The order in which relatives inherit formulated in the Talmud includes both the halakhot stated in the Torah and halakhot that are not explicit in the Torah. Precedence is granted to one’s offspring, i.e., to one’s sons or daughters and their descendants. If a man has no descendants, his paternal family members inherit from him, starting with his father, and if his father is deceased then his father’s descendants inherit from him. If his father has no descendants, the inheritance goes to his paternal grandfather and his descendants, or to his paternal great-grandfather and his descendants, and so forth. In all cases, sons and their descendants precede daughters and their descendants. An exception is that a husband takes precedence with regard to his wife’s inheritance despite the fact that they are not blood relatives. Although there are different opinions as to whether a husband’s inheritance of his wife’s property is by Torah or rabbinic law, even those who hold that it is by rabbinic law concede that it takes precedence over that of other heirs. In principle, an heir does not lose his right to the inheritance after his death; if the heir is dead, his heirs receive it. Nevertheless, a husband does not inherit property inherited by his wife after her death, nor do brothers inherit property inherited by their brother after his death. A firstborn son receives a double portion of the property his father possessed at the time of his death, but not of the property that was due to be paid to the deceased. He does not receive a double portion of his mother’s inheritance. The definition of a firstborn is a son who is the first viable offspring of his father. Whether he is his mother’s firstborn is immaterial. If the firstborn was born by caesarean section, he does not receive a double share, nor does the following son. If there are twins, the midwife’s attestation at the time of their birth as to which baby was born first is deemed credible. The mother’s testimony during the first seven days after their birth is also deemed credible. The father’s testimony that a specific son of his is the firstborn is deemed credible at any time. One cannot bequeath his estate to one who is not his heir by Torah law. Despite this, one can apportion his estate to his heirs unevenly, with the exception of the firstborn’s double portion, which may not be reduced. This principle is relevant only with regard to inheritance; if one distributes his property to others during his lifetime, even if he reserves the rights of usage until after his death, he can distribute the property to whomever he wishes. The Sages are displeased with one who distributes his entire property to people other than his heirs. Although one’s sons take precedence with regard to inheritance, a wife’s marriage contract guarantees her and her daughters sustenance from the estate. This right precedes the sons’ right to receive their inheritance. As long as the inheritance has not yet been divided between the children, each child must keep an account of his expenditures from the inheritance, as no child may take more than the others. Money that was spent on the children during their father’s lifetime is not taken into consideration. Several halakhot that have only historical significance are also discussed in the chapter, i.e., the distribution of Eretz Yisrael among the tribes in the days of Joshua, and a particular halakha that pertained to that period with regard to the transfer of inheritance from the possession of members of one tribe to the possession of members of another.

This chapter continues the discussion commenced in the previous chapter with regard to the halakhot of inheritance. It focuses on halakhot that are based on rabbinic decrees and local custom rather than Torah law. Four fundamental issues are addressed in the chapter. The first issue concerns the division of an estate between the sons of the deceased, who are the heirs, and the deceased’s daughters. Every marriage contract includes the following stipulation: Any female children you will have from me will live in my house and be sustained from my property until they are married (see Ketubot 52b). This stipulation ensures that the daughters are provided with sustenance from their father’s estate until they either reach the age of majority or marry. This chapter discusses the division of the deceased’s estate when it is insufficient to support both the sons and the daughters. It further discusses whether a tumtum, i.e., one whose sexual organs are indeterminate, is considered a male or a female with regard to this matter. The second issue concerns a situation where the heirs enhance their inheritance before dividing the property between them. In this case it is necessary to determine how to divide the profits accrued due to the enhancement of the property. The Gemara explores several cases where the manner of dividing the enhancement is not evident, e.g., when only some of the heirs invested in the property, or when some of the heirs are adult sons and some are minor sons. The third issue concerns instructions issued by a person on his deathbed. The Sages instituted that unlike the gift of a healthy person, the gift of a person on his deathbed does not require a formal act of acquisition, but is acquired by means of the verbal instruction of the person on his deathbed. This applies only if he transfers ownership of all his property. Furthermore, under certain circumstances he can retract the gift or transfer it to a different recipient. The fourth issue concerns a case where two relatives die under circumstances in which it is impossible to ascertain which of them died first. It is therefore unclear who inherits from whom, and to whom the property should now be transferred. This chapter examines the manner of adjudicating these cases of uncertainty.