Tefilah and Birkat Kohanim - Chapter 15

As explained in this halachah.

As explained in Halachah 2.

As explained in Halachah 3.

As explained in Halachah 4.

As explained in Halachah 4.

As explained in Halachah 5.

Note the discussion of this difficulty with regard to the choice of a chazan, Chapter 8, Halachah 12.

If the first word of the second priestly blessing, יאר is read with an ע instead of an א, the phrase יאר ה' פניו אליך becomes a curse rather than a blessing.

I.e., reading a shin as a sin. See Judges 12:6.

E. g., who read a chet like a hay.

The later authorities explain that if, as in many communities of the present day, the overwhelming majority of the people do not know how to differentiate between an ע and an א, a priest should not be disqualified because of this factor, since the meaning of the blessing is not changed (Magen Avraham 128:46). The Turei Zahav (128:30) states that even if a speech fault is common, but not overwhelmingly common—e.g., the substitution of a sin for a shin—a priest should not be disqualified, because such an error will not arouse the attention of the listeners. Nevertheless, this position is not accepted by all authorities.

Included in the category are people with other speech defects—e.g., a person who lisps.

Leviticus 21:16-23 mentions many physical deformities that prevent a priest from serving in the Temple. However, most of these deformities do not disqualify him from reciting the priestly blessings. As explained in this halachah, the only deformities which disqualify a priest from reciting the priestly blessings are those which will attract the people’s attention and prevent them from listening attentively to the blessings.
The Turei Zahav 128:27 questions this concept, noting that since an association was made between the recitation of the priestly blessings and service in the Temple, on the surface, priests with physical blemishes should also be prevented from reciting the blessings. The Turei Zahav explains that this association disqualifies a person only when the disqualifying factor—e.g., idol worship or intoxication—is a result of man’s own activities. If the disqualifying factor is a congenital condition—e.g., physical deformity—the priest may bless the people.

For all of these can be seen by the people while the priests recite the blessings. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 128:30-31) states that in places where the priests cover their faces and hands with their tallitot and wear socks while reciting the blessings, even these blemishes do not disqualify a priest from reciting the blessings.

And distract their concentration on the blessings.

For the same reasons as mentioned above. In places where the priests cover their faces, a priest with such a difficulty may also bless the people.

Generally, this refers to a person who lives within a city for at least thirty days (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit. 128:30).

Or if the people of the city are familiar with him (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit., 128:32).

The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 128:35) adds “even inadvertently.” Many manuscript copies of the Mishneh Torah also include that phrase.

The Rama (Orach Chayim 128:35) allows a priest who repents after committing such a sin to bless the people, so that “the door will not be closed to those who repent.”

The order of these phrases in the Bible is the opposite of the order in which they are quoted by the Rambam.

I.e., once a person has taken a life, God will not let him serve as a medium to convey blessing on the people.

See Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 5:2-4, which states that a person should sacrifice his life rather than submit to pressure to worship false gods. Nevertheless, if he fails to make this sacrifice, he is not punished by an earthly court for his sin.

Or without knowing that the worship of this god was forbidden.

This verse describes the efforts of King Josiah to cleanse Judah from the pagan practices introduced by his father and grandfather.

Note the Rambam’s comments, Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 9:13:
Any priest who served false gods, whether willingly or inadvertently—even though he sincerely repents -
should never serve in the Temple.... If he transgresses and offers a sacrifice [in the Temple], his sacrifice is not
a “pleasing fragrance.”

Many of the later authorities maintain that this association is only a point of Rabbinic Law, and the mention of Biblical verses is merely an asmachta (allusion). However, there is no indication of such a concept in the Rambam’s words.

Without actually serving the false gods.

The Magen Avraham 128:54 states that even someone who converts to Islam—which does not involve idol worship—is not allowed to recite the priestly blessings.

In this instance, as well, the Rama (loc. cit.:37) allows a priest to bless the people if he repents.

The Mishnah Berurah 128:134 notes that a person who desecrates the sanctity of the Sabbath is considered as one who adopted paganism, and, therefore, should not be allowed to recite the priestly blessing.
Rav Moshe Feinstein (Iggerot Moshe, Orach Chayim I, 33) states that present circumstances differ from those during the Mishnah Berurah’s era, and, at present, priests who violate the Sabbath laws are not judged as severely and may bless the people. Nevertheless, he agrees that if restricting such individuals from reciting the priestly blessings may motivate them to increase their Sabbath observance, they may be prevented from blessing the people.

See Halachot 6 and 7.

The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 128:34) states: A minor who has not manifested signs of physical maturity should not recite the priestly blessing alone. However, he may recite the blessing together with his brethren, the priests, to learn and become educated.
If he has manifested signs of physical maturity, he may recite the priestly blessing even while alone. However, he should do so only as a temporary measure, and not as a fixed practice, until he grows a full beard.

