## Sanhedrin Daf 59b

###### Sanhedrin 59b:1
[Sanhedrin 59b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:1)

וַהֲרֵי מִילָה, שֶׁנֶּאֶמְרָה לִבְנֵי נֹחַ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְאַתָּה אֶת בְּרִיתִי תִשְׁמֹר״, וְנִשְׁנֵית בְּסִינַי: ״וּבַיּוֹם הַשְּׁמִינִי יִמּוֹל״ – לְיִשְׂרָאֵל נֶאֶמְרָה וְלֹא לִבְנֵי נֹחַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But isn’t there** the mitzva of **circumcision, which was stated with regard to descendants of Noah,** i.e., Abraham and his descendants, who had the status of descendants of Noah at that time? **As it is written** that God said to Abraham with regard to the mitzva of circumcision: **“And as for you, you shall keep My covenant,** you and your offspring after you, throughout their generations” (Genesis 17:9). **And it was repeated at Sinai** for the Jewish people: **“And on the eighth day** the flesh of his foreskin **shall be circumcised”** (Leviticus 12:3), and nevertheless **it was stated for the Jewish people** alone **and not for the descendants of Noah.**


###### Sanhedrin 59b:2
[Sanhedrin 59b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:2)

הָהוּא לְמִישְׁרֵי שַׁבָּת הוּא דַּאֲתָא, ״בַּיּוֹם״ – וַאֲפִילּוּ בְּשַׁבָּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **That** verse stated at Sinai is not necessary for the mitzva itself, but rather **it comes to permit** circumcision on **Shabbat.** It is derived from the phrase **“on the** eighth **day”** that circumcision must always be performed on the eight day, **and** this is the *halakha* **even** if it falls **on Shabbat.** Therefore the mitzva is not considered to have been repeated at Mount Sinai.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:3
[Sanhedrin 59b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:3)

וַהֲרֵי פְּרִיָּה וּרְבִיָּה, שֶׁנֶּאֶמְרָה לִבְנֵי נֹחַ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְאַתֶּם פְּרוּ וּרְבוּ״, וְנִשְׁנֵית בְּסִינַי: ״לֵךְ אֱמֹר לָהֶם שׁוּבוּ לָכֶם לְאׇהֳלֵיכֶם״ – לְיִשְׂרָאֵל נֶאֶמְרָה וְלֹא לִבְנֵי נֹחַ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But isn’t there** the mitzva of **procreation, which was stated with regard to the descendants of Noah? As it is written: “And you, be fruitful and multiply,** swarm in the land and multiply in it” (Genesis 9:7). **And it was repeated at Sinai,** in the verse: **“Go say to them: Return to your tents”** (Deuteronomy 5:27), when the Jewish men were commanded to resume conjugal relations with their wives after having been commanded to separate from them in preparation for the giving of the Torah. Nevertheless, the mitzva of procreation **was stated for the Jewish people and not for the descendants of Noah.**


###### Sanhedrin 59b:4
[Sanhedrin 59b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:4)

הָהוּא, לְכׇל דָּבָר שֶׁבְּמִנְיָן צָרִיךְ מִנְיָן אַחֵר לְהַתִּירוֹ הוּא דַּאֲתָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **That** verse stated at Sinai is not necessary for the mitzva itself, but rather **it comes to** teach another *halakha*: **That any matter that** was prohibited **by** an official **vote** of the Sanhedrin **requires another vote to permit it.** Even if a rabbinic prohibition is no longer relevant, it is not automatically canceled, but rather a special ruling is required to cancel it. This is derived from the fact that it was necessary for God to issue a declaration (Deuteronomy 5:26) specifically canceling the prohibition that had been issued before the giving of the Torah.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:5
[Sanhedrin 59b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:5)

אִי הָכִי, כֹּל חֲדָא וַחֲדָא נָמֵי נֵימָא מִשּׁוּם מִילְּתָא אִיתְּנַי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If so, let us say** with regard to **each and every one** of the seven Noahide mitzvot that **it was repeated because of** an additional **matter** the Torah teaches, and the descendants of Noah are exempt from them all.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:6
[Sanhedrin 59b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:6)

הָכִי קָאָמַר: אַזְהָרָה מִיהְדָּר וּמִיתְנָא בַּהּ, לְמָה לִי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that **this** is what Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, **is saying:** After stating **a prohibition** with regard to the descendants of Noah, **why do I** need the Torah to **then repeat** the prohibition itself for the Jewish people? If the only purpose is to teach an additional *halakha*, it is unnecessary to repeat it in the form of a prohibition, e.g., “You shall not murder…you shall not commit adultery” (Exodus 20:13). Therefore, it is derived from the fact that the entire prohibition is repeated, and not just the new details, that it applies both to Jews and to descendants of Noah.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:7
[Sanhedrin 59b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:7)

וְאֵין לָנוּ אֶלָּא גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה בִּלְבַד, וְאַלִּיבָּא דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה. הָנֵי נָמֵי לָא אִיתְּנַי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It is stated in the *baraita*: **And we have only** the prohibition against eating **the sciatic nerve** to which this classification applies, **and** this is **according to** the opinion **of Rabbi Yehuda.** The Gemara asks: But **these** aforementioned mitzvot **also,** procreation and circumcision, **were not repeated** at Sinai in order to teach that they apply to the descendants of Noah as well as to the Jewish people, but rather were mentioned for other purposes, and therefore, they apply only to the Jewish people, similar to the prohibition against eating the sciatic nerve.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:8
[Sanhedrin 59b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:8)

הָנֵי אִיתְּנַי לְשׁוּם מִילְּתָא בְּעָלְמָא, הָא לָא אִיתְּנַי כְּלָל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **These** mitzvot **were repeated for the sake of** teaching **some** other **matter.** By contrast, **this** prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve **was not repeated at all;** it is mentioned only in Genesis. Therefore, circumcision and procreation are not included in the category of mitzvot that were given to the descendants of Noah and were not repeated at Sinai.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:9
[Sanhedrin 59b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:9)

אִי בָּעֵית אֵימָא: מִילָה מֵעִיקָּרָא לְאַבְרָהָם הוּא דְּקָא מַזְהַר לֵיהּ רַחֲמָנָא, ״וְאַתָּה אֶת בְּרִיתִי תִשְׁמֹר אַתָּה וְזַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ לְדֹרֹתָם״. ״אַתָּה וְזַרְעֲךָ״ – אִין, אִינִישׁ אַחֲרִינָא – לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If you wish, say** that there is another explanation for the fact that the mitzva of **circumcision** does not apply to the descendants of Noah despite the fact that it was repeated for the Jewish people: **From the outset, it was Abraham,** and not all the descendants of Noah, **that the Merciful One commanded to** perform this mitzva; as He said to him: **“And as for you, you shall keep My covenant, you and your offspring after you, throughout their generations”** (Genesis 17:9). The Gemara infers: **“You and your offspring,” yes; another person, no.**


###### Sanhedrin 59b:10
[Sanhedrin 59b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:10)

אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה, בְּנֵי יִשְׁמָעֵאל לִחַיְּיבוּ? ״כִּי בְיִצְחָק יִקָּרֵא לְךָ זָרַע״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **If that is so, the descendants of Ishmael should** also **be obligated** to observe circumcision, as they are also the offspring of Abraham. The Gemara explains: The verse states: **“For through Isaac, offspring shall be called yours”** (Genesis 21:12), which means that Ishmael’s descendants are not called the offspring of Abraham.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:11
[Sanhedrin 59b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:11)

בְּנֵי עֵשָׂו לִחַיְּיבוּ. ״בְּיִצְחָק״ – וְלֹא כׇּל יִצְחָק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: Granted, Ishmael’s descendants are not considered the offspring of Abraham, but at least **the descendants of Esau,** Isaac’s son, **should be obligated** to observe circumcision. The Gemara explains: Since the term: **“Through Isaac [*beYitzḥak*],”** also means: Of Isaac, it is derived that the mitzva applies to only some of Isaac’s offspring, **but not all** the descendants of **Isaac.** This serves to exclude the descendants of Esau.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:12
[Sanhedrin 59b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:12)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב אוֹשַׁעְיָא: אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה, בְּנֵי קְטוּרָה לָא לִחַיְּיבוּ? הָאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר אָבִין, וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָא: ״אֶת בְּרִיתִי הֵפַר״ – לְרַבּוֹת בְּנֵי קְטוּרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Oshaya objects to this: If that is so, the descendants of Keturah,** Abraham’s second wife, **should not be obligated** to observe circumcision. The Gemara answers: **Rabbi Yosei bar Avin says, and some say** that it is **Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina** who says that the verse: “And the uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that soul shall be cut off from his people; **he has broken My covenant”** (Genesis 17:14) is stated **to include the descendants of Keturah** in the obligation to observe circumcision.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:13
[Sanhedrin 59b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:13)

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן לֹא הוּתַּר לוֹ בָּשָׂר לַאֲכִילָה, דִּכְתִיב: ״לָכֶם יִהְיֶה לְאׇכְלָה וּלְכׇל חַיַּת הָאָרֶץ״, וְלֹא חַיַּת הָאָרֶץ לָכֶם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rav Yehuda says** that **Rav says: Meat was not permitted to Adam, the first** man, **for consumption, as it is written:** “And God said: Behold, I have given you every herb that brings forth seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree that gives forth seed; **for you it shall be for food, and for every animal of the earth,** and for every fowl of the air, and for everything that creeps upon the earth, in which there is a living soul, every green herb for food. And it was so” (Genesis 1:29–30). It is derived God told Adam: Eating vegetation is permitted to people and animals, **but** eating **the animals of the earth is not** permitted **to you.**


###### Sanhedrin 59b:14
[Sanhedrin 59b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:14)

וּכְשֶׁבָּאוּ בְּנֵי נֹחַ, הִתִּיר לָהֶם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כְּיֶרֶק עֵשֶׂב נָתַתִּי לָכֶם אֶת כֹּל״. יָכוֹל לֹא יְהֵא אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי נוֹהֵג בּוֹ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אַךְ בָּשָׂר בְּנַפְשׁוֹ דָמוֹ לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ״. יָכוֹל אַף לִשְׁרָצִים? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אַךְ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But when the children of Noah came,** God **permitted them** to eat meat; **as it is stated:** “Every moving thing that lives shall be for food for you; **as the green herb I have given you all”** (Genesis 9:3). One **might** have thought that accordingly, even the prohibition against eating **a limb from a living** animal **does not apply to** the descendants of Noah; therefore **the verse states: “Only flesh with its life, which is its blood, you shall not eat”** (Genesis 9:4). One **might** have thought that the prohibition against eating a limb from a living animal applies **even to creeping animals;** therefore **the verse states “only,”** a term used for exclusion, indicating that creeping animals are not included.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:15
[Sanhedrin 59b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:15)

וּמַאי תַּלְמוּדָא? אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: ״דָּמוֹ״ – מִי שֶׁדָּמוֹ חָלוּק מִבְּשָׂרוֹ, יָצְאוּ שְׁרָצִים שֶׁאֵין דָּמָם חָלוּק מִבְּשֶׁרָם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And what is the derivation?** What is the proof that it is creeping animals that are excluded from this prohibition and not another type of animal? **Rav Huna says:** The term **“its blood”** indicates that the prohibition pertains to animals **whose blood is** halakhically considered **separate from their flesh.** This **excludes creeping animals, whose blood is not** considered **separate from their flesh.**


###### Sanhedrin 59b:16
[Sanhedrin 59b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:16)

מֵיתִיבִי: ״וּרְדוּ בִּדְגַת הַיָּם״, מַאי לָאו, לַאֲכִילָה? לֹא, לִמְלָאכָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** to the assertion that eating meat was prohibited to Adam, from the verse: **“And have dominion over the fish of the sea,** and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that creeps upon the land” (Genesis 1:28). **What, is it not** stated **with regard to consumption,** i.e., doesn’t this verse mean that people may eat the meat of animals? The Gemara answers: **No,** the verse is referring **to** using animals for **labor.**


###### Sanhedrin 59b:17
[Sanhedrin 59b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:17)

וְדָגִים בְּנֵי מְלָאכָה נִינְהוּ? אִין, כִּדְרַחֲבָה. דְּבָעֵי רַחֲבָה: הִנְהִיג בְּעִיזָּא וְשִׁיבּוּטָא – מַאי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But are fish capable of** performing **labor?** The Gemara answers: **Yes,** they are capable, **in accordance with** the statement **of Raḥava; as Raḥava asked** the following question: If one **drove** a wagon to which **a goat and a *shibbuta*** fish were harnessed together, **what** is the *halakha*? Has he violated the prohibition of diverse kinds, in the same way that one does when plowing with an ox and a donkey together? In any event, Raḥava’s question indicates that there is a way, albeit far-fetched, for a fish to perform labor.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:18
[Sanhedrin 59b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:18)

תָּא שְׁמַע: ״וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם״, מַאי לָאו, לַאֲכִילָה? לָא, לִמְלָאכָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Come** and **hear** a proof that it was permitted for Adam to eat meat, from the phrase in the aforementioned verse: “And have dominion…**and over the fowl of the air.” What, is it not** stated with regard **to consumption?** The Gemara answers: **No,** it is referring **to labor.**


###### Sanhedrin 59b:19
[Sanhedrin 59b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:19)

וְעוֹפוֹת בְּנֵי מְלָאכָה נִינְהוּ? אִין, כִּדְבָעֵי רַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא: דָּשׁ בַּאֲוָוזִין וְתַרְנְגוֹלִין לְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה מַאי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But are birds capable of** performing **labor?** The Gemara answers: **Yes,** they are capable, **as Rabba bar Rav Huna raises a dilemma:** If one **threshed with geese and chickens, what** is the *halakha* **according to** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda?** Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, derives from the verse: “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads” (Deuteronomy 25:4), that a laborer in a field is entitled to eat from the produce during his work only if his work involves both his hands and his feet, like an ox, which treads with its forelegs as well as its hind legs. Rabba bar Rav Huna raises a dilemma as to whether the prohibition against muzzling an animal while it is being used for labor in the field applies to geese and chickens, which have only two feet. In any event, it is indicated in that dilemma that birds can perform labor.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:20
[Sanhedrin 59b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:20)

תָּא שְׁמַע: ״וּבְכׇל חַיָּה הָרֹמֶשֶׂת עַל הָאָרֶץ״. הָהוּא לְאֵתוֹיֵי נָחָשׁ הוּא דַּאֲתָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Come** and **hear** a proof from the phrase: “And have dominion…**and over every living thing that creeps upon the land.”** Creeping animals certainly cannot be used for labor. Apparently, the verse is referring to eating them. The Gemara answers: **That** phrase **comes to include** the **snake,** which was capable of performing labor when it was created.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:21
[Sanhedrin 59b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:21)

דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן מְנַסְיָא אוֹמֵר: חֲבָל עַל שַׁמָּשׁ גָּדוֹל שֶׁאָבַד מִן הָעוֹלָם, שֶׁאִלְמָלֵא לֹא נִתְקַלֵּל נָחָשׁ, כׇּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל הָיוּ מִזְדַּמְּנִין לוֹ שְׁנֵי נְחָשִׁים טוֹבִים – אֶחָד מְשַׁגְּרוֹ לַצָּפוֹן וְאֶחָד מְשַׁגְּרוֹ לַדָּרוֹם, לְהָבִיא לוֹ סַנְדַּלְבּוֹנִים טוֹבִים וַאֲבָנִים טוֹבוֹת וּמַרְגָּלִיּוֹת. וְלֹא עוֹד, אֶלָּא שֶׁמַּפְשִׁילִין רְצוּעָה תַּחַת זְנָבוֹ וּמוֹצִיא בָּהּ עָפָר לְגִנָּתוֹ וּלְחוּרְבָּתוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya says: Woe over a great attendant that has been lost to the world; as had the snake not been cursed** that it should go on its belly, **there would have been two fine snakes at the disposal of each and every one of the Jewish people. One he would send to the north, and** the other **one he would send to the south, to bring him precious *sandalbonim*,** a type of precious stone, **and** other **precious stones and pearls. Moreover,** he would **attach a strap under** his snake’s **tail** like a harness to an animal, **and use it to take dirt out to his garden and to** rebuild **his ruin,** as he does with other animals. This demonstrates that the snake was capable of performing labor.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:22
[Sanhedrin 59b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:22)

