For us? Sacrifices of innocent animals that are obviously unrelated to us? For us? Bread that we do not eat?
For us? Candles for decoration?

By that logic, I do not understand why you picked on these three commandments in particular. Do you understand tefillin? And tzitzit? And forbidden foods? And impurity and purity? How do these help us or harm us? There are some kind of spiritual consequences, and these three probably contribute to them as well.
By the way, with these three one can at least understand the intended benefit: it seems to be about shaping our relationship with the Holy One, blessed be He.

Honestly, I do not understand what “spiritual consequences” are. Do you mean spirit like air? And how does shaping a relationship with the Holy One, blessed be He, happen through slaughtering innocent animals whose innocence is compared to that of babies?

I notice that when Rabbi Michi does not have rational and intelligent answers, he replies with a question and escapes giving an answer. You have to understand that a rabbi has no free choice. His destiny is to be a rabbi, and as such he cannot give heretical answers even if in his heart he thinks that way.

Noam,
From experience, even that will not help get an answer out of him.

But what is the question exactly? We assume there is some exalted purpose to the commandments even if we do not know what it is, or alternatively all kinds of incidental human explanations. Good thing he did not ask about the duplicate creation stories in Genesis or how King David sinned with Bathsheba.

With God’s help, 8 Av 5780

To T — greetings,

The repetition of the creation story in Genesis expresses the two roles of the human being in the world: the role of shepherd and the role of farmer. The vegetation mentioned in chapter 1 is the natural woodland that grows without human assistance. The human being is meant to be the leader of the animal world.

By contrast, chapter 2 speaks of planting the garden, cultivated agriculture. Man is also given the role of working the soil and guarding it, the role of the farmer. Accordingly, there is also a difference in the woman’s role. In chapter 1, man and woman are equal in governing the animal world, but in working the soil, the man is dominant, and the woman is “a helpmate opposite him.”

And in chapter 3, each of the sons of Adam and Eve adopts one of these roles, and both offer their Creator, as a sign of gratitude, the fruit of their labor: the shepherd the firstborn of his flock, and the farmer the fruit of his land. This expresses their awareness that it was not only “their own power and the might of their hand” that brought them success, but the help they merited from their Creator, without which they would not have succeeded.

So too for later generations: a person offers his God from the flock and herd that he tended, and also from the grain, wine, and oil that he grew, in order to express gratitude to his Creator, thanks to whose help and providence man succeeded in his labor.

Best regards, S”TZ

Many thanks, S”TZ. But I only meant to needle the questioner and his pals, who surely know the standard answers already, including here, and are surprised there is no second cooking after second cooking in chewing the cud.

If in chapter 1 man reveals his power as shepherd of the animal world, and in chapter 2 man reveals his power to bring forth fruit from the earth, then in chapter 3 man reveals his ability to recreate himself: to stand before God, acknowledge his terrible failure, and recreate himself through repair and repentance.

That is what Cain teaches, and that is what David teaches. Here a sacrifice will not help, “for You do not desire sacrifice, else I would give it; You do not delight in a burnt offering.” Here man offers himself, humbles his pride, and admits his failure, and this is his choicest offering: “The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, You will not despise.”

Best regards, S”TZ

T,

“We assume there is some exalted purpose to the commandments even if we do not know what it is.” Your answer, in other words, is this: asdhfhasdfhadsfh. As for the Guide for the Perplexed, Michi chose not to answer in line with what is written there. The problem is that I keep coming back to this point because they support bringing sacrifices back or are neutral about it. And why do you care? After all, you are not the animal being led to a cruel sacrifice unlike anything else. If there is some god who wants that, then I am a black man and a leopard without spots. And anyone who supports this nowadays urgently needs treatment.

I do not agree that the answers are equivalent.

As a justice warrior, I would prefer somewhat more relevant issues, like the use of animals for food, for experiments, for shoes, for cosmetics, for enslavement, and so on and so on. By the way, regarding the future of the sacrifices, I honestly assume they will not return, even though I do not currently know the precise halakhic mechanism that will be used to avoid them. If they managed so easily to shove aside the renewal of tekhelet, then all the more so the renewal of sacrifices. So in my view you are not a justice warrior, even though I do believe the issue is bubbling inside you. Rather, you are like an Israeli soldier who, during the Second Lebanon War, went out to attack Jordan—which is a fairly hostile country, but there is nothing urgent there right now.

In addition, I have reached the gloomy conclusion that for most human beings, myself included, the most effective way to try to persuade groups of something is by outsourcing. Make money, donate to organizations that work on the issue or to expert propagandists. More economical—time is money—and more effective.

Have you ever seen me write that I am a justice warrior? I am what I am. I write because people write, and I speak because people speak, and maybe tomorrow I will die too. People write here about Judaism, so I write accordingly. Somewhere else I would write differently. Your analogy is mistaken—do you really want me to explain why? Because automatically you will become an ignoramus. Did I try to persuade you? Did I ask you for advice on how and what to do? Besides, I was part of the behind-the-scenes of everything you are writing about here. See that? I did not waste time.

With God’s help, 8 Av 5780

To T — greetings,

It may be assumed that when the Temple is rebuilt, all ten tribes will return, and then tens of millions of Pashtuns from Afghanistan will return to Judaism, and they will constitute the overwhelming majority of the Jewish people, and they will have no problem at all with offering sacrifices.

For the negligible minority of Jews who were taken captive by Western culture, there will be a simple solution: to bring meal-offerings from plant produce. The only sacrifice a person is obligated to bring is the Passover offering, and also thanksgiving offerings upon being saved from danger, and a sin-offering for a sin. So the Western “people of refined sensibilities” will all the more be forced to be careful not to stumble into sin, and thus a redeemer will come to Zion. 🙂

With the blessing, “Then the offering of Judah and Jerusalem will be pleasing to the Lord,” S”TZ

To S”TZ,

If sacrifices are so important to you, maybe volunteer to be a sacrifice yourself? It makes more sense—you atone for yourself by yourself.

With God’s help, 8 Av 5780

To A — greetings,

Indeed, the author of Sefer Ha-Chinukh explained that bringing a sacrifice is meant to arouse a person to offer his own “animal soul,” to dedicate his powers and abilities to what is higher, and when necessary to “slaughter” his natural desires for the sake of lofty values.

And as the Sages expounded on the verse, “Whoever offers a thanksgiving sacrifice honors Me, and one who orders his way aright—I will show him the salvation of God”: this refers to one who sacrifices his impulse and admits his failings, and to one who keeps a watchful eye on his ways. Whoever knows how to overcome even natural tendencies when necessary merits to see the salvation of God.

Best regards, Jim-John Halevi Corbin

By the way, the dedication of the Levites to the service of God was done by waving the Levites, after the children of Israel laid their hands on them and Aaron the priest waved them as a wave-offering to God, like a sacrifice. And as Maimonides explained at the end of the laws of the Sabbatical year and Jubilee, not only the tribe of Levi, but any person whose understanding sets him apart to serve the service of God is thereby sanctified to God and merits that God will be his portion and inheritance.

Paragraph 2, line 2
… and “one who orders his way aright,” who keeps a watchful eye on his ways. Whoever knows…

A., can you explain why my analogy is mistaken? (I want you to.)

To S”TZ,

Then please, let them sacrifice themselves. Let them not use those animals that are obviously unrelated to them. That is pure evil. As for the rest of what you wrote—I went through that route and did not see the salvation of God. I moved over to the Sitra Achra; there I saw blessing.

T,

Because it is part of their canon. In the prayers, in study, in yearning, as part of the redemption. How do you expect the consciousness on which it is based to change?

?

A.,
Do you think that even without “redemption” — which in your view will not happen anyway — they will renew the sacrifices after 2,000 years?
Now I am thinking that maybe you mean that the current consciousness makes religious people immoral, and therefore also generally less sensitive to animal suffering, and if they say that sacrifices indeed will not be renewed, that will also cause them generally to behave differently. Is that what you mean? (That would explain why you keep returning to this point.) Or is it evidence against God’s existence and goodness? (That explains less well why you keep returning to it, though I was not trying to police anyone, only to wonder—needlessly in retrospect—what the point of the repetitions was.)

Yes. I saw blessing in connecting to the Sitra Achra.

T,

That is exactly the point. It does not matter what is going to happen and how unlikely it is in the future, but the consciousness itself. You can choose to see it from this angle or that one—it is all the same. What is the point of the repetition? Internalization. Habit becomes rule and second nature in a person, and it has to be broken.

Is the problem the consciousness itself, or its practical consequences in the present?

It is all the same.

Can you explain?

I really do not understand what there is to explain. I agreed with what you said. This consciousness has consequences in present-day attitudes toward animals. Simple logic.

Here you have a living example right in front of your eyes—S”TZ here. Which is even more baffling after the prophets’ harsh attitude toward sacrifices.

(Okay. In my terms, that means the problem is in the consequences, not in holding the opinion itself as some impure personality defect.)

With God’s help, the fifth fast, 5780

Already in the story of Cain and Abel it is explained that acceptance of the sacrifice by God depends on the cleanliness of the sacrificer’s hands, and therefore God explains to Cain the basic condition for God turning toward his offering: “Surely, if you improve yourself, you will be uplifted.”

So too Isaiah, when rebuking the people for their evil deeds in chapter 1, makes clear to them that in such a state, “What need have I of all your sacrifices? says the Lord.” God accepts neither sacrifices nor prayer without correcting one’s deeds: “Wash yourselves, purify yourselves… cease to do evil, learn to do good, seek justice…”

But in chapter 56 Isaiah clarifies that when moral and faith-based repair comes, then prayer and sacrifices will be accepted favorably: “I will bring them to My holy mountain and make them joyful in My house of prayer; their burnt offerings and sacrifices shall be accepted upon My altar, for My house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples.” And similarly in chapter 60: “All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered to you, the rams of Nebaioth shall minister to you; they shall come up with acceptance on My altar, and I will glorify My glorious house.”

David also explains in Psalm 51 the transformation wrought by repentance. When sin crouches upon a person, “For You do not desire sacrifice, else I would give it; You do not delight in burnt offering,” but after repentance, in which a person offers God his broken heart—“The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, You will not despise”—then God’s favor returns to him, as it is written: “Then You will desire sacrifices of righteousness, burnt offering and whole offering; then bulls will be offered upon Your altar.”

With the blessing, “Return us to You, O Lord, and we shall return; renew our days as of old,” S”TZ

And in Jeremiah chapter 17:

“And it shall come to pass, if you diligently listen to Me, not to bring a burden through the gates of this city on the Sabbath day, and to sanctify the Sabbath day by not doing any labor on it—then kings and princes sitting on the throne of David shall enter through the gates of this city… and this city shall be inhabited forever. And they shall come from the cities of Judah and from around Jerusalem and from the land of Benjamin and from the lowland and from the hill country and from the Negev, bringing burnt offerings and meal-offerings and sacrifices and frankincense, and bringing thanksgiving offerings to the house of the Lord.”

Amen, may it be so in our days!

All the prophets came out against sacrifices in the sharpest possible way.

“Do not trust in deceptive words, saying: The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord are these. Rather, if you truly improve your ways and your deeds, if you truly do justice between a man and his fellow, if you do not oppress the stranger, the orphan, and the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place…” [Jeremiah 7:4–7]

“Will you steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely… and then come and stand before Me in this house upon which My name is called, and say, We are delivered!—only to go on doing all these abominations? Has this house, upon which My name is called, become in your eyes a den of robbers?” [Jeremiah 7:9–11]

“But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain You.” [I Kings 8:27]

“If I were hungry, I would not tell you, for the world and its fullness are Mine. Do I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? Offer to God a thanksgiving sacrifice, and fulfill your vows to the Most High.” [Psalms 50:12–14]

“I hate, I despise your festivals, and I will not delight in your solemn assemblies. For if you offer Me burnt offerings and your meal-offerings, I will not accept them, nor will I look at the peace-offerings of your fattened beasts. Remove from Me the noise of your songs; I will not listen to the melody of your harps.” [Amos 5:21–23]

“Shall I come before the Lord with burnt offerings, with yearling calves? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, with tens of thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He has told you, O man, what is good, and what the Lord requires of you: only to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God.” [Micah 6:6–8]

“What need have I of all your sacrifices? says the Lord. I am sated with burnt offerings of rams and the fat of fattened beasts, and in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats I do not delight. When you come to appear before Me, who asked this of you, this trampling of My courts? Do not continue bringing vain offerings; incense is an abomination to Me.” [Isaiah 1:11–13]

“Your burnt offerings are not acceptable, and your sacrifices are not pleasing to Me.” [Jeremiah 6:20]

“For I desire kindness and not sacrifice, and knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.” [Hosea 6:6]

And so on. The verses speak for themselves to any sensible person.

With the blessing, “Return us to You, O Lord, and we shall return; do not renew our days as of old.”

[S”TZ, to complete the correspondence to the list brought by A., Amos, Hosea, and Micah still remain.
Amos complained that they went to worship idolatry, which has no standards at all: “And bring your sacrifices every morning, your tithes every three days, and offer a thanksgiving sacrifice of leaven,” and from the negative we infer the positive. Hosea criticized the priests’ craving for meat, like the sons of Eli: “They feed on the sin-offering of My people, and set their heart on their iniquity,” and the plain sense is that the sin-offering itself is good, only here there is abuse of it. Micah did not say it himself, admittedly, but Jeremiah certainly did say it, as you brought, and he sees himself as in one league with Micah the Morashtite, “who prophesied in the days of Hezekiah king of Judah”—and how could there be dispute in prophecy? Micah also uses a reworking of Isaiah’s words about the mountain of the House of the Lord at the head of the mountains, meaning he saw himself as a colleague in Isaiah’s study hall; and Isaiah said, as you quoted. And it should also be added that the former also spoke of an altar to the Lord in the land of Egypt.)]