By Cesar L. Aharon


"There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death."
(Proverbs 14:12)



In the course of his efforts to influence U.S. legislators and to make known to the larger American population the talmudic dictum contained in the so-called "noahide laws," the late grand rabbi of the ultra-orthodox Chabad Lubavitch hassidic movement, Menachem Mendel Schneerson (1902-1994), declared the year 1977 to be a "year of education," and called upon Congress to establish an "Education Day" on the American calendar. Schneerson felt that the people of the United States would incorporate his "Education Day" into their national celebrations and eventually regard them as equal to long honored traditions such as Memorial Day, Veterans Day, or Mother's Day. As a result of this, the House of Representatives nominated 1977 "A National Year of Education". This influence was also felt in Congress, and in January of the following year, in a Joint Resolution of the House of Representatives and the Senate, signed by Thomas P. O'Neil, Speaker of the House, and Vice President and President of the Senate, Walter F. Mondale, a formal request was given to President Jimmy Carter to declare April 18, 1978 (Schneerson's seventy-sixth birthday), as "Education Day, U.S.A." The President accepted the petition and signed the proclamation into law. Since then, "Education Day U.S.A." has become an institutionalized practice in governmental circles. Every year, in the date corresponding to the eleventh day of the Hebrew month of Nissan, which is the anniversary of Schneerson's birthday, a Presidential Proclamation and a Joint Resolution by the Senate and the House of Representatives is issued as a tribute to this religious leader.

The full text of the 1978 "Education Day, U.S.A." Presidential proclamation reads:

On April 13 of this year the Congress of the United States concluded its deliberations on a joint resolution which recognized the need for this Nation to set aside a special day devoted to recognizing the importance of education in the lives of our citizens. To emphasize its commitment, the Congress has authorized and requested the President to issue a proclamation designating April 18, 1978 as Education Day, U.S.A., and calling for its appropriate observance. I am honored to join with the House of Representatives and the Senate in recognizing this need and privileged to comply with their request.

NOW, THEREFORE, I JIMMY CARTER, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim Tuesday, April 18, 1978, as Education Day, U.S.A. and I ask all Americans to observe that day in such manner as reflects their commitment to education and their recognition of its importance to the welfare of this Nation.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this seventeenth day of April, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred seventy-eight, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and second.

Jimmy Carter. (his signature)



A second proclamation no less important in terms of governmental recognition was the joint resolution issued by Congress on the same day that reads:


Ninety-Fifth Congress of the United States of America

At the Second Session

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, the nineteenth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and seventy-eight

JOINT RESOLUTION

To authorize and request the President to issue a proclamation designing April 18, as "Education Day, U.S.A.".

WHEREAS the Congress recognizes the need for the Nation to set aside on the calendar a day devoted to the importance of education to the lives of its citizens and to the general well-being of the Nation; and whereas the Lubavitch Movement, which conducts educational activities at more than sixty centers in twenty-eight States as well as around the world, is especially committed to the advancement of education and has proposed the establishment of an "Education Day, U.S.A."; and

WHEREAS world Jewry marked in 1977 the seventy-fifth birthday of the revered and renowned Jewish leader, the head of the worldwide Lubavitch movement, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who proclaimed on that occasion a "Year of Education"; and

WHEREAS the seventy-sixth birthday of this celebrated spiritual leader will occur on April 18, 1978, thus concluding the year of Lubavitch Movement activities dedicated to the "Year of Education" and the Lubavitcher Rebbe's milestone birthday: Now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the President is authorized and requested to issue a proclamation designating April 18, 1978, as "Education Day, U.S.A.".

APPROVED APR. 17, 1978


Commenting on the governmental recognition bestowed upon him, Schneerson said:

"The proclamation of an Education Day, U.S.A., on the American calendar augurs well for the vital cause of education in all countries which look up to the United States of America for leadership and inspiration in all vital matters that transcend national boundaries, and conduce to a better human society and a better world."


In another statement related to the same topic he said:

"It is fitting indeed that the U.S.A. has shown, through a forceful example to the world, that it places education among its foremost priorities. It is also to be hoped that "Education Day" will become a permanent institution, especially since, by reason of the pervasive nature of education, it would lend further significance to other "Days" such as Father's Day and Mother's Day and similar institutions which have become part of the American life. The proclamation of "Education Day, U.S.A." is of extraordinary significance in impressing upon all citizens the importance of education, both in their own lives as well as, and even more so, (in that of) the young generation in their formative years -- particularly in the present day and age."


Based on Schneerson's remarks, one would assume that he was concerned only with the educational and moral aspects of American society and nothing else. It would have been unconceivable to assume that he, a revered religious leader and a person of [as it was thought] unquestionable ethics and standards had other purposes in mind, or a hidden agenda. No one could have argued that Menachem Schneerson was actually envisioning the most powerful country in the world, the United States of America, being ruled by the tenets of talmudic law; but a careful examination of what he meant by "education" and what --in his view-- constituted "morality" will reveal a reality that was totally ignored not only by the American people, but even by the politicians and law-makers who issued the actual proclamations. Slowly, but in a very effective way, the ground was being prepared for the introduction of a form of Jewish [rabbinic] legislation which, although presented as being in line with the ideals of liberty, democracy, and justice, was in fact all the contrary. We are referring to the talmudic concept known in the Hebrew language as "sheva mitzvot bnei Noach", or "the seven laws of the children of Noah."

But first, it is necessary to understand the circumstances that led to the continuous governmental recognition and endorsements, to the point where the Education Day, U.S.A. bill became a federal law and beyond.

On April 18, 1978, one day after the first Education Day U.S.A. proclamation was made, from his office at the world Chabad Lubavitch headquarters located at 770 Eastern Parkway in Brooklyn, N.Y., the Lubavitcher rebbe --as Schneerson was known-- began using a phrase that would be quoted many times not only by him, but also in most of the subsequent Education Day proclamations, as well as in the Joint Resolutions. He said:

"Education must put together emphasis on the promulgation of fundamental human rights and obligations of justice and morality, which are the basis of any human society."

Schneerson spoke about a "morality which was the basis of any human society." This phrase was intrinsically connected to the so-called noahide laws, to the effect that this talmudic form of legislation was the source from which true morality, human rights, the sense of social justice, equity, and democracy in the United States of America were drawn. The Christian values and ethics held by its Founding Fathers were put aside and replaced by means of an historical revisionism that favored the teachings of the Jewish Talmud; in other words, the true American values had their origin in the seven noahide laws.

As time passed and the Education Day, U.S.A. proclamations and the Joint Resolutions on behalf of the Lubavitcher rebbe continued, the Chabad Lubavitch movement acquired more prominence in Capitol Hill. An example of the involvement of this Jewish group in governmental affairs can be seen in the following fact:

In 1980 the U.S. Congress legislated the establishment of an Intergovernmental Advisory Council on Education. The members of this council were appointed by President Jimmy Carter and chaired by Governor Bob Graham of Florida. The Lubavitch lobby in Capitol Hill determined that they should not miss the opportunity to be included in this program, and through the agency of influential friends such as businessman David T. Chase and Senator Joseph Lieberman, they managed to have President Carter appoint Rabbi Abraham Shemtov, who was Schneerson's liaison to the White House as a member of this council.

--It is worthy to mention that in January of 1989, right before Joseph Lieberman went to the city of Washington to take office as U.S. Senator for the State of Connecticut, he went before the rebbe to request a bracha (a blessing), so that he may succeed in all his political endeavors. Lieberman had also previously gone to consult the Rebbe on the occasion of his marriage to Hadassah Freilich, the daughter of an orthodox rabbi, with whom he had one child, Hana. This serves as an example of the important political connections the rebbe had, and explains the means by which he got in touch with key political figures in U.S. government.

Thus, on July 28, 1980, Rabbi Shemtov was presented with a special recognition signed by President Jimmy Carter and handed to him by then Secretary of Education Shirley Hofstedler. The text of the document reads:


Jimmy Carter

President of the United States of America

To all who shall see these presents. Greetings:

Know ye, that reposing special trust and confidence in the integrity and ability of Abraham Shemtov of Pennsylvania, I do appoint him a member of the Intergovernmental Advisory Council on Education for a term of two years and do authorize and empower him to execute and fulfil the duties of that Office according to law, and to have and to hold the said Office with all the powers, privileges, and emoluments thereunto of right appertaining unto him the said Abraham Shemtov, subject to the conditions prescribed by law.

In testimony whereof, I have caused these letters to be made patent and the seal of the United States to be hereunto affixed.

Done at the city of Washington this twenty-eight day of July, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and eighty, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and fifth.

By the President:

Jimmy Carter (his signature)


Talking about Abraham Shemtov, a curious anecdote comes to mind.

It was expected of him, a flamboyant member of the U.S. Intergovernmental Advisory Council on Education that he would at least be educated in the basics of current international affairs, but an embarrassing incident that occured after his term ended showed that he and other Chabad leaders lacked of an awareness of the sensibilities of non-Jewish people. The incident was published in the Jewish Week magazine of NY, June-July issue of 1987, p 14.
Accordingly, in his efforts to obtain publicity for the promotion of the noahide laws, the leadership of the Lubavitch sect invited then Chilean dictator, General Augusto Pinochet to be the seventh signer of an International Scroll of Honor on behalf of Menachem Schneerson.

Jerome Mintz, Professor of Anthropology and Jewish Studies at Indiana University relates that:

"Pinochet used the occasion to praise the principles of his own authoritarian regime; and he was in turn praised by the lay president of Chabad in Chile, David Feurstein. The originator of the proclamation, Rabbi Abraham Shemtov, director of the Chabad House of Philadelphia, was surprised by the firestorm of protest raised by opponents of the dictator's regime in Chile. Ethical and moral problems in contemporary politics seemed beyond the narrow focus of Lubavitch concerns. Shemtov explained that he does not understand Spanish or politics: 'Political science and current political goings-on in all parts of the world are not really my field.' "
(Jerome R. Mintz, "Hasidic People - A Place in the New World", pp. 396-397, Harvard University Press. )


It was clear that Shemtov was only interested in pursuing his agenda, without considering the consequences of a bad calculated move.

By 1982, now under Ronald Reagan's Presidential term, the wording of the yearly Joint Resolution in honor of the octogenarian rabbi had dramatically changed. This particular proclamation labeled as "National Day of Reflection," was more of a promotion of the noahide laws than a mere recognition to a religious leader. A look at the wording of the document shows that Schneerson's long held dream for the dissemination of the noahide laws was becoming a reality, since for the first time in American history the Senate and the House of Representatives openly endorsed talmudic law.

The text of the 1982 Joint Resolution reads:


Ninety-seventh Congress of the United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday, the twenty-fifth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and eighty-two.

JOINT RESOLUTION

To authorize and request the President to issue a proclamation designating April 4, 1982, as the "National Day of Reflection".

WHEREAS the Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our great Nation was founded;

WHEREAS these ethical values and principles which, from the dawn of civilization when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws, have been the bedrock of society without which the edifice of civilization stands in serious peril of returning to chaos;

WHEREAS society is presently profoundly concerned with the weakening of these principles that has resulted in crises that beleaguer and threaten the fabric of civilized society; and

WHEREAS the justified preoccupation with these crises must not let the citizens of this Nation lose sight of their responsibility of transmitting these historical ethical values from our distinguished past to the generations of the future, and need occasional reminder of this duty and privilege: Now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the President is authorized to issue a proclamation designating April 4, 1982, which this year coincides with the eightieth birthday of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, universally respected and revered leader and head of the worldwide Lubavitch movement, who has done so much to foster and promote these ethical values and principles, as the "National Day of Reflection."

Speaker of the House of Representatives (his signature)

President of the Senate (his signature)

APPROVED

Apr. - 3, 1982

Ronald Reagan (his signature)


The text of the Presidential Proclamation reads:


NATIONAL DAY OF REFLECTION

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation.

Amid the distractions and concerns of our daily existence, it is appropriate that Americans pause to reflect upon the ancient ethical principles and moral values which are the foundation of our character as a nation.

We seek, a steadfastly pursue, the benefits of education. But education must be more than factual enlightenment--it must enrich the character as well as the mind.

One shinning example for people of all faiths of what education ought to be is that provided by the Lubavitch movement, headed by Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, a worldwide spiritual leader who will celebrate his 80th birthday on April 4, 1982. The Lubavitcher Rebbe's work stands as a reminder that knowledge is an unworthy goal unless it is accompanied by moral and spiritual wisdom and understanding. He has provided a vivid example of the eternal validity of the Seven Noahide Laws, a moral code for all of us regardless of religious faith. May he go from strength to strength.

In recognition of the Lubavitcher Rebbe's 80th birthday, the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled have issued House Joint Resolution 477 to set aside April 4, 1982, as a "National Day of Reflection."

NOW, THEREFORE, I, RONALD REAGAN, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim April 4, 1982 as National Day of Reflection.

IN WITNESS THEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 3rd day of April, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and eighty-two, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and sixth."

Ronald Reagan. (his signature)


The recognition bestowed upon the Lubavitcher leader by the official representatives of the U.S. Government continued. But from 1984 onward, every Education Day, U.S.A. Presidential Proclamation as well as the Joint Resolution bills, included appraisals to the rebbe for his leading role in the promotion of the noahide laws in America and the world. They were once and again exalted as the ethical values and principles that ought to be followed by the citizens of the United States of America.


Excerpts of subsequent "Education Day U.S.A." Presidential Proclamations, or Joint Resolutions issued by both Houses of Congress of the United States:


1984:

"The Lubavitch movement, headed by Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, has provided people of all faiths a shining example of the true value of education. The Lubavitcher Rebbe's work is a living reminder that knowledge is worthy only when accompanied by moral and spiritual wisdom and understanding. In fostering and promoting a tradition of ethical values that can trace its roots to the Seven Noahide Laws, which have often been cited as universal norms of ethical conduct and a guarantee of fundamental human rights, the Lubavitch movement and its greatly respected leader have shown Americans of every faith that true education involves not simply what one knows, but how one lives."


1985:

"These are the values which Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson exemplifies. And they are the values, with their roots in the Seven Noahide Laws, which have guided the Lubavitch movement throughout its history. They are the essence of education in its best, and we should be certain that we pass on this precious heritage to all young Americans."


1986:

"The Congress has sought to call attention to these durable values by adopting resolutions that pay tribute to the example of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, a man who has dedicated his life to the search for wisdom and to guiding others along its pathways. He exemplifies the rich tradition of the Seven Noahide Laws, which have been the lodestar of the Lubavitch movement from its inception."


1987:

"WHEREAS in tribute of this great spiritual leader, "the rebbe" this, his eighty-fifth year will be seen as the year of "turn and return", the year in which we turn to an education which will return the world to the moral and ethical values contained in the Seven Noahide Laws.."


1988:

"WHEREAS these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws;

WHEREAS without these ethical values and principles the edifice of civilization stands in serious peril to returning to chaos.."


1989 and 1990:

"The principles of moral and ethical conduct that have formed the basis for all civilizations come to us, in part, from the centuries-old Seven Noahide Laws.

The Noahide Laws are actually seven commandments given to man by God, as recorded in the Old Testament. These commandments include prohibitions against murder, robbery, adultery, blasphemy, and greed, as well as the positive order to establish courts of justice.

Through the leadership of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson and the worldwide Lubavitch movement, the Noahide Laws --and standards of conduct duly derived from them-- have been promulgated around the globe."


1991 [the year in which the Education Day U.S.A. Presidential Proclamation became a Public Law (Public Law 102-14, H.J. Res. 104)] :

"WHEREAS society is profoundly concerned with the recent weakening of these principles (referring to the noahide laws) that has resulted in crises that beleaguer and threaten the fabric of civilized society;

WHEREAS the justified preoccupation with these crises must not let the citizens of this Nation lose sight of their responsibility to transmit these historical ethical values from our distinguished past to the generations of the future;

WHEREAS the Lubavitch movement has fostered and promoted these ethical values and principles throughout the world..."


1992:

"WHEREAS in tribute to this great spiritual leader, "the Rebbe", his birthday will be designated as "Education and Sharing Day U.S.A." and this year, his 91st, will mark a new beginning in an aged-old commitment to education, accompanied by an increase in general acts of sharing with another, in order to return the world to the moral and ethical values contained in the Seven Noahide Laws..."

"Although school has a role to play in providing direction to our youth, moral education begins at home, in the guidance that parents provide for their children, and in religious institutions, where we learn of our just and loving Creator and of the commandments that He has set before us. Recognizing that "fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom," members of the worldwide Lubavitch movement, under the leadership of Rabbi menachem Mendel Schneerson, have worked to promote greater knowledge of Divine law (referring to the noahide laws)..."


1993:

"WHEREAS the Congress recognizes that ethical teachings and values have played a prominent role in the foundation of civilization and in the history of our great Nation;

WHEREAS President William J. Clinton has indicated that ethical considerations will inform all of the decisions of his administration;

WHEREAS ethical teachings and values have formed the cornerstone of society since the dawn of civilization and found expression in the Seven Noahide Laws;

...WHEREAS Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the leader of the Lubavitch movement, is revered worldwide for the contributions he has made to education and sharing;

...WHEREAS Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson has interpreted, in the miraculous events of our times, the increasing vitality of these ideals [= the noahide philosophy] for the furtherance of human understanding and betterment;

WHEREAS the extraordinary life and work of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson have long been acknowledged by the Congress through the enactment of Joint Resolutions designating his birthday in each of the last 15 years as "Education Day, U.S.A."


1994:

"WHEREAS President William J. Clinton has indicated that ethical considerations should inform the decisions of Society;

WHEREAS ethical teachings and values have formed the cornerstone of society since the dawn of civilization and found expression in the Seven Noahide Laws.."


1995:

"WHEREAS ethical teachings and values have formed the cornerstone of society since the dawn of civilization and found expression in the Seven Noahide Laws"

"This year, let us rededicate ourselves to the teaching the love of learning that was championed by Rabbi Schneerson and is strengthened by caring leaders like him [talking about the old rebbe's emmisaries] throughout our Nation..."


1996:

"Throughout his distinguished life, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson was an advocate for the high-quality education and strong values [these "strong values" are meant to be the noahide laws] young people need to become productive and caring citizens. Drawing on a deep tradition of faith and a dedication to strengthening family and community ties, the Lubavitcher Rebbe sought to help our youth become responsible leaders and moral thinkers."


1997:

"Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, grasped these fundamental truths. Espousing the values of education, morality [morality = what is taught in the noahide laws] , and civic duty throughout his distinguished life... I urge all Americans, on this day and throughout the year, to remember the teachings of the Rebbe, and to work in partnership with educators, administrators, community leaders, and parents to help our young people thrive and prosper."


1998:

"...He was deeply committed to fostering civic pride and moral integrity [fostering "moral integrity" = fostering the tenents of the noahide laws] along with professional success. On this day, as we remember Rabbi Schneerson's achievements, let us reaffirm our commitment to providing our Nation's children with an education that will enable them to flourish, both intellectually and spiritually."


1999:

"On this day and throughout the year, let us rededicate ourselves to the ideals of education and sharing that were championed by Rabbi Schneerson and are embraced by compassionate leaders across our country. As our society continues to change and evolve, let us work with keen minds and warm hearts to forge a future of peace and prosperity for all our children."


2000:

"As we observe this special day, let us renew our commitment to excellence in education and to nurturing our young people's academic and spiritual development. Let us also remember the example of Rabbi Schneerson and pass on to our children the values and knowledge that have strengthened our Nation in the past [as it has been shown, those "values that have strengthened the U.S. in the past" are meant to be the noahide laws] and that will empower us to face the challenges of the future."


2001:

"As teachers, parents, and citizens, we have a responsibility to pass on more than just academic knowledge to our children. We also need to provide them with the moral strength to see them through turbulent and challenging times...Humanity has long recognized such core and never-changing ethical values as vital to the well-being of a society and its citizenry.
Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, clearly understood the importance of fostering character.. Next year marks the 100th annyversary of the Rebbe's birth, but his legacy of teaching that a nation's true greatness is measured by whether it produces citizens of compassion and character remains timeless.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim April 4, 2001, as Education and Sharing Day, U.S.A., 2001. By teaching children the highest standards of ethical behavior [understood to be the noahide laws], Americans prepare our next generation of leaders to pursue meaningful lives as members of a decent and caring society."


In the Spring of 1987, the Lubavitcher rebbe took a decisive step towards a definite officialization of the noahide laws. But he didn't limit himself to American government circles, because this time he directed his attention towards the nations of the world.

In a very smart move the Lubavitch lobby in the White House accomplished to have President Ronald Reagan to grant an additional recognition to Schneerson, which came along with the yearly "Education Day, U.S.A." proclamation and the joint resolution. Thus, an official document labeled the "International Scroll of Honor" was granted to the Lubavitch leader for his involvement in the promotion of the noahide laws. This document represented the ultimate honor a religious leader could aspire to. It expressed the respect and good will of Heads of States from around the world who acted as spokesmen for their respective countries. The first signature imprinted in the document was President Reagan's, followed by the rubric of many world leaders.

--But a commentary should be made with regards to the text of the International Scroll of Honor.

At first glance, this document seems to have been written by an official redactor from the White House; but a careful examination shows that it is highly unlikely that neither President Reagan or any of his advisors could have redacted it. The wording and certain key phrases used in the document indicate that they hardly would have been familiarized with some terms that are only common to religious Jews, such as the word "shlita" that was written twice after mentioning Schneerson's name. Shlita is an acronym for the Hebrew phrase "She-yichie le'orech yamim tovim, amen", meaning, "May he live long and good days, amen!" This is an expression that orthodox Jews attach after the name of their rebbes (if they are hassidic Jews), or after their grand rabbis and heads of talmudic academies, if they are mitnagdim (i.e., orthodox Jews who do not ascribe to the hassidic philosophy). We can conclude then, that the text of the International Scroll of Honor was produced by someone from the Chabad Lubavitch camp.
But before going to the text of the International Scroll of Honor, and in order to conclusively demonstrate that it was not elaborated by U.S. officials, two more details are to be shown.

In the upper part of the document, there is a logo that resembles the planet earth. The logo is surrounded by the phrase "Celebration Eighty-Five". Above the logo, three Hebrew letters are written: a 'bet', a 'samech', and a 'dalet' (with an apostrophe between the samech and the dalet). This is an acronym for the Aramaic phrase "be-siyata dish'maya," meaning "with the help of God" [lit. "with the help of heaven"]; this is one of the traditional ways in which orthodox Jews begin their correspondence or any other document sent to each other.
Underneath the logo, two more Hebrew letters are written: a peh and a hei [separated by an apostrophe]. This stands for "pe'er hador," which means, "the magnificence of the generation," and refers to the excellence and royalty they ascribe to their religious leader and to the Lubavitch movement itself. The text of the document reads:


INTERNATIONAL SCROLL OF HONOR

Presented by the Heads of State of a grateful world in tribute to the vision and spiritual leadership provided by the Lubavitcher Rebbe

RABBI MENACHEM MENDEL SCHNEERSON shlita [President Reagan saying shlita?]

on the occasion of his reaching the EIGHTY-FIFTH YEAR

WHEREAS, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, has reached the eighty-fifth year of his life which is devoted to the service of world Jewry and humanity in general; and

WHEREAS, his venerated vision, wisdom and leadership have contributed greatly to the promotion of education and the betterment of mankind by his call to recognize the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws, transmitted through G-d to Moses on Mount Sinai; and

WHEREAS, the President and both houses of Congress of the United States of America have accordingly recognized "Education Day - U.S.A." and "National Day of Reflection" on his birthday, and similar recognition offered by other nations on this day; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, on the occasion of his birthday, April 10, 1987 corresponding to the 11th of Nissan 5747, we the undersigned do present the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson shlita the International Scroll of Honor recognizing his brilliant achievements and wishing him health, long life and many more years of leadership to crown his celebrated career.

Ronald Reagan (his signature)


On May 17, 1987, Schneerson wrote a letter to President Reagan expressing his satisfaction for all the honors and recognition he had recently received. But he also saw the opportunity to communicate him his wish for a wider exposition and promotion of the noahide laws. This time he wanted to spread the knowledge of the noahic code to other nations -- and so he did.

Schneerson wrote:

"I was impressed with your meaningful Proclamation of 'Education Day, USA' in connection with the Joint Resolution of the United States Congress, and I sincerely appreciate your heading the roster of signatories to the "International Scroll of Honor" affiliated with it. Its mention of "the historical tradition of ethical values and principles, which have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws, transmitted through G-d to Moses on Mount Sinai," is a clarion call to all mankind.
Furthermore, it is particularly gratifying that you use this occasion to bring to the attention of the Nation and of the International community the need of upgrading education in terms of moral values, without which no true education can be considered complete."


Three months later, in August 25, President Reagan replied to Schneerson's letter and said:

"Dear Rabbi Schneerson:

I'm sorry to be late responding to your letter of May 17, but I'm just now having some quiet time to catch up.

I was very pleased to receive your message and to have the benefit of your reflections on the important role moral and spiritual values must play in the realm of education. The renewed attention being paid to these questions, not only in debates among public policy makers, but in academic and intellectual circles as well, is encouraging. I believe this trend is virtually certain to continue as the American people look for ways to apply the lessons of tradition to the problems facing our educational system and so many other areas of our national life.
I appreciate your contributions to these welcome developments and all that the Lubavitch movement has done to foster the inculcation of high moral and ethical standards [as we have seen, these "moral and ethical standars" are meant to be the noahide laws].

With every good wish,

Sincerely,

Ronald Reagan." (his signature)


On September 6, Schneerson wrote to President Reagan thanking him for his letter of August 25. This time he boldly insinuated that the noahide laws ought to be taught "with all their ramifications," but as we will further see, those "ramifications" actually stand against the morality and the education which he portrayed to promote. The letter reads:

".. we have reasons to believe that your forceful supportive stance to help upgrade the moral standards of human relationships on the basis of the so-called Seven Noahide Laws --with all their ramifications-- as imperatives of a Supreme Being who monitors all human conduct, has made a great impact on the consciousness of the contemporary troubled generation of mankind.

..In light of the above, your lasting contribution, through word and deed, to the advancement of all inhabitants in this blessed land and of humanity at large, will surely stand you in good stead for a goodly measure of Divine blessing."


On November 20, seven months after the International Scroll of Honor affair, President Reagan sent a letter to the leadership of the Lubavitch movement where he expressed his approval for their work and told them that he was willing to meet with them in a future date.

The letter reads:


THE WHITE HOUSE

WASHINGTON

November 20, 1987

"It is a pleasure to send greetings to everyone gathered with Rabbi Menachem Schneerson and the Merkos L'Inyonei Chinuch. The representation of the Lubavitch movement in so many countries is the testimony to the power and strength of its ideas.

I recently had the honor of signing the International Scroll of Honor that pays tribute to Rabbi Schneerson and affirms fundamental ethical values upon which all civilized societies must be based. I know that those of you gathered this week at Lubavitch World Headquarters promote the acceptance of the Almighty's commandments to all mankind. In doing so, you combat the anti-religious forces that have caused so much misery in our lifetimes. I applaud your work.

You have my best wishes for a successful meeting and for the future."

Ronald Reagan. (his signature)


In 1988, the Presidency of the United States was occupied by George Bush senior, and he and his administration were not exempted from continuing the now ten year-old practice of granting the Lubavitch leader the high governmental honor of the Education Day, U.S.A. Presidential proclamation, and the adjacent Joint Resolution in honor of every one of his birthdays. But it was on 1991, the third year of Bush's presidential term when the proclamations became a federal law. In a bill known as "Public Law 102-14, Resolution 104" the noahide laws became officially endorsed by the highest authorities of the United States of America. The document reads:


Public Law 102-14, H.J. Res. 104

102nd Congress of the United States of America

March 5, 1991

WHEREAS Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our great Nation was founded;

WHEREAS these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws;

WHEREAS without these ethical values and principles the edifice of civilization stands in serious peril of returning to chaos;

WHEREAS society is profoundly concerned with the recent weakening of these principles that has resulted in crises that beleaguer and threaten the fabric of civilized society;

WHEREAS the justified preoccupation with these crises must not let the citizens of this Nation lose sight of their responsibility to transmit these historical ethical values from our distinguished past to the generations of the future;

WHEREAS the Lubavitch movement has fostered and promoted these ethical values and principles throughout the world;

WHEREAS Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, leader of the Lubavitch movement, is universally respected and revered and his eighty-ninth birthday falls on March 26, 1991;

WHEREAS in tribute to this great spiritual leader, `the rebbe,' this, his ninetieth year will be seen as one of `education and giving,' the year in which we turn to education and charity to return the world to the moral and ethical values contained in the Seven Noahide Laws; and

WHEREAS this will be reflected in an international scroll of honor signed by the President of the United States and other heads of state: Now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That March 26, 1991, the start of the ninetieth year of Rabbi Menachem Schneerson, leader of the worldwide Lubavitch movement, is designated as `Education Day, U.S.A.'. The President is requested to issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe such day with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

Speaker of the House of Representatives (his signature)

President of the Senate (his signature)

APPROVED

MAR. 20, 1991

George Bush. (his signature)


It was about the same year that a curious phenomenon occurred in the Chabad Lubavitch movement. A prominent group in the sect started proclaiming that Schneerson was the "Moshiach" [the Messiah], and it seemed that the old rabbi himself used to approve of such expressions of fervor. He would smile and wave his hand, and even nod with the head in approval when the multitude of hassidic Jews would sing "yechi adonenu, morenu ve-rabbenu, melech ha-mashiach l'olam va'ed," which means: "long live our master, our teacher and our rebbe, the king "messiah" forever and ever!" Frenetic songs and dances accompanied the outbursts.
This would happen in farbrengens, or communal meetings with the rebbe, in many yeshivot, [talmudic academies], in synagogues, or in the streets, either in Brooklyn, Antwerp, Los Angeles, Israel, and as far as Russia. It appeared that the majority in the movement had been possessed by a mystic frenzy that according to them, was a sign and a circumlocution to the ultimate redemption that would come through their idolized rabbi.
But this trend reached its climax when some Lubavitcher leaders eventually started to claim that Schneerson wasn't only the "messiah," but God Himself.

In an article published in "The National Jewish Post & Opinion" newspaper of Indianapolis, dated January 13, 1999, page 3, a most interesting report details the matter. The article reads:

"...In paid advertisements on two full pages in the Wisconsin Jewish Chronicle exception was taken to the claim that the late Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, who headed the Lubavitch movement was God.
The claim of divinity was made in the new calender [sic] published in Russian by Rabbi Alexander Milchstein, who heads the Milwaukee Synagogue for Russian Jews-Congregation Moshiach Now.
The first page of the calendar displays a photograph of Rabbi Schneerson under which in large type in Russian letters were "B-G," standing for the word "BOG," Russian for God.
...Rabbi Milchstein defended his position and claimed that most of the Lubavitch chassidim hold the same belief as his "but hide their beliefs for fear that fundraising be affected."


Also in the weekly Jewish newspaper, the Forward, February 6, 1998, page 1 the followng was said concerning this trend in the Lubavitch movement:

" "The Lubavitcher rebbe is becoming God" for some chassidim, wrote Rabbi Berger, a Brooklyn College professor, in Ha'aretz. "For example, in the fall of 1996, the Israeli weekly Sichat HaGeullah printed a revised version of the standard messianist slogan which read, 'May our Master, Teacher and Creator (instead of Rabbi) the King Messiah live forever,' and a few weeks later it declared that it is permissible to bow to the rebbe because 'his entire essence is divinity alone.'"
Rabbi berger went on to cite an article in an English-language publication, Beis Moshiach, that called the rebbe the "Essence and being of God enclothed in a body, omniscient and omnipotent." "


But there were of course, some in the movement that opposed this trend, for they considered that the entire Chabad Lubavitch movement could lose credibility among Jews and non-Jews alike if their dead rabbi resulted not to be whom many among them said he was. The hard-earned position in the American society and the government could be seriously damaged.

Yet, to many others, the rebbe was the perfect candidate [at least] for the messianic throne, since he --they argued-- was "a towering Torah scholar and the leader of all Jewry". They called to attention that dozens of volumes of his teachings had been published to the date, and more were in the process of publication. His writings [they said] encompassed the full spectrum of Jewish scholarship; including Jewish law, ethics, philosophy, hassidic thought and Kabbalah; not to mention the fact that he held a university degree and could communicate in about 6 languages. They also considered that since the beginning of his leadership in 1951, his efforts to reach every segment of the Jewish people had been unlimited, and that for forty years he had been sending his emissaries wherever a Jew may be found -- as far as Morocco, Russia, Thailand, or Australia.

But perhaps [they argued], the most clear proof of the universalistic character of Menachem Schneerson, and a clear evidence of his "divine mission" was the fact that he had been the only prominent Jewish religious leader in 2000 years who stressed the importance of bringing a recognition from the non-Jewish world, by means of a massive effort towards the publication and awareness of the seven laws of Noah, also known as the "noahide laws," which according to rabbinic tradition, are the basic requirements for Gentiles to achieve righteousness and be above the level of the beasts [as it will be shown below].

From prime ministers to laymen, from children to renowned talmudic scholars, thousands of men, women and children from every walk of life had come to the rebbe's synagogue at 770 Eastern Parkway in Brooklyn, NY, to receive his personal blessing and advice. A number of world leaders corresponded with Schneerson on a regular basis, including some presidents of the United States.

The continuity of official recognition and endorsements to the noahide laws is confirmed by the proclamations that each year, up to the present time, have been made; nothing has changed, even after Schneerson's death which occured on June 12, 1994 after a prolongued agony; he was 92.

In June of 1995 a series of special ceremonies were held in Washington DC; they occurred in such prestigious locales as: the Senate's Dirksen Hearing Room, the U.S. Library of Congress, the Benjamin Franklyn Room in the Department of State, the U.S. Department of Education with the closing reception and banquet in the Presidential Ballroom of the Capital Hilton. This was done to pay tribute to the deceased religious leader and to acknowledge his "legacy." Also to mark the awarding of America's highest civilian recognition to him.
Thus, at the 103rd Congress of the United States of America, the Congressional Gold Medal was awarded to Menachem Mendel Schneerson.
Over one thousand of the rebbe's emissaries and guests from across America and 30 countries went to those meetings. Various members of Congress as well as the Washington Diplomatic Corps were also present; not to mention the many prominent Jewish religious leaders and other dignitaries who also attended the ceremonies.

Among those who spoke at the ceremony were the Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich; Representative John Lewis, who was the chief deputy Democratic whip; John DiLazzio [who in the year 2000 would run against Hillary Clinton for the Senate seat of the State of New York.] Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel was also there, as well as then future U.S. Vice-President wanna-be, Senator Joseph Lieberman.

At the Senate Caucus Room, Rabbi Levi Shemtov, Director of the Washington office of the American Friends of Lubavitch introduced Senator Lieberman and adressed the crowd in the following way:

"How does somebody introduce a man like Joe Lieberman? I don't know, but I will try. I refer wherever I see him -- and I see him very often -- to: "Yoisef ha-tzaddik" [Joseph, the righteous one]; a man walking the greatest halls of power on earth and clinging so tightly to the faith and the principles which form the basis of his life. He is joined here by his dear wife Hadassah, who has been a great source of support and encouragement to the work of Lubavitch here, and to me and Chana personally; and by his mother, a woman who has probably given this generation of Jews one of its greatest gifts. So, if there's one thing I can say in introducing Senator Lieberman, it is this: That he has literally shattered the glass-ceiling of what one can achieve as "a frume yid", as an observant Jew. The respect and admiration that he receives on both sides of the aisle is an example in its own right. And as we, he and I, speak about this, he in his way, and I try in mine; what we want to do, is make the legacy of the rebbe a living one by living the legacy. Ladies and gentlemen, Senator Joe Lieberman." [an ovation was given to Lieberman]


Excerpt of Lieberman speech:

"I am truly honored and sincerely humbled to have been asked to be part of this program, and I want to use this opportunity, first to really say a personal thank you, because, like those who spoke before me, and those who fill this magnificent hall tonight; I was touched by the rebbe. I have memories that are so alive, and as Rebbi [Israel Meir] Lau [Chief Rabbi of Israel] said, I can see the smile; I can see the dept and beauty of the eyes. I remember going with Hadassah to receive a "bracha" [a blessing] before we were married. I remember going, wanting to go to visit the rebbe, to ask for a "bracha" as the last step I took before flying from Connecticut, NY to Washington, to be sworn in as a United States senator in January, 1989...."

