Short answer
The Talmud is a huge record of the rabbis' debates on Jewish law, and of their stories. It was finished around 500-600 CE. Some "Talmud quotes" online are invented. "Libbre David 37" points to no real book. The code paragraph quoted as giving Jews all gentile (non-Jewish) property says no such thing. Others cut a real line. Lists quote the small book Soferim as "the best of the gentiles, kill", and usually drop its "in time of war". Many are real. The Shulchan Aruch, the main code of Jewish law, lets a Jew keep an idolater's lost property. In an early teaching in Sanhedrin 57a, a Jew who kills a gentile is "exempt": no court puts him to death. Most lists go back to hostile writers such as Rohling (1871) and Pranaitis (1892). The Qur'an tells Muslims to check a report before acting on it (49:6). Islam blames no one living today for an old text (6:164), and it forbids wronging anyone (5:8).
Full explanation
What the Talmud is
The Talmud is built in layers. The first layer is the Mishnah, edited around 200 CE. It is a code of the oral law, or Oral Torah. Rabbinic Judaism holds that God (﷾) gave Moses this teaching beside the written Torah. The second layer is the Gemara: centuries of the rabbis' debate on the Mishnah. One Gemara was completed in the Land of Israel around 400. It is the Jerusalem Talmud. The Babylonian Talmud was completed around 500-600, with later additions. Its material is of two kinds. Halakha is law. Aggadah is stories, sayings and sermons. Jewish law was later set out in codes. The chief ones are the Mishneh Torah (c. 1180) of Maimonides, a 12th-century rabbi, and Joseph Karo's Shulchan Aruch (1565). Moses Isserles (16th century), known as the Rema, added notes to the Shulchan Aruch. It is printed with them.
The standard introduction to rabbinic literature: the Mishnah, edited under Rabbi Judah the Prince around 200 CE; the Tosefta; the Jerusalem Talmud, completed in the Land of Israel around 400; and the Babylonian Talmud, completed in Babylonia over the following two centuries, with later additions. It explains the division of the material into halakha (law) and aggadah (narrative and homily).
Where the lists come from
Most lists go back to a few hostile books. The German scholar Johann Eisenmenger collected passages to attack Jews in Entdecktes Judentum (1700). The Catholic priest August Rohling copied him in Der Talmudjude (1871). Justinas Pranaitis, also a Catholic priest, lifted his Hebrew from Eisenmenger in a book of 1892. Pranaitis read words for idolaters and Samaritans as meaning Christians.
A study of anti-Talmud propaganda. It traces the lists to Eisenmenger's Entdecktes Judentum, to Rohling's Der Talmudjude (17 editions; Rohling sued Rabbi Joseph Bloch for calling him ignorant and a perjurer, then withdrew in 1885 before the hearing), and to Pranaitis, whose Hebrew quotations were lifted from Eisenmenger and who read words for idolaters and Samaritans as meaning Christians. It shows that "Libbre David 37" cites no real book (Hermann Strack searched every book called Dibre David and found no such passage), and that the "quotation" of Choshen Mishpat 348, "all property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation", is invented: the real paragraph forbids theft from Jew or gentile.
The memoir of Benzion Katz, a Jewish journalist who attended the Beilis blood-libel trial in Kiev (1913), written some fifty years later, with Leiman's notes. Katz says he drafted questions that the defence put to the prosecution's Talmud expert, the Catholic priest Justinas Pranaitis, and that Pranaitis could not answer them. Leiman's notes date Pranaitis' Latin book to 1892, say he copied almost all his arguments from earlier anti-Jewish writings, printer's errors included, and record that two non-Jewish Russian Hebraists testified for the defence. Beilis was acquitted.
Two quotes that are invented
"Libbre David 37" is said to order Jews, on pain of death, to give false explanations of rabbinic books. It points to no real book. Hermann Strack, a German Christian scholar of the Talmud, searched every book titled Dibre David. He found no such passage. "Choshen Mishpat 348" is quoted as saying that "all property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation". Choshen Mishpat is the part of the Shulchan Aruch on civil law. The real paragraph, 348:2, opens by forbidding theft from a Jew or a non-Jew.
