## Makkot Daf 7b

###### Makkot 7b:1
[Makkot 7b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:1)

הָיָה עוֹלֶה בַּסּוּלָּם וְנָפַל עָלָיו וַהֲרָגוֹ – הֲרֵי זֶה אֵינוֹ גּוֹלֶה. זֶה הַכְּלָל: כׇּל שֶׁבְּדֶרֶךְ יְרִידָתוֹ – גּוֹלֶה, וְשֶׁלֹּא בְּדֶרֶךְ יְרִידָתוֹ – אֵינוֹ גּוֹלֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
or if **one was climbing a ladder and he fell upon** a person **and killed him, that** unintentional murderer **is not exiled. This is the principle: Any** murderer **who** kills unintentionally **through his downward** motion **is exiled, and** one **who** kills **not through his downward** motion **is not exiled.**


###### Makkot 7b:2
[Makkot 7b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:2)

**גְּמָ׳** מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? דְּאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״וַיַּפֵּל עָלָיו וַיָּמֹת״ – עַד שֶׁיִּפּוֹל דֶּרֶךְ נְפִילָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks with regard to the principle that one is exiled only if he killed unintentionally through a downward motion: **From where are these matters** derived? It is derived from a verse, **as Shmuel says that the verse states** with regard to those exiled to a city of refuge: **“And he cast it down upon him and dies”** (Numbers 35:23), indicating that one is not liable to be exiled **unless** the item **falls in a downward** motion.


###### Makkot 7b:3
[Makkot 7b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:3)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״בִּשְׁגָגָה״ – פְּרָט לְמֵזִיד. ״בִּבְלִי דַּעַת״ – פְּרָט לְמִתְכַּוֵּין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The Sages taught** in a *baraita* derivations from verses written with regard to the unintentional murderer: **“Unintentionally”** (Numbers 35:11); to **exclude** from exile **the** one who kills **intentionally. “Unawares”** (Deuteronomy 19:4); to **exclude** from exile **the** one who kills **with intent.**


###### Makkot 7b:4
[Makkot 7b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:4)

מֵזִיד? פְּשִׁיטָא, בַּר קְטָלָא הוּא! אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: אֵימָא פְּרָט לְאוֹמֵר מוּתָּר. אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: אִי אוֹמֵר מוּתָּר, אָנוּס הוּא? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹמֵר, הָאוֹמֵר מוּתָּר – קָרוֹב לְמֵזִיד הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: Why is a derivation necessary to exclude one who kills **intentionally?** It is **obvious** that he is not exiled; **he is subject to** the **death** penalty. **Rather, Rava said: Say** that the type of intentional killer referred to is meant to **exclude the** one who **says** that **it is permitted** to kill the victim. The verse teaches that this person is neither executed nor is he exiled. **Abaye said to** Rava: **If** the reference is to one who **says** that **it is permitted, he** is **a victim of circumstances beyond his control,** as he did not know any better. How could that be characterized as intentional? Rava **said to him:** That is not a problem, **as I say** that with regard to **one who says** that **it is permitted,** his action **borders on the intentional.**


###### Makkot 7b:5
[Makkot 7b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:5)

״בִּבְלִי דַעַת״ – פְּרָט לְמִתְכַּוֵּין. מִתְכַּוֵּין? פְּשִׁיטָא, בַּר קְטָלָא הוּא! אָמַר רַבָּה: פְּרָט לְמִתְכַּוֵּין לַהֲרוֹג אֶת הַבְּהֵמָה וְהָרַג אֶת הָאָדָם, לַגּוֹי וְהָרַג אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל, לַנֵּפֶל וְהָרַג בֶּן קַיָּימָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* states: **“Unawares”;** to **exclude** from exile **the** one who kills **with intent.** The Gemara asks: **With intent?** It is **obvious** that he is not exiled; **he is subject to** the **death** penalty. **Rabba said:** The reference is to **exclude the** one who acted **with** the **intent to kill an animal and he killed a person** inadvertently, or one who acted with the intent **to** kill **a gentile and he killed a Jew,** or one who acted with the intent **to** kill **a non-viable newborn and he killed a viable** newborn.


