ט אמר רב ספרא בנים הרי הם כסימנים ואית דאמרי בנים עדיפי מסימנים למאי נפקא מינה דאפילו לרבי יהודה דאמר עד שירבה השחור בבנים מודה
9 she does not conceive at all; during that period<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The age of eleven years and one day to the age of twelve and one day. ');"><sup>25</sup></span> she dies and her embryo dies; after that period<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The age of eleven years and one day to the age of twelve and one day. ');"><sup>25</sup></span> both she and her embryo survive. But is it really so? Surely, Rabbah b. Samuel recited: One cannot say of a man's mother-in-law, the mother of his mother-in-law and the mother of his father-in-law that they were found incapable of procreation or that they made a declaration of refusal, since they have already given birth to children!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rabbah does not state, 'since they already grew up' but 'gave birth', which proves that even a minor (not yet grown up) is capable of bearing living children. ');"><sup>26</sup></span> — But [the reading], in fact, is, 'because she might become pregnant and as a result might die'. But, [then, the previously mentioned] difficulty remains!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From here it appears that a minor can bear children while from our Mishnah it follows that she cannot. ');"><sup>27</sup></span> — R. Safra replied: Children are like marks of puberty.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As soon, therefore, as she gave birth to a child the minor is assumed to have passed out of the age of minority into that of puberty. Hence it is impossible for a mother, whatever her age, ever to make a declaration of refusal to which a minor only is entitled. ');"><sup>28</sup></span> Others Say: Children are more conclusive proof than the marks of puberty. What practical difference is there between the two statements? — [It is this: That] even he who follows <font>R. Judah who stated, '[a girl may exercise the right of refusal] until the black<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the pubic hair. ');"><sup>29</sup></span></font> predominates'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The growth of two hairs which the Rabbis regard as a definite mark of puberty not being considered by R. Judah as conclusive proof. Keth. 36a, B.B. 156a, Nid. 52a. ');"><sup>30</sup></span> admits in the case of children.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That they provide definite proof of puberty irrespective of the state of the hair. ');"><sup>31</sup></span>