כתובות ג׳Ketubot 3

Mishnah

משנה: אֵילוּ נְעָרוֹת שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן קְנָס הַבָּא עַל הַמַּמְזֶרֶת וְעַל הַנְּתִינָה וְעַל הַכּוּתִית וְהַבָּא עַל הַגִּיּוֹרֶת וְעַל הַשְּׁבוּיָה וְעַל הַשִּׁפְחָה שֶׁנִּפְדּוּ וְשֶׁנִּתְגַּיְירוּ וְשֶׁנִּשְׁתַּחְרְרוּ פְּחוּתוֹת מִבְּנוֹת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד. הַבָּא עַל אֲחוֹתוֹ וְעַל אֲחוֹת אָבִיו וְעַל אֲחוֹת אִמּוֹ וְעַל אֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְעַל אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו וְעַל אֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו וְעַל הַנִּדָּה יֵשׁ לָהֶן קְנָס אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן בְּהִיכָּרֵת אֵין בָּהֶן מִיתַת בֵּית דִּין.

MISHNAH: The following adolescent girls can claim a fine: From someone who has intercourse with a bastard girl, or a Gibeonite or a Samaritan girl, and one who comes to a female proselyte, a kidnap victim, or a slave girl who was redeemed, converted, or freed, at less than three years and one day of age. Also from one who has intercourse with his sister, or his father’s sister, or his mother’s sister, or his wife’s sister, or his brother’s wife, or his paternal uncle’s wife, or a menstruating girl; he has to pay the fine since it is not a capital crime even though he is subject to extirpation.

Halakhah

הלכה: וְאֵילוּ נְעָרוֹת כול׳. כְּתִיב וְלוֹ תִהְיֶה לְאִשָּׁה. אִשָּׁה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לוֹ. וּמַמְזֶרֶת הִיא רְאוּיָה לוֹ. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר. כֶּסֶף יִשְׁקוֹל כְּמוֹהַר הַבְּתוּלוֹת. רִיבָה כָאן בְּתוּלוֹת הַרְבֶּה. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא. אִילּוּ הָיָה כָתוּב בְּתוּלַת כְּמוֹהַריוֹת. לֵית כְּתִיב אֶלָּא כְּמוֹהַר הַבְּתוּלוֹת. לֹא רִיבָה אוֹתָן הַכָּתוּב אֶלָּא לְמוֹהַר בִּלְבַד. וַיי דָא אָמְרָה הָדָא. דְּתַנֵּי חִזְקִיָּה. אִם מָאֵן יְמָאֵן אָבִיהָ. אֵין לִי אֶלָּא שֶׁמִּיאֶן אָבִיהָ. מְנַיִין שֶׁאִם יְמָאֲנוּ אֲפִילוּ מֵהַשָּׁמַיִם. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר מָאֵן יְמָאֵן מִכָּל מָקוֹם. מֵעַתָּה הַבָּא עַל הַשִּׁפְחָה (לֹא) יְהֵא לוֹ קְנָס. לֵית יְכִיל. דְּתַנֵּי. יָכוֹל הַבָּא עַל הַשִּׁפְחָה אֲרָמִית יְהֵא חַיָיב. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר מָהֹר יִמְהֳרֶנָּה לוֹ לְאִשָּׁה. אֶת שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ הֲוָיָיה בָהּ. יָצָאת שִׁפְחָה אֲרָמִית שֶׁאֵין לֹה הֲוָיָיה בָהּ. הָתִיבוּן. הֲרֵי אֲחוֹתוֹ אֵין לוֹ הֲוָיָיה בָהּ וְהוּא מְשַׁלֵּם קְנָס. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ הֲוָיָיה אֶצֶל אַחֵר. הֲרֵי בִתּוֹ יֵשׁ לָהּ הֲוָיָיה אֶצֶל אַחֵר וְאֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם קְנָס. שַׁנְיָיה הִיא שֶׁהוּא מִתְחַיֵיב בְּנַפְשׁוֹ. שֶׁכָּל הַמִּתְחַיֵיב בְּנַפְשׁוֹ אֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם מָמוֹן.

HALAKHAH: “The following adolescent girls,” etc. It is written: “She should be his wife,” one who can be his wife. Can the bastard girl be his wife? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, “he should weigh silver appropriate for the bride-price of virgins”, that added many virgins. Rebbi Ze‘ira said, if it had said “virgin’s brides-prices”; but it says only “appropriate for the bride-price of virgins”; the verse added them only for the bride-price. But where was this said? As Ḥizqiah stated: “If refusing her father should refuse,” not only if her father refuses; from where even if from Heaven they refuse? The verse says “refusing should refuse”, in any case. But then a man who has intercourse with a slave girl should pay the fine! This is impossible, as it was stated: I could think that one who has intercourse with a Gentile slave-girl should be obligated, the verse says, “by bride-money he should take her as a wife to himself.” Only one whom he can marry; this excludes the Gentile slave whom he cannot marry. But he cannot marry his sister and he pays the fine! There is a difference since she can be married to others. But his daughter can be married to others and he does not pay the fine! There is a difference since it is a capital crime and nobody who commits a capital crime pays money.

נְתִינָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. נְתִיניִם לֹא חָשׁוּ לָהֶם אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם פְּסוּלֵי מִשְׁפָּחָה. אַף תֵּימַר. מִשּׁוּם פְּסוּלֵי עַבְדּוּת. מֵעַתָּה הַבָּא עַל הַנְּתִינָה לֹא יִהְיֶה לֹו קְנָס. וְתַנִּינָן. הַבָּא עַל הַנְּתִינָה יֵשׁ לוֹ קְנָס.

“The Gibeonite.” Rebbi Yose said, they were worried about them only because of the detriment to the families. Could you not say, because of the disability of slaves? If that were true, one who cohabits with a Gibeonite would not be subject to a fine; but we have stated: One who cohabits with a Gibeonite is subject to a fine.

כּוּתִית. אַתְיָא כְּמָאן דְּאָמַר. כּוּתִי כְיִשְׂרָאֵל לְכָל דָּבָר. בְּרַם כְּמָאן דָּמַר. כּוּתִי כְגוֹי. לֹא בְדָא. דְּאִיתְפַּלְּגוּן. כּוּתִי כְגוֹי. דִבְרֵי רִבִּי. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר. כּוּתִי כְיִשְׂרָאֵל לְכָל דָּבָר. אֲפִילוּ תֵימָא. כּוּתִי כְגוֹי. כּוּתִים מִשּׁוּם מָה הֵן פְּסוּלִין. לֹא מִשּׁוּם גּוֹי וְעֶבֶד. גּוֹי וְעֶבֶד הַבָּא עַל בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל הַוְולָד מַמְזֵר. וּמַמְזֶרֶת יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס. לְחוּמָרִין אוֹ לְעִנְיָין מִשְׁפָּחָה אַתְּ עֲבַד לֵיהּ גּוֹי וְעֶבֶד הַבָּא עַל בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל הַוְולָד מַמְזֵר. לְעִנְיָין קְנָס אַתְּ עָבִיד לֵיהּ כְּיִשְׂרָאֵל הַבָּא עַל הַגּוֹיָה הַוְולָד גּוֹי.

“A Samaritan.” That follows him who said, a Samaritan is a like full Jew. But for him who says that a Samaritan is like a Gentile, it is not so. As they disagreed: A Samaritan is like a Gentile, the words of Rebbi. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, a Samaritan is like a Jew in every respect. Even if you say, a Samaritan is like a Gentile, why are Samaritans disqualified? Not because of a Gentile and a slave? If a Gentile or a slave has intercourse with a Jewish woman, the child is a bastard. But a bastard girl can claim a fine! For restrictions or family relations you consider him a Gentile or a slave who had intercourse with a Jewish woman; the child is a bastard. But for a fine you consider this as a Jew having intercourse with a Gentile woman, in which case the child is a Gentile.

אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי חֲנִינָא. הָאוֹנֵס וְהַמְפַתֶּה אֶת הַיְּתוֹמָה פָּטוּר. אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא בַּר מָמָל. מַחֲלוֹקֶת כְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגָּלִילִי. בְּרַם כְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס וּקְנָסָהּ שֶׁלְּעַצְמָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. מַתְנִיתָא אָמְרָה פְּחוּתוֹת מִבְּנוֹת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד. וְלֹא כִיתוֹמָה הִיא. וְהָתַנֵּי. תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר עִינָּהּ. לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַיְתוֹמָה לִקְנָס. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגָּלִילִי. אָמַר רִבִּי אַחַי. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ עַד שֶׁלֹּא מֵת אָבִיהָ וּמֵת אָבִיהָ. כְּבָר נִרְאֶה לִיתֵּן לְאָבִיהָ.

Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina said, a man who rapes or seduces an orphan girl does not have to pay. Rebbi Abba bar Mamai said, that is a disagreement, it follows Rebbi Yose the Galilean. But following Rebbi Aqiba she can claim the fine and the fine becomes her property. Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah said “at less than three years and one day of age,” and is she not like an orphan? And did we not state: “Because he raped her,” that includes an orphan for a fine, the words of Rebbi Yose the Galilean? Rebbi Aḥai said, explain it that he had intercourse with her when her father was alive; when her father died, he already had the obligation to give to her father.

תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. הָאוֹכֵל תְּרוּמָה מֵזִיד מְשַׁלֵּם אֶת הַקֶּרֶן וְאֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם אֶת הַחוֹמֶשׁ. וְתַנִּינָן. אֵילּוּ הֶן הַלּוֹקִין. הָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר לוֹקֶה. וָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר. מְשַׁלֵּם. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. לִצְדָדִין הִיא מַתְנִיתָה. אִם הִתְרוּ בוֹ לוֹקֶה. לֹא הִתְרוּ בוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם. סָבַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן לְמֵימַר. בִּמְקוֹם מַכּוֹת וְתַשְׁלוּמִין מְשַׁלֵּם וְאֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה. וְיִלְקֶה וִישַׁלֵּם. כְּדֵי רִשְׁעָתוֹ. מִשּׁוּם רִשְׁעָה אַחַת אַתָּה מְחַיְיבוֹ וְאֵי אַתָּה מְחַיְיבוֹ מִשּׁוּם שְׁתֵּי רִשְׁעָיוֹת. וִישַׁלֵּם וְלֹא יִלְקֶה. בְּמִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ שְׁתֵּי רְשָׁעְיוֹת הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר וְהִפִּילוֹ הַשּׁוֹפֵט וְהִכָּהוּ לְפָנָיו כְּדֵי רִשְׁעָתוֹ בַּמִּסְפָּר.

