Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XXVI, p. 95ff.

I.

The Tur states[1] that it is desirable to recite the passage concerning the manna every day.[2] The Beis Yosef[3] explains the rationale for this ruling: "So that one will believe that his entire sustenance comes to him through Divine providence."

In his Shulchan Aruch, the Alter Rebbe - in the Mahadura Kama[4] - quotes the ruling of the Tur and the rationale of the Beis Yosef, and adds (an explanation from the Levush[5]): "[One should also read the passage concerning the manna, to fortify his faith that all his provisions are granted to him by Divine providence.] For the Holy One, blessed be He, specifically provided every man with an omer [of manna] for every member of his household; as it is written, 'When they measured it by the omer, he who had gathered much had no excess, and he who had gathered little was lacking nothing.'"[6]

In his Mahadura Basra,[7] however, the Alter Rebbe changes his ruling. Instead of citing the Beis Yosef (and the Levush), he states: "[It is proper to recite...] the passage concerning the manna [to spur] one's trust in G-d Who provides every man with his daily bread."[8]

There are two differences between these passages:

1. [In the Mahadura Basra,] instead of using the wording of the Beis Yosef that speaks of faith [emunah], the Alter Rebbe speaks of trust [bitachon];

2. He does not focus on the fact that the manna was distributed (by Divine providence)[9] "an omer [of manna] for every member of his household," but that the fact that G-d continually granted the manna, "each day, its daily portion"[10] should evoke one's trust that G-d will grant each person his daily bread.

Seemingly, these two distinctions are dependent one on the other: The concept that "the Holy One, blessed be He, specifically provided every man with an omer [of manna] for every member of his household... 'he who had gathered much had no excess, and he who had gathered little was lacking nothing,'" strengthens a Jew's faith that his sustenance (does not come from "my strength and the power of my hand,"[11] but instead,) from G-d's providence. This was manifest in [the daily descent of] the manna. For we saw that man's activities had no effect on the quantity of manna which G-d (ordained and) granted each person.[12]

Trust (bitachon), however, implies (not only that we believe that a person's sustenance comes from G-d, but also) that we rely on G-d to certainly provide us with our sustenance. The concept of trust is derived from the fact that G-d gave the manna in consistent, daily portions, in a manner where one could rely entirely upon Him, without worrying.

Explanation is, however, necessary: What is the reason that the Beis Yosef (and the Levush) - and similarly, the Mahadura Kama of the Shulchan Aruch HaRav - focus on the concept of faith, while in the Mahadura Basra, the Alter Rebbe gives a different rationale: "[to spur] one's trust in G-d Who provides every man with his daily bread"?

II.

On the surface, it would appear that there must also be an actual difference in the application of halachah between these two rationales. [To reach that conclusion, the following] preface is necessary:

One of the differences between emunah, faith, and bitachon, trust, is that emunah is a constant factor in one's life. A believer accepts the points he believes in with absolute certainty, seeing them as givens. Therefore they are constant [factors in his life].

[This applies] even when his emunah involves [not only abstract principles, but also] points that affect his actual [life],[13] e.g., the point under discussion, that "his provisions are granted to him by Divine providence." It is not appropriate to say that he believes this concept only during the time that he is involved with his livelihood. On the contrary, this emunah is a constant.

With regard to bitachon, by contrast, a person's certainty and reliance on G-d with regard to his livelihood is a feeling that is aroused when a person is in need.[14] When a person is involved in his work to earn his livelihood, he trusts G-d, [confident that] "G-d your L-rd will bless you in all that you do."[15] He trusts that G-d will certainly bless his efforts in a manner that they will bring him sustenance.

To cite another instance: When a person finds himself in a difficult situation and does not see any natural way of being saved, he does not despair and ask:[16] "Where will my assistance come from?" Instead, he is certain (because of his bitachon in G-d,) [and trusts] that G-d - Who is the Master of nature and can alter [the situation as He desires][17] - will certainly help him. He knows: "My assistance is from G-d, Maker of heaven and earth."[18]

Moreover, the person's bitachon itself (serves as a medium that) draws down the deliverance from G-d and the satisfaction of the person's needs.

