A Knowing Heart

7/28/2019 A Knowing Heart

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/a-knowing-heart 1/221

ד ״ ס ב

A

K N O W I N GH E A R T

SICHOS I N W H I C H

T H E R E B B E A D V A N C E D

O U R E M O T I O N A L F R O N T I E R S

1FROM T H E WORKS O F

T H E LUBAVITCHER REBBE

R A B B I MENACHEM M . SCHNEERSON

T R A N S L A T E D BY

R A B B I E L I Y A H U TOUGER

הועתק והוכנס לאינטרנט

www . h e b r ew b o o k s . o r g

Published by

Sichos I n English

788 Eastern Parkway B rooklyn, N ew Y ork 11213

5762 • 2002

http://www.hebrewbooks.org/

http://www.hebrewbooks.org/



A Knowing Heart

Published andCopyrighted ©by

SICHOS I N E N G L I S H

788 Eastern Parkway • Brooklyn, N . Y . 11213

Tel. (718) 778-5436

A ll rights reserved. No part of thispublicationmay

be reproduced in anyformor by anymeans,

includingphoto-copying, without permssion in

writing fromthecopyrightholder or the publisher.

I S B N 1-8814-0068-9

5762 • 2002



T A B L E

O F C O N T E N T S

Publisher's Foreword v

ParshasNoach 1

ParshasVayeitzei 13

ParshasVayigash 25

ParshasShmos 35

ParshasBeshaach 49

Purim 63

ParshasVayikra 77

ParshasKedoshim 93

ParshasBehar-Bechukosai 103

ParshasShelach 115

ParshasBaak 139

ParshasMatos-Masei, MenachemAv 151

ParshasShoftim 169

ParshasK i Savo 179

ParshasNitzavim 195

i i i





P U B L I S H E R ' S

F O R E W O R D

L I G H T I N G OUR I N N E R FIRE

O ur Rebbeim explain1

that before theadvent of theBaa Shem

Tov, thespiritual andmaterial vitality of theJewish people hadbeen

sappedto theextent that they were inastateof faint. The new energy

that the Baa Shem Tov generated roused them to spiritual

wakefulness. Oneof the areaswhere this was keenly felt was therealm

of emotion. Before theadvent of thechassidic movement, prayerand

Torah study were primarily cold andcerebral. TheBaa Shem Tovset

the souls of theJewish people on fire, stirring them to ahigher pitch

of love for G-d and enabling themto develop deeper bonds with their

fellowmen.

He sent great scholars to learn from simple laborers whowere

untrained inbook knowledge butmasters inexpressing their lovefor

G-d and for their fellow Jews. He taught his followers to singand

dance in themdst of their Divine service. Through these andother

activities, hegave every person tools to tap thereservoir of spiritual

feelings in thedepths ofhis heart andbring them to theforefront of

his experience. He and his spiritual heirs in the generations that

followed madetheTalmud's teaching:2

"G-dseekstheheart," anopera¬

tional message, not a theoretical ideal. indeed, historians have

identified theoutpouring of emotion as one of theunique contribu¬

tions of the chassidic movement to Jewish religious experience.

1. See Kuntreis Inyano Shel Toras HaChassidus (translated as On the Essence of the Teachings of

Chassidus), sec. 1, and the sourcescited there.

2. Sanhedrin 106b.

v



v i

W hy this emphasis? Because our emotions reflect who we really

are and what truly motivates us.3

If there is no spiritual expression for

these qualities, our personalities will be disjointed. We will

intellectually understand and identify with Jewish values, but our

feelings will focus on material things. Such a dichotomy would

undermne any attempts to advance spiritually. instead, our hearts

should actuallybeat faster becauseof our love for G-d, and we should

taste genuine awe and dread with the realization that we are

constantly in Hispresence.

H O L D I N G THE REINS I N OUR HANDS

The A lter Rebbe and the subsequent C h a b a d Rebbeim

perpetuated the Baal Shem Tov's legacy of spiritual vitality and

expanded its scope, accentuating how, in order to channel the

emotions in G-d's service, the mind must harness even the most

powerful of our emotional resources.

Based on that premse, C h a b a d has always viewed emotions as a

tool to bring about a more encompassing purpose. Their intent, then,

is not self-contained — emotional expression in and of itself was never

considered the ultimate goal. instead, the emphasis has always been

on avodah , using the power of intellect to direct the flow of emotions.

Then, like a dammed river whose force is employed to produce

energy, the strength of our emotions can be used to drive the turbines

of our souls and refine and develop our characters.

The term avodah (עבודה) literally means "service" or "work."

Chassidus,4 however, notes the connection with the termתורועדוביע, the

processing of leather, where a coarse entity is transformed into a

malleable substance that serves a functional purpose. So, too, avodah

molds and refines the coarsenessof our characters, and in the process,

transforms the way we relate to ourselves, our fellow man, and G-d. i t

makes the concepts that we study real, not only intellectually, but

emotionally, unlocking the restraints we have with in our hearts.

3.

4.

See the s ichah to P a r s h a s Shof t im and the sourcesmentioned there.

See Torah Or, Mishpatim, p. 76a.



v i i

CHIPPING A W A Y A T STONE

The Alter Rebbe also contributed another dimension to the

concept of serving G-d through the heart, focusing on those times

when our hearts do not respond as wewould like them to. He explains

how even when insensitivity dulls our emotions and we do not

experience genuine spiritual feeling, we can remain aligned with our

mssion and conduct ourselves according to the inner truth that we

grasp. Though our understanding is not powerful enough to transform

the way we actuallyfeel, it can still guide our conduct.

i n that vein, the story is told that once the Alter Rebbe's brother,

R. Yehudah Leib, himself a distinguished sage,5

asked his brother:

"Why do youspeak of suchhigh levels of love and fear of G-d in your

discourses? Personally, you may be able to achieve these levels of

emotion, but i cannot and i am certain most of your other followers

feel the sameway."

The Alter Rebbe answered: "One of the prophecies of the era of

Mashiach is 'I shall remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give

you a heart of flesh.'6

In the present era, we have 'hearts of stone' and

our emotions do not necessarily respond to our understanding. i n

truth, this is a problem that we cannot eradicate on our own. it will

not be until the era of Mashiach, when G-d grants us hearts of flesh,

that the problemwill be resolved.

"But the prophecy saysnothing about 'brains of stone,' afailure to

understand what the heart should feel. This we must — and can —

remove by ourselves."

The Alter Rebbe suggests employing this type of avodah within

our Divine service on a day-to-day basis. in ch. 16 of Tanya, he

outlines "a great general principle in the Divine service of thebeinoni,"

explaining that the fundamental approach to ruling over our animal

souls and natural tendencies is to follow a three-phased pattern of

thought, feeling, and deed. One begins with meditation on the

greatness of G-d. This arouses feelings of love and fear, which in turn

find expression in the observance of the mitzvos. Fear will safeguard

5. As evident from hiscollection of Responsa, She'eris Yehudah.

6. Yechezkel 11:19; 36:26.



vi i i

one from the violation of the Torah's prohibitions and love will

motivatethe observance of the positive commandments.

The Alter Rebbe, however, continues and explains that there are

certain individuals who are unable to function in this manner. They

meditate and they understand what they should be feeling, but that is

where itends. Theirheartsjust never respond.

These individuals, the Alter Rebbe explains, can still live as

beinonim. Because if you know what you should be feeling and you

understand what deeds youwould be performing if you felt that way,

G-d helps you and enables you to conduct yourself as if you actually

felt this way. Our lack of sensitivity does not prevent our

understanding from guiding our behavior in the desired path. We may

have ideals locked up in our brains because we cannot call forth the

emotional energy to open ourselves up to themtotally. But even when

we do not feel them, they can be real for us and guide our conduct.

A W E L L OF E M O T I O N A L V I T A L I T Y

The above concepts are particularly relevant in the present

generation when we find it hard to summon up genuine feeling even

with regard to worldly matters. Communication gaps between

husbands and wives, between parents and children, are all too famliar.

One of the complaints we frequently hear is: " I just can't express

what's going on in my heart." Sure, a person may get heated up, but

the fact that communication does not occur indicates that genuine

emotion remains untapped.

A nd if this is true with regard to physical concerns, how much

more so does it apply to the spiritual. Too often, prayer is dull and

routine;we performmitzvos without passion or vitality.

7707

is a fountain of genuine spiritual feeling. From the Rebbe's

example, we can learn to experience many emotions — some that

come immediately to mnd are genuine joy and happiness, heartfelt

yearning, and acute anguish — in a spiritual context. Moreover, in

addition to showing us the extremes of the emotional spectrum, from

his conduct we can learn the feelings of contentment, compassion,

7. LubavitchWor ld Headquarters at 770 Eastern Parkway in Brooklyn.



ix

and care for others, which are the backbone of man's successful day-

to-day emotional functioning.

Quite obviously, we can learn from the Rebbe in other ways

besides recalling his conduct. in hiswritten works, he introduces us to

new horizons in avodah, the field of emotional refinement. In this

realm, the Rebbe did more than perpetuate the heritage of his

forebears, he points the way to new frontiers, by giving us a multi-

faceted conception of avodah, with applications in our Divine service,

in our interpersonal relations, and even in our business activities. in

that way, he has given us the potential to mold our characters and

change the natural flow of our emotions. And for those of us who

cannot overcome the inner obstacles that stand in the way of such a

flow, he has shown us how to conquer the "mnd of stone" by

understanding the direction inwhich our emotions should lead us and

acting accordingly. Simply put, his teachings made ideals and

concepts that are intellectually abstract cogently real.

The insights that form the basis for this approach are spread out

within a variety of chassidic texts including maamarim, sichos, and letters,

at times, consisting of a paragraph hereand apagethere. Rarely do we

find an entire work devoted to the exposition of such ideas. We have,

however, sifted through the Rebbe's work and selected several sichos

which, though beginningwith a scholarly question concerning a Torah

reading or festival, place a heavy emphasis on the direction our avodah

should take. To underscore the unique fusion of intellect and emotion

that we can learn from the Rebbe, we have entitled the collection: A

Knowing Heart.

FOCUSING ON T H E SOURCE

A t several stages during the progress of this project, we debated

among ourselves whether we should translate these sichos in a manner

that adheres directly to the original text or adapt them. There is an

obvious advantage in adaptations. They are written with the reader in

mnd, molding the message to fit his perspective and understanding.

Also, since the words are your own, you can write freely, without the

encumbrance of having to match your words to an existing text.



x

Nevertheless, that very advantage becomes a disadvantage, for

the text is no longer the Rebbe's initial message. It is not only that the

holiness of the Rebbe's words is lacking, the original contains a depth

and breadth of application that an adaptation can never duplicate. For

an adaptation is focused; there is a point that is developed and

emphasized, but by doing so, the wide-ranging scope of the original

sichah is sacrificed. For that reason, we chose to translate the sichos,

giving our readers ataste of the Rebbe's unique style of presentation

to the fullest extent possible in translation. Even though certain

portions of the text and definitely many of the footnotes are obviously

directed to scholars, wehavetried to open themto our readers.

W i t h this goal in mind, we added bracketed [ ] explanations to

serve as conceptual bridges within the text8

and translator's notes.

Also, occasionally passages that appear within the body of the original

texts have been presented as footnotes in our translation, and in one

instance— Parshas Kedoshim — we omitted portions of the sichah.

ACK NOWLEDGMENTS

We have spoken in the plural, because the production of this

volume has been truly a team effort. Acknowledgment is due to:

Rabbi Eliyahu Touger, for his translation of the text;

Rochel Chana Schilder, for her editing which added vitality and

clarity;

Rabbi Aharon Leib Raskin, who contributed additional references

and clarified certain passages;

Yosef Yitzchok Turner, for layout and typography, and

Rabbi Yonah Avtzon, director of Sichos In English, whose

encouragement, diligent efforts, and continuous support made it

possible for this text to reachpublication.

i t is our hope that the study of these sichos will inspire our readers

and ourselves to full-spirited avodah, empowering us to deepen our

relationship with G-d and with our fellow men. May this in turn

motivate us to shoulder the spiritual mssion of our age: to prepare

8. Passages in squigglebrackets { } are, by contrast, translations that appeared inbrackets

in the original.



xi

ourselves and the world at large for the coming of Mashiach, when we

will finally be granted "heartsof flesh."

Sichos In English

20 Menachem-Av, 5762





P A R S H A S

N O A C H

Likkutei Sichos, Vol . X, p. 24ff.

I .

[When speaking about the animals that came to the ark,] the Torah

states:1 "from the pure [species of] animals and from the [species of]

animals that are not pure." [Commenting on this choice of wording,]

in the Talmud, our Sages state:2

"A person should never utter an

offensive word. For the Torah elaborates [and uses] eight [extra]

letters so as not to state an offensive word, as it is written: 'from the

pure [species of] animals, and from the [species of] animals that are

not pure.'"

Rashi explains that [our Sages are offering] a rationale for the use

of the lengthy wording "from the [species of] animals that are not

pure" ([in Hebrew,] three words with a total of thirteen letters),

instead of stating in short, "the impure [species]" (oneword, with five

letters). "Thisteaches [us] to endeavor to use refined language."

Just as our Torah reading contains this instructionwith regard to

[refined] speech, it also contains another instruction with regard to

[refined] sight. [It relates how] Shem and Yefes took the utmost care

not to look upon the nakedness of their father. [When Noachbecame

intoxicated and they went to cover his nakedness,] "They walked

backwards... with their faces backwards... and they did not see the

nakedness of their father."3

As a reward for taking this precaution,

[they were granted] great and noteworthy blessings: "Blessed be G-d,

1. Bereishis 7:8.

2. Pesachim 3a; see aso BereishisRabbah on the verse.

3. Bereishis 9:23.

1



2 A K N O W I N G HEART

the L -rd of Shem. May Canaan become [a slave to them].4

May G-d

be gracious to Yefes and Hewill dwell in the tents of Shem."5

I I .

This story, however, raises a question. After the Torah tells us that

they walked "with their faces backwards," it is obvious that "they did

not see the nakedness of their father"6

(for they were facing

backwards). What does the phrase"they did not see the nakednessof

their father" add? We must say that the verse is teaching us a new

concept and a unique quality [that can be learned] from the conduct

of Shem and Yefes which we would not know from the previous

phrase, "with their faces backwards."

I I I .

This difficulty can be resolved by first [explaining the following]

teaching of the Baa Shem Tov:7

When a person sees an undesirable

quality in a colleague, this indicates that there exists within his own

self something simlar to that undesirable quality.8 Like a person who

looks in amrror, " i f his face is clean, when he looks in the mrror he

does not see any flaw." 9

if, however, he sees filth or a blotch in the

mrror, it isbecause"his own face is dirty."

[Clarification, however, is required:] On the surface, why is it

necessary to say that seeing evil in a colleague denotes a like quality

4. [In the text of the sichah itsef, the Rebbedoesnot conclude the quote, as an extension

of the principle explained in the sichah that one should not make undesirable

statements.]

5. Ibid. 26-27. (See Bereishis Rabbah 36:8 which explains that "Blessed be G-d, the L-rd of

Shem" is aso a blessing [for Shemhimself].)

6. Seemngly, the phrase "with their faces backwards" is aso unnecessary, for the verse

previouslystates"theywalkedbackwards." This question, however, is already answered

by Rashi in his commentary to Bereishis 9:23. [There Rashi explains that when they

approached Noach to cover him, they had to turn in the direction of Noach and they

executed thisturn while facing backwards.]

7. Meor Einayim, Parshas Chukas. See aso Toldos Yaakov Yosef, Parshas Terumah and other

sources. See aso SeferHaSichosKayitz5700, p. 83.

8. See simlar statements in Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 33a.

9. And therefore, "Anentirelyrighteous man who has no evil within himdoesnot see any

evil in any [other] man" (Meor Einayim, loc. cit.).



N O A C H 3

and mirror of the evil in the onlooker? Why is it not possible that this

evil be apparent only in one's colleague and not exist within oneself at

all?

[To resolve the question,] it can be explained10

that every event

that happens in the world is controlled by Divine Providence. Even

this event (i.e., that one sees an undesirable quality in a colleague)

does not happen by chance, Heaven forbid, but was ordained from

Above. Since G-d did not create anything in this world without a

purpose,11

it is impossible to say that a person would be led from

Above to see an undesirable quality in a colleague without reason.

Therefore, [seeing the undesirable quality] must surely serve as a

lesson,12

informng him that he also possesses this undesirable quality

and that it isnecessary for him to correct it.

W hy is it necessary for one to receive this lesson indirectly — to

inform him about his own evil through [seeing the corresponding evil

in] a colleague? Because"love covers all flaws."13

(How much more so

is this true with regard to self-love.) [Thus] "a person will see all

blemshes except his own."14

Therefore the way to bring a person to

the realization of his own shortcomings is to give him the opportunity

to see them [as they are manifested] in a colleague.15

When he sees

the drawbacks of these shortcomings and undesirable qualities (in his

colleague) and when he contemplates his own situation with a serious

intent, he will come to the realization that the faults he seesare in

10. See asoSeferHaS ichosKayitz57 00 , loc. cit.

11. Shabbos 77b.

12. As the Baa Shem Tov taught: "Everything that a person sees or hears is a lesson for

him in hisDivineservice" (HaYom Yom, p. 52).

13. Mishlei 10:12.

14. Negaim 2:5. Here [the intent is not the halachic context of that teaching, but rather its

ethical parallel, as] the Meiri explains in his commentary to Avos 1:7 (quoted aso by

Midrash Shmuel to that mishnah and in the maamar entitled Ish Al Diglo, 5700, sec. 3, and the

ma a ma r entitled VeAhavta, 5701, sec. 15). [Theintent isthat] one does not see his own

spiritual blemshes as blemshes and shortcomngs at all.

15. To cite aparallel (see Likkutei Sichos, Vol . IV, p. 1207, and sources there): When it is

desired [from Above] that a person deliver ajudgment [concerning his own conduct],

aploy is used and he is brought to deliver a judgment concerning a colleague.




truth his own. To reword the above statement: A l l the blemshes that

a person seesoutside [of himself]16

are (a result of) his own blemshes.

I V .

One may, however, ask: A Jew's mission is not only to refine and

elevate his own self, but also to affect his colleagues, as reflected by

the command:17 "You shall surely admonish your colleague." [And

further, our Sagesstate18 that one must repeat such an admonishment]

even 100 times.

I f so, why say that the intent of his being shown from Above the

undesirable qualitiespossessedby a colleague is for him to realize that

he possesses those undesirable qualities and that he must eliminate

them? Perhaps the true intent in showing him the undesirable

qualities in his colleague is so that he wil l admonish [his colleague]

and help him to correct and improve his conduct.

Moreover, as mentioned many times,19 the Jewish people never

serve merely as an intermediary through which G-d's intent

concerning another matter can be achieved. [We cannot say] that His

ultimate intent is directed toward a matter that is peripheral in relation

to them. (In contrast, all other created beings, even the sublime

spiritual worlds,20

are not themselves the purpose of their existence

but rather exist "for the sake of the Jewish people and for the sakeof

the Torah."21) The Jewish people, however, are themselves [G-d's]

ultimate purpose.

Just as this concept applies with regard to the Jewish people as a

whole, so, too, it applies to every individual Jew. It cannot be said that

16. [The Hebrewword וץ translated as "except" in the quoteח from N e g a i m , also serves as

the root for thetermץוחב meaning "outside."]

17. [ Vayikra 19:17.]

18. Bava Metzia 31a.

19. See the lengthyexplanations in Likkute i S i c h o s , Vo l . V , p. 246 andV ol . V I , pp. 235-236.

20. Indeed, even G-d's l ight which is "the revelation of His essence and not a revelation

from Hisessence" is revealed for the intent of the souls of the Jewish people (see the

maamar entitledHaOseh S u k a s o , 5699, sec. 2).

21. R a s h i , B e r e i s h i s 1:1; see asoBereishisRabbah 1:1, VayikraRabbah 36:4.



N O A C H 5

one Jew must serve as a mere intermediary for acolleague. [Instead,

G-d's] ultimate intent isfocused oneachJew individually.22

Accordingly, it is understood (that with regard to the individual

Divine service of every person), it cannot be said that the reason a

person isshown the faults of acolleague from Above issolely for the

benefit of the onlooker without any benefit accruing to the person

who possesses thefaults.23

[Instead, the intent is to benefit the person

who possesses the faults through] the observer's admonishment and

efforts to correct andelimnatetheevil theperson possesses.

As such, sincewemust say that thepurpose of being shown the

evil inanother person is to [aid that person in] correcting i t, why must

we say that when aperson sees evil [inacolleague] he is lookingin a

mirror; that he is being shown his own evil in the guise of his

colleague?

V .

This question can be resolved by first explaininganother problematic

concept in the passage from theT a l m u d citedabove (sec. I ): "A person

should never utter anoffensive word... as it iswritten: '...and fromthe

[species of] animals that are not pure.'"

22. See theMishnah, Sanhedr in 37a: "Each andevery individual is obligatedto say: 'The

world was created for me.'"

[Our Sages'] statement (Chul in 92a): "The leaves, theseare thecommon people....

Were it not for theleaves, theclusters [of grapes] could not bemaintained," {should

not beinterpretedas implying that thepurpose of the common people, [the leaves,] is

solely for theTorah scholars, [thegrape clusters,] and not for themselves (like the

gentile nations, ,להבדיל who aresubordinateto theJewish people). Instead,} through

[the common people's activity] to maintain theTorah scholars, they themselves are

elevatedand are includedtogether with theTorah scholars.

(To cite aparallel, Likkutei S i c h o s , V ol . V I , loc. cit ., speaks of [the various stages of

progress] in aJew's [Div ine service], explaining that thelower level is notmerelya

preparation and an intermediary toreach thehigher level. Instead, by leadingto the

higher level, it too is elevated.)

23. SeeLikkutei S i c h o s , Vol . I I , p. 531, which statesaneven greater concept. Evenwithin one

person, thereason one isallowed to fast in repentance or topurge his soul isthatthe

pain hesuffers is tohis benefit. [I tis to thebenefit notonly of thesoul, but] alsothe

body. Were itonly for thebenefit of thesoul, it is possibletosay that it isforbidden to

causethe bodypain for the benefit of thesoul.




[The Talmud] continues, mentioning another simlar principle: "A

person should aways speak with refined words, for when relating the

laws pertinent to azap,24 the Torahusesthe expression 'saddle,'

25 while

with regard to a zavah,26 it uses the expression 'seat.'"27

(The reason

the Torah usesa different expression is that it is not fitting to mention

a woman riding in the ordinary manner.28

)

The Talmud questions this principle, stating three instances where

the Torah does speak of women riding. After the resolution of the

third verse, the Talmud asks: "In the Torah, is not the term 'impure'

mentioned?"

[The order of the Talmud's questions] is difficult to understand.

The word "impure" appears in the Torah more than 100 times.

Seemngly, it would have been more logical for the Talmud to first

question the use of the term "impure," which appears frequently, and

then to inquire about the use of the expression "riding" with regard to

women. Why are the questions mentioned in the opposite order?

Also, clarification is necessary: What is the Talmud's intent when

asking in a tone of wonderment: "In the Torah, is not the term

'impure' mentioned?" It is as if the statement that "impure" is

mentioned in the Torah is a new [and previously unknown] concept

that will enable us to resolve doubts. [Since the use of the term is so

prevalent,] seemngly, it wouldhave been more appropriate [to use a

less radical expression, for example]: "Behold, the term 'impure' is

usedby the Torah."

V I .

I n resolution, it can be explained that when the subject is a halachic

decision, the decision must be rendered using the clearest wording

possible — even if such wording is offensive — so that the halachah

24. [A man who possesses a condition that resembles somewhat a gonorrheal infection.

This conditionmakeshimandthosewith whomhecomes in contact ritually impure.]

25. See Vayikra 15:9.

26. [A woman who suffers vaginal bleeding at times other than her menstrual period. This

condition makesher andthosewith whomshe comes in contact ritually impure.]

27. Ibid. 23.

28. Rashi, Pesachim, loc. cit.



NOACH 7

will be utterly decisive and unambiguous. For this reason it is

understandable why in most places in the Torah, the term "impure" is

used despite the fact that using concise wording does not have an

advantage (according to the Maharshas perspective) over refined

wording. It is only with regard to the Torah's stories that terms like

"impure" will be stated using indirect and lengthier wording.29

For

with regard to the Torah's stories, the use of lengthy but refined

wording is found as often as concise but offensive wording, because

[the advantagesof] the two are equally balanced.

I n the (majority) of places where the Torah [uses the word

"impure"], it communicates halachic rulings. Hence it is necessary for

the Torah to use the expression "impure." This is not becausethere is

an advantage to using concise wording, but because halachic rulings

must be stated clearly and unambiguously.

O n this basis, we can understand the initial supposition of the

Talmud that even if many wordswill be required, the Torahusesrefined

language even though the term "impure" is found in many places in the

Torah. For, as explained above, in most placesthe term "impure" is used

in a halachic context. Therefore, [its use] does not run contrary to the

general principle that "A person should never utter an offensive word,"

even according to the initial supposition of the Talmud that [this

principle] applies even when [it isnecessaryto use] many words.

The intent of the Talmud's question: "In the Torah, is not the term

'impure' mentioned?" is that we find the term "impure" used by the

Torah even when it is possible to use indirect language in the midst of

a story. And since we find it used at times in such a context, [that

would imply a contradiction to the teaching never to use offensive

wording. Nevertheless,] since the term "impure" is mentioned only

several times in the Torah's stories, the Talmud does not consider the

use of the term "impure" as a stronger question than the use of the

term "riding" in connection with women. Hence, it does not give this

question precedence.

29. Although the Torah's stories are directives, it is not necessary to state "impure"

explicitly. For [here, the entire process of instruction is indirect]. Even the general

thrust and the essence of the directives [communicated by the stories] are not

explicitly stated in theTorah.




V I I .

As mentioned, when it is necessary to give ahalachic ruling concerning

(an object or even) a person, we are obligated to render the ruling

using clear wording, saying "impure" or the like. Nevertheless, when

referring to impurity outside the context of direct halachic rulings, one

must refrain from [referring to it directly; for that is considered] using

offensive wording since one is speaking within the narrative aspect of

the realm of halachah.

Proof of this concept can be brought from the command:30

"When there will be a man among you who will not be pure... he shall

go outside the camp." The verse is coming to inform us of the laws

governing that person, [i.e., ahalachic ruling]. Nevertheless, since it is

not dealing with the laws that define whether or not he is pure, but

rather with the command for him to leave the camp (for it is already

known that he is impure), the Torah uses indirectwording and states

"who will not be pure" instead of "wil l be impure."

Just as the above concepts apply with regard to refined speech,

so, too, simlar concepts apply with regard to sight. When one hears

that a Jew performed an improper act, he is obligated to see the

resulting halachic imperative: i.e., he should look only to what he

realizes that he must do to correct the situation. He should admonish

[his colleague] (obviously, in a pleasant and agreeable manner31

) and

[endeavor to influence him to] adopt a positive course of conduct.

This should be the primary dimension of what hesees.

When, however, he hears about his colleague's unfavorable

conduct and does not see the halachic imperative relevant to him but

instead seesthe wickedness of his colleague, that is a sign that "his

own face is dirty." Since he focuses (not on the obligation he has to

correct the situation, but) on the fact that his colleague possesses evil,

that is a sign that the evil his colleague possesses is a reflection of his

own.

30. Devarim 23:11; see Pesachim, loc. cit.

31. See the lengthy explanations in the ma a ma r entitled Im Ruach H aMoshel, 5695 (Kuntreis

30); the letter of my reveredfather-in-law, the Rebbe, that isprinted inHaTamim, Vo l .

V I I I , p. 46ff.



N O A C H 9

Since (as stated above) "G-d did not createanything in His world

without a purpose," there is a directive in everything that a person

sees. In this instance, the directive is twofold:

a) The fact that he has been shown (fromAbove) a quality (in his

colleague) that must be corrected serves as a directive for him to

become involvedwith [that colleague] to improve him.

b) The fact that he has been shown something [that appears] evil

is a directive that this evil exists within himself and he must correct

himself. For if he were on the level of a righteous man (at least with

regard to this particular32), he would not see or focus on this evil.

V I I I .

O n this basis, we can explain why the Torah adds [the phrase]: "They

did not see the nakedness of their father," although it is seemngly

obvious from the previous phrase, "with their faces backwards." The

intent is to emphasize that not only did Shem and Yefes not see their

father's nakedness in a physical sense (because "their faces [were]

backward"), but that they did not see or feel any dimension of

"nakedness" or fault in their father. Their feelings focused entirely on

what they had to do; i.e., to cover their father's (nakedness). They did

not see their father's nakednessas an independent matter.

This approach distinguishes Shem and Yefes from their third

brother, Cham. Shem and Yefes did not see, while with regard to

Cham, it iswritten:33

"And Cham... saw."

This came as a result of differences in their inner personal

characteristics and spiritual levels. "Cham was the father of Canaan."

Since he himself possessed evil (albeit on a less extreme plane34

) —

32. The statement of M eorEinayim, loc. cit., quoted in fn. 9: "Anentirelyrighteous man who has

no evil within him (at all) doesnot see any evil in any [other] man," [does not preclude the

possibility that if a person has perfected a particular quality (even though he has other

faults), hewill not judge another person with this fault as evil. ForMeor Einayim is speaking

about] acompletelyrighteous man who"doesnot see any evil" at all.

33. Bereishis 9:22.

34. The sichah [speaks about Cham] according to the perspective of Radak who interprets

[Bereishis 9:24]: "what his youngest son had done to him" as meaning "that he went and

told his brothers." (Rashi — in his commentary to 9:22, based on Sanhedrin 70a —

[interprets Chams conduct in a far more pejorative manner].)




for Cham isassociated with ch a mmi mu s ("warmth" or"excitability"in

Hebrew),35

anexpression of theleft vector36

— hesaw37

theevil of

Noach's drinking and intoxication.38 For [the latter] is also a

manifestation ofexcitability. (AlthoughCham's excitability was on a

less extreme plane than theexcitabilityhesaw and that was manifest

by Noach, hewas still affected by itbecausethis quality existed, albeit

in alessextreme manner, within himself.)

Shem and Yefes—who represent the right and central vectors—

were above this type ofevil, even onmore refined levels. And since

they themselves were above this evil, they did not seethis [evil] in

others. They saw and knew only the task incumbent on them to fulfill.

I X .

The aboveprovides every one of us with alesson. When one hearsor

sees anundesirable quality possessed byanother Jew, he[certainly]

should notspeak about itand tell others of it asCham did. [Cham]

did not content himself with the fact that hesaw [— and was affected

by — ] theevil; heinformed others about it: "Andhetold his two

brothers outside."39

Moreover, oneshould not even think unfavorably

about acolleague.40

[Instead,] heshould contemplate [only] whathe

should do,how heshould admonish him (sothat itwill be in an

35. OrHaTorah, Parshas Vayeishev, p. 252a; See asoTorah Or, p. 27a.

36. Zohar I , 73a; see asoTorah Or, p. 26c andOr HaTorah, loc. cit.

[The term"left vector" refers tothe alignment of the Sejiros in three columns: right,

center, and left. Those of the left column or vector are connected with the element of

fire.]

O r HaTorah, Bereishis (Vol. Ill),p. 595a, states that for this reason, theTorah

mentions Noach's sons in the order: Shem Cham, and Yefes [although that isnotthe

order inwhich they were born]. For this corresponds tothe proper order of the Sejiros

[they parallel: Chessed, Gevurah, and Tferes].

37. See the commentary of Radak to 9:23: "In this, he was the father of Canaan, for hedid

not cover thenakednessof his father. He was evil, the father of evil." According to the

explanation above, the connection to his being "the father of Canaan" is reflected even

in thephrase"And Chamsaw," [i.e., his seeing Noach asevil is a sign of the evil within

him that was later manifest in Chams descendants].

38. SeeBereishis 9:21.

39. Ibid. 9:22.

40. See Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 22,which states that thoughts of lashon hara,

unfavorable gossip, are worse than speaking lashon hara.



N O A C H 11

appropriate way, as stated above) and correct his [fault]. At the same

time, he should endeavor not to see the evil in his colleague even

whilehe is workingwith him.

When one conducts himself in this manner, emulating Shem and

Yefes, he merits the promse of the blessings: "Blessed be G-d, the

L- rd of Shem. May Canaan become...." And "May G-d be gracious to

Yefes, (but) He will dwell in the tents of Shem." And he merits to be a

medium for the Torah,41

for the vessel for the Torah is peace.42

And

furthermore, he merits that the DivinePresencewill rest in "the tents

of Shem," (in the building of the Third Beis HaMikdash) 43 [which will

come about] through unity and through the love of our fellow Jews.44

M ay this take place in the immediate future.

(Adapted from Sichos Shabbos Bereishis, 5726)

41. See the Targum of Yonason ben Uziel which interprets the latter phrase as: "He will

dwell in the study halls of Shem."

42. See Midrash Tanchuma (Buber edition), Parshas Yisro, sec. 9, Yalkut Shimoni, Mishlei , sec.

934: "The Ho ly One, blessedbe He, sad: 'The entire Torah ispeace. To whomwill I

giveit? To a nation that lovespeace.'"

43. See Rashi's quote of "the Midrash of our Sages" (Yoma 9b ff.; Bereishis Rabbah 36:8) with

regard to the First Beis HaMikdash. Obviously (and indeed, to a greater extent), this

applies with regard to the Third Beis HaMikdash. See Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos

Melachim 11:4, which states that the Third Beis HaMikdash will be built byMashiach (who

will be adescendant of Davidand Shlomoh, the builders of the FirstBeis HaMikdash).

44. See Tanya, ch. 32.





P A R S H A S

V A Y E I T Z E I

Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XV, p. 252ff.

I .

This week's Torah reading elaborately describes the life of Yaakov our

Patriarch in the house of Lavan, relating how he was preoccupied

primarily with [activities] involving sheep. He worked as a shepherd,

and the payment he received from Lavan was in the form of sheep.

(The fundamental) dimension of Yaakov's property was sheep,

and from this he becamewealthy: "And the man became exceedingly

prosperous. He attained fertile sheep (— and from these sheep he

also obtained —) maidservants, servants, camels, and donkeys."1

As

Rashi2 comments: "He would sell his sheep at an expensive price and

purchaseall the above."3

Nevertheless, we see in Parshas Vayishlach, when Yaakov [instructs

his agents] to convey amessageto Esav, he describes his property in

the following order:4

" I have acquired oxen and donkeys, sheep,

servants, and maidservants." He mentions sheep after "oxen and

donkeys,"5

and not as his first and fundamental acquisition. In

particular, this represents a change from yet another verse which

describes that when Yaakov fled from Lavan:6

"He led away (first) all

1. Bereishis 30:43.

2. In his commentary to the verse.

3. See Toras Chayim on this parshah, p. 30c.

4. Bereishis 32:6.

5. See aso the commentary of Rabbeinu Bachaye to that verse.

6. Bereishis 31:18.

13




of his herds [of sheep] (and only then) all of his property... what he

had purchased with his herds."7

I I .

Every concept in the Torah is an eternal lesson for every Jew in every

place and time. In particular, this applies with regard to the "deedsof

the Patriarchs" which are related in the Torah8

— and how much more

so does this apply with regard to a concept that fills almost an entire

Torah reading. They are [certainly] "a sign to their descendants,"

endowing the descendantsof Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakovwith the

power to carry out [the appropriate] Divine service.

I t is thus understandable that the particulars involving Yaakov's

work with sheep —

a) that the sheep brought about Yaakov's [prodigious wealth]:

"And the man becameexceedingly prosperous";

b) that although his primary property was sheep, he nevertheless

exchanged (a portion of) his sheep for "maidservants, servants,

camels, and donkeys";

c) with regard to the [present] sent to Esav, he mentionedsheep

after "oxen and donkeys" —

are all significantwith regard to thespiritual service of every Jew.

I I I .

The above can be understood by first explaining the manner in which

the Midrash 9 [chooses to] describe the Jews' bond with G-d: "He will

be a Father to me and I will be a son to Him.... He will be a Shepherd

to me... and I will be sheep to Him." There is awell-known question

with regard to this teaching: Since the Jews are compared to G-d's

sons, what is added by saying that they are like His sheep? On the

contrary, how can the manner inwhich a shepherd cherishes sheep be

compared to the manner inwhich a father cherishes ason?

7. AsRashi comments on the verse: "I.e., what he had purchased with his sheep: servants,

maidservants, cames, and donkeys."

8. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V, p. 69ff.

9. ShirHaShirimRabbah 2:16 (1).



V A Y E I T Z E I 15

The explanation given10

is that it is precisely this factor that is

significant.

The fact that the Jews are called sons shows that they are an

independent entitywith regard to their relation to their Father (G-d).

[True,] the bond between a Jew and G-d does not resemble that of a

[father and a] son on this physical plane, [for] in that instance, the son

has become a separate entity from his father, while the soul, by

contrast, is "entirely one (with G-d) and is not separate at all." 1 1

Nevertheless, using the analogy of a son implies that it is as if [the

soul] is an independent entity (and is not the Father).12

[Since he is an

independent entity,] his existence and cherished quality is significant

to the Father. [These concepts] can apply only with regard to the

Divine light that [enclothes itself] in the spiritual cosmos,13

and which

serves as a source for the created beings. In relation to that level, [the

souls] are significant.

W i t h regard to the G-dly light that transcends the spiritual

cosmos, by contrast — [the level of which it is said:] "He has neither

son nor brother"14

— it is not relevant to speak of any existence

outside of His own Being. W i t h regard to this level, the Jewish people

(and their cherished quality) are compared to sheep. For sheep (and

their cherished quality) have no significance in relation to the essence

of the shepherd.

Conversely, however, this is aso a sign of the unique level of the

Jewish people, that even on the level of G-dliness where there is no

place for the existence of created beings — "He has neither son nor

brother" — the cherished nature of the Jewish people still exists.15

10. Wi th regard to the concepts stated in this section, see O r HaTorah, Re'eh, pp. 784-785,

795ff.

11. Likkutei Torah, Devarim, p. 62d.

12. [Trans. Note: And indeed, on a conscious level, this is what the soul feels.]

13. See aso Derech Mitzvosecha (p. 4a,b) which statesthat the concept of union (yichud) and

bonding (zivug) are not relevant [in the planes of spiritual existence] above Atzilus.

14. Koheles 4:8.

15. Indeed, [G-d] "consulted" with the souls of the Jewish people whether to bring into

being creation as a whole (see Bereishis Rabbah 8:7; Rus Rabbah 2:3. See aso the opening

passages of Likkutei Amarim and Or Torah from the Maggid of Mezritch. See the

explanation in Likkutei Sichos, V ol . X V I , p. 486ff.).




On this level, however, the Jews' cherished quality comesnot

because of their identity but, on thecontrary, because of [their

transcendenceof their identity and] the awesome bittul to G-d [whichthey display]. This bittul is amedium for the Divine light that tran¬

scends thespiritual cosmos, as it iswritten:16

" I dwell in exaltedness

and holiness, but I amwith the broken and the lowly-spirited."

This concept — theawesome bittul [exhibited by theJewish

people] —is alluded to in the comparison of theJews to sheep. For as

we see in actual life, sheeppossessthe quality of bittul more than other

animals.17

I V .

These two analogies for theJewish people — sons andsheep—

allude totwo approaches in man's Divine service.18

The level ofson

relates to Torah study. This service focuses on intellectual

understanding andcomprehension. (Inthis service, the person

studying fees significant. [A fter all,] he isappreciating theTorah

through his [own] powers of comprehension.)

I n order that his study focus on the true intent of the Torah, his

[study] must becharacterized by bittul. Only through [the approach

of] "my soul will be as dust to all" is it possible for [himto

experience]: "open myheart toYour Torah"19

(asexplained with

regard to [the obligation to] recite theblessings forTorah study

before [studying]).20

This bittul servesas afoundation and preparation

for Torah study. The Torah study itself, however, iscarried out (not

with bittul, but on the contrary) with the power of intellect.

16. Yeshayahu 57:15.

17. Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p. 37a ff.; Toras Chayim, Bereishis, pp. 31b, 41a; Or HaTorah,

Vayishlach, p.228b; Or HaTorah, Re'eh, p. 796.

18. Wi th regard to theconcepts inthis section, note theexplanation (Kuntreis Motzaei

Shabbos Parshas Chayei Sarah, 5738, sec. 25ff.) of our Sages' statement (Bereishis Rabbah

60:8; Rash i toBereishis 24:42): "The conversation of theservants of thePatriarchs is

superior to theteachings oftheir descendants." Seealso Or HaTorah , Parshas Re'eh, p.

801. (There it is explained that sheepare identified with the service of prayer; see aso

fn. 62in the Kuntreis cited above.)

19. The passageElokai netzor [recited after theShemoneh Esreh] (Berachos 17b).

20. Nedarim 81a; Bava Metzia 85b;explained in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XV, p. 3ff., et al.



V A Y E i T Z E i 17

The analogy of sheeppoints to our Divine service of refining [the

world at large]. ןאצ, Hebrew for sheep, relates to the word יאה יצ ,

"departure,"21

going out from the four cubits of Torah and occupying

oneself with worldly affairs to transform them into a dwelling in the

lower realms.

This path of Divine service expresses aJew's true b i t t u l to G-d, his

transcendenceof his personal existence. For he does not perform this

Divine service for himself, to reach fulfillment or to ascend [to higher

spiritual levels]. (Indeed, the contrary is true; his involvement with

worldly matters is a descent for him. He must interrupt his study of

the Torah inwhich he invests his highest and most refined powers and

involve himself in matters involving deed.) This service is performed

only to carry out G-d's wil l , to make adwelling for Him in the lower

realms.22

V .

Based on the above, we can understand the connection between the

concept of sheepand Yaakov's Divine service in Lavan's home.

There is a fundamental difference between Yaakov's Divine

service during the period described in Parshas Toldos and his Divine

servicewhich is described in P a r s h a s V ay e i t ze i . 23 P a r s h a s T o l d o s describes

Yaakov's Divine service according to the analogy of a son. He was "a

sincere man, dwelling in tents,"24

interpreted by our Sages25

as

21. Torah Or, B e r e i s h i s , p. 23c; T o r a s Chayim, B e r e i s h i s , pp. 38b, 39a ff.; Or HaTorah, loc. cit.

22. See simlar concepts in Likkute i S i c h o s , Vol. XV , p. 247, fn. 34. See also pp. 248-249

which explains that this ascent for the soul (that through the Divineservice of refining

the world at large, it will reach bi t tu l ) is intrinsically related to the fulfillment of G-d's

intent for a dwelling in the lower realms. For in order for man's Divine service to

transformthe lower realms into adwelling for G-d's essence, that Divine service must

be characterized by utter bi t tu l . [To explain: the possibility for this world to become a

dwelling for G-d exists] because it isonly in thisworld that the utter bi t tu l alluded to in

the phrase e in o d ("there is nothing else," Devar im 4:39) is manifest. A nd that awesome

level of bi t tu l is reflected inman's service.

23. W i th regard to the following concepts, see T o r a s C hay im , B e r e i s h i s , the m a a m a r entitled

VeYitein L e c h a , sec. 20ff.

24. B e r e i s h i s 25:27.

25. B e r e i s h i s R a b b a h andR a s h i to that verse. [Shemand Ever were the leading scholars of the

age.]




referring to thetents of Shem and thetents of Ever. Even the

conclusion of the Torah readingwhich relates that Yaakov had to flee

from his father's house does not mark acessation of his connection

with constant Torah study. On the contrary, he"hid in the houseof

Ever for fourteen years"26

and studied the Torah there.

Parshas Vayei tze i , bycontrast, speaks about Yaakov's departure

from the realm of Torah study and his arrival in Charan — [aplace

whose name indicates] that itwas [the focus of] G-d's anger in the

wor ld2 7 — and in the house of Lavan. There he worked as ashepherd

(also) in thesimple sense ofthe word, serving [Lavan] with all his

strength.28

(Indeed, Yaakov's conduct serves as amodel for the

dedication that a worker must show his employer.)29

This service [of herding sheep brought out Yaakov's true, inner

spiritual core]. Despite the immense concealment and hiddenness[of

G-dliness that heexperienced] inLavan's home, Yaakov remained

unaffected. " I l ived with Lavan and I observed the 613 mi tzvos . "30

There heestablished [his family,] the tribes of G-d, inamanner that

[caused ourSages tocomment:] "His progeny isperfect."31

This

Divine service evoked the ultimateb i t t u l from Yaakov.

I t is possible tosay that this is the (inner) reason why the greater

part of the property that Yaakov earned and took with himfrom the

house of Lavan was sheep. For sheep allude tothe spiritual peak that

he attained through hisDivine service in thehouse of Lavan,the

quality of b i t tu l ,32

as explained above.

{This is alluded to in theexpression מאד מאד פרוץ האיש ו ,

translated as"and theman became exceedingly prosperous." ץו פר ו

means to"break through," toovercome limtations. For through b i t t u l

26. Rash i ' s commentary at the conclusion ofP a r s h a s Toldos Megillah 16b; S e d e r Olam, ch. 2.

27. SeeRash i ' s commentary at the conclusion ofP a r s h a s Noach.

28. B e r e i s h i s 31:6.

29. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, the conclusion of Hilchos S e c h i r u s Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Choshen

Mishpat, Hilchos Shaalah ViSechirus, subsec.20; [seeasoLikkutei S i c h o s , Vol. XXV, p. 135ff.].

30. B e r e i s h i s 32:5 andRash i ' s commentary.

31. Vayikra Rabbah 36:5; Rash i ' s commentary toB e r e i s h i s 47:31; see asoPesachim 56a; Sifri to

Devarim 6:4, e t al.

32. See T o r a s C h a y i m , B e r e i s h i s , p. 30c ff., whichelaborates on the connection of this concept

to the attribute of Truth, the attributeidentifiedwith Yaakov our Patriarch.




(identified with sheep), one can overcome all the limits of the spiritual

cosmos and approach the Divine l ight that has no limtations: מאד מאד

(i.e., מאד [which alludes toanunlimted quality] is repeated twice).33

[This sequence continues] asreflected in thechassidic34

— and

positive-oriented —interpretation of theverses:35

"Hechangedmy

wages ten times.... If he said: 'The spotted ones wil l beyour wages....'

'...the ringed ones.'" Yaakov drew down "theessential wil l of the

source of emanation." This level isabove any division orform. Hence

his wageswere continually changed from one form toanother.}

V I .

The Divine service of a son, which is dependent on one's

understanding andcomprehension (i.e., one's personal existence),

must also becarried outin amanner of b i t t u l (asstated in sec. IV) .

Simlarly, theDivine service of sheep that ischaracterized (primarily)

by b i t t u l must (bring into expression) all thepowers ofone's soul,

[even] his personal existence.

Nevertheless, [expressing one's personal identity is important].

For b i t t u l andlowliness alone are not sufficient to combat the

concealment andhiddenness [ofG-d] in theworld. Instead, it is

necessary [to follow] thedirectivefound in the very beginning of the

Tur (and the Shulchan Aruch):36

"Bebold asaleopard... and valiantas a

l ion." Onemust employ thequality of boldness37

"not to be

embarrassed when confronted bymockers" and thequality of valor

33. See Torah Or, B e r e i s h i s , p. 23c; T o r a s Chayim, B e r e i s h i s , p. 39d.

34. See Torah Or, B e r e i s h i s , p. 21a-b; T o r a s Chayim, B e r e i s h i s , p. 38a-b.

35. Bereishis 31:7-8.

36. I.e., theMahadura Basra of Shulchan Aruch HaRav. In contrast, theShulchan Aruch of Rav

Yosef Karo and theMahadura Kama of Shulchan Aruch HaRav begin: " W i t h thevalor of a

lion, one should rise...." The Rama andsubsec. 3 ofShulchan Aruch HaRav ( (oc . cit.)

mention "not[to] beembarrassed...." (without mentioningthequality ofboldness,

although theShulchan Aruch HaRav concludes: "Nevertheless, heshould notretort

brazenly..." asmentioned in the comng footnote. Here isnot the place for discussion

of the issue.

37. "Nevertheless, heshould notretort brazenly, lest heacquire thehabit ofacting

insolently" (Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Mahadura Kama, loc. cit., [based on] B e i s Y o s e f ) . See aso

our Sages' statement (Beitzah 25b) which describes the Jews asthemost bold of the

peoples.




"to overcome his [evil] inclination and conquer it, l ike amighty man

who overcomes his adversary, vanquishing him and throwing him to

the ground."38

In this, however, it must be clarified that one must act as a result

of his b i t t u l to G-d's wil l . For if his valor were to come as a result of his

own self-concern, it would be the opposite of holiness. Accordingly,

such conduct cannot serve as the proper assistance in his battle

against mockers and opponents to the Torah and its mi tzvos .

(In addition, when one fights with the strength that stems from

his personal existence, [his own " I , " ] it is conceivable that he will not

be victorious in battle. For it is possible that the opposing side is

fortified with a greater measureof that type of boldness.)

Instead, it is when he [exhibits boldness] because the Torah

commanded him to, that his boldness and valor can vanquish any

opponent. It is possible to explain that this is the inner reason why the

Tu r (and the Alter Rebbe in S h u lc h a n A r u c h H a Ra v )39

also quote the

name of the author of that statement: Yehudah ben Teima. [His name

is mentioned] to allude40

to the fact that being "bold as a leopard"

comes as a result of the approach [implied by his name] Yehudah ben

Teima. Yehudah reflects the Divine service of acknowledgment41

and

b i t tu l .42 [Moreover,] it is not sufficient that the approach of b i t t u l will

merely be a preface at the beginning of one's Divine service. Instead,

Yehudah is ben Teima,43

[the latter term implying] that one's b i t t u l

must be a constant factor, [continually] expressed in the conduct of

38. Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Mahadura B a s r a . , loc. cit.

See also II Div re i HaYamim 17:6: "And he lifted up his heart in the paths of G-d." See

Torah Or, pp. 91a, 119c ff.; Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 15c, e t al.

39. I t is the custom of the Tur to quote the names of the Sages who author particular

concepts, but this is not the custom of theA lter Rebbe inS h u l c h a n A ru c h H a R a v .

40. There is also awell-known allusion. The name Yehudah (יהודה) contains the letters of

G-d's name ו-ה) -ה-י , see Sotah 10b, 36b). That is ben Teima (related to the entire

Torah).

41. [Trans. Note: Acknowledgment implies accepting an opinion other than one's own

even when onedoesnot understandwhy. This reflects bi t tul. ]

42. Torah Or, pp. 44a, 45a.

43. [Trans. Note: Although Teima is a name, it is also an allusion to the quality of

consistency.]



V A Y E i T Z E i 21

being "bold as a leopard."44

For when one expresses the qualities of

boldness and valor [as the Torah commands], it is very possible to slip

into ordinary boldnessand valor.45

V I I .

O n this basis, we can understand the particulars mentioned in secs. I

and I I with regard to Yaakov's sheep. Generally, [Yaakov's] Divine

service (and [therefore] his property) centered on sheep, as explained

above. Nevertheless, he did not remain content with this. Instead, he

included in his property "maidservants, servants, camels, and

donkeys." For in order to carry out the task of refinement as required

(including also the refinement of Esav which he would face later), all

the different types of Divine service (that are alluded to by these

types of property)46

were necessary.

[When includingthese other elements, however,] two points of

clarification must be made:

a) Yaakov increased his property by acquiring the other assets

through (exchanging) sheep. This implies that they were not

considered independent aspects of Divine service, but an outgrowth

of the Divineservice of b i t tu l .

b) Even afterwards, he did not exchangeall of his sheep for other

assets. On the contrary, even then sheep were the major part of his

property. For even when entering the battle with the concealment and

hiddenness [of G-d] with in the world, where power and valor are

necessary, the feelings of b i t t u l must remain a fundamental quality.

44. It is possible to explain that this reflects the true* quality of bi t tu l , that which transcends

boundaries and limtations. Therefore even the thrust of boldness (which on a

superficial level runs contrary to thequality of bi t tu l ) is not a contradiction to thisbi t tu l .

* See Kehi l las Yaakov, erech Yehudah ben Te ima, which states that Teima (אמת) shares the

letters of the word ,אמת "truth." [This relates to Yaakov, as it is written (M ichah

7:20):] "Grant truth to Yaakov."

45. Therefore it is necessary for great care to be shown that one not respond with

brazenness, as stated above (see fn. 36).

46. See Torah Or, B e r e i s h i s , p. 24a ff., T o r a s Chayim, B e r e i s h i s , p. 42d.



22 A K N o w i N G HEART

V I I I .

I n light of the above, we can appreciate why [Yaakov] did not

mention sheep as the first type of property he possessed when

sending messengers to Esav, despite the fact that it represented the

majority of his property. By saying: " I have acquired oxen and

donkeys, sheep, servants, and maidservants," Yaakov was mentioning

the merits47

and lofty powers that would sustain him. In this way, he

would frighten Esav and cause him to refrain from carrying out his

designs.

For this reason, [Yaakov] did not mention sheep first. [As

mentioned above, sheep] reflect the qualities of bittul, lowliness, and

submssion. And to frighten Esav, it was primarily necessary to have

him first appreciateYaakov's strength.

