Likkutei Sichos, Vol. VI, p. 13ff.

I

The Talmud explains[1] that the verse:[2] "And they embittered their lives with mortar and bricks, and all [sorts of] work in the field, all their work...," [reflects a sequence]. First, they compelled them to work with "mortar and bricks." Afterwards, they were forced to do "all [sorts of] work in the field," and ultimately,[3] "all their work."

The commentaries[4] explain the Talmud's intent as follows: One might ask: Why does the verse single out "mortar and bricks"? Seemingly, these tasks are also included in "all their work." Therefore the Talmud explains that "mortar and bricks" came first. It was the beginning of their "work in the field." Therefore the verse mentions it (first and) as a separate category.

Every concept in the Torah is extremely precise. The fact that the work with "mortar and bricks" came first (and only afterwards came "all their work") reflects more than chronological precedence. It was also the most significant and most difficult element of their enslavement. When describing the enslavement of the Jews in Egypt with a general statement, one would say that they performed work with "mortal and bricks." Afterwards, as one begins to explain the various particulars, one would speak of their "work in the field."

From this, we can conclude that even ultimately, when the Jews performed "all their work," the core of their enslavement involved making bricks.[5] This concept is also reflected in the ensuing phases of the narrative, for when Pharaoh desired to "make the work difficult for the men,"[6] {- an event which took place in the final phases of the enslavement in Egypt, after Moshe and Aharon had already come to Pharaoh as G-d's emissaries and told him to release the people -} he sought to accomplish this, (not through any other type of work, but) through the task of making bricks. [He told his overseers] not to give the Jews any straw for the bricks, and yet to require them to produce the same quantity of bricks in the same given amount of time as they had previously.

Moreover, throughout the time of the enslavement, the Jews' workday was primarily devoted to making bricks (although they also performed other tasks). This is understood from the interpretation the Midrash offers[7] to the verse:[8] "And the Egyptians made the children of Israel perform excruciating (BePerech) labor," as Be'Peh Rach, "with a soft tongue,"[9] [i.e., with deception]. Pharaoh himself took a basket and a rake and made bricks, and while performing this work, he told the Jewish people: "Work together with me today as a favor," i.e., that they should follow his example and make bricks.[10] [The Jews fell for his ploy, and] worked with him "with all their strength." When night fell, Pharaoh had a reckoning made of the bricks and told the Jews: "Prepare this amount every day."

Since every day, they had to prepare the same number of bricks that they had made on that first day when they had worked "with all their strength" for the entire day, it follows that throughout the later time of their enslavement, the overwhelming majority of their time - indeed, it could almost be said their entire time[11] - was spent making bricks.[12] The other work which they performed was carried out during the few extra hours they had and at night.[13]

On this basis, we can appreciate why the Torah mentions explicitly the Jews' work "with bricks and mortar." For even after they were compelled to perform "all their work," their primary occupation was making bricks.

II

To explain why the fundamental aspect of the Jews' enslavement[14] involved "mortar and bricks": As stated on a different occasion at length,[15] the explanation of the verse: "And Egypt enslaved the children of Israel... and they embittered their lives" [refers to the Jews' spiritual vitality]. For the true vitality and the true energy of the Jewish people stems from holiness[16] (from their G-dly soul).[17]

The Egyptians desired [to subjugate this potential and] use it to build storage cities for Pharaoh. Instead of the Jews building a dwelling for G-d, building "the city of our G-d,"[18] they were compelled by those "who cause them aggravation and distress"[19] to use their holy powers to establish a dwelling for kelipah, "storage cities for Pharaoh."

"One corresponds to the other."[20] "The city of our G-d" is built from stone (just as a city is built from many houses, and the houses built from stone[21] - for the fundamental strength of a house depends on the stones with which it is built).[22] The cities of kelipah, by contrast (for kelipah copies holiness as a monkey mimics man[23]) [are built from bricks]. And thus the essential enslavement of the Jewish people involved making bricks (for "they used bricks in place of stones"[24]), the building blocks for the Egyptian cities.

On this basis, we can understand why "mortar and bricks" is mentioned before the general term "all of their work" (as mentioned in sec. I). For the inner meaning of every act that a person performs is building. When he performs a positive act, whether a mitzvah or an activity which is neither commanded or forbidden, but is carried out "for the sake of heaven"[25] or [in a manner which fulfills the charge:[26]] "Know Him in all your ways," he adds a stone to the building of holiness. And when he performs an undesirable act, he adds a brick to the building of kelipah. The different nature of the activities is expressed in the type of building, but there is a common factor shared by all the activities, they are all building. (Positive activities are building Jerusalem, while negative activities are building Tyre.)[27]

III

Within stones themselves, there are two categories: stones and bricks. Stones are created by G-d, while bricks are fashioned by man.[28] The work performed by the Jews in Egypt centered primarily (not on using stones, but) on making bricks.

What is the difference between stones and bricks? Stones are created by G-d and allude to a high level of holiness.[29] Therefore, at the outset, the Beis HaMikdash was to be built from stone,[30] and Eretz Yisrael is praised[31] as "a land whose stones are iron."

Bricks, by contrast, refer to activities which are reshus, neither commanded nor forbidden,[32] but whose outcome - whether holiness or the opposite - depends on man's intention.

{For this reason, we find that the prohibition against prostrating oneself with outstretched hands and legs applies only on a stone floor, and not on a brick floor.[33] For the prohibition was instituted so that an activity - prostration - which resembles an activity performed in the Beis HaMikdash[34] should not be performed outside of the Beis HaMikdash. Since bricks do not allude to any element of holiness, prostrating oneself on a brick floor does not resemble the service of prostration performed in the Beis HaMikdash.}

Indeed, bricks have (the potential [to be used] for) the opposite of holiness.[35] Thus the Talmud, when speaking about designating a false divinity,[36] gives as an example:[37] "He erected a brick."[38] A similar concept is reflected in Rashi's commentary[39] [explaining why the Tower of Bavel was built with bricks]: "For there are no stones in Bavel, for it is a valley." Since Bavel (and any valley[40]) is a low place, a place where the Divine light is concealed, a place of darkness, to the extent that the Torah applies the phrase:[41] "He set me down in a dark place," to the Babylonian Talmud.[42] Therefore the level of stones which are created by Heaven is not relevant to Bavel.

IV

Based on the above, it is possible to explain why the arduous labor the Jews had to perform in Egypt concerned bricks and not stones. Since the purpose of their work was to build "storage cities for Pharaoh," the very opposite of "the city of our G-d," the building could not be performed with stones which reflect the realm of holiness, but rather with bricks, which are appropriate for "cities for Pharaoh."

This explanation is, however, insufficient. For, as explained above, the intent of the Egyptians was to use the power and vitality of holiness the Jews possessed to build the cities of kelipah, as indicated by the verse: "And Egypt enslaved the children of Israel... and they embittered their lives."[43] Thus it would seem appropriate that they would have sought (and indeed, with greater intensity[44]) to use stones for their cities, for this would have enabled them to derive nurture from the holiness contained in the stones which are created by G-d.[45]

We must therefore say that the opposite is true. Despite the great advantage possessed by stones, bricks must contain an even greater quality. And because of that greater quality, the Egyptians so anxiously endeavored to make the Jews work (as their highest priority and for the most time) with bricks. For their intent was to introduce into the realm of kelipah the high spiritual level associated with bricks.

V

On the surface, it is possible to explain that the advantage possessed by bricks over stone (which, because of this advantage, the Egyptians desired to have the "storage cities for Pharaoh" built from bricks) is that their level is lower.

