The Eddie B Sit edition, an audio series of the Talmud Bavli, Masechet Niddah, has been dedicated by Ron Yaish in honor of his children, Ovadya Avraham ben Raizel Shifra and Levi Yitzchak ben Raizel Shifra, and also in honor of his Eshet Chayil, Raizel Shifra bat Tova Yocheved. I would like to bless Ron Yaish and his wife that they should continue, b'ezrat Hashem, to have more children and that they should see much nachat from their current children, both spiritually and materially, amen and amen. Today's daf is being studied l'iluy nishmat Avraham ben Esther and v'Yosef ben Sabut, may the Ruach Hashem rest upon them in Gan Eden, amen.
We begin today's daf on Mem-He Amud Bet, twelve lines from the bottom, starting from the word Iba'ya Lehu. The question was posed: Is the time prior to a boy becoming a gadol considered 'toch zman' (within time) or 'ke-lifne zman' (like before time) or 'ke-le'achar zman' (like after time)? Let's consider a boy who is thirteen years old; he becomes liable for his nedarim (vows). We stated that even if he does not understand what nedarim are, his vows are still valid. The year before that, from twelve to thirteen, he must be assessed to see if he comprehends anything or not. The Gemara's question here is whether the period of 'toch zman'—the year before he becomes a gadol—is akin to 'ke-lifne zman' or 'ke-le'achar zman'.
Regarding the maturation of the child, what does it mean to mature? It can mean he has developed hair, known as se'arot. One might argue that once the boy grows hair after twelve years old, he could be considered a gadol. However, we maintain that 'toch zman' is like 'lifne zman', even if he has se'arot. The Gemara then asks, for what halachic implications are we discussing this? If it pertains to nedarim, there is no doubt in this case. For nedarim, we have already learned that he is neither considered a katan (minor) nor a gadol, but rather in a transitional state. Thus, for nedarim, we already know the law pertaining to ages twelve and thirteen.
However, what is the question being raised then? It concerns punishments. If he grew two se'arot at twelve years old, we want to know if he is now considered a bar onshin (one liable for punishment). Only a gadol is subject to punishment. Is he considered a gadol or not? The Gemara states that there is a machloket (dispute) between Rav and Rabbi Hanina, who both say that during the 'toch zman', he is still regarded as a katan concerning punishments, similar to the time before he matures. Conversely, Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Joshua ben Levi assert that during 'toch zman', he is treated as a gadol for the purposes of punishment.
To remember this distinction, Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak provided a mnemonic: 'v'zot lifnim b'Yisrael'. The term 'v'zot' is feminine, indicating that Rabbi Hanina, whose name is feminine, represents the opinion that considers 'toch zman' as similar to 'lifne zman'. The other interpretation suggests that 'be-Yisrael' contains the letters of 'Rav', signifying the opinion of Rav and Rabbi Hanina. Thus, both opinions are encapsulated within this mnemonic.
Rav Hamnuna then raises a question from our Mishnah. The Mishnah states that after the age of thirteen, even if one claims they do not know for whom they made the nedar or hekdesh, their words are still binding. The Gemara points out that if we consider the period of 'toch zman' as akin to 'lifne zman', the implications are significant. The Mishnah implies that after thirteen, he is fully responsible for his nedarim. However, during the 'toch zman', he is neither fully responsible nor exempt; he remains in the middle ground. Therefore, this raises a question about the implications of this distinction.
Rava responds, stating that the Gemara's inquiry is not based on a deduction but rather on the extra wording present in the Mishnah. The additional cases discussed previously on yesterday's daf were not necessary for the understanding of nedarim since we already know the law for ages twelve and thirteen. The extra case must be addressing the law concerning punishments. Thus, the case of twelve to thirteen indicates that one must be fully mature to be subject to punishment.
In summary, the Gemara concludes that there is a machloket among the Tanna'im regarding whether a twelve-year-old with se'arot is considered a gadol. The discussion highlights the necessity of both age and maturity for one to be liable for punishments. The Gemara emphasizes that one must reach the age of thirteen and develop se'arot to be deemed a bar onshin, while the period of 'toch zman' is treated as before maturity for the purposes of punishment.