{This is one of the explanations with regard to the attribute of bitachon. On the surface, there is a point requiring explanation. Bitachon means[19] that a person relies on G-d to bring him good in an overtly revealed manner. [The intent is] not only that G-d knows [in a manner that transcends human understanding that what he is undergoing] is for his good, but also that the person himself should be able to appreciate that it is good.

Seemingly, the fact that a person finds himself in a difficult situation could be because his conduct is not appropriate and therefore he is worthy of being punished. How can it be a foundation of a person's bitachon in G-d[20] that G-d will certainly (not punish him, even though [the punishment] is [ultimately] for his own good, but instead will) grant him overtly revealed good? Moreover, how can his bitachon be absolute and genuine to the extent that he has no doubt and is entirely serene?[21]

It is possible to explain as follows: When a person displays utter bitachon in G-d and has simple and absolute trust that G-d will provide him with overtly revealed good - despite the fact that this is inappropriate according to ordinary calculations and circumstances - his bitachon itself serves as a medium to draw down influence from Above. G-d responds to him "measure for measure," for the Torah declares and rules that this is His characteristic.[22] And He grants him overtly revealed good,[23] without considering at all whether he is worthy of it.[24]}

III.

From the above, it is clear that the attribute of bitachon, i.e., one's actual arousal of bitachon, has to do with asking for one's needs. When a person is involved with seeking his necessities, he trusts in G-d, [confident] that G-d will fulfill his needs.

Based on the above, since the recitation of the passage of the manna was instituted so that a person will be aroused to trust G-d,[25] it is possible to say:

1. This passage should be recited only on weekdays, but not on Shabbos[26] when we do not request our needs.[27] {[A parallel can be drawn to] the manna itself which did not descend on Shabbos[28] although it provided man with his daily sustenance.}

2. Even during the week, [the passage concerning the manna] should not be recited in the initial portion of one's prayers. With regard to the request for one's needs, [our Sages teach]:[29] "A person should always set forth [his] praise of the Holy One, blessed be He, and then pray (i.e., request his needs)." Indeed, we find this pattern in several siddurim.[30] The passage concerning the manna is positioned after prayer (together with a prayer and a request for one's livelihood).

Following the rationale [that the passage is recited]: "to fortify his faith...," by contrast, it is appropriate to recite this passage on Shabbos as well and also before prayer (which represents "G-d's praise"). For[31] faith in G-d (including, also, faith with regard to one's sustenance) must be a constant matter.

This distinction, however, requires clarification. For even in the Mahadura Basra (which states the rationale: "[to spur] one's trust in G-d"), the Alter Rebbe writes: "It is proper to recite every day... the passage concerning the manna." The wording, "every day," seemingly includes Shabbos.[32]

Similarly, [this distinction is not borne out] with regard to the place in prayer where the passage should be recited: The wording of the Mahadura Basra appears to indicate that the only difference (between its ruling and that of the Mahadura Kama) is with regard to the rationale for reciting [the passage], but not that [the rationale] brings about a difference [and] a limitation with regard to when the passage may be recited. This is also indicated by the fact that in the Mahadura Basra, the Alter Rebbe includes the law regarding the recitation of the passage concerning the manna with that regarding the passages concerning the Akeidah, (the Ten Commandments,)[33] and the sacrifices[34] (which are recited before prayer).[35]

The question thus remains: For what reason is a different rationale stated in the Mahadura Basra than in the Mahadura Kama (and in the Beis Yosef)?

IV.

The above question can be resolved through the explanation of the conduct of Rabbi Yeisa the Elder[36] (as described in the Zohar of this week's Torah reading[37] in connection with the manna).

[Rabbi Yeisa] would not prepare his meal every day until after he had requested his sustenance from G-d. As he would explain: "A meal should not be prepared until it has been given from the King."

