“ ‘You shall not eat any meat with the blood still in it. You shall not use enchantments, nor practice sorcery.
Not to practice divination by observing omens
The cited verse
The Hebrew (Masoretic Text)
לֹא תְנַחֲשׁוּ
In Maimonides’ words
How Maimonides defines this commandment in his Sefer HaMitzvot — his own words, shown as a primary source.
הזהירנו מקסום, רוצה לומר שיניע כח הדמיון במין מן ההנעה כאלו בעלי הכחות כלם המגידים מה שיתחדש קודם היותו, אמנם יתאמת להם בהיות כח הדמיון מהם הזק ודבריהם מתקיימים ברוב ולכן ישענו במה שיהיה, ויהיה להם יתרון על זה כיתרון מעלות אישי האנשים קצתם על קצתם בכל כח מכחות הנפש, ואי אפשר לאלה בעלי הכחות הדמיונות מבלתי שיעשה מעשה ופעולה אחת מהפעולות יניע בה כחו ויוציא פעולתו לאור, והנה מהם מי שיכה במטה אשר בידו בארץ הכאות תכופות ויזעק זעקות משונות ויעזוב מחשבות ויביט לארץ זמן ארוך עד שימצאהו כמו עניני חולי הנופל ויספר מה שעתיד להיות, וכבר ראיתי זה פעמים בסוף המערב. ומהם מי שישטח החול ויעמיד בו תמונות, וזה הרבה מפורסם במערב. ומהם מי שישליך אבנים דקות ביריעה מעור ויאריך לעיין בהם ואחר כך יספר דברים, וזה ידוע ומפורסם בכל מקום שהלכתי. ומהם מי שישליך אזור עור ארוך בארץ ויסתכל בו ויודיע הנסתרות. הכוונה בזה להניע את כח הדמיוני בו, לא שהפועל בעצמותו יעשה דבר או יורה על דבר זה, ובזה טעו ההמון כי הם בעבור שיצדקו להם קצת הספורים יחשבו שפעולות האלו יורו על מה שיהיה, תגיע בהם בזה הענין הטעות עד שיחשבו שקצת אותן הפעולות סבת מה שיהיה כמו שיחשבו בעלי משפטי הכוכבים, כי דיני הכוכבים הם מזה היחס כלומר שהם מין מהנעת הכח הדמיוני ולעורר אותו, ולכן לא ישתוו שני בני אדם בהודעת הנסתר ואם ישתוו בידיעת המשפט. וכל שיעשה אחת מאלו הפעולות וזולתן ממה שילך בדרכן יקרא קוסם, ואומר לא ימצא בך קוסם קסמים. ולשון ספרי איזהו קוסם זה האוחז מקלו בידו ואומר אם אלך או אם לא אלך, וזה מין ההנעה המפורסם באותו הזמן, אמר הנביא עמי בעצו ישאל ומקלו יגיד לו, והעובר על לאו זה ויעשה אחד מאלו חייב מלקות, כלומר מי שיהיה קוסם ויגיד לבגי אדם בפועל שיפעל אותו, לא מי שישאל לקוסם, אבל השאלה לקוסם מגונה מאד. וכבר התבארו משפטי מצוה זו במסכת סנהדרין. (שופטים ושוטרים, מדע הלכות ע"ז וחקות העכו"ם פי"א):
He prohibited us from divination - meaning to say, that one moves the faculty of imagination with a type of stimulus, like all of those with abilities to say what will happen before it does. Indeed, it comes true for them - since their imaginative faculty is strong, their words mostly come true. And hence they will rely upon their [predictions], and they will have an advantage with this, like [any] advantage of the personal skill of some people over others in any abilities of the spirit. And it is impossible for any of the people with these imaginative faculties without [first] doing some deed or action with which to stimulate his faculty and to bring his [imaginative] activity into effect. And among them is one who strikes the ground with a stick that is in his hand - repetitive strikes - and yells unusually, ignores his thoughts and stares at the earth a long time until he is visited by effects of a seizure, and tells over what will happen in the future. And I have already seen this a few times in the far West. [Also] among them is one who spreads out sand and shapes forms in it; and this is very famous in the West. And among them [as well] is one who throws smalls stones onto a strip of leather and studies them and afterwards speaks out words. And this is well-known and famous in every place that I have gone. And [also] among them is one who throws a long leather belt to the floor, observes it and reveals hidden things. And the intention in [all of] this is to stimulate the imaginative faculty with it; not that the action does something on its own or indicates the [specific] matter. And the masses err in this. For since some of the reports are correct, they think that these actions are what indicate what will be - [such] that this error comes to them to the point that they think that some of these actions are the cause of what will be, like some of the astrologers think. For astrology involves the same relationship - meaning that [the movement of the stars] are a type of stimulus of the imaginative faculty and arouse it. And hence no two men will be the same in their revealing that which is hidden, even if they are the same in their knowledge of the discipline. And anyone who does any of these acts and other ones that follow in this way is called a diviner; and He said, "Let no one be found among you who is a diviner" (Deuteronomy 18:10). And the language of the Sifrei (Sifrei Devarim 171:6) is, "Which is a diviner? It is one who holds his stick and says whether I should go or whether I should not go." And this was a famous type of stimulus at that time - the prophet said (Hosea 4:12) "My people consults its stick; its rod tells it (what to do)." And one who transgresses this negative commandment and does one of these [things] - meaning one who divines and speaks to people from an action that moves him - is liable for lashes; [but] not the one that asks the diviner. However asking the diviner is very vile. And the regulations of this commandment have already been explained in Tractate Sanhedrin. (See Parashat Shoftim; Mishneh Torah, Foreign Worship and Customs of the Nations 11.)
