There are different points of view regarding the immortality of the soul. Already in ancient times, there is ample evidence that reincarnation is real. Eastern religions (for example, the diverse currents of Hinduism and Buddhism) believe that the soul after the death of one body migrates, i.e. "Reincarnates" into something else; thus, life after life, she assumes different bodies - better or worse - depending on her deeds in previous lives. According to the doctrine of modern Christianity, the soul lives in the material body one single life and with the death of the body, being in inaction, awaits the verdict of the Last Judgment, which should decide its further fate - eternal bliss in the Kingdom of God or eternal torment in hell - in accordance with that. how righteous or sinful the soul was during its stay in its only and,in the literal sense of the word, a unique body.
Probably, the reader will be right if he thinks that the supporters of this or that concept will give him arguments confirming exclusively their point of view, and ambiguous judgments will be interpreted in their favor. The “forcibly persuaded” reader is likely to arrive at one of three kinds of conclusions:
1. will not accept anyone's point of view (well, all of you!), 2. will remain unconvinced (no one will convince me anyway!), 3. will develop his own concept of his posthumous "being" or "non-existence" (me it is more comfortable!).
The onslaught is always alarming: “The Hare Krishnas have read Bhagavad-gita and are pushing their ideas into our heads! But we are different, we are not Hindus. Of course, everyone is free to choose and recognize the authorities they trust. The duty of a conscientious print publication (may such immodesty be forgiven!) Is to give the reader knowledge about the essence of the subject, about its place in the general system of world outlook, about the history of its origin and development. (If you want to remember where you are going, do not forget where you came from.)
There is no alternative to the concept of "reincarnation" for adherents of Eastern faiths. They recognize this teaching for its consistency and fairness, since it follows from it that ethical, highly moral behavior allows a living being to progress from life to life, as a result of which the conditions and circumstances of his life improve each time. Moreover, reincarnation itself is the clearest evidence of God's compassion for living beings. It includes a mechanism by which each time the soul in its new incarnation is provided with another opportunity for correction and improvement. Progressing in this way from life to life, the soul can be purified to such an extent that, at last, it will break free from the cycle of birth and death, and, sinless, will return back to God.
And what about the "Western" creeds? Let us try to assess how alien to their representatives - be they Orthodox Christians, Catholics, adherents of Islam or Judaism - the idea of reincarnation of the soul. How unambiguously did they relate to reincarnation at various stages of the formation of their beliefs? Why did disputes arise within them about the subsequent fate of the soul: “transmigrates - does not transmigrate”? What is the history of the issue? Let's try to consider it in chronological order.
Reincarnation and Ancient Greece
Orpheus
Promotional video:
It turns out that in Western culture, the ideas of reincarnation have a long history: they go back to the 6th century BC. e. (!). It was then in ancient Greece, in Attica, that a system of religious and philosophical views was formed - Orphism, named after the legendary poet and musician Orpheus, who descended in search of his wife Eurydice to Hades - the kingdom of the dead, located in the bowels of the earth.
The adherents of Orphism associated earthly life with suffering, and the presence of the soul in the body was seen as its fall from the afterlife, where the soul experienced bliss. (In Hades, some places were provided for sinners: tartar; others - for the righteous: Elysium, or “islands of the blessed.”) So, according to the Orphic concepts, the body was considered as a dungeon for the soul serving a prison sentence in the earthly world.
In general, the ancient Greeks were supporters of materialistic naturalism: they identified the soul and body, united them into a single whole. Even in the afterlife, they viewed the soul as some kind of corporeal being. Orphism rejected these principles and divided the concepts of soul and body, believing that the body is sinful and mortal, and the soul is pure and eternal. According to the teaching of Orphism, a person should direct all his cognitive ability to the contemplation of God. Isn't it true that there is a serious inconsistency of opinions that arose in the geographical and cultural framework of the same country in a very distant, relatively prosperous past - in the 6th century BC. e. Should we be surprised at the discordance of opinions in the interpretation of the innermost problems of being in the modern world with its frantic rhythms, endless contradictions and incredible communication capabilities?
The teachings of Pythagoras
The consistency of any teaching is verified by time. The doctrine of Orphism was supported by the following galaxy of thinkers - the Pythagoreans, followers of the ancient Greek philosopher Pythagoras (about 580-500 BC). Pythagoras himself decisively declared the transmigration of souls. He owns the words: "The soul, falling into one being, then into another, moves, thus, in a cycle prescribed by necessity." Xenophanes, a contemporary of Pythagoras, gives such a case, proving that reincarnation exists. Once, passing by and noticing that they were torturing a puppy, Pythagoras exclaimed: “Stop! Stop this horrible beatings, because in fact it is the soul of the person who was my friend. I recognized him as soon as I heard this loud cry."
Xenophanes' testimony is echoed by Diogenes Laertius (1st century AD), a biographer of Pythagoras, who notes the ability of Pythagoras to recall his past lives. Another biographer, Iamblich (4th century AD), adds that Pythagoras also taught others to reconstruct details from their previous lives.
Pindar and Empedocles on reincarnation
The names of two other ancient Greek philosophers - Pindar and Empedocles (5th century BC) are also associated with the doctrine of reincarnation. Pindar, who also became famous as the greatest lyric poet, was the first poet in Greece to see the connection between a just reward after death and high moral qualities of a person during life.
Empedocles, in turn, taught that souls originally lived in the higher realms and fell into this embodied world because they did inappropriate acts. They are condemned, according to Empedocles, to 30 thousand births in a variety of species, including fish and plants. In the end, he argued, the soul will restore its natural state in the higher spiritual realm so that it will no longer be born. In addition, he believed that killing animals is sinful and predetermines rebirth in bodies of a lower order. Empedocles also developed the doctrine of the four elements of nature, or the elements, which for many centuries was retained in ancient and medieval philosophy. However, it is unlikely that the philosophers of the Middle Ages turned to his ideas regarding reincarnation: the Holy Inquisition knew its business!
(It is noteworthy that in some dictionaries Empedocles appears as a materialist philosopher (?) And ideologist of slave-owning democracy (!). "Isn't it thirty thousand incarnations in various types of life that Empedocles wrote about, what the compilers of the dictionary mean by evolution? However, they immediately mention" natural selection ", not embarrassed that from the time of Empedocles' life to the 19th century, when called the theory was developed by Darwin, 24 centuries have passed!)
Reincarnation in the words of Socrates and Plato
The most zealous Western adherents of the doctrine of reincarnation were the outstanding ancient Greek philosophers and thinkers Socrates and Plato (IV-V centuries BC).
Socrates, as you know, expounded his concepts orally and did not write anything down. His views are reflected in the writings of his disciples, one of whom was Plato. The idea of reincarnation found a detailed development in the work of Plato "Fedo", where he quotes the words of Socrates that the soul is invisible, does not mix with anything, is always the same and eternal, that it is immortal and does not cease to exist after the death of the body. Socrates argued that in this life the creature does not actually learn new things, but rather recalls the truths known to him from past lives.
Plato shared these judgments and consistently developed them. He argued that the soul is imprisoned in the material body and is reincarnated with his death. Therefore, the source of knowledge is the memories of the immortal soul of a person about the world of "ideas", that is, the bodyless forms of things that she contemplated before entering the mortal body. "Ideas", unlike matter, are eternal, "beyond heaven", do not arise, do not perish, are irrelevant, do not depend on space and time. Sensual things are transitory, relative, depend on space and time. Reliable knowledge is based only on truly existing "ideas".
Plato's main disciple, Aristotle (4th century BC), however, did not share his teacher's position regarding reincarnation, although his early works (for example, "Eden") testified to his recognition of preexistence. However, the doctrine of reincarnation was not forgotten and at different stages of history was revived with renewed vigor. Thus, the Roman Empire witnessed its revival, when Plutarch (1st century AD), just as convincingly as the Pythogoreans in his time, expounded the concept of transmigration.
In the III century A. D. e., first in Egypt, and then in Rome, Syria and Athens, a new philosophical school arose, called Neoplatonism. Its founder was Plotinus, an ancient Greek philosopher originally from Egypt. He, like Plato six centuries ago, argued that the soul is immortal and capable of transmigrating into new bodies. The goal of human life, according to Plotinus, is the ascent to the first unity. It is achieved by restraining and curbing bodily impulses through the development of spiritual forces, including cognitive ones. At the highest, ecstatic stage of ascent, the soul is reunited with God.
Reincarnation and early Christianity
Modern Christianity rejects the doctrine of reincarnation. Its apologists claim that the Bible does not say anything about the transmigration of souls, and consider reincarnation as something introduced into the biblical tradition from the outside.
It is unlikely that such a statement is true. The Christian doctrine was formed on the basis of the ideas of the messianic sects that recognized Jesus Christ as the Messiah. It is quite natural that its formation was influenced by the legacy left by ancient thinkers, if only because the place of origin of Christianity, as well as the vector of its spread, were closely connected with Rome and Greece. It is therefore no coincidence that the Gnostics (2nd century AD), who were early Christians, combined Christian theology with the concepts of Pythagoreanism and Neoplatonism, the cornerstone of which, as noted, was the doctrine of reincarnation. So the idea of transmigration of the soul entered the Gnostic doctrine of the early Apostolic Christian tradition.
The founders of the Christian Church (II-III centuries AD): Clement of Alexandria, Justinian the Martyr, as well as Saint Gregory of Nyssa (III-IV century AD) and Saint Jerome (IV-V century AD) repeatedly performed in support of the idea of reincarnation. Blessed Augustine himself (354–430), an eminent Christian theologian and philosopher, shared the ideas of Neoplatonism and reflected on the consolidation of the doctrine of reincarnation in the Christian doctrine. In his "Confession" he wrote: "Did I have a certain period of my life before infancy? Was this the period that I spent in the bosom of my mother, or some other?.. And what happened before this life, O Lord of my joy, did I stay anywhere or in any body?"
Origen said that reincarnation is predictable
Origen (185–254) was the most outspoken about reincarnation, whom the Encyclopedia Britannica ranks second in importance among the Church Fathers after St. Augustine. What were the views of Origen, this influential and highly educated Christian thinker, regarding reincarnation? According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, Origen's teachings largely repeated the ideas of reincarnation, which can be traced in the teachings of the Platonists, Jewish mystics, and in the religious writings of the Hindus.
Here are some of Origen's sayings: “Some souls, inclined to do evil, get into human bodies, but then, having lived the length of time measured for a person, they move into the bodies of animals, and then descend to plant existence. Following the opposite path, they ascend and regain the Kingdom of Heaven”; “… Undoubtedly physical bodies are of secondary importance; they improve only to the extent that thinking beings change. " Origen found the doctrine of reincarnation so convincing that he could not hide his irritation at the faith of the orthodox on the Day of Judgment and the subsequent resurrection from the dead. “How can you restore dead bodies, each particle of which has passed into many other bodies? - asked Origen.- Which body do these molecules belong to? This is how people plunge into a quagmire of nonsense and cling to the pious assertion that there is nothing impossible for God."
Reincarnation is canceled
However, Origen's views, although they were shared by adherents of Christianity, were not confirmed in the doctrine of the Christian church. Moreover, after his death, persecution began against the doctrine of reincarnation. And the reasons for this were, oddly enough, political rather than theological. During the time of the Byzantine emperor Justinian (6th century AD), Origenists, Gnostics and representatives of other Christian denominations that recognized reincarnation prevailed among Christians. The ambitious aspirations of Justinian told him the harmfulness of this faith, rooted among his subjects. If people are sure that they still have many lives in reserve, during which they will be able to develop and correct the mistakes they ever made, then will they show due zeal, as the emperor wanted, in their present life?
