Traditions and Commandments
Did Yeshua abolish the dietary laws? Did he also decide that the traditions of men, ie: Judaism, no longer valid in man's relationship to the Creator? Or are we simply missing something?
There is a well-known incident that occurs in Mark 7 that begins with a comment about ritual hand-washing and ends with moral-focused teaching. In its wake, however, many readers have been left with the impression that Jesus single-handedly abolished the laws of Kashrut (dietary commandments), and forbade all man-made traditions.
As Christianity emerged separate from its Jewish roots, the idea took root that Judaism is a religion of "man-made traditions". From this assumption, the idea that this is Jesus departed from Judaism is the next logical step.
However, we’ll need to unpack much of the context and background to understand this passage and the contours of the argument to reset our understanding.
Illogical Conclusion
Initially, we should look at the logic of Jesus’s argument to see if it holds up. In the major thrust of his rebuke, he scolds a certain group of Pharisees¹ for abrogating the commandments of G_D because of their specific traditions. It would then be illogical that he does exactly the same thing, dismissing G_D’s dietary commandments.
It doesn't appear that these Pharisees understood his reply in this way, for if they had, Jesus would have surely been taken to task, as this would be a massive violation of the Torah. Also, in Mark 14:55, we are told that they found nothing to charge against him.
Historical Context
In order to understand the New Testament, we must remember the contextual difficulties of that particular time period. Virtually all of the recorded disputes between Jesus and the Pharisees occurred within an unfortunate time frame for Israel, one dominated by increasing sectarianism.
At this time, the Jewish world was caught between various opinions on understanding and applying the Torah. Most relevant to the Gospels and the Epistles were the two competing schools of Pharisaic thought, which, at that particular time, struggled to find unity in everyday issues. In the Talmud, we read:
From the time that the disciples of Shammai and Hillel grew in number, they were disciples who did not attend to their masters to the requisite degree, and dispute proliferated among the Jewish people and the Torah became like two Torahs. Two disparate systems of halakha developed, and there was no longer a halakhic consensus with regard to every matter. - Sanhedrin 88b
In their effort to strive for holiness, these schools brought a degree of polarity to many day-to-day applications of Jewish law, particularly how to relate to the Gentile pagan world around them. This has been covered in a two-part series².
As you might imagine, this led to a multitude of debates over everyday observances, large and small. It was as if there were "Two Torahs".³
It would have been difficult for a layperson to know the proper ruling and thus appropriate observance regarding pure vs impure. As this was a major concern, their leaders and teachers would try to smooth these difficulties through the agency of debates (Makhloket).
Later, the compilation of the Mishnah would help to alleviate some of these debates, though this would not be for many decades after the events of the New Testament.
Hand-Washing
Additionally, in the generation before Jesus, the elders of Israel determined that hand-washing (Netilat Yadayim)⁴, a practice observed by the priestly class, should be something for all of Israel to observe. The technicalities of this dispute echo through many passages in the Gospels. An article on this topic alone can be found here⁴. It seems Jesus was never arguing against washing-hands, as this would be an indefensible position. He simply leveraged the well-known physical practice to build a deeper, more spiritually-focused point.
Types of Impurity
At the time of the Second Temple, the nation of Israel was surrounded by pagan cultures. This proved to be a major hazard when interacting with, buying goods and products from, or simply traveling through the marketplace. Often, anti-Jewish polemics attribute this separatist behavior to racism, but the truth stems from the avoidance of tumah (impurity).
In those days, especially with the availability of the Temple and subsequent pilgrimages to Jerusalem, Jews all over the Roman Empire had to maintain a status of purity. Simply being close to a person, place, or object involved in idolatry could impart a highly transmissible degree of impurity. Worse, if not remedied, this could be spread to their community.
Aside from physical purity, which would have been largely understood by most Jews, several sources of spiritual impurity were identified as well. The Sages identified them as; Blaspheming, Immorality, Bloodshed, Bearing false witness, Haughtiness, Entering a stranger’s house, Lashon Hara, Lying, Taking a false Oath, Chillul Hashem, and Idolatry⁵.
If you are familiar with the New Testament, it is evident that these are the bulk of the precautions in the teachings from Jesus, the Apostles, and Paul. In fact, this becomes the focal point in Jesus's rebuke of these particular Pharisees. What began as a question about physical practice turns to focus on forms of spiritual impurity.
And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. For from within, from the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, and foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.” - Mark 7:20-23
Acquiring tumah, inadvertently, was not sinful in itself - but failure to remedy was. If someone had acquired a degree of impurity, they would be vulnerable to sickness, separation from G_D, and evil spirits. In short, purity and holiness bring one closer to the Divine Presence; whereas impurity repels the Divine Presence.
A follow-up to this article can be found here:
The Hidden Orchard
Notes:
¹ https://www.thehiddenorchard.com/pharisees/
² Part 1:
https://www.thehiddenorchard.com/the-missing-context-of-the-new-testament-pt-1/
Part 2:
https://www.thehiddenorchard.com/the-missing-context-of-the-new-testament-pt-2/
³ As Rabbi Mordechai Yaffe explains;
the Torah had become, G-d forbid, as if it was two Torahs, this one forbids and this one permits, this one declares a matter impure, and the other declares it pure, and no law is known completely.
⁴ https://www.thehiddenorchard.com/the-pharisees-who-wash-the-outside-of-cups/
⁵ Midrash Numbers Rabbah 7:5
To see more, download this source sheet with other sources and quotes that add insight to this teaching.
