Can a Gentile be a Heretic? (Apikores)

Question

Is the category of Apikores- a heretic only limited to Jews or even non Jews?

The Sdei Chemed quotes many opinions that forbid quoting from heretics

Thus, is it permitted to quote a heretical gentile that preaches that Judaism is false? Or that there is no world to come. May I quote a wise saying from Muhammad that has nothing to do with theology per se', for since Muhammad denied the truth of the the Torah and its accuracy if he were a Jew he would be classified as an apikores.

(I know that the source for the word apikorus is really the name of a greek philosopher Epicurus)

He seems to forbid non-Jews as well (towards the end) saying that the dispensation for Aristotle et. al. is obsolete and no longer true. — Yishai, Jun 15 '15 at 18:22
http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/11283/can-a-noachide-continue-to-believe-in-religious-tenets-that-are-against-the-tora/11287#11287 — wfb, Jun 15 '15 at 19:27
Are you stuck on specifically apikores or any flavor of heretic will do? — Y e z, Jun 15 '15 at 19:47
Why do you assume Muhammad denied the Torah and its accuracy? As far as I know, he believed that people changed parts of the Torah, but he did believe that it originally was all from God. — Emet v'Shalom, Jun 15 '15 at 22:45
@Emet Ritva says he denied it. Besides going with fundamentals here, when someone says the 'real torah' never disallowed pig, but rather somebody stuck that in, then the entire holiness of the Torah is out the window. As Rambam writes in Chelek. — user6591, Jun 16 '15 at 01:36
@user6591: With all due respect to Ritva (and I don't know what he says anyway), we have to ask Muhammad (and his followers) what he believed and not speculate. Here is a link to the topic: http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/bible.htm. According to the last part of that page, the Quaran and the original Muslim scholars did not deny the Bible at all (the Quaran just says that people distorted the meaning of scripture). — Emet v'Shalom, Jun 16 '15 at 12:48
@Emet I think you should read the Rambam that Yez linked in his answer very carefully. — user6591, Jun 16 '15 at 12:55
There are three individuals who are considered as one "who denies the Torah":
a) one who says Torah, even one verse or one word, is not from God. If he says: "Moses made these statements independently," he is denying the Torah.

b) one who denies the Torah's interpretation, the oral law, or disputes [the authority of] its spokesmen as did Tzadok and Beitus.

c) one who says that though the Torah came from God, the Creator has replaced one mitzvah with another one and nullified the original Torah, like the Arabs [and the Christians]. — user6591, Jun 16 '15 at 13:27
Each of these three individuals is considered as one who denies the Torah. This is from Chabbad's site. — user6591, Jun 16 '15 at 13:28
@user6591: As for part c, you'd be surprised to learn just how many oral laws are debated whether they are from Moshe, a drasha, an asmachta for a halacha derabanan, or an agaddic drasha which may have limited or no halachic application. — Emet v'Shalom, Jun 16 '15 at 13:38
@Emet I wouldn't be surprised. But even if I would, that changes nothing. This is not about the machlokes between Bal HaMeor and Ritva concerning what an asmachta is or isn't. This is about a general denial of Torah she'bal peh, and denial of specific words in the Torah as having divine origin. You would be surprised how many people accidentally reveal their true "feelings" on these subjects while talking freely. — user6591, Jun 16 '15 at 13:44
How is it not a"denial" of the truth of the Torah when you say that Yishmael and not Yitzchok was chosen for the Brachos of Avraham. Denial of ביצחק יקרא לך זרע. Also that there is no prohibition of בשר וחלב. — Shoel U'Meishiv, Jun 16 '15 at 13:48
Would the halachic deot of Apikores go for a non-Jewish apikores as well? — EhevuTov, Jul 30 '15 at 23:21

score 7 · Answer 1 · edited Jun 16 '20 at 10:41

7

In the Rambam's list of those who have no share in the world to come, in which he lists those groups generally included in the umbrella of "heretic" (מין, אפיקורס, כופרים, וכולי), he has those who deny the Torah, הכופרים בתורה (Hilchos Teshuva 3:8). At the end of the description of those who deny the Torah, he writes:

והאומר שהבורא החליף מצוה זו במצוה אחרת, וכבר בטלה תורה זו, אף על פי שהיא הייתה מעם ה', כגון הנוצריים וההגריים

And one who says that the Creator switched this Command for another, and this Torah is nullified, even though [he says that] it is from Hashem, for example the Christians and descendents of Hagar

So Christians and descendents of Hagar made it on to his prestigious list of heretics.

edited Jun 16 '20 at 10:41

Community

1

answered Jun 15 '15 at 19:55

Y e z

58,536
3
109
249

2

perhaps he just means that the Jew who thinks like those groups is a heretic, but not that they themselves qualify for the term. – user6591 Jun 15 '15 at 20:03
Also it is halacha יז there – user6591 Jun 15 '15 at 20:03
@user6591 I assume you were using mechon mamre. In standard editions, it is #8. And I can't definitively refute your reading of the Rambam, but it does not seem to be the smoothest reading in my opinion. – Y e z Jun 15 '15 at 20:05
(I guess my userscript link went to Mechon Mamre, so I can't blame you...) – Y e z Jun 15 '15 at 20:06
It is a rough read. I was just playing devils advocate:) and yes I used your link as I wasn't near a Rambam. Then I had to scroll and scroll and scroll...... – user6591 Jun 15 '15 at 21:11
@user6591 I fixed the link - thanks for pointing it out – Y e z Jun 15 '15 at 21:13
@user6591, I don't think it is a rough read at all. The entire context is which Jews don't have a portion in the world to come, and he is outlining categories of Jews. Of course, all that says is that a non-Jew doesn't necessarily have that Halachic category. עצ"ע if there is any actual difference in making that distinction. – Yishai Jun 15 '15 at 22:04
@Yishai can you substantiate your claim that it is "outlining categories of Jews" particularly in light of the last words of halacha 5? – Y e z Jun 15 '15 at 22:14
@Yishai if he was comparing he should've said כמו. The fact that he wrote כגון sounds more like he is giving an example. And al pi his lomdus in his tshuva, the fact that he says הגריים and not ישמעאלים is significant. – user6591 Jun 15 '15 at 22:23
@yEz, that is a parenthetical. He is saying שכל ישראל יש להם חלק לעולם הבא אף על פי שחטאו and then goes on to list the exceptions, following the structure of the Mishna. Note that not everything in the list of those who don't have a portion in the world to come could apply to non-Jews - at a minimum המושך ערלתו. I just think he isn't intending to address non-Jews in this list. – Yishai Jun 15 '15 at 22:24
@user6591, what is the significance? – Yishai Jun 15 '15 at 22:26
@Yishai they are not muhamadiim. Unless I am wrong about that. – user6591 Jun 15 '15 at 22:35
@user6591, regarding כמו vs. כגון - maybe, I'm not sure that כמו has a different implication (e.g.) that would have made it a better word choice for my reading. – Yishai Jun 15 '15 at 22:38
@user6591, I have no idea. I would have assumed he was referencing muhamadiim, but he does call them ישמעאלים in other places. If this is a reference to a different religion or sect, I wonder which one makes that claim? – Yishai Jun 15 '15 at 22:39
@Yishai nice כמו:) also concerning הגריים, its possible my line of thinking was nimshach after his separating of בני קטורה and בני ישמעאל in hil. Melachim 10 8, but I don't think that is significant to this distinction. – user6591 Jun 15 '15 at 22:48
@user6591, Matt put a link in the question that supports yEz's reading, but it is hard to accept the idea proposed there. – Yishai Jun 16 '15 at 01:01
@Yishai indeed, R. Twersky reads the Rambam like yEz, which (he claims in the article) is the entire basis for his opinion. (My guess, however, is that there's also a philosophical reason) – הנער הזה Jun 16 '15 at 01:14
Perhaps נוצרים is referencing the early Christians ie. Jews? – Shoel U'Meishiv Nov 24 '18 at 16:27

score 5 · Answer 2 · answered Jun 15 '15 at 20:38

5

The mishna in Avos 2 14 reads ודע מה שתשיב לאפיקורוס. In his pirush hamishnayos, רמב׳ם quotes the gemara in Sanhedrin 38b that this refers specificaly to a non jewish apikores, not a jewish one, as this will cause him to become worse.

answered Jun 15 '15 at 20:38

user6591

33,638
2
39
81

And just for the record, from the statement of רבי יוחנן there in sanhedrin, and the Bartenura, the shoresh of the word אפיקורוס has to do with הפקר. Mr. Epicurus' doctrine doesn't seem different enough from Aristotle to warrant naming this branch of heresy after him. However cute that vort is. – user6591 Jun 15 '15 at 20:47
1

And in the Rambam's intro to Chelek as well - ומלת אפיקורוס היא ארמית, עניינה מי שמפקיר ומבזה את התורה או לומדיה – Y e z Jun 15 '15 at 21:13

Can a Gentile be a Heretic? (Apikores)

2 Answers2

Linked