SOME Jews believe in an afterlife: the Orthodox certainly do. But it is not by any means a central teaching of Judaism. Conservative Jews are officially ‘agnostic’ on the matter, and Reform ‘agnostic’ and, in general, tending towards disbelief in an afterlife.
In short, it is perfectly possible to be a religious Jew and not believe in an afterlife. In contrast, it is not really possible, in most mainstream versions of Christianity or Islam, to be a religious Christian or Muslim and not believe in an afterlife. An afterlife occupies a central place in these religions, as it does not in Judaism.
This is because Jews do not have doctrine. Jews are not defined by beliefs, as Christians are. Jews can believe all different things (or be atheists, for that matter) and still be Jews. Christians are defined by belief, which is why they have a Creed (from Latin credo= “I believe”). Jews don’t have a Creed. And while some Jewish groups do have beliefs, they are not defined AS Jews by their beliefs.
Well, yeah, Jews have no credo; that’s why I specified “religious” Jews, with “religious” being emphasized. Certainly, there are at least some bounds on what a “religious” Jew believes; for example, by definition, they believe in the literal existence of God, as conceptualized by Jewish tradition. That’s pretty well the irreducable minimum for being a religious Jew.
One can, of course, be a Jew and not be religious (you merely cannot make a formal act of conversion to another religion, at least according to some branches).
My point here is that even among the subset of Jews who are definitely religious, in that they believe in the literal existance of the Jewish concept of God, there is no necessity, within two of the three main branches of Judaism, to also believe in an afterlife.
The only statement in ANY branch of Judaism the comes close to a credo is the Shema: “Hear O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one.”
The phrase “conceptualized by Jewish tradition” is pretty misleading. Jews avoid conceptualizing God (no images PERIOD).
Anyway, belief in an afterlife is up to the individual. The answer to the question posed by this thread is still “you do the right thing because it is the right thing.” Not because of a reward in the afterlife. I think even “religious” Jews would probably mostly agree with that.
I disagree. The singularity and unity of the Jewish concept of God, plus the fact that he is considered beyond mortal comprehension (manifesting himself in the OT in pillars of flame, burning bushes, and the like), is not anthropomorphic, yet is also a personality, is in and of itself a concept of God - and a potent one. There are obvious bounds on the Jewish concept of God - Jews do not conceive of God being like Zeus, or as a Trinity. It is misleading to say that Jews have no traditional conceptualization of God. They have, and it is not like that of other religions.
That’s not true of Orthodox Judaism. Most would consider Maimonides’ 13 Principals of Faith to be a credo, and would certainly not agree with you that belief in an afterlife is up to the individual.
I guess what this debate is about is how many of Maimonedes’ 13 Principals are universally believed by all major branches of Judaism to be essential.
I suspect that only those principles dealing with the nature of God are agreed to by all major branches of Judaism. That is, the first 5 plus number 10. That is I think the irreducable minimum of religious Judaism.
To refresh my memory, my understanding of the 13 principles is as follows:
Note the last is that the dead will be resurrected. This is not exactly the same as there being an afterlife, meaning a place where the souls of the dead go when people die, like the Christian Heaven or Hell. Such a place does exist according to some Jews, in addition to the resurrection (which traditionally is associated, again by some, with the comming of the messiah).
I was mainly responding to ThelmaLou’s reference to “ANY branch of Judaism”. In general, it’s safe to say that Orthodox Judaism accepts the 13 Principles as a credo, although there are some medieval scholars such as Crescas and Albo who enumerated fewer principles, and some controversy nowadays among the more modern Orthodox as to whether lack of belief in any of the 13 principles renders one a heretic. Incidentally, Albo had only 3 principles, and Crescas had 6.
Maimonides’ 10th principle of reward and punishment necessitates belief in an afterlife because it clearly doesn’t happen in this life.
For an interesting Orthodox view on dogma in general and Maimonides in particular, you might want to read Marc Shapiro’s “The Limits of Orthodox Theology: Maimonides’ Thirteen Principles Reappraised”, or his essay here.
Y’all are both missing my point. A Christian is DEFINED by what s/he believes. The definition of a Christian is someone who believes Jesus is God and that this belief saves him/her.
A person who is born of a Jewish mother or who converts is Jewish regardless of what s/he believes, even if s/he has never heard of the Shema or Maimonides or Israel or God.
Yeah, lots of Jews believe stuff and lots of it is the same stuff. But there is no common belief such that believing it makes you Jewish.
If I say right now that I believe Jesus is God and accept Him as my Savior, I AM from that moment a Christian. I can also get baptized, but baptism without the belief doesn’t work. It’s the belief that defines you.
Judaism is not like that. That’s really my only point and I’m pretty much done with this topic.
No, I got that point. Hence I confined my initial remarks to a discussion of religious Jews.
Judaism is both ethnicity and religion. Certainly, a athiest can be a Jew, if they are born to a Jewish mother (or, according to some Reform, a Jewish parent). What an atheist cannot be, is a “religious” Jew, since that requires a belief in God.
And not just any God - it must be a specifically Jewish God. Who does not resemble in his characteristics the gods described in other religions, including Christianity.
You are making a logical error here, of thinking that because one can be Jewish and not religious, then Judaism is not defined necessarily by belief, and therefore the Jewish religious belief has no fixed boundaries. This last step is simply untrue.
Judaism has a core of fixed beliefs - the exact ambit of which is, of course, as is everything in Judaism, a matter of debate. In my opinion, the first five of Maimonedes’ 13 points is as good a place to start as any. Someone who denies God’s essential existence, singleness, incorporality, eternity, and worthiness as the singular object of worship, may well be an ethnic Jew, or even a cultural Jew, but simply cannot be a religious Jew. The rest is more or less debatable - items such as the infallibility of the prophets, and the comming of the messiah, are clearly debatable within the confines of Judaism.
Of these debatable items, none is more debatable than the existence of the afterlife, which does not even exist expressly as one of the 13 points - but rather, by becessary implication from the 11th.
Woah, that is an interesting read. And a fine example, in the best Jewish tradition, of how absolutely everything is up for debate!
I recommend, in the context of this discussion, the analysis of the 11th principle, as follows:
In summary, at least according to this author, Maimonedes himself did not regard the 11th principle as necessitating “heavenly” reward. I wonder what was meant by “immortality is entirely consequent upon intellectual attainment”?
The conclusion is of course one I would agree with, though most Orthodox thinkers would not:
Yes, and more specifically, the divinity of Jesus. The anthropomorphization of God (God incarnated as man in Jesus) is an essential aspect of pretty well all mainstream versions of Christianity, and runs counter to the Jewish notion of God.
It is on this rock that all Christian attempts to enfold Jews into Christianity have historically faltered.
Historically, the Christian notion of God evolved from the Jewish notion; there is an obvious kinship between the Jewish, Christian and Muslim notions of God. But they conceive of the diety in different ways.
The Muslim conception is actually, insofar as I understand it, closer to the Jewish one than the Christian conception. In both Islam and Judaism, the indivisibility and non-anthromorphic quality of God is central. So no trinity and, specifically, no god-incarnated-as-man.
I’d be interested in knowing what Rabbi Telushkin’s take on the matter is. A one-paragraph summary?
