Reference for Sanhedrin 137:16
ומטמא את בועלה לטמא משכב התחתון כעליון נישאת לכהן אוכלת בתרומה בא עליה אחד מן הפסולין פסלה מן הכהונה ואם בא עליה אחד מכל העריות האמורות בתורה מומתין עליה והיא פטורה
To revert to the above text: 'R. Keruspedai said in R. Shabbethai's name: The extreme limit of a "stubborn and rebellious son" is only three months'. But did we not learn, FROM THE TIME THAT HE PRODUCES TWO HAIRS UNTIL HE GROWS A BEARD RIGHT ROUND? — If he grew a beard, even if three months have elapsed, or if three months elapsed, even if he did not grow a beard [he is no longer liable].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., whichever period is shorter. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> R. Jacob of Nehar Pekod<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [A town in the vicinity of Nehardea; v. Obermeyer, Die Landschaft Babylonien, 270ff.] ');"><sup>16</sup></span> sat before Rabina, and said thus in the name of R. Huna the son of R. Joshua: From the dictum of R. Keruspedai in R. Shabbethai's name one may deduce that if a woman bears at seven months, her pregnancy is not discernible at a third of its course; for if it is, why three months: two and a third are sufficient?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the fetus being then discernible, the son is fit to be called a father, and is no longer liable, as stated above. v. Yeb. 35a. ');"><sup>17</sup></span> He demurred: In truth, it may be that her pregnancy becomes manifest at a third of its course, but we must regard the majority.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whose pregnancy lasts nine months, the fetus thus not being discernible before three months, when the son becomes fit to be called a father and no longer liable to the law of a rebellious son. ');"><sup>18</sup></span> Now, this was repeated before R. Huna the son of R. Joshua, whereupon he remarked: But can we consider the majority [only, disregarding the majority entirely] in capital charges; did not the Torah say, Then the congregation shall judge … and the congregation shall deliver the slayer?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XXXV, 25f; this is taken to mean, that in doubt, the accused be given the benefit. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> Yet you say, regard the majority! This was reported back to Rabina. He replied: Do we then not follow the majority in capital charges? But we learnt: If one witness testified that the crime was committed on the second day of the month, and one on the third, their testimony is valid; for one knew that the past month had been full, and the other did not.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 40a. ');"><sup>20</sup></span> But if you maintain that we do not follow the majority, should we not say that these witnesses testify exactly,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Jewish months are of either twenty-nine or thirty days duration. As the sanctification of the new month depended on the direct testimony of witnesses, each new month being proclaimed by the Sanhedrin. it well might happen that a witness had not known that the preceding month had consisted of thirty days, and hence thought that the day of the crime was the third, instead of the second, of the new month. ');"><sup>21</sup></span> and thus contradict each other? Hence it surely must be that we follow the majority who are wont to err with respect to the fulness of the month. R. Jeremiah of Difti said: We also learnt the following: <font>A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband's brother cohabited with her, she becomes his. The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; [if a <i>niddah</i>,] she defiles him who has connection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon [a person afflicted with gonorrhoea]</font>. If she married a priest, she may eat of <i>terumah</i>; if any unfit person cohabits with her, he disqualifies her from the priesthood. <font>If any of the forbidden degrees had intercourse with her, they are executed on her account</font>, but she is exempt.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e. that since there is a minority that does not err in respect of the length of the month, why not assume that each knows the length of the preceding month? ');"><sup>22</sup></span>