Parashas Emor: Does Hashem Hate Unibrows?

Does Hashem hate unibrows? No, of course not! But then why does the Torah ban a Kohen with a unibrow from serving in the Beis ha’Mikdash? In this dvar Torah we will examine the nature of these physical disqualifications and consider their implications within the Torah system as a whole.

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this blog post.

Parashas Emor: Does Hashem Hate Unibrows? 

Parashas Emor introduces the prohibition for a physically blemished Kohen to perform avodah (service) in the Beis ha’Mikdash (Holy Temple): “Any man from among the offspring of Aharon the Kohen who has a blemish shall not approach to offer the fire-offerings of Hashem” (Vayikra 21:21). This parallels the prohibition to offer blemished animals as offerings, which is also discussed in this parashah: “Any [animal offering] in which there is a blemish you shall not offer, for it will not be favorable for you” (ibid. 22:20). 

The pesukim (verses) specify a number of examples of both categories of blemishes which are expanded upon in great detail by Torah she’baal Peh (the Oral Torah). There are a total of 140 physical blemishes that disqualify a Kohen from avodah, 90 of which are unique to human beings, and 50 of which are common to Kohanim and animals. The halacha classifies these 140 blemishes by their location on the body. In order to appreciate the nature and scope of these blemishes, here are a few examples from each category: 

• head (misshapen skull, various forms of baldness)
• neck (too short, too long)
• ears (blindness, too small, asymmetrical in size) 
• eyebrows (unibrow, asymmetrical in appearance)
• eyelids (no eyelashes, too squinty)
• eyes (abnormal positioning, abnormal shape, abnormal size)
• nose (abnormal positioning, abnormal shape, abnormal size)
• lips (over/under-bite, cracked lips, frequent spittle)
• belly (swollen, "outie" navel)
• back (crooked spine, hunchback)
• hands (abnormal number of fingers, webbed fingers, left-handed person)
• reproductive organs (abnormal size, injured scrotum, missing testicle)
• legs (bowlegged, abnormal number of toes, clicking ankles)
• stature (disproportionate trunk, abnormal height)
• skin (albino, very red skin, any type of mole, scarring)
• miscellaneous (deaf, epileptic, suffering from tremors on account of sickness or old age, suffering from severe depression, bad body odor) 

The major question here is: Why should these blemishes disqualify a Kohen from avodah? Does Hashem have something against physically blemished individuals? Does He find clicking ankles to be annoying? Does He regard albinos as subhuman? Does bad B.O. spoil the “fragrant aroma” (Vayikra 1:9) of the burnt offerings? Indeed, some modern readers may find these laws to be not only questionable, but morally reprehensible, and accuse the Torah of stoking the flames of certain forms of discrimination, such as ableism, ageism, and other prejudices. 

Before offering an answer, we will briefly respond to the types of charges against Torah mentioned in the aforementioned paragraph. Renowned pathologist Dr. J. Beckwith begins his historical essay, Congenital Malformations: from Superstition to Understanding, as follows: 

Throughout most of human history, congenital anomalies were perceived as omens, portents, or punishments of supernatural origin. This concept is reflected in the term “monster,” probably derived from the Latin verb monstrare (to show or reveal). Other explanations for congenital abnormalities included witchcraft, astrological configurations, or emotional experiences of the pregnant mother. 

Individuals suffering from physical deformities and bodily abnormalities were feared, shunned, and ostracized in many cultures, especially in ancient times. Dr. Beckwith elaborates on this phenomenon, citing an example from a neighboring ancient civilization to ours: 

Birth defects were interpreted as omens or portents in many early cultures. For example, Babylonian–Assyrian cuneiform tablets include an extensive catalog of anomalies believed to represent omens, some of which are clearly based upon observation of actual cases. 

