Introduction Mishnah four contains further restrictions with regards to the “wayward and rebellious son”.
If his father wants [to have him punished], but not his mother; or his father does not want [to have him punished] but his mother does, he is not treated as a ‘wayward a rebellious son’, unless they both desire it. Rabbi Judah said: “If his mother is not fit for his father, he does not become a ‘wayward and rebellious son”. Deut. 21:19 states, “His father and mother shall take hold of him”. On this one verse the Rabbis made a number of restrictions on the applicability of the case of the wayward and rebellious son. First of all, a most basic understanding of this verse states that both the father and mother must agree to the punishment. This is to prevent one parent from punishing the child without the consent of the other parent. Rabbi Judah learns something slightly more complicated from this verse. He states that if the woman was not “fit” for her husband, the child cannot be punished. One explanation for the word “fit” is that the marriage was a forbidden marriage (for instance a Kohen and a divorcee). A different explanation is that the she was not equal to him in height and appearance. This requirement would then make it almost impossible for a child to become a wayward and rebellious son. After all, how many parents look exactly alike.
If one of them [his father or his mother] had a hand cut off, or was lame, mute, blind or deaf, he cannot become a “wayward and rebellious son”, because it says “his father and mother shall take hold of him” (Deut. 21:19) not those with a hand cut off; “and bring him out”, not lame parents; “and they shall say”, and not mute parents; “this our son”, and not blind parents; “he will not obey our voice” (Deut. 21:20), and not deaf parents. This section contains a midrash which excludes children of certain types of parents from being able to be punished as wayward and rebellious. The aforementioned verse states that the parents shall “take hold of him”: this means that a parent who has only one hand cannot fulfill the procedure and therefore his/her child cannot be punished as a wayward and rebellious son. The verse states that the parents must “take him out”: therefore parents with physical disabilities (probably unable to walk) cannot fulfill the procedure. They must make a statement: therefore the parents cannot be mute. They must point him out when they say, “This son of ours”: therefore they cannot be blind. Finally, they must both hear each other’s voice so that they know that he disobeys both of them: therefore they cannot be deaf.
He is warned in the presence of three and beaten. If he transgresses again after this, he is tried by a court of twenty three. He cannot be sentenced to stoning unless the first three are present, because it says, “this our son” (Deut. 21:20), [implying], this one who was whipped in your presence. The Torah states that the wayward and rebellious son had already been disciplined before he is brought to the elders to be stoned. Our mishnah understands this to be a formal beating administered by the court. The idea is to pressure the child to change before it is too late. While disciplining the son by beating him only requires a court of three, executing him requires a court of twenty three, as do all executions. The three in front of whom he was beaten must be present at the subsequent trial and execution. This is learned from the parents’ statement, “This is our son”. The word “this” implies that this same son was already beaten in front of the same judges.
If he [the rebellious son] fled before his trial was completed, and then his pubic hair grew in fully, he is free. But if he fled after his trial was completed, and then his pubic hair grew in fully, he remains liable. We learned in the first mishnah of the chapter that a child cannot be punished as a wayward and rebellious son has reached full puberty. Our mishnah teaches that if the accused child runs away before the trial is over, and by the time he returns he has reached full puberty, he can no longer be punished. However, if the trial is already over and the son was convicted, he can be punished even if he runs away and then achieves full puberty before being brought back. Since the trial is already over and we are only waiting for the punishment to be meted out, it does not matter that he is now too old to be tried as a wayward and rebellious son.
Questions for Further Thought:
• Of the strategies for dealing with understanding the laws of the “wayward and rebellious son” that we discussed in the introduction to this chapter, which is employed in this mishnah?