Talmud, Maimonides, Minors, Puberty & Sex

5

יוֹצֵא דֹפֶן, אֵין יוֹשְׁבִין עָלָיו יְמֵי טֻמְאָה וִימֵי טָהֳרָה, וְאֵין חַיָּבִין עָלָיו קָרְבָּן. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, הֲרֵי זֶה כְיָלוּד. כָּל הַנָּשִׁים מִטַּמְּאוֹת בַּבַּיִת הַחִיצוֹן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ט״ו:י״ט), דָּם יִהְיֶה זֹבָהּ בִּבְשָׂרָהּ. אֲבָל הַזָּב וּבַעַל קֶרִי, אֵינָן מִטַּמְּאִים, עַד שֶׁתֵּצֵא טֻמְאָתָן לַחוּץ:

After the birth of an offspring by caesarean section, the mother does not observe seven or fourteen days of impurity and thirty-three or sixty-six days of purity for male and female offspring, respectively, and she is not obligated to bring for it the offering brought by a woman after childbirth. Rabbi Shimon says: The halakhic status of that offspring is like that of an offspring born in a standard birth. All women become ritually impure with the flow of blood from the uterus into the outer chamber, i.e., the vagina, although it did not leave the woman’s body, as it is stated: “And her issue in her flesh shall be blood, she shall be in her menstruation seven days” (Leviticus 15:19), indicating that even if her menstrual blood remains in her flesh, she becomes impure. But one who experiences a gonorrhea-like discharge [zav] and one who experiences a seminal emission do not become ritually impure until their emission of impurity emerges outside the body.

הָיָה אוֹכֵל בַּתְּרוּמָה וְהִרְגִּישׁ שֶׁנִּזְדַּעְזְעוּ אֵבָרָיו, אוֹחֵז בָּאַמָּה וּבוֹלֵעַ אֶת הַתְּרוּמָה. וּמְטַמְּאִים בְּכָל שֶׁהוּא, אֲפִלּוּ כְעֵין הַחַרְדָּל וּבְפָחוֹת מִכָּן:

If a priest was partaking of teruma, the portion of the produce designated for the priest, and sensed a quaking of his limbs indicating that a seminal emission was imminent, he should firmly hold his penis to prevent the emission from leaving his body, and swallow the teruma while ritually pure. And the emission of a zav and a seminal emission impart impurity in any amount, even like the size of a mustard seed or even smaller than that.

תִּינוֹקֶת בַּת יוֹם אֶחָד, מִטַּמְּאָה בְנִדָּה. בַּת עֲשָׂרָה יָמִים, מִטַּמְּאָה בְזִיבָה. תִּינוֹק בֶּן יוֹם אֶחָד, מִטַּמֵּא בְזִיבָה, וּמִטַּמֵּא בִנְגָעִים, וּמִטַּמֵּא בִטְמֵא מֵת, וְזוֹקֵק לְיִבּוּם, וּפוֹטֵר מִן הַיִּבּוּם, וּמַאֲכִיל בַּתְּרוּמָה, וּפוֹסֵל מִן הַתְּרוּמָה, וְנוֹחֵל וּמַנְחִיל. וְהַהוֹרְגוֹ, חַיָּב. וַהֲרֵי הוּא לְאָבִיו וּלְאִמּוֹ וּלְכָל קְרוֹבָיו כְּחָתָן שָׁלֵם:

A baby girl, even one who is one day old, who experiences an emission of blood, becomes impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman. A baby girl who is ten days old who experiences an emission of blood for three consecutive days after the conclusion of the seven days fit for menstruation becomes impure with the impurity of ziva, and is therefore obligated to observe seven clean days before immersion. A baby boy, even one who is one day old, becomes impure with the impurity of ziva; and becomes impure with the impurity of leprous marks; and becomes impure with impurity imparted by a corpse; and he creates a levirate bond requiring the widow of his childless brother to enter into levirate marriage with him; and he exempts his widowed mother from the obligation of levirate marriage, freeing her to marry anyone she chooses; and he enables his mother, an Israelite woman who is no longer married to his father, a priest, to continue to partake of teruma; and he disqualifies his mother, the daughter of a priest who is no longer married to his father, an Israelite man, from continuing to partake of teruma, because the child is unfit to partake of teruma; and he inherits the estate of his mother if she died on the day of his birth; and if he dies, he bequeaths that inheritance to his paternal brothers; and one who kills him is liable for his murder, as it is written: “And he that smites any man mortally shall be put to death” (Leviticus 24:17), i.e., any man, including a child who is one day old; and if he dies, his status in relation to his father and to his mother and to all his relatives, in terms of the halakhot of mourning, is like that of a full-fledged groom [keḥatan shalem], whose death is deeply mourned.

