Physical Blemishes of Kohanim Today

A question is often raised (it has occurred several times on the Dinonline site) about Kohanim who possess a physical blemish, and may thereby be disqualified from participating in nesias kapayim (duchaning)—the blessing of Kohanim to the nation.

In this week’s article, we will discuss this matter and address the following questions: Are there blemishes, physical or spiritual, that disqualify a Kohen from giving the Priestly Blessing? What are the principles underlying this issue? What is the status of a Kohen who has (Heaven forbid) killed somebody in a traffic accident? In which ways is the service of blessing the nation similar to the service of Kohanim in the Temple?

These questions, among others, are addressed below.

Inside and Outside the Mikdash

The original and perhaps primary location of birkas kohanim was in the holy precincts—first the Mishkan, and later the Mikdash.

The Torah relates that upon completing the sacrificial service of the Eighth Day of the Mishkan’s dedication, Aharon blessed the people: “And Aharon raised up his hands towards the people and blessed them; and he came down from offering the sin-offering and the burnt-offering and the peace-offerings” (Vayikra 9:22).

In keeping with this, the Rambam lists birkat kohanim among the positive mitzvos associated with the Mikdashand its service (Mitzvas Aseh 26).  Moreover, the Mishnah (Tamid 7:2) says the Kohanim would bless the people after burning the limbs of the Tamidoffering.

Yet, in addition to the clear connection between birkas kohanim and the Mikdash, Rishonim agree that outside the Temple, and even after its destruction, blessing the people is a Torah mitzvah (Rambam, Sefer Ha-Mitzvos, Aseh 26; Ramban, Bamidbar 8:2;  Chinuch 378).

This emerges from a teaching of the Yerushalmi (Nazir 7:1). It raises the following question: To what degree is the blessing of Kohanim outside the Mikdash related to other parts of the Temple service within the Mikdash?

The Prayer-Service Duality

On the one hand, the Gemara (Sotah 38a) explains that birkas kohanim must be recited while standing. This law, according to the conclusion of the Gemara, is derived from the general instruction to Kohanim that they are commanded “to stand to serve.” Like other parts of the Temple service, birkas kohanim must be performed standing.

In this context it is noteworthy that birkas kohanim is recited after the blessing of retzei, in which we pray for the restoration of the Temple service. Clearly, there is a close connection between the Temple service and the blessing of the Kohanim.

On the other hand, in discussing the prohibition of one who is intoxicated against performing birkas kohanim, the Gemara (Taanis 26b-27a) explains that the law cannot be derived from the laws of the Temple service: “For if so, just as one who serves may not have a blemish, so too a Kohen who blesses [may not have a blemish].”

The Gemara assumes that even a blemished Kohen may bless the nation, and therefore rejects the comparison (on a Torah level) between the Temple service and birkas kohanim.

In fact, the Rambam (Tefillah 15:3-4)—based on the Gemara (loc. cit.) disqualifies a Kohen who is guilty of idolatry or murder, as well as a Kohen who has consumed a revi’is of wine, from blessing the nation—a disqualification derived from comparison to the Temple service.  At the same time, the same Gemara rules that a blemished or apostate Kohen may perform the blessing, apparently rejecting the comparison between birkat kohanim and the Temple service (see Tosafos, Taanis 26b).

It is thus clear that on there is a relationship between the blessing and other parts of the Temple service, but that this comparison is not absolute.

Inner and Superficial Comparisons

It seems that although birkas kohanim is part of the prayer service—in Mishnah Torah  the Rambam discusses its laws as part of the section dealing with prayer—it is derived from, and therefore inherently related to, the Temple service.

Because of this duality, it follows that although the essential properties of Kohanim need not fully match those required for the Temple service, the Kohen’s superficial appearance and actions must correlate with the conditions of the Temple service.[1]

There is therefore no disqualification of a Kohen with a blemish. The Magen Avraham (128:54) rules that even a Kohen who is an arel (uncircumcised) may participate in the blessing. However, like the Temple service, birkas hakohanim must be recited standing, and we disqualify—at least on a rabbinic level—a Kohen who is inebriated. Inebriation affects a Kohen’s behavior, and it disqualifies him from blessing the nation.