As is well known, "The Holy One, blessed be He, desired that He (blessed be He)[46] have a dwelling in the lower realms."[47] As the Alter Rebbe (whose yahrzeit falls on Teves 24 [48]) emphasizes,[49] this refers to [our material world], for "there is no lower level below it." Thus the lower the level that becomes a dwelling for G-d, the deeper and more consummate is the fulfillment of His will and intent. Thus building "the city of G-d" with bricks, which are on a lower level, fulfills G-d's intent more than building it with stones.[50]

To cite a parallel: The Beis HaMikdash possesses an advantage over the Sanctuary which accompanied the Jews in the desert. The Sanctuary was a temporary dwelling for G-d,[51] and was built primarily from (boards of) cedar, i.e., from the plant kingdom. The Beis HaMikdash, by contrast, is G-d's permanent dwelling[52] and it was built from stone,[53] inanimate matter, which is lower[54] than plants.[55]

In truth, however, this explanation is not sufficient. If this was the higher quality that bricks possess (and thus it would be fitting to build "the city of our G-d" from bricks to fulfill G-d's intent for a dwelling in the lower worlds in a more consummate manner), the Egyptians (seeking to use the highest potentials the realm of holiness possesses for the purposes of kelipah) should have desired that the building of the cities for Pharaoh, the cities of kelipah, be performed only (by Jews) using bricks. It does not seem appropriate, however, for them to have forced the Jews to make bricks.

The fact that the Egyptians did compel the Jews to perform that activity - indeed, the fundamental element of their enslavement was directed toward that end[56] - indicates that making bricks expresses the ultimate advantage [of a Jew's service]. (And for that reason, the Egyptians compelled the Jews to make the bricks for Pharaoh's cities, so that they could derive nurture from the elevated effect produced by that activity.)

VI

The elevated quality which is brought out by making bricks can be understood through the preface of a more detailed explanation of the difference between the Sanctuary and the Beis HaMikdash stated above. [As mentioned,] the Sanctuary was made primarily from plants, while the Beis HaMikdash was built from stone.

Were it true that the Sanctuary did not include inanimate matter at all, one could say simply that it had not brought about a dwelling in the lower worlds. [For G-d's dwelling would not have encompassed] the realm of inanimate matter, the lowest rung possible (and that would not be achieved until the building of the Beis HaMikdash). In truth, however, the Sanctuary also included inanimate matter, for the floor of the Sanctuary was from earth. And the earth was an integral element of the Sanctuary as a whole; it also contributed to the indwelling of G-d's Presence, as evident from the verse:[57] "And the priest will take from the earth on the floor of the Sanctuary."

As such, since G-dliness was drawn down to the lowest levels possible in the Sanctuary, why was the Sanctuary built from the plant kingdom instead of inanimate matter as was the Beis HaMikdash?

VII

The above concepts can be explained as follows: The elevated level that is achieved through drawing down G-dliness into the lower realms can be expressed in two ways:

1. Drawing G-dly light down in a manner which expresses its unlimited power, that it is infinite, and cannot be confined. It can even illuminate the lowest possible form of existence. (Were, by contrast, the light to be limited, it would not be able to extend that low.)

   To cite a parallel [in the human realm]: a generous person. The greater his quality of generosity, the further he extends it, reaching out to people on lower levels. Avraham our Patriarch [can be pointed out as a paradigm]. His quality of kindness was so unbounded[58] that he granted influence to Arabs - who bowed down - to the dust on their feet.[59]

2. Through the fact that by drawing down G-dliness, His greatness is appreciated within the lower worlds. This expresses (not only the unlimited nature of the light, that it can be extended until the lowest levels, but also) the truth of G-dliness. This is reflected in the fact that created beings on a low spiritual plane (who are not G-dly) will also recognize Him.[60]

This new development, that created beings should recognize G-dliness, is a far greater (breakthrough and) advantage over the extension of G-dliness to this material plane. For in this second motif, the truth of G-dliness is expressed so powerfully that even another entity recognizes the truth. To borrow an expression coined by the Ralbag:[61] "The unique dimension of truth is that accord is reflected from every side."[62]

Since we are speaking about a recognition of the truth of G-dliness on the part of creations within our material frame of reference, it is clear that this recognition is achieved fundamentally and in the most consummate manner through developing an awareness of G-dliness from proofs derived from the nature of creation itself; ([this follows the motif of haalah] mimateh limaalah). For this demonstrates how the creation itself reflects the truth of G-dliness. Nevertheless, even when the awareness [on the part] of a created being comes as a result of a revelation of G-dly light from Above[63] - in which instance the awareness has not permeated the created being's conceptual framework as powerfully - there is still an advantage to the fact that the G-dly light is appreciated and His truth recognized over the revelation of the light itself.[64] For the acceptance of influence [points to a higher and] deeper level than [the generation of] the influence itself.[65] To express this concept using the terminology of Chassidus: "The source of the keilim (the receptacles of Divine light) is higher than the source of the light."

{[This concept can also be illustrated by] an analogy of a generous person.[66] His desire to do good for others comes (not only because of the want of the recipient, that he is in need of the giver's generosity, but also) as a result of his own nature. Since he is by nature a generous person, that nature seeks expression in giving and doing good for others.

To cite an example: When Avraham our Patriarch had no guests to whom to show hospitality, it caused him pain.[67] Since he was a generous person, his nature pushed him to do good.[68] Therefore, just as the expression of his nature through doing good brought him pleasure, when his attribute of kindness lacked expression, he felt discomfort.

Nevertheless, we see that when a generous person does a kindness to another person, and that person accepts [and recognizes] the kindness, this awakens a greater degree of satisfaction than that evoked by the giving itself. For, as stated above, the acceptance of influence [points to a higher and] deeper level than [the generation of] the influence itself.[69]}

VIII

The above reflects the difference between the Sanctuary and the Beis HaMikdash: The Sanctuary gave expression to the unlimited power of G-d's light, showing how it can be extended to the lowest possible levels, even to inanimate matter. The Beis HaMikdash, by contrast, reflected [a deeper step]: the beings of this material plane - even inanimate matter - became a medium for G-dliness.

For this reason, the Sanctuary was itself constructed in a manner which reflects [descent] from above downward. The roof of the Sanctuary was made from the hides of rams, techashim,[70] and goats, and their wool,[71] i.e., the animal kingdom. The walls ([wooden boards,] which were below the roof) were from the plant kingdom, and the floor of the Sanctuary was earth (inanimate matter). In the Beis HaMikdash, in contrast, an opposite motif was followed. The fundamental and primary element of the structure was [stone,] inanimate matter.[72] It was used to build the entire Beis HaMikdash. Although there was a sub-structure built with beams of cedar, this was only an auxiliary element,[73] necessary for support and the like.[74]

When the advantage of the lowest level is that it enables the infinite power of G-d's light to be expressed, showing that the light can be drawn down to such a low level (but not that this level itself [becomes a medium which] expresses that light), the lowest level receives the final phases, the nethermost levels, of the influence. [The rationale is that] since the motif follows the pattern of light being drawn down as a revelation from Above, it is drawn down to the higher levels first and then to the lower levels. The lower levels thus follow (also qualitatively) the higher levels. This is the pattern that was manifest in the Sanctuary.[75]

When, however, the higher quality is expressed through the lower level itself and ascending its becoming a medium for G-dliness [through] recognizing His greatness, it is apparent that the fundamental importance is the lowest level.[76] Therefore the Beis HaMikdash [which expresses this motif] was made primarily of stone.[77]

IX

The Beis HaMikdash fulfilled the ideal that elements of this lowly world itself become vessels for G-dliness (and not only that the light is drawn down through them). Nevertheless, it did not accomplish the ultimate expression of a dwelling in the lower realms. It is only in the Future era, the Era of Mashiach, and more particularly, the Era of the Resurrection,[78] that this purpose will be consummated. The Beis HaMikdash was only "a microcosm of the World to Come,"[79] and not the ultimate expression of G-d's dwelling in the lower realms.[80]

These concepts can be understood through [the preface of the explanation of the well-known statement of the Alter Rebbe,[81] [when asked why G-d] "desired a dwelling in the lower realms" [answered]: "With regard to a 'desire,' you don't ask why."[82]

The intent is that G-d did not have a reason[83] why He wanted a dwelling in the lower worlds. It was a desire, as it were, something which is above having a reason.[84]

From this, it is understood that this dwelling in the lower realms, which is the subject of G-d's desire (which is above reason), does not reflect the attainment of a particular purpose or the attainment of fulfillment. For were this to be the case, that purpose or fulfillment would be the reason for His wanting a dwelling. Instead, the intent is something that cannot be considered as an advantage or the attainment of fulfillment.[85] [There is no reason or logic for it.] Only this can represent the true dwelling in the lower realms in which the intent that G-d desired is expressed.

Therefore (in the Sanctuary and) in the Beis HaMikdash, the true purpose of the dwelling in the lower realms which G-d desired was not manifest. For the dwelling [for G-d brought about by these structures] expressed a particular advantage[86] [- these structures brought into an expression a positive quality that is recognizable]. {[In the Sanctuary,] G-d's light was drawn down even to the lowest levels, and} [in the Beis HaMikdash,] entities of this material world became a medium for G-dliness. [But the fact that the positive value of these achievements is recognizable indicates that this is not the dwelling His essence desired.]

X

Where is the ultimate expression of the dwelling in the lower worlds that "the Holy One, blessed be He, desired"?

In Tanya,[87] the Alter Rebbe explains that [His dwelling will be manifest] in [our material world], "the lowest level possible with regard to the concealment of [G-d's] light, a double and multiplied darkness to the extent that it is filled with kelipos and the sitra achra which are actually contrary to G-d, saying 'I am, and there is nothing else but me.'[88]" [His dwelling will be manifest] in a place that has no connection with G-dliness. [It is not appropriate for G-dly light to shine there, and it is certainly not appropriate to become a medium for G-dliness.] On the contrary, it is filled with kelipos and the sitra achra whose existence is permeated by the feeling: "I am, there is nothing else but me."[89] Although they are the direct opposite of G-dliness and "are actually contrary to G-d," [it is] there [that] G-d desired to have His dwelling.

[The ultimate purpose is for] a Jew to take material entities which are "filled with kelipos and sitra achra which are contrary to G-d," and make a dwelling for G-d. [This is accomplished] (not through revealing the good and holiness which is latently concealed within them [- this is not possible, because -] their entire existence is "actually contrary to G-d,"[90] but rather) through breaking them and negating the sitra achra entirely. In this manner, the dwelling for G-d is established as a new creation through the Divine service of the Jewish people alone.[91] This is the dwelling desired[92] by the Holy One, blessed be He.[93]

And this - to make a dwelling for G-d even in a place where the created beings are "actually contrary to G-d" has no place in logic,[94] and it is not within the potential of the revealed levels of G-dliness.[95] For it is impossible to have an effect in such a place through drawing down G-dly light or even through the source of the keilim (for these levels cannot become vessels for G-d's] light, as explained above). [The transformation of such a place into a dwelling for Him] is possible only through the power from G-d's essence alone[96] (for it was He who desired to have this dwelling); "He alone has the power and the potential to create something from nothing and absolute non-being."[97] And He transferred, as it were, that power to the Jewish people so that they can make a dwelling for Him in the lower realms, despite this being an entirely new development, as explained above.[98]

XI

On this basis, we can appreciate the reason why the Jews' primary task in Egypt was making bricks. The way bricks are made is that after the prepared cement is poured into the mold used to form the bricks, they are placed into a fiery furnace[99] where they harden and become as strong as stone. As it is written with regard to the generation who built the Tower of Bavel:[100] "Let us make bricks and burn them in a fire, and the bricks will be as stone," i.e., it is through "burn[ing] them in fire," that the bricks become "as stone." [The fire] gives the bricks the hardness and strength that stones (creations made by G-d) [inherently] possess and enables one to use [the bricks] to build a structure (of holiness).[101]

Since the strength which the bricks possess comes from burning them in fire, we can apply the law stated with regard to an earthenware utensil: [102] After it is burned in a kiln, it is considered as a new entity.[103]

The strength the bricks possess is {not an innate tendency which the person is revealing,} but rather a new potential which is brought about primarily through the person's activity in burning the bricks and negating their previous form of existence.

Therefore making bricks (when this is done with the intent of using them to build "the city of our G-d") represents [the Jews'] task in making a dwelling for G-d in the lower realms. For the making of bricks involves two phases:

1. burning and negating the previous form of the bricks which stems from "the side of impurity,"[104] and

2. making them hard and strong as stone, infusing them with the strength of holiness possessed by stones which are made by G-d. [Endowing bricks with] this strength is a totally new development which is brought about through the labor of a mortal.

Parallels to these two phases are found in the mission of creating a dwelling in the lower worlds:

1. This is achieved through breaking and negating the kelipos and sitra achra of which the world is full, and

2. This is an entirely new creation which is brought about through man's Divine service.

For this reason, the fundamental task of the Jewish people throughout exile, beginning with the Egyptian exile, (the source for all [subsequent] exiles,[105]) involves making bricks. Since the consummation of the dwelling for G-d in the lower realms that will be manifest in the Era of Mashiach and the Era of the Resurrection is "dependent on our deeds and Divine service throughout the duration of the exile,"[106] our work must resemble [its purpose]. Therefore our work throughout the exile involves "making bricks."

Everything in the world begins in the Torah, [described as] "the Torah of life." [Occupying ourselves in] Libun Hilchesa the clarification of Torah law, [takes the place of making bricks Leveinim.][107] Through these efforts, we will merit [a new revelation of] Torah, "the revelation of P'nimiyus HaTorah in the Era of the Redemption, [when] 'I will show you wonders[108].' "[109] This will lead to [new revelations in the world], [bringing] the world to consummate perfection, [manifesting the purpose of] its creation,[110] for G-d's dwelling in the lower worlds will be complete. [This will come to fruition with] the coming of Mashiach. May it be in the immediate future.

   

Notes:

1. (Back to text) Sotah 11b.

2. (Back to text) Shmos 1:14.

3. (Back to text) See Shmos Rabbah 1:11; see all the Chidushei Aggados of the Maharsha to Sotah, loc. cit., who interprets the Talmudic passage in this manner.

4. (Back to text) See the Chidushei Aggados, loc. cit.

5. (Back to text) As Rashi states in his commentary to Shmos 24:10: "The Jews were enslaved in making bricks."

6. (Back to text) Shmos 5a.

7. (Back to text) Bamidbar Rabbah 15:20; Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Bahaaloscha, sec. 13; Tanchuma, Buber edition, sec. 23; see also Shmos Rabbah, ch. 1.

8. (Back to text) Shmos 1:13.

9. (Back to text) See also Sotah 11b.

10. (Back to text) See ibid. 11a.

11. (Back to text) We cannot say that they spent the entire day making bricks. For during a portion of the day, they built the cities for Pharaoh.* [It can, however, be said that building the cities] is also included in the work "with mortar and bricks." (See the Maharsha, loc. cit., who states that "in the beginning, they built cities for him." [In that vein, the phrase "with mortar and bricks"] can be interpreted "with mortar" - to make bricks - and "with bricks" - to build cities from them.

    The Ramban (in his commentary to Shmos 1:11) and the Or HaChayim (in his commentary to Shmos 1:14) state that building the cities is not included in the work "with bricks and mortar." They explain that, at the outset, the Jews began building cities, and only afterwards, were they forced to make bricks. [Despite their interpretation,] the simple meaning of the Talmudic and Midrashic passages indicates that [brick-making was their first and primary task], as explained above. See the Or HaChayim (in his commentary to Shmos 1:11) who states "According to their interpretation, one must say that words [of deception] BePeh Rach preceded the imposition of taskmasters."

    ---

    * It cannot be said that the Jews built the cities after nightfall, because:

    1. Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Vayeitzei, sec. 9, states that "the work in the field" was performed "after they returned to their homes in the evening."

    2. According to this, building the cities ("one of the primary tasks performed by the Jewish people") is not at all mentioned in the verse "And they embittered their lives" (it is merely included as a secondary factor in "all their work").

12. (Back to text) See Shmos Rabbah 1:12 [which states that the Egyptians told the Jews]: "If you go to sleep in your homes... you will not complete your quota."

13. (Back to text) Bereishis Rabbah 27:2; Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Vayeitzei, sec. 9.

14. (Back to text) This refers to the enslavement of the Jewish people in Egypt in an actual physical sense, and the spiritual exile and exodus from Egypt which every person must undergo, for "Each and every day, a person is obligated to see himself as if he left Egypt today" (Tanya, ch. 47, note the explanation there).

15. (Back to text) See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. II, p. 848ff.

16. (Back to text) For with regard to the Torah and its mitzvos, it is said (daily liturgy, evening service): "For they are our lives." See Kuntres U'Mayon, Discourse 7. See also the maamar entitled BeShaah SheHikdimu in the series of maamarim of that name from the year 5672 (ch. 2), which states: "For this reason, the type of activities in which a person is involved is very significant. For in each and every activity which a person performs, he introduces G-dly power." See also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. III, p. 848, note 22.

17. (Back to text) See Tanya, chs. 9 and 12, et al.

18. (Back to text) Cf. Tehillim 48:2. Note the interpretation in the notes of the Tzemach Tzedek to the verse.

19. (Back to text) Bereishis Rabbah 16:4 states that all the gentile powers who cause the Jews aggravation Meitzirim are called Egypt Mitzrayim.

20. (Back to text) ["The realm of unholiness corresponds to the realm of holiness" (Zohar, Vol. III, p. 47b, interpreting Koheles 7:14).]

21. (Back to text) See secs. 2 and 3 of the maamar entitled VeHayah HaNishar BiTziyon 5691, and sec. 3 of the maamar entitled Or LiArba Asor 5700, et al.

22. (Back to text) See Sefer HaYetzirah (the conclusion of ch. 4) which states: "Two stones build two houses...." Note also Negaim 12:2.

    For this reason the Beis HaMikdash, the consummate expression of "the city of our G-d," Jerusalem, was built primarily of stone, as will be explained in secs. 5 and 8.

23. (Back to text) Zohar, Vol. II, p. 148b; Yahel Or, p. 358, which quotes our Sages' comment (Midrash HaGadol), to Bereishis 5:3, [that between giving birth to Cain and Hevel and giving birth to Shes,] Adam fathered monkey-like creatures.

24. (Back to text) Cf. Bereishis 11:3. See Shaar HaPesukim, the beginning of Parshas Shmos, and Likkutei Torah, LiGimmel Parshiyos on the verse.

25. (Back to text) Avos 2:12.

26. (Back to text) Mishlei 3:6. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. III, pp. 907, 932.

27. (Back to text) See Rashi, Bereishis 25:23, based on Megillah 6a, and see also Zohar, Vol. II, pp. 236a, 240a, [which explain that building Jerusalem leads to the destruction of Tyre (Caesaria, according to some commentaries), and conversely, building Tyre leads Chas VeShlom to the destruction of Jerusalem].

28. (Back to text) See Torah Or, p. 77c; Likkutei Torah, LiGimmel Parshiyos, p. 72c ff.; See also the maamar entitled VeHayah HaNishar cited above, sec. VII.

29. (Back to text) See the maamar entitled VeHayah HaNishar; Likkutei Torah, LiGimmel Parshiyos, and Torah Or, loc. cit.,

30. (Back to text) Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Beis HaBechirah 1:8.

31. (Back to text) Devarim 8:9.

32. (Back to text) See Torah Or, loc. cit.

33. (Back to text) Magen Avraham, Orach Chayim 131:20.

34. (Back to text) Rashi, Megillah 22b, entry lo osra. The Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Avodas Kochavim 6:6ff (note the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh), in contrast, explains that the prohibition was instituted because it was a pagan practice. Even according to this interpretation, it is possible to explain that the pagans adopted this method of worship because it was one of the services in the Beis HaMikdash.

    {[To cite a parallel: The prohibition of sacrificing on] a monument (which is mentioned before the prohibition of prostrating oneself on a stone floor in the Rambam) was "cherished by the Patriarchs" (Sifri, Devarim 16:22), [but was forbidden afterwards because it was adopted by the pagans]. It is possible to explain that because it was cherished by the Patriarchs, it was adopted by the pagans (see Rashi, Devarim, loc. cit.; note also Or HaTorah, Vayeitzei, p. 198ff.).

    It must, however, be noted that the Beis HaMikdash (where there was a stone floor) was built many years after the commandment against prostrating oneself on a stone floor was given.

35. (Back to text) See Pardes Shaar Erchi HaKinnuim, erech leveinah; (quoted in Or HaTorah, Shmos, p. 24, the maamar entitled Zos Chanukas 5640, the conclusion of ch. 14; see also the maamar entitled VeHayah HaNishar, sec. 17) which states that "A brick is from the side of impurity."

36. (Back to text) [In a larger sense, this relates to all transgression, for when a person commits] even a minor transgression of a Rabbinic command, he becomes separate from the oneness and unity [of G-d], just as through the actual worship of false divinities. (see Tanya, chs. 24-25).

37. (Back to text) See Avodah Zarah 46a (see also Sotah 47a, although in some printings it was eliminated by the censor [which states that one of Yehoshua ben Parchia's students, presumably Yeshu of Nazareth, erected a brick and bowed down to it]).

    Note also [the interpretation of] Eichah 3:38: "From the mouth of the Most High will not issue forth evil."

38. (Back to text) See Likkutei Torah, LiGimmel Parshiyos, loc. cit.

39. (Back to text) To Bereishis 11:3.

40. (Back to text) Note Sisrei Torah to the Zohar, Vol. I, p. 75a, and our Sages' statement (Eruvin 6a): "He found a bika, and established a fence," [which interprets bika, the term interpreted here as valley, as open place"]. See also the maamar entitled VeHayah HaNishar, sec. 17, which interprets bika as referring to a place where there has been a rupture and there is separation.

41. (Back to text) Eichah 3:6.

42. (Back to text) [In its original, the sichah quotes the citation] as it appears in many sources within the maamarim of the Rebbeim. The concept is cited with this same wording in the Shaloh, Beis Chochmah (p. 16b) and Beis HaGadol (p. 36a). Sanhedrin 24a (quoted in the Shaloh, Shaar HaGadol (p. 35b) communicates the same concept using slightly different wording.

43. (Back to text) [Trans. Note: The italics, in the original text, emphasize that the Egyptians appreciated the holiness of the Jewish people and sought to derive nurture from that potential as mentioned in sec. II and the sources cited there.]

44. (Back to text) Compare to Tanya, Iggeres HaTeshuvah, the conclusion of ch. 6.

45. (Back to text) To cite a parallel: In his Shulchan Aruch, Hilchos Talmud Torah 4:3, the Alter Rebbe writes that before a wicked person turns to G-d in teshuvah, the Torah and mitzvos he observes generate increased vitality in the realm of kelipah.

46. (Back to text) This parenthetic addition would frequently be made by the Rebbe Rashab. The intent is explained in Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XIX, p. 27ff.

47. (Back to text) Midrash Tanchuma, Parshas Nasso, sec. 16; see also Bamidbar Rabbah 13:6.

48. (Back to text) Which in the year of his passing, 5573, fell on Motzo'ei Shabbos, Parshas Shmos.

49. (Back to text) Tanya, ch. 36.