בַּת שָׁלשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד, מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת בְּבִיאָה. וְאִם בָּא עָלֶיהָ יָבָם, קְנָאָהּ. וְחַיָּבִין עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ, וּמְטַמְּאָה אֶת בּוֹעֲלָהּ לְטַמֵּא מִשְׁכָּב תַּחְתּוֹן כָּעֶלְיוֹן. נִשֵּׂאת לְכֹהֵן, תֹּאכַל בַּתְּרוּמָה. בָּא עָלֶיהָ אַחַד מִן הַפְּסוּלִים, פְּסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהֻנָּה. בָּא עָלֶיהָ אַחַד מִכָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה, מוּמָתִין עַל יָדָהּ, וְהִיא פְטוּרָה. פָּחוֹת מִכָּן, כְּנוֹתֵן אֶצְבַּע בָּעָיִן:

A girl who is three years and one day old, whose father arranged her betrothal, is betrothed THROUGH INTERCOURSE, as the halakhic status of intercourse with her is that of intercourse in all halakhic senses. And in a case where the childless husband of a girl three years and one day old dies, if his brother the yavam engages IN INTERCCOURSE with her, he acquires her as his wife; and if she is married, a man other than her husband is liable for engaging in intercourse with her due to violation of the prohibition against intercourse with a married woman. And if she is impure due to menstruation, she imparts impurity to one who engages in intercourse with her who then renders impure all the layers of bedding beneath him, rendering them impure like the upper bedding covering a zav, in the sense that it assumes first-degree ritual impurity and does not become a primary source of ritual impurity, and it renders impure food and drink, but it does not render impure people and vessels. If she marries a priest, she may partake of teruma, like any other wife of a priest; if she is unmarried and one of the men who are unfit for the priesthood, e.g., a mamzer or ḥalal, engaged in intercourse with her, he disqualifies her from marrying into the priesthood, and if she is the daughter of a priest, she is disqualified from partaking of teruma. Finally, if one of all those with whom relations are forbidden, as stated in the Torah, e.g., her father or her husband’s father, engaged in intercourse with her, they are executed by the court for engaging in intercourse with her, and she is exempt, because she is a minor. If the girl is less than that age, YOUNGER THAN THREE YEARS AND ONE DAY, the status of intercourse with her is not that of intercourse in all halakhic senses; rather, it is like placing a finger into the eye. Just as in that case, the eye constricts, sheds tears, and then returns to its original state, so too, in a girl younger than three years and one day old, THE HYMEN RETURNS TO ITS ORIGINAL STATE.

בֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד שֶׁבָּא עַל יְבִמְתּוֹ, קְנָאָהּ. וְאֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן גֵּט עַד שֶׁיַּגְדִּיל. וּמִטַּמֵּא בְנִדָּה, לְטַמֵּא מִשְׁכָּב תַּחְתּוֹן כָּעֶלְיוֹן. וּפוֹסֵל וְאֵינוֹ מַאֲכִיל בַּתְּרוּמָה. וּפוֹסֵל אֶת הַבְּהֵמָה מֵעַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, וְנִסְקֶלֶת עַל יָדוֹ. וְאִם בָּא עַל אַחַת מִכָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה, מוּמָתִים עַל יָדוֹ, וְהוּא פָטוּר:

In the case of a boy, nine years and one day old, whose brother had died childless, who engaged in intercourse with his yevama, his brother’s widow, the status of the intercourse is that of halakhic intercourse and he acquires her as his wife; but he cannot give her a bill of divorce, if he chooses to end the marriage, until he reaches majority. And he becomes ritually impure after engaging in intercourse with a menstruating woman to the degree that he renders impure all the layers of bedding beneath him, such that they become impure like the upper bedding covering a zav. Accordingly, the bedding assumes first-degree ritual impurity status and does not become a primary source of ritual impurity, and it renders impure food and drink and does not render impure people and vessels. And if he is disqualified from the priesthood and the woman with whom he engages in intercourse is the daughter of a priest, he disqualifies her from partaking of teruma; but if he is a priest who marries an Israelite woman, he does not enable her to partake of teruma. And if he engages in bestiality, he disqualifies the animal from being sacrificed upon the altar, and the animal is stoned due to his act. And if he engaged in intercourse with one of all those with whom relations are forbidden, as stated in the Torah, e.g., his aunt or his mother, they are executed by the court due to having engaged in intercourse with him, because they are adults; but he is exempt, as he is a minor.