###### Makkot 7b:6
[Makkot 7b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:6)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״אִם בְּפֶתַע״ – פְּרָט לְקֶרֶן זָוִית. ״בְּלֹא אֵיבָה״ – פְּרָט לְשׂוֹנֵא. ״הֲדָפוֹ״ – שֶׁדְּחָפוֹ בְּגוּפוֹ. ״אוֹ הִשְׁלִיךְ עָלָיו״ – לְהָבִיא יְרִידָה שֶׁהִיא צוֹרֶךְ עֲלִיָּה. ״בְּלֹא צְדִיָּה״ – פְּרָט לְמִתְכַּוֵּין לְצַד זֶה וְהָלְכָה לָהּ לְצַד אַחֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The Sages taught** in a *baraita* based on the verse written with regard to an unintentional murderer: “And if suddenly, without enmity, he thrust him or cast upon him any vessel without lying in wait” (Numbers 35:22). **“If suddenly”;** this serves to **exclude** one who unintentionally kills another that he encounters at **a corner. “Without enmity”;** this serves to **exclude** one who unintentionally kills his **enemy,** as even if the act appears unintentional, the presumption is that it was not. **“He thrust him”;** this indicates **that** even if he unintentionally **shoved him with his body** and killed him, he is liable to be exiled. **“Or cast upon him”;** this serves to **include** the case of **a downward** motion **that is for the purpose of an upward** motion, e.g., if one bent down in order to lift an item from the ground, and in the process of bending down he killed another unintentionally, he is exiled. **“Without lying in wait”;** this serves to **exclude** one who **had** the **intent** to throw a stone **to this side and it went to a different side** and killed a person.


###### Makkot 7b:7
[Makkot 7b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:7)

״וַאֲשֶׁר לֹא צָדָה״ – פְּרָט לְמִתְכַּוֵּין לִזְרוֹק שְׁתַּיִם, וְזָרַק אַרְבַּע. ״וַאֲשֶׁר יָבֹא אֶת רֵעֵהוּ בַיַּעַר״ – מָה יַעַר רְשׁוּת לַנִּיזָּק וְלַמַּזִּיק לִיכָּנֵס לְשָׁם, אַף כֹּל רְשׁוּת לַנִּיזָּק וְלַמַּזִּיק לִיכָּנֵס לְשָׁם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
And it is written with regard to an unintentional murderer: **“And who did not lie in wait”** (Exodus 21:13); this serves to **exclude** one who **had intent to throw** a stone **two** cubits **and he** inadvertently **threw** it **four** cubits and killed a person. And it is written concerning an unintentional murderer: **“And as one who goes with his neighbor into the forest”** (Deuteronomy 19:5), from which it is derived: **Just as a forest** is ownerless property, and there is **permission for the victim and for the assailant to enter there, so too,** unintentional murder that occurs in **any** place where there is **permission for the victim and for the assailant to enter there,** is punishable with exile. The unintentional murder of one who entered the assailant’s property without his permission is not cause for the murderer to be exiled.


###### Makkot 7b:8
[Makkot 7b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:8)

בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ מֵרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הָיָה עוֹלֶה בַּסּוּלָּם וְנִשְׁמְטָה שְׁלִיבָה מִתַּחְתָּיו, וְנָפְלָה וְהָרְגָה, מַהוּ? כִּי הַאי גַוְונָא עֲלִיָּה הִיא, אוֹ יְרִידָה הִיא? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: כְּבָר נָגַעְתָּ בִּירִידָה שֶׁהִיא צוֹרֶךְ עֲלִיָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara cites a related discussion. **Rabbi Abbahu raised a dilemma before Rabbi Yoḥanan:** If **one was ascending a ladder and the rung was displaced from beneath him, and** the rung **fell and killed** another, **what is** the *halakha* with regard to his being exiled? **In a case like this, is** it considered killing in **an upward** motion, as he was climbing the ladder, and therefore he is exempt, **or is** it considered killing in **a downward** motion, as when he stepped on the rung he pushed it down, and therefore he is liable? Rabbi Yoḥanan **said to him:** In the scenario you described, **you already touched upon** the case in the *baraita* cited above, the case of unintentional murder that is performed with **a downward** motion **that is for the purpose of an upward** motion. The ruling in the *baraita* is that one is liable to be exiled in that case.