He must know that Yaakov owns sheep, i.e., that he is

characterized by bittul. Hence, [hewill know that Yaakov's] strength is

not his own personal valor, but the strength of holiness. Nevertheless,

with what do we frighten [Esav]? With power.

This, however, applies with regard to what impresses one's

opponent. For oneself, he must know and remember the truth, that

his power is an extension of his bittul, and aJew's primary resources are

sheep.48

I X .

The obvious directive that results from the above (in our generation)

is: We must carry out the order of Divine service [related to Parshas]

Vayeitzei [that focuses on] going out to the world and illumnating it.

Before this, one must prepareby studying Torah in the tents of Shem

and Ever. But to attain [the peak of] "And the man became

exceedingly prosperous," i.e., "fill[ing] up the land and conquer[ing]

it,"49

one must go out to the world and occupy himself with

illumnating i t. 5 0

47. See Bereishis Rabbah 75:6, 12 and the commentary of the Yefas Toar. See aso the

commentaryof R. MosheAlshich andMegaleh Amukos to Bereishis 32:6.

48. Note Toras Chayim, Bereishis, p. 40d.

49. Bereishis 1:28.

50. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I l l , p. 788ff.




On the contrary, in this era of ikvesa diMeshicha, when Mashiach's

approaching footsteps can be heard, the primary dimension of our

Divine service is deed.51

In the era of the Talmud, Torah study was the

fundamental element [of Divine service. This is no longer true in the

present age. Indeed,] as reflected in the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch, 52

there is no one in the present age of whom it can be said: "his Torah is

his occupation" (as was the level of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and his

colleagues). Not even a small percentage of the Jewish people are on

that level, becausethe fundamental Divine service of the present era is

deed, actual tzedakah.

I n particular, this applies in the present generation when the

efforts to find Jewsblundering in the darkness of exile and bring them

to the light of the Torah and its mitzvos [must be carried out on the

most fundamental level]. We are not speaking about making a

common person a scholar, making alesser scholar a greater scholar, or

[even] making a person who is lax in his observance of mitzvos a

genuinely G-d-fearing individual. We are talking about saving lives!

We must savethe lives of a Jew and his descendants, insuring that

they remain Jewish and conduct themselves (beginning with their

actual deeds) as aJew must conduct himself.

X .

To add another point: In order that one's efforts will find great

success, they must be carried out in a manner of bittul. They must be

carried out for the sake of fulfilling G-d's mssion of illumnating the

exile.

When one carries out his mssion with bittul, his efforts are not

correspondent to the limits of his nature and satisfaction.53

Itdoes not

make that much difference to him where G-d sends him. Wherever

G-d's providence directs him, with whichever people he comes in

51. See Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 9.

52. See Tur, Shulchan Aruch, and Shulchan Aru ch HaRav, the conclusion of sec. 106.

53. [Trans. Note: Were our Divine service to be inspired by our own understanding, there

would be certain limits. There are certain particular areas inwhichwewould chosenot

to be involved. When, by contrast, one is motivated by a commtment to G-d's

purpose, there are no limits to thespheresof activity inwhichhe devotes his efforts.]




contact, he invests all of his power and all of his strength to raise up

"many students,"54

surpassing all boundaries and limits in a manner

where "the man becomes exceedingly prosperous."

When one proceeds with the attitude that one must carry out

G-d's mssion, one is successful with all types of students. [To

paraphrase the Torah reading:] " I f he said: 'The spotted ones will be

your wages....' If he said: 'The ringed ones....' All the sheep gave

birth...."; i.e., all of the students grow up in the desired manner.

Moreover, "they are more fertile than other sheep."55

One's "progeny

is perfect"; there are no flaws inone's offspring, i.e., students.

This prepares each Jew — and all Jews — for the true and

ultimate Redemption. In this Redemption, not one Jew will remain in

exile, as wehave been promised:56

"You, the children of Israel, will be

gathered one by one," and "a great congregation will return here."57

May this take place in the immediate future.

(Adapted from Sichos Yud Kislev, 5737)

54. A vos 1:1; see Likkutei Sichos, Vol . IV, p. 1180.

55. Rashi's commentary to Bereishis 30:43.

56. Yeshayahu 27:12. See Rashi's commentary to Devarim 30:3: "He will actually hold the

hand of each and every person, [bringinghim] from his place."

57. Yirmeyahu 31:7.



P A R S H A S

V A Y I G A S H

Likkutei S i c h o s , Vol. X, p. 146ff.

I .O n the verse:

1

"And he fell on the neck of Benyamn his brother and

wept, and Benyamn wept on his neck," our Sages comment:2

[Yosef] cried for the two B at e i H aM ik dash (— as alluded to by

the fact that י ואר , translated as neck, employs aצ plural form —)

that would be built in the tribal portion of Benyamn and

would be destroyed. Benyamn... wept for the Sanctuary of

Shiloh that would be built in the tribal portion of Yosef and

wouldbe destroyed.

The M i d r a s h explains

3

why the neck is used as an analogy for theB e i s H a M i k d a s h in its interpretation of the verse:

4

"Your neck is l ike the

Tower of David." Just as the neck is at the top of aperson's body, so,

too, the Beis H a M i k d a s h is located at the top of the world." The

expression "at the top of the world" is not, however, to be interpreted

as meaning the highest point in the world. For, as our Sages5

comment

on the verse

6

"He shall dwell between his shoulders," the B e i sH a M i k d a s h is 23 cubits lower than the spring of Eitam, just as a

person's neck, though at a high point on his body, is slightly lower

than his head. On the contrary, it was said: "Let us descend a drop,

for it is written: 'He shall dwell between his shoulders.' There is no

1. B e r e i s h i s 45:14.

2. Meg i l lah 16b, citedby R a s h i in his commentary to the verse.

3. Sh i rHaSh i r imRabbah on the versewhich follows.

4. S h i r HaShirim 4:4.

5. Zevachim 54b.

6. Devar im 33:12; see R a s h i ' s commentary.

25




more attractive portion of an ox than [the place] between his

shoulders." ([According to this interpretation,] "at the top of the

world" means "among the higher points of the world.")

O n the surface, the question arises: What is the advantageand the

attraction of not being at the highest point? Ifthere is no advantagein

height, why do [our Sages] teach that "the Beis HaMikdash is located at

the top of the world"? And if height is a positive quality7

(as itappears

from our Sages' statement), seemngly, whatever is higher is more

attractive and of higher quality. What then is the reason for the Beis

HaMikdash being 23 cubits lower [than the stream of Eitam]?

The above questions can be resolved by explaining the function

of the neck, which servesas an intermediary between the head and the

body. A person's collective life-energy rests in the brain. Its

transmssion from the headto the body comesthrough the medium of

the esophagus, trachea, and veins in the throat. A simlar pattern is

found with regard to the transmssion of intellect from the brain. The

external dimension of intellect is drawn down from the brain to the

heart (and from there, its influence is spread throughout the entire

body). This comes through the medium of the narrow [organ, the]

throat, which is interposed between them.8

Thus the neck possessesa

certain advantage even over the head, for it is the neck (and throat)

that make it possible for the head's purpose to be carried out,

[enabling]:

a) all the limbs to receive their life-energy from the head; and

b) all of them to conduct themselves according to the intellect

lodged in the head.

[When each is considered] as an independent entity, the head

possesses an advantage over the neck. Therefore, even in a physical

sense, it is higher than it. This advantage, however, applies only with

regard to the order within one's internal hierarchy. When speaking

about the ultimate purpose and mssion of the head, there is an

7. Note that with regard to the four species, the blessing is recited over the lulav, (even

though the esrog possessesboth smell and taste). Since it is higher than the others, it is

more important and the entire group is called by its name (Shulchan Aruch HaRav

651:17). And asKoheles 5:7states: "There is One higher than highWho watches."

8. Torah Or, p. 58b, et al.



V A Y I G A S H 27

advantage9 to the neck (precisely because it is lower). For it is an

intermediary, and it has thepower and thepotential to transmt the

life-energy and the intellect from theheadto thebody.

Simlar concepts apply with regard to theBeis HaMikdash, whichis

described with theanalogy of a neck. Its primary advantageis its slight

descent from theforemost peak, for thepurpose of the Beis HaMikdash

is to serve as amedium through which (G-dly) light isdrawn down

[to] illumnate theworld, 1 0

even the portions on the lowest levels.

Therefore theBeis HaMikdash was located (on ahigh point, butnot) onthe highest point; [it was not] elevated entirely from theworld. (For i f

so, it would not be able [to serve as a medium] to illumnatethe

world.) I twas necessary to "descend slightly," to come closeand into

connection with the world so that it could illumnate it. {This

resembles a person's neck, which — because it is lower than (the

elevated station of) thehead, and instead, closer to thebody — isable to serve as an intermediary between the two and join them

together.}

Simlar concepts apply with regard to the Beis HaMikdash in

mcrocosm that exists within every Jew.11

When hisG-dly soul is not

uplifted andexalted to thepoint ofseparation from hisown personal

world,1 2

but instead is involved with it and enclothed within it to

refine andpurify his animal soul, body, andportion in theworld, his

entire existencebecomesaSanctuary for G-d's light.

9. In this context, note thedistinction between theHebrew terms madreigah, "level," and

maaleh, "advantage," discussed atthe beginning of thema a ma r entitledBereishis, 5705.

10. For thisreason, the windows of the Beis HaMikdash were slanted outward ( I Melachim 6:4)

[to diffuse G-dly light to the world at large]. SeeLikkutei Sichos, Vo l . I I , p. 315, andthe

sourcescited there.

11. As our Sagescomment (see Reishis Chochmah, Shaar HaAhavah Shelah, Shaar HaOsiyos, Os

Lamed, Tractate Taanis, the section beginning Meilnyan HaAvodah, Parshas Terumah, the

section entitledTorah O r, pp. 325b, 326b) on theverse (Shmos 25:8): " I will dwell within

them": "It does not say: 'within it,'butrather 'within them,' within every member of

the Jewish people."

12. [Trans. Note: I.e., theelements of his being that are not directly related to holiness.]




I I .

On this basis, we can understand whyYosef wept on Benyamn's neck

and Benyamn wept on Yosef's neck. For one mght ask: Why did each

weep on his brother's neck? Why didn't he weep on his brother's

head? For the head is the (primary and most elevated portion) of a

person's [body].

[These questions can be resolved as follows:] Man's ultimate

purpose is described by our Sages:13

" I was created solely to servemy

Creator." That service involves the consummation of G-d's intent in

the creation of each individual [person] and the creation of the entire

spiritual cosmos, [namely]: "to make adwelling for Him in the lower

realms."14

"Everything is in the hands of Heaven except the fear of

Heaven."15

[And indeed,] fear is "the beginning of Divine service, its

fundamental quality and root."16

[Hence, the consummation of G-d's

intent] is dependent on the Divine service of the Jewish people. They

wil l make adwelling for G-d in the lower realms through each one of

them refining his body, his animal soul, and his portion of the world.

Therefore the fundamental element in these [efforts] (even with

regard to the head) is the neck, which enables this service to be

carriedout.

Hence Yosef and Benyamn wept on each other's neck and not on

their head. For:

a) there is no reason to cry over the head, i.e., the soul of a Jew.

For even when [a J ew] sins, "his soul is still faithful to H i m . " 1 7

b) the purpose of a Jew is not reflected by his head, [which is

associated with] the service of the soul for itself, but in its neck,

13. As related in theMishnah andBeraisa at the conclusion of tractate Kiddush in .

14. Midrash Tanchuma, P a r s h a s Naso, sec. 16.

15. B e r a c h o s 33b.

16. [Tanya, ch. 41.]

17. Tanya, ch. 24. A nd our Sagescomment (Sanhedr in 44a): "Even if one sins, one remains a

Jew." [Moreover, for theterm"Jew," our Sagesuse the name] Yisrael (ישראל) whichcan

bedivided into the words שאר י , "a head forל Me."



V A Y I G A S H 29

[which relates to the soul's] effect on the body, the animal soul, and

its portion in the world, 1 8

as above.

I I I .

Explanation is, nevertheless, required: Why did Yosef weep over the

Batei HaMikdash that were built in the tribal portion of Benyamn while

Benyamn wept over the Sanctuary built in the tribal portion of Yosef?

Seemngly, each one of them should have wept over the destruction

of the Sanctuary or Beis HaMikdash that took place in his own tribal

portion. For ultimately, "a person is close to his own self."19

([One's connection with his own sef is so powerful that] even

with regard to the mitzvah of loving one's fellow Jew — and even with

regard to the explanations in Chassidus20 about the great quality and

extent of this love — [the command obligating this love is] neverthe¬

less to: "Love your neighbor as yourself," i.e., only a comparison is

possible. One can never actually reach the same degree of love with

which one loves his own self.21

Indeed, Iggeres HaKodesh quotes —

indeed, in the same Epistle22

that elaborates on the importance of

giving generously to tzedakah as an expression of kindness — [our

Sages' ruling] 2 3

that when a person has only one jug of water [and he

18. See Tanya, ch. 37 (p. 48b) which statesthat "The soul itself is in no need of correction

at all.... It descended to thisworld... onlyto drawdown G-dly light and to correct...."

19. Sanhedrin 9b [inexplainingwhy a person is unable to testify with regard to matters that

involve his own self]. This closeness is "far greater than the closeness of those

disqualified as 'relatives of the first degree,' i.e., two brothers or a father and a son. For

even a father and a brother cannot understand an idea one conceived through thought

alone unless they conceive it themselves. [To communicate to them, speech is

necessary.] For the relationshipwith a father and a brother are added on to aperson's

essence. With regard to his 'closeness' to his own sef, by contrast, there is nothing

added on to hisessence" (theseriesof maamarim entitledVeKochah, 5637, ch. 72).

20. See Tanya, ch. 32; Derech Mitzvosecha, Mitzvas Ahavas Yisrael Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I I , pp.

300, 435.

21. See the series of maamarim entitled VeKochah, loc. cit. Even though the love for one's

fellow Jew is an essential love {this is the intent of theword "as yourself," i.e., just as

one loves himself with an essential love, so, too, his love for his fellow Jew is an

essential love (Likkutei Sichos, loc. cit.)} and resembles the love of brothers (Tanya, ch.

32), nevertheless, the closenessof two brothers is not thesameas aperson's closeness

to his own sef, as stated in fn. 19.

22. Epistle 16.

23. Nedarim 80b; Bava Metzia 62a.



30 A K N O W I N G H E A R T

needsthe entire quantity for himself], he should not share it, for "your

own life takesprecedence."

Therefore certainly both [Yosef and Benyamn] were more

concerned with their own Sanctuaries. Hence, seemngly, their

weeping should have been focused primarily on the destruction of the

Sanctuaries [built in their own portions].

There is another point that requires explanation: On the verse:24

" A n d [Yosef] fell on [Yaakov's] neck and wept on his neck

excessively," the Zohar25

states that Yosef wept over the destruction of

the Beis HaMikdash. (In this way, the Zohar explains why "he wept on

his neck excessively." The additional weeping was over "the final exile"

which is the longest exile [our people have faced].)

[O n the surface,] it is perplexing why Yosef alone wept over the

destruction of the Beis HaMikdash while Yaakov did not. Rashi,26

quoting our Sages, explains that Yaakov did not cry, because he was

reciting the Shema. According to the Zohar, however, this explanation is

insufficient.

[T o explain:] According to the simple meaning of the above

verse, [Yosef] was not [necessarily] cryingbecauseof the destruction.

[I n that context,] the explanation that Yaakov "did not fall on Yosef's

neck and did not kiss him" because he was reciting the She m a

emphasizes the greatness of Yaakov's Divine service. Despite the fact

that this was the first time he had seen his son after so many years

when he had thought that he was not alive, he, nevertheless, did not

interrupt his recitation of the Shema. Moreover, this awesome

happiness did not prevent him from reciting (the first verse of) the

She m a with focused attention as required.27

According to the Zohar, however, [the question remains]: How is

it possible that Yaakov was not overcome by emotion and was not

disturbed by the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash? How was it

possible for him to focus his attention on the recitation of theShema?

24. Bereishis 46:29.

25. Zohar I , 211a.

26. I n hiscommentaryto theaboveverse.

27. Berachos 13b; Shulchan Aru ch HaRav 63:5.



V A Y I G A S H 31

I V .

The concepts can be explained as follows: W i t h regard to worldly

matters, why does someone cry? [To release tension and] make

himself feel better. As we see, when aperson cries over amatter that

causes himdifficulty andaggravation, the crying does nothave the

power to rectify thecircumstances that prompted himto cry. But, as

alluded to in theverse28

"My tears were like bread for me," crying

makes the person feel better. This leads to the obvious conclusion

that when aperson has thepotential tocorrect amatter, heshould not

calmhimself bycrying. Instead, heshould do what he can to correct

it.

Therefore when aperson sees thedestruction of acolleague's Beis

HaMikdash, he shares his colleague's pain and cries. But (the

fundamental) correction [of the problem] and the rebuilding of the

Beis HaMikdash anew isnotdependent on him,but on his colleague. He

can and, [indeed,] he isobligatedtohelp his colleague by:

a) reproving him (inapleasant manner);

b) arousing [Divine] mercy for him and praying for him.

Nevertheless, thenegation of the sins that caused thedestruction

of his colleague's Beis HaMikdash is dependent on his colleague, and

that colleague has free choice. [Therefore,] when one has done

everything that he can to help his colleague, and he sees that his

colleague's Beis HaMikdash remains destroyed, hissoul will be touched

andhewill cry.

[This refers to one's relations with others.] When, bycontrast, a

person seesthat his own Beis HaMikdash hasbeen destroyed, hecannot

content himself with sighing and weeping.29 On thecontrary, hemust

try to correct [the situation] and build anew by performing his Divine

service [in a manner that] brings about an individual experience of

redemption for himself.30

28. Tehillim 42:4; seeRashi's commentary and Or HaTorah tothat verse.

29. As HaYom Yom, entry for I I Adar 8, states: "One[positive] deed isbetter than1000

sighs."

30. See Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 4; Likkutei Sichos, Vol. II,p. 692.




The [only] exception is when the weeping comprises tears of

teshuvah. In that instance, the weeping itself is an act of building, as

impliedby theverse:31

"Placemytears in Your jug."[But with regard to ordinary] weeping, it can, at times, weaken

one's work to rebuild his own Beis HaMikdash, for he will think that he

has fulfilled his obligation by weeping.

Accordingly, both Yosef and Benyamn wept over the Sanctuary

that was in the other's portion. And Yaakov did not weep about the

destruction of the Beis HaMikdash, but instead, recited the Shema. For

Yaakov was the father of the entire Jewish people and thus both the

Sanctuary [of Shiloh] and the Beis HaMikdash were "in his portion,"

[i.e., relevant to him]. Accordingly, [by reciting the Shema,] he was

involved in correcting and rebuilding the Beis HaMikdash.

For the purpose of the Beis HaMikdash is to be "ahouse prepared

for sacrifices to be offered."32

And "Whoever recites the Shema.. . is

considered as if he brought a burnt-offering and sacrifices,"33

for the

fundamental aspect of the sacrifices is [expressed by the interpretation

of the verse:] "[When] a man from [among] you offers a sacrifice to

G-d,"34

[that the sacrifice must come "from you." This is achieved

through] reciting the She m a and [expressing] mesirus nefesh, [its spiritual

counterpart] — to dedicate one's soul [completely] when reciting

" [ G - d is] one," and [when reciting "Love G-d] with all your soul," [to

make a commitment to express that love] "even when one seeks to

take your soul."35

V .

Hence, there is no room for the question: Since with the spirit of

prophecy one sees that the Sanctuary and the Beis HaMikdash will be

destroyed and that this has been decreed from Above, what [then] is

31. Tehillim 56:9. See Shabbos 105b; Or HaTorah, loc. cit.

32. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Beis HaBechirah 1:1.

33. Berachos 14b; see Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 40a ff.

34. Vayikra 1:2; see Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p. 2b.

35. [I .e., to the point of sacrificing one's life.] For a comparison of these two levels of

mesirus nefesh, see Torah Or, Bereishis, p. 29b (and Or HaTorah, Vayeishev); Likkutei Torah,

Vayikra 3a Shir HaShirim 1:1.



V A Y I G A S H 33

there to do? For ourSages have already declared:36

"Even when a

sharp sword isplaced on aperson's neck, heshould notrefrain from

[seeking G-d's] mercy." Even when aHeavenly decree hasbeen

issued, through Divine service itcan berent,37

aswe find with regard

to K ing Chizkiyahu. Yeshayahu communicated tohimtheprophecy

wherein itwas decreed that Chizkiyahuwould die. Chizkiyahu told

him: "Ceaseyour prophesying and depart," and "He turned his faceto

the wall andprayed toG-d."38

And hisprayer waseffective; [G-d

assured him:] " I have heard your prayer," andgranted him fifteen

moreyearsof life, i.e., an increaseof life here in this material world. 3 9

V I .

Our Sages state:40

"[In] every generation when theBeis HaMikdash is

not rebuilt, it isconsidered as if it wasdestroyed." Simlarly, with

regard toevery individual:41

If theBeis HaMikdash is notbuilt in his

days, that is asign that his individual Beis HaMikdash is destroyed. For i f

his own Divine service, i.e., his individual Beis HaMikdash were perfect,

Mashiach would come and build the [actual] Beis HaMikdash.42

The intent and the purpose isnot that contemplation of the above

will lead tosighing and weeping, but rather todeed and action, one's

individual redemption,43

and thebuilding of the Beis HaMikdash within

his own soul. This inturn will hasten anddraw down thegreater

36. Berachos 10a

37. SeeRosh HaShanah 16b.

38. IIMelachim 20:2.

39. Ibid., 20:5-6. See Yevamos 49b;Biurei HaZohar, Vayeira, p. 18d. See aso theBiurei HaZohar

LeTzemach Tzedek, Vayeira, p. 49; andChanoch LeNaar, p. 49.

40. Talmud Yerushalmi, Yoma 1:1; Midrash Tehillim 137:10. TheMidrash Tehillim aso explains:

"What is the rationale? Becausethey did not do teshuvah."

41. See the ruling of Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Teshuvah 3:4, based onKiddushin 40b):

"Every person must seehimself [and theentire world asequally balanced....] If he

performs one mitzvah, he tips his [individual] balance and that of the entireworld to the

side of merit... as itiswritten (Mishlei 10:25): "A righteous man is the foundation of the

world."

42. SeeBoneh Yerushalayim, sec. 84, in thename of theTikkunei Zohar, that if therewereone

righteous man who would turn to G-d in complete teshuvah, Mashiach would come in his

generation. NoteRambam, loc. cit.

43. SeeTanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle4




Redemption and therebuilding of theactual Beis HaMikdash in itsplace

by Mashiach. May this take place intheimmediate future.

(A dapted from Sichos Shabbos Parshas Vayigash, 5725)



P A R S H A S

S H M O S

Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X X X V I , p. 1

I .

[Our Torah reading relates:]1

A nd Moshe matured and hewent out to hisbrethren.... He

saw an Egyptian man beating [an Israelite]... andhesmotethe

Egyptian.... Andhewent out on thenext day... and he told

thewicked man: "Why do you strike?..."

A nd [that person] replied: "W i l l youkill me?..."

Moshe became frightened and said: "Certainly, the matter

has become known...." And Pharaoh heard... andhesought to

kill Moshe. And Moshe fled....

O n the phrase:2 "And Moshe became frightened," Rashi

comments:

[The verse should be understood] according to its simple

meaning. [Alternatively,] according to the Midrash, 3 he was

worried because he saw wicked gossipers among theJewishpeople. Hethought: "Now, maybe they will not be fit to be

redeemed."

1. Shmos 2:11-15.

2. Ibid. :14.

3. Midrash Tanchuma, Shmos, sec. 10; Shmos Rabbah 1:30. (In the latter source, this concept is

stated in theexegesis of thephrase: "Certainly, thematter hasbecome known," i.e.,

[Moshe] became aware of "thereason why theJews were subjugated more than the

other nations." SeeLikkutei Sichos, V ol . X X X I , p. 9, fn. 15,and pp. 13-14. Seeaso Yefas

ToarHaShaleim on thispassage.

35




I t is worthy to consider: Why does the simple meaning (that

Moshe was concerned about his life because it had become public

knowledge that he killed the Egyptian) not suffice?4

[Why must] Rashi

also cite the interpretation of the Midrash 5 — "he was worried... now,

maybe they will not be fit to be redeemed" — which is not at all

alluded to in theverse.6

I t is possible to offer a simple explanation of the above: Rashi's

intent was to resolve a general question raised by the verse: "And

Moshe became frightened and said: 'Certainly, the matter has become

known.'" Why was this particular mentioned?7

Moshe's fear did not

4. [Moreover,] in the first and second printing of Rashi's commentary, and in the majority

of the manuscripts that are in my possession, the beginning of Rashi's commentary:

"[Theverseshould be understood] according to its simple meaning" is lacking. (Rashi's

commentary begins from: "According to the Midrash....")

5. In particular, this question warrants [explanation] because, according to this

interpretation of "and Moshe became frightened," it is aso necessary to interpret the

continuation of the verse ("Certainly, the matter has become known") in a non-literal

manner. Instead of its simple meaning (that the killing of the Egyptian was the reason

for Moshe's concern) another explanation is [necessary]. Therefore [when

commenting on the latter phrase], (after stating that this phraseshould be interpreted

straightforwardly), Rashi brings the interpretation of the Midrash* that "the matter is

known to me, regarding the question that I wouldponder, namely: How did [Israel] sin

[so severely] to warrant being subjugated [and having] back-breaking labor [imposed

upon them]?"

* Midrash Tanchuma (Buber ed.), Vaeira, sec. 17; Shmos Rabbah, loc. cit. (see fn. 3). The

commentaries to Rashi have elaborated with regard to the explanation of Moshe's

question despite the fact that [G-d had foretold the enslavement of the Jewish

people] in the covenant bein habesarim.

[Trans. Note: In the original of this sichah, this note appeared as part of the text

and the asterisk as a footnote.]

6. [Thedifficulty is confounded by the fact] that this interpretation requires explanation:

How is it possible that the promse [given by] the Holy One, blessed be He, given in

the covenant bein habesarim would not be fulfilled? {See the Introduction to Rambam's

Commentary to th e Mishnah (near the beginning) [which explains the difference] between a

promse that the Holy One, blessed be He, made "with a positivemessage conveyed

by a prophet" (which cannot be nullified) and "a promse given privately by the Ho ly

One, blessed be He, to a prophet." (Note aso sec. 2.)} See aso the following

footnote.

Moreover, [the question arises]: How did Moshe know they wereslanderers before

they informed on him(as ImreiShefer questions with regard to Rashi's commentary)?

7. It is not appropriate to rase questions concerning the entire narrative of Moshe, Dasan,

and A vi ram, [presumng] that the Torah should have related merely that "Pharaoh



SHMOS 37

motivate him to act. For Moshe did not flee to M idian until after

Pharaohheard about the matter and sought to kill him.8

To resolve this question, Rashi cites the interpretation of the

Midrash which explains that Moshe's fear came as a result of his

concern that the Jewish people were not worthy of being redeemed.9

I I .

The Torah's words should never be interpreted in a manner that

departs from their simple meaning. (In particular, this applies in the

present instance, where Rashi does not suffice himself with the inter¬

pretation of the Midrash, and indeed, mentions the simple meaning

heard" (about thekilling of the Egyptian) and "Moshe fled." [A fter all,] the entire story

about two Hebrew men striving and their rebuke of Moshe: "Who placed you?... Wil l

youkill me?..." appearsunnecessary.

I t is possible to explain that this difficulty is resolved byRashi's commentary to the

phrase "And Pharaoh heard": "They [Dasan and A vi ram] informed on him."* By

[recounting the interaction between Moshe and thesetwo villains], the Torah informs

us how this report reached Pharaoh.** Nevertheless, [the question raised previously

remains, for] it is not explained why the Torah tells us that Moshebecame frightened.

* Fromthe fact that [Rashi] does not statethat this is aMidrash, we can assumethat

this is the simple meaning of the narrative. It is possible to explain that we are

forced to come to this conclusion from the fact that the Torah tells us of Moshe's

interaction with them.

I t is apparent that they were the onlyoneswho saw [Moshe] kill the Egyptian,

for Moshe "turned this way and that way and saw that there was no one there"

(Shmos 2:8). (Note Rashi's commentary; this is not the place for discussion of it.)

Therefore, it islogical to assumethat they were the oneswho informed on him.

** Mentioning Dasan andAviram is aso important, for later on in the narrative, Moshe

returns to Egypt "after al the men (i.e., Dasan and A viram) who sought your life

had died" (Shmos 4:19, see Rashi's commentary). See aso Rashi's commentary to

Shmos 2:13: "Dasan and A vi ram. They were the ones who [in the future] left over

the manna [in violation of G-d's command]."

[Trans. Note: In the original of this sichah, this note appearedas part of the text

and theasterisks as footnotes.]

8. See the Maskil LeDavid's [gloss to] Rashi's commentary. He questions: If Moshe was

frightened for his life, why did he not fleeuntil afterwards (when Pharaoh sought to kill

him)? See aso the commentary of R. Ovadiah of Seforno. Clarification isstill required.

9. [Trans. Note: Although there is an obvious reason why Moshe became frightened,

since he did not act upon that fear, we are forced to say that his fear was not merely for

his life. Hence, Rashi cites the interpretation of theMidrash to explain the subject of his

concern.]




before the interpretation of the Midrash.) Therefore, we are forced to

say that even according to the simple meaning of the phrase"And

Moshebecame frightened" — that he feared for his life because it had

become known that he killed the Egyptian — there is an explanation

and a rationale (at least according to the approach of Derush) why the

Torah mentions this matter.

[To understand the above,] it is beneficial to first [cite] the

comments of the Midrash 10 on the verse:11

"And Yaakov became very

frightened and he was distressed":

Rabbi Pinchas said in the name of Rabbi Reuven: Two people

received promses from the Ho ly One, blessed be He, the

chosen one of the Patriarchs and the chosen one of the

Prophets, and, nonetheless, they became frightened.

"The chosen one of the Patriarchs" — this is Yaakov.... TheHo ly One, blessed be He, told him: 1 2

"Behold, I will be with

you," and yet ultimately, "Yaakov became frightened."

"The chosen one of the Prophets" — this is Moshe.... The

Ho ly One, blessed be He, told him: 1 3

"Behold, I will be with

you," and yet ultimately, Moshe became frightened. [This is

intimated by the verse:]14

"And G-d told Moshe: 'Do not fear

him (Og).'" "Do not fear him" is said only to a person who

becomes afraid.

The commentaries on the Midrash differ with regard to the intent

of this passage. There are commentaries15 who maintain that [the

Midrash] is praising Yaakov and Moshe. Although they received

10. Bereishis Rabbah 76:1.

11. Bereishis 32:8.

12. Ibid. 28:15.

13. Shmos 3:12.

14. Bamidbar 21:34.

15. See the commentary of R. Avrahamben Asher, quoted in Or HaSeche l to Bereishis Rabbah,

loc. cit. (Venice 5328), that is cited by the commentary Matanas Kehunah to Bereishis

Rabbah, loc. cit. Nezer HaKodesh HaShaleim, loc. cit. Simlar concepts are also found in the

Akeidah (Vayishlach), the conclusion of sec. 26, and other texts.



SHMOS 39

promses from G-d, they did not rely on the promise,16

fearing that

perhaps they sinned17

and were thus unworthy of having the promse

fulfilled.18

There are, however, other commentaries19

who explain that the

intent of the Midrash is that "[we] should not learn from their example,

for they should not have been afraid." Instead, "[one's] heart should

be settled, trusting in G-d."20 {This intent is apparent from the

continuation of the Midrash which states that the Prophet [Yeshayahu]

would "criticize the Jewish people, telling them:21

'Youhave forgotten

G-d Who madeyou... and you are continually frightened throughout

the day,'" i.e., the prophet rebukes the people for being afraid.}2 2

The opinion of the commentaries that [Yaakov and Moshe]

should not have become frightened is worthy of exploration. What is

lacking in the supposition that perhaps, because of their sins [they

feared that they were unworthy of the fulfillment of G-d's promse]?

16. This follows the opinion in the Midrash (loc. cit.:2) that states: "There is no [secure]

promse for the righteous in this world." (See the explanation of this approach in light

of the teachings of Chassidus in the Biurei Zohar of the Tzemach Tzedek, p. 192. See aso the

statements on p. 191 of that text which explain that the Divine service of these

individuals isabovethe level of bitachon, trust in G-d.)

17. As our Sages explicitly state (Berachos 4a, cited by Rashi in his commentary to Bereishis

32:11) with regard to Yaakov that he feared that his sins would have an effect [and

nullify the protection G-d promsed him].

18. This explanation is given by the commentaries to the Midrash, loc. cit. Simlarly, the

Akeidah states that [their fear] "did not stem froma lack of trust and a dearth of faith...

but instead, as an imperative arising fromthe perfection of their conduct (to find a way

to savethemselves, implying natural means [instead of relying on G-d's mracles])." See

the sourcesmentioned in fn. 47.

19. Yefas ToarHaShaleim to Bereishis Rabbah, loc. cit. {[As support,] the passagefrom the Talmud

cites Berachos 60a. See aso the commentaries to the Ein Yaakov (Berachos, loc. cit.) and the

Nesivos Olam (from the Maharal ) , Nesiv HaBitachon. Here is not the place for further

elaboration.}

See also the interpretation of O r HaSechel , loc. cit., (entry shnei bnei adam ) whichstates:

" I t is possible that being afraid is considered an error on the part of Yaakov and

Moshe."

20. Tehillim 113:7; quoted inBerachos, loc. cit.

This approach disputes the opinion [mentioned above] which states that "there is

no [secure] promse for the righteous in thisworld" (Yefas Toar, loc. cit.).

21. Yeshayahu 51:13.

22. See how the commentaries mentioned in fn. 15 interpret the continuation of the

Midrash according to their perspective.




(To the contrary, it appears on the surface to be a very positive

quality: One's humility is so great23

that he is always concerned that

his Divineservice is not flawless and that he is sinful.24

)

This question focuses on the general nature of the attribute of

bitachon, trust in G-d, which we are commanded [to pursue].25 Bitachon

is not merely the faith that G-d has the potential to bestow good [upon

a person] and save him from adversity. Instead, [it implies that] the

person trusts that G-d will actually do this. And his trust is so absolute

that he issereneand does not worry at all. As Chovos HaLevavos states:26

"The essence of bitachon is the serenity of the person who trusts. His

heart relies on the One Whom he trusts that He will do what is best

and most befitting with regard to the matter he trusts in Him."

Explanation is required: What is the foundation for this absolute

certainty? Even when there is an explicit promse from G-d, it is

possible that the promse will not be fulfilled because "sin will havean

effect." Certainly, this applies when there is no such promse. [More¬

over,] the possibility that "sinwill havean effect" is relevant to eachof

us (for "there is no righteous man in the world who will do good and

23. See Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 2: "Since Yaakov was very, very humble in his own

eyes,... [he thought that his] sins mght have an effect, i.e., it appeared to himthat he

had sinned."

24. This reflects the questions raised by the commentaries to the E in Yaakov (Berachos, loc.

cit.) with regard to Hillel's statement: " I ampositive that this [call of distress] is not

comng from my house." [The commentaries question why he showed so much

confidence. Why did he not worrythat perhapshe sinned, and as a result his household

wouldbebeset by difficulty?]

25. As explicitly stated in many verses, we must trust in G-d. (Many of these verses are

cited in Reishis Chochmah, Shaar HaAhavah, ch. 12.) In Shaarei Teshuvah (Shaar 3, Os 32) ,

Rabbeinu Yonah explains that this is included in the command stated in Devarim 20:1:

"When you go out to war... do not fear them." {AsRambam explains (Sefer HaMitzvos,

negative commandment 58), this verse is a command and not apromse.}[Implied is]

that " i f a person seesthat adversity is close, he should set his heart on the salvation of

G-dand trust in it."

26. Shaar HaBitachon, ch. 1. See aso his introduction to Shaar HaBitachon (entry Ach toeles

habitachon). See asoKa d HaKemach (by Rabbeinu BachayeJ, erech Bitachon whichstatesthat

"No doubt should mtigateone's bitachon."



SHMOS 41

not sin.")27 If even Yaakov our Patriarch had this fear, certainly, it

applies to others.28

I I I .

O n the surface, one mght offer the following explanation: The

concept of bitachon isbased on the faith that everything comes from

G-d, blessed be He. Thus when a person is found in distress and

difficulty, it is not because [the material factor] causing the distress

has, Heaven forbid, [independent] control in any manner whatsoever.

Instead, everything comes from Above.

Therefore the person is absolutely serene. Either way, [he has no

reason to worry]. For if it is not appropriate that any evil be visited

upon him, certainly G-dwill savehimfrom it. {This is true even when

there is no way, according to the natural order, that the person will be

saved. For there is no one who can dictate to G-d, and He has the

potential to changethe natural order.}29

A nd if the person is not worthy of G-d's kindness (but instead is

worthy of receiving a punishment), he should still be utterly serene.

For he knows that his difficulty is not a result of any [material] entity,

but rather stems from G-d alone. It has come about because he did

not fulfill his responsibilities to his Creator; his [neglect of his

obligations] brought about the difficulty. Therefore he fears G-d

alone. {Moreover, he realizes that the difficulty is for his own good.

For the punishments ordained by the Torah are expressions of G-d's

kindness, cleansing a person from the blemish of sin. Thus there is no

place forworry or fear.}

Accordingly, there is no contradiction. A person may have

absolute bitachon in G-d even though he knows that sin may have an

effect and he will not be saved from the difficulty. This does not

27. Koheles 7:20.

28. See the Kad HaKemach, loc. cit., which states that "a person who has faith may not

necessarily have bitachon. For at times, he will fear that perhaps [his] sins will have an

effect." (And in his discussion of this issue, he cites the example of Yaakov our

Patriarch.)

29. See the comments of RabbeinuYonah cited inKad H aKemach, loc. cit. See aso Likkutei

Sichos, Vol . I l l , p. 883, and themarginal notes mentioned there.




disturb his serenity, for he knows that everything that happens to him

comes from G-d.

[According to this explanation, we can interpret] the approach of

the commentaries to theMidrash who maintain that Yaakov and Moshe

should not have become frightened [and that we should not learn

from their conduct as follows]: As evident from the simple interpreta¬

tion of the relevant passages, they were afraid of [the person who

brought about the distress]. Yaakov was afraid of Esav, as it is written:

"And Yaakovbecamevery frightened and he was distressed. [Hence,]

he divided the people...."

Simlarly, Moses was warned not to fear [Og]. The fact that he

had such fear indicated that he was lacking in consummate bitachon in

G-d.

I V .

This explanation is, however, insufficient. For it is clearly apparent

that the fundamental element of bitachon is not merely serenity and

peace of mnd [that comes from the knowledge that everything is

ordained by the hand of G-d]. Instead, [the desired intent is] that the

person who has bitachon in G-d will receive manifest and overt good,30

i.e., that G-dwill deliver himfrom his difficulties.

According to the above explanation, it appears that this simple

meaning of bitachon is beyond the reach of the majority of the Jewish

people. (For "there is no righteous man in the world who will do good

and not sin" and who can justifiably declare that he is worthy of

having G-d's kindness manifest upon him.) [Itwould appear that] the

concept of bitachon is primarily [reflected in the conviction] that even

when a person does not merit G-d's kindness, he has peace of mnd

because [he realizes that] everything comes from G-d. (Moreover,

everything is for his own good; it is just not [always] manifest and

apparent good.)

{I t is only perfectly righteous men, whose Divine service has

reached consummate perfection and who therefore do not have to

30. [Trans. Note: The intent is that everything granted by G-d is ultimately good. We

desire, however, good that man can easily and readily appreciate as good.]



SHMOS 43

worry about sin having aneffect,31

who can trust that they will receive

manifest and apparent good.32

}

[Such anapproach, however, contradicts thestatements of] Chovos

HaLevavos 33 (intheexplanation of"the reasonswhy bitachon ispossible")

that "there isOne Who can betrusted becauseofHis ultimategener¬

osity and kindness which is extended to aperson who is worthy and aso

to one who isnot worthy. His generosity will continue and His kindness

will beextended without cessation orend." [According tothis view,]

the concept of bitachon isbased on theprinciple that G-d will bestow

kindness on a person who is not worthy as well.

Explanation is therefore required: [True,] G-d's mercies are

extended also topersons who are notworthy. Nevertheless, isn't it

possible that aperson will receive punishment for his undesirable

acts?34

What is the[conceptual] foundation for aperson's trust that

G-d will actgenerously to him althoughhe isnot worthy?

V .

The above questions can beresolved byfirst explaininganadage of

the Tzemach Tzedek (quoted frequently by my revered father-in-law, the

31. SeeKad HaKemach, loc. cit., the commentaries toEin Yaakov, Berachos, loc. cit.

32. According to theopinion in theMidrash that "There is no [secure] promse for the

righteous in this world," on thecontrary, therighteous donot rely (even) on[G-d's]

promse.

33. Shaar HaBitachon, ch. 2(the seventh cause); seeaso ch. 3(the introduction tothe sixth

concept); seeaso the conclusion of ch.1.

34. As stated in Chovos H aLevavos (loc. cit., ch. 3, thefourth introduction): "I t isnecessaryfor

[a person] totake great careand [undertake] intense efforts tofulfill what theCreator

obligated us inHis service, [i.e.,] tocarry outHis mitzvos... sothat theCreator will

consent togive [aperson] thematters which [that person] trusts hewill receive."

Nevertheless, this is[necessary] only sothat theperson's present conduct will notbe

in contradiction tohisbitachon in G-d. For it is impossible for a person tohavebitachon in

G- d and rebel aganst Him(asstated in that source. That text gives anexample from

mortal conduct: [A person who is entrustedwith a mssion and ignores it cannot expect

that the person who entrusted him with that mssionwill pay himgenerously].)

[Nevertheless, theintent is notthat theperson's positive conduct evokesG-d's

generosity. Instead,] thefoundation and thereason for histrust [in G-d] is G-d's

generositywhich encompasses al created beings. Seech. 2of the above source which

states that thereason for our trust is "Hismercy, graciousness, andlove." And

similarly, in ch. 3 hewrites: "The Creator shows mercy on man more than anyone else

shows mercy."




Rebbe)35 who gave this reply after someone begged him to plead for

Divine mercies on behalf of a person who was dangerously i l l :3 6 Tracht

gut, vet zaingut ("Think positively, and the outcomewill be good"). It is

apparent from the Tzemach Tzedeks words that thinking positively

(having bitachon [in G-d]) will bring about a good outcome (in revealed

and manifest good).

I t appears that the intent can be explained as follows: The obliga¬

tion of bitachon concerningwhich we were commanded is not merely a

particular element (and a natural corollary) of the faith that everything

is in G-d's hands and that G-d is generous and merciful. For there is

no need for adistinct obligation for such belief. Instead, the obligation

of bitachon is aseparate thrust in Divine service. Itsdefinition is that a

person will rely and depend on G-d alone to the extent that he casts

his lot entirely upon Him, as it is written:37

"Cast your burden upon

G-d," i.e., the person has no other dependency in the world except

upon G-d.

I t is possible to explain that this is the intent of Chovos HaLevavos

which states38

that [a person's] bitachon should resemble that "of a

prisoner in a dungeon in his master's domain." The prisoner puts his

trust only in his master, for "he is given over to his hand. No other

person can causehim harm or help him."

{For this reason, our faith in G-d is such that our actual material

situation is of no consequence. Even if according to the natural order

it is impossible for a person to be saved, he relies on G-d Who is not

bound by nature at all, Heaven forbid.}

This itself is the foundation for a person's trust that G-d will

bestow apparent and manifest good upon him, even if he is not worthy

of this kindness.

For the definition of trust is not that becausethe kindness of G-d

is totally unlimted and can be extended to a person whether he is

35. See IgrosKodesh of the Rebbe Rayatz, Vo l . I I , p. 537;Vo l . V I I , p. 197.

36. As appropriate according to the ruling of the Rama (Yoreh Deah, the conclusion of ch.

335).

37. Tehillim 55:23.

38. Loc. cit., ch. 2, the sixthcause; see aso the first introduction in ch. 3with regard to the

fifth concept.



SHMOS 45

worthy or not, he will , therefore, receive G-d's kindness without any

effort on his own part. (Were this to be true, the entire concept of

reward and punishment would thus be nullified.) Instead, bitachoninvolveswork and labor within one's soul. And this effort and labor in

developing bitachon in G-d evokes G-d's kindness.

When a person truly trusts in G-d alone from the depths of his

soul, to the extent that he has no worry at all, his arousal [of trust]

itself causes G-d to conduct Himself with him in an appropriate

manner, granting him kindness (even when, [on his own accord,]

without taking this trust into account, he is not worthy of such

kindness).39

This is the intent of the command40

to trust in G-d: that a person

should "cast his burden on G-d," [relying on Him] to grant him

manifest and apparent good. Since he trusts G-d alone (without

making calculations as to whether or not it is possible for him to be

saved [according to the natural order]), this causes a corresponding

approach41

toward him in the spiritual realms. G-d protects him and

showers mercy upon him even when, were one to make a reckoning,

39. This concept isexplicitly stated inSeferIkkarim (Maamar 4, ch. 46): "It iswritten (Tehillim

32:10): 'A person who trusts in G-dwill be encompassed by kindness,' i.e., even if he is

not worthy on his own accord, it is the propensity of bitachon to drawdown unwarranted

kindness on those who trust in G-d." See aso ch. 47: " I f a person wouldplace his hope

[in G-d] as is fitting, kindnesswouldnot bewithheld from him by G-d."

See aso Kad H aKemach , loc. cit., which states: "A person who has bitachon in G-d is

lifted above the difficulty in reward for his bitachon even if [otherwise,] it would have

been appropriate for the difficulty to have been visited upon him." See aso Nesivos

Olam, the conclusionof Nesiv HaBitachon, and other sources.

See aso Yalkut Shimoni, Yeshayahu, Remez 473, which states: "The Ho ly One, blessed

be He, asked: 'Are there G-d-fearing men among you?... Trust in M y name and [that

trust] will stand byyou.... I will savewhoever trusts inM y name.'"

Note aso Kesser Shem Tov, sec. 382, which states that, "When it is desired to take

retribution from a person who is worthy of being punished, [first,] the attribute of

bitachon is taken from him."

40. Tehillim 37:3; 115:9; see aso the sources mentioned in fn. 25.

41. See the Zohar I I , 184b, which states: "The higher realms impart influence to [thelower

realms] according to the nature of [the lower realms' approach]. If they manifest a

bright and eager countenance, brightness is shined to them from Above. And if they

manifest sadness...." See aso IgrosKodesh of the Tzemach Tzedek, p. 324ff.




he would not be worthy, and He enables him to appreciate manifest

and apparent good.42

This is the intent of the adageof the Tzemach Tzedek [cited above]

that [the person's] bitachon itself will lead to positive results. This is not

a supplementary element of our bitachon [in G-d]. Quite the contrary,

this is the definition of the bitachon that we are commanded to have.

V I .

Based on the above, it is possible to say that this is the intent of the

verse in our passage that speaks about Moshe's fear when he heard

[his fellow] Jew say: "Wi l l youkill me... like you killed the Egyptian?"

The intent was to teach us this fundamental message with regard to

the quality of bitachon: that bitachon itself will lead to and bring about

G-d's salvation. The opposite is aso true. When a person is not saved

from distress, the reason is that his bitachon is lacking.43

This is the intent of the verse: "And Moshe became frightened

and said: 'Certainly the matter has become known.'" (And directly

after that [it tells us]:) "Pharaoh heard... and he sought to kill Moshe.

A nd Moshe fled...." The fact that Moshe feared for his life and did not

trust G-d44

that no harm would befall him because of his positive

efforts [to savea Jewish man from the Egyptian who was beating him

and to rebuke the two Jewswho were quarreling] was itself the cause

42. See Tanya, Iggeres H aKodesh (the conclusion of Epistle 11): "This faith causeseverything

to become truly good in an apparent way." (See aso the Biurei Zohar of the Tzemach

Tzedek, p. 194.) Note aso simlar concepts in Nesivos O lam, loc. cit.

43. See Berachos, loc. cit., [which relates that Yehudah bar Nassan was following after Rav

Hamnuna]. He sighed. He told him: "Do you want to bring suffering upon yourself?"

as it iswritten (Iyov 3:24): 'BecauseI feared afright, it has overtaken me.'"(Seeaso the

Yefas Toar HaShaleim which quotes this narrative.) The intent is that if hewould rely on

G-d without anyworry or fear, hewould be saved from suffering. See aso the Nesivos

Olam, loc. cit.

44. See the Midrash Lekach Tov which explains that Moshe's fear [stemmed from his

acceptance of] the perspective (Bereishis Rabbah, loc. cit.) that "There is no [secure]

promse for the righteous in thisworld." (See fn. 16.) See aso the glossBeerBisadeh to

Rashi's commentary to the verse which explains that the reason Moshe was afrad that

hewould be killed was that he feared that the Jewish people were not worthy of being

redeemed. If not, hewould not haveworried at all, for he knew that his future mssion

wouldbe to redeemthe Jewish people.



SHMOS 47

for "Pharaoh [to] hear of the matter and to seek to kill Moshe."

[Moshe's lack of trust] causedhim to haveto flee [for his life].

{I t is possible to explain that this is the intent of the wording of

the verse: "And [he] said: 'Certainly, the matter has become known.'"

N ot only did Moshe think these thoughts within his heart, he

expressed them inspeech.45

This increases the emphasis on his lack of

bitachon. For in addition to having these suspicions in his mnd, he

spoke about them.}46

Were he to have had complete bitachon in G-d, and not have

worried at all about the situation inwhich he found himself (that "the

matter had become known" and would be discovered by Pharaoh),

that would havecausedthe matter to have been forgotten and for him

to haverealized apparent and manifest good.

This leads to a directive applicable to our actual conduct. When a

person encounters obstacles and encumbrances in his observance of

the Torah and its mitzvos, he should realize that the elimination of

these obstacles is dependent upon him and his conduct. If he has

absolute faith in G-d, that G-d will help him so that the situation will

be good until he is utterlyserenewithout any worry at all, [hisbitachon

will bear fruit]. (Needless to say, he must aso do whatever he can in a

natural way to remove these obstacles,47

[but it is his bitachon that will

shift the flow of the paradigm].) [He will see the realization of] the

promse: "Think positively and the outcome will be good." This will

become manifest. A l l of the obstacles and encumbrances will be

elimnated and he will enjoy actual good that is apparent and manifest

to all.

45. For the Torahdoesnot say (as itsays inBereishis 17:17): "And he said in his heart."

46. [The very fact that a thought is expressed inspeech empowers it to materialize,] as is

well known with regard to lashon hara, unfavorable gossip. By speaking, one brings the

undesirable qualities (possessed by one's colleague) from a concealed state into

revelation. (See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V, p. 15; Vol. XV, p. 32, et al.)

47. As iswell known, there is no contradiction between truebitachon in G-d and looking for

reasons [to solve one's difficulties] in the natural order. (See the elaboration on this

concept in Chovos HaLevavos, loc. cit., ch. 3, the fifth introduction, in the Akeidah,

Vayishlach, Shaar 26, and in other sources. See aso Likkutei Sichos, Vo l . XV , p. 486ff., and

the sources mentioned there.) It is only perfectly righteous men who do not have to

search for reasons in the natural order. This is not the place for extended discussion of

that issue.



48 A K NOWING HEART

Just aswith regard to theredemption from Egypt, it issaid:48

"In

the merit of [their] bitachon, the Jews were redeemed from Egypt,"so,

too, with regard to theredemption from this last exile, the Midrash

states:49

"They areworthy of redemption inreward for [their] hope

(alone)." May we merit this, that in thereward for thebitachon of the

Jewish people [inthepromse] "My salvation will come soon,"50

they

will merit that G-dwill redeem them in the true andultimate

Redemption. May this take place in the immediate future.

(A dapted from Sichos Shabbos Parshas Shmos, 5726,

andSichos Shabbos Parshas Beshalach, 5723)

48. KadHaKemach, loc. cit., basedonMidrash Tehillim, Psam22.

49. Yalkut Shimoni, Tehillim (based on Midrash Tehillim, Psam 40), cited by R. David

Avudraham, Seder Tefillos Yom HaKippurim. See aso the Chidah, Midbar Kadmos, Maarechos

Kuf, sec. 16.

50. Yeshayahu 56:1.



P A R S H A S

B E S H A L A C H

Likkutei Sichos, V ol . X X V I , p. 95ff.

I .

The Tur states1

that it is desirable to recite the passageconcerning the

manna every day.2

The Beis Yosef 3 explains the rationale for this ruling:

"So that one will believe that his entire sustenance comes to him

through Divine providence."