בַּת אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה וְיוֹם אֶחָד, נְדָרֶיהָ נִבְדָּקִין. בַּת שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה וְיוֹם אֶחָד, נְדָרֶיהָ קַיָּמִין. וּבוֹדְקִין כָּל שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה. בֶּן שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה וְיוֹם אֶחָד, נְדָרָיו נִבְדָּקִים. בֶּן שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה וְיוֹם אֶחָד, נְדָרָיו קַיָּמִין. וּבוֹדְקִין כָּל שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה. קֹדֶם לַזְּמַן הַזֶּה, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמְרוּ יוֹדְעִין אָנוּ לְשֵׁם מִי נָדָרְנוּ, לְשֵׁם מִי הִקְדָּשְׁנוּ, אֵין נִדְרֵיהֶם נֶדֶר וְאֵין הֶקְדֵּשָׁן הֶקְדֵּשׁ. לְאַחַר הַזְּמַן הַזֶּה, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמְרוּ אֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין לְשֶׁם מִי נָדָרְנוּ, לְשֶׁם מִי הִקְדָּשְׁנוּ, נִדְרָן נֶדֶר וְהֶקְדֵּשָׁן הֶקְדֵּשׁ:

With regard to a girl who is eleven years and one day old, her vows are examined to ascertain whether she is aware of the meaning of her vow and in Whose name she vowed. Once she is twelve years and one day old and has grown two pubic hairs, which is a sign of adulthood, even without examination her vows are in effect. And one examines her vows throughout the entire twelfth year until her twelfth birthday. With regard to a boy who is twelve years and one day old, his vows are examined to ascertain whether he is aware of the meaning of his vow and in Whose name he vowed. Once he is thirteen years and one day old and has grown two pubic hairs, even without examination his vows are in effect. And one examines his vows throughout the entire thirteenth year until his thirteenth birthday. Prior to that time, eleven years and one day for a girl and twelve years and one day for a boy, even if they said: We know in Whose name we vowed and in Whose name we consecrated, their vow is not a valid vow and their consecration is not a valid consecration. After that time, twelve years and one day for a girl and thirteen years and one day for a boy, even if they said: We do not know in Whose name we vowed and in Whose name we consecrated, their vow is a valid vow and their consecration is a valid consecration.

מָשָׁל מָשְׁלוּ חֲכָמִים בָּאִשָּׁה. פַּגָּה, בֹּחַל וְצֶמֶל. פַּגָּה, עוֹדָהּ תִּינוֹקֶת. בֹּחַל, אֵלּוּ יְמֵי נְעוּרֶיהָ. בָּזוֹ וּבָזוֹ, אָבִיהָ זַכַּאי בִּמְצִיאָתָהּ וּבְמַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיהָ וּבַהֲפָרַת נְדָרֶיהָ. צֶמֶל, כֵּיוָן שֶׁבָּגְרָה, שׁוּב אֵין לְאָבִיהָ רְשׁוּת בָּהּ:

The Sages stated a parable based on the development of the fruit of a fig tree with regard to the three stages of development in a woman: Minority, young womanhood, and grown womanhood. An unripe fig, a ripening fig, and a ripe fig. An unripe fig represents the stage when she is still a child and has not yet developed the signs of puberty; a ripening fig represents the days of her young womanhood, when she reaches twelve years and one day and has developed two pubic hairs. With regard to the periods both during this stage, minority, and during that stage, young womanhood, the Sages said that her father is entitled to any lost object that she finds that cannot be returned to its owner, and to her earnings, and to nullification of her vows. A ripe fig represents the stage of grown womanhood: Once she has reached her majority, her father no longer has authority over her. He can no longer nullify her vows, and he does not have a claim to lost objects found by her and her earnings belong to her.

אֵיזֶהוּ סִימָנֶיהָ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי אוֹמֵר, מִשֶּׁיַּעֲלֶה הַקֶּמֶט תַּחַת הַדָּד. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, מִשֶּׁיַּטּוּ הַדַּדִּים. בֶּן עַזַּאי אוֹמֵר, מִשֶּׁתַּשְׁחִיר הַפִּטֹּמֶת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּהֵא נוֹתֵן יָדוֹ עַל הָעֹקֶץ וְהוּא שׁוֹקֵעַ וְשׁוֹהֶה לַחֲזֹר:

What are the signs that indicate grown womanhood? Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: Grown womanhood begins from when her breast grows sufficiently so that a fold appears below the breast. Rabbi Akiva says: It begins from when the breasts sag onto the chest. Ben Azzai says: It begins from when the areola at the tip of the breast darkens. Rabbi Yosei says: It begins when the breasts have developed to a size where a person places his hand on the nipple and it depresses and slows to return.