The Hebrew יין literally means wine. The Magen Avraham 128:55 notes that the Rambam speaks only about wine and does not mention other alcoholic beverages. Accordingly, he explains that a person who becomes drunk from other alcoholic beverages may recite the priestly blessing, unless he is so drunk that he has no control of himself.
It is significant that in Chapter 4, Halachah 17, when speaking about the prohibition against an intoxicated person praying, the Rambam states: “A person who is drunk should not pray.... When is a person considered drunk? When he cannot speak before a king.” See also Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 1:1-2, where the Rambam describes the prohibition against serving in the Temple while intoxicated and mentions, albeit with differences between them, both a person who drank wine and one who became intoxicated from other alcoholic beverages.
The Magen Avraham’s decision is not accepted by all authorities. (See Mishnah Berurah 128:141.)

This is the minimum measure of wine that is considered to be able to influence a person’s behavior.

Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 1:5 states that if a person drank only a revi’it of wine, it is assumed that the wine’s effects have worn off if he sleeps a little or walks a mil.

As mentioned in the previous halachah.

I.e., interrupting slightly between drinking the entire revi’it.

And serve in the Temple (Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 1:1).

In this instance, Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash 1:5 states that sleeping or walking a mil is not sufficient to remove the effects of the wine, and one must wait until no signs of intoxication remain.
Because of the prohibition against reciting the priestly blessing while intoxicated, it is customary in Ashkenazic communities to recite the priestly blessing in the Morning Service and not during Musaf on Simchat Torah.

Interestingly, although the Rambam also mentions a revi’it in Chapter 2, Halachah 17, he chooses to define its volume here.

In modern measure, a revi’it is 86.4 milliliters according to Shiurei Torah.

See Hilchot Sefer Torah 9:9. In modern measure, a thumbbreadth is 2 centimeters according to Shiurei Torah, and 2.4 centimeters according to the Chazon Ish.

See Leviticus 8:23, 14:14.

In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Caro notes that in contrast to Chapter 4, Halachah 2, which mentions “the purification of the hands,” here, the Rambam refers to “ritual impurity.” He maintains that this choice of language was intended to imply that if a priest washed his hands in the morning, he need not wash them a second time unless they have become ritually impure. He also quotes a responsum of Rav Avraham, the Rambam’s son, who explicitly states that a priest may rely on his morning washing.
Nevertheless, in his Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 128:6), Rav Yosef Caro quotes the opinion of Rashi and Tosafot (Sotah 39a), who require the priests to have their hands washed a second time as an additional measure of holiness.

The Zohar (Vol. III, 146b) states that the Levites should wash the priests’ hands. Since the Levites are themselves holy (Numbers 8:18), it is proper that they be the ones who convey this added holiness upon the priests. The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) also mentions this practice.

See the notes to Chapter 4, Halachah 2.

See Hilchot Bi’at HaMikdash, Chapter 5.

The Targum to this verse also stresses its connection to the recitation of the priestly blessing.

A person born from relations between a priest and a woman whom he may not marry (see Leviticus 21:7).

See Hilchot Issurei Bi’ah 19:14, where the Rambam says: “A challal is just like any other non-priest.” The Pri Chadash writes that if a challal ascends to bless the people, he should be forced to descend.

In the previous five halachot.

I.e., he is suspected of sinning.

Based on Bechorot 45a, the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 128:40,41) adds that a priest who violates the specific mitzvot associated with the priesthood (the forbidden sexual relations mentioned in Leviticus 21:7 and the prohibitions against contracting impurity stemming from a corpse) may not recite the priestly blessings until he repents.

Even though he has not repented for his transgressions.

From the Rambam’s statements, it appears that the disqualifying factors mentioned above remove the mitzvah entirely from a priest.

In other places, as well, we see the Rambam urging people to encourage the nonobservant to perform mitzvot. Note the conclusion of Iggeret HaShmad:
It is not fitting to push away or despise those who violate the Sabbath. Rather one should draw
them close and encourage them to perform mitzvot... Even if a person willingly sins, when he
comes to the synagogue to pray, he should be accepted and not treated with disrespect.
The Rabbis have based [this approach on the interpretation of] Solomon’s words (Proverbs 6:30)
“Do not scorn the thief when he steals”—i.e., do not scorn the sinners of Israel when they come
discreetly to steal mitzvot.

The Jerusalem Talmud, Gittin 5:9 relates:
Do not say: “So and so is an adulterer... how can he bless me?”
God replies: “Is it he that is blessing you? I’m the one Who is blessing you.”

In his commentary on the Torah, the Rashbam emphasizes that the text of priestly blessing itself express this point, stating, “May God bless you..., May God shine..., May God turn...”

Reciting the blessings.

Thus, if the heichal projects from the wall and people have places on either side, they must move from their places to be included in the priestly blessing.

By standing behind the priests, they show that the blessing is not important to them. Hence, they are not included (Rashi, Sotah 38b). Also, as mentioned in Chapter 14, Halachah 11, the priestly blessing must be recited while the priests are standing face to face with those being blessed (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 128:37).

