Kook’s attitude toward non-Jews isn’t just found in his Zionist flavored theology. Before there were Zionists, there were still lots of Jewish anti-Gentilists. And that is because anti-Gentilism is a fundamental element of Judaism. It’s found in the Torah, in some of the most extraordinary expressions of “discrimination” in human literature, thus it should be no surprise that for the past few thousand years, it has produced various strands of Jewish ideology that is deeply hostile or ruthless toward non-Jews. After all, the passage from that 13th century Rabbi cited in the previous chapter is derived from the Torah. Check out how the Orthodox Union, one of the largest Jewish Orthodox organizations in the United States today, describes the author of that passage:
The anonymous author of the “Sefer HaChinuch,” the “Book of Training,” or “Education,” who in his modesty identifies himself only as “a Levite from Barcelona,” was a student of the Rashba, Rabbi Shlomo ben Aderet, in the thirteenth century.
“Modesty” is a peculiar term to use for someone who believed he was entitled, on being in his fantasy among the “choicest of the human species”, to enslave the vast majority of the human species. I think a more accurate term would be hubris. But I don’t suspect the authors of that little bio would have the self-awareness to identity his hubris if it was pointed out, given they live vicariously through it. “The Levite from Barcelona” was a member of the Jewish priestly caste of Levites, whose incestual pedigree may have competed with the royal Christian houses of Europe at the time. As much as there is some emphasis to supposedly care about fellow Jews in the Torah, there is also a hierarchy among Jews themselves in the Torah; and the priests traditionally placed themselves on the top. It was an imperialist priest, Ezra, who may have been among the first to impose some form of the Torah on the people of Judea. In a revealing passage from the book of Ezra (from the Tanakh), we are told that Ezra is given authority by the Persian King to impose laws on all the people of Judea, regardless of whether they knew of them or not.
We also notify you that it shall not be lawful to impose tribute, custom, or toll upon any one of the priests, the Levites, the singers, the doorkeepers, the temple servants, or other servants of this house of God.
And you, Ezra, according to the wisdom of your God which is in your hand, appoint magistrates and judges who may judge all the people in the province Beyond the River, all such as know the laws of your God; and those who do not know them, you shall teach. Whoever will not obey the law of your God and the law of the king, let judgment be strictly executed upon him, whether for death or for banishment or for confiscation of his goods or for imprisonment. -Ezra 7:24
Those people “Beyond the River” were violently coerced to be subject to the laws of the Levites.
When reading the Torah carefully, a person may come to realize that there are often two sets of rules. Rules for Israelites (“Jews”), and rules for everyone else (gentiles). In that sense, Israel today follows the same path. Just as today Jews in Israel are granted special privileges with regard to access to land, property, and other resources, Jews in the Torah are granted various rights and privileges that differ from non-Jews. For example, while Jews are told not to enslave other Jews as property, they are granted the right to do so with non-Jews, which is where the 13th century Spanish Rabbi got his ideas that he had a right to enslave non-Jews from:
And if your brother becomes poor beside you, and sells himself to you, you shall not make him serve as a slave: he shall be with you as a hired servant and as a sojourner. He shall serve with you until the year of the jubilee [7 years]; then he shall go out from you, he and his children with him, and go back to his own family, and return to the possession of his fathers. For they are my servants, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold as slaves. You shall not rule over him with harshness, but shall fear your God. As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are round about you. You may also buy from among the strangers who sojourn with you and their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property. You may bequeath them to your sons after you, to inherit as a possession for ever; you may make slaves of them, but over your brethren the people of Israel you shall not rule, one over another, with harshness. - Leviticus 25:39
It’s okay to be harsh to gentiles, but not to Jews. That is one of the fundamental messages of the Tanakh, as exemplified by passages like that and the behavior of the main characters — such as the genocidal behavior of Moses and Joshua, and of course Yahweh. Thus, when we come across a passage such as “love your neighbor as yourself”, which also appears in Leviticus and is probably most well known as coming out of the mouth of Jesus — context is extremely important. How does a genocidal barbarian like Joshua who kills or enslaves anyone who doesn’t share his mythical ancestry he believes in “love his neighbor” like himself? Well, for that particular passage, simply looking at the source is sufficient:
The Lord said to Moses on Mount Sinai, “Say to the people of Israel, When you come into the land which I give you…
You shall do no injustice in judgment; you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor. You shall not go up and down as a slanderer among your people, and you shall not stand forth against the life of your neighbor: I am the Lord.
You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason with your neighbor, lest you bear sin because of him. You shall not take vengeance or bear any grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord.
You shall keep my statutes. You shall not let your cattle breed with a different kind; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed; nor shall there come upon you a garment of cloth made of two kinds of stuff. -Leviticus 19:16
Unlike what is commonly thought today, “neighbor” in the Tanakh isn’t a reference to a universal humanity — it is a reference to other people in the cult of Yahweh: Israelites. Prohibitions applied to “slandering” Israelites, not “the nations.” There are though passages that grant some consideration for non-Israelites, such as Leviticus 19:33:
When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. The stranger who sojourns with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself; for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.
But, again — context: this passage comes shortly before the passage declaring it alright to enslave people among the nations but not Israelites and is spoken to the people who are on the way to commit genocide by the command of the same character. So, it has become the vocation of superstitious hyper-legalistic Rabbis to figure out how to reconcile how Jews should do no wrong to “sojourners” while simultaneously it’s okay for Jews to enslave strangers from “the nations” (gentiles) or exterminate them. Clarity, consistency, or integrity probably shouldn’t be something to expect from authors who think it’s a sin to make garments made of two kinds of stuff but a duty to wantonly butcher sucklings.
That of course hasn’t stopped Rabbis from trying to square that circle. The incoherent message was not lost on many Jews since it was written. So-called “sages”, people medieval Judaism has given honor as being particularly wise or knowledgeable about the Torah, such as Maimonides, spent years contemplating the madness of the Torah with the erroneous assumption it is Holy. Maimonides was an 11th century Rabbi and the personal physician of the Sultan of Egypt, Saladin. He was such a prolific author that, if you happen to waste your life studying his medical theories on phlegm and bile, you could miss some of the gems buried in his other writings that offer great value to understanding medieval Judaism.
For example, the Mishneh Torah is a compendium of Jewish law, Halakha, that he wrote derived from the Torah and Talmud. The Yigdal Prayer, which is based on Maimonides 13 Principles of Faith, is frequently sung by Jews around the world today. Maimonides has arguably more prestige in medieval Judaism than someone like Augustine in Catholicism. Today, he is still cited as an authority in political and religious debates on popular Israeli television.
On the topic of murder and the preservation of life he wrote this:
With regard to a gentile idolater with whom we are not at war, a Jewish shepherd of small livestock, and the like, by contrast, we should not try to cause their deaths. It is, however, forbidden to save their lives if their lives are threatened. For example, if such a person fell into the sea, one should not rescue him. Leviticus 19:16 states: "Do not stand idly by while your brother's [neighbor’s] blood is at stake." This does not apply with regard to such individuals, because they are not "your brothers." - Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Avodah Kochavim 10:1-2
On the topic of robbery and lost property he wrote this:
It is permissible to keep an object lost by an idolater, for Deuteronomy 22:3 speaks of returning "an object lost by your brother." Indeed, if one returns such an article, one transgresses a prohibition, for one strengthens the power of the wicked peoples of the world. If, however, one returns it to sanctify God's name, so that others will praise the Jewish people and know that they are trustworthy, this is praiseworthy.
When there is a possibility of the desecration of God's name, it is forbidden to keep an object lost by an idolater, and it must be returned. As part of "the ways of peace," we should always bring in their utensils from the outside, lest they be taken by thieves, as we do for utensils owned by Jews. - Mishneh Torah, Sefer Nezikin, Hilchot Gezelah va'Avedah 11:3
When he quotes Leviticus in the first quote, he is quoting the same passage from the Torah I quoted earlier about slandering and loving your neighbor. According to Maimonides’ interpretation of Jewish Law, Halakah, if the life of a gentile is threatened, it is forbidden to save them. And it is okay to keep a gentile’s lost wallet; it is not okay to keep a Jew’s lost wallet. But if you do return it, make sure gentiles know a Jew is doing it, so that gentiles will praise the Jewish people for being trustworthy. I don’t feel that the sort of the thing he is honest about is anything to be proud of nor is it worthy of sending American taxes to Israelis to study.
Maimonides also had quite a bit to say about Jesus. And its especially relevant because Christians today are routinely being lectured by modern Jewish Zionists that the idea that “Jews killed Jesus” is in someway “classically anti-Semitic” — by the words of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. Now, if someone were to claim that Jews killed Jesus and Jews are a race and everyone in that race is morally responsible for the execution of Jesus — I’d argue, yes, that is anti-Semitism. But, simply claiming that Jews, specifically some Jews, killed Jesus, or even that Judaism killed Jesus, is not anti-Semitism. It’s simply historically plausible and basic Christianity. Every gospel and Acts suggests that Jewish leaders plotted to have Jesus executed because of blasphemy / apostasy. And such an execution is in alignment with the Torah. Furthermore, the Talmud itself has passages that suggest that someone named “Yeshu”, was killed for sorcery and inciting people to idol worship. Its commonly believed to refer to Jesus, and that includes Jewish interpreters:
The mishna teaches that a crier goes out before the condemned man. This indicates that it is only before him, i.e., while he is being led to his execution, that yes, the crier goes out, but from the outset, before the accused is convicted, he does not go out. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: On Passover Eve they hung the corpse of Jesus the Nazarene after they killed him by way of stoning. And a crier went out before him for forty days, publicly proclaiming: Jesus the Nazarene is going out to be stoned because he practiced sorcery, incited people to idol worship, and led the Jewish people astray. Anyone who knows of a reason to acquit him should come forward and teach it on his behalf. And the court did not find a reason to acquit him, and so they stoned him and hung his corpse on Passover eve. — Talmud, Sanhedrin 43a
This traditional Jewish view of Jesus is collaborated by Maimonides who wrote a letter to the Jewish community of Yemen:
The first one to have adopted this plan was Jesus the Nazarene, may his bones be ground to dust. He was a Jew because his mother was a Jewess although his father was a Gentile. For in accordance with the principles of our law, a child born of a Jewess and a Gentile, or of a Jewess and a slave, is legitimate. (Yebamot 45a). Jesus is only figuratively termed an illegitimate child. He impelled people to believe that he was a prophet sent by God to clarify perplexities in the Torah, and that he was the Messiah that was predicted by each and every seer. He interpreted the Torah and its precepts in such a fashion as to lead to their total annulment, to the abolition of all its commandments and to the violation of its prohibitions. The sages, of blessed memory, having become aware of his plans before his reputation spread among our people, meted out fitting punishment to him.
Daniel had already alluded to him when he presaged the downfall of a wicked one and a heretic among the Jews who would endeavor to destroy the Law, claim prophecy for himself, make pretenses to miracles, and allege that he is the Messiah, as it is written, "Also the children of the impudent among thy people shall make bold to claim prophecy, but they shall fall." (Daniel 11:14). Quite some time after, a religion appeared the origin of which is traced to him by the descendants of Esau, albeit it was not the intention of this person to establish a new faith. For he was innocuous to Israel as neither individual nor groups were unsettled in their beliefs because of him, since his inconsistencies were so transparent to every one. Finally he was overpowered and put a stop to by us when he fell into our hands, and his fate is well known. After him arose the Madman who emulated his precursor since he paved the way for him.
Here, Maimonides is using collective language himself referring to the execution of Jesus. It was sages, us, and our hands, which led to his execution. Jesus’ execution was in accordance with the religious laws of Judaism and the leaders of Judaism according to a Jewish “sage” who is still widely revered by Jews today. The fact that Neo-Nazis believe that Jesus was killed by the Jews , and Neo-Nazis are anti-Semites, doesn’t mean that people who believe that Jesus was killed by some Jews are anti-Semites. Maimonides believed Jesus was killed by Jews, but I don’t suspect Zionists will accuse him of anti-Semitism. Thus, accusing people of anti-Semitism for believing Jews killed Jesus is simply slander. Based on the evidence we have its reasonable to believe Jesus was killed by Jews. All Jews? Certainly not all Jews, but some Jewish leaders at the time — “the sages of blessed memory”. No Jew today should personally be held morally responsible for the execution of Jesus. However, Jews should still be disparaged for choosing to belong to a religion that traditionally views “sorcery” as a crime deserving of torture and death.