Why sacrifices?

It's a serious question in Judaism, and of course, although they haven't been practiced for 2,000 years since the destruction of the Second Temple,

its question is still worth asking.

And there are many, many answers given by the great rabbis, most famous being won by Maimonides.

But today I want to explore another explanation

given by the early 15th century Jewish thinker of Yosef Albo in his Sefer Haikarim,

his book of principles. Albo's theory took as its starting point, not sacrifices, but two other very interesting questions.

Why, after the flood, did God permit human beings to eat meat?

Initially, neither human beings nor animals have been meat eaters, according to Baratius.

So what, after the flood, caused God, as it were, to change

his mind? The second, what was wrong with the first act of sacrifice, Kane's offering of some

of the fruits of the soil? You remember that cane in the biblical story offered some vegetables or

grain as a sacrifice, whereas Abel offered animals. God's

rejection of Cain's offering led directly to the first murder when Cain killed Abel. What was

this state in the difference between Cain and Abel as to how to bring a gift to God? This is Albo's theory. Killing animals for food

is inherently wrong. It involves taking the life of a sentient being to satisfy our needs.

Kane knew this. He believed there was a strong kinship between man and the animals. That's why he

offered not an animal sacrifice, but a vegetable one.

His error, according to Albo, is he should have brought fruit, not vegetables.

He should have brought the highest, not the lowest of non-meek produce.

Abel, by contrast, believed that there was a qualitative difference between man and the animals.

Had God not told the first humans

...