Purging Vessels

Mycenaean cupAnother aspect of kosher law can be found in the book of Numbers. After the war of vengeance against the Midianites, the Israelite soldiers were not allowed to enter the Israelite camp until they went through a process of purification. The spoils they carried home from the war also had to be cleansed before they could be brought into the Israelite camp.

Then Eleazar the priest said to the men in the army who had gone to battle: "This is the statute of the law that the LORD has commanded Moses: only the gold, the silver, the bronze, the iron, the tin, and the lead, everything that can stand the fire, you shall pass through the fire, and it shall be clean. Nevertheless, it shall also be purified with the water for impurity. And whatever cannot stand the fire, you shall pass through the water."(Numbers 31:21–23)

One aspect of this translation is misleading. Rather than "everything that can stand the fire," a more literal translation would be "everything that goes into the fire." Likewise, "whatever cannot stand the fire" is more literally rendered, "everything that does not go in the fire."

The reason this is significant is that the translation, as it stands, seems to imply that everything ideally should be purified in a fire, but if the fire would damage it, ritual washing is good enough. However, this is not consistent with ritual purity laws elsewhere, in which case if the object cannot be properly purified, it is simply destroyed.1 However, if we simply read the passage literally, it seems to speak of objects that are used in fire (such as pots and pans) as opposed to those that are not. That is to say, if the object was contaminated in a fire, then it must also be cleansed in a fire. If the object had not been contaminated in a fire, a cleansing with fire is not necessary. This reading brings clarity and consistency to the laws revealed in this passage.

Levitical purity?

One might claim that this commandment refers only to ritual purity that is separate from kosher law and only practical in the context of Temple ritual. However, we can see that this is not the case, since "everything that goes into the fire" must first be cleansed in fire, making it "clean," and then also "purified" in water. If a fire-purged vessel is somehow "clean" and yet also "impure," then we must be speaking of two separate concepts. There is nowhere else in the Torah where ritual purity is effected by passing though fire.

If the purity achieved here is strictly Tabernacle-related, then that would indicate that pots and bowls made of tin and lead went from the Midianite dinner table to the Israelite priesthood. This makes little sense. Even the gold and silver vessels would probably have been melted down and re-formed into the specialized dishes needed for Levitical purposes.

Additionally, notice that this command of purification is directed to "the men in the army who had gone to battle" (Numbers 31:21). This description automatically excludes all priests and Levites, since they don't go out to battle.2 If these dishes are only being purified because they are to be devoted to sacred use, then what is the purpose of giving this commandment to soldiers? The plain reading of the text suggests that these dishes were among the plunder that was divided "into two parts between the warriors who went out to battle and all the congregation" (Numbers 31:27).

Jewish tradition explains the "passing through fire" as communicating that the flavors and particles of non-kosher food are transmitted through heat, and they can only be purged through the same level of heat. While you may or may not agree with this interpretation, it is borne out by modern knowledge.

Consider, for example, a cast iron skillet. To season the skillet in a conventional manner, one might coat the pan with lard or bacon grease, and then bake the pan in an oven. The only way to remove the seasoning would be with intense heat.

A similar effect occurs in the inside of an oven. Wired Magazine recently published an article explaining why New York pizza is so much better than pizza in San Francisco. The answer was explained by David Tisi, whom Wired describes as "a food-development consultant who has spent much of his career studying pizza."

"As you cook, some ingredients vaporize, and these volatilized particles can attach themselves to the walls of the baking cavity," Tisi says. "The next time you use the oven, these bits get caught up in the convection currents and deposited on the food, which adds flavor." Over time, he says, more particles join the mix and mingle with the savory soot from burned wood or coal — the only fuels worth using — to create a flavor that you can't grow in a garden: gestalt, if you will.3

Another illustration of the contamination of vessels can be seen among individuals with severe and sensitive allergies. Many people with allergies have severe reactions after eating foods if they were prepared on the same equipment that was used with allergens, even if the equipment is thoroughly cleaned.

Grilled shrimp: (source)Imagine if you were fatally allergic to pork, and the slightest amount would threaten your life. If this were the case, would you be comfortable eating fish that was seared on a grill in an Americana restaurant, served on a stoneware plate? Non-kosher food can be seen to affect us in a similar way, only it is detrimental to our souls rather than our bodies.