He also recalled how, after being elected to an earlier office as attorney general of the state of Connecticut,

"...the rebbe wrote me a letter which cited from Jeremiah: 'Seek the peace of your community [meaning only other Jews], the community in which you live, and in its peace and well being will you find your freedom.' I had pledged to myself that whenever I spoke to a Jewish group, I would stress this point and its concern about the division that is occurring within the Jewish community today among and between various denominations. Between those [Jews] who are religious and those [Jews] who are secular."


Much flattery language was expressed in those meetings, to the point that even the then U.S. Secretary of Education, Richard W. Riley ascribed Schneerson the honor of being one of the reasons for the establishment of the U.S. Department of Education. He said:

"..I owe my job to him and I join with millions around the world who owe so much to the rebbe. These millions include the children of America. He was a strong champion of excellence in education not only in our religious schools, but in our public schools as well."


Curiously enough, among the youth in the Chabad Lubavitch movement itself, very few people achieve university degrees. Most of them dedicate their time to the study of Talmud, Tanya and other religious Jewish writings, -- secular literature and educational material is almost nonexistent in the Lubavitch "educational" institutions; they label it as "chukos hagoyim" [the statutes of the goyim], therefore, not worthy to dedicate any attention to them, and when they do, it is only to "learn" the difference between them and the "akum," -the "idolaters,"- and to be aware of their moral, intellectual and spiritual "superiority" over the rest of their world.
Women are definitely not encouraged or expected to pursue professional careers, they are trained since early infancy to be good yiddishe moms and to bear as many children as possible.

As for the alleged efforts on behalf of education and morality in the U.S. by Schneerson, we now proceed to engage in a deep analysis and scrutiny of the origin, nature and possible repercussions of this complicate and little known form of religious philosophy known as "sheva mitzvot bnei Noach", or the seven commandments [given to] the sons of Noah. We will see if this alleged "champion of education" did really deserve such a title, and if not, we will [with God's help] reveal the dark side of Menachem Mendel Schneerson and the noahide laws.



SOURCES FOR THE NOAHIDE LAWS

Tosefta, Avodah Zarah 9:4, and developed in the Babylonian Talmud, tractate Sanhedrin 56a- 60a and Maimonides' Mishneh Torah, "Laws of Kings and their Battles" Chapters 8 through 10. Also Mishneh Torah, "Laws of Idolatry and the Manners of the Goyim," chapter 10.


Sanhedrin 56a [compiled until the 6th century A.D.]:

"The rabbis taught: [notice that by their own admission the Noahide Laws are of rabbinic origin] Seven commandments were prescribed to the sons of Noah:
(concernin the establishment of) courts of law [dinim].
(concerning) blasphemy [birkat Hashem].
(concerning) idolatry [avodah zarah].
(concerning) sexual illicit relations [gilui arayot].
(concerning) bloodshed [sh'fichut damim].
(concerning) robbery [gazel].
And (concerning) limb that has been torn from a living animal [ever min hachai]."

** But there were dissenting opinions as to the actual number and nature of those "noahide laws" among the rabbis, as it can be read in Sanhedrin 56b:

"Rabbi Chanania ben Gamla says: Also from consuming blood from a living animal [dam min hachai]. Rabbi Chidka says, also from castration [seirus]. Rabbi Shim'on says, also from practicing sorcery [kishuf]. Rabbi Yose says, Everything that is forbidden in the Scriptural section concerning sorcery a son of Noah is warned about it [he then quotes Deut. 18:10-12]: "There must not be found among you anyone who passes his son or his daughter through the fire, or that practices divinations, an illusionist, or an enchanter, or a witch, or a charmer, or a medium, or a yid'oni [a wizard], or a necromancer" etc. "...And because of these abominations the Lord your God drives them out from before you." And [God] did not punish unless He had warned [first].
Rabbi Elazar says: Also from forbidden mixtures (hybridization [kilayim]). Noahides are permitted to wear garments of mixed fabrics and to plant diverse seeds together; and they are forbidden only from mating an animal [of one species with another], and grafting trees of different kinds."

So here, we have not 7 laws, but at least 11; namely:

1. courts of law
2. blasphemy
3. idolatry
4. sexual forbidden relations
5. bloodshed
6. robbery
7.eating a limb that was cut from a living animal
8. consumption of blood drawn from a living animal
9. emasculation or castration
10. sorcery, witchcraft
11. hybridization of plants and/or animals

*It is interesting that Moses Maimonides, the reputed 12th-century legislator and codifier of Jewish law declared that Gentiles are allowed to consume blood drawn from a living animal, contradicting the talmudic dictum in tractate Sanhedrin 56b.
He said:

"[A Gentile] is permitted to partake of blood drawn from a living animal." [Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings and Their Wars chapter 9, rule 10]

But the matter didn't end there. To make the confusion greater, the Talmud [Sanhedrin 56b] relates that according to some rabbis from the respected academy of Menashe, two of the first mentioned seven laws -- namely, birkat Hashem [prohibition of blasphemy] and dinim [establishing courts of law that would enforce the obedience to the 6 other laws] were not part of the original list; instead they had seirus [castration], and kilayim [hybridization = forbidden mixtures]. The source reads:

"For a Tanna of the academy of Menashe taught: 'The children of Noah were commanded seven precepts:
- concerning idolatry [avodah zarah]
- concerning sexual forbidden relations [gilui arayot]
- concerning bloodshed [sh'fichut damim]
- concerning robbery [gazel]
- concerning eating a limb that was cut from a living animal [ever min hachai]
- concerning castration [seirus]
- and concerning hybridization [kilayim]'. "

In the midst of this sea of confusion we find that there were rabbis who didn't even think that Gentiles were given 7 laws at all, for example Sanhedrin 56b relates that based on the expression in Genesis 2:16 that says: "And the Lord God commanded the man..." Rabbi Yehuda ruled that God prohibited them only one thing, idolatry.

The talmudic statement reads:

"Rabbi Yehuda omer: Adam harishon lo nitztavah ela al avodah zarah bil'vad"

[translation:] "Rabbi Yehuda says: The first man was commanded concerning idolatry only."

In the same talmudic paragraph we notice that another rabbi, Yehuda ben Betera, a member of a distinguished family of rabbinic scholars added the prohibition of blasphemy, making them only two laws:

"Rabbi Yehuda ben Betera omer: af al birkat Hashem"

[translation:] "Rabbi Yehuda ben Betera says: Also from blaspheming the Name of God."

But then others jumped in and added dinim = courts of law:

"Ve-yesh omrim: af al hadinim"

[translation:] "And there are those who say: 'Also courts of law'."

Thus, as it can be seen, among the dissenting groups they acknowledged only up to 3 "noahide" laws and not 7.

Yet, this wasn't the end of the mess, for in the Jerusalem Talmud, tractate Avodah Zarah chapter 2, halacha 1, it is stated that Rav Huna applied the verse "So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver" [Zechariah 11:12], to mean that the noahides were originally commanded not 3, or 7, or 11.., but 30 laws! In other words, the 30 pieces of silver in this verse were an allusion to the 30 "noahide laws" given by God to the Gentiles of the world.

The statement reads:

"For Rav Huna...stated in the name of Rav:
[the verse] 'So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver' (Zech. 11:12), refers to the thirty commandments that the noahides accepted upon themselves."

The Babylonian Talmud, in tractate Chullin 92a also declares that Gentiles "received upon themselves" 30 noahide laws, but that they were able to fulfill only three, namely: They do not draw a k'tuva [a marriage contract] between males, they do not sell the carcass of a dead person in the markets, and they respect the Torah.

But finally, there was another talmudic statement concerning the number of "commandments" given to the "noahides" that renders all the above mentioned as a mere joke and void of value. It is found in the Jerusalem Talmud, tractate Avodah Zarah 2:1 that reads:

"Rav Chiya bar Luliani said in the name of Rav Hoshayah:
'All the commandments [of the Torah, meaning the 613 laws contained in the Pentateuch] were the children of Noah commanded to accept upon themselves.'
What is the [Scriptural] evidence for that statement?
[the talmudic answer, which cites Zephaniah 3:9:] 'For then I will change the speech of the peoples to a pure language, [that they may all call upon the Name of the Lord, to serve Him with one accord]'.
--But in the end they [the Gentiles] are destined to retract [from the deal they allegedly made with God].
And what is the [Scriptural] evidence for that statement?
[the talmudic answer:] ["The kings of the earth take their stand and the princes conspire secretly, against the Lord and against His Anointed, saying:] 'Let us cut their cords and let us cast off their ropes from ourselves.'" (Psalms 2:2). -- This [verse] refers to the commandment of wearing t'fillin [phylacteries, as stated in Deuteronomy 6:8], [and also] to the commandment of wearing tzitzit [fringes on one's garment, as stated in Numbers 15:37-41]."


So, according to this last statement, the "noahides" were even "commanded" to wear phylacteries on their heads and arms [t'fillin], as well as tassels in the corners of their garnments [tzitziyot]. Also, they were commanded concerning the dietary laws [kashrut], the laws of ritual purity [taharat hamishpacha], the laws of abstaining from work on the seventh day [Shabbat], the laws of sacrifices [hilchot korbanot], etc. etc. -- but they [the Talmud alleges] "maliciously" rejected the commandments of God, as it was allegedly proven in Psalms 2:2.


**Now, it is very important to pay especial attention to these declarations because they were made by rabbis who lived by the end of the Tannaitic period [2nd century of the Common Era], -- the time when the noahide laws where mentioned for the first time in rabbinic sources.

The fact that these religious sophists who made-up the concept of noahism didn't agree -- neither in their number or nature -- proves that they just couldn't have come from God, otherwise no one would have argued at all concerning them; they would have been shown in Scripture in a plain and clear way, as it is the case of the Ten Commandments or the law of "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."
God is a God of order, He doesn't need any weird interpretative method to make His will known to His creatures.


** The alleged "biblical proof" for the noahide laws is given in the Talmud, tracatate Sanhedrin 56b. But notice that the rabbis justified the entire noahide system from a verse that has nothing to do with those seven laws or anything alike. They derived them from the words said in Genesis 2:16.

The source reads:

"From where are these rules [derived]?
[the talmudic answer:] Rabbi Yochanan said, Scripture states: "AND THE LORD GOD COMMANDED THE MAN SAYING: 'OF EVERY TREE OF THE GARDEN YOU MAY SURELY EAT' (Gen. 2:16)."

[But based on an unbiased and simple reading of this verse, can anyone find 7 laws in it? Moreover, Noah wasn't even born when God gave this order to Adam; therefore these laws should have been labeled the "adamite laws," or something like that instead of the "noahide laws."
The truth is that Genesis 2:16 simply refers to an admonition to Adam against partaking from the "tree of knowledge of good an evil," as it is evidenced in the verses that precede and follow it.

The entire paragraph reads:

"Then the Lord God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man saying: 'Of every tree of the garden you may surely eat; but from the tree of knowledge of good an evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die'."

But those ancient rabbis forced their particular hermeneutic principles of interpretation on this verse, specifically one known as gezeira shava, which works through a process of selecting same or similar words that are used in different Scriptural verses and connecting them to each other, in order to shed light to a particular difficult passage.

In the case of Gen. 2:16 all they did is to play the gezeira shava game and they got it; they came up with 7 noahide laws to "civilize" the "goyim." For example, with regards to the fourth law [gilui arayot, the prohibition of sexual forbidden relations], if Gen. 2:16 uses the word "saying" in "And the Lord God commanded the man saying...etc.," and the same word appears in Jeremiah 3:1 that reads: "Saying, 'If a man puts away his wife, and she goes from him, and becomes another man's...etc.," then the subject in Jeremiah 3:1 that deals with sexual immorality would explain and clarify the meaning of Genesis 2:16. In other words, the word "saying in Genesis forcefuly refers to sexual immorality, just as it is used in Jeremiah as a part of a sentence that deals with sexual immorality. They (the talmudic rabbis) understood it that way in spite of the obvious chronological, contextual, and literary problems that this weird interpretation presents.
Yet, it doesn't take much effort or intelligence to realize that those two verses are not related to each other, but that they deal with totally different cases and circumstances.
Just consider this, Jeremiah lived thousands of years after Adam, and... how in the world was Adam supposed to know that many generations after him a man called Jeremiah would use the word "saying," and that he (Adam) had to understand "saying" as a reference to the prohibition against sexual forbidden acts? Not to mention the hundreds of times in the Bible where the word "saying" is also used and has nothing to do with matters related to sexual immorality. This, to say the least, is the ultimate example of a stretch of the biblical text.
But the irony here is that these noahide laws are said to come from God, when in reality they are the result of sheer rabbinic manipulations of the Biblical text.]


We now continue reading the talmudic source in Sanhedrin 56b:

[The expression] "And [He] commanded" alludes to the establishment of courts of law [dinim]; for so [Scripture in Genesis 18:19] says: "For I know him that he will command his children [and his household after him, that they may keep the way of the Lord, to do righteousness and justice]."

"The Lord" alludes to blasphemy [birkat Hashem], for so [Scripture in Leviticus 24:16] says: "And he who curses the Name of the Lord shall certainly be put to death."

"God" alludes to idolatry [avodah zarah], for so [Scripture in Exodus 20:3] says: "You shall have no other gods [before Me]."

"Upon the man" alludes to bloodshed [sh'fichut damim], for so [Scripture in Genesis 9:6] says: "Whoever sheds the blood of a man [by a man his blood shall be shed]."

"Saying" alludes to illicit sexual relations [gilui arayot], for so [Scripture in Jeremiah 3:1] says: "Saying, 'If a man puts away his wife, and she goes from him, and become another man's, [can he return to her again?']."

"Of every tree of the garden" -- But not that which was stolen [i.e., fruits stolen from other trees = gazel (robbery)].

"You may surely eat" -- But not a limb from a living animal" [ = ever min hachai].

[notice that for the two last prohibitions there is no Scriptural reference, and the reason is because the rabbis didn't find a verse in the entire Hebrew Bible that uses either "of every tree of the garden" or "you may surely eat" that could be connected with the ideas of stealing or the abstention of eating a limb that was torn from a living animal.]



EXPOSING THE NOAHIDE LAWS

The nature and implications of the noahide laws are explained in the Mishneh Torah or "Yad Hachazaka," which is one of the main codes of Jewish law, written by Maimonides, who is also known as "the Rambam".

In one of the Mishneh Torah's divisions, Hilchot M'lachim Umilchamoteihem [Laws of the Kings and their Wars], Maimonides ruled that only through the obedience to the noahide laws Gentiles can be considered "righteous," worthy to be respected by Jews and will deserve eternal life after death. Those who reject them would not only be punished in this life, but will also suffer the consequences in the afterlife. The only resource for a non-Jew, and his only hope lies within the boundaries of the seven noahide laws. Gentiles must believe that these laws come from God, and that they have the obligation to abide by them.
Furthermore according to rabbinic tradition, it is the obedience to the noahide laws that separate a non-Jew from the beasts, as it is stated in the introduction of the Sefer Hachinuch (The Book of [Jewish] Education), written in the 16th century by Rabbi Aharon Halevi of Barcelona.
It says:

"Thus, one portion of mankind was chosen, and this is Israel, the fewest of all peoples. And blessed be the Lord who knows that they are the choice part of the human race [Are we dealing here with some form of racist supremacy?], who selected them to be called 'His people' and gave them all the principles of wisdom. Yet, to the rest of humanity He also gave a pathway to separate them from the beasts, and these are the seven commandments which were altogether ordered to all the people of the world." [So, according to this statement, billions of people in the world who do not "obey" the noahide laws as they are prescribed in the rabbinic codes are regarded as mere "beasts" by those who endorse the noahic regulations; particularly those in the Chabad Lubavitch movement. And we can ascertain that Menachem Schneerson was not the exception.]

As for Jesus, he plays no positive role in this tradition, but on the contrary, he and his deeds represent what a "noahide" should not be and the way a "noahide" should not act.
Salvation through faith is nonexistent; indeed, it is viewed as a concept that ought to be eradicated. --The main thing,-- as Schneerson used to say, is "the deed." In other words, Gentiles achieve salvation through works..., that is, a blind obedience to the Jewish rabbinic laws. This is confirmed in the Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings chapter 8, rule 11 that says:

"Anyone who receives upon himself these seven commandments and is precise in their observance - he is [counted] among the righteous among the the nations of the world, and he has a share in the World to Come."

In the same paragraph Maimonides adds that it is not enough to accept them "intellectually," or because they "make sense":

"And he, [the Gentile, would be considered "righteous"] only when he receives them and puts them in practice because the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded them in the Torah, and informed us through Moses, our teacher, that even previously, the sons of Noah were commanded to fulfill them. But, if he fulfills them out of intellectual conviction, he is not a resident alien [a non-Jew who is allowed to live among Jews], and not one of the righteous from the nations of the world [in other words, he is nothing but a wicked "goy"], nor of their wise men [but a fool]."


1st law - 'dinim' - [The establishment of courts of law]:

In an excerpt taken from the Chabad Lubavitch in Ciberspace website (that quotes the book "The Path of the Righteous Gentile" by Chaim Clorfene and Yaakov Rogalsky, chapter 11, part one [p. 101]) we read:

"The children of Noah are commanded to establish courts of law that will carry out justice and maintain human righteousness and morality in accord with the Seven Universal Laws. A court system that perverts justice by handing down rulings in conflict with the Seven Universal Laws is an instrument for driving God's blessings out of the world. Anyone who fails to establish a court system, that is, who lives in a community or city in which there are no courts [to enforce the noahide laws], and does nothing to correct the situation, is punishable by death. One who establishes or maintains courts of law that operate contrary to the Seven Universal Laws is also liable to the death penalty."

This is based in the Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings chapter 8, rule 9 that says:

"For every Gentile who does not accept the commandments given to the sons of Noah must be executed if he is under our [undisputed] authority."

