The Manner of the Divine Presence Resting in the Beis Hamikdash - Three Approaches: Philosophy, Kabbalah, and Chassidus

00:02 In the Rambam, in Hilchos Beis Habechirah—the Rambam calls them “the laws of the House of Choice.” That’s an unusual name. Throughout, the Rambam speaks about the Beis Hamikdash. Even at the very beginning of the first halachah, he writes: “It is a positive mitzvah to make a house for Hashem, prepared for offering sacrifices in it and making pilgrimage to it three times a year, as it says, ‘They shall make Me a sanctuary.’” In other words, the very verse from which we learn the laws of the House of Choice says, “They shall make Me a sanctuary.” Yet the Rambam calls these laws “the House of Choice.” Why doesn’t he call them “the Beis Hamikdash”? That’s the more usual, better-known name. Plainly, that’s the name used far more often. Especially since, when the Rambam lists the positive mitzvos at the beginning, he also writes that there is a mitzvah to build the Beis Hamikdash. “They shall make Me a sanctuary”—he keeps calling it a sanctuary, yet the title of all these laws is “the House of Choice.” Of course, this isn’t a small matter. The Rebbe taught us that every detail in the Rambam is precise, especially a title. The Rambam specifically chose the name “House of Choice.” Now, the word “choice” does also come from a verse about the Beis Hamikdash: “The place that Hashem will choose.” The Rambam cites it later. Yes, “the place that Hashem will choose”—the Beis Hamikdash in Jerusalem. The verse he cites in the first halachah, “For you have not yet come to the resting place and the inheritance,” is from Parshas Re’eh. It says there, “the place that Hashem will choose.” So there is a source for the word “choice.” Still, it’s surprising that the Rambam chose an unusual name, and made it the title of all these laws. There is a well-known disagreement between the Rambam and the Ramban, discussed in Chassidus, concerning the site of the Beis Hamikdash. What was the nature of

03:13 the site of the Beis Hamikdash? That is the disagreement between the Rambam and the Ramban. The Rambam’s view isn’t stated here; it’s in the Moreh Nevuchim. Their disagreement concerns how the Shechinah rested at the site of the Beis Hamikdash. In what way did it rest there? The Rambam holds that the Shechinah’s presence at the site of the Beis Hamikdash was by way of passage. The Ramban holds that it was by way of enclothement. What does that mean? Chassidus distinguishes between an influence that passes through something and an influence that is enclothed within it. When it passes through, the thing or place is only an intermediary—a passageway. It conveys the holiness, but is not itself a vessel for it. What’s an example of this kind of influence? A familiar example given in Chassidus is the hand. The hand writes down an intellectual idea. When you write an idea with your hand, the hand conveys the idea from the mind in your head onto the page. No one would say that the hand is a vessel for intellect. The hand isn’t a vessel for intellect; it has no connection to intellect. It only conveys it. It’s like a pipe through which water flows. No one would say that the water comes from the pipe. The water comes from the river, and the pipe merely carries it from the river into a container. In the same way, the hand conveys the power of intellect into writing, but it isn’t a vessel for it. The same applies to the Beis Hamikdash. What does “by way of passage” mean? It means that the holiness of the Beis Hamikdash wasn’t that the Beis Hamikdash itself was a holy place. The Beis Hamikdash was a physical place like anywhere else in the world. Physical is physical. The revelation in the Beis Hamikdash was not in the place itself; it was within the Jewish people. When a Jew came to the Beis Hamikdash, he connected with Hakadosh Boruch Hu. A Jew would come to the Beis Hamikdash and pray there, or

05:43 he would see Hakadosh Boruch Hu there. So where was Hakadosh Boruch Hu revealed? He was revealed to the Jew, who has a soul and can sense Hakadosh Boruch Hu. The site of the Beis Hamikdash was only a passageway. The site merely conveyed the revelation of Hakadosh Boruch Hu; this was where it happened. It’s like writing with the hand: the hand itself doesn’t become a vessel for the idea. The holiness only passes through the hand onto the page. Likewise, the site of the Beis Hamikdash was the place through which the revelation of G-dliness passed to the Jewish people, but the place itself was not inherently special. That is one view—the Rambam’s view. The second view is the Ramban’s. The Ramban holds that the revelation of G-dliness in the Beis Hamikdash was by way of enclothement. What does that mean? It means that the site of the Beis Hamikdash was itself a special place, where Hakadosh Boruch Hu was enclothed within the place. What example do we have of enclothement, of an effect that involves actual enclothement? The example is the brain. The brain is a vessel for intellect. It isn’t like the hand. The hand isn’t a vessel for intellect; it only conveys intellect into writing, but is not itself a vessel for it. If you write profound insights, if you write deep ideas, your hand won’t change. It won’t become more of a vessel for intellect. Whether you write simple things or deep things, there is no change in the hand. The brain, by contrast, is different. The more deeply you think and use your intellect, the more refined the brain becomes. Why? Because the brain is a vessel for intellect, and the extent to which intellect can be revealed in it depends on how refined it is. In the same way, the Ramban holds,

07:39 this applies to the site of the Beis Hamikdash. It was not a place like anywhere else in the world. The place itself was very refined, a loftier place, and because of its refinement, there was a special revelation of Hakadosh Boruch Hu there. So His revelation was inward, by way of enclothement. That means the place was a vessel for G-dliness. This, then, is the disagreement between the Rambam and the Ramban. What practical difference does it make whether we say one or the other? What difference does it make whether the revelation of G-dliness in the Beis Hamikdash was by way of passage or by way of enclothement? It is explained that each has an advantage. When the revelation is by way of enclothement, the advantage concerns the place itself: the place connects with G-dliness. It isn’t the same place anymore. You can see how the place becomes connected and becomes holy. The place itself is elevated and becomes a holy place, much like the brain. The more you use your intellect, the more refined and sensitive your brain becomes, and the better able it is to function. Likewise, the site of the Beis Hamikdash became a holy, lofty place through the holiness drawn down there and through the service of the Jewish people there—a higher place. So when we speak of enclothement, there is a special advantage in its effect on the place. But if it is merely a passageway, the place remains coarse; the place itself undergoes no change. As far as the revelation is concerned, the site of the Beis Hamikdash is the same as any place in the world. It is an ordinary, coarse, lowly place. But if we look at it from the other side and ask what level is drawn down through it, then the opposite is true. If the influence is by way of enclothement, then

09:41 The level that is drawn down is a limited level. Since the light has to become invested in a place, it has to adapt itself to that place, to connect with it, and therefore it has to contract according to the limits of the place. So there is a certain descent and contraction in it, according to those limits. The same is true of the intellect. We understand that when an idea has to be invested in a physical action, the idea has to take on a concrete form suited to the parameters of the action. So it cannot be a vessel for something unlimited; it has to descend according to the limits of the mind’s understanding. The intellect becomes concrete, descends, contracts. This is the distinction brought in Chassidus between will and intellect. Will does not contract, because it is not bound to a vessel, so it can remain a will in its full force. Intellect, by contrast, comes into a vessel, so it has to contract. But revelation that comes by way of passage is different. Since the revelation is not proportionate to the vessels, it does not become invested in them. The place is only a passageway. So there, the revelation can be unlimited. It does not become invested; it does not have to conform to the limits of the thing. It is revealed as it is, in its own form, by way of passage, as with writing. Because in writing, the hand is not a vessel for the intellect. On one hand, that is a shortcoming: the hand is not a vessel for the intellect; the hand is not refined. On the other hand, there is no limit to what I can write. With my fingers I can write the deepest ideas, the loftiest ideas. It makes no difference. The mind is a vessel. You cannot say that the brain understands things that you do not understand. What you do not understand immediately remains beyond your grasp. With writing, by contrast, you can write anything. So each has its own advantage. This brings us to the disagreement between the Rambam and the Ramban: the Ramban holds that the revelation in the Beis Hamikdash

11:22 came by way of becoming invested in the place. That is, the Ramban holds that the special quality of the Beis Hamikdash was that it was a vessel for G-dliness. The site of the Beis Hamikdash was a spiritual place, a lofty place—in its own right. On the other hand, in terms of the level of G-dliness revealed there, it was a somewhat lower level. According to the Rambam, it is the reverse. In terms of the level of G-dliness, it is G-dliness as it is, without any limitations, because when it comes by way of passage there are no limitations. So which level of G-dliness is present here? An unlimited, infinite level of G-dliness is present here. That is possible. On the other hand, from our perspective, does the place itself become elevated? The place does not become elevated. So that is the difference between the Rambam and the Ramban. On this basis we can understand why the Rambam calls his laws Hilchos Beis Habechirah, the Laws of the Chosen House. Why does the Rambam specifically call the Beis Hamikdash the Chosen House, rather than the Holy House? Because the difference between “chosen” and “holy” parallels the difference between passage and becoming invested. What is the difference between choosing and holiness? When you call it holy, you are saying there is holiness here. The house is a holy house. Holiness—a holy house—means set apart and distinct. It is a loftier house. The rest of the world is ordinary space, while the Beis Hamikdash is a loftier place. It has holiness; it is something more... It is a holy place, a lofty place. So that fits better with the Ramban’s approach. But if we say that the whole idea of the Beis Hamikdash is passage, that is the quality of choice. What does choice mean? When a person chooses, it is not because the place has some special quality. The whole basis of choice is that when you choose something, it is not because that thing has an advantage. If

13:21 the thing has an advantage, then it is not choice. Right? It is not fitting to call it choice. It has an advantage; you take it because of that advantage. So that is not choice. On the contrary, it is the thing itself—it is the thing’s advantage that draws you to it. Choice, by contrast, means that there is no special advantage, no particular reason. It is simply because I chose it. The same applies to Hakadosh Boruch Hu’s choice of the site of the Beis Hamikdash. The Rambam says that Hakadosh Boruch Hu chose the site of the Beis Hamikdash not because it was a higher place, a loftier place. No. The site itself has no special quality. The whole point is that Hakadosh Boruch Hu chose it of His own free will. He chose that His revelation would be here. Therefore, since the Rambam holds that the indwelling of the Shechinah in the Beis Hamikdash was in a transcendent manner—which has the advantage of being infinite and unlimited, but on the other hand is not bound to the limits of the place—the name “Chosen House” is also more fitting. In this respect, it is better to emphasize “Chosen House” rather than “Holy House.” This principle is something we see the Rebbe apply to many matters, including matters in Nigleh and, among them, Hilchos Beis Habechirah. The Rebbe uses this principle in explaining several details, several topics in the Rambam’s Hilchos Beis Habechirah. Through this basic point—the approaches of the Rambam and the Ramban—the Rebbe explains a number of matters. Let’s give a few examples. One example is the well-known disagreement between the Rambam and the Ramban about what was central to the Beis Hamikdash: was it the altar, or was it the Aron Hakodesh? This too is a disagreement between the Rambam and the Ramban. The Ramban writes that the main object in the Beis Hamikdash

