At the end of the 2002 romantic comedy Sweet Home Alabama, at the moment when the main character has to finally choose between two men who love her, her father memorably frames the dilemma: “You can’t ride two horses with one ass, sugarbean.” I kept thinking about this scene as I was preparing today’s daf, because the rabbis also employ the image of riding two horses simultaneously. But for them, it’s not an impossibility, but a positive metaphor.
We’ve learned that if a dying person makes deathbed gifts of property to their loved ones and then recovers, those gifts can be revoked. But what if the person who made the deathbed gifts had been extremely careful that the property transferred ownership? What if they hadn’t just verbally given a gift but had gone so far as to write up a formal document stating that the property was acquired through kinyan, legal acquisition?
The rabbis disagree about what to do in this case. I’m presenting the two positions in reverse order.
And Shmuel said: I do not know what I should rule with regard to this. Perhaps he resolved to transfer it only with a deed, and a deed is not effective after the death.
For Shmuel, it is not clear if the property has been transferred. He reasons that if, under these circumstances, you write a document stating that the property was acquired through a kinyan, then that document might actually be a contract. So if the dying person recovers, and the document was never actually given to the potential recipient, the transfer never happened. Furthermore, Shmuel reasons, if the person actually dies, then the property still doesn’t transfer — because for the rabbis, in order for a contract to be valid, both parties have to be alive when it is delivered.
But Rav is certain the property gifted by a dying person through a deed of kinyan is transferred:
In the study hall of Rav they say in the name of Rav: He caused the recipient to mount two steeds.
The Gemara explains Rav’s reasoning:
It is like the gift of a healthy person, it is like the gift of a person on his deathbed. It is like the gift of a healthy person insofar as if he recovers he cannot retract. It is like the gift of a person on his deathbed insofar as if he said that the loan owed to him is given to So-and-so, the loan owed to him is acquired by So-and-so.
Rav taught his students that if a dying person strengthened their gift with a written statement of kinyan, the gift cannot be revoked if the person recovers. In fact, its status is reinforced: It gets the benefits of deathbed gifts (where not everyone involved has to actually be present) and of healthy gifts (which cannot be retracted). Or, as Rav memorably put it, the recipient mounts two steeds.
For Rav, to be mounted on two horses means to be given a double foundation, to be strengthened. But today, it’s an expression that means something is impossible.
As we learn together, we are constantly reminded that the rabbis of the Talmud lived in a world very different from our own. They had different technologies, different relationships to non-Jews, different ideologies of gender and more. Today’s daf reminds us that while some differences are large, others are small, like which expressions are popular and what they mean. Our challenge is to bridge that gap through our learning while not losing sight of these two distinctive historical and cultural contexts. Perhaps one thing we are all learning in our journey through the daf is how to ride those two different horses simultaneously.
Read all of Bava Batra 152 on Sefaria.
This piece originally appeared in a My Jewish Learning Daf Yomi email newsletter sent on November 24, 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.
