משנה: בֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד הוּא פּוֹסֵל עַל יְדֵי אַחִים וְאַחִים פּוֹסְלִין עַל יָדוֹ. אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא פוֹסֵל תְּחִילָּה וְאַחִין פּוֹסְלִין תְּחִילָּה וְסוֹף. כֵּיצַד בֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד שֶׁבָּא עַל יְבִימְתּוֹ פָּסַל עַל יְדֵי אַחִים. בָּאוּ עָלֶיהָ אַחִים עָשׂוּ בָהּ מַאֲמָר נָֽתְנוּ גֵט אוֹ חָֽלְצוּ פָּֽסלוּ עַל יָדוֹ. MISHNAH: [A male] nine years and one day old172Cf. Chapter 3, Note 143, for the status of a male older than 9 years. disables for the brothers and the brothers disable for him; only that he disables at the beginning and the brothers disable at beginning and end173His action counts only if he acted before any of the adult brothers..
How is that? [A male] nine years and one day old who copulated with his sister-in-law disabled her for the brothers. If [any one of] the brothers copulated with her, “bespoke” her, divorced her, or performed ḥalîṣah with her, they disabled her for him.
הלכה: בֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד הוּא פוֹסֵל כול׳. הָא בְסוֹף אֵינוֹ פוֹסֵל אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מַאֲמָרוֹ אֲבָל לְאַחַר בִּיאָתוֹ פוֹסֵל. אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא פוֹסֵל בְּדָבָר אֶחָד וְהֵן פּוֹסְלִין בְּאַרְבָּעָה דְבָרִים. HALAKHAH: “[A male] nine years and one day old disables,” etc. At the end he does not disable after his “bespeaking”177The Mishnah which declares that the minor’s act counts only if he precedes his adult brothers refers to the legal ceremony of “bespeaking”; but intercourse is a real act which cannot be disregarded under any circumstances and prohibits the widow in all cases., but after his intercourse he disables. However he can disable only by one act but they may disable by four acts.
כֵּיצַד בֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד. וְאִם לִבְנוֹ יִיעָדֶנָּה. לִבְנוֹ הוּא מְייַעֲדָהּ. אֵינוֹ מְייַעֲדָהּ לָאַחִין. וְייִעֲדֶינָּהּ לָאַחִין מִקַּל וָחוֹמֶר. מַה אִם הַבֶּן שֶׁאֵינוֹ קָם תַּחְתָּיו לַחֲלִיצָה וּלְיִיבּוּם הֲרֵי הוּא מְייָעֲדָהּ לוֹ. אָחִיו שֶׁהוּא קָם תַּחְתָּיו לַחֲלִיצָה וּלְיִיבּוּם אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיִיעָדֶנָּה לוֹ. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְאִם לִבְנוֹ יִיעָדֶנָּה. הוּא מְייָעֲדָהּ. אֵינוֹ מְייָעֲדָהּ לְאָחִיו. לֹא. אִם אָמַרְתָּ בְּבֶן שֶׁהוּא קָם תַּחְתָּיו בִּשְׂדֵה אֲחוּזָה. תֹּאמַר בְּאָחִיו שֶׁאֵינוֹ קָם תַּחְתָּיו בִּשְׂדֵה אֲחוּזָה. הוֹאִיל וְאֵינוֹ קָם תַּחְתָּיו בִּשְׂדֵה אֲחוּזָה אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁייָעֲדֶנָּה לוֹ. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְאִם לִבְנוֹ יִיעָדֶנָּה. לִבְנוֹ הוּא מְייָעֲדָהּ וְאֵינוֹ מְייָעֲדָהּ לְאָחִיו. 178This Halakhah is copied from Qiddushin 1:2, fol. 59b/c which has a better and more complete text.“How is that? [A male] nine years and one day old.” “If he allots her to his son.179Ex. 21:9, speaking about a minor girl sold by her father as a slave with the understanding that her price would count as betrothal gift in case the owner would desire to marry her or would give her to his son. In that case, the betrothal is called “allotment”. If she is not married, she regains her freedom by reaching adulthood at 12 years of age.” He allots her to his son but may not allot her to the brothers180The argument is reproduced in Mekhilta deR. Ismael, Masekhta dinziqin 3, Mekhilta deR. Simeon ben Ioḥai Chap. 21 (p. 167); Babli Qiddushin 17b.. He should be able to allot her to the brothers by an argument de minore ad majus! If he may allot her to his son who may not take his place for ḥalîṣah and levirate, should it not be logical that he may allot her to his brother who may take his place for ḥalîṣah and levirate181The Babli rejects this argument by noting that levirate presumes the absence of a son.? The verse says, “if he allots her to his son.” He allots her [to his son] but may not allot her to the brothers. No. If you would accept the son since he will take [the father’s] place in a field of inheritance182The family estate going back to the distribution of land under Joshua, for which the succession is determined by the rules of Num. 27:6–11., what can you say about his brother who will not take his place in a field of inheritance? Would it be reasonable that he may allot her to him? The verse says, “if he allots her to his son.” He allots her to his son but may not allot her to the brothers.
