Taanit 27A

אי מה משרת ⁠— בעל מום לא, אף כהן מברך ⁠— בעל מום לא! הא איתקש לנזיר.

The Talmud asks: If so, then just as a priest who ministers in the Temple may not be physically blemished, so too, a priest who recites the benediction may not be blemished. The Talmud rejects this suggestion: The priest who recites the benediction is also juxtaposed to a nazirite, who is not affected by a blemish.

ומאי חזית דמקשת לקולא? אקיש לחומרא! אסמכתא נינהו מדרבנן, ולקולא.

The Talmud asks: And what did you see that you juxtaposed the cases in favor of a leniency? Perhaps you should juxtapose for a stringency, by comparing the priest who recites the benediction to a nazirite with regard to grape pits, and comparing him to a priest ministering in the Temple in relation to the prohibition against reciting the benediction if he has a physical blemish. The Talmud explains: These proofs are cited merely as support for halakhot that apply by rabbinic law, and consequently, they are interpreted as a leniency, not a stringency.

אלו הן מעמדות. לפי שנאמר: ״צו את בני ישראל כו׳״. מאי קאמר? הכי קאמר: אלו הן מעמדות. ומה טעם תיקנו מעמדות, לפי שנאמר: ״צו את בני ישראל ואמרת אליהם את קרבני לחמי לאשי״.

§ The Mishnah taught that these are the non-priestly watches: Since it is stated: “Command the children of Israel.” The Talmud asks: What is the Mishnah saying about the non-priestly watches? How does the verse relate to the watches? The Talmud explains that the Mishnah is saying as follows: These are the non-priestly watches, which will be explained later. And what is the reason that they instituted non-priestly watches? Since it is stated: “Command the children of Israel and say to them: My offering of food, which is presented to Me made by a fire, of a sweet savor to Me, you should observe to sacrifice to Me in their due season” (Numbers 28:2).