Ketubot

[Now] is not real 'harm' meant?  No, the law concerning 'harm' [is meant].  Some say: R. Johanan raised an objection against Resh Lakish: [It is written] 'And if no harm follow, he shall be surely fined'. Is not the law concerning 'harm' [meant]?  No, real 'harm' [is meant]. Raba said: Is there any one who holds that he who committed inadvertently an act which, if he had committed it wilfully, would have been punishable with death [and which is also punishable with the payment of money] is bound [to make the money payment]? Has not the school of Hezekiah taught: [It is written] He that smiteth a man … he that smiteth a beast  [from which we infer:] As in [the case of] the killing of a beast you have made no distinction between [it being done] inadvertently and wilfully, intentionally and unintentionally, by way of going down or by way of going up,  so as to free him [from the payment], but [in any case] make him liable to pay, so also in [the case of] the killing of a man you shall make no distinction between [it being done] inadvertently and wilfully, intentionally and unintentionally, by way of going down or by way of going up, so as to make him liable to pay money, but to free him from paying money?  But when Rabin came [from Palestine], he said: [As to] him who committed inadvertently an act which, if he had committed it wilfully, would have been punishable with death [and which is also punishable with the payment of money] — all agree that he is free [from the payment of money], they only differ when the act committed inadvertently would, if committed wilfully, have been punishable with lashes and something else.  R. Johanan says [that] he is bound [to make the money payment, because] only with regard to those who commit an act punishable with death, the analogy is made,  [but] with regard to those who commit an act punishable with lashes, the comparison is not made. [But] Resh Lakish says [that] he is free [from making the money payment, because] the Torah has expressly included those who commit an act punishable with lashes to be as those who commit an act punishable with death. Where has the Torah included [them]? — Abaye said: [We infer it from] the double occurrence of 'wicked man'  Raba said: [We infer it from] the double occurrence of 'smiting'.  R. Papa said to Raba: Which 'smiting' [do you mean]? If you mean  [the verse]  'And he that smiteth a beast shall pay for it, and he that smiteth a man shall be put to death,' this  speaks  of the death penalty?  — Is it this 'smiting'; he that smiteth a beast shall pay for it: life for life and next to it [comes] And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbour, as he hath done so shall it be done to him?  But here [the term] 'smiting' is not mentioned!  — We mean  the effect of 'smiting'.  But this verse refers to one who injures his fellow, and one who injures his fellow has to pay damages?  — It if does not refer to a 'smiting' in which there is the value of a perutah,  refer it  to a smiting in which there is not the value of a perutah.