The ancient texts of Judaism grapple with these questions in profound ways, and today we're going to dive into a fascinating passage from the Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 787 that explores the concept of the "redeemer of blood."
The passage begins by asking a fundamental question: why the term "redeemer of blood"? It all hinges on the verse, "If the avenger of blood finds him, he may kill him" (Numbers 35:27). At first glance, this seems to grant the avenger, the go'el hadam, free rein to execute the killer. But the Yalkut Shimoni immediately throws in a twist. It points out that the Torah also states "until they stand before the congregation" (Numbers 35:12), implying a need for a legal process. So, which is it? Instant revenge or due process?
The text presents a compelling hypothetical. Imagine someone pursuing another with murderous intent. According to the Yalkut Shimoni, even if the pursuer is warned that they are part of the covenant community and reminded of the Torah's prohibition against shedding blood (Genesis 9:6), someone might argue, "He’s still a murderer! Let him die before he kills!" In this extreme case, could someone intervene and kill the pursuer to save the intended victim? The answer, according to this passage, is yes. The same logic applies to someone pursuing a woman to rape her, even if they are reminded of the Torah's condemnation of adultery (Leviticus 20:10). You can kill him to save the life of the intended victim. A person can sacrifice their own life.
But here's the critical nuance: one might think that you can kill the pursuer immediately! Whether it's for murder or adultery. That's where the verse "And the murderer shall not die until they stand before the congregation" (Numbers 35:12) comes in. It throws a wrench in the idea of immediate, vigilante justice.
A Baraita (an early rabbinic teaching not included in the Mishnah) is cited, stating that executing the murderer is a mitzvah, a commandment, in the hand of the redeemer of blood. But Rabbi Yossi HaGelili adds a crucial condition: if there is no redeemer of blood, no family member seeking justice, then no one has the authority to execute the murderer. Rabbi Akiva vehemently disagrees. He argues that the authority lies with the redeemer of blood, but everyone is obligated to act.
So, what's the basis for Rabbi Yossi HaGelili's opinion? The Yalkut Shimoni asks. Isn't it written, "If a man commits murder" (Numbers 35:16)? And for whom is Rabbi Akiva writing? Rav Zutra bar Tovia, citing Rav, offers an explanation: It refers to a murderer who fled outside the designated boundary (a city of refuge) and was killed by the redeemer of blood. In this case, the murderer is essentially executed for his own transgression of leaving the city of refuge. But the text notes that this explanation doesn't align with either Rabbi Yossi HaGelili or Rabbi Akiva's viewpoints.
Rabbi Eliezer offers a different interpretation of "until they stand before the congregation." He explains that without this phrase, one might assume the redeemer of blood could kill the murderer immediately, based on the verse, "And the redeemer of blood shall kill the murderer; when he meets him, he shall kill him" (Numbers 35:19). Thus, the phrase "until they stand before the congregation" is necessary to ensure due process. Intriguingly, the text points out that Rabbi Yossi HaGelili and Rabbi Akiva both derive the same interpretation from the phrase "until they stand."
Finally, the passage concludes with a broader teaching: How do we know that the Sanhedrin, the ancient Jewish court, can still judge and impose the death penalty even when a person isn't immediately liable? The answer, again, lies in the phrase "until they stand before the congregation."
What does all this mean for us today? This passage from the Yalkut Shimoni highlights the tension between the impulse for immediate justice and the need for a fair and impartial legal system. It reminds us that even in cases of extreme violence, the Torah prioritizes due process and the rule of law. It urges us to grapple with the complexities of justice, revenge, and the sanctity of human life. It's a reminder that justice isn't always simple, and that true justice requires careful consideration, thoughtful deliberation, and a commitment to upholding the principles of fairness and equity for all.