So @sccit is an open zionist on a black hip hop forum?

[Ish Gibor]

The original passage is found in the Medrish, not Talmud Bavli. The English rendition you are quoting is from the book 'Hebrew myths: The Book of Genesis'.

What I read years ago was from the Babylonian Talmud. Not from the Torah. I have the Pentateuch here at home. And did you mean to say "Midrash" instead of Medrish?

Anyway, this interpretation whether wrong or right has led to the dehumanization and racism we still see till this day. It's more so the third video that is bothersome and reminiscent of history being descibered in the former videos, in particular the second one. The fist video explains who the Canaanites are. The fourth shows the slave bible.

"The Redemption of Ham"

וַיַּ֗רְא חָ֚ם אֲבִ֣י כְנַ֔עַן אֵ֖ת עֶרְוַ֣ת אָבִ֑יו וַיַּגֵּ֥ד לִשְׁנֵֽי־אֶחָ֖יו בַּחֽוּץ׃

Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father’s nakedness and told his two brothers outside.

Ham | Sefaria

 

[Koichos]

What I read years ago was from the Babylonian Talmud. Not from the Torah. I have the Pentateuch here at home.

Well, it wasn't what you quoted, because that passage is not found anywhere in Bavli.

And did you mean to say "Midrash" instead of Medrish?

Midrash/Medrash/Medresh/Medrish. The pronunciation is purely a linguistic phenomenon based on one's family's mesora or tradition.

 

[p00rky]

"Muslim countries are racist, therefore, you cannot criticize Israel for its racism."

When did he say that? I must have misread his post...

 

[RadaMillz]

His jewish, I don’t mind if his defending his people as long as no one crosses the line.



Fuk Zionist tho and what they do to the Palestinians

 

[Sccit]

facts

like him lying right here




scripture doesn’t say that at all, it says the opposite

and clearly, it matters or else The most high wouldn’t of told us this..

Romans 11:16-17

There is hope of their conversion
16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;

Romans 11:18-25

The Gentiles may not exult over them
18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

@Koichos CAN U HELP ME OUT HERE ACHI. YOURE MORE FAMILIAR THAN I AM, BUT I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT CONVERTS ARE HELD IN HIGHER REGARD ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE.

 

[Ish Gibor]

Well, it wasn't what you quoted, because that passage is not found anywhere in Bavli.


Midrash/Medrash/Medresh/Medrish. The pronunciation is purely a linguistic phenomenon based on one's family's mesora or tradition.

What you say here is partially true. I cited it from other sources. And I know that I read something similar in that translated Talmud. And I was shocked she I read it. I don't know what version it was. It's from a long time ago and it was from a library.

That particular passage is found in dozens of publications. And for some reason this theory made found a way into theology 1700 years ago, as was explained in the lecture "How Genesis became Pro-Slavery", by Dr. Stephen Haneys, Rhodes College.

Opinion | Does Talmud Contain Roots of Racism?

http://www.robertgraves.org/issues/20/2324_article_168.pdf

Apparently it was reenforced in the "Encyclopedia Judaica", by “Racist” Rabbi Rashi?

The Secret Connection between Jews and the Mass-Incarceration and Crippling Commercial-Debt of Hamitic/Hamite (So-called “Black”) Peoples in North America.

 

[Ish Gibor]

@Koichos CAN U HELP ME OUT HERE ACHI. YOURE MORE FAMILIAR THAN I AM, BUT I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT CONVERTS ARE HELD IN HIGHER REGARD ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE.

You are contradicting yourself. Meanwhile the Ashkenazi been slandering all types of schwartzes, schvartze, swarthy slurs.

Ashkenazim

Uncovering ancient Ashkenaz – the birthplace of Yiddish speakers

The Origins of Ashkenaz, Ashkenazic Jews, and Yiddish
1Manipal Centre for Natural Sciences, Manipal University, Manipal, India
2Department of Linguistics, Tel Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel
3Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States
4Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom

"Studies that compared them by genetic distance analysis of autosomal markers to European Mediterranean populations revealed that they are closer to Europeans than to other Jewish populations

EEJ are the largest and most investigated Jewish community, yet their history as Franco-German Jewry is known to us only since their appearance in the 9th century, and their subsequent migration a few hundred years later to Eastern Europe [4,5]. Where did these Jews come from? It seems that they came to Germany and France from Italy [5-8].

It is also possible that some Jews migrated northward from the Italian colonies on the northern shore of the Black Sea [9]. All these Jews are likely the descendents of proselytes.

Conversion to Judaism was common in Rome in the first centuries BC and AD. Judaism gained many followers among all ranks of Roman Society [10-13].

