Rethinking the Machloket between Rabanan and R. Yishmael

Last night, we saw how the Gemara rejected the initial suggestion that the machloket between the two views in the baraita hinges on כופרא כפרה or כופרא ממונא.  The latest suggestion is that כופרא כפרה according to both views in the baraita; the only machloket between them is whether
בדניזק שיימינן  or בדמזיק שיימינן - ie whether we measure the payment based on the value of the damager ie owner of the ox that gored, or the value of the ניזק - the value of the person killed.  We noted that this was not simply a restatement of the original baraita - but was stressing that the argument between TK and R. Yishmael is not an argument in principle, but rather, an argument based on more of a detail/technicality, if you will...

The Gemara goes on to ask what the טעמא of the Rabanan is - ie Tanna Kamma - because, as we explained, the view of R. Yishmael is clear: since כופרא is כפרה, the payment is measured on the basis of the person needing the atonement.  But the Gemara needs to elaborate the basis of the TK's view, which is less clear. 

The answer is a drasha - specifically, a Gezeira Shava from the earlier case of the aborted fetus due to the wrestling match between two men - to our case. In both cases the word השתה - or a variant of it, is used to describe the imposition of payment.  Above, it is clear that the payment is a type of compensation, and therefore goes according to the דמי ניזק; similarly, TK argues, the payment in our case is for the דמי ניזק - even though the goal of the payment is כפרה.  We explained that the Gezeira Shava is not a logical connection between the two topics, but a language connection: The common word in both contexts links the din irrespective of the different nature of the cases.  A Gezeira Shava can only be accepted if the Tanna/Tannaim speaking have an oral tradition to that effect....At the end of the shiur, we saw TK's retort, which we'll review at the start of today's shiur.

See you in shiur!