Volume 37 Number 60
Produced: Tue Oct 29 5:44:22 US/Eastern 2002
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Source of Cohanim (9)
[Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz, Mike Gerver, Yehuda Landy, Wendy
Baker, E. Stieglitz, Mort Trainer, Alex Heppenheimer, .cp.,
Stan Tenen]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <Sabba.Hillel@...>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 14:10:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Source of Cohanim
> From: <rubin20@...>
> I have gotten a few responses along the line that we are not twelve
> tribes but two and a half, so the proportion of cohanim is natural much
> higher in the general population. I had thought of mentioning this in my
One point is that after the split, most of the Northern Kingdom Kohanim
and Leviyim fled to the kindom of Yehudah. Additionally, since most
Kohanim lived in and around Yerushalayim, the refugees from those areas
were disproportionately Kohanim. I have been told that the percentage
of Kohanim among Sefaradim (or perhaps Edot Hamizrach) are higher for
that reason.
> From: David Waxman <yitz99@...>
> To strengthen the kasha, Nadiv and Avihu didn't live to the latter
> census and presumably did not procreate. Anyone know if this is true?
The meforshim state that one of the sins of Nadav and Avihu was that
they refused to marry and therefore had not children. Additionally, all
the geneologies (including those in Ezra and Divrei Hayamim) point out
that only Elazar and Isamar had children.
Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz
<sabbahem@...>, Sabba.Hillel@verizon.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <MJGerver@...> (Mike Gerver)
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 03:15:00 EST
Subject: Source of Cohanim
A point that no one seems to have brought up, is that cohanim had a
significant economic advantage over other Jews-- an additional income in
the form of trumah. During the 1300 years between Aharon's generation
and the destruction of the Second Temple, this could have led to a
significant higher growth rate among the population of cohanim, as
compared to the rest of the Jewish population. It wouldn't take such a
large differential growth rate, over such a long time, to make a large
difference in the ratio of the number of cohanim to other Jews. This is
about 50 generations. If the cohanim had a 20% higher birth rate than
other Jews, then there would be e to the 10th power (about 20,000) times
as many cohanim, relative to other Jews, at the end of this period, as
there were at the beginning.
Mike Gerver
Raanana, Israel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <nzion@...> (Yehuda Landy)
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 05:25:51 +0200
Subject: Re: Source of Cohanim
> Since Yerovam, first king of the Northern kindgom, established his own
> idols and appointed his own priests (I Kings:12) it stands to reason
> that many Kohanim and Levvim who were in the Northern kingdom would
> have gone to Jerusalem, or at least to Yehuda.
It states so explicitly in Divrei Hayamim II chp 2 verses 13-14.
Yehuda Landy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Wendy Baker <wbaker@...>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 23:33:41 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Source of Cohanim
> From: Joshua Hosseinof <jh@...>
> I do recall reading something about the relatively large number of
> kohanim in proportion to the numbers of Leviim that one finds, since one
> would expect Cohanim to be a much smaller percentage of the jewish
> population than leviim, whereas you usually find that they are about
> equal or sometimes you find more kohanim than leviim.
Just off the top of my head, it would seem that to be a Cohain is more
memorable that being a Levite, as the Cohain gets to bless the people and
does the special hand gesture freqently, while the Levite just assists in
these post Beit ha Migdash times. People who were Cohanim would be more
likely to remember and pass this down to children even in difficult times
that those who were Levvim. This misght well account for having more
Cohanim today than Leviim. Just less natural drop off.
Wendy Baker
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: E. Stieglitz <ephraim0@...>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 23:23:57 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Source of Cohanim
It might be nice to get a real Biologist/geneticist involved in this
discussion, since my own background here is limited to high school
Biology. Given that....
Stan Tenen wrote on mail-jewish:
> As I understand it, from popular reports, an extraordinarily high
> proportion of members of a particular Jewish community in Morocco
> have either Kohen or Levite genetic markers.
>
> Also, there is the question of the Lemba tribe of South Africa.
> As I remember it, one of their family lines has more than 50%
> genetic markers for Kohanim.
Again, this is just from memory of articles read 3-4 years ago:
I'm pretty sure that it's not a "Kohen" or "Levite" genetic marker, per
se. There's some genetic marker that's very rare in non-Jews, but can be
found in some Jews. Supposedly, this marker is more common in people who
claim to be Kohanim than among other Jews.
I remember seeing the number 6% in relation to all of this, though I
can't recall which group it was referring to. But we're probably dealing
with relatively small numbers.
> As of now, members of the Lemba tribe are attempting to be
> recognized as Jewish, without adopting full adherence to halacha.
> What if some, with Kohen genetic markers, do become fully
> halachically observant?
Supposedly, one reason that the incidence of the gene is so high is
because only women were allowed to convert and marry into the
tribe. They had strict rules preventing men from converting and
joining. If they were all Kohanim (I don't remember whether or not this
was ever claimed), this in itself would cause serious halachic problems.
/EJS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <mort.trainer@...> (Mort Trainer)
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:43:07 -0400
Subject: Source of Cohanim
Please don't forget that, according to most opinions, 10 of the shevatim were
"exiled" way back in the time of Sennacherib. Since Levi was not one of the
10, the proportion should have changed dramatically.
Mordechai Trainer
[Several submissions along these lines, but as pointed out, this is not
directly relevent, since shevet levi was dispersed among the
shevatim. The discussions have continued on whether prior to the exile
of the 10 tribes, the distribution already skewed to having most cohanim
/ leviim located in the area of Yehuda. Mod.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Alex Heppenheimer <aheppenh@...>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:32:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Source of Cohanim
In MJ 37:51, Joshua Hosseinof <jh@...> wrote:
> Sefer Ezra and Nehemiah mention many times the big problem of
> intermarriage that they faced during that time. It makes sense
> that the intermarriage rate amongst kohanim in those times was much
> less than amongst the rest of the Jews - while the temple stood any
> kohen who did intermarry would have been disqualified from working
> in the temple. The Kohanim might not have intermarried at all or
> only a very few of them might have done so because of the very
> explicit prohibition in the Torah about a kohen marrying a "zonah"
> which would apply to all non-jewish women.
Actually, of the 113 people listed in Ezra 10:18ff who were required to
divorce their wives, seventeen, or 15%, were Kohanim. Considering that
Kohanim made up just over 10% of the population at the time of the
return twenty-three years earlier, it would seem that on the contrary,
they were _more_ likely than the average Jew to intermarry. (To be sure,
the absolute percentages were small in both cases: 0.40% of the Kohanim,
compared to 0.25% of the other Jews.)
[It's entirely possible that some, or all, of these Kohanim had married
women who were properly converted, and were required to divorce them
because a Kohen is forbidden to marry a convert. Either way, though,
this demonstrates that neither an explicit prohibition in the Torah nor
fear of disqualification from serving in the Beit HaMikdash was enough
to deter them from contracting improper marriages: both factors would
have been equally applicable whether their wives remained gentiles or
converted properly, as the Torah's rubric of "zonah" covers both gentile
women and converts.]
> (You might ask about the prohibition in general against marrying
> non-jews in Sefer Devarim - remember that Sefer devarim was lost
> for a long time and only found during the time of Ezra).
What's the source for this? If you're thinking of the episode in which
the "book of the Torah of G-d [written] by the hand of Moshe" (which
pseudo-Rashi identifies as the book of Devarim) was discovered in the
Beit HaMikdash (II Chron. 34:14), then that took place in Yoshiyahu's
times, a century before Ezra. (And it's not clear that its contents were
unknown before that; some of the commentaries explain it that way, but
others attribute the furor over the discovery to the fact that the
scroll was found rolled to Devarim 28:36, an ominous passage.) On the
other hand, if you're referring to Nechemiah 13:1-2 ("On that day the
book of Moshe was read before the people, and there was found written in
it... [a citation from Devarim 23:4-5]"), then that took place some
years after the events of Ezra chs. 9-10.
In any case, had the prohibition in Devarim 7:2 regarding intermarriage
been entirely unknown to the people, then Ezra would have had to start
his campaign by reading this passage to them, as was done when
reintroducing the mitzvot of building Sukkot (Nechemiah 8:14) and
excluding Ammonite and Moabite converts (Nechemiah 13:1-2). On the
contrary, though, the narrative begins with the leaders informing Ezra
of the problem, and matter-of-factly calling it a "trespass" (Ezra 9:2):
evidently this prohibition was well-known but was being ignored by
segments of the population.
