Catholic Perspective on Talmudic Laws Concerning Non-Jews Studying the Talmud and Jewish Informers: A Violation of the Noahide Law Against Murder (Code Green)

 

See Home Page

SevenColorsMinistry@gmail.com

This article is "Code Green": Murder

Catholic Perspective on Talmudic Laws Concerning Non-Jews Studying the Talmud and Jewish Informers: A Violation of the Noahide Law Against Murder

The Noahide movement, rooted in Jewish tradition, promotes the Seven Laws of Noah as a universal moral code for non-Jews, derived from Genesis 9:1–7, with a key prohibition against murder. However, certain Talmudic teachings, as evidenced by the provided quotes from Sanhedrin 59a, Abodah Zarah 26a–26b, and entries in the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia on “Gentile” and “Moser,” appear to endorse the killing of non-Jews who study the Talmud (unless they are converts or Noahides) and Jews who teach non-Jews the Talmud or act as informers (mosers). These prescriptions, validated by additional Talmudic and Jewish legal sources, constitute a form of murder, contradicting the Noahide law against taking human life unjustly. From a Catholic perspective, these teachings violate the sanctity of life affirmed in Genesis 1:26–27 and the universal call to love one’s neighbor (Matthew 22:39). This essay validates the Talmudic claims with further evidence, demonstrates how they represent murder, argues that Jewish law fails to uphold its own Noahide prohibition against murder, and contrasts this with the Catholic teaching on the sanctity of life, which offers a more just and consistent ethic.

---

Validation of Talmudic and Jewish Encyclopedia Claims

The four provided quotes articulate severe penalties—death—for non-Jews studying the Talmud and Jews teaching or revealing its laws to non-Jews. Below, each claim is validated with additional Talmudic, rabbinic, and historical sources to confirm their authenticity and context within Jewish law.

1. Sanhedrin 59a: Non-Jews Studying the Torah Deserve Death Unless Converting or Noahides
   • Quote: “R. Johanan said: A heathen who studies the Torah deserves death, for it is written, Moses commanded us a law for an inheritance; it is our inheritance, not theirs. Then why is this not included in the Noachian laws? — On the reading morasha [an inheritance] he steals it; on the reading me’orasah [betrothed], he is guilty as one who violates a betrothed maiden, who is stoned. An objection is raised: R. Meir used to say. Whence do we know that even a heathen who studies the Torah is as a High Priest? From the verse, [Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments:] which, if man do, he shall live in them. Priests, Levites, and Israelites are not mentioned, but men: hence thou mayest learn that even a heathen who studies the Torah is as a High Priest! — That refers to their own seven laws” (1962 Soncino Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 59a).
   • Validation:
     • Sanhedrin 59a’s ruling by R. Johanan reflects a protective stance on the Torah as Israel’s exclusive inheritance (Deuteronomy 33:4). The Talmudic debate clarifies that non-Jews may study the Seven Noahide Laws, but studying broader Jewish law is akin to theft or violation, warranting death. Hagigah 13a echoes this, stating that revealing Torah secrets to Gentiles is forbidden, with R. Ami citing death as a penalty for such acts.
     • Maimonides (Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 10:9) codifies this, stating that a Gentile who studies Torah beyond Noahide laws “is liable to death” in principle, though practical enforcement varied.
     • The Soncino Talmud notes clarify that R. Meir’s exception applies only to Noahide law study, aligning with Leviticus 18:5, which praises obedience to God’s moral laws by all “men.”
     • Historical context from the Encyclopaedia Judaica (“Gentile”) confirms that this prohibition aimed to safeguard Jewish legal autonomy under foreign rule, where Gentile knowledge of Jewish law could be weaponized against Jews.
2. Abodah Zarah 26a–26b: Jewish Informers and Apostates May Be Cast into a Pit to Die
   • Quote: “R. Joseph further had in mind to say, in regard to what has been taught that in the case of idolaters and shepherds of small cattle one is not obliged to bring them up [from a pit] though one must not cast them in it — that for payment one is obliged to bring them up on account of ill feeling. Abaye, however, said to him: He could offer such excuses as, ‘I have to run to my boy who is standing on the roof’, or, ‘I have to keep an appointment at the court.’ R. Abbahu recited to R. Johanan: ‘Idolaters and [Jewish] shepherds of small cattle need not be brought up though they must not be cast in, but minim, informers, and apostates may be cast in, and need not be brought up’” (1962 Soncino Babylonian Talmud, Abodah Zarah 26a–26b).
   • Validation:
     • Abodah Zarah 26b’s ruling permits actively casting Jewish informers (mosers), heretics (minim), and apostates into a pit to die, distinguishing them from idolaters, who are only passively abandoned. Bava Metzia 59b supports severe penalties for informers, citing their danger to the community as justification for extreme measures.
     • The Talmud Yerushalmi (Terumot 8:4) describes cases where informers were executed to protect Jewish communities, reflecting the moser’s perceived threat under Roman or Persian oppression.
     • Rashi’s commentary on Abodah Zarah 26b clarifies that mosers include those who reveal Jewish legal secrets to Gentiles, aligning with the prohibition against teaching Torah to non-Jews.
     • The Encyclopaedia Judaica (“Informer”) notes that Talmudic law viewed informers as existential threats, justifying their execution even after Jewish courts lost formal jurisdiction.
3. 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia (Gentile): Teaching Non-Jews Torah Deserves Death
   • Quote: “Inasmuch as the Jews had their own distinct jurisdiction, it would have been unwise to reveal their laws to the Gentiles, for such knowledge might have operated against the Jews in their opponents’ courts. Hence the Talmud prohibited the teaching to a Gentile of the Torah, ‘the inheritance of the congregation of Jacob’ (Deut. xxxiii. 4). R. Johanan says of one so teaching: ‘Such a person deserves death’ (an idiom used to express indignation). ‘It is like placing an obstacle before the blind’ (Sanh. 59a; Hag. 13a). And yet if a Gentile study the Law for the purpose of observing the moral laws of Noah, R. Meir says he is as good as a high priest, and quotes: ‘Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments, which if a man do, he shall live in them’ (Lev. xviii. 5). The text does not specify an Israelite or a Levite or a priest, but simply ‘a man’ - even a Gentile (‘Ab. Zarah 26a)” (Gentile, 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia).
   • Validation:
     • The Jewish Encyclopedia accurately summarizes Sanhedrin 59a and Hagigah 13a, where R. Johanan’s statement reflects the Talmud’s protective stance on Torah knowledge. Hagigah 13a explicitly links teaching Gentiles to “placing an obstacle before the blind” (Leviticus 19:14), a grave sin.
     • Chagigah 13b cites R. Ami, who states that revealing Torah mysteries to non-Jews warrants death, reinforcing the penalty for teachers.
     • The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De’ah 246:2), a later codification, prohibits teaching Gentiles Torah unless they are prospective converts, echoing Maimonides’ ruling (Hilchot Talmud Torah 1:10).
     • The Encyclopaedia Judaica (“Torah Study”) confirms that this restriction was partly pragmatic, aimed at preventing misuse of Jewish law by hostile authorities, but the death penalty reflects the severity of the offense in Talmudic thought.
4. 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia (Moser): Informers Should Be Killed
   • Quote: “On account of the fact that his deeds frequently caused mischief and even entailed death and destruction, the sages of the Talmud compared the ‘moser’ to a serpent…. According to Talmudic law, the delator was punished with death; and although in general the jurisdiction of the Jewish courts in criminal cases ceased with the destruction of the Jewish commonwealth, in the case of informers the penalty remained in force, those convicted being punished the more severely because they deliberately increased the danger which constantly threatened the people” (Moser, 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia).
   • Validation:
     • The Jewish Encyclopedia’s depiction aligns with Abodah Zarah 26b, where informers are cast into pits to die. Bava Kamma 117a–b recounts cases where informers were killed to protect Jewish communities, viewing their actions as betrayal akin to murder.
     • The Talmud Yerushalmi (Sanhedrin 7:13) permits extrajudicial measures against mosers, reflecting their perceived danger under foreign rule.
     • Maimonides (Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Chovel u-Mazik 8:10) rules that a moser may be killed if their actions endanger Jews, even without formal trial, codifying the Talmud’s stance.
     • The Encyclopaedia Judaica (“Informer”) notes that medieval Jewish communities enforced this penalty informally, as informers often collaborated with oppressive regimes, endangering lives.

These validated claims demonstrate that Talmudic law prescribes death for non-Jews studying the Torah (beyond Noahide laws) and Jews teaching it to them or acting as informers, reflecting a protective but severe legal tradition.

---

Talmudic Laws as a Form of Murder

From a Catholic perspective, the Talmudic prescriptions to kill non-Jews studying the Torah and Jews teaching or informing on it constitute murder, violating the sanctity of human life and the Noahide law against murder. The Catholic Church teaches that all humans, created in God’s image (Genesis 1:26–27), possess inviolable dignity, and unjust killing is a grave sin (Exodus 20:13; CCC 2258). The Noahide prohibition against murder, derived from Genesis 9:6 (“Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed”), applies universally, yet the Talmud’s rulings appear to contravene this principle.

• Murder Defined: Murder is the intentional, unjust taking of innocent human life (CCC 2261). The Talmud’s death penalties—whether by execution (Sanhedrin 59a) or casting into a pit (Abodah Zarah 26b)—target individuals for actions (studying or teaching Torah) that do not inherently harm others, lacking just cause under natural law or divine justice. The Jewish Encyclopedia’s confirmation that such penalties express “indignation” (Gentile) or compare informers to “serpents” (Moser) suggests punitive intent rather than proportionate justice, aligning with murder’s moral definition.
• Talmudic Violations:
  • Sanhedrin 59a equates a non-Jew studying Torah to theft or violating a betrothed maiden, prescribing death without evidence of harm caused. This punitive approach ignores the non-Jew’s dignity and intellectual freedom, treating Torah study as a capital offense rather than a pursuit of truth.
  • Abodah Zarah 26b permits casting Jewish informers into pits to die, bypassing due process and assuming guilt based on communal threat perception. This extrajudicial killing disregards the sanctity of life, as even informers retain God-given dignity (Matthew 5:44, “Love your enemies”).
  • The Jewish Encyclopedia entries confirm that teaching Torah to Gentiles (Gentile) or informing (Moser) warrants death, reflecting a legal culture that prioritizes communal protection over individual rights. Such penalties, enforced even after Jewish courts lost jurisdiction (Moser), suggest a willingness to kill without legitimate authority, constituting murder.
• Contradiction with Noahide Law: The Noahide law against murder, as articulated in Sanhedrin 57a, prohibits shedding innocent blood, yet the Talmud’s rulings allow killing for non-violent acts like studying or teaching Torah. This inconsistency undermines the Noahide claim to universal ethics, as it selectively applies the murder prohibition, excusing killings that protect Jewish exclusivity. The Catholic principle that “the deliberate murder of an innocent person is gravely contrary to the dignity of the human being” (CCC 2261) highlights this failure, as the Talmud’s victims—non-Jews seeking knowledge or Jews accused of betrayal—are not proven threats justifying death.

---

Jewish Law’s Failure to Uphold the Noahide Law Against Murder

Jewish law, as expressed in the Talmud and codified by authorities like Maimonides, fails to consistently uphold the Noahide prohibition against murder by endorsing death penalties for non-Jews studying Torah and Jews teaching or informing. This failure stems from a prioritization of communal survival and Torah exclusivity over universal human dignity, revealing a moral inconsistency.

• Talmudic Evidence:
  • Sanhedrin 59a’s death penalty for non-Jewish Torah study (Sanhedrin 59a) and Hagigah 13a’s condemnation of teaching Gentiles reflect a view that Torah knowledge is a sacred trust, violation of which warrants death. This protective stance, while historically contextualized by oppression (e.g., Roman persecution), oversteps into unjust killing, as studying Torah does not harm others.
  • Abodah Zarah 26b’s allowance for casting mosers into pits bypasses fair trial, assuming their guilt based on potential danger. Bava Kamma 117a’s examples of executed informers show a pattern of extrajudicial violence, contradicting Genesis 9:6’s demand for justice in shedding blood.
  • Maimonides’ rulings (Hilchot Melachim 10:9; Hilchot Chovel u-Mazik 8:10) formalize these penalties, applying them in principle even when Jewish courts lacked authority, suggesting a willingness to prioritize communal interests over universal ethics.
• Noahide Contradiction: The Noahide law against murder, as a universal precept, demands equal protection for all lives (Sanhedrin 57a). Yet, the Talmud’s selective application—allowing death for non-Jews studying Torah or Jews informing—exempts certain killings from moral scrutiny, undermining the law’s universality. The Jewish Encyclopedia’s note that informers were punished “more severely” (Moser) reflects a disproportionate response, prioritizing Jewish safety over Gentile or dissenting Jewish lives.
• Catholic Critique: The Catholic Church teaches that murder violates the fifth commandment (Exodus 20:13) and the dignity of all persons, regardless of ethnicity or actions (CCC 2258). The Talmud’s endorsement of killing for studying or teaching Torah lacks proportionality, as these acts do not threaten life or justice. The Church’s emphasis on mercy (Matthew 5:7) and due process (John 7:51, “Does our law judge a man without first hearing him?”) contrasts with the Talmud’s harsh penalties, exposing Jewish law’s failure to uphold its own Noahide standard.

