An article by an
unknown author in Al-
Ahrār, August 18, 2006, claims to be reporting facts. A fact, however, is that this
article not only
claims rumors to be fact but also uses this to incite its readers against Jews in
general.
It is
perhaps no accident that the author did not want his/her name mentioned in conjunction with
this article. If
authors believe in the accuracy of the text they have written they should be ready to add their
name and
thus their credibility to this. Authors who are ready to add their name to such a text would immediately
been regarded by serious people as incredible. Editors of newspapers should be aware of the danger of
publishing
anonymous texts. They are to blame for accepting inciting texts such as this one.
The
article makes the
following bold claims:
That war is a sacred action for Jews;
Terrorism and
violence are among the
main pillars of Zionist thought;
That the Talmud encourages the killing of
non-Jews, saying that killing
non-Jews is a virtue that is rewarded with eternal life in paradise and that
“genocide is a literal application of
the Jewish Talmud.”
The allegation that the Talmud encourages
the killing of non-Jews is serious because the
Talmud is important Jewish religious literature. It is
described by Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud]
as “a record of rabbinic discussions pertaining
to Jewish law, ethics, customs and history,” that came into being
in Israel (2nd – 4rd
centuries) and Babylon (3rd – 6th century). The
Talmud is the basis for codes of
rabbinic law and is much quoted in rabbinic literature.
The article claims
to be based on a study by
Wajīh Muhammad Mu‘awwad, a researcher from the Azhar University;
however we have not seen the
study and don’t know how accurately this article represents it. The unknown author
also refers to popular
Islamic thinker Muhammad Umara but again we don’t know how accurate this reference to him
is. These comments
thus do not concern the researcher nor Muhammad Umara, but are focused on the
article.
Years ago I
met with representatives of Oz We-Shalom, a group of religious Jews who opposed the
settler movement and
advocated for peace on the basis of the Jewish scriptures. The extremely general statements of
this article
therefore make no sense to me. It seems to be yet another example of highlighting some points from
historical documents out of context for the sake of inciting one people against the other.
I am,
however, no
scholar of the Talmud and thus I asked Prof. Dr. Larry Levine, our consultant on Jewish issues,
for advice. Dr.
Levine pointed out an interesting article from Gil Student, “Killing Gentiles Is Forbidden.”
Student’s text was
written in 2000, showing that the allegations made in Al-Ahrār article are not
new.
There are
a few references that are often highlighted by those who claim the Talmud allows or
encourages violence against
non-Jews:
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,
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").
Student writes that “robbing gentiles is
absolutely forbidden” and “in no way does the Talmud
permit or encourage killing gentiles. Rather, it
strictly forbids killing anyone, Jew or gentile.”
Text 1:
Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai taught: Kill [even]
the good among the gentiles (Talmud Sofrim 15:10).
This text is
part of a study on Exodus and refers
to chapter 14:7. The Israelites, by Student referred to as Jews, had left the
Egyptian Delta but not yet
crossed the Sea of Reeds. At that moment the Egyptians, led by the King of Egypt,
decided to pursue the
Israelites with six hundred elite chariots, rather than letting them go. The text in Exodus
is not clear
about where the animals came from that drove the chariots, since the fifth plague killed all the
livestock
of Egypt (Exodus 9:6). All pharaoh’s life stock, including horses, asses, camels (there is no evidence of
the existence of camels in Egypt in the period of Ramsis II, 13th century BC, the period the
exodus is
usually dated to), oxen and sheep, were killed (Exodus (9:3)) and the Israelites took all their
livestock (Exodus
10:26). Thus Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai surmised that the livestock used for the chariots
must have been from
Egyptians who feared God, thus their livestock was not affected by the plaques. Their
animals were saved but later
they allowed their animals to be used or perhaps even drove the chariots
themselves to fight against the
Israelites. Student writes that this made Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai state
“Kill [even] the good among the gentiles.”
“To this R. Shimon ben Yochai said that, when in battle, do not
try to spare the lives of those opposing soldiers
who are fine, upstanding people. Kill any enemy soldier,
regardless of their character.”
The commentary of
Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai is rather remarkable
because Exodus 9:6 distinguishes between the livestock of the
Egyptians and the Israelites only and nowhere
in the Pentateuch is a third group of God-fearing-Egyptians
mentioned. The commentaries on the Pentateuch
are full of speculation trying to make sense of this particular holy
text; however this is not uncommon for
religious scholars and occurs in other traditions as well. When they see a
text that results in questions,
they provide interpretations that are usually in line with the mainstream
theological thinking of one’s own
religious tradition in the time that the text was written.
Since the
Talmud is the basis for codes of
rabbinic law, it is important to see how later rabbinical scholars have used this
text. Student writes “
This contextual approach to understanding R. Shimon ben Yochai’s statement is how the
post-Talmudic
literature has read this statement [see Tosafot, Avodah Zarah 26b sv Velo; Maimonides, Mishneh
Torah,
Hilchot Avodah Zarah 10:1]. Reading R. Shimon ben Yochai’s teaching as a single-sentence imperative
to kill
all gentiles is simply wrong and is not how Jewish scholars have ever understood it.” Are there examples
where Jewish scholars or, probably more likely, political activists have interpreted Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai
differently, taking this as a simple single-sentence imperative? Perhaps, but in any case Student has
demonstrated
that this is not main stream Jewish teaching.
Text 2: Student then refers to a rather
outrageous statement
of Maimonides (1135 -1204 AD) who in Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Rotze’ach 2:11
taught that “A Jew who
killed a righteous gentile is not executed in a court of law as it says (Exodus
21:14) "If a man shall act
intentional against his fellow..." [and a gentile is not considered a fellow] and
even more so that he is not
executed for killing an unrighteous gentile.”
Rabbi Yosef Karo (1488-1575
AD), another great Jewish
teacher, wrote that Maimonides meant that a Jew who killed a righteous
gentile, who is not executed in a
court of law, is nevertheless punished by heaven, thus softening the
statement of Maimonides.
The reference
shows a discrepancy between the punishment of a murderer of a
Jew and a gentile in a text from a major Jewish
scholar. It reminds me of another discrepancy I saw many
years ago in the city of Safat, where Orthodox Jews had
hung a big banner over the street stating “Love your
fellow Jew” (I still have the photo of this), clearly
excluding non-Jews. This was not a nice experience for
those who may enter a city as a non-Jew and see such a sign.
It clearly left the feeling of being treated as
second class.
This issue raises the question of who is my
neighbor or fellow. Student writes that
“the Bible says that a murderer is only executed if he kills his "fellow."
By being a part of very different
community, a gentile is not the "fellow" of a Jew. Is this murder forbidden?
Absolutely! However, biblical
fiat declares that this murder is not a capital punishment. Rather than allowing the
murderer to receive a
minor punishment, his punishment is left to divine providence. God will punish this sin
appropriately
because it is out of the court’s hands.”
Here I disagree with Student. The Ten
Commandments are very
clear and specific “thou shalt not kill,” Exodus 20: 13 and Deuteronomy 5:17. Nowhere in the
text does it
say that this commandment is limited to one’s own ethnic or religious community. Would other
commandments be
equally limited? I don’t think so. With the parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus gives the Jewish
scholars
of his day a very clear answer as to who their neighbor is. In the parable the Samaritan not the fellow
Jew
is identified, showing that the concept neighbor transcends the borders of one’s own community [see also my
text in AWR, 2004, week 50, art.25].
Student then refers to a number of additional Jewish sources
that
explicitly state that the killing of non-Jews is prohibited. For the full text of his study see:
http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/kill.html
Dr. Larry Levine, who saw the draft text of this
article,
disagrees with my interpretation of the Ten Commandments and writes “The ten commandments are
not binding on
non-Jews. This is a very common misconception.”
Levine: “According to Jewish
tradition, non-Jews are bound
by the Seven Noahide Laws. See
Avodah zarah - Do not worship
false gods.
Shefichat
damim - Do not murder.
Gezel - Do not steal (or
kidnap).
Gilui arayot - Do not be
sexually immoral (forbidden sexual acts are traditionally
interpreted to include incest, bestiality, male
homosexual sex acts, i.e. sodomy, and adultery.)
Birkat Hashem - Do not "bless God" euphemistically
referring to blasphemy.
Ever min
ha-chai - Do not eat any flesh that was torn from the body of a
living animal (given to Noah and
traditionally interpreted as a prohibition of cruelty towards animals)
Dinim - Set up a system
of honest, effective courts, police and laws.
The Talmud also states:
"Righteous people of all
nations have a share in the world to come" (Sanhedrin 105a). Any non-Jew who lives
according to these laws
is regarded as one of "the righteous among the gentiles." Maimonides writes that this
refers to those who
have acquired knowledge of God and act in accordance with the Noahide laws out of obedience to
Him. "
The
Torah (Five Books of Moses) was (were) given to the Jewish people, not to the world in general. Indeed,
there are commentaries that tell of how G-d first offered the Torah to other nations, and they turned down
the
offer.
Everywhere in the Torah G-d says to Moses, "Speak unto the children of Israel." Clearly the
Torah applies
only to the Children of Israel and not to the other nations of the world.
This may come as a
shock to you and
your readers, since Christianity has taken the approach that the Torah (at least parts of
it) apply to Christians.
But the text makes it clear time and time again that G-d was speaking to and was
interested in the Children of
Israel and gave the Torah to them, and only them. Thus what Gil Student has
written is indeed correct, and what you
have written is not.”
My response to Dr. Levine is brief.
Student may well be right from a Jewish
perspective of reading the Ten Commandments but I have grown up in
the Christian Reformed Church of The Netherlands
where the Ten Commandments are read every single Sunday,
clearly making a statement that Christian believers need
to abide by them. The Coptic Orthodox church in
Egypt stresses in a different way the importance of the Ten
Commandments. The fasting of Lent is 40 days
because Moses fasted 40 days before receiving the words of God. The
Coptic Orthodox church has preserved the
instructions for cleansing in the Pentateuch. Christian Reformed Prof. Dr.
Maas Boertien (1923-2005)
explained in a meeting many years ago that he found many similarities between temple
worship in Old
Testament times and the Coptic Orthodox liturgy, while the liturgy in the Christian Reformed Church
was
comparable to the Synagogue. These two denominations are not the only Christian denominations which show strong
appreciation for the Ten Commandments and my disagreement with Student stems from this
background.
The
lesson we can draw from the Al-Ahrār article is that it is not difficult
to search any religious
tradition for texts we disagree with and use them to show others how bad they are.
This amounts to nothing else but
bad propaganda and evil polemics that are usually used in anger and serve
no-one because one’s opponent or
perceived opponent may easily be encouraged to use the same ‘techniques.’
This only results in
polarization.
I certainly do not agree with the heavy handed Israeli policy
against the Palestinians but
responding with claims that the Jews or Palestinians or whatever contemporary
nation or religious group believes
war to be sacred and that terrorism and violence is the main basis of
their thought is ridiculous. Of course in
most religious traditions and philosophies, such as Zionism, there
are extremists who do not hesitate to argue that
violence is needed to obtain their goals, but generalizing
this as if such statements are applied to all people
belonging to a particular tradition or conviction only
serves to incite, polarize and create more tension. That in
turn only serves extremists.
