13

In order to avoid the prohibited, we must first know what it is.

What is the halachic definition of Kishuf ("magic")?

While I am mainly interested in sources, Svaras (reasonings) and thoughts are welcome too.

Here is my own current theory as an example:

Kishuf is a non-kabbalistic cause-and-effect that consistently works while the majority of that generation's scientists would claim it should not work.

Renato S. Grun
  • 6,914
  • 1
  • 21
  • 57
Adám
  • 6,801
  • 21
  • 54
  • 1
    למאי נפקא מינה? – Scimonster Jan 15 '15 at 15:09
  • @Scimonster Shemot 22:17 – MTL Jan 15 '15 at 15:11
  • 1
    possible duplicate of How are sorcery or witchcraft viewed in Judaism and Jewish Mysticism? – DanF Jan 15 '15 at 20:07
  • 2
    @DanF I don't think so. This question wants to know what is the technical definition of kishuf, while that question explores what Judaism thinks about kishuf. Those are two different questions, I think. – MTL Jan 15 '15 at 20:31
  • It means gourds! (or whatever vegetable קישואין refers to) – הנער הזה Jan 15 '15 at 20:51
  • But seriously, it seems like the Chachamim felt that in order to know what's prohibited, one needed to go through all of the various examples. Perhaps there were many specific prohibited practices, without a general rule (as the Rambam would obviously argue on your definition) – הנער הזה Jan 15 '15 at 20:53
  • @Matt How do we handle new cases today? Why would the Rambam obviously...? – Adám Jan 15 '15 at 21:35
  • 1
    my point is that it might not be possible to "handle" new cases today, without the tradition of which practices are prohibited; see Gemara linked. But the Rambam (at least as understood by the Gra) didn't believe that magic was anything that scientists couldn't explain, it was merely trickery. Some of the Geonim (R. Shmuel ben Hofni, R. Hai) held this view explicitly – הנער הזה Jan 15 '15 at 21:46
  • Also, your assumptions/definition would include kabbalah maasis – הנער הזה Jan 15 '15 at 21:54
  • @Matt There is no requirement for such a case to actually be able to occur. Wouldn't Rambam have agreed that theoretically, IF someone COULD do something unscientific, it WOULD be kishuf? Also, I forgot to add the exception clause about Kabbalah. I will edit. Thanks. – Adám Jan 15 '15 at 22:19
  • 1
    @NBZ 1. it would be really weird for the Torah to prohibit something that can't occur (I know some have this view regarding certain cases, I think that the Rambam disagrees, but that's another matter) 2. There are cases in the Gemara where people were tried for witchcraft 3. See Sefer Hamitzvos Lo Taaseh 32, where the Rambam disagrees with your definition, and the Radvaz (Metzudas David 61) connects with the understanding that the Rambam has regarding the possibility of magic, and so do many other poskim – הנער הזה Jan 15 '15 at 22:39
  • see the ramchal's book derech Hashem – ray Jan 22 '15 at 18:27
  • @ray Could you expand that into an answer? – Adám Jan 26 '15 at 16:54
  • @NBZ no time now. but it's clear there is more to reality than the physical. some people are able to communicate with other forms of creatures and worlds. kishuf has to do with connecting with the darker side of those creatures/worlds. – ray Jan 26 '15 at 17:15
  • i'm not sure why my post was deleted according to R. Saadya Gaon, the Rambam, his son, and no doubt many others, kishuf is sleight of hand. – mevaqesh Jan 29 '15 at 04:00
  • 1
    According to your definition, if 1000 years ago somebody had built a rocket ship and home to the moon then he would be doing kishuf. Is this correct? Why isn't any revolutionary invention kishuf? – mroll Nov 27 '16 at 15:19
  • @mevaqesh - see my answer which sources kitzur shulchan aruch – ezra Dec 14 '16 at 18:36

2 Answers2

2

Kitzur Shulchan Aruch, 166:4 says that even slight of hand tricks are considered magic and that they should not be viewed or performed.

At least a partial answer.

ezra
  • 18,664
  • 4
  • 35
  • 104
  • OK, so even slight of hand tricks are considered magic. What does the even refer to? What is the main group of activities that are magic such that slight of hand can be associated with it? – Adám Jan 30 '19 at 07:33
1

Bavli Sanhedrin 67a states:

A SORCERER, IF HE ACTUALLY PERFORMS MAGIC, IS LIABLE [TO DEATH]. BUT NOT IF HE MERELY CREATES ILLUSIONS. R. AKIBA SAID IN R. JOSHUA'S NAME: OF TWO WHO GATHER CUCUMBERS [BY MAGIC] ONE MAY BE PUNISHED AND THE OTHER EXEMPT: HE WHO REALLY GATHERS THEM IS PUNISHED: WHILST HE WHO PRODUCES AN ILLUSION IS EXEMPT.

Sanhedrin 67b further clarifies:

Abaye said: The laws of sorcerers are like those of the Sabbath: certain actions are punished by stoning, some are exempt from punishment, yet forbidden, whilst others are entirely permitted. Thus: if one actually performs magic, he is stoned; if he merely creates an illusion, he is exempt, yet it is forbidden; whilst what is entirely permitted? — Such as was performed by R. Hanina and R. Oshaia, who spent every Sabbath eve in studying the Laws of Creation, by means of which they created a third-grown calf and ate it.

Footnote: It thus all depends as to whose help is invoked in performing the miraculous.

Clifford Durousseau
  • 1,804
  • 10
  • 26