Much has been made of the enigmatic doubling of the word “justice” in the passage, “Justice, justice, you shall pursue” (Deuteronomy 16:20).
Ibn Ezra explains that this is to indicate that we are to pursue justice whether it is to our gain or to our loss. The Vilna Gaon suggests that it refers to justice above, in the supernal realm, and justice below, here on earth. Elsewhere we read that these are two different types of justice—one a ruling, and the other a compromise.
But what about the other word in this oft-quoted passage?
To pursue, lirdof, has an ominous set of connotations. This verb might be better translated as “to chase after.” As a halachic legal category, a rodef, or pursuer, is the term used for someone who is threatening one’s life, whom it is permissible to kill in self-defense.
Indeed, we will even see the verb being used this way in this very Torah portion when Moses (for the umpteenth time) delineates the laws of sanctuary cities.
The concept of the sanctuary city is an intriguing one, all the more so for the sudden emphasis it receives in the Book of Deuteronomy, despite being almost completely absent from the earlier books of the Torah. Sanctuary cities are designated places of refuge for manslayers, those who have killed another person unwittingly, “without having been his enemy in the past” (Ibid 19:4).
These laws establish intent as that which distinguishes a punishable murder from a tragic accident. This is important, but one is still left wondering why this law, in all of its strangeness and particularity, has become such a fixation for Moses. After all, how often do such scenarios occur?
“For instance,” explains Moses, “a man goes with his neighbor into a grove to cut wood; as his hand swings the ax to cut down a tree, the ax-head flies off the handle and strikes the other so that he dies. That man shall flee to one of these cities and live” (Ibid 19:5).
Was this kind of situation common enough to warrant concern? Moses seems to think so, commanding the Israelites to create no less than three sanctuary cities, spaced out so that they are easily reached from all parts of the holy land. “Otherwise,” he continues, “when the distance is great, the blood-avenger, chasing after [lirdof] the manslayer in hot anger, may overtake him and kill him” (Ibid 19:6).
Violence moves quickly. It chases after. Animated by hot rage and bitter grief, it will cross great landscapes and surmount obstacles to attain its bloody goals. If justice is not chased after with equal intensity, it will never outpace anarchic violence. Perhaps, then, this is why Moses stresses the teaching of the sanctuary cities. To chase after justice means to think ahead, before the handle flies from the ax. Such foresight is the one advantage a society of law has over the reactive wrath of a blood-avenger.
If justice is not chased after with equal intensity, it will never outpace anarchic violence.
The final section of Parashat Shoftim details what to do if a slain body is found in the middle of a field. Here, the pursuer has already fled. The trail has gone cold. “The identity of the slayer is not known” (Ibid 21:1).
We have arrived on the scene too late. Gone with the killer is any chance of justice, and so a ritual is performed to make atonement for the murder.
The magistrates of the town nearest to the corpse are to take an unworked heifer to a lush valley where the grass has never been tilled nor sown. “There, in the valley, they shall break the heifer’s neck … [and then] all the elders of the town nearest to the corpse shall wash their hands over the heifer whose neck was broken in the valley. And they shall make this declaration: ‘Our hands did not shed this blood, nor did our eyes see it done’” (Ibid 21:4-7).
A question: Is the fact that their eyes did not see the crime the reason that they should be absolved? Or is it the crime that they are asking to be absolved of?
In other words: Are they stating their case as innocent bystanders? Or are they begging forgiveness as those who were too slow and unwitting to chase after justice and catch it in time?
Matthew Schultz is the author of the essay collection “What Came Before” (2020). He is a rabbinical student at Hebrew College in Newton, Massachusetts.
Unscrolled Shoftim: Chasing After Justice
Matthew Schultz
Much has been made of the enigmatic doubling of the word “justice” in the passage, “Justice, justice, you shall pursue” (Deuteronomy 16:20).
Ibn Ezra explains that this is to indicate that we are to pursue justice whether it is to our gain or to our loss. The Vilna Gaon suggests that it refers to justice above, in the supernal realm, and justice below, here on earth. Elsewhere we read that these are two different types of justice—one a ruling, and the other a compromise.
But what about the other word in this oft-quoted passage?
To pursue, lirdof, has an ominous set of connotations. This verb might be better translated as “to chase after.” As a halachic legal category, a rodef, or pursuer, is the term used for someone who is threatening one’s life, whom it is permissible to kill in self-defense.
Indeed, we will even see the verb being used this way in this very Torah portion when Moses (for the umpteenth time) delineates the laws of sanctuary cities.
The concept of the sanctuary city is an intriguing one, all the more so for the sudden emphasis it receives in the Book of Deuteronomy, despite being almost completely absent from the earlier books of the Torah. Sanctuary cities are designated places of refuge for manslayers, those who have killed another person unwittingly, “without having been his enemy in the past” (Ibid 19:4).
These laws establish intent as that which distinguishes a punishable murder from a tragic accident. This is important, but one is still left wondering why this law, in all of its strangeness and particularity, has become such a fixation for Moses. After all, how often do such scenarios occur?
“For instance,” explains Moses, “a man goes with his neighbor into a grove to cut wood; as his hand swings the ax to cut down a tree, the ax-head flies off the handle and strikes the other so that he dies. That man shall flee to one of these cities and live” (Ibid 19:5).
Was this kind of situation common enough to warrant concern? Moses seems to think so, commanding the Israelites to create no less than three sanctuary cities, spaced out so that they are easily reached from all parts of the holy land. “Otherwise,” he continues, “when the distance is great, the blood-avenger, chasing after [lirdof] the manslayer in hot anger, may overtake him and kill him” (Ibid 19:6).