There, we have stated: “If somebody eats heave intentionally, he pays the principal but not the fifth.” And we have stated: “The following are flogged.” Here you say, he is flogged, and there you say, he pays. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the Mishnah is two-sided: If he was cautioned, he is flogged; if he was not cautioned, he pays. Rebbi Joḥanan is of the opinion that in a case where there is flogging or restitution, when he pays he is not flogged. Why should he not be flogged and have to pay? ( Deut. 25:2) “Corresponding to his guilt.” You sentence him for one offence but you may not sentence him for two offences. The verse speaks of one who may incur two punishments ( Deut. 25:2): “The judge shall have him laid down and flogged in his presence a number [of times] because of his guilt.”

רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר. וַאֲפִילוּ לֹא הִתְרוּ אֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם. מֵאַחַר שֶּׁאִילּוּ מַתְרִין בּוֹ לוֹקֶה. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. הָאוֹכֵל תְּרוּמָה שׁוֹגֵג מְשַׁלֵּם אֶת הַקֶּרֶן וְחוֹמֶשׁ. וְאִלּוּ הִתְרוּ בוֹ אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה. פָּתַר לָהּ כְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר. דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר אָמַר. לוֹקֶה וּמְשַׁלֵּם. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. דְּתַנִּינָן. אֵילוּ נְעָרוֹת שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן קְנָס. אִילּוּ הִתְרוּ בוֹ אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה. פָּתַר לָהּ כְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר. דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר אָמַר. לוֹקֶה וּמְשַׁלֵּם. רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. מִן הַמּוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע לָמַד רִבִּי מֵאִיר. וְיִסְּרוּ אוֹתוֹ מַכּוֹת. וְעָנְשׁוּ אוֹתוֹ מָמוֹן. רַבָּנִין אָמְרִין לְחִידּוּשׁוֹ יָצָא הַמּוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע. וְדָבָר שֶׁהוּא יוֹצֵא לְחִידּוּשׁוֹ אֵין לוֹמְדִין מִמֶּנּוּ. לְפִי שֶׁבְּכָל מָקוֹם אֵין אָדָם מִתְחַיֵיב מִדִּיבּוּרוֹ. וְכָאן אָדָם מִתְחַיֵיב מִדִּיבּוּרוֹ. הוֹאִיל וְכֵן אֵי אַתְּ לָמֵד מִמֶּנּוּ. דָּבָר אַחֵר. כָּאן אֵין אַתְּ לָמֵד מִמֶּנּוּ לֹא עוֹנְשִׁין וְלֹא מַכּוֹת. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. שׁוֹגֵג בְּחֵלֶב מֵזִיד בְּקָרְבָּן מַתְרִין בּוֹ לוֹקֶה וּמֵבִיא קָרְבָּן. וָכָא לוֹקֶה וּמְשַׁלֵּם. רִבִּי בּוּן בַּר חִיָיה בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק אָמַר כְּדֵי רִשְׁעָתוֹ. שְׁנֵי דְבָרִים מְסוּרִין לְבֵית דִּין. אַתְּ תּוֹפֵס אֶחָד מֵהֶן. יָצָא דָבָר שֶׁמָּסוּר לַשָּׁמַיִם.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, even if he was not cautioned should he not pay since when cautioned he would be flogged? A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “If somebody eats heave in error, he pays principal and fifth,” but if he was cautioned, will he not be flogged? He explains it following Rebbi Meïr since Rebbi Meïr said, he is flogged and pays. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, as we have stated: “The following adolescent girls can claim a fine,” but if he was cautioned, will he not be flogged? He explains it following Rebbi Meïr since Rebbi Meïr said, he is flogged and pays. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Rebbi Meïr learned from the calumniator. ( Deut. 22:18) “They shall punish him,” flogging; ( Deut. 22:19) “and they shall fine him”, money. But the rabbis say, [the law of] the calumniator is separate because of its novelty; one cannot learn from a novelty! Because nowhere else will a person become guilty by speech, but here he becomes guilty by speech; therefore, nothing can be inferred. Another explanation: one cannot transfer the rules of either payment or flogging. Did not Rebbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he [eats] fat in error but is intentional about the sacrifice, if he was cautioned he will be flogged and has to bring a sacrifice? So here, he is flogged and he pays. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, ( Deut. 25:2) “Because of his guilt.” If two possibilities are given to the court, one chooses one of them. This excludes matters in the power of Heaven.

הַכֹּל מוֹדִין שֶׁאֵין מָמוֹן אֶצֶל מִיתָה. מִן הָדָא מַכֵּה בְהֵמָה יְשַׁלְּמֶנָּה וּמַכֵּה אָדָם יוּמָת. מַה מַכֵּה בְהֵמָה לֹא חִלַּקְתָּה בּוֹ בֵּין שׁוֹגֵג לְמֵזִיד לְחַיְיבוֹ מָמוֹן. אַף מַכֵּה אָדָם לֹא תַחֲלוֹק בּוֹ בֵּין שׁוֹגֵג לְמֵזִיד לְפוֹטְרוֹ מָמוֹן. מַה פְלִיגִין. בְּמָמוֹן אֶצֶל מַכּוֹת. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. אֵין מָמוֹן אֶצֶל מִיתָה וְיֵשׁ מָמוֹן אֶצֶל מַכּוֹת. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אוֹמֵר. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאֵין מָמוֹן אֶצֶל מִיתָה כָּךְ אֵין מָמוֹן אֶצֶל מַכּוֹת.

Everybody agrees that there is no money payment in capital cases, as it is written ( Lev. 24:21): “The slayer of an animal must pay for it but the slayer of a human shall be put to death.” Just as you did not make a difference between unintentional and intentional action of a slayer of an animal to force him to pay money, so you should not make a difference between unintentional and intentional action of a slayer of a human to free him from paying money. Where do they differ? About money in a flogging case. Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is no money in a capital case but there is money in a flogging case, but Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, just as there is no money in a capital case so there is no money in a flogging case.

רִבִּי אִמִּי בַּבְלַיָיא בְשֵׁם רַבָּנִין דְּתַמָּן. טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. רָשָׁע רָשָׁע. נֶאֱמַר רָשָׁע בִּמְחוּיְיבֵי מִיתָה וְנֶאֱמַר רָשָׁע בִּמְחוּיְיבֵי מַכּוֹת. מַה רָשָׁע שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בִּמְחוּיְיבֵי מִיתוֹת בֵּית דִּין אֵין מָמוֹן אֶצֶל מִיתָה. אַף רָשָׁע שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בִּמְחוּיְיבֵי מַכּוֹת אֵין מָמוֹן אֶצֶל מַכּוֹת.

Rebbi Immi the Babylonian in the name of the rabbis from there: The reason of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish is “criminal, criminal.” “Criminal” is mentioned in capital cases, “criminal” is mentioned in cases of flogging. Just as for the criminal in capital cases there is no monetary fine, so for the criminal mentioned in flogging cases there is no monetary fine.

נָתָן בַּר הוֹשַׁעְיָה אָמַר. כָּאן בְּנַעֲרָה וְכָאן בְּבוֹגֶרֶת. נַעֲרָה יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס וְאֵין לָהּ מַכּוֹת. בּוֹגֶרֶת יֵשׁ לָהּ מַכּוֹת וְאֵין לָהּ קְנָס. וְאֵין לָהּ בּוֹשֶׁת וּפְגָם. רַבָּנִין דְּקֵיסָרִין אָמְרִין. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁפִּיתְּתוֹ אוֹ שֶׁמָּחֲלָה לֹו. וְסָבַר נָתָן בַּר הוֹשַׁעְיָה. בְּמָקוֹם מַכּוֹת וְתַשְׁלוּמִין מְשַׁלֵּם וְאֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה. וְיִלְקֶה וִישַׁלֵּם. כְּדֵי רִשְׁעָתוֹ. מִשּׁוּם רִשְׁעָה אַחַת אַתָּה מְחַיְיבוֹ וְאֵי אַתָּה מְחַיְיבוֹ מְשּׁוּם שְׁתֵּי רִשְׁעָיוֹת. וִישַׁלֵּם וְלֹא יִלָּקֶה כְעֵדִים זוֹמְמִין. כְּמַה דְּתֵימַר תַּמָּן בְּעֵדִים זוֹמְמִין. מְשַׁלְּמִין וְאֵין לוֹקִין. וָכָא מְשַׁלֵּם וְאֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה. טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי נָתָן בַּר הוֹשַׁעְיָה. כְּדֵי רִשְׁעָתוֹ. אֶת שֶׁמַּכּוֹתָיו יוֹצְאוֹת כְּדֵי רִשְׁעָתוֹ. יָצָא זֶה שֶׁאוֹמֵר לוֹ עֲמוֹד וְשַׁלֵּם.

Nathan bar Hoshiah said, one speaks about an adolescent girl, the other about an adult woman. The adolescent has a fine but nobody is flogged for her; for the adult he is flogged but pays no fine, she cannot be sold; she has no claim for shame and blemish. The rabbis of Caesarea said, explain it that she seduced him or remitted [the fine] for him. Nathan bar Hoshaiah thinks that in a case of flogging and payment he pays but is not flogged. Why should he not be flogged and have to pay? ( Deut. 25:2) “Because of his guilt.” You sentence him for one offence but you may not sentence him for two offences. From perjured witnesses. Just as you say there, perjured witnesses pay but are not flogged, here also he pays and is not flogged. Rebbi Jonah said, the reason of Rebbi Nathan bar Hoshaiah: ( Deut. 25:2): “For his evil deed.” It refers to one whose flogging frees him from his guilt, excluding one who is told: get up and pay.

