## Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse Chapter 18

###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:1
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:1)

מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמַדְנוּ שֶׁהַ (ויקרא כא ז יד) "זּוֹנָה" הָאֲמוּרָה בַּתּוֹרָה הִיא כָּל שֶׁאֵינָהּ בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל. אוֹ בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה לְאָדָם שֶׁהִיא אֲסוּרָה לְהִנָּשֵׂא לוֹ אִסּוּר הַשָּׁוֶה לַכּל. אוֹ שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה לְחָלָל אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא מֻתֶּרֶת לְהִנָּשֵׂא לוֹ. לְפִיכָךְ הַנִּרְבַּעַת לִבְהֵמָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא בִּסְקִילָה לֹא נַעֲשֵׂית זוֹנָה וְלֹא נִפְסְלָה לִכְהֻנָּה שֶׁהֲרֵי לֹא נִבְעֲלָה לְאָדָם. וְהַבָּא עַל הַנִּדָּה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא בְּכָרֵת לֹא נַעֲשֵׂית זוֹנָה וְלֹא נִפְסְלָה לִכְהֻנָּה שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינָהּ אֲסוּרָה לְהִנָּשֵׂא לוֹ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Based on the Oral Tradition, we learned that the term *zonah*¹ as mentioned at the beginning of the previous chapter. used by the Torah refers to one who is not a nativeborn Jewess,² a Jewish woman who engaged in relations³ with a man she was forbidden to marry, violating a prohibition that is universally applicable,⁴ or a woman who engaged in relations with a *challal*⁵ even though she is permitted to marry him.⁶ marrying any Jewish woman, even the daughter of a priest (see Chapter 19, Halachah 11).
Accordingly, a woman who engages in relations with an animal, even though she is liable for execution by stoning is not deemed as a *zonah*, nor is she disqualified from marrying into the priesthood,⁷ for she did not engage in relations with a man. [Similarly, when] a man engages in relations with a woman in the *niddah* state even though she is liable for *kerait*, she is not deemed as a *zonah*, nor is she disqualified from marrying into the priesthood, for she is not forbidden to marry him.

footnotes:
¹ The term literally means "a promiscuous woman." Halachically, however, it has a specific meaning as the Rambam continues to explain. This concept is relevant because a priest is forbidden to marry a zonah
² Even if she is a virgin, and even if she converts (Halachah 3).
³ Even against her will. It is the fact of the relations, not her intent, that causes her to be placed in this category. See Halachot 5-6.
⁴ Even a prohibition that stems from a positive commandment, as mentioned in Halachah 3.
⁵ A child born from a relationship forbidden to a priest, as mentioned in Chapter 19, Halachot 5-6. As mentioned in the notes to the following halachah, the Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's view.
⁶ There is no prohibition against a challal
⁷ She may even marry a High Priest (if she engaged in anal intercourse with an animal), as stated in Chapter 17, Halachah 14.


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:2
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:2)

וְכֵן הַבָּא עַל הַפְּנוּיָה אֲפִלּוּ הָיְתָה קְדֵשָׁה שֶׁהִפְקִירָה עַצְמָהּ לַכּל אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא בְּמַלְקוֹת לֹא נַעֲשֵׂית זוֹנָה וְלֹא נִפְסְלָה מִן הַכְּהֻנָּה שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינָהּ אֲסוּרָה לְהִנָּשֵׂא לוֹ. אֲבָל הַנִּבְעֶלֶת לְאֶחָד מֵאִסּוּרֵי לָאוִין הַשָּׁוִין בַּכּל וְאֵין מְיֻחָדִין בְּכֹהֲנִים. אוֹ מֵאִסּוּרֵי עֲשֵׂה. וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר לְמִי שֶׁהִיא אֲסוּרָה לוֹ מִשּׁוּם עֶרְוָה אוֹ לְעַכּוּ"ם וְעֶבֶד. הוֹאִיל וְהִיא אֲסוּרָה לְהִנָּשֵׂא לוֹ הֲרֵי זוֹ זוֹנָה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Whenever a person has relations with an unmarried woman, even if she is a harlot who wantonly makes herself available to everyone, although she is liable for lashes,⁸ 1:4. she is not deemed as a *zonah*, nor is she disqualified from [marrying] into the priesthood. For she is not forbidden to marry [the people with whom she engaged in relations].
[When, by contrast, a woman] engages in relations with a man with whom relations are forbidden by a negative commandment that is universally applicable - the transgression is not specific to priests - or with whom they are forbidden by a positive commandment, she is forbidden to marry him, she is a *zonah*.⁹ and she and a priest are not punished by lashes if they engage in relations. The *Shulchan Aruch* (*Even HaEzer* 6:8) quotes the Rambam's view. Needless to say, [this applies if she engages in relations with a man] who is forbidden to her as an *ervah*, a gentile, or a servant.

footnotes:
⁸ As stated in Hilchot Ishut
⁹ The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's ruling, offering a more lenient view, explaining that although a woman who enters into relations with any of the above individuals is forbidden to marry into the priesthood, these relations do not cause her to be considered as a zonah


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:3
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:3)

וְכֵן הַגִּיֹּרֶת וְהַמְשֻׁחְרֶרֶת אֲפִלּוּ נִתְגַּיְּרָה וְנִשְׁתַּחְרְרָה פְּחוּתָה מִבַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים הוֹאִיל וְאֵינָהּ בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל הֲרֵי זוֹ זוֹנָה וַאֲסוּרָה לְכֹהֵן. מִכָּאן אָמְרוּ עַכּוּ"ם אוֹ נָתִין אוֹ מַמְזֵר אוֹ גֵּר עַמּוֹנִי וּמוֹאָבִי אוֹ מִצְרִי וֶאֱדוֹמִי רִאשׁוֹן וְשֵׁנִי אוֹ פְּצוּעַ דַּכָּא וּכְרוּת שָׁפְכָה אוֹ חָלָל שֶׁבָּאוּ עַל הַיְּהוּדִית עָשׂוּ אוֹתָהּ זוֹנָה וְנִפְסְלָה לִכְהֻנָּה וְאִם הָיְתָה כֹּהֶנֶת פְּסָלוּהָ מִן הַתְּרוּמָה. וְכֵן יְבָמָה שֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ זָר עֲשָׂאָהּ זוֹנָה. וְהָאַיְלוֹנִית מֻתֶּרֶת לְכֹהֵן וְאֵינָהּ זוֹנָה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Similarly, a female convert or a freed [maid-servant] - even if she was converted or freed when she was less than three years old¹⁰ 11b). Nevertheless, she is not considered as a native-born Jewess.
The Ra'avad rules that such a woman is not considered as a *zonah*. Nevertheless, she is forbidden to marry into the priesthood, based on the interpretation of Ezekiel 44:22 advanced by *Kiddushin* 78a which states that a priest must marry only from "the seed of the House of Israel." Note the discussion of this difference of opinion by the *Maggid Mishneh*. See also Chapter 19, Halachah 12, which states that as long as converts marry among each other, their descendants are forbidden to marry into the priesthood. - since she is not a native-born Jewess, she is deemed a *zonah* and is forbidden to [marry] a priest.
On this basis, [our Sages said: A woman who has relations with] a gentile, a *netin*,¹¹ a *mamzer*,¹² an Ammonite or Moabite convert, a first- or second-generation Egyptian or Edomite convert,¹³ a man with maimed testicles or a severed member,¹⁴ or a *challal* who has relations with a [nativeborn] Jewess causes her to be considered as a *zonah* and to be forbidden to [marry into] the priesthood. If she was a priest's daughter, she is disqualified from [partaking of] *terumah*.¹⁵ of holiness." *Yevamot* 68a states: "Since she engaged in relations with someone who is forbidden to her, she is disqualified." Similarly, a *yevamah* who engaged relations with a man other than her *yevam* becomes a *zonah*.¹⁶ relations with any other man cause her to be considered as a *zonah*.
An *aylonit*¹⁷ refers to a woman who does not have female physical characteristics. Her breasts do not protrude, she stiffens during sexual relations, and her lower abdomen does not resemble that of a woman. She is considered incapable of giving birth (*Hilchot Ishut* 2:4-6). is permitted to [marry] a priest. She is not a *zonah*.