1. Orach Chayim, sec. 1; see asoShulchan Aru ch , Orach Chayim 1:5.

2. See the Perishah (based on the Talmud Yerushalmi, Berachos*) which states: "Whoever

recites the passage concerning the manna every day can rest assured [that his

sustenance will not be decreased]." Simlarly, the Alter Rebbe (Shulchan Aruch HaRav,

Mahadura Kama 1:10 and Mahadura Basra 1:9) [mentions the importance of the recitation

of thepassageevery day]. See TureiZahav 1:4. See aso [sec. I l l ] of this sichah and fn. 32.

Note asoOr HaTorah, Beshalach, p. 644, (see asoMaamarei Admur HaZakein — Razal, p.

35) which states"every day or from time to time."

* Sefer H aMa nhig, H ilchos Shabbos, sec. 44, quotes this wording from "the conclusion of

tractateYoma in the Talmud Yerushalmi. ** Simlarly, the Tashbeitz (the halachic rulings

of Maharam of Rutenberg), the Laws of Prayer, sec. 256, cites the source as "the

Talmud Yerushalmi." It has already been noted that there is no such quote in the

present text of the Talmud Yerushalmi. Rabbeinu Bachaye in his commentary to Shmos

16:16quotes this insight as "a receivedtradition among the Sages."

** This is the version according to one of the manuscript copies [of Sefer HaManhig].

(See the Jerusalem printing of 5738 which mentions the different versions of the

text.) In the present printing of Sefer HaManhig, however, the words "at the

conclusion of tractate Yoma" refer to a previous statement, that the manna was "as if

placed in a holder" (Yoma 75b). The latter version is aso necessaryaccording to the

wording of the manuscript of the text that does not mention the Talmud Yerushalmi

and the quote cited above at all.

3. In his commentary to the Tur.

49




In his Shulchan Aruch, the Alter Rebbe— in the Mahadura Kama4 —

quotes the ruling of the Tur and the rationale of the Beis Yosef , and adds

(an explanation from the Levush 5): "[One should also read the passage

concerning the manna, to fortify his faith that all his provisions are

granted to him by Divine providence.] For the Ho ly One, blessed be

He, specifically provided every man with an omer [of manna] for every

member of his household; as it iswritten, 'When they measured it by

the omer, he who had gathered much had no excess, and he who had

gathered little was lacking nothing.'"6

I n his Mahadura Basra, 7 however, the Alter Rebbe changes his

ruling. Instead of citing the Beis Yosef (and the Levush), he states: "[I t is

proper to recite...] the passageconcerning the manna [to spur] one's

trust in G-d Who provides every man with his daily bread."8

There are two differences between thesepassages:

a) [In the Mahadura Basra,] instead of using the wording of the Beis

Yosef that speaks of faith [emunah] , the Alter Rebbe speaks of trust

[bitachon];

4. 1:10.

5. 1:5.

6. Shmos 16:18. The citation of this verse is an addition by the A lter Rebbe that is not

present in his source, theLevush. See fn. 12.

7. 1:9.

8. It is noteworthy to mention that in this entire subsection, theA lter Rebbe condenseshis

statementswhen compared to theMahadura Kama. For example, with regard to the binding

of Yitzchak, in the Mahadura Kama, he quotes (from the Beis Yosef) two rationaes: "to recall

the merit of the Patriarchs before theHoly One, blessed be He... and to makeone's [evil]

inclination submt to the service of G-d, just as Yitzchak sacrificed himself." In the

Mahadura Basra, by contrast, hestatesonly"to recall the merit of the Patriarchs."*

Similarly, in theMahadura Basra, he doesnot mention the rationale for the recitation

of the Ten Commandments, nor the lengthy explanation of why they are not recited

communally, that are found in the Mahadura Kama. Similarly, with regard to the

sacrifices (in addition to the fact that they are al included in the samesubsection, in

contrast to the Mahadura Kama which lists them in severa subsections), the Mahadura

Basra omts severa of the particular laws mentioned in the Mahadura Kama. (See

Mahadura Kama, subsec. 15ff.)

Wi th regard to the passageconcerning the manna, however, the A lter Rebbe does

not merelycondensehis statements, he changes [severa points,] aswill be explained at

length.

* These differences were explained, according to the teachings of Chassidus, in Sichos

Shabbos Parshas Beshalach, 5723.



BESHALACH 51

b) He does not focus on the fact that the manna was distributed

(by Divine providence)9 "an omer [of manna] for every member of his

household," but that the fact that G-dcontinually granted the manna,

"each day, its daily portion"10 should evoke one's trust that G-d will

grant each person hisdaily bread.

Seemngly, thesetwo distinctions are dependent one on the other:

The concept that "the Ho ly One, blessed be He, specificallyprovided

every man with an omer [of manna] for every member of his household...

'he who had gathered much had no excess, and he who had gathered

little was lacking nothing,'" strengthens aJew's faith that hissustenance

(does not come from "my strength and the power of my hand,"11

but

instead,) from G-d's providence. This was manifest in [thedaily descent

of] the manna. For we saw that man's activities had no effect on the

quantityof mannawhichG-d (ordained and) granted each person.12

9. Thispoint is aso added by theLevush. Clarification isrequiredwhy theA lter Rebbe did

not quote thispoint from theLevush in hisMahadura Kama. See fn. 12.

10. See Shmos 16:4.

11. Devarim 8:17. This verse comes as acontinuation of the previous versewhichmentions

the manna.

12. On this basis, we can appreciate why the A lter Rebbe adds (as stated in fn. 6) the

prooftext: "He who had gathered much had no excess, and he who had gathered little

lacked nothing." The fact that each member of one's household received exactly an

omer was mentioned in the previous verse. This verse, however, [has a different

emphasis,] highlighting that man's actions do not alter [what has been ordained for him

from Above].

O n this basis, we can aso understand [another difference between the A lter

Rebbe's statement of this concept and that of] the Levush. The Levush states that a

person's sustenance is granted behashgachah peratis, with the uniqueDivine providence

that governs every particular aspect of an individual's destiny (see fn. 9). The A lterRebbe omts the word peratis [which emphasizes control of all particular elements of

one's destiny], for according to theA lter Rebbe, the emphasis is {not on the fact that

the manna was granted according to hashgachah peratis (exactly an omer apportioned for

each person),* but rather} that the manna was granted in a manner in which it was

overtlyrevealed that it came from Aboveand man's deedshad no effect upon it.

* The Levush, by contrast, emphasizes that a person's sustenance is controlled by

Divineprovidence. On this basis, we can appreciate the difference in the wording

used by the Levush and the A lter Rebbe. TheLevush quotes the verse, "an omer for

[each of] thenumber of members of his household," [putting an emphasis on the fact

that each individual received hisportion]. TheA lter Rebbe, by contrast, states, "an

omer [of manna] for every member of his household," [speaking more inclusively].




Trust (bitachon), however, implies (not only that we believe that a

person's sustenancecomes from G-d, but also) that werely on G-d to

certainly provide us with our sustenance. The concept of trust is

derived from the fact that G-d gave the manna in consistent, daily

portions, in a manner where one could rely entirely upon Him,

without worrying.

Explanation is, however, necessary: What is the reason that the

Beis Yosef (and the Levush) — and similarly, the Mahadura Kama of the

Shulchan Aruch HaRav — focus on the concept of faith, while in the

Mahadura Basra, the Alter Rebbe gives a different rationale: "[to spur]

one's trust in G-d Who provides every man with his dailybread"?

I I .

On the surface, it would appear that there must aso be an actual

difference in the application of halachah between these two rationales.

[T o reach that conclusion, the following] preface isnecessary:

One of the differences between emunah, faith, and bitachon, trust, is

that emunah is a constant factor in one's life. A believer accepts the

points he believes in with absolute certainty, seeing them as givens.

Therefore they are constant [factors in his life].

[This applies] even when his emunah involves [not only abstract

principles, but also] points that affect his actual [life], 1 3

e.g., the point

under discussion, that "his provisions are granted to him by Divine

providence." It is not appropriate to say that he believes this concept

only during the time that he is involved with his livelihood. On the

contrary, this emunah is a constant.

W i t h regard to bitachon, by contrast, a person's certainty and

reliance on G-d with regard to his livelihood is a feeling that is

aroused when a person is in need.14

When a person is involved in his

13. Simlar concepts apply with regard to [another dimension of] emunah, that it is an

encompassing power [which does not necessarily produce an internalized effect on a

person. This] aso [applies] even with regard to actual [life situations, and it is possible

that before breaking into a house, athief will cry out to G-d (Berachos 63a, according to

the version of the E i n Yaakov). [Such a contradiction] is not possible with regard to

bitachon.

14. [It is true that] the concept of bitachon aways exists within the feelings of the person

who shows trust. The actual arousa and revelation of the quality of trust, however,



BESHALACH 53

work to earn his livelihood, he trusts G-d, [confident that] "G-d your

L - rd will bless you in all that you do."15

He trusts that G-d will

certainly bless his efforts in a manner that they will bring him

sustenance.

To cite another instance: When a person finds himself in a

difficult situation and does not see any natural way of being saved, he

does not despair and ask:16

"Where will my assistance come from?"

Instead, he is certain (becauseof his bitachon in G-d,) [and trusts] that

G-d— Who is the Master of nature and can alter [the situation as He

desires]17

— will certainly help him. He knows: "My assistance is from

G-d, Maker of heaven and earth."18

Moreover, the person's bitachon itself (serves as a medium that)

draws down the deliverance from G-d and the satisfaction of the

person's needs.

{This is one of the explanations with regard to the attribute of

bitachon. On the surface, there is a point requiring explanation. Bitachon

means19

that a person relies on G-d to bring him good in an overtly

revealed manner. [The intent is] not only that G-d knows [in a

manner that transcends human understanding that what he is

undergoing] is for his good, but aso that the person himself should be

able to appreciate that it is good.

Seemngly, the fact that a person findshimself in adifficult situa¬

tion could be becausehis conduct is not appropriate and therefore he

isworthy of being punished. How can it be a foundation of aperson's

bitachon in G-d20

that G-d will certainly (not punish him, even though

occurs only when [this quality is] called upon in actual life. See the beginning of Nesiv

HaBitachon in Nesivos Olam by the Maharal.

15. Devarim 15:18.

16. Tehillim 121:1.

17. See [the statements of] Rabbeinu Yonah [quoted in] Kad HaKemach, erech Bitachon. See

[also] the marginal note inLikkutei Sichos, Vo l . I l l , p. 883 (also printed in Igros Kodesh of

the Rebbe Rayatz, Vol. V I , p. 398ff). See aso sec. I V of this sichah and the sources

cited in fn. 43.

18. Tehillim, loc. cit.:2.19. W i t h regard to the concepts that follow, see Likkutei Sichos, Vo l . I l l , loc. cit.

20. SeeKad HaKemach, loc. cit., which states: "Everyone who trusts in G-d has emunah.... But a

person who has emunah may not have bitachon, for sometimes he may fear that his sins

wil l havean effect." See the Tzemach Tzedek's Biurei HaZohar, pp. 189 and 192.




[the punishment] is [ultimately] for his own good, but instead will)

grant him overtly revealed good? Moreover, how can his bitachon be

absolute and genuine to the extent that he has no doubt and is entirely

serene?21

I t is possible to explain as follows: When a person displays utter

bitachon in G-d and has simple and absolute trust that G-d will provide

him with overtly revealed good — despite the fact that this is inap¬

propriate according to ordinary calculations and circumstances — his

bitachon itself serves as a medium to draw down influence from Above.

G-d responds to him"measurefor measure," for the Torahdeclaresand

rules that this is His characteristic.22

And He grants himovertly revealed

good,23

without considering at all whether he is worthy of i t. 2 4 }

I I I .

From the above, it is clear that the attribute of bitachon, i.e., one's

actual arousal of bitachon, has to do with asking for one's needs. When

a person is involved with seeking his necessities, he trusts in G-d,

[confident] that G-dwill fulfill his needs.

Based on the above, since the recitation of the passage of the

manna was instituted so that a person will be aroused to trust G-d,25

it

is possible to say:

a) This passage should be recited only on weekdays, but not on

Shabbos 26 when we do not request our needs.27

{[A parallel can be

21. See the Introduction to Shaar HaBitachon in Chovos HaLevavos which explains that such an

approach reflects the attribute of bitachon.

22. See the Mishnah, Sotah 8b.

[Trans. Note: The intent is that since one's bitachon in G-d transcends reason and

logic, G-d rewardshim with good that is not bound by thescaesof reason and logic.]

23. See the lengthy explanation in Nesivos Olam, loc. cit. Note Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle

11: "Wi th this faith, everything becomes good in a revealed manner. ([This passageis]

quoted inBiurei H aZoh ar, loc. cit., p. 194,which states: "Throughemunah and bitachon...."

24. Since G-d rewards man "measure for measure," at the outset, man may trust that [his

bitachon] will be rewarded. Note Kad H aKemach, loc. cit., which states: "The concept of

bitachon... is for one's heart to be steadfast, trusting [G-d], as if He actually promsed

him." See asoChovos HaLevavos, loc. cit., chs. 1-2.

25. This aso applies according to the rationalegiven by thePerishah (cited in fn. 2) that the

recitation of the passage was instituted "so that a person's sustenance will not be

decreased."



BESHALACH 55

drawn to] the manna itself which did not descend on Shabbos 28

although it provided man with his dailysustenance.}

b) Even during the week, [the passage concerning the manna]

should not be recited in the initial portion of one's prayers. W i t h

regard to the request for one's needs, [our Sages teach]:29

"A person

should always set forth [his] praise of the Ho ly One, blessed be He,

and then pray (i.e., request his needs)." Indeed, we find this pattern in

several siddurim. 30 The passageconcerning the manna is positioned after

prayer (together with a prayer and arequest for one's livelihood).

Following the rationale [that the passage is recited]: "to fortify his

faith...," by contrast, it is appropriate to recite this passageon Shabbos

as well and also beforeprayer (which represents "G-d's praise"). For31

faith in G-d (including, also, faith with regard to one's sustenance)

must be a constant matter.

This distinction, however, requires clarification. For even in the

Mahadura Basra (which states the rationale: "[to spur] one's trust in

26. BeerHeitev, Orach Chayim 1:9 statesthat thispassagemay aso be recited on Shabbos. This

aso appears to be the opinion of Sefer HaMManhig (cited in the marginal notes to fn. 2)

that discusses the recitation of the passage concerning the manna in "the Laws of

Shabbos. " See the continuation of thissichah.

27. It is possible to explain that [the recitation of thepassageconcerning the manna] is not

comparable to the recitation of the passages concerning the sacrifices of private

individuals. [In the latter instances, although these sacrifices were not offered on

Shabbos,] "there is no difficulty with his reciting the Scriptural passages themselves, for

he is, [after all,] reading the Torah" (Shulchan Aru ch HaRav, Mahadura Kama 1:16, Magen

Avraham 1:11). In this instance, it isonly "as if he offered the sacrifices." With regard to

the recitation of the passage concerning the manna, by contrast, its recitation is

intended to arouse (in actual practice) one's trust in G-d. Hence, it is possible to say

that it is inappropriate to recite it on Shabbos. Clarification isstill necessary.

28. [With regard to the question of] whether the manna descended on festivals, see the

commentsof the Mechilta, the Mechilta DRashbi, and Rashi to Shmos 16:26 and Tosafos, s.v.

vihayah, Beitzah 2b. See asoToras Shlomoh to Shmos, op. cit.

29. Berachos 32a, [quotedby] the Tur and the Shulchan Aru ch HaRav 51:1.

30. Siddur Yaavetz, Avodas Yisrael, et al. See aso the statement quoted in Orchos Chayim

(HaChadash) , Orach Chayim 1, that one who prays for his livelihood after the recitation of

this passageas stated in the Siddurim shouldwait until after the Shemoneh Esreh, becauseit

iswritten in the Zohar, Parshas Pinchas, that one should not pray for his livelihood before

the morning prayers. Simlar statements are made by Makor Chayim (authored by the

author of Chavos Yair) in his gossto Shulchan Aru ch , Orach Chayim.

31. See asoOlas Tamid (goss to Orach Chayim, loc. cit.) which is cited by the Be'er Heitev, loc.

cit.




G-d"), the Alter Rebbewrites: "It is proper to recite every day... the

passageconcerning the manna." Thewording, "every day," seemngly

includes Shabbos .32

Simlarly, [this distinction is not borne out] with regard to the

place in prayer where the passageshould be recited: The wording of

the Mahadura Basra appears to indicate that the only difference

(between its ruling and that of the Mahadura Kama) is with regard to

the rationale for reciting [the passage], but not that [the rationale]

brings about a difference [and] a limitation with regard to when the

passage may be recited. This is aso indicated by the fact that in the

Mahadura Basra, the Alter Rebbe includes the law regarding the

recitation of the passage concerning the manna with that regarding

the passagesconcerning the Akeidah, (the Ten Commandments,)33

and

the sacrifices34

(which are recited before prayer).35

The question thus remains: For what reason is a different rationale

stated in the Mahadura Basra than in the Mahadura Kama (and in the Beis

Yosef)?

I V .

The above question can be resolved through the explanation of the

conduct of Rabbi Yeisa the Elder36

(as described in the Zohar of this

week's Torah reading37

in connection with the manna).

32. Itappears obvious that theA lter Rebbe's intent in adding the words "every day" (that

are not stated in the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch) is to includeShabbos. (This aso applies

with regard to the passageof the Akeidah [the Binding of Yitzchak].) This is aso the

conclusion of the texts citedby theBeer Heitev, loc. cit.

33. [Trans. Note: The Ten Commandments is included inparentheses, for although in his

Shulchan Aruch theA lter Rebbe advises its inclusion in themorning prayers, hedoesnot

include it in his text of the Siddur.]

34. [Moreover,] in the Mahadura Kama, the laws regarding the recitation of the passages

concerningthe sacrifices are mentioned inseparate subsections.

35. Thereare, however, (as cited in Maasef LeChol HaMachanos, Orach Chayim 1:9) some who

recite the passage concerning the Akeidah after prayer (as is the practice with the

passageconcerning the manna).

36. In many sources (Maamarei AdmurHaZakein, 5565, Vol . I I (pp. 648, 652); Siddur Im Dach,

p. 112d; Derech Mitzvosecha, Mitzvas Tiglachas Metzora, sec. 2, et al.), this story is told of

Rav Hamnuna, the Elder. And inKuntreis U'Maayon (Discourse 17, ch. 1), it is told of

Rabbi Yeibei the Elder.

37. Zohar I I , 62b; see asoZohar I , 199b.



BESHALACH 57

[Rabbi Yeisa] would not preparehis meal every day until after

he had requested his sustenance from G-d. As he would

explain: "A meal should not be prepared until it has been

given from the K ing."

Clarification is required: Since the food (from which he prepared

his meal) was already within his possession ([as that passagestates:] " I

am in possession of my food for this day")38

and lacked only prepara¬

tion, what did he mean39

by saying that he is asking G-d to give him

that meal?

I t is possible to explain the passage based on the interpretation

given by Rabbeinu Bacheya40

of our Sages' statement41

that Yosef was

punished for asking Pharaoh's steward to mention him to Pharaoh.42

[Rabbeinu Bacheya states:] "Heaven forbid that Yosef the righteous

would place his trust in the steward. [Instead, his trust was focused]

on G-d alone. His intent, however, was that G-d ordained that [he

would meet] the steward so that through him a mracle could be

accomplished."

Why then was Yosef punished?

Becausehe saw the steward as an instrument (through which

G-d could send His deliverance).... And it is not appropriate

for the righteous and the like to seek an instrument. There¬

fore he was punished for this. For he should have trusted in

the Ho ly One, blessed be He, alone, for He is the Master of

all instruments. [Yosef should have trusted] that He would

send him an instrument without him having to seek one.

[This explanation] provokes the question:

43

W i t h regard tobitachon, it is explained (in Chovos HaLevavos 44) that we are obligated to

38. Zohar I , loc. cit. I I , p. 62a.

39. Note our Sages' comment (Shabbos 118b): "Whoever recitesHallel every day isbase."

40. At the conclusion of his commentary to Parshas Vayeishev.

41. Bereishis Rabbah 89:3; Rashi's commentary to Bereishis 40:23.

42. See Bereishis 40:14.

43. Or HaTorah (Yahel Or) L'Tehil l im, ch. 40:5; the maamar entitled Velo Zachor, 5677and 5688;

see asoMaamarei Admur HaZakein 5565, Vol . I , p. 200; Toras Chayim, Parshas Vayechi, the

maamar entitled Ben Poreis Yosef, ch. 13.

44. S haar HaBitachon, ch. 3, the fifth introduction, loc. cit., ch. 4. This concept is reiterated in

many sources. See alsoLikkutei Sichos, Vol . XV, p. 486ff.




find instruments [through which G-d works], (and many proofs are

brought for this concept). Why then was Yosef punished for seeking

"an instrument"?

I t is explained45

that there are two expressions (and levels) of

bitachon:

a) When Divine influence is drawn down in an ordinary manner,

according to the pattern of nature46

{to use the terminology of

Chassidus: [influence comng] from the level of memale kol almin (the

Divine light which invests itself in the worlds)}. On this level, it is

necessary to seek "an instrument" and to find mediums within nature.

For this [form of] Divine influence is conveyed through the natural

order.

b) When it is obvious that the Divine influence is drawn down in a

manner that doesnot follow the natural order {to use the terminology

of Chassidus: [influence comng] from the level of sovev kol almin (the

Divine light that transcends the worlds)}. [Such influence] calls forth

a higher level of bitachon, that "one rely entirely on G-d's providence

alone, without doing anything. Instead, one should trust entirely that

G-dwill certainly help through a medium."47

{Y osef the righteous who, through his Divine service, was (at all

times) connected with a level that transcends nature48

should have

conducted himself in a manner [that reflected] the higher level of

bitachon.}

45. The maamar entitled Velo Zachor, loc. cit.

46. See the seriesof maamarim entitledBeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, Vo l . I , ch. 82 (with regard to

the two leves of bitachon [as implied by the verse (Tehillim 118:8)]: "It is preferable to

take refuge in G-d than to trust in man" which are discussed in the ma a ma r entitledVelo

Zachor, loc. cit. )

47. See the series of maamarim entitledBeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, loc. cit., which states: "When

one sees that one's conduct should follow this pattern, we do not apply the principle:

'One should not rely on a mracle.'"

48. See the sources cited in fn. 43 that clarify the difference between [the spiritual levels

of] Yaakov and Yosef.



BESHALACH 59

V .

The difference between these two levels of b i tachon is apparent even

while one seeks a medium.49

According to the first approach, the

necessity for a person to employ a medium is due to the fact that the

Divine influence is drawn down according to the natural order. Hence

nature and its rules are significant. Therefore a person must seek a

medium and an instrument through which G-d's blessing will be

drawndown.

When, however, a person follows the second approach of b i t achon ,

"to do nothing but to trust in G-d," the natural order is not at all

significant for him. (Therefore it is not necessary for him to seek an

instrument or medium.) Accordingly, even if he possesses a natural

instrument or a medium through which he could receive his liveli¬

hood, his livelihood is no closer to him than it would have been had

he not had that instrument or medium. For he does not attach any

independent importance to that medium. His sole perception [of the

situation] is that he receives everything directly from G-d. And the

instrument and the medium is also made for him by G-d together with

his livelihood.50

This is also the explanation of the conduct of Rabbi Yeisa the

Elder51

who said: "A meal should not be prepared until it has been

given from the King" (although he already possessedhis food for that

day).

Rabbi Yeisa's approach to b i tachon was that he looked at every act

(individually), (not as his own deed, but rather) as a gift from G-d.52

Accordingly, [from such a perspective,] even when one possesses the

food at home and all that isnecessary is for him to take it and prepare

49. W i th regard to the concepts to follow, see L ikku te i S i c h o s , V ol . X V I , p. 174ff. (see fn. 52)

andV ol . X V I I I , p. 295ff.

50. See the interpretation of [Tehi l l im 55:23]: "Hewill provide for you(ךלכלכי)," [as "Hewill

provide the י ("medium") forכל you,] in them a a m a r entitled Ve lo Zac hor, loc . c i t .

51. See thesourcesmentioned in fn. 36. See also Likkute i S i c h o s , V ol . I , p. 6ff.,which offers a

slightly different conception.

52. The connection to the manna can be understood on the basis of the explanation in

Likkute i S i c h o s , V o l . X V , p. 176, with regard to the verse ( S h m o s 16:4): "Behold, I will rain

down for you bread from heaven." And there was a dimension of the manna that

involved effort on man's part.




it, hedoes notfeel that he istaking andpreparing hisown food, but

instead, that he is (— in thepresent tense—) being given something

by G-d. Therefore he must request these [needs] from G-d, (just ashewould request his sustenance i f he did not have food athome).

V I .

This explanation enablesus to clarify another aspect intheconduct of

Rabbi YeisatheElder. The wording of the Zohar: "[Rabbi Yeisa] would

not prepare hismeal every day until after he hadmadehisrequest..."

implies that Rabbi Yeisa conducted himself in this manner even on

Shabbos .53 There is adifficulty in this case. Shabbos is not aday when we

request ourneeds. Why then would Rabbi Yeisa pray for his [daily]

sustenance from G-d, even onShabbos?

Based on theabove, [his conduct] can beunderstood: Therequests

for one's needs that are considered inappropriate on Shabbos involve

situations where theperson isconcerned with himself: that hisneeds

and lacks befulfilled. The prayer of Rabbi Yeisa the Elder, [by contrast,]

was arousedby the fact that his own existence was entirely insignificant.

[Instead,] he felt every dimension of hisexistence wasdependent on

G-d. TheZohar54 describes such conduct by referring to thephrase:55

"Those who long for His kindness," interpreting it as"thosewho every

day await andanticipate [theopportunity to] request their sustenance

from theHoly One, blessedbeHe." The intent of their prayers isonly

to express how they "long for Hiskindness"56

; how they feel that

everything they receive isanexpression of G-d's kindness.

53. See theZohar I , 199a, which states [that aperson should not cook his food on one day

for thefollowing day, except onFriday, for thepeople would collect themanna only

for] that immediate day except on Friday, [when theywouldaso collect] forShabbos.

54. Zohar I I , loc. cit. See Or HaTorah, Beshalach, p. 644 (quoted in Likkutei Sichos, Vol.X V I , p.

177, fn. 35).

55. Tehillim 147:11.

56. Note the teaching of theMaggid of Mezritch {Or Torah, thebeginning of Parshas

Vayigash see Tikkunei Zohar, Tikkun 7 (p. 22a)} concerning our Sages'statement (Berachos

30b): "One should not stand to pray except with aserious intent," that [theseriousness

of one's intent should focus on] "there lacking nothing Above, Heaven forbid." See

aso theexplanation in theHaggadah Shel Pesach Im Biurim (Kehot 5746-5747), p. 633ff.,

with regard to eating for thesake of Heaven, that eating becomes secondary to the



BESHALACH 61

Praying for one's sustenance in this manner is acceptableeven on

Shabbos.

V I I .

The conduct of Rabbi Yeisa the Elder is not [— in its entirety — ] a

matter that [can be emulated by] every person. Nevertheless, in

microcosm,57

his approach is relevant to everyone,58

at the very least,

at specific times.

I t is possible to say that this is the difference between Shabbos and

the weekdays. During the six days of the week, a person is involved

with earning his livelihood.59

Thus his trust is expressed in seeking an

instrument and a medium [for G-d's blessing]. For [during the week]

we cannot ask him to lift himself entirely abovethe natural order and

express the higher level of bitachon. Shabbos , by contrast, is not a day of

work.60

And when a person is removed from work, he must express (at

least on a smaller scale) the higher level of bitachon, [conducting

himself as] "thosewho long for Your kindness."

O n this basis, it is possible to explain the difference between the

wording of the Mahadura Kama and the Mahadura Basra of the Alter

Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch with regard to the recitation of the passage

concerning the manna. TheAlter Rebbecomposed theMahadura Kama

of his Shulchan Aruch according to the rulings of the Talmud and the

halachic authorities.61

On an apparent level (according to the revealed

dimensions of Torah Law), bitachon involves preparing a medium [for

G-d's blessings]. [Accordingly,] were he to explain the rationale for

the recitation of the passageconcerning the manna as "[to spur] one's

recitation of the blessing, that one benefits from thisworld only so that hewill be able

to recite a blessing.

57. See the statementsof theA lter Rebbe in Tanya, the beginning of ch. 44, with regard to

Moshe. (See aso theZohar I , Introduction, p. 7b, the glossesof Mikdash Melech, andSefer

HaGilgulim, Introduction 36, which mention the connection between Rav Hamnuna the

Elder to Moshe.)

58. See Sotah 48b; Yoma 76a; Mechilta and Midrash Tanchuma, Beshalach, commenting on Shmos

16:4; Zohar I I , 62a, 63a; Or HaTorah, as cited in fn. 54.

59. As Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 156:1 rules, after prayer one should "turn to his

business... and trade faithfully."

60. Yechezkel 46:1.

61. See Shulchan Aru ch HaRav 25:28.




trust in G-d," the recitation of this passagewould be appropriate only

during the week and only after prayer (as stated in sec. I l l ) .

Therefore in his Mahadura Kama, 62

the Alter Rebbestates that the

rationale for the recitation of the passage concerning the manna

(every day) is "to fortify his faith that all his provisions are granted to

him by Divine providence."

I n his Mahadura Basra, the Alter Rebbe rules according to the

Kabbalists.63

Accordingly, he also includes a course of conduct that

reflects higher levels of Divine service. Therefore64

he mentions the

rationale: "[to spur] one's trust in G-d Who provides every man with

his daily bread." For according to the higher level of bitachon

[displayed by] "thosewho long for His kindness," it is appropriate to

recite the passageconcerning the manna every day — even on Shabbos

(and even before prayer).

(A dapted from Sichos Shabbos Parshas Beshalach, 5723)

62. This ruling is aso found in theBeis Yosef, although [even] innigleh, the revealed teachings

of Torah Law, it is stated in many places that the manna was intended to spur bitachon.

See the sourcescited in fn. 58.

63. See beginning of the Shaar HaKollel {also printed as an appendix to Shulchan Aruch

HaRav, Orach Chayim 31:1 (183a), 32:2 (184b)}. It isworthy to note that the AriZal was

not accustomed to recite thepassageconcerning the manna {SiddurHaAriZal (R. Shabsi

Rashkover), after the passage Abbaye Havah Mesadder [in our daily prayers] see Shaar

HaKavannos, InyanBirchosHaShachar PriEtz Chayim, Shaar OlamHaAsiyah, ch. 3}. Simlarly,

theA lter Rebbe omts it in his Siddur.

See O r HaTorah, loc. cit., which states: "The suggestedadvice for this is for a person

to recite thepassageconcerning the mannawith concentration every day or from time

totime."

64. Clarification isstill necessary, for the type [of individualswho can manifest such Divine

service] is a minority. {A nd as our Sages (Berachos 35b) state: "Many attempted to

conduct themselves according to the directives of Rabbi Y ishmael [who ruled that a

person must balance his commtment to Torah study with concern for his work] and

were successful."



P U R I M

Likkutei Sichos, V ol . X X X I , p. 170ff.

I .

The tractate Megillah states:1

Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai's students asked him: "Why did the

enemes of the Jewish people2

in that generation become l i¬

able for annihilation?....

[He answered]: "Because they took pleasure in the feast of

that wicked man."

" I f so, those in Shushan [deserved to] die, but those in the

world at large did not [deserve to] die...."

"Becausethey bowed down to the idol."

O n an obvious level, the transgression involved in taking pleasure

in the feast is eating non-kosher food. As the Midrash states:3

"[The

Jews] came... into danger... because they partook of the gentiles'

food."

There is awell-known question:4

Is partaking of non-kosher food

so severe a transgression that [its violation caused] the Jews to be

worthy of annihilation?5

1. Megillah 12a; see Shir HaShirim Rabbah 7:8.

2. [The Talmud often uses this term as a euphemsmwhen mentioning negative factors

concerning the Jewish people.]

3. Shir HaShirim Rabbah, loc. cit. Simlar concepts are found in the Midrash Tanchuma (Buber

ed.), the conclusion of Parshas Behar: "They were al worthy of death, because they

partook of the food of gentiles." (The standard printed text of the Midrash Tanchuma

states: "...from the food of the king.")

4. See the commentaries to Ein Yaakov, Megillah, loc. cit. the introduction to Manos HaLevi

the commentary of R. MosheAlshich to Esther 1:8; et al.

63




{The Talmud, [indeed,] raisesaquestion concerning this rationale,

for itdoes notexplain why [theJews] throughout theworld were

deserving ofdeath.6

[Seemngly, however,] itaccepts this rationaleas

sufficient towarrant thedeath of those l iving in Shushan.}7

The wordingof theTalmud isaso worthy ofnotice. TheTalmud

speaks of "taking pleasure in the feast of that wicked man." The

expression implies that the sin was noteating thefood, but"taking

pleasure inthefeast." {I tisalso slightly difficult toexplain that[the

punishment was for] eating non-kosher food. For ourSages9 interpret

the statement10

that thefeast washeld "according to thewill ofeach

individual person" asmeaning "according to thewill of Mordechai and

Haman." Simlarly, on theverse:10

"The drinking was according to law;

5. See Yalkut Shimoni toEsther (sec. 1048); Midrash Abba Gurion 1:5which quote R. Shimon

bar Yochai (theauthor of thestatement inShir HaShirim Rabbah) asstating: "Theyate

the food of kusim* aganst their will." Thewording of the Talmud: "they took pleasure in

the feast...," however, indicates that they participated willingly. {TheTalmud's

statement that their deeds were merely an"external gesture" ("out of fear," Rashi)

applies onlywith regard to the rationale "that they boweddown totheidol."}

* [Lit. "Samaritans."] This change was made duetocensorship. The proper versionis

"of gentiles" asstated inthefirst printing of theYalkut Shimoni (Salonika, 5287) and

in theFrankfort printing of5447. A simlar version isfound in Midrash Abba Gurion.

See theconclusion of fn. 3.

6. [Trans. Note: For they did not partake of the feast.]

7. See severa commentaries (Rif toEin Yaakov, loc. cit., Manos HaLevi , loc. cit. see Rashi to

Esther 4:1 andSifsei Chachamim) whoexplain that, even according to the Talmud's

conclusion, they were aso liable for taking pleasure in thefeast. Because of that

transgression, retribution wasaso meted out fortheir first sin,bowing down to the

idol. (Seefn. 50 that highlightstheconnection between the two concepts.)

8. Esther Rabbah (7:18) aso states that [thedecree came] "because Israe took pleasurein

the feast ofAchashverosh."* Perhaps theintent there is (asstated explicitly in the

Midrash previously) that "they ate, drank, became intoxicated, andacted in depraved

manner (i.e., engaged in lewd behavior)."TheTalmud, bycontrast, does not mention

[such undesirable conduct], seemngly implying that their sin involved taking pleasure

alone. See theTargum toEsther 4:1 [which aso speaks of their transgression being that

they took pleasure inthefeast, without mentioning other factors].

* Mentioning himbyname incontrast to theTalmud which speaks of"that wicked

man."

9. Megillah, loc. cit.

10. Esther 1:8



P U R I M 65

no one was compelled," the Midrash states explicitly: 1 1

"No one was

compelled to drink non-Jewish wine." Thus therewas also kosher food

at the feast. If the Talmud means to say that despite [the fact that

kosher food was available,] the Jews ate forbidden foods, it should

have statedthis explicitly.}

I I .

There are commentaries12

who explain [the severity of partaking of

the feast as follows]: Achashverosh held this feast in celebration of the

fact that the Beis HaMikdash was not rebuilt. (As the Talmud relates,13

according to the reckoning of Achashverosh, the seventy years of the

Babylonian exile had ended and yet the Jewshad not been redeemed.

"Now they will surely not be redeemed," he said, and he took out the

utensils of the Beis HaMikdash and used them.) Thus, "Anyone who

took pleasure in that feast avowed that he was happy with the de¬

struction of the Temple."

Nevertheless, the matter is not entirely understood:14

We are

speaking about a decree of annihilation, Heaven forbid, that also

includes children (who are not responsible for their conduct). As the

Megillah states,15 Haman's decree was directed at the entire nation,

"from the youth to the elders, children and women." Accordingly, if

the decreeof annihilationcamebecauseof bowing down to the idol, it

is understandable. For as the commentaries explain:16

"Annihilation is

appropriate for the worship of fase deities, as was the casewith regard

to the Golden Calf, concerning which it iswritten:17

'I will annihilate

them in a moment.'"18

But how is it possible that adecreeof annihila-

11. Esther Rabbah 2:13.

12. Rif to Ein Yaakov, loc. cit. Manos HaLevi , loc. cit.

13. Megillah 11b.

14. See aso fn. 33.

15. Esther 3:13.

16. Iyun Yaakov, commenting on Ein Yaakov, loc. cit.

17. Bamidbar 16:21; 17:10, with regard to Korach's community. Similarly, with regard to the

sin of the Golden Calf, Shmos 32:10states: " I wi ll annihilate them."

18. Note [that when] an ir hanidachas (a city whose inhabitants were led astray and

worshipped idols) [is destroyed], the women and the children are aso slan (Rambam,

Mishneh Torah, Hilchos AvodasKochavim 4:6; see the gossof the Kessef Mishneh) .




tion encompassing even thosewho did not sin (the children) would be

evoked by [the transgression of] taking pleasure [in the feast]... and

showing their happiness over the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash?' 9

I I I .

The above can be resolved through [the explanation of] our Sages'20

analogy of the Jewish people to "one lamb among seventy wolves."

[They continue:] "Great is the Shepherd [the Ho ly One, blessed be

He] Who saves it and protects it." The intent is that the Jewish

people's existence among the nations is at times mraculous, beyond

the natural order, like that of a lamb among seventy wolves which,

according to the laws of nature, would have no reason to continue to

exist. It is only G-d's kindness ("Great is the Shepherd") that saves

them and protects them through mraculous ways that transcend

nature.

Nevertheless, when are the Jews protected by special Divine

providence [that prevents] the seventy wolves from touching them?

When their conduct reflects [their awareness of] this situation and

they rely on G-d to save them and protect them. When, however,

their conduct is in contradiction to [G-d's] protection and (through

their conduct) they endow the "wolves" and their natural powers with

importance, they remove themselves, Heaven forbid, from G-d's

protection21

and place themselves under the dominion of the natural

order.

{T o cite a parallel: Rambam 22 interprets the verse:23 " I wi ll hide My

face from them... and many evilswill beset [the people] and they will

say: 'Becausemy G-d is not in my mdst theseevilshavebeset me'" to

mean that when a person separates himself from G-d, "G-dseparates

19. The gloss Gaon Yaakov to Ein Ya akov, loc. cit., states that this — why were they liablefor

annihilation? — is the intent of [our Sages'] question: "Why should [the Jews]

throughout the entire world be killed?" Clarification is, however, necessary, for this

question ("Why were they worthy of annihilation?") aso applies to the children in

Shushan itself.

20. Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Toldos, sec. 5; Esther Rabbah 10:11; see asoPesikta Rabasi, ch. 9.

21. [Thisrelates to] the concept (Berachos 29a): "Anaccuser cannot become a defender."

22. MorehNevuchim, Vol. I l l , ch. 51.

23. Devarim 31:17.



PURiM 67

Himself from him, [as it were,] and then he is exposed to any evil

which may beset him." [Through separating himself from G-d,] he

removes G-d's special providence that enables him to "escape any

chance occurrence." As a result, he is "subject to chance occur-

rences."24

I t is possible to explain that this is also the intent of R a m b a m (at

the beginning of his H i l c h o s T a a n i o s )25

in his interpretation of the

verse:26

"I f you wil l proceed in indifference to Me, (I wil l also)27

proceed in fierce indifference to you." He interprets that verse as

implying: "When I bring difficulties upon you so that you shall repent

and you say it is achance occurrence28

(— saying 'What happened to

us is a natural phenomenon and this difficulty is merely a chance

occurrence'29

— ) I wi l l increase that indifference with avengeance."

G-d's intent is not (only) that He wil l increase his punishment and

difficulty, but that He wil l conduct Himself in a manner of

indifference with regard to this person and wil l remove His special

providence. As a result, that person wil l be "subject to chance

occurrences."}30

On this basis, we can appreciate why "takingpleasure in the feast

of that wicked man" led to the decreeof the annihilation of the Jewish

people. The intent is not that the decree came as punishment for that

sin. Instead, it was a natural result of their conduct.31

24. This does not contradict the concept of hashgachah pera t i s , "Divine providence," as

explained in Likkute i S i c h o s , V ol . X V I I I , p. 199ff.

25. Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Taanios 1:3.

26. Vay ik ra 26:27-28.

27. Thesewords, though found in the verse, are not included in the standardprinted text

of the Mishneh Torah.

28. [TheHebrewtermי קר can meanboth indifference and chance occurrence.]

29. The beginningof the halachah in Hilchos Taanios, loc. cit.

30. See asimlar interpretation in theKli Y a k a r s commentary to Vayikra 26:24.

31. The explanations above resolve the question asked by the commentaries [concerning

the continuation of the Talmud ic passage: i.e., after the Talmud answers that the Jews

throughout theworld wereworthy of annihilation because: "They bowed down to the

idol," the Sages ask:] "Is there apossibility of favoritism?" The commentaries (among

themM a n o s H a L e v i , loc . c i t . A n a f Yosef, loc . c i t .) ask: Why is this question askedonly with

regard to the rationale"They bowed down to the idol" and not with regard to the

rationale "They took pleasure in the feast"? [The answer is that] the liability for

annihilation for takingpleasure in the feast is not a punishment for the sin, but rather a




For after Achashverosh "exalted Haman... and elevated him...

above all the officers,"32

the Jews were like "a lamb among seventy

wolves." By "taking pleasure in the feast," their conduct negated the

mraculous protection of "the great Shepherd." (Even though the

event took place before [Haman's ascent to power], it demonstrated

where their thoughts and feelings were focused.)

For the fact that the Jewish people derived pleasure from "that

wicked man's" invitation to them to attend his feast showed33

that the

existence of the wicked man (Achashverosh) was so important to

them that attending his feast was considered an honor from which

they derived pleasure. It was not that they had to attend the feast

(becauseAchashverosh was king and they were obligated to honor his

position),34

but that they attended because they took pleasure in

(being invited to) this feast.35

By giving importance to the seventy

wolves through taking pleasure in the honor they received from that

"wicked man," they rejected the mraculous protection of "the great

Shepherd" and instead, placed themselves under the dominion of the

"wolves" which, by nature, will prevent the lamb from continuing to

exist.36

natural result of the Jews' conduct. Accordingly, when the Jews' conduct changed, the

decreewas nullified as a matter of course.

32. Esther 3:1.

33. [The above explanations enable us to appreciate] our Sages' choice of words: "They

took pleasure in the feast of thatwickedman." The very fact that they derived pleasure

from "the feast of that wicked man" (i.e., a feast for any reason) issufficient reason for

the decree [of annihilation]. (In contrast, the commentaries cited in sec. I I emphasize

that the difficulty was not the fact that they attended a feast held by Achashverosh, but

that they attended this particular feast, one that celebrated the destruction of the Beis

HaMikdash)

34. For he ordered that al attend (EstherRabbah 7:18).

35. See asoManos HaLevi , loc. cit. Yaaros Davash, Vol. I , Sermon Ill (7 Adar, 5504), s.v. habitu

na, et al. See aso fn. 64.

36. [This aso explains why] the children aso became liable for annihilation. For the

situation becomes comparable to that described in Moreh Nevuchim (Vol. I l l , ch. 18)

[which speaks of individuals whom] "it is easy to kill," [i.e., they are not granted any

special protection by G-d]. See aso the explanations in Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X V I I I , p.

198, with regard to Korach's congregation.



PURIM 69

I V .

Additional explanation [can be gained through the following] preface:

Our Sages teach:37

"One should not rely on mracles. And the Torah

states:38

"And G-d will bless you in all that you do." Implied is that

although "It is the blessing of G-d that brings wealth,"39

this blessing

is not endowed to a person when he sits idle.40

Instead, he is obligated

to do something to earn his livelihood.

Conversely, he must know and recognize that his work is only

making a vessel.41

His efforts and undertakings are not the reason or

causethat brings him his sustenanceand livelihood. They are only the

mediums for G-d's blessings throughwhich G-d grants him his suste¬

nanceand livelihood.

G-d desiresthat aperson's sustenancebe enclothed in the natural

order and come through natural means. For it was He Who

established the natural order. Therefore, He ordained that man find

natural means for his livelihood. But the person's sustenance itself

comes from G-d's blessing. Accordingly, it is not logical to give

importance to the person's activity in its own right. For it is only a

medium through which G-d's blessing is channeled. A person's

fundamental efforts must be focused on making himself a fit medium

for G-d's blessing.

From adeeper perspective: The implication of "It is the blessing

of G-d that brings wealth" is not only that a person's sustenance

(which he earns through his endeavors within the natural order) is

dependent solely upon G-d (the Master of nature,) but aso — and

fundamentally — that the Jewish people are not under the dominion

of the natural order. As explained in several sources, the Jewish people

receive their vitality from the name Havayah that transcends the

37. Shabbos 32a Pesachim 64b Zohar I , 111b, 112b, et al.

38. Devarim 15:18. [With regard to this concept,] see the maamar entitled UVarachicha in

Maamarei Admur HaZakein 5565, Vol. I I (p. 648ff.), 5568, Vol. I , p. 165ff.; the introduction

to Derech Chayim Derech Mitzvosecha, Mitzvas Tiglachas Metzora, ch. 2ff.; Kuntreis U'Maayon,

maamar 17ff.

39. Mishlei 10:22.

40. See Sifri to Devarim, loc. cit.

41. See the sources cited in fn. 38; see aso the maamar entitled VeYadaata, 5657 (To Know

G-d, SichosIn English, 5753).




natural order.42

G-d oversees and controls all of the affars of the

Jewish people with a unique providence and with a mraculous order

that is not at all confined by the laws of nature.43

Based on the above, the reason man must performdeeds in order

to receive G-d's blessing44

is only that G-d desired that this

mraculous order be conveyed through nature. For this reason He

enclothed these mracles in natural garments, [requiring] actions

within the context of nature, [i.e., in] "everything that you do." These

deeds, however, are no more than an external garment for the

influence from Above (whose source is from the name Havayah that

transcends the natural order).

{T o what can a person who places emphasis on his businesswith¬

out having the desired degree of awareness that "It is G-d's blessing

that brings wealth" be compared? To a person who energetically

labors to sew pockets in which to place money, but does nothing to

earn the money itself.}

V .

From the above, we can appreciate the parallel to the situation of the

Jewish people in the time of Achashverosh. When the Jewish people

are found in exile under the dominion of the gentile nations, they

must honor the ruling authorities45

[to the extent that:] "The law of

the land is law."46

And we are commanded:47 "Seek out the welfare of

the city... and pray for itssake."

42. SeeLikkutei Sichos, V ol . X V I I I , p. 200ff., and thesources cited there.

43. See Derech Mitzvosecha , loc. cit. (p. 107a), [which states]: "When a believer is involvedin

commercial activity, he should have the intent that the influence comes from G-d's

blessing in the samemanner as other revealed mracles, like He caused the manna to

descend." As is well known, the Rebbe Maharash said (published in Sefer HaMaamarim

5709, p. 21, et al.) that in the present era, one's livelihood is granted like the manna. See

Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X V I I , p. 176ff.

44. By contrast, there are mracles that are not enclothed in nature [where man's effort is

not requiredentirely, to cite aparallel:] in the yearly cycle of festivals, the redemption

of Pesach. See sec. V I .

45. See Rashi's commentary to Bereishis 48:2; Shmos 5:3, 6:13, 11:8, et al.

46. Nedarim 28a; Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Gezeilah VeAveidah 5:11ff.

47. Yirmeyahu 29:7; Avos 3:2.



PURiM 71

Accordingly, when Achashverosh invited the Jews to the feast,

they were obligated to participate. (Needless to say, their participa¬

tion should have been "according to the will of each individual

person," i.e., "according to the will of Mordechai,"48 in a permitted

manner, partaking of only kosher food.) But [their participation]

should have been permeated with the clear knowledge, feeling, and

recognition that the existence of the Jewish people is not at all de¬

pendent on Achashverosh, Heaven forbid (even though he was the

ruler of the entire world49

), but is instead in the hands of G-d alone.

Moreover, the existence of the Jewish people is a mracle, at times

enclothed in nature, and at times an overt mracle, [above nature,] like

a lamb among seventy wolves as explained above. "Great is the Shep¬

herd," Who protects the Jewish people in a mraculous manner, above

the natural order.

This is the (inner) meaning in [our Sages'] statement that the sin

of the Jewish people was that "they took pleasure in the feast of that

wicked man." They did not participate in the feast as an expression of

honor for the ruling kingdom. Instead, they considered Achashverosh

so important that they erred and thought that their existence was

dependent50 on the wicked King Achashverosh, a person who acted

contrary to the fulfillment of the will of the Creator of theworld. This

caused them to consider their participation in the feast a source of

pleasure and delight.

V I .

The above explanation of the nature of the sin of the Jewish people in

the time [leading to] Haman's decree provides us with an explanation

of the unique nature of the Jews' deliverance on Purim, in contrast to

48. See the sources citedat theconclusion of sec. I .

49. Megillah 11a-b;the beginning of Targum Sheni to Esther.

50. On this basis, we can appreciate the connection between the two reasons [given by the

Sages for the decree of the Jews' annihilation] (see fn. 7): that "theytook pleasure in

the feast" and "theybowed down to the idol." For taking pleasure in the feast is (in an

abstract way) comparable to the worship of fase divinities. We see aparallel in the

explanation given by Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p. 27c, and the maamar entitled VeYadaata, loc.

cit., of our Sages' statement (Avodah Zarah 8a) that a Jew dwelling in the Diaspora

"serves fasedivinities with purity." See aso the comments of Manos HaLevi, loc. cit.




the mracle of Chanukah (and how much more so, to the redemption

from Egypt). For the deliverance on Chanukah involved mracles that

transcended the natural order ("You delivered the mighty into the

hands of the weak"51

). The deliverance of Purim, by contrast, came

about through a mracle enclothed in the natural order, (i.e., "there

was nothing that appeared to be a departure from nature").52

I t is possible to explain that this is appropriate because of the

reason for the decree in those days: {the fact that the Jewish people

placed themselves under the domnion of the natural order, and more

particularly, under the control of (Achashverosh,) "that wicked man,"

to the extent that "they took pleasure in the feast of that wicked

man"53

}.

[Generally,] a mracle that is enclothed within nature teaches us

that G-d's mraculous order is not confined to being above nature, i.e.,

it need not upset the natural order. Instead, it can aso enclothe itself

within the natural order.

The mracle of Purim [contains] a new dimension. Although it was

enclothed in nature, it was a mracle just like an overt mracle. For that

reason, we recite the blessing "Who performed mracles" both on

Chanukah (when the mracle was not enclothedwithin nature) and on

Purim (when it was). For G-d's deliverance of the Jewish people on

Purim was not a natural event. Instead, it was mraculous. "It is

obviousthat all the causeswere above nature."54

Nevertheless, it was a

mracle that was enclothed in nature. For even nature — as it affects

the Jewish people — contains mracles that transcend nature.

V I I .

[Based on the above, we see that there are] two extremes that are

demanded from every Jew: On one hand, one cannot rely on mracles

and must act within the context of the natural order. On the other

hand, he must realize that all the natural dimensions of his life are only

51. [The V e A l HaNissim prayer; Siddur Tehillat Hashem, p. 59.]

52. Torah Or, Megillas Esther, p. 93c ff., p. 100a ff. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I I , p. 154, fn. 51.

53. [As mentioned above, our Sages describe himin this manner] without mentioning his

name, Achashverosh.

54. Torah Or, loc.. cit., p. 93d, 100a.



P U R I M 73

a garment and all of his concerns are dependent on G-d's mraculous

providence.

[This twofold approach] was expressed by Esther in her efforts to

annul Haman's decree:55

On one hand, she went to Achashverosh

(carrying out the mssion with which she was charged by Mordechai)

"to make supplications to him and to beg for her people."56

To [succeed

in] this [mssion], she would have to find favor in his eyes. Indeed, her

[mssion] required that he find her uniquely appealing, for:

a) she had not been called to the king for thirty days,57

b) entering the inner royal chamber without being summoned ran

contrary to court procedure58

and involveddanger to her life ("there is

one law — to execute").57

Nevertheless, [in preparation for appearing before the king,] she

fasted for "three days, day and night." Now, fasting and afflicting

oneself in this manner will naturally lead to a reduction in one's

attractiveness.59

O n the surface, a contradiction is involved: If the deliverance of

the Jewish people is to come through efforts involving the natural

order, how could Esther have fasted60

and thus reduced the possibility

of her finding favor in the king's eyes? And if Esther was relying on

deliverance coming in a mraculous manner from Above, [her] efforts

[and those of the Jews at large] should have been directed (only) to

praying to G-d. (This would also include fasting, for it is one of the

"paths of teshuvah.") Why then did she risk her life to approach the

king?

Based on the above, [her conduct] can be understood, for such

conduct nullifies and corrects the sin of "taking pleasure in the feast."

The fundamental error that caused the Jews to take pleasure in the

55. Wi th regard to the ideas in this section, see aso Likkutei Sichos, Vol . I , p. 214ff., and Vol .

V I , p. 191ff.

56. Esther 4:8.

57. Ibid. :11.

58. Ibid. :16.

59. See the commentary of Ibn Ezra to Esther 4:16.

60. [In this context,] note Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim, the conclusion of sec. 471 which

states that soldiers [should vow to fast before battle, but] should not actually fast until

the battle is completed.




feast of Achashverosh was their thought that since they were in a

situation where endeavors within the natural order are necessary, then

the laws of nature reign and they are dependent on them.

Esther's conduct, by contrast, demonstrated how going to

Achashverosh was merely a garment for the salvation from Above

which would come like a mracle that transcends nature. Therefore it

was first necessary for them to pray and fast so that they would be

worthy of that mracle. Nevertheless, since G-d desired that the

mraculous salvation from Above also be grounded within the natural

order, Mordechai, as G-d's agent, commanded Esther to go to

Achashverosh (even though danger was involved).

As such, it is understandable that it is not so necessaryto consider

the nature of the garment ([and whether it is acceptable] even if it

does not entirely fit all the requirements of the natural order).61

For

the primary matter is not [to perfect] the medium through which

G-d's salvation comes, but to bring about the reason for the salvation

itself.

V I I I .

The above [provides] a lesson for every one [of us] in our Divine

service: The Jewish people were created as souls within bodies in a

manner that requires them to be involved with their physical needs.

Since they were created in this manner, it is surely G-d's desire that

they be involved in such matters.

The Purimnarrativeteachesus that although it isnecessaryto pay

attention to one's physical needs, one's involvement should not be

characterized by [seeking] pleasure. For this involvement is only an

"external garment," a secondary matter, subordinate to his primary

mssion in this world. A Jew's pleasure and delight should be in "the

life of his soul," in his study of the Torah and his fulfillment of the

mitzvos. His involvement in his material concerns should be only so

that hewill be healthy and unblemshed so that he can serveG-d.62

61. See the sources cited in fn. 38.

62. See Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Deos 3:1, cited by the Tur and the Shulchan Aru ch , Orach

Chayim, sec. 231. See aso the following footnote.



PURiM 75

The question of whether a person's involvement in his physical

needs is for the sakeof Heaven or not can be clarified in the following

manner: When "the life of his soul" is what is primary for him and "the

life of his body" is secondary — and moreover, given attention only

so that he will be healthy and unblemshed to serve G-d63

— then his

energy and satisfaction will be focused on the study of the Torah and

the observance of the mitzvos. His involvement in material things will

be as if he were compelled, or at least [that he perform them] without

satisfaction.64

63. For "It is of the paths (of the service)* of G-d for the body to be healthy and

unblemished" (Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Deos 4:1).

* [Although the words in parentheses are lacking in the standard printed text of the

Mishneh Torah,] this appears to be the proper version of the text as explained on

severa occasions (Likkutei Sichos, Vo l . I I , p. 531, et al.).

64. See the conclusion of the section in the Tur, loc. cit., which states: "In a like manner,*

[before his passing,] our holy teacher (R. Yehudah HaNasi) pointed his fingers

upward... and sad... '1 did not derivepleasure from them' (Kesuvos 114a). [Instead, his

conduct was solely] for thesakeof Heaven."

Commenting on Avodah Zarah 11a, Tosafos questions that statement. For our Sages

statethat [R. Yehudah HaNasi lived in a regal manner. His table was garnished with al

the delicacies of the world.] Tosafos [offers the resolution that although the delicacies

were on his table, he personally did not partake of them].

The Shelah (Assarah Maamaros, maamar 8, p. 56b ff. in the note) offers a different

resolution, explaining that our holy teacher [partook of the delicacies andyet] "did not

act for the sakeof satisfaction, that he would experience physical pleasure.... [Instead,

his intent was] that hewould havestrength in his service of the Creator. According to

this, thewording... 'I did not derive pleasure' is appropriate, i.e., 'I did not eat for the

sakeof pleasure.'"** This parallels the concepts explained above, that theJews' sin was

not that they partook of Achashverosh's feast, but that they tookpleasure in it.

* One cannot say that one's conduct will parallel that of our holy teacher entirely, for

certainly his conduct reflected his unique spiritual level as reflected in the wording

chosen by the Alter Rebbe in Tanya, ch. 8 (see the double-starred note that

follows): "...unless one did not derive pleasure from the world like our holy

teacher." {I n mcrocosm, however, this level is relevant to every person. This is the

reason the Alter Rebbementions it in Tanya. See Sichos Shabbos Parshas Ki Sisa, 5728

(quoted in Likkutei Perushim LeTanya) which explains that the Alter Rebbe [refers to

R. Yehudah HaNasi as] "our holy teacher," [instead of using his personal name, i.e.,

to clarify that R. Yehudah communicated this approach to others. It was not merely

a mark of personal spiritual refinement.]}

** It is possible to explain that this is the Alter Rebbe's intent in Tanya, loc. cit.:

"Therefore, it isnecessary... to cleanse [the body] and purify it from the impurityit




When, on the other hand, he considers his material life as

primary, then, when it comes to his spiritual matters, he says:65

"What

is my obligation and I will perform it," [i.e., his approach is cold,

paying his dues and no more.] But, by contrast, when his physical

needs are involved, he immerses himself in the matter and involves

himself with delight. He takes pleasure from the matters that concern

his animal soul.

This is the lesson that [we can derive] from the days of Purim:

that the deliverance experienced in those days was dependent on the

Jews' realization that "tak[ing] pleasure in the feast of that wicked

man" runs contrary to the fundamental existence (and true nature) of

the Jewish people. [Thisawarenesscaused] them to merit deliverance

and redemption.

May we "join redemption to redemption,"66

connecting the re¬

demption of Purim to the redemption of Pesach — and to the

ultimate exodus from the confines and limtations of the body. [At

that time,] "As in the days of your exodus from the land of Egypt, I

will show [the people] wonders,"67

in the complete and ultimate Re¬

demption, led byMashiach may this take placespeedily, in our days.

(Adapted from Sichos Purim, 5722 and 5727)

received from takingpleasure in this world... unless, like our holyteacher, one did

not derivepleasure from this world." This supports the interpretation of the Shelah

cited above, that even though R. Yehudah partook [of the delicacies,] he did not

derive pleasure. For if the intent was, as Tosafos explains, that he did not partake of

them (but instead served them for the sake of others), what would be unique in

explaining that a person who acted in this manner did not require [that his soul be

cleansed through] "purgatory of thegrave"?

65. Cf. Sotah 22b.

66. Megillah 6b.

67. Michah 7:15.



P A R S H A S

V A Y I K R A

Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I I , p. 1ff.

I .

(A t a Pesach farbrengen, 1) the [Previous] Rebbe related the manner in

which the Alter Rebbe brought his grandson, the Tzemach Tzedek, to

cheder [for the first time]. Among the points the Rebbe mentioned is

that the Alter Rebbe instructed the teacher to study the first passage

of Parshas Vayikra with the child. 2

After the teacher had studied the

passagewith the child, the child asked the Alter Rebbe: "Why is the

alef in the wordVayikra small?"3

The Alter Rebbeentered astateof dveikus for a long time and then

replied:

Adam, the first man, was G-d's handiwork4

and G-d testified

that his wisdomsurpassed that of the mnistering angels.5

But

Adam knew his own greatness and was overcome by his

1. Sichos Yom Shevi'i ShelPesach, 5700 (SeferHaSichos 5700, p. 68).

2. [The sourcefor this custom is found] in Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Tzav, sec. 14; Vayikra

Rabbah 7:3. See also the commentary of the Kli Yakar at the beginning of this Torah

reading; Sefer Chassidim, sec. 1140; Kolbo, sec. 74, as quoted by the Sifsei Cohen in his goss

to Yoreh Deah 245:8.

3. [Trans. Note: Throughout the Tanach, each of the letters of the alef-beis appears oncein

an oversized form and once in mniature (Encyclopedia Talmudis, Vol. I , p. 410). In the

word Vayikra at the beginning of this Torah reading, the alef appears in mniature, and in

the nameA d a m at the beginning of Divrei HaYamim, it is oversized.]

4. See Bereishis Rabbah 24:5; Koheles Rabbah 3:11 (2); Avos DeRabbi Nassan, the conclusion of

ch. 1 (citing Tehillim 139:5).

5. Bereishis Rabbah 17:4.

77




awarenessof this. [Therefore] he blundered [and committed]

the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge.6

Moshe our teacher... aso knew his own greatness. But not

only was Moshe not overcome by his awareness of this,

instead, it gavehim a broken and contrite heart, making him

very humble in his own eyes.7

He thought: Were another

person who was not Amram's son, or the seventh generation

in descent from Avraham, to have been given such a lofty

soul and such ancestral merit, that person would certainly

have been better than he.8

G-d states in the Torah:9

"The man, Moshe, was exceedingly

humble, more than any person on the face of the earth." No

matter how low a person's stature and how simple he was,

Moshe would measure himself against him, thinking that ifthat person had possessed the positive spiritual qualities with

which Moshe had been endowed — and had not earned

through his own work — and his ancestral merit, that person

would certainlyhave been better than he.10

There are three types of forms for the letters which the Ho ly

One, blessed be He, gave at Mount Sinai: oversized letters,

average-sized letters, and mniature letters. The Torah is

written in average-sized (beinonim) letters. For the intent is

6. See Torah Or, the conclusion of Parshas Mishpatim: "The fundamental point of the kelipah

of haughtiness became part of the nature of man through the Sin of the Tree of

Knowledge.... [Itcausesone] to see himself [andfee self-centeredness], realizingwhat

he lacks and appreciating what is to his benefit." As is well known (see the ma a ma r

entitled Lehavin Inyan Cheit Adam HaRishon in Sefer HaMaamarim Eshaleich, Liozna the maamar

entitled Padeh BeShalom, 5677, et al.) the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge was that Adam

desiredsensitivity [to material things].

7. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol.X I I I , p. 33, fn. 28 and the marginal note. Clarification is still

required.

8. See the Alter Rebbe'smaamar entitled Vayisufu HaAnavim (Sefer HaMaamarim 5562, p. 51).

See aso the sourcesmentioned in fn. 10.

9. Bamidbar 12:3.

10. Wi th regard to Moshe's humility, see the lengthy explanation in Likkutei Sichos, Vol.

X I I I , p. 30ff., p. 37 and the fns. there.



V A Y I K R A 79

that a person should be a beinoni (an intermediate).11

Through

the Torah, one reaches the level of a beinoni. W i t h regard to

Adam, the first man, whose recognition of his own greatness

caused himto commit the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge, an

oversized alef is used. Wi t h regard to Moshe our teacher,

whose Divine service of recognizing his own humility

brought himto the highest level of humility, Parshas Vayikra

usesa mniaturealef.

I I .

I n this story, there is, on the surface, a point that requires clarification:

Why was it necessary for the Alter Rebbe to mention (and indeed,

state first) the lengthy description of Adam the first man and the

explanation of why an oversized alef is used with regard to his name?

This is seemngly unrelated to the explanation of why a mniature alef

is used in Parshas Vayikra. [On the surface, it would appear] sufficient

to say that the mniature alef inParshas Vayikra is an allusion to Moshe's

great humility.

Furthermore, the explanation that the mniature alef in Parshas Va-

yikra alludes to Moshe's humility is stated in several of the

commentaries to the Torah.12

They,13

however, do not mention the

oversized alef used with regard to Adam. Now, the Tzemach Tzedek had

not yet learned about the oversized alef usedwith regard to Adam (for

it is used first in Divrei HaYamim). Indeed, he was just beginning to

study Chumash . Thus on the surface, it does not seem appropriate to

mention, and at such great length, the concept of the oversized alef

usedwith regard to Adamthe first man.

11. See Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Deos 1:4; Commentary to the Mishnah, Introduction to

Avos (Shemoneh Perakim, ch. 4). [In thesesources, Rambam speaks about the advantageof

following the "mddle path" and having one's emotional characteristics evenly

balanced.]

12. The commentary of Rabbeinu Asher to the Torah; Panei'ach Raza Moshav Zekenim Toldos

Yitzchak (by R. Y itzchak Caro); Tzror H a M o r Kli Yakar the commentary of Sifsei Cohen to

the Torah.

13. With the exception of Panei'ach Raza and Toldos Yitzchak. See also the following footnote.




{I n particular, this is true because the explanation given by the

Alter Rebbe concerning the oversized alef used with regard to Adam

speaks unfavorably about him.1 4 The Torah does not speak

pejoratively even about a non-kosher animal.15

Certainly, itwould not

be appropriate to speak about Adam — G-d's handiwork, as the Alter

Rebbe stated — in such a manner (unless there is a necessity to do

so).16

}

I I I .

I t is also necessary to understand the lengthy explanation [the Alter

Rebbe gives] with regard to the humility of Moshe. Seemngly, it

would have been sufficient to state in short (as the other commentar¬

ies do) that Moshe was exceedingly humble, as the Torahstates.

I t is possible to say that the Alter Rebbewanted to clarify to the

Tzemach Tzedek how it was possible for Moshe to be "humble in his

own eyes" although he was aware of his own greatness ([which is so

extraordinary that] no one can compare himself to Moshe).17

For

Moshe thought that if another person had been granted the same

positive qualities with which Moshe had been endowed, i.e., his lofty

soul and ancestral merit — as opposed to thosehe earned through his

own efforts — that other person would certainly have been better

than he.

Nevertheless, there are points that require clarification:

a) This concept itself requires explanation: Why is it necessary to

emphasize that Moshe also recognized his own greatness (and thus

create a need to explain that this recognition is not a contradiction to

humlity)?

b) [Seemngly, it was unnecessary for the Alter Rebbe to

elaborate] in the explanation that Moshe was not overcome by the

awareness of his own greatness — in contrast to Adam who was. It

14. In contrast to the explanations given by the commentaries mentioned in the previous

fn. who interpret the oversizedalef as alluding to Adams positive qualities as explained

in sec. I V .

15. Bava Basra 123a.

16. SeeLikkutei Sichos, Vol. V, p. 281; V ol. X, p. 26ff. [translated in this series].

17. See Shulchan Aru ch , Yoreh Deah 242:36.



V A Y I K R A 81

would have been sufficient to say that [this cameas a result of] Moshe

thinking that his greatness was not earned through his own Divine

service, but instead was the result of his ancestral merit and the

positivequalities that he was granted from Above. Why did he go into

the details of Moshe's comparison of himself to every other person

and Moshe's thought that if the other person had been endowed with

the qualities that he had been granted, that person would have been

better than he?

I V .

Initially, when looking at theAlter Rebbe'sexplanation, itappears that

the oversized alef used with regard to Adam is an allusion to an unde¬

sirable quality: i.e., that he was overcome with his greatness (in

contrast to the mniature alef in [Parshas] Vayikra which alludes to the

humility of Moshe).

I n truth, however, this cannot be said. For it is an obvious general

principle that the oversized letters in the Torah surpass the average-

sized letters, and certainly, the mniature letters.18

Even a child can

understand that the Torah uses an oversized letter to indicate

greatness and importance as judged by [the scales of] the Torah of

truth.

For this reason, commentaries19

explain that the oversized alef

used with regard to Adam alludes to the fact "that there was never a

man as great as he... or to the profuse wisdom that he possessed [as

indicatedby his] namng [of the created beings]."

Furthermore, in Likkutei Torah, 20 the Alter Rebbehimself discusses

the difference between the mniature alef and the oversized alef with

18. [This principle is also discussed in] the Kabbalah: See the statements of the Zohar and

R a m a z , et al. at the beginning of this Torah reading. See also Or HaTorah, Vayikra, Vol.

I l l , p. 724ff.; the maamarim entitled Vayikra from Sefer HaMaamarim 5678, p. 234, and Sefer

HaMaamarim 5705 (ch. 3 of that maamar); the second maamar entitled Vayidaber Elokim,

5699, et al.

19. Panei'ach Raza, Toldos Yitzchak, loc. cit. see Zohar I , 239a; I l l ,300a.

20. At the beginning of our Torah reading. See also the maamarim entitled Vayikra and

Vayidaber cited above.




which thenameAdamiswritten in Divrei HaYamim andexplains that it

indicates that Adam was greater than Moshe.

[There he explains that] theoversized alef refers to Adamas heexisted "before thesin, when hewas ona veryhigh level."

21

([On that

level,] itwas possible forhimto receive influence from theoversized

alef, i.e., "the attribute of Kesser, as itexists in itsessence.") W i t h regard

to Moshe, by contrast, the Torah states:22

"And Moshe couldnot

enter... because the cloud had rested upon it." Thecloud reflects

influence from "avery sublime andawesome level"23

(i.e., Kesser). Forthis reason, with regard to Moshe, Vayikra iswritten with amniature

alef. Forcalling (i.e., drawing down influence) to Moshe (from [the

sublime level of] thecloud) waspossible only through a tzimtzum, [a

contraction which is alludedtoby the mniature letter].24

Thus the Alter Rebbe's addition — the discussion of the

oversized alef used with regard to Adam — seemngly defeats his

purpose. For itappears to indicate that Adamwas on ahigher level

than Moshe. Moreover, italludes {notto Adam's stumbling (through

the Sin of theTree ofKnowledge), but on thecontrary,}to hislevel

before thesin.

V .

I t is possible to offer the following resolution: By offering this

explanation to the Tzemach Tzedek, theAlter Rebbe was not merely

answering the question [thechild] hadasked concerning the verse.

Instead, hewas primarily concerned with educating the Tzemach Tzedek

21. P. 1b. A nd the maamarim entitled Vayikra and Vayidaber cited above explain that the

oversized alef refers to theconsummate perfection that man will reach in the era of

Redemption (which surpassesthe level ofAdambefore the sin).

22. S hm o s 40:35.

23. Likkutei Torah, loc. cit. 1:1.

24. See Or HaTorah, Parshas Vayikra, V ol . I , p. 119; Zohar, loc. cit., quoted in Or HaTorah,

Vayikra, Vol. I l l , loc. cit.; the maamarim entitled Vayikra and Vayidaber, loc. cit.; the Likkutei

Torah of the AriZal , Parshas Vayikra quoted in Or HaTorah, loc. cit., p. 726; and the maamar

entitled Vayikra cited above. SeealsoPanei'ach Raza, loc. cit.



V A Y I K R A 83

and explaining to him the lesson in our Divine service that can be

derived from the mniaturealef in Parshas Vayikra. 25

{This [explains the connection between this story and]

statements [the Previous] Rebbe made (at an earlier farbrengen) 26 that

the Alter Rebbe personally devoted himself to the education and the

training of the Tzemach Tzedek. That was the reason that he took him to

cheder for the first timehimself.}

I n order for the lesson from the mniature alef to be complete, it

was necessary for him to preface [his explanation] with [the critique

of] Adam's [conduct].

By elaborating on the qualities possessed by Adam and the fact

that he appreciated his own greatness, the Alter Rebbe's intent went

beyond explaining the unfavorable aspectsof Adam's conduct. For, on

the contrary, [from a certain perspective,] every Jew (— due to the

spark of Adam he possesses, as will be explained in sec. V I I —) must

emulate Adam's conduct. To refer to the well-known adage:27 "Just as

a person must recognize his own shortcomngs, so, too, he must

recognize his own positive qualities."

This teaches us how we must approach "recognizing our own

humility." That awareness should not negate the recognition of one's

positive qualities.28

Instead, [the two can coexist]. For one will not be

overcome by the recognition of his positive qualities, for he realizes

that they were granted him [from Above]. They were not earned

through his own efforts, but instead came as a result of his inherent

spiritual gifts and his ancestral merit. ([The paradigm for this is] the

humility of Moshe.29

[This relates to every person, for] everyone

possessesa spark from [the soul of] Moshe.)30

25. This aso explains why, [before giving this answer,] the A lter Rebbe entered astateof

dveikus for an extended time, despite the fact that the fundamental thrust of his reply is

found in the Torah's commentaries.

26. Shabbos Chol HaMoed Pesach (Sefer HaSichos 5700, p.40).

27. Likkutei Dibburim, Vol. IV, p. 581a; see HaYom Yom, p. 107.

28. Ibid., Vo l . I l l , p. 430a.

29. The above can be connected with the fact that Moshe was "truly the embodiment of

Chochmah of Atzilus" (as related in the above narrative). Chochmah aso has akli (vessel),

but [— in contrast to the other Sefiros whose kelim are characterized by yeshus, the

awareness of their own existence — ] its kli is characterized by utter bittul. [Indeed, it]




{Furthermore, since the person recognizes his positive qualities,

it isnecessary that his thrust towardhumility be extreme, [like Moshe

who was] "exceedingly humble, more than any person," as will be

explained in sec. IX.}

Therefore there is no contradiction. The oversized alef used with

regard to Adam alludes to the fact that he recognized his own

greatness, together with the fact that it alludes to the [genuinely]

great powers that he possessed. For the recognition of one's own

greatness is a path in Divine service as mandated by the Torah.

Indeed, this is associated with the Divine service of the righteous (as

will be explained in sec. V I I ) .

W i t h this [explanation, the Alter Rebbe] underscores how a

person must take care with regard to the recognition of his positive

qualities. Even one who truly possesses very great virtues — to the

extent that the Torah of Truth refers to himwith an oversized alef —

must guard against the possibility of undesirable results stemmng

from the recognition of his positive qualities. For [this caused] even

Adam to stumble and commit the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge, the

sourceof all sins.

V I .

Since (even) Adam's (body) was G-d's handiwork, it is self-evident

that (as he was created) he had no connection to evil.3 1

(To cite a

parallel: "From the mouth of the Sublime One, evil will not

emerge"32

). Simlarly, with regard to his surrounding environment, as

is well known,33

there was no intermngling of good and bad before

resembles the light and, [like the light,] can aso be referred to as "chayeihu" (Likkutei

Torah, Bamidbar, p. 87d; Or HaTorah, Parshas Vaeira, p. 150).

For this reason, it is alluded to by the letteryud. For theyud has the form of a letter

(in contrast to [its upper] projection) which indicates that it relates to the realmof

existence. Nevertheless, it is the smalest letter, "no more than a point" (Iggeres

HaTeshuvah, ch.4; see Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IX, p. 416ff.).

30. Tanya, ch. 42.

31. Torah Or, Bereishis, p. 6a; see Sefer HaArachim Chabad, erech Adam HaRishon (pp. 168-169),

and thesourcesmentioned there.

32. Cf. Eichah 3:38.

33. Likkutei Torah of the AriZal, Parshas Bereishis, et al.



V A Y I K R A 85

the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge. For kelipas nogah was a separate

realm, lower than the world at large.

Thus the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge brought about a descent

for mankind (and for the world at large). Nevertheless, since G-d's

handiwork is eternal, it is evident that the above-mentioned advantage

possessed by Adam is of eternal relevance and remains within his

[nature] (at least in a hidden manner) after the sin.

{This concept is aso alluded to in the wording of the Alter

Rebbe: "Adam, the first man, whose recognition of his own greatness

causedhim to commit the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge, an oversized

alef isused...." On the surface, since the oversized alef used with regard

to Adam reflects his level before the sin (as stated in sec. IV),

seemngly, it would have been appropriate [for the Alter Rebbe] to

have worded his statement in the opposite order: "Adam, the first

man, is referred to with an oversized alef. Through recognizing his own

greatness, he stumbled [and committed] the Sin of the Tree of

Knowledge."

By phrasing his statements as he did [— mentioning the

oversized alef last — the Alter Rebbe] alludes to the fact that even

after Adam committed the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge, he is [still]

referred to as Adamwith an oversized alef (which, as above, alludes to

his level before the sin).}

V I I .

The eternal dimension of Adam's positive qualities is not only that

they remained (at least in a hidden manner) after the sin, but aso that

they are shared with every Jew until the end of time.

As iswell known,34

the Jews are referred to with the name, Adam,

"man," as it is written:35

"You are called man." For every soul and

spark within the Jewish people is a portion of the soul of Adam, the

first man. Therefore, every Jew is endowed with (— at least in

mcrocosm—) Adam's positive qualities.

34. Likkutei Torah, Devarim, p. 47b; see Tanya, IggeresHaKodesh, Epistle 7.

35. Yevamos 61a.




{Every Jew possesses a resemblance even to Adams quality of

having "wisdom [that] surpasses that of the mnistering angels." [This

quality] was manifest in his ability to name all the created beings by

recognizing "the l iving soul"36

that every being possessed.37 [Simi¬

larly,] as explained in holy texts,38

the names that parents give their

children is, in dimnutive, an expression of the spirit of prophecy.

They are granted from Above the inspiration to call the child with a

namethat reflects the child's " l iving soul."}

Therefore, every Jew — regardless of the situation in which he is

found — possesses a reflection of the level of Adam as he existed

before the sin.39

The difference is that with regard to Adam, this

qualitywas also manifest from the standpoint of his body (for his body

was also G-d's handiwork). For all others, by contrast, [this G-dly

dimension of their being] is manifest in a revealed manner40

only from

the standpoint of their souls, which are an "actual part of G-d fromAbove."

41

For this reason, a soul has no connection to sin. (As the Zohar42

comments on the verse:43

"When a soul sins...," stating: "The Torah

and the Ho ly One, blessed be He, ask in wonderment: 'Could a soul

sin?'"44

Even when a Jew stumbles in sin, "his soul remains faithful to

Him, even at the time of sin."45

This is the inner meaning of the verse:46

"Your people are all

righteous." Since there is a dimension of Adam (as he existed before

36. Bereishis 2:19.

37. See Or Torah by the Maggid of Mezritch, Parshas Bereishis (p. 4b ff.); Likkutei Sichos, Vol.

X V , p. 13, note the sourcesmentioned there.

38. The writings of the AriZal (SeferHaGilgulim, Hakdamah 23; see EmekHaMelech, Shaar 1, ch.

4), quoted in Or Torah , loc. cit.

39. Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I I , p. 14.

40. In a hidden manner, this aso applies with regard to the body. For [G-d's] essentia

choice [of the Jewish people] is [focused] on aJew's body [and not his soul]. {See

Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X V I I , pp. 345-6. There the phrase (Yeshayahu 60:21): "Thework of

M y hands inwhich to take pride" is interpreted as referring to the body.}

41. Tanya, ch. 2.

42. Zohar I l l , 16a; see aso p. 13b.

43. Vayikra 5:1.

44. [Trans. Note: For the Hebrewphrasecould aso be translated in that manner.]

45. Tanya, ch. 24.

46. Yeshayahu, loc. cit.



V A Y I K R A 87

the sin) within every Jew, each person's Divine service parallels that of

the righteous, despite thefact that previouslyhewas involved in the

direct opposite ofthat service. When heobserves theTorah and its

mitzvos (from the inner dimension of his soul —the attribute of Adam

within him), he isnot turningtoG-d in teshuvah. He is not"one who

was distant, but who was drawn close,"47

[even though inactual fact,

he was distant]. Instead, his Divine service resembles that of one who

was righteous48 from the outset, who never had any connection toevil

and sin.

Since every Jewpossesses this positive quality, thepossibility

exists for every Jew to recognize his own positive virtues. [For weare

not speaking about aperson with anego-centered outlook.] On the

contrary, arighteous mandoes nothave aself-oriented identity.

Instead, he is identified with holiness that does notallow evil a

foothold. (In contrast, abaal teshuvah, even after heturns toG-d, must

be continually on guard lest he return to his previous conduct.49

)

[A person need notworry when making theawareness of this

potential a fundamental element of his Divine service.] On the

contrary, aperson must know his positive qualities. At times, thisis

the way (— through "lifting up his heart in the paths of G-d"50

—)to

overcome the hiddenness and concealment [of G-d] in thisworld. For

this [infuses] one's Divine service with thepower ofholiness in a

manner simlar to the Divine service of the righteous.

V I I I .

For this reason, precaution is necessary. Theawareness of one's

positive qualities must be coupled with an awareness of one's

fundamental humility. Otherwise, therecognition of one's positive

qualities can causeone todescend and stumble.

47. Cf.Berachos 34b.

48. Seesimlar concepts explained in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XV , pp.245-246.

49. Likkutei Torah, Devarim. See aso Tanya, Iggeres HaTeshuvah, ch. 11, [which advises abaal

teshuvah] "not tolift up his heart," [i.e., become haughty,] but instead to behumble in

thepresenceof every person."

50. IIDivrei HaYamim 17:6;Torah Or, pp. 91b; 119cff.; Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 15c.




I t is obvious that a person who is not righteous, whose evil is "in

its power and strength,"51

must be careful with regard to recognizing

his own positive qualities. Otherwise, it is possible for him to fall prey

to the elemental yeshus (self-concern) that stems from theyetzer hara.

The Alter Rebbe, however, was endeavoring to educate the

Tzemach Tzedek, who was [inherently] righteous52

andwould grow up to

be anasi (leader)53

among the Jewish people. Accordingly, he felt that

even greater caution was necessary. For Adam was a righteous man

and G-d's handiwork, and seemngly he had no connection to sin, nor

was there even a foothold for the powers of evil. Nevertheless, even

with regard to him, the awareness of his own positive qualities caused

him to blunder and commit the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge.

Certainly, every [other] righteous man must take precautions with

regard to the recognition of his positive qualities.54

I X .

O n this basis, we can aso understand why the Alter Rebbe elaborated

in explanation of Moshe's humility. ([Notonly did he explain that] he

was humble because he thought that his positive qualities had been

endowed to him [from Above],) [the Alter Rebbe also emphasized

that Moshe compared himself to others]. He thought that if that

other person had been granted thesepositive qualities, he would have

been better than he.

51. Cf. Tanya, ch. 13.

52. As our Sages comment (BBava Basra 16a): "You created righteous men." As the Tikkunei

Zohar (Introduction 1, 2) states: "Among the souls of the Jewish people are... righteous

men." Ultimately, [through his life,] such an individual reveas his initial potential. (See

Tanya, ch. 14.)

53. Who is obligated to conduct himself in [a manner bespeaking prosperity, as Tehillim

119:45] states: " I wi l l proceedwith ease."

54. On this basis, we can explain the continuation of the story: that the A lter Rebbe

recited ama a ma r of Chassidus on the verse (Vayikra 1:2): "When a man from [among] you

will offer a sacrifice to G-d." It is possible to say that this aludes to the concept that

even the attribute of Adam (the first man, seeRashi's commentary to the verse; see aso

Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X V I I , p. 13ff.) must be offered as a sacrifice to G-d," i.e., that one

must sacrifice the soul of a person on an earthly plane to G-d (Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p.

2c).



V A Y I K R A 89

[This isnecessary, because] a person must take precautions. Since

he adopts astancethat reflects the power within holiness and involves

the recognition of his positive qualities, it is possible that self-

centeredness will arise. [Hence,] the ordinary recognition of his own

humility is not sufficient. Instead, he must go to the opposite

extreme55

of pride and [manifest] absolute humility and bittul.

Genuine humility is not demonstrated by emphasizing one's own

negative qualities, but instead, seeking to highlight the positive

qualities that another person possesses.

We see this in our own lives. There are people who are able to

bring about bittul within themselves. Moreover, they can even bear

[criticism] and [listen when] another person reduces their self-image

to nothingness. Even so, [this does not necessarily obliterate their ego

entirely]. They [may] think: "It's true that I 'm nothing, but the other

person is more of a nothing than I am."

Bringing oneself to the level that he thinks about himself as

nothing and looks at the other person as something requires a very

different approach to Divine service and demands a higher level of

bittul.

I n this, we can see the great humility of Moshe who was able to

make amends for the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge. {As is well

known, when "Moshe received the Torah at Sinai,"56

the

contamnation from the Sin of the Tree of Knowledgeceased.57} Not

only was Moshe humble, he was the direct opposite of self-concern;

"exceedingly humble, more than any person on the face of the

55. See Rambam's statements in Shemoneh Perakim, ch. 4, and Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Deos 2:2.

See aso his statements there (2:3) with regard to humility and lowliness ([that this is

one of the areaswhereone's conduct may be extreme]. "Hence, with regard to Moshe

our teacher, it iswritten that he was "extremelyhumble"). See the gloss of the Lechem

Mishneh to ch. 1, halachah 4, and Shulchan Aru ch HaRav 155:1, 156:3.

56. Cf. A vos 1:1.

57. Shabbos 146a. On this basis, we can appreciate why the humility of Moshe is alluded to

in the mniaturealef of the word Vayikra. For the indwelling of the Divine Presence

within the Sanctuary was a sign that atonement had been granted for the Sin of the

Golden Calf (Rashi, in his commentary to Shmos 38:21 Vayikra 9:23; see aso his

commentary to Vayikra 9:2). And it was through the Sin of the Golden Calf that the

contamnation brought about by the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge returned (Zohar I ,

52b; I I , 193b).




earth."58

He compared himself with every Jew, [and by doing so, came

to respect every one of them,] thinking that "had that person been

given his positive qualities, he would certainly have achieved more

than he."

X .

This leads to one of the practical directives that we can derive from

this story. On one hand, every Jew must realize that he possesses a

heritage of awesome potentials and he must recognize his own posi¬

tive qualities. [ A n d that is extremely important lest he shy away] when

a mitzvah presents itself. For he knows his own spiritual level and will

protest: "How can a person like me undertake this holy project?" He

must realize that he possesses within himself an attribute that [re¬

flects] Adam as he existed before the sin. Accordingly, regardlessof

what he had done until now, at this moment, he must [— and he has

the potential to — ] conduct himself as if he is utterly above any con¬

nection to sin.

On the other hand, he must realize that all of these positive

qualities are endowed to him from Above. Were they to have been

given another person, that person would certainly have done better.

Therefore, the recognition of his own positive qualities will not cause

him to feel self-important. On the contrary, it will cause him to be

humble in his owneyes.

This bittul will then enable him to reach true greatness, as it is

said:59

"He who is small is great." And this will lead to G-d calling to

Moshe — to the attribute of Moshe one possesses in his soul — with

a solicitation of endearment.60

This in turn makes possible the Divine

service of bringing sacrifices, [rising upward from level to level] until

the consummate expression [of this phase of Divine service] in the

Third Beis HaMikdash where "We will offer before You the sacrifices

58. Not only was he humble and lowly in his own eyes, he had — to quote the A lter

Rebbe'swording in the story — "a broken and contrite heart."

59. Zohar I , 122b; I l l , 168a. See aso the Panei'ach Raza, loc. cit., which states that the

oversizedalef usedwith regard to Adamrefers to Moshe.

60. See TorasKohanim andRashi to that verse.



VAYIKRA 91

that we are obligated... in accordance with the command of Your

wil l . " 6 1

May this take place inthenear future.

(A dapted from Sichos 13 Nissan, 5726)

61. M ussa f liturgy, [Siddur Tehillat Hashem, p. 195].





P A R S H A S

K E D O S H I M

Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X V I I , p.219ff.

I .

W i t h regard to themitzvah of ahavas Yisrael, wefind two different

statements from our Sages:1

a) "Rabbi Akiva states: 'Love your neighbor asyourself.' This is a

great general principle intheTorah;"2

b) thestatement from Hillel ([who lived] several generations

earlier): "What ishateful toyoudonotdo toyour friend. This is the

entire Torah; therest iscommentary."3

The difference between thewording ofthese two statementsis

obvious. "This is agreat general principle in theTorah" means that

ahavas Yisrael is one of theTorah's general principles. It iseven a

"great" general principle, but it isstill only one general principle.4

(It is

not th e general principle of the Torah.) Hillel, bycontrast, sees [ahavas

Yisrael] as"theentire Torah."5

The remainder is merely commentary.

1. [Trans. Note: Certain portions of this sichah were not included in this translation.]

2. Sifri toVayikra 19:18; Jerusalem Talmud, Nedarim 9:4; Bereishis Rabbah 24:7.

3. Shabbos 31a.

4. Indeed, according to Ben Azzai (see thesources mentioned in fn. 2), there isanother

general principle of greater import.

5. [Moreover, theHebrew expression uses twoterms, kol andkulah, toemphasize that

ahavas Yisrael encompasses the entire Torah.] See Turei Zahav (Orach Chayim 582:3)

[which focuses on theexpression inour Rosh HaShanah prayers: "Rule over theentire

world"; there thetwo terms, kol andkulo, areaso used. TheTurei Zahav explains that

sometimes wespeak of awhole, although we mean only the majority. By repeating the

expressions, it isemphasized that His sovereignty encompassestheworld in its totality.

Simlarly, theemphasis here is that ahavas Yisrael encompassesthe Torah in itstotality.]

93




For this reason, wecan understandwhy Rashi, in his commentary

to [thisverse in] theTorah, quotes Rabbi Akiva's statement (butnot

Hillel's). For according to asimple perspective,6

ahavas Yisrael isnot the

entire Torah.7

It ismerely thegeneral principle that [motivates] the

mitzvos between man and man.8

{For this reason, we seethat Rashi, in hiscommentary to the

Talmud, 9 (which also reflects thesimple meaning ofthe text, albeit of

the Talmud,)10 [first] explains thestatement that notdoing what is

hateful to afriend is "theentire Torah" asreferring not toahavas

Yisrael, but [to ourrelationship with G-d]. "[The term] 'your friend'

refers tothe Holy One, blessedbeHe.... Do not violate His words."11

(This is indeed "the entire Torah.")

According tohis second explanation (and the fact that it isstated

second issignificant), Rashi interprets "your friend" asreferring to a

friend onthis material plane, but heexplains that according to this

interpretation, [ahavas Yisrael does notencompass] theentire Torah,12

6. [Trans. Note: AndRashi defines hismssion asexplaining thesimple meaning of the

Torah.]

7. I.e., according tothe simple meaning of the Torah and the Talmud, [ahavas Yisrael isnot

the entire Torah]. Only according to theinner, [mystic] dimension of the Torahcan

that besad, asexplained by the A lter Rebbe in Tanya, ch. 32, and by the Tzemach Tzedek

in Derech Mitzvosecha, Mitzvas Ahavas Yisrael, andOr HaTorah, Shoftim, p. 838ff., et al. (See

aso Sefer HaErachim Chabad, erech Ahavas Yisrael, sec. 8.) These concepts are quoted in

Kuntreis Ahavas Yisrael. See aso theMaharal's text Nesivos Olam, Nesiv Ahavas Reya, ch. 1, et

al.

8 See the commentaries of theRaavad and theKorban Eidah to theJerusalem Talmud, loc. cit.

9. Shabbos, loc. cit.

10. [Trans. Note: TheTalmud, bydefinition, is less directly involved with thesimple

meaning of theBiblical text andaso focuses onmore sophisticated techniquesof

interpretation.]

11. There are gosses to Rashi (Nachlas Yaakov as quoted by the Sifsei Chachamim, Maskil

LeDavid) which maintain that this isaso the intent inRashi's commentary to the Torah.

That, however, requiresmuch explanation.

12. This clarifies whyRashi brings this as asecond interpretation. [Hillel was speaking to a

potential convert.] Now aconvert must accept theobservanceofal 613 mitzvos. And

therefore it was necessaryfor Hillel to have in mind the entire Torah.

{Nevertheless, thefirst interpretation isaso notsufficient, [because it isaso

problematic]. (Firstly, theinterpretation of"your friend" is notliteral. Accordingto

that interpretation, Hillel should havesad "the Holy One, blessedbeHe" orthe like.

[Why did he haveto speak in allegory?]) Moreover, [according to this interpretation,]

it isnot understood why [Hillel] usesnegative termnology: "What ishateful... do not



K E D O S H I M 95

but rather "[the prohibitions against] robbery, theft, adultery; and the

majority of the mtzvos.}13

Explanation is necessary: [Both Rabbi Akiva's and Hillel'sstatements] are "the words of the l iving G-d."

14

We must therefore say

that both statements and concepts are true and can be explained

according to the inner dimension of the Torah. Nevertheless, a

question arises: Since Hillel [considers] ahavas Yisrael as "the entire

Torah," why does R. Akiva consider it (only): "a great general

principle in the Torah"? (After all, 200 includes 100.)15

Moreover, as

mentioned previously, Hillel's statement was authored many

generations [before R. Akiva's,] as stated above.

I I .

The above can be understood based on the [explanation of another]

statement by Hil lel :1 6 "Be of the disciples of Aharon, loving peace...

loving the created beings and drawing them close to the Torah." What

is the connection between "Loving peace... loving the created beings"

and "drawing them close to the Torah"? Ahavas Yisrael motivates a Jew

to seek out another person's welfare (not onlywith regard to spiritual

matters, but) with regard to all things, the material as well as the

spiritual.17

As is well known,18 with that expression, the mishnah is clarifying

that one should not compromse the Torah for the sake of ahavas

Yisrael. "Loving the created beings" should be expressed in bringing

them close to the Torah and not, Heaven forbid, [bringing the Torah

do," instead of using a positive expression. According to the interpretation that "your

friend" refers to another person, by contrast, this can be understood. See the Chiddushei

Aggados of the Maharsha to Shabbos, loc. cit.}

13. [Trans. Note: I.e., it relates to those mitzvos that concern our relationship with our

fellowman. Theseare themajority of — but not all — the mitzvos.

14. Eruvin 13b.

15. [Trans. Note: I.e., within a greater sum alesser sumis surely included.]

16. A vos 1:12.

17. Thus we see that the Baal Shem Tov would seek to help others with regard to their

material situation without making the favors he performed conditional to any spiritual

[improvement on the part of the recipient]. (SeeLikkutei Sichos, Vo l . I , p. 261.)

18. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I I , p. 316; Vol . XV, p. 198.




close to them, i.e., one should not] adapt the Torah to the disposition

of people at large and make compromses within it.

According to this interpretation, "drawing them close to the

Torah" is a (secondary) point, clarifying how one should "love the

created beings." The simple meaning of the verse, [however, leadsto a

different interpretation]: "Drawing them close to the Torah" is an

extension and aconsequence of "loving the created beings." "Loving

the created beings" leadsto — and is expressed by — "bringing them

close to the Torah."

This concept is also reflected in ch. 32 of Tanya where the Alter

Rebbe quotes [Hillel's statement] and explains: "This implies that

even those who are distant from the Torah of G-d and His service...

must be drawn close with thick cords of love. For perhaps it will be

possible to draw them close to the Torah and Divine service." The

[ultimate] intent of "draw[ing] them close with thick cords of love"

should be to "draw them close to the Torah and Divine service."

([The Alter Rebbe, nevertheless, includes a proviso.] Even if one is

not successful [in achieving that goal], "he does not forfeit the reward

for themitzvah of loving one's fellow Jew.")19

[Thus it seems that aJew's love for his fellow man has an ulterior

motive; it must lead to the recipient's spiritual advancement.] Now

(previously in that chapter) the Alter Rebbe explains20

that ahavas

Yisrael stems from the fact that he is a Jew and he possesses a soul.

( A n d "all souls are complementary and we share one Father.

Therefore all Jews are actually called brothers.")21

For this reason, one

must love "every Jewish soul, great or small."21

(As the Maggid [of

Mezritch] says:22

"One must love an absolutely wicked man in the

sameway as one loves an absolutely righteous man.")

19. This explanation aso clarifies the A lter Rebbe's choice of wording: "he does not

forfeit...." Seemngly, he should have stated: "he still receives the reward...." Since,

however, the intent of "loving the created beings" is "drawing them close to the

Torah," onemght think that if one is not successful in that purpose, one in fact forfets

the reward for themitzvah. See fn. 37.

20. See Derech Mitzvosecha, loc. cit. Sefer HaErachim, loc. cit., Kuntreis Ahavas Yisrael, loc. cit.

21. Tanya, ch. 32.

22. Quoted in Sefer HaMaamarim 5700, p. 117. See Kuntreis Ahavas Yisrael, notes to p. 7; see

aso Likkutei Sichos, Vo l . X I I , p. 217, fn. 17, and further fns. 34 and 35.



K EDOSHI M 97

Since the love for the other person is (not dependent on the

person's level of Divine service, but is rather) an essential love that

stems from the soul, why is this love associated with "drawing them

close to the Torah"?

I I I .

To explain the above: As is well known, our Sages state:23

"[G-d's]

conception of the Jewish people precedes all matters," even the

Torah. For the Jews have precedence over — i.e., are higher — than

the Torah. On the other hand, the Zohar states:24

"The Jews connect

themselves to the Torah and the Torah connects to the Ho ly One,

blessedbe He." That seems to imply that the Torah is higher than the

Jewish people.25

Among the explanations given for [this paradox]26

is that the

statement that the Jews transcend the Torah applies as they exist in

their source. As the souls descend and [exist on] the physical plane,

by contrast, the Torah transcends the Jewish people and a soul must

connect to G-d through the Torah.

Thus there are two [seemngly] opposite [dimensions] of aJew's

makeup: Becauseof the dimension of the Jewish soul that transcends

the Torah, "a Jew, even if he sins, remains a Jew."27

No matter how

many transgressions he will perform (G-d forbid), he does not forfeit

his Jewishness. For the bond between (the essence of) the soul of a

Jew and G-d is not dependent on his efforts in the Torah and its

mtzvos.28

[The result of that connection] is, however, that every Jew will

ultimately turn [to G-d] in teshuvah; 29 he will return to the Torah and

its mitzvos. [The rationale is that] since the connection of a Jew (on the

23. Bereishis Rabbah 1:4; Tanna D'Bei Eliyahu, ch. 14.

24. The quoteto follow is how the passageis cited in Chassidus (Likkutei Torah, Rosh HaShanah,

p. 59a; Shir Ha Sh i r i m , p. 16d, et al.). See asothe Zohar I l l , 73a.

25. [Trans. Note: For apparently, the Jewsneedthe Torah to connect to G-d.]

26. Likkutei Torah, Shir HaShirim, loc. cit the seriesof maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu 5672,

Vol . I , ch. 76; Vol. I l l , p. 1403ff; the maamar entitled Az Yashir, 5700, ch. 33, et al.

27. Sanhedrin 44a.

28. The seriesof maamarim entitledBeShaah SheHikdimu 5672, Vol . I l l , p. 1252.

29. Tanya, ch. 39; Shulchan Aru ch HaRav, Hilchos Talmud Torah 4:3.




physical plane) to G-d is through the Torah, it is impossible for the

essential quality possessed by a Jew to remain an isolated entity

(without expression in the Torah and its mitzvos). Instead, it must lead

him to the observance of the Torah and its mitzvos (and through this,30

the essential quality of his soul that transcends the Torah will also be

revealed.)31

I V .

These [concepts] lead to the two perspectives that apply to the

endeavor of "lov[ing] your neighbor as yourself." The essenceof that

love stems from the [utter] unity that exists in the source of the

Jewish souls,32

as the Jews exist above the Torah, transcending the

Torah's limtations. Accordingly, this love is expressed equally to all

Jews, even to those who are "distant from G-d's Torah and His

service."33

For on this level, a distinction cannot be made between a

righteous man and a Jew who is distant from the Torah.34

Moreover,

this love is not limited to the spiritual dimensions of the other Jew, but

instead, encompasses all of his affars, even his physical concerns,14

for

theseare the physical concerns of a Jew.

Nevertheless, sinceaJew's existence is bound up with the Torah,

as stated above, ahavas Yisrael (even the love which stems from the

30. [Trans. Note: I.e., the fact that a person who transgressedreturns to Torahobservance

reveas that he possesses a potential that indeed transcends the Torah. For it is this

inner connection that motivates the change in his conduct.]

31. Therefore even [the potential for] teshuvah (— which transcends the Torah as evident

from the fact that it can compensatefor a deficiency in theobservanceof the Torah —

) is revealed through the Torah. (See the series of maamarim entitledBeShaah SheHikdimu

5672, Vol. I l l , p. 1408; the seriesof maamarim entitled Yom Tov Shel Rosh HaShanah 5666, p.

235, et al.)


33. Wi th the exception of the "heretics and apostates" (Tanya, op. cit.). (See aso fn. 35.)

See aso Sefer HaErechim Chabad , loc. cit.,sec. 5, which describes [how love can embrace

even such individuals].

34. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I I , p. 300, which explains that the Maggid's statement cited

above (see fn. 22) that one must love an "absolutely wicked man in the sameway as

one loves an absolutely righteous man" is not a complete expression of ahavas Yisrael.

The statement implies that one differentiates between a righteous man and a wicked

man, and with regard to love stemmng from one's essence, such distinctions do not

exist.



K E D O S H I M 99

essenceof the soul which is above theTorah) becomesamitzvah of the

Torah. Wemust love a Jew because theTorah commands usto. As a

consequence, [this love ischanneled through] the limits and specifi¬

cations that theTorah establishes. (For example, no compromses in

the Torah may bemade because ofahavas Yisrael.) And indeed, there

are someJewswhomtheTorah commands us to relate to in amanner

of: " W i t h theutmost hatred, I hate them."35

V .

This reflects theconcept that Hillel emphasizes (which isaso under¬

scored by theAlter Rebbe's statements in Tanya) that "lov[ing] the

created beings" (those distant from G-d and His service) must leadto

draw[ing] them close to the Torah. The love [that one has for his

fellow Jew] stems from [the recognition of] their essential quality, the

fact that they areJews.

{[ I t is true that] wemust love a Jew (andhelp him in all his

concerns) even when we are not successful in drawing him close to

the Torah.} [Nevertheless, wemust operate according to thesame

rationale that we employ] with regard to ourown Divine service.The

essential positive quality that we areJewish (i.e., thebond with G-d

that transcends theTorah) cannot remain separate from theTorah,

but instead, must motivate us to theobservance of theTorah and its

mitzvos (asstated insec. I l l ) .

35. Tehillim 139:22, as interpreted by Shabbos 116a; see Tanya, loc. cit.

The explanations in sec. V clarify why theA lter Rebbe quotes this concept in

Tanya, loc. cit. (although even from a simple perspective this idea is necessary to

complete the explanation of the concept). Seemngly, it contradicts the concepts

stated previously: a) that ahavas Yisrael stems from [the fundamental connection

between] thesoul, and b) a Jew, even thoughhesins, remains a Jew.

The revelation of thesoul's qualities comes about through theTorah (aswill be

explained). Now [such individuals] have completely severed their connection to the

Torah, [totheextent that] "they have no portion intheG-d of Israel." (In their present

situation,) it is impossiblefor thequalities of their soul to beexpressed (in contrast to

people at large who are"distant from G-d and His service"). Hence, [towardthem,] it

is impossible to expressahavas Yisrael that stems from the soul in a revealed manner.

{This concept follows as aconsequence to theexplanation of theconcept stated

previously [in ch. 32 in Tanya]: that "loving the created beings" leadsto "drawing them

close to the Torah," aswill beexplained.}




Simlar concepts apply with regard to the love for thosewho are

"distant from the Torah of G-d and His service." The fact that one

fees their essential quality, [i.e.,] the fact that they are Jews, motivates

him not to remain complacent because of this alone. Instead, it

propels himtoward efforts to transform theminto TorahJews.

Since the essential quality of a Jew comes into expression through

the Torah, when a person remains distant from the Torah, it is

impossible for himto havean authentic appreciation of the true peace

and oneness that exists between himand all other Jews36 (that they are

"actually brothers because of the source of their souls")32

"Drawing

them close to the Torah" — connecting them with the Torah and in

this way, with G-d — enables the perception (in a revealed manner)37

of the essential quality possessed by the Jews that transcends the

Torah.

V I .

O n this basis, we can understand the explanation of the two expres¬

sions used by our Sages with regard to ahavas Yisrael. Rabbi Akiva is

speaking about ahavas Yisrael as we must — and as we actually — prac¬

tice, [loving] a fellow Jew [by showing concern] for himas he exists

[on this material plane], a soul enclothed within a body, according to

the limtations of the Torah. Accordingly, it is not appropriate to say

that it is "the entire Torah," because that would necessitate compro¬

msing the standards of the Torah for the sakeof ahavas Yisrael (as the

36. On this basis, we can appreciate why in Tanya, loc. cit., the A lter Rebbe quotes the

words (of Hillel's statement): "loving peace." For "drawing them close to the Torah"

establishespeacebetween himand people at large, since it gives themthe potential to

enable"the soul to be given primacy over the body."

37. Nevertheless, even if he is not successful in "draw[ing] themclose to the Torah," they

still possess (in a hidden manner, at least) the essentia quality of the Jewish people.

Hence, "he doesnot forfeit the reward for themitzvah of loving one's fellow Jew."

Based on Sichos Shabbos Parshas Chayei Sarah, 5737, it can be explained that after the

A lter Rebberevealed this concept ("he doesnot forfeit..."), the consequence [of ahavas

Yisrael] is greater than merely not forfeiting [the merit of this mitzvah]. For indeed, he

receves a great profit: by fulfilling the A lter Rebbe's command, he binds himself with

him.

["N ot forfeiting"] (as opposed to saying "he is granted a reward") is relevant only

when it is obvious that he [already] possesseda reward (see Berachos 10b; Nazir 15a).



