Virgin Maiden

One who seduces a virgin maiden is fined fifty sela'im pure silver and this is a fine. And if he raped her the same penalty would be levied. This fine is a positive commandment from the Torah, as it says "the man who lay with her shall pay the girl’s father fifty [shekels of] silver":

What is considered seduction and what is considered rape? Seduction is an encounter she desired. Rape is when he has relations with her against her will. Any woman who has relations in the field is presumed to have been raped and we treat such a case as a rape case until witnesses testify that she had relations of her own volition. And any woman who has relations in the city is presumed to have been seduced since she did not cry out in distress, unless witnesses testify that she was raped, for example if a man drew his sword and said "if you scream I will kill you."

The seduced woman who doesn't want to marry her seducer, or if her father did not want her to wed him, or if the seducer didn't want to enter [into marriage]- the seducer pays the [fifty sela'im] penalty and goes on his way and we don't force him to marry her. However if he does want to marry her, he doesn't pay a fine rather he writes her a ketubah like one would for any virgin maiden. However regarding the woman who was raped, if she or her father don't want her to marry her rapist they can decline collect the [fifty sela'im] penalty and go on their way. If she and her father want her to marry her rapist but the rapist doesn't want to marry her, we force him to marry her and he has to pay the penalty, as it states: "she shall be his wife" and this is a positive commandment. Even if she is lame, blind, or has leprosy he is forced to marry her and he cannot divorce her forever, as it is stated: "he shall never have the right to divorce her." This is a negative commandment.

And this woman does not get a ketubah, since the only reason the Rabbis instituted a ketubah for a woman was so that she would not be viewed lightly and easy to divorce in her husband's eyes. And this husband (her rapist) is not allowed to divorce her.

If the girl he raped was forbidden to him, even if the reason is from a positive commandment, or id she were a shn'iyah (ie forbidden via Rabbinic prohibition) he should not marry her. Furthermore, if he witnesses immoral behavior of hers after he married her he should divorce her. As it states: "she shall be his wife." Namely a woman who is (halachically) fit for him.

A High Priest who raped or seduced a virgin maiden, is not allowed to marry her because he is commanded to marry a virgin maiden and when the time comes to marry her she is no longer a virgin maiden. If they did marry, he must give her a get.

Even though it says by a rapist: "he shall never have the right to divorce her" since [this negative commandment] is preceded by a positive commandment of: "she shall be his wife" this is a negative commandment that can be fixed by fulfilling the positive commandment. Thus, lashes are only administered if he does not fulfill the associated positive commandment like I will explain in The Laws of Sanhedrin. Therefore a rapist who sinned by divorcing his wife is forced to return to her and we don't give him lashes. However if his divorcée dies before he could remarry her, or she became betrothed to someone else, or if he was a Kohein who's forbidden from marrying a divorcée- he would get lashes since he violated a negative commandment and he is unable to fulfill the accompanying positive commandment.

The rapist or seducer isn't obligated to pay the fine until he has relations with her [in the ordinary fashion] with witnesses present, and he doesn't need to be forewarned. At what age is the girl eligible to receive the fine? After she is three full years until she reaches bagrus (twelve and a half). If she had relations before she was three this is not considered relations. If one were to have relations with her from when she's reaches bagrus there is no fine, as it states "virgin maiden" and not "bogeres".

Whether she has a father or doesn't have a father there still is the fine. These women do not collect the fine: a bogeres (twelve and a half), a girl who has dissolved a marriage via mi'un, a woman who does not display biologically mature female characteristics, a mentally incompetent girl, a deaf mute, and a girl who had a bad name (ie reputation) when she was younger and two witnesses testified that she wanted to engage in relations with them, and a woman divorced from nisuin (chuppah, final stage of marriage) who is still a virgin maiden. However a woman divorced from eirusin (engagement, first part of marriage) if she was raped she's eligible to receive the fine, and she keeps the payment of the fine. However if she was seduced she's not entitled to the fine.

