Answer

Indeed, one cannot make a condition regarding inheritance, since inheritance takes effect automatically after your death and not by virtue of an action of yours. You can make a condition only about something that you yourself bring about. At most, one can give a lifetime gift. The ruling that in monetary matters, a person’s condition against what is written in the Torah is valid applies only to the proprietary result of an action he performed.
——————————————————————————————
Questioner:
I found two will templates online:
 http://www.daat.ac.il/DAAT/mishpach/tsavaa2-2.htm
 http://www.daat.ac.il/DAAT/mishpach/tsavaa1-2.htm
Are these formulations generally okay? In addition, it says there: “Everything that I give to the beneficiaries according to this document, I hereby give as a complete and absolute gift, from today and one hour before my death.” I did not understand the meaning of the words: “from today and one hour before my death.” Is the acquisition effected from today? Or beginning one hour before death? Also, regarding the acquisition by means of a symbolic cloth-exchange mentioned there, is it really necessary to lift an object and transfer it? Or is that just wording expressing firm intent?
Also, is there any basis at all to say that the inheritance laws of the State of Israel are more binding than the Torah’s inheritance laws because Israeli law involves some kind of implicit consent or something like that?
——————————————————————————————
Rabbi:
As far as I have seen, those formulations are fine.
The accepted meaning of that wording is that the act of acquisition performed now transfers title in principle to the heir, and the assets are conveyed to him one hour before the death of the one leaving them. I think there is also room to understand it as an acquisition that is built gradually from now and becomes final one hour before death, but this is not the place to elaborate.
Indeed, one must lift a cloth. The document and its witnesses only testify that this was in fact done.
 
Just as one cannot make a condition against the laws of inheritance, so too custom or the law of the king cannot change them. It is the same mechanism.
At the moment I think that perhaps the king can confiscate the money of the halakhic heir after it has reached him and transfer it to the legal heir. But I am doubtful whether even that is possible, because he is not doing so for the needs of the monarchy, and it is not clear that the rule of the law of the kingdom applies here. The matter still requires thought.
——————————————————————————————
Questioner:
Are the assets (including those that have not yet come into the world) considered to remain in my possession until an hour before death, so that I am allowed to do with them as I please? Also, regarding the section about property to which a formal acquisition does not apply, it seems that no possibility of cancellation is mentioned there. It says: “I obligate myself to the above beneficiaries from now, both by vow and by way of lien, such that already now I am obligated to pay every sum.” Can the vow and the lien be canceled in a case of divorce, for example? Regarding the cloth, to whom must it belong, and who must lift it? And does it need to be transferred back afterward?
Also, is this will valid with respect to descendants not yet in the world (or only for those who already existed at the time the will was signed)?
——————————————————————————————
Rabbi:
When one transfers ownership from today and one hour before my death, the principal ownership passes to the buyer, and the produce remains that of the transferor until one hour before his death. That is what defines the rights of use.
A vow requires annulment. As far as I know, a lien cannot be canceled. However, if a divorce really occurs, one could argue that he did not undertake the obligation with that in mind, and even though he did not stipulate it explicitly, this is like matters that are in his heart and in the heart of every person (like one who sells his property with the intention of moving to the Land of Israel, Kiddushin 49 and Tosafot there). But this is a complicated topic, and this is not the place to elaborate.
 
In a symbolic acquisition by cloth, the halakhic ruling is that one acquires with the utensil of the buyer. This can be done through a third person, who transfers the cloth to the buyer so that he can acquire by means of it (like the rabbi at a wedding betrothal ceremony who gives his own cloth). After the acquisition is completed, the cloth is returned to its owner (unless he does not want it).
 
There is a problem with transferring ownership to fetuses, and certainly to those who are not even fetuses yet (transferring to someone not yet in the world). One must remember that the acquisition is being effected now.
——————————————————————————————
Questioner:
I am not familiar with how inheritance distribution is usually arranged in the religious community, but is it really common practice that only the sons inherit and that the firstborn inherits a double portion? Or is the usual practice that the inheritance is divided according to Israeli law (in which case the wife and daughters would be holding the sons’ property by theft—unless the sons waive their rights)?
——————————————————————————————
Rabbi:
Some cut corners and leave it to the law. But according to Jewish law that is not valid (as I explained). Of course, if the law is implemented and the heirs waive their respective shares to one another, then there is no problem. The problem is if one of them does not waive, in which case the others are thieves. One who wants to make sure it is valid according to Jewish law gives a lifetime gift, like the documents you saw.