Roman historian Tacitus pointed out 19 centuries ago that the
Jews are unique among the peoples of the world in their intense hatred
and contempt for all peoples but their own, he was only repeating
what many other scholars had discovered before him. For the next 1,900
years other investigators came to similar conclusions, either from a study
of the Jews' religious writings or from a study of the Jews' behavior toward
these was the reformer, Martin Luther, who in 1543 wrote in "Von den
Juden und Ihren Lugen": "Does not their
Talmud say, and do not their rabbis write, that it is no sin to kill if
a Jew kills a heathen, but it is a sin if he kills a brother in Israel?
It is no sin if he does not keep his oath to a heathen. Therefore, to steal
and rob, as they do with their usury, from a heathen is a divine service.
For they hold that they cannot be too hard on us nor sin against us, because
they are of the noble blood and circumcised saints; we, however, are cursed
goyim. And they are the masters of the world, and we are their servants,
yea, their cattle..."Should someone
think that I am saying too much, I am not saying too much, but much too
little. For I see in their writings how they curse us goyim and wish us
all evil in their schools and their prayers."
The Jews responded
to Luther like they responded to all the others. They put him down as just
another "hater," blinded by religious bigotry. And today that's
still the Jews' standard answer to everyone who says or writes anything
about them except the most fawning praise.
newsman William Cash, a Los Angeles correspondent for London's Daily Telegraph,
reported that in a magazine article the simple fact that the executives
in Hollywood's motion picture industry are nearly all Jews, they shrieked
at him, "Hater!" and denied his facts. When famous actor Marlon
Brando later repeated the same fact, he was as well attacked for being
Shahak's book "Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of 3,000
Years" is all the more important for being a document by a acknowledgeable
Jew; a Jewish "insider," about the beliefs and behavior of his fellow
Jews. Born in Warsaw in 1933, Shahak spent a portion of his childhood in
the concentration camp in Belsen, from which he immigrated to Palestine
He grew up
in Israel, served in the Israeli military, and became a chemistry professor.
Like all Israelis, he became fluent in Hebrew. He also became acclimated
to the peculiar moral atmosphere of Israeli society: a combination of overweening
arrogance and deceit, a mixture of pugnacious self-righteousness and duplicity.
fellow Israelis, however, Professor Shahak is deeply troubled by this peculiar
atmosphere. Whereas the Jews around him take it for granted that the
goyim on whom they depend for economic, military, and diplomatic support
are too stupid ever to figure out what the Jews think about them and say
about them behind their backs and plan to do to them when they can, and
too sheeplike ever to take effective action if they do figure it out,
he worries. He remembers that the Romans figured it out, and they consequently
sacked Jerusalem and ended their cult in Palestine. He
remembers that the Germans figured it out, and that's why he
became an involuntary tenant in a concentration camp. He's worried that
if his fellow Jews continue behaving as they always have, they will get
themselves into some really serious trouble -- again.
Professor Shahak is concerned about the behavior of those of his people
who adhere to "Judaism." He is not one of these himself, and so
he is able to look with some degree of objectivity at the mixture of superstition,
Jewish chauvinism, and hatred of non-Jews which makes up the Jewish religion
and its sacred writings. He deplores traditional Jewish teachings, not
only because of the danger that some new Martin Luther will come along
and spill the beans to the Gentiles, but because of the spiritually debilitating
effect these teachings have had on the Jews themselves. Of the world of
medieval Jewry in Europe, the world of the ghetto and the shtetl which
modern Jewish writers refer to in euphoric tones as a world of quaint tradition
and piety, Shahak says: "It was a world sunk in the most abject superstition,
fanaticism, and ignorance ..."
He cites a
number of specific instances of the ways in which Jewish religious authorities
have kept their flocks under control. In general, the
rabbis have taught their fellow Jews that their Gentile neighbors are spiritually
and morally unclean; that they are subhuman, on a level with the beasts
of the field; and that they hate Jews and must be hated in return.
Jews are taught that the Christian religion is
a religion fit only for animals, and that its founder, Jesus, was the son
of a prostitute and is presently immersed in a pit of boiling excrement
Among the Hassidim
(Hebrew for "pious ones") all of these teachings are kept current.
Shahak points out that a central thesis of the Hassidic doctrine is that
only Jews are human beings, and that the universe was created for them
alone. Non-Jews were created only to be used by
Jews. Although this teaching about the subhumanity of Gentiles
is most open and explicit among the bearded, side locked, black-hatted
Orthodox Jews that one sees in Jewish strongholds such as New York City,
it comes from the core of Jewish tradition and is accepted to a greater
or lesser degree by all pious Jews. It is, for example, a specific tenet
of the Jewish Defense League and is cited in the membership handbook for
frustrating to Professor Shahak is the clever deception which his fellow
Jews use to conceal the true nature of Judaism from their Gentile neighbors.
Regarding the veil of false piety which conceals from Gentile eyes the
malevolent doctrine of the Hassidim, he writes: "A
chief deceiver in this case, and a good example of the power of deception,
was Martin Buber. His numerous works eulogizing the whole Hasidic movement
(including Habbad) never so much as hint
at the real doctrines of Hassidism concerning non-Jews."
