Abrahamism

Spencer Quinn reviews Israel Shahak's 1994 classic "Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years.
"Keep in mind that while devout Jews were praying for the death of gentiles and while Jewish leaders were fully aware of the hidebound [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— Kevin MacDonald (@TOOEdit) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Kvasir wrote:

Shahak, Israel wrote:

According to the cabbala, the universe is ruled not by one god but by several deities, of various characters and influences, emanated by a dim, distant First Cause. Omitting many details, one can summarize the system as follows. From the First Cause, first a male god called "Wisdom" or "Father" and then a female goddess called "Knowledge" or "Mother" were emanated or born. From the marriage of these two, a pair of younger gods were born: Son, also called by many other names such as "Small Face" or "the Holy Blessed One;" and Daughter, also called "Lady" (or "Matronit," a word derived from Latin), "Shekhinah," "Queen," and so on. These two younger gods should be united, but their union is prevented by the machinations of Satan, who in this system is a very important and independent personage. The Creation was undertaken by the First Cause in order to allow them to unite, but because of the Fall they became more disunited than ever, and indeed Satan has managed to come very close to the divine Daughter and even to rape her (either seemingly or in fact opinions differ on this). The creation of the Jewish people was undertaken in order to mend the break caused by Adam and Eve, and under Mount Sinai this was for a moment achieved: the male god Son, incarnated in Moses, was united with the goddess Shekhinah.
Unfortunately, the sin of the Golden Calf again caused disunity in the godhead; but the repentance of the Jewish people has mended matters to some extent. Similarly, each incident of biblical Jewish history is believed to be associated with the union or disunion of the divine pair.
The Jewish conquest of Palestine from the Canaanites and the building of the first and second Temple are particularly propitious for their union, while the destruction of the Temples and exile of the Jews from the Holy Land are merely external signs not only of the divine disunion but also of a real "whoring after strange gods:" Daughter falls closely into the power of Satan, while Son takes various female satanic personages to his bed, instead of his proper wife.
The duty of pious Jews is to restore through their prayers and religious acts the perfect divine unity, in the form of sexual union, between the male and female deities. Thus before most ritual acts, which every devout Jew has to perform many times each day, the following cabbalistic formula is recited: "For the sake of the [sexual] congress of the Holy Blessed One and his Shekhinah. . . " The Jewish morning prayers are also arranged so as to promote this sexual union, if only temporarily. Successive parts of the prayer mystically correspond to successive stages of the union: at one point the goddess approaches with her handmaidens, at another the god puts his arm around her neck and fondles her breast, and finally the sexual act is supposed to take place.
Other prayers or religious acts, as interpreted by the cabbalists, are designed to deceive various angels (imagined as minor deities with a measure of independence) or to propitiate Satan. At a certain point in the morning prayer, some verses in Aramaic (rather than the more usual Hebrew) are pronounced. This is supposed to be a means for tricking the angels who operate the gates through which prayers enter heaven and who have the power to block the prayers of the pious. The angels only understand Hebrew and are baffled by the Aramaic verses; being somewhat dull - witted (presumably they are far less clever than the cabbalists) they open the gates, and at this moment all the prayers, including those in Hebrew, get through. Or take another example: both before and after a meal, a pious Jew ritually washes his hands, uttering a special blessing. On one of these two occasions he is worshiping God, by promoting the divine union of Son and Daughter; but on the other he is worshiping Satan, who likes Jewish prayers and ritual acts so much that when he is offered a few of them it keeps him busy for a while and he forgets to pester the divine Daughter. Indeed, the cabbalists believe that some of the sacrifices burnt in the Temple were intended for Satan.
For example, the seventy bullocks sacrificed during the seven days of the feast of Tabernacles were supposedly offered to Satan in his capacity as ruler of all the Gentiles, in order to keep him too busy to interfere on the eighth day, when sacrifice is made to God. Many other examples of the same kind can be given.
Several points should be made concerning this system and its importance for the proper understanding of Judaism, both in its classical period and in its present political involvement in Zionist practice.
First, whatever can be said about this cabbalistic system, it cannot be regarded as monotheistic, unless one is also prepared to regard Hinduism, the late Graeco- Roman religion, or even the religion of ancient Egypt, as "monotheistic."