The answer was negative, and Justinian decided to use the Christian faith as a political weapon. He reasoned: if people are taught that they have only one life at their disposal, this will increase their responsibility in fulfilling their duty to the emperor and the state. With the help of the priesthood, the emperor wished to "grant" his subjects one and only life, after which those who proved themselves well would go to heaven, those who are bad - to hell. Thus, by manipulating religious beliefs, Justinian sought to strengthen the power of his worldly power.
Justinian's wife played an important role in this. The empress, according to the historian Prokopius, was not at all of noble birth: she was born in the family of an amphitheater guard and was a courtesan before her marriage. Having become an empress, in order to erase the traces of her shameful past, she ordered the torture and execution of all her former courtesan friends. There were no more, no less - about five hundred. The Empress feared retribution for her act. She had no doubts about the forgiveness of sins from the clergy in her present life, so high was her position. However, she was horrified by the future: what if she had to be born again and live in some new body in accordance with the previously committed deeds? Apparently in anxiety about her future, she concluded that if a "divine order" from the clergy reversed the doctrine of reincarnation,then she will not have to be born again and reap the fruits of her sinfulness.
Emperor Justinian sent a letter to the Patriarch of Constantinople, in which Origen was presented as a vicious heretic. Then, in 543, a church assembly met in Constantinople by order of Justinian. With her approval, the emperor issued an edict listing and condemning the mistakes that Origen had allegedly made. Further events developed according to the scenario of a political struggle.
Pope Virgil expressed dissatisfaction with Justinian's interference in theological debate. He rejected the imperial edict and even quarreled with the Patriarch of Constantinople, who supported Justinian. But the pressure on the supreme clergy from the state authorities continued to grow, and after a while the Pope nevertheless issued a decree in which he anathematized Origen's teaching, which was prohibited by the imperial edict. The papal decree read: "If anyone believes in the unthinkable existence of the soul before birth and in the most absurd rebirth after death, he must be anathematized." However, this decree caused strong discontent from the authoritative bishops of Gaul, North Africa and a number of other provinces, and in 550, Pope Virgil was forced to cancel it.
Origen's merits in the formation of the Christian religion could not be disputed, and although by the time the events described unfolded, about 300 years had passed since his death, Origen's authority as a theologian among the priesthood remained great.
The ambitious Justinian continued to fight. He had all the levers of power in his hands, and he had no experience in political intrigues. And on May 5, 553, the Second Council of Constantinople was held, presided over by the Patriarch of Constantinople. The cathedral could hardly be called "Ecumenical", since it was attended mainly by Justinian's henchmen, who wanted to see him at the head of the eastern part of the church. (Apparently, the emperor's ambitions extended not only to secular power!) So, 165 Eastern (Orthodox) bishops, natives of the lands that were in feudal subordination to Byzantium, and about a dozen Western bishops were present at the council. The rest of the Western bishops refused to take part in the council.
The assembled representatives were to decide by voting whether Origenism (the so-called doctrine of reincarnation) was acceptable to Christians. Emperor Justinian controlled the entire voting procedure. Historical documents indicate that a conspiracy was prepared to falsify the signatures of Western church representatives, most of whom shared Origen's views. Seeing that an unworthy game was being played at the cathedral, Pope Virgil, despite the fact that he was at that time in Constantinople, did not participate in the cathedral in protest and was not present at the final verdict.
So, by the decree of the Second Council of Constantinople, Christians, starting from 553, were allowed to believe in eternal life, as before, but were commanded to forget about her own sister - reincarnation. It was decided to consider that eternity begins with birth. However, infinite, or eternal, can only be considered that not only has no end, but also has no beginning, right? Then, can the abolition of theological doctrine be considered legitimate under the forceful pressure of secular authority? Is it legitimate to forget Origen's teachings just because its bearer was not canonized, and later was subjected to fierce attacks from the imperial power? Finally, isn't it time to return to Christians the hidden truths discovered by one of the most influential fathers of Christianity? These questions are still open.
