Talk:Talmudic views on gentiles

Latest comment: 5 days ago by BurningLibrary in topic Quotes

Quotes

edit

Inbox

edit
Quotes that may be considered for inclusion.

Torah study

edit
See also: Torah study
See also: Torah study (Wikipedia)

Three Blessings

edit
See also: Birkot hashachar (Wikipedia)

The relevant Wikipedia article is Birkot hashachar, but it has rather little to say on the topic. The quote is by all measures notable, but it is difficult to present it well.

Soliciting opinions from the community on how to deal with this one. Include? Move to Birkot hashachar? Remove? Or something else? BurningLibrary (talk) 18:54, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Adam

edit

Donkeys

edit

The article "Gentiles Are Human" by Gil Student offers some commentary on Berakhot 58a:13–15 and Yevamot 98a:3. The article "Gentiles in Judaism" by the same author is also worth reading.

It is also worth pointing out that the term used, חמור, is from the Bible (Ezekiel 23:20) and is not original with the Talmud. BurningLibrary (talk) 09:10, 18 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Help

edit

Property

edit

Business

edit

Murder

edit

Quotes about the Talmud

edit

Unknown translations

edit
Quotes where the particular translation is unknown.

Unsourced quotes

edit

Outbox

edit
Quotes that may belong somewhere else.

Debt

edit

Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz argues that this no longer applies. BurningLibrary (talk) 13:20, 8 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Conquest

edit

Comment. Quotes about war and conquest are better dealt with elsewhere, such as a Wikipedia article that can discuss them in context. BurningLibrary (talk) 09:33, 2 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Illustrations

edit
Images that may be used to illustrate the page.
edit

Most of the quotes on this page are from the William Davidson Talmud, which has been made available under a Creative Commons non-commercial license:

Through the generous support of The William Davidson Foundation, these translations are now available with a Creative Commons non-commercial license, making them free for use and re-use—even beyond Sefaria. […] The William Davidson digital edition of the Koren Noé Talmud, with commentary by Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz, was released with a CC BY-NC license by Koren Publishers.

This means that the limits on quotations can be relaxed when quoting from this edition of the Talmud. BurningLibrary (talk) 15:43, 30 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Comments

edit

On 8 October 2023, the user Ziran-Naturally made an edit that added some comments with regard to Sanhedrin 59a:2–4. The comments pointed out that the passage is a discussion which considers points and counter-points, but ends with a positive conclusion: "a gentile who engages in Torah study is considered like a High Priest" (Sanhedrin 59a:4). However, the comments were deleted in later edits. The summary of one edit read: "Refrain from using personal subjective commentary, leave text as is."

I have no wish to start an edit war, so I suggest that we discuss the topic here instead. I myself think that comments are in general a good thing. Given how cryptic some Talmudic passages can be, it is clarifying to provide some context, and comments make it possible to do just that.

There may be a discussion to be had with regard to how the comments are to be worded. Certainly, they should be brief, use neutral language, and be sourced properly (with links to Wikipedia if possible). Perhaps the proposed comments can be improved in this regard. But if so, this would be a discussion about how the comments are to be phrased, not whether they warrant inclusion.

That is what I think, anyway. I encourage others to contribute their own views on the topic. Let's all focus on being civil, and work on making this page as factually grounded as it can be. BurningLibrary (talk) 13:52, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Since no one has replied, I have taken it upon myself to re-add some of the comments contributed by Ziran-Naturally. I have changed the wording somewhat in order to make it more neutral. As I have stated previously, I think the point made is a clarifying one and that it therefore belongs. BurningLibrary (talk) 21:17, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

I have moved a number of quotes to this talk page so that we can work on commenting them better before, eventually, including them in the main page in a way that is fair and balanced. I suggest that we use this talk page as a drafting space. BurningLibrary (talk) 15:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Controversial quotes

edit

This page has been tagged as NPOV due to concerns over its neutrality. To address this, most of the quotes have been moved here so that the page can be rebuilt in a way that meets Wikiquote's requirements. Please refer to the NPOV discussion on this page.

