וְכִֽי־יָזִ֥ד אִ֛ישׁ עַל־רֵעֵ֖הוּ לְהָרְג֣וֹ בְעָרְמָ֑ה מֵעִ֣ם מִזְבְּחִ֔י תִּקָּחֶ֖נּוּ לָמֽוּת׃ (ס)
At kapag sinadya ng isang tao na patayin ang kanyang kapwa nang may pakana, kunin mo siya kahit mula sa Aking dambana upang mapatay.
On Flight and Finding
[77] After treating in this way of unintentional acts he goes on to legislate concerning assault and premeditation, saying, “If a man set upon his neighbour to slay him by guile and flee for refuge” (Exod. 21:14) to God, even to Him Who has been already symbolically called a place, Who is the occasion of life to all; for in another place likewise it says, “Whosoever shall flee there shall live” (Deut. 19:5).
On the Special Laws
§ 86. (Intention to kill.) Heinemann points out that in giving this interpretation to Ex. 21:14 ἐπιθῆται … δόλῳ, and extending it to cover βούλευσις in general, Philo is following Greek law, τὸν βουλεύσαντα ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ ἐνέχεσθαι καὶ τὸν χειρὶ ἐργασάμενον, Andocides i. 94.
On the Confusion of Tongues
[160] And indeed if a man makes a treacherous attempt against another’s life, but is unable to kill him, he is none the less liable to the penalty of the homicide, as is shewn by the law enacted for such cases. “If,” it runs, “a man attacks his neighbour to kill him by guile and flees to refuge, thou shalt take him from the altar to put him to death” (Ex. 21:14). And yet he merely “attacks” him and has not killed him, but the law regards the purpose of murder as a crime equal to murder itself, and so, even though he takes sanctuary, it does not grant him the privileges of sanctuary, but bids him be taken even from the holy place, because the purpose he has harboured is unholy.