Bava Basra, Chapter 8, Mishnah 8 - the last Mishnah of the chapter. Basically, this is a repetition of the content of the previous Mishnah, with one exception appearing at its end. In the previous Mishnah, we dealt with how the inheritance is divided when there are sons, and we focused on the sons as the heirs. Our Mishnah discusses a case where the father did not leave sons, but only daughters, and the answer is that in principle, the law is exactly the same.
"Hiniyach banos gedolos u'ketanos" - If he left older and younger daughters:
If the father did not leave sons, but rather daughters, and among them are older and younger ones - "ein hagedolos misparnesos al haketanos, velo haketanos nizonos al hagedolos" - the older daughters are not supported at the expense of the younger ones, and the younger daughters are not sustained at the expense of the older ones. Once the father passes away, the older daughters may not take more than their fair share of the inheritance, even if they need fancier clothes. Similarly, the younger daughters do not receive extra at the expense of the others, even if they require more expensive food. "Ela cholkos beshaveh" - but rather they divide it equally - the division of the estate is done entirely equally: if there are four daughters, each takes a quarter, and the account must be balanced, keeping receipts and making an exact calculation.
"Nis'u gedolos yinase'u ketanos" - If the older daughters married, the younger daughters should marry:
If the older daughters married after the father's passing, and their wedding expenses were paid from the estate's funds, the younger ones must be paid for in the same way, dollar for dollar, so that the division is completely fair. That is: if after the father's passing, and before the money was divided, the two older daughters married at an expense of 100,000 shekels, 100,000 shekels must be set aside for the younger daughters' weddings, and only then is the rest of the estate divided equally among the daughters.
The younger daughters' claim for a wedding like their sisters:
The next line in the Mishnah, like in the previous Mishnah, presents a new case: The older daughters married with lavish weddings while the father was still alive, and now the two younger daughters, who are not yet married and are coming to inherit, claim that they want to receive lavish weddings like their sisters. The Mishnah states: "Im amru ketanos: harei anu nis'os kederech shenisatem atem - ein shom'in lahen" - if the younger daughters say: we will marry in the way that you married - we do not listen to them. Their claim is not granted, but rather the estate is divided equally among the four daughters, and what was given in the past remains in the past.
"Zeh chomer bevanos mibevanim" - This is a stringency regarding daughters over sons:
The last part of the Mishnah can be misleading. It seemingly sounds like a direct continuation and conclusion of what was stated above, but in fact, it is a new law in its own right: There is one way in which the treatment of younger daughters is different, depending on whether they have older brothers or not. This difference is based on a concept mentioned earlier, and which will be discussed extensively in the next Mishnah.
There is a rabbinic law, an enactment of the Sages, that when a woman marries, one of the conditions of the kesubah is that the husband will support her daughters until they become adults - technically, until the age of twelve and a half or until their marriage. Until then, the father or the father's assets are obligated in the support of the younger daughters, and this obligation comes before any consideration of inheritance. For example: a man who left two sons and two daughters and one apartment - beis din steps in, rents out the apartment, and from the rental income of 1,000 shekels a month gives 500 to each of the daughters for their support, while the sons are forced to beg from door to door and collect charity.
Our Mishnah comes to teach the distinction between the two cases:
Two sons and two daughters: If he left two married sons and two unmarried younger daughters, the younger daughters take everything for the purpose of their sustenance.
Four daughters: If he left two adult, married daughters and two unmarried younger daughters, and all four are the heirs - the younger daughters do not receive special treatment. In the example brought above, the apartment is rented out, they collect 1,000 shekels, and they divide it equally among all four: each daughter takes 250, the unmarried younger ones and the married adults alike.
And these are the words of the Mishnah: "Zeh chomer babanos mibabanim, shehabanos nizonos al habanim ve'ein nizonos al habanos" - this is a stringency regarding daughters compared to sons, that the daughters are supported over the sons, but they are not supported over the daughters. This stringency applies to the daughters as opposed to the sons: unmarried daughters who have not yet reached the age of twelve and a half and were orphaned upon their father's passing, are supported prior to their brothers as described above, but they are not supported prior to their sisters. It is worth emphasizing that support includes everything - food, clothing, medical care, housing, and all their life necessities; nevertheless, they do not receive special support at the expense of their older sisters.
In summary: In this Mishnah we learned that when the father did not leave sons but only daughters, the division of the estate between the older and younger daughters is done equally. The older daughters are not supported by the younger ones, nor are the younger ones supported by the older ones, and if the older daughters get married using funds from the estate - an identical sum is set aside for the marriages of the younger daughters. We also learned that the younger daughters' claim to be married in the same manner as their sisters were married during their father's lifetime is not accepted. Finally, we addressed a new, independent law: the rabbinic enactment in the kesubah conditions regarding the support of the daughters grants them priority over the brothers, but it does not provide priority for one daughter over her sisters.
With this we conclude the eighth chapter of Tractate Bava Basra, and in the next section we will move on to the ninth chapter.