Clarification is required: Since the food (from which he prepared his meal) was already within his possession ([as that passage states:] "I am in possession of my food for this day")[38] and lacked only preparation, what did he mean[39] by saying that he is asking G-d to give him that meal?

It is possible to explain the passage based on the interpretation given by Rabbeinu Bacheya[40] of our Sages' statement[41] that Yosef was punished for asking Pharaoh's steward to mention him to Pharaoh.[42] [Rabbeinu Bacheya states:] "Heaven forbid that Yosef the righteous would place his trust in the steward. [Instead, his trust was focused] on G-d alone. His intent, however, was that G-d ordained that [he would meet] the steward so that through him a miracle could be accomplished."

Why then was Yosef punished?

Because he saw the steward as an instrument (through which G-d could send His deliverance).... And it is not appropriate for the righteous and the like to seek an instrument. Therefore he was punished for this. For he should have trusted in the Holy One, blessed be He, alone, for He is the Master of all instruments. [Yosef should have trusted] that He would send him an instrument without him having to seek one.

[This explanation] provokes the question:[43] With regard to bitachon, it is explained (in Chovos HaLevavos[44]) that we are obligated to find instruments [through which G-d works], (and many proofs are brought for this concept). Why then was Yosef punished for seeking "an instrument"?

It is explained[45] that there are two expressions (and levels) of bitachon:

1. When Divine influence is drawn down in an ordinary manner, according to the pattern of nature[46] {to use the terminology of Chassidus: [influence coming] from the level of memale kol almin (the Divine light which invests itself in the worlds)}. On this level, it is necessary to seek "an instrument" and to find mediums within nature. For this [form of] Divine influence is conveyed through the natural order.

2. When it is obvious that the Divine influence is drawn down in a manner that does not follow the natural order {to use the terminology of Chassidus: [influence coming] from the level of sovev kol almin (the Divine light that transcends the worlds)}. [Such influence] calls forth a higher level of bitachon, that "one rely entirely on G-d's providence alone, without doing anything. Instead, one should trust entirely that G-d will certainly help through a medium."[47]

{Yosef the righteous who, through his Divine service, was (at all times) connected with a level that transcends nature[48] should have conducted himself in a manner [that reflected] the higher level of bitachon.}

V.

The difference between these two levels of bitachon is apparent even while one seeks a medium.[49] According to the first approach, the necessity for a person to employ a medium is due to the fact that the Divine influence is drawn down according to the natural order. Hence nature and its rules are significant. Therefore a person must seek a medium and an instrument through which G-d's blessing will be drawn down.

When, however, a person follows the second approach of bitachon, "to do nothing but to trust in G-d," the natural order is not at all significant for him. (Therefore it is not necessary for him to seek an instrument or medium.) Accordingly, even if he possesses a natural instrument or a medium through which he could receive his livelihood, his livelihood is no closer to him than it would have been had he not had that instrument or medium. For he does not attach any independent importance to that medium. His sole perception [of the situation] is that he receives everything directly from G-d. And the instrument and the medium is also made for him by G-d together with his livelihood.[50]

This is also the explanation of the conduct of Rabbi Yeisa the Elder[51] who said: "A meal should not be prepared until it has been given from the King" (although he already possessed his food for that day).

Rabbi Yeisa's approach to bitachon was that he looked at every act (individually), (not as his own deed, but rather) as a gift from G-d.[52] Accordingly, [from such a perspective,] even when one possesses the food at home and all that is necessary is for him to take it and prepare it, he does not feel that he is taking and preparing his own food, but instead, that he is (- in the present tense -) being given something by G-d. Therefore he must request these [needs] from G-d, (just as he would request his sustenance if he did not have food at home).

VI.

