Moshe Halbertal, Avishai Margalit, Idolatry, translated by Naomi Goldblum. Cambridge, Ms.: Harvard University Press, 1992

 Review by José Gabriel Alegría

Idolatry is a remarkable study that traces back the roots of this idea in the Torah i.e. what, for Christianity, constitutes the Old Testament, and the development of this problem within the history of Judaism. However, it poses fundamental questions that would echo throughout the entire history of Abrahamic religions and the ways in which monotheism has historically defined itself in opposition to polytheism.

Several different Hebrew terms were summarily translated as “idol” and “idolatry” via the Greek and Latin translations in the Septuagint and Vulgate bibles. However, the authors propose that the rabbinic expression avodah zara, itself deriving from the biblical expression esh zara, for “strange fire” constitutes the key concept. This occurs in Leviticus when Aaron’s sons offer such a “strange fire” to the Lord, causing his anger, thus perishing on the spot (Leviticus 10:1-5). From the starting point we are faced with the interesting issue that what constitutes idolatry is not necessarily a mistaken belief, but a mistaken form of ritual. (p. 3)

Perhaps the most original aspect of this book is what can be termed the sexual hypothesis for idolatry. “Idolatry is a sexual sin” (p. 11) and in biblical narratives idol worship is conducted because of sexual temptation, or because of greed and fascination with the precious materials that an image is made of, not because of any particular faith or conviction. “But one cannot derive from this any metaphysical standpoint concerning the existence of other gods, as this is not the essence of the sin” (p. 23). Indeed, idols are often mocked by the prophets (especially Isaiah) for being mere empty matter, devoid of any spiritual content or power. However, the question of their evil essence, if there is one, which causes real fear and discomfort, is never fully resolved, and “It is entirely possible that the Bible admits the existence of other gods and merely forbids their worship – a standpoint called ‘monolatry’.” (p. 22).

The issue is therefore not a theological question either, it is a matter of ritual and sexual behavior. This misbehavior is first and foremost sodomy, which invariably goes hand in hand with idolatry. But there also exists a fear of contamination by marriage with women from other groups, as is the case when King Solomon is said to have fallen to the worship of idols because of his many wives from foreign tribes (1 Kings 11).

The fundamental sexual symbolism is laid down when Israel is compared to the wife and God to the husband (p.11) and within this context, the expression that God is jealous (Exodus 34:14) acquires a very direct connotation. When idols are worshipped, the wife is unfaithful to the Husband, and she is punished accordingly every time when that moment comes. The angry Husband even says, “And none shall save her from me” (Hosea 2:12). These idols, in turn, tend to be phallic: “You made yourself phallic images and fornicated with them” (Ezekiel 16:15-26). As such, the whole matter becomes a very odd abusive relationship where both partners are immortal and where divorce is not an option.

This finds expression in the strange narrative of Hosea and his marriage to a prostitute as a way to emulate and expiate the sins of his people (Hosea 1:2, 2:9-11, 14-15).

Another overarching question is “why are linguistic representations of God apparently permitted while visual representations are forbidden?” (p. 2) regarding the many passages that speak, for example, of the Hand of God or implicitly anthropomorphize him. In this regard, the analysis turns to the argumentation constructed by Maimonides, the eminent 12th century Sephardic philosopher. He argued, that, in the Torah, God “speaks in the language of people” (p. 54). That is to say the revelations received by humans are designed by God so that we may, to some extent, grasp their meaning, but they do by no means represent the whole of His divine nature. Idolatry is therefore conceptualized by Maimonides as “an error of substitution” (p. 42) where such figures of speech, the purpose of which is merely didactic and metaphorical, are given visible images and worshipped as ends in themselves. In an exercise of negative theology, the philosopher wants to get rid of what Wittgenstein considered the mythological layer inherent in language in general (p. 57) and in doing this, denies implicitly the possibility of a sacred language.

At this point it is clear that idolatry is by no means exclusive to the pagan other, and it is perfectly possible to commit such sin even when worshipping the one God, if symbols are misunderstood. This constant fear of failing at one’s own religion, even when performed in good faith, developed into a particular itching that has been termed by later authors an “idol anxiety” (Ellenbogen & Tugendhaft, 2011). At the same time, as sharply pointed out in the chapter on “Idolatry and Myth”, not only does the Bible clearly evolve from, and contain, several narratives that would classify as mythical, but additionally myths in polytheist societies are given several layers of interpretation that can also become highly abstract.

Meanwhile, “Philosophical criticism of myth, as it appeared within pagan societies, attributed to the masses a literal interpretation of the myth” and was “a criticism of folk religion. The monotheists, for their polemical purposes, attributed the literal reading to all pagans without distinction. But the pagan elite did not believe the myths literally any more than the monotheists did.” (p. 84) An assertion which is remarkably accurate if we think, for example, about the discomfort that ancient Romans felt about what they considered superstitious beliefs and practices among themselves.

There follows a fascinating discussion on how the pagan myth can be “domesticated” by monotheist societies and given a symbolic value that does not need to enter into conflict with religion, as is the case with the survival of Greco-Roman mythology within Christianity.

The “Chain of Criticism of Religion” is a pattern by which monotheism feels the cyclical need to purge itself inwardly (p. 112) from such foreign pagan elements; but it is also deployed because tradition may fossilize and turn into superstition, or because human imagination and projection, especially artistic creativity, may lead to such errors.

Ultimately, the idol does not need to have a material reality or image. It is possible, according to Francis Bacon, to create idols in the mind, if concepts are misunderstood and personalized (p. 242). If therefore, the distinction between idolatry and proper, philosophical monolatry or Deism, lies in the mind of the worshipper, how can religious authorities ensure that they will ever get rid of it? And the point is that they never actually do. This is where the reasoning goes full circle, and why idolatry can only be defined in terms of orthopraxis and normative sexual behavior in the outside world. As the last chapter “Idolatry and Political Authority” states, at the end of the day it is all about political authority, about who has the right to determine the proper way of conducting religion. And in the context of the Old Testament, the clear goal is that of building a sacralized Monarchy against which “idolatry is rebellion” (p. 192).

The sexual metaphor, although it may seem surprising and bizarre at first glance, would continue to live on in Christian literature and even reach its paroxysm in the Book of Revelation, where the Heavenly Jerusalem is described as the “bride of the Lamb” (i.e. of the Messiah) and the two would in fact unite in mystical marriage (Revelation, 19:7; 21:9).

To my estimation, the ideas in this book are incredibly rich. In the colonial approach to the indigenous Americans and their native religiosity, these would repetitively be accused by their colonizers of being sodomites as well as idolaters, both concepts being still deeply linked in the Renaissance Christian mindset (Goldberg, Sodometries, 2009).

This book does not, however, engage with art history, where the problem of the idol has had its own fascinating, troubled life, for which a good companion volume could be Michael Camille’s The Gothic Idol (Cambridge University Press, 1989) which remains the chief study on the topic in medieval art, and The Idol in the Age of Art (Ashgate Publishing, 2009) which studies this concept in the art of the early modern period. Nevertheless, Idolatry remains a daring and fresh take on the subject that could hardly be contested on a conceptual level, in both the depth of its erudition and the sharpness of its ideas.

Bibliography

• Camille, Michael. The Gothic Idol. Cambridge University Press, 1989.

• Cole, Michael W.; Zorach, Rebecca. The Idol in the Age of Art: Objects, Devotions and the Early Modern World. Routledge, 2009.

• Ellenbogen, Josh; Tugendhaft, Aaron. Idol Anxiety. Stanford University Press, 2011.

• Goldberg, Jonathan. Sodometries: Renaissance Texts, Modern Sexualities. Fordham University Press, 1992.