The World To Come and Gilgulim

A. We don’t only believe in Torah SheB’ksav.

B. So, don’t believe in gilgullim. It’s not like it’s one of the ikkarei emunah.

The Wolf

ezlev: Sha’ar HaGilgulim was written by the Ari Z”L. I can’t tell you for sure, but find it highly, highly improbable that the Rambam believed in Gilgul. It didn’t really become popular in Jewish thought until the Zohar came out. R’ Saadya Gaon rejects the notion as a non-Jewish one.

Mekubalim knew about before the Zohar. The Ramban alludes to it in quite a few places and he didn’t have the Zohar.

There are many reasons why the Torah doesn’t talk about another world explicitly. However, Chazal understood Arichas Yamim to mean beyond this world. In Navi there are some references to life after death. Vehaya Nefesh Adoni …

“But doesn’t the fact thaat the Arizal wrote the Sefer show enough proof?”

No.

“Please consult a Rov before you stand your ground”

I once heard a Chasidic Rebbe “pasken” against the position of the Arizal on the topic of gilgulim.

ezlev: I don’t know whether they exist and it doesn’t bother me. There were great Gedolei Torah that held that they don’t exist. There were many more Gedolei Torah who held that they do. There are philosophical theological issues involved in believing in Gilgulim. There are other philosophical theological issues that Gilgulim can explain. At the end of the day, I don’t know and I’ll probably never know. I do disagree with your statement, though, that denying them is denying a part of our Torah.

HaLeiVi: The Ramban mentions several ideas from the Zohar because it’s clear that he had many of the traditions that R Moshe De Leon used when he put together the final text of the Zohar. And well-played with Heshel. But I think charlie meant a detail within Gilgulim, not whether or not they exist at all.

‘Who is this “Chasidic Rebbe”, Abraham Joshua Heshel?’

No. He is widely respected. But it is up for him to publish his opinion if he wishes to.

” I think charlie meant a detail within Gilgulim, not whether or not they exist at all.”

Correct. The machloket was associated with the famous talking fish incident over a decades ago; this rabbi held contrary to Arizal that humans can’t return as anything other than a human.

So he is a Chasidic Rebbe who, as it turns out, disgrees with the Baal Shem Tov. He might be a Rav and comes from a Chassidic dynasty, and might have retained some of the style — perhaps with a new flavor — but one thing he isn’t is a Rebbe.

Now, to argue on the Arizal on an Inyan in Kabbala is foolish and arrogant. Does this person really know the intricate details of what a Neshama is, from where it originates, the many different types of Gilgulim and their purpose? This is like preferring speculation over a first hand report.

But for interest sake, from the later Rishonim who openly speak of Gilgul we only find it about a person. But the Gemara in Bava Kama does seem to allude to another kind, in the topic of changing after seven years.

A nony mouse: There are various places in Tanakh in which the existence of life after death is alluded to or mentioned. Look at Tehillim 17, for example, or 1 Samuel 28.

Belief in gigulim appears in the Zohar, the Ramban, the tzfat Kabbalists, and virtually every major rabbi to discuss the subject in the past 500 years (with the exception of the Rashash). Yet because some pre-publication-of-the-Zohar rishonim were against the concept of gilgulim, one is not obligated to believe in it. Some also say that one is not obligated to believe in any particular kabbalistic concept; it is all seen as optional.

But reincarnation is not just a Hindu belief — it is found in various religions throughout the world.

????”? ???? ??? ?? ????? ?????? ??? ??? ???? ??”?

Quote from R’ Dovid Sinzheim (1745-1812) in Sheva Chakiros.

Sam, most of who? Not Rabbanim Gedolei Yisroel throughout the generations from his time. I don’t either think Rebbi Shimon wrote it, just like Rebbe Eliezer didn’t write Pirkei D’Rebbe Eliezer. Neither did Rav Ashi write the Gemara. Most of these Sefarim were written by Rabban Savurai or early Geonim.

The Ramban had the Sefer Habahir and a Kabbalah from his Rebbe. As I said, what you find from beforehand pales in comparison to the Zohar Hakkadosh. R’ Moshe De Leon was no greater Mekubal than the Ramban. The Ramban writes that we don’t have the Sod of Arayos, which is in the Zohar. It is very obvious from many areas that the Ramban was not privy to the Zohar. In fact, before it came out, Rebbe Shimon Bar Yochay was not the central figure of Kabbalah as he is today.

Although to you this is all one mush, to those that learn these Sefarim Be’iyun there is no Shaychos between what preceeded the Zohar and what followed. This is besides the fact that more was found after his time.

We have to take into consideration that Hashem didn’t want those things revealed until the late 1800s when the wellsprings came forth. Humans were not ready for this information until the time of the redemption, although Sages who lived beyond this World of Lies had this knowledge beforehand.

Shema Yisrael, Hashem is One. There is only one knowledge that has now burst forth into many different streams and religions all steaming from the one knowledge that was given to us on Mount Sinai.

Interesting, PAA.

But personally, I find the CR a better place to discuss shidduch crises, other socioeconomic crises, pareve pots,and recipes.

Gilgulim is somewhat above my pay grade.

And probably, though they”ll pretend not, the same might go for a few other posters.

“and even Moshe Rabbeinu didn’t understand ???? ??? ??”

Actually, the pashtus of the Gemara and I think the Penei Yehoshua actually spells this out is not that he didn’t understand why there could be ???? ??? ?? but that he didn’t understand how there could be ???? ??? ?? and ???? ???? ??.