Hebrew: Sefer HaMitzvot, Warsaw 1883 (public domain). English: Sefaria Edition, trans. Rabbi Francis Nataf, 2021 (CC0). Via Sefaria; translator’s footnotes omitted.
Literary form: a prohibition
Applicability
How the catalog describes where and when this commandment applies. These are independent descriptions, not a verdict on which laws still count.
- Recorded as practiced today
Classical halakhic consequences
The consequences the classical halakhah attaches to this commandment, grouped by who imposes them. Where a category has none recorded, that absence is itself meaningful.
Imposed by a court
- Lashes (malkot)
At the hands of Heaven
No divinely-imposed consequence is recorded.
Ritual remedy
No ritual remedy is recorded.
How the streams of Judaism treat this commandment
The streams of Judaism read the same commandment differently — an ongoing plurality, not a ranking. Each position below is reported as the catalog records it; none is presented as the correct one.
- Orthodox Binding
- Conservative Binding
- Reform Kept as an ethical principle
- Reconstructionist Kept as an ethical principle
- Karaite Position uncertain
24 of 613 commandments have been examined in depth so far — this one is queued.
How later traditions received this commandment
How later traditions read or reworked this commandment, each attributed to its own voice. The catalog’s own classification of each reception is shown as it records it, never adopted as GEBible’s.
Philo of Alexandria
- De Specialibus Legibus 1.59-65 rationalized it Philo's interpretive program rationalizes the prohibition of divination/mantic practice, framing it as forbidding reliance on illegitimate sign-reading in favor of legitimate prophecy and reason; the reading is Philo's allegorizing construal, not the plain sense of the verse.
The New Testament
- Acts 16:16-18 The catalog describes this reception as: condemned Paul exorcises a slave-girl with a 'spirit of divination' (pneuma pythōna); reflects analogous early-Christian condemnation of mantic practice rather than a direct citation of Lev 19:26.
The Qur'an and hadith
- Q 5:90 carried a parallel
Beside the older legal codes of its world
The commandment set beside the ancient Near-Eastern legal collections scholars compare it to — a descriptive comparison, not a claim of dependence.
- code of hammurabi the Mesopotamian legal system addresses accusations of witchcraft (kišpū) through the river ordeal, illustrating state regulation of illicit supernatural practice; the parallel is thematic only, since CH §2 concerns sorcery accusations rather than divination/omen-reading, and the Mesopotamian framework presupposes rather than rejects the broader divinatory worldview Relationship to the parallel: shared theme §2 (river ordeal for an accusation of kišpū / witchcraft) Roth, Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor, 2nd ed. (Scholars Press, 1997)
- egyptian negative confession the Egyptian deceased recites declarations of innocence concerning moral and cultic offenses; the connection to the Israelite anti-divination prohibition is at most a loose analogy of cultic-ethical boundary-marking, and should not be read as an Egyptian condemnation of mantic practice (magic/heka was in fact a legitimate, divinely-sanctioned Egyptian institution) Relationship to the parallel: shared theme Chapter 125 (declarations of innocence before the tribunal of Osiris) Faulkner, The Egyptian Book of the Dead (rev. ed. 1972)
Where this commandment meets modern human-rights frameworks
One modern normative lens, attributed to it — not GEBible’s assessment. Each row names the framework it measures against and the catalog’s own classification of the relation.
This framework catalogues tensions; it records agreement in only one of its entries. The near-total tension rate is the shape of the instrument, not a finding.
-
UDHR Article 18
This framework classifies the relation as a substantive tension.
UDHR Article 18 protects freedom of thought and the freedom to manifest belief in practice; prohibiting omen-reading and applying corporal punishment to the practice restricts a form of private belief-expression that post-Enlightenment frameworks would regard as a matter of personal conscience.
-
Article 18
This framework classifies the relation as a substantive tension.
ICCPR Article 18(1) protects freedom to hold religious or other beliefs and to manifest them in practice; applying lashes for privately interpreting natural signs as omens conflicts with the right to freedom of thought and personal belief.
-
general principle
This framework classifies the relation as an incompatible method.
Violation carries thirty-nine lashes; no contemporary legal system imposes corporal punishment for the act of reading omens or observing signs to determine the future, even where fortune-telling is subject to consumer-protection regulation.
-
Article 7
This framework classifies the relation as a direct contradiction.
ICCPR Article 7 prohibits cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment; inflicting thirty-nine lashes for observing and interpreting natural signs as omens constitutes such treatment.
-
rabbinic tradition
This framework classifies the relation as abrogated in practice.
Malkot requires a functioning Sanhedrin; the corporal sanction is de facto suspended, though the divination prohibition remains de jure binding in Orthodox halakha.