Stage 3 · Saadia Gaon (882–942)

Emunot v'Deot: VI:8 · Against Metempsychosis

כתאב אלאמאנאת ואלאעתקאדאת — The Book of Beliefs and Opinions

Emunot v'Deot in the original Judeo-Arabic, with a working English translation by Eliyahu Freedman (working draft). Hover a phrase to see its English light up; tap any word for a gloss.

Layers
Pageריד

Aligned sentence by sentence

. . , , ,

Section 8. Now, those who hold to transmigration and metempsychosis are the weakest of people in their arguments and the most corrupt in their views. I will enumerate all the arguments they adduce for it, examine each one and refute it.

, .

I say: their first argument is from the doctrine that He created spiritual beings and then placed them in bodies — they say there must therefore be something He created as non-corporeal that migrated into the corporeal.

,

Its refutation: I already showed the invalidity of that doctrine at the beginning of this chapter, and there is no need to repeat it.

, ,

Their second argument: a person is sometimes found to possess the character traits of beasts — cruelty, ignorance, brutishness — so they say it is because an animal soul is within him.

, ,

Its refutation: the soul is one and acquires these blameworthy traits through bad company — whoever occupies himself with the company of the wicked takes on their character.

, ,

Just as when a person commits sins specific to beasts without repenting, his heart becomes darkened and defiled — and he may incline toward character even baser than that sin.

, .

For this reason the Creator commanded to keep away from the wicked — for their proximity leads to adopting their character — as He said: 'Do not dwell among them... lest they teach you to do all their abominations' (Deut 20:18).

, ,

Their third argument: children are sometimes struck with suffering and pain without any sin and without benefit — so they say it is because of sins from a past life.

,

Its refutation: there is no requirement that benefit materialize immediately — the benefit may come in the future, if that pain has refined his sensibility.

Pageרטו

Aligned sentence by sentence

, . .

— and makes him patient and modest; or perhaps his recompense will be in the world to come. If both elements are combined, there is no absence of benefit.

, , ,

Their fourth argument: scriptural prooftexts — which I will enumerate. They said: 'Not with you alone... but also with those who are not here with us today' (Deut 29:13–14) — this shows all souls were created before that time.

, ,

Its refutation: the speech was addressed to future generations from their descendants — there is no indication of transmigration in it whatsoever.

.

Moreover, if a soul had passed from one body to another, how would it have knowledge of what no one else knows?

, ,

They also cite: 'Happy is the man who did not walk in the counsel of the wicked' (Ps 1:1) — arguing 'the man' with the definite article indicates this person was previously a 'man' before.

,

Its refutation: this is in the extreme of remoteness, given knowledge of how definite and indefinite articles are properly used in the Hebrew tongue.

,

Moreover, were it as they say, no one could rejoice in any good that befalls a person — because this person might be drawing toward the fate of that very body according to that doctrine.

.

— for the end-result of this body is that a worse body comes after it.

Pageריז

Aligned sentence by sentence

" , , ,

They cited: 'Who laid the seal upon it as clay' (Job 38:14) — and the like — arguing this refers to the soul in a prior existence.

.

Its refutation: this is part of God's speech — may He be praised — which overwhelms the human who is unable to account for all the matters mentioned and is humbled by them.

, .

This is shown by what precedes it: 'Who placed wisdom in the inner mind, or who gave the rooster understanding?' (Job 38:36) — which humbles the person, since he cannot fathom the source of dim-wittedness and the cold.

" . . ,

They also cited: 'He restores my soul' (Ps 23:3) — arguing this means the soul returns to another body.

, , .

Its refutation: the meaning of 'yeshobev' is 'he heals, he revives' — just as one says 'I bring back the spirits' meaning 'I calm the winds.'

, ,

They said: He breathed and the souls lived — arguing this indicates new souls being breathed into bodies (Ezek 37 allusion).

, , .

Its refutation: that passage speaks of resurrection, not transmigration — for transmigration keeps the body and causes the soul to move on, whereas resurrection gathers the soul and body and assembles them both.

, .

Furthermore: the text commands summoning the wind 'from the four directions' — whereas transmigration does not bring anything from four directions.

,

When these responses became clear to me, I distinguished what they say about transmigration from resurrection by means of several distinctions.

. .

Transmigration keeps the body and exchanges the soul; resurrection exchanges the body and returns the soul. Transmigration would join two souls in one body; resurrection joins only one soul with one body.

.

Transmigration moves a soul from a better body to a worse one; resurrection moves a soul only to its own body.

. , ,

Transmigration makes the soul remain in the body without death; resurrection makes the soul depart the body and then return to it. These are the distinctions between them — and no valid proof for transmigration stands.

.

Here ends the Sixth Maamar.

English is a working draft — alignment is sentence-by-sentence.