Вопросы мои, наверное, наивные и Вам уже порядком надоевшие.
Но всё таки хотелось бы услышать хоть какие нибудь прямые ответы
на мои простые вопросы (там где я ставлю знак вопроса)
если Вам не жалко, то прочитайте еще разок мой последний текст и ответте кратенько на вопросы
хотя бы просто: да – нет
, Вы поставили совершенно правильные вопросы, но их так много и они настолько серьезные, что я даже не знаю, как к ним подступиться. И однозначно ответить на них не всегда возможно. Насколько я понял, Вас, в первую очередь, интересует следующая группа вопросов:
магия на практике?
Это буквально надо понимать?
Я о ней ничего не знаю и, наверно, знать не хочу.
Но если это магия, то она и на меня тоже действует?
Или она действует на тех, которые "поставили разум и истину вне закона,
ради реализации своего 700-летнего мессианского проекта"?
Она их наделяет силой?
Если совсем коротко, то скорее «да», чем «нет». И рассказ В. Пелевина нельзя воспринимать только как «прикол» и «глум».
Наверное, в подтверждение я должен был бы, как минимум, привести несколько авторитетных мнений. Но, опять-таки, - с одной стороны, их очень много, а с другой – честно признаюсь, не лежит у меня душа заниматься сейчас составлением такой подборки.
Скажу лишь, что Р. Генон
(крупный специалист в оккультной и эзотерической тематике) называл магию – традиционной наукой самой высшей пробы
. Он же неоднократно предупреждал о вреде различных оккультистских суррогатов магии, нацеленных на реализацию всевозможных «сил» и «эффектов» (т.е., побочной и даже профанической стороны магической науки)
, а также об огромной опасности эпидемии спиритизма, захлестнувшей США и Европу (включая Россию
) в конце XIX столетия.
Именно ввиду несомненной для Р.Генона реальности этих «сил», он постоянно напоминал об опасности их развязывания и пробуждения. Все его творчество проникнуто чувством глубокой тревоги и, надо также признать, удручающего пессимизма – в связи с невозможностью обуздания давно вышедших из-под контроля «экспериментов»
в этой области.
Конечно, для большинства современных людей это должно звучать несколько неожиданно и даже диковато, но это факт. Современная цивилизация оказалась полностью выдана во власть бесов.
Поскольку Вас это частное мнение вряд ли удовлетворит, приведу еще и свидетельство Вавилонского Талмуда
по поводу магии. Обратите внимание, уважаемый Гендос – уже в Мишне проведена классификация различных видов магии и оставлена лазейка для некоторых их них (оговорено разрешение на создание «магических иллюзий», - я выделил этот момент в тексте
), а Гемара уже фактически легализует «белую магию»
. Учитывая реальное место Талмуда Бавли в современной евро-американской цивилизации, нам всем должно было бы быть не до смеха.
