Judaism discovered

The Lazarus Goldschmidt Talmud, published in the capital of the Third Reich in 1935 by Jiidischer Verlag, (subsequent volumes were published in Berlin in 1936)


650

Opponents of Judaism Who Died at the Hands of the Nazis Thirdly, any true Christian today should be able to see that the Nazis did the work of the rabbis by killing Christians who witnessed to Judaism

and who had proved to be highly irritating to the rabbis. We will mention three cases out of hundreds. Edith Stein, a prominent convert to Christ who was hated by the rabbinic establishment, was killed by the Nazis in Auschwitz. Who did Stein's murder benefit?

Irene Nemirovsky (pictured at left) was a Judaic convert to Catholicism. She was deported from France, forced into Auschwitz and perished there. Nemirovsky's writing was of a high order. Her novel David Golder displays significant psychological ./ insight into the plight of ( Judaics estranged from Christ.

The saintly Maximilian Kolbe (pictured at right) was a Catholic priest who ran a large media network dedicated to exposing Judaism and Freemasonry. From Europe to Asia his vast printing empire churned out literature educating Judaics and gentiles alike about the evils of Judaism and the masonic movement. In Japan he established a center at Nagasaki. In Poland he was seized and imprisoned by the Nazis in Auschwitz and killed there (by lethal injection).

After the Nazis murdered Kolbe, the American government made certain to finish the job, by choosing to detonate a second atomic bomb on none other than the city of Nagasaki, a citadel of Christianity in Asia, and headquarters of Kolbe's media center in the Far East.

Thus was extinguished, by the combined malevolence of the Axis forces of Hitler and the Allied forces of President Truman, an important modern Christian mission.

651

As opposed to rank-and-file activists like Kolbe and Fr. Charles Coughlin,⁷⁸² one could say that the Roman Church hierarchy in its analysis and presentation of Judaism since the Renaissance has never fully recovered from the effects of the infiltration by the Neoplatonist network attached to the Mirandola/Ficino/Reuchlin faction, which in Rome today comprises more than a faction; it occupies the papacy itself, as evidenced by the fact that the Neoplatonist philosophy comprises the epistemology of John Paul II and Benedict XVI. Giovanni Pico della Mirandola: "Quod dicitur a Cabalistis, quod linea viridis gyrat universum, conuenientissime dicitur ad conclusionem quam ultimam diximus ex mente Porphyrii."

Fr. Francesco Giorgio's commentary on Pico's declaration: "Haec conclusio est difficilis in modo ponendi ipsam; est tamen pulchra. Ude sciendum est quod Hermes, diffiniens Deurn, dicit: Deus est sphaera intelligibilis sive intellectualis, cuis centrum est ubique, circumfrentia vero nusquam..." ⁷⁸³

The Judeo-Churchian Kabbalist usurpers gained the papacy during the Renaissance, interrupted by a counter-reaction every now and then from a successor-Pontiff opposed to the occult, the most illustrious of these being Pope Pius X. In the twentieth century, every pontiff from John XXIII onward, (with the possible exception of Albino Luciani, "John-Paul I," whose reign was too brief to assess), up to and including Benedict XVI in our twenty-first century, has been a pope acceptable to Pharisaic Orthodox Judaism. (For propaganda reasons, Pius XII is libeled by many Zionists and Talmudists, but as Rabbi David G. Dalin demonstrates in his book, The Myth of Hitler's Pope, Pius XII was not disruptive of the rabbinic cause).

This is not to imply that everything these slippery Renaissance and modern bishops of Rome have said or done has been necessarily diabolic or

652

completely consonant with rabbinic and Zionist demands. They are too shrewd to allow the appearance of a complete capitulation. Nonetheless, these popes have indeed either surrendered (with certain window-dressing qualifications for the purpose of maintaining their "Christian" credentials) at best, or, what is worse, actively cooperated with the Talmudic and Kabbalistic imperium.⁷⁸⁴ One can justly state that Karol Wojtyla ("John Paul IF) was not a Christian, but rather a crypto-rabbi. Many Protestant leaders (Falwell, Hagee, Pat Robertson, among others) deserve the same designation.

Johann Reuchlin's Statement on Kabbalah and the Rabbinic "Glosses" on Scripture:

"Now I come to the third category in my classification of Jewish books: those treating the sublime mystery of the pronouncements and words of God, known as the Kabbalah. I could easily say a great deal on the subject —both for and against it. For twenty years ago, our most Holy Father, Pope Innocent VIII, ordered this material, namely the books of the Kabbalah, to be studied and appraised by many very learned bishops and professors; this in response to the challenge of that most noble and learned gentleman, Count Johann Pico della Mirandola, of blessed memory, who at the time called for a scholarly disputation in Rome, and posted notices announcing the event. Among other themes and theses for deliberation, he also presented the following: 'There is no body of learning that offers more conclusive evidence of the Godhead of Christ than magic and the Kabbalah.'

"Our exegetes of the Holy Scripture spoke and wrote a great deal, however, to prove the contrary, even though they had no in-depth notion of just what sort of beast this 'Kabbalah' might be. With great conviction, nevertheless, the Count overturned their arguments. Whereupon, Dr. Peter Garcia, Bishop of Barcelona, countered with a further written attack against the Count, which he dedicated to Pope Innocent. And finally, following Innocent's death, Alexander VI became Pope. He, in turn, ordered many highly learned cardinals, bishops and Magister Palatii to thoroughly look into the matter and advise him regarding the positions for and against (as)

.

653

presented in the writings and speeches of both of the aforementioned parties. Thus did His Holiness conclude, thanks to their efforts, that the aforementioned Count Johann did rightfully study the books of the Kabbalah and that his books on the subject are well founded. Subsequently, in the year 1493, he therefore, issued a papal letter in which he approved of the Count's book on the subject, entitled Apologia. In that work, Count Pico conducts a thorough study of the Kabbalah and concludes that these books, of which there are some seventy, reveal not only the spiritual heritage of the holy man, Moses, but also offer a substantiation of the truth of our Christian Faith. He maintains, furthermore, that Pope Sixtus IV had ordered that these very books of the Kabbalah be translated into Latin and thus made accessible for study, since they would be of particular importance for our Christian Faith. Of said books, only three have been issued to date in Latin. On the basis of all of the above, and also because I myself have read many of the books of the Kabbalah, I could, in connection with this recommendation, dwell at length on the pros and cons of the argument. Since, however, one can conclude with certainty from the book, Apologia, by the aforementioned Count della Mirandola (approved by Pope Alexander) that the books of the Kabbalah are not only harmless, but also eminently useful for our Christian Faith; and since Pope Sixtus IV ordered that they be translated into Latin for the benefit of us Christians, it will suffice for me to draw the conclusion therefrom concerning said Kabbalistic books, that neither should they, nor may they lawfully be suppressed or burned. So that, however, this part of my argument be likewise substantiated, let me refer back to the (apocryphal) third book of Ezra of our Bible, where in chapter 9, we read of the 70 books inspired by God, not intended to be understood by every man. Further: As to the fourth category in my classification of Jewish books, the commentaries and glosses on the Bible, I recommend that they neither should, nor may lawfully be suppressed or burned, for the following reason: they explain precisely how every word of the Bible is to be understood in the particularity of its linguistic context —as we find, for instance, in the work of Abraham ben Ezra, Moses ben Gabirol and Rabbi David Kimchi, all of whom offer a grammatical analysis of each word. The same holds true for the commentaries and textual glosses of Rabbi Solomon (better known as Rashi), Rabbi Moses of Garona, Rabbi Levi ben Gershon —known as Magister Leo de Banolis, the two learned masters, father and son, Rabbi Joseph and Rabbi

654

David Kimchi, the latter's brother, Moses Kimchi and many others who painstakingly elucidate the Old Testament, word for word, according to the particularities of the Hebrew language; just as Eustathius (twelfth-century archbishop, rhetorician) did for Homer, and Theon (Greek astrologer) for Ptolemy and other commentators have done. ...What else should I say of them than that which has already been said and so passed into law, in the secular realm, by our praiseworthy emperors, and in the religious realm, by the popes? 'That they (the rabbis) are to be left in peace in their synagogues, ceremonies, rites, habits, customs, and devotional prayers, particularly if they do us no harm and display no public disrespect for our Christian Church. For the Christian Church has nothing whatsoever to do with them, other than in the nine points cited in the legal gloss...'

"Finally, let us consider the books that treat philosophy, the humane and natural sciences and other related areas that comprise the sixth category of my classification of Jewish books. Of these, let me say that I believe they should be treated precisely the same way their Greek, Latin or German counterparts are treated: teachings and practices which are not forbidden should not be meddled with. If however, Jewish books were brought forward that taught or offered instruction in the 'forbidden arts,' such as magic, devil worship or witchcraft, and if said books sought to inflict harm on people, one would then be justified in tearing up, or burning, or otherwise disposing of them as anathema to human nature...In the event, however, that such books of magic contain only that which is good and beneficial to human life and nothing injurious, then one should not burn or otherwise dispose of them...except for those books about grave robbery."⁷⁸⁵

This was written by Reuchlin in 1510 but, the way things are going, it could have been penned in 2010, so "in synch" is it with modern dogma about the benevolence of the sacred rabbinic texts. The same defective party line which Reuchlin pushed five hundred years ago is current today, except perhaps for the reference to "grave robbery" which no "progressive western" intellectual or churchmen would now dare assert with regard to Judaism. But in every other respect, including the New Age idea that the Kabbalah consists in "books of magic (that) contain only that which is good," Reuchlin's malarkey squares with the received opinion about the Kabbalah and the

.

655

Talmud which is spoon-fed at colleges, universities, in the media and the churches; this stalest of chestnuts. What remarkable discipline and cohesion has this ideology exerted, that in five centuries it has yet to be discredited or dethroned from its exalted position within our society, culture and churches.

The Talmud and the Papal "Index Expurgatorius"

We now come to an examination of the Index Expurgatorius, the "list of specified passages to be deleted from works otherwise permitted," often confused with the better known Index librorum prohibitorum, the list of books whose contents were completely prohibited. In the former, offending passages were omitted and the book was subsequently published or, it would appear, allowed to circulate in manuscript form. From the demand for expurgation of works arose the publication of the Talmud and sundry rabbinic texts, under Catholic auspices, expurgated according to the varying criteria of various prelates. Those placed in charge of these expurgations by the Vatican were sometimes frum Judaics, even rabbis, or Catholic clerics in the pay of Judaics; hence, one could say that the expurgation process was not wholly one-sided, but something of a collaborative effort between rabbis and Rome, with the resulting expurgated rabbinic text licensed for publication by Rome. For this reason it may not be an exaggeration to call the publication that resulted, a papal Talmud: "The first attempt in Italy at such an index was the one ordered by Julius III so as to overcome some of the difficulties presented by the proposed censorship of Hebrew books. The Pope chose for compiler Abraham Provencal of Mantua, one of a family of famous rabbis, and himself a physician, philosopher and rabbi successively in Ferrara, Mantua, Casal-Montferat and Modena. Another censor of Hebrew books, this time operating under the pontificate of Cardinal Caraffa who became Pope Paul IV, 'was Jacob Geraldino...His orders were to examine all manuscripts and all books already printed, and as he might deem proper in each case, to correct and expurgate from them anything contrary to the Catholic faith...or contrary to good principles and morals. His salary in this position was apparently paid by the Jews...charges of leniency toward the Talmud...were made against this...censor." ⁷⁸⁶

.

656

We should recall that in this same time period in which the Talmud and other rabbinic texts were experiencing a relatively "Golden Era" as Popper describes it, certain Protestant books were being wholly burned and their authors executed, while rabbis and their books were consulted, treated as collaborators and allowed to be published under license from Papal Rome. If we study the practice of the Renaissance Catholic authorities, we find an uncanny similarity between their practice and the views of Reuchlin, expressed in a secret report composed for Archbishop Uriel in 1510. It would seem that Reuchlin's confidential assessment of Judaism's sacred books became the Vatican's covert attitude throughout most of the sixteenth century. If this is the case, it answers the question as to why rabbis were allowed to prosper, negotiate and lobby the Roman Church in this era, while independent Bible students and Protestant gentiles were often hunted and killed by the Catholic authorities:

"Reuchlin...argues that the Jews do not fit the category 'heretics' and can therefore not be persecuted as heretics." ⁷⁸⁷ In Reuchlin's private communication to Uriel he wrote: "Heretics are subject to the Christian church by virtue of their baptism and other sacraments they may have received; and in things concerning the faith they have no other judge but the pope and the ecclesiastics of our faith. But as far as the Jews are concerned, in matters of faith they are subject to their own judges and to no one else. No Christian should pass verdict on them, except in a secular case transacted in a secular court. For they are not members of the Christian church, and their faith is none of our business." ⁷⁸⁸

Reuchlin lies shamelessly: "Now, there is no one who can say in truth that the Talmud, in which the four higher faculties are described, is completely evil and one cannot learn anything good from it. For it contains many good medical prescriptions and information about plants and roots, as well as good legal verdicts collected from all over the world by experienced Jews. And in theology the Talmud offers in many passages against the wrong faith...many passages in the Talmud which support us Christians." ⁷⁸⁹ He sells the same snake oil with regard to the Midrash and other rabbinic

.

657

glosses on the Old Testament: "I further claim (and can cite authorities for it) that our doctors and teachers of Holy Scripture have great need and ought to use such commentaries, glosses and exegesis for the understanding of the biblical text...." Reuchlin's secret evaluation of the rabbinic texts was far too candid for public scrutiny and discussion, and much of the venom that he and Erasmus directed at Pfefferkorn was due to Pfefferkorn having gained access to Reuchlin's report and then exposing it a year later in Handt Spiegel ("Hand Mirror").

The "Papist Talmud," the result of a symbiotic arrangement between the Roman Catholic authorities and the rabbinic authorities, may or may not have been the result of a conspiracy, but it nonetheless served the needs of Judaism marvelously in the centuries ahead, by permitting rabbis to pretend that the Catholic-expurgated Talmud, minus some of the witchcraft, idolatry and blasphemy in the actual Talmud — was in fact the authentic Talmud, an "inoffensive" religious manual for Judaics. Before we pursue this matter of the Catholic-redacted Talmud further, let us examine what was removed from the Talmud to make it palatable for publication under Roman Catholic auspices.

Earlier in the sixteenth century, the famous Talmud printer Gershom of Soncino, relocated his print works to Pesaro and began to publish expurgated, sanitized versions of the Talmud with the tacit approval of Rome. Where Jesus was attacked by name, a blank space was left where the owner of the Talmud could write in Jesus' name later. Where non-Jews were singled out for contempt, or for punitive action or murder, code words were substituted. Popper outlines the process: "...he (Gershom) was not satisfied with censoring the few words objected to in the manuscripts. He was more careful to omit everywhere the words 'Jesus' and 'the Nazarene,' and left a corresponding blank space, to be filled in, perhaps, when the purchaser should get his copy into the privacy of his own study. In addition there were omissions in phrases like 'the guilty Kingdom of Rome"...(Rome among Jews was the generally accepted equivalent of 'Christianity')...In Megilloth (the treatise 'Scrolls' 24b, bottom), occurs a passage in which one is forbidden to pray with his dress or his phylacteries in a certain condition, because it is the condition in which non-Jews pray. The MS copies of Rashi's commentary to this passage explain 'non-Jews, as 'priests who are the followers of Jesus of Nazareth.' But Gershom has changed this, and makes Rashi refer 'non-Jews'

658

to Idolaters.' Similarly, in Megilloth 17b, Rashi's explanation of goyim as 'disciples of Jesus of Nazareth' becomes 'those who do not believe in the law of Moses, which he received from heaven.' So (too) in bhodhah zarah, at the beginning, goi (non-Jew) is replaced by obhdhe bhodhah zarah, 'idolaters.' The passage in Sanhedrin 56b equating striking a Jew with striking God was also omitted." ⁷⁹⁰

Likewise with the rabbinic aspersions cast on the property of goyim, as for example that lost items need not be returned to a goy. This too was censored: "...the omission of two entire passages in Rashi's commentary to Kthubhoth, 15b; the latter of these (the end of section 1), is that on the return of found articles...In the eleven omitted lines is contained a discussion of the difference in treatment of found articles belonging to a Jew and those belonging to a non-Jew...nearly a hundred words (were excised) referring to the disposition of found articles which belong to Jews on the one hand and Gentiles on the other..." ⁷⁹¹

Without belaboring the point, let it be said, that many other alterations like this were made to the Talmudic text in Catholic Europe, so as to enhance the likelihood that the Talmud as a whole would pass inspection and gain approval for publication, or at the very least, for circulation of the Talmud in manuscript. Much noise is made by the "Holocaust" hysterics to the effect that in almost all times prior to the mid-twentieth century, most Judaics living under Catholic rule were subject to murder, oppression and destruction of their holy books. This cartoon impression is not difficult to sustain on a superficial level. There were many harsh-sounding edicts issued by the Roman Catholic Church against both rabbinic writings and Judaism, but the careful researcher delves beneath surface appearances, and beneath the papist bluster was the reality, beginning in the Renaissance, of Catholic-rabbinic collaboration in the circulation of Talmudic texts, sometimes through Bomberg and Soncino, later at Pesaro and still later (in the 1550s) in Milan (under Spanish rule); in the Milanese city of Cremona, and in the vicinity of Trent; as well as in Basel in 1578, with the de facto permission of Pope Gregory XIII.

.

659

In Cremona a yeshiva operated with the full knowledge of the Catholic authorities under the direction of Rabbi Joseph Ottolenghi. No yeshiva can function without student access to the Talmud and cognate texts. In 1556, the printing house of Vincenzo Conti in Cremona printed copies of the Talmud, as did Rivadi Trento, the printing firm founded by Cardinal Christopher Madruz, the former Governor of Milan and papal legate to Ancona. The Talmud and other rabbinic holy texts were, in these instances, published under the supervision of the local Catholic authorities, with the understanding that the books were to be published after having been expurgated. To the Catholic censors "the Jews willingly brought their books, pointed out all passages of the kind to which objection had been made in Rome, and allowed them to be expurgated...and took care to have their action recorded in the public archives...The Jews...had come to welcome such an expurgation as a comparatively easy insurance against more serious restriction, and in yet a few years were ready to petition for it and to pay for it."

Whether as a result of connivance or concatenation, this Renaissance-era, Catholic-supervised, supposedly "benign" version of the Talmud began to gain renown among gentiles to such an extent that as the centuries passed, its provenance was lost in the mists of time, and the legend was put forth that this expurgated version was the authentic Talmud of Judaism: no imprecations against Christ, no admonitions to steal from or murder gentiles, and so forth. The redacted Talmud has been a propaganda staple of Orthodox Judaism ever since. As recently as the summer of 2005, the Chief Rabbi of Russia, Berel Lazar, used it to quash an attempt by members of the Russian parliament and intelligentsia (see appendix) to declare certain rabbinic writings, such as the Shulchan Aruch, as "hate literature" citing many racist and homicidal passages. The chief rabbi attributed these citations to "poor translation" of the text and "told the Jerusalem Post that he had already met with deputies in the State Prosecutor's Office to explain that the book does not incite national and religious hatred. At issue, he said, were entries involving responsibilities of a Jew vis-a-vis idol worshipers, not non-Jews. 'We showed that the attacks were baseless/ he said, 'and stemmed from the poor translation of the original text. For example, it does not say that a Jewish midwife should not help a non-Jewish woman deliver her child, but an idol

660

worshiper... We brought examples from other halachic literature to prove this..." ⁷⁹²

Rabbi Lazar is promoting a canard that has long been used to deceive readers of the English-language Soncino edition Talmud, which substitutes code words like "idol worshipper," "Akum" and "Cuthean" for original Talmud passages that used the words goy and goyim and rain or minnim (alternate names for Christians). In the 1578 Basel edition of the Talmud, "Goi (non-Jew) was generally replaced by 'Kuthite' or 'Kushite." Min, the Talmudic term for Christian was replaced by "Sadducee' or 'Epicurean." Other euphemisms for gentiles and Christians substituted in the Talmud were "worshipper of the stars and planets," abbreviated as the aforementioned "Akum." The section of BT Sanhedrin 43a containing accusations that Jesus was a sorcerer who deserved execution, were also re-worked.

Who does the chief rabbi of Russia think he is fooling in pretending to assert a distinction between Christians and idol worshipers in the canonical Orthodox rabbinic literature? This is the level of contempt these rabbis have for the intelligence of goyim. They prey on the cluelessness and gullible nature of the majority. They lie about the contents of the rabbinic texts in the belief that no one will dare to verify these texts forensically, with research that pre-dates the expurgated Talmud versions of which the reader is now aware. So exalted a Talmud scholar as a chief rabbi is cognizant that the expurgated rabbinic books, whether published in Basel, or in Cremona under the Conti imprint, in the sixteenth century, or in the USA, in the twentieth century, bear the same relationship to the actual texts of Judaism, that Dr. Thomas Bowdler's 1807 The Family Shakespeare —with Shakespeare's ribald statements and allusions expunged — does with regard to the authentic texts of the Elizabethan playwright. The difference being that whereas Bowdler is today a figure of ridicule and his name a synonym for priggish censorship, Chief Rabbi Lazar's advancement of a sanitized rabbinic text is published by a flagship Israeli newspaper with the confident expectation that this hokum will find acceptance among the public.

The Renaissance-era Catholic-rabbinic joint publication of the works of Judaism was a scandal to many, including Cardinal Michael Ghislieri, who protested to the Senate of Milan in 1557: "...in the city of Cremona there are

.

661

some who have...printed certain works, commentaries...called 'Thalmud,' although those works have been condemned..." Cardinal Ghislieri got nowhere. The Senate ruled that his charges were unfounded and "answered his appeal...for the confiscation and destruction of Talmudic works, with the objection raised by the Jewish people: that law had already been obeyed through the erasure of offensive passages, and further interference was forbidden by a clause of the law itself." Thus did the Catholic civil authority in the city of Milan act as the mouthpiece of the rabbis. To ice the cake, after Cardinal Ghislieri's protest, "...the printing house in Cremona continued its publications undisturbed during that year, and besides completing six works, it began at least one other important one. This was the Zohar, the great cabbalistic or mystical work...Doubtless before it was presented to the officials, certain passages which refer slightingly to Jesus, and which had been omitted in the printed editions, had already been cut out."

The Cardinal-bishop of Mantua subsequently declared that the Zohar of the Kabbalah contained "nothing contrary to the Catholic faith." On April 25, 1558, he issued a license for its publication. A license was also granted in Cremona for the Cremona edition of the Zohar, published with a license issued on August 5, 1558 and signed by Grambattista Chiarino, the Inquisitor General, and published under his protection. Hence, the Roman Inquisition was complicit in the publication of a volume of the Kabbalah!

Five years after having been instrumental in its publication, the Roman Inquisition condemned the Zohar, a sly ruse that gave them the ability to issue plausible denials of their sanction of rabbinic works. Similar decrees were issued against the Talmud from time to time for the same motive: fancy window-dressing with which to deceive the "faithful."

No less an authoritative body than the Counter-Reformation's dogmatic Council of Trent ruled in favor of the Talmud on March 24, 1564. "With the Pope (Pius IV of Milan), Jewish arguments proved effective, and when the Index of Trent appeared...it was found that among the books prohibited were 'the Talmud and its glosses, annotations, interpretations and expositions.' But this prohibition was modified by the clause: "...but if they shall be published without the title Talmud, and without calumnies and insults to the Christian religion, they shall be tolerated."

This was the first acknowledgment by the central (Roman Catholic) authorities of its (the Talmud's) general validity. The Council of Trent also

662

codified the principle of publishing expurgated works in general, a move that was viewed as favorable to the Talmud, by establishing the rule that certain books "instead of being entirely condemned, might be read when freed of obnoxious passages." If one examines the Council of Trent's Index of Forbidden Books, one finds the books of the Talmud listed. The faithful Catholic who deduces from this list the conclusion that the Talmud was prohibited by the Counter-Reformation at Trent will be sadly deceived: "...the Trent Index had permitted the publication providing the name Talmud was not used and the obnoxious passages were omitted." ⁷⁹³ By this arrangement Rome permitted the publication of the Talmud under the titles Shishshah s'dharim (six orders) or Limmud (learning).

In 1566 the new pope, Pius V issued measures to reverse this highly favorable treatment of the rabbinic texts, but with limited success. On April 10, 1572, a few weeks before Pius V died, the Inquisitor of Mantua, Giovanni Battista de Milano, gave permission for the sale of Rabbi Moses Maimonides' Miskneh Torah and Rabbi Joseph Karo's Kesph Mishneh. In 1578 the Vatican's premier theologian, Cardinal Robert Bellarmine was placed at the head of a team of five linguists charged with locating every unethical and anti-Christian passage in the Talmud and rabbinic writings. "The intention was to collect finally and index in one great work all passages judged offensive, and to place a copy in the hands of the regularly appointed expurgator; his whole duty would consist then, in the merely mechanical expurgation of such passages in any work brought before him...It can well be imagined that this careful work progressed slowly; indeed, it dragged along so slowly that it seems never to have been far enough advanced to become of service." ⁷⁹⁴

Renaissance Rome was careful to prohibit and execrate the Talmud and associated rabbinic holy books in its proclamations, but not in practice. Here now is the fine-sounding decree of Pope Clement VIII of 1593 against the "impious writings" of the rabbis: "...specially and expressly states and wishes that the kind of impious Talmudic, cabalistic and other Hebrew books should ...be considered entirely condemned and prohibited...the above-mentioned decree shall be inviolably and forever observed." It would appear

.

663

that the perverse and costly bureaucracy established to publish the Talmud under the rubric of "expurgation" had finally come to an end, and that Clement intended to forbid both the expurgation of the Talmud and its publication in any form. But "there were only one or two cases of punishment under this law; the ban was never afterward raised.'' ⁷⁹⁵ The Renaissance Vatican, during several pontificates, managed to consistently create a paper trail of anti-Talmudic invective and polemic which meant absolutely nothing in terms of interdicting its publication. Indeed, the double-cross seemed always to be in place during the sixteenth century. In the same year that Clement VIII issued his dramatic and supposedly permanent prohibition of the rabbinic Talmud, he permitted the publication of toxic rabbinic commentaries on the Old Testament by "Rabbi Solomon" and by Reuchlin's favorite rabbinic exegete, David Kimchi (Brief of April 17,1593). The Catholic "expurgation" process benefited the rabbis in two ways. First by keeping the bulk of the books of the Talmud, as well as the Kabbalah and Midrash and writings of the law codes of Karo and Maimonides, in print. Second, it allowed for the complete uncensored Talmud to be read, since the censored portions were secretly recorded and preserved by Judaism's believers in separate manuscripts, and then clandestinely reproduced in supplementary form as the Hesronot Ha-shas. Anyone who possessed the Catholic-authorized expurgated Talmud and the Hesronot Ha-shas supplement possessed the complete Talmud — an ingenious joke on Christians and quite a coup by the Vatican Mafia on behalf of its rabbinic partners in conspiracy against the gospel of Jesus Christ.

In 1994, Rabbi Tzvi Marx, director of Applied Education at the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem, made an extraordinary admission concerning how rabbis in the past have issued two sets of texts: the authentic Talmudic texts with which they instruct their own youth in the Talmud schools (yeshiviot) and "censured and amended" versions which they disseminate to gullible non-Jews for public consumption. Rabbi Marx stated that in the version of Maimonides* teachings published for public consumption, Maimonides is made to say that whoever kills a human being transgresses the law. But, Rabbi Marx points out "...this only reflects the censured and amended printed text, whereas the original manuscripts have it

664

only as 'whoever kills an Israelite." ⁷⁹⁶ Hesronot Ha-shas contains the list of Talmudic omissions" that were expurgated. Hesronot Ha-shas was reprinted in 1989 by Sinai Publishing of Tel-Aviv. Hesronot Ha-shas lists both the original Talmud texts that were later changed or omitted, and the falsified texts cited for gentile consumption as authentic.

Prof. Israel Shahak: "The first mechanism I shall discuss is that of surreptitious defiance, combined with outward compliance... talmudic passages directed against Christianity or against non-Jews had to go or to be modified— the pressure was too strong. This is what was done: a few of the most offensive passages were bodily removed from all editions printed in Europe after the mid-16th century. In all other passages, the expressions 'Gentile,' 'non-Jew,' 'stranger' (goy, eino yehudi, nokhri) —which appear in all early manuscripts and printings as well as in all editions published in Islamic countries — were replaced by terms such as 'idolator,' 'heathen' or even 'Canaanite' or 'Samaritan,' terms which could be explained away but which a Jewish reader could recognize as euphemisms for the old expressions....At the same time, lists of Talmudic Omissions were circulated in manuscript form, which explained all the new terms and pointed out all the omissions. At times, a general disclaimer was printed before the title page of each volume of talmudic literature, solemnly declaring, sometimes on oath, that all hostile expressions in that volume are intended only against the idolators of antiquity, or even against the long-vanished Canaanites, rather than against 'the peoples in whose land we live'....Needless to say, all this was a calculated lie from beginning to end; and following the establishment of the State of Israel, once the rabbis felt secure, all the offensive passages and expressions were restored without hesitation in all new editions. (Because of the enormous cost which a new edition involves, a considerable part of the talmudic literature, including the Talmud itself, is still being reprinted from the old editions. For this reason, the above mentioned Talmudic Omissions have now been published in Israel in a cheap printed edition, under the title Hesronot Shas)...Under external pressure, the rabbis deceptively eliminated or modified certain passages — but not the actual practices which are prescribed in them." ⁷⁹⁷

.

665

The heirs of the Pharisees often deny the existence of the Talmud passages here cited, in order to brazenly claim that such passages are the "fabrications of anti-Semites." In 1994, the 80 year old Lady Jane Birdwood was arrested and prosecuted in a criminal court in London, England for the "crime" of publishing in her pamphlet, The Longest Hatred, the truthful statement that the Talmud contains anti-gentile and anti-Christian passages. She was accused of violating the Public Order Act of 1986. In the course of her Orwellian thought-crime trial, which was ignored by the U.S. media, a rabbi was called as a prosecution witness. The rabbi proceeded to flatly deny that the Talmud contained anti-gentile or anti-Christian passages and on the basis of the rabbi's ipse dixit "prestige," this elderly and ailing woman was sentenced to three months in jail and fined the equivalent of $1,000. She was subsequently struck by a speeding bicycle in London, incurring injuries that hastened her death.⁷⁹⁸

.

666