A Knowing Heart

A KNOWING HEART
SICHOS IN W H I C H T H E REBBE ADVANCED O U R EMOTIONAL FRONTIERS

F R O M T H E WORKS OF
T H E L U B A V I T C H E R REBBE RABBI M E N A C H E M M . S C H N E E R S O N
TRANSLATED BY RABBI ELIYAHU TOUGER
www.hebrewbooks.org
Published by
Sichos In English
788 Eastern Parkway Brooklyn, New York 11213
5762 2002
A Knowing Heart
Published and Copyrighted by SICHOS I N ENGLISH 788 Eastern Parkway Brooklyn, N.Y. 11213 Tel. (718) 778-5436
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means, including photo-copying, without permission in writing from the copyright holder or the publisher.
I S B N 1-8814-0068-9
5762 2002
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Publisher's Foreword Parshas Noach Parshas Vayeitzei Parshas Vayigash Parshas Shmos Parshas Beshalach Purim Parshas Vayikra Parshas Kedoshim Parshas Behar-Bechukosai Parshas Shelach Parshas Balak Parshas Matos-Masei, Menachem Av Parshas Shoftim Parshas Ki Savo Parshas Nitzavim
v 1 13 25 35 49 63 77 93 103 115 139 151 169 179 195
iii
PUBLISHER'S FOREWORD
L I G H T I N G O U R INNER FIRE
Our Rebbeim explain that before the advent of the Baal Shem Tov, the spiritual and material vitality of the Jewish people had been sapped to the extent that they were in a state of faint. The new energy that the Baal Shem Tov generated roused them to spiritual wakefulness. One of the areas where this was keenly felt was the realm of emotion. Before the advent of the chassidic movement, prayer and Torah study were primarily cold and cerebral. The Baal Shem Tov set the souls of the Jewish people on fire, stirring them to a higher pitch of love for G-d and enabling them to develop deeper bonds with their fellowmen. H e sent great scholars to learn from simple laborers who were untrained in book knowledge but masters in expressing their love for G-d and for their fellow Jews. H e taught his followers to sing and dance in the midst of their Divine service. Through these and other activities, he gave every person tools to tap the reservoir of spiritual feelings in the depths of his heart and bring them to the forefront of his experience. H e and his spiritual heirs in the generations that followed made the Talmud's teaching: "G-d seeks the heart," an opera
2
tional message, not a theoretical ideal. indeed, historians have identified the outpouring of emotion as one of the unique 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 sources cited there.

2. Sanhedrin 106b.
vi
Why this emphasis? Because our emotions reflect who we really are and what truly motivates us. 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 undermine any attempts to advance spiritually. instead, our hearts should actually beat faster because of our love for G-d, and we should taste genuine awe and dread with the realization that we are constantly in His presence.
H O L D I N G THE REINS I N O U R H A N D S
3
The
Alter
Rebbe
and
the
subsequent
Chabad
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 premise, Chabad 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
Chassidus,
4
avodah
( )literally means "service" or "work."
however, notes the connection with the term , 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 coarseness of 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 within our hearts.
3. 4.
See the sichah to Parshas Shoftim and the sources mentioned there.
See Torah Or, Mishpatim, p. 76a.
vii
CHIPPING AWAY AT 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 we would 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 mission and conduct ourselves according to the inner truth that we grasp. Though our understanding is not powerful enough to transform the way we actually feel, 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, asked his brother: "Why do you speak of such high 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 same way." 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.' 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. i t will not be until the era of Mashiach, when G-d grants us hearts of flesh, that the problem will be resolved. "But the prophecy says nothing about 'brains of stone,' a failure 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. i n ch. 16 of Tanya, he outlines "a great general principle in the Divine service of the beinoni," 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. 6. As evident from his collection of Responsa, She'eris Yehudah. Yechezkel 11:19; 36:26.
6 5
viii
one from the violation of the Torah's prohibitions and love will motivate the 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 it ends. Their hearts just 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 you would 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 them totally. But even when we do not feel them, they can be real for us and guide our conduct.
A W E L L OF EMOTIONAL VITALITY
The above concepts are particularly relevant in the with regard to worldly matters.
present
generation when we find it hard to summon up genuine feeling even Communication gaps between husbands and wives, between parents and children, are all too familiar. 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. And 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 perform mitzvos without passion or vitality. 770 is a fountain of genuine spiritual feeling. From the Rebbe's example, we can learn to experience many emotions some that come immediately to mind 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. Lubavitch W o r l d Headquarters at 770 Eastern Parkway in Brooklyn.
7
ix
and care for others, which are the backbone of man's successful dayto-day emotional functioning. Quite obviously, we can learn from the Rebbe in other ways besides recalling his conduct. i n his written 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 multifaceted conception of avodah, with applications in our Divine service, in our interpersonal relations, and even in our business activities. i n that way, he has given us the potential to mold our characters and change the natural flow of our emotions. A n d 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 "mind of stone" by understanding the direction in which 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 here and a page there. 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 beginning with 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 O N THE 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 mind, 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.
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 a taste 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, we have tried to open them to our readers. W i t h this goal in mind, we added bracketed [ ] explanations to serve as conceptual bridges within the text 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.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
8
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 reach publication. 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 mission of our age: to prepare
8.
Passages in squiggle brackets { } are, by contrast, translations that appeared in brackets in the original.
xi
ourselves and the world at large for the coming of Mashiach, when we will finally be granted "hearts of flesh." Sichos In English
20 Menachem-Av, 5762
PARSHAS NOACH
Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X, p. 24ff.
I.
[When speaking about the animals that came to the ark,] the Torah states: "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: "A person should never utter an
2 1
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]" (one word, with five letters). "This teaches [us] to endeavor to use refined language." Just as our Torah reading contains this instruction with 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 Noach became 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." As a reward for taking this precaution, [they were granted] great and noteworthy blessings: "Blessed be G-d,
3
1.
Bereishis 7:8.
2.
3.
Pesachim 3a; see also BereishisRabbah on the verse.

Bereishis 9:23.
A K N O W I N G HEART
the L-rd of Shem. May Canaan become [a slave to them]. May G-d be gracious to Yefes and He will dwell in the tents of Shem."
5
II.
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 nakedness of 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."
III.
This difficulty can be resolved by first [explaining the following] teaching of the Baal Shem Tov: When a person sees an undesirable quality in a colleague, this indicates that there exists within his own self something similar to that undesirable quality. Like a person who looks in a mirror, " i f his face is clean, when he looks in the mirror he does not see any flaw." if, however, he sees filth or a blotch in the mirror, it is because "his own face is dirty." [Clarification, however, is required:] O n the surface, why is it necessary to say that seeing evil in a colleague denotes a like quality
9 8 7
4.
[In the text of the sichah itself, the Rebbe does not conclude the quote, as an extension of the principle explained in the sichah that one should not make undesirable statements.] Ibid. 26-27. (See Bereishis Rabbah 36:8 which explains that "Blessed be G-d, the L-rd of Shem" is also a blessing [for Shem himself].) Seemingly, the phrase "with their faces backwards" is also unnecessary, for the verse previously states "they walked backwards." 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 this turn while facing backwards.]
Meor Einayim, Parshas Chukas. See also Toldos Yaakov Yosef, Parshas Terumah and other
5. 6.
7.
sources. See also SeferHaSichosKayitz5700,

8.
p. 83.
See similar statements in Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 33a.
9.
A n d therefore, "An entirely righteous man who has no evil within him does not see any
evil in any [other] man" (Meor Einayim, loc. cit.).
NOACH
and mirror of the evil in the onlooker? W h y 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 explained 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 10
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
informing him that he also possesses this undesirable quality
and that it is necessary for him to correct it. W h y 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." blemishes except his own."
14 13
(How much more so
is this true with regard to self-love.) [Thus] "a person will see all Therefore the way to bring a person to
15
the realization of his own shortcomings is to give him the opportunity to see them [as they are manifested] in a colleague. 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 sees are in
10. See also SeferHaSichosKayitz5700,

11. Shabbos 77b.
loc. cit.
12. As the Baal Shem Tov taught: "Everything that a person sees or hears is a lesson for him in his Divine service" (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 also by
Midrash Shmuel to that mishnah and in the maamar entitled Ish Al Diglo, 5700, sec. 3, and the
maamar entitled VeAhavta, 5701, sec. 15). [The intent is that] one does not see his own spiritual blemishes as blemishes and shortcomings at all. 15. To cite a parallel (see Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IV, p. 1207, and sources there): When it is desired [from Above] that a person deliver a judgment [concerning his own conduct], a ploy is used and he is brought to deliver a judgment concerning a colleague.
A KNOWING HEART
truth his own. To reword the above statement: All the blemishes that a person sees outside [of himself] are (a result of) his own blemishes.
16
IV.
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

18
further, our Sages state that one must repeat such an admonishment] even 100 times. If so, why say that the intent of his being shown from Above the undesirable qualities possessed by 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 will admonish [his colleague] and help him to correct and improve his conduct. Moreover, as mentioned many times, serve merely as an
19
the Jewish people never G-d's intent
intermediary through which
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,
21 20
are not themselves the purpose of their existence
but rather exist "for the sake of the Jewish people and for the sake of the Torah." ) 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 Hebrew word translated as "except" in the quote from Negaim, also serves as the root for the term meaning "outside."]
31a.
17. [ Vayikra 19:17.]

18. Bava Metzia
19. See the lengthy explanations in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V , p. 246 and Vol. V I , pp. 235-236. 20. Indeed, even G-d's light which is "the revelation of His essence and not a revelation from His essence" is revealed for the intent of the souls of the Jewish people (see the
maamar entitled HaOseh Sukaso, 5699, sec. 21. Rashi, Bereishis 1:1; see also BereishisRabbah 2). 1:1, VayikraRabbah 36:4.
NOACH
one Jew must serve as a mere intermediary for a colleague. [Instead, G-d's] ultimate intent is focused on each Jew 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 is shown the faults of a colleague from Above is solely for the benefit of the onlooker without any benefit accruing to the person who possesses the faults. who
23
[Instead, the intent is to benefit the person
possesses the faults through] the observer's admonishment and As such, since we must say that the purpose of being shown the
efforts to correct and eliminate the evil the person possesses. evil in another person is to [aid that person in] correcting it, why must we say that when a person sees evil [in a colleague] he is looking in a mirror; that he is being shown his own evil in the guise of his colleague?
V.
This question can be resolved by first explaining another problematic concept in the passage from the Talmud cited above (sec. I): "A person should never utter an offensive word... as it is written: '...and from the [species of] animals that are not pure.'"
22. See the Mishnah, Sanhedrin 37a: "Each and every individual is obligated to say: 'The world was created for me.'" [Our Sages'] statement (Chulin 92a): "The leaves, these are the common people.... Were it not for the leaves, the clusters [of grapes] could not be maintained," {should not be interpreted as implying that the purpose of the common people, [the leaves,] is solely for the Torah scholars, [the grape clusters,] and not for themselves (like the gentile nations, , who are subordinate to the Jewish people). Instead,} through [the common people's activity] to maintain the Torah scholars, they themselves are elevated and are included together with the Torah scholars. (To cite a parallel, Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V I , loc. cit., speaks of [the various stages of progress] in a Jew's [Divine service], explaining that the lower level is not merely a preparation and an intermediary to reach the higher level. Instead, by leading to the higher level, it too is elevated.) 23. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. II, p. 531, which states an even greater concept. Even within one person, the reason one is allowed to fast in repentance or to purge his soul is that the pain he suffers is to his benefit. [It is to the benefit not only of the soul, but] also the body. Were it only for the benefit of the soul, it is possible to say that it is forbidden to cause the body pain for the benefit of the soul.
[The Talmud] continues, mentioning another similar principle: "A person should always speak with refined words, for when relating the laws pertinent to a zap, the Torah uses the expression 'saddle,' while with regard to a zavah,
26 24 25
it uses the expression 'seat.'"

28
27
(The reason
the Torah uses a different expression is that it is not fitting to mention a woman riding in the ordinary manner. ) 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. Seemingly, 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. W h y 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,] seemingly, it would have been more appropriate [to use a less radical expression, for example]: "Behold, the term 'impure' is used by the Torah."
VI.
In 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 condition makes him and those with whom he comes 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 makes her and those with whom she comes in contact ritually impure.]
27. Ibid. 23. 28. Rashi, Pesachim, loc. cit.
NOACH
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
29
wording. It is only with regard to the Torah's stories that terms like "impure" will be stated using indirect and lengthier wording. 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 advantages of] the two are equally balanced. In 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 because there is an advantage to using concise wording, but because halachic rulings must be stated clearly and unambiguously. On this basis, we can understand the initial supposition of the Talmud that even if many words will be required, the Torah uses refined language even though the term "impure" is found in many places in the Torah. For, as explained above, in most places the 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 is necessary to 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. A n d 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 the Torah.
A KNOWING HEART
VII.
As mentioned, when it is necessary to give a halachic 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., a halachic 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 indirect wording and states "who will not be pure" instead of "will be impure." Just as the above concepts apply with regard to refined speech, so, too, similar 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 manner ) and [endeavor to influence him to] adopt a positive course of conduct. This should be the primary dimension of what he sees. When, however, he hears about his colleague's unfavorable conduct and does not see the halachic imperative relevant to him but instead sees the 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.
31
30. Devarim 23:11; see Pesachim, loc. cit.
31. See the lengthy explanations in the maamar entitled Im Ruach HaMoshel, 5695 (Kuntreis 30); the letter of my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe, that is printed in HaTamim, Vol. V I I I , p. 46ff.
NOACH
Since (as stated above) "G-d did not create anything 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 (from Above) a quality (in his colleague) that must be corrected serves as a directive for him to become involved with [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 particular ), he would not see or focus on this evil.
32
VIII.
On this basis, we can explain why the Torah adds [the phrase]: "They did not see the nakedness of their father," although it is seemingly 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 nakedness as 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 is written: "And Cham... saw." This came as a result of differences in their inner personal
34 33
characteristics and spiritual levels. "Cham was the father of Canaan." Since he himself possessed evil (albeit on a less extreme plane )
32. The statement of MeorEinayim, loc. cit., quoted in fn. 9: "An entirely righteous man who has no evil within him (at all) does not 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), he will not judge another person with this fault as evil. For Meor Einayim is speaking about] a completely righteous man who "does not 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 Cham's conduct in a far more pejorative manner].)
10
for Cham is associated with chammimus ("warmth" or "excitability" in Hebrew), Noach's

35
an expression of the left vector

38
36
he saw the evil of
37
drinking and intoxication.
For [the latter] is also a
manifestation of excitability. (Although Cham's excitability was on a less extreme plane than the excitability he saw and that was manifest by Noach, he was still affected by it because this quality existed, albeit in a less extreme manner, within himself.) Shem and Yefes who represent the right and central vectors were above this type of evil, even on more refined levels. A n d since they themselves were above this evil, they did not see this [evil] in others. They saw and knew only the task incumbent on them to fulfill.
IX.
The above provides every one of us with a lesson. When one hears or sees an undesirable quality possessed by another Jew, he [certainly] should not speak about it and tell others of it as Cham did. [Cham] did not content himself with the fact that he saw [ and was affected by ] the evil; he informed others about it: "And he told his two brothers outside." Moreover, one should not even think unfavorably about a colleague.
40 39
[Instead,] he should contemplate [only] what he
should do, how he should admonish him (so that it will be in an
35.
OrHaTorah,
Parshas Vayeishev, p. 252a; See also Torah Or, p. 27a.
36. Zohar I , 73a; see also Torah Or, p. 26c and Or HaTorah, loc. cit.
[The term "left vector" refers to the 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.] Or HaTorah, Bereishis (Vol. I l l ) , p. 595a, states that for this reason, the Torah mentions Noach's sons in the order: Shem, Cham, and Yefes [although that is not the order in which they were born]. For this corresponds to the 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 he did not cover the nakedness of 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 the phrase "And Cham saw," [i.e., his seeing Noach as evil is a sign of the evil within him that was later manifest in Cham's descendants].
38. See Bereishis 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.
NOACH
11
appropriate way, as stated above) and correct his [fault]. A t the same time, he should endeavor not to see the evil in his colleague even while he is working with him. When one conducts himself in this manner, emulating Shem and Yefes, he merits the promise of the blessings: "Blessed be G-d, the L-rd of Shem. May Canaan become...." A n d "May G-d be gracious to Yefes, (but) He will dwell in the tents of Shem." A n d he merits to be a medium for the Torah,
41
for the vessel for the Torah is peace. A n d

43
42
furthermore, he merits that the Divine Presence will rest in "the tents of Shem," (in the building of the Third Beis HaMikdash) May this take place in the immediate future.
(Adapted from Sichos Shabbos Bereishis, 5726)
[which will
44
come about] through unity and through the love of our fellow Jews.
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 H o l y One, blessed be He, said: 'The entire Torah is peace. To whom will I give it? To a nation that loves peace.'"
43. See Rashi's quote of "the Midrash of our Sages" (Yoma 9b ff.; Bereishis Rabbah 36:8) See Rambam, Mishneh Torah, with Hilchos
regard to the First Beis HaMikdash.
Obviously (and indeed, to a greater extent), this
applies with regard to the Third Beis HaMikdash.
Melachim 11:4, which states that the Third Beis HaMikdash will be built by Mashiach (who will be a descendant of David and Shlomoh, the builders of the First Beis HaMikdash).
44. See Tanya, ch. 32.
PARSHAS VAYEITZEI
Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X V , 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 became wealthy: "And the man became exceedingly prosperous. He attained fertile sheep ( and from these sheep he also obtained ) maidservants, servants, camels, and donkeys." As Rashi
2 1
comments: "He would sell his sheep at an expensive price and

3
purchase all the above."
Nevertheless, we see in Parshas Vayishlach, when Yaakov [instructs his agents] to convey a message to Esav, he describes his property in the following order: donkeys,"
5 4
" I have acquired oxen and donkeys, sheep,
servants, and maidservants." He mentions sheep after "oxen and and not as his first and fundamental acquisition. In
6
particular, this represents a change from yet another verse which describes that when Yaakov fled from Lavan: "He led away (first) all
1. 2.
3. 4.
Bereishis 30:43. In his commentary to the verse.

See Toras Chayim on this parshah, p. 30c. Bereishis 32:6.
5. 6.
See also the commentary of Rabbeinu Bachaye to that verse. Bereishis 31:18.
13
14
of his herds [of sheep] (and only then) all of his property... what he had purchased with his herds."
7
II.
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 "deeds of the Patriarchs" which are related in the Torah 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 descendants of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov with the power to carry out [the appropriate] Divine service. It 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 became exceedingly 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 mentioned sheep after "oxen and donkeys" are all significant with regard to the spiritual service of every Jew.
8
III.
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 a well-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? O n the contrary, how can the manner in which a shepherd cherishes sheep be compared to the manner in which a father cherishes a son?
7.
8. 9.
As Rashi comments on the verse: "I.e., what he had purchased with his sheep: servants, maidservants, camels, and donkeys."
See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V , p. 69ff. ShirHaShirimRabbah 2:16 (1).
VAYEITZEI
15
The explanation given is that it is precisely this factor that is significant. The fact that the Jews are called sons shows that they are an independent entity with 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." soul] is an independent entity (and is not the Father).
12 11
10
Nevertheless, using the analogy of a son implies that it is as if [the [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, 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 13
and which
serves as a source for the created beings. In relation to that level, [the
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 also 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. W i t h regard to the concepts stated in this section, see Or HaTorah, Re'eh, pp. 784-785, 795ff.
11. Likkutei Torah, Devarim, p. 62d.
12. [Trans. Note: A n d indeed, on a conscious level, this is what the soul feels.] 13. See also Derech Mitzvosecha (p. 4a,b) which states that 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 also the opening passages of Likkutei Amarim and Or Torah from the Maggid of Mezritch. See the explanation in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I , p. 486ff.).
16
O n this level, however, the Jews' cherished quality comes not because of their identity but, on the contrary, because of [their transcendence of their identity and] the awesome bittul to G-d [which they display]. This bittul is a medium for the Divine light that tran scends the spiritual cosmos, as it is written:
16
" I dwell in exaltedness
and holiness, but I am with the broken and the lowly-spirited." This concept the awesome bittul [exhibited by the Jewish people] is alluded to in the comparison of the Jews to sheep. For as we see in actual life, sheep possess the quality of bittul more than other animals.
17
IV.
These two analogies for the Jewish people sons and sheep allude to two approaches in man's Divine service. The level of son relates to Torah study. This service focuses on intellectual understanding and comprehension. (In this service, the person
18
studying feels significant. [After all,] he is appreciating the Torah through his [own] powers of comprehension.) In order that his study focus on the true intent of the Torah, his [study] must be characterized by bittul. Only through [the approach of] "my soul will be as dust to all" is it possible for [him to experience]: "open my heart to Your Torah"
20 19
(as explained with
regard to [the obligation to] recite the blessings for Torah study before [studying]). This bittul serves as a foundation and preparation for Torah study. The Torah study itself, however, is carried 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. W i t h regard to the concepts in this section, note the explanation (Kuntreis
Motzaei
Shabbos Parshas Chayei Sarah, 5738, sec. 25ff.) of our Sages' statement (Bereishis Rabbah
60:8; Rashi to Bereishis 24:42): "The conversation of the servants of the Patriarchs is superior to the teachings of their descendants." See also Or HaTorah, Parshas Re'eh, p.
801. (There it is explained that sheep are identified with the service of prayer; see also
fn. 62 in the Kuntreis cited above.)
19. The passage Elokai netzor [recited after the Shemoneh Esreh] (Berachos 17b). 20. Nedarim 81a; Bava Metzia 85b; explained in Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X V , p. 3ff., et al.
VAYEiTZEi
17
The analogy of sheep points to our Divine service of refining [the world at large]. , Hebrew for sheep, relates to the word , "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 a Jew's true bittul to G-d, his transcendence of 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 in which 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 will, to make a dwelling for H i m in the lower realms.
22
V.
Based on the above, we can understand the connection between the concept of sheep and Yaakov's Divine service in Lavan's home. There is a fundamental difference between Yaakov's Divine
23
service during the period described in Parshas Toldos and his Divine
service which is described in Parshas Vayeitzei. Parshas Toldos describes
25
Yaakov's Divine service according to the analogy of a son. He was "a sincere man, dwelling in tents,"
24
interpreted by our Sages
as
21.
Torah Or, Bereishis, p. 23c; Toras Chayim, Bereishis, pp. 38b,
39a ff.; Or HaTorah, loc. cit.
22. See similar concepts in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V , p. 247, fn. 34. See also pp. 248-249 which explains that this ascent for the soul (that through the Divine service of refining the world at large, it will reach bittul) 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 transform the lower realms into a dwelling for G-d's essence, that Divine service must be characterized by utter bittul. [To explain: the possibility for this world to become a dwelling for G-d exists] because it is only in this world that the utter bittul alluded to in the phrase ein od ("there is nothing else," Devarim 4:39) is manifest. A n d that awesome level of bittul is reflected in man's service. 23. W i t h regard to the following concepts, see Toras Chayim, Bereishis, the maamar entitled
VeYitein Lecha, sec. 20ff.
24. Bereishis 25:27. 25. Bereishis Rabbah and Rashi to that verse. [Shem and Ever were the leading scholars of the age.]
18
referring to the tents of Shem and the tents of Ever. Even the conclusion of the Torah reading which relates that Yaakov had to flee from his father's house does not mark a cessation of his connection with constant Torah study. O n the contrary, he "hid in the house of Ever for fourteen years" and studied the Torah there. Parshas Vayeitzei, by contrast, speaks about Yaakov's departure from the realm of Torah study and his arrival in Charan [a place whose name indicates] that it was [the focus of] G-d's anger in the world and in the house of Lavan. There he worked as a shepherd (also) in the simple sense of the word, serving [Lavan] with all his strength.
28 27 26
(Indeed, Yaakov's conduct serves as a model for the

29
dedication that a worker must show his employer.)
This service [of herding sheep brought out Yaakov's true, inner spiritual core]. Despite the immense concealment and hiddenness [of G-dliness that he experienced] in Lavan's home, Yaakov remained unaffected. " I lived with Lavan and I observed the 613 mitzvos." [caused our Sages to comment:] "His progeny is perfect." Divine service evoked the ultimate bittul from Yaakov. It is possible to say that this is the (inner) reason why the greater part of the property that Yaakov earned and took with him from the house of Lavan was sheep. For sheep allude to the spiritual peak that he attained through his Divine service in the house of Lavan, the quality of bittul, as explained above. {This is alluded to in the expression , translated as "and the man became exceedingly prosperous." means to "break through," to overcome limitations. For through bittul
32 31 30
There he established [his family,] the tribes of G-d, in a manner that This
26. 27. 28. 29.
Rashi's commentary at the conclusion of Parshas Toldos Megillah See Rashi's commentary at the conclusion of Parshas Noach. Bereishis 31:6. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, the conclusion of Hilchos Sechirus
16b; Seder Olam, ch. 2.
Shulchan Aruch HaRav,
Choshen
Mishpat, Hilchos Shaalah ViSechirus, subsec. 20; [see also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X X V , p. 135ff.]. 30. 31. Bereishis 32:5 and Rashi's commentary. commentary to Bereishis 47:31; see also Pesachim 56a; Sifri to
Vayikra Rabbah 36:5; Rashi's Devarim 6:4, et al.
32. See Toras Chayim, Bereishis, p. 30c ff., which elaborates on the connection of this concept to the attribute of Truth, the attribute identified with Yaakov our Patriarch.
VAYEITZEI
19
(identified with sheep), one can overcome all the limits of the spiritual cosmos and approach the Divine light that has no limitations: (i.e., [ which alludes to an unlimited quality] is repeated twice).
34 35 33
[This sequence continues] as reflected in the chassidic and positive-oriented interpretation of the verses: "He changed my wages ten times.... If he said: 'The spotted ones will be your wages....' '...the ringed ones.' " Yaakov drew down "the essential will of the source of emanation." This level is above any division or form. Hence his wages were continually changed from one form to another.}
VI.
The Divine service of a son, which is dependent on one's understanding and comprehension (i.e., one's personal existence), must also be carried out in a manner of bittul (as stated in sec. I V ) . Similarly, the Divine service of sheep that is characterized (primarily) by bittul must (bring into expression) all the powers of one's soul, [even] his personal existence. Nevertheless, [expressing one's personal identity is important]. For bittul and lowliness alone are not sufficient to combat the [of G-d] in the world. Instead, it is concealment and hiddenness
36
necessary [to follow] the directive found in the very beginning of the Tur (and the Shulchan Aruch): "Be bold as a leopard... and valiant as a lion." One must employ the quality of boldness
37
"not to be
embarrassed when confronted by mockers" and the quality of valor
33. See Torah Or, Bereishis, p. 23c; Toras Chayim, Bereishis, p. 39d. 34. See Torah Or, Bereishis, p. 21a-b; Toras Chayim, Bereishis, p. 38a-b.
35. Bereishis 31:7-8.

36. I.e., the Mahadura Basra of Shulchan Aruch HaRav. In contrast, the Shulchan Aruch of Rav
Yosef Karo and the Mahadura Kama of Shulchan Aruch HaRav begin: "With the valor of a lion, one should rise...." The Rama and subsec. 3 of Shulchan Aruch HaRav ((oc. cit.) mention "not [to] be embarrassed...." (without mentioning the quality of boldness, although the Shulchan Aruch HaRav concludes: "Nevertheless, he should not retort brazenly..." as mentioned in the coming footnote. Here is not the place for discussion of the issue. 37. "Nevertheless, he should not retort brazenly, lest he acquire the habit of acting
insolently" (Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Mahadura Kama, loc. cit., [based on] Beis Yosef). See also
our Sages' statement (Beitzah 25b) which describes the Jews as the most bold of the peoples.
20
"to overcome his [evil] inclination and conquer it, like a mighty 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 bittul to G-d's will. 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 mitzvos. (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 measure of 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 Tur (and the Alter Rebbe in Shulchan Aruch HaRav)
40 39
also quote the
name of the author of that statement: Yehudah ben Teima. [His name is mentioned] to allude 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 acknowledgment bittul.
42 41
and
[Moreover,] it is not sufficient that the approach of bittul will

43
merely be a preface at the beginning of one's Divine service. Instead, Yehudah is ben Teima, [the latter term implying] that one's bittul must be a constant factor, [continually] expressed in the conduct of
38.
Shulchan Aruch HaRav,
Mahadura Basra., loc. cit.
See also II Divrei 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, et al.
39. It is the custom of the Tur to quote the names of the Sages who author particular concepts, but this is not the custom of the Alter Rebbe in Shulchan Aruch HaRav. 40. There is also a well-known allusion. The name Yehudah ( )contains the letters of G-d's name (---, 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 one does not understand why. This reflects bittul.]
42. Torah Or, pp. 44a, 45a.
43.
[Trans. Note: Although Teima is a name, it is also an allusion to the quality of consistency.]
VAYEiTZEi
21
being "bold as a leopard."
44
For when one expresses the qualities of

45
boldness and valor [as the Torah commands], it is very possible to slip into ordinary boldness and valor.
VII.
On this basis, we can understand the particulars mentioned in secs. I and II 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) were necessary. [When including these 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 Divine service of bittul. b) Even afterwards, he did not exchange all of his sheep for other assets. O n 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] within the world, where power and valor are necessary, the feelings of bittul must remain a fundamental quality.
46
44. It is possible to explain that this reflects the true* quality of bittul, that which transcends boundaries and limitations. Therefore even the thrust of boldness (which on a superficial level runs contrary to the quality of bittul) is not a contradiction to this bittul. * See Kehillas Yaakov, erech Yehudah ben Teima, which states that Teima ( )shares the letters of the word , "truth." [This relates to Yaakov, as it is written (Michah 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, Bereishis, p. 24a ff., Toras Chayim, Bereishis, p. 42d.
22
A K N o w i N G HEART
VIII.
In 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 merits designs. For this reason, [Yaakov] did not mention sheep first. [As mentioned above, sheep] reflect the qualities of bittul, lowliness, and submission. A n d to frighten Esav, it was primarily necessary to have him first appreciate Yaakov's strength. He must know that Yaakov owns sheep, i.e., that he is characterized by bittul. Hence, [he will know that Yaakov's] strength is not his own personal valor, but the strength of holiness. Nevertheless, with what do we frighten [Esav]? W i t h 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 a Jew's primary resources are sheep.
48 47
and lofty powers that would sustain him. In this way, he
would frighten Esav and cause him to refrain from carrying out his
IX.
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 illuminating it. Before this, one must prepare by studying Torah in the tents of Shem and Ever. But to attain it," one
49
[the peak of] "And the man became world and occupy himself with
exceedingly prosperous," i.e., "fill[ing] up the land and conquer[ing] must

50
go out to the
illuminating i t .
47. See
Bereishis Rabbah
75:6,
12 and the
commentary of the
Yefas Toar. See
also the
commentary of R. Moshe Alshich and Megaleh 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.
VAYEITZEI
23
O n 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 Aruch,

52
fundamental element [of Divine service. This is no longer true in the present age. Indeed,] as reflected in the ruling of the Shulchan 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). N o t even a small percentage of the Jewish people are on that level, because the fundamental Divine service of the present era is deed, actual tzedakah. In particular, this applies in the present generation when the efforts to find Jews blundering 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 a lesser 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 save the lives of a Jew and his descendants, insuring that they remain Jewish and conduct themselves (beginning with their actual deeds) as a Jew 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 mission of illuminating the exile. When one carries out his mission with bittul, his efforts are not correspondent to the limits of his nature and satisfaction. It does 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
53
51. See Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 9. 52. See Tur, Shulchan Aruch, and Shulchan Aruch 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 in which we would chose not to be involved. When, by contrast, one is motivated by a commitment to G-d's purpose, there are no limits to the spheres of activity in which he devotes his efforts.]
24
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 mission, one is successful with all types of students. [To paraphrase the Torah reading:] "If he said: 'The spotted ones will be your wages....' If he said: 'The ringed ones....' A l l the sheep gave birth...."; i.e., all of the students grow up in the desired manner. Moreover, "they are more fertile than other sheep." One's "progeny is perfect"; there are no flaws in one'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 we have been promised: "You, the children of Israel, will be gathered one by one," and "a great congregation will return here." May this take place in the immediate future.
(Adapted from Sichos Yud Kislev, 5737)
57 56 55
54. Avos 1:1; see Likkutei Sichos, V o l . 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, [bringing him] from his place."
57. Yirmeyahu 31:7.
PARSHAS VAYIGASH
Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X, p. 146ff.
I.
On the verse: "And he fell on the neck of Benyamin his brother and wept, and Benyamin wept on his neck," our Sages comment:
2 1
[Yosef] cried for the two Batei HaMikdash ( as alluded to by the fact that , translated as neck, employs a plural form ) that would be built in the tribal portion of Benyamin and would be destroyed. Benyamin... wept for the Sanctuary of Shiloh that would be built in the tribal portion of Yosef and would be destroyed. The Midrash explains why the neck is used as an analogy for the
3
Beis HaMikdash in its interpretation of the verse: "Your neck is like the
4
Tower of David." Just as the neck is at the top of a person's body, so,
too, the Beis HaMikdash is located at the top of the world."
5
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 Sages comment on the verse HaMikdash
6
"He shall dwell between his shoulders," the Beis
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. O n the contrary, it was said: "Let us descend a drop, for it is written: 'He shall dwell between his shoulders.' There is no
1. 2. 3.
4. 5.
Bereishis 45:14. Megillah 16b, cited by Rashi in his commentary to the verse. ShirHaShirimRabbah on the verse which follows.
Shir HaShirim Zevachim 54b. 4:4.
6.
Devarim 33:12; see Rashi's commentary.
25
26
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.") On the surface, the question arises: What is the advantage and the attraction of not being at the highest point? If there is no advantage in height, why do [our Sages] teach that "the Beis HaMikdash is located at the top of the world"? A n d if height is a positive quality (as it appears from our Sages' statement), seemingly, 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 serves as an intermediary between the head and the body. A person's collective life-energy rests in the brain. Its transmission from the head to the body comes through the medium of the esophagus, trachea, and veins in the throat. A similar pattern is found with regard to the transmission 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. Thus the neck possesses a 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 mission 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 possesses both 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). A n d as Koheles 5:7 states: "There is One higher than high W h o watches."
Torah Or, p. 58b, et al.
8 7
8.
VAYIGASH
27
advantage to the neck (precisely because it is lower). For it is an intermediary, and it has the power and the potential to transmit the life-energy and the intellect from the head to the body. Similar concepts apply with regard to the Beis HaMikdash, which is described with the analogy of a neck. Its primary advantage is its slight descent from the foremost peak, for the purpose of the Beis HaMikdash is to serve as a medium through which (G-dly) light is drawn down [to] illuminate the world,
10
even the portions on the lowest levels.
Therefore the Beis HaMikdash was located (on a high point, but not) on the highest point; [it was not] elevated entirely from the world. (For if so, it would not be able [to serve as a medium] to illuminate the world.) It was necessary to "descend slightly," to come close and into connection with the world so that it could illuminate it. {This resembles a person's neck, which because it is lower than (the elevated station of) the head, and instead, closer to the body is able to serve as an intermediary between the two and join them together.} Similar concepts apply with regard to the Beis HaMikdash
11
in
microcosm that exists within every Jew. When his G-dly soul is not uplifted and exalted to the point of separation from his own personal world,
12
but instead is involved with it and enclothed within it to
refine and purify his animal soul, body, and portion in the world, his entire existence becomes a Sanctuary for G-d's light.
9.
In this context, note the distinction between the Hebrew terms madreigah, "level," and maaleh, "advantage," discussed at the beginning of the maamar entitled Bereishis, 5705.
10. For this reason, the windows of the Beis HaMikdash were slanted outward (I Melachim 6:4) [to diffuse G-dly light to the world at large]. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. II, p. 315, and the sources cited there.
11. As our Sages comment (see Reishis Chochmah, Shaar HaAhavah Lamed, Tractate Taanis, the section beginning Meilnyan Shelah, Shaar HaOsiyos, Os HaAvodah, Parshas Terumah, the
section entitled Torah Or, pp. 325b, 326b) on the verse (Shmos 25:8): " I will dwell within them": "It does not say: 'within it,' but rather 'within them,' within every member of the Jewish people." 12. [Trans. Note: I.e., the elements of his being that are not directly related to holiness.]
28
II.
On this basis, we can understand why Yosef wept on Benyamin's neck and Benyamin wept on Yosef's neck. For one might ask: W h y did each weep on his brother's neck? W h y 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: " I was created solely to serve my 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 a dwelling for H i m in the lower realms."
14 13
"Everything is in the hands of Heaven except the fear of Heaven."

15
[And indeed,] fear is "the beginning of Divine service, its

16
fundamental quality and root."
[Hence, the consummation of G-d's
intent] is dependent on the Divine service of the Jewish people. They will make a dwelling 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] carried out. Hence Yosef and Benyamin 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 Jew] sins, "his soul is still faithful to H i m . "
17
(even with
regard to the head) is the neck, which enables this service to be
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 the Mishnah and Beraisa at the conclusion of tractate Kiddushin.
14. 15. 16. Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Naso, sec. Berachos 33b. [Tanya, ch. 41.] 16.
17. Tanya, ch. 24. A n d our Sages comment (Sanhedrin 44a): "Even if one sins, one remains a Jew." [Moreover, for the term "Jew," our Sages use the name] Yisrael ( )which can be divided into the words , "a head for Me."
VAYIGASH
29
[which relates to the soul's] effect on the body, the animal soul, and its portion in the world, as above.
18
III.
Explanation is, nevertheless, required: W h y did Yosef weep over the Batei HaMikdash that were built in the tribal portion of Benyamin while Benyamin wept over the Sanctuary built in the tribal portion of Yosef? Seemingly, each one of them should have wept over the destruction of the Sanctuary or Beis HaMikdash that took place in his own tribal
19
portion. For ultimately, "a person is close to his own self."
([One's connection with his own self is so powerful that] even with regard to the mitzvah of loving one's fellow Jew and even with regard to the explanations in Chassidus
20
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. indeed, in the same Epistle Sages' ruling]
23 22 21
Indeed, Iggeres HaKodesh quotes
that elaborates on the importance of
giving generously to tzedakah as an expression of kindness [our that when a person has only one jug of water [and he
18. See Tanya, ch. 37 (p. 48b) which states that "The soul itself is in no need of correction at all.... It descended to this world... only to draw down G-dly light and to correct...." 19. Sanhedrin 9b [in explaining why 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 relationship with a father and a brother are added on to a person's essence. With regard to his 'closeness' to his own self, by contrast, there is nothing added on to his essence" (the series of maamarim entitled VeKochah, 5637, ch. 72).
20. See Tanya, ch. 32; Derech Mitzvosecha, Mitzvas Ahavas Yisrael Likkutei Sichos, V o l . 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 the word "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 closeness of two brothers is not the same as a person's closeness to his own self, as stated in fn. 19. 22. Epistle 16.
23. Nedarim 80b; Bava Metzia 62a.
30
needs the entire quantity for himself], he should not share it, for "your own life takes precedence." Therefore concerned certainly both [Yosef and Benyamin] were more with their own Sanctuaries. Hence, seemingly, 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: O n the verse: "And [Yosef] fell on
25 24
[Yaakov's] neck and wept on his
neck
excessively," the Zohar the Beis HaMikdash.
states that Yosef wept over the destruction of
(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].) [On 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. [To explain:] According to the simple meaning of the above verse, [Yosef] was not [necessarily] crying because of the destruction. [In that context,] the explanation that Yaakov "did not fall on Yosef's neck and did not kiss him" because he was reciting the Shema 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 Shema with focused attention as required.
27
According to the Zohar, however, [the question remains]: H o w is it possible that Yaakov was not overcome by emotion and was not disturbed by the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash? H o w was it possible for him to focus his attention on the recitation of the Shema?
24. Bereishis 46:29.

25. Zohar I , 211a.
26. In his commentary to the above verse.

27. Berachos 13b; Shulchan Aruch HaRav 63:5.
VAYIGASH
31
IV.
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 a person cries over a matter that causes him difficulty and aggravation, the crying does not have the power to rectify the circumstances that prompted him to cry. But, as alluded to in the verse
28
" M y tears were like bread for me," crying
makes the person feel better. This leads to the obvious conclusion that when a person has the potential to correct a matter, he should not calm himself by crying. Instead, he should do what he can to correct it. Therefore when a person sees the destruction of a colleague'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 is not dependent on him, but on his colleague. He can and, [indeed,] he is obligated to help his colleague by: a) reproving him (in a pleasant manner); b) arousing [Divine] mercy for him and praying for him. Nevertheless, the negation of the sins that caused the destruction 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, his soul will be touched and he will cry. [This refers to one's relations with others.] When, by contrast, a person sees that his own Beis HaMikdash has been destroyed, he cannot content himself with sighing and weeping. O n the contrary, he must 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 29
28. Tehillim 42:4; see Rashi's commentary and Or HaTorah to that verse. 29. As HaYom Yom, entry for I I Adar 8, states: "One [positive] deed is better than 1000 sighs."
30. See Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 4; Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I I , p. 692.
32
The [only] exception is when the weeping comprises tears of teshuvah. In that instance, the weeping itself is an act of building, as implied by the verse: "Place my tears 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 Benyamin wept over the Sanctuary that was in the other's portion. A n d Yaakov did not weep about the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash, but instead, recited the Shema. For were "in his portion," Yaakov was the father of the entire Jewish people and thus both the Sanctuary [of Shiloh] and the Beis HaMikdash [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 "a house prepared for sacrifices to be offered."
32 31
A n d "Whoever recites the Shema... is

33
considered as if he brought a burnt-offering and sacrifices,"
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 Shema 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. mesirus nefesh, see Torah Or, Bereishis, p. 29b 1:1. (and Or HaTorah, Vayeishev); Likkutei Torah,
35. [I.e., to the point of sacrificing one's life.] For a comparison of these two levels of
Vayikra 3a, Shir HaShirim
VAYIGASH
33
there to do? For our Sages have already declared:
36
"Even when a
sharp sword is placed on a person's neck, he should not refrain from [seeking G-d's] mercy." Even when a Heavenly decree has been issued, through Divine service it can be rent,
37
as we find with regard
to King Chizkiyahu. Yeshayahu communicated to him the prophecy wherein it was decreed that Chizkiyahu would die. Chizkiyahu told him: "Cease your prophesying and depart," and "He turned his face to the wall and prayed to G-d."
38
A n d his prayer was effective; [ G - d

39
assured him:] " I have heard your prayer," and granted him fifteen more years of life, i.e., an increase of life here in this material world.
VI.
Our Sages state:
40
"[In] every generation when the Beis HaMikdash is

41
not rebuilt, it is considered as if it was destroyed." Similarly, with regard to every individual: If the Beis HaMikdash is not built in his days, that is a sign that his individual Beis HaMikdash is destroyed. For if 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 is not that contemplation of the above will lead to sighing and weeping, but rather to deed and action, one's individual redemption,
43
and the building of the Beis HaMikdash within
his own soul. This in turn will hasten and draw down the greater
36. Berachos 10a. 37. See Rosh HaShanah 16b. 20:2. 38. IIMelachim
39. Ibid., 20:5-6. See Yevamos 49b; Biurei HaZohar, Vayeira, p. 18d. See also the Biurei HaZohar LeTzemach Tzedek, Vayeira, p. 49; and Chanoch LeNaar, p. 49. 40. Talmud Yerushalmi, Yoma 1:1; Midrash Tehillim 137:10. The Midrash Tehillim also explains:
"What is the rationale? Because they did not do teshuvah."

41. See the ruling of Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Teshuvah 3:4, based on Kiddushin 40b):
"Every person must see himself [and the entire world as equally balanced....] If he performs one mitzvah, he tips his [individual] balance and that of the entire world to the side of merit... as it is written (Mishlei 10:25): " A righteous man is the foundation of the world."
42. See Boneh Yerushalayim, sec. 84, in the name of the Tikkunei Zohar, that if there were one
righteous man who would turn to G - d in complete teshuvah, Mashiach would come in his
generation. Note Rambam, loc. cit.
43. See Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 4.
34
Redemption and the rebuilding of the actual Beis HaMikdash in its place by Mashiach. May this take place in the immediate future.
(Adapted from Sichos Shabbos Parshas Vayigash, 5725)
PARSHAS SHMOS
Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X X X V I , p. 1
I.
[Our Torah reading relates:]
1
And Moshe matured and he went out to his brethren.... He saw an Egyptian man beating [an Israelite]... and he smote the Egyptian.... A n d he went out on the next day... and he told the wicked man: "Why do you strike?..." And [that person] replied: "Will you kill me?..." Moshe became frightened and said: "Certainly, the matter has become known...." A n d Pharaoh heard... and he sought to kill Moshe. A n d Moshe fled.... On 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 the Jewish people. He thought: "Now, maybe they will not be fit to be redeemed."
1.
2. 3.
Shmos 2:11-15.
Ibid. :14. Midrash Tanchuma, Shmos, sec. 10; Shmos Rabbah 1:30. (In the latter source, this concept is
stated in the exegesis of the phrase: "Certainly, the matter has become known," i.e., [Moshe] became aware of "the reason why the Jews were subjugated more than the other nations." See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X X X I , p. 9, fn. 15, and pp. 13-14. See also Yefas ToarHaShaleim on this passage.
35
36
It is worthy to consider: W h y does the simple meaning (that Moshe was concerned about his life because it had become public knowledge that he killed the Egyptian) not suffice? [Why must] Rashi
4
also cite the interpretation of the Midrash alluded to in the verse.

6
"he was worried... now,
maybe they will not be fit to be redeemed" which is not at all It 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.'" W h y was this particular mentioned? 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: "[The verse should be understood] according to its simple meaning" is lacking. (Rashi's commentary begins from: "According to the Midrash....") In particular, this question warrants [explanation] because, according to this interpretation of "and Moshe became frightened," it is also 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 phrase should be interpreted straightforwardly), Rashi brings the interpretation of the Midrash* that "the matter is known to me, regarding the question that I would ponder, namely: H o w 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).
7
5.
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.] [The difficulty is confounded by the fact] that this interpretation requires explanation: H o w is it possible that the promise [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 the Mishnah (near the beginning) [which explains the difference] between a promise that the Holy One, blessed be He, made "with a positive message conveyed by a prophet" (which cannot be nullified) and "a promise given privately by the H o l y One, blessed be He, to a prophet." (Note also sec. 2.)} See also the following footnote. Moreover, [the question arises]: H o w did Moshe know they were slanderers before they informed on him (as ImreiShefer questions with regard to Rashi's commentary)? 7. It is not appropriate to raise questions concerning the entire narrative of Moshe, Dasan, and Aviram, [presuming] that the Torah should have related merely that "Pharaoh
6.
SHMOS
37
motivate him to act. For Moshe did not flee to Midian until after Pharaoh heard 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
II.
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 the killing of the Egyptian) and "Moshe fled." [After all,] the entire story about two Hebrew men striving and their rebuke of Moshe: "Who placed you?... Will you kill me?..." appears unnecessary. It is possible to explain that this difficulty is resolved by Rashi's commentary to the phrase "And Pharaoh heard": "They [Dasan and Aviram] informed on him."* By [recounting the interaction between Moshe and these two 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 Moshe became frightened. * From the fact that [Rashi] does not state that this is a Midrash, we can assume that 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. It is apparent that they were the only ones who 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 is logical to assume that they were the ones who informed on him. ** Mentioning Dasan and Aviram is also important, for later on in the narrative, Moshe returns to Egypt "after all the men (i.e., Dasan and Aviram) who sought your life had died" (Shmos 4:19, see Rashi's commentary). See also Rashi's commentary to Shmos 2:13: "Dasan and Aviram. 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 appeared as part of the text and the asterisks as footnotes.] See the Maskil LeDavid's [gloss to] Rashi's commentary. He questions: If Moshe was frightened for his life, why did he not flee until afterwards (when Pharaoh sought to kill him)? See also the commentary of R. Ovadiah of Seforno. Clarification is still required. [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 the Midrash to explain the subject of his concern.]
8.
9.
38
before the interpretation of the Midrash.) Therefore, we are forced to say that even according to the simple meaning of the phrase "And Moshe became 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 promises from the Holy 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.... The Holy One, blessed be He, told him:
12
"Behold, I will be with
you," and yet ultimately, "Yaakov became frightened." "The chosen one of the Prophets" this is Moshe.... The
13
Holy One, blessed be He, told him:

14
"Behold, I will be with
you," and yet ultimately, Moshe became frightened. [This is intimated by the verse:] "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 commentaries Midrash]
15
who maintain that [the
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. Avraham ben Asher, quoted in Or HaSechel 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. Similar concepts are also found in the Akeidah (Vayishlach), the conclusion of sec. 26, and other texts.
SHMOS
39
promises from G-d, they did not rely on the promise,

17
16
fearing that
perhaps they sinned and were thus unworthy of having the promise fulfilled.
18
There are, however, other commentaries
19
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

21
continuation of the Midrash which states that the Prophet [Yeshayahu] would "criticize the Jewish people, telling them: 'You have forgotten G-d W h o made you... and you are continually frightened throughout the day,'" i.e., the prophet rebukes the people for being afraid.}
22
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 promise]?
16. This follows the opinion in the Midrash (loc. cit.:2) that states: "There is no [secure] promise 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 also the
statements on p. 191 of that text which explain that the Divine service of these individuals is above the 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 promised him]. 18. This explanation is given by the commentaries to the Midrash, loc. cit. Similarly, the Akeidah states that [their fear] "did not stem from a lack of trust and a dearth of faith... but instead, as an imperative arising from the perfection of their conduct (to find a way to save themselves, implying natural means [instead of relying on G-d's miracles])." See the sources mentioned in fn. 47.
19. Yefas ToarHaShaleim to Bereishis Rabbah, loc. cit. {[As support,] the passage from the Talmud Nesiv HaBitachon. Here is not the place for further
cites Berachos 60a. See also the commentaries to the Ein Yaakov (Berachos, loc. cit.) and the
Nesivos Olam (from the Maharal),
elaboration.} See also the interpretation of Or HaSechel, loc. cit., (entry shnei bnei adam) which states: "It is possible that being afraid is considered an error on the part of Yaakov and Moshe." 20. Tehillim 113:7; quoted in Berachos, loc. cit. This approach disputes the opinion [mentioned above] which states that "there is no [secure] promise for the righteous in this world" (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.
40
(To the contrary, it appears on the surface to be a very positive quality: One's humility is so great that he is always concerned that his Divine service is not flawless and that he is sinful. ) This question focuses on the general nature of the attribute of bitachon, trust in G-d, which we are commanded [to pursue]. Bitachon
25 24 23
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. A n d his trust is so absolute that he is serene and 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 H i m . " Explanation is required: What is the foundation for this absolute certainty? Even when there is an explicit promise from G-d, it is possible that the promise will not be fulfilled because "sin will have an effect." Certainly, this applies when there is no such promise. [More over,] the possibility that "sin will have an effect" is relevant to each of 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 might have an effect, i.e., it appeared to him that he had sinned." 24. This reflects the questions raised by the commentaries to the Ein Yaakov (Berachos, loc. cit.) with regard to Hillel's statement: " I am positive that this [call of distress] is not coming from my house." [The commentaries question why he showed so much confidence. W h y did he not worry that perhaps he sinned, and as a result his household would be beset 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." {As Rambam explains (Sefer HaMitzvos, negative commandment 58), this verse is a command and not a promise.}[Implied is] that "if a person sees that adversity is close, he should set his heart on the salvation of G-d and trust in it."
26. Shaar HaBitachon, ch. 1. See also his introduction to Shaar HaBitachon (entry Ach toeles
habitachon). See also Kad HaKemach (by Rabbeinu BachayeJ, erech Bitachon which states that "No doubt should mitigate one's bitachon."
SHMOS
41
not sin.")
27
If even Yaakov our Patriarch had this fear, certainly, it

28
applies to others.
III.
On G-d, the surface, one might offer the following explanation: The blessed be He. Thus when a person is found in distress and concept of bitachon is based on the faith that everything comes from 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-d will save him from 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 change the natural order.}
29
And 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 for worry 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 Rabbeinu Yonah cited in Kad HaKemach, loc. cit. See also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I l l , p. 883, and the marginal notes mentioned there.
42
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 the Midrash 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 Yaakov became very frightened and he was distressed. [Hence,] he divided the people...." Similarly, Moses was warned not to fear [ O g ] . The fact that he had such fear indicated that he was lacking in consummate bitachon in G-d.
IV.
This explanation is, however, insufficient. For it is clearly apparent that the fundamental element of bitachon is not merely serenity and peace of mind [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, i.e., that G-d will deliver him from 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.) [It would 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 mind 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
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 an effect, who can trust that they will receive manifest and apparent good. } [Such an approach, however, contradicts the statements of] Chovos HaLevavos
33 32
31
(in the explanation of "the reasons why bitachon is possible")
that "there is One Who can be trusted because of His ultimate gener osity and kindness which is extended to a person who is worthy and also to one who is not worthy. His generosity will continue and His kindness will be extended without cessation or end." [According to this view,] the concept of bitachon is based on the principle 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 to persons who are not worthy. Nevertheless, isn't it possible that a person will receive punishment for his undesirable acts? What is the [conceptual] foundation for a person's trust that G-d will act generously to him although he is not worthy?
34
V.
The above questions can be resolved by first explaining an adage of the Tzemach Tzedek (quoted frequently by my revered father-in-law, the
31. See Kad HaKemach, loc. cit., the commentaries to Ein Yaakov, Berachos, loc. cit.
32. According to the opinion in the Midrash that "There is no [secure] promise for the righteous in this world," on the contrary, the righteous do not rely (even) on [G-d's] promise. 33. Shaar HaBitachon, ch. 2 (the seventh cause); see also ch. 3 (the introduction to the sixth concept); see also the conclusion of ch. 1. 34. As stated in Chovos HaLevavos (loc. cit., ch. 3, the fourth introduction): "It is necessary for [a person] to take great care and [undertake] intense efforts to fulfill what the Creator obligated us in His service, [i.e.,] to carry out His mitzvos... so that the Creator will consent to give [a person] the matters which [that person] trusts he will receive." Nevertheless, this is [necessary] only so that the person's present conduct will not be in contradiction to his bitachon in G-d. For it is impossible for a person to have bitachon in G-d and rebel against H i m (as stated in that source. That text gives an example from mortal conduct: [A person who is entrusted with a mission and ignores it cannot expect that the person who entrusted him with that mission will pay him generously].) [Nevertheless, the intent is not that the person's positive conduct evokes G-d's generosity. Instead,] the foundation and the reason for his trust [in G-d] is G-d's generosity which encompasses all created beings. See ch. 2 of the above source which states that the reason for our trust is "His mercy, graciousness, and love." A n d similarly, in ch. 3 he writes: "The Creator shows mercy on man more than anyone else shows mercy."
44
Rebbe) who gave this reply after someone begged him to plead for Divine mercies on behalf of a person who was dangerously i l l :
36
35
Tracht
gut, vet zaingut ("Think positively, and the outcome will 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). It appears that the intent can be explained as follows: The obliga tion of bitachon concerning which 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 a distinct obligation for such belief. Instead, the obligation of bitachon is a separate thrust in Divine service. Its definition is that a person will rely and depend on G-d alone to the extent that he casts his lot entirely upon H i m , as it is written: G-d," upon G-d. It is possible to explain that this is the intent of Chovos HaLevavos which states
38 37
"Cast your burden upon
i.e., the person has no other dependency in the world except
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. N o other person can cause him 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 W h o 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 because the kindness of G-d is totally unlimited and can be extended to a person whether he is
35. See IgrosKodesh of the Rebbe Rayatz, Vol. I I , p. 537; Vol. 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 sixth cause; see also the first introduction in ch. 3 with 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, bitachon involves work and labor within one's soul. A n d 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 command to trust in G-d: that a person should "cast his burden on G-d," [relying on H i m ] 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 approach
41
40
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 is explicitly stated in SeferIkkarim (Maamar 4, ch. 46): "It is written (Tehillim 32:10): ' A person who trusts in G-d will be encompassed by kindness,' i.e., even if he is not worthy on his own accord, it is the propensity of bitachon to draw down unwarranted kindness on those who trust in G-d." See also ch. 47: " I f a person would place his hope [in G-d] as is fitting, kindness would not be withheld from him by G-d." See also Kad HaKemach, 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 also Nesivos Olam, the conclusion of Nesiv HaBitachon, and other sources. See also Yalkut Shimoni, Yeshayahu, Remez 473, which states: "The H o l y One, blessed be He, asked: 'Are there G-d-fearing men among you?... Trust in M y name and [that trust] will stand by you.... I will save whoever trusts in M y name.'" Note also 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 also the sources mentioned in fn. 25. 41. See the Zohar I I , 184b, which states: "The higher realms impart influence to [the lower 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. A n d if they manifest sadness...." See also IgrosKodesh of the Tzemach Tzedek, p. 324ff.
46
he would not be worthy, and He enables him to appreciate manifest and apparent good.
42
This is the intent of the adage of 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.
VI.
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: "Will you kill 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 also 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. And Moshe fled...." The fact that Moshe feared for his life and did not trust G - d
44
that no harm would befall him because of his positive
efforts [to save a Jewish man from the Egyptian who was beating him and to rebuke the two Jews who were quarreling] was itself the cause
42. See Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh (the conclusion of Epistle 11): "This faith causes everything to become truly good in an apparent way." (See also the Biurei Zohar of the Tzemach Tzedek, p. 194.) Note also similar concepts in Nesivos Olam, 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 is written (Iyov 3:24): 'Because I feared a fright, it has overtaken me.'"(See also the Yefas Toar HaShaleim which quotes this narrative.) The intent is that if he would rely on G-d without any worry or fear, he would be saved from suffering. See also 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] promise for the righteous in this world." (See fn. 16.) See also the gloss BeerBisadeh to Rashi's commentary to the verse which explains that the reason Moshe was afraid that he would be killed was that he feared that the Jewish people were not worthy of being redeemed. If not, he would not have worried at all, for he knew that his future mission would be to redeem the Jewish people.
SHMOS
47
for "Pharaoh [to] hear of the matter and to seek to kill Moshe." [Moshe's lack of trust] caused him to have to 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.'" Not only did Moshe think these thoughts within his heart, he
45
expressed them in speech. This increases the emphasis on his lack of bitachon. For in addition to having these suspicions in his mind, he spoke about them.}
46
Were he to have had complete bitachon in G-d, and not have worried at all about the situation in which he found himself (that "the matter had become known" and would be discovered by Pharaoh), that would have caused the matter to have been forgotten and for him to have realized 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 utterly serene without any worry at all, [his bitachon will bear fruit]. (Needless to say, he must also 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 promise: "Think positively and the outcome will be good." This will become manifest. A l l of the obstacles and encumbrances will be eliminated and he will enjoy actual good that is apparent and manifest to all.
45. For the Torah does not say (as it says in Bereishis 17:17): "And he said in his heart." 46. [The very fact that a thought is expressed in speech 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. X V , p. 32, et al.)
47. As is well known, there is no contradiction between true bitachon 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 also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 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
Just as with regard to the redemption from Egypt, it is said: "In the merit of [their] bitachon, the Jews were redeemed from Egypt," so, too, with regard to the redemption from this last exile, the Midrash states:
49
48
"They are worthy of redemption in reward for [their] hope

50
(alone)." May we merit this, that in the reward for the bitachon of the Jewish people [in the promise] " M y salvation will come soon," Redemption. May this take place in the immediate future.
(Adapted from Sichos Shabbos Parshas Shmos, 5726, and Sichos Shabbos Parshas Beshalach, 5723)
they
will merit that G-d will redeem them in the true and ultimate
48. Kad HaKemach, loc. cit., based on Midrash Tehillim, Psalm 22. 49. Yalkut Kuf, 50. Shimoni, Tehillim (based on Midrash Tehillim, Psalm 40), cited by R. David Avudraham, Seder Tefillos Yom HaKippurim. sec. 16. Yeshayahu 56:1. See also the Chidah, Midbar Kadmos, Maarechos
PARSHAS BESHALACH
Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X X V I , p. 95ff.
I.
The Tur states that it is desirable to recite the passage concerning the
1
manna every day. The Beis Yosef explains the rationale for this ruling:
2 3
"So that one will believe that his entire sustenance comes to him through Divine providence."
1.
Orach Chayim, sec. 1; see also Shulchan Aruch, 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]." Similarly, the Alter Rebbe (Shulchan Aruch HaRav,
Mahadura Kama 1:10 and Mahadura Basra 1:9) [mentions the importance of the recitation
of the passage every day]. See TureiZahav

Note also Or HaTorah,
1:4. See also [sec. I l l ] of this sichah and fn. 32.
Beshalach, p. 644, (see also Maamarei Admur HaZakein Razal, p.
35) which states "every day or from time to time." * Sefer HaManhig, Hilchos Shabbos, sec. 44, quotes this wording from "the conclusion of
tractate Yoma in the Talmud Yerushalmi. ** Similarly, 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 16:16 quotes this insight as "a received tradition 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 also necessary according 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
50
In his Shulchan Aruch, the Alter Rebbe in the Mahadura Kama
quotes the ruling of the Tur and the rationale of the Beis Yosef, and adds (an explanation from the Levush ): "[One should also read the passage
5
concerning the manna, to fortify his faith that all his provisions are granted to him by Divine providence.] For the Holy One, blessed be He, specifically provided every man with an omer [of manna] for every member of his household; as it is written, 'When they measured it by the omer, he who had gathered much had no excess, and he who had gathered little was lacking nothing.'" In his Mahadura Basra,
7 6
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 passage concerning the manna [to spur] one's trust in G-d W h o provides every man with his daily bread." There are two differences between these passages: 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. 5. 6. 7. 8. 1:10. 1:5. Shmos 16:18. The citation of this verse is an addition by the Alter Rebbe that is not present in his source, the Levush. See fn. 12. 1:9. It is noteworthy to mention that in this entire subsection, the Alter Rebbe condenses his statements when compared to the Mahadura Kama. For example, with regard to the binding
of Yitzchak, in the Mahadura Kama, he quotes (from the Beis Yosef) two rationales: "to recall
8
the merit of the Patriarchs before the Holy One, blessed be He... and to make one's [evil] inclination submit to the service of G-d, just as Yitzchak sacrificed himself." In the Mahadura Basra, by contrast, he states only "to recall the merit of the Patriarchs."* Similarly, in the Mahadura Basra, he does not 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 all included in the same subsection, in contrast to the Mahadura Kama which lists them in several subsections), the Mahadura Basra omits several of the particular laws mentioned in the Mahadura Kama. (See Mahadura Kama, subsec. 15ff.) W i t h regard to the passage concerning the manna, however, the Alter Rebbe does not merely condense his statements, he changes [several points,] as will 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) "an omer [of manna] for every member of his
9
household," but that the fact that G-d continually granted the manna, "each day, its daily portion"
10
should evoke one's trust that G-d will
grant each person his daily bread. Seemingly, these two distinctions are dependent one on the other: The concept that "the Holy One, blessed be He, specifically provided 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 a Jew's faith that his sustenance (does not come from "my strength and the power of my hand," but instead,) from G-d's providence. This was manifest in [the daily descent of] the manna. For we saw that man's activities had no effect on the quantity of manna which G-d (ordained and) granted each person.
12 11
9.
This point is also added by the Levush. Clarification is required why the Alter Rebbe did not quote this point from the Levush in his Mahadura Kama. See fn. 12.
10. See Shmos 16:4.
11. Devarim 8:17. This verse comes as a continuation of the previous verse which mentions the manna. 12. O n this basis, we can appreciate why the Alter 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]. On this basis, we can also understand [another difference between the Alter 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 unique Divine providence that governs every particular aspect of an individual's destiny (see fn. 9). The Alter Rebbe omits the word peratis [which emphasizes control of all particular elements of one's destiny], for according to the Alter 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 overtly revealed that it came from Above and man's deeds had no effect upon it. * The Levush, by contrast, emphasizes that a person's sustenance is controlled by Divine providence. On this basis, we can appreciate the difference in the wording used by the Levush and the Alter Rebbe. The Levush quotes the verse, "an omer for [each of] the number of members of his household," [putting an emphasis on the fact that each individual received his portion]. The Alter Rebbe, by contrast, states, "an omer [of manna] for every member of his household," [speaking more inclusively].
52
Trust (bitachon), however, implies (not only that we believe that a person's sustenance comes from G-d, but also) that we rely 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 H i m , 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 daily bread"?
II.
O n the surface, it would appear that there must also be an actual difference in the application of halachah between these two rationales. [To reach that conclusion, the following] preface is necessary: 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],
13
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. O n 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. Similar 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] also [applies] even with regard to actual [life situations, and it is possible that before breaking into a house, a thief will cry out to G-d (Berachos 63a, according to the version of the Ein Yaakov). [Such a contradiction] is not possible with regard to
bitachon.
14. [It is true that] the concept of bitachon always exists within the feelings of the person who shows trust. The actual arousal 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." 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 15
He trusts that G-d will
certainly bless his efforts in a manner that they will bring him
"Where will my assistance come from?"
Instead, he is certain (because of his bitachon in G-d,) [and trusts] that G-d W h o is the Master of nature and can alter [the situation as He desires] will certainly help him. He knows: " M y assistance is from G-d, Maker of heaven and earth."
18 17
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. O n the surface, there is a point requiring explanation. Bitachon means 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 also that the person himself should be able to appreciate that it is good. Seemingly, the fact that a person finds himself in a difficult situa tion could be because his conduct is not appropriate and therefore he is worthy of being punished. H o w can it be a foundation of a person's bitachon in G - d
20 19
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 in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I l l , p. 883 (also printed in Igros Kodesh of the Rebbe Rayatz, Vol. V I , p. 398ff). See also 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, Vol. I l l , loc. cit. 20. See Kad 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
will have an effect." See the Tzemach Tzedek's Biurei HaZohar, pp. 189 and 192.
54
[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
It 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 "measure for measure," for the Torah declares and rules that this is His characteristic. A n d He grants him overtly revealed good, without considering at all whether he is worthy of i t . }
23 24 22
III.
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-d will 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, it is possible to say: a) This passage should be recited only on weekdays, but not on Shabbos
26 25
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 rewards him with good that is not bound by the scales of reason and logic.]
23. See the lengthy explanation in Nesivos Olam, loc. cit. Note Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle
11: "With this faith, everything becomes good in a revealed manner. ([This passage is] quoted in Biurei HaZohar, loc. cit., p. 194, which states: "Through emunah 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 HaKemach, loc. cit., which states: "The concept of bitachon... is for one's heart to be steadfast, trusting [G-d], as if He actually promised
him." See also Chovos HaLevavos, loc. cit., chs. 1-2.
25. This also applies according to the rationale given by the Perishah (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 although it provided man with his daily sustenance.}
28
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 Holy One, blessed be He, and then pray (i.e., request his needs)." Indeed, we find this pattern in several siddurim. The passage concerning the manna is positioned after
30
prayer (together with a prayer and a request for one's livelihood). Following the rationale [that the passage is recited]: "to fortify his faith...," by contrast, it is appropriate to recite this passage on Shabbos as well and also before prayer (which represents "G-d's praise"). For 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 states that this passage may also be recited on Shabbos. This also 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 this sichah. 27. It is possible to explain that [the recitation of the passage concerning 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 Aruch HaRav, Mahadura Kama 1:16, Magen
31
faith in G-d (including, also, faith with regard to one's sustenance)
Avraham 1:11). In this instance, it is only "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 is still necessary. 28. [With regard to the question of] whether the manna descended on festivals, see the
comments of the Mechilta, the Mechilta DRashbi, and Rashi to Shmos 16:26 and Tosafos, s.v. vihayah, Beitzah 2b. See also Toras Shlomoh to Shmos, op. cit. 29. Berachos 32a, [quoted by] the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch HaRav 51:1. 30. Siddur Yaavetz, Avodas Yisrael, et al. See also the statement quoted in Orchos Chayim
(HaChadash), Orach Chayim 1, that one who prays for his livelihood after the recitation of this passage as stated in the Siddurim should wait until after the Shemoneh Esreh, because it is written in the Zohar, Parshas Pinchas, that one should not pray for his livelihood before the morning prayers. Similar statements are made by Makor Chayim (authored by the
author of Chavos Yair) in his gloss to Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim. 31. See also Olas Tamid (gloss to Orach Chayim, loc. cit.) which is cited by the Be'er Heitev, loc. cit.
56
G-d"), the Alter Rebbe writes: "It is proper to recite every day... the passage concerning the manna." The wording, "every day," seemingly includes Shabbos.
32
Similarly, [this distinction is not borne out] with regard to the place in prayer where the passage should 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 also indicated by the fact that in the Mahadura Basra, the Alter Rebbe includes the law regarding the
33
recitation of the passage concerning the manna with that regarding the passages concerning the Akeidah, (the Ten Commandments,) the sacrifices (which are recited before prayer).
34 35
and
The question thus remains: For what reason is a different rationale

stated in the Mahadura Basra than in the Mahadura Kama (and Yosef)? in the Beis
IV.
The above question can be resolved through the explanation of the conduct of Rabbi Yeisa the Elder
37 36
(as described in the Zohar of this
week's Torah reading in connection with the manna).