A study of anti-Talmud propaganda. It traces the lists to Eisenmenger's Entdecktes Judentum, to Rohling's Der Talmudjude (17 editions; Rohling sued Rabbi Joseph Bloch for calling him ignorant and a perjurer, then withdrew in 1885 before the hearing), and to Pranaitis, whose Hebrew quotations were lifted from Eisenmenger and who read words for idolaters and Samaritans as meaning Christians. It shows that "Libbre David 37" cites no real book (Hermann Strack searched every book called Dibre David and found no such passage), and that the "quotation" of Choshen Mishpat 348, "all property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation", is invented: the real paragraph forbids theft from Jew or gentile.
Main text: whoever steals even a perutah's worth (the smallest coin) transgresses "Ye shall not steal" and must pay, whether he steals from a Jew or from an idolater, from an adult or a child. The Rema's gloss: the error of an idolater, such as misleading him in a reckoning or evading his loan, is permitted, provided he does not know of it, so that there is no desecration of God's name (citing the Tur). "And some say" it is forbidden to mislead him, and only his own unprompted mistake may be kept (citing the Mordechai). The printed text's akum (idolater) is a censor-era term.
Two passages in the minor tractates: Soferim and Kallah
The lists quote "Soferim 15:10" as "the best of the gentiles, kill". A gentile is a non-Jew. Soferim is a minor tractate, a small book gathered after the Talmud. The saying is Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai's (2nd century), and it comes in several versions. The Mekhilta, an early commentary on Exodus, says it of the God-fearing Egyptians whose horses pulled Pharaoh's chariots after Israel. The Jerusalem Talmud gives "the most fit among the gentiles, kill". It stands in a string of sayings such as "the most fit of doctors is for Gehenna", that is, for hell. Only Soferim has "in time of war". The lists usually drop those words. "Kallah 1b" points to Kallah, another minor tractate. In it Rabbi Akiva (2nd century) swears an oath to a mother with his lips and annuls it in his heart. He does it to learn the truth about her son's birth. The longer tractate Kallah Rabbati tells the same story, and asks at once: "How could Rabbi Akiva do this?"
The same string of sayings ("the best of doctors is for Gehenna", "the most worthy of butchers is Amalek's partner"), with Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai's: "the best of the idolaters, in time of war, kill; the best of serpents, crush its brain; the most worthy of women practises sorcery". The printed text's ovdei kokhavim (star-worshippers) is a censor's term. Only this version adds "in time of war".
Asks where Pharaoh found horses for the six hundred chariots that pursued Israel, when the Egyptians' cattle had died. It answers: from the Egyptians who "feared the word of the LORD" and brought their animals indoors before the hail (Exodus 9:20). So the animals of the God-fearing became a snare to Israel, "whence Rabbi Shimon says: the best of the gentiles, kill; the best of serpents, crush its head". In context the saying is about those Egyptians.
In a string of sayings about trades and types ("most donkey-drivers are wicked, most sailors are pious", "the most fit of doctors is for Gehenna"), Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai is quoted: "the most fit among the gentiles, kill; the best of serpents, crush its brain; the most fit of women is a sorceress". This version has no "in time of war".
Rabbi Akiva disagrees with his teachers about a bold boy's birth. To prove it he promises the boy's mother the World to Come if she answers him, and when she asks him to swear, he swears "with his lips" and annuls it "in his heart". She tells him the boy was born of adultery. The story names no one else.
Tells the same story of Rabbi Akiva, and its own Gemara objects at once: "How could Rabbi Akiva do this?", citing Leviticus 5:4 on an oath uttered with the lips. It answers that he swore in an ambiguous form of words, and even so annulled it in his heart.
| As the lists give it | Verdict | What the source says |
|---|---|---|
| "Libbre David 37" | Invented | No such book or passage was ever found |
| "Choshen Mishpat 348": all property of other nations belongs to Jews | Invented | 348:2 opens by forbidding theft from a Jew or a non-Jew |
| "Soferim 15:10": the best of the gentiles, kill | Cut short | Soferim has "in time of war", which the lists drop |
| "Kallah 1b": Rabbi Akiva's oath | Cut short | Kallah Rabbati asks at once: "How could Rabbi Akiva do this?" |
Real lines on property: Choshen Mishpat 348:2 and 266:1
Other lines on the lists are real. The Rema's note on paragraph 348:2 permits misleading an idolater in a calculation, or evading his loan, if he does not know. An idolater is a person who worships idols. The condition is that God's (﷾) name is not disgraced. The Rema also records a view that forbids misleading him. It allows only keeping his own mistake. Paragraph 266:1 lets a Jew keep an idolater's lost property. It calls returning it "a transgression", "because he strengthens the hands of transgressors". The same paragraph praises returning it to honour God's (﷾) name. It requires return where keeping the item would disgrace His name.