Secondly, the real nature of classical Judaism is illustrated by the ease with which this system was adopted. Faith and beliefs (except nationalistic beliefs) play an extremely small part in classical Judaism.
What is of prime importance is the ritual act, rather than the significance which that act is supposed to have or the belief attached to it. Therefore in times when a minority of religious Jews refused to accept the cabbala (as is the case today), one could see some few Jews performing a given religious ritual believing it to be an act of worship of God, while others do exactly the same thing with the intention of propitiating Satan but so long as the act is the same they would pray together and remain members of the same congregation, however much they might dislike each other. But if instead of the intention attached to the ritual washing of hands anyone would dare to introduce an innovation in the manner of washing, a real schism would certainly ensue.
The same can be said about all sacred formulas of Judaism. Provided the working is left intact, the meaning is at best a secondary matter. For example, perhaps the most sacred Jewish formula, "Hear O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one," recited several times each day by every pious Jew, can at the present time mean two contrary things. It can mean that the Lord is indeed "one;" but it can also mean that a certain stage in the union of the male and female deities has been reached or is being promoted by the proper recitation of this formula.
However, when Jews of a Reformed congregation recite this formula in any language other than Hebrew, all Orthodox rabbis, whether they believe in unity or in the divine sexual union, are very angry indeed.
Finally, all this is of considerable importance in Israel (and in other Jewish centers) even at present. The enormous significance attached to mere formulas (such as the "Law of Jerusalem"); the ideas and motivations of Gush Emunim; the urgency behind the hate for non-Jews presently living in Palestine; the fatalistic attitude towards all peace attempt s by Arab states all these and many other traits of Zionist politics, which puzzle so many well- meaning people who have a false notion about classical Judaism, become more intelligible against this religious and mystical background. I must warn, however, against falling into the other extreme and trying to explain all Zionist politics in terms of this background. Obviously, the latter's influences vary in extent. Ben- Gurion was adept at manipulating them in a controlled way for specific ends. Under Begin the past exerts a much greater influence upon the present. But what one should never do is to ignore the past and its influences, because only by knowing it can one transcend its blind power.

Jewish History, Jewish Religion - The Weight of Three Thousand Years

Shahak, Israel wrote:

The third example comes from a work which has far less serious scholarly intent but is all the more popular for that: The Joys of Yiddish by Leo Rosten. This light - hearted work first published in the USA in 1968, and reprinted in many editions, including several times as a Penguin paperback is a kind of glossary of Yiddish words often used by Jews or even non- Jews in English- speaking countries. For each entry, in addition to a detailed definition and more or less amusing anecdotes illustrating its use, there is also an etymology stating (quite accurately, on the whole) the language from which the word came into Yiddish and its meaning in that language. The entry Shaygets whose main meaning is "a Gentile boy or young man" is an exception: there the etymology cryptically states "Hebrew Origin," without giving the form or meaning of the original Hebrew word. However, under the entry Shiksa the feminine form of Shaygets the author does give the original Hebrew word, sheqetz (or, in his transliteration, sheques) and defines its Hebrew meaning as "blemish." This is a bare-faced lie, as every speaker of Hebrew knows. The Megiddo Modern Hebrew-English Dictionary, published in Israel, correctly defines shegetz as follows: "unclean animal; loathsome creature, abomination (colloquial pronounced shaygets) wretch, unruly youngster; Gentile youngster."

