Maimonides and the question of Hindu idolatry - Hindu-Noahide Book Club 1.5 - Same God, Other God by Alon Goshen-Gottstein

  See Table Of Contents 

Part 5 of this book club - (Same God, Other God by Alon Goshen-Gottstein):  

Maimonides would be the most strict on Hindu idolatry and under a cursory inspection it is believed that Hinduism would be labeled avodah zarah and would be impermissible to practice for non-Jews.  This is derived from the fact that Maimonides determined Christianity to be avodah zarah and so why not Hinduism. However the author begins to poke holes in Maimonides and makes it clear that as long as the non-Jewish worshipper keeps in mind the one true god, and their idol represents the one true god or absolute, that this might not be counted as idolatry even under Maimonides. Vedanta is held up as more compliant to Jewish standards than Christianity.  The point here is to make even the most strict interpretations of the question of avodah zarah open to Hinduism so that they can be used as useful Noahides.  

• According to Maimonides idolatry starts out as honoring what god creates alongside god, god is not forgotten at first but like a king's guard is honored to honor the king, the stars and planets are honored to honor god. 
• In this early phase of idolatry the idol-worshipper knows the difference between the one god and the creation he is including in his worship. 
• However, eventually, due to rituals and new religions surrounding the worship of creation, knowledge of god is lost among idol-worshippers. 
• According to Maimonides, the worship of another being is still illegal even if the worshipper has not lost vision of the one true god. 
• Maimonides does not make it clear as to whether or not a physical idol can be used if it is used to worship the one true god alone. 
• Maimonides would have likely seen Hinduism as avoda zara (idolatry). 
• If Hindus do not lose sight of the absolute in worship, and their idols represent the one true god, then it is debatable as to whether Hinduism is permissible under Maimonides. 
• Hindus are not using classical intermediaries when they pray to different deities but view these as a manifestation of the absolute, not a worship through proxy. 
• If modern pantheistic and panentheistic versions of Judaism are used, then Hinduism would not be idolatry.
• According to Maimonides, even Kabbalah could be considered idolatry, so it makes sense to not judge Hinduism so harshly if Jews want to keep their mysticsm. 
• If Maimonides understanding of Christianity is used to judge Hinduism, then both are idolatry. 
• However, Maimonides does not explain why Christianity is idolatry, it is simply presented as self-evident. 
• Maimonides declarations of avoda zara could have been based more on an intuitive sense of otherness rather than a dissection of theology. 
• In some ways, Hindu vedanta is easier to reconcile with Judaism than Christianity.  The reason is complicated and I could be misunderstanding it but I believe this is because vedanta does not forget the unmanifest when engaging with the manifest idols and they do not worship the physical idol but the absolute present in the idol.