(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Makos 10



(a) In Parshas Masei, the Torah refers to another forty-two Arei Miklat. Abaye ...
1. ... differentiates between these towns and the initial six - inasmuch as they only save the murderer from the Go'el ha'Dam in the event that he entered there knowing that he was in an Ir Miklat, whereas the original six save him whether he is aware where he is or not.
2. ... reconciles the Beraisa, which lists Chevron as an Ir Miklat, with the Pasuk in Shoftim, which informs us that they gave Chevron to Kalev - by establishing the latter as the suburbs of Chevron and the villages surrounding it, but not the town itself.
(b) With regard to Arei Miklat, the Beraisa disqualifies ...
1. ... very small towns - because they will not be able to supply the murderers with food.
2. ... large cities - because they would encourage the Go'el ha'Dam to visit the city, avenge the murder of his relative, and escape in the crowds.
(c) The problem with Kedesh, which the Beraisa earlier listed as an Ir Miklat is - that the Pasuk in Yehoshua lists it as a fortified city, in which case it would have fallen under the category of a large city, which should not have been eligible as an Ir Miklat.

(d) Rav Yosef resolves the problem, by referring to two Kedesh's (both in Naftali), one a large city, the other, a neighboring village with the same name, just like the Saleikum and Akra de'Saleikum cited by Rav Ashi.

(a) Besides water, the Beraisa require an Ir Miklat to have - markets, surrounding villages and suburbs, and many residents.

(b) If a potential Ir Miklat did not have ...

1. ... a natural water supply - then they would import water.
2. ... surrounding villages - they would build them (to prevent Go'alei ha'Dam from gathering together en masse and attacking the town, to avenge the blood of their next of kin).
3. ... many residents - they would bring Kohanim, Levi'im and Yisre'elim to live there (see Aruch la'Ner).
(c) According to Rebbi Nechemyah, an Ir Miklat may not sell weapons or hunting implements (though the Chachamim disagree) - for fear that the Go'el ha'Dam (whom they would inspect for weapons, together with all guests, as he entered) might purchase a weapon with which to kill the murderer.

(d) The Chachamim concede that, besides placing traps - one is not permitted to make ropes, because both of these activities will attract the Go'el ha'Dam (see Aruch la'Ner).

(e) Rebbi Yitzchak cites the source for all these Halachos as - "ve'Nas el Achas he'Arim ha'Eil *va'Chai*" (obligating Beis-Din to do whatever is needed to enable the murderers to live).

(a) The Beraisa learns from the same Pasuk that if a Talmid killed be'Shogeg - his Rebbe must accompany him into Galus.

(b) Rebbi Ze'eira extrapolates from this - that one should only learn with 'decent' Talmidim.

(c) Rebbi Yochanan learns from the juxtaposition of the Pasuk "ve'Zos ha'Torah Asher Sam Moshe ... " to the Pasuk "es Betzer ba'Midbar" - that Divrei Torah are 'Koltin' too.

(d) Nevertheless (even assuming that 'Koltin' means from the Go'el ha'Dam) Rebbi Yochanan needs to rule that if a Rav kills be'Shogeg, the entire Yeshivah must go into Galus with him - because they only save the murderer from the Go'el ha'Dam as long as he is actually learning (but no longer have effect once he closes his Gemara).

(a) In addition, when Rebbi Yochanan described the words of Torah as 'Koltin', he might have meant - that they save a person from the Mal'ach ha'Maves (as we shall now see), but not from the Go'el ha'Dam (even whilst he is learning).

(b) The Malach ha'Maves' Sheli'ach was initially unable to touch Rav Chisda - because (like in the well-known incident with David Hamelech), he was sitting in Yeshivah and learning Torah without break.

(c) He finally managed to do his job - by climbing a cedar-tree just outside the Yeshivah and causing it to fall, momentarily distracting Rav Chisda from his learning.

(a) Rav Tanchum bar Chanila'i gives the reason for the Torah opening the list of the Ir ha'Nidachas with "Betzer" which belonged to the tribe of Reuven - because Reuven was the first of the brothers to go about saving Yosef from being killed.

(b) When Rebbi Simla'i explains the words "Az Yavdil Mosheh Shalosh Arim be'Eiver ha'Yarden *Mizrechah Shamesh*" to mean that Hashem said to Moshe ...

1. ... 'Hazrach Shemesh le'Rotzchim', meaning - that he should make the sun shine for the murderers, by ensuring that they lived in the Arei Miklat, as we explained earlier.
2. ... 'Hizrachta Shemesh le'Rotzchim', meaning - that he had already made the sun shine for the murderers, by designating the Arei Miklat.
(c) Rebbi Sima'i also connects the Pasuk in Koheles "Ohev Kesef Lo Yisba Kesef" with Moshe - who prepared the three Arei Miklat in Eiver ha'Yarden, even though he knew that they would not become functional until the three in Eretz Yisrael (where he was not destined to go) did, because he performed a Mitzvah that came to hand (irrespective of whether he was able to fulfill it or not).

(d) And he interprets the continuation of the Pasuk "u'Mi Ohev ba'Hamon Lo Tevu'ah" in the same way as Rebbi Elazar explained the Pasuk "Mi Yemalel Gevuros Hashem Yashmi'a Kol Tehilaso", which therefore means - that it is only someone who has a vast store of knowledge (Mikra, Mishnah, Halachos and Agados) who is able to Darshen in public.

(a) The Rabbanan (or Rabah bar Mari) explained the Pasuk to mean - that someone who loves Talmidei-Chachamim will have children who are Talmidei-Chachamim, as indeed happened to Rava B'rei de'Rabah, who himself loved Rabbanan, and who subsequently had sons who were Talmidei-Chachamim.

(b) According to Rav Ashi, the Pasuk means that it is someone who learns in public who will succeed in his learning. This explanation tallies with Rebbi b'Rebbi Chanina's interpretation of the Pasuk "Cherev el ha'Badim ve'No'alu", which he explains to mean - that a sword is at the necks of Talmidei-Chachamim who study alone.

(c) And he ...

1. ... explains "ve'Na'olu" (based on the Pasuk in Beha'aloscha ("Asher No'alnu") to mean - that they become foolish (by virtue of the fact that they learn without a Chavrusa to complement their lack of understanding).
2. ... applies the continuation of the latter Pasuk "va'Asher Chatanu" to our Sugya - inasmuch as they end by sinning (the inevitable result of a flawed Torah knowledge).
(a) Ravina interprets the Pasuk in the same way as Rav Ashi, only with regard to *teaching* Torah. He quotes Rebbi as having said how he learned more from his Chaverim than from his Rebbes, but most of all - he learned from his Talmidim ...

(b) ... because a person can sleep whilst being taught, whereas he must concentrate when learning with a Chavrusa. On the other hand, with a Chaver, it is a matter of fifty percent input, whereas Talmidim require a hundred percent input.

(c) According to Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi, the Pasuk ...

1. ... "Omdos Hayu Ragleinu, bi'She'arayich Yerushalayim", which was said by David to Hashem - means - that if we defeated our enemies in battle, it was due to the fact that in Yerushalayim, they sat and studied Torah.
2. ... "Samachti be'Omrim Li, Beis Hashem Neilech" was - David's reaction to people who said how they wished how that old man (himself) would die, and his son Shlomoh would ascend the throne and build the Beis-Hamikdash. It actually made him happy to hear (how people were impatient for the building of the Beis-Hamikdash).
(d) Hashem's response (based on another Pasuk there "Ki Tov Yom ba'Chatzerec ha me'Alef") was - that *He* preferred one day of David's Torah-learning than the thousand burnt-offerings that Shlomoh was destined to bring on the day that he inaugurated the Beis-Hamikdash.



(a) According to Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov in a Beraisa, they would mark interesections of roads leading to the Arei Miklat - with signposts that were marked 'Miklat'.

(b) Rav Kahana quotes the Pasuk in Shoftim - "Tachin Lecha ha'Derech" as the source for this.

(c) Rav Chama b'Rebbi Chanina Darshens from the Pasuk (in connection with the previous Halachah) "Tov ve'Yashar Hashem, al-Kein Yoreh Chata'im ba'Derech" - that if Hashem guides sinners along the right path, how much more so Tzadikim.

(d) Resh Lakish Darshens the Pasuk "va'Asher Lo Tzadah ve'ha'Elokim Inah le'Yado" - with reference to Reuven who murdered someone be'Meizid, and Shimon be'Shogeg, but in neither case were there witnesses. Hashem will guide them both to the same inn, where Shimon, who is descending a ladder, falls on Reuven, killing him. And this time, there are witnesses, and he has to run into Galus.

(e) All this is hinted in the Pasuk in Shmuel "Ka'asher Yomar Meshal ha'Kadmoni 'me'Resha'im Yeitzei Resha". The "Meshal ha'Kadmoni" is - none other than the Torah (which preceded the world [and Shmuel was referring to our Pasuk in Mishpatim]).

(a) Rav Huna learns from the Pesukim in Balak "Lo Seilech Imahem" ... "Kum Lech Itam" - that Hashem leads a person on the way that he wishes to go.

(b) And Yeshayah ha'Navi teaches the same lesson in the Pasuk "Ani Hashem Elokecha Melamedcha Leho'il, *Madrich'cha be'Derech Teilech*". Rav Huna interprets the Pasuk in Mishlei (in Kesuvim) "Im le'Leitzim Hu Yalitz, ve'la'Anavim Yiten Chein to mean - that if a person wants to mix with mockers, then Hashem leads him to that company; whereas if he wants to join those who are humble, Hashem will help him find favor with them, too.

(a) Rav Huna states that if a Go'el ha'Dam kills the murderer as he is running towards the Ir Miklat - he is Patur.

(b) And he explain that the Pasuk "ve'Lo Ein Mishpat Maves" - refers to the Go'el ha'Dam under those very circumstances.

(c) Based on the following phrase "Ki Lo Sonei Hu Lo" (which certainly pertains to the murderer) - the Beraisa ascribes "ve'Lo Ein Mishpat Maves" too, to the murderer, since most probably, both phrases refer to the same person.

(d) To resolve the Kashya on Rav Huna, we quote another Beraisa, where the Tana, based on the same Pesukim, maintains - that if "Ki Lo Sonei Hu Lo" pertains to the murderer, then "ve'Lo Ein Mishpat Maves" must pertain to the Go'el ha'Dam.

(a) We try to prove from our Mishnah, which speaks about two Talmidei-Chachamim accompanying the murderer to the Ir Miklat, to speak to the Go'el ha'Dam - that the Go'el ha'Dam must be Chayav should he kill the murderer (a Kashya on Rav Chisda). Otherwise, what would the Talmidei-Chachamim say to him?

(b) But we refute this proof however - by establishing their request (not as a warning, but) as a plea to deal with him mercifully, seeing as he only killed his relative be'Shogeg.

(c) Incidentally, the Rabbanan in the Beraisa counter Rebbi Meir's argument that the murderer can speak for himself - on the grounds that sometimes, Sheluchim can achieve what the person himself cannot.

(d) According to the Tana, the Talmidei-Chachamim would plead with the Go'el ha'Dam to have mercy on the murderer, because he was a Shogeg. This is not obvious at all - in light of Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah, whom we have already discussed, who says that initially, a murderer is obligated to run to an Ir Miklat irrespective of how or why he killed him.

12) The Pesukim "ve'Chi Yiheyeh Ish Sonei le'Re'eihu ve'Arav Alav ... ve'Shalchu Ziknei Iro ve'Lakchu Oso mi'Sham ... ", seem to support Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah's opinion. But Rebbi, who disagrees with Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah, interprets them - from the point of view of the murderer, who thinks that he can escape to an Ir Miklat even if he is a Meizid (though in fact, he cannot).


(a) Rebbi Elazar extrapolates ...
1. ... from the Pasuk (in connection with a murderer be'Shogeg) "ve'Amad Pesach Sha'ar ha'Ir, ve'Diber be'Oznei Ziknei ha'Ir ha'Hi es Devarav" - that once the majority of the town comprises murderers, it no longer tales in fresh murderers (because the Pasuk implies that the murderer is speaking to his superiors, and not to his equals).
2. ... from the word "Ziknei" - that a town that does not have Zekeinim cannot serve as an Ir Miklat.
(b) This is also the subject of a Machlokes between Rebbi Ami and Rebbi Asi. The one who renders a town an Ir Miklat even if it has no Zekeinim, explains "Ziknei" - to mean Lechatchilah (but Bedi'eved, it doesn't matter).

(c) Rebbi Ami and Rebbi Asi repeat their Machlokes in two other cases (where the Torah uses the word "Ziknei"). One of them is that of ben Sorer u'Moreh; the other - that of Eglah Arufah.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,