מַתְנִיתִין פְלִיגָא עַל רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. הָאוֹכֵל תְּרוּמָה מֵזִיד מְשַׁלֵּם אֶת הַקֶּרֶן וְאֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם אֶת הַחוֹמֶשׁ. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּנָתָן בַּר הוֹשַׁעְיָה דְאָמַר. מְשַׁלֵּם. נִיחָא. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן דְּאָמַר. אִם הִתְרוּ בוֹ לוֹקֶה וְאִם לֹא הִתְרוּ בוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם. פָּתַר לָהּ מֵזִיד בְּ[לֹא] הַתְרָאָה. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ לא שַׁנְיָיא. הִיא שׁוֹגֵג הִיא מֵזִיד. הִיא הִתְרוּ בוֹ הִיא לֹא הִתְרוּ בוֹ. פָּתַר לָהּ כְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר דְּאָמַר. לוֹקֶה וּמְשַּׁלֵּם.

Our Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish! “If somebody eats heave intentionally he pays the principal but not the fifth.” In the opinion of Nathan bar Hoshaiah who said he pays, it is understandable. In the opinion of Rebbi Joḥanan who said, if he was cautioned he is flogged, but if he was not cautioned he pays, he explains it as intentional without cautioning. In the opinion of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish there is no difference between intentional and unintentional, between cautioned or not cautioned. He explains following Rebbi Meïr who says, he is flogged and he pays.

אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנִינָה קוֹמֵי רִבִּי מָנָא. וַאֲפִילוּ יִסְבּוֹר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ כִּדְמַתְנִיתִין דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר. קְרַיָיה דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר. וְהַכְּתִיב אִישׁ כִּי יֹאכַל קוֹדֵשׁ בִּשְׁגָגָה. אֶלָּא מִיסְבַּר סָבַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. חוֹמֶשׁ קָרְבָּן. וַאֲפִילוּ תֵימַר. חוֹמֶשׁ קָרְבָּן. קֶרֶן קָרְבָּן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן בַּר שָׁלוֹם. מַתְנִיתִין אָמְרָה שֶׁהַקֶּרֶן קְנָס. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן אֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם תְּרוּמָה אֶלָּא חוּלִין מְתוּקָּנִין וְהֵן נַעֲשִׂין תְּרוּמָה. אִילּוּ מִמַּה שֶׁאָכַל הָיָה מְשַׁלֵּם נִיחָא. וְעוֹד מֵהָדָא דְתַנֵּי. אָכַל תְּרוּמָה טְמֵיאָה מְשַׁלֵּם חוּלִין טְהוֹרִין. וְאִם שִׁילֵּם חוּלִין טְמֵאִין יָצָא. וְלֹא דְמֵי עֵצִים הוּא חַיָיב לוֹ. הָדָא אָמְרָה שֶׁהַקֶּרֶן קְנָס. כְּמַה דְּאַתְּ אָמַר קֶרֶן קְנָס. וְדִכְוָותָהּ חוֹמֶשׁ קְנָס. אֶלָּא רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ כְּדַעְתֵּיהּ. כְּמַה דוּ אָמַר תַּמָּן. הַכֹּל הָיָה בִכְלָל לֹא תַעֲנֶה בְרֵעֲךָ עֵד שָׁקֵר. יָצָא וַעֲשִׂיתֶם לוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר זָמַם לַעֲשׂוֹת לְאָחִיו. לֹא שֶׁיְּשַׁלֵּם מָמוֹן. וָכָא הַכֹּל הָיָה בִכְלָל וְכָל זָר לֹא יֹאכַל קוֹדֶשׁ. יָצָא וְאִישׁ כִּי יֹאכַל קוֹדֵשׁ בִּשְׁגָגָה שֶׁיְּשַׁלֵּם מָמוֹן.

Rebbi Ḥinena said before Rebbi Mana: Even if Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish thought the entire Mishnaiot were Rebbi Meïr’s, does the verse agree with Rebbi Meïr? Is it not written ( Lev. 22:14): “If a person ate consecrated food in error”? But Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish must hold that the fifth is a sacrifice. But even if he holds that the fifth is a sacrifice, can the principal be a sacrifice? Rebbi Yudan bar Shalom said, the Mishnah declares that the principal is a fine, as we have stated: “He does not pay in heave but in totally profane food which is turned into heave.” If he had to pay from what he ate, it would be fine. And it was stated: “If he ate impure heave, he has to pay in pure profane food, but if he paid in impure profane, he discharged his obligation.” Does he not owe him the price of wood? That shows that the principal is a fine and since the principal is a fine, the fifth also is a fine. But Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish follows his own opinion. Just as Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, there, everybody was under the obligation of ( Ex. 20:16) “Do not become a false witness against your neighbor”, but this one was treated separately, ( Deut. 19:19) “do to him what he intended to do to his brother”, to pay money; also here, everybody was under the obligation of ( Lev. 22:10) “no outsider shall eat holy [food],” but this one was treated separately, ( Lev. 22:14) “if somebody should eat holy [food] in error,” to pay money.

וְתַנֵּי מוֹדִין חֲכָמִים לְרִבִּי מֵאִיר בְּגוֹנֵב תְּרוּמַת חֲבֵירוֹ וַאֲכָלָהּ שֶׁהוּא לוֹקֶה וּמְשַׁלֵּם. שֶׁכֵּן הָאוֹכֵל תְּרוּמָה לוֹקֶה. וְהָתַנֵּי מוֹדִין חֲכָמִים לְרִבִּי מֵאִיר בְּגוֹנֵב חֵלֶב חֲבֵירוֹ וַאֲכָלוֹ שֶׁלּוֹקֶה וּמְשַׁלֵּם. שֶׁכֵּן הָאוֹכֵל חֶלְבּוֹ לוֹקֶה. וְהָתַנֵּי. הַחוֹסֵם אֶת הַפָּרָה מְשַׁלֵּם שֵׁשֶׁת קַבִּין לְפָרָה וְאַרְבָּעָה קַבִּין לַחֲמוֹר. שֶּׁכֵּן הַחוֹסֵם פָּרָתוֹ לוֹקֶה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. שֶּׁכֵּן מְחוּיָיבֵי מִיתוֹת. גָּנַב תְּרוּמַת הַקּוֹדֵּשּׁ וַאֲכָלָהּ שֶׁהוּא לוֹקֶה וּמְשַׁלֵּם. מִכָּל מָקוֹם הִפְסִידוֹ מָמוֹן.

Did we not state: The Sages admit to Rebbi Meïr that one who stole his neighbor’s heave is flogged and has to pay since whoever eats heave is flogged. Did we not state: The Sages admit to Rebbi Meïr that one who stole his neighbor’s fat is flogged and has to pay since whoever eats fat is flogged. Did we not state: The Sages admit to Rebbi Meïr that one who muzzled his neighbor’s cow is flogged and has to pay six qab per cow and four qab for a donkey since whoever muzzles his cow is flogged. Rebbi Yose said, the same holds if death is the penalty. If he stole Temple heave and ate it, he is whipped and has to pay since in any case he caused monetary loss.

אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. מֵעַתָּה הַבָּא עַל אֲחוֹתוֹ קְטַנָּה יִלְקֶה וִישַׁלֵּם. שֶׁכֵּן הַבָּא עַל אֲחוֹתוֹ בוֹגֶרֶת לוֹקֶה. חָזַר וָמַר. גַּבֵּי אֲחוֹתוֹ חָל עָלָיו תַּשׁלוּמִין וּמִיתָה כְּאַחַת. בְּרַם הָכָא. מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁחָסַם נִתְחַיֵיב מַכּוֹת. מִיכָּן וָאֵילַךְ בְּתַשְׁלוּמִין. הָתִיב רִבִּי זְעִירָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי מָנָא. הֲרֵי הַמֵּצִית גְּדִישׁוֹ שֶׁלַּחֲבֵירוֹ בַשַּׁבָּת. עַל שִׁיבּוֹלֶת הָרִאשׁוֹן חַיֵיב [מִיתָה] מִיכָּן וְהֵילַךְ בְּתַשְׁלוּמִין. וְלֵית אָמַר כֵּן עַל כָּל שִׁיבּוֹלֶת וְשִׁיבּוֹלֶת יֵשׁ בָּהּ הַתְרָיַית מִיתָה. וָכָא עַל כָּל חֲסִימָה וַחֲסִימָה יֵשׁ בָּהּ הַתְרָיַי[ת] מַכּוֹת. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּי רִבִּי בּוּן אָמַר. תְּרֵין אֲמוֹרָאִין. חַד אָמַר. בְּחוֹסֵם בִּתְרוּמָה וּבְקֳדָּשִׁים. וְחָרָנָה אָמַר. בְּחוֹסֵם עַל יְדֵי שָׁלִיחַ. שָׁלִיחַ לוֹקֶה וְהוּא פָטוּר. דָּם יֵחָשֵׁב לָאִישׁ הַהוּא וְלֹא לְשׁוֹלְחָיו.

Rebbi Mana said before Rebbi Yose: If it is so, he who sleeps with his minor sister should be flogged and have to pay since if he sleeps with his adult sister he is flogged. He reversed himself and said, there death and payment fall on him simultaneously. But here, when he muzzled he is subject to flogging but only later for payment. Rebbi Ze‘ira objected before Rebbi Mana: He who sets fire to his neighbor’s grain stack on the Sabbath is subject to capital punishment from the first ear but only later for payment! One cannot say that because for every single ear there is cautioning for the death penalty. Here also, for every moment of muzzling there is cautioning for flogging. Rebbi Yose bar Abun said, two Amoraïm. One said, if he muzzled for heave which is Temple property. The other one said, if he muzzled through an agent. Then the agent is flogged and he is free ( Lev. 17:4): “As a blood guilt it will be charged on this man,” not on his employers.

שׁוֹגֵג בִּתְרוּמָה וְמֵזִיד בְּחָמֵץ. שׁוֹגֵג בִּתְרוּמָה וּמֵזִיד בְּנָזִיר. שׁוֹגֵג בִּתְרוּמָה וְמֵזִיד בְּיוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים. אִין תִּפְתְּרִינָהּ בִּשְׁנֵי דְבָרִים נִיחָא. וְאִין תִּיפְתָּר בְּדָבָר אֶחָד מַחְלוֹקֶת רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ.

In error for heave and intentional for leavened, in error for heave and intentional for nazir, in error for heave and intentional for the Day of Atonement. If one explains it with two things, it is fine. If one explains it for one, this is the disagreement of Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish.

תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. אֵין בֵּין שַׁבָּת לְיוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים אֶלָּא שֶׁזֶּה זְדוֹנוֹ בִּידֵי אָדָם וְזֶה זְדוֹנוֹ בְּהִיכָּרֵת. הָא בְתַשְׁלוּמִין שְׁנֵיהֶן שָׁוִין. מַתְנִיתָא דְרִבִּי נְחוֹנְיָיא בֶּן הַקָּנָה. דְּרִבִּי נְחוֹנְיָיא בֶּן הַקָּנָה אוֹמֵר. יוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים כְּשַׁבָּת לְתַשְׁלוּמִין. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן מְנַסְּיָא אוֹמֵר. מְחוּיָיבֵי כְרִיתוּת כִּמְחוּיָיבֵי מִיתוֹת בֵּית דִּין. מַה בֵּינֵיהוֹן. רִבִּי אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אֲבִינָא. נַעֲרָה נִידָּה בֵּינֵיהוֹן. רִבִּי מָנָא אוֹמֵר. אַף אֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ בֵּינֵיהוֹן. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי נְחוֹנְיָיא בֶּן הַקָּנָה. מַה שַׁבָּת אֵין לוֹ הֵיתֵר אַחַר אִיסּוּרָהּ אַף יוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים אֵין לוֹ הֵיתֵר אַחַר אִיסּוּרוֹ. וְאֵילּוּ הוֹאִיל וְיֵשׁ לָהֶן הֵיתֵר אַחַר אִיסּוּרָן מְשַׁלֵּם. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן מְנַסְּיָא מַה שַׁבָּת יֵשׁ בָּהּ כָּרֵת. אַף יוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים יֵשׁ בָּהּ כָּרֵת וְאֵילּוּ הוֹאִיל וְאֵין בָּהֶן כָּרֵת מְשַּׁלֵּם.

There, we have stated: “The only difference between the Sabbath and the Day of Atonement is that intentional infraction of the former is punished by the hands of man, but intentional infraction of the latter is punished by extirpation.” Therefore, for payment both follow the same rules. This is by Rebbi Neḥoniah ben Haqanah since “Rebbi Neḥoniah ben Haqanah says, the Day of Atonement follows the rules of Sabbath for payment. But Rebbi Simeon ben Menassiah says those subject to extirpation equal those subject to capital punishment.” What is between them? Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Avina said, a menstruating adolescent girl is between them. Rebbi Mana said, also his wife’s sister is between them. In the opinion of Rebbi Neḥoniah ben Haqanah, just as the Sabbath does not become permitted after its prohibition started; so theDay of Atonement does not become permitted after its prohibition started. However, these may become permitted after their prohibition started, he has to pay. But Rebbi Simeon ben Menassiah said, extirpation applies to the Sabbath and the day of Atonement; extirpation does not apply to these, he has to pay.

רִבִּי יוּדָה בַּר פָּזִי בְעָא. מַכּוֹת וְכָרֵת מַה אָמְרִין בָּהּ אִילֵּין תַּנָּיֵי. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. צְרִיכָה לְרַבָּנִין. רִבִּי יוֹנָה בְעָא. לָמָּה לֹא שָׁמַע לָהּ מִן הָדָא דְּתַנִּי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי. דְּתַנִּי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי. רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר. נֶאֱמַר כָּרֵת בְּשַׁבָּת וְנֶאֱמַר כָּרֵת בְּיוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים. מַה כָּרֵת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בְּשַׁבָּת אֵין מַכּוֹת אֶצֶל כָּרֵת אַף כָּרֵת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בְּיוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים אֵין מַכּוֹת אֶצֶל כָּרֵת. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. מַה צְרִיכָה. לֹא כְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. בְּרַם כְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. מַה מַכּוֹת אֶצֶל מִיתָה יֵשׁ לוֹ כָּל שֶׁכֵּן מַכּוֹת אֶצֶל כָּרֵת. וְאִיתְפַּלְּגוּן. הַשּׁוֹחֵט אוֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ לְשֵׁם עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. הִתְרוּ בוֹ מִשֵּׁם אוֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ לוֹקֶה. מִשֵּׁם עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה הָיָה נִסְקָל. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר. אֲפִילוּ הִתְרוּ מִשֵּׁם אוֹתוֹ וְאֶת בְּנוֹ אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה מֵאַחַר שֶׁאִילּוּ הִתְרוּ בוֹ מִשֵּׁם עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה הָיָה נִסְקָל. אָמַר לֵיהּ. אֲפִילוּ כְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן צְרִיכָה לוֹ. תַּמָּן שְׁנֵי דְבָרִים. וָכָא דָבָר אֶחָד.

Rebbi Judah bar Pazi asked: What say these Tannaïm about whipping and extirpation? Rebbi Yose said, that is a problem for the rabbis. Rebbi Jonah said, why can we not understand it from what Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai stated? As Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai stated: “Rebbi Ṭarphon says, extirpation was mentioned for the Sabbath and the Day of Atonement. Since for extirpation mentioned for the Sabbath there is no payment in a case involving the death penalty, so for extirpation mentioned for the Day of Atonement there is no payment in a case involving extirpation.” Rebbi Mana said before Rebbi Yose: When do we need this? Not for Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? But for Rebbi Joḥanan, if he admits flogging in death penalty cases, certainly flogging in extirpation cases, since they disagreed: If somebody slaughters [an animal] and its young for idolatrous purposes. Rebbi Joḥanan says, if he was cautioned about an animal and its young, he is flogged, about idolatry, he is stoned to death. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, even if he was cautioned about an animal and its young, he is not flogged since he would be stoned to death had he been cautioned about idolatry. He said to him, we need it even for Rebbi Joḥanan! Here are two cases, there it is one case.

עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ מַה אִיכָּא בֵּין אִילֵּין תַּנָּאֵי לְאִילֵּין רַבָּנִין. לָאוִין. לֹא כְרִיתוּת. רִבִּי יוּדָן אָמַר. הַבָּא עַל הַמַּמְזֶרֶת בֵּינֵיהוֹן. רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה אָמַר. הַמֵּצִית גְּדִישׁ חֲבֵירוֹ בְּיוֹם [טוֹב] בֵּינֵיהוֹן. עַל דַּעֲתִּין דְּאִילֵּין תַּנָּאֵי הוֹאִיל וְאֵין בָּהֶן כָּרֵת מְשַׁלֵּם. עַל דַּעֲתִּין דְּרַבָּנִין דְּאֵילּוּ הוֹאִיל וְיֵשׁ בְּהֶן מַכּוֹת אֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם. מֵעַתָּה אֵילּוּ נְעָרוֹת שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן קְנָס. דְּלָא כְרַבָּנִין. אָמַר רִבִּי מַתַּנְיָה. תִּיפְתָּר דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל בְּמַמְזֵר שֶׁבָּא עַל הַמַּמְזֶרֶת.

According to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, what is between these Tannaïm and those rabbis? Prohibitions without extirpation. Rebbi Judan said, he who sleeps with a bastard girl is between them. Rebbi Ḥananiah said, he who puts fire to the grain stack of his neighbor on a holiday is between them. These Tannaïm think, since there is no extirpation, he pays. Those rabbis think, since there is flogging he does not pay. But then “these are the adolescent girls who can claim a fine” cannot follow the rabbis! Rebbi Mattaniah said, explain it according to everybody if it refers to a bastard male who sleeps with a bastard girl.

וְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו לָאו יְבִמְתּוֹ הִיא. אָמַר רִבִּי מַתַּנְיָה. תִּפְתָּר שֶׁהָיוּ לְאָחִיו בָּנִים וִאֵירַס אִשָּׁה וָמֵת וּבָא אָחִיו וְאָנְסָהּ.

But is his brother’s wife not his sister-in-law? Explain it that the man’s brother had children and had performed the preliminary wedding with a woman when he died and [the surviving] brother came and raped her.

Mishnah

משנה: וְאֵילוּ שֶׁאֵין לָהֶן קְנָס. הָבָּא עַל הַגִּיּוֹרֶת וְעַל הַשְּׁבוּיָה וְעַל הַשִּׁפְחָה שֶׁנִּפְדּוּ וְשֶׁנִּתְגַּיְירוּ וְשֶׁנִּשְׁתַּחְרְרוּ יְתֵירוֹת עַל בְּנוֹת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אומֵר. שְׁבוּיָה שֶׁנִּיפְדֵּית הֲרֵי הִיא בִקְדוּשָּׁתָהּ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא גְדוֹלָה.

MISHNAH: The following cannot claim a fine: One who comes to a proselyte woman, a kidnap victim, or a slave girl who was redeemed, converted, or freed, at more than three years and one day of age. Rebbi Jehudah says, the redeemed kidnap victim is in her holiness even if she is an adult.

Halakhah

הלכה: אֵילוּ שֶׁאֵין לָהֶן קְנָס כול׳. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. לֹא רִיבָה אוֹתָהּ רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אֶלָּא לִקְנָס. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. אַף לִכְתוּבַּת מְנָה מָאתַיִם. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר. אַף לְהַאֲכִילָהּ תְּרוּמָה. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ רִבִּי יוּדָה וְרִבִּי דוֹסָא שְׁנֵיהֶן אוֹמְרִים דָּבָר אֶחָד. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. הַשְּׁבוּיָה אוֹכֶלֶת בִּתְרוּמָה. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי דוֹסָא. אָתָא רִבִּי חֲנִינָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי דוֹסָא.

HALAKHAH: “The following cannot claim a fine,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Jehudah excepted the kidnap victim only for the fine. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: Also for the ketubah of a mina or 200 [ zuz]. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, even to let her eat heave. In the opinion of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Dosa both said the same, as we have stated there: The kidnap victim eats heave, the words of Rebbi Dosa. Rebbi Ḥanina came in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Practice follows Rebbi Dosa.

Mishnah

משנה: הַבָּא עַל בִּתּוֹ עַל בַּת בִּתּוֹ עַל בַּת בְּנוֹ עַל בַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ עַל בַּת בְּנָהּ עַל בַּת בִתָּהּ אֵין לָהֶן קְנָס מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מִתְחַיֵיב בְּנַפְשׁוֹ שֶׁמִּיתָתוֹ בִּידֵי בֵית דִּין וְכָל הַמִּתְחַיֵיב בְּנַפְשׁוֹ אֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם מָמוֹן שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְלֹא יִהְיֶה אָסוֹן עָנוֹשׁ יֵעָנֵשׁ.

