Ketubot 29: Fines and/or Karet for Raping a Na'ara

Perek III begins in daf 29 with a new Mishna: These are the cases of young women where fines are paid to their fathers: if one has intercourse with a mamzeret, or a Gibeonite, or a kutit, a Samaritan woman.  As well, with a young woman convert who has already converted, a captive woman who was ransomed, a maidservant who was freed before the age of three years and one day. For one who has intercourse with his sister, his mother's sister, his father's sister, his wife's sister, his brother's wife, father's brother's wife (after divorce) or with a menstruating woman, a fine is paid.  Karet is the punishment for these last offences.  However, since karet is in the hands of G-d and not in the hands of the court (ie. there is no death penalty for these transgressions), a fine is in order.

The Gemara clarifies a number of issues:

What does this teach us about karet versus capital punishment?  To recall past texts, one who is liable to capital punishment is not liable to fines.  But one who is liable to karet, death at the hand of G-d/excommunication, is liable to a fine as well as karet

Why are those of 'flawed' lineage deserving of fines when those of 'unflawed' lineage are not? or is this simply to distinguish the na'ara from a minor?

Why would minors not receive fines after being raped?  R. Meir is careful to note that when still available for sale as a maidservant, one's daughter can be raped without a fine owed.  But once she is a na'ara, she can no longer be sold and is deserving of the fine if she is raped.  Rashi disagrees, and Torah verses must be found to prove this opinion, for the verse at hand clearly indicates that only the father of a na'ara is paid a fine for this transgression.

What is the significance of "young woman"?  Is this about virginity?  Is it like other Talmudic conversations, where the word 'na'ara' is said three times to represent the issue at hand (rape of a young woman), a fine for violation of prohibitions, and a fine for a one who has committed this crime that is punishable by karet.  How is a young woman different from a minor and why is this specific to young women?

The rabbis use a gezera shava, a verbal analogy, to connect this fine with the amount of money in the 'dowry of the virgins'.  They use shared phrasing to demonstrate that these young women are entitled to the same amount of money: 50 sela (in silver coins).  To put this into context, a standard get, divorce contract, is worth 200 dinars or zuz.  That is the same as 400 sela.  The dowry for a virgin and the fine for raping a na'ara are each 1/8 the amount of money paid out to a woman who is divorced.  Clearly that fine is not intended to support this woman for a year, like the amount of the ketubah.  Instead it is a fine paid to the woman's father for his 'damaged property'.  

Generally speaking, men can betroth women through rape. This Mishna seems to discourage that act - at least when it is done indiscriminately.  Rape in these cases does not lead to betrothal.  But the rabbis argue about this.  Certainly not in all cases!  For we know that betrothal does take place if a man rapes a mamzeret.  So what could this mean?  Perhaps it refers to a High Priest who rapes a widow.  She is forbidden to him, but if he rapes her, their children are not mamzerim but chillulin.  Does this explain the discrepancy?

So much detail is in each phrase of Ketubot that it is very difficult to select some information to share.  IT is also tough to distill what I learn.  And not only because what I read is so complex and so detailed, but because it is also disturbing, illuminating, and informative about societal realities that I would love to research further.  One daf each day makes no sense, especially when it comes to Masechet Ketubot.