PJ 223

CHAPTER 11

2/17/91 #3   HATONN

THE VATICAN OF JUDAISM
JUDAISM/PHARISAISM

[CONTINUATION OF QUOTING:]

The eminent Rabbi Louis Finkelstein, the head of the The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, often referred to as the "The Vatican of Judaism", in his Forward to his First Edi­tion of this world-famous classic "The Pharisees, The Sociologi­cal Background of Their Faith", on page XXI states:

". . Judaism. . .Pharisaism became Talmudism, Talmudism became Midieval Rabbinism, and Midieval Rabbinism became Modern Rabbinism. But throughout these changes in name. . .the spirit of the ancient Pharisees survives, unaltered. . .From Palestine to Babylonia; from Babylonia to North Africa, Italy, Spain, France and Germany; from these to Poland, Russia, and eastern Europe generally, ancient Pharisaism has wandered. . .demonstrates the enduring importance which attaches to Phari­saism as a religious movement. . ."

The celebrated Rabbi Louis Finkelstein in his great classic quoted from above traces the origin of the form of religious worship practiced today under the present name "Judaism", to its origin as "Pharisaism" in Judea in the time of Jesus. Rabbi Louis Finkelstein confirms what the eminent Rabbi Adolph Moses stated in his great classic "Yahvism, and Other Dis­courses", in collaboration with the celebrated Rabbi H.G.Enelow, published in 1903 by the Louisville Section of the Council of Jewish Women, in which Rabbi Adolph Moses, on page 1 states:

"Among the inumerable misfortunes which have befallen. . .the most fatal in its consequences is the name Judaism. . .Worse still, the Jews themselves, who have gradually come to call their religion Judaism. . .Yet, neither in biblical nor post-biblical, neither in talmudic, nor in much later times, is the term Judaism ever heard. . .The Bible speaks of the religion. . .as 'Torath Yahve', the instruction, or the moral law revealed by Yahve. . .in other places. . .as ' Yirath Yahve', the fear and reverence of Yahve. These and other appelations CONTIN­UED FOR MANY AGES TO STAND FOR THE RELIGION. . .To distinguish it from Christianity and Islam, the Jewish philosophers sometimes designate it as the faith or belief of the Jews. . IT WAS FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS. WRITING FOR THE INSTRUCTION OF GREEKS AND ROMANS. WHO  COINED THE TERM JUDAISM, in order to pit it against Hel­lenism. . .By Hellenism was understood the civilization, com­prising language, poetry, religion, art, science, manners, cus­toms, institutions, which. . .had spread from Greece, its original home, over vast regions of Europe, Asia and Africa. . .The Christians eagerly seized upon the name. . .The Jews them­selves, who intensly detested the traitor Josephus, refrained from reading his works. .  THE TERM JUDAISM COINED BY JOSEPHUS REMAINED ABSOLUTELY UN­KNOWN TO THEM. . .IT WAS ONLY IN COMPARA­TIVELY RECENT TIMES. AFTER THE JEWS BECAME FAMILIAR WITH MODERN CHRISTIAN LITERATURE.. THAT THEY BEGAN TO_ NAME THEIR RELIGION JU­DAISM." (emphasis supplied)

This statement by the world's two leading authorities on this subject clearly establishes beyond any question or any doubt that so-called "Judaism" was not the name of any form of religious worship practiced in Judea in the time of Jesus. The Flavius Josephus referred to in the above quotation lived in the 1st cen­tury. It was he who coined the word "Judaism" in the 1st cen­tury explicitly for the purpose recited clearly above. Religious worship known and practiced today under the name "Judaism" by so-called or self-styled "Jews" throughout the world was known and practiced in Judea in the time of Jesus under the name "Pharisaism" according to Rabbi Louis Finkelstein, head of The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, and all the other most competent and qualified recognized authorities on the subject.

The form of religious worship known as "Pharisaism" in Judea in the time of Jesus was a religious practice based exclu­sively upon the Talmud. The Talmud in the time of Jesus was the Magna Charta, the Declaration of Independence, the Con­stitution, and the Bill of Rights, all rolled into one, of those who practiced "Pharisaism". The Talmud today occupies the same relative position with respect to those who profess "Judaism". The Talmud today virtually exercises totalitarian dictatorship over the lives of so-called or self-styled "Jews" whether they are aware of that fact or not. Their spiritual leaders make no at­tempt to conceal the control they exercise over the lives of so-called or self-styled "Jews". They extend their authority far be­yond the legitimate limits of spiritual matters. Their authority has no equal outside religion.

The role the Talmud plays in "Judaism" as it is practiced to­day is officially stated by the eminent Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer, the Director of Interreligious Activities of the American Jewish Committee and the President of the Jewish Chaplains Associa­tion of the Armed Forces of the United States. In his present capacity as official spokesman for The American Jewish Committee, the self-styled "Vatican of Judaism", Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer wrote a most revealing and comprehensive article with the title "What is a Jew" which was published as a feature article in Look Magazine in the June 17, 1952 issue. In that ar­ticle Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer evaluated the significance of the Talmud to "Judaism" today. In that illuminating treatise on that important subject by the most qualified authority, at the time, Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer stated:

"The Talmud consists of 63 books of legal, ethical and his­torical writings of the ancient rabbis. It is a compendium of law and lore. IT IS THE LEGAL CODE WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF JEWISH RELIGIOUS LAW AND IT IS THE TEXTBOOK USED IN THE TRAINING OF RABBIS." [H: Please obtain of copy of RAPE OF JUSTICE by Eustace Muffins--which can, I believe, be obtained through America West--to see just how far the judicial system is entangled and practices "law" by the rules of the "Talmud".]

In view of this official evaluation of the importance of the Talmud in the practice of "Judaism" today by the highest body of so-called or self-styled "Jews" in the world it is very neces­sary at this time, my dear Dr. Goldstein, to inquire a little fur­ther into the subject of the Talmud. In his lifetime the eminent Michael Rodkinson, the assumed name of a so-called or self-styled "Jew" who was one of the worlds great authorities on the Talmud, wrote "History of the Talmud" . This great classic on the subject was written by Michael Rodkinson in collaboration with the celebrated Rabbi Isaac M. Wise. In his "History of the Talmud" Michael Rodkinson, on page 70, states:

"Is the literature that Jesus was familiar with in his early years yet in existence in the world? Is it possible for us to get at it? Can we ourselves review the ideas, the statements, the modes of reasoning and thinking, ON MORAL AND RELI­GIOUS SUBJECTS, which were current in his time, and MUST HAVE BEEN REVOLVED BY HIM DURING THOSE THIRTY SILENT YEARS WHEN HE WAS PONDERING HIS FUTURE MISSION? To such inquiries the learned class of Jewish rabbis ANSWER BY HOLDING UP THE TALMUD. Here, say they, is THE SOURCE FROM WHENCE JESUS OF NAZARETH DREW THE TEACHINGS WHICH ENABLE HIM TO REVOLUTIONIZE THE WORLD; and the question becomes, therefor, an interesting one TO EVERY CHRISTIAN. What is the Talmud? THE TALMUD. THEN IS THE WRIT­TEN FORM OF THAT WHICH. IN THE TIME OF JESUS  WAS CALLED THE TRADITIONS OF THE ELDERS AND  TO WHICH HE MAKES FREQUENT ALLUSIONS. What sort of book is it'?" .

Stimulated by that invitation every Christian worth of the name should immediately take the trouble to seek the answer to that "interesting" question "to every Christian". My dear Dr. Goldstein, your articles do not indicate whether you have taken the time and the trouble to personally investigate "what sort of book" the Talmud is either before or after your conversion to Catholicism. Have you ever done so? If you have done so what is the conclusion you have reached regarding "what sort of book" the Talmud is? What is your personal unbiased and unprejudiced opinion of the Talmud? Is it consistent with your present views as a devout Roman Catholic and a tried and true Christian? Can you spare a few moments to drop me a few lines on your present views?

In case you have never had the opportunity to investigate the contents of the "63 books" of the Talmud so well summarized by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer in his illuminating article "What is a Jew", previously quoted, may I here impose upon your precious time and quote a few passages for you until you find the time to conveniently investigate the Talmud's contents personally. If I can be of any assistance to you in doing so please do not hesitate to let me know in what manner you can use my help.

From the Birth of Jesus until this day there have never been recorded more vicious and vile libelous blasphemies of Jesus, of Christians and the Christian faith by anyone, anywhere, or any­time than you will find between the covers of the infamous "63 books" which are "the legal code which forms the basis of Jew­ish religious law" as well as the "textbook used in the training of rabbis". The explicit and implicit irreligious character and im­plications of the contents of the Talmud will open your eyes as they have never been opened before. The Talmud reviles Jesus, Christians and the Christian faith as the priceless spiritual and cultural heritage of Christians has never been reviled before or since the Talmud was completed in the 5th century. You will have to excuse the foul, obscene, indecent, lewd and vile lan­guage you will see here as verbatim quotations from the official unabridged translation of the Talmud into English.  BE PREPARED FOR A SURPRISE.

In the year 1935 the international hierarchy of so-called or self-styled "Jews" for the first time in history published an offi­cial unabridged translation of the complete Talmud in the En­glish language with complete footnotes. What possessed them to make this translation in English is one of the unsolved mysteries. It was probably done because so many so-called or self-styled "Jews" of the younger generation were unable to read the Tal­mud in the many ancient languages in which the original "63 books" of the Talmud were first composed by their authors in many lands between 200 B.C. and 500 A.D.

The international hierarchy of so-called or self-styled "Jews" selected the most learned scholars to make this official transla­tion of the Talmud into English. These famous scholars also prepared official footnotes explaining passages of the Talmud where they were required. This official unabridged translation of the Talmud into English with the official footnotes was printed in London in 1935 by the Soncino Press. It has been always referred to as the Soncino Edition of the Talmud. A very limited number of the Soncino Edition were printed. They were not made available to any purchaser. The Soncino Edition of the Talmud is to be found in the Library of Congress and the New York Public Library. A set of the Soncino Edition of the Talmud has been available to me for many years. They have become rare "collector's items" by now.

[H: Do you also see that it is up to you-the-people as to whether or not these Journals end up removed from the hands of the world population and fall among the "rare" publications accidentally missed in the mass destruction of the information? It is up to you, citizens of the world, as the world nears destruction at the hands of those who have stolen your very "Truth of God Creator". How can you know Truth if all documentation thereof is destroyed by the would be KINGS AND CONTROLLERS OF THE PLANET?]

The Soncino Edition of the Talmud with its footnotes is like a double-edged sword. It teaches the Talmud to countless millions of the younger generation of so-called or self-styled "Jews" who are not able to read the Talmud in the many ancient languages in which the Talmud was written by its authors between 200 B.C. and 500 A.D. It also teaches Christians what the Talmud has to say about Jesus, about Christians and about the Christian faith. Someday this is bound to back-fire. Christians will some day challenge the assertion that the Talmud is the "sort of book" from which Jesus allegedly "drew the teachings which enabled him to revolutionize the world" on "moral and religious sub­jects". The rumbling is already heard in places.

[H: As you read the quotations, I want (especially you ones who objected to Germain and Hatonn using Bull-shit to see if a scribe would edit it out) to have you REALLY PAY AT­TENTION AS WE PUT THIS INFORMATION INTO YOUR HANDS AND SEE IF YOU STILL BELIEVE THE CHRIST FRAGMENT OF GOD/CREATOR/CREATION WOULD LIKELY UTILIZE THESE TERMS.]

