Are Christians and Buddists considerd Noahide, because the follow laws the same/similar to the 7 Noahide laws?

B"H
Dear "Anonymous Member,"

The very name "Noahide," or one who has taken upon himself the seven precepts of the sons of Noah, suggests that they cannot be Buddhists in the traditional sense of the word, neither Christians practicing a form of Catholicism (with their statues, crucifixes and icons, and other apertinences of "strange worship." For the seven precepts that G-d has given to Noah and to his posterity after the Great Deluge, and that He has given also to his forbear, Adam, are these:

1) To refrain from idolatry and all practices thereof.

2) To refrain from cursing one's G-d.

3) To refrain from murder, which prohibition includes abortions.

4) To refrain from thievery and brigandage.

5) To refrain from fornication and all sinful license.

6) To establish Courts of justice, so that no man takes the law into his own hands.

7) To abstain from eating flesh torn or cut away from animals while they are still alive. (Rather, all animals must first be butchered or shot and their blood allowed to drain, before they and their limbs can be eaten.)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

On the other hand, holding ill-founded beliefs do not necessarily put a man on par with idol worshippers. A case in point is the Mohammedan, though while he holds ill-founded beliefs, he is still not considered an idol-worshipper. The test, in this case, is what you do with those beliefs. Some say Protestant Christians, though definitely mistaken in their beliefs, do not fit under the category of idol-worshippers, per se.

You should know, furthermore, that both Jews and non-Jews are obliged to perform the seven precepts of the sons of Noah, with slight variations. For example: A Jewish woman who makes an abortion upon her unborn fetus, though she has done wrong, goes unpunished by the Courts - unless that infant had first put forth his head from the matrix of the womb. A non-Jew who performs an abortion upon an unborn child is guilty by the act, and is punished by the Court.
A Jewish man who steals, or purloins others, is made to make restitution (pay double), while a non-Jew who steals, or purloins others, is made liable thereby to the death sentence. (For the law prescribes withal that death should be the penalty for any gentile who transgresses but one of these least commandments.)
Concerning the establishment of Courts, and unlike the practice used in Israel, it is sufficient that a single judge be the arbitrator in all cases brought before him in non-Jewish courts of law. With Israel, any Court less than three judges is called "an impudent court."
Also in the prohibition "to refrain from fornication and all sinful license," this precept requires an explanatory note:
The most trustworthy of our exponents on Jewish law avers that Legal marriages are not consummated, neither betrothals nor acts of wedlock assumed, between gentile persons who come together for the purpose of mating one with the other. Rather, there is only co-habitation by way of mutual agreement, which thing alone makes them man & wife. For the institution of marriage by way of giving monies for betrothals, or canopies, or writs of marriages, etc. were only given to this nation (i.e. Israel). Yet, with gentiles, all these things are unnecessary. Mutual agreement makes them man & wife. Likewise, to disannul or terminate that agreement of marriage between gentiles, no formal writ of divorce, or any instrument whatsoever, is needed between them. Simply by way of mutual consent or by desertion of one party, the couple is no longer considered man & wife.

One of the fine points arising from this teaching is the case where a Jewish man has connexions with a betrothed Jewish woman after first obtaining her consent, and a non-Jew, likewise, has connexions with a betrothed gentile woman after first obtaining her consent. Though both cases seemingly have the same nature and appearances, they are yet different in outcome. For a Jewish man who has connexions with a betrothed Jewish woman who awaits wedlock with her husband, even though she had given her consent to such connexions, both become liable thereby to the death penalty. Yet, a gentile man who has connexions with a "betrothed" gentile woman (even though she had consented to such connexions) is NOT liable to the death penalty - since betrothals do not hold as valid, legal or binding with non-Jews, and so it is as though she were still single. In this case, the man and that unfaithful woman are judged according to the custom of that place. (see: Tosefta Avodah Zarah 89)4 ).

Sincerely,
David Ben-Abraham

It seems from your post that gentiles are punished more severly for transgressing one of the 7 Noachide commandments than a Jew would be for transgressing the same commandment. Why is this?

quote:

A Jewish woman who makes an abortion upon her unborn fetus, though she has done wrong, goes unpunished by the Courts - unless that infant had first put forth his head from the matrix of the womb. A non-Jew who performs an abortion upon an unborn child is guilty by the act, and is punished by the Court.

