The soul of a Jew and a soul of a Non-Jew by Hanan Balk

Vol 16 Balk

The author starts by listing the view which the Kabbalah presents on the nature of the Gentile soul versus the nature of the Jewish soul.
He finds it problematic that the difference between the Jewish soul and a Gentile soul is bigger than the difference between a soul of a human and a soul of an animal.
The soul of the Jew is godly, but the soul of the Gentile is from the three satanic spheres with no redeaming qualities whatsoever.
Judasim basically states that only the Jew is a human, that the Gentiles is a beast among other beasts.
The conclusion drawn is obviously that Jewish life has infinitely higher value than a Non-Jewish life. this follow logically from the fact that the Jewish soul is godly, but a Non-Jewish soul is like the soul of a beast.
He tries to save Judaism contending the idea that the Rambam, (Maimonides) who often is referred to as Judaism’s greates philosopher, is representing a non-racist non-supremacist view of the nature of the Gentile soul, and to accomplish this he uses the obfuscated version of
Maimonides “Guide to the perplexed”, which the Jewish humanist Professor Israel Shahak is mentioning in his book “Jewish history Jewish religion the weight of 3000 years”
Jewish history jewish religion Israel Shahak
Chapter 2, Subsection “The Deception continues”, page 23 in the pdf
The text is pasted at the end of this blogpost.
Professor Israel Shahak thoroughly destroys the alleged humanism of “Judaism’s greatest philosopher” of who the Jews in Israel are devoting medical centers in his name, since the Rambam was a physician.
Here is a poets reading of a compilation of articles from chapter 5 of “Jewish history jewish religion” as well as “Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel”
https://archive.org/stream/JewishFundamentalismInIsrael/JFI#page/n43/mode/2up
If this clip is taken down, search for “Israel Shahak the laws against Non-Jews”

The Jewish humanist Rabbi Jehiel Jacob Weinberg also destroys the the alleged humanism within Judaism, and within the teachings of Maimonides (the Ramabam) here:

http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/704650/professor-marc-b-shapiro/scholars-and-friends-r-yechiel-ya-akov-weinberg-and-prof-samuel-atlas/

Page 112
“The spiritual state in all circles brings sadness and hopelessness. I have bitter thoughts about the very existence of the nation and its hopes for the future.
The entire world hates us. We assume that this hatred is due to the wickedness of the nations, and so no one stops to think that perhaps we also bear some guilt. We regard all the nations as similiar to an ass.
It is forbidden to save a Gentile,
it is forbidden to offer him free medical treatment,
it is forbidden to violate the Sabbath to save his life,
his sexual intercourse does not render a woman forbidden to her husband according to R. Tam, because their issue is like the issue of horses. Can the nations resign themselves to such a deprivation of rights?
It is permitted to deceive a Gentile and cancel his debt as well as forbidden to return his lost object!
What can we do? Can we uproot our Torah teaching with apologetic formulae or
clever deceptions.
God knows that I have written this with the blood of my heart, the blood of my soul”

Page 118

“In my opinion it is fitting to put an end to the hatred of religions for each other.
More than Christianity hates Judaism, Judaism hates Christianity.
There is a dispute if stealing from Gentiles is forbidden from the Torah,
everyone holds that deceiving a Gentile and cancelling his debt is permitted, one is not to return a lost object to a Gentile,
according to R. Tam intercourse with a Gentile does not render a woman forbidden to her husband, their issue is like the issue [of horses]. According to Maimonides,
if a Jew has sex with a Gentile [woman], the Gentile is killed because the Jew stumbeled into sin through her.
The law of the Gentile is the same as that of an animal. Maimonides derived this law on his own. It is not found in the Bavli or Yerushalmi.
We must solemnly and formally declare that in our day 
this does not apply.
Meiri wrote as such, but the teachers and ramim whisper in the ears of students that all this was written because of the censor

Rabbi Hanan Balk lecture regarding the saving of gentiles from death can be found at the yutorah.org site, there he concludes that the great Maimonides does not allow it.
The only rabbi who unfourtunately does not count is the medieval rabbi Meiri who rabbi Weinberg refers to. Wikipedia refers to him as an insignificant rabbi.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menachem_Meiri

The Deception Continues
Modern scholars of Judaism have not only continued the deception, but have actually improved upon the old rabbinical methods, both in impudence and in mendacity. I omit here the various histories of antisemitism, as unworthy of serious consideration, and shall give just three particular examples and one general example of the more modern “scholarly” deceptions. In 1962, a part of the Maimonidean Code referred to above, the so-called Book of Knowledge, which contains the most basic rules of Jewish faith and practice, was published in Jerusalem in a bilingual edition, with the English translation facing the Hebrew text.20 The latter has been restored to its original purity, and the command to exterminate Jewish infidels appears in it in full: “It is a duty to exterminate them with one’s own hands.” In the English translation this is somewhat softened to: “It is a duty to take active measures to destroy them.” But then the Hebrew text goes on to specify the prime examples of “infidels” who must be exterminated: “such as Jesus of Nazareth and his pupils, and Tzadoq and Baitos21 and their pupils, may the name of the wicked rot.” Not one word of this appears in the English text on the facing page (78a). And, even more significant, in spite of the wide circulation of this book among scholars in the Englishspeaking countries, not one of them has, as far as I know, protested against this glaring deception. The second example comes from the USA, again from an English translation of a book by Maimonides. Apart from his work on the codification of the Talmud, he was also a philosopher and his Guide to the Perplexed is justly considered to be the greatest work of Jewish religious philosophy and is widely read and used even today. Unfortunately, in addition to his attitude towards non-Jews generally and Christians in particular, Maimonides was also an anti-Black racist. Towards the end of the Guide, in a crucial chapter (book III, chapter 51) he discusses how various sections of humanity can attain the supreme religious value, the true worship of God. Among those who are incapable of even approaching this are:

“Some of the Turks [i.e., the Mongol race] and the nomads in the North, and the Blacks and the nomads in the South, and those who resemble them in our climates. And their nature is like the nature of mute animals, and according to my opinion they are not on the level of human beings, and their level among existing things is below that of a man and above that of a monkey, because they have the image and the resemblance of a man more than a monkey does.”

