Cities of Refuge

11) you shall provide yourselves with places to serve you as cities of refuge to which a manslayer who has killed a person unintentionally may flee. (12) The cities shall serve you as a refuge from the avenger, so that the manslayer may not die unless he has stood trial before the assembly. (13) The towns that you thus assign shall be six cities of refuge in all. (14) Three cities shall be designated beyond the Jordan, and the other three shall be designated in the land of Canaan: they shall serve as cities of refuge. (15) These six cities shall serve the Israelites and the resident aliens among them for refuge, so that anyone who kills a person unintentionally may flee there... (25) The assembly shall protect the manslayer from the blood-avenger, and the assembly shall restore him to the city of refuge to which he fled, and there he shall remain until the death of the high priest who was anointed with the sacred oil.

"In early times, before peoples were organized under a king, ministers, judges and officers, every family took revenge against other families, and the closest relative of the dead was responsible to avenge his death. The Torah established judges and officers and transferred the responsibilities of avenging [a killing] from individuals to the community. Now in a case of murder it was possible to mollify the avenger by telling him to leave it to the judges to investigate and execute the killer if found guilty of murder. However, when the killing was unintentional, it was impossible to mollify the avenger and oblige him to watch he who killed his father or brother remain unpunished. He and his acquaintances would interpret this [his inaction] to be proof that he does not love his father or brother, since he does not avenge their death. Now it was impossible to totally uproot this attitude [that lack of vengeance implied lack of love]. The divine wisdom knew that condemning the avenger to death when avenging an unintentional killing would not prevent all or even most of the avengers from avenging the death of their relatives...Therefore, what did the Torah do? It left the avenger the right to avenge the killing of his kin but designated places of refuge where the [unintentional] killer could seek protection and in which the avenger is unable to kill him"

(6) Rabbi Yose bar Yehuda says: At the outset, both neglectful and purposeful arrive at the city of refuge. The court sends for them and takes him from there. One who is to be killed by the court, is executed, and the one who is to be exiled, they return him back to his place, as it says, "The community will return him to his city of refuge."(Numbers 35:25) (The death of) one who is annointed with oil (the high priest) and one who has additional clothes (a step in becoming the high priest) and one who used to be anointed, return the killer (from the city of refuge to his city of origin). Rabbi Yehudah says: even one who is annointed for the purposes of war returns the killer. Therefore, the mothers of priests provided food and clothes (to the residents of cities of refuge), so they would not pray for their sons to die. If the high priest died after his judgment was renderd, he is not exiled. If the high priest died before his judgment was rendered and they appointed a new one and after that his judgment was rendered, he is returned [home] with the death of the second.

(8) Similarly, a killer who was exiled to his city of refuge and the people of that city want to honor him, he should say to them, "I am a killer." If they say "Nevertheless", he should accept it from them, as it says, "This is the matter [words] of the killer." (Deuteronomy 19:4) They would pay rent to the Levites, these are the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Meir says: they do not pay them rent. (When he returns to his city of origin) he returns to the status [authoity] that he had been, these are the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: he would not return to the status that he had been.

§ Rabbi Elazar says: An unintentional murderer is not admitted to a city of refuge whose majority consists of unintentional murderers, as it is stated with regard to an unintentional murderer who fled to a city of refuge: “And he shall speak his matters in the ears of the elders of that city” (Joshua 20:4), indicating that there is some novel element in the matters that he seeks to convey to the elders of the town, but not when their matters are equal to his matters, as those elders made the same statements when they arrived at the city of refuge as unintentional murderers. And Rabbi Elazar says: An unintentional murderer is not admitted to a city in which there are no elders, as we require the fulfillment of the verse: “And he shall speak in the ears of the elders of the city” (Joshua 20:4), and there are none.

GEMARA: The mishna teaches: If after the unintentional murderer’s verdict was decided and he was sentenced to exile, the High Priest died, the unintentional murderer is not exiled. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? Abaye says: It is derived through an a fortiori inference: If one who was already exiled now emerges with the death of this High Priest, with regard to one who was not yet exiled, is it not right that he should not be exiled? The Gemara rejects this reasoning: And perhaps with regard to this one, who was already exiled, his sin was atoned for by his exile, and therefore the death of the High Priest facilitates his return, but that one, who was not yet exiled, no, his sin was not atoned for and the death of the High Priest should not prevent his exile. The Gemara rebuts: Is it his exile that atones for his sin? It is the death of the High Priest that atones for his sin, and the High Priest died. The mishna teaches: If it was before his verdict was decided that the High Priest died and they appointed another in his place, and thereafter his verdict was decided, he returns with the death of the second High Priest. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? Rav Kahana said that they are derived from a verse, as the verse states: “And he shall dwell there until the death of the High Priest, whom he anointed with the sacred oil” (Numbers 35:25). Now is it the unintentional murderer who anoints the High Priest? Rather, the reference is to that High Priest who was anointed during his days, after he committed the unintentional murder. The Gemara asks: Why is his return home dependent on the death of the second High Priest? Earlier (11a), the Gemara explained that the High Priest bears a share of the responsibility for unintentional murderers, as he should have pleaded for mercy for his generation and he did not do so. In this case, as the High Priest in question was appointed only after the murder transpired, what could he have done to prevent the unintentional murder? The Gemara answers: He should have pleaded for mercy that the verdict of the unintentional murderer would be decided by the court favorably, so that he would not be sentenced to exile, and he did not plead.

(9) All the cities of the Levites offer asylum, each one being a city of refuge, as it is written: "In addition to [the six cities of refuge assigned to the Levites] you shall give forty-two cities ; all the cities which you give to the Levites shall be forty-eight" (Numbers 35:6-7). The Torah regards them all alike in terms of refuge.