###### Makkot 7b:9
[Makkot 7b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:9)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ, זֶה הַכְּלָל: כׇּל שֶׁבְּדֶרֶךְ יְרִידָתוֹ – גּוֹלֶה, שֶׁלֹּא בְּדֶרֶךְ יְרִידָתוֹ – אֵינוֹ גּוֹלֶה. שֶׁלֹּא בְּדֶרֶךְ יְרִידָתוֹ לְאֵיתוֹיֵי מַאי? לָאו לְאֵיתוֹיֵי כְּהַאי גַוְונָא? וְלִיטַעְמָיךְ, כָּל שֶׁבְּדֶרֶךְ יְרִידָתוֹ, לְאֵיתוֹיֵי מַאי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Abbahu **raised an objection to** the explanation of Rabbi Yoḥanan from the mishna, which states: **This is the principle: Any** murderer **who** kills unintentionally **through his downward** motion **is exiled, and** one **who** kills **not through his downward** motion **is not exiled.** Rabbi Abbahu clarifies: With regard to the phrase in the mishna: One **who** kills **not through his downward** motion, **what** case that was not already specified does this serve **to add? Is it not to add a case like this,** and to teach that even though the death was caused by the falling rung, since the assailant was ascending the ladder at the time, he is not exiled? Rabbi Yoḥanan replied: **And according to your reasoning** that this apparently extraneous phrase serves to include a case that is not addressed explicitly, with regard to the previous phrase in the mishna: **Any** murderer **who** kills unintentionally **through his downward** motion, what case that was not already specified does this serve **to add?**


###### Makkot 7b:10
[Makkot 7b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:10)

אֶלָּא לְאֵיתוֹיֵי קַצָּב, הָכָא נָמֵי לְאֵיתוֹיֵי קַצָּב. דְּתַנְיָא: קַצָּב שֶׁהָיָה מְקַצֵּב, תָּנָא חֲדָא: לְפָנָיו – חַיָּיב, לְאַחֲרָיו – פָּטוּר. וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ: לְאַחֲרָיו – חַיָּיב, לְפָנָיו – פָּטוּר. וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ: בֵּין לְפָנָיו בֵּין לְאַחֲרָיו – חַיָּיב, וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ: בֵּין לְפָנָיו בֵּין לְאַחֲרָיו – פָּטוּר. וְלָא קַשְׁיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** one may say that it serves **to add** the case of **a butcher. Here too,** in the latter clause, the phrase: One who kills not through his downward motion, serves **to add** the case of **a butcher, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: With regard to **a butcher who was chopping** animal limbs with a cleaver, **one** Sage **taught** that if he killed a person **in front of him,** he is **liable** to be exiled; if he killed a person **behind him,** he is **exempt. And it is taught** in **another** *baraita*: If he killed a person **behind him,** he is **liable;** if he killed a person **in front of him,** he is **exempt. And it is taught** in **another** *baraita*: **Both** if he killed a person **in front of him and** if he killed a person **behind him,** he is **liable. And it is taught** in **another** *baraita*: **Both** if he killed a person **in front of him and** if he killed a person **behind him,** he is **exempt. And** although these *baraitot* appear contradictory, the apparent contradiction is **not difficult.**


###### Makkot 7b:11
[Makkot 7b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:11)

כָּאן – בִּירִידָה שֶׁלְּפָנָיו, וַעֲלִיָּה שֶׁלְּאַחֲרָיו. כָּאן – בַּעֲלִיָּה שֶׁלְּפָנָיו, וִירִידָה שֶׁלְּאַחֲרָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
When a butcher is about to cut the meat of an animal, he raises the cleaver and lowers it behind him in order to create momentum that will generate power. Then he raises the cleaver from behind him and brings it down forcefully onto the meat. In that process, the butcher lowers the cleaver in front of him and behind him and raises the cleaver both in front of him and behind him. Each of the four *baraitot* addresses a different stage of the process. **Here,** the *baraita* that says he is liable if he unintentionally murders a person in front of him and exempt if he unintentionally murders a person behind him, is referring to a case where the butcher swings the cleaver **with a downward** motion **in front of him and an upward** motion **behind him. There,** the *baraita* that says he is exempt if he unintentionally murders a person in front of him and liable if he unintentionally murders a person behind him, is referring to a case where the butcher swings the cleaver **with an upward** motion **in front of him and a downward** motion **behind him.**