The autosomal genetic distance analysis presented here clearly demonstrates that the investigated Jewish populations do not share a common origin."
~Avshalom Zoossmann-Diskin1,2,3 et al.
"The origin of Eastern European Jews revealed by autosomal, sex chromosomal and mtDNA polymorphisms"
1 Department of Haematology and Genetic Pathology, School of Medicine, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
2 Department of Human Genetics, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Israel
3 Current Address: Blood Bank, Sheba Medical Center, Ramat-Gan 52621, Israel
The origin of Eastern European Jews revealed by autosomal, sex chromosomal and mtDNA polymorphisms

 

[MalickSyXShabbaz]

And We warned the Children of Israel in the Scripture, “You will certainly cause corruption in the land twice, and you will become extremely arrogant.

-Surah Al-Isra', Ayah 4

 

[MalickSyXShabbaz]

Indeed, We revealed the Torah, containing guidance and light, by which the prophets, who submitted themselves to Allah, made judgments for Jews. So too did the rabbis and scholars judge according to Allah’s Book, with which they were entrusted and of which they were made keepers. So do not fear the people; fear Me! Nor trade my revelations for a fleeting gain. And those who do not judge by what Allah has revealed are ˹truly˺ the disbelievers.

-Surah Al-Ma'idah, Ayah 44

 

[Koichos]

@Sccit

In regard to the verses posted above, the NT is not Scripture. We do not accept the NT because it's not a Jewish text, just as notzrim do not accept the Qur'an because it's not a notzri text. What the NT has to say regarding anything Jewish (Moshiach Tzidkainu, Jewish status, gairim, mitzvos, bris miloh) is irrelevant. The Torah is the ONLY true and authentic source of instruction and enlightenment from Hashem. All other forms of religion and spiritual and moral instruction are false or at least misleading. Any system other than Judaism is foreign to the Torah. Notzrus chews its cud but does not have a cleft hoof (outright idolatry mamosh); Islam has a cleft hoof but does not chew its cud (veiled foreign worship). Like the pig, Islam is deceptive—it is like the pig who shows his hooves to claim he's kosher.

@Koichos CAN U HELP ME OUT HERE ACHI. YOURE MORE FAMILIAR THAN I AM, BUT I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT CONVERTS ARE HELD IN HIGHER REGARD ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE.

Yes, gairim tzedekim are held in higher regard b'einei Hashem than a natural born Jew, and they are to be treated accordingly. There is a lav d'oroiso (prohibition min hatorah) of causing tzaros (worries) to a gair. A person is not to be reminded that he or she is a convert lest it cause ona'as hagair (hurt or embarrassment). Those who criticize gairim are transgressing numerous mitzvois loi sa'oseh (negative mitzvos), besides the oseh (obligation) of 'v'ahovtem es hagair', of loving the convert. A natural born Jew who oppresses a convert is transgressing three issurei d'oroiso: "v'gair loi soinei v'loi silchotzainu" (Shmos 22:20); "v'chi yogur Itcha gair b'artzechem loi soinu osoi" (Voyikroh 19:33); "v'loi soinu ish es amisoi" (Voyikroh 25:17). Some of the greatest Jews who ever lived were themselves gairim or first generation descendants of gairim (R' Akiva). It is brought down in the gemoro that Klal Yisroel went into golus to enable Judaism to spread throughout the world allowing chosiday umois ho'oilom, righteous nochrim, the chance to convert and join the Jewish People.

In fact, ALL Jews are descended from converts one way or another, as that is how Am Yisroel began. Whether natural born or convert, no one Jew is more Jewish than the other. A Jew is a Jew is a Jew, regardless. The Jewish nation has been a conglomerate since its inception 3,332 years ago at Har Sinai. A Mizrachi is not more Jewish than a Sefardi, a Sefardi is not more Jewish than an Ashkenazi, and neither one of the three are more Jewish than one who completes their conversion today. All Jews are 100% Jewish whether they descend from the Jews who stayed in the mizrach, or the Jews who spread forth to Ashkenaz, Sefarad and Teiman by way of Judea millennia ago; or they descend from one who converted today. It doesn't matter. Genetics is not the end all, be all, of what makes a Jew, Jewish. Gairim tzedekim continue to replace those Jews who went off the derech and assimilated. A lot of converts are very happy to become Jewish; a lot of Jews are not too happy to be Jewish. Perhaps the two balance one another out with regard to Jewish trauma.