footnotes:
¹⁰ At that age, even if she had engaged in relations, her hymen would regenerate and she would be considered as a virgin (Ketubot
¹¹ See Chapter 12, Halachot 22-23, which defines this term and the prohibition against such a man marrying a native-born Jewess.
¹² See Chapter 15 which describes the prohibition of such a man marrying a native-born Jewess.
¹³ See Chapter 12, Halachot 18-21, which describes the prohibition of such converts marrying a native-born Jewess.
¹⁴ See Chapter 16 which describes the prohibition of such a man marrying a native-born Jewess.
¹⁵ Leviticus 22:12 states "When the daughter of a priest is [possessed] by a foreigner, she may not partake of the terumah
¹⁶ Since she is forbidden to marry anyone other than her yevam
¹⁷ The term aylonit


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:4
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:4)

הַבָּא עַל אַחַת מֵהַשְּׁנִיּוֹת וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן כְּגוֹן הַבָּא עַל קְרוֹבַת חֲלוּצָתוֹ אוֹ עַל חֲלוּצָתוֹ לֹא עָשָׂה אוֹתָהּ זוֹנָה שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינָהּ אֲסוּרָה לְהִנָּשֵׂא לוֹ מִן הַתּוֹרָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בְּהִלְכוֹת יִבּוּם:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When a man engages in relations with one of the *shniot*¹⁸ 1:6 for a list of these prohibitions. or the like, e.g., a man who engages in relations with a relative of the woman with whom he performed *chalitzah* or with the woman with whom he performed *chalitzah*, he does not cause her to be deemed a *zonah*. For she is not forbidden to him according to Scriptural Law, as we explained in *Hilchot Yibbum*.¹⁹ 1:12-13 which explains that once a woman is obligated to undergo *chalitzah*, there is no Scriptural prohibition against engaging in relations with her or her relatives. Nevertheless, our Sages instituted these prohibitions as safeguards.

footnotes:
¹⁸ These refer to distant relatives whom the Rabbis forbade as safeguards to Scriptural prohibitions. See Hilchot Ishut
¹⁹ See Hilchot Yibbum


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:5
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:5)

הָא לָמַדְתָּ שֶׁאֵין הֱיוֹתָהּ זוֹנָה תּוֹלֶה בִּבְעִילָה שֶׁל אִסּוּר. שֶׁהֲרֵי הַבָּא עַל הַנִּדָּה וְעַל הַקְּדֵשָׁה וְהַנִּרְבַּעַת לַבְּהֵמָה נִבְעֲלָה בְּעִילָה שֶׁל אִסּוּר וְלֹא נַעֲשֵׂית זוֹנָה. וּמִי שֶׁנִּשֵּׂאת לְחָלָל נִבְעֲלָה בְּעִילָה שֶׁל הֶתֵּר כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר וְנַעֲשֵׂית זוֹנָה וְאֵין הַדָּבָר תָּלוּי אֶלָּא בִּפְגִימָה וּמִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ שֶׁאֵינָהּ פְּגוּמָה אֶלָּא מֵאָדָם הָאָסוּר לָהּ אוֹ מֵחָלָל כְּמוֹ שֶׁאָמַרְנוּ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
We thus learned that a woman's being deemed as a *zonah* is not dependent on her engaging in forbidden relations, for when a man engages in relations with a *niddah* or a harlot or when a woman engages in relations with an animal, the woman has engaged in forbidden relations and yet she is not deemed a *zonah*. When, by contrast, [a woman] marries a *challal*, she engages in relations that are permitted, as will be explained,²⁰ and yet she is deemed a *zonah*. Thus the matter is dependent on the spiritual blemish alone. According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that the spiritual blemish comes only from a man who is forbidden to her or a *challal*, as we explained.

footnotes:
²⁰ Chapter 19, Halachah 16.


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:6
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:6)

כָּל הַנִּבְעֶלֶת לְאָדָם שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה אוֹתָהּ זוֹנָה בֵּין בְּאֹנֶס בֵּין בְּרָצוֹן בֵּין בְּזָדוֹן בֵּין בִּשְׁגָגָה [בֵּין כְּדַרְכָּהּ בֵּין שֶׁלֹּא כְּדַרְכָּהּ] מִשֶּׁהֶעֱרָה בָּהּ נִפְסְלָה מִשּׁוּם זוֹנָה. וּבִלְבַד שֶׁתִּהְיֶה בַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד וְיִהְיֶה הַבּוֹעֵל בֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד וָמַעְלָה. לְפִיכָךְ אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה לְאַחֵר בֵּין בְּאֹנֶס בֵּין בְּרָצוֹן נִפְסְלָה לִכְהֻנָּה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Whenever a woman engages in relations that cause her to be deemed a *zonah*, she becomes disqualified as soon as the man's organ enters her²¹; see Chapter 1, Halachah 10. whether she engages in relations against her will or willingly, whether in conscious violation or inadvertently, whether through vaginal or anal intercourse. [This applies] provided she is at least three years old and the man with whom she engages in relations is nine years old or more.²² Therefore when a married woman engages in adultery, whether against her will or willingly, she is disqualified from [marrying into] the priesthood.²³

footnotes:
²¹ We are translating the term heara
²² For below these ages, any sexual contact in which these individuals engage is not significant, as stated in Chapter 1, Halachot 13-14.
²³ I.e., if the woman's husband dies after the adulterous relations without divorcing her, she may not marry a priest. Alternatively, as the Rambam continues to explain in the subsequent halachot, if she is the wife of the priest, she may not remain married to him.


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:7
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:7)

אֵשֶׁת כֹּהֵן שֶׁנֶּאֶנְסָה בַּעְלָהּ לוֹקֶה עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם טֻמְאָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כד ד) "לֹא יוּכַל בַּעְלָהּ הָרִאשׁוֹן אֲשֶׁר שִׁלְּחָהּ לָשׁוּב לְקַחְתָּהּ לִהְיוֹת לוֹ לְאִשָּׁה אַחֲרֵי אֲשֶׁר הֻטַמָּאָה". הַכּל בִּכְלָל שֶׁאִם נִבְעֲלוּ אֲסוּרִין עַל בַּעֲלֵיהֶן. פֵּרֵט לְךָ הַכָּתוּב בְּאֵשֶׁת יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁנֶּאֶנְסָה שֶׁהִיא מֻתֶּרֶת לְבַעְלָהּ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר ה יג) "וְהִיא לֹא נִתְפָּשָׂה" אֲבָל אֵשֶׁת כֹּהֵן בְּאִסּוּרָהּ עוֹמֶדֶת שֶׁהֲרֵי הִיא זוֹנָה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When the wife of a priest is raped, [if her husband engages in relations with her afterwards,] he is punished by lashes because of her defilement. [This is derived from Deuteronomy 24:4]: "Her first husband who sent her away cannot return and take her as a wife after she has been defiled."²⁴ 11:14), it is interpreted as referring to all married women who are defiled by adultery. The wife of an Israelite who was raped is an exception, but not the wife of a priest.
The commentaries question the exactness of the Rambam's statements here, because in this instance two separate prohibitions - the prohibition against relations with one's defiled wife and the prohibition against a priest engaging in relations with a *zonah* - are involved. See the *Maggid Mishneh* for a discussion of the issue. See also Chapter 1, Halachah 22. All [women] were governed by the general principle: If they engaged in [adulterous] relations, they are forbidden to their husbands. The Torah singles out an exception: the wife of an Israelite who was raped.²⁵ 24:19. She is permitted to her husband, as [implied by Numbers 5:13]: "And she was not seized." The wife of a priest remains forbidden, because she is a *zonah*.²⁶

footnotes:
²⁴ As the Rambam implies, the prohibition indicated by this verse is not explicitly referring to a woman married to a priest. Instead, halachically (see Hilchot Gerushin
²⁵ See Hilchot Ishut
²⁶ I.e., despite the fact that she is not held responsible for the adulterous relations, they create a spiritual blemish that prevents her from marrying a priest.


