He shall not come near to the veil, nor come near to the altar, because he has a defect; that he may not profane my sanctuaries, for I am Yahweh who sanctifies them.’ ”
A blemished priest shall not enter the Temple from the altar inward
The cited verse
The Hebrew (Masoretic Text)
אַ֣ךְ אֶל־הַפָּרֹ֜כֶת לֹ֣א יָבֹ֗א וְאֶל־הַמִּזְבֵּ֛חַ לֹ֥א יִגַּ֖שׁ כִּֽי־מ֣וּם בּ֑וֹ וְלֹ֤א יְחַלֵּל֙ אֶת־מִקְדָּשַׁ֔י
In Maimonides’ words
How Maimonides defines this commandment in his Sefer HaMitzvot — his own words, shown as a primary source.
שהזהיר כהן בעל מום מהכנס למקדש, רוצה לומר (ס"א בין) המזבח ובין האולם והמזבח וההיכל. והוא אמרו אך אל הפרכת לא יבא. וכבר התבאר בסוף טהרות (כלים פ"א) שבין האולם והמזבח עם כל ההיכל נאסרה כניסתו על בעלי מומין ופרועי ראש. וכבר התבאר גם כן בספרי ששני לאוין אלו הן אל הפרכת לא יבא ואל המזבח לא יגש לא יספיק אחד מהם בלתי האחר וששניהם יחד להשלמת הדין בענין אחד, והוא הגבלת המקום האסור עליהם ליכנס בו. וכל זמן שיכנס אחד מהם לפנים מן המזבח שלא לעבוד לוקה. (אמור אל הכהנים, שם פ"ו):
That He prohibited a priest with a blemish to enter the Temple - meaning to say the altar, between the [entrance] hall and the altar and the sanctuary. And that is His saying, "But he shall not enter behind the curtain [...]" (Leviticus 21:23). And it has already been explained at the end of Tahorot (Kelim 1) that entrance into, between the hall and the altar - along with all of the sanctuary - is forbidden to [priests] with blemishes or with unkempt hair. And it has also already been explained in the [Sifra] (Sifra, Emor, Chapter 3:10) that these two negative statements, which are, "he shall not enter behind the curtain and not approach the altar," do not suffice - one without the other - and that both of them together complete the same matter: And that is the demarcation of the place that is forbidden for them to enter. And any one of them who enters from the altar and onwards, not to serve, is lashed. (See Parashat Emor; Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 6.)
Hebrew: Sefer HaMitzvot, Warsaw 1883 (public domain). English: Sefaria Edition, trans. Rabbi Francis Nataf, 2021 (CC0). Via Sefaria; translator’s footnotes omitted.
Literary form: a prohibition
Applicability
How the catalog describes where and when this commandment applies. These are independent descriptions, not a verdict on which laws still count.
- Requires a standing Temple
- Binding in the land of Israel
Classical halakhic consequences
The consequences the classical halakhah attaches to this commandment, grouped by who imposes them. Where a category has none recorded, that absence is itself meaningful.
Imposed by a court
- Lashes (malkot)
At the hands of Heaven
No divinely-imposed consequence is recorded.
Ritual remedy
No ritual remedy is recorded.
How the streams of Judaism treat this commandment
The streams of Judaism read the same commandment differently — an ongoing plurality, not a ranking. Each position below is reported as the catalog records it; none is presented as the correct one.
- Orthodox Binding, with modification
- Conservative Not binding
- Reform Rejected
- Reconstructionist Rejected
- Karaite As the catalog records it: affirmed non operative
24 of 613 commandments have been examined in depth so far — this one is queued.
How later traditions received this commandment
How later traditions read or reworked this commandment, each attributed to its own voice. The catalog’s own classification of each reception is shown as it records it, never adopted as GEBible’s.
Qumran (the Dead Sea Scrolls)
- 1QSa (1Q28a) 2:3-9 read it more strictly
- 4QMMT B 39-49 read it more strictly
Philo of Alexandria
- De Specialibus Legibus 1.79-83 rationalized it
Josephus
- Ant. 3.278-279 paraphrased it
Beside the older legal codes of its world
The commandment set beside the ancient Near-Eastern legal collections scholars compare it to — a descriptive comparison, not a claim of dependence.
- hittite instructions exclusion of physically impaired persons from sacred service and space Relationship to the parallel: parallel with divergence CTH 264 (Instructions for Temple Officials) McMahon, in Hallo & Younger, Context of Scripture 1.83 (1997)
Where this commandment meets modern human-rights frameworks
One modern normative lens, attributed to it — not GEBible’s assessment. Each row names the framework it measures against and the catalog’s own classification of the relation.
This framework catalogues tensions; it records agreement in only one of its entries. The near-total tension rate is the shape of the instrument, not a finding.
-
Article 7
This framework classifies the relation as a direct contradiction.
UDHR Article 7 guarantees equal protection of the law without discrimination; the prohibition bars a class of persons defined entirely by physical condition from entering a zone of religious space, constituting institutionalized discriminatory exclusion on the basis of bodily difference.
-
Article 26
This framework classifies the relation as a direct contradiction.
ICCPR Article 26 prohibits discrimination on any ground including 'other status,' which in contemporary interpretation encompasses disability; the commandment imposes differential spatial restrictions on persons based solely on physical characteristics, which Article 26 jurisprudence would classify as discriminatory.
-
general principle
This framework classifies the relation as an incompatible method.
The commandment prescribes corporal punishment (thirty-nine lashes) for a blemished priest entering a zone of sacred space, a non-violent act; modern norms prohibit flogging.
-
general principle
This framework classifies the relation as a direct contradiction.
Modern penal proportionality precludes corporal punishment for entering a physical space while having a physical disability; the lashes sanction is disproportionate under any post-Enlightenment sentencing framework.
-
general principle
This framework classifies the relation as abrogated in practice.
Rabbinic tradition holds that the Sanhedrin's jurisdiction to impose malkot lapsed after 70 CE; the conflict is de jure, not enforced. The commandment is additionally doubly inoperative because it presupposes a functioning Temple.