The quotes were previously organized in the following manner:

  • Killing
    • Sanhedrin 57a:16–17
  • Robbery
    • Sanhedrin 57a:17, Sanhedrin 57a:22
  • Torah study
    • Sanhedrin 59a:2–5
  • War
    • Sanhedrin 59a:16, Soferim 15:10
  • Law
    • Bava Kamma 113a:21
  • Interpersonal aid
    • Bava Kamma 113b:8, Avodah Zarah 26a:16, Avodah Zarah 26b:6–7
  • Business
    • Bava Kamma 113b:10, Bava Kamma 113b:12, Bava Batra 54b:5, Avodah Zarah 2a:1, Avodah Zarah 37a:1
  • Status as a man/human
    • Gittin 47a:9, Avodah Zarah 3a:2, Keritot 6b:20, Berakhot 58a:15, Berakhot 25b:11
  • Miscellaneous
    • Menachot 43b:17

NPOV

edit

I believe that this article does not adhere to WQ:NPOV for the following reasons:

1. The quotes on this page are presented out of context, giving a false impression of the Talmud and of Jewish beliefs. For example, the quote that “If a Jew murders a gentile, he is exempt” has never been understood to mean that Jews may murder gentiles. “Exempt” here means exempt from punishment by a Jewish court, which does not have jurisdiction.[2]

2. The quotes on this page sometimes treat the English gloss added by modern commentators as part of the text. For example, the entire quote about a Jew being permitted to rob a gentile is not found in the text of the Talmud itself. [3] [4]

3. Several quotes from Sanhedrin 59a are presented as entirely separate, when in fact they appear back-to-back in the text. This obscures the fact that the quotes are a dialogue. The idea that a non-Jew is liable to death for studying Torah is contradicted in the very next sentence, but by presenting the two quotes as separate, it becomes easy to point to only the first as if it were the authoritative view.

4. The commentary at the top of the page says that the Talmud is authoritative, but fails to mention that not every quote in it is authoritative. The text is a record of arguments between rabbis, and Jews do not accept every one of those arguments.[5]

5. Quotes about Jesus in the Talmud should not be included here. The only reason I can see for them to be here is to paint a picture of the Talmud as hateful to Christians. It’s also misleading to include them without the context that the “Jesus” in question may or may not be Jesus of Nazareth,[6]and that the entire episode is a fable rather than a literal teaching. Besides, Jesus was a Jew, so it’s off-topic.

6. The selection of quotes here is cherry-picked to give a negative impression of teh Talmud. For example, a few quotes here appear to compare gentiles to animals. But those quotes are refuted elsewhere in the Talmud, and yet those refutations are not quoted here.[7]

7. The “quotes about the Talmud” section at the bottom contains a single quote, which has no relevance to the topic. It seems to be here only to try and tie modern Jews to the Talmud’s attitude towards non-Jews, which was a product of its time. I don’t think this section is needed at all.

8. The entire topic of what the Talmud says about non-Jews is very nuanced. It was written at a time when Jews could expect no justice from non-Jewish courts, and so laws were formulated to protect Jews. In my opinion, reducing this topic to quotes is bound to present a biased view. I’m not sure why this page needs to exist at all. At the least it should be folded into the existing page about the Talmud.

9. I’m concerned that this page’s non-neutral point of view may already be used to justify antisemitism.[8]

I can go into more detail about the context that’s missing for other specific quotes, but hopefully this is enough context to explain why I think this page needs attention.

Template:Reflist-talk Aaronak (talk) 14:43, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Aaronak: The idea is that by collecting these particular quotes in one place—here—the subject can, hopefully, be dealt with in some way that is nuanced and fact-oriented. It also takes some weight off of other pages, such as the Talmud page.
I’m not sure why this page needs to exist at all. At the least it should be folded into the existing page about the Talmud.
The thing is that this has actually been tried already. Most of the quotes listed here were originally part of the Talmud page. Adding them back would defeat the purpose.
But I do think you make thoughtful and well-sourced points on the whole. How do you feel about including some of these points into the page itself in the form of comments? Cf. earlier discussions on this talk page about providing context through comments.
To address some of your other observations:
Several quotes from Sanhedrin 59a are presented as entirely separate, when in fact they appear back-to-back in the text. This obscures the fact that the quotes are a dialogue.
I agree that these should be presented as a whole. They could be combined into a single quote, but such a quote might become rather long. An alternative, then, is to present the passage in the form of multiple quotes, but add comments to tie things together.
The commentary at the top of the page says that the Talmud is authoritative, but fails to mention that not every quote in it is authoritative. The text is a record of arguments between rabbis, and Jews do not accept every one of those arguments.
By all means, feel free to improve the wording of the page description if you think it omits essential context. The only thing to keep in mind here is that as a rule, the page description should not be too long, so its language should be concise and to the point. This applies to comments as well.
For example, the quote that “If a Jew murders a gentile, he is exempt” has never been understood to mean that Jews may murder gentiles. “Exempt” here means exempt from punishment by a Jewish court, which does not have jurisdiction.
I think this point should be clarified in a comment. Perhaps the following passage from the "The Jewish Attitude towards Gentiles" article may be cited in a footnote (with <ref>): "The reason is assumedly because the High Court doesn't have the authority to put someone to death if the victim wasn't someone who's totally protected under the High Court (the Gentiles living in Israel are not granted full citizenship)." In that way, the comment would point, with a footnote, to a source that discusses the topic in more detail. Of course, additional footnotes may point to other sources.
I don’t think [the “quotes about the Talmud” section] is needed at all.
I would like to keep this section, because it provides a way to provide additional context in the form of quotes discussing the Talmud. For example, the "The Jewish Attitude towards Gentiles" article could be quoted here.
Quotes about Jesus in the Talmud should not be included here.
I agree, we already have Jesus in the Talmud for this purpose. (You may also be interested in Toledot Yeshu.)
You make many other points that are also worth considering. My apologies for the late reply―I have not been involved with the page as of recently because I wanted to give others a chance to contribute to it. I don't think a page such as this should be dominated by any single person, although I am of course the page's main contributor and its creator. It should be a community decision what to do with quotes such as these, provided that we as a community are able to arrive at some consensus with regard to the best course of action. That is what this talk page is for.
In any case, thank you for your participation. I hope something comes of it. BurningLibrary (talk) 20:35, 1 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Update. I have removed the NPOV tag, as the page now includes both positive views and other views. Quotes from the William Davidson edition of the Talmud use bold text to distinguish original text from the English gloss.
The "Quotes" section of this talk page contains a number of quotes that may be considered for inclusion. While some attempts have been made at contextualizing difficult passages, the page is probably in need of an accompanying Wikipedia article that can explain things better.
For the time being, I recommend focusing on growing the "Positive views" section. If there are positive views about gentiles in the Talmud, let this page show it.
I have also proposed a few guidelines over at Talk:Talmud. Everyone is welcome to participate in that discussion as well. BurningLibrary (talk) 17:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
  1. "There is an argument amongst the commentators whether there's merely no obligation or that one should specifically not save them." "The Jewish Attitude towards Gentiles", Jewish Belief Reimagined, 2018-12-02.
  2. https://jewishbelief.com/the-jewish-attitude-towards-gentiles/ – retrieved 2024-1-11
  3. http://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.57a.17?ven=William_Davidson_Edition_-_English – retrieved 2024-1-11. Note that the referenced quote is in non-bolded characters, denoting that it is explanatory commentatary added by the translators.
  4. https://jewishbelief.com/the-jewish-attitude-towards-gentiles/ – retrieved 2024-1-11
  5. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Talmud#ref34865 – retrieved 2024-1-11
  6. https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/517 – retrieved 2024-1-11
  7. http://talmud.faithweb.com/articles/man2.html - retrieved 2024-1-11
  8. https://www.reddit.com/r/religion/s/sOQuQTtXbQ – retrieved 2024-1-11
Return to "Talmudic views on gentiles" page.