###### Makkot 7b:12
[Makkot 7b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:12)

כָּאן – בִּירִידָה שֶׁלְּפָנָיו וְשֶׁל אַחֲרָיו, כָּאן – בַּעֲלִיָּה שֶׁלְּפָנָיו וְשֶׁל אַחֲרָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
In addition, **here,** the *baraita* where he is liable in both instances, is referring to a case where the butcher swings the cleaver **with a downward** motion both **in front of him and behind him. There,** the *baraita* where he is exempt in both instances, is referring to a case where the butcher swings the cleaver **with an upward** motion both **in front of him and behind him.** The two phrases that constitute the principle in the mishna teach that the determining factor is whether the motion is upward or downward, not whether it is in front of him or behind him. This is Rabbi Yoḥanan’s reply to the objection of Rabbi Abbahu.


###### Makkot 7b:13
[Makkot 7b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:13)

לֵימָא כְּתַנָּאֵי: הָיָה עוֹלֶה בַּסּוּלָּם וְנִשְׁמְטָה שְׁלִיבָה מִתַּחְתָּיו, תָּנֵי חֲדָא חַיָּיב, וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ פָּטוּר. מַאי לָאו בְּהָא קָא מִיפַּלְגִי, דְּמָר סָבַר יְרִידָה הִיא, וּמָר סָבַר עֲלִיָּה הִיא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Let us say** that Rabbi Abbahu’s dilemma with regard to unintentional murder committed by one climbing a ladder is **the subject of** a dispute between ***tanna’im*:** If **one was ascending a ladder and its rung was displaced from beneath him, it is taught** in **one** *baraita* that he is **liable, and it is taught** in **another** *baraita* that he is **exempt. What, is it not** that the *tanna’im* **disagree with regard to this, as** one **Sage holds: It is** unintentional murder in **a downward** motion, and therefore he is liable, **and** one **Sage holds: It is** unintentional murder in **an upward** motion, and therefore he is exempt?


###### Makkot 7b:14
[Makkot 7b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:14)

לָא, דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא עֲלִיָּה הִיא. וְלָא קַשְׁיָא: כָּאן לִנְיזָקִין, כָּאן לְגָלוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects that parallel: **No,** that is not the point of contention, **as everyone agrees** that **it is an upward** motion, **and** there is no dispute between the Sages in the *baraitot*. Nevertheless, the apparent contradiction between them is **not difficult,** as **here,** in the *baraita* that rules him liable, the reference is **to** payment of **damages,** as with regard to one’s liability to pay damages, there is no difference between upward and downward motions, or between intentional and unwitting damage; and **there,** in the *baraita* that rules him exempt, the reference is **to exile,** from which one who murders unintentionally in an upward motion is exempt by Torah edict.


###### Makkot 7b:15
[Makkot 7b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:15)

אִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא הָא וְהָא לְגָלוּת, וְלָא קַשְׁיָא, הָא דְּאַתְלַיע, הָא דְּלָא אַתְלַע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If you wish, say** instead that in both **this** *baraita* **and that** *baraita* the reference is **to exile, and** it is **not difficult,** as **this** *baraita*, where the ruling is that he is liable, is referring to a case **where** the rung of the ladder **was worm infested** and he should have been cautious before stepping on it, and **that** *baraita*, where the ruling is that he is exempt, is referring to a case **where** the rung **was not worm infested,** as in that case it is murder due to circumstances beyond his control, as he could not have anticipated that the rung would be displaced.


###### Makkot 7b:16
[Makkot 7b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:16)

וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: הָא וְהָא דְּלָא אַתְלַע, וְלָא קַשְׁיָא, הָא דְּמִיהַדַּק, וְהָא דְּלָא מִיהַדַּק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you wish, say** that in both **this** *baraita* **and that** *baraita* the reference is to a rung that **was not worm infested, and** it is **not difficult,** as **this** *baraita*, where the ruling is that he is exempt, is referring to a case **where** the rung **was tightly** inserted into the ladder, and therefore he could not have foreseen that it would be displaced, **and that** *baraita*, where the ruling is that he is liable, is referring to a case **where** the rung **was not tightly** inserted and he should have anticipated its displacement.