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:8
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:8)

אֵשֶׁת יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁנֶּאֶנְסָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא מֻתֶּרֶת לְבַעְלָהּ אֲסוּרָה לִכְהֻנָּה. אֵשֶׁת כֹּהֵן שֶׁאָמְרָה לְבַעְלָהּ נֶאֱנַסְתִּי אוֹ שָׁגַגְתִּי וּבָא עָלַי אֶחָד אוֹ שֶׁבָּא עֵד אֶחָד וְהֵעִיד לוֹ עָלֶיהָ שֶׁזִּנְּתָה בֵּין בְּאֹנֶס בֵּין בְּרָצוֹן הֲרֵי זוֹ אֵינָהּ אֲסוּרָה עָלָיו. שֶׁמָּא עֵינֶיהָ נָתְנָה בְּאַחֵר. וְאִם הִיא נֶאֱמֶנֶת לוֹ אוֹ הָעֵד נֶאֱמָן לוֹ וְסָמַךְ דַּעְתּוֹ לְדִבְרֵיהֶם הֲרֵי זֶה יוֹצִיא כְּדֵי לָצֵאת יְדֵי סָפֵק:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When the wife of an Israelite is raped, although she is permitted to her husband,²⁷ she is forbidden to [marry into] the prietshood.²⁸
When the wife of a priest tells her husband: "I was raped or inadvertently, I engaged in relations with another man," or one witness testifies against her that she committed adultery whether willingly or unwillingly, she is not forbidden to him.²⁹ warning to his wife. See *Hilchot Ishut* 24:18). [The rationale is that we suspect] that perhaps she set her eyes on another [man].³⁰ If he considers her as trustworthy, or he considers the witness as trustworthy and he accepts his word,³¹ he should divorce her so that there is no doubt regarding the matter.³² to *Hilchot Ishut, loc. cit.*)

footnotes:
²⁷ For the adulterous relations were carried out against her will.
²⁸ After her husband dies.
²⁹ Testimony is not considered binding unless it is made by two witnesses. Thus the testimony of one witnesses is not of consequence. Similarly, a person's testimony cannot be used against himself. Hence, the woman's own testimony is not of consequence.There is one instance where the testimony of one witness is significant. When the husband issued a sotah
³⁰ And seeks to be released from her husband so that she may engage in relations with him.
³¹ And thus he believes that his wife committed adultery.
³² For since he believes either his wife or the witness, he will be consenting to a transgression each time he enters into relations with her. Accordingly, he has a moral and spiritual obligation to divorce her (Maggid Mishneh


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:9
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:9)

אֵשֶׁת כֹּהֵן שֶׁאָמְרָה לְבַעְלָהּ נֶאֱנַסְתִּי אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא מֻתֶּרֶת לְבַעְלָהּ כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ הֲרֵי הִיא אֲסוּרָה לְכָל כֹּהֵן שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם אַחַר שֶׁיָּמוּת בַּעְלָהּ. שֶׁהֲרֵי הוֹדֵית שֶׁהִיא זוֹנָה וְאָסְרָה עַצְמָהּ וְנַעֲשֵׂית כַּחֲתִיכָה הָאֲסוּרָה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Although the wife of a priest who tells her husband: "I was raped," is permitted to her husband as explained, she is forbidden to any other priest³³ 6:25 states that the Rambam's ruling applies only as an initial and preferred option. After the fact, if she marries a priest, they may remain husband and wife unless he believes her statements. after her husband dies.³⁴ justifies the Rambam's ruling and it is accepted as law by the *Shulchan Aruch* (*Even HaEzer* 6:13).
The Ra'avad's rationale is that if the woman is able to provide a satisfactory explanation why she originally stated that she was forbidden, her word is accepted, as is the case with regard to other similar situations. The *Maggid Mishneh* does not accept this logic. See *Chelkat Mechokek* 6:12 and *Beit Shmuel* 6:26 which discuss this issue. For she has acknowledged that she is a *zonah* and caused herself to be forbidden, making herself a prohibited entity.

footnotes:
³³ The Beit Shmuel
³⁴ The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam, explaining that since the woman's statements were rejected, they are considered of no consequence afterwards. The Maggid Mishneh


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:10
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:10)

כֹּהֵן שֶׁקִּדֵּשׁ גְּדוֹלָה אוֹ קְטַנָּה וְאַחַר זְמַן בָּא עָלֶיהָ וְטָעַן שֶׁמְּצָאָהּ דְּרוּסַת אִישׁ נֶאֶסְרָה עָלָיו מִסָּפֵק שֶׁמָּא קֹדֶם קִדּוּשִׁין נִבְעֲלָה אוֹ אַחַר קִדּוּשִׁין. אֲבָל יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁטָּעַן טַעֲנָה זוֹ לֹא נֶאֶסְרָה עָלָיו שֶׁיֵּשׁ כָּאן שְׁנֵי סְפֵקוֹת שֶׁמָּא קֹדֶם קִדּוּשִׁין וְשֶׁמָּא אַחַר קִדּוּשִׁין. וַאֲפִלּוּ נֹאמַר לְאַחַר קִדּוּשִׁין שֶׁמָּא בְּאֹנֶס שֶׁמָּא בְּרָצוֹן. שֶׁהָאֲנוּסָה מֻתֶּרֶת לְיִשְׂרָאֵל כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When a priest³⁵ consecrates a woman, whether a minor or past majority, and afterwards engages in relations with her and claims that she had engaged in relations previously,³⁶ 11:8-15. The rationale is that we operate on the presumption that a man will not take on the expense and trouble of making a wedding and then forfeit it because of a spurious claim. she is forbidden to him because of the doubt involved:³⁷ perhaps she engaged in relations before she was consecrated or perhaps it was afterwards.³⁸. When, by contrast, an Israelite makes such a claim, there are two doubts involved:³⁹ Maybe [the forbidden relations] preceded the consecration or maybe they came afterwards. Even if we say that they came afterwards, maybe she was raped or maybe she participated willingly. For a raped woman is permitted to an Israelite, as we explained.⁴⁰

footnotes:
³⁵ In contrast to an Israelite, as the Rambam continues to explain.
³⁶ The husband's word is accepted as stated in Hilchot Ishut
³⁷ Since the doubt involves a Scriptural prohibition, we rule stringently.
³⁸ For if the relations took place afterwards, even if she was raped, she is forbidden to her husband as a zonah
³⁹ And when there are two doubts involved, even when a Scriptural prohibition is concerned, we rule leniently.
⁴⁰ See Halachah 7.


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:11
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:11)

לְפִיכָךְ אִם קִדְּשָׁהּ אָבִיהָ לְיִשְׂרָאֵל וְהִיא פְּחוּתָה מִבַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד וְטָעַן שֶׁמְּצָאָהּ דְּרוּסַת אִישׁ נֶאֶסְרָה עָלָיו מִסָּפֵק שֶׁאֵין כָּאן אֶלָּא סָפֵק אֶחָד שֶׁמָּא בְּאֹנֶס שֶׁמָּא בְּרָצוֹן וְסָפֵק אִסּוּר שֶׁל תּוֹרָה לְחֻמְרָא:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Therefore if a girl's father consecrated her to an Israelite when she was less than three years old and [when they married, the Israelite] claimed that he discovered that she had engaged in relations previously, she is forbidden to him because of the doubt. For there is only one doubt involved: Maybe the relations were against her will⁴¹ or maybe she engaged willingly.⁴² When there is a doubt concerning a Scriptural prohibition involved, [we rule] stringently.

footnotes:
⁴¹ Although a minor who willfully commits adultery is not punished, she is forbidden to her husband (Chapter 3, Halachah 2).
⁴² Since she was consecrated before the age of three, even if she had engaged in relations beforehand, her hymen would have regenerated. Thus there is only one doubt involved.


