- שכיב מרע שאמר תנו הלואתי לפלוני הלואתו לפלוני
The Gemara inferred that Rav Nachman holds that a שכיב מרע cannot transfer something which a בריא cannot transfer with a kinyan. This seems to contradict another ruling of Rav Nachman: שכיב מרע שאמר תנו הלואתי לפלוני – a שכיב מרע who said, “Give my loan (which is owed to me) to Ploni,” הלואתו לפלוני – his loan is transferred to Ploni. But a בריא cannot transfer an oral loan through a kinyan, since a debt is not something tangible which he owns!? Rav Pappa answers: הואיל ויורש יורשה – since an heir inherits [a loan], a שכיב מרע can transfer it as well, since מתנת שכיב מרע was enacted as an inheritance, as taught on Daf 149. Rav Acha brei d’Rav Ikka answered that a loan can be transferred by a בריא: Rav taught that if a lender tells his borrower: מנה לי בידך תנהו לפלוני – “I have a maneh in your hands; give it to Ploni,” במעמד שלשתן קנה – if he said this in the presence of the three people (i.e., the מלוה, the לוה, and the recipient), he acquires the right to collect the loan, based on a Rabbinic enactment. Therefore, a שכיב מרע can also transfer a loan.
- A שכיב מרע who divided his property to multiple people
Rav Nachman said: שכיב מרע שכתב כל נכסיו לאחרים – if a שכיב מרע wrote away all his property to others, we examine his original intentions: אם במחלק – if it seems he was dividing them out, intending from the beginning to give everything away, then if he dies, they all acquire their respective gifts, and if he recovers, he may retract from all of them, (as taught in the Mishnah on Daf 146b). אם בנמלך – If it appears he was reconsidering, meaning he planned to give only a partial gift, and continually changed his mind and gave more gifts until he gave away everything, then if he recovers, אינו חוזר אלא באחרון – he can only retract from the last gift. All the gifts (except the final one) were partial gifts, and he cannot retract from them. The Gemara asks why his pauses between gifts indicate changing his mind; perhaps he was thinking about what to give each recipient!? It answers: סתמיה דשכיב מרע מידק דייק והדר יהיב – the standard practice of a שכיב מרע is to first decide carefully and then give them away. Therefore, his pauses indicate a change of mindset.
- חזרה במקצת הויא חזרה בכולה
The Gemara asks: חזרה במקצת הוי חזרה בכולה או לא – is a retraction of part a retraction of all of it, or not? If a שכיב מרע gave all his possessions to someone, in which case he is able to retract, and he retracted from part of the gift and gave it to someone else, does that indicate a retraction from his entire first gift, and the rest of it reverts to him (and his gift to the second recipient would be a partial gift, from which he cannot retract)? A proof is brought from a Baraisa stating that if one gave all his property to one person, and then (retracted and) gave some of it to a second recipient, שני קנה ראשון לא קנה – the second person acquires his gift, but the first person does not acquire his gift. The fact that the second person does acquire his share, and the first person does not acquire the remaining amount, proves that the partial retraction was considered a retraction from the entire first gift, so he receives nothing. Since the second person’s gift is now only a partial gift, he would receive it whether the שכיב מרע died or recovered.