## Ketubot Daf 40b

###### Ketubot 40b:1
[Ketubot 40b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/40b:1)

מַעֲשֵׂה מַחַט — שְׁלֹשִׁים?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
the **needlecraft** of a tailor, a common, less valuable skill, is the fine also **thirty** *sela*? Rather, just as with regard to the slaves, the sum is not dependent on the standing of the victim, so too with regard to a woman who was raped.


###### Ketubot 40b:2
[Ketubot 40b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/40b:2)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא: אִילּוּ בָּאוּ עָלֶיהָ שְׁנַיִם, אֶחָד כְּדַרְכָּהּ, וְאֶחָד שֶׁלֹּא כְּדַרְכָּהּ, יֹאמְרוּ: בָּעַל שְׁלֵימָה — חֲמִשִּׁים, בָּעַל פְּגוּמָה — חֲמִשִּׁים? אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: אִי הָכִי, גַּבֵּי עֶבֶד נָמֵי, יֹאמְרוּ: עֶבֶד בָּרִיא — שְׁלֹשִׁים, עֶבֶד מוּכֵּה שְׁחִין — שְׁלֹשִׁים?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rabbi Zeira said** a different proof: **Had two** men **engaged in forced intercourse with her, one vaginal intercourse, and one anal intercourse, they will say:** If one who **engaged in forced intercourse** with **an untainted** virgin pays **fifty** *sela*, does one who **engaged in forced intercourse** with her when she is **tainted,** i.e., after she has engaged in anal intercourse, also pay **fifty** *sela*? Apparently, the fifty *sela* is the fixed sum of the fine, while the rest of the payment varies on a case-by-case basis. **Abaye said to him:** This too is no proof, as **if so, with regard to a slave as well, they will say** if one whose ox gored **a healthy slave** pays **thirty** *sela*, does one whose ox gored **a slave afflicted with boils** also pay **thirty** *sela*?


###### Ketubot 40b:3
[Ketubot 40b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/40b:3)

אֶלָּא אָמַר אַבָּיֵי, אָמַר קְרָא: ״תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר עִינָּהּ״, הָנֵי תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר עִינָּהּ, מִכְּלָל דְּאִיכָּא בּוֹשֶׁת וּפְגָם. רָבָא אָמַר, אָמַר קְרָא: ״וְנָתַן הָאִישׁ הַשּׁוֹכֵב עִמָּהּ לַאֲבִי הַנַּעֲרָה חֲמִשִּׁים כָּסֶף״. הֲנָאַת שְׁכִיבָה חֲמִשִּׁים, מִכְּלָל דְּאִיכָּא בּוֹשֶׁת וּפְגָם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Abaye said** a different proof. **The verse says:** “Fifty shekels of silver…**because he tormented her”** (Deuteronomy 22:29); **these** fifty *sela* are the fine paid **because he tormented her.** From which it **may be inferred that there are** the additional payments of **humiliation and degradation** beyond that sum mentioned in the verse. **Rava said** an alternative proof. **The verse says: “And the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver”** (Deuteronomy 22:29). For **the pleasure of lying** with her he pays **fifty** *sela*; from which it **may be inferred that there are** the additional payments of **humiliation and degradation,** beyond payment of the fine.


###### Ketubot 40b:4
[Ketubot 40b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/40b:4)

וְאֵימָא לְדִידַהּ? אָמַר קְרָא: ״בִּנְעוּרֶיהָ בֵּית אָבִיהָ״, כׇּל שֶׁבַח נְעוּרֶיהָ — לְאָבִיהָ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And say** that these additional payments are paid **to her?** The Gemara answers that **the verse says:** “Between a father and his daughter, **being in her young womanhood, in her father’s house”** (Numbers 30:17), from which it is derived that **all profits** of **her young womanhood** go **to her father.**