Even if the end goal of the cleansing in fire in this passage is entirely ritual, it makes sense that it would only be possible to cleanse something ritually after it has been completely cleansed hygienically. In other words, immersing a pan in water to remove ritual impurity is only possible after all traces of non-kosher food have been removed. A vessel does not qualify for ritual purification if it still contains contaminating substances (such as unclean species and pagan sacrifices). Immersing it would be as ineffective as taking a ritual bath while holding onto a dead rat. That means that a hygienic cleansing is the prerequisite and first stage of a ritual cleansing process.

In the world today, without a Temple, priesthood, or sacrifices, some people believe that ritual purity has absolutely no practical bearing on life. That belief is not shared by traditional Judaism.

While it is not explicit in the text, traditional Judaism sees the second purification—the washing in water—as related not to the holiness of the Tabernacle, but of the entire Israelite nation. The vessels go through a re-dedication ceremony. They were originally formed by Midianites for the purpose of containing food offered to idols and celebrating pagan feasts. But now, as they enter Jewish homes they are devoted to a new, holier purpose: the service of the one true God. It is as if the dishes themselves are "baptized" and undergo a religious conversion. This idea is supported by the special role of the Jewish people as "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Exodus 19:6).

Nonetheless, if the ritual purity of these vessels was not an issue, then that would only account for the second purification in water, since the first purification in fire is hygienic. For the purposes of dietary law alone, there is still a need to cleanse the vessel of all traces of contaminants, and the process that the Torah prescribes for this is "passing through a fire."

Perhaps you are not convinced that this is the original intent of Numbers 31:21–23. That is understandable, since the passage is short on details. Nonetheless, a law of the Torah is revealed here; the passage has to have some meaning. If we dismiss the traditional explanation, then it becomes our duty to propose another, which must also account for the double cleansing of verse 23. The traditional Jewish explanation is, at the very least, both biblical and reasonable.

"Kashering" to Remove Holiness

There is another text that we may bring to bear on the issue of cleansing vessels. This passage is different, however, because instead of imparting holiness to vessels, the task is to remove it.

The LORD spoke to Moses, saying, "Speak to Aaron and his sons, saying, This is the law of the sin offering. In the place where the burnt offering is killed shall the sin offering be killed before the LORD; it is most holy. The priest who offers it for sin shall eat it. In a holy place it shall be eaten, in the court of the tent of meeting. Whatever touches its flesh shall be holy, and when any of its blood is splashed on a garment, you shall wash that on which it was splashed in a holy place. And the earthenware vessel in which it is boiled shall be broken. But if it is boiled in a bronze vessel, that shall be scoured and rinsed in water. Every male among the priests may eat of it; it is most holy. But no sin offering shall be eaten from which any blood is brought into the tent of meeting to make atonement in the Holy Place; it shall be burned up with fire." (Leviticus 6:24-30)

This passage is puzzling. Why must the vessel in which the offering was boiled be either cleansed or destroyed?

One explanation is that holy or consecrated foods can only be eaten by certain individuals, in a state of ritual purity, under specific circumstances (which vary). Now imagine that someone cooked sacrificial meat in an earthenware pot. The priest is very careful to prepare himself ritually before partaking of this meat. The following day, however, the priest sits down to enjoy a non-sanctified meal of boiled vegetables. But since he used the same earthenware pot that he had used for the sacrificial meat, the flavor of the holy food becomes infused into the vegetables. This means that he would taste the flavor of the sacrifice while in a normal (non-sanctified) ritual state. The Torah seeks to prevent this by requiring that the dishes in which the meat was cooked be purged of the flavor of the holy meat. In the case of earthenware, this is not possible, so the dish must be broken to prevent the dish from being used again. The Sages derive from this that earthenware in which non-kosher foods have been cooked cannot be made kosher again.

1. 1. Leviticus 11:33, for example.
2. 2. See Numbers 1:20–54.
3. 3. Wired Magazine 16.05, "Why New York City's Iconic Pizza Is So Tough to Replicate" http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/magazine/16-05/ps_pizzasci