50. (Back to text) See Menachos 82a which states that "Any sacrifice that is obligatory may only be brought from non-sacred [animals]." [Animals which are consecrated - and thus holier - are not fit to be used.]

51. (Back to text) See Shir HaShirim Rabbah 1:16(3) which applies the verse (II Shmuel 7:6): "And I traveled in a tent," to the Sanctuary. (See also Torah Or, Parshas Vayigash.)

52. (Back to text) See Shir HaShirim Rabbah, loc. cit., which applies the verse (Tehillim 132:14): "This is My resting place forever" to the Beis HaMikdash. (See also Torah Or, loc. cit.)

53. (Back to text) Indeed, it is forbidden to build with wood which projects outward in the Beis HaMikdash {Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Beis HaBechirah 1:9 (this view is also accepted by the Raavad, see the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh) and Sefer HaChinuch, mitzvah 492, as cited in Torah Or, loc. cit.}.

54. (Back to text) The reason why the Beis HaMikdash was built with stones and not with bricks - although they are lower - is explained in note 95.

55. (Back to text) See the explanations in Torah Or, loc. cit., Toras Chayim, the maamar entitled Vayigash, sec. 8, and in the Siddur, p. 21b.

    In Likkutei Torah, Devarim, p. 99d, and in Maamarei Admur HaZakein, Hanachos R. Pinchas, p. 81, similar concepts are used to explain the advantage possessed by the Sanctuary of Shiloh over the Sanctuary in the desert. For in Shiloh, the walls were made of stone.*

    ---

    * The standard text of Likkutei Torah states "curtains," but that is a printing error as noted by the Rebbe Rashab printed at the back of Likkutei Torah.

56. (Back to text) As reflected in the sources mentioned in note 7.

57. (Back to text) Bamidbar 5:17.

58. (Back to text) See Torah Or (the maamar entitled Anochi Magen Loch), p. 12a; the notes on this concept in Likkutei Torah, LiGimmel Parshiyos, p. 88a [see Or HaTorah, Bereishis, Vol. IV, p. 693a ff.].

59. (Back to text) Bava Metzia 86b; see also Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I, p. 28.

    [Trans. Note: The analogy of light (also described in Chassidic terminology as gilui milimaalah, revelation from Above) implies a disadvantage. For the revelation does not permeate the lower realms as they exist within their own context. For example, when a window is opened and light enters a dark room, a fundamental change has not been made in the room itself. If the window is closed, it will be dark, just as it was previously. Similarly, in the analogue, the radiation of G-dly light in the Sanctuary, although G-d's light reached down to the level of the earth, it did not make a permanent change within the earth on which the sanctuary was erected. Indeed, once the Sanctuary was moved to another place, the earth remained ordinary, as it was before the Sanctuary had been erected. See note 77.

    With regard to the Beis HaMikdash, in contrast, its construction brought about a permanent change in the nature of the place on which it was built. Therefore, even in the present age, thousands of years after the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash, its site is still holy, and must be treated with reverence (Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Beis HaBechirah 6:16). This parallels the motif of haalah milimatah limaalah, elevation upward, in which created beings on the lower plane are elevated, refined, and brought close to G-dliness.]

60. (Back to text) It can be explained that this reflects the distinction between the two reasons the Etz Chayim (Shaar HaKlallim) [gives for the creation of the world]: "to be generous to His created beings [reflecting the motif of revelation from Above] and so that they recognize His greatness."

    This also reflects the distinction between the rationale "that they recognize His greatness," and [the reason for creation mentioned by] the Zohar (Vol. II, Parshas Bo, p. 42b): "so that He makes Himself known to them." For "so that He makes Himself known" (implies even against their will), i.e., that there be a revelation of G-dliness in the world. "So that He makes Himself known," follows the motif of revelation from Above, [i.e., independent of the refinement of the created beings, He reveals Himself to them].

    {[The association of the rationale "so that He makes Himself known" with the motif of revelation from Above is also reflected in the Etz Chayim [Shaar Alef] (Shaar HaHakdamos, Hakdamah 3) [which mentions as a reason for creation]: "so that the perfection of His powers be revealed." From the statements of the Etz Chayim that "this rationale was already explained in the Zohar... also in Parshas Bo," one can conclude that the rationale ["so that the perfection of His powers be revealed"] shares the same general thrust as "so that He makes Himself known," [for both involve revelation from Above]. See also the maamar entitled Yom Tov Shel Rosh HaShanah 5666, and the maamar entitled Shokav Amudei Sheish 5702, sec. 18, which states that "so that the perfection of His powers be revealed" is an explanation of the Zohar's statement," so that He makes Himself known."}

    In the above motif, however, the concept of willingly accepting His will is not relevant. With regard to "the created beings recogniz[ing] His greatness," the intent [and the focus] is on the created beings and their appreciation of His greatness so that they will merit to be a medium [for Him].

    On this basis, we can appreciate why the reason given by the Etz Chayim in Shaar HaHakdamos, ["so that the perfection of His powers be revealed"] relates to the creation as a whole, while the explanation given in Shaar HaKlallim ["so that they recognize His greatness"] refers particularly to the "emanation of one point that includes ten" (i.e., [the emanation of] the Ten Sefiros of the Akudim that were contained in one keili). For the rationale "so that they recognize His greatness" was consummated with the emanation of the Akudim (and not through the higher levels of Divine emanation), because the Akudim represent the beginning of the existence of keilim (the maamar entitled HaSam Nafsheinu, 5724) [see Hemshech 5672, Vol. II, p. 1119].

61. (Back to text) Sefer Milchemes HaShem, Discourse 6, the conclusion of ch. 15, cited in Kitzurim VeHaaros LiTanya, p. 102.

62. (Back to text) [Trans. Note: I.e., a truth is true. It is the reality and because of its truth, it will be reflected in every setting. To cite a basic example, within the context of the conceptual framework that prevails in our world, 2+2=4. No matter how hard someone will shout: "No, it equals 5," that will not change the reality. Taking the concept a step further: with regard to Einstein's theory, e=mc2, the fact that for thousands of years, people were not aware of this reality did not alter it. Since this theory is true, its truth is reflected in the interplay of energy and matter to the extent that ultimately it could not help but be recognized.

    And going further: since G-d is the true reality, even a frame of reference which outwardly does not recognize Him, and which defines existence in terms of its own conception, will ultimately come to the awareness of Him.]

63. (Back to text) [Trans. Note: In the motif of haalaah milimatah limaalah, the lower rung is elevated and lifted to a higher level. The classic example used to illustrate this mode is a student who studies and elevates his understanding. Once he has learned new concepts, he has changed himself; he now possesses a more developed intellectual potential than he did previously.

    Within this level, there are two approaches: one student whose skills focus on his ability to recall his teacher's instruction. Since he has assimilated and internalized the wisdom he was taught, his own level has advanced. Nevertheless, his advance is due primarily to the influence received from his teacher. He has not changed his own thinking processes fundamentally.

    The second approach is illustrated by a student who was taught not only to parrot his teacher, but to deal with new and different conceptual frameworks according to the mindset of his teacher. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. X, p. 82, which explains similar concepts while interpreting Avos 2:9 which describes R. Eliezer ben Horkenus as "a cemented cistern which does not lose a drop," i.e., he preserves his teacher's wisdom, and R. Elazar ben Arach: "as a stream that flows with ever-increasing strength," i.e., he extends his teacher's wisdom to new and different situations concerning which he had not received instruction from him. These two approaches can be compared to the recognition of G-dliness because of a revelation from Above, and the recognition that stems from proofs derived from the nature of creation itself.]

64. (Back to text) [Trans. Note: I.e., even the student on the first level has changed his conceptual framework.]

65. (Back to text) This represents the further extension indicated by the expression "The culmination of deed [is] first in thought" (the Lecha Dodi hymn) over the "The beginning is implanted in the end" (Sefer Yetzirah 1:7). "The end" refers to the conclusion of the influence. In this level is implanted "the beginning," the very root of the influence. (As explained in the text, through drawing down G-d's light to the lowest levels, "the end ," its unlimited power, is revealed.)

    "The culmination of deed," in contrast, refers to the acceptance of the influence. This level is "first in thought," i.e., preceding even the highest level of thought, above even the root of the influence (the maamar entitled HaSam Nafsheinu, loc. cit., see also Toras Chayim, the maamar entitled Vayigash, chs. 2 and 3) [Hemshech 5672, Vol. II, p. 1119; Likkutei Sichos, Vol. XIX, p. 384ff.].

66. (Back to text) See Toras Chayim, loc. cit., ch. 3.

67. (Back to text) Rashi, Bereishis 18:1; see also Bereishis Rabbah 48:9.

68. (Back to text) See the maamar entitled HaChodesh HaZeh 5700, sec. 3, and the maamar entitled BaYom HaShemini 5708, sec. 27, et al.

69. (Back to text) [Trans. Note: Through the analogy, the Rebbe is illustrating how in giving; there are two motifs functioning: the person's own desire to give - which parallels the revelation of Divine light from Above - and the relationship between the giver and the recipient - which reflects the advantage achieved through the recognition of G-d by the created beings.

    When a person's giving is merely an expression of his nature, he is confined within his self. He is not concerned with the person to whom he is giving; even if the recipient is on a much lower level, he gives because his nature demands it. When, however, he becomes concerned with the recipient and how that person accepts the gift, he steps out of the limits of his own self and relates to that other person. This awakens within him greater satisfaction, because it brings out a deeper point in the soul, a level where there is no distinction between him and the other person. See Likkutei Sichos, Vol. VI, p. 116.

    To cite a parallel: Bava Basra 9b: "Whoever gives a perutah to a poor person is granted six blessings, while one who appeases him with words is granted eleven blessings." When giving charity, one does not necessarily have to relate to the recipient. Appeasing him with words, by contrast, involves communication and establishing a rapport with him; stepping beyond one's own self.

    In the analogue, the revelation of light from Above reflects a dimension of G-dliness which is limited to His own nature, as it were, i.e., it is an expression of light which is defined as light and does not leave room for anything else. This light is drawn down to the lowest levels of existence, showing how even in such a framework, this light can prevail.

    The recognition of G-dliness by the created beings, by contrast, reflects an unlimited dimension of G-dliness, that He has no bounds whatsoever - neither darkness, nor light - and therefore can be appreciated by a created being, even though that being "lives in darkness," i.e., feels separate from Him.]

70. (Back to text) [Trans. Note: A beautiful, multi-colored animal that existed only at that time (Shabbos 28a); alternatively, the ermine (Jerusalem Talmud, Shabbos 2:3). Note the commentaries to Shmos 25:5.]

71. (Back to text) The bottom-most curtain of the roof included one type of flax besides two types of wool (Rashi, Shmos 26:1). It is possible to explain that this reflects the function of an intermediary between one level (the roof) and another level (the boards). Similarly, the lowest point of the boards stood within sockets - inanimate matter, [which served as an intermediary between the boards and the earth].

72. (Back to text) A slight question might be raised because the roof of the Beis HaMikdash included "[wooden] panels and beams of cedar" (I Kings 6:9), i.e., [entities from] the plant kingdom. See, however, Middos 4:6 which states that the Beis HaMikdash had a ceiling of mortar, stones, and cement above this. The passages from Torah Or and Toras Chayim cited in note 74 state: "The cedar beams in the ceiling were merely supports for the fundamental structure of the ceiling which was made from inanimate matter." And "[the beams] merely supported the roof." (See also Maamarei Admur HaZakein 5565, pp. 142, 144, 146.) Note also the passages from the Siddur Im Dach and Likkutei Torah cited in note 55 which state that the beams were sunken into the ceilings. This is not the place for further discussion of this matter.

73. (Back to text) See Middos 3:8 (according to the version of the text cited by most commentaries); Kessef Mishneh commenting on Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Beis HaBechirah 1:9; the commentaries to the Mishnah, Middos 1:6, et al.

74. (Back to text) Torah Or, Parshas Vayigash; Toras Chayim, the maamar entitled Vayigash, ch. 8.

75. (Back to text) [Trans. Note: Since the revelation from Above does not bring about an internal change within the recipient, the levels and gradations within the system of the recipient remain unaltered, and therefore are respected, as it were, by the light which shines into the system. With regard to the motif of haalah milimatah limaalah, by contrast, since the lower levels are refined and elevated, they are no longer "lower," and they are fit to receive the light on a higher level.]

76. (Back to text) See Toras Chayim, loc. cit., which states that the Beis HaMikdash revealed the motif, "The culmination of deed [is] first in thought" (see footnote 65).

77. (Back to text) This also explains why the Sanctuary served as only a temporary dwelling for G-d, while the Beis HaMikdash served as a permanent dwelling (see notes 51, 52). For when the revelation is only drawn down from Above, it does not permeate the internal makeup of the recipient to a great degree. (Note Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p. 2b,c which states that an arousal from Above that comes on its own initiative and which is not followed by striving from below upward will not endure.)

78. (Back to text) Tanya, ch. 36.

79. (Back to text) Torah Or, loc. cit. Toras Chayim, loc. cit., uses the expression "resembling the Future era." See also Tanya, loc. cit. which after stating that the ultimate revelation will come in the Era of Mashiach, states that in microcosm, this was revealed at the time of the giving of the Torah.

80. (Back to text) [Trans. Note: For as will be explained, the Beis HaMikdash reflected how entities which are fit to be mediums for G-dliness realized their purpose. This is not G-d's ultimate intent.]

81. (Back to text) Cited in the maamar entitled Yom Tov Shel Rosh HaShanah 5666, and the maamar entitled Shokav Amudei Sheish 5702, sec. 19.

82. (Back to text) [Trans. Note: I.e., we are speaking about a true desire, not something wanted for a reason, but something wanted solely because it is wanted.

    We expect every created being to have a reason for its existence. Since it did not exist previously and was brought into being, it is logical that it was brought into being for a purpose, a reason that makes sense.

    What being has no purpose for its existence, needs no reason to be? Only G-d.

    He is, He was, and He will be. His existence is not brought into being from nothingness, but rather His is true existence, for He exists independently without a cause or reason for being.

    He invested a dimension of His genuine being, as it were, into the creation, as the Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 1:1) states: "From the truth of His Being came into existence all the beings." This is what our Sages meant by saying He "desired" creation, i.e., He invested something which is not reasonable or logical, an aspect that does not have a purpose or a cause, a dimension of His true Being, into the creation.]

83. (Back to text) [Although] the Zohar and the Etz Chayim (as mentioned in note 60) give reasons for the creation of the world, [these reasons do not represent the ultimate truth]. They are [merely] preparatory steps [necessary] to complete the purpose of a dwelling in the lower realms. For the concept of a dwelling is that {not only is the entire essence found within, but} the essence is found there in a revealed manner (see Likkutei Sichos, Vol. IV, p. 1054, where this concept is explained at length).

    In order for the essence to be revealed, [motifs] associated with revelation "to be generous with His created beings" and "so that they recognize His greatness" are necessary. For the knowledge and recognition [of G-d that come as a result of these motifs] are preparatory steps for the revelation of G-d's essence.

    {[To cite a parallel:] The love and fear [of G-d] reflect the revealed powers of the soul. [As such, they are removed from the essence of the soul, and are not fit mediums for the revelation of G-d's essence.] Nevertheless, they are "the ways of G-d," because they enable G-d's essence to be expressed in revelation, through the actual deed of the mitzvos (Likkutei Sichos, Vol. III, p. 956).