Shalom David:

Your words here seem to be a little inconcistant with a halachic description I recently read signed in the name of Fred Rosner MD, Rabbi Moshe Tendler, and Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, which also included psychiatric risks in the valid reasons for which a therapeutic termination of pregnancy would be permissible under the general theme of when necessary for the mother's life.

Your words here seem to give an overly broad view that there exists no medical termination of pregnancy to a gentile which would not be punished by the earthly court, and similarly, none by a Jew which would not be punished by the Heavenly Court.

B"H
Gila,

This is what we are taught by the Rabbis, who have learned the same from the Talmud. I have seen it stated explicitly in the Jerusalem Talmud (Megillah) that gentiles are liable to the death penalty, simply for breaking one of their seven commandments.
Why this is, I can only rationalize. Perhaps it is because these laws are so basic, and seen as vital and essential to the good conduct, success and safety of all men. Even their conscience tells them not to be inhumane to animals, and not to wrong others. Of course, the Rabbis teach us that they must perform these injunctions because they were commanded to do so, and not simply because their conscience told them what was right and wrong.
Perhaps Rav Chaim can elaborate further on this subject.

Sincerely,
David

quote:

You should know, furthermore, that both Jews and non-Jews are obliged to perform the seven precepts of the sons of Noah, with slight variations.

Shalom David:

On this point I once heard it explained that at least one of the 7 Noachide Laws do not apply to Jews, and I think it is the requirement to set up a system of law.

One reason for this might be that we already have Mitzvos and Halachos, and they are defined and derived from Hashem's words in the Torah.

quote:

Originally posted by rob:

Your words here seem to be a little inconsistent with a halachic description I recently read signed in the name of Fred Rosner MD, Rabbi Moshe Tendler, and Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, which also included psychiatric risks in the valid reasons for which a therapeutic termination of pregnancy would be permissible under the general theme of when necessary for the mother's life...

Indeed, Rob, I was bringing the halacha in very broad and general terms, but not in the case where a pregnancy was terminated because of there being danger imposed to the mother's life. This, I thought, was already obvious to most of our readers.

Sincerely,
David

quote:

Originally posted by Gila:
It seems from your post that gentiles are punished more severly for transgressing one of the 7 Noachide commandments than a Jew would be for transgressing the same commandment. Why is this?

I can't answer this, but it would seem logical that if a Jewish woman, G-d Forbid, needs an abortion she should get a Jewish doctor to perform it.

Interesting point, but surely if the woman NEEDS an abortion then it is no sin, and so neither the jewish nor the non-jewish doctor will have sinned, no?

As I understand it, the Din of "Rodeif" being able to kill a pursuer does not apply to a non-Jew.

Looking at no. 6, I saw something in this law that I had not seen before.

A "court of justice" is a "house of judgment" and deals with all three, of civil, criminal and religious law, by definition (not current practice). Thus, by Noahide law, none of us "takes the law into his own hands". This would then also apply to using our reason to decide what is lawful - civillily, legally, or religiously.


[QUOTE]Originally posted by David Ben-Abraham:

6) To establish Courts of justice, so that no man takes the law into his own hands.

]

It seems the Jewish soul is not acquired at conception but rather sometime before birth. However, the gentile soul is acquired earlier so the abortion issue has different consequences for Jews as it does for gentiles.

quote:

Are Christians and Buddists considerd Noahide, because the follow laws the same/similar to the 7 Noahide laws?

The original question was about the "Noachideness" of non-Jewish belief systems. We had a different thread on this question earlier. Within the Jewish paradigm a Noachide is defined formally according to Jewish halacha before a Jewish Beit Din. However, if a gentile is not an idolator and has never heard of Noachide laws, is he a Noachide?

Several years ago, President Reagan declared the USA a Noachide nation. Why? Because an issue was raised in the "Middle East peace process" that Israel could not negotiate with idolatrous nations etc. President Reagan decided to make it official in order that both Jews and Muslims could not later call the negotiations invalid for this reason.

The newly created and yet evolving Beit Din HaGadol of Israel (Sanhedrin) is making strides in establishing a halachic corpus for this purpose.

quote:

Interesting point, but surely if the woman NEEDS an abortion then it is no sin, and so neither the jewish nor the non-jewish doctor will have sinned, no?

