לְהָבִין אִמְרֵי בִינָה

To comprehend statements of discernment, This is the same epistle called in many places in the writings of Chabad, "to comprehend statements of discernment." "Statements of discernment" is an expression in the book of Proverbs, and the author of the Tanya here relates it to words of Torah that relate to understanding, the level of Bina. This is also the way he relates to the statement here of the Ba'al Shem Tov, in a way that allows it to be understood and explained to others.

מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בַּסֵּפֶר הַנִּקְרָא 'צַוָּואַת רִיבָ"שׁ'

which are written in the book called Tzava'at Rivash , The Ba'al Shem Tov himself did not write any books or record his teachings in writing. The teachings that we have are collections from the writings of his students and teachings that spread by word of mouth. Many of these teachings are collected into the book, Tzava'at Rivash, which literally means, the Testament of Rabbi Yisrael Ba'al Shem Tov. It is one of the first books of Hasidism, and the first of the collected works that attempted to clarify the words of the Ba'al Shem Tov and organize them. It is not clear why the book was named this way, but perhaps a hint to this can be found in the responsa of the author of the Tanya from his period of imprisonment, in which he relates to this question. He writes that the book "was composed by a person who was present at the passing of the Ba'al Shem Tov." It was this book that particularly aroused the ire of the mitnagdim and was even burned at the direction of the Vilna Gaon. It is therefore no surprise that the author of the Tanya chose to specifically explicate this book in his epistle to the congregation of Vilna. Before beginning to explain the book itself, he prefaces with some general points about the book.

הֲגַם שֶׁבֶּאֱמֶת אֵינָהּ צַוָּואָתוֹ כְּלָל

although in truth it is not his testament at all The author of the Tanya first relates to the title of the book. Although it is called "the testament," it is not actually the testament of the Ba'al Shem Tov. Any person who actually reads the book will observe immediately that it is not a testament, not even a spiritual one. Meaning, this is not a thoughtful summation left behind by a person after his death, in which he is concerned about clarifying his thoughts such that no one should be confused after his death at which time he would be unable to correct them. That is what the author of the Tanya is explaining here, that this is not a testament. Therefore, one should relate to the ideas of the book as if they were spoken by a living person to other living people who shared a spiritual connection and atmosphere. Such things, when approached by later generations in a different spiritual environment, are often difficult to understand. In order to grasp them, they must first be broadly introduced and contextualized, in order to create an atmosphere similar to that of the original context, in an organized way. That is the purpose of the author of the Tanya in this epistle.

וְלֹא צִיוָּה כְּלָל לִפְנֵי פְּטִירָתוֹ.

and he did not issue any command before his passing. By adding the phrase "he did not issue any command before his passing," perhaps the author of the Tanya's purpose is to mention that this was not the way of the Ba'al Shem Tov at all. It is not a coincidence that the Ba'al Shem Tov did not write, for he was a vibrantly living person, and everything he said and did was within the vibrancy of life, the ways of living people and situations. This was his greatness, and such a quality cannot be captured in any text, or crystalized for later generations.

רַק הֵם לִקּוּטֵי אִמְרוֹתָיו הַטְּהוֹרוֹת

Rather, they are a collection of his pure sayings, The statements of the Ba'al Shem Tov – he doesn't even call them by the more official word ma'amar, discourse, but by the more casual term "his sayings" – are themselves pure. Meaning, they are something which emerged from the inner dimension and entered into the inner dimension, from one divine soul to another (regarding which we say, "the soul you gave me is pure") without the garments or covers that exist for things that traverse the outer world.

שֶׁלִּקְּטוּ לִקּוּטֵי בָּתַר לִקּוּטֵי

which they collected, collection after collection. However, the writing of these statements led to them no longer being in their initial, "pure" form, since "they collected, collection after collection." This expression, taken from the Talmud, references the commandment of leket, one of the agricultural gifts to poor people, the collection of fallen harvested crops. The Talmud says that after the poor would make their first round of collection gleanings, and the poorest of them would make a second gleaning (collection after collection), there was nothing of value remaining in the field, and anything left was permitted to any person. Here as well, the sayings of the Ba'al Shem Tov which were collected in this book were before any "collection," meaning they were not spoken by him directly, but rather they were collected by his students, things he said in different places and contexts. They were then compiled in an order that was not always coherent. Additionally, they are actually a "collection after collection," for they are not only a collection of the clearly central and important statements, but also contain secondary elements mixed in that are less important and less clear. These are things that are attributed to the Ba'al Shem Tov, but brought by one student in the name of another student, second- or third-hand.

וְלֹא יָדְעוּ לְכַוֵּין הַלָּשׁוֹן עַל מַתְכּוּנְתּוֹ

And they did not know how to formulate the language properly, A collection of sayings that are taken out of their context often requires a reformulation of the statements and their presentation in order to make the collection coherent. Additionally, as the author of the Tanya observes, the Ba'al Shem Tov spoke in Yiddish, while the book (like all hasidic writings from that time) was written in Hebrew. This meant that the composers of the collected writings had to translate them. Thus, the combination of the required editing of the collection for the sake of coherence, with a translation process that necessarily grappled with the loss of nuance from the original language, meant that it was impossible to avoid errors in the intent of the sayings, both for the composers as well as the readers.

אַךְ הַמְּכוּוָּן הוּא אֱמֶת לַאֲמִיתּוֹ.

nevertheless, the intended meaning is absolutely true. Despite the errors, the book has tremendous value, as the underlying intent is true. The intent of the Ba'al Shem Tov, and the intent of his students who collected his sayings, are found in the book. The only limitation is that sometimes it is necessary to clarify and explain the language utilized, so that the true meaning can be extracted. Here begins the explanation of that passage from Tzava'at Rivash that caused so much controversy. Although the author of the Tanya does not quote the passage here, we thought it appropriate to print it as it is printed in our version of Tzava'at Rivash. "And similarly, if a person engaged in prayer hears someone speaking, he should say, why did God bring that person to speak during my prayer? This is certainly divine providence. The speech is the Divine Presence that manifested (enclothing itself) as it were, in this person's mouth in order that I should strengthen myself (a different version reads: motivate myself) to service. There is so much for me to do to strengthen myself in service, meaning in prayer. This is even more so if the person speaking is not Jewish, or a child as it means that it is as if the Divine Presence has (constricted itself and) manifested in such a person, and how much more appropriate that the person should pray with alacrity." It seems that the controversy emanating from this passage is that it sounds like the Divine Presence can rest upon a non-Jewish person, and even upon an evil gentile who is disturbing a Jewish person from prayer. Ostensibly, this does seem very problematic. How can such a thing be said?! In order to understand this, the author of the Tanya presents a lengthy introductory explanation, built with a number of layers based upon the words of the Sages and the Arizal. This allows even those who are not hasidim to understand the words of the Ba'al Shem Tov.

וְהוּא בְּהַקְדֵּים מַאֲמַר רַבּוֹתֵינוּ ז"ל: כָּל הַכּוֹעֵס כְּאִילּוּ עוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדַת כּוֹכָבִים וּמַזָּלוֹת וכו׳.

I will preface my explanation with a statement of our Rabbis: Whoever gets angry, it is as though he is worshipping the stars and constellations... The author of the Tanya prefaces his explanation of the words of the Tzava'at Rivash with a statement from the Rabbis. The intent of this passage is not that anger literally is idol worship. It is part of a broad perspective found among our Sages, especially in works of Kabbala and Hasidism, that sins (and performed commandments) have broad spiritual scopes beyond the action delineated by halakha. This affect includes, not only the action, but also one's thoughts and even emotional states, all of which can fall under the parameter of a particular sin. This does not mean that such an emotional state or thought is literally considered that sin, with all of its practical ramifications, however, it shares a certain intersection with it, in which such thoughts or deeds are to some degree, a manifestation of that actual sin as it is defined in the Torah.

וְהַטַּעַם מוּבָן לְיוֹדְעֵי בִינָה

The reason is understood by those who know discernment, Since "anger abides in the bosom of fools" (Eccles. 7:9), and "those who know discernment" are the opposite of fools. "Those who know discernment" are not special people with a unique ability to understand this. Any person (a beinoni, which is the measure of "any person") who uses his ability to discern can internalize his understanding and link it to the inner knowledge and attributes of his soul, every person according to his ability. This will make him "one who knows discernment," meaning that his understanding becomes the reality of his tangible lived experience. "Those who know discernment" are able to actually detach themselves from anger and relate to its underlying root. They can understand the mechanism that gives rise to it and that the way to prevent and heal it lies above, in the root that precedes da'at, which is emuna (faith).

לְפִי שֶׁבְּעֵת כַּעֲסוֹ נִסְתַּלְּקָה מִמֶּנּוּ הָאֱמוּנָה.

since when one is angry, faith departs from him. This is faith in the oneness of God and His Providence over every detail in creation at all times and in all events that transpire in a person's life. The author of the Tanya is not speaking here of understanding or internalized knowledge that have been lost, but rather to faith. Anger is not something intellectual, and even if a person understood, that would not cause his anger to dissipate. Therefore, the author of the Tanya speaks of faith, for faith is the inner layer, more essential than the intellect, and, when facing off against anger, faith is deeper than intellect.

כִּי אִילּוּ הָיָה מַאֲמִין שֶׁמֵאֵת ה׳ הָיְתָה זֹאת לוֹ לֹא הָיָה בְּכַעַס כְּלָל.

For if he believed that this happened to him from God, he would not grow angry at all. When a person lives with the belief that everything comes from God, he does not become angry. This kind of faith, in which a person has no need to ponder whether God exists, or whether everything comes from Him, since these truths are simply known, has the power to prevent a person from becoming angry. Why is it that when a person believes that everything that happens to him come from God, he does not become angry? Anger is comprised of multiple layers. The first layer is when there is something that a person experiences as bad, something uncomfortable and a violation of the person's expectations. The last layer is when there is someone or something to blame for this, someone upon whom to heap one's frustration in the form of anger. There is a combination of arrogance and frustration that accumulates and operates within a life that is empty of faith. In contrast, a person who has a simple belief that everything is from Hashem will not even initially think that something happening to him is bad, for "nothing bad descends from above." God certainly only does that which is good, even if the person does not feel it at that moment. It is easier to relate to anger as a lack of faith in simpler situations, like one in which the blame falls on oneself, happenstance, or higher forces. Examples such as when a person bumps into something and gets injured, or just misses the last bus are such situations. It is much more difficult to see things this way when another person is mixed into the situation and it is clear that this other person is doing problematic things and is to blame. What does such a situation have to do with faith in God?

וְאַף שֶׁבֶּן אָדָם שֶׁהוּא בַּעַל בְּחִירָה מְקַלְּלוֹ אוֹ מַכֵּהוּ אוֹ מַזִּיק מָמוֹנוֹ, וּמִתְחַיֵּיב בְּדִינֵי אָדָם וּבְדִינֵי שָׁמַיִם עַל רוֹעַ בְּחִירָתוֹ אַף עַל פִּי כֵן, עַל הַנִּיזָּק כְּבָר נִגְזַר מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם וְהַרְבֵּה שְׁלוּחִים לַמָּקוֹם.

And although a person with free will has cursed him, or struck him, or damaged his property – and the assailant is held liable by human laws and the laws of Heaven for his bad choice – even so, this was already decreed upon the injured party from Heaven, and the Omnipresent has many messengers. One would think that in such a situation it is appropriate to be angry at the person, since he chose to do this damage and is responsible. This is not relevant to the victim, as this "was already decreed upon the injured party from Heaven" even before the assailant chose to cause damage, and irrespective of the assailant's bad choice. The perspective here is to differentiate between the assailant and the victim. Each person has a tally with God directly, and people are not supposed to make tallies with one another (and become angry with each other), because the tally is only between us and God. God does not operate directly in the world, but rather enclothes Himself in the vessels of the world, in "messengers." These include things like the forces of nature, animals, as well as people. The expression "many messengers" says that God is not obligated to use any particular messenger or method. This allows God the freedom for His providence to act according to His wishes in the world, with independence. It also allows man the freedom to choose and to take responsibility for his actions.

וְלֹא עוֹד, אֶלָּא אֲפִילּוּ בְּשָׁעָה זוֹ מַמָּשׁ שֶׁמַּכֵּהוּ אוֹ מְקַלְּלוֹ – מִתְלַבֵּשׁ בּוֹ כֹּחַ ה' וְרוּחַ פִּיו יִתְבָּרַךְ הַמְחַיֵּיהוּ וּמְקַיְּימוֹ.

Moreover, even at that actual moment when he is striking him or cursing him, he is enclothed with the strength of God and the breath of His mouth, which gives him life and sustains him. Even if we view this person as a messenger, it is not like a messenger of another person, that after he is sent, he acts as an independent agent, and there is reason to hold him responsible and even be angry with him. When God sends a messenger, He does not leave him. The calculations and responsibility of the sender are with the messenger on the front line of his mission, at every moment and with every move. However – and this is a confusing point – God animates him even when he does not agree with him and speaks through him even when it seems that he is not fulfilling God's wishes (and even in times in which he is actually not fulfilling His wishes). A person is punished for these violations. Yet even so, in the bigger picture, these violations are the will and speech of God, and this person fulfills those things when speaking.

וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב: ״כִּי ה׳ אָמַר לוֹ קַלֵּל״ (שמואל ב טז,י) וְהֵיכָן אָמַר לְשִׁמְעִי?

For it is written: "Because the Lord said to him: Curse" (II Sam. 16:10). Now, when did He say this to Shimi? The author of the Tanya brings a textual example about when David and his men were fleeing from Avshalom, and Shimi was standing in their path, throwing stones at them and cursing David. Avishai ben Tzruya protests and wants to execute judgment upon him – "please let me cross, and I will remove his head" – but David refuses and tells him, "He curses because the Lord said to him: Curse David…. Leave him alone and let him curse, because the Lord said to him." The fact that David accepted this judgment is understandable, but the statement that "the Lord told him to curse" appears extreme. It is not written explicitly in the text, and it also did not appear that God wanted this.

אֶלָּא שֶׁמַּחֲשָׁבָה זוֹ, שֶׁנָּפְלָה לְשִׁמְעִי בְּלִבּוֹ וּמוֹחוֹ, יָרְדָה מֵאֵת ה׳, וְרוּחַ פִּיו הַמְחַיֶּה כָּל צְבָאָם הֶחֱיָה רוּחוֹ שֶׁל שִׁמְעִי בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁדִּיבֵּר דְּבָרִים אֵלּוּ לְדָוִד. כִּי אִילּוּ נִסְתַּלֵּק רוּחַ פִּיו יִתְבָּרַךְ

Rather, this thought, which fell into Shimi's heart and mind, descended from God, and the breath of His mouth, which gives life to all their hosts, gave life to Shimi's spirit when he spoke these words to David. For

רֶגַע אֶחָד מֵרוּחוֹ שֶׁל שִׁמְעִי, לֹא יָכוֹל לְדַבֵּר מְאוּמָה

had the breath of His mouth departed even for a single moment from Shimi's spirit, he would not have been able to say anything "God told him to curse" is not referring to a prophetic incident in which God tells a prophet to speak certain words. Rather, it is a borrowed phrasing to express the idea discussed here: everything which happens in the world and which transpires in a person's life, is from the power and actions of God Himself, and should be accepted as such. Any existing aspect of reality must be from God and sustained by God with His speech (which creates and sustains all being). Accordingly, any part of reality, even one such as this, is the word of God. For David, who understands and accepts this, even Shimi, standing and cursing, is as if God is speaking to him. The text does not say that God told Shimi to curse David, because in fact, He never did so, and Shimi was not obligated to curse. David said this because from his perspective, one of seeing God within all events in his life, it is God who told Shimi to curse him. David expresses this in such an extreme way because this is what he wants to emphasize right now – that currently, in his situation, he accepts whatever befalls him with complete humility and love, as if it was the word of God Himself speaking to him. Additionally, David did not say that God cursed him, but rather that God told Shimi to do so. The difference here is that when God speaks to a prophet, and the prophet is nullified before the holiness of God, he expresses God's inner word and will into the world without any internal barrier between himself and God. This is not the case regarding Shimi's curse of David. It is certain that this curse was not the inner will of God. God's will here was David's act of humility and his response. Shimi's curse was simply a means, the "back-end" of the inner divine intent. David's extreme response to this incident was an act of repentance, moving to the opposite extreme. Sin is the substitution of the inner divine intent with the outer, the "back-end." Repentance is the reversal of this, the bringing of the inner intent to its outer context. This is what David achieved here. The curse of Shimi was a form of the back side of the divine intent, and David turns it toward the inner divine intent when he says, "God told him to curse."

(וְזֶהוּ כִּי ה' אָמַר לוֹ בָּעֵת הַהִיא מַמָּשׁ קַלֵּל אֶת דָּוִד.

[This is the meaning of the phrase, "because the Lord said to him" – at that very moment – "curse David." And who would say to him… When God animates Shimi during that moment and gives him the desire and ability to curse David, it is as if "He literally told him to do it at that moment." If God told him to curse, who can tell him that he should not, and who could attack him the way that Avishai ben Tzruya wanted? At this point, the author of the Tanya brings an entire section which appears in Sha'ar HaYiḥud VeHa'emuna, with some changes in wording and order (the sentences of the introduction and the summary are from chapter 1, and the remainder are from chapter 2).

וְכַנּוֹדַע מַה שֶּׁאָמַר הבעש״ט ז״ל עַל פָּסוּק: ״לְעוֹלָם ה׳ דְּבָרְךָ נִצָּב בַּשָּׁמָיִם״ (תהלים קיט,פט).

as is known from what the Ba'al Shem Tov said on the verse "Forever, Lord, Your word stands in the heavens" (Ps. 119:89). These words allude to the divine words that create the heavens and which remain there sustaining them constantly.

שֶׁצֵּירוּף אוֹתִיּוֹת שֶׁנִּבְרְאוּ בָּהֶן הַשָּׁמַיִם

That the combination of letters with which the heavens were created, God created the world with speech. Divine speech is not only a bestowal of something to created reality. It is itself the creation, and the divine speech is a combining of letters. This perspective, which forms the basis of many of the ideas of the Ba'al Shem Tov (and extensively explained throughout Sha'ar HaYiḥud VeHa'emuna ) is that the twenty-two epistles of the Hebrew alphabet are the root forces of creation from which all things stem, like foundational stones that are organized to build a house. Just as a lone stone is not a house in any way, so each letter, in isolation, lacks meaning and is not yet speech. Speech begins by combining the letters. This gives them meaning and transforms them from potential creation into actual creation. This is why the author of the Tanya speaks here of the combinations of letters that created the heavens.

שֶׁהוּא מַאֲמַר ״יְהִי רָקִיעַ כו׳״ (בראשית א,ו)

which is the utterance "let there be a firmament..." (Gen. 1:6), This is one of the ten utterances that God used to create the world, recorded in the first chapter of Genesis. This chapter describes that act of creation through the speech of God. God spoke ten sentences, "let there be a firmament," "let the land," "let there be plants and animals,"... This is unlike the speech of man which we generally perceive as a transference of information. God's speech actually creates and manifests those things when He speaks. In the Tanya it is explained that the speech of God is like the speech of man in the sense that it reveals that which was hidden, from thought and the hidden recesses of one's soul, from an undifferentiated state to one in which they are manifest, standing on their own, allowing the person speaking, as well as others, to relate to them. Similarly, and even more so, the speech of God constitutes the emergence of God's hidden essential being into revelation. This is divine creation.

הֵן נִצָּבוֹת וְעוֹמְדוֹת מְלוּבָּשׁוֹת בַּשָּׁמַיִם לְעוֹלָם לְהַחֲיוֹתָם וּלְקַיְּימָם.

they stand firm, enclothed in the heavens, to give them life and sustain them. As explained, these letters that God speaks, which combine to form the words "let there be a firmament," are enclothed in the heavens that we see (and those we do not see) and animate and sustain them. We do not hear these letters and words like the speech that we use, but rather we experience them as the perpetuation of the heavens,... An analogy for this is when a king issues instructions, "do such-and-such," only those in his inner circle actually hear him speak. The rest of the populace only witness the results of the speech, the actions taken as a result of the orders of the king. Here as well, the "inner circle" is that which is written in the Torah: the letters combine to form the words "let there be a firmament." The "outer circle" is reality, and that is where one sees the heavens and the earth. However, unlike the analogy, the words of the omnipresent God are not separate from the results. There is no person who hears the words and then commits the actions. Rather, it is the speech itself that manifests the person hearing it, that which he hears, and the action that he does. It is all just divine speech. This is the point that the author of the Tanya comes to emphasize here: The entire creation, while appearing to be an independent reality, seeming to be even more tangible than the Creator Himself, is only the speech of the Creator. Just as speech has no tangibility and existence separate from the one speaking – when he is silent, there is nothing – so it is with the entirety of creation. The heavens, the earth, and all they contain, have no existence of their own without God speaking them into being.

וְלֹא כְּהַפִלוֹסוֹפִים שֶׁכּוֹפְרִים בְּהַשְׁגָּחָה פְּרָטִית

This is not as claimed by the philosophers who deny God's divine providence The quote from chapter 1 of Sha'ar HaYiḥud VeHa'emuna ends here, and now the author of the Tanya quotes from chapter 2: This reference to "philosophers," does not imply people who totally deny the existence of God (it is unclear if there are actually people like this, but either way, it is not a position the author of the Tanya wishes to assess). Rather, he is referring to those who deny God's divine providence. The question of divine providence stands at the foundation of faith: In what kind of God do we believe? What is the relationship between Him and the created beings? Does His state of being, or lack thereof, matter relative to us? The perspective of the philosophers mentioned here is that there is a God, and that He created the world, but that there is no direct connection between Him and the world He created. This world is merely an emanation of the Creator, a result of His cause and effect, in which each entity and each thing that happens has a cause that drives it. This array of causes is rooted in the first cause, the cause of all causes, which is found in God. Within this perspective, in which the narrow cause-effect dynamics of the physical world are applied to all of existence, God is not present. He is present only as "beyond" (the power of all powers, the God of all gods), but not as an involved party that relates directly to us and to whom we must relate directly in return. The author of the Tanya refers to those who espouse such a view as "those who deny personal providence," which is a denial of the direct relationship between God and the world, that every detail of every living thing lives and exists in each moment because God personally animates it exactly as it is. This conception also operates in reverse: Every detail relates to God directly, with no barriers, and draws its life-force and existence only from God.

וּמְדַמִּין בְּדִמְיוֹנָם הַכּוֹזֵב

and who compare, with their deceptive imagination, This perspective of the philosophers stems from the way people think they understand the small slice of reality which they observe and then apply that way of thinking to far broader aspects of reality about which they have no conception. Many of these flawed understandings evolved from exactly such false comparisons and equations between different parts of existence. The fact that things operate in a certain way and rhythm in one context does not mean that things work the same way in another context, in different times or under different conditions. There is a strong, seductive pull to extend what we know to that which we do not know, to apply things that are familiar and easier to contemplate to that which is less comfortable and requires more. The Hebrew word for false that the author of the Tanya uses here is "akhzav" which can be compared to the river called Akhzav: In one area, it is full of water, and we want to think it has always been so. But the next day, or in a different location, it can be completely dry.

אֶת מַעֲשֵׂה ה׳ עוֹשֵׂה שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ לְמַעֲשֵׂה אֱנוֹשׁ וְתַחְבּוּלוֹתָיו.

the work of God, who created heaven and earth, to man's creative work and his schemes. We understand, with certain limits, how to do certain things, even sophisticated things: we build houses, construct tools and vessels, create and prepare things.... We imagine, implicatively, that this understanding extends to a completely different area, to the actions of God who created the heavens and the earth. Certainly, this comparison is not entirely false, for man was created in the image of God, and our entire ability to interact with the Divine is predicated on this connection and comparison, as is written in many works of Hasidism, "from my flesh, I will view God" (Job 19:26). However, in order to correctly employ this comparison, a person must be aware of the immense differences between man, a created, limited being, and God, the one Creator of which there is nothing outside Him. One of the differences is:

כִּי כַּאֲשֶׁר יֵצֵא לַצּוֹרֵף כְּלִי שׁוּב אֵין הַכְּלִי צָרִיךְ לִידֵי הַצּוֹרֵף, שֶׁאַף שֶׁיָּדָיו מְסוּלָּקוֹת הֵימֶנּוּ הוּא קַיָּים מֵעַצְמוֹ.

For when a smith completes a vessel, the vessel has no further need of the smith's hands, since even when his hands leave it, it exists on its own. When a person acts in the physical world, he operates in an environment that is external to him, one with independent existence relative to him, just as he independently exists. When he creates something in the world, he is only combining elements that previously existed, and even the combination itself is not something new from nothing, but a possibility embedded within the details of existence. Therefore, when a person creates a tool, when he combines different materials, these materials continue to exist in this new state, it is for this end that they were initially created, and not as a result of his actions and intent. Additionally, even man, as part of the creation, receives his life force and ability to be and create from beyond himself, from that which is above him, just like the tool he creates.

וְטָח מֵרְאוֹת עֵינֵיהֶם הַהֶבְדֵּל הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁבֵּין מַעֲשֵׂה אֱנוֹשׁ וְתַחְבּוּלוֹתָיו

Their eyes are besmeared and they see not the major distinction

שֶׁהוּא יֵשׁ מִיֵּשׁ, רַק שֶׁמְּשַׁנֶּה הַצּוּרָה וְהַתְּמוּנָה, לְמַעֲשֵׂה שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ שֶׁהוּא יֵשׁ מֵאַיִן.

between man's creative work and his schemes, which consist of making one thing out of another, of merely modifying the form and shape, and the creation of heaven and earth, which is the creation of existence from nothingness. The difference between "one thing from another" and "existence out of nothingness" is the essential difference between man's actions and the actions of the Divine. All things done by man, physical or spiritual, are only "one thing from another." We are able to alter the relationship between things (primarily the relationship between us and the things around us), but we cannot change the essence of something such that it can be something which it was not before. The difference is, as was stated, that we are part of creation, on the same plane as the things we create, and we are only able to modify our relationships with the other entities within creation, but not the essence of their existence. God, in contrast, stands outside of the creation. As the Creator, only He has the capacity to create something new in the full meaning of the word, a creation of something from nothing, something that has no precedent at all.

וְהוּא פֶּלֶא גָּדוֹל יוֹתֵר מִקְּרִיעַת יַם סוּף עַל דֶּרֶךְ מָשָׁל, אֲשֶׁר הוֹלִיךְ ה׳ בְּרוּחַ קָדִים עַזָּה כָּל הַלַּיְלָה וַיִּבָּקְעוּ הַמָּיִם. וְאִילּוּ פָּסַק הָרוּחַ כְּרֶגַע הָיוּ הַמַּיִם חוֹזְרִים וְנִיגָּרִים בַּמּוֹרָד כְּדַרְכָּם וְטִבְעָם, וְלֹא קָמוּ כַּחוֹמָה.

This is a greater marvel than the splitting of the Red Sea, for instance, where God caused the sea to recede with a strong east wind all night long, and the waters were split. If the wind had ceased even for an instant, the waters would have reverted and flowed downward in their natural way. They would not have stood like a wall, As is written, "and the water was a wall for them, on their right and on their left" (Ex. 14:22). The miracle of the splitting of the sea was that "He turned the sea into dry land" (Ps. 66:6), that the sea behaved like dry land.

אַף שֶׁטֶּבַע זֶה בַּמַּיִם הוּא גַּם כֵּן נִבְרָא וּמְחוּדָּשׁ יֵשׁ מֵאַיִן, שֶׁהֲרֵי חוֹמַת אֲבָנִים נִצֶּבֶת מֵעַצְמָהּ בְּלִי רוּחַ, רַק שֶׁטֶּבַע הַמַּיִם אֵינוֹ כֵּן.

even though this natural tendency of water to flow downward is also a novel phenomenon created from nothingness. For a stone wall stands upright by itself without the support of the wind, but that is not the nature of water. The miracle of the splitting of the Red Sea was also a creation of something from nothing. However, it was not the creation of an entity, but rather a creation of a natural tendency that did not exist previously.

וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן וְקַל וָחוֹמֶר בִּבְרִיאַת יֵשׁ מֵאַיִן

Certainly, and all the more so, with regard to the creation of existence from nothingness, Like the creation of the heavens and the earth, which are not only nature and its patterns, but rather their entire existence is something from nothing. "Certainly, and all the more so" is a double language, reflecting the two ways that the creation of the heavens is a bigger miracle than the splitting of the Red Sea. Firstly, in the splitting of the Red Sea, the "something from nothing" is only the change in behavior of the water to stand as a stone wall. This was different from the natural behavior of water, but contrast that with the creation of water itself, in which its entire existence is something from nothing. Secondly, while this standing of water like a wall is a new concept for water, it is not a new idea intrinsically, as we have stones shaped as walls within nature. Meaning, the miracle in the splitting of the Red Sea is only in relation to the water, but the miracle of complete "something from nothing" is absolute, as there is nothing like it anywhere in reality, that there is nothing at all before the "something" is created.

שֶׁהִיא לְמַעְלָה מֵהַטֶּבַע

which transcends the laws of nature Nature (teva ) is the built-in nature of something in the essence of its creation, as opposed to external attributes (like a coin, matbe'a, the same root as teva, that has a fixed imprint and shape, not as something added to the coin, but as the defining characteristic of that coin). In this sense, the term "above nature" relates to behavior that changes the essential qualities of something, adding a new element that was not present in its essential creation. It follows that when an entity's entire being is new, then it is called "above nature." The term sounds absurd, like saying that the nature of something is beyond nature. This is because this term is merely borrowed to describe a phenomenon that inherently lacks nature. It is a term that points to God Himself, as it were, connecting the idea of "nature" to God, which signifies that as the Creator of the world, He must be "above nature."

וְהַפְלֵא וָפֶלֶא יוֹתֵר מִקְּרִיעַת יַם סוּף

and is an even more astonishing wonder than the splitting of the Red Sea, Which is known as a miracle that is above nature. As was explained, the creation of the heavens and the earth is a bigger miracle.

עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה שֶׁבְּהִסְתַּלְּקוּת חַס וְשָׁלוֹם כֹּחַ הַבּוֹרֵא יֵשׁ מֵאַיִן מִן הַנִּבְרָא יָשׁוּב הַנִּבְרָא לְאַיִן וְאֶפֶס מַמָּשׁ.

how much more so that upon the withdrawal, God forbid, of the Creator's power of creating existence from nothingness from the creation, the creation would literally revert to absolute nothingness. At the splitting of the Red Sea, the east wind held the waters as firm as a wall, and it is clear that had the wind ceased, the wall of water would have stopped standing as well. This certainly applies to the creation – like the east wind holding the waters, there is something that maintains creation at all times, which breathes and acts upon it, and if that ceased to exist, God forbid, creation would return to its "natural" state of "nothingness."

אֶלָּא צָרִיךְ לִהְיוֹת כֹּחַ הַפּוֹעֵל בַּנִּפְעָל תָּמִיד לְהַחֲיוֹתוֹ וּלְקַיְּימוֹ.

Rather, the force of the Creator must constantly be within the creation to grant it life and sustain it. The force of God must be like the east wind, in the terms of the metaphor. As soon as we perceive "existence" not as a reality itself, as a "natural" and permanent state, but as an action, it follows that there must be someone who is constantly performing the action, and if not, we are left with nothing.

וּבְחִינָה זוֹ הוּא דְּבַר ה׳ וְרוּחַ פִּיו שֶׁבַּעֲשָׂרָה מַאֲמָרוֹת שֶׁבָּהֶן נִבְרָא הָעוֹלָם.

This force is none other than the word of God and the breath of His mouth that are in the ten utterances through which the world was created. When the entire world is viewed like the wonder of the splitting of the Red Sea, then the force of the Creator within the creation, the divine speech of the ten utterances that articulates the existence of reality, becomes obvious, like the presence of the world itself.

וַאֲפִילּוּ אֶרֶץ הַלֵּזוּ הַגַּשְׁמִית וּבְחִינַת דּוֹמֵם שֶׁבָּהּ חַיּוּתָן וְקִיּוּמָן הוּא דְּבַר ה׳ מֵעֲשָׂרָה מַאֲמָרוֹת, הַמְלוּבָּשׁ בָּהֶן וּמְקַיְּימָן לִהְיוֹת דּוֹמֵם וְיֵשׁ מֵאַיִן, וְלֹא יַחְזְרוּ לְאַיִן וְאֶפֶס מַמָּשׁ כְּשֶׁהָיוּ.

Even the life and sustenance of this physical world and its inanimate components is the word of God from the ten utterances, which is enclothed in them and sustains them, to be inanimate and in a state of existence from nothingness, and so that they do not revert to their previous state of absolute nothingness. Not only is the word of God the sustenance of the animal and vegetable kingdoms, whose vitality is evident, but it also sustains inanimate objects, which do not appear to contain life. In addition to imparting life, "the word of God from the ten utterances" also constitutes their very existence from absolute nothingness. In this regard, there is no difference between an inanimate object and a living plant: Everything in the world, apart from the vital movement of animals and the power of growth within plants, also contains an "inanimate" part, which is the very existence of matter. The basic existence of any substance from nothingness is equal at all levels.

וְזֶה שֶׁכָּתַב הָאֲרִיזַ״ל שֶׁגַּם בְּדוֹמֵם כַּאֲבָנִים וְעָפָר וּמַיִם יֵשׁ בָּהֶם בְּחִינַת נֶפֶשׁ וְחַיּוּת רוּחָנִיִּית.

This is the meaning of that which the Arizal wrote, that even inanimate objects, such as stones, soil, and water, have a soul and spiritual life force. Here the "quotation" returns to the author of the Tanya's comments in chapter 1 of Sha'ar HaYiḥud VeHa'emuna. The Arizal states that all of those entities have a "soul and spiritual life force" because their very existence as specific objects, as entities that endure, is the "spirit of life" within them. This concludes the citation.

וְהִנֵּה נוֹדַע לְיוֹדְעֵי חֵן

Now, it is known to those initiated in the esoteric wisdom of Kabbala Since the author of the Tanya is about to use kabbalistic language and terminology, whose proper understanding depends on prior knowledge of these concepts, he therefore notes that they are "known to those initiated in the esoteric wisdom."

כִּי דְּבַר ה׳ נִקְרָא בְּשֵׁם ‘שְׁכִינָה׳ בִּלְשׁוֹן רַבּוֹתֵינוּ ז״ל

that the word of God is called the "Divine Presence," in the terminology of our Rabbis, That which the Tanakh calls "the word of God," or "utterances," or "the breath of the mouth" of God is termed the "Divine Presence" by the Rabbis in the Talmud and midrashim. The "Divine Presence" refers to the divine life force, and in a certain sense the existence of the Divine that is present within all things. This life force, which is constricted and delineated, vitalizes and constitutes all things, within their specific boundaries. The "Divine Presence" is also divine speech, because just as a person takes himself, his thoughts and feelings, and so on, and makes them present in his speech when he talks to another person, so too God makes Himself present, as it were, in the divine speech that is within created reality.

וְ׳אִימָא תַּתָּאָה׳ וּ׳מַטְרוֹנִיתָא׳ בִּלְשׁוֹן הַזֹּהַר, וּבִפְרָט בְּרֵישׁ פָּרָשַׁת וָאֵרָא (חלק ב כב,ב)

and "the lower mother" and matronita [the queen] in the terminology of the Zohar , especially at the beginning of Parashat Va'era (2:22b), The language of the Zohar is not like the language of the Rabbis in the Talmud and midrashim, even though it resembles to the extent that it too is Aramaic and depictive. Instead, the Zohar uses the ancient language of Kabbala, about which we do not know much, although it forms the basis for later kabbalistic terminology and thought. "The lower mother" contrasts with "the upper mother," which is Bina, the feminine, receptive counterpart of Ḥokhma, and the mother of the attributes in Atzilut (the six sefirot, "Zeir Anpin "). The lower mother is Malkhut, the feminine, receptive aspect of Zeir Anpin (the "small face" of the world of Atzilut, which relate to the worlds) that receives on behalf of the worlds, and she is the mother of the worlds. "The queen" is the title given to a married woman who receives the influence from her husband, with which she gives life to the reality over which she reigns, bringing it into existence and "speaking" it.

לְפִי שֶׁשּׁוֹכֵן וּמִתְלַבֵּשׁ בַּנִּבְרָאִים לְהַחֲיוֹתָם. וּבִלְשׁוֹן הַמְּקוּבָּלִים נִקְרָא בְּשֵׁם ‘מַלְכוּת׳

because it resides in and is enclothed in the created beings, to give them life. In the terminology of the kabbalists, the word of God is called Malkhut ("Kingship"), All of these concepts express, each in a different way, the concept of divine speech that speaks and gives life to the entire creation, in general and in particular, as explained above. The term "kabbalists" here refers mainly to the Arizal. Malkhut is the tenth and last of the sefirot. Now, one can readily understand why speech is related to the last sefira. As in the human soul, once all the internal processes in the soul, its achievements, understanding and emotion, have been completed, everything is brought to a conclusion in the speech that the soul produces. However, it is more difficult to understand why it is called Malkhut. What is the connection between speech and Malkhut, kingship?

