you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]no_u 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

That's not a translation.

Read the whole passage (search: gentile): https://www.sefaria.org/Bava_Kamma.113a?lang=bi

My response to it here

[–]hfxB0oyA 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

An excerpt:

Rav Ashi said: The mishna issues its ruling with regard to a gentile customs collector, whom one may deceive, as it is taught in a baraita: In the case of a Jew and a gentile who approach the court for judgment in a legal dispute, if you can vindicate the Jew under Jewish law, vindicate him, and say to the gentile: This is our law. If he can be vindicated under gentile law, vindicate him, and say to the gentile: This is your law. And if it is not possible to vindicate him under either system of law, one approaches the case circuitously, seeking a justification to vindicate the Jew. This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva disagrees and says: One does not approach the case circuitously in order to vindicate the Jew due to the sanctification of God’s name, as God’s name will be desecrated if the Jewish judge employs dishonest means.

From this, it would seem that there are disagreements within Judaism about this principle, as there are disagreements within all communities. This is why I remain skeptical about tarring any community with one brush.

[–]no_u 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I agree, and after giving this more thought, my primary concern is - in my reply to Jet - here.

[–]Airbus320 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Jet only accepts merkava