sex with under aged children is alright with the Jewish Talmud ?

[William Gaatjes]

I know this is not really latest news or politics but i wanted to ask this any way.

I was doing some reading, and what i have read disturbs me.
Is it true that in the Talmud it is written that sex with other men is forbidden while sex with boys younger than the age of 9 is alright because young boys are not seen as men by rabbi ?
Is it true that in the Talmud it is written that sex with girls younger then 3 years old is alright because the hymen is assumed to heal completely ?

If this is true, than this is very disturbing.
Of course this does not mean all Jews would support such activities most would vigorously take a stance from it but it is dangerous nevertheless...
Decline of morality indeed...



Moving to P&N.
- Anandtech Moderator SagaLore

 

[wwswimming]

I know this is not really latest news or politics but i wanted to ask this any way.

I was doing some reading, and what i have read disturbs me.
Is it true that in the Talmud it is written that sex with other men is forbidden while sex with boys younger than the age of 9 is alright because young boys are not seen as men by rabbi ?
Is it true that in the Talmud it is written that sex with girls younger then 3 years old is alright because the hymen is assumed to heal completely ?

If this is true, than this is very disturbing.
Of course this does not mean all Jews would support such activities most would vigorously take a stance from it but it is dangerous nevertheless...
Decline of morality indeed...

Yes, the Talmud states clearly that all of the following behaviors are acceptable -
* for a Jewish person to kill a Gentile
* for a Jewish person to rob from a Gentile
* for a Jewish person to otherwise swindle a Gentile
* for a Jewish person to sexually assault a Gentile
* for a Jewish person to otherwise assault a Gentile

However, these are not the only passages of the Talmud.

Much of the Talmud pertains to business law, e.g. the Sanhedrin section. In fact, if you take the time to read it, you will find that it is very similar to a business school or law textbook - because the Talmud was THE original business & law textbook used by Jewish rabbi's & Jewish people. The Talmud told them how to conduct themselves in business transactions.

Full contents of the Talmud, the Rabbi Epstein translation, @

http://www.come-and-hear.com/tcontents.html

 

[William Gaatjes]

I have read a little bit before but not much just enough to get some idea, it almost seems that everything is treated as a financial issue that can be bought. As long as you have enough money, you can get away with everything. Is it true the Talmud has arisen from the texts of the Pharisees ? One of the 3 major (religious) political and social directions in ancient Judaism ?

 

[William Gaatjes]

I do wonder how many people realize that Christians are seen as Gentiles as well... There has been a steady uprise of orthodox (and ultra orthodox) religious Jews in Israel for decades. I wonder how much of them see the Talmud as truth and obligation to do what ever they think is necessary. When looking objectively, these people are no more different then the fundamental part of the Islamic believers. These fundamentalists of either religion have no moral or good will towards anybody.
They only seek to destroy and will do so when given the chance.

 

[Lemon law]

In many ways the Islamic Koran is patterned after the Jewish bible. And Islam holds as prophets many Jewish Jewish religious figures dating back to Abraham. And the Koran also recognizes Jesus Christ as another Islamic prophet. Which is why comparative religious scholars lump the three religions together as Abramic religions.

But only Roman Catholic and their offshoot in the still existent Constantinople pope recognize just one central authority figure called a pope to define what their religions is. By in large today, since only a minority of Christian practishners recognize the pope, all three religions tend to differ widely in interpretations depending on which religious poobah is speaking.

All claim to know the mind of GOD, but there is little agreement between them.

 

[William Gaatjes]

In many ways the Islamic Koran is patterned after the Jewish bible. And Islam holds as prophets many Jewish Jewish religious figures dating back to Abraham. And the Koran also recognizes Jesus Christ as another Islamic prophet. Which is why comparative religious scholars lump the three religions together as Abramic religions.

But only Roman Catholic and their offshoot in the still existent Constantinople pope recognize just one central authority figure called a pope to define what their religions is. By in large today, since only a minority of Christian practishners recognize the pope, all three religions tend to differ widely in interpretations depending on which religious poobah is speaking.

All claim to know the mind of GOD, but there is little agreement between them.

That the Islam was an attempt to be a cleaned up version of the Christian views at the time when the Islam started to develop should be of no surprise. Well, i see a connection now with the buying off practice stated in the Talmud and the way the Catholic church operates. Both claim that sins can be bought off. One of the many reasons i think why Martin Luther(The German priest) was against the roman catholic church and started the beginning of the protestant movement. I also now understand why some priests seem to have no problem having sex with young boys while they are heavily religious. I could never understand how someone deeply religious (at least some of the perpetrators, not all) would do such acts while they seem to be god fearing men.

God fearing, it is a strange way of describing faith is it not ?

