The congregation shall protect the murderer from the blood avenger, and return him to his refuge city where he had fled, and he must remain there until the death of the Kohen Gadol who was anointed with the sacred oil. (Bamidbar 35:25)

Rashi: Because the High Priest should have prayed that this misfortune might never happen in Israel in his days (cf. Makos 11).

The gemora in Makos tells us that the person who killed a fellow Jew unintentionally was allowed to go into exile in the “refuge city”. While there, a zealous relative was not permitted to kill him. Once the Kohen Gadol died, he was free to leave and the relative was no longer allowed to kill him. The gemara asks, “Why is it ‘fair’ that the Kohen Gadol’s death be the determinant of the accidental killer’s freedom?” The Kohen Gadol’s family members even brought the killer food so that he shouldn’t daven for his freedom through the death of the Kohen Gadol. The gemara answers that the Kohen Gadol should have prayed that Beis Din would have ruled “not guilty.”

On this the Bi’er Yosef asks, “How could the Kohen Gadol pray that a judge on the Beis Din should make a mistake and rule incorrectly on this case?” To this he answers with a fascinating idea. The gemora states that if everyone in the Beis Din agrees that someone is guilty of murder, the accused is vindicated! Therefore, the Kohen Gadol’s prayers, on the contrary, were that all the judges should see the truth that he was guilty – yet the end result would be that the accused would be acquitted.

On this point the Bi’er Yosef asks another difficult question: Is it really in the accused’s best interest that he be acquitted, for if he is acquitted, he will not get the atonement that he needs to rectify his sin? Ultimately, isn’t the Kohen Gadol doing the accused a disservice!? The Bi’er Yosef answers this by citing another gemora, which says that the Kohen Gadol also atones for different sins simply by wearing certain priestly vestments. One of these sins is killing negligently. Therefore, the Bi’er Yosef sets forth that the Kohen Gadol will actually achieve the atonement that this man needs via the indirect means of the priestly vestments.

It always bothered me that wearing certain clothing could cause atonement for another person. How does that work? The Shla Hakodesh explains how sackcloth helps one to repent, but he does not explain how the priestly vestments give atonement. The Bi’er Yosef explains that the intent of the Kohen Gadol when donning the vestments is that they should atone for all those who have committed these sins, which thereby allows the sinners to gain atonement. This is similar to all the sacrifices that were brought in the Beis Hamikdash, where the intent in bringing the offering brought about the atonement.

Upon seeing all this it became apparent to me that if we see someone doing something wrong and our reaction is to condemn him, we are not following in the ways of Aharon Hakohen. We – like the Kohen Gadol – should not be looking for ways to condemn a sinner, but rather for him to turn around and repent from his evil ways.

At this time of year, when many speak about the topic of baseless hatred and how to eradicate it, the question is often asked, “Whoever hates someone always has a good reason. Hence is it not ‘baseless’ hatred but rather hatred with a valid reason?!” I believe that based on the above, we can offer another explanation. Instead of leaving this person as he is, if we pray for him to repent fully, and that he should have atonement for his sins, we can achieve the ultimate result, and the hatred even for those who have done wrong can be understood as “b’chinam” – baseless – for there is more than one way to get rid of the evil.

As the wife of Reb Meir taught us, we should daven for the cessation of sins (through people doing Teshuva) and not for the cessation of the sinners.