וְאִם לִבְנוֹ יִיעָדֶנָּה. לִבְנוֹ הוּא מְייָעֲדָהּ וְאֵינוֹ מְייָעֲדָהּ לְבֶן בְּנוֹ. שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר אַבָּא בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעִירָא. בְּפָרֲשַׁת נְחָלוֹת אַתְּ עֲבַד בֶּן בֵּן כְּבֵן וְהָכָא לֵית עֲבַד בֶּן בֵּן כְּבֵן. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא. מָאן דָּמַר לִי הָדָא מִילְּתָא אֲנָא מַשְׁקֶי לֵיהּ קוֹנְדִּיטוֹן. הָתִיב רִבִּי תַנְחוּם. הֲרֵי פָרֲשַׁת נְחָלוֹת הֲרֵי עָשִׂיתָ אָח כְּבֵן וּשְׁאָר כָּל־הַקְּרוֹבִים כְּבֵן. (וְאֵין) אַתְּ עוֹשֶׂה בֶּן בֵּן כְּבֵן. הָתִיבוֹן רַבָּנִן דְּקַיסָרִין. הֲרֵי פָרֲשַׁת טֻמְאוֹת הֲרֵי עָשִׂיתָה אָח כְּבֵן וּשְׁאָר כָּל־הַקְּרוֹבִים כְּבֵן. וְאֵין אַתְּ עוֹשֶׂה בֶּן בֵּן כְּבֵן. אָמַר הָא אֲזִיל קוֹנדִּיטוֹן. “If he allots her to his son;” he allots her to his son but he may not allot her to his grandson. Samuel bar Abba asked before Rebbi Ze‘ira: In matters of inheritance you take the grandson like the son but here you do not take the grandson like the son185If the son died before the father, the grandson inherits the son’s part.? Rebbi Ze‘ira said, if anybody explains this matter, I shall pour him spiced wine186Latin conditum (sc., vinum),“spiced wine”.. Rebbi Tanḥum187In Qiddushin: R. Naḥum, a third generation Amora, student of Samuel bar Abba. His name fits into the scheme of things but not the fifth generation R. Tanḥum. answered: In matters of inheritance where the brother can take the place of the son and all others can take the place of the son, the grandson takes the place of the son.188Here, a sentence is missing which appears in the text of Qiddushin: וְכָאן שֶׁלֹּא עָשִׂיתָ אָח כְּבֵן וּשְׁאָר כָּל־הַקְּרוֹבִים כְּבֵן אֵין אַתְּ עוֹשֶׂה בֶן בֵּן כְּבֵן: “but here, where neither the brother nor the other relatives take the role of the son, the grandson does not take the role of the son.” The rabbis of Caesarea answered: In matters of impurity you consider the brother like the son and all [near] relatives like the son but not the grandson like the son189In the list of close relatives who have to defile themselves for the burial of the deceased (Lev. 21:2–3), the grandson or grandfather is absent. Among Cohanim, the grandson may not defile himself for his grandfather.. He said, there went the spiced wine.