32. It appears obvious that the Alter Rebbe's intent in adding the words "every day" (that are not stated in the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch) is to include Shabbos. (This also applies with regard to the passage of the Akeidah [the Binding of Yitzchak].) This is also the conclusion of the texts cited by the Beer Heitev, loc. cit. 33. [Trans. Note: The Ten Commandments is included in parentheses, for although in his Shulchan Aruch the Alter Rebbe advises its inclusion in the morning prayers, he does not include it in his text of the Siddur.] 34. [Moreover,] in the Mahadura Kama, the laws regarding the recitation of the passages concerning the sacrifices are mentioned in separate subsections.
35. There are, 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 passage concerning the manna).
36. In many sources (Maamarei AdmurHaZakein, p. 112d; Derech Mitzvosecha, Mitzvas 5565, Vol. I I (pp. 648, 652); Siddur Im Dach, Tiglachas Metzora, sec. 2, et al.), this story is told of
Rav Hamnuna, the Elder. A n d in Kuntreis U'Maayon (Discourse 17, ch. 1), it is told of Rabbi Yeibei the Elder.
37. Zohar II, 62b; see also Zohar I , 199b.
BESHALACH
57
[Rabbi Yeisa] would not prepare his 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 King." Clarification is required: Since the food (from which he prepared his meal) was already within his possession ([as that passage states:] " I am in possession of my food for this day") and lacked only prepara tion, what did he mean that meal? It is possible to explain the passage based on the interpretation given by Rabbeinu Bacheya of our Sages' statement
40 41 39 38
by saying that he is asking G-d to give him
that Yosef was

42
punished for asking Pharaoh's steward to mention him to Pharaoh.
[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 miracle could be accomplished." W h y then was Yosef punished? Because he saw the steward as an instrument (through which G-d could send His deliverance).... A n d 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 Holy 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: bitachon, it is explained (in Chovos HaLevavos )
44 43
W i t h regard to
that we are obligated to
38. Zohar I , loc. cit. I I , p. 62a.
39. Note our Sages' comment (Shabbos 118b): "Whoever recites Hallel every day is base."
40. A t 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'Tehillim, ch. 40:5; the maamar entitled Velo Zachor, 5677 and 5688; see also Maamarei Admur HaZakein 5565, V o l . I , p. 200; Toras Chayim, Parshas Vayechi, maamar entitled Ben Poreis Yosef, ch. 13. the
44. Shaar HaBitachon, ch. 3, the fifth introduction, loc. cit., ch. 4. This concept is reiterated in many sources. See also Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X V , p. 486ff.
58
find instruments [through which G-d works], (and many proofs are brought for this concept). W h y then was Yosef punished for seeking "an instrument"? It is explained
bitachon:
45
that there are two expressions (and levels) of
a) When Divine influence is drawn down in an ordinary manner, according to the pattern of nature
46
{ t o use the terminology of
Chassidus: [influence coming] from the level of memale kol almin (the Divine light which invests itself in the worlds)}. O n 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 does not follow the natural order { t o use the terminology of Chassidus: [influence coming] 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-d will certainly help through a medium."
47
{Yosef the righteous who, through his Divine service, was (at all times) connected with a level that transcends nature
bitachon.}
48
should have
conducted himself in a manner [that reflected] the higher level of
45. The maamar entitled Velo Zachor, loc. cit.
46. See the series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, Vol. I, ch. 82 (with regard to the two levels 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 maamar entitled Velo
Zachor, loc. cit. )
47. See the series of maamarim entitled BeShaah 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 miracle.'" 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 bitachon 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 drawn down. When, however, a person follows the second approach of bitachon, "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. A n d the instrument and the medium is also made for him by G-d together with his livelihood. Elder day). Rabbi Yeisa's approach to bitachon was that he looked at every act (individually), (not as his own deed, but rather) as a gift from G-d.
52 51 50
This is also the explanation of the conduct of Rabbi Yeisa the who said: "A meal should not be prepared until it has been given from the King" (although he already possessed his food for that
Accordingly, [from such a perspective,] even when one possesses the food at home and all that is necessary is for him to take it and prepare
49. W i t h regard to the concepts to follow, see Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I , p. 174ff. (see fn. 52) and Vol. X V I I I , p. 295ff. 50. See the interpretation of [Tehillim 55:23]: "He will provide for you ()," [as "He will provide the "( medium") for you,] in the maamar entitled Velo Zachor, loc. cit. 51. See the sources mentioned in fn. 36. See also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 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 Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XV, p. 176, with regard to the verse (Shmos 16:4): "Behold, I will rain down for you bread from heaven." A n d there was a dimension of the manna that involved effort on man's part.
60
it, he does not feel that he is taking and preparing his own food, but instead, that he is ( in the present tense ) being given something by G-d. Therefore he must request these [needs] from G-d, (just as he would request his sustenance if he did not have food at home).
VI.
This explanation enables us to clarify another aspect in the conduct of Rabbi Yeisa the Elder. The wording of the Zohar: "[Rabbi Yeisa] would not prepare his meal every day until after he had made his request..." implies that Rabbi Yeisa conducted himself in this manner even on Shabbos. There is a difficulty in this case. Shabbos is not a day when we
53
request our needs. W h y then would Rabbi Yeisa pray for his [daily] sustenance from G-d, even on Shabbos? Based on the above, [his conduct] can be understood: The requests for one's needs that are considered inappropriate on Shabbos involve situations where the person is concerned with himself: that his needs and lacks be fulfilled. The prayer of Rabbi Yeisa the Elder, [by contrast,] was aroused by the fact that his own existence was entirely insignificant. [Instead,] he felt every dimension of his existence was dependent on G-d. The Zohar
54
describes such conduct by referring to the phrase:
55
"Those who long for His kindness," interpreting it as "those who every day await and anticipate [the opportunity to] request their sustenance from the Holy One, blessed be He." The intent of their prayers is only to express how they "long for His kindness" ; how they feel that everything they receive is an expression of G-d's kindness.
56
53. See the Zohar I, 199a, which states [that a person should not cook his food on one day for the following day, except on Friday, for the people would collect the manna only for] that immediate day except on Friday, [when they would also collect] for Shabbos.
54. Zohar I I , loc. cit. See Or HaTorah, Beshalach, p. 644 (quoted in Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X V I , p.
177, fn. 35). 55. Tehillim 147:11. 56. Note the teaching of the Maggid of Mezritch { O r Torah, the beginning of Parshas
Vayigash see Tikkunei Zohar, Tikkun 7 (p. 22a)} concerning our Sages' statement (Berachos
30b): "One should not stand to pray except with a serious intent," that [the seriousness of one's intent should focus on] "there lacking nothing Above, Heaven forbid." See also the explanation in the Haggadah Shel Pesach Im Biurim (Kehot 5746-5747), p. 633ff., with regard to eating for the sake of Heaven, that eating becomes secondary to the
BESHALACH
61
Praying for one's sustenance in this manner is acceptable even on

Shabbos.
VII.
The conduct of Rabbi Yeisa the Elder is not [ in its entirety ] a matter that [can be emulated by] every person. Nevertheless, in microcosm, his approach is relevant to everyone, at specific times. It 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. 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 above the natural order and express the higher level of bitachon. Shabbos, by contrast, is not a day of work. A n d when a person is removed from work, he must express (at least on a smaller scale) the higher level of bitachon, [conducting himself as] "those who long for Your kindness." On this basis, it is possible to explain the difference between the
wording of the Mahadura Kama and the Mahadura Basra of the Alter
60 59 57 58
at the very least,
Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch with regard to the recitation of the passage concerning the manna. The Alter Rebbe composed the Mahadura Kama
of his Shulchan Aruch according to the rulings of the Talmud and the
halachic authorities.
61
O n 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 passage concerning the manna as "[to spur] one's
recitation of the blessing, that one benefits from this world only so that he will be able to recite a blessing. 57. See the statements of the Alter Rebbe in Tanya, the beginning of ch. 44, with regard to Moshe. (See also the Zohar I, Introduction, p. 7b, the glosses of Mikdash Melech, and Sefer 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 business... and trade faithfully."

60. Yechezkel 46:1. 61. See Shulchan Aruch HaRav 25:28.
156:1 rules, after prayer one should "turn to his
62
trust in G-d," the recitation of this passage would 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 Rebbe states 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." In his Mahadura Basra, the Alter Rebbe rules according to the Kabbalists. Accordingly, he also includes a course of conduct that reflects higher levels of Divine service. Therefore
64 63
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] "those who long for His kindness," it is appropriate to recite the passage concerning the manna every day even on Shabbos (and even before prayer).
(Adapted from Sichos Shabbos Parshas Beshalach, 5723)
62. This ruling is also found in the Beis Yosef, although [even] in nigleh, the revealed teachings of Torah Law, it is stated in many places that the manna was intended to spur bitachon. See the sources cited 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 is worthy to note that the AriZal was not accustomed to recite the passage concerning 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}. Similarly,
the Alter Rebbe omits it in his Siddur. See Or HaTorah, loc. cit., which states: "The suggested advice for this is for a person to recite the passage concerning the manna with concentration every day or from time to time." 64. Clarification is still necessary, for the type [of individuals who can manifest such Divine service] is a minority. { A n d as our Sages (Berachos 35b) state: "Many attempted to conduct themselves according to the directives of Rabbi Yishmael [who ruled that a person must balance his commitment to Torah study with concern for his work] and were successful."
PURIM
Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X X X I , p. 170ff.
I.
The tractate Megillah states:
1
Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai's students asked him: "Why did the enemies of the Jewish people in that generation become li able for annihilation?.... [He answered]: "Because they took pleasure in the feast of that wicked man." "If so, those in Shushan [deserved to] die, but those in the world at large did not [deserve to] die...." "Because they bowed down to the idol." On an obvious level, the transgression involved in taking pleasure in the feast is eating non-kosher food. As the Midrash states: "[The
3 2
Jews] came... into danger... because they partook of the gentiles' food." There is a well-known question: Is partaking of non-kosher food so severe a transgression that [its violation caused] the Jews to be worthy of annihilation?
5 4
1.
Megillah 12a; see Shir HaShirim Rabbah 7:8.
2.
3.
[The Talmud often uses this term as a euphemism when mentioning negative factors concerning the Jewish people.]
Shir HaShirim Rabbah, loc. cit. Similar concepts are found in the Midrash Tanchuma (Buber
ed.), the conclusion of Parshas Behar: "They were all 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. Moshe Alshich to Esther 1:8; et al.
63
64
{The Talmud, [indeed,] raises a question concerning this rationale, for it does not explain why [the Jews] throughout the world were deserving of death. [Seemingly, however,] it accepts this rationale as sufficient to warrant the death of those living in Shushan.}
7 6
The wording of the Talmud is also worthy of notice. The Talmud speaks of "taking pleasure in the feast of that wicked man." The expression implies that the sin was not eating the food, but "taking pleasure in the feast." { I t is also slightly difficult to explain that [the punishment was for] eating non-kosher food. For our Sages interpret the statement
10 9 8
that the feast was held "according to the will of each

10
individual person" as meaning "according to the will of Mordechai and Haman." Similarly, on the verse: "The drinking was according to law;
5.
See Yalkut Shimoni to Esther (sec. 1048); Midrash Abba Gurion 1:5 which quote R. Shimon
bar Yochai (the author of the statement in Shir HaShirim Rabbah) as stating: "They ate the food of kusim* against their will." The wording of the Talmud: "they took pleasure in the feast...," however, indicates that they participated willingly. {The Talmud's statement that their deeds were merely an "external gesture" ("out of fear," Rashi) applies only with regard to the rationale "that they bowed down to the idol."} * [Lit. "Samaritans."] This change was made due to censorship. The proper version is "of gentiles" as stated in the first printing of the Yalkut Shimoni (Salonika, 5287) and in the Frankfort printing of 5447. A similar version is found in Midrash Abba Gurion. See the conclusion of fn. 3.
6.
7.
[Trans. Note: For they did not partake of the feast.]

See several commentaries (Rif to Ein Yaakov, loc. cit., Manos HaLevi, loc. cit. see Rashi to
Esther 4:1 and Sifsei Chachamim) who explain that, even according to the Talmud's conclusion, they were also liable for taking pleasure in the feast. Because of that transgression, retribution was also meted out for their first sin, bowing down to the idol. (See fn. 50 that highlights the connection between the two concepts.) 8. Esther Rabbah (7:18) also states that [the decree came] "because Israel took pleasure in the feast of Achashverosh."* Perhaps the intent there is (as stated explicitly in the Midrash previously) that "they ate, drank, became intoxicated, and acted in depraved manner (i.e., engaged in lewd behavior)." The Talmud, by contrast, does not mention [such undesirable conduct], seemingly implying that their sin involved taking pleasure alone. See the Targum to Esther 4:1 [which also speaks of their transgression being that they took pleasure in the feast, without mentioning other factors]. *
9.
Mentioning him by name in contrast to the Talmud which speaks of "that wicked man."
Megillah, loc. cit.
10. Esther 1:8
PURIM
65
no one was compelled," the Midrash states explicitly:
11
"No one was
compelled to drink non-Jewish wine." Thus there was 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 stated this explicitly.}
II.
There are commentaries
12
who explain [the severity of partaking of

13
the feast as follows]: Achashverosh held this feast in celebration of the fact that the Beis HaMikdash was not rebuilt. (As the Talmud relates, according to the reckoning of Achashverosh, the seventy years of the Babylonian exile had ended and yet the Jews had not been redeemed. "Now they will surely not be redeemed," he said, and he took out the utensils of the Beis HaMikdash struction of the Temple." Nevertheless, the matter is not entirely understood:
14
and used them.) Thus, "Anyone who
took pleasure in that feast avowed that he was happy with the de 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 decree of annihilation came because of bowing down to the idol, it is understandable. For as the commentaries explain: "Annihilation is appropriate for the worship of false deities, as was the case with regard to the Golden Calf, concerning which it is written: them in a moment.'"
18 17 16
' I will annihilate
But how is it possible that a decree of annihila-
11. Esther Rabbah 13. Megillah
2:13.
12. Rif to Ein Yaakov, loc. cit. Manos HaLevi, loc. cit. 11b.
14. See also 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 32:10 states: " I will 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 also slain (Rambam,
Mishneh Torah, Hilchos AvodasKochavim 4:6; see the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh).
66
tion encompassing even those who 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
III.
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 Holy One, blessed be He] W h o saves it and protects it." The intent is that the Jewish people's existence among the nations is at times miraculous, 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 miraculous 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 protection order. { T o cite a parallel: Rambam
22 21
G-d's
and place themselves under the dominion of the natural interprets the verse:
23
" I will hide M y
face from them... and many evils will beset [the people] and they will say: 'Because my G-d is not in my midst these evils have beset me'" to mean that when a person separates himself from G-d, "G-d separates
19. The gloss Gaon Yaakov to Ein Yaakov, loc. cit., states that this why were they liable for 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?") also applies to the children in Shushan itself.
20. Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Toldos, sec. 5; Esther Rabbah 10:11; see also Pesikta Rabasi, ch. 9.
21. [This relates to] the concept (Berachos 29a): "An accuser 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 occurrences."
24
It is possible to explain that this is also the intent of Rambam (at

the beginning of his Hilchos Taanios)
25
in his interpretation
of the
27
verse:
26
" I f you will proceed in indifference to Me, (I will also)
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 a chance occurrence occurrence' difficulty,
29 28
( saying 'What happened to
us is a natural phenomenon and this difficulty is merely a chance ) I will increase that indifference with a vengeance." He will conduct Himself in a manner of G-d's intent is not (only) that He will increase his punishment and but that indifference with regard to this person and will remove His special providence. As a result, that person will be "subject to chance occurrences."}
30
On this basis, we can appreciate why "taking pleasure in the feast of that wicked man" led to the decree of 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 peratis, "Divine providence," as explained in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I I I , p. 199ff.
25. Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Taanios 1:3.
26. Vayikra 26:27-28. 27. These words, though found in the verse, are not included in the standard printed text
of the Mishneh Torah.
28.
29.
[The Hebrew term can mean both indifference and chance occurrence.]
The beginning of the halachah in Hilchos Taanios, loc. cit.
30. See a similar interpretation in the Kli Yakars commentary to Vayikra 26:24. 31. The explanations above resolve the question asked by the commentaries [concerning the continuation of the Talmudic passage: i.e., after the Talmud answers that the Jews throughout the world were worthy of annihilation because: "They bowed down to the idol," the Sages ask:] "Is there a possibility of favoritism?" The commentaries (among them Manos HaLevi, loc. cit. Anaf Yosef, loc. cit.) ask: W h y is this question asked only 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 taking pleasure in the feast is not a punishment for the sin, but rather a
68
For
after Achashverosh "exalted Haman... and elevated him...

32
above all the officers," the Jews were like "a lamb among seventy wolves." By "taking pleasure in the feast," their conduct negated the miraculous 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 showed 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 (because Achashverosh was king and they were obligated to honor his position),
34 33
but that they attended because they took pleasure in

35
(being invited to) this feast.
By giving importance to the seventy
wolves through taking pleasure in the honor they received from that "wicked man," they rejected the miraculous 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 decree was 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 that wicked man." The very fact that they derived pleasure from "the feast of that wicked man" (i.e., a feast for any reason) is sufficient reason for the decree [of annihilation]. (In contrast, the commentaries cited in sec. II 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 all attend (EstherRabbah 7:18).

35. See also Manos HaLevi, loc. cit. Yaaros Davash, Vol. I , Sermon I l l (7 Adar, 5504), s.v. habitu
na, et al. See also fn. 64. 36. [This also explains why] the children also 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 also the explanations in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I I I , p. 198, with regard to Korach's congregation.
PURIM
69
IV.
Additional explanation [can be gained through the following] preface: Our Sages teach: states:
38 37
"One should not rely on miracles. A n d the Torah

39
"And G-d will bless you in all that you do." Implied is that
40
although "It is the blessing of G-d that brings wealth," this blessing is not endowed to a person when he sits idle. 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
cause that brings him his sustenance and livelihood. They are only the mediums for G-d's blessings through which G-d grants him his suste nance and livelihood. G-d desires that a person's sustenance be enclothed in the natural order and come through natural means. For it was He W h o 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 a deeper 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 also 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
37. Shabbos 32a Pesachim 64b Zohar I , 111b, 112b, et al.
;
that transcends the
38. Devarim 15:18. [With regard to this concept,] see the maamar entitled UVarachicha to Derech Chayim Derech Mitzvosecha, Mitzvas maamar 17ff. 39. Mishlei 10:22. 40. See Sifri to Devarim, loc. cit. G-d, Sichos In English, 5753). Tiglachas Metzora, ch. 2ff.; Kuntreis
in
Maamarei Admur HaZakein 5565, Vol. I I (p. 648ff.), 5568, V o l . I , p. 165ff.; the introduction U'Maayon,
41. See the sources cited in fn. 38; see also the maamar entitled VeYadaata, 5657 (To Know
70
natural order.
42
G-d oversees and controls all of the affairs of the

43
Jewish people with a unique providence and with a miraculous order that is not at all confined by the laws of nature. to receive G-d's blessing
44
Based on the above, the reason man must perform deeds in order is only that G-d desired that this [requiring] actions miraculous order be conveyed through nature. For this reason He enclothed these miracles in natural garments, 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). {To what can a person who places emphasis on his business with 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 authorities
46 45
[to the extent that:] "The law of

47
the land is law." A n d we are commanded: the city... and pray for its sake."
"Seek out the welfare of
42. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I I I , p. 200ff., and the sources cited there. 43. See Derech Mitzvosecha, loc. cit. (p. 107a), [which states]: "When a believer is involved in commercial activity, he should have the intent that the influence comes from G-d's blessing in the same manner as other revealed miracles, 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, Vol. X V I I , p. 176ff. 44. By contrast, there are miracles that are not enclothed in nature [where man's effort is not required entirely, to cite a parallel:] 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. Yirmeyahu 29:7; Avos 3:2. 46. Nedarim 28a; Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Gezeilah VeAveidah 5:11ff. 47.
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," 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 world ), but is instead in the hands of G-d alone. Moreover, the existence of the Jewish people is a miracle, at times enclothed in nature, and at times an overt miracle, [above nature,] like a lamb among seventy wolves as explained above. "Great is the Shep herd," Who protects the Jewish people in a miraculous 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 dependent
50 49 48
on the wicked King Achashverosh, a person who acted
contrary to the fulfillment of the will of the Creator of the world. This caused them to consider their participation in the feast a source of pleasure and delight.
VI.
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 cited at the conclusion 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 "they took pleasure in the feast" and "they bowed down to the idol." For taking pleasure in the feast is (in an abstract way) comparable to the worship of false divinities. We see a parallel 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 false divinities with purity." See also the comments of Manos HaLevi, loc. cit.
72
the miracle of Chanukah (and how much more so, to the redemption from Egypt). For the deliverance on Chanukah involved miracles that transcended the natural order ("You delivered the mighty into the hands of the weak" ). The deliverance of Purim, by contrast, came about through a miracle enclothed in the natural order, (i.e., "there was nothing that appeared to be a departure from nature").
52 51
It 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 dominion 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" }. [Generally,] a miracle that is enclothed within nature teaches us that G-d's miraculous order is not confined to being above nature, i.e., it need not upset the natural order. Instead, it can also enclothe itself within the natural order. The miracle of Purim [contains] a new dimension. Although it was enclothed in nature, it was a miracle just like an overt miracle. For that reason, we recite the blessing "Who performed miracles" both on Chanukah (when the miracle was not enclothed within 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 miraculous. "It is obvious that all the causes were above nature." Nevertheless, it was a miracle that was enclothed in nature. For even nature as it affects the Jewish people contains miracles that transcend nature.
54 53
VII.
[Based on the above, we see that there are] two extremes that are demanded from every Jew: O n one hand, one cannot rely on miracles and must act within the context of the natural order. O n the other hand, he must realize that all the natural dimensions of his life are only
51. [The VeAl 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 him in this manner] without mentioning his name, Achashverosh.
54. Torah Or, loc.. cit., p. 93d, 100a.
PURIM
73
a garment and all of his concerns are dependent on G-d's miraculous providence. [This twofold approach] was expressed by Esther in her efforts to annul Haman's decree:
55
O n one hand, she went to Achashverosh

56
(carrying out the mission with which she was charged by Mordechai) "to make supplications to him and to beg for her people." To [succeed in] this [mission], she would have to find favor in his eyes. Indeed, her [mission] required that he find her uniquely appealing, for: a) she had not been called to the king for thirty days, contrary to court procedure one law to execute").
57 58 57
b) entering the inner royal chamber without being summoned ran and involved danger to her life ("there is
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
On 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 fasted
60
and thus reduced the possibility
of her finding favor in the king's eyes? A n d if Esther was relying on deliverance coming in a miraculous 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.") W h y 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. W i t h regard to the ideas in this section, see also 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.
74
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 miracle that transcends nature. Therefore it was first necessary for them to pray and fast so that they would be worthy of that miracle. Nevertheless, since G-d desired that the miraculous 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 necessary to 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.
VIII.
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 Purim narrative teaches us that although it is necessary to 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 mission 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 he will be healthy and unblemished so that he can serve G-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 Aruch, Orach
Chayim, sec. 231. See also the following footnote.
PURiM
75
The question of whether a person's involvement in his physical needs is for the sake of 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 unblemished to serve G-d
63
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
several occasions (Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 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 said... '1 did not derive pleasure from them' (Kesuvos 114a). [Instead, his conduct was solely] for the sake of Heaven." Commenting on Avodah Zarah 11a, Tosafos questions that statement. For our Sages state that [R. Yehudah HaNasi lived in a regal manner. His table was garnished with all 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 and yet] "did not act for the sake of satisfaction, that he would experience physical pleasure.... [Instead, his intent was] that he would have strength in his service of the Creator. According to this, the wording... ' I did not derive pleasure' is appropriate, i.e., ' I did not eat for the sake of pleasure.'"** This parallels the concepts explained above, that the Jews' sin was not that they partook of Achashverosh's feast, but that they took pleasure 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." {In microcosm, however, this level is relevant to every person. This is the reason the Alter Rebbe mentions 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 is necessary... to cleanse [the body] and purify it from the impurity it
76
When, on the other hand, he considers his material life as primary, then, when it comes to his spiritual matters, he says: "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. [This awareness caused] them to merit deliverance and redemption. May we "join redemption to redemption,"
66 65
connecting the re
demption of Purim to the redemption of Pesach and to the ultimate exodus from the confines and limitations 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 by Mashiach may this take place speedily, in our days.
(Adapted from Sichos Purim, 5722 and 5727)
received from taking pleasure in this world... unless, like our holy teacher, one did not derive pleasure 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 the grave"?
65. Cf. Sotah 22b. 66. Megillah 6b. 67. Michah 7:15.
PARSHAS VAYIKRA
Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X V I I , p. 1ff.
I.
(At a Pesach farbrengen, ) the [Previous] Rebbe related the manner in
1
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. After the teacher had studied the
2
passage with the child, the child asked the Alter Rebbe: "Why is the alef in the word Vayikra small?" replied: Adam, the first man, was G-d's handiwork and G-d testified that his wisdom surpassed that of the ministering angels. But Adam knew his own greatness and was overcome by his
5 4 3
The Alter Rebbe entered a state of dveikus for a long time and then
1. 2.
Sichos Yom Shevi'i ShelPesach, 5700 (SeferHaSichos 5700, p. 68). [The source for this custom is found] in Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Tzav, sec. reading; Sefer Chassidim, sec. to Yoreh Deah 245:8. 14; Vayikra
Rabbah 7:3. See also the commentary of the Kli Yakar at the beginning of this Torah
1140; Kolbo, sec. 74, as quoted by the Sifsei Cohen in his gloss
3.
[Trans. Note: Throughout the Tanach, each of the letters of the alef-beis appears once in
an oversized form and once in miniature (Encyclopedia Talmudis, Vol. I , p. 410). In the
word Vayikra at the beginning of this Torah reading, the alef appears in miniature, and in
the name Adam 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
78
awareness of this. [Therefore] he blundered [and committed] the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge.
6
Moshe our teacher... also knew his own greatness. But not only was Moshe not overcome by his awareness of this, instead, it gave him a broken and contrite heart, making him very humble in his own eyes. 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.
9 8 7
G-d states in the Torah: "The man, Moshe, was exceedingly humble, more than any person on the face of the earth." N o matter how low a person's stature and how simple he was, Moshe would measure himself against him, thinking that if that 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 certainly have been better than he.
10
There are three types of forms for the letters which the Holy One, blessed be He, gave at Mount Sinai: oversized letters, average-sized letters, and miniature 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.... [It causes one] to see himself [and feel self-centeredness], realizing what he lacks and appreciating what is to his benefit." As is well known (see the maamar
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 desired sensitivity [to material things]. 7.
8.
See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X I I I , p. 33, fn. 28 and the marginal note. Clarification is still required.
See the Alter Rebbe's maamar entitled Vayisufu HaAnavim (Sefer HaMaamarim 5562, p. 51).
See also the sources mentioned in fn. 10.

9. Bamidbar 12:3.
10. W i t h regard to Moshe's humility, see the lengthy explanation in Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X I I I , p. 30ff., p. 37 and the fns. there.
VAYIKRA
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 him to commit the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge, an oversized alef is used. W i t h regard to Moshe our teacher, whose Divine service uses a miniature alef. of recognizing his own humility brought him to the highest level of humility, Parshas Vayikra
II.
In this story, there is, on the surface, a point that requires clarification: W h y 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 seemingly unrelated to the explanation of why a miniature alef is used in Parshas Vayikra. [On the surface, it would appear] sufficient to say that the miniature alef in Parshas Vayikra is an allusion to Moshe's great humility. Furthermore, the explanation that the miniature alef in Parshas Vayikra alludes to Moshe's humility is stated in several
12
of the
commentaries to the Torah.
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 used with 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 used with regard to Adam the first man.
11. See Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Deos 1:4; Commentary to the Mishnah,
Introduction to
Avos (Shemoneh Perakim, ch. 4). [In these sources, Rambam speaks about the advantage of
following the "middle path" and having one's emotional characteristics balanced.]
12. The commentary of Rabbeinu Asher to the Torah; Panei'ach Raza Yitzchak (by R. Yitzchak Caro); Tzror HaMor
evenly
Moshav Zekenim Toldos
Kli Yakar the commentary of Sifsei Cohen to
the Torah.
13. W i t h the exception of Panei'ach Raza and Toldos Yitzchak. See also the following footnote.
80
{ 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.
14
The
Torah
15
does
not
speak
pejoratively even about a non-kosher animal. Certainly, it would 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
III.
It is also necessary to understand the lengthy explanation [the Alter Rebbe gives] with regard to the humility of Moshe. Seemingly, it would have been sufficient to state in short (as the other commentar ies do) that Moshe was exceedingly humble, as the Torah states. It is possible to say that the Alter Rebbe wanted 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 those he 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: W h y 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 humility)? b) [Seemingly, 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 oversized alef as alluding to Adam's positive qualities as explained in sec. IV.
15. Bava Basra 123a.
16. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V , p. 281; Vol. X, p. 26ff. [translated in this series].
17. See Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 242:36.
VAYIKRA
81
would have been sufficient to say that [this came as 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 positive qualities that he was granted from Above. W h y 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?
IV.
Initially, when looking at the Alter Rebbe's explanation, it appears 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 miniature alef in [Parshas] Vayikra which alludes to the humility of Moshe). In truth, however, this cannot be said. For it is an obvious general principle that the oversized letters in the Torah surpass the averagesized letters, and certainly, the miniature 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, commentaries
19
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 indicated by his] naming [of the created beings]." Furthermore, in Likkutei Torah,
20
the Alter Rebbe himself discusses
the difference between the miniature alef and the oversized alef with
18. [This principle is also discussed in] the Kabbalah: See the statements of the Zohar and Ramaz, et al. at the beginning of this Torah reading. See also Or HaTorah,
HaMaamarim
Vayikra, V o l .
I l l , p. 724ff.; the maamarim entitled Vayikra from Sefer HaMaamarim 5678, p. 234, and Sefer 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. A t the beginning of our Torah reading. See also the maamarim entitled Vayikra Vayidaber cited above.
and
82
which the name Adam is written in Divrei HaYamim and explains that it indicates that Adam was greater than Moshe. [There he explains that] the oversized alef refers to Adam as he existed "before the sin, when he was on a very high level."
21
( [ O n that
level,] it was possible for him to receive influence from the oversized alef, i.e., "the attribute of Kesser, as it exists in its essence.") W i t h regard to Moshe, by contrast, the Torah states:
22
"And Moshe could not

23
enter... because the cloud had rested upon it." The cloud reflects influence from "a very sublime and awesome level" (i.e., Kesser). For this reason, with regard to Moshe, Vayikra is written with a miniature alef. For calling (i.e., drawing down influence) to Moshe (from [the sublime level of] the cloud) was possible only through a tzimtzum, [a contraction which is alluded to by the miniature letter].
24
Thus the Alter Rebbe's addition the discussion of the oversized alef used with regard to Adam seemingly defeats his purpose. For it appears to indicate that Adam was on a higher level than Moshe. Moreover, it alludes {not to Adam's stumbling (through the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge), but on the contrary,} to his level before the sin.
V.
It is possible to offer the following resolution: By offering this explanation to the Tzemach Tzedek, the Alter Rebbe was not merely answering the question [the child] had asked concerning the verse. Instead, he was primarily concerned with educating the Tzemach Tzedek
21. P. 1b. A n d the maamarim entitled Vayikra
and Vayidaber cited above explain that the
oversized alef refers to the consummate perfection that man will reach in the era of Redemption (which surpasses the level of Adam before the sin).
22. Shmos 40:35.
23. Likkutei Torah, loc. cit. 1:1. 24. See Or HaTorah, Parshas Vayikra, V o l . I , p. 119; Zohar, loc. cit., quoted in Or HaTorah, and Vayidaber, loc. cit.; the Likkutei loc. cit., p. 726; and the maamar Vayikra, V o l . I l l , loc. cit.; the maamarim entitled Vayikra
Torah of the AriZal, Parshas Vayikra quoted in Or HaTorah,
entitled Vayikra cited above. See also Panei'ach Raza, loc. cit.
VAYIKRA
83
and explaining to him the lesson in our Divine service that can be derived from the miniature alef in Parshas {This [explains the connection Vayikra.
25
between
this
story
26
and] that
statements [the Previous] Rebbe made (at an earlier farbrengen)
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 time himself.} In order for the lesson from the miniature 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 aspects of 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: "Just as a person must recognize his own shortcomings, 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. 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 28 27
[This relates to every person, for] everyone

30
possesses a spark from [the soul of] Moshe.)
25. This also explains why, [before giving this answer,] the Alter Rebbe entered a state of 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., Vol. 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 also has a kli (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]
84
{Furthermore, since the person recognizes his positive qualities, it is necessary that his thrust toward humility be extreme, [like Moshe who was] "exceedingly humble, more than any person," as will be explained in sec. I X . } 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 him with an oversized alef must guard against the possibility of undesirable results stemming from the recognition of his positive qualities. For [this caused] even Adam to stumble and commit the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge, the source of all sins.
VI.
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. parallel: "From the mouth of the Sublime One,
32 33 31
(To cite a
evil will not
emerge" ). Similarly, with regard to his surrounding environment, as is well known, there was no intermingling of good and bad before
resembles the light and, [like the light,] can also 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 letter yud. For the yud has the form of a letter (in contrast to [its upper] projection) which indicates that it relates to the realm of existence. Nevertheless, it is the smallest letter, "no more than a point" (Iggeres
HaTeshuvah, ch.4; see Likkutei Sichos, V o l . IX, p. 416ff.). Chabad, erech Adam HaRishon 30. Tanya, ch. 42. 31. Torah Or, Bereishis, p. 6a; see Sefer HaArachim (pp. 168-169),
and the sources mentioned there.

