The Torah says if a man seduces a woman he must pay her 50 silver shekel and should marry her (Shemot 22,16):

וְכִי־יְפַתֶּה אִישׁ בְּתוּלָה אֲשֶׁר לֹא־אֹרָשָׂה וְשָׁכַב עִמָּהּ מָהֹר יִמְהָרֶנָּה לּוֹ לְאִשָּׁה׃

If a man seduces a virgin for whom the bride-price has not been paid, and lies with her, he must make her his wife by payment of a bride-price.

What if the woman seduces the man, must he pay the penalty?

  • 1
    The fine for seducing a woman does not stem from the act of having relations, but rather from taking her virginity and thus reducing her bride price from 200 sheckels down to 100 sheckels. As such, it makes no difference whose idea it was, her bride price has been reduced by the man in question and he pays the fine May 24, 2019 at 18:26
  • 1
    "The defendant claims the act was consensual..."
    – ezra
    May 24, 2019 at 22:05
  • Related: judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/104060/…
    – Al Berko
    May 26, 2019 at 16:15
  • @JoshK AFAIK 50 Sh is fine, besides it there are damages, see EH"E 177
    – Al Berko
    May 26, 2019 at 16:30
  • Please read my answer judaism.stackexchange.com/a/104099/15579 and see if you still have a question.
    – Al Berko
    May 27, 2019 at 11:37

3 Answers 3


If the Naara seduces the man and her father is not alive he does not pay the penalty as she wanted it and she has forgiven the money (but if she was raped he would have to pay her) Mishne Lemelech Naaro Besula 2,14:

ואם אין לה אב הרי הן של עצמה. פי' דוקא באונס אבל מפותה אין לה כלום שכבר מחלה

However when the father is alive she is in his jurisdiction so the man should have realised when she was trying to seduce him that the rights for consummation belong to her father. So regardless whether she seduced him or not, she is not in charge of her body and he has to pay for "seducing" her away from her father and he is benefiting from the cohabitation at the expense of her father's monetary loss as she is no longer virgin. However it is the father's right be Mochel forgive the monetary damages (just like all monetary obligations) as he has the potential to make her get married against her will to a person who is repulsive or with leprosy so Kesubos 40b:

ונתן האיש השוכב עמה לאבי הנערה חמשים כסף הנאת שכיבה חמשים מכלל דאיכא בושת ופגם ואימא לדידה ...מסתברא דאביה הוי דאי בעי מסר לה למנוול ומוכה שחין:

  • The comment exchange here strayed beyond the bounds of due civility. Feel free to try again, focusing on the content, and in a polite manner.
    – Isaac Moses
    May 27, 2019 at 14:13

The Gemara in Yevamos (53b) and Sanhedrin (74b) tells us the nature of a Man when it comes to sexual relations:

אין קישוי אלא לדעת

That a man cannot develop or maintain an erection without his knowledge or intent to do so.

The Gemara also tells us in contrast with man, that a woman is קרקע עולם. Meaning that she is always considered as a passive actor.

A man is always considered to be in the proverbial "drivers seat" when it comes to the act of Relations.

Technically, a woman is always the receiver and a man the giver.

This is why a man cannot be raped. For to maintain his erection implies he also intends on doing the act.

Now while פיתוי - seduction - is not rape, As it is consensual in nature. Still as The Meforshim explain (Rashi, Ramban etc. מדבר על ליבה) it implies that one was needed to be convinced and pushed into the consensual act.

If a man is subject to פיתוי it would would contradict the statement above of אין קישוי אלא לדעת which means that a Man is 100% fully intentional in his act without need for convincing.

Furthermore, as previously mentioned, a woman is a passive player, thus by definition, she cannot be a seducer in the act, which implies an active role.

  • I once asked a prominent posek if according to the Gemara of אין קישוי אלא לדעת, a man would be responsible if he was injected with a drug that made him have an erection, and then forced on a woman, and he said in such a case the man would be exempt, as the Gemara was only referring to a regular case of a natural erection. May 24, 2019 at 19:11
  • @רבותמחשבות 100% see the Raavad that argues on the Rambam. There are other cases where it would be considered an ones on the man May 25, 2019 at 18:47
  • Thanks for the source! May 26, 2019 at 2:08

According to Rambam's Halachot Naarah Betulah, seduction plays no role in the case of a Mefateh, see my long answer here.

A man that had sexual relations with an underage girl (given the conditions I listed) is automatically considered Mefateh (in a city or a Rapist if in rural), no matter who started, how it started.

This is only when the girl wasn't a prostitute in the first place, of course (thanks @tcdw).

  • 1
    This is not accurate. If the girl was not seduced but made herself hefker from the outset, she is a kedeisha and not a mefutah. See Naarah Betulah 2:17.
    – tcdw
    May 29, 2019 at 7:03
  • @tcdw Thank you I included that in the answer.
    – Al Berko
    May 29, 2019 at 11:43
  • So if she is a prostitute everything is okay? What is kedeisha and metufah?
    – user4951
    Jul 23, 2019 at 16:03
  • @user4951 Kdeshah is one who's paid for her services (or her father). Mefutah is one that wasn't paid. Please notice that those laws are monetary not criminal - we only decide whether he should pay for his enjoyment, we don't judge him criminally.
    – Al Berko
    Jul 24, 2019 at 4:44
  • I think that statutory rape should be a tort rather than crime. It makes sense.
    – user4951
    Jul 24, 2019 at 14:58

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .