Bava Batra

Whence [it is to be inferred] that [both provisions] were made by one court? Is it not possible [that] they were made by two [different] courts?  — This possibility  cannot be entertained,  for in the earlier part [of the Mishnah cited] it was stated: R. Eleazar b. Azariah gave the following exposition in the presence of the Sages in the Vineyard of Jabneh:  '[Since it was provided that] the sons shall be heirs [to their mother's kethubah], and the daughters shall be maintained [out of their father's estate, the two cases are to be compared]: As the sons cannot be heirs except after the death of their father, so the daughters cannot claim maintenance except after the death of their father'.  [Now], if it is granted [that both provisions]  were enacted by one court, one can well understand why an analogy was drawn between one provision and the other. If, however, it is argued [that they] were enacted at two [different] courts, how could an analogy be drawn between one provision and the other?  — What proof!  It is quite possible still to maintain [that the provisions]  were enacted by two [different] courts;  but  the latter court had to frame its provisions on the lines analogous to those of the former court in order that there might be no discrepancy between the one provision and the other. Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: If a [dying] man gave all his property  to his wife, in writing, he [thereby] only appointed her administratrix. It is obvious [that if he assigned all his property to] his grown up son, he [thereby], merely appointed him administrator.  What [is the law, however, if he assigned it to] his young son? — It was stated [that] R. Hanilai b. Idi said in the name of Samuel: Even [If to] his youngest son who [still] lies in [his] cradle. It is obvious [that if a father assigned all his property to] his son or [to] a stranger, the stranger [is to receive it] as a gift,  while the son [is merely appointed] administrator.  [If he assigned it to] his betrothed or [to] his divorced wife, [either of them is to receive it] as a gift.  The question was [however], asked, What [is the law if the assignment was made to] a daughter where there are sons, [to] a wife where there are brothers,  or to a wife where there are sons of the husband?  — Rabina said in the name of Raba: None of these  acquires possession, except his betrothed, or divorced wife. R. 'Awira in the name of Raba said: All these acquire possession except a wife where there are brothers,  and a wife where there are sons of the husband.