And just as

<<the one who stones [another]

<<is not himself

<<stoned,

<<one who comes

<<to stone

<<but did not

<<stone,

<<is it not

<<logical

<<that he should not

<<be stoned?

<<Rather,

<<it is clearest

<<as we answered

<<originally.

[If they say:] “We testify

<<about a certain man

<<that he is

<<liable

<<to exile,”

<<etc.

<<From where

<<are these

<<matters derived?

<<Said

<<Reish Lakish:

<<for

<<the verse says:

<<‘He

<<shall flee

<<to

<<one of

<<the cities’ —

<<he [alone flees],

<<and not

<<the conspirators.

Rabbi Yochanan

<<says:

<<an a-fortiori argument:

<<just as

<<he [the killer],

<<who performed

<<an act

<<intentionally,

<<is not

<<exiled,

<<these,

<<who did not

<<perform

<<an act

<<intentionally,

<<is it not

<<logical

<<that they should not

<<be exiled?

But it itself

<<gives [the reverse]:

<<(is it not

<<a logical

<<inference?)

<<He,

<<who performed

<<an act

<<intentionally,

<<should not

<<be exiled,

<<so that

<<he not

<<have

<<for him

<<atonement.

<<But these,

<<who did not

<<perform

<<an act

<<intentionally,

<<too

<<should be exiled,

<<so that

<<there be

<<for them

<<atonement!

<<Rather,

<<it is clearest

<<as Reish Lakish [said].

Said

<<Ulla:

<<A hint

<<to conspiring witnesses

<<from the Torah —

<<from where?

<<‘A [mere] hint’

<<to conspiring witnesses?!

<<But surely

<<it is written:

<<‘And you shall do

<<to him

<<as

<<he schemed’! [explicit]

<<Rather:

<<a hint

<<to conspiring witnesses

<<who are flogged,

<<from the Torah,

<<from where?

<<As it is written:

<<‘They shall vindicate

<<the

<<righteous one

<<and condemn

<<the

<<wicked one.

<<And it shall be,

<<if

<<deserving

<<of flogging

<<is the wicked one.’

<<Is it from

<<‘they shall vindicate

<<the

<<righteous

<<and condemn

<<the

<<wicked,’

<<‘and it shall be

<<if

<<deserving

<<of flogging

<<is the wicked one’?

Rather:

<<witnesses

<<who condemned

<<the

<<righteous one,

<<and there came

<<witnesses

<<other,

<<and vindicated

<<the

<<righteous one

<<of the outset,

<<and rendered

<<these [first ones]

<<wicked —

<<‘and it shall be

<<if

<<deserving

<<of flogging

<<is the wicked one.’

But let it derive

<<for him

<<from ‘You shall not

<<bear [false witness]’!

<<Because

<<it is

<<a prohibition

<<that has no

<<in it

<<action,

<<and any

<<prohibition

<<that has no

<<in it

<<action —

<<one is not

<<flogged

<<for it.

The Sages taught:

<<Four

<<things

<<were said

<<of conspiring witnesses:

<<they are not

<<made

<<a son of a divorcee

<<or a son of a chalutzah,

<<and they are not

<<exiled

<<to the cities of

<<refuge,

<<and they do not

<<pay

<<the

<<ransom,

<<and they are not

<<sold

<<as a Hebrew

<<slave.

<<In the name of

<<Rabbi Akiva

<<they said:

<<also

<<they do not

<<pay

<<on

<<their own

<<admission.

‘They are not made

<<a son of a divorcee

<<or son of a chalutzah’ —

<<as we said.

<<‘And they are not exiled

<<to the cities of refuge’ —

<<as we said.

<<‘And they do not

<<pay

<<the

<<ransom’ —

<<they hold:

<<the ransom is

<<atonement,

<<and these

<<are not

<<subject to

<<atonement

<<at all.

Who is

<<the tanna [who holds]

<<the ransom is

<<atonement?

<<Said

<<Rav Chisda:

<<Rabbi Yishmael,

<<son

<<of

<<Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka,

<<it is,

<<as it was taught:

<<‘And he shall give

<<the redemption of

<<his life’ —

<<the value of

<<the victim.

<<Rabbi Yishmael,

<<son

<<of

<<Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka,

<<says:

<<the value of

<<the one who injured.

<<What,

<<is it not

<<in this

<<[that]

<<they disagree?

<<For one Master

<<holds:

<<the ransom is

<<money,

<<and the other Master

<<holds:

<<the ransom is

<<atonement?

Said

<<Rav Pappa:

<<No,

<<everyone

<<agrees

<<the ransom is

<<atonement,

<<and here

<<in this

<<[that]

<<they disagree:

<<one Master

<<holds:

<<by the victim

<<we assess,

<<and the other Master

<<holds:

<<by the injurer

<<we assess.

What is

<<the reasoning

<<of the Rabbis?

<<It is stated

<<‘imposition’

<<below,

<<and it is stated

<<‘imposition’

<<above:

<<just as

<<there [above]

<<it is by the victim,

<<so too

<<here

<<by the victim.

And Rabbi Yishmael?

<<‘And he shall give

<<the redemption of

<<his life’

<<is written.

<<And the Rabbis?

<<Yes,

<<‘the redemption of

<<his life’

<<is written,

<<however

<<when

<<we assess,

<<by the victim

<<we assess.

‘And they are not sold

<<as a Hebrew slave.’

<<Held

<<Rav Hamnuna

<<to say:

<<this applies only

<<where

<<there is

<<to him

<<[funds] of his own,

<<for since

<<he

<<is not

<<sold,

<<they

<<too

<<are not

<<sold.

<<But

<<where

<<there is not

<<to him

<<of his own,

<<even though

<<there is

<<to them

<<of their own,

<<they are sold.

Rava said to him:

<<But let them say

<<to him:

<<‘If

<<you

<<had

<<[funds] of yours,

<<would

<<you have

<<been sold?

<<We

<<too

<<are not

<<sold.’

<<Rather,

<<held

<<Rav Hamnuna

<<to say:

<<this applies only

<<where

<<there is

<<to him

<<either

<<his own

<<or

<<theirs,

<<but

<<where

<<there is not

<<to him

<<neither

<<his own

<<nor

<<theirs,

<<they are sold.

<<Rava said to him:

<<‘And he shall be sold

<<for his theft’ —

<<said

<<the Torah;

<<for his theft,

<<and not

<<for his scheme.

In the name of

<<Rabbi Akiva

<<they said

<<etc.

<<What is

<<the reason

<<of Rabbi Akiva?

<<He holds

<<a fine

<<it is,

<<and a fine

<<one does not

<<pay

<<on

<<one's own

<<admission.

<<Said

<<Rabbah:

<<Know [it],

<<for

<<they did not

<<do

<<an act,

<<[yet] are executed

<<and [would] pay.

<<Said

<<Rav Nachman:

<<Know [it],

<<for

<<the money is

<<in the hand of

<<the owners,

<<and [yet] they pay.