מלכים א, פרק ג׳, פסוק כ״ג

In the climax of a complex trial, King Solomon distills the heated arguments of two women into a sharp, clear confrontation. He chooses to ignore the unproven stories leading up to this moment, such as the late night switching of the infants, and focuses entirely on the core of the dispute: their mutual denial regarding the identity of the living child [מצודת דוד, אברבנאל].

By carefully repeating the women's claims, the king applies a fundamental principle of legal procedure. A judge must restate the arguments of the involved parties before making a ruling, proving that he has fully listened to and understood their words [רד״ק, צאינה וראינה, אברבנאל]. At this stage of the trial, with no witnesses present, the two women stand completely equal in the eyes of the law [אברבנאל]. According to strict legal rules, the woman physically holding the living child at that moment should have simply taken an oath and kept him, since the burden of proof lies on the person trying to take the child away. However, the king's final ruling departs from this standard procedure [אלשיך].

Beyond proper legal conduct, the precise repetition of the women's statements exposes a deep psychological layer hidden in how they frame their arguments. The king highlights that the true mother opens her plea with a focus on life, speaking first of her living son. In contrast, the lying woman begins her claim by focusing on death. Through this subtle difference in the order of their arguments, it becomes clear who is telling the truth [חומת אנך].

Furthermore, the very fact that the lying woman mentions the dead child betrays her guilt. If each woman were simply claiming her own baby, there would be no reason for her to bring up the other woman's dead infant. This extra detail is a calculated attempt to cover up the fraud of switching the children. Ultimately, her own words become a trap, serving as the very evidence that exposes her lie [אלשיך].