occupied himself with the Torah was to be regarded as equal to the High-Priest, proves nothing, since
in the case supposed the Gentile acts like a Rabbinic Jew. But, and this is a more serious point, it is
difficult to believe that those who make this quotation are not aware, how the Talmud (Ab. Z. 3 a)
immediately labours to prove that their reward is not equal to that of Israelites. A somewh at similar
charge of one-sidedness, if not of unfairness, must be brought against Deutsch (Lecture on the Talmud,
Remains, pp. 146, 147), whose sketch of Judaism should be compared, for example, with the first Perek of
the Talmudic tractate Abodah Zarah.
In truth, the bitter hatred which the Jew bore to the Gentile can only be explained from the
estimate entertained of his character. The most vile, and even unnatural, crimes were imputed to
them. It was not safe to leave cattle in their charge, to allow their women to nurse infants, or
their physicians to attend the sick, nor to walk in their company, without taking precautions
against sudden and unprovoked attacks. They should, so far as possible, be altogether avoided,
except in cases of necessity or for the sake of business. They and theirs were defiled; their
houses unclean, as containing idols or things dedicated to them; their feasts, their joyous
occasions, their very contact, was polluted by idolatry; and there was no security, if a heathen
were left alone in a room, that he might not, in wantonness or by carelessness, defile the wine or
meat on the table, or the oil and wheat in the store. Under such circumstances, therefore,
everything must be regarded as having been rendered unclean. Three days before a heathen
festival (according to some, also three days after) every business transaction with them was
prohibited, for fear of giving either help or pleasure. Jews were to avoid passing through a city
where there was an idolatrous feast - nay, they were not even to sit down within the shadow of
a tree dedicated to idol-worship. Its wood was polluted; if used in baking, the bread was
unclean; if a shuttle had been made of it, not only was all cloth woven on it forbidden, but if such
had been inadvertently mixed with other pieces of cloth, or a garment made from it placed with
other garments, the whole became unclean. Jewish workmen were not to assist in building
basilicas, nor stadia, nor places where judicial sentences were pronounced by the heathen. Of
course, it was not lawful to let houses or fields, nor to sell cattle to them. Milk drawn by a
heathen, if a Jew had not been present to watch it,47 bread and oil prepared by them, were
unlawful. Their wine was wholly interdicted48 - the mere touch of a heathen polluted a whole
cask; nay, even to put one's nose to heathen wine was strictly prohibited!
47. Ab. Zar. 35 b.
48. According to R. Asi, there was a threefold distinction. If wine had been dedicated to an idol, to
carry, even on a stick, so much as the weight of an olive of it, defiled a man. Other wine, if prepared by a
heathen, was prohibited, whether for personal use or for trading. Lastly, wine prepared by a Jew, but
deposited in custody of a Gentile, was prohibited for personal use, but allowed for traffic.
Painful as these details are, they might be multiplied. And yet the bigotry of these Rabbis was,
perhaps, not worse than that of other sectaries. It was a painful logical necessity of their system,
against which their heart, no doubt, often rebelled; and, it must be truthfully added, it was in
measure accounted for by the terrible history of Israel.