Judaism discovered

Maimonides and Islam

Rabbi Maimonides relegated Mohammed to the same category of wickedness in which he consigned Jesus Christ. Maimonides declared in his Epistle to Yemen that "Islam is the cruelest and most implacable enemy that the Jewish people have faced in their entire history." If a Muslim today were to approach a rabbi or follower of Judaism and confront them with these statements, the typical response would be that Maimonides' statements were "taken out of context" or that they are "antisemitic fabrications." The rabbi would be likely to tell the Muslim that Maimonides, in the case of the convert Obadia, evinced his respect for Islam as a monotheistic religion which was not implicated in idol worship: "Maimonides responds that Obadia was right: Muslims are unquestionably monotheists and when they bow down to the stone in the Mosque of Mecca there hearts are directed to heaven and they do

.

485

not worship the stone. 'Just because they lie about us,' Maimonides writes, we shall not lie about them and assert that they are idolaters, if they are not." ⁵⁷⁶Wow, what noblesse obligel This is the Maimonides of Establishment legend, a prince of a fellow!

People will believe this myth and accept it at face value if they fail to recognize the lawyer's dissimulation beneath Maimonides' statement. Maimonides, as we have seen, has established the legal principle for killing Christians (minim) Talmud skeptics (Tzadok and Baithos) and traitors ("It is a mitzvah to kill a traitor"). ⁵⁷⁷ This philosopher of homicide is now magically transformed by the Establishment into an avuncular old soul when it comes to Islam. The fact is, Maimonides was talking for the benefit of Muslim consumption when he wrote to Obadia, giving the impression he didn't think Islam was too bad, and feigning fairness. His authentic teaching about Islam however ("the cruelest and most implacable enemy that the Jewish people have faced in their entire history"), was reserved for private dissemination among his fellow Judaics; and like so many of his harsh rulings, the command against Islam will only be put into effect "in a time when the Jews have control over the gentiles," ⁵⁷⁸ as for example in Palestine as of this writing. In Maimonides' time, his life was forfeit to Islamic rulers in whose jurisdiction he at times resided. So he triggered his "Obadia" escape clause, allowing him a huge advantage, to move within the highest circles of his detested enemies, including the Sultan's court, posing as a caring physician, who treated Muslim patients for remuneration (he was sometimes refused payment, however),⁵⁷⁹ even as he laid the groundwork for denying anyone but Judaics the right to own land or homes in Palestine and where no "gentile neighborhood" may be established.⁵⁸⁰

.

486

As we have seen, rabbinic texts are strewn with escape clauses and loopholes allowing for permissible dissimulation. But other than documenting these as a type of calculated and ingrained treachery that is intrinsic to the religion itself, our eye is not on the public relations hype and smokescreens, but on what Talmudists themselves actually believe inside Judaism, and put into practice against persons they judge to be a min or an apikoros.

By rabbinic definition those who promote the doctrine of sola Scriptura and oppose the doctrine and teaching of the Talmud, are apikorsus. This is not just some medieval anachronism. One of the most ritually excoriated examples in Judaic annals dates from Poland around the turn of the nineteenth century and is seared into the collective memory of the rabbis as a notorious outbreak of "apikoros": "Many Warsaw gevirim (prominent, affluent Judaics) were Maskilim (anti-Talmudic reformers and assimiliationists), especially after 1795, when Warsaw came under Prussian and French occupation...After 1815 when Russia annexed the duchy of Warsaw, renaming it the Kingdom of Poland...A 'Jewish problem' had developed thanks to the skyrocketing growth of the Jewish population...a Polish committee sent a request to the reformer David Friedlander of Berlin asking his opinion, as a pupil of the enlightened Mendelssohn, how best to handle the problem. Back came Friedlander's reply in an epistle titled, 'Opinion on the Improvement of the Jews in the Kingdom of Poland.' He felt that the Jews were hampered by the Talmud, Chassidus (Hasidic Judaics) and their kehila self-government system. Jews must receive general education, speak Polish and streamline their religion. They should be informed that they would 'receive in time civil rights, if they endeavored to perfect themselves in the spirit of the regulations issued for them."

As part of this reform attempt, a panel with a very interesting name was formed by the government of Poland, comprised of Christian Poles along with five reform-minded Judaics. It was called the "Old Testament Believers." Its name was intended as an obvious challenge to Orthodox Judaism, which at that time was regarded (correctly) as being a religion of Old Talmud Believers. Hence, in the eyes of the Maimonidean rabbis, the "crimes" of this movement of apikorsus were compounded: "Three years later in 1825 the Polish government appointed a 'Committee of Old Testament Believers' consisting mainly of Polish officials together with an advisory council of five Jews. Its job was to bring 'civilization' to the Jewish people."

487

A reformed rabbinic seminary was established to create a new breed of Judaic steeped only in the Old Testament and not the Oral Traditions: "...the position of administrator...was handed to Anton Eisenbaum (a distinguished pioneer of Yiddish literature and publishing), a radical assimilator so distant from Yiddishkeit (faithful rabbinic observance) that it was rumored that his kitchen was treif (not kosher). Then Eisenbaum hand-picked a staff to fit in with his aspirations and the place became a nest of apikorsus. For example, he trusted the department of Hebrew and Bible to Abraham Buchner, the notorious author of a German pamphlet titled, Die Nicktigkeit des Talmuds ("The Worthlessness of the Talmud," Warsaw, 1848. Alternate title: Der Talmud in seiner Nicktigkeit). Any student entering the institution with a drop of yiras Shamayim (scrupulous and pious fear of committing the least sin), was almost certain to leave a confirmed secularist, and instead of producing rabbis, the place —which survived for 37 years —churned out heretics." ⁵⁸¹

The Rabbinic World in the Pre-Modern Age "...one of the most totalitarian societies in the whole history of mankind"

What is not well known is that in times past, prior to intervention by supposedly "antisemitic" gentile society at large, the rabbis would have had David Friedlander and Anton Eisenbaum and other participants from the "nest of apikorsus," whipped, beaten or even killed. "Since the time of the late Roman Empire, Jewish communities had considerable legal powers over their members. Not only powers which arise through voluntary mobilization of social pressure (for example refusal to have any dealing whatsoever with an excommunicated Jew or even to bury his body), but a power of naked coercion: to flog, to imprison, to expel — all this could be inflicted quite legally on an individual Jew by the rabbinical courts for all kinds of offenses. In many countries — Spain and Poland are notable examples — even capital punishment could be and was inflicted, sometimes using particularly cruel methods such as flogging to death...one can quote from the responsa written shortly before 1832 by the famous Rabbi Moshe Sofer of Pressburg (now Bratislava), in what was then the autonomous Hungarian Kingdom in the Austrian Empire, and addressed to Vienna in Austria proper, where the Jews had already been granted some considerable individual rights. He laments

.

488

the fact that since the Jewish congregation in Vienna lost its powers to punish offenders, the Jews there have become lax in matters of religious observance, and adds: 'Here in Pressburg, when I am told that a Jewish shopkeeper dared to open his shop during the Lesser Holidays, I immediately send a policeman to imprison him.' This was the most important social fact of Jewish existence before the advent of the modern state: observance of the religious laws of Judaism, as well as their inculcation through education, were enforced on Jews by physical coercion, from which one could only escape by conversion to the religion of the majority, amounting in the circumstances to a total social break and for that reason very impracticable, except during a religious crisis. However, once the modern state had come into existence, the Jewish community lost its powers to punish or intimidate the individual Jew. The bonds of one of the most closed of 'closed societies,' one of the most totalitarian societies in the whole history of mankind, were snapped. This act of liberation came mostly from outside; although there were some Jews who helped it from within, these were at first very few...one will not find in Hannah Arendt's voluminous writings, whether on totalitarianism (Origins of Totalitarianism) or on Jews, or on both, the smallest hint as to what Jewish society in Germany was really like in the 18th century: burning of books, persecution of writers, disputes about the magic powers of amulets, bans on the most elementary 'non-Jewish' education such as the teaching of correct German or indeed German written in the Latin alphabet...Before the end of the eighteenth century, German Jews were allowed by their rabbis to write German in Hebrew lettters only on pain of being excommunicated, flogged, etc....

"...the social consequence of this process of liberalization was that, for the first time since about AD 200, a Jew could be free to do what he liked, within the bounds of his country's civil law, without having to pay for this freedom by converting to another religion. The freedom to learn and read books in modern languages, the freedom to read and write books in Hebrew not approved by the rabbis (as any Hebrew or Yiddish book previously had to be), the freedom to eat non-kosher food, the freedom to ignore the numerous absurd taboos regulating sexual life, even the freedom to think — for 'forbidden thoughts' are among the most serious sins — all these were granted to the Jews of Europe (and subsequently of other countries) by modern or even absolutist European regimes...Nicholas I of Russia...issued

489

many laws against the Jews of his state. But he also strengthened the forces of 'law and order' in Russia — not only the secret police but also the regular police and the gendarmerie — with the consequence that it became difficult to murder Jews on the order of their rabbis, whereas in pre-1795 Poland it had been quite easy...For example, in the late 1830s a 'Holy Rabbi' (Tzadik) in a small Jewish town in the Ukraine ordered the murder of a heretic (apikoros) by throwing him into the boiling water of the town baths, and contemporary Jewish sources note with astonishment and horror that bribery was 'no longer effective' and that not only the actual perpetrators but also the Holy Man (Tzadik) were severely punished. The Metternich regime of pre-1848 Austria was notoriously reactionary...but it did not allow people, even liberal Jew(s)...to be poisoned. During 1848, when the regime's power was temporarily weakened, the first thing the leaders (rabbis) of the Jewish community in the Galician city of Lemberg (now Lvov) did with their newly regained freedom was to poison the liberal (Jew) ...of the city ⁵⁸²...In the countries of east Europe as well as in the Arab world, the Jews were liberated from the tyranny of their own religion and of their own communities by outside forces...

"It is important to note that all the supposedly 'Jewish characteristics' — by which I mean the traits which vulgar so-called intellectuals in the West attribute to 'the Jews' — are modern characteristics, quite unknown during most of Jewish history, and appeared only when the totalitarian Jewish community began to lose its power. Take, for example, the famous Jewish sense of humor. Not only is humor very rare in Hebrew literature before the 19th century (and is only found during few periods, in countries where the Jewish upper class was relatively free from the rabbinical yoke, such as Italy between the 14th and 17th centuries, or Muslim Spain), but humor and jokes are strictly forbidden by the Jewish religion — except, significantly, jokes against other religions. Satire against rabbis and leaders of the community was never internalized by Judaism, not even to a small extent, as it was in Latin Christianity...Or take the love of learning. Except for a purely religious learning, which was itself in a debased and degenerate state, the Jews of Europe (and to a somewhat lesser extent also of the Arab countries) were dominated, before about 1780, by a supreme contempt and hate for all

The aforementioned Avraham Cohen.

490

learning (excluding the Talmud and Jewish mysticism). Large parts of the Old Testament, all non-liturgical Hebrew poetry, most books on Jewish philosophy were not read and their very names were often anathematized. Study of all languages was strictly forbidden, as was the study of mathematics and science. Geography, history — even Jewish history —were completely unknown. The critical sense, which is supposedly so characteristic of Jews, was totally absent, and nothing was so forbidden, feared and therefore persecuted as the most modest innovation or the most innocent criticism. It was a world sunk in the most abject superstition, fanaticism and ignorance..." ⁵⁸³

What a mockery of history it is, that Maimonides, the heresy-hunting thought cop who compiled the rabbinic enforcement code against the apikorsus, intended to maintain over the centuries the superstition, fanaticism and ignorance of the Judaic people, is presented to posterity as the supreme exemplar of the cultured Judaic intellectual-philosopher-prince, fount of reason and lofty thinking! Maimonides built into his law code the principle of situation ethics. It is a rabbinic technique. After delineating in the most minute detail the rules by which gentiles were to be tolerated rather than killed, Maimonides declared, "All of the above matters apply only in an era when Israel is in exile among the gentiles or in an era when the gentiles are in power. When however Israel is in power over them, it is forbidden to allow a gentile among us." ⁵⁸⁴

Rabbinic apologists and persons with a mental defect are wont to quote only the nice-sounding material of Maimonides that can be used to buttress the postulate that Orthodox Judaism is a humane and just religion: "For a man of his time, Maimonides offered reasonably humane directives for how Jews were to treat and regard gentiles." What they don't tell their readers is that this only obtains when Judaics are weak or in exile. When they are in power, Maimonides forbids a gentile to draw breath in their midst, though even this is subject to how useful the gentile may be as a public relations shill or some other type of slave. Either way, in times of rabbinic supremacy, the gentile exists at the whim of his Judaic master. No "rights" or equality are involved.

.

491

Or this howler: "...Maimonides did not recognize a Jewish people ontologically distinct from the rest of humanity. He affirms: 'There is no difference whatever between you and us/ citing the law in support: 'One ordinance shall be both for you of the congregation and also for the stranger that sojourneth with you.' Likewise: 'The pious men among the gentiles have a share in the world-to-come."⁵⁸⁵

Maimonides decrees in the Mishneh Torah that it is forbidden to give credit to the words of gentiles or to be "gracious with them" and lo and behold even though some of the later editions claim he is only referring to "idol worshipers" (and thus, if he were sincere, not to all gentiles, and certainly not to Muslims), in truth, the Siftei Cohen 151:18 states that "this applies to all gentiles, even Muslims who do not worship idols." ^58G

Maimonides enlarges on this in his ruling on the laws relating to the Mashiach (Messiah), targeting Mohammed as well as Jesus: (beginning in Venice, from 1574 onward, these passages from Maimonides were censored, from all known texts published in Europe): "J*sus of Nazareth who aspired to be the Mashiach and was executed by the court, was also spoken of in Daniel's prophecies: 'The renegades among your people shall exalt themselves in an attempt to fulfill the vision, but they shall stumble.' (Daniel 11:14). Can there be a greater stumbling block than (Christianity)? All the prophets spoke of Moshiach as the redeemer of Israel and their savior, who would gather their dispersed ones and strengthen their (observance of) the mitzvos. In contrast (the founder of Christianity) caused the Jews to be slain by the sword, their remnants to be scattered and humiliated, the Torah to be altered, and the majority of the world to err and serve a god other than the L-rd.

Maimonides and Islam, Part II

"Nevertheless, the intent of the Creator of the world is not within the power of man to comprehend, for (to paraphrase Yeshayahu 55:8) His ways are not our ways, nor are His thoughts our thoughts. (Ultimately) all the deeds of J*sus of Nazareth and that Ishmaelite (Mohammed, the founder of Islam; described by Maimonides as "the maniac" in Iggeret Teiman, i.e. his Epistle to Yemen), who arose after him will only serve to pave the way for the

.

492

coming of Mashiach and for the improvement of the entire world, (motivating the nations) to serve G-d together, as it is written (Zephaniah 3:9), 'I will make the peoples pure of speech so that they will all call upon the Name of G-d and serve Him with one purpose.' How will this come about? The entire world has already become filled with talk of (the supposed) Messiah, as well as of the Torah and the mitzvos. These matters have been spread among many spiritually insensitive nations, who discuss these matters as well as the mitzvos of the Torah. Some of them (i.e. the Christians) say: 'These commandments were true, but are not in force in the present age; they are not applicable for all time.' Others (i.e. the Moslems) say: Implied in the commandments are hidden concepts that cannot be understood simply; the Messiah has already come and revealed them.' When the true Messiah king will arise and prove successful, his (position becoming) exalted and uplifted, they will all return and realize that their ancestors endowed them with a false heritage; their prophets and ancestors cause them to err." ⁵⁸⁷

Lest any deny that Maimonides made these evil statements we will explicate the source for this quotation here in the corpus of our text, rather than in a necessarily brief footnote. The preceding ruling of Maimonides, having the force of law, comes from Chacham Yosef Kapach of Jerusalem's Yemenite manuscript of Rambam (Maimonides) Hilchos Melachim ("The Laws of Kings and Moshiach"). This is mostly concerned with what the Messiah will be and will not be. For example "One should not entertain the

.

493

notion that the King Mashiach must work miracles and wonders, bring about new phenomena within the world, resurrect the dead, or perform other similar deeds. This is (definitely) not true. (A proof can be brought from the fact that) that Rabbi Akiva, one of the greatest Sages of the Mishnah, was one of the supporters of King Ben Koziva, and would describe him as the King Mashiach. He and all the Sages of his generation considered him to be the King Mashiach until he was killed because of (his) sins. Once he was killed, they realized that he was not (the Mashiach). The Sages did not ask him for any signs or wonders."

"...one should not conclude that, with regard to Islam, Maimonides was expressing any real tolerance...To show that Maimonides was anything but an adherent of religious tolerance, it is sufficient to note that, in his opinion, not only is it impossible for a Muslim to be a pious gentile, but it is even forbidden for a gentile to follow the dictates of Islam. (Hilkhot Melakhim 8:11) He unequivocally accepts the Talmudic view that any gentile religious system is illicit and the only alternatives for gentiles are conversion or observance of the Seven Laws of Noah which, by definition, exclude any other religious system." ⁵⁸⁸

.

494

Mishneh Torah: Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 9:4

In the uncensored text of the Mishneh Torah: Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 9:4, Maimonides declares that, "The Christians are idol worshippers and Sunday is their festival."

Due to the Catholic expurgation of Judaic texts in the past, the word "Canaanite" is sometimes substituted for "Christian" in editions of the Mishneh Torah published during the Renaissance. It is indefensible to claim that Maimonides was referring to Canaanites in Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 9:4, and not Christians, since medieval Judaic editions of Hilchot Avodat Kochavim give the word as "Christian." The word "Canaanites" is a censor's alteration. What is more, we know that Sunday is the Christian day of worship. The Canaanites had appointed no such day. Furthermore, Maimonides declared in his Sefer HaMitzvot (on the extermination of peoples, no. 187), that the Canaanites no longer exist. To speak strictly, in the

495

uncensored text of Maimonides Avodah Zarah (1:3), Maimonides "explicitly describes the Christians as idolaters."

Maimonides, Mishneh Torah: Hilchot Melachim 11:4

Mishneh Torah: Hilchot Melachim 11:4: "Jesus of Nazareth who imagined that he was the Messiah and was executed by the court, was also alluded to in Daniel's prophecies, 'the lawless among your people shall exalt themselves in an attempt to fulfill the vision, but they shall fail."

496

.

Mishneh Torah: Hilchot Melachim 11:4 (continued): Maimonides declares: "Can there be a greater stumbling block than Christianity?"

"Religious tolerance and ecumenism were not in fashion in Maimonides' day, and he was not favorably disposed toward either Christianity or Islam. Jesus is characterized by him as a renegade who tried to annul the Jewish religion, and he rules in his rabbinic works that there is a religious commandment to kill 'Jesus of Nazareth and his students.' He classifies the Christian religion...as a form of idolatry and he accordingly rules that Christians are subject to all the disabilities placed on idolaters by rabbinic law."⁵⁸⁹

Noachide Hoax: Judaism Actually Disparages the Noah of the Bible

As one of the highest legal codifiers in Judaism, Maimonides' equation of Christianity with idolatry reveals just how macabre and ominous are the rabbinic appeals to "righteous gentiles" to submit to the "Seven Laws of Noah" or "Noachide Laws," particularly in light of the fact that these supposed "laws of Noah" have nothing to do with the Biblical patriarch Noah, who is mocked in the secret lore of Judaism as an incompetent drunk who was incapable of fulfilling God's commission and who compounded the sin of Adam. ⁵⁹° In Judaism's Midrash Rabbah we read, "Three had a passion for agriculture and no good was found in them: Cain, Noah and Uzziah." ⁵⁹¹

497

The rabbis teach that Noah ended as a castrate. One story has it that he was castrated by a lion while he was drunk and on his way to have intercourse and this "scattered his semen." ⁵⁹² Alternately the Midrash says that it was actually Ham who castrated Noah, and that Noah told Ham, "You have prevented me from doing something in the dark (having sex), therefore your seed will be ugly and dark-skinned." °⁹³

A full page advertisement in the New York Times of April 7, 2006, p. A17, sponsored by the racist extremist Chabad Lubavitcher rabbis, advanced the notion that the late Chabad-Lubavitcher Grand Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson was/is the Moshiach (Messiah). After claiming that Schneerson was a "scion of the House of David" and quoting extensively from Maimonides, the following proclamation was printed at the bottom of the advertisement: "Not Just for Jews: The Rebbe's message extends to all mankind...through adherence to the core principles of the Seven Noahide Laws...These laws include...establishment of a system of laws and justice..." (emphasis supplied). As we have noted, Schneerson's sect exerts considerable influence over the U.S. Federal government. Its leading rabbis have been regular visitors of the White House since the administration of Carter, and the frequency of the visits increased with each subsequent administration, whether Democrat or Republican. Homeland Security director Michael Chertoff is a close associate. This influence culminated in the enactment by Congress of the obscure Public Law 102-14, passed in 1991 by the 102nd Congress, 1st session, according official recognition of the Federal government's legal obligation "to return the world to the moral and ethical values contained in the Seven Noahide Laws."

The rabbis allege that "when a gentile resolves to fulfill the Seven Noahide Laws, his or her soul is elevated," that the adoption of these laws is a means for "bridging the Judeo-Christian gap" and fulfilling "the path of the righteous gentile." It is claimed that as "Noahides," these "good" gentiles will not have to follow all the rules of the Talmud of Judaism, only the "Seven Laws of Noah." What they are not told is that in order to faithfully adhere to the so-called Seven Laws of Noah, the "righteous gentiles" are obligated to suffer the prize indignity of submitting to rabbinic interpretations of those

498

laws, which amount to an infinite number of glosses and explications running from here to eternity. A more accurate name for the heavy burdens with which these gullible gentiles are going to bind themselves, would be the Seven Billion Noachide Laws.

The Noachide set-up is above all a legal system which will eventually develop courts and a judiciary with the power to impose capital punishment for grievous infringements of the Noachide Laws. One death penalty offense under the Noahide rabbinic legal system is "idolatry." Since Maimonides has ruled that Christians are idolaters, it is not difficult to see that the 102nd US Congress, and the numerous churchmen who promote submission to the "Noachide" Laws, wittingly or unwittingly, have laid the groundwork for the execution, at some future date, of authentic Christians, individually by trial before a rabbinic judge, or en masse. ⁵⁹⁴ Conversely, Maimonides rules that all gentiles who are not followers of the Noachide Law are liable to death. Hilchot Melachim 8:10 states that any gentile who does not accept the Noachide laws should be slain, though this only applies when Judaics have "undisputed authority over Eretz Israel."

Maimonides ruled that when a Judaic murders even a righteous gentile (a gentile who is a friend and ally of Judaism) the Judaic is not to be harmed: "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." (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Rotze'ach 2:11) The Judaic publishing company's commentary accompanying the preceding teaching of Maimonides, states that Jesus was an example of a min (plural: minim). The commentary also states that the "students of Tzadok" were defined as those Jews who deny the truth of the Talmud and who uphold only the written law (i.e. the Old Testament). Maimonides taught in another part of the Mishneh Torah that gentiles are not human: "Man alone, and not vessels, can contract uncleanness by carriage. ...The corpse of a gentile, however, does not convey uncleanness by overshadowing. ...a gentile does not contract corpse uncleanness; and if a gentile touches, carries, or overshadows a corpse he is as one who did not touch it. To what is this like? It is like a beast which touches a corpse or overshadows it. And this

499

applies not to corpse uncleanness only but to any other kind of uncleanness: neither gentiles nor cattle are susceptible to any uncleanness."⁵⁹⁵

In the legal code of Maimonides a gentile who holds public office is considered to be a robber: "When does the statement that a customs-collector is considered to be a highwayman apply? When the customs-collector is a gentile, is self-appointed, or was appointed by the king but is given unlimited jurisdiction and takes whatever he wants and leaves whatever he wants." ⁵⁹⁶

"The Rambam's words (which are quoted by the Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 369:6) imply that even if a gentile customs-collector was appointed by the ruling authorities, he is considered to be a robber, for we assume that he will take more than his due (Maggid Mishneh)" —Rabbi Eliyahu Touger.