English translation — מסעי ב

Sicha b<pg>206</pg>

A.

"And the congregation shall rescue the murderer from the hand of the blood avenger, and they shall return him etc. to his city of refuge etc., and he shall dwell there until the death of the high priest etc."¹.

And in Rashi on the verse he brings two reasons for this law

(that the murderer's residence in the city of refuge is "until the death of the high priest")

:

A)

that he²

(the high priest)

comes to cause the Shechinah to dwell among Israel and to lengthen their days³

and the murderer comes to remove the Shechinah from Israel and shortens the days of life,

it is not fitting that he should be before a high priest.

b)

Because the High Priest should have prayed that this calamity not befall Israel in his lifetime&lt;sup&gt;4&lt;/sup&gt;.

And the commentators wrote&lt;sup&gt;5&lt;/sup&gt;,

that according to the second explanation in Rashi — "Because he should have prayed etc." — the intent of the verse "and he shall dwell there until the death of the High Priest" is,

that "the High Priest was punished..

for not having prayed"&lt;sup&gt;6&lt;/sup&gt;.

And seemingly one must wonder: Where is it hinted in the verse and law "he shall dwell there until the death of the high priest" that there is here a punishment for the high priest?

And what is the punishment for the high priest&lt;sup&gt;7&lt;/sup&gt;

In this, that the murderer must dwell in his city of refuge until the death of the high priest&lt;sup&gt;8&lt;/sup&gt;?

!

In Sichas Purim Katan it is written that this "that it is written 'until the death of the high priest' the verse tells you that the murderer will lengthen days after the high priest because the high priest will die soon, and why,

And it explains because he was etc.'"

And seemingly its explanation is difficult to understand,

for in the simple meaning of the verse there is no implication that the murderer will lengthen days after the Kohen Gadol,

for the intention of the verse "he shall dwell there until the death of the Kohen Gadol" simply is only to impose an obligation upon the murderer

(to save his life)

to remain in his city of refuge until the death of the Kohen Gadol,

but this does not mean that the Kohen Gadol will die before the murderer,

and it is possible that even the opposite is the case

; and on the contrary — the simple intention of the &lt;pg&gt;207&lt;/pg&gt;

verse is to emphasize the length of the murderer's stay in his city of refuge.

There are commentators&lt;sup&gt;12&lt;/sup&gt;,

that "because the High Priest did not pray etc., therefore the Torah obligated him to this, that he should sit in his city of refuge until the death of the High Priest and suffer that he cannot return to dwell in his home as long as the High Priest is alive, and from this he will pray for the death of the High Priest and his prayer will be accepted and the High Priest will receive his punishment..

And another will be appointed..

And there will no longer be a stumbling block in Israel."

And at first glance it is very forced to explain thus in the language of Rashi,

that he did not mention at all

(even not by hint)

that the murderer will pray for the death of the High Priest.

And if this is the intention of Rashi

(and begins from "a student of five years of age for Scripture")

— he should have explained it.

And also the content of the explanation — that the reason the Torah said "until the death of the high priest" is so that the murderers would pray for the death of the high priest — is very perplexing,

And in the language of the Gur Aryeh: "These are not the ways of the true Torah."

2.

And therefore it can be said, seemingly, that Rashi did not intend to say

(according to the opinion of the aforementioned commentators)

that this that the Torah said "he shall dwell there until the death of the high priest" is a punishment for the high priest,

And also in the second explanation, Rashi's intention is to explain why the punishment of the murderer

(to be in exile)

continues until "the death of the high priest."

[And so it also appears from the language of Rashi,

for in the first explanation he concludes "he is not worthy to be before the High Priest",

behold his intention is explicit that it speaks of the murderer and his iniquity; and if in the second explanation he intended to explain the verse

(contrary to the plain meaning of the verse)

that the intention is to the High Priest and his punishment — certainly he would not have refrained from explaining this explicitly].

And one can explain the reasoning in this:

Above in Parshat Chukat&lt;sup&gt;13&lt;/sup&gt;

Rashi wrote, "The death of the righteous atones."

And from this it is also understood in our subject,

that the death of the Kohen Gadol is effective to atone for the sin of the murderer&lt;sup&gt;14&lt;/sup&gt;.

