Exodus 21:23

Studied by claude-opus-5-5 October 8, 2026

וְאִם־אָס֖וֹן יִהְיֶ֑ה וְנָתַתָּ֥ה נֶ֖פֶשׁ תַּ֥חַת נָֽפֶשׁ׃

ve'im-'asôn yihyeh, venātattāh nefesh taḥat nāfesh.

And-if disaster there-is, then-you-shall-give life in-place-of life.

What it meant

"But if disaster does strike — if the blow proves deadly — then you shall give a life in place of the life that was lost."

The verse finishes a two-part case. Two men are fighting, and one of them hits a pregnant woman who is standing nearby. Verse 22 covers the outcome where her child or children come out but no disaster follows. There the striker pays whatever the woman's husband claims, as the judges assess it. Verse 23 is the mirror case: if disaster does follow. The word for it, 'asôn, is rare. In its only other uses Jacob dreads it as something that could kill his youngest son and send his father to the grave in grief. So the word points to a deadly or grievous outcome, not a bruise. Who suffers it, the mother only or possibly her child, is not stated, and readers have disagreed since ancient times.

The ruling is stated as an equation: nefesh (a living being, a life) set taḥat ("in the place of", "in exchange for") nefesh. The verb is "give", the same verb used one verse earlier for paying the fine. So the sentence sounds like settling a debt: what was lost must be matched by something of equal weight, no more and no less. The sudden "you" (singular) may speak to the offender ("you shall give") or to the community and its judges who must see the matter settled.

This is the opening line of the famous series that continues "eye for eye, tooth for tooth" (vv. 24–25). The first hearers understood it as a principle a court applies: the penalty fits the harm, it falls on the offender himself and not on his family, and a human life is not reduced to a fine. Whether "life for life" was carried out literally or could be settled by an equivalent payment in such a case is a real and ancient question (see debates).

Where the English drifted

mischief (KJV, YLT) 'asôn

What we hear

Playful naughtiness, pranks, minor trouble-making.

What they heard

A calamity, probably deadly or grievous, the kind of disaster Jacob feared would kill Benjamin (Gen 42:38).

Where the later meaning came from: The English word has weakened since the 17th century. In 1611 'mischief' still meant harm, misfortune or injury.
life for life (and the 'eye for eye' series it heads) nefesh taḥat nefesh

What we hear

A licence for personal revenge, or a picture of crude, bloodthirsty justice.

What they heard

A court-administered principle of equal value. The penalty must match the harm, fall on the offender alone, and not exceed the loss. It limited retaliation rather than encouraging it.

Where the later meaning came from: Popular use of 'an eye for an eye' to mean vengeance. Readings of Matthew 5:38–39 sometimes forget that Jesus was addressing personal retaliation, not the court principle itself.

What the first hearers heard

To Israelites hearing this law, the verse said several things at once:

Unintended harm is still real harm. The striker meant to hit someone else, yet if his blow brings disaster on the woman, the community may not treat it as a minor matter settled by a fine. A life has been lost, and the answer must be weighed in lives.
A pregnant woman, and what she carries, is under the law's protection. Even in the "no disaster" case of v. 22, the striker pays her husband. Verse 23 raises the stakes when the outcome is grave.
Justice is proportional and personal. The phrase "in place of" assured hearers that the penalty would match the loss. Unlike Hammurabi's law, it would not fall on the offender's innocent daughter and would not vary with the victim's rank.
This is the court's business. The settlement is framed in the legal language of "giving" and assessment that runs through the chapter. It belongs to judges and community, not to a family's private vengeance.

The formula is short, rhythmic and easy to remember, and it went on to be quoted throughout Israel's legal tradition (Lev 24:17–21; Deut 19:21).

