David P. Wright
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- September 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780195304756
- eISBN:
- 9780199866830
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195304756.003.0006
- Subject:
- Religion, Biblical Studies
This explores the compositional logic involved in creating the laws on homicide (Exodus 21:12–14), injury/assault (vv. 18–19), slave homicide (vv. 20–21), aggravated miscarriage (abortion; vv. ...
More
This explores the compositional logic involved in creating the laws on homicide (Exodus 21:12–14), injury/assault (vv. 18–19), slave homicide (vv. 20–21), aggravated miscarriage (abortion; vv. 22–23), talion ("an eye for and eye," etc.; vv. 23b-25), and slave injury (vv. 26–27). It demonstrates that all of these laws are a unity based on sources in the Laws of Hammurabi. It also shows that the talion law is integrally connected to the legislation on homicide and injury, giving the requirement that one must indemnify a victim or their kin, even if the injury or homicide was accidental. The Covenant Code thus identifies and solve problems in the homicide and injury laws of its source.Less
This explores the compositional logic involved in creating the laws on homicide (Exodus 21:12–14), injury/assault (vv. 18–19), slave homicide (vv. 20–21), aggravated miscarriage (abortion; vv. 22–23), talion ("an eye for and eye," etc.; vv. 23b-25), and slave injury (vv. 26–27). It demonstrates that all of these laws are a unity based on sources in the Laws of Hammurabi. It also shows that the talion law is integrally connected to the legislation on homicide and injury, giving the requirement that one must indemnify a victim or their kin, even if the injury or homicide was accidental. The Covenant Code thus identifies and solve problems in the homicide and injury laws of its source.
Bernard S. Jackson
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198269311
- eISBN:
- 9780191683596
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198269311.003.0010
- Subject:
- Religion, Biblical Studies, Judaism
Between the two Exodus passages on the goring ox, the first dealing with the homicidal and the second with the bovicidal variety, we find a law dealing with harm resulting from a pit. Philo and ...
More
Between the two Exodus passages on the goring ox, the first dealing with the homicidal and the second with the bovicidal variety, we find a law dealing with harm resulting from a pit. Philo and Josephus both assume that a water pit is involved here, and give credible accounts of the realia involved. In depasturation, the delict certainly includes wilful sending of the animal into the non-permitted field. In the fire delict, however, there is no suggestion that the damage was caused wilfully, although the lighting of the fire was certainly intentional. One cannot infer from this that strict liability attached to everyone who in all circumstances started a fire. The context of the agricultural delict has to be borne in mind. Damage from both depasturation and fire — and, one might add, from the pit — occur in the context of normal agricultural activities. It may be that the action of starting a fire is inherently less blameworthy than that of sending one's cattle into an unauthorised field.Less
Between the two Exodus passages on the goring ox, the first dealing with the homicidal and the second with the bovicidal variety, we find a law dealing with harm resulting from a pit. Philo and Josephus both assume that a water pit is involved here, and give credible accounts of the realia involved. In depasturation, the delict certainly includes wilful sending of the animal into the non-permitted field. In the fire delict, however, there is no suggestion that the damage was caused wilfully, although the lighting of the fire was certainly intentional. One cannot infer from this that strict liability attached to everyone who in all circumstances started a fire. The context of the agricultural delict has to be borne in mind. Damage from both depasturation and fire — and, one might add, from the pit — occur in the context of normal agricultural activities. It may be that the action of starting a fire is inherently less blameworthy than that of sending one's cattle into an unauthorised field.
Bernard S. Jackson
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198269311
- eISBN:
- 9780191683596
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198269311.003.0011
- Subject:
- Religion, Biblical Studies, Judaism
The passage commencing Exodus 22:6 and extending to the end of verse 14 forms the basis of the rabbinic classification of the ‘four guardians’. Each type of bailee is based by the rabbis on one ...
More
The passage commencing Exodus 22:6 and extending to the end of verse 14 forms the basis of the rabbinic classification of the ‘four guardians’. Each type of bailee is based by the rabbis on one section of this passage, and the liabilities of each class are distinguished. The history of early rabbinic law in this area manifests an underlying principle: where the bailment is unilaterally for the benefit of one party or the other, whether it be the bailee or bailor, the risk entailed in the bailment falls primarily upon the party who has such unilateral benefit; where the bailment is bilaterally for the benefit of both parties, there is a more equal division of the risks. The biblical basis for this standard of liability of the gratuitous bailee lies in Exod. 22:7, where a special procedure, involving the divinity, is used where the deposited property has been stolen (but the thief has not been found), in order to determine whether the bailee ‘put his hand to’ the property of his neighbour.Less
The passage commencing Exodus 22:6 and extending to the end of verse 14 forms the basis of the rabbinic classification of the ‘four guardians’. Each type of bailee is based by the rabbis on one section of this passage, and the liabilities of each class are distinguished. The history of early rabbinic law in this area manifests an underlying principle: where the bailment is unilaterally for the benefit of one party or the other, whether it be the bailee or bailor, the risk entailed in the bailment falls primarily upon the party who has such unilateral benefit; where the bailment is bilaterally for the benefit of both parties, there is a more equal division of the risks. The biblical basis for this standard of liability of the gratuitous bailee lies in Exod. 22:7, where a special procedure, involving the divinity, is used where the deposited property has been stolen (but the thief has not been found), in order to determine whether the bailee ‘put his hand to’ the property of his neighbour.
