Sanhedrin 73: When We are Permitted to Kill in Self-Defence

A new Mishna lists those who must be killed to ensure that they will not transgress:

• one who pursues another to kill him
• one who pursues a man to 'sodomize" him
• one who pursues a betrothed young woman to rape her

Others are not killed for their actions but must be forewarned:

• one who pursues an animal to "sodomize" it
• one who desecrates Shabbat
• one who is about to engage in idol worship

The Gemara walks us through a balancing act.  Why are the first three acts grouped to gather and the second three acts grouped together?  The rabbis are attempting to weigh competing priorities.

• the disrespectful behaviour of simply lowering a young woman's value
• the imperative to "not stand idly by the blood of another"; ie. to save a person who is in mortal danger
• one's obligation to one's neighbours over oneself
• mere prohibitions do not permit a person to save another at the cost of his life - for example, a high priest who is pursuing a widow or a divorcee 
• if a woman's worth is not damaged by the sin, then death can be avoided
• desecration of idol worship might be connected to the desecration of Shabbat
• perhaps a rapist must be killed because a woman would rather give her life than be raped
• levels of degradation might determine levels of punishment

Our daf ends with a disturbing discussion about the rape of a young woman by her brother.  If he raped her atypically, i.e. anal intercourse, and then raped her typically, i.e. vaginal intercourse, what is his punishment?  She is still a virgin after the first rape, and thus he is not killed for his crime.  When he rapes her again, she has already been degraded, and so he is not killed for this crime, either.  The rabbis consider the possibility that she has acquiesced to the rapes for fear that her brother would kill her otherwise.  This does not mitigate the decision to minimize the brother's punishment.  

Such casual conversation regarding violent, traumatic and horrific personal assaults is disconcerting.  It is understood that the rabbis are using this example to help them understand when a person can kill to avoid being killed.  However, the callous wording of their conversation continues to create discomfort for any reader sensitive to such heinous acts of cruelty.