We continue with the third chapter of Maseches Avodah Zarah, and before us is Mishnah 3. In the two previous mishnayos we dealt with images and statues themselves; our mishnah discusses an entirely different case - a person who finds a vessel, a vessel of any kind, with a form connected to avodah zarah stamped upon it.
The text of the mishnah:
"HaMotzei kelim va'aleihem tzuras chamah, tzuras levanah, tzuras drakon - yolichem l'Yam HaMelach" - one who finds vessels upon which there is the form of the sun, the form of the moon, or the form of a dragon, must take them to the Dead Sea.
What is this "form"?
The mishnah is not speaking of a mere geometric symbol - a circle with lines radiating out from it like a sun, or a crescent like a moon. It is speaking of a human figure representing the imagined god who rules through the power of the sun or of the moon:
In Greek mythology: Helios for the sun, Selene for the moon.
In Roman mythology (and since we are dealing with the Roman period, this is the more fitting comparison): Sol and Luna.
The idea is one and the same: a human figure embodying the power behind the heavenly body, and alongside it the form of the dragon as well. Whether we are speaking of an earring or of a plate, as we will see shortly, what we have before us is a symbol of that avodah zarah.
The concern is that these vessels were actually used for avodah zarah, at least from time to time. The Torah is not satisfied with a prohibition of benefit alone but requires destruction - both for the objects discussed in the previous mishnah, which are forbidden in benefit, and for the vessels before us, since we assume they were actually worshipped.
"Yolichem l'Yam HaMelach":
How are they destroyed? The mishnah instructs that they be cast into the Dead Sea. The Dead Sea is a place whose floor no one reaches, through which no one passes, and from which nothing is retrieved - the vessels are lost there forever. As to the manner of casting them in, the Rishonim disagree:
The opinion of Rabbeinu Tam and the Bach: He throws them in as they are, and they sink to the bottom. This is the straightforward reading.
Another opinion: They must first be ground up or burned, and only the ashes or the dust are cast into the Dead Sea.
The view of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel:
"Shel mechubadin asurin, shel mevuzin mutarin" - the ruling depends on the nature of the vessel on which the image is stamped:
An honored vessel: an expensive, important piece of jewelry, such as an earring or a necklace. Here we are concerned that the image is bound up with the idolatry itself, and therefore it is forbidden.
A degraded vessel: an item of lesser value, such as a pot or a soup bowl, and likewise an image stamped on a plate. In such a case the human figure representing the power behind the sun or the moon is there purely for beauty and decoration, and therefore - at least according to Rabbeinu Tam - it is permitted, meaning permitted to derive benefit from it.
A practical note:
One should not keep any of these things in the house. Even a picture of the sun or the moon should not be left in the house, and all the more so these figures, which give a physical form, as it were, to the powers standing behind the heavenly bodies. In the very process of removing them and disposing of them, however, one may derive benefit from them: someone who chooses to burn them is permitted to enjoy the fire while they burn.
The view of Rabbi Yosi:
The Mishnah has not yet ended. Rabbi Yosi is lenient regarding the manner of destruction and says: "shochek v'zoreh laruach o matil layam" - he has two options, to grind the object and scatter its powder to the wind, or to cast it into the Dead Sea. In his view scattering to the wind is sufficient, while the first Tanna holds that it is not.
Why not? The concern is that if he grinds the object into powder and scatters it, some of the powder will land on the ground - in a place where there is farming and people grow crops - and will mix into the soil in which tomatoes grow. It turns out that the plant grows through "zeh v'zeh gorem": both the permitted soil and the forbidden powder combine to produce it. The point is not that the tomato could have grown from the powder of the idolatry alone, but that the powder contributed some small part to its growth.
In Rabbi Yosi's opinion, zeh v'zeh gorem is permitted, and therefore he is not concerned that the powder will land in someone's field: it is a minority, nullified in the majority, and amounts to nothing. The Sages, however, hold that zeh v'zeh gorem is forbidden, especially in the context of idolatry.
"Amru lo: af hu na'aseh zevel":
The Sages answered Rabbi Yosi that the ground-up dust will eventually become fertilizer that is added to the soil in which the crop grows, and this is forbidden - "shene'emar: v'lo yidbak b'yadcha me'umah min hacherem". This verse comes from the passage of the ir hanidachas, a city that has entirely turned to idolatry. The very existence of a second, additional verse, and its wording "me'umah" - nothing at all - teach that even zeh v'zeh gorem is forbidden, and therefore scattering to the wind is not enough. It stands to reason that in a place where there is no farming there is no such concern, but in a place where crops are grown it is forbidden.
In summary: the law is that any object of idolatry that comes into a person's possession must be destroyed, and the authorities disagree as to whether it must first be ground up before being cast into the Dead Sea. On the question of zeh v'zeh gorem the Sages are stringent with idolatry and forbid it, but this stringency stems from the additional verse "v'lo yidbak b'yadcha me'umah min hacherem". It follows that for the other prohibitions of benefit, such as the prohibition of benefiting from chametz on Pesach, where there is no additional verse, grinding and scattering to the wind is sufficient, and zeh v'zeh gorem is permitted even if the powder did reach some field.