Short answer: yes and no — and it depends very much on what Aryeh Kaplan meant by “information.”
Taken literally, the statement is incomplete; taken as Kaplan intended, it is a careful, limited analogy, not a denial of the soul.
Let me explain this accurately and gently, because this touches the deepest questions of aging, death, and hope.
1. First, a necessary correction (important)
Aryeh Kaplan did not write a book titled “Jews for nothing.”
That title does not exist in his bibliography.
Kaplan’s discussions of this idea appear mainly in:
The Handbook of Jewish Thought
Meditation and Kabbalah
Essays on the soul (נשמה, neshamah)
So if someone quoted him that way, it was likely:
paraphrased
simplified
or misunderstood.
That already matters.
2. What Kaplan was trying to say
Kaplan was speaking within Jewish philosophy and Kabbalah, not modern materialism.
When he used the word “information,” he did not mean:
data stored on a hard drive,
abstract bits detached from meaning, or
something impersonal or mechanical.
He meant something closer to:
an enduring spiritual pattern of identity, intention, and moral form.
In modern language, he was trying to say:
The soul is not physical matter;
It is not energy;
It is not bound to the brain; and
It survives death because it is form, meaning, and identity, not flesh.
“Information” was his bridge word to modern readers.
3. Where the statement becomes misleading
If someone says:
“What survives death is mere information”
— that is not Kaplan, and not Judaism.
In Jewish thought:
The soul is personal;
The soul is known by God;
The soul is accountable; and
The soul continues in awareness, not dormancy.
Kaplan explicitly rejects the idea that the soul is just a cold record.
In fact, he insists:
The soul retains conscious identity after death.
4. Jewish view vs. reductionist view
View. What survives death
Kaplan
(Jewish thought) Enduring personal spiritual identity
(likened to “information” only as analogy)
Materialism Nothing
Reductionism Data without self
Biblical-Christian Personal soul,resurrected body
Kaplan was not a reductionist.
5. Why Kaplan used that language at all
He was answering a modern objection:
“How can something non-physical survive physical death?”
So he said, in effect:
A melody survives without the instrument;
Meaning survives without ink; and
A pattern survives without matter.
That is illustrative, not exhaustive.
6. Where Christianity differs (and goes further)
Christian Scripture agrees with Kaplan up to a point —
but then goes beyond him.
The Bible says:
The soul survives death (Luke 23:43);
The person remains known and named (Revelation 6:9–11); and
The body itself will be raised, not discarded (1 Corinthians 15).
So Christianity says:
Not only information survives — the person will be restored.
That is something Kaplan, as a Jew, does not affirm in the same way.
7. Speaking directly to you, at 77
This matters deeply in your season of life.
Your aches, fatigue, and weakening body are not signs that you are dissolving into “mere information.”
Biblically — and even in Kaplan’s better sense — you remain you:
known,
remembered,
held, and
awaited.
Christian hope says:
What survives is not just what you were,
but who you are — and who you will be.
8. The clearest way to say it (fair and honest)
Here is a sentence that is both accurate to Kaplan and truthful to Scripture:
Kaplan used “information” as an analogy to say the soul is not physical, but he did not mean the soul is impersonal or reduced to data; Scripture goes further and promises the restoration of the whole person.
===
Explain 혼, 백, 영 biblically and otherwise.
This is a deep and important question, and I will answer it carefully, comparatively, and pastorally, not mixing systems but placing them side by side so their differences are clear.
We’ll proceed in four steps:
Biblical framework (혼 · 백 · 영)
Jewish background (for clarity)
Other religious/philosophical systems
What truly survives, and why this matters—especially in aging
1. 혼(魂), 백(魄), 영(靈) — Biblical understanding
Important note:
The Bible was written in Hebrew and Greek, not classical Chinese.
The terms 혼·백·영 are East Asian interpretive lenses applied later to help explain biblical anthropology.
That said, they can be used carefully and approximately.
(1) 백(魄) — the life bound to the body
Closest biblical concepts:
Hebrew: nephesh (생명, living being)
Greek: psychē (in bodily life sense)
Meaning:
Biological life force,
Breath, appetite, sensation,
Instinctive vitality tied to the body.
Biblical support
“The life (nephesh) of the flesh is in the blood.” (Leviticus 17:11)
At death
Does not survive independently
Returns to dust, breath returns to God (Ecclesiastes 12:7)
👉 백 corresponds to bodily life-energy, not eternal identity.
(2) 혼(魂) — the personal self
Closest biblical concept:
Hebrew: nephesh (in personal sense)
Greek: psychē (self, person)
Meaning:
The I,
Personality, memory, desire,
Moral and relational self.
Biblical support
“Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul (psychē).”
(Matthew 10:28)
At death:
Survives physical death,
Conscious, accountable, remembered by God.
👉 This is not information only, but personal continuity.
(3) 영(靈) — God-related dimension
Closest biblical concepts:
Hebrew: ruach
Greek: pneuma
Meaning:
Capacity for God
God-breathed life
The dimension that communes with God
Biblical support
“The Spirit (ruach) of God has made me.” (Job 33:4)
“God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit.” (John 4:24)
At death
Returns to God
Awaiting resurrection (Philippians 1:23)
👉 영 is not absorbed or dissolved; it remains relational.
Biblical Summary
Aspect. Function. Fate
백. bodily vitality perishes
혼. personal self. survives
영. God-related life preserved
Christianity then adds:
Resurrection of the body — restoring the whole person (1 Corinthians 15)
2. Jewish (non-Christian) understanding (brief)
Judaism often speaks of:
Nephesh (life)
Ruach (spirit/moral breath)
Neshamah (higher soul)
There is survival after death, but:
Resurrection is less defined
No final union with Messiah as Christ
Kaplan fits here.
3. Comparison with other religions & philosophies
(A) Buddhism
View: No eternal self (anatta);and
What continues is karma-stream, not personhood.
Comparison
Bible. Buddhism
Enduring self. No enduring self
Memory preserved. Memory dissolves
Resurrection. No resurrection
👉 Buddhism aims at release from self, not restoration.
(B) Hinduism
View
Atman (true self) is eternal
Ultimately merged with Brahman
Comparison
Bible. Hinduism
Personal identity retained Individuality dissolves
Relationship with God. Absorption into. ultimate
Resurrection. Reincarnation cycle
.
👉 Christianity rejects absorption.
(C) Reductionism / Materialism
View
Human = brain chemistry
Death = total cessation
Comparison
Bible. Reductionism
Soul survives. Nothing survives
Meaning persist. Meaning ends
Moral accountability. None
👉 This view cannot account for consciousness, morality, or hope.
(D) “Information-only survival” (modern hybrid)
Identity reduced to patterns or data
No personal subject remains
👉 Biblically rejected:
“I am the resurrection and the life.” (John 11:25)
Not: your data survives — you do.
4. What truly survives — and why this matters at 77
Your 백 is weakening — Scripture expects that.
Your 혼 is intact — Scripture promises that.
Your 영 is being drawn closer to God — Scripture celebrates that.
“Though our outer self is wasting away, our inner self is being renewed day by day.”
(2 Corinthians 4:16)
Christian hope is not:
escape from body
loss of self
reduction to information
It is:
The whole person, known, loved, remembered, and restored in Christ.
Final sentence (quiet, true, and strong)
The Bible teaches that what survives death is not mere energy or information, but the person — soul and spirit — held by God and awaiting resurrection.
No comments:
Post a Comment