Disappearing Signs of Puberty
In yesterday’s daf, Bava Batra 155b, we encounter the following:
וְכִי לָא נוֹלְדוּ לוֹ סִימָנֵי סָרִיס, עַד כַּמָּה? תָּנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא: עַד רוֹב שְׁנוֹתָיו.
כִּי אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי חִיָּיא, אִי כָּחֵישׁ אֲמַר לְהוּ: לִיבְרֵי; וְאִי אִבְּרִי אֲמַר לְהוּ: לִיכְחוֹשׁ. דְּהָנֵי סִימָנֵי – זִמְנִין דְּאָתוּ מֵחֲמַת כְּחִישׁוּתָא, זִמְנִין דְּאָתוּ מֵחֲמַת בְּרִיּוּתָא.
The Gemara asks: And if he did not develop the signs of a sexually underdeveloped man, until when is he considered a minor if he does not develop two pubic hairs? Rabbi Ḥiyya teaches in a baraita: He is considered a minor until most of his years have elapsed, i.e., until he is thirty-five years old.
When the case of one who had not developed pubic hair would come before Rabbi Ḥiyya, he would offer the following advice: If the person was thin, he would say to those appearing in court: Cause him to become fat, and if he was fat, he would say to them: Cause him to become thin.
The gemara then immediately follows this with an explanation:
דְּהָנֵי סִימָנֵי – זִמְנִין דְּאָתוּ מֵחֲמַת כְּחִישׁוּתָא, זִמְנִין דְּאָתוּ מֵחֲמַת בְּרִיּוּתָא.
This is because these signs indicating puberty sometimes develop due to excessive thinness, and sometimes they develop due to corpulence.
Regarding this follow-up, there are three variants.
Omit it entirely
Regarding one or the other, thinness or corpulence, have the signs fall out, de-natru, instead of developing
Have it as we have in our printed texts, that both words are דְּאָתוּ.
Exploring Rishonim, I would wonder whether Rashbam really omits it entirely from the text. Thus, he writes:
הני סימנים זימנין כו' - פירוש הוי ואדלקמיה קאי כי אתו לקמיה דר' חייא כו':
Elsewhere in Bava Batra, he says that something is a peirush, and that meant that it was not actually part of the core Talmudic text. Some commentator had written it, perhaps on the margins, and it was incorporated by scribes into the main text. See this earlier post.
It also seems that Rashbam had this text appear before the actual text it was commenting on, in which case this is what ואדלקמיה קאי means. We can see this in our printed texts of Rashbam, in Vilna and Venice printings. Thus, in Vilna,
The hanei simanim appears first. Later, explaining the text achshuhu, he adds that perhaps it is because of corpulence. Meanwhile, in Sefaria, they reverse it, so that Rashbam’s comments appear in the order the words appear in our Talmudic text.
What is the text of the peirush? For Rashbam, the concern about corpulence was that it would cause the pubic hairs to fall out. This may be a random association that popped into my head, but see earlier in Bava Batra, 73b, in the Rabba bar bar Chana stories.
וְאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה: זִימְנָא חֲדָא הֲוָה קָא אָזְלִינַן בְּמַדְבְּרָא, וַחֲזֵינַן הָנְהוּ אֲווֹזֵי דְּשָׁמְטִי גַּדְפַיְיהוּ מִשֻּׁמְנַיְיהוּ, וְקָא נָגְדִי נַחֲלֵי דְמִשְׁחָא מִתּוּתַיְיהוּ. אָמֵינָא לְהוּ: אִית לַן בְּגַוַּיְיכוּ חֻלָקָא לְעָלְמָא דְאָתֵי? חֲדָא דְּלִי גַּדְפָּא, וַחֲדָא דְּלִי אַטְמָא. כִּי אֲתַאי לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, אָמַר לִי: עֲתִידִין יִשְׂרָאֵל לִיתֵּן עֲלֵיהֶן אֶת הַדִּין.
And Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: Once we were traveling in the desert and we saw these geese whose wings were sloping because they were so fat, and streams of oil flowed beneath them. I said to them: Shall we have a portion of you in the World-to-Come? One raised a wing, and one raised a leg, signaling an affirmative response. When I came before Rabbi Elazar, he said to me: The Jewish people will eventually be held accountable for the suffering of the geese. Since the Jews do not repent, the geese are forced to continue to grow fat as they wait to be given to the Jewish people as a reward.
For Rashbam there, it wasn’t that the wings were sloping, but that the geese’s feathers fell out due to the excessive fat. דשמטי גדפייהו - נופלות נוצה שלהן מרוב שומן: So maybe he assumes a similar process here.
Regardless, he was just reporting the words as it appeared in the Talmudic text before him.
While Rashbam is more prone to emending the text to match a sevara, Rabbeinu Tam authored Sefer HaYashar to defend the integrity of the original text, even if it seems surprising on the surface level. In this instance, Tosafot cite Rabbeinu Tam who wants the girsa to be that it never developed in the first place, so option (3) — the word is דְּאָתוּ.
