Yerushalmi Ketubot 13:3 ירושלמי כתובות י״ג:ג׳

MISHNAH: Admon promulgated seven [rules]. If somebody dies and is survived by sons and daughters. If the estate is large, the sons inherit and the daughters will be sustained⁵⁰From the estate.. If the estate is small⁵¹If the entire estate is needed to sustain the daughters until they marry., the daughters shall be sustained and the sons shall go begging. Admon said, because I am a male, shall I lose? Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, I am convinced by Admon’s statement⁵²All underage children are sustained together..

HALAKHAH: “Admon promulgated seven [rules],” etc. ⁵³Most of this Halakhah is found in Baba batra 9:1, in a somewhat different formulation. How large is a large estate? Rebbi Ze‘ura, Rav Jehudah in the name of Rav: That there should be twelve months of sustenance for all of them⁵⁴Sons and daughters together.. Samuel heard this and said, this is the opinion of Rabban Gamliel ben Rebbi⁵⁵Gamliel III., but the Sages say, until they⁵⁶The daughters, who have to be supported until either they marry or reach adulthood. reach adulthood or are married. They asked before Rebbi Yose⁵⁷This probably should read “R. Yasa” since R. Yose lived three generations after R. Joḥanan. In Baba batra, the person who was asked is R. Ḥiyya bar Abba, R. Joḥanan’s successor as head of the Academy., what did you hear from Rebbi Joḥanan? He said to them, let us explain the words of the Sages by their words! Nathan bar Hoshaia asked before Rebbi Joḥanan, if there was sustenance for twelve months but the estate diminished in value? He answered him, since the heirs⁵⁸The sons. He follows the majority opinion in the Mishnah that only the daughters are supported by a small estate, but he follows Rabban Gamliel III in the definition of a large estate. Practice almost always follows R. Joḥanan. started to eat with permission, they continue to eat until the last coin is gone.

When does one appraise for them? Rebbi Mana said, one appraises at the end⁵⁹At the end of 12 months.. Rebbi Ḥanina said to him, the words of the rabbis imply that one does not listen to you, for Nathan bar Hoshaia asked before Rebbi Joḥanan, if there was sustenance for twelve months but the estate diminished in value? He answered him, since the heirs started to eat with permission, they continue to eat until the last coin is gone! Therefore, one appraises at the start⁶⁰The only valid appraisal is one made immediately after the father’s death.. Rav Ḥisda asked: If there was sustenance for twelve months and then the property increased in value⁶¹Can the daughters claim part of the value by which the estate has increased over the appraisal?? Let us hear from the following, for Rebbi Ḥanina, Rebbi Yasa⁶²In Baba batra, the statement is in the name of “the Babylonian R. Ammi”, i. e., R. Immi, the constant companion of R. Yasa. said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If the heirs sold, they sold from their own property⁶³If the male heirs sold real estate from a small estate, their sale is valid since they are the heirs in biblical law; the rights of the daughters are purely contractual. While the widow can take the real estate away from the buyer for her ketubah as prior mortgage holder, the daughters cannot since their claim was created only at their father’s death, when the sons already were legal owners of the property.
The same statement by R. Assi (= Yasa) in the name of R. Joḥanan is in the Babli, 103a.. So here, if it increased in value, their property value increased⁶⁴The daughters cannot acquire any rights to the inheritance which they did not have immediately upon their father’s death.. If the estate was not sufficient for twelve months’ sustenance, may the sons say to the daughters, take what is yours and leave⁶⁵If there was more than enough to sustain the daughters but not enough for daughters and sons together, can the sons pay the daughters and take the remainder as inheritance?! Rebbi Abba said, is that a question? The Mishnah says that they cannot say so to them, as we have stated there⁶⁶Mishnah 10:2.: “If the orphans say, we accept the properties of our father for the value of an extra denar in order to take their mother’s ketubah; one does not listen to them but one appraises the properties in court.”

As you say, after deduction for her ketubah, after deduction of burial costs, after deduction of loans by witnesses or by contract⁶⁷The value of the estate is computed only after all liens and debts have been deducted.. After deduction for daughters’ dowries? For him⁶⁸In Halakhah 6:6, R. Ḥanina holds that daughters’ dowries are privileged, R. Joḥanan that they are not privileged. One would assume that practice would follow R. Joḥanan, but in Baba batra daughters’ dowries are listed together with the ketubah and outstanding loans as diminishing the free portion of the estate used to determine whether it is “small” or “large”. who says, one forecloses from mortgaged property for daughters’ dowries, the dowries are privileged. For him who says, one does not foreclose from mortgaged property for daughters’ dowries, the dowries are not privileged. Let us hear from the following⁶⁹This does not refer to any discussion; it introduces a new topic.: The widow and the sons are of equal rank⁷⁰If the widow decides not to claim her ketubah, her claim of support by the estate is of equal weight with that of sons and daughters.. The widow and the daughters are of equal rank. The widow does not push the sons aside and the widow does not push the daughters aside. How is that? If there was enough for 12 months sustenance and a widow to sustain⁷¹If there was just enough to sustain sons and daughters for 12 months but the widow also claims sustenance, then widow and daughters are sustained and the sons do not get anything.. That explains that sometimes the widow pushes out the sons by means of the daughters. Just as she pushes out the sons by means of the daughters, should she not push them out by means of the sons⁷²This text does not make much sense. The text in Baba batra is in worse shape, but the original meaning can be gleaned from it even if the original text is lost irretrievably: פְּעָמִים שֶׁאַלְמָנָה דוֹחָה אֶת הַבָּנוֹת עַל יְדֵי הַבָּנִים. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהָאַלְמָנָה דוֹחָה לְבָנוֹת עַל יְדֵי בָנִים כֶּן תִּדְחֶה אַלמָנָה לְבָנִים. “Sometimes the widow pushes out the daughters by means of the sons. Just as the widow pushes out the daughters by means of the sons, should she not push the sons out?” Since clearly here the roles of “sons” and “daughters” are exchanged, the question is whether the widow’s sustenance should not preempt the daughters’ if the estate is not sufficient for all of them.? She might claim her ketubah and lose her right to sustenance⁷³Her claim to sustenance is conditional; it cannot override the claim of the daughters which is absolute. The Babli disagrees, 43a, and declares that the claim of the widow precedes that of the daughter..

“The sons shall go begging.” Some Tannaïm state, “shall support themselves.⁷⁴In Baba batra, the Escurial ms. has a third reading יסחרו “shall go around.”” He who says “shall support themselves”, “make yourselves comfortable under the tree.⁷⁵Gen. 18:4. The text reads וְהִשָּׁעֲנוּ תַּחַת הָעֵץ.” He who says, “go begging”, “may his children wander about begging, asking out of their ruins.⁷⁶Ps.109:10.”

Rav Ze‘ira, Rav Ḥananel in the name of Rav; Ze‘ira in the name of Abba bar Jeremiah: Ḥanan made two statements, practice follows him; Admon made seven statements, practice does not follow him. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda in the name of Rebbi Isaac bar Ḥaqula: In every case in which Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, I am convinced by Admon’s statement, practice follows him⁷⁷Except for small syntactical changes, this paragraph is identical with the one at the end of Halakhah 1, Notes 36, 37..