Yevamot 159

שלא ראה שעה אחת בכשרותו מנא ידעינן אמר אביי כל המטיל מים ואינו עושה כיפה

who has not experienced a moment [of life] in a state of fitness.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., who was born with defective organs. ');">¹</span> How could this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That a child was a saris from birth. ');">²</span> be ascertained? — Abaye replied: [By observing whether] when he urinates no arch is formed. What are the causes?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of congenital impotency. ');">³</span>

ממאי הואי דאפיה אימיה בטיהרא ושתיא שיכרא מרקא אמר רב יוסף היינו דשמענא לאמי דאמר כל שממעי אמו לקוי ולא ידענא מאי ניהו

— That the child's mother baked at noon<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The heat of the oven combined with the heat of the day obviously affected the generative organs of the embryo. ');">⁴</span> and drank strong<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Others, 'pale', 'diluted'. ');">⁵</span> beer.

וליחוש שמא הבריא בינתים כיון דתחלתו וסופו לקוי לא חיישינן

R. Joseph said: It must have been such a saris<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The congenital eunuch or 'saris by nature' spoken of in our Mishnah. ');">⁶</span> of whom I heard Ammi saying. 'He who is afflicted from birth',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'from his mother's bowels'. ');">⁷</span> and I did not know [at the time] to whom he was referring. But should we not take into consideration the possibility that he might have recovered in the meantime!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Between the periods of his early and present impotency. And since he was possessed of his manly powers even if only for a short time, bow could he (v. our Mishnah) be regarded as a 'saris by nature'? ');">⁸</span>

מתיב רב מרי רבי חנינא בן אנטיגנוס אומר בודקין אותו שלש פעמים בתוך שמונים יום

— Since he suffered from affliction in his early as well as in his later life, no [possible interval of recovery] need be taken into consideration R. Mari raised an objection: R. Hanina b. Antigonos stated, 'It<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The firstborn of a beast afflicted with a serious blemish which renders it unfit for the altar. ');">⁹</span> is to be examined<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To ascertain whether the blemish is a permanent one. If it was only a passing affliction it does not affect the legal fitness of the animal. ');">¹⁰</span>

לחד אבר חיישינן לכוליה גופא לא חיישינן:

three times in eighty days'!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' At the beginning, middle and end of the period. Only where the blemish remained for the full eighty days is it regarded as permanent. If no examination was made in the middle of the period mentioned, the blemish cannot be deemed to be a permanent since it is possible that it had disappeared for some time and reappeared again V. Bek. 38b. Why, then, is the middle period disregarded in the case of the saris? ');">¹¹</span> — Precautions are to be taken in respect of one limb;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The eye, for instance, which was the limb affected in the case cited. ');">¹²</span> in respect of the entire body<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The impotency of the saris is an affliction affecting his body as a whole. ');">¹³</span>

רבי אליעזר אומר לא כי וכו': ורמינהו בן עשרים שנה ולא הביא שתי שערות יביאו ראיה שהוא בן עשרים והוא הסריס לא חולץ ולא מייבם בת עשרים ולא הביאה שתי שערות יביאו ראיה שהיא בת עשרים והיא האילונית לא חולצת ולא מתייבמת דברי בית הלל ובית שמאי אומרים זה וזה בני שמנה עשרה

no such precautions need be taken.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is unlikely that such a defect should appear, disappear and reappear again. ');">¹⁴</span> R. ELIEZER SAID: NOT SO etc. A contradiction may be pointed out: If at the age of twenty he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A levir whose duty it is to contract levirate marriage or to submit to halizah. ');">¹⁵</span> did not produce two hairs,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The marks of puberty. ');">¹⁶</span>

רבי אליעזר אומר הזכר כדברי ב"ה ונקבה כדברי ב"ש מפני שהאשה ממהרת לבא לפני האיש

they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The relatives of the widow who wish to exempt her from the halizah and the marriage. ');">¹⁷</span> must bring evidence that he is twenty years of age and he, being confirmed as a saris,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By a display of the required symptoms. ');">¹⁸</span> neither submits to <i>halizah</i> nor performs the levirate marriage. If the woman<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The widow whose husband had died without issue. ');">¹⁹</span>

אמר רמי בר דיקולי אמר שמואל חזר בו ר' אליעזר איבעיא להו מהי הדר ביה תא שמע דתניא רבי אליעזר אומר סריס חמה חולץ וחולצין לאשתו שכן במינן מתרפאין באלכסנדריא של מצרים

at the age of twenty did not produce two hairs,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The marks of puberty. ');">²⁰</span> they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The levir's relatives. Cf. supra note 9, mutatis mutandis. ');">²¹</span> must bring evidence that she is twenty years of age and she, being confirmed as a woman who is incapable of procreation neither performs <i>halizah</i> nor is taken in levirate marriage; so Beth Hillel. But Beth Shammai maintain that with the one as well as with the other [this takes place at] the age of eighteen. R. Eliezer said. In the case of the male, the law is in accordance with Beth Hillel and in the case Of the female, the law is in accordance with Beth Shammai because a woman matures earlier than a man!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Nid. 47b. Now, the case spoken of here is that of a congenital saris and yet R. Eliezer stated that he is subject neither to halizah nor to the levirate marriage, which is in direct contradiction to his statement in our Mishnah! ');">²²</span>

רבי אלעזר אומר לעולם לא הדר ביה וכי תנן ההיא לעונשין

Rami b. Dikuli replied in the name Of Samuel: R. Eliezer changed his view.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The two statements were made at an earlier and later period respectively. ');">²³</span> The question was raised: From which statement did he withdraw? — Come and hear what was taught: R. Eliezer said. A congenital saris<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 538. n. 11. ');">²⁴</span> submits to <i>halizah</i>, and <i>halizah</i> is arranged for his wife, because cases of such a nature are cured in Alexandria in Egypt.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As this Baraitha agrees with our Mishnah and, in addition, contains also a reason for its statement, based on actual experience. it is reasonable to assume that R. Eliezer withdrew from his other view contained in the Baraitha of Niddah. ');">²⁵</span>

