Chapter Five: Miscellaneous Halachot – Weapons in Synagogue, Kohanim, and Use of Ma’aser Funds

Article Summary

Core Halachic Principles

a. It is permissible to enter a synagogue with a weapon. If possible, it is best to conceal it.

b. It is permissible to carry a weapon during the prayer service and during the priestly blessing (Birkat Kohanim).

c. A kohen who kills a terrorist or enemy soldier, and to no comparison, if he killed another person during operational activity in a negligent yet almost unpreventable fashion (shogeg hakarov le’ones), is permitted to perform Birkat Kohanim.

d. A kohen who killed a person negligently and repented, according to the Shulchan Aruch should not perform Birkat Kohanim and according to Rema may do so.

e. It is permissible to use one’s charitable tithes (ma’aser) in order to purchase a weapon and maintain it for defense purposes, however it is fitting to limit this to up to fifty percent of the funds.

Analysis of the Halacha

1.Weapons in Synagogue

The Shulchan Aruch rules that it is prohibited to bring a long knife into a synagogue: It is permissible to enter the synagogue with one’s walking staff, satchel, and money pouch, and some say it is prohibited to enter with a long knife or an exposed head.¹

The source for this is in the Orchot Chaim in the name of the Maharam: And Rabbi Meir (=the Maharam), may his soul rest in Eden and his memory be blessed, writes that it is prohibited to go into [a synagogue] with a long knife because prayer lengthens the life of man and a knife shortens it.²

Even though the Shulchan Aruch writes this as “some say”, no one disagrees with this opinion.³ The authorities add that if the weapon was concealed it is permitted. This is written by the Mishneh Brura in the name of the Eliyah Rabbah and the Aruch HaShulchan there.⁴

From the wording of the Taz, it is evident that according to him, even a covered knife is prohibited to bring into a synagogue. He writes that since it is burdensome to take the knife out, a long knife was specifically prohibited, but a short knife, which is sometimes used, is not prohibited.⁵

The Tzitz Eliezer Responsa learns from the wording of the Taz that a short knife is permissible to bring into a synagogue because it has a purpose, which is not the case with a weapon, where one should not differentiate between long and short and both should be prohibited.⁶ He also differentiates there between a weapon with a magazine, which is prohibited because it can shorten a person’s life, and a weapon without a magazine which is permissible. Practically, the Tzitz Eliezer writes that, barring a special need, one should not bring any weapons into a synagogue. When it is not possible to leave it outside, one may bring it in without an ammunition cartridge. When this is also not possible, it is permissible to bring the weapon into the synagogue in a concealed fashion, especially for a handgun, which can go undetected if concealed. The Tzitz Eliezer adds that when there is a security need, one may bring a weapon into the synagogue, however one should make an effort to remove it and place it nearby if possible or cover it with his clothes and tallit.

Specifically from the wording of the Taz, who is stringent regarding a knife, does Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef learn to be lenient with a firearm.⁷ In line with the Taz’s reasoning that when it is burdensome one does not need to be stringent, Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef writes that any weapon that a soldier must carry that involves a burden and any level of risk with leaving it outside is permissible to bring into a synagogue.⁸ According to him, there is no obligation to conceal the weapon, but it is best to do so.

An aspect of this discussion is the question of whether the prohibition is specifically for a synagogue or any place that people pray. In Orchot Chaim, the source of the prohibition, the rationale behind the prohibition is – “because prayer lengthens the life of man and a knife shortens it”, and from this the Tzitz Eliezer clarifies that the prohibition is not exclusively for a synagogue, but any place people pray. Granted, the Shulchan Aruch writes this halacha amongst the halachot of the synagogue, and from here the Mateh Yehuda learns that the prohibition is specifically for a synagogue.⁹ In any case, we have written that one may nowadays bring a weapon into the synagogue, and if so, for a location that is not a synagogue or is only temporarily a synagogue, one may certainly be lenient.

2.Weaponry During Birkat Kohanim

There is no unique prohibition to carry a weapon during Birkat Kohanim. This is written by Rabbi Chaim David Halevi: In practice, we do not find an explicit prohibition for a kohen to bless Israel when he is girded with a weapon, but we have found a stronger [limitation] (following the principle of 200 mana [=a priori]) that one is prohibited from entering a synagogue with a long knife .¹⁰.

Therefore, in situations where it is permissible for a person to enter a synagogue with a weapon, it is permissible for a kohen to perform Birkat Kohanim with a weapon. However, in practice, a pistol-carrying kohen should ideally conceal it during Birkat Kohanim, and if he carries a rifle, it is best to give the weapon to a friend for safekeeping.¹¹

3.Performance of Birkat Kohanim by a KohenWho Has Killed

It is stated in the Talmud: Rebbe Yochanan said: any kohen who kills a person should not perform Birkat Kohanim, as it is stated “your hands are full of blood”.¹²

The Rishonim disagree regarding the boundaries of this halacha. The Shulchan Aruch rules in accordance with the Rambam, who says that a kohen should not perform Birkat Kohanim even if he killed negligently and repented. A kohen that has killed a person, even negligently, should not perform Birkat Kohanim even if he repents.¹³

The Rema disagrees with him and writes that the custom according to the Ashkenazi Rishonim was to interpret this as someone who stands behind his rebellious act. There are those who say that if one repents, they may perform Birkat Kohanim, and there are those who are lenient for ba’alei teshuva, not to lock the door before them [and encourage repentance], and this is the prevailing custom.¹⁴

The Achronim disagree whether the opinion of the Rema refers to a person who killed negligently or also one who killed intentionally.¹⁵

Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef rules that a person who kills enemy soldiers performs a mitzvah and is permitted to perform Birkat Kohanim, however there are those who are stringent even for this.¹⁶ Additionally, Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef rules that if the killer could not have prevented it in any way or at least close to unpreventable, that they may perform Birkat Kohanim, even according to the Shulchan Aruch.

Therefore, a kohen who kills a terrorist or enemy soldier is permitted to perform Birkat Kohanim. Additionally, a kohen who killed during training, operational activity, or during a terror attack, in a negligent yet almost unpreventable fashion, and repented – may perform Birkat Kohanim.¹⁷

However, if he killed negligently in a preventable fashion and repented, according to the Shulchan Aruch he should not perform Birkat Kohanim and according to the Rema he may do so.

4.Purchasing a Weapon and Paying for Training from Ma’aser Funds

One who carries a weapon when there is a security need fulfills the mitzvah of protecting one’s life and defending others. Acquiring a weapon, maintaining it, and training with it involve significant financial expenses. One should determine whether they may use ma’aser funds for this purpose..¹⁸

The Sages determine that each person should separate ten percent of their earnings for charity. The Rema rules that ma’aser funds be used for the poor only,¹⁹ however the prevailing custom is according to the lenient authorities who allow its use for the sake of a mitzvah.²⁰

Granted, one should not use ma’aser funds to fulfill a mitzvah that a person is obligated to complete, such as buying a pair of tefillin, however carrying a weapon is not a total obligation like tefillin.²¹ At the very most it is considered “a beautification of the mitzvah” that one may, according to some of the authorities, fulfill through ma’aser funds.²²

In practice, one may use ma’aser funds for purchasing and maintaining a weapon, however it is appropriate not to use all of one’s ma’aser funds for this purpose, rather up to fifty percent.²³

Shield of Israel – to the home page and table of contents

Notes - הערות שוליים

Orach Chaim 151:6.
Orchot Chaim, volume 1, Laws of the Synagogue, article 1.
Rabbi Zvi Hersh Chajes challenges why the Shulchan Aruch did not rely upon the Gemara in Sanhedrin – “and [Pinchas] stood up from within the congregation and took a spear in his hand” – from here that one cannot enter the synagogue with a weapon” (82a). The Achronim discuss this question, amongst them the authorities mentioned further on. For a summary of this topic see Rabbi Tzvi Reisman, Ratz KeTzvi – Man of War, Sivan 5784, pages 320-325, and see there (pages 320-322) for a summary of all the topics discussed here.
Aruch HaShulchan, ibid., article 10; Mishneh Brura, ibid., subarticle 22.
Taz, ibid., subarticle 2. This resolves this halacha with the Shulchan Aruch’s ruling that one must cover the knife during Birkat HaMazon (180:5), where he does not differentiate between long and short knives, since there is no burden in covering it.
Tzitz Eliezer Responsa, volume 10, article 18. However, he also brings logical reasoning to differentiate between a long and short weapon there.
Yechave Da’at Responsa, volume 1, article 18.
He juxtaposes this to the opinion of the Aruch HaShulchan (earlier footnote 103) that a weapon is considered attire for a soldier (even though one can disagree with him regarding the permit to carry it). The Tzitz Eliezer also writes in the margins of his remarks that there is logical reasoning to be lenient for a soldier and police officer according to the opinion of the Aruch HaShulchan.
On the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, article 151. This is also the opinion of Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef in the aforementioned Yechave Da’at Responsa, and Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, as brought by Rabbi Avraham Chaim Sherman, ‘Iron Supplies and Weaponry – on the Altar, in the Sanctuary, and in the Lesser Sanctuary’, Torah SheBa’al Peh, 38 (5757), pages 89-101 (a summary is presented on page 97).
Aseh Lecha Rav Responsa, volume 9, article 2. We were not able to find a specific approach to performing Birkat Kohanim in the context of weaponry in a synagogue in the words of the aforementioned authorities. Compare this to the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer Melamed, https://www.yeshiva.org.il/ask/575.
The practical guidelines we have written here are also found in the Torat HaMachane, 1, Second Edition – 5782, pages 167-168.
Berachot 32b.
Orach Chaim 128:35.
Ibid.
Mishneh Brura, ibid., subarticle 130-131, writes that according to the Rema, even one who murders intentionally and repents may perform Birkat Kohanim, however there are those who are stringent and interpret the opinion of the Rema as only for cases of negligence.
Yechave Da’at Responsa, volume 2, article 14. Compare this to the opinion of Rabbi Tzvi Shachter, Nefesh HaRav, Jerusalem 5759, page 132, in the name of Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, that even a soldier who killed an enemy combatant in a mitzvah situation should not perform Birkat Kohanim.
Yechave Da’at Responsa, volume 5, article 16. He discusses in a responsum of a kohen who killed in a car accident, and he writes according to the Shulchan Aruch that if he killed him because he drove recklessly, he cannot perform Birkat Kohanim even if he repents. If he drove carefully and the accident was caused by another reason, this is considered shogeg hakarov le’ones and is a disagreement between the Achronim. In practice, Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef rules that if it was unpreventable or close to unpreventable and he repented, one should add the opinion of the Rema (see earlier) and he may perform Birkat Kohanim. According to this, even a person who kills accidentally in training or operational activity could potentially be considered karov le’ones depending on the circumstances. Therefore, one should add that the Shulchan Aruch, ibid., article 36, rules that a mohel who causes the death of an infant when circumcising him may perform Birkat Kohanim, since he had intentions to perform a mitzvah. The authorities writes that the same ruling applies to a doctor that causes the death of a patient (see the Piskei Teshuvot, ibid. article 477). Thus, one can say the same for a soldier or other weapon holder that causes an accidental death during operational activity or training. This is also written on the IDF Chief Rabbinate’s website, Hilchot Nesiat Kapayim, chapter 23, rendered by Rabbi Yitzchok Zilberstein, https://bit.ly/4tV7lmT.
See a similar discussion in the compilation published by Tzohar Ethics, Rabbi Yuval Cherlow and Rabbi Avraham Stav, Jewish Sustainability – Environmental Responsibility From Theory to Practice, chapter 10. Our opinion here relies on the conclusions and sources brought there, https://bit.ly/4tyvLlT.
Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah, 249:1.
Drisha, Yoreh Deah 249:1; Shach, ibid., subarticle 3; Taz, ibid., subarticle 1.
One should compare it to assisting with the income of one’s adult children, which is not obligatory, and the authorities disagree regarding if one may do this using ma’aser funds. See Shach and Taz ibid.
See ‘Jewish Sustainability’, (earlier footnote 148) footnote 239.
See ibid., footnote 242.