#the talmud

[dragoneyes618]

If one could speak of Biblical verses as being vilified, then "an eye for an eye" would be the most vilified verse in the Bible. It is commonly cited to "prove" the existence of an "Old Testament" ethic of vengeance, and then contrasted with the New Testament's supposedly higher ethic of forgiveness. "An eye for an eye" is often associated with modern Jews as well, and invariably in a pejorative manner. Israel's critics, for example, commonly accuse her of practicing "eye for an eye" morality when she retaliates against Arab terrorist acts.

In actuality, the biblical standard of "an eye for an eye" stood in stark contrast to the legal standards prevailing in the societies that surrounded the ancient Hebrews. The Code of Hammurabi, a legal code hundreds of years older than the Torah, legislated retaliation even against innocent parties. Thus, if A constructed a building for B, and the building collapsed and killed B's daughter, then A's daughter was put to death (Law number 229). The biblical law of "an eye for an eye" restricted punishment solely to the perpetrator. Furthermore, unlike Hammurabi's code, one who caused another's death accidentally was never executed.

"An eye for an eye" also served to limit vengeance; it did not permit "a life for an eye" or even "two eyes for an eye." The operative biblical principle was that punishment must be commensurate with the deed, not exceed it. Blood feuds and vendettas were long practiced among the Israelites' neighbors - indeed, they have persisted in the Middle East until this century - and revenge was often carried out without restraint.

Christian often contend that Jesus went beyond the standard of "an eye for an eye," that he advocated forgiveness and saw retaliation as unworthy of man. Yet the New Testament records Jesus saying, "But the one who disowns me in the presence of men, I will disown in the presence of my Father in heaven" (Matthew 10:33). In other words, Jesus seems to advocate treating others as they have treated him; a standard of justice that is perfectly commensurate with the demand of "an eye for an eye."

In the time of the Talmud, "an eye for an eye" was not carried out literally, and Orthodox Jewish scholars teach that it was never practiced. The Talmud's rabbis feared that the very process of removing the perpetrator's eye might kill him as well, and that, of course, would be forbidden (Bava Kamma 84a). "An eye for an eye" was therefore understood as requiring monetary compensation equivalent to the value of an eye. The same understanding was applied to almost all the other punishments enumerated in the same biblical verse, "a tooth for a tooth, a wound for a wound."

The only punishment in this set that was not converted to a monetary fine was capital punishment for murderers, "a life for a life." Because the Torah believed that premeditated murder deserved the death penalty, there was obviously no fear of punishing the killer excessively. Jewish law did dictate, however, that murderers be executed in the quickest manner possible. Hence, later Jewish law forbade the Roman punishment of crucifixion.

Torah law also forbade remitting a murderer's sentence with a monetary fine. Life and money, according to the biblical ethic, are incommensurate; one can never atone for murder by paying money. In this regard, too, Torah law differed from the laws of the ancient Jews' neighbors, which would sometimes fine those who had murdered people belonging to a lower social class and which made certain property crimes (for example, looting at a fire) capital offenses. In Jewish law, property crimes could never be punished with death, and murderers could never be let off with payment of money, even if the family of the victim were willing to accept it (see Numbers 35:31, and Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, "Laws Concerning Murder," 1:4).

Both in its insistence that evil must be punished and in its equal insistence on setting limits to that punishment, "an eye for an eye" is a basic principle of biblical justice.

- Jewish Literacy, Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, pages 558-560

[onelastchanc]

Now I don’t know if any other Jews have recently seen that Piers Morgan segment featuring “Dan Bilzerian” but oh boy…

I’m not one to call out antisemitism when it comes to politics revolving around Israel and Palestine, as I often feel it puts a bigger target on my back as a Jew-ish person (mind you the target is very much already there). However, the propaganda they have featured on this very large television station is absolutely appalling to me. Even looking at it on social media really just confirms how quickly everyone is to jump on the Jew hate train.

To remain down to earth, I’m obviously not that surprised as it is Piers Morgan… but the man featured has nazi rhetoric that he is able to throw to a larger audience, and they just eat it up.

I’m going to link the video here

It’s a bite sized clip but make of it what you will, I wouldn’t recommend watching if you’re already in a bad headspace about this situation

[therealmackenson10]

The talmud says that god gave the jews not only I the power to overcome the ways of the world but the power to overcome god himself. 🤮

@endcelebrationofignorance

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

The lightest (i.e., least massive) known star, OTS 44 [3000 x 2400] :: [just--space]

* * * *

There are stars who's light only reaches the Earth long after they have fallen apart. There are people who's remembrance gives light in this world, long after they have passed away. This light shines in our darkest nights on the road we must follow.

The Talmud..

