Likkutei Amarim Tanya - Chapter 22 - Part 3

00:01 We’re taking up the point at the end of chapter 22. I’ll start again from the last three lines of page 27b. The Alter Rebbe explains here why the existence of kelipah and the sitra achra is called “other gods.” There were two explanations for that name. The first is that they receive their sustenance from the external aspect of G-dliness, from its “backside.” I won’t go into the first half of the chapter at length. Then the Alter Rebbe added that besides this sustenance from the external aspect, from the encompassing light, there is also a tiny amount of contracted light that becomes invested internally within the kelipah—but it is in a state of exile. The kelipah opposes G-dliness, even the life-force within it. Then he adds—and now we’ll read the lines inside. At the end of the page: “Therefore they are called ‘other gods,’ which is actual idolatry.” That is the second explanation. “Other gods” means that they are other, separate—“other” in the plain sense. They are disconnected from Hakadosh Boruch Hu. It is a denial of the oneness of the King of kings, Hakadosh Boruch Hu, a denial of the oneness of Havayah. What is the oneness of Havayah? We said in chapter 21 that it means “I alone, and there is nothing besides Me.” There is no existence apart from Hakadosh Boruch Hu. That is utter bittul. And here, “since the holy light and life-force is in a state of exile within them”—in the case of kelipah, its life-force is in exile. It does not shine openly, and that is why they are not nullified. That is a form of exile, as we explained at length in the previous class. “It is not nullified at all before the holiness of Hakadosh Boruch Hu.” So kelipah, the sitra achra, has no bittul before Hakadosh Boruch Hu. And because it has no bittul, it follows that it is the very opposite of the oneness of

02:28 Havayah. The oneness of Havayah means bittul. It means that He alone exists and there is nothing besides Him—the idea of bittul. But in practice, in kelipah and the sitra achra the life-force is in a state of exile, so it is not in a state of bittul. The absence of bittul is itself the defining feature of kelipah and the sitra achra. “On the contrary, it raises itself like an eagle, saying, ‘I am, and there is none besides me.’” With kelipah and the sitra achra, it is not merely that there is no bittul. More than that: it is the opposite of bittul, a sense of self. “It raises itself like an eagle, saying, ‘I am, and there is none besides me.’” That is the nature of the sitra achra. The words “raises itself like an eagle” come from a verse concerning kelipah. “Raises itself like an eagle”—it is a verse in Iyov, if I’m not mistaken. Here, it says in connection with Edom, “If you raise yourself like an eagle, from there I will bring you down.” In later chapters, the Alter Rebbe will bring this verse concerning the sitra achra in general: the sitra achra raises itself like an eagle. That is the analogy. Just as the eagle rises above all the animals and birds, so kelipah and the sitra achra raise themselves like an eagle. This is the sense of self in kelipah, which wants to draw sustenance and influence from G-dliness—all of that. So here the Alter Rebbe brings it in connection with the opposite of the oneness of Havayah. It is not only that kelipah and the sitra achra lack bittul before G-dliness. On the contrary, they raise themselves like an eagle, “saying, ‘I am, and there is none besides me.’” That, too, is a verse. What does “I am, and there is none besides me” mean? It means: I, my own independent existence—and besides me, everything else is secondary. That is what the words mean. As though nothing exists besides me, only the self of the sitra achra. “And as in the statement, ‘My river is mine, and I made myself.’” Here is another example of this aspect of kelipah and the sitra achra, of idolatry as the opposite of

