post header

"The Talmud Unmasked": some things you should know before reading

"The Talmud Unmasked", which you can find at our website, is a short book written by Iustinus Bonaventura Pranaitis. It contains excerpts from the Talmud and related rabbinical literature showing what the Jews are taught and commanded regarding their behaviour towards Christians and Christianity in general. Originally published in Latin in 1892, it offers precise insights and useful sources limited not only to the Talmud, but also collections of commentaries by famous rabbis which are at times appended to the Talmud.

This is crucial since Jews will always present themselves as these friendly, wise sages who hold nothing but love and tolerance towards everyone. The book shows, however, that they hate Christians, desire their disgrace in every conceivable way, and are commanded to defraud them, avoid offering them help of any kind, let them die (or even to kill them, in the right circumstances), etc. In addition, they are commanded to hide all these things, to avoid hostility (e.g. a Jew can only heal a goy (gentile) to avoid enmity when they are a minority), or to give a good impression (trickery during trials against a goy is only allowed if the goyim will not notice).

It is therefore a great weapon against Judaism by merely showing what Jews themselves write. But if you want to properly use its references in a discussion, you will have to verify them, otherwise you will be accused of making things up. That means that you will have to check the reference work for yourself and see if the text is indeed as it is presented. And while in some cases this may be trivial, some references can be almost impossible to trace for different reasons.

As mentioned in the book itself, Jews themselves censor their own texts if they spread to the goyim. Therefore, to make sure one has the text in its original form, it is necessary to use old manuscripts such as the ones mentioned by Pranaitis as his sources of content, mostly editions from before the end of the 17th century.

In this article we list the challenges when it comes to tracing references back to their sources and include examples to show the legitimacy of all of Pranaitis' work.

Difficulties when it comes to finding the sources themselves

Many of the referenced works are only available in Hebrew, and at times are relatively obscure and hard to find online, if not impossible. In addition, the name of the book is usually a transliteration of the Hebraic name, which means that available online versions may use a different transliteration. For example, the book cited as "Tosephoth" can be found by looking for "Tosafot", and "Iore Dea" by looking for "Yoreh Deah".

To help in this process, we provide a list with some of the most referenced works with a link to an online version. Keep in mind that some of these are only in Hebrew. In those cases, we recommend the use of modern AI tools for translation, such as ChatGPT. Provide a paragraph and ask for the translation into any language to obtain much better results than a traditional translator. If you have doubts about the legitimacy of a translated part, ask for a word-by-word literal translation that you can verify.

  • Maimonides' Hilkoth Akum can be found here. Check the section that contains the text for other referenced books from Maimonides, such as Hilkoth Maakhaloth (here).
  • Iore Dea can be found here. Check the commentary section at the right when clicking a paragraph.
  • Tosephoth can be found here. The references can be found mostly in the "Tosafot on Talmud" section.
  • Choshen Hammischpat can be found here.
  • Rabbi Bechai's commentary on the books of the Pentateuch can be found here. Each main section corresponds to one of the five books. For example, the commentary regarding Deuteronomy can be found in the Devarim section.
  • Kad Hakkemach can be found here. This one is particularly tricky since the original text is referenced using the folio number, but the text itself has no real structure and is fully in Hebrew, being separated into thematic sections by the publishers. We recommend trying to infer the section from the quote in the book and using a translator to slowly go through the section.
  • Taanith can be found here.
  • Rabbi David Kimchi's commentaries can be found here.

Missing parts from a censored text

One of the most common forms of censor used to hide contents is to straight-up remove parts that may cause enmity. Many examples of this were given in a former article, but more can be found.

For example, The Talmud Unmasked makes the following claim:

In the Talmud, Christ is called Otho Isch – “That man”, i.e. the one who is known to all. In the Tract Abhodah Zarah, 6a, we read:
“He is called a Christian who follows the false teachings of that man, who taught them to celebrate the feast on the first day of the Sabbath, that is, to worship on the first day after the Sabbath.”

However, if we go to the referenced Talmud tract in Sefaria, a version that mentions explicitely parts where the text has been censored, the quote can't be found. Some search, however, shows that the quote is indeed found in older manuscripts:

Many of these instances are referenced by notes. For example, the text from Hilkoth Maakhaloth XI cited by the Talmud Unmasked reads:

The same is permitted in the case of all gentiles who are not idolaters, such as the Turks [Ismaelites]. A Jew, however, is not permitted to drink their wine, although he may use it to his own advantage. All the best known Rabbis agree on this. But since Christians are idolaters, it is not allowed even to use their wine to advantage.

