The Torah in Parashat Mishpatim (Shemot 21:28-32) discusses situations of “Nizkeh Behema” – where a person’s animal causes damage to another person, such as when an ox gores another ox, or gores a human being. The Sefer Ha’hinuch lists as the 51 st Biblical command the obligation upon Bet Din to preside over these cases and require the responsible party to compensate the victim. A fundamental distinction exists between cases where an animal caused damage while acting abnormally, and situations of an animal who damaged through normal behavior. Oxen, for example, generally gore, and so if an ox fatally gores another ox, the owner is responsible to pay only “Hasi Nezek” – half the value of the damage caused. And, if half the value of the damage exceeds the value of the ox, then the owner can just give his ox to the victim. Since this violent conduct was unusual and thus could not have been expected, the owner’s responsibility is lower. However, if the ox had gored on three separate occasions, and the owner was warned to guard the animal against violent behavior, then if the ox gores another ox, the owner must pay full compensation for the damages. Since the animal had established a habit of violent behavior, the owner is held fully responsible for damages it causes. In the case of an ox that fatally gored a human being, Bet Din stones the animal. If, for whatever reason, Bet Din did not kill the animal, and the animal managed to kill three people on three separate occasions, then the owner must make a payment to the victim’s inheritors to protect himself against punishment by G-d. A person is held responsible for his animal’s damages only if the damage was caused in the victim’s property, or in a public area. If, however, an ox went into somebody else’s property, and was then gored by an ox belonging to that property’s owner, then the owner bears no responsibility, because the incident occurred on his property. Different standards of protection are required in the case of a “Shor Tam” – an ox that had not yet gored three times – and in the case of a “Shor Mu’ad” – an ox that had gored three times. The Gemara establishes that the owner of a “Shor Tam” that damages is required to pay compensation unless he had guarded the animal at the standard of “Shemira Me’ula” – a high level of protection. In the case of a “Shor Mu’ad,” however, whose owner would be required to pay more for damages, the owner is absolved even if he guarded the animal at a low standard of protection (“Shemira Pehuta”). The nature of this obligation, to compensate for damages caused by one’s animal, has been understood in several different ways. Some Rabbis understood that the owner must pay compensation for failing to properly guard the animal; it is only because he did not properly protect against damage that he bears responsibility to pay. Others, however, maintained that one’s property should be viewed as an extension of himself. Just as a person is responsible for the damages which he causes, he is similarly responsible for the damages caused by his animal, which is an extension of himself. Yet a third, particularly novel, theory was advanced by the Serideh Esh (Rav Yechiel Yaakov Weinberg, 1884-1966), who suggested that in essence, an animal that causes damage should be held responsible to compensate the victim. But since an animal cannot, quite obviously, be forced to pay compensation, the responsibility is transferred to the owner. Regardless, this Misva reminds us of the emphasis the Torah places on sensitivity and consideration, that religious life requires us to live in a way that keeps other people’s safety and wellbeing in mind. By commanding the Bet Din to preside over these cases and hold people accountable for damages caused by their animals, the Torah ensures that we all act responsibly and do what we can to maintain a safe, secure environment for everybody.