15 —ברכת כהנים, מומים גופניים, וחלוקת האצבעות

Shalom u'Vrachah! [Before 5700] In response to your question regarding Shulchan Aruch Admur HaZaken, Laws of Nesiat Kapayim (Priestly Blessing), section 128:28, which cites Megillah (24b) that one who has defects on his face or hands should not lift his hands (for Birkat Kohanim). Admur writes: such as if his hands are bent or twisted to their sides, which is Rashi's explanation in Megillah on the words 'twisted' and 'crooked' in the Baraita. The Ran explains 'twisted' as a hand bent backward and 'crooked' as being unable to separate his fingers. You wish to say there is a dispute between Rashi and the Ran also in practical law, and that the Rama also disagrees by bringing both Rashi's and the Ran's explanations in Shulchan Aruch. But since Admur only brings Rashi's explanation, you infer that according to Rashi (and thus Admur), a Kohen who cannot separate his fingers (the Ran's case) may still perform Nesiat Kapayim. Therefore, you conclude that the Ran does not mean total inability to separate fingers—since that would be an obvious defect—but rather inability to keep them separated for the entire duration of Birkat Kohanim. Since this is not a true defect, Rashi and Admur rule he may perform Nesiat Kapayim.

First, note that Rama's comments here are only explanations of foreign terms in Shulchan Aruch (like 'bohakniyot', 'twisted', 'crooked'), not actual halachic rulings—as is evident from Magen Avraham and Taz who also explain these terms. There are several responses to your question:

A) Nowhere is there any explicit dispute between Rashi and the Ran regarding practical law—not even in interpretation—just as those who explain 'bohakniyot' differently do not actually disagree in practice; especially since one explanation refers to a type of white blemish mentioned in Nidah 19a.

B) The custom for Kohanim to separate their fingers is just that—a custom—as written by Admur (128:20) and cited from Geonim in Aruch under 'Chalon'. There is no Talmudic source for this. Thus, even if one cannot keep his fingers spread throughout Birkat Kohanim—or even cannot separate them at all—there is no reason to disqualify him from Nesiat Kapayim. The prohibition exists only when people would stare at him due to an unusual defect causing distraction; but here he is not different from other Kohanim who also do not always separate their fingers by Torah law.

C) The Shulchan Aruch states: "One who has a defect on his face or hands such as... crooked..." Clearly, 'crooked' means an actual defect. Magen Avraham brings the Ran's explanation here. It is far-fetched to say that mere inability to keep one's fingers spread for all of Birkat Kohanim counts as a defect; what source does the Ran have for such a novel idea? Nor can one object based on 'bohakniyot', which is not considered a defect since we recite "Blessed... Who changes creatures" over it (Berachot 58b); see also Bechorot 45b.

D) In Chullin (56a), there is a version—also cited by Rashi on Devarim 32:5 and Mishlei 4:24—about teeth of a mole being crooked and twisted. According to your reading of the Ran, how would you interpret 'twisted' here?

E) Most importantly: 'Twisted' ('akushot') is synonymous with 'bent' ('akumot'); only that 'akum' isn't Torah language while derivatives of 'akush' appear often in Tanach. In many places, translations render both as 'bent'. What does inability to keep or even separate one's fingers have to do with being bent? It seems clear that both Rashi and the Ran intend only to distinguish between types of bending—not define new meanings for these words. Thus, both explanations are included within Rashi's definition; "two hundred includes one hundred."

Regarding your main question: If a Kohen cannot keep his fingers separated throughout Birkat Kohanim—should he be disqualified? One might argue that since nowadays all Kohanim make five spaces between their fingers—even if only due to custom—and he does not do so, he stands out among his peers and people will stare at him causing distraction; therefore he should be disqualified. For this reason tying his fingers with tzitzit strings—as you asked—wouldn't help either because it would still make him stand out.

However, I think this reasoning does not hold up. If any difference whatsoever caused people to stare until they were distracted—the examples given in Talmud are just illustrations (see commentary on Megillah about Istis/Pua). Rambam generally only writes what is explicit in sources; it's surprising such a novelty—that any difference disqualifies—was never mentioned by poskim! Also, Shulchan Aruch Admur 128:46 (from Beit Yosef) says that covering up facial defects with a tallit doesn't help when others don't cover theirs because standing out causes people to stare; but if so it should have said even healthy Kohanim can't cover themselves lest they change custom! Later it says "even if all want to cover themselves it's forbidden because people will realize it's due to someone's defect"—he specifies "because he has a defect," rather than just "because of this." Clearly only significant differences causing extra attention matter.

This distinction appears also in Lechem Mishneh on Rambam Hilchot Nesiat Kapayim 15:2 regarding whether local familiarity helps for certain defects but not others; see also Beit Yosef about blindness in one eye versus two eyes.

Therefore since no source considers inability to keep one's fingers separated as a disqualifying defect—even though it makes him different from others—there's no basis for forbidding him from performing Nesiat Kapayim. Even someone who cannot separate his fingers at all may do so; especially nowadays when most cover their faces with their tallit—a further support from Taz cited in section 46—even though this isn't practiced for actual defects.

As for tying one's fingers with tzitzit strings so as to fulfill the custom of five spaces—you wondered whether this creates an interruption between Divine Presence and people's gaze through his hands. Note:

A) From Admur section 36 it's clear that while seeing through the hands was once essential—in Temple times—it now serves only as remembrance; thus throughout this section distraction is given as the main concern (see commentaries).

B) There seems no issue with such an interruption—just as tefillin straps wrapped around one's finger during weekday prayers aren't removed before Birkat Kohanim—even though Shulchan Aruch discusses places where Birkat Kohanim occurs during weekday prayers when tefillin are worn.

C) Even according to section 36 where it's proper for nothing—including tallit—to intervene between hand and congregation, there's still no comparison between covering with an entire tallit versus thin tzitzit threads or tefillin straps; see Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 651:7 Rama.

D) The Midrash cited in section 20 says "the Divine Presence peers through their finger gaps"—so there's no interruption between Shechinah and congregation; nor does tzitzit or tefillin constitute separation for this purpose.

Another possible solution based on section 20: Between each word during Birkat Kohanim one may bring one's fingers together again—and surely during each word he can manage briefly to keep them separated properly.

It's unclear which option is preferable: tying with tzitzit strings—even though it makes him different from other Kohanim but doesn't cause distracting stares—or separating before each word despite possible confusion or textual doubts noted by Shaar HaKolel quoting She'erit Yehuda.

You also asked about customs regarding keeping hands outside one's tallit (Admur section 36)—which isn't practiced everywhere—and separating all ten fingers per Zohar quoted by Magen Avraham but omitted by Admur. Minchat Yom Tov quotes Zohar and Sefer Heichal HaBracha saying failure makes one transgressor—which practice should be followed?

Certainly there are established customs among Anash families regarding these details; observe local practice.

Your suggestion that making five spaces fulfills "He peers through windows" appears mistaken—it refers rather to "He peers through lattices," as cited by Admur section 20 following Tur etc.; see Midrash Tanchuma Parshat Naso commentary Etz Yosef and entries under Chalon in Aruch Hashalem—not like Rash Buber who maintains an inverted version—and distinctions between windows/lattices are discussed elsewhere including Likkutei Torah.

From various printings of Shulchan Aruch it's worth clarifying authorship of foreign-word glosses therein; check Ketzos HaShulchan by Naeh of Jerusalem if available—I couldn't obtain it here. Also check Sephardic editions regarding removal of tefillin straps during Birkat Kohanim—I found Kenesset HaGedolah here but not more.

Summary

This letter analyzes whether physical limitations affecting finger separation disqualify a Kohen from performing Birkat Kohanim. The conclusion is that unless there is an obvious deformity causing distracting stares, such limitations do not invalidate participation according to halachah or custom.