IR MIKLAT

(כה) וְהִצִּ֨ילוּ הָעֵדָ֜ה אֶת־הָרֹצֵ֗חַ מִיַּד֮ גֹּאֵ֣ל הַדָּם֒ וְהֵשִׁ֤יבוּ אֹתוֹ֙ הָֽעֵדָ֔ה אֶל־עִ֥יר מִקְלָט֖וֹ אֲשֶׁר־נָ֣ס שָׁ֑מָּה וְיָ֣שַׁב בָּ֗הּ עַד־מוֹת֙ הַכֹּהֵ֣ן הַגָּדֹ֔ל אֲשֶׁר־מָשַׁ֥ח אֹת֖וֹ בְּשֶׁ֥מֶן הַקֹּֽדֶשׁ׃

Numbers 35:25

(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.

5. How come the man slayer should have remained and abided there, in that land, until the death of the high priest? - This is a somewhat arbitrary and irrelevant direction, and besides, the priest could have passed away just a week after the man slayer’s arrival in his territory. What would occur in that scenario? Would comparable regulations and privileges for both individuals still be put into effect? Also, who indeed was anointed with the sacred oil, as in the context this is not clarified?

Composed in Middle-Age France (1000 CE). Commentary on the Tanakh written by Shlomo Yitzchaki - today, generally referred to by the acronym Rashi. Rashi was a medieval French rabbi, and he lived in Troyes, France (1040-1105). Acclaimed for his ability to bestow the basic meaning of the text in a concise and lucid fashion, Rashi appeals to both learned scholars and beginner students, and his works remain a centerpiece of contemporary Jewish study. His comprehensive commentary is an essential explanation of the Tanakh and resides in a place of honor on the page of almost all editions of the Tanakh. Over 300 supercommentaries have been written to further explain Rashi’s comments on the Torah, analyzing his choice of language and citations, penned by several of the greatest names in Rabbinic literature. While quoting many Midrashim and Talmudic passages, Rashi, in his commentary, states that his purpose is to present the pshat (contextual meaning) of the text.

רש"י על במדבר ל״ה:כ״ה:א׳

עד מות הכהן הגדול. שֶׁהוּא בָא לְהַשְׁרוֹת שְׁכִינָה בְיִשְׂרָאֵל וּלְהַאֲרִיךְ יְמֵיהֶם, וְהָרוֹצֵחַ בָּא לְסַלֵּק אֶת הַשְּׁכִינָה מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל וּמְקַצֵּר אֶת יְמֵי הַחַיִּים, אֵינוֹ כְדַאי שֶׁיְּהֵא לִפְנֵי כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל (ספרי); דָּבָר אַחֵר — לְפִי שֶׁהָיָה לוֹ לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל לְהִתְפַּלֵּל שֶׁלֹּא תֶאֱרַע תַּקָּלָה זוֹ לְיִשְׂרָאֵל בְּחַיָּיו (עי' מכות י"א):

Rashi on Numbers 35:25:1

עד מות הכהן הגדול [HE SHALL ABIDE IN IT] UNTIL THE DEATH OF THE HIGH PRIEST — because he serves to cause the Shechinah to dwell in Israel and thereby prolong their days, whilst the murderer serves to make the Shechinah depart from Israel and thereby shortens the days of the living. He is therefore not worthy that he should stand before a High Priest (that he should be anywhere near a High Priest) (Sifrei Bamidbar 160:9). Another explanation why he had to remain there until the High Priest’s death: Because the High Priest should have prayed that this misfortune might never happen in Israel in his days (cf. Makkot 11a).

רש"י על במדבר ל״ה:כ״ה:ב׳

אשר משח אותו בשמן הקדש. לְפִי פְשׁוּטוֹ מִן הַמִּקְרָאוֹת הַקְּצָרִים הוּא, שֶׁלֹּא פֵּרֵשׁ מִי מְשָׁחוֹ, אֶלָּא כְּמוֹ אֲשֶׁר מְשָׁחוֹ הַמּוֹשֵׁחַ אוֹתוֹ בְּשֶׁמֶן הַקֹּדֶשׁ; וְרַבּוֹתֵינוּ דְרָשׁוּהוּ בְמַסֶּכֶת מַכּוֹת (שם) לִרְאָיַת דָּבָר, לְלַמֵּד שֶׁאִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִגְמַר דִּינוֹ מֵת הַכֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל וּמִנּוּ אַחֵר תַּחְתָּיו, וּלְאַחַר מִכָּאן נִגְמַר דִּינוֹ, חוֹזֵר בְּמִיתָתוֹ שֶׁל שֵׁנִי, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר אשר משח אתו, וְכִי הוּא מוֹשְׁחוֹ לַכֹּהֵן אוֹ הַכֹּהֵן מָשַׁח אוֹתוֹ? אֶלָּא לְהָבִיא אֶת הַנִּמְשָׁח בְּיָמָיו שֶׁמַּחֲזִירוֹ בְּמִיתָתוֹ:

Rashi on Numbers 35:25:2

אשר משח אתו בשמן הקדש WHO WAS ANOINTED WITH THE HOLY OIL — According to its plain sense, this is one of the elliptical sentences — for it does not expressly mention who anointed him, but it is the same as אשר משחו המושח בשמן המשחה “… the High Priest whom he who carried out the anointing had anointed with the holy oil”. — Our Rabbis, however, expounded it in Treatise Makkot 11b as a proof for a law: that it intends to teach that if, before the sentence on him has been passed that he should go into a city of refuge, the High Priest died and they appointed another in his stead, and afterward his case was finished, he returns home through the death of the second, because it is said, אשר משח אתו. But did he anoint the priest or did the priest anoint him? for the words may literally mean either: “until the death of the High Priest whom he (the murderer) had anointed” or “until the death of the High Priest who has anointed him (the murderer)” — but the words are used to include the case of the High Priest who was anointed in his days (and whom, as it were he had anointed), viz., that he (such a High Priest) causes him to return home through his death.

Ovadiah ben Ya’akov Seforno was an Italian rabbi, Biblical commentator, philosopher, halachic authority, and physician who wrote commentaries on a considerable portion of the Tanach. After an early period of wandering, he settled in Bologna, where he founded a yeshiva. Sforno was held in high regard by his contemporaries, Maharam Padua and Maharik Kolon, and is also quoted in responsa of modern authorities who consulted him on issues of Halacha. Seforno was admired for his wide knowledge by Henry II, King of France, to whom he sent a Latin translation he prepared of his philosophical work, Or Amim.

ספורנו על במדבר ל״ה:כ״ה:א׳

(א) עד מות הכהן הגדול כבר באר שהגלות היא על השוגג ובהיות מיני השגגות בלתי שוות כי מהם קרוכות לאונס ומהן קרובות אל המזיד נתן לגלות זמן בלתי שוה בכל השוגגים כי מהם שתהיה שגגתו מעט קודם מיתת הכהן ומהן שימות הרוצח בגלות קודם שימות הכהן וזה במשפט האל יתברך היודע ועד שיענוש את השוגג כפי מדרגת שגגתו כאמרו והאלהים אנה לידו:

Sforno on Numbers 35:25:1

(1) עד מות הכהן הגדול, the Torah had already made clear that exile is a penalty applicable only to inadvertently committed killing. Seeing that there are different degrees of inadvertent killing, i.e. some border on accidents totally beyond the control of the perpetrator, whereas others are acts of criminal negligence, though unintended, the Torah in determining the penalty does not give us a fixed time, but a variable. When the killing occurred only a short time before the death of the High Priest, the exile spends little time in the city of refuge; on the other hand, there may be times when the exile dies in the city of refuge before the High Priest officiating at the time of the “crime,” dies. These variables are taken into account by G’d Who alone is in possession of all the facts, i.e. the degree of negligence which caused this inadvertent killing. The important reference to G’d’s involvement and calculations in all this is found in Exodus 21,13 והאלוקים אנה לידו, “G’d had caused, directed his hand,” (that of the inadvertent killer.)

Chizkiah ben Manoach lived in the thirteenth century, probably in France. The details of his biography are unknown. He is the author of "Chizkuni", a popular commentary on the Torah, which is actually a compilation of insights culled from the Midrashim, as well as the writings of twenty Rishonim, including Rashi, Rashbam and Ibn Ezra. However, Chizkuni does not name any of his sources (other than Rashi), as he felt that one should focus on the message rather than the messenger.

חזקוני, במדבר ל״ה:כ״ה:א׳

(א) וישב בה עד מות הכהן הגדל שלא יהיו העולם מרננין על הכהן הגדול כשיראו הרוצח יוצא חוץ לעיר מקלטו ואומרים ראיתם זה שהרג את הנפש חנם יוצא ונכנס עם בני אדם ואין הכהן עושה בו נקמה והדבר מוטל עליו לעשות כדכתיב והאיש אשר יעשה בזדון לבלתי שמוע אל הכהן וגו׳‎ אבל הכהן שקם אחריו אין לרנן עליו ממה שלא נעשה בימיו.

Chizkuni, Numbers 35:25:1

(1) וישב בה עד מות הכהן הגדול, “and he has to dwell there until the death of the High Priest.” The reason is so that people at large will not accuse the High Priest as not having fulfilled his task of seeing to it that murder does not go unpunished (Deuteronomy 17,12). They would not be able to blame the new high Priest as the killing had not occurred while he was in office.

Bahya ben Asher ibn Halawa (Rabbeinu Behaye) was a Spanish rabbi, scholar and Biblical commentator. He was a pupil of Rashba, and modeled his exegetical style on that of Ramban. He was the first to build his Torah commentary on the four principles denoted by the letters PaRDeS, "Peshat, Remez, Drush, Sod," or 1) the plain text; 2) a deeper, more philosophical approach to the text; 3) a homiletical approach to the text; and 4) a mystical kabbalistic interpretation of the text. He also authored a work on ethics called "Kad HaKemach".

רבנו בחיי, במדבר ל״ה:כ״ה:א׳

וישב בה עד מות הכהן הגדול. דרשו רז"ל תלה הכתוב כפרתו של רוצח בשוגג במיתתו של כהן גדול, מפני שהוא מכפר על כל ישראל והיה לו לבקש רחמים על בני דורו ולא בקש, והרי עון הרציחה שאירע בימיו. ועוד שמיתתו של כהן גדול נחמה לקרובו של נרצח שלא יחם לבבו עוד ולא ידאגו עליו כל כך. ועוד דרשו בו לפי שהכהן הגדול הוא סבה להשרות שכינה בישראל להאריך ימיהם והרוצח סבה לסלק השכינה מישראל ולקצר את ימיהם ואינו כדאי שיעמוד לפני הכהן גדול.

Rabbeinu Bahya, Bamidbar 35:25:1

וישב בה עד מות הכהן הגדול, “and he will stay there until the death of the High Priest.” Our sages in Makkot 11 linked the duration of the stay of such an inadvertent killer to the death of the High Priest to the fact that the High Priest is the means of atonement for the people; it had been up to him to beseech G’d for mercy and he had failed to do so (adequately) or the tragedy of this killing would not have occurred. In this manner, he shares the guilt of any murder which occurs during his tenure of the office of High Priest.
Furthermore, the death of the High Priest serves as a measure of consolation and comfort for the relatives of the slain person who will no longer bear a grudge concerning that killing. The Sifri on our verse also writes that seeing that the High Priest is the cause for the Presence of the Shechinah to dwell in Israel, i.e. the cause that lengthens the lives of the people, the killer had caused the opposite i.e. he caused the Shechinah to depart [by reducing the average lifespan of the people through killing someone prematurely, Ed.]. It is not appropriate therefore that the killer present himself in the vicinity of the High Priest. Hence he had to remain confined to the city of refuge.

רבנו בחיי, במדבר ל״ה:כ״ה:ב׳

אשר משח אותו. המושח, ורבים כן חסרי הפועל. ודרשו רז"ל במסכת מכות, אשר משח אותו מלמד שאם עד שלא נגמר דינו מת כה"ג ומנו אחר תחתיו ולאחר מכאן נגמר דינו חוזר במיתתו של שני, שנאמר אשר משח אותו וכי הוא משחו לכהן גדול או הכהן משח אותו, אלא להביא את הנמשח בימיו שהוא מחזירו במיתתו.

Rabbeinu Bahya, Bamidbar 35:25:2

אשר משח אותו, “whom one had anointed.” The subject המושח is missing in this verse. It is one of the numerous verses where this occurs. Our sages in Makkot 11 derive from this missing word that if a High Priest died during the period that the court had to decide if the killer was an intentional killer or not, and a new High Priest was appointed prior to the end of the trial, the killer has to remain in the city of refuge until the death of the second High Priest. The reason that although the second High Priest was not even in office yet is still associated with this killer is that the new appointee should have prayed that the court would find the killer as innocent of wrongdoing instead of convicting him of manslaughter through negligence. [I believe the underlying linkage is that the killer confined in the city of refuge prays for the demise of the High Priest so that he can go home. Ed.]

Shmuel ben Meir (Rashbam) was a French Tosafist and Torah commentator. He was a son of Rashi's daughter, Yocheved, and older brother of the famous Tosafists, Isaac ben Meir (Rivam) and Jacob ben Meir (Rabbeinu Tam). His Torah commentary is concise, and hews strictly to the concept of the "peshat" or plain-sense meaning of the text, sometimes at the expense of received rabbinic traditions. He does not hesitate to argue with Rashi when he feels that his commentary strayed from the plain meaning of the verse. Rashbam also wrote a lengthier commentary on the Talmud, portions of which are printed in the Vilna Shas where no commentary of Rashi is available. Rashbam's opinions are also frequently mentioned in the Tosafot throughout Shas.

רשב"ם על במדבר ל״ה:כ״ה:א׳

עד מות הכהן הגדול - לפי פשוטו: כל ימי השופט הגדול דוגמת: אסיריו לא פתח ביתה.

Rashbam on Numbers 35:25:1

עד מות הכהן הגדול; according to the plain meaning of the text the word is used to describe the senior judge. The idea of “lifetime” imprisonment referring to the lifetime of the judge who imposed the sentence occurs in this sense also in Isaiah 14,17 אסיריו לא פתח ביתו, “he never released his prisoners.”

Shabbetai Bass was a Polish printer, publisher, bibliographer and author of Siftei Chakhamim, the most widely used supercommentary on Rashi's commentary to the Chumash and Megillot. His surname stems from his position as a bass singer in the choir of the Altneuschul of Prague, where he went to learn Torah after his parent's martyrdom. He settled in Amsterdam in 1679 after extensive travels, where he learned the printer's craft. He subsequently settled in Breslau where he set up a successful publishing/printing establishment. He was a ground-breaking bibliographer whose classification system was unprecedented at his time. In his old age, he was falsely charged with printing works considered blasphemous by Christian authorities. As a result, he had to spend time in prison before eventually getting acquitted. His last years were devoted to revising his bibliographical work, but he died before he could complete the revision.

שפתי חכמים, במדבר ל״ה:כ״ה:א׳

שלא תארע. ר"ל דלטעם ראשון קשה דכתיב עד מות הכהן גדול מגיד לך הכתוב שרוצח יאריך ימים אחר מות כהן הגדול, לפי שכ"ג ימות מהרה, ולמה ומפרש לפי שהיה כו'. ולפי' ד"א קשה אם הכהן גדול נענש שמת על שלא התפלל, למה ישוב הרוצח לביתו אחר מות הכ"ג, לכך פירש גם טעם ראשון:

Siftei Chakhamim, Numbers 35:25:1

That this [pitfall] not occur. According to the first interpretation, there is the difficulty that it is written, “Until the death of the Kohein Gadol.” The verse is saying that the murderer will live after the death of the Kohein Gadol since the Kohein Gadol would die sooner, but why would this be? Therefore, Rashi explains, “Because he should have…” However, according to the second interpretation, there is the difficulty that even if the Kohein Gadol was punished with death for not praying, why should the murderer return home after the death of the Kohein Gadol? Therefore, he also brings the first reason.

שפתי חכמים, במדבר ל״ה:כ״ה:ב׳

מי משחו. דקרא משמע דרוצח משח לכ"ג בשמן המשחה, לכך צ"ל דמן המקראות וכו':

Siftei Chakhamim, Numbers 35:25:2

Who anointed him. The verse implies that the murderer anointed the Kohein Gadol with the sacred oil, therefore one must say that this is one of the shortened passages . . .