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:12
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:12)

כָּל אִשָּׁה שֶׁקִּנֵּא לָהּ בַּעְלָהּ וְנִסְתְּרָה וְלֹא שָׁתָת מֵי סוֹטָה אֲסוּרָה לְכֹהֵן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא סְפֵק זוֹנָה. בֵּין שֶׁלֹּא רָצָת הִיא לִשְׁתּוֹת. בֵּין שֶׁלֹּא רָצָה לְהַשְׁקוֹתָהּ. בֵּין שֶׁהָיְתָה שָׁם עֵדוּת שֶׁמּוֹנְעָהּ מִלִּשְׁתּוֹת. בֵּין שֶׁקִּנְּאוּ לָהּ בֵּית דִּין. בֵּין שֶׁהָיְתָה מִן הַנָּשִׁים שֶׁאֵין רְאוּיוֹת לִשְׁתּוֹת. הוֹאִיל וְלֹא שָׁתָת מִכָּל מָקוֹם הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה לִכְהֻנָּה מִסָּפֵק:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Any woman who was given [a *sotah*] warning⁴³ 1:1). by her husband, entered into privacy [with the man she was warned against], but did not drink the *sotah* waters is forbidden to [marry] a priest,⁴⁴ because there is an unresolved question whether or not she is a *zonah*.⁴⁵ [This applies] whether she did not wish to drink [the waters],⁴⁶ 2:1, 3:2 which imply that the refusal to drink the waters is tantamount to an admission of guilt. her husband did not wish to compel her to drink the waters,⁴⁷ (*Hilchot Sotah* 2:1). there was testimony that prevented her from drinking,⁴⁸ 1:14 states that if even one witness testifies that he saw the woman commit adultery after receiving the *sotah* warning, she becomes forbidden to her husband. the warning was delivered by the court,⁴⁹ 1:10 states that, when a husband is unable to supervise his wife's moral behavior, the court may issue such a warning on his behalf. In such an instance, however, the woman is not compelled to drink the *sotah* waters. or she was one of the woman who is not fit to drink.⁵⁰ 2:2 lists fifteen women who are not given the option of drinking the *sotah* waters. Whatever the reason that she did not drink, she is forbidden to [marry into] the priesthood because of the doubt [that has been created].

footnotes:
⁴³ A formal warning delivered in the presence of witnesses not to enter into privacy with a specific man (Hilchot Sotah
⁴⁴ I.e., if her first husband dies without divorcing her.
⁴⁵ Drinking the waters would have tested her virtue. Since she did not undergo this test, the matter is unresolved and hence she is forbidden to a priest.
⁴⁶ See Hilchot Sotah
⁴⁷ In such an instance, the woman is forbidden to her original husband, but he must pay her the money due her by virtue of her ketubah
⁴⁸ Hilchot Sotah
⁴⁹ Hilchot Sotah
⁵⁰ Hilchot Sotah


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:13
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:13)

פְּנוּיָה שֶׁרָאוּהָ שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה לְאֶחָד וְהָלַךְ לוֹ וְאָמְרוּ לָהּ מִי הוּא זֶה שֶׁבָּא עָלַיִךְ וְאָמְרָה אָדָם כָּשֵׁר הֲרֵי זוֹ נֶאֱמֶנֶת. וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא אֲפִלּוּ רָאוּהָ מְעֻבֶּרֶת וְאָמְרוּ לָהּ מִמִּי נִתְעַבַּרְתְּ וְאָמְרָה מֵאָדָם כָּשֵׁר הֲרֵי זוֹ נֶאֱמֶנֶת וְתִהְיֶה מֻתֶּרֶת לְכֹהֵן:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
[The following rules apply if we] saw that an unmarried woman engaged in relations with a man who then departed. She is asked: "Who is the man with whom you engaged in relations?" If she says, "He is an acceptable man,"⁵¹, nor a gentile, nor another individual who would disqualify her from marrying into the priesthood. her word is accepted. Moreover, even if we see that she is pregnant and we ask her: "From whom did you conceive?" and she says, "From an acceptable man," her word is accepted and she is permitted [to marry] a priest.⁵²

footnotes:
⁵¹ I.e., neither a mamzer
⁵² This represents the legal abstract. Our Sages, however, applied stringencies as indicated by the following halachah.


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:14
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:14)

בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּשֶׁיִּהְיֶה הַמָּקוֹם שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה בּוֹ פָּרָשַׁת דְּרָכִים אוֹ בִּקְרָנוֹת שֶׁבַּשָּׂדוֹת שֶׁהַכּל עוֹבְרִין שָׁם. וְהָיוּ רֹב הָעוֹבְרִים שָׁם כְּשֵׁרִים וְרֹב הָעִיר שֶׁפָּרְשׁוּ אֵלּוּ הָעוֹבְרִין מִמֶּנָּה כְּשֵׁרִים. שֶׁהַחֲכָמִים עָשׂוּ מַעֲלָה בְּיוּחֲסִין וְהִצְרִיכוּ שְׁנֵי רֻבּוֹת. אֲבָל אִם הָיוּ רֹב הָעוֹבְרִים פּוֹסְלִים אוֹתָהּ כְּגוֹן עַכּוּ"ם אוֹ מַמְזֵרִים וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁרֹב הַמָּקוֹם שֶׁבָּאוּ מִמֶּנָּה כְּשֵׁרִים אוֹ שֶׁהָיוּ רֹב אַנְשֵׁי הַמָּקוֹם פְּסוּלִין אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁרֹב הָעוֹבְרִין שָׁם כְּשֵׁרִים חוֹשְׁשִׁין לָהּ שֶׁמָּא לְמִי שֶׁפּוֹסֵל אוֹתָהּ נִבְעֲלָה וְלֹא תִּנָּשֵׂא לְכֹהֵן לְכַתְּחִלָּה. וְאִם נִשֵּׂאת (לֹא) תֵּצֵא:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When does the above apply? When the place where she engaged in relations was on a thoroughfare or in a carriage in the fields where everyone passes by,⁵³, in its fixed place, we do not follow the majority. and most of the passersby are acceptable and most of the inhabitants of the city from which these passersby departed are acceptable. [The rationale for this stringency is that] our Sages elevated the standards required with regard to lineage⁵⁴). and required two majorities.⁵⁵
If, by contrast, most of the people passing by would disqualify her, e.g., they were gentiles, *mamzerim*, or the like, even if most of the inhabitants of the city from which they came were acceptable, we are suspect regarding her [status]. Perhaps she engaged in relations with a person who would disqualify her. Hence, the initial and preferred option is for her not to marry a priest.⁵⁶ (*Even HaEzer* 6:17). That source, however, also cites the view of the *Tur* and other *Rishonim* which maintains that if she states that the person with whom she engaged in relations are acceptable and the majority of the people are acceptable, she may marry into the priesthood at the outset. The *Beit Shmuel* 6:31 also cites a third, more lenient view. If she marries one, she need not divorce.⁵⁷ 6:32). [This ruling also applies] if most of the inhabitants of the locale were unacceptable even though most of the passersby were acceptable.

