Dear Bat Sheva,

The idea of reincarnation does not appear in the Scriptures, nor in the Talmud or midrashim. We first encounter it in the 12th century, in Sefer HaBahir from southern France, traditionally (but, of course, incorrectly) attributed to the second century Palestinian Tanna R’ Nachonia the son of Hahanah. It is written there that the soul returns to the body up to one thousand times.

The development of teachings on reincarnation are found in the Zohar and in other sources, primarily in the work of the Ari.

Until then the idea of reincarnation was rejected even by the widespread Jewish view view. Rabbi Saadiah Gaon (ninth century CE) claimed that it was madness to think that there was such a thing as reincarnation. He said, “Some of those people called Jews I have found talking about that that copy [reincarnation], and for them the spirit of Reuven may come to rest in Shimon, and then in Levi, and then in Yehuda. There are many of them who state that sometimes a man’s spirit will rest in an animal, and sometimes an animal’s spirit in a man, and many of these things are madness and confusion” (Sefer HaEmunot V’HaDayot, essay six).



The view that there is reincarnation has existed since ancient times, for example in Greek philosophy (Plato). It was also widespread in the Far East and the Gnostic Christian cults of the first centuries CE (a mixture of Christianity, Greek philosophy, and Eastern religions).

It is first mentioned in Jewish sources in Sefer HaBahir, as we wrote above. It is quite possible that on this issue Judaism was influenced by other cultures, but we do have testimony of authentic experience on this topic, for example, in the book Shivchei HaAri.

In his book On the Kabbalah and its Symbolism (Mossad Bialik 1977), Gershom Scholem dedicates a chapter to this phenomenon (Chpater Nine, Reincarnation, pg. 308). Since then a number of articles on the topic have been published, and can be found on RAMBI , by keyword or title: http://jnul.huji.ac.il/rambi.



Sincerely,



Daat Emet

Hello.



It would seem that this medrash aggada is meant to be taken literally, that this is the same person, body and soul, who merited longevity far beyond the norm. It is not that Eliyahu was born in a different body and the soul of Pinchas entered this new body, as the teachings of reincarnation would have it. This is also the way the medieval commentators, “to whose study halls the spirit of sod and Kabbalah had not reached” understood the matter.

See, for example, the French sages, the authors of the Tosaphot, who did not conceive of this fantastical theory.



The Gemara (Bava Batra 121b) states: “Our Rabbis taught: Seven [men] spanned [the life of] the whole world. [For] Methuselah saw Adam; Shem saw Methuselah, Jacob saw Shem; Amram saw Jacob; Ahijah the Shilonite saw Amram; Elijah saw Ahijah the Shilonite, and Elijah is still alive.” (For Elijah never died, and still visits the homes of Jews when they perform a circumcision.) The authors of the Tosaphot claim that this opinion contradicts the opinion that Elijah is Pinchas, for if that were true, fewer than seven people are needed to span the time from the first man to our days. Were the teachings of reincarnation to have been popular in the study halls of the authors of the Tosaphot (the 12th-13th centuries) they would have immediately tried to reconcile the contradiction, as they usually did, and they would have claimed that though Pinchas was Eliyahu, that the soul of Pinchas was reincarnated in Eliyahu, the physical body was not that of Pinchas.



As support for our words we will bring another example. The Talmud (Bava Batra 91a) claims: “Ibzan is Boaz,” and Rashi wondered at this connecting of two people who lived in far removed eras. In I Chronicles 2:11 Rashi wonders: “If Ibzan were Boaz, he would have sired a son at 300 years old, and this is not possible, as Abraham wondered of himself: ‘At one hundred shall I sire a child?’.” Therefore, the teachings of reincarnation could not have penetrated Rashi’s study hall.

But when Rabbi David the son of Shlomo ibn Zamra (b. Spain 1479, d. Tzefat 1573) was asked this question, in an era in which the teachings of sod and reincarnation had spread throughout the religious world, his answer was based on the teachings of reincarnation.

You asked me: according to the opinion which states “Pinchas is Eliyahu,” Eliyahu was a cohen, so how could the cohen Eliyahu become impure in reviving the dead son of the widow from Zrephath?

Answer: According to the wisdom of the sages of the hidden this is no question at all, for in saying that Pinchas is Eliyahu one refers to the source of his soul. [Thus Eliyahu, physically born to a father who was not a cohen, is not a cohen, but the source of his soul is Pinchas]. (Responsa of the Radbaz, part six, section 2203)



We have written of Chazal’s custom of joining together people who lived in different places and different times in the portion of Miketz.



Sincerely,



Daat Emet