Teshuvah - Chapter Eight

This phrase is adapted from Psalms 31:20: “How great is the good that You have hidden for those who fear You.”

The Rambam includes the principle of reward and punishment in his Thirteen Principles of Faith (Commentary to the Mishnah, introduction to Sanhedrin, Chapter 10). There, he states, “The greatest reward is the world to come.” In this and the following chapter, the Rambam describes the various rewards which we will be granted for our observance of the Torah and its mitzvot; the ultimate reward to be granted in the world to come and the lesser, material rewards to be granted in this world. As mentioned above, the Rambam structured the Mishneh Torah as a text of halachot, practical directives for our behavior. He omits all philosophical and ethical concepts which are not halachot, i.e., which are not directly applicable in our daily lives. In this context, his explanation of the world to come and the other rewards mentioned in these chapters, is not included as an end in its own right. Rather, the Rambam mentions it as a necessary preface to the concept discussed in Chapter 10, the service of God motivated by love with no desire for any ulterior motive. Antigonus of Socho taught the latter principle to his students in his statement (Avot 1:3): “Do not be like servants serving the master for the sake of a reward. Rather, be like servants who serve their master with no intention of receiving a reward.” Two of his most promising students, Tzadok and Beitus, misunderstood Antigonus’ intention and interpreted that statement to mean that man would receive neither reward nor punishment for his behavior. Disillusioned, they forsook the Torah entirely and started breakaway sects, the Sadducees and Beitusees, which led thousands away from Jewish practice and destroyed the unity of the Jewish people (See the Rambam’s Commentary to Avot, loc. cit.). To prevent the possibility of his statements being similarly misunderstood, the Rambam prefaces his discussions of that concept with a detailed description of the rewards and punishments man will receive. Afterwards, he concludes that our service should not be carried out for the sake of receiving those rewards, but rather, out of love for God.

I.e., the eternal spiritual life of the soul. Note the Rambam’s statements, Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 1:11, explaining the description of God as alive. Since each soul is a spark of God, in microcosm, these concepts apply to our souls as well.

In this spiritual realm, the soul will have no contact with evil and its effects.

This promise, extended for the fulfillment of the mitzvah of sending away the mother bird, can, by extension, be considered as being granted for the fulfillment of the totality of Torah and mitzvot.

More precisely, the expression מפי השמועה, refers to a tradition of the Sages based on an allusion from a Biblical verse (Yad Malachi).

The Torah explicitly promises long life for honoring one’s parents and for sending away a mother bird when taking its eggs. Kiddushin 39b relates that once Rabbi Ya’akov saw a father tell his son to bring pigeon eggs down from a tree. With proper filial obedience, the son climbed to the nest, drove away the mother, and descended with the eggs. On his way down, he fell and was killed. After he saw this, Rabbi Ya’akov remarked: “There is no reward for the fulfillment of mitzvot in this world. The long life promised by the Torah refers to life in the world to come.” Though as explained in Chapter 9, the Rambam maintains that we will receive a certain measure of reward in this world as well, he also agrees that the essential reward for the fulfillment of Torah and mitzvot will be in the world to come.

As described in Halachot 2-5.

In his introduction to Chapter 10 of Sanhedrin, the Rambam states that karet, being cut off, is the most severe punishment the soul can receive. However, that statement is not intended to imply that no other retribution will be given. On the contrary, in Chapter 3, Halachah 5, the Rambam states: All the wicked whose sins are greater [than their merits] are judged according to their sins [and will receive appropriate retribution], but they are granted a portion in the world to come, for all Israel have a share in the world to come. The following individuals do not have a portion in the world to come. Rather, their [souls] are cut off and they are judged for their great wickedness and sins forever. This implies that in addition to being cut off from the world to come, they will be judged in Gehinom and receive retribution. Thus, it would appear that there are three categories of sinners; a) Those who commit “minor sins. They suffer retribution in Gehinom for a maximum of twelve months and then are granted a portion in the world to come; b) Those who commit sins punishable by karet. They are “cut off” and do not merit the life of the world to come; c) The thirteen categories mentioned in Chapter 3, Halachah 6. In addition to being denied a portion in the world to come, they suffer eternal judgment and retribution. This elaboration is necessary because many commentaries (See Kessef Mishneh and the Ramban, Sha’ar HaGmul) mention that it is possible to misinterpret the Rambam’s statements in this halachah and infer that no other punishment will be received other than the “death” and nullification of the soul. They take great lengths to explain how retribution in Gehinom is one of the fundamental concepts of Jewish belief. [Parenthetically, it must be noted that selections from the Sha’ar HaGmul are printed in most publications of the Rambam under the title, Peirush — “explanation.” That term is a misnomer for, in many instances, the Ramban takes a different view than the Rambam. As will be explained, the Ramban bases many of his principles on the teachings of the Kaballah and thus, disputes a number of the concepts stated by the Rambam.]

