Talmud su Deuteronomio 22:29

HALAKHAH: “The following adolescent girls,” etc. It is written⁷Deut. 22:29, speaking of the rapist.: “She should be his wife,” one who can be his wife⁸This argument will be used at the end of the paragraph to exclude the slave-girl from consideration since she cannot legally marry anybody. The bastard can legally marry a proselyte or another bastard (Mishnah Qiddušin4:1). The inverse question could be asked if a bastard rapes a regular Jewish girl. The question is asked in the Babli, 29b.. Can the bastard girl be his wife? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, “he should weigh silver appropriate for the bride-price of virgins⁹Ex. 22:16, speaking of the seducer. In the Babli, 29b, R. Simeon ben Laqish argues differently.”, that added many virgins. Rebbi Ze‘ira said, if it had said “virgin’s brides-prices”; but it says only “appropriate for the bride-price of virgins”; the verse added them only for the bride-price¹⁰It implies only that even a virgin disqualified in general still has a claim to a full ketubah; e. g., if a bastard girl marries a proselyte.. But where was this said¹¹That the fine must be paid.? As Ḥizqiah stated: “If refusing her father should refuse⁹Ex. 22:16, speaking of the seducer. In the Babli, 29b, R. Simeon ben Laqish argues differently.,” not only if her father refuses; from where even if from Heaven they refuse¹²By a biblical prohibition.? The verse says “refusing should refuse”, in any case. But then a man who has intercourse with a slave girl should pay the fine! This is impossible, as it was stated: I could think that one who has intercourse with a Gentile slave-girl should be obligated, the verse says, “by bride-money he should take her as a wife to himself.” Only one whom he can marry; this excludes the Gentile slave whom he cannot marry¹³While the Gentile slave-girl of a Jewish owner becomes pseudo-Jewish by baptism in a miqweh, she would be able to contract a marriage only by manumission by which she would become a full-fledged proselyte. Cf. Halakhah 1:4, Notes 181–184.. But he cannot marry his sister and he pays the fine! There is a difference since she can be married to others. But his daughter can be married to others and he does not pay the fine¹⁴Mishnah 3:2.! There is a difference since it is a capital crime and nobody who commits a capital crime pays money¹⁵Even if he cannot be convicted because there were no two eyewitnesses to the act..

Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina said, a man who rapes or seduces an orphan girl does not have to pay²⁴Since Deut. 22:29 states that “the man who had intercourse with her has to give her father 50 silver [šeqel].” This seems to negate the obligation if there is no father to collect the fine.. Rebbi Abba bar Mamai said, that is a disagreement, it follows Rebbi Yose the Galilean²⁵He holds in Mishnah 3:7 that an underage girl which was preliminarily married and then divorced as a virgin has no claim to the fine (since by the preliminary marriage she was emancipated from her father’s power.) R. Aqiba holds that she can claim the fine for herself.. But following Rebbi Aqiba she can claim the fine and the fine becomes her property. Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah said “at less than three years and one day of age,” and is she not like an orphan²⁶Neither the proselyte nor the freedwoman are under the authority of a father; nevertheless, the Mishnah gives them the right to claim the fine.? And did we not state: “Because he raped her,²⁷Deut. 22:29. In the Babli, 44b, and Mekhilta dR. Ismael(Mišpaṭim 17; ed. Horovitz-Rabin p. 309), the inference is from Ex. 22:16. In any case, R. Yose the Galilean seems to contradict himself.” that includes an orphan for a fine, the words of Rebbi Yose the Galilean? Rebbi Aḥai said, explain it that he had intercourse with her when her father was alive; when her father died, he already had the obligation to give to her father²⁸For R. Yose the Galilean the fine belongs to the father’s heirs..

If he came to her before she was preliminarily married, then she was preliminarily married and divorced⁶⁰Does R. Yose the Galilean require the rapist to pay even after his victim was preliminarily married?. Does the statement of Rebbi Aḥai not imply that he pays? Did we not state: “For he had mistreated her,⁶¹Deut. 22:29. A reason is given for the punishment of the rapist; therefore, the punishment applies any time the reason applies.” to include the orphan for the fine, the words of Rebbi Yose the Galilean⁶²In Sifry Deut. 245, R. Eliezer holds that this refers only to the rapist, for whom the reason is given, but not to the seducer, for whom the rules do not extend to the orphan. In the Babli, 44b, R. Yose the Galilean applies the same rule to the orphaned victim of the seducer by an argument reproduced in Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Mišpaṭim, Neziqin 17.. Rebbi Aḥai said, explain it that he came to her before her father died; when subsequently her father died he already was obligated to give to her father⁶³R. Yose the Galilean is not contradicting himself; he only exempts the rapist or seducer of the preliminarily married girl if the sexual act happened while the girl was no longer in the father’s power. But if it happened earlier, even though the court proceedings had not started at the father’s death or the girl’s preliminary marriage, the obligation of rapist or seducer is not erased.. One came to her before her father died and subsequently her father died; one came to her before she was preliminarily married, subsequently she was divorced⁶⁴The two cases are parallel.. Rebbi Ze‘ira said that Rav Ḥisda asked: If one came to her before she was married and then she was married⁶⁵Who collects the fine if an adolescent was raped and then (both preliminarily and definitively) married before the rape was adjudicated in court?? Since you say there, she is under her husband but he has to pay to her father, so in this case she is under her husband but he has to pay to her father.