###### Ketubot 40b:5
[Ketubot 40b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/40b:5)

וְאֶלָּא הָא דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא אָמַר רַב: מִנַּיִן שֶׁמַּעֲשֵׂה הַבַּת לְאָבִיהָ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְכִי יִמְכּוֹר אִישׁ אֶת בִּתּוֹ לְאָמָה. מָה אָמָה, מַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיהָ לְרַבָּהּ — אַף בַּת, מַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיהָ לְאָבִיהָ. לְמָה לִי? תִּיפּוֹק לֵיהּ מִ״בִּנְעוּרֶיהָ בֵּית אָבִיהָ״! אֶלָּא, הַהִיא בַּהֲפָרַת נְדָרִים הוּא דִּכְתִיב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **However,** with regard to **that** which **Rav Huna said** that **Rav said: From where** is it derived **that the handiwork of the daughter** goes **to her father?** It is **as it is stated: “And if a man sells his daughter as a maidservant”** (Exodus 21:7), juxtaposing his daughter to a maidservant: **Just as a maidservant, her handiwork** belongs **to her master,** as she was sold for that purpose; **so too a daughter, her handiwork** goes **to her father. Why do I** need this complicated proof? **Let him derive it** directly from the verse **“Being in her young womanhood, in her father’s house.” Rather,** this cannot be derived from that verse because **that** verse **is written with regard to the nullification of vows.** A young woman is subject to her father’s authority with regard to her vows, which he has the right to nullify. The matter of monetary rights is not addressed in that verse.


###### Ketubot 40b:6
[Ketubot 40b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/40b:6)

וְכִי תֵּימָא נֵילַף מִינֵּיהּ, מָמוֹנָא מֵאִיסּוּרָא לָא יָלְפִינַן. וְכִי תֵּימָא נֵילַף מִקְּנָסָא, מָמוֹנָא מִקְּנָסָא לָא יָלְפִינַן. אֶלָּא מִסְתַּבְּרָא דְּאָבִיהָ הָוֵי, דְּאִי בָּעֵי מָסַר לַהּ לִמְנֻוּוֹל וּמוּכֵּה שְׁחִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you say: Let us derive** monetary matters **from** vows, i.e., just as she is subject to her father’s authority with regard to vows the same is true with regard to monetary matters, **we do not derive monetary** matters **from ritual** matters. **And if you say: Let us derive** that her father receives payment **from** the *halakha* of **a fine,** i.e., just as the fine is paid to her father, as explicitly stated in the Torah, so too, other payments are also paid to her father, **we do not derive monetary** matters **from fines.** The payment of a fine is a novel element decreed by the Torah and cannot serve as a paradigm for standard monetary matters. **Rather,** the Gemara explains that **it is reasonable that** the payments of humiliation and degradation are paid **to her father, as if he wished** to do so he could **give her** hand in marriage **to a repulsive** man **or one afflicted with boils,** thereby humiliating her. Since her humiliation is under his control, payment for her humiliation is similarly his.


###### Ketubot 40b:7
[Ketubot 40b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/40b:7)

פְּגָם, רוֹאִין אוֹתָהּ כְּאִילּוּ הִיא שִׁפְחָה נִמְכֶּרֶת. הֵיכִי שָׁיְימִינַן לַהּ? אָמַר אֲבוּהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל: אוֹמְדִין כַּמָּה אָדָם רוֹצֶה לִיתֵּן בֵּין שִׁפְחָה בְּתוּלָה לְשִׁפְחָה בְּעוּלָה לְשַׁמְּשׁוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna continues: How is her **degradation** assessed? **One considers her as though she were a maidservant sold** in the marketplace, and assesses how much she would have been worth beforehand and how much she would be worth currently. The Gemara asks: **How do we assess her** value? **Shmuel’s father said: One estimates** the difference **between how much a person is willing to give** to purchase **a virgin maidservant and** how much he is willing to give **to** purchase **a non-virgin maidservant to serve him.**


