Thread 18083782

Were blood libels a real thing?

>>18083782 (OP)
Nobody denied it before the 19th century. It's obvious Jews killed babies and nobody ever denied it, the denials came centuries later when Jews began to Jew harder.
It's impossible to explain what happened besides jews as it's completely impossible goy have a coordinated conspiracy for centuries to kill their babies.

>>18083782 (OP)
What a strangely "Jewish" picture. Distortion of the human form.

>>18083782 (OP)
No. Jews don't actually need baby blood to maintain their bodily functions. The people paying Trump's cohorts in government do though.

>>18083796
>The people paying Trump's cohorts in government
Are Jews. So this is a strange attempt at a rebuttal

>>18083822
maybe he wanted to say that only some of the Jews need baby blood to survive. like only their upper class

>>18083782 (OP)
Very doubtful they were factual events. Of course, 'blood libel' is an extant phenomenon and there are several cases where it was claimed. But when you examine them in context you can't conclude it was anything but a myth born from ignorance. Though I can believe the first case had some factual basis (I.E. A Jew did kill a Christian child) many others were just made up from whole cloth.
>>18083795
It's a Norwegian Newspaper cartoon against circumcision.

>>18083849
Anyone neutrally examining the thing would raise an eyebrow at all the cases being extremely formulaic. Aside from the fact clergymen and local businessmen had financial incentives to push these because it boosted patronage to local shrines and also even pilgrimage.

>>18083782 (OP)
> jews have strict dietary laws and drinking blood is a huge sin (leviticus 17:10-12)
> the pope himself said this shit was fake (pope innocent iv, 1247)
> literally a 2000 year old debunked conspiracy theory for pogroms

The only "real" thing about it is that people used it as an excuse to murder jews.

>>18084257
More often than not the Jew murder was a side effect, and what they wanted was to take their property or increase patronage to local religious shrines through creation of a little folk saint.
Though I'm sure a lot of it was also fear.

>>18083782 (OP)
>One could at this point conclude that the use of the powdered blood of children, and especially Christian blood, as a haemostatic during circumcision, in view of the disinterest in its regard shown even by converted Jews, on other points inclined to defame Judaism, is a chimera and a tendentious invention, either of the inquisitors, obsessed with blood, or of Jews themselves, terrorized by torture and slavishly eager to placate their tormenters. But this would be erroneous and misleading.

>The texts of the practical Cabbalah, the handbooks of stupendous medications (segullot), compendia of portentous electuaries, recipe books of secret cures, mostly composed in the German-speaking territories, even very recently, stress the haemostatic and astringent powers of young blood, above all, on the circumcision wound. These are ancient prescriptions, handed down for generations, put together, with variants of little importance, by cabbalistic herb alchemists of various origins, and repeatedly reprinted right down to the present day, in testimony to the extraordinary empirical effectiveness of these remedies.

>A more delicate matter than the above seems to relate to a passage in the Talmud (Ketubot 102b) which might be interpreted as an indirect confirmation of the phenomenon of ritual murder during an ancient epoch, although we don’t know how widespread or how widely approved it may have been. The passage concerns a so-called “outside” baraita, or mishnah, i.e., one not incorporated into the codified and canonical text of the mishnah (dating back approximately to the third century A.D.) – which seems to be one of the oldest – and may therefore be traced back to Palestine at the time of the second Temple.

>>18084279
>“A man is killed, leaving a son of a tender age in the care of his mother. When the father’s heirs approach and say, ‘Let him grow up with us’, and the mother says ‘Let him grow up with me’, he (the boy) should be left with the mother, and should not be entrusted to the care of anyone entitled to inherit from him. A case of this kind happened in the past and (the heirs) killed him on Passover Eve (Hebrew: weshachatuhu ’erev ha-Pesach)”.

