Exodus 22:4Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

The law clearly differentiated between a thief who was found with stolen goods still alive and one who was caught with a butchered animal. In the case of the latter, the thief was required to pay restitution of four or five times the value, while in the former scenario, he was obliged to repay only double the amount. The exact reasons for this distinction are not clear today, but it likely had roots in ancient traditions and the customs of pastoral communities. The death of the livestock and the loss of their offspring may have signified a more substantial loss not just for the individual owner but also for the broader livelihood of the herding community. Nevertheless, in light of verse 9, the law appears to have accounted for the situation where the animal had strayed into the herd, allowing for the possibility of a defense or justification in such cases.