In the same chapter, rule 10 we read:

"And so, Moses was commanded by the mouth of the Almighty to coerce all the inhabitants of the world to receive the laws that were ordered to the sons of Noah; and anyone who does not accept them should be executed!"
[This was one of Schneerson's favorite statements, for he used to quote it repeatedly in almost every discourse where he would adress the matters related to the non-Jewish world]

Rabbi Yom Tov Lipmann Heller (1579-1654), better know as the Tosafot Yom Tov; in his commentary on the Mishnah, tractate Pirkei Avot 1:14, acknowledged that Jewish law enacts that the noahide laws are to be imposed on the "goyim" by all means, -- even throug violence.

The excerpt reads:

[Mishnah]:

" [R. Akiva said:] 'Beloved is man, for he was created in the image [of God]. It is a sign of abundant love that it was made known to him that he was created in the image [of God], for it is said: 'In the image of God He made man'."

[Tosafot Yom Tov]:

" [based on this statement, R. Akiva] has brought morality to the entire world, as we have been commanded by Moses [concerning the enforcement of the noahide laws upon the non-Jewish people]. And since we were commanded to coerce by the edge of the sword [to the obedience of the noahide laws], with killing and destruction, how much more are we commanded to use the force of words."

Similarly, Menachem Schneerson, the "lover of humanity" declared:

"The death penalty is given to the goy if he merely refuses to accept the seven noahide laws, because this would be an outright breach of the entire reason of these commandments; that is, to accept God's sovereignty." [Likutei Sichot 26:140]

He also implied in Likutei Sichot 26:135-6 that this law applies even in the current era, but he lamented the fact that the Jews don't have the means to enforce it.
[how happy Schneerson would have been if the judicial applications of the noahide laws had been enforced during his lifetime, and not only in American lands but also in the entire world. He really longed to see the day when the penalties for the violation of any of these rabbinical laws were excerted on anyone who wantonly would choose to ignore the "decrees of the Almighty," i.e., the noahide laws.

We also read in the Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Milah [Laws of Circumcision] chapter 1, rule 6:

"[A Jew who] acquires a grown-up slave from the akum [the word akum is an acronym for the Hebrew phrase "ovdei kochavim u-mazalot," meaning, "servants of the stars and constellations" -- an euphemism for "idol-worshippers." Akum is the term used to describe every Gentile who does not abide by the noahide laws as prescribed in the codes of Jewish law... Christians included] and he [the Gentile slave] doesn't want to be circumcised, we may have patience on him for a period of twelve months. But more than this, it is forbidden to keep him for any longer period while he remains uncircumcised; but rather he should be sold to another akum.
If at the outset, while the slave was still in possession of his idolater master and he [the master] determines that he would not be circumcised [and the slave wishes to live among Jews], it is permissible [for a Jew] to accept him, eventhough he is an "arel" [an uncircumcised male], but only if he accepts the seven commandments ordered to the sons of Noah, and he would become a "ger toshav" [a Gentile who is allowed to live among Jews, i.e., a "resident alien"]. But if he doesn't receive upon himself the seven laws, he should be killed immediately!"


** What form of execution is applied to those who fail to receive and obey these noahide laws? The answer is given in the Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings, chapter 9, rule 14:

"A noahide who transgresses any of these seven laws shall be executed by the sword [Heb. "Yehareg be-sayif" i.e., decapitation]."

In chapter 10, rule 5 of the same work we read:

"As we have explained that the form of execution to be inflicted to a noahide is [always] by decapitation."

The Talmud, tractate Sanhedrin 56b unequivocally states that:

"Every death penalty inflicted to noahides is only by decapitation."

A footnote in the Moznaim edition of the Mishneh Torah that comments on this statement declares: "In contrast to a Jew, a Gentile offender is executed for the violation of even the slightest mitzvah [noahide regulation] ...gentiles are required to maintain a stable and orderly world."

*Ask yourself, if the noahide laws would ever be enforced in the world [which is a foolish guess, because people are not that stupid to even consider being ruled by such nonsense]; how many thousands of human beings would die every day throughout the planet for having broken any of these tyranic laws? And..Alas! by decapitation!

To begin with, the first victims of the carnage would be the followers of every religion that falls in the category of "idolatry," which is the third noahic prohibition in the talmudic list of Sanhedrin 56a, --Christianity included --.
At this point we would have at least 4 billion people among Christians, Budhists, Hare Krishnas, psychics and mediums, as well as voodoo practitioners, the adherents of native and mystery religions, atheists, etc. -- all of them killed; executed by the noahide courts under the strict supervision of orthodox rabbis. Put it in simple terms, those would be true "kosher executions" -- and obviously by decapitation.
Tens of thousands of temples and houses of worship from all over the world would be demolished and every form of religious literature [Christian Bibles included] thrown to the burning flames. The few who remain alive and decide to continue with their faith would have to hide in the mountains and the jungles to escape certain death. Religious persecution would be a day-to-day occurrence.

The next in line would be the millions of practicing homosexuals from all walks of life, as well as those who commit what under noahide legislation are considered "sexual crimes," whom also would be counted by the multitudes. [This will be fully explained below].

The "blasphemers" too, would taste the edge of the sword. All those whom out of rage or just for being used to it, pronounce "unacceptable" statements either against God or the rabbis who "represent His authority on earth."

Then, every person who steals, no matter if he stole a minimum quantity of money [a "pruta"], property, or millions that belong to another person or institution. They would also be executed by the sword: Off with their heads!

The murderers and others who for some reason have to take the life of another person, as well as those who practice abortions and the ones who have them; they would not be sent to jail, because their final destiny would be the gallows. And according to noahic law, they would be executed based on the testimony of one single witness, -- no need of an elaborate trial that would cost resources to a noahide government.

Even a community where there are no noahide courts of law in charge to enforce the blind adherence to the six other laws, is to be wiped from the face of the earth, as it has been previously stated.

And last but not least, those who would choose to eat meat while the source from where it was taken had the minimum sign of life, as it is the custom of certain peoples in the Far East, who prefer to eat fish while it is still alive, because --as they say-- this is the most fresh kind of meat; therefore they like to eat it that way.
They too, would have their heads cercenated by the noahide courts of law.

All these people... all these miserable people.. all of them killed for transgressing the tyranic noahide laws. No mercy, no compassion; just the adherence to the strict letter of the law..., the noahide laws.
And while this happens out there in the cruel world, the Lubavitchers and the rest of the "elected" would be dancing and singing "oy oy oy," while drinking "l'chaims" in front of a picture of their "rebbe-moshiach."

...talking about holocausts and indifference towards the suffering of others.


** At this point we may wonder, who would be in charge of enforcing this kind of legislation?

The answer is simple; since most rabbinic authorities regard the noahide laws as a form of extension of Jewish law for non-Jews, they take it as their responsibility to set the criteria for such legislation. This, involves not only the delineation of the rules that would govern the behavior of the "noahide" --as it is demonstrated in the dozens of ramifications taken from the original seven laws--, but also involves the punishment for the transgression of these laws.
According to Maimonides, when the Gentile court system fails to apply the penalties that convey the infringement of the noahide laws, it is incumbent upon the Jewish courts to take a direct action, to get involved.
This, he derived from Genesis 34, where the rape of Dinah, Jacob's daughter by Shechem, a Canaanite prince is described. Accordingly, as "noahides", the people of Schechem were responsible to execute their prince for the crimes committed against Dina; namely, abduction and rape, which fall into the category of gazel (robbery). But when they failed to carry out the execution, they themselves were liable to the death penalty because they transgressed the positive commandment concerning the establishment of courts of law ["dinim"], so two of Jacob's sons [Shimeon and Levi], took the law into their own hands and orchestrated a systematic mass-killing, wiping out the entire population of Shechem.
This set up a precedent that would determine the level of involvement of the Jewish criminal system in noahide affairs. And so, lawfulness becomes something which Jews impose on non-Jews.

That Jewish courts would be in charge of applying punishment on the Gentiles who do not act in compliance to the tenets of the noahic regulations [in the event that the Gentile noahide courts fail to act] is evident in the following example.

Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings chapter 10, rule 9 states:

"And so, a Gentile who rests, even on a weekday, observing that day as a Sabbath -- is liable to the death penalty; and needles to say, [he is liable] if he creates a religious festival for himself.
The general principle governing these matters is: They are not to be allowed to originate a new religion or create new commandments based on their own decisions. But either, they become righteous converts [to Judaism] and accept all the commandments, or retain their [own] law [the noahide laws] without adding or detracting from them. And if he engages in Torah-study, makes a Sabbath, or creates a [religious] practice, a Jewish court should beat him, punish him, and inform him that he is liable to the death penalty."


Interestingly, Nachmanides, in his commentary on Genesis 34: 13 disagreed with Maimonides' position on what constitutes Dinim. He did not limit it to the enforcement of the six other laws, but included civil matters into it:

"In my opinion, the commandment to establish courts of law enjoined upon the descendants of Noah in their seven commandments not only includes the requirement of maintaining judges in every district, but they were also commanded [to rule] on matters related to theft and over-reaching, extortion, and the payment of wages, bailees, rape and seduction, torts and personal injuries, loans and commercial transactions, and those similar to them just as the laws that were given to Israel."


2nd law 'birkat Hashem' - (The prohibition of blasphemy).

Maimonides, in his Mishneh Torah, Laws of Idolatry chapter 2, rule 6 determined that the acceptance of the existence of any god apart from the God of Israel falls in the category of blasphemy; and we can ascertain that the Christian dogma of the divinity of Jesus is alluded here, for although Christian theology does not consider Jesus as a "second god," but the manifestation of God in the flesh, in the noahic tradition Jesus is seen as a false god, therefore this belief would be deemed as a religious crime and its adherents prosecuted, as the text explains:

"Anyone who accepts idolatry as true [Christianity, as we shall see, was considered an "idolatrous religion" by Maimonides and by the Lubavitcher rebbe], even if he does not [actually] worship it, such a person disgraces and blasphemes the glorious and awesome Name [of God].
This applies both to one who practices idolatry and to one who curses God's Name, as it is said: "If a person commits [an act of idolatry] in a defiant way, whether he is a native or a proselyte, he is blaspheming the Name [of the Lord]" (Numbers 15:30).
Therefore, the idolater is to be hanged, just as the blasphemer has to be hanged. Both of them are executed by being stoned to death. And because of this, I have included the laws that apply to the blasphemer in the [section of the Mishneh Torah that deals with the] Laws of Idolatry; for the two of them deny the fundamental principles of [the faith]."

** Not only the belief in Jesus Christ falls into the category of blasphemy, but other Christian dogmas, such as the enmity between Satan and God are included, as it can be read in an excerpt from the Chabad Lubavitch in Ciberspace website:

"The teaching in Christian theology that the evil force rebelled against the Lord and set up a separate kingdom is tantamount to blasphemy, for it denigrates the Creator and denies His infinite majesty."


*Another curious fact related to the prohibition of blasphemy is that according to authoritative rabbinic sources, those who take lightly or mock at the statements of the Jewish rabbis, no matter how ridiculous, or how contrary to human reason they may be (such as the one in the Talmud, tractate Gittin 69b, where the rabbis' medical advice for the cure of catarrh --a common cold-- is to knead the excrement of a white dog with balsam and eat it) deserve to die "by the hands of heaven," and after the transgressor dies he will be punished in hell in boiling excrement.

This is well explained in the Talmud, tractate Eruvin 21b that reads:

"My son, be admonished [to obey] the words of the Scribes more than the words of the Torah, for in the words of the Torah there are positive and negative commandments [and the penalties for their transgression vary], But as to the enactments of the Scribes, whoever transgresses the enactments of the Scribes deserves death.
Perhaps you may say: If there is substance in their words, why were they not written [together with the rest of Scriptures]?'
[the answer:] Scripture says: "Of making many books there is no end" , "...and much study wearies the flesh" (Eccl. 12:12).
Rav Pappa, the son of Rav Acha bar-Adda said in the name of Rav Acha bar-Ulla: 'This teaches that anyone who mocks at the words of the sages, his punishment [will be] in boiling excrement'."

* According to another tracatate of the Talmud, this is what happened to Jesus, who, for being "irrespectful" to the manners of the rabbis was condemned and punished in such a horrendous way.

(Gittin 56b):

"Onkelos, the son of Kalonikus, the son of Titus' sister wanted to convert [to Judaism]. He went and raised Titus [from hell] by means of necromancy. He asked him: 'Who is esteemed in that world?' [in the underworld] He answered: 'Israel'. 'Should I join them?' He [Titus] replied: 'Their precepts are numerous and you will not be able to carry them out. Go and attack them in that world and you will become a head, for it is written: (Lam. 1:5) "Their adversaries have become the head" etc. Whoever opresses Israel becomes a head'. He [Onkelos] said to him: 'What is the punishment of such a man?' [ i.e., 'What is your punishment in hell?'] He replied: 'What he decreed for himself [he speaks in third person, meaning 'what I decreed for myself']; every day his [i.e., 'my'] ashes are collected and judgement is passed on him; then he is burned and his ashes are scattered over the seven seas'.
He went and raised Balaam by means of necromancy. He asked him: 'Who is esteemed in that world?' He replied: 'Israel'. [Onkelos asks:] 'Should I join them?' He answered: 'Seek not their peace or their good all the days.' He asked him: 'What is the punishment of such a man?' [ i.e., 'What is your punishment in hell?] He replied: 'In boiling semen'.
He went and raised Yeshu [an offensive way to say 'Jesus'] by means of necromancy.
He asked him: 'Who is esteemed in that world?' he replied: 'Israel.'
'Should I join them?'
He replied: 'Seek their good, seek not their harm. Whoever touches them is like if he touches the pupil of his own eye' [quoting Zechariah 2:12].
He [Onkelos] asked him: 'What is the punishment of such a man?' [i.e., 'what is your punishment in hell?]
He replied: 'In hot-boiling excrement!'
For a master said: 'Whoever mocks at the words of the sages, his punishment is in hot-boiling excrement' [ here he quoted the Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Eruvin 21b].
Come and see the difference between the sinners of Israel [refering to Jesus] and the prophets of the nations who worship idols!"


* In the Talmud God Himself is reproached by an angel for "speaking idle of the ancestors of the Jewish people.

Sanhedrin 44b:

"Abaye said to Rav Dimi: 'To what do you in the West relate this [Scriptural] passage: "Do not go hastly to strive, lest you don't know what to do in the end thereof, when your fellow puts you in shame. Quarrel with your fellow, but do not reveal the secrets of another! (Pr. 25: 8, 9)?
[the talmudic answer:] "At the time the Holy One, Blessed be He said to Ezekiel: "Go say to Israel: 'Your father was an Amorite and your mother a Hittite" (Ez. 16:3), an arguing spirit said before the Holy One, Blessed be He, 'Master of the universe, if Abraham and Sarah would come and stand before You, and You say this to them, they would be humiliated! Quarrel with Your fellow, but do not reveal the secrets of another!'"
But is he [the angel] worthy of so much [audacity towards God]?
Yes! For Rabbi Yose, the son of Rabbi Chanina said, He [the angel] has three names: Piskon, Itmon, and Sigron.
"Piskon", because he argues with bluntly words towards the One above.
"Itmon", because he conceals the sins of Israel.
"Sigron", because when he closes [a matter] no one can reopen it."

** Piskon, is derived from the root "pasak," to split, to cut off.
** Itmon, derives from the root "atam," to lock.
** Sigron, derives from the root "sagar," to close.

As it can be seen, in this talmudic passage God Himself is accused of transgressing the prohibition of ona'at d'varim, grieving with words, insulting others. Accordingly, God "insulted" the patriarchs of the Jewish people, and since the Torah forbids to cause distress to another person by making statements that would wound, shame, or embarrass him [see Leviticus 25:17 and Bava Metzia 58b], by doing this, God deserved a strong "rebuke" which was carried on by a heavenly messenger who defended the honor of the Jewish people. No one, not even the Creator should dare to express himself bad about this "illustrious" people, and much less of their "sages"... such a thing would be tantamount to blasphemy!


3rd law 'avodah zarah' - (the prohibition of idolatry)

Are Christians regarded as idolaters by noahide standards? The Mishneh Torah, Laws of Idolatry and Statutes of the Goyim [Hilchot Avodah Zarah Ve-chukot Hagoyim] Chapter 9, rule 4 gives us the answer:

"The Christians are idol-worshipers, and Sunday is the day of their pagan festival. Therefore it is forbidden to engage in transactions with them in the land of Israel on Thursday and Friday each and every week, and needless to say, on Sunday itself [the day when Christians traditionally go to church], when this is forbidden in all places. And in such a way we behave towards them during all their pagan celebrations."


** Menachem Schneerson confirmed this statement in a letter written on May 28, 1965, that was quoted in the Likutei Sichot series, volume 37, p. 198, and also in the book "Kol Ba'ei Ha'olam" ['All the Inhabitants of the World'], page 281. He blatantly and unequivocally labeled Christians as "idol-worshippers":

"... according to the known halachic ruling which [states that] Christians are idol-worshippers.
From this we understand that [the exposure to Christian] tenents is not only destructive to Jewish children -- for much concern is taken about them in [the Mishneh Torah,] 'Laws of Idolatry'.--
Thus [we reason], that if their normal [secular educational] standards are themselves a very grave matter, how much more [their religious ones] are totally forbidden [to us]!"

How ironic and disgraceful it is that a man who has been celebrated and recognized as a "champion of education" to the point that every anniversary of his birthday is officially proclaimed as "Education Day U.S.A.," labeled the educational curriculum in the schools of the United States a "grave matter" and advised his followers against having anything to do with it.
This explains why in the Lubavitch movement almost no child or teenager ever attends a regular school but only their religious academies, where they learn exclusively rabbinic literature such as Talmud, Mishneh Torah, the Shulchan Aruch, traditional rabbinic commentaries on the Bible as well as kabbalistic works like the Zohar, and especially the writings of the Chabad masters such as Tanya, -- and obviously the teachings of Menachem Schneerson.

Let's switch places and imagine the reaction in the organized Jewish community if they had discovered that [for example] a respected Christian leader such as Billy Graham or Cardinal O'Connor would have said that the Jews are "idol-worshippers" or a similar remark. Or if they realize that there were Christian writtings that label Jews as "idol-worshippers," and that "Saturday is their pagan festival." Certainly they would make the biggest deal out of this.
One could think of articles in newspapers and magazines, as well as in talk-shows in national television and radio. Powerful people from the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Congress, Agudat Israel of America, and many other major Jewish organizations [even the Chabad Lubavitch organization] bringing up the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Cozacs, the Holocaust and the O.J. Simpson's case; showing to the world "how wicked Christianity is and its bigoted nature". --The cry of "anti-semitism" would resound once again all over in the media--.

But in this case, since it is was a Jewish "celebrity," a revered religious leader; Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the "great" Lubavitcher rebbe; the man who has been adored by Jews and non-Jews alike, the chassidic "messiah," etc., then he can get away with it. No one will say anything... [except me?]

** The above mentioned derogatory statement by Schneerson was based on Maimonides' Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Avodah Zarah chapter 10, rule 1. His attitude towards these Christian "idolaters" was clear. The text reads:

"We may not draw a covenant with the idol-worshippers which will establish peace between them [and us] and yet allow them to worship idols, for it is written: "Do not establish a covenant with them" (Deut. 7:2). Rather, they must renounce their religious convictions or be killed.
It is forbidden to have mercy upon them, for it is written: "Do not be gracious to them" (Deut. 7:2). Therefore, if we see any of them being swept away or drowning in a river, we should not help him. If we see him at the verge of death, we should not save him.
To whom these matters apply? to the goy!
But with regards to Jewish traitors, and the minim [Jewish "sectarians"] and the epikorsim, it is a religious obligation to eliminate them with our own hands and to cause them to descend to the pit of destruction [Heb. "be'er shachat" = hell], for they are a cause for distress to Israel and sway the people away from God, as Jesus the Nazarene and his disciples did, and Tzadok and Baitos and their disciples. May the name of the wicked become putrid!"


** We also read in Maimonides' Hilchot Rotzeach Ushmirat Hanefesh [Laws of Slaughter and Protection of Life) chapter 4, rule 11:

"But Gentiles with whom there is no war between us and them, and [Gentile] shepherds of small animals [who dwell] among the Jews, and those similar to them, we should not procure their deaths. However, it is also forbidden to rescue them if they are at the verge of death; for instance, if we see one of them who fell into the sea, we are not to get him out, for it is said: (Lev. 19:16): "You shall not stand idle upon the blood of your neighbor," And he is not your neighbor!" [according to Jewish law only a Jew qualifies to be considered a "neighbor" to another Jew; therefore the biblical possitive commandment of "You shall love your neighbor as yourself" doesn't apply to a non-Jew, -- only to Jews; similarly the prohibition of "You shall not covet your neighbor's wife" doesn't apply to the wife of a Gentile, only to the wife of another Jew]


A similar statement is found in another main code of Jewish law, the Shulchan Aruch, Yore De'a 159, sif alef.


** In the "Noah's Covenant" web site, which promotes the philosophy of the Chabad Lubavitch movement, and particularly the teachings of their rebbe we read:

"The Noachide commandment of "justice" [implies] primarily teaching one's neighbors, friends, associates, etc. the details of the Noachide code, and that G-d sees and hears everything, rewarding every good deed and punishing every sin. This means outreach.
Noachides must turn Christians away from their idolatry and their disregard of G-d's Law, and must bring all gentiles to a full acceptance of G-d's Law, including the oral Torah and the complete authority of the orthodox rabbis.
This will quickly revolutionize our society, restoring morality, respect for authority, and the fear of G-d throughout the land. Similar efforts, of course, must also be extended to foreign countries."
"...Noachides must also aggressively combat the schemes of Christian missionaries, who are stealing Jewish --and gentile-- souls away from eternal life under G-d's Law [meaning the 7 rabbinic-made laws which according to Jewish legislation apply to them] to the evil of Christian idolatry."

It further says:

"It is vitally important that as a movement we continue to grow. There certainly should be "publicity" and an aggressive outreach program to pull Christians out of their churches and bring them to G-d's Law [refering to the noahide laws]."


** Rabbi Yosef Albo, in his Sefer Ha-ikkarim (Book of [Jewish Religious] Principles) chapter 25, paragraph 21 stated that:

"An idol-worshiper [meaning a Gentile] who refuses [to repent and to] accept the seven noahide laws, which the stranger observes, may have his live taken; and this goes in line with the consensus of all religions.
Even the philosophers permit to take his life saying: "Kill the one who has no religion!"
And so the Torah also admonishes us in relation to idolaters: "You shall not allow any person to live" (Deut. 20:16).
Now if it is permitted to take his life, surely one may take his property. The idolater should be killed and deserves no pity!"


** In the Sefer Nitzachon Hayashan [the Book of the Ancient Victory], which is an anti-Christian medieval diatribe written by an anonymous author and was widely circulated among Jews; in its chapter entitled "Bikoret ha-Evangelion ve-haNotzrut" [A Critique of the Gospels and Christianity] paragraph 226, we are told that all the believers in Jesus will ultimately be tormented in hell for their "idolatrous ways":

"Moreover, ask them [the Christians] why they afflict themselves on Friday. If it is because Yeshu was hung on that day, then they should have made it a festive and a joyous day, since according to what they say, through his hanging and torments they were saved from hell.
But they mourn because they know that all who believe in him will go down to hell, to a place of obstacles and stumbling."


** With regards to the Jewish believers in Jesus the antagonism is more evident. Prayers and invocations were composed by the rabbis that expressed a fiery hatred against these Jewish-Christians. They were arranged and accommodated in the daily prayer service in such a way that they had to be repeated as many times as possible. A good example of this is a statement in the Shmoneh Esreh, which is the Jewish prayer par excellence and the central feature of the three daily prayers.

The Shmone Esreh features a peculiar "blessing" -- which is actualy a curse --. This curse was composed during the administration of Rabban Gamliel II some time after the destruction of the Second Temple (circa A.D. 100), and it is also associated with Shmuel Hakatan who died at about 125 A.D. The talmudic passage that mentions the introduction of this "benediction," which is found in tractate Berachot 28b reads:

"The rabbis taught: Shim'on ha-Pakoli arranged the Eighteen Benedictions in their order before Rabban Gamliel in Yavneh.
Raban Gamliel said to the sages: 'Is there anyone who knows how to formulate the [additional] "benediction," [the one] concerning the minim? Shmuel haKatan stood up and formulated it."

We see that by this time the Shmoneh Esreh, which according to tradition was arranged by the anshei k'nesset hag'dolah [the men of the great assembly] in the 4th century B.C., had acquired an additional "blessing" [making a total of 19], but it continued be known as the "Eighteeen [Heb. "Shmoneh Esreh"] Benedictions." This additional "blessing" was known as "birkat haminim", which means "the blessing over the "minim" = the sectarians, and it was directed against groups that were considered antagonistic to the rabbinic social and religious monopoly. It is the opinion of most scholars that although the birkat haminim focused on dissenting groups, it was mainly directed against the Jewish believers in Jesus Christ.

The existence of maledictions against the Christians said by Jews during religious services was a well knwon fact. The evidence can be seen in the writings of some of the Church Fathers who wrote about this since early as the 2th century A.D.
For example Justin Martyr, in his "Dialogue with Tripho," chapter 16, wrote on this respect:

"..cursing in your synagogues those that believe in Christ. For you have not the power to lay hands upon us, on account of those who now have the mastery. But as often as you could, you did so."

Jerome stated in his commentary on Amos 1:11,12:

"Until today they blaspheme the Christian people in their synagogues under tha name of 'Nazarenes'."

In his commentary on Isaiah 5:18,19 he remarked:

"Three times each day they anathemize the Christian name in every synagogue under the name of 'Nazarenes'."

Also in his commentary on Isaiah 49:7:

"They curse him [Jesus] three times a day in their synagogues under the name of 'Nazarenes'."

But perhaps the most revealing non-Jewish source related to the birkat haminim and its original purpose is found in the "Panarion", which is an account and refutation of 80 forms of heresy written by Epiphanius, bishop of Constantia in the 4th century.

Talking about the Nazarenes, -especifically Jews who professed faith in Jesus,- Epiphanius wrote [Panarion 29. 9,2]:

"However, they are very much hated by the Jews. For not only the Jewish children cherish hate against them but the people also stand up in the morning, at noon, and in the evening, three times a day and they pronounce curses and maledictions over them when they say their prayers in their synagogues. Three times a day they say: "may God curse the Nazarenes. For they are more hostile against them because they proclaim as Jews that Jesus is the Messiah, which runs counter to those who still are Jews who did not accept Jesus."

This prayer that was said "three times a day" in a standing position is no other than the Shmoneh Esreh, also known as "Amidah," which literally means "standing" [from the Hebrew verb "amad" = to stand].

From its early inception, the Amidah has been recited three times a day, up to the present time during shacharit [morning], mincha [noon], and arvit, also known as ma'ariv [evening] prayers. Nowadays, the wording of the 12th "benediction" of the Shmoneh Esreh [which is the birkat haminim] has been changed for obvious reasons, but still contains very strong language against the detractors of the Jewish faith.

Professor Jakob Jocz, Ph.D., in his scholarly work entitled "The Jewish People and Jesus Christ -- A Study in the Relationship Between the Jewish People and Jesus Christ" [page 53], conclusively demonstrated that the birkat haminim was part of the series of maledictions refered by the Church Fathers. He wrote:

"That the original text of the birkat haminim must have made mention of the Christians was anticipated by the learned Prof. Samuel Krauss. Dr. Krauss rightly concluded from the repeated complaints by the Church Fathers that the Jews cursed the Christians in their synagogues three times daily, that this must have constituted an integral part of the Daily Prayers. This assumption was borne out by an old text found in a Cairo Genizah by Dr. Solomon Schechter. That text reads:
'For the apostates (lameshumadim) let there be no hope, and may the arrogant kingdom [= Rome?] soon be rooted out in our days, and the Nazarenes [Heb. "vehanotzrim"] and the minim perish as in a moment and be blotted out from the Book of Life and with the righteouss may they not be inscribed. Blessed are Thou, O Lord, who humblest the arrogant.'
It is difficult to assess the age of the Genizah fragment, but it is not the only instance where the Notzrim are explicitly mentioned in the birkat haminim."

Professor Jocz's statement was confirmed by Alexander Marx, the learned academic in the area of history at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, and close friend of Solomon Schechter, who in 1907 published a text of the siddur of Rabbi Amram Gaon, which is dated from 1426. In this ancient prayer book, the 12th "benediction" of the Amidah reads:

"Lam'shumadim al tehi tikvah, u-malchut zadon mehera te'aker ve-yameinu, ve-haNotzrim ve-haminim k'rega ye'avedu. Yimachu misefer ha-chayim, ve-im tzadikim al yekatevu. Baruch Atah Hashem, machnia zedim."

[translation:] "let there be no hope for the apostates, and may the arrogant kingdom soon be rooted out in our days, and may the Notzrim and the minim be destroyed as in a moment. Erase them from the Book of Life, and with the righteous may they not be inscribed.
Blessed are You Hashem, who humiliates the arrogant ones."

Now, the fact that since the 7th century (seven centuries before R. Amram Gaon edited the above mentioned siddur) the word Notzrim came to describe the Christians in general and not only Jewish-Christians, proves that this malediction was not limited to the Jewish believers in Jesus, but to all kinds of Christians [Heb. "Notzrim"].

This is confirmed by Rashi (1040-1105), who is regarded as the greatest Jewish commentarist of the Hebrew Bible and the Talmud.
In the uncensored editions of Rashi's commentaries on the Talmud, tractates Chagiga (5b), Megillah (17b and 24b) and Rosh Hashanah (17a), it is unequivocally stated that the term "minim" refers to the followers of Jesus, let it be Jew or Gentile.
For example, Rashi's commentary on Chagiga 5b reads:

"Minim -- Talmidei Yeshu she-einam maaminim le-divrei rabboteinu, zichronam liv'racha."

[translation:] "Minim -- these are the disciples of Yeshu, who do not believe in the words of our rabbis of blessed memory."

In his commentary on Rosh Hashanah 17a Rashi wrote:

"Minim -- hem talmidim shel Yeshu Hanotzri asher heferu divrei Elokim chayim lera-a"

[translation:] "Minim -- they are are the disciples of Yeshu the Nazarene who contravened the Words of the Living God to wickedness."

Also, in the Sefer ha-Kuzari, written by 12th century Jewish philosopher and poet, Rabbi Yehudah Halevi, -- in his third discourse, section 65 (maamar shlishi, ot samech-hei), it is stated that the 12th "benediction" of the Amidah, i.e., the "birkat haminim," is exclusively dedicated to the followers of Jesus Christ.

The text reads:

"Ve-hem ha-minim, she'anu mit'palelim al avadam bit'filah asher le-Yeshu ve-chaverav im ham'shumadim..."

[translation:] "And these are the minim, of whom we pray concerning their destruction in the prayer which is said about Yeshu and his companions, together with the apostates..."


**Another example of rabbinic hatred against Jesus and Christianity in general is a statement found in the Aleinu, which is a declaration recited by the end of Jewish religious services. This particular statement in the Aleinu is omitted in Reform and Conservative prayer books [most Jews in those movements don't even know about the existence of this derogatory material], but can be found in some orthodox siddurim [prayer books], such as the Artscroll Siddur and the Chabad-Lubavitch "Tehillat Hashem".
The statement goes:

"For they bow to vanity and emptiness [the expression "and emptiness" in Hebrew is "va-rik"], and pray to a god which helps not..."
"...Therefore we hope in You, Lord our God, that we may speedily see in the splendor of Your might, to get rid of detestable idolatry from the earth [as we have read above, Christianity is regarded as an idolatric religion], and false gods [they regard Jesus as a "false god"] be utterly destroyed, to perfect the world [Heb. "letaken olam"] through the kingship of the Almighty."

This statement in the Aleinu was the cause of bitter polemics and antagonism between Christians and Jews, especially during the 14th century, when a Jewish Christian named Pesach Peter exposed it to be an open insult to Christianity.
Accordingly, the numerical value of the Hebrew word "va-rik" [and emptiness], which sums 316, was a reference to the derogatory way the Jews call Jesus, i.e., "Yeshu" -- which stands for "imach sh'mo v'zichro," meaning: "may his name and memory be blotted out" --, and whose numerical value is also 316.

* Jesus' Hebrew name is Yehoshua (Joshua), which in its Aramaic form is "Yeshua." See for instance in Nehemiah 8:17 where the Hebrew name Yehoshua, refering to Joshua the son of Nun, --Moses successor,-- is rendered Yeshua bin-Nun, and not "Yeshu bin-Nun." Also in Haggai 1:1,12 and Zechariah 6:11 we find that the name of the High Priest who returned from the Babylonian captivity with Zerubabel and Nehemiah is pronounced Yehoshua ben Yehotzadak (Joshua the son of Jehozadak), whereas in Ezra 3:2,8 and Nehemiah 12:26 the same High Priest is named Yeshua ben-Yotzadak. Thus, it can be concluded that in post-exilic times the names Yehoshua and Yeshua were regarded as equivalent.
--In the Septuagint the names Yehoshua and Yeshua are rendered "IESUS" = Jesus. Also in Philo of Alexandria's works, the name "Joshua" ("Yehoshua") is rendered "IESUS" [see for instance De Mutatione Nominum XXI].

The earliest rabbinic sources that mention Jesus don't render his name as "Yeshu," but Yeshua, as it is proven in the Tosefta (2th century A.D.), tractate Chullin 2. 22,23 (2:6 in the Buber edition), and in the uncensored parts of the Jerusalem Talmud, tractates Shabbat 14d and Avodah Zarah 40d and 41a.
In later rabbinic works, such as Abarvanel's commentary on Daniel 7:8 and in Maimonides' Yad Hachazaka, Hilchot Avodah Zarah 10:1 and M'lachim 11:4 we find Jesus' name rendered 'Yeshua.' Also, in his famous treatise entitled "Chizuk Emuna" (Faith Strengthened), chapter 21 (pages 192,193 in Wagenseil's Tela Ignea Satanae), 16th-century polemicist, R. Yitzchak Troki admits that Jesus' Jewish name was originally pronounced Yeshua and not "Yeshu".
Likewise, it is important to mention that in the earliest anti-Christian polemic treatise (written in the 6th century), composed in Arabic and entitled "Qissat Mujadalat as-Usquf," which in its Hebrew translation was called "Sefer Nestor Ha-komer" (the Book of Nestor the ["pagan" Christian] Priest), Jesus' name is pronounced "Yeshua" and not "Yeshu".
--(see "The Polemic of Nestor the Priest - Qissat Mujadalat al-Usquf and Sefer Nestor Ha-Komer" [page 25], translated by Johannis Niehoff-Panagiotides - Ben-Zvi Institute for the Study of Jewish Communities in the East, Jerusalem, 1996).

Indeed "Yeshu" is not even a name, and contrary to Jewish propaganda that claims that "Yeshu" was "probably the Galilean pronunciation for Yeshua," or that it was simply a "common name" in ancient times, this term, which in reality is a slur against Jesus, didn't exist until the rabbis of the talmudic era started to use it whenever they refered to Jesus Christ. This has been acknowledged by succeeding generations of Jewish scholars such as 16th-century Eliya Levita, who, in his reputed "Tishbi," --a lexicon of the Hebrew words in the Talmud and the Hebrew of the Middle Ages which was the source for the pronunciation and the vocalization of Hebrew by the German and Italian Jewish communities,-- stated with regards to the term "Yeshu" [see the Tishbi under the word "Yeshu"]:

"L'fi she-haYehudim einam modim she-hu hayah hamoshia, lefichach einam rotzim lik'ro 'Yeshua', vehefilu ha-'Ayin' ve-kor'in lo 'Yeshu'"

[translation:] "For the Jews don't admit that he was the Savior, therefore they don't want to call him 'Yeshua,' so they knocked down the (letter) 'Ayin,' and call him 'Yeshu'."

Also R. Abraham Farissol (ca. 1451-1525), in his book "Magen Avraham", folio 59, says:

"His name was Yeshua; but as Rabbi Moses, the son of Maimon of blessed memory has written it, and as we find it throughout the Talmud, it is written "Yeshu." They have carefully left out the [letter] Ayin, because he was not able to save himself."

