Hi, I'm a member of the Shabbos Chabura, but I have a Gemara question. Is Rashi's comment in D"H "Meshum DeHatzdiku" (2b) giving TWO reasons why the juxtaposition of these two pasukim must be interpreted to be a Remez to the fact that we give Malkos to certain Eidim Zommemim (1 - that "VeHatzdiku ..." is superfluous; and 2 - that we don't always give Malkos when someone is found to be guilty)? Or, is this only ONE reason? If it's ONE reason, what is that reason?
Kol Tuv and many thanks. David
David Hillel Rosmarin, Toronto
It is one reason. Rashi writes that there is no way to explain that the word "v'Hatzdiku" can apply to the Ba'al Din, because in most cases there is no Malkus for the Ba'al Din when he is found guilty. Therefore, Rashi learns that the word "v'Hatzdiku" applies to the second set of Edim who made a person innocent who was previously found guilty. The verse continues, "v'Hayah Im Bin Hakos," referring to a case in which "Ka'asher Zamam" cannot apply, in which case we give Malkus.
D. Zupnik