Study Niddah folio 46A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
and the reason that the development of two hairs renders him an adult is that the onset of his matter, i.e., his reaching puberty, was completed for him after the time? Rav Hamnuna infers from here that if the child developed two hairs during the time, it is considered as before the time, and he
And furthermore, R' Zeira raises an objection to the opinion that the development of signs indicating puberty during the time is equivalent to their development after the time. It is taught in a baraita which deals with the verse: “Speak to the children of Israel and say to them: When either man or
R' Zeira analyzes this baraita. What are the circumstances? If it is referring to a case where the boy has not yet developed two pubic hairs, then he is a minor, and the halakha with regard to him cannot be derived from the word “man.” Rather, is it not referring to a case where the boy has develo
Rav Naḥman said that the baraita is not a refutation of the opinion of R' Yoḥanan and R' Yehoshua ben Levi, as this matter is subject to a dispute between tanna’im, since there is another baraita which teaches the following: Everyone agrees with regard to a nine-year-old boy who developed two hairs
Rav Naḥman analyzes the baraita. This baraita itself is difficult, as you initially said that from 9 years of age until the age of 12 years and one day it is a mole, from which it can be inferred that if he developed two pubic hairs in the 13th year itself, it is a sign indicating puberty. And th