(The Mishnah taught a dispute between R. Yehuda and R. Meir about a blind person's obligation to go into exile.) They both expounded the same pasuk (Bamidbar 35:23), "and without seeing (his victim)" - R. Meir says that this includes a blind person; R. Yehuda says that it excludes a blind person.

R. Ba disagrees: Who is the tana (of our Mishnah) who says that a blind person does not go into exile? It is R. Yehuda who exempts a blind person from all of the mitzvos of the Torah, as the Mishnah (in Maseches Berachos) teaches - R. Yehuda says that whoever did not see the luminaries in his life cannot recite the Berachos of the Shema on behalf of others. We infer that if he did see, he may recite them. (R. Ba does not understand our Mishnah's dispute to be an isolated discussion. Rather, it is part of a general discussion as to whether blind people are liable in mitzvos.)

Question: The opinion of R. Yehuda seems to have switched...In the Beraisa, R. Yehuda said a blind person is exempt from exile and all other mitzvos; here, you said that he gives a blind person the ability to say the Berachos of Shema for others (since he is obligated in mitzvos)?

Answer (R. Chanina son of R. Hillel): When the Mishnah in Megillah taught that a person who has never seen the luminaries may not say the Berachos...but do you think that a person who happens to be presently in a dark place may not say the Berachos?! However, in terms of exile, "without seeing" excludes a blind person.

Question: How do the Rabbanan (who say that a blind person is exempt from exile just as he is exempt from all mitzvos) use the phrase "without seeing"? It includes one who killed at night in the requirement to go into exile.

(Mishnah): To where do they flee? To one of the (six) Cities of Refuge, three of which are in the Transjordan and three in the Land of Canaan, as the pasuk states (Bamidbar 35:14), "You shall provide the three cities in Transjordan...".

Until the three in the Canaan were chosen, the three in the Transjordan could not accept killers, as the pasuk states (Bamidbar 35:13), "(The cities that you provide) shall serve as six cities of refuge (for you)" - all six will (begin to) accept at the same time.

Beis Din must provide good access roads to the cities, as the pasuk states (Devarim 19:3), "Prepare the road for yourself and divide into three parts the boundary of your land".

They give him two Torah scholars to accompany him, lest the redeemer meet him on the way and kill him, and the Torah scholars can talk to the redeemer and appease him.

(R. Meir): The killer can speak on his own behalf, as the pasuk states (Devarim 19:4), "And this is the matter (literally: word) of the killer" - meaning that he may speak to them.

(R. Yosi bei R. Yehuda): At the beginning, whether a person killed accidently or intentionally, he must flee to the City of Refuge. Beis Din then send for him and bring him to them. One who is found guilty is given the death penalty and one who is not is acquitted. And one who is found liable to go into exile is taken back to the same city, as the pasuk states (Bamidbar 35:25), "and the congregation shall return him to the city of refuge".

Whether an anointed Kohen Gadol (during the 1st Beis HaMikdash period) or one who merely wore the vestments (during the 2nd Beis HaMikdash period, when they no longer had the anointing oil), or a Kohen Gadol who had retired from office, the death of any of these allows the killer to return home.

R. Yehuda: Even the Kohen Gadol anointed for war (who gave the soldiers the pep talk before they went out to battle) returns the killer when he dies. Therefore, the mothers of the Kohanim would supply food and clothing to the killers so that the killers would not pray for their sons to die.

If a killer was given his verdict and the Kohen Gadol then died, he does not go into exile.

If the Kohen Gadol died before the verdict was made and another Kohen Gadol was appointed and the verdict was then made, he returns home upon the death of the second Kohen Gadol.

If the verdict was made without there being a Kohen Gadol, or if a person killed the Kohen Gadol or if the Kohen Gadol killed, the killer can never leave the city (and return home).

A killer may not leave the city to testify for a mitzvah (such as for the New Moon), nor to testify in a monetary case, nor to testify in a capital case. And even if Yisrael needs him and even if he is the head of the army like Yoav ben Tzruyah, he may not leave, as the pasuk says (Bamidbar 35:25), "(and the congregation shall return him to the city of refuge) to which he had fled [Shamah - there]" - there he shall dwell, there he shall die and there he shall be buried.

Just as the city absorbs (and protects the killer), so does its Techum (the 2000 amah wide area around the city boundaries).

If a killer left the Techum and the redeemer discovered him...

(R. Yosi Haglili): It is a mitzvah for the redeemer to kill him and optional for anyone else.

(R. Akiva): It is optional for the redeemer and anyone else who kills him will not be liable (but is prohibited to do it).

If a tree is standing within the Techum and its foliage is leaning outside the Techum, or if it is standing outside the Techum and its foliage is leaning into the Techum, the entire tree follows the location of its foliage.

If a killer accidently killed again inside the City of Refuge, he must be exiled from neighborhood to neighborhood. A Levite (who anyway lives in one of the Cities of Refuge) who killed, is exiled from city to city.

Similar (to R. Meir's statement above in (e)), if a killer was sent to a City of Refuge and when he arrived, the people wanted to honor him, he must tell them that he is a killer. If they then tell him that nevertheless, they want to honor him, he may accept their honor, as the pasuk states (Devarim 19:4), "And this is the matter (literally: word) of the killer" - meaning that on this occasion, he must speak to them.

(Gemara - Beraisa): Moshe set aside three cities in the Transjordan and when they came to the land, they set apart another three.

None of the cities could absorb killers until they had conquered and divided the land.

Once the land was conquered and divided, there came an obligation to observe there Shemita and Yovel and all of the Cities of Refuge could now absorb killers.

The three cities that they set aside in the Land of Israel corresponded to the three in the Transjordan set aside by Moshe, thereby creating two parallel rows like the rows of a vineyard.

Chevron in Yehuda corresponded to Batzar Bamidbar in the Transjordan; Shechem in Har Efraim corresponded to Ramos in Gilad (in the Transjordan); Kadesh in the Galil corresponded to Golan in Bashan (in the Transjordan).

Even though Shechem in Har Efraim had been set aside (since it could not absorb before the Land had been conquered), they temporarily set aside Kiryas Yearim as a City of Refuge until they had conquered Shechem. Even though Kadesh in the Galil had been set aside, since it could not yet absorb, they set aside Gamla until they had conquered Kadesh.

The pasuk states (Devarim 19:3), "divide (into three parts)" - they must be positioned in a way that they divide the length of Israel into three, so that from Chevron to Yehuda is like from Chevron to Shechem and from the Chevron to Shechem is like from Shechem to Kadesh.

If one of the cities was destroyed, they rebuild it in the same place.

Question: From where do we know that even if they could not rebuild it there, they should build a City of Refuge elsewhere?

Answer: The pasuk states (Bamidbar 35:15), "(These) six cities" (that were mentioned in pasuk 13) - this teaches that if they cannot be rebuilt in their original location, they are valid as the six cities even if they are elsewhere.

Question: This should be done within the same portion of the same tribe. From where do we know that it could be rebuilt even with the portion of a different tribe?

Answer: The pasuk says (Bamidbar 35:11), "(You shall designate cities for yourselves); they shall be (cities of refuge to you)..." - the words 'they shall be' are extra to teach this. This may be done on condition that the new city is also positioned in a way that they divide the length of Israel into three etc.