עַל שֵׁם: ״דְּבַר מֶלֶךְ שִׁלְטוֹן״ (קהלת ח,ד), כִּי הַמֶּלֶךְ מַנְהִיג מַלְכוּתוֹ בְּדִיבּוּרוֹ

after the verse "governance is by the king's word" (Eccles. 8:4), as the king rules his kingdom with his word. The king does not take actions himself but rather he tells others what to do. Furthermore, he does not expect them to do it because they have understood the logic and reason behind it, nor out of love for him, but rather because he is issuing a command to them, an order. In other words, he imposes his authority through speech alone, which contains nothing other than what he says. This is the meaning of "governance is by the king's word" – speech itself expresses and sustains his rule, and this is the connection between the king and kingship, Malkhut.

וְעוֹד טְעָמִים אֲחֵרִים יְדוּעִים לְיוֹדְעֵי חֵן.

There are also other reasons that are known to those initiated in the esoteric wisdom of Kabbala. That is, there are other reasons known to them as to why divine speech and the "Divine Presence" are called Malkhut.

וּמוּדַעַת זֹאת, כִּי יֵשׁ בְּחִינַת וּמַדְרֵיגַת מַלְכוּת דַּאֲצִילוּת וּבְחִינַת מַלְכוּת דִּבְרִיאָה וכו׳

And it is known that there is an aspect and level of Malkhut of the world of Atzilut, and an aspect of Malkhut of the world of Beria ... For each of the four worlds – Atzilut, Beria, Yetzira, and Asiya – there are ten sefirot, which are the totality of the divine illumination which bestows influence and is revealed in that world. Thus, for example, the sefira of Ḥokhma is the source of all the wisdom [Ḥokhma ] that belongs to that world, while Ḥesed (Kindness) is the source of all bestowal and giving, and so on. The summation of all sefirot is the Malkhut of every world, what is received from all of them, from Ḥokhma, Bina, Ḥesed, Gevura, and so forth. It is like speech, which receives from all the inner levels in order to constitute the external reality that expresses them. The author of the Tanya will proceed to explain what the Malkhut of each world – Atzilut, Beria, Yetzira, and Asiya – constitutes and brings to life: which world, which creatures it contains, and so on.

וּפֵירוּשׁ מַלְכוּת דַּאֲצִילוּת הוּא דְּבַר ה׳

" Malkhut of Atzilut " means the word of God that gives life and being to the great souls which belong to the world of Atzilut , With respect to Atzilut he mentions only souls, not actual angels and worlds, because the pure, lofty souls are the main entities that are emanated in Atzilut, and the influence upon them is the central influence of Atzilut. Accordingly, when the author of the Tanya discusses the world of Beria he will speak about souls and angels, and with regard to Asiya, which is this world in general, he will refer to the foundation of the physical earth. What does a soul of Atzilut look like? How does it conduct itself in our world? In order to convey this idea, the author of the Tanya presents some examples of souls of Atzilut:

כְּמוֹ נִשְׁמַת אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן

such as the soul of Adam, The soul of Adam, the first man, who was the handiwork of the God – and was thus certainly created with all the perfection that a person should have – was a soul of Atzilut. In other words, his soul had a direct link to the Divine, without any concealment or mediation, as though it was one with God.

שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בּוֹ: ״וַיִּפַּח בְּאַפָּיו נִשְׁמַת חַיִּים כו׳״ (בראשית ב,ז)

regarding which it is stated: "And He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life…" (Gen. 2:7), As explained in Likkutei Amarim (chap. 2), this breathing into the soul of Adam expresses the direct bond of his soul with the Divine, not through a screen and not even by means of boundaries and the mediation of letters. This essence, which emerges from within God's internality is itself the soul that is enclothed in the human body.

וּכְמוֹ נִשְׁמוֹת הָאָבוֹת וְהַנְּבִיאִים

and such as the souls of the Patriarchs and the prophets The author of the Tanya compares the souls of the Patriarchs to the souls of the prophets, despite the fact that the Patriarchs certainly possessed more all-encompassing souls. The reason is that for the purposes of defining "a soul of Atzilut," it does not matter how all-encompassing the soul is, whether or not that person was a leader and father of all Israel. Rather, what counts is the private relationship of this soul with the Divine, whether it was a direct relationship and entailed the complete nullification of one's own person. In this regard, the souls of the prophets are equal to those of the Patriarchs.

וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן

and others similar to them This is referring to the souls of the righteous in each generation, since although prophecy came to an end, the prophetic inspiration did not cease, and in their prophetic inspiration, the greatest righteous individuals also attain the self-abnegation of a soul of Atzilut. Admittedly, the prophetic inspiration is not at the level of prophecy, but it appears that the difference between them lies in the message, its higher source and its penetration of reality down to the actual material existence. However, when it comes to the personality of the recipient of the prophecy or the prophetic inspiration, they are both in a state of complete negation with respect to what is passing through them. It does not matter what exactly is occurring or at what level; as far as the person himself is concerned, at that point he is in the world of Atzilut.

(שֶׁהָיוּ מֶרְכָּבָה לה׳ מַמָּשׁ, וּבְטֵלִים מַמָּשׁ בִּמְצִיאוּת אֵלָיו

(who were a literal vehicle for God, and who were actually negated in existence relative to Him, The souls of Atzilut are considered a vehicle, which means to have attained the deepest level of nullification of existence, bitul bimetziut. Hasidic thought differentiates between two types of negation: "Negation of the self," bitul hayesh, and "negation of existence," bitul bimetziut. "Negation of the self" is the level of nullification of the souls in the worlds of Beria, Yetzira, and Asiya. It is also a level of a "vehicle," but as explained elsewhere it is that level which every Jew attains when he performs a mitzva. He is then considered as a vehicle for that act, and yet he is not a vehicle himself in terms of his personality and life in general, since he still feels himself, his will and his opinion as "an entity" in and of itself, and he can never negate this. He is a vehicle only for specific acts (or statements or thoughts), when he performs the mitzva and nullifies his own will in order to fulfill God's will. This is the "negation of the self." By contrast, "negation of existence" is a level of souls of Atzilut, those who are an actual vehicle in all of their physical limbs, souls, and all of the events of their lives, like the Patriarchs and the prophets. Such a person does not need to negate his self and his will, as he has no self or sense of existence that he has to negate; he has no other desire or opinion that he must subdue. Rather, all the movements of his soul, and even his body, are not his own, but belong solely to the one above.

כְּמַאֲמַר רַבּוֹתֵינוּ ז״ל: שְׁכִינָה מְדַבֶּרֶת מִתּוֹךְ גְּרוֹנוֹ שֶׁל מֹשֶׁה. וְכֵן כָּל הַנְּבִיאִים וּבַעֲלֵי רוּחַ הַקּוֹדֶשׁ הָיָה קוֹל וְדִבּוּר הָעֶלְיוֹן מִתְלַבֵּשׁ בְּקוֹלָם וְדִבּוּרָם מַמָּשׁ כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַב הָאֲרִ"י זַ״ל).

in accordance with the Rabbis' statement: "The Divine Presence would speak from Moses's throat." Likewise, with regard to all the prophets and those who had prophetic inspiration, the supreme voice and speech of God would be enclothed in their actual voice and speech, as the Arizal wrote). Moses was more than a messenger for a particular mission that he received from God. Instead, the Divine Presence itself would speak from his throat. In other words, one who listened to Moses was hearing the actual Divine Presence. With regard to the prophets as well, they were, as explained, in a state of absolute negation of themselves and their speech. What they said was not a translation, a transmission, or a rehearsal of the divine speech they heard, but rather the divine speech itself speaking through their mouths. Malkhut of Atzilut is the word of God, the Divine Presence, which gives life to the emanated beings that belong to the world of Atzilut. Just as the world of Atzilut in general is not a world but the Divine, so too the souls of Atzilut should not be considered as the existence of separate "selves" at all, but solely divine revelations. The difference between the sefirot of Atzilut and those souls is only that the former bestow influence while the latter receive it. Furthermore, the souls are recipients only with respect to the sefirot, whereas in relation to the world they are givers. These are the very wholly righteous individuals of all generations.

וּמַלְכוּת דִּבְרִיאָה הוּא דְּבַר ה׳ הַמְּחַיֶּה וּמְהַוֶּה הַנְּשָׁמוֹת וְהַמַּלְאָכִים שֶׁבְּעוֹלָם הַבְּרִיאָה, שֶׁאֵין מַעֲלָתָם כְּמַעֲלַת הָאֲצִילוּת וכו׳

And the Malkhut of Beria is the word of God that gives life and being to the souls and angels in the world of Beria , whose level is not like the level of Atzilut ... Malkhut of Beria is the speech of the sefirot from the world of Beria, meaning, the summation and revelation of sefirot of Beria. The world of Beria, as its name implies, is the creation [beria ] of the world ex nihilo, unlike Atzilut, which is divinity. The world of Beria is not a corporeal world either, and it is not a world that hides its divine vitality. However, in contrast to the world of Atzilut it is already a "world," an "entity" in its own right. It not only recognizes the Divine, it is entirely a recognition of the Divine, divine understanding and knowledge. However, this is the case only from the other side; it is not divine recognition itself, from the inside, but rather the recognition of the Divine as attained by another. Therefore, Malkhut of Beria sustains not only souls but also angels. In addition, as mentioned above the souls in the world of Beria are not at the level of "the seed of man," but rather "the seed of animals." The difference between them is analogous, metaphorically speaking, to the difference between sight and hearing: The souls (and angels) of Beria can be considered to hear, but not see, the Divine. "Seeing" is direct, without a barrier or mediation, and thus they themselves are a revelation of the Divine, whereas "hearing" is like hearing from somebody else what they have seen, like via a screen, which, thin as it may be, is still a barrier of the most significant kind – between "something" and "nothing" creation. The author of the Tanya now moves on to discuss Malkhut of Asiya, without mentioning Malkhut of Yetzira. Perhaps the difference between Beria and Yetzira is not relevant to the subject matter of this epistle. Atzilut is unity, Asiya is separation (which can lead to a lack of a relationship), while in the middle there are worlds that relate to them both. It is true that there is a difference between the two types of relationships, between Beria and Yetzira, just as there is a difference between intellect and emotion, but that is not the topic currently under discussion.

וּמַלְכוּת דַּעֲשִׂיָּה הוּא דְּבַר ה׳ הַמְחַיֶּה וּמְהַוֶּה אֶת עוֹלָם הַזֶּה בִּכְלָלוֹ

And the Malkhut of Asiya is the word of God that gives life and being to this world in general, Malkhut of Asiya is the speech of the sefirot of the world of Asiya (the ten utterances), which constitutes and gives life to the world in which we live in general, in both the spiritual and the material sense. The world of Asiya, in relation to God, is like an action in relation to the person who performed it: It is the level furthest away from himself and his individuality, further removed than his feelings, thought, and speech, to such an extent that it can even be seen as entirely unrelated to him (similar to the way in which one cannot see in a deed the one who did it, as opposed to speech and thought). In the same manner, this physical world can be viewed as an entity in and of itself, which is detached from the divinity that sustains and brings it into being from nothingness.

עַד יְסוֹד הֶעָפָר וְהַמַּיִם אֲשֶׁר מִתַּחַת לָאָרֶץ

right down to the element of earth and the water that is under the ground Even this world – including its material qualities – is divided into four elements: Fire; wind; water; and earth, with earth as the lowest element. The elements of earth and water are described as "under the ground," in the sense that the ground conceals the divine life force from them, in contrast to the elements of wind and fire which are "above the earth," meaning, they are not completely hidden, and they at least have the aspiration to reach higher, to the existence of holiness that they can recognize there. As mentioned in the ancient books on nature, it is in the nature of the elements of water and earth to descend, while wind and fire rise upward.

(אֶלָּא שֶׁבְּחוּץ לָאָרֶץ הַחַיּוּת הוּא עַל יְדֵי הִתְלַבְּשׁוּת שָׂרִים הַחִיצוֹנִים הַמְמוּנִּים עַל ע׳ אוּמּוֹת

(however, outside the Land of Israel, the life force is created by means of the enclothing of "external spiritual angels" charged over the seventy nations. That is, outside the land of Israel the life force from the word of God, Malkhut of Asiya, does not reach the physical earth directly. Every nation and culture has a spiritual essence, "minister," from which it receives its vitality and its special character. These ministers are "external," in the sense that they convey the external aspect of the life force rather than its internal essence, the effects of the life force upon the physical earth, not its inner, divine meaning. This external effect is the existence of the kelippa (literally, "husk," the forces of impurity) which receives all of its life force from the sacred, but which hides this and even acts as a diametrically opposing force in the worlds. How is this possible? The answer is comprised of several stages. One is that the divine life force is drawn forth through its enclothing in the seventy external ministering angels, who in themselves are not evil, but rather they are messengers of God sent to constitute a reality in which the presence of God is not evident. Only this reality, which receives from them, can be evil and part of the kelippa. Second, as will be explained below, even this life force, through which God sustains these ministers, is not an internal, direct influence, but rather it comes by way of an illumination, in an encompassing manner.

דְּהַיְינוּ, שֶׁיּוֹרֵד נִיצוֹץ מִדְּבַר ה׳ הַנִּקְרָא בְּשֵׁם ‘מַלְכוּת דַּעֲשִׂיָּה׳

That is, a spark descends from the word of God that is called " Malkhut of Asiya ," It is not the word of God itself, Malkhut of Asiya, that descends to the kelippa, but only a spark from it. A spark is merely an illumination, a glimmer of the thing itself. In other words, God does not give life to the kelippot directly, with His speech, but through the illumination of sparks from His speech. A spark connotes distance, which indicates that this is not like a deliberate act of giving from a bestower to a recipient, but like a light that shines and sparkles from the illumination, so that everyone outside can enjoy it as well. On a mundane level, this can be compared to a person's daily schedule. There are things that one wants and intends to do, while there are events that happen on their own, even when he actually does not have any interest in them. These are like a background – perhaps even taking the form of a contrast – without which his inner desire cannot be sustained. In this sense, every undertaking is surrounded by a kind of "illumination" – numerous procedures that come into being and are activated (or not) by the same deed. The same applies to the higher realm, with respect to God: These ministering angels, and the kelippa and evil that stem from them, certainly do not represent His inner will, and they do not receive directly from His speech. They are not the meaning and letters of the speech, but merely a spark from it, like a kind of speech within a speech.

וּמֵאִיר עַל הַשָּׂרִים שֶׁל מַעְלָה בִּבְחִינַת מַקִּיף מִלְמַעְלָה, אַךְ אֵינוֹ מִתְלַבֵּשׁ בָּהֶם מַמָּשׁ, אֶלָּא נִמְשָׁךְ לָהֶם חַיּוּת מֵהֶאָרָה זוֹ שֶׁמֵּאִיר עֲלֵיהֶם מִלְמַעְלָה בִּבְחִינַת מַקִּיף.

which shines upon the supernal ministers in the form of encompassment from above, yet is not actually enclothed in them; rather, the life force is drawn to them from this illumination that shines upon them from above, in the form of encompassment. Even with respect to one who receives its illumination, this spark is not received as an inner light and life force, but as an encompassment from above. As explained in Likkutei Amarim (chap. 48), this is not like a physical illumination, which cannot be internal if it is an encompassment. Rather, it is the illumination of a spiritual life force that is not limited in place, neither physical nor spiritual. An "encompassing illumination" means that it is not enclothed in the vessels of that reality, as the affairs and conduct of the ministering angels and the lands of the nations. However, it sustains the great ensemble of which it forms part. Even in terms of the physical world, in order for something to exist within its limits, its boundary must differ from it and even be the opposite of it. This perimeter that surrounds everything in existence has no end, since every finite entity requires an encompassment, and an encompassment for its encompassment, ad infinitum. On the spiritual plane, this does not mean that the encompassment is found only within the perimeter, as stated, because the life force of the entity – its inner essence and that which is inside its internality, its character and all the particulars of its properties – are actually received at all times from the power of this encompassment. Therefore, when it is stated regarding the supernal ministers that the divine life force shines upon them in the form of encompassment, they themselves can be described as that form of encompassment. That is, with regard to the inner desire that is revealed, for example, through the enclothing of Malkhut of Asiya in a certain person who performs a mitzva, there is an encompassing illumination for him that incorporates the gentiles and all their masses, who can also stand in opposition to and against that person, his thoughts and his deeds, in that very same movement of holiness. It can be further understood from this observation that the inner light enclothed in the vessels is the revealed light, in contrast to the encompassing light, which is hidden. Consequently, one who acts with holiness and sustains spirituality in his life – regarding whom it is stated that the divine life force is enclothed within him – is also one who perceives the divine life force, who feels with love and awe the divine reality that constitutes and gives him life. However, one who belongs to the kelippa, who receives his life force from those ministering angels in the form of encompassment, is unable to see.

וּמֵהַשָּׂרִים נִשְׁפָּע חַיּוּת לָאוּמּוֹת

And from the ministers, a life force flows to the nations, A lowlier influence descends from the ministering angels to the created beings who receive from them. While there is continuity here, the summation is erroneous. Above, with the ministers, there can be a subtle understanding of how there is nevertheless something above them, and that there is a power above all powers in existence, all the way up to God Himself. However, the nations below no longer have such a capability; they attribute the status of a god to what they perceive as the source of their power, by worshiping and serving it, and this is idolatry.

וְלִבְהֵמוֹת חַיּוֹת וְעוֹפוֹת שֶׁבְּאַרְצוֹתֵיהֶם, וְלָאָרֶץ הַגַּשְׁמִית וְלַשָּׁמַיִם הַגַּשְׁמִיִּים שֶׁהֵם הַגַּלְגַּלִּים

and to the animals, beasts, and fowl that are in their lands, and to the physical earth and heaven that are the celestial bodies The life force that flows from the ministers also goes to the entire natural physical infrastructure of that land which belongs to them: The animal, vegetable, and mineral kingdoms, the earth and the sky. Each of these expresses in its own way the essence of the "minister" to which it belongs. Like all of those who receive from the ministers, these too are a form of a kelippa that hides the divinity which constitutes and gives life to them. The additional phrase "that are the [celestial] bodies" refers to the boundary realm between the spiritual and the material. These bodies [galgalim ] include what we would call today the laws of nature, the ways in which the materials of nature develop [mitgalgelim ] from one form to another, from one state to the next; the laws of causality; particular laws; general laws; and rules of conduct, which encompass and incorporate ever more entities and worlds. This addition serves to teach that these laws are also under the influence of the spiritual "ministers" that belong to that part of the world.

(אֶלָּא שֶׁשָּׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ וּבְהֵמוֹת וְחַיּוֹת וְעוֹפוֹת טְהוֹרִים נִשְׁפָּעִים מִקְּלִיפַּת נוֹגַהּ, וְהַטְּמֵאִים וְנַפְשׁוֹת הָאוּמּוֹת מִשְּׁאָר קְלִיפּוֹת)

(only that the heaven and earth, and the pure animals, beasts, and fowl, receive their flow from the kelippa , the husk, called noga , whereas the impure ones and the souls of the nations receive their flow from the other kelippot ) "The other kelippot " means the three impure kelippot, from which the souls of the nations and the impure beasts and fowl receive their flow. This parenthetical observation refers to the division between the two general levels of the kelippa, which differ in the degree of the concealment of the divine life force within them. One level is kelippat noga, meaning, the kelippa that contains noga, light, such that the concealment within it is not entirely sealed up, and thus holiness can be revealed within it itself. The second level is the impure kelippot, which are completely sealed. There is no revelation of holiness in them themselves, and all of their flow comes by way of encompassment, as will be explained. The example he brings for kelippat noga is the entire existence of the physical world that is used for the performance of mitzvot, which includes all material entities – heaven and earth, the pure animals,... His example for the impure kelippot is the beasts that may not be eaten and the souls of the nations, as explained at the beginning of the Tanya.

וְהִנֵּה שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר בָּהֶם בְּחוּץ לָאָרֶץ

Now, heaven and earth and all that is in them, outside the Land of Israel, Here the author of the Tanya distinguishes between the heaven and earth that are outside the Land of Israel, and the heaven and earth within Israel. The heaven and earth outside the Land of Israel are part of the lands of the nations, which receive their flow from the seventy aforementioned ministering angels. It is this heaven and earth that he is speaking of here, since the heaven and earth in the Land of Israel do not receive from the ministers but directly from the holiness, and therefore they themselves can be holy and not kelippa at all.

כּוּלָּם כְּלֹא מַמָּשׁ חֲשִׁיבֵי לְגַבֵּי הַשָּׁרִים שֶׁהֵם חַיּוּתָם וְקִיּוּמָם, וְהַשָּׂרִים כְּלֹא מַמָּשׁ חֲשִׁיבֵי לְגַבֵּי הַחַיּוּת הַנִּמְשָׁךְ לָהֶם מֵהַנִּיצוֹץ

are all considered insubstantial in relation to the ministers that are their life force and existence, while the ministers are considered insubstantial in relation to the life force

מִדְּבַר ה׳ הַמֵּאִיר עֲלֵיהֶם מִלְמַעְלָה.

that is drawn to them from the spark of the word of God that shines upon them from above. The rule for all levels of progression is that the lower level is nullified in relation to a higher level and is not considered a separate existence at all. This rule applies to the levels of the kelippa as well. Since the lowest level is merely a particular that contains nothing new with respect to the general and the source, it is not considered a distinct entity, and therefore the higher level returns and essentially fills the whole space.

וְאַף עַל פִּי כֵן, הַחַיּוּת הַנִּמְשָׁךְ לְתוֹכָם מֵהֶאָרָה זוֹ הוּא בִּבְחִינַת גָּלוּת בְּתוֹכָם

Nevertheless, the life force that is drawn into them from this illumination is considered to be in exile within them. That is, the life force drawn into all the levels of the kelippa from this illumination of the word of God, from the holiness, is considered to be in exile within them. Everything that we stated with regard to the negation of a lower level in favor of a higher one applies from above to below, and in the case of holiness, from below to above as well, since the lower level is aware of the upper level that constitutes and sustains it. In the progression of the kelippot, however, when the higher level is not revealed to the lower one, the lower one is not nullified and does not diminish itself. On the contrary, it takes everything for itself, and the more it receives the greater it appears in its own eyes. This absurd situation – in which entire beings and worlds can deny the sacred, and even fight against it, at the very moment that they receive their entire existence from it – is called "the exile of the Divine Presence." It is comparable to the state of people in exile: They are subjugated to others in a place that does not belong to them and that does not suit them, where they are unable to discover their strengths and selves and in which they suffer humiliation and what is special about them remains hidden. What is more, not only is a person in exile unable to use his strengths to express himself, but he is even compelled (and sometimes tempted) to relinquish his powers and talents in order to raise and strengthen the very one who has captured him. Similarly, the Divine Presence, which is in the exile of the nations and all that belong to them, does not reveal itself and is even "compelled" to sustain these worlds, with all the falsehood and heresy they contain.

שֶׁלָּכֵן נִקְרָאִים בְּשֵׁם ״אֱלֹקִים אֲחֵרִים״

This is why they are called " elohim aḥerim " (foreign gods), Since the life force that the gentiles receive from the ministering angels is in exile, where they are unable to see the divine power in their vicinity, they attribute this power to the ministers and to themselves (either actually to themselves or to the reflection of their desires and needs in the symbols they create, such as natural forces). This is why the ministering angels are called "foreign gods."

וְקָרוּ לֵיהּ ״אֱלָהָא דֶּאֱלָהַיָּא״ שֶׁגַּם הֵם, הֵן בְּחִינַת אֱלֹקוּת.

and they, those people and nations, call Him "the God of gods," as they maintain that those too, the "elohim aḥerim," are divine. Those people and nations, who worship the ministering angels and the forces of the world, call the Holy One, blessed be He, "the Gods of gods," in accordance with their erroneous assumption that the "elohim aḥerim " are also divine, only that God is above them.

וְלָכֵן הַגּוֹיִם הַנִּשְׁפָּעִים מֵהֶם הֵם עוֹבְדֵי עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה מַמָּשׁ,

Therefore, the nations that receive their flow from them, those supernal angels, are actual idol worshippers, The ministering angels themselves are not actual idols, but in the next stage, for the people who receive from them in this physical world, this can turn into proper idolatry. That is, not merely a crack in the divine unity, but an entire belief system of idolatry, which maintains that the idol itself can provide benefit and do harm, that it can give and take away. That which cannot happen above, in the spiritual realm that is never entirely sealed, can indeed occur in this world, where the divine concealment can be absolute.

עַד עֵת קֵץ שֶׁיְּבוּלַּע הַמָּוֶת וְהַסִּטְרָא אָחֳרָא

until the time of the end, when death and the sitra aḥara are swallowed, There is no complete solution to this problem at this time. This is part of the essence of this world, that it has a backside, where evil, idolatry, and death exist. It will only be at "the time of the end" (Daniel 11:35, and elsewhere), in the future and complete redemption, when death and the sitra aḥara (the back side) are swallowed out of existence, that this state of affairs will no longer be maintained. Ever since the sin of the Tree of Knowledge, the sitra aḥara rules over the world, and even if it is sometimes weakened – in a particular generation, for a specific person, or at a certain time in the lives of all people – it persistently reawakens once again. It is only at the future redemption that the sitra aḥara will disappear from existence forever.

וְ״אָז(צפניה ג,ט),

and "then I will convert all the peoples to a pure language, for all of them to call in the name of the Lord" (Zeph. 3:9). Then, at the time of the redemption, there will no longer be any concealment. For the concealment stems from the back side, as explained above, whereas then God will turn His face toward all the nations, and the speech that constitutes and sustains them will be "a pure language," meaning that it will be clear to everyone that it is the divine speech. All of them will "call in the name of the Lord," that is, their sight and hearing, their speech and all their modes of expression, will be in "in the name of the Lord." At present, when the garments of the kelippot conceal things, it is possible for a person or a world to express something else, whether themselves, idolatry, or anything else. In the future, however, every garment will reveal only the divine force that is enclothed in it. The author of the Tanya now presents a different explanation of the concept "the exile of the Divine Presence."

וְנִקְרָא גַּם כֵּן בְּשֵׁם 'גָּלוּת הַשְּׁכִינָה' מֵאַחַר שֶׁחַיּוּת זֶה אֲשֶׁר בִּבְחִינַת גָּלוּת בְּתוֹכָם הוּא מֵהֶאָרָה הַנִּמְשֶׁכֶת לָהֶם מֵהַנִּיצוֹץ מִדְּבַר ה' הַנִּקְרָא בְּשֵׁם שְׁכִינָה

This state is also called by the name "the exile of the Divine Presence," since this life force which is considered to be in exile among them is from the illumination that is drawn to them from the spark of the word of God which is called by the name Divine Presence This is referring to the state of the concealment of the divine life force by the ministering angels and the kelippot. After discussing the meaning of the term "exile," the emphasis here is on the expression "Divine Presence." The author of the Tanya is saying that the divine life force which is in exile is called the "Divine Presence."

(וְגָלוּת זֶה נִמְשָׁךְ מֵחֵטְא עֵץ הַדַּעַת וְאֵילָךְ

(and this exile comes from the sin of the Tree of Knowledge and onward, The concept of "the exile of the Divine Presence" starts from the sin of the Tree of Knowledge. It is true that even before this sin the world existed, and it was even a "broken" world, in the sense that it was in need of rectification – and hence Adam received the command "to cultivate it and to keep it" (Gen. 2:15). However, this was not yet termed "exile." Exile is a kind of concealment and affront that cannot be created from above but only from below, by man. Only man, who can choose to act against the divine will, can fashion a genuine exile, such that the Divine Presence is not only unrevealed, but also the world is operating openly against the divine will.

וְהוּא בְּחִינַת אֲחוֹרַיִים לְבַד דִּקְדוּשָּׁה

and it is only an aspect of the "back side" [aḥorayim ] of sanctity. This is referring to the exile that extends from the sin of the Tree of Knowledge. There are many degrees of back and front, both with respect to the revelation of the Divine Presence and the exile of the Divine Presence: How internal this divine revelation is, or the opposite, how internal this exile and concealment of the Divine Presence is. On a human level, this can be compared to a person who is compelled to do something he would rather not do. It makes a difference whether it is only an action, in which he merely does what is required while his heart and soul are not in it, or if it is a creation of his inner spirit, in which case he must invest his heart and his creative power, what is truly precious and internal to him, albeit for people or a cause in which he has no interest. In both cases it is a form of an "exile" for him, but what a fundamental difference there is between the two. Similarly, this exile in which the divine speech sustains the ministers and the lands of the gentiles, which extends from the sin of the Tree of Knowledge, is "only an aspect of the back side of sanctity," in which, as it were, the holiness provides merely from its back side and externality, so that they can exist. This is nothing more than the external framework of life.

אַךְ

However, when Israel was exiled among the nations – and Israel's attachment and root is considered the supernal countenance – This is the more internal and deeper exile. The author of the Tanya uses here the phrase "supernal countenance" which literally means "supernal face" which is the opposite of the back side. Here the exile of the Divine Presence is not merely at the level of the Divine Presence that sustains the worlds of the ten utterances, but its inner desire, which is represented by the people and souls of Israel. All entities, from the souls of Israel and the angels to the smallest grains of dust in the ground, receive their existence and life from the Divine Presence, the divine power that is enclothed in them and sustains them in their current state. The difference between them depends on where that power is attached and rooted, the form of the Divine Presence, the specific divine image above. The world of Asiya, and in a broader sense the existence of all the created worlds, are attached and rooted solely in the force of the divine action or speech, which are considered like the back side in relation to the internality of the divine will. By contrast, the attachment of Israel and their root is at the "supernal countenance," "the supernal face". This depiction of the souls of Israel, as a soul within a body down below in this world, engaged in Torah and mitzvot, is engraved in the point of the inner essence of the divine will, the inner essence of recognition, the inner essence of the attributes, and the inner dimension of the divine speech and action.

הִנֵּה זוֹ הִיא גָּלוּת שְׁלֵימָה וְעַל זֶה אָמְרוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ ז״ל: גָּלוּ לֶאֱדוֹם שְׁכִינָה עִמָּהֶם)).

this is a complete exile. And with regard to this, our Rabbis stated: When they were exiled to Edom, the Divine Presence was exiled with them)]. When Israel is in exile, this means that not only is the back side, the active force of the Divine Presence, in exile, but the entire level of the Divine Presence, in its complete state, has also been exiled. This exile to Edom of which the Rabbis spoke, is not the exile that began with the sin of the Tree of Knowledge, but a more profound and complete state of exile. With regard to this level, they said that "the Divine Presence was exiled with them," meaning, the Divine Presence itself, the essence of the Divine Presence, is in the exile of Israel in Edom. A person can perform a marginal, superficial act, without being present himself. It can be a hassle and waste of time for him, and even a kind of "exile," while he is still thinking about, desiring, and longing for other things that resonate with him. This is not the case when he is dealing with something that truly concerns him, such as something upon which his life depends or that of his only child. In such a situation, he is entirely present. This is true of Israel's exile among the nations, and therefore "the Divine Presence is with them."

וְהִנֵּה אַף כִּי ״ה׳ אֶחָד וּשְׁמוֹ אֶחָד״ (זכריה יד,ט) דְּהַיְינוּ דִּבּוּרוֹ וְרוּחַ פִּיו הַמְכוּנֶּה בַּזּוֹהַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בְּשֵׁם ‘שְׁמוֹ׳ (תיקוני זהר תיקון כב [סו,ב])

Now, although "the Lord is one and His name is one" (Zech. 14:9), that is, His speech and the breath of His mouth, which are termed "His name" in the holy Zohar (Tikkunei Zohar 22 [66b]), The divine speech, which is the Divine Presence, as explained above, is also called God's "name." It is explained in several places that just as a person's speech is not intended for him but for others, to disclose to them what he is thinking, so too a person's name is not necessary for him but for others, so that they can call upon him and refer to him. With regard to God's name and His speech, the verse states that "the Lord is one and His name is one." This does not mean that He and His name are the same, but rather that this disclosure of His name serves to reveal God Himself – not one of His deeds, nor even one of His powers, but God Himself. Consequently, when we call Him by His name, we are referring to God Himself. Likewise, the divine speech is His name, the Divine Presence, which is, as explained, the internal expression of God that is in all entities.

הוּא יָחִיד וּמְיוּחָד

is singular and unique, In its essence, God's name is singular and unique. Since it refers to God Himself, it follows that in every situation and place it is God's complete, unique and singular expression. The multitude of God's names, like the multitude of His acts of speech, do not express plurality but rather unity. The multiplicity stems from the multifaceted reality, from our limited ability to see further than the boundaries of our personalities, beyond one narrow angle at a time, while all the names and all the speech point to a single source: The one who is called by these names and who issues the speech. The speech acts themselves, like the names, regardless of how numerous they are, cannot exist without the one who utters them. Not only is His name "one," it is "singular and unique." There are lengthy discussions elsewhere on the difference between eḥad, one, and yaḥid, unique. One idea is that eḥad expresses the unity in multiplicity, in the worlds, whereas yaḥid refers to God's personal unity. Here too, it can be suggested that "the Lord is one [eḥad ] and His name is one [eḥad ]" articulates the unity of the name and the Divine Presence in all the revelations of the worlds, while His description as "singular and unique [yaḥid ]" denotes His unity in Himself, in the one so named, that He is completely one.

אַף עַל פִּי כֵן, הַהֶאָרָה וְהַמְשָׁכַת הַחַיּוּת הַנִּמְשֶׁכֶת מֵרוּחַ פִּיו יִתְבָּרַךְ מִתְחַלֶּקֶת לד׳ מַדְרֵגוֹת שׁוֹנוֹת.

even so, the illumination and the drawing of the life force from the breath of His mouth divides into four different levels. God, the source of the speech, is one, and even that which He reveals is essentially one, which is the Divine Presence – the existence of God in the world, which is also one. And yet the illumination is drawn forth to the worlds from the Divine Presence itself, in a manner that can be compared to a ray of the sun, in the sense that it is not an entity in and of itself but merely progressing levels and forms of the revelation of the one sun. In general terms, there are four such levels:

שֶׁהֵן ד׳

These are the four worlds of Atzilut , Beria , Yetzira, and Asiya , and the change is due to the (many) constrictions and veils, which constrict and hide the light and the life force, so that it does not illuminate as much in the world of Beria as in the world of Atzilut , and in the world of Yetzira it arrives via more constrictions and veils... These four worlds are four levels that progress from one another. Not four parallel worlds but four worlds that are arranged in descending order. The ellipsis [...] at the end of the sentence here refers to the world of Asiya, which constricts the illumination in the world of Yetzira to an even greater extent, down to the reality of the physical Asiya, in which there is a complete concealment and even a kelippa that resists the light. The author of the Tanya merely alludes to this through the ellipsis because he does not want to say it explicitly here. As stated, a single source is revealed in all these levels and worlds, only that each descent to a lower world involves the addition of increasingly more veils and constrictions. Thus, the differences between the levels lies not in what they contain but only in the particular level of revelation and concealment.

אֲבָל אֵין שׁוּם שִׁינּוּי חַס וְשָׁלוֹם בְּעַצְמוּת הַשְּׁכִינָה שֶׁהִיא דְּבַר ה׳ וְרוּחַ פִּיו.

However, there is no change, God forbid, in the essence of the Divine Presence, which is the word of God and the breath of His mouth. This essence is one, just as God is one, on every level and in every world. The only difference is, as stated, the degree of revelation with respect to the world. The harsh expression "God forbid" indicates that this a sensitive point, particularly here when the author of the Tanya is addressing mitnagdim as well. What is the meaning of the constriction of the Divine? One might understand that He actually constricts himself and even removes Himself from a certain place. In response to such a suggestion, he cries "God forbid!" He stresses that there is no change at all, not only in God Himself, but also in the revelation itself, which is the Divine Presence. All the levels of the worlds and what they contain are nothing but degrees and modes of the revelation of the Divine Presence. The only change is from the perspective of the lower beings who receive the illumination of the Divine Presence, whether it is revealed or hidden, and the like.

