Is the Tanakh for everyone?

[Sha'irullah]

A common outside opinion regarding the Tanakh is that is is just for the Jews although Christians like using it still. Although it is indeed a Jewish text and thus mean't for Jews there is a stigma for me when I take any inspiration from it. I always have the opinion that Judaism is a very closed religion and does not take kindly to outsiders using their holy writ. Lets face it, the 2 most major religions have essentially copied from the Tawrah.

Is it frowned upon for a goy like myself to enjoy reciting verses from the book of Tehillim/Psalms? I just got a Tanakh and I obviously am interested in the differences.

 

[Tarheeler]

A common outside opinion regarding the Tanakh is that is is just for the Jews although Christians like using it still. Although it is indeed a Jewish text and thus mean't for Jews there is a stigma for me when I take any inspiration from it. I always have the opinion that Judaism is a very closed religion and does not take kindly to outsiders using their holy writ. Lets face it, the 2 most major religions have essentially copied from the Tawrah.

Is it frowned upon for a goy like myself to enjoy reciting verses from the book of Tehillim/Psalms? I just got a Tanakh and I obviously am interested in the differences.

Only Jews are required to follow it; others are free to use it if they wish.

To me, the problem arises when someone tells us that we're understanding it or following it incorrectly. As for the idea of our religion being "closed", I think that's more a matter of ignorance than anything else; I've found that very few non-Jews know anything about Judaism, and base most of their knowledge on rumors, assumptions, and misinformation. I've met a lot of people who had no idea that one could convert to Judaism; they assumed that if you weren't born a Jew, you could never become one.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Is it frowned upon for a goy like myself to enjoy reciting verses from the book of Tehillim/Psalms? I just got a Tanakh and I obviously am interested in the differences.

Not by me. I refer to my copy of Asad's The Message of the Qur'an often. I find it to be a valuable and frequently inspiring resource. I hope you have the same experience.

 

[Tumah]

The Talmud teaches that a non-Jew is not allowed to learn Torah. The exception is to learn the parts that are relevant for non-Jews, namely: regarding the 7 Noahide Laws. On the other hand, the Talmud also teaches that a non-Jew who does learn the portions of the Torah related to the 7 Noahide Laws is considered as great as the High Priest.

So there you have it. Do with it what you will.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The Talmud teaches that a non-Jew is not allowed to learn Torah.

Perhaps the Talmud is wrong ...

 

[Tumah]

Perhaps the Talmud is wrong ...

Yes, other religions have been saying that for a long time.

However, I feel as a Jew, I should take the position of Jewish teachings rather than non-Jewish ones. At the very least, it would behoove me to present the official Jewish teaching on the subject when that is what is requested.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I appreciate your point of view. Please appreciate mine, that being that there exists a world of difference between the concept "official Jewish teaching" and "orthodox Jewish teaching." I suspect that most people affiliated with the World Union of Progressive Judaism, as well as those associated with the Reform, Reconstructionist, and the Conservative movements, would welcome a respectful reading of the Tanakh by a non-Jew.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Here is an interesting article ...

 

[metis]

A common outside opinion regarding the Tanakh is that is is just for the Jews although Christians like using it still. Although it is indeed a Jewish text and thus mean't for Jews there is a stigma for me when I take any inspiration from it. I always have the opinion that Judaism is a very closed religion and does not take kindly to outsiders using their holy writ. Lets face it, the 2 most major religions have essentially copied from the Tawrah.

Is it frowned upon for a goy like myself to enjoy reciting verses from the book of Tehillim/Psalms? I just got a Tanakh and I obviously am interested in the differences.

First of all, we couldn't really stop you if we wanted to and, secondly, I think that you not only have the ability to read it, I think you should. I've read much of the Qur'an, the entire Bhagavad Gita, parts of the Pali Canon, the entire "New Testament", and I don't understand what harm this might do other than maybe encouraging some to maybe second-guess their own scriptures. However, I don't think that's really bad either. I have always had problems with the "my way or the highway" approach found with some groups and some people.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The Talmud teaches that a non-Jew is not allowed to learn Torah. The exception is to learn the parts that are relevant for non-Jews, namely: regarding the 7 Noahide Laws. On the other hand, the Talmud also teaches that a non-Jew who does learn the portions of the Torah related to the 7 Noahide Laws is considered as great as the High Priest.

So there you have it. Do with it what you will.

From Sanhedrin 59a:

R. Johanan said: A heathen who studies the Torah deserves death, for it is written, Moses commanded us a law for an inheritance; it is our inheritance, not theirs. Then why is this not included in the Noachian laws? — On the reading morasha [an inheritance] he steals it; on the reading me'orasah [betrothed], he is guilty as one who violates a betrothed maiden, who is stoned. An objection is raised: R. Meir used to say. Whence do we know that even a heathen who studies the Torah is as a High Priest? From the verse, [Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments:] which, if man do, he shall live in them. Priests, Levites, and Israelites are not mentioned, but men: hence thou mayest learn that even a heathen who studies the Torah is as a High Priest! — That refers to their own seven laws.

We should perhaps be careful when using the phrase "the Talmud teaches," lest we distort our teachings. Here, for example, the Talmud 'teaches' that there was a disagreement between R. Johanan and R. Meir.

 

[Levite]

While Jews generally have not been pleased when other religions take our scriptures, adopt them wholesale, and twist them as they please (and then tell us we don't really understand our own texts), that is a very different matter from individual non-Jews respectfully and curiously studying our texts and traditions, or even individual non-Jews using/syncretizing for personal use such elements of our text and tradition they feel resonate with them.

There have been any number of authorities in our tradition who have condoned teaching non-Jews at least some Torah, even if only for the sake of promoting cordial relationships among Jews and non-Jews. And there are many fine scholars and rabbis today-- including some Orthodox ones-- who will teach Tanach or Talmud or any other Jewish text to non-Jews who wish to learn.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

While Jews generally have not been pleased when other religions take our scriptures, adopt them wholesale, and twist them as they please (and then tell us we don't really understand our own texts), that is a very different matter from individual non-Jews respectfully and curiously studying our texts and traditions, or even individual non-Jews using syncretizing for personal use such elements of our text and tradition they feel resonates with them.

There have been any number of authorities in our tradition who have condoned teaching non-Jews at least some Torah, even if only for the sake of promoting cordial relationships among Jews and non-Jews. And there are many fine scholars and rabbis today-- including some Orthodox ones-- who will teach Tanach or Talmud or any other Jewish text to non-Jews who wish to learn.

Yet another fine post.

 

[Tumah]

I appreciate your point of view. Please appreciate mine, that being that there exists a world of difference between the concept "official Jewish teaching" and "orthodox Jewish teaching." I suspect that most people affiliated with the World Union of Progressive Judaism, as well as those associated with the Reform, Reconstructionist, and the Conservative movements, would welcome a respectful reading of the Tanakh by a non-Jew.

That may and or may not be so. I have no idea. But I do think that the opinion of the Talmud should be presented when someone requests a Jewish perspective.

Your knee-jerk attack on the Talmud ("Perhaps the Talmud is wrong") because it doesn't work with your inter-faith views, suggests that you don't appreciate my view. Which is fine. But why are you asking me to appreciate yours immediately afterwards?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

That may and or may not be so. I have no idea. But I do think that the opinion of the Talmud should be presented when someone requests a Jewish perspective.

Very well: see post 10.

Your knee-jerk attack on the Talmud ("Perhaps the Talmud is wrong") ...

It was not a knee-jerk reaction. I have never considered Talmud to be inerrant holy writ.

... because it doesn't work with your inter-faith views, ...

It had absolutely nothing to do with "my interfaith views," nor am I at all sure what you think you meant by the reference.

..., suggests that you don't appreciate my view. Which is fine. But why are you asking me to appreciate yours immediately afterwards?

No, it does not. Google offers the following definitions for 'appreciate' …

1. recognize the full worth of.
2. understand (a situation) fully; recognize the full implications of.

Neither definition suggests agreement or approval.

 

[Tumah]

Very well: see post 10.

Oh, I missed that post.
Anyway, there is no disagreement there. As I explained (quoting Rashi actually) one is speaking about Torah learning in general and the other about the 7 Noahide Laws.

It was not a knee-jerk reaction. I have never considered Talmud to be inerrant holy writ.

The knee-jerking I was referring to was the need to point that out. You could have just made a comment along the lines of not all Jews following the Talmud rather than directly attacking it.

It had absolutely nothing to do with "my interfaith views," nor am I at all sure what you think you meant by the reference.

Aren't you involved in interfaith dialogue between Jews and Muslims?
I meant that a Talmudic passage that works against the goal of that dialogue would I assume automatically be dismissed.

No, it does not. Google offers the following definitions for 'appreciate' …

1. recognize the full worth of.
2. understand (a situation) fully; recognize the full implications of.

Neither definition suggests agreement or approval.

Ok. Then I full recognize the implication of your position and am in complete disapproval.

 

[CMike]

A common outside opinion regarding the Tanakh is that is is just for the Jews although Christians like using it still. Although it is indeed a Jewish text and thus mean't for Jews there is a stigma for me when I take any inspiration from it. I always have the opinion that Judaism is a very closed religion and does not take kindly to outsiders using their holy writ. Lets face it, the 2 most major religions have essentially copied from the Tawrah.

Is it frowned upon for a goy like myself to enjoy reciting verses from the book of Tehillim/Psalms? I just got a Tanakh and I obviously am interested in the differences.

Any religion can ready and study the Tanach.

What gets me displeased is when they start twisting perverting it to fit their beliefs.

 

[dantech]

Read all about it. Just don't come tell us how it should be interpreted when you started learning the names of the Hebrew letters a week ago. Sorry, this rant has nothing to do with you, just the people on this forum in general.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Read all about it. Just don't come tell us how it should be interpreted when you started learning the names of the Hebrew letters a week ago. Sorry, this rant has nothing to do with you, just the people on this forum in general.

Any religion can ready and study the Tanach.

What gets me displeased is when they start twisting perverting it to fit their beliefs.

I understand fully what you guys are saying. I do not understand Judaism and to be frank I find it intimidating considering that I was a Christian and a Muslim at one point and the giant elephant in room is Judaism. Both religions copied the Tawrah after all.

I just can't tell the difference between wacky fundamental Judaism from ultra liberal Judaism since I am ignorant of the most basics. I keep hearing this stuff that no gentile should read the tanakh and it is not for them as opposed to the other side saying it is for anybody.
I am a monotheistic non-idolatrous semitic neopagan so I hope my religious affiliation wouldn't be deemed "anti-Judaic" I assume?
Having an interest in Semitic theology it just seems that the Tanakh would be a no-brainer for me.

 

[Avi1001]

......I just can't tell the difference between wacky fundamental Judaism from ultra liberal Judaism.....

Hi, I'm the ultra liberal Jewish whacko. Any questions ?

 

[Levite]

I understand fully what you guys are saying. I do not understand Judaism and to be frank I find it intimidating considering that I was a Christian and a Muslim at one point and the giant elephant in room is Judaism. Both religions copied the Tawrah after all.

I just can't tell the difference between wacky fundamental Judaism from ultra liberal Judaism since I am ignorant of the most basics. I keep hearing this stuff that no gentile should read the tanakh and it is not for them as opposed to the other side saying it is for anybody.
I am a monotheistic non-idolatrous semitic neopagan so I hope my religious affiliation wouldn't be deemed "anti-Judaic" I assume?
Having an interest in Semitic theology it just seems that the Tanakh would be a no-brainer for me.

A religious affiliation in and of itself would be very hard to classify as "anti-Judaic." Generally speaking, we judge individuals on their actions, not the beliefs of their group or faith or culture or whatnot-- at least, in theory we do so, since that's how we're supposed to act.

I am sure if you look in the ultra-Orthodox world you can find some people who think non-Jews should be prohibited from any kind of Torah study. But you can probably also find people who don't think that. And likewise, if you look on the leftward fringe of the Liberal movements, I'm sure you can find some people who think that non-Jews should be able to stroll right in and claim equal share in Torah and Jewish tradition with Jews. But you can certainly also find people who don't think that. And the majority of practicing Jews are neither on the far right or the far left.

For most Jews, I think, the issue is not whether non-Jews study Torah at all, but why they do so, and what they do with the knowledge they gain once they have it: if they continue to be respectful of Judaism, and use the knowledge they gain for their own personal intellectual or spiritual pursuits, there is no problem. It is only if they use the knowledge they gain to try and appropriate our texts and traditions, to assert the exclusive claim of superiority or authenticity of their beliefs over ours, or to turn what they have learned into tools for aggressively proselytizing Jews to their beliefs that we have a problem.