Comentario citado sobre Deuteronómio 22:27

הרודף אחר חבירו להרגו – as it is written regarding the engaged maiden (Deuteronomy 22:26): “[But you shall do nothing to the girl. The girl did not incur the death penalty,] for this case is like that of a man attacking another and murdering him.” An analogy is made [between] the killer and the betrothed maiden. Just as the betrothed maiden is given/intended to have her purity saved by killing the rapists, so too in the case of a killer the persecuted person is given to be saved by killing the killers. And the betrothed maiden is derived from Scripture as it is written (Deuteronomy 22:27): “[He came upon her in the open;] though the engaged girl cried for help, there was no one to save her,” behold there is someone to save her, one is obligated to save her in any manner that one can save her.

Just as with the pregnant woman, permission is given – to the savior to save her from this rape with the life of this rapist. Kill him only until he comes upon her, as it is written: there is nobody to save her, and if there is a savior, they should save her any way possible.

Therefore, one should say that the text recognised modesty within them, for it's the way of women when they come to the well to speak with a man who's found there. And with his also being a stranger who wasn't from their land, they surely asked him "what's your land, and from which people are you?" (Yonah 1:8), or at the very least they spoke with one another. But these were not like that group of women - rather, "they came" and immediately "they drew water and filled" etc, and they didn't make light in word, even one with the other, for they were embarassed in front of him. And this is "And he sat by the well" - for this reason they were all silent, "and they came", as has been said.
And further, he saw secondly that there was no agreement (lit. "closeness of mind", קירוב דעת) between the shepherds - for was it not the contrary, "And the shepherds came and drove them away" (Shemot 2:16) - for this reason he put himself nearby, to rise alone against the many shepherds, and he wasn't concerned that they would break his skull (Avodah Zarah 25b). And behold, our rabbis of blessed memory said (ibid.) that they wanted to rape them [this is a general statement about non-Jews in the Talmud, not specific to these shepherds], and Moshe came and saved them, as it says "the engaged girl cried out, and there was none to save her" (Devarim 22:27). And it's possible that this is alluded to in the verse by its saying "And they drove them off" (Shemot 2:17) with a mem [i.e. a masc. pl. object rather than a fem. pl. one] - and that is, since "they came and drew water and filled" (Shemot 2:16), then the shepberds came to them, to connect with them, and then "they drove away" (Shemot 2:17) - the daughters drove the shepherds away from them with their cries, for the young women cried out to seek saviours to come and save them, and then Moshe was angry with the shepherds and arose and saved the daughters from rape, and he also saved their water and gave their flocks to drink and didn't water the shepherds' flocks from this. And this is [true], since they overpowered the shepherds to drive them away, since it's as men do, that's why it doesn't say ותגרשום "and they (f.pl.) drove them (m.pl.) away", rather ויגרשום "and they (m.pl.) drove them (m.pl.) away".
And first it says "their father's flock" (Shemot 2:16) and after that it says "their flock" (Shemot 2:17), and after that "the flock" (Shemot 2:19). Therefore, it was in their being adult daughters that they 'owned' the flock for the need of their weddings/dowries from their father, their own flock alone, and their father's flock alone. And they, out of respect for their father, began to draw water and to fill [troughs] for their father's flock. And this is "and they drew water, and filled... to water their father's flock" (Shemot 2:16) - but it wasn't enough for their own flock. And in Moshe's coming to save them, he then watered their father's flock which was great, and drew water for us and filled troughs for our own flock. This is why he "watered the flock" (Shemot 2:19), since it includes their father's flock and also their own, enough to sate the needs of their father's flock. And they began to drink but hadn't finished when the shepherds struggled, since they hadn't finished watering their flocks when they drove off the shepherds, and Moshe watered their flocks from troughs which they themselves had filled, and he drew more water himself, and after that he drew water and watered their flocks, as is said.

ובשר בשדה טרפה [NEITHER SHALL YE EAT] ANY FLESH THAT IS TORN IN THE FIELD – The same holds good in case the animal has been torn in the house, only that Scripture speaks of what usually happens mentioning the field because it is the place where it is usual for cattle to be torn. A similar instance is, (Deuteronomy 22:27) “for he found her in the field”, but the same law would apply if he found her elsewhere. Another example is, (Deuteronomy 23:11) “Any man that is unclean by reason of uncleanliness that chanceth him by night”; the same law, however, applies to an uncleanliness that happens by day, but night is mentioned because Scripture speaks of what usually happens (Mekhilta). The Targum renders ובשר בשדה טרפה by ובשר תליש מן חיוא חיא “flesh that is torn off from a living animal”, i. e. flesh that has been torn off through a laceration caused by a wolf or a lion, from a living beast which is permitted to be eaten (e. g., a stag), or from cattle permitted to be eaten.