footnotes:
⁵³ This factor is necessary to allow for us to apply the principle: "Whenever an entity is separated, it is considered as having been separated from the majority." When, as stated in Halachah 15, the relations occur in a place where an entity is kevua
⁵⁴ Compare to Chapter 15, Halachah 11, which states that when the lineage of the child is involved, the woman's word is accepted even when the majority of the men are not acceptable. The rationale for the difference is that with regard to the child, there is no alternative. If the child is not deemed acceptable, he or she will not be able to marry within the Jewish people. If, however, the woman's word is not accepted, she will still be able to marry anyone other than a priest (Maggid Mishneh
⁵⁵ I.e., instead of requiring a simple majority as is the usual standard.
⁵⁶ This ruling is cited by the Shulchan Aruch
⁵⁷ After the fact, we rely on the halachic abstract stated in the previous halachah. This applies even if most of the people are unacceptable (Beit Shmuel


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:15
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:15)

רָאוּהָ שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה בָּעִיר אוֹ נִתְעַבְּרָה בָּעִיר אֲפִלּוּ לֹא הָיָה שׁוֹכֵן שָׁם אֶלָּא עַכּוּ"ם אֶחָד אוֹ חָלָל אֶחָד וְעֶבֶד וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן הֲרֵי זוֹ לֹא תִּנָּשֵׂא לְכַתְּחִלָּה לְכֹהֵן. שֶׁכָּל הַקָּבוּעַ כְּמֶחֱצָה עַל מֶחֱצָה הוּא. וְאִם נִשֵּׂאת לֹא תֵּצֵא הוֹאִיל וְהִיא אוֹמֶרֶת לְכָשֵׁר נִבְעַלְתִּי:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
If we saw that she engaged in relations in a city or she became pregnant in a city, [more stringent rules apply]. Even if there was only one gentile, *challal*, servant, or the like⁵⁸ dwelling in the city, the initial and preferred option is that she not marry a priest. [The rationale is that] whenever entities are in their permanent locale, [probability is not taken into consideration. Instead, all doubts] are considered as equally balanced.⁵⁹ explains the Rambam's ruling as follows: When the woman goes to the unacceptable man for relations, he is considered as in his established place and hence, the doubt is considered equally balanced. Even when the unacceptable man comes to the woman for relations - in which instance, he has been separated from his natural place, and hence the principles of probability should apply - we rule stringently. This is a safeguard, lest one rule leniently when the woman goes to the man.
The *Tur* (*Even HaEzer* 6) rules more leniently, maintaining that if the man comes to the woman, we follow the principles of probability. The *Shulchan Aruch* (*Even HaEzer* 6:18) mentions both views without stating which one should be followed. If she already married [a priest], she need not be divorced because she says: "I engaged in relations with an acceptable man."⁶⁰

footnotes:
⁵⁸ I.e., persons who would disqualify her from marrying into the priesthood.
⁵⁹ The Kessef Mishneh
⁶⁰ And after the fact, we rely on her word.


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:16
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:16)

הָיְתָה אִלֶּמֶת אוֹ חֵרֶשֶׁת אוֹ שֶׁאָמְרָה אֵינִי יוֹדַעַת לְמִי נִבְעַלְתִּי אוֹ שֶׁהָיְתָה קְטַנָּה שֶׁאֵינָהּ מַכֶּרֶת בֵּין כָּשֵׁר לְפָסוּל הֲרֵי זוֹ סְפֵק זוֹנָה. וְאִם נִשֵּׂאת לְכֹהֵן תֵּצֵא אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הָיוּ שְׁנֵי הָרֻבִּין הַמְּצוּיִין אֶצְלָהּ כְּשֵׁרִים:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When a woman is dumb, deaf,⁶¹ she says: "I don't know the identity of the man with whom I engaged in relations," or she was a minor that cannot differentiate between a man who is acceptable and one who is not, she is considered as a *zonah* of questionable status.⁶²). A child born from these relations is considered a *mamzer* of questionable status, as stated in Chapter 15, Halachah 12. [After the fact,] if she married a priest, she must be divorced⁶³ unless there is a twofold majority of men with whom she could have engaged in relations that are acceptable.⁶⁴

footnotes:
⁶¹ In these two instances, we assume that she lacks the intellectual sophistication to know the status of the man with whom she engaged in relations.
⁶² In all instances, the initial and preferred option is for her not to marry into the priesthood (Maggid Mishneh
⁶³ Since a question of Scriptural Law which cannot be clarified is involved, we rule stringently.
⁶⁴ In such an instance, we are not concerned with the doubt because of the high probability that the man was acceptable.


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:17
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:17)

הַשְּׁבוּיָה שֶׁנִּפְדֵּית וְהִיא בַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד אוֹ יֶתֶר אֲסוּרָה לְכֹהֵן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא סְפֵק זוֹנָה שֶׁמָּא נִבְעֲלָה לְעַכּוּ"ם. וְאִם יֵשׁ לָהּ עֵד שֶׁלֹּא נִתְיַחֵד הָעַכּוּ"ם עִמָּהּ הֲרֵי זוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה לִכְהֻנָּה. וַאֲפִלּוּ עֶבֶד אוֹ שִׁפְחָה אוֹ קָרוֹב נֶאֱמָן לְעֵדוּת זוֹ. וּשְׁתֵּי שְׁבוּיוֹת שֶׁהֵעִידָה כָּל אַחַת מֵהֶן לַחֲבֶרְתָּהּ הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶאֱמָנוֹת. הוֹאִיל וְאִסּוּר כָּל הַסְּפֵקוֹת כֻּלָּן מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים לְפִיכָךְ הֵקֵלּוּ בִּשְׁבוּיָה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When a woman taken captive is redeemed and she is three years old or more,⁶⁵ she is forbidden to [marry] a priest, because there is a question whether she is a *zonah*. Perhaps a gentile engaged in relations with her.
If there is a witness that a gentile did not enter into seclusion with her, she is acceptable to the priesthood.⁶⁶ Even a servant, a maid-servant, or a relative⁶⁷ 7:1; *Beit Shmuel* 7:3). is acceptable with regard to this testimony. [Moreover,] when two women who were taken captive give testimony on behalf of each other, their word is accepted.⁶⁸ [The rationale is] that all the prohibitions involving questionable situations are of Rabbinic origin.⁶⁹ Therefore they ruled leniently with regard to a woman taken captive.

footnotes:
⁶⁵ The minimum age from which time onward sexual relations are significant.
⁶⁶ As the Rambam proceeds to explain, since the prohibition is of Rabbinic origin, we do not follow the Scriptural requirements applying to witnesses. Therefore although ordinarily the testimony of two acceptable witnesses is required, in this instance, we accept the testimony of only one witness and moreover, accept testimony from witnesses - women, servants, and relatives - who would ordinarily be disqualified.
⁶⁷ There is a difference of opinion among the commentaries whether the testimony of a woman's son or daughter is acceptable. If they mention the matter in the course of conversation, their word is accepted as evident from the following halachah, If, however, a son or a daughter deliver testimony on their mother's behalf, most authorities maintain that the testimony is not accepted (see Chelkat Mechokek
⁶⁸ Even though one could argue that each one is lying on the other's behalf.
⁶⁹ Whenever there is a question whether or not a Scriptural prohibition applies, we rule stringently. This principle, however, is a point of Rabbinic Law. According to Scriptural Law, since the prohibition is not definitely established, one need not observe it.


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:18
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:18)

וְכֵן קָטָן שֶׁהָיָה מֵסִיחַ לְפִי תֻּמּוֹ נֶאֱמָן. מַעֲשֵׂה בְּאֶחָד שֶׁנִּשְׁבָּה הוּא וְאִמּוֹ וּבְנָהּ מֵסִיחַ לְפִי תֻּמּוֹ וְאָמַר נִשְׁבֵּינוּ לְבֵין הָעַכּוּ"ם אֲנִי וְאִמִּי יָצָאתִי לִשְׁאֹב מַיִם וְדַעְתִּי עַל אִמִּי לִלְקֹט עֵצִים וְדַעְתִּי עַל אִמִּי. וְהִשִּׂיאוּ אוֹתָהּ חֲכָמִים לְכֹהֵן עַל פִּיו:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
Similarly, a minor who states [that a woman was not touched by her captors] in the course of conversation.⁷⁰, Chapter 13, and commentaries.
There are authorities (Rabbenu Nissim) who maintain that a child's word is also accepted when he gives testimony directly. The *Shulchan Aruch* (*Even HaEzer* 7:1) also quotes that view although he appears to favor the above perspective. An incident occurred with regard to a child who was captured together with his mother. In the course of conversation, he said: "My mother and I were captured by the gentiles. When I went out to draw water from the well, I was thinking about my mother. [When I went] to gather wood, I was thinking about my mother." Our Sages [permitted] her to marry a priest because of his words.⁷¹

footnotes:
⁷⁰ A minor is not acceptable as a witness. Nevertheless, if he makes statements in the course of his conversation which indicate that a woman - his mother or any other woman - was not molested by her captors, those statements can serve as evidence to grant the woman license to marry a priest.The rationale is that these statements are considered to reflect the truth. We suspect that the child is telling us a representative account of what happened. Hence, since the prohibition was instituted only because of doubt, such statements are sufficient to allay our suspicions. With regard to the principle of accepting statements made in the course of conversation, see Hilchot Gerushin
⁷¹ Because the implication is that his mother was not molested.


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:19
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:19)

אֵין הַבַּעַל נֶאֱמָן לְהָעִיד בְּאִשְׁתּוֹ הַשְּׁבוּיָה שֶׁלֹּא נִטְמְאָה. שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מֵעִיד לְעַצְמוֹ. וְכֵן שִׁפְחָתָהּ לֹא תָּעִיד לָהּ. אֲבָל שִׁפְחַת בַּעְלָהּ מְעִידָה לָהּ. וְשִׁפְחָתָהּ שֶׁהָיְתָה מְסִיחָה לְפִי תֻּמָּהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
A husband's word is not accepted if he testifies⁷²; *Beit Shmuel* 7:4). The Rama (*Even HaEzer* 7:2), however, mentions opinions that grant leniency when he makes such statements in the course of conversation. that his wife who was taken captive was not defiled.⁷³ (*Even HaEzer* 7:2)]. Similarly, her maid-servant may not testify on her behalf.⁷⁴ A maid-servant belonging to her husband, however, may testify on her behalf. And statements made by her maid-servant in the midst of conversation are accepted.⁷⁵

footnotes:
⁷² Or if he makes the statements in the course of conversation (Maggid Mishneh
⁷³ The rationale is based on the principle: "A person may not give testimony on his own behalf" [Shulchan Aruch
⁷⁴ For we fear that she may lie to cover up for her.
⁷⁵ For we do not assume that she will know that these statements may be used to advance the cause of her mistress.


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:20
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:20)

כֹּהֵן שֶׁהֵעִיד לִשְׁבוּיָה שֶׁהִיא טְהוֹרָה הֲרֵי זֶה לֹא יִשָּׂאֶנָּה שֶׁמָּא עֵינָיו נָתַן בָּהּ. וְאִם פְּדָאָהּ וְהֵעִיד בָּהּ הֲרֵי זֶה יִשָּׂאֶנָּה. שֶׁאִלּוּ לֹא יָדַע שֶׁהִיא טְהוֹרָה לֹא נָתַן בָּהּ מְעוֹתָיו:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When a priest testifies that a woman who had been taken captive is pure, he may not marry her. [We suspect that] he focused his attention on her.⁷⁶ 7:6, *Beit Shmuel* 7:7). If he redeemed her and testified on her behalf, he may marry her, for if he did not know that she was pure, he would not have paid money on her behalf.⁷⁷ 36b).

footnotes:
⁷⁶ We suspect that he desired to marry her and therefore testified that she was not defiled even though he did not have definite information to that effect. Although we enforce this stringency with regard to the priest himself, we accept his testimony with regard to others and allow her to marry another priest (Chelkat Mechokek
⁷⁷ For other persons might come and testify that she was defiled in which instance, he would be forced to divorce her. Hence were he not sure that the matter was true, he would not risk forfeiting his money (Ketubot


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:21
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:21)

הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁאָמְרָה נִשְׁבֵּיתִי וּטְהוֹרָה אֲנִי נֶאֱמֶנֶת שֶׁהַפֶּה שֶׁאָסַר הוּא הַפֶּה שֶׁהִתִּיר אֲפִלּוּ הָיָה שָׁם עֵד אֶחָד שֶׁמֵּעִיד שֶׁהִיא שְׁבוּיָה. אֲבָל אִם יֵשׁ שָׁם שְׁנֵי עֵדִים שֶׁנִּשְׁבֵּית אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת עַד שֶׁיָּעִיד לָהּ אֶחָד שֶׁהִיא טְהוֹרָה. הָיוּ שָׁם שְׁנֵי עֵדִים שֶׁנִּשְׁבֵּית וְעֵד אֶחָד מֵעִיד שֶׁנִּטְמֵאת וְאֶחָד מַכְחִישׁ אוֹתוֹ וּמֵעִיד לָהּ שֶׁהִיא טְהוֹרָה וְלֹא נִתְיַחֵד עִמָּהּ עַכּוּ"ם עַד שֶׁנִּפְדֵּית. אֲפִלּוּ זֶה שֶׁמֵּעִיד שֶׁהִיא טְהוֹרָה אִשָּׁה אוֹ שִׁפְחָה הֲרֵי זוֹ מֻתֶּרֶת:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When a woman says: "I was taken captive, but I am pure," her word is accepted. [The rationale is] that the mouth that forbid her granted her license.⁷⁸ [This applies] even if there is one witness who testifies that she was taken captive.⁷⁹ 23b), the *Beit Shmuel* 7:8 states that this applies even if the witness testifies that the woman was defiled. If, however, there are two witnesses who testify that she was taken captive, her word is not accepted unless one person testifies that she is pure.
If there were two witnesses who testified that she was taken captive, one witness who testifies that she was defiled and another who contradicts his statements and testifies that she is pure and that a gentile did not enter into seclusion with her until she was redeemed, she is permitted.⁸⁰ states that this applies even if the witness who testified that she was defiled testified first. Although one might think that once the first witness testifies, her status would be established as forbidden, our Sages ruled leniently with regard to a woman taken captive. [This applies] even if the one who testifies that she is pure is a woman or a maid-servant.

footnotes:
⁷⁸ We would forbid her from marrying a priest only because of her own statements and in those very statements, she maintains that she is pure.
⁷⁹ For the testimony of one witness is not halachicly significant. Based on Rashi (Ketubot
⁸⁰ The Maggid Mishneh


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:22
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:22)

מִי שֶׁאָמְרָה נִשְׁבֵּיתִי וּטְהוֹרָה אֲנִי וְהִתִּירוּהָ בֵּית דִּין לְהִנָּשֵׂא וְאַחַר כָּךְ בָּאוּ שְׁנֵי עֵדִים שֶׁנִּשְׁבֵּית הֲרֵי זוֹ תִּנָּשֵׂא לְכַתְּחִלָּה וְלֹא תֵּצֵא מֵהֶתֵּרָהּ. וַאֲפִלּוּ נִכְנַס אַחֲרֶיהָ שַׁבַּאי וַהֲרֵי הִיא שְׁבוּיָה לְפָנֵינוּ בְּיַד אֲדוֹנֶיהָ הֲרֵי זוֹ לֹא תֵּצֵא מֵהֶתֵּרָהּ שֶׁהִתִּירוּהָ. וּמְשַׁמְּרִין אוֹתָהּ מֵעַתָּה עַד שֶׁתִּפָּדֶה:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When a woman stated: "I was taken captive, but I am pure," and a court granted her license to marry [a priest], she may marry [one] as an initial and preferred option. Her license is not revoked [even if] afterwards two witnesses come and testify that she was taken captive.⁸¹ Even if her captor enters afterwards and we see that she is a captive under his dominion, her license [to marry a priest] is not revoked. We provide her with protection until she is redeemed.⁸² 23a relates, the daughters of the Sage Shmuel were taken captive. They were transported to *Eretz Yisrael*. They told their captors to wait for them outside and entered the court of Rabbi Chaninah and said: "We were taken captive, but we are pure." The Sages permitted them to marry into the priesthood.

