Q&A: The Souls of Israel and Converts at Mount Sinai
The Souls of Israel and Converts at Mount Sinai
Question
- “Our God, and with whoever is not here with us today” (Deuteronomy 29:14)
Even the souls of Israel throughout the generations, and the converts who were destined to convert, were there (midrash).
We stood at Mount Sinai and in our souls tasted the holiness of the Torah, and therefore there is a yearning in the Jewish soul, and in converts, for the Torah.
We also see in our own times a yearning among converts for Torah and commandments, which reinforces these texts.
In your view, can you connect to these ideas? Please explain. Thank you.
Answer
In my view, these are childish ideas that are suitable for kindergarten children. It is clear to me that no souls were standing there. I do not even understand what it means for souls to stand in some place. Beyond that, even if they did stand there, why would that obligate me? What obligates me is a contract or an oath that I myself took and entered into. I am not familiar with obligations created by commitments of souls.
For me it is clear that, if there is anything to this at all, the intention is a metaphorical description saying that the collective of Israel stood there and received the Torah, and that obligates future generations (“who are not here with us today”). This is unlike a personal commitment, which obligates only the person himself and not the generations after him. I have elaborated on this in several places, in writing and orally, in light of the Rosh’s responsum cited by the Rema in Yoreh De’ah about communal oaths and bans that also apply to those yet to be born (unlike a father’s oath, which does not obligate his son). At the moment I found this:
https://mikyab.net/%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%AA/%D7%A9%D7%91%D7%95%D7%A2%D7%94-%D7%A9%D7%A0%D7%A9%D7%91%D7%A2%D7%95-%D7%90%D7%91%D7%95%D7%AA%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%95-%D7%A2%D7%9C-%D7%94%D7%A8-%D7%A1%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99
Discussion on Answer
The obligation, as you explained it, or the command to the soul—which is a person’s essence, not his body but his inner self, which is spiritual.
I’m bringing a midrash, not making this up myself..
So it follows that both I and you were there and heard the description of the giving of the Torah.
As for converts: certain souls of gentiles were there, and they have a high potential to convert, though it is still their choice.
The yearning of some converts reinforces the above view.
So both you and I — correction.
In addition, there’s no need to use words of contempt toward other worldviews within Judaism, even if you may not connect to them.
Especially when this is backed by a midrash and can fit the plain meaning of the verse in the Torah, and there is evidence of this yearning.
I think this is connected to the question of evil.
For example, if a person was a murderer in a previous incarnation, is it reasonable to punish him in another incarnation when he does not remember his previous incarnation? If so, then even if you obligated yourself in another world and do not remember it, it is still valid.
K., you made a nice connection. Thanks.
According to Sha’ar HaGilgulim in Kabbalah, Rabbi Chaim Vital discusses this at length based on the words of his teacher, the holy Ari.
I don’t like bringing mystical proofs and I don’t connect to that in my worldview as basic evidence for an argument, but since you mentioned it, it’s nice.
What I wrote is that in the subconscious there is memory.
The obligation is on the body. A person who dies is exempt from the commandments. According to your logic, he would still be obligated in the commandments. And what exactly is the soul/life-force? There are different opinions. From Maimonides’ view, that it is the intellect in a person—of a person who has acquired intelligibles—to more mystical views. According to none of the views is there any significance to its being obligated in the commandments.
As for reincarnation, it is not accepted by everyone, and it seems this is not the position of classical Judaism. These ideas gained momentum with the spread of Kabbalah, and even there there are disputes. Quite a few held that reincarnation of souls is not a Jewish belief, or that it cannot fit Jewish belief: from Saadia Gaon, Rabbi Joseph Albo, Rabbi Abraham son of Maimonides, the Rosh, and others. Some also argued that it is impossible to punish a person for something he does not remember, or that a soul that already had free choice would receive free choice again, or that there could be rectification of something when a person does not remember what he is supposed to rectify, and also that this contradicts the essence of repentance.
https://www.e-vrit.co.il/Product/25813/%D7%9E%D7%99_%D7%90%D7%A0%D7%99_%D7%94%D7%90%D7%93%D7%9D_
A person who died being exempt has nothing to do with the soul that is destined to be born.
The soul is also not obligated in the commandments before it is born into a body.
The concept of the soul is the person’s “I”; after all, it is clear that a person is not the body in which he appears..
I expanded on this in my book, God willing,
Who Am I, the Human Being? God willing, link above.
As for reincarnations, I wrote that only as a nice aside.
The problem with the Rabbi’s answer is that the ability of acceptance by the many to obligate future generations is based on a verse in the Torah—Nachmanides on Bechukotai, Nachmanides on the laws of the ban. But we are discussing the source of the obligation of future generations. You cannot obligate future generations in the Torah by virtue of a verse in that very Torah, which they still have not accepted upon themselves.
A. Acceptance by the many is a logical principle, and proofs for it are brought from various sources. Even the law of a state is binding by virtue of acceptance by the many.
B. The Torah expects us to observe it by virtue of acceptance by the many. If you do not accept the Torah’s validity, then indeed you will not observe it.
Beyond that, conversion is the result of free choice, and therefore it cannot be that the souls of converts had already stood at Mount Sinai. Nobody knows in advance who will be a convert and who will not.