An important ramification of this is the law of birkas kohanim at night. The time of day when the blessing is recited is related to its superficial enactment, and it therefore stands to reason that the blessing cannot be recited at night. This, indeed, is the opinion of Hagahos Maimoniyos (Tefillah 3, Letter Hei), citing the Mordechai, who explains that birkas kohanim is compared to the Temple service.

This opinion is also ruled by the Shulchan Aruch Harav (623:8, who says that the blessing may be recited until nightfall), and by others (see Shaar Ha-Tzion 623:11). However, there is a minority opinion of the Maharil (cited by Darkei Moshe) who permits the recitation of birkas kohanim even after nightfall (the Magen Avraham 623:3 notes both opinions).

Disqualifying Physical Blemishes

Although the Gemara rules out a comparison with the Temple service with regard to blemishes, the Mishnah (Megillah 4:7) teaches that certain blemishes do disqualify the Kohen from participation in the blessing: “A priest whose hands have blemishes may not raise his hands. Rabbi Yehuda says, `Moreover, one whose hands are stained with a woad (a blue dye) or madder (a red dye) may not lift up his hands, because the people will gaze at him.”

This halachah is ruled by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 128:30), who adds that conspicuous facial blemishes also disqualify the Kohen.

Unlike the popular misconception, there is no concern that gazing at the Kohanim will cause a person to become blind. This concern is reserved for the blessing of Kohanim in the Temple (Chagigah 15a), where the Shechinah rested on the Kohanim’s hands.

Yet, although it involves no danger, the Rambam (Tefilla 14:7) explains that just as the kohanim should not gaze at the people to ensure that they do not become distracted, so the congregation should not gaze at the kohanim (and become distracted). A Kohen with superficial blemishes is likely to attract attention, and he is therefore disqualified from blessing the people.

The custom today is that the Kohanim cover their hands and faces with a tallis. The disqualification due to superficial blemishes on hands and face applies only where their face and hands are uncovered, and not where they are covered (Shulchan Aruch 128:30-31).

In addition, today there is no reason for people to avoid seeing Kohanim, whose hands and faces are covered. The Mishnah Berurah (89) explains further that in our days there is no prohibition against seeing the Kohen’s uncovered hands, since the Shechinah does not descend upon them (rather, it is only prohibited to gaze at the Kohanim in a way that distracts a person from the blessing)—but that it might be customary to refrain from seeing them in memory of the Mikdash.

Blemishes of the Spirit

The Rambam (Tefillah 15:6-7), followed by the Shulchan Aruch (128:39), rules that as a general rule, sins do not disqualify a Kohen from participation in the blessing. He explains: “The blessing is not dependent upon the Kohanim, but rather on Ha-Kadosh Baruch Hu… Kohanim should perform their mitzvah as they are instructed, and Ha-Kadosh Baruch Hu, in His mercy, will willingly bless Israel.”

Although the Magen Avraham (128:56) explains (citing Raanach) that this refers to Kohanim who have repented their sins, this is not the simple explanation of the ruling which does not mention the Kohen’s repentance. Indeed, the silence of the Mishnah Berurah implies that he does not concur with the Magen Avraham on this matter.

However, there are a number of sins that do disqualify a Kohen from blessing. The Rambam (Tefillah 15:3) mentions three sins: murder, idolatry, and conversion to another (idolatrous) religion. The Mishnah Berurah (128:134) adds that even one who converted to Islam is disqualified. The Rema rules that repentance is effective even for somebody who previously left the faith.

Can a Murderer Bless?

Regarding a Kohen who has murdered, the Gemara (Berachos 32b) teaches that the hands of a Kohenwho has murdered may not be vehicles of a Divine blessing: “Rabbi Yochanan said: ‘A kohen who has killed someone may not raise his hands, since it says (Yeshayahu 1:15), ‘[When you spread your hands, I will ignore you…] your hands have been filled with blood.'”

This halachah is applied by Mishpetei Uziel (Vol. 2, no. 7) to killing a non-Jew, though Maamar Mordechai (128:43) derived from the Perishah that it does not apply to a non-Jew.