###### Ketubot 40b:8
[Ketubot 40b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/40b:8)

מַאי נָפְקָא לֵיהּ מִינַּהּ? אֶלָּא בֵּין שִׁפְחָה בְּעוּלָה לְשִׁפְחָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ בְּעוּלָה, לְהַשִּׂיאָה לְעַבְדּוֹ. וּלְעַבְדּוֹ מַאי נָפְקָא לֵיהּ מִינַּהּ? בְּעֶבֶד שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ לְרַבּוֹ קוֹרַת רוּחַ הֵימֶנּוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: With regard to **a non-virgin maidservant to serve him;** if he purchases her for service, **what difference is there to him** whether or not she is a virgin? **Rather,** the difference **between a maidservant who engaged in intercourse and a maidservant who did not engage in intercourse** is with regard to how much one is willing **to marry her to his slave.** The Gemara further asks: **And** with regard to marrying her **to his slave, what difference is there to him** whether or not she is a virgin? The Gemara answers: It is **with regard to a slave from whom his master has** a sense of **satisfaction,** and he seeks a virgin for the slave in order to reciprocate. The difference between the price that the master is willing to pay for each of the maidservants is the degradation that the offender pays the victim.


###### Ketubot 40b:9
[Ketubot 40b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/40b:9)

**מַתְנִי׳** כׇּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ מֶכֶר — אֵין קְנָס. וְכׇל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ קְנָס — אֵין מֶכֶר. קְטַנָּה — יֵשׁ לָהּ מֶכֶר, וְאֵין לָהּ קְנָס. נַעֲרָה — יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס, וְאֵין לָהּ מֶכֶר. הַבּוֹגֶרֶת — אֵין לָהּ לֹא מֶכֶר וְלֹא קְנָס.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **Any place where there is sale** by a father of his minor daughter as a Hebrew maidservant, **there is no fine** if she is raped. **And any place where there is a fine,** when a young woman is raped; **there is no sale** by the father. The Gemara specifies: **A minor is subject to sale** by her father, **and she is not entitled to a fine** if she is raped. **A young woman is entitled to a fine** if she is raped **and is not subject to sale. A grown woman is neither subject to sale nor entitled to a fine.**


###### Ketubot 40b:10
[Ketubot 40b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/40b:10)

**גְּמָ׳** אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: זוֹ דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר, אֲבָל חֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס בִּמְקוֹם מֶכֶר. דְּתַנְיָא: קְטַנָּה מִבַּת יוֹם אֶחָד וְעַד שֶׁתָּבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת — יֵשׁ לָהּ מֶכֶר וְאֵין לָהּ קְנָס. מִשֶּׁתָּבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת עַד שֶׁתִּיבְגַּר — יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס וְאֵין לָהּ מֶכֶר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. שֶׁהָיָה רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: כׇּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ מֶכֶר — אֵין קְנָס, וְכׇל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ קְנָס — אֵין מֶכֶר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: קְטַנָּה מִבַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד וְעַד שֶׁתִּיבְגַּר — יֵשׁ לָהּ קְנָס.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **Rav Yehuda said** that **Rav said: This** *halakha* in the mishna is **the statement of Rabbi Meir, but the Rabbis say: She is entitled to a fine** even **where** there is **a sale, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **A minor** girl, **from one day old until she grows two** pubic **hairs, is subject to sale and is not entitled to a fine. From when she grows two** pubic **hairs** and becomes a young woman **until she matures** into a grown woman, **she is entitled to a fine and she is not subject to sale;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Meir, as Rabbi Meir would state** the principle: **Any place where there is a sale there is no fine, and any place where there is a fine there is no sale. And the Rabbis say: A minor** girl **from the age of three years and one day until she matures** into a grown woman **is entitled to a fine.**


