Midrash su Deuteronomio 22:27

And the shepherds came and drove them away (ibid., v. 17). If he had been a great and powerful priest of Midian, would they have dared drive them away? This teaches us that they oppressed him and drove his daughters away just as a divorced woman is driven away, as Scripture states: So he drove out the man (Gen. 3:24). But Moses stood up and saved them (Exod. 3:17). You learn from this that the shepherds were about to attack them, as is stated in the verse: The betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her (Deut. 22:27). And when they came to Reuel, their father … they said: “An Egyptian saved us” (Exod. 2:18).

"and flesh in the field, treifah ("torn"): This tells me only of the field. Whence do I derive (that a treifah is forbidden also) in the house? From (Leviticus 22:8) "Neveilah (carrion) and treifah he shall not eat." Treifah is likened to neveilah. Just as neveilah is forbidden both in the house and in the field, so, treifah. If so, why is "field" (specifically) written here? Scripture speaks of the common instance. Similarly, (in respect to a ravished maiden) (Devarim 22:27) "For in the field he found her" — Scripture speaks of the common instance. Similarly (Ibid. 20:6) "Who is the man who has planted a vineyard?" This tells me only of a vineyard. Whence do I derive (the same for) all trees? Scripture speaks of the common instance. Here, too, "in the field treifah" — Scripture speaks of the common instance.