Shabbat Parashat Emor - 5781

Shabbat Parashat Emor - 5781

Rabbi Hal Miller

If the daughter of a man who is a Kohen will be defiled through having

illicit relations, she defiles her father, she shall be consumed by the fire.

[Vayikra 21:9]

Elsewhere we see punishments for illicit relations for all Jews, yet here the

Torah gives us a commandment specifically dealing with Kohanim. Elsewhere

we are told that "fathers are not punished for the sins of the sons, and sons

are not punished for sins of the fathers", yet here it seems the father is, in

addition to the daughter, getting some kind of negative result. Further, it says

that "she shall be consumed by the fire", whereas for other similar situations,

it's both the woman and the man. What is the Torah instructing us with this verse?

The Gemora Bava Metzia [51a] says that this verse specifies that in the case of the daughter of a Kohen doing this, the death penalty applies to her alone, not to the man involved and not to any potential false witnesses (eidim zomemim). Why? There is some additional sanctity involved here. How does that work?

Rashi tells us that this verse only applies to a married woman who is the daughter

of a Kohen, and that everyone agrees it does not apply to an unmarried woman.

From where does he know this? Rav Hirsch explains that the verse does not call

her a bat kohen, daughter of a Kohen, rather a bat ish kohen, the daughter of a

man who is a Kohen. A woman who is still in her Kohen father's home is called a

bat kohen, but when she marries, she transfers to her husband's domain, although

is still the daughter of a man who is a Kohen. Rav Hirsch continues that even so,

she retains some additional level of sanctity above that of a woman from the rest

of the nation, as we see from various laws about terumah, and from our verse and

therefore more is expected of her than from a non-Kohen-connected woman.

There is much disagreement as to the meaning of "she defiles her father". Ramban

says it means exactly that, her father is desecrated by her act. R'Meir in Bava

Metzia [52b] says likewise, that if people had treated him with honor, they now treat

him with disdain.

Talelei Oros differs. If she acts this way, it is an indication that her father has some

fault. Ramban, R'Meir, and Talelei Oros would need to argue that, although a father

is not punished for the sins of his sons, that may not apply to daughters, and he may

have some increased level of responsibility for them.

Onkelos comes out opposite of Ramban and R'Meir, and translates the verse

as the daughter is defiled FROM the holiness of her father, therefore it is only the

daughter defiled, not the father. She has separated herself from the sanctity, and

merits the stricter treatment. Onkelos does not need to argue against the "sins of

the sons" situation, as he is really not involved here.

The verse is about the sanctity of the priesthood. Kohanim are set apart from the

rest of the nation, men and women both.