Jewish History, Jewish Religion - The Weight of Three Thousand Years

Shahak, Israel wrote:

Using the concepts of Platonism to analyse Israeli policies based of "Jewish ideology" should not seem strange. It was noticed by several scholars, of whom the most important was Moses Hadas, who claimed that the foundations of "classical Judaism," that is, of Judaism as it was established by talmudic sages, are based on Platonic influences and especially on the image of Sparta as it appears in Plato. According to Hadas, a crucial feature of the Platonic political system, adopted by Judaism as early as the Maccabean period (142- 63 BC), was "that every phase of human conduct be subject to religious sanctions which are in fact to be manipulated by the ruler." There can be no better definition of "classical Judaism" and of the ways in which the rabbis manipulated it than this Platonic definition. In particular, Hadas claims that Judaism
adopted what "Plato himself summarized [as] the objectives of his program," in the following well- known passage:

Plato wrote:

The principle thing is that no one, man or woman, should ever be without an officer set over him, and that none should get the mental habit of taking any step, whether in earnest or in jest, on his individual
responsibility. In peace as in war he must live always with his eyes on his superior officer . . . In a word, we must train the mind not to even consider acting as an invidual or know how to do it.

(Laws, 942 ab)

If the word "rabbi" is substituted for "an officer" we will have a perfect image of classical Judaism. The latter is still deeply influencing Israeli-Jewish society and determing to a large extent the Israeli policies.
It was the above quoted passage which was chosen by Karl Popper in The Open Society and Its Enemies as describing the essence of "a closed society." Historical Judaism and its two successors, Jewish Orthodoxy and Zionism, are both sworn enemies of the concept of the open society as applied to Israel. A Jewish state, whether based on its present Jewish ideology or, if it becomes even more Jewish in character than it is now, on the principles of Jewish Orthodoxy, cannot ever contain an open society. There are two choices which face Israeli - Jewish society. It can become a fully closed and warlike ghetto, a Jewish Sparta, supported by the labour of Arab helots, kept in existence by its influence on the US political establishment and by threats to use its nuclear power, or it can try to become an open society. The second choice is dependent on an honest examination of its Jewish past, on the admission that Jewish chauvinism and exclusivism exist, and on an honest examination of the
attitudes of Judaism towards the non- Jews.

Jewish History, Jewish Religion – The Weight of Three Thousand Years

Shahak, Israel wrote:

“Historically, Zionism is both a reaction to antisemitism and a conservative alliance with it although the Zionists, like other European conservatives, did not fully realize with whom they were allying themselves.

Jewish History, Jewish Religion – The Weight of Three Thousand Years

Shahak, Israel wrote:

So one will not find in Hannah Arendt's voluminous writings, whether on totalitarianism or on Jews, or on both, the smallest hint as to what Jewish society in Germany was really like in the 18th century: burning of books, persecution of writers, disputes about the magic powers of amulets, bans on the most elementary "non- Jewish" education such as the teaching of correct German or indeed German written in the Latin alphabet. Nor can one find in the numerous English- language "Jewish histories" the elementary facts about the attitude of Jewish mysticism (so fashionable at present in certain quarters) to non-Jews: that they are considered to be, literally, limbs of Satan, and that the few non satanic individuals among them (that is, those who convert to Judaism) are in reality "Jewish souls" who got lost when Satan violated the Holy Lady (Shekhinah or Matronit, one of the female components of the Godhead, sister and wife of the younger male God according to the cabbala) in her heavenly abode. The great authorities, such as Gershom Scholem, have lent their authority to a system of deceptions in all the "sensitive" areas, the more popular ones being the most dishonest and misleading.

