What is the main difference between the Justinian code and the natural rights of Thomas Jefferson?

According to the Justinian Digest, natural law is that which nature has taught all living things: for this right is inherent not only to the human race, but to all animals that are born on land and in the sea, and birds; this includes a union of a man and a woman, which we call marriage; here also the offspring of children, here the upbringing. We see that animals, even wild ones, have knowledge of this right - Justinian stated.

At the same time, according to him, the right of peoples is that which is enjoyed by the peoples of mankind; one can easily understand its difference from natural law: the latter is common for all animals, and the former is only for humans (in their relations) among themselves.

The concept of natural law became common in the 17th century, during the formation of industrial civilization. The major thinkers of this time, and, after them, the enlighteners of the 17th century, called as natural the right to satisfy the basic needs of human, given to every person by nature itself. These natural rights primarily included the right to life and its preservation, to basic necessities of life, to protection from hostile encroachment.

Jefferson lists life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as a natural right. He claimed that all people are created equal.

In Digest, along with the concept of law (jus), the traditional concept of "justice" (justitia) is used, but it is interpreted as "justice" in the spirit of Christian morality. In Jefferson's interpretation of the problems of social equality of people, their inalienable rights to life and freedom, one can see the influence of Locke's ideas of bourgeois liberalism.