Gulliver and Maimonides

Gulliver ends up hating all of humanity (spoilers). He writes:

"When I thought of my family, my friends, my countrymen, or the human race in general, I considered them, as they really were, Yahoos in shape and disposition, perhaps a little more civilized, and qualified with the gift of speech; but making no other use of reason, than to improve and multiply those vices..."

Is it just me or does this sound like Maimonides' description of unlearned peoples (Guide 3:51, Pines trans.):

"Those... are all human individuals who have no doctrinal belief, neither one based on speculation nor one that accepts the authority of tradition: such individuals as the furthermost Turks found in the remote North, the Negroes found in the remote South, and those who resemble them from among them that are with us in these climes. The status of those is like that of irrational animals. To my mind they do not have the rank of men, but have among the beings a rank lower than the rank of man but higher than the ram or the apes. For they have the external shape and lineaments of a man and a faculty of discernment that is superior to that of the apes."

A Mishnah Directed At Non-Jews Only?

Rosh Hashanah 4a says (in resolution of a contradiction) that it is considered full tzedaka for Jews to give for the wrong reasons (e.g. so that one's son will live), but it is not considered tzedaka when non-Jews do so (see Rashi there, and Tosafot Pesachim 8b).

Tosafot on this line in Rosh Hashana asks a simple question. In the beginning of Avot, we learn that one must not do the commandments in order to get stuff, yet the Talmud states that it is ok. Contradiction? No, write Tosafot, that line in Avot is directed at non-Jews, not Jews.

Isn't that crazy? Are there any other sources that suggest other Mishnayot are not for the Jews?

Rav Kahn responds:

 I don't think that Tosafot mean that the Mishnah is directed specifically to non-Jews. Based on the parallel Tosafot in Pesachim, I think it means, "People like the non-Jews", who ONLY do things for the reward, and should the reward not be forthcoming they regret having done the good deed in the first place. While Tosafot say that this is a midah of non-Jews, it equally applied to Jews who are sorry they ever did the good deed. Why, then, do Tosafot in RH mention non-Jews specifically (unlike in Pesachim)? In order to make it work well with the Gemara in RH which is comparing Jews and non-Jews.

Yaakov marrying two sisters according to the tosafists

In order to answer the questions of how Yaakov could marry two sisters, or his children marrying their twins (according to the midrash), Tosafot (found in Tosafot HaShalem Genesis 37:35) suggest that non-Jews (B'nei Noach) are only prohibited in the erva of adultery! And they base it off a statement of Rabbi Chanina in Snahedrin 57b that gentiles only have the prohibition of "בעולת בעל", implying anything else they do not have. Am I reading this wrong? True, they have difficulties with that answer afterward, but it is a suggestion.

Shadal and "the spirit of God"

Shadal translates Genesis 1:2's "וְר֣וּחַ אֱלֹהִ֔ים" as "a POWERFUL wind" colloquially called "a wind of God", but just meaning very strong winds, not "the spirit of God" or anything like that. I see now that the gemara also probably thought this. Chagigah 12a: "Wind and water [were created on the first day], as it says, "וְר֣וּחַ אֱלֹהִ֔ים מְרַחֶ֖פֶת עַל־פְּנֵ֥י הַמָּֽיִם"

A sanskrit term in the Talmud

Shmuel calls Chiya bar Rav an aryan in Chagiga 14a. Back then, "arya" meant "noble".http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arya_(Buddhism)

Uncle John's Bathroom Reader Plunges into History Presents: Heavy Mettle

The Kuzari on the Awesomeness of the Mishnah

Rabbi Yehudah HaLevi, on why the Mishnah is too awesome to have been written by man alone:

"It is greatly distinguished by terseness of language, beauty of style, excellence of composition, and the comprehensive employment of homonyms, applied in a lucid way, leaving neither doubt nor obscurity. This is so striking that every one who looks at it with genuine scrutiny must be aware that mortal man is incapable of composing such a work without divine assistance. Only he who is hostile to it, who does not know it, and never endeavored to read and study it, hearing some general and allegorical utterances of the Sages deems them senseless and defective, just as one who judges a person after meeting him, without having conversed with him for any length of time."