Because - Emor 5771

21:17 – 18 (יז דַּבֵּר אֶל-אַהֲרֹן, לֵאמֹר: אִישׁ מִזַּרְעֲךָ לְדֹרֹתָם, אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בוֹ מוּם--לֹא יִקְרַב, לְהַקְרִיב לֶחֶם אֱלֹ קָיו יח כִּי כָל-אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר-בּוֹ מוּם, לֹא יִקְרָב: אִישׁ עִוֵּר אוֹ פִסֵּחַ, אוֹ חָרֻם אוֹ שָׂרוּעַ) We have the commandment and prohibition against allowing a Bal Mum, a Jew who has some physical abnormality to do the Avoda in the Bais Hamikdash. The language of the Posuk is somewhat striking. We are commanded that a Jew who has a physical deformity is not permitted to do the service of the Bais Hamikdash. The reason is because anyone who has a physical deformity is not allowed to do the service of the Bais Hamikdash. That doesn’t seem to make sense. (כִּי) is giving a reason, don’t do this because. The Torah doesn’t always tell us reasons, however, sometimes it does.  Here it says, (אִישׁ מִזַּרְעֲךָ לְדֹרֹתָם, אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בוֹ מוּם--לֹא יִקְרַב, לְהַקְרִיב לֶחֶם אֱלֹ קָיו יח כִּי כָל-אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר-בּוֹ מוּם, לֹא יִקְרָב). Because anyone who has a Mum can’t do the Avodah. So it is saying that one cannot do the Avoda because one cannot do the Avoda. It is a Pliya? That is not a reason, it is just repeating the prohibition.

The Tosafos Beracha interprets as follows. He says the Torah is telling us that there are times that we have a Mitzvah to do and we ask why and there are times that we are told accept the Mitzvah without knowing the reason and do it because you were told to do it.

We find such an expression in the Gemara in Maseches Shabbos 21a (22 lines from the top) (א"ל אין מדליקין מאי טעמא לפי שאין מדליקין). Certain types of oils can’t be used to light Shabbos candles. Abaya asked why not? The Rebbi said because we don’t. He said don’t think into the reason, accept it.

Similarly, in Maseches Nidda 60a (9 lines from the bottom) (א"ל אין תולין מה טעם לפי שאין תולין). So we find that sometimes a Rebbi understood that you have to teach a Halacha without teaching the reason.  That is what the Torah is saying here as well. (אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בוֹ מוּם--לֹא יִקְרַב, לְהַקְרִיב לֶחֶם אֱלֹ קָיו יח כִּי כָל-אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר-בּוֹ מוּם, לֹא יִקְרָב). The reason is because someone who has a Mum is not allowed to do it. Now this is what it says in Tosafos Beracha.

We can add, why should the Torah do that only here, there are many Chukim in the Torah. There are many Mitzvos Stumim, Mizvos whose meanings are not known to us. There the Torah doesn’t use this expression. Only here by a Bal Mum do we use this expression. Why is that so?

The answer would seem to be as follows. There are many Mitzvos whose reasons are not known to us, and we accept it. Any intelligent human being knows that he will not understand everything. For example the Mitzva of Parah Aduma.  We know that it is above our understanding to figure out and appreciate why a red cow is used for that particular use. Or why an Esrog is waved on Sukkos with a Lulav. It is a Chok. Don’t ask, because.

By a Bal Mum, however, a human being who has feelings, would feel bad. Why should this person not be able to do the Avodah, just because he has a physical deformity? Is he any less of a Jew? Is he any less of a valuable person? Does that make him any less of a human being?

It goes against the usual grain of B’nei Yisrael, Rachmanim, Baishanim, Gomlei Chasadim. We who care for people. When we hear that because someone is a Bal Mum he is ineligible to do the Avodah, we would question it more harshly. You would think why should that be? It is Dafka here that the Torah tells us why? Because. Because I said that a Bal Mum should not be doing the Avodah.

I would add that we are now learning Sefer Yehoshua in the Motzoei Shabbos Navi Shiur. We will come to episodes in Yehoshua which involve a lot of killing and a lot of death, and one wonders, certainly an American in the 21^st century, so much killing so much death?

Strikingly the Rishonim don’t come to explain it, they don’t come to apologize for Sefer Yehoshua. It is as if to say this was the command of Hashem and we have to accept it. It is Dafka such an issue, an issue where our sense of fairness is challenged that we have to understand the concept of Ein L’har’er Acharov.