Every word

וְאִם־
ve'im · H518

and if

Opens the second half of a two-part case law. Verse 22 said 'and there is no disaster', and this clause answers it: 'but if there is disaster'. The 'and' here works as a contrast ('but'), as most translations recognise.
אָס֖וֹן
'asôn · H611

harm, disaster, fatal mishap

A rare word for a calamity that strikes someone, probably a deadly or grievous one. It is the hinge of the case: with no 'asôn the striker pays a fine (v. 22), and with 'asôn the talion formula applies. The verse does not say who suffers it, the woman or (on some readings) the child, and that is one of the main points of debate.
יִהְיֶ֑ה
yihyeh · H1961

to be, happen

'There is' or 'it happens'. The imperfect form here describes a possible situation in law ('should there be'). The main pause mark of the verse falls on this word and closes the 'if' clause.
וְנָתַתָּ֥ה
venātattāh · H5414

to give, pay

'Then you shall give.' The grammatical form (a perfect verb after 'and', which in law carries a future sense of obligation) states what must follow. It is the same verb used in v. 22 for paying the fine ('he shall give'), so the language of settlement continues. The sudden switch to 'you' is striking. It could be the offender who gives, or the court or community who imposes the penalty.
נֶ֖פֶשׁ
nefesh · H5315

life, living being, person

The life given in settlement. Here it means a life, a living person, and not an immaterial 'soul'.
תַּ֥חַת
taḥat · H8478

under; in place of, in exchange for

The word of equivalence: one thing put in the place of another. Elsewhere in this same chapter it marks repayment and compensation ('ox for ox', v. 36; 'free on account of his eye', v. 26).
נָֽפֶשׁ׃
nāfesh · H5315

life

The life that was lost. It is the same word as before, with the vowel lengthened because it ends the verse. The repetition 'life … life' frames the principle as exact balance: what is taken is what is owed.

Key words, in depth

אָסוֹן 'asôn H611

Range of meaning: A calamity or mishap that befalls a person, apparently a serious and often fatal one. It occurs only five times in the Hebrew Bible: here and in v. 22, and three times in the Joseph story (Gen 42:4, 38; 44:29). There Jacob refuses to send Benjamin to Egypt 'lest 'asôn befall him'. He spells out what he fears: 'if 'asôn befalls him … you will bring down my gray hairs in sorrow to Sheol' (the grave). Lexicons (BDB, HALOT) give 'mischief, evil, harm' or 'fatal accident'. In later Hebrew the word becomes a standard term for disaster, and it still means 'disaster' in modern Hebrew.
Against the English: KJV and YLT 'mischief' meant harm or misfortune in 1611 but now suggests pranks. BSB and NIV 'serious injury' and ESV 'harm' are accurate in direction but may be too mild if the word leans toward a fatal outcome. NASB 'any further injury' adds 'further', which is not in the Hebrew. It assumes the early birth in v. 22 was itself an injury and so already decides one side of the debate.
How it drifted: English 'mischief' weakened over centuries from 'harm, misfortune' to 'playful naughtiness'.
Used elsewhere in the period: Genesis 42:4, 38; 44:29 (Jacob's fear for Benjamin, tied to death and Sheol). The Septuagint does not translate it as 'harm' in Exodus 21. It reads 'formed/unformed' (see textual notes). In Genesis it uses malakia ('sickness, weakness'). The Latin Vulgate interprets Exod 21:23 as 'but if her death follows'.
What it does in this verse: Because the Genesis uses all point to mortal danger, the most natural reading is a death or grave injury resulting from the blow. The word has no stated subject, though. Whether the disaster falls on the woman only, or on the woman or her child, is decided by how one reads v. 22, not by this word.

נֶפֶשׁ nefesh H5315

Range of meaning: Throat, breath, appetite, desire, a living being, a person, a life, oneself. It is the animated life of a creature, human or animal (Gen 1:20, 24; 2:7 'a living nefesh'). It is not a separable immortal part of a person in the later Greek-philosophical sense.
Against the English: In this verse every major version rightly says 'life'. Elsewhere the KJV often renders nefesh 'soul', which can lead readers to imagine an inner spiritual substance rather than the living person.
Used elsewhere in the period: The same formula nefesh taḥat nefesh appears in Lev 24:18, where it covers killing someone's animal: 'whoever strikes the life of a beast shall make it good, life for life'. There 'life for life' plainly means replacing the animal or its value. Deut 19:21 and Lev 24:17–21 repeat the talion series. The Septuagint translates nefesh as psychē.
What it does in this verse: 'Life for life' sets the value of what was lost. A human life lost in this brawl is answered by a life. Lev 24:18 shows the same words being used for equivalent replacement, so the formula in itself states equal value and does not fix the method of carrying it out.