A convert, a girl who was taken captive, and a freed maidservant- if they converted, were redeemed or freed and she is three years old or less she can collect the fine. If she was three years old and a one day [ie older] when she converted, was freed, or redeemed she is not eligible to collect the fine. Since relations she has after this age are considered significant, she is like other non-virgins.

If the virgin maiden was forbidden to the rapist or the seducer- if this prohibition's punishment was kareis, for example: his sister, his aunt, a niddah or similar types of unions- or she was forbidden to him due to a negative commandment [ie one that does not carry with it the penalty of kareis or death] if he was warned, he is administered lashes and doesn't pay the fine since a person isn't punished via both lashes and a monetary payment. However, if he was not warned, since he isn't liable for lashes he does pay the fine.

If the woman was forbidden to him due to a positive commandment, or she was a sh'niyah or something similar that made her forbidden due to a Rabbinic enactment, whether he was or wasn't warned he is obligated to pay the fine since in these cases there is no punishment via lashes.

If the woman was forbidden to him due to a punishment of death by Beis Din, for example: his daughter, daughter-in-law, or similar- whether he was or wasn't warned he is exempt from paying the fine, as it states (Exodus 21:22): "If there will not be a [fatal] accident, he should be punished" the implication being that there was a fatal accident, no punishment would be administered. Even though this woman was killed unintentionally, the man didn't intend [to hurt] her as it is written [Ibid.]: "When men fight, and one of them pushes a woman" we learn from here that the Torah doesn't differentiate between an intentional and unintentional action to exempt him from a monetary obligation. And it says (Leviticus 24:18): "A person who fatally strikes an animal shall reimburse", and (Leviticus 24:21): "one who fatally strikes a person shall die." Just as by the killing of an animal the Torah didn't differentiate between an intentional and unintentional action regarding him be make him liable for payment, so too by the killing a person the Torah didn't differentiate between an intentional and unintentional to exempt him from payment.

And this is the law regarding every transgression that carries a punishment of death by Beis Din- there is no financial obligation.

If [the rapist or seducer] has relations with her and she dies, he is exempt from the fine, as it states (Deuteronomy 22:29): "the man who lay with her must give to the maiden's father"and not "the father of the dead maiden." This case is referring to when she died before the case would be brought to court.

The fine of 50 silver pieces represents merely the payment for the pleasure of sexual relations. In addition, a seducer is obligated to pay for embarrassment and damages in addition to the fixed amount mentioned by the Torah. A rapist, moreover, also pays for the pain [he caused the girl]. [A seducer is not required to make this payment,] because a girl who willingly engages in relations does not [suffer] pain. A girl who is raped does, as reflected by [Deuteronomy 22:29]: "because he violated her."

Thus, a seducer makes three payments: the fine, and compensation for embarrassment and damages. A rapist makes four payments: the fine, and compensation for embarrassment, pain and damages.

The fine is the same in all instances. Whether one has relations with the daughter of the High Priest, or the daughter of a convert or a bastard, the fine is 50 silver pieces. The amount paid for embarrassment, damages and pain is not uniform, however. Instead, the amount must be evaluated [by the court].

How is this evaluation made? With regard to embarrassment, everything is dependent on the identity of the person who is embarrassed, and the identity of the person who embarrasses her. The embarrassment suffered by a girl of high repute from a family of known lineage cannot be compared to the embarrassment suffered by a poor, ignoble maiden. And the embarrassment suffered at the hands of an important person of great stature cannot be compared to that suffered at the hands of a base and empty fellow.

On this basis, the judges consider the stature of [the rapist or the seducer] and his victim. They evaluate how much a father and the girl's family would give to prevent [these relations] from taking place with this individual. This is the amount [the man] is obligated to pay.

