R. Yitzchak says: "an eye for an eye": I understand this to mean that whether or not he intends (to blind him), he pays only money. And, indeed, Scripture limits one who intends to cause a blemish to monetary payment, as it is written (Leviticus 24:19) "And a man if he maims his neighbor"—general; "an eye for an eye"—particular. general-particular. (The rule is:) The general subsumes only what exists in the particular. Then, in (20) "as he maims a man," there is a reversion to the general. Perhaps the first general is generalized (i.e., all maimings are to be included.) Would you say that? We have here an instance of general-particular-general, where (the rule is that) you judge in accordance with the particular, viz.: Just as the particular specifies permanent maimings, external organ prominences, and intended (injuries) as paying only money (and not being punishable by death) (so, all such maimings are included.) Thus, "as he maims a man"—when he intends to maim him.