Thus, Tosafot write:
הכי גריס ר"ת דזימנין דאתו מחמת בריאותא וזימנין דאתו מחמת כחישותא. והכי גרסי' בהאשה רבה (יבמות דף צז.) בכל הספרים וכך נראה יותר דכי אתו לקמיה דרבי חייא משמע שעדיין לא הביאו שתי שערות ולכך אמר להבריאם או להכחישם כדי להביא שערות ולא כספרים דגרסי זימנא דנתרי מחמת בריותן:
They note that this is the girsa in Yevamot 97a in all manuscripts. Also, it makes more sense, for when they came before Rabbi Chiya, the implication is that he had not yet brought forth two pubic hairs, and therefore he instructed to fatten him up or cause him to be skinnier, in order to cause those hairs to emerge; and not like the manuscripts (in our sugya) which says that “sometimes they fall out because of corpulence.”
Maybe. In terms of the logic of it, it could be then they had emerged in the past, but the person never had opportunity to bring this as evidence before the corpulence caused it to fall out.
What about the manuscript evidence on our sugya, in Hachi Garsinan? We have examples of options 2, and 3. And also, the peirush preceding the text.
Let us explore.
Munich 95, Vatican 115b and Florence 8-9 have de-natrei, but preceding the text, as Rashbam wrote. Florence also has an Ashkenazic pronunciation, with a samech in place of the tav in de-natrei. Also, Florence only discusses corpulence and falling out, and does not discuss lack of emergence because of skinniness.
Meanwhile, the printings have the explanation afterwards, and have דְּאָתוּ for both skinniness and corpulence.
The same for Hamburg 165 and Paris 1337, with דאתו for both, and after Rabbi Chiya’s instruction.
Escorial has the greatest internal diversity. It is falling out because of skinniness and never emerging because of corpulence.
If this is a peirush, which makes sense to me, then it also makes sense that the idea was transferred from Yevamot 97a, the closing words at the end of the perek. Looking there, there is clearly a ha’avara, a transferred sugya, from one place to the other.
וְכִי לֹא נוֹלְדוּ לוֹ סִימָנֵי סָרִיס, עַד כַּמָּה? תָּנֵי דְּבֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא: עַד רוֹב שְׁנוֹתָיו.
The Gemara asks a question with regard to the halakha itself: And in a case where he does not develop the signs of a eunuch, until what age is he considered a minor? The school of Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: Until most of his years have passed, i.e., until he reaches the age of thirty-five, i.e., halfway to seventy, the standard length of a man’s life.
כִּי אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרָבָא, אִי כָּחוּשׁ אֲמַר לְהוּ: זִילוּ אַבְרְיוּהּ. וְאִי בָּרִיא אֲמַר לְהוּ: זִילוּ אַכְחֲשׁוּהּ. דְּהָנֵי סִימָנִין, זִמְנִין דְּנָתְרִי מֵחֲמַת כְּחִישׁוּתָא, וְזִמְנִין דְּנָתְרִי מֵחֲמַת בְּרִיּוּתָא.
On the same issue, the Gemara relates: When they would come before Rava to inquire about someone who had reached the age of maturity but had not yet developed the physical signs, if the person in question was thin, he would say to them: Go and fatten him up before we decide on his status. And if he was fat, he would say to them: Go and make him thin. As these signs, the pubic hairs of maturity, sometimes they fall off due to thinness and sometimes they fall off due to fatness. It is therefore possible that after his bodily shape is adjusted he will develop the signs of maturity and will not have the status of a eunuch.
It is the same text, except it is Rava instead of Rabbi Chiyya. (We had Rava in our own Bava Batra sugya, in context, as well as obviously Rabbi Chiyya.) Most texts in Yevamot have Rabbi Chiyya as the one instructing.
Note also that this printed text in Yevamot diverges from the way Tosafot explaining Rabbeinu Tam cited it. They claimed that it was דאתו throughout, yet here it is with דְּנָתְרִי!
And there is sufficient support. Three printings, plus Munich 141 and Oxford 367 have it.
Meanwhile Munich 95 and Vatican 110-111 have דאתו or, with an insertion, דלא אתו, which can fit with Rabbeinu Tam.
Finally, the same tradition appears in Niddah 47b.
וכי לא נולדו לו סימני סריס עד כמה תני ר' חייא עד רוב שנותיו
The Gemara asks a question with regard to the halakha itself: And in a case where he does not develop the signs of a sexually underdeveloped man, until what age is he considered a minor? Rabbi Ḥiyya teaches: Until most of his years have passed, i.e., until he reaches the age of thirty-five, halfway to seventy, which is the standard length of a person’s life.
כי אתו לקמיה דרבי חייא אי כחיש אמר להו אבריוה אי בריא אמר להו אכחשוה דהני סימנים זימנין דאתו מחמת כחישותא זימנין דאתו מחמת בריאותא
The Gemara relates: When people would come before Rabbi Ḥiyya to inquire about someone who had reached the age of puberty but had not yet developed the physical signs of maturity, if the person in question was thin, he would say to them: Go and fatten him up before we decide on his status. If he was fat, Rabbi Ḥiyya would say to them: Go and make him thin. As these signs indicating puberty sometimes come due to thinness and sometimes they come due to fatness. It is therefore possible that after his bodily shape is properly adjusted this individual will develop the signs indicating puberty and will not have the status of a sexually underdeveloped man.
Tosafot ad loc. note that de-atu vs de-natrin is a variant in different manuscripts. Thus:
זימנין דאתו מחמת כו'. יש ספרים דגרסי זימנין דנתרן [ע' תוס' ב"ב קנה: ד"ה הכי גרס ר"ת]:
In that sugya, all the variants on Hachi Garsinan has de-atu.