Main text: whoever steals even a perutah's worth (the smallest coin) transgresses "Ye shall not steal" and must pay, whether he steals from a Jew or from an idolater, from an adult or a child. The Rema's gloss: the error of an idolater, such as misleading him in a reckoning or evading his loan, is permitted, provided he does not know of it, so that there is no desecration of God's name (citing the Tur). "And some say" it is forbidden to mislead him, and only his own unprompted mistake may be kept (citing the Mordechai). The printed text's akum (idolater) is a censor-era term.
Following Maimonides: an idolater's lost property may be kept, and one who returns it "commits a transgression, because he strengthens the hands of transgressors". If he returns it to sanctify God's name, so that they praise Israel as people of faithfulness, he is praiseworthy. "Where there is desecration of God's name, his lost property is forbidden, and he must return it." Everywhere, their belongings are brought in safe like a Jew's, "because of the ways of peace".
Sanhedrin 57a: killing and robbery
Sanhedrin 57a cites a baraita, an early teaching left out of the Mishnah. It concerns the laws that bind all mankind. A Jew who kills a gentile is "exempt" (patur), meaning no court puts him to death. Robbery of a gentile by a Jew is "permitted" (mutar). The Gemara asks why it says "exempt" and not "permitted". It answers with another teaching. That teaching rules that gentiles are neither pulled out of a pit nor thrown in, like Jewish shepherds who lived by robbery. Another page of the Talmud, Bava Kamma 113b, says that robbing a gentile is forbidden.
In a discussion of the laws binding on all descendants of Noah, the Gemara cites a baraita (a teaching from the time of the Mishnah). Bloodshed by a gentile against a gentile or an Israelite makes him liable (hayav); by an Israelite against a gentile he is exempt (patur), that is, no court executes him. Robbery and similar acts by a gentile are forbidden (asur); by an Israelite against a gentile, "permitted" (mutar). The Gemara explains that for killing the baraita says "exempt", not "permitted", because another teaching rules that gentiles, like Jewish shepherds who lived by robbery, are not thrown into a pit. That teaching's other half, that they are not pulled out, is the source of Yoreh De'ah 158; the Meiri limits it to idolaters without religion. Rav Aha son of Rav Ika explains the "similar acts" of robbery as withholding a hired worker's wages. Bava Kamma 113b states that robbing a gentile is forbidden. The printed Vilna text reads kuti (Cuthean), a censor's substitution; the Koren (William Davidson) text reads goy in its vocalized version and nokhri in its unvocalized one, both meaning gentile.
Rav Bivi bar Giddel, citing Rabbi Shimon Hasida: robbing a gentile is forbidden, while his lost property may be kept. Rav Huna derives the ban on robbery from Deuteronomy 7:16: the peoples are to be "consumed" only at a time when they are delivered into Israel's hand, and not otherwise. A baraita adds that where there is desecration of God's name, even keeping his lost property is forbidden. Shmuel says a gentile's error may be kept. The Meiri, commenting on this page, rules that every people that worships God is like Israel in all these matters.
Rescue and healing: "Hilkhot Akum X" and Yoreh De'ah 158
The lists' "Hilkhot Akum X" ("Laws of Idolaters, chapter 10") is Maimonides, Idolatry 10:1-2. It says that no covenant is made with idolaters: "they must turn from their worship, or be killed". It adds: "it is forbidden to have mercy on them". One who sees an idolater drowning does not pull him out. Killing him, or pushing him into a pit, is forbidden, "because he is not at war with us". He may not be healed even for a fee. Where hostility is feared, he is healed for a fee, but not for free. A resident gentile is healed for free. That is a gentile who keeps the seven laws given to all mankind. The same passage says Jewish informers and heretics are to be destroyed by hand, "like Yeshua ha-Notzri", Jesus of Nazareth, "and his disciples". Where the manuscripts say "idolaters", printed editions say "the seven nations" of Canaan. The printed editions also leave out those names (Yeshua and his disciples). Yoreh De'ah, the Shulchan Aruch's part on ritual law, repeats the rule at 158:1. In the same sentence it applies the rule to Jewish shepherds who lived by robbery.
From Deuteronomy 7:2, no covenant is made with idolaters to leave them at peace in their worship: "rather they must turn from their worship, or be killed", and "it is forbidden to have mercy on them". One who sees one drowning does not pull him out, but to kill him or push him into a pit is forbidden, "because he is not at war with us". That is said of gentiles; but of Jewish informers, minim and apikorsim (heretics) it says "it is a mitzvah to destroy them by hand" and to bring them down to the pit of destruction, because they afflict Israel and turn the people away from God, "like Yeshua ha-Notzri and his disciples, and Tzadok and Boethus and their disciples". Hence it is forbidden to heal idolaters even for a fee; where one fears them or fears hostility, they are healed for a fee, but not for free. A resident gentile who keeps the seven laws is healed for free. The manuscripts behind the Mechon Mamre text read "idolaters" and "a gentile who worships idols"; printed editions read "the seven nations", put the rule on informers and heretics in the past ("it was the law"), and leave out the names.
Paragraph 1, as printed (Lemberg 1888): "idolaters of the seven nations" with whom there is no war, and Jewish shepherds of small cattle in the Land of Israel at the time when most fields were Israel's, are not brought to their death, but are not rescued when about to die. They are not healed even for a fee unless hostility is feared. The Rema: then even for free, if one cannot avoid it; and it was permitted to test a remedy on a Canaanite slave (one edition: on a Cuthean). The rule is for Jews who persist in sin, like those shepherds, who lived by robbery; a Jew who sins for his own appetite must be rescued. Paragraph 2 turns to Jewish heretics and those who deny the Torah and prophecy. The Torat Emet edition reads "it is a mitzvah to kill them", openly or by stratagem; the Lemberg printing says this was done "in the time of the Temple". Its source, Maimonides (Murderer 4:10), writes "it was a mitzvah". The Rema adds that apostates who join idol worship are treated alike, but one who comes to repent is received. The Torat Emet edition has no "seven nations" in paragraph 1.
Purity and family: Yevamot 61a and 98a, Avodah Zarah 36b
Yevamot 61a records Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai (2nd century): "you are called adam, and the idolaters are not called adam". Adam is Hebrew for "man". The saying belongs to a rule of ritual impurity. The question is whether a gentile's corpse makes those under the same roof impure. The same saying is at Bava Metzia 114b. In Yevamot 98a, Rava, a 4th-century Babylonian rabbi, explains the rule that "a gentile has no father" in marriage law. He says the Torah treats a gentile's offspring as legally unrelated to him. He cites Ezekiel 23:20, where the prophet likens Egypt's men to asses and horses. Avodah Zarah 36b records a first-century decree on gentiles' daughters. Rav Nahman bar Yitzhak, a 4th-century Babylonian rabbi, explains it. Gentile girls count as niddah "from the cradle". Niddah is the ritual impurity of a menstruating woman. The lists render it as "filth".
A baraita: Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai says that the graves of gentiles do not convey impurity under a roof, because Ezekiel 34:31 calls Israel adam ("men") and the Torah's rule reads "when a man (adam) dieth in a tent" (Numbers 19:14): "you are called adam, and the idolaters are not called adam". The Gemara at once objects from Numbers 31:40 and Jonah 4:11, where gentiles are called adam, and answers that there the word marks people off from animals. The same saying is at Bava Metzia 114b and Keritot 6b.
On the family status of converts. Rava explains the rule that "a gentile has no father" in marriage law: twin brothers conceived before their mother converted do not perform levirate marriage, though they share one father. So, he says, the Torah treats a gentile's offspring as legally unrelated to him ("the Merciful One made his seed ownerless"), citing Ezekiel 23:20, a harsh image the prophet uses of Egypt in an allegory. The subject is which family ties count in the marriage laws after conversion.
Rav is reported as listing the bans on gentiles' bread, oil, wine and daughters among the eighteen decrees issued in one day by the disciples of Shammai and Hillel (1st century). Rav Nahman bar Yitzhak explains the decree on daughters: gentile girls count as ritually impure (niddah) "from the cradle". The discussion goes on to earlier decrees against sexual relations and seclusion with gentile women. It is a law of ritual purity that kept Jews from relations and marriage with gentiles.
Blows, heretics and informers
In Sanhedrin 58b, Rabbi Hanina (3rd century) says that a gentile who strikes a Jew is "liable to death". Slapping a Jew's cheek, he adds, is like slapping the Divine Presence. Maimonides puts it in his code: such a gentile is "liable to death", but is not put to death. Two harsh laws concern Jews themselves. Yoreh De'ah 158:2 turns to Jewish heretics. One edition reads "it is a mitzvah to kill them". A mitzvah is a religious duty. The Lemberg printing of 1888 says this was done "in the time of the Temple". Choshen Mishpat 388:15 is the law of the moser, or informer. He is a Jew who hands Jews or their money over to gentiles. If he is known to have done it three times, plans and schemes are sought "to remove him from the world". That means bringing about his death. The Rema allows only indirect means, "even though it is forbidden to kill him" with one's own hands. An earlier paragraph, 388:10, permits killing an informer who says he will inform, "even in this time". It calls it a mitzvah if he persists after a warning.
