Study Sanhedrin folio 78B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
על משענתו ונקה המכה״. וכי תעלה על דעתך שזה מהלך בשוק וזה נהרג? אלא זה שאמדוהו למיתה, והקל ממה שהיה, ולאחר כך הכביד ומת – שהוא פטור.
upon his staff, then he that struck him is absolved; only for his loss of livelihood should he give and he should heal him” (Exodus 21:19). The phrase: “Then he that struck him is absolved,” is superfluous; would it enter your mind to say that this individual whom he struck is walking in the marketplace, and that individual who struck him will be executed as a murderer? Rather, this is referring to a case where the doctors assessed his condition, saying that it would lead to death, and his condition eased somewhat from what it was and he walked in the marketplace, and after that his condition worsened and he died, and the verse is teaching that he is exempt.
ורבנן, האי ״ונקה המכה״ מאי דרשי ביה? מלמד שחובשין אותו.
The Talmud asks: And as for the Rabbis who disagree with R' Neḥemya and hold that he is liable in that case, what do they interpret from that phrase: “Then he that struck him is absolved”? The Talmud explains that according to the Rabbis, the verse teaches that they incarcerate him until the fate of the victim can be determined, and the phrase: “Then he that struck him is absolved,” means that he is freed from incarceration.
ורבי נחמיה, חבישה מנא ליה? יליף ממקושש.
The Talmud asks: And as for R' Neḥemya, from where does he derive the halakha of incarceration? The Talmud answers: He derives it from the incident of the wood gatherer in the wilderness with regard to whom it is written: “And they placed him under guard” (Numbers 15:34).
ורבנן נמי לילפו ממקושש? מקושש בר קטלא הוא, ומשה לא הוה ידע קטליה במאי. לאפוקי האי, דלא ידעינן אי בר קטלא הוא אי לאו בר קטלא הוא.
The Talmud challenges: And the Rabbis too, let them derive the halakha of incarceration from the incident of the wood gatherer. The Talmud explains: With regard to the wood gatherer, he was incarcerated because it was known from the outset that he was liable to be killed, and Moses did not know with what form of capital punishment his death would be implemented. This is to the exclusion of this individual who struck another, with regard to whom we do not know if he is liable to be killed or if he is not liable to be killed. Therefore, one cannot derive the halakha in this case from the case of the wood gatherer.