According to the Torah, one who kills inadvertently, escapes to the cities of refuge (arei miklat) (Numbers 35:11).  What is the meaning of this law? 

The simplest approach is to view the cities of refuge laws as protective in nature.  Having taken life, there is fear for the killer's life.  Hence, the structure exists for a safe haven.

This idea is supported by the distinction made by the rabbis in the Talmud.  As summarized by Dr. J. H. Hertz, there exist three categories of this apparent accident: grave carelessness, contributory negligence and complete innocence.  In the last case, the killer need not escape to the cities of refuge as he would not be pursued by family members.  In the former case, it would not be enough to escape to the cities as a more severe penalty would be enacted.  Only in the case of contributory negligence are the cities of refuge necessary.  In such situations, these cities are necessary in order to protect the killer from those seeking revenge.

Another thought comes to mind.  Perhaps the cities of refuge can be viewed as punitive in nature.  For one who kills another with grave carelessness, the cities of refuge are not enough of a punishment.  For one who kills with complete innocence, the cities of refuge are too harsh a punishment.  Only in the case of contributory negligence, is the banishment to the cities of refuge an appropriate punishment.

Note the mysterious law surrounding the length of sentence in the cities of refuge.  The killer goes free only when the High Priest dies, a seemingly arbitrary amount of time.  Sforno argues that it is not arbitrary, but reflective of Divine justice.  In his words, "Since the cases of manslaughter may differ widely, some entirely removed from any foreseeable possibility, some close to carelessness, the time of banishment also differs widely....This is divine justice.  God, who alone knows, bears witness and dispenses justice as due to each inadvertent killer."  In other words, the length of penalty differs in each case.  Only God knows the deeper intention of each "inadvertent" killer.  Hence, the correlation with the death of another person.

One other thought.  Perhaps the cities of refuge serve as a place where the killer can experience a period of rehabilitation.  In the words of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, "the whole character that has been imprinted upon this retention in the city of asylum is expiation: to redeem himself from the burden of the guilt feeling which weighs heavily upon him." 

No wonder Rambam states that "if a student is being exiled to a city of asylum, his teacher is exiled with him."  (Rambam, Laws of Homicide 7:1)  With a teacher, one can always be led on a path of self reflection and regeneration. Consider our societal methods of criminal punishment.  As much we try, the system is far from perfect.  Perhaps it would be wise to glean from the lessons of the cities of refuge and apply the need for rehabilitation and growth to those in our contemporary prison system.  

Shabbat Shalom,

Rabbi Avi Weiss