Gilgulim is interesting because some Rishonim and Acharonim have declared it to be a very important yesod and some have said that it is Avoda Zara. I wonder if it is possible that there is a middle ground (i.e. gilgulim do occur but aren’t that important).

Interestingly reports of gilgulim have been studied pretty extensively and there is substantial evidence that they do occur. A Professor at the University of Virginia, a psychiatrist, extensively researched numerous cases, and published many articles and books on the subject. A colleague of Stevenson published a book called “Life before Life: Children’s Memories of Previous Lives” which summarized the results of their research at the University.

Haleivi,

You are correct. I was not careful in the way I wrote.

“Pashtus of the Gemara is actually that Moshe Rabbeinu did get an answer, ???? ???? ????? ????? ????. The Gemara then says that Rebbi Meir holds that for ??? ???? ?? there is not always a reason.”

I wasn’t discussing the answer; I was discussing the question.

“that is not the primary function of Toras Hagilgul in the Arizal.”

It doesn’t have to be the primary function. As long as it answers the issue, my point is that anyone who was bothered by this issue obviously didn’t hold of, or didn’t know about gilgul.

That’s not the Gemara’s answer.

Yerushalmi:

I quoted the Maharalbach above and used it as part of a proof that gilgulim don’t exist.

Haleivi:

1)I’m not sure that your understanding of R’ Meir is correct. All the Gemara says is that R’ Meir argues. Then it says shene’emar… and quotes a pasuk which proves that Rasha V’tov Lo can defy explanation. I don’t think that necessarily means that R’ Meir was only arguing about Rasha v’tov lo. It could be that that pasuk was just used to prove that Moshe’s request to understand H’s ways was not answered, the proof being that Rasha v’tov lo is unexplainable. I am not saying that you are wrong (in fact I think I am more noteh to your reading) but I am suggesting another reading.

2)As for the Ramban, he discusses tzadik v’ra lo in his introduction to Iyov. He does not directly mention the Gemara in Berachos but he doesn’t seem to accept the Gemara’s answer of “tzadik gamur…” as the final word on the matter – he points out that there can be tzadikim gemurim like Iyov who still have troubles.

3)As for Rabbeinu Yonah, he is explaining pshat in the Mishnah in Avos which by the way, Rashi explains pretty much the same way. He also quotes the Prophet Jeremiah so he seems to have good backing. Additionally, his understanding of the Gemara in Berachos might be in accordance with what I wrote in point#1 or point#2.

4)I won’t claim to be an expert in Maimonidean thought, but in Moreh Nevuchim 3:17 he discusses different views of Hashgacha and he seems to hold that any little thing that goes wrong for someone is a punishment for some bad deed and every little thing that goes right is a reward for a good deed. He implies that Yissurin shel ahava is a minority view (and again implies it in 3:25).

If one believes in Olam Haba and/or yissurin shel ahava, I don’t really see why anyone would have the kashya of tzadik v’ra lo. But anyway my original point was that if tzadik v’ra lo makes perfect sense based on the concept of gilgul, then anyone who struggled with this issue perforce did not know of/hold of gilgul. Now perhaps you can make the same argument in regards to olam haba/yissurin shel ahava in which case I would either be stumped or I would say that perhaps they hold like the Rambam (or what I think the Rambam seems to be saying).

In summation, this is definitely a complex topic and I am definitely not claiming to have expertise in it.

By the way Haleivi, not really anything to do with gilgulim, but about pshat in the Gemara of Moshe’s questions, the Benayahu has an interesting pshat in R’ Meir.

He explains that there were three questions. (He assumes that the questions were already assuming that we are dealing with a tzadik gamur.)

1)Why is there tzadik v’tov lo? Getting rewarded in this world is bad for him. The answer to that was ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??”? ????? ???? – the reward in this world is a complete gift and it doesn’t come out of his share in the next world.

2)Why is there tzadik v’ra lo? If he didn’t do any aveiros why is he getting punished? This question was not answered.

3)Why is there Rasha v’tov lo? The obvious answer would be that there’s no one who hasn’t done any mitzvos, so he is getting his reward in this world. But that would beg the question – why is there rasha v’ra lo? He should have it good in olam hazeh in order to use up all his reward. The answer to this question was ??????? ?? ??? ???? ??”? ????? ???? – H’ is merciful when he gives the rasha his reward. Some people when they have it good, it causes them to do more bad. For such a person H’ won’t give him a good life in this world because that will cause him to be even worse which will make the next world even worse for him.

Although I’m not sure why he didn’t just say that tzadik v’ra lo is because even a tzadik does some aveiros, just like he says that even a rash does some mitzvos.

???? ????? ???? ??????? ???????? ?????? ???????? ????? ????? ???????

In fact I recall that one of the mefarshim pointed this out but I can’t find it now (it might have been the Tzlach which I don’t have now but I’ll try to check tonight.)

PAA: It’s a Chassam Sofer. And he thinks the one thing that everyone, even a Tzaddik Gamur, is Over on is “Vihyisem N’kiyim”.

Looking back at the gemara, it seems to me like the lashon of ???? ???? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?? indicates that the entire question wasn’t answered; not that Rasha v’tov lo is an exception.

If I’m a gilgul of someone who lived a long time ago, then by Techiyas Hameisim, which body gets the neshama? There’s 1 neshama for 2 bodies!

You’ll be a Siamese twin when Moshiach comes.