InanimatePragmatist
There is nothing for your genetics.
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2025
- Posts
- 5,763
- Reputation
- 7,763
hold on (מַאי ״לֹא עָשׂוּ בּוֹ קָטָן כְּגָדוֹל״? אָמַר רַב: לֹא עָשׂוּ בִּיאַת פָּחוֹת מִבֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים כְּבֶן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: לֹא עָשׂוּ בִּיאַת פָּחוֹת מִבֶּן שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים כְּבֶן שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים. The Gemara asks: What does it mean that the Torah does not deem a younger boy to be like an older boy? Rav says: It means that the Torah does not deem the intercourse of one who is less than nine years old to be like the intercourse of one who is at least nine years old, as for a male’s act of intercourse to have the legal status of full-fledged intercourse the minimum age is nine years. And Shmuel says: The Torah does not deem the intercourse of a child who is less than three years old to be like that of one who is three years old.) what is this
Do you want me to:
This lack of explicit condemnation is exactly why critics often point to passages like this to argue that:
Do you want me to
ChatGPT said:
You just quoted Talmud Bavli, Tractate Niddah 44b (and parallels).What This Passage Actually Means
- The Talmud often discusses minimum ages for various legal definitions (e.g., contracts, vows, sexual acts).
- This specific passage is about when an act of sexual intercourse is considered legally significant in Jewish law.
Key Points From Your Quote
- “Less than nine years old”–
- For a male, sexual intercourse is not legally considered full intercourse if he is under nine years old.
- Why? Because he is not physiologically capable of producing offspring.
- “Less than three years old”–
- For a female child, intercourse is not considered legally significant if she is under three years old.
- This does not mean approval of the act—it’s about whether it creates marriage/betrothal or certain ritual impurity consequences in biblical law.
Why This Gets Misused
- Antisemitic sourcesoften cite this to claim:
- “The Talmud condones pedophilia.”
- In reality:
- The Talmud is setting legal age thresholds for defining actions, similar to how modern law sets a “legal age of consent”.
- It does not say these acts are acceptable; it just says they don’t create certain legal statuses (like marriage consummation or impurity).
Example in Modern Law
- In most countries, sex with someone below a certain age is:
- Illegal and abusive, but…
- Legally treated differently because the minor is not considered capable of consent.
- That’s basically what’s happening here—age-based legal categorization, not approval.
Summary
This passage is:- A technical legal discussion about when an act counts as “intercourse” in biblical law.
- Not an endorsement of the act itself.
- Often taken out of context by people who don’t understand Talmudic legal language.
Do you want me to:
- Break down how this became one of the most common “Talmud slanders”?
- Show how it’s used in propaganda, like the image you posted earlier?
- Compare how ancient legal codes (Roman, Greek, etc.) handled similar age issues?
You said:
it doesnt condems it either. Yes or no, tell me.ChatGPT said:
Yes, you are correct – the passage you quoted does not explicitly condemn the act.Why?
- The Talmud is a legal text, not a moral-philosophical one.
- Its focus is on legal consequences:
- Does this act create ritual impurity?
- Does it count as marriage consummation?
- It often assumes morality is already understood from Torah law and deals only with the legal status of actions.
Implication
- It does not say the act is “good” or “allowed.”
- It also does not pause to condemn it in moral terms—because that’s not what the Talmud usually does.
This lack of explicit condemnation is exactly why critics often point to passages like this to argue that:
- The Talmud is morally indifferent to certain acts.
- Jewish law historically focused more on technical legality than explicit moral language.
Do you want me to
