Sanhedrin 69

Sanhedrin 69

וְאָמַר רַחֲמָנָא: ״אִישׁ״. אִישׁ – אַתָּה צָרִיךְ לַחֲזוֹר עָלָיו אִם יֵשׁ לוֹ גּוֹאֲלִין וְאִם לָאו. קָטָן – אִי אַתָּה צָרִיךְ לַחֲזוֹר עָלָיו, בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁאֵין לוֹ גּוֹאֲלִין.

And the Merciful One states: “But if the man has no relative,” teaching that it is only in the case of a convert who is a man that you must go around seeking whether or not he has relatives, i.e., children who were born to him after his conversion. But in the case of a convert who is a minor, you do not have to go around searching for relatives; it is known that he has no relative, since a minor cannot father a child.

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: ״אִישׁ״ – אֵין לִי אֶלָּא אִישׁ. בֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד שֶׁרָאוּי לְבִיאָה מִנַּיִין? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְאִישׁ״.

Abaye raised an objection to Rabba from a baraita discussing a designated maidservant, about whom the verse states: “And if a man lies carnally with a woman who is a maidservant designated to a man, and not fully redeemed, nor freedom given her, inquiry shall be made; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free” (Leviticus 19:20). From the word “man,” I have derived only that this halakha applies to an adult man. But as for a minor aged nine years and one day, who is fit for engaging in intercourse, from where is it derived that he too is subject to this halakha? The verse states: “And if a man.” The extraneous letter vav, meaning “and,” serves to include a minor who is nine years old, as already at that age he can perform complete intercourse.

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: יֵשׁ לוֹ וְאֵינוֹ מוֹלִיד, כִּתְבוּאָה שֶׁלֹּא הֵבִיאָה שְׁלִישׁ דָּמֵי.

Rabba said to Abaye: There is no proof from here, as even though a nine-year-old boy has sperm, he cannot father a child. His sperm is like the seed of grain that was cut even though it had not yet reached one-third of its growth. Such seed, even if planted, will not grow.

דְּבֵי חִזְקִיָּה תָּנָא: ״וְכִי יָזִד אִישׁ״ – אִישׁ מֵזִיד וּמַזְרִיעַ, וְאֵין קָטָן מֵזִיד וּמַזְרִיעַ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב מָרְדֳּכַי לְרַב אָשֵׁי: מַאי מַשְׁמַע דְּהַאי ״מֵזִיד״ לִישָּׁנָא דְּבַשּׁוֹלֵי הוּא? דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיָּזֶד יַעֲקֹב נָזִיד״.

A Sage of the school of Ḥizkiyya taught: The verse states: “But if a man comes intentionally [yazid] against his neighbor, to slay him with guile, you shall take him from My altar, that he may die” (Exodus 21:14). The use of the term yazid in this context and its juxtaposition to the word “man” teaches that a man can heat [mezid] himself up and produce viable sperm, but a minor cannot heat himself up and produce viable sperm. Therefore, even though a minor can engage in full intercourse with a woman, he cannot father a child. Rav Mordekhai said to Rav Ashi: From where may it be inferred that this word mezid is a term meaning heating up? As it is written in a different verse: “And Jacob cooked [vayyazed] pottage” (Genesis 25:29).

וְהָא תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל: ״בֵּן״ – וְלֹא אָב?

The Gemara asks: But didn’t the school of Rabbi Yishmael teach the following baraita concerning a stubborn and rebellious son: The verse that states: “If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son,” teaches that a son can become a stubborn and rebellious son, but not a father, so that one who has a child cannot be sentenced as a stubborn and rebellious son.

הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אִילֵּימָא דְּאִיעַבַּר בָּתַר דְּאַיְיתִי שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת, וְאוֹלֵיד מִקַּמֵּי דְּלַקֵּיף זָקָן – מִי אִיכָּא שְׁהוּת כּוּלֵּי הַאי? וְהָא אָמַר רַבִּי כְּרוּסְפָּדַאי: כׇּל יָמָיו שֶׁל בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים בִּלְבַד! אֶלָּא לָאו דְּאִיעַבַּר מִקַּמֵּי דְּלַיְיתֵי שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת, וְאוֹלֵיד מִקַּמֵּיהּ דְּלַקֵּיף זָקָן, וּשְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: קָטָן מוֹלֵיד!