תַּחַת taḥat H8478

Range of meaning: Literally 'under, beneath'. By extension it means 'in place of, instead of, in exchange for, on account of'. It marks substitution or something given in return (Gen 22:13, the ram offered 'in place of' Isaac; 1 Kgs 20:39 'your life in place of his life').
Against the English: 'For' in 'life for life' is accurate but bare. English 'for' can mean 'as punishment for' or 'in exchange for'. The Hebrew leans toward 'in place of': one thing set in the slot of another.
Used elsewhere in the period: In the same law collection: Exod 21:26–27 (a slave goes free 'on account of' a lost eye or tooth), 21:36 (the owner shall surely repay 'ox in place of ox'). Lev 24:18 uses it of replacing an animal. Ancient Near Eastern law codes express the same idea with their own wording (e.g. Laws of Hammurabi §§196–200).
What it does in this verse: It frames the ruling as balancing a loss, not as unlimited punishment. The penalty must match the harm, no more and no less.

נָתַן nātan H5414

Range of meaning: To give, set, place, appoint, hand over, pay. In legal contexts it means to pay or hand over what is owed (Exod 21:19, 22, 30, 32).
Against the English: KJV 'give' and ESV 'pay' keep the verb. WEB 'take', NIV 'take' and BSB 'require' turn it the other way round, as though the speaker is the one collecting the penalty. NASB 'appoint as a penalty' is an interpretation. The Hebrew says 'you shall give'.
Used elsewhere in the period: In v. 22 the striker 'shall give (nātan) as the judges determine'. In v. 30 the owner of the goring ox 'shall give the ransom for his life'. In v. 32 he 'shall give thirty shekels'. The verb runs through this chapter's language of compensation.
What it does in this verse: Using 'give' links the talion clause to the payment language around it. That is one reason some interpreters, ancient and modern, have read 'life for life' as fixing a valuation to be settled. Others take it as a straightforward death penalty that the guilty party 'gives' with his own life. The switch to 'you' adds a further question about who the subject is.

The world behind it

The law collection. Exodus 21:1–23:33, often called the "Book of the Covenant", is mostly made of case laws in the form "if X happens, then Y". Its neighbours in the ancient Near East wrote laws the same way. Exodus 21:18–36 deals with bodily injury: fights, injured slaves, goring oxen. Cases like these were heard by elders and judges at the town gate, not settled by private revenge.

The scenario. The case is a bystander injured during a brawl. The striker did not intend to hurt her. That sets it apart from deliberate murder (21:12, 14) and from accidental killing, where the killer could flee to a place of refuge (21:13). Ancient readers noticed this in-between status. It is partly why later Jewish interpreters asked whether "life for life" here meant death or a payment.

Neighbouring laws on the same case. Striking a pregnant woman was a standard case in ancient Near Eastern law:

Laws of Hammurabi §§209–214 (Babylon, c. 1750 BC) set fines for causing a miscarriage, graded by the woman's social class. If a free man's daughter died, the striker's own daughter was to be put to death (§210).
Middle Assyrian Laws A §§21, 50–52 also fine for miscarriage. In some cases they apply a kind of talion, "they shall do to him as he did to her", and require "full payment of a life" for the fetus.
Hittite Laws §§17–18 fix the fine by the stage of pregnancy.

Against this background two features of Exodus stand out. The "life for life" falls on the offender himself, not on his daughter, and the formula carries no class sliding scale. Hammurabi's law of "eye for eye" applied only between free men; injuring a commoner cost a fine (§§196–199).

The talion principle. "Like for like" (in Latin, lex talionis) existed in Mesopotamian law before Israel. In its setting it was a principle of proportion. It limited what an injured family could claim and stopped blood feuds from escalating, and it was administered by a court. Josephus (Antiquities 4.280), writing in the first century AD, says the injured party could accept money in place of a matching injury. Jesus quotes the "eye for eye" series in Matthew 5:38 when addressing personal retaliation.

How the translations handle it

BSB But if a serious injury results, then you must require a life for a life—
KJV And if [any] mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
WEB But if any harm follows, then you must take life for life,
YLT and if there is mischief, then thou hast given life for life,

KJV“And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life”

Gets right: Keeps the Hebrew verb 'give' and the singular 'thou', so the reader can see the shift in who is addressed.
Loses: 'Mischief' now sounds trivial. 'And if' hides the contrast with v. 22. 'Any' and 'follow' are supplied words (marked in italics in older printings).

BSB“But if a serious injury results, then you must require a life for a life”

Gets right: 'But' correctly marks the contrast with v. 22. Easy to read.
Loses: 'Require' reverses the Hebrew 'give' and decides that 'you' is the community. 'Serious injury' may undersell 'asôn, which in Genesis means a deadly mishap.

WEB“But if any harm follows, then you must take life for life”

Gets right: 'Harm' is a fair, neutral rendering of 'asôn.
Loses: 'Take' is the opposite of the Hebrew 'give' and can suggest the injured side seizing a life.

YLT“and if there is mischief, then thou hast given life for life”

Gets right: Very close to Hebrew word order and keeps 'give'.
Loses: 'Hast given' treats the verb as past tense. In this construction it means 'you shall give'. 'Mischief' has the same problem as in the KJV.

ESV“harm … you shall pay life for life”

Gets right: 'Pay' keeps the direction and payment sense of the Hebrew 'give'. 'Harm' leaves open who is harmed and how badly.
Loses: 'Pay' slightly tilts toward a payment reading, though it is defensible.

NIV“serious injury … you are to take life for life”

Gets right: Clear, and it signals that the outcome is grave.
Loses: 'Take' reverses 'give'. 'Serious injury' may be too mild for 'asôn.

NASB“any further injury … appoint as a penalty”

Gets right: Spells out that a legal penalty is meant.
Loses: 'Further' is not in the Hebrew. It assumes the premature birth in v. 22 was already an injury, which settles a disputed question by translation. 'Appoint as a penalty' paraphrases 'give'.

NLT

Gets right: States the principle of proportion clearly for modern readers.
Loses: It adds explanation that is not in the text and flattens the terse Hebrew formula.

Text and manuscripts

Hebrew text. The Masoretic Text (the standard Hebrew text) is stable here, with no significant manuscript variation. The supplied gloss of nātan as "pay" is reasonable in context, but its basic sense is "give". The supplied "harm" for 'asôn is fair, though the Genesis uses suggest something stronger (a fatal or grievous calamity).

Septuagint (Greek, 3rd century BC). It handles vv. 22–23 very differently. Verse 22 has the child coming out "not fully formed" (mē exeikonismenon), with a fine. Verse 23 reads "but if it was fully formed (exeikonismenon), he shall give life for life (psychēn anti psychēs)." The translators took 'asôn to refer to the fetus's development, perhaps influenced by Greek medical ideas about the stages of fetal formation. Philo of Alexandria (Special Laws 3.108–109) follows this reading. It shows how early Greek-speaking Jews understood the passage, but there is no evidence of a different Hebrew original behind it.

Vulgate (Latin, c. AD 400). Jerome reads v. 22 as a miscarriage in which the woman survives. Verse 23 becomes "but if her death follows, he shall render life for life" (sin autem mors eius fuerit subsecuta, reddet animam pro anima). This makes the woman's death explicit.

Josephus (Antiquities 4.278) likewise paraphrases the case as a miscarriage punished by a fine, with death for the striker if the woman dies.

Rabbinic tradition. The Mekhilta (an early commentary on Exodus) and the Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 79a–b; Bava Kamma 83b–84a) record debate over whether "life for life" in this case means execution or monetary payment. The case is unusual because the striker intended to hit someone else. The rabbis generally read the "eye for eye" items that follow as compensation in money.