15:15 was the Aron Hakodesh. The Aron Hakodesh, which held the Tablets and the Torah, was the central element of the Beis Hamikdash; everything else was around it. Everything else was a detail. But the central point of the Beis Hamikdash—the inner intent of Hakadosh Boruch Hu when He asked, “They shall make Me a sanctuary, and I will dwell among them”—was the Aron Hakodesh, because that was the special place for the Shechinah. The Rambam explicitly writes otherwise. The Rambam begins Hilchos Beis Habechirah with: “It is a positive commandment to make a house for Hashem, prepared for offering sacrifices in it.” In other words, according to the Rambam, what is the main purpose of the Beis Hamikdash? Offering sacrifices. To the extent that the Rambam does not even discuss the Aron. First of all, simply look at the order of things. What is the first item the Rambam mentions? The altar. When you look at the Rambam’s order, which furnishing does he mention first? The altar. And regarding the Aron, the Rambam does not write about it at all. The Rambam does not describe what the Aron was like or how it was made. The Rambam only writes that there was a stone in the Holy of Holies, and so on. There is an entire sicha of the Rebbe about this. Right? But there are laws concerning the construction of the Aron—how to make it, what is to be done with it. There is a sicha of the Rebbe about that. Why? Yet the Rambam does not write about it. In other words, the Ramban and the Rambam have two entirely different approaches. According to the Ramban, the central element of the Beis Hamikdash is the Aron Hakodesh. That is the straightforward meaning of Chumash. You look in Chumash—yes, what does it say? “They shall make Me a sanctuary, and I will dwell among them.” What does it say immediately afterward? “They shall make an ark.” The Ramban wrote a commentary on the Torah, and that is what he says. Why does the Torah begin with the Aron? Because the Aron was the central object. The Rambam disagrees; he holds that it was the altar. What is the difference? It is connected to this point. If we say that the main purpose of the Beis Hamikdash is holiness,

17:09 For there to be a place in the world that is a holy place—that is connected with the Aron Kodesh. The Aron Kodesh, the Torah. Torah is something inward. Right? That is the whole point of Torah: to bring holiness into the world, so that the world becomes a holy place. And that is the point of the Beis Hamikdash. The Beis Hamikdash was the vessel through which the Aron Kodesh made that place a place of holiness. So that is connected with Torah and the Aron Kodesh. The Ramban—that is the Ramban’s view. That is why the Ramban holds that the Aron Kodesh is the central element of the Beis Hamikdash. The Rambam, according to his approach, holds that the Beis Hamikdash was primarily for the Jewish people. The building was only a means to that end. So when the Rambam explains the purpose of the Beis Hamikdash, he says it is a place where Jews go up for the pilgrimage festivals and offer sacrifices. That is part of the service of the Jewish people. And because the central point is the service of the Jewish people, the place itself is not the whole point. It is a choice that Hakadosh Boruch Hu made: through this place, a Jew can connect with Hakadosh Boruch Hu. That is the idea of the sacrifices. The Rebbe explains several other fundamental points in which these two approaches are expressed—two general aspects of the Beis Hamikdash. But in light of this, a question arises in chapter 2 of the laws of... Do you have the passage? When you look at chapter 2 of Hilchos Beis Habechirah, you see something interesting. The Rambam writes about the altar: “The location of the altar is exceedingly precise, and it is never moved from its place.” He brings verses. Then, in the second halachah, the Rambam gives a whole account. He writes: “It is a tradition held by everyone that the place where David and Shlomo built the altar on the threshing floor of Aravnah is the place where Avraham built the altar and bound Yitzchak upon it; and it is the place where Noach built an altar when he came out of”

19:13 the ark. It is the altar on which Kayin and Hevel offered sacrifices, and on which Adam Harishon offered a sacrifice when he was created; and from there he was created.” The Rambam lists several things that happened at the site of the altar. First, he says that the altar’s location is exceedingly precise. Right? It is an exact location. Then he tells us that the site of the altar is not just any place. Many things happened there. Noach built the ark there. Avraham built the altar there and bound Yitzchak. Adam Harishon offered a sacrifice there when he was created, and he was created from there. Now, the Rambam is not a book of stories. He writes this because he wants to emphasize something about the altar. So the question arises: the commentators say that, with this, the Rambam wants to explain why the altar’s location is so precise. Since this place had a history—this is where the binding of Yitzchak took place, and where Noach was—of course its location is significant and precise. All these things happened here. But according to that, it contradicts everything we have said. We are saying that, according to the Rambam, the Beis Hamikdash is a matter of choice. What does choice mean? It means that the place does not have some inherent advantage. Choice means the place has no particular advantage; it is simply chosen. Here it says the opposite. Why is the altar’s location precise? Because the binding of Yitzchak took place here, and Noach was here, and Avraham was here, and Adam Harishon was here. If so, it comes out the opposite: this is indeed a more elevated, more special place. That goes against the Rambam’s whole approach—that the site of the Beis Hamikdash, and likewise the site of the altar, is not a matter of inherent holiness but of choice. That is the question. There is another point here. We are already running late.