Buber (1878-1965) promoted Hassidism in Germany during the rise of the
National Socialists; in fact, until 1938, when he left for Palestine, and
Shahak considers Buber's efforts, despite their deceptiveness, at least
partly responsible for the National Socialist reaction to the Jews.
of Jewish deception given by Professor Shahak concerns the etymology of
the Yiddish word for a Gentile girl, Shiksa. He cites the popular English-language
book "The Joys of Yiddish" (New York, 1968), by Leo Rosten, which
tells its readers that Shiksa comes from the Hebrew word sheqetz, meaning
"blemish." Writes Shahak, "This is a
barefaced lie, as every speaker of Hebrew knows. The Megiddo Modern Hebrew-English
Dictionary, published in Israel, correctly defines sheqetz as follows:
'unclean animal; loathsome creature, abomination...' "
writes with passion. He evidently feels that liberating Jews everywhere
from the shackles of their misanthropic superstitions and freeing Israeli
state policy in particular from the stifling influence of Judaism is a
matter of some urgency. He focuses our attention especially on the inherent
hatefulness of Judaism with citations from a number of Jewish religious
In a chapter
titled "The Laws against Non-Jews," he writes: "...[T]he
Halakhah, that is the legal system of classical Judaism; as practiced by
practically all Jews from the 9th century to the end of the 18th and as
maintained to this very day in the form of Orthodox Judaism, is based primarily
on the Babylonian Talmud. However, because of the unwieldy complexity of
the legal disputations recorded in the Talmud, more manageable codifications
of Talmudic law became necessary...The most authoritative code, widely
used to date as a handbook, is the Shulhan 'Arukh..."
He then cites
the teaching of this code regarding homicide: "According
to the Jewish religion, the murder of a Jew is a capital offense and one
of the three most heinous sins (the other two being idolatry
and adultery). Jewish religious courts and
secular authorities are commanded to punish, even beyond the limits of
the ordinary administration of justice, anyone guilty of murdering a Jew...When
the victim is a Gentile, the position is quite different. A Jew who
murders a Gentile is guilty only of a sin against the laws of Heaven, not
punishable by a court. To cause indirectly the death of a Gentile is
no sin at all."
Thus, one of
the two most important commentators on the Shulhan 'Arukh explains that
when it comes to a Gentile, "one must not lift
one's hand to harm him, but one may harm him indirectly, for instance by
removing a ladder after he had fallen into a crevice...there is no prohibition
here, because it was not done directly...A Gentile murderer who happens
to be under Jewish jurisdiction must be executed whether the victim was
Jewish or not. However, if the victim was Gentile and the murderer converts
to Judaism, he is not punished."
gives us a rabbi's answer to an Israeli soldier who has asked whether or
not it is proper to kill Arab women and children. In his answer the rabbi
quotes from the Talmud: "The best of the Gentiles
-- kill him; the best of snakes -- dash out its brains."
more offensive are the Jewish beliefs on sexual matters. Shahak writes:
"Sexual intercourse between a married Jewish
woman and any man other than her husband is a capital offense for both
parties, and one of the three most heinous sins. The status of Gentile
women is very different."
presumes all Gentiles to be utterly promiscuous and the verse "whose
flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue [of semen]
is like the issue of horses"
is applied to them...Therefore, the concept of adultery does not apply
to intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman; rather the Talmud
equates such intercourse to the sin of bestiality.
to the Talmudic Encyclopedia": "He who
has carnal knowledge of the wife of a Gentile is not liable to the death
penalty, for it is written: 'thy fellow's wife' rather than the alien's
wife...and although a married Gentile woman is forbidden to the Gentiles,
in any case a Jew is exempted."
does not imply that sexual intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile
woman is permitted; quite the contrary. But the main punishment is inflicted
on the Gentile woman; she must be executed, even if she was raped by the
a Jew has coitus with a Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three
or an adult, whether married or unmarried, and even if he is a minor aged
only nine years and one day; because he had willful coitus with her she
must be killed, as is the case with a beast, because through her a Jew
got into trouble."
overriding concern with matters of money and property mirror that of the
Jews, and Professor Shahak offers a number of hair-splitting examples of
Jewish beliefs on the subject and the way in which distinctions are made
between the property of Jews and Gentiles, and between Jewish dealings
with another Jew and with a Gentile. Two of these examples will suffice
a Jew finds property whose probable owner is Jewish, the finder is strictly
enjoined to make a positive effort to return his find by advertising it
publicly. In contrast, the Talmud and all the early rabbinical authorities
not only allow a Jewish finder to appropriate an article lost by a Gentile,
but actually forbid him or her to return it..."
is forbidden to defraud a Jew by selling or buying at an unreasonable price."
However, "Fraud does not apply to Gentiles,
for it is written: 'Do not defraud each man his brother'..."
out that "the Halakhah interprets all such
idioms [as 'each man his brother' or 'neighbor'] as
referring exclusively to one's fellow Jew."
How have the
Jews managed to keep teachings of this sort concealed from the Gentiles
among whom they live? The truth of the matter is that they have not always
been able to do so. Luther was not the only Christian scholar who learned
Hebrew, peered into the Talmud, and was horrified by what he saw.
the Jews were able to bribe the Christian authorities to overlook such
things, but throughout the later Middle Ages there were prohibitions
and burnings of Talmudic literature by outraged popes and bishops. The
Jews developed a clever system of double bookkeeping to circumvent such
"persecution." They modified or deleted
the offending passages from new editions of the Talmud, and they made up
a separate compendium -- Talmudic Omissions, or in Hebrew Hesronot Shas
-- which circulated surreptitiously among the rabbis. In Israel today,
feeling cocky enough to dispense with most such deceptions, the Jews are
putting the passages which formerly had been omitted or modified back into
the latest editions of the Talmud or the Shulhan 'Arukh in their original
form. They are still careful with translations into Gentile
tongues, however. Professor Shahak gives an example: "In
1962 a part of the Maimonidean Code...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. 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 Tzadoqand Baitos [the founders
of the Sadducean sect] 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 English-speaking
countries, not one of them has, as far as I know, protested against this
is a rare Jew indeed, and his book is essential reading for anyone interested
in the problem of the Jews. (The book being referenced here in is: "Jewish
History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, by Professor