אמר רב כהנא משום רבי עקיבא אין לך עני בישראל אלא רשע ערום והמשהא בתו בוגרת אטו המשהא בתו בוגרת לאו רשע ערום הוא
to whom will you assimilate him? to an unmarried woman?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For if an incestuous paramour be excluded from the punishment of an adulterous woman, whether the daughter of a priest or an Israelite (since relationship is independent of these), his law can only be assimilated to that of an unmarried woman, whose unchastity is not punished at all. But surely it cannot be maintained that an illegitimate daughter is burnt for incest with her father, though her offence is a passive one, and less than the man's (v. supra 74b), whilst he goes scot free! Hence the limitation of 'she' cannot apply to this.
');"><sup>25</sup></span>
Sefer HaChinukh
To not reveal the nakedness of the daughter: To not reveal the nakedness of the daughter, and this is not elucidated in the language of the Torah, that the verse would state, "The nakedness of your daughter you shall not reveal." And because of [the following] did a verse not come about it explicitly, since there is no need for it: As since the Torah forbade the daughter of the son and the daughter of the daughter which are more distant than she, there is no reason to say that she is forbidden - as it is an a fortiori argument (kal vachomer). And they, may their memory be blessed, also learned it from a inferential comparison (gezearah shavah). As if we had only extracted it with an fortiori argument, no one would have ever been judged for it - as it is established for us (Sanhedrin 76a) [that] 'we do not punish from an inference.'
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