Jewish History, Jewish Religion – The Weight of Three Thousand Years

Shahak, Israel wrote:

The Deception Continues
Modern scholars of Judaism have not only continued the deception, but have actually improved upon the old rabbinical methods, both in
impudence and in mendacity. I omit here the various histories of antisemitism, as unworthy of serious consideration, and shall give just
three particular examples and one general example of the more modern "scholarly" deceptions.
In 1962, a part of the Maimonidean Code referred to above, the so called Book of Knowledge, which contains the most basic rules of Jewish faith and practice, was published in Jerusalem in a bilingual edition, with the English translation facing the Hebrew text. The latter has been restored to its original purity, and the command to exterminate Jewish infidels appears in it in full: "It is a duty to exterminate them with one's own hands." In the English translation this is somewhat softened to: "It is a duty to take active measures to destroy them." But then the Hebrew text goes on to specify the prime examples of "infidels" who must be exterminated: "such as Jesus of Nazareth and his pupils, and Tzadoq and Baitos and their pupils, may the name of the wicked rot." Not one word of this appears in the English text on the facing page (78a). And, even more significant, in spite of the wide circulation of this book among scholars in the English- speaking countries, not one of them has, as far as I know, protested against this glaring deception.
The second example comes from the USA, again from an English translation of a book by Maimonides. Apart from his work on the codification of the Talmud, he was also a philosopher and his Guide to the Perplexed is justly considered to be the greatest work of Jewish religious philosophy and is widely read and used even today.
Unfortunately, in addition to his attitude towards non- Jews generally and Christians in particular, Maimonides was also an anti - Black racist.
Towards the end of the Guide, in a crucial chapter (book III, chapter 51) he discusses how various sections of humanity can attain the supreme religious value, the true worship of God. Among those who are incapable of even approaching this are:

Maimonides wrote:

Some of the Turks [i.e., the Mongol race] and the nomads in the North, and the Blacks and the nomads in the South, and those who resemble them in our climates. And their nature is like the nature of mute animals, and according to my opinion they are not on the level of human beings, and their level among existing things is below that of a man and above that of a monkey, because they have the image and the resemblance of a man more than a monkey does.

Now, what does one do with such a passage in a most important and necessary work of Judaism? Face the truth and its consequences? God forbid! Admit (as so many Christian scholars, for example, have done in similar circumstances) that a very important Jewish authority held also rabid anti - Black views, and by this admission make an attempt at self - education in real humanity? Perish the thought. I can almost imagine Jewish scholars in the USA consulting among themselves, "What is to be done?"for the book had to be translated, due to the decline in the knowledge of Hebrew among American Jews. Whether by consultation or by individual inspiration, a happy "solution" was found: in the popular American translation of the Guide by one Friedlander, first published as far back as 1925 and since then reprinted in many editions, including several in paperback, the Hebrew word Kushim, which means Blacks, was simply transliterated and appears as "Kushites," a word which means nothing to those who have no knowledge of Hebrew, or to whom an obliging rabbi will not give an oral explanation. During all these years, not a word has been said to point out the initial deception or the social facts underlying its continuation and this throughout the excitement of Martin Luther King's campaigns, which were supported by so many rabbis, not to mention other Jewish figures, some of whom must have been aware of the anti-Black racist attitude which forms part of their Jewish heritage.
Surely one is driven to the hypothesis that quite a few of Martin Luther King's rabbinical supporter s were either anti-Black racists who supported him for tactical reasons of "Jewish interest" (wishing to win Black support for American Jewry and for Israel's policies) or were accomplished hypocrites, to the point of schizophrenia, capable of passing very rapidly from a hidden enjoyment of rabid racism to a proclaimed attachment to an anti-racist struggle and back and back again.

Jewish History, Jewish Religion – The Weight of Three Thousand Years

Shahak, Israel wrote:

Everywhere, classical Judaism developed hatred and contempt for agriculture as an occupation and for peasants as a class, even more than for other Gentiles a hatred of which I know no parallel in other societies. This is immediately apparent to anyone who is familiar with the Yiddish or Hebrew literature of the 19th and 20th centuries.

Jewish History, Jewish Religion – The Weight of Three Thousand Years

Shahak, Israel wrote:

First, ‘it is forbidden to desecrate the Sabbath . . . for a Karaite.’ This is stated bluntly, absolutely and without any further qualification.
Presumably the hostility of this small sect makes no difference, so they should be allowed to die rather than be treated on the Sabbath.
As for Gentiles: ‘According to the ruling stated in the Talmud and Codes of Jewish Law, it is forbidden to desecrate the Sabbath whether violating Biblical or rabbinic law in order to save the life of a dangerously ill gentile patient. It is also forbidden to deliver the baby of a gentile women on the Sabbath.’
------
According to the Talmudic Encyclopedia: ‘He who has carnal knowledge of the wife of a Gentile is not liable to the death penalty, for it is written: 'thy fellow's wife' rather than the alien's wife; and even the precept that a man 'shall cleave unto his wife' which is addressed to the Gentiles does not apply to a Jew, just there is no matrimony for a heathen; and although a married Gentile woman is forbidden to the Gentiles, in any case a Jew is exempted.’
------
According to the Halakhah, Jews must not (if they can help it) allow a Gentile to be appointed to any position of authority, however small, over Jews. (The two stock examples are ‘commander over ten soldiers in the Jewish army’ and ‘superintendent of an irrigation ditch.’)
Significantly, this particular rule applies also to converts to Judaism and to their descendant s (through the female line) for ten generations or ‘so long as the descent is known.’
Money and Property
1. Gifts. The Talmud bluntly forbids giving a gift to a Gentile. However, classical rabbinical authorities bent this rule because it is customary among businessmen to give gifts to business contacts. It was therefore laid down that a Jew may give a gift to a Gentile acquaintance, since this is regarded not as a true gift but as a sort of investment, for which some return is expected. Gifts to ‘unfamiliar Gentiles’ remain forbidden. A broadly similar rule applies to almsgiving. Giving alms to a Jewish beggar is an important religious duty. Alms to Gentile beggars are merely permitted for the sake of peace. However there are numerous rabbinical warnings against allowing the Gentile poor to become ‘accustomed’ to receiving alms from Jews, so that it should be possible to withhold such alms without arousing undue hostility.
2. Taking of interest. Anti-Gentile discrimination in this matter has become largely theoretical, in view of the dispensation which in effect allows interest to be exacted even from a Jewish borrower. However, it is still the case that granting an interest-free loan to a Jew is recommended as an act of charity, but from a Gentile borrower it is mandatory to exact interest. In fact, many though not all rabbinical authorities, including Maimonides, consider it mandatory to exact as much usury as possible on a loan to a Gentile.
3. Lost property. If a Jew finds property whose probable owner is Jewish, the finder is strictly enjoined to make a positive effort to return his find by advertising it publicly. In contrast, the Talmud and all the early rabbinical authorities not only allow a Jewish finder to appropriate an article lost by a Gentile, but actually forbid him or her to return it. In more recent times, when laws were passed in most countries making it mandatory to return lost articles, the rabbinical authorities instructed Jews to do what these laws say, as an act of civil obedience to the state but not as a religious duty that is without making a positive effort to discover the owner if it is not probable that he is Jewish.
4. Deception in business. It is a grave sin to practice any kind of deception whatsoever against a Jew. Against a Gentile it is only forbidden to practice direct deception. Indirect deception is allowed, unless it is likely to cause hostility towards Jews or insult to the Jewish religion. The paradigmatic example is mistaken calculation of the price during purchase. If a Jew makes a mistake unfavorable to himself, it is one's religious duty to correct him. If a Gentile is spotted making such a mistake, one need not let him know about it, but say "I rely on your calculation," so as to forestall his hostility in case he subsequently discovers his own mistake.
5. Fraud. It is forbidden to defraud a Jew by selling or buying at an unreasonable price. However, ‘Fraud does not apply to Gentiles, for it is written: 'Do not defraud each man his brother' but a Gentile who defrauds a Jew should be compelled to make good the fraud, but should not be punished more severely than a Jew [in a similar case].’
6. Theft and robbery. Stealing (without violence) is absolutely forbidden as the Shulhan 'Arukh so nicely puts it: ‘even from a Gentile.’
Robbery (with violence) is strictly forbidden if the victim is Jewish.
However, robbery of a Gentile by a Jew is not forbidden outright but only under certain circumstances such as ‘when the Gentiles are not under our rule,’ but is permitted ‘when they are under our rule.’
Rabbinical authorities differ among themselves as to the precise details of the circumstances under which a Jew may rob a Gentile, but the whole debate is concerned only with the relative power of Jews and Gentiles rather than with universal considerations of justice and humanity. This may explain why so very few rabbis have protested against the robbery of Palestinian property in Israel: it was backed by overwhelming Jewish power.
------
I shall now list a few of the special laws concerning Gentiles in the Land of Israel. Their connection with actual Zionist practice will be quite apparent.
The Halakhah forbids Jews to sell immovable property fields and houses in the Land of Israel to Gentiles. In Syria, the sale of houses (but not of fields) is permitted.
