신명기 19:4의 인용 해설

וזה דבר השמטה, “this shall be the nature of the remission;” our sages in tractate Gittin, folio 37 state that this wording is the source of the rule that if a borrower comes to the lender in the sh’mittah year offering to pay back what he had borrowed, the lender has to decline by saying: “I remit the debt.” A similar rule applies to when a person guilty of having killed someone unintentionally comes to the gates of a city of refuge asking for entry he has to say: I have killed someone.” This too is derived from the wording: וזה דבר הרוצח, “this is the nature of the law concerning an unintentional killer;” (Compare Deuteronomy 19,4). The Jerusalem Talmud in tractate Makkot, chapter 2, halachah 6, adds that if someone had shown that he has complete mastery of one tract of the Talmud, and he is praised as if he had mastered two tractates, he is obliged to respond that he has mastered only a single tractate.

Er muss auswandern. Denn es heißt (Deut. 19,4): „Ohne Wissen“; dies ist ein zweiter beschränkender Ausdruck, der dem Blinden (der zwar nicht sieht, aber doch wissen kann) mit einschließt, nach der Regel, dass ein beschränkender Ausdruck, der auf einen andern beschränkenden Ausdruck folgt, das Gesetz erweitern will ( אין מיעיט אחר מיעוט אלא לרבות ).

And they delegate to him to disciples of the Sages [as escorts] in case anyone attempted to slay him on the way, and that they might speak to him. Rabbi Meir says: “He may [even] plead his cause himself, as it says, “And this is the word of the manslayer” (Deut. 19:4). In order to prevent the blood avenger from finding the manslayer on his way to the city of refuge the court would assign two disciples of the Sages to travel with him and plead with the blood avenger should he try and attack while on the way. Rabbi Meir’s statement can be read in two ways. He may be suggesting that not only should the disciples of the Sages plead his case, but he should plead himself. According to this interpretation, Rabbi Meir does not disagree with the previous opinion, but rather adds upon it. Alternatively, Rabbi Meir may disagree with the previous opinion. Rabbi Meir may believe that only the manslayer may plead his case, but not the disciples of the Sages. In either case the act of pleading is learned from the verse in Deuteronomy which states “the word of the manslayer”, understood by Rabbi Meir to hint that the manslayer should plead his own case.