The Talmud (long post is long)

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by KundaliniRising, Oct 30, 2009.

  1. #1 KundaliniRising, Oct 30, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 30, 2009
    I've read some pretty terrible things about the Talmud concerning what Jewish people think about gentiles (non-jewish people) and I half believed it, but like any logical free thinker, seeing that anytime I typed the chapter quoted into google that the majority of the sites quoting them were white supremacy sites, I just gave the jewish people the benefit of the doubt that since the talmud is a hebrew book, and you won't find it in a library, and the copy of the complete talmud I found on amazon was over 2000 dollars, and all the other books are "the essential teachings of the talmud", that perhaps white supremacists had simply made the shit up, since most people aren't gonna drop 2 grand and learn hebrew just to further their bigotry. I also figured that any online translation of the Talmud would certainly have these things edited out, and according to this, I was right in my assumption

    "The response of the orthodox rabbis to documentation regarding the racism and hatred in their sacred texts is simply to brazenly lie, in keeping with the Talmud's Baba Kamma 113a which states that Jews may use lies ("subterfuge") to circumvent a Gentile.


    The Simon Wiesenthal Center, a multi-million dollar rabbinical propaganda center dispatched Rabbi Daniel Landes in 1995 to deny that the Talmud dehumanizes non-Jews. "This is utter rot," he said. His proof? Why, his word, of course."

    But today I searched through an online version of the "Babylonian Talmud" and to my suprise, I found these teachings to be true.

    This just further enforces my belief that the main religions are indeed a "conspiracy" to strip the gentiles of spiritual knowledge, and get them to act as slaves and merely exist, instead of doing what we're meant to, which is advance ourselves spiritually, and learn all we can and advance in science (something the church punished by death).

    Now, a couple people on here have called me an anti-semite (they're jewish, no gentiles have ever called me a racist, because i'm not), and I'm sure they'll call me one again for posting a few things you can find in the Babylonian Talmud, but that's not the point at all. I dont think that every jewish person is conspiring against the world to enslave us, that every Jewish person has these beliefs, or hate all jews by any means, I could really give a fuck less what race you are as long as your a good person. I do however have a problem with corrupt people in power who wish to enslave humanity, such as government officials, which also includes "gentiles" who have the same agenda. It makes sense to me that after centuries of oppression and slavery, that the rabbi's who wrote the Talmud would be pretty pissed at gentile people for shitting in their cheerios for so long, and want to turn the tides and oppress/enslave the people whove done it to them.

    So, now that that's out of the way, I'm going to post some teachings I actually verified with the online version of the babylonian talmud here so all of you can see the kind of things you'll find if you ever actually read the religous texts of the 3 main religions. Unfortunately the way the talmud is setup, it's not like the bible where you can go mathew 13:2 and cut right to the verse, you gotta read the whole friggin thing to find it, but at least it's somewhat indexed.

    The ones that don't name a section are from the same section posted above them. *oh by the way, heathen/cuthean mean gentile, ha, what a good start to begin with, calling gentiles heathens.

    Sanhedrin 57a- Now is a heathen executed for robbery? Has it not been taught: 'With respect to robbery — if one stole or robbed30 or [seized] a beautiful woman,31 or [committed] similar offences,32 if [these were perpetrated] by one Cuthean33 against another, [the theft, etc.] must not be kept, and likewise [the theft] of an Israelite by a Cuthean, but that of a Cuthean by an Israelite may be retained'

    This is saying it is fine for a jew to steal from a gentile

    But where a penalty is incurred, it is explicitly stated, for the commencing clause teaches: 'For murder, whether of a Cuthean by a Cuthean, or of an Israelite by a Cuthean, punishment is incurred; but of a Cuthean by an Israelite, there is no death penalty'

    This says if a gentile kills a gentile, or a gentile kills a jew, the punishment is death, but if a jew kills a gentile, well that's just fine and dandy

    It applies to the withholding of a labourer's wage.44 One Cuthean from another, or a Cuthean from an Israelite is forbidden, but an Israelite from a Cuthean is permitted

    This says, it's ok for a jew not to pay a gentile for his work.

    Sanhedrin 58b R. Hanina said: If a heathen smites a Jew, he is worthy of death,21 for it is written, And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian

    Ifyou punch a jew in the face, he should be allowed to kill you (ha, eye for an eye.. right) and that verse about killing the Egyptian, thats something Moses did in the book of exodus, he then proceeded to bury the egyptians corpse in the sand.

    Bab Kamma 113a 'Where a suit arises between an Israelite and a heathen, if you can justify the former according to the laws of Israel, justify him and say: 'This is our law'; so also if you can justify him by the laws of the heathens justify him and say [to the other party:] 'This is your law'; but if this can not be done, we use subterfuges to circumvent him.

    a subterfuge is a lie, this means it is ok for a Jew to lie to a gentile

    These are just a few, if you'd like to verify these yourself, be my guest, alot of them are highlighted on the website in an aqua color.

    Here is where you can read the Babylonian Talmud
    Jews' College (Soncino) Babylonian Talmud

    Heres a list of the horrible things the Talmud says. I've cut out things that talk shit on christianity, and left only parts regarding Gentiles as being lesser beings than the jews, as well as some just downright fucked up teachings. I've italicized some that I think are worthy of notice.

    Some Teachings of the Jewish Talmud

    Where a Jew Should Do Evil
    [​IMG]
    Moed Kattan 17a: If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.
    Penalty for Disobeying Rabbis
    Erubin 21b. Whosoever disobeys the rabbis deserves death and will be punished by being boiled in hot excrement in hell.
    Hitting a Jew is the same as hitting God
    Sanhedrin 58b. If a heathen (gentile) hits a Jew, the gentile must be killed.
    O.K. to Cheat Non-Jews
    Sanhedrin 57a . A Jew need not pay a gentile ("Cuthean") the wages owed him for work.
    Jews Have Superior Legal Status
    Baba Kamma 37b. "If an ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite there is no liability; but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite...the payment is to be in full."
    Jews May Steal from Non-Jews
    Baba Mezia 24a . If a Jew finds an object lost by a gentile ("heathen") it does not have to be returned. (Affirmed also in Baba Kamma 113b). Sanhedrin 76a. God will not spare a Jew who "marries his daughter to an old man or takes a wife for his infant son or returns a lost article to a Cuthean..."
    Jews May Rob and Kill Non-Jews
    Sanhedrin 57a . When a Jew murders a gentile ("Cuthean"), there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may keep.
    Baba Kamma 37b. The gentiles are outside the protection of the law and God has "exposed their money to Israel."
    Jews May Lie to Non-Jews
    Baba Kamma 113a. Jews may use lies ("subterfuges") to circumvent a Gentile.
    Non-Jewish Children are Sub-Human
    Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.
    Abodah Zarah 36b. Gentile girls are in a state of niddah (filth) from birth.
    Abodah Zarah 22a-22b . Gentiles prefer sex with cows.

    Sick and Insane Teachings of the Talmud
    Gittin 69a . To heal his flesh a Jew should take dust that lies within the shadow of an outdoor toilet, mix with honey and eat it.
    Shabbath 41a. The law regulating the rule for how to urinate in a holy way is given.
    Yebamoth 63a. States that Adam had sexual intercourse with all the animals in the Garden of Eden.
    Yebamoth 63a. Declares that agriculture is the lowest of occupations.
    Sanhedrin 55b. A Jew may marry a three year old girl (specifically, three years "and a day" old).
    Sanhedrin 54b. A Jew may have sex with a child as long as the child is less than nine years old.
    Kethuboth 11b. "When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing."
    Yebamoth 59b. A woman who had intercourse with a beast is eligible to marry a Jewish priest. A woman who has sex with a demon is also eligible to marry a Jewish priest.
    Abodah Zarah 17a. States that there is not a whore in the world that the Talmudic sage Rabbi Eleazar has not had sex with.On one of his whorehouse romps, Rabbi Eleazar leanred that there was one particular prostitute residing in a whorehouse near the sea, who would receive a bag of money for her services. He took a bag of money and went to her, crossing seven rivers to do so. During their intercourse the prostitute farted. After this the whore told Rabbi Eleazar: "Just as this gas will never return to my anus, Rabbi Eleazar will never get to heaven."
    Hagigah 27a. States that no rabbi can ever go to hell.
    Baba Mezia 59b. A rabbi debates God and defeats Him. God admits the rabbi won the debate.
    Gittin 70a. The Rabbis taught: "On coming from a privy (outdoor toilet) a man should not have sexual intercourse till he has waited long enough to walk half a mile, because the demon of the privy is with him for that time; if he does, his children will be epileptic."
    Gittin 69b. To heal the disease of pleurisy ("catarrh") a Jew should "take the excrement of a white dog and knead it with balsam, but if he can possibly avoid it he should not eat the dog's excrement as it loosens the limbs."
    Pesahim 111a. It is forbidden for dogs, women or palm trees to pass between two men, nor may others walk between dogs, women or palm trees. Special dangers are involved if the women are menstruating or sitting at a crossroads.
    Menahoth 43b-44a. A Jewish man is obligated to say the following prayer every day: Thank you God for not making me a gentile, a woman or a slave.
    Tall Tales of a Roman Holocaust
    Here are two early "Holocaust" tales from the Talmud: Gittin 57b. Claims that four billion Jews were killed by the Romans in the city of Bethar. Gittin 58a claims that 16 million Jewish children were wrapped in scrolls and burned alive by the Romans. (Ancient demography indicates that there were not 16 million Jews in the entire world at that time, much less 16 million Jewish children or four billion Jews).


    Genocide Advocated by the Talmud
    Minor Tractates. Soferim 15, Rule 10. This is the saying of Rabbi Simon ben Yohai: Tob shebe goyyim harog ("Even the best of the gentiles should all be killed").
    This passage is from the original Hebrew of the Babylonian Talmud as quoted by the 1907 Jewish Encyclopedia, published by Funk and Wagnalls and compiled by Isidore Singer, under the entry, "Gentile," (p. 617).
    This original Talmud passage has been concealed in translation. The Jewish Encyclopedia states that, "...in the various versions the reading has been altered, 'The best among the Egyptians' being generally substituted." In the Soncino version: "the best of the heathens" (Minor Tractates, Soferim 41a-b].
    Israelis annually take part in a national pilgrimage to the grave of Simon ben Yohai, to honor this rabbi who advocated the extermination of non-Jews. (Jewish Press, June 9, 1989, p. 56B).
    On Purim, Feb. 25, 1994, Israeli army officer Baruch Goldstein, an orthodox Jew from Brooklyn, massacred 40 Palestinian civilians, including children, while they knelt in prayer in a mosque. Goldstein was a disciple of the late Brooklyn Rabbi Meir Kahane, who told CBS News that his teaching that Arabs are "dogs" is derived "from the Talmud." (CBS 60 Minutes, "Kahane").
    University of Jerusalem Prof. Ehud Sprinzak described Kahane and Goldstein's philosophy: "They believe it's God's will that they commit violence against goyim, a Hebrew term for non-Jews." (NY Daily News, Feb. 26, 1994, p. 5).
    Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg declared, "We have to recognize that Jewish blood and the blood of a goy are not the same thing." (NY Times, June 6, 1989, p.5).
    Rabbi Yaacov Perrin said, "One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail." (NY Daily News, Feb. 28, 1994, p.6).


    (This would explain the constant assault on Palestine by Israel)


    Talmudic Doctrine: Non-Jews are not Human
    The Talmud specifically defines all who are not Jews as non-human animals, and specifically dehumanizes Gentiles as not being descendants of Adam. Here are some of the Talmud passages which relate to this topic.
    Kerithoth 6b: Uses of Oil of Anointing. "Our Rabbis have taught: He who pours the oil of anointing over cattle or vessels is not guilty; if over gentiles (goyim) or the dead, he is not guilty. The law relating to cattle and vessels is right, for it is written: "Upon the flesh of man (Adam), shall it not be poured (Exodus 30:32]); and cattle and vessels are not man (Adam).
    "Also with regard to the dead, [it is plausible] that he is exempt, since after death one is called corpse and not a man (Adam). But why is one exempt in the case of gentiles (goyim); are they not in the category of man (Adam)? No, it is written: 'And ye my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, are man" (Adam); [Ezekiel 34:31]: Ye are called man (Adam) but gentiles (goyim) are not called man (Adam)."
    In the preceding passage, the rabbis are discussing the portion of the Mosaic law which forbids applying the holy oil to men.
    The Talmud states that it is not a sin to apply the holy oil to Gentiles, because Gentiles are not human beings (i.e. are not of Adam).
    Another example from tractate Yebamoth 61a: "It was taught: And so did R. Simeon ben Yohai state (61a) that the graves of gentiles (goyim) do not impart levitical uncleanness by an ohel [standing or bending over a grave], for it is said, 'And ye my sheep the sheep of my pasture, are men (Adam), [Ezekiel 34:31]; you are called men (Adam) but the idolaters are not called men (Adam)."
    The Old Testament Mosaic law states that touching a human corpse or the grave of a human imparts uncleanness to those who touch it. But the Talmud teaches that if a Jew touches the grave of a Gentile, the Jew is not rendered unclean, since Gentiles are not human (not of Adam).
    From Baba Mezia 114b: ""A Jewish priest was standing in a graveyard. When asked why he was standing there in apparent violation of the Mosaic law, he replied that it was permissible, since the law only prohibits Jews from coming into contact with the graves of humans (Adamites), and he was standing in a gentile graveyard. For it has been taught by Rabbi Simon ben Yohai: 'The graves of gentiles [goyim] do not defile. For it is written, 'And ye my flock, the flock of my pastures, are men (Adam)' (Ezekiel 34:31); only ye are designated men (Adam)."
    Ezekiel 34:31 is the alleged Biblical proof text repeatedly cited in the preceding three Talmud passages. But Ezekiel 34:31 does not in fact support the Talmudic notion that only Israelites are human. What these rabbinical, anti-Gentile racists and ideologues have done in asserting the preceding absurdities about Gentiles is distort an Old Testament passage in order to justify their bigotry.
    In Berakoth 58a the Talmud uses Ezekiel 23:20 as proof of the sub-human status of gentiles. It also teaches that anyone (even a Jewish man) who reveals this Talmudic teaching about non-Jews deserves death, since revealing it makes Gentiles wrathful and causes the repression of Judaism.
    The Talmudic citation of this scripture from Ezekiel as a "proof-text" is specious, since the passage does not prove that Gentiles are animals. The passage from Ezekiel only says that some Egyptians had large genital organs and copious emissions. This does not in any way prove or even connote that the Egyptians being referred to in the Bible were considered animals. Once again, the Talmud has falsified the Bible by means of distorted interpretation.
    Other Talmud passages which expound on Ezekiel 23:20 in this racist fashion are: Arakin 19b, Berakoth 25b, Niddah 45a, Shabbath 150a, Yebamoth 98a. Moreover, the original text of Sanhedrin 37a applies God's approval only to the saving of Jewish lives (cf. the Hesronot Ha-shas, Cracow, 1894).










    If you wish to read all of the atrocities in the talmud, here is the link to the complete site.




    Truth About the Talmud: Judaism's Holiest Book
     
  2. The first line of your post kind of turned me away to what you have to say being that the Talmud is not the most holy book of the Jews. Maybe for some small sects of Judaism it is, but by most Jews, the Hebrew Bible still is the holiest book. Why wouldn't it be? According to Judaism, it was written by god while the Talmud was written by men. And according to me, those men are the corrupt men who had to fight the corrupt men who were creating Christianity at the time.
     
  3. #3 KundaliniRising, Oct 30, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 30, 2009
    Well I'm not Jewish so I really wouldn't know what their most holy book is, but that's what I read so I posted it. The bible isn't holy anyway, other than people think it was written by god, but it was indeed written by man as well, not god. And the "corrupt men" who wrote the bible weren't gentile, the bible is about Jewish prophets and apostles, the gentiles had their own religions that were stripped from them. They couldn't even make up their own story, they had to steal everything (and according to the Talmud, its all good to steal the origional stories of the gentiles as your own and then claim that your gods chosen people, when it wasn't even jewish people in the actual stories)

    There I removed it for you, although the first line of my post not being correct is a sorry excuse to avoid responding to the rest of the post, which is backed up by the talmud itself.
     
  4. Well I did kinda respond to the rest of your post by saying I think the men who wrote the Talmud were corrupt. It was written during the first few centuries CE which is when Christianity was starting to popularize. They had to compete with the "gentiles."
     
  5. The Talmud does not record what contemporary Jews believe about gentiles any more than the Bible tells you what the weather is currently like in Greece. It is a historical document that records attitudes and ideologies that were operative when it was created. The Jewish literary tradition consists of generations and generations of commentaries and opinions written about the source materials, in attempts to make these teachings livable in the contemporary world to the greatest extent possible. Most of the Talmud is not "written by God" in Jewish tradition; it is the words of learned rabbis who were attempting to clarify or explain elements of the Jewish law (keep in mind that we're talking about rules that were used to govern a bronze-age tribal kingdom here, as well as the inspiration for a modern religion).

    Learning the "Truth" about what Jews currently believe about social interactions with non-Jews from the Talmud is like someone saying they know how you feel about black people because they read your great-grandfather's diary.

    If you want to know how modern Jews feel about non-Jews, don't go looking for it in ancient books. Ask a living person. What is in the books is not how they "really" feel that they are concealing from you; what is in the books is how people who have been dead for thousands of years thought about other people who have been dead for thousands of years.
     
  6. Like I said in my post above, I know that modern Jews don't all think about gentiles like this, but it doesn't change the fact that the talmud teaches these things. Christians don't kill their children for disobeying god anymore, but it's still in the bible.
     
  7. Alright, so what are you trying to prove? The Talmud, like almost all other religious texts have parts with bad teachings by today's standards. A few people still hold by those teachings while most people don't. Religious texts needed these things to scare the people of the time so they join their religion and don't leave. 99% of people nowadays don't hold by it anymore so whats the difference?
     
  8. What do you mean back then? The foundation of judeochristianity is still to this day fear of going to hell.

    I'm not trying to prove anything, all I'm doing it pointing out the fact that these are the things these religous texts teach when you get down to what judaism or christianity truly is, regardless of how people like to make up their own belief's. The fact is these books are guidelines on how to think and live, even if people no longer listen to them, but there are still religous radicals who take every word from their holy documents as undeniable fact of how god wants them to think/life.
     

  9. Jews don't believe in Hell, generally speaking. Judaism and Christianity are very, very different- it is a mistake to lump them together just because one originated with the other.


    Why do you think what is in these books is what Judaism and Christianity "really is"?
     

  10. Your correct as far as hell, I wasn't really thinking, the word "judeochristianity" comes out of my fingers so often that I just typed it subconsciously.


    And if holy texts aren't the basis for what religions are, then wtf is?
     
  11. Basis, sure. But what that basis turns into when people get hold of it? Unpredictable. So the Talmud says some ugly things about gentiles. What does that mean? The gentiles that were being written about in the Tanakh and the Torah were local non-Jewish tribal peoples that the Jews were engaged in ongoing conflict with over control of land and resources. Modern attitudes towards gentiles are very different from what is in these books, because the contemporary situation of the Jewish people is very different.

    I see there being a big difference between saying something is the basis for a religion (as in the inspiration, a historical source, etc.) and saying that something is what they 'really' are. It is not that the contemporary attitudes are a false front that is put over the "real" attitude which is found in their texts.

    When you get into discussions about what a religion "really is", you're getting into a very shaky set of ground. Scholars of religion and the religious themselves debate endlessly about what constitutes the 'essence' of a religion, or if a faith can be said to have one. There are several positions that were once popular, and are still often found in the popular press and older books on religion, but which modern philosophers and scholars tend to see as having been very limited and flawed.

    -"Essentialism", the idea that there is some particular set of practices or teachings (the 'essence') of a religion that are its core- any phenomenon that embraces this essence is part of the religion, and anything that doesn't is not. The problem with essentialism is that it tends to elevate the position of views and practices that are sometimes not that important to the religionists themselves, and also tend to 'disqualify' religious movements on the basis of doctrinal details that may not matter to the practitioners themselves. The attempt to boil a very diverse religious faith (like Christianity or Buddhism) down to 'essential' doctrines almost always does violence to the real diversity of the tradition.

    -'Textualism', the view that what a religion really is is found in its foundational texts, and practices and beliefs among the populace that deviate from this are 'corruptions' of the original faith. This approach ignores the fact that there are always significant aspects of any faith that are not written down, and that by and large for most of history the foundational texts of religions have not been available to their practitioners- mass publishing and literacy not having been common until the modern ear. This view calls into question what we mean when we are talking about religion, and where the authority lies to determine what is and isn't 'right'. Why does the written tradition automatically have more authority than what people actually do? Why are oral transmissions, music, and visual arts given less attention than what is written in books? The answer is that historically, the books have been easier for scholars to get a hold of and study, and so their work has been strongly biased in favor of saying that what is in the books is "real".

    In the 19th Century, Westerners who had read about Buddhism went into villages in Southeast Asia and said: "Nothing here looks like what was in the books. They've corrupted the teachings and what they practice isn't really Buddhism any more." The truth was, they weren't sophisticated enough in the local languages and cultural norms to recognize what was going on, and they were ignoring the fact that there isn't much historical evidence that what is recorded in books was ever anything more than an idealized view. They were confusing the map with the territory.

    In the same way, you can look at contemporary Christianity or Judaism and then look at the Old Testament and say: "Doesn't look much alike. They must have abandoned "real" religion in favor of doing what they like." But what is in the book is just a snapshot of what religion was like in these places for a relatively brief period of time. It looses tons of details about what daily life was really like, and the process of accommodation to social, political, and technological changes.

    Judaism, for instance, was entirely centered for centuries around the sacrificial system that focused on an ethnic priesthood (the house of Aaron) making offerings in the temple to commune with God. Huge chunks of the OT and the Talmudic tradition are dedicated to ritual purity for operating in the temple, good and bad choices for animal sacrifices, etc. Well, the Romans destroyed the temple and the Jews were driven into exile. Then Muslims built a giant ass mosque on top of the site of the old temple. It was no longer possible for Jews to practice their religion as they had before- just as was the case during the Babylonian exile or the Egyptian captivity. So the Jews adapted. They moved the center of their religious life from sacrifice in the temple to study in the synagogue. Community leadership moved from the Kohens (priests) to the Rabbis (teachers of theology, philosophy, and law). Did they stop being Jews when this happened? They don't think so. But there are very few Jews- even among the Orthodox- who would like to see things go back to the way they were before, even if it were politically possible. Animal sacrifice and burning meat is not how modern people communicate with their spiritual side. Shit about pestering Canaanites started to lose a bit of relevance once they were a minority population living in Europe instead of a tribal confederacy in the Middle East.

    Every religion has totally ridiculous, and often offensive, gibberish in their ancient texts because these are fragments of ideas from thousands of years ago. Ethics were different, authority was different, lifestyles were different. The world's religions are essentially the story of people trying to preserve what is good in these traditions- the wisdom, the virtues, the community, the moral guidance- in the constantly changing face of the world. Every religious tradition is conservative in the literal sense- they are trying to preserve some form of Wisdom in an environment that is radically different from the one the tradition evolved in. Some attempts at adaptation are more successful than others. People sometimes disagree- violently- about what is really worth preserving. Sometimes the Wisdom that should be at the core of these traditions has rotted away or become irrelevant over time.

    So every religion has its share of ugliness in the roots of the tree. To me, the more interesting question is what they have done with it, and how the leaves and flowers are looking now.
     
  12. I don't feel like reading all of that right now, or your posts in my other threads cuz my vision is fucked up, but god damn dude, who are you? How old are you, did you go to college for this shit or something? Like you continually blow my mind overloading me with facts disputing everything I say to where I get flustered having to try responding to so many things haha. +fucking rep
     
  13. Haha- thanks. I did study religion some in college, but mostly have just been interested in it since I was a kid and read a lot about it. Sorry for the long-ass replies- I get going and keep thinking of more things.
     

Share This Page