This explanation enables us to clarify another aspect in the conduct of Rabbi Yeisa the Elder. The wording of the Zohar: "[Rabbi Yeisa] would not prepare his meal every day until after he had made his request..." implies that Rabbi Yeisa conducted himself in this manner even on Shabbos.[53] There is a difficulty in this case. Shabbos is not a day when we request our needs. Why then would Rabbi Yeisa pray for his [daily] sustenance from G-d, even on Shabbos?

Based on the above, [his conduct] can be understood: The requests for one's needs that are considered inappropriate on Shabbos involve situations where the person is concerned with himself: that his needs and lacks be fulfilled. The prayer of Rabbi Yeisa the Elder, [by contrast,] was aroused by the fact that his own existence was entirely insignificant. [Instead,] he felt every dimension of his existence was dependent on G-d. The Zohar[54] describes such conduct by referring to the phrase:[55] "Those who long for His kindness," interpreting it as "those who every day await and anticipate [the opportunity to] request their sustenance from the Holy One, blessed be He." The intent of their prayers is only to express how they "long for His kindness"[56]; how they feel that everything they receive is an expression of G-d's kindness.

Praying for one's sustenance in this manner is acceptable even on Shabbos.

VII.

The conduct of Rabbi Yeisa the Elder is not [- in its entirety -] a matter that [can be emulated by] every person. Nevertheless, in microcosm,[57] his approach is relevant to everyone,[58] at the very least, at specific times.

It is possible to say that this is the difference between Shabbos and the weekdays. During the six days of the week, a person is involved with earning his livelihood.[59] Thus his trust is expressed in seeking an instrument and a medium [for G-d's blessing]. For [during the week] we cannot ask him to lift himself entirely above the natural order and express the higher level of bitachon. Shabbos, by contrast, is not a day of work.[60] And when a person is removed from work, he must express (at least on a smaller scale) the higher level of bitachon, [conducting himself as] "those who long for Your kindness."

On this basis, it is possible to explain the difference between the wording of the Mahadura Kama and the Mahadura Basra of the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch with regard to the recitation of the passage concerning the manna. The Alter Rebbe composed the Mahadura Kama of his Shulchan Aruch according to the rulings of the Talmud and the halachic authorities.[61] On an apparent level (according to the revealed dimensions of Torah Law), bitachon involves preparing a medium [for G-d's blessings]. [Accordingly,] were he to explain the rationale for the recitation of the passage concerning the manna as "[to spur] one's trust in G-d," the recitation of this passage would be appropriate only during the week and only after prayer (as stated in sec. III).

Therefore in his Mahadura Kama,[62] the Alter Rebbe states that the rationale for the recitation of the passage concerning the manna (every day) is "to fortify his faith that all his provisions are granted to him by Divine providence."

In his Mahadura Basra, the Alter Rebbe rules according to the Kabbalists.[63] Accordingly, he also includes a course of conduct that reflects higher levels of Divine service. Therefore[64] he mentions the rationale: "[to spur] one's trust in G-d Who provides every man with his daily bread." For according to the higher level of bitachon [displayed by] "those who long for His kindness," it is appropriate to recite the passage concerning the manna every day - even on Shabbos (and even before prayer).

(Adapted from Sichos Shabbos Parshas Beshalach, 5723)

   

Notes:

1. (Back to text) Orach Chayim, sec. 1; see also Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 1:5.

2. (Back to text) See the Perishah (based on the Talmud Yerushalmi, Berachos*) which states: "Whoever recites the passage concerning the manna every day can rest assured [that his sustenance will not be decreased]." Similarly, the Alter Rebbe (Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Mahadura Kama 1:10 and Mahadura Basra 1:9) [mentions the importance of the recitation of the passage every day]. See Turei Zahav 1:4. See also [sec. III] of this sichah and fn. 32. Note also Or HaTorah, Beshalach, p. 644, (see also Maamarei Admur HaZakein - Razal, p. 35) which states "every day or from time to time."

