Ritually Clean and Unclean Animals
11: 1-47
The whole of Leviticus 11 is dedicated to the subject of ritually clean and ritually unclean animals. Sometimes different translations are made such as pure or impure. The ArtScroll Chumash uses the words pure and contaminated. I will be using the words ritually clean or ritually unclean, which, in my opinion, come closer to the Hebrew. It is the first discussion in a series of chapters relating to the purity codes. ADONAI declared that the priests were to distinguish between the holy and the common, and between the ritually clean and ritually unclean; so that you will teach the people of Isra’el all the mitzvot God had told them through Moshe (10:10-11). But before we can begin to learn about the dietary mitzvot we must first learn the basic distinction between ritually clean and ritually unclean. Next, with regard to food, if God declared something to be holy, then to be able to identify it, there would naturally have to be something that was common or unholy. Everything couldn’t be holy.
Ritual impurity is the biblical concept that a person can be in a state which, according to the Torah, prevents the person from having any contact with the Tabernacle or Temple and its sacrifices. God was in the process of teaching His people a critical spiritual reality.
This reality is that life does not mix with death; sin does not mix with righteousness; sacred does not mix with profane; and idolatry does not mix with Ha’Shem! In other words, the declaration of being ritually clean or unclean teaches mankind about the issues of life and death. By declaring a person ritually unclean, ADONAI was saying, in effect, “You are in a state where you have either sinned yourself or have come into contact with the realm of sin and death. I want you to know that My Kingdom is totally different from that realm. Thus, I must prohibit you from drawing near to Me in a ritually unclean state. The lesson was this: just as there were only two conditions, ritually clean or unclean, regarding offering sacrifices and drawing near to YHVH, so there are only two realms or kingdoms. One can be called the kingdom of this world, the kingdom of darkness, Satan’s kingdom, the kingdom of Adam, or the kingdom of sin and death. The second kingdom can be called the Kingdom of Heaven, the Kingdom of God, the Kingdom of Messiah, the kingdom of light, or the kingdom of life and righteousness.158
Concepts of ritual purity and impurity are some of the most difficult of all biblical concepts to grasp. The ideas of ritual cleanliness and uncleanliness are completely removed from our Western context. They are also misleading because it seems as if ritually clean and unclean are talking about hygiene, as if a ritually unclean person is actually dirty or soiled. The terms pure and impure can be misleading because they might imply a moral state as if an impure person was less morally upright than a pure person. Ritual impurity is quite independent of physical cleanliness. It certainly does not imply sinfulness.
The Hebrew word tamei is variously translated as ritual impurity, uncleanness, defilement, and the like. Its antithesis, tahor, is translated as ritual purity or cleanliness. In an attempt to come to a definitive understanding of these terms, it is easier to say what they are not than it is to say what they are. Ritual impurity is not a physical condition in-and-of itself, but a defiling disease like leprosy could render that person ritually unclean. When discussing ritual cleanness and uncleanness, we are not speaking about dirt, grime or germs. It is not at all biological. It has nothing to do with bacterial infections or communicable diseases. Ritually clean and unclean are not health issues. The Torah didn’t quarantine lepers because they were contagious; it quarantined them because they were ritually unclean. In the same way, the Torah doesn’t forbid pork because of the threat of trichinosis or for any other health issue. If so, it should have forbidden chicken because of the threat of salmonella. The Torah forbids pork because God says it is ritually unclean. To be sure, there are real and positive health benefits for us if we follow the Torah’s dietary mitzvot. The Father has our physical bodies in mind; and modern medical science continues to validate the medical wisdom of the Torah’s dietary mitzvot. Yet the mitzvot of ritual cleanliness and uncleanliness are larger in scope than good health advice.