וְאִם לִבְנוֹ יִיעָדֶנָּה. לְדַעַת. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. לֵית כָּאן לְדַעַת. אָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא כֵּן. אִית כָּאן כְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יְהוּדָה. אָמַר רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר אֶבְדוֹמָא. אֲפִילוּ תֵימַר אִית כָּאן כְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יְהוּדָה לֹא קָטָן הוּא. אִם לִבְנוֹ יִיעָדֶנָּה. לְדַעַת. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. מְייָעֲדֶנָּהּ בֵּין לִבְנוֹ הַגָּדוֹל בֵּין לִבְנוֹ הַקָּטָן בֵּין לְדַעַת בֵּין שֶׁלֹּא לְדַעַת. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר. אֵינוֹ מְייָעֲדָהּ אֶלָּא לִבְנוֹ הַגָּדוֹל בִּלְבַד לְדַעַת. “If he allots her to his son;” with [the girl’s] agreement190This is the explicit interpretation of the Babli (Qiddushin 19a) which seems to be valid here also and explains the apparent duplication of the argument in this paragraph.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is no agreement here. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said so, the statement follows Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah191He holds in a baraita(Qiddushin1:2, fol. 59c; Babli 19a) that the money given to the father does not count as bride money but that the allotment is a legal betrothal since from the moment of betrothal she is no longer a servant. The money with which she is bought is money with which her services are bought for the duration of her servitude. By allotment, the value of the remainder of the money (computed by the remaining days of her servitude) is given as wedding gift. This implies that on the last day of her servitude she can be allotted to master or son only if at least a peruṭah’s worth of servitude is left (if the day’s worth is prorated by hours).. Rebbi Samuel bar Eudaimon said, even if you say the statement follows Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah, is he not a minor192Who is not called “a man” and cannot legally acquire. The Babli (19a) refers to the case of a levir aged 9 years and 1 day (Mishnah Yebamot 7:4) who by intercourse does acquire preliminarily his sister-in-law by biblical standards, except that his wife cannot be prosecuted for adultery since it is written (Lev. 20:10): “A man who commits adultery with a man’s wife”. This implies that there are cases where a woman can be legally married to a male without being a man’s wife.? “If he allots her to his son;” with [the latter’s] agreement. Rebbi Joḥanan said, he allots her to his minor or adult son, with and without the latter’s agreement. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he allots her only to his adult son with the latter’s agreement193In the Yerushalmi, practice should follow R. Joḥanan. In the Babli, R. Joḥanan’s opinion is not mentioned; what is asserted here in the name of R. Simeon ben Laqish is there attributed to the unquestioned authority of R. Yannai, the teacher of both R. Joḥanan and R. Simeon ben Laqish..
בֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד עוֹשֶׂה אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל גְּרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדֶיוֹט. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן דְּהוּא פָתַר לָהּ בְּיִיעוּדִין נִיחָא יִיעוּדִין שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ קִנְייָן בָּהּ עוֹשֶׂה אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל גְּרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ דְּהוּא פָתַר לָהּ בְּנִישּׂוּאִין תְּהֵא פְטוּרָה מִן הַחֲלִיצָה וּמִן הַיִיבּוּם. וְהָתַנִּינָן נָשָׂא אִשָּׁה וּמֵת הֲרֵי זוֹ פְטוּרָה. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבִין. אַתְיָא דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ כְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יְהוּדָה. וְתַנֵּי כֵן. בֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד עַד בֶּן שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה וְיוֹם אֶחָד שֶׁהֵבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת הֲרֵי זוֹ שׁוּמָא. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר. הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ סֵימָנִין. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן חֲנִינָה. וְהֵן שֶׁעָֽמְדוּ בוֹ בִשְׁעַת סֵימָנִין. “A male nine years and one day old makes194If he marries, the marriage is valid to turn his widow into a woman forbidden to the High Priest and if he divorces her, she becomes forbidden to a common priest. a widow for the High Priest or a divorcee or one who performed ḥalîṣah for a common priest.” In the opinion of R. Joḥanan who will explain this for allotments195He restricts the validity of the statement to a girl married by allotment since only in that case is his marriage valid by biblical standards. it is understandable; since he acquires by allotment he makes a widow for the High Priest or a divorcee or one who performed ḥalîṣah for a common priest. In the opinion of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish196For him, a minor cannot be allotted a wife; therefore, the marriage must be contracted under rabbinic rules and the author of that baraita cannot accept the statement in the next Mishnah that the widow of a childless minor is not subject to the laws of levirate. who must explain this for a marriage, she should also be free from levirate or ḥalîṣah, as we have stated197Mishnah 17.: “If he married a woman, that one is free from levirate or ḥalîṣah.” Rebbi Abin said, following Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish it198The baraita which opened this paragraph must follow R. Yose ben R. Jehudah while the Mishnah follows the anonymous majority. comes following Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah, as it was stated so: If a male nine years and one day old up to twelve years and one day old grew two pubic hairs, they are warts199Not signs of adulthood defined as onset of puberty. Quoted in Babli Niddah 46a.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah said, they are indicators200Greek σημεῖον “sign, marker”. [of puberty]. Rebbi Jacob ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: Only if they were still there at the time of indicators201During his thirteenth year, when the growth of pubic hair is expected. In the Babli, the statement is attributed to a R. Kruspedai ben Sabbatai..
רִבִּי יוֹסֵה בָּעֵי. עָֽמְדוּ בוֹ בִשְׁעַת סֵימָנִין. לְמַפְרֵיעוֹ הוּא נַעֲשֶׂה אִישׁ אוֹ מִיכָּן וּלְבָּא. רִבִּי אָבוּן פְּשִׁיטָא לֵיהּ. לְמַפְרֵיעוֹ הוּא נַעֲשֶׂה אִישׁ כָּל־שֶׁכֵּן לָבֹא. דּוּ פָתַר הָדָא דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ כְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יְהוּדָה. וְלָמָּה לֵית רִבִּי יוֹסֵי פָּתַר הָדָא דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ כְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵה בֵּירִבִּי יְהוּדָה. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. דְּהִיא צְרִיכָה לֵיהּ. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בָּעֵי. עָֽמְדוּ בוֹ בִשְׁעַת סֵימָנִין לְמַפְרֵיעוֹ נַעֲשֶׂה אִישׁ אוֹ מִיכָּן וּלְהַבָּא. נִיחָא אַלְמָנָה. וּגְרוּשָׁה. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ מִשֶּׁהִגְדִּיל נָתַן לָהּ גֵּט. חֲלִיצָה. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ וָמֵת וְחָֽלְצוּ לָהּ אַחִין וְעַל יָדָיו הִיא נַעֲשֵׂית חֲלוּצָה. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ פָּחוֹת מִתֵּשַׁע. אָמַר רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר אֶבְדוֹמָא. וְכֵינִי. אֶלָּא בְגִין דְּתַנָּא כּוּלְהוֹן תֵּשַׁע תַנָּא אַף הוּא עִמְּהוֹן. Rebbi Yose asked: When they204The pubic hairs. remained until the time of indicators, does he retroactively become a man or from that time onward? For Rebbi Abun it is obvious that he becomes a man retroactively, so certainly also for the future, for he explains the position of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish by Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah. Why does Rebbi Yose not explain the position of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish by Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah since he asked, when they remained until the time of indicators, does he retroactively become a man or from that time onward? Rebbi Mana said, because he had difficulty. Rebbi Yose asked: When they remained until the time of indicators, does he retroactively become a man or from that time onward205His difficulty is following R. Yose ben R. Jehudah, not R. Simeon ben Laqish who denies the validity of actions of a minor. His problem is with R. Joḥanan.? One understands the case of a widow206If his marriage by allotment is sanctioned by biblical decree, if he dies the widow is a widow by biblical standards and unquestionably forbidden to the High Priest.. But a divorcee207Even if his marriage, effected by his adult father, is valid, a divorce which needs his conscious action is certainly invalid as long as he is a minor.? Explain it if he copulated with her after he became an adult and divorced her. Ḥalîṣah? Explain it if he copulated with her, died, and the [adult] brothers performed ḥalîṣah; she had ḥalîṣah because of him. In that case, even if he was younger than nine [years]! Rebbi Samuel ben Eudaimon said, that is correct. But because in all cases one stated “nine”, one stated this with them.
רִבִּי יוּדָה בַּר פָּזִי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. מֵאָחָז לָמַד רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יוּדָה. דְּתַנֵּי. אָחָז הוֹלִיד בֶּן תֵּשַׁע וְהָרָן בֶּן שֵׁשׁ וְכָלֵב בֶּן עֶשֶׂר. כְּמָאן דָּמַר. הוּא כָּלֵב בֶּן חֶצְרוֹן הוּא כָּלֵב בֶּן יְפוּנֶּה. Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Rebbi Yose ben Jehudah learned from Aḥaz, as it was stated: Aḥaz produced a child at age nine209He became king at age 20 and ruled for 16 years (2K. 16:2). His son Ḥizqiah became king at age 25 (2K. 18:2). That seems to mean that Ḥizqiah was born when his father was 11 years old. However, since the first year of the reign is only counted from the day of accession to the next New Year’s Day, it is possible that he was born when his father was 10 and was conceived when he was 9. This computation has no parallel in the sources., Haran at age six210The computation is detailed in Babli Sanhedrin 69b and is based on two hypotheses, (1) that Sarah, 10 years younger than Abraham, was Abraham’s niece, Haran’s daughter, against the explicit testimony of the biblical text that she was his paternal halfsister, and that (2) Haran was the youngest of Teraḥ’s sons (Gen. 11:27) and at least two years younger than Abraham., and Caleb at age ten following him who identifies Caleb ben Ḥeṣron with Caleb ben Yephuneh211This also is detailed in Babli Sanhedrin 69b and is based on the identification of Caleb ben Yephuneh the spy, whose children are enumerated in 1Chr. 4:15, with Caleb ben Ḥeṣron whose descendants are mentioned in 1Chr. 2:18–21. Caleb ben Ḥeṣron is described as the great-grandfather of Beṣalel who built the Tabernacle. {The Babli never mentions the problem of the quite impossible identification of the two Calebs.} Since Caleb ben Yephuneh was 40 years of age in the year after the Exodus (Jos. 14:7) and Beṣalel is called “man” in Ex. 36:4, he was at least 13 years of age, only 27 years younger than his great-grandfather. That means that Caleb, Uri, and Ḥur all were fathers at age 9. If Caleb was father at age 10, then one of his descendants was father at age 8..