Although it may seem obvious from the Rambam's description of the ressurection, I still haven't seen a direct quotation that he specifically eliminates reincarnation. I have not found anything in Moreh Nebuchim or in the various iggrot.
As far the resurrection, the Rabbis said it was an essential belief of Judiasm. They do not list any other beliefs (not explicit in the torah) where one loses his place in the world to come. They apparently didn't feel it necessary to explain why it was an essential belief. Maybe it was obvious or maybe since it was polemical, they didn't want to give the Sadduccess any ammunition. (I doubt if the Rambam would appreciate all the neoplatonistic meanderings of R. Boteach.)

Aryeh Shore

this topic is a form of reincarnation, or gilgil for much of these later questions have been asnwered earlier.

the issue of the Saadia Goan which clearly states his oppion of reincarnation in his battle with the Karite however no one have ask what was the karite view of reincarnation that the Goan was saying doesn't exist.

now the 13 princples of faith which is not accpeted by every Orhtodox jew never the less are basic principles the belief in reincarnation is not the essence of Judaism.

now weather the RamBam beleive or follow the belief in reincarnation is up in the air. most text that deal with reincarnation are nister, mystical asspect of the torah.

so this is what we know that reincarnation without question is part of Traditional Judaism and there are quite a number of traditional and famous rabbis who to speak of reincarnation. some we even know from the Gemora. in truth what does reincarnation contradict?

Many Rishonim did not believe in reincarnation. Rav Saadia Gaon explains in length how it is false and calls it absurd. The Rambam also did not believe in reincarnation as well as Rav Yosef Albo (author of Sefer Haikarim). I reccomend visiting and reading the articles on www.mesora.org since it follows authentic Judiasm and dispells many false opinions which have infiltrated Judaism.

ok what exactly does the Rambam say which makes you say that he disprove of the concept of reincernation as well as Rav Yosef Albo as well where can i read it?

as much some of what the website has put up i wouldn't trust at all since it misquote the rabbis... in fact take a look earlier in this converstation about reincarnation between Dov and myself in which he uses the same website you did moesra, when we were talking about the unity of HaShem. and follow the link they dov post that countine our converstation and you will see how frankly Mosra misquote the last Rebbe of Chabad, as well spoke quite false about Chassidim and other matters.

To the contrary, the mesora website DOES quote sources and does NOT misquote the Rabbi's at all. Look at how many Rishonim did NOT believe in reincarnation. The fact the Rambam does not mention it at all and that he holds of reward and punishment proves the fact that he would not and did not hold of reincarnation. It does not make sense because it goes against what the Rambam said with regards to reward and punishment. This is also why Saadia Gaon goes out of his way to specifically disprove this false notion and how harmful it is. To see Rav Yosef Albo against the belief of reincarnation look at his Sefer Haikarim. I saw it myself but I forgot the exact chapter it is in. I can find out exactly where it is if you want to see it yourself. Rav Saadia Gaon disproves reincarnation in his Sefer Emunos Vdeyos. Also read the Introduction of Rabbeynu Bachye's Sefer Chovos Halevovos where he says one must use his mind in ALL areas and not just parrot what Rabbi's say.

With regards to Chassidim, the Gra himself was against Chassidus. Why do you think he was? because of the many dangerous beliefs it had and it was having an influence on many Jews. Chassidism is not found anywhere in the Torah and once you change or add or subtract something to the Torah, like the Chassidic movement did, it is no longer Torah.

1. You can't use the Gra in an argument against the ideas of the Zohar. The Gra was also a kabbalist. Since he knew the sources, he strongly objected to the way the Chassidim used the kabballah.
2. In the final analysis Judiasm is what the Jews do. For better or worse, Chassidut is clearly considered part of Judiasm. Like R. Solovechik said, all rabbinim today have to be a little bit of Rebbe as this is what the Jewish people expect. The Rationalistic approach to Judiasm as purported by the Torah and Madah people is can only go so far in reaching people and bringing them back to Judiasm. The last issue of the YU bulletin suggested that a little spiritualism may be in order.
3. Overintelluctilization of Judiasm has always been a problem. The incredible success of Chassidut shows how much the Rabbis had lost contact with what the people really want.

Aryeh Shore

Why can't one use the Gra as an argument against Chassidut? He was against them because of them doing practices alien to Judaism, such as davening at 12pm. The Gra saw the movement as a dangerous one, and therefore was vehemently against it. The Noda B'Yehuda was also one of the great gedolim of that time who was against Chasidism. One of the reason's people are not staying Jewish is because they think Judaism is a religion which makes no sense and they look at it no different than Christianity or Islam. I know this for a fact because I talk to alot of people who think Judaism is based on faith like the other religions are, and this is false. Judaism is not a fantasy religion. Hashem expects us to reach knowledge of him and see the truth with our intellects, not our emotions. I may feel something is right, but that doesn't make it right. One must follow the Torah and the Mesora and use their mind to find the truth.

Quote “Look at how many Rishonim did NOT believe in reincarnation.”

I don’t think that this matters. There are Rishonim that say you only need one Hadus or that their tops cut off are Kosher and you can sit in a Sukkah with the plastic covering on it. But that’s not the Haskamas Achronim and Poskim to Paskin like them. Like in any Shaila, we must see what the Basraim hold. (Imagine going to a Rav for a Shaila and he says “well Rav Sadya Paskins this way.” But in reality Shulchon Orech and all the Noisey Keilim Paskins the other way. Since you hold the Gra in great esteem, he, being a Basra, held of Gilgulim, as he writes in many places. So does the Mishna B’rurah bring the concept down (in Sharei Tzion explaining why we read Yonah on Yom Kipper, see there.) It seems to be an accepted concept among the Achronim, so it shouldn’t make a difference if some Rishonim say otherwise. Which Achron do you know that didn’t hold of Gilgul (there is a Rashas at the end of BM (Baruch Atah Bivoecha) that asks a question on them from the Gemarah there, but he doesn’t actually argue. Even if he did, he’s not as authoritative as Gra and Mishna B’rurah )

Quote “The fact the Rambam does not mention it at all and that he holds of reward and punishment proves the fact that he would not and did not hold of reincarnation.”

This is really no proof when you think into it (and not just parrot it.) It is known (and brought in the Nosei Keilim all the time) that the Rambam only writes in the Mishna torah only things that are brought explicitly in the Gemarah. So there are no proof there. Other writings are not necessary the place for it. The fact that he agrees to reward and punishment is also no proof that the Rambam didn’t hold of Gilgulim. Just because R’ Sadya held that it was a contradiction doesn’t mean that the Rambam must. I’m not into Kabalah or Gilgulim, but I’m sure the Gra and other Rishonim and Achronim that agree to Gilgulim have an answer to reconcile the two ideas. Just off the bat, you can say that it’s a supplement to punishment, especially that Gilgul seems to be a punishment in itself, besides all the suffering that comes in the 2nd life is also part of punishment.

I also would like to point out, for those that bring as a proof that the Gemarah emits the concept, that the Gemarah doesn’t hold of it. The same group also claim that they don’t need to take Agadata literally. Thus together, they claim they don’t know what Agadata really means but they’re sure that none of them means Gilgulim (go figure that one out.)
Furthermore, it is pretty explicit in the Gemarah that there is a lot more to Torah then Bavli (Havayos Abaya V’Rava). See Sukkah 28a that there is Maasah Markava and Maasah B’raishes, which we don’t have any idea what that is. Plus there is Mashalei Kovsim V’Shaulim and Sichas Malachim, Sheidim and Dikalim. Which Rashi didn’t even know what they were. It would seem that the Bavli is somewhat only a part of Torah (which is for practical Halacha,) but not the exclusive thing in Torah.