בַּת עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה שֶׁלֹּא הֵבִיאָה שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת, תָּבִיא רְאָיָה שֶׁהִיא בַת עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה, וְהִיא אַיְלוֹנִית, לֹא חוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַבֶּמֶת. בֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה שֶׁלֹּא הֵבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת, יָבִיא רְאָיָה שֶׁהוּא בֶן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה, וְהוּא סָרִיס, לֹא חוֹלֵץ וְלֹא מְיַבֵּם, אֵלּוּ דִּבְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, זֶה וָזֶה בְּנֵי שְׁמֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, הַזָּכָר כְּדִבְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל, וְהַנְּקֵבָה כְּדִבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמַּאי, שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה מְמַהֶרֶת לָבֹא לִפְנֵי הָאִישׁ:

A girl twelve years and one day old who grew two pubic hairs is classified as a young woman. Six months later, she becomes a grown woman. But a woman who is twenty years old who did not grow two pubic hairs and was never classified as a young woman shall bring proof that she is twenty years old, and from that point forward she assumes the status of a sexually underdeveloped woman [ailonit], who is incapable of bearing children. If she married and her husband died childless, she neither performs ḥalitza nor does she enter into levirate marriage, as the mitzva of levirate marriage applies only to a woman capable of conceiving a child. An ailonit is excluded from that mitzva. In the case of a man who is twenty years old who did not grow two pubic hairs, they shall bring proof that he is twenty years old and he assumes the status of a sexually underdeveloped man [saris], who is excluded from the mitzva of levirate marriage. Therefore, if his married brother dies childless, he neither performs ḥalitza nor enters into levirate marriage with his yevama. This is the statement of Beit Hillel. Beit Shammai say: For both this case of a woman and that case of a man, they shall bring proof that they are eighteen years old, and they assume the status of a sexually underdeveloped woman and man respectively. Rabbi Eliezer says: The status of the male is determined in accordance with the statement of Beit Hillel, i.e., he assumes the status of a sexually underdeveloped man at the age of twenty; and the status of the female is determined in accordance with the statement of Beit Shammai, i.e., she assumes the status of a sexually underdeveloped woman at the age of eighteen. The reason is that the woman is quick to reach physical maturity, and reaches that stage before the man reaches physical maturity.

6

בָּא סִימָן הַתַּחְתּוֹן עַד שֶׁלֹּא בָא הָעֶלְיוֹן, אוֹ חוֹלֶצֶת אוֹ מִתְיַּבֶּמֶת. בָּא הָעֶלְיוֹן עַד שֶׁלֹּא בָא הַתַּחְתּוֹן, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, לֹא חוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַבֶּמֶת. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אוֹ חוֹלֶצֶת אוֹ מִתְיַבֶּמֶת. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאָמְרוּ, אֶפְשָׁר לַתַּחְתּוֹן לָבֹא עַד שֶׁלֹּא בָא הָעֶלְיוֹן, אֲבָל אִי אֶפְשָׁר לָעֶלְיוֹן לָבֹא עַד שֶׁלֹּא בָא הַתַּחְתּוֹן:

If the lower sign of puberty, two pubic hairs, appeared in a young woman before the upper sign, development of the breasts, appeared, then she is an adult, as the pubic hairs are an unequivocal sign. Therefore, if her childless husband died and she came before her husband’s brother [yavam] for levirate marriage, she either performs the ritual through which a yavam frees a yevama of her levirate bonds [ḥalitza] or enters into levirate marriage with her husband’s brother. If the upper sign indicating puberty appeared before the lower sign appeared, i.e., the two pubic hairs are not visible, although that order of development is apparently impossible, Rabbi Meir says: In fact, it is possible for the breasts to develop before the growth of two pubic hairs, and the concern is that the two hairs did not grow and fall out but rather they never grew in the first place, which would mean that she remains a minor. Therefore, if her childless husband dies, she neither performs ḥalitza nor does she enter into levirate marriage with her husband’s brother. And the Rabbis say: She has reached majority, and therefore if her childless husband dies she either performs ḥalitza or enters into levirate marriage with her husband’s brother. That is due to the fact that the Sages said: It is possible for the lower sign of puberty to appear before the upper sign appears; but it is impossible for the upper sign to appear before the lower sign appears.