32. Cf. Eichah 3:38. 33. Likkutei Torah of the AriZal, Parshas Bereishis, et al.
VAYIKRA
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 also alluded to in the wording of the Alter Rebbe: "Adam, the first man, whose recognition of his own greatness caused him to commit the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge, an oversized alef is used...." O n the surface, since the oversized alef used with regard to Adam reflects his level before the sin (as stated in sec. I V ) , seemingly, 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 Adam with an oversized alef (which, as above, alludes to his level before the sin).}
VII.
The eternal dimension of Adam's positive qualities is not only that they remained (at least in a hidden manner) after the sin, but also that they are shared with every Jew until the end of time. As is well known, the Jews are referred to with the name, Adam,
34
"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 microcosm ) Adam's positive qualities.
34. Likkutei Torah, Devarim, p. 47b; see Tanya, IggeresHaKodesh, Epistle 7. 35. Yevamos 61a.
86
{Every Jew possesses a resemblance even to Adam's quality of having "wisdom [that] surpasses that of the ministering angels." [This quality] was manifest in his ability to name all the created beings by recognizing "the living soul"
36
that every being possessed.

38
37
[Simi
larly,] as explained in holy texts,
the names that parents give their
children is, in diminutive, an expression of the spirit of prophecy. They are granted from Above the inspiration to call the child with a name that reflects the child's "living 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
quality was 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 manner only from the standpoint of their souls, which are an "actual part of G-d from Above."
41 40
For this reason, a soul has no connection to sin. (As the Zohar comments on the verse: sin?'"
44 43
42
"When a soul sins...," stating: "The Torah
and the Holy One, blessed be He, ask in wonderment: 'Could a soul Even when a Jew stumbles in sin, "his soul remains faithful to
45 46
Him, even at the time of sin."
This is the inner meaning of the verse:
"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.
XV, p. 13, note the sources mentioned 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 also applies with regard to the body. For [G-d's] essential choice [of the Jewish people] is [focused] on a Jew's body [and not his soul]. {See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I I , pp. 345-6. There the phrase (Yeshayahu 60:21): "The work of M y hands in which to take pride" is interpreted as referring to the body.}
41. Tanya, ch. 2.
42. Zohar I l l , 16a; see also p. 13b.

43. Vayikra 5:1.
44.
45. 46.
[Trans. Note: For the Hebrew phrase could also be translated in that manner.]
Tanya, ch. 24. Yeshayahu, loc. cit.
VAYIKRA
87
the sin) within every Jew, each person's Divine service parallels that of the righteous, despite the fact that previously he was involved in the direct opposite of that service. When he observes the Torah and its mitzvos (from the inner dimension of his soul the attribute of Adam within him), he is not turning to G-d in teshuvah. He is not "one who was distant, but who was drawn close,"
48 47
[even though in actual fact,
he was distant]. Instead, his Divine service resembles that of one who was righteous from the outset, who never had any connection to evil and sin. Since every Jew possesses this positive quality, the possibility exists for every Jew to recognize his own positive virtues. [For we are not speaking about a person with an ego-centered outlook.] O n the contrary, a righteous man does not have a self-oriented identity. Instead, he is identified with holiness that does not allow evil a foothold. (In contrast, a baal teshuvah, even after he turns to G-d, must be continually on guard lest he return to his previous conduct. ) [A person need not worry when making the awareness of this potential a fundamental element of his Divine service.] O n the contrary, a person must know his positive qualities. A t times, this is the way ( through "lifting up his heart in the paths of G-d" ) to overcome the hiddenness and concealment [of G-d] in this world. For this [infuses] one's Divine service with the power of holiness in a manner similar to the Divine service of the righteous.
50 49
VIII.
For this reason, precaution is necessary. The awareness of one's positive qualities must be coupled with an awareness of one's fundamental humility. Otherwise, the recognition of one's positive qualities can cause one to descend and stumble.
47.
Cf. Berachos 34b.
48. See similar concepts explained in Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X V , pp. 245-246.

49. Likkutei Torah, Devarim. See also Tanya, Iggeres HaTeshuvah, ch. 11, [which advises a baal
teshuvah] "not to lift up his heart," [i.e., become haughty,] but instead to be humble in the presence of every person."
50. IIDivrei HaYamim 17:6; Torah Or, pp. 91b; 119c ff.; Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 15c.
88
It 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 the yetzer hara. The Alter Rebbe, however, was endeavoring to educate the Tzemach Tzedek, who was [inherently] righteous and would grow up to
52
be a nasi (leader) among the Jewish people. Accordingly, he felt that

53
even greater caution was necessary. For Adam was a righteous man and G-d's handiwork, and seemingly 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.
54
Certainly, every [other] righteous man must take precautions with regard to the recognition of his positive qualities.
IX.
On this basis, we can also understand why the Alter Rebbe elaborated in explanation of Moshe's humility. ( [ N o t only 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 these positive 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 reveals his initial potential. (See
Tanya, ch. 14.)
53. W h o is obligated to conduct himself in [a manner bespeaking prosperity, as Tehillim 119:45] states: " I will proceed with ease." 54. O n this basis, we can explain the continuation of the story: that the Alter Rebbe recited a maamar 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 alludes to the concept that even the attribute of Adam (the first man, see Rashi's commentary to the verse; see also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 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).
VAYIKRA
89
[This is necessary, because] a person must take precautions. Since he adopts a stance that reflects the power within holiness and involves the recognition of his positive qualities, it is possible that selfcenteredness will arise. [Hence,] the ordinary recognition of his own humility is not sufficient. Instead, he must go to the extreme of pride and [manifest] absolute humility and bittul.
55
opposite
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.
In 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
contamination from the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge ceased. } N o t only was Moshe humble, he was the direct opposite of self-concern; "exceedingly humble, more than any person on the face of the
See Rambam's statements in Shemoneh Perakim, ch. 4, and Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Deos 2:2.
57
55.
See also his statements there (2:3) with regard to humility and lowliness ([that this is one of the areas where one's conduct may be extreme]. "Hence, with regard to Moshe our teacher, it is written that he was "extremely humble"). See the gloss of the Lechem
Mishneh to ch. 1, halachah 4, and Shulchan Aruch HaRav 56. Cf. Avos 1:1. 155:1, 156:3.
57. Shabbos 146a. On this basis, we can appreciate why the humility of Moshe is alluded to in the miniature alef 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 also his commentary to Vayikra 9:2). A n d it was through the Sin of the Golden Calf that the contamination brought about by the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge returned (Zohar I, 52b; II, 193b).
90
earth." 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."
58
X.
This leads to one of the practical directives that we can derive from this story. O n one hand, every Jew must realize that he possesses a heritage of awesome potentials and he must recognize his own posi tive qualities. [And 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, regardless of 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. O n 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. O n the contrary, it will cause him to be humble in his own eyes. This bittul will then enable him to reach true greatness, as it is said: "He who is small is great." A n d 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 59
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 Alter Rebbe's wording in the story "a broken and contrite heart." 59. Zohar I , 122b; I l l , 168a. See also the Panei'ach Raza, loc. cit., which states that the oversized alef used with regard to Adam refers to Moshe. 60. See TorasKohanim and Rashi to that verse.
VAYIKRA
91
that we are obligated... in accordance with the command of Your will." May this take place in the near future.
(Adapted from Sichos 13 Nissan, 5726)
61
61. Mussaf liturgy, [Siddur Tehillat Hashem, p. 195].
PARSHAS KEDOSHIM
Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I I , p. 219ff.
I.
W i t h regard to the mitzvah of ahavas Yisrael, we find two different statements from our Sages:
1
a) "Rabbi Akiva states: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' This is a great general principle in the Torah;"
2
b) the statement from Hillel ([who lived] several generations earlier): "What is hateful to you do not do to your friend. This is the entire Torah; the rest is commentary."
3
The difference between the wording of these two statements is obvious. "This is a great general principle in the Torah" means that ahavas Yisrael is one of the Torah's general principles. It is even a "great" general principle, but it is still only one general principle. (It is not the general principle of the Torah.) Hillel, by contrast, sees [ahavas Yisrael] as "the entire Torah." The remainder is merely commentary.
5 4
1.
2. 3.
[Trans. Note: Certain portions of this sichah were not included in this translation.]
Sifri to Vayikra 19:18; Jerusalem Talmud, Nedarim 9:4; Bereishis Rabbah 24:7. Shabbos 31a.
4. 5.
Indeed, according to Ben Azzai (see the sources mentioned in fn. 2), there is another general principle of greater import. [Moreover, the Hebrew expression uses two terms, kol and kulah, to emphasize that
ahavas Yisrael encompasses the entire Torah.] See Turei Zahav (Orach Chayim 582:3)
[which focuses on the expression in our Rosh HaShanah prayers: "Rule over the entire world"; there the two terms, kol and kulo, are also used. The Turei Zahav explains that sometimes we speak of a whole, although we mean only the majority. By repeating the expressions, it is emphasized that His sovereignty encompasses the world in its totality. Similarly, the emphasis here is that ahavas Yisrael encompasses the Torah in its totality.]
93
94
For this reason, we can understand why Rashi, in his commentary to [this verse in] the Torah, quotes Rabbi Akiva's statement (but not Hillel's). For according to a simple perspective, ahavas Yisrael is not the
6
entire Torah. It is merely the general principle that [motivates] the mitzvos between man and man. Talmud,
9 8
{For this reason, we see that Rashi, in his commentary to the (which also reflects the simple meaning of the text, albeit of
10
the Talmud,)
[first] explains the statement that not doing what is
hateful to a friend is "the entire Torah" as referring not to ahavas Yisrael, but [to our relationship with G-d]. "[The term] 'your friend' refers to the Holy One, blessed be He.... Do not violate His words." (This is indeed "the entire Torah.") According to his second explanation (and the fact that it is stated second is significant), Rashi interprets "your friend" as referring to a friend on this material plane, but he explains that according to this interpretation, [ahavas Yisrael does not encompass] the entire Torah,
6. 7.
12 11
[Trans. Note: A n d Rashi defines his mission as explaining the simple meaning of the Torah.] I.e., according to the simple meaning of the Torah and the Talmud, [ahavas Yisrael is not the entire Torah]. Only according to the inner, [mystic] dimension of the Torah can that be said, as explained by the Alter Rebbe in Tanya, ch. 32, and by the Tzemach Tzedek
in Derech Mitzvosecha, Mitzvas Ahavas Yisrael, and Or HaTorah, Shoftim, p. 838ff., et al. (See also Sefer HaErachim Chabad, erech Ahavas Yisrael, sec. 8.) These concepts are quoted in Kuntreis Ahavas Yisrael. See also the Maharal's text Nesivos Olam, Nesiv Ahavas Reya, ch. 1, et al. See the commentaries of the Raavad and the Korban Eidah to the Jerusalem Talmud, loc. cit. Shabbos, loc. cit.
8. 9.
10. [Trans. Note: The Talmud, by definition, is less directly involved with the simple meaning of the Biblical text and also focuses on more sophisticated techniques of interpretation.]
11. There are glosses to Rashi (Nachlas Yaakov as quoted by the Sifsei Chachamim, Maskil
LeDavid) which maintain that this is also the intent in Rashi's commentary to the Torah. That, however, requires much explanation. 12. This clarifies why Rashi brings this as a second interpretation. [Hillel was speaking to a potential convert.] N o w a convert must accept the observance of all 613 mitzvos. A n d therefore it was necessary for Hillel to have in mind the entire Torah. {Nevertheless, the first interpretation is also not sufficient, [because it is also problematic]. (Firstly, the interpretation of "your friend" is not literal. According to that interpretation, Hillel should have said "the Holy One, blessed be He" or the like. [Why did he have to speak in allegory?]) Moreover, [according to this interpretation,] it is not understood why [Hillel] uses negative terminology: "What is hateful... do not
KEDOSHIM
95
but rather "[the prohibitions against] robbery, theft, adultery; and the majority of the mitzvos.}
13
Explanation is necessary:
[Both
Rabbi Akiva's and

14
Hillel's
statements] are "the words of the living G-d." 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
15
general many
principle in the Torah"? (After all, 200 includes 100.) Moreover, as mentioned previously, Hillel's statement was authored generations [before R. Akiva's,] as stated above.
II.
The above can be understood based on the [explanation of another] statement by Hillel:
16
"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 only with regard to spiritual matters, but) with regard to all things, the material as well as the spiritual.
17
As is well known, with that expression, the mishnah is clarifying

18
that one should not compromise 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. These are the majority of but not all the mitzvos.
14. Eruvin 16. Avos 13b.
15. [Trans. Note: I.e., within a greater sum, a lesser sum is surely included.]
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]. (See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I, p. 261.)
18. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I I , p. 316; Vol. X V , p. 198.
96
close to them, i.e., one should not] adapt the Torah to the disposition of people at large and make compromises 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, leads to a different interpretation]: "Drawing them close to the Torah" is an extension and a consequence of "loving the created beings." "Loving the created beings" leads to 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 the mitzvah of loving one's fellow Jew.")
19
[Thus it seems that a Jew's love for his fellow man has an ulterior motive; it must lead to the recipient's spiritual advancement.] N o w (previously in that chapter) the Alter Rebbe explains
20
that ahavas Father.
Yisrael stems from the fact that he is a Jew and he possesses a soul. (And "all souls are complementary and we share one
21 21
Therefore all Jews are actually called brothers.") For this reason, one must love "every Jewish soul, great or small." (As the Maggid [of Mezritch] says:
22
"One must love an absolutely wicked man in the
same way as one loves an absolutely righteous man.")

19. This explanation also clarifies the Alter Rebbe's choice of wording: "he does not forfeit...." Seemingly, 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," one might think that if one is not successful in that purpose, one in fact forfeits the reward for the mitzvah. 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
also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X I I , p. 217, fn. 17, and further fns. 34 and 35.
KEDOSHIM
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"?
III.
To explain the above: As is well known, our Sages state: "[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. O n the other hand, the Zohar states: "The Jews connect
24 23
themselves to the Torah and the Torah connects to the Holy One, blessed be 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 [seemingly] opposite [dimensions] of a Jew's makeup: Because of the dimension of the Jewish soul that transcends the Torah, "a Jew, even if he sins, remains a Jew."
27
N o 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 mitzvos.
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 quote to follow is how the passage is cited in Chassidus (Likkutei Torah, Rosh HaShanah, p. 59a; Shir HaShirim, p. 16d, et al.). See also the Zohar I l l , 73a. 25. [Trans. Note: For apparently, the Jews need the Torah to connect to G-d.] Vol. I , ch. 76; V o l . I l l , p. 1403ff; the maamar entitled Az Yashir, 5700, ch. 33, et al. 27. Sanhedrin 44a. 28. The series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu 5672, V o l . I l l , p. 29. Tanya, ch. 39; Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Hilchos Talmud Torah 4:3. 1252. 26. Likkutei Torah, Shir HaShirim, loc. cit the series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu 5672,
98
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, revealed.)
31 30
the essential quality of his soul that transcends the Torah will also be
IV.
These [concepts] lead to the two perspectives that apply to the endeavor of "lov[ing] your neighbor as yourself." The essence of 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 limitations. 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

34
righteous man and a Jew who is distant from the Torah.
Moreover,
14
this love is not limited to the spiritual dimensions of the other Jew, but instead, encompasses all of his affairs, even his physical concerns, for these are the physical concerns of a Jew. Nevertheless, since a Jew'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 transgressed returns to Torah observance reveals 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 compensate for a deficiency in the observance of the Torah ) is revealed through the Torah. (See the series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu
5672, Vol. I l l , p. 1408; the series of maamarim entitled Yom Tov Shel Rosh HaShanah 5666, p.
235, et al.)
33. W i t h the exception of the "heretics and apostates" (Tanya, op. cit.). (See also fn. 35.) See also 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 same way 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 stemming from one's essence, such distinctions do not exist.
KEDOSHIM
99
essence of the soul which is above the Torah) becomes a mitzvah of the Torah. We must love a Jew because the Torah commands us to. As a consequence, [this love is channeled through] the limits and specifi cations that the Torah establishes. (For example, no compromises in the Torah may be made because of ahavas Yisrael.) A n d indeed, there are some Jews whom the Torah commands us to relate to in a manner of: "With the utmost hatred, I hate them."
35
V.
This reflects the concept that Hillel emphasizes (which is also under scored by the Alter Rebbe's statements in Tanya) that "lov[ing] the created beings" (those distant from G-d and His service) must lead to 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 are Jews. { [ I t is true that] we must love a Jew (and help him in all his concerns) even when we are not successful in drawing him close to the Torah.} [Nevertheless, we must operate according to the same rationale that we employ] with regard to our own Divine service. The essential positive quality that we are Jewish (i.e., the bond with G-d that transcends the Torah) cannot remain separate from the Torah, but instead, must motivate us to the observance of the Torah and its mitzvos (as stated in sec. I l l ) .
35. Tehillim 139:22, as interpreted by Shabbos 116a; see Tanya, loc. cit.
The explanations in sec. V clarify why the Alter 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). Seemingly, it contradicts the concepts stated previously: a) that ahavas Yisrael stems from [the fundamental connection between] the soul, and b) a Jew, even though he sins, remains a Jew. The revelation of the soul's qualities comes about through the Torah (as will be explained). N o w [such individuals] have completely severed their connection to the Torah, [to the extent that] "they have no portion in the G-d of Israel." (In their present situation,) it is impossible for the qualities of their soul to be expressed (in contrast to people at large who are "distant from G-d and His service"). Hence, [toward them,] it is impossible to express ahavas Yisrael that stems from the soul in a revealed manner. {This concept follows as a consequence to the explanation of the concept stated previously [in ch. 32 in Tanya]: that "loving the created beings" leads to "drawing them close to the Torah," as will be explained.}
100
Similar concepts apply with regard to the love for those who are "distant from the Torah of G-d and His service." The fact that one feels their essential quality, [i.e.,] the fact that they are Jews, motivates him not to remain complacent because of this alone. Instead, it propels him toward efforts to transform them into Torah Jews. 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 him to have an authentic appreciation of the true peace and oneness that exists between him and all other Jews (that they are "actually brothers because of the source of their souls")
32 36
"Drawing
37
them close to the Torah" connecting them with the Torah and in this way, with G-d enables the perception (in a revealed manner) Torah. of the essential quality possessed by the Jews that transcends the
VI.
On 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 him as he exists [on this material plane], a soul enclothed within a body, according to the limitations of the Torah. Accordingly, it is not appropriate to say that it is "the entire Torah," because that would necessitate compro mising the standards of the Torah for the sake of ahavas Yisrael (as the
36. O n this basis, we can appreciate why in Tanya, loc. cit., the Alter Rebbe quotes the words (of Hillel's statement): "loving peace." For "drawing them close to the Torah" establishes peace between him and people at large, since it gives them the potential to enable "the soul to be given primacy over the body." 37. Nevertheless, even if he is not successful in "draw[ing] them close to the Torah," they still possess (in a hidden manner, at least) the essential quality of the Jewish people. Hence, "he does not forfeit the reward for the mitzvah of loving one's fellow Jew." Based on Sichos Shabbos Parshas Chayei Sarah, 5737, it can be explained that after the Alter Rebbe revealed this concept ("he does not forfeit..."), the consequence [of ahavas Yisrael] is greater than merely not forfeiting [the merit of this mitzvah]. For indeed, he receives a great profit: by fulfilling the Alter Rebbe's command, he binds himself with him. ["Not forfeiting"] (as opposed to saying "he is granted a reward") is relevant only when it is obvious that he [already] possessed a reward (see Berachos 10b; Nazir 15a).
KEDOSHIM
101
threat to Jewish life supersedes the entire Torah ). Instead, [ahavas

38
Yisrael] is merely "a general principle in the Torah," [i.e., one like others,] and must be expressed through the guidelines of the Torah.
39
Hillel, by contrast, also speaks about ahavas Yisrael, as it is expressed on the material plane (to a soul as it exists in a body), but [he speaks about it] as it relates to the source of the Jewish souls, the level at which "the Jews precede the Torah." A t this level, the entire Torah exists for the sake of the Jewish people, for the purpose of 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") is expressed in a revealed manner through ahavas Yisrael, it is "the entire Torah and the rest is commentary."
40
(Adapted from Sichos Shabbos Parshas Kedoshim, 5727)
38. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos YesodeiHaTorah, ch. 6.
39. See Sichos Shabbos Parshas Yisro, 5740, which explains that the connection between being "of the students of Aharon" and "drawing them close to the Torah" resembles the convergence between "kindness and truth" (Tehillim 85:11) which [our Sages] (Shmos Rabbah 5:10) [associate with the meeting of Aharon (kindness) and Moshe (Torah and truth). Implied is that even the kindness personified by Aharon (the level of "abundant kindness") that transcends the spiritual cosmos and that motivates an unbounded measure of love to be extended to people at large must correlate with the truth of the Torah (personified by Moshe). O n this basis, we can also explain the statements of Hillel and Rabbi Akiva. Hillel was characterized by the attribute of kindness {Zohar I l l (Raya Mehemna), p. 245a; the introduction to Tanya, et al.}. Therefore, he emphasized the importance of ahavas Yisrael as it transcends (the limitations of) the Torah. Rabbi Akiva, by contrast, is identified with the Torah (see Menachos 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 emphasized ahavas Yisrael as being
"one of the great general principles in the Torah." 40. [Trans. Note: Perhaps, for this reason, Hillel felt it necessary to emphasize the importance of "drawing them close to the Torah," which implies that "the Torah should not be brought close to them," i.e., that compromises should not be made in the Torah for the sake of the Jewish people.]
PARSHAS BEHAR-BECHUKOSAI
Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X X I I , p. 159ff.
I.
As mentioned on many occasions, 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 blessing recited beforehand and afterwards).} These factors indicate that the two Torah readings share a common theme that enables them to be joined together. [With regard to the present week] it is necessary to understand: What is the common theme [that unites] the two Torah readings Behar and Bechukosai? O n 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. Seemingly, the names Behar
3 2 1
(with the same
and Bechukosai communicate opposite thrusts. Behar (lit. "On Mount [Sinai]") points to lifting oneself up. In Divine service, this means that there are times when a Jew has to act with assertiveness and power, [as it is written:] "And he lifted up his heart in the ways of G-d." For example, when confronted with a
5 4
1. 2.
3.
See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I I I , p. 300, p. 380ff., et al. In contrast to the Yemenite custom (see Likkutei Sichos, p. 380, fn. 24).
See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V , p. 57; Vol. X V I I I , loc. cit., et al.
4.
Moreover, a certain measure of 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 sources cited in fn. 6). I I Divrei HaYamim 17:6; see the sources cited in fns. 15 and 20.
5.
103
104
challenge, a person must stand firm with unshakable strength and boldness so that he can withstand the challenge. He must "be bold as a leopard."
6
Bechukosai ("If you [proceed] in M y 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," to the extent that "You have no license to wonder about it." 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).
8 7
II.
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" ) the first Torah reading is called Behar. O n the surface, the fundamental emphasis is on the word [that follows Behar:] Sinai. That term clarifies that we are speaking about the special mountain on which the Torah was given. Sinai ("On Mount Sinai"). does not clarify which
12 11 10 9
Hence, it would
13
have been appropriate to call the Torah reading "Sinai" or at least Behar (For there are several Torah readings about whose names include two words.) W h y is the name Behar which mountain is being spoken appropriate?
6.
Avos 5:20, cited at the beginning of the Tur, Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim), and Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Mahadura Basra (see Mahadura Kama 1:3). BamidbarRabbah, the beginning of Parshas Chukas Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Chukas, secs. 3,
7.
8, et al.
8. 9. Rashi, the beginning of Parshas Chukas, based on Yoma 67b. In contrast, both the Siddur of Rav Saadia Gaon and the Seder Tejilos of Rambam refer to the
Torah reading as Behar Sinai. 10. See the sources cited in Likkutei Sichos, V o l . 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 the Mishnah (Avos 1:1): "Moshe received the Torah from Sinai."
12. As Rav Saadia Gaon and Rambam refer to the Torah reading.
13. E.g., ChayeiSarah, VeZosHaBerachah.
BEHAR-BECHUKOSAI
105
This question is reinforced when we consider the lesson in our Divine service to be derived from the words "On Mount Sinai." Our Sages state that the reason [G-d] chose to give the Torah on Mount Sinai is that it is the lowest of all mountains. Thus a paradox is produced.
15 14
O n one hand, humility is required, [for M t . Sinai is] "the
lowest [of all mountains]." Simultaneously, it is a mountain. [Implied is that both modes of expression are demanded of a person. Although he must be humble, he should not be a "doormat," trampled on [by people at large]. Instead, the quality of humility has to be coupled with power and dignity. These two concepts are indicated by the words Behar Sinai. Behar ("On Mount") points to a person's dignity and power. Sinai when
bittul.
16
used alone without specifying that a mountain is involved reflects the concept of in the world."}
18
{ [ I n this context, the name] Sinai ( )is

17
associated with the word "( bramble"), "the lowest of all the trees This indicates that of the two (lifting oneself up and bittul), the fundamentally important quality is bittul. It is only that it is necessary to clarify that one's bittul should not cause him to become a
19 20
"doormat," tread upon by every foot. Instead, (at times,) one must show power and elevate oneself. As our Sages commented: more, Heaven forbid. In that light, why is it appropriate to call the Torah reading Behar alone, alluding to "lifting oneself up" without mentioning Sinai, bittul, the quality that is most essential?
14. Midrash Tehillim (Buber ed.) on Tehillim 68:17, et al.
"A Torah
sage must have one sixty-fourth of a measure (of pride)," but not
15. W i t h regard to this concept, see Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar 15b-c; Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I , p. 276ff., et al. 16. Cf. Eruvin 98a {tread upon "by many... leading to abasement" (Rashi)}.
17. See the commentary of Ramban to Devarim 1:6; the commentaries to Moreh Nevuchim, V o l .
I, ch. 66.
18. Shmos Rabbah 2:5.
19. See Likkutei Torah, loc. cit., which states that much more bittul is required. Similarly, with
regard to boldness, see the statements in the Mahadura Kama of Shulchan Aruch HaRav,
loc. cit. (based on those of the Beis Yosef), clarifying the caution that must be taken with regard to this quality.
20. Sotah 5a. See Torah Or, Megillas Esther, p. 91b; Hosafos, p. 119c ff., et al. See also fn. 33.
106
III.
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 feels 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 feels that one nullifies himself (for G-d) indicates that there (still) exists an entity that must be nullified. true bittul, one feels nothing else other than G-dliness. This concept is reflected in nigleh, the realm of Torah law. As explained once at length, there is a difference in Jewish law between a servant and an agent. {As is well known, 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 is seen as an extension of him].} [Our Sages state:]
25 24 23 22
In a state of
"A person's agent
is like him." This
(primarily) reflects the highest conception of agency in which the agent assumes the identity of the principal. Even according to this understanding, however, a distinction 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 affairs he
21. See Rama (Orach Chayim 98:1) [who states that before prayer, one should contemplate these two concepts].
22. See the series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, ch. 214; the maamar entitled
Mi Yitein, 5706, ch. 4.