The version of the text at Sefaria is missing the reference about Christians at the end, but it is included in note 24.

Parts that have been altered to make it seem they refered to past practices

This form of censor is also mentioned in The Talmud Unmasked:

The latest device invented to deceive the censors was inserting the word haiah (was) into the genuine text, as if to indicate that the matter in question once had its place there.

This is the case in Iore Deah 158, 2. The quote in The Talmud Unmasked reads:

...likewise to those who deny the Torah and the Prophets of Israel – the law is that all those should be killed; and those who have the power of life and death should have them killed; and if this cannot be done, they should be led to their death by deceptive methods.

While the text found at Sefaria reads:

And the heretics, and those who deny the Torah and Jewish prophecy -- they had the custom during the times of the Holy Temple to kill them. If one's hands were strong enough to kill them with a sword, in public, he would kill him [in that way], and if not, he would develop a plan in order to bring about their death.

The sudden references to the past make no sense in the context of the text and the purpose of the commentary, and is sudden and unexpected. Additionally, the comments attached to the text make it clear that the original didn't discuss about the past for no reason, but about the present.

For example, comment labelled as "Rabbi Akiva Eiger on Shulchan Arukh, Yoreh De'ah 158:1" reads "it is written that specifically we cast them into a pit but we do not kill them by hand", in present.

Translations with strangely ommitted parts

Even if an english translation is available, these can be altered to ommit crucial parts. For example, The Talmud Unmasked quotes the following text as Rabbi Bechai's comment on deuteronomy:

The Scripture teaches us to hate idols and to call them by ignominious names. Thus, if the name of a church is Bethgalia – “house of magnificence”, it should be called Bethkaria – an insignificant house, a pigs’ house, a latrine. For this word, karia, denotes a low-down, slum place.

This text, from Bechai's Devarim 7:26, is presented in this way in the English translation available at Sefaria:

The verse teaches that we must relate to idolatry with a very negative and disdainful attitude and when for some reason speaking about it always make plain how we detest it. We are not to refer to houses of pagan worship by the names they are usually referred to but by some name which belittles them, downgrades them. (Sanhedrin 63). We have a principle that unbecoming speech is forbidden unless such epithets are reserved for idolatry and places where such idolatry is practiced (compare Isaiah 46: 1 where the prophet ridicules pagan deities in insulting language: “Bel is bowed, Nebo is cowering.”) The author quotes more such examples from the Talmud where pagan sites are referred to in a derogatory manner.

Wait a minute. This translation doesn't seem very similar to Pranaitis' quote, in which detail is given about how exactly names are corrupted to give a derogatory meaning. And the translation even stops at the end and merely says "The author quotes more such examples from the Talmud where pagan sites are referred to in a derogatory manner". However, if I put the hebrew text of the entire section through ChatGPT's translation I get the following result:

The Scripture teaches you that a person is obliged to abominate idolatry by mentioning it in disparaging language. If there was a name, Beit Galya, which implies height, it is called Beit Karya, which implies depth and lowliness. And so they also said, all mockery is prohibited except for the mockery of idolatry, which is permitted. As it is written (Isaiah 46): "Bel bows down, Nebo stoops," and it is written (there), "They stoop, they bow down together, they could not deliver the burden." And so, the name of Mercury was Claus among his worshippers, and it is a language of praise and honor, and the sages replaced it with the name Mercurius, 'Mar' meaning exchange or replacement. Just like the language of the sages in 'Mar of Shechita with exchange of Shechita', and so they replaced Claus with Colis, which is a language of mockery and disgrace, from the language (Psalms 79), 'Mockery and ridicule.' This is how Rabbeinu Tam explained it. And so, they also said, 'beforehand from the Kelkelon is forbidden,' and Rashi explained, 'bangles made for idolatry and sacrificed before it beforehand, and they make them for modesty and honor.' And we say, 'beforehand from the Kelkelon is forbidden' in order to mention it in a name of disgrace, and 'their honor in disgrace I will say.' And there are those who say 'Marklus,' meaning 'exchange of Claus,' and it is mockery. Therefore, the Scripture includes 'abominate, you shall abominate it' in action and mentioning their names.

One wonders why the translator ommited such clear examples of distortion of names. In these cases it is always recommended to translate the Hebrew version if it is available, though keep in mind it can be censored in the aforementioned ways.

Slander against the author

The author of The Talmud Unmasked was a Catholic priest, an expert in rabbinical literature and Hebrew. Since his quotes are accurate and impossible to contradict, Jews must resort to character assassination (literally and figuratively, since Pranaitis died during the Bolshevik revolution).

If you search for his name, one of the first results will be his Wikipedia page. It is described how Pranaitis was called to testify about Jewish teachings in a trial regarding a Russian child that was murdered through Jewish ritual murder in which dozens of small holes were punctured into his body and his blood was extracted. The Wikipedia page tells us this about Pranaitis:

His credibility rapidly evaporated, however, when the defence demonstrated his ignorance of some simple Talmudic concepts and definitions, such as hullin,[4] to the point where "many in the audience occasionally laughed out loud when he clearly became confused and couldn't even intelligibly answer some of the questions asked by [Beilis'] lawyer".[1] Rebekah Marks Costin's account in Robert Garber's Jews on Trial quotes the key exchange of the trial which served to destroy Pranaitis' credibility:
Q: What is the meaning of the word Hullin [animals permissible as food]?
A: I don't know.
Q: What is the meaning of the word Erubin [Sabbath walking limits]?
A: I don't know.
Q: What is the meaning of the word Yebamot [family relationships]?
A: I don't know.
Q: When did Baba Batra[6] live and what was her activity?
A: I don't know.[7]
The last question "was fatal once it was tactfully explained to the jury. Baba Batra is a tractate of the Talmud, quite well known to scholars, students, and many Jewish laymen."[7] A Tsarist secret police agent would later report on Pranaitis' testimony, saying:
Cross-examination of Pranaitis has weakened the evidential value of his expert opinion, exposing lack of knowledge of texts and insufficient knowledge of Jewish literature. Because of his amateurish knowledge and lack of resourcefulness, Pranaitis' expert opinion is of very low value.

The first lie here is that "the last question was fatal" because Baba Batra is a Talmud tractate. All the mentioned questions refer to a Talmud tractate. The second lie is, of course, that Pranaitis wouldn't know what they are. All the mentioned tractates are listed in The Talmud Unmasked and cited several times each. It is absolutely impossible that Pranaitis would lack knowledge of them because, as it is evident, these questions that "destroy Pranaitis' credibility" are a complete fabrication by the author of the text in the Wikipedia page: Mendel Beilis, the very Jew who murdered the child, the witnesses, and later wrote an autobiography that evidently is as accurate as one would expect from Jewish accounts.

Finally, the reference to "a Tsarist secret police agent" comes from a book called "Tsarist Russia and the Beilis Case" written by A.C. Tager in 1934. Tager became an attorney of the Moscow District Court of Justice in 1917, precisely the year of the Bolshevik Revolution. Wikipedia tells us:

In the 1930s, Tager, along with a group of employees of the Central Archival Administration, was engaged in the search for documents proving the falsity of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion


The book "Tsarist Russia and the Beilis Affair" was conceived as part of a trilogy: its second volume was to be devoted to the Dreyfus affair , and the third to state anti-Semitism in Germany in the 1930s

So as can be observed, the source of the slander are a Jew who murdered several children, and a Bolshevik Jew who dedicated his life to writing Jewish propaganda. For these reasons, which you can find being parroted endlessly by Jews all over the internet, Pranaitis is labelled as an evil anti-semite and his work dismissed, despite Pranaitis never making any mention of semites beyond the following one:

I considered it unworthy of me to keep silent just for the sake of my own personal safety while the conflict rages between the two camps of "Semites" and "Anti-Semites", both of which claim they are fighting for the truth, while I know that the whole truth is not to be found in either camp.


The Talmud Unmasked is an incredibly valuable collection of references to Jewish literature. Read it and, if you want to arm yourself against Jews, verify personally the references that you find to be the most important. Keep in mind, though, that a small amount of them may be hard to trace unless you own ancient documents.