Deuteronomy 25:12

Deu 25:12 Then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall not pity [her].

Ver. 12. Cut off her hand.] The instrument of her sin. Thus Cranmer thrust his hand, wherewith he had subscribed a recantation, first into the fire, crying out, "Thou unworthy right hand." An Act of Parliament was here made, in the reign of Philip and Mary, that the authors and sowers of seditious writings should lose their right hands. By virtue whereof John Stubbs and William Page had their right hands cut off, with a cleaver driven through the wrist with the force of a beetle, in the days of Queen Elizabeth, for a book written against the marriage with the Duke of Anjou, entitled, "The Gulf wherein England will be Swallowed up by the French Marriage," &c., which most men presaged would, if it had gone on, have been the ruin of religion. {a}

{a} Camden’s Elisab., fol. 239.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Then thou shall cut off her hand,.... Which was to be done not by the man that strove with her husband, or by any bystander, but by the civil magistrate or his order. This severity was used to deter women from such an immodest as well as injurious action, who on such an occasion are very passionate and inconsiderate. Our Lord is thought to refer to this law, Mat 5:30; though the Jewish writers interpret this not of actual cutting off the hand, but of paying a valuable consideration, a price put upon it; so Jarchi; and Aben Ezra compares it with the law of retaliation, "eye for eye", Exo 21:24; which they commonly understand of paying a price for the both, &c. lost; and who adds, if she does not redeem her hand (i.e. by a price) it must be cut off:

thine eye shall not pity her; on account of the tenderness of her sex, or because of the plausible excuse that might be made for her action, being done hastily and in a passion, and out of affection to her husband; but these considerations were to have no place with the magistrate, who was to order the punishment inflicted, either in the strict literal sense, or by paying a sum of money.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

This is the only mutilation prescribed by the Law of Moses, unless we except the retaliation prescribed as a punishment for the infliction on another of bodily injuries Lev 24:19-20. The act in question was probably not rare in the times and countries for which the Law of Moses was designed. It is of course to be understood that the act was willful, and that the prescribed punishment would be inflicted according to the sentence of the judges.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

In her regard: words supplied also by the Septuagint conformably to the context. (Calmet) --- The indecency and impudence of the woman, left her no excuse; (Haydock) though the Rabbins falsely maintain, that she might transgress this law in case of necessity, and might cut off the hand of her husband’s antagonist. (Grotius) (Calmet) --- She would thus put the man in danger of having no posterity. (Menochius) --- If even the imminent danger of her husband would not authorize her to act in this manner, when the person was stripped to fight, how severely will God punish all wanton liberties!

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Partly because of the great mischief she did to him, both to his person and posterity, and partly to deter all women from all immodest and impudent carriages, and to secure that modesty which is indeed the guardian of all the virtues, as immodesty is an inlet to all vices, as the sad experience of this degenerate age shows; and therefore it is not strange that it is so severely restrained and punished.

Thine eye shall not pity her, which thou wilt be very apt to do, because of the infirmity of her sex, and the urgency of the occasion, this being done for the necessary preservation of her husband.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

וקצת את כפה THEN THOU SHALT HEW OFF HER HAND — i.e., she must pay money that is the equivalent of the shame to which he has been put (Bava Kamma 28a), all according to the social position of the person who put him to shame and of him who was shamed (Bava Kamma 83b). But perhaps this is not the meaning, but that you should cut off her hand, literally?! It states, however, here לא תחוס, “thine eye shall not pity her” and it states there (Deuteronomy 19:21) in the laws concerning the plotting witnesses “thou shalt not pity them”; now, what is the case there? It is monetary compensation (see Rashi on that passage)! So, too, monetary compensation is here intended (Sifrei Devarim 293:2).

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.