Gila,

You are correct. If a woman NEEDS an abortion it's pekuach nefesh and it's not an aveira to perform or request such an abortion. However, there are specific halachic parameters for deciding what's a "necessary" abortion. So even when halacha allows it under certain circumstances, it's a far cry from the
requirements of the goyish laws of the land.....assuming we are in the galut. Well, even in Israel....I know abortion has become a problem in Israel too.

For anyone who knows women in Israel contemplating abortion, "Friends of Efrat" is a good organization to work with. It provides everything a woman needs to support a pregnancy and several months after the birth of the baby, since most abortions in Israel are sought for economic reasons.
http://www.friendsofefrat.org/

My point was that even in a case of Pikuach Nefesh, where Jewish Law would mandate an abortion, a Jewish doctor should perform it in preference to a non-Jewish one.

Quote "Your words here seem to be a little inconcistant with a halachic description I recently read signed in the name of Fred Rosner MD, Rabbi Moshe Tendler, and Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, which also included psychiatric risks in the valid reasons for which a therapeutic termination of pregnancy would be permissible under the general theme of when necessary for the mother's life.

Your words here seem to give an overly broad view that there exists no medical termination of pregnancy to a gentile which would not be punished by the earthly court, and similarly, none by a Jew which would not be punished by the Heavenly Court."

You need not to go that far, since the gemarah in Sanhedrin 72b says that before it sticks his head out, you can cut it to little pieces to save the mother’s life. But I don’t think that it’s really a question on David. If he wrote that it’s prohibited to Mechalel Shabbos I don’t think he needs to write exemptions of Pekuach Nefesh. The concept of Chilul Shabbos is prohibited is still true.

Quote "On this point I once heard it explained that at least one of the 7 Noachide Laws do not apply to Jews, and I think it is the requirement to set up a system of law."

The Gemarah in Sanhedrin 59a says that there is nothing that is prohibited to a non Jew that is permitted to a Jew (unless it’s a Mitzvah for the Jew to do it, Like keeping Shabbos- Tosfos.) The Gemara Ibid 56b explains that the Mitzvah of setting up courts is by Jews and was expanded to them.

About the reasoning of the Chumrah of the punishment of the Goyim could be that since they have such few Mitzos, so the Torah was more Chumor not for them to transgress any of them. .

Another possible answer, that there is 2 points for punishment for Avairos. 1) For the damage that was done 2) for rebelling against the king. For 1) the punishment should resemble the damage that was done, if it was less damage, then the punishment should be less severe. For 2) then it would require death in all cases. So for Goyim, Hashem says that they’re guilty for any sin because of rebellion. For Jews, he was only Makpid on the damage, since either because a Jew always really wants to be loyal, Or that we’re children to the king (which has a certain leniency to it, like we see by Dovid and Avshalom) Or that we serve a bigger purpose on the plans of the king, so he spares us from death for rebelling.

Quote "As I understand it, the Din of "Rodeif" being able to kill a pursuer does not apply to a non-Jew."

I never heard of that. Do you have a source for this? Misvara (from logic) I don’t see any difference (unless if it was referring to a Jew Roidef after a Goy But a Goy after another Goy, why wouldn’t you kill the guilty party to save the innocent?)

Quote "since betrothals do not hold as valid, legal or binding with non-Jews, and so it is as though she were still single. In this case, the man and that unfaithful woman are judged according to the custom of that place. (see: Tosefta Avodah Zarah 8 L Frown9)4 )."

I found it there in 9, but I think it’s referring to a Goy going on a Yisraelis who’s betrothed, then the Jewish court judges it. But a Goyta that is betrothed would be exempt completely.

Yisroel,
Why can't a Jewish doctor perform the abortion if it's pekuach nefesh? Once it's pekuach nefesh, surely a Jewish doctor would be compelled to perform the mitzvah.

quote:

Originally posted by MosheYisraeli:
Yisroel,
Why can't a Jewish doctor perform the abortion if it's pekuach nefesh? Once it's pekuach nefesh, surely a Jewish doctor would be compelled to perform the mitzvah.

Moshe Yisraeli, that's exactly what I said.