Despite the fact – or perhaps precisely because – the reasons for the laws of kashrut are unclear, kashrut has long been considered one of the most central features of leading a Jewish life. It does stand to reason that something we do so often and literally can’t live without should be fused with religious meaning.
What that meaning is is not at all clear and various theories have been proposed over the ages – some at complete odds with each other. What is universally agreed upon is that the laws of kashrut are one of the classic examples of a chok, a mitzva which we would have never come up with on our own and hence demonstrates fidelity to and faith in G-d. This, in contrast to the “ethical mitzvot” like theft or honouring parents which reasonable people and societies understand are necessary and can and should be observed regardless of one’s religious beliefs or lack thereof.
We may find great meaning and much to learn from the chukim, however such is true only after the fact. But had they not been given by G-d there would be no reason for man to invent such laws. Hence one can be an upstanding person of the highest moral character and impeccable integrity and yet violate these laws.
While we must search for the ethical teaching of each and every one of the chukim, and while proper observance of these laws will enhance one’s personal growth, one can, and many have, reached great ethical heights even as they flaunt the chukim. Unlike the mishpatim of the Torah – laws the rationale of which is clear – of the Torah which directly impact on one’s character, there is no direct relationship between the chukim and our ethical development.
Rather, they are meant to develop our religious sensitivity, our trust and adherence to G-d’s divine command even if we may not understand the purpose of each indvidual mitzva. Yet there is no intrinsic reason to follow them. As the Rambam writes “were it not for the Law, they would not at all be considered transgressions” (Shemoneh Perakim, Chapter 6). Hence the Rambam asserts that one should desire to violate these laws[1] and only not do so because G-d has commanded us not to.
If for example one does not like cheeseburgers not eating them does little to strengthen one’s relationship with G-d. But if one would love to have one but refrains because G-d said so – despite the fact that there is nothing inherently wrong in eating it – that demonstrates a much higher level of religious observance[2].
Of all that we may not eat it is the pig that has become the symbol of that which is not kosher.
It is the only animal the Torah lists that has split hooves but does not chew its cud. It is thus the symbol of hypocrisy, “pretending” to be kosher on the outside but when examined a little more carefully it becomes clear it is anything but.
The Ritva (Kiddushin 49b) quotes an (unsourced) rabbinic teaching – which he himself leans to rejecting – that the reason the pig is called a chazir is “because in the future G-d will lechazeero, return it, to Israel” as chazir is the same root as lechazeer to return. Whether this teaching is to be understood literally is something we will have to wait to find out[3]. That wait will end when man no longer acts like the hypocritical pig and “our inside will be like our outside[4]”, turning this “world of falsehood” into a word of truth worthy of redemption.
[1] The Rambam gives three examples of chukim – laws whose non-observance is a religious but not an ethical breach: The prohibition of eating (or cooking) a mixture of meat and milk; that of shatnez, wearing garments containing both wool and linen and arayot, sexual transgressions.
That sexual sins are not seen as ethical violations may come as a shock to many but reflect the current moral climate in which there is nothing unethical about the intimate relationship of two consenting adults. Judaism sees its sexual ethic as part of the notion of kedusha, holiness (see for example Rashi on Vayikra 19:2). One can be unholy yet most ethical. While adultery – with the terrible harm caused to others - would clearly not be included in the category of chukim, premarital relations and homosexually clearly would. This is a most important point the Rambam is making and should inform our attitude toward those who violate these Torah prohibitions.
[2] It seems to me that this is another illustration of the notion that (modern) ba’alei teshuva, those who violated the law, but now do not are on higher level than the fully righteous. Having been taught since before I could speak that one does not eat meat and milk I have no desire to eat non-kosher food. That was a natural by-product of having been raised that way. But those who used to enjoy cheeseburgers, lobster and whatever else their hearts desired and now refrain from eating are on a much more exalted level; not eating something they once enjoyed and would continue to do so but don’t because of their religious beliefs.
[3] Without realizing it perhaps this teaching refers to lab grown pork though to the best of my knowledge such “meat” is considered by many – but not all – to remain not kosher.
[4] This was the admission requirement Rabban Gamliel insisted on before allowing students into the Beit Midrash, the study hall. It might be nice in theory but in practice all it does is prevent most people form learning Torah. His successor Rabbi Elazar ben Azaria reversed that policy and literally the same day 700 additional benches were brought into the Beit Midrash.
