4.
The Expert Opinion of Priest
Pranaitis
It was only at the end of the
preliminary investigation, when the case was submitted for additional examination
and was in the hands of N.A. Mashkevich, that the judicial authorities
recognized the need to carry out a so-called “ritual expert examination” – to question
a competent person about the Judaic rite in general and the blood doctrine in
particular.
The expert
opinion on these issues was given to the investigator by Roman Catholic priest I.B.
Pranaitis, a master of theology, a former professor of the Hebrew language at
the Petrograd Roman Catholic Theological Academy, who wrote in
During the proceedings
in the case of Yushchinsky’s murder, Pranaitis was the curator (administrator) of
all Catholic churches of the
His examination by
the investigator took place from
Pranaitis’ expert
opinion is below.
[Some fragments
were not included by Zamyslovsky in this book due to their blasphemous nature. They
were translated using the edition of Pranaitis’ expert report published in
* * *
To the question whether any sources
of Jewish religious teachings contain direct references to the existence of the
so-called “blood doctrine” among the Jews, i.e. direct prescriptions of the law
which would require the use, by the Jews, of blood of non-Jews in general and
that of Christians in particular for religious purpose, I answer that I have
not met, in the sources of Jewish religious teachings known to me, such direct
references to the above-mentioned doctrine, in the form of definite and exact commands
of their religious law, which would be explicit and clear enough to not allow any
other interpretation. And one cannot conceive that printed sources available to
anyone interested in Jewish religious teachings would contain such references, because
no one would announce publicly about his criminal activities.
Nevertheless, it
does not mean yet that the Jews, indeed, do not have such doctrine, that the
Jews never murdered non-Jews in general and Christians in particular for
religious purpose, and that there are no ritual murders at all and the
accusation made against the Jews in this regard is an absurdity and a fabrication.
All those who made
disclosures in this area of Jewish religious teachings describe this doctrine quite
definitely, as an extraordinary secret that is being transmitted by word of
mouth from one generation to another, to the chosen ones, under pain of heavy
punishments, and with special incantations.
Still, even among
the Jews that converted to Christianity there are those who reject any
disclosures of the negative aspects of Jewish religious teachings and defend
Jewry against all accusations, even if these are well-grounded (professors
Khvolson and Levison); and there are those who expose the negative aspects of
Jewish religious teachings, but completely deny the existence of the said blood
doctrine among the Jews (Alekseev and others).
To clear up this
apparent contradiction, one can quote Iore
Dea (157, 2, Hagah), which says:
“If a Jew is able
to deceive the Akum by pretending he
is an Akum (himself), he may do so.”
Thus, rabbinism
teaches that the Jews may adopt Christianity insincerely, for the sake of
appearances. A Jew who was christened sincerely, or one who was christened for
the sake of appearances, but then became a Christian by conviction, angered God
and must be killed – such thesis is found in Iore Dea (158, 2, Hagah):
“Apostates who were
christened (for the sake of appearances) and then joined the Akum to worship idols as they do are the
same as those who were christened to anger God, and they are to be thrown into
a pit and left there.”
Thus, an
insincere christening and an insincere profession of faith are clearly mentioned
here as allowed actions, and only a sincere adoption of Christianity is a sin
that angers God. This thesis, recognized by rabbinism, is mentioned by Jewish
professor Graetz in his History of the
Jews (vol. XI, p. 368). In the eulogy to Börne and Heine he reproaches, quite
unfoundedly, the priests who baptized them for not having allegedly required them
to profess their faith sincerely. “They both,” writes Graetz, “renounced
Judaism outwardly, but only as fighters who take possession of the enemy’s
armor and banner in order to strike him more certainly and kill him more
thoroughly.” Doctor Graetz was a professor of the Rabbinic Seminary in
Having mentioned earlier
that the blood doctrine is being transmitted from one generation to another, I
find it necessary to quote, from the very sources of Jewish religious teachings,
references to the existence of secret teachings among the Jews.
The sanctity of
the Kabbalah is so high that one is forbidden, under pain of anathema, to impart
it to the uninitiated.
The Zohar (Vayikra, III, 106a) says:
“It is not
allowed to impart these words (of the Kabbalah) to anyone who is not from the
community of reapers of the field (i.e. Kabbalists), for, should it not be
acted according to this, God will damn those who will impart (these words) to
the uninitiated.”
Having said that
I have not met, in the sources of Jewish religious teachings known to me, any
direct commands of the law, which would not allow any other interpretation, to use
human (non-Jewish) blood for religious purpose, I would like to proceed now to
the second question that you, Mr. Investigator, had asked me.
The question was:
“Is it allowed, from the perspective of the Jewish religious law, to use human
(non-Jewish and, in particular, Christian) blood for religious or any other
purpose?”
I would like to
explain that this question has been a subject of heated controversy for a long
time. Some do not admit categorically a positive answer to this question, while
others, on the contrary, claim that it must be answered affirmatively.
The former say:
There are and can be no ritual murders because they are forbidden by the Law of
Moses. Neither the Talmud nor the whole rabbinic literature have even a hint
that the Jews would need Christian blood for any purpose whatsoever. The Talmud
says nothing at all about Jesus Christ or Christians. All words used in the
Talmud to designate non-Jews, such as Goi,
Akum, Abodah Zarah, Nokhri, Min, Am Haaretz, etc., do not refer to
Christians. All accusations made against the Jews are a product of the ignorant
Middle Ages. Scholars of all times have condemned the “blood libel”. There are,
also, Papal bulls which attest that the Jews do not use Christian blood.
History brings no proven case of a ritual murder. Even if there were cases of
sadism, it was the work of some fanatics, heretics. Why should the whole Jewry
be accused? Is it not true that Christianity has sadistic sects too? Is it not
true that the early Christians were accused of murdering children and consuming
their blood? Is it not true that there were many sorcerers and magicians among
Christians?
To this, their
opponents object: The Law of Moses passed away, just like the night passes away
when the day dawns. Moses was replaced by another prophet: “The Lord your God
will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren.
Him
you shall hear.” (Deuteronomy 18:15) The Old
Testament, full of mentions of the coming Messiah, ended its existence at the
moment that had been predicted by the prophets (Daniel
This fact is
clearly realized by the Talmud:
“During the last
forty years before the destruction of the Temple the lot [‘For the Lord’] did not
come up in the right hand (Leviticus 16:21); nor did the crimson-colored strap
become white; nor did the westernmost light shine; and the doors of the Temple would
open by themselves.” (Talmud, Yoma,
39b)
The synagogue became
similar to a straw from which all the wheat was threshed; to an eggshell from
which a nestling hatched; to a house that emptied after its inhabitant had
left. And when the city and the sanctuary were destroyed (Daniel
“From the day on
which the
“[...the
Judeans,] who killed both the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and have
persecuted us; and they do not please God and are contrary to all men,
forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they may be saved, so as always to
fill up the measure of their sins; but wrath has come upon them to the
uttermost,” writes Paul, a Pharisee and a fierce persecutor of the early
followers of Christ, the murderer of Saint Stephen, who knew his fellow Jews very
well. (1 Thessalonians 2:15-16)
Having remained
without the sacrificial altar and the priesthood, the Jews fell under the rule
of those who had taken the place of priests – rabbis, who were scholars and interpreters
of the books of the Old Testament. Everyone interpreted in his own way. In the
lack of an authority from above, they contradicted one another. What was
forbidden by Hillel’s school was allowed by Shammai’s school, and vice versa. From
such interpretations, the Talmud was composed, and it became the holy book of
the Jews:
“There is nothing
superior to the Holy Talmud.” (Mizbeach,
Hamelech, chapter V)
The Talmud is put
above the Holy Scripture:
“There is greater
stringency in respect to the teachings of the scribes (rabbis) than in respect
to the Torah.” (Sanhedrin, 88b)
“Even the
contradictory interpretations should be considered as the words of the living
God” (Erubin, 13b)
“My son, be more
careful in the observance of the words of the scribes (rabbis) in the Talmud
than of the words of the Bible, as there are only commands and prohibitions in
the words of Bible. Anyone who departs from the words of the rabbis deserves
death... Anyone who mocks at the words of the rabbis will be tormented in
boiling excrements.” (Erubin, 21b)
“If one has
learnt Scripture and Mishnah but did not attend upon rabbinical scholars, he is
godless.” (Sotah, 22a)
Even if today
rabbinism, for tactical reasons, denies the mandatory nature and the significance
of the Zohar with the whole Nistar (the secret teaching of the Kabbalah), in the
Zohar itself (Tikunei, 82a, 114a-b)
we read that it is a grave sin to deny the wisdom of the Kabbalah.
Mafteach, in the appendix
to volume I of the Przemysl edition of the Zohar, tells about this as follows:
“A greater sin is
committed by the one who (in reality) denies the wisdom of the Kabbalah and
says that there is only peshat
(direct interpretation); it would be better for him to not having been born.”
The high
authority of the Kabbalah also follows from the following fact: In the work Kneset ha-Gedola, in the beginning of Kelale ha-Poskim, by Radbaz, as well as
in Sefer Yuhasin and in Shaalot u-Teshubot by Mahari Halevi, it
is written that everyone must fulfill the commands of the Kabbalah which are
not found in the Talmud or in Poskim,
that is in the books of Tur, Shulchan, and others. Furthermore, if
any place in the Zohar is in contradiction with the Talmud, one must follow the
Zohar. In the Zohar (III, 244b) it says: “The rabbis of Mishnah and Gemara adjusted
their Talmud in accordance with the secrets of the Kabbalah.”
Thus, the sources
of Jewish religious teachings should be considered today the Shulchan Aruch and
the Zohar, which practically replaced the Law of Moses (the Talmud with Mishnah
and Gemara). The Shulchan Aruch is a relatively recent code of law, which has a
high authority among modern Jewry and governs the life of a Jew in all its
moments, while the Zohar is a comprehensive collection of kabbalistic texts.
In view of what
has been said above, in order to answer the proposed question one must solve the
following particular questions:
Is it allowed,
from the perspective of Jewish religious teachings, the murder of a non-Jew in
general and that of a Christian in particular by the Jews, and how does the
Jewish religious law regard such murder?
Is it allowed,
from the perspective of the same teachings, the use of human blood as food or
for any other purposes?
The solving of these
particular questions, in view of the undeniable historical facts of murders interpreted
in history as ritual, would offer a basis for making certain conclusions and
giving an answer to the general question.
Before solving
the above-mentioned problems, I must consider another particular attendant question
which allows the advocates of the unreachable height of Talmudic teaching to relate
inconvenient places from the sources of Jewish religious teachings to persons
other than Christians, to whom such places actually relate. This question always
generates a lot of controversy, even if, in my opinion, it is solved completely
clearly and simply in the same sources. I am talking about the very rich
terminology in Hebrew used to define non-Jews in general and Christians in
particular. I mean, here, terms and expressions such as Goi, Akum, Abodah Zarah, Minim, Amme Haaretz Haolam, Nokhri, Kuthi,
and many others; over 50 of such terms are found in the Talmud. This
terminology is never used in strict accordance with the etymological
interpretation of a term, so, as a result, each of these terms is used to
define a non-Jew, whether he is a Christian, a Gentile or someone else.
Goi means “a nation”,
“a people”. It is used very seldom for
In Buxtorf’s Lexicon, the term Goi is defined as follows:
“This is how the
Jews call everyone who does not belong to the nation of
Akum – The first
letters of the words Abhde Kokhabhim u’Mazzaloth
– worshippers of stars and planets. However, this term is applied to Christians
as well.
“Thus, if a gift
is sent to the Akum, even in these
times, on the eighth day after the feast of Nithal (Christmas), which they call
Naye Yar (the New Year)...” (Iore Dea,
148, 5, 12)
“Here, in our
city (
Apparently, it
was not the worshippers of stars they needed to sweep the streets in
Abodah Zarah – A foreign
cult, idolatry.
“And be it known
that these Christian people who follow Jesus, although their teachings vary,
are all Abodah Zarah – worshippers of
idols.” (Maimonides, commentary to Abodah
Zarah, 78c)
Minim – Minaeans, heretics,
and, in particular, Christians.
“Minaeans are
those who believe in two gods (like the heretics of Manicheans)... Minaeans are people who distort the word of God
into evil, like the Sadducees and Baithosees.” (rabbi Solomon, interpretation
of Rosh Hashanah, 17a)
“In our own day
there exists a sect among the Jews throughout all the synagogues of the East,
which is called the sect of the Minei [Minaeans], and is even now condemned by
the Pharisees. The adherents to this sect are known commonly as Nazarenes; they
believe in Christ the Son of God.”
The Jews have a
prayer called Birkat ha-Minim which
is directed against heretics and apostates who converted from Judaism to
Christianity or Mohammedanism. It is read daily to call down everlasting
destruction on them. The curse against the “proud state” (
Maimonides calls
this prayer (in Hilkhot Tefillah,
chapter 7) Birkat Linshumdim – prayer
against the baptized.
Kad ha-Kemah (80a) says that
it was composed in the town of Jaffa and, due to great necessity, added to the
eighteen prayers (Shemone Esre) for a
very important reason: so that the “godless” (i.e. Christian) kingdom be destroyed.
The Jerusalem
Talmud, published in Krakow in 1602, says that the prayer of Shel Minim (against the heretics) was
written much later than the eighteen prayers (Shemone Esre) in the town of Jaffa “in the time close to the
appearance of that Nazarene (Jesus) who taught that one must abandon the Law of
Living God.”
In Tsemah David (vol. 1, p. 36, b) it says:
“The Sanhedrin
was transferred from Jerusalem to Jaffa forty years before the destruction of
the Temple, in 4385, and it was there that rabbi Samuil, in the presence of
rabbi Gamaliel the Elder, wrote the prayer against the heretics, according to
the treatise Sanhedrin, chapter I.”
This circumstance clearly tells when this prayer was written, for what reasons,
and against what kind of heretics it is directed (Buxtorf’s Lexicon, the word Min).
“Rabbi Meir calls
the books of the Minaeans Aven Gilaion
(volumes of iniquity) because they call them Euangelion (Gospel).” (Shabbat, 116a)
Notzrim – Nazarenes.
A Notzri is anyone who “follows the delusion
of That Man who ordered to celebrate, instead of the Sabbath, the first day
after the Sabbath (Sunday).” (Abodah
Zarah, 6a)
Amme Haaretz Haolam – Peoples of the earth, rabble, ignorant people, idiots.
“We have
trespassed against our God, and have taken pagan wives (Nokhrioth) from the peoples of the earth (Meamme Haaretz).” (Ezra 10:2)
“Then all the
peoples of the earth (Amme Haaretz) will
see that you are called by the name of the Lord, and they will fear you.”
(Deuteronomy 28:10)
“And do not be
afraid of the people of the earth (Am
Haaretz), because we will devour them.” (Numbers 14:9)
“The people of
the earth – Abodah Zarah, idolaters.”
(Zohar, I, 25a)
Nokhrim – Strangers,
foreigners, as opposed to
Kuthim – The Samaritans.
All these terms,
despite their different etymological meaning, can be found in different sources
when the same texts are quoted by the rabbis, and thus they replace one another, *)
being used as synonyms to define the same term of a non-Jew, as opposed to a
Jew.
*) To show this, one can bring a countless number
of examples; here are just several of them:
1) in
Abodah Zarah, 25b – Goi; in Iore Dea, 153, 2 – Akum;
2) in Jebbamoth, 61a – Nokhrim; in Kerithuth, 6b
– Goim;
3) in
Orach Haim, 39, 1 – Akum; in Gittin, 45b – Nokhri;
4) in
Choshen ha-Mishpat, 266, 1 – Akum; in Baba Metzia, 31a – Nokhri;
5) in Orach Haim, 20, 2 – Akum; in the commentary of Ateret
Cohanim – Goi; in Yad haHazaka, Hilchot Tzitzit, 2, 7 (by Maimonides) – Kuthi.
As I now proceed
to the question of whether it is allowed, from the perspective of Jewish
religious teachings, the murder of a non-Jew in general and of a Christian in
particular, I must point out that no matter what contradictions appeared
between different rabbinic schools, they were nevertheless united in their hatred
against non-Jews, whom they call by the general term of “peoples of the earth”
– Amme Haaretz (Numbers 14:9, Deuteronomy
28:10).
Non-Jews are not
even considered human beings:
“You are my
flock, the flock of my pasture are men... You are thus called men, but the Goim are not called men.” (Kerithuth, 6b,
commentary to Ezekiel 24:31)
“God created them
in the form of men for the glory of
But most of all
the hatred of the Jews is directed against the followers of the one who “was
the cause of the destruction of
In
How much hatred,
malice and blasphemous attitude to Jesus Christ and the Holy Virgin Mary can be
found in numerous Jewish religious books!
[Insert from the 1913 book: Jesus is
called by them Yeshu, which is
composed of the first letters of Yimakh
Shemo Uzikro, i.e. “May his name and memory be obliterated”. The
name of our Savior in Hebrew is Joshua, which means “salvation”. As a mockery
of Christ’s name, the Jews call him Elloyoshia,
i.e. “god that cannot save”.
In the prayer read by
the Jews when they leave the synagogue, in which they thank God for creating
them different than the other nations, they add the words “who prostrate
themselves in front of the vanity and emptiness, venerate it, and invoke the god
that cannot save”.
We find the same in the
works of Rasha who interprets the words from Psalms 18:41 – “Yeshavveu veen Moshiach”, i.e. “They
cried for help, but there was no one to save them” – as “Such is the foreign god.”
Regarding this, Buxtorf
remarks: These wailings are apparently being put into the mouth of Christians
and the Abodah Zarah; it is Jesus who
is meant by the term of “foreign god”. Therefore, it is at his name that the
Jews mock by resorting to the casuistry: Yeshavveu
veen Moshiach.
Furthermore, the epithet
Notzri (the Nazarene) is applied to
Jesus Christ. This epithet means the same as Ben Nezar, which, however, was also
the name of a famous robber mentioned in the Talmud, in the treatise Ketubot (51, 2). Rabbi Isaac Abarbanel
(1437-1508), as he explains the words of prophet Daniel, “I was considering the
horns, and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them” (Daniel
7:8), writes: “Note that the rabbis derive this little horn from Ben Nezar,
i.e. Jesus the Nazarene, and associate it with the impious kingdom, i.e. the
kingdom of Edom, for this kingdom belongs to His people.” (Mayanei HaYeshua, 66b)
The Pure Virgin
Mary is called by the Jews not Maria,
but Charia, which means manure,
feces.
Saints (kedoshim in Hebrew) are called by the
Jews kedeshim, i.e. cinaedos –
sodomites. Women saints are called kedeshot
– whores.
The Sunday is
called yom ed – the day of calamity. The
feast of Christmas is Nital, i.e. downfall.
Easter is called not Pesach, but Ketzach (destruction) or Kesach (gallows). A Christian church is
called not beth hatefillah (house of
prayer), but beth hattiflah (house of
stupidity or vanity) or beth hatturah
(house of shame). A Christian sermon is called defecation. In the Jerusalem
Talmud we read: “If you find them during defecation (mozobelim instead of mezabechim
– sacrifice), you must exclaim: ‘Whoever sacrifices to any god other than the
Lord must be destroyed!’ (Exodus
The current
situation of the Jews after the destruction of the
“Make no covenant with them [the Akum]... Either turn them away from
their idols or kill them.” (Maimonides, Hilchot
Akum, X, 1)
“When the Jews have more power, it
is a sin to leave among us a Goi who
worships stars and planets. Even if fate brought him to us by accident or he
came to us as a wandering merchant, we must not allow him to pass through our
country.” (Maimonides, Hilchot Akum,
X, 1-7)
All Old Testament
instructions regarding the fight against the Amalekites, Edomites and other
neighboring Gentile peoples are also applied to the idolaters of the most
recent times.
“The people of
the earth are idolaters, and it has been written about them: Let them be wiped
off the face of the earth. Destroy the memory of the Amalekites. They are with
us still in this Fourth Captivity, namely, the Princes [of
The fact that the
Jews use the term of idolaters for Christians is absolutely clear from a whole
number of texts:
1) In the
Talmud (Abodah Zarah, 7b), the Christian
Sunday is called a “feast of idolaters”.
2) Maimonides
(in Abodah Zarah, I, 3) writes: “Be
it known that the Nazarenes, the followers of the delusion of Jesus, although
their teachings vary, are all idolaters, and you should treat them like
idolaters... This is how the Talmud teaches.”
3) Rabbi
Asher in Halachot (Abodah Zarah, 83b) says directly: “The
cross is idolatry.”
4) “Everything
the prophets said about the destruction of the
To throw off the
Edomite yoke, liberate themselves from the Fourth Captivity, subjugate all the nations
to their rule, destroy the
“Rabbi Jehuda said
to Rabbi Chezkia:
‘He is to be
praised who is able to free himself from [the enemies of
Rabbi Chezkia
asked:
‘How must we
fight against them?’
Rabbi Jehuda
said:
‘By wise counsel
thou shalt war against them.’
By what kind of
war? The kind of war that every son of man (i.e.
To reach this
goal, a Jew is allowed to use any means: lies, deceit, trickery, perjury, and
finally, merciless slaughter.
“Where a suit
arises between an Israelite and a Goy,
if you can justify the former according to the laws of Israel, justify him and
say: ‘This is our law’; so also if
you can justify him by the laws of the Goim,
justify him and say [to him]: ‘This is your
law’; but if this cannot be done, we use subterfuges to circumvent him. This is
the view of R. Ishmael, but R. Akiba said that one should not lie so as not to
profane the Name of God if a Jew is caught lying; but the Name of God is not
profaned if the Goy does not notice that
you are a liar... The Name of God is not profaned if, for example, a Jew lies
to the heir of a Goy: I gave a thing
to your father, but he is dead; now you return it to me – as long as the Goy does not know that the Jew is lying.”
(Baba
“A Jew is selling
to an Akum; his [the Jew’s] companion
appears and gives short measure or short weight or short change to the Akum; he must share this profit with his
companion, whether he helped his companion for money or for free.” (Choshen ha-Mishpat,
183, 7, Hagah)
“If a Jew is able
to deceive them [idolaters] by pretending he is a worshipper of the stars, he
may do so.” (Iore Dea, 157, 2)
A Jew can perjure
with a clear conscience:
“She (the mother
of the Mamzer) said to him, ‘Swear to
me.’ And Rabbi Akiba swore with his lips, but in his heart he invalidated his
oath.” (Kallah, 1b)
One should not
save a Christian from an inevitable death, and one must remove everything which
could save him.
“Having noticed
that a heretic who denies the Torah fell into a deep pit, with a ladder in it,
take the ladder quickly away saying, ‘I need it to take my son off the roof; I
will bring it right back,’ or something of that kind. However, do not kill the Kuthim who are not our enemies, but
do not save them from an inevitable death either.” (Choshen ha-Mishpat, 425, 5)
“Do not kill the Akum who are not our enemies, but do not
save them from an inevitable death either. For example, if you see one of them
fall into the sea, do not pull him out even if he promises you a lot of money.”
(Iore Dea, 158, 1)
“Do not have pity for them, for it
is said: Show no mercy unto them. Therefore, if you see an Akum in difficulty or drowning, do not go to his help. And if he is
in danger of death, do not save him from death. But it is not right to kill him
by your own hand by shoving him into a well or in some other way, since they
are not at war with us.” (Maimonides, Hilchot
Akum,
X, 1)
Finally, the
Talmud encourages and commands to kill non-Jews in general and Christians in
particular.
“They (the Goim) have been a stumbling block for
them (the Israelites), therefore rabbi Shimon said: Kill the best of the Goim, crush the brain of the best of the
snakes.” (Mekhilta, IIa, chapter Beshalach)
We read the same
in Jalkut Rubeni (93a), which
corresponds to the chapter Beshalach:
“In the Talmudic
treatise Soferim it says: Kill the
fairest of the godless people (in the original – the Akum).”
The same is said
in the treatise Abodah Zarah (26b, in
the first lines of Tosafot).
Eisenmenger says
that in his copy of the Talmud, published in Amsterdam, these words have been
omitted in chapter 15 of the above-mentioned treatise Soferim, because the Jews had been afraid to include them, and
makes the conclusion: “Since they are commanded to kill the best of the Goim or the Gentiles and godless people,
it means that they are allowed to kill any Christian without distinction.” (Eisenmenger,
Entdecktes Judenthum, 1700, part II,
chapter III, p. 215)
The Jews and
their advocates deny that the Jewish religious law allows murder, by quoting
the commandment “You shall not kill” (Exodus
Such
interpretation can be seen from the commentary of rabbi Levi ben Gershon to the
Pentateuch (77d, chapter Vayishma Yithro),
where Gershon teaches as follows:
“The words ‘You
shall not kill’ mean that you should not take the life of an Israelite, because they [the Israelites]
are allowed to kill animals, as it clearly follows from many places of the law.
Thus, they are commanded to kill certain nations, such as the Amalekites and
others, leaving no one alive. It follows from here that this commandment only
refers to the Israelites.”
Rabbi Moses ben Maimon is in
agreement with that; in his book Yad
haHazaka (part 4, sheet 47, chapter I, no. 1, section Hilchot Rotzeach), he writes:
“Anyone who kills an Israelite violates the prohibitive
commandment, for it was written: You shall not kill.”
Since this
commandment only forbids to kill Jews, and the other nations are excluded, it
is obvious that the killing of Christians is allowed.
Furthermore, the
Jews and their advocates object by saying that the words “Kill the best of the Goim” should be understood in the sense
that one should kill the best of the Goim
in wartime, and it does not mean that the Goim
could be killed in peacetime. To this, Eisenmenger objects, absolutely
correctly (Eisenmenger, Ibid., p.
215):
“To this, I say
that sometimes these words are indeed given such interpretation in rabbinic
books. *) However, since the words ‘in wartime’ are not found (yet) in the
old book of Mekhilta or in the treatise Soferim, one must conclude that these
words were only included in other books later, by other persons, so that Christians
and people of other nations who read or hear about such godless teaching would
not reproach the Jews with it, and also so that the command to kill the best of
the Goim would not stir an excessive
zeal of those Jews who have a particular weakness for Christian blood, and the
killing of several or many Christians would not lead to the murder of all the
Jews, who had already been repeatedly subjected to harsh persecutions and the
expulsion from many countries for murders and other crimes...”
*) Thus, in Sefer
Toledot Adam ve-Hava, 160b, Part 6, it says: “In another place, we say:
Kill the best of the Goim, and the
Jerusalem Talmud, in the treatise Kiddushin,
explains that it should be understood as referring to war, while in peacetime
they [the Goim] are taken out of a
pit, but are not thrown there, even if they are idolaters and transgress the
seven commandments (of Noah).” Such interpretation is also found in the book Be’er Hagolah, 44c, or in the Tosafot to the Talmudic treatise Abodah Zarah, 26b. (Quoted from Eisenmenger,
Ibid.)
If we were to
admit that, indeed, the command was only to kill the best of the Goim in wartime, but not in peacetime as
well, then why does the above-mentioned book Mekhilta say that rabbi Shimon uttered his words, “Kill the best of
the Goim”, because the Egyptians were
a stumbling block for the Israelites when the latter lived in Egypt? War is not
mentioned here at all, and there is no reasonable way to impose such
interpretation. Furthermore, had the case been about the murder in wartime, the
Jews would have not been afraid to announce publicly about such meaning of
these words, because one is allowed to kill enemies during a war. However, the
attempts of the Jews to hide or conceal such sense (by reinterpretation or
omissions) is a clear and indisputable proof of the fact that there is
something wrong here.”
Here, it could be
added that even if one were to admit that the Jews and their advocates are
right in interpreting the words “Kill the best of the Goim” by adding “in wartime”, then, in view of the above quote from
the Zohar (I, 25a) about the “Fourth Captivity” – a time of permanent war to
death, their argument has no sense whatsoever for the time of the “Fourth
Captivity”.
The above quote,
“Kill the best of the Goim”, can be found
in many sources, sometimes in a slightly different form.
For example,
Rabbi Salomon Iarchi says, in chapter 14 of Exodus,
the
Edzar tells that
he saw an edition where it was said directly: “Kill the best of Christians (Notzrim).”
Rabbi Yochanan
said: “A Goi who studies the Law
deserves death.” (Sanhedrin, 59a)
The same is
written in Mattekh Aaron, 60a.
An objection to
this quite clear text is made by quoting another text from Sanhedrin: “A Goi who
studies the Law is equal to a chief priest.” This text is also given in Abodah Zarah (3a), but the same source,
in Tosafot, explains it as follows:
“The words that a Goi who studies the
Law is equal to a chief priest should be understood as referring to their seven
commandments (of Noah), because, if we were to mean here the other commandments
(from the Law of Moses), it would be wrong, for we said in the Talmudic
treatise Sanhedrin, in chapter seven
entitled Arba Mifot, that a Gentile
(in the Hebrew text – Goi) who
studies the Law (of Moses) deserves death.”
Rabbi Moses ben
Maimon (Rambam) speaks very clearly on this subject in Yad haHazaka (part 4, chapter 10, treatise Hilchot Melachim, no. 9):
“A Goi who studies the Law deserves death.
He must only study his seven commandments.”
From this, it can
be clearly seen that a non-Jew who studies the Law of Moses (which quite a few
Christians do) deserves death, and, consequently, a Jew may kill him.
In the Talmud, in
the treatise Pesachim (49b), it says:
“Rabbi Eliezer
said: It is permitted to pierce a non-Jew even on the feast of the Atonement
when it falls on the Sabbath. Then, his disciples said to him: Rabbi, you
should rather say to sacrifice (instead of “pierce”). He replied to them: No,
for it is necessary to say a berakh
(a prayer, a doxology) while sacrificing, but there is no need of a berakh when you pierce someone.”
Some object to
this completely clear text by saying that it speaks about a figurative death by
impoverishment, about the confiscation of property. This objection has not a
leg to stand on because the rabbinic criminal law does not list figurative
death as a punishment, and also because the words of rabbi Eliezer about a
sacrifice with a berakh and a piercing
without a berakh would have no sense if
property were to be confiscated as a punishment by figurative death. These
words undoubtedly indicate that this text means an actual killing.
The sources of
Jewish religious teachings do not confine themselves to the permission to kill
non-Jews in general and Christians in particular, but go even further – they
recommend, encourage, praise and command to kill. The slaughter of non-Jews,
and, consequently, that of Christians, is a sacrifice pleasing to God. The idea
that the murder of a non-Jew is a sacrificial act can be found in many places.
“Take the life of
the Klipoth *) and kill them,
and thus you will please Shekinah (the goddess of the heaven) the same as one
who offers incense to Her.” (Sefer Or
*) Klipoth
– shell, husk. One of the names used for non-Jews, in contrast to grain, i.e.
the Jews.
In the same work
(p. 180) it says: “A Jew must remove thorns from his vineyard, that is root out
the Klipoth, as there can be nothing
more pleasing to God than the eradication of the impious and the Klipoth by us.”
“[Anyone who]
sheds the blood of the impious is just as pleasing to God as the one who offers
a sacrifice to Him.” (Yalkut Shimoni,
245, p. 772; Bamidbar Rabbah, 229c)
Here, the word
“impious” undoubtedly refers to Christians, because Christians are considered
by the Jews to be impious godless people, a godless nation, while Christianity
is called by them a “kingdom of the godless”, a “godless kingdom”, “the godless
kingdom of Esau” or “the godless Roman Kingdom”, as it was proven beyond doubt
by Eisenmenger in his above-quoted work (part I, chapters 16 and 17).
After the
“The only
sacrifice required is that we remove the unclean from amongst us.” (Zohar, III,
227b)
“The goat that
was sent to Azazel on the Day of Atonement is a proof that we must be the death
of the Klipoth.” (Mikdash Melech to p. 32a of the Zohar)
“Every Jew must
free the holy people, which in the fifth millennium (Anno Mundi) fell under the
rule of shells (Klipoth) and the
godless Akum, may their name be
erased... And if one asks how I could help him, He (God) says: You must erase
the memory of Amalek, for the goddess of the heaven (Matrunita) will not be pleased
until you revenge yourself upon Amalek by exterminating the Goim and their children.” It was said by
“holy” rabbi Israel Yaffe in Sefer Or
Israel, 38b.
The murderers of
non-Jews, and, consequently, those of Christians, are granted the highest place
in the heaven.
“In the palaces
of the fourth heaven are those who lamented over
An objection to
this quote is that it does not speak about those who killed idolaters, but
rather about the killed Jews who are splashed over with blood as if it were
purple. However, in the
Having attached to
the extermination of non-Jews, including Christians, the characteristics of a
religious feat prescribed by the law, and those of a sacrificial act which
replaced the sacrifice in the Temple for the period of non-existence of the
Temple and the Altar, Jewish religious teachings, in conformity with this, combine
and associate the notion of a sacrificial goat with that of the nation of the Edomites,
the Christian nation. The basis for such association is found by the
interpreters in the word “sair”,
which means not only “goat”, but also “hairy” – the name which was used for
Esau, the progenitor of the Edomites (Ish
Sair). Eisenmenger explains this issue in his above-mentioned work (part
II, chapter II, pp. 158-159) as follows: The scapegoat, on whom all the sins of
the Jews were placed and who was then driven into the desert as a gift to the
devil, designates, according to rabbinic teachings, Esau and his descendants,
who are Christians today. This is why not only Esau, but also Christianity is
called “Sair” – hairy or shaggy, or
the goat-like demon of the desert.
The fact that the
goat which was driven into the desert and given to the devil means Esau can be
seen from Yalkut Hadash, 102c, under
the title Yamim Noraim. In chapter
103 of the book Magalekh Amikot it
says: “Jacob told to Esau (Genesis 33:14) to go to Seir (a woody area, the name
of the country of the Edomites) (Genesis 32:3): and Jacob sent messengers ahead
of him to his brother Esau in the land of Seir, the country of Edom, because he
(Esau) was the goat which was driven away (into the desert) on the Day of
Atonement as a gift for Azazel.”
Another place
says in a similar way: “In that moment, the Holy and Blessed One removes all
the sins of the Israelites and places them upon the impious Esau, as it was
said (Leviticus 16:22): And the goat (Sair) shall bear upon him all their
iniquities. Not the goat, but the impious Esau, as it was said (Genesis 27:11):
Behold, Esau my brother is a hairy man (Ish
Sair).” (Yalkut Shimoni,
interpretation of Isaiah, p. 58, column 1, no. 366)
What kind of
meaning lies in the above-mentioned notion of “goat” can be seen from the
following quote: “Had the nations understood the real meaning of this goat,
they – may God prevent it – would not have left an Israelite alive not even for
a day.” (Yalkut Hadash, p. 101,
column 3, no. 21)
“The Lord your
God will put all these curses on your enemies who hate and persecute you. (Deuteronomy
30:7) – This sentence will be fulfilled against the nation which descends from
Esau.” (Emek Hamelech, p. 146, column 4)
“Deliverers will
go up on
So far, I have
pointed out places from Jewish religious teachings which prove that the murder
of non-Jews in general and of Christians in particular by the Jews is allowed, for
the reasons of the hate that runs all through the teachings of Talmudic
rabbinism in a sharp and clear form. However, it would not be enough to limit
ourselves to this explanation alone. The sources of Jewish religious teachings
have enough places which offer another reason for the extermination of non-Jews
by murder, a mystical reason.
The whole
mystical teaching of Judaism is concentrated around the expected coming of the Messiah.
On the ground of the messianic idea, Jewish mysticism created the teaching that
God, having created the world, dropped particles of his divine holiness into
living creatures in the form of sparks, and, when the light and dark sides were
created, a part of these divine sparks fell on the dark side (the dark side consists
of non-Jews, the Klipoth, i.e. husk
or shell, which retains these sparks). Overall, 288 divine sparks fell on the dark
side (Hayim Vital, Peri Etz Hayim,
33b). The liberation of such sparks from the klipoth (the dark side) and their return upward, to their original
source, accelerates the arrival of the Messiah. Thus, such moment depends upon
the liberation of all these 288 divine sparks from the klipoth (shells, husks, the dark side of the creation). From here
it follows the thesis that a Jew who waits for the Messiah with all his heart must
strive for the liberation of such sparks by killing the Klipoth, just as Moses killed the Egyptian.
[Insert from the 1913 book: In order to
explain and confirm the above theory, I would like to quote from the works of
Hayim Vital (1543-1620), a great authority among the Jews. In the work Shaar Hakdamot (shaar 6, derush 2, sheet
33b) he writes: “The mystery of the said thing is that in order to combine
(mate, copulate, unite) the Little Face and His Wife, we raise the female
waters in two ways: firstly, by prayer as we bow to the ground (with prostration
or a long low bow), for through it (the prayer) they (those who pray) raise the
divine sparkles, which are found in shells (husks, crusts, klipoth) everywhere, up to the mountain; and secondly, by killing
the shells (klipoth) and removing
them from this world, for in this case they (the klipoth) raise with them the divine sparks situated in the shells,
through the mystery of the female waters, up to the Wife of the Little Face,
and by way of this the Little Face unites with his Wife and puts the sparks in
order. (Things happen) similarly with the Little Face and his Wife, for, as
they are raised to the Father and Mother (i.e. the Higher Sephiroths – the
Wreath and the Queen) during their coupling, they take the splinters (sparks)
of the Father and Mother with them and raise them up to the Mother, bring them through
the mystery of the female waters to Her (the Mother), and put the sparks, which
are raised up each time by small splinters, in order. And this thing continues
until all the sparks are removed from the shell, become separated (released
from the shells – klipoth) and are put
in order. And then the Messiah will come, as is known.”
From the above
text it can be seen that by killing the shells (klipoth), which causes the rising of the sparks, the coupling of
the
The same “genius”
Hayim Vital in his work Sefer ha-Likutim
(13b) explains: “Cain’s soul, which had originated from the filth of the Serpent
(it is assumed that Cain was an offspring of Eve and the Serpent who seduced
her), passed into the Egyptian, who was an Akum...
Therefore, Moses, into whom, as we know, Abel’s soul had passed, had to save
the good soul of his brother Cain, which had mixed with the evil soul of the
Egyptian, so he killed him (the Egyptian) not with a sword, but by the Name of
God.” – End of the insert.]
The fact that the
murder of a non-Jew, and, consequently, that of a Christian, is given the significance
of a sacrificial act, that is a ritual significance, can be seen from many
places of the Zohar.
Thus, in part two
of the Zohar (40b, to Exodus 12:3) it says:
“Each of them
must take a lamb for their families, one lamb for each family. We have the
teaching that three are united (equal) between them: the firstborn of an
animal, the firstborn of a female prisoner, and the firstborn of a maidservant *),
for all the rest (the salvation of
*) The Przemysl edition of the Zohar mentions here
the firstborn of a maidservant, while the
**) That is one which is called a lamb
figuratively, allegorically.
***) One, the symbol of the unity of God, is Ehad in Hebrew. The numeric expression
of the word Ehad is thirteen. Compare
it with the text below.
From the Zohar
(part II, 119a) it can be seen that the sacrifice must be performed in a
certain kabbalistic way:
“And their (Am Haaretz’s – non-Jews’) death must be
with a shut mouth, like that of an animal which dies with no voice or speech.
While praying, he (the slaughterer) must say: I have no mouth to speak, and no
brow to raise my head. And he says a prayer of thanksgiving and vows to the
Holy One, may his name be blessed, that every day he (Am Haaretz) must be killed in Ehad in the same way as cattle are
killed – with twelve tests of the knife and with the knife, which amounts to
thirteen.” *)
*) Every pious Jew, before he dies and passes
into eternity, must say a short last prayer, whose all power and main
significance lies in its last word, Ehad,
which means “one”. It shows that God is one, i.e. the unity of God is
professed. See the expert opinion of professor Troitsky in the next chapter.
As I quote this
text, I find it necessary to draw attention to the comparison of this text with
the results of the forensic medical report and the autopsy report for Andrei
Yushchinsky, namely: during Yushchinsky’s murder, his mouth was shut (traces of
the injury to the mucous membrane of the mouth made by the teeth) and a group of
stab wounds,
Those who deny
Jewish ritual murders mention, among their arguments, the circumstance that after
the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in
“Rabbi Joshua said:
I heard that sacrifices are being made, even if there is no
“Rabbi Joshua
said: I heard that sacrifices are being slaughtered, even if there was no
libation... for the first consecration sanctified both that time and the
future.” (Tosefta, 3h)
This text says
that sacrifices are being made or
slaughtered, i.e. Rabbi Joshua, who lived in the 2nd century A.D., mentioned,
as a rumor, that sacrifices were being made during his time, that is after the
destruction of the
As I now proceed
to the question of how Jewish religious teachings regard human blood, I find it
necessary to mention that the use of blood by the Jews for ritual purpose does
not imply that it must be obligatorily consumed as food – the assumption on
which the objections of those who deny ritual murders are based. Ancient
sacrifices in the
Nevertheless, the
sources of Jewish religious teachings attach great importance to blood. For
example:
“For the life of
the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an
atonement for your souls.” (Leviticus 17:11)
The Mishnah
(treatise Zevachim, chapter VIII, paragraph 7;
8, 16) explains: “What is the blood of the soul? The blood which flows out. And
what is a squeezed blood? The one which does not flow out... If it (the blood
of the soul) got mixed with the squeezed blood, he is told not to sprinkle. And
if he sprinkled, the mixture is considered a mixture of wine and water: if its form
changed – pasul, and if it did not – kosher.”
In the same source
(chapter I, 2a, 1-6), Rabbi Joshua says:
“All sacrifices
slaughtered not in their own name are valid [kosher], save that they do not free their owners of their
obligation, with the exception of the Passover-offering and the sin-offering [hattat]. [This holds good of] a Passover-offering
in its proper time; and a sin-offering at all times.”
In the treatise Kerithuth, chapter V, it says:
“A person that ate
an olive’s bulk of blood of cattle or clean animals or birds must make a
sin-offering (hattat). One is only
liable for blood from shechita (blood
that is obtained during a slaughtering done according to a Jewish rite). For
blood from piercing, tearing or bloodletting, even if the soul goes out with
it, there is no liability... The blood of two-legged creatures (i.e. people)
and the blood of eggs and reptiles is forbidden, but there is no liability for
it.”
In the treatise Chullin (chapter VI, paragraph 2;
6, 4) it says: “If a person slaughtered (an animal) for a medicine, to give it
to a gentile (for food), or to feed dogs, he must cover the blood. If a person
pierced or torn, or if the shechita
(slaughtering) was done by a gentile, the covering is not necessary.” Furthermore,
in Tosefta (6, 1) it says: “If a
person slaughters because he needs blood, he must not slaughter by way of shechita, but what should he do? He either
pricks or pinches.”