04:34 the oneness of Havayah. At the other extreme, where it is completely undisguised, he brings the example of Pharaoh. “My river is mine, and I made myself”—that is written about Pharaoh. It is also a verse. Actually, these are two verses, but the Alter Rebbe joins two verses written about Pharaoh. “The great serpent lying in the midst of his rivers”—I think it was the prophet Yeshayahu who said that; I don’t remember. Yes, the great serpent lying in the midst of his rivers. It says of Pharaoh that he is like the great serpent in the river, in the... And he says, “My river.” Pharaoh had the river, the Nile. And the Nile was what led Pharaoh to make himself into an object of idolatry. The Nile had received a blessing from Yaakov Avinu: the Nile would rise and irrigate the land whenever he came to it. That was Yaakov Avinu’s blessing. But afterward Pharaoh went and turned it into idolatry, as though he were a god, as though he owned the Nile. That is the meaning of “My river is mine”: the river belongs to me. The river was the source of sustenance, since Egypt had no rain, so all its sustenance came through the river. And because the river rose and irrigated the land, Pharaoh claimed, “My river is mine.” I’m the owner of the river, as it were. And not only that—he went further: “I made myself,” meaning that I created myself. Two things: he claimed ownership of the river, the source of sustenance. Beyond that, “I made myself,” as though no one made me. I made myself. That was Pharaoh’s kelipah, showing the ultimate coarseness, the ultimate sense of self possible in the existence

06:21 of kelipah and idolatry—to the point of completely cutting himself off from Hakadosh Boruch Hu, as though to say, “I made myself.” So that is the “on the contrary” that the Alter Rebbe adds here. The Rebbe gives several explanations of this. First, let’s read the Tanya: “For our Sages said.” The Alter Rebbe continues: based on what we’ve explained here, the foundation of idolatry is the lack of bittul. The essence of idolatry is the absence of bittul. That is what makes it idolatry—the opposite of the oneness of Havayah. On this basis, the Alter Rebbe explains a fundamental point about idolatry. Our Sages say that arrogance is equivalent to actual idolatry. That is what the Gemara says. There is a Gemara in Sotah. The yeshivah students learned Sotah, so they know. Anyway, I was there. After the Gemara’s whole discussion of idolatry and arro—sorry, of arrogance, it says that arrogance is equivalent to actual idolatry. That is why the Gemara says: “Neither it nor any part of it.” Arrogance must be rejected entirely, because it really is like idolatry. But at first glance, how can you say that arrogance is actual idolatry? Idolatry is one of the three gravest transgressions; it is an extremely serious matter. Arrogance is a character trait—a sense of self, pride. So why say that arrogance is like actual idolatry? What? What is the connection? Based on what we’ve explained here, we see how the Rebbe explains it, and this reveals the depth of the matter. Why is arrogance so very serious, so utterly unacceptable? Because the main point—and this is also in the Rambam. The Rebbe cites the Rambam’s halachic ruling. In the Gemara there is a dispute about whether one may have a little arrogance—“an eighth of an eighth.” There are several opinions there in the Gemara, and the Rambam rules

08:23 In Hilchos Deos, he rules according to the view that, when it comes to arrogance, one should have none of it—not even a little. You also see that the Rambam writes that one should be repulsed by this trait. Now, with all other character traits, one should always follow the middle path, going to neither one extreme nor the other. There are two exceptions, though, which the Rambam says require going all the way to the opposite extreme: arrogance and anger. We know that both of these traits are connected to idol worship. Regarding arrogance, as he cites here, it is equivalent to idol worship; and regarding anger, too: anyone who becomes angry is considered as though he worships idols. Here the Alter Rebbe explains arrogance, because it relates to the principle we are discussing in Tanya—the sense of being a separate entity. Arrogance is the very essence of that sense of self. That is the whole foundation here in Tanya. As for anger, the Alter Rebbe does not explain it here, but he does explain it in the well-known Igeres Hakodesh, section 25. There he cites Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and explains why anger is connected to idol worship. But right now we are discussing arrogance. So the Alter Rebbe asks: What is the explanation? Why do we say that arrogance is like idol worship? Notice the precise wording: “just like actual idol worship,” not simply “like idol worship.” The Alter Rebbe adds the word “actual.” In other words, it is not just that this is what the books say. There are explanations in the books for why arrogance is connected to idol worship. Some explain it in a subtle sense: idol worship is bowing to an image, and when you are arrogant, it is as though you are making an image of yourself. Various explanations are given in the books, but he emphasizes the word “actual.” Why is it just like actual idol worship? Based on what we have just explained, it is understood: because the essence and root of idol worship—what is the essence and root of idol worship? Based on