There is something very interesting to think about: after great Jewish trauma, there are always lots of converts to come in the next generation. This happened after Yetzius Mitzroyim, Churban Bayis Sheini, Spanish Inquisition, the Khirbn/HaShoah. Esoterically, the way I think it works is like this: that trauma is carried in the genes. If you are born to Khirbn survivors, or family that are survivors, even though you didn't personally go through it, trauma is carried in your genes. Epigenetic markers are turned on, and trauma is carried through. Whenever the klal collectively go through a great trauma, there are high markers of trauma that's turned on. This can be very suffocating to a people. I think by divine dispensation righteous nochrim are drawn to Judaism, ultimately balancing the trauma. Physically, and on a genetic level, they don't carry Jewish trauma. When they integrate into the Jewish community, what they are effectively doing is creating an equilibrium. They are balancing out the energy, the non(Jewish)-trauma and the trauma, to maintain a healthy homeostasis.

 

[Koichos]

What you say here partially true, but I cited it from other sources. And I know that I read something similar in that translated Talmud. And I was shocked she I read it.

That particular passage is found in dozens of publications.

Opinion | Does Talmud Contain Roots of Racism?

http://www.robertgraves.org/issues/20/2324_article_168.pdf

You can cite all the sources you want. It simply doesn't exist anywhere in Bavli (there is no anti-black rhetoric in Bavli). It is a mistranslation of a Medrish. Anyone translating the original passage exactly as it reads can see it has nothing to do with race. Moreover, the last sentence "Men of this race are called Negroes" does not actually exist in the Medrish. It appears as commentary by the authors of 'Hebrew myths: The Book of Genesis' following their poor rendition of the Medrish which immediately precedes it.

Apparently it was referred in the Encyclopedia Judaica as stated by “Racist” Rabbi Rashi between approximately 1010-1030?

The Secret Connection between Jews and the Mass-Incarceration and Crippling Commercial-Debt of Hamitic/Hamite (So-called “Black”) Peoples in North America. . . USURY AND INTEREST IS TERRORISM !!! — BACAI TRIBES

Rash"i lived half a millennium after Bavli was committed to writing. Rash"i didn't speak English. The quote being attributed to Rash"i is from a Medrish on B'raishis (the one above was on Tanchumo), which again is not being translated correctly.

 

[Ish Gibor]

You can cite all the sources you want. It simply doesn't exist anywhere in Bavli (there is no anti-black rhetoric in Bavli). It is a mistranslation of a Medrish. Anyone translating the original passage exactly as it reads can see it has nothing to do with race. Moreover, the last sentence "Men of this race are called Negroes" does not actually exist in the Medrish. It appears as commentary by the authors of 'Hebrew myths: The Book of Genesis' following their poor rendition of the Medrish which immediately precedes it.


Rash"i lived half a millennium after Bavli was committed to writing. Rash"i didn't speak English. The quote being attributed to Rash"i is from a Medrish on B'reishis (the one above was on Tanchumo), which again is not being translated correctly.

Of course it wasn't written in English in the original texts. But fact is that there is a long history into this that can be traced back 1700 years ago, and it did dehumanize Black people. Nor did the term negroe was in use, but it referred to a particular people phenotypically described as Black people of today. The same people that have experienced racism and dehumanization based on this theory. So for these reasons citing sources is important since this doctrine goes beyond Farrakhan, Griff or now even Nick Cannon. And that is what this conversation is about. I think that you don’t understand the seriousness of this problem that has been invoked upon Black people. And the fact that Ashkenazi racism/discrimination towards Blacks has been so prevalent isn’t helping either.

I am now starting to wonder who it was who did these translations and what their purpose was? The lecture below does explain it to some degree, but is still lacking in some primary sources of the first translations and translators.

I remember that the NOI-Farrakhan wanted to sit down and have talk with rabbis about this, but they rejected this. Had they done so, a lot of unnecessary things could have been prevented, even after the fact of 1700 years of dehumanization.

 

[Family Lives Matter]

Dude seriously defended Jewish rabbis sucking baby dikk's after they get circumcised dudes a cockroach

 

[Koichos]

Of course it wasn't written in English in the original texts. But fact is that there is a long history into this that can be traced back 1700 years ago, and it did dehumanize Black people.

The point was that the text that is being attributed to Rash"i was not penned by him (similar to the text that is being attributed to Bavli), and the original passage written in Mishnaic Hebrew has no racial enmity.

Nor did the term negroe was in use, but it referred to a particular people phenotypically described as Black people of today.

The term was in use by the time 'Hebrew myths: The Book of Genesis' was written. It is used there in the commentary following their rendition of the passage from the Medrish.

