ROUND SIX: GENTILES
-- Part Two

In my last article I demonstrated how Mr. Hoffman uses selective

citation, combined with inflammatory subtitles, to distort the message

of the Talmud.  The full context of Mr. Hoffman's own citations,

amplified by the footnotes, show that the Talmud considers stealing from

a Gentile or robbing a Gentile to be forbidden by the Scriptures.

Nevertheless, the Talmud does hold that a Rabbinical court could not

impose penalties in such cases.  A footnote explained that there was, at

that time, no equivalent civil law among the Gentiles, and all law

governing relations with Gentiles were based on the principle of

reciprocity.  The ancient talmudists looked to the scriptures to

support this ruling, and this discussion, the basis for the footnote

mentioned above, is "cited" by Mr. Hoffman!



In article ,

hoffman2nd@delphi.com begins with this libelous and false subtitle:



	Jews May Rob and Kill Non-Jews



Once again -- not so! -- as Mr. Hoffman ought to know if he read the

English version published by Soncino Press, as he claims he did.



	Baba Kamma 37b. Gentiles are outside the protection of the law

	and God has >exposed their money to Israel.<



The entire passage is:



	R. Abbahu thereupon said: The Writ says, _He stood and measured

	the earth; he beheld and drove asunder the nations,_  [which may be taken to imply that] God

	beheld the seven commandments  which were accepted by all the descendants of Noah,

	but since they did not observe them, He rose up and declared

	them to be outside the protection of the civil law of Israel

	[with reference to damage done to cattle by cattle].

			-- Baba Kamma, p. 213



Note that we are again discussing the case of one ox goring another --

the same case we started with in my last article.  Mr. Hoffman likes to

take the same passage, divide it into several "citations," and spread

them out in his article, in order to inflate the number of "damaging"

passages he can "expose."



Note the footnote to the last statement above:



	The exemption from the protection of the civil law of Israel

	thus referred only to the Canaanites and their like who had

	willfully rejected the elementary and basic principles of

	civilised humanity.

			-- Baba Kamma, p. 213, Footnote 4



The Talmud continues:



	R. Johanan even said that the same could be inferred from this

	[verse], _He shined forth from Mount Paran,_   [implying that] from Paran   He exposed their money

	to Israel.	-- Baba Kamma, p. 213.



Finally, we have arrived at Mr. Hoffman's text, which clearly does not

allow the robbery of a heathen, but merely explains why certain legal

issues between Jews and non-Jews -- but only those non-Jews who reject

basic legal standards themselves -- cannot be adjudicated by a

rabbinical court of law.





Under the same vile subtitle (Jews May Rob and Kill Non-Jews) Mr.

Hoffman includes this "citation:"



	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.



This is true and, again, derives from the lack of reciprocity -- that

is, an equivalent law -- among the Gentiles, as stated in this footnote

to the passage above:



	[I.e., though it is forbidden to rob the heathen (v. Yad,

	Genebah I, 2; VI, 8), the offence was non-actionable.  For

	reason, v. B.K. (Sonc. ed.) note on Mishnah 37b.]

			-- Sanhedrin, p. 388, Footnote 6.



The latter note is the one I quoted in my last article that explains

the concept of reciprocity.



It is interesting to note that this ruling is cited to prove that there

is no death penalty for Gentiles convicted of robbery!



A note at the end of the paragraph sheds more light on these rulings:



	Not a few of these harsh utterances (where they do not reflect

	the old Semetic tribal law...) were the natural result of

	Jewish persecution by the Romans, and must be understood in

	that light.  In actual practice, these dicta were certainly

	never acted upon, and it is significant that a commission of

	Roman officers, after investigating Jewish law in its relations

	to Gentiles, took exception to only two laws, one relating to

	the damage done by a goring ox,...



Once again the ubiquitous goring ox!  Mr. Hoffman and his ilk are

certainly getting lots of mileage from this single, insignificant

passage!



	...and the other permitting a Jew the use of property stolen

	from a Gentile.  R. Gamaliel repealed this latter law.  (B.K.

	38a; Sifre Deut. 344.)  Hence, reverting to the discussion, the

	Tanna could not have stated that the murder of a Cuthean by a

	Jew is permissible; therefore he is forced to speak

	of punishment.  -- Sanhedrin, p. 389, Footnote 2.



In other words, a Jew may not murder or kill a Gentile, and for that

reason the passage states "there is no death penalty" instead of stating

"it is permitted."  ("Tanna" -- pl. Tannaim -- is the Aramaic word for

any rabbi, or teacher, who participated in the creation of the Talmud.)





Finally, Mr. Hoffman breaks off another piece of this same discussion,

subject to this same principle of reciprocity, and presents it as a

separate "citation" with its own vile and, naturally, false subtitle:



	O.K. to Cheat Non-Jews

	Sanhedrin 57a . A Jew need not pay a Gentile (>Cuthean<) the

	wages owed him for work.



Note that this is not a quotation, but a paraphrase of the discussion

in the Talmud, and, true to Mr. Hoffman's "standards of scholarship,"

not at all accurate.  To tell the truth, the argument that Mr. Hoffman

paraphrases is convoluted, involved, and tiresome -- not worth quoting

and explicating in its entirety here.  (Anyone who wishes can look it up

in the Soncino edition, as I did, and as Mr. Hoffman claims he did!)



Of course, to withold a laborer's wages is a crime and a sin according

to the Scriptures, even if the laborer is a Gentile, but the rabbinical

court has no jurisdiction.  The footnote to this ruling is short and

sweet: "I.e., non-actionable." 



But that "meticulous scholar" Mr. Hoffman has managed to overlook so

much data -- data that I could not keep from tripping over in my cursory

check up on his citations -- it is not at all surprising that he missed

this little footnote as well.



--

Harry Katz



The learned man should judge himself according to his own teaching,

and not do anything that he has forbidden others to do.

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