“Transhumanism” refers to a new vision of the human, which results from the confluence of advancements in the life sciences, neuroscience, genomics, robotics, informatics, medicine, and nanotechnology. These developments include new kinds of cognitive tools that combine artificial intelligence with interface technology, molecular nanotechnology, extension of human life span, genetic enhancing of human physical and mental capacities, combating diseases and slowing down the process of aging, and exercising control over desires, moods, and mental states. Those who enthusiastically promote these developments in biotechnology and bioengineering maintain that the accelerating pace of technological development and scientific understanding will usher in a new age in the history of the human species during which people will live longer, will possess new physical and cognitive abilities, and will be liberated from suffering and pain due to aging and disease. In the transhumanist age, humans presumably will no longer be controlled by nature but will be the controllers of nature.This paper will focus on two features of transhumanism—radical life extension and cyber-immortality—and critique them from a Jewish perspective. These two features are independent of each other, based on different scientific developments, and have rather disparate goals. Radical life extension program offers perpetuation of youth and postponement of death. The paper will critique this aspect of transhumanism by showing (a) that transhumanism holds a mistaken notion of human well-being because it rejects the religious belief in human createdness, (b) that awareness of human createdness and finitude provides a deeper appreciation of the preciousness of life and a sense of gratitude that increases the joy of being alive, and (c) that transhumanism falls prey to the contemporary veneration of youth and fails to understand the wisdom that comes with the aging process and the struggle with declining capacities. Whereas radical life extension is based on advances in the life sciences, the second feature of transhumanism—cyber-immortality—is based on advances in artificial intelligence. Transhumanists envision the downloading of the human mind onto intelligent machines that will perpetuate the activity of the mind long after the demise of the embodied brain. This promise of immortality is problematic for the following reasons: (a) it equates human identity with a certain kind of intelligence to the exclusion of all others; (b) it conditions human immortality on machines built by humans and unduly venerates human technological inventiveness; and (c) it offers a simplistic notion of transcendence that concretizes the utopian impulse rather than positing utopianism as a prescription rather than a description. The critical engagement with transhumanism will be presented from a Jewish perspective, a religious tradition that values human createdness, finitude, and embodiment while being open to contemporary biotechnological advancements. However, a few Jewish thinkers (e.g., Joseph Dov Soloveitchik and Hans Jonas) have been critical of contemporary technology and cautioned against it on religious and philosophical grounds. The task for humanity today is not to devise ways to perpetuate youth or postpone death but to ensure that humans will be able to live with dignity, age with dignity, and die with dignity so as to honor human creation in the image of God. The transhumanist program is thus misdirected because it is based on a mistaken understanding of being human. The critique of transhumanism, however, will not abate the pace of technological advancements, nor does it deny the positive aspects of transhumanism, such as the desire to alleviate human suffering and pain. Whether or not we endorse transhumanism, it is incumbent on all of us to engage transhumanism openly and critically from secular and religious perspectives.