1. The Nature and Purposes of Sacred Space - Part 3
Introduction - we will spend most of our time in this lesson on personal
standards required to be and to serve as priests.Then we will examine the
role and service of the Levites.
We will work at three levels - 1) what did these mitzvot mean in the context
of the ancient Temple,2) what might they mean in the operation of our
most usual sorts of scared space, such as our churches and synagogues,
and 3) what might they mean on the more personal level, that is, how
“internal” priests and Levites might serve within us to operate sacred space
where encounter with the Divine is facilitated to lead us to greater holiness.
As we proceed, we’ll explore this concept of “internal clergy” - what it might
mean and how it might work. Just from the words, what ideas are triggered
initially in your mind?
(Discussion- Possibilities might include: conscience, mind, ego,driver of
intentionality or will, governor of soul, better self, etc. Is there something
inside of us that lights the fire of our offerings, pushes us toward God’s

2. way, and facilitator of our drawing near to God? What is that? Can we think
of these mitzvot regarding the priests as guiding us as well with regard to
such “internal priests”? I would like for us to suspend doubts, if we have
them, and work on the hypothesis that they do.)
XXV. Read Exodus 30:19-20.What do you make of the requirement for
priests to wash their hands and feetwith water when they enter the
sanctuary or when they approach the altar to serve?
(This practice was clearly seen in part as encouraging physical cleanliness.
But, even more, it was to serve as a sort of spiritual purification. This, as
Chinuch teaches, elevates for us the Temple and the activities done there.
Also, as we approach sacred encounter, we “wash away” the stuff of the
ordinary world in order to draw near the Divine with “new” skin and self.
Is there a way to accomplishthis in our own communal or personal sacred
space?
Jews have the mikvah. We could wash hands as we move into sacred
space. Or we could mentally or spiritually achieve some other sort of
separation from secular to sacred as we cross the threshold with certain
thoughts or meditations or changes of perspective.)

3. XXVI-XXVIII.Read Exodus 28:2-4, 28, 32; 29:8. Why did the garb of the
priests matter in days of old, and should the dress of our modern day
priests or our inner priest matter to us? How?
(While the exact nature and purpose of these ancient clothes remain
unclear, certain truths can be gleaned from these mitzvot.
First, the garments and other elements were beautiful and splendid in a
way that inspired the worshippers that beheld them. The priests served the
Sovereignin sacred space, and the sight of them suggestedthe glory of
the One they served. Further, the clothes displayed symbolic meaning
through their material make-up, function, stitching, and other adornments
that reminded both the ones who wore them and those who observed them
of the holiness of the sacred drama.
Some sages suggestedthat the garments served to atone for various sins.
These were garments of the soul, which helped to bring out inherent luster
and strengths. In a way, this allowed the true holiness and splendor of the
garments’ true inner counterparts to envelop the priest, transform him, and
rectify the world from which all our actions flow. We, thus, could identify our

4. essence with these noble qualities. Sins could thus be seenas merely
outward failures, not inherent spiritual deficiencies.
We,too, tend to expectmore than ordinary clothes or even suit and tie or
dress from our clergy. It may be robes. Should/could it be more? Or is garb
less important for us than the Biblical language suggests it was for the
Temple,or even altogether unimportant?
Discussion.)
XXIX-XXXV.Read Leviticus 10:6-7;21:1-3,11. What are these mitzvot all
about? Why do you think there’s a concernabout the immediate capacity of
a priestwho’s touched death to facilitate sacred encounter? Does this have
any meaning to us today? If so, what?
(While certain of these mitzvot appear on the surface to guide generally
toward properdemeanor and appearance of the priest, they are designed
mainly to prevent a priest who is in mourning from,at the same time,
conducting worship. The behaviors described in the first mitzvot
characterize a person whose thoughts and spirit are directed toward grief
rather than the religious functions performed insacred space.

5. We will discuss these concepts infar greater depth in upcoming chapters,
so we must postpone agood bit of important substance until then. But let’s
at least simply understand here that the drama of death and the drama of
formal sacred encounter are both significant, but separate elements of
living. This is not to say that God is with us only in sacred space. God is
with us in each drama. The Torah, however, guides us to live them fully
and, thus, separately, not mixing or diluting them in ways that diminish
each. This separation is especially essential in the case of priests who lead
in sacred encounter and must be thoroughly engaged with worshippers
experiencing sacred drama.
These requirements are so important that even contact with the death of
kin must be avoided, in the case of the High Priest, when grief can only
distract from service. God imposes limitations and disciplines on priestly life
that fosterfocus, single-mindedness,order,and decorum in their attitude
and service. Our clergy help lead us to holiness principally through sacred
encounter. God expects their full devotion in those sacred moments.
Do we learn lessons from this guidance for the conduct of our modern-day
priests or our inner priest?
Discussion- the separation of experiences of fundamentally important, but
different chapters of our lives is wise, especially to avoid mixing and diluting
with sacred encounter those emotions, feelings, thoughts, and soul energy
that are by necessityoriented to different tasks.)

6. XXXVI-XXXVII.Read Leviticus 22:2 and 21:6. Again, I want to delay our
considerationof what “tamei” and “tahor” mean until we dig deep on them
and related concepts inthe next chapter. These are very difficult matters. I
have hypotheses to suggest when we come to them. But, for now, I simply
want you to rememberthe point we discusseda momentago: there are
certain dramas of life after which we, here specificallythe priests, require a
separation before being able again to be wholly focusedand whole-hearted
in the sacred encounter that is experienced in sacred space.
XXXVIII.Read Leviticus 10:8-11.Why would you think priests and
worshippers are forbiddenfrom entering the sanctuary while intoxicated?
(Worshippers and priests can hardly experience sacred encounter
appropriately and fully while mentally, spiritually, and physically diverted by
drink or intoxicant. This risk becomesexceptionally dangerous if the priest
errs in the sacred process as a result of being so diverted. Surely, too,
intoxication is a certain sign of disrespect for the sanctuary, the Way of life
it promotes, the holiness that we aspire to attain and promote, and the One
we come there to encounter and follow.)
XXXIX-XLI.Read Leviticus 21:23,17-18. We moderns, I think rightly,
generally, support inclusion and rights for the disabled. Do our sentiments
conflict with these words? How might they be made compatible? Think
broadly about the purposes served by the mitzvot.

7. (While there can be a debate about the merits of this whole-scale
prohibition, I think the mitzvot, at the least, are fundamentally saying that a
priest must be fully capable of facilitating sacred encounter. Such work may
involve sight, movement, other senses, and focus and attention, but if the
priest has limitations that diminish these capacities, the words here say
such limitations are disqualifying, either temporarily or permanently.
It may be that these senses speak to inner capacities, too. The “inner
priest” who is “blind” or “deaf” or “dumb” or otherwise blemished, perhaps
spiritually, should be disqualified as well.
What might we more specificallybe talking about here? Can you think of
disabilities or blemishes that would make our present-day or inner priests
incapable of facilitating sacred counter for us?
Discussion.)
XLII-XLVII.Read Leviticus 21:13-15;21:7.We certainly are far more liberal
today about marriage choices our modern day priests are able to make. Do

8. we see any wisdom in these ancient practices, or they just old-fashioned
and without meaning in our times?
(If a person or force or element of life that plays a priestly role lacks a
whole and devoted love, support, and comfort, there arguably could be a
missing quality, if not a void. In addition to the gift of being “well married,”
the priest also benefits from bearing responsibilityfor, and giving, love,
compassion, and support to the spouse. The mutuality of such a special
relationship and the sharing and service it involves surely informs,
enriches, and adds value to priestly service to others and to God.
While some can survive and even perform work well in less desirable
personal circumstances, it is likely true generally that being married to a
personwho is incapable of loyalty, caught up in or deeply wounded by
previous relationships, or of poorcharacter would undercut the spirit, joy,
full duty, and dignity expected of the priest.
One key point the sages make is that if a priestis going to properly
castigate the sinner and help him turn back from wrongdoing, he must be
upright himself. Finally, if the priest is there to help lead us to holiness, he
must live to the highest standard.
As we continue to think about the work of our inner priests,do you see
truths in these mitzvot that might enlighten us further?

9. Discussion.)
XLVIII-LIV.Read Numbers 18:23,Numbers 4:19, Deuteronomy18:1-2,
Numbers 35:2, Leviticus 25:34 and Deuteronomy12:19.
We spent time in our study of Torah last year on Levi and the role of the
Levites who succeededhim. For those of you who studied the Prophets
and the Psalms with me, we learned a good bit about the Levites in those
texts as well. We will learn even more when we get to the next chapters in
this year’s study. But let’s start today by looking at several mitzvot that
introduce us to the Levites, their role in the operation of sacred space, and
how they might matter to us in our own time.
A. Assuming, as we will learn in greater detail in coming weeks, that the
Levites have discrete, full-time duties in the Temple and the Levitical cities,
what do we learn from the mitzvot we’ve just read?
(The Levites, like the priests, were expected to devote themselves fully to
service of God, facilitate our coming near to God, and teach and inspire the
people to live in God’s Way. They had discrete roles in sacred space,
including guarding, singing, being gatekeepers, and opening and closing
the gates. They were not generally to engage in, or be concerned about,
the interests of commerce, war, and other such matters. Thus, they were to
be separated apart, supported, and kept from the affairs that would distract

10. them from their divinely established mission. It was/is our duty, that of
those served by the Levites, to support them entirely.)
B. What might this mean to us today, with respect to those who preform
Levitical duties in our external or internal sacred space?
(We have the duty to support full-time servants of God who help bring us to
God and God’s ways, whether they serve us in church or synagogue, cities
in which they dwell, or even internally within ourselves. How, and in what
ways might we do this? What might such support entail?
Discussion- Cover ideas of material, spiritual, and moral support for those
who study, teach, minister, bring people to God, including that part of
ourselves that is devoted to God and bringing all of our other constituent
parts to service of God.)
Conclusion.