 

[OCGuy]

Amazing that such archaic belief systems such as religion would have archaic teachings.

 

[Zebo]

I don't like religion as many of you know and this is why. Immutable "gods" law from a different time and space where perhaps that was acceptable everywhere, instead of reason and man deciding his own fate with malleable laws.


Not saying every philosophy about religion is bad in our current context, some has value, but some shit is really fucked up.

 

[William Gaatjes]

Amazing that such archaic belief systems such as religion would have archaic teachings.

It is not that strange. Libraries are meant to pass on teachings.
What is in those libraries to be found is what is of much concern to any human.
It can be seen clearly through history that one act of amoral behavior will not be the downfall of any society. But when the number of different amoral behaviors increases, any society will destabilize and fall apart. It fits with the way the human mind works. The human mind is volatile. And it is even more volatile in a group setting.

 

[William Gaatjes]

I don't like religion as many of you know and this is why. Immutable "gods" law from a different time and space where perhaps that was acceptable everywhere, instead of reason and man deciding his own fate with malleable laws.


Not saying every philosophy about religion is bad in our current context, some has value, but some shit is really fucked up.

Well, what i find interesting is that this behavior IIRC came from a time period of amoral life for the people living back then. Everything we would say that such behavior is disgusting and those people should be killed (yes even me would say that then), was alright then. Everything that is even forbidden in the bible of Christ and condemned was alright then. It is disturbing that such texts are still to be found.

 

[JS80]

Posting in an "I hate Jews" thread veiled as a discussion on the Talmud.

 

[OCGuy]

Posting in an "I hate Jews" thread veiled as a discussion on the Talmud.

Well Mohammed dillyed little girls and Catholic priests covered up systemic child molestation....so I think it is just a problem with religion in general.

 

[JS80]

Well Mohammed dillyed little girls and Catholic priests covered up systemic child molestation....so I think it is just a problem with religion in general.

I'm sure there are many non-religious people who have sex with little girls and boys. Sounds like a sociopathic human problem vs religion. I don't ever recall Jesus teaching His followers it's OK to have sex with boys.

 

[OCGuy]

I'm sure there are many non-religious people who have sex with little girls and boys. Sounds like a sociopathic human problem vs religion. I don't ever recall Jesus teaching His followers it's OK to have sex with boys.

Fundamentalist religion breeds the sociopathic behavior, because it is against human nature.

 

[William Gaatjes]

Posting in an "I hate Jews" thread veiled as a discussion on the Talmud.

I hope you are trolling.
Thinking i hate people with the Judaic believe is quite the mistake to make.
But it is obvious that i am not allowed to show any open honest critique about immoralities that are to be found in religions. I am also very against the ancient practices in the middle east marrying little girls. Even while this can be a cultural custom to create bonds between families. This also may have happened a lot of times in western history. But again it is obvious that from your post, that we are not allowed to discuss eye brow raising customs from ancient Jewish traditions. And this disturbs me. Instead of having open discussions, people who ask questions are vilified. Even people with a Jewish background are vilified when giving critique.

 

[William Gaatjes]

I'm sure there are many non-religious people who have sex with little girls and boys. Sounds like a sociopathic human problem vs religion. I don't ever recall Jesus teaching His followers it's OK to have sex with boys.

Well, an interesting point of view arises from the religious Christian texts that Jesus and the Pharisees did not get along and in effect where each others arch enemies. It seems that the Pharisees where the originators of the texts present in the Talmud. But i have to honestly say, i just picked this up from Christian followers. I am not a historian although i love all history.

 

[JS80]

Fundamentalist religion breeds the sociopathic behavior, because it is against human nature.

Fundamentalist Christian would imply that one follows Jesus' teachings to the T right? If so, wouldn't a fundamentalist Christian sell all his goods, donate to charity, and volunteer in a 3rd world country until he dies?

 

[JS80]

Well, an interesting point of view arises from the religious Christian texts that Jesus and the Pharisees did not get along and in effect where each others arch enemies. It seems that the Pharisees where the originators of the texts present in the Talmud. But i have to honestly say, i just picked this up from Christian followers. I am not a historian although i love all history.

The Pharisees had taken over the religion and instilled/realized their power over the followers. Jesus more or less "taught" the truth and relayed the message to the people that the temple was no longer required to have a relationship with their maker. No more temple = Pharisees lose their power, hence they had him killed. Which is why the Catholic Church is a giant oxymoron.

Also remember the Talmud are discussions amongst Jewish religious leaders/philosophers. It is not the word of God. They are merely texts written by humans.

 

[William Gaatjes]

Fundamentalist Christian would imply that one follows Jesus' teachings to the T right? If so, wouldn't a fundamentalist Christian sell all his goods, donate to charity, and volunteer in a 3rd world country until he dies?

