Chapter 21

1And these are the ordinances that you shall set before them.   אוְאֵ֨לֶּה֙ הַמִּשְׁפָּטִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר תָּשִׂ֖ים לִפְנֵיהֶֽם:
And these are the ordinances: Wherever it says, “these” [in the Torah,] it [(this word) is used to] separate from what has been stated previously. [Where it says,] “And these,” [it means that] it is adding to what has been previously stated (Tanchuma Mishpatim 3). [Thus] just as what has been previously stated [namely the Ten Commandments,] were from Sinai, these too were from Sinai. Now why was the section dealing with laws juxtaposed to the section dealing with the altar? To tell you that you shall place the Sanhedrin adjacent to the Beth Hamikdash (other editions: the altar). — [From Mechilta]   ואלה המשפטים: כל מקום שנאמר אלה פסל את הראשונים, ואלה מוסיף על הראשונים, מה הראשונים מסיני, אף אלו מסיני. ולמה נסמכה פרשת דינין לפרשת מזבח, לומר לך שתשים סנהדרין אצל המקדש [המזבח]:
that you shall set before them: The Holy One, blessed is He, said to Moses: Do not think of saying, “I will teach them the chapter or the law [both terms seemingly refer to the Oral Torah] two or three times until they know it well, as it was taught, but I will not trouble myself to enable them to understand the reasons for the matter and its explanation.” Therefore, it is said: “you shall set before them,” like a table, set [with food] and prepared to eat from, [placed] before someone. — [From Mechilta, Eruvin 54b]   אשר תשים לפניהם: אמר לו הקב"ה למשה לא תעלה על דעתך לומר אשנה להם הפרק וההלכה ב' או ג' פעמים עד שתהא סדורה בפיהם כמשנתה, ואיני מטריח עצמי להבינם טעמי הדבר ופירושו, לכך נאמר אשר תשים לפניהם, כשלחן הערוך ומוכן לאכול לפני האדם:
before them: But not before gentiles. Even if you know that they [gentiles] judge a certain law similarly to the laws of Israel, do not bring it to their courts, for one who brings Jewish lawsuits before gentiles profanes the [Divine] Name and honors the name of idols to praise them (other editions: to give them importance), as it is said: “For not like our Rock [God] is their rock, but [yet] our enemies judge [us]” (Deut. 32:31). When [we let] our enemies judge [us], this is testimony to [our] esteem of their deity. — [From Tanchuma 3]   לפניהם: ולא לפני גוים, ואפילו ידעת בדין אחד שהם דנין אותו כדיני ישראל, אל תביאהו בערכאות שלהם, שהמביא דיני ישראל לפני גוים מחלל את השם ומיקר שם עבודה זרה להחשיבה, שנאמר (דברים לב לא) כי לא כצורנו צורם ואויבינו פלילים, כשאויבינו פלילים זהו עדות לעלוי יראתם:
2Should you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall work [for] six years, and in the seventh [year], he shall go out to freedom without charge.   בכִּ֤י תִקְנֶה֙ עֶ֣בֶד עִבְרִ֔י שֵׁ֥שׁ שָׁנִ֖ים יַֽעֲבֹ֑ד וּבַ֨שְּׁבִעִ֔ת יֵצֵ֥א לַֽחָפְשִׁ֖י חִנָּֽם:
Should you buy a Hebrew slave: A slave who is himself a Hebrew. Or perhaps it means only a slave of a Hebrew, a Canaanite [servant] whom you bought from a Hebrew. And concerning him, he [the Torah] says, “he shall work [for] six years.” How [then] can I apply the [law in the following] verse, “and you shall bequeath them” (Lev. 25:46) ? [Does this verse apply] concerning one [a servant] purchased from a non-Jew, but one [a servant] purchased from an Israelite goes free after six years? Therefore, the Torah states: “Should your brother, a Hebrew man… be sold to you, [he shall serve you for six years]” (Deut. 15:12). [This is the clarification that] I [God] said this only regarding your brother. — [From Mechilta]   כי תקנה עבד עברי: עבד שהוא עברי, או אינו אלא עבדו של עברי, עבד כנעני שלקחתו מישראל, ועליו הוא אומר שש שנים יעבוד, ומה אני מקיים (ויקרא כה מו) והתנחלתם אתם, בלקוח מן הגוי, אבל בלקוח מישראל יצא בשש, תלמוד לומר (דברים טו יב) כי ימכר לך אחיך העברי, לא אמרתי אלא באחיך:
Should you buy: from the hand of the court, who sold him [into servitude] because of his theft, as it is said: “If he has no [money], he shall be sold for his theft” (Exod. 22:2). Or perhaps it refers only to one who sold oneself [into servitude] because of poverty, but if the court sold him, he does not go free after six [years]? When he [the Torah] says: “And if your brother becomes impoverished beside you and is sold to you” (Lev. 25:39), one who sells oneself because of poverty is mentioned [here]. So [to avoid repetition,] how do I apply “Should you buy” ? [By understanding that this is] concerning one sold by the court.   כי תקנה: מיד בית דין שמכרוהו בגנבתו כמו שנאמר (שמות כב ב) אם אין לו ונמכר בגנבתו. או אינו אלא במוכר עצמו מפני דוחקו, אבל מכרוהו בית דין לא יצא בשש, כשהוא אומר (ויקרא כה לט) וכי ימוך אחיך עמך ונמכר לך, הרי מוכר עצמו מפני דוחקו אמור, ומה אני מקיים כי תקנה, בנמכר בבית דין:
to freedom: Heb. לַחָפְשִׁי, to freedom.   לחפשי: לחירות:
3If he comes [in] alone, he shall go out alone; if he is a married man, his wife shall go out with him.   גאִם־בְּגַפּ֥וֹ יָבֹ֖א בְּגַפּ֣וֹ יֵצֵ֑א אִם־בַּ֤עַל אִשָּׁה֙ ה֔וּא וְיָֽצְאָ֥ה אִשְׁתּ֖וֹ עִמּֽוֹ:
If he comes [in] alone: Heb. בְּגַפּוֹ, meaning that he was not married, as the Targum renders: אִם בִּלְחוֹדוֹהִי. The expression בְּגַפּוֹ means “with his skirt,” [i.e., the skirt of his cloak, meaning] that he came only as he was, alone within his clothing, in the skirt of his garment.   אם בגפו יבא: שלא היה נשוי אשה כתרגומו אם בלחודוהי. ולשון בגפו בכנפו, שלא בא אלא כמות שהוא, יחידי, בתוך לבושו בכנף בגדו:
he shall go out alone: [This] tells [us] that if he was not married at first, his master may not give him a Canaanite maidservant from whom to beget slaves. — [From Kid. 20a] [   בגפו יצא: מגיד שאם לא היה נשוי מתחלה, אין רבו מוסר לו שפחה כנענית להוליד ממנה עבדים:
if he is a married man: [Lit., if he is someone’s husband, meaning] an Israelite [woman]. — [From Mechilta]   אם בעל אשה הוא: ישראלית:
his wife shall go out with him: Now who brought her in that she should go out? Rather, the text informs us that whoever purchases a Hebrew slave is [also] responsible for supporting his wife and his children. [From Mechilta, Kid. 22a]   ויצאה אשתו עמו: וכי מי הכניסה שתצא, אלא מגיד הכתוב, שהקונה עבד עברי חייב במזונות אשתו ובניו:
4If his master gives him a wife, and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and he shall go out alone.   דאִם־אֲדֹנָיו֙ יִתֶּן־ל֣וֹ אִשָּׁ֔ה וְיָֽלְדָה־לּ֥וֹ בָנִ֖ים א֣וֹ בָנ֑וֹת הָֽאִשָּׁ֣ה וִֽילָדֶ֗יהָ תִּֽהְיֶה֙ לַֽאדֹנֶ֔יהָ וְה֖וּא יֵצֵ֥א בְגַפּֽוֹ:
If his master gives him a wife: From here we deduce that his master has the option to give him [the slave] a Canaanite maidservant [in order] to beget slaves from her. Or, perhaps this means only an Israelite woman? Therefore, Scripture says: “The woman and her children shall belong to her master.” Thus, He is speaking only about a Canaanite woman, for a Hebrew woman she, too, goes free after six [years], and even before six [years], when she develops signs [of puberty], she goes free, as it is said: “your brother, a Hebrew man or a Hebrew woman [that one shall serve you for six years]” (Deut. 15:12). [This] teaches [us] that a Hebrew [maidservant] also goes free after six [years]. — [From Mechilta, Kid. 14b]   אם א-דניו יתן לו אשה: מכאן שהרשות ביד רבו למסור לו שפחה כנענית להוליד ממנה עבדים. או אינו אלא בישראלית, תלמוד לומר האשה וילדיה תהיה לאדוניה, הא אינו מדבר אלא בכנענית, שהרי העבריה אף היא יוצאה בשש, ואפילו לפני שש אם הביאה סימנין יוצאה, שנאמר (דברים טו יב) אחיך העברי או העבריה, מלמד, שאף העבריה יוצאה בשש:
5But if the slave says, "I love my master, my wife, and my children. I will not go free,"   הוְאִם־אָמֹ֤ר יֹאמַר֙ הָעֶ֔בֶד אָהַ֨בְתִּי֙ אֶת־אֲדֹנִ֔י אֶת־אִשְׁתִּ֖י וְאֶת־בָּנָ֑י לֹ֥א אֵצֵ֖א חָפְשִֽׁי:
my wife: [This refers to] the maidservant.   את אשתי: השפחה:
6his master shall bring him to the judges, and he shall bring him to the door or to the doorpost, and his master shall bore his ear with an awl, and he shall serve him forever.   ווְהִגִּישׁ֤וֹ אֲדֹנָיו֙ אֶל־הָ֣אֱלֹהִ֔ים וְהִגִּישׁוֹ֙ אֶל־הַדֶּ֔לֶת א֖וֹ אֶל־הַמְּזוּזָ֑ה וְרָצַ֨ע אֲדֹנָ֤יו אֶת־אָזְנוֹ֙ בַּמַּרְצֵ֔עַ וַֽעֲבָד֖וֹ לְעֹלָֽם:
to the judges: Heb. אֶל-הָאֱלֹהִים, to the court to consult his sellers, for they sold him [the slave] to him [to his master]. — [From Mechilta]   אל הא-להים: לבית דין, צריך שימלך במוכריו שמכרוהו לו:
to the door or to the doorpost: I might think that the doorpost is [a] qualified [place] on which to bore [the servant’s ear]. Therefore, Scripture says: “and you shall thrust it into his ear and into the door” (Deut. 15:17), [meaning] “into the door,” but not “into the doorpost.” What then does or to the doorpost mean? [The text is] comparing the door to the doorpost. Just as the doorpost is upright [i.e., attached to the house; otherwise it is not called a doorpost], so is the door upright. [A detached door may not be used for the ritual of ear boring.]-[From Mechilta, Kid. 22b]   אל הדלת או אל המזוזה: יכול שתהא המזוזה כשרה לרצוע עליה, תלמוד לומר (דברים טו יז) ונתתה באזנו ובדלת, בדלת ולא במזוזה, הא מה תלמוד לומר או אל המזוזה, הקיש דלת למזוזה מה מזוזה מעומד אף דלת מעומד:
and his master shall bore his ear: [I.e.,] the right [ear]. Or perhaps it means the left one? Therefore, the Torah states אֹזֶן “ear,” here and אֹזֶן [elsewhere] for [the purpose of making] a גְזֵרָה שָׁוָה, [which means two places having similar wording, which indicates that the rulings pertaining to one situation also apply to the other]. It is stated here: “and his master shall bore his ear,” and it is stated regarding the mezora [person with the disease of zara’ath]: “the cartilage of the right ear of the one who is becoming pure” (Lev. 14:14). Just as there the right [ear] is specified, here too the right [ear] is meant. Now, why was the ear chosen to be bored out of all the organs of the body? Rabban Jochanan ben Zakkai said: The ear that heard on Mount Sinai, “You shall not steal” (Exod. 20:13) and [then] went and stole, shall be bored. And if [the text is referring to] one who sold himself [into servitude, the reason is that] the ear that heard, “For the children of Israel are slaves to Me” (Lev. 25:55) and [then] went and acquired a master for himself, [this ear] shall be bored. Rabbi Shimon used to interpret this verse [in a beautiful manner] like a bundle of pearls [or a great amount of perfume in this way:]-why were the door and the doorpost singled out from all the fixtures in the house? The Holy One, blessed is He, said: The door and the doorpost were witnesses in Egypt when I passed over the lintel and the two doorposts, and I said, “For the children of Israel are slaves to Me; they are My slaves,” but [they are] not slaves to slaves, and [yet] this one went and acquired for himself a master-[his ear] shall be bored before them [for everyone to see]. — [From Kid. 22b]   ורצע א-דניו את אזנו במרצע: הימנית. או אינו אלא של שמאל, תלמוד לומר אזן, אזן לגזרה שוה נאמר כאן ורצע אדוניו את אזנו, ונאמר במצורע (ויקרא יד יד) תנוך אזן המטהר הימנית, מה להלן הימנית, אף כאן הימנית. ומה ראה אזן להרצע מכל שאר אברים שבגוף, אמר רבי יוחנן בן זכאי (קדושין כב ע"ב) אזן זאת ששמעה על הר סיני לא תגנוב, והלך וגנב, תרצע. ואם מוכר עצמו, אזן ששמעה על הר סיני (ויקרא כה נה) כי לי בני ישראל עבדים, והלך וקנה אדון לעצמו, תרצע. ר' שמעון היה דורש מקרא זה כמין חומר מה נשתנו דלת ומזוזה מכל כלים שבבית, אמר הקב"ה דלת ומזוזה שהיו עדים במצרים כשפסחתי על המשקוף ועל שתי המזוזות ואמרתי כי לי בני ישראל עבדים, עבדי הם ולא עבדים לעבדים, והלך זה וקנה אדון לעצמו, ירצע בפניהם:
and he shall serve him forever: Heb. לְעֹלָם, until the Jubilee year [the fiftieth year of the cycle]. Or perhaps it means literally forever, as its apparent meaning? Therefore, the Torah states [in reference to the Jubilee year]: “and each man to his family you shall return” (Lev. 25:10). [This] informs [us] that fifty years are called עֹלָם. But [this does] not [mean] that he must serve him [his master] the entire fifty years, but he must serve him until the Jubilee year, regardless of whether it is near or far off. — [From Mechilta, Kid. 15a]   ועבדו לעלם: עד היובל. או אינו אלא לעולם כמשמעו, תלמוד לומר (ויקרא כה י) ואיש אל משפחתו תשובו, מגיד שחמישים שנה קרוים עולם, ולא שיהא עובדו כל חמשים שנה, אלא עובדו עד היובל בין סמוך בין מופלג:
7Now if a man sells his daughter as a maidservant, she shall not go free as the slaves go free.   זוְכִֽי־יִמְכֹּ֥ר אִ֛ישׁ אֶת־בִּתּ֖וֹ לְאָמָ֑ה לֹ֥א תֵצֵ֖א כְּצֵ֥את הָֽעֲבָדִֽים:
Now if a man sells his daughter as a maidservant: Scripture is referring [here] to a minor girl. I might think that even if she develops signs [of initial puberty, the father may sell her]. [But] you must agree that a kal vachomer [the inference of a major rule from a minor rule] applies here namely if she who is already sold goes free with signs [that is, when she has signs of initial puberty], as it is written: “she shall go out for nothing, without money” (Exod. 21:11), which we interpret as referring to the signs of initial puberty, does it not make sense that she who is not sold [and has initial signs of puberty] should not be sold [at all]? -[From Mechilta, Arachin 29a] [At the moment when a female has two pubic hairs, usually when she is twelve years old, she is no longer considered a minor. She is then called נַעִרָה. She is, however, still under her father’s jurisdiction until six months later, when her breasts have developed to a certain stage. Then she is called בּוֹגֶרֶת, a mature girl. In the case of a Hebrew maidservant, the father may sell her only when she is a minor, not after she has become a נַעִרָה   וכי ימכר איש את בתו לאמה: בקטנה הכתוב מדבר. יכול אפילו הביאה סימנים. אמרת קל וחומר ומה מכורה קודם לכן יוצאה בסימנין, כמו שנאמר (פסוק יא) ויצאה חנם אין כסף, שאנו דורשים אותן לסימני נערות, שאינה מכורה אינו דין שלא תמכר:
she shall not go free as the slaves go free: [I.e.,]-like the emancipation of Canaanite slaves, who go free because of [the loss of] a tooth or an eye. [See below, verses 26, 27.] This one [a Hebrew maidservant], however, will not go free because of [the loss of] a tooth or an eye, but she will work for [her complete] six years or until the Jubilee year or until she develops signs [of initial puberty]. Whichever comes first will be the first [event] to effect her emancipation, and [her master] will reimburse her for the value of her eye or the value of her tooth. Or perhaps this is not so [i.e., the intention of the verse], but “she shall not go free as the [male] slaves go free” [meaning] after six years or in the Jubilee year? Therefore, the Torah states: “Should your brother, a Hebrew man or a Hebrew woman, be sold to you…” (Deut. 15:12). This compares the Hebrew woman to the Hebrew man in regard to all the ways he can be emancipated: just as a Hebrew man goes free following six years [of service] or in the Jubilee year, so too does a Hebrew woman go free following six years [of service] or in the Jubilee year. What then is the meaning of “she shall not go free as the slaves go free” ? [This means] she shall not go free with [the loss of] the tips of her limbs, as do the Canaanite slaves. I might think [then] that [only a Hebrew maidservant does not go free due to the loss of the tips of her limbs, but] a Hebrew man does go free with [the loss of] the tips of his limbs. [Therefore, the Torah] compares the Hebrew man to the Hebrew woman: just as the Hebrew woman does not go free with [the loss of] the tips of her limbs, neither does the Hebrew man go free with [the loss of] the tips of his limbs. — [From Mechilta]   לא תצא כצאת העבדים: כיציאת עבדים כנענים שיוצאים בשן ועין, אבל זו לא תצא בשן ועין, אלא עובדת שש או עד היובל, או עד שתביא סימנין, וכל הקודם קודם לחירותה ונותן לה דמי עינה או דמי שינה, או אינו אלא לא תצא כצאת העבדים בשש וביובל, תלמוד לומר (דברים טו יב) כי ימכר לך אחיך העברי או העבריה. מקיש עבריה לעברי לכל יציאותיו מה עברי יוצא בשש וביובל, אף עבריה יוצאה בשש וביובל, ומהו לא תצא כצאת העבדים, לא תצא בראשי אברים כעבדים כנענים. יכול העברי יוצא בראשי אברים, תלמוד לומר העברי או העבריה, מקיש עברי לעבריה מה העבריה אינה יוצאה בראשי אברים, אף הוא אינו יוצא בראשי אברים:
8If she is displeasing to her master, who did not designate her [for himself], then he shall enable her to be redeemed; he shall not rule over her to sell her to another person, when he betrays her.   חאִם־רָעָ֞ה בְּעֵינֵ֧י אֲדֹנֶ֛יהָ אֲשֶׁר־ל֥וֹ (כתיב אשר־לא) יְעָדָ֖הּ וְהֶפְדָּ֑הּ לְעַ֥ם נָכְרִ֛י לֹֽא־יִמְשֹׁ֥ל לְמָכְרָ֖הּ בְּבִגְדוֹ־בָֽהּ:
If she is displeasing to her master: [Meaning] that she does not please him to the extent that he would [want to] marry her. — [From Mechilta]   אם רעה בעיני א-דניה: שלא נשאה חן בעיניו לכונסה:
who did not designate her: For he should have designated her and married her, and the money paid for her purchase is the money of her betrothal. Here Scripture hints that it is a mitzvah [for the master] to perform יִעוּד, designation for marriage, [with the maidservant] and it hints that she would not require any other betrothal. [I.e., neither money nor articles of value would have to be given to the girl’s father in order to marry her. The money the father originally received for selling his daughter now would become the money of betrothal from her master.]-[From Kid. 19b]   אשר לא יעדה: שהיה לו ליעדה ולהכניסה לו לאשה, וכסף קנייתה הוא כסף קידושיה. כאן רמז לך הכתוב שמצוה ביעוד ורמז לך שאינה צריכה קדושין אחרים:
he shall enable her to be redeemed: [This means] he [the master] should give her the opportunity to be redeemed and go free, for he too assists in her redemption. Now what is this opportunity that he gives her? That he deducts from her redemption, according to the number of years that she worked for him, as if she had been hired by him [and was not a slave]. How so? Let us say that he bought her for a maneh [one hundred zuz], and she worked for him for two years. We say to him, “You knew that she would ultimately leave at the end of six years. This means that you bought each year’s work for one-sixth of a maneh, and she has worked for you for two years, which equals one-third of a maneh. Accept two-thirds of a maneh [from her, to pay for the remaining four years] and let her leave you.” -[from Kid. 14b]   והפדה: יתן לה מקום להפדות ולצאת, שאף הוא מסייע בפדיונה ומה הוא מקום שנותן לה, שמגרע מפדיונה כמספר השנים שעשתה אצלו, כאלו היא שכורה אצלו. כיצד, הרי שקנאה במנה ועשתה אצלו שתי שנים אומרים לו יודע היית שעתידה לצאת לסוף שש, נמצא שקנית עבודת כל שנה ושנה בששית המנה, ועשתה אצלך שתי שנים, הרי שלישית המנה, טול שתי שלישיות המנה ותצא מאצלך:
to another person: Heb. לְעַם נָכְרִי. [Meaning] that neither the master nor the father has the right to sell her to anyone else. — [from Kid. 18a]   לעם נכרי לא ימשל למכרה: אינו רשאי למכרה לאחר, לא האדון ולא האב:
when he betrays her: If he [the master] comes to betray her and not fulfill the commandment of designation, and the father, too, since he betrayed her and sold her to this one.   בבגדו בה: אם בא לבגוד בה, שלא לקיים בה מצות ייעוד, וכן אביה, מאחר שבגד בה ומכרה לזה:
9And if he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her according to the law of the daughters [of Israel].   טוְאִם־לִבְנ֖וֹ יִֽיעָדֶ֑נָּה כְּמִשְׁפַּ֥ט הַבָּנ֖וֹת יַֽעֲשֶׂה־לָּֽהּ:
And if he designates her for his son: [I.e., if] the master [chooses her as a wife for his son]. [This] teaches [us] that his son also stands in his [the master’s] place to designate her if his father so desires, and he does not require another betrothal, but he [can] say to her, “Behold, you are designated to me with the money your father received [originally] for your value.” -[From Kid. 18b]   ואם לבנו ייעדנה: האדון. מלמד, שאף בנו קם תחתיו ליעדה, אם ירצה אביו, ואינו צריך לקדשה קידושין אחרים. אלא אומר לה הרי את מיועדת לי בכסף שקיבל אביך בדמיך:
according to the law of the daughters [of Israel]: Meaning sustenance, clothing, and marital relations. — [From Mechilta]   כמשפט הבנות: שאר, כסות ועונה:
10If he takes another [wife] for himself, he shall not diminish her sustenance, her clothing, or her marital relations.   יאִם־אַחֶ֖רֶת יִקַּח־ל֑וֹ שְׁאֵרָ֛הּ כְּסוּתָ֥הּ וְעֹֽנָתָ֖הּ לֹ֥א יִגְרָֽע:
If he takes another [wife] for himself: in addition to her. — [From Mechilta]   אם אחרת יקח לו: עליה:
he shall not diminish her sustenance, her clothing, or her marital relations: from the maidservant whom he had already designated. — [From Mechilta]   שארה כסותה וענתה לא יגרע: מן האמה שיעד לו כבר:
her sustenance: Heb. שְׁאֵרָהּ, [referring to] food. — [From Mechilta, Keth. 47b]   שארה: מזונות:
her clothing: Heb. כְּסוּתָה, lit., her covering As its apparent meaning [namely her clothing].   כסותה: כמשמעו:
her marital relations: Heb. עֹנָתָה, [meaning physical] intimacy. — [From Mechilta, Keth. 47b]   ענתה: תשמיש:
11And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go free without charge, without [payment of] money.   יאוְאִ֨ם־שְׁלָשׁ־אֵ֔לֶּה לֹ֥א יַֽעֲשֶׂ֖ה לָ֑הּ וְיָֽצְאָ֥ה חִנָּ֖ם אֵ֥ין כָּֽסֶף:
And if he does not do these three things for her: If he does not do any one of these three things for her. Now what are these three things? He should designate her for himself or for his son [as a wife], or he should deduct from the money of her redemption and allow her to go free. But this one [master] designated her neither for himself nor for his son, and she could not afford to redeem herself [even after the deduction]. — [From Mechilta]   ואם שלש אלה לא יעשה לה: אם אחת משלש אלה לא יעשה לה, ומה הן השלש, ייעדנה לו, או לבנו, או יגרע מפדיונה ותצא, וזה לא ייעדה לא לו ולא לבנו, והיא לא היה בידה לפדות את עצמה:
she shall go free without charge: [The text] adds [another means of] emancipation for this [maidservant] beyond what it provided for male slaves. Now what is this [means of] emancipation? וְיָצְאָה חִנָם informs you that she goes free when she shows [initial] signs [of puberty], and she must stay with him until she develops [these] signs. If six years pass before the appearance of these signs, we have already learned that she goes free, as it is said: “Should your brother, a Hebrew man or a Hebrew woman [be sold to you, that one] shall serve you for six years” (Deut. 15: 12). What then is the meaning of “she shall go out without charge” ? If the signs [of puberty] precede the [end of] six years, she shall go free because of them. Or perhaps it means only that she goes out when she reaches maturity [i.e., at twelve and a half years]? Therefore, Scripture says: “without [payment of] money,” to include her emancipation at maturity. If both of them [i.e., that she goes free “without charge” and “without money”] were not stated, [and “she shall go out without charge” was stated,] I would say that “she shall go out without charge” refers to [her being freed at] maturity. Therefore, both of them were stated, so that the disputant has no opportunity to differ. -[From Mechilta, Kid. 4a]   ויצאה חנם: ריבה לה יציאה לזו יותר ממה שריבה לעבדים, ומה היא היציאה, ללמדך שתצא בסימנין ותשהה עמו עד שתביא סימנין. ואם הגיעו שש שנים קודם סימנין, כבר למדנו שתצא, שנאמר (דברים טו יב) העברי או העבריה ועבדך שש שנים, ומהו האמור כאן ויצאה חנם, שאם קדמו סימנים לשש שנים תצא בהן, או אינו אומר שתצא אלא בבגרות תלמוד לומר אין כסף לרבות יציאת בגרות ואם לא נאמרו שניהם הייתי אומר ויצאה חנם זו בגרות, לכך נאמרו שניהם, שלא ליתן פתחון פה לבעל הדין לחלוק:
12One who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death.   יבמַכֵּ֥ה אִ֛ישׁ וָמֵ֖ת מ֥וֹת יוּמָֽת:
One who strikes a man so that he dies: Several verses have been written in the section dealing with murderers, and I will explain what I am able to explain [about] why they [these verses] are needed.   מכה איש ומת: כמה כתובים נאמרו בפרשת [במיתת] רוצחין, ומה שבידי לפרש למה באו כולם, אפרש:
One who strikes a man so that he dies: Why was this said? Because it says: “And if a man strikes down any human being, he shall surely be put to death” (Lev. 24:17), I understand [that even if he deals him] a blow without death. Therefore, the Torah says: “He who strikes a man and he dies,” meaning that he is liable only for a blow causing death. If it said: “He who strikes a man,” and it did not say, “And if a man strikes down any human being,” I would say that one is liable only if one strikes a man. If one strikes a woman or a minor, how do we know [that one is liable]? Therefore, the Torah says: “if [a man] strikes down any human being,” referring even to a minor or even a woman. Also, if it said: “He who strikes a man,” I would understand that even a minor who struck and killed [someone] would be liable. Therefore, the Torah [specifically] says: “if a man strikes down,” but not a minor who strikes [someone] down. Also, “if… strikes down any human being” implies even a nonviable infant. Therefore, the Torah [here] says: “He who strikes a man,” implying one is liable only if one strikes a viable infant, one [who is] capable of becoming a man [i.e., an adult]. -[From Mechilta]   מכה איש ומת: למה נאמר, לפי שנאמר (ויקרא כד יז) ואיש כי יכה כל נפש אדם מות יומת, שומע אני בהכאה בלא מיתה, תלמוד לומר מכה איש ומת, אינו חייב אלא בהכאה של מיתה. ואם נאמר מכה איש, ולא נאמר ואיש כי יכה, הייתי אומר אינו חייב עד שיכה איש, היכה את האשה ואת הקטן מנין, תלמוד לומר כי יכה כל נפש אדם, אפילו קטן ואפילו אשה. ועוד אלו נאמר מכה איש, שומע אני, אפילו קטן שהכה והרג יהא חייב, תלמוד לומר ואיש כי יכה, ולא קטן שהכה. ועוד, כי יכה כל נפש אדם, אפילו נפלים במשמע, תלמוד לומר מכה איש, אינו חייב עד שיכה בן קיימא ראוי להיות איש:
13But one who did not stalk [him], but God brought [it] about into his hand, I will make a place for you to which he shall flee.   יגוַֽאֲשֶׁר֙ לֹ֣א צָדָ֔ה וְהָֽאֱלֹהִ֖ים אִנָּ֣ה לְיָד֑וֹ וְשַׂמְתִּ֤י לְךָ֙ מָק֔וֹם אֲשֶׁ֥ר יָנ֖וּס שָֽׁמָּה:
But one who did not stalk [him]: He did not lie in wait for him, and he did not intend [to kill him]. -[From Sifrei, Num. 35:22]   ואשר לא צדה: לא ארב לו ולא נתכוין:
stalk: Heb. צָדָה, an expression meaning “lie in wait.” And so does Scripture say: “but you are stalking (צֹדֶה) my soul to take it” (I Sam. 24:12). It is, however, impossible to say that צָדָה is an expression [that is] related to [hunting animals as in the following verse:] “the one who hunted game צַיִד) (הַצָּד ” (Gen. 27:33) [and to render: he did not hunt him down], because in [the expression of] hunting beasts, there is no “hey” in its verb, and the noun related to it is צַיִד, whereas the noun in this case is צְדִיָּה (Num. 35:20), and its verb is צוֹדֶה, but the verb of this one [namely hunting] is צָּד. I say, [therefore,] that this is to be interpreted as the Targum [Onkelos] renders: But he who did not stalk [him]. Menachem, however, classified it (Machbereth Menachem, p. 148) in the grouping along with הַצָּד צַיִד, but I disagree with him. If it is at all possible to classify it in one of the groupings of צד [enumerated by Menachem], we may classify it in the grouping of “on the side (צַד) you shall be borne” (Isa. 66:12); “I shall shoot to the side (צִדָּה) ” (I Sam. 20:20); “And he will speak words against [lit., to the side of] (לְצַד) the Most High” (Dan. 7:25). Here, too, אִשֶׁר לֹא צָדָה means that he did not look sideways (צִדֵּד) to find for him some occasion [lit., side] to kill him. This [interpretation] too is questionable. In any case, it is an expression of stalking. [   צדה: לשון ארב, וכן הוא אומר (שמואל א כד יא) ואתה צודה את נפשי לקחתה, ולא יתכן לומר צדה לשון הצד ציד (בראשית כז לג), שצידת חיות אין נופל ה"א בפועל שלה, ושם דבר בה ציד, וזה שם דבר בו צדיה ופועל שלו צודה, וזה פועל שלו צד. ואומר אני פתרונו כתרגומו ודלא כמן ליה. ומנחם חברו בחלק צד ציד, ואין אני מודה לו. ואם יש לחברו באחת ממחלוקת של צד, נחברנו בחלק (ישעיה סו יב) על צד תנשאו, צדה אורה (שמואל א' כ כ), ומלין לצד עלאה ימלל (דניאל ז כה). אף כאן אשר לא צדה לא צדד למצוא לו שום צד מיתה, ואף זה יש להרהר עליו, סוף דבר לשון אורב הוא:
but God brought [it] about into his hand: Heb. אִנָּה, made it ready for his hand, an expression similar to “No harm will be prepared (תְאוּנֶּה) for you” (Ps. 91:10); No wrong shall be prepared (יְאוּנֶּה) (Prov. 12:21); [and] “he is preparing himself (מִתְאַנֶה) against me” (II Kings 5:7), [meaning that] he is preparing himself to find a pretext against me..   והא-להים אנה לידו: זימן לידו, לשון לא תאונה אליך רעה (תהלים צא י), לא יאונה לצדיק כל און (משלי יב כא), מתאנה הוא לי (מלכים ב' ה ז), מזדמן למצוא לי עילה:
but God brought [it] about into his hand: Now why should this go out from before Him? That is what David said, “As the proverb of the Ancient One says, ‘From the wicked comes forth wickedness’” (I Sam. 24:14). The proverb of the Ancient One is the Torah, which is the proverb of the Holy One, blessed is He, Who is the Ancient One of the world. Now where did the Torah say, “From the wicked comes forth wickedness” ? [This refers to:] “but God brought [it] about into his hand.” To what is the text referring? To two people, one who killed unintentionally and one who killed intentionally, but there were no witnesses who would testify to the matter. This one [who killed intentionally] was not executed, and that one [who killed unintentionally] was not exiled [to the refuge cities]. So the Holy One, blessed is He, brings them [both] to one inn. The one who killed intentionally sits under a ladder, and the one who killed unintentionally is ascending the ladder, and he falls on the one who had killed intentionally and kills him, and witnesses testify about him and sentence him to exile. The result is that the one who killed unintentionally is exiled, and the one who killed intentionally was killed. -[From Mechilta, Makkoth 10b]   והא-להים אנה לידו: ולמה תצא זאת מלפניו, הוא שאמר דוד (שמואל א' כד יג) כאשר יאמר משל הקדמוני מרשעים יצא רשע, ומשל הקדמוני היא התורה, שהיא משל הקב"ה שהוא קדמונו של עולם. והיכן אמרה תורה מרשעים יצא רשע, והא-להים אנה לידו. במה הכתוב מדבר, בשני בני אדם, אחד הרג שוגג ואחד הרג מזיד, ולא היו עדים בדבר שיעידו, זה לא נהרג וזה לא גלה, והקב"ה מזמנן לפונדק אחד, זה שהרג במזיד יושב תחת הסולם, וזה שהרג שוגג עולה בסולם ונופל על זה שהרג במזיד והורגו, ועדים מעידים עליו ומחייבים אותו לגלות, נמצא זה שהרג בשוגג גולה, וזה שהרג במזיד נהרג:
I will make a place for you: Even in the desert, where he [the man who has murdered] shall flee, and what place affords him asylum? This is the camp of the Levites. -[From Mechilta, Mak. 12b]   ושמתי לך מקום: אף במדבר, שינוס שמה, ואיזה מקום קולטו, זה מחנה לויה:
14But if a man plots deliberately against his friend to slay him with cunning, [even] from My altar you shall take him to die.   ידוְכִֽי־יָזִ֥ד אִ֛ישׁ עַל־רֵעֵ֖הוּ לְהָרְג֣וֹ בְעָרְמָ֑ה מֵעִ֣ם מִזְבְּחִ֔י תִּקָּחֶ֖נּוּ לָמֽוּת:
But if… plots deliberately: Why was this said? Because it said: “One who strikes [a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death]” (verse 12), I [may] understand [this to apply to] a physician [who killed a patient], the agent of the court who killed by [administering] forty lashes, the father who strikes his son, the teacher who disciplines his pupil, and the unintentional [killer]. Therefore, the Torah states: “But if [a man] plots deliberately,” but not the unintentional [killer]; “to slay him with cunning,” but not the agent of the court, the physician, or the one who disciplines his son or his pupil, for although they are intentional [in striking], they do not act with cunning. -[From Mechilta]   וכי יזיד: למה נאמר, לפי שנאמר מכה איש וגו' שומע אני אפילו גוי, והרופא שהרג ושליח בית דין שהמית במלקות ארבעים, והאב המכה את בנו, והרב הרודה את תלמידו, והשוגג, תלמוד לומר וכי יזיד ולא שוגג על רעהו ולא על גוי. להרגו בערמה - ולא שליח בית דין והרופא והרודה את בנו ותלמידו, שאף על פי שהם מזידין אין מערימין:
[even] from My altar: if he were a kohen and wanted to perform the [sacrificial] service, you shall take him to die. [From Mechilta, Yoma 85a]   מעם מזבחי: אם היה כהן ורוצה לעבוד עבודה, תקחנו למות:
15And one who strikes his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.   טווּמַכֵּ֥ה אָבִ֛יו וְאִמּ֖וֹ מ֥וֹת יוּמָֽת:
And one who strikes his father or his mother: Since we learned that one who strikes one’s fellow is liable to make monetary compensation (Exod. 21:18, 19, 24, 25), but he is not liable to death, the text had to state that one who strikes his father is liable to the death penalty, but he is not liable except for a blow that causes a wound. -[From Mechilta, Sanh. 84b]   ומכה אביו ואמו: לפי שלמדנו על החובל בחבירו שהוא בתשלומין ולא במיתה, הוצרך לומר על החובל באביו שהוא במיתה, ואינו חייב אלא בהכאה שיש בה חבורה:
his father or his mother: Either this one or that one. -[From Mechilta, Sanh. 85b]   אביו ואמו: או זה או זה:
shall surely be put to death: by strangulation. -[From Mechilta, Sanh. 85b]   מות יומת: בחנק:
16And whoever kidnaps a man and sells him, and he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death.   טזוְגֹנֵ֨ב אִ֧ישׁ וּמְכָר֛וֹ וְנִמְצָ֥א בְיָד֖וֹ מ֥וֹת יוּמָֽת:
And whoever kidnaps a man: Why was this said [here since the law of kidnapping is mentioned elsewhere (Ho’il Moshe)]? Since it says (Deut. 24:7): “Should a man be found stealing a person from among his brothers” [meaning from the children of Israel, and he has worked with him and sold him, that thief shall die, and you shall clear away the evil from your midst]. [From here] I know only [that] a man who kidnapped a person [is liable to death]. How do I know if a woman, one of indeterminate sex, or a hermaphrodite kidnap [a person, that they too are liable to death]? Therefore, the Torah states: “And whoever kidnaps a man and sells him…” And since it says here: “And whoever kidnaps a man,” I know only that one who kidnaps a man [is liable to death]. How do I know that if one kidnaps a woman [he is also liable… to death]? Therefore, the Torah states (Deut. 24: 7): “stealing a person.” Therefore, both of them [both verses] were needed; what one [verse] left out the other [verse] filled in [lit., revealed]. -[From Mechilta, Sanh. 85b]   וגנב איש ומכרו: למה נאמר, לפי שנאמר (דברים כד ז) כי ימצא איש גונב נפש מאחיו, אין לי אלא איש שגנב נפש, אשה או טומטום או אנדרוגינוס שגנבו מנין, תלמוד לומר וגונב איש ומכרו. ולפי שנאמר כאן וגונב איש, אין לי אלא גונב איש, גונב אשה מנין, תלמוד לומר (שם) גונב נפש, לכך הוצרכו שניהם, מה שחסר זה גלה זה:
and he is found in his possession: [I.e., this means] that witnesses saw him that he kidnapped him and sold him, and he [the kidnapped man] was found in his hand prior to the sale. -[From Mechilta]   ונמצא בידו: שראוהו עדים שגנבו ומכרו ונמצא בידו כבר קודם מכירה:
shall surely be put to death: By strangulation. Every death penalty mentioned in the Torah without qualification is strangulation (Mechilta, Sanh. 84b). [God] interrupts the subject [of discussing sins against parents] and writes, “and whoever kidnaps a man” between [the verses] “one who strikes his father or his mother” and “one who curses his father or his mother.” It appears to me that that is [the underlying reason for] the controversy [found in Sanh. 85], that one Tannaic master believes that we are comparing striking [someone] to cursing [i.e., just as one is liable only if one curses a person who keeps the commandments as befits a Jew (see Exod. 22:27), so too is one liable only for striking a person who keeps the commandments, but not for striking a Cuthite], and the other master believes that we do not compare cursing to striking [and thus one would be liable for striking a Cuthite even though he does not keep the commandments]. -[Rashi, referring to Sanh. 85b]   מות יומת: בחנק, כל מיתה האמורה בתורה סתם חנק היא. [והפסיק הענין וכתב וגונב איש, בין מכה אביו ואמו למקלל אביו ואמו, ונראה לי היינו פלוגתא, דמר סבר מקשינן הכאה לקללה, ומר סבר לא מקשינן]:
17And one who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.   יזוּמְקַלֵּ֥ל אָבִ֛יו וְאִמּ֖וֹ מ֥וֹת יוּמָֽת:
And one who curses his father or his mother: Why was this said? Since [Scripture] says: “any man, any man who curses his father [or his mother shall surely be put to death]” (Lev. 20:9). [From there] I know only that if a man curses his father [he is liable to death]. How do I know that if a woman curses her father [she too is liable to death]? Therefore, Scripture says [here]: “And one who curses his father or his mother….” It makes an unqualified statement, meaning whether it is a man or a woman. If so, why does it say, “any man who curses” ? [In order] to exclude a minor. -[From Mechilta]   ומקלל אביו ואמו: למה נאמר, לפי שהוא אומר (ויקרא כ ט) איש איש אשר יקלל את אביו, אין לי אלא איש שקלל את אביו, אשה שקללה את אביה מנין, תלמוד לומר ומקלל אביו ואמו סתם בין איש ובין אשה. אם כן למה נאמר איש אשר יקלל, להוציא את הקטן:
shall surely be put to death: By stoning. Wherever it says: “his blood is upon him,” [it means that he is to be put to death] by stoning. The model for all of them is “with rocks they shall stone them; their blood is upon them” (Lev. 20:27). Regarding the one who curses his father, it says: “his blood is upon him” (Lev. 20:9). -[From Mechilta; Sanh. 66a; Sifra, end of Kedoshim]   מות יומת: בסקילה, וכל מקום שנאמר דמיו בו, בסקילה ובנין אב לכולם (ויקרא כ כז) באבן ירגמו אותם דמיהם בם, ובמקלל אביו ואמו נאמר דמיו בו (ויקרא כ ט):
18And if men quarrel, and one strikes the other with a stone or with a fist, and he does not die but is confined to [his] bed,   יחוְכִֽי־יְרִיבֻ֣ן אֲנָשִׁ֔ים וְהִכָּה־אִישׁ֙ אֶת־רֵעֵ֔הוּ בְּאֶ֖בֶן א֣וֹ בְאֶגְרֹ֑ף וְלֹ֥א יָמ֖וּת וְנָפַ֥ל לְמִשְׁכָּֽב:
And if men quarrel: Why was this said? Since it says: “An eye for an eye” (Exod. 21:24), we learn only [that if one assaults his fellow, he must pay] the value of his limbs [which he amputated or rendered permanently useless], but [payment for] idleness and healing we have not [yet] learned. Therefore, this section, [which delineates those payments,] was stated. -[From Mechilta]   וכי יריבן אנשים: למה נאמר, לפי שנאמר (פסוק כד) עין תחת עין, לא למדנו אלא דמי איבריו, אבל שבת ורפוי לא למדנו, לכך נאמרה פרשה זו:
but is confined to [his] bed: Heb. וְנָפַל לְמִשְׁכָּב, as the Targum [Onkelos] renders: לְבוּטְלָן, and he falls into idleness, [meaning] into an illness that prevents him from working.   ונפל למשכב: כתרגומו ויפול לבוטלן, לחולי שמבטלו ממלאכתו:
19if he gets up and walks about outside on his support, the assailant shall be cleared; he shall give only [payment] for his [enforced] idleness, and he shall provide for his cure.   יטאִם־יָק֞וּם וְהִתְהַלֵּ֥ךְ בַּח֛וּץ עַל־מִשְׁעַנְתּ֖וֹ וְנִקָּ֣ה הַמַּכֶּ֑ה רַ֥ק שִׁבְתּ֛וֹ יִתֵּ֖ן וְרַפֹּ֥א יְרַפֵּֽא:
on his support: Heb. עַל-מִשְׁעַנְךְתּוֹ, with his health and his strength. -[From Mechilta].   על משענתו: על בוריו וכחו:
the assailant shall be cleared: Now would it enter your mind that one who did not kill should be killed? But rather, [the Torah] teaches you here that they imprison him until it becomes apparent whether this one [the victim] will get well, and this is its meaning: When this one gets up and walks on his support, then the assailant shall be cleared, but before this one [the victim] gets up, the assailant shall not be cleared. -[From Keth. 33b]   ונקה המכה: וכי תעלה על דעתך שיהרג זה שלא הרג, אלא למדך כאן שחובשים אותו, עד שנראה אם יתרפא זה, וכן משמעו כשקם זה והולך על משענתו אז נקה המכה, אבל עד שלא יקום זה לא נקה המכה:
only [payment] for his [enforced] idleness: Heb. שִׁבְךְתּוֹ, the [enforced] idleness from his work due to the illness. If he cut off his hand or his foot, we assess [payment for] the idleness as if he were a watchman of a cucumber field, because even after [recovery from] the illness, he is not fit for work that requires a hand or foot, and he [the assailant] already gave him as payment for his damage the value of his hand and his foot, as it is said: “a hand for a hand, a foot for a foot” (Exod. 21:24). -[From B.K. 83b, 85b, Tosefta B.K. 9:1]   רק שבתו: בטול מלאכתו מחמת החולי, אם קטע ידו או רגלו, רואין בטול מלאכתו מחמת החולי כאילו הוא שומר קשואין, שהרי אף לאחר החולי אינו ראוי למלאכת יד ורגל, והוא כבר נתן לו מחמת נזקו דמי ידו ורגלו, שנאמר (פסוק כד) יד תחת יד רגל תחת רגל:
and he shall provide for his cure: As the Targum [Onkelos] renders: and he shall pay the physician’s fee.   ורפא ירפא: כתרגומו, ישלם שכר הרופא:
20And should a man strike his manservant or his maidservant with a rod, and [that one] die under his hand, he shall surely be avenged.   כוְכִֽי־יַכֶּה֩ אִ֨ישׁ אֶת־עַבְדּ֜וֹ א֤וֹ אֶת־אֲמָתוֹ֙ בַּשֵּׁ֔בֶט וּמֵ֖ת תַּ֣חַת יָד֑וֹ נָקֹ֖ם יִנָּקֵֽם:
And should a man strike his manservant or his maidservant: The text is referring to a Canaanite slave, or perhaps it is referring only to a Hebrew [slave]? To clarify this, the Torah says: “because he is his property” (verse 21). Just as his property is his permanent acquisition, so is the slave [in question] one who is his permanent acquisition. Now, was he [the one who kills his slave] not included in “He who strikes a man and he dies” (above, verse 12) ? This verse was written [lit., came] to exclude him [the owner of the slave] from the general rule [concerning murder], to be judged with the law of “a day or two days” (verse 21), that if he did not die under his hand but lingered an entire twenty-four-hour period, he is exempt. -[From Mechilta]   וכי יכה איש את עבדו או את אמתו: בעבד כנעני הכתוב מדבר. או אינו אלא בעברי, תלמוד לומר כי כספו הוא, מה כספו קנוי לו עולמית, אף עבד הקנוי לו עולמית. והרי היה בכלל (פסוק יב) מכה איש ומת, אלא בא הכתוב והוציאו מן הכלל, להיות נדון בדין יום או יומים, שאם לא מת תחת ידו ושהה מעת לעת פטור:
with a rod: The verse refers to [a rod] that has sufficient [weight and strength] to kill [someone]. Or perhaps that is not so, but [the master is liable] even if it [the rod] does not have sufficient [weight and strength] to kill? Therefore, the Torah says concerning an Israelite: “Or if he strikes him with a stone that can be held in the hand, from which he may die” (Num. 35:17). (“Or if he strikes him with a wooden instrument that can be held in the hand, from which he may die” ) (Num. 35:18). -[Mizrachi version] Now could the matter not be understood by a kal vachomer [an inference from a major to a minor case], that if [in the case of] an Israelite [victim], [a case] which is treated more stringently, one is not liable unless he struck him [the victim] with an article that has sufficient [weight and strength] to kill and the blow is on an organ which could cause death, how much more should it be so [in the case of] a slave, [a case] which is treated more leniently? -[From Mechilta]   בשבט: כשיש בו כדי להמית הכתוב מדבר. או אינו אלא אפילו אין בו כדי להמית, תלמוד לומר בישראל (במדבר לה יז) ואם באבן יד אשר ימות בה הכהו, והלא דברים קל וחומר מה ישראל חמור אין חייב עליו, אלא אם כן הכהו בדבר שיש בו כדי להמית, ועל אבר שהוא כדי למות בהכאה זו, עבד הקל לא כל שכן:
he shall surely be avenged: [with] death by the sword [decapitation], and so does the Torah say: “a sword avenging the vengeance of the covenant” (Lev. 26:25). -[From Mechilta, Sanh. 52b]   נקם ינקם: מיתת סייף, וכן הוא אומר (ויקרא כו כה) חרב נוקמות נקם ברית:
21But if he survives for a day or for two days, he shall not be avenged, because he is his property.   כאאַ֥ךְ אִם־י֛וֹם א֥וֹ יוֹמַ֖יִם יַֽעֲמֹ֑ד לֹ֣א יֻקַּ֔ם כִּ֥י כַסְפּ֖וֹ הֽוּא:
But if he survives for a day or two he shall not be avenged: If one day[’s survival] exempts him [from punishment], then would not [survival of] two days be even more obvious? [Why then, is the word יומים written?] Rather [it must be that we are speaking of] one day which is as two days, and what [kind of day] is that? A full, twenty-four hour period.   אך אם יום או יומים יעמוד לא יקם: אם על יום אחד הוא פטור, על יומים לא כל שכן, אלא יום שהוא כיומים, ואיזה, זה מעת לעת:
he shall not be avenged, because he is his property: But if someone else struck him, even if he lingered for twenty-four hours before he died, he [the other person] is liable [to incur the death penalty].   לא יקם כי כספו הוא: הא אחר שהכהו, אף על פי ששהה מעת לעת קודם שמת, חייב:
22And should men quarrel and hit a pregnant woman, and she miscarries but there is no fatality, he shall surely be punished, when the woman's husband makes demands of him, and he shall give [restitution] according to the judges' [orders].   כבוְכִֽי־יִנָּצ֣וּ אֲנָשִׁ֗ים וְנָ֨גְפ֜וּ אִשָּׁ֤ה הָרָה֙ וְיָֽצְא֣וּ יְלָדֶ֔יהָ וְלֹ֥א יִֽהְיֶ֖ה אָס֑וֹן עָנ֣וֹשׁ יֵֽעָנֵ֗שׁ כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֨ר יָשִׁ֤ית עָלָיו֙ בַּ֣עַל הָֽאִשָּׁ֔ה וְנָתַ֖ן בִּפְלִלִֽים:
And should men quarrel: with one another, and [one] intended to strike his fellow, and [instead] struck a woman. [From Sanh. 79a]   וכי ינצו אנשים: זה עם זה, ונתכוין להכות את חבירו והכה את האשה:
and hit a pregnant woman: Heb. נְגִיפָה וְנָגְפוּ is only an expression of pushing and striking, as [in the following phrases:] “lest you strike ךְתִּגֹף your foot with a stone” (Ps. 91:12); “and before your feet are bruised (יִתְנְַָפוּ) ” (Jer. 13:16); “and a stone upon which to dash oneself (נֶגֶף) ” (Isa. 8:14).   ונגפו: אין נגיפה אלא לשון דחיפה והכאה, כמו (תהלים צא יב) פן תגוף באבן רגלך, (ירמיה יג טז) ובטרם יתנגפו רגליכם, (ישעיה ח יד) ולאבן נגף:
but there is no fatality: with the woman. -[From Sanh. 79a, Jonathan]   ולא יהיה אסון: באשה:
he shall surely be punished: to pay the value of the fetuses to the husband. They assess her [for] how much she was valued to be sold in the market, increasing her value because of her pregnancy. -[From B.K. 49a] I. e., the court figures how much she would be worth if sold as a pregnant slave when customers would take into account the prospect of the slaves she would bear, and her value as a slave without the pregnancy. The assailant must pay the difference between these two amounts. -[B.K. 48b, 49a]   ענוש יענש: לשלם דמי ולדות לבעל שמין אותה, כמה היתה ראויה למכר בשוק להעלות בדמיה בשביל הריונה:
he shall surely be punished: Heb. יֵעָנֵשׁ עָנוֹשׁ. They shall collect monetary payment from him, like וְעָנְשׁוּ [in the verse] “And they shall fine (וְעָנְשׁוּ) him one hundred [shekels of] silver” (Deut. 22:19). [From Mechilta]   ענוש יענש: יגבו ממון ממנו, כמו (דברים כב יט) וענשו אותו מאה כסף:
when the woman’s husband makes demands of him: When the husband sues him [the assailant] in court to levy upon him punishment for that.   כאשר ישית עליו וגו': כשיתבנעו הבעל בבית דין להשית עליו עונש על כך:
and he shall give [restitution]: The assailant [shall give] the value of the fetuses.   ונתן: המכה דמי ולדות:
according to the judges: Heb. בִּפְלִלִים, according to the verdict of the judges. -[From Mechilta]   בפלילים: על פי הדיינים:
23But if there is a fatality, you shall give a life for a life,   כגוְאִם־אָס֖וֹן יִֽהְיֶ֑ה וְנָֽתַתָּ֥ה נֶ֖פֶשׁ תַּ֥חַת נָֽפֶשׁ:
But if there is a fatality: with the woman.   ואם אסון יהיה: באשה:
you shall give a life for a life: Our Rabbis differ on this matter. Some say [that he must] actually [give up his] life, and some say [that he must pay] money, but not actually a life, and if one intends to kill one person and kills another, he is exempt from the death penalty and must pay his [the victim’s] heirs his value, as [it would be if] he were sold in the marketplace. -[From Mechilta, Sanh. 79]   ונתתה נפש תחת נפש: רבותינו חולקין בדבר. יש אומרים נפש ממש, ויש אומרים ממון, אבל לא נפש ממש, שהמתכויון להרוג את זה והרג את זה פטור ממיתה ומשלם ליורשיו דמיו, כמו שהיה נמכר בשוק:
24an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, a foot for a foot,   כדעַ֚יִן תַּ֣חַת עַ֔יִן שֵׁ֖ן תַּ֣חַת שֵׁ֑ן יָ֚ד תַּ֣חַת יָ֔ד רֶ֖גֶל תַּ֥חַת רָֽגֶל:
an eye for an eye: If [a person] blinds his neighbor’s eye, he must give him the value of his eye, [which is] how much his price to be sold in the marketplace has decreased [without the eye]. So is the meaning of all of them [i.e., all the injuries enumerated in the following verses], but not the actual amputation of a limb, as our Rabbis interpreted it in the chapter entitled הַחוֹבֵל, he who assaults. -[From B.K. 83b, 84a]   עין תחת עין: סימא עין חבירו נותן לו דמי עינו, כמה שפחתו דמיו למכור בשוק, וכן כולם, ולא נטילת אבר ממש, כמו שדרשו רבותינו בפרק החובל (בבא קמא פד א):
25a burn for a burn, a wound for a wound, a bruise for a bruise.   כהכְּוִיָּה֙ תַּ֣חַת כְּוִיָּ֔ה פֶּ֖צַע תַּ֣חַת פָּ֑צַע חַבּוּרָ֕ה תַּ֖חַת חַבּוּרָֽה:
a burn for a burn: Heb. כְּוִיָּה, a burn caused by fire. [Rashi probably alludes to מִכְוַת-אֵשׁ in Lev. 13:24.] Until now [the Torah] spoke of an injury that decreases the value [of the victim], and now of [an injury] that does not decrease the [victim’s] value [as a slave] but causes pain, for instance if he [the assailant] burned him [the victim] on his nails with a spit, they [the judges] compute how much [money] a person like him would be willing to take to endure such pain. -[From B.K. 84a, Mechilta]   כויה תחת כויה: מכות אש, ועד עכשיו דבר בחבלה שיש בה פחת דמים, ועכשיו בשאין בה פחת דמים, אלא צער, כגון כוואו בשפוד על צפרנו אומדים כמה אדם כיוצא בזה רוצה ליטול להיות מצטער כך:
a wound: Heb. פֶּצַע, a wound that bleeds, where he wounded his [victim’s] flesh, navredure in Old French, all according to what it [the wound] is. If it decreases his value, he [the assailant must] pay [for the] damage; if he falls into idleness, he [must] pay for idleness, and for healing, shame, and pain. This verse is superfluous [because there is no difference between a wound and a burn. Whatever damage he inflicts he must pay]. In [the chapter] הַחוֹבֵל (B.K. 84a), our Rabbis interpreted it as making one liable for [the victim’s] pain even where there is [permanent] damage [which he must pay for], because although he pays him [the victim] the value of his hand, we do not exempt him from the [payment compensating for the victim’s] pain, reasoning that since he [the assailant] purchased his [the victim’s] hand [by giving the victim payment for its value], he may amputate it with whatever he wants. We say, however, that he should amputate it with a medication that lessens the pain. However, [if] he cut it off with [an] iron [implement] and caused him pain [he must give the victim compensation]. -[From B.K. 85a]   פצע: היא מכה המוציאה דם, שפצע את בשרו, נברדור"א בלעז, [פציעה] הכל לפי מה שהוא אם יש בו פחת דמים נותן נזק, ואם נפל למשכב נותן שבת ורפוי ובשת וצער. ומקרא זה יתר הוא, ובהחובל דרשוהו רבותינו לחייב על הצער אפילו במקום נזק, שאף על פי שנותן לו דמי ידו, אין פוטרין אותו מן הצער לומר הואיל וקנה ידו יש עליו לחתכה בכל מה שירצה, אלא אומרים יש לו לחתכה בסם, שאינו מצטער כל כך, וזה חתכה בברזל וצערו:
a bruise: Heb. חַבּוּרָה. This is a blow in which blood collects but does not come out. It only reddens the flesh on that spot. The term חַבּוּרָה is equivalent to tache in Old French [meaning] a spot, like “or a leopard its spots (חִבַרְבֻּרֹתָיו) ” (Jer. 13:23). Its Aramaic translation is מַשְׁקוֹפֵי, an expression of beating, batedure in Old French, [meaning] beating, knocking, and so, שְׁדֻפוֹתקָדִּים (Gen. 41:23) [is translated by Onkelos as:] קִדּוּם שְׁקִיפָן, [which means] “beaten by the [east] wind,” and similarly, “on the lintel (עַל הַמַשְׁקוֹף)” (Exod. 12:7), [is given this appellation] because the door bangs against it [the lintel]. [See commentary on Exod. 12:7.]   חבורה: היא מכה שהדם נצרר בה ואינו יוצא, אלא שמאדים הבשר כנגדו ולשון חבורה [טי"א] בלעז [כתם], כמו (ירמיה יג כג) ונמר חברברותיו ותרגומו משקופי, לשון חבטה בטדור"א בלעז [מכה], וכן ושדופת קדים (בראשית מא ו) שקיפן קידום, חבוטות ברוח, וכן על המשקוף (לעיל יב כג) על שם שהדלת נושק עליו:
26And if a man strikes the eye of his manservant or the eye of his maidservant and destroys it, he shall set him free in return for his eye,   כווְכִֽי־יַכֶּ֨ה אִ֜ישׁ אֶת־עֵ֥ין עַבְדּ֛וֹ אֽוֹ־אֶת־עֵ֥ין אֲמָת֖וֹ וְשִֽׁחֲתָ֑הּ לַֽחָפְשִׁ֥י יְשַׁלְּחֶ֖נּוּ תַּ֥חַת עֵינֽוֹ:
the eye of his manservant: [This refers to] a Canaanite, but a Hebrew [slave] does not go out with [the loss of his] tooth or [his] eye as we have stated on “she shall not go out as the slaves go out” (Exod. 21:7).   את עין עבדו: כנעני, אבל עברי אינו יוצא בשן ועין, כמו שאמרנו אצל לא תצא כצאת העבדים (פסוק ז):
in return for his eye: And so it [the law] is with the twenty-four tips of limbs: [i.e.,] the fingers and toes, the two ears and the nose, and the רֹאֹש הַגְּוִיָה, which is the male organ. Why were [both] a tooth and an eye mentioned [when the Torah could have mentioned only one]? Because if it had mentioned an eye and did not mention a tooth, I would say that just as an eye was created with him [at birth], so [does this apply to] everything that is created with him, but a tooth was not created with him [at birth]. [Therefore, I would say that if the master knocked out his slave’s tooth, the slave would not be freed.] If it mentioned a tooth and did not mention an eye, I would say [that] even [if the master knocked out] a baby tooth, which would be replaced [by the natural growth of another tooth, the slave would be freed]. Therefore, it mentions the eye [which cannot be replaced, to teach us that if the master knocks out a baby tooth, the slave is not freed]. -[From Kid. 24a]   תחת עינו: וכן בכ"ד ראשי אברים אצבעות הידים והרגלים. ושתי אזנים והחוטם וראש הגויה, שהוא גיד האמה. ולמה נאמר שן ועין, שאם נאמר עין ולא נאמר שן, הייתי אומר מה עין שנברא עמו אף כל שנברא עמו, והרי שן לא נברא עמו, ועם נאמר שן ולא נאמר עין, הייתי אומר אפילו שן תינוק שיש לה חליפין, לכך נאמר עין:
27and if he knocks out the tooth of his manservant or the tooth of his maidservant, he shall set him free in return for his tooth.   כזוְאִם־שֵׁ֥ן עַבְדּ֛וֹ אוֹ־שֵׁ֥ן אֲמָת֖וֹ יַפִּ֑יל לַֽחָפְשִׁ֥י יְשַׁלְּחֶ֖נּוּ תַּ֥חַת שִׁנּֽוֹ:
28And if a bull gores a man or a woman and [that one] dies, the bull shall surely be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten, and the owner of the bull is clear.   כחוְכִֽי־יִגַּ֨ח שׁ֥וֹר אֶת־אִ֛ישׁ א֥וֹ אֶת־אִשָּׁ֖ה וָמֵ֑ת סָק֨וֹל יִסָּקֵ֜ל הַשּׁ֗וֹר וְלֹ֤א יֵֽאָכֵל֙ אֶת־בְּשָׂר֔וֹ וּבַ֥עַל הַשּׁ֖וֹר נָקִֽי:
And if a bull gores: [This law refers to] either a bull or any domestic animal, beast, or bird, but the text spoke of what usually occurs [i.e., bulls usually gore]. -[From Mechilta, B.K. 54b]   וכי יגח שור: אחד שור ואחד כל בהמה וחיה ועוף אלא שדיבר הכתוב בהווה:
and its flesh shall not be eaten: From the implication of what was stated: “the bull shall surely be stoned,” do I not know that it will become carrion [i.e., meaning not killed according to halachah], and carrion is forbidden to be eaten. For what purpose, then, does the Torah state: “and its flesh shall not be eaten” ? [To inform us] that even if one slaughtered it [according to halachah] after it was sentenced, it is forbidden to be eaten. How do we know that no benefit may be derived from it [this animal sentenced to death]? Therefore, the Torah says: “and the owner of the bull is clean (נָקִי) ”, as one says to his friend, “So-and-so lost his property [lit., was cleaned out (נָקִי) of his property], and he has no benefit at all from it” (B.K. 41a). This is its midrashic meaning. Its simple meaning is as its apparent meaning. Since it says concerning a habitual gorer: “and also its owner shall be put to death,” it had to say that in the case of a tame [bull]: “and the owner of the bull is clean [i.e., clear of any charges].” [The tame bull (ךְתָּם) is the bull that did not gore habitually, but only once or twice. In the case of the bull that killed a person, this bull is put to death, but the owner is clear; i.e., he does not have to pay ransom. Should the bull gore three times, it is called מוּעָד, warned. If the fourth time it gores it kills someone, it is liable to death, and its owner is also liable to death by the hands of Heaven. In order to clear himself of this punishment he must pay ransom, as is delineated in verses 29 and 30.]   ולא יאכל את בשרו: ממשמע שנאמר סקול יסקל השור, איני יודע שהוא נבלה, ונבלה אסורה באכילה, אלא מה תלמוד לומר ולא יאכל את בשרו, שאפילו שחטו לאחר שנגמר דינו, אסור באכילה. בהנאה מנין, תלמוד לומר ובעל השור נקי, כאדם האומר לחבירו יצא פלוני נקי מנכסיו ואין לו בהם הנאה של כלום, זהו מדרשו. ופשוטו כמשמעו לפי שנאמר במועד וגם בעליו יומת, הוצרך לומר בתם ובעל השור נקי:
29But if it is a [habitually] goring bull since yesterday and the day before yesterday, and its owner had been warned, but he did not guard it, and it puts to death a man or a woman, the bull shall be stoned, and also its owner shall be put to death,   כטוְאִ֡ם שׁוֹר֩ נַגָּ֨ח ה֜וּא מִתְּמֹ֣ל שִׁלְשֹׁ֗ם וְהוּעַ֤ד בִּבְעָלָיו֙ וְלֹ֣א יִשְׁמְרֶ֔נּוּ וְהֵמִ֥ית אִ֖ישׁ א֣וֹ אִשָּׁ֑ה הַשּׁוֹר֙ יִסָּקֵ֔ל וְגַם־בְּעָלָ֖יו יוּמָֽת:
since yesterday and the day before yesterday: This implies [a total of] three gorings. [From Mechilta, B.K. 23b]   מתמל שלשם: הרי שלש נגיחות -:
and its owner has been warned: Heb. וְהוּעַד, a word denoting a warning in front of witnesses (Mechilta, B.K. 24a), like “The man warned us repeatedly (הָעֵד הֵעִד) ” (Gen. 43:3).   והועד בבעליו: - לשון התראה בעדים, כמו (בראשית מג ג) העד העיד בנו האיש:
and it puts to death a man, etc.: Since it stated: “if [a bull] gores,” I know only that [the bull is liable to death] if it kills him [its victim] by goring [with its horns]. If it killed him through biting, shoving, or kicking, how do we know [that it must be killed]? Therefore, the Torah states: “and it puts to death,” [implying that in whatever way it kills its victim, the bull is liable to death]. -[based on Mechilta]   והמית איש וגו': לפי שנאמר וכי יגח, אין לי אלא שהמיתו בנגיחה, המיתו בנשיכה, דחיפה, רביצה, בעיטה מנין, תלמוד לומר והמית [מכל מקום]:
and also its owner shall be put to death: By the hands of Heaven [and not through a court]. I might think that it [this verse] means [that he is liable to death] by the hands of man [i.e., through the court]. Therefore, the Torah states: “The assailant shall surely be put to death; he is a murderer” (Num. 35:21), [implying that] for his [act of] murder you [must] kill him, but you do not kill him [i. e., anyone] for his bull’s [act of] murder. -[From Sanh. 15b]   וגם בעליו יומת: בידי שמים. יכול בידי אדם, תלמוד לומר (במדבר לה כא) מות יומת המכה רוצח הוא, על רציחתו אתה הורגו, ואי אתה הורגו על רציחת שורו:
30insofar as ransom shall be levied upon him, he shall give the redemption of his soul according to all that is levied upon him.   לאִם־כֹּ֖פֶר יוּשַׁ֣ת עָלָ֑יו וְנָתַן֙ פִּדְיֹ֣ן נַפְשׁ֔וֹ כְּכֹ֥ל אֲשֶׁר־יוּשַׁ֖ת עָלָֽיו:
insofar as ransom shall be levied upon him: Heb. (אִם). This (אִם) is not [meant as a] conditional, but it is like “When (אִם) you lend money” (Exod. 22:24), a word meaning “that.” His sentence is that the court levy ransom upon him.   אם כפר יושת עליו: אם זה אינו תלוי, והרי הוא כמו (לקמן כב כד) אם כסף תלוה, לשון אשר, זה משפטו, שישיתו עליו בית דין כופר:
he shall give the redemption of his soul: [This means] the value of the victim [as a slave]. This is the view of Rabbi Ishmael. Rabbi Akiva says: The value of the damager, [i.e., the owner of the goring bull]. -[From Mechilta]   ונתן פדיון נפשו: דמי ניזק, דברי רבי ישמעאל, רבי עקיבא אומר דמי מזיק:
31Or if it gores a young boy or a young girl, according to this ordinance shall be done to him.   לאאוֹ־בֵ֥ן יִגָּח אוֹ־בַ֣ת יִגָּ֑ח כַּמִּשְׁפָּ֥ט הַזֶּ֖ה יֵעָ֥שֶׂה לוֹ:
Or if it gores a young boy: Heb. בֵן, lit., a son A son who is a minor.   או בן יגח: בן שהוא קטן:
or a young girl: Heb. בַת, lit., a daughter who is a minor. Since it says (verse 29): “and it puts to death a man or a woman,” I may think that he (the bull) is liable only for [killing] adults. Therefore, the Torah states: “Or if it gores a young boy, etc.” to make one liable for minors as [for] adults. -[From Mechilta, Mechilta d’Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai, B.K. 43b, 44a]   או בת: שהיא קטנה. לפי שנאמר והמית איש או אשה, יכול אינו חייב אלא על הגדולים, תלמוד לומר או בן יגח וגו', לחייב על הקטנים כגדולים:
32If the bull gores a manservant or a maidservant, he shall give silver [in the amount of] thirty shekels to his master, and the bull shall be stoned.   לבאִם־עֶ֛בֶד יִגַּ֥ח הַשּׁ֖וֹר א֣וֹ אָמָ֑ה כֶּ֣סֶף | שְׁלשִׁ֣ים שְׁקָלִ֗ים יִתֵּן֙ לַֽאדֹנָ֔יו וְהַשּׁ֖וֹר יִסָּקֵֽל:
…a manservant or a maidservant -: Canaanites. -[From Mechilta]   אם עבד או אמה: כנעניים:
thirty shekels: This is a decree of the Scriptures [that the bull’s owner pay thirty shekels] whether he [the dead slave] was worth a thousand zuz or whether he was worth no more than a dinar. The weight of the shekel is four pieces of gold, which equal half an ounce according to the official weight of Cologne.   שלשים שקלים יתן: גזירת הכתוב הוא, בין שהוא שוה אלף זוז, בין שאינו שוה אלא דינר. והשקל משקלו ארבע זהובים שהם חצי אונקיא למשקל הישר של קולוניי"א:
33And if a person opens a pit, or if a person digs a pit and does not cover it, and a bull or a donkey falls into it,   לגוְכִֽי־יִפְתַּ֨ח אִ֜ישׁ בּ֗וֹר א֠וֹ כִּֽי־יִכְרֶ֥ה אִ֛ישׁ בֹּ֖ר וְלֹ֣א יְכַסֶּ֑נּוּ וְנָֽפַל־שָׁ֥מָּה שּׁ֖וֹר א֥וֹ חֲמֽוֹר:
And if a person opens a pit: which was covered, and he uncovered it.   וכי יפתח איש בור: שהיה מכוסה וגלהו:
or if… digs: Why was this stated? If he is liable for opening [a pit that had already been dug], is it not [true that he would be] even more [guilty] for digging [a new pit]? But this is to include a digger [who digs deeper] after a digger, that he is liable. [I.e., if one digs a pit nine handbreadths deep, which is capable of injuring an animal but not killing it, and another digs one handbreadth more, making the open pit capable of killing an animal, the second digger is liable in all cases.] -[From B.K. 51a]   או כי יכרה: למה נאמר, אם על הפתיחה חייב, על הכרייה לא כל שכן, אלא להביא כורה אחר כורה שהוא חייב:
and does not cover it: intimating that if he covered it, he is exempt [from paying for any damages that could occur], and the text speaks of one who digs in a public domain. -[From B.K. 55b]   ולא יכסנו: הא אם כסהו, פטור, ובחופר ברשות הרבים דבר הכתוב:
and a bull or a donkey: The same applies to all domestic animals and beasts, for wherever it says: “a bull and a donkey,” we [can] derive [that it applies to all domestic animals] through a גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה, similar wording of שׂוֹר שׁוֹר, [which is] from [the law concerning the] Sabbath, as it is stated: “In order that your bull and your donkey rest” (Exod. 23:12). Just as there [referring to the Sabbath] every domestic animal and beast is like the bull [in reference to the law], for it says elsewhere [regarding the Sabbath] (Deut. 5:14) “[…you shall not perform any kind of work, neither you, nor your son…] and all your animals,” here, too, all animals and beasts are like the bull [in reference to the law]. The bull and the donkey are mentioned only [for us to understand that] for a bull [that falls into a pit the owner is liable] but not for a man [who falls into a pit], and [he is liable for] a donkey but not for utensils. -[From B.K. 10b]   שור או חמור: הוא הדין לכל בהמה וחיה, שבכל מקום שנאמר שור וחמור, אנו למדין אותו שור שור משבת, שנאמר למען ינוח שורך וחמורך (שמות כג יב); מה להלן כל בהמה וחיה כשור. שהרי נאמר במקום אחר וכל בהמתך (דברים ה יג) אף כאן, כל בהמה וחיה כשור, ולא נאמר שור וחמור אלא שור, ולא אדם, חמור, ולא כלים:
34the owner of the pit shall pay; he shall return money to its owner, and the dead body shall be his.   לדבַּ֤עַל הַבּוֹר֙ יְשַׁלֵּ֔ם כֶּ֖סֶף יָשִׁ֣יב לִבְעָלָ֑יו וְהַמֵּ֖ת יִֽהְיֶה־לּֽוֹ:
the owner of the pit: [This refers to] the creator of the obstacle [i.e., the pit], although the pit is not his, for he made it in a public domain, Scripture made him its owner, insofar as he is liable for its damages. -[From B.K. 29b]   בעל הבור: בעל התקלה, אף על פי שאין הבור שלו, שעשאו ברשות הרבים, עשאו הכתוב בעליו להתחייב עליו בנזקין:
he shall return money to its owner: Heb. יָשִׁיב. [The word] יָשִׁיב [is written] to include [anything] worth money, even bran. -[From B.K. 7a] (See Exod. 22:4: “the best of his field or the best of his vineyard he shall pay,” which Rashi explains to mean that damages are paid from the best land. Rav Huna the son of Rav Yehoshua in the Talmud (B.K. 7b) solves this apparent discrepancy by concluding that it applies only if the defendant prefers to pay the damages with land, but if he prefers to pay with movable objects, everything is deemed the best, because if it cannot be sold here, it can be sold elsewhere.) [Addendum to Rashi] [It can therefore be easily converted to cash.]   כסף ישיב לבעליו: ישיב, לרבות שוה כסף, ואפילו סובין:
and the dead body shall be his -: [The dead animal will belong to] the one [owner] who sustained the damage. They assess the carcass, and he [the owner] takes it for its value, and the damager pays him in addition to it [the carcass] payment for his damage. -[From Mechilta, B.K. 10b]   והמת יהיה לו: לניזק, שמין את הנבלה ונוטלה בדמים ומשלם לו המזיק עליה תשלומי נזקו:
35And if a man's bull strikes his friend's bull and it dies, they shall sell the live bull and divide the money received for it, and they shall also divide the dead body.   להוְכִֽי־יִגֹּ֧ף שֽׁוֹר־אִ֛ישׁ אֶת־שׁ֥וֹר רֵעֵ֖הוּ וָמֵ֑ת וּמָ֨כְר֜וּ אֶת־הַשּׁ֤וֹר הַחַי֙ וְחָצ֣וּ אֶת־כַּסְפּ֔וֹ וְגַ֥ם אֶת־הַמֵּ֖ת יֶֽחֱצֽוּן:
And if… strikes: Heb. יִגֹּף, shove, either with its horns, or with its feet, or whether he bit him with his teeth All are included in נְגִיפָה, for נְגִיפָה is only an expression of striking. -[From Mechilta]   וכי יגף: ידחוף, בין בקרניו, בין בגופו, בין ברגליו, בין שנשכו בשניו, כולן בכלל נגיפה הם, שאין נגיפה אלא לשון מכה:
a man’s bull: Heb. שׁוֹר-אִישׁ, a bull [belonging to] a man.   שור איש: שור של איש:
they shall sell the live bull, etc.: Scripture speaks of [two bulls] of equal value a bull worth two hundred [zuz] that killed a bull worth two hundred [zuz]. Whether the carcass is worth much or worth little, when this one takes half [the value of] the live [bull] and half [the value of] the dead one, the result is that each one sustains half the damage that death inflicted upon him. We learn that the tame [bull] pays half the damage, for from the equal ones [the bulls of equal value] you learn [how it is with] the unequal ones [bulls of unequal value], for the law of the tame bull is to pay half the damage, not more or less. Or perhaps, even if they were unequal when they were alive, Scripture mandates that they sell them both [and divide the proceeds of the sale between them]? [This cannot be true since] if you say that sometimes the damager would gain very much, or sometimes the victim would receive much more than the amount of the complete damage, for half the value of the damaging bull [may] exceed the entire value of the bull that was damaged. If you say that, the [law regarding the] tame bull is more stringent than the [law regarding the] habitual gorer [which is illogical]. You are compelled to say that Scripture is referring only to the ones [bulls] of equal value. It teaches you that the tame bull pays half the damage, and from the [law concerning] equal ones, you learn about the unequal ones, that for the one who is awarded half the damage they [the court] assess the carcass, and the decrease of its value due to the death, [and] he receives half the depreciation and leaves (B.K. 34a). Now why did Scripture state it in this language? To teach [us] that the tame bull pays only with its body, and if it gored and subsequently died, the one [owner] who sustained the damage receives only the carcass, and if it does not equal half his damage, he has a loss. Or if a bull worth a maneh [one hundred zuz] gored a bull worth five hundred zuz, he [the owner] receives only the bull, for the tame bull did not become obligated to obligate its owner to pay from the best of his property (B.K. 16b).   ומכרו את השור וגו': בשוים הכתוב מדבר, שור שוה מאתיים שהמית שור שוה מאתיים, בין שהנבלה שוה הרבה, בין שהיא שוה מעט, כשנוטל זה חצי החי וחצי המת, וזה חצי החי וחצי המת, נמצא כל אחד מפסיד חצי נזק [שהזיקה המיתה, למדנו שהתם משלם חצי נזק, שמן השוין אתה למד לשאינן שוין] כי דין התם לשלם חצי נזק לא פחות ולא יותר. או יכול אף בשאינן שוין בדמיהן כשהן חיים, אמר הכתוב וחצו את שניהם, אם אמרת כן, פעמים שמזיק משתכר הרבה, כשהנבלה שוה לימכר לנכרים הרבה יותר מדמי שור המזיק, ואי אפשר שיאמר הכתוב, שיהא המזיק נשכר. או פעמים שהניזק נוטל הרבה יותר מדמי נזק שלם, שחצי דמי שור המזיק שוין יותר מכל דמי שור הניזק, ואם אמרת כן, הרי תם חמור ממועד, על כרחך לא דבר הכתוב אלא בשוין. ולמדך שהתם משלם חצי נזק, ומן השוין תלמד לשאינן שוין, שהמשתלם חצי נזקו שמין לו את הנבלה, ומה שפחתו דמיו בשביל המיתה, נוטל חצי הפחת והלך, ולמה אמר הכתוב בלשון הזה ולא אמר ישלם חציו, ללמד שאין התם משלם אלא מגופו, ואם נגח ומת, אין הנזוק נוטל אלא הנבלה, ואם אינה מגעת לחצי נזקו, יפסיד. או שור שוה מנה שנגח שור שוה חמש מאות זוז, אינו נוטל אלא את השור, שלא נתחייב התם לחייב את בעליו לשלם מן העליה:
36Or if it was known that it was a [habitually] goring bull since yesterday and the day before yesterday, and its owner does not watch it, he shall surely pay a bull for a bull, and the dead body shall be his.   לוא֣וֹ נוֹדַ֗ע כִּ֠י שׁ֣וֹר נַגָּ֥ח הוּא֙ מִתְּמ֣וֹל שִׁלְשֹׁ֔ם וְלֹ֥א יִשְׁמְרֶ֖נּוּ בְּעָלָ֑יו שַׁלֵּ֨ם יְשַׁלֵּ֥ם שׁוֹר֙ תַּ֣חַת הַשּׁ֔וֹר וְהַמֵּ֖ת יִֽהְיֶה־לּֽוֹ:
Or if it was known: Or if it was not tame, but it was known that it was a [habitually] goring bull today and from yesterday and the day before yesterday, totaling three gorings. -[From Mechilta, B.K. 23b]   או נודע: או לא היה תם, אלא נודע כי שור נגח הוא היום, ומתמול שלשום, הרי שלש נגיחות:
he shall surely pay a bull: The complete damage. [Midrash Hagadol from Mechilta d’Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai]   שלם ישלם שור: נזק שלם:
and the dead body shall be his: [I.e.,] the victim’s, and in addition to that, the damager must complete it until the victim is paid his entire damage [due to him]. -[From B.K. 10b. 53b]   והמת יהיה לו: לניזק, ועליו ישלים המזיק, עד שישתלם ניזק כל נזקו:
37If a man steals a bull or a lamb and slaughters it or sells it, he shall pay five cattle for the bull or four sheep for the lamb.   לזכִּ֤י יִגְנֹֽב־אִישׁ֙ שׁ֣וֹר אוֹ־שֶׂ֔ה וּטְבָח֖וֹ א֣וֹ מְכָר֑וֹ חֲמִשָּׁ֣ה בָקָ֗ר יְשַׁלֵּם֙ תַּ֣חַת הַשּׁ֔וֹר וְאַרְבַּע־צֹ֖אן תַּ֥חַת הַשֶּֽׂה:
five cattle, etc.: Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai said: The Omnipresent was considerate of people’s honor. [For] a bull, which walks with its [own] feet, and the thief was not disgraced by carrying it on his shoulder, he pays fivefold. [For] a lamb, which he [the thief] carries on his shoulder, he pays [only] fourfold because he was disgraced by it. Rabbi Meir said: Come and see how great the power of work is. [For the theft of] a bull, which caused [the owner] to stop working, he [the thief] pays five. [For the theft of] a lamb, which did not cause [the owner] to stop working, [the thief pays] four. -[From Mechilta, B.K. 79b, Tosefta B.K. 7:3]   חמשה בקר וגו': אמר רבן יוחנן בן זכאי חס המקום על כבודן של בריות, שור שהולך ברגליו ולא נתבזה בו הגנב לנושאו על כתפו, משלם חמישה, שה שנושאו על כתפו, משלם ארבעה הואיל ונתבזה בו. אמר רבי מאיר בא וראה כמה גדולה כחה של מלאכה, שור שבטלו ממלאכתו משלם חמשה שה שלא בטלו ממלאכתו ארבעה:
for the bull…for the lamb: Scripture repeated them [i.e., the mentioning of the bull and the lamb] to tell [you] that the rule of fourfold and fivefold payments applies only to a bull and a lamb. [From B.K. 67b]   תחת השור תחת השה: שנאן הכתוב לומר, שאין מדת תשלומי ארבעה וחמשה נוהגת אלא בשור ושה בלבד: