Avodah Zarah 056

1:
When we began our study of this fourth chapter of Tractate Avodah Zarah I mentioned that the chapter has two topics. The first topic, which is covered by the first seven mishnayot of the chapter, is concerned with statues of the pagan deities. Thus we come now to the seventh and last mishnah of this chapter that deals with idol worship and from mishnah 8 onwards we shall be dealing with another aspect of idolatry.

2:
Our present mishnah is philosophical rather than halakhic. It concerns a conversation between certain sages and others. This conversation took place in the city of Rome, Italy. Actually, we know who the sages are who took part in this conversation, since the members of a delegation to Rome are mentioned in the Gemara [Makkot 24a]:

So, the four sages mentioned in the Gemara are the 'elders' mentioned in our mishnah. The fact that Rabbi Eli'ezer was not included in the delegation suggests that this trip to Rome took place some time after his excommunication; in fact, it can be dated precisely to the year 95 CE. (Those interested in the story of the excommunication of Rabbi Eli'ezer will find it recounted in Avot 127.)

3:
The leaders of the Sanhedrin often had to make the journey to Rome to intercede with the imperial authorities on some matter or other, and this trip was just one such journey. The sages disembarked at the port of Puteoli. Puteoli was a major port on the north side of the bay of Naples, so, indeed, after disembarking the sages still had before them a considerable journey by road on the way to Rome. So great was the metropolis of the world that they could hear the noise coming from the city long before they reached it. This caused great distress to three of the members of the delegation. Only 25 years had passed since the Romans had defeated the Jews and destroyed the Bet Mikdash in Jerusalem, so they agonized over the apparent prosperity of Rome while Jerusalem, "God's Footstool", was still a ruin.

4:
While we can identify the elders mentioned in our mishnah it is not so easy to identify their interlocutors. We can be sure that when the sages visited cities in the diaspora they spent time with the Jews who lived there. It is possible that some of the leaders of the Jews of Rome are asking why it is that God permits idolatry. However, this same episode is also recounted elsewhere in our sources where the details are slightly different:

In a previous mishnah we found Rabban Gamli'el in an altercation with a philosopher, Proclus, and there [AZ 040] we noted that this term was often used as a euphemism for non-Jewish religious leaders.

5:
The course of the conversation is simple. The 'philosophers' ask the sages why their God does not destroy idolatry if it is so abhorrent to Him as they claim. According to other sources Rabban Gamli'el acted as the spokesman of the sages. He responded that God would not destroy the sun and moon, which are so beneficial to the world, just because fools have turned them into objects of worship. We are not told whether the 'philosophers' accepted this response.

Tamar Dar writes:

I am relating to AZ 049 where you ask us to relate to contemporary implications. The association that occurs to me is that of precious gems which can be used for decoration; but there are men and women who attribute to them special supernatural properties, something which can be attributed to idolatry. Of course, we should note that the gems have no such properties; therefore they should be used only for decoration.

I respond:

I must profess ignorance as to magical properties of gems – though, of course, I am sure that there are people who do attribute such things to precious stones.

In AZ 053 Judith May related to the aesthetic aspects of religious art and I responded. Now Jim Feldman adds:

I am a tad surprised that two powerful works by Jewish authors have not been raised in this latest discussion:

Leonard Berstein's "Mass," commissioned by none other than Jackie Kennedy: and Chaim Potok's "My Name Is Asher Lev". The first leads to the obvious question: "What's a good Jewish boy like Leonard Bernstein doing writing by far the best mass of the twentieth century?" I cannot answer that, but I certainly enjoyed the mass just as I have those of Bach, Mozart and Verdi. I am stirred by the power of the music. I am also stirred by the power of Kol Nidre (and Bloch's Shlomo rapsody thereon). Is there not an intellectual connection between the longings that underlie religious belief and the power so many feel in the works created to express or support that belief? The second deals most astonishingly directly with the conflict in a Hasidic community between the compulsion that drives a truly gifted artist and the revulsion to "images." Potok is both a superb author and learned Orthodox rabbi.

I respond:

We can agree to differ about who wrote "by far the best mass of the twentieth century". As the Hebrew proverb says: "There's no point in arguing about taste and smell." I am not aware of any themal connection between the Kol Nidré of Max Bruch and the Schelomo rhapsody of Ernest Bloch. Sadly, I must point out that Chaim Potok is no longer with us: he died in 2002. Incidentally, he was a member of the Rabbincal Assembly (Conservative).