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.

The mishna in Sanhedrin 90a lists Gehazi as one of the 4 commoners who have no share in the world to come. I have seen different reasons for this none of which I fully understand.

  1. He mocked the words of the sages - artscroll says this, not sure when he did this but its not included as one of the reasons why someone would lose their olam haba in the mishna

  2. he denied the resurrection - this is quite possible according to the midrashim that say he spoke (disparagingly) on his way to revive the shunamite woman's son. But later on he extols his master's ability to resurrect that same child to the king. So even if he may have doubted in the past he clearly no longer does.

  3. He pronounced the name of God - this is my own interpretation which I haven't seen elsewhere. The mishna lists that as one of the reasons to forfeit olam haba [according to one opinion] and Gehazi seems to have done something very similar to make Yerovam's calf speak (see Sotah 47a)

  4. He didn't repent for causing others to sin - found in otzar aggados - similarly not listed in the mishna.

I'm looking for a clear-cut reason why Gehazi has no share in the world to come.

share|improve this question
add comment

2 Answers 2

He tried to ruin a prophet's -- and therefore G-d's -- reputation by cashing in on it. (II Kings 5:20). That's a huge, huge disgrace to the name of G-d.

share|improve this answer
1  
Touche. Is it listed in the Mishnah? Or is it written anywhere explicitly regarding his loss of 'Olam HaBa? –  Seth J Jul 23 '13 at 15:28
    
(And did he try to ruin the prophet's reputation, or would that have been the foreseeable outcome of his scheme?) –  Seth J Jul 23 '13 at 15:29
    
seth, exactly my thoughts –  pokemon Jul 23 '13 at 15:31
    
@SethJ the curse that Elisha puts on him is what took away his Olam haBa, and the curse was put because of the incident that Shalom mentioned... –  gt6989b Jul 23 '13 at 15:39
1  
@gt6989b, well, the question seems to be just that - was it the curse that stripped him of his 'Olam HaBa? Is that attested to anywhere explicitly? –  Seth J Jul 23 '13 at 15:47
show 4 more comments

the relevant discussion is in Sotah 47a (quoting from std english translation):

R. Johanan said: He (Elisha) went to induce Gehazi to repent but he refused. He said to him, ‘Repent’; but he replied: ‘Thus have I received from thee that whoever sinned and caused others to sin is deprived of the power of doing penitence’. What had he done?

  • Some say: He applied a loadstone to the idolatrous image of Jeroboam and suspended it between heaven and earth.
  • Others say: He engraved upon it the Name [of God] so that it used to exclaim, ‘I [am the Lord thy God]’ and ‘Thou shalt have no [other God beside me]’
  • Still others say: He drove the Rabbis from before him, as it is written: And the sons of the prophets said unto Elisha, Behold now, the place where we dwell before thee is too strait for us — hence, up to then it had not been too strait.

It seems like he was prvented from doing teshuva for some sort of chillul Hashem which does not allow him to get his share in the World to Come. I did see in lectures by Rav Moshe Wolfson that there are chassidic sources which disclose that at the end of days, Elisha will take back the curse and Gehazi will repent.

share|improve this answer
    
Since that Gemara is cited by the OP, maybe you should make clear that, while he was not stripped of 'Olam HaBa for the crimes listed, he was prevented from doing Teshuvah because of them, and since he could not do Teshuvah for his public Hillul HaShem as mentioned by Shalom, he could not receive 'Olam HaBa (or something). –  Seth J Jul 23 '13 at 20:46
    
@SethJ is that ok? –  gt6989b Jul 23 '13 at 20:48
    
I think so. I don't know if everyone else will agree, but +1 from me. –  Seth J Jul 23 '13 at 20:51
    
none of the sources you quote indicate that these events were deemed a chillul hashem. Regarding the line from Rav Wolfson the gemarah itself in Sanhedrin 104b->105a indicates that gechazi does in fact have a chelek in olam haba –  not-allowed to change my name Jul 24 '13 at 1:04
add comment

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.