וְגַּם בִּבְחִינַת הַהֶאָרָה וְהַמְשָׁכַת הַחַיּוּת, הִנֵּה הַהֶאָרָה שֶׁבַּאֲצִילוּת בּוֹקַעַת הַמָּסָךְ וּמִתְלַבֶּשֶׁת בִּבְרִיאָה, וְכֵן מִבְּרִיאָה לִיצִירָה וּמִיְּצִירָה לַעֲשִׂיָּה. וְלָכֵן אוֹר אֵין סוֹף בָּרוּךְ הוּא שֶׁבָּאֲצִילוּת הוּא גַּם כֵּן בָּעֲשִׂיָּה וּבָעוֹלָם הַזֶּה הַחוֹמְרִי

Furthermore, with respect to the illumination and the drawing of the life force, the illumination in Atzilut breaks through the partition and is enclothed in Beria , and similarly from Beria to Yetzira and from Yetzira to Asiya . Therefore, the light of Ein Sof , blessed be He, which is in Atzilut is also in Asiya and in this material world It is not only in its source that the Divine Presence is one, but also "with respect to the illumination and the drawing of the life force," the light that passes through and seems to change in its transitions from one degree to the next. The illumination that breaks through the partition between Atzilut and Beria, and is then enclothed in Beria, is not a different illumination but the very same light. One might have thought that the relationship between the worlds is a causal one between different forces, that there is no actual penetration from one world to another but only an indirect effect, like the result and reaction to the supreme illumination. If so, each world would receive at most from the world that is above it. The author of the Tanya therefore emphasizes that this is not the case; rather, the supreme illumination itself penetrates through all the partitions and the differences between the worlds, and it itself illuminates every reality and world, only with different garments and coverings each time. This can be compared, on a mundane level, to human communication. If one person tells another about something he has seen, and what he thought and felt about it, the other will receive an indirect message, only via the person who is relating it to him. However, if the first person succeeds in conveying – whether through his speech or in some other manner – something of the actual experience he had, the sight he saw, he will be able to transfer to the second individual an element of the very same content he received. Accordingly, the other person will receive not only the speech of the person who is talking to him, but also something of what the teller himself has experienced. The same applies all the way upward.

עַל יְדֵי הִתְלַבְּשׁוּתוֹ בְּמַלְכוּת דבי״ע

by means of its enclothing in the Malkhut of Beria , Yetzira, and Asiya , How does this illumination, the light of Ein Sof in Atzilut, pass all the way down to this corporeal world? This answer is by means of its enclothing in the sefira of Malkhut in each world. The sefira of Malkhut is like speech in relation to the soul. Just as the soul reveals itself, its wisdom and feelings, by means of speech, so too the divine illumination in each world reveals itself to the world below it through its enclothing in the sefira of Malkhut. The secret of speech lies in its ability to transfer content from one realm to another, from one world to the next. This appears to be difficult to understand: If two worlds are truly separate, with no sharing and overlap between them in terms of matter, intellect, or emotions, any connection between them would seem to be impossible. However, as is the case between people, even if they are from different worlds, when they converse, they create a relationship with each other and transmit contents, emotions and the light itself from one to another. This wondrous connection happens through the letters of speech, in those primary forces whose essence no one can define in precise terms, which pass between one world and another – from high above, before any world existed, before Ḥokhma came into being, all the way down to this material world. Everywhere they bear the innermost content and reveal it in the terms of that place. Just like speech, it is Malkhut that passes from one world to the next, and when it passes, it transfers not only that world which is currently speaking, but also what is spoken to that world, and so on and so forth, all the way up. This can be compared to a rabbi teaching his student: He conveys through his speech not only what he himself is thinking or feeling, but also what he received from his own rabbi, and that rabbi from his rabbi; the very same words and letters themselves that enclothe the inner light within them.

כַּמְבוֹאָר הַכֹּל בְּכִתְבֵי הָאֲרִ״י זַ״ל.

all as explained in the writings of the Arizal. The above explanation refers to the descent of the divine illumination, the light of the Divine Presence, to the worlds and even the existence of the kelippat noga. The Rabbis call this descent "the exile of the Divine Presence." This is all explained in great detail in the writings of the Arizal, in many places and from various perspectives. Here, however, he does not get into a discussion of all that, as his comments are not meant only for those initiated in the esoteric wisdom of Kabbala. Nevertheless, since he is also addressing those who rely on the writings of the Arizal, he notes in passing that the ideas are mentioned and clarified there. The author of the Tanya now turns his attention to the soul of man, as that same descent also occurs in the soul and being of man – in his experience, speech, and behavior – and this is the focus of the statement of the Ba'al Shem Tov that is under discussion. In general, this is a characteristic transition from kabbala to Hasidism – that which concerns the worlds is "all as explained in the writings of the Arizal," before he continues: "Now, the soul of man..."

וְהִנֵּה נֶפֶשׁ הָאָדָם,

Now, the soul of man, as known to all, is comprised of the ten sefirot of Ḥokhma , Bina , Da'at ..., This "man" means specifically a Jewish man, for he is speaking about the divine soul, which is found in the Jewish people. Man was created "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27), and that which exists in the Divine is also present in man. Of course, there is a massive, immeasurable difference between created man and the divine Ein Sof. Accordingly, when this comparison is made, we necessarily speak in terms of the degrees through which the structure can be defined, that is, those degrees by which the soul manifests itself and operates in relation to the ten sefirot through which God reveals Himself and acts. He therefore states here: "Comprised of the ten sefirot..." To further clarify this, the similarity between the structure of the soul and the ten sefirot applies only to the internal relationships between the components of the structure. For example, when talking about the kindness [ḥesed ] of a person and the kindness of God – which, in the figurative language of the Zohar, are called the right hand of a person and the right hand of God – there is no comparison between them. However, if one thinks about the relationship between the right and left hands, the comparison does have meaning, since something of the relationship between left and right is maintained at all levels. In this sense, there is a complete structure that preserves the entirety and the core of the essential relationships – between left and right, above and below, Ḥokhma and Bina, intellect and moral attributes, and so on. This is man, who is called a "small world" and was created in the image of God.

וְאַף שֶׁכּוּלָּן מֵרוּחַ פִּיו יִתְבָּרַךְ, כְּדִכְתִיב : ״וַיִּפַּח בְּאַפָּיו כו׳״ (בראשית ב,ז).

even though they are all from the breath of His mouth, as it is written: "And He breathed into his nostrils..." (Gen. 2:7). All of the ten sefirot, and the powers that the soul is comprised of, come from the breath of God's mouth, as it states with regard to the soul of man: "And He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life." This means that the soul of man is drawn from the inner essence of God, the same interiority that precedes any constriction, splitting and demarcation of the lights into vessels of sefirot and letters. As explained in Likkutei Amarim, on the verse "And He breathed into his nostrils" – "one who blows from within himself he blows." For one might have thought that the soul is nothing but a extension modelled on the lofty sefirot: The wisdom [ḥokhma ] of man is drawn from the wisdom [Ḥokhma ] above, his kindness [ḥesed ] is drawn from Ḥesed, and this is the whole of man. However, here it is stated that the concept of "in the image of God" goes deeper than that, and just as there is a single, infinite divine essence within all the sefirot, so too within all the powers and manifestations of the soul there is one soul that was drawn from the one inner, infinite essence above. And although the similarity can be seen only in their powers and actions, the connection is actually internal and obscured – where the Divine Presence is itself one, there the soul itself is also one.

מִכָּל מָקוֹם דֶּרֶךְ פְּרָט, חָכְמָה בִּינָה דַּעַת שֶׁבְּנַפְשׁוֹ הֵן דּוּגְמָא לְחָכְמָה בִּינָה דַּעַת שֶׁבְּעֶשֶׂר סְפִירוֹת

In any case, the Ḥokhma , Bina , Da'at that are in his soul, specifically, are a miniature version of the Ḥokhma , Bina , Da'at that are in the ten sefirot , "Specifically" means in the specific details of the forces of the souls, those which we can observe. Here too there is a connection and resemblance to the forces above. The phrase "miniature version" implies that they are not merely similar, but rather that they are the very same thing, only constricted and on a smaller scale, like a particular instance and not merely comparable. The sefira of Ḥokhma is the very same as the wisdom [ḥokhma ] in one's soul, the sefira of Bina is the understanding [bina ] in one's soul, and so on and so forth.

הַמְכוּנּוֹת בְּשֵׁם ‘אַבָּא וְאִמָּא׳

which are called by the name "father and mother." The sefirot of Ḥokhma and Bina are called "father and mother." The kabbala of the Arizal discusses not only sefirot but also "partzufim " (divine countenances), which entails an entire structural analogue that is comprised of particulars (sefirot ) that complement one another and together create a single essence, like the countenance of a person's face, just as the human body has a head, a right leg and a left leg, and so on. The partzufim of Atzilut are as follows: "Father" and "mother," which parallel the sefirot of Ḥokhma and Bina; "Zeir Anpin, incorporating the six sefirot that correspond to the emotive attributes, and the Nukva (nekeva, the feminine aspect) of the sefira of Malkhut (there are two additional partzufim in Keter: Atik Yomin and Arikh Anpin ). While the partzuf of the father is comprised of only a single sefira, Ḥokhma, all the other sefirot are composed of it; Ḥesed of the father; Yesod of the father, and so on. In other words, not only the sefira of Ḥokhma but also the Ḥokhma that bestows, the Ḥokhma that limits, the Ḥokhma that connects, and so on and so forth. The difference between the sefira of Ḥokhma and the partzuf of the father can be summed up in the following terms: The sefira of Ḥokhma is the abstract power of Ḥokhma, whereas the partzuf of the father is like a wise person [ḥakham ]. The same applies to the partzuf of the mother.... The definition of a sefira as a partzuf thus applies both to its internal complexity and its relationships with the other sefirot and partzufim.

וּמִדּוֹת אַהֲבָה וְיִרְאָה וכו׳

And the attributes of love and fear… that are in his soul are a miniature version of the attributes in the ten sefirot that are called by the name " Zeir Anpin ." These "attributes of love and fear" are the six sefirot that correspond to the emotive attributes: Love [Ḥesed ]; fear [Gevura ]; Tiferet; Netzaḥ; Hod; and Yesod. The six attributes, from Ḥesed to Yesod, when they relate and operate as a single organic unit, form a separate partzuf that is called "Zeir Anpin " ("the small countenance").

וְכֹחַ הַדִּבּוּר שֶׁבְּנַפְשׁוֹ דּוּגְמָא לַדִּבּוּר הָעֶלְיוֹן הַנִּקְרָא בְּשֵׁם מַלְכוּת וּשְׁכִינָה.

And the power of speech in his soul is a miniature version of the supernal speech that is called by the name Malkhut and the Divine Presence. It was already explained earlier that the word of God is called Malkhut and the Divine Presence. Here the author of the Tanya adds that human speech is an example of this. In other words, just as the divine speech not only reveals itself to the other but also creates the other in which it is revealed, residing within it and sustaining it, so too, one should understand the power of speech in the human soul as a kind of specimen of this activity. That is, the speech that a person utters likewise provides not only a disclosure of information, but in a certain way it also creates reality – the very same reality for which this information is significant.

וְלָכֵן כְּשֶׁמְּדַבֵּר דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה מְעוֹרֵר דִּבּוּר הָעֶלְיוֹן לְיַחֵד הַשְּׁכִינָה

Therefore, when one speaks words of Torah, he arouses the supernal speech to unify the Divine Presence. When a person "speaks words of Torah" he is articulating God's words, not his own speech. It is true that even when a person speaks his own words, he likewise discloses, evokes, and to a certain extent creates the reality he speaks. However, when he speaks words of the Torah, he reveals and awakens the Torah in his world, which is the supreme speech of God, which exists beyond the reality of the world, beyond even His revelation as the Creator of the world. That is to say, speaking words of Torah is itself the revelation of God who is separate from the world, and when a member of Israel, who is an expression of the Divine Presence, speaks words of Torah, this constitutes a connection and unification of God's speech with the speech of the Divine Presence.

וּמִשּׁוּם הָכֵי קַיְימָא לָן בִּקְרִיאַת שְׁמַע וּבִרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן וְדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה, לֹא יָצָא בְּהִרְהוּר בְּלֹא דִּבּוּר.

For this reason, we maintain as halakha with regard to the recitation of Shema , Grace after Meals and words of Torah, that one has not fulfilled his duty through mere contemplating without actual speech. These Torah obligations specified by the author of the Tanya cannot be fulfilled if one merely thinks of the words but fails to articulate them orally. Since the unification is created through speech, it must likewise be performed below specifically by means of speech. God created the world through speech and He also reveals Himself in the Torah through speech. Therefore, the only way to unify the two is by means of speech, rather than through the emotions of love or fear and the like, in the form of mere contemplation or thought. In all such instances we are referring only to a certain level of revelation – we are thinking about the ideas and we feel something about what we are thinking. It is only through speech that we truly unite in the thing itself. For it is there, in the letters, that God has placed Himself, as it were, and it is only when all emotions and thoughts are put into speech that the unification can occur. Fulfilling one's duty means that unification has occurred. In order for unification to occur in its ultimate extent, the unification of God and the Divine Presence, it must transpire within the person himself. "Unification" means that two things unite, and in the case of a person this generally means between thought and speech, between his internal aspect – the intellect and emotions as they are revealed in one's thought – and between speech, which refers to the outer reality and the other, all the way down to the materiality and physicality of the world. Accordingly, no unification can happen if contemplation is not accompanied by speech. It is only together with speech that it can unite with the world and express it. When one unites it with the thought that is in his speech, he thereby unifies the Divine Presence.

וְהִנֵּה זֶה לְעוּמַּת זֶה

Now, in the corresponding counterpart to holiness, This expression, which appears frequently in the hasidic sources, is shorthand for the idea that every manifestation of holiness has its impure foil. For the existence of impurity (the kelippa ) is not independent, it has no source of existence, no essence and structure of its own. Rather, it is merely a certain twisted reflection of holiness.

יֵשׁ עֲשָׂרָה כִּתְרֵי דִּמְסָאֲבוּתָא

there are ten crowns of impurity, Corresponding to the ten holy sefirot, which are the divine source of all reality – and on the inner level, the source of the souls of Israel – there are "crowns of impurity," which are a source of life and power fashioned in imitation of the structure of the ten sefirot. The world of the kelippa receives from these crowns. This is the world that is not nullified with respect to the Divine, which considers itself in some way as a separate "being" of its own. Therefore, it strives to separate and prevent the unification and connection of the world with God, for if unification does occur and its "self" is negated, its whole existence will cease. This world is the exact opposite of holiness, since for every power and aspect of holiness, which seeks to unify with the Divine, there is a contrasting power of impurity and being that endeavors to block that unification.

וּמֵהֶן נִמְשָׁכוֹת נַפְשׁוֹת הָאוּמּוֹת, גַּם כֵּן כְּלוּלוֹת מֵעֶשֶׂר בְּחִינוֹת אֵלּוּ מַמָּשׁ.

and the souls of the nations are drawn from them, and they are also comprised of these very same ten aspects. In contrast to the souls of Israel, which are incorporated and receive from the ten holy sefirot, the souls of the nations are incorporated and receive from the ten "crowns of impurity." That is, corresponding to the forces of holiness, for example, the desire for closeness to God and His delight, to become wise through His wisdom, and to love and fear Him, which motivate and sustain the holy soul of Israel, the souls of the nations have a life force that comes from the side of impurity. In contrast to the power of delight in holiness, such as in attaining divinity and the delight of Shabbat, there are the forces of carnal pleasures. In opposition to the wisdom of holiness, which is the power of nullification, there is a coarse wisdom that takes the form of self-aggrandizement, when a person prides himself on his cleverness. Similarly, against the kindness and love of holiness and generosity there are evil loves and lusts. In the case of Gevura (Restraint), there is anger and the like; for Tiferet (Beauty) there is idolatry, and so on and so forth.

וּמוּדַעַת זֹאת בָּאָרֶץ מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בְּסֵפֶר הַגִּלְגּוּלִים עַל פָּסוּק: ״אֲשֶׁר שָׁלַט הָאָדָם בְּאָדָם לְרַע לוֹ״ (קהלת ח,ט), שֶׁהוּא סוֹד גָּלוּת הַשְּׁכִינָה בְּתוֹךְ הַקְּלִיפּוֹת לְהַחֲיוֹתָם וּלְהַשְׁלִיטָם עַתָּה בִּזְמַן הַגָּלוּת

It is commonly known what it written in Sefer HaGilgulim on the verse: "Whenever man controlled man, it was to his detriment" (Eccles. 8:9), that this is the secret of the exile of the Divine Presence among the kelippot , to give them life and enable them to rule now, in the time of exile, This verse is interpreted in the writings of the Arizal as follows: "Whenever man" – this is a wicked man, a man of the kelippa; "controlled man" – a man of holiness. Thus, "whenever man controlled man" is basically the secret of the existence and power of the world of the kelippa. For as we explained, the kelippa is not a separate entity of its own; it does not have its own source or purpose for its life and existence. If it does exist and is active, this is because "a man had control over man," because it takes from holiness, against its will, all of its vitality – its wisdom, powers, and capabilities. It envelops holiness and sucks the life forces from it as though they were its own, as though it is not receiving from the holy, as if the holy does not exist, to such an extent that it works against the holy.

אֲבָל הוּא ״לְרַע לוֹ וכו׳״

although it is "it was to his detriment..." This is the secret of the exile of the Divine Presence. The rule of evil during the exile of the Divine Presence actually works to the detriment of evil. It only appears to be the victory and success of evil, but the secret and the truth is that it is to his disadvantage, as this rule consumes the sources of his life and existence until at the end of the process he will be completely destroyed.

וְלָכֵן הָאוּמּוֹת שׁוֹלְטִין עַתָּה עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל, לִהְיוֹת נַפְשׁוֹת הָאוּמּוֹת מֵהַקְּלִיפּוֹת אֲשֶׁר הַשְּׁכִינָה מִתְלַבֶּשֶׁת בִּבְחִינַת גָּלוּת בְּתוֹכָם.

Therefore, the nations currently rule over Israel, as the souls of the nations are from the kelippot in which the Divine Presence is enclothed in the form of exile. The Divine Presence is expressed and represented by the souls of Israel. The idea that was previously explained in spiritual and in abstract terms is formulated here in a more concrete manner: This state of affairs finds expression in the concepts and setting of this world in the form of the people of Israel among the nations.