K E D O S H I M 101

threat toJewish life supersedes theentire Torah38

). Instead, [ahavas

Yisrael] ismerely "ageneral principle in theTorah," [i.e., onelike

others,] and must beexpressedthrough the guidelines of the Torah.39

Hillel, by contrast, aso speaks about ahavas Yisrael, as it is

expressed on thematerial plane (to asoul as itexists in abody), but

[he speaks about it] as itrelates to thesource of the Jewish souls, the

level atwhich "the Jews precede theTorah." At this level, theentire

Torah exists for thesake of theJewish people, for thepurposeof

expressing and revealing their [true] qualities. Since the[true] quality

of the Jewish people (that they are"actually brothers because of the

source of their souls") isexpressed in arevealed manner through

ahavas Yisrael, it is "the entire Torah and therest is commentary."40

(A dapted from Sichos Shabbos Parshas Kedoshim, 5727)

38. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos YesodeiHaTorah, ch. 6.

39. See Sichos Shabbos Parshas Yisro, 5740, which explains that theconnection between being

"of thestudents ofAharon" and"drawing them close to theTorah" resembles the

convergence between "kindness and truth" (Tehillim 85:11) which [our Sages] (Shmos

Rabbah 5:10) [associate with themeeting of Aharon (kindness) and Moshe (Torah and

truth). I mplied is that even the kindness personified byAharon (the level of "abundant

kindness") that transcends thespiritual cosmos andthat motivates anunbounded

measureof loveto beextended topeople atlarge must correlatewith the truth of the

Torah (personified by Moshe).

On this basis, wecanaso explainthestatements ofHillel and Rabbi Akiva. Hillel

was characterized by the attribute of kindness {Zohar I l l (Raya Mehemna), p.245a;the

introduction toTanya, et al.}. Therefore, heemphasized the importance of ahavas Yisrael

as it transcends (the limtationsof) the Torah.

Rabbi Akiva, bycontrast, isidentified with theTorah (seeMenachos 29b; Sanhedrin

86a) and was one of the disciples of the House of Shammai (Rashi, BavaMetzia 37b;S'dei

Chemed, Klallim, Maareches Ayin, Klal 87) who were characterized by the attribute of truth

(see Likkutei Torah, Shir HaShirim, p. 48c). Hence he emphasizedahavas Yisrael as being

"one of the great general principles in the Torah."

40. [Trans. Note: Perhaps, for this reason, Hillel felt itnecessary to emphasize the

importance of "drawing them close to theTorah," which implies that "theTorah

should not bebrought close tothem," i.e., that compromses should not bemadein

the Torah for thesakeof the Jewish people.]





P A R S H A S

B E H A R - B E C H U K O S A I

Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X X I I , p. 159ff.

I .

As mentioned on many occasions,1

whenever two Torah readings are

joined together, they are fused into a single reading. {This is reflected

by the fact that we divide the two Torah readings into (only) seven

aliyos. Furthermore, the conclusion of the first Torah reading and the

beginning of the second are included in one aliyah 2 (with the same

blessing recited beforehand and afterwards).}

These factors indicate that the two Torah readings share a

common theme that enablesthem to be joined together. [Wi th regard

to the present week] it is necessary to understand: What is the

common theme [that unites] the two Torah readings Behar and

Bechukosai? On the contrary, [the two Torah readings appear to convey

opposite ideas]. As mentioned several times, the name of a Torah

reading communicates its inner message.3

Seemngly, the names Behar

and Bechukosai communicate opposite thrusts.

Behar (lit. "On Mount [Sinai]") points to lifting oneself up. In

Divine service, this means that there are times4

when a Jew has to act

with assertiveness and power, [as it is written:] 5

"And he lifted up his

heart in the ways of G-d." For example, when confronted with a

1. See Likkutei Sichos, Vo l . X V I I I , p. 300, p. 380ff., et al.

2. In contrast to the Yemenite custom(see Likkutei Sichos, p. 380, fn. 24).

3. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V, p. 57; Vol. X V I I I , loc. cit., et al.

4. Moreover, a certain measureof this trait must be expressed at the beginning of each

day when a person must express himself with the "bold[ness of] a leopard" (see the

sourcescited in fn. 6).

5. I I Divrei HaYamim 17:6; see the sourcescited in fns. 15 and 20.

103




challenge, a person must stand firm with unshakable strength and

boldness so that he can withstand the challenge. He must "bebold as

a leopard."6

Bechukosai ("If you [proceed] in My chukim.."), by contrast, is

associated with bittul. We observe chukim because "It is a statute that I

have pronounced; an edict that I have decreed,"7

to the extent that

"You have no license to wonder about it." 8

Since G-d gave an order,

we fulfill it (even though we do not understand the reason or even

more, even if it [appears to be] contrary to reason and logic).

I I .

We can appreciate [the connection between the two Torah readings]

through first explaining why — according to Jewish custom (and

"[Jewish custom] is [accepted] as law"10

) — the first Torah reading is

called Behar.

On the surface, the fundamental emphasis is on the word [that

follows Behar:] Sinai. That termclarifies that we are speaking about the

special mountain on which the Torah was given.11

Hence, it would

have been appropriate to call the Torah reading "Sinai" or at least Behar

Sinai ("On Mount Sinai").12

(For there are several Torah readings13

whose names include two words.) Why is the name Behar — which

does not clarify which mountain is being spoken about —

appropriate?

6. A vos 5:20, cited at the beginning of the Tur, Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim), and Shulchan

Aru ch HaRav, Mahadura Basra (see Mahadura Kama 1:3).

7. BamidbarRabbah, the beginning of Parshas Chukas Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Chukas, secs. 3,

8, et al.

8. Rashi, the beginning of Parshas Chukas, basedon Yoma 67b.

9. In contrast, both the Siddur of Rav SaadiaGaon and the Seder Tejilos of Rambam refer to the

Torah reading as Behar Sinai.

10. See the sources cited inLikkutei Sichos, Vol . IV, p. 1080; Vol.X X I I , p. 30, fn. 4; p. 56, fn.

2, et al.

11. As our Sages (Toras Kohanim, as quoted by Rashi) comment on this verse: "Just as [the

mitzvah of] shemittah is from Sinai..., so, too, all... are from Sinai." Or to refer to the

wording of theMishnah (Avos 1:1): "Moshe received theTorah from Sinai."

12. As Rav SaadiaG ao n and Rambam refer to the Torah reading.

13. E.g., ChayeiSarah, VeZosHaBerachah.



BEHAR-BECHUKOSAI 105

This question isreinforced when we consider thelesson in our

Divine service to bederived from the words "On Mount Sinai." Our

Sagesstate14 that the reason [G-d] chose to give the Torah on Mount

Sinai is that it is thelowest of all mountains. Thus aparadox is

produced.15

On one hand, humility is required, [for Mt. Sinai is] "the

lowest [of all mountains]." Simultaneously, it is amountain. [Implied

is that both modes of expression are demanded of a person. Although

he must behumble, heshould not be a"doormat,"16

trampled on [by

people atlarge]. Instead, thequality ofhumility has to becoupled

with power and dignity.

These two concepts areindicated by the words Behar Sina i . Behar

("On Mount") points to aperson's dignity and power. Sina i —when

used alone without specifying that amountain isinvolved —reflects

the concept of bittul. {[I n this context, thename] Sinai (םיני) is

associatedwith the word , ("bramble")סנה17

"the lowest of all the trees

in the wor ld."} 1 8

This indicates that ofthe two (lifting oneself up and bi t tu l ) , the

fundamentally important quality is b i t tu l . It isonly that it isnecessary

to clarify that one's b i t t u l should not cause himto become a

"doormat," tread upon by every foot. Instead, (at times,)19

one must

show power and elevate oneself. As our Sagescommented:20

"A Torah

sage must have onesixty-fourth of ameasure (of pride)," but not

more, Heaven forbid.

In that light, why is itappropriate tocall the Torah reading Behar

alone, alludingto"l ifting oneself up" without mentioning Sinai, b i t tu l ,

the quality that is most essential?

14. Midrash Tehillim (Buber ed.) onTehillim 68:17, e t al.

15. W i th regard to this concept, see Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar 15b-c; Likkutei S i c h o s , Vo l . I , p.

276ff., e t a l.

16. Cf. Eruv in 98a {treadupon "by many... leading to abasement" (Rashi)}.

17. See the commentary ofRamban toDevarim 1:6; the commentaries toMoreh Nevuchim, Vol.

I , ch. 66.

18. S h m o s Rabbah 2:5.

19. See Likkutei Torah, loc. cit . , which states that much more bi t tu l is required. Similarly, with

regard to boldness, see the statements in theMahadura Kama of Shulchan Aruch HaRav,

loc. ci t . (based on those of the B e i s Y o s e f ) , clarifying the caution that must be taken with

regard to this quality.

20. Sotah 5a See Torah Or, Megillas E s t h e r , p. 91b;Hosafos, p. 119c ff.,et al. Seeasofn. 33.




I I I .

Among the explanations is that the Divine service of bittul, [which

focuses on] "man's humility," must [stem from a recognition of] "the

greatness of the A-lmighty."21

One is batel, because he fees that the

truth of all existence is G-dliness.

As a result, the true concept of bittul is that one is so far from a

conception of self that he does not even feel that he is batel. For the

very fact that one fees that one nullifies himself (for G-d) indicates

that there (still) exists an entity that must be nullified.2 2

In astateof

true bittul, one fees nothingelseother than G-dliness.

This concept is reflected in nigleh, the realm of Torah law. As

explained once at length,23

there is a difference in Jewish law between

a servant and an agent.

{A s iswell known,24

there are three conceptions of agency:

a) The principal gives the agent the license and the power to act

in his stead. The deed performed by the agent is, however, associated

with the agent.

b) The deed is considered as if the principal performed it.

(Although performed by the agent,) it is the principal's act.

c) (Not only the deed of the agent and his power of action are

associated with the principal. Instead,) the agent himself becomes

identified with the principal [and isseen as an extension of him].}

[Our Sages state:]25

"A person's agent is like him." This

(primarily) reflects the highest conception of agency in which the

agent assumesthe identity of the principal.

Even according to this understanding, however, adistinction can

be made between the principal and the agent. (Therefore the concept:

"A person's agent is like him" applies only with regard to the affars he

21. See Rama (Orach Chayim 98:1) [whostates that before prayer, one should contemplate

thesetwo concepts].

22. See the seriesof maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, ch. 214; the maamar entitled

M i Yitein, 5706, ch. 4.

23. Likkutei Sichos, Vol . XX, p. 303.

24. SeeLekach Tov, authored by R. Yosef Engel, General Principle1.

25. Berachos 34b.




was charged to carefor and not to other matters,26 even those thatare

relevant atthat time.)27

[I n halachic terms,] a servant, by contrast, is not considered anindependent entity at all. Hisexistence is identified with his master.

Accordingly, everything acquired by a servant is acquired by his

master.28

[The rationale for this distinction is that] an agent is an

independent entity who nullifies himself to theprincipal. Accordingly,

even while his identity is nullified, there still remains aplace for hisown personal existence.29 A servant, by contrast, does not need to

nullify his identity to themaster [through his ownvolition]. Fromthe

very outset, he is "the property and possession of his master."30

Hence, there is noconcept of his existing as aseparateentityat all.

I V .

Fromtheabove, it isunderstood that when onemanifests true bittul to

G-dliness, [hisrecognition of] his personal power and raisinghis

spirits do notpresent acontradiction. For we are notspeaking about

the power and elevation of one's own individual identity. We are

speaking about thepower andelevation of G-dliness.31 As our Sages

26. [Trans. Note: I.e., if aperson charged an agent with managing acertain facet of his

business concerns, theagent's privilege to act is limited to that area. Hecannot take

action with regard to other facets of theprincipal's holdings.]

27. See themarginal note to Likkutei Sichos, Vo l . XX , loc. cit., fn. 17.

28. Pesachim 88b;Kiddushin 23b; seeaso the following footnote.

29. On this basis, we canappreciate therationalerequiring theagent to be of thesame

halachic status astheprincipal. (SeeKiddushin 41bwhich states: "Just asyou are members

of the covenant, so, too, your agents must be....") Similarly, Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p. 1c

states: "Therefore, adeaf-mute, amentally incapable person, and amnor cannot serve

as agents, forthey do notresemble theprincipal." SeeLikkutei Sichos, V ol. X X X I I I , p.

114ff., which explainstheseconcepts at length.

30. See the seriesof maamarim entitled Yom Tov Shel Rosh HaShanah, 5666, pp. 326-327, where

this concept isexplainedat length. Notetheopinion (the gloss of Rashba to Kiddushin

23b) that when a servant acquires property, it becomes hismaster's from thevery

outset. [It is not that itenters theservant's domain and is transferred from thereto the

master. Instead, the servant does not have a domain of his own andacts as "an

extendedarm" of his master.]

31. AsRabbi Shimon bar Yochai said (Zohar I , 125a): " I am[His] sign* in theworld." See

Sefer HaMaamarim 5564, p. 106; Or HaTorah, Vayechi, p. 359a ff., Yom Tov Shel Rosh HaShanah,

5666, p. 159; Sefer HaMaamarim 5686, p. 43, et al.




say32 with regard to a servant: "The servant of aking is aking." This

does not generate feelings of self-importance and pride in the servant.

For the importance and greatness is not his own; it is the king's.

For this reason, the Torah reading is referred to as Behar alone. For

the ultimate level of bittul is that even when a person resembles a

"mountain" (i.e., when he stands with power and isuplifted), it is not

necessary to clarify that the power of holiness (and not his ego,

Heaven forbid) is being expressed. For he is batel to G-dliness to the

extent that there is not even an initial assumption that he is concerned

with his own identity. It is, thus, unnecessary to emphasize that the

mountain is (a result of the approach of) Sinai, [which is bittul].

V .

This is the explanation (with regard to our Divine service) concerning

the different ways to whichMount Sinai can be referred.

A t the beginning of one's Divine service, when one has asenseof

his own identity, he must be Sinai alone. There is no place for being a

mountain, lifting oneself up — only bittul. 33 Since he is concerned with

* [I mplied is that just as a sign publicizes the message it seeks to communicate, so,

too, Rabbi Shimon was the medium to make G-dliness known in the world.

Simultaneously, Rabbi Shimon, like a sign, had no conception of his own personal

existence.]

32. Sh'vuos 47b (there the version is "like a king"); Sifri and Rashi to Devarim 1:7; Rashi to

Bereishis 15:18, et al .

33. TheHosafos to Torah Or (p. 120a) statethat the concept of having 1/64 of ameasureof

pride applies at the beginning of one's Divine service. (See aso Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar,

loc. cit., and similarly, Torah Or, Megillas Esther, p. 91b, which explains that [otherwise]

"his heart will not be motivated to approach Divine service, saying 'Who amI? And

what is myDivineservice worth?'")

[That does not represent a contradiction to the explanations above, for the

statements in Torah Or] refer to a person lifting his heart up after he is alreadybatel (i.e.,

he is a Torah scholar). Indeed, he is so batel that [we fear that] "hewill not be motivated

to Divine service." Therefore he needs a certain measureof pride so that hewill be so

motivated. [Thesichah,] by contrast, is speaking about a person at the beginningstages

of the Divineservice of nullifying himself.

Based on the above and the further explanations in [thesichah], severa points can be

resolved:

a) [the apparent contradiction between the statements in] Torah Or concerning the

need for a 1/64 measureof pride and the ruling of Rambam* (Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Deos




his own identity, the motif of [assumng] power and raising one's self-

image in the realm of holiness is not appropriate. For him, that would

mean lifting up and [showing] the power of his own ego.

{[ A parallel in the realm of halachah is] the first conception of

agency mentioned above: The agent is an independent entity, and yet

he nullifies himself and actson behalf of the principal.}

A t a higher rung in Divine service, one proceeds to Mount Sinai.

Here, he can feel like "a mountain," lifting himself up. Since he has

developed an inner bittul, the power [he expresses] is not his own; it

stems from G-dliness.

Nevertheless, he still must be cautioned. Hence, we mention

Sinai, bittul. For there is the possibility that he will slip into self-

concern, since his bittul has not permeated his existence entirely. He is

still feeling that he isnullifying himself to G-d.

{This parallels the higher conception of agency,34

when the agent

transfers his power to the principal, and so, it is considered as the

principal's deed, or on the highest level, when the agent is identified

with the principal. [Even on this level,] however, a distinction can be

madebetween the agent and the principal.}

2:3) that "Anyone who possesses — even a trace of — pride [is worthy of being]

placed under a ban of ostracism."**

b) the difference between the wording of the Shulchan Aruch HaRav 156:3 —

although it cites Rambam, albeit with regard to anger — [and the wording of Rambam

himself. The A lter Rebbe uses the wording] "until the other extreme"*** (while

Rambam states "[not] even a trace").

c) The difference in thewording of Rambam himself [between pride] — concerning

which Rambam states, "[not] even a trace" — and anger concerning which he states,

"until the other extreme."

As iswell known, Rambam's ruling refers to the situation of themajority. This is not

the place for further discussion of thesematters.

* See Likkutei Levi Yitzchok, Igros (p. 305), which offers adifferent resolution [of the

apparent contradiction].

** The notation by theEinHaMishpat [on the phrase in Sotah, loc. cit.]: "One who lacks

[this quality] is worthy of being placed under a ban of ostracism" as referring to

Rambam, loc. cit., has been questioned by the commentaries.

*** Thiswording doesnot negatethequalityof prideentirely. It implies that there is a

certain dimension [ofpride] (for it mentions "the other extreme"). (In contrast, the

wording "[not] even a trace" [impliesthetotal eradication of that quality].)

34. See the following footnote.




The highest level isBehar , where al that ismentioned is the

mountain. One's b i t t u l is socomplete that hedoes not need the word

o f caution:35

Sinai. [He issoidentifiedwith G-d that] there is no room

f o r even a thought that something other than G-dliness exists.

V I .Although B e h a r represents avery high level ofb i t tu l ,

36

itnevertheless

serves as adirective for every Jew in his Divine service. For, in truth,

every Jew is "a mountain," for all of Israel [are described]37

as kings.

[There aretimes] when it isdemanded of [every] Jew, [not only

those onahigh level of bi t tu l , ] toassert himself for thesake of his

Yidd ishke i t . [The intent is] not that heshould sacrifice his b i t tu l , because

there isnoother way toprotect him from evil, butthat [heshould

assert himself knowing that] theinner dimension of this strength is

the power of theG-dly soul which is"anactual part ofG-d from

Above."38

35 . It ispossible tosay that this reflects thedistinction between B e h a r (the name of the

Torah reading) and רהה ("the mountain"), atermused to refer toMount Sinai attimes

(e.g., S h m o s 19:2; see also S h m o s 25:40 and other instances).

I n the latter instance, aswell, the name Sinai isnot mentioned explicitly, although

stating "the mountain," clearly implies that theintent istherenowned mountain, i.e.,

Sinai. In ourDivine service, this rung represents thehighest conception of agency,

where theagent isidentified with theprincipal. Nevertheless, asstated above, a

distinction can bemadebetween the agent and the principal. [Implied is that thereis

still an" I , " andhence, aneed forself-nullification. Similarly,] when stating"the

mountain," [although Sinai, bi t tu l , is not mentioned,] it is alluded to.

I n B e h a r ("On Mount"), bycontrast, noallusion toSinai ismade atall. For, as

explained in the text above, this refers to astatewhere the person's individual identity

is not felt atal l . [There is no need to caution himwith regard to bittul . ]

36. See the sources inS e f e r HaMaamarim 5564 andOrHaTorah citedin fn. 31.

37. The IntroductiontoT i k k u n e i Z o h a r 1b. [This representsahigher rung than] S h a b b o s 67a

[which describes them] as"sonsof kings."

Based on theexplanation of the advantage ofservants over agents (sec. I l l ) , it is

possible todraw aparallel totheadvantage the Jews possess over angels. For the

Hebrew מלאך means both ["angel" and] agent ( L i k k u t e i T o r a h , Vay ik ra , p.1c;seealso

Tanya, Kuntreis Acharon, p. 159a; the sources mentioned in fn. 31, andS e f e r HaLikkutim

from the T z e m a c h T z e d e k , e r e c h M a la c h ) . Incontrast, the Jewish people arereferredto

either as"sons" (who shareone essencewith their father) or asservants ([concerning

whomthe motif] "The servant of aking is aking" applies).

38. Tanya, ch. 2.




A Jew must realize that his soul "was never driven into exile, or

subjugated to the dominion of the nations.... W i t h regard to every¬

thing involving... Torah, mitzvos, and Jewish custom, no one can

impose his views on us."39

We are taught:40

"The law of the ruling authority is law," and

warned:41

"Do not provoke [even] a small gentile." But when it comes

to a matter involving Yiddishkeit, [every Jew] is (the "servant of aking,"

[and therefore]) "a king." Hence, not onlydoes he havethe power of

aking, but also he may not forego his honor.42

For the honor is not his

to forego. It is the honor of the K ing, the K ing of kings Who states: " I

will dwell within them,"43 within the G-dly soul [of every Jew] which is

"an actual part of G-d from Above," a part of the essence.44

V I I .

Based on the above, we can appreciate the connection between Behar

and Bechukosai: there is no contradiction between the two thrusts in

Divine service indicated by their names. Not onlydoesBehar (strength

and dignity) not run contrary to Bechukosai (bittul), one is a result of the

other. As explained above, the strength and dignity impliedby Behar is

an outgrowth of true bittul, a manifestation of bittul so complete that it

leaves no room for any other thought. From the outset, there is no

doubt that the servant is [an extension of and identified with] the

Master.

This commitment of bittul is expressed through Bechukosai — ob¬

serving mitzvos in amanner of chukim. The Alter Rebbe explains45

that

39. [The Previous Rebbe's address to the chassidimon 3 Tammuz, 5687, before departing

in exile to K ostroma.] Likkutei Dibburim, Vol. IV, p. 692a; Sefer HaMaamarim 5687, p. 196;

[English translation, Defiance and Devotion, p. 55].

40. Gittin 10b.

41. See Pesachim 113a.

42. Kiddushin 32b.

43. Shmos 25:8. See Reishis Chochmah, ShaarHaAhavah, ch. 6; Shelah (ShaarHaOsios, OsLamed), et

al . [which emphasize that the intent of the verse is:] "within every member of the

Jewish people."

44. Sefer HaMaamarim Kuntreisim, Vol . I I , p. 40b ff.

45. Likkutei Torah, the beginning of Parshas Bechukosai. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. Ill, Parshas

Bechukosai Vol. IV, p. 1056; Vol. V I I I , p. 127ff., et al. See aso the beginning of the

maamar entitled VaYedaber... Zoos Chukas, 5665 (SeferHaMaamarim 5665, p. 224).




Bechukosai aso has the implication "engraved." [This points to a con¬

nection deeper than the] unity of the letters and the entity on which

they are engraved. [To explain:] written letters are an ancillary entity,

aside from the parchment. Engraved letters, by contrast, are not a

distinct entity in their own right. [Instead,] their entire existence is

the entity on which they are engraved; for example, the entire

existence of the alef in the stonetablets is the stone.

This is the implication of the term chukim. It reflects a deeper

commitment than the term gezeiros, "decrees." The term "decree"

would imply that a person [feels] compelled to observe themitzvos. He

must break [his nature] to perform an act that does not haveareason.

The term chok — which aso has the implication of engraving —

indicates that one is not compelled to perform the mitzvah. Instead,

one is entirelybatel to G-dwithout any senseof personal identity at all

(like letters that have been engraved into a precious stone). As a

result, he [willingly] fulfills every aspect of G-d's will.

O n this basis, we can appreciate the careful choice of wording in

our Sages' expression (with regard to chukim):8

"Youhaveno license to

wonder about it." On the surface, the directive should have been

worded: "Do not wonder about it." 4 6

I t is possible to offer the following explanation: The phrase"You

have no license to wonder about it" implies that by and large, one

should wonder about [and contemplate the Torah's commands]. The

commitment "Wewill do" should be coupled with — albeit followed

by47

— the promse "We will listen" (interpreted48

to mean, "We will

understand"). For, generally, we must seek to understand the

motivating rationales for the mitzvos. In this instance, however, this

doesnot apply.

46. As Midrash Tehillim (Buber ed.) 9:3 states: "Do not wonder about it." And the Midrash

Socher Tov 9:3 states: "There is none who may wonder about it."

47. [Trans. Note: I mplied is that the order is significant. First must come naaseh, an

unreserved commtment to carry out G-d's will. It should, however, be followed by

nishmah, an attempt to understand themotivating factors for His will.]

48. As reflected in thephrase"For your servant understands" ( I Shmuel 3:9-10). [I mplied is

that aperson's commtment to G-d must include unreserved allegiance ("Wewill do")

and an effort to understand ("We will listen"), but the unreserved allegiance must be

given promnence over one's intellectual endeavors.]




A person has amnd and heshould use it. W i th regard tothese

particular mitzvos, however, man was notgiven "license towonder

about [them]."

Moreover, [even with regard tothese mitzvos,] theintent is to

negate only the kind of thought described as ,הרהור "wonder." Chukim

need not beobserved in amanner that negates entirely intellectual

meditation, research, and inquiry.49

On the contrary, [there shouldbe

an intellectual element to theobservance of thec huk i m ] .50

[It's true

that] with in thestatements of ourSages, wefind explanations that

chuk im are not intellectual commandments. Some of them, indeed,

appear to be theopposite of logic.51

[Therefore,] one must [control]

his intellect andneither wonder about norimpugn52

thec h u k i m . He

should notthink that thechuk im lack anything when compared to

thosemitzvos which can be comprehended intellectually.

On the contrary, [since] chukah reflects engraving, [it implies that

a person's] b i t t u l to G-d has progressed to thepoint that it is

"engraved with in him." Forhim, there isnothing else outsideof

G-dliness (like letters engraved on ajewel which are part of the jewel

itself). The individual's personality (his thoughts and feelings) arenot

a contradictiontob i t tu l , for he hastranscended his individual identity

entirely and has identified with G-d.

V I I I .

On this basis, we canalso understand theconnection between the

content (of the majority) of the Torah reading—which speaks about

reward and punishment for the mitzvos —and the name Bechukosai . On

49. The latter terms are borrowedfrom theMishnah (Chag igah 11b) which uses themwithin

the context of studyingMaasehMerkavah ("the mysticsecretsof theDivine chariot").

50. SeeRambam, Mishneh Torah, the conclusion ofHilchos Temurah: "Although al of the chukim

of the Torah aredecrees... it isworthy to meditate upon them. Whenever a reason can

be given, you should giveareason." See alsoMoreh Nevuch im, Vo l . I l l , ch. 26. Seealso

Likkutei S i c h o s , V ol . X X X I I , p. 174ff.

51. Midrash Tanchuma, P a r s h a s Chukas, sec. 3;Bamidbar Rabbah andYalkut Shimoni, the beginning

of P a r s h a s Chukas, e t al.

52. The root, ,הרהר translated as"wonder" in our Sages' statement regarding chuk im, also

has theimplication "impugn." Thus ourSages (Sanhedr in 110a) describe onewho

impugns his teacher or the Shech inah asbeing .מהרהר See Likkutei S i c h o s , V ol . I l l , p. 898;

V ol . V I I I , p. 131, fn. 52.




the surface, the implication of chukim is observance [of these mitzvos]

only becausethey are G-d's commandments (i.e., even though we do

not know the reason for them and we don't appreciate any advantage

in observing them). How is this an appropriate name for a Torah

reading in which both the beginning and the majority of the Torah

reading speak about promses of reward for the observance of the

mitzvos (or the opposite, punishment for the failure to observe them)?

[Seemngly, these verses would seem to serve] as encouragement to

observethe mitzvos becauseof the reward one will receive.

The explanation is as follows: When a person is batel to G-d in a

manner of engraving — nothing apart from G-dliness exists (like en¬

graved letters which are an integral part of the jewel) — the reward he

receives for his observance is also viewed in a simlar light: The fact

that the mitzvos lead to reward does not motivate such a person to

perform the mitzvos for the sake of his own reward and benefit (i.e.,

that they will bring himgood in a material or spiritual sense). For the

only good he appreciates is what is good in G-d's terms. [Neverthe¬

less,] sinceG-d is the ultimate of good, His mitzvos lead to good in all

things,53

including simple material well-being and prosperity.

(Sichos Shabbos Parshas Behar-Bechukosai, 5740)

53. This interpretation can be offered in addition to the interpretation offered by Rambam

(Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Teshuvah 9:1) that the promses of material prosperity are means

to achieve spiritual wellbeing. See also Likkutei Sichos, Vol . XV, p. 312. See also Likkutei

Sichos, Parshas Bechukosai, 5751.



P A R S H A S

S H E L A C H

L i k k u t e i S i c h o s , Vol. X X X I I I , p. 85ff.

I .This week's Torah reading refers to thespies as a"congregation."

1

They were ten [innumber], (for Yehoshua andCaleb were not

included among them). From this, our Sages2

derive the concept that

any tenJewswho j o in together are considered "a congregation."3

I t isnecessary toexplain4

why this law, which emphasizesthe

unique positive quality of acongregation with regard tomattersof

holiness (— "Any matter ofholiness should not be [recited] in [a

quorum of] less than ten"5

—) isderived from [the narrative of] the

spies (ofwhom it is said: "How long will this evil congregation

exist?").6

1. Bamidbar 14:27.

2. Megi l lah 23b(quoted inR a s h i ' s commentary to theverse). According toseveral

versions, the concept is also found in B e r a c h o s 21b; Sanhedr in 74b (see the Gil iyon B e S h a s ,

loc. cit. see the commentary ofR a s h i andMaharsha, loc. cit).

3 SeeRambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Tefillah 8:5;Shulchan Aruch HaRav 55:2 [with regard to

the composition of am iny an (quorum) for prayer].

4. See S e f e r H a S i c h o s 5704, p. 29.

5. B e r a c h o s andM egi l lah, loc. c i t . , which develop an equation basedon the use of the termךו ת

in both Vayikra 22:32 andBamidbar 16:21.

S e f e r H a S i c h o s 5704, loc. cit., cites theverse: "Separate yourselves from this evil

congregation," [adding the word "evi l" to Bamidbar 16:21]. Either it is aprinting error

and "evil" is extra, or the intent is to refer to twoverses, that verseand theverse in our

Torah reading as the Talmud does. [This is indicated by] the conclusion of thepassage

which speaksabout a congregation of ten.

6. Note that the Talmud Yerusha lm i , Sanhedr in 1:4 (and B e r a c h o s 7:3) quote an opinion which

states that the concept isderived from the verse ( B e r e i s h i s 42:5): "And the children of

Israel came topurchase food among the visitors" [which speaks about Yaakov's ten

righteous sons].

115




I t istrue that thelaws involving aholy congregation7

also apply

with regard to awicked person. [For even he] "is counted among the

quorumof ten with regard to all matters of holiness... (for) aJew, even

i f he sins, isa Jew.8

Heretains his holiness and has not departed from

the collective of the Jewish people."9

Nevertheless, on thesurface, this is aninsufficient explanation.

{[Firstly,] it ispossible to say (and this appears to be thesimple

meaning ofthe Biblical narrative) that thespies were included in the

category of "thosewho rebel against G-d," (asCaleb exhorted them:10

"Do notrebel against G-d"). AccordingtoJewish law,11

it is not so

simple topostulate that "thosewho rebel" can beincluded in aquo¬

rum of tenwith regard tomatters of holiness. [In particular, this

applies with regard to theinstance at hand,] for all tencould be

deemed "thosewho rebel."}

[I n addition,] thederivation of theconcept that acongregation

must includetenalso applies to the"congregation" of aSanhedrin,12 [a

Jewish court, of whom it is said:]13

"And thecongregation shall

judge... and the congregation shall save." Obviously,awicked person

cannot be included insuch acongregation.14

[Thus thequestion

remains unresolved.]

7. Seethe wording of Shulchan Aruch HaRav, loc. cit.: "This congregation must beal free,

adult males... as was the congregation mentioned further on. For women, servants, and

mnors are not included."

8 Sanhedrin 44a.

9. Shulchan Aruch HaRav, loc. cit. :14 (based on theBeis Yosef, s.v. kosav bisefer, which quotes

HaManhig, sec. 79). See asoTanya, theconclusion of ch. 1, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 23

(p. 136b); Sefer HaMaamarim 5565, Vol. II,p. 964, et al.

10. Bamidbar 14:9. This statement was addressed to the entire Jewish people. Nevertheless,

it certainly applies tothe spieswho, accordingtothe simple meaning of the narrative,

(see Rashi's commentary to 14:27) were not only themselves sinners, but were

considered "those who causethe many to sin."

11. See theBeis Yosef, loc. cit., which cites theRashba Pri Megadim (Eshel Avraham, loc. cit. :10), et

al.

12. Mishnah, Sanhedrin 2a.

13. Bamidbar 35:24-25.

14. Adistinction can, however, be made. For it is possible to say that although they are not

disqualified from beingacongregation, they are, however, disqualified from serving on

the Sanhedrin.



SHELACH 117

I t is possible to explain that this is one of the instanceswhere the

concepts stated in nigleh, the revealed dimension of the Torah, allude

to the explanations in pnimiyus haTorah, Torah's mystic dimensions. [In

pnimiyus haTorah, it is explained that] the spieswere on a very elevated

spiritual level.15

Not only was their intent not to rebel in the simple

sense, Heaven forbid, but instead, [their actions reflected] their very

lofty spiritual rung,16

as will be explained at length.

{A s clarified in several sources, nigleh and pnimiyus haTorah are one

Torah. [Certainly,] each discipline has its own rules and general prin¬ciples, and "we do not derive halachah from aggadah."17 Nevertheless,

since in essence they are one Torah, they share a connection, bond,

and even oneness (to the extent that the Zohar' 8 describes them with

the analogy of the body and the soul). Even the concepts in pnimiyus

haTorah which, on the surface, do not conform to the simple meaning

of the narrative and the halachah , have a source in nigleh, 19

sometimes

through allusion and sometimes explicitly.

Simlarly, with regard to the matter at hand: According to the

simple meaning of the narrative (and in general, according to [the

understanding of the matter in] nigleh), the sin of the spieswas severe,

and because of it they themselves were punished, as were the entire

generation that journeyed through the desert. Nevertheless, we are

forced to say that even according to nigleh, there is an allusion to the

high level of the spiesthat is explained inpnimiyus haTorah.}

15. This relates to our Sages' statement (Bava Basra 16a) that the Satan and Peninah acted

for thesakeof Heaven.

16. See Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 36d.

17. Talmud Yerushalmi, Peah 2:4. (See the Encyclopedia Talmudit, erech Aggadah.) Moreover, within

the category of Halachah itsef, [there are distinctions, and] we do not derive laws

concerningmonetary law from laws concerning the Torah'sprohibitions (Berachos 19b).

18. Zohar I l l , 152a.

19. See Derech Mitzvosecha, p. 5a (and p. 22a). The revealed dimension [of the Torah] is an

explanation of its hidden dimension, [analogous to the relationship between] the body

and the soul.




I I .

I n the teachings of Chassidus ([i.e.,] pnimiyus haTorah), it is explained20

that the spies did not want to enter Eretz Yisrael because of their very

lofty level of Divine service.21

They did not want to lower themselves

to enter a pattern of life that would require:22

"For six years you shall

sow your field," i.e., to involve themselves in ordinary material and

physical activities. As R. Shimon bar Yochai states:23

"Should a person

plow... and sow...? If so, what will be with the Torah?" Instead, [the

spies'] entire will and desire (was to continue [the pattern of life which

began with] the Giving of the Torah) and remain in seclusion in the

desert, isolated from life within a settled community, without having

to deal with the challenges of earning a livelihood. (For in the desert,

G-d provided for their needs with the manna, "bread from heaven,"24

and water from Miriams well.2 5

The Clouds of Glory accompanied

them, kill ing the snakes and scorpions [before them], and laundering

their clothes.)26

This, [they felt,] is the true way to study the Torah

and attach oneself to G-d. As our Sages comment:27

"The Torah was

given (to be elucidated) onlyby thosewho partook of the manna."

{They erred in this, for there is a greater advantage in following

the pattern of life in Eretz Yisrael, fulfilling the mitzvos dependent on

l iving in the [Holy] Land — and in general, mitzvos involving deed —

that surpasses [the heights of] clinging [to G-d experienced] in the

desert.}

On this basis, it is possible to explain why the definition of aholy

congregation is derived from the use of the term "congregation" with

regard to the spies. This alludes to the concept that the sin of the

spies should not be understood according to its simple meaning.

Instead, they erred in the above-mentioned manner, for they thought

20. Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar (p. 37b, 38b), basedon the teachingsof Kabbalah Or HaTorah, loc.

cit. (p. 443ff.; 455ff.), et al.

21. See Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 36c-d.

22. Vayikra 25:3.

23. Berachos 35b.

24. Shmos 16:4ff.

25. See Rashi, Bamidbar 20:2.

26. See Rashi, Bamidbar 10:34; Devarim 8:4.

27. Mechilta to Shmos 16:4.



SHELACH 119

that theirs was thefundamental path inDivine service.28

[Becauseof

this error,] with regard to their elevated rung in Divine service—and

also (and this could beconsidered theprimary factor) because they

attempted to influence the Jewish people atlarge—this isconsidered

a great and serious transgression.

I I I .

I t ispossible tomakeafurther conclusion: The concept that the spies'

conduct has asource in holiness isalludedtoand can bederived from

the fact that [although as aresult], their generation remained in the

desert forforty years,29

they did notsuffer alife oftravail anddiffi¬

culty. On thecontrary, their lives were characterized bytranquility.

For theentire forty years, they hadmanna as food, water from

Miriams well, and protection from theClouds of Glory (asexplained

above).

O n thesurface, thedemand and the desire of the spies and their

entire generation was toremain in the desert and not enter Eretz Yisrael.

How is itappropriate that [this iswhat actually happened]? Their

request wasfulfilled andthey remained in thedesert intranquility

whilebeing protected by G-d's cloud during the day and the night.

{Moreover, as iswell known,30 thepunishments of the Torahare

intended to correct the corresponding sin, until the situation becomes

the opposite of the sin. If so, the ["punishment" given thespies]

28. Note that although according to theMishnah (Sanhedrin 108a), thespies will not be

granted aportion in theWor ld toCome, from theZohar I l l , 276a (in the Raya

Mehemna), itappearsthat theywill begranted aportion.

See aso the text Asarah Maamaros (MMaamar Chikur Din, sec. I I , ch. 8)which offersa

renowned interpretation of Rabbi Akiva's statement (Sanhedrin, loc. cit.) that the

generation that wandered through the desert will not be granted aportion in the Wor ld

to Come asmeaning that they havenoneed of the Wor ld to Come and that they are

above it. (SeeLikkutei Levi Yitzchak, Igros, p. 358ff.) See asoLikkutei Sichos, Vol. X X I I I , p.

102.

Noteaso the prayer (and the interpretation) of theA lter Rebbe associated with the

verse (Tehillim 73:25): "Who do Ihave in heaven?": " I donot want Your [Gan Eden...],"

ascited inDerech Mitzvosecha, Shoresh Mitzvas HaTefillah, sec. 40.

29. Wefind this expression severa times (in both theWritten and Oral Law) although

actually they remained in thedesert for less than 39years [after this incident]. See

Rashi toBamidbar 14:33.

30. SeeLikkutei Sichos, loc. cit., p. 98ff.




certainly raisesquestions. For the desire of the spieswas not nullified;

their sin ([i.e., their unwillingness to] enter Eretz Yisrael) was not

corrected and undone. Instead, they were given what they had

desired. The entire generation remained — for the full span of their

years— in the desert!

One mght say that they were not worthy of entering Eretz Yisrael

because of their sin. (Since they spurned Eretz Yisrael, they therefore

did not merit to enter it.) Nevertheless, explanation is required: Why

was their punishment to remain in the desert in tranquility, protected

by the Clouds of Glory, led by Moshe and Aharon?}

Based on the above explanation (according to pnimiyus haTorah), it

is possible to explain the rationale as follows: The spiritual advantage

of [remaining in] the desert (whichwas the spies' intent, an intent for

the sake of Heaven)31

is [fundamentally] not an error. (It did,

however, lead to a deed that was in error.)

Dwelling in the desert, amdst the Clouds of Glory, is in itself an

act of holiness. [The spies] thought that this was the ultimate purpose.

[I n truth, however,] this advantage is merely a preparatory stage to

enter Eretz Yisrael. For in order to reach the elevated rung associated

with entering Eretz Yisrael, it was necessary to undergo the preparation

and training gained by remaining in the desert for forty years.

I V .

By first explaining R a m b a m s statements inHilchos Teshuvah, we are able

to elucidate the above concept ([derived from] pnimiyus haTorah) in a

halachic context.

I n ch. 10 of Hilchos Teshuvah,32 Rambam writes:

A person should not say: " I will fulfill the mitzvos of the Torah

and occupy myself with its wisdom in order to receive all the

blessings contained within i t" or "...in order to merit the life

of theWor ld to Come."

31. See fn. 15.

32. Halachah 1.



SHELACH 121

[Nor should he say:] " I wi l l eschew all the sins that the Torah

warned against in order to be saved from the curses it

contains" or "...in order not to be cut off from the life of the

Wo r ld to Come."

I t is not fitting to serve G-d in this manner. One who serves

in this manner servesout of fear. He is not on the level of the

prophets, nor is he on the level of the wise. The only ones

who serve G-d in this manner are the common people, the

women, and children. They are educated to serve [Him] out

of fear until they increase their knowledge and serve[Him]

out of love.

I n the preceding chapter, Ra mba m had stated:33

For this reason, all of Israel, [including] their prophets and

their wise men, yearned for the era of Mashiach, so that theywould find rest from [the oppression of the gentile] ruling

powers who do not allow them to occupy themselves in the

Torah and mitzvos as isbefitting. [In this way,] they would find

tranquility and grow in wisdom in order to merit the life of

the Wo r ld to Come.

O n the surface, explanation is required: How is it possible [for

Ra mba m] to say: "It is not fitting to serveG-d in this manner. One who

serves in this manner... is not on the level of the prophets, nor is he on

the level of the wise" when he explicitly stated previously34

that this is

the path of the prophets and the wise35

(and hence, " A l l of Israel,

[including] their prophets and their wise men, yearned for the era of

33. Ch. 9, halachah 2.

34. Simlarstatementsare aso made in Hilchos Melachim 12:5.

35. In ch. 9, halachah 1 [of Hilchos Teshuvah, Rambam aso mentions] "meriting the life of the

Wor ld to Come." That reference, however, comes in continuation of the promse that

G-d will grant us goodness "so that wewill not be occupied in matters required by the

body throughout our days... but instead, will be free to study wisdomand perform

mitzvos to merit the life of theWor ld to Come." This, however, reflects G-d's intent and

not the yearning and intent of man. [Hence, it does not rase a question.] Simlar

concepts apply with regard to other mentions of "merit[ing] the life of the Wor ld to

Come" inhalachah 1.




Mashiach")? Seemngly, this does represent the level of the prophets

and the wise men.36

On a simple level it is possible to explain that two different sub¬

jects are being discussed. Ch. 9does not discuss the manner in which

the mitzvos should be observed, but instead explains the meaning and

the essence of the reward for the mitzvos in the life of the Wor ld to

Come.37

[Itstates that the life of the Wo r ld to Come is] "the consum¬

mation of the reward in its entirety and the final good which will not

cease or be reduced."38

Therefore, "all the prophets yearned for i t ,"3 9

and "David so earnestly yearned for the life of the Wo r ld to Come."40

A nd for this reason, "all of Israel, [including] their prophets and their

wise men, yearned" for an ideal situation to prevail within the world4 1

in the era of Mashiach. For it is only in this manner (that they will be

able to occupy themselves in the Torah and itsmitzvos in afitting man¬

ner and thus merit the life of the Wor ld to Come).

I n ch. 10, by contrast, Ra mba m speaksabout the desired approach to

the Torah and itsmitzvos; that aperson's intent inobservanceshould not

be to merit the life of the Wor ld to Come, but instead should be

motivated by love. Thus, although one should desire the life of the

Wor ld to Come, this should not be his purpose in observing the Torah

and itsmitzvos.42

Instead, it should be an independent matter.43

36. Simlar questions are aso raised by Hagahos Emek Melech with regard to Rambam's

statements in Hilchos Melachim.

37. In doing so, it continues and concludes the concepts that Rambam began to explain in

ch. 8 with regard to "the good that is hidden for the righteous," i.e., the life of the

Wor ld to Come.

38. Hilchos Teshuvah 9:2.

39. Ibid. 8:3.

40. Ibid. :7.

41. This [— a situation where man can live in peaceand prosperity— ] aso represents the

thrust of many prayers recited by theJews [throughout the ages, beginningwith] the

prayer (andvow) of Yaakov recorded in the beginning of Parshas Vayeitzei.

42. A simlar interpretationwould aso be appropriate for the statement at the beginning of

ch. 7: "A person should aways strive to do teshuvah in order... to merit the life of the

Wor ld to Come."

43. AsRambam writes in his Commentary to theMishnah, in his introduction to Sanhedrin, ch.

10: "The ultimate purpose is theWor ld to Come and one's striving should be directed

toward it.... Nevertheless, although it is the ultimate desire, it is not fitting for one who

servesG-d out of love to serveHimin order to reach theWor ld to Come."



SHELACH 123

This distinction, however, appears somewhat forced. For the

wording: "They would find tranquility and grow in wisdom so that

they would merit the life of the Wor ld to Come" indicates that ulti¬

mately, their thought and their intent (even when they are not in the

mdst of observing the mitzvos) is that their observance is [intended] to

enablethemto merit the life of the Wo r ld to Come.

V .

[This difficulty can be resolved through an explanation of R a m b a m s

understanding of what it means to "serve G-d out of love." He]

continues [to explain that concept] in ch. 10 (in aseparate halachah) :

One who serves [G-d] out of love occupies himself in the

Torah and its mitzvos and walks in the paths of wisdom

without any ulterior motive, not because of fear of evil or in

order to acquire good. Instead, he doeswhat is true44 because

it is true, and ultimately, good will comebecauseof it.

This is a very elevated rung. Not every wise man merits it. It

is the rung of Avraham our Patriarch whom the Ho ly One,

blessed be He, called:45

"He who loved Me," because his

Divine service was motivated by love.Clarification is necessary: On the surface, here also, Ra mba m

appears to be contradicting his own statements. For in the first

halachah , he states that Divine service motivated by fear is the path of

"the common people, the women, and children," and is not "the level

of the prophets, nor... the wise," implying that the Divine service of

the prophets and the wise is motivated by love. Yet in halachah 2, he

states that Divine service motivated by love "is a very elevated rung.

Not every wise man merits it."Implied is that this rung is not attained

[even] by the prophets and wise men.

44. Clarification is necessary concerning the intent of the phrase "what is true." Note

Rambam's wording at the beginning of the Mishneh Torah (Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 1:4): "He

alone is true." [There,] according to the simple meaning, the intent is "the truth of His

existence."

45. [Yeshayahu 41:8.]




Moreover, at the conclusion of halachah 1, Ra mba m writes that the

common people should be "educated to serve [Him] out of fear until

they increasetheir knowledge and serve [Him] out of love." One can

infer that Divine service motivated by love is relevant to every person.

Nevertheless, in halachah 2, he describes service motivated by love as

"an elevated rung," above the reach of even [many of] the wise.46

V I .

Accordingly, it would appear appropriate to [make the following

distinction]. The occupation with the Torah and itsmitzvos "in order to

merit the life of the Wo r ld to Come" spoken of by Ra mba m in ch. 9

does not mean that one is motivated by the idea of receiving [a

portion in] the Wo r ld to Come as a reward. Instead, one's intent is to

reach [a level of awareness that enables him] to continue to perform

his Divine service of the Torah and its mitzvos in a manner appropriate

for theWo r ld to Come.47

To explain: W i t h regard to the love of G-d, Ra mba m continues [to

elaborate]:48

What is [the degree of] love that is befitting? That one

should love G-d with a very great, excessive, and fierce love

until his soul is bound up in the love of G-d and he is

obsessedwith it at all times.

A nd at the conclusion of that chapter, he states:49

46. There are some manuscript copies of theMishneh Torah that have adifferent version of

the conclusion of halachah 1. Instead of reading "Not every wise man merits it," they

read, "Not every man merits it" {see Sefer HaMada (Jerusaem 5724)}. (See aso

Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, loc. cit., [which speaks about simlar concepts

and] states: "This is a very difficult matter and cannot be attained by every person.")

[According to the manuscript version,] there is no difficulty. Nevertheless, the

majority of the manuscripts and printings of the Mishneh Torah follow the version that

states"wise man" (as above).

47. There is a difference in practice resulting from these two approaches. Continuing [to

perform one's Divine service] according [to the approach of the Wor ld to Come]

spurs and encourages one further and further, as our Sages (Koheles Rabbah 1:13) state:

"Whoever possesses 100 desires 200. Whoever possesses200 desires 400." Hence, he

does not rest. If, by contrast, [one's intent is to] receive a reward, there is the

possibilitythat hewill be content with hisportion, rest, [andceaseto strivehigher].

48. Ch. 10, halachah 3.



SHELACH 125

I t iswell known and clear that love for the Ho ly One, blessed

be He, will not become attached within aperson's heart until

he becomesobsessedwith it at all times....50

One loves the Ho ly One, blessed be He, only [as an

outgrowth of] the knowledge with which he knows Him....

Therefore it is necessary for a person to seclude himself to

comprehend and to contemplate wisdom and concepts that

make His Creator known to him.

Implied is that the definition of loving G-d is that one's soul (and

one's mind) are attached to Him. The consummation of this approach

will be in the Wo r ld to Come, as Ra mba m writes in his description of

that realm in ch. 8:51

"The righteous will sit with their crowns on their heads and

delight in the radiance of the Divine presence...." "Theircrowns on their heads" [is an analogy referring to] the

knowledge they attained which served as the medium that

enabled them to merit the life of the Wo r ld to Come. It will

accompany them and itwill be their crown....

"Delight in the radiance of the Divine presence": [This

means] that they know and grasp [the dimensions] of the

truth of the Ho ly One, blessed be He, which they [can]not

know [while] in a dark and lowly body.

Therefore Ra mba m states:52

"This is the reward that surpassesall

other rewards and the goodness that surpasses all other goodness."

[Although the righteous are described] as "sitting" and "delighting,"

49. Ibid., halachah 6.

50. It is possible to say that halachah 3 is speaking about an instance where one's love of

G- d is already lodged in his heart. Thus it speaks of "the love of G-d in the heartsof

those who love Himand who are obsessed with Himat al times." Halachah 6, by

contrast, speaks about being obsessed intellectually with [G-dliness] so that this leads

to the love of G-d [being implanted] within one's heart.

51. Ch. 8, halachah 2, [basedon Berachos 17a].

52. Ibid., halachah 3. There are severa simlar statements found in ch. 8 and the conclusion

of ch. 9.




they will have no rest,53

[but instead, will "proceed from strength to

strength"].54

[According to this approach,] the life of the Wor ld to Come is

not (only) a reward for one's observanceof the Torah and itsmitzvos, it

is a perpetuation [of one's Divine service] and an ascent, [making

possible] a continuous movement toward consummate attachment to

G-d through the Torah and itsmitzvos.

Based on the above, we can appreciate the distinction between

Ra mba m's statement at the beginning of ch. 10:

A person should not say: " I will fulfill the mitzvos of the Torah

and occupy myself with its wisdom in order to receive all the

blessings contained within i t" or "...in order to merit the life

of theWor ld to Come."

and his statement in ch. 9 that:

A l l of Israel, [including] their prophets and their wise men,

yearned for the era of Mashiach, so that they would find rest

from [the oppression of the gentile] ruling powers who do

not allow them to occupy themselves in the Torah andmitzvos

as is becoming. [In this way,] they would find tranquility and

grow in wisdom so that they would merit the life of theWo r ld to Come.

The yearning of the Jewish people for the era of Mashiach is in

order that theywill "grow in wisdom so that theywould merit the life

of the Wo r ld to Come." The intent is not to receive a reward, i.e.,

compensation for their Divine service. Instead, their intent is to merit

the ultimate consummation of their love and attachment to G-d(which was mentioned previously),

55

i.e., to be obsessed with it at all

times. Thiswill come through increasing and enhancing one'swisdom

in the era of Mashiach.

53. See fn. 47.

54. [MoedKattan 29a, quoting Tehillim 84:8.]

55. See theAvodasHaKodesh, sec. I I , ch. 5, which quotes the sageRabbi Yosef. Hedoesnot

make such statements in the name of Rambam. (See the interpretation he advances for

Rambam's approach.) See aso Shelah (p. 47a ff. and the marginal note on p. 49b wth

regardto Rambam's approach).



SHELACH 127

I n ch. 10, by contrast, when Ra mba m speaks critically of

performng the Torah's mitzvos for the sakeof meriting the life of the

Wo r ld to Come, [his intent is that one should not seek a portion in

the Wo r ld to Come] as a reward for his Divine service. For this

reason, Ra mba m mentions "the life of the Wo r ld to Come" together

with "receiv[ing] all the blessings contained within," i.e., different

dimensions of benefits and reward he receives for his Divine service.56

[He emphasizes that] since one's intent [in this case] is not to reach

the perfection of Divine service but only to receive a reward, he

should avoid this approach to Divine service.

{Within this [lesser] category [of Divine service], however, there

are two approaches:

1) In the beginning of ch. 10, Ra mba m states:

A person should not say: " I will fulfill the mitzvos... in order to

receive all the blessings..." or "...in order to merit the life of

theWo r ld to Come."... [Nor should he say,] " I wi l l eschew all

the sins... in order to be saved from the curses [the Torah]

contains" or "...in order not to be cut off from the life of the

Wo r ld to Come."