Torah society stands in stark contrast to these prevailing views and attitudes in the ancient world. Judaism does not regard individuals with physical abnormalities to be inferior in any way to any other person. There is no discrimination when it comes to their religious observance nor are there any limitations to their roles in the community (with the sole exception of Kohanim in Mikdash). These individuals were never regarded as “cursed” or “harbingers of evil” or anything that even remotely negative. Indeed, the Sages decreed that a blessing should be recited upon seeing such an individual: “Blessed are You, Hashem, our God, King of the universe, Who makes creations different.” In other words, physical abnormalities are not viewed as negative, but are regarded positively as expressions of the wisdom and magnificence of the Creator. Moreover, the Torah clearly states that the essence of the human being is the tzelem Elokim (truth-seeking intellect) – not the physical body. Thus, there are no grounds for the assumption that a person should have lesser value in the eyes of God simply because his or her body looks different.

Of course, this only strengthens our question! These laws of Kohanim’s blemishes are an anomaly – the only Torah laws which, on the surface, seem to stigmatize physical imperfections. 

The Sefer ha’Chinuch (Mitzvah #275) answers this question as follows: 

At the root of this mitzvah lies the reason that the majority of people’s actions are favorable to the hearts of those who see them in accordance of the eminence of those who do them. For when a man is distinguished in his appearance and good in his actions, he “will find favor and good success” (Mishlei 3:4) in everything he does in the eyes of all who observe him. If, however, he is the opposite of this – inferior in his form or peculiar in his limbs – then even if he is straight in his ways, his activities will not be so attractive to the heart of those who see him. 

It is therefore truly fitting that the messenger (i.e. the Kohen), on whom atonement depends, should be a man of grace, handsome in appearance and fair in features, and pleasing in all his ways – that the minds of men may be drawn to him. And in addition to this, it is possible that in the perfection of his form lies an intimation of matters through which, as a man’s thoughts dwell on them, his spirit will be cleansed and exalted. 

It is therefore not right in any way that there should be in him [the Kohen] any deviation in any of his forms whatsoever, lest the spirit of the contemplator be distracted on account of the peculiarity and stray from the desired goal. 

According to the Sefer ha’Chinuch, physically blemished Kohanim were not barred from performing the avodah on account of any inherent deficiency or inadequacy on their part. Rather, as we say nowadays, it was all about “the optics.” The Beis ha’Mikdash is meant to be an awe-inspiring place, as the Sefer ha’Chinuch describes (Mitzvah #95): 

Hashem desired the good for human beings, as we have stated. Therefore He commanded us to establish a location that should be pure and clean to the ultimate degree of cleanliness, to purify there the thoughts of people and to rectify and perfect their hearts towards Him. 

Indeed, it is a mitzvah to be in awe of Mikdash, as the Sefer ha’Chinuch writes (Mitzvah #254): 

[He commanded us] to have a reverent awe of the Sanctuary: in other words, that we should regard and establish it in our souls as the place of awe and veneration, so that our hearts will be moved when we come there to pray or to bring offerings, as it is stated: “and you shall revere My Sanctuary” (Vayikra 19:30). 

The Sefer ha’Chinuch’s explanation of the Kohanim’s blemishes is built upon this idea, namely, that in order to produce the proper degree of awe, reverence, and inspiration in those come to the Beis ha’Mikdash, the Kohanim had to be flawless in their appearance. Anything less would detract from the intended effect of the Sanctuary, which was to inspire the visiting Jews to emulate the priestly models of avodah who ministered therein. 

A modern example of this phenomenon can be drawn from the world of fashion. Clothing companies know that in order to sell their products, they must use flawlessly attractive models, in ads and in clothing stores. These companies know that the vast majority of individuals will never live up to the beauty standards of these models, but will nevertheless purchase this clothing hoping that they will partake of some level of attractiveness, like these models. 

