Asylum Cities - and Sactuary Cities

Matot- Masei

Num. 30:2 - 36:13

Précis: Matot begins with a speech to the heads (matot) of the tribes concerning the importance and sacredness of vows. The parasha then returns to the war with the Midianites, including the purification of the warriors and division of the booty. The tribes of Reuben, Gad and half of Manasseh express their desire to dwell east of the Jordon, and are permitted to do so, after promising to enter the Land to help the rest of the People defeat the Canaanites.

            The Book of Numbers ends with Masei. “These are the stages (masei) of the journey” which the Israelites made through the desert. In what amounts to a recapitulation, all of the stops along the way are identified. The Israelites are reminded to drive the Canaanites from the Land. Most of the parasha outlines the Israelites' entry to the Promised Land and sets out the first steps to be taken as they establish their national home, including the distribution of land among the tribes. The Levitical cities are described, as well as the cities of refuge. Just prior to their invasion of the land, the laws differentiating between murder and killing are repeated. The parasha ends with a summary of the commandments and ordinances. 

 Num. 35:9-10 “The Lord spoke further to Moses: ‘Speak to the Israelite people and say to them, ‘When you cross the Jordan into the land of Canaan, you shall provide yourselves with places to serve as cities of refuge to which a manslayer who has killed a person unintentionally may flee. The cities shall serve you as a refuge from the avenger so that the manslayer may be brought before a tribunal…”

            The concept of cities of refuge (“arei miklat”) was developed for a society in which revenge was the usual reaction to a murder, whether intentional or unintentional. Even today, there remain cultures in which physical revenge is used in reaction to a range of “insults” (from “improper” relations with a female relative to the killing of a relative). While the concept of a city of refuge was probably not a creation of the Israelites (there were similar concepts known in neighboring cultures of that era), it was a mark of a society in while the rule of law was to be supported.       

            The Hebrew word we translate here as “avenger” (go'el) literally means “redeemer,” as in one who redeems the honor of his clan. This shows just how important this concept of honor was in this society.

            The Torah rejects revenge and instead demands a system of tribunals to protect the accused from the vengeance of others. If found innocent of intentional killing, the accused would be permitted to live in the city, isolated from the community where he had committed the non-willful slaying.  For a civilization which had yet to invent prisons, this was an important development.

            Today, we have an on-going debate about the modern form of cities of refuge, more commonly referred to as “sanctuary cities.” The cause is certainly different (an escaped accused murderer on the one hand and a seeker of asylum on the other) but a common concept remains: the need for a system of law which recognize the need for justice. How we go about finding justice in the modern context is certainly an important is to consider. I personally am guided in this issue by our tradition which requires us to care for the orphan, the widow, and the stranger among us.

Facts and Perception

Sh’lach

Num. 13:1-15:41

Précis: Moses is ordered to “send out” (sh’lach l’cha) spies to examine the land. Representatives of each tribe go out, report on its bounty, but also report about its fearsome inhabitants. The People are frightened, and their “murmuring” turns into something close to panic. God tells Moses that He will destroy the People, but Moses intercedes; the People are sentenced to spend 40 years in the wilderness. The parasha then returns to matters concerning the Tabernacle, with a discussion of the offering for unintentional sins. Near its end, the parasha discusses the wearing of tzitzit, a paragraph which is part of the traditional recitation of the Sh’ma. This is the 27th of 54 parshiot, marking the half-way point in the yearly reading.

Num. 13:1-2 “And Adonai spoke to Moses, saying, ‘Send men and let them scout out the land of Canaan that I am giving to the children of Israel; send one man from each tribe, each a prince of his tribe.’”

This week’s reading tells us a lot about how our perceptions are influenced by our preconceptions.

            Moses send out 12 men, one from each tribe, to investigate the Land that they are about to enter. Ten come back with one story; the other two come back with a different account entirely. The all saw the same thing, yet some described fierce inhabitants and great dangers, including fearsome inhabitants who consider the Israelites as “grasshoppers.” The other two (Joshua and Caleb) report on the richness of the land and their assurance that they, with God’s help, they will surely succeed in their efforts.

            This is not a case of truth verses lies; it is a matter of perception. Each group reports the “truth” as they perceive it.

            It’s been said that one may argue about opinions, but we can’t argue about facts. At one time, this was the case in America. No longer. This is exactly what’s at play with American news outlets, be they newspapers of record or cable outlets or on-line sources of “facts.”  We have a President who has introduced the concept of “fake news” despite their truth.

            But even if the facts are facts, we, like the spies of our story, see them through our own preconceptions, through our “world view” if you will. How we understand the world depends not only on the facts, but upon our perception of those facts. Is it any wonder that it’s becoming increasingly difficult to communicate effectively with each other?