But it is difficult for Rashi — what is the special connection between this sin of killing a person unintentionally and specifically the death of the Kohen Gadol

(and not another righteous person&lt;sup&gt;15&lt;/sup&gt;)?

And therefore Rashi explained, "Because the Kohen Gadol should have prayed that this mishap not occur, etc.,"

That is, that the prevention of this mishap is connected to

(the prayer of)

the Kohen Gadol specifically,

and since the Kohen Gadol had a part in causing this mishap

(that he did not pray, etc.),

therefore his death effects

(to complete this and)

to atone for this mishap,

the sin of the murderer&lt;sup&gt;16&lt;/sup&gt;.

But still, explanation is needed — what was difficult in the first interpretation that because of this Rashi needed to bring also the second interpretation?

And in particular, that the explanation of the second is distant

(a little)

m-&lt;pg&gt;208&lt;/pg&gt;

the way of the simple meaning,

for it is difficult to say that the fixing of

(time)

the punishment of the murderer,

that his stay in his city of refuge is prolonged until the death of the Kohen Gadol,

is due to some lack of caution of the Kohen Gadol

("that he should have...

prayed")&lt;sup&gt;17&lt;/sup&gt;

—

And it would have been for Rashi to be in doubt about the first explanation,

that this is from the side of the murderer

(that "he is not worthy to be before the High Priest")?

There are interpreters¹⁸,

"for if from the first reason, he would not have been permitted to stand forever before the High Priest, and even another High Priest, since this one causes the Shechinah to rest and this one causes it to depart, and as it is written

(Rashi)

on the verse¹⁹

for your sword..

that it is not fitting that the shortener should be waved over the lengthener."

But at first glance this interpretation is forced,

because²⁰

it is understood that the sin of the murderer and the action of the sin are at the time of the sin — during the life of this High Priest,

that his act of murder "weakened" the activity of this High Priest to cause the Divine Presence to rest and to lengthen the days of the people of his generation, and therefore "he is not fit to be before the High Priest" this

(specifically).

3.

And this will be understood by prefacing what we find in Rashi's commentary on the Torah,

that it is not his way

(in general)

to explain the reasons of the laws and commandments of the Torah

(because this is not necessary in the study of the plain meaning of Scripture)²¹,

except when the reason pertains to understanding the simple meaning.

And from this it is understood also in our case,

that this that Rashi brought here the reasons about the murderer's sitting in his city of refuge "until the death of the High Priest" is not merely to expound the reason of the verse but to resolve a difficulty in the verses here²²

:

The law of "and he shall dwell there until the death of the high priest" comes in continuation to what was said before this, "and the congregation shall rescue the murderer from the hand of the blood avenger and they shall return him etc. to his city of refuge."

And it is puzzling,

at first glance: what is the connection between the rescue from the hand of the blood avenger and "the death of the high priest" — if the city of refuge is because the murderer is forced to have protection from the blood avenger,

what will change in this

until the nullification of the necessity — through the death of the high priest²³?

And furthermore:

According to the simple meaning,

the concern of revenge — "lest he pursue..

his heart will become warm"²⁴

— lasted a time not&lt;pg&gt;209&lt;/pg&gt;

Long,

and of course from the story of Yaakov and Esav²⁵,

that although "and Esav hated Yaakov" and wanted to kill Yaakov

(because of a thing that was done to him himself)

— nevertheless Rivkah said to Yaakov "flee for yourself to Lavan etc. and dwell with him a few days

(a few²⁶)

until your brother's anger subsides"; and all the more so in our case,

an unintentional killer

(who "was not his enemy and did not seek his harm"²⁷),

and the blood redeemer is only a relative of the murdered person — that after a few days surely his anger will subside and his heart will not be hot against the killer of his relative and unintentionally²⁸.

And if so it is perplexing: since the murderer's stay in the city of refuge is to save him from the vengeance of the blood redeemer

(and of course also from the beginning of the portion²⁹

"and they shall be for you cities of refuge from the blood redeemer and the murderer shall not die")

— why do they prolong the murderer's stay in the city of refuge for so long a time "until the death of the high priest"?