###### Ketubot 40b:11
[Ketubot 40b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/40b:11)

קְנָס אִין, מֶכֶר לָא?! אֵימָא: אַף קְנָס בִּמְקוֹם מֶכֶר. אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר? אָמַר קְרָא: ״וְלוֹ תִּהְיֶה לְאִשָּׁה״ — בִּמְהַוָּה עַצְמָהּ הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר. וְרַבָּנַן? אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ, אָמַר קְרָא: ״נַעֲרָ״, אֲפִילּוּ קְטַנָּה בַּמַּשְׁמָע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara questions the statement of the Rabbis in the *baraita* with regard to a girl more than three years of age: **A fine, yes, but sale, no?** Do the Rabbis maintain that a father cannot sell his minor daughter as a Hebrew maidservant? Rather, emend the text and **say:** She **is even entitled to a fine where** she is subject to **sale. Rav Ḥisda said: What is the rationale** for the opinion **of Rabbi Meir?** It is as **the verse says** with regard to a rapist: “And the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty *sela*, **and to him she shall be as a wife”** (Deuteronomy 22:29). **The verse is speaking with regard to one** halakhically competent to **marry** by **herself,** which means she must be a young woman. The Gemara asks: **And** what is the rationale for the opinion of **the Rabbis? Reish Lakish said** that **the verse says “young woman [*na’ara*]”;** however, although the term is pronounced *na’ara*, it is written as *na’ar*, without the letter *heh*, and **even a minor girl is indicated** by that term.


###### Ketubot 40b:12
[Ketubot 40b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/40b:12)

שַׁמְעַהּ רַב פָּפָּא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב חָנָן מִבֵּי כְלוֹחִית, אֲזַל אַמְרַהּ קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב שִׁימִי בַּר אָשֵׁי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אַתּוּן, אַהָא מַתְנִיתוּ לַהּ. אֲנַן, אַהָא מַתְנֵינַן לָהּ, אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: הַמּוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע עַל הַקְּטַנָּה — פָּטוּר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְנָתְנוּ לַאֲבִי הַנַּעֲרָה״, ״נַעֲרָה״ מָלֵא דִּיבֵּר הַכָּתוּב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: **Rav Pappa, son** of **Rav Ḥanan, from** a place called **Bei Keloḥit, heard** this *halakha* and **went and said it before Rav Shimi bar Ashi.** Rav Shimi **said to him: You teach this** statement **concerning that** matter. **We,** based on our traditions, **teach it concerning this** matter, as **Reish Lakish said: One who slanders a minor girl,** falsely claiming that she was not a virgin on the wedding night, **is exempt** from paying the fine, **as it is stated: “And they shall give them to the father of the young woman [*na’ara*]”** (Deuteronomy 22:19). **The verse spoke of *na’ara*,** not only pronounced but written **in full,** indicating that this payment is in effect only with regard to a young woman, not a minor girl. However, in places where the term is written *na’ar*, even a minor girl would be included.


###### Ketubot 40b:13
[Ketubot 40b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/40b:13)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה: טַעְמָא דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״נַעֲרָה״, הָא לָאו הָכִי, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא אֲפִילּוּ קְטַנָּה? וְהָא כְּתִיב: ״וְאִם אֱמֶת הָיָה הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה לֹא נִמְצְאוּ בְתוּלִים לַנַּעֲרָה. וְהוֹצִיאוּ אֶת הַנַּעֲרָה אֶל פֶּתַח בֵּית אָבִיהָ וּסְקָלוּהָ״, וּקְטַנָּה לָאו בַּת עוֹנָשִׁין הִיא! אֶלָּא: כָּאן נַעֲרָה, הָא כׇּל מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״נַעֲרָ״ — אֲפִילּוּ קְטַנָּה בַּמַּשְׁמָע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Adda bar Ahava** strongly **objects to this: The reason is that the Merciful One writes “*na’ara*”** with a *heh*. Is that to say that **if that were not the case I would have said that** this *halakha* applies **even** to **a minor girl?** How is that possible? **But isn’t it written: “And if this matter was true, that the hymen of this young woman was not found intact; then they shall remove the young woman to the entrance of her father’s house and stone her”** (Deuteronomy 22:20–21). **And** this verse clearly refers to a young woman old enough to be punished, as **a minor is not subject to punishment. Rather, here,** with regard to the payment of a slanderer, the verse speaks of **a *na’ara*,** written with a *heh*, and a minor is excluded. This is a paradigm from which **it may be inferred** that in any place **that it is stated “*na’ara*”** without a *heh*, **even a minor girl is indicated.**