In parshas Masei, the nation is given the boundaries of the land it is about to enter, and which it is charged to capture. Forty-two cities are then assigned to the Levites, and an additional six cities are given them to serve as cities of refuge, to save the inadvertent murderer from the avenger of blood. We have noted in the past the comment of the Talmud that there were an equal number of cities of refuge on each side of the Yarden River, even though there were only two and a half tribes on the eastern side of the river, and nine and a half tribes on the western side. The Talmud explains that there was an abundance of murderers on the eastern side, and that is why there had to be a proportionately larger number of cities of refuge there. The Maharal of Prague asks, aren't the cities of refuge set aside to serve the inadvertent? How, then, can an abundance of willful murderers have any repercussions for the number of cities of refuge needed? He answers that, because there was an abundance of willful murderers on the eastern side of the Yarden, life, in general, was not valued properly, and, in such an atmosphere inadvertent murders occurred more often, as well. This observation of the Maharal can, I believe, help us understand the verses preceding the section on the boundaries of the land and the purpose for bringing, at length, the laws of the cities of refuge after setting out the boundaries.

Before the nation is given the boundaries of the land, it is told, "If you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land before you, those of them whom you leave shall be as pins in your eyes and as thorns in your sides, and they shall harass you upon the land in which you dwell" (Bamidbar 33: 55). The nation, then, was commanded to drive the inhabitants of the land out. As the Talmud tells us, three options were given to these inhabitants. Either they could make peace and accept observance of the Noachide laws upon themselves, or they could leave the land and go to another country, or they could wage war. In most cases, the war option was chosen, and, as a result, the nation had to engage in a great deal of battle in the process of inhabiting the land. Such an atmosphere, if carried into everyday life once they settled into their designated homes, had the potential of having a negative effect on the atmosphere of the country in general, placing it in a militaristic mode, and lessening the value of life in general. Just as the Maharal taught us that an abundance of willful murders can lead to an increase in inadvertent murders, a militaristic mode could have the effect of viewing life as less important than it is. Perhaps for this reason the laws of the city of refuge are presented at length precisely at this juncture, in order to emphasize the value of life,and the safeguards that must be taken to preserve it.

Rabbi Yehudah Leib Ginzburg, in his commentary Yalkut Yehudah to parshas Shoftim, mentions the Talmudic comment regarding the address made to Jewish soldiers before waging war in the Holy Land. The kohein begins his address by saying, "Hear Yisroel (Shema Yisroel) you are today approaching battle against your enemies" (Devorim 20:3). Rashi, citing the Talmud (Sotah 42a), writes that the seemingly superfluous words, 'Shema Yisroel' - Hear O Yisroel - are an allusion to the prayer of Shema that is recited twice daily. The kohein, says the Talmud, by beginning his address with these words, is telling the soldiers that even if the only merit they have is that of the recitation of the Shema, they are worthy of having God save their lives during battle. Why should the Shema be effective specifically in regard to the battles that are described in parshas Shoftim? Rabbi Ginzburg explains by referring to Rashi's explanation of the first sentence of the Shema,"Hear Yisroel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one" (Devorim 6:4).This verse expresses our hope that God, who is at the moment recognized as the One God only by his people Yisroel, will, eventually, be recognized as such by all nations. Before embarking on a war in which many human beings will likely be killed, we must know that our motivation in doing so is not any form of hatred of humanity, but, on the contrary, by our love for humanity and hope that they will join us in our recognition of God's unity.

The nations we are commanded to wage war against transgressed the seven Noachide laws, thereby ignoring, the fundamental elements of morality, or, as my teacher Rav Ahron Soloveichik put it, the natural law that is embedded in every man's heart and mind. Before we wage war against them, we offer to make peace with them, on condition that they accept observance of the Noachide laws upon themselves. Although there is a dispute among the medieval commentators as to whether we send this peace offer even to members of the seven Canaanite nations, Rav Ahron Soloveichik maintained that all agree that if they offer to make peace on their own, we do accept their offer. Only if they insist on remaining in the land and at the same time persist in violating the seven laws do we go on to wage war against them. To allow the seven nations to remain in the land and continue with their immoral, inhumane practices would make our goal of bringing all the nations to a recognition of the One God virtually impossible to attain.The kohein, in addressing the soldiers, alludes to the Shema in order to remind them of the reason that they are about to wage war. Keeping this message in mind as they go out to fight will help them wage war with the proper intention, and thereby provide them with the merit they need to win the battle. Following our discussion of the placement of the section concerning the cities of refuge close to the section on driving the nations out of the land, we can add that keeping in mind the true motivation behind these wars when fighting them will prevent the creation of an atmosphere in which human life is not valued, such as the institution of the cities of refuge is meant to deal with.