334 Paul Heger The rule in Exod 21,30 authorizing compensation for death caused by the goring ox might appear to be an exception to the biblical principle allowing no relief to a murderer. Certain scholars (47) in fact conjecture that this type of payment was also allowed in other cases of death, at the choice of the family of the injured party. One basis of such argument is that the term ˆtn in Exod 21,23, “Thou shalt give life for life”, implies giving money. I disagree with this conjecture for several reasons: first, early translations, such as the LXX and Tg. Onq., took this phrase literally. Second, the expression wvpn ˆydp “he may redeem his [the ox’s owner’s] life”, used in connection with the goring ox, is not a paradigm for a pecuniary composition (48). It is unequivocally a ransom for the defendant’s misconduct, not a composition. The second segment of the phrase is expressed in third person, and refers to the ox’s owner (49). The rpk “ransom” (50) is thus instituted from the perspective of the giver of the payment. The wronged party is not involved in the settlement, and is not mentioned in the text; the court establishes the amount of the ransom. This is not composition for the life of the person killed. The owner has facilitated a criminal occurrence by his negligence, but he did not intend to disturb the divine order, and this does not represent a direct affront against God. It is therefore perceived to a greater degree as an issue between humans (51), and to a lesser degree as a sin towards God, for which capital punishment is not required. Another exception to the prohibition against composition for taking a life is seen by some scholars in Exod 21,20-21. This releases the killer of a slave from capital punishment; this could include a Hebrew slave, in the opinion of some scholars, and is thus an exception to the rule requiring a life for a life (52). These verses cannot (47) See, e.g., R. ROTHENBUSCH, Die kasuistische Rechtssammlung im ‘Bundesbuch’ (Ex. 21,2-11.18-22,16) (Münster 2000), 320, n. 401, as well as the scholars listed in C. HOUTMAN, Exodus (Historical Commentary on the Old Testament; Leuven 2000) 166-167. (48) Contra Rothenbusch. (49) As is also perceived by PATRICK, “Studying Biblical Law as a Humanities”, 32, 40. (50) This term has various meanings; much has been written on its ritual connotations. In our case, it must be understood as “forgiveness”, i.e. for the sinner. (51) JACKSON, Essays, 128, writes that because of his failure to take the required measures to prevent the death of a person, he is “accountable to the kin”. (52) See, e.g., ROTHENBUSCH, Die kasuistische Rechtssammlung, 33.