The Talmud says in tractate Sanhedrin 64b, on the verse: “Because he has despised the word of the Lord and has broken His commandment, that soul shall surely be cut off; his iniquity shall be upon him” (Numbers 15):
“‘Shall surely be cut off’ — cut off in this world, shall surely be cut off in the World to Come; these are the words of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Ishmael said to him: But it has already said, ‘and shall be cut off’ — are there then three worlds? Rather, ‘and shall be cut off’ means in this world, ‘cut off’ means in the World to Come, and ‘shall surely be cut off’ is just the Torah speaking in human language.”
That is, despite their dispute about the World to Come, they both agree that the sinful soul is cut off from this world.
Whereas according to the doctrine of reincarnation, the soul is not cut off from this world, but returns again and again.

And Nachmanides, in his commentary to Leviticus 18:29, goes on at length explaining the matter of karet and says:
“And the explanation of the matter is that one who eats forbidden fat or blood, if he is righteous and his merits are greater, but his desire overcame him and he stumbled in that sin, his days will be cut short and he will die in his youth before reaching old age, which is sixty years. But his soul is not subject to karet; rather, he will have a share in the world of souls as is fitting for his good deeds, for he was righteous, and he will also have a share in the World to Come, which is the world after the resurrection. Of this it says: ‘and that man shall be cut off.’
But if along with that grave sin his iniquities are more numerous than his merits, then the punishment of karet for that grave sin reaches the sinful soul after it has parted from the body, and it is cut off from the life of the world of souls, …
Those whose iniquities are more numerous than their merits, including the sin of the sinners of the nations of the world in their bodies — and Rav Pappa said: through sin, meaning sexual immorality among the forbidden relations — descend to Gehinnom and are judged for twelve months. After twelve months their body is consumed, their soul is burned, and the wind scatters them under the feet of the righteous, etc.”
[end quote]

That is, according to the above, whatever the precise character of the punishment of karet may be, surely the Torah does not mean — according to the view of the great sages of Israel — that the soul returns to this world for the sake of repair, as in the belief in reincarnation.

Not at all necessarily. It can be cut off from this world in its current phase and return in reincarnation.

And what would you say about Nachmanides’ view?
That after the souls of the wicked are burned, they rise again and reincarnate?

The words of Rabbi Akiva, Rabbi Ishmael, and Nachmanides are clear:
To be cut off from this world is not to return to it in reincarnation again and again and again.

As I explained, I disagree. Even Nachmanides is speaking only about very specific kinds of karet, and even there it can be rejected. In short, even if you find some sage whose words do not fit with reincarnation — so what? Is one forbidden to disagree with him?

The situation is the opposite.
Those who support belief in reincarnation are actually the minority.
If you survey the views of the sages of Israel from the Sages in the Talmuds through the medieval authorities, and even after them such as Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch and so on — the great sages of Israel on whose shoulders the Jewish bookshelf stands — you will find that the overwhelming majority either ignored belief in reincarnation, like the Sages in the Talmuds or Maimonides, even though they certainly knew of it (after all, even the Pharaohs already held that belief), or else they came out against it in harsh terms.

Like Saadia Gaon in Beliefs and Opinions: “Among people who are called Jews, I found some who speak of transmigration, and they call it transfer, meaning reincarnation of souls. According to them, the spirit of Reuben returns in Simeon, and afterward in Levi, and afterward in Judah. And many of them say that sometimes a human spirit can be in an animal, and the spirit of an animal in a human, and many things of this madness and confusion.”

How is it that in the Talmuds and midrashim, which deal extensively with faith and with reward and punishment, there is not a word about belief in reincarnation, although they certainly knew of it?
The obvious conclusion is that they did not refrain from mentioning it because they were unaware of it, but because they saw it as a false belief, a foreign belief.

Why, for example, did Elisha ben Avuyah become a heretic, when he could easily have explained the scene he saw — that boy who fell to his death — as a soul that had come to repair a previous reincarnation?

Or the deaths of the Ten Martyrs of the Roman kingdom — why did the Talmud not explain their deaths through reincarnation?

But Benjamin, Nachmanides is considered the one who brought the idea of reincarnation into Judaism, as he is regarded as one of the early kabbalists. So within his own system, karet and reincarnation presumably do have to work together.
Admittedly, in his own words this is not really explicit. In Job chapters 32–33 he rejects all the other commentators’ explanations of Elihu’s words and promises to explain something serious, but it’s impossible to understand what he wants there because of all the hints and concealment. And in Sha’ar HaGemul he calls Elihu’s answer “the secret of ibbur.”
But that is the accepted way to interpret his words there, as dealing with reincarnation. I don’t know why, but the truth is that it can fit there in verses like: “Lo, all these things God works, twice, three times with a man, to bring back his soul from the pit, that he may be enlightened with the light of life.” Even so, it is still not clear what the great mysterious secret here is.
In any case, for every question about kabbalistic teaching from earlier sources that did not mention it, the answer is always ready: that it was all a hidden tradition, covered over and wrapped in aggadic sayings, and that some parts were only revealed with the appearance of the Zohar, and that Elijah taught the Ari, and the Hasidim say that Ahijah the Shilonite, who preceded Elijah the prophet, taught the Baal Shem Tov, and so on and so on and so on.