###### Makkot 7b:17
[Makkot 7b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:17)

**מַתְנִי׳** נִשְׁמַט הַבַּרְזֶל מִקַּתּוֹ וְהָרַג, רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: אֵינוֹ גּוֹלֶה, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: גּוֹלֶה. מִן הָעֵץ הַמִּתְבַּקֵּעַ, רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: גּוֹלֶה, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: אֵינוֹ גּוֹלֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** If **the blade** of an ax or hatchet **was displaced from its handle,** and it flew through the air **and killed** a person, **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says: He is not exiled, and the Rabbis say:** He is **exiled.** If part **of a tree that is being split** flew through the air and killed a person, **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says:** The murderer is **exiled, and the Rabbis say: He is not exiled.**


###### Makkot 7b:18
[Makkot 7b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:18)

**גְּמָ׳** תַּנְיָא, אָמַר לָהֶם רַבִּי לַחֲכָמִים: וְכִי נֶאֱמַר ״וְנָשַׁל הַבַּרְזֶל מֵעֵצוֹ״? וַהֲלֹא לֹא נֶאֱמַר אֶלָּא ״מִן הָעֵץ״! וְעוֹד, נֶאֱמַר ״עֵץ״ לְמַטָּה וְנֶאֱמַר ״עֵץ״ לְמַעְלָה, מָה ״עֵץ״ הָאָמוּר לְמַעְלָה מִן הָעֵץ הַמִּתְבַּקֵּעַ, אַף ״עֵץ״ הָאָמוּר לְמַטָּה מִן הָעֵץ הַמִּתְבַּקֵּעַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **It is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **said to the Rabbis: Is it stated** in the verse: **And the blade displaces from its wood** handle? **But isn’t it stated:** “And the blade displaces **from the wood”** (Deuteronomy 19:5), indicating that it is a wood chip from the tree that causes the death of the person? **And furthermore: *Etz* is stated below:** “And the blade displaces from the *etz*,” **and *etz* is stated above,** earlier in the same verse: “And his hand wields the ax to cut down the *etz*.” **Just as** the term ***etz* stated above** is referring to wood **from the tree that is being split, so too,** the term ***etz* stated below** is referring to wood **from the tree that is being split,** not to the wood of the ax handle.


###### Makkot 7b:19
[Makkot 7b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:19)

אָמַר רַב חִיָּיא בַּר אָשֵׁי אָמַר רַב: וּשְׁנֵיהֶם מִקְרָא אֶחָד דָּרְשׁוּ: ״וְנָשַׁל הַבַּרְזֶל מִן הָעֵץ״, רַבִּי סָבַר: יֵשׁ אֵם לַמָּסוֹרֶת, ״וְנִישֵּׁל״ כְּתִיב, וְרַבָּנַן סָבְרִי: יֵשׁ אֵם לַמִּקְרָא, ״וְנָשַׁל״ קָרֵינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi says** that **Rav says: And both of them,** Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and the Rabbis, **interpreted one verse** to arrive at their rulings. The verse states: **“And the blade displaces [*venashal*] from the wood.” Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **holds:** The **tradition** of the manner in which the verses in the Torah are written **is authoritative,** and one derives *halakhot* based on the manner in which the words are written, not on the manner in which they are vocalized. **And it is written *venishel*,** a transitive verb, indicating that the blade displaced wood chips from the tree. **And the Rabbis maintain:** The **vocalization** of the Torah **is authoritative, and we read** the term as ***venashal*,** an intransitive verb indicating that the blade is displaced from its wooden handle and kills a person.


###### Makkot 7b:20
[Makkot 7b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/7b:20)

וְרַבִּי, יֵשׁ אֵם לַמָּסוֹרֶת סְבִירָא לֵיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** does **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **hold** that the **tradition** of the manner in which the verses in the Torah are written **is authoritative?**