Rabbi Hanina says that a gentile who strikes a Jew is liable to death, from Moses and the Egyptian (Exodus 2:12), and that one who slaps a Jew's cheek is as if he slapped the cheek of the Divine Presence (a wordplay on Proverbs 20:25). Next to it Resh Lakish says that one who merely raises his hand against his fellow is called wicked (Exodus 2:13, two Hebrews fighting), and Rabbi Elazar says such a man has no remedy but burial. Rabbi Hanina's "liable to death" is a legal statement (Maimonides codifies it, Kings and Wars 10:6); the rest is aggadah.
A gentile who strikes a Jew, even causing the slightest injury, is "liable to death", but he is not put to death.
Paragraph 1, as printed (Lemberg 1888): "idolaters of the seven nations" with whom there is no war, and Jewish shepherds of small cattle in the Land of Israel at the time when most fields were Israel's, are not brought to their death, but are not rescued when about to die. They are not healed even for a fee unless hostility is feared. The Rema: then even for free, if one cannot avoid it; and it was permitted to test a remedy on a Canaanite slave (one edition: on a Cuthean). The rule is for Jews who persist in sin, like those shepherds, who lived by robbery; a Jew who sins for his own appetite must be rescued. Paragraph 2 turns to Jewish heretics and those who deny the Torah and prophecy. The Torat Emet edition reads "it is a mitzvah to kill them", openly or by stratagem; the Lemberg printing says this was done "in the time of the Temple". Its source, Maimonides (Murderer 4:10), writes "it was a mitzvah". The Rema adds that apostates who join idol worship are treated alike, but one who comes to repent is received. The Torat Emet edition has no "seven nations" in paragraph 1.
The law of the moser: of a Jew known to have three times handed Jews or their money over to gentiles, the code says counsel and stratagem are sought "to remove him from the world", that is, to bring about his death. The Rema adds: by indirect means only, "even though it is forbidden to kill him" with one's own hands. One who speaks words of informing in public, and so causes harm, is punished as the judges see fit.
It is permitted to kill the moser (informer) anywhere, "even in this time". It is permitted to kill him before he informs, once he has said he will inform on someone, in body or in money, even a small sum: he has made himself liable to death. He is warned, "Do not inform"; if he is brazen and says he will inform all the same, "it is a mitzvah to kill him", and whoever kills him first gains merit. The Rema adds: where there is no time to warn him, no warning is needed; and some say it is forbidden to kill him if one can be saved from him by maiming him, such as cutting his tongue or blinding his eyes, for he is no worse than any other pursuer.
Real passages with their own pages
Other real passages have their own pages on this site. In Gittin 57a, a man the manuscripts call Yeshu says his punishment is boiling excrement, for mocking the words of the sages. Sanhedrin 43a says that Yeshu was hanged on the eve of Passover. Sanhedrin 107b says that he practised sorcery and led Israel astray. Most scholars read these Yeshu passages as being about Jesus. Shabbat 104b and Sanhedrin 67a tell of a man called Ben Stada, whose mother was named Miriam. A Babylonian saying explains her nickname: she "strayed from her husband". Sanhedrin 55b repeats the Mishnah's rule that from three years and one day a girl can be betrothed (bound in marriage) through intercourse. Ketubot 11b is about the marriage settlement, the sum a husband owes his wife. It says an adult's act with a girl under three is "nothing" in law. So she is still counted a virgin and keeps the full settlement.