Kohelet Rabbah 3:18 states: “The wicked are like the beasts: Just as the beasts are destined to die in this world and will not receive a portion in the world to come, so, too, the wicked….” Similarly, the tractate of Kallah states that a beast will not receive a portion in the world to come.

Sanhedrin 90b relates that Rabbi Akiva considered the repetition of a verb in Torah as an allusion to a new concept and not merely a literary device.

Moed Kattan 28a relates that a person who violated a sin punishable by karet would die before reaching the age of fifty. See Tosafot’s commentary. In his Commentary on the Mishnah, Sanhedrin 9:6, the Rambam emphasizes that premature death does not represent the totality of the retribution these individuals will receive.

And cease to exist. See the commentary to Halachah 5.

These statements created a great controversy among the commentaries. The Ra’avad writes: “The statements of this individual resemble those who say that the resurrection will not be for the bodies, only for the souls. I swear that our Sages of blessed memory do not share that opinion….” The Kessef Mishneh explains that the difference between the Rambam and the Ra’avad is semantic. Ikarim (Discourse 4, Chapter 31) explains that, in the Talmud and the Midrashim, the Sages used the expression, the world to come, to refer to two different rewards: a) the spiritual world of the souls which the righteous merit after death; and b) the age of the resurrection of the dead, when the entire nation will rise from their graves, both body and soul. Both the Rambam and the Ra’avad believe in both these concepts. Indeed, the Rambam includes the belief in the resurrection of the dead in his Thirteen Principles of Faith (principle thirteen) and in Chapter 3, Halachah 6, lists those who deny the resurrection among those who will not merit a portion in the world to come. However, he defines the term, “the world to come,” as referring to the world of the souls alone. In contrast, the Ra’avad interprets the expression, “the world to come,” as referring to the era of the resurrection. Indeed, the abovementioned difficulty led to such controversy, that the Rambam found it necessary to compose a special treatise, Iggeret T’Chiat HaMeitim, to emphasize his belief in the resurrection of the dead. In that text, he explains that in the Mishneh Torah, he elaborated more on the concept of the world to come than on the resurrection because: I only saw people discussing the resurrection… while forgetting entirely about the world to come…. Furthermore, though as explained there, the resurrection is one of the cornerstones of Moses’ Torah, it is not the ultimate purpose. Rather, the ultimate purpose is the world to come. Though these two opinions agree on the fundamental principles of faith, there is still a basic difference between them. As will be explained in the commentary to Chapter 9, Halachah 2, the crux of the issue is the question: What is the ultimate good which the Jewish people will merit? Is it the spiritual world of the souls, as the Rambam maintains, or will that good become manifest within the context of material reality at the resurrection of the dead as conceived by the Ra’avad?

In Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 2:3-5, the Rambam writes that the angels are spiritual entities without a body. The Sages of the Kabballah, basing their statements on Psalms 104:4, explain that the souls are on an even higher level than the angels. The angels have a spiritual body, while the souls have no body whatsoever.

