לע"נ הצדיק המיוסר רבי אברהם יהודה בן פסח אליעזר
ור' יואל בן פנחס הלוי
The Gemara says at the beginning of Makkos that if witnesses testified that Ploni is חייב גלות and were found to be זוממין we don't send them to galus but rather they receive 39 special love taps, as derived from "הוא ינוס" - He [who killed בשוגג] will run away to the עיר מקלט and not the עדים זוממין.
FREGT Tosfos [ד"ה מעידין]: How can the עדים obligate a person to go to galus for killing accidentally [what do you call a mistake made by your dentist? "Acci-dental"], the killer can just say "Hey dude, מזיד הייתי - I did that on purpose, so no galus for me!!" [Tosfos leaves out the "dude" part. The Baalei Hatosfos never met a chilled beach bum from Venice Beach Cal.]. This is like we see in Bava Metzia [3a] that עדים who say that Ploni ate חלב [first Ploni kills, now חלב - what is NEXT??] cannot obligate him in a korban, because he can claim that he ate in knowingly, so no korban is mandated.
[Tosfos answers that it is talking about a case when there is circumstantial evidence that he killed by accident, such as when the metal literally "flew off the handle" of the axe and hit someone who promptly hit the proverbial bucket].
Asked [that is English for "FREGT", if you didn't know the English term...] the Maharsha [not related to "Marsha" of the Brady Bunch], how can Tosfos say that he could claim that he was מזיד?! Tosfos asked in Bava Metzia [ג: ד"ה מה] that he can't make such a claim because a person may not incriminate himself in line with the rule "אין אדם משים עצמו רשע"? There Tosfos answer that he is believed because we don't want him to bring a korban [for eating חלב] in which he is not obligated for it is חולין בעזרה, which is gematria "bad news". But here where there are no "חולין בעזרה" issues, how can we believe him that he was מזיד when the rule is "אין אדם משים עצמו רשע"???!!!