footnotes:
⁸¹ Had the witnesses made their statements first, the woman would not have been granted this license. Nevertheless, once she is given permission to marry into the priesthood, that permission is not rescinded unless there are witnesses that she was defiled.
⁸² I.e., watchmen who will observe her and prevent her from being raped by her captors. Although she did not enjoy this protection beforehand, we grant it to her at present.All of the particulars in this halachah are taken from an actual incident that took place. As Ketubot


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:23
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:23)

בָּאוּ לָהּ שְׁנֵי עֵדִים אַחַר כָּךְ שֶׁנִּטְמֵאת אֲפִלּוּ נִשֵּׂאת וַאֲפִלּוּ הָיוּ לָהּ בָּנִים הֲרֵי זוֹ תֵּצֵא. וְאִם בָּא עֵד אֶחָד אֵינוֹ כְּלוּם. אָמְרָה נִשְׁבֵּיתִי וּטְהוֹרָה אֲנִי וְיֵשׁ לִי עֵדִים שֶׁאֲנִי טְהוֹרָה אֵין אוֹמְרִין נַמְתִּין עַד שֶׁיָּבוֹאוּ הָעֵדִים אֶלָּא מַתִּירִין אוֹתָהּ מִיָּד. וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא אֲפִלּוּ יָצָא עָלֶיהָ קוֹל שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלֶיהָ עֵדֵי טֻמְאָה מַתִּירִין אוֹתָהּ עַד שֶׁיָּבוֹאוּ. שֶׁבִּשְׁבוּיָה הֵקֵלּוּ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
If two witnesses came and stated that [a woman] was defiled, even if she had married and even if she bore children [to her husband, the priest], she must be divorced.⁸³ If one witness came and testified [that she was defiled], his testimony is of no consequence.⁸⁴ 7:9 and the *Beit Shmuel* 7:12 states that even if the witness came after she was given license to marry into the priesthood, but before she actually married, his testimony is of no consequence and the license is not rescinded. This applies even if witnesses had also come and testified that she had been held captive.
If the woman says, "I was taken captive, but I am pure, and I have witnesses that I am pure," we do not say: "Let us wait until the witnesses come." Instead, we grant her license [to marry into the priesthood] immediately. Moreover, even if a rumor is circulated that there are witnesses that she was defiled,⁸⁵ 7:11 quotes the Ritbah who maintains that this ruling applies even if the rumor was substantiated in court. As long as there is not actually testimony, her status remains unchanged. we grant her license [to marry into the priesthood] until the witnesses come. [The rationale is that] we are lenient with regard to a woman taken captive.

footnotes:
⁸³ For testimony delivered by two witnesses establishes a halachic reality which must be reckoned with.
⁸⁴ The Chelkat Mechokek
⁸⁵ The Chelkat Mechokek


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:24
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:24)

הָאָב שֶׁאָמַר קִדַּשְׁתִּי אֶת בִּתִּי וְגֵרַשְׁתִּיהָ וַהֲרֵי הִיא קְטַנָּה נֶאֱמָן. קִדַּשְׁתִּיהָ וְגֵרַשְׁתִּיהָ כְּשֶׁהָיְתָה קְטַנָּה וַהֲרֵי הִיא גְּדוֹלָה אֵינוֹ נֶאֱמָן לְהַחֲזִיקָהּ גְּרוּשָׁה. נִשְׁבֵּית וּפְדִיתִיהָ בֵּין שֶׁהִיא גְּדוֹלָה בֵּין שֶׁהִיא קְטַנָּה אֵינוֹ נֶאֱמָן. שֶׁלֹּא הֶאֱמִינָה אוֹתוֹ תּוֹרָה אֶלָּא לְאָסְרָהּ מִשּׁוּם אִישׁוּת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כב טז) "אֶת בִּתִּי נָתַתִּי לָאִישׁ הַזֶּה". אֲבָל לֹא לְפָסְלָהּ מִשּׁוּם זְנוּת:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When a father states: "I consecrated my daughter and I had her divorced,"⁸⁶ 3:11 (see also 9:10). [as long as] she is a minor," his word is accepted.⁸⁷ "I consecrated my daughter and I had her divorced while she was a minor," when she is past majority, his word is not accepted with regard to her being considered as a divorcee.⁸⁸ 64a).
[When he says,] "She was held captive and I redeemed her," his word is not accepted whether she is a minor or past majority. For the Torah deems him trustworthy only with regard to having her forbidden because of marriage, for it is written [Deuteronomy 22:16]: "I gave my daughter to this man,"⁸⁹ but not to have her disqualified as a *zonah*.⁹⁰ 7:15 explains that we do not accept his word based on the principle of *miggo*. To explain: one might think that since the father's word would be accepted were he to claim that he consecrated her and had her divorced, we accept his word if he claims that she was taken captive, for had he desired to lie, he could have claimed that she was divorced. We do not follow that argument, because the statement that she was taken captive involves a more encompassing prohibition, causing her to be forbidden to partake of *terumah* as well as being forbidden to marry a priest.

footnotes:
⁸⁶ As is his right until she reaches maturity [Hilchot Ishut
⁸⁷ And she is forbidden to marry into the priesthood.
⁸⁸ For his word is accepted only as long as the matter is in his hands (see Kiddushin
⁸⁹ Since he has the right to consecrate her and effect her divorce, his word is accepted with regard to her status.
⁹⁰ The Beit Shmuel


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:25
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:25)

אֵשֶׁת כֹּהֵן שֶׁנֶּאֶסְרָה עָלָיו מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּיָה הוֹאִיל וְהַדָּבָר סָפֵק הֲרֵי זוֹ מֻתֶּרֶת לָדוּר עִמּוֹ בֶּחָצֵר אֶחָד וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיִּהְיוּ עִמּוֹ בָּנָיו וּבְנֵי בֵּיתוֹ תָּמִיד לְשָׁמְרוֹ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When the wife of a priest is forbidden to him because she was taken captive, [we grant a leniency]. Since [the prohibition was instituted because] of a doubt,⁹¹ (*Even HaEzer* 7) states that, based on the Rambam's statements, if there are witnesses that the woman was defiled, this leniency is not granted. she is permitted to dwell together with him in the same courtyard, provided his children and the members of his household will always be there to watch him.⁹²

footnotes:
⁹¹ I.e., the prohibition was instituted because we suspect that she was defiled. The Beit Yosef
⁹² And see that the couple do not engage in intimacy.


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:26
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:26](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:26)

עִיר שֶׁבָּאָה בְּמָצוֹר וְנִכְבְּשָׁה אִם הָיוּ הָעַכּוּ"ם מַקִּיפִין אֶת הָעִיר מִכָּל רוּחוֹתֶיהָ כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תִּמָּלֵט אִשָּׁה אַחַת עַד שֶׁיִּרְאוּ אוֹתָהּ וְתֵעָשֶׂה בִּרְשׁוּתָן הֲרֵי כָּל הַנָּשִׁים שֶׁבְּתוֹכָהּ פְּסוּלוֹת לִכְהֻנָּה כִּשְׁבוּיוֹת שֶׁמָּא נִבְעֲלוּ לְעַכּוּ"ם. אֶלָּא מִי שֶׁהָיְתָה מִבַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וּלְמַטָּה כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
[The following laws apply when] a city was held under siege and conquered. If the gentiles surrounded the city from all sides so that it was impossible for [even] one woman to escape⁹³ 27b. There are several other interpretations of that passage. The *Shulchan Aruch* (*Even HaEzer* 7:10) quotes the Rambam's view, but also that of dissenting authorities. See also *Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot* 12:24 which states a ruling dependent on the same passage. without being seen and placed under their dominion, all of the women in [the city] are forbidden [to marry into] the priesthood. They are considered as if they were held captive for perhaps they were raped by gentiles. [The only exception] are those less than three years old as explained.⁹⁴

footnotes:
⁹³ This ruling (as continued in the following three halachot) reflects the Rambam's interpretation of Ketubot
⁹⁴ See Halachah 17.