Rav Chaim says:

"I don’t think that this matters. There are Rishonim that say you only need one Hadus or that their tops cut off are Kosher and you can sit in a Sukkah with the plastic covering on it. But that’s not the Haskamas Achronim and Poskim to Paskin like them. Like in any Shaila, we must see what the Basraim hold. (Imagine going to a Rav for a Shaila and he says “well Rav Sadya Paskins this way.” But in reality Shulchon Orech and all the Noisey Keilim Paskins the other way. Since you hold the Gra in great esteem, he, being a Basra, held of Gilgulim, as he writes in many places. So does the Mishna B’rurah bring the concept down (in Sharei Tzion explaining why we read Yonah on Yom Kipper, see there.) It seems to be an accepted concept among the Achronim, so it shouldn’t make a difference if some Rishonim say otherwise. Which Achron do you know that didn’t hold of Gilgul (there is a Rashas at the end of BM (Baruch Atah Bivoecha) that asks a question on them from the Gemarah there, but he doesn’t actually argue. Even if he did, he’s not as authoritative as Gra and Mishna B’rurah )"

First of all, according to what u said that we go according to basraim, that means that Rav Saadia Gaon should have held that there is such a thing as reincarnation since there were Rabbonim before his time who held of it. But this does not make sense at all because he saw the flaw in this belief and spoke out against it. In areas of Hashkafa there is no such thing as psak. When the Rambam and the Ramban disagreed, they each felt the other one was wrong and they tried to support their arguments. One of the most ridicuolous things that people say is that although 2 Rabbonim are arguing, they are both correct. Thats impossible. If i say yes and you say no, do we agree? of course not! its unbelievable how many people can make such a statement. The Rambam and Ramban would be the first to tell any person that they thought they were right about a certain concept. No one can reconcile something if they clearly have 2 opposite views so when u say the Gra would be able to reconcile both opinions, that is completely false. How can u say that there is reincarnation and that there isn't at the same time? you obviously cannot! It doesnt matter how many acharon held of reincarnation, there are many rishonim and acharonim who do not believe in it. But this isnt the point and is irrelevant. We don't follow people we look at the idea to see if it coincides with the Torah, makes sense, and is true.

Another thing, you write: "Which Achron do you know that didn’t hold of Gilgul (there is a Rashas at the end of BM (Baruch Atah Bivoecha) that asks a question on them from the Gemarah there, but he doesn’t actually argue. Even if he did, he’s not as authoritative as Gra and Mishna B’rurah )"

Here you say that if the Rav is greater, then we follow him so that even if i told you of a acharon that disgarees with the Gra or Mishna Berurah, you say that he is not as authoritative as them. If thats true, then you support me even more because a Rishon is more authoritative than an acharon and this takes away your whole concept of going according to basraim in matters of hashkafa. You just proved me more right. The fact is we don't go by who is the greater gadol and who is the more recent Rav, we look at the idea that the person is claiming is true. Did the Ramban say that because Rashi lived before me maybe hes greater than me and I cant disagree with him if i disagree with something he says? of course not! he did and said what he thought was true.

You say: "This is really no proof when you think into it (and not just parrot it.) It is known (and brought in the Nosei Keilim all the time) that the Rambam only writes in the Mishna torah only things that are brought explicitly in the Gemarah. So there are no proof there. Other writings are not necessary the place for it. The fact that he agrees to reward and punishment is also no proof that the Rambam didn’t hold of Gilgulim. Just because R’ Sadya held that it was a contradiction doesn’t mean that the Rambam must."

That also does not make sense when you say the Rambam doesnt have to believe that reincarnation is not true. He can't believe it because it would be a contradiction to schar v'onesh and that is why he did not hold of it. If he felt it was such an important belief, he would have wrote about it and said that its true. But he didnt, which proves he did not believe in that.

1. I said you can't use the Gra's opposition to Chassidut as a suggestion the Gra disagreed with the Zohar. He was a kabballist that is why he is called HaChasid.

2. Rav Chaim takes a very broad view. I am acquainted with a much narrower view. After a hundred years of fiece arguments the Shulchan Aruch became our definitive source for halacha. This is the only book from achronim accepted by all. Even other books by the same author are not considered as authoritive. (Incidently I only count four books while some of my co-religionist count five. Only they can read the fifth book.)
No other book by an achron is accepted by all jews and certainly no book or system of philosophy was ever accepted by all jews. Most jews didn't care about philosophy and most still don't. They just want to do the mitzvot that HaShem commanded. As I use to say, a jew can believe in just about anything outside what is spelt out in the Bible and Talmud (astrology, reincarnation, dream interpetation, talking to the dead, golems) except that they can't believe the messiah died and is coming back. Well you can't be right about everything.

Achron - Jewish authority from after the 15th century.
Shulchan Aruch - set table - book of Jewish law of four volumes dealing with relevant Jewish law, i.e. it does not discuss things like the Temple service.

Aryeh Shore

hmm.. if a person dwell on four things it would have been better if he was never born. what was before him, what is after him, what is above and what is below.

the orign of this topic was due to a question which was raise are there sources within Judaism which support a concept of some form/type of reincarnation and without question we have clearly seen sources from all the way back to the talmudic period that support it.

as well we have found sources which haven't support the concept. and yes it is important to recolie what the rabbis say. for when we do so what we tend more oftend find is not a big disagreement but merely a disagreement on pecularies.

we tend to accpet earlier authroies for a time period due to the fact of learning as well as they had sources in their hands that laters rabbi didn't have. a clear example is shown with the RamBam.

as well just because a rabbi doesn't comment on a matter doesn't mean he or she is for or against the matter and to say one way or the other is a grave error. for then we are adding words to which they did not say.

and frankly teh Gra had no problem with the Chassidim in the fact they prayed at midnight. rather it dealt mroe with the concept of them spreading Kabbalah to the masses. even more so due to the fact not to long before the raise of the Baal Shem Tov there was a man Shabbati Zevi who had some likeness in which was a self proclaim messiah and later convert to Islam with a large following of jews even respected rabbis.
so keep in mind event in time when you quote rabbis and why they might say such a thing. as much it is nto against Torah to pray at midnight in fact it is in the gemora that David would araise at midnight to praise Hashem. and surely teh Gra knwe this.

personally do i believe in reincarnation i don't think about it much nor do i overly think of the world to come. for it is of greater importance what we do in this world. as i stated at the beganing those who overly think about such things would have been better if they were never born.

however yes there is without question traditional sources of those who accpeted reincarnation. and if you say it is a matter of rationalistic to disagree with it as Saadia then surely you think your greater then the rabbis who say it exist. and many of them were rationalist and much more learned then I and understand the books they read and not depended on websites.

To Laurence Shore: Im not talking about whether the Gra agreed or disagreed with the Zohar. Im saying that he was against chasidism and anyone claiming otherwise is just lying and trying to let a movement survive. Also, a jew cannot believe in anything he wants because then you are saying that a belief means nothing and is of no value, when that is not true. It is crucial that a person have the correct beliefs.

To Mack K: There is no source in the Torah or Talmud where reincarnation is mentioned. In a case where one says reincarnation exists and another says it does not exist, there is no way to reconcile such an argument because they are contradictory. Either it exists, or it doesn't. First of all you can learn from the fact that the Rambam doesn't speak about reincarnation that he did not believe in it. It goes against a principle. Also, the Gra did have a problem with the fact that chasidim where davening after zman kiras shema and zman tefilah. This is totally against the Gemara which says there are zmanim. I am not saying I am greater than anyone. There are many Rishonim who did not believe in reincarnation and they supported their arguments. I do not depend on websites and one must analyze any statement made from anyone, including a Gadol. No one is perfect and therefore one must look at the idea mentioned and not at a person's stature. You must decide with your mind after looking at the sources which view is correct and choose a belief. This is what I did.

Quote “First of all, according to what u said that we go according to basraim, that means that Rav Saadia Gaon should have held that there is such a thing as reincarnation since there were Rabbonim before his time who held of it. “

This is a misnomer, since Basraim are not earlier authorities, but later. This are what the Achronim take all the Shitos and Machrea what makes more sense.

Quote “In areas of Hashkafa there is no such thing as psak.”

This is ”but words of prophecy” . where do you get such a rule from? Why shouldn’t it work like the rest of Torah?