Just as attractive models enhance the attractiveness of the clothing they wear and cause the onlookers to aspire to this level of attractiveness, the same is true of the Kohanim. These are individuals who have devoted their lives to Hashem, to learning and teaching Torah, and to giving up their private civilian roles in order to live a life apart as models of avodas Hashem. They are intended to be the equivalent of Hollywood celebrities, epitomizing the life of chochmah (wisdom) and divine service rather than the life of fame and glamour. We are meant to look up to them and want to be like them, knowing full well that their lifestyle will likely be outside of our reach. When a Jew makes a pilgrimage to the Beis ha’Mikdash and sees Kohanim in action, he should be filled with a sense of awe and admiration. If that Kohen were blemished in any way, this would shatter the illusion and dilute the effect, thereby impeding the fundamental mission of Mikdash. 

This is why physical blemishes only disqualify Kohanim from their role in avodah, and do not invalidate any other Jew from doing any other mitzvah. Only Kohanim in the awe-inspiring Mikdash occupy this celebrity status in Judaism. There are other classes of individuals who are to be admired and emulated – such as talmidei chachamim (Torah scholars), tzadikim (righteous people), chasidim (pious people) – but none of these individuals function in the same capacity as the Kohanim of Mikdash. “For the lips of the Kokhen should safeguard knowledge, and people should seek teaching from his mouth, for he is an angel of Hashem, Master of Legions” (Malachi 2:7). Just as the true “angels of Hashem” are pristine in their metaphysical purity, so must their earthly counterparts be pristine in their physicality. 

I believe that this gives us some insight into the Torah’s general approach in mitzvos. The Rambam (Moreh ha’Nevuchim 3:32), in his famous explanation of korbanos (sacrifices), writes: 

Many commandments in our Torah are the result of a similar course adopted by the same Director, for it is impossible to go suddenly from one extreme to the other; therefore, it is impossible for man – according to human nature – to suddenly discontinue everything to which he has been accustomed. 

The Rambam applies this to korbanos, explaining that it would have been too much for Hashem to completely abolish a mode of worship to which the people had become so attached. He cites an example of Hashem using this approach in a non-mitzvah area: 

There occurs in the Torah a passage which contains exactly the same idea; it is the following: “God did not lead them by way of the land of the Philistines, even though it was near, for God said, ‘lest the people change their mind when they see war, and return to Egypt;’ but God led the people around, by way of the wilderness of the Sea of Reeds” (Shemos 13:17). Here Hashem led the people around, away from the direct road which He originally intended, because He was concerned that they might meet on that way with hardships too great for their ordinary strength; He took them by another road in order to obtain thereby His original goal. In the same manner Hashem refrained from commanding what the people by their natural disposition would be incapable of obeying, and gave the aforementioned commandments as a means of accomplishing His primary goal– namely, knowledge of Him, and the rejection of avodah zarah. 

The disqualifying blemishes of the Kohanim are another example of this phenomenon. On the one hand, the Torah does not assign any inherent value to physical attractiveness. At the same time, the Torah recognizes that it is human nature to care about physical appearances. The Torah can emphasize time and again that the essence of a human being is the tzelem Elokim and that true success lies in the pursuit of knowledge rather than beauty, but at the end of the day, the average Jew will still look askance at a Kohen with a unibrow, will be distracted by a Kohen who is an albino, and will be put off by a Kohen with bad body odor. 

In other words, the Torah must walk a fine line between its idealistic goal of perfecting human beings and the pragmatic realities of catering to human nature. That line can only be drawn by the Creator of man, “the God of the spirits of all flesh” (Bamidbar 16:22). Shlomo ha’Melech said: “Train the youth in accordance with his way (i.e. his nature), and even when he is old, he will not deviate from it” (Mishlei 22:6), and the same pedagogical tactic is employed by the Giver of Torah.

Parashas Pinchas: The Killer Kohen

Disclaimer: this dvar Torah is flawed. I wasn't able to work everything out in time. Rather than not posting anything at all, I figured I might as well post what I have, as polished as I can make it. If you find value in what you read, great! If you spot the problems and shortcomings, then I hope they will prompt you to seek your own understanding - and I hope you share this with me!

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this blog post.

