Day#2 (Part 2): Leviticus 22:1-16

(Study Notes)

(Leviticus 22:1-3)

We can understand this reasoning by connecting this discussion with the next command: Aaron and his sons (meaning the High Priest and the priests in every generation) must be “scrupulous” about the sacred donations, lest the name of HaKadosh Baruch Hu be profaned. These donations include the animal sacrifices, the tithes, and the rituals to be performed with each.

Scrupulous (/ˈskruːpjələs/) describes someone or something extremely meticulous, precise, and attentive to details, or strictly honest and principled. It implies a high regard for ethics or accuracy, often used for careful work or moral integrity. (Merriam-Webster; Vocabulary.com; Collin’s Dictionary).

This means that the priests are to take great care and go to great painstaking lengths to ensure every detail is fulfilled precisely. This is difficult enough for a fully able-bodied priest, let alone a man with God-given limitations. If a priest becomes unclean by any means, he is prohibited from partaking in the sacred donations that the Israelites consecrate to HaKadosh Baruch Hu.

Again, certain defects could lead to specific problems—some of which include becoming unclean. So, instead calling a man to a position where he could be at risk of harming himself by unintentionally becoming unclean, HaKadosh Baruch Hu prohibits his service in certain areas, thereby protecting His beloved child through carefully considered limitations.

(Leviticus 22:4-5)

HaKadosh Baruch Hu through Moshe Rabbeinu then provides a list of the various types of uncleanness that would disqualify a Priest from partaking in the holy, consecrated offerings:

1. Eruptions (on the skin)

2. Discharges

3. Touching a corpse

4. Touching anything that touched a corpse

5. If the man has an emission of semen.

6. If he touches any swarming thing

7. Touching any human that makes him unclean—e.g. those with any form of leprosy.

(Leviticus 22:6-7)

If a Priest becomes unclean through one or more of these means, he is unclean and he cannot eat of the sacred donations until he is clean. To cleanse himself, the Priest must wash his clothes and entire body in water. He will remain unclean until sunset. At the beginning of the new day, he will be clean.

The Mishnah and Talmud state that the priests would wait until the last minute to wash to ensure they rid themselves of all uncleanliness before sunset, when all uncleanliness would be erased. After washing, then they would eat the Terumah portion—this time for eating is noted as one of the determining factors of the proper times to state the evening Shema—not until the priests go in to eat their gift portions. (The Mishnah (Tractate Berakhot, Chapter 1)).

Question: What does a Priest do for the portions that must be eaten on the day they are offered and none left until morning? Offerings for the day must be finished (or on the fire) by the end of mincha, before sunset. A Jewish day ends at sunset. How can a priest cleanse himself at just before sunset in order to be clean and eat after sunset if some offerings require that they be completely eaten before sunset—are they simply just burned in the fire, since they cannot be completely eaten on the same day?

(Leviticus 22:8)

Unlike the general population of Jewish Israelites, priests are not allowed to eat anything that died naturally or that was torn by beasts. Eating such animals makes a general Jew unclean until evening, so a Priest is prohibited from eating them so they are not made unnecessarily unclean. This prohibition is to lessen the need for a Priest to wash before sunset so he could be clean and eat his due—being scrupulous and not contacting uncleanliness to begin with seems to be the best practice.

(Leviticus 22:9)

For the Priests, HaKadosh Baruch Hu commands that they shall keep His commandments lest they incur guilt and die for profaning the holy and sanctified things, including themselves who are consecrated to HaKadosh Baruch Hu.

The weight and magnitude of this warning communicates just how holy and sanctified the work of the Priests is, as well as how holy the Priests are. It is not some light and trivial matter. Priestly service has the consequences of death on one side and the blessing of life on the other. Not just for themselves but for the entire Jewish community.