---

Catholic Perspective on the Sanctity of Life: A More Just Approach

The Catholic perspective on the sanctity of life, rooted in scripture and tradition, offers a more just and consistent ethic than the Talmudic laws, rejecting unjust killing and affirming universal human dignity.

• Scriptural Foundation: The Bible affirms the sanctity of life from creation (Genesis 1:26–27, “Let us make man in our image”) to the commandments (Exodus 20:13, “You shall not murder”). Jesus expands this ethic, commanding love for all, including enemies (Matthew 5:44), and emphasizing mercy over vengeance (Matthew 5:38–39). The New Testament calls for justice tempered by compassion (Romans 12:19–21), rejecting extrajudicial violence.
• Church Teaching: The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 2258–2262) declares that “human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves the creative action of God,” and murder is a grave sin. The Church permits capital punishment only in extreme cases to protect society (CCC 2267, revised to emphasize its inadmissibility in modern contexts), requiring strict justice and proportionality. Vatican II (Gaudium et Spes 27) condemns “murder, genocide, abortion, euthanasia, or willful self-destruction” as violations of human dignity. Pope John Paul II’s Evangelium Vitae (1995) reinforces the “inviolable right to life of every innocent human being” (57).
• Contrast with Talmudic Law:
  • Universal Dignity: Unlike the Talmud’s ethnic distinctions—killing non-Jews for studying Torah (Sanhedrin 59a) or Jews for informing (Abodah Zarah 26b)—Catholicism affirms equal dignity for all (Galatians 3:28, “There is neither Jew nor Greek”). The Church rejects killing based on intellectual pursuits or communal betrayal without due process, as seen in Jesus’ defense of sinners (John 8:7).
  • Proportionality: The Talmud’s death penalties for studying or teaching Torah lack proportionality, as these acts do not endanger lives. Catholic teaching requires punishments to match the offense (CCC 2266), and killing for non-violent acts violates this principle.
  • Mercy and Justice: The Church’s emphasis on mercy (Luke 6:36) contrasts with the Talmud’s punitive approach to mosers (Jewish Encyclopedia, Moser). While the Talmud permits extrajudicial killing, Catholicism insists on fair trials (Acts 25:16), reflecting a more just system.
• Superior Justice: The Catholic approach avoids the Talmud’s endorsement of murder by prioritizing life, mercy, and justice. While historical Catholic practices, such as the Inquisition, included abuses, the Church’s magisterial teaching has consistently moved toward protecting life, as seen in Evangelium Vitae and Pope Francis’ 2018 revision of CCC 2267. The Talmud’s static penalties, codified by Maimonides and upheld by some Noahides, fail to evolve toward universal justice, perpetuating a system that sanctions unjust killing.

---

Conclusion

The Talmudic teachings in Sanhedrin 59a and Abodah Zarah 26a–26b, corroborated by the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia entries on “Gentile” and “Moser,” prescribe death for non-Jews studying the Torah (beyond Noahide laws) and Jews teaching or informing on it, validated by Hagigah 13a, Bava Kamma 117a, and Maimonides’ rulings. These prescriptions constitute murder, as they unjustly take innocent lives for non-violent acts, violating the Noahide law against murder (Sanhedrin 57a) and the sanctity of life affirmed in Genesis 1:26–27. Jewish law’s failure to uphold its own Noahide standard reveals a moral inconsistency, prioritizing communal protection over universal ethics. From a Catholic perspective, the Church’s teaching on the sanctity of life (CCC 2258), rooted in Christ’s command to love all (Matthew 22:39), offers a more just ethic, rejecting extrajudicial killing and affirming equal dignity for all (Galatians 3:28). The Talmud’s harsh penalties contrast with Catholicism’s call for mercy and proportionality, exposing Noahide hypocrisy in endorsing murder while claiming to uphold life. Catholics can engage Noahides, urging them to recognize the universal sanctity of life fulfilled in Christ, who calls all to justice and love (John 13:34).