[Avodah] Ramp On!

[Michael Makovi]

>> R' Micha Berger asked:
>>
>> Why not allow the handicapped kohein serve, and use it >> as an
opportunity to teach the idea that ...
>> The fact is that HQBH didn't choose to symbolize this
>> message, but rather bowed to the least common
>> denominator of people's perceptions of the handicapped. >> And so,
I repeat, that it is not obvious why.


> Here is a partial guess, which I hope other might build >upon:
>
> Not every event is intended as an educational experience.
> IIRC, the requirement for a lack of mumim is often
> explained in terms of how distracting they are to the
> onlookers. Sometimes the experience should just be a
> simple emotional high, such as when everything runs
> smoothly and beautifully, without the distractions of
> something which is unattractive to the eye.
> Akiva Miller

Perhaps this isn't what you meant, but the following is what I
derived: a mum might distract onlookers, period. Maybe we shouldn't be
distracted, maybe we should view handicapped people as completely
equal, maybe we shouldn't stop and gawk at the strange appearances of
certain people. But the fact is, people do. Hashem perhaps said a mum
could not do the avodah, because He knew onlookers would be
distracted. Whether or not they ought to be distracted is entirely
beside the point.

Regarding your enemy in Mishpatim: famously, your enemy is described
to be a sinner, for there is a mitzvah to love your fellow, so how
could a person possibly have a stam enemy?! Elah....
But see Nechama Leibowitz: She cites Mechilta (I think) that there is
another explanation: The Torah is speaking of reality. True, there is
a mitzvah to not hate your fellow. But who says the man with the enemy
in Mishpatim is following this halacha? Maybe he stam hates the guy.
Okay, so he's doing an averah; what's difficult to understand about
that? So if a person does an averah by having an enemy, he
nevertheless bedieved shouldn't let that stop him from helping the guy
with his donkey (l'hatchila, it would be his friend's donkey, and he'd
need no mitzvah to tell him to help the guy).

I still go with the idea that it is symbolic that our avodah must be
shalem, and so Hashem said the priest must be physically shalem as a
symbolic representation. The entire point of our avodah is to
symbolize service to Hashem, so this symbolism is very fitting. Why
have symbolism of all people are equal here? This is a nice teaching,
but it can be taught elsewhere. Here, we are dealing with davka
avodah, so let's have a symbol that has to do with davka avodah.

And as was said by another, couldn't one just as well say that the
Torah should have let women be kohanim, or abolished kohanim
altogether and let everyone do avodah, if the (hypothetical) purpose
is to teach equality? Adarabba, perhaps the Torah wants to teach davka
that not everyone is equal when it comes to practical skill and
opportunity, and that some people simply can't cut certain things.
This is a lesson as important as teaching that everyone is
intrinsically equal in theoretical value and worth.

Mikha'el Makovi