(Beraisa #2 - R. Yehudah): A blind person does not pay for embarrassment. Also, he is exempt from all monetary laws of the Torah.

Question: What is his reason?

Answer: "The Tzibur will judge between the murderer and the avenger (the victim's relative) according to these Mishpatim (monetary laws)" - only those who are liable for murder are liable for Mishpatim.

(Beraisa #3 - R. Yehudah): A blind person does not pay for embarrassment. Also, he is exempt from all Mitzvos of the Torah.

Question: What is his reason?

Answer: "These are the Mitzvos, statutes and Mishpatim" - only those who are liable for Mishpatim are commanded about Mitzvos and statutes.

Rav Yosef (who was blind): At first, I hoped to hear that the Halachah follows R. Yehudah (that a blind person is exempt from Mitzvos).

Question: What is the reason?

Answer: He would get a greater reward for doing Mitzvos, even though he is exempt.

Retraction (Rav Yosef): After hearing R. Chanina's teaching, I hope to hear that the Halachah does not follow R. Yehudah.

(R. Chanina): One who is commanded and fulfills gets a greater reward than one who is not commanded and fulfills.

If the Halachah were unlike R. Yehudah, Rav Yosef would get a greater reward for the Mitzvos, because he is commanded.

(Mishnah): The Torah was stringent about a man who damages, to obligate him to pay Nezek, pain, medical expenses, Sheves, and embarrassment, and compensation for a fetus;

An ox only pays Nezek, it is exempt from compensation for a fetus.

One who strikes his father or mother and does not make a wound, or one who strikes a person on Yom Kipur is liable for all damages.

One who strikes a Yisrael slave is liable for all damages, except for Sheves if it is his own slave;

One who strikes another's Kena'ani slave is liable for all damages;

R. Yehudah says, embarrassment does not apply to slaves.

One loses from encounters with a Cheresh, lunatic or child. One who damages any of them is liable. If any of them damaged someone, he is exempt.

One loses from encounters with a slave or (married) woman. One who damages either of them is liable. If either of them damaged someone, he or she is exempt now, but pays later;

If the slave is freed or the woman is divorced, then he or she is liable to pay.

One who strikes his father or mother and makes a wound, or one who strikes a person on Shabbos is exempt from all damages because he is liable to die.

One who strikes his Kena'ani slave is exempt from all damages.

(Gemara - R. Elazar) Question: If Reuven hit Shimon's daughter (a minor), does he pay to her or to Shimon?

The Torah gave Shevach Ne'urim (what a girl earns or receives (e.g. for Kidushin) throughout the period that she is a minor or Na'arah) to the father. Perhaps this also applies to damages;

Question: Why should this be?

Answer: Her value decreased.

Or, perhaps the Torah gave to the father only Shevach Ne'urim such as Kidushin money, for a repulsive person would pay Shimon money to let him marry Shimon's daughter. However, Shimon has no Reshus (jurisdiction) over wounding his own daughter, so money paid for damages is hers!

Answer (Rav): The Torah gave to the father only Kidushin money.

Question (Mishnah): One who strikes a Yisrael slave is liable for all damages, except for Sheves if it is his own slave. (Since a girl's labor belongs to her father, the Halachah should be the same!)

Answer (Abaye): Rav admits that the father receives the Sheves, since he owns her labor until Bagrus.

Question (Beraisa #1): If Reuven hit his son, if the son is an adult, Reuven pays him immediately. If the son is a minor, he buys something lasting.

If Reuven hit his daughter (a minor), he is exempt. If Shimon hit Reuven's daughter, he pays Reuven.

Answer: The Beraisa discusses the Sheves.

(Beraisa #1): If one hit his son (an adult), he pays immediately.

Contradiction (Beraisa #2): If one hit another's sons or daughters, if they are adults, he pays them immediately. If they are minors, he buys something lasting

If one hit his own sons or daughters, he is exempt.

Answer: If one feeds his children, he is exempt (if he hits them). If they feed themselves, he is liable.

Question: Beraisa #1 cannot discuss children that feed themselves!

(Seifa of Beraisa #1): If he hit his daughter (a minor), he is exempt. Further, if he hit another's daughter, he pays her father.

If she feeds herself, she must receive the money!

Even according to the opinion that a master can tell his slave 'work for me, and I will not feed you' says so only about a Kena'ani slave;

The master can make him work all day; and the slave can pursue his food at night.

A master cannot tell his Yisrael slave 'work for me, and I will not feed you', for it says "it is good for him with you." He is with you regarding food and drink (he eats no worse than his master)!

All the more so, a man cannot tell his daughter 'work for me, I will not feed you'!

Answer: We can answer like Rabah brei d'Rav Ula said (elsewhere, that the father gets) the money above what she needs to eat.

Question: Beraisa #2 cannot discuss one who feeds his children. It says that if one hit another's sons or daughters, if they are adults, he pays them immediately. If they are minors, he buys something lasting;

The father should receive the money (since he is feeding them)!

Answer: A man who feeds his children is insistent not to lose money (e.g. if he hits them, he should not pay). He does not mind if they get money from another source (e.g. when someone else hit them).

Question: He is insistent to receive lost items that they find!

Clarification of Answer: He is insistent to get money they get from another source if it came without bodily pain to them; he is not insistent to get money which came through bodily pain.

Question: We find that he is insistent to receive money they get from another source that came through bodily pain!

(Beraisa #1): Further, if he hit another's daughter, he pays her father.

Answer: That refers to an exacting father. He does not feed his children. He is insistent to get money they get from another source;

In Beraisa #2, the father feeds his children. He is insistent not to pay them, but he is not insistent to get money they get from another source.

Question: What is the 'something lasting'?

Answer #1 (Rav Chisda): It is a Sefer Torah.

Answer #2 (Rabah bar Rav Huna): It is a tree from which they eat dates.

(Reish Lakish): The Torah gave to the father only Shevach Ne'urim money (like Rav holds).

(R. Yochanan): Even if someone bruised her, her father gets the money.

Question: Can that really be?! Even R. Elazar only asked about a blow that decreases her value, not a bruise that does not decrease her value!

Answer (R. Yosi bar Chanina): R. Yochanan refers to a bruise on the face that decreases her value.