The Forewarned Ox and the Owner Who Owes a Ransom

"But if the ox was a gorer" (Exodus 21:29) — I know only of an ox that gored while still harmless; from where that it must be testified against? Scripture teaches "if the ox was a gorer." "It" — certainly, and not in doubt. "Yesterday" — that is two; "the day before" — that is three: this teaches that it does not become a forewarned ox until they testify against it three days, one after another. "And it was warned in its owner" — there is no warning except before the owner. From where even in court? Scripture teaches "or it was known that the ox was a gorer" (verse 36) — or it became known in court. "And its owner did not keep it in" — I know only of the owner; from where do I include a borrower, an unpaid bailee, a hirer, and a paid bailee? Scripture teaches "and did not keep it in" — whoever has the duty to guard it. Then what does "its owner did not keep it in" exclude? A borrower who borrowed it presumed harmless and it turned out forewarned. "Did not keep it in" — but if he kept it, he is exempt from the ransom. "Did not keep it in" — one who has the sense to guard, so that they are exempt from the ransom. "And it killed a man or a woman" — why do I need this? It was already said "and if an ox gores a man or a woman and he dies." Rather, since it says "if the ox was a gorer from yesterday and the day before," I might think he is liable even if it did not kill; Scripture teaches "and it killed a man or a woman." "A man or a woman" — just as a man's damages go to his children, so a woman's damages go to her children; the husband does not inherit her ransom, for a husband does not inherit his wife when he is in the grave. "The ox shall be stoned" — why do I need this? It was already said "the ox shall surely be stoned." Rather, since it says "and also its owner," I might think that just as the ox is stoned so its owner is stoned; Scripture teaches "the ox shall be stoned" — the ox is stoned and its owner is not stoned. Then what does "the ox shall be stoned, and also its owner shall be put to death" teach? By the death of the owner, so is the death of the ox: just as the owner's death is by pushing, by stoning, and by twenty-three judges, so the ox's death is by pushing, by stoning, and by twenty-three judges. Another interpretation: "the ox shall be stoned, and also its owner shall be put to death" — as the death of the ox, so the death of the owner. From this they said: an ox that is terminally injured, or one belonging to a terminally injured person, that killed a soul, is not stoned. Another interpretation: the judgment of the ox is completed only before its owner. Or might it be that if it has no owner it is not stoned? Scripture teaches "the ox shall be stoned" — in any case. Another interpretation: "and also its owner shall be put to death" — might it mean actual death? This is learned from its context: "if a ransom is laid upon him." If it meant actual death, how do I uphold "you shall take no ransom for the life of a murderer" (Numbers 35:31)? Rather, death at the hand of Heaven; and if he gives a ransom, atonement is made for him.