In Sha’ar HaGmul, the Ramban questions why the Rambam felt the need to elaborate on this matter: Even the smallest student in Israel knows that the soul of a righteous man who dies rests in the [spiritual] good of the higher worlds with no contact with a body or matter at all…. Though the nature of his mystery is known only to a select few and only God can grasp the true comprehension of the matter, the general awareness of this concept is simple for all.

Thus, though certain statements of our Sages will employ such terms, they all must be considered metaphors used only because “the Torah speaks in human terms.” See Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 1:11-12.

Berachot 17a relates that Rav would frequently repeat this statement.

It is absurd to think that God would create a body equipped to perform physical functions, e.g., digestion and reproduction, in an era when these functions will be nullified. One of the fundamental principles of faith is that God does not create anything without a purpose. Thus, if there will be no need for bodily functions, there will be no purpose for a physical body (Iggeret T’Chiat HaMeitim, Chapter 4).

Even in the spiritual realms, the righteous will “proceed from strength to strength (Psalms 84:8)” as Moed Kattan 29a relates, “The righteous have no rest in this world or the world to come.” Nevertheless, that spiritual progress will not be accompanied by any physical effort or struggle.

Pesachim 50a declares: “Happy is he who comes here (to the world to come) with his studies with him.” The commentaries explain that in the world to come, the soul will review the same Torah knowledge with which it was involved in the material world. However, in the material world, it would appreciate the concepts in physical terms, while in the world to come, it will appreciate the spiritual truths that motivate those concepts. See also the Rambam’s introduction to the tenth chapter of Sanhedrin and the notes to the following halachah.

Chapter 9, Halachah 1, relates that the portion in the world to come a person merits is determined by, “the greatness of a person’s deeds and the abundance of his knowledge.”

Shir HaShirim Rabbah 3:11 quotes Rabbi Chaninah bar Yitzchok: “We have reviewed the entire Bible and have not found a record of Batshevah making a crown for her son.” Thus, he concludes that the phrase is a metaphor. However, he interprets the metaphor differently than the Rambam.

Knowledge is the most exalted of our potentials and thus can be viewed as the “crown” of our personalities.

The physical nature of the body puts limits on our intellect and prevents us from appreciating the true nature of Godliness (see Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 1:10).

In Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah (4:9), the Rambam refers to the aspect of the soul which is connected with our bodily functions with the term neshamah, while here, he uses the term nefesh. Similarly, in the Guide for the Perplexed (Vol. I, Chap. 49), the Rambam differentiates between these two aspects of the soul.

This is “the image and form” of God which He granted man (Genesis 1:26), i.e., man’s power to conceive concepts intellectually.

In the Guide for the Perplexed (Vol. I, Chapter 68), the Rambam explains how before a person conceives of an idea, the person, the idea which he wishes to conceive, and his thought processes are three different things. However, after he conceives of the idea, he and the idea are one.

Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah (4:9) explains that the soul has the potential to conceive concepts whose existence transcend the four elements on which our material reality is based.

Halachot 8 and 9.

And not that element of soul which endows our bodies with physical life.

Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 4:3 relates that the existence of all creation is dependent on the combination of the four elements: fire, wind, water, and dust. Hence, ultimately, all these entities will have a limited span of existence until eventually, this combination will cease. Halachah 9 of that chapter explains that the “form of the soul” is not dependent on these elements, but comes “from God, from the heavens.” Therefore, it has the potential to grasp abstract concepts as above and, hence, will merit eternal life.

See Targum Yonatan on that verse. In his introduction to the tenth chapter of Sanhedrin, the Rambam emphasizes how the soul’s existence is dependent on its knowledge of God, the source of life: “The existence of the soul… is forever, like the existence of the Creator for He is the reason for its existence for it has grasped Him.

See Halachah 6.

See Halachah 7.

The commentaries have raised many questions concerning this halachah: Why did the Rambam cite so many metaphors? Why did he choose these terms and omit others, e.g., the land of life [Psalms 27:13]?” Which rationale did he use governing the order in which these phrases were quoted? Among the answers given is that these expressions reflect the spiritual reality. The expression, “the courtyards of God,” is a plural term, implying that it refers to two levels: an inner courtyard and an outer courtyard. Thus, in total there are ten levels mentioned here. According to the Kaballah, there are ten Divine powers (Sefirot) which are the source for all creation. Hence, the world was created with ten statements of creation. The spiritual realms are also governed by the same ten potentials. Thus, each of the ten metaphors mentioned above correspond to a different spiritual level. The order chosen by the Rambam reflects the order of the spiritual realms which these metaphors describe.