21:12 Just one more point, the way the Rebbe explains it. You can see how every detail is precise in the Rebbe’s explanation, how the wording of each point is exact. The Rebbe says... When we look closely at the Rambam’s wording, we see just the opposite. The Rambam is not saying that because Avraham performed the binding of Yitzchak there, and Noach built his altar there, and because of everything involving Adam Harishon, the altar’s location became precise. On the contrary, the Rambam’s first statement, in halachah 1, is: “The location of the altar is exceedingly precise.” No explanations. Instead, he cites the verse, “This is the altar for burnt offerings for Israel.” In halachah 1, the Rambam gives no history, no stories. He writes that the altar’s location is precise because that is what the Torah says: “This is the altar for burnt offerings for Israel.” And then he writes, “And in the Mikdash, our forefather Yitzchak was bound.” Wait, let me see. I’m not sure. I don’t remember how the Rebbe explains that line. I need to look at the sicha. In any case, in the first halachah, the Rambam’s main point is that it is so because Hakadosh Boruch Hu chose it. In the second halachah, the Rambam adds all the other details. In other words, the sequence is the reverse. It was not chosen because the binding of Yitzchak took place here, or because something else happened here. On the contrary: because Hakadosh Boruch Hu chose this place for the altar—because Hashem chose it, as the verse says, “This is the altar for burnt offerings for Israel”—when Avraham came to bind Yitzchak, through prophecy or however it was, he knew that this was the place Hashem had chosen. So he built the altar there. That is the precision of the Rambam’s wording. In halachah 2, the Rambam writes: “It is a tradition held by everyone that the place where David and Shlomo built the altar, etc., is the place where Avraham built the altar.” What is precise

23:32 about that wording? “The place where David and Shlomo built”—he had already said that. So the Rambam could have said more briefly, “It is a tradition held by everyone that this is the place where Avraham built.” Instead: “The place where David and Shlomo built the altar is the place where Avraham built.” What is the Rambam telling us? That the order is the reverse. He does not mean that because the binding of Yitzchak took place here, and because Adam Harishon did what he did here when he was created, David and Shlomo built the altar here. On the contrary, the fact that this was the place where David and Shlomo would build the altar was the reason Avraham acted here earlier. Avraham knew that this was the place Hashem had chosen. So the cause was the other way around: Hakadosh Boruch Hu’s choice of the place, which Avraham perceived in advance. This is only the beginning of the explanation. Later in the sicha, the Rebbe goes on to explain why, nevertheless, the Rambam includes all this. If it is entirely a matter of choice, why does the Rambam need to bring the whole account? The Rebbe explains that the Rambam wants to tell us that, together with the Beis Hamikdash being a place of choice, with the unique quality of choice, there is also the aspect of holiness. The Beis Hamikdash also has an inherent quality of holiness. It is not that the Rambam holds that the Beis Hamikdash has no such quality—as though, simply put, the Ramban holds that it has holiness and the Rambam holds that it does not. Certainly, the Rambam holds that the Beis Hamikdash has both aspects. One aspect is choice, which is connected with the unlimited revelation of Hakadosh Boruch Hu. And along with that, there is another aspect to the Beis Hamikdash: holiness, which is connected with the dimension of limitation. Now,

25:09 that aspect exists as well, and both qualities are needed together. The site of the Beis Hamikdash must also have the quality of holiness. That is why the Rambam is careful to mention the things the forefathers did there: through them, they brought that holiness into the place inwardly, so that it became a holy place as well. Along with that, because it is a matter of choice, it has that additional quality too. So we will stop here, in short. Afterward, everyone can read the sicha and see how every detail of the wording is precise, and so on.