Emor: defectives
Emor: defectives
Emor begins with
disqualification from the sacrificial rite. Aaron, Moshe’s brother, and
his descendants were chosen to be Cohanim, the clan that could perform the Temple
service. Cohanim are forbidden contact with the dead (presumably to mourn them.)
For ordinary Cohanim, close relatives, that are universally mourned, are exempted
from the restriction. The kohen gadol, the High Priest ,has no exceptions. No
matter how close the relative, the Cohen Gadol must remain pure and avoid
exposure to the corpse tumah. The elevated status of the Cohen limits his
life in significant ways: the price of
privilege.
The parsha
becomes more cringy when it talks about the physical defects that disqualify a
Cohen from performing the service. He cannot be blind, or lame or have an eye
disease, etc. Now, there appears to be a conflict between the Enlightenment and
Torah. Western culture has taught me to celebrate the triumphs of the disabled.
The Torah disqualifies them from the Temple service.
I
immediately imagine the blind, lame Cohen who, through simulations and
extensive practice, knows just where to place the bowl to collect the
sacrificial blood; places that blood in exactly the correct positions on the
altar; waves the appropriate parts of the sacrificed animal; places the proper
pieces on the burning altar and walks off to the appreciative applause of the
Temple attendees.
Maybe I imagine
this all wrong. I want the Torah to make sense to my contemporary self and show
sympathy for the victim of Nature’s caprice. I do not want the Torah to offend
my modern sensibilities. I confront the challenge of bringing these vectors
into alignment.
The death of
Aaron’s eldest sons, Nadav and Avihu, has demonstrated the danger of flawed
Temple service. Perhaps the “disqualification”
of the flawed priest is really an exemption from the draft. The service would
be too dangerous for a priest with a broken arm or impaired vision. That approach
to the issue is an easy out.
More likely,
the involvement of a priest with a disability would shift the focus of the
service to the struggles of the challenged individual. The service would change
from spectacle to human drama. The
intention of the author would be lost in sentimentality.
Having a disabled
person perform the rite would display the cruelty of a Nature ruled by the One
Gd. The sacrificial rite inherently includes a plea for Divine mercy and generosity.
The performance of that rite by someone who had been deprived of some element
of that goodness would lead to questions. Actually, the mention of the disqualification
of the disabled in the parsha leads to those questions, perhaps in a more
appropriate context.
The
disqualification of flawed animals from the sacrificial rite is easier to accept.
The altar cannot become a dump for unfit animals. On a deeper level, the demand
for high quality livestock echoes the sacrifices of Abel and Cain. Abel brought:” the
choicest of the firstlings of his flock” and Gd paid heed to Abel’s offerings. Cain, who
brought less than the best, did not merit Gd’s attention. The consequence of this
envy is the story of the first murder. The wisdom of providing high quality has unforeseen
consequences.
The requirement
that sacrificial animals be unblemished is central to the story of the destruction
of the second temple ( Gittin 56a):
The emperor went
and sent with him (bar Kamtza) a choice three-year-old calf. While
bar Kamtza was coming with the calf to the Temple, he made a blemish
on the calf’s upper lip. And some say he made the blemish on
its eyelids, a place where according to us, i.e., halakha, it is
a blemish, but according to them, gentile rules for their offerings, it is
not a blemish.
The blemish
notwithstanding, the Sages thought to sacrifice the animal as an
offering due to the imperative to maintain peace with the government.
Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkolas said to them: If the priests do that, people will
say that blemished animals may be sacrificed as offerings on
the altar. The Sages said: If we do not sacrifice it, then we must prevent
bar Kamtza from reporting this to the emperor. The Sages thought to kill him
so that he would not go and speak against them. Rabbi Zekharya said to
them: If you kill him, people will say that one who makes a
blemish on sacrificial animals is to be killed.
Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The excessive humility of Rabbi
Zekharya ben Avkolas destroyed our Temple, burned our Sanctuary, and exiled us
from our land.
Was this
story a prophetic vision of our parsha?
It is people
who put the devil in the details.