According to the Rambam, this restriction applies even after the Kohen has repented—though Hagahos Maimoniyos (15:1) cites the Raavya and Rabbeinu Simcha, who limit the restriction to a murderer who is “known and inclined to kill.” The Shulchan Aruch (128:35) rules as the Rambam.

Although the Rema adds that the custom is to be lenient for those who have repented (in order not to “close the door” before them), the Mishnah Berurah (Biur Halachah, s.v. Afilu asa) cites Peri Chadash and Eliyah Rabbah, who insist that one should not rule leniently concerning a Kohenwho murdered with intent, even if he has repented.

The Chayei Adam (32:5) relies on the ruling of the Rema where the victim did not die instantly, but only after a number of days (see Maharsham 5:30 for an application of this ruling to somebody who killed with intent and later repented).

The Mishnah Berurah (128:129) rules that one who has been forced to kill, as well as one who causes a woman to miscarry (which is not considered full murder), may perform birkas kohanim.

Accidental Killing

Contemporary authorities discuss a number of cases that can be of practical consequence. For example, may a Kohen one who has caused a fatal car crash participate in blessing?

Based on the ruling of Rema, there is clearly room for leniency concerning somebody who has repented. As the Mishnah Berurah implies, authorities are only stringent with regard to somebody who killed intentionally, and not concerning somebody who killed inadvertently. This ruling was given by Rav Shmuel Wosner (Shevet Halevi 1, Orach Chaim 43).

For Sephardim (who often don’t follow the glosses of the Rema), Rav Ovadya Yosef (Yechavveh Daas 5:16) rules that a Kohen should not recite the blessing if he has caused a fatal car crash, but adds that if he was driving carefully and somebody jumped out in front of the car, he is not disqualified. He also rules that if the accident only caused injury the Kohen is not disqualified, even if the victim ultimately died of his wounds—providing the Kohen repented.

The Shulchan Aruch (128:36) rules that a Kohen who performs a circumcision on a child who passes away as a result is not disqualified, because he “intended to fulfill a mitzvah.” This ruling also applies to a doctor whose patient passes away under his care, or on the operating table. He, too, intended to fulfill a mitzvah.

A number of authorities explain that a Kohen who killed while a soldier should be considered as having been forced to kill, and may participate in birkas kohanim (Shut Iggros Moshe, Yoreh De’ah 2:158; see Shut Tiferes Tzvi 36, who explains that after a soldier is forced to go to the army, he is permitted to kill the enemy, who wishes to kill him; see also Mishpetei Uziel, ibid., quoting from Darkei Teshuvah; Hitorerus Teshuvah 4:11). It is even more obvious that a soldier in the Israel Defense Forces continues to participate in the blessing, for he fights to save the Jewish people.

Shabbos Desecraters

Some authorities (see Peri Chadash 128) suggest that since an idol-worshiper is disqualified from the blessing, there is also room to disqualify a Kohen who publicly desecrates the Shabbos. This is based on the Gemara(Chullin 5a), which compares one who publicly violates Shabbos to an akkum (an acronym for “worshipper of stars and constellations”).

The Shulchan Aruch Harav (128:52), the Peri Megadim (52), and the Mishna Berura (134) all rule that a public Shabbos violator should not participate in the blessing.

However, Rav Moshe Feinstein (Orach Chaim 1:33) argues that the comparison between violation of Shabbos and idolatry is not absolute, as we see from the fact that repentance surely helps for a Kohen who once desecrated Shabbos, while it does not help for idolatry.

Rav Moshe rules that violation of Shabbos by Jews of his time does not demonstrate kefirah, as public violation of Shabbos used to do in the past. Therefore, although it is preferable that they should not participate in the blessing, if they are aware of their right to bless the people, they should not be prevented from doing so.

Somebody who is married to a woman forbidden to Kohanim, such as a divorcee or a convert, is disqualified from issuing the blessing—though he does not have the status of a chalal. All his children, however, do have the status of a chalal. A male who is a chalal may not participate in the blessing—indeed, he loses the elevated status of a Kohen entirely (Shulchan Aruch 128:40; Mishnah Berurah 147). A girl born from such a union is a chalalah, and she may not marry a Kohen. If she does, her children retain the chalal status.