כַּיּוֹצֵא בוֹ, כָּל כְּלִי חֶרֶס שֶׁהוּא מַכְנִיס, מוֹצִיא. וְיֵשׁ שֶׁמּוֹצִיא וְאֵינוֹ מַכְנִיס. כָּל אֵבָר שֶׁיֶּשׁ בּוֹ צִפֹּרֶן, יֶשׁ בּוֹ עֶצֶם, וְיֵשׁ שֶׁיֶּשׁ בּוֹ עֶצֶם וְאֵין בּוֹ צִפֹּרֶן:

Similar to the order of the appearance of the signs of puberty in a girl, where it is impossible for the upper sign to appear before the lower sign, there is an analogous principle with regard to the mutual dependency of two items: Any earthenware vessel with a hole that enables entry of liquid into the vessel certainly enables exit of liquid through that hole, and it thereby ceases to be a vessel fit for sanctification of the waters mixed with the ashes of the red heifer. And there are holes that enable exit of liquids from the earthenware vessels but do not enable entry of liquids from outside the vessel, and therefore it remains a vessel. Likewise, in any limb of the body where there is a nail, there is certainly a bone in it as well. If it is the limb of a corpse, it transmits ritual impurity through contact, movement, and in a tent, even if its size is less than that of an olive-bulk. And there are limbs in which there is a bone but yet there is not a nail in it. That limb does not transmit impurity in a tent if its size is less than that of an olive-bulk. (Emphasis mine)

יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁבָּעַל עַכּוּ”ם מִשְּׁאָר הָאֻמּוֹת דֶּרֶךְ אִישׁוּת. אוֹ יִשְׂרְאֵלִית שֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה לְעַכּוּ”ם דֶּרֶךְ אִישׁוּת הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ לוֹקִין מִן הַתּוֹרָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים ז ג) “לֹא תִתְחַתֵּן בָּם בִּתְּךָ לֹא תִתֵּן לִבְנוֹ וּבִתּוֹ לֹא תִקַּח לִבְנֶךָ”. אֶחָד שִׁבְעָה עֲמָמִין וְאֶחָד כָּל אֻמּוֹת בְּאִסּוּר זֶה. וְכֵן מְפֹרָשׁ עַל יְדֵי עֶזְרָא (נחמיה י לא) “וַאֲשֶׁר לֹא נִתֵּן בְּנֹתֵינוּ לְעַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ וְאֶת בְּנֹתֵיהֶם לֹא נִקַּח לְבָנֵינוּ”:

When a Jew engages in relations with a woman from other nations, [taking her] as his spouse or a Jewess engages in relations with a non-Jew as his spouse, they are punished by lashes, according to Scriptural Law. *Licentious relations with a gentile man or woman are not included in the scope of this Scriptural prohibition, as stated in the following halachah. As [Deuteronomy 7:3] states: “You shall not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughter to his son, and do not take his daughter for your son.”

This prohibition applies equally to [individuals from] the seven [Canaanite] nations and all other gentiles. *Although the verse the Rambam cites as a prooftext refers to the seven Canaanite nations, all other gentiles are also included as reflected by the verse from Nechemiah.
The Tur (Even HaEzer 16) differs with the Rambam, explaining that the verse should be understood within its limited context, referring only to the seven nations. (The Rambam’s opinion has a source in the Sheiltot D’Rabbenu Achai Gaon, while that of the Tur is found in the Sefer Mitzvot Gadol) The crux of the difference is the exegesis of the continuation of the verse cited by the Rambam: “For he shall sway your son away.” Kiddushin 68b quotes Rabbi Shimon as focusing on the motivating rationale for the verse and thus including all those who might sway a person’s heart. Thus it refers to all gentiles. The Sages, however, do not accept this perspective. This was explicitly stated in Ezra *Although the verse is contained in the Book of Nechemiah, the Rambam considers Ezra and Nechemiah as one book. See Hilchot Sefer Torah 7:15. Similarly, Sanhedrin 93b states that none of the books of the Tanach are named after Nechemiah.
The verse cited by the Rambam is part of the oath taken by the people to remain true to their faith upon their return to Zion. At that time, the gentiles living in the land were not Canaanites. [Nechemiah 10:31]: “That we will not give our daughters to the gentiles in the land and that we will not take their daughters for our sons.”

