Bava Batra

R. Kahana, [however], said to him: If [her husband] had [subsequently] bought other property would she not [have been entitled to] seize [it]?  Now, since if he had bought other property she would [have been entitled to] seize [it],  in this case too she [is] also [entitled to] seize [the dead daughter's third]. [Once] a certain [dying] man divided his estate between his wife and his son, [and] left over one palm-tree.  Rabina intended to give his decision [that] she  can only have  [that] one palm-tree.  R. Yemar, [however], said to Rabina: If she had no [claim upon the son's share], she [should] have no [claim] even [upon] the one palmtree.  But since she may seize  the palm-tree she may also seize  all the estate. R. Huna said, [if] a dying man assigned all his estate, in writing, to another [person]  the matter is to be investigated.  If he  is entitled to be his heir, he receives it as an inheritance; and if not, he receives it as a gift. R. Nahman said to him: Why should you indulge in circumlocution!  If you hold [the same view] as R. Johanan b. Beroka,  say, 'The halachah is according to R. Johanan b. Beroka', for, indeed, your statement runs on [the same lines] as [those of] R. Johanan b. Beroka? [But], perhaps, you meant [your statement to apply to a case] like the following.  Once, while a person was in a dying condition he was asked to whom his estate shall be given. '[Shall it] perhaps [be given] to X?' he was asked. And he replied to them, 'To whom [else] then?' And [is it] on [such a case as] this [that] you told us, '[If that person] is entitled to be his heir he receives it as an inheritance, and if not, he receives it as a gift?' — He replied to him: 'Yes, this [is exactly] what I meant'. In respect of what legal practice?  — R. Adda b. Ahabah wished to explain  before Raba [that] if he  is entitled to be his heir his  widow is maintained out of his estate,  and if not, his  widow is not maintained out of his estate.  Raba, however, said to him: Should she be worse off [in the case of a gift]? If  in [the case of] an inheritance which is Biblical,  it has been said [that] his  widow is to be maintained out of his estate,  how much more [should that be so] in [the case of] a gift  which is only Rabbinical?  But, said Raba, [the difference  lies in a case] like [the following] which [was] sent [by] R. Aha son of R. 'Awya: According to the view of R. Johanan b. Beroka, [if a dying man said], 'My estate [shall be] yours, and after you [it shall be given] to X', if the first was [one] entitled to be his heir, the second has no [claim] whatsoever beside the first, for this is not a [specific] expression of 'gift' but [rather] of 'inheritance', and an inheritance cannot be terminated.  Raba said to R. Nahman: Surely, he  has [already] intercepted it!  — He thought [erroneously] that it could be intercepted but the All-Merciful said, 'It cannot be terminated'.