Midrasz do Jozuego 20:78

(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."

(Numb. 19:3 cont.:) AND HE (Eleazar) SHALL SLAUGHTER IT (i.e., Edom-Rome) IN HIS PRESENCE (i.e., of the Holy One). Thus it is stated (in Is. 34:6): FOR THE LORD HAS A SACRIFICE IN BOZRAH,¹³⁴See Makk. 12a, according to which prince of Edom erred in seeking asylum in Bozrah instead of Bezer, which is listed in Deut. 4:43 and Josh. 20:8 as a city of refuge. A GREAT SLAUGHTER IN THE LAND OF EDOM (i.e., Rome). R. Berekhyah (interpreting the text differently) said: THE SLAUGHTER OF A GREAT ONE (i.e., Rome's guardian spirit) IN EDOM.

R. Shimon b. Yochai says: He was a fool, who did not know how to entice. He may be compared to a man who went to marry a woman and said to her: "Your father is a king, and I am a king, your father is wealthy and I am wealthy, your father feeds you flesh and fish and gives you old wine to drink, and I, etc." This is not enticement! How does one entice? He says to him: "Your father is a commoner and I am a king, your father is poor and I am rich, your father feeds you greens and beans, and I will feed you flesh and fish, your father leads you to the bath-house on foot, and I will take you there in a sedan-chair." Now if one (Nevuchadnezzar) who desired to speak in praise of his land did not speak demeaningly of Eretz Yisrael, how much more so should one who desires to speak in praise of Eretz Yisrael (take care not to be stinting in his praise!) And it is written (Joshua 20:7) "Kiryat Arba (lit., "the city of the four") — this is Chevron." (It was so called) because four kings contended over it, each one saying "Let it be called by my name!" Now does this not follow a fortiori, viz.: If four kings contended thus over the "refuse" of Eretz Yisrael, how much more so is Eretz Yisrael (itself) to be lauded!

(Bamidbar 35:13) "And the cities which you shall provide — six cities of refuge shall there be for you.": together with the first (three designated by Moses across the Jordan). You say, together with the first. But perhaps (the meaning is) exclusive of the first? (Ibid. 14) "The three cities shall you provide across the Jordan, and the three cities shall you provide in the land of Canaan" indicates "together with the first." And they are (Devarim 4:43) "Betzer in the desert in the land of the plain for (the tribes of) Reuven; Ramoth in Gilead for Gad; and Golan in Bashan for Menasheh. And, corresponding to them, three in the land of Canaan, viz. (Joshua 20:7) "And they set aside Kedesh in the Galil in the hill (country) of Naftali, and Shechem in the hill of Ephraim, and Kiryath Arba, which is Chevron, in the hill of Yehudah." We find, then, the two and a half tribes across the Jordan corresponding (in this respect) to the nine and a half tribes in the land of Canaan, most of the spillers of blood residing in Gilead. As it is written (Hoshea 6:8) "Gilead, the city of the workers of wrong, steeped in blood." (Bamidbar 35:13) "cities of refuge shall there be for you": What is the intent of this? I derive that they provide refuge only for those (who killed) in the land. Whence do I derive (the same for those) outside the land? From "shall there be for you" (— in any event). (Ibid. 15) "for the children of Israel": This tells me (that they provide refuge only) for (native) Israelites. Whence do I derive the same for proselytes and sojourners? From (Ibid.) "and for the proselyte and the sojourner in their midst." But perhaps (the meaning is that) just as a sojourning proselyte is exiled for (unwittingly killing) another, so, he is exiled for (unwittingly killing) an Israelite, and an Israelite is exiled for (unwittingly killing) him? — It is, therefore, written "for you." How so? If an Israelite killed him, he is exempt. If he killed an Israelite, he is killed. "shall these six cities be for refuge": What is the intent of this? From (14) "The three cities shall you provide across the Jordan," I might think that the first that is set aside provides refuge (immediately). It is, therefore, written "shall these six cities be for refuge," Scripture hereby apprising us that one (city) does not afford refuge until all have been set aside.