The virgin blood
of the Klipoth (dam betulim) is considered a highly valuable sacrifice.
[Insert from the 1913 book: “Also, for
the mentioned fourth way of a man with a virgin (Proverbs 30:19), I found an
explanation in the words of the teacher (Isaac Luria), may his memory be
blessed, and I will shortly describe it here. The fact is that we do not realize
how precious a virgin’s blood is in the celestial world. For by everything
which is to be damned below (on the earth) contempt is caused above (to the
celestial beings); but then, even if she is untouched, even if she is a virgin
who did not know a man, she still comes from the shells (klipoth) – may God save us from them! And not only this, but also
the coupling (between the King and Shekinah) is only done by lessening
strictness and by strengthening clemency. And by what means? By bringing there
red blood, which administers justice by itself, even if it is clean (has the
power to cleanse and redeem). And this is a very important matter, and thus I
explain the (fourth) way.” (Hayim Vital, Sefer ha-Likutim, 156a.)
A controversy is
stirred up by Delitzsch and others with respect to this text. However, if this
is not sacrificial blood (dam betulim),
but rather virgin one, then we can only assume that Hayim Vital, a man of
unquestionable authority in Israel, either advocates the marriage between a
Jewish man and a non-Jewish woman, which is strictly prohibited by the Judaic
law, or recommends a Jewish man to deflower a non-Jewish (and, consequently, a
Christian) woman, which, from the perspective of Jewish religious teachings, is
equivalent to bestiality (zoophilia). – End
of the insert.]
Those who deny
Jewish ritual murders claim that the consumption of blood as food is
undoubtedly prohibited by the Jewish religious law, so the addition of blood to
matzo and any other similar use of blood contradicts the law. This claim is not
quite true, because a text in the Talmud does allow to consume blood as food.
In the treatise Machshirin (chapter 6, paragraph 4) it
says: “There are seven liquids that do not cause susceptibility to uncleanness
and may be eaten: dew, water, wine, oil, blood,
milk and honey.”
Thus, blood is
listed among such drinks as milk, water, wine, etc.
The same source also
speaks about the drinking of blood from bloodletting, i.e. blood obtained by
piercing a blood vessel. Some translations of this fragment add the words “to a
sick person”, which, however, do not appear in the original text.
Maimonides in his
explanations to this text says: “The author means here that blood from
bloodletting (dam hakkiza) is to be
given to animals and people to drink, because they usually drink it.” Maimonides
also says: “Blood from bloodletting used for treatment is considered clean.”
Thus, the healing
properties of blood are recognized by such authority as Maimonides, and the
consumption of blood for medical purpose is allowed by the Jewish religious
law.
The reference to
Mayer – that in this scholar’s opinion it is allowed to consume boiled blood –
only confirms the claims of those who expose the Jews and say that blood is
added to a special kind of the Passover bread (matzo) called afikoman, which is eaten at the end of
the Passover Seder, because the blood in matzo would be in a boiled state,
which the Jews are allowed to eat, according to Mayer. Similarly, the blood in
the ashes of a rag soaked in blood and then burned would be in the same state, according
to those who expose the Jews.
As to the
question of why the Jews need blood of non-Jews and, in particularly, that of
Christians, those who expose this secret of Jewish religious teachings mention a
whole number of purposes. Namely, the Jews need blood as a constant sacrifice
of hate towards their biggest enemies, Christians (like the vendetta in Italy,
or the blood feud in the East); they need it because even the rabbis doubt
whether Jesus Christ was not the true Messiah and believe that if he was, they
would be saved through the blood of his followers; and finally, they believe
that blood has magical properties.
The scholars who
deny Jewish ritual murders say that the accusations of such murders are a result
of the medieval ignorance, and point to witch trials and medieval sorcerers and
exorcists among Christians. However, they do not mention that all those
“sorceries”, the result of the medieval ignorance, were of Jewish origin, and
that all magic formulas were based on the Hebrew alphabet. The Talmud
(completed in the 6th century A.D.) contains a lot of “magical” advices and
instructions:
“If a person wants
to see the devil, he must take the uterus of a black cat which gave birth for
the first time and is the daughter of a black cat which gave birth for the first
time; burn it in fire, grind it up, fill his eyes with the ashes, and then he
will see them (the demons).” (Berakhot,
6b)
“When a ship is
about to sink, white sparkles appear above it. If one hits them with a stick on
which the words ‘Ehye Asher Ehye Yah Hashem Tsebaoth Amen, Amen, Selah’ are inscribed,
the waves will calm down.” (Baba Batra,
73a)
“Johani, the
daughter of Retibi, was a widow and a witch. When it came time for a woman to
give birth, she would close her womb with witchcraft. When the woman would be
in great pain, Johani would say to her: ‘I’ll ask mercy for you, perhaps my
prayer will be answered.’ Then she would go and nullify the witchcraft and the
baby would come out. One time, she had a workman in the house. She went to the
house of a woman in labor and the workman heard the sound of the witchcraft
banging inside a vessel as a fetus bangs in the womb of the mother. He came and
opened the stopper of the vessel, the spell departed, the baby was born, and
everyone found out that Johani was a witch.” (Sotah, chapter III; Wagenseil, p. 529)
Wagenseil makes a
commentary to this text:
“In the past,
witchcraft was often practiced by the Jews; it was done by very respectable
rabbis, as proved by Gerson in chapter 17 of his work on the Talmud. But even
today there are Jewish wizards, as proved by Friderick Francisc von Oettingen,
a baptized Jew, in his book Schlangebalg
which was directed against his fellow Jews. Although Sabbatai Zevi, as he was answering
to these accusations, tried to whitewash his people, he would often confirm, rather
than refute, what his opponent wrote, for everybody knows that the part of the
Kabbalah called Kabbalah Maasit (Practical
Kabbalah) is a real witchcraft.” (Wagenseil, Sotah, p. 592)
In connection
with the above quotes from the sources of Jewish religious teachings and the thoughts
about their sense and meaning, I find it necessary to mention several
historically recorded cases of the slaughter and murder of Christians and
Christian children by the Jews. History knows a lot of them, but I believe that
not all of such cases were recorded by history. I will only restrict myself to
several of them.
Socrates
Scholasticus in his Historia
Ecclesiastica (book VII, chapter 13) says that, in 418, the Jews slaughtered
Christians in
Cluverius writes
that, in 614, the Jews bought out 90,000 prisoners of war, mainly Christians,
from Persian king Khosrau II and killed them in a very cruel manner.
Dio Cassius in Roman History (book 68) writes that the
Jews in Cyrene attacked the Romans and Greeks, slaughtered them brutally, ate
their flesh, made belts for themselves of their entrails, anointed themselves
with their blood and worn their skins for clothing.
In more recent
times, since the 12th century, history has known very many cases of murders of
Christians by the Jews for ritual purpose, accompanied by the crucifixion, exsanguination
and circumcision of the victims. Such cases were recorded by very reliable historians
(Baronius, the Bollandists, or Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century).
Some of the
victims of ritual murders, such as Simon of Trent, were canonized by the
Catholic Church, which is very careful and slow in this regard. The records of
the
In 1485, the Jews
assassinated Great Inquisitor Pedro de Arbués for ritual purpose. He was
only canonized in 1865.