    Or to cite another example: Bringing the world into existence is possible only through the potential of G-d's essence. Nevertheless, the medium which actually brings the world into being is G-d's light, as it is enclothed in the vessels (keilim) (Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 20, p. 130b). [I.e., His essential desire is expressed through the light and the vessels which are revealed mediums.] For the fulfillment of the purpose of "a dwelling in the lower worlds," a dwelling for His essence, comes through (the preparatory phases of) "to be generous with His created beings" (which is brought into fulfillment by G-d's light) and "so that they recognize His greatness" (which is brought into fulfillment by the vessels).}

    It is possible to explain that this order was reflected in the order of the indwelling of G-d's Presence. First, His Presence was manifest in the Sanctuary which reflected G-d's light, then in the Beis HaMikdash (built by Shlomo) which reflected the vessels, and the Beis HaMikdash to be built in the Future which will be a dwelling for His Essence.

84. (Back to text) These concepts are also reflected in our Divine service. If the world was created for a reason, the creation itself would have some importance, for it is the medium which fulfills G-d's intent. As such, the person who carries out this mission would also be given a certain degree of importance, [for it is his service] who brings this intent to fruition.

    Since the true purpose of the creation is that "this arose in His will" - "He desired" - the creation has no importance or point of connection to Him. For the entire purpose for its existence is that G-d desired it. [To explain: Were there to be a reason and rationale for the creation, the world and the person fulfilling that purpose would deserve recognition as representative of that purpose. It would symbolize something of genuine meaning and importance.

    Since, however, the world came about only because of a desire - and a desire is not motivated by a valid reason - there is no reason for a person to attach any importance to his accomplishment of G-d's desire. For even when the desire is brought to fruition, the person has not accomplished anything necessary or required. He has merely carried out a desire.]

    Thus making a dwelling for Him comes through utterly negating and nullifying the feeling of one's own importance. (The person should not think: "I am important because I have fulfilled G-d's intent.") For the entire concept of a dwelling in the lower realms is not something that it necessary. It is only the subject of His desire (see note 93).

85. (Back to text) From the fact that the intent for the dwelling in the lower realms stems from G-d's essence which is above all revealed levels {for even the light which is a revelation from His essence is for the sake of this intent (see the maamar entitled ViAsisa Chag Shavuos, 5673, and the maamar entitled Anochi Havayah E-lokecha 5703, sec. 3}, it can be understood that it was His will and His choice that motivated His desire, not a logical reason. For His essence is not characterized by any description, nor does He have tendencies of any sort.

86. (Back to text) For these purposes, [i.e., the advantage these structures conveyed,] the explanation that G-d "desired" [a dwelling] is unnecessary. (For there is a rationale explanation [for the manifestation of His Presence].) Moreover, since they express an advantage and lead to fulfillment, they cannot fulfill the intent of G-d's desire, a dwelling [for His essence]. For since the dwelling is intended for His essence, as it were, the appreciation of the advantage and the fulfillment attained contradicts the revelation of His essence (see the preceding notes).

    [The intent is that any intellectually sound reason, by definition, has a limited scope, for intellect must have bounds. As such, it is not a fit medium to express G-d's essence.]

87. (Back to text) Ch. 36.

88. (Back to text) Cf. Yeshayahu 47:8, 10; Tzephaniah 2:15.

89. (Back to text) [Trans. Note: The source for the feeling: "I am, there is nothing else but me," is G-d's essence, the only level that can aptly be described with such an expression. Every level of Divine light feels that it is an expression of the Source of light and is therefore, nullified to that source. The kelipos which permeate our material world, by contrast, do not feel G-d's Presence and only feel themselves. Nevertheless, the possibility for them to have such a feeling stems from the fact that His essence is the source of their being.]

90. (Back to text) [Trans. Note: Certainly, in every element of existence, there is a spark of G-dliness. Indeed, without that spark of G-dliness, the entity could not continue to exist (Tanya, Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah, ch. 1). Nevertheless, since our world is governed by the gestalt of kelipah, G-dliness invested in these entities is not evident, nor can it be revealed in a natural manner. To borrow an analogy from the laws of kashrus, the condition of the G-dly spark can be described with the expression chatichah naaseh neveilah: the substance though originally kosher, through its contact with an unkosher substance, is now considered as carrion. It is only, as the sichah continues to explain, through the Divine service of the Jewish people and the power to bring about a totally new change which G-d granted them that this G-dliness can be granted expression.]

91. (Back to text) On this basis, we can understand our Sages' statements (Shabbos 119b, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 268:1) that "Whoever prays on Friday night and recites the passage VaYichulu is considered as if he is a partner with the Holy One, blessed be He, in the task of creation."

    The Chidushei Aggados of the Maharsha (loc. cit.) interprets this passage as follows: "By reciting VaYichulu, [the person] gives testimony about [G-d's] work of creation (see Shulchan Aruch HaRav, loc. cit.:12). By doing so, he becomes the partner of the Holy One, blessed be He, because without the person's testimony, G-d's work [of creation] would not be known."

    On the surface, explanation is necessary: A person through his testimony makes known G-d's work of creation, but he does not add anything to the actual task of creation. How can he justly be called a partner to the Holy One, blessed be He, who created all existence?

    [Based on the above explanations, this question can be resolved.] For a created being to "recognize G-d's greatness" {- the term "greatness" refers to the task of creation (Berachos 58a) -}, it is necessary for him to bring about an entirely new development, [one equal to G-d's creation of something from nothing]. [For man's recognition of the G-dliness present within the world despite the gestalt of kelipah is as radical a change as G-d's creation of the world from absolute nothingness.]

    {[In this context, a halachic comparison can be made. In Jewish law, for a legal document to be considered viable, two types of witnesses are required: a) witnesses who sign the legal document, testifying to the truth of its contents, and b) eidei kiyum, witnesses who verify the signatures of the witnesses to the document.]

    Similarly, in this context, by reciting VaYichulu, the person serves as an eid kiyum (without whose testimony, the legal document would have no power). Through these witnesses testimony, they establish [the authenticity of the legal document] and cause it to be considered a [significant] entity.}

    The reason our Sages use the expression "is considered [a partner]," [i.e., and not "becomes a partner,] is that the potential to recognize G-dliness comes from G-d's essence (as will be explained in the text and in note 98) [and is thus not entirely the person's own contribution].

    There is another concept implied. The kelipos and the sitra achra are entities without substance, non-beings Metziyus D'Heder (Toras Sholom, p. 134ff.). Thus through the Divine service of subduing the sitra achra and transforming the darkness to light, a new development is brought about within the creation. [Entities that are] non-beings are transformed into entities of substance.

    On this basis, we can appreciate the expression "partner in the task of creation," which implies that the person's activities have an effect on the creation itself (the existence of the heaven and the earth).

92. (Back to text) As it is written (cf. Iyov 14:15; see Shmos Rabbah 36:4, Vayikra Rabbah 31:1): "He desired the work of your hands."

    Kesubos 5a applies the expression: "The deeds of the righteous are greater than the making of heaven and earth" to the Sanctuary and to the Beis HaMikdash. And in the maamar entitled Gedolim Maaseh Tzaddkim 5685, sec. 7, it is explained that the advantage of the deeds of the righteous is reflected in the new development brought about by the nullification of yesh (self-conscious existence) to ayin (nothingness). {See also Shmos Rabbah (loc. cit.) which explains that the expression "He desires the work of your hands" as referring to the service in the Sanctuary.}

    Nevertheless, since the holiness drawn down in the Sanctuary and the Beis HaMikdash does not reach the lowest levels of existence themselves (those which are "filled with the kelipos and the sitra achra"), this cannot be considered as an entirely new development. {To cite a parallel, the maamar entitled Tiku 5667 (in the series of maamarim entitled Yom Tov Shel Rosh HaShanah 5666; see also the maamar entitled Acharei 5666) explains that the task of refinement carried out through drawing down Divine light cannot truly be considered as a new development.} Thus [the service in the Sanctuary and the Beis HaMikdash] cannot be considered the ultimate expression of "the deeds of the righteous" (man's Divine service). [That will not come until the service during the exile will bear fruit in the construction of the Third Beis HaMikdash.]