Now, what does one do with such a passage in a most important and necessary work of Judaism? Face the truth and its consequences? God forbid! Admit (as so many Christian scholars, for example, have done in similar circumstances) that a very important Jewish authority held also rabid anti-Black views, and by this admission make an attempt at selfeducation in real humanity? Perish the thought. I can almost imagine Jewish scholars in the USA consulting among themselves, “What is to be done?”—for the book had to be translated, due to the decline in the knowledge of Hebrew among American Jews. Whether by consultation or by individual inspiration, a happy “solution” was found: in the popular American translation of the Guide by one Friedlander, first published as far back as 1925 and since then reprinted in many editions, including several in paperback, the Hebrew word Kushim, which means Blacks, was simply transliterated and appears as “Kushites,” a word which means nothing to those who have no knowledge of Hebrew, or to whom an obliging rabbi will not give an oral explanation.22 During all these years, not a word has been said to point out the initial deception or the social facts underlying its continuation—and this throughout the excitement of Martin Luther King’s campaigns, which were supported by so many rabbis, not to mention other Jewish figures, some of whom must have been aware of the anti-Black racist attitude which forms part of their Jewish heritage.23

The author Hanan Balk goes on as he praises Maimonides, in mixing in statements by the humanist medieval rabbi Meiri, who is considered as an unimportant rabbi because he ruled that all the hateful rulings against the Gentiles no longer apply. His rulings are unfourtunately not taken into account when deciding Halakaha.
The humanist rabbi Jehiel Jacob Weinberg reveal the following about “Judaism’s greatest philosopher”/ “the Eagle”:

According to Maimonides,
if a Jew has sex with a Gentile [woman], the Gentile is killed because the Jew stumbeled into sin through her.
The law of the Gentile is the same as that of an animal.
Maimonides derived this law on his own.
It is not found in the Bavli or Yerushalmi. We must solemnly and formally declare that in our daythis does not apply.
Meiri wrote as such, but the teachers and ramim whisper in the ears of students that all this was written because of the censor

http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/704650/professor-marc-b-shapiro/scholars-and-friends-r-yechiel-ya-akov-weinberg-and-prof-samuel-atlas/

Page 112

“The spiritual state in all circles brings sadness and hopelessness.
I have bitter thoughts about the very existence of the nation and its hopes for the future.
The entire world hates us. We assume that this hatred is due to the wickedness of the nations, and so no one stops to think that perhaps we also bear some guilt. We regard all the nations as similiar to an ass.
It is forbidden to save a Gentile,
it is forbidden to offer him free medical treatment,
it is forbidden to violate the Sabbath to save his life,
his sexual intercourse does not render a woman forbidden to her husband according to R. Tam, because their issue is like the issue of horses. Can the nations resign themselves to such a deprivation of rights?
It is permitted to deceive a Gentile and cancel his debt as well as forbidden to return his lost object!
What can we do? Can we uproot our Torah teaching with apologetic formulae
or clever deceptions. God knows that I have written this with the blood of my heart, the blood of my soul”

 

Page 118
“In my opinion it is fitting to put an end to the hatred of religions for each other.
More than Christianity hates Judaism, Judaism hates Christianity.
There is a dispute if stealing from Gentiles is forbidden from the Torah, everyone holds that deceiving a Gentile and cancelling his debt is permitted, one is not to return a lost object to a Gentileaccording to R. Tam intercourse with a Gentile does not render a woman forbidden to her husband, their issue is like the issue [of horses].

According to Maimonides, if a Jew has sex with a Gentile [woman], the Gentile is killed because the Jew stumbeled into sin through her. The law of the Gentile is the same as that of an animal. Maimonides derived this law on his own.It is not found in the Bavli or Yerushalmi. We must solemnly and formally declare that in our daythis does not apply. Meiri wrote as such, but the teachers and ramim whisper in the ears of students that all this was written because of the censor

Hanan Balk does not stop there in his lying about the criminality of Judaism, but he also goes on with trying to pull off the standard deception that a “Gentile who studies the Torah is like a High Priest” – They always omit the whole verse which says that this refers to their Noahide laws, but that a Gentile who studies the whole Torah deserves death!

Page 20 in the text by Balk
A statement in the Talmud supports Maimonides: “R. Meir used to say: ‘How do we know that even a non-Jew who occupies himself with Torah is comparable to the High Priest?

The full quote from Sanhedrin 59 however is
R. Johanan said: A heathen who studies the Torah deserves death, for it is written, Moses commanded us a law for an inheritance;2  it is ourinheritance, not theirs.3   Then why is this not included in the Noachian laws? — On the reading morasha [an inheritance] he steals it; on the reading me’orasah [betrothed], he is guilty as one who violates a betrothed maiden, who is stoned.4  An objection is raised: R. Meir used to say. Whence do we know that even a heathen who studies the Torah is as a High Priest? From the verse, [Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments:] which, if man do, he shall live in them.5  Priests, Levites, and Israelites are not mentioned, but men: hence thou mayest learn that even a heathen who studies6  the Torah is as a High Priest! — That refers to their own seven laws.7
http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_59.html

https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20161108183052/http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_59.html

 

About Lasse Karagiannis

Trala la la
This entry was posted in Compilation_Judaic_Crimes_Against_Humanity, Eget. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s