The official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud pub­lished in 1935 was "Translated into English with Notes, Glos­sary and Indices" by such eminent Talmudic scholars as Rabbi Dr. I. Epstein, Rabbi Dr. Samuel Daiches, Rabbi Dr. Israel W. Slotki, M. A., Litt, D., The Reverend Dr. A. Cohen, M.A., Ph.D., M.Sc., Jacob Schater, A. Mishcon, A. Cohen, M.A., Ph.D., Maurice Simon M.A., and the Very Reverend The Chief Rabbi Dr., J. H. Hertz wrote the "Foreword" for the Soncino Edition of the Talmud. The Very Reverend Rabbi Hertz was at the time the Chief Rabbi of England.

The following are but a few of the many similar quotations with footnotes from the Soncino Edition of the Talmud, the "sort of book" form which Jesus allegedly "drew the teachings which enable him to revolutionize the world" on "moral and religious" subjects:

(Book) Sanhedrin, 54b-55a: "What is meant by this?--Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Ped­erasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that (2). What is the basis of their dispute?--Rab maintains that only he who is able to engage in sexual inter­course, may, as the passive subject of pederasty throw guilt (upon the actual offender); whilst he who is unable to engage in sexual intercourse cannot be a passive subject of pederasty (in that respect) (3). But Samuel maintains: Scriptures writes, (And thou shalt not lie with mankind) as with the lyings of a woman (4). It has been taught in accordance with Rab: Ped­ erasty at the age of nine years and a day; (55a) (he) who com­mits bestiality, whether naturally or unnaturally: or a woman who causes herself to be bestiality abused, whether naturally or unnaturally, is liable to punishment (5)."

Footnotes:

(1) The reference is to the passive subject of sodomy. As stated in supra 54a, guilt is incurred by the active participant even if the former be a minor, i.e. less than thirteen years old. Now, however, it is stated that within this age a distinction is drawn. (emphasis is in original, Ed.)

(2)Rab makes nine years the minimum; but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred. Samuel makes three the minimum.

(3)At nine years a male attains sexual matureness.

(4)Lev. XVII1,22.

(5)Rashi reads ("xxx") (Hebrew characters, Ed.) instead of ("zzz") (Hebrew characters, Ed.) in our printed texts. A male, aged nine years and a day, who commits etc. There are thus three distinct clauses in this Baraitha. The first--a male aged nine years and a day--refers to the passive subject of pederasty, the punishment being incurred by the adult offender. This must be its meaning: because firstly, the active offender is never ex­plicitly designated as a male, it being understood, just as the Bible states, Thou shalt not lie with mankind, where only the sex of the passive participant is mentioned; and secondly, if the age reference is to the active party, the guilt being incurred by the passive adult party, why single out pederasty: in all crimes of incest, the passive adult does not incur guilt unless the other party is at least nine years and a day? Hence the Baraitha sup­ports Rab's contention that nine years (and a day) is the mini­mum age of the passive partner for the adult to be liable." (emphasis in original, Ed.)

Before giving any more verbatim quotations from the "sort of book" from which it is falsely alleged Jesus "drew the teachings which enable him to revolutionize the world" on "moral and re­ligious subjects" I wish to here again recall to your attention the official statement by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer in Look Magazine for June 17, 1952. In that official statement made by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer on behalf of the American Jewish Commit­tee, self-styled "The Vatican of Judaism", informed the 20,000,000 readers of Look Magazine that the Talmud "IS THE LEGAL CODE WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF JEWISH RELIGIOUS LAW AND IT IS THE TEXTBOOK USED IN THE TRAINING OF RABBIS". Please bear this mind as your read further.

Before continuing I wish also to call your attention to another feature. Confirming the official view of Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer, the New York Times on May 20, 1954 ran a news item under the headline "Rabbis Plan a Fund to Endow Two Chairs". The news item itself ran as follows: "Special to the New York Times, Uniontown, Pa. May 19--Plans for raising $500,000. for the creation of two endowed chairs at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America were announced today at the fifty-fourth annual convention of the Rabbinical Assembly of America. THE PROFESSORSHIPS WOULD BE KNOWN AS THE LOUIS GINSBERG CHAIR IN TALMUD. . .! This is further proof that the Talmud is not yet quite a dead-letter in the "TRAINING OF RABBIS". Is further proof needed on that question?

The world's leading authorities on the Talmud confirm that the official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud translated into English follows the original texts with great exactness. It is almost a word-for-word translation of the original texts. In his famous classic "The History of the Talmud" Michael Rodkinson, the leading authority on the Talmud, in collaboration with the celebrated Reverend Dr. Isaac Wise, states:

"With the conclusion of the first volume of this work at the beginning of the twentieth century, we would invite the reader to take a glance over the past of the Talmud, in which he will see. . .that not only was the Talmud mi destroyed, but was so saved that NOT A SINGLE LETTER OF IT IS MISSING; and now IT IS FLOURISHING TO SUCH A DEGREE AS CAN­NOT BE FOUND IN ITS PAST HISTORY... THE TALMUD IS ONE OF THE WONDERS OF THE WORLD. During the twenty centuries of its existence. . .IT SURVIVED IN ITS EN­TIRETY, and not only has the power of its foes FAILED TO DESTROY EVEN A SINGLE LINE, but it has not even been able materially to weaken its influence for any length of time. IT STILL DOMINATES THE MINDS OF A WHOLE PEO­PLE WHO VENERATE ITS CONTENTS AS DIVINE TRUTH. . .The colleges for the study of the Talmud are in­creasing almost in every place where Israel dwells, especially in this country where millions are gathered for the funds of the two colleges, the Hebrew Union College of Cincinnati and The Jewish Theological Seminary of America in New York, in which the chief study is the Talmud. . .There are also in our city houses of learning (Jeshibath) for the study of the Talmud in the lower East Side, where many young men are studying the Tal­mud every day."