איתמר אכל חלב מבן שתים עשרה [ויום אחד] עד בן שמנה עשרה ונולדו בו סימני סריס ולאחר מכאן הביא שתי שערות רב אמר נעשה סריס למפרע ושמואל אמר קטן היה באותה שעה

R. Eleazar said: As a matter of fact he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Eliezer. ');">²⁶</span> did not change his view at all, but that statement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra, that the age of a male is twenty, in agreement with Beth Hillel, and that that of a female is eighteen, in agreement with Beth Shammai. ');">²⁷</span> was taught in respect [of the age of] punishment.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' At the ages stated males and females respectively, emerging from their state of minority and entering that of majority, become subject to all legal obligations and penalties. The statement has no reference at all to halizah or the levirate marriage. ');">²⁸</span>

מתקיף לה רב יוסף לרב אילונית לרבי מאיר יהא לה קנס

It was stated: If a person<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The reference is to a female though the masc. gender 'saris' is used. The age of twelve years and one day is applicable to females only. ');">²⁹</span> between the age of twelve years and one day<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Below this age a girl is regarded as a minor. ');">³⁰</span> and that of eighteen years<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This will be according to R. Eliezer, supra. ');">³¹</span>

אמר ליה אביי מקטנותה יצתה לבגר

ate forbidden fat,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or committed any other transgression. The eating of forbidden fat, [H] is invariably taken as the example of a punishable offence. Cf. Golds. a.l. ');">³²</span> and after the marks of a saris had appeared, he grew two hairs.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The marks of puberty. ');">³³</span> Rab ruled that the person is deemed to be a saris retrospectively.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From the age of twelve years and one day. Despite the absence of the hairs until after the age of eighteen. and their subsequent appearance. the girl is regarded as having passed into her majority at the earlier age of twelve years and one day. and consequently subject from that time to all legal penalties, the delay in the emergence of her marks of puberty being attributed to her mere impotence. ');">³⁴</span>

א"ל כל כי הני מילי מעלייתא יתאמרו משמאי דתניא אין הסריס נידון כבן סורר ומורה לפי שאין בן סורר ומורה נידון אלא בחתימת זקן התחתון ואין אילונית נידונית כנערה המאורסה שמקטנותה יצתה לבגר

But Samuel ruled [that the person is regarded as] having been a minor at that time.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Between the ages of twelve and eighteen. Samuel holds that majority sets in at the latter age only when the girl's impotency is definitely established. ');">³⁵</span> R. Joseph demurred against Rab:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who regards a girl, who was only subsequently found to be a saris, as having been a saris and consequently also of age from the moment she was twelve years and one day old. ');">³⁶</span> According to R. Meir,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who exempts the seducer of a minor from the payment of the fine prescribed in Deut. XXII, 29. ');">³⁷</span>

אמר רבי אבהו סימני סריס ואילונית ובן שמנה אין עושין בהן מעשה עד שיהו בן עשרים

a woman who is incapable of procreation<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The seducer of whom is also exempt from the fine mentioned (supra note 2) on the ground that, as she did not produce the required hairs, she was regarded at the time as a minor. V. Keth. 35b. ');">³⁸</span> should be entitled to a fine!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because, since it was later established that she was sterile, she should be regarded (cf. supra note 1) as having been sterile, and so also of age, retrospectively. ');">³⁹</span> — Abaye replied: She passes from her minority [directly] into adolescence.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The former age is twelve years and one day; the latter is twelve and a half plus one day. In the intervening age a girl is described as [H] damsel or maiden; and it is during this period ([H]) that she is entitled to the fine mentioned. The sterile woman does in fact become of age retrospectively, as Rab laid down, but she assumes the status of the adolescent woman who is not entitled to the fine. ');">⁴⁰</span>

ובן שמנה מי קחיי והתניא בן שמנה הרי הוא כאבן ואסור לטלטלו אבל אמו שוחה עליו ומניקתו

The other said to him: May all such fine sayings be reported in my name. For so it was taught: A saris is not tried as a stubborn and rebellious son,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Deut. XXI, 18ff. ');">⁴¹</span> because no stubborn and rebellious son is tried unless he bears the mark of the pubic hair.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'lower beard'. ');">⁴²</span> Nor is a woman who is incapable of procreation tried as a betrothed damsel<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who has been outraged (v. Deut. XXII, 23ff). ');">⁴³</span> because from her minority she passes [directly] into adolescence.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra n. 5. ');">⁴⁴</span> R. Abbahu stated: On [the basis of] the marks of a saris, of a woman incapable of procreation, and of an eight-[month] child<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Born in the eighth month of conception. who, as a rule, is not viable. ');">⁴⁵</span> no decision is made<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As to whether in the case of the former they are impotent and of age, and in the case of the latter whether he is viable. ');">⁴⁶</span> until they attain the age of twenty.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Between the age of twelve and this age the former are regarded as minors until they have produced two pubic hairs, if these appear before they were twenty; and if these were not produced at twenty their majority begins from the age of twelve. In the case of the child he cannot be regarded as viable before he has completed the twentieth year of his life. ');">⁴⁷</span> Is, however, an eight-[month] child viable? Surely it was taught: An eight-month child is like a stone,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Obviously because he is not viable. ');">⁴⁸</span> and it is forbidden to move him;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the Sabbath when only such objects may be moved as were intended to be used on that day. The moving of a stone is forbidden. ');">⁴⁹</span> only his mother may bend over him and nurse him