Exodus 21:36
Or if it be known that the ox hath used to push in time past, and his owner hath not kept him in; he shall surely pay ox for ox; and the dead shall be his own.
Or if it be known {H3045} that the ox {H7794} hath used to push {H5056} in time past {H8543}{H8032}, and his owner {H1167} hath not kept {H8104} him in; he shall surely {H7999} pay {H7999} ox {H7794} for ox {H7794}; and the dead {H4191} shall be his own.
But if it is known that the ox was in the habit of goring in the past, and the owner did not confine it; he must pay ox for ox, but the dead animal will be his.
But if it was known that the ox had a habit of goring, yet its owner failed to restrain it, he shall pay full compensation, ox for ox, and the dead animal will be his.
Or if it be known that the ox was wont to gore in time past, and its owner hath not kept it in; he shall surely pay ox for ox, and the dead beast shall be his own.
Cross-References
No cross-references found.
Commentary
Exodus 21:36 is part of the "Book of the Covenant" (Exodus 21-23), a collection of civil laws given by God to Israel after the Ten Commandments. This specific verse addresses the legal liability for property damage caused by an animal, particularly when the owner has prior knowledge of the animal's dangerous tendencies.
Context
This verse builds upon the previous law concerning an ox that gored another ox (Exodus 21:35). While the previous verse dealt with an accidental goring resulting in shared loss, Exodus 21:36 introduces the critical element of negligence. It describes a scenario where the owner was aware of their ox's aggressive nature ("hath used to push in time past") but failed to take adequate measures to restrain it ("hath not kept him in"). The severity of the penalty reflects this heightened culpability. This contrasts sharply with the even more severe penalties for an ox that gored a person, as outlined in Exodus 21:28-32.
Key Themes
Linguistic Insights
The phrase "used to push in time past" (Hebrew: ื ึทืึผึธื ืืึผื ืึดืชึผึฐืืึนื ืฉืึดืึฐืฉืืึนื, naggach hu mitmol shilshom) emphasizes a repeated, known pattern of aggressive behavior, not an isolated incident. It signifies that the ox had a history of goring or pushing, making its owner fully aware of its dangerous disposition. The owner's failure to "keep him in" (ืึนื ืึดืฉืึฐืึฐืจึถื ึผืึผ, lo yishmerennu) implies a lack of proper restraint or supervision despite this knowledge, underscoring the negligence that warrants the stricter penalty.
Practical Application
The principles found in Exodus 21:36 remain highly relevant today. While we may not own oxen, the underlying concepts apply to any property or situation where a known danger exists. This includes:
This verse serves as a timeless reminder of the importance of vigilance, responsibility, and the societal expectation that individuals will take reasonable steps to prevent harm when they are aware of a potential danger, upholding the broader biblical call for justice and righteousness.
Please note that only the commentary section is AI-generated โ the main Scripture and cross-references are stored on the site and are from trusted and verified sources.