[END OF QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]                             

***Dharma, there is something wrong with your computer key­board--write no more until it is checked and cleared. We will take a respite while this is taken care of, please.***

PJ 223

CHAPTER 12

2/17/91 #4    HATONN

[QUOTING CONTINUED:]

This "divine truth" which "a whole people venerate" of which "not a single letter of it is missing" and today "is flour­ishing to such a degree as cannot be found in its history" is il­lustrated by the additional verbatim quotations which follow:

(Book) Sanhedrin, 55b: "A maiden three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband's brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; (if a niddah) she defiles him who has connection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon (a person affliected with gonorrhea).' (emphasis in original text of Soncino Edition, Ed.)

(Book) Sanhedrin, 58b. "R. Eleazar said in R. Hanina's name; If a heathen had an unnatural connection with his wife, he incurs guilt; for it is written, and he shall cleave, which ex­cludes unnatural intercourse (2). Raba objected: Is there any­thing for which a Jew is not punishable and a heathen is? (3). But Raba said thus: A heathen who violates his neighbor's wife is free from punishment. Why so?--(Scripture saith) To his wife, but not to his neighbor's; and he shall cleave, which ex­cludes unnatural intercourse (4).

Footnotes: (2) His wife derives no pleasure from this, and hence there is no cleaving.

(3)A variant reading of this passage is: Is there anything permitted to a Jew which is forbidden to a heathen. Unnatural connection is permitted to a Jew.

(4)By taking the two in conjunction, the latter as illustrating the former, we learn that the guilt of violating the injunction 'to his wife but not to his neighbor's wife' is incurred only for natu­ral but not for unnatural intercourse." (emphasis in original, Ed.)

(Book) Sanhedrin, 69a. "'A man': from this I know the law only with respect to a man: whence do I know it of one aged nine years and a day who is capable of intercourse? From the verse, And 'if a man'? (2)--He replied: Such a minor can pro­duce semen, but cannot beget therewith; for it is like the seed of cereals less than a third grown (3)."

(footnotes) "(2) 'And" (') indicates an extension of the law, and is here interpreted to include a minor aged nine years and a day.

(3)Such cereals contain seed, which if sown, however, will not grow.

(Book) Sanhedrin, 69b. "Our rabbis taught: If a woman sported lewdly with her young son (a minor), and he committed the first stage of cohabitation with her,--Beth Shammai say, he thereby renders her unfit for the priesthood (1). Beth Hillel de­clare her fit. . .All agree that the connection of a boy nine years and a day is a real connection; whilst that of one less than eight years is not (2); their dispute refers only to one who is eight years old.

(footnotes "(1) i.e., she becomes a harlot whom a priest may not marry (Lev. XXL,7.).

(2)So that if he was nine years and a day or more, Beth Hillel agree that she is invalidated from the priesthood; whilst if he was less than eight, Beth Shammai agree that she is not."

(Book) Kethuboth, 5b. "The question was asked: Is it allowed (15) to perform the first marital act on the Sabbath? (16). Is the blood (in the womb) stored up (17), or is it the result of a wound? (18).

(footnotes) "(15) Lit., 'how is it'?

• (16) When the intercourse could not take place before the Sabbath (Tosaf).
• (17) And the intercourse would be allowed, since the blood flows out of its own accord, no wound having been made.
• (18) Lit., or is it wounded? And the intercourse would be forbidden."

(Book) Kethuboth, 10a-10b. "Someone came before Rabban Gamaliel the son of Rabbi (and) said to him, 'my master I have had intercourse (with my newly wedded wife) and I have not found any blood (7). She (the wife) said to him, 'My master, I am still a virgin' . He (then) said to them: Bring me two handmaids, one (who is) a virgin and one who had intercourse with a man. They brought to him (two such handmaids), and he placed them on a cask of wine. (In the case of) the one who was no more a virgin its smell (1) went through (2), (in the case of) the virgin the smell did not go through (3). He (then) placed this one (the young wife) also (on a cask of wine), and its smell (4) did not go through. He (then) said to him: Go, be happy with thy bargain (7). But he should have examined her from the be­ginning (8)."

(footnotes) "(1) i.e., the smell of wine.

(2)One could smell the wine from the mouth (Rashi). (3)One could not smell the wine from the mouth.

(4)i.e., the smell of wine.

(5)Rabban Gamaliel.

(6)To the husband.

(7)The test showed that the wife was a virgin.

(8)Why did he first have experiment with the two hand­maids."

(Book) Kethuboth, 1 la-1 lb. "Raba said, It means (5) this: When a grown up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this (6), it is as if one puts the finger in the eye (7); but when a small boy has intercourse with a grown up woman, he makes her as 'as a girl who is in­jured by a piece of wood' ".

(footnotes) "(5). Lit., 'says'.

• (6) Lit., 'here', that is, less than three years old.
• (7) Tears come to the eyes again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years."

(Book) Kethuboth, lla-1 lb. "Rab Judah said that Rab said: A small boy who has intercourse with a grown up woman makes here (as though she were) injured by a piece of wood (1). Al­though the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act, nevertheless the woman is injured by it as by a piece of wood."

(footnotes) "(1) Although the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act, nevertheless the woman is injured by it as by a piece of wood."

