Bechorot 43: Dis/Abilities: "Blemishes", Looking Like Other Priests, Differences

We begin Perek VII with descriptions of blemishes that will prohibit kohanim from sacrificing in the Temple.  Our first Mischa notes the following permanent or temporary blemishes:

• one whose head is pointed (narrow above and wide below)
• one whose head is like a hammer with a protruding forehead
• one whose head has an indentation
• one whose head protrudes at the back

Those with humped back are considered fit by Rabbi Yehuda and disqualified by the rabbis.  The kere'ach, one without a row of hair encircling his head from ear, is considered to be fit for service.  I wonder whether this this because men of a certain age often have hair that grows in this pattern, or because of another more Torah-based consideration?

The Gemara brings in other potential blemishes - warts, cataracts, scabs, those with scurvy regarding the qualification of both animals to be sacrificed and priests to perform the act of sacrifice (Leviticus 21:20; 22:22).  As well, they note that one with a gibben, blemished eyebrows, or a charum, a sunken nose, might or might not disqualify a priest from service.  The rabbis are concerned with what might be perceived as repulsive.  

According to Rabbi Yishmael, every Torah passage that was stated and repeated was repeated only for the novel element introduce therein.  The repetition was meant to teach only one halacha.  The rabbis debate why the Torah might repeat certain words and ideas regarding the sanctification of animals and priests. Rabbi Yochanan notes that Leviticus 21:21 tells us that no man among the seed of Aaron the priest who has a blemish shall come for ward to sacrifice the offerings of the Lord made by a fire.  This one must have the appearance of other priests.  There is an interesting conversation regarding the appearance of priests and whether or not these might resemble the appearance of Aaron enough to qualify them for service.

We learn that that one who is a gibben is either one with too many eyebrows, one with no eyebrows, or one with one eyebrow.  Rabbi Chanina says that it might be one who has two backs and two spines.  One with a crooked spine might look as if there are two spines present, it is noted.

Our final Mishna teaches that a charum was disqualified as well.  This might be one whose eyes are at equal levels with the brow of the nose, one with eyes too high or two low on the head, one whose eyes are placed in different places on the face, one whose eyelashes have fallen out - in this case, due to the appearance of a blemish.  The rabbis argue that these conditions might be too stringent.

Again, like our learning of late, the rabbis are eager to define "normalcy" in order to create a special category of firstborns.  Why not simply allowing the "firstborn" stand on its own without looking to the so-called blemishes?  First, Torah law instructs us to do so.  Secondly, in the time of the Talmud it was not understood that physical (or other) difference might be simply that and not the representation of something more sinister or "less than".  However, in today's world, even the very orthodox community struggles to include those of us who are "blemished" - ie. all of us - in service, albeit sometimes in creative ways so as to continue to to honour past interpretations of Torah law.