What are the connotations of "mi'Temol Shilshom"?
Rashi: It means that the ox gored three times, 1 and has now become a Mu'ad.
Bava Kama, 23b: 'A Mu'ad is an ox that gored (three times) on three days
What is the meaning of "ve'Hu'ad bi'Ve'aLa'av"?
Rashi: The Din Mu'ad will only apply if the owner is warned 1 after each of the three initial gorings.
Bava Kama: From "Veheimis Ish O Ishah" until "ve'Gam Be'aLa'av Yumas", we can extrapolate that the ox must have the same owner from the time it killed until the conclusion of the Din. Consequently, if, after the ox gorews, the owner declared it Hekdesh or Hefker, the ox is not stoned.
Mechilta: It teache us that the ox is not Chayav to be stoned unless it has been warned. 2 .
Bava Kama, 13b: It implies that Beis-Din may not accept witnesses unless the owner of the ox is present ('Let the owner of the ox come and stand by his ox!'). 3
What are the connotations of "ve'Lo Yishmerenu"?
Bava Kama, 45b (citing R' Yehudah): 'If the owner tied it with its reins and locked the barn door, and the ox nevertheless exited the barn and damaged, a Tam is Chayav; a Mu'ad is Patur. 1
Mechilta: It comes to include a Shomer Chinam in the Din of Shor Tam and Mu'ad. 2
Bava Kama (Ibid.): Since the Torah writes "ve'Lo Yishmerenu Ba'alav"
Having already written "u'Meis" (in Pasuk 28), why does the Torah insert the word "ve'Heimis"?
Rashi: To teach us that 'goring' is La'av Davka, and that the same Din will apply if the animal kills a person by biting, pushing or kicking 1 him.
Moshav Zekenim: Also these are Toldos of Keren. If the damager benefits, this is Shen; if it normally happens when it walks, this is Regel. There is Kofer for Shen and Regel, but the animal is not killed.
What sort of Misah is the owner of the ox subject to?
Rashi, Ramban (citing the Mechilta), Rashbam, Seforno and Targum Yonasan: He is Chayav Misah bi'Yedei Shamayim. 1
Targum Onkelos: He is Chayav Misas Beis-Din. 2
Unless he pays Kofer (Rashbam), provided there are witnesses (Seforno); and we learn this from the words "Rotze'ach Hu" (in the Pasuk "Mos Yumas ha'Makeh, Rotze'ach Hu" [Bamidbar 35:21], in connection with a murderer), implying that a murderer is Chayav through Beis-Din for his own act of murder, but not for an act perpetrated by his ox (Rashi). According to the Ramban, the Lashon "Yumas" implies Shamayim, like we find in Bamidbar (18:7) and in Vayikra (22:9).
Why does the Torah find it necessary to add "O Ishah"?
Ramban (citing Kidushin, 35a): To teach us that one is Chayav Misah or Kofer for the death of a woman just like one is Chayav for the death of a man.
Bava Kama, 42b (citing R. Akiva): to compare a woman to a man, inasmuch as, in the event that she dies, damages that are owed to her go to her heirs
See Torah Temimah, note 216.
What are the ramifications of the comparison of the ox to his master?
Bava Kama, 44b: To sentence the ox to death even if it meant to gore Reuven and it inadvertently gored Shimon
Sanhedrin, 15b: The Pasuk cannot be coming to teach us that the owner of the ox is Chayav Misah bi'Yedei Adam, (Refer to 21:29:7:1) since the Pasuk writes in Masei, 35:21 "Mos Yumas ha'Makeh, Rotze'ach Hu", implying that Beis-Din may only sentence him to death for his murder, but not for that of his ox.
As the Torah writes in Mas'ei, 35:12 "Ad Amdo Lifnei ha'Eidah la'Mishpat".
What are the connotations of "ve'Gam Be'aLa'av Yumas"? What sort of Misah is he Chayav?
Mechilta: Misah bi'Yedei Shamayim. 1
Mechilta: Since the Pasuk continues "Im Kofer Yishas aLa'av", and redemption from death is applicable only to someone who is Chayav Misah bi'Yedei Shamayim. Citing R. Yishmael, the Mechilta exclaims 'Come and see how far the Mercy of Hakadosh-Baruch-Hu extends to human-beings, when a man can redeem himself from Misah bi'Yedei Shamayim with money!'
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes that v'Hemis includes other ways that it killed. If so, why does it say (Pasuk 28) "v'Chi Yigach"?
Riva citing R"A: If not for v'Chi Yigach, one might have thought that he is liable only if it killed like other killers, but not through goring.
Bartenura: It needed to teach Negichah, that it is one of the four Avos Nezikim.
Rashi writes that v'Hemis includes other ways that it killed. Why is this needed? They are Toldos (derivatives) of goring (Bava Kama 2b)! And Bava Kama 42b learns from v'Hemis that Nezek owed to a woman goes to her heirs!
Gur Aryeh: We can know from reasoning [that these are Toldos, and one pays for them], but we cannot kill the ox from reasoning; we need a verse.