Commentaire de citation sur Le Deutéronome 22:24

And the phrase she were at all ‘to a man’ means that she is [promised] unto him but [still] is in her father’s house, and has not yet come to his [the man’s] house, and [hence] this must refer to a betrothed girl, for Scripture calls her too, the wife of his fellow.⁴⁸Deuteronomy 22:23. Thus she is already called the wife of the man to whom she is betrothed, in the same way that here he is described as her ish (man) — literally “husband.” Now our Rabbis did not explain [that this verse refers to a fully-married wife, and teaches] that a husband himself can annul the vows of his married wife which she “brought along” from her father’s house to his house, as would seem the simple meaning of the verse, for if that were so, why would Scripture have to repeat itself and say [in Verse 11], And if a woman vowed in her husband’s house, for if he can annul [even] those vows which preceded [his marriage to her], surely [he can annul] those vows which [she makes whilst she is] in his house!⁴⁹So why, then would the Torah state the obvious (in Verse 11): And if a woman vowed in her husband’s house etc.? It must be because Verses 7-9 speak about a betrothed woman, in which case both the father and the betrothed do jointly annul her vow. “If the father revoked the vow but not the betrothed, or if the betrothed revoked it but not the father, the vow is not revoked. Still less need it be said if one of them explicitly confirmed the vow” (Nedarim 67a). — It should be noted that the term “betrothed” in this connection has reference to the actual “betrothal” of a man to a woman to be his wife [not a mere “engagement”]. In the eyes of the Jewish law she is then considered his wife, except that the consummation of the marriage takes place some time after the betrothal. And [even without resorting to this reasoning], it is the tradition [of the Rabbis] which decides [the true meaning of the verses].

אשר לא ארשה, for if the girl had been betrothed to someone the penalty would be death by stoning as spelled out in Deuteronomy 22,24.

Our Sages explained: The cry of a certain maiden... with a horrible death. They stripped her bare and smeared her with honey, and the bees stung her to death. You might ask: How did Rashi know she was a maiden? The answer is: From a gezeirah shavah to (Devarim 22:24): “על דבר אשר לא צעקה בעיר, which speaks of a betrothed maiden. There is a question on the first explanation: How could Hashem be unsure of the facts, not to know whether it was indicative of their conduct so that they should be destroyed? Thus Rashi explains, “The cry of a certain maiden,” [according to which the verse means:] If they killed her unjustly, as she claimed [when she cried out, then they will be destroyed]. And even if they killed her justly, “I will know” what to do [as to punishing them for their other sins]. But the actual deed was well known to Hashem. (Maharshal)