Some actually have done so. But i do not think because being fundamentalist, but rather out of love.

It seems with what i understand of it, the Pharisees where masterminds in avoiding the by the Abrahamic covenant created strict laws the Jewish people had to live by at that time as claimed in religious texts. The Talmud is sort of a way of how to solve disputes up to how to obey or avoid the Abrahamic covenant. A law for everything. That just does not work. Common sense together with morality and love needs to rule.

 

[William Gaatjes]

The Pharisees had taken over the religion and instilled/realized their power over the followers. Jesus more or less "taught" the truth and relayed the message to the people that the temple was no longer required to have a relationship with their maker. No more temple = Pharisees lose their power, hence they had him killed. Which is why the Catholic Church is a giant oxymoron.

Also remember the Talmud are discussions amongst Jewish religious leaders/philosophers. It is not the word of God. They are merely texts written by humans.

Yes, the catholic church once again... Always bringing back the vile...
I fear that a lot of ultra orthodox Jewish people might take the Talmud as guides of life and as the word of god. And this may not be wise and will cause problems such as another war in the most extreme scenario.
It is not uncommon as we can see in other religions as well, that the word of the religious leader is taken and accepted by the followers as the word of god...

 

[JEDIYoda]

I know this is not really latest news or politics but i wanted to ask this any way.

I was doing some reading, and what i have read disturbs me.
Is it true that in the Talmud it is written that sex with other men is forbidden while sex with boys younger than the age of 9 is alright because young boys are not seen as men by rabbi ?
Is it true that in the Talmud it is written that sex with girls younger then 3 years old is alright because the hymen is assumed to heal completely ?

If this is true, than this is very disturbing.
Of course this does not mean all Jews would support such activities most would vigorously take a stance from it but it is dangerous nevertheless...
Decline of morality indeed...

It is real obvious the OP hates Jews. Why would the Op believe such nonesense and take it at face value without doing any research?

Doing reading and actually understanding what you read are two different things....but coming from you I would expect no less than to post something without doing any research or attempting to understand what you claim to have read!

http://talmud.faithweb.com/

The Accusation

Yebhamot 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."

Aboda Sarah 37a: "A gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."

The Text

Talmud Ketuvot 11b (The citation mentioned is evidently in error. Talmud Yevamot 11b has no relevant passage)



Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav: A male child who has relations with a female adult causes her to be like one who was injured with a stick... Rava said: This is what was meant - an adult male who has relations with a female child has not done anything because less than this [three years old] is like sticking a finger into an eyeball.

While those unused to these Talmudic discussions might be taken aback by the use of euphemisms, the discussion here relates to the dowry for virgins and non-virgins. A virgin receives a higher dowry. While the tell-tale sign of virginity is the release of blood due to the breaking of the hyman on the wedding night, there are occasions when the hyman has already been broken such as when the woman suffered an injury. The Talmud here adds that a sexual act with a male minor is not considered to be a loss of virginity because one of the participants is not fully active. While the female's hyman may have been broken, she has not engaged in what can be classified as a sexual act (although it is certainly child abuse).

The Talmud continues that a sexual act between a male adult and a female under the age of three is also not considered a loss of virginity (although it is child abuse). Since the girl is too young for her hyman to be broken, she is still considered a virgin.

Nowhere is the Talmud permitting such behavior. Sex outside of a marriage is strictly forbidden (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Ishut 1:4, Hilchot Na'arah Betulah 2:17; Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 26:1, 177:5) as is this obvious case of child abuse. The Talmud is only discussing ex post facto what would happen if such a case arose.

The same usage occurs in the passage in Talmud Avodah Zarah 37a. The Talmud states that at the age of three a girl is capable of participating in a sexual act. However, that act is not permissible. See also Jerusalem Talmud Ketuvot 1:2 (4b).

 

[William Gaatjes]

It is real obvious the OP hates Jews. Why would the Op believe such nonesense and take it at face value without doing any research?

Doing reading and actually understanding what you read are two different things....but coming from you I would expect no less than to post something without doing any research or attempting to understand what you claim to have read!

http://talmud.faithweb.com/

The Accusation

Yebhamot 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."

Aboda Sarah 37a: "A gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."

The Text

Talmud Ketuvot 11b (The citation mentioned is evidently in error. Talmud Yevamot 11b has no relevant passage)



Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav: A male child who has relations with a female adult causes her to be like one who was injured with a stick... Rava said: This is what was meant - an adult male who has relations with a female child has not done anything because less than this [three years old] is like sticking a finger into an eyeball.