10:17 what we learned in chapter 6, what is its whole essence? The root of idol worship is considering something to be an entity in its own right. The central issue in idol worship is not the stone, not the statue, not the physical object. What exactly are you doing when you bow to something? What is the central issue in idol worship? The very fact that, to you, there is something besides Hakadosh Boruch Hu. That is the essence of idol worship: regarding something as an entity in its own right. Its essence is the very feeling, the very importance you assign to something that exists on its own, separate from Hashem’s holiness. It exists, separate from the holiness of Hakadosh Boruch Hu. As the Rebbe explained earlier, holiness means bittul. Holiness means “there is nothing besides Him,” and anything that lacks that bittul lacks the recognition that there is nothing besides Him. That in itself is the reality of idol worship. So the moment that recognition is lacking, the thing is separate. It feels itself to be an entity in its own right, separate from Hashem’s holiness. This is not necessarily outright denial of Hashem. Idol worship does not mean denial. That is the Alter Rebbe’s definition. Looking at idol worship in the straightforward sense, in the revealed Torah and in halachah, you might think: What does idol worship mean? That a person denies Hakadosh Boruch Hu. Then the question arises: How does arrogance fit? What is the connection? Idol worship means denying Hakadosh Boruch Hu—the worst thing possible. Arrogance means a person feels a bit of self-importance. But according to what we have explained here, it is the other way around: idol worship does not mean denial. It does not mean that a person denies Hakadosh Boruch Hu. That is not what idol worship means. He may believe in Hakadosh Boruch Hu. Idol worship means assigning importance to something besides Hakadosh Boruch Hu. That is its definition, and that is what the Alter Rebbe says here: “Because the essence and root of idol worship...” There are many aspects of idol worship that branch off from it—consequences, as they are called. So, as something that branches off,

12:09 a person engaged in idol worship may reach a point where he does not believe in Hakadosh Boruch Hu at all, where he denies Him completely. But that is not the essence of idol worship. It is one form that may develop, until he reaches such a state. But that is not its essence, and idol worship is not necessarily denial. A person can believe in Hakadosh Boruch Hu and nevertheless practice idol worship. Why? Because idol worship is the very idea of saying that something exists besides Hakadosh Boruch Hu. That is its definition. That is what “the essence and root of idol worship” means. Its essence, its root, is not denial. Its root is the very absence of bittul—the sitra achra—regarding something as an entity in its own right. It is as the Alter Rebbe said earlier about the kelipos and sitra achra: they feel themselves to be independent entities. Something regarded as an entity in its own right is likewise considered idol worship, without outright denial, “as it says in the Gemara, they call Him ‘the G-d of gods.’” What is the proof that idol worship does not necessarily mean denial? The Gemara says explicitly that even idol worshippers believe that there is G-dliness. Idol worshippers are not necessarily people who deny Hakadosh Boruch Hu. That is what the Gemara says, at any rate. The point is that idol worshippers also believe there is a “G-d of gods.” They believe in Hakadosh Boruch Hu, the supreme ruler. What, then, do they claim? That Hakadosh Boruch Hu chose the stars and constellations and appointed them as ministers. So they, too, believe there is a “G-d of gods.” There is the King of kings above, and there are intermediaries. That is how they can call Him the “G-d of gods.” So it is not simply that idol worshippers do not believe in Hakadosh Boruch Hu. And we can therefore understand why it is said that an arrogant person is entirely

