Midras Yosua 21:12: Ein Yaakov (Glick Edition) & Yalkut Shimoni

(Fol. 9b) Our Rabbis were taught: Three cities did Moses separate on this side of the Jordan, and corresponding to them, Joshua separated in the land of Canaan, and they were right opposite one against the other, just as two rows in a vineyard. Namely (Josh. 20, 7) Hebron in Judah, opposite (Deut. 4, 43) Bezer in the wilderness; Shechem in the mountain of Ephraim, opposite Ramoth in Gilead; Kedesh in Galilea in the mountain of Naphthali, opposite Golan in Bashan. (Josh. 20, 7) And the three, i.e., it should be divided into three that there shall be the same distance from South Palestine to Hebron as from Hebron to Shechem; and from Hebron to Shechem as from the latter to Kedesh, and from Shechem to Kedesh as from the latter to North Palestine. How is it that three were needed on the other side of the Jordan, and only three for the whole land of Israel? Said Abaye: "In Gilead there were many murderers, (Fol. 10) as it is written (Hos. 6, 8) Gilead is a city of them that work iniquity, it is covered with footprints of blood." And R. Elazar explained the verse: "They followed up [their victims] to commit murder." Why were the cities on both sides of the Jordan far from the boundary, and the middle one near? Said Abaye: "Because Shechem was also full of murderers: as it is said (Ib., ib. 9) And as troops of robbers wait for a man, so doth the company of priests, they murder in the way toward Shechem." What is meant by the company of priests? Said R. Elazar: "They conjoined themselves to kill as the priests who would enjoin themselves to receive the heave-offerings from the barns." But were there not more cities of refuge? Behold there is (Num. 35, 6) And in addition to them shall ye give forty and two cities? Said Abaye: "The former protects the refugee in any instance, whether he is aware of that city being a place of refuge or not; while the latter accept him only when he is aware [of its protective power]." Was then the city of Hebron indeed a city of refuge? Does not the passage say (Jud. 1, 20) And they gave Hebron unto Kaleb as Moses ordered. Said Abaye: "It was only the suburb of it, as it is written (Josh. 21, 12) But the fields of the city, and the villages thereof, gave they to Caleb, the son of Jephunneh."

We are taught (Num. 26) It was divided only by lots. Except Joshua and Caleb, What does this mean? Shall we assume that they did not take any land at all? Is it possible? If, as said above, they took the shares that were not theirs, how much more ought they take their own? It means they did not take by lots, but by the decree of Heaven. Joshua, as it is written (Joshua 19, 50) By the order of the Lord did they give him the city which he had asked — Timnath Serah on the mountains of Ephraim. And Caleb — as it is written (Jud. 1, 20) And they gave Hebron unto Caleb as Moses has spoken. But was not Hebron one of the cities of refuge? Abaye said: "It refers to the suburbs and village surrounding the city, as it is written (Josh. 21) But the field of the city and its villages they gave to Caleb the son of Yephunah for his possession.

And the cities that you shall give: Including the first cities or excluding the first cities? It is derived from the phrase "and you shall give the cities" - which means you shall give the three cities, etc. What is the purpose of stating "and the cities, along with their pasturelands"? This teaches us where the cities of refuge are located - three on the east side of the Jordan River and three in the land of Canaan, as it is stated, "You shall give beyond the Jordan, etc." Until the three cities were chosen in the land of Canaan, the three cities on the east side of the Jordan did not accept the accidental manslayer, as it is stated, "Six cities of refuge shall you have." Only when all six cities were ready to accept, they functioned together. It is taught in a Baraita: Moses designated three cities on the east side of the Jordan River, and correspondingly, Joshua designated three cities in the land of Canaan. And they were aligned like two rows: Hebron in the territory of Judah corresponds to Bezer in the wilderness. Shechem in the hill country of Ephraim corresponds to Ramoth in Gilead. Kedesh in the hill country of Naphtali corresponds to Golan in Bashan. And the three cities should be arranged in a triangle, so that there is a direct line from the south of Hebron to Hebron, from Hebron to Shechem, and from Shechem to Kedesh, and from Kedesh to the north. On the east side of the Jordan, three cities, and in the land of Israel, three cities. Abaye said: In Gilead, murderers were common, as it is written: "Gilead, a city of workers of mischief, is stained with blood" (Hosea 6:8), indicating that they used to lie in wait to kill souls. And what about this matter? And what about that matter? From this angle and from that angle? Abaye said: In Shechem as well, murderers were common, as it is stated: "The company of priests shed blood on the way to Shechem" (Hosea 6:9), indicating that they used to join together to kill souls, just as these priests would join together to distribute the terumah in the granary. And furthermore, the verse states: "And you shall give them forty-two cities" (Numbers 35:7). Abaye said: These cities accept unintentional manslayers, whether they were aware of it or not, whereas those cities only accept them if they were aware. And Hebron is indeed a city of refuge, as the verse states: "They gave to Caleb Hebron" (Joshua 14:13). Abaye said: This is a separate matter, as it is written: "They gave the fields of the city and its villages to Caleb" (Joshua 21:12). And Kedesh is indeed a city of refuge, as the verse states: "Rekem and Kinneret, Kedesh" (Joshua 19:37). And it was taught in a Baraita: These cities are not made like small cities or large cities, but rather as medium-sized towns. Rav Yosef said: There are two Kedesh cities. Rav Ashi said: Such as Salka and Akra, which are Kedesh cities.