Violence moves quickly. It chases after. Animated by hot rage and bitter grief, it will cross great landscapes and surmount obstacles to attain its bloody goals. If justice is not chased after with equal intensity, it will never outpace anarchic violence. Perhaps, then, this is why Moses stresses the teaching of the sanctuary cities. To chase after justice means to think ahead, before the handle flies from the ax. Such foresight is the one advantage a society of law has over the reactive wrath of a blood-avenger.
The final section of Parashat Shoftim details what to do if a slain body is found in the middle of a field. Here, the pursuer has already fled. The trail has gone cold. “The identity of the slayer is not known” (Ibid 21:1).
We have arrived on the scene too late. Gone with the killer is any chance of justice, and so a ritual is performed to make atonement for the murder.
The magistrates of the town nearest to the corpse are to take an unworked heifer to a lush valley where the grass has never been tilled nor sown. “There, in the valley, they shall break the heifer’s neck … [and then] all the elders of the town nearest to the corpse shall wash their hands over the heifer whose neck was broken in the valley. And they shall make this declaration: ‘Our hands did not shed this blood, nor did our eyes see it done’” (Ibid 21:4-7).
A question: Is the fact that their eyes did not see the crime the reason that they should be absolved? Or is it the crime that they are asking to be absolved of?
In other words: Are they stating their case as innocent bystanders? Or are they begging forgiveness as those who were too slow and unwitting to chase after justice and catch it in time?
Matthew Schultz is the author of the essay collection “What Came Before” (2020). He is a rabbinical student at Hebrew College in Newton, Massachusetts.
Did you enjoy this article?
You'll love our roundtable.
Editor's Picks
Israel and the Internet Wars – A Professional Social Media Review
The Invisible Student: A Tale of Homelessness at UCLA and USC
What Ever Happened to the LA Times?
Who Are the Jews On Joe Biden’s Cabinet?
You’re Not a Bad Jewish Mom If Your Kid Wants Santa Claus to Come to Your House
No Labels: The Group Fighting for the Political Center
Latest Articles
It’s Time to Add Humor to Our Fight Against Jew-Haters
Bored Panda: I Thought I’d Seen Every Shade Of Blue, Until I Sailed Through French Polynesia
If the Horseshoe Fits… Saddle Up!
Brain Surgery, Film Noir, Accidental Love: Marcus Freed Is Still Out There
Washington’s Promise, America’s Test
Thoughts on Radiation
The October 8th and October 9th Jew
Rethinking Rabbinical Education for a New Era
At a time when the Jewish world can feel uncertain and strained, investing in new models of rabbinic formation is an act of hope.
The Hidden Cost of Campus Antisemitism: Faculty Mental Health
Since Hamas’ October 7 terrorist attack, many Jewish faculty at colleges and universities across the country have been describing their professional lives in language more commonly associated with trauma than academic disagreement.
Quo Vadis after October 8th: A Pledge for a New Direction in Memory Politics to End Political Homelessness
Remaining politically homeless is not a defeat; it is a commitment to a truth that refuses to be simplified.
The Crisis in Jewish Education Is Not About Screens
If we want to produce Jews who carry Torah in their bones, we need institutions willing to demand that commitment, and not institutions that blame technology for their own unwillingness to insist on rigor.
Theodor Herzl’s Liberal Nationalist Leap of Hope – and America’s
Herzl recognized nationalism as a powerful but neutral tool, capable of bringing out the best in us – or the beast in us.
Nation of Laws – A poem for Parsha Mishpatim
I live in a nation of laws but the laws seem to change with the flick of a tweet.
Borrowed Spotlight Art Exhibit Pairs Holocaust Survivors with Celebrities
Cindy Crawford, Wolf Blitzer and Chelsea Handler are among the celebrities who were photographed with survivors.
A Bisl Torah — Holy Selfishness
Honoring oneself, creating sacred boundaries, and cultivating self-worth allows a human being to better engage with the world.
A Moment in Time: “Choosing our Move”
Waiting for Religious Intelligence as for AI and Godot
Award-Winning Travel Author Lisa Niver Interviews Churchill Wild Guide Terry Elliott
Print Issue: One Man’s Show | February 6, 2026
How Meir Fenigstein Brings Israeli Stories to the American Screen
Does Tucker Carlson Have His Eye on The White House?
Jason Zengerle, a contributing writer for The New York Times Magazine, and staff writer at the New Yorker wrote a new book about Carlson, “Hated By All The Right People: Tucker Carlson and The Unraveling of The Conservative Mind.”
Michelle Heston: Valentine’s Day, Cake Love & Chocolate Ganache
Taste Buds with Deb – Episode 142
Love Stories – A Persian Love Cake
Love is precious and this Persian Love Cake is the perfect way to show a little love to your friends and family.
Table for Five: Mishpatim
Empathy for Strangers
Meir Fenigstein: One Man’s Show
How Meir Fenigstein Brings Israeli Stories to the American Screen
Rosner’s Domain | In 2026, It’s Right vs. Right
The elections of 2026 will not be “right vs. center-left.” They will be “right vs. right.”
Bret Stephens Has Kicked Off a Long Overdue Debate: Are Jews Fighting the Right Way?
Why is it that despite the enormous resources and money we spend fighting antisemitism, it just keeps getting worse?
More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.