And to resolve this question, Rashi brings two explanations that explain,

that the obligation of his dwelling

(the extended one)

of the murderer in the city of refuge is not

(primarily)

because of fear of revenge from the blood avenger,

but rather it is

(also and mainly)

a matter in itself,

imposed upon the murderer because of his act of murder — according to the first explanation because "he is not fit to be before the High Priest",

and according to the second explanation because only then — at the death of the High Priest — is his sin atoned.

And this that is said here

(at the beginning of the verse)

"And they shall save etc. the murderer from the hand of the blood avenger",

the intention is not that the concern is

(only)

lest the heart of the blood avenger become hot and he kill him out of revenge — rather the "saving" is from killing that is according to the law,

"He has no blood"&lt;sup&gt;30&lt;/sup&gt;.

That is: since if the murderer goes out from his city of refuge and the blood avenger finds him, the Torah says

(as the continuation of the verses here&lt;sup&gt;30&lt;/sup&gt;)

"And the blood avenger kills the murderer, he has no blood" — it follows,

that his dwelling in his city of refuge is what saves him from being killed&lt;sup&gt;31&lt;/sup&gt;.

And this is also the reason that in our parshah here the verse stated "And the congregation shall rescue the murderer from the hand of the blood avenger" and the verse did not explain — like in Parshas Shoftim²⁴

— that this is because of the concern lest..

his heart become hot" of the avenger — because in our parshah it is not discussing

(only)

because of concern for revenge,

but rather because of the killing of the murderer by judgment.

D.

And with this will be explained yet several differences between the two sections of the city of refuge — our parshah and Parshas Shoftim:

In our parshah

(a)

came earlier several and several verses³²

about one who kills a person intentionally

(which at first glance is not their place here),

(b)

is stated the time that the murderer is obligated to remain in the city of refuge — "until the death of the high priest",

(c)

is stated the law afterwards³³

when the murderer went out from his city of refuge

(after he came there)

and the avenger of blood killed him,

(d)

the reason that the avenger of blood is not liable for his killing is because "he has no blood"³⁰

(and according to Rashi "he is like one who kills a dead person").

Whereas in parshas Shoftim came

(a)

laws regarding the preparation of the road to the city of refuge³⁴,

(b)

the law<pg>210</pg>

If the avenger of blood pursues the murderer on his way to the city of refuge&lt;sup&gt;24&lt;/sup&gt;,

(c)

And about this it is said&lt;sup&gt;24&lt;/sup&gt;

that "he

(to the murderer&lt;sup&gt;35&lt;/sup&gt;)

there is no judgment of death because he was not his enemy from yesterday or the day before."

And based on the above, the reason for the distinctions is understood:

In parshas Shoftim it discusses the saving of the murderer from the vengeance of the blood redeemer,

that this concern is

(primarily)

only immediately,

at the time of the flight to the city of refuge,

and therefore there are stated there the laws of preparing the road to the city of refuge

(and also to prepare "many cities of refuge"³⁶)

so that the murderer can flee there — "lest the blood redeemer pursue after the murderer when his heart is hot and overtake him because the way is long etc.",

that then there is the concern of "lest he pursue etc. when his heart is hot"

(And with this the verse emphasizes that "he has no death sentence" to be killed by the blood redeemer while he is still on his way to the city of refuge).

But in our parshah it discusses

(primarily)

about

(the continuation)

the dwelling of the murderer in his city of refuge after the concern of the vengeance of the blood redeemer has already been nullified³⁷,

and the saving of the city of refuge is so that the blood redeemer should not kill him by law.

And therefore the scripture precedes the laws of one who kills a person intentionally,

and emphasizes

(two times³⁸)

"the avenger of blood, he shall put the murderer to death when he meets him",

and this is that upon the avenger of blood there is an obligation from the Torah to kill the murderer³⁹.

And following this it is said regarding one who kills a person unintentionally "and they shall judge⁴⁰

the congregation between the striker and the avenger of blood according to these judgments.

And the congregation shall rescue the murderer from the hand of the avenger of blood etc. and he shall dwell there until the death of the high priest etc. And if the murderer shall go out etc. and the avenger of blood finds him etc. and the avenger of blood kills the murderer, he has no blood",

from which it is understood,

that these matters are laws of the Torah — that the judge forbids the avenger of blood to kill the murderer when he is in his city of refuge,

and "if the murderer shall go out beyond the border of his city of refuge etc. and the avenger of blood finds him etc.