(Leviticus 22:10)

Speaking of the Jewish community, HaKadosh Baruch Hu declares that the laypeople of the community are prohibited from eating the Priests’ holy portions. Specifically:

1. No bound or hired laborers of a Priest may eat of the Priests’ portion. BUT

2. If a person is a slave who has been purchased, then he or she CAN eat of the Priests’ portion because the purchased slave is the Priest’s property—a member of his household. This includes the slave that was born from a slave in the priest’s household.

(Leviticus 22:12)

Furthermore, if a priest’s daughter marries a layperson, she is not allowed to partake of the holy portions. If the daughter is a widow or becomes divorced, has no kids, and enters back into her father’s home, then she can partake of the Priest’s (her father’s) portion.

Thus, this statement helps to clarify the question raised in a previous study. From the above two laws, we learn that the entire household of the Priest shares the portion of the Priest that offers the sacrifice—like the Pesach offering, where one household shares the entire male lamb or goat.

But, here, if a daughter of a Priest married outside of the priesthood, she removes herself from the offerings of the priesthood—she becomes part of the non-priesthood Tribe, and her portion in the priesthood becomes cut off.

These laws are connected with the laws of transfer of power from father to husband when a Jewish woman marries. If the woman becomes widowed or divorced, the power transfers back to the father, but only if she has no children.

(Leviticus 22:14)

If a layperson eats of the sacred portion unwittingly, then the layperson must pay back the priest plus 1/5^th of the value they ate.

While this repayment is possible, one must consider how a layperson would acquire the portion without the Priest giving the holy portion to the layperson. When we read Leviticus chapter 7, it is clear the portions remain in the priests’ possession at all times, except for when the layperson first brings their  offerings and gives them to the priests from their own hands.

If a layperson eats of the holy portion (which is taken by the Priest from said offerings of the layperson), the Priest must be culpable in some manner for giving the holy portion to the layperson.

For this reason, HaKadosh Baruch Hu prohibits the Priest from profaning the holy portions by disallowing laypersons from eating the portions.

An example of such a case of the priest providing a “layperson” (i.e. a non-priest) with a holy portion is the priest who gave David the showbread to eat. In 1 Samuel 21:1-6, David was on the run from Saul, who was trying to kill him (again). He made his way to the priest, Ahimelech in Nob.

Being on the run, David had no provisions, so David asked the priest if there was any food that he (the priest) could give him (David). The priest said the only food in the tabernacle was the bread that had just been switched out after the week—so, the old showbread, which only the priests are to eat.

David, the layperson, took the bread so he could survive. Yet, we are not told that David ever had to repay Ahimelech, as is stated above. Was this an oversight? Or did Hashem have mercy because there was no other option?

Too, if there was no other food in the tabernacle, then other tithes of fruit, vegetables, grain etc was missing—does this indicate a larger issue with the people not “bringing the whole tithe into the storehouse”?

Whatever the answers, we can see that the layperson got hold of the priests’ portion by way of the priest himself.   

(Leviticus 22:16)

So, perhaps knowing such cases would occur (because HaKadosh Baruch Hu sees, knows, and ordains all things even before they occur), HaKadosh Baruch Hu commands the Priests to keep the laypeople from incurring such guilt that would require such penalties—thus, Hashem puts the onus on the priests, knowing that if the laypeople incur the guilt of eating the priestly portion, the priests themselves would have to be involved in the layperson obtaining the ‘forbidden’ portion.

This also reminds us that the priests are set over the Jewish community to protect the commoners from doing things that are against Torah. This does not mean an excessive man-made  hedge is to be placed around Torah—for a hedge that keeps us from breaking Torah also prevents us from actually keeping Torah. Both keep us from the blessings of HaKadosh Baruch Hu.

Furthermore, if the priest (or chieftains) do not advise properly, if they thwart the community from receiving the help they ask for, or if they willingly led the people astray or unnecessarily add a burden, then Hashem holds the leaders accountable, not necessarily the people—this idea was posed and partially worked through in our discussion of Yom Kippur and Leviticus 16 in last week’s parsha study.

Am Yisrael Chai!

Kimberly Davis