An anonymous aggadah (story) in the Talmud's cycle on the destruction of Jerusalem (Kamtza and Bar Kamtza, 55b-58a). Onkelos son of Kalonikos, son of Titus's sister, wants to convert (le-igayyurei). He raises by necromancy (be-negida) three dead men and asks each who is esteemed (chashiv) in that world, and whether he should join them. Titus says Israel's commandments are too many, and advises him to fight them; he is burned and scattered each day, as he decreed for himself. Balaam answers with Deuteronomy 23:7, "you shall not seek their peace or their welfare"; his punishment is boiling semen (be-shikhvat zera rotachat). The third says: seek their good, do not seek their harm (tovatam derosh, ra'atam lo tidrosh); whoever touches them touches the apple of his eye. His punishment is boiling excrement (be-tso'ah rotachat). The Talmud explains it with "as the Master said: whoever mocks the words of the Sages (ha-mal'ig al divrei chakhamim) is punished in boiling excrement". It closes: come and see the difference between the sinners of Israel (posh'ei Yisrael) and the prophets of the nations; the Vilna text adds ovdei avodah zarah, idol-worshippers. Rashi names the rule's source as Eruvin 21b. The Koren/Steinsaltz edition explains the closing line: Balaam, a prophet, wished Israel harm, while Yeshu ha-Notzri, a Jewish sinner, sought their good. Herford (p. 68) and Krauss called the three men Israel's chief enemies; the Talmud's own words do not. The name: the standard printed text reads "the sinners of Israel" in the third scene, though the verb is singular (asqeih, "raised him") and Onkelos asks about "that man". Three medieval manuscripts, read on the libraries' images, name him. MS Vatican ebr. 130 (1381), f. 35v, reads Yeshu ha-Notzri, "Jesus the Nazarene". MS Munich 95 (1342), f. 223r, and MS Vatican ebr. 140 (14th century), f. 54r, read Yeshu; the Rashi column of Vatican 140 glosses "the sinners of Israel" as "Yeshu". The Koren/Steinsaltz edition prints Yeshu ha-Notzri.
The Mishnah (6:1) says a herald goes out before a man led to execution. The Talmud asks whether a herald also went out earlier, and quotes a baraita (tanya, a teaching presented as from the early sages, the tannaim, but left out of the Mishnah) as an objection. The baraita says that on the eve of Passover they hung Yeshu ha-Notzri. For forty days a herald had announced that he would be stoned, because he practised sorcery (kishef), enticed Israel to idolatry (hesit) and led it astray (hiddiach), and had called for anyone who knew a reason to acquit him. None was found. Ulla, a Palestinian-born teacher of the 3rd-4th century active in Babylonia, objects: an enticer to idolatry is not given a search for a defence (Deuteronomy 13:9). He answers himself: Yeshu was different, because he was karov le-malchut, close to the government (or to royalty). A second baraita follows on five disciples, each condemned by a play on a verse. It has no parallel in the Mishnah, the Tosefta or the Jerusalem Talmud. (A related tradition about Ben Stada, an enticer stoned at Lod, is in the Jerusalem Talmud, Sanhedrin 7:12, and Sanhedrin 67a adds that he was hanged on Passover eve; whether he is Jesus is disputed.) Manuscripts: MS Florence II.I.7-9 (1177), MS Karlsruhe (Reuchlin) 2 and MS Yad Harav Herzog 1 read Yeshu ha-Notzri, and Florence adds "on the eve of the Sabbath"; in MS Munich 95 (1342) the name has been erased (reported by Schäfer 2007, pp. 64-65 and 133-140, and for Florence and Munich by Rabbinovicz through Dalman 1893). The passage is missing from the standard printed (Vilna) text; the Koren/Steinsaltz edition restores it.
Aggadah. A baraita (tanu rabbanan) teaches: always let the left hand push away and the right hand draw near, not like Elisha, who pushed Gehazi away with both hands, and not like Yehoshua ben Perachiah, who pushed Yeshu ha-Notzri away with both hands. The story follows. When King Yannai was killing the Sages, Yehoshua ben Perachiah and Yeshu went to Alexandria. On the way back the teacher praised an inn; the pupil said the innkeeper's eyes were narrow (terutot); the teacher excommunicated him with four hundred shofars. Later, while reciting the Shema, the teacher waved to him to wait; the pupil thought he was rejected, "went, set up a brick and bowed down to it" (azal zakaf leventa ve-hishtachaveh lah), and refused to repent, citing his teacher's rule that one who sins and makes the many sin is given no chance to repent. It closes: "And the Master said: Yeshu practised sorcery, enticed and led Israel astray" (kishef ve-hesit ve-hiddiach et Yisra'el). Printed editions from Basel (1578-81) on removed the name. The Jerusalem Talmud's older form of the story is at Hagigah 2:2.
