(1)Question. Is it permissible for a sick person to consult gentile sorcerers?

(2)Answer. When life is in danger or such probability exists, or in case a limb of the body is in danger, such consultation is permissible; for sorcerers at times help through genuine remedies. But when no danger is involved this practice is prohibited, because sorcery in general is based on nothing else but falsehoods, deceit, and delusions.

(3) And this is proved in an opening passage of Yevamot (4a) where we ask about the requirement to stone a sorceress, and we don’t derive her sentence from the category of the medium and the wizard.

(4) For we cannot say that the prohibition on the medium and the wizard derives from, “Before a blind person, do not place an obstacle” (Lev. 19:14), which is Rabbi Yishmael’s position in the chapter Arba Mitot (Sanhedrin 56b), about the Children of Noah [non-Jews], that they are prohibited from magic, since we do not rule in favor of R Yishmael {I think this is actually referring to R Yosi}

(5) For all of Talmud teaches that Children of Noah are only commanded in the seven commandments, and the Riba (Isaac ben Asher Ha-Levi, 11th cent Tosafist) and Asheri (Asher ben Jehiel, aka the Rosh, 13th cent. halakhist) also ruled that it is not according to Rabbi Hizkiya/Hidkiya, who said that the Children of Noah are commanded on castration [or sorcery - the rest of the line of gemara in Sanhedrin 56b discusses sorcery in the name of Rabbi Shimon]

(6) And if so, there is no prohibition here, only the positive commandment to “be whole-hearted” [with the Lord your God, Deut. 18:13] as it is written, and it seems from his words that he is not proclaiming a real prohibition. And I say, with all due respect [to the Rosh], he did not read the words of the Rambam carefully enough, as he wrote in chapter 11 in Idol Worshippers, “It is forbidden to do magic or to ask a magician, rather we inflict the lashes of rebellion upon the asker, and the magician who actually does this act [of magic] is lashed” etc. (Mishneh Torah, Avodat Kochavim, chapter 11)

(7) And if so, you can see that he explicitly declares that both of them are prohibited [by Torah], but because here [in the case of the question being asked] there is no [actual] act, we do inflict merely rabbinic lashes upon him [as opposed to biblical], as he wrote in that same chapter about the asker of a medium, and what is written in that same chapter that they are in the general prohibition because of “wholehearted you shall be” (Deut. 18:13), this is specifically for those who believe in them. On this he says that he is among fools and idiots, and the Torah warns against this nonsense and those who believe in it and think that it’s the truth, as he wrote explicitly, “And only on those who believe,” wrote Rambam in that same chapter, [in the case that] his work or his profession in a fixed way is an astrologer of the heavens, indeed he is lashed.

(8) And I say that Rambam was reasoning about what is written in the Torah about one who asks a medium or a wizard specifically, but in these other cases written about in this passage, for example, a meunan (necromancer), menachesh (fortune teller), kosem (magician), and a mechashef (sorcerer), the Torah only associated “the asker” with the prohibition on “the medium” because it is making a distinction between “the asker” [aka, one who wants to actually call forth a spirit] and one who turns to the medium themself.

(9) For one is a venal sin and the other is a mortal sin, which is not true about all of the others, but, in fact, the word “the asker” refers to all of those verses which precede it. Indeed, and also since a medium has no method other than asking, since even one who turns [to them] can only ask, and behold, the proof is that Rashi explained that the prohibition extends to one who turns [to a medium, not just the asker], and it is for that reason that the Torah wrote “One who asks a medium”

(10) And the same is true in all those cases in which the manner of performing the magic does not involve asking a question, but rather doing the act itself. Even so, one who asks them is liable [to biblical punishment].

(11) But nonetheless, in Ramban’s teshuva I found that specifically the medium and the wizard are what the Torah forbids [a person from] asking, but you don’t have the other ones that are written in the verse. And [here’s Ramban’s quote]: “[If] an Israelite asks a non-Jewish sorcerer, this is only forbidden because of “wholehearted you shall be,” like one who asks astrologers,” and once we’ve come to this conclusion, it seems that even a regular sick person is not forbidden from asking a sorcerer or magician according to what Rambam reasoned, that there is no warning rather a prohibition in all cases because of “wholehearted you shall be”

(12) And also, it’s not really a prohibition, it’s a mere midrashic interpretation, because it’s not listed in the general mitzvot or the positive commandments, and also the essence of the text is to be wholehearted, which is to be faithful with God, May He be praised, to remember Him and be assured of him, to etch him in the heart of man, and because of this, in the case where one is sick, it is not appropriate to be stringent and turn [this drash] into a prohibition.

(13) But in any case, I say that since the essence is that he is prohibited them since they are vanities and frauds and things of trickery, and there is nothing real in them.

(14) If so, what is the reason not to be lenient in general with asking sorcerers because of “wholehearted you shall be” since there is nothing real in them and all of it is silliness?

(15) He [Rambam] said that a sick person who is in danger is permitted, even according to the Rambam, since sometimes they [the non-Jewish sorcerers] are correct and find things that are real and accurate, and even a doubtful risk of death pushes off Shabbat, which is [a crime punished by] stoning -- so all the more so in this case!

(16) But where there is no danger to life, no [this is not permitted]. Even [in a case of] danger of limb [this is prohibited], because all of the Achronim disagree with Rabbenu Tam, who compared the danger [of loss of] limb to the topic of desecrating. Desecrating Shabbat for danger to one’s life, the analogy is clear [but this is not the case for danger to limb, so it is prohibited in this case]

(17) And in any case, sometimes he sees [fit to] be lenient even on things where there is no danger to life, rather danger to limb, for example when it is known that a sick person comes to a person who does magic or in a case [where there is] a bad spirit, that it is permitted to ask them, according to the words of the Rambam, in their eyes or similar to them, most sorcerers know and find help and medicine [ie, they may be pseudo-doctors] and it is possible, even according to Rambam, that he will see to find a leniency and to say that the Torah does not prohibit magic in this manner, that it came only to expel and cancel magic and bad spirits and the like, for the Torah only prohibited asking of them and pursuing after them and believing in them when it is true in their eyes

(18) And there is some proof of this matter in that the Sanhedrin would learn magic in order to cancel magic of those condemned to death.

(19) And in this manner, I found in the responsum of Rav Menachem, Moreh Tzedek, to learn from a magician the matters of magic in order to save himself or others.

(20) And I found for this a powerful support in the chapter “Kol Habasar” (Chullin 105b) that tells there [the story of when] Rav Hisda and Rabba bar Bar Huna were traveling on a boat, and a woman said to them, “Seat me together with you,” but they didn’t seat her with them. She said a word and the boat was tied [stuck in place]. They also said something and released it. And they all permitted that it is permitted to cancel magic with magic, and all the more so when a non-Jew does it. But on a different matter, for example just a general sick person who is not in danger, I cannot find a leniency at all.

(21) Words of Shlomo Luria