Did Rabbi Moshe Isserles Permit Gentiles Who Are Obligated by the Noahide Laws to Believe in the Creator of the Universe in Partnership With Foreign Gods?

Revised Sun, 2 June 2024 = 25th of Iyyar, 5784

Introduction – 1 Biblical Proof and 3 Proofs from the Words of our Sages that It is Forbidden for Gentiles to Worship the Creator in Partnership with Foreign Gods.

Bamidbar / Numbers 29:21 as translated by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan states:

29 Woe is to you, Moab;

you are destroyed, nation of Kemosh.*

Your* sons have become refugees,

your daughters are captives

To Sichon, king of the Amorites.

In his footnotes, Rabbi Kaplan adds:

21:29 Kemosh. Moabite deity, possibly a war god; see Judges 11:24; 1 Kings 11:7, 2 Kings 23:13; Jeremiah 48:7,13. It is said to be a natural formation of black rock in the form of a woman (Faneach Razah, quoting Sekhel Tov). Its worship included shaving the head (Midrash HaGadol on Exodus 20:5; Sefer HaMitzvot, Negative Commandment 6; cf Jeremiah 9:25).

— Your. Literally, “his.”

From Bamidbar / Numbers 23:17 it appears that the Moabites also believed in Hashem. Nevertheless, their additional belief in Kemosh seems to be a reason for destruction, for being refugees and for captivity as quoted above. Clearly implying it is not okay for Gentiles to believe in Hashem with partner deities.

Aruch La’ner & a Few Other Commentaries Tried to Deduce from the Conversation between Ruth the Moabite and Naomi that it is Okay for Gentiles to Believe in Hashem With Partner Deities

On the basis of the conversation between Ruth the Moabite and Naomi as understood by the Talmud, tractate Yevamot 47b, there are some commentaries that try to deduce that it is okay for Gentiles to believe in Hashem with partner deities.

Yevamot 47b with translation and commentary of Sefaria.org

The Gemara reconstructs the original dialogue in which Naomi attempted to dissuade Ruth from converting: Naomi said to her: On Shabbat, it is prohibited for us to go beyond the Shabbat limit. Ruth responded: “Where you go, I shall go” (Ruth 1:16), and no further. Naomi said to her: It is forbidden for us to be alone together with a man with whom it is forbidden to engage in relations. Ruth responded: “Where you lodge, I shall lodge” (Ruth 1:16), and in the same manner. Naomi said to her: We are commanded to observe six hundred and thirteen mitzvot. Ruth responded: “Your people are my people” (Ruth 1:16). Naomi said to her: Idolatrous worship is forbidden to us. Ruth responded: “Your God is my God” (Ruth 1:16). Naomi said to her: Four types of capital punishment were handed over to a court with which to punish those who transgress the mitzvot. Ruth responded: “Where you die, I shall die” (Ruth 1:17). Naomi said to her: Two burial grounds were handed over to the court, one for those executed for more severe crimes and another for those executed for less severe crimes. Ruth responded: “And there I shall be buried” (Ruth 1:17). Immediately following this dialogue, the verse states: “And when she saw that she was steadfastly minded she left off speaking with her” (Ruth 1:18). Once Naomi saw Ruth’s resolve to convert, she desisted from her attempts to dissuade her.

What Activity is Ruth Really Losing by Converting to Judaism?

Aruch La’ner raised the following question on this Talmudic passage. We know that all Gentiles are forbidden to worship idolatry by the Noahide laws. Therefore what activity is Ruth really losing by converting to Judaism? Even if she remains a Gentile, she still is forbidden to worship idolatry! Aruch La’ner concludes that there is a type of idolatry that is forbidden to Jews but permitted to Gentiles. Namely, worshiping Hashem with partner deities.

Maharsha had an alternative answer to the question what is Ruth losing by converting to Judaism? Maharsha said, she is losing the right to leave the land of Israel, which is considered by the Talmud in tractate Ketuvot 110B to be on the level of serving idols. There they bring proof for this view by the statement of King David in I Samuel 26:19

“For they have driven me out this day that I should not cleave to the inheritance of Hashem saying: Go, serve other gods”. But who said to David: Go, serve other gods? Rather, this comes to tell you that anyone (Jewish) who resides outside of the land of Israel is considered as though he is engaged in idol worship.

I will not hide the fact that Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv in his commentary to Sota 36b liked Maharasha’s answer because he asserted that allowing Gentiles to worship idols together with Hashem is a rejected view. However, I personally prefer an answer that will explain that Naomi was talking about the prohibition of idolatry on a simple level and not talking about the commandment to live in Israel.

So why was Naomi talking about the prohibition of idolatry if Gentiles are indeed forbidden to worship Hashem with partners as part of their Noahide Commandments?

Rabbi Hayyim Jacob Choidanski (explaining Rambam’s view) said in the process of conversion, we inform the convert about the fundamentals of the faith, i.e., the unity of G-d and the prohibition against the worship of false deities. We elaborate on this matter (Rambam, Hilchot Issurei Biah 14:2). Naomi’s discussion with Ruth was to fulfill this element in the conversion process and has nothing to do with the issue of discouraging converts from converting by informing them of extra obligations that they would have if they decide to become Jewish. An added benefit of choosing Rabbi Choidanski’s explanation is that it fits the words of the passage from Yevamot 47b quoted above more precisely than Aruch La’ner’s suggested explanation.

The Enosh Proof

Sifri on Parshat Eikev, section 43 as translated by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein https://www.sefaria.org.il/Sifrei_Devarim.43.18?lang=bi states:

R. Yossi says: Why are they called “elohim” (“gods”)? So as not to leave an opening for future generations to say: If they (their idols) were called by His name (“Elokim“), they would have been effective. And when were they called by His name? In the days of the generation of Enosh, of which it is written (Bereshith 4:26) “And to Sheth, too, there was born a son, and he called his name Enosh.

Then they began to call (artifacts) by the name of the L-rd.”
At that time Oceanus rose and flooded a third of the world. The Holy One Blessed be He said to them: You have made something new and called it by My name; I, too, will do something new and call it by My name, as it is written (Amos 5:8) “He called to the waters of the sea, and He spilled them out upon the face of the earth — ‘the L-rd’ is His name.”

The above implies the worship of the generation of Enosh was defined as a sin for Gentiles since Enosh and his generation were Gentiles.

What Was the Enosh Sin?

In the commentary of the Rosh to Genesis 4:26, he describes it as a belief in Hashem with partner deities. So too, Ramban to Genesis 10:8 understands the sin as worship of partner deities together with Hashem. Rashi to Genesis 4:26 said, THEN IT WAS BEGUN [TO CALL etc.] — The word הוחל must be connected in meaning with חולין “profane matters “) viz, calling the names of men and the names of idols after the name of the Holy One, blessed be He — making them the objects of idolatrous worship and calling them Deities (Genesis Rabbah 23:7).

Rambam’s View

In Chapter 1, halacha 1 in Hilkhot Avoda Zara Rambam (Maimonides) states:

During the times of Enosh, mankind made a great mistake, and the wise men of that generation gave thoughtless counsel. Enosh himself was one of those who erred.

Their mistake was as follows: They said G-d created stars and spheres with which to direct the world. He placed them on high and treated them with honor, making them servants who minister before Him. They are fit to praise and glorify them and to treat them with honor. And [They perceived] this to be the will of G-d , blessed be He, that they exalt and honor those whom He exalted and honored, just as a king desires that the servants who stand before him be honored. Indeed, doing so is an expression of honor to the king.

After this thought entered their hearts, they began to construct temples to the stars and offer sacrifices to them. They would praise and glorify them with words, and bow themselves before them, because by doing so, they would – according to their bad opinion – be fulfilling the will of the Creator.

This was the essence of the worship of foreign worship, and this was the rationale of those who worshiped them… {end of quote}.

Meiri (Beit Habechira) in his introduction to Avot, explained the Enosh sin as the philosophical conclusion that Hashem wished to be worshipped through his intermediaries in the heavens. Just as it is fitting according to their logic for lowly citizens to honor the important officials of the king.

After the flood, false prophets added to this sin and said that Hashem actually commanded that they serve a certain angel or constellation and to make images for worship.

From that point in time until the generation of the division (of mankind) they believed that evil idea that there was joint power and dominion of the Almighty with these partners.

Radak in his commentary to Genesis 4:26 offers two explanations for the verse.

The first explanation understood that it was only in the time of Enosh, that people concluded that prayer to Hashem accomplishes something. But the Talmud in tractate Chulin 60b implies that Adam already knew about the effectiveness of prayers so it is hard to accept this explanation.

Radak’s second explanation based on the sages is that the generation decided to worship Hashem with the stars and constellations acting as intermediaries.

The Translation of the Septuagint Proof (Sefaria.org Translation of the Talmud, tractate Megilla page 9)

The Gemara continues: And this was due to the incident of King Ptolemy, as it is taught in a baraita: There was an incident involving King Ptolemy of Egypt, who assembled seventy-two Elders from the Sages of Israel, and put them into seventy-two separate rooms, and did not reveal to them for what purpose he assembled them, so that they would not coordinate their responses. He entered and approached each and every one, and said to each of them: Write for me a translation of the Torah of Moses your teacher. The Holy One, Blessed be He, placed wisdom in the heart of each and every one, and they all agreed to one common understanding. Not only did they all translate the text correctly, they all introduced the same changes into the translated text…

To the verse that discusses the worship of the sun and the moon, about which it is written: “Which the Lord your God has allotted to all the nations” (Deuteronomy 4:19), they added a word to make it read: “Which the Lord your God has allotted to give light to all the nations,” to prevent the potential misinterpretation that the heavenly bodies were given to the gentiles so that they may worship them.

Rashi as well as Rabbi Avraham Min Hahar explain that if they had not added “to give light”, to the translation the non-Jews would have wrongly concluded that a descendant of Noah is permitted to practice idolatry.

The “Daf Al HaDaf” commentary on that section of the Talmud adds that since Hashem gave the sun and the moon (and stars) to give light to all of them and to bring about other great benefits, this would be cause for an error; for an assumption would be assumed that on account of gratitude and expressing thanks it is correct to bow to them and worship them. Now to remove this claim, comes the warning, (Deuteronomy 4:19) “When you raise your eyes to the sky, and see the sun, moon, stars and other heavenly bodies, do not bow down to them or worship them…”; for there is no obligation of gratitude to those that are compelled to act and have no free will and on the contrary it will be considered idolatry to do so. And this is what the Sages added in the translation for King Ptolemy “that I did not command you to worship”, and one should not grant them gratitude over doing the will of their master without free will, and therefore by default it should be understood that it is forbidden to bow to them.

In summary the sages of Israel who translated the Septuagint seemed to do everything possible to stop Gentiles from belief in Hashem with partner deities. It is unlikely that they would have made such an effort unless they believed that the Noahide code of laws incumbent on Gentiles includes the prohibition of worshiping the Creator with partners.

With this Introduction in Mind It is Shocking to Discover that Some Prominent Modern Rabbis Interpret the Words of Rabbi Moshe Isserles as Permitting Gentiles to Believe in the Creator of the Universe with Foreign Gods

Rabbis such as Aruch La’ner believed that Rabbi Moshe Isserles (a very influential rabbi for Ashkenazi Jewry) held the opinion that for Gentiles we have lower standards on the issue of idolatry and it is possible to worship Catholic Christianity without violating the Noahide commandment to abstain from idolatry.
Most of the lenient rabbis probably did not have access to the manuscript of Darkei Moshe Ha’aroch, Yoreh Deah chapter 151, where Rabbi Moshe Isserles makes it clear that providing Catholics with the Latin translation of the Bible (both what they call the “Old Testament” and “New Testament”), is forbidden because it leads them to commit idolatry and belief in heretical views.

Below are the words of Rabbi Isserles in Hebrew. (After the quote, the rest of this article will be in English.)

In What Area is Rabbi Moshe Isserles More Lenient than Rabbi Yosef Karo on the Issue of Catholics?

Rabbi Moshe Isserles in his commentary to Orach Chaim chapter 156, citing Rabbeinu Nissim came up with a halachic leniency for a Jew who wants to have a business partnership with a Catholic, even though he might have to end up getting a “Catholic Oath” from the partner. Rabbeinu Yerucham (who also believes that the Catholic clergy who burn frankincense in religious rituals, practice idolatry that is forbidden for Noahides) offers an additional argument why the Catholic Oath of his times, where J-man of the Christians is not explicitly mentioned (see Darkei Moshe Hakatzar, O.C. 156) is grounds for leniency.

Rabbeinu Nissim on the Rif, tractate Avoda Zara 7a

The text of the chapter that starts with “the 4 deaths administered by the court” (page 63b) is the following:

“The father of Shmuel stated it is forbidden for a person to make a partnership with an idolater etc.

Tosafot wrote in the name of Rabbeinu Shmuel z”l, that all the more so if one violated (this statement of the father of Shmuel) and made a partnership that it is forbidden to accept from him an oath. But Rabbeinu Tam z”l said that if he made a partnership with him it is permissible to bring him to make an oath in order to save from his hand. As stated [page 6b] if he gave a loan (to the idolater) based on an oral agreement, he can extract payment of the loan from him (even on a holiday of idolatry) because he is like saving from their hands.

But this is not a good proof, for there it is a different case; for perhaps the idolater won’t go and thank his deity, but here, definitely he will swear. Furthermore, there he is definitely saving (money) but here, perhaps he will not save, for perhaps he will swear (and exempt himself from payment).

Nevertheless by careful analysis of what was stated in the chapter, starting with “the men of the city” (page 28a) one can deduce a leniency, where one of the sages state, “I should get a special reward” that I never made a partnership with an idolater and since it is prohibited, what is the great deed that he feels he will get a special reward (more than others) for it. And they explained, this is what the sage meant. I would not make a partnership together with an idolater and I would even exempt him from an oath in order not to be in the habit of being by him and learning from his deeds. And they also wrote, that this is what he meant. That even at a time that it is not usual for the idolater to swear by their idolatry, I would not make a partnership with him. And for this reason (that under certain situations it is considered just an act of piety, above the letter of the law) they were accustomed to permit it, because, they do not swear by their idolatry”.

Rabbeinu Nissim, (in his insights to tractate Sanhedrin 63b) personally felt that there is a rabbinic prohibition to cause Catholics and Muslims to make an oath because the saints and the maniac of the Muslims mentioned in their oaths (at least during his days) are idolatry. And he held there is a rabbinic extension of the commandment, “Do not pronounce the name of another deity, you must not let it be heard through your mouth” (Exodus 23:13) that forbids even causing a Gentile to swear by a false deity. Rabbeinu Nissim nevertheless quotes the more lenient view of Ramban. Presumably he does so to explain why many observant Jews in his days were in fact demanding oaths from Catholics in order to save their money.

In the continuation of his commentary on the Rif, tractate Avoda Zara 7a Rabbeinu Nissim states:

Now Ramban wrote, that which was stated, it is forbidden for an Israelite to make a partnership with an idolater is not a real actual prohibition, for in reality it is not even forbidden by rabbinic law; for the prohibition “do not put a stumbling block before the blind” is only applicable when the Gentile cannot do the sin except with the help of an Israelite, similar to one who extends a cup of wine to a Nazirite who is standing on the second side of a river. Furthermore it is possible that the sons of Noah are not prohibited to make an oath or to fulfill it, in the name of idolatry and the verse, “you must not let it be heard through your mouth” is applicable only for Israelites by the Torah but in this situation, even on a rabbinical level it is not forbidden, because the Israelite is not making him swear by idolatry, rather the idolater by his own accord swears on account of his obligation of an oath to the Israelite and because all this is forbidden as an act of piety (above the letter of the law), the sage stated there, “I deserve a special reward” (for avoiding this situation with a Gentile).

