{"id":21001,"date":"2025-03-18T06:19:50","date_gmt":"2025-03-18T05:19:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sukkatshalom-bneinoach.com\/?p=21001"},"modified":"2025-03-18T06:19:50","modified_gmt":"2025-03-18T05:19:50","slug":"the-origins-of-idolatry-part-iv-no-gods-before-me","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sukkatshalom-bneinoach.com\/es\/the-origins-of-idolatry-part-iv-no-gods-before-me\/","title":{"rendered":"LOS OR\u00cdGENES DE LA IDOLATR\u00cdA PARTE IV - NO HAY DIOSES ANTES DE M\u00cd"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u05d1\u05e1 \"\u05d3<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let\u2019s begin by referencing \u00c9xodo 20:3<\/a>, where it states, “You shall not worship them nor serve them, for I am Hashem, your G-d.”<\/strong> This verse appears in the context of the Ten Commandments, underscoring the absolute prohibition of idolatry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In our previous classes on idolatry, we explored the definition of Avod\u00e1 Zarah<\/strong> (foreign worship) and what constitutes idolatrous practices. We discussed different forms of idolatry, the types of items that should and should not be kept in one\u2019s home, and the historical development of idolatry. Initially, the natural and universal understanding was that there was only one G-d. However, idolatry developed later as a deviation from this original monotheistic belief.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Question: Is the Noahide Obligation in Monotheism Different from the Jewish Obligation?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Today, we will build upon these discussions by exploring the concept of Mierda<\/strong>, which refers to associating another entity with G-d. The key question is: Does this constitute a violation of the Noahide laws?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To examine this, we must first look at the Talmudic<\/strong> basis for the prohibition of Shituf. A particularly relevant passage is found in the Talmud, Sanhedrin 63a<\/a><\/strong>, where Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai states:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

“Anyone who associates the name of Heaven with something else is uprooted from the world, as it is said (Exodus 22:19): ‘One who sacrifices to the gods shall be destroyed\u2014except for Hashem alone.'”<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

This verse, found in the laws following the Ten Commandments, establishes that sacrifices must be offered exclusively to Hashem. In ancient times, sacrifices were the primary form of worship<\/strong>, though we do have an ongoing record of oraci\u00f3n<\/strong> as well, dating back to Adam.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thus, if a person were to offer a sacrifice to both Hashem and another entity<\/strong>, this would be considered Shituf and would be forbidden under penalty of death. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai\u2019s statement implies that Shituf is universally prohibited, even for Noahides<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Debate Among Commentators: Is Shituf Prohibited for Noahides?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

En Tosafot<\/strong> (medieval Talmudic commentators) analyze this passage and raise an interesting point. They cite Biblical examples where Hashem\u2019s name is mentioned alongside another figure<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Judges 7:20<\/strong> \u2013 When Gideon’s soldiers fought against Midian, they cried out, “For Hashem and for Gideon!”<\/strong> This seems to associate Gideon with divine success.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. Numbers 21:7<\/strong> \u2013 The Israelites say, “We have spoken against Hashem and against you,”<\/strong> referring to Moshe (Moses).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    Do these verses suggest that Shituf is not always a form of idolatry<\/strong>?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Tosafot argue that Shituf is not inherently Avodah Zarah (idolatry) unless it grants divine status to the other entity.<\/strong> In the case of Gideon, for example, the people were simply recognizing their leader in a battle cry\u2014this was not an act of worship. Similarly, in Numbers, the Israelites were acknowledging Moshe as their teacher, not as a divine being.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Another relevant discussion is found in the Talmud, tractate Bechorot 2b<\/a><\/strong>, regarding oaths. In many cultures, people invoke G-d\u2019s name when swearing an oath in court or in business transactions. Rabbeinu Tam<\/strong> (the grandson of Rashi) permits accepting an oath from a non-Jew who invokes both G-d and another power if this is their cultural custom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    This is significant because it suggests that, since Noahides are not explicitly commanded to swear solely in Hashem\u2019s name<\/strong>, there may be some leniency regarding Shituf<\/strong> for them. But to be clear, the leniency is not a dispensation to engage in shituf, to be careless about how one expresses himself or to dismiss the theological problem of trinitarianism. Rather, the leniency concerns whether a Noahide is punished for it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    And in any case, this is a minority opinion<\/strong>. Most later Rabbinic authorities reject this leniency.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The Code of Jewish Law: A Stricter View<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    When we look at later halachic (Jewish legal) rulings<\/strong>, such as those found in the Shulj\u00e1n Aruj<\/strong> (Orach Chaim 156), we see that Rabbi Yosef Karo<\/strong> takes a much stricter stance. He states:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n

    “One should avoid partnerships with idolaters lest they be required to swear an oath and violate the principle of ‘You shall not let the name of other gods be heard upon your lips.'”<\/em> (Exodus 23:13)<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    This verse reinforces the Jewish prohibition against even mentioning the names of foreign gods. Many Jews follow this by using alternative names when referring to certain figures\u2014for example, saying \u201cYeshu\u201d or \u201cYoshke\u201d<\/strong> instead of \u201cJesus\u201d or writing \u201cX-mas\u201d instead of \u201cChristmas.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    This ruling raises a question: How does this apply to Noahides?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    En Rema (Rabbi Moshe Isserles)<\/strong>, in his glosses to the Shulchan Aruch, takes a more lenient<\/strong> approach. He writes that in modern times, some permit<\/strong> partnerships with non-Jews, since they do not necessarily swear by an idol but rather associate G-d with something else.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Thus, according to the Rema and the Tosafot, Shituf is not strictly prohibited for Noahides.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The Majority View: Noahides Must Uphold Strict Monotheism<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    When we look at later halachic (Jewish legal) rulings<\/strong>, such as those found in the Shulj\u00e1n Aruj<\/strong> (Orach Chaim 156), we see that Rabbi Yosef Karo<\/strong> takes a much stricter stance. He states:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    “One should avoid partnerships with idolaters lest they be required to swear an oath and violate the principle of ‘You shall not let the name of other gods be heard upon your lips.'”<\/em> (Exodus 23:13)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    This verse reinforces the Jewish prohibition against even mentioning the names of foreign gods. Many Jews follow this by using alternative names when referring to certain figures\u2014for example, saying \u201cYeshu\u201d or \u201cYoshke\u201d<\/strong> instead of \u201cJesus\u201d or writing \u201cX-mas\u201d instead of \u201cChristmas.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    This ruling raises a question: How does this apply to Noahides?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    En Rema (Rabbi Moshe Isserles)<\/strong>, in his glosses to the Shulchan Aruch, takes a more lenient<\/strong> approach. He writes that in modern times, some permit<\/strong> partnerships with non-Jews, since they do not necessarily swear by an idol but rather associate G-d with something else.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Thus, according to the Rema and the Tosafot, Shituf is not strictly prohibited for Noahides.<\/strong>s coming from Christian backgrounds<\/strong> who previously believed in the Trinity<\/strong> o divine intermediaries<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Conclusion: What Should a Noahide Strive For?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Given this debate, where does that leave Noahides?<\/p>\n\n\n\n