Rebirth/Reincarnation in Judaism

[Phyllis Sidhe_Uaine]

Susma,

There is a very old joke about Judaism: if you have ten men, you have a shul and if you have eleven men, you have 2 shuls .

Don't get me started on if you have twelve men.

Phyllis Sidhe_Uaine

[bananabrain]

Please accept my commendations for your clear, concise, and straightforward answers -- without any hint of rancor.

heh. likewise, i hope y'all won't mind me pointing out that these type of answers risk missing out important aspects of the issues concerned. in my experience, there are no straightforward answers!

although what achnai has written is a clear, substantially correct summary, there are two very different issues to be addressed here. one of these is the *messianic resurrection of the dead*, (tehiyyat ha'meitim in hebrew) and the other is the mystical doctrine of *reincarnation* or gilgul. gilgul is an esoteric concept popular in kabbalistic and hassidic circles. there is no consensus upon whether it is something one is required to believe or not. the belief in THM, by contrast, has been consensus for over 2000 years (its source text is the passage in ezekiel about the "valley of dry bones") and, as achnai says, belief that, when the Messiah comes, the dead will return to life and inhabit the "world to come" is mandatory as part of orthodox theology.
the precise details of what this actually involves, however, are subject to much debate and discussion. it is, for example, believed by some that the dead will tunnel through the earth and emerge in jerusalem, which is why it's much better to be buried there or at least in israel. it is also subject to debate whether everyone will be resurrected or just the righteous of all nations, or what form this will take, whether we get back the bodies we had when we died or whether we get back younger versions. likewise, it is discussed whether we'd then live forever, or get just one more life. however, it is not permitted to maintain that the THM will not occur in some form, which is what the Talmudic debate with the sadducees and, later, the karaites, was about. it also shows jesus as being in line with rabbinic belief here rather than sadducee or karaite belief. if one chooses not to believe in it, the punishment is not being rewarded by it, which i suppose is pretty much poetic justice.

1. What for Jews is being rebirthed or reincarnated, the body, the soul, or the consciousness, or what?

in terms of gilgul, the liturgy i am familar with suggests that the various different parts of the soul are all recycled in a fashion more or less reminiscent of the samsaric cycle. i don't believe that they are all considered to stay together, which is probably why you don't remember the past lives of your nefesh, ruah or neshama - human souls are essentially emergent, composite objects just as our bodies are. in fact, this makes quite a lot of sense in terms of the conservation of energy seen as including spiritual components. if our bodies can be recycled why should parts of our souls not be? however, this belief is not shared by all jews and many deny it entirely. it's not "mandated".

i believe the main difference between the salvationist christian (as opposed to jesus') position is that only the "saved" will be resurrected at the appropriate time, whereas we say that "the righteous of the nations have a share in the world to come".

b'shalom

bananabrain

[Susma Rio Sep]

Thanks, Banana.

I can always depend upon you for the fine tuning and choice morsels of Jewish religious doctrines and observances.

Tell me, are you doing all the readings in order to give explanations to posters here on your religion, for a career, like being an active fulltime member of the Jewish Anti-defamation League, or something like that?

I had some exchange with another very learned Jew elsewhere about homosexual sex, and he told me that it is no abomination in Jewish religious ethics.

Now is my chance to hear from still another also very learned Jewish scholar on this question. What do you say about the religious ethics of homosexual sex, i.e., between two guys, a posteriori?

Susma Rio Sep

[bananabrain]

no, i don't get paid for this. wish i did. [brian? any spare cash?] i'm just doing my bit to create peace and understanding, which is done through increasing knowledge and decreasing ignorance. it's also quite fun as long as people don't make an effort to be unreasonable. this is not the purpose of the ADL, who are mostly reactive and more focused on preventing anti-semitism, whereas i am more focused on promoting philo-semitism as part of tolerance.