MISHNAH: The one who comes to his daughter, his granddaughter from his daughter or his son, his wife’s daughter, his wife’s granddaughter from her daughter or her son does not pay the fine since he committed a capital crime and should be executed by the court; for anybody committing a capital crime does not pay cash as it is said: “If there is no case of murder, a fine shall be imposed.”

Halakhah

הלכה: הַבָּא עַל בִּתּוֹ כול׳. אִילּוּ אַחֵר בָּא עָלֶיהָ קְנָסָהּ לָאו לְאָבִיהָ הוּא. תִיפְתָּר שֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ עַד שֶלֹּא מֵת אָבִיהָ וּמֵת אָבִיהָ. כְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגָּלִילִי. בְּרַם כְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס וּקְנָסָהּ שֶׁלְּעַצְמָהּ.

HALAKHAH: “The one who comes to his daughter,” etc. If another man had come to her, would the fine not be her father’s? Explain it that another man came to her before her father died and then her father died. That follows Rebbi Yose the Galilean. But following Rebbi Aqiba, she collects a fine and the fine is hers.

רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. מִמַּשְׁמַע שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְלֹא יִהְיֶה אָסוֹן אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אִם יִהְיֶה אָסוֹן וְנָתַתָּ נֶפֶשׁ תַּחַת נָפֶשׁ. וּמַה תַלְמוּד לוֹמַר אִם יִהְיֶה אָסוֹן לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַמֵּזִיד בְּהַתְרָיָיה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וְלָאו מַתְנִיתָא הִיא שֶׁכָּל הַמִּתְחַיֵיב בְּנַפְשׁוֹ אֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם מָמוֹן. דְּלָא אַתְיָא אֶלָּא בְשׁוֹגֵג. אָמַר חִזְקִיָּה. עוֹד תַּנֵּי מַתְנִיתָא. מַכֵּה בְהֵמָה יְשַׁלְּמֶנָּה וּמַכֵּה אָדָם יוּמַת. מַה מַכֵּה בְהֵמָה לֹא חִלַּקְתָּה בוֹ בֵּין בְּשׁוֹגֵג בֵּין בְּמֵזִיד לְחַיֵיב מָמוֹן. אַף מַכֵּה אָדָם לֹא תַחֲלוֹק בּוֹ בֵּין שּׁוֹגֵג לְמֵזִיד לִפְטוֹר מָמוֹן.

Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: We understand that, since it said “if there is no case of murder, a fine shall be imposed”, that if it is a case of murder, you shall take life for life? Why does the verse say, it is a case of murder? To add the case of premeditation and warning. Rebbi Yose said, is that not a Mishnah, “for anybody committing a capital crime does not pay cash”, that it deals not only with cases of error. Ḥizqiah said, one states a baraita: “The slayer of an animal must pay for it but the slayer of a human shall be put to death.” Just as you did not make a difference between unintentional and intentional action of a slayer of an animal to force him to pay money, so you should not make a difference between unintentional and intentional action of a slayer of a human to free him from paying money.

Mishnah

משנה: נַעֲרָה שֶׁנִּתְאָרְסָה אוֹ שֶׁנִּתְגָּרְשָׁה רִבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגָּלִילִי אוֹמֵר אֵין לָהּ קְנָס. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס וּקְנָסָהּ שֶׁל עַצְמָהּ.

MISHNAH: If an adolescent girl had been preliminarily married but was divorced, Rebbi Yose the Galilean says she cannot collect the fine; Rebbi Aqiba says, she can collect the fine and it belongs to her.

Halakhah

הלכה: נַעֲרָה שֶׁנִּתְאָרְסָה כול׳. מַאי טַעֲמָא דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגָּלִילִי. אֲשֶׁר לֹא אוֹרָשָׂה.

HALAKHAH: “An adolescent girl who had been preliminarily married,” etc. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose the Galilean? “Who was not preliminarily married.”

עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִתְאָרְסָה נוֹתֵן לְאָבִיהָ. נִתְאָרְסָה נוֹתֵן לְעַצְמָהּ. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי הָגָּלִילִי. נַעֲרָה נוֹתֵן לְאָבִיהָ. בּוֹגֶרֶת נוֹתֵן לְעַצְמָהּ. בְּתוּלָה נוֹתֵן לְאָבִיהָ. מוּכַּת עֵץ נוֹתֵן לְעַצְמָהּ. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא דִכְתִיב נַעֲרָה. נַעֲרָה וְלֹא בוֹגֶרֶת. בְּתוּלָה. בְּתוּלָה וְלֹא מוּכַּת עֵץ. לֵּית כְּתִיב אֲשֶׁר לֹא אוֹרָסָה. אֲשֶׁר לֹא אוֹרָסָה מְלַמֵּד הֵימֶינָּה לִגְזֵירָה שָׁוָה. מַה תַּמָּן חֲמִשִּׁין אַף הָכָא חֲמִשִּׁין. וְלֵית לֵיהּ לְרִבַּי יוֹסֵי חֲמִשִּׁין. אִית לֵיהּ כֶּסֶף כֶּסֶף. מַה כֶּסֶף שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לְהַלָּן חֲמִשִּׁין. אַף כָּאן חֲמִשִּׁין.

Before she was preliminarily married, he gives to her father; after she had been preliminarily married, he gives to herself. In the opinion of Rebbi Yose the Galilean, if she is an adolescent, he gives to her father; if she is an adult, does he give it to herself? If she is a virgin, he gives to her father; if she is injured by wood, does he give it to herself? It is different, because it is written “an adolescent”, adolescent but not adult. “A virgin,” a virgin not one injured by wood. Is it not written “who was not preliminarily married,” “who was not preliminarily married,” to infer from there by an equal cut? Since in one case it is 50, so in the other case it is 50. Does Rebbi Yose not have “50”? He has “silver, silver”. Since “silver” written at one place is 50, so “silver” [written at the other place] also is 50.

בָּא עָלֶיהָ עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִתְאָרְסָה וְנִתְאָרְסָה וְנִתְגָּרְשָׁה. לֵית מִילְתָא דְרִבִּי אַחַי אָמְרָה שֶׁהוּא נוֹתֵן. וְהָתַנֵּי תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר עִינָּהּ. לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַיְּתוֹמָה לִקְנָס. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגָּלִילִי. אָמַר רִבִּי אַחַי. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ עַד שֶׁלֹּא מֵת אָבִיהָ וּמֵת אָבִיהָ כְּבָר נִרְאֶה לִיתֵּן לְאָבִיהָ. הוּא בָא עָלֶיהָ עַד שֶׁלֹּא מֵת אָבִיהָ וּמֵת אָבִיהָ וְהוּא בָא עָלֶיהָ עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִתְאָרְסָה וְנִתְגָּרְשָׁה. רִבִּי זְעִירָא אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא בְעָא. בָּא עָלֶיהָ עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִישֵּׂאת וְנִישֵּׂאת. מִמַּה דְתֵימַר תַּמָּן תַּחַת בַּעֲלָהּ הִיא הוּא נוֹתֵן לְאָבִיהָ. וָכָא תַּחַת בַּעֲלָהּ הִיא הוּא נוֹתֵן לְאָבִיהָ.

If he came to her before she was preliminarily married, then she was preliminarily married and divorced. Does the statement of Rebbi Aḥai not imply that he pays? Did we not state: “For he had mistreated her,” to include the orphan for the fine, the words of Rebbi Yose the Galilean. Rebbi Aḥai said, explain it that he came to her before her father died; when subsequently her father died he already was obligated to give to her father. One came to her before her father died and subsequently her father died; one came to her before she was preliminarily married, subsequently she was divorced. Rebbi Ze‘ira said that Rav Ḥisda asked: If one came to her before she was married and then she was married? Since you say there, she is under her husband but he has to pay to her father, so in this case she is under her husband but he has to pay to her father.

Mishnah

משנה: הַמְפַתֶּה נוֹתֵן שְׁלֹשָׁה דְבָרִים וְהָאוֹנֵס אַרְבָּעָה. הַמְפַתֶּה נוֹתֵן בּוֹשֶׁת וּפְגָם וּקְנָס. מוֹסִיף עָלָיו הָאוֹנֵס שֶׁנּוֹתֵן אֶת הַצַּעַר וְהַמְפַתֶּה אֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן אֶת הַצַּעַר. הָאוֹנֵס נוֹתֵן מִיַּד וְהַמְפַתֶּה לִכְשֶׁיּוֹצִיא. הָאוֹנֵס שׁוֹתֶה בַעֲצִיצוֹ וְהַמְפַתֶּה אִם רָצָא לְהוֹצִיא מוֹצִיא.

MISHNAH: The seducer pays for three things and the rapist for four. The seducer pays for shame, diminution of value, and fine. The rapist in addition pays for suffering; the seducer does not pay for suffering. The rapist pays immediately, the seducer only if he divorces her. The rapist drinks from his pot; the seducer may divorce if he wishes.

Halakhah

הלכה: הַמְפַתֶּה נוֹתֵן שָׁלֹשׁ כול׳. וּדְלֹא כְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן פָּטַר אֶת הָאוֹנֵס מִן הַצַּעַר. לְמַה זֶה דוֹמֶה. לְחוֹתֵךְ יַבֶּלֶת חֲבֵירוֹ וְעָתִיד לְחַתְּכָהּ. לְמַה זֶה דוֹמֶה. לְקוֹצֵץ נְטִיעוֹת חֲבֵירוֹ וְעָתִיד לְחַתְּכָן. אָמְרוּ לוֹ. אֵינוֹ דוֹמָה נִבְעֶלֶת בְּאוֹנֵס לַנִּבְעֶלֶת בְּרָצוֹן. לֹא דוֹמָה נִבְעֶלֶת בְּאַשְׁפָּה לַנִּבְעֶלֶת בַּחוּפָּה. מַה מְקַיֵים רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר עִינָּהּ. אָמְרֵי בְשֵׁם רַב חִסְדָּא. תִּיפְתָּר בְשֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ עַל הַקּוֹצִים.