When the Jews are more powerful than the Gentiles we are forbidden to let an idolater among us; even a temporary resident or itinerant trader shall not be allowed to pass through our land unless he accepts the seven Noahide precepts, for it is written: ‘they shall not dwell in thy land’ that is, not even temporarily. If he accepts the seven Noahide precepts, he becomes a resident alien (ger toshav) but it is forbidden to grant the status of resident alien except at times when the Jubilee is held [that is, when the Temple stands and sacrifices are offered].
However, during times when Jubilees are not held it is forbidden to accept anyone who is not a full convert to Judaism (ger tzedeq).
*****
Let us begin with the text of some common prayers. In one of the first sections of the daily morning payer, every devout Jew blesses God for not making him a Gentile. The concluding section of the daily prayer (which is also used in the most solemn part of the service on New Year's day and on Yom Kippur) opens with the statement: ‘We must praise the Lord of all . . . for not making us like the nations of [all] lands . . . for they bow down to vanity and nothingness and pray to a god that does not help.’ The last clause was censored out of the prayer books, but in eastern Europe it was supplied orally, and has now been restored into many Israeli – printed prayer books. In the most important section of the weekday prayer the ‘eighteen blessings’ there is a special curse, originally directed against Christians, Jewish converts to Christianity and other Jewish heretics: ‘And may the apostates have no hope, and all the Christians perish instantly.’ This formula dates from the end of the 1st century, when Christianity was still a small persecuted sect. Sometime before the 14th century it was softened into: ‘And may the apostates have no hope and all the heretics perish instantly,’ and after additional pressure into: ‘And may the informers have no hope, and all the heretics perish instantly.’ After the establishment of Israel, the process was reversed, and many newly printed prayer books reverted to the second formula, which was also prescribed by many teachers in religious Israeli schools. After 1967, several congregations close to Gush Emunim have restored the first version (so far only verbally, not in print) and now pray daily that the Christians ‘may perish instantly.’ This process of reversion happened in the period when the Catholic Church (under Pope John XXIII) removed from its Good Friday service a prayer which asked the Lord to have mercy on Jews, heretics etc. This prayer was thought by most Jewish leaders to be offensive and even anti-Semitic.
Apart from the fixed daily prayers, a devout Jew must utter special short blessings on various occasions, both good and bad (for example, while putting on a new piece of clothing, eating a seasonal fruit for the first time that year, seeing powerful lightning, hearing bad news, etc.)
Some of these occasional prayers serve to inculcate hatred and scorn for all Gentiles, We have mentioned in Chapter 2 the rule according to which a pious Jew must utter curse when passing near a Gentile cemetery, whereas he must bless God when passing near a Jewish cemetery. A similar rule applies to the living; thus, when seeing a large Jewish population a devout Jew must praise God, while upon seeing a large Gentile population he must utter a curse. Nor are buildings exempt: the Talmud lays down that a Jew who passes near an inhabited non-Jewish dwelling must ask God to destroy it, whereas if the building is in ruins he must thank the Lord of Vengeance.
(Naturally, the rules are reversed for Jewish houses.) This rule was easy to keep for Jewish peasants who lived in their own villages or for small urban communities living in all-Jewish townships or quarters. Under the conditions of classical Judaism, however, it became impracticable and was therefore confined to churches and places of worship of other religions (except Islam). In this connection, the rule was further embroidered by custom: it became customary to spit (usually three times) upon seeing a church or a crucifix, as an embellishment to the obligatory formula of regret. Sometimes insulting biblical verses were also added.
There is also a series of rules forbidding any expression of praise for Gentiles or for their deeds, except where such praise implies an even greater praise of Jews and things Jewish. This rule is still observed by Orthodox Jews. For example, the writer Agnon, when interviewed on the Israeli radio upon his return from Stockholm, where he received the Nobel Prize for literature, praised the Swedish Academy, but hastened to add: ‘I am not forgetting that it is forbidden to praise Gentiles, but here there is a special reason for my praise’ that is, that they awarded the prize to a Jew.
Similarly, it is forbidden to join any manifestation of popular Gentile rejoicing, except where failing to join in might cause ‘hostility’ towards Jews, in which case a ‘minimal’ show of joy is allowed.
In addition to the rules mentioned so far, there are many others whose effect is to inhibit human friendship between Jew and Gentile. I shall mention two examples: the rule on ‘libation wine’ and that on preparing food for a Gentile on Jewish holy days.
A religious Jew must not drink any wine in whose preparation a Gentile had any part whatsoever. Wine in an open bottle, even if prepared wholly by Jews, becomes banned if a Gentile so much as touches the bottle or passes a hand over it. The reason given by the rabbis is that all Gentiles are not only idolaters but must be presumed to be malicious to boot, so that they are likely to dedicate (by a whisper, gesture or thought) as ‘libation’ to their idol any wine which a Jew is about to drink. This law applies in full force to all Christians, and in a slightly attenuated form also to Muslims. (An open bottle of wine touched by a Christian must be poured away, but if touched by a Muslim it can be sold or given away, although it may not be drunk by a Jew.) The law applies equally to Gentile atheists (how can one be sure that they are not merely pretending to be atheists?) but not to Jewish atheists.

