Study Ketubot folio 33A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
חובל בחבירו נמי, אם כן בטלת ״לא יוסיף פן יוסיף״! עדים זוממין נמי, אם כן בטלת ״והיה אם בן הכות הרשע״! אלא: עדים זוממין, אפשר לקיומה בבן גרושה ובן חלוצה. חובל בחבירו נמי, איכא לקיומה כגון שהכהו הכאה שאין בה שוה פרוטה.
The Talmud asks: Based on that reasoning, the same would hold true for one who injures another as well; if so, if he pays and is not lashed, you have rendered moot the prohibition “40 he should strike him; he should not exceed, lest if he should exceed” (Deuteronomy 25:3). The same would hold true for conspiring witnesses as well; if so, you have rendered moot the verse interpreted as addressing the matter of conspiring witnesses: “And it should be if the wicked man deserves to be flogged” (Deuteronomy 25:2). Rather, with regard to conspiring witnesses, that verse can be fulfilled in the case of the son of a divorcée or the son of a ḥalutza. If witnesses testified that a priest is the son of a divorcée or a ḥalutza and were discovered to be conspiring witnesses, there is no payment and they are flogged. With regard to one who injures another as well, the verse can be fulfilled in a case where he struck him with a blow that does not cause damage amounting to the value of a peruta.
אחותו נמי, איכא לקיומה באחותו בוגרת! אמר לך רבי יוחנן: האי ״תחת אשר עינה״ מיבעי ליה לכדאביי. דאמר אביי, אמר קרא: ״תחת אשר עינה״. האי ״תחת אשר עינה״, מכלל דאיכא בושת ופגם.
The Talmud raises a difficulty: If so, with regard to one’s sister as well, the lashes can be fulfilled in the case of one who had forced sex with his sister who is a grown woman. Since there is no fine in that case, he is flogged and the verse is not moot. The Talmud answers: R' Yoḥanan could have said to you that he does not agree with Ulla because this verse: “Because he tormented her” (Deuteronomy 22:29), is not available for a verbal analogy, as he requires it to derive in accordance with that which Abaye said, as Abaye said that the verse states: The fine of 50 dinar is payment “because he tormented her”; by inference one may conclude that beyond the fine, there is compensation for humiliation and degradation.