There are 41 Missvot in Perashat Shof'tim, and one of them is that you can not hold one liable for a punishment based on the testimony of a single witness. Two witnesses are the minimum but three or more are treated as a group, as the Gemara in Masekhet Makkot explained that even if you have three or more witnesses, and one of them is actually a relative or an ineligible witness for some other reason, their testimony is rejected even though you still have two or more eligible witnesses. This was learned from the verse: על פי שני עדים או על פי שלשה עדים יקום דבר On the testimony of two or three witnesses a matter shall be established. The verse adds three even though two is enough to teach you that a group of three or more witnesses is comparable to two witnesses in the fact that if one witness is ineligible the entire testimony is rejected by the court. Furthermore the inclusion of three witnesses in this verse also teaches that two witnesses could invalidate the testimony of three witnesses just like three witnesses could invalidate the testimony of two witnesses. The Gemara also taught that when witnesses lied in a case involving a death sentence, they are liable for death, but the false witnesses can not be put to death until their entire group are established to be false witnesses. So while two witnesses are the minimum, when there are more, they are treated as a group. If one is ineligible, the group is rejected. Two witnesses could invalidate the testimony of three or more witnesses and invalidated witnesses only get punished if their entire group is invalidated. These are the laws that our Rabbis extracted from the text with Midrash Halakhah, but the Ramban taught that according to the straightforward meaning of the text, the Torah is teaching that if there are three or more more witnesses, they should all testify. Two is the minimum, but if there are three or more, they should all testify. The Sefer HaHinukh explained that the Torah never trusts one witness no matter how wise or pious or important that one person is. Anyone could succumb to their evil inclination at any time. So at least two reliable witnesses are required in a court case. This is because it's unlikely that two honest people would agree to lie together.
WARS
Another Missvah that is counted in Perashat Shof'tim is the prohibition of being afraid of going to battle or running away from our enemies in a battle. This applies to men when the Jewish people are in the land of Israel. When defending the land of Israel and the Jewish people living there, a soldier should not allow himself to become fearful, like the verse says: כי תצא למלחמה על אויבך וראית סוס ורכב עם רב ממך לא תירא מהם כי ה' אלקיך עמך המעלך מארץ מצרים When you go to war against your enemy and you see horses and chariots and a nation more numerous than you, do not be afraid of them because HaShem your Lord, who brought you out of Egypt is with you The Seder HaHinukh explained that when Jewish soldiers are defending the Jewish people in the land of Israel, each soldier should put his full faith in Hashem and not fear the enemy. It is Hashem who makes us victorious in war. Still we are obligated to make our full military effort in order to sanctify Hashem's Name when the world sees Hashem's miracles on behalf of His nation. The Ramban points out that the Missvah is not to be fearless because we are relying on our own military capabilities but rather to be fearless because Hashem is fighting on our behalf like the verse says: כי ה' אלקיכם ההלך עמכם להלחם לכם עם איביכם להושיע אתכם "Because HaShem your Lord who goes with you to fight for you with your enemies to save you."
Now before they went to war, the officers asked the soldiers these questions followed by a fourth question: Who built a house and didn't live in it? Who planted a vineyard and didn't reap the fruits? Who betrothed a woman and didn't marry her? All were sent home in case they would die, and another man would live in their house, or reap the fruits of their vineyard or marry their fiancée. Rashi explained that this was because this would cause a person mental anguish or emotional distress. However the Abarbanel disagreed. He asked, why should a person care about what happens after they die? If one was alive and someone else got their house or their vineyard or their wife, then that would cause mental anguish. Furthermore, what about people that have had their house or vineyard for years, isn't it worse for them to lose those things? Even more so than for someone who never actually had them? So the Abarbanel explained that each of these things comes with a Missvah. The house has the Missvah of: כי תבנה בית חדש ועשית מעקה לגגך "When you build a new house you shall make a guardrail for your roof" The vineyard has the Missvah of eating the fruits of the fourth year in Jerusalem which is known as נטע רבעי Neta' R'ba-'ee And with one's wife there is the Missvah of having children. So according to the Abarbanel it's not the mental anguish of not physically enjoying life, it's prioritizing one who will miss the opportunity to perform his Missvah. This doesn't apply to someone who has had a house or a vineyard or a wife for years since they already had the opportunity to perform those Missvot. And then there's the fourth and final question: Who is afraid and weak-hearted? Go home! Here we have a dispute between Ribbi 'Aqiba and Ribbi Yose' HaGalili. R. Aqiba explained that it means afraid of war, meaning he is not able to fulfill the Missvah that we described earlier of being fearless during the battle. R. Yose' HaGalili explained that it means he is afraid because of his transgressions. Meaning that he believes that he might die in the battle because he has transgressions. And Ribbi Yose' HaGalili explained that they only sent home the first three groups (new house, new vineyard, new wife) in order not to embarrass those that left because of their transgressions. In Hilkhot Melakhim, HaRambam ruled in accordance with R. Aqiba that someone that was afraid of the battle was sent home, not one who was afraid because of his transgressions.