Herford notes that the censored modern editions read "the sinners of Israel", a plural that does not fit the singular story; the older editions read "the sinner of Israel", and the book of expurgated passages reads Yeshu. He concludes that Jesus is the person meant. On Sanhedrin 107b he notes that King Yannai reigned a full century before Jesus, and explains the anachronism by the rabbis' very vague ideas of past chronology. He judges that the story of Jesus in hell is a haggadic invention, not tradition about him, and that the rabbinic passages add nothing new to the Gospels' history of Jesus, beyond confirming that he lived.
Reads the Babylonian Talmud's Jesus passages as deliberate counter-narratives that parody the New Testament stories, written by rabbis who knew the Gospels, especially Matthew and John. He argues that this bold reply came from Sasanian Babylonia, where the rabbis lived outside Christian power, unlike the Jews of Roman and Byzantine Palestine. In his table of manuscripts and printings, all three manuscripts of Gittin 57a name Jesus, while the Soncino printing (1484-1519) leaves the name out and the Vilna edition reads "sinners of Israel"; he ascribes such gaps in the printed Jesus passages to censorship, or to printers pre-empting it. On Gittin 57a he doubts that mocking the Sages was the story's original charge, holding that the editor borrowed it from Eruvin 21b. He then offers, as an admittedly speculative reading, that the excrement mocks the Eucharist: Jesus sits in what his followers produce after eating his flesh.
Halakha on the Sabbath. The Mishnah here says that one who scratches marks on his flesh on the Sabbath is liable in Rabbi Eliezer's view and exempt in the Sages'. A baraita adds that Rabbi Eliezer said to the Sages: did not Ben Stada bring sorceries out of Egypt "in an incision on his flesh" (bi-seritah she-al besaro)? They answered: "He was a fool" (shoteh hayah), and proof is not brought from fools. The name Yeshu does not appear. The Gemara then debates who Ben Stada was and ties him to Ben Pandira and a mother named Miriam; that discussion belongs to the question of Mary.
Aggadah set inside a legal discussion. The Mishnah (Sanhedrin 7:10) deals with the enticer (mesit) who urges others to worship idols. A baraita says that for this offence alone the court hides witnesses to catch him, and adds: "And so they did to Ben Stada in Lud, and they hanged him on the eve of Passover." The Gemara then asks, as in Shabbat 104b: Ben Stada? He is Ben Pandira! Rav Hisda answers that Stada was the husband and Pandira another man (bo'el Pandira). The Gemara objects that the husband was Pappos ben Yehudah; perhaps the mother was Stada. It objects again that the mother was Miriam megaddela neshaya (here without se'ar, "hair", which in Shabbat 104b is found only in the Vilna print; Schäfer n. 11). It answers with a saying of Pumbedita: satat da mi-ba'alah, "this one strayed from her husband". The name Yeshu does not appear. The printed Vilna text has these lines only in Hesronot ha-Shas, the supplement of censored passages.
In a debate on another point of the same criminal law (whether an animal involved in a sexual crime is put to death), Rav Yosef quotes Mishnah Niddah 5:4. From three years and one day a girl can be betrothed by intercourse, and a man who has relations with her when she is married is liable for adultery. Any man the Torah forbids to her who has relations with her is executed, and she is exempt. The Gemara explains that the Torah spares her out of pity, because she is a minor. Rava quotes the parallel rule for a boy of nine (Mishnah Niddah 5:5). The question is left unresolved.
On Mishnah Ketubot 1:3 and the amount of the marriage settlement. Rav holds that an act by a boy under nine leaves a woman like one injured by wood; Shmuel disagrees. Rava explains the Mishnah: an adult's act with a girl under three is "nothing" in law, because below that age the body heals, as an eye that is touched sheds a tear and recovers. So she keeps the status of a virgin and the full settlement. The rest of the folio discusses when a settlement is reduced or lost.
What the Qur'an asks of a Muslim
The Qur'an tells Muslims to check a report before acting on it (49:6). It forbids repeating what one does not know (17:36). It commands justice even toward those one dislikes: "let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong" (5:8). So a Muslim must never pass on a forged line. He must quote a real one exactly, with its reference. The Qur'an calls itself the guardian over the scriptures before it (5:48). So a Muslim judges Israel's later tradition by what God (﷾) revealed. Islam blames no one living today for an old text: "no bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another" (6:164).
“O ye who believe! If a wicked person comes to you with any news, ascertain the truth, lest ye harm people unwittingly, and afterwards become full of repentance for what ye have done.”
“And pursue not that of which thou hast no knowledge; for every act of hearing, or of seeing or of (feeling in) the heart will be enquired into (on the Day of Reckoning).”
