Question

Hello Michi,
In the second part of the book Moves Among the Standing, you explained that after the destruction, the king's powers were transferred to the religious court.
Later, in the tenth chapter (page 156), in the course of a discussion on the "reason for the verse," you presented the topic of "damage caused by an ox" as an example of interpreting the reason for the verse, supposedly contrary to the rule that verses are not to be interpreted teleologically.
I wanted to suggest another way of looking at the issue: in light of what you wrote in chapter two, is it possible to say that the topic of damage caused by an ox falls under the king's authority, and therefore the rule "we do not expound the reason for the verse" is not relevant in this case?