Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses the prohibitions of eating meat and milk together. While it is prohibited to cook meat and milk and eat the product of said cooking, the rabbis forbade eating milk and meat together even without cooking it.

There is an interesting Pesikta Rabbasi (25) that discusses this prohibition regarding the angels who ate by Avraham. Bereishis (18:8) records that Avraham served the angels butter, milk and meat. The Midrash reports the following dialogue between the angels and God at the time of the giving of the Torah. Angels wanted God to keep the Torah for them; however, God referred to many commandments that have to do with physicality and mortality, such as forbidden foods and ritual impurity. God told them, “none of these commandments relate to you.” This is where the Pesikta Rabbasi adds an interesting twist to the standard Midrash: After God gives the Jewish people the Torah, they sin with idolatry and the Golden Calf. At the point that Moshe is about to give the Torah the second time to the Jews with the second Tablets, the angels once again claim that they are entitled to the Torah, because look at what the Jews did. God answers, “but you ate meat and milk when you visited Avraham - which is something that even a young Jewish child knows not to do.” On the basis of this argument, the Jewish people were given the Torah the second time, and the angels once again lost the debate. (This explains the juxtaposition of the verses in Shemos 34:26-27, where the first verse states the prohibition of cooking the kid in the mother’s milk and then the next verse speaks of the writing of the Torah. One justifies the other because of this behind-the-scenes discussion.)

How do we understand this exchange? And, even on a simple level, why does the argument of meat and milk come up only at the giving of the Torah for the second time?

Thematically, the giving of the first tablets versus the giving of the second tablets after the sin of the golden calf represents the ideal versus the actual. Meaning, there was an ideal state that the Jews temporarily occupied, but could not sustain long-term, and they were brought down by sin, their own lack of faith and panic when Moshe did not come back, and other mortal factors. The giving of the second Tablets represents recognition of this pragmatic reality, a second marriage so to speak, with realistic expectations, and the ways in which humans must engage with the Torah on their level.

The first time the angels argue about their right to have the Torah they are easily defeated, because clearly, the version of the Torah that God was giving involved ways in which humans were to overcome various temptations in order to elevate themselves. The prohibitions against forbidden foods and ritual impurity indicated an expression of the word of God that was tailored to humans.

Yet, once it emerges that the Jews failed, sinning immediately, the angels are once again emboldened. We can imagine their argument was, human beings failed to fulfill the Torah, so even if it’s not designed for us and we are not tempted in the same manner, it is still better off that we have it than they have it. This is a good argument, and now, only at this time, does God come back to them with the story of the meat and milk and the angels. What kind of answer is that really? And, in any case, it isn’t prohibited technically to eat meat and milk together; it is only prohibited to cook meat and milk and to eat that byproduct. So what did the angels do wrong?

I believe God’s argument back to the angels the second time was about an internalization of Torah principles. His point was, “Yes, it is true that the humans sinned right away and have a propensity to do so. Yet, something else happens as well when they receive the Torah. There is an internalization of the principles to the point that even if it’s not strictly forbidden, every child knows not to eat meat and milk.” That is to say, while there is weakness and sin, something else is happening too. Torah is becoming part of a culture to the extent that there’s an intuitive and voluntary extension of the prohibition, understanding that there’s something toxic about the meat and milk mixture and staying far away from it. The angels had no idea. The angels, who have no fathers nor sons, do not have a culture. They do not have the ability to create civilization, a country or a lifestyle built around ideas, but humans even if they are not strictly obeying or even understanding the technicalities properly, create culture. This was God’s point to the angels the second time around. They may sin, but that is on a specific commandment and a specific weak moment. However, they have the capacity to integrate Torah ideals and build them so much into their culture that even young children instinctively follow its essence and inner spirit.