Entitlements
‘Not Returned To His Former Prominence’
(Makkos 12a)
Our daf cites a dispute between R. Meir and R. Yehuda regarding a rotze’ach of former prominence who killed someone unintentionally and must flee to one of the cities of refuge. Is he restored to his position of prominence when he returns home upon the death of the kohen gadol? R. Meir’s view says yes; R. Yehuda says no. The halacha follows R. Yehuda (Rambam, Hilchos Rotze’ach chap. 7:14).
A Brand New Post?
The Rogatchover Gaon (cited in the hagahot to the Ritva, Novella Makkos 12a) understands R. Yehuda to mean that the rotze’ach has no claim to his former position. Consequently, he may not forcibly remove the person who replaced him and reassume his position. However, he may be appointed to another position of prominence.
The Ritva (ad loc.) disagrees. He posits that if an exiled rotze’ach forfeits his rights to his former position – because of the seriousness of his sin – certainly he is not to be rewarded with another high post. (He explains that this rule only applies to killers; other repentant sinners may be appointed to high positions.)
A Life Peerage
The Ritva gleans from our sugya that if one is appointed to a position – even if he is not told for how long – he may not be removed from it without a valid reason. He deduces this rule from the fact that the Gemara indicates that were it not for the gravity of the sin of murder, a rotze’ach would be entitled to demand to be reinstated to his former post.
Inheriting A Position
The Gemara cites a baraisa in which R. Meir and R. Yehuda differ about a returning rotze’ach claiming the rights to a post once held by his father. The Ritva deduces from this barasia that, generally speaking, all agree (both R. Meir and R. Yehuda) that a son has a claim to his father’s vacated position – similar to the primogeniture rights of royalty. The Rambam holds this view as well (Hilchos Melachim 1:7; Hilchos Klei HaMikdash 4:20).
The Crown Of Torah
The Chasam Sofer (Responsa Orach Chayyim 12) was once asked about a congregation whose rabbi had died and whose son who wished to assume his father’s position. The Chasam Sofer ruled that although a son usually inherits his father’s position, if the position is Torah-related, he does not automatically inherit it. He cites several sources as proof and concludes that if the son is not acceptable to the kehilla, he has no right to the position. However, he writes, if most of the kehilla is in favor of the son assuming his late father’s post, and only a few individuals are opposed, the son should be allowed to assume the position.
The Avnei Nezer (Yoreh De’ah 312:30) disagrees and rules that the rule of inheriting a position of prominence pertains even to the position of rosh yeshiva, for example.