Sanhedrin Daf 84 סַנהֶדרִין דַף 84

A Baraisa records three opinions about the punishment for a זר who performs avodah in the Mikdash. Rebbe Yishmael derives a gezeirah shavah between "והזר הקרב יומת" – and the non-Kohen who approaches (and performs avodah) shall but put to death, and a passuk where people said, after the incident of Korach, that whoever approaches the Mishkan "ימות" – will die. Just as that death was בידי שמים, so too a זר who performs avodah dies through מיתה בידי שמים. Rebbe Akiva derives a gezeirah shavah from נביא שהדיח – a prophet who leads a city astray to serve avodah zarah. Rebbe Akiva favors deriving from that passuk, which also says "יומת", rather than "ימות" written by Korach. Rebbe Yishmael holds the two pesukim discussing a הדיוט – commoner are more similar, rather than deriving from a נביא. Rebbe Akiva responds that since the נביא was מדיח others, אין לך הדיוט גדול מזה – there is no one more of a commoner than this one. Rebbe Akiva holds a נביא שהדיח gets סקילה; therefore, a זר who performs avodah is killed with סקילה. Rebbe Yochanan ben Nuri also derives from נביא שהדיח, but holds that his מיתה is חנק, and so holds that a זר who performs avodah receives חנק.

The tenth Perek begins: אלו הן הנחנקין – these are the ones who are strangled: one who strikes his parent, one who kidnaps a Jew, a זקן ממרא – sage who rebels against Sanhedrin, a נביא שקר, one who prophecies in an idol’s name, an adulterer, עדים זוממין of a married בת כהן (who testified she should receive שריפה), and a man who had relations with a married בת כהן. The Gemara asks how we know that "מכה אביו" means to wound a father, and not to kill him. It first answers that since an ordinary murderer is killed with סייף, it is impossible that killing a parent is punished with חנק, a lighter punishment!? According to Rebbe Shimon, that חנק is more severe than סייף, the Gemara answers that since other pesukim discussing striking and killing specify that the victim died, it implies that wherever this is not stated, it means only to wound. We derive from the extra word "נפש" written by striking an animal, that striking a parent is not liable עד שיעשה בהן חבורה – unless he inflicts a wound upon them.

The Gemara asks: בן מהו שיקיז דם לאביו – can a son let his father’s blood for health reasons? Rav Masna answered that the passuk says "ואהבת לרעך כמוך" – you shall love your fellow as yourself, implying you may only not do to another something which you would not want for yourself; since you would want others to let your blood, one may let a parent’s blood. Rav Dimi bar Chanina answered with a hekesh between "מכה אדם" ו"מכה בהמה" – one who strikes a person and one who strikes an animal.  Just as one who wounds an animal for healing purposes is exempt from paying, אף מכה אדם לרפואה פטור – so too one who wounds a person (i.e., parent) for healing purposes is exempt from the death penalty.

Rav did not allow his son to remove his splinter, and Mar brei d’Ravina did not allow his son to open his boil, because the son might mistakenly inflict a wound. The Gemara asks that if so, they should not allow anyone to treat these conditions, since it is forbidden for any Jew to wound another!? It answers that another Jew only risks a שיגגת לאו – inadvertent transgression of a negative commandment, whereas his son risks the more severe שגגת חנק – inadvertent transgression of a חנק prohibition.