Sanhedrin 098

5:
The Seifa [last section] of our mishnah is based on the biblical prohibitions against activities involving the occult:

The above translation is loose and interprets the practical application of the deed rather than translating it, which would involve using terms with which we not familiar, nor are we sure of the precise difference between them. The biblical verse uses two terms: Ov and Yid'oni. Both terms, as I have already noted, refer to some means or other of making contact with the dead. Nowadays we would call them a medium. Both the Hebrew terms denote some kind of familiar spirit – I believe the term used during the middle ages was "incubus". Thus the Ov is not the person practicing the occult art, but the means by which they claim to be making contact. That is why, possibly, a better rendition of the biblical verse would have been something like "Any man or woman who hosts an incubus…"

6:
The biblical concept of what happens to a human being after his physical death was that in some way or other he descended into the nether world, called She'ol there to continue some kind of ephemeral and undefined existence. It was the spirit of the person that resided in She'ol, obviously still possessed of human shape even though nothing more than a "shade". It is not described in terms of reward or punishment, but simply as a place to be. The fact that it was deemed to be gloomy and unhappy was only because it was devoid of the joy of life.

7:
The pessimistic outlook of the very late book of Job does see it in a more positive light, but this is not typical:

8:
It would seem that our ancestors believed that that it was possible to communicate with these spirits. It was possible to "call them up" from She'ol, and as they rose from their resting place they would make weird noises [Isaiah 8:19, 29:4]. The most famous account of such a séance is concerned with King Saul. I believe that what flawed Saul as a king was the fact that he suffered from an inferiority complex, and that it was probably for this very reason that he was selected by Samuel: Saul would be dependent on Samuel for support. Indeed they got on splendidly until Saul showed some small measure of independence, at which point the prophet abruptly terminated their relationship, leaving the king rudderless. His desperation gradually deteriorated into manic depression, with both homicidal and suicidal tendencies. On the eve of what was to be his last battle, Saul seeks out the services of "the woman of En-Dor", who was known as a medium, so that he can consult with his now dead mentor.

And on that encouraging note Saul went off to fight the Battle of Mount Gilbo'a.

9:
The sages saw these mediums as charlatans and tricksters. The details to which our mishnah relates are no longer clear, leaving ample room for the later sources and commentators to have a field day. One thing seems clear, however: the sages seem to be implying that these mediums used some kind of ventriloquism to represent the spirits of the dead. At the end of our mishnah we once again see the limiting effect of rabbinic re-interpretation: only the mediums themselves are to be put to death; their clients are only to be warned that they are contravening a prohibition of the Torah. The fact that recourse to mediums, séances and similar activities is wrong seems to be axiomatic, because nowhere is the prohibition explicitly amplified. One source however suggests to my mind that the reason for this prohibition was because it was verging on the idolatrous. The prophet rails against those who have recourse to such mediums because they are choosing them over God, who should be the obvious address for their queries:

During our discussion of Mishnah Seven we referred to the pagan deity "Hermes". Albert Ringer writes:

My mishna has 'Markulys'. Could that be Hercules and not Hermes. In the later Roman times Hercules was rather popular as a deity. I don't know about the habit to throw stones.

I respond:

The Hebrew is indeed Merkulis. However this a mishnaic corruption of the Latin name Mercurius – Mercury. There are many examples of Lambdacism in the transfer between Latin and Hebrew. (Lambdacism is the tendency to replace "r" with "l", as used to be common among native Chinese speaking English.) Thus Mercurius became Merculius, and then Merkulis. Mercurius – Mercury – was the Roman name of the Greek god Hermes. The identity is proven by the fact that it was a well-known custom to throw a stone at a Herm, as I described in the shiur. There is no linguistic way in which "Herkules" could become "Markulis".

---

David Sieradzki writes:

You wrote: "A certain Ovadyah converted from Islam to Judaism (perhaps Ovadyah was a Hebraization of Abdullah)."

I recently read that during the Middle Ages, it was common for converts to Islam to adopt the name "Abdullah", servant of God – a tradition perhaps comparable to our tradition of renaming converts "ben/bat Avraham v'Sarah." Perhaps this Muslim tradition found its way into a Jewish equivalent ("Ovadyah") in some countries and during some periods of time.