Four Philosophical Dialogues Between R’ Yehuda Hanasi and the Roman Antoninus (Sanhedrin 91a-b)

Body and the soul on judgment day; Reason for the path of the sun; When is the soul placed in a child; From when does the evil inclination dominate a child

Jan 03, 2024

Illustration by DALL-E. Description: “A historical scene depicting a series of dialogues between Antoninos, a Roman leader, and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. The setting is an ancient study room with Roman and Jewish cultural elements. They are engaged in deep conversation, surrounded by scrolls and texts. The scene illustrates four distinct topics of their discussion: 1. A scale balancing a heart and a feather, symbolizing the judgment of the soul and the body. 2. A vivid depiction of the sun rising in the east and setting in the west, with an ancient compass for direction. 3. A delicate image of an embryo with a faint, glowing outline of a soul being infused into it. 4. A shadowy figure representing the evil inclination, lurking at a symbolic entrance, representing birth. The mood is contemplative and respectful, capturing the philosophical and spiritual nature of their dialogues.”

This sugya describes a series of dialogues between Antoninos--a Roman leader--and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. For Antoninos’s historical identity, see the Hebrew Wikipedia entry on R’ Yehuda Hanasi, section Antoninus.

See my analysis of the previous aggadic sugya, about the dialogues of Geviha ben Pesisa, in front of Alexander the Great. And see my analysis of a set of six philosophical dialogues between Jewish sages and Romans, relating to defense of Judaism, as against paganism, in Tractate Avoda Zara. Unlike the discussions there, the dialogues of R’ Yehuda Hanasi and Antoninus don’t (on their face) directly relate to Judaism as opposed to Roman paganism.

Dialogues:

Why shouldn’t the body and the soul be able to exempt themselves from judgment for their sins?
Why does the sun emerge in the east and set in the west?
From when is the soul placed in a person?
From when does the evil inclination dominate a person?

Technical

Translation and explanation from ed. Steinzaltz, at Sefaria:

Sanhedrin 91a (section #17) - 91b (section # 7)

Hebrew text, with punctuation, is taken from Talmud Navigator (Excel version), with slight adjustments. I also added quotation marks around Biblical verses.

I split the lines of the translation and explanation, to match the Hebrew.

I introduce each section before quoting the Talmudic passage. My introductions are in italics, to differentiate them from the passage itself.

The body and the soul should be able to exempt themselves from judgment for their sins

This passage dialogue discusses the nature of judgment and responsibility. Antoninos suggests that both the body and soul can avoid judgment for sins. He argues that the body, after death, is inert like a stone, and the soul, once separated from the body, is like a bird in the air, incapable of sinning.

Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi counters with a parable about a king who had an orchard with valuable figs and appointed two guards to watch over it: one lame and one blind. The lame guard saw the figs but couldn't reach them, while the blind guard could walk but not see them. Together, they conspired to steal the figs. When the king asked about the missing figs, each guard pleaded their respective disability. The king then demonstrated their guilt by placing the lame guard on the shoulders of the blind guard, recreating the circumstances of the theft.

This parable illustrates that both the body and the soul are jointly responsible for sins committed during life. God will reunite the soul and body on the day of judgment to assess their combined actions, as they were when they sinned. This concept is supported by a verse from Psalms, which, according to the Talmudic interpretation, metaphorically refers to the soul as 'heavenly' and the body as 'earthly.'

אמר ליה אנטונינוס לרבי: גוף ונשמה יכולין לפטור עצמן מן הדין, כיצד? גוף אומר: נשמה חטאת, שמיום שפירשה ממני ־ הריני מוטל כאבן דומם בקבר. ונשמה אומרת: גוף חטא, שמיום שפירשתי ממנו ־ הריני פורחת באויר כצפור.
אמשול לך משל, למה הדבר דומה: למלך בשר ודם, שהיה לו פרדס נאה, והיה בו בכורות נאות, והושיב בו שני שומרים, אחד חיגר ואחד סומא. אמר לו חיגר לסומא: בכורות נאות אני רואה בפרדס. בא והרכיבני ונביאם לאכלם. רכב חיגר על גבי סומא, והביאום ואכלום.
לימים בא בעל פרדס. אמר להן: בכורות נאות היכן הן? ־ אמר לו חיגר: כלום יש לי רגלים להלך בהן? ־ אמר לו סומא: כלום יש לי עינים לראות? מה עשה ־ הרכיב חיגר על גבי סומא ודן אותם כאחד.
אף הקדוש ברוך הוא מביא נשמה וזורקה בגוף, ודן אותם כאחד. שנאמר (תהלים נ') "יקרא אל השמים מעל, ואל הארץ לדין עמו". "יקרא אל השמים מעל" ־ זו נשמה, "ואל הארץ לדין עמו" ־ זה הגוף.

Apropos exchanges with prominent gentile leaders, the Gemara cites an exchange where Antoninos, the Roman emperor, said to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: The body and the soul are able to exempt themselves from judgment for their sins. How so? The body says: The soul sinned, as from the day of my death when it departed from me, I am cast like a silent stone in the grave, and do not sin. And the soul says: The body sinned, as from the day that I departed from it, I am flying in the air like a bird, incapable of sin.
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: I will tell you a parable. To what is this matter comparable? It is comparable to a king of flesh and blood who had a fine orchard, and in it there were fine first fruits of a fig tree, and he stationed two guards in the orchard, one lame, who was unable to walk, and one blind. Neither was capable of reaching the fruit on the trees in the orchard without the assistance of the other. The lame person said to the blind person: I see fine first fruits of a fig tree in the orchard; come and place me upon your shoulders. I will guide you to the tree, and we will bring the figs to eat them. The lame person rode upon the shoulders of the blind person and they brought the figs and ate them.
Sometime later the owner of the orchard came to the orchard. He said to the guards: The fine first fruits of a fig tree that were in the orchard, where are they? The lame person said: Do I have any legs with which I would be able to walk and take the figs? The blind person said: Do I have any eyes with which I would be able to see the way to the figs? What did the owner of the orchard do? He placed the lame person upon the shoulders of the blind person just as they did when they stole the figs, and he judged them as one.
So too, the Holy One, Blessed be He, brings the soul on the day of judgment and casts it back into the body, as they were when they sinned, and He judges them as one, as it is stated: “He calls to the heavens above and to the earth that He may judge His people” (Psalms 50:4). “He calls to the heavens above”; this is the soul, which is heavenly. “And to the earth that He may judge His people”; this is the body, which is earthly.

Why does the sun emerge in the east and set in the west?

In this dialogue, Antoninos questions Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi about the sun's pattern of rising in the east and setting in the west. Antoninos wonders why the sun always follows this specific path without deviation.

Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi initially responds by suggesting that the direction of the sun's movement is arbitrary and that if it were reversed, the question would remain the same. However, Antoninos clarifies his inquiry, asking why the sun consistently sets in the west and doesn't occasionally change its course.

Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi then offers a spiritual explanation, suggesting that the sun's setting in the west is a form of worship, akin to bowing to God. He supports this by referencing a verse from Nehemiah, which speaks of heavenly bodies worshipping God. He also mentions that the Divine Presence is traditionally believed to rest in the west, as indicated by the location of the Holy of Holies in the Temple, where the Ark and the Divine Presence resided.

Antoninos proposes an alternative scenario where the sun could set slightly at midday to greet its Creator and then return to set in the east. In response, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi presents a practical reason for the sun's consistent path: it benefits workers and travelers. The gradual waning of daylight from east to west signals to them that it's time to return home or seek shelter for the night, thereby providing a functional purpose to the sun's predictable trajectory.

אמר ליה אנטונינוס לרבי: מפני מה חמה יוצאה במזרח ושוקעת במערב?
אי הוה איפכא, נמי הכי הוה אמרת ליִ
אמר ליה: הכי קאמינא לך, מפני מה שוקעת במערב?
כדי ליתן שלום לקונה, שנאמר (נחמיה ט') "וצבא השמים לך משתחוים".
אמר ליה: ותיתי עד פלגא דרקיע, ותתן שלמא ותיעולִ
משום פועלים, ומשום עוברי דרכים.