The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances? If we say that his wife conceived after he grew two pubic hairs and the baby was born before he grew a beard around his genitals, is there such a long interval between these two times to allow for carrying the child to term? But doesn’t Rabbi Kruspedai say: The entire time during which it is possible to judge and sentence a stubborn and rebellious son is only three months, the time between the appearance of two pubic hairs and the growth of a beard around the genitals? Consequently, it is impossible for a child to be born to the stubborn and rebellious son during this period. Rather, is it not that his wife conceived before he grew two pubic hairs, and the baby was born before he grew a beard around his genitals? And you can learn from it that a minor can, in fact, father a child.

לָא, לְעוֹלָם דְּאִיעַבַּר בָּתַר דְּאַיְיתִי שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת, וְאוֹלִיד בָּתַר דְּאַקֵּיף זָקָן. וּדְקָא קַשְׁיָא דְּרַבִּי כְּרוּסְפָּדַאי – כִּי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי אֲמַר: אָמְרִי בְּמַעְרְבָא ״בֵּן״ – וְלֹא הָרָאוּי לִקְרוֹתוֹ אָב.

The Gemara rejects this reasoning: No, actually, you can explain that his wife conceived only after he grew two pubic hairs, and the baby was born after he grew a beard around his genitals. And as for that which is difficult for you based on the statement of Rabbi Kruspedai that the halakha governing a stubborn and rebellious son applies for only three months, it can be explained as follows: When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that they say in the West, Eretz Yisrael, that the term “son” teaches that only a son can become a stubborn and rebellious son, but not one who is fit to be called a father. That is to say, the verse does not exclude someone whose child was born during this period, but rather one whose wife conceived during this time, so that he is fit to be called a father.

גּוּפָא, אָמַר רַבִּי כְּרוּסְפָּדַאי אָמַר רַבִּי שַׁבְּתַי: כׇּל יָמָיו שֶׁל בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה אֵינָן אֶלָּא שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים בִּלְבַד. וְהָאֲנַן תְּנַן: מִשֶּׁיָּבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת וְעַד שֶׁיַּקִּיף זָקָן! הִקִּיף זָקָן – אַף עַל גַּב דְּלָא מְלוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים. מְלוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים – אַף עַל גַּב דְּלֹא הִקִּיף.

§ Returning to the matter itself: Rabbi Kruspedai says that Rabbi Shabbtai says: The entire time during which it is possible to judge and sentence a stubborn and rebellious son is only three months. The Gemara asks: But didn’t we learn in the mishna that a boy can be judged as a stubborn and rebellious son from when he grows two pubic hairs until he grows a beard around his genitals? This seems to indicate that his liability depends on his physical maturity, and not on any specific time period. The Gemara answers: If he grew a beard around his genitals, then even if three months have not passed, he can no longer become liable as a stubborn and rebellious son. And if three months passed, then even if he has not grown a beard around his genitals, he is similarly exempt.

יָתֵיב רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב מִנְּהַר פְּקוֹד קַמֵּיהּ דְּרָבִינָא, וְיָתֵיב וְקָאָמַר מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ מִדְּרַבִּי כְּרוּסְפָּדַאי אָמַר רַבִּי שַׁבְּתַי, יוֹלֶדֶת לְשִׁבְעָה אֵין עוּבָּרָהּ נִיכָּר לִשְׁלִישׁ יָמֶיהָ.

Rabbi Ya’akov from Nehar Pekod sat before Ravina and sat and said in the name of Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua: Learn from the statement that Rabbi Kruspedai says that Rabbi Shabbtai says that when a woman gives birth at seven months, her fetus cannot yet be discerned after one-third of her days of pregnancy. In a nine-month pregnancy, the fetus can be discerned after three months, which is one-third of the pregnancy. In the case of a pregnancy that lasts seven months, the fetus cannot be discerned at the end of one-third of the pregnancy, i.e., after two and one-third months, but after three months, as in a standard nine-month pregnancy.

דְּאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ: עוּבָּרָהּ נִיכָּר לִשְׁלִישׁ יָמֶיהָ, לְמָה לִי שְׁלֹשָׁה? בִּתְרֵי וְתִילְתָּא סַגִּיא!

Rabbi Ya’akov explains the inference: As if it enters your mind that when a woman gives birth at seven months, her fetus can already be discerned after one-third of her days of pregnancy, i.e., after two and one-third months, why do I need three months from the time the boy reaches adulthood until the end of the time that he can become liable as a stubborn and rebellious son? A period of two and one-third months should suffice. If he engaged in intercourse with a woman immediately upon reaching adulthood and the intercourse resulted in a seven-month pregnancy, the fetus would be able to be discerned after two and one-third months, and he would be fit to be called a father already from then. From the statement of Rabbi Kruspedai, citing Rabbi Shabbtai, it is clear that the earliest time the fetus can be discerned is after three months of the pregnancy have passed.