This is intended to [teach one to rise above] Divine service

motivated by fear. [He should not] serveG-d becausehe fears for his

spiritual life, 5 7

and therefore heserves G-d so that hewill have alife of

repose in this world ([i.e.,] "be saved from the curses"). Or (if his

spiritual life is important to him), he seeks that his soul merit the

eternal life of theWo r ld to Come ("in order not to be cut off from the

life of theWo r ld to Come").

2) In halachah 4, Rambam writes:

The Sages of the early generations declared: "Perhaps you

will say: 'I will study Torah so that I will become wealthy,'...

56. It is possible to say that in general, this can aso be described as [seeking] a reward.

When speaking more precisely, it can be considered as serving G-d out of fear rather

than seeking a reward aswill be explained.

57. To refer to the wording used byRambam in halachah 5, "so that retribution will not be

visitedupon him."




'...so that I will receive reward in the Wo r ld to Come.'58

Therefore the Torah teaches59

[that observance must be] 'to

love G-d.'"

I n this instance, the person seeks to receive a reward (not because

of his fear for his spiritual life, but) rather as compensation for his

Divine service: (either material compensation, " I will become

wealthy," or spiritual compensation " I wi ll receive reward in the Wo r ld

to Come"). This is alessrefined level [within the category of] serving

G-d for an ulterior motive.}6 0

V I I .

Although the desire of the wise and the prophets to attain the life of

the Wo r ld to Come is a continuation and a higher plane within their

Divine service of love, there is a higher level of Divine service that

"not every wise man merits." This is the new dimension that Ra mba m

introduces in halachah 2,61

"the rung of Avraham our Patriarch,"

"do[ing] what is true becauseit is true."

The advantage of this rung of Divine service can be explained as

follows: When one's Divine service is motivated by an ordinary level

of love {which is possessed by every Jew (and certainly) by "the

prophets and the wise,"} one's involvement in the Torah and its

mitzvos is in order to connect and attach himself to G-d. Thus his

58. In this instance, the person is not seeking — as stated in halachah 1 — "to attain the life

of theWor ld to Come" (which is the purpose of the observanceof themitzvos, i.e., "the

consummation of the reward given for the mitzvos"). Instead, he is seeking an extrinsic

reward (according to his own conception). [For some, it is material:] "so that I will

becomewealthy; so that I be called a rabbi." [Others seek to receive spiritual reward.

Instead of being compensated in this world,] they want to receive their reward in the

Wor ld to Come.

59. [Devarim 11:13.]

60. Note the difference in the wording Rambam uses. In halachah 1, Rambam uses the

expression "in order to receive al the blessings...or ...in order to merit," while in

halachah 4, he changeshis wording andstates, "so that I will becomewealthy, ...so that I

will receive reward in the Wor ld to Come." (The implication [of the latter phrase] is

that the service is intended for an extraneous purpose.)

61. On a simple level, the wording Rambam uses in halachah 2, "One who serves out of love

occupies himself in the Torah and its mitzvos," refers to [Divine service motivated by]

love on al levels. However, an anaysis of the precise wording he uses reflects the

inclusion of a higher level of love.



SHELACH 129

involvement in the Torah and its mitzvos is not focused on [the Torah

and its mitzvos themselves], but on an ancillary [purpose and] desire.

[He is not observing the Torah and mitzvos for their own sake, but in

order to achieve connection with G-d.]

When, however, his Divine service is motivated by [a higher level

of] love, "he does what is true because it is true." [His motivation

transcends all personal intent,] not only Divine service for the sakeof

receiving a reward. For he has no external motivation for his Divine

service, not even the purpose of clinging to G-d, which is the intent of

knowing G-d and loving Him. Instead, "he does what is true because

it is true"; because it is G-d's commandment and will. For fulfilling

G-d's commandments is inherent truth.

Ra mba m describes this rung of service as "a very elevated rung,"

([surpassing] "the level of the prophets" and "the level of the wise"

mentioned in the previous halachah) . For it is impossible to say that

this level is attained by all the wise. On the contrary, "Not every wise

man merits it." Instead, it is "the rung of Avraham our Patriarch whom

the Ho ly One, blessed be He, called: 'He who loved Me.'" For in

order to reach this great level ("do[ing] what is true because it is

true") one must reach a veryhigh level of love [of G-d].

V I I I .

Based on the above, we can clarify [the connection of the above

concepts to] the spies and the generation that wandered through the

desert: The spies (and the generation that wandered through the

desert as a whole) were on a very high level. They did not want to

lower themselves and perform ordinarywork in Eretz Yisrael, 62 because

this approach would not enable them to occupy themselves in Torah

study as is befitting. Instead, they would spend the majority of their

days involved "in matters which the body requires."63

They desired to continue and to advance,64 following the pattern

of life in the desert where "good things flow in abundance"65

as

62. Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 37a.

63. Cf. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Teshuvah 9:1.

64. For obviouslyone must "proceed higher in matters of holiness" [Berachos 28a].

65. Cf. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, HilchosMelachim 12:5.




elucidated above (manna from Heaven, water from Miriams well, and

the Clouds of Glory that accompanied them). They had nothing to

upset themwhile performing their Divine service. Being undisturbed

would enable them to "find tranquility and grow in wisdom in order to

merit the life of the W orl d to Come." As Ra mb a m states, this is the

desire of "all of Israel, their prophets, and their wise men."

Their desire to remain in the desert reflects a lofty level of

attachment to G-d: Divine service motivated by love.66

Nevertheless,

by enteringEretz Yisrael , they would have reached an even higher level,

the fulfillment of G-d's commandments without any external motive

at all, [i.e.,] "do[ing] what is true, because it is true."

Attaining this rung requires a higher level of love. The fact that

the spiesand the generation that wandered through the desert desired

to remain there and not to enter Eretz Yisrael indicates that they had

not yet reached this perfect level of attachment and higher plane of

love.

For this reason, the Jewish people remained in the desert in an

atmosphere where nothing disturbed them from studying the Torah

and clinging to G-d in a consummate manner, amdst repose and

tranquility. In this manner, they would "increasetheir knowledge" and

reach perfection in their souls' attachment [to G-d].67

After this, in

the following generation, i.e., on a new and higher level, they would

enter Eretz Yisrael to fulfill G-d's commandments — both through the

66. NoteLikkute i Torah, Devar im, p. 32c, which, based on the Zohar I l l , 163b, interprets the

phrase (Bamidbar 14:35): "In this desert you shall perish ",(יתמו) as "In this desert, you

shall be perfected."

67. Thisenablesus to understand the interpretation in the text Asarah Maamaros (cited in fn.

28) that the generation that wandered through the desert has no need of the W orl d to

Come. Above, it was explained that their desire to remain in the desert paralleled the

Jewish people's desire for the W orl d to Come. However, during the forty years that

they remained in the desert, they ascendedhigher from level to level until they reached

a veryhigh peak even though they were l iv ing in physical bodies on this earthly plane.

Thus the level of theW orl d to Come (ordinarily) experienced by souls: "The righteous

sit and delight" (Rambam, Hi lchos Teshuvah 8:2), would be considered a descent and a

decline for them. Hence, they were in no need of i t. {SeeShaar M aam arei Razal at the

beginning of ch. Chei lek in tractate Sanhedr in regarding the different levels within the

W orl d to Come. This is not the place for further discussion of the issue ( S i c h o s Shabbos

P a r s h a s S h e l a c h , 5747).}



SHELACH 131

actual entry into the land and through the observance of mitzvos with

physical objects in the land — for this service emphasizes that one

"doeswhat is truebecause it is true."

I t is possible to explain that this is the intent of the statements

that Yehoshua and Caleb made inresponseto the entire congregation

of the Jewish people:68 " I f G-d desiresus... and will bring us." Implied

is that the entry into Eretz Yisrael is connected with G-d's desire for the

Jewish people.69

[Entering into Eretz Yisrael] reflects G-d's desire and

will, and this act leadsto the revelation of G-d's desires for [the Jewish

people]. [This reflects] a higher level of attachment between the

Jewish people and G-d than the bond achieved through increasing

one'swisdom in the desert.

I X .

When Ra mba m mentions that [one who truly loves G-d] "doeswhat is

true because it is true," he concludes: "Ultimately, good will come

because of it." The inclusion of this phrase raises a question, for

seemngly, he is speaking about a wise man who is not at all concerned

with the good that hewill receive becauseof his Divine service.

I t is possible to explain that [thedifficulty is resolved by] carefully

considering the intent of the expression: "Ultimately, good will come

because of it." 7 0

Implied is that when a person "does what is true

because it is true," the good that results will be more elevated than the

ordinary conception of good71

in the Wo r ld to Come.72

Accordingly,

68. Bamidbar 14:8; see Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 38c.

69. Note the Baa ShemTov's interpretation of the verse (MMalachi 3:12): "And you shal be

a cherished land." [The Baa ShemTov interprets the verse as indicating that just as a

cherished land contains unlimted resources of good, so, too, such unbounded

potentials are found within the Jewish people] {HaYom Yom, entry 17 Iyar, Kesser Shem

Tov (Kehot), Appendix 44}.

70. There are versions [of the Mishneh Torah that read: "Ultimately, the good will come]

includedwithin i t" (see Rambam, SeferHaMada, loc. cit.).

71. This reflects a contrast to the statement (Nedarim 62a): "Study out of love and

ultimatelyhonor will come."

72. By contrast, Nedarim, ibid., does not speak of the good of the Wor ld to Come, but

insteadstatesthat a person should not study for thesakeof being calledwise or a rabbi

(this concept is mentioned by Rambam in halachah 4). Wi th regard to this, Nedarim

concludes: "Ultimatelyhonor will come."




becauseof his connection and his soul's clingingto G-d, hereachesa

higher level of fulfillment7 3

than someone whose study of theTorah

and observance of themitzvos ismotivated by adesire to connect andcling to G-d.

O n this basis, wecan understand Yehoshua's and Caleb's previous

statements:74

"The land isvery, very good."75

Through Divine service

in thedesert, studying theTorah in amanner that allows us to devote

ourselves to its wisdomundisturbed, wemerit "to see thegoodnessof

G-d in theland of life,"7 6 i.e., in theWo r ld to Come which is "avery

great good that has no comparison among the forms of goodnessin

this world." AsRa mba m states inHilchos Teshuvah:77 "This goodness is

infinitely great with no comparison or likeness. This iswhat ismeant

by David's statement:78

'How great is the goodness that You have

hidden away for thosewho fear Y ou.'"

For through the entry into Eretz Yisrael and through the

observance of the mitzvos in that land — i.e., through carryingout

Divine service in a manner [indicative of how] "G-ddesires us,"

"doing what istrue because it istrue" — we merit a very great level of

goodness. [This goodness is not described by using the adjective]

meod, "very," only once. (That would allude to a level of goodness

above thecapacity ofman to receive inthis world, i.e., thegoodness

of theWo r ld to Come.) [Such goodness] would come as aresultof

Divine service on the level of meod, i.e., "avery great, excessive, and

fierce love until his soul is bound up in the love of G-d and he is

73. See Rambam's statement (Hilchos Teshuvah 9:1): "He merits according to thegreatnessof

his deedsand the abundanceof his knowledge," [which implies that] there are different

leves within the Wor ld to Come. This concept aso applies according to the

understanding of Ramban (Shaar HaGmul; his perspective isaccepted by the teachings of

Chassidus see Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p. 15c; Derech Mitzvosecha, p. 14b) which interprets

the termWor ld to Come asreferring to [the Eraof theResurrection when] thesouls

will beenclothed within bodies. (See Bava Basra 75a; theconclusion of tractate Taanis

Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XIX,p. 67ff.; Vol. XI V, p. 66, fn. 76.)This is not theplacefor

further discussion of this matter.

74. Bamidbar 14:7.

75. See Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, pp. 37a, 38c; Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IV, Parshas Shelach.

76. Tehillim 27:13; quoted byRambam, Hilchos Teshuvah 8:7; see asoHilchos Teshuvah 8:3.

77. Hilchos Teshuvah 8:6.

78. Tehillim 31:20.



SHELACH 133

obsessed with it at all times." Instead, [the verse uses the adjective]

"very" twice, meod, meod, referring to the Divine service described by

Ra mba m: "He doeswhat is true because it is true, and ultimately, good

will comebecauseof it." 7 9

The goodness that comes as a result of this elevated plane of

Divine service is exceedingly great, even when compared to [the

goodness that results from] the "very great, excessive, and fierce love"

that relates to the level of meod. For [this higher level of love] indicates

that the person is entirelybatel to G-d.

X .

The fact that the Torah — which is eternal instruction — relates the

narrative of the spies and the generation that wandered through the

desert, and the response of Yehoshua and Caleb to their complaint,

indicates that every Jew has the potential to serve G-d on the level

called for by Yehoshua and Caleb, higher than "the very elevated

level" of Divine service manifested by the spies (and the generation

that wandered through the desert).

What is implied is that the advantage of carrying out mitzvos that

involve deed in Eretz Yisrael leads to "This land is very, very good."

(The repetition of meod) does not apply only to the people who

entered Eretz Yisrael after 40years in the desert. Instead, it is applicable

to all Jews who observe mitzvos [motivated by kabbalas ol and] because

they are G-d's commandments. This kabbalas ol possessesan advantage

over the attachment to G-d motivated by love.

I t is possible to say that this concept is also implicit inRa mba m's

words. In continuation of his statements concerning "the advantageof

Avraham our Patriarch whom the Ho ly One, blessed be He, called

'He who loved Me,'" Ra mba m writes: "This is the quality about which

we have been commanded by G-d, via Moshe, as it iswritten:80

'And

you shall love G-d, your L-rd. ' When a person loves G-d as is

befitting, he will immediately [be inspired to] fulfill all the mitzvos out

79. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XX, p. 45ff., which explains the reason Rambam speaks about

[receiving areward] in this place.

80. Devarim 6:5.




of love." (In the halachah that follows, he continues to explain: "What

is meant by loving Him as is befitting?")

O n the surface, Ra mba m's statements are problematic. After stating

that "This is a very elevated rung. Not every wise man merits it," how

is it possible to say: "This is the quality about which we have been

commanded... via Moshe," i.e., that it is amitzvah which every Jew is

commanded to observe?81

This, however, points to the concept Ra mba m is teaching us: "Not

every wise man merits it" [refers to merit] on the basis of his own

independent efforts and Divine service. Nevertheless, (through and)

empowered by G-d's command ([communicated] via Moshe), every

individual can attain this level.

X I .

There is, nevertheless, a necessity for further clarification: Love is an

emotion in aperson's heart that is attained through meditation on the

greatness of G-d, as Ra mba m states at the conclusion of ch. [10 of

Hilchos Teshuvah] (and in Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah).82 What is meant by

stating that every Jew can attain the level of love that is befitting,

equivalent to the rung of Avraham our Patriarch?

The question can be resolved based on Ra mba m's statements in

halachah 4:

The Sages of the early generations declared: "Perhaps you

will say: 'I will study Torah so that I will become wealthy,'

'...so that I will be called a rabbi,' '...so that I will receive

reward in the Wo r ld to Come.' Therefore the Torah teaches:

[ I will study Torah] 'to love G-d.' Everything that you do,

you should do solely out of love." Moreover, our Sagessaid...

and the great Sages would instruct their wise students...:83

"Do not be like servants...."

81. [Trans. Note: And thus within his capacity to attain. If this degreeof love is reserved

only for those on Avrahams level, how can everyone be commanded to attain it?]

82. Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 2:1.

83. [Avos 1:3.]



S H E L A C H 135

O n the surface, why did Ra mba m wait until after explaining the

heights of serving G-d out of love (the level of Avraham our Patriarch

described in halachah 2), and explaining the nature of the love that is

befitting (as described in halachah 3), to negate the intent of serving

G-d "so that I will be wealthy"? Seemngly, it would have been

appropriate to [negate such motivation] in halachah 1 [which teachesa

person to rise above] Divine service motivated by fear: "A person

should not say: ' I will fulfill the mitzvos of the Torah... in order to

receive all the blessings.'"

{Since this is a lower level of service of G-d — for an ulterior

motive (as stated in sec. V I ) — it would seemappropriate to negate

the manner of Divine service for these ulterior motives before

elaborating on the greatness of Avrahams level (i.e., the love that is

befitting).}

I t is possible to explain that in this manner, Ra mba m is emphasizing

that Divine service motivated by love, "about which we have been

commanded by G-d, via Moshe," is relevant for every Jew, even those

on a very low level who, left to themselves, would "study the Torah to

become wealthy."

To explain: There are two levelswithin "the love that is befitting":

a) Feelings of lovewithin the heart. "This is a very elevated rung."

I n particular, this is the level of Avraham, and as Ra mba m explains in

halachah 3: "What is [the degree of] love that is befitting? That one

should love G-d with a very great, excessive, and fierce loveuntil his

soul is bound up in the love of G-d."

b) [A level that relates] even to someonewho has not reached the

level of Avraham, to love G-d in a manner that isbefitting (which will

lead a person to "do what is true because is true"). On the contrary,

such a person desires to study the Torah to become wealthy. Never¬

theless, even such a person is given the directive "'to love G-d.'

Everything that you do, you should do solely out of love."

[I mplied is that] even someonewho does not feel the love that is

befitting in his heart can, nevertheless, cause himself to act as moti-




vated by love,84 becausehe was commanded to do so by G-d. [Hewill

conduct himself like those] on that "very elevated rung," "do[ing]

what is truebecause it is true."85

This is reflected by Ra mba m's statements in halachah [5]. ([In that

halachah , ] he defines what is meant by avodah l ishmah, Divineservice for

its own sake, and avodah shelo l ishmah, Divine service for an ulterior

motive. He aso quotes [the principle] stated by our Sages:86

"A

person should always occupy himself in the Torah shelo l ishmah, for out

of service shelo l ishmah will come service that is l ishmah.") Afterwards, he

states:

When one teaches children, women, and most of the com¬

mon people, one should teach them to serve out of fear and

for the sakeof a reward. As their knowledge grows and their

wisdom increases, this secret, [i.e., the importance of Divine

service without an ulterior motive,] should be revealed to

them gradually. They should be habituated to this concept

gently until they comprehend it and know it and serveHim

out of love.

This statement is seemngly extraneous. In halachah 1, Ra mba m

stated that one should be educated to serve out of fear until he

increases his knowledge and serves out of love. Why was it necessary

to repeat it?

The repetition, however, emphasizes that "this secret," i.e., the

highest levels of love as manifested by Avraham "who loved Me," can

be manifest by "children, women, and the common people." (They

must, however, be "habituated... gradually and... gently.") For since

"we have been commanded by G-d, via Moshe" about such love,

84. See simlar concepts in the introduction to Sec. I I of Tanya entitled Chinuch Katan (albeit

that there the thrust is somewhat different). See aso Tanya, ch. 16, and the beginning

of ch. 17.

85. [Trans. Note: There are select individuals who perform such self-transcendent Divine

service out of conscious feelings of love. Others, however, may not fee this love, but

can comprehend the mode of conduct such love would lead to. They conduct

themselves in this manner, not as a result of their personal feelings, but because they

were commanded to and they arecarrying out the command.]

86. [Pesachim 50b.]



SHELACH 137

through studying the Torah and observing the mitzvos 87 [solely]

becausethey are G-d'scommandments, every Jew — even if hedoes

not have feelings of love revealed within his heart — can certainly

come to observanceandstudy l ishmah, "serving Himoutof love."88

(A dapted from Sichos Shabbos Parshas Shelach, 5746)

87. See Torah Or, the beginning of Parshas Yisro.

88. I mplied isafusion of twomotifs: service and love. On arevealed level, service [is more

promnent]. See thestatement of theA lter Rebbe (and his Divine service that relates

to this) ascited in fn. 28.





P A R S H A S

B A L A K

Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X V I I I , p. 293ff.

I .

According to Jewish law,1

theHaftorah of aTorah reading reflectsthe

content of that Torah reading, and more precisely, its conclusion.2

Seemngly, theconnection between Parshas Balak and itsHaftorah is

direct. TheHaftorah relates3

that G-dcommands theJewish people:

" M y nation, remember the counsel given by Balak, K ing of Moav, and

the response Bilaamthe son of Beor gave him from Shittim." This

relatestothe content of Parshas Balak.

I t is, however, understood that the connection between the Hafto-

ra h and the Torah reading is notconfinedto asingleverse but relates

to itsgeneral theme. This isobvious from thefact that, as iswell

known, theHaftorah wasoriginally instituted inplace of theentire

Torah reading.4

Accordingto therecognized general principle5

thata

subject's theme isalludedtoin its beginning, it isclear that there is a

connection between (theconclusion of)Parshas Balak and thebegin¬

ning of the Haftorah: 6 "The remnant of Yaakov will be in themdst of

1. TurandShulchan Aru ch (andShulchan Aru ch Ha Ra v) , Orach Chayim 284:1; Turand Rama,

428:8.

2. SeeBeis Yosef to theTur(Orach Chayim 283; see asoShulchan Aru ch HaRav 283:1, based

on Tosafos, Megillah 23a)which emphasizes that theHaftorah should relate to thelast

concept mentioned. Rama, loc. cit. (and asoShulchan Aruch 284:7; Shulchan Aruch HaRav

284:13) usethis concept as thebasis for theruling that when two Torah portionsare

combined, theHaftorah isassociatedwith the second portion.

3. Michah 6:5.

4. Avudraham; Levush , Bach, Taz, Shulchan Aru ch HaRav 284:1.

5. SeeLikkutei Sichos, Vol. V, p. 58, fn. 12,et al.

6. Michah 5:6.

139




many nations... they will nothope from man, norexpect from a

mortal."

I I .

The Haftorah is speaking about thetime at thebeginning of the

Redemption; thetime before Mashiachs identity will be definitely

established. For [toestablish Mashiachs identity definitively it is

required that] hecomplete waging all thewars and"transformthe

nations... sothat they serveG-d with asingle purpose."7

The Haftorah,

by contrast, speaks about how [Mashiach] will [be in theprocessof]

waging wars against thenations, as it iswritten:8 "Theremnantof

Jacob will be in themdst of thenations... like alion among the

animals of the forest... who tramples andpreys."

Moreover, notonly will the erathat theHaftorah speaks about

involve [conflict] with external evil — [wars against] thegentiles—

there will aso beinternal evil, i.e., within theJews themselves, as it is

written:9 " I wi l l cutaway witchcraft from your hand.... Iwill cutaway

your idols.... I will uproot your Asherah trees."10 [I mplied isthat] the

evil will be so powerful that itwill benecessary forthere to be

assistance from Above toelimnate it,as theverse states: " I w i l l cut

away.... Iwill uproot." [The existence ofsuch evil indicates that] the

Haftorah speaks about thetime at thebeginning of theRedemption

when thelast preparations for thecomplete Redemption will take

place.

Simlarly, theTorah reading, Parshas Balak, speaks ofacomparable

phase inhistory, thetime directly before theJews' entry into Eretz

Yisrael for the first time [as anation]. The Jews were "intheplainsof

Moav, across from Jericho attheJordan,"11

ready to enter Eretz Yisrael.

7. Tzephaniah 3:9.When Rambam quotesthis verse inMishneh Torah, HilchosMelachim 11:4, he

addsanextravav. See themarginal notes to Likkutei Sichos, Vol . V, p.420, andVo l . X I V ,

p. 414. [Thelatter source explains that Rambam occasionally changes slightly the

wording of averse that hequotes inorder tofitthemeaning ofhis text.] Seeaso the

context of Rambam's statements in ch. 11, loc. cit.

8. Michah 5:7-8.

9. Ibid. 5:11-13.

10. [Trees worshipped as fase deities.]

11. Bamidbar 22:1.



B A L A K 141

[This resembles theJews' state] before entering Eretz Yisrael at the time

of the ultimate Redemption. In particular, [the connection is

apparent] according to the well-known concept12

that had the Jews

not sinned, the ultimate Redemption would havecome when they first

enteredEretz Yisrael.

I I I .

The preparation for the Redemption is, as stated in the beginning of

the Haftorah: "not [to] hope from man, nor expect from a mortal."

Even though the Haftorah is speaking about a phase before the Re¬

demption blossoms into complete fulfillment, still, we will no longer

have to rely on mortals, nor depend on them [for our succor. Implied

is that we will not] even [rely on our fellow] Jews, as it is written:13

"Cursed is the human who trusts in man." ["Man" refers to the Jews,

as our Sagesstate:]14

"You are called 'man.'" Instead, we will rely only

on G-d, as it is written:15

"Blessed be the man who puts his faith in

G-d."

Since the verse speaks about a time at the beginning of the

Redemption, we can assumethat the charge not to rely on man is not

intended merely to negate a forbidden course of conduct, one that

runs contrary to the Torah's guideline "Cursed is the human who

trusts in man." Instead, it teaches us to rise above reliance on man

even in a manner permitted by the Torah. For in that era, this will not

be necessary.

I t is written:16

"And G-d your L -rdwill bless you in everything

that you do." [Commenting on the verse,] the Sifri asks: "Shall one sit

idle?17

The Torah teaches: 'in everything that you do.'" For according

to the Torah, it is necessary to make a medium within the natural

12. Nedarim 22b; see Shmos Rabbah 32:1, et al.

13. Yirmeyahu 17:5.

14. Yevamos 61a.

15. Yirmeyahu 17:7.

16. Devarim 15:18.

17. This is the manner inwhich the passage is usually quoted although the version in the

standard published texts of the Sifri is slightly different. See aso the Yalkut Shimoni on

the verse that quotes athird version.




order,18

since we should not rely on mracles.19

[Hence,] since

according to the natural order it is necessary to [work] with others,

even gentiles, there is room within the Torah's guidelines to "hope

from man."

The verse "Cursed is the human who trusts in man" does not

represent a contradiction to the above. Although we make a medium

in the natural order, we do not rely on the natural order as it exists in

its own right ("hop[ing] from man"). Instead, one trusts in G-d and

believes that He will help him through the mediums that he has

prepared within the natural order.20

This represents the new development that will come in the time

of the Redemption: [Blessingswill come] "like dew from G-d"21

which

"does not come to the world through mortal efforts, nor does man

request it. Simlarly, Israel will not rely on assistance from man, but

from G-d."21

{I n this vein, Chassidus22 interprets the verse:23

"It is preferable to

rely on G-d than to trust in man" as teaching that "trust[ing] in man"

is permitted by the Torah. It is, however, "preferable to rely on G-d."

"Trust[ing] in man" refers [not only to man on the earthly plane,

but also to] the Sublime Man, [G-d's image,] i.e., the Divine energy

that "fills all the worlds" (memale kol almin). From the perspective of this

level of spirituality, man must endeavor to make a mediumwithin the

natural order on which G-d's blessings will rest.24

Therefore it is

"preferable to rely on G-d," on the level of G-dliness that "transcends

all the worlds" (sovev kol almin). At this level, it is not necessary for man

18. See the introduction to Derech Chayim Derech Mitzvosecha, Mitzvas Tiglaches Metzora, sec.

I I ff.; Kuntreis U'Maayon, Discourse 17ff.

19. See Pesachim 64b; Zohar I , 111b; I I , 112b. See alsoBerachos 35b which states: "Many did...

as Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai [taught — to rely on G-d to provide for their needs

withoutworking themselves — ] and they were unsuccessful."

20. See the sources cited in fn. 18. See aso the ma a ma r entitledVeYadaata, 5657 {English

translation, To Know G -d (Sichos In English, 5753)}.

21. Michah 5:6, and Rashi's commentary.

22. Likkutei Torah, Devarim, p. 90d, 91b; Yahel Or on the verse; the maamar entitled Velo Zachor,

5688.

23. Tehillim 118:8.

24. See the explanation of these concepts in Toras Chayim, in the maamar entitled Ben Pores

Yosef, sec. X I I I ; Yahel Or to Tehillim 40:5; the maamar entitled Velo Zachor, loc. cit.



B A L A K 143

to establish a medium in the natural order. Instead, "He wil l provide

for you (25

יכלכלך)," [i.e.,] G-d wil l provide the medium (י ) asכל well .}2 4

I V .

The ultimate intent is not for the natural order to be nullified but for it

to be refined and elevated26

to the extent that it is overtly apparent

that nature is one with G-d. W i th regard to the concept at hand —

not to hope in man — the intent is not to negate the help that a

person offers. Instead, the natural order should be so totally

permeated with G-d's oneness that we see [the help that a man offers]

(not as help from man) but only as help from G-d.

[To explain:] The acts [within the natural order that one employs

as a medium] can be conceived of in two ways:

a) One knows that the natural order in and of itself is of no

significance; it is merely an axe in the hands of the chopper.20

Nevertheless, since G-d commanded that a person act and make a

medium [for success] within the natural order, he considers the natural

order significant. Hedoesnot consider the natural order important in its

own right, but nevertheless, since G-d has commanded that it be

employed, hegrants it a certain measureof importance.27

b) He acts with in the context of the natural order only because

G-d commanded him to. The natural order has no importance for him

whatsoever. It isonly a medium to carry out G-d's wi l l .2 8

This is the explanation29

of our Sages' interpretation30

of the

phrase:31

"The faith of your times." They say: "'The faith' — refers to

25. Cf. Tehill im 55:23.

26. See Likkutei Dibburim, Vol. IV, p. 752bff.; Likkutei S i c h o s , Vol. V, p. 80, e t al.

27. [To cite aparallel:] Likkute i S i c h o s , Vo l . IV , p. 1044, explains the claimof the spies that

"the Homeowner," G-d, "cannot remove His utensils," [i.e., that He cannot displace

the Canaanite nations]. [They understood that the Canaanites and the entire] natural

order are [merely] G-d's utensils and He is the Homeowner. Nevertheless, since He

desired that the world follow the natural order, [they reasoned that] "He cannot

remove His utensils."

28. See Pirke i DeRabbi El iezer , ch. 33: "DidYitzchak sow grain, Heaven forbid? He took

tithes... and sowed tzedakah." As explained in Likkute i S i c h o s , Vol. V , p. 74, [his entire

intent inperformng the physical activitywas to carry out the aforementioned mitzvos] .

29. See Likkutei S i c h o s , Vol. I , pp. 216, 240.

30. S h a b b o s 31a. See T o s a f o s , s.v. Emunas (quotingthe Talmud Yerushalmi).




the Order of Agricultural Laws"; [i.e.,] "one believes in the Eternal

L i fe and sows."

[Seemngly,] sowing grain is a natural act; one sows seeds and

grain grows. It does not matter who does the sowing, a Jew or לי ,להבד

a gentile. Even if a kernel of grain falls into the groundwithout being

planted by man, the nature of the earth is to cause it to grow. Indeed,

this nature is so much a part of the world that it iswritten:32

"The time

of seeding and the time of harvest... will not cease."

Nevertheless, a Jew does not consider this natural pattern as

important. He does not sow becauseaccording to nature this wil l lead

to the growth of his crops. Instead, he "believes in the Eternal Life

and sows."33

V .

The difference between these two approaches goes beyond the

manner and the extent to which b i t achon , trust in G-d, is felt. [Instead,

the two approaches] lead to a difference in one's actual conduct in

thought, speech, and deed.

When a person considers [the medium] that he makes [for G-d's

blessing] as significant, he views that medium and the Torah and its

mi tzvos as two different subjects. [Thus it is possible that] he will feel a

conflict between his involvement in the Torah and its mi tzvos and [the

activities mandated by] his involvement in the natural order. For

example, if he prolongs his prayers, he may lose business contacts. If

he gives generously to t zedakah, he may lack the money he needs for

investments.

He will thus find himself in [a constant struggle]; "power wil l pass

from one to the other."34

He may forego involvement in activities

mandated by the natural order (knowing that "the blessing of G-d

31. Yeshayahu 33:6.

32. B e r e i s h i s 8:22.

33. [Trans. Note: I.e., his sowing is an act of faith. Although he knows that sowing grain

will lead to growth according to the rules of nature, this knowledgedoesnot affect him.

Instead, he is focused on his relation to G-d that transcends nature.]

34. Cf. B e r e i s h i s 25:23. See T a n y a , ch. 13, [which speaks of a simlar struggle within a

person'sheart].



B A L A K 145

brings wealth,"35

and that thesenatural meansare only a medium and a

garment for G-d's blessing) in order to involve himself in the Torah

and its mitzvos. Even then, doing so involves an inner war and [a

struggle to] overcome his animal soul. [Moreover,] there is always the

possibility that the balance of power will shift and the opposite side

will be victorious.

When, however, he gives no importance to [the medium] that he

makes [for G-d's blessing,] and involves himself with it only to fulfill

the Creator's will, that involvementbecomes an act of Divine service.

When he "carries out all [his] deeds for the sake of Heaven"36

and

"knows G-d in all [his] ways,"37

he does not see "all of [his] deeds"

and "all of [his] ways" as separate from [the goal to which they are

directed]. On the contrary, the perception that they are "for the sake

of Heaven" and acts of knowing G-d, permeates them, [making the

deed and the intent] one.

Since he does not conceive of any existence other than G-d's will,

it is obvious that one mitzvah will not contradict another mitzvah. On

the contrary, one mitzvah leadsto another one.38

V I .

The difference between these two approaches does not begin with a

distinct difference in conduct. For, at the outset, [as stated above,

both approaches agree that the Torah and its mitzvos are true. Even

according to the approach that puts a greater emphasis on worldly

matters,] the yetzer hara does not try to convince a person that he

should transgress G-d's will. Instead, at first, the difference involves a

hairsbreadth. Theyetzer hara agrees, as it were, that the involvement in

finding a mediumwithin the natural order should not be in contradic¬

tion to the observance of the Torah and its mitzvos. It merely

emphasizes that activities within the natural order should be given

their due importance. Ultimately, however, [this approach] causes

theseactivities to be considered of primary importance.

35. Mishlei 10:22.

36. A vos 2:12.

37. Mishlei 3:6.

38. A vos 4:2.




Indeed, as my revered father-in-law, the Previous Rebbe,

interpreted39

our Sages' statement:40

"This is the craft of theyetzer hara.

Today, it will tell him: 'Do this.' The following day, it will say: 'Do

that.' Unt i l ultimately, it will tell him: 'Go and worship idols.'" At the

beginning, the yetzer hara does not try to convince a person to do the

opposite of his true wil l 4 1

(and violate G-d's will, Heaven forbid). On

the contrary, it tells the person: "Do this": observe the Torah and its

mitzvos. And it explains to him how that observance makes sense

according to the understanding of the animal soul and the yetzer hara.I n this way, it penetrates into the person's observance of the Torah

and mitzvos and habituates him to thinking that it is necessary for the

yetzer hara to agreeto his conduct. [This gives theyetzer hara a position

of importance and later enables it] to tell the person: "Do that," and

ultimately to tell him: "Go and worship idols."

Therefore the way to protect oneself thoroughly from the

deception of the yetzer hara is not through Divine service directed by

logic and reason. For logic and reason leave room for the natural order

[to be given prominence]. Instead, one should devote himself to

G-d's Wil l with bittul and mesirus nefesh that transcend logic and reason.

O n this level, nothing other than G-d's Wi l l exists for this person.

{This parallels the distinctionmade in sec. I l l between "rely[ing]

on G-d" and "trust[ing] in man." "Trust[ing] in man," [Divine service

corresponding to the G-dly light which] "fills all the worlds" (which

within the personal world of the soul refers to service directed by

logic and reason), requires one's involvement according to the natural

order. For the natural order is significant with regard to this level of

G-dly light.

"Rely[ing] on G-d," [Divine service corresponding to the G-dly

light which] "transcends all the worlds" (which within the personal

world of the soul refers to bittul that transcends logic and reason)

grants no [independent] importance to the mediums of the natural

39. See the maamar entitled Amar Rav Oshiyia, 5689, sec. 7 (Sefer HaMaamarim Kuntreisim, Vol.

I , p. 37a). See asoLikkutei Sichos, Vol. I l l , p. 900.

40. Shabbos 105b.

41. For as Rambam states (Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Gerushin, the conclusion of ch. 2), [every

Jew'strue desire is to observe the Torah and its mitzvos].



BALAK 147

order. Therefore themotif is: "He wil l provide for you (ךלכלכי )," G-d

wil l providethemedium.

There wil l bemediums, butthey wil l come from Above.As

mentioned previously, even when such aperson employs natural

means, hedoes notgrant them any[independent] importance. It is

not appropriate tosaythat hereceives "help from man," because the

mediums of the natural order are one with G-d.}

This isthepreparation for theRedemption when we wil l receive

blessings "not hoped for from man." Then theveil of concealment wil l

be lifted from nature entirely and wewil l seewith our mortal eyes that

nature itself is G-dly. Hence thepattern wil l bethat [blessings come]

"likedew from G-d.... They wi l l not hope from man, nor expect froma

mortal."21

{This parallels [themotif] "Hewi l l provide for you"

[described above].}

V I I .

Based on theabove, we canappreciate theconnection of the Ha f to r a h

to theconclusion of P a r s h a s B a l a k , which relatesthesin of B a a l P e o r and

the self-sacrifice ofPinchas42

that corrected that sin (asitiswritten:43

"And heatoned for the children of Israel").

Baal P e o r was served bydefecating in theidol's presence.44 It is

explained inChass i dus45

that thesource forthis sinisthat onegrants

importance tophysical pleasures which are [intruth] thewaste

product of the sublime pleasure.

What would causeaperson toconsider waste products (physical

pleasures) ofprimary importance? This comes from thefact thathe

considers thenatural order asbeing important. [Making this initial

error] leadshimto betotally absorbed in material matters.

42. Pinchasriskedhis life to kill thenas i of thetribeof Shimon even though the entiretribe

was gathered together [at that place]. Moreover, herequiredseveral mracles [to prove

theproprietyof hisactions]. (SeeTargum Yonason b e n Uziel, Sifri, Midrash Tanchuma to the

conclusion ofP a r s h a s Balak Sanhedrin 82b.)

43. Bamidbar 25:13.

44. R a s h i , Bamidbar 25:3; see asoSanhedrin 64a

45. Likkutei Torah, Devarim, p. 11c; themaamar entitledVeneishev Bagei at theconclusion of S e f e r

HaMaamarim Eshalaleich Liozna S e f e r HaMaamarim 5562, p. 88ff. See asoLikkutei S i c h o s , Vol.

I V , p. 1327ff. (with regard to the conceptsexplained in secs. V I I andV I I I ) .




On this basis, we canunderstand our Sages' statement46 thatthe

atonement [brought about byPinchas] isstill anactive force and will

continue to exert positive influence [inthis world] until the

Resurrection of the Dead. For the purification and atonement forthe

sin [of Baal Peor] will notcome until that time. Atthat point, nature

will beconsummately refined and itwill beobvious that nature is

completely at onewith G-dliness. Thus itwill not bepossible togive

primacy to material concerns.

Therefore the atonement [for this sin] was brought about through

the self-sacrificeofPinchas. [Torah Lawdoes not mandate] such self-

sacrifice. [Indeed, were Pinchas tohave asked whether tohave taken

action,] hewould nothave been instructed to do soaccording to

Torah law.47

Nevertheless, Pinchas remained steadfast and was will ing

to sacrifice his life. This reflects self-sacrifice that transcends logic and

reason, even [logic andreason] within therealm of holiness. As

explained above, it isthrough bittul that transcends logic andreason,

(even [logic andreason] within therealm of holiness) that it is

possible toprotect oneself and notmake adivision between nature

and G-dliness even though [onecarries out innature] theTorah's

directive: " A n d G-dwill blessyou in all that you do."

V I I I .

On this basis, we canalso understand theconnection between the

above concept and the entry of the Jewish people into Eretz Yisrael. (As

explained in sec. I I ,theevents described inParshas Balak occurred

shortly before the entry into Eretz Yisrael.)

I n thedesert, [thepeople were sustained by] manna, i.e., a

mraculous pattern [of existence]. It was not possible to errand think

that human input could have anyeffect on [one's fortunes], as

46. Sifri toParshas Pinchas. Seeaso Sanhedrin 82b which states: "It isappropriate that this

atonement...." Note aso Tosafos, Sotah 14a, s.v. mipnei.

47. [I .e., althoughtaking such action issanctioned—and even considered praiseworthy

— it must comeon theperson's own initiative. The court should not instruct himto

take such steps] (Sanhedrin, loc. cit. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Issurei Bi'ah 12:5; Tur,

EvenHaEzer, sec. 16;Rama, ChoshenMishpat 425:4).



B A L A K 149

reflected by the verse:48

"The one who gathered more did not have

more, nor did the one who gathered less have less." Moreover, only

enough manna for one day descended, emphasizing how one must

have absolute trust in G-d that He will provide for his needs day by

day.49

I n contrast, the entry into Eretz Yisrael brought about the

beginning of a new phase in Divine service,50

[serving Him in a way]

appropriate for "a settled land."51

Hence, [as a preparation,] it was

necessary to confront the issueof Baal Peor, [to emphasize that] even

though one begins to live according to the natural order, one should

not "hope in man." [Instead,] he should appreciate that nature is not

an independent entity and the same utter reliance on G-d that

prevailed in the desert isstill necessary.

I X .

This lesson is aso appropriate inthese, the last days of exile, when we

are preparing to enter Eretz Yisrael led by Mashiach. We are l iving in an

era characterized by the double and redoubled darkness52

of exile, the

very opposite of the beginning of the Redemption,53

as isplainly seen.

Nevertheless, all the revelations of the Future Redemption are

"dependent on our deeds and Divine service throughout the era of

exile."54

48. Shmos 16:18.

49. YalkutShimoni, Beshalach, sec. 258; see asoYoma 76a.

50. In particular, this was true after theJewsconquered the lands of Sichon and Og. Note,

however, Rashi's commentary to Shmos 16:35. SeeLikkutei Sichos, Vol. V I I I , p. 189.

51. Shmos, loc. cit.

52. The phrase "double and redoubled darkness" implies that there are some who err and

consider the darkness light. They consider our situation in exile as "the beginning of

the Redemption." This is darkness and a concealment of the exile itsef. See the

interpretation of the Baa Shem Tov (quoted in Toldos Yaakov Yosef, the beginning of

Parshas Bereishis) of the verse (Devarim 31:18): " I wi l l certainly conceal My face on that

day." [The repetition of the verb "conceal" in the original Hebrew] indicates that the

concealment itself is veiled. One does not perceive the concealment. Instead, this

redoubleddarkness is erroneously called "the beginning of the Redemption."

53. See the notes to Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V, where this concept is explained.

54. Tanya, ch. 37.




I n particular, this applies in the present generation when we are

making the final preparations for the Redemption to be led by

Mashiach. As thePrevious Rebbe states,55 Mashiach is"standing behind

our wall." 5 6

Moreover, thewalls of exilearealready burning.57

[A t this time,] every person must have (atleast) aforetaste of the

approach of "nothop[ing] in man" in hisDivine service. Heshould

not grant the mediums of the natural order any [independent]

importance andinstead, place his trust in G-d alone.

Through this, everyone will be redeemed from theworriesand

problems that disturb him. Forwhen hecarries out "all that youdo"

only for thesakeof fulfilling G-d's will, hewill not beworried, nor will

hebedisturbed, for all that will concern himiscarryingout G-d'swill.

This individual redemption that will be experienced by each

person58

will serve as the preparation and the medium for the all-

encompassing Redemption led by Mashiach, and to the erathat will be

"only Shabbos and rest for life everlasting."59

(A dapted from Sichos Shabbos Parshas Balak, 5723)

55. In the KolKoreh published inHaKeriah VehaKedushah, Sivan 5701.

56. Cf. Shir HaShirim 2:9.

57. See the letter of thePrevious Rebbe printed in thebeginning of HaYom Yom (p. 12).

See asoLikkutei Dibburim, Vol. I l l , p. 794, et al.

58. See Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 4.

59. Theconclusion of tractate Tamid .



P A R S H A S

M A T O S - M A S E I ,

M E N A C H E M AVLikkutei Sichos, V ol . X X I I I , p. 214ff.

I .

When the parshiyos Matos and Masei are joined together,1

they are read

on theShabbos

when the month ofMenachem

Av is blessed or on the

first Shabbos of Menachem Av. As is well known,2

all of the Torah

readings sharea connection to the time at which they are read. Thus it

is evident that the parshiyos Matos and Masei share a connection, not

only to the period of Bein HaMetzarim 3 in general,4

but also (and

primarily) to the month of A v . 5

1. As is the practice in most years. In only two annua cycles (during leap years) are the

two read as separateparshiyos. See the calendars included in the Tur (Orach Chayim) that

follow the laws of Rosh Chodesh.

2. See Shelah, Cheilek Torah Shebichsav, the beginning of Parshas Vayeishev (p. 297a).

3. [Trans. Note: This term literally means "between the straits." It refers to the three-

week period between the fasts of 17 Tammuz and Tishah BeAv when customs

associated with mourning are observed to commemorate the destruction of the Beis

HaMikdash.]

4. See Shelah at the beginning of our Torah reading (p. 366b ff.) which states that these

three Torah readings (Matos, Masei and Devarim) are aways read duringBein HaMetzarim

becausethey are appropriate to the time (see aso the title on p. 366a) and explains the

connection between them.

See aso Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I I I , p. 378ff., which explains severa particulars

regarding this connection. See aso ibid., p. 411ff., which explains the connection

betweenParshas Masei and the period of Bein HaMetzarim.

5. [The following distinctions can be made:] There is a) the period of Bein H aMetzarim as a

whole which divides into b) the days of Tammuz and the days of Av. The latter

subdivide into c) the beginning days of A v and the week in which Tishah BeAv fals.

That in turn subdivides (although not aways) into the ordinary week days, the day

preceding Tishah BeAv, Tishah BeAv itself, Tishah BeAv which is postponed, and the

151




I I .

(When blessing themonth [of A v ] , it isJewish custom — whichis

considered as Torah Law6 — to refer to it as Menachem Av. {This

custom has halachic relevance with regard to themanner in whichthe

nameof themonth iswritten in alegal document. [A legal document

is unacceptable if the name of the month is not written correctly.

Nevertheless, such] adocument is acceptable when dated Menachem

A v . Indeed, even if onewrites merely Menachem and notAv, thelegal

document is acceptable7

because it iswell known that themonthof

A v isreferred to asMenachem. Infact, there arethose who follow the

custom of using thetermMenachem instead of the termAv in marriage

contracts and other legal documents.8

}

This custom can be explained based on the following preface:

Our Sages relate9

that thenames of themonths "ascendedwith them

from Babylonia." Thecommentaries10

explain that thenames of all11

day following Tishah BeAv. {Thereareaso practical halachic distinctions between these

different times, as explained in the Shulchan Aru ch (Orach Chayim, sec. 551 ff.) and

commentaries.}

6. See Talmud Yerushalmi, Pesachim 4:1; Tosafos, Menachos 20b, s.v. nifsal.

7. Get Pashut, EvenHaEzer 126:35, quoted by the Pis'chei Teshuvah 126:12. See asothe Aruch

HaShulchan 126:16 whichstatesthat it is not our customto writeonlyMenachem, but that

i f onewrites Menachem Av, theget isacceptable after thefact, because "themonth is

blessed inthis manner throughout our countries and it is common to mention it in

correspondence."

8. Get Pashut, loc. cit.

9. Talmud Yerushalmi, Rosh HaShanah 1:2; Bereishis Rabbah 48:9; Tosafos, Rosh HaShanah 7a, s.v.

midivrei.

There is aslight difference in the wording of thesesources. See theAlbeck edition

of Bereishis Rabbah and the different versions of the text he cites. See aso the

commentary of Ramban to Shmos 12:2.

10. Rav Avraham Ibn Ezra and Chizkuni to Shmos, loc. cit. See Toras Shlomoh to Parshas Bo (sec.

10-11); Appendix, sec. IV.

11. On thesurface, thenameAvrases aquestion, aswill bementioned. I t ispossible to

explain that [not all the names are of Babylonian origin,] but the overwhelmng

majority are.

I t isaso possible to explain — albeit theexplanation isquite forced — that the

month wasreferred to in this manner in Babylonia in the Persian tongue. See the

sources cited that explain that this period of theyear is referred to in this manner

because in Persian, this name describes the events that occur, not because of the

meaning of the termAv in Lashon HaKodesh.



MATOS-MASEI, M E N A C H E M A V 153

the months are notbased onLashon HaKodesh 12 but are of Chaldean

origin, 1 3

(and are Persian names).14

This statement, however, isproblematic, for wefind that our

Sages make several extrapolations15 based on themeaning of the

names of the months in Hebrew.16

It ispossible toexplain that, at the

outset, there is nodifficulty. When ourSages saythat thenames of

the months ascended with them from Babylonia, they mean the

connection between the names and the months originated in

Babylonia and [the use of theterm as thename of amonth] was

brought [toEretz Yisrael] from there. Thenames of the months

themselves arenot, however, Babylonian in origin.1 7

Even if onewould saythat some of theterms are of Babylonian

origin, that certainly does notapply with regard to thenameAv.

Moreover —and this is offundamental importance—since theyare

names employed18

by the Torah,19 it isevident that they are associated

12. [TheHo ly Tongue, Biblical Hebrew.]

13. RavAvrahamIbn Ezra andChizkuni to the above verse.

14. Ramban to the above verse.

15. See thePesikta Zuta, Bo, which interprets thename Nissan asalluding to thenissim,

mracles, wrought on behalf of the Jewish people. Seeaso Midrash Shmos with regardto

the names of al themonths cited inToras Shlomoh, loc. cit. Note aso the different

acronyms citedby our Sageswith regard to the name Elul. Seefn. 18

16. We find the Talmud (Shabbos 77b; Kesuvos 10b) interpreting theword desha, "doorway," as

an allusionto[the Hebrew terms meaning] "the way through there." The connection,

however, ismerely an allusion, for the word desha is not atermin Lashon HaKodesh [and

the allusion isnot intrinsically related to its meaning].W i t h regardtothenames of the

months, by contrast, itappears that theallusionsareconnected to the meanings of the

terms [in Lashon HaKodesh]. *

* Toras Shlomoh, loc. cit., states that our Sagesendeavored to find aJewish connectionto

thenamesof the months and endow thenameswith Jewish content. Much clarifica¬

tion, however, is required, for how arethesedifferent from the other extrapolations

of names made byour Sages? Note thequote from Midrash Sechel Tov onBereishis

46:9.

[Trans. Note: Intheoriginal, this footnote was abracketed passage in the body

of the sichah and thepassagemarked by an asterisk, afootnote.]

17. See the commentary to Bereishis Rabbah, loc. cit., ascribed to Rashi which states:

"Previously, they were notrevealed."

18. Some are cited in the Tanach (see Talmud Yerushalmi, Rosh HaShanah, loc. cit. the

commentary ofRav AvrahamIbn Ezra, loc. cit.). Wi th regard to thename A v, see the




with theinterpretation that they aregiven inLashon HaKodesh.20

In

particular, this applies with regard to ( M e n a c h e m ) A v. The term Av has

the meaning "father," just as theword is interpreted in Lashon

HaKodesh.21

According tothis, themeaning of the name M e n a c h e m Av isthat

we "comfort the father," i.e., we are comforting our Father in Heaven,

as it were. Were the month named AvM e n a c h e m , the intent wouldbe

that the father (our Father in Heaven) iscomforting (the Jews).22

The

termM e n a c h e m Av, by contrast, implies that the father is the one being

comforted.23

{[In contrast,] the meaning of the termM e n a c h e m T z i y o n

(mentioned in the blessing N a c h e i m ) isthat Tziyon isbeing comforted

(by G-d).}

Mishnah, Taanis 4:5-6; Targum* S h e n i toMegillas E s t h e r 3:7;Targum Yonason be n Uziel, Bamidbar

13:25.

* For thisprinciple can also be applied to the Targum since it was alsogiven to Moshe

at Sinai (see Shulchan Aruch HaRav 285:2; note also the sources cited; see also Toras

Shlomoh, theAppendix toVol. X V I I , sec. 23,subsec. 2, thebeginning of Vol.

X X I V ) . Since these names are cited in the Targum, they have ameaning in Lashon

HaKodesh.

19. Even according to the commentaries who maintain that the names are of Chaldean (or

Persian) origin (see fn. 10), it is possible to offer the explanation offered by the Shelah

(p. 409b):

When you see our Sages interpret aword and say that itoriginated in Greek or in

another secular language... do not think that the Torah employed any language other

than Lashon HaKodesh . Instead, the intent isthat when the H o l y One, blessed be He,

created the world, there was only Lashon HaKodesh . In the Generation of the Dispersion

[after theconstruction of theTower of Bavel], when G-d mxed together all the

languages, these words from Lashon HaKodesh became mxed into Greek, Catpian,or

A frican.

See also Divrei Torah by the author of the text MinchasElazar (Vol. II, sec. V I I ) .

20. On this basis, we can appreciate that we find several acronyms inLashon HaKodesh with

regard to the name Elul (see Likkutei S i c h o s , V ol. IX , p. 296ff., and the sourcesmentioned

there; see asoLikkutei S i c h o s , Vol. XIX, p. 162); Or HaTorah (Terumah, p. 1527) with

regard to the name Adar (אדר) [that it alludes to] רד א, [that G-d's Infinity dwells]. See

T o r a s Shlomoh ascited in fn. 10.