Artwork: Searing Spear, by Chris Rahn

Parashas Pinchas: The Killer Kohen

This parashah begins with Pinchas being rewarded for his act of zealotry, as recounted at the end of Parashas Balak:

Hashem spoke to Moshe, saying: "Pinchas ben Elazar ben Aharon ha'Kohen has turned My anger away from Bnei Yisrael by his zealously avenging Me among them, so that I did not destroy Bnei Yisrael because of My jealousy. Therefore, say: 'I hereby give him My covenant of peace. It shall be for him and for his descendants after him an eternal covenant of kehunah (priesthood), because he was zealous for his God and atoned for Bnei Yisrael.'"

The Abravanel [1] raises a basic question: 

What is the [nature of the] reward that Ha'Kadosh Baruch Hu gave to Pinchas for turning back His anger from Bnei Yisrael and acting zealously on his behalf? ... The kehunah that He said He would give to him and his offspring after him, "an eternal covenant of kehunah" - this had already been given to the offspring of Aharon for all time! What, then, was the reward that He gave Pinchas in exchange for his service?

The Abravanel offers a somewhat halachic answer [2] based on a misconception that Bnei Yisrael would have otherwise had about Pinchas's status as a valid kohen:

[Bnei Yisrael] said that since Pinchas killed someone, and came in contact with a corpse, he would be pasul (halachically disqualified) for the avodas ha'Mikdash (Temple service), and would not be able to approach the altar of Hashem, since he shed blood. On account of this, Hashem commanded Moshe to say to everyone, and to publicize to Bnei Yisrael ... that Pinchas would NOT be pasul for the avodas ha'Mikdash, but to the contrary: he and his offspring after him would have an eternal covenant of kehunah - in other words, that they would always be kohanim of Hashem, and Kohanim Gedolim, for long days ... 

Thus, Pinchas's reward corresponded to his [act of zealotry] ... Therefore He said: "because he was zealous on behalf of His God, and atoned for Bnei Yisrael" - in other words, since the kehunah was appropriate for him, insofar as he was zealous on behalf of his God - and his zealotry was a praiseworthy act of avodah before Him - therefore, it was befitting for him to always be a kohen, to atone for them through the avodas ha'Mikdash.

The source for the halacha that a kohen who killed someone is pasul for avodah is brought down in the halachos of Birkas Kohanim, and is extended via kal va'chomer (an a fortiori argument) to other forms of avodah. [3] Regarding its primary application the Rambam [4] writes:

Six things prevent birkas kohanim: speech, blemishes, aveirah (transgression), years, wine, and impurity of the hands ... How does aveirah [prevent birkas kohanim]? A kohen who killed someone, even unintentionally, even though he did teshuvah, he may not raise his hands [to do birkas kohanim,] as it is stated: "your hands are filled with blood" (Yeshayahu 1:15) and it is written: "and when you spread out your palms, I will hide My eyes from you" (ibid.).

In order to understand why killing someone would preclude birkas kohanim - and, by extension, avodas ha'Mikdash - we need to understand the Rambam's citation from Sefer Yeshayahu. Although the Rambam breaks it up into two parts, both are from the same pasuk, which reads: "And when you spread your palms, I will hide My eyes from you; even if you increase prayer, I will not listen - your hands are filled with blood." What insight does this provide about why a kohen who killed someone would be pasul for birkas kohanim and avodas ha'Mikdash? Apparently, this disqualification has nothing to do with the kohen's righteousness, since he may not do birkas kohanim even if he did teshuvah. Why, then, would such a kohen be unfit for avodah?

I believe the answer lies in the role of the kohanim, in birkas kohanim and in general. The kohanim act as the conduit of the shem Hashem (the name of God), which is the source of the berachah (blessing), as the pasuk states: "you shall place My name upon Bnei Yisrael, and I will bless them" (Bamidbar 6:27). Although there are many interpretations of what, exactly, the pesukim mean, one thing is clear: birkas kohanim is intended to bring about life, divine favor, and peace between God and His people. Likewise, kohanim are supposed to be messengers of peace, as the mishnah in Avos 1:12 states:

Hillel would say: Be among the disciples of Aharon, loving peace and pursuing peace, loving people and bringing them close to Torah.

