reply to post by stavis
I would check your sources before posting random quotes. This is what I could find after searching for a few hours. Seems like most of it is not
A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them.
--Zohar, Toldoth Noah 63b
This is not the Talmud, clearly, as you're referencing the Zohar
The decisions of the Talmud are words of the living God. Jehovah himself asks the opinions of earthly rabbis when there are difficult affairs in
--Rabbi Menachen, Comments for the Fifth Book
OK, a comment (which I doubt is true based on all the other quotes)…but what's the point?
Jehovah himself in heaven studies the Talmud, standing: he has such respect for that book.
This is quite long, but it seems to talk about things like sacrifice, and idolatry (before I stopped reading). The above quote seems like it would be
out of place. But feel free to correct me:
To communicate anything to a Goy about our religious relations would be equal to the killing of all Jews, for if the Goyim knew what we teach about
them, they would kill us openly.
--Libbre David 37
Again, not the Talmud, and I could not, in earnest find any reference to a book Libbre David and a religious text site.
When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves.
--Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D
Again, nothing I can find with that book name in the talmud or other jewish text (other than that one quote you provided being returned in google
On the house of the Goy one looks as on the fold of cattle.
--Tosefta, Tractate Erubin VIII
Finally, our first actual Talmud book. Unfortunately, after reading part VIII (very boring), there is nothing similar to this quote. The tractate
talks about setting up an area around your house where you're allowed to carry things on the Sabbath that you would not normally be allowed to carry.
The only reference I can see to non-jewish people is:
If a man leave his house and goes to take his Sabbath-rest in another town (without previously joining in the Erub), be he a Gentile or an Israelite,
he thereby prevents the other inmates of his court from carrying within it. Such is the dictum of R. Meir.
R. Jehudah saith: "He does not prevent the others."
R. Jose saith: "A Gentile prevents the others, but an Israelite does not, as it is not usual for an Israelite to return on the day of rest."
R. Simeon saith: Even if the man left his house and had gone to take his Sabbath-rest with his daughter, in the same town, he does not prevent the
other inmates, since he has in thought renounced his abode for the time being.
So form what I gather, one rabbi says that if a person (jewish or not), goes to another town where he is not part of this "area where you can carry
things on sabbath" then no one is allowed to carry things
Another rabbi then says, no, the person (jewish or not jewish) does not prevent other from carrying things
And a third rabbi says, if the traveler is not jewish, then he prevents people from carrying things, if he is jewish, then he doesn't.
Then a fourth rabbi says, he doesn't prevent people from carrying things
When a Jew has a Gentile in his clutches, another Jew may go to the same Gentile, lend him money and in turn deceive him, so that the Gentile shall be
ruined. For the property of a Gentile, according to our law, belongs to no one, and the first Jew that passes has full right to seize it.
--Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 156
This isn't part of the Talmud, but another book of laws. I couldn't find the text online, but I did find someone explaining it:
Schulchan Aruch Choszen Hamiszpat 156: "When a Jew has a gentile in his clutches another Jew may go to the same Gentile, lend him money and in turn
deceive him, so the Gentile shall be ruined. For the property of a Gentile according to our law belongs to no one, and the first Jew that passes has
full right to seize it."
This quotation is so wildly distorted--almost beyond recognition--that it barely squeaked past being included in Part A. The Shulchan Aruch is
discussing the laws of unfair business practice. The question on the table there is, to what extent a Jew may go to divert a business account held by
his Jewish competitor from a Gentile customer. The passage there reads as follows, "If someone has an account with a Gentile, there are locales that
forbid another Jew from interfering and attempting to divert the account away, in some locales, however, they permit this and allow a Jew to approach
the Gentile and extend him loans, to do business with him, to offer monetary incentives in order to divert the business to himself, because the
Gentiles' business is free and open to all who wish to get it."
That all property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which consequently is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples. An orthodox Jew
is not bound to observe principles of morality towards people of other tribes. He may act contrary to morality, if profitable to himself or to Jews in
general. A Jew may rob a Goy, he may cheat him over a bill, which should not be perceived by him, otherwise the name of God would become dishonoured.
--Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat, 348
Same as above:
Shulchan Aruch Choszen Hamiszpat 348: "All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation which consequently is entitled to seize upon it
without any scruples."
No such statement in that section or any other section of the Shulchan Aruch.
If a goy killed a goy or a Jew he is responsible, but if a Jew killed a goy he is not responsible.
--Tosefta, Aboda Zara, VIII, 5
There is no chapter 8 in Abuda Zara
Everyone who sheds the blood of the impious [non-Jews] is as acceptable to God as he who offers a sacrifice to God.
Other Midrash commentary, I could not find online
Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form,
and condemned to serve the Jew day and night.
--Midrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L
I don't see this Midrash anywhere. The only quote online associated with it is the one you posted, which leads me to think it's not real
A Jew may do to a non-Jewess what he can do. He may treat her as he treats a piece of meat.
--Hadarine, 20, B; Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348
Same reference as earlier but different quote…seems fishy.
A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl.
--Gad. Shas. 2:2
not even sure where to go finding what Gad Shas is a reference too
Do not save Goyim in danger of death.
Show no mercy to the Goyim.
--Hilkkoth Akum X1
He who desires that none of his vows made during the year shall be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, 'Every vow which I
may make in the future shall be null.1
This one is actually true, but incomplete. The very next lines pretty much say this wouldn't occur..
"PROVIDING THAT HE REMEMBERS THIS AT THE TIME OF THE VOW. But if he remembers, he has cancelled the declaration and confirmed the vow?2 — Abaye
answered: Read: providing that it is not remembered at the time of the vow. Raba said, After all, it is as we said originally.3 Here the
circumstances are e.g., that one stipulated at the beginning of the year, but does not know in reference to what. Now he vows. Hence, if he remembers
[the stipulation] and he declares: 'I vow in accordance with my original intention', his vow has no reality. But if he does not declare thus, he has
cancelled his stipulation and confirmed his vow."
So it's kind of like a paradox. At the beginning of the year, you can say you won't keep any vows, providing that when you make the future vow you
remember your pledge that you wouldn't keep it. If you don't remember your pledge, then you must keep your vow. If you do remember your pledge,
then you can't make the vow.