Yerushalmi Ketubot 3:6 ירושלמי כתובות ג׳:ו׳

MISHNAH: How does he⁷⁶The rapist mentioned in Mishnah 5. drink from his pot? Even if she is lame, even if she is blind, or even if she is afflicted with boils⁷⁷He has to marry her and is prohibited from divorcing her.. If a matter of immorality was found with her⁷⁸If she was found guilty of adultery or incest. In that case, the husband is not permitted to keep her. or she could not marry in Israel⁷⁹If she was a bastard or a Gibeonite., he may not keep here since it is written⁸⁰Deut. 22:29.: “She shall be his wife,” a wife appropriate for him.

HALAKHAH: “How does he drink from his pot,” etc. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Ḥiyya, in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: It should not have said “she shall be his wife” for the calumniator⁸¹The man who claims that his bride was not a virgin; Deut. 22:13–19. Since the verse treats this as accusing his wife of a capital crime, it must be that he accuses her of adultery while living in her parents’ house but preliminarily married to him. If he cannot prove the accusation, he is fined 100 pieces of silver (400 zuz) and “she shall be his wife; he cannot send her away all his days.” Since he can only accuse her if she is his wife, the first clause of this sentence is superfluous.
It should be noted that since the husband is related to his wife, he is barred from testifying in court against her. Deut. 22:14 states only that he calumniates her and asserts that he did not find her a virgin. That would be a civil case, discussed in the first Chapter. To make this a criminal case, one must assume that the husband brought witnesses to the adultery. This is the standard rabbinic interpretation of the case.
Without invocation of the rule of gezerah šawah, Sifry Deut. 238 reads the verse as applying the rules of Mishnah 6 to the case of the calumniator.; it is superfluous since she already is his! Why does the verse say, “she shall be his wife”? You should infer from this by an equal cut⁸²Cf. Note 56. The preceding argument makes it clear that the expression “she shall be his wife” is not needed for any inference; the application of the rule of gezerah šawah is legitimate.. One has to infer from “she shall be his wife”, “she shall be his”⁸³Identical expressions in Deut. 22:19 (the calumniator) and 22:29 (the rapist).. Since “she shall be his” which is said there means a wife appropriate for him, so “she shall be his” which is said here means a wife appropriate for him. Then since “she shall be his” which is said there means a wife appropriate for him and he pays the fine, so “she shall be his” which is said here means a wife appropriate for him and he pays the fine⁸⁴Only the calumniator pays 100 pieces of silver, the rapist 50.. Rebbi Ze‘ira, Ulla [ben]⁸⁵The Amora who is called Ulla in the Babli is always called Ulla ben Ismael in the Yerushalmi. That must be the reading here also. The text as written, Ulla in the name of R. Ismael (Tanna of the 2nd generation) in the name of R. Eleazar (Amora) does not make sense. Ulla’s argument, in a very complicated formulation, is also in the Babli, Makkot 15a. Ismael, in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: It should not have said “she shall be his wife” for the calumniator; it is superfluous since she already is his! Why does the verse say, “she shall be his wife”? You should infer from this by an equal cut. One has to infer from “she shall be his wife”, “she shall be his”. Since “she shall be” which is said there means that if he divorced her one tells him to take her back, so “she shall be his” which is said here means that if he divorced her one tells him to take her back. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated⁸⁶Tosephta 3:7.: “In the cases of both the rapist and the calumniator who divorced, one forces them to take back. If they were Cohanim they absorb the forty⁸⁷Since a Cohen may not take back his divorcee, by divorcing her he committed a sin which cannot be repaired and “absorbs” 39 lashes (which are called 40 in Deut. 25:3)..”

As it was stated⁸⁸Sifry Deut. 241; Tosephta Sanhedrin 10:10.: “Living married to a husband⁸⁹Deut. 22:22. While the man sleeping with a preliminarily married girl is stoned, the adulterer with a woman who had lived with her husband while preliminarily married is strangled; Sifry Deut. 241.,” that includes one who had received her husband in her father’s house while preliminarily married; the one who comes after him is strangled. Not only a regular intercourse but even perverse⁹⁰Perverse intercourse is one which leaves the woman a virgin but leads to sexual satisfaction.. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan; it is necessary to mention perverse intercourse for if it were regular, why mention her husband⁹¹As is implicit in the text here and made explicit in the Babli, Qiddušin 9b, the preliminarily married girl who had perverse relations with her husband is no longer a virgin in criminal law but any other man can remove her status of virgin only by penetration.? As we have stated: If she was raped by two men, the first is stoned, the second strangled⁹²Speaking of the virgin preliminarily married girl Deut. 22:23–27. The second man sleeps with a married woman who is not a virgin, Deut. 22:22.. The preliminarily married adolescent girl. If ten men came upon her perversely and then one regularly, they are all stoned⁹³The same statement in slightly different formulations in the Babli, Qiddušin 9b, Sanhedrin 66b, Yerushalmi Qidduṡin 1:1 (fol. 58b); Tosephta Sanhedrin 10:9.. If they all come upon her regularly, the first is stoned and the remainder strangled. If ten men “touched” her⁹⁴Their penises touched her genitals without injuring the hymen; cf. Yebamot 4:2, Note 59. and then one penetrated, they are all stoned. If they all penetrated, the first is stoned and the remainder strangled. A single girl. If ten men came upon her perversely and then one regularly, they all pay the fine. If they all come upon her regularly, the first is stoned and the remainder is free⁹⁵They are freed from the biblically imposed fine of the rapist; they still can be sued for claims of diminution of value and suffering.. If she chose one of them, the others were freed from the prohibition⁹⁶This sentence clearly refers to the prior case that all the men raping her are liable for the fine. In that case, all of them are required to marry her and forbidden to divorce her. But since a woman cannot have more than one husband, she may choose one of them. The others then do not infringe on the prohibition to divorce her since they cannot marry her.. If she said, he⁹⁷Her first choice among the rapists. is impossible, she repeatedly chooses. If he was married to her sister, he already is freed⁹⁸A man raping his wife’s sister cannot marry her (Lev. 18:18). He pays but does not marry her.. If she died, he is freed. If he died, one does not force the levir⁹⁹If the childless rapist dies before he marries his victim, there is no obligation on the levir to marry her since the rape is no marriage; it only creates an obligation of marriage..