“If a man causes a field or vineyard to be eaten by letting his animal loose, and it grazes in another man’s field, he shall make restitution from the best of his own field, and from the best of his own vineyard.
To judge cases of damage caused by fire
The cited verse
The Hebrew (Masoretic Text)
כִּי־תֵצֵא אֵשׁ וּמָצְאָה קֹצִים וְנֶאֱכַל גָּדִישׁ אוֹ הַקָּמָה אוֹ הַשָּׂדֶה שַׁלֵּם יְשַׁלֵּם הַמַּבְעִר אֶת־הַבְּעֵרָה
In Maimonides’ words
How Maimonides defines this commandment in his Sefer HaMitzvot — his own words, shown as a primary source.
היא שצונו לדון בדיני השור. והוא אמרו יתעלה וכי יגח שור וכי יגוף שור. וכבר התבאר דין זה בששה פרקים הראשונים מקמא. (ואלה המשפטים, נזקי ממון פ"א):
That is that He commanded us to administer the laws of the ox [that causes damage]. And that is His, may He be exalted, saying, "And when an ox gores" (Exodus 21:28); and "And when an ox injures" (Exodus 21:35). And this law has already been explained in the first six chapters of [Bava] Kamma. (See Parashat Mishpatim; Mishneh Torah, Damages to Property 1.)
Hebrew: Sefer HaMitzvot, Warsaw 1883 (public domain). English: Sefaria Edition, trans. Rabbi Francis Nataf, 2021 (CC0). Via Sefaria; translator’s footnotes omitted.
Literary form: a case law — "if X, then Y"
Applicability
How the catalog describes where and when this commandment applies. These are independent descriptions, not a verdict on which laws still count.
- Recorded as practiced today
Classical halakhic consequences
The consequences the classical halakhah attaches to this commandment, grouped by who imposes them. Where a category has none recorded, that absence is itself meaningful.
Imposed by a court
No court-imposed penalty is recorded.
At the hands of Heaven
No divinely-imposed consequence is recorded.
Ritual remedy
No ritual remedy is recorded.
How the streams of Judaism treat this commandment
The streams of Judaism read the same commandment differently — an ongoing plurality, not a ranking. Each position below is reported as the catalog records it; none is presented as the correct one.
- Orthodox Binding
- Conservative Binding
- Reform Kept as an ethical principle
- Reconstructionist Kept as an ethical principle
- Karaite Binding
24 of 613 commandments have been examined in depth so far — this one is queued.
How later traditions received this commandment
How later traditions read or reworked this commandment, each attributed to its own voice. The catalog’s own classification of each reception is shown as it records it, never adopted as GEBible’s.
Philo of Alexandria
- De Specialibus Legibus 4.26-29 rationalized it
Josephus
- Ant. 4.287 reinterpreted it
Beside the older legal codes of its world
The commandment set beside the ancient Near-Eastern legal collections scholars compare it to — a descriptive comparison, not a claim of dependence.
- hittite laws liability for arson and accidental fire spread, with restitution and house-reconstruction provisions Relationship to the parallel: parallel with divergence §§98-100 Hoffner, The Laws of the Hittites (1997); cf. Roth, Law Collections 2nd ed. (1997) for a parallel translation
- code of hammurabi theft of property during a house-fire emergency, penalized by being cast into the fire; addresses fire as a legal context but concerns theft-during-emergency rather than fire-spread liability Relationship to the parallel: shared theme §25 Roth, Law Collections 2nd ed. (1997)
Where this commandment meets modern human-rights frameworks
One modern normative lens, attributed to it — not GEBible’s assessment. Each row names the framework it measures against and the catalog’s own classification of the relation.
This framework catalogues tensions; it records agreement in only one of its entries. The near-total tension rate is the shape of the instrument, not a finding.
No tension with the catalogued modern frameworks is recorded here.