Thursday, July 21, 2011

To Serve and to Praise

In the fifth of Rambam's thirteen principles of faith, Rambam asserts that Hashem is the only One to Whom it is proper to serve and to praise.  (I'm talking about the real Rambam, not the 13 ani maamins in the siddur alleged to be based on Rambam)  Does this mean that it is forbidden to praise people?  Does it mean that it is forbidden to serve people?  Is there a difference between serving someone by bowing down to him and serving him a cup of coffee?  If so, what is the difference?

4 comments:

  1. We have actual commands to serve people in this world, such as your parents, teachers, talmidei chachamim, so it obviously is not actually forbidden. And while we sometimes couch this things in terms even similar to serving God (Pirkei Avos, the fear of your teacher should be like the fear of heaven), there is a distinction.

    R. Soloveitchik draws a line between the relative reliance on things/people/etc., which is permitted, and the absolute reliance which must be reserved for God. He even says that having absolute reliance on anything other than God is idolatry. I think we can probably apply this same relative vs. absolute distinction to service/fear/respect/praise also.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What does it mean to absolutely serve/fear/respect/praise? How would your distinction manifest itself in these areas?

    ReplyDelete
  3. How does this sound: if your father tells you not to do a mitzvah or to do an aveirah, you ignore him because the kavod you owe Hashem supercedes the kavod you owe your father. Absolute service/fear/respect/praise can't be superceded, and can demand much more of you than relative versions. Service to God can make you sacrifice your only son; service to your rebbi better not involve that.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That is a very logical interpretation, but I think it is inconsistent with the language of Rambam; Rambam writes that Hashem is the only One that it is proper to praise, not that He is the only One that it is proper to praise "absolutely." Possible, but, in my opinion, a bit strained.

    ReplyDelete