Данная глава содержит в комментариях упоминание имени Христа, в кощунственном контексте (я также выделил его в тексте
). http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_67.htmlBabylonian Talmud: Tractate Sanhedrin
That is merely a mnemonical sign.1 MISHNAH
. A MESITH IS A [SEDUCING] LAYMAN,2 AND HE WHO SEDUCES AN INDIVIDUAL3 SAYING, 'THERE IS AN IDOL IN SUCH AND SUCH A PLACE; IT EATS THUS, IT DRINKS THUS, IT DOES SO MUCH GOOD AND SO MUCH HARM. FOR ALL WHOM THE TORAH CONDEMNS TO DEATH NO WITNESSES ARE HIDDEN TO ENTRAP THEM, EXCEPTING FOR THIS ONE. IF HE INCITED TWO [TO IDOLATRY], THEY THEMSELVES ARE WITNESSES AGAINST HIM, AND HE IS BROUGHT TO BETH DIN AND STONED. BUT IF HE ENTICED ONE, HE MUST REPLY, I HAVE FRIENDS WHO WISH TO DO SO LIKEWISE [COME AND PROPOSE IT TO THEM TOO].' BUT IF HE WAS CUNNING AND DECLINED TO SPEAK BEFORE THEM, WITNESSES ARE HIDDEN BEHIND A PARTITION, WHILST HE WHO WAS INCITED SAYS TO HIM, MAKE YOUR PROPOSAL TO ME NOW IN PRIVATE. WHEN THE MESITH DOES SO, THE OTHER REPLIES, HOW SHALL WE FORSAKE OUR GOD IN HEAVEN TO GO AND SERVE WOOD AND STONES?' SHOULD HE RETRACT, IT IS WELL. BUT IF HE ANSWERS, 'IT IS OUR DUTY [TO WORSHIP IDOLS], AND IS SEEMLY FOR US, THEN THE WITNESSES STATIONED BEHIND THE PARTITION TAKE HIM TO BETH DIN, AND HAVE HIM STONED. IF HE SAYS, 'I WILL WORSHIP IT', OR, 'I WILL GO AND WORSHIP', OR, 'LET US GO AND WORSHIP'; OR, 'I WILL SACRIFICE [TO IT]', 'I WILL GO AND SACRIFICE', 'LET US GO AND SACRIFICE'; 'I WILL BURN INCENSE, 'I WILL GO AND BURN INCENSE'. 'LET US GO AND BURN INCENSE'; 'I WILL MAKE LIBATIONS TO IT', 'I WILL GO AND MAKE LIBATIONS TO IT, LET US GO AND MAKE LIBATIONS, 'I WILL PROSTRATE MYSELF BEFORE IT', 'I WILL GO AND PROSTRATE MYSELF'. 'LET US GO AND PROSTRATE OURSELVES'. (GUILT IS INCURRED).4 GEMARA
. A MESITH IS A LAYMAN. Thus, only because he is a layman [is he stoned]; but if a prophet, he is strangled. WHO SEDUCES AN INDIVIDUAL: thus, only if he seduces an individual; but if a community, he is strangled. Hence, who is [the Tanna of] the Mishnah? — R. Simeon. For it has been taught: A prophet who entices [people to idolatry] is stoned; R. Simeon said: He is strangled.5 Then consider the second clause.6 A maddiah7 is one who says: 'Let us go and serve idols': whereon Rab Judah observed in Rab's name: This Mishnah teaches of those who lead astray a seduced city. Thus it agrees with the Rabbis [who maintain that these too are stoned, not strangled]. Hence, the first clause is taught according to R. Simeon; the second according to the Rabbis! — Rabina said: Both clauses are based on the Rabbis' ruling, but proceed from the universally admitted to the disputed.8 R. Papa said: When the Mishnah states A MESITH IS A HEDYOT,9 it is only in respect of hiding witnesses.10 For it has been taught: And for all others for whom the Torah decrees death, witnesses are not hidden, excepting for this one. How is it done? — A light is lit in an inner chamber, the witnesses are hidden in an outer one [which is in darkness], so that they can see and hear him,11 but he cannot see them. Then the person he wished to seduce says to him, 'Tell me privately what thou hast proposed to me'; and he does so. Then he remonstrates; 'But how shall we forsake our God in Heaven, and serve idols'? If he retracts, it is well. But if he answers: 'It is our duty and seemly for us', the witnesses who were listening outside bring him to the Beth din, and have him stoned.12 MISHNAH
. A MADDIAH IS ONE WHO SAYS, 'LET US GO AND SERVE IDOLS'. A SORCERER, IF HE ACTUALLY PERFORMS MAGIC, IS LIABLE [TO DEATH]. BUT NOT IF HE MERELY CREATES ILLUSIONS.13 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
. Rab Judah said in Rab's name: This Mishnah teaches of those who lead astray a seduced city.14
A SORCERER, IF HE ACTUALLY PERFORMS MAGIC etc. Our Rabbis taught: [Thou shalt not suffer] a witch [to live]
:15 this applies to both man and woman. If so, why is a [female] witch stated? — Because mostly women engage in witchcraft
. How are they executed? — R. Jose the Galilean said: Here it is written, Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live; whilst elsewhere is written, Thou shalt not suffer anything that breatheth to live.16 Just as there, the sword is meant, so here is the sword meant too. R. Akiba said: It is here stated, Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live; whilst elsewhere it is said, [There shall not a hand touch it, but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through;] whether it be beast or man, it shall not live.17 Just as there, death by stoning is meant, so here too. R. Jose said to him, I have drawn an analogy between 'Thou shalt not suffer to live' written in two verses, whilst you have made a comparison between 'Thou shalt not suffer to live', and 'It shall not live'. R. Akiba replied: I have drawn an analogy between two verses referring to Israelites, for whom the Writ hath decreed many modes of execution,18 whilst you have compared Israelites to heathens, in whose case only
To Part b
Original footnotes renumbered. See Structure of the Talmud Files
1. I.e., in both the reference is to something done for the first time: there to coition; here to profanation. But the similarity ceases at this point.
