Texts in Conversation
Exodus 21 only uses an ox as an example of enforcing laws about liability, while the Samaritan Pentateuch expands the language to include “any animal,” likely to clarify and generalize the commandment.
Share:
2500 BCE
1000+ CE
Exodus 21:28
Hebrew Bible
26 “If a man strikes the eye of his male servant or his female servant so that he destroys it, he will let the servant go free as compensation for the eye. 27 If he knocks out the tooth of his male servant or his female servant, he will let the servant go free as compensation for the tooth. 28 “If an ox gores a man or a woman so that either dies, then the ox must surely be stoned and its flesh must not be eaten, but the owner of the ox will be acquitted. 29 But if the ox had the habit of goring, and its owner was warned but he did not take the necessary precautions, and then it killed a man or a woman, the ox must be stoned and the man must be put to death. 30 If a ransom is set for him, then he must pay the redemption for his life according to whatever amount was set for him.
Date: 750–400 BCE (based on scholarly estimates)
Samaritan Exodus 21:28
Samaritan Penteteuch
Samaritan
26 And if a man strikes the eye of his slave, male or female, and destroys it, he shall let him go free because of his eye. 27 And if he knocks out the tooth of his slave, male or female, he shall let him go free because of his tooth. 28 And if an ox or any animal strikes a man or a woman to death, the animal shall certainly be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten, but the owner of the animal shall be cleared of guilt. 29 But if the animal has been [accustomed to] striking in the past, and his owner has been warned but has not restrained it, and it killed a man or a woman, the animal shall be stoned, and its owner also shall be put to death. 30 If ransom is imposed on him, then he shall give for the redemption of his life whatever is imposed on him.
Date: 130–120 BCE (based on scholarly estimates)
Search:
Notes and References
"... In 4Q158 1–2 4, one finds a similar case of an added detail that anticipates an element of the narrative revealed only later. Here, the added verb ויאחזהו, “and he held him fast,” seems to have been inserted by way of explanation of the following demand, שלחני, “Let me go!” Occasionally, minor additions in the Samaritan Pentateuch have halakhic import. The main example here is the addition of the phrase וכל בהמה, “or any (domestic) animal,” to the goring ox laws and other laws involving farm animals in the Covenant Code and in Deuteronomy (Exodus 21:28) ... This same change occurs in Samaritan Pentateuch Exodus 21:33, 35; 22:3; 23:4; Deuteronomy 22:1, 4. The additions indicate that the laws are to be interpreted as applying not simply to the specific animals explicitly mentioned, but to any comparable animal; thus the laws’ applicability is extended ..."
Molly M. Zahn, Rethinking Rewritten Scripture: Composition and Exegesis in the 4Q Reworked Pentateuch Manuscripts, STDJ 95 (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 142.
* The use of references are not endorsements of their contents. Please read the entirety of the provided reference(s) to understand the author's full intentions regarding the use of these texts.
Your Feedback:
Leave a Comment
Anonymous comments are welcome. All comments are subject to moderation.
User Comments
,