Our Gemara on this daf discusses various physical defects that disqualify a kohen from serving in the Temple.

The verse in the Torah that discusses this disqualification states (Vayikra 21:17):

“Speak to Aaron and say: No man among your offspring throughout the ages who shall have a defect (asher yihye) shall be qualified to offer the food of his God.”

Kli Yakkar notes that the language asher yihye is in future tense “shall have.” He says the ancients had wisdom and understood that every physical blemish was a manifestation of an inner spiritual blemish. Therefore, the language is “shall be” because once the inner conditions for the blemish are present currently, the physical part is inevitable even if not yet seen. Furthermore, the person’s current behavior is seen, and so if it was improper, the belief was that a corresponding blemish would eventually appear.

Ramban (Vayikra 26:11) says that if the righteous became ill during the era of prophecy they would seek out a prophet for guidance as to what was lacking and needed to be healed. He notes the language of our sages (Berachos 60a) that “permission is given to the physician to heal.” The emphasis is on the physician allowing him to heal and not on the person who was stricken ill. This is no different than the imperative to give charity. We must give without judgment though it is incumbent upon the recipient to wonder why he must receive charity and to take his own spiritual steps to address it. So too when a person suffers a physical illness, the physician should try and help in any way. However, the one who was suffering, must consider deeper causes.

I will go further. One does not even need to believe that the disease came from divine providence in order to legitimately use the disease as a moment to ponder what lesson should be learned from the experience. For example the Gemara Succah (29a) states:

“When the sun is eclipsed it is a bad omen for the entire world. The Gemara tells a parable. To what is this matter comparable? It is comparable to a king of flesh and blood who prepared a feast for his servants and placed a lantern [panas] before them to illuminate the hall. He became angry at them and said to his servant: Take the lantern from before them and seat them in darkness.”

How can we make sense of this when we know that an eclipse is an astronomical event which can be predicted with great accuracy, and not in response to any sin other than predetermined orbital mechanics. It is also relevant that the Greek philosopher and mathematician, Thales was able to calculate and predict a solar eclipse in 585 BCE, way before the Gemara, and the rabbis may very well have had this knowledge too. We do know that they were aware of Halley’s Comet, see Horiyos 10a.

So what were the sages driving at? Did they know it was a sham but just used it to terrify the ignorant masses into being humbled and repentant, with shades of a Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court? Hardly likely. Rather, the sages asked us to invoke the natural existential terror when we see how powerful God is through nature, and we see how tiny and fragile we are in comparison, so we use the opportunity to ponder repentance. This is a subtle but important distinction and no different than how Ramban understands the rainbow (Bereishis 9:13). The Rainbow always existed as a consequence of nature, but after the flood God assigned the Rainbow as a reminder of the covenant.

Natural events or even the natural entropy of illness are part of God’s way to designate reminders of our mortality so that we examine our lives and make corrections while we still can. If we merit a degree of Providence that the illness is a direct telegram from God and if our repentance is sufficient that it heals us, wonderful. However, if not a personal telegram it still matters. And even if our repentance does not bring an automatic and corresponding healing that does not diminish the value and meaning of taking spiritual inventory when illness and other misfortunes remind us of our frailty and impermanence in this world.

(Of note, though the sages discussion about eclipses serving as a sign of God’s wrath has been adequately explained by the above approach, and I rejected the possibility that the Rabbis were scaring the masses, there is a different approach. The Rambam famously posits the idea of so-called necessary beliefs in The Guide for the Perplexed (III:27-28). He asserts that the Torah may use a simplistic idea to convey a deeper truth. Such as, the Torah may refer to God‘s anger being kindled, even though God really does not get angry because that is a weakness.

But the idea of God's so-called displeasure needs to be conveyed on a simple level so that the unsophisticated masses will understand the necessity of obeying the law. Those who have a more sophisticated idea of God will understand that He does not get angry, but the consequences for sin are equivalent to feeling God’s wrath. In a similar vein, the sages may have been doing the same thing in that particular aggadah.)