(Book) Hayorath, 4a. "We learnt: (THE LAW CONCERN­ING THE) MENSTRUANT OCCURS IN THE TORAH BUT IF A MAN HAS INTERCOURSE WITH A WOMAN THAT AWAITS A DAY CORRESPONDING TO A DAY HE IS EX­EMPT. But why? Surely (the law concerning) a woman that awaits a day corresponding to a day is mentioned in the Scrip­tures: He hath made naked her fountain. But, surely it is writ­ten, (1)--They might rule that in the natural way even the first stage of contact is forbidden; and in an unnatural way, however, consummation of coition only is forbidden but the first stage of contact is permitted. If so, (the same might apply) even (to the case of) a menstruant also! (2)--The fact, however, is (that the ruling might have been permitted) (3) even in the natural way (4) alleging (that the prohibition of) the first stage (5) has refer­ence to a menstruant woman only (6). And if you prefer I might say: The ruling may have been that a woman is not regarded as a zabah (7) except during the daytime because it is written, all the days of her issue (8)." (emphasis appears in Soncino Edition original, Ed.)

(footnotes) "(13) Lev. XV,28.

• (14) Cf. supra p.17,n.10. Since she is thus Biblically consid­ered unclean how could a court rule that one having intercourse with her is exempt?
• (15) Lev.XX,18.

(1)Ibid.13. The plural "xxxx" (Hebrew characters, Ed.) im­plies natural, and unnatural intercourse.

(2)Why then was the case of 'a woman who awaits a day cor­responding to a day' given as an illustration when the case of a menstruant, already mentioned, would apply the same illustra­tion.

(3)The first stage of contact.

(4)In the case of one 'who awaits a day corresponding to a day'; only consummation of coition being forbidden in her case. (5)Cf. Lev.XX,18.

(6)Thus permitting a forbidden act which the Sadducees do not admit.

(7)A woman who has an issue of blood not in the time of her menstruation, and is subject to certain laws of uncleaness and purification (Lev.XV,25ff).

(8)Lev.XV,26. Emphasis being laid on days."

(Book) Abodah Zarah, 36b-37a. "R. Naham b.Isaac said: They decreed in connection with a heathen child that it would cause defilement by seminal emission (2) so that an Israelite

child should not become accustomed to commit pederasty with it. . .From what age does a heathen child cause defilement by seminal emission? From the age of nine years and one day. (37a) for inasmuch as he is then capable of the sexual act he likewise defiles by emission. Rabina said: It is therefore to be concluded that a heathen girl (communicates defilement) from the age of three years and one day, for inasmuch as she is then capable of the sexual act she likewise defiles by a flux.

(footnotes) "(2). Even though he suffered from no issue."

(Book) Sotah, 26b). "R. Papa said: It excludes an animal, because there is not adultery in connection with an animal (4). Raba of Parazika (5) asked R. Ashi, Whence is the statement which the Rabbis made that there is no adultery in connection with an animal?--Because it is written, Thou shalt not bring the hire of a harlot or the wages of a dog etc.; (6) and it has been taught: The hire of a dog (7) and the wages of a harlot (8) are permissable, as it is said, Even both of these (9)--the two (specified texts are abominations) but not four (10). . .As lying with mankind. (12) But, said Raba, it excludes the case where he warned her against contact of the bodies (13). Abaye said to him, That is merely an obscene act (and not adultery), and did the All-Merciful prohibit (a wife to her husband) for and ob­scene act?" (emphasis in original text, Ed.)

(footnotes) "(4) She would not be prohibited to her husband for such an act.

(5). Farausag near Baghdad v.BB.(Sonc.Ed.)p.15,n.4. He is thus distinguished from the earlier Rabbi of that name. (6)Deut.XX111,19.

(7)Money given by a man to a harlot to associate with his dog. Such an association is not legal adultery.

(8)If a man had a female slave who was a harlot and he ex­changed her for an animal, it could be offered.

(9)Are an abomination unto the Lord ibid.

• (10) Viz., the other two mentioned by the Rabbi.
• (11) In Num. V,13. since the law applies to a man who is in­capable.
• (12) Lev.XVD1,22. The word for 'lying' is in the plural and is explained as denoting also unnatural intercourse.

•(13)  With the other man, although there is no actual coition." (emphasis appears in original Soncino Edition, Ed.)

(Book) Yebamoth, 55b. "Raba said; For what purpose did the All-Merciful write 'carnally' in connection with the designated bondmaid (9), a married woman (10), and a sotah (11)? This in connection with the designated bondmaid (is required) as has just been explained (12). That in connection with a married woman excludes intercourse with a relaxed membrum (13). This is a satisfactory interpretation in accordance with the view of him who maintains that if one cohabited with forbidden rela­tives with relaxed membrum he is exonerated (14); what, how­ever, can be said, according to him who maintains (that for such an act one is) guilty?--The exclusion is rather that of intercourse with a dead woman (15). Since it might have been assumed that, as (a wife), even after her death, is described as his kin (16), one should be guilty for (intercourse with) her (as for that) with a married woman, hence we are taught (that one is exoner­ated).

(footnotes) (9) Lev.XIX,20.

• (10) Ibid.XVIII,20.
• (11) Nwn. V,13.
• (12) Supra 55a.
• (13) Since no fertilization can possibly occur.
• (14) Shebu.,18a,Sanh.55a.
• (15) Even though she dies as a married woman.
• (16) In Lev.XXI,2. where the text enumerates the dead rela­tives for whom a priest may defile himself. As was explained, supra 22b, his kin refers to one's wife." (emphasis in Soncino Edition original, Ed.)

(Book) Yebamoth, 103a-103b. "When the serpent copulated with Eve (14) he infused her (15) with lust. The lust of the Is­raelites who stood at Mount Sinai (16) came to an end, the lust of idolators who did not stand at Mount Sinai did not come to an end."

(footnotes) "(14) In the garden of Eden, according to tradi­tion.

• (15) i.e., the human species.
• (16) And experienced the purifying influence of divine Rev­elation."