In the same token, the statement in Yitzchak Troki's Chizuk Emunah (chapter 21) reads:

"And what if he was called 'Yeshua'? We also read in the Scriptures that in those times there were many Jews whose names were also 'Yeshua,' as we find in (the book of) Ezra (chapters) 2, 3 and 10, and in the second book of Chronicles (chapter) 31.
And since the goyim, in their (native) language don't call him 'Yeshua,' with (the letter) 'Ayin,' but (they call him) 'Yesu,' or 'Yezu' (refering to the Latin pronunciation 'Iesu,' as in 'Iesu Christos' = 'Jesus Christ'), in the same way, also the Jews call him 'Yeshu' without the 'Ayin.' Therefore, from the name 'Yeshua,' which is called 'Yezu' (allegedly by the Christians) they can't get any inference in favor of their faith... For also the Christians, in their tongue call 'Yezu' to Joshua the son of Sirach (refering to the author of the apocryphal book 'Ben Sirach') who wrote a book for the Christians, which in their language is called 'Ecclesiasticus'."

In this particular source, we notice that Yitzchak Troki tries to justify the use of the term 'Yeshu' based on the Latin form Iesu, but his attempts are opposed by the overwhelming evidence given by his correligionists such as the above mentioned source in Eliya Levita's Tishbi. Also, Troki's mistake is established in the fact that he ignored the most basic rules of Latin grammar; for whenever in Latin the two names Iesus and Christus are combined, they are pronounced Iesu Christo, or Iesum Christum, depending on whether it is the subject, object, direct object etc. of a sentence. So depending on the sentence in which the name is used in Latin, let it be nominative, genitive, dative, accusative and vocative cases the form Iesus [Jesus] is altered to fit the grammatic requirements of the language, for example Acts 3:6 in the Latin Vulgate:

"Petrus autem dixit: 'argentum et aurum non est mihi, quod autem habeo hoc tibi do -- In nomine Iesu Christi Nazareni surge et ambula!'"

[translation:] "But Peter said, 'I do not posess silver and gold, but what I do have I give to you: In the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene -- walk!'"

And Romans 5:1:

"iustificati igitur ex fide pacem habemus as Deum per Domimum nostrum Iesum Christum."

[translation:] "Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ."

In Spanish, the combination of Jesus and Christ (Jesus and Cristo) is pronounced Jesucristo. This doesn't mean that whenever the Spanish-speaking people say 'Jesucristo' they mean to say Yeshu-Cristo ("Yeshu" is the Christ). To assume such a thing would be ridiculous!

I will now provide more sources that show that the changing of the name "Yeshua" to "Yeshu" was done with a malicious intent. The first one is in the version of the infamous "Sefer Tol'dot Yeshu" (book of the generations of Yeshu), paragraph # 7, by Johann Jacob Huldreich [1705]. The specific paragraph reads:

"Uche'asher ra'a Yeshua she-b'nei Yisrael einam mit'chaverim elav, ve-kor'im lo b'shem 'Yezush,' k'lomar 'Yimach Zichro Vimach Sh'mo,' az amar Yeshua: 'Ein li chelek be-Elokei Yisrael, ve-halach ve-gilah panim ba-Torah shelo cha-halachah."

[translation:] "And when Yeshua realized that the children of Israel would not befriend him, and that they would call him 'Yezush', which mean to say: 'May his memory and his name be blotted out,' he said: 'There is no portion for me in the God of Israel.' And he went and perverted the Torah contrary to the halacha."
(Notice that the initials of Yimach Zichro Vimach Sh'mo ["May his memory and name be blotted out"] form 'YZVSH,' i.e., "Yezush" -- the way Jesus is refered to in this particular version of the Tol'dot Yeshu').

Another proof is found in a footnote of the recension of the Tol'dot Yeshu in Yehuda Eisenstein's "Otzar Vikuchim," which is a compilation of Jewish anti-Christian polemic literature [page 228].
In this marginal note it is clearly explained that the term Yeshu is an acronym for the Hebrew phrase "Yimach Sh'mo V'zichro," meaning "May his name and memory be blotted out."

The Otzar Rashei Tevot, which is a Lexicon of Hebrew abreviations used in rabbinic works [page 269] defines Yeshu as:

"Yeshu" -- 'Yimach Shmo V'zichro'
[translation:] "Yeshu" -- 'May his name and memory be blotted out.'

In a 13th century anti-Christian Jewish treatise entitled Sefer Yosef Ham'kane (The Book of Yosef the Zealot), also known as T'shuvot Haminim (Answers to the Minim) written by Rabbi Yosef ben Nathan Hamekane-Oficial, we read that the author refers to his Christian opponent as "Yeshu".
Now, if "Yeshu" is just a name, why in the world should the rabbi adress someone whom he regarded as a bitter enemy with this name - which incidentally was not his own?

This is how this particular source begins, which is found in page 77 [paragraph 82] of the edition of Yehuda Rosenthal's "Sefer Yosef Ham'kane", Jerusalem, 1970 [a complete bibliography of this kind of literature is found in Rosenthal's ""Sifrut HaVikuach ha-Anti-Notzrit", in Areshet, Vol. II, pp. 130-179]:

"Shaal adan ham'shumad Yeshu le-harabbi Nathan -- neeman adah..."

[translation:] "Mr. meshumad Yeshu asked to Rabbi Nathan -- adorned with faithfulness..."

*Notice that while the Christian contender is called "meshumad" [destroyed] and "Yeshu," the Jewish debater is adressed as "adorned with faithfulness."
The reason why the Christian party is refered to as "Yeshu" is explained in a marginal note at the bottom of the page; this note explains the meaning of "Yeshu."
The footnote reads:

"Yeshu -- Yimach Sh'mo Ve-zichro."
[translation:] "Yeshu -- may his name and memory be blotted out."

Thus we see that the rabbi couldn't find a better way to express his biggoted attitude against the Christian scholar whom he spoke about, than to curse him with the same malediction which he also directed against Jesus Christ throughout his book.

Finally, the definition of the expression "Yimach Sh'mo ve-zichro" in The Complete Hebrew-English Dictionary, by Massada Publishers [page 2645] reads:

"Yimach Sh'mo Ve-zichro -- May his name and memory be blotted out! - Damn him!"

**At this point it has been proven that the term "Yeshu" is NOT the pronunciation of the name of Jesus in its original form but an insultative epithet that denotes contempt and hatred against him. The correct pronunciation is "Yeshua," which, as it has been pointed out, is the Aramaic form of the Hebrew name Yehoshua, and means "The Lord is Salvation," or "The Lord has saved."

The real reason for the change of "Yeshua" to "Yeshu" is found in a statement in an ancient halachic midrash called Sifre, which is a legal commentary on the books of Numbers and Deuteronomy. In Sifre, parashat Re'e, piska 9 [piska 61 in the English edition entitled: "A Tannaitic Commentary on the Book of Deuteronomy," published by the Yale University Press - page 116] we read:

"Rabbi Eliezer omer: 'minayin lik'tzotz et ha-ashera she-chayav le-sharesh achareha?'
Talmud lomar: 'Ve-ibadetam et sh'mam min hamakom hahu.'
Amar Rabbi Akiva: 'mah ani tzarich? Ha-lo k'var ne-emar, abed te'abdun'? U-mah talmud lomar: 'Ve-ibadetam et sh'mam'?
-- L'shanot et sh'mam!"

[translation:] "Rabbi Eliezer says: 'From where do we know that when an Asherah (a pillar for pagan worship) is cut down, it must also be uprooted? Scripture says [Deut. 12:3]: 've-ibadetam et sh'mam' min ha-makom hahu ("and you shall destroy their names from that place").
Rabbi Akiva said to him: 'Why do I need this [Scriptural evidence]? Does not (the Scripture, in verse 2) previously says: 'abed t'abdun' ("you shall utterly destroy")? Then, why (the apparent repetition): 'and you shall destroy their names'?
-- (this teaches us that we are commanded) to change their names."

In conjuction with this statement in Sifre, I present another source, which is in the Shulchan Aruch, one of the fundamental codes of Jewish law.
In Yore De'a, siman 446 the Shulchan Aruch states:

"Tzarich le-sharesh achar ha-elilim u-l'chanot lahem shem genai."

[translation:] "We are bound to uproot detestable idolatry (Heb. 'elilim') and to ascribe to them disgraceful names."

The Tur, Yore De'a, siman 146, confirms the same statement:

"Ve-tzarich le-sharesh achareha u-l'chanot lah shem genai"

[translation:] "And we are bound to uproot it and to ascribe to it disgraceful names."

Now, since Jesus has been regarded as a false god, and Christianity an idolatric religion, as it has been shown in the previous mentioned sources, --based in those facts, we understand why the Aleinu, which has been an integral part of the daily Jewish liturgy, that expresses the "hope" of a world being "perfected" (from the rabbinic perspective of course), needed to include such a fiery statement. For, what other resource had the Jewish religious leaders who transmitted this "prayer" to vilify their Christian enemies, than through such insults? That is also the reason for the slur "Yeshu," which is directed against Jesus. For every time they said "Yeshu" they expressed their inner wish to have "his name and memory blotted out".

(But I should emphasize, that even though Jesus' name in modern Hebrew is pronounced "Yeshu," there are Jews who call him that way but don't know that they are uttering a curse against him, -- they are ignorantly following a tradition handed down by the ancient rabbis and their religious leaders, who in turn did mean to insult and revile Jesus by all possible means, for their hatred towards him has never ceased, up to our days. Therefore those who call Jesus "Yeshu" are cursing him just as it was originally intended by those rabbis).

We conclude this commentary by saying that sources such as Sifre, Re'e, 9 and the Shulchan Aruch, Yore De'a 446, among others, are the basis for such attitudes towards the Founder of Christianity and his followers, for in those sources we find that there is an actual commandment to destroy not only the object of worship per se, but even their names, by ascribing to them "disgraceful epithets." Therefore, --since the name "Yeshua" was taken as the name of a "false god," i.e., an idol, by those ancient rabbis, thus regarded as "detestable idolatry,"-- they determined to "change" and corrupt its pronunciation by means of an ingenuous play of words. They took off the last letter of the word "Yeshua", which is spelled Yud-Shin-Vav-Ayin, --in other words, they removed the Ayin, and so, they got "Yeshu" [Y'SHV].--
Eventually they realized that the epithet Yeshu contained the initials of the phrase Yimach Sh'mo V'zichro, which means "may his name and memory be blotted out," therefore they stressed on such pronunciation and pushed for the total obliteration of Jesus' original name, which is "Yeshua".

The Aleinu "prayer" is a perfect example of the militant atitude of the rabbinic tradition towards whatever the ancient religious Jewish leaders regarded as "detestable idolatry," and most especifically, towards Christianity; that is why in such unrepentant and firmly way it states:

"...Therefore we hope in You, Lord our God, that we may speedily see in the splendor of Your might, to get rid of detestable idolatry (Heb. 'elilim') from the earth, and false gods be utterly destroyed, to perfect the world... etc."


In our analisys of the Aleinu and it's attitude towards Jesus Christ we find that the Encyclopedia Judaica [vol. 2, page 557] explains that in many Jewish communities they had the custom of spitting to the ground at the moment of saying "va-rik"
(as we have seen, just as the word "va-rik" ["and emptiness"], which is part of the expression: "For they vow to vanity and emptiness and pray to a god that saves not," has the numerical value of 316, -- so the term "Yeshu," -- the insultative name given to Jesus in the Jewish tradition sums 316)

"This [the Encyclopedia Judaica says] was, no doubt, a popular gesture suggested by the double meaning of rik ("emptiness" and "spittle"). In view of this accusation, rabbis such as Isaiah Horowitz discouraged the indecorous practice. The popular Yiddish phrase, er kummt tsum oysshpayen ("he comes at the spitting") came, therefore, to describe someone who arrived at a service as late as the concluding Aleinu."

It is clear that such an act was a manifestation of contempt against Jesus Christ, who was viewed by them as the reason for the "idolatrous" ways of the Christian masses.
Among many orthodox Jews this heinous act is still performed during the recitation of the Aleinu; they spit as a gesture of scorn towards him. In no other prayer they do it, only at the time of saying "hevel va-rik" [vanity and emptiness], -- the moment of the infamous practice.

Incidentally, the Congressional Gold Medal awarded to Menachem Schneerson by Pres. Clinton in 1995 contains an inscription in Hebrew characters which was taken from the Aleinu prayer. The inscription says: letaken ha-olam = "TO PERFECT THE WORLD".
This expression is part of the statement: "...Therefore we hope in You, Lord our God, that we may speedily see in the splendor of Your might, to get rid of detestable idolatry from the earth, and false gods be utterly destroyed, TO PERFECT THE WORLD through the kingship of the Almighty."

The fact that this phrase from the Aleinu was chosen by the rabbis who designed the gold medal reflects their hidden desire and the fiery hatred against Christianity held in traditional Judaism; particularly in the Chabad Lubavitch movement.

*Unfortunately, in most so-called "Messianic congregations," which are fond to follow rabbinic rituals during their religious services, the Aleinu is also recited, but in most of the cases they do it out of ignorance. Yet, there are leaders among them who out of wanton stubborness still choose to say it, --no matter if they have been explained of the meaning and implications of this ignominous "prayer". In their obsession to imitate Jewish religious practices they are willing to perform the most aberrant acts.

Now, in spite of the fact that the version of the Aleinu that is said in Reform temples and Conservative synagogues, as well as in Messianic congregations omits the above mentioned insultative paragraph, the recitation of the non-omitted section is still derogatory against non-Jews, due to the fact that the first part of the said invocation, in their prayer books begins as folows:

"It is our duty (Heb. 'Aleinu') to praise the Lord of all, to ascribe greatness to the Fashioner of the primeval creation, for He has not made us like the goyim of the lands, and has not emplaced us like the families of the earth. He has not appointed our portion like theirs nor our lot like all their multitudes. (At this point, the nasty part that has been discussed above begins in orthodox prayer books: "For they vow to vanity and emptiness...", etc.).

--It is important to mention that in the Messianic churches the non-Jewish attendants usually constitute a 90% or more of the membership, therefore to hear a Gentile thanking God for "not having made him a Gentile is ludicrous and even funny. It is like having a paralitic scoffing at other paralitics for not been able to play football, -- a real oxymoron.
If someone was born a Gentile, let him/her thank the all-wise God for having created them the way He pleased. God doesn't make mistakes, He knows why everyone was created the way they were created.

An analysis of the first statement of the Aleinu which is recited in Reform, Conservative, in many Messianic (and obviously in Orthodox) congregations reveals an attitude that is in itself higly offensive towards non-Jewish people; for, what gives those who recite this "prayer" the right to extol themselves and brag of superiority over the rest of the world, just for being members of a particular community? (more ridiculous is the case of the messianic Gentiles who also repeat such outrageous declaration as if the insult wouldn't be for them as well.)
Who says that those who recite "for He has not made us like the goyim of the lands" are indeed better and above the millions who day by day try to live a moral and decent life, who also honor God and their fellow human beings? What makes them better than the multitudes who work with their hands and brains to sustain a family in order to raise their children to be good citizens of their respective lands? Does not this kind of supremacist attitude resembles the one propagated by the Nazis in the late 1930's, when the hords of arian youth were indoctrinated by Hitler's henchmen to the effect that they "where not made as the rest of the world," but that they were meant to be superior in intelligence, morals and physical qualities"? Are not similar stands condemned in democratic countries like the United States of America, and outlawed in most European countries in our days?
Moreover, a close analysis on the statistics in the Jewish world, and particularly in Israel shows that the level of social problems such as wife-beating, child-abuse, theft, frauds, murders, sexual crimes, religious bigotry, intolerance etc., is no much different than in the rest of the world.
We can't avoid to think in the many Jews who like 18-year old Samuel Sheinbein who together with Aaron Needle, two Maryland Jewish residents brutally beated to death and then burned and dismembered beyond recognition the body of 19-year old Alfredo Enrique Tello Jr., and after the crime escaped to Israel, to avoid the American justice system (Needle committed suicide in an American prison).

A similar case occurred in Canada, where Daniel Weiz, 19, and two accomplices kicked to death Kimitri Baranovski, age 15 in a Toronto park on November 11, 1999. Weiz, an Israeli citizen who at the time served in that country's army fled to Israel to escape the Canadian law,

We also have the case of Arieh Deri, a prominent political figure in Israel and an ultra-orthodox Jew. Deri was convicted for corruption, bribery, breach of trust and aggravated fraud for taking governmental monies for his personal gain.

Hiedi Fleiss, the "Hollywood madam," who served time in a federal prison for conspiracy, tax evasion and money laundering. She runned a high-priced prostitution ring that served the rich and famous in the Hollywood area. While in jail Fleiss declared that she was been persecuted just "for being Jewish," and accused the American legal system of "anti-semitism, --does that sound familiar?--.

Or what about Jonathan Pollard, a traitor who is an American citizen, - serving life in prison for spying in detriment of U.S. national security?

We have also the case of Rabbi Fred J. Neulander, the former head of Congregation M'kor Shalom in New Jersey, who was convicted for setting up the 1994 contract-killing of his wife, Carol, in their Cherry Hill, N.J., home. Carol Neulander was blundgeoned to death with a lead pipe, so he could continue an affair with Philadelphia radio personality Elaine Soncini, who was pressuring him to leave his wife.

Another criminal -- also a rabbi, R. Hertz Frankel who was arrested and convicted for conspiring with Public School District No. 14 in the N.Y. area, to place 80 hassidic women in no-show jobs on the district payroll.

74-year old Rabbi Eli Gottesman (also an orthodox clergyman) who in 1988 was named "Rabbi of the Year" by the New York Board of Rabbis. In February, 2000 Gottesman was convicted for having smuggled drugs to inmates he used to minister to in an upstate New York federal prison at Binghamton, N.Y.

One more rabbi with sexual addictions, the senior rabbi of congregation Emanu-El (from 1985 to 1992) in San Francisco.
R. Robert Kirschner was forced to resign in 1992 after several female members complained about what they described as "his predatory sexual advances." Kirschner confessed that he consummated several adulterous affairs in the temple in an interview with Fred Rosembaum, who is the director of Northern California's Lehraus Judaica adult educational program, who interviewed him to get information for his book "Visions of Reform: Congregation Emanu-El and the Jews of San Francisco, 1849-1999" published by Magnes Press.

One highly publicized case, the relationship between Anita Green and her rabbi, Steven Jacobs.
Green was the president of Shir Chadash/The New Reform Congregation in Los Angeles when she was murdered in 1990. Her husband, Mel Green (also a Jew), was convicted of ordering the killing, and is now serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole.
Although the Greens were separated at the time of the murder, Anita's affair with Rabbi Jacobs began while she was still living with her husband, according to Michele Samit's, who wrote a book entitled "No Sanctuary: The True Story of a Rabbi's Deadly Affair." where the whole story is detailed.

Mayor Gerald Ackerman, 42, arranged in the Port Huron Court in Michigan, on multiple counts of criminal sexual conduct with four teenage and pre-teen girls. The girls who used to attend programs in a youth center the mayor founded, and who ranged in ages between 9 to 14, said Ackerman had engaged in disgusting sexual practices with them. The prosecutors reccomended life in prison for this depraved individual.

An Article in the "Jewish Post and Opinion" dated on March 31, 1999 relates the case of Barry Alan Adelstein, age 46, who was sentenced to eight years in prison for indecent sexual contact with a child at a Dallas area synagogue. Adelstein had been previously warned by saynagogue officials not to socialize with his students, who took computer lessons from him.

A story which appeared in the August 2, 1999 edition of the Jewish Chronicle of London revealed the ugly face of Jewish-orthodox religious overlapping of crimes committed by someone of their members. The affair began when a Stamford Hill resident (the heart of the strictly orthodox community in London), an 18-year old orthodox Jew named Eli Cohen sexually assaulted a 5-year old girl. When the mother of the girl (who is also Jewish) reported the sexual abuse against her daughter to the police, an angry mob of religious Jews stormed her house and lured rocks and eggs at the windows while screaming moiser, moiser! And "get out of town!" because she committed the "unpardonable sin" of having reported another Jew to the arka'ot shel akum (the courts of the "idolaters), i.e., the secular authorities. The assailant was eventually arrested by the police and the mob of chassidic fanatics kept their frustration.

--And make no mistake, most of these individuals, especially the rabbis who where sent to prison for their bad actions, would recite the Aleinu every single day; stressing the difference between them and the "goyim". They would not miss to recite "For He has not made me like the goyim of the lands, and has not emplaced me like the families of the earth.."... After all, it doesn't matter if they (the non-Jews) are free and they (the fellons) are in jail; they are still morally and spiritually "superior" than the rest of the Gentile world... just for being Jewish.-- But in reality, there is no difference between (for example) Samuel Sheinbein, Daniel Weiz or Rabbi Fred Neulander, -- convicted murderers, and any non-Jewish murderer who is also purging a sentence for their crimes; no matter how many times they may recite the Aleinu or any other rabbinic supremacist invocation.

I could continue mentioning case after case of crimes that are commonly committed by Jews throughout the world, but this is not the goal of this comment; the goal is to show that just as in the non-Jewish society there are problems and circumstances of all natures, so too the Jews are not exempted to the failures and downs of our human nature. Therefore, to assume, or even imply that Jews were "not made as the goyim of the lands," i.e., the rest of the world, is preposterous and insultative. Everyone is capable to do the most henious acts; everyone can commit murder, rape, steal, commit adultery, defraud and cheat. Everyone can deceive, blaspheme, hate and be intolerant; let it be Jew or Gentile. Therefore, statements that are intended to position one person or group above others with the intent of demarking a superiority, either in terms of race, religion or ethnic standards is an objectionable practice that ought to be condemned by concious and rational people in all places.]


** We also read in Maimonides' Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings chapter 11, rule 4:

"..Also Jesus of Nazareth who aspired to be the Messiah and was executed by the judicial court [Heb. 'beth din'] was also [alluded to] in Daniel's prophecies, as it is said: "The vulgar ones among your people shall exalt themselves in order to fulfill the vision, but they shall stumble" (Daniel 11:14).
Is there a greater stumbling block than this [talking about Christianity]?
All the prophets said that the Messiah would be the redeemer of Israel and its savior, and that he would gather their dispersed and strengthen their [observance] of the commandments. But these [the followers of Jesus] caused Israel to be slain by the sword, and their remnants to be scattered and humbled, the Torah to be altered, and the majority of the world to err and serve a god [this is the best evidence that Maimonides regarded Christians as "idolaters," and since the Lubavitcher Rebbe was an ardent promoter of Maimonides' teachings, it is clear that he shared the same disdain against Christians and Christianity.] other than Hashem."


** Under noahide law, Gentiles are not allowed to separate a day of the week for religious purposes (for example, Sunday), as ruled in the Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings, chapter 10, rule 9:

"And so, if a Gentile rests, even on a weekday, observing that day as a Sabbath, is liable to the death penalty; and needles to say, [he is liable] if he creates a religious festival for himself.
The general principle governing these matters is: They are not to be allowed to originate a new religion or create new commandments based on their own decisions. But either, they become righteous converts [to Judaism] and accept all the commandments, or retain their [own] law [the noahide laws] without adding or detracting from them. And if he engages in Torah-study, makes a Sabbath, or creates a [religious] practice, a Jewish court should beat him, punish him, and inform him that he is liable to the death penalty."


** The above mentioned statement is explained in the "Noah's Covenant" website, a place in the internet that promotes the values and philosophy of the Chabad Lubavitch movement concerning non-Jews and the absolute subjection to the commands of the late Lubavitcher rebbe, Menachem Schneerson:

"Noachides may not observe any religious holidays outside the rabbinical traditions of Torah -- most especially including such Christian holidays as X-mas. Easter, Halloween [Halloween is not a Christian holiday], All Saint's Day, Good Friday, Ash Wednesday, and probably even the "new year" [January 1st]. Alien religious holidays are forbidden even under the minimum of the Noachide code, these are violations of the commandment against idolatry. Instead Noachides should commemorate at least the following holidays: Rosh Hashanah, Sukkos, the 19th of Kislev (the chassidic "new year"), Chanukah, Purim, Shavuos -- and each person's birthday on the Hebrew calendar. However, Noachide participation in these holidays is different in various ways from the manner of Jewish observance. Each holiday must be observed according to precise rules."


** Gentiles are limited to the study of the noahide laws. - Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings chapter 10, rule 9:

"A Gentile who engages in the study of the Torah deserves death. They should engage only in the study of their seven commandments."

Also in the Talmud, tractate Sanhedrin 59a we read:
"A Gentile who engages in Torah-study deserves death, for it is written: "Moses commanded us a Torah for an inheritance" (Deut. 33:4); it is our inheritance, not theirs!"


4th law, gilui arayot - (concerning forbidden sexual relations).


** In the Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings, chapter 9, rule 5 we read:

"There are six illicit sexual relations forbidden to the sons of Noah: His mother, his father's wife, a married woman, his maternal sister, a male, and an animal."


** According to the Mishneh Torah in Hilchot Issurei Bi'a (Laws of Forbidden Sexual Relations) chapter 14, rule 10 every other person apart from the above mentioned close relatives are sexually permitted to a Gentile, for example, his paternal sister, his paternal aunt, his first female-cousin, and even his own daughter:

"With regards to sexual forbidden relations, the goyim are not forbidden [to any woman] with the exception of his mother, his father's wife, his maternal sister, a married woman, a male, and a beast; as it was made clear in the Laws of the Kings and [their] Wars [chapter 9 rule 5]. But any other sexual relation is permitted to them."


** As it has been pointed out, Incest between a Gentile father and his daughter is permitted under noahide legislation. This can be read in the Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 58b which reads:

"A Gentile is sexually permitted to his daughter [Heb. "goy mutar be-vito"]. And if you would say: [Then,] why did Adam not marry his [own] daughter? [the answer:] So that Cain would marry his sister."


** The Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah (Laws of Forbidden Sexual Relations) chapter 14, rules 10 through 17 delineates the specific prohibitions and leniencies which under noahide legislation are incumbent upon non-Jews. It also deals with the cases of proselytes who get sexually involved with close relatives while they are in a status of Gentiles.

The source reads:

"The Gentile is sexually forbidden only to his mother, his father's wife, and his maternal sister; the prohibition extends also to a married woman, a male, and an animal, as it will be explained in the 'Laws of Kings and Wars'. All other forbidden relations are permitted to him [such as paternal sister, his paternal aunt, daughter, granddaughter, first cousin, niece, etc.].
A Gentile who converts [to Judaism], or a slave who has achieved his liberty is regarded as if he were a newborn child, and all relatives [who were sexually] prohibited to him while he was a Gentile or a slave are therefore no longer considered forbidden; and if both, him and they would convert, he will not be held liable on account of forbidden sexual relations with any of them at all.
It is a Torah law that a convert [to Judaism] is permitted to marry his mother or his maternal sister who have too converted, but the sages have forbidden this matter, so that they should not say, "we came from a stringent form of sanctity to a lesser sanctity;" for she was forbidden to him, but now she is permitted. Similarly, if a convert has sexual intercourse with his mother or sister who have remained Gentiles, he is regarded as if he had intercourse with a heathen woman [lit. "with a foreigner"].
What is the rabbinic ruling concerning converts with regard to forbidden unions with their own kind? If, while still a heathen, the convert was married to his mother or his sister, and they [also] convert, they must separate from one another, as we have explained. But if he was married to a woman of the other forbidden unions [to Jews], and both of them become proselytes, he and his wife don't need to separate from one another.
A convert is forbidden to his mother's relatives after he becomes a proselyte, this according to the ruling of the scribes. But he is permitted to his father's kin, even though he knows for certain that they are his kin on his father's side. For instance, if both are twins, it is certain that they had the same father; But with all this, [the rabbis] did not prohibit his father's kin. Therefore, a Gentile who converts to [Judaism] is allowed to marry his brother's wife on his father's side, or his paternal aunt, or his stepmother, or his son's wife, even though they had contracted the marriage with his brother, his father, his paternal uncle, or his son, after they also had become proselytes. Also, his mother's half sister by her father's side, his paternal sister, or his own daughter who became a proselyte are [sexually] permitted to him.
But he is forbidden to marry his maternal sister, his maternal aunt, or the wife of his maternal brother, if him [his maternal brother] married her after he had become a proselyte. However, if his brother married her while he was a Gentile, she is permitted to him.
If twin brothers were conceived while their mother was in a state of unholiness, but were born in holiness, they are liable if one marries the wife of the other.
... a man is also permitted to marry two sisters who have converted to Judaism provided that they come from the same father [with different mothers].
Proselytes are not [sexually] forbidden to all secondary degrees of family kinship. Therefore, a convert may marry his maternal grandmother, and a man is allowed to marry a female convert and her maternal grandmother, or her daughter's granddaughter; and so, with all other secondary degrees of family kinship.
The Gentile slave [of a Jew] may marry his mother while she is a slave; and needless to say, he may also marry his daughter, his sister or the like, since he has departed from the congregation of the Gentiles, and the sexual forbidden relations incumbent upon the Gentiles are no longer forbidden to him, and since he has not come to the congregation of Israel, neither are the unions forbidden to converts to Judaism forbidden to him."


** Under certain circumstances rabbinical law allows a Jew to take the wife of a "noahide" without this being considered adultery. So we read in Maimonides' Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings, Chapter 8, Rule 3:

"Sexual relations with a Yefat To'ar [lit. "a beautiful woman," i.e. a non-Jewish female who was taken captive during war] are only permitted while she is in captivity, as it is said: 'If you see.. among the captives...' [The full text which is in Deuteronomy 21:10,11 says:"When you go out to battle against your enemies, and the Lord your God delivers them into your hands and you take them away captive; and if you see among the captives a beautiful woman [Heb. 'Yefat To'ar'], and you desire her, you may take her for yourself as a wife.."]
[The text continues:] This can be done to her whether she is a virgin or no longer a virgin, and even is she is married, for the marriages of the goyim are not recognized [by Jewish Law]."

So here we have a case where after winning a war, if a Jew sees among the captives a married Gentile woman and he finds her "attractive," regardless if she finds him repulsive, he is allowed by his rabbinical law to take her -- no matter if this is done by the use of force [by beating her up]; even if she pleads for mercy and tells him that she is married and loves her husband and has children; if he wants her his halacha allows him to force her, no questions asked.

Yet, Jewish law grants him to violate her only one time, during the first encounter [but not at the battlefield; he should take her to his house and rape her there], and if after this he wishes to keep her he has to marry her [but before she would have to convert to Judaism].
Yet, this is not an excuse or a "solution" for this crime, because the halacha doesn't take into consideration the woman's feelings and decisions; therefore, if this heinous act is done her dignity would be insulted and her life destroyed by the abuser.
But the sad reality is that If he wants her he can have her, regardless of her great suffering; her word doesn't count. In other words, the woman has to forcibly marry him -- but only provided that "he desires her". This is delineated by Maimonides in Laws of Kings chapter 8, rule 5 which reads:

"He [the Jewish captor] must deal with her so that she will accept [to convert].
If she accepts [the conversion] and he desires her, she may convert and immerse herself [in the ritual bath = mikvah] as all other converts do."

*Notice that she would be accepted for conversion only if he [the Jew] "desires her," but if she agrees to convert and be with him for whatever reason, let it be shame, sense of guilt, lost of hope, or even if she gets in love with him, --but he doesn't "desire her" anymore then she has to be kicked out, rejected and left with all her misery. The only decision that counts here and the final word pertains to the Jewish "master," and the halacha can care less about the Gentile woman's situation.
Now, at this point we should pay extreme attention to the following fact: According to Jewish law, in case that the Jew decides to make her his "wife" because he really desires her --even if she refuses,-- she would be forced to spend a period of thirty days in his house, where she would be ordered to let all her nails grow without cleaning them; she would also have her head totally shaved so that she may look repulsive and not appear attractive to him anymore; she has also to wear only dirty rags and won't be allowed to brush her theeth, wear make-up, take a bath or even change her monthly sanitary towels. The procedure of this act is explained in the Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings and Their Wars chapter 8, rule 5 that reads:

"Thus, when he [her Jewish raptor] enters, he sees her; when he leaves, he sees her, so that he becomes disgusted with her."

Also in Sifre [piska 213]:

"So that he will look upon her when he goes in and when he goes out; if she looks like a pumpkin-shell, he will see her in all her ugliness."

And in the Sefer Hachinuch, mitzvah 532:

"...to make her repulsive in his eyes it was commanded that her head has to be shaved, in order to destroy the beauty of her attractive hair, and that her nails be let grow in order to take away the beauty of her hands; and he is to have her weep and wail the first month, so as to disfigure her face and let her eyes be ruined by tears. Also, Scripture made it mandatory that she should remain with him in his house as she does all this, during the first month, and this is to make her despicable in his eyes, so that as he enters and goes, he should continually stumble over her and sees her in her ugliness."

There are two reasons for such treatment to the woman: The first one, which is a rabbinic interpretation of course, is to let her "cry and lament over the loss of her idols," i.e., the abandonment of her former religion. [she has to renounce to her religion] The second is that this needs to be done to her in order to discourage her Jewish captor from a potential emotional attachment to a "heathen" woman who, although she might convert to the Jewish religion, her Gentile background would be a stumbling block to him, therefore she has to be treated in such a humiliating way with the intent to make her Jewish captor realize the "mistake" he would make if he marries her.

But the story doesn't end there.

If as a result of the first sexual encounter she becomes pregnat, the baby would not be recognized by the Jewish biological father as his legal child, simply because he was conceived while the woman was a Gentile, and all the "impurities" that are inherent to Gentiles [according to the Jewish tradition] are imbeded in his little nature; therefore the baby wouldn be unworthy to be his son due to his "unclean" status of a goy. This is well explained in the Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings chapter 8, rule 8. and also in the Talmud, tractate Yevamot 23a that reads:

"A son born to you from an idolatress is called 'her son' and not yours."

But there is more to this tragedy, because Jewish law rules that if ultimately the Jewish captor decides not to keep her, she has anyways to spend a total of twelve months in his place, --and obviously we could foresee that during that period of time she would be constantly harrased by his Jewish relatives and humiliated by him.-- Or does anyone think that a "shiksa" would be treated nicely and be sustained as any other member of the Jewish family? ["shiksa" is an extremely derogatory term commonly used among Jews to describe non-Jewish females who have relations with Jewish males. shiksa comes from the Hebrew word "shekets", which means something abominable, loathsome, filthy, nasty]
Moreover... what makes anyone to think that her raptor will not abuse her sexually during those twelve months that she has to live with him? Who says that he will not again burn of desire for her and do to her as he pleases? Who will be there for her when the abuser and the victim are alone in the house and he wishes to have some "little fun"? [sigh...].

After a year had passed, she would finally be allowed to leave, but wait.... her disgraces don't end there, because according to Jewish law she would be forced to accept the noahide laws and abide by their unjust rules. This is clearly explained by Maimonides in Laws of Kings chapter 8, rules 7 and 9 that reads:

"If she doesn't want to convert he must be patient with her for twelve months. But if she [still] refuses to convert [after a year], she must receive the seven laws that were commanded to the descendants of Noah, and then she should be sent to her own...
...A yefat to'ar who does not wish to abandon idolatry after twelve months should be killed... for every goy who does not receive the laws which were commanded to the children of Noah must be executed if he is under our undisputed authority!"

Now, notice the expression: "a yefat to'ar who does not wish to abandon idolatry after twelve months should be killed..."
Based on this statement, and considering the fact that the Mishneh Torah blatantly labels Christianity as "idolatry," it is not difficult to realize that in case that this "yefat to'ar" was a Christian, she certainly would be compelled to abandon and abhorr Jesus Christ or be killed... by decapitation [which is the standard form of execution for "noahides"]
Who says that there are no forced conversions in the Jewish [rabbinic] tradition?

We wonder if the rabbis [especially the Lubavitchers] would pause for a moment and think that actions like these are a flagrant violation of the most elemental forms of human rights towards such unfortunate women, and that anyone who does this would be deemed and even prosecuted as a war criminal by any decent society.

But perhaps some rabbis could argue: "we do not do this in our days." Or they may say: "you are quoting outdated and archaic religious texts that have no relevance for us today."