Quote “One of the most ridicuolous things that people say is that although 2 Rabbonim are arguing, they are both correct. Thats impossible. If i say yes and you say no, do we agree? of course not! its unbelievable how many people can make such a statement”

Even though this had nothing to do with my argument, the Ritva in Eiruvin 13b says such a reasoning. And personally, I don’t think there is such a problem to the thinker.

Quote “when u say the Gra would be able to reconcile both opinions, that is completely false. “

I didn’t say he reconciled both opinions, I said he reconciled both ideas. He held that there is no contradiction between reward and punishment and Gilgulim. I gave a few possible reasons and I can think up a few more reasons. (especially that I read a long time ago the Gra held someone only becomes a Gilgul 4 times, so even like R’ Sadya’s understanding of Gilgul, there is an end where there is a final judgement.) This is without reading any liturature from the Baalei Gilgul to see how they answer the question. Did you ever read the Gra’s explanation on Gilgul to see what he says on the question? Most likely not. How can you say that a certain concept contradicts if you haven’t read anything from the other side of the argument. (Afterwards I found that the Abarbanel (in Shmuel 2 14:14) says that a part of Gilgul is a punishment, as I wrote in my last post (Baruch Shekavanti)) So there are plenty of ways to answer the contradictions, so there is no reason to say that it contradict Torah.

Quote “there are many rishonim and acharonim who do not believe in it.”

As I asked you in my last post, which Achronim didn’t hold of Gilgul? I found out that The Alshich, Shla, Gra Sefer Charadim, Mishna Brurah held of it (besides Ramban) so who’s on your side?

Quote “We don't follow people we look at the idea to see if it coincides with the Torah, makes sense, and is true. “

Who is the “we” that is supposed to see if it does this? Every Tom Dick and Harry? There is a good reason why their positions are seeked by everyone and yours are not. When you don’t understand the position of the Gra how it fits into Torah, the chances are (more than a million to one) that you missed something than that the Gra missed it. Especially if you haven’t gone through the Sugya that well. I recently went through in the the forums of “Parshas Ketores” and “did dovid sin” this point and I’ll do it again. If you’re intellectually honest with yourself, realize your limited amount of Torah knowledge and (no pun intended) intellect, realize how little of Bavli you know, besides everything else you don’t know, thus if you disagree with the Gra, the smart thing is to find out what are you missing that you can’t understand the Gra.

Quote “Here you say that if the Rav is greater, then we follow him so that even if i told you of a acharon that disgarees with the Gra or Mishna Berurah, you say that he is not as authoritative as them. If thats true, then you support me even more because a Rishon is more authoritative than an acharon and this takes away your whole concept of going according to basraim in matters of hashkafa. You just proved me more right. The fact is we don't go by who is the greater gadol and who is the more recent Rav, we look at the idea that the person is claiming is true. Did the Ramban say that because Rashi lived before me maybe hes greater than me and I cant disagree with him if i disagree with something he says? of course not! he did and said what he thought was true.”

This is puzzling. Rashi and Rambam were at the same level of scholarship, that is why he would argue. But every Tom Dick and Harry? Lets say that Rabbi Irving Greenberg of Wisconson wants to argue with the Gra, that’s something else all together, or 10th grader Jerry Schwartz arguing with the Gra. The comparition is rediculous.

Quote “That also does not make sense when you say the Rambam also doesnt have to believe its a contradiction. Of course he does! because it would be a contradiction to schar v'onesh and that is why he did not hold of it. “

As we already wrote, there is definite contradiction, since Gilgul itself is a punishment plus there is a limited amount of Gilgul, so there is no logical way to prove the Rambam didn’t hold of it.

Quote “If he felt it was such an important belief, he would have wrote about it and said that its true. But he didnt, which proves he did not believe in that.”

Since it’s not brought down explicitly in Gemarah the Rambam never brings it down. It had nothing to do with Halacha, so why should he bring it down? At best, your “proof” is just speculative.

