Qitzur Shulchan Arukh – 186

סִימָן קפו – הִלְכוֹת אֲבֵדָה וּמְצִיאָה

186: Laws of “You Shall Not Muzzle”

א: כָּל הַמּוֹנֵעַ אֶת הַבְּהֵמָה מִלֶּאֱכֹל בִּשְׁעַת מְלַאכְתָּהּ, לוֹקֶה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר, “לֹֽא־תַחְסֹ֥ם שׁ֖וֹר בְּדִישֽׁוֹ׃. אֶחָד שׁוֹר וְאֶחָד כָּל מִינֵי בְהֵמָה וְחַיָה, בֵּין טְמֵאִים בֵּין טְהוֹרִים, וְאֶחָד הַדִּישָׁה וְאֶחָד כָּל שְׁאָר מְלָאכוֹת ֹשֶל גִּדּוּלֵי קַרְקַע. וְלֹא נֶאֱמַר שׁוֹר בְּדִישׁוֹ, אֶלָא בַּהֹוֶה. וַאֲפִלּוּ חֲסָמָהּ בְּקוֹל, דְהַיְנוּ שֶׁצָּעַק עָלֶיהָ וְעַל יְדֵי זֶה לֹא תֹאכַל, חַיַב מַלְקוֹת

Whomever prevents an animal from eating at the time of its working, gets lashes [in beis din, assuming all the criteria for corporeal punishment were met; the point here is that it is a violation of a lo sa’asei, “you shall not”, in the Torah]. As it says, “Do not muzzle an ox while it threshes” [by treading upon the grain] (Bamidbar 25:4). Whether an ox, whether any other kind of farm or wild animal, whether non-kosher or kosher breeds, whether threashing or whether any other work of things that grow from the ground. It only said “ox while it is threshing” because it was what exists [is common]. Even if he “muzzles” it by voice, which is to yell at it and thereby it won’t eat, he is due lashes.

ב: יִשְׂרָאֵל הַדָּשׁ אֲפִלּוּ בְּפָרָתוֹ ֹשֶל גּוֹי וּתְבוּאָה שֶׁל גּוֹי, עוֹבֵר מִשּׁוּם לֹא-תַחְסֹם

A Jew who threshes, even with a non-Jew’s cow and non-Jew’s grain [can] violate “do not muzzle”.

ג: אִם הַבְּהֵמָה אֵינָהּ יְכוֹלָה לֶאֱכֹל, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא צְמֵאָה, צָרִיךְ לְהַשְׁקוֹתָהּ

If the animal can’t eat because it is thirst, one is obligated to give it to drink. [Even though it is phrased as “thou shalt not”, it goes beyond prohibition and mandates action as well.]

ד: בְּהֵמָה שֶׁהִיא עוֹשָׂה בְּדָבָר שֶׁהוּא רַע לִבְנֵי מֵעֶיהָ, מֻתָּר לְחָסְמָה, שֶׁלֹּא הִקְפִּידָה הַתּוֹרָה אֶלָּא עַל הֲנָאָתָהּ, וַהֲרֵי אֵינָהּ נֶהֱנֵית

An animal that does something which is bad for its internal organs, it is permissible to muzzle it. For the Torah is only being careful for its benefit, and this isn’t to its benefit.

Although this siman isn’t really on topic in terms of financial law, since it was both about middos and short, I didn’t leave a whole in the sequence of simanim.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *