Mishneh Torah, Testimony 20-22

Sugya Map

• Issue: Application of hazamah (witness-condemnation) for false testimony concerning a bat kohen's (priest's daughter's) adultery.
• Nafka Mina(s): The lying witnesses are strangled, not burnt, despite their intent to cause burning for the accused woman.
• Primary Sources: Deuteronomy 19:19 ("כאשר זמם לעשות לאחיו"), Makkos 5b, Sanhedrin 55b, Mishneh Torah, Testimony 20:10.

Text Snapshot

"שְׁנַיִם שֶׁהֵעִידוּ עַל רְאוּבֵן שֶׁנָּאף עִם בַּת כֹּהֵן וְנִגְמַר דִּינוֹ לְהֵחָנֵק וְדִין הַנּוֹאֶפֶת לִשְׂרֵפָה וְאַחַר כָּךְ הוּזְמוּ הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶחֱנָקִין וְאֵינָן נִשְׂרָפִין. וְזוֹ מְסוֹרֶת הִיא." (Mishneh Torah, Testimony 20:10)

• Dikduk/Leshon Nuance: The phrase "וְזוֹ מְסוֹרֶת הִיא" ("and this is an oral tradition") is telling. It signals that this ruling is not derived through conventional logical means, but rather stems from a specific, received tradition or drasha.

Readings

Rambam's Chiddush

The Rambam states the halakha that witnesses who falsely testify about a bat kohen's adultery are strangled, not burnt, despite her intended punishment being burning. This deviates from the usual principle of middah keneged middah for hazamah and the general rule of chamura (more severe penalty) for one liable for two deaths.

Shorshei HaYam's Elucidation

The Shorshei HaYam (on MT, Testimony 20:10:1) explicates this mesorah by referencing the Gemara (Makkos 5b, Sanhedrin 55b) and Tosafot. He explains that the drasha of "לאחיו" ("to his brother") in Deuteronomy 19:19 implies "לאחיו ולא לאחותו" ("to his brother, but not to his sister"). This means the hazamah penalty applies only to the death penalty intended for the male accused (strangulation for Reuven, the bo'el), not the female (burning for the bat kohen).

Friction

The Kushya

Why do hazamah witnesses not receive the chamura (burning) when they intended to cause both strangulation and burning, given the general rule that one subject to two death penalties receives the chamura? (Steinsaltz, MT, Testimony 20:10:2; MT, Sanhedrin 14:4).

The Terutz

The specific drasha "לאחיו ולא לאחותו" from "כאשר זמם לעשות לאחיו" (Deut 19:19) acts as a gezeiras hakasuv (scriptural decree). This drasha limits the hazamah punishment to the death penalty applicable to a male, overriding both the principle of middah keneged middah based on the full intent of the witnesses and the general rule of chamura. (Shorshei HaYam, MT, Testimony 20:10:1, citing Tosafot Makkos 5b s.v. "כל הזוממין")

Intertext

• Deuteronomy 19:19: "ועשיתם לו כאשר זמם לעשות לאחיו" – The foundational verse for hazamah, specifically the "לאחיו" which dictates the drasha.
• Makkos 5b (Tosafot s.v. "כל הזוממין"): The primary Talmudic source for the drasha of "לאחיו ולא לאחותו" regarding hazamah in the bat kohen case.

Psak/Practice

This halakha underscores a critical meta-psak heuristic: a precise scriptural drasha or mesorah can explicitly limit or override a seemingly logical application of a broader halachic principle (like middah keneged middah or chamura). The Torah's detailed language dictates the precise contours of justice, even when counter-intuitive.

Takeaway

The application of hazamah is not merely a logical middah keneged middah based on intent, but is strictly bounded by specific scriptural derashot, demonstrating the primacy of mesorah over apparent rational inference.