Study Ketubot folio 32A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
וקיימא לן דאינו לוקה ומשלם. אמר עולא, לא קשיא: כאן באחותו נערה, כאן באחותו בוגרת.
And since we maintain in general that one is not both flogged and liable to pay, if one receives lashes for having sex with his sister, why must he pay the fine as well? Ulla said: This is not difficult; here, the halakha in the Mishnah is with regard to his sister who is a young woman, for whom one pays a fine and is not flogged, whereas there, the halakha in the Mishnah is with regard to his sister who is a grown woman, for whom one does not pay a fine.
The Talmud asks: In the case of one who has sex with his sister who is a grown woman, too, although he does not pay a fine, isn’t there compensation for humiliation and degradation? He should be exempt from lashes in that case as well. The Talmud answers: There, the halakha in the Mishnah is with regard to his sister who is an imbecile, with regard to whom there is no humiliation or degradation beyond her status as an imbecile. The Talmud asks: But isn’t there payment for pain even in the rape of an imbecile? The Talmud responds: The halakha is with regard to a seduced woman, who is not entitled to payment for pain, as she had sex willingly.
השתא דאתית להכי, אפילו תימא אחותו נערה, ביתומה ומפותה.
The Talmud comments: Now that you have arrived at this explanation that the Mishnah is referring to a seduced woman, the Mishnah can be understood even if you say it is referring to his sister who is a young woman. The reason that the seducer does not pay the fine is that the halakha is with regard to one who is an orphan and a seduced woman. Were her father alive, he would receive the payment. Because he died, the payment goes to her. Since she willingly participated in the sex, she relinquished her right to the payment, and the seducer is therefore liable to receive lashes.