Oleg Anatolyevich Platonov

The Enigma of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion

Rodnik; Moscow; 1999

ISBN 5-89466-033-3

Translated by ChatGPT

Abstract

The sixth book of archival research, "The Thorny Crown of Russia," is dedicated to the
study of the most mysterious document of the 20th century - The Protocols of the Elders of
Zion - a comprehensive work of Jewish-Talmudic thought, outlining the program of a secret war
against Christian civilization.

The author traces the more than 2500-year-old path of the development of the ideology of the
Protocols of Zion, from the emergence of the Talmud and the racial doctrine of Judaism to the
creation of modern Jewish-Masonic and Zionist organizations of global domination, including
the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Club, and the World
Forum.

The book utilizes previously unpublished materials from the Bern Trial and correspondence of
its participants, confirming that the testimonies of witnesses and experts who challenged the
authenticity of the Protocols of Zion in court were falsified and pre-paid by Jewish
organizations.

The main sources of archival materials for this book were the State Archive of the Russian
Federation, the Center for the Storage of Historical and Documentary Collections (formerly the
Special Archive of the USSR), the archive of the Holy Trinity Monastery (Jordanville, USA), and
the archive of the Hoover Institution (Stanford, USA).

The book is equipped with a unique dictionary of the world behind the scenes.
The Enigma of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion

There are different viewpoints regarding the origin of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, but in
my opinion, what matters is not who composed them, but rather that the entire history of the
20th century eerily corresponds to the ambitions stated in this document.

Metropolitan of St. Petersburg and Ladoga, Ioann (Snychev)

Introduction

The most horrific tragedy in the history of any nation is when it becomes a hostage to a
blasphemous, anti-human system of beliefs, transforming into a blunt instrument for realizing
those beliefs. Every nation has good and bad people, kind and evil, sincere and indifferent.
However, the blasphemous, anti-human system turns all of them into a unified organization, or
rather an organized herd, led by criminal leaders, and the blame for their actions falls on the
entire nation.

Here are a few examples from history.

In the 13th century, Mongolian tribes became hostages to the monstrous ideology of Genghis
Khan, turning them from peaceful nomads into bloodthirsty and cruel conquerors.

The German nation experienced a similar tragedy, falling victim to Hitler's delusional racist
ideas, which transformed a cultured nation into a gang of audacious marauders and rapists.

For two decades (1917-1937), the Russian people became hostages to the blasphemous, anti-
human system of Bolshevism, paying a huge price and enduring the Bolshevik dictatorship.
However, the most typical example of ideological hostage-taking is a significant part of the
Jewish people who, for two and a half millennia, have been unable to overcome the
blasphemous, anti-human worldview of the Talmud, which preaches racism, racial exclusivity,
and the "special" rights of Jews. The ideology of the Talmud has predetermined many tragic
events in human history, pitting Jews against the entire world.

According to the research of the renowned scholar of Judaism, D. Reed, the beginning of the
history of Jews becoming hostages to the blasphemous, misanthropic system can be traced
back to the 6th century BC when a small Palestinian tribe of Jews (previously rejected by the
Israelites) proclaimed a racial doctrine. According to this doctrine, Jews declared themselves
the "chosen" people who were destined to eventually dominate the entire humanity. The
theory of the dominant race was declared a Jewish law and extensively developed in numerous
books of the Talmud. "The sect that subjugated the Jewish people outwardly accepted the
concept of a single and universal God, introducing it into Scripture only to destroy it,
proclaiming a new faith based on its denial. Although this is done cautiously, the denial is full of
contempt. For the teachings of the dominant race, such denial was necessary and inevitable: if
a dominant race exists, then it is itself God."

Hundreds of generations of Jews have become slaves to this blasphemous, racist law, which
determined the main directions of their national life. The ideas of this law materialized in many
documents of Judaism - from the Talmud to the establishment of the modern state of Israel,
finding the most vivid and characteristic expression in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Emerging in the second half of the 19th century, this document encompassed the experience of
Jewish Talmudic believers in their struggle for global dominance of the "chosen" people. Being
a compilation of preceding secret Jewish documents, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion
presented a political manifesto and catechism, outlining the political program of Jews among
hostile Christian nations (Gentiles). In this sense, they are similar to other programmatic
documents of the 19th and early 20th centuries, such as Karl Marx's "Communist Manifesto,"
catechisms of Masonic orders, and Nikolai Bukharin's "ABC of Communism." This is not a dry
manual for action but a call to fight, presented with journalistic brilliance and pathos, answering
the question of what to do and how.
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion have often been declared fake, without sufficient evidence.
Many researchers, even conscientious ones, were puzzled by the fact that their documentary
title, "Protocols," clearly did not correspond to the journalistic content. The thing is that the
Protocols of the Elders of Zion were never a transcript of any congress or meeting; they are a
comprehensive work of Jewish Talmudic thought. They encompassed everything that
concerned Jewish Talmudists: their attitude towards Christian nations, their desire to elevate
themselves above them and subdue them in the name of their racial doctrine.

Today, at the end of the 20th century, when much of what was mentioned in the Protocols of
the Elders of Zion has been realized, it is practically impossible to dispute their accuracy. The
Protocols of the Elders of Zion might be the only historical document that reveals the meaning
of what has been happening in the 20th century with undeniable accuracy.

Over the century, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion have been published hundreds of times in
almost every language in the world. In terms of mass circulation, they are surpassed only by the
Bible and the works of V.I. Lenin, becoming one of the most read books of the 20th century.

For a Russian Orthodox person, the appearance of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in Russia
is associated with the name of the Holy Righteous John of Kronstadt. The great saint blessed
the publication of the book with the attached Protocols, decisively saying to its author, "Print it,
people will read and buy it."

During the troubled days of 1905, the truth about the sinister plans of the ideologists of the
Protocols of the Elders of Zion was spoken by the Russian saint, St. Vladimir (Bogoyavlensky), at
that time the Metropolitan of Moscow and Kolomna. In his sermon titled "What Should We Do
in These Troubled Days?", which he composed with the participation of Bishop Nikon
(Rozhdestvensky), the Holy One revealed the Jewish roots of the turmoil that had engulfed our
homeland. The sermon was read on October 16 in all churches of Moscow and the Moscow
region. St. Vladimir himself delivered this sermon in the Dormition Temple of the Moscow
Kremlin on the eve of October 17, when the Russian Church established the service of
thanksgiving molebens in honor of the miraculous deliverance of Tsar Alexander III and his
family during the train crash near the Borki station, and on the eve of the Manifesto on the
"Granting of Freedoms."
The sermon of the Holy One, published in numerous editions, made a tremendous impression
on the Russian people, opening the eyes of many to the essence of what was happening in
Russia. Moreover, the prayerful appeals of Metropolitan St. Vladimir to defend the Tsar and
Holy Russia from the criminal conspirators awakened broad patriotic sentiments, rallying
millions of Russian people to fight against the enemies of the Motherland. In a short period,
from the end of 1905 to the first half of 1906, the rising Russian people eliminated several
thousand of the most active revolutionary conspirators, political bandits, and terrorists, forcing
the rest of them to flee abroad.

The history of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is more interesting than the most captivating
detective story because it encompasses all the intricacies of the secret activities of Jewish and
Masonic organizations. Following the winding paths of the Jewish-Masonic conspiracy, one
constantly encounters facts of monstrous crimes, cruelty, and bloodthirstiness. Murder from
behind the corner, treachery, spreading false rumors, blackmail, intimidation, extortion, bribery
– these are just some of the methods used by Jewish Talmudists to deceive and enslave not
only the Jewish people but all of humanity. While working on this book, I managed to find
numerous previously unpublished documents and materials on the history of the Protocols of
the Elders of Zion, stored in the archives of Russia and the United States. Of particular interest
are the materials of the Bern Trial dedicated to these protocols, as well as the correspondence
of the participants in this trial, confirming that the testimonies of witnesses and experts who
challenged the authenticity of the Protocols were falsified and pre-paid by Jewish organizations.

The author expresses gratitude to all individuals and organizations who contributed to the
search for documents and materials for this book and its publication. Special thanks are
extended to the custodians of the State Archive of the Russian Federation (GARF), the Center
for the Storage of Historical and Documentary Collections (TSKIDK – formerly the Special
Archive of the USSR), the archive of the Holy Trinity Monastery (ASTM – Jordanville, USA), and
the Hoover Institution Archive (AGI – Stanford, USA). Great appreciation goes to the Russian
people in the United States who, at their own risk, assisted me in familiarizing myself with the
activities and personnel of international Jewish, Zionist, and globalist organizations and lodges,
particularly the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group,
the World Forum (Gorbachev Foundation), and the Order of B'nai B'rith.
PART I

The Talmud and the Development of Secret Jewish Power

Chapter 1

Prehistory of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion - The Fanatical Sect of

the Pharisees. Segregation of the Jews - Emergence of the Talmud -
The Esoteric Teachings of Judaism - Shulchan Aruch.

The prehistory of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is intertwined with the entire history of
Talmudic Judaism. The Protocols encapsulate the quintessence of the two-thousand-year
struggle of Talmudic Jews against Christ and Christian civilization, aiming to establish
dominance over humanity and physically annihilate all opposing forces to the 'chosen' people.
As we shall see, the Protocols of Zion are nothing more than a free adaptation of the most
sacred passages of the Talmud, which became a political program for a significant portion of
Jews in their relations with the nations of the world.

Long before the birth of Christ, the religious precepts of the ancient Jews were compiled in the
Pentateuch of Moses (later incorporated into the Old Testament of Christians with some
modifications).

The birth of Christ and the advent of the New Testament fundamentally changed the entire
spiritual and moral atmosphere of the world. Every person on Earth was given a chance to
attain eternal life. Many Jews embraced the Savior and converted to Christianity.
However, only a portion of the Jews embarked on the path of salvation. The others, influenced
by Judaistic sects, rejected the hand extended by Christ and assumed a hostile position towards
Him.

Chronologically, the origins of the misanthropic ideology of Talmudic Judaism can be traced
back to the 6th century BC, when the Kingdom of Judah ceased to exist. Its capital, Jerusalem,
and its main sanctuary, the Temple of Solomon, were destroyed by the Chaldeans, and the Jews
were taken into captivity, where they remained for about 60 years. During these decades,
Jewish priests came into contact with Chaldean sages who advocated a Satanic and pantheistic
religion. In the view of these sages, God was not the creator of the Universe but, in a way,
emerged from it. Every matter, from stones to humans, possessed a certain degree of intellect
and soul, and God was the sum of all these conscious and unconscious souls in the world. Since
humans were rational beings and infinitely more perfect than others, they absorbed the largest
portion of this divine essence and, in a sense, represented the god of the world around them.

As noted by the Russian scholar V. Mokshansky, Chaldean philosophy exerted a strong

influence on the Jews. In turn, it was these Chaldean sages who laid the firm foundation for the
peculiarities of Judaism, replacing the Chaldean religion with a religion of racial pride. The
Chaldeans taught the Jews that Israel was not created to toil, fight, work, and invent like other
nations but to be the sanctuary of Jehovah. If they adhered to Jehovah's laws, everything else
would be provided for them. They instilled in the Jews the notion of Jehovah as a truly unified
and almighty God, but one who sought only his own glory, which he wanted to proclaim to the
entire world through the Jewish people. For this reason, he showed mercy only to the Jews,
while being a cruel God to all other nations, which were destined for destruction.

Initially, Jewish priests kept this racist doctrine secret even from their own people. To preserve
this perverse ideology among the segment of Jewish priests who had succumbed to Chaldean
influences, the sect of the Pharisees emerged. The Pharisees, though few in number, were
tightly knit and obligated their members to maintain the strictest secrecy. They relentlessly
pursued a dual goal: to seize political power and gradually sway the people's conviction in favor
of their secret teachings. They fully achieved both of these objectives. They took control of the
judicial institutions, dominated the Sanhedrin, and had such influence that judges and even the
priests themselves, who formed the highest class of the people, depended on them for
everything. Holding the majority of the highest religious positions and the majority of votes in
the Sanhedrin gave them the power to authoritatively interpret the law.

Even in the centuries preceding the advent of Christ, the Pharisees instilled in the people an
instinctive aversion to everything non-Jewish, presenting the Messiah's human nature as a
worldly king and the destroyer of all non-Jews, while the Prophets' explanations of the afterlife
were replaced with teachings of the migration of souls borrowed from the Chaldeans.

Since the fall of Jerusalem, the Jews who did not accept Christ gradually deviated from Moses'
Pentateuch, replacing it with various religious innovations that completely distorted the
meaning of the Covenant given by God to Moses. Enraged against Christ and His Teaching, and
essentially siding with Satan, the rabbis began to interpret and comment on the true
Pentateuch in a perverted manner. These distorted interpretations and commentaries of the
Higher Law are collected in a compilation known as the Talmud.

In fact, the Jewish rabbis and the Pharisee sectarians brought about a religious and political
revolution, depriving the majority of the Jewish people of the true Word of God.

The Talmud distorted the meaning of Moses' legislation to such an extent that it became
unrecognizable.

Originally, the Talmud circulated among the Jews in the form of scattered oral traditions and
secret scrolls until Rabbi Akiba collected them together in the 2nd century. However, Rabbi
Akiba did not write down all these secret knowledge; he memorized them and orally
transmitted them to his disciples. Of course, the main secret that Jews were forbidden to write
down on scrolls until that time was their attitude towards other nations, their behavior in
dealing with them. According to secret religious decrees, Jews were prohibited from
committing it to writing and making public what they were taught orally.

However, according to Jewish tradition, Rabbi Judah (Yehuda), who was born on the day of
Akiba's death, apparently received unofficial permission from the Jewish Sanhedrin to disclose
much of the secret Jewish knowledge. The Jewish leaders who rejected Christ were concerned
that many Jews were converting to Christianity, condemning their fellow tribesmen for their
hostility towards the rest of the world. The Jewish Sanhedrin hastened to publish a compilation
of secret Jewish knowledge, the Talmud, in order to separate Jews from other nations and give
it a "divine" authority whose observance surpassed the Law of Moses accepted by Christians.

Around 180 AD, Rabbi Judah compiled what is known as the Mishnah, a massive textbook that
included all the halakhot (legislative ordinances) covering the law, theology, and morality of the
Jews.

The compilation of the Gemara, commentaries on the Mishnah, followed the compilation of the
Mishnah. The Gemara included additions called "aggadah," which consisted of poetry,
allegories, and additional decrees. Overall, the Mishnah and Gemara received the name
Talmud, which appeared in two editions - the Jerusalem Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud.

The Jerusalem Talmud (published around 469 CE in 36 volumes) was arranged and reviewed by
Rabbi Johanan. The Babylonian Talmud (published around 505 CE in 12 volumes) was compiled
by the rabbis Abina and Assi.

For over a thousand years, the Talmud (in both editions) was truly known only to the rabbis and
a select group of chosen individuals. The broader Jewish masses received only the secret
knowledge from the rabbis that they were supposed to know. The secret rulings of the Talmud
were transmitted orally to the Jews. It was only in 1565 that Jewish authorities in Venice
allowed the publication of a work by Rabbi Joseph Caro called the Shulchan Aruch, which
contained the main rulings of the Babylonian Talmud, fully disclosing the worldview of Judaism.
For several centuries, the Shulchan Aruch became the guidebook for the majority of Jews, a
popular compilation of rules for communal life and laws for all Jews.

Renowned Jewish scholar Ellenberger noted that the Shulchan Aruch "was recognized by all
rabbis as the only acceptable compendium of laws and, thanks to the invention of printing, it
became widely spread through multiple editions."

As the same Jewish scholar points out, "since the Shulchan Aruch took root and was
appreciated and approved by Jews in all countries as the sole legislative guide, the Talmud lost
its original significance and in many places was consigned to the archives. Here, it is studied
only by spiritual individuals, serving as a subject of research solely for rabbis and Jewish
theologians, purely for the sake of understanding the sources. However, the secular Jew of our
time knows the Talmud only by name, as he is not even capable of reading it. For three
centuries now, the Shulchan Aruch has been the only book of laws for Jews and serves as our
catechism. In light of all this, it is necessary to conclude that the term 'Jewish-Talmudist,' strictly
speaking, no longer makes sense, as such individuals have hardly existed for three hundred
years. The present-day Jews, at least in the vast majority, are Shulchan Aruch adherents."

The main goal of the Shulchan Aruch, like the Talmud, was to popularize the idea of Jewish
separateness from other nations, to consolidate them into a distinct informal organization
united by common claims of "tribal exclusivity," "chosenness," and "extraordinary talent"
compared to other nations. Talmudic ideas promoted by the Shulchan Aruch instilled in Jews
the belief that they were the sole legitimate rulers of humanity by divine right. The Jews who
propagated the Shulchan Aruch among Jews, the Talmudic Jews, did everything to separate
themselves from other nations and to oppose all of humanity. The Talmudists imposed
numerous demeaning and petty restrictions and prescriptions on the Jewish people regarding
various ritual washings, prohibitions on eating with non-Jews from the same utensil, and
consuming certain foods. Violation of these decrees subjected Jews to severe punishments,
including death.

The content of the Shulchan Aruch was virtually unknown to Christians until the late 19th
century. Only in 1883, in the journal "Westphalian Mercury," did a baptized Jew named Briman,
writing under the pseudonym Justus, publish a study in which he translated 100 of the most
characteristic laws of the Talmud into German for the general public. Jewish organizations
attempted to discredit this study, accusing the author and the journal editor of forgery.
However, based on the conclusions of authoritative expertise, the accuracy of the translation of
the Talmudic laws was irrefutably established. The lawsuit by Jewish organizations was rejected
as unfounded and malicious. The expert, a prominent researcher of Judaism named Dr. Karl
Eckert, subsequently published the materials of his expertise as a separate book, which we will
use in the next chapter.

To properly understand many Jewish texts that I will present in my book, it is necessary to
clarify the concepts used by the Talmudists in reference to all those outside their circle.

Let us provide the complete interpretation of these concepts by Dr. K. Eckert:

The terms "goy," "nochri," "akum," "oved-elilim," and "kuti" are used by rabbis to refer to all
non-Jews.

Goy, in Hebrew, means "nation" and is rarely used in the Bible in relation to Israel, for example,
Ex. 19:6. It is more often applied to foreign nations, for example, Deut. 28:36, 49-50, and is also
used to mean "pagan nation," for example, Ps. 2:1. However, in later Talmudic usage, goy came
to mean not an entire pagan nation but an individual. The feminine form is goya.

Nochri means "stranger," "foreigner," or "gentile," in contrast to Israel, referring to a non-Jew,

for example, Isa. 2:6. The feminine form is nochrif.

Akum is an abbreviation formed from the initial letters of the Chaldean words "avodde
kochavim u'mazzalot," which means "worshippers (worship) of stars and planets."

Oved-elilim means "idol worshipers."

Kuti or Kutim refers to the people who were resettled by the Assyrian king Shalmaneser in the
Kingdom of Israel and, through intermingling with the remaining Israelites, formed the
Samaritan tribe (see: 2 Kings 17:24, 30). The feminine form is kutit (see: Talmud Hullin 6a).

For rabbis, there is no difference between these words. In different books, within the text of
the same laws, they are interchangeably used. On the other hand, all the laws have been
compiled into the aforementioned collections from the Talmud, and if there are any differences
among them, it is only in the terminology used to refer to "non-Jews."

The laws of the Talmud consider Christians as idol worshipers. Here are a few examples
confirming this:

In Talmud Abodah Zarah (7b), the Resurrection of Christ is classified as one of the "holidays of
idol worshipers." In the same Talmudic tractate (27b), it is narrated how a disciple of Jesus
named Jacob wanted to heal the son of Rabbi Ishmael's sister, who had been bitten by a snake,
in the name of Jesus. However, Rabbi Ishmael did not allow it because one cannot seek healing
from a heretic. On the previous page (26b), it is stated: "Who is a heretic? One who engages in
idol worship."

In Talmud Shabbat (116a), it is said: "Rabbi Meir calls the books of heretics 'Avon Gillayon,'
which means 'Calamity on empty paper,' because they themselves call them the Gospel."

According to Maimonides in Abodah Zarah 1:3: "Know that the Nazarenes who follow the
footsteps of Jesus, even though their dogmas differ, are nevertheless all idol worshipers. One
should treat them as one would treat idol worshipers... This is what the Talmud teaches."

In Shaloh U-Teshuvot Hafla'ah Zopher, section Yoreh De'ah CXXXI, it is stated: "There is no
doubt that his (a contemporary non-Jew's) worship is genuine idol worship." The same is said
by Rambam in Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot XI, 4.

In Hagaah Asher Abodah Zarah III, 5, it is explicitly stated: "The cross belongs to idol worship."

Rabbeinu Asher writes in Abodah Zarah IV, 1: "The silver cup held by a Christian priest and the
censer with which he fumigates belong to idol worship."

Chapter 2

The most terrifying document in world history. - Hatred towards the human race. - Jews are
"supreme beings". - Gentiles are equal to animals. - The "right" to dominate the world. -
Enemies of the Jews will be destroyed.
Let us now proceed to the direct examination, perhaps, of the most terrifying document in
world history - the basic laws of the Talmud, compiled in the Shulchan Aruch. These anti-human
laws have been the cause of tragedy for many representatives of the Jewish people, as they
essentially transformed a certain part of them into an informal criminal organization, racially
opposed to the rest of humanity. "I believe," wrote J. G. Fichte, "that Judaism is so horrifying
because it is founded and built upon deep hatred towards the entire human race." The racial
and misanthropic character of Judaic laws can only be compared to certain racist documents of
fascist Germany.

For the completeness and accuracy of the picture and subsequent analysis of these laws, we
will present them in two translations - a generalized one (and sometimes simply in paraphrase)
by Briman (Justus) and the literal translation by Dr. K. Eckert, which corrects some inaccuracies
in Briman's translation. Overall, both of these versions complement each other and provide an
understanding of the Jewish-Talmudic ideology.

Law 1

"A Jew is not allowed to sell a garment with tzitzit (fringes on the corners of the garment worn
by Jews during morning prayers, see Numbers 15:38) to an akum (Christian). He should not
even lend such a garment to an akum as collateral or even temporarily, because when an akum
possesses such a garment, one should be wary that he may deceive a Jew by claiming to be
Jewish. If a Jew were to trust him and embark on a journey with him alone, the akum would kill
him."

Orach Chayim 20, 2:

"It is prohibited to sell an akum an outer garment with (ritual) fringes; he may approach a Jew
on the way and kill him. Even lending or storing an outer garment with fringes to an akum is
forbidden, except in the case when it is given for a short period so that there is no need to fear
this."
Law 2

"Everything that is necessary for Jewish worship, such as the aforementioned fringes and the
like, can only be made by a Jew and not by an akum, because it must be made by people, and
akumim should not be regarded by Jews as humans."

Orach Chayim 14, 1:

"Fringes made by an akum are not suitable, because it is written: 'Speak to the children of
Israel' (Numbers 15:38), excluding akumim."

Yebamoth 61a:

"The graves of akumim are not defiled when one leans over them, because it is said: 'But you
are My sheep, the sheep of My pasture, you are men' - you are called men, but akumim are not
called such."

Law 3

"The prayer Kaddish (which begins with the words 'Yitgadal ve'yitkadash,' meaning 'Magnified
and sanctified,' hence the name 'Kaddish') is allowed to be recited only where ten Jews are
gathered together, and it should be in such a way that no impure thing, such as excrement or
an akum, separates them from one another."

Orach Chayim 55, 20:

"If ten (Jews) are in one place (together) and recite the prayer Kaddish or Kedusha, then one
who does not belong to them may respond ('amen'). Others consider it necessary that
excrement or an akum does not separate them."
Law 4

"When an akum with a cross is encountered, it is strictly forbidden for a Jew to bow his head,
even if he is in the midst of praying. Even if he has reached a point in his prayer where it is
necessary to bow his head (in Jewish prayers, there are certain places where they must bow
their head), he must still avoid doing so."

Orach Chayim 113, 8:

"When someone (obviously, from among Jews) is praying, and an akum with a cross in his
hands is coming towards him, and he (the Jew) has reached a place (in the prayer) where it is
customary to bow, he should not bow, even if his thoughts are solely directed towards God."

Law 5

"And now, when there is no longer a temple or sacrifices in Jerusalem, the sons of Aaron, the
high priest, must enjoy among the dispersed Jews the known distinctions and honors over other
Jews and always have the right to bless (the Jews) on every holiday. But if anyone from such a
family becomes an akum, then the entire family is defiled and therefore loses this priestly
right."

Orach Chayim 128, 41, Haga:

"Some say that when he (the kohen) has a daughter who has joined the akums or has engaged
in immorality, then no one is obliged to respect him because she has defiled him."

Law 6
"A Jew who becomes an akum is cursed to such an extent that even when he donates candles
or something similar to the synagogue, it is forbidden to accept them."

Orach Chayim 154, 11, Haga:

"If someone who has joined the akums donates wax or candles for the synagogue, it is
forbidden to light them."

Law 7

"The Simun prayer (which a Jew recites after lunch and at the end blesses the host of the
house) should not be recited in the house of an akum, so that the akum is not blessed."

Orach Chayim 193, 3, Haga:

"Usually, the communal meal prayer is not recited in the house of an akum. And it seems to me
that the reason for this is that one cannot have a set meal in the house of an akum out of fear
of the akum himself. Hence, it appears as if you have eaten without it being a set meal. Another
reason is that one may fear retribution if you alter the text of the grace after meals and do not
say, 'May the Merciful One bless the master of this house!'"

Law 8

"For every pleasant fragrance that a Jew senses, he is obligated to recite a brief blessing, except
in cases where the spices or fragrant substance have already been in a place of filth to eliminate
a bad odor, or when the fragrant substances have been in the hands of a harlot who uses
perfumes to entice people to sin, or finally, when the fragrant substances were brought from
the sanctuary of the akumim, then it is forbidden to recite a blessing for the fragrance because
it has already been defiled by the place of filth, the harlot, or the sanctuary of the akumim."

Orach Chayim 217, 4:

"Over the fragrances of a harlot, for example, a bundle of spices hanging from her neck, or the
one she holds in her hands or mouth, one cannot recite the blessing of thanksgiving because it
is even forbidden to smell them, as it might tempt one to kiss her or come too close to her
body."

Similarly, in the same source, 217, 5:

"Over the fragrances of idolatry, one cannot recite the blessing of thanksgiving because it is
forbidden to even smell them."

Law 9

"When passing by the ruined temple of the akumim, every Jew is obligated to say: 'Glory to
You, Lord, for You have eradicated this house of idols from here.' But when a Jew passes by a
temple that is still untouched, he should say: 'Glory to You, Lord, for You prolong Your wrath
against the wicked.' And when he sees 600,000 Jews gathered together, he must say: 'Glory to
You, Wise God!' But when he sees a gathering of akumim, he should say: 'Your mother shall be
greatly ashamed; she who bore you shall blush' (Jeremiah 50:12). When a Jew passes by a
Jewish cemetery, he should say: 'Glory to You, Lord, for You have created them so justly.' But
before the cemetery of akumim, he should say: 'Your mother shall be greatly ashamed, and so
on.' When a Jew sees well-built houses of the akumim, he should say: 'The houses of the proud
shall be laid waste.' But when he sees the ruins of an akum's house, he should say: 'The Lord is
a God of vengeance.'"

Orach Chayim 224, 1:

"Whoever sees a statue of Mercury or any other idolatrous object must say: 'Praise be to You,
Lord our God, King of the universe, for the patience You extend to those who violate Your will.'"

Similarly, in the same source, 224, 2:

"Whoever sees a place from which idolatry has been eradicated, if it is in the land of Israel, he
must say: 'Praise be to You, Lord our God, King of the universe, who has eradicated idolatry
from our land.' But if it is in a foreign land, he should say: '...who has eradicated idolatry from
this place!' And in both cases, he says further: 'Just as You have eradicated it from this place, so
may You eradicate it everywhere and turn the hearts of idolaters to Your service!'"

Similarly, in the same source, 224, 5:

"Whoever sees 600,000 Israelites gathered together should say: 'Praise be to You, Lord our
God, King of the universe, who knows the secret mysteries.' But if they are idolaters, he should
say: 'Your mother shall be greatly ashamed; she who bore you shall blush; behold, the future of
those nations is a wilderness, a dry land, and a desert!'"

Similarly, in the same source, 224, 12:

"Whoever sees the graves of Israelites should say: 'Praise be to You... who has created you
justly,' and so on. But over the graves of akumim, he should say: 'Your mother shall be greatly
ashamed...'"

Similarly, in the same source, 224, 11:

"Whoever sees the houses of the akumim, when people are living in them, should say: 'The
houses of the proud shall be laid waste' (Proverbs 15:25). But if these dwellings are empty, he
should say: 'O God of vengeance, Lord, God of vengeance, appear!' (Psalm 94:1)."

Law 10

"In the evening, on the eve of the Sabbath, every Jew, upon seeing illumination, is obligated to
say: 'Glory to You, Lord, Creator of light.' However, where the light comes from a temple of the
akumim, it is forbidden to thank God for the use of such light."

Orach Chayim 298, 5:

"It is forbidden to recite a blessing over idolatrous lamps."

Law 11

"On the Sabbath, it is strictly forbidden for a Jew to buy or sell. However, it is permitted to
purchase a house from an akum in Palestine, and in this case, it is even allowed to write a legal
document (contract) so that there is one less akum in Palestine and one more Jew."

Orach Chayim 306, 11:

"In the land of Israel, it is permitted to buy a house from an akum, even on the Sabbath. They
write the contract and present it in public places, specifically in the presence of the akumim.
They write it in their language because the prohibition of conducting business transactions on
the Sabbath is only by the Rabbis. However, they did not prohibit it for the purpose of
populating the land of Israel."

Law 12

"Any work that can be performed on the Sabbath to save a Jew from death is not only
permitted but even obligatory. Therefore, if on the Sabbath a house or a pile of stones collapses
on a Jew, it is allowed to remove this pile and save the life of the Jew who is under it. Even if
several akumim are also under the pile together with the Jew, if we were to save the Jew, the
akumim would also be saved (and this act, specifically saving an akum from death, even on a
weekday, as we will see later in Law 50, is considered a great sin). Nevertheless, in order to save
the Jew, it is necessary to remove the pile of stones."

Orach Chayim 329, 2:

"When saving a life, one should not pay attention to the majority (i.e., the religious status or
background of the individuals involved)."

Law 13
"A Jewish midwife is not only permitted but obligated to assist a Jewish woman on the Sabbath
and, in doing so, perform everything that under other circumstances would violate the sanctity
of the Sabbath. On the contrary, helping an akumah (a Christian woman) is prohibited, even
when it is possible to do so without violating the Sabbath, because she should be considered
only as an animal."

Orach Chayim 330, 2:

"It is not allowed on the Sabbath to provide assistance to an akumah during childbirth, even
with something that does not violate the sanctity of the Sabbath."

Law 14

"On the eve of Passover (the last evening before Passover), every Jew is obligated to recite the
Shefoch prayer (in which they appeal to God to pour out His wrath upon the Gentiles). And if
the Jews recite the prayer with reverence, the Lord will undoubtedly hear them and send the
Messiah, who will pour out His wrath upon the Gentiles."

Orach Chayim 480, Hagah:

"Some say that it is necessary to recite the prayer 'Pour out Your wrath, etc.' before 'Not unto
us, O Lord,' and to open the doors, so as not to forget that it is a night of vigil. As a reward for
such faith, the Messiah will come and pour out His wrath upon the Gentiles."

The text of the Shefoch prayer reads:

"Pour out Your wrath upon the nations that do not know You, and upon the kingdoms that do
not invoke Your name; for they have devoured Jacob and laid waste his dwelling place." (Psalm
79:6-7)

"...Pour out Your fury upon them, and let Your burning anger overtake them!" (Psalm 69:25)
"Pursue them, O Lord, with Your anger and destroy them from under the heavens."
(Lamentations 3:66)

Law 15

"On holidays, when all work is prohibited, cooking is also prohibited. Each person is allowed to
prepare only what they need for their own meal. However, when one needs to cook for oneself,
it is permitted to add additional food to the same pot, even if the added food is intended for
dogs, because we are obligated to provide sustenance for dogs. However, adding food for a
Gentile is strictly forbidden, as we are not obligated to provide sustenance for them."

Orach Chayim 512, 1:

"On festive days, it is not permissible to cook for a Gentile. Therefore, it is also forbidden to
invite them, as it may result in cooking more (food). However, inviting them (Hagah) is only
prohibited in one's (Jewish) home, but sending food to their (Gentile's) home through a Gentile
is allowed."

"However, it is permitted to share a meal with one's own servant, maidservant, messenger, or a
Gentile who came (without invitation), because then we need not fear that more was cooked
for them" (Hagah). "It is allowed to cook more for one's servant or maidservant in the same pot
used for oneself, but cooking for another Gentile is prohibited in any case."

"When a Jew bakes bread in a Gentile's oven, and one of the loaves is to be given to him, it is
not permissible to designate a specific loaf for the Gentile before baking because then he (the
Jew) would be baking specifically for the Gentile, while he is obliged to first bake without
designating any loaf and then give it to him (the Gentile)."

In the same source, 512, 2:

"When soldiers (Gentiles) provide flour to a Jew for him to bake bread for them, it is
permissible to bake for them if they have no objection to him giving a little bit to a small
(Jewish) child from here."

In the same source, 512, 3:

"It is forbidden to cook or bake specifically for dogs, but it is allowed to take food and give it to
them."

"Furthermore, it is allowed to add food for dogs in the same pot used for oneself, even if there
is something else that could be given to the dogs if the desire arose."

Talmud Beza 21b:

"Why do you consider it necessary to include dogs among 'yours' (i.e., those for whom you may
cook), while excluding Gentiles? I include dogs because you are obligated to feed them, and I
exclude Gentiles because you are not obligated to feed them."

Law 16

"During Chol HaMoed (the days of Jewish festivals celebrated in spring and autumn), all trade
and business activities are strictly forbidden. However, it is allowed to engage in moneylending
with a non-Jew."

Orach Chayim 539, 13:

"Lending money to non-Jews with interest is permitted only for those non-Jews who regularly
borrow from the Jew, as it is a transaction that the Jew might otherwise lose. It is also
permitted for those non-Jews who do not usually borrow from him, but under the condition
that the Jew charges interest only for the first week and uses it for his own enjoyment during
the festival."
Law 17

“When a plague appears somewhere, as a result of which many people become victims of an
epidemic, then the Jews should gather in the synagogue and, without eating or drinking, pray
all day long that Jehovah will take pity on them and deliver them from the plague. When the
plague appeared among animals, then this should not be done, except for the case when it
arose among pigs, since their insides are like the insides of people, and also when the plague
appeared among the Akum.

Orah-chaim 576, 3.

When the plague is among pigs, then one must reconcile, because their (pigs) insides are like
the insides of a person, and even more so when the plague appears among the Akum, and not
among the Jews.

Law 18

“On the holiday of Haman, all Jews should read the thanksgiving prayer “Arur Haman,” which
says: “May Haman and all Akum be cursed, and may Mordecai and all Jews be blessed.”

Orachhainm 690, 16.

“We must say: ‘Cursed be Haman, blessed be Mordecai; Cursed be Zeresh, blessed be Esther;
May all Akum be cursed, may all Jews be blessed!’”

Law 19

"Any court (i.e., a tribunal presided over by the chief rabbi) has the authority to sentence
someone to the death penalty, even in our time, and whenever it deems necessary, even if the
offense itself does not merit capital punishment."
Choshen Mishpat 2, 1:

"Every court, even if the judges are appointed outside of Palestine, when they see that the
people are in turmoil and the situation calls for it, has the power to sentence to death, impose a
monetary fine, or any other punishment, even in cases where there is no clear evidence. They
have the authority to act as they see fit in order to curb the unruliness of the people."

Law 20

"When two Jews have a dispute over money or other matters and are compelled to seek legal
resolution, they must go before the Bet Din (rabbinical court) and abide by its decision.
However, they are not allowed to turn to a non-Jew or seek their rights before a secular court
where non-Jews serve as judges. Even if the non-Jewish law is identical to the Jewish law, it is
still a grave sin and a terrible blasphemy. Whoever violates this directive by seeking their rights
alongside another Jew before a non-Jewish court, the Bet Din is obligated to exclude them from
the community (i.e., subject them to a curse) until they release their fellow Jew from their
claim."

Choshen Mishpat 26, 1:

"It is forbidden to litigate before non-Jewish judges and in their courts, even in a case where
they decide according to Jewish law; this is prohibited even if both parties agree to be judged
by them (non-Jews). And anyone who expresses an intention to litigate before them (non-
Jewish judges) is wicked and is regarded as if he has blasphemed, insulted, or raised his hand
against the Torah of Moses, our Teacher, peace be upon him! The Bet Din has the power (it is in
their hands) to curse and subject him to anathema until he withdraws his case from the non-
Jews against his fellow Jew."

Law 21
"It is not fitting for a Jew to be a witness on behalf of a non-Jew against another Jew. Therefore,
when a non-Jew demands money from a Jew and the Jew denies his debt to the non-Jew, then
it is forbidden for another Jew who knows that the non-Jew is right to testify in his favor. But
when a Jew violates this directive and becomes a witness on behalf of the non-Jew against his
fellow Jew, then the Bet Din is obligated to exclude him from the community (i.e., subject him
to anathema)."

Choshen Mishpat 28, 3:

"When a non-Jew has a claim against a Jew, and there is another Jew who can testify in favor of
the non-Jew against the Jew, and besides him, there are no other witnesses, and the non-Jew
invites the Jew to testify on his behalf, then if this occurs in a place where, according to non-
Jewish law, money can be awarded based on a single witness testimony, it is forbidden for the
mentioned Jew to testify on his behalf (the non-Jew); and if the Jew nevertheless provides such
testimony, a curse should be imposed upon him."

Witnesses)

Law 22

"Only those who possess some humanity and honor can be witnesses, but whoever throws
away their honor, for example, someone who walks naked in the street or openly begs for alms
from non-Jews when it can be done secretly (i.e., privately, as needed), they resemble a dog
because they consider their honor as nothing – therefore, they are incapable of being
witnesses."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 34:18:

"According to the rabbis, despicable individuals are incapable of giving testimony as witnesses.
These include, for example, those who publicly eat in the street, in front of everyone, those
who walk naked in the street, engaging in dirty work, and similar people who consider shame as
nothing. They are all regarded as dogs, and they have no qualms about giving false testimony.
The same category also includes those who openly accept alms from non-Jews, even though
they have the means to support themselves secretly; they become despicable and pay no
attention to it. According to the rabbis, all these individuals are incapable of being witnesses."

Law 23

"Only those who are recognized as human beings can be considered witnesses. However, when
it comes to an akum or a Jew who has become an akum, and is even worse than a natural
akum, they cannot be regarded as human beings – therefore, their testimonies are devoid of
any value" (compare to Law 2).

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 34:19:

"A goy (non-Jew) and a slave are incapable of giving testimonies."

Law 24:

"When a Jew holds an akum in his clutches (in the Babylonian variant it is the expression
'ma'arufiya,' meaning to strip, continuously deceive, not letting go), then it is permissible for
another Jew to also approach the same akum, lend him money, and, in turn, deceive him in
such a way that the akum eventually loses all his money. The basis for this is that the money of
the akum is considered unclaimed property, not belonging to anyone, and the first person who
desires it has the full right to take possession of it."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat, 156:5, Haga.

"When a Jew has a 'good customer' in the akum, meaning (in such) a locality where it is
believed that others are prohibited from competing with him or conducting business with this
akum; however, there are (other) localities where they do not (impose such restrictions), and
some allow another Jew to approach the same akum, lend him money, conduct business with
him, deceive him, and take away his money, because the money of the akums is considered
ownerless property, and whoever arrives first has the right to claim it. Others, however,
prohibit this (i.e., Jews competing with each other).

Law 25:

"Citizens (i.e., Jews) of one community have the right to forbid merchants from other localities
to come to their place and sell goods cheaper, except in cases where the goods of the outsiders
are better than those of the local residents. In that case, the locals cannot prohibit it, as the
buyers would receive better merchandise. However, this can only be permitted where the
buyers are also Jews. In a place where the buyers are non-Jews (akum), outsiders can be
forbidden, and this is because allowing a benefit to the akum is considered a sin; for we (Jews)
recognize as a fundamental rule that one can throw a piece of meat to a dog, but one should
not give it to a non-Jew (Christian), as a dog is better than a non-Jew (Christian)."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 156:7, Haga.

"Some say that the law that allows citizens of one city to forbid citizens of another city (from
coming with goods) applies only when the buyers do not suffer a loss, specifically when they
(outsiders) sell as other merchants of that city and when their goods are not better than those
of the locals. However, when they sell cheaper or when their goods are better, causing the
buyers to profit from them (outsiders), then the merchants of the city cannot forbid this, but
only on the condition that the buyers are Jews; if the akumim (non-Jews) benefit from this, then
there is no prohibition (i.e., the locals can certainly forbid this to outsiders)."

Law 26:
"When a Jew employs an agent in a business deal, with an agreement that everything the agent
finds belongs to the owner (the Jew), and the agent deceives an akum by involving him in the
secondary payment of a debt previously settled by the same akum, or the agent cheats the
akum in any other way, then the profit obtained belongs to the owner (the Jew). This is because
such profits are considered as if they were found items (as the property of Christians is
considered to be unclaimed property according to Jews, so Jews can take as much as they can
seize)."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 176:12, Haga.

"When someone made an agreement with another person for them to trade with the latter's
money, and everything found by the latter (the agent) belongs to the owner (the one who
provided the money), and the agent receives a debt already paid by the akum, then it falls into
the category of 'found items' since each redeemed promissory note is nothing more than a
piece of paper. Therefore, if someone returns such money to the akum, they are not obliged to
compensate their owner (the one who provided the money), and it is even directly permitted
(i.e., to return the non-Jew his money)."

Law 27:

"When a Jew sends an agent (a messenger) to the akum to collect a specific amount of money,
and the agent deceives the akum by taking more than was supposed to be taken, then the
excess amount belongs to the agent."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 183:7.

"When someone sends an agent (a messenger) to collect money from the akum, and (this one)
makes a mistake and gives the him more money than is due, then all the excess amount
belongs to the agent, but only if the agent knew about the mistake before handing over the
mistakenly received money to their owner (the one who sent the agent). However, if the agent
did not know about the mistake and already handed over the money to the one who sent them,
then all the excess amount belongs to the latter (the one who sent the agent)."
Law 28:

"When a Jew is dealing with an akum, and another Jew comes and deceives the akum,
regardless of whether by false measurement, weight, or quantity, then both Jews must share
such profit (barыsh) between them."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 183:7, Haga.

"When someone has a business transaction with an akum, and another Jew comes and assists
him by deceiving the akum in measurement, weight, or quantity, then they share the profit
(barыsh) between themselves, regardless of whether he (the assisting Jew) helped for money
or without charge."

Law 29:

"When a Jew sends an agent (a messenger) to the akum to pay a debt, and upon arrival, the
agent notices that the akum has forgotten about the debt, then the sent agent must return the
money to the Jew who sent him. The agent cannot justify himself by claiming that by paying the
money to the non-Jew (Christian), he intended to honor the Name of God, so that the akum
would say: 'Jews are indeed honorable people.' He could only do something like that with his
own money; he has no right to disperse someone else's money."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 183:8.

"Reuben sent Simon to buy clothes for him on credit, and when the payment was due, Reuben
gave him the money to make the payment. However, it turned out that the seller forgot about
the payment. In this case, Simon must return the money to Reuben, and he is not allowed to
say: 'I want to keep the money for now, maybe the akum will remember it a little later.' He also
cannot say: 'I want to sanctify the Name of God and give the money to the akum.'"

Law 30:

"When a Jew sells something, movables or immovables, to another Jew, and it turns out that
the seller stole these items, as a result of which the rightful owner took them back, then the
seller is obligated to return the money received from the buyer since he should not have stolen.
However, if he stole these items from an akum, and the akum takes them back, then the seller
is not obligated to return the money to the buyer."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 225:1.

"Every seller of land, a slave, or movables is responsible for the obligations (related to the
mentioned items). For example, if someone comes and, due to the seller's fault, takes away
from the buyer the purchased item from the seller's hands, then the buyer goes back and takes
back the full amount paid to the seller because the purchase was taken away thanks to the
latter (the seller)."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 225:2.

"But, when the purchase is taken away from the buyer by an akum – whether by royal decree
or by the decision of their judges, then the seller is not obligated to return the paid money.
Even if the akum claims that the seller stole or robbed him and presents witnesses from other
akums as evidence, the seller has no obligation in such cases because it is coercion, and the
seller is not required to compensate for what was taken by force."

Law 31:
"It is strictly forbidden for a Jew to deceive his fellow Jew, and deception is considered when he
deprives him of one-sixth of the value. Whoever deceives his fellow Jew must return everything
back. It is evident that all of this applies only among Jews. However, it is permitted to deceive
an akum (non-Jew), and he does not have to return to the akum what he deceived him by,
because in the Holy Scriptures, it is said: 'Do not deceive your neighbor, brother.' But akums are
not our brothers, on the contrary, as mentioned above (Law 25), they are worse than dogs!"

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 227:1.

"It is forbidden to deceive one's neighbor both in buying and selling, and anyone who deceives,
whether he is a seller or a buyer, violates the prohibition."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 227:2.

"What amount is necessary for the obligation to return? One-sixth of the value. For example, if
someone sells something worth 6 for 5, or worth 7 for 6, or worth 5 for 6, or worth 6 for 7, it is
deception. Although the sale is valid, the deceiver must pay the money he deceived by and
return everything to the deceived."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 227:26.

"But concerning the akum, there is no deception (in excessive enrichment) because it is said:
'Do not deceive one of your brothers!' Nevertheless, an akum who deceives a Jew is obliged,
according to our (Jewish) laws, to return everything he deceived so that he has no advantage
over the Jew."
Law 32:

"When a Jew rents a house from another Jew, then it is permissible for a third Jew to come and
offer a higher price than the first tenant and rent the house for himself. However, when the
owner is an akum (non-Jew), then the one responsible for the akum receiving more profit shall
be cursed (this expression is in Aramaic - 'menuda,' meaning he cannot go to the synagogue
until the rabbi releases him from the bonds of the curse)."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 237:1, Haga.

"And there is someone who writes that under the fear of Rabbi Gershon's curse, it is forbidden
to compete when renting houses from akums."

Law 33:

"It is considered an obligation for a Jew to fulfill everything written by a sick person in their will,
except in the case when they ordered something sinful to be done. According to this, if the sick
person in their will gifts something to an akum (non-Jew), it should not be executed because, as
we will see later, it is considered a grave sin to give anything to an akum."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 256:3.

"It is not allowed to obey a sick person when he commands to give a gift to an akum because it
is the same as if he commands to commit a sin with his money."

Law 34:

"A Jew who finds something, whether it be animate or inanimate objects, is obligated to return
them to their owner. It is evident that this applies only to a Jew who has lost something.
However, when the find belongs to an akum (non-Jew), then not only is the Jew not obligated
to return it, but, on the contrary, it is considered a grave sin to return anything to an akum,
unless it is done with the purpose of making akums say: 'Jews are honorable people.'"

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 259:1.

"Whoever sees a lost item of a Jew is obligated to make an effort to return it to its owner
because it is written: 'You must return it back.'"

The thing lost by Akum is allowed to be kept (without giving it back), because it is said: “Lost by
your brother”, hence - whoever gives it away (he) commits a great sin. But if he returns it to
sanctify the Name (of God), so that the Jews are praised and claimed to be honest people, then
this is commendable.

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 266:1.

Law 35:

"When a Jew encounters a burdened animal, which has fallen under the weight of its load, or a
loaded wagon, and the animals pulling it have collapsed in exhaustion, then he is obligated to
come to the aid of the driver or the wagoner and, as needed, assist in unloading or reloading.
Every Jew must provide such help both to his fellow and to the animals. He is obligated to do so
even if only the cargo belongs to a Jew and the animals to an akum (non-Jew), or vice versa
when the animals belong to a Jew and the cargo to an akum. However, when the animals and
the cargo both belong to an akum, then there is no consideration of compassion or mercy
toward the cargo owner or the animals. In such a case, no Jew is obligated to assist either the
owner of the cargo or the animals."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 272:1.

"Whoever meets his neighbor on the road with his animal that has fallen under its burden,
whether it is a proportional or an excessive weight, is obligated to relieve the animal of its load
because it is written: 'You must help him.'"

The same applies when the animal belongs to an akum, and the cargo to a Jew. If the akum
himself is the driver of the animal, it does not impose any obligation. However, when he is not
the driver, then there is an obligation to unload and load the cargo because the Jew is in a
difficult position.

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 272:8.

"Likewise, when the animal belongs to a Jew, and the cargo to an akum, you are obligated to
unload and load because the Jew is in a difficult position. But when both the animal and the
burden belong to an akum, then you are not obligated to engage in this unless to avoid
animosity."

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 272:9.

Law 36:

"When a Jew owes money to an akum, and this akum dies, it is forbidden for the Jew to return
the money to the akum's heirs, provided that no other akum knows that the Jew still owes the
deceased akum. However, if at least one akum knows about the debt, then the Jew is obligated
to pay the money to the heirs, so that the akums do not say: 'The Jews are deceivers.'"

Hoshen Ha-Mishpat 283:1.

"A Jew who owes something to an akum, when the latter dies and none of the akums know
about the debt, is not obligated to pay it to the heirs."

Law 37:

"A Jew is prohibited from stealing anything from another Jew or from a gentile (goy). However,
deceiving a gentile, for example, by overcharging him during a transaction (in Hebrew, the term
used is 'ta'uf' - deceive), or not paying his debt, is allowed, but one must be cautious so that the
act remains undetected and does not desecrate the Name of God.

"Hoshen ga-Mishpat 348, 2."

Anyone who steals, even if it is something of little value, violates the commandment: 'Do not
steal,' and is obligated to return it, regardless of whether it belongs to a Jew or a gentile, to an
important or insignificant person, whom he stole from (Haga).

Leading a gentile astray, for example, deceiving him during a transaction or not repaying a debt,
is allowed, but only if he is not aware of it, so as not to desecrate the Name of God. Some say
that it is directly prohibited to deceive him and that it is only permissible when he makes a
mistake himself."
Law 38:

"When a Jew buys something from a thief and sells the purchased item to another Jew, and
then a third Jew comes and claims that the purchased item is his property and takes it for
himself, the seller is obligated to return the buyer's money. However, if a gentile comes to the
buyer and claims that the purchased item is his property, it is not returned to him. If the gentile
complains to their court (gentile court) and recovers his property through the legal process,
then the seller is not obligated to return the buyer's money (because the buyer, who bought
from the thief, did not make a mistake as the purchased item was stolen property from the
gentile).

Hoshen ga-Mishpat 356, 10, Haga

If a Jew buys something from a thief and sells it to another Jew, and then a gentile comes and
claims that it was stolen from him and takes it back according to their laws (gentile laws), then
if the identity of the thief is known, the first Jew is obligated to return the money to the second
buyer. But if the identity of the thief is unknown, the first Jew is not obligated to return the
money to the second buyer because he can say, 'Perhaps the gentile is lying.'"

Law 39:

"When a Jew is a monopolistic buyer (who has purchased from the government a monopoly
over a whole city or a larger district for a certain sum), it is not allowed for another Jew to cause
harm to him (for example, through smuggling or contraband). But when the monopolistic buyer
is a gentile, then it is allowed, as it is similar to not paying one's debts, and as we have seen
above (law 37), this is permissible.

Hoshen ga-Mishpat 369, 6.

Similarly, if a Jew has bought from the king the right to collect customs duties, then the one
who engages in smuggling is considered a robber of the Jew. But when the customs duties have
been taken as a payment to the gentile, then it is allowed (to engage in smuggling), as it is
equivalent to not paying one's debts, and this is permissible in a place where there is no fear of
desecrating the Name (of God).

Law 40:

"When a Jew holds the position of a muhasa (i.e., a government tax collector or customs
inspector) - in other words, when he has not purchased the right (to collect taxes for himself)
and is collecting them for the government - then he is forbidden to use violence against another
Jew. Why? Because the king (for whom he collects) is a gentile, and non-payment of taxes is
equivalent to not paying debts to a gentile, which, as we have seen (see law 37), is permissible -
therefore, one Jew should not compel another Jew to do so. However, if the said official (Jew)
fears that the king will find out about it, then he may use force against another Jew.

Hoshen ga-Mishpat 369, 6, Haga

There are those who say that even in cases where the official is Jewish, if he has not purchased
(the right to collect customs duties) for himself but is collecting them for the king, although
engaging in smuggling is prohibited based on local laws, nevertheless, when someone imports
prohibited goods, the collector should not compel him (the smuggler) to pay the duty because
it is the same as not paying debts, which is permissible. But if this is done out of fear of the king,
then, of course, the collector can compel him (the smuggler) to pay."

Law 41:
"State laws must be enforceable; however, this only applies to laws that generate revenue for
the government. But among tax laws, not all are subject to enforcement, only those related to
land (i.e., property taxes and taxes on buildings); as for other tax and excise laws, they do not
need to be enforced. Property and building taxes cannot be avoided because the land belongs
to the ruler, and he can declare that he allows us to live on his land only if we pay taxes on real
estate."

Hoshen ga-Mishpat 369, 11, Haga.

"When in a place where non-Jewish laws are applied, and someone gets married, and his wife
dies, then her father or other heirs are not entitled to claim: 'Every man who married agreed to
the local customs, and we settle the matter according to non-Jewish laws, so the husband is not
an heir, etc.' In this case, the state law does not apply because, as we say, it is a law only when
the ruler receives revenue or when it concerns civil governance. However, private matters
cannot be judged by non-Jewish laws, or else all Jewish laws would become superfluous."

The same applies to Hoshen ga-Mishpat 369, 8, Haga.

"There are those who say: 'State law is the law.' But we assert that this is true only regarding
taxes and levies related to the land because the ruler allows us to live in the country only under
this condition. This rule does not apply to other matters. And others argue and tell that we say
in all matters: 'State law is the law'."

Law 42:

"It is forbidden to play cubiya with a Jew, meaning to deceive him in card games, dice, or other
gambling games, as all of this is robbery, and robbing Jews is prohibited. But with a non-Jew, it
is permissible to play cubiya."

Hoshen ga-Mishpat 370, 1.

"There are things that rabbis prohibit because they fall under the category of 'robbery,' and
anyone who acts against this is considered a robber according to rabbinic decision. For
example, those who release doves and those who play with "bones"."

The same applies to Hoshen ga-Mishpat 370, 3.

"There is also someone who says that playing with "bones" with a non-Jew is not considered
robbery, but still, it is a sin because they engage in frivolities."

Law 43:

"When a Jew sells something to a non-Jew and takes more than it is worth, and then another
Jew comes to the non-Jew and tells him that the purchase is not worth that much, as a result of
which the non-Jew returns the item, then the second Jew is obligated to pay the first Jew the
difference between the cost and the price for which the item was sold to the non-Jew.

Likewise, when a Jew lends money to a non-Jew with high interest, and another Jew comes to
the non-Jew and offers him money at lower interest rates, the second Jew is considered wicked
and must compensate the first Jew for all the excess profit he would have gained from the non-
Jew if the latter had not borrowed money from the second Jew."

Hoshen ga-Mishpat 386, 3, Hara.

"There is someone who writes that when Reuven sold something to a non-Jew, and then
Shimon comes and tells the non-Jew that the item is not worth that much, then Shimon must
fully compensate Reuven."

"When Reuven lent money to a non-Jew as collateral, and then Shimon comes and tells the
non-Jew that he wants to lend him money at more moderate interest rates, and the non-Jew
returns Reuven's money, then Shimon is allowed to do so since it only causes a loss (deprivation
of profit). However, he is still considered wicked."
Law 44:

"When the law requires a contribution of natural products (such as wine, straw, etc.) to the
king, and a certain Jew avoids this obligation, but another Jew reports him, as a result of which
he is forced to make the contribution, then the Jew who made the report must compensate the
first Jew for all the seized natural products (and, of course, other losses, as well as possible
fines) in this manner."

Hoshen ga-Mishpat 388, 2.

"When the ruler orders the delivery of wine, straw, or similar things to him, and an informant
goes and says, 'So-and-so has wine or straw reserves in this or that place,' and they go there
and take (those reserves), then the informant is obligated to provide compensation."

Law 45:

"Even in our time, it is permissible to kill a moseir, which means a person who boasts that he
intends to inform on someone, as a result of which the accused may face bodily punishment
(such as imprisonment) or financial penalties, even if they are minor. Initially, they tell him, 'Do
not inform.' But when he resists and repeats, 'I will still inform,' not only is it allowed but
considered a righteous act to kill him, and the one who delivers the deadly blow to him will be
blessed. And when there is no time to warn him, then it is permissible to kill him immediately
without warning."

Hoshen ga-Mishpat 388, 10.

"A betrayer is permitted to be killed anywhere, even in our time. It is allowed to kill him before
he manages to inform; he has condemned himself to death as soon as he says, 'I will inform on
so-and-so, causing him to suffer a loss either physically or financially, even if it's just a small
amount.' You must warn him and say, 'Do not inform!' But when he persists and says, 'No, I will
still inform,' then it is a meritorious deed to kill him, and whoever kills him first gains merit
(Haga). If there is no time to warn him, then even the warning itself is unnecessary. There are
those who say that it is only necessary to kill a betrayer when there is no possibility of escaping
him through any of his body parts. However, when it is possible to escape by disabling one of
his body parts, for example, cutting out his tongue or blinding him, then it is forbidden to kill
him because such a betrayer is no more dangerous than other pursuers."

Law 46:

"When someone has informed against a Jew to non-Jewish authorities three times, even if he
promises to improve and not inform in the future, one should still find ways and means to get
rid of him from this world. The expenses incurred in removing him should be paid by those Jews
living in the same city (the place of the incident)."

Hoshen ga-Mishpat 388, 15.

"When it is established that someone has informed against a Jew or his money to non-Jewish
authorities three times, then one must seek ways and methods to get rid of him from this
world."

The same applies to Hoshen ga-Mishpat 388, 16.

"All residents of the area, even those who pay their taxes in another location, must participate
in the expenses incurred to eliminate the betrayer from this world."
Law 47:

"When a Jewish ox gores a non-Jewish ox, the Jewish owner is not obligated to compensate the
non-Jewish owner for the loss because it is stated in the Bible (Exodus 21:35): 'If someone's ox
gores his neighbor's ox,' and the non-Jew is not my neighbor (in the sense of a fellow Jew).
However, when, on the contrary, a non-Jewish ox gores a Jewish ox, then the non-Jew is
obligated to compensate the Jewish owner for the damages because he is a non-Jew."

Hoshen ga-Mishpat 406, 1.

"When a Jewish bull gores a non-Jewish bull, then the Jewish owner is exempt from liability. But
when a non-Jewish bull gores a Jewish bull, regardless of whether it is known to be prone to
goring or not, then the non-Jewish owner must compensate for the harm caused."

Law 48:

"When the fields in Palestine belonged to Jews, it was forbidden to keep small livestock at that
time because it could harm others since such animals usually seek food on others' fields.
However, in Syria, and everywhere else where the fields did not belong to Jews, every Jew was
allowed to keep small livestock freely. On the contrary, in our time, when the fields in Palestine
no longer belong to Jews, they are also allowed to keep small livestock here."

Hoshen ga-Mishpat 409, 1.

"One should not keep small livestock in Palestine because they have a habit of grazing on
others' fields and causing harm. In Syria and in the deserts of Palestine, it is allowed to keep
small livestock. Now, when Jews do not own fields in Palestine, it seems to be allowed (there as
well)."

Law 49:

"Keeping a vicious dog that bites people is forbidden for a Jew unless the dog is tied on a chain,
but this applies only where only Jews live. On the contrary, where non-Jews also reside, a Jew is
allowed to keep such a vicious dog (without it being tied on a chain)."

Hoshen ga-Mishpat 409, 3.

"It is prohibited to keep a vicious dog unless it is tied on an iron chain. But in a city close to the
border, it is allowed; they tie it during the day and let it loose at night (Haga). Some say that
nowadays, when we live among non-Jews, it is allowed anyway—just go and see what people
usually do. However, if the dog is so vicious that one may fear harm to people, then it seems to
be forbidden, except in the case when it is kept on an iron chain."

Law 50:

"Since the Sanhedrin and the Temple (in Jerusalem) no longer exist, death sentences cannot be
pronounced (by the Sanhedrin, i.e., the supreme council of judges) as it was in the past.
However, a rabbinical court can only sentence to death according to Law 19. Regardless of this,
besides the permission to kill a moseir (see Law 45), killing without a rabbinical sentence is
considered a righteous act in the following cases:

b) A Jew performs a righteous act when he kills an apikores (heretic). When a Jew can publicly
execute such a killing, he should do it! But when he cannot do this due to fear of the
government authorities, then he should consider ways to secretly eliminate the apikores from
this world. Thus, while a Jew is not directly obligated to kill a non-Jew with whom he lives in
peace, he is by no means allowed to save the non-Jew from death."

Hoshen ga-Mishpat 425, 5, Haga.

"We no longer have the power to give lashes (39 lashes with a whip or rod), exile, kill, or beat
all those who deserve death according to the Bet Din (rabbinical court). We can only
excommunicate and exclude them from the community according to the law. However, if the
Bet Din deems that the situation demands it in order to protect (a certain matter), they (Jewish
judges) can punish as they wish... All this applies only to such cases when the Bet Din is
necessary. On the contrary, regarding those who can be killed even without the Bet Din, the
death penalty is carried out even now, as we will explain."

Hoshen ga-Mishpat 425, 5.

"A Jewish heretic, that is, one who engages in non-Jewish worship or sins deliberately, even if it
is merely eating meat from a carcass or wearing a garment made of wool and linen with intent
to defy Jewish laws, is considered a heretic, as are those who reject the Torah and the prophets
of Israel. Killing all such individuals is a righteous act. When there is the authority to kill them all
with a sword, then let it be done. But if there is no such authority, they should be hindered in
every possible way to bring about their death. For example, when you see one of them fall into
a well and there is a ladder in the well, hurry to remove it, saying, 'I have a concern—I need to
take my son down from the roof, and I will bring it back to you now,' and so on. However, non-
Jews with whom we are not at war or those who graze small livestock in Israel where the fields
belong to Jews, etc., are not to be harmed to death. However, it is forbidden to save them from
death."

Law 51:

"An animal killed by a non-Jew or by a Jew who has become a non-Jew should be considered
carrion by Jews."
Yore De'ah 2, 1.

"An animal killed by a gentile should be considered as if it died of natural causes, even if the
gentile is a minor or not an idolater, and even if other Jews were present when it happened."

Law 52:

"A Jew is prohibited from slaughtering an animal that is not yet 8 days old. And when a non-Jew
comes to sell an animal to a Jew and claims that the animal is already 8 days old, the Jew should
not believe him, as non-Jews are liars and deceivers."

Yore De'ah 15, 3.

"One cannot rely on a non-Jew regarding young goats that they sell to him and claim they are 8
days old."

Law 53:

"A Jew is forbidden from hiring a non-Jewish woman (Christian woman) as a wet nurse when he
can have a Jewish woman as one because the nature and character of the wet nurse usually
pass on to the child; from a non-Jewish woman, the child becomes foolish and acquires bad
qualities."

Yore De'ah 81, 7, Haga.

"It is not allowed to have a child nursed by a non-Jewish woman when a Jewish woman is
available because the milk of a non-Jewish woman closes the heart and creates evil tendencies
in the child. Therefore, the wet nurse, even if she is Jewish, should not eat any forbidden food,
and the child itself should not eat such foods as all of this will harm the child later on."