For example, Avot 3;16 states: “Everything is prepared for the feast.” In his Commentary on the Mishnah, the Rambam explains that the ultimate purpose of all the activities of this world is to merit the world to come. The use of the metaphor of a feast to describe the appreciation of Godliness is also employed by the Sages in their interpretation of Exodus 24:11: “They had a vision of God and they ate and drank.” Vayikra Rabbah 20:10, Zohar (Vol. I. 135a, b) interpret the verse to mean that the vision of God was satisfying and nourishing like food. In his gloss on this halachah, the Ra’avad again objects to the Rambam’s statements, explaining that Pesachim 119b relates that after the feast which God will make for the righteous, God will grant David the privilege of reciting grace with the cup of blessing. In a spiritual feast, that would not be possible. The Kessef Mishneh resolves that difficulty according to the principles mentioned above. The feast the Ra’avad describes will be held in the Messianic age, while the feast the Rambam mentions refers to the world to come. Other commentaries note that even were Pesachim, loc. cit., also to be referring to the world to come, there would be no difficulty. The “cup of blessing” can also be understood as a metaphor. Nevertheless, it must be emphasized that most major Rabbinical figures agree that the feast referred to by our Sages will be a meal of food and drink at which the Leviathan and aged wine will be served. See the statements of Rav Saadia Gaon in The Paths of Faith, Section 10, Chapter 2; the commentary of the Ramban and Rabbenu Bachaye on Genesis 1:21; the commentary of the Rashba and the Maharsha on Bava Batra 74b. Indeed, Rav Avraham, the Rambam’s son, in the text Milchemot Hashem, writes that in the Messianic age, God will make a feast for the righteous.

It is significant that the Rambam does not mention the term, Gan Eden, the Garden of Eden. In his introduction to the tenth chapter of Sanhedrin, the Rambam explains that Gan Eden is a physical place, “the choicest place in the earth with many streams and fruit trees. It will be revealed to man in the Messianic age.” In Sha’ar HaGmul, the Ramban elaborates on this matter. He takes pains to emphasize that Gan Eden is also a physical place, the place where Adam lived before the sin. It exists at present and will be enjoyed by the righteous in the Messianic age. Nevertheless, he adds that the same term also applies to a correspondent realm in the spiritual worlds where, after death, the soul will enjoy the benefits of its service in this world. He brings a number of Talmudic and Midrashic statements which employ the term Gan Eden in the same context as the Rambam uses the term, “the world to come.”

As mentioned in the commentary to Halachah 1, there were many who misinterpreted these statements as an implication that the soul would not suffer punishment in Gehinom for its sins. Indeed, this was one of the reasons why many of the leading Rabbis of the Alsace-Lourraine community considered banning the Book of Knowledge (the first of fourteen books in the Mishneh Torah) and prohibiting its study. In a polemic written in defense of that work, the Ramban brings examples (see the commentary to Halachah 1) to show that the Rambam also believed in other punishments. However, he saw karet as the ultimate punishment and the most total retribution.

Halachah 1 quotes our Sages as explaining the repetition of the verb: הכרת means to be cut off in the world and תכרת to be cut off in the world to come.”

In contrast to others, such a person’s sins cannot be purged by the punishments of Gehinom.

The Sifra relates: The meaning of the term karet raises questions. However, since Leviticus 23:29-30 states: “Any soul who does not fast… will be cut off… I will obliterate that soul…,” we may presume that karet also involves the obliteration of the soul.

As in the previous halachah, the reasons why the Rambam cites these metaphors and quotes them in this order is problematic. Among the resolutions offered by the commentaries is that, according to Kabballah, there are four degrees of Kelipah, evil, and they are alluded to by these four terms.

In the Sha’ar HaGmul, the Ramban takes issue with this concept and explains that “it is impossible for this sublime soul to be nullified or obliterated.” Emek HaMelech (Tikkunei Teshuvah), Torah Or (Parshat Yitro), and other Kabballistic texts stress this point, emphasizing that the soul is a spark of God. Thus, it is an eternal entity that can never be nullified. Due to the severity of its sins, a soul may not merit to attain the spiritual rewards of the soul after death (the Rambam’s interpretation of the world to come). However, ultimately, even such a soul will be resurrected together with the entire Jewish people (the Kabballistic interpretation of the world to come). In that context, the Sefer HaGilgulim explains how the above principles can be reconciled with our Sages’ statements that certain individuals will not merit a portion in the world to come. It explains that every Jewish soul will merit resurrection. Furthermore, each different incarnation of the soul will be resurrected as an independent entity. However, if a person committed sins so severe that he was denied a portion in the world to come, the particular incarnation which committed those sins will not merit resurrection.

The common Arabs of the Rambam’s time and many other primitive peoples also believed that the righteous would merit an eternal existence after death. However, instead of appreciating the spiritual nature of this existence, they conceived of it in material terms, viewing it as an extension of physical good.

Kiddushin 49b states: “Ten measures of lewdness descended to this world, nine were taken by the Arabs.”

As the Rambam proceeds to explain, there is no intrinsic value to material satisfaction. It is only because of our own physical needs, that we attach value to these pleasures.

In his introduction to the tenth chapter of Sanhedrin, the Rambam explains that even within the context of material existence, a person will often forgo physical satisfaction because of an ideological conflict or to enhance his reputation. Thus, we see that even in the physical world, these pleasures are not considered as the ultimate good. Surely, within the context of the spiritual existence of the world to come, they are of no value.

Hilchot De’ot 4:1 states: “Maintaining the body healthy and complete is of the paths of God for it is impossible to comprehend or grasp any aspect of the knowledge of God while one is sick.” Accordingly, in Chapter 3 of that section, he prescribes a middle course of behavior which tends neither to asceticism, nor to over-indulgence in material pleasures. Nevertheless, those directives only apply within the context of our present existence in which our souls are contained within physical bodies.

In his introduction to the tenth chapter of Sanhedrin, the Rambam states: “Just as the blind man cannot appreciate the hue of colors, the deaf man cannot grasp the sound of voices, nor the eunuch, the desire for sex, so too, our bodies cannot appreciate spiritual pleasures.” The very nature of material reality prevents any complete and actual awareness of spiritual truth.

Shmot Rabbah 30:24 relates that in the world to come, when Jews will see the reward for the mitzvot, they will appreciate how it is too great for the physical world to contain.

As mentioned in Halachah 4, we find expressions used by the Bible and the Sages which appear to describe the world to come in physical terms. However, to appreciate the intent of these expressions, we must view them in the abstract, as metaphors, and try to appreciate the spiritual concepts which they communicate.

In his introduction to the tenth chapter of Sanhedrin, the Rambam uses the following parable to explain how after appreciating the spiritual pleasures of the world to come, the soul will no longer have any appreciation or desire for material pleasures. In his youth, a prince would play ball with his friends in the streets of the city. When he assumed the throne, he was introduced to higher forms of pleasure and derived satisfaction from ruling his kingdom in a righteous manner. Having tasted this more sophisticated pleasure, he has no desire whatsoever to return to his childhood games.

As mentioned in Halachah 2, the good of the world to come will be the: “‘Delight in the radiance of the Divine Presence’…. They will comprehend the truth of Godliness which they cannot grasp while in a dark and humble body.” In his introduction to the tenth chapter of Sanhedrin, the Rambam further elaborates on the nature of this spiritual pleasure, explaining that it results from the direct appreciation of “the truth of the Creator.” As long as our souls are enclothed within a physical body, such awareness is impossible.

