Bava Batra — Daf 124a

אף מוחכרת ומושכרת שבחא דממילא קא אתי דלא חסרי בה מזוני

מני ר' היא דתניא אין בכור נוטל פי שנים בשבח ששבחו נכסים לאחר מיתת אביהן רבי אומר אומר אני בכור נוטל פי שנים בשבח ששבחו נכסים לאחר מיתת אביהן אבל לא בשבח שהשביחו יתומים לאחר מיתת אביהן

ירשו שטר חוב בכור נוטל פי שנים יצא עליהן שטר חוב בכור נותן פי שנים ואם אמר איני נותן ואיני נוטל רשאי

מאי טעמייהו דרבנן אמר קרא (דברים כא, יז) לתת לו פי שנים מתנה קרייה רחמנא מה מתנה עד דמטיא לידיה אף חלק בכורה עד דמטיא לידיה

ורבי אומר אמר קרא פי שנים מקיש חלק בכורה לחלק פשוט מה חלק פשוט אע"ג דלא מטא לידיה אף חלק בכורה אע"ג דלא מטא לידיה

ורבנן נמי הכתיב פי שנים ההוא למיתבא ליה אחד מצרא

ורבי נמי הכתיב לתת לו ההוא שאם אמר איני נוטל ואיני נותן רשאי

א"ר פפא דיקלא ואלים ארעא ואסיק שירטון דכ"ע לא פליגי דשקיל כי פליגי בחפורה והוה שובלי שלופפי והוו תמרי דמ"ס שבחא דממילא ומר סבר אישתני:

אמר רבה בר חנא אמר ר' חייא עשה כדברי רבי עשה כדברי חכמים עשה

so [in the case of] one rented out or given on hire, the appreciation [must be] such as comes naturally and they do not lose thereby [the cost of its] food. In accordance with [whose view is the law  quoted]? — It is [in accordance with that of] Rabbi. For it was taught: a firstborn son is not [entitled] to take a double portion in the appreciation of the estate, which accrued after the death of their father. Rabbi said: I say, A firstborn son does take a double portion in the [natural] appreciation of an estate which accrued after the death of their father,  but not in the appreciation which the orphans produced after the death of their father. If they inherited a bond of indebtedness the firstborn takes a double portion [in the collected debt].  If a bond of indebtedness [for a debt incurred by the father] was produced against them, the firstborn must pay a double portion [of the debt]. If, however, he said, 'I neither give, nor take [the double portion]',  he is allowed [to do so].  What is the reason [for the opinion] of the Rabbis?  Scripture says, Giving him a double portion,  the [All] merciful has, thus, called it a gift;  as a gift [does not become his]  until it comes into his possession,  so the portion of the birthright [does not become his] until it comes into his [father's] possession.  But Rabbi maintains, [since] Scripture says, a double portion,  the portion of the birthright [is to be] compared to the ordinary portion; as the ordinary portion [is his] although it has not yet come into his [father's] possession,  so [is] the portion of the birthright although it has not yet come into his possession. But [as to] the Rabbis also, surely it is written, a double portion? — That [expression indicates that the two portions] to be given to him are to adjoin one another.  But [as to] Rabbi also, surely it is written, Giving him? — That [expression is to indicate] that if he said, 'I neither take, nor give [the double portions],'  he is permitted to do so. R. Papa said: [In the case where] a [young] palm-tree [was bequeathed] and it became stronger, [or a plot of] and and it produced alluvial soil, all  agree that [the firstborn] takes [a double portion].  The dispute only relates to [the case] where hafurah  turned into [well developed] ears of corn, [or where] undeveloped dates turned into [fully developed] dates. [One] Master  is of the opinion that this is regarded as natural appreciation,  and the [other] Master[s]  hold the opinion [that this is a case of complete] transformation. Rabbah b. Hana said in the name of R. Hiyya, 'He who acts  in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi is acting correctly,  [and] he who acts  in accordance with the opinion of the Sages  is acting correctly.'  —