מועצת החוג למחשבת ישראל התכנסה היום, יום א’ ה-11.12.2011 , והחליטה לבטל את האירוע המתוכנן למחר על הספר “תורת המלך”. נימוקיה של המועצה היו: הענקת במה אוניברסיטאית, במיוחד עם נוכחות המחבר או נציגו, עלולה לתת גושפנקא לתוכן הגזעני של הספר ולחזק את השפעתו המסוכנת בחברה הישראלית
מתן במה מעין זו עלול גם לסייע בבוא הזמן לסנגוריו בבית הדין. אם האירוע יתקיים כמתוכנן בפורום כלשהו בניגוד להחלטת מועצת החוג, מוצהר בזאת שאין לו חסות של החוג למחשבת ישראל וכל חבר בחוג שישתתף בו עושה זאת כאדם פרטי ולא כחבר בחוג או כראש החוג. החוג מתנער מכל אחראיות מוסרית ומשפטית לאירוע.

Update:

The following flyer was being passed around Hebrew University today.  Thanks to Yitz Landes for sending it to me.

Is Calling for Murder a Legitimate Opinion?

“When we come upon a non-Jew who is transgressing one of the Seven Noahide Laws, we kill him from a place of caring about the Seven Noahide Laws, and there is no prohibition in this.”

“There is a rationalization for causing harm to children if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us. In a situation such as this the attack will be directed just at them, and not only in order to harm adults.”

From the book Torat ha-Melekh

This coming Monday, 12.12, Rabbi Yisrael Ariel, who supports the book Torat ha-Melekh that permits and encourages the killing of non-Jews, will come to speak on a panel at Beit Hill of Hebrew University.

“The is no place in reality for a non-Jew as he is..the prohibition to kill a non-Jew does not come from the value of his life, which are not legitimate in and of themselves.

-Is every opinion legitimate for public debate?
-Do we want to let opinions like this into our conversation?
-What type of university grants a forum to someone who publicly supports racism and calls for murder?
-What type of campus are we if we are quiet about this?

You are invited to come and protest with us, today, Monday, 12.12, 6:15 pm Beit Hillel

The Facebook page of Beit Hillel is reporting that the panel discussion is happening as planned and all of the planned participants are there, so maybe the Department of Jewish Thought was unsuccessful in getting it cancelled.

Some people are trying to lobby the university to make sure that it doesn’t become a forum for incitement, although I am not sure if they would really like to see it cancelled.  A university should be about critical discussion of ideas and issues and not ignoring them.

The Jewish Annotated New Testament, hereafter JANT in this review, is meant to meet the needs of discrete (and occasionally overlapping) sets of readers: (1) Jews, (2) Christians, and (3) readers who approach the New Testament without any intention to appropriate what they learn within the framework of a Jewish or Christian metanarrative. JANT annotates the New Testament without attempting to persuade the reader to embrace a non-Christian perspective on the text. At the same time, it models a critical, empathetic, non-Christian reading of the New Testament at every turn.

JANT is one milestone among many in an ongoing cultural project of paramount importance: the task of appropriation of everything from Qumran sectarian literature to 1-4 Maccabees, Tobit and Ben Sira; from Joseph and Aseneth, Jubilees, 1 Enoch, 4 Ezra, to 2 Baruch; from the New Testament and the Didache to Philo and Josephus, within the confines of a set of cultural loyalties in which the tradition of the Sages continues to occupy pride of place. The project is of interest to Jews, Christians, and uncommitted readers alike.

See the full review here.

והא אמר אבוה דשמואל: אסור לאדם שיעשה שותפות עם הגוי, שמא יתחייב לו שבועה, ונשבע לו בשם עבודת כוכבים שלו, והתורה אמרה: (שמות כג) לא ישמע על פיך!

Has not the father of Shemuel said: One must not form a partnership with a heathen lest he [the heathen] will be bound to take an oath to him and he will swear in the name of his idol and the Torah says: [And make no mention of the name of other gods.] neither let it be heard out of thy mouth? (Exodus 23:23)

On this statement of Shemuel’s father is found one of the most important comments by the Tosafot about Christianity.

עוד פר”ת בזמן הזה כולן נשבעים בקדשים ואין תופסין בהם אלהות ואע”פ שמזכירין [עמהם] שם שמים וכוונתם [לד"א] [מ"מ] אין זה [שם] עבודת כוכבים כי דעתם לשם עושה שמים וארץ ואע”ג שמשתתף ש”ש ודבר אחר אין כאן לפני עור לא תתן מכשול דבני נח לא הוזהרו על כך ולדידן לא אשכחן איסור בגרם שיתוף

This Tosafot addresses the status of shittuf, “association” (other translations: “co-sovereignty” or “co-divinity”). A Jew is prohibited from causing someone else to perform a forbidden act, and this Tosafot discussed whether a Jew causing a Gentile to take a oath that includes shittuf, was prohibited.

Professor David Berger, and before him Professor Jacob Katz [see Exclusive and Tolerance, p. 163], has written and spoken about this and related Tosafot. You can read a short discussion of his here, or you can listen to a lecture by him here. Also see the comments by Marc Shapiro about the “historical truth” of this Tosafot, i.e. what it may really mean, and the “halakhic truth,” i.e. how it has been (mis)understood by some poskim here. Lastly, see this helpful source sheet by Rabbi Simon Wolf’s Daf Yomi site (recommended).