At the proof from (Beraisa): "You will cut off her hand (for having grabbed a man by his private parts to save her husband)" - this means, she must pay.
I understand the answer is an answer for R. Yehuda; but how will R. Nachman explain this?
Mordechai Cutler, Chicago, USA
The Gemara proves that a person may not conduct justice for himself, even in a place of potential financial loss, from the fact that the Torah obligates a woman -- who saved her husband from being hit -- to pay for hitting the aggressor. The Gemara refutes this proof and says that there it is different because the woman could have saved him in some other way.
According to the way I understand your question, you are asking that even if it is possible to save himself in some other way, and thus it is not a situation of potential loss, nevertheless Rav Nachman holds that a person may not do justice for himself. If this is your question, then this is answered by Rashi and Tosfos, when they write that whenever it is possible to save oneself in some other matter, this not only removes the potential loss, but it is not considered doing an act of justice at all, and thus even Rav Nachman holds that it is Asur.
M. Kornfeld