23. Likkutei Sichos, V o l . XX, p. 303.
24. See Lekach Tov, authored by R. Yosef Engel, General Principle 1.

25. Berachos 34b.
BEHAR-BECHUKOSAI
107
was charged to care for and not to other matters, even those that are relevant at that time.)
27
26
[In halachic terms,] a servant, by contrast, is not considered an independent entity at all. His existence 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 the principal. Accordingly, even while his identity is nullified, there still remains a place for his own personal existence.
29
A servant, by contrast, does not need to

30
nullify his identity to the master [through his own volition]. From the very outset, he is "the property and possession of his master." Hence, there is no concept of his existing as a separate entity at all.
IV.
From the above, it is understood that when one manifests true bittul to G-dliness, [his recognition of] his personal power and raising his spirits do not present a contradiction. For we are not speaking about the power and elevation of one's own individual identity. We are speaking about the power and elevation of G-dliness. As our Sages
26. [Trans. Note: I.e., if a person charged an agent with managing a certain facet of his business concerns, the agent's privilege to act is limited to that area. He cannot take action with regard to other facets of the principal's holdings.]
31
27. See the marginal note to Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XX, loc. cit., fn. 17. 28. Pesachim 88b; Kiddushin 23b; see also the following footnote. 29. O n this basis, we can appreciate the rationale requiring the agent to be of the same halachic status as the principal. (See Kiddushin 41b which states: "Just as you are members of the covenant, so, too, your agents must be....") Similarly, Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p. 1c states: "Therefore, a deaf-mute, a mentally incapable person, and a minor cannot serve as agents, for they do not resemble the principal." See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X X X I I I , p. 114ff., which explains these concepts at length.
30. See the series of maamarim entitled Yom Tov Shel Rosh HaShanah, 5666, pp. 326-327, where
this concept is explained at length. Note the opinion (the gloss of Rashba to Kiddushin 23b) that when a servant acquires property, it becomes his master's from the very outset. [It is not that it enters the servant's domain and is transferred from there to the master. Instead, the servant does not have a domain of his own and acts as "an extended arm" of his master.] 31. As Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai said (Zohar I , 125a): " I am [His] sign* in the world." 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.
108
say with regard to a servant: "The servant of a king is a king." 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 is uplifted), 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].
32
V.
This is the explanation (with regard to our Divine service) concerning the different ways to which Mount Sinai can be referred. A t the beginning of one's Divine service, when one has a sense of 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
[Implied 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. The Hosafos to Torah Or (p. 120a) state that the concept of having 1/64 of a measure of pride applies at the beginning of one's Divine service. (See also 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 am I? A n d what is my Divine service 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 already batel (i.e., he is a Torah scholar). Indeed, he is so batel that [we fear that] "he will not be motivated to Divine service." Therefore he needs a certain measure of pride so that he will be so motivated. [The sichah,] by contrast, is speaking about a person at the beginning stages of the Divine service of nullifying himself. Based on the above and the further explanations in [the sichah], several points can be resolved: a) [the apparent contradiction between the statements in] Torah Or concerning the
need for a 1/64 measure of pride and the ruling of Rambam* (Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Deos
BEHAR-BECHUKOSAI
109
his own identity, the motif of [assuming] power and raising one's selfimage 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 acts on 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 selfconcern, since his bittul has not permeated his existence entirely. He is still feeling that he is nullifying himself to G-d. {This parallels the higher conception of agency, 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 made between 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 Alter Rebbe uses the wording] "until the other extreme"*** (while Rambam states "[not] even a trace"). c) The difference in the wording of Rambam himself [between pride] concerning which Rambam states, "[not] even a trace" and anger concerning which he states, "until the other extreme." As is well known, Rambam's ruling refers to the situation of the majority. This is not the place for further discussion of these matters. See Likkutei Levi Yitzchok, Igros (p. 305), which offers a different resolution [of the apparent contradiction]. ** The notation by the EinHaMishpat [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. *** This wording does not negate the quality of pride entirely. It implies that there is a certain dimension [of pride] (for it mentions "the other extreme"). (In contrast, the wording "[not] even a trace" [implies the total eradication of that quality].) 34. See the following footnote.
34
110
The highest level is Behar, where all that is mentioned is the mountain. One's bittul is so complete that he does not need the word of caution: Sinai. [He is so identified with G-d that] there is no room for even a thought that something other than G-dliness exists.
35
VI.
Although Behar represents a very high level of bittul,
36
it nevertheless
37
serves as a directive for every Jew in his Divine service. For, in truth, every Jew is "a mountain," for all of Israel [are described] as kings. [There are times] when it is demanded of [every] Jew, [not only those on a high level of bittul,] to assert himself for the sake of his Yiddishkeit. [The intent is] not that he should sacrifice his bittul, because there is no other way to protect him from evil, but that [he should assert himself knowing that] the inner dimension of this strength is the power of the G-dly soul which is "an actual part of G-d from Above."
38
35.
It is possible t o say that this reflects the distinction between Behar (the name of the Torah reading) and "( the mountain"), a term used to refer to Mount Sinai at times (e.g., Shmos 19:2; see also Shmos 25:40 and other instances). In the latter instance, as well, the name Sinai is not mentioned explicitly, although stating "the mountain," clearly implies that the intent is the renowned mountain, i.e., Sinai. In our Divine service, this rung represents the highest conception of agency, where the agent is identified with the principal. Nevertheless, as stated above, a distinction can be made between the agent and the principal. [Implied is that there is still an " I , " and hence, a need for self-nullification. Similarly,] when stating "the mountain," [although Sinai, bittul, is not mentioned,] it is alluded to. In Behar ("On Mount"), by contrast, no allusion to Sinai is made at all. For, as explained in the text above, this refers to a state where the person's individual identity is not felt at all. [There is no need to caution him with regard to bittul.]
36. See the sources in Sefer HaMaamarim
5564 and Or HaTorah cited in fn. 31.
37. The Introduction to Tikkunei Zohar 1b. [This represents a higher rung than] Shabbos 67a [which describes them] as "sons of kings." Based on the explanation of the advantage of servants over agents (sec. Ill), it is possible to draw a parallel to the advantage the Jews possess over angels. For the Hebrew means both ["angel" and] agent (Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p. 1c; see also
Tanya, Kuntreis Acharon, p. 159a; the sources mentioned in fn. 31, and Sefer HaLikkutim
from the Tzemach Tzedek, erech Malach). In contrast, the Jewish people are referred to either as "sons" (who share one essence with their father) or as servants ([concerning whom the motif] "The servant of a king is a king" applies).
38. Tanya, ch. 2.
BEHAR-BECHUKOSAI
111
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." We are taught: warned:
41 40 39
"The law of the ruling authority is law," and
"Do not provoke [even] a small gentile." But when it comes
to a matter involving Yiddishkeit, [every Jew] is (the "servant of a king," [and therefore]) "a king." Hence, not only does he have the power of a king, but also he may not forego his honor.
43 42
For the honor is not his
to forego. It is the honor of the King, the King of kings W h o states: " I will dwell within them," within the G-dly soul [of every Jew] which is "an actual part of G-d from Above," a part of the essence.
44
VII.
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. N o t only does Behar (strength and dignity) not run contrary to Bechukosai (bittul), one is a result of the other. As explained above, the strength and dignity implied by 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 a manner of chukim. The Alter Rebbe explains
39.
45
that
[The Previous Rebbe's address to the chassidim on 3 Tammuz, 5687, before departing
in exile to Kostroma.] 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. ch. 6; Shelah (ShaarHaOsios, OsLamed), et 43. Shmos 25:8. See Reishis Chochmah, ShaarHaAhavah,
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. I l l , Parshas
Bechukosai Vol. IV, p. 1056; Vol. V I I I , p. 127ff., et al. See also the beginning of the
maamar entitled VaYedaber... Zoos Chukas, 5665 (SeferHaMaamarim 5665, p. 224).
112
Bechukosai also 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 stone tablets 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 the mitzvos. He must break [his nature] to perform an act that does not have a reason. The term chok which also has the implication of engraving indicates that one is not compelled to perform the mitzvah. Instead, one is entirely batel to G-d without any sense of 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. On this basis, we can appreciate the careful choice of wording in our Sages' expression (with regard to chukim): "You have no license to wonder about it." O n the surface, the directive should have been worded: "Do not wonder about i t . "
46 8
It is possible to offer the following explanation: The phrase "You have no license to wonder about i t " implies that by and large, one should wonder about [and contemplate the Torah's commands]. The commitment "We will do" should be coupled with albeit followed by
47
the promise "We will listen" (interpreted to mean, "We will For, generally, we must seek to understand the
48
understand"). does not apply.
motivating rationales for the mitzvos. In this instance, however, this
46. As Midrash Tehillim (Buber ed.) 9:3 states: "Do not wonder about it." A n d the Midrash Socher Tov 9:3 states: "There is none who may wonder about it." 47. [Trans. Note: Implied is that the order is significant. First must come naaseh, an unreserved commitment to carry out G-d's will. It should, however, be followed by nishmah, an attempt to understand the motivating factors for His will.] 48. As reflected in the phrase "For your servant understands" (I Shmuel 3:9-10). [Implied is that a person's commitment to G-d must include unreserved allegiance ("We will do") and an effort to understand ("We will listen"), but the unreserved allegiance must be given prominence over one's intellectual endeavors.]
BEHAR-BECHUKOSAI
113
A person has a mind and he should use it. W i t h regard to these particular mitzvos, however, man was not given "license to wonder about [them]." Moreover, [even with regard to these mitzvos,] the intent is to
Chukim
negate only the kind of thought described as , "wonder."

49
need not be observed in a manner that negates entirely intellectual meditation, research, and inquiry. O n the contrary, [there should be an intellectual element to the observance of the chukim].
50
[It's true
that] within the statements of our Sages, we find explanations that chukim are not intellectual commandments. Some of them, indeed, appear to be the opposite of logic.
51
[Therefore,] one must [control]

52
his intellect and neither wonder about nor impugn the chukim. He should not think that the chukim lack anything when compared to those mitzvos which can be comprehended intellectually. On the contrary, [since] chukah reflects engraving, [it implies that a person's] bittul to G-d has progressed to the point that it is "engraved within him." For him, there is nothing else outside of G-dliness (like letters engraved on a jewel which are part of the jewel itself). The individual's personality (his thoughts and feelings) are not a contradiction to bittul, for he has transcended his individual identity entirely and has identified with G-d.
VIII.
On this basis, we can also understand the connection between the content (of the majority) of the Torah reading which speaks about reward and punishment for the mitzvos and the name Bechukosai. O n
49. The latter terms are borrowed from the Mishnah (Chagigah 11b) which uses them within the context of studying MaasehMerkavah ("the mystic secrets of the Divine chariot").
50. See Rambam, Mishneh Torah, the conclusion of Hilchos Temurah: "Although all of the chukim
of the Torah are decrees... it is worthy to meditate upon them. Whenever a reason can be given, you should give a reason." See also Moreh Nevuchim, Vol. I l l , ch. 26. See also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XXXII, p. 174ff.
51. Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Chukas, sec. 3; Bamidbar Rabbah and Yalkut Shimoni, the beginning of Parshas Chukas, et al.
52. The root, , translated as "wonder" in our Sages' statement regarding chukim, also has the implication "impugn." Thus our Sages (Sanhedrin 110a) describe one who impugns his teacher or the Shechinah as being . See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I l l , p. 898; Vol. V I I I , p. 131, fn. 52.
114
the surface, the implication of chukim is observance [of these mitzvos] only because they 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). H o w is this an appropriate name for a Torah reading in which both the beginning and the majority of the Torah reading speak about promises of reward for the observance of the mitzvos (or the opposite, punishment for the failure to observe them)? [Seemingly, these verses would seem to serve] as encouragement to observe the mitzvos because of 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 similar 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 him good in a material or spiritual sense). For the only good he appreciates is what is good in G-d's terms. [Neverthe less,] since G-d is the ultimate of good, His mitzvos lead to good in all things, including simple material well-being and prosperity.
(Sichos Shabbos Parshas Behar-Bechukosai, 5740)
53
53. This interpretation can be offered in addition to the interpretation offered by Rambam
(Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Teshuvah 9:1) that the promises of material prosperity are means to achieve spiritual wellbeing. See also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V , p. 312. See also Likkutei
Sichos, Parshas Bechukosai, 5751.
PARSHAS SHELACH
Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X X X I I I , p. 85ff.
I.
This week's Torah reading refers to the spies as a "congregation."
2 1
They were ten [in number], (for Yehoshua and Caleb were not included among them). From this, our Sages derive the concept that any ten Jews who join together are considered "a congregation."
4 3
It is necessary to explain why this law, which emphasizes the unique positive quality of a congregation with regard to matters of holiness ( "Any matter of holiness should not be [recited] in [a quorum of] less than ten" ) is derived from [the narrative of] the spies (of whom it is said: "How long will this evil congregation exist?").
6 5
1. 2.
Bamidbar 14:27. Megillah 23b (quoted in Rashi's commentary to the verse). According to several versions, the concept is also found in Berachos 21b; Sanhedrin 74b (see the Giliyon BeShas,
loc. cit. see the commentary of Rashi and Maharsha, loc. cit). See Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Tefillah 8:5; Shulchan Aruch HaRav 55:2 [with regard to
3.
the composition of a minyan (quorum) for prayer].

4. See SeferHaSichos 5704, p. 29.
5.
Berachos and Megillah, loc. cit., which develop an equation based on the use of the term in both Vayikra 22:32 and Bamidbar 16:21. Sefer HaSichos 5704, loc. cit., cites the verse: "Separate yourselves from this evil congregation," [adding the word "evil" to Bamidbar 16:21]. Either it is a printing error and "evil" is extra, or the intent is to refer to two verses, that verse and the verse in our Torah reading as the Talmud does. [This is indicated by] the conclusion of the passage which speaks about a congregation of ten.
6.
Note that the Talmud Yerushalmi, Sanhedrin 1:4 (and Berachos 7:3) quote an opinion which states that the concept is derived from the verse (Bereishis 42:5): "And the children of Israel came to purchase food among the visitors" [which speaks about Yaakov's ten righteous sons].
115
116
It is true that the laws involving a holy congregation also apply with regard to a wicked person. [For even he] "is counted among the quorum of ten with regard to all matters of holiness... (for) a Jew, even if he sins, is a Jew. He retains his holiness and has not departed from the collective of the Jewish people."
9 8
Nevertheless, on the surface, this is an insufficient explanation. {[Firstly,] it is possible to say (and this appears to be the simple meaning of the Biblical narrative) that the spies were included in the category of "those who rebel against G-d," (as Caleb exhorted them:
11 10
"Do not rebel against G-d"). According to Jewish law, it is not so simple to postulate that "those who rebel" can be included in a quo rum of ten with regard to matters of holiness. [In particular, this applies with regard to the instance at hand,] for all ten could be deemed "those who rebel."} [In addition,] the derivation of the concept that a congregation must include ten also applies to the "congregation" of a Sanhedrin, [a
12
Jewish court, of whom it is said:]
13
"And the congregation shall

14
judge... and the congregation shall save." Obviously, a wicked person cannot be included in such a congregation. remains unresolved.] [Thus the question
7.
See the wording of Shulchan Aruch HaRav, loc. cit.: "This congregation must be all free, adult males... as was the congregation mentioned further on. For women, servants, and minors are not included."
Sanhedrin 44a. Shulchan Aruch HaRav, HaManhig, loc. cit. :14 (based on the Beis Yosef, s.v. kosav bisefer, which quotes sec. 79). See also Tanya, the conclusion of ch. 1, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 23
8. 9.
(p. 136b); Sefer HaMaamarim 5565, Vol. I I , p. 964, et al.
10. Bamidbar 14:9. This statement was addressed to the entire Jewish people. Nevertheless, it certainly applies to the spies who, according to the simple meaning of the narrative, (see Rashi's commentary to 14:27) were not only themselves sinners, but were considered "those who cause the many to sin."
11. See the Beis Yosef, loc. cit., which cites the Rashba Pri Megadim (Eshel Avraham, loc. cit. :10), et al. 12. Mishnah, Sanhedrin 2a.
13. Bamidbar 35:24-25. 14. A distinction can, however, be made. For it is possible to say that although they are not disqualified from being a congregation, they are, however, disqualified from serving on
the Sanhedrin.
SHELACH
117
It is possible to explain that this is one of the instances where 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 spies were on a very elevated spiritual level.
15
N o t only was their intent not to rebel in the simple

16
sense, Heaven forbid, but instead, [their actions reflected] their very lofty spiritual rung, as will be explained at length. {As 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."
8 17
Nevertheless,
since in essence they are one Torah, they share a connection, bond, and even oneness (to the extent that the Zohar' 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, through allusion and sometimes explicitly. Similarly, 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 spies was 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 spies that is explained in pnimiyus haTorah.}
19
sometimes
15. This relates to our Sages' statement (Bava Basra 16a) that the Satan and Peninah acted for the sake of 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 itself, [there are distinctions, and] we do not derive laws concerning monetary law from laws concerning the Torah's prohibitions (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.
118
II.
In the teachings of Chassidus ([i.e.,] pnimiyus haTorah), it is explained
21 20
that the spies did not want to enter Eretz Yisrael because of their very lofty level of Divine service. They did not want to lower themselves to enter a pattern of life that would require: "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: "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," and water from Miriam's well.
26 25 24 23 22
The Clouds of Glory accompanied
them, killing the snakes and scorpions [before them], and laundering their clothes.) 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) only by those who 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 living in the [Holy] Land and in general, mitzvos involving deed that surpasses [the heights of] clinging [to G-d experienced] in the desert.} O n this basis, it is possible to explain why the definition of a holy 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), based on the teachings of 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. 26. See Rashi, Bamidbar 20:2. See Rashi, Bamidbar 10:34; Devarim 8:4.
27. Mechilta to Shmos 16:4.
SHELACH
119
that theirs was the fundamental path in Divine service.
28
[Because of
this error,] with regard to their elevated rung in Divine service and also (and this could be considered the primary factor) because they attempted to influence the Jewish people at large this is considered a great and serious transgression.
III.
It is possible to make a further conclusion: The concept that the spies' conduct has a source in holiness is alluded to and can be derived from the fact that [although as a result], their generation remained in the desert for forty years, For
29
they did not suffer a life of travail and diffi
culty. O n the contrary, their lives were characterized by tranquility. the entire forty years, they had manna as food, water from Miriam's well, and protection from the Clouds of Glory (as explained above). On the surface, the demand and the desire of the spies and their entire generation was to remain in the desert and not enter Eretz Yisrael. How is it appropriate that [this is what actually happened]? Their request was fulfilled and they remained in the desert in tranquility while being protected by G-d's cloud during the day and the night. {Moreover, as is well known, the punishments of the Torah are intended to correct the corresponding sin, until the situation becomes the opposite of the sin. If so, the ["punishment" given the spies]
28. Note that although according to the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 108a), the spies will not be granted a portion in the W o r l d to Come, from the Zohar I l l , 276a (in the Raya Mehemna), it appears that they will be granted a portion. See also the text Asarah Maamaros (MMaamar Chikur Din, sec. I I , ch. 8) which offers a renowned interpretation of Rabbi Akiva's statement (Sanhedrin, loc. cit.) that the generation that wandered through the desert will not be granted a portion in the World to Come as meaning that they have no need of the W o r l d to Come and that they are
above it. (See Likkutei Levi Yitzchak, Igros, p. 358ff.) See also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X X I I I , p.
30
102. Note also the prayer (and the interpretation) of the Alter Rebbe associated with the verse (Tehillim 73:25): "Who do I have in heaven?": " I do not want Your [Gan Eden...],"
as cited in Derech Mitzvosecha, Shoresh Mitzvas HaTefillah, sec. 40.
29. W e find this expression several times (in both the Written and Oral Law) although actually they remained in the desert for less than 39 years [after this incident]. See
Rashi to Bamidbar 14:33. 30. See Likkutei Sichos, loc. cit., p. 98ff.
120
certainly raises questions. For the desire of the spies was 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 might 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: W h y 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 (which was 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, amidst the Clouds of Glory, is in itself an act of holiness. [The spies] thought that this was the ultimate purpose. [In 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.
IV.
By first explaining Rambams statements in Hilchos Teshuvah, we are able to elucidate the above concept ([derived from] pnimiyus haTorah) in a halachic context.
In 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 the World to Come."
31. See fn. 15.

32. Halachah 1.
SHELACH
121
[Nor should he say:] " I will 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 World to Come." It is not fitting to serve G-d in this manner. One who serves in this manner serves out 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. In the preceding chapter, Rambam had stated:
33
For this reason, all 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 and mitzvos as is befitting. [In this way,] they would find tranquility and grow in wisdom in order to merit the life of the World to Come. On the surface, explanation is required: H o w is it possible [for Rambam] to say: "It is not fitting to serve G-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 previously that this is the path of the prophets and the wise
35 34
(and hence, "All of Israel,
[including] their prophets and their wise men, yearned for the era of
33.
Ch. 9, halachah 2.
34. Similar statements are also made in Hilchos Melachim 12:5. 35. In ch. 9, halachah 1 [of Hilchos Teshuvah, Rambam also mentions] "meriting the life of the W o r l d to Come." That reference, however, comes in continuation of the promise that G-d will grant us goodness "so that we will not be occupied in matters required by the body throughout our days... but instead, will be free to study wisdom and perform mitzvos to merit the life of the W o r l d to Come." This, however, reflects G-d's intent and not the yearning and intent of man. [Hence, it does not raise a question.] Similar concepts apply with regard to other mentions of "merit[ing] the life of the W o r l d to Come" in halachah 1.
122
Mashiach")?
Seemingly, this does represent the level of the prophets

36
and the wise men.
O n a simple level it is possible to explain that two different sub jects are being discussed. Ch. 9 does 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 World to Come.
37
[It states that the life of the World to Come is] "the consum
38
mation of the reward in its entirety and the final good which will not cease or be reduced." Therefore, "all the prophets yearned for i t , "
39
and "David so earnestly yearned for the life of the World to Come." wise men, yearned" for an ideal situation to prevail within the world
40
And for this reason, "all of Israel, [including] their prophets and their
41
in the era of Mashiach. For it is only in this manner (that they will be able to occupy themselves in the Torah and its mitzvos in a fitting man ner and thus merit the life of the World to Come). In ch. 10, by contrast, Rambam speaks about the desired approach to the Torah and its mitzvos; that a person's intent in observance should not be to merit the life of the World to Come, but instead should be motivated by love. Thus, although one should desire the life of the World to Come, this should not be his purpose in observing the Torah and its mitzvos. Instead, it should be an independent matter.
42 43
36. Similar questions are also 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 W o r l d to Come.
38. Hilchos Teshuvah 9:2. 39. Ibid. 8:3. 40. Ibid. :7.
41. This [ a situation where man can live in peace and prosperity ] also represents the thrust of many prayers recited by the Jews [throughout the ages, beginning with] the prayer (and vow) of Yaakov recorded in the beginning of Parshas Vayeitzei. 42. A similar interpretation would also be appropriate for the statement at the beginning of ch. 7: " A person should always strive to do teshuvah in order... to merit the life of the W o r l d to Come." 43. As Rambam writes in his Commentary to the Mishnah, in his introduction to Sanhedrin, ch. 10: "The ultimate purpose is the W o r l d 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 serves G-d out of love to serve H i m in order to reach the W o r l d 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 World to Come" indicates that ulti mately, their thought and their intent (even when they are not in the midst of observing the mitzvos) is that their observance is [intended] to enable them to merit the life of the World to Come.
V.
[This difficulty can be resolved through an explanation of Rambams understanding of what it means to "serve G-d out of love." He] continues [to explain that concept] in ch. 10 (in a separate 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 does what is true because it is true, and ultimately, good will come because of it. This is a very elevated rung. N o t every wise man merits it. It is the rung of Avraham our Patriarch whom the Holy One, blessed be He, called:
45 44
"He who loved Me," because his
Divine service was motivated by love. Clarification is necessary: O n the surface, here also, Rambam 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. N o t 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.]
124
Moreover, at the conclusion of halachah 1, Rambam writes that the common people should be "educated to serve [Him] out of fear until they increase their 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
VI.
Accordingly, it would appear appropriate to [make the following distinction]. The occupation with the Torah and its mitzvos "in order to merit the life of the World to Come" spoken of by Rambam in ch. 9 does not mean that one is motivated by the idea of receiving [a portion in] the World 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 the World to Come. elaborate]:
48 47
To explain: W i t h regard to the love of G-d, Rambam continues [to 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 obsessed with it at all times. And at the conclusion of that chapter, he states:
49
46. There are some manuscript copies of the Mishneh Torah that have a different 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 (Jerusalem, 5724)}. (See also Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah, loc. cit., [which speaks about similar 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 W o r l d to Come] spurs and encourages one further and further, as our Sages (Koheles Rabbah 1:13) state: "Whoever possesses 100 desires 200. Whoever possesses 200 desires 400." Hence, he does not rest. If, by contrast, [one's intent is to] receive a reward, there is the possibility that he will be content with his portion, rest, [and cease to strive higher].
48. Ch. 10, halachah 3.
SHELACH
125
It is well known and clear that love for the Holy One, blessed be He, will not become attached within a person's heart until he becomes obsessed with it at all times....
50
One loves the Holy 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 H i m . The consummation of this approach will be in the World to Come, as Rambam 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...." "Their crowns 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 World to Come. It will accompany them and it will 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 Holy One, blessed be He, which they [can]not know [while] in a dark and lowly body. Therefore Rambam states:
52
"This is the reward that surpasses all
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 hearts of those who love H i m and who are obsessed with H i m at all 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, [based on Berachos 17a].
52. Ibid., halachah 3. There are several similar statements found in ch. 8 and the conclusion of ch. 9.
126
they will have no rest, strength"].

54
53
[but instead, will "proceed from strength to
[According to this approach,] the life of the World to Come is not (only) a reward for one's observance of the Torah and its mitzvos, 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 its mitzvos. Based on the above, we can appreciate the distinction between Rambam'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 the World to Come." and his statement in ch. 9 that: All 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 and mitzvos as is becoming. [In this way,] they would find tranquility and grow in wisdom so that they would merit the life of the World to Come. The yearning of the Jewish people for the era of Mashiach is in order that they will "grow in wisdom so that they would merit the life of the World 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), i.e., to be obsessed with it at all times. This will come through increasing and enhancing one's wisdom
in the era of Mashiach.
55
53. See fn. 47. 54. [MoedKattan 29a, quoting Tehillim 84:8.] 55. See the AvodasHaKodesh, sec. I I , ch. 5, which quotes the sage Rabbi Yosef. He does not make such statements in the name of Rambam. (See the interpretation he advances for Rambam's approach.) See also Shelah (p. 47a ff. and the marginal note on p. 49b w t h regard to Rambam's approach).
SHELACH
127
In
ch.
10, by contrast,
when Rambam speaks critically of
performing the Torah's mitzvos for the sake of meriting the life of the World to Come, [his intent is that one should not seek a portion in the World to Come] as a reward for his Divine service. For this reason, Rambam mentions "the life of the World 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. { W i t h i n this [lesser] category [of Divine service], however, there are two approaches: 1) In the beginning of ch. 10, Rambam 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 the World to Come."... [Nor should he say,] " I will 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 World to Come." This is intended to [teach one to rise above] Divine service motivated by fear. [He should not] serve G-d because he fears for his spiritual life, and therefore he serves G-d so that he will have a life of repose in this world ([i.e.,] "be saved from the curses"). O r (if his spiritual life is important to him), he seeks that his soul merit the eternal life of the World to Come ("in order not to be cut off from the life of the World to Come").
2) In halachah 4, Rambam writes:
57
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 also 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 as will be explained. 57. To refer to the wording used by Rambam in halachah 5, "so that retribution will not be visited upon him."
128
'...so that I will receive reward in the World to Come.' Therefore the Torah teaches love G-d.'"
59
58
[that observance must be] 'to
In 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 will receive reward in the World to Come"). This is a less refined level [within the category of] serving G-d for an ulterior motive.}
60
VII.
Although the desire of the wise and the prophets to attain the life of the World 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 Rambam introduces in halachah 2,
61
"the rung of Avraham our Patriarch,"
"do[ing] what is true because it 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 the W o r l d to Come" (which is the purpose of the observance of the mitzvos, 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 become wealthy; 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 W o r l d 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 all the blessings...or ...in order to merit," while in halachah 4, he changes his wording and states, "so that I will become wealthy, ...so that I will receive reward in the World to Come." (The implication [of the latter phrase] is that the service is intended for an extraneous purpose.) 61. O n 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 all levels. However, an analysis 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 sake of 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 H i m . 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. Rambam 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. O n the contrary, "Not every wise man merits it." Instead, it is "the rung of Avraham our Patriarch whom the Holy 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 very high level of love [of G-d].
VIII.
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 ordinary work 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." They desired to continue and to advance,
64 63
following the pattern

65
of life in the desert where "good things flow in abundance"

62. Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 37a. 63. Cf. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Teshuvah 9:1. Cf. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, HilchosMelachim
as
64. For obviously one must "proceed higher in matters of holiness" [Berachos 28a].
65. 12:5.
130
elucidated above (manna from Heaven, water from Miriam's well, and the Clouds of Glory that accompanied them). They had nothing to upset them while performing their Divine service. Being undisturbed would enable them to "find tranquility and grow in wisdom in order to merit the life of the World to Come." As Rambam 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 entering Eretz 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 spies and 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, amidst repose and tranquility. In this manner, they would "increase their 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. Note Likkutei Torah, Devarim, p. 32c, which, based on the Zohar I l l , 163b, interprets the phrase (Bamidbar 14:35): "In this desert you shall perish ()," as "In this desert, you shall be perfected." 67. This enables us 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 World to Come. Above, it was explained that their desire to remain in the desert paralleled the Jewish people's desire for the W o r l d to Come. However, during the forty years that they remained in the desert, they ascended higher from level to level until they reached a very high peak even though they were living in physical bodies on this earthly plane. Thus the level of the W o r l d to Come (ordinarily) experienced by souls: "The righteous sit and delight" (Rambam, Hilchos Teshuvah 8:2), would be considered a descent and a decline for them. Hence, they were in no need of it. {See Shaar Maamarei Razal at the beginning of ch. Cheilek in tractate Sanhedrin regarding the different levels within the W o r l d to Come. This is not the place for further discussion of the issue (Sichos Shabbos
Parshas Shelach, 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 "does what is true because it is true." It is possible to explain that this is the intent of the statements that Yehoshua and Caleb made in response to the entire congregation of the Jewish people: Jewish people.
69 68
"If G-d desires us... and will bring us." Implied
is that the entry into Eretz Yisrael is connected with G-d's desire for the [Entering into Eretz Yisrael] reflects G-d's desire and will, and this act leads to 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's wisdom in the desert.
IX.
When Rambam mentions that [one who truly loves G-d] "does what is true because it is true," he concludes: "Ultimately, good will come because of it." The inclusion of this phrase raises a question, for seemingly, he is speaking about a wise man who is not at all concerned with the good that he will receive because of his Divine service. It is possible to explain that [the difficulty is resolved by] carefully considering the intent of the expression: "Ultimately, good will come because of i t . "
70
Implied is that when a person "does what is true

71
because it is true," the good that results will be more elevated than the ordinary conception of good in the World to Come.
72
Accordingly,
68. Bamidbar 14:8; see Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 38c.
69. Note the Baal Shem Tov's interpretation of the verse (MMalachi 3:12): "And you shall be a cherished land." [The Baal Shem Tov interprets the verse as indicating that just as a cherished land contains unlimited 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]
included within it" (see Rambam, SeferHaMada, loc. cit.).
71. This reflects a contrast to the statement (Nedarim 62a): "Study out of love and ultimately honor will come." 72. By contrast, Nedarim, ibid., does not speak of the good of the W o r l d to Come, but instead states that a person should not study for the sake of being called wise or a rabbi (this concept is mentioned by Rambam in halachah 4). W i t h regard to this, Nedarim concludes: "Ultimately honor will come."
132
because of his connection and his soul's clinging to G-d, he reaches a higher level of fulfillment cling to G-d. On this basis, we can understand Yehoshua's and Caleb's previous statements: "The land is very, very good." Through Divine service in the desert, studying the Torah in a manner that allows us to devote ourselves to its wisdom undisturbed, we merit "to see the goodness of G-d in the land of life,"
76 74 75 73
than someone whose study of the Torah
and observance of the mitzvos is motivated by a desire to connect and
i.e., in the World to Come which is "a very

77
great good that has no comparison among the forms of goodness in this world." As Rambam states in Hilchos Teshuvah: by David's statement: For through
78
"This goodness is
infinitely great with no comparison or likeness. This is what is meant ' H o w great is the goodness that You have Yisrael and through the hidden away for those who fear You.'" the entry into Eretz observance of the mitzvos in that land i.e., through carrying out Divine service in a manner [indicative of how] "G-d desires us," "doing what is true because it is true" 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 the capacity of man to receive in this world, i.e., the goodness of the World to Come.) [Such goodness] would come as a result of Divine service on the level of meod, i.e., "a very 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 the greatness of his deeds and the abundance of his knowledge," [which implies that] there are different levels within the World to Come. This concept also applies according to the understanding of Ramban (Shaar HaGmul; his perspective is accepted by the teachings of
Chassidus see Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p. 15c; Derech Mitzvosecha, p. 14b) which interprets
the term W o r l d to Come as referring to [the Era of the Resurrection when] the souls will be enclothed within bodies. (See Bava Basra 75a; the conclusion of tractate Taanis Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X I X , p. 67ff.; Vol. X I V , p. 66, fn. 76.) This is not the place for further discussion of this matter.
74. Bamidbar 14:7. 75. 76. See Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, pp. 37a, 38c; Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IV, Parshas Shelach. Tehillim 27:13; quoted by Rambam, Hilchos Teshuvah 8:7; see also Hilchos 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 Rambam: "He does what is true because it is true, and ultimately, good will come because of i t . "
79
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 entirely batel 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 40 years 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 possesses an advantage over the attachment to G-d motivated by love. It is possible to say that this concept is also implicit in Rambam's words. In continuation of his statements concerning "the advantage of Avraham our Patriarch whom the Holy One, blessed be He, called 'He who loved Me,'" Rambam writes: "This is the quality about which we have been commanded by G-d, via Moshe, as it is written: '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
80
79. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XX, p. 45ff., which explains the reason Rambam speaks about [receiving a reward] in this place.
80. Devarim 6:5.
134
of love." (In the halachah that follows, he continues to explain: "What is meant by loving H i m as is befitting?") On the surface, Rambam's statements are problematic. After stating that "This is a very elevated rung. N o t 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 a mitzvah which every Jew is commanded to observe?
81
This, however, points to the concept Rambam is teaching us: "Not every wise man merits i t " [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.
XI.
There is, nevertheless, a necessity for further clarification: Love is an emotion in a person's heart that is attained through meditation on the greatness of G-d, as Rambam 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 Rambam'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 World 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 Sages said... and the great Sages would instruct their wise students...: "Do not be like servants...."
83
81. [Trans. Note: A n d thus within his capacity to attain. If this degree of love is reserved only for those on Avraham's level, how can everyone be commanded to attain it?]
82. Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 83. [Avos 1:3.] 2:1.
SHELACH
135
On the surface, why did Rambam 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"? Seemingly, it would have been appropriate to [negate such motivation] in halachah 1 [which teaches a 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 seem appropriate to negate the manner of Divine service for these ulterior motives before elaborating on the greatness of Avraham's level (i.e., the love that is befitting).} It is possible to explain that in this manner, Rambam 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 levels within "the love that is befitting": a) Feelings of love within the heart. "This is a very elevated rung." In particular, this is the level of Avraham, and as Rambam 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 love until his soul is bound up in the love of G-d." b) [A level that relates] even to someone who has not reached the level of Avraham, to love G-d in a manner that is befitting (which will lead a person to "do what is true because is true"). O n 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." [Implied is that] even someone who does not feel the love that is befitting in his heart can, nevertheless, cause himself to act as moti-
136
vated by love, because he was commanded to do so by G-d. [He will conduct himself like those] on that "very elevated rung," "do[ing] what is true because it is true."
85
84
This is reflected by Rambam's statements in halachah [5]. ([In that halachah,] he defines what is meant by avodah lishmah, Divine service for its own sake, and avodah shelo lishmah, Divine service for an ulterior motive. He also quotes [the principle] stated by our Sages: "A person should always occupy himself in the Torah shelo lishmah, for out of service shelo lishmah will come service that is lishmah.") 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 sake of 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 serve H i m out of love. This statement is seemingly extraneous. In halachah 1, Rambam stated that one should be educated to serve out of fear until he increases his knowledge and serves out of love. W h y 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,
86
84. See similar concepts in the introduction to Sec. II of Tanya entitled Chinuch Katan (albeit that there the thrust is somewhat different). See also 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 feel 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 are carrying out the command.]
[Pesachim 50b.]
86.
SHELACH
137
through studying the Torah and observing the mitzvos
87
[solely]
because they are G-d's commandments, every Jew even if he does not have feelings of love revealed within his heart can certainly come to observance and study lishmah, "serving H i m out of love."
88
(Adapted from Sichos Shabbos Parshas Shelach, 5746)
87. See Torah Or, the beginning of Parshas Yisro.
88. Implied is a fusion of two motifs: service and love. O n a revealed level, service [is more prominent]. See the statement of the Alter Rebbe (and his Divine service that relates to this) as cited in fn. 28.
PARSHAS BALAK
Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I I I , p. 293ff.
I.
According to Jewish law, the Haftorah of a Torah reading reflects the
1
content of that Torah reading, and more precisely, its conclusion.

