Don Isaac Abravanel, sometimes spelled Abarbanel (1437-1508) was a probing and penetrating Jewish thinker, as well as a prolific
Biblical commentator. Leviticus 22 provides more painstaking detail, as to what constituted kosher
animal sacrifices in the Tabernacle. Priests remained ever vigilant, and accepted those animals for
sacrifices that met the Torah’s rigorous demands. In this way, they vetted for altar activity only those
bulls, sheep, or goats that passed “inspection.”
“And God spoke unto Moses, saying. Speak unto Aaron and to his sons,
and unto all the Children of Israel, and say unto them: Whosoever be of
the House of Israel, or of the strangers in Israel, that bring his
offering…you shall offer a male without blemish of the cattle [herd], of
the sheep, or of the goats.”
Abravanel teaches that when the Temple stood in Jerusalem, Jew and Gentile flocked to the holy place,
bringing animal sacrifices. Let’s focus on foreigner visitors here. Some sacrifices brought by them may
have been obligatory, insofar as they may have uttered a solemn vow. Had no verbal promise been
spoken, the sacrificial designation would be considered a free-volition offering.
Be that as it may, the Torah instructed priests to be mindful of all visitors desiring to bring sacrifices –
regardless of creed. For our purposes here, as mentioned, we place the emphasis on visiting Gentiles,
per the upcoming verse: “Neither from the hand of a foreigner shall you offer the bread of your God of
any of these, because their corruption is in them, there is a blemish in them. They shall not be accepted
for you.” Abravanel asks: how should we interpret the term “corruption” here? Who/what does it
decry?
Abravanel writes that, on occasion, unscrupulous non-Jews may have been tempted to bring maimed
animals as sacrifices and try to slip them past officiating priests. Perhaps ill intent motivated these
unsavory or corrupt individuals. That is, foreigners may have wanted to show disdain for Temple
practices. Maybe, they sought to pour scorn on the Hebrew’s religion. If so, then corrupt hearts matched
the mangled animals they sought to sacrifice.
Alternatively, Abravanel advances, “corruption” mentioned in the verse does not refer to malicious
foreigners’ intentions. However, even if a Gentile’s intention was sincere, still and all, if his sacrifice did
not cut mustard with the Torah’s standards, and was deemed corrupt owing to its imperfections, priests
would not accept the animal from their hands.
In sum, all visitors to the Temple were treated equally, bound by Torah law. For foreigners, therefore, no
dispensation would be forthcoming. Failure to comply with the commandments brought in this chapter
would mar the priests’ reputation, let alone be characterized as a slight to God’s honor.