The Gemara relates another exchange. Antoninos said to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: For what reason does the sun emerge in the east and set in the west?
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: If it were the reverse, you would have also said that to me, as the sun must emerge from one direction and set in the other.
Antoninos said to him: This is what I am saying to you: For what reason does the sun set in the west and not occasionally deviate and set elsewhere?
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: The sun always sets in the west in order to greet its Creator, as it is stated: “And the hosts of heaven worship You” (Nehemiah 9:6). Setting is a form of worship; it is as though the sun is bowing to God. The Divine Presence rests in the west, as is evident from the fact that the Holy of Holies in the Temple, in which the Ark, the resting place of the Divine Presence, is located in the west.
Antoninos said to him: If so, let the sun come until the midpoint of the sky, set slightly and greet its Creator, and return and enter its place of origin in the east and set there.
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi answered him: The sun sets in the west due to workers and due to travelers, as, if the sun did not proceed from east to west with the light of day gradually waning, they would not know that it is time to return home or to find an inn.

From when is the soul placed in a person?

In this dialogue, Antoninos and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi discuss the timing of when a soul enters a human body. Antoninos asks whether the soul is imparted at the moment of conception or at the formation of the embryo, which occurs forty days after conception.

Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi initially states that the soul enters at the formation of the embryo. However, Antoninos challenges this view, arguing that it's implausible for the embryo to exist without a soul for the first forty days, likening it to a piece of meat that cannot remain unspoiled without preservation. He suggests that the soul must be present from the moment of conception to sustain the embryo.

Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi acknowledges the validity of Antoninos's argument and agrees that the soul is indeed imparted at conception. He supports this revised understanding with a verse from the Book of Job, which speaks of God's providence preserving the spirit. This verse is interpreted to indicate that the soul is preserved within a person from the moment of conception.

ואמר לו אנטונינוס לרבי: נשמה מאימתי ניתנה באדם, משעת פקידה או משעת יצירה?
משעת יצירה.
אמר לו: אפשר חתיכה של בשר עומדת שלשה ימים בלא מלח ואינה מסרחת? אלא, משעת פקידה.
דבר זה למדני אנטונינוס, ומקרא מסייעו, שנאמר (איוב י') "ופקדתך שמרה רוחי".

And Antoninos said to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: From when is the soul placed in a person? Is it from the moment of conception or from the moment of the formation of the embryo, forty days after conception?
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: It is from the moment of the formation of the embryo.
Antoninos said to him: That is inconceivable. Is it possible that a piece of meat could stand for even three days without salt as a preservative and would not rot? The embryo could not exist for forty days without a soul. Rather, the soul is placed in man from the moment of conception.
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: Antoninos taught me this matter, and there is a verse that supports him, as it is stated: “And Your Providence [pekudatekha] has preserved my spirit” (Job 10:12) indicating that it is from the moment of conception [pekida] that the soul is preserved within a person.

From when does the evil inclination dominate a person?

In this dialogue, Antoninos and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi discuss when the evil inclination begins to dominate a person. Antoninos queries whether it starts from the formation of the embryo or from birth.

Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi initially suggests that the evil inclination starts at the embryo's formation. However, Antoninos counters this by arguing that if this were true, the evil inclination would cause the fetus to harm the mother's womb and emerge prematurely. Instead, he proposes that the evil inclination begins to dominate a person only upon birth.

Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi accepts Antoninos's perspective and finds support for it in a biblical verse from Genesis, which speaks of sin lurking at the entrance. This is interpreted to mean that the evil inclination starts to exert its influence from the moment of birth, symbolized by the newborn emerging from the entrance of the mother's womb.

ואמר לו אנטונינוס לרבי: מאימתי יצר הרע שולט באדם, משעת יצירה או משעת יציאה?
משעת יצירה.
אמר לו: אם כן בועט במעי אמו ויוצאִ אלא: משעת יציאה.
דבר זה למדני אנטונינוס, ומקרא מסייעו שנאמר (בראשית ד') "לפתח חטאת רבץ".

And Antoninos said to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: From when does the evil inclination dominate a person? Is it from the moment of the formation of the embryo or from the moment of emergence from the womb?
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: It is from the moment of the formation of the embryo.
Antoninos said to him: If so, the evil inclination would cause the fetus to kick his mother’s innards and emerge from the womb. Rather, the evil inclination dominates a person from the moment of emergence from the womb.
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: Antoninos taught me this matter, and there is a verse that supports him, as it is stated: “Sin crouches at the entrance” (Genesis 4:7), indicating that it is from the moment of birth, when the newborn emerges from the entrance of his mother’s womb, that the evil inclination lurks.