3
Seemingly, the connection between Parshas Balak and its Haftorah is direct. The Haftorah relates that G-d commands the Jewish people: " M y nation, remember the counsel given by Balak, King of Moav, and the response Bilaam the son of Beor gave him from Shittim." This relates to the content of Parshas Balak. It is, however, understood that the connection between the Haftorah and the Torah reading is not confined to a single verse but relates to its general theme. This is obvious from the fact that, as is well known, the Haftorah was originally instituted in place of the entire Torah reading. According to the recognized general principle that a subject's theme is alluded to in its beginning, it is clear that there is a connection between (the conclusion of) Parshas Balak and the begin ning of the Haftorah: "The remnant of Yaakov will be in the midst of
6 4 5
1.
Tur and Shulchan Aruch (and Shulchan Aruch HaRav),
Orach Chayim 284:1; Tur and Rama,
428:8.
2. See Beis Yosef to the Tur (Orach Chayim 283; see also Shulchan Aruch HaRav 283:1, based HaRav
on Tosafos, Megillah 23a) which emphasizes that the Haftorah should relate to the last
concept mentioned. Rama, loc. cit. (and also Shulchan Aruch 284:7; Shulchan Aruch
284:13) use this concept as the basis for the ruling that when two Torah portions are combined, the Haftorah is associated with the second portion.
3. 4. 5. 6. Michah 6:5. Avudraham; Levush, Bach, Taz, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 284:1. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V , p. 58, fn. 12, et al. Michah 5:6.
139
140
many nations... they will not hope from man, nor expect from a mortal."
II.
The Haftorah is speaking about the time at the beginning of the Redemption; the time before Mashiachs established. For [to establish Mashiachs identity will be definitely identity definitively it is
7
required that] he complete waging all the wars and "transform the nations... so that they serve G-d with a single purpose." The Haftorah, by contrast, speaks about how [Mashiach] will [be in the process of] waging wars against the nations, as it is written: "The remnant of Jacob will be in the midst of the nations... like a lion among the animals of the forest... who tramples and preys." Moreover, not only will the era that the Haftorah speaks about involve [conflict] with external evil [wars against] the gentiles there will also be internal evil, i.e., within the Jews themselves, as it is written: " I will cut away witchcraft from your hand.... I will cut away your idols.... I will uproot your Asherah trees."
10 9 8
[Implied is that] the
evil will be so powerful that it will be necessary for there to be assistance from Above to eliminate it, as the verse states: " I will cut away.... I will uproot." [The existence of such evil indicates that] the Haftorah speaks about the time at the beginning of the Redemption when the last preparations for the complete Redemption will take place. Similarly, the Torah reading, Parshas Balak, speaks of a comparable phase in history, the time directly before the Jews' entry into Eretz Yisrael for the first time [as a nation]. The Jews were "in the plains of Moav, across from Jericho at the Jordan,"
7.
11
ready to enter Eretz Yisrael.
Tzephaniah 3:9. When Rambam quotes this verse in Mishneh Torah, HilchosMelachim 11:4, he
adds an extra vav. See the marginal notes to Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V , p. 420, and Vol. XIV, p. 414. [The latter source explains that Rambam occasionally changes slightly the wording of a verse that he quotes in order to fit the meaning of his text.] See also 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 false deities.]
11. Bamidbar 22:1.
BALAK
141
[This resembles the Jews' state] before entering Eretz Yisrael at the time of the ultimate Redemption. In particular, [the connection is
12
apparent] according to the well-known concept

entered Eretz Yisrael.
that had the Jews
not sinned, the ultimate Redemption would have come when they first
III.
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:
14 13
"Cursed is the human who trusts in man." ["Man" refers to the Jews, as our Sages state:] "You are called 'man.'" Instead, we will rely only on G-d, as it is written: G-d." Since the verse speaks about a time at the beginning of the Redemption, we can assume that 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. It is written:
17 16 15
"Blessed be the man who puts his faith in
"And G-d your L-rd will bless you in everything
that you do." [Commenting on the verse,] the Sifri asks: "Shall one sit idle? 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 in which the passage is usually quoted although the version in the standard published texts of the Sifri is slightly different. See also the Yalkut Shimoni on the verse that quotes a third version.
142
order,
18
since we should not rely on miracles.
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: [Blessings will come] "like dew from G-d" which "does not come to the world through mortal efforts, nor does man request it. Similarly, Israel will not rely on assistance from man, but from G-d."
21 21
{ I n this vein, Chassidus
22
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 medium within 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). A t this level, it is not necessary for man
18. See the introduction to Derech Chayim Derech Mitzvosecha, Mitzvas II ff.; Kuntreis U'Maayon, Discourse 17ff. Tiglaches Metzora, sec.
19. See Pesachim 64b; Zohar I , 111b; II, 112b. See also Berachos 35b which states: "Many did...
as Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai [taught to rely on G-d to provide for their needs without working themselves ] and they were unsuccessful." 20. See the sources cited in fn. 18. See also the maamar entitled VeYadaata, 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.
BALAK
143
to establish a medium in the natural order. Instead, "He will provide for you ( ",([ i.e.,] G-d will provide the medium ( )as well.}
25 24
IV.
The ultimate intent is not for the natural order to be nullified but for it to be refined and elevated
26
to the extent that it is overtly apparent
that nature is one with G-d. W i t h 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. He does not consider the natural order important in its own right, but nevertheless, since G-d has commanded that it be
27
employed, he grants it a certain measure of importance.
b) He acts within the context of the natural order only because G-d commanded him to. The natural order has no importance for him whatsoever. It is only a medium to carry out G-d's will. This is the explanation
31 29 28
of our Sages' interpretation
30
of the
phrase: "The faith of your times." They say: "'The faith' refers to
25. Cf. Tehillim 55:23.
26. See Likkutei Dibburim, Vol. IV, p. 752b ff.; Likkutei Sichos, V o l . V , p. 80, et al.
27.
[To cite a parallel:] Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IV, p. 1044, explains the claim of 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 Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer, ch. 33: " D i d Yitzchak sow grain, Heaven forbid? He took tithes... and sowed tzedakah." As explained in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V , p. 74, [his entire intent in performing the physical activity was to carry out the aforementioned mitzvos].
29. 30. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I , pp. 216, Shabbos 31a. 240. See Tosafos, s.v. Emunas (quoting the Talmud Yerushalmi).
144
the Order of Agricultural Laws"; [i.e.,] "one believes in the Eternal Life and sows." [Seemingly,] sowing grain is a natural act; one sows seeds and grain grows. It does not matter who does the sowing, a Jew or , a gentile. Even if a kernel of grain falls into the ground without 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 is written: "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 because according to nature this will lead to the growth of his crops. Instead, he "believes in the Eternal Life and sows."
33 32
V.
The difference between these two approaches goes beyond the manner and the extent to which bitachon, 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 mitzvos as two different subjects. [Thus it is possible that] he will feel a conflict between his involvement in the Torah and its mitzvos 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 tzedakah, he may lack the money he needs for investments. He will thus find himself in [a constant struggle]; "power will 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. 32.
Yeshayahu Bereishis
33:6.
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 knowledge does not affect him. Instead, he is focused on his relation to G-d that transcends nature.] ch. 13, [which speaks of a similar struggle within a
34. Cf. Bereishis 25:23. See Tanya, person's heart].
BALAK
145
brings wealth," and that these natural means are 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 involvement becomes an act of Divine service. When he "carries out all [his] deeds for the sake of Heaven"
37 36
35
and
"knows G-d in all [his] ways," he does not see "all of [his] deeds" and "all of [his] ways" as separate from [the goal to which they are directed]. O n 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. O n the contrary, one mitzvah leads to another one.
38
VI.
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. The yetzer hara agrees, as it were, that the involvement in finding a medium within 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 these activities to be considered of primary importance.
35. Mishlei 10:22.
36. Avos 37. Mishlei 2:12. 3:6.
38. Avos 4:2.
146
Indeed,
39
as
my revered
father-in-law, the
40
Previous
Rebbe,
interpreted our Sages' statement:
"This is the craft of the yetzer hara.
Today, it will tell him: 'Do this.' The following day, it will say: 'Do that.' Until ultimately, it will tell him: 'Go and worship idols.'" A t the beginning, the yetzer hara does not try to convince a person to do the opposite of his true will
41
(and violate G-d's will, Heaven forbid). O n
the contrary, it tells the person: "Do this": observe the Torah and its mitzvos. A n d it explains to him how that observance makes sense according to the understanding of the animal soul and the yetzer hara. In 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 agree to his conduct. [This gives the yetzer 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 Will with bittul and mesirus nefesh that transcend logic and reason. On this level, nothing other than G-d's Will exists for this person. {This parallels the distinction made 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, V o l . I , p. 37a). See also Likkutei Sichos, V o l . I l l , p. 900. 40. Shabbos 105b. 41. For as Rambam states (Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Gerushin, the conclusion of ch. 2), [every
Jew's true desire is to observe the Torah and its mitzvos].
BALAK
147
order. Therefore the motif is: "He will provide for you ()," G-d will provide the medium. There will be mediums, but they will come from Above. As mentioned previously, even when such a person employs natural means, he does not grant them any [independent] importance. It is not appropriate to say that he receives "help from man," because the mediums of the natural order are one with G-d.} This is the preparation for the Redemption when we will receive blessings "not hoped for from man." Then the veil of concealment will be lifted from nature entirely and we will see with our mortal eyes that nature itself is G-dly. Hence the pattern will be that [blessings come] "like dew from G-d.... They will not hope from man, nor expect from a mortal."
21
{This parallels [the motif]
"He will provide for you"
[described above].}
VII.
Based on the above, we can appreciate the connection of the Haftorah
to the conclusion of Parshas Balak, which relates the sin of Baal Peor and
the self-sacrifice of Pinchas
42
that corrected that sin (as it is written:

44
43
"And he atoned for the children of Israel"). Baal Peor was served by defecating in the idol's presence. explained in Chassidus
45
It is
that the source for this sin is that one grants
importance to physical pleasures which are [in truth] the waste product of the sublime pleasure. What would cause a person to consider waste products (physical pleasures) of primary importance? This comes from the fact that he considers the natural order as being important. [Making this initial error] leads him to be totally absorbed in material matters.
42. Pinchas risked his life to kill the nasi of the tribe of Shimon even though the entire tribe was gathered together [at that place]. Moreover, he required several miracles [to prove
the propriety of his actions]. (See Targum Yonason ben Uziel, Sifri, Midrash conclusion of Parshas Balak Sanhedrin 82b.) Tanchuma to the
43. Bamidbar 25:13.

44. Rashi, Bamidbar 25:3; see also Sanhedrin 64a. 45. Likkutei Torah, Devarim, p. 11c; the maamar entitled Veneishev Bagei at the conclusion of Sefer HaMaamarim Eshalaleich Liozna Sefer HaMaamarim 5562, p. 88ff. See also Likkutei Sichos, V o l .
IV, p. 1327ff. (with regard to the concepts explained in secs. V I I and VIII).
148
O n this basis, we can understand our Sages' statement continue to exert positive influence [in this world]
46
that the
atonement [brought about by Pinchas] is still an active force and will until the Resurrection of the Dead. For the purification and atonement for the sin [of Baal Peor] will not come until that time. A t that point, nature will be consummately refined and it will be obvious that nature is completely at one with G-dliness. Thus it will not be possible to give primacy to material concerns. Therefore the atonement [for this sin] was brought about through the self-sacrifice of Pinchas. [Torah Law does not mandate] such selfsacrifice. [Indeed, were Pinchas to have asked whether to have taken action,] he would not have been instructed to do so according to Torah law. Nevertheless, Pinchas remained steadfast and was willing to sacrifice his life. This reflects self-sacrifice that transcends logic and reason, even [logic and reason] within the realm of holiness. As explained above, it is through bittul that transcends logic and reason, (even [logic and reason] within the realm of holiness) that it is possible to protect oneself and not make a division between nature and G-dliness even though [one carries out in nature] the Torah's directive: "And G-d will bless you in all that you do."
47
VIII.
O n this basis, we can also understand the connection between the above concept and the entry of the Jewish people into Eretz Yisrael. (As explained in sec. I I , the events described in Parshas Balak occurred shortly before the entry into Eretz Yisrael.) In the desert, [the people were sustained by] manna, i.e., a miraculous pattern [of existence]. It was not possible to err and think that human input could have any effect on [one's fortunes], as
46. Sifri to Parshas Pinchas. See also Sanhedrin 82b which states: "It is appropriate that this atonement...." Note also Tosafos, Sotah 14a, s.v. mipnei. 47. [I.e., although taking such action is sanctioned and even considered praiseworthy it must come on the person's own initiative. The court should not instruct him to
take such steps] (Sanhedrin, loc. cit. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Issurei Bi'ah 12:5; Tur, EvenHaEzer, sec. 16; Rama, ChoshenMishpat 425:4).
BALAK
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
In
contrast,
the entry into Eretz

51
Yisrael
50
brought about
the
beginning of a new phase in Divine service, appropriate for "a settled land."
[serving H i m in a way]
Hence, [as a preparation,] it was
necessary to confront the issue of 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 is still necessary.
IX.
This lesson is also appropriate in these, the last days of exile, when we are preparing to enter Eretz Yisrael led by Mashiach. We are living in an era characterized by the double and redoubled darkness of exile, the very opposite of the beginning of the Redemption, as is plainly seen. Nevertheless, exile."
54 53 52
all the revelations of the Future Redemption are
"dependent on our deeds and Divine service throughout the era of
48. Shmos 16:18.

49. YalkutShimoni, Beshalach, sec. 258; see also Yoma 76a.
50. In particular, this was true after the Jews conquered the lands of Sichon and Og. Note, however, Rashi's commentary to Shmos 16:35. See Likkutei 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 itself. See the interpretation of the Baal Shem Tov (quoted in Toldos Yaakov Yosef, the beginning of Parshas Bereishis) of the verse (Devarim 31:18): " I will certainly conceal M y 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 redoubled darkness 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.
150
In particular, this applies in the present generation when we are making the final preparations for the Redemption to be led by Mashiach. As the Previous Rebbe states, Mashiach is "standing behind
55
our wall." Moreover, the walls of exile are already burning.
56
57
[At this time,] every person must have (at least) a foretaste of the approach of "not hop[ing] in man" in his Divine service. He should not grant the mediums of the natural order any [independent] Through this, everyone will be redeemed from the worries and problems that disturb him. For when he carries out "all that you do" only for the sake of fulfilling G-d's will, he will not be worried, nor will he be disturbed, for all that will concern him is carrying out G-d's will. This individual redemption that will be experienced by each person
58
importance and instead, place his trust in G-d alone.
will serve as the preparation and the medium for the all59
encompassing Redemption led by Mashiach, and to the era that will be "only Shabbos and rest for life everlasting."
(Adapted from Sichos Shabbos Parshas Balak, 5723)
55. In the KolKoreh
published in HaKeriah VehaKedushah, Sivan 5701.
56. Cf. Shir HaShirim 2:9.
57. See the letter of the Previous Rebbe printed in the beginning of HaYom Yom (p. 12).
See also Likkutei Dibburim, Vol. I l l , p. 794, et al. 58. See Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 4.
59. The conclusion of tractate Tamid.
PARSHAS MATOS-MASEI, MENACHEM A V

Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X X I I I , p. 214ff.
I.
When the parshiyos Matos and Masei are joined together, they are read
1
on the Shabbos when the month of Menachem A v is blessed or on the first Shabbos of Menachem Av. As is well known, all of the Torah
2
readings share a 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 primarily) to the month of Av.
5 3
in general, but also (and
1.
As is the practice in most years. In only two annual cycles (during leap years) are the two read as separate parshiyos. See the calendars included in the Tur (Orach Chayim) that follow the laws of Rosh Chodesh.
See Shelah, Cheilek Torah Shebichsav, the beginning of Parshas Vayeishev (p. 297a).
2.
3.
[Trans. Note: This term literally means "between the straits." It refers to the threeweek 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 always read during Bein HaMetzarim because they are appropriate to the time (see also the title on p. 366a) and explains the connection between them. See also Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X V I I I , p. 378ff., which explains several particulars regarding this connection. See also ibid., p. 411ff., which explains the connection
between Parshas Masei and the period of Bein HaMetzarim.
5.
[The following distinctions can be made:] There is a) the period of Bein HaMetzarim 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 falls. That in turn subdivides (although not always) into the ordinary week days, the day preceding Tishah BeAv, Tishah BeAv itself, Tishah BeAv which is postponed, and the
151
152
II.
(When blessing the month [of Av], it is Jewish custom which is considered as Torah Law to refer to it as Menachem Av. {This
6
custom has halachic relevance with regard to the manner in which the name of the month is written in a legal document. [A legal document is unacceptable if the name of the month is not written correctly. Nevertheless, such] a document is acceptable when dated Menachem Av. Indeed, even if one writes merely Menachem and not Av, the legal document is acceptable because it is well known that the month of Av is referred to as Menachem. In fact, there are those who follow the custom of using the term Menachem instead of the term Av in marriage contracts and other legal documents. } This custom can be explained based on the following preface: Our Sages relate that the names of the months "ascended with them from Babylonia." The commentaries
10 9 8 7
explain that the names of all
11
day following Tishah BeAv. {There are also practical halachic distinctions between these
different times, as explained in the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim, sec. 551 ff.) and
commentaries.}
6. 7. See Talmud Yerushalmi, Pesachim 4:1; Tosafos, Menachos 20b, s.v. nifsal. Get Pashut, EvenHaEzer 126:35, quoted by the Pis'chei Teshuvah 126:12. See also the Aruch
HaShulchan 126:16 which states that it is not our custom to write only Menachem, but that if one writes Menachem Av, the get is acceptable after the fact, because "the month is blessed in this manner throughout our countries and it is common to mention it in correspondence."
8. 9. Get Pashut, loc. cit. Talmud Yerushalmi, Rosh HaShanah midivrei. 1:2; Bereishis Rabbah 48:9; Tosafos, Rosh HaShanah 7a, s.v.
There is a slight difference in the wording of these sources. See the Albeck edition of Bereishis Rabbah and the different versions of the text he cites. See also 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. O n the surface, the name A v raises a question, as will be mentioned. It is possible to explain that [not all the names are of Babylonian origin,] but the overwhelming majority are. It is also possible to explain albeit the explanation is quite forced that the month was referred to in this manner in Babylonia in the Persian tongue. See the sources cited that explain that this period of the year is referred to in this manner because in Persian, this name describes the events that occur, not because of the meaning of the term A v in Lashon HaKodesh.
MATOS-MASEI, MENACHEM A V
153
the months are not based on Lashon HaKodesh origin,

13
12
but are of Chaldean
(and are Persian names).
14
This statement, however, is problematic, for we find that our Sages make several extrapolations
16 15
based on the meaning of the
names of the months in Hebrew. It is possible to explain that, at the outset, there is no difficulty. When our Sages say that the names 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 the term as the name of a month] was brought [to Eretz Yisrael] from there. The names of the months themselves are not, however, Babylonian in origin.
17
Even if one would say that some of the terms are of Babylonian origin, that certainly does not apply with regard to the name Av. Moreover and this is of fundamental importance since they are names employed by the Torah, it is evident that they are associated
18 19
12. 13. 14. 15.
[The H o l y Tongue, Biblical Hebrew.] Rav Avraham Ibn Ezra and Chizkuni to the above verse. Ramban to the above verse. See the Pesikta Zuta, Bo, which interprets the name Nissan as alluding to the nissim, miracles, wrought on behalf of the Jewish people. See also Midrash Shmos with regard to the names of all the months cited in Toras Shlomoh, loc. cit. Note also the different acronyms cited by our Sages with regard to the name Elul. See fn. 18.
16. We find the Talmud (Shabbos 77b; Kesuvos 10b) interpreting the word desha, "doorway," as an allusion to [the Hebrew terms meaning] "the way through there." The connection, however, is merely an allusion, for the word desha is not a term in Lashon HaKodesh [and the allusion is not intrinsically related to its meaning]. W i t h regard to the names of the months, by contrast, it appears that the allusions are connected to the meanings of the
terms [in Lashon HaKodesh]. *
Toras Shlomoh, loc. cit., states that our Sages endeavored to find a Jewish connection to the names of the months and endow the names with Jewish content. Much clarifica tion, however, is required, for how are these different from the other extrapolations of names made by our Sages? Note the quote from Midrash Sechel Tov on Bereishis 46:9.
[Trans. Note: In the original, this footnote was a bracketed passage in the body of the sichah and the passage marked by an asterisk, a footnote.] 17. See the commentary to Bereishis Rabbah, loc. cit., ascribed to Rashi which states: "Previously, they were not revealed."
18. Some are cited in the Tanach (see Talmud Yerushalmi, Rosh HaShanah, loc. cit. the
commentary of Rav Avraham Ibn Ezra, loc. cit.). W i t h regard to the name Av, see the
154
with the interpretation that they are given in Lashon HaKodesh.
20
In
particular, this applies with regard to (Menachem) Av. The term A v has the meaning "father," just as the word is interpreted in Lashon
HaKodesh.
21
According to this, the meaning of the name Menachem A v is that we "comfort the father," i.e., we are comforting our Father in Heaven, as it were. Were the month named A v Menachem, the intent would be that the father (our Father in Heaven) is comforting (the Jews). comforted. (by G-d).}
23 22
The
term Menachem Av, by contrast, implies that the father is the one being { [ I n contrast,] the meaning of the term Menachem Tziyon (mentioned in the blessing Nacheim) is that Tziyon is being comforted
Mishnah,
Taanis 4:5-6; Targum* Sheni to Megillas Esther 3:7; Targum Yonason ben Uziel, Bamidbar
13:25. * For this principle can also be applied to the Targum since it was also given to Moshe at Sinai (see Shulchan Aruch HaRav 285:2; note also the sources cited; see also Toras Shlomoh, the Appendix to V o l . X V I I , sec. 23, subsec. 2, the beginning of V o l . X X I V ) . Since these names are cited in the Targum, they have a meaning 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 a word and say that it originated in Greek or in another secular language... do not think that the Torah employed any language other than Lashon HaKodesh. Instead, the intent is that 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 the construction of the Tower of Bavel], when G-d mixed together all the languages, these words from Lashon HaKodesh became mixed into Greek, Catpian, or African. 20. See also Divrei Torah by the author of the text MinchasElazar (Vol. II, sec. VII). O n this basis, we can appreciate that we find several acronyms in Lashon HaKodesh with regard to the name Elul (see Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IX, p. 296ff., and the sources mentioned
there; see also Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X I X , p. 162); Or HaTorah (Terumah, p. 1527) with
regard to the name Adar ([ )that it alludes to] , [that G-d's Infinity dwells]. See
Toras Shlomoh as cited in fn. 10.
21. See the maamar entitled Nachamu, 5670, sec. 10; see also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IV, p. 1080ff. 22. See the sources cited in the previous footnote. Note also the Maharil, at the beginning of Hilchos Tishah BeAv, who says, "May the Father show mercy on them." 23. See the sources quoted in Taamei Minhagim, Inyonei Tishah BeAv (secs. 632-633) with regard to the rationales for the name Menachem Av.
155
Our Sages state:
24
"G-d says, as it were: 'What will be

26 27
25
with a
Father W h o exiled His children? comfort H i m , as it were.
(Woe to the children who were [Since He is in distress,] we
exiled from their Father's table.)'"
III.
O n this basis, we can understand the connection between the month
of Menachem A v 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 Midian: "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."
30 29
The Sifri
31
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 similar concept in Parshas Masei. It is written: "And you
32
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 also quotes a slightly different version: "Woe to the Father...." This version is cited in many sources. 26. [When citing this quote,] Ein 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 a Father..."; and b) changes the text somewhat. This is not the place for further discussion of the matter.
28. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IV, loc. cit.; Sefer HaArachim Chabad, Vol. I , erech Av. Note the
sources cited there.

29. Bamidbar 31:2.
30. Ibid.:3. 31. Commenting on the verse; see also 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.
156
Divine presence is among them .... Cherished are the Jewish people. Wherever they are exiled, the Divine presence accompanies them, and when they return, the Divine presence will accompany them." For exile does not affect the Jewish people alone; it affects G-d as well. [When the Jewish people are in exile,] the Divine presence is [also] in exile. A n d the redemption of the Jewish people also involves the redemption of the Divine presence, as it were. Certainly, it is obvious that the redemption of the Divine presence is more important than the redemption of the Jewish people.
34
33
IV.
It is, however, necessary to understand [the following]: The name Menachem A v emphasizes only the comfort given the Father and does not mention at all the comfort given the Jewish people, the son.
35
Nevertheless, this is the name with which all Jews refer to the month. It is thus problematic: Were we speaking about great tzaddikim whose Divine service is carried out for G-d's sake without any thought of their own selves, not even to cling to H i m , Divine presence. [Moreover, the use of such a name would be understandable] even if the Jews were not on the level where they perform their Divine service for G-d's sake, but they perceive the exile of the Divine presence in terms of the spiritual destruction they face "We are unable to ascend, see, and prostrate ourselves," i.e., [they would feel discomfort from the fact that] G-dliness is not shining in the world and they are lacking the revelation of G-dliness in their souls, in their
38 37 36
we could understand
that their perception of the exile involves feeling the exile of the
33. See Rashi's commentary to the verse.

34. See also Megillah 29a; Rashi's commentary to Devarim 30:3, et al.
35. See sec. I I and the sources mentioned there. 36. See Tanya, ch. 10, which explains that this thrust characterizes the Divine service of "men of ascendancy." 37. The Mussaf liturgy for the festivals.
38. See Likkutei Torah, Devarim, p. 98b.
157
study of the Torah and observance of the mitzvos, and in particular in the Divine service 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" 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 the Jews. Every person knows that these are the concerns that cause us aggravation. H o w is it appropriate that even a person [with such concerns] refers to the month as Menachem Av, [putting the emphasis on comforting G-d, and not on receiving his own needs]?
39
found within oneself, i.e., the spark of the Father within
V.
The above concepts can be resolved by first explaining a similar con cept that applies with regard to prayer. There is a well-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. For the soul is an actual part of G-d from Above; it is one of the limbs of the Divine
42
39. Iyov 31:2. Tanya, ch. 2, adds the term "actual."

40. Or Torah, the beginning of Parshas Vayigash. See also the section Aggados Chazal, entry Ein
Omdin (p. 108c in the Kehot edition); see also the conclusion of the maamar entitled Al Taas (p. 115d); Likkutei Amarim of the Maggid, sec. 12 (in the Kehot edition), Or HaTorah, Ki Sisa (Vol. VIII), p. 30098ff. See also Sefer HaMaamarim 5665, p. 190ff., the
series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, V o l . I I , p. 901, and several of the
maamarim entitled Ein Omdim from the Rebbeim.

41. Berachos 5:1. 42. See Tanya, ch. 28.
158
presence. This is the essential request that should be fulfilled and that influence be generated Above."
43
In 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

45
pray to G-d and entreat H i m to fulfill this lack.
H o w 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?
VI.
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: his own. It is G-d's property.
47 46
"A person does
not have jurisdiction over his body at all." For a person's body is not It 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 feels and having the intent that "nothing should be lacking Above." For his intent in praying that his bodily needs be fulfilled is {not that he (himself) should not feel a lack,} but that G-d's property should not suffer deficiency.
43. 44. 45. Or Torah, the beginning of Parshas Vayigash. See Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Teshuvah 9:1. See ibid., Hilchos Tefillah 1:2: "This is the obligation of this mitzvah:... To ask for the needs that one lacks with appeal and supplication." See also the 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 gloss of Radbaz Hilchos Sanhedrin 18:6; the commentary of OrHaChayim to Bamidbar 16:24. to
159
VII.
This explanation is not sufficient, however, [for several reasons]. {Firstly, the wording of the Maggid implies that one should have in mind the lack of "the Head of all heads," [G-d Himself,] 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 Zohar
48
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. It 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 stated that when a
49
person feels that he is lacking something, he should pray to G-d that He should fill 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 feels 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]. A n d 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. V I I I ) : " I pray with the intent of a
child." It can be said that this concept relates only to the idea of praying "to H i m , and not to His attributes." (See sec. V I I of that text.)
160
earnest reverence," implies that the entire concept of prayer should be only "that nothing should be lacking Above." We are thus forced to say that even a person who at that moment is thinking only about his personal needs, is in an inward way praying for the lack felt Above.
52 51
VIII.
The explanation of these concepts is as follows:
54 53
There
is a
fundamental difference between a Jew's soul and his body. A Jew's soul is "an actual part of G-d from Above." The material make-up of his body, by contrast, resembles the bodies of the gentiles." people] is as they are enclothed in a body.
56 55
Therefore the Alter Rebbe writes that G-d's choice [of the Jewish The rationale is as follows: The term "choice" is appropriate when speaking about two subjects that resemble each other (in the matter under concern). When subjects do not share any common factors and have no shared traits, the concept of choice is not appropriate. [In such a case, one merely selects] what one desires. Therefore the true concept of choice applies in relation to the body which "in its material being resembles the bodies of the gentiles." W i t h regard to the soul, by contrast, the concept of choice is not appropriate, [since the differences are distinct]. This itself, however, reflects an advantage that a Jew's body possesses over his soul. For it is the body, as it were, that has a connection to G-d's essence. The soul (in and of itself) relates to the
51. Or Torah, Parshas Vayigash. There the Zohar (Tikkunei Zohar, Tikkun 6, p. 22a) is cited, that
57
52.
one should not be like "those who act for their own sake and cry 'Give, give.'" [Trans. Note: The key to the resolution offered by the Rebbe is that a person should not see his needs and G-d's needs as two separate matters. Since, as explained in detail in the following sections, G-d's essence identifies, as it were, with the bodily concerns of the Jewish people, paying attention and praying for such concerns is paying attention to the lack felt Above.]
53. W i t h regard to the concepts that follow, see Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I I I , p. 409, fns. 70 and 71 and the sources mentioned there.
54. Tanya, ch. 2. 55. Ibid, ch. 49 (p. 70a). 56. Ibid, (p. 69a ff.). 57. See Toras Shalom, pp. 11, 120, 122.
161
qualities of light and revelation. The body and its material dimensions, which G-d chose, are connected with G-d's very essence. For the concept of choice applies only with regard to G-d's essence, which has no prior cause or antecedent, Heaven forbid. (All the levels other than His essence, by contrast, even the most sublime levels of G-dly light [follow
60 59 58
a different motif].
For light is
[characterized by] a tendency
and thus there is something

