Priestly Gifts: Arm, Cheeks, and Stomach

While Teruma, the tithing of fruits and vegetables, is a well-known Torah requirement that is still practiced nowadays, there are actually another two dozen such “Matnot Kehuna,” priestly gifts that the Torah requires us to give. (1) Most of these gifts/tithes were only binding from biblical times up until the era of the Beit Hamikdash, but some continue to be practiced even nowadays, such as Teruma, Challa (setting aside a portion of dough when baking), and Petter Chamor (the redemption of a firstborn donkey).

Another example of Matnot Kehuna is that of giving a Kohen the zeroa (the arm), the Lechayayim (the cheeks) (2) and the Keiva (the abomasum stomach) after slaughtering an animal. (3) As the Torah says, “And this shall be given to the priests from the people, from those who offer a sacrifice, whether it be ox or sheep, they shall give the priest the shoulder, and the two cheeks, and the stomach.” (4)

The mitzva does not apply to “chayot” (wild game like deer) or poultry.(5) The mitzva to give these gifts to a Kohen is the responsibility of the shochet, not the owner of the animal, (6) though the owner of the animal chooses which Kohen they are to be given to. (7) So too, the three gifts may be given to more than one Kohen or may otherwise be divided up in any way. For example, one may give one Kohen the zeroa and a different Kohen the keiva, and the like. (8) The Kohen was encouraged to indulge with an elaborate meal when eating these meats. (9)

Nevertheless, for some reason, there is a widespread laxity in the mitzva of zeroa, lechayayim, and keiva even though it appears to be fully binding nowadays. Several authorities have protested this disregard for the mitzva, declaring that those who do not observe it are worthy of excommunication. (10) There is also some discussion whether the mitzva applies only in Eretz Yisrael or whether it also applies in the Diaspora with most authorities ruling that it applies in both Eretz Yisrael and in the Diaspora. (11) This is largely because the mitzva is not dependent on land at all. (12) With the exception of Orla, (13) only mitzvot dependent on land are exclusive to Eretz Yisrael. All the other mitzvot of the Torah apply equally everywhere in the world. (14)

Rashi attempts to justify the neglect in performing this mitzva, especially outside of Eretz Yisrael, based on the view that connects the mitzva of “reishit hagez” (the mitzva to give the first shearing from a flock of sheep to a Kohen) to the mitzva of “zeroa, lechayayim, and keiva.” According to this view, just like the former does not apply outside of Eretz Yisrael, so too, the latter does not apply outside Eretz Yisrael, either. While Rashi strongly encourages people to fulfill this mitzva even outside of Eretz Yisrael, he says that those who are lenient need not be reprimanded. He also notes that historically there were communities in which there were simply no Kohanim to give the gifts to, making the fulfillment of the mitzva almost impossible. (15)

Indeed, it may very well be due to Rashi’s ruling that Jews in the Diaspora did not observe this mitzva. As the Tur writes, "Rashi ruled that the actual giving is not done nowadays…and so wrote the Maharam of Rothenberg and this is the practice." (16) 

Over the centuries, a number of other arguments were put forward in order to justify the non-observance of the mitzva of zeroa, lechayayim, and keiva. Most of these lenient considerations stemmed from the precarious financial situation of world Jewry that was common along with the already high cost of kosher meat. Among these leniencies is the approach that, if a non-Jew owns the animal or any part of it, the animal is exempt from zeroa, lechayayim, and keiva. Similarly, there is a view that if the shechita takes place on the property of a non-Jew, the animal is exempt, as well.

Perhaps the most celebrated argument for leniency in the observance of this mitzva (and most other Kohen-related mitzvot) is the fact that purity of lineage is a serious question nowadays. There is extensive discussion as to whether today’s Kohanim are considered to be genuine Kohanim. This is why Kohanim are not given the Teruma or Challa nowadays, as we simply don’t have adequate evidence as to who is truly a Kohen. (18) So too, the requirement to treat Kohanim with honor and give them precedence, is minimized nowadays for the same reason. (19) Naturally, this extended to the mitzva of zeroa, lechayayim, and keiva, as well. (20) Indeed, due to the doubt as to who is really a Kohen, some authorities recommend that one should perform the mitzva of pidyon haben, namely, that one should redeem oneself, with as many Kohanim as possible. (21) There is also a view that one is only required to give the zeroa, lechayayim, and keiva if one is explicitly requested to by a Kohen. Since we don’t see Kohanim protesting outside of slaughterhouses demanding these gifts, it is as if the Kohanim themselves have released us from the mitzva. (22)

While all the above-mentioned leniencies are weak, at best, common custom is to be lenient. It is noted that the prophet Yechezkel would not eat meat from which the zeroa, lechayayim, and keiva was not separated and given to a Kohen. (23) It appears that Yemenite communities did indeed observe this mitzva throughout the years of exile. (24) It is taught that proper observance of this mitzva can lead to receiving Divine inspiration (25) and to victory over our enemies. (26)

Nevertheless, the mitzva is slowly beginning to be more widely observed nowadays. (27) A number of Jewish-owned slaughterhouses around the world have an arrangement whereby they give a Kohen or group of Kohanim the financial equivalent of the zeroa, lechayayim, and the keiva which is considered to be an acceptable (though not unanimous) fulfillment of the mitzva. (28) Indeed, the earlier authorities discuss the question of what one should do if there is no Kohen to give the meat to and it will spoil. This was especially relevant before the era of refrigeration. One of the solutions to this problem was to calculate the value of the zeroa, lechayayim, and keiva and set aside the money to be given to a Kohen at a later date. Meanwhile, one was permitted to eat the meat. (29)

We are taught that the mitzva of the zeroa, lechayayim, and keiva is meant to remind us of the act of Pinchas. When Pinchas attacked Zimri and Cozbi who were committing an immoral act, he grabbed his spear with his hand, he prayed with his mouth, and he stabbed them in the stomach (30) which corresponds to the zeroa, lechayayim, and keiva respectively. Pinchas was later made a Kohen for his deed.

1 Chullin 132b.

2 There is some dispute as to how much of the mouth the Kohen is entitled to. See for example, Aruch Hashulchan, YD 61:12.

3 YD 61:1, 28.

4 Devarim 18:3.

5 YD 61:17.

6 Chullin 132a; Taz, YD 61:29.

7 Tosefta, Peah 2:13; Rema, YD 61:28.

8 Chullin 132b; YD 61:9.

9 Bechorot 27a.

10 Aguda, Chullin 152.

11 Chullin 132b; Mordechai, Chullin 736; Sifri, Devarim 18:3; Rambam, Chullin 9:1, 10:4; Hilchot Bikkurim, 9:1.

12 Rashi, Chullin 115b.

13 YD 294:8, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 173:1.

14 The only exception is the mitzva of “Orlah” which applies everywhere.

15 Sefer Hapardes L’rashi, p. 95.

16 Tur, YD 6; YD 61:21.

17 Bach, YD 293.

18 Mahari Weil 193.

19 Magen Avraham 201:4.

20 Pleiti, YD 61:6.

21 Sheilat Yaavetz 1:155. Furthermore, since the Kohen cannot prove his genealogy, he recommends that Kohanim return the money that they are given for pidyon haben since there is the possibility that the Kohen may, in fact, not be a Kohen and, therefore, the money he receives could be stolen money!

22 Mahari Kurkus, Bikkurim 9.

23 Chullin 37b.

24 Zevach Today, YD 61.

25 Kaf Hachaim, YD 61:54.

26 Panim Yafot, Devarim 18.

27 See here regarding the O-U’s efforts to reinstate the mitzva: https://kehuna.org/meeting-minutes-with-the-ou-regarding-implementing-the-mitzvah-of-zroa-lechyayaim-and-keva-in-chul/.

28 Mahari Kurkus, Bikkurim 9.

29 Tosefta, Chullin 9:7.

30 Chullin 134b.