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לְעוֹלָם אֵימָא לָךְ, עוּבָּרָהּ נִיכָּר לִשְׁלִישׁ יָמֶיהָ. זִיל בָּתַר רוּבָּא.

Ravina said to Rabbi Ya’akov: Actually, I could say to you that even when a woman gives birth at seven months, her fetus can already be discerned after one-third of her days of pregnancy. But the halakha with regard to a stubborn and rebellious son was not adjusted accordingly because of the principle that one follows the majority. Most women give birth at nine months, and their fetuses are discernible only after three months. Therefore, the fact that one would be fit to be called a father in the case of a seven-month pregnancy is disregarded.

אַמְרוּהָ קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ. אָמַר לֵיהּ: וּבְדִינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת מִי אָזְלִינַן בָּתַר רוּבָּא? הַתּוֹרָה אָמְרָה: ״וְשָׁפְטוּ הָעֵדָה וְהִצִּילוּ הָעֵדָה״, וְאַתְּ אָמְרַתְּ זִיל בָּתַר רוּבָּא?!

The Sages stated this answer before Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, whereupon he said to them: But do we blindly follow the majority in cases of capital law and not judge each case on its own merits? Doesn’t the Torah state: “And the congregation shall judge…and the congregation shall deliver” (Numbers 35:24–25), from which it is derived that the court must make every effort to find exculpatory arguments in support of the accused; and yet you say that one follows the majority? If it is possible that already after two and one-third months the stubborn and rebellious son will be fit to be called a father, from that time on he should be exempt from punishment.

אַהְדְּרוּהָ קַמֵּיהּ דְּרָבִינָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: וּבְדִינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת לָא אָזְלִינַן בָּתַר רוּבָּא? וְהָתְנַן: אֶחָד אוֹמֵר ״בִּשְׁנַיִם בַּחֹדֶשׁ״ וְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר ״בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה״, עֵדוּתָן קַיֶּימֶת, שֶׁזֶּה יוֹדֵעַ בְּעִיבּוּרוֹ שֶׁל חֹדֶשׁ וְזֶה אֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ.

The Sages then brought Rav Huna’s analysis back to Ravina and presented it before him. Ravina said to them: And do we not follow the majority in cases of capital law? But didn’t we learn in the mishna (Sanhedrin 40a): If one witness says that the event occurred on the second of the month, and one witness says that the event occurred on the third of the month, this is not regarded as a contradiction and their testimony stands, since it is possible to say that this witness knows of the addition of a day to the previous month, and according to his tally the event occurred on the second of the month, and that witness does not know of the addition of a day to the previous month, and according to his tally the event occurred on the third of the month.

וְאִי סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ לָא אָמְרִינַן זִיל בָּתַר רוּבָּא, נֵימָא: הָנֵי דַּוְקָא קָא מַסְהֲדִי, וְאַכְחוֹשֵׁי הוּא דְּקָא מַכְחֲשִׁי אַהֲדָדֵי! אֶלָּא לָאו מִשּׁוּם דְּאָמְרִינַן זִיל בָּתַר רוּבָּא, וְרוּבָּא דְאִינָשֵׁי עֲבִדִי דְּטָעוּ בְּעִיבּוּרָא דְּיַרְחָא!

And if it enters your mind that we do not say that one follows the majority in cases of capital law, let us then say that these witnesses are testifying with precision, and that they contradict each other, and therefore the accused should be acquitted. Rather, is it not because we say that one follows the majority, and the majority of people are apt to err with regard to the addition of an extra day to the month?

אָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה מִדִּפְתִּי: אַף אֲנַן נָמֵי תְּנֵינָא, בַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת בְּבִיאָה, וְאִם בָּא עָלֶיהָ יָבָם – קְנָאָהּ, וְחַיָּיבִין עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ.

Rabbi Yirmeya of Difti says: We learn in another mishna (Nidda 44b) as well that one follows the majority even in cases of capital law: A girl who is three years and one day old whose father arranged her betrothal can be betrothed with intercourse, as, despite her age, the legal status of intercourse with her is that of full-fledged intercourse. And in a case where the childless husband of a girl three years and one day old dies, if his brother, the yavam, engages in intercourse with her, he acquires her as his wife. And if a girl of that age is married, a man other than her husband is liable for engaging in intercourse with her due to violation of the prohibition against adultery, as despite her age she is legally considered to be a married woman.

