Response to:

"Why Jews are Persecuted - Some Insight from Jewish Writings"

"The Code of the Jews - From the Talmud"

"Why jews Are Persecuted For Their Religion - The Truth Is Stranger Than Fiction!

CLAIM

"We beg Thee, O Lord, inflict Thy wrath on the nations not believing in Thee. Take away, O Lord all hope from them. Destroy all foes of Thy nation."--Synagoga Judaica, p. 212. Minhagen, p. 23. Crach Chaim, 480 Hagah

RESPONSE

This is stated in the Haggada of Passover, it is the passage beginning with "Shefoch Chamatcha". After what the gentiles have done to the Jews through the ages I see no wrong at all in praying to G-d to destroy our assailants. The prayer is not against gentiles in general only against the bloodthirsty barbarous anti-Semites as the prayer carries on the say "because they have destroyed Jacob (the people of Israel) and demolished your sanctuary". This end is of course deliberately excluded from the text they copied for this reason. E.S.

CLAIM

"The teachings of the Talmud stand above all other laws. They are more important than the laws of Moses."- Rabbi Ismael, Rabbi Chambar, et. al.

RESPONSE

The passage as quoted is clearly spurious. Rabbi Ishmael lived far too early to be saying anything about the Talmud (which was not compiled until centuries afterwards), and there is nobody with a name that sounds remotely like Rabbi "Chambar."

There are some statements that speak of the teachings of the sages as being "more beloved" before God than those of the Torah (because of their human component), or requiring more strengthening (i.e., additional stringencies lest people treat them lightly). I am not aware of any statement that formulates it as in the passage. From Usenet message: catamont-2305980759150001@ts003d13.den-co.concentric.net

CLAIM

"The decisions of the Talmud are the words of the living God. Jehovah Himself asks the opinion of the earthly rabbis when there are difficult affairs in heaven." - Rabbi Menachem Commentary on Fifth Book

RESPONSE

Although the sources quoted do not exist it is because of the ignorance of the one who copied it, but the general idea is correct. The Talmud and commentaries state many times that both sides of a dispute between Talmudic sages are actually true they are just stating the two ways of logic reasoning while both concepts originate from G-d's divine wisdom. That is why so to speak G-d learns the Talmud, it means to say he is the source of all the Talmudic reasoning, and he "states" the laws in name of the sages who projected the divine logic of each opinion. By the way the sources quoted are definitely forged as name "Jehova" is never mentioned in any novellae apart from the scriptures as it is strictly forbidden to utter it at all. E.S./edited D.S.M.

CLAIM

"Jehovah Himself studies the Talmud standing, he has such respect for that book."-Tract Mechilla.

RESPONSE

There is no tractate called Mechila and there seems to be no mentioning of G-d studying the Talmud standing. In general whenever you see the word "Jehovah" in a cite it is the best proof it is forged as this name is never ever mentioned in the Talmud or Poskim as it is strictly prohibited to pronounce it. E.S.

CLAIM

"It is more wicked to question the words of the rabbis than that of the Torah."- Michna Sanhedryn 11:3.

RESPONSE

This severity is not relating to all aspects as we see by the punishment given to those who transgress Torah laws is by far more strict. However, as the sages had to enforce their decrees, usually for the benefit of public safety, in a way, one who transgresses these decrees is undermining the words of the sages and violating the whole concept of communal adherence, which will effect public security which is the regular reason for Rabbinical decrees.

CLAIM

"It is forbidden to disclose the secrets of the law. He who would do it would be as guilty as though he destroyed the whole world." - Jektut Chadasz, 171, 3.

RESPONSE

I see nothing wrong with this statement although the source again does not make sense. On the contrary, look at this anti-Semite he is misunderstanding the Jewish sources and using them as a warrant for genocide.

The laws of the Torah were given to the Jews, we are proud of our heritage and do not wish anyone to learn it. It is not true that anyone transgressing this prohibition is to be punished (it does not say so anywhere). Until 35 years ago Chinese martial arts were kept by the Masters as a secret, they would not teach it to a white man, what is wrong with this? I wonder if they condemn them also for it? (They are most probably scared.) E.S.