The altar in the
Sandomierz pulpit has an icon showing the murder of a Christian boy by the
Jews. It also has (or, at least, had until recently) a special bench for Jewish
delegates who had to attend the sermons due to the fact that the Jews had committed
this murder.
In a sacristy in
Leczyca,
*) A similar painting can be found in the Roman
Catholic church in
History also knows
a lot of cases of such murders which were followed by the trial and punishment
of the murderers.
In 1182, for the
murder of a 12-year-old boy in Pontoise, the Jews were expelled from
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
In
The above cases,
recorded in history by the contemporaries and documented by court sentences, are
complete enough to consider that ritual murders are not fabrications, but
actual and properly confirmed events.
I consider it
appropriate to talk about the Papal bulls that allegedly defend the Jews
against the accusations of ritual murders. The collections of such bulls are
distributed lately each time a ritual murder trial occurs (the 1853
The same Pope
Innocent IV whose four alleged bulls were produced in the
Those who defend
the Jews against the “blood libel” object to such evidence as court sentences
by claiming that those sentences prove nothing because they were passed in trials
where torture had been used. They forget that history knows a whole number of
court sentences (all the guilty verdicts in such cases in the 19th century) passed
in trials where no torture was used and where the murderers were persistently
condemned by the jury even after the annulment of such verdicts; furthermore,
during the trials on such cases, details that were typical for such trials and
had been established at the trials of the previous centuries were reproduced
with an almost photographic accuracy.
If we were to believe
those who deny the existence of Jewish ritual murders, we would have to assume
the bad faith of all judges who have presided over such trials in the course of
many centuries and up until the present day, and passed guilty verdicts for the
accused; we would have to assume the complete groundlessness of such verdicts,
despite the fact that in some cases, as it can be seen from the above
historical references, the Jews were caught in the act, that is we would have
to deny the obviousness. We would have to disbelieve a whole number of
testimonies of historians of all European nations, among which the Jews lived;
to dismiss, for no reason, the disclosures made by Jewish converts to
Christianity; and, finally, to reject the facts of discovery of exsanguinated
bodies, prickled all over and having the signs of the circumcision. We would
have to admit that all cases of ritual murders recorded by history have been a
provocation carried out systematically in the course of many centuries; that chroniclers of all countries
lied, as if they were in collusion, when they wrote about the completely
similar circumstances of murders and repeated one another in the slightest
details; and that all testimonies of eyewitnesses, including the illiterate
ones, were fabricated by them with an extraordinary knowledge of the details of
the murders.
From the above
quotes from the sources of Jewish religious teachings I deduce the following theses
based on these quotes:
1) The
Jewish religious law does not forbid to kill Christians; moreover, it allows,
encourages and commands such murders; thus, from the perspective of this law,
there are no impediments for the murders of Christians by the Jews.
2) The
Jewish religious law attaches huge significance – symbolical, magical and
medical – to blood in general and human blood in particular.
3) The said
law even allows to consume such blood as food.
4) The above
quotes have direct references to the possibility of the replacement of bloody
sacrifices that existed before the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in
On the basis of
these theses and taking into consideration the proved facts of ritual murders
of Christians by the Jews, I come to the following conclusion:
1) Ritual
murders of Christians by the Jews are a reality rather than a fabrication.
2) Such
ritual murders are the result of sadism, i.e. extreme and monstrous limits of
conclusions made from the whole Jewish religious teachings and its various
interpretations.
3) Until
proven otherwise, the murder of Andrei Yushchinsky in Kiev, taking into
consideration its nature and environment, the apparent lack of reasons, the way
the injuries were inflicted, the crime instrument, the nature and great number
of injuries whose purpose was to torture and torment, the location of these
injuries on the victim’s body, the exsanguination of the victim, the lack of
almost all the blood that flew out of the body both on the clothes and at the
place of discovery of Yushchinsky’s body, and the time of the murder (before
the Passover), has all the distinctive and characteristic features of a typical
ritual murder.
* * *
From the works written about the
Jewish blood doctrine, investigator N.A. Mashkevich examined the book of Greek
monk Neophytes, published in Greek in
Monk Neophytes, a
former rabbi who converted to Orthodox Christianity, tells how he himself was
initiated into the blood secret. As he reached the age of 13 (the first Jewish
adulthood), his father, in accordance with the Jewish tradition, laid a “power wreath”
on him, and then, as they were alone, his father began to inculcate in him hate
towards Christians, as a duty imposed by God, after which he revealed the blood
secret as the most sacred and important rite of the Jewish religion.
“My son,”
continued Neophytes’ father, “I adjure you with all the elements of heaven and
earth to keep this secret always deep in your heart and trust it neither to
your brothers or your sister or your mother or, later, to your wife; to no
mortal man, and especially to no women. If God will give you even ten grown-up
sons, do not open this secret to all of them, but only to the one you will
consider the smartest and most capable to keep the secret, just like I do with
you now. You must watch carefully that this son of yours is committed and
zealous for our faith... May the whole earth refuse to accept your body and
belch it out of its depths if you ever, under any circumstances, even out of
extreme necessity, reveal this blood secret to anyone except the one I
mentioned, even if you become a Christian for the sake of benefit or for other
reasons. Now take care not to betray your father by giving away this divine
secret which I revealed to you today. And if you do not, may my curse befall
you in the very hour you commit this sin, and may it follow you all your life
until your death, and for all eternity.”
According to
Neophytes, the blood secret is not clearly mentioned in any of the Jewish books,
and is being transmitted by word of mouth exclusively and is known not to all
Jews, but to the chosen ones only. There are three reasons to use Christian
blood: 1) hatred towards Christians; 2) superstitions from the area
of magic, witchcraft and Kabbalah; and 3) belief in the spiritual reality
of blood.
The religious
rites during which Christian blood is used are as follows:
Marriage. The bridegroom and the bride prepare themselves for it by observing a
strict 24-hour fast, abstaining themselves even from water until the sunset.
Then, a rabbi comes, takes a freshly baked egg, peels it, divides it into two
halves, sprinkles them with special ashes, and gives one half to the bridegroom
and one to the bride. As they eat the egg, the rabbi reads prayers. What kind
of ashes are these? They are obtained after rabbis soak a rag in Christian
blood, dry it and burn it.
Circumcision. A rabbi takes a bowl with wine, into which one drop of blood of the circumcised
child and one drop of Christian blood (apparently, in the form of the same
ashes or powder) have been put. Having shaken the mixture, the rabbi puts his
little finger into the bowl, and then into the child’s mouth with the words, “And
as you lay there in your blood I said to you: Live!” (Ezekiel 16:6)
Wailing for
Passover. As they bake unleavened bread, the Jews make separately a baked bread,
into which they add a little powder with Christian blood. Each Jew, even a
little child, must eat at least an olive’s bulk of this bread. Such bread is
called (in Greek) epikomion.
Death. Having come to the deceased person, a rabbi takes the white of an egg
and a little Christian blood, shakes the mixture and sprinkles it on the
deceased’s chest, saying the following verse from the Ezekiel’s prophecy: “I
will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses.”
(Ezekiel 36:25)
All these depressing
bloodsheds, in Neophytes’ opinion, make true the words of Jeremiah who prophesied
about the Jews as follows: “On your skirts is found the lifeblood of the
guiltless poor” (Jeremiah
As a result of
these countless murders,