   * Sefer HaManhig, Hilchos Shabbos, sec. 44, quotes this wording from "the conclusion of tractate Yoma in the Talmud Yerushalmi.** Similarly, the Tashbeitz (the halachic rulings of Maharam of Rutenberg), the Laws of Prayer, sec. 256, cites the source as "the Talmud Yerushalmi." It has already been noted that there is no such quote in the present text of the Talmud Yerushalmi. Rabbeinu Bachaye in his commentary to Shmos 16:16 quotes this insight as "a received tradition among the Sages."

   ** This is the version according to one of the manuscript copies [of Sefer HaManhig]. (See the Jerusalem printing of 5738 which mentions the different versions of the text.) In the present printing of Sefer HaManhig, however, the words "at the conclusion of tractate Yoma" refer to a previous statement, that the manna was "as if placed in a holder" (Yoma 75b). The latter version is also necessary according to the wording of the manuscript of the text that does not mention the Talmud Yerushalmi and the quote cited above at all.

3. (Back to text) In his commentary to the Tur.

4. (Back to text) 1:10.

5. (Back to text) 1:5.

6. (Back to text) Shmos 16:18. The citation of this verse is an addition by the Alter Rebbe that is not present in his source, the Levush. See fn. 12.

7. (Back to text) 1:9.

8. (Back to text) It is noteworthy to mention that in this entire subsection, the Alter Rebbe condenses his statements when compared to the Mahadura Kama. For example, with regard to the binding of Yitzchak, in the Mahadura Kama, he quotes (from the Beis Yosef) two rationales: "to recall the merit of the Patriarchs before the Holy One, blessed be He... and to make one's [evil] inclination submit to the service of G-d, just as Yitzchak sacrificed himself." In the Mahadura Basra, by contrast, he states only "to recall the merit of the Patriarchs."*

   Similarly, in the Mahadura Basra, he does not mention the rationale for the recitation of the Ten Commandments, nor the lengthy explanation of why they are not recited communally, that are found in the Mahadura Kama. Similarly, with regard to the sacrifices (in addition to the fact that they are all included in the same subsection, in contrast to the Mahadura Kama which lists them in several subsections), the Mahadura Basra omits several of the particular laws mentioned in the Mahadura Kama. (See Mahadura Kama, subsec. 15ff.)

   With regard to the passage concerning the manna, however, the Alter Rebbe does not merely condense his statements, he changes [several points,] as will be explained at length.

   * These differences were explained, according to the teachings of Chassidus, in Sichos Shabbos Parshas Beshalach, 5723.

9. (Back to text) This point is also added by the Levush. Clarification is required why the Alter Rebbe did not quote this point from the Levush in his Mahadura Kama. See fn. 12.

10. (Back to text) See Shmos 16:4.

11. (Back to text) Devarim 8:17. This verse comes as a continuation of the previous verse which mentions the manna.

12. (Back to text) On this basis, we can appreciate why the Alter Rebbe adds (as stated in fn. 6) the prooftext: "He who had gathered much had no excess, and he who had gathered little lacked nothing." The fact that each member of one's household received exactly an omer was mentioned in the previous verse. This verse, however, [has a different emphasis,] highlighting that man's actions do not alter [what has been ordained for him from Above].

    On this basis, we can also understand [another difference between the Alter Rebbe's statement of this concept and that of] the Levush. The Levush states that a person's sustenance is granted behashgachah peratis, with the unique Divine providence that governs every particular aspect of an individual's destiny (see fn. 9). The Alter Rebbe omits the word peratis [which emphasizes control of all particular elements of one's destiny], for according to the Alter Rebbe, the emphasis is {not on the fact that the manna was granted according to hashgachah peratis (exactly an omer apportioned for each person),* but rather} that the manna was granted in a manner in which it was overtly revealed that it came from Above and man's deeds had no effect upon it.

    * The Levush, by contrast, emphasizes that a person's sustenance is controlled by Divine providence. On this basis, we can appreciate the difference in the wording used by the Levush and the Alter Rebbe. The Levush quotes the verse, "an omer for [each of] the number of members of his household," [putting an emphasis on the fact that each individual received his portion]. The Alter Rebbe, by contrast, states, "an omer [of manna] for every member of his household," [speaking more inclusively].

