Éxodo 22:1

La Biblia Reina-Valera

CUANDO alguno hurtare buey ú oveja, y le degollare ó vendiere, por aquel buey pagará cinco bueyes, y por aquella oveja cuatro ovejas.

Parallel Translations

La Biblia de las Americas
Si alguno roba un buey o una oveja, y lo mata o vende, pagará cinco bueyes por el buey y cuatro ovejas por la oveja.

La Biblia Reina-Valera Gomez
Cuando alguno hurtare buey u oveja, y le degollare o vendiere, por aquel buey pagar� cinco bueyes, y por aquella oveja, cuatro ovejas.

Sagradas Escrituras (1569)
Cuando alguno hurtare buey u oveja, y lo degollare o vendiere, por aquel buey pagar� cinco bueyes, y por aquella oveja cuatro ovejas.

Bible Verse Review
  from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge

sheep: or, goat

he shall: There is a smaller compensation required in other things - Exodus 22:9, and also a disproportion between an ox and a sheep. The reason of the former is, as Maimonides explains it, because money, goods, etc., are better guarded in houses and cities, than cattle in a field; which consequently can be more easily stolen. The reason of the latter seems to be, as it is explained by Bishop Patrick, that an ox was of greater value, and more useful for the purposes of husbandry. Leviticus 6:1-6, Numbers 5:7, 2 Samuel 12:6, Proverbs 6:31, Luke 19:8

five oxen: Proverbs 14:4

Reciprocal: Exodus 22:4 - he shall restore double Leviticus 5:16 - make Leviticus 6:5 - restore Leviticus 19:11 - shall not Deuteronomy 24:7 - then that Job 20:10 - his hands Ezekiel 33:15 - give

Gill's Notes on the Bible

If a man shall steal an ox or a sheep,.... In which the substance of men chiefly lay in those times, and particularly the people of Israel, who were now come out of Egypt, with their flocks and herds, and these lying near together, were the more liable to be stolen; and hence also the laws in the preceding chapter concerning oxen and damages done by them, and oxen and sheep are only mentioned; perhaps chiefly because used in sacrifice, as well as serviceable for other things; not but that stealing other cattle and other things were criminal and forbidden, and to be punished in proportion:

and kill it, or sell it; either of which cases would plainly show that he took it away with an intention to deprive the owner of it, and to convert it to his own use:

he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep; the reason of this difference, five being obliged to be given for the one, and but four for the other, is, because the one was more valuable than the other, as well as more useful, and also more easily stolen, and therefore the greater mulct or fine was laid upon the theft of it, to deter from it: the Targum of Jonathan expresses the reason of the law thus; five for oxen, because the theft of them hindered from ploughing, or made to cease from it; and for sheep but four, because there was trouble in the theft of them, and there was no tillage or agriculture by them: and Saadiah Gaon observes, that the damage that comes to the owner of the ox is more than that by a lamb, because with it, the ox, he ploughs, which is a creature that was used in those countries to be employed in that service, as well as in treading out the corn: Maimonides u accounts for it thus,

"the restitution of the theft of oxen is increased by one, because the theft of them is easy; sheep are fed in flocks, and are easily kept and watched, and can scarcely be taken away by theft but in the night; but oxen are fed scattered here and there, and therefore cannot be so easily kept by the herdsmen; hence also their theft used to be more common:''

four fold restitution was in use with the ancient Persians, with whom it was a rule,

"whoever took any substance of another, in retaliation they took fourfold from him, and if he restored it, he gave fourfold of the same w.''

u Moreh Nevochim, par. 3. c. 41. w Lib. Shed-dar, apud Hyde Relig. Vet. Pers. p. 472.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

The theft of an ox appears to have been regarded as a greater crime than the theft of a sheep, because it showed a stronger purpose in wickedness to take the larger and more powerful animal. It may have been on similar moral ground that the thief, when he had proved his persistency in crime by adding to his theft the slaughter, or sale, of the animal, was to restore four times its value in the case of a sheep (compare the marginal references), and five times its value in the case of an ox; but if the animal was still in his possession alive (see Exodus 22:4) he had to make only twofold restitution.

Clarke's Notes on the Bible

CHAPTER XXII

Laws concerning theft, 1-4;

concerning trespass, 5;

concerning casualties, 6.

Laws concerning deposits, or goods left in custody of others,

which may have been lost, stolen, or damaged, 7-13.

Laws concerning things borrowed or let out on hire, 14, 15.

Laws concerning seduction, 16, 17.

Laws concerning witchcraft, 18;

bestiality, 19;

idolatry, 20.

Laws concerning strangers, 21;

concerning widows, 22-24;

lending money to the poor, 25;

concerning pledges, 26;

concerning respect to magistrates, 28;

concerning the first ripe fruits, and the first-born of man

and beast, 29, 30.

Directions concerning carcasses found torn in the field, 31.

NOTES ON CHAP. XXII

Verse Exodus 22:1. If a man shall steal — This chapter consists chiefly of judicial laws, as the preceding chapter does of political; and in it the same good sense, and well-marked attention to the welfare of the community and the moral improvement of each individual, are equally evident.

In our translation of this verse, by rendering different Hebrew words by the same term in English, we have greatly obscured the sense. I shall produce the verse with the original words which I think improperly translated, because one English term is used for two Hebrew words, which in this place certainly do not mean the same thing. If a man shall steal an ox (שור shor) or a sheep, (שה seh), and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen (בקר bakar) for an ox, (שור shor), and four sheep (צאן tson) for a sheep (שה seh). I think it must appear evident that the sacred writer did not intend that these words should be understood as above. A shor certainly is different from a bakar, and a seh from a tson. Where the difference in every case lies, wherever these words occur, it is difficult to say. The shor and the bakar are doubtless creatures of the beeve kind, and are used in different parts of the sacred writings to signify the bull, the ox, the heifer, the steer, and the calf. The seh and the tson are used to signify the ram, the wether, the ewe, the lamb, the he-goat, the she-goat, and the kid. And the latter word צאן tson seems frequently to signify the flock, composed of either of these lesser cattle, or both sorts conjoined.

As שור shor is used, Job 21:10, for a bull probably it may mean so here. If a man steal a BULL he shall give five OXEN for him, which we may presume was no more than his real value, as very few bulls could be kept in a country destitute of horses, where oxen were so necessary to till the ground. For though some have imagined that there were no castrated cattle among the Jews, yet this cannot be admitted on the above reason; for as they had no horses, and bulls would have been unmanageable and dangerous, they must have had oxen for the purposes of agriculture. צאן Tson is used for a flock either of sheep or goats, and seh שה for an individual of either species. For every seh, four, taken indifferently from the tson or flock must be given; i.e., a sheep stolen might be recompensed with four out of the flock, whether of sheep or goats: so that a goat might be compensated with four sheep, or a sheep with four goats.