(2) ונתתי פני I WILL SET MY FACE פני [AGAINST THAT SOUL] — פני is taken to mean as much as פנאי שלי My leisure — i.e. I will turn away (פונה) from all My affairs and concern Myself only with him (Sifra, Acharei Mot, Section 7 4; cf. also Targum Jonathan)
FOR THE LIFE OF THE FLESH IS IN THE BLOOD; AND I HAVE GIVEN IT TO YOU UPON THE ALTAR TO MAKE ATONEMENT FOR YOUR SOULS. The sense of this verse is to state that He forbade us [to eat] blood because He has given it to us to be upon the altar and to effect atonement for our souls, and it is therefore the part dedicated to G-d, just as is the case with the forbidden fat.184Above, 3:17.
And if one should ask: “Why then has He forbidden us to eat the blood of a wild animal and that of a fowl, from which offerings are not brought?” We will dismiss the questioner by saying that it was His wish to keep us far away from eating any kind of blood, in order that we should never make a mistake therein [and eat forbidden blood as a result of failing to distinguish between one kind of blood and another]. In the case of fat, however, He did not [categorically] forbid all kinds of fat, because [the permissible kind of fat] is distinguishable from the non-permissible.
Now the Rabbi [Moshe ben Maimon] wrote in the Moreh Nebuchim (Guide of the Perplexed, III, 46) that the Chaldeans loathed blood, considering it impure, and only those who sought to establish contact with the demons and to foretell the future would eat it. Now the Torah always seeks to destroy these foolish theories, by [ordaining measures which are] contrary to their ideas. Therefore He prohibited the eating of blood and chose it as the means of purifying [the impure] by means of the sprinklings thereof, and to throw it upon the altar of G-d for atonement. Therefore He said, I will set My face against that soul that eateth blood, just as He said with reference to him who gives of his children to Molech because this [practice of eating blood] leads to a kind of idol worship, such words not being stated concerning any other commandment.
Now these words [of Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon] are sensible in themselves, however the verses do not indicate [that the reason for the prohibition against eating blood is] so [as the Rabbi has said], for they always state the reason for that prohibition to be, For as to the life of all flesh, the blood thereof is all one with the life thereof. And in the Book of Deuteronomy He again states, Only be steadfast in not eating the blood; for the blood is the life; and thou shalt not eat the life with the flesh. (Deuteronomy 12:23).
It is proper, therefore, to explain the reason for the prohibition against eating blood by saying that G-d created all lower creatures for the purpose of man, since only he amongst all of them recognizes his Creator. Nonetheless, He did not at first permit man to eat anything except for vegetation, but no living creatures at all, just as is stated in the Chapter of Creation where it is said, Behold, I have given you every herb yielding seed etc. for food (Genesis 1:29) but when the flood came and they [the lower creatures] were saved by the merit of Noah, and he brought offerings from them to G-d which were acceptable before Him, He gave man permission to slaughter [and eat them], just as He said, Every moving thing that liveth shall be for food for you; as the green herb have I given you all, since their existence was because of man. Thus He permitted man to use their bodies for his benefit and needs because their life was on account of man’s sake, and that their soul [i.e., blood] should be used for man’s atonement when offering them up before Him, blessed be He, but not to eat it, since one creature possessed of a soul is not to eat another creature with a soul, for all souls belong to G-d.
The life of man just as the life of the animal are all His, even one thing befalleth them; as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath.196Ecclesiastes 3:19.
Now in the opinion of the Greek philosopher [i.e., Aristotle] as interpreted by those who scrutinize his words, it was out of the Active Intellect197A concept of great significance in Medieval philosophy, the Active Intellect denoted an incorporeal substance, the role of which was to make the forms of the imagination “actual” objects of the intellect, after they have been only “potential” objects of the intellect. Yehudah Halevi in his “Al Khazari,” when presenting the view of the philosophers, writes of it: “This is the degree of the Active Intellect, namely, that angel whose degree is below the angel who is connected with the sphere of the moon” (p. 37). It is out of that Active Intellect that the animal soul originated. that there emitted a very fine and bright flash and glitter of light, from which came forth the spark which is the soul of the animal. It is thus in a certain sense a real soul. It therefore has sufficient understanding to avoid harm, and to seek its welfare, and a sense of recognition towards those with whom it is familiar, and love towards them, just as dogs love their masters, and they have a wonderful sense of recognition of the people of their households, and similarly pigeons have a sense of knowledge and recognition. Now it is also known that the food one eats is taken into the body of the eater and they become one flesh.198Genesis 2:24. If one were to eat the life of all flesh,190Further, Verse 14. it would then attach itself to one’s own blood and they would become united in one’s heart, and the result would be a thickening and coarsensss of the human soul so that it would closely approach the nature of the animal soul which resided in that which he ate, since blood does not require digestion as other foods do, which thereby become changed, and thus man’s soul will become combined with the blood of the animal! And Scripture states, Who knoweth the spirit of man whether it goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast whether it goeth downward to the earth?199Ecclesiastes 3:21. It is for this reason that He said, For as to the life of all flesh, the blood thereof is all one with the flesh thereof,190Further, Verse 14. for all flesh, whether man or beast, has its soul in the blood, and it is not fitting to mix the soul that is destined to destruction with that which is to live [in the hereafter]. Rather, it is to be as an atonement upon the altar to be acceptable before G-d. This is the sense of the expression, Therefore I said to the children of Israel: No soul of you shall eat blood,200Verse 12. meaning: “Because the blood is identical with the soul, and it is not proper that one soul devour another, therefore I had compassion upon man’s life and gave it [the animal’s soul] to him upon the altar, so that the soul of the animal should effect atonement for his soul.” Thus we have been taught in the Sifre:201Sifre, R’eih 76. “Only be steadfast in not eating the blood.192Deuteronomy 12:23. Rabbi Yehudah says, [From the fact that it states, only be steadfast, which indicates that a special effort was required], you learn that they were addicted to eating blood etc. For the blood is the life192Deuteronomy 12:23. — this teaches you why it was prohibited. And thou shalt not eat the life with the flesh192Deuteronomy 12:23. — this prohibits the eating of a limb cut from a living animal.” This is a hint and proof for what we have explained. It is for this reason that He further commanded that we are to cover up all blood of an [edible] wild beast or fowl [which have been ritually slaughtered]202Verse 13. because their blood is not brought upon the altar, for even of fowls only two species [i.e., young pigeons and turtle doves] may be brought as offerings, and they too are not slaughtered [in the usual way];203See above, 1:15. but in the case of cattle, most of them that are found among men may be slaughtered to the Glorious Name and their blood is used for atonement, and it is therefore not to be covered. There was no necessity to require the covering of the blood of an ordinary [unconsecrated] animal, since the slaughtering of cattle for ordinary meat was not permitted in the desert,204See Ramban above, Verse 2. and even afterwards [when Israel came into the Land of Israel and a meal of ordinary meat was permitted], the commandment of the Torah is directed to the majority [and since in most cases cattle were brought as offerings, and their blood would be needed for the altar, therefore He did not require covering of the blood even if the cattle were not slaughtered as offerings].