2. Heb. hedyot. As opposed to a prophet.
3. Heb. hedyot. But not a whole community. On the Heb. term hedyot, v. p 456, nn. 2 and 3.
4. The seducer by using any one of those expressions incurs guilt and is executed; v. Rashi (supra, 61a) who refers it to the seduced person.
5. V. infra 84a.
6. I.e., the next Mishnah, which is really part of this.
7. Who is stoned, as stated in the Mishnah on 53a, of which all the subsequent Mishnahs in this chapter are explanations.
8. Lit., 'nor only this, but that also).' When the Mishnah states, [HE] WHO SEDUCES AN INDIVIDUAL, it is not intended to exclude a multitude, but merely to commence with the universally agreed law. Then the next Mishnah adds that the same applies to the seduction of a multitude, though this is not admitted by all.
9. [H], [G] rendered in Mishnah, 'LAYMAN', also means ignorant, ignoble.
10. I.e., hedyot is not used in the sense of a layman as opposed to a prophet, but in the sense of ignoble; so dastardly in his action, that he is not shewn the same consideration as other malefactors, but hidden witnesses are set to entrap him. There is no dispute between Rabina and R. Papa, both teaching that the two clauses agree with the Rabbis; but Rabina explains the phrase, 'HE WHO SEDUCES AN INDIVIDUAL', whilst R. Papa deals with 'A MESITH IS A HEDYOT'.
11. Otherwise, they could not testify.
12. In the uncensored editions of the Talmud there follows this important passage
(supplied from D.S. on the authority of the Munich and Oxford Mss. and the older editions) 'And this they did to Ben Stada in Lydda ([H]), and they hung him on the eve of Passover. Ben Stada was Ben Padira. R. Hisda said: 'The husband was Stada, the paramour Pandira
. But was nor the husband Pappos b. Judah? — His mother's name was Stada. But his mother was Miriam, a dresser of woman's hair? ([H] megaddela neshayia): — As they say in Pumbaditha, This woman has turned away ([H]) from her husband, (i.e., committed adultery)
.' T. Herford, in 'Christianity in the Talmud', pp. 37 seqq, 344 seqq, identifies this Ben Stada with Jesus of Nazareth
. As to the meaning of the name, he connects it with [G] 'seditious', and suggests (p. 345 n. 1) that it originally denoted 'that Egyptian
' (Acts XXI 38, Josephus, Ant. XX, 8, 6) who claimed to be a prophet and led his followers to the Mount of Olives
, where he was routed by the Procurator Felix, and that in later times he might have been confused with Jeshua ha-Notzri. This hypothesis, however, involves the disregard of the Talmudic data, for Pappos b. Judah lived a century after Jesus (Git. 90a), though the mother's name, Miriam (Mary), would raise no difficulty, as [H] megaddela neshayia may be the result of a confusion with Mary Magdalene (v. also Box, The Virgin Birth of Jesus, pp. 201f, for other possible meanings of Ben Stada and Ben Pandira) Derenbourg (Essai note 9, pp. 465-471) rightly denies the identity of Ben Stada with Jesus, and regards him simply as a false prophet executed during the second century at Lydda.
13. I.e., the illusion of doing something, whereas in fact he does nothing.
14. Cf. supra 53a.
15. Ex. XXII, 17.
16. Deut. XX, 17. This refers to the war of extermination against the seven races inhabiting Canaan before the Conquest by Joshua. They would naturally be killed by the sword.
17. Ex. XIX, 13. This refers to the taboo placed upon Mount Sinai before the Theophany.
18. And yet at Sinai stoning was chosen.
Tractate List / Glossary / Search / Bible Reference Sanhedrin 67b
one death penalty is decreed.1 Ben 'Azzai said:2 It is here written, Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live, whilst [immediately after] it is said, Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.3 Now, this is placed in proximity, teaching that just as the latter is stoned, so is the former. Thereupon R. Judah said to him: Shall we, because of this proximity, exclude the former [from the easier death implied by an unspecified death sentence] changing it to stoning?4 But [reason this:] The ob and yidde'oni were included among other sorcerers.5 Why were they singled out?6 That other sorcerers may be assimilated to them, and to teach thee, just as the ob and yidde'oni are stoned, so are all other sorcerers stoned. But even according to R. Judah, are not ob and yidde'oni two statements teaching the same thing, and two statements teaching the same thing cannot throw light upon anything else?7 — R. Zechariah answered: For this very reason R. Judah is generally said to maintain that even two statements singled out for the same purpose illumine the proposition as a whole.8
R. Johanan said: Why are they [sorcerers] called Kashshafim?9 — Because they lessen the power of the Divine agencies
There is none else besides Him:11 R. Hanina said: Even by sorcery.12 A woman once attempted to take earth from under R. Hanina's feet.13 He said to her, 'If you succeed in your attempts, go and practise it [sc. sorcery]
: it is written, however, There is none else beside him'. But that is not so, for did not R. Johanan say: Why are they called mekashshefim?14 Because they lessen the power of the Divine agencies? — R. Hanina was in a different category, owing to his abundant merit.15
R. Abaye b. Nagri said in the name of R. Hiyya b. Abba: Belatehem refers to magic through the agency of demons, belahatehem to sorcery [without outside help]
.16 And thus it is also said, And the flame [Heb. lahat] of the sword that turns of itself.17
Abaye said: The sorcerer who insists on exact paraphernalia18 works through demons; he who does not works by pure enchantment.
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.
R. Ashi said: I saw Karna's father20 blow his nose violently and streamers of silk issued from his nostrils.
Then the magicians said unto Pharoah, This is the finger of God:21 R. Eleazar, said: This proves that a magician cannot produce a creature less than a barley corn in size. R. Papa said: By God! he cannot produce even something as large as a camel; but these [larger than a barley corn] he can [magically] collect [and so produce the illusion that he has magically created them], the others he cannot
Rab said to R. Hiyya: 'I myself saw an Arabian traveller take a sword and cut up a camel; then he rang a bell, at which the camel arose.'
He replied, 'After that, was there any blood or dung? But that was merely an illusion.' Ze'iri happened to go to Alexandria in Egypt and bought an ***. When he was about to water it, it dissolved, and there stood before him a landing board.22 The vendors then said to him; 'Were you not Ze'iri, we would not return you [your money]: does anyone buy anything here without first testing it by water?
Jannai24 came to an inn. He said to them, 'Give me a drink of water,' and they offered him shattitha.25 Seeing the lips of the woman [who brought him this] moving,26 he [covertly] spilled a little thereof, which turned to snakes. Then he said, 'As I have drunk of yours, now do you come and drink of mine.' So he gave her to drink, and she was turned into an ***. He then rode upon her into the market. But her friend came and broke the charm [changing her back into a human being], and so he was seen riding upon a woman in public. And the frog came up, and covered the land of Egypt
.27 R. Eleazar said: It was one frog, which bred prolifically and filled the land. This is a matter disputed by Tannaim. R. Akiba said: There was one frog which filled the whole of Egypt [by breeding]
. But R. Eleazar b. Azariah said to him, 'Akiba, What hast thou to do with Haggadah?28 Cease thy words and devote thyself to 'Leprosies' and 'Tents.'29 One frog croaked for the others, and they came'.