וְהִנֵּה אַף שֶׁזֶּה צָרִיךְ בֵּיאוּר רָחָב אֵיךְ וּמַה מִכָּל מָקוֹם הָאֱמֶת כֵּן הוּא

Now, although this requires detailed explanation, how and what, it is nevertheless the truth. The enclothing of the Divine Presence in exile, the exile of Israel among the nations, and the significance of this for the kelippa – all of these are not simple matters, and there is not and cannot be a brief and unambiguous explanation for them. Just as the life force itself does not come directly and simply from God to the kelippa, so too the explanation of these concepts is necessarily extensive, through the expansion of the mind and painted on a broad canvas. For this process, of the life of the kelippa and the exile of the Divine Presence, can be understood only by looking at the larger picture. Nevertheless, the secret of the exile of the Divine Presence, as explained in the writings of the Arizal, is the internal truth of what can clearly be seen of the spiritual, and even material, reality of the exile of the Divine Presence and the exile of Israel. Although the author of the Tanya does not get into the broader explanation here, one point does require clarification:

אֶלָּא שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי כֵן, אֵין הַקְּלִיפּוֹת וְהָאוּמּוֹת יוֹנְקִים וּמְקַבְּלִים חַיּוּת אֶלָּא מֵהֶאָרָה הַנִּמְשֶׁכֶת לָהֶם מִבְּחִינַת אֲחוֹרַיִים דִּקְדוּשָּׁה

Yet even so, the kelippot and the nations suckle and receive their life force only from the illumination that is drawn to them from an aspect of the "back side" [aḥorayim ] of sanctity, Despite the fact that in the secret of the exile of the Divine Presence, the Divine Presence descends and is enclothed in the spiritual kelippot and among the nations, in order to sustain them, they do not receive their life force from the internality of the Divine Presence, which is the revelation of the inner divinity. Were they to receive their life force from the internality of the Divine Presence that is held captive within them, they themselves would be holy rather than kelippa. What makes them kelippa, and turns the existence of the Divine Presence within them into an exile, is their reception of the life force from the externality and back side of holiness. In other words, they do not bond with the source of their life force, but only take advantage of it in order to take the life force for themselves.

כְּמַאן דְּשָׁדֵי בָּתַר כַּתְפֵּיהּ

like one throwing to someone behind his shoulder, When someone is giving what he wishes to the person to whom he desires to give it, he turns his face toward him. However, in our world, every act of giving necessarily entails that the gift is received by others as well, to whom the giver has no desire to give. He is not turning his face to them at that time, but rather – in the terms of the vivid metaphor used here – he throws to them behind his shoulder. The distinction between front and back applies to everything in reality, physical and spiritual alike. This is a necessary corollary of the complex reality of the world, that everything in it has a front and back. Some are more front side while others are more back side, but there can be nothing in reality that does not have something of both. For the sake of illustration only (as this can be observed in all things and places, as stated) everything in the world that a person might desire has a price, and it comes with consequences that are sometimes negative. They would rather not pay the price, and they are willing to relinquish those side effects, but they realize that there is no choice, as one is impossible without the other. This limitation applies not only to us created beings, as God Himself is subject to this constraint, as it were, when He intervenes in the world. This is the image of the Divine to which the world relates – the internality and externality, so to speak, of God's relationship with His world. In order for there to be a world (olam, similar to he'elem, unknown), and specifically this lower world, it has to perceive its existence, to a certain extent, as an entity unto itself, and such a perception of reality can be formed only when it (also) accepts the "back side." Relating to the front means, in essence, identification. The more interiority there is in the relationship, the fewer relational definitions – love, fear, self-awareness – and more of a single identification, up to the level of a face-to-face relationship, which means a complete unity that leaves no room for anything else. In the terms of the above metaphor, when a person pays for what he receives – whether through work, sorrow, money, or emotional investment – he will feel, to some degree, that he deserves something, that he himself took the trouble and got it done. The back side, which is what he pays, hides the interior, the one who gives, and creates this appearance which, as stated, enables the world to exist: That there is someone, something, who deserves this, who decides it, who exists. In contrast, when a person receives internally, he feels that he is receiving a free gift, and then he senses the reality of the Giver rather than his own, his negation with respect to the one above, not his own reality down here below. Indeed, with regard to God Himself (who is also beyond the world) there is a level above all this, where everything is internal, for it is He who wishes that there should be a front and back. The revelation of this internal level is the Torah (as will be explained at length in the next epistle), which itself is all internality, it is entirely God's wisdom and will, and yet at the same time it defines what is front and back in the worlds. If so, those who are connected to the Torah and its mitzvot are also linked to that highest level where everything is internal, everything subsumed into unity.

וְאַף גַּם זֹאת עַל יְדֵי צִמְצוּמִים וּמָסַכִּים רַבִּים וַעֲצוּמִים

and even that comes via numerous and immense constrictions and veils, The illumination of the life force that is drawn to the nations and the kelippot is not only "back side," but also constricted and hidden, which is not the same thing. Although in general the interior is concealed in the back side, the initial power remains intact. For the back side of something that relates directly to the primary inner purpose and essence of that thing, is simply the back side of the inner essence, not constricting, concealing it or distorting it in any way. In other words, the back side of the entity is the way that it is compatible with the world, not by expressing its inner purpose, but rather, through delineating the means by which its existence is made possible. This can be as relating to the supreme spiritual reality of our world – its principles, models, and overarching design. It is only afterward, by means of constrictions and veils, that the back side descends to particular situations within reality, where the divine inner essence becomes entirely constricted and hidden, to the extent that what is above, the thing's ultimate spiritual purpose, may look totally different and even be nullified entirely to the back side, its secondary aspect. The back side then is able to descend into a deluded sense of independent self and spout heresy and other falsities.

עַד שֶׁנִּתְלַבְּשָׁה הֶאָרָה זוֹ בְּחוֹמְרִיּוּת עוֹלָם הַזֶּה, וּמַשְׁפַּעַת לָאוּמּוֹת עוֹשֶׁר וְכָבוֹד וְכָל תַּעֲנוּגִים גַּשְׁמִיִּים.

until that illumination is enclothed in the materiality of this world and bestows upon the nations wealth and honor and all physical pleasures. The materiality of this world is the lowest level of progression. Materiality in and of itself is not evil; it does not deny God nor rebel. It is simply sealed up and does not transmit any part of the inner illumination. This is why it appears as though it is the sole reality, outside of which there is nothing. "Wealth and honor and all physical pleasures" are the totality of life that is bestowed by this material world. This is the life force that the physical world grants, and that is what the nations feel and live on.

מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן יִשְׂרָאֵל יוֹנְקִים מִבְּחִינַת פָּנִים הָעֶלְיוֹנִים

This is not the case for Israel, who suckle from the aspect of the supernal countenance, The Jewish people are inner essence with respect to the nations. In comparison to those nations which belong to the kelippa, who suckle from the externality of the worlds, Israel suckles from the interiority. What is more, they draw their power from "the supernal countenance," that is, from the holiness, from the relationship to the Divine in the worlds. In addition, from the perspective God Himself there is, as we explained, a "supernal countenance" that transcends even the reality of the worlds of front and back, where there is no back side at all. This is where the Jewish people receive their essential vitality.

כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב: ״יָאֵר ה׳ פָּנָיו אֵלֶיךָ״ (במדבר ו,כה). כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד לְפִי שֹׁרֶשׁ נִשְׁמָתוֹ עַד רוּם הַמַּעֲלוֹת.

as it is written: "May the Lord shine His countenance upon you" (Num. 6:25), each and every one in accordance with the root of his soul, until the most elevated heights. This verse is from the Priestly Blessing, in which the priests, as the messengers of God, bless Israel. Each and every member of Israel receives illumination from the divine inner essence above, from the most elevated heights, which is above everything. However, the revelation of the illumination for each individual person is "in accordance with the root of his soul."

וְאַחַר הַדְּבָרִים וְהָאֱמֶת הָאֵלֶּה, הַגְּלוּיִם וִידוּעִים לַכֹּל נַחֲזוֹר לְעִנְיָן רִאשׁוֹן בְּעִנְיַן הַכַּעַס, שֶׁהוּא כְּעוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. וְהַיְינוּ

After these matters and words of truth, which are revealed and known to all, we will return to the first topic, the issue of anger, that it is like worshipping idols. This applies to worldly affairs, This lengthy introduction served to explain what the entire Jewish people believes: That everything is from God, and everything that happens and exists is God's thought and speech, and there is nothing else besides Him. However, this speech of God, which is called the Divine Presence, is in exile, and therefore it is possible that the illumination of the Divine Presence, which is in everything, is not clearly evident. These explanations, which are derived on the one hand from the Kabbala of the Arizal – which the mitnagdim also accept – and from the doctrine of the Ba'al Shem Tov on the other, which Rabbi Shneur Zalman seeks to interpret and reconcile with the Kabbala of the Arizal, form the basis of his argument. He can now return to the topic from which he began. When is it appropriate to say that anger is like worshipping idols, and that all we explained in this regard applies? This comparison is accurate with respect to worldly affairs, when one gets angry about something that has gone awry, when it is not in accordance with his wishes, involving the conduct of this world.

כִּי הַכֹּל בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם חוּץ מִיִּרְאַת שָׁמַיִם (ברכות לג,ב).

as everything is in the hands of Heaven except for fear of Heaven (Berakhot 33b). "Everything" here includes all the affairs of the world. If one grows angry, he is thereby showing that he does not believe that everything is in the hands of Heaven. On the emotional level at least, he feels that there is a force or someone else who is doing this to him, to which he directs his anger. After all, one cannot be angry with God, and if one becomes enraged, his fury is not toward God.

וְלָכֵן בְּמִילֵּי דִשְׁמַיָּא לְאַפְרוֹשֵׁי מֵאִיסּוּרָא לֹא שַׁיָּיךְ הַאי טַעְמָא דַּאֲמַרַן

And therefore, in matters of Heaven, where one can separate himself or others from a prohibition (Shabbat 40b), the reason that we stated does not apply, Sometimes, in order to prevent someone else, or himself, from violating a prohibition, it is necessary to get angry with him, and it is not enough to speak gently. Since in matters involving fear of Heaven, and spiritual issues between man and God, one has a choice and not everything is in the hands of heaven, anger here is not a sign of heresy and lack of faith in God. Quite the contrary – the anger that is designed to stop a person from violating a prohibition is not directed toward God, but toward the kelippa that conceals God. If so, the comparison to an idol worshipper is especially inaccurate here, as he is actively fighting against the worship of idols.

וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב ״וַיִּקְצוֹף מֹשֶׁה״ (במדבר לא,יד) וְהַיְינוּ מִשּׁוּם כִּי ה' הִקְרָה לְפָנָיו מִצְוָה זוֹ לְאַפְרוֹשֵׁי מֵאִיסּוּרָא כְּדֵי לְזַכּוֹתוֹ.

as it is written: "And Moses became enraged" (Num. 31:14). This was because God gave him the opportunity to fulfill this mitzva, to separate people from a prohibition, for his merit. The Torah relates that Moses became angry with the soldiers upon their return from the war against Midian for taking the women as captives rather than killing them. He saw this as a capitulation on the part of the commanders to their evil inclination, as it was on account of the people's sin with the daughters of Midian that they had gone to war in the first place. This anger of Moses was thus directed against the kelippa and the evil inclination, and it is an example of a permitted anger, because it helped prevent people from committing a transgression.

אַךְ זֶהוּ כְּשֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּיָדוֹ לִמְחוֹת בְּקִצְפּוֹ וְכַעֲסוֹ עַל חֲבֵירוֹ. אֲבָל כְּשֶׁאֵין בְּיָדוֹ לִמְחוֹת, כְּגוֹן נָכְרִי הַמְדַבֵּר וּמְבַלְבְּלוֹ בִּתְפִלָּתוֹ

However, this is the case specifically when one has the power to object to another through his rage and anger, but if he does not have the power to object, such as when a gentile is speaking and confusing him when he is praying, The author of the Tanya again emphasizes that the anger must provide the actual benefit of preventing someone from sinning, not if the object of one's anger, such as a gentile, will take no notice of his anger at all. In a situation where "he does not have the power to object," it is as though he has encountered a force of nature. Accordingly, it is no longer a question of whether the gentile is right or not, what he deserves and what is best for him. The only issue is – as with a natural event that we have to deal with – how best to react. In this particular case, anger directed at the gentile, or at trees and stones, or even at God Himself – is irrelevant. Since the act of the gentile cannot be viewed as an opportunity one has been given to perform a mitzva, but rather as a kind of force of nature, the following question arises:

אִם כֵּן מַה זֹּאת עָשָׂה ה׳ לוֹ?

then "what is this that God has done to him?" This question is founded on a worldview that is emphasized in hasidic thought: Everything that happens to a person, all that one hears, sees, or comes to his mind, is directed at him in particular. Not like normal daily events to which a person must respond, but as a divine statement and guidance. What he is experiencing is indeed an interruption in his service to God, which he must overcome, but he must also see beyond that: It is the path of the service of God that he is now required to follow. This is the divine speech addressed to him, instructing him: "You will ascend from here." When this gentile plainly disturbs him in his service of God, confusing him in his prayer, and he cannot do anything to change it – he cannot ask, protest, or grow angry – what is the divine statement here? How is it possible to worship God in this situation, to transcend this obstacle?

אֵין זֹאת כִּי אִם כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּתְגַּבֵּר וְיִתְאַמֵּץ יוֹתֵר בִּתְפִלָּתוֹ בְּעוֹמֶק הַלֵּב וּבְכַוָּונָה גְּדוֹלָה כָּל כָּךְ עַד שֶׁלֹּא יִשְׁמַע דִּבּוּרֵי הַנָּכְרִי

It is for no other reason than that he should overcome it and make more effort in his prayer, from the depths of his heart and with such great intention that he does not hear the gentile's talk, When there is nothing that can be done, it must be that God does not want him to engage with the gentile. With that said, it is also impossible for him not to pray at all, or to pray without intention, since God certainly does not desire him to refrain from his service. It is here that the aforementioned worldview has extreme ramifications. Although he cannot alter what is happening right in front of him and ascend toward God, he still asks: "What is this that God has done to me?" He is not content with doing nothing, in cutting off contact with the Divine and turning to some other issue of concern. Rather, he descends to confront the issue: He stands in the same place, continues the same prayer, while focusing his intention more and more, until this disturbance ceases to exist, meaning, it becomes meaningless to him. The fact that something is bothering him means that his intention is incomplete, that he is not fully immersed in the prayer. The part of him that remains outside, which belongs to external matters, can go on hearing the chatter of the gentile. The gentile who is disturbing him should be read as nothing other than a sign that his intention is not complete. There are things that a person cannot know on his own, and this is God's way of telling him: "Your intention is imperfect, and you can do more."

אַף שֶׁלְּמַדְרֵגָה זוֹ צָרִיךְ הִתְעוֹרְרוּת רַבָּה וַעֲצוּמָה

even though one requires a great and mighty arousal to attain this level. In every prayer one has to overcome distractions, concentrate on the task at hand and disconnect from the surrounding world. This is far from easy. Typically, we construct for ourselves a supportive external environment by freeing up time, entering a quiet place that is set aside for this purpose, together with others who wish to pray. This helps turn one's attention from his affairs and concentrate on prayer alone. It is true that the mind must still dismiss internal disturbances, such as thoughts and feelings that continue to run through it, but with hard work and patience this too can be achieved. Here, by contrast, when the external disturbance is ongoing, and continues to feed one's negative thoughts and feelings incessantly, it is not enough to work quietly and patiently, to silence one's thoughts and so on. Instead, one must go on the offensive, with "a great and mighty arousal."

וְעֵצָה הַיְּעוּצָה

The recommended counsel A counsel is not an instruction, and is therefore not binding in the same way. When a counsel is given, this effectively means: "Here is a path forward, a solution to the problem, although there might be other possibilities as well." With regard to the level of internality, the counsel is very much internal as well, on a level that a person cannot as yet be compelled to follow. It is only when one chooses, and indeed marches along this path, that matters will become clear to him.

לְהִתְעוֹרְרוּת זוֹ הִיא מֵעִנְיָן זֶה עַצְמוֹ:

for this arousal is from this matter itself: The hasidic method of awakening within a person the great power that is required for this war, is to use the same power that is interfering with him. Instead of building another opposing force, to break it, the counsel is to use that very same force itself. When one thinks about it, this idea is so obvious that it cannot be otherwise. The only force that can fully match the disturbance is the force of that distraction itself. One just needs to know how to do it, how to direct the forces, as will be explained below.

כְּשֶׁיָּשִׂים אֶל לִבּוֹ וְיִתְבּוֹנֵן עִנְיַן יְרִידַת הַשְּׁכִינָה כִּבְיָכוֹל ״וַתֵּרֶד פְּלָאִים״ (איכה א,ט) לְהִתְלַבֵּשׁ נִיצוֹץ מֵהֶאָרָתָהּ, אֲשֶׁר הִיא בִּבְחִינַת גָּלוּת, בְּתוֹךְ הַקְּלִיפּוֹת דֶּרֶךְ כְּלָל לְהַחֲיוֹתָם.

When one contemplates and reflects on the matter of the descent of the Divine Presence, as it were – "it has descended in an extraordinary fashion" (Lam. 1:9) for a spark from its illumination to be enclothed, such that it is in a form of exile among the kelippot in general, to give them life. The reflection must be accompanied by contemplation. Not merely a general, theoretical reflection on the matter, but a personal, private contemplation that penetrates the heart – one must sense and feel what he has understood in his mind. In the mind we only think about reality, whereas in the heart we actually feel it and are within it. He adds the phrase "as it were" because, as will eventually become clear, this is not a real descent but only an apparent one, for the needs of the present. "It has descended in an extraordinary fashion [pela'im ]." Pele refers to something that is distant and detached from our understanding. The verse is thus speaking of a descent that goes so far down that one cannot see the place from where it began, and one does not understand why it dropped so far. This "form of exile among the kelippot in general" has been discussed at length in this epistle. There are two stages here. The first stage is a general reflection – to understand the mechanism, the principle, of the secret of the exile of the Divine Presence. This is followed by the particular reflection, with regard to the specific gentile who is before us, and his speech.

וְעַתָּה הַפַּעַם, נִיצוֹץ הֶאָרָתָהּ מִתְלַבֵּשׁ בִּבְחִינַת גָּלוּת דֶּרֶךְ פְּרָט בְּדִבּוּר נָכְרִי זֶה הַמְדַבֵּר דְּבָרִים הַמְבַלְבְּלִים עֲבוֹדַת ה׳, הִיא כַּוָּונַת הַתְּפִלָּה

Now, on this occasion, the spark of its illumination is enclothed in a form of exile specifically through the speech of this gentile, who is saying things that can confuse someone involved in the service of God, which is the intention of prayer, The process that was explained in general terms with respect to the exile of the Divine Presence is happening here to this particular person: A spark of the Divine Presence, which is the life force within the gentile's speech, is disturbing him in his efforts to serve God and reveal the Divine Presence in the world. The difference is that when one think and talks on the level of theory, the ideas have to be organized in the mind – they must be structured properly, without internal contradictions, and so on. However, when one meets an actual example, it must fit in with one's living, breathing, harsh reality. When a person contemplates the exile of the Divine Presence, he is not experiencing it at that moment. However, in the situation itself, when this gentile is standing and interfering with one's prayer – the act is real, and the entire logical structure that we have built around the secret of the exile of the Divine Presence has no effect on him at all. He continues in his own way – he talks, taunts, and confuses, and it is disturbing, annoying, and discouraging. And yet, as the author of the Tanya will proceed to point out, this particular case, for the very reason that it is very much real and unbearable, has the power to bring the exile of the Divine Presence to its breaking point and reversal.

וּכְמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר לְעֵיל, כִּי ״זֶה לְעוּמַּת זֶה וכו׳״.

as explained above, that there is a corresponding counterpart to holiness. What is the internal mechanism that one should reflect upon in order to transform the power of interference into the power of prayer? As explained above, the principle of "God made this corresponding to that" (Eccles. 7:14) refers to the structure of the kelippot that corresponds to the structure of holiness. This means that this kelippa which is so disturbing and frightening has no reality of its own. There is nothing within a kelippa that is not in holiness, in terms of its power, structure, and method; it contains nothing original, as it takes and receives everything from holiness like a shadow merely duplicating the source – only in reverse, in its outer contours. If so, the entire reality of that kelippa and disorder is subjective; it is completely dependent on what the praying person thinks and feels. If he lets it bother him and distract him, then it exists, but if he pays no attention to it and continues to pray with intent, it will be nullified.

וְדִבּוּר הָעֶלְיוֹן מִתְלַבֵּשׁ בַּדִּבּוּר הַתַּחְתּוֹן וכו׳

The upper speech is thus enclothed in the lower speech..., The "upper speech" is the Divine Presence, the word of God enclothed in the "lower speech," which is spoken by man below. Since there is "a corresponding counterpart," the lower speech can also be the speech of this gentile who is disturbing. Therefore, when the individual who is praying pays no attention to what the gentile is saying, but continues to recite the sacred lower speech, he thereby transforms the power of speech that was enclothed in that gentile into the holy speech of prayer. As stated, the existence of the gentile's speech is from the shadows, where no direct clear light of holiness shines; he draws out the power of holiness from there and turns it into a destructive force. However, when one prays and the higher speech is directly enclothed in his speech shedding light at that moment, the shadow will disappear.

וְזֶהוּ מַמָּשׁ ״אֲשֶׁר שָׁלַט הָאָדָם בְּאָדָם לְרַע לוֹ״. דְּהַיְינוּ, שֶׁעַל יְדֵי זֶה מִתְעוֹרֵר הָאָדָם לְהִתְפַּלֵּל יוֹתֵר בְּכַוָּונָה, מֵעוּמְקָא דְּלִבָּא, עַד שֶׁלֹּא יִשְׁמַע דִּיבּוּרָיו.

and this is a real example of "whenever man controlled man, it was to his detriment." In other words, through this disturbance, the person is aroused to pray with greater intention, from the depths of the heart, until he does not even hear his speech. This is a practical example of the lesson we previously learned in general terms. When the Divine Presence is enclothed in this gentile, who is talking and interfering with one's prayer, this would appear to be a case of "whenever man controlled man." It is as though the kelippa rules over the power of holiness "it was to his detriment." However, it is actually "to do him harm" – to the kelippa, as this disturbance itself awakens one to pray with greater intent, until the kelippa has no existence at all. Beforehand, it had a meager existence, since although the man was focused on his prayer, he lacked full intention, and the proof of this is that the gentile bothered him when he talked. There was holiness, but there was some room in both the soul and the world, for the kelippa as well. However, after the state of "when a man controlled a man," when the speech of the gentile enclothed the speech of holiness in order to disturb it, the intention of the one praying was awakened to an even greater extent, "from the depths of the heart." Here there is no longer any place for the kelippa, not even a little. The depths of the heart, as explained elsewhere, is the point of the revelation of the soul itself – when the soul is aroused from this spot, there is no longer any place for anything else. The principle of "a corresponding counterpart" applies to the revelations of one's soul and its illuminations, but when it comes to the soul itself, within the heart of man, there is no opposing force at all. The downfall of the kelippa occurs after the stage of "whenever a man had controlled a man." It is only then, when one becomes aware of and senses the ruling power of the kelippa, when he feels like an animal in a trap, he is awakened, through this power, to fight for his life. As the author of the Tanya says elsewhere, when a person finds himself in a position in which his life is hanging in the balance, this affects him all the way down to the bones, to the innermost point of his heart, and he discovers within himself powers of which he was previously unaware. At that juncture, he will focus on nothing else, nothing will distract him, not anything similar to this nor a counterpart to it. The author of the Tanya now returns to his starting point. Thus far he has explained the statement in Tzava'at Rivash – which so upset the mitnagdim – that the Divine Presence "rested" upon that evil gentile who was standing and disturbing a person trying to pray. Even according to the explanation offered here by the author of the Tanya, the term "rested" has misleading implications, and he therefore notes:

וּמַה שֶּׁכָּתַב הַמְלַקֵּט ״שָׁרְתָה״ לֹא יָדַע לְכַוֵּין הַלָּשׁוֹן בְּדִקְדּוּק, כִּי הבעש״ט ז״ל הָיָה אוֹמֵר דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה בִּלְשׁוֹן אַשְׁכְּנַז

As for what the compiler wrote, that the Divine Presence "rested" upon that gentile, he did not know how to render the language in a precise manner, as the Ba'al Shem Tov would say words of Torah in Yiddish rather than in the Hebrew. It was not only the Ba'al Shem Tov, but rather, all the hasidic Rebbes would speak Torah in the vernacular, in Yiddish. As explained at the start of the commentary on this epistle, the Torah of Hasidism was and is essentially an Oral Torah, which lives and breathes life, and like every oral law it is spoken in the vernacular. Nevertheless, when the hasidic Torah was written down it was typically translated into the holy language, Hebrew. Even in the case of Chabad Hasidism, almost all the articles on Hasidism, in their hundreds and thousands, were originally taught in Yiddish. However, in the particular case of Chabad Hasidism, which held the actual written words of the Torah in very high regard, the Rebbes were careful to translate the articles into Hebrew, and they would proofread them and make sure that they were accurate. Many of them were even written in Hebrew from the outset. The same cannot be said for statements cited in the name of the Ba'al Shem Tov, as these were certainly not compiled with the same strictness. Furthermore, since Hebrew was not a spoken, living language like Yiddish, even if those translators had the precise version of the words of the Ba'al Shem Tov before them, they would not have been able to translate them faithfully, by finding the exact words required while conveying the spirit of the ideas. Indeed, it is not only in Tzava'at Rivash, but rather, in many writings that are attributed to the Ba'al Shem Tov, that one can find corruptions and inaccuracies. One who is familiar with the language and the spirit of the times can often decipher from the words how the idea was originally formulated in Yiddish and the way that it was translated, not always successfully, into Hebrew.

וְרָצָה לוֹמַר ״נִתְלַבְּשָׁה״,

He meant to say "became enclothed," In other words, an exact translation is "became enclothed." There is a fundamental difference between the terms "resting" and "enclothing" – in fact, they are almost antonyms. The resting of the Divine Presence upon a person or place means the revelation of the Divine Presence through him, whether he is a prophet through whose mouth the Divine Presence speaks, or whether it has the more general and less explicit meaning of a person whose deeds and entire manner of conduct express the divine revelation in his own way. It is true that every revelation, including that of the Divine Presence, occurs through the enclothing of the vessels, but in the case of the revelation and resting of the Divine Presence the vessel forfeits its own existence (it is nullified in existence) and in its totality it solely expresses the bond between the Divine Presence that is revealed in it and the world to which it is connected. This vessel – whether it is a person, an angel or a place – maintains only a superficial connection to the world. It looks like any other person, any regular object, but inside it is one thing alone: The revelation of the Divine Presence. The concept of "the enclothing of the Divine Presence," by contrast, signifies an enclothing that is not the resting of the Divine Presence, that is, the clothing reveals itself rather than what is enclothed in it. For in truth, everything exists by virtue of the Divine Presence that is enclothed in it; there is no other source of life and existence. However, there is a difference between clothing that is nullified (in its own awareness or the awareness of the one looking at it) in favor of the Divine Presence that is revealed within it – and is therefore a reality of holiness and the resting of the Divine Presence – and between a clothing that is not nullified in this manner, and which displays its existence, from its perspective, while hiding the Divine Presence that is within it. This type of clothing, when it conceals in an extreme manner, is the kelippa itself. Accordingly, with regard to the statement attributed to the Ba'al Shem Tov, that "the Divine presence rested in that person's mouth," referring to the mouth of the gentile who is standing and interfering with one's prayer, the author of the Tanya maintains that it should have said "became enclothed."

וְהַיְינוּ בִּבְחִינַת גָּלוּת, וְזֶהוּ, ״וּבִפְרָט אִם הוּא נָכְרִי כו׳״

which refers to exile, and the proof of this is the ensuing statement: "And especially if he is a gentile...," in which case this is a state of absolute exile. The enclothing of the Divine Presence is itself the exile of the Divine Presence. The proof that this is referring to the enclothing and exile of the Divine Presence, rather than its resting upon the gentile, is the statement later in Tzava'at Rivash that when one reflects on how the Divine Presence is enclothed in that person's mouth, he should declare: "How I must strengthen myself in the service, which is prayer, and especially if he is a gentile or a minor..." In other words, the fact that he is a gentile only emphasizes the above, that an enclothing of the Divine Presence is happening here, rather than a resting. An adult Jew is a fitting vessel for the resting of the Divine Presence; in its essence, his soul is a reflection of the Divine, while his body is a vessel designed for engaging in holiness and performing mitzvot. This is not the case for a gentile, as he and his body are a kelippa that conceals the Divine. Thus, when the Divine Presence is enclothed in this gentile, it is in a state of complete exile. Not only is it not revealed as the resting of the Divine Presence, but it is even giving life to the person who is concealing it!

וְאֵין לִתְמוֹהַּ אִם נִיצוֹץ מִן הֶאָרַת שְׁכִינָה נִקְרָא בְּשֵׁם שְׁכִינָה

One should not be surprised that a spark from the illumination of the Divine Presence is itself called the Divine Presence, As stated by the Ba'al Shem Tov, "the Divine Presence was enclothed in this man's mouth...," as only a spark of the Divine Presence is in exile. A spark is merely an illumination of something, not the thing itself. This illumination can appear as though it is detached from its source, as if it exists separately from the source, until it might seem to be an entity of its own. This is why it is specifically in connection to the exile of the Divine Presence (such as the breaking of the vessels) that we speak of sparks – the descent of sparks and the refinement and ascent of the sparks.... In contrast, whenever we speak of the Divine Presence itself, we refer not to the exile but to the resting and revelation of the Divine Presence. Nevertheless, this perception of a spark, which is merely a part, as the whole, should come as no surprise:

דְּהָא אַשְׁכְּחַן שֶׁאֲפִילּוּ מַלְאָךְ נִבְרָא נִקְרָא בְּשֵׁם ה', בְּפָרָשַׁת וַיֵּרָא (בראשית יח,ג) לְפֵירוּשׁ הָרַמְבַּ״ן. וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב (בראשית טז,יב) :

as we find that even a created angel is called by the name of God, in Parashat Vayera (Gen. 18:3), according to the commentary of the Ramban. And it is likewise written: "She

״וַתִּקְרָא שֵׁם ה׳ הַדּוֹבֵר אֵלֶיהָ וכו׳״, וּכְהַאי גַּוְונָא טוּבָא.

called the name of the Lord who spoke to her…" (Gen. 16:13), and there are many other similar instances. When Abraham saw the angel, he declared: "My Lord…please do not depart from upon your servant" (Gen. 18:3), and the Ramban explains that although he was merely a created angel, Abraham called him by the name of God, "Lord." The second example comes from Hagar, who "called the name of the Lord who spoke to her: You are the God of my vision" (Gen. 16:13), even though it was an angel who spoke to her, as explicitly stated in the verses. We find many other instances that an angel, or any other divine revelation, even if only partial, is called by the name of God. It must be admitted that these examples cited by the author of the Tanya are not the same as the case described by the Ba'al Shem Tov. The angels that are called by the name of God are not a spark of the Divine Presence hidden in exile, but messengers of God who reveal Him and speak in His name. Nevertheless, once it has been explained that even an evil gentile can enclothe a spark of the Divine Presence, it no longer matters whether this spark is in a state of concealment and exile or revelation and holy light. The principle is the same either way: Even a mere spark and the barest illumination of the Divine Presence is the Divine Presence and it is called thus. The truth is that the Divine Presence is one (just as "God is one," so too "His name is one"; see Zech. 14:9), and there is no such thing as a spark that is separate from Him. It just appears that this is the case, and that is the exile of the Divine Presence. When it is observed that the spark is not separate, that it is unified with the Divine Presence, this is the ascent of the spark and the redemption of the Divine Presence. Then it will be seen that the spark is the Divine Presence itself. Up to this point, the author of the Tanya has elucidated the statement of the Ba'al Shem Tov. His interpretation is both profound and true, both for hasidim and for all those who take the words of the Ba'al Shem Tov seriously. From here until the end of the epistle, he will mainly address the mitnagdim, those who oppose the path of the Ba'al Shem Tov and are unable to see its inner depth (even though their entire original question probably focused on a different point). For them he takes a step back to add a level of clarification, in their language and mode of thought.

וְכִמְדוּמֶּה לִי שֶׁתְּפִיסָתָם אֵינָהּ מִצַּד דִּקְדּוּק הַלָּשׁוֹן, אֶלָּא מֵעִיקַּר עִנְיַן הִתְלַבְּשׁוּת הַשְּׁכִינָה בַּקְּלִיפּוֹת.

It seems to me that their approach, of those who object to the statement of the Ba'al Shem Tov, is not based on a linguistic analysis, but due to the basic idea of the enclothing of the Divine Presence in the kelippot . Their issue is not the difference between "resting" and "enclothing," between two modes of divine expression. Rather, they have a fundamental problem here, as they object to the Ba'al Shem Tov's basic assumptions, which is what led to such extreme reactions, as even actually burning the book Tzava'at Rivash. The author of the Tanya does not get into the details of the whole issue, which was one of the (few) real topics of dispute between the hasidim and mitnagdim. The problem, as presented here, is in the perception of God's reality in everything and everywhere. If that is the case, then it must be that He is not only in the upper heavens or in the synagogue, but also in places that are undignified, and even where evil and the kelippa reign. Such a statement is undoubtedly problematic: Can this be true? What does it mean? How should one react to these claims, if at all? These questions, whether they were posed directly or indirectly, occurred to everyone. Many preferred not to deal with them but to leave them in a state of unresolved ambiguity, and the author of the Tanya will address such individuals later on. By contrast, the original hasidic view, which seemed at the time to have been a novel approach that contradicted the accepted viewpoint, is that, indeed, this is the truth: There is an enclothing of the Divine Presence in all things, even the kelippot. Accordingly, nothing should be entirely rejected and negated, even if it is kelippa. Rather, one should search for the holy spark within it, and, if possible, elevate and rectify it. This is the message from Tzava'at Rivash here, as the author of the Tanya explains in this epistle, and as stated frequently in the works of the early hasidim, the disciples of the Ba'al Shem Tov.

שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אֱמוּנָה בְּמַה שֶּׁאָמַר הָאֲרִ״י ז״ל בְּסֵפֶר הַגִּלְגּוּלִים.

As they do not believe in what the Arizal said in Sefer HaGilgulim . The Arizal explains in Sefer HaGilgulim the secret of the exile of the Divine Presence, that it follows the verse: "Whenever a man controlled a man it was to his detriment" (Eccles. 8:9). The meaning of "whenever a man controlled..." is as stated here – the enclothing of the Divine Presence in a kelippa. That is, a spark of the Divine Presence, which is the Divine Presence itself, when it is enclothed in a kelippa, is the life force of that kelippa. As stated, this touches upon those issues that were considered fundamental disputes between the hasidim and mitnagdim. It seems that the author of the Tanya's opinion on those points was that there is no actual fundamental disagreement here, but mostly differences of formulation and divergent attitudes toward the same concepts, only that in the heat of battle there is a tendency to exaggerate and emphasize the contrasts. The point that Hasidism makes is that these claims which appear everywhere – in the Bible, statements of the Rabbis, and the teachings of the Arizal – should be treated with all seriousness, and fully absorbed into one's heart, and one's actual life in practice. Naturally, this leap from theory to reality can startle and shock people, provoking resistance. The author of the Tanya was aware of this potential opposition. Therefore, he attempts, both here and elsewhere, to break down the concepts into their constitutive elements and explain them rationally and logically; to show that they all share a common fundamental outlook, that what the hasidim say and do is actually the same as what the mitnagdim believe, only that the hasidim seek to extend those fundamental truths, using the very same logic, to arrive at more far-reaching conclusions. The author of the Tanya proceeds to examine one-by-one those points that emerge from the words of the Arizal, which are accepted by everyone, and show that it is impossible to separate them from the conclusions he reached based on the statements of the Ba'al Shem Tov.

שֶׁאִם יִרְצוּ לְחַלֵּק בֵּין קְלִיפּוֹת הָרוּחָנִיִּים לְעוֹבְדֵי גִילּוּלִים הַגַּשְׁמִיִּים אֵין לְךָ גַּשְׁמִי כַּעֲפַר הָאָרֶץ, וְאַף עַל פִּי כֵן

For if they wish to differentiate between the spiritual kelippot and the physical worshippers of molten images, that is impossible, as you have nothing more physical than the dust of the earth, and even so the Malkhut of Malkhut of Asiya is enclothed in it, and within it there is the Malkhut of Yetzira ..., as stated above. The Arizal discussed the enclothing of the Divine Presence in the spirituality of the kelippot. The author of the Tanya states that one cannot differentiate between spirituality and materiality in this context, and claim that the enclothing of the Divine Presence can occur on the spiritual levels, but not with regard to actual materiality. The reason is that that "you have nothing more physical than the dust of the earth," and yet it is explained in the writings of the Arizal that "the Malkhut of Malkhut of Asiya is enclothed in it, and within it there is the Malkhut of Yetzira...," meaning, the Malkhut of Asiya and the Malkhut of Atzilut, that is, the Divine Presence. This shows that the Divine Presence is enclothed even in material substances, such as the dust of the earth, and in this respect, there is no difference between spirituality and materiality.