Even those who are standing parallel to the place of the priests.

Sotah (loc. cit.) states: “Even an iron divider cannot separate between Israel and their Father in heaven.”

The Be’ur Halachah explains that the people who are standing to the sides of the priests, but in front of them, should face the heichal. In principle, those who are standing parallel to the priests should turn to the side and face the priests. However, since it is not proper that people standing next to each other in the synagogue should face different directions, they need not shift the positions of their feet. It is sufficient for them to tilt their heads slightly towards the priests.

As the Rambam mentions in the following halachah, even people who do not attend the synagogue can be included in the priestly blessing.

The priestly blessing is included among “the holy matters” that require a minyan. See Chapter 8, Halachot 4-6.

I.e., even if there will not be ten people to respond “Amen,” the priestly blessing can be recited.

Even though there will be no one to read the words of the blessings to them, as mentioned in Chapter 14, Halachot 3 and 14. The question of whether the chazan should also recite the priestly blessing is discussed in the following halachah.

Unless there are a minyan of priests to respond “Amen,” it is preferable that they all recite the blessings and none respond.

I.e., those outside the synagogue. Even though they were unable to attend the synagogue, since they were prevented by forces beyond their control, they are included within the blessing.

The Mishnah Berurah 128:99 states that even if there are no women or children present to answer “Amen,” the blessing may be recited.

I.e., if there are twelve priests, two recite the blessings and ten respond “Amen,” so that there will be a minyan responding “Amen.”

The Shulchan Aruch HaRav 128:38 states that in such an instance, the chazan should not call out “Kohanim,” since, according to many opinions, if the priests are not called to recite the blessings, they are not obligated to do so. Thus, the priests who did not recite the blessings will not be considered negligent in their fulfillment of the mitzvah.

The Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 128:20, states that if other priests are present, a priest serving as the chazan should never recite the priestly blessing. The Pri Chadash takes issue with this decision, and allows him to recite the priestly blessings if he is confident that he will not err.

Lest he become confused after completing the priestly blessing and be unable to complete the Shemoneh Esreh (Berachot 34b).

Note Shulchan Aruch HaRav 128:33 and the Mishnah Berurah 128:76, which state that at present, since the chazan prays from a siddur, he need not worry about being confused and may recite the priestly blessing.

The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) states that in such a case, the chazan should move from his place slightly during the blessing R’tzey (see the following halachah) and after concluding the blessing Modim, ascend to the duchan and recite the priestly blessing.

Or according to Ashkenazic custom, in all services when the priestly blessing would be recited other than the Musaf Service of the festivals.

See the notes to Chapter 14, Halachah 4, for an explanation of the connection between the blessing Sim shalom and the priestly blessings.

To commemorate the recitation of these blessings.

Our translation is based on the Mishnah Berurah 127:8, which explains that the intent is that the priests themselves are a “consecrated people.”

Numbers 6:24-27.

The Hagahot Maimoniot explain that the recitation of this verse parallels the prayer recited by the priests after completing the blessings (Chapter 14, Halachah 12). It is Ashkenazic custom not to recite this final verse (Magen Avraham 127:4).

Nevertheless, there are some communities which recite “Amen,” based on the Tanya Rabbati 334.

The Magen Avraham emphasizes that reciting the priestly blessings a second time is not considered to be a transgression of the prohibition of adding to the Torah’s commandments. That prohibition is violated when one adds to the blessings themselves (see Chapter 14, Halachah 12), but not when one fulfills one mitzvah a number of times.

But he is not obligated to (Mishnah Berurah 128:106).

Each time he blesses the people, he should recite the blessing beforehand (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 128:41, Mishnah Berurah loc. cit.).

See Chapter 14, Halachah 3.

This applies even if he was prevented from leaving his place by forces beyond his control (Radbaz, Magen Avraham).

Shulchan Aruch HaRav 128:12 and the Mishnah Berurah 128:27 state that even if he reaches the duchan after the chazan completes R’tzey, as long as he reaches there before the priests begin reciting the blessing, he may join them.

The Rambam’s statements are based on Sotah 38b. There, the Talmud states that one “violates three positive commandments.” The Rambam amends that statement, explaining that although there is only one commandment for the priests to bless the people, the Torah mentioned the commandment in three different ways to emphasize the importance of its fulfillment. Thus, the failure to bless the people is considered as nullifying the observance of three commands.
In Sefer HaMitzvot (Shoresh 9), the Rambam cites this teaching as a classic example of a fundamental principle regarding the reckoning of the 613 mitzvot. Though the Talmud often states that many mitzvot are involved in the performance or transgression of a particular commandment, this does not mean that the mitzvah should be counted as more than one mitzvah when calculating the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. Rather, the Talmud means to say that the performance of this mitzvah is considered as important as if many mitzvot were involved.