ב"ה
Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day
Biat Hamikdash - Chapter 6
Biat Hamikdash - Chapter 6
1Any priest who has a physical blemish—whether a permanent blemish or a temporary blemish1 —should not enter the area of the altar and beyond in the Temple, as Leviticus 21:21-23 states: “Any man from among the descendants of Aaron the priest who has a blemish... shall not come near the curtain,2 nor may he approach the altar.”אכָּל כּוֹהֵן שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ מוּם, בֵּין מוּם קָבוּעַ בֵּין מוּם עוֹבֵר, לֹא יִכָּנֵס לַמִּקְדָּשׁ מִן הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְלִפְנִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "אֶל הַפָּרֹכֶת לֹא יָבֹא וְאֶל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לֹא יִגַּשׁ" (ויקרא כא, כג).
If he transgresses and enters this area,3 he is liable for lashes even if he did not perform any service.וְאִם עָבַר וְנִכְנַס - לוֹקֶה, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא עָבַד.
If he performs service in the Temple, he invalidates and desecrates his service. He is worthy of lashes for the service as well,4 as ibid.:17 states: “One who has a blemish shall not draw near to offer....”5 According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that this warning means that he shall not draw near to the Temple service.וְאִם עָבַד בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ - פָּסַל וְחִלֵּל עֲבוֹדָתוֹ, וְלוֹקֶה אַף עַל הָעֲבוֹדָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בוֹ מוּם לֹא יִקְרַב" (ויקרא כא, יז) - מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ שֶׁאַזְהָרָה זוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יִקְרַב לָעֲבוֹדָה.
2Similarly, a person with a temporary blemish who performs service in the Temple invalidates his service and is liable for lashes,6 as ibid.:18 states: “Any man who has a blemish shall not draw close....” According to the Oral Tradition, we have learned that this is a warning against a priest with a temporary blemish serving.בוְכֵן בַּעַל מוּם עוֹבֵר שֶׁעָבַד - פָּסַל וְלוֹקֶה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "כָּל אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר בּוֹ מוּם לֹא יִקְרָב" (ויקרא כא, יח) - מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ שֶׁזּוֹ אַזְהָרָה לְבַעַל מוּם עוֹבֵר.
A priest with a blemish who serves is not liable for death, only for lashes.וְאֵין בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין שֶׁעָבְדוּ בְּמִיתָה, אֶלָא בְּמַלְקוּת בִּלְבַד.
3All physical blemishes—whether the priest had them from birth or acquired them afterwards, whether they will heal or they will not heal—disqualify him until they heal.גכָּל הַמּוּמִין כֻּלָּן, אֶחָד שֶׁהָיוּ בּוֹ מִתְּחִלַּת בְּרִיָּתוֹ וְאֶחָד שֶׁנֹּלְּדוּ בּוֹ אַחַר כֵּן, בֵּין שֶׁאֵינָן עוֹבְרִין, בֵּין עוֹבְרִין - הֲרֵי זֶה פָּסוּל עַד שֶׁיַּעֲבֹרוּ.
4A permanent blemish is a broken leg or a broken arm.7 A temporary blemish is a dry skin eruption or a moist skin eruption also known as a chazizit.8דמוּם קָבוּעַ, כְּגוֹן שֶׁבֶר רֶגֶל אוֹ שֶׁבֶר יָד; וּמוּם עוֹבֵר, כְּגוֹן גָּרָב אוֹ יַלֶּפֶת, וְהִיא הַ'חֲזָזִית'.
Not only the blemishes mentioned in the Torah,9 but any apparent bodily blemish disqualifies the priests, as ibid.:21 states: “Any man who has a blemish,” i.e., any type. Those mentioned by the Torah are merely examples.10וְלֹא הַמּוּמִין הַכְּתוּבִין בַּתּוֹרָה בִּלְבַד הֵן שֶׁפּוֹסְלִין בַּכּוֹהֲנִים, אֶלָא כָּל הַמּוּמִין הַנִּרְאִין בַּגּוּף, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "כָּל... אֲשֶׁר בּוֹ מוּם" (ויקרא כא, יח; ויקרא כא, כא) - מִכָּל מָקוֹם. וְאֵלּוּ הַכְּתוּבִים בַּתּוֹרָה דֻּגְמָא הֵן.
