וְזֶה־לְּךָ֞ תְּרוּמַ֣ת מַתָּנָ֗ם לְכָל־תְּנוּפֹת֮ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ לְךָ֣ נְתַתִּ֗ים וּלְבָנֶ֧יךָ וְלִבְנֹתֶ֛יךָ אִתְּךָ֖ לְחָק־עוֹלָ֑ם כָּל־טָה֥וֹר בְּבֵיתְךָ֖ יֹאכַ֥ל אֹתֽוֹ׃
Inilah pula yang menjadi milikmu: persembahan khusus dari pemberian mereka, yaitu segala persembahan unjukan orang Israel; semuanya itu telah Kuberikan kepadamu, kepada anak-anakmu yang laki-laki dan yang perempuan bersamamu, sebagai hak yang tetap untuk selamanya; setiap orang yang tahir di rumahmu boleh memakannya.
Rabbeinu Bahya
A Midrashic approach based on Sanhedrin 54: we are dealing with two separate laws (negative) in this verse. The expression ערות אביך refers to “your father’s wife” (as opposed to his genitals being exposed). The words ערות אמך refer to “your mother who is not the wife of your father.” As to the word ערות אשת אביך in verse 8, this refers to this prohibition applying even after the death of the father when the woman is no longer your father’s wife.
The words ערות אחותך בת אביך in verse 9 refer to a half-sister not born of the same mother or the daughter of your mother who does not share the same father with you.
The words מולדת בית או מולדת חוץ in that verse refer to the fact that no distinction is made if she is born out of wedlock or as a child of a legal marriage; in either event she is forbidden to you being considered your sister. You have to respect her kinship to you though it may not be the result of a formalised relationship. As to the Torah repeating in verse 11 ערות בת אשת אביך מולדת אביך, this all belongs together with the line ערות אחותך בת אביך, “your sister who has not been born of the same mother as you.” The repetition simply means that violating this prohibition makes the party doing so guilty of having violated two separate commandments. Someone who has sexual intercourse with a half-sister from another mother becomes guilty of transgressing the injunction against relations with a sister as well as against the injunction not to expose the nakedness of one’s father’s wife’s legal daughter.
The words ערות אחותך בת אביך in verse 9 refer to a half-sister not born of the same mother or the daughter of your mother who does not share the same father with you.
The words מולדת בית או מולדת חוץ in that verse refer to the fact that no distinction is made if she is born out of wedlock or as a child of a legal marriage; in either event she is forbidden to you being considered your sister. You have to respect her kinship to you though it may not be the result of a formalised relationship. As to the Torah repeating in verse 11 ערות בת אשת אביך מולדת אביך, this all belongs together with the line ערות אחותך בת אביך, “your sister who has not been born of the same mother as you.” The repetition simply means that violating this prohibition makes the party doing so guilty of having violated two separate commandments. Someone who has sexual intercourse with a half-sister from another mother becomes guilty of transgressing the injunction against relations with a sister as well as against the injunction not to expose the nakedness of one’s father’s wife’s legal daughter.
Rabbeinu Bahya
Others quoted by Rashi believe that the encounter described in the Book of Samuel between King Shaul and the spirit of Samuel was real and that Samuel indeed told Shaul all that is reported there in the text. Our sages in Chagigah 4 agree with the latter opinion. The problem with that interpretation is that if indeed Samuel really appeared to Shaul, how is it that a woman such as this necromancer was able to resurrect the dead by using the “science” called here שואל אוב?
The opinion of both Rav Hai Gaon and Rav Saadyah Gaon is that the woman claiming to be a necromancer most certainly did not resurrect Samuel, but that G’d did so. They write as follows according to Kimchi on our verses (end of commentary on verse 25) in the Book of Samuel. This is what the gaonim are reported as having said: it is quite far-fetched to assume that the woman knew the future nor that she knew how to resurrect the dead using methods attributed to necromancers. G’d revived Samuel in order for him to tell Shaul what would happen to him. The woman knew nothing of this at all. This is why she became so frightened and exclaimed: with a loud voice (verse 12-13) “why did you trick me when in fact you are Shaul?!”...she then said: “I have seen “elohim” rise from the earth.” The fact that she had asked in verse 11 “whom shall I raise for you?” was a figure of speech used by necromancers all the time and did not mean that they had the actual power to do so. So far the quote of Rabbi Saadyah Gaon in the commentary by Kimchi.
The opinion of both Rav Hai Gaon and Rav Saadyah Gaon is that the woman claiming to be a necromancer most certainly did not resurrect Samuel, but that G’d did so. They write as follows according to Kimchi on our verses (end of commentary on verse 25) in the Book of Samuel. This is what the gaonim are reported as having said: it is quite far-fetched to assume that the woman knew the future nor that she knew how to resurrect the dead using methods attributed to necromancers. G’d revived Samuel in order for him to tell Shaul what would happen to him. The woman knew nothing of this at all. This is why she became so frightened and exclaimed: with a loud voice (verse 12-13) “why did you trick me when in fact you are Shaul?!”...she then said: “I have seen “elohim” rise from the earth.” The fact that she had asked in verse 11 “whom shall I raise for you?” was a figure of speech used by necromancers all the time and did not mean that they had the actual power to do so. So far the quote of Rabbi Saadyah Gaon in the commentary by Kimchi.
Rashi
ויליד ביתו AND THEY THAT ARE BORN IN HIS HOUSE — This refers to the children of his maid-servants. A priest's wife may eat תרומה as may be derived from this verse, for she, too, is “an acquisition obtained by his money” (Ketuvot 57b; cf. Mishna Kiddushin 1:1… 'האשה נקנית בכסף וכו, one of the ways in which a marriage may be contracted is by the passing of money or its equivalent from the man to the woman. A wife is therefore a קנין כסף). But it may also be derived from another verse (Numbers 18:11) "[the heave-offering…] everyone that is clean in thy house may eat of it”. Thus is it expounded in Sifrei Bamidbar 117 2.