The answer to that would be that if those statements are "irrelevant" to religious Jews today, then why in the world are they taught and promoted with such a zealotry by themselves in their yeshivot [Jewish religious academies] and synagogues?
Is the Mishneh Torah outdated and irrelevant today? or the Shulchan Aruch, or the Talmud, or the enormous bulk of "Responsa literature" as well? [Keep in mind that these texts are the primary source for those infamous statements]

To the Lubavitchers I would ask: Are the many commentaries of their rebbe on the Yad Hachazaka, or his "Likutei Sichot," or his "sifrei ha-maamarim" "irrelevant" in our days?

I can assure that no religious Jew would answer me that they are no longer important to them.

But one thing I could say though, that they would accuse me of "misinterpretations" or "misquotations." That is the most common argument [excuse] they bring when they realize that the person who is exposing this literature has access to the sources and can study them in their original languages. -- Yet, they would hardly take a time to refute the evidence presented by the person who challenges them on these issues.

So let's keep presenting the evidence and at the end, anyone would make their own final judgement.


** A commentary on the law of the yefat to'ar in the Moznaim edition of the Mishneh Torah (page 156), declares:

"[The Talmud, in Tractate] Sanhedrin 52b teaches that a Jew is not liable for transgression of the prohibition against adultery if he sleeps with a Gentile's wife. However, though a Jew is absolved for punishment for such an act, the Gentile is liable [to the death penalty]. One of the seven mitzvot which the Gentiles are obligated to fulfill is the prohibition against adultery".

We have already learned that the punishment inflicted on a Gentile who transgresses any of the noahide laws is by decapitation (Laws of Kings chapter 9, rule 14):

"A Noahide who transgresses any of these Seven Laws shall be executed by the sword [decapitation]".


** To add insult to injury, and in order to minimize the obvious moral flaws that convey such an act, the rabbinic sources teach that this can be done because non- Jewish females are by nature inclined to sexual promiscuity; therefore their treatment as mere sexual objects is not taken as a violation of their human rights, since according to the rabbis that is exactly what these women wanted in the first place.

This is clearly stated in the Sefer Hachinuch (the Book [of Jewish religious] Education), mitzvah 532.

The text reads:

"That we were commanded concerning the law of the 'beautiful woman,' to do with her according to the scriptural judgement written in this parasha, as it it said: "and you see among the captives a beautiful woman" etc. (Deut. 21:11). A 'beautiful woman,' that is, that she is beautiful in his eyes. The substance of the commandment about her is that the Jew is to bring her to his house and order her to shave her head and let her fingernails grow, and to remove off from her the attractive garments that she brought from her house. For such are the ways of the accursed goyim, that their daughters would adorn themselves during war to commit whoredom [with the enemy in order to entice them].
...These are the things explained in Scripture concerning the law of the 'beautiful woman,' and similarly, upon all these [acts] the obligation of a positive precept applies."

The same astounishing statement can also be found in Nachmanides' commentary on Deut. 21:12 and in Sifrei to Deuteronomy, [parashat "ki tetze," piska 3].

The Hebrew text in Nachmanides' commentary reads:

"Ve-al da'at rabboteinu" = (And in the opinion of our rabbis)

"she'omrim she-hakol le-cha'er et yafeyah" = (who said that all these rules were made in order to ruin her beauty)

"tzivah she-tasir ha-b'gadim ha-nayim me'aleha" = ([since] He [God] commanded that she has to remove her beautiful garments from her)

"She-hagoyim arurim hem" = (for the goyim, who are accursed,)

"B'noteihem mitkashtot ba-milchama k'dei liz'not achareihen" = (their daughters adorn themselves during war in order to entice [the enemy] into prostitution after them).

Nachmanides also explained in his commentary on Deuteronomy 21:13 that her Jewish captor is allowed to indulge in such a heinous act against her, in order to "control his lustful heart that yearns for whorish acts":

"Thus he takes her captive in battle [even if she is a married woman, as it has been shown] and brings her to his home and to his city, and he has sex with her [obviously by means of a forceful act] so that he may control his whorish heart."

Notice how Nachmanides falls into a gross contradiction. In one statement he accuses the Gentile women, the daughters of the "accursed goyim" of sexual promiscuity, but here he says that it is actually the Jewish males who look for aberrant sexual acts in order to "control their whorish heart." ...Such "wisdom"...

** One of the most extreme enactments related to gilui arayot made by the rabbis is the one found in the Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Issurei Bi'a (The Laws of Forbidden Sexual Relations), Chapter 12, rule 8 that says:

"A Jew who have sex with a Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three years and one day or an adult, whether single or married, and even if he [the Jew] is a minor of nine years and one day, because he had willful sexual contact with her, -- she must be killed, for a Jew came to disaster through her just as if he had been with a beast."

...What a lesson of "morality," "mercy," and "compassion" we get here from the rabbinic law; the same rabbinic law that enacts the Noahide "commandments" for Gentiles.
Just imagine... according to this halachic ruling, if a Jew burns of sexual desire for a non-Jewish female, and she happens to be a minor [notice that the text goes as far as to mention a little girl of three years and one day], and he manages to have sex with her, being this a rape and a sheer case of pedophylia [itself a crime]; if this would happen... then, based on this law, it is the little girl who is to be killed, because a "son of the covenant" [should I say a degenerate and a pervert?], in being with a Gentile child would have been contaminated through an act that is comparable to bestiality, In other words, the little girl would have caused a Jew to sin as if he had been with a she-dog or a cow!... Or in the words of the Sefer Hachinuch, or the Ramban's, it would have been the non-Jewish girl who "enticed" him to an act that is comparable to "bestiality." Her "whorish nature" compelled her to "tempt" an "innocent and holy Jew," therefore the little "shiksa" [as religious Jews would label her] would deserve to be punished; she had to pay the consequences of her "unpardonable sin".

And the punishment? The death penalty! [and as we have seen, the form of execution to her would be by decapitation --"noahides" are to be killed only by decapitation--].

How could have Menachem Schneerson believed this? How did he possibly endorse and promote a set of laws that rule an injustice like this? From where in the world did Maimonides, the author of this nefarious "law" get such stupidity? Certainly NOT from God's Word.
Is this the kind of people whom most Jews call "sages"? For heaven's sake, this is more extreme than a triple X-rated video! No doubt, acts like this would be worse than whatever happened in Joseph Mengele's horror labs.
....May God have had mercy on such men. May God have mercy on those who like them also spread this evil.


5th law, Sh'fichut Damim - (The prohibition of Bloodshed)

** On Sh'fichut Damim, we read in the Talmud, tractate Sanhedrin 57a:

"With regards to bloodshed, if a goy kills another goy, or a goy kills a Jew, he is liable [to the death penalty]; [but] if a Jew [kills] a goy, he is exempt."

** The same rabbinic rule can be found in Maimonides' Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Rotzeach (Laws of Slaughter) chapter 2, rule 11.


** Talking about murder... according to Jewish Law it is a religious duty to eliminate Jewish "apostates" (Jews who believe in Jesus), and other "enemies" of the Jewish people, as we read in the Mishneh Torah, Laws of Idolatry (heb. Hilchot Avodah Zarah Vechukot Hagoyim), chapter 10, rules 1 and 2:

"We may not draw a covenant with the idol-worshippers which will establish peace between them [and us] and yet allow them to worship idols, for it is written: 'Do not establish a covenant with them' (Deut. 7:2). Rather, they must renounce their religious convictions or be killed. It is forbidden to have mercy upon them, for it is written: "Do not be gracious to them" (Deut. 7:2).
Therefore, if we see any of them who is being swept away or drowning in a river, we should not help him. If we see him at the verge of death, we should not save him. But it is forbidden to eliminate him by hand or to push him into a pit or the like-- provided that he is not waging war against us.
To whom these rules apply? to the goy!
But Jewish traitors, the minim [Jewish believers in Jesus] and the epikorsim... we are commanded to kill them with our [own] hands and to cause them to descend to the pit of destruction [Heb. be'er shachat = another name for 'hell'], for they are a snare to the Jews and sway the people away from God; as it was done to Jesus the Nazarene and his disciples, and to Tzadok and Baitos with their disciples...May the name of the wicked become putrid!"


** We also read in Hilchot Edut [Laws of Evidence] chapter 10, rule 11:

"As for the informers, the epikorsin and the apostates, the sages did not consider it necessary to include them among those that are disqualified [to go to heaven], because they [the rabbis] enumerated only the wicked among the Jews.
But these rebellious deniers are on a lower level than the goyim, for with regard to the goyim, we are not bound neither to rescue them [from the pit] nor cast them [into it], and the pious among them [that is, Gentiles who observe the 7 Noahide laws] have a portion in the World to Come. But these [Jewish "transgressors"] are to be cast into the pit and not rescued, and they have no portion in the World to Come."


6th law, Gazel - (The Prohibition of Robbery).

** The Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings, chapter 9, Rule 9 states that Gentiles are warned concerning all forms of robbery:

"A Noahide is liable for [violating the prohibition against] theft whether he stole from a Gentile or from a Jew."

But we see that under rabbinic legislation, a Jew is not judged by the same standards, just as in the case of the prohibition of sexual forbidden relations. Thus, the Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 57a declares:

"And for robbery, is a goy put to death? It was taught: "For robbery, [if] he stole [something] or robbed [somebody], and similarly [if he took] a yefat to'ar [as his prisoner of war -- which according to the Noahide code is still a robbery of sorts], and similarly that which is like them, [If this was done by] A goy to another goy, or a by a goy to a Jew - it is forbidden! But [if this is done by] a Jew to a goy, this is permitted!"

** The Mishneh Torah, Hilchot G'nevah [Laws of Robbery] chapter 1, rule 2, rules that a Gentile is executed for stealing even a small amount of property; and even though a Jew is also prohibited from stealing from a Gentile, he would not receive the death penalty for such an act.

7th law, ever min hachai - [The prohibition of eating a limb that has been torn from a living animal]

Most people think that this law is intended to promote "kindness to the animals," this, to say the least, is the way it is portrayed to the public; and since ever min hachai prohibits the consumption of meat while the animal from which it was cut is still alive, no one could imagine that the rabbis, who enacted this law would themselves, under specific circumstances endorse such a horrible practice. But the Jewish "sages" found [as they always do] a way to override their own prohibitions, and this was done in a very ingenious way.

The exception to the rule is that this prohibition excludes the case of the ben peku'a, a Hebrew term that describes the offspring of a kosher animal that was removed from its mother's womb after the mother has been slaughtered according to the laws of sh'chita [ritual slaughter].
The rabbis ruled that, even if the little calf continues to live, by all halachic standards it is considered as having already been killed and it doesn't need to undergo sh'chita in order to be fit for consumption, and it is not either subjected to the law of ever min hachai --the prohibition of consuming meat from a living animal--. In other words, a Jew is technically permitted to eat the limbs of a small calf while it is alive, piece by piece if he wishes... and this would be perfectly legal.

In the Encyclopedia Talmudica, volume 4, columns 388 through 394, all the laws related to the ben peku'a are explained. It says that if one slaughters a pregnant animal and finds an eight-month fetus in it, alive or dead, it may be eaten and does not require sh'chita.
It also relates a case, when during a wedding celebration in Pumbedita, a town near the Euphrates River [modern Iraq], many b'nei peku'ot [plural of ben peku'a] were found in their mother's wombs at the time of their slaughter.
Rabbi Chai Gaon (939-1038), one of the most respected halachists of his time ordered to dispose them with a hatchet and eaten at the wedding feast without requiring sh'chita.
We can imagine the cruel death those poor animals experienced by the hands of their executoners.

One example of the cruelty to animals that occurs in some Jewish communities is a case that happened in 1999, during the shlog'n kapores ritual that is performed one day before Yom Kippur [the Day of Atonement], when many Jews [mostly chassidic Jews] wave a white chicken [a rooster for males and a hen for females] over the head of another Jew while reciting prescribed prayers and invocations, so that the penalty for their sins may be transferred to the fowl.

Rabbi Mendel Katzman, a Chabad Lubavitch "emmisary" of the Rebbe, together with Benzion Melechson, Cesar Aharon, as well as a 12-year old boy, and Michael - a chassidic Jew from Israel, were busy waving chickens over one another's heads outside the Chabad House in the city of Omaha, Nebraska.
It happened that after the chickens were dead (or that's what they thought), -- at the moment of getting them out of the bucket where they were thrown, -- they realized that three of the chickens were still alive. The shochet [ritual slaughterer] failed to kill them; he just sliced their necks without severing the jugular vein as the law of sh'chita reqires it.
Aharon went to notify Rabbi Katzman about this, and Katzman coldly told him to get some pruning shears and decapitate them; without considering the suffering that this form of death would cause to the chickens.
Moreover, Katzman's order was difficult to perform because the blades of the scissors were not sharp enough to chop off the chicken's heads without grossly mutilate their necks first.
After many tries and much effort, finally two of the remaining chicken died, but not from decapitation, but by suffocation and pain; the blades failed to do their job. The last chicken managed to to run as fast as it could to a momentarily escape. It was a bizarre scene to see four guys with yarmulkas on their heads chasing a bloody white chicken all over the backyard of a synagogue to kill it.
Finally the chicken was caught and met his fate in the same cruel manner the other chicken died.

This case and the case of the ben peku'a, in one word, are forms of extreme cruelty to animals.


**We have seen that the so-called "Noahide Laws" far from being [as it has been stated in many of the "Education Day, U.S.A. presidential proclamations"] the "ethical values and principles that have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization", are in reality a spiritual and moral fraud that promotes whatever runs contrary to justice and compassion. Human rights have no place in this form of religious dictatorship. Non-Jews are divested of the most fundamental principles of honor and their humanity is downgraded to a level "just above that of the beasts."

Many of the moral standars that still exist in our society would be eliminated and substituted by whatever the rabbis decree; for example, if in our days the case of a father engaging in sexual relations with his own daughter, or a brother with his paternal sister, or someone with his paternal aunt is considered incest, --under noahide rule such and act would be perfectly legal and morally acceptable; and since according to noahic law Gentiles are not required to have a matrimonial ceremony sanctioned by either a judge or someone from the clergy in order to be "legally" married, all they have to do is to have sexual relations with someone of the opposite sex who is not "forbidden" to him/her and that would make them a "married couple". Thus if a "noahide dad" wishes to "marry" his daughter, all he needs to do is to entice her and copulate with her, and... he got himself a wife.

Yet, Menachem S. never revealed this part of the deal, ...that is, the fine print of his Noahide "God-given laws".

Moreover, the rabbis who came-up with such outrageous rules disregarded the fact that nature itself shows that in the event of a pregnancy, the offspring of such unions could suffer of various genetic defects or physical malformations.

But perhaps someone would ask: If this is so, if the Noahide Laws indeed promote all those evils, then why is it that so many U.S. Presidents and prominent politicians have endorsed such a horrendous thing? The answer is simple, they did not know the "fine print" of the matter.
It is clear that they [the Chabadniks] accomplished such success because they never revealed the whole truth of the matter; only what sounded nice and in compliance with "political correctness." In other words, it was done by way of deception.

Put in very simple terms, the Noahide Laws can be compared with those calling-cards that are sold in convenience stores around the country. They offer "the lowest rates" in the market [down to 1 cent a minute], but would not tell that for every call, up to 60 cents are taken from the total time that was originally offered. Thus, the calls are in reality far more expensive than those offered through conventional long distance companies. All it takes to unveil the deception, is to read the "fine print".

If the Presidents of the United States and the Senators who participated in the Noahide affairs would have known what they endorsed, none of the Education Day U.S.A. proclamations would have existed for sure. Schneerson's agenda would have remained just a dream, and the Congressional Gold Medal would have never been given in his honor. He would have passed just as another radical religious leader with crazy ideas, like Jim Jones, David Koresh, Sun Myung Moon, or the Ayatola Khomeini.

This is not difficult to realize since, as it is known, more than one U.S. President have held their Christian faith in high esteem, having no shame in publicly stating their love for Jesus Christ; therefore it is impossible that they would have endorsed a form of religious law that denigrates and insults the very escence of their faith and that of millions of their fellow Americans.

Let it be clear, no American government will ever accept a set of man-made laws that condone and even promote injustices such as religious persecution, human rights violations and supremacist attitudes from one segment of society -in this case a religious minority- over the rest of the population. The Constitution of the United States will never be in line with any law that legislates the death penalty for non-Jewish women who have sexual relations with Jewish males. It will never agree with clauses that permit incest between relatives from the paternal side [among Gentiles]; for example, a man with his paternal sister, his paternal aunt, or a father with his own daughter. There will never be a system of religio-judicial courts that would order the decapitation of non-Jewish citizens based on the testimony of a single witness (women excluded, they don't qualify to be witnesses or judges), and without a warning, as the Noahide laws decree. Also, it is ludicrous to even think that anyone will be decapitated in America for being homosexual or for having an extra-marital affair, as the Noahide laws rule.

Very few people would imagine that the Lubavitcher rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the greatest promoter of the Noahide Laws in history, the person who was honored for his "love" and "compassion" for humanity, would have gladly sent people like Elton John or the male leaders of the Gay Civil Rights Movement to the gallows -to have their heads chopped off for being homosexuals.
And this is not an exaggeration, for Schneerson himself longed for the inclusion and a final take-over by the Noahide Laws over the American legal system with all their ramifications, -- meaning, not only the promotion of the 7 laws per se, which at first glance seem to be something harmless and even moral, such as "not to eat the limb that was cut from a living animal," or "to abstain from blasphemy;" -- but Scneerson wanted to see the U.S. ruled by the Noahide Laws with whatever is implied in them, --that is, the application of the halachic or legal rabbinic clauses that are incumbent to the Noahic code; for example, the form of execution to be inflicted on a "noahide" that brakes any of these man-made laws.

Schneerson's goal was to have the non-Jewish population of the United States of America totally subjected and ruled by judicial ennactments that are exclusively managed, interpreted and manipulated by orthodox rabbis [particularly Chabad Lubavitch rabbis].


**With regards to the alleged "compassion" and "love for humanity" of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, there are a few things that need to be mentioned here. The first is the outcome of an unfortunate incident that occured in 1991 in the city of New York. The whole situation was known as "the Crown Hights Riots," and this is what hapened:


This page is still under construction

More to come!


Questions? Comments? Email me at: cesaraharon@cs.com