וּמְטַמְּאָה אֶת בּוֹעֲלָהּ, לְטַמֵּא מִשְׁכָּב הַתַּחְתּוֹן כְּעֶלְיוֹן. נִישֵּׂאת לַכֹּהֵן – אוֹכֶלֶת בִּתְרוּמָה. בָּא עָלֶיהָ אֶחָד מִן הַפְּסוּלִין – פְּסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה. וְאִם בָּא עָלֶיהָ אֶחָד מִכׇּל הָעֲרָיוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בְּתוֹרָה – מוּמָתִין עָלֶיהָ, וְהִיא פְּטוּרָה.

The mishna continues: And if she is impure due to menstruation, she transmits impurity to one who engages in intercourse with her, who then renders all the items designated for lying beneath him impure like the items designated for lying above him. If she marries a priest, she may partake of teruma like any other wife of a priest. If she is unmarried and one of the men who is unfit for the priesthood, e.g., a mamzer or ḥalal, engaged in intercourse with her, he has disqualified her from marrying into the priesthood, and if she is the daughter of a priest, she is disqualified from partaking of teruma. And if one of any of those with whom relations are forbidden, which are enumerated in the Torah, engaged in intercourse with her, e.g., her father or father-in-law, the man is executed by the court for engaging in intercourse with her, and she is exempt because she is a minor.

אַמַּאי? אֵימָא: אַיְילוֹנִית הִיא, וְאַדַּעְתָּא דְּהָכִי לָא קַדֵּישׁ! אֶלָּא, לָאו דְּאָמְרִינַן: זִיל בָּתַר רוּבָּא, וְרוֹב נָשִׁים לָאו אַיְילוֹנִית נִינְהוּ.

Rabbi Yirmeya of Difti explains how this mishna demonstrates that one follows the majority even in cases of capital law: Why is a man who engaged in intercourse with a three-year-old girl who was married to another man liable to receive the death penalty? Say that perhaps it will turn out that she is a sexually underdeveloped woman [ailonit] who is incapable of bearing children, and her husband did not betroth her with this understanding; and consequently the marriage is null, as it was entered into in error. Therefore, a man who engaged in intercourse with her should not be liable to receive the death penalty for adultery. Rather, is it not that we say that one follows the majority, and the majority of women are not sexually underdeveloped women, and therefore the assumption is that the betrothal was valid? This is proof that even in cases of capital law one follows the majority.

לָא, מַאי ״חַיָּיב עָלֶיהָ״ דְּקָתָנֵי? קׇרְבָּן.

The Gemara refutes this claim: No; rather, what is the meaning of that which is taught in the mishna: And if she is married, a man other than her husband is liable for engaging in intercourse with her due to violation of the prohibition against intercourse with a married woman? This means that if a man unwittingly engaged in intercourse with a three-year-old girl who was married to another man, he is liable to bring a sin-offering, but there is no liability to receive the death penalty based on a majority.

וְהָא ״מוּמָתִין עַל יָדָהּ״ קָתָנֵי? בְּבָא עָלֶיהָ אָבִיהָ.

The Gemara asks: But wasn’t it taught in the mishna: And if one of any of those with whom relations are forbidden, which are enumerated in the Torah, engaged in intercourse with her, the man is executed by the court for engaging in intercourse with her? The Gemara answers: This is referring to a case where her father or some other close relative engaged in intercourse with her, so that the prohibition is incest, rather than adultery.

וְהָא ״אִם בָּא עָלֶיהָ אֶחָד מִכׇּל הָעֲרָיוֹת״ קָתָנֵי? אֶלָּא, הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן: דְּקַבְּלַהּ עִילָּוֵיהּ.

The Gemara asks: But wasn’t it taught: If one of any of those with whom relations are forbidden engaged in intercourse with her, the man is executed by the court for engaging in intercourse with her? This seems to indicate that the death penalty is imposed for all types of forbidden intercourse with a three-year-old girl, even if the intercourse is forbidden as a result of her being married. The Gemara refutes this claim: Rather, what are we dealing with here? With a case where the husband explicitly accepted her upon himself as his wife even if she turns out to be a sexually undeveloped woman. Therefore, another man who engages in intercourse with her is liable to receive the death penalty even if he is not one of her close relatives.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הַמְסוֹלֶלֶת בִּבְנָהּ קָטָן, וְהֶעֱרָה בָּהּ – בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: פְּסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה, וּבֵית הִלֵּל מַכְשִׁירִין.

§ The Sages taught in a baraita: If a woman was acting lewdly with her minor son and he performed the initial stage of intercourse with her, Beit Shammai say that he has thereby disqualified her from marrying into the priesthood. And Beit Hillel deem her fit to marry into the priesthood, because they maintain that the intercourse of a minor is not regarded as intercourse.

אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבָּה בַּר נַחְמָנִי: אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר זְעֵירִי: הַכֹּל מוֹדִים בְּבֶן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד שֶׁבִּיאָתוֹ בִּיאָה, פָּחוֹת מִבֶּן שְׁמֹנֶה שֶׁאֵין בִּיאָתוֹ בִּיאָה. לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ אֶלָּא בְּבֶן שְׁמֹנֶה, דְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי סָבְרִי: גָּמְרִינַן מִדּוֹרוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנִים, וּבֵית הִלֵּל סָבְרִי: לָא גָּמְרִינַן מִדּוֹרוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנִים.

Rabbi Ḥiyya, son of Rabba bar Naḥmani, says that Rav Ḥisda says, and some say that Rav Ḥisda says that Ze’eiri says: All, i.e., both Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, concede with regard to a boy nine years and one day old that his intercourse is regarded as intercourse and disqualifies a woman from marrying into the priesthood as well as results in her liability to receive the death penalty, even though he himself is not liable to receive it. And they also all concede concerning a boy less than eight years old that his intercourse is not regarded as intercourse vis-à-vis these halakhot. They disagree only about a boy who is eight years old, as Beit Shammai maintain that we learn from earlier generations, when people were able to father children at that age, and we apply that reality to the present; and Beit Hillel maintain that we do not learn from earlier generations.

וְדוֹרוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנִים מְנָלַן דְּאוֹלִיד? אִילֵּימָא מִדִּכְתִיב: ״הֲלוֹא זֹאת בַּת שֶׁבַע בַּת אֱלִיעָם אֵשֶׁת אוּרִיָּה הַחִתִּי״, וּכְתִיב: ״אֱלִיעָם בֶּן אֲחִיתֹפֶל הַגִּלֹנִי״, וּכְתִיב: ״וַיִּשְׁלַח בְּיַד נָתָן הַנָּבִיא וַיִּקְרָא אֶת שְׁמוֹ יְדִידְיָהּ בַּעֲבוּר (כִּי) ה׳ (אֲהֵבוֹ)״.

The Gemara asks: And from where do we derive that in earlier generations men fathered children at this age? If we say that we know this from the following calculation: It is written: “Is this not Bathsheba, daughter of Eliam, wife of Uriah the Hittite?” (II Samuel 11:3). And it is also written: “And Eliam, son of Ahithophel the Gilonite” (II Samuel 23:34), which teaches that Bathsheba was the granddaughter of Ahithophel. And it is written with reference to the birth of Solomon: “And he sent by the hand of Nathan the prophet, and he called his name Jedidiah, for the Lord’s sake” (II Samuel 12:25).

וּכְתִיב: ״וַיְהִי לִשְׁנָתַיִם יָמִים וַיִּהְיוּ גֹזְזִים לְאַבְשָׁלוֹם״, וּכְתִיב: ״וְאַבְשָׁלוֹם בָּרַח וַיֵּלֶךְ גְּשׁוּרָה וַיְהִי שָׁם שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים״.

And later it is written: “And it came to pass after two years, that Absalom had sheepshearers” (II Samuel 13:23), and at that time Amnon was killed (see II Samuel 13:23–29), this being at least two years after Solomon was born. And afterward it is written: “So Absalom fled, and went to Geshur, and was there three years” (II Samuel 13:38), so that this was five years after Solomon was born.

וּכְתִיב: ״וַיֵּשֶׁב אַבְשָׁלוֹם בִּירוּשָׁלִַים שְׁנָתַיִם יָמִים וּפְנֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ לֹא רָאָה״. וּכְתִיב: ״וַיְהִי מִקֵּץ אַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה וַיֹּאמֶר אַבְשָׁלוֹם אֶל הַמֶּלֶךְ אֵלְכָה נָּא וַאֲשַׁלְּמָה אֶת נִדְרִי אֲשֶׁר נָדַרְתִּי לַה׳ בְּחֶבְרוֹן״. וּכְתִיב: ״וַאֲחִיתֹפֶל רָאָה כִּי לֹא נֶעֶשְׂתָה עֲצָתוֹ וַיַּחֲבֹשׁ אֶת הַחֲמוֹר וַיָּקׇם וַיֵּלֶךְ אֶל בֵּיתוֹ וְאֶל עִירוֹ וַיְצַו אֶל בֵּיתוֹ וַיֵּחָנַק״.

