Victims at this time
Hello Rabbi,
We got to talk in reserve about the Temple and the anticipation of its construction, and the secularists there raised the well-known question regarding sacrifices, which I will reiterate and present from my perspective as a religious person:
Work in the Temple is perceived today in the eyes of modern man as something very crude and pagan – slaughtering an animal, throwing its blood on the altar, and then burning its internal organs over fire, it doesn’t sound very sympathetic, to put it mildly.
According to the Torah’s command, on the face of it, there is no possibility of avoiding the act of sacrifice while the ביהמק is in effect, because while there are sacrifices that are not obligatory to bring, such as a sin offering that comes only for a sin, and it appears that a person volunteers it of his own free will, after all, there are public sacrifices (such as the Tamid sacrifice and the additional sacrifices on Shabbats and holidays) that the Torah commands to be offered in any case.
Regarding the whole-animal sacrifice, it would seem reasonable to say that it is not difficult, because it is no less than the slaughter of an animal in our day, which is accepted today by all meat-eaters of all kinds, and the Torah comes and says to simply do it in the Temple and eat the meat in holiness (the Ramban interprets that this was the situation in the wilderness at the Tabernacle – it was permissible to eat only whole-animal meat, and when they entered the Land, even profane meat was permitted). However, on second thought, the difficulty does not stem from the actual eating of meat, but from the divine requirement to do an act that involves supposedly “dirty” dealing with blood and meat. The question is, is this what God expects us to do? God, blessed be He, is perceived today, at least as a humane and merciful God who has nothing to do with such things! On the other hand, I thought that perhaps our view today is incorrect, because if this is the role of the animal, then it reaches its correction and purpose, and this is good for it.
One of the religious guys in the reserves raised the possibility that perhaps the sacrifices were really intended only for that period when idolatry dominated the world in a similar way (as Maimonides did in his Teachings of the Perplexed), and that perhaps in the Temple that will be built, this will not be the case, but as far as I know, no such system actually exists. The Book of Ezekiel also mentions the Third Temple with sacrifices to be offered in it.
In any case, I would love to hear your opinion on the matter.
thanks
Hello.
First, one must distinguish between feelings and beliefs. Even something that seems repulsive can still have value. In this context, it is also important to distinguish between the actual killing of animals and their abuse (as is the case in the meat industry today). The actual killing is not morally wrong, as long as the animal does not suffer. Therefore, my assumption in the discussion is that it is not about the suffering of animals but about the actual use and killing of them.
Assuming there is no suffering, would you be deterred from eating meat in the future? Or even from eating it today? So why do the sacrifices deter you? If their sacrifice brings some spiritual benefit, it is no different from the benefit of eating, and we should accept that.
The problem arises because we do not see the benefit of this sacrifice other than fulfilling God’s will. Therefore, the question arises as to why God would want this. But it is possible that this problem arises for us only because we have never experienced a situation where there is a temple and sacrifices are offered there. Perhaps if we had experienced it, we would see what kind of exaltation or strong spirituality prevails over us in such a situation, and then we would understand the spiritual value of the sacrifice. It is difficult to judge a situation that you have not experienced and cannot imagine what it means for you and in general.
Now you can see that this discussion is unnecessary. From my perspective today, it is clear that I do not desire nor miss the return of sacrifices. A situation where priests walk with their feet soaked to the ankles in blood is far from being the touchstone of my life. If in the future the Temple is built and sacrifices are offered in it, then we will either be able to see whether there is indeed value in it, and then the question will not arise, or we will feel that there is still no value in it, and then perhaps there is room to discuss this question. In the meantime, this is an unborn egg, since it is not at all clear that there is a problem.
I answered you in an internal religious debate. Regarding secularists, it's a different debate, because they don't accept the religious value of things. From this perspective, it's clear that there's no point in sacrificing, but it's true for them even if there was nothing morally wrong with it. It's just a worthless act for them. These are divided viewpoints and there's no point in discussing it.
It's like a secularist asking why not desecrate Shabbat to save a gentile's life (in my opinion today, desecration is obligatory, but according to Talmudic law, this is the halakha). From his perspective, there's no value in keeping Shabbat, so it's clear that in his opinion there's a reason to desecrate Shabbat to save a gentile's life. He's not in conflict. But I am in conflict, because from my perspective, desecrating Shabbat is a serious problem. It's the value of a gentile's life that stands in contrast, and therefore I'm in conflict. There's no point in discussing it with someone who doesn't accept one of the two values in the conflict. You can argue with him about the value of Shabbat, and after he accepts that, you can discuss saving a gentile's life (does that reject the value of Shabbat or not). But without him accepting the value of Shabbat, what's the point of discussing it?!
Just to clarify the matter, even a Jew's life is not saved by desecrating the Sabbath except because he will keep many Sabbaths (this is one of the reasons in the issue of Yoma. We will discuss it for the sake of illustration). We see that the value of a Jew's life does not reject the Sabbath, but the future Sabbaths that he will keep. In other words, the value of the Sabbath is not rejected in the face of the value of the life of a Jew, and therefore not of a Gentile either. From the secular point of view, of course, there is no value for the Sabbath and there is value for human life, and therefore it is not possible to discuss any of this with him at all. It is like asking a Ukrainian why he is going to war against Russia, after all, people will be killed there. He will answer you that he is a Ukrainian patriot and wants to defend his homeland. But I am not interested in Ukraine and its defense. Therefore, I will insist on asking why he kills people for his nonsense. You understand that there is no value and no point in such a discussion.
Thank you very much for the detailed and waiting response!
By the way, with your permission, I usually ask Rabbi Moshe Rat at the same time as you. He gave a very similar answer to yours, and added a parable in this context to marital relations to help understand the matter: From the perspective of someone lacking passion, it seems disgusting, dirty and material, dealing with flesh, secretions and bodily fluids. And this may indeed be so, but on the other hand, when this is done out of love and a deep spiritual connection - it elevates the connection between the couple much more than a mere platonic relationship.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
