Please Explain Sanhedrin 54b

Hi! I am an nonobservant Jew who's taken interest into defending Judaism against defamation. Can you help me understand the meaning of Sanhedrin 54b:20? People often claim that it means that Judaism allows people to have sex with a boy, as long as he is under 9. Obviously that would make no sense, and would be rape and sodomy. But the last line that makes this hard to understand is, "...if a child who is less than nine years old engages in homosexual intercourse passively, the one who engages in intercourse with him is not liable." Am I correct in believing this means that the rapist would only not be liable to specifically pay the fine that rapists usually pay their victims when the victim loses their virgnity, since it's not possible as a young boy to lose your virginity? That might be a totally false interpretation. Does the Talmud at a different point say that they still would be liable for the crime of pedophilic rape, just not specifically financially liable for payment in exchange for the lost virginity? Again, if the Talmud is actually limiting liability to the rapist, assuming I didn't misinterpret what was the subject noun of the lost liability in the quote. Obviously, I know the Talmud is a book of differing, contradictory opinions and so nothing in it is defamatory to Jews in general. It'd just be useful if there's a simpler answer.

Shalom!

Thank you for your question.

You have correctly pointed out one of the most misunderstood Talmudic passages.

For the benefit of readers, we will post the entire passage in question:

The Talmud asks:

"What does it mean that the Torah does not deem a younger boy to be like an older boy? Rav says: It means that the Torah does not deem the intercourse of one who is less than nine years old to be like the intercourse of one who is above nine years old. For a male’s act of intercourse to have the legal status of full-fledged intercourse the minimum age is nine years. And Shmuel says: The Torah does not deem the intercourse of a child who is less than three years old to be like that of one who is three years old."

The Talmud continues:

"In what regard do Rav and Shmuel disagree? Rav holds that any halacha that applies to one who engages in intercourse actively also applies to one who engages in intercourse passively. And any halacha that does not apply to one who engages in intercourse actively also does not apply to one who engages in intercourse passively.  Therefore, just as one who engages in intercourse actively is not liable if he is less than nine years old, as the intercourse of such a child does not have the halachic status of intercourse, so too, if a child who is less than nine years old engages in homosexual intercourse passively, the one who engages in intercourse with him is not liable."

This passage does not suggest, by any stretch of the imagination, that intercourse with minors is permitted. It is one of the most horrible and vile sins of the entire Torah. It is a sin against G-d and it is a sin of society (which is an additional sin against G-d). Everyone agrees that such conduct is to be abhorred and severely punished. Indeed, it is one of the few sins where rabbis are encouraged to involve the police and secular authorities when there is a known sinner in this area.

What the Talmud comes to discuss is what form of punishment should be given to the offenders. There are many areas in Judaism where the same sin can have different punishing ramifications depending on many factors. Even where the punishment is “light,” it does not come to suggest that the sin is any less severe. There are even situations where no punishment can be given! This too, of course, does not make the sin any less bad.

The Jewish legal system is extremely intricate when minor variations in details came have tremendous ramification in punishments and repercussions.

I hope this explains it.