We have taken the position In this paper that the issur of Arkhoath Shel Nochrim is not limited to idol worshipers alone but to all "goyim." We also would like to point out that the issur of Arkhoath is not limited to those "goyim" who take bribes. Rather, the issur of going to Arkhoath Shel Nochrim is an all encompassing, general issur embracing all and any "goyim."

We have referred to the Tashbatz that the issur includes not only idol worshipers but that it is - that is, members of the Islamic faith. The Tashbatz, In another tshuva, chelek 2, siman 220, also has an additional source for the issur, the verse of (Psalms 147). This passuk is, obviously, all-inclusive and not limited to idol worshipers or, for that matter, corrupt judicial systems.

Indeed, the very of , cannot be limited to heathens alone. For the passuk excludes from Dayanus anyone who is not included in . The truth, of course, is that even Hedyotos (laymen) are excluded by this verse. Certainly then, the goyim that are excluded are all goyim.

This, however, creates a problem. Why is it that kabala of hedyotos is valid and the kabala of goyim is not? If the issur is derived from the same verse how can we say that the halacha of kabala is different with regard to goyim ?

The explanation of the Netziv (Haamek Sheala, Mishpatim siman 101) follows, in approximate terms:

The passuk of is also used in another sense --- the -- the halacha has to be set before them, prepared for them like a set table ready to eat (Sanhedrin 6b). Moshe Rabbeinu was told that the Dayanim have to be taught Torah in such a manner that they should be so absolutely clear in their decision that when asked they should be prepared to defend their decision without hesitation. In other words, at the first instance, the passuk speaks of teaching the Dayanim Torah. On this comes now the of for goyim may not be taught Torah. There is an issur to teach Torah to goyim because of . Obviously, there is no issur to teach Torah to hedyotos. On the contrary, let us teach them, and let them learn. Of necessity then, imbedded In the passuk itself, we find the difference between hedyotos and goyim. And that is why kabala helps for hedyotos and not for goyim.

lf the issur of is related to the issur of teaching them Torah it goes without saying that in this issur there is no distinction between idol-worshipers or any other gentile, between corrupt judicial systems or ethical ones.

One can go even further. The Or Zarua (in Bav Kama siman 3) holds, as opposed to the Shulchan Aruch, that when both parties accept the Arkhaoth, their judgment is valid. His argument is based on the fact that since Bnei Noah are commanded in Dinim, their Din is valid even for two Jews. The point I would like to make is that even the Or Zarua speaks only about the validity of such going to Arkhaoth. But he also admits that in having chosen these Arkhaoth the parties have transgressed the issur of . Were the Or Zarua speaking only of a corrupt system, it is hard to say that he would grant such a system any validity.

Some versions have it as , instead of . The Halacha applies to both. See note 6.