Emor: Disability and the Divine Gaze—Reexamining the Category of “Mum”

by Anna Eisenstat Rimerman '27

Our parsha introduces a deeply challenging concept: ritual limitations for “a person with a blemish,” “ish asher bo mum” (Vayikra 21:18). The term “mum” is heretofore reserved for objects or animals intended for ritual purposes, and it indicates a physical defect that affects status and acceptability. Here Moshe is commanded to instruct Aharon that his sons and their offspring are only suitable to offer God’s food and approach the curtain or altar on the condition that they are free from a list of 12 physical afflictions, both congenital and acquired (this instruction only applies to Kohanim and does not revoke their status or privilege of consuming consecrated food, and as such. may not represent a broader biblical ethic of disability). Rabbinic tradition has grappled with this instruction throughout our history, with midrash and halakha often displaying a marked discomfort with the notion that a non-volitional bodily state may obstruct a priest from nearing Hashem in worship. 

The Rambam points out that the list of mumim enumerates externally perceptible conditions, while clearly accepting the sanctuary labor of someone afflicted with internal ailments. Note that an animal with internal injuries would be considered a tereifa and thus unfit for service (Hilkhot Bi’at Hamikdash, 6:7). Rabbi Professor Daniel Sperber takes this as evidence that, regarding human mumim, “the fault lies not with the priest himself but with the one who looks at him” (רחמיו על כל מעשיו", פרשת אמור תשפ"ב”). Let us consider this imagined gaze. Bible scholars have posited that there is something about a disabled body that affronts the divine gaze (Jeremy Schipper and Jeffrey Stackert, “Blemishes, Camouflage, and Sanctuary Service: The Priestly Deity and His Attendants” Hebrew Bible and Ancient Israel 2.4, 2018). After all, who should pass judgement on the bodies involved in ritual offerings if not God? However, rabbinic interpretations largely vehemently disagree with this understanding, explaining that God’s grace does not discriminate superficially. As such we turn our focus to a very different gaze upon the priest. In the words of Rabbi Eliyahu Meir Bloch, “The disqualification of a kohen with a mum isn’t because the blessed Creator doesn’t want him, God forbid. Rather, it is because of the weakness of people, who do not feel the same respect for someone with a mum as for someone who’s healthy in every body part” (Peninei Da’at al HaTorah, Wycliffe, 5756, vol. 2, 45-47).

Note that there would be a significant human audience observing the temple worship, turning expectantly toward the Kohen as their personal emissary. If we rest our focus on this human audience, then the physical appearance and associated social status of the Kohen becomes a question of shifting public stigma and subjective judgement rather than one of objective spiritual worth or metaphysical qualification.

This ethos is found in the halakhic debate regarding a “blemished priest,” who wishes to participate in the Priestly Benediction1. In the Mishnah we discover that, akin to the restriction on sacrificial work, 

A Kohen who has a disability may not raise his hands in blessing. Rabbi Yehudah says that even if his hands are colored with dye he should not raise his hands since the nation will look at him (Mishnah Megillah 4:7).

The great problem of mumim comes to light. Clearly we are concerned not with the body of the individual but with the gaze of the nation! 

In parallel sugiyot in the Bavli and Yerushalmi, we discover that there is a key exemption to the restriction on a priest with a physical disability to offer their blessing: dash b’iro mutar, one who is known in their community may offer his blessing (Rashi on Bavli Megillah 24a, Yerushalmi Taanit 4:1). This heter offers a glimpse into the Talmudic perception of mum and the problem it may pose to a priest’s social and spiritual status. Rabbi Dr. Benjamin Lau offers the following conclusion:

It is clear that if the community had not reacted to those “blemished” people with acceptance, the attitude of the halakha would not have changed… If this is the case, the public has enormous power to define the place and standing of people with disabilities in society. Our attitude towards the disabled is not decreed from heaven (“Disability and Judaism: A Study in Halakhic Responsiveness,” YCT Disabilities Inclusion Torah Reader 2023).

Even as the halakha concerns itself with the gaze of the community rather than God’s judgement of the mum, the midrash tells us to keep an eye out for the Divine gaze during Birkat Kohanim. Chagigah 16a teaches that looking at a Kohen during their blessing from the dukhan was blinding in the time of the Temple. Rashi explains that the blinding force is the Shekhina which rests upon the hands of the priests. Shir Hashirim Rabba 2:9 teaches that the Beloved looks out at us: “‘Gazing through the window,’ from between the priests’ shoulders, ‘Peering through the lattice,’ from between the priests’ fingers.” And what words does the beloved utter in this intimate moment of observation? Yivarekhika hashem v’yishmarekha - None other than Birkat Kohanim itself.

Religious life enables a relationship between humanity and God, whether played out through material offerings in the Temple or spiritual supplications in the synagogue. The question of who is fit to facilitate that encounter can rest upon the requirements of either partner, God or human. The halakhic treatment of the blessing of a blemished Kohen is a perfect example of this question of who should mediate the dialogue between us; answers found in Jewish traditions teach an essential lesson. The Mishnah is concerned with the eyes of the nation, the Talmud is concerned with the social acceptance of the community (“dash b’iro”), and the Acharonim and modern poskim are concerned with the distracted glance of the congregants in shul (“hesech da’at”). All of these positions make one thing clear: though our own gaze may falter, God does not look away from us. The Creator’s gaze rests upon humankind without discrimination or ableism. It peeks out at us through the hands of any Kohen whom the community truly welcomes and who himself wishes to face his community with earnest care. Poignantly, the Talmud dictates the blessing that precedes Birkat Kohanim thus: “Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has sanctified us with the sanctity of Aaron and commanded us to bless His people, Israel, with love” (Sotah 39a). The unique opportunity of direct divine gaze offered by Birkat Kohanim calls us to be cognizant of the nature of our own gaze upon one another. Subsequently, we discover that when humans cultivate love for fellow humans, we all benefit by the revelation of more divine grace in our lives.

print

______________________________________________________________________________

1. There is a significant machloket regarding whether there is a direct connection between the instructions in our parsha regarding sacrificial worship and the rules dictating who may give the priestly blessing (Yerushalmi Taanit 4:1, Bavli Taanit 27a). This debate has important bearings on the level of chumra of the rules, their reasoning as well as their respective possible heters.

______________________________________________________________________________

Anna Eisenstat Rimerman grew up in a religious community in Israel and studied in the women’s beit midrash in Migdal Oz before serving in the IDF. Anna has participated in the Van Leer Institute’s Research Group on Secularism and Religion and worked as an editor for the Hayo Haya History Journal. She studied at the Beit Prat Midrasha and served as a member of their Jerusalem community leadership board. Anna completed her Master’s in Theological Studies at Harvard Divinity School with a concentration in Comparative Studies. While at Harvard, she served as the co-president of the Jewish Student Association Kehilla and focused on spiritual caregiving and chaplaincy training. Anna’s current research interests lie at the intersection of Mysticism and Gender Studies in Judaism and Christianity in the Middle Ages.