Jewish History, Jewish Religion – The Weight of Three Thousand Years

Shahak, Israel wrote:

According to the Talmud, Jesus was executed by a proper rabbinical court for idolatry, inciting other Jews to idolatry, and contempt of rabbinical authority. All classical Jewish sources which mention his execution are quite happy to take responsibility for it; in the Talmudic account the Romans are not even mentioned.”

Jewish History, Jewish Religion – The Weight of Three Thousand Years

Shahak, Israel wrote:

The attitude of Judaism towards Islam is, in contrast, relatively mild.
Although the stock epithet given to Muhammad is ‘madman’ (‘meshugga’), this was not nearly as offensive as it may sound now, and in any case it pales before the abusive terms applied to Jesus. Similarly, the Qur'anun like the New Testament is not condemned to burning. It is not honored in the same way as Islamic law honors the Jewish sacred scrolls, but is treated as an ordinary book. Most rabbinical authorities agree that Islam is not idolatry (although some leaders of Gush Emunim now choose to ignore this). Therefore the Halakhah decrees that Muslims should not be treated by Jews any worse than ‘ordinary’ Gentiles. But also no better. Again, Maimonides can serve as an illustration. He explicitly states that Islam is not idolatry, and in his philosophical works he quotes, with great respect, many Islamic philosophical authorities. He was, as I have mentioned before, personal physician to Saladin and his family, and by Saladin's order he was appointed Chief over all Egypt's Jews. Yet, the rules he lays down against saving a Gentile's life (except in order to avert danger to Jews) apply equally to Muslims.
******
The Hebrew word is meshummadim, which in rabbinical USAge refers to Jews who become ‘idolaters,’ that is either pagan or Christians, but not to Jewish converts to Islam.

Jewish History, Jewish Religion – The Weight of Three Thousand Years