TALMUD ENCOURAGES JEWS TO DECEIVE
By Rev. Ted Pike
11 Oct 10
What kind of religion sanctions deception and immorality for the sake of political goals? Orthodox Talmudic Judaism. The Babylonian Talmud encourages Jews to cheat and deceive Gentiles whenever necessary! In fact, “by way of deception” is the motto of Israel’s spy agency Mossad. Official license to deceive and even commit sexual immorality was seen in Israel this week.
Eminent Orthodox Rabbi Ari Shvat responded to a female student’s question about the morality of seducing and sleeping with an enemy. “ I was asked a question by a student of mine who was a religious girl that had been recruited by the Mossad. She wanted to know if a woman was allowed to do this kind of work.” Shvat ruled yes and published an essay in Tehumin, an annual collection of articles on law and modernity. The Jewish Worldsummarizes: “A new Halachic study ruled that seducing an enemy for the sake of national security is an important mitzvah…” It is, in fact, an “utmost mitzvah” (legal command). Shvat’s work was published by the Tzomet Institute, a non-profit organization dedicated to “seamlessly merging Judaism with modern Israeli life.”
In the ruling, Shvat says women can be “used to seduce enemy agents in order to cajole information out of them or see them captured.” Jewish World says such women were used to capture nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu and to assassinate a senior Hamas operative in Dubai last January. Such deception, says the rabbi, is “Halacha,” or binding Talmudic law. Even with homicidal intent, he writes, “sexual intercourse with a Gentile for the sake of a national cause is not only sanctioned, but is a highly important mitzvah…Our Sages of Blessed Memory elevate such acts of dedication to the top of the Halacha’s mitzvahs pyramid.”
Rabbi Yisrael Rosen, head of Tzomet Institute and editor-in-chief of Tehumin, called the study “daring and important…Although it is highly unlikely that Mossad agents will seek rabbinical advice, this essay is very important and courageous. The author is versed in religious discourse and even conservative rabbis would surely agree with his thesis.”
Shvat’s ruling, reported by a major Jewish news agency, is presented without criticism. It reveals a disturbing, even ominous fact:
Talmudic Judaism encourages Jews to ensnare and deceive Gentiles in order to advance Jews and Jewish causes, as long as they can get away with it. If they are caught and Israel is embarrassed, the “holy name of God” (synonymous with Israel’s good reputation) may be blasphemed. If that is a real possibility, the Talmud tells Jews to back off. But in order to save the Jewish nation it is even morally permitted to murder and commit adultery.
God “Outlawed” the Gentiles
The Talmudic position concerning deception of Gentiles is embodied in the Halachic dictum, “It is permitted to deceive a goy (Gentile).” [1] In legal and business matters, the Talmud says Gentiles are beneath equality with Jews. As the 1905 Jewish Encyclopedia explains [2], the Gentiles were “outlawed” by God from the beginning.
The passage in Moses’ farewell address: ‘The Lord came form Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from Mount Paran’. . . indicates that the Almighty offered the Torah to the Gentile nations also, but, since they refused to accept it, He withdrew His ‘shining’ legal protection form them, and transferred their property rights to Israel, who observed His law. A passage in Habakkuk is quoted as confirming this claim: ‘God came from Teman, and the Holy One from Mount Paran. . .He stood and measured the earth he beheld, and drove asunder [“outlawed”] the nations.’ . . .the Talmud adds that He had observed how the Gentile nations steadfastly refused to obey the seven moral Noachian precepts, and hence He decided to outlaw them.” (Baba Kama 38a).
The rabbis believed Gentiles demonstrated their stupidity by thinking their own laws were worthy of obeying. The Talmud denies the Gentile status as a “man,” so they are also excluded from being the Jews’ neighbor.
Another reason for discrimination was the vile and vicious character of the Gentiles… With such a character… it would naturally be quite unsafe to trust a Gentile as a witness… He could not be depended upon to keep his promise or word of honor like a Jew.” (Bek. 13b) A Gentile. . . is not a ‘neighbor’ in the sense of reciprocating and being responsible for damages caused by his negligence; nor does he watch over his cattle. Even the best Gentile laws were too crude to admit of reciprocity.
The meaning of these passages is obvious: As animals cannot be “neighbors” to men and as the behavior and laws of the animal world do not require observance by humans, so the Gentile world is beneath the Jewish. This source confirms: “The Torah outlawed the issue of a Gentile as that of a beast.”
In a Jewish Courtroom
Jewish contempt for Gentile law was best illustrated in the courtroom. Imagine a Jewish court in Babylon in 350 A.D. as the Jewish Encyclopedia describes:
It sometimes happened that the Gentile, wishing to take advantage of the liberal Jewish laws, summoned his Jewish opponent to a Jewish court. In such cases the Gentile would gain little benefit, as he would be dealt with by the Jewish or Gentile laws, as might be least advantageous to him. The judge would say: ‘This is in accordance with our law’ or ‘with your law’ as the case might be. If this was not satisfactory to the Gentile, legal quibbles and circumventions might be employed against him.
The primary source for the above quote, Baba Kama 113a (Soncino edition), elaborates:
Where a suit arises between an Israelite and a heathen, if you can satisfy 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 cannot be done, we use subterfuges to circumvent them [‘subterfuge’ = deceit used in order to achieve one’s goal – editor]. This is the view of R. Ishmael, but R. Akiba said that we could not attempt to circumvent them on account of the sanctification of the Name.
However, the same source comments: “but were there no infringement of the sanctification of the Name, we could circumvent him.”
By “sanctification of the Name,” Rabbi Akiba refers to the dignity and reputation of God’s name in the eyes of the world. If lying in the court may bring disrespect to Israel and thus to the God of the Hebrews will, then it had better not be done. The real question about perverting justice against a Gentile is whether a Jew can get away with it. The Jewish Encyclopedia summarizes the majority opinion, stating: “The Mishnah. . .declares that if a Gentile sue an Israelite, the verdict is the for defendant; if the Israelite is the plaintiff, he obtains full damages.” [3]
The Divine Right of Cheating
Outright robbery of a Gentile is not endorsed, but the Talmud makes broad provision for indirect thievery; a Jew doesn’t need to return a lost article to a Gentile. Baba Kama 113b continues: “And with all lost things of thy brother’s: it is to your brother that you make restoration, but you need not make restoration to a heathen.”
As Rabbi Akiba warned, the Jew must avoid bringing God’s name into dishonor by cheating Gentiles. Yet, as a passage in B.K. 113b, 114a reveals, Rabbi Samuel was not above cheating a Gentile out of the full price of a gold bowl, while Rabbi Kahana cheated a Gentile out of both the number and price of a quantity of barrels.
A passage from the Talmud describes with praise how the head of a famous Talmudic academy cheated a Gentile out of a gold bowl for less than even a copper one was worth. This passage continues with examples of cheating from the likes of Rabina and Ashi, sages from the academy at Sura in Babylonia, and the two most important figures in the final editing of the Talmud.
“Public Property”
Despite the fear that defrauding Gentiles might bring dishonor God’s name, the Talmud generally upholds the right of Jews to Gentiles’ property. God “outlawed” Gentiles at Mt. Sinai and their property rights were now Israel’s. The Rabbis by their own decree could at least theoretically declare the property of Gentiles to be ownerless. The Jewish Encyclopedia (p. 621) summarizes:
All retaliation or measures of reprisal are based on the Jewish legal maxim of eminent domain, ‘the judicial authority can annul the right to the possession of property and declare such property ownerless.’
Pharisees: The Original Racists
Perhaps the most remarkable feature of Rabbinic bias against the Gentile was that, in most cases, there is no mention of the possibility that the “goy” is doing his best or is the rightful owner of his property. He is viewed as a member of a class with known characteristics: The Jew is good, the Gentile bad; the Jew must be acquitted, the Gentile convicted. An essentially racist view of human nature was assumed. Indeed, the Pharisees were the original racists. Few religions possess such racist undertones as rabbinic Judaism.
The bad example of the most respected sages of Israel had a widespread and corrosive effect on the relations of Jews with their neighbors. One wonders if the Gentiles were aware of their position as fair game to predatory Jews. Choschen Ham spells out some of the ground rules for exploiting Gentiles:
If a Jew is doing good business with an Akum [Gentile] it is not allowed to other Jews in other places to come and do business with the same Akum. In other places, however, it is different, where another Jew is allowed to go to the same Akum, lead him in, do business with him and to deceive him and take his money. For the wealth of the Akum is to be regarded as common property and belongs to the first who can get it.
And again:
If a Jew is doing business with an Akum and a fellow Israelite comes along and defrauds the Akum, either by false measure, weight, or number, he must divide his profit with his fellow Israelite, since both had a part in the deal, and also to help him along. [4]
Secret Hatred
Just as the Talmud gives Jews the right to cheat Gentiles, so any inquiry into its true teachings by Gentiles is answered deceptively. This continues today. Jews must maintain a well-meaning appearance in order to dwell and trade among Gentiles. A commentary in Abodah Zarah (I, 2, fol. 7b) laments: “Since we are in captivity, we cannot live without trading with them, and we depend upon them for our food, and we must fear them. . . .” (Pranaitis, p. 65)
For this reason, Jews were encouraged to practice philanthropy, even toward Gentiles. “Needy Gentiles may be helped as well as needy Jews,” for the sake of peace. [5] Yet such expedients are to be employed only when there is no alternative. “Therefore,” the Talmud says,
If you enter a town and find them celebrating a feast, you may pretend to rejoice with them in order to hide your hatred. Those, however, who care about the salvation of their souls, should keep away from such celebrations. You should make it known that it is a hateful thing to rejoice with them, if you can do it without incurring their enmity. [6]
Also:
No one is allowed to praise them or say how good an Akum is. How much less to praise what they do or to recount anything about them which would redound to their glory. If, however, while praising them you intend to give glory to God, namely, because he has created comely creatures, then it is allowed to do so. [7]
Gentiles: Keep Out
Separatism between Jew and the corrupting Canaanites had a divinely sanctioned purpose in the time of Joshua. But the Pharisees nourished and intensified racism long after its usefulness was done. Gentiles were forbidden from becoming acquainted with the Jewish religion—an instruction never given by God. The Pharisees considered a Gentile so far beneath a Jew that hospitality or religious instruction were forbidden to him. In Sanh. 104a, “Hezekiah b. Hiyya deduces from II Kings XX.18 that he who shows hospitality to a heathen brings the penalty of exile upon his children.” The Jewish Encyclopedia article on “Gentiles” (p. 621) heartily agrees:
The Talmud comments on the untruthfulness of Gentiles (a band of strange children whose mouth speaketh vanity, and their right [in raising it to take an oath] is a right hand of falsehood) and contrasts it with the reputation of a Jew: The remnant of Israel shall not do iniquity nor speak lies; neither shall a deceitful tongue be found in their mouth. (Zeph. iii. 13) [8]
Such holiness may be facilitated by following this suggestion from the Talmud as related by the Jewish Encyclopedia, p. 617, “Judah ben Illai recommends the daily recital of the benediction ‘Blessed be thou… who hast not made me a goy.’”
Why Have Jews Been So Persecuted?
What if these passages from the Talmud weren’t written in the Talmud by authority of the Pharisees but in the New Testament by authority of Jesus? If they were, Jesus’ followers would have become the most despised and mistrusted of men. Christians (if any survived) would have faced discrimination and even banishment from civilized society. People today would laugh at any Christian reply that their sufferings were caused by bigoted nations.
Yet history books in our educational system describe the long saga of Jewish suffering as primarily caused byChristian “anti-semitic” bigotry against “innocent” Jews.
Why have the Jews been exiled from 60 countries since they began to follow the leadership of the Pharisees nearly two millennia ago? It’s because of something toxic within the religion of the Pharisees.
Jesus put it most directly: Rabbinic Judaism is the “synagogue of Satan” (Rev 3:9)—the church that Satan goes to, the religion he inspired and owns.
(Adapted from Israel: Our Duty…Our Dilemma by Rev Ted Pike. This 345-page book is available for $24.90, post-paid, online at www.truthtellers.org or from National Prayer Network, P.O. Box 828, Clackamas, OR, 97015.)
Footnotes:
1. Baba Kama 113b, quoted in “The Talmud Unmasked,” by Rev. I. B. Pranaitis. This volatile passage is paraphrased or omitted in Jewish translations of the Talmud meant for modern audiences. However scholars of Hebrew and Aramaic have translated passages by Pranaitis for me and found them more accurate than Jewish translations for the public.
2. “Gentile,” p. 620.
3. Ibid. Pg. 620.
4. Choschen Ham 156, 5 Hagah, 183 Hagah, Pranaitis, pp. 72-73. Choschen Ham is a rabbinic treatise not part of the Talmud proper, but of comparable authority. Since the Pranaitis translation is consistent with views expressed in the Talmud and Jewish Encyclopedia, I have included it.
5. Gittin 61a, quoted from the Jewish Encyclopedia article, “Gentile,” p. 623.
6. Iore Deah 147, 12 Hagah, Pranaitis, p. 69. Iore Deah is part of a compendium of Jewish law first formulated by Maimonides. Again, I feel that the Pranaitis translation from the Krakow edition is trustworthy.
7. Ibid. 151, 14 Hagah.