וְאִם מִשּׁוּם טוּמְאַת נַפְשׁוֹת הַנָּכְרִים, הֲרֵי

And if they were to claim that the difference is due to the impurity of the souls of the gentiles, that is also incorrect, as their souls are from the coupling of Zeir and Nukva (male and female) of the spiritual kelippot , as explained in the writings of the Arizal. One might claim that the relevant divide is not between spirituality and materiality, but impurity and purity. The idea is that although the physical is indeed very lowly, it is at least neutral, which is not the case for the gentile, who has an element of impurity in his spiritual root, in his very essence, and it is therefore possible that the Divine Presence does not enclothe itself in him. However, that claim is also incorrect, as the source of the souls of the gentiles is "from the coupling of Zeir and Nukva of the spiritual kelippot, as explained in the writings of the Arizal." A soul, including that of a gentile, is the offspring of a lofty, spiritual coupling, which in the case of holiness is the source of the flowing of the Divine Presence to the world, although here it went to the side of the kelippa and impurity. Zeir and Nukva are kabbalistic terms that refer to the general male and female, from whose coupling all entities in the world came into being. Every creature and individual soul is the result of a particular pairing and combination of Zeir and Nukva. In the realm of holiness, Zeir and Nukva are the attributes of divinity and Malkhut, that is, the revelation of God, the Divine that lies just beyond the world (which is Zeir Anpin ), and the divine reality that is within all entities in the world, which is the Divine Presence. Their coupling causes the entire existence of holiness in the world to come into being. In the case of the kelippa, these are their "corresponding counterpart," meaning, the coming into being of a reality that is not holy, the attributes and powers that operate in the world, and the world itself (of Ḥesed and Gevura..., which do not appear to relate to God), as well as existing reality, the "matter" of the world as it exists and stands by itself. The coupling, or pairing, of these two, forms the creatures and souls of kelippa, such as the soul of this gentile that is actively working against holiness.

נִמְצָא שֶׁהָרוּחָנִיִּים מְקוֹר טוּמְאָתָם.

It follows, that the spiritual forces are the source of their impurity. Even the abstract spiritual kelippot, which have not yet formed into a specific, real evil and impurity – and thus the Divine Presence is clearly enclothed in them – are the source of impurity for the souls of those gentiles, of that tangible impurity below. We must therefore say that the Divine Presence is also enclothed in that actual impurity which is in this physical gentile below.

אַךְ בֶּאֱמֶת צָרִיךְ בֵּיאוּר רָחָב אֵיךְ הוּא הִתְלַבְּשׁוּת זוֹ

However, in truth a broad explanation is required as to how this enclothing occurs, It is indeed possible to understand and justify those who find this claim hard to accept, because it is truly difficult to grasp and emotionally accept this idea. It is obvious and easy to comprehend that the Divine Presence is enclothed in holiness, that God gives life and brings into being that which is good in His eyes, which upholds and extends His wisdom and will, and so on. However, how can we understand that He is enclothed in something that goes against His will? We are comfortable with a simplistic world view: God is good, and everything He does and sustains is good, whereas that which is evil and opposes holiness is not God. However, to say that the Divine Presence is enclothed in evil as well – not only on the theoretical level but in reference to actual entities and people who are causing us harm – this is difficult to accept in one's heart. Yet the author of the Tanya does not shy away from this point: He agrees that these claims require a comprehensive explanation. However, this epistle is not the right forum for such an analysis. As stated, this was not an internally distributed epistle to the author of the Tanya's colleagues and students, but rather it was intended for a wide range of people, including those who were categorically opposed to the path of Hasidism. For such individuals a few wise sentences are not enough; rather, they are in need of a broader exposition, including introductions that are not merely rational explanations. Understanding this issue also involves a mental readiness to accept the ideas, and this cannot be conveyed in writing, but is formed through years of study and labor. Consequently, this is not the appropriate place for a detailed discussion.

אֲבָל לֹא עָלֵינוּ תְּלוּנָתָם כִּי אִם עַל כִּתְבֵי הָאֲרִ״י ז״ל.

yet their complaints do not apply to us, but to the writings of the Arizal. After all, based on his citations here, it is clear that his main points are taken from the teachings of the Arizal. With this observation, the author of the Tanya diverts the conversation from the essence of the idea themselves (which, as stated, he is unable to analyze fully in this context) to a discussion of the Arizal's writings. The writings of the Arizal form the basis of the author of the Tanya's discussion here, not only because they are accepted by everyone and that they were at the time (and still are) an indisputable source of authority, but also because the Kabbala of the Arizal is in a certain sense the last accepted formulation of the Jewish religious worldview and thought. As is the case for any field of knowledge, the discussion must be grounded not only on general acceptance, but on updated consensus as well. This is true in every arena: One must refer to the most recent and most detailed source of the current ways of thinking and existing concepts. There is no point in taking several steps backward.

וְאַל יַחְשְׁדֵנִי שׁוֹמֵעַ שֶׁאֲנִי בְּעֵינַי שֶׁהֵבַנְתִּי דִּבְרֵי הָאֲרִ״י ז״ל לְהַפְשִׁיטָן מִגַּשְׁמִיּוּתָן

Nor should the listener suspect me of thinking that I have understood the words of the Arizal, by abstracting them from their physical garb. These are not expressions of modesty; rather, after he has diverted the arguments of the mitnagdim from the words of the Ba'al Shem Tov to the writings of the Arizal, he wishes to emphasize that his understanding of the words of Arizal does not differ from their own. For if it were to emerge from his comments that he comprehends them differently, in a deeper and more abstract manner, any common basis for the discussion would thereby be lost, and there would be no point in him formulating his own arguments either. Of course, on the personal level as well, he does not want them to think of him as arrogant, someone who considers himself above them: Both because if they think that way, they won't listen to him and will only hate him all the more, and also because he really does not think that he is above them. This attitude of the author of the Tanya toward the mitnagdim, to truly not be condescending or patronizing toward them, remained consistent throughout the years, and this is what he demanded of his hasidim as well.

כִּי לֹא בָּאתִי רַק לְפָרֵשׁ דִּבְרֵי הבעש״ט ז״ל וְתַלְמִידָיו עַל פִּי קַבָּלַת הָאֲרִ״י ז״ל. בְּשֶׁגַּם שֶׁעִנְיָן זֶה אֵינוֹ מֵחָכְמַת הַקַּבָּלָה וּמֵהַנִּסְתָּרוֹת לה׳ אֱלוֹקֵינוּ כִּי אִם מֵהַנִּגְלוֹת לָנוּ וּלְבָנֵינוּ לְהַאֲמִין אֱמוּנָה שְׁלֵימָה, בְּמִקְרָא מָלֵא שֶׁדִּבֵּר הַכָּתוּב: "הֲלֹא אֶת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֶת הָאָרֶץ אֲנִי מָלֵא נְאֻם ה'" (ירמיה כג,כד) שֶׁאֵין מִקְרָא יוֹצֵא מִידֵי פְּשׁוּטוֹ.

For my purpose is only to explain the words of the Ba'al Shem Tov, of blessed memory, and his disciples in accordance with the Kabbala of the Arizal, especially as this topic is not from the wisdom of the Kabbala and from the hidden matters that belong to the Lord our God, but rather from those matters that are revealed to us and our children, to believe with a complete faith in an explicit verse that appears in the Tanakh: "Do I not fill the heavens and the earth, the utterance of the Lord" (Jer. 23:24), as a verse does not depart from its literal meaning. The author of the Tanya asserts that "my purpose is only to explain the words of the Ba'al Shem Tov," meaning, he does not aim to expand upon and clarify the concept of the enclothing of the Divine Presence abstracted from its physical garb, but only to translate the words of the Ba'al Shem Tov into the common terms of the writings of the Arizal and the statements of the Rabbis. The expression "to us and our children" comes from Deuteronomy 29:28. If the ideas are divested of their kabbalistic terminology, the fact that God is everywhere is a basic assumption of the Jewish worldview, in every area and at every level. "To believe with a complete faith." Even if this idea is not grasped with all the complexity and problematic aspects of the various worldviews, as explained in the books of Kabbala, in any case every Jew believes with a simple faith "in an explicit verse that appears in the Bible:'Do I not fill the heavens and the earth, the utterance of the Lord." There are profound hasidic interpretations of this verse, which is part of the reason why he quotes it here, but it can also be understood in accordance with its plain meaning. Even for those who are unfamiliar with all the deeper levels of interpretation, there is a simple meaning to this Biblical verse that everyone can understand, in accordance with his capability, even without any preliminary knowledge from other fields: God is everywhere, in heaven and on earth, the upper and lower worlds, the spiritual and the physical realms, and so on.

וְגַם הִיא אֱמוּנָה פְּשׁוּטָה בִּסְתָם כְּלָלוּת יִשְׂרָאֵל וּמְסוּרָה בְּיָדָם מֵאֲבוֹתֵיהֶם הַקְּדוֹשִׁים שֶׁהָלְכוּ בִּתְמִימוּת עִם ה', בְּלִי לַחֲקוֹר בְּשֵׂכֶל אֱנוֹשִׁי עִנְיַן הָאֱלֹקוּת, אֲשֶׁר הוּא לְמַעְלָה מֵהַשֵּׂכֶל עַד אֵין קֵץ

It is also a simple belief among the unlearned, general population of Israel, handed down to them from their holy ancestors, who walked in wholeness with God, without investigating with human intellect the matter of the Divine, which infinitely transcends the intellect, This is "a simple belief" not because it is written in the verse, but because it is the most fundamental axiom of Jewish faith, even before anything has been said or written down: The belief in one God, with all that this entails. The phrase "the unlearned, general [population of] Israel" indicates that this belief is not limited to any particular community, movement, or individual with special intelligence. Rather, it belongs to all Israel, at whatever level or place a Jew might be. This belief was transmitted not through intellectual explanation, or anything similar, but "handed down to them from their holy ancestors" in plain terms, since it is, as stated, the basic faith that every Jew receives from his forefathers, just as he accepts from them his status as a Jew. The content of faith is above reason. This is the definition of faith – the faculty of the soul that grasps what cannot be understood and known, what transcends reason. The intellect can attain anything that can be contained within its limits, the concepts and values ​​that fit the dimensions with which it thinks. Anything that is not compatible with human intellect will not enter it and is termed "above the intellect." There are concepts that transcend one particular intellect but can enter into a higher intellect. This is not the case when it comes to anything divine, which inherently transcends the intellect to an infinite degree; it is grasped by the faculty of simple, pure faith.

לֵידַע אֵיךְ הוּא ״מְלֹא כָל הָאָרֶץ״ רַק שֶׁ״חֲדָשִׁים מִקָּרוֹב בָּאוּ״ לַחֲקוֹר בַּחֲקִירָה זוֹ.

to know how He "fills the whole world." It is merely that "new ones have come recently" to delve into this investigation. These questions concern the "how." There is no dispute regarding the basic point that God "fills the heavens and the earth" – and if there is a question it is illegitimate, and there is no answer to it – because this is an article of faith that exists for every Jew, which is inexplicable while also incontestable. The types of questions are: How can this be; it doesn't seem to make sense; it doesn't suit a certain person's experience, and so on and so forth. These questions do not contradict the faith, but they weaken and conceal it. As stated, those who have perfect faith do not raise such questions, but only those "new ones [who] have come recently." These are "new" people, who have come from a mindset and a cultural atmosphere where this simple belief has no place, and they inquire and expect answers. Just as in the verse, they are called "new" not as a term of praise, but by way of disapproval. Their ancestors lived in a world of faith, of basic assumptions that stand by themselves rather on intellectual comprehension, and these newcomers have arrived "to delve into this investigation," to try to understand these ideas with their powers of thought.

וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר לְקָרֵב לָהֶם אֶל הַשֵּׂכֶל אֶלָּא דַּוְקָא עַל פִּי הַקְדָּמוֹת לְקוּחוֹת מִכִּתְבֵי הָאֲרִ״י ז״ל מוּפְשָׁטוֹת מִגַּשְׁמִיּוּתָן וּכְפִי שֶׁשָּׁמַעְתִּי מֵרַבּוֹתַי נ״ע.

It is only possible to draw them close to understanding on the basis of propositions taken from the writings of the Arizal, abstracted from their physical garb, as I heard from my rabbis, whose souls are in the Garden of Eden. Here he is not talking about real understanding by means of the intellect, as he has already stated that it is impossible to grasp these matters, but rather the effort to "draw them close to understanding" – that is, to explain them where possible, in such a manner that the issue is at least not rendered problematic, so that the learner will feel: "Although I do not understand, comprehension is possible and I am close to attaining it. The ideas do not contradict my intellectual understanding but simply extend it a little further." He refers to "propositions taken from the writings of the Arizal," because the initial question stemmed from their supposed understanding of the writings of the Arizal, and therefore any explanation that might put their minds at ease must also be in accordance with the Arizal's teachings. The other significance of the writings of the Arizal here is that the Kabbala of the Arizal, from when it was discovered, had spread throughout the Jewish Diaspora and been accepted as the official "theology" of Judaism, as the binding foundation of any later development of a philosophy and path in the service of God. Just as the mitnagdim based their opposition to Hasidism on the acceptance of Kabbala of the Arizal, so too the author of the Tanya, when he seeks to defend Hasidism and clarify it, does so "on the basis of propositions taken from the writings of the Arizal." Furthermore, since the difficulty was caused by a superficial ("physical") understanding of the writings of the Arizal, the explanation should take the form of an abstraction of these ideas from their physical state, as was briefly explained above. These "rabbis, whose souls are in the Garden of Eden," and who understood and taught how to abstract the words of the Arizal from their physical garb, are the Ba'al Shem Tov and the Maggid of Mezeritch. Even if the author of the Tanya did not hear this directly from the Ba'al Shem Tov, he heard his opinion by way of his disciples, mainly from the Maggid. It is important for him to note this here, in order to stress that this method of abstracting the words of the Arizal from their physicality is not merely a rational idea, but a kabbalistic approach upon which the hasidic movement was founded. And particularly, this whole epistle deals with the system attributed to the Ba'al Shem Tov.

אַךְ אִי אֶפְשָׁר לְבָאֵר זֶה הֵיטֵב בְּמִכְתָּב כִּי אִם מִפֶּה לְאֹזֶן שׁוֹמַעַת

Yet this cannot be thoroughly explained in writing, but only from mouth to attending ear, This abstraction from physicality cannot be achieved in writing. Unlike speech, writing is merely letters and words, without any live and direct contact between the one bestowing the ideas and their recipient. That which is transferred through the written word is only the outer garments, which receive their meaning in accordance with the mind of the receiver; if his mind was coarse before, written paragraphs will do nothing to change that. The phrase "from mouth to attending ear" refers to the verbal content of what someone says to a person standing in front of him, who can see him and relate to him specifically. Only in this manner is it possible to transfer the contents inside the garments from one person to another. An "attending ear" is thus a person who wishes to hear, who really desires to understand what was said to him, not merely in order to formulate a response.

לִיחִידֵי סְגוּלָּה וְלַשְּׂרִידִים אֲשֶׁר ה' קוֹרֵא

and then only to unique individuals and to the remnant whom the Lord shall call, These "unique individuals" have the ability, due to their talent, hard work, and inner connection, to listen and receive the interiority of ideas, on a fundamental level. The phrase "the remnant whom the Lord shall call" is derived from Joel 3:5. He again uses a Biblical expression to describe those special individuals: They are survivors of all the vicissitudes of time, as they do not depend on and are not immersed in the affairs of the world, but rather they are ready for the Lord to call upon them.

כְּדִכְתִיב: ״וּמְבַקְשֵׁי הֲוָיָ״ה יָבִינוּ כֹל״ (משלי כח,ה) וּמִכְּלַל הֵן אַתָּה שׁוֹמֵעַ כו׳.

as it is written: "but seekers of the Lord will understand all" (Prov. 28:5), and from the affirmative you can understand... Only those who, for their part, call upon God and seek Him will be able to hear the inner essence; only such a person can succeed in abstracting the words from their physicality. As a rule, these ideas cannot be transmitted by means of any object or skill on the part of the giver alone. If the recipient is unwilling and refuses to seek them, if he does not ask the questions himself, and fails to devote himself to the point of abstracting himself of his physicality, he won't hear the message. The full quote is "and from the affirmative you can understand the negative." If all these conditions are not met, the abstract idea cannot be transferred from its physical state.

הִנֵּה אַתֶּם רְאִיתֶם פֵּירוּשׁ מַאֲמָר אֶחָד מִסְּפָרִים הַיְּדוּעִים, לְדוּגְמָא וּלְאוֹת כִּי גַּם כָּל הַמַּאֲמָרִים הַתְּמוּהִים יֵשׁ לָהֶם פֵּירוּשׁ וּבֵיאוּר הֵיטֵב לְיוֹדְעֵי חֵן.

You have thus seen the clarification of a single section from the well-known books, as an example and illustration that all the puzzling passages likewise have an explanation and a clear elucidation to those initiated in the esoteric wisdom of Kabbala. This statement is addressed to those who expressed reservations over the statement of the Ba'al Shem Tov. He does not intend, nor does he think it necessary, to explain all the sayings of the Ba'al Shem Tov and his students in this manner. He has provided an example, which can serve as a model, as it demonstrates that there is a valid interpretation and explanation for all the rest as well. When a person gets involved with material, he no longer needs to go back each time and clarify the basics in accordance with the introductions to the writings of the Arizal, and so on. Instead, he can skip all that and deal directly with the inner meaning of the ideas.

אַךְ לֹא יְקַוּוּ מַעֲלָתָם אֵלַי לְבָאֵר לָהֶם הַכֹּל בְּמִכְתָּב, כִּי הִיא מְלָאכָה כְּבֵידָה וּמְרוּבָּה וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר בְּשׁוּם אוֹפֶן. רַק אִם תִּרְצוּ שִׁלְּחוּ מִכֶּם אֶחָד וּמְיוּחָד שֶׁבָּעֵדָה, וּפֶה אֶל פֶּה אֲדַבֶּר בּוֹ אִם יִרְצֶה ה', וה' יִהְיֶה עִם פִּי בְּהַטִּיפִי. וְיִהְיוּ לְרָצוֹן אִמְרֵי פִי.

However, your honors should not expect that I will clarify everything for them in writing, for that is a heavy and extensive labor, and it is not possible in any form. But if you want, send one special person from your assembly, and I will speak with him one-on-one, God willing. May the Lord be with my mouth when I express myself, and may the words of my mouth find favor. The author of the Tanya is here granting them permission to send someone to him for clarification of some particular matter that they are having difficulty understanding. He concludes with a petition to the God, as he too requires God's will and assistance to formulate the ideas. When concepts have been abstracted from their physicality, it is not as though they have been placed in a box where some individual, whoever he might be, has ready access to them. Just as there must be, as stated, a high level of devotion and preparation on the part of the hearer so that he can receive the ideas, the same applies – to an even greater extent – to the speaker. If that is the case, he will be able, God willing, to convey his message successfully.