Quote “one must analyze any statement made from anyone, including a Gadol. No one is perfect”

Including yourself (and a lot less perfect than the Gedolim.) So if you feel their reasoning could be faulty, how much more you should think that your “reasoning” is not faulty as well.

quote:

Originally posted by Intellect:
Why can't one use the Gra as an argument against Chassidut? He was against them because of them doing practices alien to Judaism, such as davening at 12pm. The Gra saw the movement as a dangerous one, and therefore was vehemently against it. The Noda B'Yehuda was also one of the great gedolim of that time who was against Chasidism. One of the reason's people are not staying Jewish is because they think Judaism is a religion which makes no sense and they look at it no different than Christianity or Islam. I know this for a fact because I talk to alot of people who think Judaism is based on faith like the other religions are, and this is false. Judaism is not a fantasy religion. Hashem expects us to reach knowledge of him and see the truth with our intellects, not our emotions. I may feel something is right, but that doesn't make it right. One must follow the Torah and the Mesora and use their mind to find the truth.

I simply don't understand what you are trying to say in the above comment.
If I read this without any prior knowledge of the topic I would believe that you are attempting to say;
1. That chasidus and it's adhereants are having a negative effect on Jewish contenuity. That is completely out of touch with what is going on in the world. I am not, and never have been, a member of Lubavitch but I hear that they have had some success in the area of helping people live Torah u'Mitzvos.
2. Chasidic Rebbes and their Chasidim are not following the Torah and Mesorah, and using their minds to find the truth. Lekutei m'HoRaN, Tanya and hundreds of other examples of brilliant minds following the Torah and mesorah using their minds to find the truth.
But since you don't understand what they are saying, and probably have never attempted to do so, they have no validity.

I thought to remain silent on the matter for Rav Chaiim made a better point i could and can make.

it arose within me to cite the sources in the in which case the very thing you say is not in the gemora is thus if error in this matter perhaps you realize you might have error in these other matters which are much more complicated.

1) Chasid is biblical which usully refer some merely practiced acks of love and kindness. which was the very essence teaching of the Baal Shem Tov. (ps 145:17)

in the gemora it really pick up and Chassidim are in refence to peity which once more how the Chassidims are, to the extent we refer to them as ultra Orthodox.
as for a source for the accpetence of praying at midnight the Gra knew very will from the concept mention more then these places in the Talmuds.

as much my reference to David is in Berachot Bavli 3b

"...R. Ashi said: Until midnight he[David] was engrossed in the study of Torah; from that point on he recited songs and praises."


"Which Rabbi Yochanan said that a man may pray all day. all for what? that prayer never loses it vaule"

---Yershalmi Talmud Berchot first page.



"the number of these prayers may not be diminished, but may be increased. If a person wants to pray all day long, he may."


--Mishnah Torah Hilchot Tefilah 1:9

so surely perhaps you misunderstood the true reason why teh Gra was not please with Chassidim which had nothign to do with them praying at midnight because everyone acknowldge it as accpetable. and in fact by mention this case as a reason teh Chassidim are not torah base perhaps you should rethink that while you rethink perhaps you errored in reincarnation.

