Commentary for Sanhedrin 101:13

איצטריך סד"א קרא לאפוקי מדרבא מדגלי רחמנא בבת כהן ולא בבת ישראל קמ"ל

'But perhaps "her father"is stated in order to exclude others?' — How then would you explain theverse? That she committed adulterous incest with her father! If so, why onlya priest's daughter: does not the same apply to an Israelite's daughter?For [did not] Raba say: R. Isaac b. Abudimi said unto me: 'We learn identityof law from the fact that hennah [they] occurs in two related passages, andlikewise zimmah [wickedness] intwo'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In Lev. XVIII, 10 it is stated: The nakedness of thy son's daughter, or of thy daughter's daughter, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover: for they ([H] hennah) are thine own nakedness. Further it is written (ibid. XVIII, 17): Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter, neither shalt thou take her son's daughter, or her daughter's daughter, to uncover her nakedness; for they ([H] hennah) are her near kinswomen: it is wickedness ([H] zimmah). Just as in the latter verse, intercourse with one's wife's daughter is treated as with her granddaughter, so in the former case, incest with one's daughter is the same offence as with one's granddaughter. Though this is not explicitly stated, it is deduced from the fact that hennah occurs in both cases. Further, in Lev. XX, 14 it is stated: And If a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness ([H] zimmah): they shall be burnt with fire. The use of zimmah in Lev. XX, 14 and in Lev. XVIII, 17 show that burning by fire is the penalty in both cases; and the use of hennah in Lev. XVIII, 17 and Lev. XVIII, 10 shews that in Lev. XVIII, 10 too the penalty is burning (cf. the Euclidean axiom: the equals of equals are equal). Thus we see that incest between a man, even an Israelite, and his daughter is punished by burning. How then could we assume that the verse under discussion, which decrees burning as a penalty for whoredom by a priest's daughter (implying the exclusion of an Israelite's daughter), refers to incest with one's father, and consequently what need is there for the deduction from she profaneth? ');">¹²</span>

Explore commentary for Sanhedrin 101:13. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.