In short, being ritually unclean is not a physical condition; on the other hand, it is not purely a spiritual condition either. It is not sin or transgression. It is not guilt or punishment. It is in no way to be considered bad, sinful or evil. For example, a menstruating woman is considered ritually unclean. However, menstruation cannot be understood to be a sin. Crossing through a cemetery renders a person ritually unclean, yet it is regarded as a good deed to accompany the dead to burial. A ritually unclean animal such as a camel is no more shamefully or morally bankrupt than a ritually clean animal like a giraffe. Clean (tahor) and unclean (tamei) must then be understood as purely ritual states as related to the Tabernacle.
In practical terms, Leviticus 11 refers to dead things: dead animals and dead people. So, a live, ritually unclean animal, does not render it ritually unclean while alive. Thus, it is not contaminating to own a cat – at least not in Levitical terms. Only when it is dead does its carcass render a person or substance ritually unclean through physical contact. A ritually clean animal is designated as ritually clean because after it is butchered and the blood removed, contact with its carcass does not render a person ritually unclean. On the other hand, the dead body of a ritually clean animal will render a person ritually unclean if it has died for some reason other than being butchered by ritual slaughter. Thus, a cow that dies as road kill is just as ritually contaminating as pig’s flesh.
The distinction between ritually clean and unclean animals did not originate in Leviticus or the Sinai covenant. There is evidence that pigs were regarded as ritually unclean by the Babylonians. Noah knew the difference between ritually clean and unclean animals even before the Flood. The distinction was most probably decided upon the basis of eligibility for sacrifice. Of those animals that were suitable for sacrifice, seven pairs were taken into the ark. Of those that were not, only one pair was taken.
Yet, we might wonder, if the distinction between ritually clean and unclean animals existed in the days of Noah, why is there no mention of dietary mitzvot pertaining to ritual cleanness and uncleanness until Leviticus 11? We might ask the same question in regard to the mitzvot of emissions and leprosy. These mitzvot come immediately after the story of the death of Nadab and Abihu. The death of the two sons of Aaron has sufficiently impressed us with the hazards involved in approaching Ha’Shem in the Tabernacle (see Bh – The Death of Nadab and Abihu). The mitzvot of being ritually clean and unclean were all Tabernacle related. Entering into the presence of God in His Tabernacle while in the state of ritual impurity was not only a sin, it was dangerous, just as Nadab and Abihu found out. Thus, you will separate the people of Isra’el from their ritual uncleanness, so that they will not die in a state of ritual uncleanness for defiling My Tabernacle which is there with them (Leviticus 15:31).159
Freedom in Messiah: The Bible tells us specifically why these mitzvot were given . . . do not make yourselves ritually unclean, do not defile yourselves with them . . . for you are to be holy, because I am holy (11:43-45). Thus, the purpose of eating kosher was/is to set Isra’el aside as a separate holy nation. Not for salvation. According to Paul when a person does any part of Torah to earn merit or keep any part of his atonement, his justification received by grace through faith and accomplished in total by the death and resurrection of Yeshua Messiah, then that becomes legalism! But, on the other hand, because the Lord has written Torah on our hearts as a new creation (see the commentary on Jeremiah Eo – I Will Make a New Covenant with the People of Isra’el), it has now become part of our basic identity. We can then join with Paul, as well as tens-of-thousands of other Jewish believers about whom it is said: You see, brother, how many tens-of-thousands (or a minimum of twenty-thousand Jewish believers in Jerusalem alone not counting the rest of the country) there are among the Jewish people who have believed – and they are zealous for the Torah. They saw no contradiction in their faith in Yeshua and their zealousness for the Torah (21:17-20).
If Paul wanted to teach against a believer, especially a Jewish believer, living according to the Torah (which would include dietary mitzvot), that would have been a good time to do so. But, in fact, he teaches the exact opposite and confirms that not only is it permissible but he himself lived that way also! Thus, if Isra’el, especially remnant Isra’el – and those who are grafted into Isra’el – see the importance of maintaining their identity as a holy nation, then why should anyone be discouraged from it?160
In the final analysis, today Messianic Jews and Gentiles have the freedom in Messiah to choose whether they want to eat kosher or not (see the commentary on First Corinthians Bm – The Weaker Brother or Sister).
Leave A Comment