When the Beis Hamikdash is restored, sacrifices are supposed to resume. But why? For centuries now we have been taught that the offerings of our lips replace bullocks. For what reason does korbonot need to resume?
Asked
Active
Viewed 151 times
1
-
there are many korbanot that have nothing to do with repentance – rosends Jul 29 '19 at 17:54
-
6This is like asking why people don't want to be raped even though they don't get punished for it, as the verse says ולנערה לא תעשה דבר אין לנערה חטא מות. We don't bring offerings now because we are אנוסים forced against our will and God gracefully forgives us anyway. Of course we want to do things the right way and God won't accept half baked practices if we can do the right thing. – Double AA Jul 29 '19 at 18:12
-
Sourcing the two assertions would make this question more compelling. – Alex Jul 29 '19 at 18:18
-
The recital of the offering is called מעשה קטנה, literally a 'small action' because our lips move. But קטנות also has a connotation of undeveloped or immature. Think in terms of other mitzvot where a 'Katan', a child can be permitted to do something if they know what they are doing it for, etc. But it is always preferred for the adult to fulfill, if available. – Yaacov Deane Jul 29 '19 at 19:02
-
If they could assemble and move the safety sarcophagus onto the Chernobyl reactor remains, surely we could figure out a way to safely truck transport the object in the way back to Mecca. And who knows? Maybe the folks that can't seem to live without it there will follow behind it in a long long line. Speedily in our days. – Gary Jul 29 '19 at 21:25
1 Answers
-4
G-d neither needs nor wants sacrifices, and only allowed it because people in ancient times felt differently. It is a concession to human needs. The Rambam also states that this is not only his view but is the view of the prophets.
We can add that the ancient rabbis around 70 CE when the temple was destroyed also felt that sacrifices were unnecessary. Therefore when the temple was destroyed, they did not seek a way to continue sacrifices. It would have been easy for them to do so if they felt it was necessary.
Of course, as is to be expected, many rabbis disagreed. We still have many references in the siddur praying for the restoration of sacrifices. But the siddur is a compendium of many often conflicting ideas, which prompt us to think and to remember the past. Abravanel agrees with Maimonides and cites a Midrash.
Additionally Rabbi Kook and the Midrash states that grain will be offered in the Third Temple.
Turk Hill
- 1,348
- 7
- 16
-
1You forgot to mention that Rambam explicitly says that no mitzvah can ever change, and lists multiple mitzvos related to offerings... – Heshy Jul 29 '19 at 20:33
-
-
See Guide of the Perplexed 3:32: “All these restrictions served to limit this kind of worship, and keep it within those bounds within which G-d did not think it necessary to abolish sacrificial service altogether. But prayer and supplication can be offered everywhere and by every person… the Prophets in their books are frequently found to rebuke their fellow-men for being over-zealous and exerting themselves too much in bringing sacrifices: the prophets thus distinctly declared that the object of the sacrifices is not very essential, and that G-d does not require them. – Turk Hill Jul 29 '19 at 22:01
-
“To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? says the Lord” (Isaiah 1:11). Jeremiah 7:22–23 says, “For I (G-d) spoke not unto your fathers nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt concerning burnt offerings or sacrifice. But this thing I commanded them, saying, ‘Obey My voice.’” – Turk Hill Jul 29 '19 at 22:01
-
That's fine. Nevertheless, Rambam never says that they'll be abolished, or that we don't have to bring them, etc.; "G-d does not require them" means no more than that - that we're not doing G-d any favors by bringing sacrifices - but that does not mean that we therefore don't have to do so at all. And in fact, in Rambam's summation of what mitzvos will once again be fulfilled when Moshiach comes (Laws of Kings 11:1), the first on his list is "we will offer sacrifices." – Meir Jul 29 '19 at 23:07
-
@Meir Rabbi Kook as well as the Midrash explain that we will offer grain instead. But your in the right track, though. – Turk Hill Jul 29 '19 at 23:10
-
-
@Heshy You took the verse out of context. In context it reads: Jeremiah 7:22–23 says, “For I (G-d) spoke not unto your fathers nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt concerning burnt offerings or sacrifice. But this thing I commanded them, saying, ‘Obey My voice.’” – Turk Hill Jul 30 '19 at 00:11
-
1Okay, but G-d clearly did say to bring offerings. There's no way around that. It's the entire beginning of Vayikra, among other places. Probably the simplest explanation is what Radak and Malbim say, that offerings aren't the primary purpose. – Heshy Jul 30 '19 at 00:16
-
-
1And the Mishneh Torah reads "Bring them" in a whole lot more words than that. We can keep quoting things at each other or we can try to resolve the apparent contradiction. – Heshy Jul 30 '19 at 00:20
-
@Heshy The Rambam felt that G-d does not need nor want sacrifices. See GfP where he takes a strong issue against sacrifices. – Turk Hill Jul 30 '19 at 00:41
-
2And see Mishneh Torah where he goes on at great length about the requirement to bring sacrifices. – Heshy Jul 30 '19 at 00:55
-
1Both Rabbi Kook and the Midrash say that grain and prayer will replace the sacrifices. – Turk Hill Jul 30 '19 at 01:08
-
The MT and GfP, a paradox? Rambam went public for sacrifices but privately he dismisses them and says they will never happen again. – Turk Hill Jul 30 '19 at 01:16
-
The WtC is to be like a Garden of Eden. There will be no sacrifices in this new garden of G-d’s. Period. – Turk Hill Jul 30 '19 at 01:25
-
where do rav kook and the midrash say that grain and prayer will replace the sacrifices? – honi May 15 '22 at 05:02