(Book) Yebamoth, 63a. "R. Eleazar further stated: What is meant by the Scriptural text, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh (5)? This teaches that Adam had intercourse

with every beast and animal but found no satisfaction until he cohabited with Eve.

(footnotes) "(5) Gen.I1,23. emphasis on This is now." (emphasis appears in original Soncino Edition, Ed.)

(Book) Yebamoth, 60b. "As R. Joshua b. Levi related: ' There was a certain town in the Land of Israel the legitimacy of whose inhabitants was disputed, and Rabbi sent R. Ramanos who conducted an enquiry and found it in the daughter of a proselyte who was under the age of three years and one day (14), and Rabbi declared her eligible to live with a priest (15)."

(footnotes) "(13) A proselyte under the age of three years and one day may be married by a priest.

• (14)And was married to a priest.
• (15)i.e., permitted to continue to live with her husband."

P (Book) Yebamoth, 59b. "R. Shimi b. Hiyya stated: A woman who had intercourse with a beast is eligible to marry a priest (4). Likewise it was taught: A woman who had inter­course with that which is no human being (5), though she is in consequence subject to the penalty of stoning (6), is nevertheless permitted to marry a priest (7).

(footnotes) "(4) Even a High Priest. The result of such in­tercourse being regarded as a mere wound, and the opinion that does not regard an accidently injured hymen as a disqualification does not so regard such an intercourse either.

(5)A beast.

(6)If the offense was committed in the presence of witnesses after due warning.

(7)In the absence of witnesses and warning."

(Book) Yebamoth, 12b. "R. Bebai recited before R. Naham: Three (catagories of) women may (7) use an absorbent (8) in their marital intercourse (9), a minor, a pregnant woman and a nursing woman. The minor (10) because (otherwise) she might (11) become pregnant, and as a result (11) might die. . .And what is the age of such a minor? (14). From the age of eleven years and one day until the age of twelve years and one day. One who is under (15), or over this age (16) must carry on her marital intercourse in the usual manner."

(footnotes "(7) (So Rashi.R.Tam: Should use, v.Tosaf s. v.)

(8) Hackled wool or flax. To prevent conception.

• (16) May use an absorbent.
• (17) Lit., 'perhaps' .
• (14) Who is capable of conception but exposed thereby to the danger of death.
• (15) When no conception is possible.
• (16) when pregnancy involves no fatal consequences."

(Book) Yebamoth, 59b. "When R.Dimi came (8) he related; It once happened at Haitalu (9) that while a young worn an was sweeping the floor (10) a village dog (11) covered her from the rear (12) and Rabbi permitted her to marry a priest. Samuel said: Even a High Priest.

(footnotes) "(8) From Palestine to Babylon.

(9)(Babylonian form for Aitulu, modern Airterun N.W. of Kadesh, v.S. Kelin, Beitrage,p.47).

• (10) Lit., 'house'.
• (11) Or 'big hunting dog' (Rashi), 'ferocious dog' (Jast.), 'small wild dog' (Aruk).
• (12) A case of unnatural intercourse.

[H: Is any of this beginning to be a bit outlandish to any of you? Dogs? "A village dog' covered her from the rear.."? Is this not the most confusing bunch of nonsense you have ever seen? Does it cross anyone's mind that you might be dealing with rules set up by ones totally unfamiliar with much of anything suitable to behavior by Earth Human? Oh yes, you have bestiality but hardly anything so allowable as "trivial" in being covered from the rear by a dog--while sweeping the floor yet? Would you believe such a tale if anyone walked up to you and told you this--today? Does anyone begin to relate anything in these outlandish displays of obscenities with what you have heard of the activities of "little gray aliens"?] To continue:

(Book) Kethuboth, 6b. "Said he to him: Not like those Babylonians who are not skilled in moving aside (7), but there are some who are skilled in moving aside (8). If so, why (give the reason of) 'anxious'?(10)--For one who is not skilled. (Then) let them say: One who is skilled is allowed (to perform the first intercourse on Sabbath), one who is not skilled is forbidden?--Most (people) are skilled (11). Said Raba the son of R. Hanan to Abaye: If this were so, then why (have) groomsmen (12) why (have) a sheet?(13)--He (Abaye) said to him: There (the groomsmen and the sheet are necessary) perhaps he will see and destroy (the tokens of her virginity) (14).

(footnotes) "(7) i.e., having intercourse with a virgin with­out causing a bleeding.

Thus no blood need come out, and 'Let his head be cut off and let him not die!' does not apply.

• (9) If the bridegroom is skilled in "moving sideways'.
• (10) He need not be anxious about the intercourse and should not be free from reading Shema' on account of such anxiety.
• (11) Therefor the principle regarding 'Let his head be cut off and let him not die!' does not, as a rule, apply.
• (12) The groomsmen testify in case of need to the virginity of the bride. V. infra 12a. If the bridegroom will act in a man­ner that will cause no bleeding, the groomsmen will not be able to testify on the question of virginity.

•(13)         To provide evidence of the virginity of the bride. Cf.Deut.XXII,17 .

• (14) It may happen that he will act in the normal manner and cause bleeding but he will destroy the tokens and maintain that the bride was not a virgin; for this reason the above mentioned provisions are necessary. Where however he moved aside and made a false charge as to her virginity, the bride can plead that she is still a virgin (Bashi)."