R. AKIBA SAID, etc.
- To Next Folio -
Original footnotes renumbered. See Structure of the Talmud Files
1. Viz., decapitation. Consequently, no true analogy is possible.
2. His full name was Simeon b. 'Azzai. There were four companions each named Simeon, so for short they were referred to by their patronym (Rashi in Ab. IV, 1).
3. Ex. XXII, 19.
4. R. Judah does not regard the proximity of two subjects, [H] as a method of exegesis.
5. I.e., in the verse, Thou shalt not suffer a sorcerer to live.
6. In Lev. XX, 27.
7. This is in accordance with the exegetical principle that if a general proposition is stated, and then one part thereof is singled out for special mention, the latter illumines the former; but not if two are singled out. For if they were intended to convey a teaching with respect to the proposition as a whole, only one should have been singled out, from which the second (together with the rest of the general statement) would be derived.
8. R. Judah does not agree with the limitation expressed above, and it is precisely from this verse that he deduces that even two statements may be singled out to convoy a teaching for the whole; v. Kid. 35a.
10. I.e., making incantations of death against those for whom Heaven has decreed life
(Rashi); and in general seeking to interfere with the course of events as decreed from above. The word is treated as an abbreviation, thus Keshafim, Kahash, Famalia, Ma'alah. (Lessens [the] Family on High).
11. Deut. IV, 35.
12. I.e., not even sorcerers have power to oppose His decree.
13. To perform magic against him.
14. [H] Hebrew form of Kashshafim.
15. Therefore God should certainly not permit any sorcerer to harm him.
16. In the references to Pharoah's magicians, two words are employed to denote their art: belatehem, ([H]) e.g., Ex. VII, 22 (with their enchantments); and belahatehem ([H]) Ex. VII, 11.
17. Gen. III, 24, thus lahat is referred to an action taking place of itself; similarly, belahatehem connotes sorcery performed without extraneous aid.
18. Demanding particular properties for different kinds of magic
19. V. p 446, nn. 9, 10. It thus all depends as to whose help is invoked in performing the miraculous.
20. He was a magician
21. Ex. VIII, 19; this refers to the plague of lice, which they could not imitate.
22. The *** had been a product of sorcery, created out of a landing board. Things thus created reverted to their original form when brought into contact with water
23. The scholars of the first century referred frequently to Egypt as the original home of magic arts (Blau, Das aljudische Zauberwesen, pp. 37-49). Sorcery was very rife in Alexandria, and was practised by Jews too, who were more influenced by pagan ideas in this city than in any other place of their dispersion. Among the less intelligent, Jewish and pagan, witchcraft were freely indulged in (Schurer, Geschichte, 3rd ed., III, 294-304). It is not clear in this passage whether Ze'iri had bought the *** from a Jew or Gentile, but the fact that such particular respect was shewn to him would seem to indicate that the vendor was a Jew.
24. Rashi observes that this is the reading, not R. Jannai; for a scholar would not practise witchcraft.
25. A drink prepared of flour and water. Cf. Lat. ptisanarium, a decoction of barley groats
26. By this he recognised her to be a witch, probably muttering a charm.
27. Ex. VIII, 6.
28. Haggadah, also aggadah, from Nagad, to narrate, denotes the narrative, and homiletical portions of the Talmud.
29. [Nega'im and Ohaloth, two subjects in the Talmud and name of two tractates dealing respectively with uncleanliness of a corpse and leprosy, subjects of extreme difficulty and thus suited to R. Akiba's keen dialetics.]