And it is written: “So Absalom dwelt two years in Jerusalem, and did not see the king’s face” (II Samuel 14:28), bringing the tally to seven years after Solomon was born. And it is written: “And it came to pass after forty years, that Absalom said to the king, I pray you, let me go and pay my vow, which I have vowed to the Lord, in Hebron” (II Samuel 15:7). This was the beginning of Absalom’s rebellion against David. Accordingly, at that time Solomon was at least seven years old. And at some point during the rebellion it is written: “And when Ahithophel saw that his counsel was not followed, he saddled his donkey, and arose, and went to his house, to his city, and put his household in order, and strangled himself and died” (II Samuel 17:23).

וּכְתִיב: ״אַנְשֵׁי דָמִים וּמִרְמָה לֹא יֶחֱצוּ יְמֵיהֶם״. וְתַנְיָא: כׇּל שְׁנוֹתָיו שֶׁל דּוֹאֵג אֵינָן אֶלָּא שְׁלֹשִׁים וְאַרְבַּע, וְשֶׁל אֲחִיתֹפֶל אֵינָן אֶלָּא שְׁלֹשִׁים וְשָׁלֹשׁ. כַּמָּה הָוְיָא לְהוּ? תְּלָתִין וּתְלָת. דַּל שְׁבַע דַּהֲוָה שְׁלֹמֹה, פָּשׁ לְהוּ עֶשְׂרִים וְשֵׁית. דַּל תַּרְתֵּי שְׁנֵי לִתְלָתָא עִבּוּרֵי, אִשְׁתְּכַח דְּכֹל חַד וְחַד בְּתַמְנֵי אוֹלֵיד.

And it is written: “Bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days” (Psalms 55:24). And in keeping with this verse, it is taught in a baraita: All of Doeg’s years were only thirty-four and Ahithophel’s were only thirty-three. Neither reached the age of thirty-five, half of the normal life span of seventy years. Based on this, one can calculate: How many years did Ahithophel live? Thirty-three. Subtract seven years, Solomon’s age at the time of Ahithophel’s death, which leaves Ahithophel twenty-six years old at the time of Solomon’s birth. Subtract two more years for three pregnancies, one preceding the birth of Eliam the son of Ahithophel, one preceding the birth of Bathsheba, daughter of Eliam, and one preceding the birth of Solomon, son of Bathsheba. It turns out that three generations were born in twenty-four years, and that each and every parent begot a child at the age of eight.

מִמַּאי? דִּלְמָא תַּרְוַיְיהוּ בִּתְשַׁע אוֹלֵיד, וּבַת שֶׁבַע אוֹלִידָא בְּשֵׁית, מִשּׁוּם דְּאִיתְּתָא בָּרְיָא. תֵּדַע, דְּהָא הֲוַי לַהּ וָלָד מֵעִיקָּרָא.

The Gemara refutes this proof: From where do you prove this? Perhaps both Ahithophel and his son Eliam fathered children when they were each nine years old, and Bathsheba gave birth to Solomon when she was six, because a woman is stronger and can conceive at an earlier age. Know that this is true that women conceive at an earlier age, as Bathsheba had already given birth to a child from David before giving birth to Solomon (see II Samuel 11:27). Therefore, no proof can be derived from here.

אֶלָּא מֵהָכָא: ״אֵלֶּה תּוֹלְדֹת תֶּרַח תֶּרַח הוֹלִיד אֶת אַבְרָם אֶת נָחוֹר וְאֶת הָרָן״. וְאַבְרָהָם גָּדוֹל מִנָּחוֹר שָׁנָה, וְנָחוֹר גָּדוֹל מֵהָרָן שָׁנָה. נִמְצָא אַבְרָהָם גָּדוֹל שְׁתֵּי שָׁנִים מֵהָרָן. וּכְתִיב: ״וַיִּקַּח אַבְרָם וְנָחוֹר לָהֶם נָשִׁים וְגוֹ׳״.

Rather, it is from here that one can deduce that in earlier generations men fathered children at the age of eight, as it is written: “And these are the generations of Terah; Terah begot Abram, Nahor, and Haran” (Genesis 11:27). And Abraham was at least one year older than Nahor, and Nahor was one year older than Haran, so it turns out that Abraham was two years older than Haran. And it is written: “And Abram and Nahor took wives for themselves; the name of Abram’s wife was Sarai and the name of Nahor’s wife was Milka, daughter of Haran, father of Milka and father of Iscah” (Genesis 11:29).

וְאָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק: ״יִסְכָּה״ זוֹ שָׂרָה, וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמָהּ ״יִסְכָּה״? שֶׁסּוֹכָה בְּרוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ. וְהַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״כֹּל אֲשֶׁר תֹּאמַר אֵלֶיךָ שָׂרָה שְׁמַע בְּקֹלָהּ״. דָּבָר אַחֵר: ״יִסְכָּה״ – שֶׁהַכֹּל סָכִים בְּיוֹפְיָהּ. וּכְתִיב: ״וַיִּפֹּל [אַבְרָהָם] עַל פָּנָיו וַיִּצְחָק וַיֹּאמֶר בְּלִבּוֹ וְגוֹ׳״. כַּמָּה קַשִּׁישׁ אַבְרָהָם מִשָּׂרָה? עֲשַׂר שְׁנִין. וְקַשִּׁישׁ מֵאֲבוּהּ תַּרְתֵּין שְׁנִין. אִשְׁתְּכַח כִּי אוֹלְדַהּ הָרָן לְשָׂרָה בְּתַמְנֵי אוֹלְדַהּ.

And Rabbi Yitzḥak says: Iscah is in fact Sarah. And why was she called Iscah? Because she envisioned [shesokha] hidden matters by means of divine inspiration. And this explains what is written: “In all that Sarah has said to you, hearken to her voice” (Genesis 21:12). Alternatively, Sarah was also called Iscah, because all gazed [sokhim] upon her beauty. And it is written: “And Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in his heart: Shall a child be born to him that is a hundred years old? And shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, give birth?” (Genesis 17:17). How much older was Abraham than Sarah? He was ten years older than her and, as stated above, he was two years older than her father, Haran. It turns out then that when Haran begot Sarah, he begot her at the age of eight.

מִמַּאי? דִּלְמָא אַבְרָהָם זוּטָא דַּאֲחוּהּ הֲוָה, וְדֶרֶךְ חׇכְמָתָן קָא חָשֵׁיב לְהוּ.

The Gemara refutes this proof: From where do you prove this? Perhaps Abraham was the youngest of the brothers, and not the oldest among them. The fact that Abraham is listed first is no proof that he was the oldest, as perhaps the verse listed them in the order of their wisdom and therefore Abraham, being the wisest, was mentioned first.

תֵּדַע דְּקָא חָשֵׁיב לְהוּ קְרָא דֶּרֶךְ חׇכְמָתָן, וּכְתִיב: ״וַיְהִי נֹחַ בֶּן חֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד נֹחַ אֶת שֵׁם אֶת חָם וְאֶת יָפֶת״. שֵׁם גָּדוֹל מֵחָם שָׁנָה, וְחָם גָּדוֹל מִיֶּפֶת שָׁנָה. נִמְצָא שֵׁם גָּדוֹל מִיֶּפֶת שְׁתֵּי שָׁנִים. וּכְתִיב: ״וְנֹחַ בֶּן שֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה וְהַמַּבּוּל הָיָה מַיִם עַל הָאָרֶץ״. וּכְתִיב: ״(וְאֵלֶּה) תּוֹלְדֹת שֵׁם שֵׁם בֶּן מְאַת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד אֶת אַרְפַּכְשָׁד שְׁנָתַיִם אַחַר הַמַּבּוּל״. בֶּן מֵאָה שָׁנָה? בַּר מְאָה וְתַרְתֵּין שְׁנִין הֲוָה!

Know that it is true that the verse sometimes lists brothers not according to their birth order, but in the order of their degrees of wisdom, as it is written: “And Noah was five hundred years old; and Noah begot Shem, Ham, and Japheth” (Genesis 5:32). According to this, Shem was at least one year older than Ham, and Ham one year older than Japheth, so it turns out that Shem was two years older than Japheth. And it is written: “And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth” (Genesis 7:6). And it is written: “These are the descendants of Shem; Shem was one hundred years old, and begot Arpachshad two years after the flood” (Genesis 11:10). If Shem was the oldest brother, how could he be only 100 years old? He must have been at least 102 years old, as Noah was 500 years old when his third son was born, and he was 600 years old at the time of the flood.

אֶלָּא, דֶּרֶךְ חׇכְמָתָן קָא חָשֵׁיב לְהוּ. הָכָא נָמֵי, דֶּרֶךְ חׇכְמָתָן קָא חָשֵׁיב לְהוּ.

Rather, the verse listed them in the order of their degrees of wisdom, Shem being the wisest. With regard to his age, Shem was the youngest of the brothers, having been born when Noah was 502 years old. Shem begot his son 100 years later, which was two years after the flood. Here too, then, with regard to the sons of Terah, it can be argued that the verse lists them in the order of their degrees of wisdom.