21. See them a a m a r entitledNachamu, 5670, sec. 10; see alsoLikkutei S i c h o s , Vol . IV , p. 1080ff.

22. See the sources cited in the previous footnote. Note also theMahar i l , at the beginning

of Hilchos Tishah BeAv, whosays, "May the Father show mercy on them."

23. See thesources quoted in Taamei Mi n h a g i m , Inyonei Tishah BeAv (secs. 632-633) with

regard to the rationales for the nameMenachem Av.



MATOS-MASEI, MENACHEM A V 155

Our Sages state:24

"G-d says, as it were: 'What will be25 with a

Father Who exiled His children?26

(Woe to the children who were

exiled from their Father's table.)'"27

[Since He is in distress,] we

comfort Him, as it were.

I I I .

On this basis, we can understand the connection between the month

of Menachem Av and the parshiyos of Matos and Masei. This concept —

that a Jew appreciates that the comfort he is seeking in this month is

not (only) comfort for himself, but (primarily) comfort for the Father,

our Father in Heaven — is also emphasized in Parshas Matos and in

Parshas Masei.28

Parshas Matos relates G-d's command to Moshe with regard to the

war against M idian: 2 9

"Take the revenge for the children of Israel from

the Midianites." When, however, Moshe communicated the com¬

mandment to the Jewish people, he spoke of: "tak[ing] the revenge

for G-d upon Midian." 3 0

The Sifri31 comments that Moshe told the

Jews: "You are not taking vengeance on behalf of mortals. You are

taking vengeance on behalf of He Who spoke and brought the world

into being."

We see a simlar concept inParshas Masei. It is written:32

"And you

shall not defile the land... in which I dwell, because I , G-d, dwell

among the children of Israel." The Sifri comments on that verse:

"Cherished are the Jewish people. Even though they are impure, the

24. Berachos 3a

25. Dikdukei Sofrim aso quotes a slightly different version: "Woe to the Father...." This

version is cited in many sources.

26. [When citing this quote,] E in Yaakov adds"among the idolators."

27. See Tur, Orach Chayim, sec. 56. That text, however, a) states "Woe are the children..."

before "What will be with aFather..."; and b) changes the text somewhat. This is not

theplacefor further discussion of the matter.

28. See Likkutei Sichos , Vol. IV, loc. cit.; Sefer HaArac h im Chabad, Vol. I , erech Av. Note the

sourcescited there.

29. Bamidbar 31:2.

30. Ibid .:3.

31. Commenting on the verse; see aso Rashi's commentary to the verse; Bamidbar Rabbah

22:2; Midrash Tanchuma, ParshasMatos, sec. 3; and the discussion of the concept in fn. 74.

32. Bamidbar 35:34.




Divine presence isamong them3

.... Cherished arethe Jewish people.

Wherever they areexiled,34

theDivine presence accompanies them,

and when they return, theDivinepresencewill accompany them."

For exiledoesnotaffect the Jewish people alone; itaffects G-das

well. [When theJewish people are inexile,] theDivine presenceis

[also] in exile. Andtheredemption of the Jewish people also involves

the redemption of theDivine presence, as itwere. Certainly, it is

obvious that the redemption of the Divinepresence ismore important

than the redemption of the Jewish people.

I V .

I t is,however, necessary tounderstand [thefollowing]: Thename

Menachem Avemphasizes only thecomfort given theFather anddoes

not mention at all thecomfort given theJewish people, the son.

Nevertheless, this is thename with which all Jews refer to the

month.35

I t isthus problematic: Were wespeaking about great tzaddikim

whose Divine service iscarried out for G-d's sakewithout any thought

of their own selves, noteven tocling toHim, 3 6

we could understand

that their perception of theexile involves feeling theexile of the

Divinepresence.

[Moreover, the use of such aname would be understandable]

even if theJewswere not on thelevel where they perform their Divine

service for G-d'ssake, but they perceive theexile of theDivine

presence interms of thespiritual destruction they face — "Weare

unable toascend, see,and prostrate ourselves,"37

i.e., [theywould feel

discomfort from thefact that] G-dliness is notshining in theworld

and they are lacking the revelation of G-dliness in their souls,38

in their

33. SeeRashi's commentary to the verse.

34. SeeasoMegillah 29a;Rashi's commentary toDevarim 30:3,et al.

35. Seesec. I I and thesourcesmentioned there.

36. SeeTanya, ch.10, which explains that this thrust characterizes theDivine service of

"men of ascendancy."

37. TheMussaf liturgy for the festivals.

38. SeeLikkutei Torah, Devarim, p. 98b.




study of the Torah and observance of the mitzvos, and in particular in

the Divineservice of prayer (to prostrate themselves).

This could be considered somewhat parallel to the concept of

"comforting the Father," for one comforts the "part of G-d from

Above"39

found within oneself, i.e., the spark of the Father within

oneself.

Can this, however, be said about every Jew, in every situation?

There are times when we feel under stress, with pressure from the

gentile powers, financial worries, and trying and vexing physical

situations. We are lacking our physical needs with regard to [matters

involving] our children, health, and sustenance, for they are not as

abundant as is appropriate for theJews. Every person knows that these

are the concerns that causeus aggravation. How is it appropriate that

even a person [with such concerns] refers to the month as Menachem

Av, [putting the emphasison comforting G-d, and not on receiving his

own needs]?

V .

The above concepts can be resolved by first explaining a simlar con¬

cept that applies with regard to prayer. There is awell-known teaching

of the Maggid [of Mezritch]40

based on our Sages' statement:41

"One

should stand in prayer only with an attitude of earnest reverence."

[The Maggid explains that] we must pray not for our own lacks and

needs, but for the needs and lacks [felt] by the Divine presence, as it

were. "Even if one asks for his own needs, his intent should be that

nothing should be lacking Above, Heaven forbid. For42

the soul is an

actual part of G-d from Above; it is one of the limbs of the Divine

39. Iyov 31:2. Tanya, ch. 2, addsthe term"actual."

40. Or Torah, the beginning of Parshas Vayigash. See asothe section Aggados Chazal, entryEin

Omdin (p. 108c in the Kehot edition); see aso the conclusion of thema a ma r entitledAl

Taas (p. 115d); Likkutei Amarim of the Maggid, sec. 12 (in the Kehot edition), Or

HaTorah, Ki Sisa ( Vo l . V I I I ) , p. 30098ff. See aso Sefer HaMaamarim 5665, p. 190ff., the

series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, Vol . I I , p. 901, and severa of the

maamarim entitledEin Omdim from the Rebbeim.

41. Berachos 5:1.




158 A K NOWING HEART

presence. This is the essential request that should be fulfilled and that

influence be generatedAbove."43

I n this as well, there is — as mentioned above — a conceptual

difficulty. There are individuals who are on the level that their own

needs are not important to them. Hence they do not feel their own

lack — or at least they do not regard it as being of primary

importance. Hence, their prayers are focused on the lack Above.

Most people, however, are concerned with their own bodies and

physical needs. They feel the body's lack and this distresses them and

disturbs them from concentrating on the study of the Torah and the

observance of the mitzvos.44 Hence it is a positive commandment to

pray to G-d and entreat Him to fulfill this lack.45

How can the

teaching of the Maggid — that one should be concerned with the lack

felt by G-d as it were — be appropriate to such prayer?

V I .

According to nigleh (the revealed dimension of Torah Law), it is

possible to offer (at least, a somewhat forced) explanation based on

the ruling of the Alter Rebbe in his Shulchan Aruch:46 "A person does

not havejurisdiction over his body at all." For aperson's body is not

his own. It is G-d's property.47

I t thus follows that when a person lacks his material needs, this

brings about sorrow, as it were, for G-d, the true Owner of the body.

Therefore there is no contradiction in praying for G-d to satisfy the

bodily needs that one fees and having the intent that "nothing should

be lacking Above." For his intent in praying that his bodilyneeds be

fulfilled is {not that he (himself) should not feel a lack,} but that

G-d's property should not suffer deficiency.

43. Or Torah, the beginning of Parshas Vayigash.

44. See Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Teshuvah 9:1.

45. See ibid., Hilchos Tefillah 1:2: "This is the obligation of this mitzvah:... To ask for the needs

that one lackswith appea and supplication." See asothe commentaries to this ruling

and the statements of the Tzemach Tzedek at the beginning of the maamar entitled Shoresh

Mitzvas HaTefillah in Derech Mitzvosecha.

46. The portion entitled ChoshenMishpat, HilchosNizkei Guf ViNefesh, subsec. 4.

47. See Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Rotzeach U'Shemiras Nefesh 1:4; the goss of Radbaz to

Hilchos Sanhedrin 18:6; the commentary of OrHaChayim to Bamidbar 16:24.




V I I .

This explanation is not sufficient, however, [for several reasons].

{F irstly, the wording of the Maggid implies that one should have in

mnd the lack of "the Head of all heads," [G-dHimself,] and not the

lack present within G-d's possessions.}

[More fundamentally, however,] as explained several times, nigleh,

the Torah's external, legal dimension, and nistar, its hidden mystic

secrets, are one Torah. The Zohar48 describes them as "the soul of the

Torah and the body of the Torah." Thus it is impossible that there

should be a contradiction between them.

I t would appear [on the surface] that the intent of the concept of

prayer as mandated by Torah Law is different from that expressed in

the Maggid's teaching cited above. In nigleh, it is stated49

that when a

person fees that he is lacking something, he should pray to G-d that

He should f i l l that lack. According to this concept, when a person is

on a level when he is bothered by only — or at least primarily— the

lack he fees in his material needs, and at that moment he does not feel

that his body is G-d's possession, there is a positive commandment

for him to pray for the fulfillment of his needs.

Moreover, the meaning of the words of prayer [focuses on our

physical necessities]. And praying according to the meaning of the

words is a fundamental element of prayer. Those words should be

interpreted according to their simple meaning. [Thus we are praying

for material benefits, health, and wellbeing,] as explained by the

commentaries to the prayers.50

Even those who interpret the prayers

according to the intent of the AriZal emphasize that he spoke about

subtle intents, allusions, and mystic secrets [and not the simple

meaning of the prayers].

According to the teaching of the Maggid, by contrast, our Sages'

statement: "One should stand in prayer only with an attitude of

48. Zohar I l l , 152a.

49. See fn. 45.

50. Note the well-known statement (the Responsa of Rivosh, Responsum 157, quoted by

the Tzemach Tzedek in Shoresh Mitzvas HaTefillah, sec. VIII): " I pray with the intent of a

child." It can be said that this concept reates only to the idea of praying "to Him, and

not to His attributes." (See sec. V I I of that text.)




earnest reverence," implies that the entire concept of prayer shouldbe

only "that nothing shouldbelacking Above."51

We arethus forcedto

say that even aperson who atthat moment isthinking only abouthis

personal needs, is — in aninward way — praying for thelack felt

Above.52

V I I I .

The explanation of these concepts is as follows:53

There is a

fundamental difference between aJew's soul and hisbody. A Jew's

soul is "anactual part of G-d from Above."54

The material make-up of

his body, by contrast, resembles the bodies of the gentiles."55

Therefore theAlter Rebbe writes that G-d'schoice [of theJewish

people] is asthey are enclothed inabody.56

The rationale is asfollows: The term "choice" isappropriate when

speaking about two subjects that resemble each other (in thematter

under concern). When subjects donot shareany common factorsand

have noshared traits, theconcept of choice is notappropriate. [In

such acase, onemerely selects] what one desires.

Therefore thetrue concept of choice applies inrelation to the

body which "in its material being resembles the bodies of the

gentiles." Wi t h regard to thesoul, bycontrast, theconcept ofchoice

is not appropriate, [since the differences aredistinct].

This itself, however, reflects anadvantage that aJew's body

possesses over hissoul. For it is thebody, as itwere, that has a

connection toG-d's essence.57

The soul (in and of itself) relatesto the

51. OrTorah, Parshas Vayigash. There theZohar (Tikkunei Zohar, Tikkun 6, p. 22a) iscited, that

one should notbelike "those whoact for their ownsakeand cry'Give, give.'"

52. [Trans. Note: The keyto theresolution offered by the Rebbe isthat aperson should

not seehisneedsand G-d's needsastwoseparatematters. Since, asexplained in detail

in thefollowing sections, G-d's essence identifies, asit were, with the bodily concerns

of the Jewish people, paying attention —and praying—for such concerns ispaying

attention tothe lack felt Above.]

53. Wi th regardto theconcepts that follow, seeLikkutei Sichos, V o l . X V I I I , p.409, fns. 70

and71 and thesourcesmentioned there.

54. Tanya, ch. 2.

55. Ibid, ch. 49 (p. 70a).

56. Ibid, (p. 69aff.).

57. SeeToras Shalom, pp. 11, 120, 122.






I X .

Based on the above, it is understandable that even when a Jew prays

and petitions G-d for his bodilyneeds (and their material dimensions),

this is not a contradiction to the Maggid's teaching that one should

pray for the lack felt Above. On the contrary, when there is a lack in a

Jew's bodily [needs], this affects {not only the revealed levels of

G-dliness (as is true when there is a lack in the spiritual needs of the

soul,) but also} (the true) "Head of all heads," in G-d's very essence,

as it were. [For that is the source of] the choice of aJew's physical

body.

Thus when a Jew fees a lack in his bodilyneedsthat brings himto

pray to G-d, the true inner [dimension of his prayer] stems64 from the

fact that inside he fees his true being — the choice of G-d's essence

which is focused on the physical body.

Therefore every Jew is given the directive: "One should stand in

prayer only with an attitude of earnest reverence." It is possible for

him — and therefore it is necessary for him— to have the apparent

intent65

that his requests for his material needsare being madebecause

of the lack in his sourceAbove, in the dimension of G-d's essence that

relates to him, as it were.

X .

O n this basis, we can understand the intent of the nameMenachem Av,

"comforting the Father."66

Every Jew is G-d's son, [as it were]. And

the choice of G-d's essence is focused on [aJew's] body. Hence the

inner dimension of aJew's feeling in exile, (even) [because of a lack]

in physical matters that concern his body, is the fact that the Divine

presence is in exile.

64. See related concepts inLikkutei Sichos, V o l . X I X , p. 295ff., basedon the teachings of the

Baa ShemTov.

65. See Tanya, the conclusion of ch. 41.

66. See Sefer H aMaamarim 5665, loc. cit., p. 193, which explains the Maggid's teaching

concerning the mishnah: "One should stand in prayer onlywith an attitude of earnest

reverence," and states: "This is the concept of Tikkun Chatzos (the mdnight mourning

prayers) that must precedeprayer. [The intent is] to fee the bitterness of the exile of

theDivinepresence."




The exile of G-dliness, as it were, does not involve only the

Shechinah, [the aspect of G-dliness that] "rests within and enclothes

itself in the mdst of the worlds to grant themvitality and to maintain

them,"67

but instead affects "the Father," even His essence, as it were.

When a Jew lacks his physical needs, [since] the choice of G-d's

essence is focused upon them, this brings about a condition of exile

for (the Father), as it were,68

[affecting] the very essence of

G-dliness.69

X I .

O n this basis, we can also understand a relevant passage in the Sifri.70

After stating: "Wherever (Israel) is exiled, the Divine presence

accompanies them... and when they return, the Divine presence will

accompany them" and citing relevant prooftexts, the Sifri continues:

Rebbi states: "To cite an analogy, it is like aK ing who tells his

servant: 'I f you seek me,71

I am with my son. Whenever you

look for me, I will be with my son.' This is [implied by] the

phrase:72

'...Who dwells among them in the mdst of their

impurity.'"

This passage is seemngly problematic: What does Rebbi add to

the preceding statements in the Sifri made by Rabbi Nassan who

states: "Cherished are the Jewish people. Wherever they are exiled,

the Divine presence accompanies them, and when they return, the

Divine presence will accompany them"? That statement also implies

that G-d is aways together with the Jewish people in all places.

67. Tanya, ch. 41 (p. 57b).

68. [The expression "as it were" is employed] becausethe concept of actual exile applies

onlywith regard to [theSefirah of Malchus], the lowerH ei [of G-d's name] (Tanya, Iggeres

HaTeshuvah, ch. 6, et al.). See aso Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IX, p. 179ff., and, in particular, p.

182, which explains Rashi's commentary to Devarim 30:3: "He dictated exile for

Himself," which implies that Hisessence [is in exile, as it were].

69. See Kuntreis U'Maayon, Maamar 3, and the sourcescited there.

70. Commenting on Bamidbar 35:34 as quoted above.

71. Our translation follows the wording of the first printing of the Sifri. See the Yalkut

Shimoni and theHagahos HaGra which offer slightlydifferent versions of the text.

72. Vayikra 16:16.




The difference between these two quotes can be explained as

follows: When saying, "Cherished are the Jewish people. Wherever

they are exiled, the Divine presence accompanies them," Rabbi

Nassan is speaking about the aspect of the Jews' souls that is

connected with a dimension that arouses cherished feelings. This is

not the essenceof the soul, but a revealed level related to feeling. On

this level, it is manifest that the Jewish people are "cherished" and

thus distinguishedfrom the other nations of theworld. W i t h regard to

this level of the soul, we say: "Wherever [the Jews] are exiled, the

Divinepresenceaccompanies them."

Since the soul in its own right is "an actual part of G-d from

Above" and this is revealed, it is sufficient that "the Divine presence

accompany them" for the exile not to have an effect on them.

Rebbi adds that [the relationship between G-d and the Jewish

people encompasses] the body as well. Therefore he refers to the

analogy of:

a king who tells his servant: " I f you seek me, I amwith my

son. Whenever you look for me, I will be with my son." This

is [implied by] the phrase: "...Who dwells among them in the

mdst of their impurity."

This does not refer to a matter that is associated with cherished

feelings or revealed levels. Instead, it is an essential matter involving

the [fundamental] connection between a father and a son. This is

connected with the body upon which the choice of G-d's essence is

focused,73

as explained above.74

73. See the maamar entitledHaMichaseh Ani MeiAvraham cited in fn. 61.

74. It can be explained that this is the basis for the difference in the interpretation of the

phrase "tak[ing] the revenge for G-d upon M idian" (Bamidbar 31:3; see fn. 31) by the

Sifri and Bamidbar Rabbah (and Midrash Tanchuma). Bamidbar Rabbah (and Midrash Tanchuma)

explain that the phrase "revenge for G-d" is employed "because of the Torah and

mitzvos that weregiven us. Therefore executing revenge for G-d is your revenge."

[I mplied is that the focus is on] revealed levels [of G-dliness]. Since [the Jews] are

connected to G-d in a revealed manner (through the Torah and its mitzvos), [they

identify with taking revenge for G-d]. A ll of this appliesprimarily to the soul.

The Sifri, by contrast, focuses on the essential dimension of the Jewish people that

precedes the Torah, and not on the revealed connection [to G-d] (established by the

Torah and itsmitzvos). This relates primarily to the body. Accordingly:




Accordingly, Rebbi:

a) emphasizes that [theconnection continues] "Whenever you

look for me." Since there is abond with G-d's essence, theconcepts

of variation and changedonot apply.75

b) quotes thephrase: "Who dwells among them in themdstof

their impurity," which relates to thebody and its related mattersand

not to thesoul76

and its related matters. [Forwith regard to thelatter,

our Sages teach]77

that (even) "Thewords of theTorah do not

contract ritual impurity."

X I I .

According to theabove explanation of the nameMenachem A v, we can

resolve another related question: Comfort applies inasituation where

an undesirable event occurred to aperson and the lack that he

suffered cannot be rectified. Through words or through deeds, a

colleague who didnotsuffer asimlar loss isable tocomfort the one

who did.

a) It isnecessary to emphasize: "You are not taking vengeance onbehalf of

mortals."

b) When stating the positive dimension: "You aretakingvengeance on behalf of He

W ho spoke and brought the world into being," [G-disreferred to as theCreator of]

the world, [indicating anemphasis on] thebody, which in its material form resembles

the bodies of the gentiles.

{See aso Toras Shalom, p. 120,which emphasizes the connection between the choice

of G-d's essencewithin thebody and the concept that creation yesh meiayin (existence

from nothingness) stems from thepower ofG-d's essence. Seeaso ibid., p. 122, and

Sefer HaMaamarim 5678, p.113 ff. This is not the place for further discussion of this issue.}

75. Rabbi Nassan aso mentions, "Wherever they areexiled." There is, however, a

distinction between his position and that of Rebbi. For Rebbi emphasizes, "Whenever

you will look for me," i.e., atal times, notonly in al places. (See thecommentary of

Sifri D'bei Ravto the abovepassagein the Sifri.)

76. [The soul is] "agarden spring, awell of living waters" (Shir HaShirim 4:15). {Seethe

maamarim entitled Az Yashir Yisrael (Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 62b;Sefer HaMaamarim 5702,

p. 129ff., and the ma a ma r of that title of 5743; the maamarim entitledMe'ein Gannim (Sefer

HaMaamarim 5702, p. 133; Sefer HaMaamarim Kuntreisim, Vol. I, p. 200a, et al.) [These

"waters"] donot contract ritual impurity themselves. On thecontrary, they purify the

impure.

77. Berachos 22a.




I n the instance at hand, how is it possible for theJews to comfort

G-d,78

as it were, when they themselves are in exile? On the contrary,

the Jewish people suffer the primary element of the exile. G-d is in

exileonly as a result of the fact that He is together with the Jews.

The concept can be explained as follows: Wi t h regard to a father

and son, our Sages state:79

"A son's potential surpasses that of his

father." As is well known, the statement has two implications: [the

obvious one,] that a son possesses an advantage over his father, but

also, that this very advantage is an outgrowth of his father's potential.

Since the son has his source in his father's essence, it is possible that

his potential will surpassthe revealed powers possessedby his father.80

Implied is that the essential connection between a father and his son

becomes manifest in the fact that the son's potential surpasses that of

the father.

Everyconcept on the earthly plane has its source [— and reflects —

] the spiritual plane. Simlarly, with regard to the concept at hand, the

fact that a son's potential exceeds that of his father stems from the

fact that the same relationship exists between G-d and the Jewish

people, as it were.

Since G-d's essence is invested in the Jewish people as they exist

on the material plane, that essence is revealed [to a greater extent]

than it is revealed in the spiritual realms, even on the highest levels of

G-dliness. Therefore the Jewish people as they exist on the earthly

plane — where the greatness of the son's potential, [which in turn

manifests] the power of G-d's essence, is revealed — have the

potential to comfort their Father in Heaven, as it were.81

We see a

78. See the passages from Taamei HaMinhagim (cited in fn. 23) which state that G-d

comforts Himself, as it were.

79. Sh'vuos 48a.

80. See the seriesof maamarim entitled Sameach TiSamach, 5657, p. 93ff., et al. Igros Kodesh of

the Previous Rebbe, Vol . IV , p. 405.

81. See the explanations in severa sources (the series of maamarim entitled BeShaah

SheHikdimu, 5672, Vo l . I I , p. 1123ff., et al.) that with regard to the pleasure derived from

"the acceptance of the Divine service and the bittul within the created beings (i.e.,

within the Jewish people) in a positive manner; this has a greater advantage than

[G-d's] initial intent.... There is the possibility that... it will enjoy success." See aso

Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XI X, p. 384ff.




simlar concept in nigleh. Our Sages relate82

that G-d declares: "You

havevanquished Me, M y son. Youhavevanquished Me."

X I I I .

Since the entire month is called Menachem Av, it follows that the

concept of comfort begins (not only after Tishah BeAv, when the

seven weeks of comfort begin, but) from the very beginning of the

month. For the comfort for the exile is dependent on the conduct of

the Jewish people. The only reason for the exile is our sins.

Conducting ourselves in the opposite manner [brings about comfort].

This is particularly truewith regard to the practices performed in

the beginning of the month of Av that are associated with the

destruction of the Beis H aM ikdash. Throughtheseactivities we comfort

the Father, weakening [the influence of] the destruction and bringing

closer the rebuilding [of the Beis HaMikdash].

I n general, during these days we should endeavor to increase our

observanceof the Torah and itsmitzvos to the greatest degree possible.

I n particular, this applies with regard to those laws and practices

observed at the present time. [Our Sages teach]83

that in these days,

we should reduce [those activities that lead to material satisfaction and

happiness,] and increaseour involvement in the Torah about which it

is said:84

"The precepts of G-d are just, gladdening the heart." In

particular, this applies to the custom followed in several places of

concluding Talmudic tractates85

during these days at which time "a

celebration86

ismadefor the sages."87

82. Bava Metzia 59b. See the Shelah, ShaarHaGadol (p. 29b ff.) with regardto the concept of

"service for G-d's sake."

83. [Taanis 4:6.]

84. Tehillim 19:9; see Tur and Shulchan Aruch, Hilchos Tishah BeAv (Orach Chayim, sec. 554).

85. Note the renowned custom of the Rebbe Rashab to conclude the study of Talmudic

tractates during thesedays even though hewouldnot eat meat or drinkwine afterwards

(Sefer HaMinhagim — The Book of Chabad-Lubavitch Customs, p. 95).

86. Shabbos 118b; Ram a, Yoreh Deah 246:26; see the gloss Beer Heitev which states: "...to the

extent that meat and wine are partaken of at thesefeasts even during thesedays." (See

asoRama, Orach Chayim 551:10.)

87. See Shaar Yissachar (by R. Chayim Elazar of Munkatsch), Maamarei Chodesh Tammuz-Av,

sec. 8: "The tzaddikim whose roots stem from the students of the Baa ShemTovwould




In general, this applies toenergetic study ofall aspects of the

Torah, for this [study] brings happiness. In particular, it applies tothe

study ofthe laws ofthe construction ofthe B e i s H a M i k d a s h . Forthe

M i d r a s h88

relates that through such study, "the construction of the B e i s

H a M i k d a s h isnot nullified" and G-d considers it asif one isinvolved89

in the actual construction of the Beis H a M i k d a s h .

Through these deeds andthis Divine service, wecomfortour

Father in Heaven. A nd then He will haveregret90

and He will take the

Jewsout of exile and build the T h i r d B e i s H a M i k d a s h , "the Sanctuary of

G-d, established by Your hands."91

May this take place speedily, in our

days.

(Adapted from the S i c h o s of S h a b b o s P a r s h a s Matos-Masei, 5742,

andS h a b b o s P a r s h a s Emor, 5737)

follow the customof concludingTa lmud ic tractates during the month of Av andwould

partake of meat...."

88. Midrash Tanchuma, P a r s h a s Tzav, sec. XIV. SeeLikkutei S i c h o s , Vol. XV II I , p. 412ff., and the

sourcesmentioned there where the concept is explained at length.

89. The present tense isused. Implied also is that not only is it a s ifone isperformng the

deed, but that one isactively investinghimself and occupiedwith its performance.

90. SeeR a s h i ' s commentary toB e r e i s h i s 6:6, [which explains that theroot םחנ canmean

regret aswell as comfort].

91. S h m o s 15:17; seeZohar I l l , 221a



P A R S H A S

S H O F T I M

Likkutei Sichos, V ol . X X I V , p. 115ff.

I .

O n the verse:1

"Is a man a tree of the field...?" the Talmud 2 reiterates

the question asked by the verse and explains:

[The verse states:]1

"From it, you shall eat; you shall not cut it

down. [And the passage continues:]3 "This you shall destroy

and cut down."

What is implied? If a Torah scholar isbefitting, "From it, you

shall eat" {i.e., "learn from him" (Rashi)}; "you shall not cut it

down." If not, "This you shall destroy" {i.e., "turn away from

him" (Rashi)} "and cut down."

Explanation is necessary: From the Talmud's reiteration of the

question in the verse, it is apparent that the Talmud understands that

the comparison between a person and a tree is not a mere analogy4

from which we can appreciate one (or several) points regarding the

qualities and characteristics of a person.

{Were the verse merely comparing people to trees with regard to

certain particulars, itwould not be in place to ask: "Is a man a tree of

the field?"5 Certainly there are some particulars in which a person

1. Devarim 20:19.

2. Taanis 7a.

3. Devarim 20:20.

4. Based on the above, we can appreciate why the Talmud does not use the expression

"Why was a person described with the analogy of a tree?" although the Talmud uses

such expressions severa times in the samepassagewith regard to the words of Torah.

5. Rashi (andsimlarly, Rabbeinu Gershom) in his commentary to that passagestate: "An

association is established between a person and a tree of the field... Just as a tree of the

169




resembles atree. [Nevertheless, these shared characteristics are not

sufficient for aperson to becalled"atreeof the field."]}6

Instead, the intent is that "a manis atree of the field."7

A tree

expresses (— not onlysecondary particulars concerning mankind —)

but who man is.

{This is also understood from the fact that we do not recite

Tachanun onTu BeShvat,8 theNew Year of the Trees,

9 and it is Jewish

custom to eat fruit to mark this day.10 (These customs areassociated

with theverse: "Isaman atreeof the field...?"11

)

I f a tree were merely an analogy for man, it would not be

appropriate to celebrate thetrees' New Year.12

Fromtheabove, it is

understood that "a man is a tree of the field"; i.e., trees describe a

man's identity. Hence, theNew Year of theTrees isrelevant to man.}

[Based on theabove,] thefollowing questions arise:

a) How istheTalmud's question, "Is aman atree of the field?" an¬

swered by the explanation, "I f a Torah scholar is befitting"?

field...." I tappears that theintent of the Talmud is not that aperson is atree, but thata

tree merely is ananalogy for aperson.* This issomewhat problematic, for what then

was theTalmud's original supposition?

* TheMaharsha in his Chiddushei Aggados (andsimilarly, RabbeinuYitzchakA lfasi in his

commentary to Ein Yaakov) explains that according to thesimple meaning of the

verse ("Is aman atree of the field?" asRashi comments in hisgloss to the verse),

the order of the Hebrew terms should have been rearranged. But from thewording

of the Talmud, itappears that thequestion is — asstated above — how can it be

said that man is atree?

6. Seefor example, Avos 3:17. In particular, thedetails of the analogy are explained in Sefer

HaLikkkutim from the Tzemach Tzedek, erech Etz, Sefer HaArachim Chabad, Vol. I , erech Adam,

sec. 11, et al.

7. See Rashi, Bamidbar 13:20.

8. Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 131:6.

9. Rosh HaShanah 1:1 (according to the School of Hillel).

10. Magen Avraham 131:16; the HaShlamah to Shulchan Aru ch HaRav prepared by Rav

Nechemah of Dubravna 131:8. There arethose who follow thecustom of reciting

passages from theTanach and theZohar {as published inPri Etz Hadar (first printing,

Venice5488)}. I have not, however, seen this practice followed in thesecountries [i.e.,

in the Ashkenazic community].

11. SeeLikkutei Mahariach, V ol . I l l , Minhagei Shvat (explaining why we wear holidayclothing

on that day), et al.

12. Obviously, there is adifference between this celebration and thecustom of hanging

flowering branches inthesynagogues on Shavuos (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 494:15).



SHOFTIM 171

Seemngly, that is referring merely to an analogy and an analogue.

Moreover, it appears to relate to only one dimension [of the relation¬

ship]. Thus as a whole, the question remains: "Is a man a tree of the

field?"

b) How is it appropriate to describethe advantages possessed by

man [— the highest form of life — ] through a comparison to a tree, a

member of the plant kingdom?

True, within man, there isalso a dimension [comparable to] plant

life (as reflected in the growth of one's hair and nails. But if this is the

point, then a) man also possesses a greater quality, the dimension of

animal life, 1 3

and b) more fundamentally, [although man possesses a

plant-like dimension,] this does not represent the unique characteris¬

tic of man. How then can we say: "Man is atreeof the field...?"

I I .

The unique positive characteristic of the plant kingdom (when

compared to the animal kingdomand humans) isexpressedby the fact

that it does not conceal [its connection to the source of] its true life.

Instead (through its roots), it is aways connected to its source, the

power of growth in the earth that grants it life and makes it grow.

[Indeed,] when a plant is uprooted from the ground, it loses [the

qualities that distinguish it as] a plant.

A n animal and a human need not remain connected to their

source at all times. Although they too came into being from the earth

— for "everything was formed from earth"14

— they are not

connected to it at all times.15 [Similarly, in an individual sense,] after

the birth of every animal or human, he is no longer connected to his

source ([his mother] who bore him). Even the food on which an

animal and a human subsist does not require one to be in constant

13. For as iswell known, a human includes aspects of al four kingdoms: inanimate matter,

plants, animals, and humans. See Sefer HaArachim, loc. cit., sec. 7; [Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V I , p.

109 ff].

14. Koheles 3:20; Bereishis Rabbah 12:11.

15. Consider, however, the adonai hasadeh (Kilayim 8:5) which is described by theEtz Chayim

(Shaar 42) as an intermediate rung between the plant kingdomand the animal kingdom.




contact with his source of nurture. Plant life, by contrast, is aways

connected to the power of growth in the earth.

[We do find a parallel to plant life in the animal kingdom.] Fish

must always exist in water, the sourceof their vitality. If they leave the

sea, they die immediately.16

On the contrary, they seemngly surpass

the plant kingdom in this aspect. For their entire being remains

encompassed in water, the sourceof their vitality.

But this reflects precisely the distinction between the two: Even

when plants grow and extend far beyond their source in the earth —

like treeswhich grow very high beyond the earth, their source— they

still remain connected to their roots in the earth, and through them,

to the power of growth in the earth.

Moreover, each particular fish is not connected with its

immediate source, [the water in which it was born,] for its individual

life-energy. Thus there are fish that wander from rivers to oceans and

viceversa. This phenomenon is not found with regard to plant life.

I I I .

I n the above, there is an advantage to trees relative to other plant

life: 1 7

Other plants,18

e.g., grains and vegetables, do not continue to

exist (connected to the earth as a plant) from year to year. [Instead,]

they wilt and die. Trees, by contrast, produce fruit from year to year.

They bear all the climatic changes of summer and winter without

ceasing to exist.

Thus trees share a very strong connection to their source of

vitality. This endows themwith great strength not to be influenced by

the fluctuations of the seasons, to continue to exist, and even to grow

from year to year.

16. See Avodah Zarah 3b; Berachos 61b.

17. Moreover, the ultimate fulfillment of the growth potential of the plant kingdomis

reflected in trees, as IMelachim states: "And he spoketo the trees, from the cedar to...

the hyssop" (See Toras Chayim, Bereishis, the maamar entitled VaYaatzer, sec. 17).

18. See the different opinions concerning thesematters: Berachos 60a ff. and commentaries;

Tur, Shulchan Aruch, Shulchan Aruch HaRav (Orach Chayim 203); Seder Birchas HaNehenin 6:6.



SHOFTIM 173

I V .

Man is "aworld inmicrocosm."19 Just as theworld at large contains

four types of existence: inanimate matter, plants, animals, and humans,

so, too, these four types of existence [are paralleled] —in aspiritual

sense — within man.20

As is well known,21

aperson's emotions

represent the plant kingdomwithin man, for the emotions possess the

potential to grow from an underdeveloped stageto adeveloped stage.

Intellect possesses—in additiontothe potential for growth— a

parallel to theanimal kingdom,22

as expressed in thequalityof

movement and [the ability to] change from place toplace. Just as an

animal moves from oneplace toanother, so, too, intellect is not

(grounded, i.e.,) defined andconfined to agiven nature. [Onthe

contrary,] thenature of intellect is tounderstand aconcept (notas

one desires it tobe, but) as itis. And thus [aperson who followshis

intellect] proceeds andchanges his [emotional] place, sometimes

tending tokindness, sometimes tending toseverity, according to his

understanding]. Wi t h regard to onematter, hisintellect may dictate

that kindness isappropriate, and with regard toanother, hemay tend

toward severity.

W i t h regard toemotions, bycontrast, (asthey exist in and of

themselves, [i.e., without considering how they are influencedby

intellect,]) they are defined by their nature; theattribute of kindness

remains (as it exists independently) confined to that emotional thrust.

Simlarly, theattribute ofseverity remains in itsnatural thrust. [The

emotions merely] grow from an underdeveloped stageto adeveloped

stage [but do not changetheir fundamental tendency].

V .

Just asin the macrocosm, the world atlarge, where the plant kingdom

possesses anadvantage inalways being connected to itssource, so,

too, the"plant" element of man's personality, emotions, possesses an

19. Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Pekudei, sec. 3;A vos DeRabbi Nassan 31:3,et al.

20. See the sourcescited in fn. 13.

21. Torah Or, p. 4a; see the sourcescited in Sefer HaArachim, loc. cit.

22. SeeLikkutei Sichos, Vol. V I , p. 155 (and p. 113).




advantageover intellect, for[the emotions] areconstantly connected

to their source, the inner dimension of aperson's soul.

This isalso the reason23 that emotions possesssuch strong power,

to the extent that it is very difficult to havethemchangetheir "place"

(as explained above with regard totrees). When aperson iskind by

nature, it isvery difficult forhim tochange andbecome aperson

whose emotions arecharacterized byseverity. (Andtheopposite is

also true.)

{I t ispossible, although it is notcommon or prevalent, for a

person to usehis mnd toovercome his natural emotional tendencies

to such anextent that hecan transform them from bad togood.24

To

citeaparallel with regard to trees: attimes, through taking extra effort

to uproot atree from itsplace and plant itin another place, thetree

will grow in thenew place and, attimes, flourish better and stronger

than in its first place.}25

This itself explains thereason why intellect is notconfined to a

person's natural tendency. (As we see, aperson canunderstand and

comprehend26 concepts that run contrary to his natural tendency.) For

intellect (which corresponds toanimal life) is not — in arevealed

23. See themaamar entitled Vehaaretz Hoyisa, Sefer HaMaamarim 5568, Vol. I andVol. II; Toras

Chayim, Bereishis, p. 11dff.; the series ofmaamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, Vol. I ,

secs. 251-252; themaamar entitledLehavin Inyan Tainas HaMiragl im, 5715.

24. It is explained in severa sources that through a promnent expression of intellect (gadlos

hamochin), the nature of one's emotional characteristics are transformed (see Torah Or,

Hosafos, p. 107dff.; Derech Mitzvosecha, p. 84a;Or HaTorah, Mishpatim, p. 1134; themaamar

entitled BeYom HaShemini Atzeres, 6665; the series ofmaamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu,

5672, Vol. I l l , p. 1231ff., (where it isexplained that this results from apromnent

expression of Chochmah).

I n this context, note aso the adage, "The entire purpose ofChassidus is tochange

the nature of one's emotional characteristics" (seeKesser Shem Tov, sec. 24; Likkutei

Dibburim, Vol. I , p. 56a;Sefer HaMaamarim Kuntreisim, Vol. II,p. 321b). See aso the series

of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, Vol. I , the conclusion of sec. 258which

states that even thequalityof Chochmah "causes (only) aweakening [of thenatural

thrust] of the emotions. Nevertheless, the emotions asthey are in their essentia state

do not change."

25. As our Sages (Shmos Rabbah 44:1) statewith regard to avine: "When its owners desire

to improve it... they uproot itfrom itsnatural place, replant itelsewhere, and it is

improved." See asoBereishis Rabbah 15:1; Zohar, I I , 167(explained inOr HaTorah, Bereishis,

p. 45b ff.).

26. SeeTanya, ch. 5.



SHOFTIM 175

manner —connected to thesource of one's soul [to thesamedegree

as emotions are],27

{asanimal life in theworld at large does not

require a(constant) connection toits source}.

V I .

Basedon the above, we can understand the meaning of the verse: "Isa

man atree of afield?" A man is "atree of thefield" (asexplainedin

sec. 1)becausehis emotions,28

thedimension within himthat parallels

plant life, express (his source), theinner dimension of hissoul, in a

revealed manner.

For that reason, man's essential task inDivine service does(not

primarily involve intellectual challenges, butfundamentally,) the re¬

finement andpolishing of theemotions.29

For therefinement of the

emotions affects theinner dimensions of the soul. Therefore it isthis

Divine service that brings aperson tohis personal fulfillment. Indeed,

even aperson's intellectual fulfillment ("And you shall know...")30

is

accomplished through bringing about change within his emotions

("and you shall take ittoheart...").

For this reason,31

theTalmud explains theconcept of a person

being identifiedwith atree with theguidance: "I faTorah scholar is

befitting, 'From it, you shall eat.'" "Befitting" implies that theTorah

scholar possesses notonly thequalities of intellect (study), butalso

27. See theseries of maamarim entitledBeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, Vo l . I , loc. cit., which states

with regard toChochmah: "Chochmah is theexpression of theessence in anattribute

which isoutside theessence, while theemotions are therevelation of theessence."

[Trans. Note: Theimplication isthat although Chochmah is adistinct attribute, the

fundamental simplicity of theessence isrevealed within it. Nevertheless, since it is a

distinct attribute, itdoes notreveal theunique power of theessence. That finds

expression in the emotions.]

28. See theseriesofmaamarim entitledBeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, Vol. Ill,p. 1221: "In general,

a person can beidentified through his emotions, for 'aman is atreeof the field.'"

29. See thema a ma r entitledAl Totzar es Moab by the Mitteler Rebbe (Kehot 5736), p.6ff.;

Sefer HaMaamarim 5565, Vo l . I I , p.802ff., et al. Seeaso the ma a ma r entitledE i n HaKadosh

Baruch Hu Ba, 5685 (Sefer HaMaamarim Kuntreisim, Vol. I l l) , sec. 2; the maamar entitled

Vayisa Aharon, 5694 (Sefer HaMaamarim Kuntreisim, Vol. II), sec. 1;et al. See aso theadage

quoted in fn. 24.

30. Devarim 4:39.

31. Wi th regard to the ensuing concepts, see Likkutei Sichos, Vo l . I V , p. 1115ff.




that hisintellect affects hisemotions andcauses him to conduct

himself ina"befitting" manner.

From such aTorah scholar oneshould "eat," i.e., study, for "a

man is atree of thefield." When is onetruly human (and thus a

person from whom one would desire tolearn)? When one is atree,

i.e., when one's emotions are as they should be.32

V I I .

Just as the above applies with regard to every individual, it also applies

to the Jewish people as awhole. A ll of the Jews stem from thethree

Patriarchs: Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov, and areconstantly con¬

nected with thePatriarchs. On theverse:33

"From thepeaksof

boulders, I seehim," Rashi comments: " I gaze attheir heads, at the

beginning of their roots,34

and I seethem [i.e., theJewish people]

strongly based... becauseof the Patriarchs and the Matriarchs."

How is the connection between every Jew and the three

Patriarchs expressed? Not (asprominently) through thequality of

intellect, but through the quality ofemotion. As iswell known,35

the

three Patriarchs personify the three qualities of love, fear, and mercy

(which represent, in ageneral sense, thetotality of ouremotional

potential36

). They endow their descendants forall time with these

32. See the use of this expression in K e s u b o s 67awith regard to giving charity{which expresses

thequalityof kindness, the attribute that accompanies all other attributes— Likkutei Torah,

Devarim, p. 76b, (Pri Etz Chayim, S h a a r ChagHaSukkos, ch. 1; Meorei Or, Os Yud, 8 et al.}.

33. Bamidbar 23:9.

34. See Yeshayahu 27:6: " I t will come that Yaakovwill root...."

35. See Torah Or, the beginning of P a r s h a s Vaeira the maamar entitled Vaeira ( S e f e r

HaMaamarim 5562, loc. cit.) et al. See asoTanya, ch. 18ff.

36. See Tanya, ch. 3;* Torah Or, p. 1b; S e f e r HaMaamarim 5562, loc. cit., Or HaTorah, P a r s h a s

Behaaloscha, p. 321,Vayikra, Vol. I ll , p. 862.

Simlar concepts are explainedwith regard to the use of the termרדח as an acronym

for C h e s s e d (kindness), Din (judgment), andRachamim (mercy). (SeeMeorei Or,erech Cheder

8:7, commentary Yair Nasiv). Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p. 2d, Bamidbar, pp. 44a 71b; S e f e r

HaLikkutim, erech Cheder.

* Tanya , loc. c i t . , states: "The other emotional qualities areall branches ofawe and

love," [and itmentions only] theexpressions of kindness andseverity. {This

version ispresent inall texts of Tanya (Vol. I ).} The passage from Or HaTorah,

P a r s h a s Vay ik ra , cited above, however, states: "Netzach, Hod, and Y e s o d are branches



SHOFTIM 177

emotional qualities. Thus "within every person, at all times," there

exists an [emotional] counterpart of the Patriarchs.

The explanation [of this concept] is that an inheritance reflects a

connection with the essence of the person bestowing the inheritance

and his heir.37

Therefore, the inheritance that the Patriarchs endowed

their descendants is not very closely tied to their intellectual level and

their comprehension of G-dliness (for example, Avraham is identified

with "intellect that is hidden from all conception"38

[and few of us

sharethat degree of understanding]). For on a revealed level, intellect

does not have (such a powerful) connection with the essenceand the

inner dimension that is transferred through inheritance.

[What is our spiritual inheritance from the Patriarchs?] It is the

connection with their Divine service in the emotions: love, fear, and

mercy. For the nature of their emotions isassociatedwith the essence

of the soul.

V I I I .

Among the lessons that we can derive from the above: Every Jew's

source of vitality is the Torah, as we say,39

"They [the Torah's

of Chessed, Gevurah, and Tiferes... as stated in Tanya, ch. 3: 'The other emotional

qualities are al branches of awe and love.' [Tiferes is not mentioned, because Tanya,

loc. cit.] doesno more than explain that there are essentia elements and extensions

of the emotional qualities."

{Tanya, ch. 46 (p. 65b) states: "The 248 limbs are divided into three attributes:

right (identified with kindness), left (identified with severity), and the center

(identified with mercy). They are represented by the two arms and the trunk."

Simlar concepts are found in other sources. These sources (or at least most of

them), however, place the (primary) emphasis on the three vectors (but in each

vector, there is the fundamental thrust, its interrelation to the level above it, and its

interrelation to the level below it.)}

37. See Tzafnas Paneiach (Vol. I , Responsum 118, et al.) which explains that the heir is [a

continuation of] the existence of the person whose inheritance he receives.

38. Torah Or, the beginning of Parshas Lech Lecha.

I t can be said that even on the level where the Patriarchs are identified with

Chochmah, Binah, and Daas {see Or HaTorah, Parshas Lech Lecha (Vol. IV), p. 690b); see aso

Toras Chayim, Lech Lecha, p. 84dff., which explains that the Patriarchs represent the three

vectors Chochmah-Chessed-Netzach, Binah-Gevurah-Hod, and Daas-Tiferes-Yesod}, this refers to

their source and not to their fundamental thrust. This is not the place for discussion of

the matter.

39. [Evening service, daily liturgy.]





P A R S H A S

K I S A V O

Likkutei Sichos, V ol . X X X I V , p. 153ff.

I .

I n Sefer HaMitzvos , Rambam writes:

The eighth mitzvah with which we were commanded is to [en¬

deavor to] emulate Him, may He be exalted, according to our

potential, as it iswritten:1 "And you shall follow His ways."

This commandment is reiterated in the phraser2

"to follow all

His ways," which has been interpreted3

[as implying]: "Just as

the Ho ly One, blessed be He, is called compassionate, so,

too, you shall be compassionate. Just as the Ho ly One,

blessed be He, is called merciful, so, too, you shall bemerciful. Just as the Ho ly One, blessed be He, is called

generous, so, too, you shall be generous."

{The above concepts are taught by the Sifri.}4 This concept is

also echoed by another verse:5

"Follow after G-d, your L-rd ,"

which is interpreted6

to mean [that we should endeavor to]

emulate His positive actions and the noble character traits

with which theA-lmighty, may He be exalted, is described.

1. Devarim 28:9.

2. Ibid. 11:22. {Thephrase (ibid., 10:12): "to follow al His ways" refers to al the mitzvos

and is a commandment of a general nature as explained in fn. 19.}

3. By theSifri (Rambam, however, alters slightlythe wording of the S i f r i ) .

4. The statement included in brackets is found in the editions of Sefer HaMitzvos published

by Rabbi Heller and Rabbi Kapach. It is not included in the standard public text.

5. Devarim 13:5.

6. Sotah 14a

179





K i SAVO 181

"The ways of G-d are just," as implying that the entire Torah is "the

ways of G-d . "}1 7

R. Avraham,Ra mba m's son, continues, [offering a resolution to this

question]:

One of the fundamental principles of [our] faith... is that we

do not rely {only} on the apparent meaning and the simple

interpretation of a verse, {as is the approach of the Karaites}.

Instead, [werely on] the meaning indicated by theverse and

the Oral Tradition together....

Thus even though the simple meaning of theverse definitely

appears to be referring to all the mitzvos, we are nevertheless

obligated to believe that it refers to a particular mitzvah. For

the Oral Tradition interprets this [verse] as meaning, "Just as

He is called compassionate...." Thus according to theexplanation of the Oral Tradition, this is not a mitzvah of a

general nature.

I n the remainder of the responsum, [R. Avraham] explains that

the simple meaning of the verses also forces [us to accept this

interpretation], for:

After stating [in the beginning of the verse:]18

"When you will

keep the commandment of G-d," which includes the

observance of all the mitzvos, the verse continues: "And you

shall follow His ways." [This refers to a particular fiat] which

one mght think is not necessarily obligatory in the way that

the other mitzvos are obligatory. For "the commandment"

refers to [the observance of] deeds, while "follow[ing] G-d's

ways" refers to qualities dependent on our emotional

characteristics, as the Oral Tradition explains: "Just as He is

called compassionate...."

17. [Trans. Note: Thus the charge to follow G-d's ways appears to merely reiterate the

need to observe the mitzvos that have been commandedpreviously anddoesnot appear

to be an independent charge.]

18. Devarim 28:29.




To summarize: "follow[ing] His ways" contributes an added

dimension over a person's excellence in mitzvos as a whole.

Thus it has been explained that [this phrase] focuses on

something different from the mitzvos that are mentioned

previously.19

[I n synopsis:] "Follow[ing] His ways" is not a general

commandment, becauseaccording to the Oral Tradition,20

the verse is

not speaking about the observanceof all the mitzvos, but rather, those

"matters that are dependent on the emotional characteristics" of

compassion, mercy, and the like.

I I .

There is, however, room to question the matter: If the term "His

ways" mentioned in this verse refers to "qualities dependent on our

emotional characteristics," then there is no new dimension in this

mitzvah. For conducting oneself in a merciful and compassionate

manner is included in the mitzvah: 21 "Love your neighbor as yourself."22

19. This comes in addition to [another proof cited by R. Avraham] previously: "I f the

phrase... 'And you shal follow His ways' was a general commandment, the versewould

read: 'When youwill keep this entire commandment... to follow al of His ways,' as is

stated inverse10:12: 'Now, Israel, what doesG-d, your L-rd, ask of you?...'"

On the basis of [R. Avrahams] statements, we can appreciate why Rambam (and

similarly, the others who reckon the number of mitzvos) consider the verse "And you

shal follow His ways" the primary [source for themitzvah], and not the verse: "to follow

all His ways" (onwhich the Sifri comments). For " A n d you shal follow..." is a (greater)

indication of a commandment.

{One still mght ask: Why doesn't [Rambam] focus on the verse: "Follow after G-d,

your L -rd" (which is cited in Sotah, loc. cit.) as his primarysource? It can, however, be

explained that the verse can be interpreted as the Ramban does in his commentary to

the Torah.* [Hence, it is not a clear indication of this mitzvah.]}

* [There theRamban explains that this verse is acharge for the people to follow the

directives given themby the prophets.]

20. Nevertheless, the phrase "to follow al His paths" in Devarim 10:12 is a genera

command, as is the phrase (ibid. 5:30): " [ Y ou shal walk in] the entire path which G-d

your L -rd commanded" (which was cited in the question posed to R. Avraham) as

stated in the responsum

21. Vayikra 19:18.

22. [When stating themitzvah of emulating G-d's attributes] inHilchos Deos 1:6 (quoted later

in the sichah), Rambam explains this mitzvah as implying, "Just as He is calledholy, so,



K i SAVO 183

As Ra mba m writes:23

"Wewere commanded to show pity, mercy,

charity, and kindness, asimplied by the verse: 'Love your neighbor as

yourself.'" Thus [itwould appear that with the command to "follow in

His ways" — toborrow] Ra mba m's wording in General Principle4 —

"[G-d] did not command us toperform anything more than what we

had known already."

Simlar concepts arestated by Ra mba m with regard tovisitingthe

sick, comforting mourners, andburying thedead. {[These are] acts

that reflect G-d's attributes. Thus in tractate Sotah, 24

theverse: "Follow

after G-d, your L-rd ," is interpreted as meaning:

too, you shouldbeholy.* In this manner, theprophets described G-d with different

terms: patient, abounding in kindness, righteous, just, perfect, mghty, powerful,and

the like [with theintent that weemulate these traits]." Seemngly, some of these

qualities are not related to the mitzvah of loving one'sneighbor asoneself.** [And thus

the difficulty that the attributes we must seek to emulate are al included in the mitzvah

of brotherly love could be resolved.]

[This, however, is not so. For] the commandment to beholy isageneral command

(as explicitly stated inSefer HaMitzvos, General Principle 4). Similarly, theother

attributes mentioned there can aso be derivedfrom other mitzvos, and seemngly do not

require the commandment to "follow [His] paths."