61
resembling compulsion to follow the tendency [toward revelation]. As such, the true concept of free choice is not relevant at that level.) Although the concept of choice is totally dependent on the initiative of the One W h o chooses and does not stem from the object chosen (i.e., the body) at all, since it is G-d's essence that is choosing, that choice defines the body's identity. For when G-d's essence is drawn down, it is not possible that there will remain the possibility of there being [even in the abstract] anything other than H i m .
63 62
58. 59.
See Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 20 (p. 130a ff.). See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IV, pp. 1309, 1340ff.
60. For even simple, unqualified light [has a definition. It] is light, not the essence, nor is it influence or darkness. 61. The concept of G-d's choice of the Jewish people is explained in several sources. [There it is explained] that the true source of the Jewish people is G-d's essence, for they are His sons, as it were (see Sefer HaMaamarim 5659, p. 14ff.; the maamar entitled
HaMichaseh Ani MeiAvraham, 5672; Toras Shalom, p. 220, et al.).
It is obvious that G-d's choice of the Jewish people refers to the Jews as their souls are enclothed within bodies. There are, however, two aspects of this choice: a) the source of G-d's choice as it exists within His essence. O n this level, "It is I and not any other" there is no room for any other existence at all. This level relates to the souls as they are "sons of G-d," the essence of the Father; see secs. 11-12. In contrast, as the soul exists as a conscious entity, and in particular, as it descends to the material plane, the choice of G-d's essence is not apparent within it, instead [what is perceptible is influence from] the revealed levels [of Divine light]. b) the revelation of G-d's choice is within the body, which in its material state resembles the bodies of the gentiles (note Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XIX, p. 282). Therefore it is the soul that [imparts] G-d's choice to the body and establishes it [as a factor defining the body's inner nature]. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X V I I I , loc. cit. Clarification is still required with regard to all these matters. This, however, is not the place for further discussion of the issue. 62. The term "drawn down" is being used in a figurative [and not exact] sense. For [in truth,] the essence cannot be drawn down. See the maamar entitled Tiku, 5694 (printed
in Sefer HaMaamarim 5711), sec. 2. 63. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X I , p. 5ff.
162
IX.
Based on the above, it is understandable that even when a Jew prays and petitions G-d for his bodily needs (and their material dimensions), this is not a contradiction to the Maggid's teaching that one should pray for the lack felt Above. O n 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 a Jew's physical body. Thus when a Jew feels a lack in his bodily needs that brings him to pray to G-d, the true inner [dimension of his prayer] stems from the fact that inside he feels 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 intent that his requests for his material needs are being made because of the lack in his source Above, in the dimension of G-d's essence that relates to him, as it were.
65 64
X.
On this basis, we can understand the intent of the name Menachem Av, "comforting the Father." Every Jew is G-d's son, [as it were]. A n d the choice of G-d's essence is focused on [a Jew's] body. Hence the inner dimension of a Jew'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.
66
64. See related concepts in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XIX, p. 295ff., based on the teachings of the Baal Shem Tov. 65. See Tanya, the conclusion of ch. 41. 66. See Sefer HaMaamarim 5665, loc. cit., p. 193, which explains the Maggid's teaching concerning the mishnah: "One should stand in prayer only with an attitude of earnest reverence," and states: "This is the concept of Tikkun Chatzos (the midnight mourning prayers) that must precede prayer. [The intent is] to feel the bitterness of the exile of the Divine presence."
163
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 midst of the worlds to grant them vitality and to maintain them," 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),
69 67
as it were,
68
[affecting] the very essence of
G-dliness.
XI.
On this basis, we can also understand a relevant passage in the After stating: "Wherever Sifri.
70
(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 a King who tells his servant: ' I f you seek me, phrase:
72 71
I am with my son. Whenever you
look for me, I will be with my son.' This is [implied by] the '...Who dwells among them in the midst of their impurity.'" This passage is seemingly 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 always together with the Jewish people in all places.
67.
Tanya, ch. 41 (p.
57b).
68.
[The expression "as it were" is employed] because the concept of actual exile applies only with regard to [the Sefirah of Malchus], the lower Hei [of G-d's name] (Tanya, Iggeres HaTeshuvah, ch. 6, et al.). See also 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 His essence [is in exile, as it were].
69. See Kuntreis U'Maayon, Maamar 3, and the sources cited 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 the Hagahos HaGra which offer slightly different versions of the text. 72. Vayikra 16:16.
164
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 essence of the soul, but a revealed level related to feeling. O n this level, it is manifest that the Jewish people are "cherished" and thus distinguished from the other nations of the world. W i t h regard to this level of the soul, we say: "Wherever [the Jews] are exiled, the Divine presence accompanies 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: "If you seek me, I am with 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 midst 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, as explained above.
73 74
73. See the maamar entitled HaMichaseh 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 Midian" (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 were given us. Therefore executing revenge for G-d is your revenge." [Implied 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]. All of this applies primarily 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 its mitzvos). This relates primarily to the body. Accordingly:
165
Accordingly, Rebbi: a) emphasizes that [the connection continues] "Whenever you look for me." Since there is a bond with G-d's essence, the concepts of variation and change do not apply.
75
b) quotes the phrase: "Who dwells among them in the midst of their impurity," which relates to the body and its related matters and not to the soul and its related matters. [For with regard to the latter, our Sages teach]
77 76
that (even) "The words of the Torah do not
contract ritual impurity."
XII.
According to the above explanation of the name Menachem Av, we can resolve another related question: Comfort applies in a situation where an undesirable event occurred to a person and the lack that he suffered cannot be rectified. Through words or through deeds, a colleague who did not suffer a similar loss is able to comfort the one who did.
a) It is necessary to emphasize: "You are not taking vengeance on behalf of mortals." b) When stating the positive dimension: "You are taking vengeance on behalf of He Who spoke and brought the world into being," [G-d is referred to as the Creator of] the world, [indicating an emphasis on] the body, which in its material form resembles the bodies of the gentiles. {See also Toras Shalom, p. 120, which emphasizes of G-d's essence within the body and the concept from nothingness) stems from the power of G-d's Sefer HaMaamarim 5678, p. 113 ff. This is not the place the connection between the choice that creation yesh meiayin (existence essence. See also ibid., p. 122, and for further discussion of this issue.}
75. Rabbi Nassan also mentions, "Wherever they are exiled." There is, however, a distinction between his position and that of Rebbi. For Rebbi emphasizes, "Whenever you will look for me," i.e., at all times, not only in all places. (See the commentary of
Sifri D'bei Rav to the above passage in the Sifri.)
76. [The soul is] "a garden spring, a well of living waters" (Shir HaShirim 4:15). {See the
maamarim entitled Az Yashir Yisrael (Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 62b; Sefer HaMaamarim 5702,
p. 129ff., and the maamar of that title of 5743; the maamarim entitled Me'ein Gannim (Sefer
HaMaamarim 5702, p. 133; Sefer HaMaamarim Kuntreisim, V o l . I , p. 200a, et al.) [These
"waters"] do not contract ritual impurity themselves. O n the contrary, they purify the impure.
77. Berachos 22a.
166
In the instance at hand, how is it possible for the Jews to comfort G-d,
78
as it were, when they themselves are in exile? O n the contrary,
the Jewish people suffer the primary element of the exile. G-d is in exile only as a result of the fact that He is together with the Jews. The concept can be explained as follows: W i 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 surpass the revealed powers possessed by 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. Every concept on the earthly plane has its source [ and reflects ] the spiritual plane. Similarly, 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 comforts Himself, as it were.
79. Sh'vuos 48a.
(cited in fn. 23) which state that G-d
80. See the series of maamarim entitled Sameach TiSamach, 5657, p. 93ff., et al. Igros Kodesh of
the Previous Rebbe, Vol. IV, p. 405. 81. See the explanations in several sources (the series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, Vol. 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 also
Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X I X , p. 384ff.
167
similar concept in nigleh. Our Sages relate
82
that G-d declares: "You
have vanquished Me, M y son. You have vanquished Me."
XIII.
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 true with regard to the practices performed in the beginning of the month of A v that are associated with the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash. Through these activities we comfort the Father, weakening [the influence of] the destruction and bringing closer the rebuilding [of the Beis HaMikdash]. In general, during these days we should endeavor to increase our observance of the Torah and its mitzvos to the greatest degree possible. In 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 increase our involvement in the Torah about which it is said:
84
"The precepts of G-d are just, gladdening the heart." In

85
particular, this applies to the custom followed in several places of concluding Talmudic tractates
86
during these days at which time "a

87
celebration is made for the sages."
82. Bava Metzia 59b. See the Shelah, ShaarHaGadol
(p. 29b ff.) with regard to the concept of
"service for G-d's sake."

83. [Taanis 4:6.] 554). 84. Tehillim 19:9; see Tur and Shulchan Aruch, Hilchos Tishah BeAv (Orach Chayim, sec.
85. Note the renowned custom of the Rebbe Rashab to conclude the study of Talmudic tractates during these days even though he would not eat meat or drink wine afterwards
(Sefer HaMinhagim The Book of Chabad-Lubavitch Customs, p. 95).
86. Shabbos 118b; Rama, Yoreh Deah 246:26; see the gloss Beer Heitev which states: "...to the extent that meat and wine are partaken of at these feasts even during these days." (See
also Rama, 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 Baal Shem Tov would
168
In general, this applies to energetic study of all aspects of the Torah, for this [study] brings happiness. In particular, it applies to the study of the laws of the construction of the Beis HaMikdash. Midrash
88
For the
89
relates that through such study, "the construction of the Beis
HaMikdash is not nullified" and G-d considers it as if one is involved

in the actual construction of the Beis HaMikdash.
Through these deeds and this Divine service, we comfort our Father in Heaven. A n d then He will have regret and He will take the Jews out of exile and build the Third Beis HaMikdash,
91 90
"the Sanctuary of
G-d, established by Your hands." May this take place speedily, in our days.
(Adapted from the Sichos of Shabbos Parshas Matos-Masei, 5742,
and Shabbos Parshas Emor, 5737)
follow the custom of concluding Talmudic tractates during the month of A v and would partake of meat...."
88. Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Tzav, sec. X I V . See Likkutei Sichos, V o l . X V I I I , p. 412ff., and the
sources mentioned there where the concept is explained at length. 89. The present tense is used. Implied also is that not only is it as if one is performing the deed, but that one is actively investing himself and occupied with its performance. 90. See Rashi's commentary to Bereishis 6:6, [which explains that the root can mean regret as well as comfort].
91. Shmos 15:17; see Zohar I l l , 221a.
PARSHAS SHOFTIM
Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XXIV, p. 115ff.
I.
On the verse: "Is a man a tree of the field...?" the Talmud
1 2
reiterates
the question asked by the verse and explains: [The verse states:] "From it, you shall eat; you shall not cut it down. [And the passage continues:] "This you shall destroy and cut down." What is implied? If a Torah scholar is befitting, "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 analogy qualities and characteristics of a person. {Were the verse merely comparing people to trees with regard to certain particulars, it would not be in place to ask: "Is a man a tree of the field?" Certainly there are some particulars in which a person
1.
2.
5 4 3 1
from which we can appreciate one (or several) points regarding the
Devarim 20:19.
Taanis 7a.
3. 4.
Devarim 20:20. 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 several times in the same passage with regard to the words of Torah. Rashi (and similarly, Rabbeinu Gershom) in his commentary to that passage state: "An association is established between a person and a tree of the field... Just as a tree of the
5.
169
170
resembles a tree. [Nevertheless, these shared characteristics are not sufficient for a person to be called "a tree of the field."]}
6
Instead, the intent is that "a man is a tree of the field." A tree
7
expresses ( not only secondary particulars concerning mankind ) but who man is. {This is also understood from the fact that we do not recite Tachanun on T u BeShvat, the New Year of the Trees, and it is Jewish
8 9
custom to eat fruit to mark this day.
10
(These customs are associated

11
with the verse: "Is a man a tree of the field...?" ) If a tree were merely an analogy for man, it would not be appropriate to celebrate the trees' New Year. From the above, it is understood that "a man is a tree of the field"; i.e., trees describe a man's identity. Hence, the New Year of the Trees is relevant to man.} [Based on the above,] the following questions arise: a) H o w is the Talmud's question, "Is a man a tree of the field?" an swered by the explanation, " I f a Torah scholar is befitting"?
12
field...." It appears that the intent of the Talmud is not that a person is a tree, but that a tree merely is an analogy for a person.* This is somewhat problematic, for what then was the Talmud's original supposition? * The Maharsha in his Chiddushei Aggados (and similarly, Rabbeinu Yitzchak Alfasi in his commentary to Ein Yaakov) explains that according to the simple meaning of the verse ("Is a man a tree of the field?" as Rashi comments in his gloss to the verse), the order of the Hebrew terms should have been rearranged. But from the wording of the Talmud, it appears that the question is as stated above how can it be said that man is a tree?
6.
See for example, Avos 3:17. In particular, the details of the analogy are explained in Sefer
HaLikkkutim from the Tzemach Tzedek, erech Etz, Sefer HaArachim Chabad, V o l . I , erech Adam,
sec. 11, et al.

7. 8. See Rashi, Bamidbar 13:20. Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 131:6.
9.
Rosh HaShanah 1:1 (according to the School of Hillel).

131:16; the HaShlamah to Shulchan Aruch HaRav prepared by Rav
10. Magen Avraham
Nechemiah of Dubravna 131:8. There are those who follow the custom of reciting passages from the Tanach and the Zohar {as published in Pri Etz Hadar (first printing, Venice 5488)}. I have not, however, seen this practice followed in these countries [i.e., in the Ashkenazic community]. 11. See Likkutei Mahariach, Vol. I l l , Minhagei Shvat (explaining why we wear holiday clothing on that day), et al. 12. Obviously, there is a difference between this celebration and the custom of hanging flowering branches in the synagogues on Shavuos (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 494:15).
SHOFTIM
171
Seemingly, 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) H o w is it appropriate to describe the 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 is also 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,
13
and b) more fundamentally, [although man possesses a
plant-like dimension,] this does not represent the unique characteris tic of man. H o w then can we say: "Man is a tree of the field...?"
II.
The unique positive characteristic of the plant kingdom (when compared to the animal kingdom and humans) is expressed by the fact that it does not conceal [its connection to the source of] its true life. Instead (through its roots), it is always 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
15
earth"
14
they are
not
connected to it at all times.
[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 is well known, a human includes aspects of all 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 the Etz Chayim (Shaar 42) as an intermediate rung between the plant kingdom and the animal kingdom.
172
contact with his source of nurture. Plant life, by contrast, is always 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 source of their vitality. If they leave the sea, they die immediately. O n the contrary, they seemingly surpass the plant kingdom in this aspect. For their entire being remains encompassed in water, the source of 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 trees which 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 vice versa. This phenomenon is not found with regard to plant life.
16
III.
In the above, there is an advantage to trees relative to other plant life:
17
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 them with 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 kingdom is reflected in trees, as IMelachim states: "And he spoke to the trees, from the cedar to...
the hyssop" (See Toras Chayim, Bereishis, the maamar entitled VaYaatzer, sec. 17).
18. See the different opinions concerning these matters: Berachos 60a ff. and commentaries;
Tur, Shulchan Aruch, Shulchan Aruch HaRav (Orach Chayim 203); Seder Birchas HaNehenin 6:6.
SHOFTIM
173
IV.
Man is "a world in microcosm." Just as the world at large contains four types of existence: inanimate matter, plants, animals, and humans, so, too, these four types of existence [are paralleled] in a spiritual sense within man.
20 19
As is well known,
21
a person's emotions
represent the plant kingdom within man, for the emotions possess the potential to grow from an underdeveloped stage to a developed stage. Intellect possesses in addition to the potential for growth a parallel to the animal kingdom,
22
as expressed in the quality of
movement and [the ability to] change from place to place. Just as an animal moves from one place to another, so, too, intellect is not (grounded, i.e.,) defined and confined to a given nature. [On the contrary,] the nature of intellect is to understand a concept (not as one desires it to be, but) as it is. A n d thus [a person who follows his intellect] proceeds and changes his [emotional] place, sometimes tending to kindness, sometimes tending to severity, according to his understanding]. W i t h regard to one matter, his intellect may dictate that kindness is appropriate, and with regard to another, he may tend toward severity. W i t h regard to emotions, by contrast, (as they exist in and of themselves, [i.e., without considering how they are influenced by intellect,]) they are defined by their nature; the attribute of kindness remains (as it exists independently) confined to that emotional thrust. Similarly, the attribute of severity remains in its natural thrust. [The emotions merely] grow from an underdeveloped stage to a developed stage [but do not change their fundamental tendency].
V.
Just as in the macrocosm, the world at large, where the plant kingdom possesses an advantage in always being connected to its source, so, too, the "plant" element of man's personality, emotions, possesses an
19. Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Pekudei, sec. 3; Avos DeRabbi Nassan 31:3, et al. 20. See the sources cited in fn. 13. loc. cit. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V I , p. 155 (and p. 113). 21. Torah Or, p. 4a; see the sources cited in Sefer HaArachim, 22.
174
advantage over intellect, for [the emotions] are constantly connected to their source, the inner dimension of a person's soul. This is also the reason that emotions possess such strong power, to the extent that it is very difficult to have them change their "place" (as explained above with regard to trees). When a person is kind by nature, it is very difficult for him to change and become a person whose emotions are characterized by severity. (And the opposite is also true.) { I t is possible, although it is not common or prevalent, for a person to use his mind to overcome his natural emotional tendencies to such an extent that he can transform them from bad to good. To cite a parallel with regard to trees: at times, through taking extra effort to uproot a tree from its place and plant it in another place, the tree will grow in the new place and, at times, flourish better and stronger than in its first place.}
25 24 23
This itself explains the reason why intellect is not confined to a person's natural tendency. (As we see, a person can understand and comprehend
26
concepts that run contrary to his natural tendency.) For
intellect (which corresponds to animal life) is not in a revealed

See the maamar entitled Vehaaretz Hoyisa, Sefer HaMaamarim 5568, V o l . I and V o l . I I ; Toras Chayim, Bereishis, p. 11d ff.; the series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, V o l . I , secs. 251-252; the maamar entitled Lehavin Inyan Tainas HaMiraglim, 5715.
23.
24. It is explained in several sources that through a prominent expression of intellect (gadlos hamochin), the nature of one's emotional characteristics are transformed (see Torah Or,
Hosafos, p. 107d ff.; Derech Mitzvosecha, p. 84a; Or HaTorah, Mishpatim, p. 1134; the maamar entitled BeYom HaShemini Atzeres, 6665; the series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu,
5672, V o l . Ill, p. 1231ff., (where it is explained that this results from a prominent expression of Chochmah). In this context, note also the adage, "The entire purpose of Chassidus is to change the nature of one's emotional characteristics" (see Kesser Shem Tov, sec. 24; Likkutei
Dibburim, Vol. I , p. 56a; Sefer HaMaamarim Kuntreisim, Vol. I I , p. 321b). See also the series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, Vol. I , the conclusion of sec. 258 which
states that even the quality of Chochmah "causes (only) a weakening [of the natural thrust] of the emotions. Nevertheless, the emotions as they are in their essential state do not change." 25. As our Sages (Shmos Rabbah 44:1) state with regard to a vine: "When its owners desire to improve it... they uproot it from its natural place, replant it elsewhere, and it is
improved." See also Bereishis Rabbah 15:1; Zohar, I I , 167 (explained in Or HaTorah, Bereishis,
p. 45b ff.).
SHOFTIM
175
manner connected to the source of one's soul [to the same degree as emotions are],
27
{as animal life in the world at large does not
require a (constant) connection to its source}.
VI.
Based on the above, we can understand the meaning of the verse: "Is a man a tree of a field?" A man is "a tree of the field" (as explained in sec. 1) because his emotions, revealed manner. For that reason, man's essential task in Divine service does (not primarily involve intellectual challenges, but fundamentally,) the re finement and polishing of the emotions.
29 28
the dimension within him that parallels
plant life, express (his source), the inner dimension of his soul, in a
For the refinement of the
emotions affects the inner dimensions of the soul. Therefore it is this Divine service that brings a person to his personal fulfillment. Indeed, even a person's intellectual fulfillment ("And you shall know...") is accomplished through bringing about change within his emotions ("and you shall take it to heart..."). For this reason,
31 30
the Talmud explains the concept of a person
being identified with a tree with the guidance: " I f a Torah scholar is befitting, 'From it, you shall eat.'" "Befitting" implies that the Torah scholar possesses not only the qualities of intellect (study), but also
27. See the series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, Vol. I , loc. cit., which states with regard to Chochmah: "Chochmah is the expression of the essence in an attribute which is outside the essence, while the emotions are the revelation of the essence." [Trans. Note: The implication is that although Chochmah is a distinct attribute, the fundamental simplicity of the essence is revealed within it. Nevertheless, since it is a distinct attribute, it does not reveal the unique power of the essence. That finds expression in the emotions.]
28. See the series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, Vol. I l l , p. 1221: "In general,
a person can be identified through his emotions, for 'a man is a tree of the field.'" 29. See the maamar entitled Al Totzar es Moab by the Mitteler Rebbe (Kehot 5736), p. 6ff.; Sefer HaMaamarim 5565, Vol. II, p. 802ff., et al. See also the maamar entitled Ein HaKadosh
Baruch Hu Ba, 5685 (Sefer HaMaamarim Kuntreisim, V o l . I l l ) , sec. 2; the maamar entitled Vayisa Aharon, 5694 (Sefer HaMaamarim Kuntreisim, Vol. II), sec. 1; et al. See also the adage
quoted in fn. 24.

30. Devarim 4:39.
31. W i t h regard to the ensuing concepts, see Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IV, p. 1115ff.
176
that his intellect affects his emotions and causes him to conduct himself in a "befitting" manner. From such a Torah scholar one should "eat," i.e., study, for "a man is a tree of the field." When is one truly human (and thus a person from whom one would desire to learn)? When one is a tree, i.e., when one's emotions are as they should be.
32
VII.
Just as the above applies with regard to every individual, it also applies to the Jewish people as a whole. A l l of the Jews stem from the three Patriarchs: Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov, and are constantly con nected with the Patriarchs. O n the verse: beginning of their roots, How
34 33
"From the peaks of
boulders, I see him," Rashi comments: " I gaze at their heads, at the and I see them [i.e., the Jewish people] every Jew and the three
35
strongly based... because of the Patriarchs and the Matriarchs." is the connection between Patriarchs expressed? N o t (as prominently) through the quality of intellect, but through the quality of emotion. As is well known, the three Patriarchs personify the three qualities of love, fear, and mercy (which represent, in a general sense, the totality of our emotional potential ). They endow their descendants for all time with these
36
32. See the use of this expression in Kesubos 67a with regard to giving charity {which expresses the quality of kindness, the attribute that accompanies all other attributes Likkutei Torah,
Devarim, p. 76b, (Pri Etz Chayim, Shaar ChagHaSukkos, ch. 1; Meorei Or, Os Yud, 8, et al.}. 33. Bamidbar 23:9.
34. See Yeshayahu 27:6: "It will come that Yaakov will root...."
35. See Torah Or, the beginning of Parshas Vaeira the maamar entitled Vaeira (Sefer HaMaamarim 5562, loc. cit.) et al. See also Tanya, ch. 18ff. 36. See Tanya, ch. 3;* Torah Or, p. 1b; Sefer HaMaamarim 5562, loc. cit., Or HaTorah, Parshas
Behaaloscha, p. 321, Vayikra, V o l . I l l , p. 862.
Similar concepts are explained with regard to the use of the term as an acronym
for Chessed (kindness), Din (judgment), and Rachamim (mercy). (See Meorei Or, erech Cheder 8:7, commentary Yair Nasiv). HaLikkutim, erech Cheder. Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p. 2d, Bamidbar, pp. 44a, 71b; Sefer
Tanya, loc. cit., states: "The other emotional qualities are all branches of awe and love," [and it mentions only] the expressions of kindness and severity. {This version is present in all texts of Tanya (Vol. I ) . } The passage from Or HaTorah, Parshas Vayikra, cited above, however, states: "Netzach, Hod, and Yesod 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. 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 37
[and few of us
share that degree of understanding]). For on a revealed level, intellect does not have (such a powerful) connection with the essence and 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 is associated with the essence of the soul.
VIII.
Among the lessons that we can derive from the above: Every Jew's source of vitality is the Torah, as we say,
of Chessed, Gevurah, and Tiferes... as stated in Tanya,
39
"They [the Torah's

other emotional
ch. 3: 'The
qualities are all branches of awe and love.' [Tiferes is not mentioned, because Tanya, loc. cit.] does no more than explain that there are essential 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." Similar 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.
It 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. I V ) , p. 690b); see also
Toras Chayim, Lech Lecha, p. 84d ff., 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.]
178
precepts]
are our life."
Nevertheless,
most
people's
lives are
structured ([and this is acceptable even] according to the Torah's dictates) in a manner that those "whose occupation is the Torah" are few. [Indeed,] yoshvei ohel, individuals who dwell tranquilly in the tents of Torah [are small in number]. Instead of being "fish in the sea," which are always connected to their source of vitality,
40
[our people]
by and large involve themselves in worldly matters, [and with those activities] carry out the mission to make a dwelling for H i m on this mortal plane. [In such a situation,] we must remember that "man is a tree of the field." A Jew must continuously be connected to the source of his vitality: the life-energy of the Torah and its mitzvos that he received while dwelling in the tents of the Torah before the time came for him to go out and pursue his livelihood.
41
[The experience of those years]
must remain constant for him to the extent that at present, he is connected to that time. It is not that he must have the feeling that he once studied in a cheder or in a yeshivah and he remembers now what he then felt and did. Instead, he must feel connected to that time at present. In the here and now, he should feel that this is his life-energy and this constitutes his being. Simultaneously, the Torah scholars must know that Torah study alone is insufficient. For intellect alone allows for the possibility of fluctuation. [With Torah study alone] there is no certainty that after one leaves the "tents of Torah" he will remain connected to the Torah as is befitting. Only when the study is "taken to heart" is the Torah so engraved within the person that he will not change. Regardless of the situation in which he will find himself, he will remain connected to the source of the waters of life, the Torah and its mitzvos.
(Adapted from Sichos Motzaei Shabbos Parshas Vaeira, 5739;
Sichos Shabbos Parshas Beshalach, 5740)
40. See the sources cited in fn. 16.

41. I.e., the age of 20 (Avos 5:22); see the Alter Rebbe's Hilchos Talmud Torah 3:1 (and the Kuntreis Acharon to that law).
PARSHAS K I SAVO
Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X X X I V , p. 153ff.
I.
In 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 is written: "And you shall follow His ways." This commandment is reiterated in the phraser "to follow all His ways," which has been interpreted [as implying]: "Just as the Holy One, blessed be He, is called compassionate, so, too, you shall be compassionate. Just as the Holy One, blessed be He, is called merciful, so, too, you shall be merciful. Just as the Holy One, blessed be He, is called generous, so, too, you shall be generous." {The above concepts are taught by the Sifri.}
5 6 4 3 2 1
This concept is
also echoed by another verse: "Follow after G-d, your L-rd," which is interpreted to mean [that we should endeavor to] emulate His positive actions and the noble character traits with which the A-lmighty, may He be exalted, is described.
1.
Devarim 28:9.
2. 3. 4.
5. 6.
Ibid. 11:22. {The phrase (ibid., 10:12): "to follow all His ways" refers to all the mitzvos and is a commandment of a general nature as explained in fn. 19.} By the Sifri (Rambam, however, alters slightly the wording of the Sifri). 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.
Devarim 13:5. Sotah 14a.
179
180
In a responsum, R. Avraham, Rambam's son, writes that he was

7
asked [to explain his father's position]: [A question was raised,] for {this mitzvah} includes [all the mitzvos], as do other verses which exhort us in a similar manner, [e.g.,] "Follow the entire path that G-d, your L-rd, commanded you,"
8
"When you will safeguard the entire

9 10
commandment that I command you today { t o observe i t } , " and "Now, Israel, what does G-d, your L-rd, ask of you...?" Our
master has already stated, { i n the general principles primarily in
outlined in the beginning of Sefer HaMitzvos},
General Principle 4, that it is not appropriate to include commands of a general nature [in the reckoning of the 613]
mitzvos.
{ T o explain an added dimension [of the question]: A l l of the mitzvos are called "the ways of G-d," not only because G-d commanded us to follow them, but because He follows them Himself. [In this vein,] our Sages state that the Holy One, blessed be He, fulfills all the mitzvos, as it were. A n d they interpret the verse:
12 11
"He
relates His words to Yaakov," commenting: "What He does, He tells Israel to do and observe." (As the Talmud states: "The Holy One, blessed be He, puts on tefillin," prays,"
14 13
"The Holy One, blessed be He,

5 16
and the like.) Thus the mitzvos are all G-d's ways. This
concept is explicitly stated in the Zohar,' which interprets the verse:
7.
[In the] Frieman [collection of R. Avraham's Responsa] (Jerusalem, 5698), it is Responsum 63. It is also included in the Shelsinger printing of Rambam (New York, 5707), Vol. of Addendae, sec. 3.
Devarim 5:30. Ibid. 19:9.
8. 9.
10. Ibid. 10:12. 11. Tehillim 147:19.

12. Shmos Rabbah 30:9. [See the maamar entitled Issa BeMidrash Tehillim, 5653, which elaborates
on this point.]
13. Berachos 6a. 14. Ibid. 7a.
15. V o l . I , p. 175b. See the explanation of this concept at length in Biurei HaZohar (Parshas Vayishlach, p. 19b ff.). See also fn. 62. 16. Hoshea 14:10.
K i SAVO
181
"The ways of G-d are just," as implying that the entire Torah is "the ways of G - d . " } 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, [we rely on] the meaning indicated by the verse and the Oral Tradition together.... Thus even though the simple meaning of the verse 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 the explanation of the Oral Tradition, this is not a mitzvah of a general nature. In 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:] "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 might 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...."
18 17
R. Avraham, Rambam's son, continues, [offering a resolution to this
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 commanded previously and does not appear to be an independent charge.] 18. Devarim 28:29.
182
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 previously. [In synopsis:]
19
mentioned
"Follow[ing]
His
ways"
is
not
20
general
commandment, because according to the Oral Tradition, the verse is not speaking about the observance of all the mitzvos, but rather, those "matters that are dependent on the emotional characteristics" of compassion, mercy, and the like.
II.
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... ' A n d you shall follow His ways' was a general commandment, the verse would read: 'When you will keep this entire commandment... to follow all of His ways,' as is stated in verse 10:12: 'Now, Israel, what does G-d, your L-rd, ask of you?...'" O n the basis of [R. Avraham's] statements, we can appreciate why Rambam (and similarly, the others who reckon the number of mitzvos) consider the verse "And you shall follow His ways" the primary [source for the mitzvah], and not the verse: "to follow all His ways" (on which the Sifri comments). For "And you shall follow..." is a (greater) indication of a commandment. {One still might ask: W h y doesn't [Rambam] focus on the verse: "Follow after G-d, your L-rd" (which is cited in Sotah, loc. cit.) as his primary source? 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 the Ramban explains that this verse is a charge for the people to follow the directives given them by the prophets.] 20. Nevertheless, the phrase "to follow all His paths" in Devarim 10:12 is a general command, as is the phrase (ibid. 5:30): "[You shall 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 the mitzvah of emulating G-d's attributes] in Hilchos Deos 1:6 (quoted later in the sichah), Rambam explains this mitzvah as implying, "Just as He is called holy, so,
Ki SAVO
183
As Rambam writes:
23
"We were commanded to show pity, mercy,
charity, and kindness, as implied by the verse: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'" Thus [it would appear that with the command to "follow in His ways" to borrow] Rambam's wording in General Principle 4 "[G-d] did not command us to perform anything more than what we had known already." Similar concepts are stated by Rambam with regard to visiting the sick, comforting mourners, and burying the dead. {[These are] acts that reflect G-d's attributes. Thus in tractate Sotah, after G-d, your L-rd," is interpreted as meaning:
24
the verse: "Follow
too, you should be holy.* In this manner, the prophets described G-d with different terms: patient, abounding in kindness, righteous, just, perfect, mighty, powerful, and the like [with the intent that we emulate these traits]." Seemingly, some of these qualities are not related to the mitzvah of loving one's neighbor as oneself.** [And thus the difficulty that the attributes we must seek to emulate are all included in the mitzvah of brotherly love could be resolved.] [This, however, is not so. For] the commandment to be holy is a general command (as explicitly stated in Sefer HaMitzvos, General Principle 4). Similarly, the other attributes mentioned there can also be derived from other mitzvos, and seemingly do not require the commandment to "follow [His] paths."
See also the Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 611) which interprets [the mitzvah of]
"follow[ing] His paths" [as follows]: "We are commanded to perform all our deeds in an upright and positive manner... to relate to all the matters shared between us and our colleagues in a kind and merciful manner," [thus reinforcing the question in the body of the sichah]. (In "the laws governing the mitzvah," however, [that text] also cites matters between man and G-d.) Similarly, Rambam in his Sefer HaMitzvos mentions only the qualities of compassion, mercy, and generosity. Similarly, the passage from Sotah, loc. cit., quoted later in the body of the sichah, speaks only of deeds that express lovingkindness. This is not the place for extensive discussion of this issue.
* Rambam's source is Vayikra Rabbah (Parshas Kedoshim 24:4) see also Midrash Tanchuma,
Parshas Kedoshim, sec. 2; Tanchuma, Buber ed. 2:4): "Just as I am holy, you shall be holy." Similarly, Toras Kohanim, the beginning of Parshas Korach, speaks of emulating the King (see the interpretation of Korban Aharon and others). See also Moreh Nevuchim, V o l . I , ch. 54, [which speaks of this obligation] "as explained in the interpretation of [the charge] 'Be holy.'" ** In Moreh Nevuchim, loc. cit., it appears that the obligation to "emulate H i m to the extent of our capacities" applies with regard to all [His] Thirteen Attributes. [This applies] even with regard to the attribute of "exacting retribution" which relates to punishment. General Principle 9; see also negative mitzvah 302.
23. Sefer HaMitzvos, 24. Loc. cit.
184
Emulate the attributes of the Holy One, blessed be He. Just as He clothed the sick,... so [should] you.... The Holy One, blessed be He, visited the sick;... so [should] you. The Holy One, blessed be He, comforted mourners;... so [should] you. The Holy One, blessed be He, buried the dead;... so [should] you....} [In this context, Rambam states:] "All of these acts and other similar
25
ones are included in one mitzvah... 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'" { Rambam 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 Rambam maintains that these particulars are also included in the mitzvah of "follow[ing] His ways."}
27
III.
[In resolution,] it is possible to explain that R. Avraham's 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 G-d's emotional characteristics" is that the mitzvah of "follow[ing]
28
ways" (does not refer to the performance of deeds of mercy, but rather) on [developing such] feelings in our hearts. 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 also Hilchos Avel 14:1.
26.
27.
In contrast to the Sefer Mitzvos Gadol, positive mitzvah 7, which quotes only the passage from Sotah (and not that from the Sifri). See the following footnote.
See the Hasagos of the Ramban to Sefer HaMitzvos, General Principle 1 (entry,
VehaTeshuvah hashilishis) which states: "[Rambam] follows the wording quoted in the Sifri, while the author of Halachos [Gedolos] follows the wording quoted in the Talmud." 28. [Trans. Note: I.e., not only should we perform acts of love, we should feel love within our hearts.]
Ki SAVO
185
a) The apparent HaMitzvos

29
meaning of Rambam's words (both in Sefer

30
and in the Mishneh Torah )
is that the commandment "Love

31
your neighbor as yourself" includes not only conducting oneself in a brotherly manner towards one's fellow man, having such feelings in his heart. 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. Similarly, the conclusion of Rambam'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." {As explained in another source, address this issue: One states:
35 34 32
but also loving him

33
A n d when a person has feelings of
love in his heart, he will naturally be aroused to feelings of mercy and
it is possible to explain that
this is the difference between the two statements of our Sages that "Follow after the attributes of the Holy 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: "Cling to His ways" (reflecting the
29. Positive mitzvah 206, and similarly, in the listing of the commandments at the beginning
of the Mishneh Torah. 30. Hilchos Deos 6:3.
36
31. Such an interpretation is apparent from the statements of the Sefer Mitzvos Gadol, positive mitzvah 9: "[With 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 the word "to love" used by Rambam. See also his wording in negative
mitzvah 302.
33. This is also indicated by the wording of Sefer HaMitzvos (positive mitzvah 206) where Rambam speaks of "love and compassion." This concept is also reflected in the wording used by Rambam in his General Principle 9 (cited above).
34. SichosMotzaeiShabbosKodesh, 35. Sotah, loc. cit. 36. Rashi, commentary to Devarim 13:5. See also Rashi, Shabbos 133b, entry, havei domeh, which Yud Shvat, 5734.
speaks of "clinging to His ways." Similarly, the Meiri in his ChiburHaTeshuvah (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] interpreted the verse (Devarim 11:22): 'To cling to Him.'" See also Or HaTorah by the Maggid of Mezritch commenting on Devarim, op. cit.: "Our Sages said: 'Is it possible to cling to Him....?' Instead, the intent is: cling to His
186
wording of the verses: "And to H i m , cling" Him.")