13. (Back to text) Similar concepts apply with regard to [another dimension of] emunah, that it is an encompassing power [which does not necessarily produce an internalized effect on a person. This] also [applies] even with regard to actual [life situations, and it is possible that before breaking into a house, a thief will cry out to G-d (Berachos 63a, according to the version of the Ein Yaakov). [Such a contradiction] is not possible with regard to bitachon.

14. (Back to text) [It is true that] the concept of bitachon always exists within the feelings of the person who shows trust. The actual arousal and revelation of the quality of trust, however, occurs only when [this quality is] called upon in actual life. See the beginning of Nesiv HaBitachon in Nesivos Olam by the Maharal.

15. (Back to text) Devarim 15:18.

16. (Back to text) Tehillim 121:1.

17. (Back to text) See [the statements of] Rabbeinu Yonah [quoted in] Kad HaKemach, erech Bitachon. See [also] the marginal note in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. III, p. 883 (also printed in Igros Kodesh of the Rebbe Rayatz, Vol. VI, p. 398ff). See also sec. IV of this sichah and the sources cited in fn. 43.

18. (Back to text) Tehillim, loc. cit.:2.

19. (Back to text) With regard to the concepts that follow, see Likkutei Sichos, Vol. III, loc. cit.

20. (Back to text) See Kad HaKemach, loc. cit., which states: "Everyone who trusts in G-d has emunah.... But a person who has emunah may not have bitachon, for sometimes he may fear that his sins will have an effect." See the Tzemach Tzedek's Biurei HaZohar, pp. 189 and 192.

21. (Back to text) See the Introduction to Shaar HaBitachon in Chovos HaLevavos which explains that such an approach reflects the attribute of bitachon.

22. (Back to text) See the Mishnah, Sotah 8b.

    [Trans. Note: The intent is that since one's bitachon in G-d transcends reason and logic, G-d rewards him with good that is not bound by the scales of reason and logic.]

23. (Back to text) See the lengthy explanation in Nesivos Olam, loc. cit. Note Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 11: "With this faith, everything becomes good in a revealed manner. ([This passage is] quoted in Biurei HaZohar, loc. cit., p. 194, which states: "Through emunah and bitachon...."

24. (Back to text) Since G-d rewards man "measure for measure," at the outset, man may trust that [his bitachon] will be rewarded. Note Kad HaKemach, loc. cit., which states: "The concept of bitachon... is for one's heart to be steadfast, trusting [G-d], as if He actually promised him." See also Chovos HaLevavos, loc. cit., chs. 1-2.

25. (Back to text) This also applies according to the rationale given by the Perishah (cited in fn. 2) that the recitation of the passage was instituted "so that a person's sustenance will not be decreased."

26. (Back to text) Be'er Heitev, Orach Chayim 1:9 states that this passage may also be recited on Shabbos. This also appears to be the opinion of Sefer HaManhig (cited in the marginal notes to fn. 2) that discusses the recitation of the passage concerning the manna in "the Laws of Shabbos." See the continuation of this sichah.

27. (Back to text) It is possible to explain that [the recitation of the passage concerning the manna] is not comparable to the recitation of the passages concerning the sacrifices of private individuals. [In the latter instances, although these sacrifices were not offered on Shabbos,] "there is no difficulty with his reciting the Scriptural passages themselves, for he is, [after all,] reading the Torah" (Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Mahadura Kama 1:16, Magen Avraham 1:11). In this instance, it is only "as if he offered the sacrifices." With regard to the recitation of the passage concerning the manna, by contrast, its recitation is intended to arouse (in actual practice) one's trust in G-d. Hence, it is possible to say that it is inappropriate to recite it on Shabbos. Clarification is still necessary.

