Priestly blessings and an overdose of piety

In an ideal world where terms of praise are not laden with undercurrents of insult or abuse, it would be good to be called a chasid. This term, infused with the root meaning of chesed, kindness, epitomises the person who seeks to do God's bidding even before he has been commanded to do so (see eg Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto, Mesilat Yesharim). It is also a fit appellation for anyone who is unselfish with their assets (5:13), slow to anger and quick to calm down (5:14), positive towards the concepts of charity (5:16) as well as learning Torah in public (5:17) and for its own sake (Avot 6:1).

English translations of chasid often employ terms such as "pious" and "devout", which do not do full justice to the word.

Hillel (Avot 2:6) states that an am ha'aretz cannot be a chasid. But what is an am ha'aretz? Unlike chasid -- which is a term of praise -- am ha'aretz is almost always a pejorative term. It is often rendered "ignoramus", "unlearned person", someone who is "common" or "knows not Torah".

Over the years, Hillel's statement has attracted many comments and has been applied to many situations. I have just found another one.

The priestly blessings that the Kohanim administer to a Jewish prayer quorum are a practice of great antiquity, going right back to biblical times (see Numbers 6:22-27). By long-established custom and practice, the congregation do not stare at the Kohanim at the point of delivery of these blessings, but avert their gaze while they listen intently to the Kohanim's words.

Rabbi Eliezer Papo (the 'Pele Yo'etz') in his book Chesed La'Alafim (vol 1, 128:16) notes that some people, in an excess of piety, do not merely avert their eyes from their priestly benefactors but actually turn their backs on them -- presumably to avoid any risk of inadvertently looking up at the Kohanim and watching them at work. Since all a person need do is to cast his or her gaze demurely down to the ground, this act of turning one's back on the Kohanim is a demonstration of an excess of piety -- and this constitutes the behaviour of an am ha'aretz. And that, concludes the Pele Yo'etz, is a practical example of Hillel's teaching that an am ha'aretz cannot be a chasid.