Belief in reincarnation existed among some of the sects of the Second Temple period. It is not foreign to Judaism and not an invention of the kabbalists.

I don’t understand why you take certain aggadic statements and ignore others, when aggadic statements according to most opinions are not meant to be understood literally. There are also very famous aggadic statements that Jews are not judged in Gehinnom at all, because Abraham takes them out of there by virtue of circumcision. Or the Talmud in Nedarim, which says there is no Gehinnom except in the future, when the Holy One, blessed be He, takes the sun out of its sheath: the righteous are healed by it and the wicked are judged by it. According to that approach, there is no Gehinnom at all.
All these approaches contradict one another no less than reincarnation contradicts any one of them.
I also heard that the burning is the sinner’s suffering, feelings of guilt, and the scattering under the feet of the righteous is a metaphor for his inferiority compared to them. Just as fire consumes flesh, so guilt burns the soul.
In addition, most systems of reward and punishment developed in the period of the medieval authorities. Most approaches do not fit with the Talmud, not only reincarnation.

The doctrine of reincarnation of souls has provided a lot of livelihood for a lot of people.

“To The Last Decisor”
I’ve noticed that you comment here, Rabbi.
Your comments do not add anything to the discussion, and they are not serious.

I think it would be appropriate for you to respect everyone here, and yourself as well, and stop commenting — unless you have something useful to contribute to the discussion.

Good evening,
Despite all the claims and opinions raised here, in my view the Sages in the Mishnah and the Talmuds did not hold the belief in reincarnation and saw it as a foreign belief, and many of those who came after them — the Geonim and the medieval authorities and onward — understood this very well, which gave them the warrant to oppose it in explicit terms and not merely make do with ignoring it.

By contrast, a major principle of faith for them was the resurrection of the dead.
And these two beliefs seem not to fit together, and even to push each other aside.

AA, add also the Talmud in Bava Metzia that one who has relations with another man’s wife dies by strangulation and still has a share in the World to Come, in contrast to one who publicly humiliates his fellow. Yet publicly humiliating one’s fellow is not an offense punishable by karet, unlike relations with another man’s wife.
That greatly weakens Benjamin’s claim. Also, if he has a share in the World to Come despite the prohibition he transgressed, then one may argue that he must be able to undergo some repair, and then reincarnation is not so far-fetched.

But this should be qualified. First of all, there may be some other repair above without his returning to the world. And it may be that what was said there was an educational message so that people would not publicly humiliate others, and therefore they exaggerated the severity of the prohibition. But again, why does the adulterer have a share in the World to Come? It is hard to see that as an educational message.

It may be that all the sufferings of Gehinnom are an educational message so that people will not treat the commandments lightly, and in truth many times when it is said “he has no share in the World to Come,” or that he is judged in Gehinnom, or receives this or that punishment, or is even liable to death, it is speaking of relatively minor rabbinic prohibitions. In my opinion, one also cannot infer anything factual from aggadic statements. If I’m not mistaken, the Rabbi also once remarked on that.

Benjamin, the origin of belief in reincarnation really is obscure. But as people said before, it existed among some Jewish sects in the Second Temple period. Why didn’t the Talmud mention it? Maybe because certain sects like the Gnostics believed in it, and they did not want to grant them legitimacy.
According to quite a few scholars, many Talmudic aggadot were intended to fight heretics. One of the figures almost never mentioned in the Talmud is Enoch. Enoch was one of the great righteous figures in the Second Temple period, but certain sects such as the earliest Christians used him to lend authority to their belief.

A second reason may be that a person would say that in any case he will be reincarnated and fix everything, so why should he be righteous or refrain from sinning? The Sages certainly knew of belief in reincarnation. If it had been irreconcilable, they would have condemned and attacked it, not merely ignored it elegantly.

It may be that there is no reincarnation at all and that this is a superstitious belief that entered Judaism.
But in any case, as others noted before, other medieval approaches regarding the World to Come also do not fit the plain meaning of the Talmud. Maimonides’ view of acquiring wisdom and the union of the intellect with the active intellect is also not exactly Talmudic or biblical, and clearly its source is foreign.
I don’t see reincarnation as exceptional among the various beliefs. And there are many contradictions even within the aggadot of the Sages.

In any case, the question is whether this is a true belief or nonsense. If it is true, then it does not matter what the Sages thought; and if it is a false belief, then even if the Sages had explicitly accepted it, it would still be rejected.

On the factual level, given population growth it is hard to believe that reincarnation is possible, since the population has grown enormously, even exponentially. But if one can reincarnate into cattle, animals, and even plants and inanimate objects, that changes everything. But it is hard for me to believe that such a high number were utterly wicked people who reincarnate into inanimate objects and animals.

Belief in reincarnation of souls is heresy against the Torah of Moses.
The question about the punishment of karet is ridiculous. It stems from pettiness and a lack of understanding of the Torah.