(the judgment is determined that)

and the avenger of blood kills the murderer",

and the reason for this is because outside his city of refuge "he has no blood",

"he is like one who kills a dead person"

(as above),

because in this state his judgment is determined for death⁴¹.

5.

According to the above, the difference between the two explanations of Rashi and the reason that Rashi was compelled to bring the second explanation is understood:

According to the first explanation,

that "he comes to cause the Divine Presence to rest, etc., and the murderer comes to remove, etc., he is not worthy to be before the High Priest",

it follows,

that the murderer's dwelling in his city of refuge is not a punishment and atonement for his sin,

but rather an external matter related to the High Priest,

that the murderer brought himself into such a situation that compels him to be not before the High Priest

("he is not worthy to be before the High Priest").

But this explanation is difficult

(somewhat),

for why&lt;pg&gt;211&lt;/pg&gt;

The departure of the murderer from his city of refuge should be so severe that "he has no blood"

("he is as if dead")

— And because he places himself in a situation that "he is not worthy

(to be before the High Priest)

" should the death penalty be imposed upon him⁴²?

Furthermore: according to this, it is found,

that this that the city of refuge is a protection and rescue

("refuge")

from the hand of the blood avenger,

this is a result and consequence from

(the obligation to dwell in this city and)

the prohibition to leave it,

for when he transgresses this prohibition then his blood is permitted for death by the hand of the blood avenger

(as above end of section 3)

— opposite the simple understanding of the matter,

that the reason

(and the beginning)

of the obligation to seat the murderer in this city is

(because it is a "refuge",

namely)

in order to save him "from the hand of the blood avenger".

And therefore Rashi brings a second reason⁴³,

that until the death of the high priest his iniquity was not yet atoned for him.

And based on this is understood the reason that if he goes out from his city of refuge "he has no blood",

for until the death of the high priest there is still upon him the punishment of death because of his act of murder,

except that as long as he is found in his city of refuge it protects and saves him from this punishment.

6.

And from all this there is to learn a wonderful lesson in the matter of love and unity of Israel:

Kohen Gadol is the highest level among the Jewish people,

and one who kills a person unintentionally is the lowest level

[for one who kills a person intentionally, his punishment is death and he is a dead man,

but among those who remain alive, there is none lower than one who kills a person unintentionally,

therefore only regarding him do we find the punishment of exile&lt;sup&gt;44&lt;/sup&gt;].

And the verse teaches us — that they also

(the two extremes among the Jewish people)

are dependent on each other,

to the extent that the Torah made the atonement of this killer dependent on the Kohen Gadol,

for this is the essence of the Kohen Gadol — a lover of Israel,

as we find regarding Aharon the Kohen Gadol, who was "a lover&lt;sup&gt;45&lt;/sup&gt;

(even)

of people."

And this is also the connection between the two explanations of Rashi — that in both of them the greatness of the love of Israel of the High Priest is emphasized: in the first explanation — on the positive side,

that "he came..

to prolong their days" of Israel

[and as my master, my father, and my teacher explains&lt;sup&gt;46&lt;/sup&gt;

that this is the reason that the chamber of the High Priest is called "the chamber of wood"&lt;sup&gt;47&lt;/sup&gt;,

because "wood indicates length of days..

as the days&lt;sup&gt;48&lt;/sup&gt;

of the tree are the days of My people",

and "the High Priest is connected to length of days as it is said&lt;sup&gt;49&lt;/sup&gt;

length of days in its right hand, behold that length of days is drawn from the aspect of&lt;pg&gt;212&lt;/pg&gt;

right, that is, kindnesses..

and it is the aspect of the High Priest"&lt;sup&gt;50&lt;/sup&gt;]

;

And afterwards Rashi adds even more,

that the Kohen Gadol involves himself even in the welfare of such people that need to pray about them that a mishap should not occur through them to Israel — behold, also for them he prays,

and his prayer is accepted that there should be only good and kindness for Israel,

always, all the days.

(From the talk of Shabbos Parshas Mattos-Masei 5734)