FRUIT TREES
Later in the Perashah we read about the prohibition of cutting down a fruit tree when laying siege to a city. The verse says, לא תשחית את עצה לנדח עליו גרזן כי ממנו תאכל ואתו לא תכרת כי האדם עץ השדה לבא מפניך במצור "Don't destroy her tree, wielding an axe upon it, because you will eat from it, and don't cut it down because man is the fruit of the tree to come from you in the siege." The end of this verse is difficult to understand. According to the Ibn Ezra the verse means, don't cut down the trees in order to lay siege to the city, because man's life is dependent upon the fruit of the trees. The Ibn Ezra understood כי האדם עץ השדה as a parenthetical comment that means that man's life is dependent upon the fruit of the trees. And לבא עליך במצור means to force the enemy into a siege. So don't cut down the tree (because man's life is dependent upon the fruit of the trees) in order to force the enemy into a siege. The Ramban pointed out that according to our Rabbis you could cut down fruit trees if you need the wood to build a fence around the city that you are laying siege to. If you don't have trees to cut that do not bear fruit, then you may cut down fruit bearing trees. So he explained the verse as saying, don't destroy fruit bearing trees as part of your destruction of the city, because you will live from the fruit of these trees while you are putting your enemy in a siege. So he explained כי האדם עץ השדה like Ibn Ezra, that man lives from the fruit of the trees. But לבא מפניך במצור means while you're laying siege as opposed to Ibn Ezra who explained, don't cut the trees in order to lay a siege. Another way of reading this part of the verse is like Rashbam who explained that here כי means rather. So he explained, don't cut the fruit trees unless they are being used strategically by your enemy to escape from your siege. Whereas in the first two explanations אדם meant your men, here it refers to your enemy. Cut the "tree of the field" that their "men" use "to come away from you in the siege." According to this explanation כי האדם עץ השדה לבא מפניך במצור means "rather (cut) the trees of the field that (their) men use to run away from you in the siege." Another approach found in other explanations is the rhetorical question approach. Onkalos translated כי האדם עץ השדה לבא מפניך במצור ?Are trees like people that run away from you in a siege So there's no justifiable reason to cut them. And Rashi explained the verse as meaning, Are the trees like people that will go into the siege if you kill those that try to escape? There's also the explanation of Targum Yonatan which is, are the trees like people that try to hide in order to avoid being in the siege? In all of these explanations כי האדם עץ השדה is a rhetorical question asking, are trees like people, to show that there's no reason to chop them down. This is either because they are not trying to escape or hide or they won't cooperate out of fear. Therefore they should be left living. So this phrase could either be understood as teaching us that man depends on the fruit of trees especially during a war. Or that you could chop down the fruit trees if the enemy is using them strategically. Or it's a rhetorical question emphasizing that there's no good reason to chop down fruit trees since the trees are not like people that will escape or hide or be coerced into cooperation. From this verse we learn the prohibition of destroying food or clothing or utensils without a justifiable reason (בל תשחית). A person may cut down a fruit tree if the wood is valuable and he wants to sell it, or if the tree is causing damage to other trees or fields, or if it only produces very little fruit. One can throw away food if it's spoiled or clothing if it's worn out. But destroying good food is a transgression. The food is a blessing from Hashem that we should enjoy and benefit from. This prohibition applies in all times and places to both men and women.
THE UNSOLVED MURDER
The end of the perashah described a ceremony performed in the case of an unsolved murder known as 'Eghlah 'Arufah. If a corpse is found five judges from the Sanhedrin come and measure which the city the corpse is closest to. Then judges from that city slaughtered a young female calf, that was never worked, near a swift flowing stream of water. And the land around it will never be ploughed or planted. All the judges of the city washed their hands at the stream of water over the slaughtered calf. Then they declared that their hands didn’t spill the blood and their eyes did not witness it. And the judges from the Sanhedrin said: "Forgive your Nation Israel whom you redeemed Hashem, and do not let innocent blood remain among the Jewish people." According to HaRambam, this elaborate ceremony is meant to call attention to the unsolved murder with the hope that the killer will be revealed. Either witnesses will come forth or the identity of the killer will become known and the deceased's relative will avenge the murder. Furthermore a Jewish king has the right to kill a murderer even if there wasn't a strong enough testimony for the court to issue a death penalty. (See MT Hilkhot Melakhim 3:10) The Ramban wrote that slaughtering the female calf was like a sacrifice to atone for the spilling of innocent blood. The Abarbanel explained that the 'Eghlah 'Arufah ceremony was to alert the leaders of the city that they are too lax with violent crime and they need to increase the safeguards that deter murders. They have to make it very difficult for anyone to get away with murder in their city. That takes us back to the very beginning of the Perashah which called upon us to appoint judges and policemen everywhere (שפטים ושטרים תתן לך בכל שעריך) Judges and policemen that have the power and authority to prevent crime. Otherwise chaos becomes the norm. Perhaps all of these reasons are valid, as many of our Missvot are multi-dimensional, and we can only appreciate the many facets of the Missvot of the Torah by studying many different commentaries.