After reading these verbatim quotations from the countless other similar quotations which you will find in the official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud in the English lan­guage are you of the opinion, my dear Dr. Goldstein, that the Talmud was the "sort of book" from which Jesus "drew the teachings which enable him to revolutionize the world" on "moral and religious subjects"? You have read here verbatim quotations and official footnotes on a few of the many other subjects covered by the "63 books" of the Talmud. When you read them you must be prepared for a shock. I am surprised that the United States Post Office does not bar the Talmud from the mails. I hesitated to quote them in this letter. [H: I also hesitated to quote them herein because the next barrage of accusations and denouncing will pile upon my people--but truth is truth and if you ones will not take time to look it up for self then hope for your journey is slim in­deed. I MOST CERTAINLY DO NOT EXPECT YOU TO FIND TRUTH BY SIMPLY ASKING A NICE RABBI OR CLERGYMAN. I would like, herein, to remind you of something regarding these Zionists; Your own Jerry Falwell stood forth as leader of your "Moral Majority" and stated before the world: "I am proud to say that I am a Zionist!" Does it mean that he KNEW all these things of heinous con­tent? No, he is simply another of the ignorant and inten­tionally uninformed!]

In support of the contention by the top echelon among the outstanding authorities on this phase of the present status of the Talmud, further proof of the wide influence exerted by the Tal­mud upon the so-called or self-styled "Jews" is supplied by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer's article "What is a Jew" in the June 17, 1952 issue of Look Magazine. Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer's article contains a lovely picture of a smiling man seated in a chair with a large opened book upon his lap. Seated around him on the floor are about a dozen smiling men and women. They are paying close attention to the smiling man in the chair with the opened book upon his lap. He is reading to the persons on the floor. He emphasizes what he is reading by gestures with one of his hands. Beneath this photograph of the group is the following explanation:

"ADULTS STUDY ANCIENT WRITINGS, TOO. RABBI IN THIS PICTURE, SEATED IN CHAIR, LEADS GROUP DISCUSSION OF TALMUD BEFORE EVENING PRAYER." (emphasis supplied)

This picture and explanation indicate the extent the Talmud is the daily diet of so-called or self-styled "Jews" in this day and age. The Talmud is first taught to children of so-called or self-styled "Jews" as soon as they are able to read. Just as the Tal­mud is the "textbook by which rabbis are trained" so is the Tal­mud also the textbook by which the rank-and-file of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" are "trained" to think from their earliest age. In the translation of the Talmud with its texts edited, corrected and formulated by the eminent Michael Rodkinson, Reverend Dr. Isaac M. Wise, on page XI, it states:

"THE MODERN JEW IS THE PRODUCT OF THE TALMUD" . (emphasis supplied)

To the average Christian the word "Talmud" is just another word associated by them with the form of religious worship practised in their synagogues by so-called or self-styled "Jews". Many Christians have never heard of the Talmud. Very few Christians are informed on the contents of the Talmud. Some may believe the Talmud to be an integral part of the religious worship known to them as "Judaism". It suggests a sort of bible or religious text book. It is classed as a spiritual manual. But otherwise few if any Christian has an understanding of the con­tents of the Talmud and what it means in the daily lives of so-called or self-styled "Jews". As an illustration, my dear Dr. Goldstein, how many Christians have any conception of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer recited in synagogues on the Day of Atonement?

[H: For you readers of AND THEY CALLED HIS NAME IMMANUEL, allow me to point out that the original release of this information was titled TALMUD JMMANUEL. I think it is now evident as to WHY Sananda chose to relabel it. There is now a new copy of the book translated by Billy Meier--again called the TALMUD IMMANUEL. I suggest you be most careful in the reading thereof for it is printed solely for the monetary value and these ones who are repro­ducing the work have done everything they could do to STOP our publishing of the truth. "Talmud" is a perfectly good word but as is always the case with the great deceiver, you do not get goodness and light--but lies and deceit. Therefore, God will refrain from utilizing terms which will mislead you who are efforting to find Truth. A word placed so blatantly upon the cover indicates misuse of the intent if it is there to connote TRUTH!]

In Volume VIII of the Jewish Encyclopedia on page 539 found in the Library of Congress, the New York Public Library and libraries of all leading cities, will be found the official translation into English of the prayer known as the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer. It is the prologue of the Day of Atonement services in the synagogues. It is recited three times by the standing congregation in concert with chanting rabbis at the al­tar. After the recital of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer the Day of Atonement religious ceremonies follow immediately. The Day of Atonement religious observances are the highest holy days of so-called or self-styled "Jews" and are celebrated as such throughout the world. The official translation into En­glish of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer follows:

"ALL VOWS, OBLIGATIONS, OATHS, ANATHEMAS, whether called 'konam', 'konas', or by any other name, WHICH WE MAY VOW, OR SWEAR, OR PLEDGE, OR WHEREBY WE MAY BE BOUND, FROM THIS DAY OF ATONEMENT UNTO THE NEXT, (whose happy coming we await), we do repent. MAY THEY BE DEEMED AB­SOLVED, FORGIVEN, ANNULLED, AND VOID AND MADE OF NO EFFECT; THEY SHALL NOT BIND US NOR HAVE POWER OVER US. THE VOWS SHALL NOT BE RECKONED VOWS; THE OBLIGATIONS SHALL NOT BE OBLIGATORY; NOR THE OATHS BE OATHS." (emphasis supplied).

[H: Go right back now and REALLY READ THAT PRAYER FOR YOU DID NOT PICK UP THE POINT THE FIRST TIME!]

The implications, inferences and innuendoes of the "Kol Nidre (All Vows) prayer are referred to in the Talmud in the Book of Nedarim, 23a-23b as follows:

(Book) "And he who desires that NONE OF HIS VOWS MADE DURING THE YEAR SHALL BE VALID, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, 'EVERY VOW WHICH I MAY MAKE IN THE FUTURE SHALL BE NULL (1). (HIS VOWS ARE THEN INVALID,) PROVIDING THAT HE REMEMBERS THIS AT THE TIME OF THE VOW." (emphasis in original and supplied, Ed.)