>We know that the Hebrew verb shachet has the meaning of “butcher”, “kill”, as well as to “immolate”, as, for example, as a sacrifice (as for example, Exodus 12:21 “Thou shalt sacrifice the Passover lamb”, we-shachatu ha-pesach). If in the case in question were merely a matter of a simple murder committed by heirs for profit, the statement that the murder was committed “on Passover Eve” would be quite superfluous

>In the eyes of the Ashkenazi Jews of Trent, it was obvious that the ritual obligation to use the blood of Christian children in the Passover celebrations was exclusively incumbent upon heads of families, and not on other members of the community. The rule, enounced to the judges by Israel, the son of Samuele da Nuremberg, was that “Jewish fathers of families in the feast of Purim, before dinner, take a small quantity of the blood of a Christian child, put it in their cup full of wine and sprinkle the table with it”. Angelo of Verona placed it in the category, not of ritual regulations, but of customs (Hebrew, minhagh, Latin mos) and, always with patience and in a summary manner, explained that “the established custom is that the head of the family, and no one else, must place the powdered blood in the unleavened bread in the time of the Passover”.

>>18084282
>On the other hand, procuring the raw material required for performance of the blood ritual was not an easy job, involving costs which the heads of poorer families could not afford. It was therefore anticipated that the heads of poorer families were exempt from a task which proved too costly for them, as was unhesitatingly admitted by the ancient expert Mosè of Würzburg when he explained to the inquisitors of Trent that “the Jews naturally require the blood of a Christian child, but if they were poor and could not afford any blood, they were relieved of the expense”.

>Mosè da Würzburg certainly know which precedents to mention in describing the recommendation to avoid discussion of the counter-ritual of the Passion of Christ and the use of the blood of Christian children in the Passover celebrations among women, children and the feebleminded, “who are unable to keep a secret”. Among the Jews of Germany, these precautions were quite understandable. Their violent anti-Christian feelings and expressions, both ideological and ritualistic, in which these feelings found an outlet and a reflection, necessarily had to be surrounded by a protective aura of secrecy and omertà [fatalistic manliness] because any indiscretion in this regard, either deliberately or through naiveté, could be the precursor of struggle and tragedy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passovers_of_Blood

>>18083782 (OP)
Real enough

>>18084286
>[…] but then Grotius equivocated. Jews were not “always innocent,” he wrote, “since they hold that it is lawful and pious to curse Christians, as appears in the Talmud and other books.” Jews could not refrain “from deeds where they were satisfied with their strength.” And “as for murdering children and collecting their blood,” he referred Słupecki to “authorities” of late medieval and early modern historiography and polemical literature—Stumphius, Michael Neander, Fortalitium fidei—for stories about “Munich, Zurich, Bern, Wissenscho in Turigia, Uberlingen… Deissenhofen by Lake Constance.” And if some of these might be doubtful, “with more certainty than these, Sabellicus affirms the same in Enneads 10, book 7 about the Jews of Trent; and about Tyrnavia in Hungary, Bonfinius, book 4, chapter 5 of 10.” Moreover, Grotius added, blood had a place in magic and superstition, including the belief that “children’s blood is a remedy for leprosy.” And if this belief “has brought many kings an evil reputation,” Jews often practiced medicine and “could have the readier recourse the more they hate Christians,” especially “if they were not deterred by the fear of punishment.”

Magda Teter, Blood Libel: On the Trail of an Antisemitic Myth

>did the people who are absolutely utterly forbidden from consuming blood of any kind, and have developed whole systems of food preparation to avoid it, murder children to consume their blood
What fucking moron believes this?

>>18084305
see >>18084279
>The texts of the practical Cabbalah, the handbooks of stupendous medications (segullot), compendia of portentous electuaries, recipe books of secret cures, mostly composed in the German-speaking territories, even very recently, stress the haemostatic and astringent powers of young blood, above all, on the circumcision wound. These are ancient prescriptions, handed down for generations, put together, with variants of little importance, by cabbalistic herb alchemists of various origins, and repeatedly reprinted right down to the present day, in testimony to the extraordinary empirical effectiveness of these remedies.

>>18084332
>no see they were doing magic with the blood
Do you fuckers hear yourselves?

>>18084335
Yeah? Medieval people believed in magic.