History /
The history of Talmud and why idiots shouldn't read it [19]
Inspired by Crno's post in Random... polishforums.com/off-topic/random-chat-88343/4/#msg1962469
Talmud has been read in Poland, mostly by Polish Jewish community, for centuries and it is an important part of our history.
Contrary to popular belief Talmud is
not a Jewish book of law. A lot of people get seriously agitated when they read in it statements about people who are "liable to the death penalty" for very minor offenses like, for example, Torah scholar having a dirty shirt...
"A Torah scholar on whose clothes a fat stain is found is liable to receive the death penalty" (Shabbat 114a)
... :)
Well, if there's a death penalty for that, then we shouldn't be surprised that the capital punishment is also named as proper for non-Jews studying Torah (although, on the very same page another rabbi says that a non-Jew studying Torah is similar to High Priest :D) or disrespecting one's parents. We are quite surprised, therefore, when we learn from history that no Jew or Gentile has ever been executed under Jewish law either for having a dirty t-shirt or telling his mum to f*ck off (although both should be frowned upon in any civilised country).
The reason for the lack of executions is that when Talmud was compiled, the death penalty was no longer in effect in Judaism for half a millennium! So, anyone with two or three brain cells understands that in most cases when Talmud speaks of "death penalty" it is an exaggeration made to stress a point (like in the example that I mentioned, the point that a Torah scholar should keep a neat appearance). It's like an Italian chef in a Great Book of Pizza (if any such book exists) saying:
"Whoever puteth pineapple on pizza is liable to receive the death penalty!". Nobody would take that literally, right? :)
Anyways, contrary to the nonsense that Crno and other anti-semites on the Internet spout, Talmud is not "judaism's holiest book", rabbis don't "elevate it above Torah", and it is not a codex of penal law. It's also not scripture, in the sense that Jews, Muslims and Christians understand it. It is merely a book of various rabinical commentaries and opinions (often contradictory) about philosophy, law or biblical interpretation, and should be treated as such.