 

[Ish Gibor]

@Sccit

In regard to the verses posted above, the NT is not Scripture. We do not accept the NT because it's not a Jewish text, just as notzrim do not accept the Qur'an because it's not a notzri text. What the NT has to say regarding anything Jewish (Moshiach Tzidkainu, Jewish status, gairim, mitzvos, bris miloh) is irrelevant. The Torah is the ONLY true and authentic source of instruction and enlightenment from Hashem. All other forms of religion and spiritual and moral instruction are false or at least misleading. Any system other than Judaism is foreign to the Torah. Notzrus chews its cud but does not have a cleft hoof (outright idolatry mamosh); Islam has a cleft hoof but does not chew its cud (veiled foreign worship). Like the pig, Islam is deceptive—it is like the pig who shows his hooves to claim he's kosher.
.

I fully agree with this.

Yes, gairim tzedekim are held in higher regard b'einei Hashem than a natural born Jew, and they are to be treated accordingly. There is a lav d'oroiso (prohibition min hatorah) of causing tzaros (worries) to a gair. A person is not to be reminded that he or she is a convert lest it cause ona'as hagair (hurt or embarrassment). Those who criticize gairim are transgressing numerous mitzvois loi sa'oseh (negative mitzvos), besides the oseh (obligation) of 'v'ahovtem es hagair', of loving the convert. A natural born Jew who oppresses a convert is transgressing three issurei d'oroiso: "v'gair loi soinei v'loi silchotzainu" (Shmos 22:20); "v'chi yogur Itcha gair b'artzechem loi soinu osoi" (Voyikroh 19:33); "v'loi soinu ish es amisoi" (Voyikroh 25:17). Some of the greatest Jews who ever lived were themselves gairim or first generation descendants of gairim (R' Akiva). It is brought down in the gemoro that Klal Yisroel went into golus to enable Judaism to spread throughout the world allowing chosiday umois ho'oilom, righteous nochrim, the chance to convert and join the Jewish People.

In fact, ALL Jews are descended from converts one way or another, as that is how Am Yisroel began. Whether natural born or convert, no one Jew is more Jewish than the other. A Jew is a Jew is a Jew, regardless. The Jewish nation has been a conglomerate since its inception 3,332 years ago at Har Sinai. A Mizrachi is not more Jewish than a Sefardi, a Sefardi is not more Jewish than an Ashkenazi, and neither one of the three are more Jewish than one who completes their conversion today. All Jews are 100% Jewish whether they descend from the Jews who stayed in the mizrach, or the Jews who spread forth to Ashkenaz, Sefarad and Teiman by way of Judea millennia ago; or they descend from one who converted today. It doesn't matter. Genetics is not the end all, be all, of what makes a Jew, Jewish. Gairim tzedekim continue to replace those Jews who went off the derech and assimilated. A lot of converts are very happy to become Jewish; a lot of Jews are not too happy to be Jewish. Perhaps the two balance one another out with regard to Jewish trauma.

There is something very interesting to think about: after great Jewish trauma, there are always lots of converts to come in the next generation. This happened after Yetzius Mitzroyim, Churban Bayis Sheini, Spanish Inquisition, the Khirbn/HaShoah. Esoterically, the way I think it works is like this: that trauma is carried in the genes. If you are born to Khirbn survivors, or family that are survivors, even though you didn't personally go through it, trauma is carried in your genes. Epigenetic markers are turned on, and trauma is carried through. Whenever the klal collectively go through a great trauma, there are high markers of trauma that's turned on. This can be very suffocating to a people. I think by divine dispensation righteous nochrim are drawn to Judaism, ultimately balancing the trauma. Physically, and on a genetic level, they don't carry Jewish trauma. When they integrate into the Jewish community, what they are effectively doing is creating an equilibrium. They are balancing out the energy, the non(Jewish)-trauma and the trauma, to maintain a healthy homeostasis.

So there is no actual lineage in the Tanakh, or was it but most are now stem from converts? And what’s your opinion on the Lachish and the Assyrians?


"saiah 20:4 So shall the king of Assyria lead away the Egyptians prisoners, and the Ethiopians captives, young and old, naked and barefoot, even with their buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt.

So shall the king of Assyria lead the captivity of Egypt and the exile of Cush, youths and old men, naked and barefoot, with bare buttocks, the shame of Egypt."
Chabad.org

“Ziv said that many Jewish-Ethiopian customs go against modern Jewish practice, but perfectly align with customs and rituals described on scrolls found in the Qumran caves and in books dating back to the Second Temple Period. The Qumran Caves are where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, which include the third oldest Hebrew Bible ever found.”
Ethiopian Judaism nearly identical to that practiced during Second Temple Period