web analytics
July 30, 2015 / 14 Av, 5775
At a Glance
Judaism
Sponsored Post


Home » Judaism » Parsha »

Arei Miklat

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

This column is dedicated to the refuah sheleimah of Shlomo Eliezer ben Chaya Sarah Elka.

In parshas Masei the Torah discusses the halachos regarding when one person accidentally kills another. The Torah says that a relative of the victim (goel hadam) may avenge the death of his relative by killing the murderer who acted accidentally. According to the Torah, the perpetrator must go to one of the arei miklat (city of refuge). While in the ir miklat the goel hadam may not kill the murderer who acted accidentally. If he does kill him while he was in the ir miklat, he will be liable for murder.

The Gemara in Makkos 11b draws from a pasuk in this week’s parshah,asher nas shamah, v’yashav bah – he should run there and dwell there,” that an accidental murderer must remain in the ir miklat forever; even if klal Yisrael needs him, he may not leave. The Mishnah says that even if he is someone like Yoav ben Tziruya, a general in the army, he may not leave the ir miklat to fight a battle for klal Yisrael.

The Acharonim are bothered by this halacha. They point out that pikuach nefesh is generally docheh (takes precedence) over all other mitzvos. Why then is the pikuach nefesh of all of klal Yisrael not docheh the mitzvah of remaining in the ir miklat?

The Ohr Somayach (Hilchos Rotzeach 7:8) suggests that the reason why the accidental murderer should not leave the ir miklat, even for the pikuach nefesh of all of klal Yisrael, is because as soon as he leaves the city the goel hadam may kill him. One is not obligated to risk his own life in order to save someone else’s life. Therefore the accidental murderer should not leave under any circumstance.

However, this answer only fits according to those who opine that one is not required to save another person when his action possibly puts his life in danger. The Hagaos Maimanis (Hilchos Rotzeach 1:14) quotes a Yerushalmi that says that one is required to save another person who is definitely in danger of losing his life, even if by doing so he is putting his own life at risk. The Beis Yosef (Choshen Mishpat 426) explains that since one person’s life is in certain danger, that fact precedes the possibility that another person’s life is in danger. According to this opinion, this question remains: Why can the accidental murderer not leave to save another person’s life? After all, it is not assured that he will be forfeiting his life by leaving the city. Thus, according to this opinion, he should be obligated to leave.

Others suggest that although it is not certain that the goel hadam will kill the accidental murderer if he leaves the ir miklat, nevertheless when he leaves he attains the status of a gavra kiteila (dead man). If someone else kills him, that person will not be liable for murder, for he killed someone who was already considered dead. A person is not required to place himself in a situation whereby he considered killing a gavra kiteila in order to save another person’s life.

The Cheshek Shlomo, in Makkos, asks another question on the halacha that an accidental murderer cannot leave the ir miklat under any circumstance. He says that the implication is that he may not leave, even to eat the Korban Pesach. If one does not eat the Korban Pesach he is liable for kareis. Why does the assei of eating the Korban Pesach, which has the punishment of kareis if not eaten, not doche the mitzvah of remaining in the ir miklat?

According to the Ohr Somayach that explains that the reason why the accidental murderer may not leave the ir miklat is because this action endangers his life, we can answer this question as well. There is a mitzvah of v’chai bahem v’lo she’yamus bahem (we should live by the mitzvos and not endanger our lives by performing the mitzvos). Since by leaving the ir miklat the accidental murderer will be endangering his life, he is not required to perform the mitzvah of eating from the Korban Pesach.

Perhaps we can extend this answer to explain the opinion that one must enter into a safek sakanas nefashos – which is certain danger – in order to save another person’s life. For this opinion only posited that one must enter a safek life-threatening situation in order to save another person’s life. It was not said that they do not consider a safek life-threatening situation to not indeed be safek life- threatening. Consequently, even the Yerushalmi would agree that one should not put himself into a safek life threatening situation in order to perform a mitzvah – even if the mitzvah has a punishment of kareis if not performed. Therefore, an accidental murderer would not leave the ir miklat – even to perform a mitzvah (such as eating the Korban Pesach) that has kareis attached to it.

About the Author: For questions or comments, e-mail RabbiRFuchs@gmail.com.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “Arei Miklat”

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
“Praised is the nation that understands the quavering sound of the shofar.” (Psalms 89:16).
Orthodox Rabbis to Lobby near Rosh HaShanah against Deal with Iran
Latest Judaism Stories
011-OT-Maps-Israel-Tribes

One must view the settlement of Israel in a positive light. Thinking otherwise is a grievous sin.

Vaetchanan

Reaching a stronger understanding of what Moses actually did to prevent him from entering the land

Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis

Anti-Zionism, today’s anti-Semitism, has gone viral, tragically supported globally & by many Jews

The 10 Statements main point was not content but the encounter between G-d & His nation, Israel

Before going in, I had told R’ Nachum all of the things we were doing in Philly, and how it was very important to receive a good bracha on behalf of our newest venture, a Russian Kollel.

Question: When a stranger approaches a congregant in shul asking for tzedakah, should the congregant verify that the person’s need is genuine? Furthermore, what constitutes tzedakah? Is a donation to a synagogue, yeshiva, or hospital considered tzedakah?

Zvi Kirschner
(Via E-Mail)

(JNi.media) Tisha B’Av (Heb: 9th of the month of Av) is a fast day according to rabbinic law and tradition, commemorating the destruction of the First Temple in 586 BCE by the army of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, and the destruction of the Second Temple in the year 70 CE by the Roman army led […]

Devarim often parallels the stories in Bereishit but in reverse & can be considered as a corrective

‘Older’ By A Month
‘…Until The Beginning Of Adar’
(Nedarim 63a)

We realize how much we miss something only after it’s gone.

Because the words of Torah gladden the heart, studying Torah is forbidden when Tisha B’Av is on a weekday, except for passages in Scripture that deal with the destruction of the Temple and other calamities.

On Super Bowl Sunday itself, life seems to stop. Over one hundred million people watch the game. About half of the households in the country show it in their living rooms and dens.

Moses begins Sefer Devarim reviewing much of the 40 years in the desert & why he can’t enter Israel

While they are definitely special occurrences, why are they cause for a new holiday?

Torah wasn’t given to be kept in Sinai; Brooklyn or Beverly Hills-It was meant to be kept in Israel!

More Articles from Rabbi Raphael Fuchs
Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

In addition to the restrictions of Tisha B’Av, there are several restrictions that one may not perform during the week that Tisha B’Av falls in.

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

We do not find that Pinchas was chastised for what he did; on the contrary he was greatly rewarded.

The Shulchan Aruch in the very first siman states that one should rise in the morning like a lion, implying that simply rising form bed requires strength of a lion, in line with the Midrash.

Tosafos answers that nevertheless the sprinkling is a part of his taharah process.

Performing ketores outside the Beis Hamikdash, and at the wrong time is an aveirah.

Ten of the twelve spies returned with a negative report, stating that this would be impossible.

The flavor of the mon was not artificial; the mon would now consist of the actual flavors from the desired food.

Tosafos suggests several answers as to how a minor can own an item, m’d’Oraisa.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/parsha/arei-miklat/2013/07/04/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: