Alexander Gorsky
But what was the significance of the perplexing statement, "It shall not enter into the mouth"? Does it abolish the Mosaic laws regarding the classification of food, distinguishing between what is acceptable and what is not? If it does, how can we reconcile that with the reverence for the law, which led the Lord to dismiss the tradition of Korban? Conversely, if it does not annul these laws, how should we interpret it? The disciples struggled to find an answer and therefore sought the Lord’s clarification. Peter requested that the Lord shed light on this parable for them. The Lord, astonished at their lack of understanding, asserted that food itself, being an external substance, cannot cause inner moral defilement.
Read more (150 words)
However, this does not imply that all types of food are neutral for individuals. As long as divine commandments exist and are not revoked, consuming food that contradicts those laws will indeed defile an individual, stemming from a heart that disregards the law and seeks to gratify the flesh. The latter part of the parable communicates that the origin of moral impurity resides within the human heart, signifying that those desiring to remain pure before God must cleanse their hearts. The Lord did not address the laws governing clean and unclean foods, which were to be rendered obsolete with the dissolution of the Old Testament covenant, coinciding with the establishment of the New Covenant between God and humanity and the new spiritual law within the hearts of the new Israel. Nonetheless, He revealed to His disciples that these external laws are, even at present, significantly inferior to the internal principles.