5There are three types of blemishes involving humans:11 a) blemishes that disqualify a priest from serving and an animal from being offered as a sacrifice;12 b) blemishes that only prevent a man from serving;13 c) blemishes that do not disqualify a priest, but because of the impression that would be created,14 our Sages stated that every priest who has such a blemish should not serve.השְׁלוֹשָׁה מִינֵי מוּמִין הֵם: יֵשׁ מוּמִין שֶׁהֵן פּוֹסְלִין הַכּוֹהֵן מִלַּעֲבֹד וְהַבְּהֵמָה מִלִּקָּרֵב, וְיֵשׁ מוּמִין שֶׁפּוֹסְלִין הָאָדָם בִּלְבַד מִלַּעֲבֹד, וְיֵשׁ מוּמִין שֶׁאֵין פּוֹסְלִין, אֲבָל מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן אָמְרוּ שֶׁכָּל כּוֹהֵן שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ אֶחָד מֵהֶן אֵינוֹ עוֹבֵד.
6Whenever a priest who has a blemish that disqualifies both a person and animal serves, whether inadvertently or intentionally, his service is invalid. If he served intentionally, he is liable for lashes.וכָּל מִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ מוּם שֶׁפּוֹסֵל בָּאָדָם וּבַבְּהֵמָה וְעָבַד, בֵּין בְּשׁוֹגֵג, בֵּין בְּמֵזִיד - עֲבוֹדָתוֹ פְּסוּלָה. וְאִם הָיָה מֵזִיד, לוֹקֶה.
Whenever a priest who has a blemish that disqualifies only a person serves, even though he is liable for lashes,15 his service is valid.16וְכָל מִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ מוּם מִן הַמּוּמִין הַמְּיֻחָדִין לָאָדָם וְעָבַד, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא לוֹקֶה - לֹא חִלֵּל עֲבוֹדָתוֹ.
If he has one of the blemishes that disqualify him because of the impression that could be created, he is not liable for lashes and his service is valid.וְאִם הָיָה בּוֹ דָּבָר מִדְּבָרִים שֶׁהֵם מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן - אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה, וַעֲבוֹדָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה.
7Only blemishes that are apparent17 disqualify a person. Blemishes that are within the cavity of the body, e.g., a person’s kidney or his spleen was removed or his intestines were perforated, even though he becomes a treifah,18 his service is acceptable. This is derived from the mention, Leviticus 21:19, of “a broken leg or a broken arm.” Just as these are apparent, all disqualifying blemishes must be apparent.זאֵין פּוֹסֵל בָּאָדָם אֶלָא מוּמִין שֶׁבַּגָּלוּי; אֲבָל מוּמִין שֶׁבַּחֲלַל הַגּוּף, כְּגוֹן שֶׁנִּטַּל כֻּלְיָתוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם אוֹ טְחוֹל שֶׁלּוֹ, אוֹ שֶׁנִּקְּבוּ מֵעָיו, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה טְרֵפָה - עֲבוֹדָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "שֶׁבֶר רָגֶל אוֹ שֶׁבֶר יָד" (ויקרא כא, יט) - מַה אֵלּוּ בַּגָּלוּי, אַף כֹּל בַּגָּלוּי.
8An uncircumcised person19 is like a foreigner as Ezekiel 44:9 states: “Any foreigner20 with an uncircumcised heart and uncircumcised flesh.”חהֶעָרֵל - הֲרֵי הוּא כְּבֶן נֵכָר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "כָּל בֶּן נֵכָר עֶרֶל לֵב וְעֶרֶל בָּשָׂר" (יחזקאל מד, ט).
Therefore if an uncircumcised priest serves, he disqualifies his service and is liable for lashes21 like a non-priest22 who serves. He is not, however, liable for death.23לְפִיכָךְ עָרֵל שֶׁעָבַד - חִלֵּל עֲבוֹדָתוֹ וְלוֹקֶה, כְּזָר שֶׁעָבַד; אֲבָל אֵינוֹ חַיָּב מִיתָה.
9A priest who married women sinfully24 may not serve25 until he is compelled by the court to take a vow dependent on the discretion of other people so that it cannot be nullified26 that he will not continue to sin. He may then perform the service, descend from the altar, and divorce her.טכּוֹהֵן שֶׁהָיָה נוֹשֵׂא נָשִׁים בַּעֲבֵרָה - אֵינוֹ עוֹבֵד, עַד שֶׁיַּדִּירוּהוּ בֵּית דִּין עַל דַּעַת רַבִּים, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תִהְיֶה לוֹ הֲפָרָה, שֶׁלֹּא יוֹסִיף לַחֲטֹא; וְעוֹבֵד וְיוֹרֵד וּמְגָרֵשׁ.