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:27
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:27](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:27)

וְאִם הָיָה אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁתִּמָּלֵט אִשָּׁה אַחַת וְלֹא יֵדְעוּ בָּהּ אוֹ שֶׁתִּהְיֶה בָּעִיר מַחֲבוֹאָה אַחַת אֲפִלּוּ אֵינָהּ מַחְזֶקֶת אֶלָּא אִשָּׁה אַחַת הֲרֵי זוֹ מַצֶּלֶת עַל הַכּל:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
If it was possible for one of the woman to escape without being detected or there was one hiding place in the city - even if it could hold only one woman - it saves all [the women from being deemed forbidden].⁹⁵. As stated in the following halachah, had she desired to lie, instead of saying merely that she was not molested, she could have claimed to have escaped or have hidden.

footnotes:
⁹⁵ Even if the woman admits that she did not escape or hide, her word is accepted, based on the principle of miggo


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:28
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:28](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:28)

כֵּיצַד מַצֶּלֶת. שֶׁכָּל אִשָּׁה שֶׁאָמְרָה טְהוֹרָה אֲנִי נֶאֱמֶנֶת. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין לָהּ עֵד מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁיְּכוֹלָה לוֹמַר נִמְלַטְתִּי כְּשֶׁנִּכְבְּשָׁה הָעִיר אוֹ בְּמַחֲבוֹאָה הָיִיתִי וְנִצַּלְתִּי נֶאֱמֶנֶת לוֹמַר לֹא נִמְלַטְתִּי וְלֹא נֶחְבֵּאתִי וְלֹא נִטְמֵאתִי:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
How does it save [the women from being deemed forbidden]? The word of every woman who claims "I am pure" is accepted. Since she could have said: "I escaped when the city was conquered," or "I was in a hiding place and I was saved," her word is accepted if she says: "I did not escape, nor did I hide, but I was not defiled."⁹⁶ 7:15 which state that the Rambam's words imply that the woman must come to court and make these statements to be granted license to marry into the priesthood. They also mention Rabbenu Nissim's view that does not require this measure, but instead permits all women in these situations to marry into the priesthood automatically.

footnotes:
⁹⁶ See the Chelkat Mechokek


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:29
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:29](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:29)

בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בִּגְדוּד שֶׁל אוֹתָהּ מַלְכוּת שֶׁהֵם מִתְיַשְּׁבִין בָּעִיר וְאֵין יְרֵאִין לְפִיכָךְ חוֹשְׁשִׁין לָהֶם שֶׁמָּא בָּעֲלוּ. אֲבָל גְּדוּד שֶׁל מַלְכוּת אַחֶרֶת שֶׁפָּשַׁט וְשָׁטַף וְעָבַר לֹא נֶאֶסְרוּ הַנָּשִׁים מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם פְּנַאי לִבְעל שֶׁהֵן עוֹסְקִים בַּשָּׁלָל וּבוֹרְחִין לָהֶם. וְאִם שָׁבוּ נָשִׁים וְנַעֲשׂוּ בִּרְשׁוּתָן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁרָדְפוּ אַחֲרֵיהֶם יִשְׂרָאֵל וְהִצִּילוּ אוֹתָן מִיָּדָם הֲרֵי הֵן אֲסוּרוֹת:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When does the above apply? With regard to a battalion from that country who settle in the city and are not afraid. Therefore we fear that they raped the women. With regard to a battalion from another country, which swept through the city, pillaged and passed on, the women are not forbidden.⁹⁷ [The rationale is that] they do not have time to rape, because they are busy gathering spoil and fleeing.⁹⁸ maintains that even when the conquering army is from another country, if they remain in the city for a longer period, the women are forbidden from marrying into the priesthood. We suspect that since there was no immediate pressure to flee, the soldiers may have raped the local women. If, however, they took the women captive and they were under their dominion, they are forbidden [to the priesthood]⁹⁹ even though Jews pursue [the battalion] and rescued [the women] from them.¹⁰⁰).

footnotes:
⁹⁷ As mentioned above, there are opinions that differ and maintain that even when the battalion is from another country, the women are forbidden.
⁹⁸ The Kessef Mishneh
⁹⁹ As are any women taken captive by gentiles as stated above.
¹⁰⁰ Since our Sages forbade women taken captive, that prohibition is universally enforced, regardless of the length of time the women were in captivity (Kessef Mishneh


###### Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:30
[Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 18:30](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Forbidden%20Intercourse/r/18:30)

הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁנֶחְבְּשָׁה בְּיַד עַכּוּ"ם עַל יְדֵי מָמוֹן מֻתֶּרֶת. עַל יְדֵי נְפָשׁוֹת אֲסוּרָה לִכְהֻנָּה וּלְפִיכָךְ אִם הָיָה בַּעְלָהּ כֹּהֵן נֶאֶסְרָה עָלָיו. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בִּזְמַן שֶׁיַּד יִשְׂרָאֵל תַּקִּיפָה עַל הָעַכּוּ"ם וְהֵם יְרֵאִין מֵהֶם. אֲבָל בִּזְמַן שֶׁיַּד הָעַכּוּ"ם תַּקִּיפָה אֲפִלּוּ עַל יְדֵי מָמוֹן כֵּיוָן שֶׁנַּעֲשֵׂית בִּרְשׁוּת הָעַכּוּ"ם נֶאֶסְרָה אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הֵעִיד לָהּ אֶחָד כִּשְׁבוּיָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

**Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007:**
When a woman was imprisoned because of financial matters, she is permitted [to marry into the priesthood].¹⁰¹ 7:11)]. These laws apply not only to jails, but instances when women are held captive by men for other reasons. When she is imprisoned with regard to matters involving capital punishment, she is forbidden to the priesthood.¹⁰² Therefore if her husband is a priest, she is forbidden to him.¹⁰³ (*Even HaEzer* 7:11). The Ramah quotes the opinion of Rabbenu Asher and other Ashkenazic authorities who maintain that a woman would be forbidden to even an Israelite husband for the reasons stated above. He does, however, mention more lenient views.
When does the above apply? When the Jews have power over the gentiles and they are afraid of them. When, by contrast, the gentiles are in power, even when a woman is imprisoned because of financial matters, she is forbidden since she was taken under the dominion of the gentiles¹⁰⁴ unless there is a witness who testifies on her behalf as is the law regarding a woman taken captive, as explained above.¹⁰⁵

footnotes:
¹⁰¹ I.e., we do not suspect that she was raped, because the gentiles will fear to rape her lest they be forced to forfeit the money owed them [Ramah (Even HaEzer
¹⁰² I.e., we fear that she was raped by her jailers.
¹⁰³ If, however, the husband is an Israelite, there is no prohibition. We do not fear that the women would try to save her life by seducing her jailers or accepting their advances. Were that to be the case, the relations would be considered voluntary and thus she would be prohibited to her husband.The Rambam's ruling is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch
¹⁰⁴ The commentaries question if these laws apply with regard to contemporary prison conditions when it is less likely for the prison staff to ravage women held under their jurisdiction.
¹⁰⁵ Halachah 17.