The Sifri (Deuteronomy 33:29) relates that before Moses’ death, the Jews asked him to describe the world to come to them. He replied: “I don’t know how to describe it to you, but one thing I can tell you: ‘Happy is your portion.’”

Berachot 4a comments on this verse: David told God, “I trust that in the future you will give a generous reward to the righteous, but I do not know if I will be included among them.”

Most commentaries maintain that the Rambam is referring to the passage from Berachot which he quotes at the conclusion of the halachah.

As explained in the previous halachah, the very nature of material reality prevents us from gaining a complete and actual awareness of spiritual concepts. Thus, man cannot conceive of the world to come.

God knows all of His creations, both physical and spiritual, and thus, He appreciates the nature of the world to come.

The prophetic visions do not refer to the ultimate reward of the world to come, but rather, to the Messianic age, when Israel will be granted dominion over the gentile nations and an age of peace and knowledge will begin. See Chapter 9, Halachah 2, Hilchot Melachim, Chapters 11 and 12.

Any praise that a mortal man would use to describe the world to come would describe this spiritual concept in material terms and thus, serve as an inadequate description of this ultimate good.

It is to be their reward for fulfilling the Torah and mitzvot as He desires.

Berachot 34b, Sanhedrin 99a.

There is a difficulty in the Rambam’s quotation of this statement. The Talmud explicitly states that this statement conflicts with that of Shmuel: There is no difference between the present age and the Messianic era except [the emancipation] from our subjugation to the [gentile] kingdoms. The Messianic prophecies represent a change in the nature of the world and the introduction of a miraculous order. This runs contrary to Shmuel’s opinion which maintains that, in the Messianic era, the natural order of the world will not change. Thus, the question arises: In Hilchot Melachim (12:2) and in the following chapter, Halachah 2, the Rambam quotes Shmuel’s statement as halachah. How can the Rambam quote two conflicting statements and establish them both as binding halachah? The Lechem Mishneh explains that though the Rambam quotes Shmuel’s words, he interprets them differently. Shmuel maintains that there will be no change whatsoever between the present era and the Messianic age except for the distribution of power between Israel and the nations. In contrast, the Rambam maintains that there will be a change between the two time periods. In the Messianic age, the prophets’ promises will be fulfilled and an age of peace and knowledge will begin. Nevertheless, as he explains in the Hilchot Melachim, Chapter 12, the fulfillment of the Messianic prophecies will not represent a fundamental change in the nature of the world. All of the prophecies that appear to imply such a change must be interpreted as metaphors. For example, the prophecy (Isaiah 11:6), “A wolf will dwell with a lamb,” should not be interpreted to mean that the wolves will change their preying nature. Rather, the prophecy is a metaphor describing how the gentile nations, “the wolves,” will dwell in peace with Israel, “the lamb.”

The Rambam seeks to clarify that the world to come will not come into being only in the future.

The existence of the World to Come does not require the nullification of our world.

We should not think that the World to Come does not exist because we cannot perceive it. There are various levels of existence. On a plane of existence which transcends ours, the spiritual truths of the World to Come exist as actual realities.

The past tense is used, implying that the world to come was already “made” and “hidden” by God and that it exists at present, albeit on a different place of existence than the material reality we know.

A term which allows for such misconception.

Similarly, the Medrash Tanchuma (VaYikra 10) explains that the term “the world to come” is appropriate only in regard to man and not to God.

For it is our service in this world which allows us to merit a place in the world to come.

To enable them to earn a place in the world to come. The Ra’avad objects to this halachah, stating that it appears that the Rambam denies the statement (Sanhedrin 97a) that there will be only six millennia to the existence of the present state of our world. As above, the Kessef Mishneh explains that the difference between the two is only semantic. The Ra’avad interprets the world to come as the world of resurrection. Hence, he emphasizes how the nature of existence will change. The Rambam does not need to make such a distinction for he refers to the world to come as the spiritual world of the souls. In Iggeret T’Chiat HaMeitim (Chapter 4), the Rambam writes that even the souls which are resurrected will die. In contrast, the world to come will remain as an eternal spiritual reality.