B]To Rav Chaim[/B]: I don't understand what your saying. When Rav Saadia was alive, the people who were living right before him where the basraim according to you. Since that is the case, Rav Saadia was arguing with the basraim and did not agree with them. I will prove to you that there is no such thing as psak in Hashkafa. Each Rishon and Acharon tried to support their beliefs. Now for example, the Rambam argues on the Gemara about the idea of miracles. You see from this that there is no such thing as psak in hashkafa because the Rambam used his mind as well to see what was true and he came to a different understanding of the way miracles work (im not sure but the opinion mentioned in the Gemara about miracles can be that there were some Rabbonim who had that understanding of miracles but not all the Rabbonim in the Gemara did.) You see that in areas of Hashkafa, the Rambam held that there is no such thing as psak. For example, you can't force one to believe that the sky is blue if it isn't. The person does not believe it, he is just saying that but he knows it isn't true. I am sure the Ritva did not say that if 2 people are arguing with each other and one says yes and one says no as to if something is kosher, that the Ritva would say they are both correct. The Rambam and Ramban argued vehemently on each other are you saying it was all a show? of course not! they honestly felt their opinion was correct. This does not mean G-D forbid that they didn't respect each other and love each other. Of course they did! but in Torah they were looking for the truth. Also, imagine one told a non-jew what your saying. He would laugh at the person and ridicule him. Is this a way to show the beauty of Torah? when the posuk says in Chumash Devarim that the nations will see and say how wise the Jews are how will they see we are wise if we are conradictory? of course they won't if this is what they hear. There is no way to reconcile reward and punishment together with reincarnation. It doesn't make sense that a person can be a gilgul 4 times and then finally there is a final judgement. The fact is the person got a second chance and nowhere in the Torah does it say that people get second chances. We only have one life that we are to choose the way to live. Life or death as the posuk says in the Torah and Hashem tells us to choose life. It actually happens to be that i read in the artscroll book of Rishonim which lists all the Rishonim, their works, and history of them, that one of the Rishonim said that although reincarnation is true, it cannot be proven through logic but we believe in it because it is in the Zohar. So you see he held that he could not support the position through logic. There are many Rishonim and Acharonim who did not believe in gilgul. I can name you some but its irrelevant how many held either view. The Rambam, Rav Saadia Gaon, Rav Yosef Albo, Rabbeynu Bachye (Chovos Halevovos), Rav Chaim Brisker did not believe in reincarnation. There are many more, but like I said, it is irrelevent as to how many held either side. I don't claim to be on the level of the Gra or other Rabbonim. I am holding on to an opinion which is supported from great Rishonim. Let's say the Rambam believed he was not as great as Rav Saadia Gaon. This would not deter him from arguing on Rav Saadia Gaon if he felt he was right about something. Was the Gra on the level of the Rambam? he wasn't so according to your thing that if they are on the same level they can argue, how could the Gra disagree with the Rambam? He has to agree according to the Rambam according to you. But you see he does not because in Hashkafa there is no psak. So your argument is not valid. What i said proving that the Rambam did not hold of reincarnation is a valid proof and you have no argument to support your position that he believe in it. I do have an argument and i mentioned it. Also if he did believe in it, he would have mentioned it has a fundamental belief within Hashkafa, but he didn't, which proves my point. The Rambam wrote a sefer on Hashkafa and if he felt reincarnation was a fundamental belief would he not write it? so you see he did not hold of it.

To MK Fink: The fact is chasidism has and is having a negative effect on Jewish continuity. There are many false ideas and practices that where and are still taught by the movement. I was trying to show you in that comment that many Gedolim of that time were against chasidism, and for many reasons.

What are you saying? the Gemara in Brochos has a perek dealing with when the zmanim for the prayers are and chasidism goes against it. This IS one of the reasons the Gra was against chasidism.

One of the differences between achronim and rishonim is that the reshonim had access to numberous manuscripts and oral traditions which were simply lost. So when two rishonim argue they may have different sources. However Achronim have no such advantage and they must make their arguments in full.

When we say we don't poskin haskapha, most people cite the structure of the Midrash. Unlike halacha where an definitive opinion must be reached, we see in the midrash all of the maybe ten different opinions are given and until very recently no one ever tried to reconcile one opinion with the other. However, the structure of a halachic discussion as we see in talmud it not so much to show which opinion is correct but to show the difference in opinion is very small and that there would only be an actual difference in only very rare cases.

As for reconcilling philosophical differences, maybe someone will show up with the genius to do it. However, I would like to point out we are still waiting for someone to solve the problem of the four forces and to reconcile quantum mechanics with relativity


Aryeh Shore

quote:

Originally posted by laurence shore:

Since as the Arbarnel (15th cent), who SUPPORTS REINCARNATION, points out that the soul actions are determinined by the nature of the body, one can't hold one responsible for what happened in a different body.

Aryeh Shore

Hi Aryeh. Are you the same Aryeh Shore who posted the following on yichudim.org?

"The Arbarbanel (15th century Spain), no stranger to the kabballah, brings the major arguments of Aristotle, the holy one (sic), that IT CAN NOT BE since the soul and body are judged at the resurrection and every body is different so the soul can not be held responsible for different bodies and lives."

I'm confused. Did Arbarbanel "support reincarnation" as you mention here? Or did he say "it can not be," as you mention in the yichudim.org post? What am I misreading here? Thanks.