Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Do other beings besides humans have free will? Perhaps animals have free will? What about angels?

Does the status of other types of beings' freedom of will affect us in any way?

share|improve this question
2  
    
1  
related: judaism.stackexchange.com/a/9203/603 –  Menachem Apr 16 '13 at 22:54
    
angels level of free choice is like jumping into the ocean of a ship (Darash Moshe). Others say it is like jumping into fire. The reason for that is because they have free choice but they are very aware of God –  shlomo Apr 17 '13 at 1:17
    
@shlomo Do you mean that angels' level of free choice is like our choice between jumping into a fire or not doing so? Like we theoretically could do it, but we obviously wouldn't? So angels could make wrong choices, but they're all as obvious to them as not jumping into a fire because they are so aware of God? –  Daniel Apr 17 '13 at 3:54
show 4 more comments

1 Answer

B"H, I have humbly tried to summarize the Friedlander translation of the Rambam's Moreh Nevuchim Section III Chapter XVII (link) as regards the free will of earthly beings other than man. Hashem Yerachem if I've erred in this task. Elements in brackets, including ellipses, are my own.

The Rambam begins with views "generally accepted by our Sages" on the matter:

According to this principle man does what is in his power to do - by his nature, his choice, and his will - and his action is not due to any faculty created for the purpose. All species of irrational animals likewise move by their own free will. This is the Will of G-d; that is to say, [...] that all living beings should move freely, and that man should have power to act according to his will or choice within the limits of his capacity. Against this principle we hear, [Baruch Hashem], no opposition on the part of our nation.

The Rambam later explains his view on the matter:

My opinion on this principle of Divine Providence [...] is that in the lower or sublunary portion of the Universe, Divine Providence does not extend to the individual members of species except in mankind. It is only in this species that the incidents in the existence of the individual beings, their good and evil fortunes, are the result of justice, in accordance with the words, "For all His ways are judgment." But I agree with Aristotle as regards all other living beings and, à fortiori, as regards plants and all the rest of earthly creatures. [As regards these other living beings] action is, according to my opinion, entirely due to chance, as taught by Aristotle. [...] This is expressed in the following passage: "And makest men as the fishes of the sea, as the creeping things, that have no ruler over them. They take up all of them with the angle" (Havakkuk 1:14-15). [...] One cannot object to this theory saying, "Why should G-d select mankind as the object of His special Providence, and not other living beings?" For he who asks this question must also inquire, "Why has man alone, of all species of animals, been endowed with intellect"? [...] Understand thoroughly my theory, that I do not ascribe to G-d ignorance of anything or any kind of weakness. I hold that Divine Providence is related and closely connected with the intellect, because Providence can only proceed from an intelligent being, from a being that is itself the most perfect Intellect. Those creatures, therefore, which receive part of that intellectual influence will become subject to the action of Providence in the same proportion as they are acted upon by the Intellect.

share|improve this answer
3  
And what do they say? –  Double AA Jun 9 '13 at 15:10
    
Whom are you referring to? Are you suggesting that I embed an excerpt from the Friedlander translation? If so, it would help me greatly if you could be more direct with your suggestions in the future. Thanks! –  Lee Jun 10 '13 at 8:43
1  
Lee, @DoubleAA - I don't think your original post was in violation of any rules here, but it also wasn't very helpful, making the reader chase a reference to find out the answer to the question (do animals have free will). Your revised version is much more helpful; thanks. It's fine to quote or summarize; even a few sentences of summary to accompany the link would have been an improvement over the original. –  Monica Cellio Jun 13 '13 at 15:19
1  
Thanks for your comment, @MonicaCellio. I will try to submit more helpful comments/answers in the future, and would appreciate comments presented in such a fashion as yours in return. Tizku l'mitzvot. –  Lee Jun 13 '13 at 15:22
1  
@LeeFogel, thanks for your understanding. Most users here strive to be helpful; we sometimes fall short of the mark. I regret not commenting earlier. –  Monica Cellio Jun 13 '13 at 15:25
show 4 more comments

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.