HALAKHAH: “The seducer pays three,” etc. This does not follow Rebbi Simeon, since Rebbi Simeon freed the rapist from paying for suffering. To what can you compare this? To one who cuts somebody’s wart when that one would have cut it himself in the future. To what can you compare this? To one who cuts somebody’s trees when that one would have cut them himself in the future. They said to him, you cannot compare one who is deflowered by rape to one who is deflowered by consent; you cannot compare one who is deflowered on a dungheap to one who is deflowered in the bridal chamber! How does Rebbi Simeon interpret’’because he mistreated her”? They said in the name of Rav Ḥisda, explain it that he raped her on thorns.

וְהַמְפַתֶּה לִכְשַיּוֹצִיא. אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא. בְּשֶׁלֹּא רָצָה לְקַיֵים. אֲבָל אִם רָצָה לְקַיֵים אֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן כְּלוּם. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. כֶּסֶף יִשְׁקוֹל כְּמוֹהַר הַבְּתוּלוֹת. מַגּיד שֶהוּא עוֹשֶׂה אוֹתָן עָלָיו מוֹהַר. וְאֵין מוֹהַר אֶלָּא כְתוּבָּה. כְּמַה דְאַתְּ אָמַר הַרְבּוּ עָלַי מְאֹד מוֹהַר וּמַתָּן.

“The seducer only if he divorces her,” etc. Rav Ḥisda said, if he does not want to keep her. But if he decides to keep her, he does not give anything. Rebbi Ismael stated: “He should weigh silver appropriate for the bride-price of virgins”, which indicates that his obligation is for him that of bride-price, and bride-price is the ketubah; as it also says “add for me much bride-price and gifts.”

רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר שָׁאַל. בְּנוֹת אֲנוּסָה מַהוּ שֶׁיְּהֵא לָהֶן בְּתְנַאי כְתוּבָּתָהּ. פְּשִׁיטָא לִי בָאֲנוּסָה דְּלֵית לָהּ בְּנִין דִּיכְרִין. כִּמְּפוּתָּה דְּלֵית לָהּ בְּנָן נוּקְבָן. אִין תֵּימַר תְּרֵיהוֹן צְרִיכָה לֵהּ. נִשְׁאוֹל. בְּנוֹת אֲנוּסָה וּבְנוֹת מְפוּתָּה מַהוּ שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן בְּתְנַאי כְתוּבָּה. הֵן דִּצְרִיכָה לִי כְרַבָּנִין. הֵן דִפְשִׁיטָא לֵיהּ כְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יְהוּדָה. דְּתַנֵּי. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר. הָאוֹנֵס נוֹתֵן כְּתוּבַּת מְנָה.

Rebbi Eleazar asked: Do the daughters of the rape victim have the rights given by the ketubah stipulations? It is clear to me that the rape victim has no [ ketubah] of the male children, and that the seduced victim has no [ ketubah] of the male children. If you say that he questions in both cases, we could ask, do the daughters of the rape victim and the daughters of the seduced girl have the rights given by the ketubah stipulations? That is a problem following the rabbis, but it is obvious following Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah; as it was stated: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, the rapist gives a mina as ketubah.

Mishnah

משנה: כֵּיצַד הוּא שׁוֹתֶה בַעֲצִיצוֹ. אֲפִילוּ הִיא חִיגֶּרֶת אֲפִילוּ הִיא סוֹמָה וִאֲפִילוּ הִיא מוּכַּת שְׁחִין. נִמְצָא בָהּ דְּבַר זִימָּה אוֹ שֶׁאֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה לָבוֹא בְיִשְׂרָאֵל אֵינוֹ רַשַּׁאי לְקַיְימָהּ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְלוֹ תִהְיֶה לְאִשָּׁה אִשָּׁה שֶׁהִיא רְאוּיָה לוֹ.

MISHNAH: How does he drink from his pot? Even if she is lame, even if she is blind, or even if she is afflicted with boils. If a matter of immorality was found with her or she could not marry in Israel, he may not keep here since it is written: “She shall be his wife,” a wife appropriate for him.

Halakhah

הלכה: בְּאֵי זֶה צַד הוּא שׁוֹתֶה בַעֲצִיצוֹ כול׳. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. לֹא יֹאמַר וְלוֹ תִהְיֶה לְאִשָּׁה זֶה הַמּוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע. שֶׁאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ כְּבָר הִיא תַּחַת יָדוֹ. וּמַה תַלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְלוֹ תִהְיֶה לְאִשָּׁה. תְּלַמֵּד הִימֶינָה לִגְזֵירָה שָׁוָה. מִתְדָּרֵשׁ וְלוֹ תִהְיֶה לְאִשָּׁה וְלוֹ תִהְיֶה. מַה לוֹ תִהְיֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לְהַלָּן אִשָּׁה שֶׁרְאוּיָה לוֹ אַף וְלוֹ תִהְיֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כָּאן אִשָּׁה הָרְאוּיָה לוֹ. אִי מַה לְהַלָּן אִשָּׁה הָרְאוּיָה לוֹ וּמְשַׁלֵּם קְנָס. אַף לוֹ תִּהְיֶה לְאִשָּׁה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כָּאן אִשָּׁה הָרְאוּיָה לוֹ וּמְשַׁלֵּם קְנָס. רִבִּי זְעִירָא עוּלָּא (בְשֵׁם רִבִּי) יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. לֹא יֹאמַר וְלוֹ תִהְיֶה בְמוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע שֶׁאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ כְּבָר הִיא תַּחַת יָדוֹ. מַה תַלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְלוֹ תִהְיֶה לְאִשָּׁה. מְלַמֵּד הִימֶינָה לִגְזֵירָה שָׁוָה. מִתְדָּרְשָׁהּ וְלוֹ תִהְיֶה וְלוֹ תִהְיֶה. מַה תִהְיֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לְהַלָּן גֵּירַשׁ אוֹמְרִים לוֹ שֶׁיַּחֲזִיר אַף לוֹ תִהְיֶה הָאָמוּר כָּאן גֵּירַשׁ אוֹמְרִים לוֹ שֶׁיַּחֲזִיר. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. אֶחַד הָאוֹנֵס וְאֶחַד הַמּוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע שֶׁגֵּירְשׁוּ כּוֹפִין אוֹתָן לְהַחֲזִיר. אִם הָיוּ כֹהֲנִים סוֹפְגִין אֶת הָאַרְבָּעִים.

HALAKHAH: “How does he drink from his pot,” etc. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Ḥiyya, in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: It should not have said “she shall be his wife” for the calumniator; it is superfluous since she already is his! Why does the verse say, “she shall be his wife”? You should infer from this by an equal cut. One has to infer from “she shall be his wife”, “she shall be his”. Since “she shall be his” which is said there means a wife appropriate for him, so “she shall be his” which is said here means a wife appropriate for him. Then since “she shall be his” which is said there means a wife appropriate for him and he pays the fine, so “she shall be his” which is said here means a wife appropriate for him and he pays the fine. Rebbi Ze‘ira, Ulla [ben] Ismael, in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: It should not have said “she shall be his wife” for the calumniator; it is superfluous since she already is his! Why does the verse say, “she shall be his wife”? You should infer from this by an equal cut. One has to infer from “she shall be his wife”, “she shall be his”. Since “she shall be” which is said there means that if he divorced her one tells him to take her back, so “she shall be his” which is said here means that if he divorced her one tells him to take her back. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: “In the cases of both the rapist and the calumniator who divorced, one forces them to take back. If they were Cohanim they absorb the forty.”

כְּהָדָא דְתַנֵּי. בְּעוּלַּת בַּעַל. לְהָבִיא אֶת הַמְקַבֶּלֶת בַּעֲלָהּ בְּבֵית אָבִיהָ וְהִיא אָרוּסָה וְהַבָּא אַחֲרָיו בְּחֶנֶק. וְלֹא סוֹף דָּבָר מִכְּדַרְכָּהּ אֶלָּא אֲפִילוּ שֶׁלֹּא כְדַרְכָּהּ. רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. לָכֵן צְרִיכָה שֶׁלֹּא כְדַרְכָּהּ. אֲפִילוּ תֵימָא מִכְּדַרְכָּהּ לָמָּה לִי בַעֲלָהּ. אֲפִילוּ כַיי דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. בָּאוּ עָלֶיהָ שְׁנַיִם. הָרִאשׁוֹן בִּסְקִילָה וְהַשֵּׁינִי בְחֶנֶק. נַעֲרָה מְאוֹרָסָה. בָּאוּ עָלֶיהָ עֲשָׂרָה שֶׁלֹּא כְדַרְכָּהּ וְאֶחָד כְּדַרְכָּהּ כּוּלָּן בִּסְקִילָה. כּוּלְּהוֹן כְּדַרְכָּהּ. הָרִאשׁוֹן בִּסְקִילָה וְהַשְּׁאָר בְּחֶנֶק. הֶעֲרוּ בָהּ עֲשָׂרָה בְנֵי אָדָם וְאֶחָד גָּמַר אֶת הַבִּיאָה כּוּלְּהוֹן בִּסְקִילָה. כּוּלְּהוֹן גָּמְרוּ אֶת הַבִּיאָה. הָרִאשׁוֹן בִּסְקִילָה וְהַשְּׁאָר בְּחֶנֶק. וּבִפְנוּיָה. בָּאוּ עָלֶיהָ עֲשָׂרָה שֶׁלֹּא כְדַרְכָּהּ וְאֶחָד כְּדַרְכָּהּ כּוּלָּם בִּקְנָס. כּוּלְּהוֹן בִּכְדַרְכָּהּ. הָרִאשׁוֹן בִּקְנָס וְהַשְּׁאָר פָּטוּר. בֵּירְרָה לָהּ אֶחָד מֵהֶן נִפְטְרוּ כוּלָּן מִלֹּא תַעֲשֶׂה. אָמְרָה. אֵיפְשַׁר. בּוֹרֶרֶת וְחוֹזֶרֶת וּבוֹרֶרֶת. הָיָה נָשׂוּי אֶת אֲחוֹתָהּ כְּבָר נִפְטַר. מֵתָה כְּבָר נִפְטַר. מֵת אֵין כּוֹפִין אֶת הַיָּבָם.