28. (Back to text) [With regard to the question of] whether the manna descended on festivals, see the comments of the Mechilta, the Mechilta D'Rashbi, and Rashi to Shmos 16:26 and Tosafos, s.v. vihayah, Beitzah 2b. See also Toras Shlomoh to Shmos, op. cit.

29. (Back to text) Berachos 32a, [quoted by] the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch HaRav 51:1.

30. (Back to text) Siddur Yaavetz, Avodas Yisrael, et al. See also the statement quoted in Orchos Chayim (HaChadash), Orach Chayim 1, that one who prays for his livelihood after the recitation of this passage as stated in the Siddurim should wait until after the Shemoneh Esreh, because it is written in the Zohar, Parshas Pinchas, that one should not pray for his livelihood before the morning prayers. Similar statements are made by Makor Chayim (authored by the author of Chavos Yair) in his gloss to Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim.

31. (Back to text) See also Olas Tamid (gloss to Orach Chayim, loc. cit.) which is cited by the Be'er Heitev, loc. cit.

32. (Back to text) It appears obvious that the Alter Rebbe's intent in adding the words "every day" (that are not stated in the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch) is to include Shabbos. (This also applies with regard to the passage of the Akeidah [the Binding of Yitzchak].) This is also the conclusion of the texts cited by the Be'er Heitev, loc. cit.

33. (Back to text) [Trans. Note: The Ten Commandments is included in parentheses, for although in his Shulchan Aruch the Alter Rebbe advises its inclusion in the morning prayers, he does not include it in his text of the Siddur.]

34. (Back to text) [Moreover,] in the Mahadura Kama, the laws regarding the recitation of the passages concerning the sacrifices are mentioned in separate subsections.

35. (Back to text) There are, however, (as cited in Maasef LeChol HaMachanos, Orach Chayim 1:9) some who recite the passage concerning the Akeidah after prayer (as is the practice with the passage concerning the manna).

36. (Back to text) In many sources (Maamarei Admur HaZakein, 5565, Vol. II (pp. 648, 652); Siddur Im Dach, p. 112d; Derech Mitzvosecha, Mitzvas Tiglachas Metzora, sec. 2, et al.), this story is told of Rav Hamnuna, the Elder. And in Kuntreis U'Maayon (Discourse 17, ch. 1), it is told of Rabbi Yeibei the Elder.

37. (Back to text) Zohar II, 62b; see also Zohar I, 199b.

38. (Back to text) Zohar I, loc. cit.; II, p. 62a.

39. (Back to text) Note our Sages' comment (Shabbos 118b): "Whoever recites Hallel every day is base."

40. (Back to text) At the conclusion of his commentary to Parshas Vayeishev.

41. (Back to text) Bereishis Rabbah 89:3; Rashi's commentary to Bereishis 40:23.

42. (Back to text) See Bereishis 40:14.

43. (Back to text) Or HaTorah (Yahel Or) L'Tehillim, ch. 40:5; the maamar entitled Velo Zachor, 5677 and 5688; see also Maamarei Admur HaZakein 5565, Vol. I, p. 200; Toras Chayim, Parshas Vayechi, the maamar entitled Ben Poreis Yosef, ch. 13.

44. (Back to text) Shaar HaBitachon, ch. 3, the fifth introduction, loc. cit., ch. 4. This concept is reiterated in many sources. See also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XV, p. 486ff.

45. (Back to text) The maamar entitled Velo Zachor, loc. cit.

46. (Back to text) See the series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, Vol. I, ch. 82 (with regard to the two levels of bitachon [as implied by the verse (Tehillim 118:8)]: "It is preferable to take refuge in G-d than to trust in man" which are discussed in the maamar entitled Velo Zachor, loc. cit.)

47. (Back to text) See the series of maamarim entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu, 5672, loc. cit., which states: "When one sees that one's conduct should follow this pattern, we do not apply the principle: 'One should not rely on a miracle.'"

