Why does the Torah use the double expression "Ki Harog Tahargenu"?
Rashi: To teach us that even if the Meisis leaves Beis-Din innocent, they are obligated to bring him back and to judge him guilty (if new evidence emerges to implicate him); 1 and if he leaves Beis-Din guilty, they are not permitted to bring him back (should new evidence emerge that points to his innocence). 2
Bechor Shor: It means that if necessary, Make efforts to obtain testimony to have him killed. 3
See Torah Temmah, note 26. See also Torah Temimah citing Sanhedrin, 33b, who cites others who learn these Dinim from "Lo Sachmol" and "Lo Sechaseh" in Pasuk 9..
See Sifsei Chachamim. This is an exception to "ve'Naki ve'Tzadik Al Taharog" (Mishpatim Sh'mos, 23:7). Perhaps even if Eidim Zomemin come, we do not return him. Normally, testimony that cannot be Huzam is invalid. (PF) Beis Yitzchak (EH 1:72) says that just like Meisis is a Chidush (he need not be warned), so too, testimony that cannot be Huzam is valid for it. Rava (Sanhedrin 78a) says so about Edim Zomemin; all could agree about a Mesis. Margoliyas ha'Yam (Sanhedrin 67a, 3) extrapolates that we accept such testimony, since the one enticed can be a witness, and he cannot be Huzam, for that would also contradict his testimony! Baruch Ta'am 5 and Sho'el u'Meshiv (1:56) also discuss this.
What does the Torah mean when it writes "Yadcha Tih'yeh bo ba'Rishonah ve'Yad Kol ha'Am ba'Acharonah"?
Rashi: It means that, initially, it is incumbent upon the victim - whom he tried to entice - to kill him 1 (as a Shali'ach Beis-Din), but if for some reason, he did not succeed in doing so, then he must die at the hand of others.
See Torah Temimah, note 29.
Why ust the victim carry out the death sentence, and not the witnesses, who are appointed to do so in all other cases?
Oznayim la'Torah: Because just as in the case of murder, where, due to the severity of the sin of murder, the Go'el ha'Dam is appointed to carry out the death sentence - since he is angry at his brother's death and is the one who is most capable of countering the efforts of the murderer to defend himself - so too, due to the severity of the sin of Avodah Zarah, is the victim, angry at having been victimized, the one who is most capable of countering the efforts of the Meisis to defend himself. 1
See Oznyim la'Torh DH 'Yadcha' #1/.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes that the double expression teaches us that if he leaves Beis-Din innocent, one may bring him back to judge him guilty, and if he left guilty, one does not bring him back to acquit him. How can we expound both from one repetition?
Mizrachi: Because, having already stated "Yadcha ? Lehamiso", both "Harog" and "Tahargenu" are superfluous.
Gur Aryeh: Because both D'rashos are equal - there is no reason to learn one, and not the other. Consequently, we learn both.
Aderes Eliyahu: Because the Torah changed the form of the word. "Harog" alludes to killing passively (Beis Din sentenced him, and you have a reason for his acquittal); Therefore - Remain silent. "Tahargenu "is active (Beis Din acquitted him, and you have a reason to convict him); Therefore - 'Tell them!'
