיִּים. שֶׁאֵין זֶה מַתְּנַת שְׁכִיב מֵרַע אֶלָּא כִּשְׁאָר כָּל מַתְּנוֹת הַבְּרִיאִים. שֶׁאִם הִגִּיעַ הַשְּׁטָר לְיַד הַמְקַבֵּל אוֹ שֶׁקָּנוּ מִיַּד הַנּוֹתֵן קָנָה הַכּל וְאֵין יָכוֹל לַחְזֹר בּוֹ:
Do not err: Should a dying man apportion all his property and state explicitly that he is giving everything from the present, and that his gift should take effect during his lifetime - such a gift is not governed by the laws pertaining to a gift of a sh'chiv me'ra. Instead, it is like any other gift given by a healthy person. If the legal document reaches the hand of the recipient, or the giver confirms the gift with a kinyan, the recipient acquires everything, and the giver cannot retract.
הַנּוֹתֵן מַתָּנָה כְּשֶׁהוּא שְׁכִיב מֵרַע וְכָתַב בָּהּ בַּחַיִּים וּבַמָּוֶת אוֹ מֵחַיִּים וּבַמָּוֶת. בֵּין בַּכּל בֵּין בְּמִקְצָת. הוֹאִיל וְכָתוּב בּוֹ וּבַמָּוֶת הֲרֵי זוֹ מַתְּנַת שְׁכִיב מֵרַע. שֶׁזּוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בָּהּ וּבַמָּוֶת שֶׁלֹּא יִקְנֶה אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מִיתָה. וְזֶה שֶׁכָּתוּב בָּהּ מֵחַיִּים סִימָן לְיַשֵּׁב אֶת דַּעְתּוֹ שֶׁיִּחְיֶה מֵחֹלִי זֶה:
When a person on his deathbed gives a gift and, its legal record states: "In life and in death ..." or "From my life and in my death ...," it is considered to be a gift given by a sh'chiv me'ra, because it says "in death." This applies whether the dying man apportions all his property or only a portion of it. The expression "in death" indicates that the intent is that the gift should take effect after the giver's death. It says "in life" only to settle the giver's mind and express a prayer that that he will survive this illness.
שְׁכִיב מֵרַע שֶׁנָּתַן הַנְּכָסִים שֶׁהַדָּבָר גָּלוּי שֶׁהֵן כָּל נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ. הֲרֵי זֶה כְּמַתָּנָה בְּמִקְצָת וְאִם קָנוּ מִיָּדוֹ וְעָמַד אֵינוֹ חוֹזֵר. חוֹשְׁשִׁין אָנוּ שֶׁמָּא נִשְׁאֲרוּ לוֹ נְכָסִים אֲחֵרִים בִּמְדִינַת הַיָּם. עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר כָּל נְכָסַי שֶׁהֵן אֵלּוּ אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה מֻחְזָק שֶׁאֵין לוֹ נְכָסִים אֶלָּא אֵלּוּ. וְאַחַר כָּךְ תִּהְיֶה הַמַּתָּנָה בַּכּל:
Even though a person on his deathbed apportions all the property that he is known to possess, it is considered as if he apportioned only part of his estate. If the sh'chiv me'ra confirmed the gift with a kinyan and then recovered, the gift is not retracted. The rationale is that we suspect that he owns other property in a distant country. This law applies unless the dying man says: "All my property that is these...," or unless it is the common assumption that the person owns only the property that he apportioned. In such instances, the gift is considered to apply to all his property.
שְׁכִיב מֵרַע שֶׁכָּתַב כָּל נְכָסָיו לַאֲחֵרִים. רוֹאִין. אִם כִּמְחַלֵּק כְּתָבָם. מֵת קָנוּ כֻּלָּן. עָמַד חוֹזֵר בְּכֻלָּן. וְאִם כְּנִמְלַךְ אַחַר שֶׁשִּׁיֵּר חָזַר וְכָתַב וְקָנוּ מִיָּדוֹ עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. מֵת קָנוּ כֻּלָּן. עָמַד אֵינוֹ חוֹזֵר אֶלָּא בָּאַחֲרוֹן שֶׁהֲרֵי נָתַן לוֹ כָּל הַנְּכָסִים הַנִּשְׁאָרִים:
The following rules apply when a sh'chiv me'ra apportions all his property to other people. We see whether it appears that his intent was to divide his estate. If that is so, if he dies all the intended recipients acquire the property designated for them. If he recovers, all the gifts are retracted. Different laws apply if, however, it appears that he was reconsidering the matter - e.g., after he made a gift with which he left over part of his property, he paused and then apportioned more, and then paused and then apportioned more and confirmed each of his gifts with a kinyan. If he dies, all the intended recipients acquire the property designated for them. If he recovers, only the final gift he designated is retracted. For this person alone was given all his remaining property.
הַכּוֹתֵב כָּל נְכָסָיו לְעַבְדּוֹ וְעָמַד חוֹזֵר בַּנְּכָסִים וְאֵינוֹ חוֹזֵר בָּעֶבֶד. שֶׁהֲרֵי יָצָא עָלָיו שֵׁם בֶּן חוֹרִין:
When a sh'chiv me'ra signs over all his property to one of his servants and then recovers, the gift of the property is retracted. The gift of freedom to the slave, however, is not retracted, for he has already gained the reputation of being a free man.
שְׁכִיב מֵרַע שֶׁצִּוָּה מֵחֲמַת מִיתָה. כְּגוֹן שֶׁהָיְתָה דַּעְתּוֹ נוֹטָה שֶׁהוּא מֵת וַדַּאי. וְנִכָּר דָּבָר זֶה מִכְּלַל דְּבָרָיו. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁקָּנוּ מִיָּדוֹ בְּמִקְצָת אִם עָמַד חוֹזֵר:
When a sh'chiv me'ra apportions his property because of his impending death - i.e., he thinks that he will die, and this is obvious from his words - even though a kinyan is made to confirm the gift of a portion of his estate - if he recovers, the gift is retracted.
וְהַמְפָרֵשׁ בַּיָּם. וְהַיּוֹצֵא בְּשַׁיָּרָא. וְהַיּוֹצֵא בְּקוֹלָר. וְהַמְסֻכָּן וְהוּא שֶׁקָּפַץ עָלָיו הַחֹלִי וְהִכְבִּיד עָלָיו חָלְיוֹ. כָּל אֶחָד מֵאַרְבַּעְתָּן כִּמְצַוֶּה מֵחֲמַת מִיתָה. וַהֲרֵי דְּבָרָיו כִּכְתוּבִין וְכִמְסוּרִין וּמְקַיְּמִין אוֹתָן אִם מֵת. וְאִם נִצַּל וְעָמַד אֲפִלּוּ קָנוּ מִיָּדוֹ בְּמִקְצָת חוֹזֵר. כְּדִין כָּל מְצַוֶּה מֵחֲמַת מִיתָה:
When a person goes out to sea or on a caravan journey, is being transported in chains, or is dangerously ill, having fallen sick suddenly with a severe infirmity - any of these four individuals is considered to be a person who apportions his property because of his impending death. His statements are considered as if they are written down in a legal document and his property has already been apportioned. If these individuals die, their instructions are carried out. If they are saved and recover, even though a kinyan had been made to confirm the gift of a portion of his estate, the gift is retracted, as is the law with regard to anyone who apportions his property because of his impending death.
שְׁכִיב מֵרַע שֶׁנִּתַּק מֵחֹלִי לְחֹלִי. אִם לֹא עָמַד וְלֹא הָלַךְ עַל מִשְׁעַנְתּוֹ בַּשּׁוּק מַתְּנָתוֹ מַתָּנָה:
The following laws apply when a sh'chiv me'ra passes from one sickness to another. If he does not recover and does not walk unsupported in the marketplace, the gift that he gave is binding.
עָמַד בֵּין הַחֹלִי שֶׁצִּוָּה בּוֹ וּבֵין הַחֹלִי שֶׁמֵּת מִמֶּנּוּ וְהָלַךְ עַל מִשְׁעַנְתּוֹ. אוֹמְדִין אוֹתוֹ עַל פִּי רוֹפְאִים. אִם מֵחֲמַת חֹלִי הָרִאשׁוֹן מֵת מַתְּנָתוֹ קַיֶּמֶת וְאִם לָאו אֵין מַתְּנָתוֹ קַיֶּמֶת. וְאִם הָלַךְ בַּשּׁוּק בְּלֹא מִשְׁעֶנֶת אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ אֹמֶד אֶלָּא בָּטְלוּ מַתְּנוֹתָיו הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת:
Different rules apply when the dying man stands and walks supported between the sickness in which he apportioned his property and the sickness from which he died. We have physicians assess whether or not he died from the first sickness that affected him. If this is so, the gift is binding. If not, the gift is not binding. If he walked in the marketplace without a support, no assessment is necessary, and the gifts that he originally gave are nullified.
מַתְּנַת שְׁכִיב מֵרַע שֶׁאֵין כָּתוּב בָּהּ שֶׁמִּתּוֹךְ הַחֹלִי הַזֶּה שֶׁצִּוָּה בּוֹ מֵת וְאֵין הָעֵדִים מְצוּיִין לִשְׁאל לָהֶם. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֲרֵי זֶה הַמְצַוֶּה מֵת. הֲרֵי הַמַּתָּנָה בְּטֵלָה. שֶׁאֵין מִיתָתוֹ רְאָיָה. שֶׁמָּא מֵחֹלִי שֶׁנָּתַן בּוֹ הַמַּתָּנָה נִרְפָּא וְאַחַר כָּךְ חָלָה חֹלִי אַחֵר וּמֵת. לְפִיכָךְ הַנְּכָסִים בְּחֶזְקַת הַיּוֹרְשִׁין. עַד שֶׁיָּבִיא רְאָיָה שֶׁמִּתּוֹךְ הַחֹלִי הַזֶּה שֶׁנָּתַן בּוֹ מַתָּנָה זוֹ מֵת:
When there is a record of an oral will made by a sh'chiv me'ra that does not say that he died because of the sickness during which he apportioned his property, and the witnesses are not present to corroborate this, the gift is nullified, despite the fact that he died. For his death is not proof that he did not recover. Perhaps he recovered from the sickness during which he apportioned his property and then contracted another sickness and then died. Therefore, the property is presumed to belong to the legal heirs unless the recipients of the gift bring proof that he died because of the sickness during which he apportioned his property.