web analytics
August 31, 2015 / 16 Elul, 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
Seder at the White House. The one without the kippa is President Obama.
Obama Cashes in on Separating Israel from American Jews’ Concerns
Latest Judaism Stories
Torat-Hakehillah-logo-NEW

The common translation of the opening words of this week’s parsha, Ki Seitzei, is: “When you go out to war against your enemy.” Actually the text reads “al oyvecha” upon your enemy. The Torah is saying that when Israel goes out to war, they will be over and above their enemy. The reason why Bnei […]

Rabbi Avi Weiss

The love between Gd & Israel is deeper than marriage; beyond the infinite love of parent for child

Q-A-Klass-logo

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)

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

Since giving the machatzis hashekel will not change his financial situation, he is obligated to do so even though it is more than a fifth of his income.

Today, few people fast during the Days of Selichot, but the custom is to rise early to recite Selichot.

Each month is associated with a particular tribe. The month of Elul is matched up with Gad. What makes Gad unique?

Sanctions and indictment of the Jew, holding him to a higher standard, is as common and misplaced as ever.

To allow for free will, there are times when Hashem will allow a person the “opportunity to be the messenger.”

“There is a mitzvah to pay the worker on that day,” answered Mr. Lerner.

Be happy. Be grateful. God knows what he is doing. It is all happening for a reason.

We get so busy living our lives, handling our day-to-day little crises that we forget to go that one step deeper and appreciate our lives.

The promise for long life only comes from 2 commandments; What’s the connection between them?

Mighty Amalek deliberately attacked enemy’s weakest members, despicable even by ancient standards

If we parents fail to honor responsibilities then society’s children will pay the price for our sins

Consider how our Heavenly Father feels when He sees His children adopting all other parents but Him

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

Since giving the machatzis hashekel will not change his financial situation, he is obligated to do so even though it is more than a fifth of his income.

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

We can suggest that since Hashem Himself appointed Dovid there is no question. The rules are only in place for when we must chose a king ourselves.

Perhaps a careful reading of the pesukim in the parsha will shed light on this dilemma.

The second parshah of Shema is referring to keeping the rest of the mitzvos, and there the Torah does not require that one spend all of his money in order to perform the mitzvos.

Why would Moshe Rabbeinu have thought that the vow that disallowed him to enter Eretz Yisrael was annulled simply because he was allowed to conquer and enter the land of Sichon and Og?

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.

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.

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

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: