If a woman brings in two garments for Tzon Barzel that are worth 100 Zuz a piece and they appreciate 100%, she receives them both back. (1)
R. Yosi holds that if a pregnant Bas Yisrael is widowed from a Kohen the servants of Tzon Barzel may not eat Terumah. (2)
There is a dispute concerning a pregnant Bas Kohen who is widowed from a Kohen whether the servants of Tzon Barzel may eat Terumah according to R. Yosi. (3)
The Chachamim hold that if a Bas Yisrael marries a Kohen and he dies when she is pregnant her servants may Terumah no matter who inherits them.
Shmuel says that if someone makes a Kinyan for an unborn child he is Koneh.
If the widow of a Kohen has children both the servants of Melug and the servants of Tzon Barzel may eat Terumah.
If the widow of a Kohen is pregnant and she does not have children the servants of Melug and the servants of Tzon Barzel may not eat Terumah.
If the pregnant widow of the Kohen has children the servants of Melug may eat Terumah but not the servants of Tzon Barzel. (4)
R. Shimon Ben Yochai says that the servants of Tzon Barzel may eat Terumah only if the children of the pregnant widow of the Kohen are male. (5)
When orphans divide up their inheritance the Beis Din appoints a caretaker who divides up the property between them. (6)
If there is not enough inheritance to support all of the children the Chachamim decreed that the daughters are supported from the property and not the sons. (7)
Neither a Bas Yisrael who is a pregnant widow of a Kohen, or a Bas Kohen who is a pregnant widow of a Yisrael may eat Terumah.
Neither a Bas Kohen who is a Shomeres Yavam to a Yisrael, or a Bas Yisrael who is a Shomeres Yavam to a Kohen may eat Terumah.
A BIT MORE
1. She receives one of them back without payment when she collects her Kesuvah and the other one she has a right to buy back at the present value.
2. Even though the widow has children and consequently may eat Terumah herself, the servants may not eat Terumah because the unborn child also has a share in the servants. However the Chachamim hold that the unborn child does not have any ownership of the servants and thus the servants may eat Terumah.
3. Rabah holds that the reason why the servants of the pregnant widow may not eat Terumah is because an unborn child in the womb of a non-Kohen is regarded as a non-Kohen even though his father is a Kohen. Consequently if the mother is a Bas Kohen the servants may eat Terumah. R. Yosef holds the reason why the servants of the pregnant widow may not eat Terumah is because only a servant owned by an already born Kohen may eat Terumah, but not a servant owned by an unborn Kohen. This reason applies even if the mother is a Bas Kohen.
4. This is the opinion of R. Yosi who holds that the unborn child has a Kinyan in the servants.
5. If the children are male we are not concerned about the possibility of a portion of the servants being owned by the unborn child. The reason is because maybe the unborn child is female and thus does not have a portion in the servants and even is he is a male maybe the mother will have a miscarriage.
5. Shmuel says that when the orphans grow up they can protest the portion they were given and R. Nachman holds that they have no right to protest.
6. However if the sons sell the inheritance it is a valid sale.