14:01 like an idol worshipper. It is not because he denies Hakadosh Boruch Hu; he believes in Hakadosh Boruch Hu. But the very fact that he regards himself as an entity apart from G-dliness is exactly the point of idol worship: attributing importance to something else, an intermediary, an entity besides Hakadosh Boruch Hu. He calls Him the “G-d of gods.” These people, too, regard themselves as independent entities. They believe there is G-dliness, but they also think that other things exist besides Hakadosh Boruch Hu. They regard themselves as independent entities, and by doing so they separate themselves from the holiness of Hashem, blessed be He. The very fact that they feel themselves to be important separates them from holiness. They are not nullified to Him, blessed be He; they lack bittul. So you see that he returns once again to this point. This is the basis, the foundation, the foundation of all of Tanya. Why? Why does the absence of bittul already make you like an idol worshipper? The Alter Rebbe says: “For the supernal holiness rests only upon that which is nullified to Him, blessed be He, as explained above.” Holiness is bittul. The moment you do not have that bittul, there is no holiness. No holiness. That itself is what idol worship means. “And therefore they are called ‘mountains of separation’ in the holy Zohar.” This is the reason. Why does the Zohar call the kelipah and sitra achra “mountains of separation”? Turei deperuda means “mountains of separation.” They are called mountains because a mountain stands out—an image of self-importance, of being an entity. That is the meaning of turei deperuda, mountains of separation. So what exactly makes them mountains of separation? This is the point: their self-importance, their being “mountains,” their sense of being independent entities—that itself creates separation. That is what separates them from the oneness of Hakadosh Boruch Hu, and that is the reality

15:56 of kelipah and sitra achra. So a person who is arrogant, who lacks bittul in this respect, becomes part of kelipah and sitra achra. It is something like actual idol worship. And this brings us to the distinction involved in calling Hashem “the G-d of gods.” Idol worship does not necessarily deny Hashem; there is another side to it. Look at the Rambam. First, the Rambam describes how idol worship began. There was the generation of Adam, and then Enosh. In the first generations, they believed completely in Hakadosh Boruch Hu. Then came the generation of Enosh. What began then? The Rambam says that they believed Hakadosh Boruch Hu created the world, established it, and made everything. Nevertheless, just as a king has ministers and does not personally attend to every detail—the ministers do that, though the king appoints them—so too, they thought, Hakadosh Boruch Hu made the stars and constellations, and they exert influence. Therefore, even while believing in Hakadosh Boruch Hu as the overall ruler, they thought they also had to bow to the stars and constellations, because the flow of blessing came through them. That is what the Rambam says. The Rebbe explains in the well-known maamar of 11 Nissan, “Bayom Ashtei Asar,” that there are two levels here. At the first level, they did not even regard them as ministers, but as servants, like waiters—less important than ministers. Waiters bring the food; they have no importance of their own. But since they bring the food to you, they deserve thanks. “The wine belongs to its owner, but thanks go to the one who pours it.” That was the first stage, which, according to halachah,

17:55 is not even considered actual idol worship. Seemingly, it is called shituf—attributing a role to another power alongside Hashem—and shituf is not actual idol worship. A non-Jew, for example, may believe in shituf, though idol worship is forbidden to him under the Seven Noahide Laws. According to halachah, there is a distinction. As the Rambam rules, a non-Jew who believes in shituf is not an idol worshipper. So what is the difference? This is one of the distinctions; there is a great deal more to say about it, but we will not go into the whole subject now. Seeing the stars and constellations as waiters who merely bring the flow of blessing closer—that is called shituf. By contrast, the next stage was to see them as ministers. Ministers already have an independent standing. So arrogance—the feeling that you yourself are an independent entity—is a denial of Hashem’s true oneness. On a subtle level, that itself falls within the definition of denial of His true oneness. Hashem’s true oneness means that “everything before Him is considered as nothing,” and everything is completely nullified to Hakadosh Boruch Hu. This relates to all the points we discussed about the Chofetz Chaim and the heart. When you lack that feeling, you lack that bittul, and that is called arrogance. So it is like actual idol worship. According to what we have learned here, then, Pharaoh—whom the Alter Rebbe brings here; we will get to Pharaoh in a moment—is not really the basic example of idol worship. Pharaoh was much worse. What emerges here is, seemingly, a very striking insight: the whole matter of idol worship begins, the Alter Rebbe says, when you do believe in Hakadosh Boruch Hu, but feel that there is another independent existence as well. Bittul is lacking. According to the Alter Rebbe,

