Two days ago, we read a story in which Rava tried to use the legal system to lay claim to a dying convert’s property. Today, we read a story in which Rav Dimi uses his knowledge of the law to seize property from his sister.
Rav Dimi’s sister owned an orchard. Whenever she was sick and thought she was dying, she would give the orchard to Rav Dimi. When she recovered, she would retract her gift and take the orchard back.
On the one hand, the sister’s habit can be read as a series of generous gestures: Rav Dimi would not have been first in line to inherit his sister’s property, so by allocating it to him every time she became gravely ill, she was looking out for him. On the other hand, we can imagine that her practice of declaring herself at death’s door and then recovering, only to repossess the gift, may have been emotionally taxing on Rav Dimi — especially if his judgment was that her illnesses were not quite so serious and the whole routine was a bid for attention. I would like to imagine that Rav Dimi had nothing but sympathy for his sister’s recurrent illnesses. At the same time, I can empathize with him at the moment when his sympathy ran out:
On one occasion she was sick. She sent a message to Rav Dimi: Come and acquire my property. He sent a message back to her: I do not want to come.
That’s it, says Rav Dimi: You’re not dying and I’m not coming. But the sister appears serious in her expectation that this is the end:
She sent a message to him: Come and acquire my property in any manner that you want.
He went and reserved for her part of the orchard, and he acquired the rest of the property from her with an act of acquisition.
Rav Dimi sees an opportunity to put an end to this emotionally taxing cycle: He sets aside a part of the orchard and acquires the rest, knowing that a deathbed gift of only part of her property, as we have learned, is irrevocable. This time, when his sister recovers and tries to take back her orchard, she will not be able to.
As a matter of course, and perhaps coming as no surprise to either Rav Dimi or the reader, the sister recovers. When she tries to retract the gift, Rav Dimi refuses to return the orchard. So his sister sues him, bringing the matter before Rav Nahman.
Rav Dimi, for his part, initially refuses to come to court, explaining that he acquired the orchard legally and cannot be compelled to return it. Rav Nahman, clearly in sympathy with the sister, issues an ultimatum: Come to court or I will excommunicate you.
When Rav Nahman looks into the matter, he sides with the sister, explaining:
One who issues directives due to the expectation of their imminent death can retract their gift even if they did not transfer all of their property, as they evidently granted the gift only because they expected to die.
The sister won her suit. Like Rava did two pages ago on Bava Batra 149, Rav Dimi used his knowledge of the law to seize possession of another’s property, but was checked by a colleague. We find that rabbis are not immune from misusing their power, but in a community of colleagues are able to restrain one another — at least in these two cases.
Read all of Bava Batra 151 on Sefaria.
This piece originally appeared in a My Jewish Learning Daf Yomi email newsletter sent on November 23, 2024. If you are interested in receiving the newsletter, sign up here.
Help us keep Jewish knowledge accessible to millions of people around the world.
Your donation to My Jewish Learning fuels endless journeys of Jewish discovery. With your help, My Jewish Learning can continue to provide nonstop opportunities for learning, connection and growth.