> Another point regarding the religiosity of the kohanim during that
> time period is that most of the neviim came from the Kohanim
> (Yirmiyahu, Yechezkel, etc) - so if the kohanim were more religious
> they were less likely to intermarry.
First of all, these prophets lived during the era of the first Beit
HaMikdash; conditions had changed considerably decades later during the
return - see Malachi 1:6-7, 2:1-9 for sharp denunciations of the lack of
religious commitment among (some of) the Kohanim.
Furthermore, even in the time of the first Beit HaMikdash there were
individual Kohanim who worshiped idols (see II Kings 23:8-9) or
otherwise failed to live up to their responsibilities (see Yirmiyah
20:1-2). Indeed, in his description of the future Beit HaMikdash (may it
be built soon!) and its operations, Yechezkel (44:15) goes so far as to
say that only the family of Tzadok had remained loyal to the service of
Hashem.
> (See also Masechet Yevamot 86b and in Tosafot on that page "Mipnei
> Mah" regarding how Ezra punished the leviim - so many of the leviim
> might have been disqualified which as side effect increased the
> percentage of kohanim in the total jewish population)
But Ezra punished the Levi'im by taking away their exclusive rights to
maaser, as the Gemara explains there; he didn't disqualify any of them.
So why would this have caused a reduction in the number of Levi'im vs.
Kohanim?
Kol tuv,
Alex
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: .cp. <chips@...>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 18:56:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Source of Cohanim
}I have gotten a few responses along the line that we are not twelve
}tribes but two and a half, so the proportion of cohanim is natural much
}higher in the general population. I had thought of mentioning this in my
}original post, only to point out how it is a non answer. Firstly, that
}is assumeing that when Sancherev exiled the Asseres HaSevatim, there
}were no or few Levim and Cohanim amongst them. That is at odd with the
}historic position of Cohanim and Leviyim being mixed up amongst the rest
}of Klal Yisroel (they didn't have a Nachla for that reason). As proof of
}the fact that Cohanim and Leviim were dispersed amongst the rest of Klal
}Yisroel, consider that according to this theory there are really three
}and a half Shevatim, the third being Shevet Levi, in which case, one out
}of every five people should be a Cohain or Levi, something which
}obviously isn't true.In addition, even assuming this is right, if we
}recalculate only with Yehuda, Binyomin and half menasha, we get a
}proportion of .0000396% of the population being Cohanim, still
}unexplainable as to how they are now hundreds of times that proportion
}now. I would hazard a guess that the percent of cohainim is closer to
}5% amongst Askenazim, and amongst sefardim even higher.
The present Jewish population is made up of Yehuda, Binyomin,
Shimon and Levy. There were very,very few of Levy in the Kingdom of
Israel. Add in that the Kohanym and Davidic families were intertwined
and that they both did quite well in Golus Bovel. Then in the time of
the 2nd Bayis , it was the Kohanym and Levyim who were the most desired
of families to marry into. I don't think 5% is that much of a stretch.
-rp
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Stan Tenen <meru1@...>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 14:02:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Source of Cohanim
As I understand it, from popular reports, an extraordinarily high
proportion of members of a particular Jewish community in Morocco have
either Kohen or Levite genetic markers.
Also, there is the question of the Lemba tribe of South Africa. As I
remember it, one of their family lines has more than 50% genetic markers
for Kohanim.
What are we to make of this? Is there an explanation for the Moroccan
genetics?
As of now, members of the Lemba tribe are attempting to be recognized as
Jewish, without adopting full adherence to halacha. What if some, with
Kohen genetic markers, do become fully halachically observant? Would
they be accepted as Kohanim, or would there be a halachic process of
"re-certification"? Or is Kohen status, once lost, never recoverable?
(And what if, as is possible, the Lemba had connections to Judaism
similar to those of the Ethiopians, from pre-Talmudic times?)
Best,
Stan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 37 Issue 60