Making Partnerships with Gentiles – The Ruling of the Uncensored Shulchan Aruch & The Argument of Rabbi Moshe Isserles for Leniency

In the Venice version of the Shulchan Aruch printed during the lifetime of Rabbi Yosef Karo, Rabbi Karo writes in the Orach Chaim section, chapter 156: And one should be careful not to make a partnership with a descendant of Noah who worships idolatry for perhaps he (the partner) will be liable to make an oath (to the Jew) and he would be transgressing “you must not let it be heard through your mouth”.

In later editions of the Shulchan Aruch, this ruling was censored and replaced with the code word “Cuthites”. That is to say, the text was changed to state: “One should be careful not to make a partnership with a Cuthite for perhaps he will be liable to make an oath and one would be transgressing “you must not let it be heard through your mouth”.

The Bar-Ilan responsa, project, version 28 still contains the censored text.

Rabbi Moshe Isserles Responds to the Ruling of Rabbi Karo by Referring to Rabbeinu Nissim’s Commentary on the Rif Cited Earlier in this Article

Rabbi Isserles states: there are those who are lenient with making partnerships with Gentiles (Censored texts: “Cuthites” or “Star Worshipers”) in our times.

In vague terms in order to avoid the wrath of the Christian censor, Rabbi Isserles describes where the ideological beliefs of the Catholics differ from classic pagans without actually mentioning the terms Catholic or Christianity or Trinity.

Rabbi Isserles in his conclusion leaves it unclear in his answer if the Gentile is actually allowed to believe in the Creator of Heaven and Earth along with other deities or is he simply stating we Jews are not causing any sins by having the Gentile make a Catholic Oath.

Rabbi Isserles provides Rabbeinu Nissim cited above as the source for his views so it becomes clear that all that Rabbi Isserles meant to say is that we Jews are not causing any sins by having the Gentile make a Catholic Oath.

Rabbi Yechiel Michel Epstein in Aruch Hashulchan, O.C. 156:4 also agrees that the key issue here is having them say an oath and it is not “blanket permission” for Gentiles to believe in the Creator with partners.

He states:

And one should be careful not to make a partnership with an Arab for perhaps he (the partner) will be liable to make an oath (to the Jew) and he would be transgressing “you must not let it be heard through your mouth”.

But there are those that are lenient in our times because they do not swear by the stars and their intent is towards the Maker of Heaven and Earth but they make a partnership between the name of the Creator and something else and we don’t find this is a violation of “before the blind you shall not place a stumbling block”, because they are not commanded regarding making oaths, to avoid swearing by a partnership of the Creator and something else.

Summary

Catholic Christianity that believes in a trinity is idolatry both for Jews and Non-Jews. According to Rabbeinu Nissim at least some (perhaps all) of the Muslims have turned their maniac into what should be classified as a separate deity.

Rabbeinu Nissim and Rabbeinu Yerucham found loopholes in the idolatry laws for Jews in exile in Catholic countries to significantly improve their economic standing by partnering with the Catholics. The bottom line is they both found some justification to be lenient on certain issues of business relations with the Catholics, without granting a general stamp of approval for Catholic ideology.

Even When Gentiles Are Idol Worshipers, Jews Are Subject to the Ways of Peace Laws of the Talmud, tractate Gittin 61a

translation by https://www.sefaria.org.il/Gittin.61a.5?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en

The mishna teaches: One does not protest against poor gentiles who come to take gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and the produce in the corner of the field, which is given to the poor [pe’a], although they are meant exclusively for the Jewish poor, on account of the ways of peace. Similarly, the Sages taught in a baraita (Tosefta 5:4): One sustains poor gentiles along with poor Jews, and one visits sick gentiles along with sick Jews, and one buries dead gentiles along with dead Jews. All this is done on account of the ways of peace, to foster peaceful relations between Jews and gentiles.

And furthermore see, Sefer Hamitzvot Hakatzar of the Chafetz Chaim, negative commandment 20.

The Chafetz Chaim also informs us in Mishna Brura, chapter 304 and in Beu’r Halacha to chapter 330 that trinity believers and Muslims do not have the more honorable status of Gair Toashav.

Further suggested reading:

Article by the main editor of vilnagaon.org