21:21 who brings the example of Pharaoh—what did Pharaoh say? “My river is mine, and I made myself.” Pharaoh did not believe in Hakadosh Boruch Hu at all. Pharaoh said he had made the Nile, and more than that, he said he had made himself. In other words, “I, and nothing besides me.” So Pharaoh is an extreme example. This is actual idol worship taken to the opposite extreme. In bringing Pharaoh, the Alter Rebbe gives an example of the overall idea. He explains that “other gods” means “other”—a state of exile. The Divine life-force is within the kelipos, so deeply in exile there that it is not nullified. The Alter Rebbe wants to explain that this exile can be so great. As we explained in the previous class, exile means that you are in a place but do not control what happens there; others control you. It can reach an extreme like Pharaoh. He received his sustenance from Hakadosh Boruch Hu, yet took it to the opposite extreme, to a state of complete denial: he did not believe in the existence of Hakadosh Boruch Hu at all—“I made myself.” But that is an extreme. Even without going that far, there can be idol worship while you still believe in Hakadosh Boruch Hu. With Pharaoh, we see the effect of this exile. The example of Pharaoh shows us the basis of exile, and something much deeper as well. The whole point with Pharaoh is, as

23:23 we said, that all the power Pharaoh had came from Yaakov’s blessing. Pharaoh would go to the Nile, and the Nile would rise to meet him. How did that happen? It was a blessing. Rashi says in Parshas Vayigash that Yaakov blessed him that the Nile would rise to meet him. Yaakov Avinu came to Pharaoh, and “Yaakov blessed Pharaoh.” What blessing did he give him? That the Nile would rise to meet him. So Pharaoh had received a blessing from Yaakov. He took that blessing and turned it into idol worship. Here you see the depth of the Shechinah’s exile. Do you understand? All the power you have comes from holiness. Yaakov Avinu gave you that power; everything you have comes from holiness. Yet Pharaoh took the power he received from holiness and made himself into an idol, an object of worship. He made himself a god. That is why, later, when Hakadosh Boruch Hu sent Moshe Rabbeinu to break Pharaoh, where does the Chumash say He sent him, in Parshas Va’eira? To the Nile. He sent him there in the morning, when Pharaoh went out: “Behold, he is going out to the water.” He sent Moshe to see what Pharaoh did in the morning, to catch him there on the bank of the Nile—to break his kelipah, so to speak. All your power comes from the Nile, yet you go to the river and hide there so people will think you are a god. That is where Moshe caught him. There is also the well-known account of this whole matter. So that is the point about Pharaoh. Besides this, there is an extensive, wonderful sicha of the Rebbe on this passage in

25:30 Tanya, chapter 21. It relates to the frogs: why was the plague of frogs the second plague, after Hakadosh Boruch Hu struck the Nile? The Rebbe has a very interesting sicha on this. The Midrash says that the plague of frogs was the main blow to Pharaoh’s kelipah. There, the Rebbe explains something very interesting: there are three levels of denial. There are those who believe in Hakadosh Boruch Hu, those who oppose Him, and those who neither believe nor oppose. There is a form of idol worship in which a person believes there is another god. That, too, is idol worship, as we learned here—the ordinary kind. He believes in Hakadosh Boruch Hu but also believes the constellations have power. Then there are those who oppose Hakadosh Boruch Hu and act against Him. But there are also people who neither believe in Him nor oppose Him, as though He simply does not exist and was never part of the picture. The Rebbe explains that this is actually the deeper kelipah. Pharaoh’s kelipah was that he did not believe in Hakadosh Boruch Hu, but did not oppose Him either. And that is what the frogs addressed. It is as though, from the outset, the whole question means nothing to him. He is neither one nor the other. And that is actually the worst thing—what they call “indifference.” Indifference is the worst thing. Someone who opposes you at least cares enough to oppose you. You can see this in practice when helping a Jew come closer to teshuvah. One person goes along with you; another shouts and argues. With that second person, you can actually see that he has a soul. Someone who does not care about anything—that is the worst. It does not interest him. It makes no difference.

27:23 To them, the whole matter is “not important.” Indifference. That is the worst thing, and we see it in each person’s own avodah as well. Now let’s hear how to translate all of this into our avodah, so that everyone will have the urge to do teshuvah, Moshiach will come, and we’ll finally have the Geulah and the end of the world.