Bava Batra — Daf 141b

דתניא המבשרני במה נפטר רחמה של אשתי אם זכר יטול מנה ילדה זכר נוטל מנה אם נקבה מנה ילדה נקבה נוטל מנה ילדה זכר ונקבה אין לו אלא מנה

והא זכר ונקבה לא אמר דאמר נמי אם זכר ונקבה נמי יטול מנה אלא למעוטי מאי למעוטי נפל

ההוא דאמר לה לדביתהו נכסי להאי דמעברת אמר רב הונא הוי מזכה לעובר והמזכה לעובר לא קנה

איתיביה רב נחמן לרב הונא האומר אם ילדה אשתי זכר יטול מנה ילדה זכר נוטל מנה אמר ליה משנתינו איני יודע מי שנאה

ולימא ליה רבי מאיר היא דאמר אדם מקנה דבר שלא בא לעולם

אימור דשמעת ליה לרבי מאיר לדבר שישנו בעולם לדבר שאינו בעולם מי שמעת ליה

ולימא ליה רבי יוסי היא דאמר עובר קני דתנן עובר פוסל ואינו מאכיל דברי רבי יוסי

שאני ירושה הבאה מאיליה

ולימא ליה רבי יוחנן בן ברוקה היא דאמר לא שנא ירושה ולא שנא מתנה דתנן רבי יוחנן בן ברוקה אומר אם אמר על מי שראוי ליורשו דבריו קיימין

אימור דשמעת ליה לרבי יוחנן בן ברוקה לדבר שישנו בעולם לדבר שאינו בעולם מי אמר

ולימא ליה רבי יוחנן בן ברוקה היא וסבר לה כרבי יוסי מי יימר דסבר לה

ולימא ליה במבשרני אי הכי דקתני סיפא ואם אין שם יורש אלא הוא יורש הכל אי במבשרני יורש מאי עבידתיה

ולימא ליה בשילדה אי הכי דקתני סיפא ואם אמר כל מה שתלד אשתי יטול הרי זה יטול כל שתלד כל שילדה מיבעי ליה

as it was taught: '[If a person said]: "He who will bring me tidings whereby the womb of my wife was opened, shall receive, if the child be a male, a maneh", [then] if she gave birth to a male he receives a maneh. [If. however.] he said: "[He will receive] a maneh if [he brings 'me tidings that she gave birth to] a female", [then] if she gave birth to a female, he receives a maneh, [and if] she gave birth to a male and a female, he only receives a maneh'. But surely'. he did not speak of a 'male and a female'!  — [This refers to the case] where he also said, 'He shall also receive a maneh if [he brings tidings that] a male and a female [were born]'. What. then. [did he mean] to exclude?  To exclude a miscarriage. [Once] a certain [man] said to his wife: 'My estate shall be his with whom you are pregnant — R. Huna said, 'This is [a case of] making an assignment to an embryo through the agency of a third party, and whenever such an assignment is made, [the embryo does] not acquire possession. R. Nahman raised an objection against R. Huna's ruling: IF A MAN SAID: SHOULD MY WIFE BEAR A MALE CHILD, HE SHALL RECEIVE A MANEH, [AND HIS WIFE] DID BEAR A MALE CHILD, HE RECEIVES A MANEH!  — He replied to him: [As to] our Mishnah. I do not know' who is its author.  But should he not have replied to him [that] it  [represents the view' of] R. Meir who stated [that] a man may convey possession of a thing that has not [yet] come into the world!  — [It is possible to] say that R. Meir holds this view  [only when possession is conveyed] to that which is [already'] in the world;  [but] has he been heard [to hold the same view when possession is conveyed] to that which is not [yet] in the world! But let him reply to him that it  [represents the view of] R. Jose who said [that] an embryo acquires [possession]! For we learnt:  'An embryo disqualifies [his deceased father's slaves from eating the heave.offering[13 but does not confer the right of eating it [on his mother];  these are the words of R. Jose'?  — An inheritance which came to one under the ordinary laws of succession,  is different. But let him reply to him [that] it  [represents the view of] R. Johanan b. Beroka who said, that there was no difference between an inheritance and a gift! For we learnt:  R. Johanan b. Beroka said: If [a person] said [it]  concerning one who is entitled to be his heir,  his instruction is legally valid  — [It is possible to] say that R. Johanan b. Beroka has been heard [to hold the view only where possession is given] to that which is [already] in the world;  [but] did he say [that the same law applies also] to that which is not in the world! And let him reply to him [that] it  [represents the view of] R. Johanan b. Beroka and [that] he holds the [same] opinion as R. Jose!  Who can say that he  holds such an opinion! Let him, then, reply to him [that our Mishnah speaks of the case] where [the money was offered by a husband] 'to him who would bring me tidings'!  — If so,  [explain] the last clause wherein it is stated, AND IF THERE IS NO [OTHER] HEIR BUT THIS ONE, HE INHERITS ALL [THE ESTATE]. If [the Mishnah speaks] of a reporter  what has he to do with heirship! Then let him reply to him [that our Mishnah speaks of the case] where she has [already] given birth [to the child]!  — If so,  the last clause is wherein it is stated. IF [HOWEVER] HE SAID: whatever MY WIFE SHALL BEAR, SHALL RECEIVE [A CERTAIN PORTION]. HE RECEIVES [IT] [instead of]. WHATEVER SHE SHALL BEAR, should have [read]. 'whatever she has born'!