 (footnotes) "(1) This may have provided a support for the custom of reciting Kol Nidre (a formula for dispensation of vows) prior to the Evening Service of the Day of Atonement (Ran). . .Though the beginning of the year (New Year) is men­tioned here, the Day of Atonement was probably chosen on ac­count of its great solemnity. But Kol Nidre as part of the ritual IS LATER THAN THE TALMUD, and, as seen from the fol­lowing statement of R. Huna b. Hinene, THE LAW OF REVOCATION IN ADVANCE WAS NOT MADE PUBLIC. (emphasis supplied and in original text,Ed.)

The greatest study of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer was made by the eminent psycho-analyst Professor Theodor Reik, the celebrated pupil of the famous Dr. Sigmund Freud. The analysis of the historic, religious and psychological background of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer by Professor Reik pre­sents the Talmud in its true perspective. This important study is contained in Professor Reik's "The Ritual, Psyco-Analytical Studies". In the chapter on the Talmud, on page 168, Professor Reik states:

"THE TEXT WAS TO THE EFFECT THAT ALL OATHS WHICH BELIEVERS TAKE BETWEEN ONE DAY OF ATONEMENT AND THE NEXT DAY OF ATONEMENT ARE DECLARED INVALID." (emphasis supplied)

Before explaining to you how the present wording of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer was introduced into the Day of Atonement synagogue ceremonies, my dear Dr. Goldstein, I would like to quote a passage to you from the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia.

The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia confirms the fact that the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer has no spiritual value as might be believed because it is recited in synagogues on the Day of Atonement as the prologue of the religious ceremonies which follow it. The secular significance of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer is indicated forcefully by the analysis in the Uni­versal Jewish Encyclopedia. In Volume VI, on page 441, it states:

"The Kol Nidre HAS NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL IDEA OF THE DAY OF ATONE­MENT. . .it attained to extraordinary solemnity and popularity by reason of the fact that it was THE FIRST PRAYER RE­CITED ON THIS HOLIEST OF DAYS."

My dear Dr. Goldstein, prepare for the shock of your life. Compelled by what you have now read here about the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer you must be shocked to learn that many Christian churches actually "pealed their bells" on the Day of Atonement in celebration of that holy day for so-called or self-styled "Jews". How stupid can the Christian clergy get? From what I have learned after a cursory inquiry I am unable to say whether it was a case of stupidity or cupidity. With what you already know, together with what you will additionally know before you finish this letter, you will be able to judge for yourself whether it was stupidity or cupidity. There is not one single fact in this entire letter which every graduate of a theo­logical seminary did not have the opportunity to learn.

The following news item was featured in the New York on October 7th only a few days ago. Under a prominent headline "JEWISH HOLIDAYS TO END AT SUNDOWN" the New York World Telegram gave great prominence to the following story:

"Synagogues and temples throughout the city were crowded yesterday as the 24 hour fast began. Dr. Norman Salit, head of the Synagogue Council of America, representing the three major Jewish bodies, had called on other faiths TO JOIN THE FAST.
.Cutting across religious lines, MANY PROTESTANT CHURCHES IN THE CITY PEALED THEIR BELLS LAST NIGHT TO SOUND THE KOL NIDRE, TRADITIONAL MELODY USED AT THE START OF YOM KIPPUR. THE
GESTURE OF GOOD-WILL WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE MANHATTAN OFFICE OF THE PROTESTANT COUNCIL." (emphasis supplied)

That just about "tops" anything I have ever had come to my attention revealing the ignorance and indifference of the Chris­tian clergy to the hazards today facing the Christian faith. From my personal contacts with the Manhattan Office of the Protes­tant Council in the recent past I hold out very little hope for any constructive contribution they can make to the common defense of the Christian faith against its dedicated enemies. In each instance they buckled under the "pressure" exerted upon them by the "contacts" for so-called or self-styled "Jews". If it was not so tragic it would be comic. It was a joke indeed but the joke was on the Christian clergy. Ye Gods! "Many" Christian churches "pealed their bells", as the Protestant Council reports the event, "TO SOUND THE KOL N1DRE, TRADITIONAL MELODY USED AT THE START OF YOM KIPPUR". Just where does betrayal of a trust and breach of faith begin?

The present wording of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer dates from the 11th century. A political reversal in eastern Eu­rope compelled the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Eu­rope to adopt the present wording of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer. That story involves the history of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe.

Before relating here as briefly as possible the history of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" of eastern Europe I would like to quote here another short passage from the Jewish Encyclopedia in Volume VII, on page 540, states:

"AN IMPORTANT ALTERATION IN THE WORDING of the 'Kol Nidre' was made by Rashi's son-in-law, Meir ben Samuel, WHO CHANGED THE ORIGINAL PHRASE 'FROM THE LAST DAY OF ATONEMENT TO THIS ONE' to 'FROM THIS DAY OF ATONEMENT UNTIL THE NEXT' " .

(emphasis supplied)

[END OF QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]

We will herein stop quoting and for that matter, stop the writing at this point for this sitting. Thank you for the long hours of service, Dharma. I ask you to be particularly attuned to my call for you are in danger and hence is why we had to disengage
your prior computer. We will simply have to work our way through the next few days of bringing forth this information for as you might well note--THE EVIL BROTHERHOOD DOES  NOT WANT IT BROUGHT FORTH! When human realizes how he has been duped he shall rise up and stop this madness. Ah, and may it be "in time".

Hatonn to stand-by. I shall keep the shielding in place but I must ask that you remain within my commands lest you be dam­aged. The Truth is going to come forth now and it has confir­mation and credentials of proof--just as you were told at onset by "The Command"--"that you would be given credentials and credibility from that which is the Silver Clouds and would be forthcoming from Earth-place." And so it shall be put to print that Man may see how sadly he has been made the dupe.

Good evening. God grants his protection of his servants. Salu.