See aso the Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 611) which interprets [the mitzvah of]

"follow[ing] His paths" [as follows]: "Wearecommanded toperformal our deeds in

an upright and positive manner... to relate to al the matters shared between usand our

colleagues in akind andmerciful manner," [thusreinforcing the question in the body of

the sichah]. (In "the laws governing themitzvah," however, [that text] aso cites matters

between man andG-d.) Similarly, Rambam in hisSefer HaMitzvos mentions onlythe

qualities of compassion, mercy, and generosity. Similarly, thepassagefrom Sotah, loc. cit.,

quoted later in the body of the sichah, speaksonly of deedsthat expresslovingkindness.

This is not the place for extensive discussion of this issue.

* Rambam's source isVayikra Rabbah (Parshas Kedoshim 24:4) see asoMidrash Tanchuma,

Parshas Kedoshim, sec. 2;Tanchuma, Buber ed. 2:4): "Just as I amholy, you shal be

holy." Similarly, Toras Kohanim, the beginning of Parshas Korach, speaksof emulating

the K ing (see theinterpretation ofKorban Aharon andothers). Seeaso Moreh

Nevuchim, Vol. I , ch. 54, [which speaks of this obligation] "asexplained in the

interpretation of [the charge] 'Beholy.'"

** In Moreh Nevuchim, loc. cit., itappears that theobligation to"emulate Himto the

extent of our capacities" applies with regard to al [His] ThirteenAttributes. [This

applies] even with regard to the attribute of "exacting retribution" which reatesto

punishment.

23. Sefer HaMitzvos, General Principle 9; seeaso negativemitzvah 302.

24. Loc. cit.




Emulate the attributes of the Ho ly One, blessed be He. Just

as He clothed the sick,... so [should] you.... The Ho ly One,

blessed be He, visited the sick;... so [should] you. The Ho lyOne, blessedbe He, comforted mourners;... so [should] you.

The Ho ly One, blessedbe He, buried the dead;... so [should]

you....}

[I n this context, Ra mba m states:]25

"Al l of theseactsand other simlar

onesare included in onemitzvah... 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'"

{Ra mba m does not mention these particulars in [this portion of]

Sefer HaMitzvos. 26 Nevertheless, he does state: "This concept is also

echoed by another verse: 'Follow after G-d, your L-rd. ' This was

interpreted {in the passage from Sotah cited} to mean [that we should

endeavor to] emulate His positive actions and His noble character

traits," indicating that Ra mba m maintains that these particulars are also

included in the mitzvah of "follow[ing] His ways."}27

I I I .

[I n resolution,] it is possible to explain that R. Avrahams intent in

stating that "the mitzvos refer to [the observance of] deeds, while

'follow[ing] G-d's ways' refers to qualities dependent on our

emotional characteristics" is that the mitzvah of "follow[ing] G-d's

ways" (does not refer to the performance of deeds of mercy, but

rather) on [developing such] feelings in our hearts.28

This is the new

dimension contributed by this mitzvah that we would not know from

other sources:

This, however, is not a sufficient explanation, because:

25. Sefer HaMitzvos , General Principle 2; see asoHilchos Avel 14:1.

26. In contrast to the Sefer Mitzvos Gadol, positivemitzvah 7, which quotes only the passage

from Sotah (and not that from theSifri). See the following footnote.

27. See the Hasagos of the Ramban to Sefer HaMitzvos , General Principle 1 (entry,

VehaTeshuvah hashilishis) which states: "[Rambam] follows thewording quoted in the Sifri,

whilethe author ofHalachos [Gedolos] follows thewording quoted in the Talmud."

28. [Trans. Note: I.e., not only should we performacts of love, we should fee lovewithin

our hearts.]



K i SAVO 185

a) The apparent meaning of Ra mba m's words (both in Sefer

HaMitzvos 29 and in theMishneh Torah 30) is that the commandment "Love

your neighbor as yourself" includes not only conducting oneself in a

brotherly manner towards one's fellow man,31

but aso loving him —

having such feelings in his heart.32

And when a person has feelings of

love in his heart, he will naturally be aroused to feelings of mercy33

and

the like to his colleague.

b) The expression "And you shall follow His ways" points to the

performance of deeds, i.e., one's actual conduct, not (only) to feelings

in one's heart. This is reflected in our Sages' words that speak about

clothing the naked, visiting the sick, and the like. Simlarly, the

conclusion of Ra mba m's statements in Sefer HaMitzvos articulates: "This

concept is also echoed by another verse... [that] was interpreted to

mean [that we should endeavor to] emulate His positive actions."

{A s explained in another source,34

it is possible to explain that

this is the difference between the two statements of our Sages that

address this issue: One states:35

"Follow after the attributes of the

Ho ly One, blessed be He." (This reflects the wording of the verses:

"Follow after G-d, your L-rd ," "Follow His paths," and "And to follow

all His paths.") The other states:36

"Cling to His ways" (reflecting the

29. Positivemitzvah 206, and similarly, in the listing of the commandments at the beginning

of the Mishneh Torah.

30. Hilchos Deos 6:3.

31. Such an interpretation is apparent from the statements of the Sefer Mitzvos Gadol,

positive mitzvah 9: " [Wi th regard to] the mitzvah of loving your neighbor as yourself:

The general principle is: 'What is distasteful to you, do not do to a colleague.'"

32. This is implied by theword "to love" used byRambam. See aso hiswording in negative

mitzvah 302.

33. This is aso indicated by the wording of Sefer HaMitzvos (positivemitzvah 206) where

Rambam speaks of "love and compassion." This concept is aso reflected in thewording

used byRambam in his General Principle 9 (citedabove).

34. SichosMotzaeiShabbosKodesh, Yud Shvat, 5734.

35. Sotah, loc. cit.

36. Rashi, commentary to Devarim 13:5. See asoRashi, Shabbos 133b, entry, havei domeh, which

speaksof "clinging to His ways." Similarly, theMeiri in hisChiburHaTeshuvah (Discourse

1, ch. 11) states: "Our Sages declared: 'Cling to His ways.'" Similarly, the Pnei Moshe,

gloss to the Talmud Yerushalmi, (Peah 1:5, entry Adameh lo) mentions, "As [our Sages]

interpretedthe verse (Devarim 11:22): 'To cling to Him.'"

See aso Or HaTorah by the Maggid of Mezritch commenting on Devarim, op. cit.:

"Our Sages sad: 'Is it possible to cling to Him....?' Instead, the intent is: cling to His




wording of the verses: "And to Him, cling" 3 7

and "And cling to

Him." ) 3 8

Following His ways and attributes implies conducting oneself in

actual practice according to the attributes of the Ho ly One, blessed

be He. Clinging to His attributes refers to [arousing] feelings in one's

heart. (This can be understood from the expression "clinging" which

indicates emotional arousal.)39

}

This is aso indicated byRa mba m's statements inMoreh Nevuchim:40

The ultimate fulfillment of man is to emulate Him according

to his potential {this reflects the commandment "And you

shall follow in His paths," as explained inSefer HaMitzvos}; i.e.,

to have our deeds resemble His deeds.... [As our Sages] say:

"Just as He is compassionate.... Just as He is merciful...."

As he emphasizes there at length, the ways of the Ho ly One,

blessed be He, are His attributes, "the description [of qualities that

would lead to] His deeds." [For] "He performs actions that resemble

the actions that we perform as a result of feeling, i.e., our character

traits. [The intent] is not, however, that He possesses character

traits."

This — Ra mba m maintains — is the ultimate perfection of human

conduct: "To performthese actions in the appropriate measureand in

relation to the appropriate people, not simply as a result of emotional

arousal.... A l l emotional arousal is undesirable."41

Note [Rambam's]

lengthy treatment of the subject there. [See aso sec. V I below.]

attributes." Such statements are aso echoed by Tanya, Iggeres H aKodesh, Epistle 15 (p.

123b). See aso the Sifri on the above verse which comments: "Study the Aggadah so

that... youwill cling to His attributes."

37. Devarim 13:5.

38. Ibid. 11:22.

39. As reflected in Bereishis 34:3: "And his soul clung to Dinah." Note the explanation in

Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XI V, p. 55ff.

40. V ol. I , the conclusion of ch. 54. (Our translation isbasedon Rav Kapach's text.)

41. In particular, this applies with regard to the quality of punishment (see the second

marginal note in fn. 22). {I n addition to the concept that the acts of mercy and

forgiveness must "excessively outweigh the acts of retribution" (Moreh Nevuchim, loc.

cit.),} the quality of punishment must be exercised without any feeling of anger, as

Moreh Nevuchim, loc. cit., states: "He is not angry, wrathful, or hateful towardhim." {In

contrast, acts of mercy must certainly be accompanied by feelings of mercy in one's



K i SAVO 187

I V .

Therefore it appears that the new dimension of the command to

"follow His ways" which we would not have known otherwise is

reflected in Ra mba m's own words: "To emulate Him, may He be

exalted, according to our potential." "Follow[ing] His ways" is not

merely a command that obligates us to conduct ourselves (with regard

to our behavior) in mercy, compassion, and the like, 4 2

but rather [a

command] to emulate Him according to our potential,43

i.e., that our

conduct in mercy and compassion should be carried out with the

intent and purpose of emulating the Creator. (Needless to say, as a

result, [these qualities] will also be expressed in the person's

conduct.)

Thus this mitzvah is one of the "duties of the heart." Implied is that

a person should conduct himself with mercy and compassion {not

(only) because his understanding obligates him to act in this manner

because these ways represent good and upright behavior, but also}

"to emulate Him." Since these ways are the ways of G-d, he should

[endeavor to] emulate Him. [This isalso reflected by] the wording of

our Sages: "Just as the Ho ly One, blessed be He, is called..., so, too,

you shall be...." For man's intention in following G-d's paths should be

to emulate His Creator.

{This does not contradict the above explanations that following

[G-d's] ways is not a command involving [only] the feeling in one's

heart, but rather it focuses on one's conduct and deeds. For this

explanation does not negate the importance of deed. (On the

contrary, it also emphasizes [deed], as stated above.) It underscores,

however, what the intent and the purpose of one's following [G-d's]

ways should be: to emulate Him. This is a concern of the heart and of

heart. These feeings must, however, [be controlled] so that they will not be in

opposition to conducting oneself "as appropriate," and thus will bring about the

desired benefit.}

42. As indicated by the understanding of theSeferHaChinuch (quoted in fn. 22 above).

43. This is reflected in our Sages' statement (Shabbos 133b; Talmud Yerushalmi, Peah, loc. cit.

Sofrim 3:13; Mechilta to Shmos 15:2): "Emulate Him. Just as He is compassionate and

merciful, so, too, you...."




a person's intent — that his following these paths of conduct should

be carried out becausethey are G-d's ways.}

This also explains why "follow[ing] His ways" is not a command

of a general nature. For the new dimension [it communicates] is the

intent in following theseways: "to emulate Him." 4 4

V .

According to the above, it is possible to explain that there is aso a

difference in the way one actually conducts oneself. As a preface, [let

us focus on] the manner in which Ra mba m explains the mitzvah of

"following [G-d's] ways" in his Mishneh Torah. At the beginning of

Hilchos Deos, Ra mba m explains45

at length that "The straight path is the

intermediate quality in each of the character traits that a person

possesses, the quality that is equidistant from both extremes." He

continues bringing examples: "One should not become angry except

because of troublesome matters over which it is appropriate to

become angry...; One should not desire anything except matters that

the body needs."

After explaining at length the intermediate quality of each

character trait, he continues:46

"We are commanded to follow these

intermediate paths. They are the good and just ways, as it is written:

'And you shall follow His paths.'"

I n the following halachah , Ra mba m continues:47

[Our Sages] taught the following interpretation of this mitzvah:

"Just as He is called compassionate, so, too, you shall be

compassionate. Just as He is called merciful, so, too, you shall

be merciful. Just as He is called holy, so, too, you shall be

holy."

44. Thus [the new dimension] is not because, [as R. Avraham, Rambam's son, explained,]

the commandment is confined to the emotions. {[ In this context,] see the conclusion

of sec. V I I , which explains why our Sages state that the verse refers only to the

emotions. See aso fn. 59.}

45. Hilchos Deos 1:4.

46. In the conclusion of Halachah 5. According to some versions of the Mishneh Torah, this

phrasemarks the beginning of Halachah 6 (see the printing of Sefer HaMada, Jerusalem

1924). Note aso the commentary of theMigdal Oz.

47. Halachah 6.



K i SAVO 189

For this reason, the prophets described the A-lmghty with all

these different adjectives:... To make known that these are

good and just paths in which a person must conduct himself

to emulate Him according to his potential."

I n the halachah that follows,48 Ra mba m explains how "a person

should train himself in these character traits... according to the

intermediate qualities." He then concludes: "Since the Creator is

called by these names, [compassionate, merciful, etc.,] and they

represent the mddle path that we are obligated to follow, this path is

called 'the way of G-d.'"

On the surface, the statements [in Hilchos Deos] are difficult to

comprehend, for Ra mba m includes two different and seemngly

unrelated points in [his explanation of] the commandment [to]

"follow His paths":

a) "the intermediate quality ineachof the character traits";

b) "the good and just paths..." in which "a person is obligated to

conduct himself..."; i.e., "the adjectives," [e.g., compassionate and

merciful,] "with which the prophets called the A-lmighty."49

Therefore we are forced to say that these [two seemngly different

positions] are in fact alike. When a person follows these "good and

just paths" in order to "emulate Him according to his potential," this

[endeavor] will obligate him to "follow these intermediate paths."

V I .

[The uniqueness of] the above can be understood based on the

passage from Moreh Nevuchim, loc. cit., which describes G-d's ways and

attributes as "the description [of qualities that would lead to] His

48. Halachah 7.

49. Similarly, theSefer HaChinuch mentions boththesedifferent points.

TheA lter Rebbe (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 156:3), by contrast, explains themitzvah of

"walk[ing] in His ways" [as follows]: "A person must emulate his Creator {i n al the

emotional qualities that he possesses}, to abhor the evil in those qualities and to

choose the good." He does not statethat we are obligated to follow the intermediate

paths. (In Law 2, however, he does statethat "one shouldfollow the mddle path, for it

isa good and just path.") This is not the place for further discussion of the matter.




deeds... actions which resemble the actions that weperform as a result

of emotional arousal and [our] character traits."

ThereRa mba m continues, explaining that:

I t is appropriate for the leader of a country... to emulatethese

attributes andperformtheseactions in the appropriatemeasure

and inrelation to the appropriate people, not simply as a result

of emotional arousal.... A ll emotional arousal is undesirable.

Illustratingby example, [Rambam continues]:

Therewill be times when hewill bemerciful and compassionate

to certain people. [He will act] not merely out of ordinary

feeling and generosity, but as is appropriate. And at times, he will

seek revenge and bear a grudge against some other people,

manifesting anger as is appropriate for themwithout feelings of

anger.... His purpose should be for thisactivity to produce thegreatest possible good for people at large.

A nd Ra mba m concludes:

The ultimatefulfillment of man is to emulate Him according

to his potential, i.e., to have our deeds resemble Hisdeeds.

The continuation of Ra mba m's statements clearly implies that his

[original] statement — that all of G-d's attributes are modes of

expression that do not result from emotional arousal — is not [merely

intended] to clarify that the concepts of emotional arousal and change

are not appropriate to mention with regard to the Creator. (As he

emphasizes there, [G-d's attributes are expressed] "withoutemotional

arousal or change.... They emanate from Him, blessed be He, without

bringing about any new quality extrinsic to Himself at all.") Instead,

[Rambam isexplaining] a further [concept that] relates to the nature of

the functioning of the emotions themselves.50 Becausetheseattributes

50. [Trans. Note: In other words, there are two points in Rambam's statements:

a) a theological construct. Man's emotions involve arousal. His feelings ebb and

flow becausehe is influenced by his environment. It is inappropriate to speak of such a

state of flux with regard to theA -l mighty, for, bydefinition, G-d cannot change.

b) abehavioral construct. Just as G-d exercises His attributes at will and by choice,

without being subject to emotional whims, so, too, we should control our feelings

rather than respond to them.]



K i SAVO 191

emanate from Himwithout emotional arousal, they are truly good and

just paths. For every attribute is expressed in an appropriate and

fitting manner.51

[O n this basis,] we can appreciate the sequence of Ra mba m's

statements. After he explains the nature of the functioning of the

Divine attributes, he states that it is fitting for man to conduct himself

in a simlar manner: "The ultimate fulfillment of man is to emulate

H i m according to his potential; i.e., to have our deeds resemble His

deeds.... [As our Sages] say: 'Just as He is compassionate.... Just as He

is merciful....'"

When a person emulates his Creator and controls [the expression

of] his attributes as G-d controls [the expression of] His attributes, as

it were, then man's attributes will be expressed in an appropriate

manner and will accomplish the objective desired for this particular

attribute.

On this basis, we can appreciate the connection between the two

concepts stated in theMishneh Torah: "the intermediate quality in each

of the character traits," and the commandment to "emulate G-d

according to his potential" by conductinghimself in the good and just

pathswhichreflect the adjectives used to describe theA-lmighty.

Generally, a person acts in an extreme manner (with regard to

each of his emotion attributes) [becausehe responds to] (emotional)

arousal which does not leave room for an opposite perspective. He

does not exercise his intellectual faculties to determne whether it is

appropriate to act in this manner or not. Hence, his conduct is

extreme.

When, however, a person expresses his emotions with the intent

of "emulating [G-d] according to his potential," he does not exercise

51. [Trans. Note: Our emotional attributes are fundamentally all positive qualities. The

benefit that can be elicited from them, however, depends on proper timing, i.e.,

knowing when to exercise which emotional quality. Man reacts to his surrounding

environment and often becomes emotionally excited. This prevents himfrom thinking

clearly and knowing which emotional attribute to exercise at which time. It is, by

contrast, totally inappropriate to speak of G-d as becomng emotionally aroused, for

He never changes. Instead, His emotional attributes are expressed onlywhen they are

called for. Man should emulate his Creator and express his own emotions in asimlar

manner.]




his emotions (only) asaresult of emotional arousal. Instead, his intent

istoreflect the true [positive dimension of] theseemotional attributes

(as they areexpressed byG-d). [Accordingly,] hewill expressthe

intermediate quality in each emotional attribute, manifesting each—

asR a m b a m states inM o r e h N e v u c h i m — "as isappropriate." Therefore,

"There will betimes when hewill bemerciful.... Andattimes, [he will

seek revenge...] against others."

V I I .

Based on theabove explanation that the newdimension of the

commandment to"follow His ways" is to"emulate [Him]. . . according

to [our] potential," it ispossible toexplain thechoice oftheverb

והלכת , which is translated as"fol low." 5 2

יכה הל [means "progress" or"going." Inthemost complete sense,]

i t refers toascending from level tolevel (asreflected in theverse:53

"They shall proceed from strength tostrength.") Primarily, itrefersto

an ascent to arung that isincomparably higher than one's previous

rung.

{From this reason, theangels arereferred to as "thesewho

stand," asin theverse:54 " I shall grant you progress among thesewho

stand." [They arereferred to inthis manner] "because throughout

their existence, they remain on one level."55

On thesurface, this requires explanation: Inseveral sources it is

explained that the angelsarecontinually ascending from level tolevel.

Their [progress] is reflected intheir song.56

Why then are they

described as"remaining on one level"?

52. Significantly, inHilchos D e o s , at the conclusion of ch. 1, Rambam cites B e r e i s h i s 18:19

[which usesa different verb,] stating: "And they shall keepthe way of G-d."

53. Tehi l l im 84:8. See theconclusion ofB e r a c h o s [which cites this verse as aprooftext,

reflecting how the righteous] "haveno rest."

54. Zechariah 3:7.

55. Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 38d; see aso the first maamar inP a r s h a s Bechukosai and severa

other sources.

56. [Trans. Note: The angels aredescribed assinging G-d's praises. These songs reflect

their pattern of ascent within the spiritual worlds.]



K i SAVO 193

In resolution it is explained57

that all of the ascentsexperienced by

the angels are gradual, i.e., they ascend to a level that is relative and

comparable to their previous rung. As such, even though they

"proceed from strength to strength," they have not left their initial

rung entirely. (For even the highest rung they attain has a connection

to the lowest rung [at which they started].) Hence, they are

considered as remaining on one level for their entire existence.}

This is the (inner) interpretation of "following His ways": that the

two implications of the verse יכה — ",, "progress," and "His waysהל

[the emulation of G-d] — are dependent on each other. When is it

possible for a person to "emulate [G-d] according to his potential,"

"[following] (G-d's) ways?" When he progresses, ascending from level

to level, each rung incomparably higher than the previous.

I t is human nature for [the expression of] a person's emotional

attributes to stem from the arousal of feelings in his heart. For his

emotional expression to be in emulation of G-d's qualities, he must l ift

himself above his natural emotional tendencies, proceeding [to higher

rungs] until he [acts in a manner] comparable to his Creator.

On this basis, we can understand our Sages' emphasis that the

"ways" mentioned in theverserefer to the emotional attributes (and not

to the mi tzvos which are deeds), although there are several sources that

refer to all the mitzvos as G-d's ways.58

A person's actions are limited. His

emotional attributes, by contrast, are "the characteristics of his soul (i.e.,

spiritual [qualities]) and can be considered unlimted when compared

with hisdeeds. Therefore our Sages interpret the phrase "And you shall

follow His paths" which speaks of הכי , incomparableהל progress and

ascent, as referring to "qualities dependent on our emotional

characteristics."59

For primarily, the ascent that a person can make from

level to level (and even anascent that reflects progresswhich transcends

57. See the maamar entitled T z e e n a U'Re'ena,5660, e t al.

58. See thesourcescited in sec. I ; note also fn. 20.

59. This could also be the intent of the conclusion of the statements of Rav Avraham,

Rambam's son: "Included in this is a concept whose comprehension is far removed at the

outset.... Understand this, because it is a refined concept." [This can be interpreted as]

alluding to the idea that יכה לה, progress, is relevant only with regard to our emotional

characteristics.




all previous levels) isrelevant with regard tohis emotional attributes

(and not with regard to hisdeeds, for his deedsare limited).

V I I I .

A deeper interpretation of "follow[ing] His ways" can be offered (based

on the teachings of Chass idus) : Every Jew'ssoul is "an actual part of G-d

from Above."60

From this itcan beunderstood that thesoul itself is

utterly unbounded. It isonly that itsmanifestation in thebody is

limited. From this it isunderstood that when aperson isarousedto

Divine service from the essenceof his soul, this lifts him up and brings

about anunlimitedascent. In simple terms, hehas such anunbounded

degreeof vitality in his Divine service that [he is motivated to a level of]

self-sacrifice (that transcendsthe limits of intellect).

This isthe intent of the command to"follow His paths," i.e., "to

emulate Him... according to our potential." Aperson's Divine service

in his observanceof the Torah and its mitzvos (which are all called "His

ways," asabove) should be characterized by הכי -, incomparable proהל

gress,61

[extending] beyond all limtations. [This ispossible when] a

person arousesandrevealstheessenceof his soul, which is an actual part of

G-d. In this way he"emulatesHis Creator" "according to [his] potential."62

(Adapted from the S i c h o s of S h a b b o s P a r s h a s Vayechi, 5741)

60. Tanya, ch. 2.

61. It can beexplained [that these two different interpretations] reflect thedifference

between therevealed dimension ofthe Torah [asexpressed by Torah law] and the

inner dimension of the Torah [as expressed by Chass idus ] . The revealed dimension of

the Torah "has ameasure (although its measureexceeds the earth; lyov 11:9)," while

the inner dimension of the Torah "has no measurewhatsoever.... It isactually Ein Sof "

(O r HaTorah, Chanukah, p. 310a; S e f e r HaMaamarim, Vol. II, p. 470a). Therefore, according

to the revealed dimension of the Torah (which has ameasure) "following His ways"

([which demands] unlimted progress) refers to"qualities dependent on our emotional

characteristics" (asexplained in sec.V I I ). According to theapproach of pnimiyus

haTorah (which has nomeasure), every individual mitzvah can beobserved with the

unlimted vitality (of the essence of the soul). [According tothat understanding,] the

verse"follow His ways" can be interpretedsimply as referring to all of the mitzvos.

62. See the passage from the Biure i HaZohar (cited in fn. 15) which explains that the Torah

and its mitzvos are referred to as"the ways of G-d" because they are pathways todraw

down the revelation of Or Ein Sof , G-d's infinite light. Itis possible toexplain that for

the mitzvos to bepathways todraw down Or Ein Sof (an infinite quality), man's Divine

service must involveהכ י ל ה in His ways, progresswithout limitation.



P A R S H A S

N I T Z A V I M1

Likkutei Sichos, V ol . X X X I V , p. 173ff.

I .

"For thismitzvah which I command you today is not wondrous... nor is

it distant. It is not in heaven... nor is it across the sea.... Rather, the

matter is very close to you, in your mouth and in your heart to do it." 2

According to the simple meaning of the verse, it is

understandable that the concept that "the matter is very close to you"

is a new idea. For it is possible (even from a Torah perspective) to

think that the Torah and its mitzvos3 are wondrous and distant.

[Therefore] theversecomes to teach us a new idea; that "the matter is

very close to you."

The fundamental new [dimension of] the concept relates to the

words "in your heart." As the Alter Rebbe writes in Tanya:4 "On the

surface, it... runs contrary to our natural tendency.... For the matter is

not close [to a person] to truly transform his heart from the desiresof

1. And aso Chai Elul, the birthday of "the two great lumnaries, the Baa ShemTov {5458

(1698)}and theAlter Rebbe {5505 (1745)}."

2. Devarim 30:11-14.

3. See the commentaries to the verse (Ramban, Kli Yakar, and others) who offer two

interpretations of "thismitzvah": that it refers to the entire Torah or that it refers to the

mitzvah of teshuvah whichwas mentioned before that.

The commentary of the Abarbanel — after first explaining that theverseis referring

to teshuvah — states: "Nevertheless, Devarim Rabbah (8:7*) explains that 'this mitzvah

refers to the totality of the Torah." See Likkutei Torah, Devarim, p. 45b ff.; the maamarim of

theMitteler Rebbe, Parshas Nitzavim, p. 777ff., et al.

* See aso 8:2ff.; Midrash Lekach Tovon the verse.

4. Ch. 17.

195




this world to the love of G-d. As the Talmud states:5

'Is fear a small

matter?' How much more so does this applywith regard to love!"

This is the new dimension taught by the verse, that the matter is

"very close" even to our hearts. As explained at length in Tanya,6 it is

"very close" for every person7

to reach the love of G-d, for there is a

natural love of G-d hidden in the heart of all Jewswhich is "an inheri¬

tance from our ancestors." Accordingly, it is not necessary for a

person to generate and initiate new feelings of love for G-d in his

heart. A l l that is necessary is that he reveal the love that exists inher¬

ently.

This, however, is an insufficient explanation. For it is difficult to

say that the primary new insight taught by the verse applies only to

"your heart," since the verse aso mentions "your mouth" and "to do

it." Implied is that theverseaso contributes a new insightwith regard

to our speech and actions. Indeed, the fact that the verse mentions

"your mouth" before "your heart"8

indicates that there is a new

dimension (not only with regard to "in your heart"), but aso with

regard to " in your mouth" and "to do it."

I I .

I t is possible to say that [the following] is the core of the explanation:

O n the title page9

of the Tanya, the Alter Rebbe writes that it is

"based on the verse: 'Rather the matter is very close to you, in your

mouth and in your heart to do it,' to thoroughly explain how it is very

close through along, short path, with G-d's help."

5. Berachos 33b.

6. Fromch. 18ff.

7. Tanya, ch. 18, explains that this applies aso to one "whose comprehension of the

knowledge of G-d is limited, nor does he have the emotional potential to understand

the greatness of G-d's infinity to the extent that itgenerates fear and love, even merely

in hismndand in the subtlereachesof his thought" (as explained in Tanya, chs. 16 and

17). See aso fn. 10.

8. See aso the commentary of theAlshich.

9. The title pagewas aso composed by theA lter Rebbe.



N I T Z A V I M 197

I t is possible to explain that theAlter Rebbe is not speaking about

two paths — a long path and a short path10

— but rather one path

that is both long and short.

We find this expression — ("a long, short path") — in a story

related by our Sages:11

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Channanya said:... "Once I was walking

on a path and I saw a child sitting at a fork. I asked him:

'Whichway should I take to proceed to the city?'

"He told me: 'This path is short, but long. This path is long,

but short.'12

" I went on the path that was short, but long. When I reached

the city, I saw that it was surrounded by gardensand orchards

[through which I could not pass]. I retraced my way and told

him: 'My son, you said it was short.'

"He answered: 'Didn't I [also] say that it was long?'"

Thus [by using thiswording, the Alter Rebbe implies] that Divine

service "in your mouth and in your heart to do it," is a long path. (As

Tanya explains at length, [the mode of Divine service] to reach the

love of G-d that will motivate a person to actual deed: "to do it" [is

10. There are those who explain that indeed this is theA lter Rebbe's intent: that the Tanya

speaks of two paths: one [dependent on] the love and fear that comes as a result of

meditation, as explained in chs. 16-17, and another that is dependent on the person

arousingwithin himself his natural, [inherent] love for the one G-d, as explained in ch.

18ff.

The first path is "long," because the love comes from and is generated by man's

Divine service through meditation on the greatness of G-d. [Meditating] in a manner

that will generatelove and fear in aperson's heart (or even in his mnd) is dependent

on labor [over] an extended time.

The second path, [by contrast,] is short, because [itdoesnot require] the person to

generate love and fear of G-d in his heart. Instead, he merely remembers and arouses

the hidden love that inherently exists within the hearts of al Jews. See aso Likkutei

Sichos, V ol . X X X I V , p. 172.

Nevertheless, it appearsmore likely that the A lter Rebbe's intent is to refer to our

Sages' expression "a long, short path," as above. On this basis, it appears that al the

paths inTanya follow themotif of "along, short path."

11. Eruvin 53b; Eichah Rabbah 1:19, using slightly different wording.

12. Eichah Rabbah, loc. cit., uses the expression: "This is close, but distant; this is distant, but

close."




very involved]). I t is,however, also a"short path," since through it a

person can reach "the city of our G-d"13

without obstacles and

impediments.

To explain: There is an inherent, natural love [forG-d] in the

heart of all Jews, and it is"very close," [i.e., easy,] to arouseand reveal

this love that exists within one's heart. Nevertheless, since innately

this love ishidden, much work andlabor isrequired forthis loveto

permeate theperson's entire being (until [it affects] "your mouth... to

do it") .

Unt i l this lovehaspenetrated theentire existence of aperson, he

is "distant" from theTorah and itsmitzvos, 14 for there areobstacles and

impediments [in his way].Torefer back to theanalogy, in "theshort,

long path," theactual distance onetravels ismnimal. Nevertheless,

with regard to reaching thedestination — entering the city — it is

"long." For even though he isable tocome very near to thecity, there

are obstaclespreventing his entrance.

When [aperson's Divine service] also reaches "his mouth... to do

it," it is a"long, short path." Forthere will be no obstacles and im¬

pediments preventing him from entering "the city of our G-d."

13. Cf. Tehillim 48:2.

14. [It istrue that] "at any moment and at al times, it iswithin aperson's capacityand

potential to remove thespirit of folly and forgetfulness from his mdst and recall and

arousehis love for G-d" (Tanya, ch. 25). [Thusheawayshas thepotential not tosin.]

Nevertheless, this isonly apotential. [It is not"close to him."On thecontrary,] even

after herecalls andarouses hislove forG-d to conquer the yetzer hara with regard to

"turn[ing] away from evil and do[ing] good" (cf. Tehillim 34:15), this has not become

the natural tendency of hissoul, andafterwards, hemust [agan] arouse his loveto

conquerhisyetzer hara. See Kuntreis HaAvodah, ch. 5 (p. 33).

The conclusion of ch. 25states:

Becausethe observance of the Torah and itsmitzvos is dependent on this— thatone

aways remember theconcept of sacrificing one's life forG-d for thesakeofHis

unity, that this beestablished at al times within hisheart, during theday andthe

night. I t should not depart from his memory.

I t ispossible to explain that this represents ahigh level in therevelation of our

hidden love [for G-d]; that it hasalready become one's natural tendency. Clarification

isstill necessary.

Wi th regard to thegeneral concept of thelevels of hidden love and the Divine

service of man required to reveal it, see Sefer HaArachim Chabad, Vol. I , erech Ahavah

Mesuteres.



N I T Z A V I M 199

Therefore, it is only then that he is "close" to the observance of the

Torah and itsmitzvos.

I I I .

I t iswell known that our love of G-d is dependent on our knowledge

of Him. AsRa mba m states:15

"One loves G-d solely as an outgrowth of

the knowledge with which he knows Him. The love will be

proportionate to the knowledge: if meager, meager, if abundant,

abundant."16

Accordingly, we can conclude that parallels to the concepts men¬

tioned above with regard to [Divine service] " in your heart" exist within

the realm of the knowledge of G-d. [I n particular it was stated that:]

a) The essential love [of G-d] is very close to every person. For

every Jew possessesa natural love for G-d.

b) Nevertheless, labor is required to reveal this love and draw it

down within all the particular dimensions of a person's potentials

including actual deed ("in your mouth... to do it") .

c) [O n l y after such labor] is a person "close" to the Torah and its

mitzvos, [having traveled] "the long, short path." For although it is

long, in that it requires effort, it is short, becausehe enters "the city of

our G-d" without any impediments or obstacles.

This concept can be clarified by first explaining the idea that the

knowledge of G-dcomeseither through simple faith or as an intellectual

imperative, [spurred by] man's understanding, through rational

deduction. Each of thesepathshas an advantageover the other.

The "truth of His (G-d's) being"17

is beyond the capacity of a

created being to comprehend. AsRa mba m writes:18

"It is not within the

capacity of the knowledge of a l iving man who is a composite of body

and soul to appreciate the truth of this matter completely." Instead,

one believes in "the truth of His being."

15. Mishneh Torah, the conclusion of Hilchos Teshuvah.

16. See alsoRambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 2:2: "What is the path [that brings

one] to the love and fear of Him? When one meditates...," [i.e., through knowledge

and thought].

17. This expression isemployedby Rambam at the beginning of Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah.

18. Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 1:10.




This represents theadvantage of faith over intellectual research.

Through faith, we canrelate to "thetruth of Hisbeing." Through

mortal intellect, bycontrast, [we] cangrasp only alimited dimension

of theknowledge of theCreator, [knowing Hi monly] "accordingto

the potential possessed by man to comprehend and understand."19

This isnot "the truth of His being" as it is.

Nevertheless, since the knowledge [of G-d] comes as an

intellectual imperativeand [as aresult ofone's own logical] research,

it has amore internalized effect. For itstems from theperson's own

thought andsef, as it were. Faith, by contrast, (stems from the

oneness ofG-d that shines within one's soul). [Hence,] it canhave

[merely] anencompassing effect on theperson20

[without penetrating

his thought processes]. Inthat vein, ourSages comment:21

"Before

breaking in, athief calls out toG-d." For although the thief believes in

G-d andtherefore prays toHi mforsuccess in histheft, atthat very

moment, he isacting against G-d's commandment.

I V .

I t is possible to explain that [theabove reflects] the crux of a

difference ofopinion between Ra mba m andRaavad. Ra mba m maintains

that the fundamental dimension of theknowledge of G-d is the

knowledge that stems from intellectual research, while according to

Raavad, theconcept of faith [receives primacy].

On Ra mba m's statement:22

"Avraham was forty years old when he

recognized his Creator," Raavad comments: "There is an Aggadic

teaching23

that [herecognized G-d] at agethree. [This isalludedto

19. Hilchos Teshuvah, loc. cit. There Rambam concludes: "as we explained in Hilchos Yesodei

HaTorah. "

20. [Trans. Note: The termmakkif means "surrounding"or"encompassing." In Chassidus, it

isused as theantonymtopnimi, "inner." Pnimiyus refers topowers and potentials thata

person can control with hismnd and feelings. Makkif , by contrast, refers topowers and

potentials that transcend aperson's conscious grasp and affect himinamanner thathe

cannot control.]

21. Berachos 63aaccording to theversion of theE in Yaakov. See thecomments of Dikdukei

Sofrim.

22. Mishneh Torah, Hilchos AvodasKochavim 1:3.

23. Nedarim 32a;Bereishis Rabbah 64:4, et al.



N I T Z A V I M 201

by] the verse:24 "Because Avrahamheeded (עקב) M y voice," [i.e., he

heeded M y voice for the number of years (172)] numerically

equivalent to25

עקב.

I t is possible to explain that Ram bam cites the teaching "Avraham

was forty years old when he recognized his Creator," because

according to his approach, one's fundamental recognition of the

Creator comes when it is inspired by his intellect. Simlarly,

Avrahams recognition of his Creator refers to his perception that

stemmed from "his proper understanding."26

{A s Ram bam elaborates there:

He began contemplating with his mind while he was young.27

He would think during the day and at night and would

wonder: "How is it possible for the [heavenly] sphere to

continue to revolve without having anyone control it? Who is

causing it to revolve?..." He did not have a teacher or an

instructor.... His heart would contemplate and comprehend

until (at age forty) he grasped the path of truth and

understood the path of righteousness through his proper

understanding, gaining the knowledge that there is one G-d

and He controls the sphere.}

Therefore (in [his] Mishneh To rah ) Ram bam cites the view that

"Avrahamwas forty years old when he recognized his Creator." For

"at forty, one attains understanding."28

According to Raavad, by

contrast, the fundamental knowledge of the Creator possessed by

24. B e r e i s h i s 26:5.

25. [Trans. Note: Avrahaml ived 175 years. Thus if he served G-d for 172years as alluded

to by theword ,עקב he first recognized Himat age three.]

26. [M i shneh Torah , loc . cit.]Thepreciseness of Rambam's intent [is evident from his choice of

wording]. For many verses and statements of our Sagespoint to Avrahams high level

of faith in G-d, as it iswritten: ( B e r e i s h i s 15:6): "And he believed in G-d." Similarly, the

Mechi l ta (Beshalach 14:31) states: "Avrahamacquired thisworld and theW orl d to Come

as an inheritance solely in the merit of the faith with which he believed in G-d." He is

called "the foremost of all men of faith." See S h m o s Rabbah 23:5 (and the commentary of

R. Zev Einhorn); S h i r HaShirim Rabbah 4:2 (2), e t al.

27. See Ha gahos M a imon ios , loc . cit.:1,2; K e s s e j M i s h n e h , loc . c i t . See the discussion of this issuein

Likkutei S i c h o s , Vol. XX, p. 14ff. and p. 19ff.

28. A v o s 5:22.




Avrahamcamethrough faith that stemmed from revelation from G-d.

Therefore he cites [the teaching that Avraham] was three. Plainly, at

age three, one is incapable of recognizing one's Creator withunderstanding and completeawareness.

We find simlar concepts with regard to Moshe our teacher.

Ra mba m writes:29

What was the objective Moshe our teacher desired to achieve

when he asked:30 "Pleaseshow meYour glory"?

He desired to know the truth of the being of the Ho ly One,

blessed be He, until hewouldknow itwithin his heart like the

knowledge of a person whomhe has seen and whose image is

engraved within his heart. Thus in his knowledge, that person

isdistinctfrom others.

Simlarly, Moshe our teacher sought that the existence of the

Ho ly One, blessed be He, should be distinct in his heart from

other existences until he would know the truth of His

existence as it exists [for itself].3 1

The Ho ly One, blessed be

He, replied that it is not within the intellectual capacity of a

l iving man who is a composite of body and soul to appreciate

the truth of this matter completely.

TheKessef Mishneh quotes Raavad's dispute of that statement:

This is not satisfactory in my opinion. For at Sinai, for the

forty days [he spent on the mountain, after which he

received] the tablets, he saw what no other prophet ever saw

to the extent that the angels were envious of him and sought

to push him away until he [was able to] grasp [G-d's] throne.

What more was necessary?

On the surface, the difference between the views [ofRa mba m and

Raavad] revolves around the question: What is the consummate level

of knowledge of G-d that a person should [endeavor to] reach? Is it

29. Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 1:10.

30. Shmos 33:18.

31. [Trans. Note: I.e., G-dliness, not as viewed in relation to man — or even to spiritual

beings — but as He exists independent of them.]



N I T Z A V I M 203

knowledge that comes through intellectual comprehension or knowl¬

edge that comes through faith (which cannot be attained through

comprehension, but which is granted from Above)? According to

Raavad, the consummate perfection of Moshe's comprehension was at

the Giving of the Torah — what he saw at Sinai, i.e., a revelation from

Above. According to Rambam, fundamentally, the consummate perfec¬

tion of knowledge is what one understands and graspsintellectually.

Therefore Moshe was not content with what he saw at Sinai, but in¬

stead sought [further] knowledge and comprehension.32

V .

I t is possible to explain that Rambam's approach (in the Mishneh Torah)33

does not follow (only) the perspective that favors intellectual

research, but instead, represents an intermediateview.

[To explain:] In H i l c h o s T e s h u v a h ,34

R a m b a m explains the foundation

of free choice: "License is granted to every person. If he desires to

direct himself toward a good path and be righteous, he has the

potential. If he desires to direct himself toward an evil path and be

wicked, he has the potential." He elaborates on the explanation of the

32. This difference in perspective is also underscored by the difference of opinion between

R a m b a m and Raavad at the conclusion of H i l c h o s T e s h u v a h , which brings to a close Th e B o o k

of Know ledge. [ThereRambam speaks of being "obsessed" .(ישגה) Raavad states: " I do not

knowwhat hemeanswhen using the term 'obsession.'"]

33. W i th regard to his text Moreh Nevuch im, see his statements in the introduction to that

text. See also the letter of Rambam to his student, R. Yosef, that is printed in that text

before the introduction.* See alsoLikkutei S i c h o s , Vol . X X V I , (p. 39, [in particular,] note

119).** This is not the place for further discussion of the matter.

The fact that Rambam doesnot cite "[logical] research and evaluation" in his Mishneh

Torah (see R o s h Amanah by the Abarbanel, ch. 17) as he does in Moreh Nevuchim indicates

that, from the perspective of halachah, he does not see these as included in the

obligation of the mitzvah to know G-d. See also S e f e r H a S i c h o s 5748 (V ol. I , pp. 206-207,

fn. 22).

[* In these sources, Rambam explains that he composed Moreh Nevuch im to resolve

questions of faith that mght arise in the mnd of abelieving person who was also

exposed to philosophic reasoning.]

[** There the Rebbe explains that even though Rambam's approach appears to run

contrary to that of C h a s s i d u s , the two can be resolved.]

34. Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Teshuvah 5:1.



204 A K NOWING HEART

concept and the necessity [to accept] this principle. At the conclusion

of the chapter,35

he states:

Lest one ask: Behold, the Ho ly One, blessed be He, knows

everything that will occur. Does He know — before it

transpires — that this person will be righteous or does He

not know? If He knows that hewill be righteous, [seemngly,]

it is impossible that he will not be righteous. If, [conversely,]

you say that even though He knows that he will be righteous,

it is possible that hewould be wicked, His knowledge would

be incomplete.

Know that the resolution of this matter [can be described

with the verse]:36

"Its measure is longer than the earth and

broader than the sea." Many great and fundamental principles

and lofty concepts are dependent on it. However, thestatementsthat I make must be known and understood:

We already explained... that the Ho ly One, blessed be He,

does not know with knowledge that is external [to Him] as

do men whose selves and knowledge are two [separate

entities]. Instead, He, may His name be praised, and His

knowledge are one. The knowledge of a mortal cannot

comprehend this concept in its entirety.

Just as it is impossible for a mortal to comprehend and grasp

the truth of the Creator's [being], as it iswritten:37

"No man

will see Me and live," so, too, it is beyond man's potential to

comprehend and grasp the Creator's knowledge. This is [the

intent] of the prophet's statements:38

"My thoughts are not

your thoughts, nor your ways, My ways."

Accordingly, we do not possess the potential to conceive

how the Ho ly One, blessed be He, knows all the creations

and their deeds. Nevertheless, we do know without doubt

35. Ibid. :5.

36. Cf. Iyov 11:9.

37. Shmos 33:20.

38. Yeshayahu 55:8.



N I T Z A V I M 205

that a mortal's deeds are in his [own] hands. The Ho ly One,

blessedbe He, does not lead him [in a particular direction] or

decreethat he perform any given act.

This matter is known, not only because of the tradition of

faith, but through clear proofs from the words of wisdom.

Raavad objects to Ra mba m's statements, stating:

This author did not conduct himself according to the manner

of the wise. For a person should not initiate [the discussionof] a matter without knowing how to complete it. [Here,] he

began by asking questions and yet left the matter unresolved,

[forcing one] to return to faith. Itwouldhave been preferable

to leave the matter as accepted by the simple faith of the

believers.

Although there is no ultimate resolution of this matter, it is

desirable to support him with a partial resolution, saying:

Were man's righteousness or wickedness dependent on the

Creator's decree, i.e., His knowledge being His decree, we

would have a very severe difficulty. Now, however, the

Creator has removed this dominion from His hand and given

it to man himself. [Accordingly,] His knowledge is not a

decree, but resembles the knowledge of the astrologers who

deduce from [their appreciation of] a given power what the

courseof [aperson'sconduct will be].

I t is possible to explain Ra mba m's position as follows: Intellectual

research should not be confined only to those matters that can be

thoroughly comprehended. Instead, even with regard to matters that

"we do not possess the potential to conceive," there is an obligation

to labor to comprehend this very idea: that the concept surpasses our

understanding.

This reflects the difference of opinion between Ra mba m and

Raavad. Raavadalso writes that "it is desirable to support himwith a

partial resolution." Nevertheless, according to Raavad, the "simple

faith of the believers" and intellectual comprehension are two matters

that should not be combined. Faith is a matter that is above aperson's




intellect, that [stems instead] from the nature of a Jew. Intellect, by

contrast, is connected with a person's mortal existence and thinking

powers. Accordingly, the "partial resolution" that Raavad offers is a

matter which can be assimlated by mortal logic.39 Wi t h regard to

matters that require faith, however, it is improper to mix in any

intellectual conception.

According to Ra mba m, the obligation to labor to recognize, know,

and comprehend [spiritual concepts] does not apply only to those

concepts that a person is able to grasp intellectually, but also to those

matters that surpasshis intellectual comprehension and ordinary logic

and understanding. Even such matters must be established and

affirmed within his mnd. Therefore even with regard to the

knowledge of the Ho ly One, blessed be He, of which he writes: "It is

beyond man's potential to comprehend and grasp the Creator's

knowledge..." and "We do not possess the potential to conceive how

the Ho ly One, blessed be He, knows," Ra mba m states that the matter

"must be known and understood." In this manner, a person will

understand that G-d's knowledge does not represent a contradiction

to man's choice.

O n this basis, it is possible to say that the above can serve as an

explanation of the two expressions that (according to some

interpretations) Ra mba m uses with regard to the first mitzvah, [i.e., the

mitzvah to recognize G-d]. In Sefer HaMitzvos,40 Rambam describes [the

first mitzvah] as a mitzvah to believe, while in the Mishneh Torah,41 he

speaks of [the same mitzvah in terms of] "know[ing]." [Both

approaches are necessary.] The foundation of the matter must be

faith. For the "truth of His (G-d's) being" cannot be grasped

intellectually in its entirety; but instead, must be perceived through

39. Although he concludes: "A l l this is not worthwhile," [his intent] is that the resolution

itself [is not entirelyworthwhile]. [He is not rejecting it] becausethe subject surpasses

mortal comprehension.

40. Positivemitzvah 1, according to the standard translation. See the sources cited in Likkutei

Sichos, Vol. X X V I , pp. 114-115, notes 10, 13, [which mention the views of other

scholars who note that Sefer HaMitzvos was written in Arabic, and that the proper

translation of thetermRambam usesthere is "to know" and not "to believe."]

41. Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 1:1 and at the beginning of the listing of the mitzvos in the

opening of the Mishneh Torah.



N I T Z A V I M 207

faith. Conversely, however, in this realm itself, knowledge is

necessary. Man must meditate to the [full] extent of his intellectual

capacity to understand and know even those dimensions [of

G-dliness] that are above [the scope] which must be presumed as an

intellectual imperative.42

This is aso Ra mba m's appreciation of Moshe's request cited above

[sec. I V ] :4 3

"He desired to know the truth of the being of the Ho ly

One, blessed be He,... He, blessed be He, made known to Moshe

matters that were not known by any man previously... until he was

able to conceive [a dimension of] the truth of His being." [This

perception] was perceived conceptually, i.e., it was not merelyseen or

believed, but entered Moshe's comprehension. This came after

Moshe's request to know G-d's truth.44

V I .

O n this basis, it appears that the two approaches to the love [of G-d]

described above [sec. I I ,] aso have parallels with regard to the

knowledge of G-d that leadsto this love.

A t the outset, there must be simplefaith, to believe in the truthof

G-d's existence. This matter is "very close" to every person. For the

quality of faith inherently exists within everyJew'snature, for they are

"believers, the descendantsof believers."45

Faith alone, however, is a "short, long path." For it does not

nullify entirely the possibility of obstacles and impediments. For

[although] faith — in and of itself — is a wondrous quality, [it is]

distant from aperson's actual conduct (as explained above with regard

to [the prayers of] athief before breaking in [to a home]).

42. See the explanation ofRambam's statements at the beginning of theMishneh Torah and its

conclusion: "Theywill knowhidden matters and grasp the knowledge of their Creator,"

in the hadranim on theMishneh Torah from 5735 {published in 5745 (Kehot, N .Y .) } and

5746 (Likkutei Sichos, V ol . X V I I , p. 250 ff.), et al.

43. Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 1:10.

44. On this basis, we can appreciate the gloss of Kessef Mishneh to this halachah, [attempting

to] resolve the objection raised byRaavad with regard to the verse (Shmos 33:19): " I wi ll

be gracious to whomI [choose to be] gracious...."

45. Shabbos 97a; Shmos Rabbah 3:12. See Maamarei Admor HaZakein Parshiyos HaTorah, Vol. II,

pp. 653, 657; Or HaTorah, Parshas Ki Sisa, p. 1838ff.; 1879ff.; et al.




Therefore a person must also labor intellectuallyevenwith regard to

matters that are beyond the scopeof our intellectual potential.Although

comprehension (particularly regarding such matters) requires much

work and is "a long path," it is "short." For it enables us to enter "the

city of our G-d" without obstacles and impediments. For the person's

knowledgeand comprehension affects his heart, as it iswritten:4 6

"Know

the G-d of your father and serve H i m with afull heart."

V I I .

[The two-phased pattern that exists] with regard to the mi tzvah of

knowing G-d as a whole and the Div ine service with in our hearts

("serv[ing] Him with a full heart") also applies regarding the

revelation of the teachings of C h a s s i d u s .

"He made everything excellently in its season."47

When the time

came, "G-d uncovered His holy arm"48 and "one — our teacher, the

Baal Shem Tov — descended from the most sublime heavens."49

Through his [efforts], the teachings of C h a s s i d u s were revealed. The

secrets of the Torah, which, according to the Torah's structure should

have remained secret and hidden, were drawn down and revealed by

the Baal Shem Tov and his students and their students, the righteous

men of our world.5 0 In this way, the revelation of G-d's hidden

dimensions that transcend the scope of mortal intellect was drawn

down.

The sequence of this revelation was that faith [as inspired by]

pn im iyus haTorah was revealed first. In general, this reflects the approach

implied by the interpretation of the verse:51

יה ו יח , "aצדק באמנת

46. IDivreiHaYamim 28:9.

47. K o h e l e s 3:11; see the interpretation of this verse in K o h e l e s R a b b a h and also that of the

verse ( K o h e l e s 3:1): "to every time and season and to every desire." As explained in

Likkute i S i c h o s , V ol . V I I , p. 206 (and in the appendix to the series of ma a ma r i m entitled

Y o m To v S h e l R o s h H a S h a n a h , 5 6 6 6 ) at length, [the implication is that each step of the

world's spiritual development is preordained by G-d].

48. Cf. Y e s h a y a h u 52:10. [Employed in this context in] I g r o s K o d e s h of the Previous Rebbe,

V ol. IV , p. 313.

49. LikkuteiDibburim, Vol. I , p. 31b ff.

50. The I g r o s K o d e s h of the Previous Rebbe, loc . c i t .

51. Chabakuk 2:4; see Makkos 24a, Tanya, ch. 33 (p. 42a,b).



N I T Z A V I M 209

righteous man will l ive by his faith," asהי ו ח ק באמנת , "a righteousצד

man will impart life through his faith," by revealing the soul that exists

with in every Jew.52

The consummation of the revelation of Chass idus as"a long, short

path" (enabling one toenter "thecity of ourG-d" without any

impediments) comeswhen faith permeates aperson's intellect, and his

mind understands andknows G-d in away that reflects hisfaith.

Similarly, [this approach must affect] his emotions. Not only will he

generate love and fear ofG-d in amanner commensurate with his

understanding and meditation (and not just [inspire] hisheart with

Documents

A Knowing Heart