CENSORSHIP OF THE TALMUD
-- Part Two

In my previous article (<3qluoc$c2u@earth.usa.net>) I presented a

concise history of censorship of the Talmud.  Armed with this

information, we are ready to take to take a closer look at the citations

from Dr. Shahak that Mr. Hoffman (hoffman2nd@delphi.com) posted in

article <5U9YnUO.hoffman2nd@delphi.com>.



	CONCEALMENT OF HATEFUL TALMUDIC TEXTS



This headline is Mr. Hoffman's creation, not Dr. Shahak's.  It is meant

to imply that the Rabbis and other members of the Jewish community

responsible for studying and publishing the Talmud have been involved

in a conspiracy spanning centuries to "conceal" so-called "hateful"

talmudic passages.  The citations from Dr. Shahak have been carefully

selected to reinforce this implication:



	>>...Talmudic passages directed against Christianity or against

	non-Jews had to go or be modified--the pressure was too strong.



Who applied this pressure?  If Mr. Shahak provides an answer

Mr. Hoffman has not included it.  However, we know from my last article

that the pressure was applied mainly by the Catholic Church, but also by

various other church and governmental entities throughout Europe,

North Africa, and Asia.



	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.



While there may be a few “offensive” passages in the Talmud, my

previous article clearly establishes that censorship of the Talmud was

not limited to "a few of the most offensive passages!"  References to

pagan Greece and Rome were also excised or altered, for example, "...and

the name of Christ was systematically removed, even when the reference

was not negative [Adin Steinsaltz, The Essential Talmud, p. 84]."



	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 such terms

	as >idolater,< >heathen< or even >Canaanite< or >Samaritan<.....

 

	>>Needless to say, this was a calculated lie from beginning to

	end...



 
Exactly what "was a calculated lie from beginning to end?"  Certainly

not that the Talmud was censored!  The only falsehood here is the

implication that the excisions and emendations outlined by Dr. Shahak

were not forced upon the Jewish community against their will!  But that

is probably not a conscious lie, so much as it is a silly mistake made

by an overzealous atheist engaged in a holy war against religion.


	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..



As well they should!  The caretakers of the Talmud had every right --

nay, the moral duty -- to resist political and religious censorship to

the utmost!  Besides, the ignorant hypocrites who censored the Talmud

had no care for the antiquity of the Talmud, nor for the cultural

heritage it preserves.  Even if it were abandoned entirely as a holy

work and moral guide, it would retain a priceless intrinsic value equal

to the classics of pagan Rome and Greece, not least for the insights it

affords into the customs and practices of its times.



	...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<<(pp.22-23).

 

If only that were true!  The sad fact is, as outlined in my previous

article, errors introduced by censors were propagated by the

printing press and much of the original text has been lost and cannot

be reconstructed.  And I must repeat that what the censors found to be

“offensive” was largely arbitrary and unreasonable, as must be expected

when a bureaucrat exercises absolute authority.



	>>Modern scholars of Judaism have not only continued the

	deception, but have actually improved upon the old rabbinical

	methods, both in impudence and mendacity<<(p. 24).



Actually, unless Mr. Hoffman has done great violence to Dr. Shahak's

text by selectively quoting him, the charges of “impudence and

mandacity” would have to be laid at the door of the author.



--

Harry Katz



He who unjustly hands over one man's goods to another, he shall pay God

for it with his own soul.

	-- The Wit and Wisdom of the Talmud, Madison C. Peters, ed.