As it was stated: “Living married to a husband,” that includes one who had received her husband in her father’s house while preliminarily married; the one who comes after him is strangled. Not only a regular intercourse but even perverse. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan; it is necessary to mention perverse intercourse for if it were regular, why mention her husband? As we have stated: If she was raped by two men, the first is stoned, the second strangled. The preliminarily married adolescent girl. If ten men came upon her perversely and then one regularly, they are all stoned. If they all come upon her regularly, the first is stoned and the remainder strangled. If ten men “touched” her and then one penetrated, they are all stoned. If they all penetrated, the first is stoned and the remainder strangled. A single girl. If ten men came upon her perversely and then one regularly, they all pay the fine. If they all come upon her regularly, the first is stoned and the remainder is free. If she chose one of them, the others were freed from the prohibition. If she said, he is impossible, she repeatedly chooses. If he was married to her sister, he already is freed. If she died, he is freed. If he died, one does not force the levir.

Mishnah

משנה: יְתוֹמָה שֶׁנִּתְאָרְסָה וְנִתְגָּרְשָׁה רִבִּי לָעְזָר אוֹמֵר הָאוֹנֵס חַיָיב וְהַמְפַתֶּה פָטוֹר.

MISHNAH: About an orphan girl who had been preliminarily married and was divorced, Rebbi Eleazar says that the rapist has to pay but the seducer does not.

Halakhah

הלכה: יְתוֹמָה שֶׁנִּתְאָרְסַה וְנִתְגָּרְשָׁה כול׳. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. אַתְיָא דְרְבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּשִׁיטַּת רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה רַבּוֹ. כְּמַה דְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אָמַר. יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס וּקְנָסָהּ לְעַצְמָהּ. כֵּן אָמַר רִבִּי אֶלֱעָזָר. יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס וּקְנָסָהּ שֶׁלְּעַצְמָהּ. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ בִמְפוּתָּה. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה אוֹמֵר בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁמָּחְלָה לוֹ. וְיֵשׁ אָדָם מוֹחֵל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ שֶׁלּוֹ. פָּתַר לָהּ בִּיתוֹמָה. וְתַנֵּי דְבֵית רִבִּי כֵּן. הַיְּתוֹמָה. רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אָמַר. הָאוֹנֵס חַיָיב וְהַמְפַתֶּה פָטוֹר. וְיֵשׁ אָדָם מוֹחֵל עַל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ בִרְשׁוּתוֹ. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. דָּמַר רִבִּי בּוּן בַּר חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי זְעוּרָה. קְנָס אֵין בּוֹ מִשָּׁעָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. עָמְדָה בַדִּין עַד שֶׁלֹּא מֵת אָבִיהָ הֲרֵי הֵן שֶׁלָּאָב. מַת הָאָב הֲרֵי הֵן שֶׁלָּאַחִין. אִם אוֹמֵר אַתְּ כֵּן קְּנָס כֵּן הוּא מִשָּׁעָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה. הֲרֵי הֵן שֶׁלָּאַחִין מִשָּׁעָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה. רָבָא בְשֵׁם רַב חִסְדָּא. בְּבוֹשֶׁת וּפְגָם הָדָא מַתְנִיתָא. דְּרִבִּי מָנָא אָמַר. מָהוּ. הָאוֹנֵס חַיָיב בַּכֹּל וְהַמְפַתֶּה פָטוֹר מִן הַכֹּל. רִבִּי אָבִין אָמַר. שַׁמַּי בָּעֵי. מָהוּ הָאוֹנֵס חַיָיב וְהַמְפַתֶּה פָטוֹר. הָאוֹנֵס חַיָיב בַּכֹּלּ וְהַמְפַתֶּה פָטוֹר מִן הַבּוֹשֶׁת וּמִן הַפְּגָם וְחַיָיב בִּקְנָס. וְהָא רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. אוֹ. הָאוֹנֵס פָּטוּר מִן הַבּוֹשֶׁת וְחַיָיב בִּקְנָס וְהַמְפַתֶּה פָטוֹר מִן הַכֹּל. הַהִיא דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגָּלִילִי הִיא.

HALAKHAH: “About an orphan girl who had been preliminarily married and was divorced,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it turns out that Rebbi Eleazar follows the opinion of his teacher Rebbi Aqiba. Just as Rebbi Aqiba said that she can collect the fine and it belongs to her, so Rebbi Eleazar said that she can collect the fine and it belongs to her. Then also for a seduced one? Rebbi Jeremiah said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, explain it that she remitted it to him. Can anybody remit anthing that does not belong to him? Explain it for an orphan; as it was stated in the House of Rebbi thus: The orphan, Rebbi Eleazar said that the rapist has to pay her but the seducer does not. Can anybody remit something which is not in his possession? Let us hear from the following, as Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said in the name of Rebbi Ze‘ura: The fine is not due from the first moment on. As we have stated there: “If she came to court before her father died, [the payments due] belong to her father and if the father died they belong to the brothers.” If you say that the fine is due from the first moment, it would belong to the brothers from the first moment! Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Ḥisda: The Mishnah deals with shame and diminution of value. As Rebbi Mana said, how is it? The rapist is obligated for everything and the seducer is free from everything. Rebbi Abin said, [Rebbi] Shammai asked: What does it mean that the rapist has to pay but the seducer does not? The rapist has to pay everything but the seducer is free [from paying] for shame and diminution of value but is obligated for the fine. That is Rebbi Aqiba’s. Or, the rapist is free [from paying] for shame and diminution of value but is obligated for the fine but the seducer is free from everything? That is Rebbi Yose the Galilean’s.

Mishnah

משנה: וְאֵי זֶהוּ הַבּוֹשֶׁת הַכֹּל לְפִי הַמְבַיֵישׁ וְהַמִּתְבַּיֵישׁ. פְּגָם רוֹאִין אוֹתָהּ כְּאִילּוּ הִיא שִׁפְחָה נִמְכֶּרֶת כַּמָּה הָיְתָה יָפָה וְכַמָּה הִיא יָפָה. קְנָס שָׁוֶה בְּכָל אָדָם. וְכָל שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ קִיצְבָּה מִן הַתּוֹרָה שָׁוֶה בְּכָל אָדָם.

MISHNAH: How much is shame worth? Everything depends on the offender and the offended. For diminution of value one considers her as if she were a slave girl to be sold; how much would she have been worth before and how much would she be worth now. The fine is equal for everybody since everything determined by the Torah is equal for everybody.

Halakhah

הלכה: אֵי זֶהוּ הַבּוֹשֶׁת. הַכֹּל לְפִי הַמְבַיֵישׁ וְהַמִּתְבַּיֵישׁ כול׳. לֹא דוֹמֶה הַמְבַיֵישׁ אֶת הַגָּדוֹל לַמְבַיֵישׁ אֶת הַקָּטָן. לֹא דוֹמֶה מִתְבַּיֵישׁ מִן הַגָּדוֹל לַמִּתְבַּיֵישׁ מִן הַקָּטָן. בּוֹשֶׁת הַגָּדוֹל מְרוּבָּה וְנִזְקוֹ מְמוּעָט. בּוֹשֶׁת הַקָּטָן מְמוּעָט וְנִזְקוֹ מְרוּבָּה.

HALAKHAH: “How much is shame worth? Everything depends on the offender and the offended,” etc. One cannot compare one who is offended by a person of high standing to one offended by a person of low standing. The shame for a person of high standing is great but the injury he incurs is small. The shame for a person of low standing is small but the injury he incurs is great.

Mishnah

משנה: כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ מֶכֶר אֵין קְנָס וְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ קְנָס אֵין מֶכֶר. קְטַנָּה יֵשׁ לָהּ מֶכֶר וְאֵין לָהּ קְנָס. נַעֲרָה יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס וְאֵין לָהּ מֶכֶר. הַבּוֹגֶרֶת לֹא מֶכֶר וְלֹא קְנָס.

MISHNAH: Anytime there is a sale there is no fine and anytime there is a fine there is no sale. The underage girl is subject to sale but not to fine; the adolescent can claim a fine but has no sale; the adult has neither fine nor sale.

Halakhah

הלכה: כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ מֶכֶר כול׳. רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא. בְּרַם כָּרַבָּנִין יֵשׁ מֶכֶר וּקְנָס כְּאַחַת. כְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר. מִבַּת יוֹמָהּ וְעַד גֹ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד יֵשׁ לָהּ מֶכֶר וְאֵין לָהּ קְנָס. מִבַּת גֹ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד עַד שֶׁתִּבְגּוֹר יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס וְאֵין לָהּ מֶכֶר. בּוֹגֶרֶת לֹא מֶכֶר וְלֹא קְנָס. כְּרַבָּנִין. מִבַּת יוֹמָהּ וְעַד גֹ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד מֶכֶר וּקְנָס כְּאַחַת. מִבַּת גֹ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד עַד שֶׁתָּבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת יֵשׁ לָהּ מֶכֶר וְאֶין לָהּ קְנָס. מִשֶּׁתָּבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת וְעַד שֶׁתִּבְגּוֹר יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס וְאֵין לָהּ מֶכֶר. בּוֹגֶרֶת לֹא מֶכֶר וְלֹא קְנָס.

HALAKHAH: “Anytime there is a sale,” etc. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: This is Rebbi Meïr’s. But for the rabbis there can be sale and fine together. Following Rebbi Meïr: From one day old until the age of 3 years and one day there is sale but no fine. From the age of 3 years and one day until she becomes an adult there is a fine but no sale. The adult, neither sale nor fine. Following the rabbis: From one day old until the age of 3 years and one day there is sale and fine together. From the age of 3 years and one day until she grows two pubic hairs there is sale but no fine. After she grows two pubic hairs until she becomes an adult there is a fine but no sale. The adult, neither sale nor fine.

תַּמָּן תַּנִינָן. הַבָּא עַל נַעֲרָה מְאוֹרָסָה אֵינוֹ חַיָיב עַד שֶׁתְּהֵא נַעֲרָה בְתוּלָה מְאוֹרָסָה בְבֵית אָבִיהָ. בָּאוּ עָלֶיהָ שְׁנַיִם. הָרִאשׁוֹן בִּסְקִילָה וְהַשֵּׁינִי בְחֶנֶק. רִבִּי יָסָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם לָעְזָר. דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא. בְּרַם כְּרַבָּנִין אֲפִילוּ [קְטַנָּה]. מַאי טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי מֵאִיר. נַעַר חָסֵר כָּתוּב בַּפָּרָשָׁה. מַה מְקַיְימִין רַבָּנִין נַעַר. רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ אָמַר בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. נַעֲרָה אַחַת שְׁלֵימָה כָתוּב בַּפָּרָשָׁה. לִימְּדָה עַל כָּל הַפָּרָשָׁה שֶׁהִיא גְדוֹלָה. מָתִיב רִבִּי מֵאִיר לָרַבָּנִין. הֲרֵי הַמּוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע הֲרֵי כָתוּב בּוֹ נַעַר וְהִיא גְדוֹלָה. דְּאֵין הַקְּטַנָּה נִסְקֶלֶת. מַה עָבְדִין לָהּ רַבָּנִן. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבִין. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ דֶּרֶךְ זָכְרוּת.