KATE ZEBIRI
- Published in print:
- 1993
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198263302
- eISBN:
- 9780191682469
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198263302.003.0005
- Subject:
- Religion, Islam
This chapter examines the works of Maḥmūd Shaltūt relevant to the Islamic fiqh. During the 19th and 20th centuries, the development of fiqh was overtaken by the rapid pace of legal reforms and in ...
More
This chapter examines the works of Maḥmūd Shaltūt relevant to the Islamic fiqh. During the 19th and 20th centuries, the development of fiqh was overtaken by the rapid pace of legal reforms and in many cases the Shari'a was displaced by Western-style codes of law. Despite this, Shaltūt did not confine his works on acts of worship and family laws and expanded his scope to cover the subjects of civil, criminal liability, and penal law. His legal works were always based on the framework of traditional Islamic jurisprudence.Less
This chapter examines the works of Maḥmūd Shaltūt relevant to the Islamic fiqh. During the 19th and 20th centuries, the development of fiqh was overtaken by the rapid pace of legal reforms and in many cases the Shari'a was displaced by Western-style codes of law. Despite this, Shaltūt did not confine his works on acts of worship and family laws and expanded his scope to cover the subjects of civil, criminal liability, and penal law. His legal works were always based on the framework of traditional Islamic jurisprudence.
Vita Daphna Arbel
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- May 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199837779
- eISBN:
- 9780199932351
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199837779.003.0004
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies
The chapter shows how several scenes, paralleling prevalent early Jewish and Christian exegetical traditions, depict Eve as accountable for inflicting death on Adam and all humanity. Simultaneously, ...
More
The chapter shows how several scenes, paralleling prevalent early Jewish and Christian exegetical traditions, depict Eve as accountable for inflicting death on Adam and all humanity. Simultaneously, other scenes subtly portray Eve as playing a beneficial role in the context of Adam’s death, such as caring for his body, mourning his decease, pleading for his soul, and witnessing his final ascent to heaven. The chapter demonstrates how these later portrayals resonate with a broad range of culturally esteemed funerary practices and conceptions associated with women, well established in the multicultural landscape in which the GLAE emerged. With attention to relations between social practices and narrativation, the chapter further suggests that, by associating Eve with valued funerary practices, the GLAE representations undermine traditions of Eve’s liability, emphasize countertraditions about her positive role in the aftermath of Adam’s death, and ultimately assert an ideological stance concerning the valued standing of Eve in the context of contrasting views.Less
The chapter shows how several scenes, paralleling prevalent early Jewish and Christian exegetical traditions, depict Eve as accountable for inflicting death on Adam and all humanity. Simultaneously, other scenes subtly portray Eve as playing a beneficial role in the context of Adam’s death, such as caring for his body, mourning his decease, pleading for his soul, and witnessing his final ascent to heaven. The chapter demonstrates how these later portrayals resonate with a broad range of culturally esteemed funerary practices and conceptions associated with women, well established in the multicultural landscape in which the GLAE emerged. With attention to relations between social practices and narrativation, the chapter further suggests that, by associating Eve with valued funerary practices, the GLAE representations undermine traditions of Eve’s liability, emphasize countertraditions about her positive role in the aftermath of Adam’s death, and ultimately assert an ideological stance concerning the valued standing of Eve in the context of contrasting views.
O.P. Albino Barrera
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- April 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780199370993
- eISBN:
- 9780199374212
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199370993.003.0009
- Subject:
- Religion, Religion and Society, Religious Studies
This chapter employs legal theory, social philosophy, and traditional moral theology to ask how and to what extent individuals are personally responsible for the harms that markets cause to distant ...
More
This chapter employs legal theory, social philosophy, and traditional moral theology to ask how and to what extent individuals are personally responsible for the harms that markets cause to distant others. Giving both theoretical and practical reasons for the importance of individuating collective responsibility, the chapter distinguishes causal responsibility, moral responsibility, and liability to take corrective action and argues that without identifying how particular individuals are personally responsible for collective harms, no one individual has much incentive to take action. It focuses on five of the most important factors that should be considered in any reasonable account of individual and collective responsibility for harms to distant others. These include the nature and severity of the harm, the nature of the economy, causal relations, the capabilities of agents, and the philosophical commitments of the evaluators or the general public or both.Less
This chapter employs legal theory, social philosophy, and traditional moral theology to ask how and to what extent individuals are personally responsible for the harms that markets cause to distant others. Giving both theoretical and practical reasons for the importance of individuating collective responsibility, the chapter distinguishes causal responsibility, moral responsibility, and liability to take corrective action and argues that without identifying how particular individuals are personally responsible for collective harms, no one individual has much incentive to take action. It focuses on five of the most important factors that should be considered in any reasonable account of individual and collective responsibility for harms to distant others. These include the nature and severity of the harm, the nature of the economy, causal relations, the capabilities of agents, and the philosophical commitments of the evaluators or the general public or both.