While those unused to these Talmudic discussions might be taken aback by the use of euphemisms, the discussion here relates to the dowry for virgins and non-virgins. A virgin receives a higher dowry. While the tell-tale sign of virginity is the release of blood due to the breaking of the hyman on the wedding night, there are occasions when the hyman has already been broken such as when the woman suffered an injury. The Talmud here adds that a sexual act with a male minor is not considered to be a loss of virginity because one of the participants is not fully active. While the female's hyman may have been broken, she has not engaged in what can be classified as a sexual act (although it is certainly child abuse).

The Talmud continues that a sexual act between a male adult and a female under the age of three is also not considered a loss of virginity (although it is child abuse). Since the girl is too young for her hyman to be broken, she is still considered a virgin.

Nowhere is the Talmud permitting such behavior. Sex outside of a marriage is strictly forbidden (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Ishut 1:4, Hilchot Na'arah Betulah 2:17; Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 26:1, 177:5) as is this obvious case of child abuse. The Talmud is only discussing ex post facto what would happen if such a case arose.

The same usage occurs in the passage in Talmud Avodah Zarah 37a. The Talmud states that at the age of three a girl is capable of participating in a sexual act. However, that act is not permissible. See also Jerusalem Talmud Ketuvot 1:2 (4b).

I was wondering when you would arrive. And of course you also condemn any critique or interest in honest discussions. This clearly states your agenda, not mine. Before i found out about the subject and was still deciding to post about it, i already knew i would be called a Jew hater and i might even get the label "anti-semitic". Now already 2 times since i posted this thread i am called a Jew hater simply because i have an interest and because i am curious. But that is not strange since even peaceful active Jewish people are called "anti-semitic" when ever they ask about difficult situations or give critique.

I do not want to see a possible war in the future or current endless terrorist attacks and growing hate and an endless stream of victims on all sides and crying family members who have to bury their children.

However, do you not find it strange that such acts are described so vividly ? The only logical reason to describe such events is because they have taken place and probably the perpetrators where high society members . And sex outside of the marriage ? Was it not common to have concubines when you had money enough ? You would just buy off your "sin" and it would be ok ? In "zuz" yes ?

 

[OCGuy]

Fundamentalist Christian would imply that one follows Jesus' teachings to the T right? If so, wouldn't a fundamentalist Christian sell all his goods, donate to charity, and volunteer in a 3rd world country until he dies?

The problem with that being that everyone has their own interpretation of "Jesus' teachings."

There are towns in Utah where they banish the boys to keep the M:F ratio a certain balance.

 

[routan]

Wow. Gross. Apparently, this guy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimon_bar_Yochai has stated: "A proselyte who is under the age of THREE years and one day is permitted to marry a priest, for it is said, But all the women children that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves, and Phinehas surely was with them.

 

[routan]

It is real obvious the OP hates Jews. Why would the Op believe such nonesense and take it at face value without doing any research?

Doing reading and actually understanding what you read are two different things....but coming from you I would expect no less than to post something without doing any research or attempting to understand what you claim to have read!

http://talmud.faithweb.com/

The Accusation

Yebhamot 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."

Aboda Sarah 37a: "A gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."

The Text

Talmud Ketuvot 11b (The citation mentioned is evidently in error. Talmud Yevamot 11b has no relevant passage)



Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav: A male child who has relations with a female adult causes her to be like one who was injured with a stick... Rava said: This is what was meant - an adult male who has relations with a female child has not done anything because less than this [three years old] is like sticking a finger into an eyeball.

While those unused to these Talmudic discussions might be taken aback by the use of euphemisms, the discussion here relates to the dowry for virgins and non-virgins. A virgin receives a higher dowry. While the tell-tale sign of virginity is the release of blood due to the breaking of the hyman on the wedding night, there are occasions when the hyman has already been broken such as when the woman suffered an injury. The Talmud here adds that a sexual act with a male minor is not considered to be a loss of virginity because one of the participants is not fully active. While the female's hyman may have been broken, she has not engaged in what can be classified as a sexual act (although it is certainly child abuse).

The Talmud continues that a sexual act between a male adult and a female under the age of three is also not considered a loss of virginity (although it is child abuse). Since the girl is too young for her hyman to be broken, she is still considered a virgin.

Nowhere is the Talmud permitting such behavior. Sex outside of a marriage is strictly forbidden (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Ishut 1:4, Hilchot Na'arah Betulah 2:17; Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 26:1, 177:5) as is this obvious case of child abuse. The Talmud is only discussing ex post facto what would happen if such a case arose.

The same usage occurs in the passage in Talmud Avodah Zarah 37a. The Talmud states that at the age of three a girl is capable of participating in a sexual act. However, that act is not permissible. See also Jerusalem Talmud Ketuvot 1:2 (4b).

WHAT
THE
FUCK