Damages [are evaluated] according to [the girl's] beauty. We look at her as if she were a maid-servant being sold in the marketplace: what price would she fetch as a virgin, and what price would she fetch as a non-virgin. For a man would like to buy a virgin maid-servant to give him to his servant, whose welfare and satisfaction he desires. [The rapist or the seducer] should pay the difference in the price. The compensation for pain is evaluated based on her youth and the size of her body, and his age and the size of his body. We evaluate how much a father would be willing to pay so that such [a daughter] would not suffer pain from such [a man], and [the rapist is obligated to] pay [this amount].

A seducer must compensate [the girl's father] for the embarrassment and damages immediately. He is not, however, required to pay the fine unless he does not marry [the girl], as [Exodus 22:16] states: "If her father refuses to allow him to marry her, then he must pay...." A rapist, by contrast, must make all four payments and marry her immediately. Therefore, whenever the woman desires to divorce or when she becomes widowed, she does not receive anything.

[The following laws apply when] two men entered into relations with her, one through vaginal intercourse and one through anal intercourse. If the man who had anal intercourse with her was first, he is liable for embarrassment and for damages. If he was second, he is liable only for embarrassment, because she has already suffered damages. The one who engaged in vaginal intercourse, whether first or last, is liable for the fine and all other payments. Nevertheless, the embarrassment and damages to a girl who had never engaged in relations at all cannot be compared to the embarrassment and damages to a girl who has engaged in anal intercourse.

We have already mentioned the girls for whom a fine need not be paid: They are ten: A bogeret, a girl who dissolved her marriage via mi'un, one who was divorced, an aylonit, a mentally incompetent girl, a deaf mute, a convert, a girl who had been taken captive, a freed slave, and one who has a tarnished reputation. A fine must be paid for all other girls.

Whenever a fine is required to be paid for a girl, compensation is also required for embarrassment and damages, and if she was raped she must also be compensated for the pain. Conversely, whenever a fine is not required to be paid for her, she is not entitled to compensation for embarrassment and damages if she is seduced or raped. Exceptions to this are a bogeret, a girl who had dissolved her marriage via mi'un, a mentally incompetent girl and a deaf mute. [If they are seduced, no payment is required at all.]

What is implied? If a man rapes a bogeret or a girl who had dissolved her marriage via mi'un, although a fine is not required to be paid, compensation is also required for embarrassment damages and pain. And a man who rapes a mentally incompetent girl or a deaf mute is required to make compensation for pain. One who seduces any of these girls is not liable at all.

A person is not ever liable to pay a fine because of his own admission. Instead, he is made liable by the testimony of witnesses. Therefore, [if a man] says: "I raped or seduced the daughter of so and so," he is not liable to pay a fine. He must, however, make restitution for the embarrassment and the damages [he caused]. Similarly, when a maiden files a legal claim against a man, saying "You raped me," or "You seduced me," and he denies the matter entirely, he is required to take a Rabbinic oath to support his claim, for if he admits his culpability, he would be liable for the embarrassment, the damages and the pain.

If a girl claims, "You raped me," and the man claims, "No, I seduced you," he is required to take an oath mandated by Scriptural law with regard to [the compensation for] the pain, and he must pay the damages and the embarrassment. [The oath is required] because he admitted a portion of the claim [made against him], as will be explained in [the section dealing with that subject].

The three payments made because of seduction, and the four payments made because of rape are made to the girl's father, for all the monetary benefit that accrues during a girl's youth belongs to her father. If her father is no longer alive [at the time of the rape or the seduction], [these payments are made] to her.

When a girl who was raped or seduced does not file a claim until [either] she reaches bagrut, she marries, or her father dies, she herself is entitled to the three or four payments [mentioned above]. If she appeared in court and filed a claim for payment, and then she reached bagrut or she married, the father is entitled to the payments. If the father dies after she files a claim for payment in court, the payments belong to her brothers, for they are her father's heirs. [The rationale is that] once she files a claim for payment in court, her father is considered to have acquired the payments.

When a girl was consecrated and then divorced, she is entitled to the fine, but only that. If she was raped or seduced, and afterwards, she becomes consecrated to another [man], her father is entitled to the fine and the damages, for consecration does not take a girl out of her father's domain [and nullify his rights over her].

I maintain that [the intent of] the Torah's statement [Leviticus 19:29], "Do not defile your daughter to have her play the harlot," is that a father should not say: "Since the obligation of the Torah for a seducer or a rapist was solely that he should give the father money, I will hire my virgin daughter to someone to have relations with her for whatever price I desire, or I will allow him to have relations for her without charge. For a man has the right to forgo monetary rights to him to any person he desires." To counter such thoughts, it is written: "Do not defile your daughter." The Torah obligates a rapist and a seducer to pay money rather than be punished by lashes when the matter happened by chance, without the knowledge of [the girl's] father, and she did not ready herself for [the relations]. For this is an extraordinary and uncommon matter. If, however, a person leaves his virgin daughter accessible for anyone to engage in relations with her, this will cause the entire earth to be filled with sexual immorality. For [ultimately], a father will marry his daughter and a brother his sister, [for in a sexually permissive society] a [girl] may become pregnant and give birth without knowing who the child's father is. When a person has his daughter act in this manner, she is considered to be a harlot, and both the man and the girl who engage in relations should be punished by lashes, as [Deuteronomy 23:18] states: "There shall not be a harlot." [In such an instance,] the man is not required to pay a fine, for the Torah prescribed a fine only in the instance of seduction or rape. When a girl prepares herself [for relations] either on her initiative or on that of her father, she is a harlot. And the prohibition against harlotry applies both with regard to a virgin and a non-virgin. For this reason our Sages stated that a girl who was reputed to have conducted herself immodestly while young is not entitled to a fine, as we have explained, for we can assume that she willingly opened herself to this experience.

When a person issues a slanderous report concerning a Jewish maiden, and the matter is discovered to be false, he should be punished by lashing, as [Deuteronomy 22:18] states: "And he shall be flogged." The warning [for this negative commandment] is derived from [Leviticus 19:16]: "Do not go about as a slanderer among your people." He must also give her father 100 sela'im of pure silver. If the girl is an orphan, the money is given to her.

When a person issues a slanderous report on a girl below majority, or on a bogeret, he is not liable for the fine or for lashes. He is not liable unless he issues a slanderous report regarding a na'arah. [This is derived from Deuteronomy 22:15]: "[They will] present signs of the maiden's virginity." The word נערה, "maiden" is written in a full form.

Cases pertaining to this law may be brought only in the time of the Temple, and in the presence of a court of 23 [judges], because there is the possibility that capital punishment will be involved. For if the accusation [brought by the husband] is discovered to be true, the girl must be executed. Cases involving rape or seduction, by contrast, are judged at all times in the presence of three [judges], as will be explained in Hilchot Sanhedrin.

It is one of the Torah's positive commandments for the wife of a man who issued a slanderous report about her to remain married to him forever, as [Deuteronomy 21:19] states: "She must remain his wife." This applies even if she is blind or a leper. If he divorces her, he transgresses a negative commandment, as the verse continues: "He may never send her away as long as he lives." [If he divorces her,] we compel him to remarry her, and he is not lashed, as explained with regard to a rapist. If, however, another man takes the initiative and consecrates her first, she dies, or he is a priest, who is forbidden to marry a divorcee, he should be punished by lashes for divorcing her.

If immodest behavior [on the woman's part is discovered], or it is discovered that she is forbidden to him as a result of a negative commandment, a positive commandment, or even [a Rabbinic commandment, such as the prohibition against] a sh'niyah, he should divorce her with a get. Why should the positive commandment [of remaining married to the woman] not supersede the negative commandment [of engaging in relations with an adulterous wife, or any other negative commandment] with regard to this man who issues a slanderous report or a rapist, and thus he should marry [or remain married to] this woman who is forbidden to him? For it is possible that she will not desire to remain married to him, and thus, both the positive and negative commandments will be observed.

