(updated and revised from Vayikra 5766-2006)

Can the ancient sacrificial rituals possibly convey a relevant message for contemporary times?

At first blush, not very likely. But, upon studying the sacrificial rites in depth we discover that there is indeed much that we may learn. (See the weekly messages of Parashat Vayikra for years 2021, 2022, 2023)

This week’s Torah portion, parashat Vayikra, opens with the laws of the עֹלָה–Olah–“the burnt offering” sacrifice. It is the only offering that is entirely consumed by fire, from which neither the priest nor the donor eats of the animal’s flesh. Our rabbis tell us that the Olah symbolically represents the donor’s desire to offer himself to G-d, but, in lieu of himself, offers the animal. This is what is implied in the meaning of the Hebrew word קָרְבָּן–“korban”–coming close to G-d.

The Torah informs us that there are three different types of animals that may be brought as burnt offerings–some more valuable than others. Large animals, such as oxen or bulls, are most valuable. Less valuable are sheep or goats. A person who cannot even afford a goat could bring a תּוֹר–tor or a בֵּן יּוֹנָה–ben yonah, a turtledove or a young pigeon.

While the procedures for sacrificing a bird are somewhat similar to the procedures for other animals, there are some significant differences. After the bird is slaughtered, its blood is pressed on the altar wall. Certain parts of the bird are then discarded, and the priest offers the remaining parts up in smoke on the altar. The Torah, (Leviticus 1:17), specifies that the animal is burnt בִכְנָפָיו–“bikh’na’fav”–with its wing feathers still attached.

The rabbis of the Midrash, Vayikra Rabbah 3:5, cited by Rashi ask: “But there is hardly a more repulsive smell than that of burning feathers? If so, why burn them?” The rabbis inform us that bird offerings are usually brought by poor people who cannot afford the larger, more expensive, animals. Had the feathers been removed, the bird would appear so tiny and scrawny as to embarrass the poor donor. The message then is, endure the foul odor so that the altar may be adorned by a poor man’s offering.

The example of the poor person’s bird sacrifice is only one of many instances in the Torah that show Judaism’s unusual sensitivity to people in need or in discomfort. The theme of “sensitivity” is repeated many times in Jewish law. A few examples:

• The Code of Jewish Law states that one should try to show sensitivity to their own limbs when putting on shoes by tying them alternately, rather than favoring one foot over the other (Orach Chaim 2:4).
• The ancient priests wore britches under their cloaks and walked to the Temple altar on a ramp, rather than expose the nakedness of their bodies to the stones of the altar (Exodus 20:23).
• When a person is found guilty of a capital crime and is executed, the criminal’s body is not permitted to hang overnight. It must be taken down and buried by nightfall (Deuteronomy 21:22-23).
• A creditor who takes a poor person’s nightclothes as collateral for a loan, must return those clothes when the poor borrower is ready to go to sleep. If day clothes are taken as collateral, they must be returned by morning (Exodus 22:25-26).
• 36 times the Torah states that Jews must love the stranger and care for the people who are at a social disadvantage.
• The Rabbinical Ethicists maintain that the challot on Friday night are covered so as not to embarrass them while all the attention is showered on the wine during the blessing of the kiddush.
• Each of these customs and rituals is meant to teach a profound lesson. Surely, if we’re supposed to be sensitive to the limbs of our body and not favor one foot over the other, how much more must we be sensitive not to unfairly favor one person over another in daily life encounters, or one child over another. If we are expected to be sensitive to the feelings of a challah, how much more must we be sensitive to the feelings of the people around us.

A fascinating practice frequently observed at traditional Jewish weddings is that the bride and groom do not embrace or kiss at the end of the ceremony. Why should that be? After all, if the bride had immersed herself in a mikveh before the wedding, why should the newlywed husband and wife not be permitted to kiss? One common reason often offered is that public displays of affection are not deemed modest or appropriate. Displays of affection should be saved for the private yichud room. Another suggested reason for not kissing is to spare the feelings of the bride who has not been able to go to the mikveh before her wedding. And to be certain that no bride is embarrassed, Jewish women have agreed not to display any public affection at the chupah.

So, is there anything to be learned from the ancient rituals of animal sacrifice? There is much. Much that is in fact revolutionary: revolutionary human values, extraordinary moral concepts, and an uncommon surfeit of sensitivity.

May you be blessed.

https://rabbibuchwald.njop.org