48. (Back to text) See the sources cited in fn. 43 that clarify the difference between [the spiritual levels of] Yaakov and Yosef.

49. (Back to text) With regard to the concepts to follow, see Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XVI, p. 174ff. (see fn. 52) and Vol. XVIII, p. 295ff.

50. (Back to text) See the interpretation of [Tehillim 55:23]: "He will provide for you (lkfkfh)," [as "He will provide the hkf ("medium") for you,] in the maamar entitled Velo Zachor, loc. cit.

51. (Back to text) See the sources mentioned in fn. 36. See also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I, p. 6ff., which offers a slightly different conception.

52. (Back to text) The connection to the manna can be understood on the basis of the explanation in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XV, p. 176, with regard to the verse (Shmos 16:4): "Behold, I will rain down for you bread from heaven." And there was a dimension of the manna that involved effort on man's part.

53. (Back to text) See the Zohar I, 199a, which states [that a person should not cook his food on one day for the following day, except on Friday, for the people would collect the manna only for] that immediate day except on Friday, [when they would also collect] for Shabbos.

54. (Back to text) Zohar II, loc. cit. See Or HaTorah, Beshalach, p. 644 (quoted in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XVI, p. 177, fn. 35).

55. (Back to text) Tehillim 147:11.

56. (Back to text) Note the teaching of the Maggid of Mezritch {Or Torah, the beginning of Parshas Vayigash; see Tikkunei Zohar, Tikkun 7 (p. 22a)} concerning our Sages' statement (Berachos 30b): "One should not stand to pray except with a serious intent," that [the seriousness of one's intent should focus on] "there lacking nothing Above, Heaven forbid." See also the explanation in the Haggadah Shel Pesach Im Biurim (Kehot 5746-5747), p. 633ff., with regard to eating for the sake of Heaven, that eating becomes secondary to the recitation of the blessing, that one benefits from this world only so that he will be able to recite a blessing.

57. (Back to text) See the statements of the Alter Rebbe in Tanya, the beginning of ch. 44, with regard to Moshe. (See also the Zohar I, Introduction, p. 7b, the glosses of Mikdash Melech, and Sefer HaGilgulim, Introduction 36, which mention the connection between Rav Hamnuna the Elder to Moshe.)

58. (Back to text) See Sotah 48b; Yoma 76a; Mechilta and Midrash Tanchuma, Beshalach, commenting on Shmos 16:4; Zohar II, 62a, 63a; Or HaTorah, as cited in fn. 54.

59. (Back to text) As Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 156:1 rules, after prayer one should "turn to his business... and trade faithfully."

60. (Back to text) Yechezkel 46:1.

61. (Back to text) See Shulchan Aruch HaRav 25:28.

62. (Back to text) This ruling is also found in the Beis Yosef, although [even] in nigleh, the revealed teachings of Torah Law, it is stated in many places that the manna was intended to spur bitachon. See the sources cited in fn. 58.

63. (Back to text) See beginning of the Shaar HaKollel {also printed as an appendix to Shulchan Aruch HaRav, Orach Chayim 31:1 (183a), 32:2 (184b)}. It is worthy to note that the AriZal was not accustomed to recite the passage concerning the manna {Siddur HaAriZal (R. Shabsi Rashkover), after the passage Abbaye Havah Mesadder [in our daily prayers]; see Shaar HaKavannos, Inyan Birchos HaShachar; Pri Etz Chayim, Shaar Olam HaAsiyah, ch. 3}. Similarly, the Alter Rebbe omits it in his Siddur.

    See Or HaTorah, loc. cit., which states: "The suggested advice for this is for a person to recite the passage concerning the manna with concentration every day or from time to time."

64. (Back to text) Clarification is still necessary, for the type [of individuals who can manifest such Divine service] is a minority. {And as our Sages (Berachos 35b) state: "Many attempted to conduct themselves according to the directives of Rabbi Yishmael [who ruled that a person must balance his commitment to Torah study with concern for his work] and were successful."