What is implied by the term "issuing a slanderous report"? That a person should come to court and say: "I engaged in marital relations with this maiden, and I discovered that she was not a virgin. I investigated the matter and determined that she committed adultery after I had consecrated her. These are the witnesses in whose presence she committed adultery." The court then listens to the words of the witnesses and examines their testimony. If the truth of the claim is substantiated, the girl is executed by stoning. If the [girl's] father brings witnesses who nullify [the testimony] of the witnesses, and it is determined that they testified falsely, [the witnesses] should be executed by stoning, [the husband] should be flogged, and he should pay 100 sela'im. This is what is meant by [Deuteronomy 22:17]: "This is [evidence of] my daughter's virginity" - i.e., these are the witnesses who nullify [the testimony] of the husband's witnesses. If the husband brings other witnesses who nullify [the testimony] of the father's witnesses, the maiden and the father's witness should be executed by stoning. This is what is meant by [Deuteronomy 22:20]: "If the [accusation] is true." According to the Oral Tradition, the passage speaks of witnesses who nullify the testimony of other witnesses, and a third pair who nullify the testimony of the second pair.

When a man issues a slanderous report about his wife after she becomes a bogeret, he is free of liability for the lashes and for the fine, even though his witnesses testify that she committed adultery when she was a na'arah. If the accusations are proven true, [the girl] should be executed by stoning, even though she is a bogeret. [The rationale is] that she was a na'arah when she committed adultery.

Whenever a na'arah is not entitled to a fine if she was raped or seduced, [her husband] is not punished by flogging or by a fine if he issues a slanderous report about her. In addition, when a non-Jewish girl was converted below the age of three or a maidservant was freed below the age of three, [her husband] is not punished by flogging or by a fine if he issues a slanderous report about her. This applies even if a girl was conceived before her mother was converted and born after she was converted. [The rationale is based on Deuteronomy 22:19]: "Because [the husband] defamed the virtue of an Israelite maiden." [Implied is that] she must be conceived and born as an Israelite.

A man is not held liable when [his] witnesses are discovered to have lied [in the following situation]. He consecrates a maiden and divorces her, consecrates her again and then issues a slanderous report about her, bringing witnesses who say that she committed adultery during the first time she had been consecrated. Similarly, a man is not held liable to be flogged or for a fine when [his] witnesses are discovered to have lied [in the following situation]. He issues a slanderous report about his yevamah, bringing witnesses who say that she committed adultery during the time she had been consecrated to his brother. Whenever a man is not liable [to be flogged and fined], he may divorce his wife if he desires to.

A man is not liable [for these penalties] unless he engages in relations with his wife in the ordinary manner and issues a slanderous report about her, saying that she engaged in relations [previously] in the ordinary manner. If he engaged in anal intercourse with his wife, and said that he discovered that she was not a virgin, he is not liable [for these penalties]. He is, however, given stripes for rebellious conduct.

Similarly, if he says, "I discovered that she was not a virgin," but does not say that she committed adultery after he had consecrated her, or if he claims that she committed adultery but did not bring witnesses, but rather the witnesses came on their own initiative, he is not liable [for these penalties]. Nevertheless, the witnesses are executed if their testimony is nullified.

The Torah's statement [Deuteronomy 22:17]: "They will then spread the garment" is a euphemism. The intent is that they debate the private aspects of this matter. Similarly, [other expressions in the passage are to be understood non-literally. [For example,] "This is [evidence of] my daughter's virginity" means "these are the witnesses who nullify the testimony of the husband's witnesses." The death penalty issued "if the [accusation] is true" is issued only when she has committed adultery after being consecrated [and is observed by] witnesses, as implied by [Deuteronomy 22:21]: "acting immorally [in] her father's house." Before she is consecrated, the Torah does not hold her liable at all, and a person who engages in relations with her is liable only for a financial penalty, whether he seduced her or raped her.