אָמַר רַב כָּהֲנָא: אַמְרִיתַהּ לִשְׁמַעְתָּא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב זְבִיד מִנְּהַרְדְּעָא. אָמַר לִי: אַתּוּן מֵהָכָא מַתְנִיתוּ, וַאֲנַן מֵהָכָא מַתְנֵינַן לַהּ: ״וּלְשֵׁם יֻלַּד גַּם הוּא אֲבִי כׇּל בְּנֵי עֵבֶר אֲחִי יֶפֶת הַגָּדוֹל״. יֶפֶת הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁבְּאֶחָיו הֲוָה.

Rav Kahana says: I stated this discussion before Rav Zevid of Neharde’a. When he heard it, he said to me: You learn that Shem was not Noah’s oldest son from there, and we learn it from here: “And to Shem, the father of all the children of Eber, the brother of Japheth the elder, to him also were children born” (Genesis 10:21). This verse indicates that Japheth, rather than Shem, was the oldest of the brothers.

אֶלָּא מְנָלַן? מֵהָכָא: ״וּבְצַלְאֵל בֶּן אוּרִי בֶן חוּר לְמַטֵּה יְהוּדָה״, וּכְתִיב: ״וַתָּמׇת עֲזוּבָה אֵשֶׁת כָּלֵב וַיִּקַּח לוֹ כָלֵב אֶת אֶפְרָת וַתֵּלֶד לוֹ אֶת חוּר״. וְכִי עֲבַד בְּצַלְאֵל מִשְׁכָּן בַּר כַּמָּה הָוֵי? בַּר תְּלֵיסַר, דִּכְתִיב: ״אִישׁ אִישׁ מִמְּלַאכְתּוֹ אֲשֶׁר הֵמָּה עֹשִׂים״. וְתַנְיָא: שָׁנָה רִאשׁוֹנָה עָשָׂה מֹשֶׁה מִשְׁכָּן, שְׁנִיָּה הֵקִים מִשְׁכָּן וְשָׁלַח מְרַגְּלִים.

The Gemara asks: Rather, from where do we derive that in earlier generations men fathered children at the age of eight? From here, as it is written: “And Bezalel, son of Uri, son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, made all that the Lord commanded Moses” (Exodus 38:22). And it is written: “And Azubah died, and Caleb took for himself Ephrat, who bore him Hur. And Hur begot Uri, and Uri begot Bezalel” (I Chronicles 2:19–20). And when Bezalel made the Tabernacle how old was he? He must have been at least thirteen years old, as it is written: “And all the wise men that carried out all the work of the sanctuary, came every man from his work that they did” (Exodus 36:4), and one who is less than thirteen is not called a man. And it is taught in a baraita: In the first year following the exodus from Egypt Moses made the Tabernacle; in the second year he erected the Tabernacle and sent out the spies.

וּכְתִיב: ״בֶּן אַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה אָנֹכִי בִּשְׁלֹחַ מֹשֶׁה עֶבֶד ה׳ וְגוֹ׳״, ״וְעַתָּה הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי הַיּוֹם בֶּן חָמֵשׁ וּשְׁמֹנִים שָׁנָה״. כַּמָּה הָוְיָא לְהוּ? אַרְבְּעִין. דַּל אַרְבֵּיסַר דַּהֲוָה בְּצַלְאֵל, פָּשָׁא לְהוּ עֶשְׂרִים וְשֵׁית. דַּל תַּרְתֵּי שְׁנֵי דִּתְלָתָא עִיבּוּרֵי, אִשְׁתְּכַח דְּכֹל חַד וְחַד בְּתַמְנֵי אוֹלֵיד.

And it is written that Caleb, Bezalel’s great-grandfather, said to Joshua: “I was forty years old when Moses the servant of the Lord sent me from Kadesh Barnea to spy out the land” (Joshua 14:7). And he added: “And now, behold, I am this day eighty-five years old” (Joshua 14:10). How many years old was Caleb when he was sent off with the spies? He was forty. Subtract fourteen years, as Bezalel was at least fourteen years old when Caleb was sent to spy out the land. This is known because that mission took place a year after the Tabernacle was erected. This leaves twenty-six years. Subtract two more years for three pregnancies, one preceding the birth of Hur, son of Caleb, one preceding the birth of Uri, son of Hur, and one preceding the birth of Bezalel, son of Uri. It turns out that three generations were born in twenty-four years, and that each and every parent begot a child at the age of eight.

בֵּן, וְלֹא בַּת. תַּנְיָא: אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: בְּדִין הוּא שֶׁתְּהֵא בַּת רְאוּיָה לִהְיוֹת כְּבֵן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה,

§ The mishna teaches that the penalty for rebelliousness is imposed upon a son, but not upon a daughter. It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Shimon says: It would be reasonable that a daughter should be fit to be treated like a stubborn and rebellious son, and to be punished like him if she sins in the same way as he does.