וְלֹא אָסְרָה תּוֹרָה אֶלָּא דֶּרֶךְ חַתְנוּת אֲבָל הַבָּא עַל הַכּוּתִית דֶּרֶךְ זְנוּת מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים. גְּזֵרָה שֶׁמָּא יָבוֹא לְהִתְחַתֵּן. וְאִם יִחֲדָהּ לוֹ בִּזְנוּת חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם נִדָּה וּמִשּׁוּם שִׁפְחָה וּמִשּׁוּם כּוּתִית וּמִשּׁוּם זוֹנָה. וְאִם לֹא יִחֲדָהּ לוֹ אֶלָּא נִקְרֵאת מִקְרֶה אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם כּוּתִית [ג.] וְכָל חִיּוּבִין אֵלּוּ מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן:

The Scriptural prohibition applies only to marital relations. *The Tur, loc. cit., differs with the Rambam concerning this point as well, stating that there is no concept of marriage between a Jew and non-Jew. When, by contrast, one engages in relations with a gentile woman with a licentious intent, he is given “stripes for rebellious conduct” according to Rabbinic Law. [This is a] decree, lest this lead to marriage.

If [a Jew] designates [a gentile woman] for licentious relations, he is liable for relations with a niddah, a maid-servant, a gentile woman, and a licentious woman. *This was a decree passed by the court of the Hasmoneans when they saw that the Jews were sharing intimacy with Greek women (Avodah Zarah 36b). The transgressor is given stripes several times, once for each of the Rabbinic prohibitions he ignored. If he did not designate her for himself, but instead, [engage in relations with her] spontaneously, he is only liable for relations with a gentile woman. All of these liabilities are Rabbinic in origin. *According to Scriptural Law, if a Jew engages in relations with a gentile woman in public “the zealot may strike him,” as stated in Halachah 4. The Hasmoneon’s decree, however, applies even when relations were carried out in private.

בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים כְּשֶׁהָיָה הַבּוֹעֵל יִשְׂרָאֵל. אֲבָל כֹּהֵן הַבָּא עַל הַכּוּתִית לוֹקֶה מִן הַתּוֹרָה מִשּׁוּם זוֹנָה. וְאֶחָד זוֹנָה כּוּתִית וְאֶחָד זוֹנָה יִשְׂרְאֵלִית. וּבִבְעִילָה בִּלְבַד לוֹקֶה שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינָהּ בַּת קִדּוּשִׁין:

When does the above apply? When the man who engaged in relations was an Israelite. If, however, a priest engages in relations with a gentile woman, he is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law, because of the prohibition against relations with a zonah. *The term zonah is generally translated as “prostitute.” It has, however, a precise halachic definition, as stated in Chapter 18, Halachah 1. [This prohibition applies] both to a non-Jewish zonah and a Jewish one. He receives lashes for relations alone, for he cannot consecrate her. *Note the contrast to the laws applying to a Jewish zonah, as mentioned in Chapter 17, Halachah 2.

כָּל הַבּוֹעֵל כּוּתִית בֵּין דֶּרֶךְ חַתְנוּת בֵּין דֶּרֶךְ זְנוּת אִם בְּעָלָהּ בְּפַרְהֶסְיָא וְהוּא שֶׁיִּבְעל לְעֵינֵי עֲשָׂרָה מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל אוֹ יֶתֶר אִם פָּגְעוּ בּוֹ קַנָּאִין וַהֲרָגוּהוּ הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מְשֻׁבָּחִין וּזְרִיזִין [ו.] וְדָבָר זֶה הֲלָכָה לְמשֶׁה מִסִּינַי הוּא. רְאָיָה לְדָבָר זֶה מַעֲשֶׂה פִּינְחָס בְּזִמְרִי:

Whenever a man has relations with a gentile woman in public, i.e., the relations are carried out in the presence of ten or more Jews, if a zealous person strikes him and kills him, he is considered praiseworthy and ardent. *The Ra’avad rules that the zealous person must warn the transgressor before striking him. The Maggid Mishneh states that the concept of a warning is relevant only with regard to execution by the court and not to the independent actions taken by a zealous person. The Rama (Choshen Mishpat 425:4) quotes the Ra’avad’s view. [This applies whether the relations were] in the context of marriage or licentious in nature. This matter is a halachah conveyed to Moshe at Sinai. *I.e., a law which is not commanded by the Written Torah, yet communicated by the Oral Tradition. Support for this can be derived from Pinchas’ slaying of Zimri. *As Numbers, ch. 25 relates, the Jews began worshiping idols, because they were lured to by Midianite women. Enraged Moses commanded that the worshipers be executed. Zimri, the prince of the tribe of Shimon, took a Midianite woman and confronted Moses, engaging in relations before him. When Pinchas saw this, he slew Zimri, giving expression to the law mentioned by the Rambam.

