Q&A: Hairs, Measurements, and Estimations
Hairs, Measurements, and Estimations
Question
Hello and blessings,
Halakhic majority in Jewish law comes at the time one produces two pubic hairs. The commonly accepted ages as well—12 for girls and 13 for boys—are because of Rabbah’s presumption that at this age they have produced two hairs (and even if for some other reason, the Talmud still requires two hairs and relies on Rabbah’s presumption).
In other words, halakhic adulthood, whose implications relate to commandment observance, acquisitions, marriage, and more, depends on physical development that is not connected to intellectual development, while because of these two hairs we assume that the boy or girl is intellectually mature and that their decisions come from judgment and understanding.
Every day we see cases of earlier or later physical development that are not at all dependent on cognitive development. If so, why is halakhic adulthood not dependent on a cognitive test rather than on hairs? I would have had no difficulty using Rabbah’s presumption that a girl or boy at age 12/13 (or any other age) should be presumed mature once we have a presumption that at this age they have reached cognitive maturity (however that is defined), but what do hairs have to do with all this?
Many thanks,
Lavi
Answer
I think this stems from the fact that it is hard to give a sharp and objective measure for mental maturity. So they prefer physical indicators that provide a clear line, even though it is obvious that they do not always run parallel to psychological maturation.
An analogy is the passage in the Jerusalem Talmud that explains that for a three-year-old girl her virginity is restored, and if a religious court intercalated the year or the month, then the girl’s physiology changes accordingly. This is of course nonsense, and it seems likely to me that the Jerusalem Talmud did not mean to claim that. It is only using the verse as an illustration for a halakhic claim, according to which there is a line at age three for the restoration of virginity, even though it is obvious that there is no full overlap (it does not happen at the same age for every girl). They decided on a sharp, objective halakhic line—age 3—and therefore even if the religious court intercalated the year, the line remains age 3.
Discussion on Answer
The hairs are a sign, not a cause. The conceptual analyses in yeshiva-style learning about whether it is a sign or a cause deal with the halakhic definition—that is, how Jewish law wants us to relate to the hairs. But obviously the determination itself was made because the hairs are a sign. There is no logic at all in making maturity depend on hairs.
Rabbah’s presumption is a secondary determination according to which age is a sign for hairs, in order to spare unpleasant examinations or ambiguities. By the way, as far as I recall, according to most halakhic decisors age—that is, Rabbah’s presumption—is only rabbinic. Fundamentally, maturity is determined by the hairs.
Hairs are a sign of sexual maturity. It may be that psychologically there are people who are not capable of taking responsibility for children, but for most of the world the presumption is that if someone can have children, he takes responsibility for them, and therefore he has been considered an adult through most of history. Nowadays that has changed a bit, and the law has changed accordingly and raised the minimum age of adulthood for marriage.
Thank you. Let us assume that the two hairs are indeed only a sign (although I do not completely agree with that), and even if we accept Y.D.’s connection that sexual maturity supposedly brings with it the ability to take responsibility, would it not be more appropriate to ground Rabbah’s presumption in cognitive maturity itself (that 12/13-year-olds are generally of sound mind) rather than in the sign of hairs, which generally exist at that age?
I didn’t understand the question. Age replaces the other signs. It is a sign for the emergence of two hairs, which are a sign of maturity. What exactly do you want to replace with what? It seems to me you’re just being stubborn.
I do not want to replace age as the criterion; that is fine—assuming this is the age of cognitive maturity.
But why two hairs and not a cognitive examination?
It seems that the Sages latched onto a sign of physical maturity rather than cognitive maturity—why not find a sign of cognitive maturity?
Unless it is actually proven that these go hand in hand and at the same pace—which does not seem to match reality today (do Sephardim who grow hairs at a very early age also mature cognitively faster than European Ashkenazim, who mature physically several years later?).
Everything has already been explained, and I have no idea what this discussion is about. I’m done.
I have no problem with an age line—not age 3, when virginity is restored, and not age 12/13, which is determined based on a presumption about what we want to establish. That is, if the understanding is that there is some physiological thing that happens at a certain age on average (a presumption that until age 3 virginity is restored, or that at age 12/13 a person is cognitively mature), then the criterion is age, because it is reality-based, similar to laws today in which the age of minors is determined by an age criterion.
But what is the connection between two hairs and cognitive maturity? It seems that the two hairs are a cause and not a sign. If they were only a sign, why do we need to arrive at Rabbah’s presumption? After all, age is the sign. And even if they are only a sign, how does this sign indicate cognitive maturity? Is there a connection between the two things?
Thank you very much