Similarly, if he would become impure due to contact with a human corpse,27 he is disqualified until he makes a resolution in court not to contract such impurity.וְכֵן אִם הָיָה מִטַּמֵּא לַמֵּתִים - פָּסוּל, עַד שֶׁיְּקַבֵּל עָלָיו בְּבֵית דִּין שֶׁלֹּא יִטַּמֵּא.
If he transgressed and performed service before taking such a vow or making such a resolution, he does not disqualify his service even though he remains married in sin.28וְאִם עָבַר וְעָבַד קֹדֶם שֶׁיַּדִּיר אוֹ שֶׁיְּקַבֵּל, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא נָשׂוּי בַּעֲבֵרָה - לֹא חִלֵּל עֲבוֹדָה.
10When a priest performed service and afterwards, his genealogy was checked and it was discovered that he was a challal,29 his previous service is acceptable, but he may not serve in the future.יכּוֹהֵן שֶׁעָבַד וְנִבְדַּק וְנִמְצָא חָלָל - עֲבוֹדָתוֹ כְּשֵׁרָה לְשֶׁעָבַר, וְאֵינוֹ עוֹבֵד לְהַבָּא.
If, however, he does continue to serve, he does not desecrate the service. This is derived from Deuteronomy 33:11: “May God bless His legion and find acceptable the work of his hand.” Implied is that He will find acceptable even the desecrated among them.30וְאִם עָבַד - לֹא חִלֵּל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "בָּרֵךְ ה' חֵילוֹ וּפֹעַל יָדָיו תִּרְצֶה" (דברים לג, יא) - אַפִלּוּ חֻלִּין שֶׁבּוֹ תִּרְצֶה.
11The High Court would sit in the Chamber of Hewn Stone.31 Their primary ongoing activity was sitting and judging the priests, e.g., examining the lineage of the priests32 and inspecting their blemishes.יאבֵּית דִּין הַגָּדוֹל הָיוּ יוֹשְׁבִין בְּלִשְׁכַּת הַגָּזִית, וְעִיקַר מַעֲשֵׂיהֶם הַתָּדִיר - שֶׁהֵן יוֹשְׁבִין וְדָנִין אֶת הַכְּהֻנָּה וּבוֹדְקִין אֶת הַכּוֹהֲנִים בַּיֹּחֲסִין וּבַמּוּמִין.
Whenever a disqualifying factor was found in the lineage of a priest, he would put on black clothes and wrap himself in black and leave the Temple Courtyard. Whoever is found to be bodily sound and of acceptable lineage puts on white garments and enters and serves with his priestly brethren.כָּל כּוֹהֵן שֶׁנִּמְצָא פָּסוּל בְּיִחוּסוֹ - לוֹבֵשׁ שְׁחוֹרִים וּמִתְעַטֵּף שְׁחוֹרִים, וְיוֹצֵא מִן הָעֲזָרָה; וְכָל מִי שֶׁנִּמְצָא שָׁלֵם וְכָשֵׁר - לוֹבֵשׁ לְבָנִים, וְנִכְנָס וּמְשַׁמֵּשׁ עִם אֶחָיו הַכּוֹהֲנִים.
12A priest who is discovered to be of acceptable lineage, but was discovered to have a physical blemish should sit in the Chamber of Wood33 and removes worm-eaten wood for the Altar’s pyre.34 He should be included in the division of the sacrifices with the members of his clan and may partake of the sacrifices,35 as Leviticus 21:22 states: “He may partake of the food of his God from the sacrifices of the most holy order and of the sacred foods.”יבמִי שֶׁנִּמְצָא כָּשֵׁר בְּיִחוּסוֹ וְנִמְצָא בּוֹ מוּם - יוֹשֵׁב בְּלִשְׁכַּת הָעֵצִים, וּמְתַלֵּעַ עֵצִים לַמַּעֲרָכָה. וְחוֹלֵק בַּקֳּדָשִׁים עִם אַנְשֵׁי בֵּית אָב שֶׁלּוֹ וְאוֹכֵל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "לֶחֶם אֱלֹהָיו מִקָּדְשֵׁי הַקֳּדָשִׁים וּמִן הַקֳּדָשִׁים יֹאכֵל" (ויקרא כא, כב).
Footnotes
1.
From the repetition of verses in Leviticus concerning this issue, the Sifra derives that the prohibition encompasses both types of blemishes.
2.
The curtain separating between the Sanctuary and the Holy of Holies.
3.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 69) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 277) consider this as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. In his gloss to Sefer HaMitzvot, the Ramban differs. He maintains that although there is a prohibition against a blemished priest serving in the Temple as the Rambam proceeds to explain, there is no Scriptural prohibition against merely entering this portion of the Temple area. The Megilat Esther supports the Rambam’s view.