    See also Rashi's commentary to Shmos 15:17: "The Sanctuary of G-d, established by Your hands," [which notes that the phrase uses the plural "hands" and states: "When will the Sanctuary be built with two hands?... In the Future (i.e., the Era of the Redemption)." And Kesubos, loc. cit., derives the concept "The deeds of the righteous are greater" from that prooftext.

93. (Back to text) Although this dwelling is fashioned through the Divine service of mortals, there is no personal sense of pride involved (see note 84). A parallel can be drawn to the advantage possessed by "a simple servant" over "a faithful servant," as described in the maamar entitled Acharei 5666. Although the service of a simple servant is an entirely new development which is achieved through his own initiative alone, his work is, nevertheless, identified as his master's (and indeed, this identification is what makes this dynamic possible). For a (simple) servant does not view himself as an independent entity at all, as explained at length in that source.

    From the fact that the dwelling is being established for G-d's essence, as explained in note 96, we can appreciate that the bittul (self-nullification) required is of a more consummate level than the bittul involved in Divine service that is motivated by the revealed levels of G-dliness. For the bittul involved in Divine service that is motivated by the revealed levels of G-dliness [is incomplete], as reflected by the statement (cf. Zohar, Vol. I, p. 11b): "Everything before Him is as nothing," i.e., because of one's awareness of G-d's greatness, one considers oneself as nothing. [Implied is that the person retains a certain vestige of self; for indeed, it is he who perceives G-d's greatness and therefore concedes his self-importance.] The bittul evoked by G-d's essence, by contrast, [is total], as reflected by the verse (Devarim 4:39): "There is nothing else," [i.e., one feels that there is no existence whatsoever apart from G-dliness] (the maamar entitled U'Lekachtem Lachem, 5661, and the maamar entitled Im Bechukosai 5667).

94. (Back to text) [Trans. Note: For there is no reason to make a dwelling for G-d in a place that is entirely unsuitable for that purpose.]

95. (Back to text) The creation of the lower realms of existence was not motivated by a reason. {For as explained at the beginning of the series of maamarim entitled Yom Tov Shel Rosh HaShanah 5666 and the maamar entitled Shokav 5702, the reasons mentioned by the Zohar and the Etz Chayim do not necessitate the creation of the worlds of Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah, and certainly, do not necessitate the creation of our material world.} Similarly, the ultimate motive for the revelation of G-dliness in these realms is not motivated by these rationales. For since the lower realms were not brought into being because {of the rationales stemming from} the revealed levels of G-dliness, these revealed levels of G-dliness do not affect them.

    On this basis, we can appreciate why (at the outset), the Beis HaMikdash had to be built from stone. For the new development of the Beis HaMikdash (over the Sanctuary) was that the entities of the lower realms became vessels for G-dliness, as explained in sec. VIII. Since bricks are lower than stones, seemingly it would have been proper to build the Beis HaMikdash with bricks rather than stones, because they are on a lower level. This was not done, because the revelation of the Beis HaMikdash could not penetrate to the bricks. For as explained above, bricks represent the side of impurity. (See Tanya, ch. 7, which states that when a person eats without an intent to elevate the food, his eating "is not better... than the kelipos and the sitra achra in this world,... which are in the majority - indeed to the extent that one can say entirely - evil," [i.e., kelipah permeates the gestalt of our world and thus bricks are unfit for the Beis HaMikdash].)

    Although if there were no stones available, the Beis HaMikdash could be built with bricks (Rambam, Hilchos Beis HaBechirah, 1:8); such a brick building would relate to the level of bricks that resembles stone. (As the passage from Tanya cited previously continues, [in kelipas nogah,] there is "a small amount of good mixed together with it.")

    Note the explanation in the series of maamarim entitled Matzah Zu 5640, sec. 60, with regard to the advantage of the Chanukah lamps (which we are commanded to place at the entrance to our homes, at the outside) over the study of the Torah, [i.e., that the Chanukah lamps elevate the public domain].

    With regard to Torah study, it is also said (Devarim 6:7): "And you shall speak of them ... when you walk on your way." Nevertheless, even in such a situation, Torah study does not draw light into the public domain, the "separate mountains" (cf. Tanya, end of ch, 33), to the same extent as the Chanukah lamps do. For the obligation to speak the words of Torah "when you walk on your way" comes in continuation - and thus resembles - the obligation to speak words of Torah when "you sit at home."

96. (Back to text) Moreover, the dwelling established in the lower worlds is a dwelling for G-d's essence. And as explained in several sources, in His dwelling, His entire essence is found.

97. (Back to text) Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 20 (p. 130b).

98. (Back to text) Note the maamar entitled Tiku 5667. There it states that the souls that descend to this physical plane (- they correspond to the level of a simple servant described above -) possess the power "to refine the complete material obsession that characterizes the animal soul - a task which is an entirely new development, equivalent to the creation of being from nothingness - [which] stems from the power of G-d's essence which has the potential to create being from nothingness."

99. (Back to text) See Rashi, Bereishis 11:3 (note also Rashi, Shmos 5:7). See also Torah Or, p. 77c ff.

100. (Back to text) Bereishis 11:3. As is stated in many sources (see those mentioned in note 24, Or HaTorah, Parshas Shmos, p. 24, the maamar entitled Zos Chanukas 5640, ch. 14, the subjugation of the Jewish people and their efforts in making bricks corrected the sin of making the bricks for the Tower of Bavel.

101. (Back to text) Torah Or, loc. cit.

102. (Back to text) [This is relevant with regard to the laws of ritual purity and impurity, as stated by] Tosafos (Pesachim 30b, entry HaTorah; Zevachim, 96a, entry Ela); see also Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Keilim 1:6, 13; 15:1, et al.

103. (Back to text) The same concepts apply with regard to bricks. [They are also considered as new entities, different entirely from their previous state.]

     These concepts can also be applied with regard to man (who creates this dwelling for G-d). Since "his foundation is earth" (Yom Kippur liturgy), [he is also an earthenware utensil]. There is no way of correcting his material inclination {i.e., his tendencies to undesirable character traits which he has to a greater extent than animals (Kuntres U'Mayon, Discourse 15, ch. 2)}. They must be burnt, nullifying his yeshus (self-consciousness) [entirely].

     A parallel [can be made to the laws of kashering] an earthenware utensil. Boiling is not sufficient. It must be burned in fire. See the maamar entitled VeAfu (Likkutei Torah, Vayikra, p. 48c).

104. (Back to text) See the sources mentioned in note 35.

105. (Back to text) The maamar entitled Kol Dodi 5709; see Bereishis Rabbah 16:4.

106. (Back to text) Tanya, ch. 37.

107. (Back to text) Raaya Mehemna (Zohar, Vol. III, p. 153a), et al., quoted and explained in Torah Or, the beginning of Parshas Shmos, and Toras Chayim and Or HaTorah.

     The clarification of Torah law parallels the two thrusts reflected in making bricks:

     1. the clarification of the laws comes through the removal and the weakening of the power of kelipah which veils and conceals the laws (see Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 26, p. 144b ff.);

     2. through the clarification of Torah law, new Torah concepts are developed (see Tanya, loc. cit., the maamarim entitled Ashreichem Yisrael and Lech Lecha 5667).

108. (Back to text) Cf. Michah 7:15.

109. (Back to text) Torah Or, loc. cit.

110. (Back to text) See Tanya, ch. 36; Zohar, Vol. III, p. 125a (note Zohar, Vol. I, p. 139a); Rambam, Mishneh Torah, the conclusion of Hilchos Melachim; Avodas HaKodesh, Vol. II, ch. 39.