There, we have stated: “He who comes to a preliminarily married adolescent is guilty only if she was an adolescent, virgin, preliminarily married, in her father’s house. If two came upon her, the first is stoned and the second strangled.” Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: That is Rebbi Meïr’s. But following the rabbis even if she is a minor. What is Rebbi Meïr’s reason? “A lad” is written in the paragraph. How do the rabbis explain “a lad”? Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Once in the paragraph it is written “a young woman”; this teaches that in the entire paragraph she is an adult. Rebbi Meïr objected to the rabbis: In the matter of the calumniator, “a lad” is written and she is an adult since a minor is not stoned! What do the rabbis with this? Rebbi Abin said, explain it if he came to her as to a male.

יַעֲקֹב בַּר בָּא בְעָא קוֹמֵי רַב. הַבָּא עַל הַקְּטַנָּה מָהוּ. אָמַר לֵיהּ. בִּסְקִילָה. הַבָּא עַל הַבּוֹגֶרֶת מָהוּ. אָמַר לֵיהּ. אֲנִי אֶקְרָא נַעֲרָה וְלֹא בוֹגֶרֶת. וּקְרָא נַעֲרָה וְלֹא קְטַנָּה. תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר עִינָּהּ לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַקְּטַנָּה לִקְנָס. וּקְרָא תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר עִינָּהּ לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַבּוֹגֶרֶת לִקְנָס. אָמַר רַב. אַף עַל גַּב דִּנְצָחֵיהּ יַעֲקֹב בְּדִינָה הֲלָכָה. הַבָּא עַל הַקְּטַנָּה בִּסְקִילָה וְהִיא פְטוּרָה. רִבִּי אָבִין בְשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. וְלָמָּה. שָׁמַע לָהּ מִן הָדָא וּמֵת הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר שָׁכַב עִמָּהּ לְבַדּוֹ. וְכִי אֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין שֶׁאֵין לַנַּעֲרָה חֵט מָוֶת. מַה תַלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְלַנַּעֲרָה לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה דָבָר אֵין לַנַּעֲרָה חֵט מָוֶת. לְהָבִיא הַבָּא עַל הַקְּטַנָּה מְאוֹרָסָה בִסְקִילָה וְהִיא פְטוּרָה.

Jacob bar Abba asked before Rav: What is the law for him who comes to a minor? He said to him, by stoning. What is the law for him who comes to an adult? He said to him, I am reading “an adolescent”, not an adult. Read “an adolescent”, not a minor! “‘Because he mistreated her’, that includes a minor for a fine”, read ‘because he mistreaded her’, that includes an adult for a fine! Rav said, even though Jacob won the logical argument, practice is that he who comes to a minor is [punished] by stoning but she is free. Rebbi Abin in the name of Samuel: Why? He understood it from the following: “The man who had lain with her alone should die.” Did we not know that “the girl has not committed a capital crime”? Then why does the verse say: “Do not do anything to the girl, the girl has not committed a capital crime”? That includes him who comes to a preliminarily married underage girl that he is stoned and she is free.

Mishnah

משנה: הָאוֹמֵר פִּיתִּיתִי אֶת בִּתּוֹ שֶׁלִּפְלוֹנִי מְשַׁלֵּם בּוֹשֶׁת וּפְגָם עַל פִּי עַצְמוֹ וְאֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם קְנָס. הָאוֹמֵר גָּנַבְתִּי וְטָבַחְתִי וּמָכַרְתִי מְשַׁלֵּם אֶת הַקֶּרֶן עַל פִּי עַצְמוֹ וְאֵין מְשַׁלֵּם לֹא תַשְׁלוּמֵי כֶפֶל וְלֹא תַשְׁלוּמֵי אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִישָּׁה. הֵמִית שׁוֹרִי אֶת פְּלוֹנִי אוֹ שׁוֹרוֹ שֶׁלִּפְלוֹנִי הֲרֵי זֶה מְשַׁלֵּם עַל פִּי עַצְמוֹ. הֵמִית שׁוֹרִי עַבְדּוֹ שֶׁלִּפְלוֹנִי אֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם עַל פִּי עַצְמוֹ. זֶה הַכְּלָל כָּל הַמְשַׁלֵּם יוֹתֵר עַל מַה שֶׁהִזִּיק אֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם עַל פִּי עַצְמוֹ.

MISHNAH: One who says, I seduced X’s daughter, pays for shame and diminution of value on his own testimony but he does not pay the fine. One who says, I stole and I slaughtered or sold, pays the value on his own testimony but neither double restitution nor four or five times. My ox killed X or X’s ox, he pays on his own testimony. My ox killed X’s slave, he does not pay on his own testimony. This is the principle: Anybody who has to pay more than the damage he caused does not pay on his own testimony.

Halakhah

הלכה: הָאוֹמֵר פִּיתִּיתִי אֶת בִּתּוֹ שֶׁלִּפְלוֹנִי כול׳. רִבִּי יִצְחָק שָׁאַל. מָהוּ שֶיְּשַׁלֵּם דְּמֵי הַעֶבֶד מִפִּי עַצְמוֹ. מַה צְרִיכָה לֵיהּ. כָּל שְׁלֹשִׁים קְנָס אוֹ יוֹתֵר מִדָּמָיו קְנָס. אִין תֵּימַר. כָּל שְׁלֹשִׁים קְנָס. [אֵין] מְשַׁלֵּם. אִין תֵּימַר. יוֹתֵר מִדָּמָיו קְנָס. (אֵינוֹ) מְשַׁלֵּם. תַּמָּן תַּנִינָן. הֵמִית שׁוֹרְךָ אֶת עַבְדִּי. וְהוּא אוֹמֵר. לֹא הֵמִית. מַשְׁבִּיעָךְ אֲנִי. וְאָמַר אָמֵן. [פָּטוּר]. אָמַר רִבִּי חַגַּיי קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁהֵמִית עֶבֶד מוּכֶּה שְׁחִין. אָמַר לוֹ. אָמוּר דְּבַתְרָהּ. הֵמִית שׁוֹרְךָ אֶת בְּנִי. וְהוּא אוֹמֵר. לֹא הֵמִית. מַשְׁבִּיעָךְ אֲנִי. וְאָמַר אָמֵן. חַיָיב. וּפָתְרָהּ כְּמוּכֶּה שְׁחִין וִיהֵא פָטוּר. אָמַר רִבִּי חַגַּיי קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. תִּיפְתָּר כְּמָאן דָּמַר. וְנָתַן פִּדְיוֹן נַפְשׁוֹ. שֶׁלַּמַּזִּיק. אָמַר לֵיהּ. וְאִין כְּמָאן דְּאָמַר. וְנָתַן פִּדְיוֹן נַפְשׁוֹ. שֶׁלַּמַּזִּיק. כּוּלּוֹ קְנָס. מָהוּ שֶׁיֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ. צֵא יְדֵי שָׁמַיִם. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. מַעֲשֶׂה בְרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל שֶׁהִפִּיל שֶׁן טֵבִי עַבְדּוֹ. אָתָא גַבֵּי דְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ. אָמַר לֵיהּ. טֵבִי עַבְדִּי מָצָאתִי עִילָּה לְשַׁחְרְרוֹ. אָמַר לֵיהּ. וּמַה בְיָדָךְ. וְאֵין קְנָסוֹת אֶלָּא בְּבֵית דִּין וּבְעֵדִים. וְיֹאמְרוּ לוֹ. צֵא יְדֵי שָׁמַיִם. הָדָא אָמְרָה שֶׁאֵין אוֹמְרִין לוֹ צֵא יְדֵי שָׁמַיִם. רִבִּי גַמְלִיאֵל בֵּירִבִּי אֲבִינָה בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי מָנָא. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל כְּמָאן דָּמַר. מוּתָּר לְשַׁחְרְרוֹ. אָמַר לֵיהּ. כָּל גַּרְמָהּ אָמְרָה שֶׁאָסוּר לְשַׁחְרְרוֹ. דִּי לֹא כֵן הָיוּ לוֹ לְשַׁחְרֵר מִשָּׁעָה רִאשׁוֹנָה.

HALAKHAH: “One who says, I seduced X’s daughter,” etc. Rebbi Isaac asked: Would he have to pay the slave’s value on his own testimony? What is his problem? Are the entire 30 [šeqel] a fine or is only the excess over his value a fine? If you say, the entire 30 [šeqel] are a fine, he does not pay. If you say, the excess over his value is a fine, he pays. There, we have stated: “‘Your ox killed my slave’! The other said, ‘he did not kill’. ‘I want you to swear’ and he said ‘Amen’, he is free.” Rebbi Ḥaggai said before Rebbi Yose, explain it if he killed a slave afflicted with boils. He said to him, what does it say afterwards? “‘Your ox killed my son’! The other said, ‘he did not kill’. ‘I want you to swear’ and he said ‘Amen’, he is obligated.” Why do you not explain it that he was afflicted with boils, then he would be free. Rebbi Ḥaggai said before Rebbi Yose, explain it following him who says “he shall pay the redemption of his person”, the one’s who caused the damage. He said to him, if following him who says “he shall pay the redemption of his person”, the one’s who caused the damage, everything is a fine. Can one say to him, be also in the clear with Heaven? Let us hear from the following: It happened that Rabban Gamliel knocked out his slave Tebi’s tooth. He came to Rebbi Joshua and said to him, I found a reason to free my slave Tebi. He said to him, what do you have in your hand? Fines can be imposed only by witnesses! Could they not say to him, do your duty before Heaven? That means one does not tell him, do your duty before Heaven! Rebbi Gamliel ben Avina asked before Rebbi Mana: Does Rabban Gamliel follow him who said, it is permitted to manumit? He said to him, the story in itself implies that it is forbidden to manumit since, otherwise, he could have freed him immediately!