38
37
and "And cling to
Following His ways and attributes implies conducting oneself in actual practice according to the attributes of the Holy 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.) } This is also indicated by Rambam's statements in Moreh Nevuchim:
40 39
The ultimate fulfillment of man is to emulate H i m according to his potential {this reflects the commandment "And you shall follow in His paths," as explained in Sefer HaMitzvos}; "Just as He is compassionate.... Just as He is merciful...." As he emphasizes there at length, the ways of the Holy 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 Rambam maintains is the ultimate perfection of human conduct: "To perform these actions in the appropriate measure and in relation to the appropriate people, not simply as a result of emotional arousal.... A l l emotional arousal is undesirable."
41
i.e.,
to have our deeds resemble His deeds.... [As our Sages] say:
Note [Rambam's]
lengthy treatment of the subject there. [See also sec. V I below.]

attributes." Such statements are also echoed by Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 15 (p. 123b). See also the Sifri on the above verse which comments: "Study the Aggadah so that... you will 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, V o l . X I V , p. 55ff.
40. Vol. I , the conclusion of ch. 54. (Our translation is based on 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 toward him." { I n contrast, acts of mercy must certainly be accompanied by feelings of mercy in one's
Ki SAVO
187
IV.
Therefore it appears that the new dimension of the command to "follow His ways" which we would not have known otherwise is reflected in Rambam's own words: "To emulate H i m , 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,
42
but rather [a
43
command] to emulate H i m according to our potential, 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 H i m . " Since these ways are the ways of G-d, he should [endeavor to] emulate Him. [This is also reflected by] the wording of our Sages: "Just as the Holy 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 feelings 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 the SeferHaChinuch (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...."
188
a person's intent that his following these paths of conduct should be carried out because they 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 these ways: "to emulate H i m . "
44
V.
According to the above, it is possible to explain that there is also a difference in the way one actually conducts oneself. As a preface, [let us focus on] the manner in which Rambam explains the mitzvah of "following [G-d's] ways" in his Mishneh Torah. A t the beginning of Hilchos Deos, Rambam explains at length that "The straight path is the
45
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.'" In the following halachah, Rambam 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 also fn. 59.}
45. Hilchos Deos 1:4.
46. In the conclusion of Halachah 5. According to some versions of the Mishneh Torah, this phrase marks the beginning of Halachah 6 (see the printing of Sefer HaMada, Jerusalem, 1924). Note also the commentary of the Migdal Oz.
47. Halachah 6.
K i SAVO
189
For this reason, the prophets described the A-lmighty with all these different adjectives:... To make known that these are good and just paths in which a person must conduct himself to emulate H i m according to his potential." In the halachah that follows,
48
Rambam 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, called 'the way of G-d.'" O n the surface, the statements [in Hilchos Deos] are difficult to comprehend, for Rambam includes two different and seemingly unrelated points in [his explanation of] the commandment [to] "follow His paths": a) "the intermediate quality in each of 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 merciful,] "with which the prophets called the A-lmighty."
49
merciful, etc.,] and they
represent the middle path that we are obligated to follow, this path is
and
Therefore we are forced to say that these [two seemingly different positions] are in fact alike. When a person follows these "good and just paths" in order to "emulate H i m according to his potential," this [endeavor] will obligate him to "follow these intermediate paths."
VI.
[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, the Sefer HaChinuch mentions both these different points. The Alter Rebbe (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 156:3), by contrast, explains the mitzvah of "walk[ing] in His ways" [as follows]: " A person must emulate his Creator { i n all the emotional qualities that he possesses}, to abhor the evil in those qualities and to choose the good." H e does not state that we are obligated to follow the intermediate paths. (In Law 2, however, he does state that "one should follow the middle path, for it is a good and just path.") This is not the place for further discussion of the matter.
190
deeds... actions which resemble the actions that we perform as a result of emotional arousal and [our] character traits." There Rambam continues, explaining that: It is appropriate for the leader of a country... to emulate these attributes and perform these actions in the appropriate measure and in relation to the appropriate people, not simply as a result of emotional arousal.... All emotional arousal is undesirable. Illustrating by example, [Rambam continues]: There will be times when he will be merciful and compassionate to certain people. [He will act] not merely out of ordinary feeling and generosity, but as is appropriate. A n d at times, he will seek revenge and bear a grudge against some other people, manifesting anger as is appropriate for them without feelings of anger.... His purpose should be for this activity to produce the greatest possible good for people at large. And Rambam concludes: The ultimate fulfillment of man is to emulate H i m according to his potential, i.e., to have our deeds resemble His deeds. The continuation of Rambam'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] "without emotional arousal or change.... They emanate from H i m , blessed be He, without bringing about any new quality extrinsic to Himself at all.") Instead, [Rambam is explaining] a further [concept that] relates to the nature of the functioning of the emotions themselves. Because these attributes
50
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 because he is influenced by his environment. It is inappropriate to speak of such a state of flux with regard to the A-lmighty, for, by definition, G-d cannot change. b) a behavioral 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 H i m without emotional arousal, they are truly good and just paths. For every attribute is expressed in an appropriate and fitting manner.
51
[On this basis,] we can appreciate the sequence of Rambam'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 similar 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. O n this basis, we can appreciate the connection between the two concepts stated in the Mishneh Torah: "the intermediate quality in each of the character traits," and the commandment to "emulate G-d according to his potential" by conducting himself in the good and just paths which reflect the adjectives used to describe the A-lmighty. Generally, a person acts in an extreme manner (with regard to each of his emotion attributes) [because he responds to] (emotional) arousal which does not leave room for an opposite perspective. He does not exercise his intellectual faculties to determine 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 him from thinking clearly and knowing which emotional attribute to exercise at which time. It is, by contrast, totally inappropriate to speak of G-d as becoming emotionally aroused, for He never changes. Instead, His emotional attributes are expressed only when they are called for. Man should emulate his Creator and express his own emotions in a similar manner.]
192
his emotions (only) as a result of emotional arousal. Instead, his intent is to reflect the true [positive dimension of] these emotional attributes (as they are expressed b y G-d). [Accordingly,] he will express the intermediate quality in each emotional attribute, manifesting each
as Rambam states in Moreh Nevuchim "as is appropriate." Therefore,
"There will be times when he will be merciful.... A n d at times, [he will seek revenge...] against others."
VII.
Based on the above explanation that the new dimension of the commandment to "follow His ways" is to "emulate [Him]... according to [our] potential," it is possible to explain the choice of the verb , which is translated as "follow."
52
[ means "progress" or "going." In the most complete sense,] it refers to ascending from level to level (as reflected in the verse:
53
"They shall proceed from strength to strength.") Primarily, it refers to an ascent to a rung that is incomparably higher than one's previous rung. {From this reason, the angels are referred to as "these who stand," as in the verse: " I shall grant you progress among these who stand." [They are referred to in this manner] "because throughout their existence, they remain on one level."
55 54
On the surface, this requires explanation: In several sources it is explained that the angels are continually ascending from level to level. Their [progress] is reflected in their song. described as "remaining on one level"?
56
W h y then are they
52. Significantly, in Hilchos Deos, at the conclusion of ch. 1, Rambam cites Bereishis 18:19
[which uses a different verb,] stating: "And they shall keep the way of G-d." 53. Tehillim 84:8. See the conclusion of Berachos [which cites this verse as a prooftext, reflecting how the righteous] "have no rest."
54. Zechariah 3:7. 55. Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 38d; see also the first maamar in Parshas Bechukosai and several
other sources. 56. [Trans. Note: The angels are described as singing G-d's praises. These songs reflect their pattern of ascent within the spiritual worlds.]
Ki SAVO
193
In resolution it is explained that all of the ascents experienced 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 , "progress," and "His ways," [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. It 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 lift 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 the verse refer to the emotional attributes (and not to the mitzvos which are deeds), although there are several sources that refer to all the mitzvos as G-d's ways. A person's actions are limited. His
58
57
emotional attributes, by contrast, are "the characteristics of his soul (i.e., spiritual [qualities]) and can be considered unlimited when compared with his deeds. Therefore our Sages interpret the phrase "And you shall follow His paths" which speaks of , incomparable progress and ascent, as referring to
59
"qualities dependent
on
our emotional
characteristics." For primarily, the ascent that a person can make from level to level (and even an ascent that reflects progress which transcends
57.
See the maamar entitled Tzeena U'Re'ena,5660,
et al.
58. See the sources cited 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 , progress, is relevant only with regard to our emotional characteristics.
194
all previous levels) is relevant with regard to his emotional attributes (and not with regard to his deeds, for his deeds are limited).
VIII.
A deeper interpretation of "follow[ing] His ways" can be offered (based on the teachings of Chassidus): Every Jew's soul is "an actual part of G-d from Above."
60
From this it can be understood that the soul itself is
utterly unbounded. It is only that its manifestation in the body is limited. From this it is understood that when a person is aroused to Divine service from the essence of his soul, this lifts him up and brings about an unlimited ascent. In simple terms, he has such an unbounded degree of vitality in his Divine service that [he is motivated to a level of] self-sacrifice (that transcends the limits of intellect). This is the intent of the command to "follow His paths," i.e., "to emulate Him... according to our potential." A person's Divine service in his observance of the Torah and its mitzvos (which are all called "His ways," as above) should be characterized by , incomparable progress,
61
[extending] beyond all limitations. [This is possible when] a

62
person arouses and reveals the essence of his soul, which is an actual part of G-d. In this way he "emulates His Creator" "according to [his] potential."
(Adapted from the Sichos of Shabbos Parshas Vayechi,
5741)
60.
Tanya, ch. 2.
61. It can be explained [that these two different interpretations] reflect the difference between the revealed dimension of the Torah [as expressed by Torah law] and the inner dimension of the Torah [as expressed by Chassidus]. The revealed dimension of the Torah "has a measure (although its measure exceeds the earth; lyov 11:9)," while the inner dimension of the Torah "has no measure whatsoever.... It is actually Ein Sof"
(Or HaTorah, Chanukah, p. 310a; Sefer HaMaamarim, Vol. I I , p. 470a). Therefore, according
to the revealed dimension of the Torah (which has a measure) "following His ways" ([which demands] unlimited progress) refers to "qualities dependent on our emotional characteristics" (as explained in sec. V I I ) . According to the approach of pnimiyus haTorah (which has no measure), every individual mitzvah can be observed with the unlimited vitality (of the essence of the soul). [According to that understanding,] the verse "follow His ways" can be interpreted simply as referring to all of the mitzvos. 62. See the passage from the Biurei 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 to draw down the revelation of Or Ein Sof, G-d's infinite light. It is possible to explain that for the mitzvos to be pathways to draw down Or Ein Sof (an infinite quality), man's Divine service must involve in His ways, progress without limitation.
PARSHAS NITZAVIM
1
Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X X X I V , p. 173ff.
I.
"For this mitzvah 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." According to the simple meaning of the verse, it
2
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 mitzvos 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 3
are wondrous and distant.
[Therefore] the verse comes to teach us a new idea; that "the matter is
"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 desires of
1. 2. 3.
A n d also Chai Elul, the birthday of "the two great luminaries, the Baal Shem Tov {5458 (1698)} and the Alter Rebbe {5505 (1745)}." Devarim 30:11-14. See the commentaries to the verse (Ramban, Kli Yakar, and others) who offer two interpretations of "this mitzvah": that it refers to the entire Torah or that it refers to the mitzvah of teshuvah which was mentioned before that. The commentary of the Abarbanel after first explaining that the verse is 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
the Mitteler Rebbe, Parshas Nitzavim, p. 777ff., et al. * 4. See also 8:2ff.; Midrash Lekach Tov on the verse.
Ch. 17.
195
196
this world to the love of G-d. As the Talmud states: 'Is fear a small
5
matter?' H o w much more so does this apply with 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,
7 6
it is
"very close" for every person to reach the love of G-d, for there is a natural love of G-d hidden in the heart of all Jews which 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. All 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 also mentions "your mouth" and "to do it." Implied is that the verse also contributes a new insight with 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 also with regard to "in your mouth" and "to do it."
II.
It is possible to say that [the following] is the core of the explanation: On the title page of the Tanya, the Alter Rebbe writes that it is
9
"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 a long, short path, with G-d's help."
5.
Berachos 33b.
6. 7.
From ch. 18ff. Tanya, ch. 18, explains that this applies also 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 it generates fear and love, even merely in his mind and in the subtle reaches of his thought" (as explained in Tanya, chs. 16 and 17). See also fn. 10. See also the commentary of the Alshich. The title page was also composed by the Alter Rebbe.
8. 9.
NITZAVIM
197
It is possible to explain that the Alter Rebbe is not speaking about two paths a long path and a short path that is both long and short. We find this expression ("a long, short path") in a story related by our Sages:
11 10
but rather one path
Rabbi Yehoshua ben Channanya said:... "Once I was walking on a path and I saw a child sitting at a fork. I asked him: 'Which way 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 gardens and orchards [through which I could not pass]. I retraced my way and told him: ' M y son, you said it was short.' "He answered: 'Didn't I [also] say that it was long?'" Thus [by using this wording, 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 i t " [is
10. There are those who explain that indeed this is the Alter 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 arousing within 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 generate love and fear in a person's heart (or even in his mind) is dependent on labor [over] an extended time. The second path, [by contrast,] is short, because [it does not 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 all Jews. See also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XXXIV, p. 172. Nevertheless, it appears more likely that the Alter Rebbe's intent is to refer to our Sages' expression "a long, short path," as above. O n this basis, it appears that all the paths in Tanya follow the motif of "a long, 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."
198
very involved]). It is, however, also a "short path," since through it a person can reach "the city of our G-d" impediments. To explain: There is an inherent, natural love [for G-d] in the heart of all Jews, and it is "very close," [i.e., easy,] to arouse and reveal this love that exists within one's heart. Nevertheless, since innately this love is hidden, much work and labor is required for this love to permeate the person's entire being (until [it affects] "your mouth... to do it"). Until this love has penetrated the entire existence of a person, he is "distant" from the Torah and its mitzvos,
14 13
without obstacles and
for there are obstacles and
impediments [in his way]. To refer back to the analogy, in "the short, long path," the actual distance one travels is minimal. Nevertheless, with regard to reaching the destination entering the city it is "long." For even though he is able to come very near to the city, there are obstacles preventing his entrance. When [a person's Divine service] also reaches "his mouth... to do it," it is a "long, short path." For there will be no obstacles and im pediments preventing him from entering "the city of our G-d."
13. Cf. Tehillim 48:2.
14. [It is true that] "at any moment and at all times, it is within a person's capacity and potential to remove the spirit of folly and forgetfulness from his midst and recall and arouse his love for G-d" (Tanya, ch. 25). [Thus he always has the potential not to sin.] Nevertheless, this is only a potential. [It is not "close to him." O n the contrary,] even after he recalls and arouses his love for G-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 his soul, and afterwards, he must [again] arouse his love to
conquer his yetzer hara. See Kuntreis HaAvodah, ch. 5 (p. 33).
The conclusion of ch. 25 states: Because the observance of the Torah and its mitzvos is dependent on this that one always remember the concept of sacrificing one's life for G-d for the sake of His unity, that this be established at all times within his heart, during the day and the night. It should not depart from his memory. It is possible to explain that this represents a high level in the revelation of our hidden love [for G-d]; that it has already become one's natural tendency. Clarification is still necessary. W i t h regard to the general concept of the levels of hidden love and the Divine
service of man required to reveal it, see Sefer HaArachim Chabad, V o l . I , erech Ahavah Mesuteres.
NITZAVIM
199
Therefore, it is only then that he is "close" to the observance of the Torah and its mitzvos.
III.
It is well known that our love of G-d is dependent on our knowledge of Him. As Rambam states: "One loves G-d solely as an outgrowth of
15
the knowledge with which he knows H i m . The love will abundant."

16
be
proportionate to the knowledge: if meager, meager, if abundant, 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. [In particular it was stated that:] a) The essential love [of G-d] is very close to every person. For every Jew possesses a 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) [Only 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, because he 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-d comes either through simple faith or as an intellectual imperative, [spurred by] man's understanding,
17
through rational
deduction. Each of these paths has an advantage over the other. The "truth of His (G-d's) being" is beyond the capacity of a
18
created being to comprehend. As Rambam writes: "It is not within the capacity of the knowledge of a living 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 also Rambam, 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 is employed by Rambam at the beginning of Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah.
18. Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 1:10.
200
This represents the advantage of faith over intellectual research. Through faith, we can relate to "the truth of His being." Through mortal intellect, by contrast, [we] can grasp only a limited dimension of the knowledge of the Creator, [knowing H i m only] "according to the potential possessed by man to comprehend and understand." This is not "the truth of His being" as it is. Nevertheless, since the knowledge [of G-d] comes as an intellectual imperative and [as a result of one's own logical] research, it has a more internalized effect. For it stems from the person's own thought and self, as it were. Faith, by contrast, (stems from the oneness of G-d that shines within one's soul). [Hence,] it can have [merely] an encompassing effect on the person
20 19
[without penetrating
21
his thought processes]. In that vein, our Sages comment:
"Before
breaking in, a thief calls out to G-d." For although the thief believes in G-d and therefore prays to H i m for success in his theft, at that very moment, he is acting against G-d's commandment.
IV.
It is possible to explain that [the above reflects] the crux of a difference of opinion between Rambam and Raavad. Rambam maintains that the fundamental dimension of the knowledge of G-d is the knowledge that stems from intellectual research, while according to Raavad, the concept of faith [receives primacy]. O n Rambam's statement: teaching
23 22
"Avraham was forty years old when he
recognized his Creator," Raavad comments: "There is an Aggadic that [he recognized G-d] at age three. [This is alluded to
19. Hilchos Teshuvah, loc. cit. There Rambam concludes: "as we explained in Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah. "
20. [Trans. Note: The term makkif means "surrounding" or "encompassing." In Chassidus, it is used as the antonym to pnimi, "inner." Pnimiyus refers to powers and potentials that a person can control with his mind and feelings. Makkif, by contrast, refers to powers and potentials that transcend a person's conscious grasp and affect him in a manner that he cannot control.] 21. Berachos 63a according to the version of the Ein Yaakov. See the comments of Dikdukei
Sofrim. 22. Mishneh Torah, Hilchos AvodasKochavim 23. Nedarim 32a; Bereishis Rabbah 64:4, et al. 1:3.
NITZAVIM
201
by] the verse: equivalent to
24
"Because ( )Avraham heeded M y voice," [i.e., he

25
heeded M y voice for the number of years (172)] numerically . It is possible to explain that Rambam 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. Similarly,
26
Avraham's recognition of his Creator refers to his perception that stemmed from "his proper understanding." {As Rambam 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? W h o 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 Torah) Rambam cites the view that "Avraham was 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.
Bereishis
26:5.
25. [Trans. Note: Avraham lived 175 years. Thus if he served G-d for 172 years as alluded to by the word , he first recognized H i m at age three.] 26. [Mishneh Torah, loc. cit.] The preciseness of Rambam's intent [is evident from his choice of wording]. For many verses and statements of our Sages point to Avraham's high level of faith in G-d, as it is written: (Bereishis 15:6): "And he believed in G-d." Similarly, the Mechilta (Beshalach 14:31) states: "Avraham acquired this world and the W o r l 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 Shmos Rabbah 23:5 (and the commentary of
R. Zev Einhorn); Shir HaShirim Rabbah 4:2 (2), et al.
27. See Hagahos Maimonios, loc. cit.:1,2; KessejMishneh,

Likkutei Sichos, V o l . XX, p. 14ff. and p. 28. Avos 5:22. 19ff.
loc. cit. See the discussion of this issue in
202
Avraham came through 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 with understanding and complete awareness. We find similar concepts with regard to Moshe our teacher. Rambam writes:
29
What was the objective Moshe our teacher desired to achieve when he asked: "Please show me Your glory"? He desired to know the truth of the being of the Holy One, blessed be He, until he would know it within his heart like the knowledge of a person whom he has seen and whose image is engraved within his heart. Thus in his knowledge, that person is distinct from others. Similarly, Moshe our teacher sought that the existence of the Holy 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].
31 30
The Holy One, blessed be
He, replied that it is not within the intellectual capacity of a living man who is a composite of body and soul to appreciate the truth of this matter completely. The Kessef 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? O n the surface, the difference between the views [of Rambam 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.]
NITZAVIM
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 grasps intellectually. Therefore Moshe was not content with what he saw at Sinai, but in stead sought [further] knowledge and comprehension.
32
V.
It is possible to explain that Rambam's approach (in the Mishneh does not follow (only) the perspective
34
Torah)
33
that favors intellectual
research, but instead, represents an intermediate view.

[To explain:] In Hilchos Teshuvah, Rambam 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
Rambam and Raavad at the conclusion of Hilchos Teshuvah, which brings to a close The Book
of Knowledge. [There Rambam speaks of being "obsessed" (). Raavad states: " I do not know what he means when using the term 'obsession.'"] 33. W i t h regard to his text Moreh Nevuchim, 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 also Likkutei Sichos, 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 does not cite "[logical] research and evaluation" in his Mishneh
Torah (see Rosh 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 Sefer HaSichos 5748 (Vol. I , pp. 206-207, fn. 22). [* In these sources, Rambam explains that he composed Moreh Nevuchim to resolve questions of faith that might arise in the mind of a believing 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 Chassidus, the two can be resolved.]
34. Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Teshuvah 5:1.
204
concept and the necessity [to accept] this principle. A t the conclusion of the chapter,
35
he states:
Lest one ask: Behold, the Holy 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 he will be righteous, [seemingly,] 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 he would 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 are dependent on it. However, the
broader than the sea." Many great and fundamental principles and lofty concepts statements that I make must be known and understood: We already explained... that the Holy One, blessed be He, does not know with knowledge that is external [to H i m ] 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 is written:
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
" M y thoughts are not
your thoughts, nor your ways, M y ways." Accordingly, we do not possess the potential to conceive how the Holy 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.
NITZAVIM
205
that a mortal's deeds are in his [own] hands. The Holy One, blessed be He, does not lead him [in a particular direction] or decree that 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 Rambam's statements, stating: This author did not conduct himself according to the manner of the wise. For a person should not initiate [the discussion of] 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. It would have 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 course of [a person's conduct will be]. It is possible to explain Rambam'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 Rambam and Raavad. Raavad also writes that "it is desirable to support him with 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 a person's
206
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 assimilated by mortal logic. intellectual conception. According to Rambam, 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 surpass his intellectual comprehension and ordinary logic and understanding. Even such matters must be established and affirmed within his mind. Therefore even with regard to the knowledge of the Holy 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 Holy One, blessed be He, knows," Rambam 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. On this basis, it is possible to say that the above can serve as an explanation of the two expressions that
40
39
W i t h regard to
matters that require faith, however, it is improper to mix in any
(according to
some
interpretations) Rambam uses with regard to the first mitzvah, [i.e., the
mitzvah to recognize G-d]. In Sefer HaMitzvos, Rambam describes [the
41
first mitzvah] as a mitzvah to believe, while in the Mishneh Torah,
he
speaks of [the same mitzvah
in terms
of] "know[ing]."
[Both grasped
approaches are necessary.] The foundation of the matter must be faith. For the "truth of His (G-d's) being" cannot be intellectually in its entirety; but instead, must be perceived through
39. Although he concludes: "All this is not worthwhile," [his intent] is that the resolution itself [is not entirely worthwhile]. [He is not rejecting it] because the subject surpasses mortal comprehension. 40. Positive mitzvah 1, according to the standard translation. See the sources cited in Likkutei Sichos, V o l . 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 the term Rambam uses there 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.
NITZAVIM
207
faith.
Conversely,
however,
in this realm itself, knowledge is those dimensions [of
necessary. Man must meditate to the [full] extent of his intellectual capacity to understand intellectual imperative. [sec. I V ] :
43 42
and know even
G-dliness] that are above [the scope] which must be presumed as an This is also Rambam's appreciation of Moshe's request cited above "He desired to know the truth of the being of the Holy 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 merely seen or believed, but entered Moshe's comprehension. This came after Moshe's request to know G-d's truth.
44
VI.
On this basis, it appears that the two approaches to the love [of G-d] described above [sec. II,] also have parallels with regard to the knowledge of G-d that leads to this love. At the outset, there must be simple faith, to believe in the truth of G-d's existence. This matter is "very close" to every person. For the quality of faith inherently exists within every Jew's nature, for they are "believers, the descendants of 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 a person's actual conduct (as explained above with regard to [the prayers of] a thief before breaking in [to a home]).
42. See the explanation of Rambam's statements at the beginning of the Mishneh Torah and its conclusion: "They will know hidden matters and grasp the knowledge of their Creator," in the hadranim on the Mishneh Torah from 5735 {published in 5745 (Kehot, N.Y.)} and 5746 (Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 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 by Raavad with regard to the verse (Shmos 33:19): " I will be gracious to whom I [choose to be] gracious...."
45. Shabbos 97a; Shmos Rabbah 3:12. See Maamarei Admor HaZakein Parshiyos HaTorah, pp. 653, 657; Or HaTorah, Parshas Ki Sisa, p. 1838ff.; 1879ff.; et al. Vol. I I ,
208
Therefore a person must also labor intellectually even with regard to matters that are beyond the scope of 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 knowledge and comprehension affects his heart, as it is written: "Know the G-d of your father and serve Him with a full heart."
46
VII.
[The two-phased pattern that exists] with regard to the mitzvah of knowing G-d as a whole and the Divine service within our hearts ("serv[ing] H i m with a full heart") also applies regarding the revelation of the teachings of Chassidus. "He made everything excellently in its season." When the time came, "G-d uncovered His holy arm" and "one our teacher, the Baal Shem Tov descended from the most sublime heavens."
49 48 47
Through his [efforts], the teachings of Chassidus 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.
50
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] pnimiyus haTorah was revealed first. In general, this reflects the approach implied by the interpretation of the verse:
51
, "a
46.
IDivreiHaYamim
28:9.
47. Koheles 3:11; see the interpretation of this verse in Koheles Rabbah and also that of the verse (Koheles 3:1): "to every time and season and to every desire." As explained in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. V I I , p. 206 (and in the appendix to the series of maamarim entitled Yom Tov Shel Rosh HaShanah, 5666) at length, [the implication is that each step of the world's spiritual development is preordained by G-d]. 48. Cf. Yeshayahu 52:10. [Employed in this context in] Igros Kodesh of the Previous Rebbe, Vol. IV, p. 313.
49. LikkuteiDibburim, Vol. I , p. 31b ff.
50. The Igros Kodesh of the Previous Rebbe, loc. cit.

51. Chabakuk 2:4; see Makkos 24a, Tanya, ch. 33 (p. 42a,b).
NITZAVIM
209
righteous man will live by his faith," as , "a righteous man will impart life through his faith," by revealing the soul that exists within every Jew.
52
The consummation of the revelation of Chassidus as "a long, short path" (enabling one to enter "the city of our G-d" without any impediments) comes when faith permeates a person's intellect, and his mind understands and knows G-d in a way that reflects his faith. Similarly, [this approach must affect] his emotions. N o t only will he generate love and fear of G-d in a manner commensurate with his understanding and meditation (and not just [inspire] his heart with vitality of a general nature), but also his love and fear will be connected to [the dimensions of] G-d that transcend reason and logic. This is "a long, short path" of Divine service. [The intent is that] the faith which stems from the essence of the soul should permeate all the powers of the soul in an internalized manner. This is "a long path." It is, however, the shortest and most secure way to enter "the city of our G-d." For none of the factors that hinder and impede a person and cause him to stumble as he enters "the city of our G-d" remain. For all of the powers of his soul, his [intellectual powers] Chochmah,
Binah, and Daas, and his [emotional powers] Chessed, Gevurah, Tiferes,
Netzach, Hod, and Yesod are all permeated with inner vitality in Divine service. As such, the person can enter "the city of our G-d" as a whole and in all of his particulars. The consummation of this enterprise will be "in that era... [when] the Jews will be great sages and know the hidden matters, and comprehend the knowledge of their Creator according to the [full] extent of mortal potential, as it is written: 'For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of G-d as the waters cover the ocean bed.'"
(Adapted from Sichos Shabbos Parshas Tazria-Metzora
54 53
and Shabbos Parshas Emor, 5742)
52. W i t h regard to this and the subsequent points, see Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XXIV, p. 182ff.
53. 54. Yeshayahu 11:9. Rambam, Mishneh Torah, HilchosMelachim 12:5.

A Knowing Heart

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

A Knowing Heart

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

A KNOWING HEART

SICHOS IN W H I C H T H E REBBE ADVANCED O U R EMOTIONAL FRONTIERS

TRANSLATED BY RABBI ELIYAHU TOUGER

v 1 13 25 35 49 63 77 93 103 115 139 151 169 179 195

Chassidus), sec. 1, and the sources cited there.

( )literally means "service" or "work."

however, notes the connection with the term , the

CHIPPING AWAY AT STONE

Alter Rebbe also contributed another dimension to the

Pesachim 3a; see also BereishisRabbah on the verse.

(for they were facing

sources. See also SeferHaSichosKayitz5700,

See similar statements in Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar, p. 33a.

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

informing him that he also possesses this undesirable quality

(How much more so

10. See also SeferHaSichosKayitz5700,

"You shall surely admonish your colleague." [And

the Jewish people never G-d's intent

intermediary through which

are not themselves the purpose of their existence

17. [ Vayikra 19:17.]

[Instead, the intent is to benefit the person

it uses the expression 'seat.'"

will be utterly decisive and unambiguous. For this reason

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

for Cham is associated with chammimus ("warmth" or "excitability" in Hebrew), Noach's

an expression of the left vector

he saw the evil of

drinking and intoxication.

For [the latter] is also a

[Instead,] he should contemplate [only] what he

should do, how he should admonish him (so that it will be in an

Parshas Vayeishev, p. 252a; See also Torah Or, p. 27a.

for the vessel for the Torah is peace. A n d

regard to the First Beis HaMikdash.

Obviously (and indeed, to a greater extent), this

applies with regard to the Third Beis HaMikdash.

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

purchase all the above."

" I have acquired oxen and donkeys, sheep,

Bereishis 30:43. In his commentary to the verse.

it is not relevant to speak of any existence

" I dwell in exaltedness

(as explained with

16. Yeshayahu 57:15.

going out from the four cubits of Torah and occupying

interpreted by our Sages

Torah Or, Bereishis, p. 23c; Toras Chayim, Bereishis, pp. 38b,

39a ff.; Or HaTorah, loc. cit.

(Indeed, Yaakov's conduct serves as a model for the

dedication that a worker must show his employer.)

26. 27. 28. 29.

16b; Seder Olam, ch. 2.

Shulchan Aruch HaRav,

Vayikra Rabbah 36:5; Rashi's Devarim 6:4, et al.

embarrassed when confronted by mockers" and the quality of valor

35. Bereishis 31:7-8.

also quote the

[Moreover,] it is not sufficient that the approach of bittul will

Shulchan Aruch HaRav,

Mahadura Basra., loc. cit.

being "bold as a leopard."