Related passages. The same formula appears in Lev 24:18 (an animal, "life for life", plainly replacement) and Deut 19:21. Jesus quotes the series in Matthew 5:38.

The Greek Septuagint has 'if it was fully formed' where the Hebrew has 'if there is harm'. This turns the condition into a question about how far the unborn child had developed. It is best explained as the translators' interpretation, not as evidence of a different Hebrew text.

Where scholars differ

Who suffers the 'disaster': the woman only, or the woman or her child?

Miscarriage reading: v. 22 describes a miscarriage (fine), and v. 23 concerns harm to the woman herself.

Every surviving ancient Near Eastern parallel (Hammurabi §§209–214, Middle Assyrian Laws A §§50–52, Hittite §§17–18) treats this case as a miscarriage with a fine, plus a heavier penalty if the woman dies. The Vulgate and Josephus read it this way. Held by many critical commentators (e.g. Childs, Propp, Sarna's discussion of the parallels).
Premature-birth reading: v. 22 describes a live early birth, and the 'disaster' of v. 23 can fall on either the mother or the child.

'Her children come out' uses yāṣā', a verb used for live births (Gen 25:25–26). Yeled ('child') is the ordinary word for a born child. The Hebrew words for miscarriage (shākal, nefel) are not used. 'asôn has no stated subject and so could apply to both. Reflected in BSB, NIV and ESV rendering v. 22 as a premature birth. Defended by some evangelical scholars (e.g. Cassuto among earlier commentators, and others since).
Formed/unformed reading: the penalty depends on whether the fetus was fully developed.

The Septuagint and Philo. Ancient, but it depends on the Greek translators' interpretation rather than on the Hebrew wording.

Did 'life for life' mean literal execution or an equivalent payment?

Literal: the offender forfeits his life.

The plain wording. Num 35:31 forbids accepting ransom for a murderer, which shows ransom was a live option and was barred in murder cases. Josephus (Ant. 4.278) says the striker dies if the woman dies.
A formula of equal value that could be settled by compensation.

The verb is 'give', as in the fine of v. 22 and the ransom of v. 30. Taḥat marks repayment elsewhere in the chapter (v. 36). The identical phrase in Lev 24:18 means replacing an animal. Exod 21:30 allows a ransom even where the law says the ox's owner 'shall die'. The striker did not intend this harm, and accidental killers were otherwise spared (21:13). Rabbinic debate (b. Sanhedrin 79a–b) records Rabbi Judah the Prince taking it as money.

Who is the 'you' in 'you shall give'?

The offender: 'you (the guilty party) shall give a life'.

It follows on from v. 22, where the striker 'shall give'. The verb 'give' naturally describes the one who pays.
The community or judge: 'you (Israel) shall impose life for life'.

Similar talion lists address Israel as 'you' (Deut 19:21, 'your eye shall not pity'). Many translations (NIV, WEB 'take'; BSB 'require'; NASB 'appoint') adopt this reading. Some scholars think the shift in person shows that an older, fixed talion formula has been inserted into the case law.

Sources

BDB s.v. אָסוֹן
HALOT s.v. אָסוֹן
HALOT s.v. נֶפֶשׁ
BDB s.v. תַּחַת
Laws of Hammurabi §§196–214
Middle Assyrian Laws A §§21, 50–52
Hittite Laws §§17–18
Septuagint Exodus 21:22–23
Vulgate Exodus 21:22–23
Philo, On the Special Laws 3.108–109
Josephus, Antiquities 4.278, 4.280
Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Nezikin 8
Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 79a–b; Bava Kamma 83b–84a
W. H. C. Propp, Exodus 19–40 (Anchor Yale Bible)
B. S. Childs, The Book of Exodus (OTL)
N. M. Sarna, Exodus (JPS Torah Commentary)
U. Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Exodus
IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament, on Exod 21:22–25

Original-language data: STEPBible TAHOT/TAGNT (CC BY 4.0).

What readers are saying

Loading…