The Kessef Mishneh notes that from Hilchot Sanhedrin 19:4, it appears that lashes are given only if the priest enters the building of the Temple, not this portion of the courtyard.
4.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 70) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 275) also consider this as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. As indicated by the following halachah, according to the Rambam, this prohibition refers to a priest with a permanent blemish.
5.
Although the prooftext refers specifically to the daily offering, the Sifra explains that the repetition of verses indicates that the prohibition encompasses all sacrifices.
6.
Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 71) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 276) also consider this as one of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. The Ramban differs and maintains that there is only one negative commandment against a priest with a blemish serving in the Temple and it includes both instances, a permanent blemish and a temporary blemish.
7.
See Leviticus 21:19.
8.
Ibid.:20.
9.
Ibid.:18-21.
10.
In his commentary to the Torah, the Ramban takes a slightly different approach, maintaining that those blemishes mentioned in the Torah outline the general categories of blemishes.
11.
There are also blemishes that disqualify an animal, but do not disqualify a human, as stated in Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach, ch. 2. See the gloss of the Radbaz there. There it is explained that it appears that the Rambam’s intent is not that if these conditions are found in men, they do not disqualify a priest. Instead, the intent is that it is extremely uncommon to find such a condition in a human. Hence they are “not appropriate to be found in a human.” Nevertheless, if a priest does have such a condition, it is considered as a blemish and he is disqualified.
12.
These are described in Chapter 7.
13.
These are described in Chapter 8.
14.
See the conclusion of ch. 8.
15.
If he serves intentionally.
16.
The commentaries note that there appears to be a contradiction between this statement and the Torah’s explicit statements. The Torah mentions exceptionally long eye-brows and crushed testicles as blemishes. These blemishes apply to a human and not to an animal. Nevertheless, it appears that they are also included by the statement (ibid.:23): “He shall not desecrate My sacred offerings.”
17.
Even blemishes that are ordinarily covered by a person’s clothes are considered as apparent.
18.
A person who will not live more than 12 months.
19.
This applies even when there was no transgression in the priest remaining uncircumcised, e.g., an instance when two of his brothers died because of circumcision (Rashi, Sanhedrin 83a).
20.
This term also has the connotation of an idolater.
21.
Rashi (ibid. 84a) states that since the warning is dependent on a verse from the Prophets and not from the Torah itself, the person is not liable for lashes. The Rambam’s view is based on Zevachim 18b which maintains that the prohibition was taught by the Oral Tradition. Ezekiel merely provided a support. The Rambam, however, mentions the verse from Ezekiel because of the connection to the non-priest so that there will be a link to an explicit prohibition from the Torah.
22.
See Chapter 9, Halachah 1.
23.
As a non-priest is (ibid.).
24.
E. g., he married a divorcee or another woman forbidden to the priesthood. See Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah, chs. 17-19 where these prohibitions are detailed.
25.
These laws have parallels in the present era as well. Such a priest may not recite the Priestly Blessing [Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 128:40)].
26.
Since the vow is not being taken dependent on his own discretion, but on that of other people, it cannot be nullified. See Hilchot Sh'vuot 6:8.
27.
Which is forbidden to a priest, as stated in Hilchot Evel, ch. 1.
28.
For this prohibition is merely a Rabbinic safeguard.
29.
A challal is a priest conceived in relations forbidden to a priest or the son of a challal. None of the mitzvot of the priesthood apply to him.
30.
Challal, “desecrated,” and chayl, “legion,” share two of the same root letters. Hence the above concept can be derived (Kiddushin 66b).
31.
The presence of the Sanhedrin in this chamber is discussed in Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 5:17 and Hilchot Sanhedrin 14:11-12.
32.
See Hilchot Issurei Bi’ah 20:2.
33.
Located in the Women’s Courtyard; see Hilchot Beit HaBechirah 5:8.
34.
For worm-eaten wood is undesirable. See Hilchot Issurei Mizbeiach 6:2.
35.
See Hilchot Ma’aseh HaKorbanot 10:17.
Rabbi Eliyahu Touger is a noted author and translator, widely published for his works on Chassidut and Maimonides.
Published and copyright by Moznaim Publications, all rights reserved.
To purchase this book or the entire series, please click here.
To purchase this book or the entire series, please click here.
The text on this page contains sacred literature. Please do not deface or discard.
Vowelized Hebrew text courtesy Torat Emet under CC 2.5 license.
The text on this page contains sacred literature. Please do not deface or discard.
