Rav Kahana Receives the Torah

"And the accused shall flee there." This means that one should not leave there, neither for the sake of fulfilling a positive commandment, nor for the sake of monetary matters, nor for the sake of saving lives. Even all of Israel should go there, and even a military officer like Yoav ben Tzruya should not leave from there forever, as it is stated, "There, there shall be his place of residence; there, his death shall be; and there, his burial shall be." If a person unintentionally kills another, except for killing his own father. And we raised a dilemma: Does a son go into exile because of his father? Rav Kahana said: This is not difficult. This statement applies to Rabbi Shimon, who said that strangulation is more severe than the sword. If the unintentional killing is by a sword, it can be atoned for, but if it is by strangulation, it cannot be atoned for. According to the Rabbis who say that the sword is more severe and it kills one's father unintentionally, it is considered unintentional killing by the sword, and it cannot be atoned for. Rava said: The exception is for one who strikes his father intentionally with a vessel. Since in the case of intentional murder, he is liable to be executed, the same applies even in the case of unintentional murder. This teaches us this halacha. "And the accused shall flee there" — "murderer" includes any murderer by implication. It is stated "unintentionally causing death," implying that it includes even one who unintentionally kills his father or mother. Therefore, the verse states "murderer causing death." I only stated that "murderer causing death" excludes one who unintentionally kills his father or mother, as he does not go into exile. "Murderer" but not one who plotted. "Unintentionally causing death" excludes intentional killing; these are the words of Rabbi Chanina. Rabbi Elazar ben Matya says: "Unintentionally causing death" excludes killing on Shabbat. "Unintentionally" excludes killing one's father on a weekday.