וְאֵין הַקַּנַּאי רַשַּׁאי לִפְגֹּעַ בָּהֶן אֶלָּא בִּשְׁעַת מַעֲשֶׂה כְּזִמְרִי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר כה ח) “וְאֶת הָאִשָּׁה אֶל קֳבָתָהּ”. אֲבָל אִם פֵּרַשׁ אֵין הוֹרְגִין אוֹתוֹ. וְאִם הֲרָגוֹ נֶהֱרַג עָלָיו. וְאִם בָּא הַקַּנַּאי לִטּל רְשׁוּת מִבֵּית דִּין לְהָרְגוֹ אֵין מוֹרִין לוֹ וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא בִּשְׁעַת מַעֲשֶׂה. וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא אִם בָּא הַקַּנַּאי לַהֲרֹג אֶת הַבּוֹעֵל וְנִשְׁמַט הַבּוֹעֵל וְהָרַג הַקַּנַּאי כְּדֵי לְהַצִּיל עַצְמוֹ מִיָּדוֹ אֵין הַבּוֹעֵל נֶהֱרַג עָלָיו. וְהַבָּא עַל בַּת גֵּר תּוֹשָׁב אֵין הַקַּנָּאִין פּוֹגְעִים בּוֹ אֲבָל מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת:

The zealous person can strike [the fornicators] only at the time of relations, as was the case with regard to Zimri, as [Numbers 25:8] states: “[He pierced] the woman into her stomach.” *Our Sages relate that Pinchas’ javelin went through Zimri’s back and into her gut, killing them both in the midst of relations. If, however, [the transgressor] withdraws, *Even if he transgressed already. he should not be slain. Indeed, if [the zealous person] slays him, he may be executed [as a murderer]. *Needless to say, a warning must be given and two acceptable witnesses must observe the slaying.

If the zealous person comes to ask permission from the court to slay him, they do not instruct him [to], even if this takes place at the time [of relations]. Not only that, if the zealous person comes to kill the transgressor and he withdraws and kills the zealous person in order to save himself, the transgressor is not executed for killing him. *For the zealous person is considered as a rodef, pursuer, whom the intended victim has the right to slay, as stated in Hilchot Rotzeach, ch. 1.
When a Jew has relations with the daughter of a resident alien, *As explained in Chapter 14, Halachah 7, this refers to a non-Jew who accepted the seven universal laws commanded to Noah and his descendants. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 9:6), the Rambam states that the woman herself – not only her father – must not be an idolater. the zealot may not strike him. [The transgressor] should, however, be given stripes for rebellious conduct.

לֹא פָּגְעוּ בּוֹ קַנָּאִים וְלֹא הִלְקוּהוּ בַּיִת דִּין הֲרֵי עָנְשׁוֹ מְפֹרָשׁ בְּדִבְרֵי קַבָּלָה שֶׁהוּא בְּכָרֵת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (מלאכי ב יא) “כִּי חִלֵּל יְהוּדָה קֹדֶשׁ ה’ אֲשֶׁר אָהֵב וּבָעַל בַּת אֵל נֵכָר” (מלאכי ב יב) “יַכְרֵת ה’ לָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂנָּה עֵר וְעֹנֶה”. אִם יִשְׂרָאֵל הוּא לֹא יִהְיֶה לוֹ עֵר בַּחֲכָמִים וְלֹא עוֹנֶה בַּתַּלְמִידִים וְאִם כֹּהֵן הוּא לֹא יִהְיֶה לוֹ מַגִּישׁ מִנְחָה לַה’ צְבָאוֹת. הִנֵּה לָמַדְתָּ שֶׁהַבּוֹעֵל כּוּתִית כְּאִלּוּ נִתְחַתֵּן לְעַכּוּ”ם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר “בָעַל בַּת אֵל נֵכָר וְנִקְרָא מְחַלֵּל קֹדֶשׁ ה’:”

If the zealot did not strike him, nor did he receive stripes from the court, *The Maggid Mishneh writes that if he was given “stripes for rebellious conduct” by the court, he is no longer liable for kereit. Our Sages (Makkot 23b) state a similar concept with regard to a person who receives lashes for the violation of a Scriptural prohibition. The Rambam extends the idea to include a person who is punished on the basis of Rabbinic decree. his punishment is explicitly stated in the words of the prophetic tradition. He is liable for karet, *This applies even if relations are conducted in private. as [Malachi 2:11-12] states: “Judah desecrated that which is sacred to God, [by] loving and engaging in relations with the daughter of a foreign god. May God cut off from a man who does this any progeny and descendant.” [Implied is] *As interpreted by Yevamot 22b, 23a. that if he is an Israelite, he will not have progeny among the wise who will raise issues, nor a descendant among the scholars who will respond. If he is a priest, he will not have [a descendant] who “presents an offering to the Lord of Hosts.” Thus you have learned that a person who shares intimacy with a gentile woman is considered as if he married a false deity, as the verse states: “engaging in relations with the daughter of a foreign god.” And he is called one who “desecrated that which is sacred to God.”

