[Picture: Noah's Sacrifice. watercolor circa 1896–1902 by James Tissot]

[For articles on the “Sabbath of  "Vayikra" in Hebrew, click here]

Rabbi Dr. Yossi Feintuch was born in Afula and holds a Ph.D. in American history from Emory University in Atlanta. He taught American history at Ben-Gurion University.

Author of the book US Policy on Jerusalem (JCCO).

He now serves as rabbi at the Jewish Center in central Oregon. (JCCO).

*  *  *

While the book of Leviticus and its first portion Vaikra focus considerably on animal sacrifices as a standard way of serving God, they do offer alternative offerings. These were either ‘’a grain offering’’ of fine semolina with oil and frankincense, or ‘’a meal-offering baked in the oven’’, or ‘’on a griddle’’, or ‘’in a pan’’.  These offerings were equal to the animal offerings in that they too went up on the altar producing ‘’a fragrant odor to the Lord’’ (Ch.2:2).

[Picture: These were either ‘’a grain offering’’ of fine semolina with oil and frankincense... The copyright holder in this photo has not been found. Therefore, the use is made under section 27A of the Copyright Law. The main rights holder, please contact: yehezkeally@gmail.com]

As we reflect back on the very first offerings in the Torah, one might think that Abel’s animal gift ‘’of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof’’ was preferable in God’s sight to Cain’s veggie gift ‘’from the fruit of the ground’’, if only because ‘’the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering; but unto Cain and to his offering He had not respect’’ (Genesis 4:4-5).  Truth is, there is no decisive telling why God accepted Abel’s gift but rejected Cain’s, notwithstanding the fact that Cain was the first human to bring any offering to God. The Torah leaves it for us to speculate forever why God ignored Cain’s produce offering.

Notably, the Torah does not fault Cain’s "veggie" offering as such, nor does it express any preference for the animal offerings that Abel brought.  While the Torah prohibits sacrificing animal with the slightest blemishes: ‘’Blind, or broken, or maimed, or having a wen, or scabbed, or scurvy, you shall not offer these unto the Lord’’ (Lev. 22:22), no such disqualifications are attached anywhere to the plant or grain offering; these simply cannot be disqualified from the altar.  But even more significantly, while the animal-sacrificing person independently slaughters it outside the Tent of Meeting before conceding the slain animal to the Kohen (priest) to continue for him the sacrificial protocol (i.e., ‘’bring forward the blood and cast the blood round the altar’’ 1:5), the person bringing an offering from the produce of the soil may himself pour on the flour the requisite oil and frankincense before conceding his gift to the Kohen.

[Picture: Cain and Abel (19th-century illustration). The picture is a public domain]

In other words, his involvement with the sacrifice is more elaborate than for the one who chose an animal as his offering. This is a significant idea because it renders the bringer of flour as more pro-actively involved in the service of God, and with less reliance on the Kohen as a go-between the person and God. Moreover, while only folks of means could afford an animal for an offering, bringing choice flour enabled poor folks to participate in this major ceremonious ritual. The veggie option democratized the sacrificial system enabling the poor a sense of closeness to the divine as well; the Hebrew word for a sacrifice, korban, connotes nearness.

Indeed, the Rabbis note that the Torah calls the bringer of flour offering a “soul” (nefesh), while calling the one who brings an animal offering “a man (“adam”). For the Rabbis that meant that in bringing flour as a gift to God, the poor person brings it soulfully, since that was all that he could afford, even if the person sacrificing an animal spent more money for his gift but might have done so only by rote.

Hence the Talmud teaches that as long as one's full attention is given to Heaven the size or material value of the offering isn’t that important.  The poor might still view his gift as inconsequential, but for Heaven it is huge. Thus the Rabbinic teaching that when you do a favor to someone else let it be seen in your eyes as of little value. But when another does you a small favor, see it as a huge gesture of goodwill.

When the tourist asked the local in a popular story why he cared so much about throwing back into the sea washed-ashore starfish, for there were thousands of them that he would never be able to help, thus meaning to say that his noble efforts still made no real difference for those other starfish, the local bent low and heaved another starfish into the water retorting: ‘’It sure made a difference for this one’’. Why, it is the small deeds -- a small check for a worthy cause, a short good word or consolation to the one who needs it, a brief visit or a friendly phone call to the ill or shut-in that always moves the world forwards.

[For articles on the “Sabbath of  "Vayikra" in Hebrew, click here]