CLAIM

"Every goy who studies the Talmud and every Jew who who helps him in it, ought to die." - Sanhedryn, 59a, Aboda Zora 8-6, Szagiga

RESPONSE

The quote from Sanhedrin does say that a gentile may not study torah but the other sources do not exist. There is no practical death penalty for this offense the penalty stated is only a term of speech stated in order to indicate the severity of the sin. A gentile may study the laws regarding the 7 Noahide commandments as stated ibid. and he will merit great everlasting bliss for this, however he may not study the laws of Judaism. The basic reason for prohibiting the study of Torah is because it is a special covenant between G-d and his chosen people, any one who is not affiliated with the chosen people is regarded a thief. Rashi ibid. E.S.

CLAIM

"To communicate anything to a goy about our religious relations would be equal to the killing of all Jews, for if they knew what we teach about them they would kill us openly." - Libbre David 37.

RESPONSE

Total balderdash, there is no such statement at all, and there is no such book. E.S.

CLAIM

"If a Jew be called upon to explain any part of the rabbinic books, he ought to give only a false explanation. Who ever will violate this order shall be put to death." Libbre David 37.

RESPONSE

As explained above, there is no such book.

CLAIM

"A Jew should and must make a false oath when the goyim asks if our books contain anything against them."-Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17.

RESPONSE

This is a forgery. The word "Sehelot Uteshubot" means Talmudic responsa, there is no such book at all. Besides, there is nothing in the Torah which may cause disturbance to a gentile. What can have been written is that one may take an oath that there is nothing against gentiles in Jewish law as it is a true oath. E.S.

CLAIM

"The Jews are human beings , but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts."-Baba Mecia 114, 6 [i.e.: 114b].

RESPONSE

Apparently a deliberate mistranslation. The passage deals with the technical rules of corpse-impurity which, according to the author of this text, apply to Jews and not to gentiles. In this connection Ezekiel 34:31 is cited: "And ye My sheep [referring to Israel], the sheep of My pasture, are _men [Hebrew: "adam"]_, and I am your God, saith the Lord God." From a careful midrashic reading of this Biblical verse, Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai deduced "Only "ye" [i.e., Israel, not other nations] are designated "adam," in the sense that only Jewish corpses and graves generate impurity according to Numbers 19:14: "This is the law: when a _man ['adam']_ dieth in a tent, every one that cometh into the tent...shall be unclean seven days..." The passage is legal and exegetical, not theological. If anything, it seems to put Jews on a lower footing than non-Jews. Typically, the words "but beasts" were added on by whoever put this list together. They do not appear in the original. From Usenet message: catamont-2305980759150001@ts003d13.den-co.concentric.net

CLAIM

"When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves." - Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D.

RESPONSE

There is no such source. However, we find a talmudic statement relating to the spiritual afterlife allegorically that there will be no need for toil in the spiritual world, as one who has a large amount of slaves does not need to toil, thus so to speak angels will execute our errands. Another Talmudic statement which might have incited the ignoramus is that in the messianic times every Jew will have 2800 disciples from among the nations who will wish to learn from him the ways of the Torah. E.S.

CLAIM

"Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and commanded to serve the Jew day and night." - Midrasch Talpioth, p225-L.

RESPONSE

I was unable to check this reference in my extensive Judaica library. The book "Midrash Talpiyyot" is appparently an obscure eighteenth-century Kabbalistic work that is little known and carries no authority whatsoever. Even if the citation were correct (which seems doubtful in light of the other examples on this list, and the fact that Jews never employ the designation "Jehovah"), it is hard to imagine what could be proven from it about Judaism or the Talmud. From Usenet message catamont-2305980759150001@ts003d13.den-co.concentric.net

CLAIM

As soon as the King Messiah will declare himself, He will destroy Rome and make a wilderness of it. Thorns and weeds will grow in the Pope's palace.

Then He will start a merciless war on non-Jews and will overpower them. He will slay them in masses, kill their kings and lay waste the whole Roman land. He will say to the Jews: 'I am the King Messiah for whom you have been waiting. Take the Silver and Gold from the Goyim.'" - Josiah 60, 6 Rabbi Abarbanel to Daniel 7, 13.

RESPONSE

The Abarbanel (circa 1440 - 1510) does not relate to Rome rather than to the oppressors of the Jewish nation who will wish to conduct a genocide before the revelation of the Messiah. E.S.

CLAIM

"A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."- Aboda Sarah 37a.

RESPONSE

Apparently a deliberate misquote. The observation is a technical, physiological one, regarding the impurities related to genital "flows" as outlined in Leviticus chapter 15. The Talmudic source argues that since the tearing of the hymen at that age would be permanent (as distinct from a younger girl whose hymen the rabbis believed would grow back), she is considered to have reached a state of physical development that her discharges would be included under the category of impure flows according to the Biblical purity laws. (The same rule, by the way, would apply to a Jewish girl). This is of course not a permission to "violate" the girl, merely a legal definition of her age. From Usenet message catamont-2305980759150001@ts003d13.den-co.concentric.net

CLAIM

"A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl." - Gad. Shas. 2:2.

RESPONSE

No such source at all, on the contrary any sexual contact with a gentile woman is strictly prohibited even without marriage, see Talmud Sanhedrin 82a and Avoda Zarah 36b E.S.

CLAIM

"A Jew may do to a non-Jewess what he can do. He may treat her as he treats a piece of meat." - Hadarine, 20, B; Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348.

RESPONSE

This is of course poppycock, there is no such source called Hadarine, while the chapter in Choshen Mishpat 348:2 states clearly that one may not steal from a gentile exactly as one may not steal from a fellow Jew. E.S.

CLAIM

"A Jew may misuse the non-Jewess in her state of unbelief." - Maimonides, Jak. Chasaka 2:2.

RESPONSE

This too is a lie, there is no book in the Rambam called Jak. and the word Chazaka - legal claim - has nothing to do with this

CLAIM

"If a goy kills a goy or a Jew he is responsible; but if a Jew kills a goy he is not responsible." - Tosefta. Aboda Zara 8, 5.

RESPONSE

The Tosefta relates to the death penalty carried out by a gentile court, when the murderer is a Jew he has to be killed by a Jewish court. Besides, the usual famous answer to this question is that all this relates to the ancient pagan worshipers and not to present day gentiles. E.S.

CLAIM

"It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces."- Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 388.

RESPONSE

What on earth is wrong with this? A denunciator is one who will cause a fellow Jew harm that he does not deserve. The gentiles have already forgotten but less that a century ago if a Jew was caught breaking a trivial law it would caused an atrocity and/or massacre throughout the country, this is the reason for the prohibition of denouncing. Besides this law is not accepted practically see Remah ibid 10. E.S.

CLAIM

"Thou shalt not do injury to thy neighbor (Bible), but it is not said, 'Thou shalt not do injury to a goy.' " - Mishna Sanhedryn 57.

RESPONSE

This is a lie, one may not injure a gentile, there is not such verse in the Bible and no such statement in the Talmud or Mishna. (There is no Mishna in (There is no Mishna in Sanhedrin 57.)

CLAIM

"When you go to war do not go as the first, but as the last, so that you may return as the first. Five things has Kanaan recommended to his sons: 'Love each other, love the robbery, hate your masters and never tell the truth.' " - Pesachim F. 113B

RESPONSE

This has nothing to do with Jews, Kanaan was a gentile he was the son of Noah, these are truly the ways of the anti-Semitic gentiles as we can perceive in history. E.S.

CLAIM

"A Jew is permitted to rape, cheat and perjure himself; but he must take care that he is not found out, so that Israel may not suffer." - Schulchan Aruch, Jore Dia.

RESPONSE

This too is a lie, there is no such statement and no such source. E.S.

CLAIM

"A Jew may rob a goy-that is, he may cheat him in a bill, if unlikely to be perceived by him." - Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348.

RESPONSE

This law regards something which according to Jewish law is considered cheating but is permitted according to gentile law. A Jew does not have to act towards a gentile in a different way than the gentile legislature requires from him. Besides, practically the ruling is to prohibit this too. E.S.

CLAIM

"If a goy wants a Jew to stand witness against a Jew in a court of law, and if the Jew could give fair evidence, he is forbidden to do it; but if a Jew wants a Jew to be a witness in a similar case against a goy, he may do it." - Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 28, Art. 3 and 4

RESPONSE

This law was also wrongly understood. According to Jewish law one may not charge a person to pay money in a law court because of the testimony of one witness, but two witnesses are needed. So the Shulchan Aruch states that in a place were the gentile legislature will charge someone to pay because of the testimony of one witness, a Jew may not go and be the witness to charge a fellow Jew as two witnesses are needed. But to charge a gentile he is permitted to attend the court as we are dealing with a scenario were gentiles agree to the concept of accepting one witness alone. E.S.

CLAIM

"Those who do not confess the Torah and the Prophets must be killed. Who has the power to kill them, let them kill them openly with the sword. If not, let them use artifices, till they are done away with." - Schulchan Aruch. Choszen Hamiszapt 425.5.

RESPONSE

This law applies to killing Jewish heretics, the following line in this passage is that this law does not apply to anyone non Jewish and it is forbidden to harm any gentile, on no account at all. The Jewish heretics ibid. are only people which are a potential cause of harm and trouble to the nation. E.S.

CLAIM

"All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which, consequently, is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples. An orthodox Jew is not bound to observe principles of morality towards people of other tribes. He may act contrary to morality, if profitable to himself or to Jews in general." - Schulchan Aruch. Choszen Hamiszpat 348.

RESPONSE

This is a famous lie. On the contrary, in the source cited the only article dealing with gentiles is #2 which states clearly that there is no difference between the prohibition of stealing from a Jew or from a non-Jew, both are strictly prohibited. E.S.

CLAIM

"Should a Jew inform the goyish authorities that another Jew has much money, and the other will suffer a loss through it, he must give him remuneration." - Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 388.

RESPONSE

The Halacha [Jewish Law -DSM] is dealing with envious gentile tyrants who always loved stealing Jewish money and used to find pretexts for leveling new taxes on certain rich Jews. In such a case if a fellow Jew went and notified the "authorities" about someone that he is rich, and consequently this rich person was wronged by the tyrant he will have to pay his losses. E.S.

CLAIM

"How to interpret the word 'robbery.' A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take women slaves, etc., from a goy or a Jew. But a Jew is not forbidden to do all this to a goy."- Tosefta, Abda Zara VIII, 5.

RESPONSE

This Tosefta is dealing with the laws which have to be enforced by gentile law courts according to the Noahide law. It only says that a Jew has can't be judged and punished by a gentile court but by a Jewish court even though his offense was against a gentile. E.S.

[The Tosefot comprise of commentary on the Talmud made by various Rabbis after the completion of the Talmud and after the time of Rashi. "Tosefot" simply means "additions" or "supplements". The Tosefot use the same methods of dialectical debate and style as does the Talmud. David S. Maddison

CLAIM

"On the house of the goy one looks as on the fold of cattle." - Tosefta, Erubin VII, 1.

RESPONSE

The true source is ibid. V 15. An Eiruv is a imaginary wall set by a certain procedure, permitting one to carry on Shabbat in the places included in the Eiruv. A barn. cattle fold, storage house etc. have a certain Halachic status [Halacha = Jewish Law DSM] regarding carrying on Shabbat as they are not completely included in the Eiruv. A "fold of cattle" is a Halachic term used for all houses in the district not inhabited or inhabited by anyone who did not take part in the Eiruv Jew or non-Jew alike, which have not participated in the Eiruv and have the Halachic status termed as "A cattle fold". E.S.

[Jews are not permitted to carry things outside of their homes on the Sabbath. An "eruv" or "eiruv" can be constructed to effectively extend the limits of the home to include other areas.] David S. Maddison

CLAIM

"All vows, oaths, promises, engagements, and swearing, which, beginning this very day or reconciliation till the next day of reconciliation, we intend to vow, promise, swear, and bind ourselves to fulfill, we repent beforehand; let them be illegalized, acquitted, annihilated, abolished, valueless, unimportant. Our vows shall be no vows, and our oaths no oaths at all." - Schulchan Aruch, Edit. I, 136. (The Jewish Kol Nidre ["All Vows"] Oath has been set to a morbid Jewish music, and is often heard on the radio.

It is sung as a chant at each Yom Kippur [Jewish New Year] service [September17].)

RESPONSE

This too is a famous misunderstanding as it states clearly that the annulment of vows applies only to personal vows i.e. "I will not eat apples any more" etc. The Halacha (ibid.) states explicitly that they do not apply to business vows, vows in a court of law, or any other vow concerning a second or third party. E.S.

Apart from the above, a further error of fact is that Yom Kippur is not the Jewish New Year, nor does it occur on the same date every year. David S. Maddison

CLAIM

"Everything a Jew needs for his church ritual no goy (gentile DSM) is permitted to manufacture, but only a Jew, because this must be manufactured by human beings and the Jew is not permitted to consider the goyim as human beings." - Schulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 14, 20, 32, 33, 39. Talmud Jebomoth 61.

RESPONSE

These sources relate to the law stating that anyone who is not obligated to keep a certain religious law may not produce the ritual article, i.e. a Jewish woman or Jewish child may not spin Tzitzis, or write Teffillin etc. this includes gentiles in most circumstances as they are not obligated to perform these deeds. Nevertheless, this law applies only to certain ritual articles not too the vast majority which may be manufactured by gentiles, i.e. a gentile may sew the Tzitzis garment. A gentile may even spin Tzitzith thread if a Jew is present to verify that the gentile had in mind to spin it for the ritual use see ibid, chapter 11. A gentile may build a synagogue, exterior and interior, he may build the Holy Ark, the Bima, the Torah scoll dressing etc. E.S.

CLAIM

"A Jewish mid-wife is not only permitted but she is compelled to help a Jewish mother on Saturday (Jewish Sabbath) and when so doing to do anything which otherwise would desecrate the Saturday. But it is forbidden to help a non-Jewish woman even if it should be possible to help her without desecrating the Saturday, because she is to be considered only as an animal."- Schulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 330.

RESPONSE

On the contrary it states clearly that the Shabbat may be desecrated to help a non-Jewish woman giving birth. E.S.

CLAIM

"At the time of the Cholhamoed the transaction of any kind of business is forbidden. But it is permitted to cheat a goy, because cheating of goyim at any time pleases the Lord."- Chulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 539.

RESPONSE

Nothing of the sort is found there. The passage deals with various types of business transactions that are forbidden or permissible on the "intermediate days" of festivals. Some of the references are to transactions with gentiles (who are not bound by the prohibitions); e.g., it is permitted to collect a debt from a gentile on the half-holidays. Nowhere does it say anything about cheating. From Usenet message catamont-2305980759150001@ts003d13.den-co.concentric.net

CLAIM

"The Jews are strictly forbidden to cheat their brothers and it is considered cheating already if one-sixth of the value has been taken away from him. Whoever has cheated his brother has to return it to him. Naturally all that only holds the Jew, to cheat a goy he is permitted and he is not permitted to return to him what he cheated him out of. Because the Bible says: 'Thou shalt not cheat thy next brother,' but the non-Jews are not our brethren, but as mentioned above, worse than dogs." - Aruch Choszen Hamiszpat 227.

RESPONSE

There is no such statement in the Bible or anywhere else. A Jew may not cheat a non-Jew exactly as he may not cheat a Jew see ibid. 348:2. E.S.