עָוֹן זֶה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מִיתַת בֵּית דִּין אַל יְהִי קַל בְּעֵינֶיךָ. אֶלָּא יֵשׁ בּוֹ הֶפְסֵד שֶׁאֵין בְּכָל הָעֲרָיוֹת כְּמוֹתוֹ. שֶׁהַבֵּן מִן הָעֶרְוָה בְּנוֹ הוּא לְכָל דָּבָר וּבִכְלַל יִשְׂרָאֵל נֶחְשָׁב אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא מַמְזֵר וְהַבֵּן מִן הַכּוּתִית אֵינוֹ בְּנוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים ז ד) “כִּי יָסִיר אֶת בִּנְךָ מֵאַחֲרַי” מֵסִיר אוֹתוֹ מִלִּהְיוֹת אַחֲרֵי ה’:

Although this transgression is not punishable by execution by the court, it should not be regarded lightly, for it leads to a detriment that has no parallel among all the other forbidden sexual relations. For a child conceived from any other forbidden sexual union, is [the father’s] son with regard to all matters and is considered a member of the Jewish people, even if he is a mamzer. *Indeed, Horiot 13a states that a mamzer who is a scholar receives precedence over a High Priest who is unlearned. A son conceived by a gentile woman, by contrast, is not considered his son. [This is derived from Deuteronomy 7:4:] “For he shall sway your son away from following Me.” She turns him away from being one of those who follow God.

וְדָבָר זֶה גּוֹרֵם לְהִדָּבֵק בְּעַכּוּ”ם שֶׁהִבְדִּילָנוּ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מֵהֶם וְלָשׁוּב מֵאַחֲרֵי ה’ וְלִמְעל בּוֹ:

This matter causes one to cling to the gentile nations from whom the Holy One, blessed be He, has separated us, and to turn away from following God and to betray Him.

עַכּוּ”ם הַבָּא עַל בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל אִם אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ הִיא נֶהֱרַג עָלֶיהָ וְאִם פְּנוּיָה הִיא אֵינוֹ נֶהֱרַג:

When a gentile engages in relations with a Jewish woman, if she is married, he should be executed. *For the gentiles are prohibited against adultery. If she is single, he is not executed.

אֲבָל יִשְׂרָאֵל הַבָּא עַל הַכּוּתִית בֵּין קְטַנָּה בַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד בֵּין גְּדוֹלָה בֵּין פְּנוּיָה בֵּין אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ וַאֲפִלּוּ הָיָה קָטָן בֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד כֵּיוָן שֶׁבָּא עַל הַכּוּתִית בְּזָדוֹן הֲרֵי זוֹ נֶהֱרֶגֶת מִפְּנֵי שֶׁבָּא לְיִשְׂרָאֵל תַּקָּלָה עַל יָדֶיהָ כִּבְהֵמָה. וְדָבָר זֶה מְפֹרָשׁ בַּתּוֹרָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר לא טז) “הֵן הֵנָּה הָיוּ לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּדְבַר בִּלְעָם” (במדבר לא יז) “וְכָל אִשָּׁה יֹדַעַת אִישׁ לְמִשְׁכַּב זָכָר הֲרֹגוּ”:

If, by contrast, a Jewish male enters into relations with a gentile woman, when he does so intentionally, SHE SHOULD BE EXECUTED. *Note the gloss of the Maggid Mishneh who questions the source for the Rambam’s ruling, arguing that the passage from Numbers cannot be interpreted as definitive proof. She is executed because she caused a Jew to be involved in an unseemly transgression, AS [is the law with regard to] AN ANIMAL. *See Chapter 1, Halachot 16-18. [This applies regardless of] whether the gentile women WAS A MINOR OF THREE YEARS OF AGE, *If, however, she is younger than three, the relations are not considered significant. or an adult, whether she was single or married. And it applies even if [the Jew] was a minor of nine years old, [she is executed]. *From that age onward, sexual relations in which he engages are significant, as stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 13.

This [punishment] is explicitly mentioned in the Torah, as [Numbers 31:16-17] states: “Behold they were [involved] with the children of Israel according to the advice of Balaamו. *Who advised the Midianites and the Moabites to have their women seduce Jewish men to provoke God’s wrath. Execute any woman fit to know a man through lying with a male.” (Emphasis mine)