Talmud sobre Números 27:11

So far the son [inherits from] the father. The father from the son? Since the son only inherits by the father’s power, is it not logical that the father on whom the son depends inherit from him? The verse says, “close²¹Num. 27:11.”; the closer relative has precedence²²The argument presented would imply that the father has precedence over his grandchildren. Therefore, the argument de minore ad majus has to be rejected and the rules all must be found in the verse. It is asserted that a person’s closest relatives are his children. The verse then also justifies the rule of the Mishnah that the heir is the agnate connected to the bequeather by a minimum of ascents in the genealogical tree..

HALAKHAH: “Both son and daughter are equal for the rules of inheritance,” etc. It is written^76,Deut. 21:17. The entire paragraph only deals with father and son; since the mother is neither required nor empowered to recognize a child as hers, it cannot refer to the mother’s inheritance.
It probably is correct to read פִּי שְׁנַיִם as “double portion” rather than “two thirds” which would read פִּים (1S.13:21); cf. Sifry Deut. #217. The double portion of male first-borns is also found in the Egyptian native law both in Ptolemaic and in Roman times and the Syro-Roman law book.⁷⁸The verse makes it clear that only property actually at hand in the estate at the moment of the father’s death is subject to the double portion privilege of the firstborn son, but not expected income (Sifry Deut. 217).: “Of anything which will be found with him,” etc. How could he inherit the expectancy like existing property? ⁷⁹Tosephta 7:7, Bekhorot 6:18. How? If his father died during his father’s father’s lifetime, he takes a double portion of his father’s estate but not a double portion of his grandfather’s estate. But if his father was a firstborn, just as he takes from his father’s estate so he takes from his grandfather’s estate⁸⁰If the grandfather dies after the father, the grandson can take a double portion of the former’s estate only if he is the only son of a firstborn son. If his father had been a firstborn but has brothers, the rule of Mishnah 1 implies that their father’s estate inherits a double portion in the grandfather’s estate. Since this is future income, all brothers inherit equally. Cf. Babli Bekhorot 52b.. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Abba [Cohen]⁸¹Reading of E; this is the name usually quoted. bar Delaiah: It was said “a rule of law⁷⁶Deut. 21:17. The entire paragraph only deals with father and son; since the mother is neither required nor empowered to recognize a child as hers, it cannot refer to the mother’s inheritance.
It probably is correct to read פִּי שְׁנַיִם as “double portion” rather than “two thirds” which would read פִּים (1S.13:21); cf. Sifry Deut. #217. The double portion of male first-borns is also found in the Egyptian native law both in Ptolemaic and in Roman times and the Syro-Roman law book.” in the matter of a double portion just as it was said “a rule of law⁸²Num. 27:11.” in the matter of a single portion. Since for a single portion one considers the son as if he were alive to take his father’s single portion⁷Only agnates inherit; all claims to inheritance are valid per stirpes. so for a double portion one considers the son as if he were alive to take his father’s double portion⁸³The rule of Mishnah 2 applies to double portions as well as single ones..