Rujukan Talmud untuk Ulangan 23:3: Jerusalem Talmud Ketubot, Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot, Jerusalem Talmud Terumot & Jerusalem Talmud Horayot

MISHNAH: The following adolescent girls¹The biblical law prescribes (Deut. 22:28–29) that the man raping נַעֲרָה בְתוּלָה “a virgin adolescent girl” has to pay her father 50 šeqel and must marry her. In the corresponding law about the seducer of a virgin (Ex. 22:15) he has to pay if he does not marry the girl. In that paragraph, the adolescent is not mentioned; but since it is stated that the father has the right to withhold her from the seducer, it follows that the girl cannot be an adult; she must be underage or adolescent. An adolescent is a girl in the first 6 months after she grows two pubic hairs, cf. Nedarim Chapter 10, Note 1. The age at which the fine can be claimed is the topic of Halakhah 3:9. can claim a fine: From someone who has intercourse with a bastard girl²Obviously, one who rapes or seduces an eligible Jewish girl has to pay. The Mishnah enumerates only those categories where there might be an argument that he should not be required to pay. Each category is discussed in the Halakhah. A bastard is excluded from contracting a valid marriage in the native congregation in Deut. 23:3., 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 age³Cf. Mishnah 1:2.. 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 wife⁴If she was divorced or became a widow before the final marriage. The preliminary marriage activates all incest prohibitions implied by marriage., or his paternal uncle’s wife⁵But for a capital crime he does not pay since there cannot be two punishments for one crime. Extirpation is a divine punishment, outside the purview of a human court., or a menstruating girl; he has to pay the fine since it is not a capital crime⁶This word is in the ms. and editio princeps but should be deleted. even though he is subject to extirpation.

It turns out that Rebbi Ḥuna follows Abba Shaul, as we have stated²⁷A different formulation, stressing the opposition of the anonymous majority, in Babli 39b.: “Abba Shaul says, one who brings his sister-in-law into his house because of beauty or another reason²⁸Other than fulfilling the biblical commandment. commits intercourse of prostitution and the child is close to be a bastard²⁹Who is forbidden to marry a Jewish partner, Deut. 23:3..”

Rebbi Ḥaggai asked before Rebbi Yose: Is the child a bastard following Rebbi Jehudah? He said to him, “No one with a damaged testicle or with cut-off penis may marry⁶²Deut. 23:2. The prohibition of the father’s wife is verse 1, the rule of bastardy is verse 3; cf. Chaper 4, Note 211.” interrupts the argument. It interrupted the argument in the matter of the father’s wife. He retorted, the father’s wife was part of the set of all incest prohibitions; it was selected from this set to teach about bastardy for all incest prohibitions⁶³This is an application of Rule 9 of R. Ismael (Introduction to Sifra): “Anything in a set which was selected from that set to teach, was not selected to teach only for itself but for the entire set.”
The prohibition of the stepmother is contained in the set of all incest prohibitions (Lev., Chapters 18,20). Therefore, if the result of incest with a stepmother is a bastard, the result of any other incestuous relation must be a bastard (cf. Mishnaiot 4:14,15).. (Let the father’s wife be selected to teach about bastardy for all incests prohibitions.) Similarly, let the rape victim be selected to teach a prohibition concerning all rape victims⁶⁴R. Ḥaggai wants to argue that since according to R. Jehudah, the prohibition of a person who had unmarried sex with his father is written in one verse with the prohibition of the father’s wife, all relationships that would be incestuous in the case of marriage should be prohibited.. He said to him, the father’s wife was part of the set of all incest prohibitions; it was selected from this set to teach about bastardy for all incest prohibitions. Can you say that the rape victim was in a set of all rape victims, that it could teach a prohibition concerning all rape victims⁶⁵There does not exist a set of women prohibited as incestuous by extramarital sex; the set to which Rule 9 might be applied contains only the woman who had slept with his father. The parallel reasoning implied by R. Ḥaggai does not work.? Why cannot the father’s wife be selected to teach about the rape victims in her case? He said to him, is she is the father’s wife, she is not his rape victim; is she is the father’s rape victim, she is not his wife.