The involvement of God in the world

Just a note regarding B.
Many of our rabbis, the great and early ones, did not accept the concept of reincarnations as something real and serious. It is not mentioned in the Bible, the Babylonian, or the Jerusalem Bible at all [although there is no shortage of all kinds of parables and legends there], so the question of Rabbi Michi's opinion is not only about him but about all those who believe in divine intervention in the present seven times. [For the methods that there is no such thing as reincarnations]

I don't think there is even a single great person today who denies reincarnation.
The fact that they denied it in the past (for example, Ras”g) could have been for the following reasons:
a. They were explained to them incorrectly.
b. They were afraid that the masses would be tempted by this mysticism, so they said it was not true.

Besides, so what if they opposed it?
If this is the truth, then it is the truth.
The fact that there are physicists who opposed the Big Bang theory does not mean that it is not true.

By the way, even in our day, I don't think there are rabbis who say that we should bother with the issue of reincarnations, etc.
We need to understand that we live here in this world and behave accordingly.
So it is true that it is part of a much broader system, but it does not matter too much in terms of a person's daily conduct.

Is this true or just nonsense?
Answer:
It is not mentioned in the Bible. Fact.
In the Babylonian [despite the many stories and parables] it is not mentioned.
In the Jerusalem [despite the many stories and parables] it is not mentioned.

In later periods this belief [or fantasy] came [from India?] and spread and became known also among the people of Israel, the Jews, and many of our early rabbis denied it and some even mocked it.
Some accepted it.
What do most of the sages of Israel [today, and how did they know?] or not, relevant to the discussion of whether this is a true belief or a collection of myths?

To David.
You assume that Ras”G was probably some kind of devil who was not explained to him well… but to me and you, they explain it really wonderfully… Oh, what a shame that Ras”G [and the other first men] did not have at least our intelligence and knowledge of the Torah…
And yes, he really did believe in it, just bluffing people lest they fall for it…
That is, according to you, we have 2 options. Either you are dealing with a moron or a bluffer…
I assume that Ras”G and the other first men who denied it [and the Jerusalem Babylonian and the Bible did not mention] were neither morons nor bluffers.
But they simply thought it was nonsense. Is it difficult for us to deal with it? It's not terrible. There are many other difficult things in life…

This is a Kabbalistic matter, Kabbalah was not/was not known among the people of Israel before the time of the Ramban, and the Zohar became/was known even later. So it is no wonder that the Rabbis and others did not mention or deny it. But today, when Kabbalah has been accepted by the majority of the Jewish community and the majority of the Jews (the Orthodox) and influences many rulings and customs “on the table” – so in fact this is the current position of Judaism. There is no difference whether something was accepted among the people during the Babylonian Empire or among the Amoraim or from the end of the Rishonim period.

“Uri and Yeshay”

As they wrote here, Kabbalah was not known to many at that time.
Apparently, those who did know knew a little, and told it in a distorted way to the Rabbi, and the Rabbi probably objected.
So he is certainly not stupid, he simply absorbed incorrect information.
Incidentally, even today, rabbis oppose Michael Laitman, the guru of “Kabbalah for the People”, and rightly so. He presents a very partial picture.

If they said relatively serious things, and the Rabbi did think there was a certain truth here, and yet he objected, it may be for the same reason as the opponents/Lithuanians initially opposed Hasidism in a fairly serious way – it was necessary so that the common people would not be confused by one thing and get confused (for example, it happened that people were engaged in Kabbalah and got confused).
So I don't think he's a bluff either.

To Rabbi Michi,
What I meant in the first question is something like this –
You agree that the survival of the Jewish people is a rare and special thing. And yet you believe that it shouldn't be explained by “providence” (general providence).
So even if we see “rare and special” statistics on the answering of prayers for individuals, you will say that it shouldn't be explained by “providence” (private providence).
So right now you're saying that ”I don't see it” (intervention),
but even if “they see it” you can come up with other excuses.

True. These are not excuses but logical explanations. A rare event does not indicate anything. This question has been discussed here several times in the past.