[liberty1776]

Talmud teaches an EVIL jewish tradition

[infinityonhighvevo]

translator? uhm.. im actually trans right now

[punchyfeeley]

Talmudic insult of the day “vinegar, son of wine” (said to someone who has a cool dad)

[zooptseyt]

Also i really love how antisemites are like "the talmud is a secret text the jews hide from us that teaches them how to cheat christians" when the talmud is freely publicly accessible in its entirety and is like "does it count as something going from the private to the public domain if you throw it from your window into somebody else's window and it never touches the ground" and "Rabbi Yochanan said that Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, had a massive cock. The size of Rabbi Yochanan's cock was smaller than Rabbi Yishmael's, but the exact size is up for debate. Both sides agree that it was pretty huge, too, though."

[indecisiveavocado]

so about rashi

there are three things worth noting about rashi:

it's thought his daughters were fairly educated to the point that there's an urban legend about someone saying the reason it's ok to wear tefillin is that rashi's daughters wore tefillin

at the time of course it was not socially acceptable for women to put their names on things

rashi got an INSANE (like, physically impossible, someone's done the calculations) amount done

so we have a guy who does a ridiculous amount and his daughters who were allegedly very smart but couldn't have published at the time.

conclusion: maybe rashi's stuff was actually a joint rashi + daughters project he couldn't put their names on?

[dragoneyes618]

"There is a story about a Yeshivah student who was persuaded one day to take a rest from his Talmud studies and visit the countryside. As he walked through a farmyard, he saw a strange little animal, and asked, "What is that?" He was told that it was a hen. "Ah!" he cried in mystic delight. "It is the holy tarnegoles from the Talmud!" (Actually, he said "from the Gemorra" - one of the most awkward things about the Talmud is that its most devoted students never call it that "Talmud."

- The Day God Laughed, Hyam Maccoby, page 18

[onelastchanc]

An INTRODUCTION

Hello! This is just an intro to anyone who’s curious about this blog:

You can call me Rye, I’m 18 years old and this is my conversion blogggg.

I began my conversion process back in December. I live not in the U.S. so it’s been difficult to find a community to surround myself with. But I will be moving to the U.S. in the summer!

I still have yet to contact a rabbi as I am waiting till I move closer to a Jewish community.

Its been a very interesting few months in this journey but I’m very dedicated and I know I may still have years ahead of me which I’m gladly looking forward to.

Also, I just want to put out that I’m still learning and am just a kid, so if anyone has tips or suggestions on literacy or getting in contact with a synagogue or finding a community, IT WOULD BE VERY APPRECIATED.

[therealmackenson10]

The talmud commands them to not spare any soul in their holy war. Man, woman, or child, none of them are innocent.

So when the USA ask for a “ cease-fire” that’s not what Israel’s plans are. 🤮

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Caravaggio

* * * *

We Are Contextual Beings By Pir Aga Mir Here is one of my central inquiries: If our spiritual and religious practices are not expanding our circle of empathy, compassion, love and care, what is their purpose? If they are not preparing us for our physical deaths, what ends are they serving? Part of the reason that institutional religions have lost their way in this regard is that the praxis of a once-enlightened human cannot be calcified and universalized. As humans, we are contextual beings. The context of Jerusalem 2100 years ago or Mecca 1500 years ago or India 4,000 years ago, or even the Amazon 100 years ago, does not translate into a relevant code-of-ethic or moral philosophy in the messy, entangled world of modernity. In fact, the context of Jesus or Mohammed (may peace be upon them) could not translate from the moment they left the material realm. This is not to say that practices and traditions and aspects of culture should not be preserved and perpetuated. Rather, they should be openly shared and discussed with a contemporary critical lens and the loving embrace of the evolutionary impulse that lies within all of us. Does your spiritual practice make you a better student of the impoverishment of your time? Does it allow you to be in deeper service to the transformations that are happening now? Does it connect you more deeply to the body you inhabit? Does it root you more profoundly to this generous planet that serves as your home and your mother? We have all chosen to incarnate in troubled times. You may describe our context as the Anthropocene or the Kali Yuga (the dark ages in the Vedic cycle) -- a context that rewards short-termism, greed, extraction. We must all be good students of our culture in order to be conscientious objectors. This is the path of the mystic. [...] Some may call that heretical, I would describe it as being contextually relevant.

Part of our spiritual practice is to study our cultures in order to understand the antidote logic. In our culture of modernity, the antidote is to cultivate reciprocal relationships, to live in dialogue with a living planet, to act in solidarity with all Life, to build power and oppose oppression, and to live in the gift, without usury, speculation or accumulation. We know that our souls will continue coming back to this planet until we create heaven on Earth. Non-dualistically, we also understand that heaven on Earth is already here. We source our political power from the simultaneous truths of multiple realities. This is divine will.

I can do no better than to borrow from our siblings who wrote the Talmud:

Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, But neither are you free to abandon it.

(Ian Sanders)

[liberty1776]

Shocker! What does the Talmud really say about Jesus? Was Joseph invente...

A different Jesus in the Talmud? 

[majestativa]

“All that for a ‘Perhaps’?” (The Talmud) All that for an “Almost”?

Edmond Jabès, The Book of Shares