“O ye who believe! stand out firmly for Allah, as witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to piety: and fear Allah. For Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do.”
“To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute;”
“Say: "Shall I seek for (my) Cherisher other than Allah, when He is the Cherisher of all things (that exist)? Every soul draws the meed of its acts on none but itself: no bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another. Your goal in the end is towards Allah: He will tell you the truth of the things wherein ye disputed."”
Replies and answers
Sahih al-Bukhari 6903 — Kitab al-Diyat (Book of Blood Money), hadith 6903
Abu Juhayfa asked Ali whether he and his household had anything that is not in the Qur'an. Ali swore that they had only what is in the Qur'an, the understanding of His Book that God gives a man, and a written sheet of rulings: on blood-money, on freeing captives, and that a Muslim is not killed in retaliation for a disbeliever.
Cited for
Islamic law also distinguishes believer from unbeliever. Al-Bukhari was a 9th-century collector of hadith (reports of the Prophet's (ﷺ) words and deeds). He records that a Muslim is not killed in retaliation for a disbeliever. Muslims should not judge the Talmud by a standard their own law fails.
The response
This page states what the Talmud says. The schools of Islamic law differ on that hadith. The Hanafi school puts a Muslim to death for killing a dhimmi, a non-Muslim under Muslim rule, and sets the same blood-money for both. In the Shafi'i school he is not put to death, but he still owes blood-money for the life he took. The Maliki school sets that sum at half the Muslim's. In every school the Prophet's (ﷺ) warning stands: whoever kills a person under treaty will not smell the fragrance of Paradise.
Where it lands — The Hanafi school gives a dhimmi's life the same protection as a Muslim's. In the Shafi'i and Maliki schools the killer still owes blood-money. In every school the Prophet's (ﷺ) warning falls on him.
Qur'an 49:6 — Surat al-Hujurat (The Inner Apartments), verse 6
“O ye who believe! If a wicked person comes to you with any news, ascertain the truth, lest ye harm people unwittingly, and afterwards become full of repentance for what ye have done.”
Cited for
Why repeat the harsh lines at all? A Muslim page that lists them spreads them, whatever its intentions.
The response
The lines already circulate, mixed with forgeries. A reader needs to know which are forged and what the real ones say. Each rabbinic text cited here can be read on Sefaria, a free website of Jewish texts. The Qur'an tells Muslims to verify a report before acting on it, and not to repeat what they do not know.
Where it lands — The page sorts the forged lines from the real ones; silence would leave the lists standing.
Perspectives
Rabbinic Judaism
The Talmud records the Oral Torah and the debates of the sages (the early rabbis) over it. Law is decided by the codes and their authorities, not by a single line. The sages commanded Jews to support gentiles' poor, visit their sick and bury their dead, "because of the ways of peace".
Menachem ha-Meiri, a rabbi of Perpignan who died about 1315, limits the harsh rules to ancient idolaters without religion. He treats nations who worship God like Israel. The Aruch HaShulchan is a code by Rabbi Yechiel Michel Epstein (d. 1908). It forbids all deception in the countries of its day.
Rebuttal
Granted, and a fair reader quotes them too. But these are the Meiri's and Epstein's own rulings, not the code's words. The Shulchan Aruch prints the rules on an idolater's lost property, his error and his rescue without the Meiri's limit.
The Talmud and Maimonides command support for gentiles' poor and visits to their sick. They command burial of their dead, because of the ways of peace.
Rebuttal
This is true. But the Shulchan Aruch, the main code, also lets a Jew keep an idolater's lost property, and calls returning it "a transgression" (Choshen Mishpat 266:1).
Historians of the lists
The circulating lists descend from Eisenmenger, Rohling and Pranaitis. Christian and Jewish scholars have exposed their forgeries and distortions.
"Libbre David 37" cites no real book, and the Choshen Mishpat 348 "quotation" about gentile property is invented.
Pranaitis, a source of many lists, copied his material from earlier anti-Jewish writers.
The Islamic perspective
Islam forbids false witness against anyone, Jews included. A Muslim quotes the Talmud exactly, and judges it by the Qur'an.
The Qur'an commands Muslims to be just even toward those they dislike. It commands them to bear witness for justice even against themselves.
The Qur'an orders a report to be verified before it is acted on. It forbids repeating what one does not know.
In Islam no one bears the blame for another's words.
The Qur'an is the guardian over earlier scripture, and Israel's later tradition is judged by it (5:48).