מֵיתִיבִי, הָיָה רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן תֵּימָא אוֹמֵר: אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן מֵיסֵב בְּגַן עֵדֶן הָיָה, וְהָיוּ מַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת צוֹלִין לוֹ בָּשָׂר וּמְסַנְּנִין לוֹ יַיִן. הֵצִיץ בּוֹ נָחָשׁ וְרָאָה בִּכְבוֹדוֹ, וְנִתְקַנֵּא בּוֹ. הָתָם בְּבָשָׂר הַיּוֹרֵד מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** from a *baraita* to the assertion that eating meat was prohibited to Adam: **Rabbi Yehuda ben Teima would say: Adam, the first** man, **would dine in the Garden of Eden, and the ministering angels would roast meat for him and strain wine for him. The snake glanced at him and saw his glory, and was jealous of him,** and for that reason the snake incited him to sin and caused his banishment from the Garden. According to this, evidently Adam would eat meat. The Gemara answers: **There** the reference is **to meat that descended from heaven,** which was created by a miracle and was not the meat of animals at all.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:23
[Sanhedrin 59b:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:23)

מִי אִיכָּא בָּשָׂר הַיּוֹרֵד מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם? אִין, כִּי הָא דְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן חֲלַפְתָּא הֲוָה קָאָזֵיל בְּאוֹרְחָא, פְּגַעוּ בֵּיהּ הָנָךְ אַרְיָוָתָא דַּהֲווֹ קָא נָהֲמִי לְאַפֵּיהּ. אֲמַר: ״הַכְּפִירִים שֹׁאֲגִים לַטָּרֶף״. נְחִיתוּ לֵיהּ תַּרְתֵּי אַטְמָתָא. חֲדָא אַכְלוּהָ וַחֲדָא שַׁבְקוּהָ. אַיְתְיַהּ וַאֲתָא לְבֵי מִדְרְשָׁא, בָּעֵי עֲלַהּ: דָּבָר טָמֵא הוּא זֶה אוֹ דָּבָר טָהוֹר? אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: אֵין דָּבָר טָמֵא יוֹרֵד מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Is there** such a thing as **meat that descends from heaven?** The Gemara answers: **Yes, it is like this** incident: **As Rabbi Shimon ben Ḥalafta was walking along the way, he encountered those lions that were roaring at him,** intending to eat him. **He said: “The young lions roar after their prey,** and seek their food from God” (Psalms 104:21), and they deserve to receive food. **Two thighs** of an animal **descended** from heaven **for him.** The lions **ate one** of these thighs, **and they left** the other **one. He took it and entered the study hall,** and **inquired about it: Is this** thigh **a kosher item or a non-kosher item?** The Sages **said to him:** Certainly it is kosher, as **a non-kosher item does not descend from heaven.**


###### Sanhedrin 59b:24
[Sanhedrin 59b:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:24)

בָּעֵי מִינֵּיהּ רַבִּי זֵירָא מֵרַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: יָרְדָה לוֹ דְּמוּת חֲמוֹר, מַהוּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: יָארוּד נָאלָא! הָא אָמְרִי לֵיהּ: אֵין דָּבָר טָמֵא יוֹרֵד מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
In connection to that story, it is related that **Rabbi Zeira asked Rabbi Abbahu:** If **the likeness of a donkey had descended for him, what** would the *halakha* have been? Would it have been permitted? Rabbi Abbahu **said to him: Foolish bird [*yarud nala*].** The Sages already **said to him** that **a non-kosher item does not descend from heaven;** therefore, it must be kosher.


###### Sanhedrin 59b:25
[Sanhedrin 59b:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/59b:25)

רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: אַף עַל הַכִּישּׁוּף. מַאי טַעְמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן? דִּכְתִיב:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ In the *baraita* that lists the Noahide mitzvot (56a), it is stated that **Rabbi Shimon says** that the descendants of Noah were **also** commanded **concerning** the prohibition against engaging in **sorcery.** The Gemara asks: **What is the reasoning** behind the opinion **of Rabbi Shimon?** The Gemara answers: **As it is written:**