Reference for Sanhedrin 101:30
מתקיף לה ר' ירמיה מידי למעלה למטה קתני אלא אמר רבי ירמיה
— Rabin sent a messagein the name of R. Jose son of R.Hanina:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Here we have an example of a Talmudic responsum. Rabin migrated from Babylonia to Palestine, and wrote many letters from Babylonia to Palestine with the results of his researches. Cf. Keth. 49b; B.M. 114a; B.B. 139a. 'Rabin sent' then will mean from Palestine to Babylonia. ');"><sup>26</sup></span> This is the explanationof the teaching.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the Baraitha containing the statement of R. Eliezer. ');"><sup>27</sup></span> Indeed it is inaccordance with the Rabbis' views and this is its meaning: Where an adulterouswoman's death is more lenient than that of her father for incest [with hisdaughter], that is in the case of an Israelite's daughter, who is a arusah,her punishment beingstrangulation;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whilst her father's penalty is death by burning. ');"><sup>28</sup></span> then in the caseof a priest's daughter, her punishment is the same as her father's, viz., burning;but where an adulterous woman's penalty is greater than her father's, thatis in the case of an Israelite's daughter, who is an arusah, her punishmentbeing stoning,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which, according to the Rabbis, in severer than burning, the father's punishment. ');"><sup>29</sup></span> then in the caseof a priest's daughter, her punishment is as that of her father-in-law forincest with her, viz., bystoning.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rashi points out that it is unnecessary to liken her punishment to her father-in-law's, since the penalty of every arusah is stoning. But in any case the Talmud refutes this explanation. ');"><sup>30</sup></span> R. Jeremiah objected tothis explanation: Does then the Baraitha state 'greater' or 'lesser'? ButR. Jeremiah explained it thus: