Talmud zu Bamidbar 35:25

MISHNAH: If they sinned before being appointed; when afterwards they were appointed, they remain commoners^1,Since at the moment of the sin they became obligated for the sacrifices, a later change of status has no influence. The difference between ecclesiastical and political offices will become clear in Mishnah 2.⁷For the purposes of this sacrifice.. Rebbi Simeon says, if it became known to them before they were appointed, they are obligated; if after they were appointed they are not liable. Who is the Prince? This is the king, as it is said⁸Lev. 4:22., if he transgressed one of the commandments of the Eternal, his God; a Prince who has none above him but the Eternal, his God. And who is the Anointed? This is one anointed with the anointing oil, not one clothed in multiple garb⁹Making the anointing oil was commanded personally to Moses (Ex.30:25). All High Priests up to the time of king Josiah were anointed with it. Since that time, the oil was no longer available; it cannot be reconstituted. The later High Priests were inducted into their office by investiture with the High Priest’s garments..
The only difference between the priest anointed with the anointing oil and the one clothed in multiple garb is the bull brought for all commandments¹⁰The rules about the High Priest’s purification sacrifice explained in Chapter 2 became obsolete with the destruction of the First Temple and could be restored to validity only if a dig on the Temple Mount would recover the flask containing the original oil. The High Priests of the Second Temple had the status of commoners in this respect.. And the only difference between an officiating High Priest and a deposed one is the bull of the Day of Atonement¹¹Which has to be acquired by the High Priest with his own money together with a goat (Lev. 16:3). and the tenth of an ephah¹²The personal daily offering of the High Priest, Lev. 6:12–16, of about 3.84 l of fine flour..
Both are equal in the office of the day of Atonement¹³If the acting High Priest becomes impure or otherwise incapacitated, a former High Priest can replace him without special dedication. No common priest can perform any of the prescribed acts of the Day of Atonement., commanded about the virgin¹⁴Lev. 21:13. This applies only if the High Priest marries while High Priest. If he married a widow while a common priest, he still may be elevated to High Priest., and prohibited for a widow¹⁵Lev. 21:14., and do not defile themselves for close relatives¹⁶Lev. 21:11., and may not let their hair grow¹⁷Lev. 21:10. or rend their garments¹⁸Lev. 21:10. These are forbidden as mourning rites., and let the homicide return¹⁹Num. 35:25 (where anointing is mentioned), 32 (where anointing is not mentioned)..

⁷⁷A parallel (except for the corrector’s additions) is found in the Babli, Zevaḥim88b, Arakhin 16a, in the name of R. Anani bar Sason. Rebbi Simon said, just as sacrifices atone, so the garments⁷⁸The High Priest’s. atone, shirt, trousers, turban, and vest. The shirt was atoning for [wearers of kilaim⁷⁹While most of the High Priest’s garments contained kilaim, only the shirt was worn directly on the body. It seems that the trident here interprets the argument at the start of kilaim 9:1 to mean that biblically on kilaim which gives immediate protection to the body is forbidden. There are those who want to say,]⁸⁰Corrector’s addition (from a different source, not in the parallel in the Babli.) for spillers of blood, as you are saying,⁸¹Gen. 37:31. they dipped the shirt in blood. The trousers were atoning for uncovering nakedness⁸²The technical term for incest and adultery., as you are saying⁸³Ex. 28:42., make for them linen trousers to cover the flesh⁸⁴“Flesh” as a limb always denotes the penis, the only boneless limb.of nakedness. The turban was atoning for haughtiness, as you are saying,⁸⁵Lev. 8:9. This is a pun on the expression “thick of head” for “haughty”. he put the turban on his head. The belt was atoning for [thieves; but some are saying, for]⁸⁰Corrector’s addition (from a different source, not in the parallel in the Babli.) the crooked ones. Rebbi Levi said, it was 32 cubits and he wound it around on both sides. The breast plate was atoning for those who bend the law, as you are saying⁸⁶Ex. 28.15., you shall make a breast-plate of judgment. The vest was atoning for idol worshippers, as you are saying⁸⁷Hos.3:5., without vest and household-gods. The coat. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Jonathan of Bet-Guvrin: For two things there was no atonement⁸⁸They do qualify for any obligatory sacrifice. but the Torah established atonement for them. These are those: one who spreads slander, and the involuntary homicide. For him who spreads slander there was no atonement, but the Torah fixed atonement for them, the bells of the coat: it shall be on Aaron in service, and its sound be heard⁸⁹Ex. 28:35.. The sound may come to atone for the sound. For the involuntary manslaughter there was no atonement but the Torah established atonement for them, the death of the High Priest⁹⁰Num. 35:25.. He shall dwell there until the High Priest’s death

MISHNAH: Where are they exiled to? To the cities of refuge. To the three in Transjordan and the three in the Land of Canaan, as it is said⁴⁶Num. 35:14.: Three cities you shall designate in Transjordan, etc. As long as those in the Land of Israel had not been selected⁴⁷Jos. 20:7. Sifry Num. 160., those in Transjordan were not receiving, as it is said⁴⁸Num. 35:13., there shall be six cities of refuge, not until all six were receiving together⁴⁹Giving asylum to the involuntary homicide..
Roads were maintained from one to the other, as it is said⁵⁰Deut. 19:3.: Maintain the road for yourselves, and divide the domain of your Land into three parts⁵¹Divide both the Land of Israel and Transjordan into three Voronoi domains each so that the nearest city of refuge always was indicated on the sign posts.. One sends with them⁵²The homicide. two scholars lest he⁵³The avenger of the blood. kill him⁵²The homicide. on the road, to argue with him. Rebbi Meïr says, he⁵³The avenger of the blood. may argue for himself as it is said⁵⁴Deut. 19:4., this is the word of the homicide.
Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, at the start both the involuntary and the voluntary [homicide] go to the city of refuge; the court sends and brings them back from there. If one is found guilty by a death sentence, they execute him. If he is found not guilty in a capital case, he is freed. If he is found guilty to be exiled they return him to his place as it is said⁵⁵Num. 35:25., the community shall return him to his city of refuge. Not only⁵⁶The homicide may return to his home town upon the death of the High Priest (Num. 35:28). a [High Priest] anointed with the anointing oil⁵⁷A High Priest of the period of Judges or Kings, anointed from the vial prepared by Moses (Ex. 30:22–33)., but also one wearing the many vestments⁵⁸A High Priest of Second Temple times, wearing an imitation of the High Priest’s robes., and one deposed from his office⁵⁹A High Priest of Herodian times or later, when High Priests usually were appointed annually.. Rebbi Jehudah says, also the one anointed for war⁶⁰To exhort the army, Deut. 20:2. returns the homicide. Therefore, the mothers of the [High] Priests support them with food and clothing, so they should not pray for the death of their sons.
If sentence had been passed when the High Priest died, he is not exiled. If sentence had not yet been passed when the High Priest died, and sentence was passed after a successor had been appointed, he returns after the death of the second.
If sentence was passed when there was no High Priest, or one who killed a High Priest, or a High Priest who killed, can never leave from there. He⁵²The homicide. cannot leave from there, neither for a testimony of obligation,⁶¹A religious act, neither civil nor criminal; e. g., to testify to the appearance of the New Moon. nor a testimony in a civil suit, nor a testimony in a criminal suit, not even if Israel needs him like Joab ben Ṣeruya⁶²David’s general., he cannot ever leave from there, as it is said there⁵⁵Num. 35:25.. There shall be his dwelling, there he shall die, there he shall be buried.
Just as the city grants asylum, so does its domain grant asylum⁶³Every city of refuge also is a Levitic city (Num. 35:6). Each Levitic city was surrounded by a greenbelt of 2’000 cubits, having the same status as the city itself (Lev. 35:4–5; Sotah 5:4 Notes 107–111.) The avenger of the blood has no right to pursue the homicide into the city’s domain.. If a murderer left the domain and was found by the avenger of the blood, Rebbi Yose the Galilean says, it is the obligation of the avenger of the blood and the right of everybody⁶⁴To kill the homicide who left the city of refuge (in the Babli: intentionally).. Rebbi Aqiba says, it is the right of the avenger of the blood and nobody would be liable because of him.
If a tree stands inside the domain but its crown is outside the domain, or the tree stands outside the domain but its crown is inside the domain, everything follows the crown⁶⁵If most of the crown is outside (inside), the entire tree is considered outside (inside). In the Babli, the crown is only taken as an extension of the tree.. If somebody killed in one of these cities, he is exiled from quarter to quarter; but a Levite⁶⁶Whose city it is. Only a Levite can be a permanent resident of a city of refuge. who killed is exiled from one city to another.
Similarly⁶⁷This makes no sense here; it is copied from the identical Mishnah Ševiˋit 10:8., a homicide exiled to a city of refuge whom the citizens of the town wanted to honor, should say to them, I am a homicide. If they tell him, anyway, he should accept, for it is said⁵⁴Deut. 19:4., this is the word of a homicide.

Rebbi Abbahu said, but he returns upon the death of the third¹³⁷In G: “the second.” This reading has to be rejected since it is that of Mishnah 10. It rather seems to refer to Mishnah 11, about one who killed a High Priest, or a homicidal High Priest.. Rebbi Abbahu said, if they need it¹³⁸In G: If they (the High Court or the government) need him (the homicide.), they send and bring him from there. Rebbi Yose said, our Mishnah does not say so, but “even if Israel needs him like Joab ben Ṣeruya⁶²David’s general., he cannot ever leave from there, as it is said there⁵⁵Num. 35:25.. There shall be his dwelling, etc.”

¹⁷³A slightly changed parallel is in Ševuˋot 4:1. From where following Rebbi Ismael? Rebbi Ismael stated: The congregation shall judge¹⁷⁴Num. 35:24, about the trial of the homicide who fled to a city of asylum. R Ismael objects to R. Aqiba’s inferences from additional את ,ו etc. and insists that any interpretations of verses conform to the plain sense of the verse within the purview of his hermeneutical rules.; the congregation shall save¹⁷⁵Num. 35:25.. The congregation be neither relatives of the murderer nor relatives of the murdered. Rebbi Yose said, otherwise you would say that the court is engaged in vendetta¹⁷⁶This gives the missing argument in R. Ismael’s statement.. This implies that the judges may not be related to the accused. And from where that the witnesses may not be related to the accused? The Torah said, kill on the testimony of witnesses, kill on the sentence of judges. Since judges may not be related to the accused, neither may witnesses be related to the accused. From where that witnesses may not be relatives of one another¹⁷¹Deut. 24:16 is indeterminate enough to include both testimony and sentence by relatives.? Think of it, if they be found perjured, would they not be killed by their testimony¹⁷⁰Cf. Gittin 9:8, Note 128. Formal perjury, “plotting”, is testimony which is impossible, i. e., where it was proven that the witnesses were not at the place about which they testify at the time they assert to have seen the object of their testimony. If only one witness was perjured, there is only one valid witness and his testimony is worthless by biblical standards; for worthless testimony there can be no biblical punishment. Therefore, if the two perjured witnesses were related, each would be convicted by his relatives’ testimony; this is forbidden by Deut. 24:16. But testimony which would not expose the witnesses to the penalty of perjury is worthless. The Babli, 28a, points out that this argument also eliminates a single relative among the witnesses.?