Which Noahide is it?

I am pleased to see that my last blog post was well read and shared.

This will be a short [holiday] week, so before delving into the next topic of neo-noahism [as apparently I've coined it as such] I would like to make a brief statement concerning the last blog post.

There are many Noahides in the World B"H.
There are not as many Noahide organizations however.

Aside from the various lone wolf Noahides [and their quasi-organizations; i.e. blogs and books] the official Noahide organizations can probably be counted on one hand.

So to be clear, my mezzuza blog post was directly addressing issues that arise from the beliefs presented on AskNoah.org in cooperation with the expressed beliefs of Pirchei Shoshanim who work in tandem with Ask Noah. 

The issue is: 'are all Noahides akum?' Ask Noah says yes, all Noahides are akum.

On a side note, the blog post had nothing to do with posting a mezzuza on a Noahide's door post. That was strictly the subject matter of a thread on Ask Noah. My objective was strictly to point out the belief system of Ask Noah involving their theological basis of the concept/term - akum, and the ramifications as such.

To be clear that akum does not simply mean: 'akum is just a censored word. It really means all non-Jews' [as some say]; please note the actual text and context of the Rema [from Ask Noah's source text]: 

*(the subject of the Rema in context is when a Jew sells his house to an absolute non-Jew; an akum)

"The akum [complete non-Jew, diametrically opposed to Noahide, during the sale; not careful with the 7 Laws] that requests that he give him [the] mezzuza, so that he may hang it on the door post, [the law is that] it is forbidden to give it to him."

וְאִם שָׂכַר הַבַּיִת מֵעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים, אוֹ שֶׁשְּׂכָרוֹ לְעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים, נוֹטְלָהּ וְיוֹצֵא. הַגָּה: וְעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים שֶׁבִּקֵּשׁ שֶׁיִּתְּנוּ לוֹ מְזוּזָה, וְרוֹצֶה לְקָבְעָהּ בְּפִתְחוֹ, אָסוּר לִתְּנָהּ לוֹ

*The source of this halacha comes from the Talmud, Bava Metzia 102a and the Talmudic term for non-Jew there is Nochri. Please note, a Nochri is the Biblical version of the Talmudic term akum. This is not a censorship issue in context. 

A righteous observant Noahide by definition is not a Nochri in context. Nochri carries a context as an idolater [at least in shituf], and the observant Noahide seeks to reject [all forms of] idolatry [properly]. The Noahide and the Nochri are diametrically opposed philosophically. They should not be the same person [and won't be when Noahides follow the Torah path]; the pinnacle of this concept is a Ger who formally rejects shituf. 

(see Parahsas Re'eh 14:21 where the Nochri is in direct contrast with the Ger in your Gates. Bedieved [consequently], the Ger in this verse could be a [lesser] Noahide, i.e. lacking proper kabbalah and yet careful in the 7 Laws, but still not considered a Nochri. For example, in regard to giving neveilah to the Ger and selling it to the Nochri, any observant Noahide would receive the neveilah as a gift, whereas a Christian, who is a Nochri must purchase the meat. This law is not contingent on a Jubilee Year, and is applicable even today. 

It is also interesting to point out that a Muslim in this case is considered a Ger Toshav [akum], but not a kosher Noahide, and would be gifted the meat over the purchasing Christian. The Rema's akum would be sold the meat, not gifted, for he is a Nochri, and not a Noahide. According to Ask Noah all Noahides are by default Nochri and would never be allowed to be gifted the meat.

The akum of the Rema is a Nochri, i.e. not careful at all in the 7 Laws, by definition of its context, and therefore not the righteous Noahide.)  

It should be obvious and clear that there are many denominations of Noahism, and none of them yet see eye to eye on all crucial subject matters. Notice the last blog post was directed solely upon Ask Noah and their expressed views of akum. I relied on Pirchei Shoshanim's views on akum as well for consistency, especially since they are an official partnership.

Please take note that the majority [if not all] of my original content that takes aim against neo-noahism is in response to content from Ask Noah and Pirchei Shoshanim, as the majority of Noahides subscribe to and share their teachings on the internet and social media. If I occasionally change gears, I will make that clear in my content.

We can take away from this that there are many different hashkafot within today's Noahide, all of which are man-made. Noahism is a new religion and  there are too many disturbing contradictions within Noahism. The search for authentic Noahism is a worthy cause, and yes it is theoretically found within authentic Torah sources. Its authentic version is not man-made, which means, to date, neo-noahism is not authentic [yet]. My goal is not to perfect Noahism, nor is Ger [Toshav] Noahism.

My insights against neo-noahism are not intended to reveal what Noahism is [or should be], rather to reveal what it is not. In the case of my last blog post, I pointed out two parts: A) There are indeed righteous Noahides B) These righteous Noahides per force cannot be considered akum. There are Noahides who are not righteous, and rightfully are considered akum. This would beg the question of what deems one righteous, and this too, is beyond the scope of what I have written about.

There is also the question of, 'why is Ger [Toshav] relevant for non-Jews [who are not content with being Noahides, for better or for worse] and how does exposing the fallacies of Noahism relate to Ger [Toshav]?'

This is not the most pertinent question and it has folks in a bind. However the answers are: A) By definition, from a Torah point of view, Noahism should be authentic B) From a Torah point of view Ger [Toshav] exists and matters.

Theoretically the two are not exactly related nor synonymous, but they are similar enough that people 'conflate' the two. They shouldn't. Reality dictates itself, and with that said, three initiatives must be met with non-Jews seeking righteousness: A) Refine Ger [Toshav] B) Keep Ger [Toshav] separate from Noahide C) Clarify Noahism where it conflicts with Ger [Toshav].

In my last blog post, neo-noahism conflicts with Ger [Toshav], in that Ask Noah paints its Noahides as Pious Gentiles and as akum. One could argue that Ger [Toshav] is a righteous gentile, and BY DEFINITION A GER TOSHAV IS NOT AN AKUM. In authentic Noahism, a righteous gentile, a Noahide, Pious...is not an akum. A non-righteous gentile is an akum.

Neo-noahism conflates [in terminology] its observant congregants with its non-observant congregants. Torah terminology seeks to do the opposite; its terminology distinguishes between observant, non-observant, etc. A righteous Noahide does not think of one's self as an akum per force [according to its Torah definition]; they are not being taught by Ask Noah this fact, nor its ramifications.

There are many differences between an akum and a Pious Gentile in Jewish Law. Another example is the 'Shabbos Goy'. A Shabbos Goy is an akum. A Pious Gentile may not be a Shabbos Goy, but for that to happen they will have to leave the category of akum, and through the prescription laid out in Torah. This is achieved through taking a proper 'kabbalah' [which contains a proper rejection of shituf]. The lack thereof, even if one does not actively belief in shituf, will keep one confined to that of an akum.

It is not mandatory that a gentile seeking righteousness must A) leave akum B) Not be a Shabbos Goy C) Properly reject shituf. One can be an observant Noahide of Noahism and still be A) akum B) Shabbos Goy C) not having rejected shituf according to the Torah prescription [kabbalah].

Yet one may choose to not be an akum. By definition, there are more than one type of non-Jew. We see this explained by the Ritva to Makkos 9a: 'There are three types of non-Jews - Ger Toshav, Ben Noach, and Goy [akum].

In conclusion I have presented at least four core issues:

1. What Noahism isn't [a conflation of terms]
2. What Noahism is [at least a few points of it; not in its entirety]
3. That there is more to choose from [Ger Toshav; not limited to a conflated version of Noahism]
4. There are more than one type of non-Jew

One can be a Noahide. One can be a Ger [Toshav]. One should at the very least be real, and not a product of conflation. Not all non-Jews are the same, and one has the God-given freedom of free will to choose what is best for them. 

Perhaps there is an even more authentic Noahide program out there, one more intelligent than that of Ask Noah. If so, I applaud them. In the meantime, I urge Noahides that if they seek out Noahism, please make sure it is authentic. And for those who seek Ger [Toshav] intelligently, the Torah applauds you and embraces you. The two are not at odds, rather they should be complimentary toward each other. If they are not, then something is wrong.

Topics like the mezzuza, giving meat, Shabbos Goy, etc. come up often, creating awareness and arousing the same burning question each time: 'how many types of non-Jews are there in Torah [Judaism]'. Here is a hint: it's like, ya'll - 'more than two'.

To those that know, it is called 'you either know the sugia' [sugia: bigger framework to which a topic is indigenous to] or 'you do not know the sugia'. Akum, Noahide, Ger, etc. all belong to the greater sugia of the non-Jew in the Torah. To not acknowledge the entire sugia at any point in the discussion of non-Jews is automatically rendered false and incomplete. 

Ger [Toshav] usually is the answer to the questions concerning the righteous gentile. But I understand that people struggle making the jump. This is why the Lubavitcher Rebbe himself states, that there is a righteous Noahide stage that exists between Ger and akum. See the Ritva and others as well. 

The missing distinctions are the cause of confusion because they are deliberately withheld from Torah discussions of the non-Jew. My advice to ya'll...is to not only learn the sugia, but learn how to apply it as well [Lefi Pshuto - textual truths]. 

'These' are the textual truths [Lefi Pshuto] that people apply to real life as a construct. Real life doesn't work this way, nor is real life a contruct. The Torah itself identifies what a righteous gentile is in reality; He is the Ger in your Gates, and he is not a Nochri.

May Hashem bless us all to have the truth revealed with open eyes and may this continue to happen deep into 5778 and beyond.

  

Modern Noahides [of Noahism] are Aku"m

Some things are outrageous and treif

Modern [invented] Noahism is a contemporary man-made religion. In the post Vendyl Jones - era, Noahides are being rounded up to conform to a secular neo-noahism. The ramifications that manifest from this predicament are too many to mention and list in this [specific] blog post, but I would like to point out what I consider to be a core issue of neo-noahism.

Neo-noahism has created a special distinction for non-Jews by referring to them as akum. The immediate logical question is what does akum mean? It means idolater. But that would imply that all non-Jews are idolaters. Neo-noahism would then respond that akum also is a general term for any non-Jew. So if you are reading this, and you are a non-Jew, or a Noahide, you are an akum [according to neo-noahism]. 

Now that we have exchanged insults, I will add some salt to the wound. Neo-noahism defines its Noahide congregants as Faithful and observant Noahides [B'nei Noach] as opposed to secular and plain descendants from Noach. In other words, in Noahism, there are [only] two kinds of people in this world: Jews and non-Jews. And there are [only] two kinds of non-Jews: observant ones and secular ones. Our job as Jews and their job as 'missionaries' are to make all B'nei Noach 'frum'; supremely religious. This would turn them into superior faithful observant Noahides. It is safe to loosely and philosophically [non-halachically] refer to them as the pious from among the nations. 

At this point I have introduced to you the bulk of their terminologies in reference to non-Jews; remember there is only one category of non-Jew in contrast to the Jew. They are just non-Jews. And they are:

• Noahide
• B'nei Noach
• Pious...
• non-Jews
• Akum
• observant [ones]
• secular [ones]
• ...and there are more that are beyond the scope of this blog post

Try to paint a picture of a classic 'Noahide' within these terms. He is a non-Jew. I suppose he isn't idolatrous, i.e. he is not a practicing Christian. Today there is no longer any Biblical idolatry left in the world. He is somewhat righteous; pious from the nations. He keeps the 7 Laws happily and responsibly. He is frum, observant, and therefore faithful. Until now this sounds really good, and if we are sticking to context, our Noahide stands on good ground. 

Before continuing, I would like to point out that up to now we have not given any source text [Hebrew original] and we have described him purely from opinions and colloquial terms. If it happens to be technically correct in some areas, it is not intentional to the point where we can draw conclusions. And please keep in mind this is all English. Also keep in mind, this is how Noahides today are being taught - in this style and format. They are not presented with anything deeper, more authentic, Hebrew, nor made aware of the bigger picture going on in this discussion [according to Torah].

Do you see a problem with this picture? 

Our good characterized Noahide is clearly being seen in a positive light. But there is an elephant in the room. He is a non-Jew... And therefore he is an akum. No matter how high he climbs, he is still an akum. He is a Shabbos goy, and he is being told he will never not be a Shabbos goy. The most he can hope for is to be a supremely loyal and faithful and observant Shabbos goy. He is an akum. Some would call that [as mentioned above] an idolater. Others would quickly chime in and say akum just means non-Jew. But the conflict is how can a legitimate righteous and pious Noahide be forever confined within the term akum? 

All of the laws [halachot] for akum would then be applied to our Noahide. The Noahide [observant] is then halachically the same as the non-observant [Ben Noach]. Nothing was gained from piousness. Now dig a little bit deeper, if there is a halacha for an akum - idolater, the same halacha applies to the Noahide. Simple logic [along these lines] mandates that I [the Jew] am to consider the akum idolater the exact same as the pious Noahide.

An example of this is in the following question that was asked and posted on asknoah.org:

 "Can Noahides put up a Mezuzah scroll on their doorposts, though they are not commanded to do so? If not, should a Noahide remove them if he already has them?"

...the answer given [as it relates to our akum issue] is:

(the general answer given there was an all around no, and the student reiterated the question, thus the context of the answer presented here)

"No, since this violates all of the general principles above from Rambam. Likewise we have the ruling to this effect, specifically regarding mezuzah, by Rema (Rabbi Moshe Isserles), the famous Ashkenazi rabbinical authority, in his gloss on the Shulkhan Arukh (Code of Jewsh Law), section Yoreh Deah, vol. 3, chapter 291, law 2."

Let me be clear: Someone asked the official site for Noahism whether or not a Noahide may hang a mezzuza on their doorpost...

(It is made obvious in Noahism, that all discussions of Noahides implies a faithful and observant Noahide. To cut to the chase, that means the Noahide is from the pious among the Nations. This begs the question as to why this Noahide would still be considered akum and would come categorically under the akum in halachic matters.)

...The answer given was no, and quoted the 'Rema' as the official answer. It is true, that every Orthodox Jewish Rabbi holds from the Rema, the Ashkenazi halacha that compliments the Shulchan Aruch. This is universally agreed upon in this context...

...However when one opens the Rema, they may be surprised by what they read, especially given the context of asknoah's framework. If we are dealing with a pious Noahide, one asking if they can hang a mezzuza, and the answer is no, one would suspect the Rema to be addressing a pious observant faithful Noahide. I would also expect the Hebrew to reflect this in its context...

...I would not expect it to say akum, for surely that would imply the idolater context of non-Jew. We must then address what is the subject matter of this Rema?

It is dealing with a non-Jew who bought a house from a Jew, and the law is that the non-Jew isn't allowed to then hang a mezzuza on the doorpost, [almost] exactly as asknoah reported...

...Pay attention that I gave over the context of the Rema, and i described it with the word 'non-Jew'. The only question left is, what was the Hebrew word given in the Rema, that I translated [for expression] as 'non-Jew'? The word in the Rema is 'akum'.

Asknoah then gave the answer [no] to the mezzuza question not through a personal or philosophical opinion, which could be argued either way. The site quoted the Rema, whose context was similar, but not the same as our original question. The conclusion was then taken from the Rema, this akum, and represented as an answer to the Noahide.

The discussion would look like this:

Q: 'Can a [real] Noahide hang a mezzuza?'
A: 'No, an akum cannot hang a mezzuza.'

or, alternatively,

A: 'No, an idolater [idolatrous non-Jew] may not [actually should not, but that is another story altogether] hang up a mezzuza.'

There are at least two problems with this: A) The question and the answer don't match and B) The Noahide is synonymous with an idolatrous non-Jew.

The conclusion from this [and there are many; too many to count] is that Noahides are considered idolatrous [akum] by halacha.

But the Torah is merciful, and allows for a third category, one who proactively rejects idolatrous ways according to the Torah. This is called Ger Toshav. It exists today, and the idolatry that they reject is called shituf; the idolatrous behaviour, thoughts, etc. while today there is no outright idolatry. Many have left their idolatrous ways, but fulfillment comes through a full rejection of all forms of idolatry, even shituf. This takes the Noahide out from being categorically 'akum'.

The ramifications of this are many. If you are a Noahide, mazal tov on leaving behind your idolatrous ways. But finish the job, or be content with staying akum. The choice is yours. Should you wish to continue your path toward returning to Hashem, the Torah exists to advise you, and there are Jews on that path who serve as a Light to Nations. And like Adam in the garden, there are many challenges on the path of the Tree of Life.

Choose Life.

available on Amazon.com