intended to increase the knowledge, interest, and anticipation of the reader, thereby hastening the realization of our hopes and prayers for the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the Beit HaMikdash.

"Clothes Maketh the Man…"
We are all familiar with that renowned expression (Ed. note: Shakespeare said in Hamlet, "For the apparel oft proclaims the man." But the expression has much older origin in Greek writings.) In the case of the Kohanim who served in the Beit HaMikdash, this axiom was literally true. In fact the Gemara says (Zevachim 17b),"When their Bigdei Kehuna, (priestly garments) are 'upon them' (i.e. when the Kohanim are actually wearing their requisite garments), their Kehuna (priesthood) is 'upon them' (and they may serve in the Mikdash). But when their Bigdei Kehuna are not upon them, they are not invested with their priesthood" (and they may notserve in the Mikdash). Tosafot direct our attention to a variant reading in Sanhedrin which also furnishes a Biblical source for this observation. "And you shall cause his (Aaron's) sons to come near, and dress them in tunics. You shall gird them with a sash - Aaron and his sons - and you shall wrap the headdresses onthem. The priesthood shall be a perpetual statute for them…" (Shemot 28:8,9). A Kohein was duty bound to wear the requisite garments when he performed Avoda; if he failed to do so, his service was invalid. The Gemara continues, "When they are not wearing their appointed garments, they are not endowed with their priesthood and they are regarded as Zarim (non-Kohein - however, other requirements and restrictions of being a kohein apply). And a Master said, 'A Zar who performs the Avoda is deserving of death'" (Sanhedrin 83b). Rashi interpreted the pasuk, "To sanctify him so he may minister unto Me" (Shemot 28:3) as meaning "To sanctify him in order to induct him into the priesthood by means of (wearing) Bigdei Kehuna, so that he will be a priest unto Me." The Kohanim Gedolim of Bayit Rishon were embrocated with Shemen Hamishcha, a special prepared anointing oil. Rambam asks, "And if there was no anointing oil?" and then,basing himself on Yoma 5a, he proceeds to answer his own question. "They dress (the designated Kohein) in the larger number of vestments of the Kohein Gadol." The Kohein Gadol, when he performed Avoda, wore eight garments, the common Kohein wore only four (Hil. Klei Mikdash 4:12). In the case of Kohanim serving in theBeit HaMikdash, clothes indeed made the man!

Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzva 99) considers the wearing of Bigdei Kehuna as a positive commandment. The Chinuch writes: "The Kohanim were commanded to wear distinctive clothing for greatness and glory, and (only when wearing them) could they (validly) serve in the Mikdash." He also analyzes the psychological aspects of the Mitzva."The thoughts and intentions of the messenger (the Kohein), who (by serving in the Mikdash) effects atonement, must be 'seized' by the Avoda. All his thoughts and all his intentions must be directed only to the Avoda. Therefore it is proper that, when he performs Avoda, he should wear distinguishing clothing. When he seesthese special garments on his person, his heart will awaken and he will remember before Whom he is performing Avodah." The Chinuch also notes the salutary effects of Bigdei Kehuna on the hearts and minds of Olei Regel. "It adds to the glory of the Mikdash and the Avoda when those serving there are dressed in an extraordinarymanner. …by magnifying the (glory) of the Mikdash and (increasing) the awe that it inspires, the hearts of evildoers are softened and they repent of their sins."

Rambam's Sefer Hamitzvot also counts the Kohanim wearing Bigdei Kehuna during the their Avoda as a Mitzvat Asei (#33). Both the Sefer Hachinuch and the Sefer Hamitzvot emphasize the requirement that the Kohanim must wear the ordained garments, no more, no less. Interestingly enough, commentaries on Sefer HaMitzvot comparethe ruling of the Rambam with that of the Ba'al Halachot Gedolot. While the identity of the author of Halachot Gedolot is disputed by scholars, the conceptual originality of this Sefer is not. The well-known concept of 613 (Taryag) Mitzvot in the Torah is based on a famous Gemara. "R Simlai taught, '613 Mitzvot were communi-cated to Moses, 365 negative commandments … and 248 positive commandments…'" (Makot 23b). A trailblazer in Halachic research in the Geonic era, the Ba'al Halachot Gedolot was the first Sage who tried to identify all 613 Mitzvot, both positive and negative, and examine each one in detail. He contends that the requirementof Kohanim to wear Bigdei Kehuna when they performed Avoda is not a Mitzva in its own right. However, he does consider the prohibition of performing Avoda without one of the mandatory garments or wearing an extra garment as one of the Mitzvot Lo Ta'aseh (prohibitions) (Ot 68). Ramban notes that "if a Kohein wears BigdeiKehuna and does not perform the Avoda, no Mitzva is fulfilled. The Kohein's donning the Bigdei Kehuna before Avoda is merely a preparation for the Avoda". (Similarly, building a Sukka is simply a preparation for the actual Mitzva, dwelling in the Sukka.) Concurring with the Ba'al Halachot Gedolot (and in contradistinction to Rambam), Ramban points out that if we considered the regular Kohanim's wearing the Bigdei Kehuna as a separate Mitzva, and not simply as a "preparation" for the Mitzva, "we would be obliged to consider the Kohein Gadol's wearing of his special white linen garments (when he entered Kodesh HaKodashim on Yom Kippur) asa separate Mitzva as well. …And what about the (eight 'golden vestments' of) the Kohein Gadol? … (the wearing of the requisite garments) is only 'part' of the Mitzva of performing the Avoda …and Rambam himself has already explained that we do not include in the Taryag Mitzvot individual 'parts of Mitzvot.'" (Ramban on the Sefer Hamitzvot of the Rambam)

Lev Samei'ach, another major commentary on the Sefer HaMitzvot, totally disagrees. "…it is true that if a Kohein performed Avoda (and lacked a requisite garment or wore an additional) garment, his Avoda is invalid… but that is not the intention of the pasuk… The pasuk (Shemot 28:2) said that Bigdei Kehuna were 'for gloryand beauty'. In them the Kohanim were to be honored and glorified… and these garments were to be their distinguishing mark as already elucidated by Rambam in Hil. K'lei Hamikdash 4:12." ([The Kohein Gadol] is anointed with oil and arrayed in the special vestments of the Kohein Gadol." Note Vayikra 21:10) And the common Kohanim? Lev Samei'ach quotes the Gemara in Zevachim 17b already cited above.

"When their Bigdei Kehuna are 'upon them…" He continues; "If this is so, then the act of wearing Bigdei Kehuna certainly should be considered a Mitzva in its own right (as asserted by Rambam) since the Kohanim were commanded to be 'honored and glorified' by wearing them and that they 'are invested with their Kehuna' (and are privileged to serve in the Beit HaMikdash) only because of them." <to be continued>
Catriel Sugarman gives illustrated lectures on the Beit HaMikdash and related topics. He can be reached at(02) 652-7531 or acatriel@netvision.net.il

Catriel is in the process of writing a book: The Temple of Jerusalem, A Pilgrims Prospective; A Guided Tour through the Temple and the Divine Service

[The Parshat Bo Homepage]
[The TORAH tidbits Homepage] [How to use TORAH tidbits]
[About The OU/NCSY Israel Center] [About TORAH tidbits]
 [www.ou.org]