As such, a kohen who took a life cannot be the vehicle of this berachah, since his association to the termination of a life would contradict his peace-affirming role, and undermine his berachah. Analogously, this would be akin to the way people would perceive a doctor who killed someone. Even if this doctor possessed great medical expertise, his identity as someone who restores life would be undermined by his taking of life. This is why it doesn't matter whether the kohen killed someone intentionally or unintentionally, nor does it matter that he did teshuvah. The very fact that he is associated with the loss of life constitutes a blemish as a messenger of peace, in the capacity of birkas kohanim and avodas ha'Mikdash.

We see a similar phenomenon with Hashem's explanation of why David ha'Melech was not chosen to build the Beis ha'Mikdash itself: "You shall not build a temple to My name, for you are a man of war, and you have shed blood" (I Divrei ha'Yamim 28:3). The Mikdash, which "will be called 'a house of tefilah' for all people" (Yeshayahu 56:7) cannot be associated with bloodshed, as our pasuk states: "even if you increase tefilah, I will not listen, for your hands are filled with blood."

How, then, was Pinchas able to retain his kehunah? True, his killing of Zimri and Cozbi was not an aveirah, but wouldn't his taking of life mar his role as a messenger of peace?

The answer to this question was provided by the Abravanel in his explanation of how Pinchas's reward corresponded to his act of zealotry: "the kehunah was appropriate for him, insofar as he was zealous on behalf of his God - and his zealotry was a praiseworthy act of avodah before Him." In other words, Pinchas's zealotry was subsumed under a more fundamental framework than peace or  even life, namely, avodas Hashem. Since life and peace are, themselves, only of value insofar as they facilitate avodas Hashem, Pinchas's execution of sinners did not contradict the primary message of birkas kohanim or his role as a kohen, since the berachah itself presupposes that the blessings we receive will be used for avodas Hashem. In order to clarify this, Hashem publicly endorsed Pinchas's kehunah and emphasized that it was not only "an eternal covenant of kehunah," but also "My covenant of peace."

[1] Don Yitzchak Abravanel, Commentary on Sefer Bamidbar: Questions on Bamidbar 25:10-18
[2] It should be noted that the standard answer to this question (Zevachim 101b, cited by Rashi on Bamidbar 25:13) is that only Aharon and his two sons with their future offspring had been anointed as Kohanim for the avodah, whereas Pinchas - who had been born earlier - was not anointed as a Kohen for the avodah until after he killed Zimri. Apparently, the Abravanel rejects this answer. Either that, or I'm misreading the Abravanel's question.
[3] Rabbeinu Chezkia ben Manoach (Chazkuni), Commentary on Sefer Bereishis 25:31
[4] Rabbeinu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides), Mishneh Torah: Sefer Ahavah, Hilchos Tefilah u'Birkas Kohanim 15:1,3

Parashas Behaalosecha: The Non-Symbolic Trumpets

Parashas Behaalosecha: The Non-Symbolic Trumpets

This week's parashah features the unusually multifaceted mitzvah of the chatotzros (trumpets). This mitzvah has a number of functions. Here are the pesukim, with my own paragraph divisions between the categories of functions: 

Hashem spoke to Moshe, saying: "Make for yourself two silver trumpets - make them hammered out, and they shall be yours for the summoning of the assembly, and to cause the camp to journey. When they sound a tekiah (long blast) with [both of] them, the entire assembly shall assemble to you, to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting. If they sound a tekiah with one, the leaders shall assemble to you; to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting. When you sound teruah (short blasts), the camps resting to the east shall journey. When you sound teruah a second time, the camps resting to the south shall journey; teruah shall they sound for their journeys. When you gather together the congregation, you shall sound a tekiah but not a teruah. 

The sons of Aharon, the Kohanim, shall sound the trumpets, and it shall be for you an eternal decree for your generations. When you go to wage war in your Land against an enemy who oppresses you, you shall sound short blasts of the trumpets, and you shall be remembered before Hashem, your God, and you shall be saved from your enemies. 