"abomination" is a loaded translation of the word TO'EV which indicates the seriousness of it in the scheme of sin. it's less serious than breaking the laws of Shabbat, for example. furthermore, it is a much *worse* sin to discriminate against someone because of where they choose to put their nadgers. it gets disproportionate attention because of the modern obsession with rights and ignorance of responsibilities. it is possible to be in all respects other than this a fully observant religious jew - in fact, there's a film called "trembling before G!D" about orthodox gays which explores the issue with far more knowledge and sensitivity than i will be capable of. i have learned with the film-makers on several occasions and they really know their stuff. it's quite a complicated area technically but basically, anal sex is not OK, but then neither is any activity involving "waste of sperm", ie no possibility of conception whether there are two men involved, one, or a heterosexual couple. so, yes, one particular act is a sin, but it is a sin between man and G!D, not man and man and is in any case *so* far down the list of issues we should be concerned about it is simply ridiculous to spend as much time as we do obsessing about it instead of worrying about Shabbat and ethics.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[Vajradhara]

Namaste bananabrain,

i hope that you don't mind if i impose on you just a bit.

can you tell me if the Jewish perception of the Garden of Eden is of a physical location or is it understood metaphorically?

gassho.

[bananabrain]

vaj,

it is located physically in "sacred time" and vice-versa. the first chapter of genesis is the most mysterious and symbolic of the whole Torah and should really be studied last, once other areas have been mastered.

why do you ask?

b'shalom

bananabrain

[Vajradhara]

Originally Posted by bananabrain

vaj,

it is located physically in "sacred time" and vice-versa. the first chapter of genesis is the most mysterious and symbolic of the whole Torah and should really be studied last, once other areas have been mastered.

why do you ask?

b'shalom

bananabrain

Namaste banana,

thank you for the response.

i was curious as i was in a discussion with a Christian about their conception and he asked if i knew how the Jewish folks veiwed it... and i realized that i didn't and being that i'm here to learn, i thought that i would ask

so... if i can ask a follow up...

when you say "vice-versa" are you meaning to indicate that sacred time is the Garden of Eden as well as the Garden of Eden existing only in sacred time?

[bananabrain]

when you say "vice-versa" are you meaning to indicate that sacred time is the Garden of Eden as well as the Garden of Eden existing only in sacred time?

yes. shabbat is also eden.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[Vajradhara]

Namaste all,

another homage to Dauer and his nefarious plan to bring up old conversations from the past!

so... continuing as it were...

sacred time exists temporally within the garden of eden and the garden of eden exists within a sacred time loop or stream, in parallel with secular time, so to speak?

metta,

~v

[bananabrain]

that sounds more or less like what i mean.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Bananabrain,

thank you for the post.

interesting... is there an explanation for how a being in either time stream can interact or influence events in the other stream?

metta,

~v

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Vajradhara

Namaste Bananabrain,

thank you for the post.

interesting... is there an explanation for how a being in either time stream can interact or influence events in the other stream?

metta,

~v

An explanation for prophesy?

[dauer]

Theurgy. Yum.

[bananabrain]

well, vaj, G!D Is by definition a Place ("Ha-MaQOM") where all times are one time, or time has no meaning, or is flat or however you choose to characterise it. if you are able, as a prophet, to gain some of the Divine Perspective, then, naturally your view of time will be affected by seeing other timestreams superimposed on your current time, so, seattlegal, that is kind of where that thought takes me, too. of course, for HaMaqom, "all" times means *all* times, ie, in the words of elrond's mother-in-law, "things that will come to pass and some things that have not yet come to pass". which explains why some prophecy doesn't come true or hasn't yet been fulfilled. in fact, as yoda puts it, "always in motion is the future, hm, yes". except for G!D, obviously. furthermore, one time-stream will necessarily affect another due, among other things, to heisenberg's uncertainty principle which, if i understand it correctly, suggests that you can't observe something without changing it. certainly time travel 101 as taught in star trek says as much as well. at any rate it explains why prophets tend to be in such a bad mood.

b'shalom

bananabrain