On a day of your gladness, and on your festivals, and on your new moons, you shall sound the trumpets over your burnt-offerings, and over your feast peace-offerings; and they shall be a remembrance for you before your God; I am Hashem, your God.

The trumpets served four functions: (1) summoning the assembly and the leaders, (2) signaling the camps to move, (3) causing us to be remembered before Hashem at a time when we are oppressed or afflicted, and (4) accompanying the korbanos (offerings) on joyous holidays. The first two functions were only relevant when Bnei Yisrael were encamped in the Midbar (Wilderness). The second two functions apply for all generations, as long as the Mikdash (Temple) still stands. 

Two basic questions arise from these facts: 

1. Why are trumpets the instrument of choice? What is their significance? Moreover, why not use the Torah's other mitzvah instrument: the shofar? After all, the same types of blasts are sounded: tekiah, teruah, tekiah. Not only that, but in the Mikdash, a shofar accompanied the two trumpets during these blasts, so it's not as though the shofar is irrelevant here. 
2. What is the common denominator between these four functions? What do these four things have in common, such that they are unified by this mitzvah?

Now, it is tempting to answer question #1 by searching for some sort of symbolism in the trumpets and their blasts, and then use that symbolism to answer question #2. There are a number of details about the trumpets which lend themselves to this approach: the fact that they had to be hammered out of silver and no other type of metal, the fact that there can never be fewer than two trumpets and never more than 120, the fact that they were only sounded in the Mikdash, the fact that Moshe Rabbeinu made the first set of trumpets and no one else was permitted to use them - even to the point where they were put into genizah when Moshe died - etc. etc.

That is certainly a fine approach, and I have no doubt that it can yield good results. However, I would like to share a simpler approach which is often overlooked, due to its simplicity.

The Sefer ha'Chinuch explains:

At the root of this precept lies the reason that at the time of a korban they had to intensely focus their thoughts on its purpose, for as is it is known, it could become disqualified through certain specific thoughts. Moreover, an offering required perfect concentration of intention before the Lord of all, Who commanded us about it. Similarly, at a time of trouble, a man needs great concentration when he pleads before his Creator that He should have mercy on him and rescue him from his misfortune. Therefore they were commanded about sounding the trumpets at these times. For man, insofar as he is a physical being, requires a great arousal to matters. For human nature, with nothing to arouse it, will remain asleep. And nothing will stir him like the sounds of melody - it is a known matter - and especially trumpets, the blast of which is the strongest sound among all musical instruments. 

And there is another benefit to be found in the blast of the trumpets, as it would seem, apart from the arousal to proper intention. For by the force of the sounds, a man will remove from his heart the thought of other affairs of the world, and he will pay attention at that time to nothing but the matter of the offering. But why should I go on at length, when this is evident to anyone who gives ear to hear trumpets and the peal of the shofar with proper intention? 

See what I mean by "simple"? The Sefer ha'Chinuch's answer to the first question (Why trumpets?) is "because trumpets are loud, and they help you focus." His answer to the second question (What do these functions have in common?) is "they all require focus." (Technically, he didn't explain the two Midbar functions, but it is reasonable to assume that he would apply his explanation there as well.)

This explanation of the trumpets certainly isn't glamorous, but it is conservative and cogent. It explains the reason for the mitzvos without positing anything other than what the facts, themselves, suggest. It eschews the perils of metaphor and symbolism-speculation. Last but not least, it helps us to understand the mitzvah on its most basic level, which is a necessary step before moving on to a more advanced understanding. 

In my opinion, the Sefer ha'Chinuch's explanation here should serve as a paradigm for analyzing the reasons for all mitzvos. Start with the basic structure of the mitzvah and develop a theory from the bottom and up, making the minimum number of assumptions possible. The navi's admonition to "walk humbly with your God" (Michah 6:8) applies as much to methodology in learning as it does to life.