Likkutei Amarim Tanya - Chapter 33 - Part 2

00:01 Speaker 1 The Alter Rebbe explains in chapter 33 how a person can attain true joy of the soul. How? By contemplating the unity of Hashem. When a person does as he says—“to deepen his thought and picture in his mind” the matter of “His true unity”—this can awaken joy in him. And not just joy, but true joy in Hashem. So here the Alter Rebbe begins to explain it. We’re at the fourth or fifth line of chapter 33. What should the contemplation focus on? The Alter Rebbe is going to explain it briefly here. Everyone knows that the subject of Hashem’s unity is explained at length. There are many maamarim about it. Yes. Nevertheless, here too, in chapter 33 of Tanya, the Alter Rebbe briefly explains the central point of Hashem’s unity and what one should contemplate. As we’ll see later, even though the Alter Rebbe is brief here, and one might think he is only mentioning things that he explains at greater length elsewhere, there are also novel points here that are not found elsewhere. But let’s first see what the Alter Rebbe says. The Alter Rebbe says that a person needs to contemplate, to deepen his thought, in order to reach joy—true joy of the soul. This comes through contemplating His unity, His true unity. He says to contemplate how He fills all the worlds, upper and lower. What should the contemplation be? It should be about how Hakadosh Boruch Hu fills all the worlds, both the upper worlds and the lower worlds. “And even this entire earth is filled with His glory.” Because our world—that is, our physical world—which appears to be a world of concealment, even

02:19 Speaker 1 in this world, what is it? It too is a vessel for this. What fills it? What fills our world? “This earth” too is “entirely filled.” What fills this world? His glory, the glory of Hakadosh Boruch Hu, which is G-dliness. “And everything before Him is considered as truly nothing.” All things, all the worlds and everything in them, have no significance or standing before Hakadosh Boruch Hu. So what is the Alter Rebbe saying here? So far, he has made three points, as we see in the Tzemach Tzedek, who understands the plain meaning here to be three subjects for contemplation. In these two lines, the Alter Rebbe has already included three levels of contemplation. First, the Alter Rebbe says to contemplate “how He fills all the worlds, upper and lower.” The Tzemach Tzedek understands this to mean contemplating memalei kol almin—how He fills all the worlds. When a person begins to contemplate Hashem’s unity, the order is from below upward. First he contemplates memalei kol almin. With Hakadosh Boruch Hu, there are upper worlds and lower worlds. That is the whole idea of memalei kol almin: there are upper and lower worlds, and all these worlds differ from one another. Hakadosh Boruch Hu fills each world according to its nature—the upper worlds according to theirs and the lower worlds according to theirs. That is the contemplation of memalei kol almin. Then he says, “And even this entire earth is filled with His glory.” “His glory” refers to a makif, an encompassing presence, as explained in several places. Glory is something encompassing, something that does not become inwardly invested. So “His glory” refers to sovev kol almin. What does “and even this entire earth is filled with His glory” mean? It means that when we come to sovev

04:19 Speaker 1 kol almin, we are speaking of a higher light, the light of sovev kol almin, which is present everywhere, even on this earth. But if he is speaking about sovev kol almin, how does the expression “the entire earth is filled” fit? At first glance, “filled” belongs to memalei—memalei fills. But sovev does not fill; it encompasses. So why use the expression “the entire earth is filled”? We also find the verse that the Alter Rebbe cites in Tanya, chapter 48: “Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?” That verse certainly speaks of sovev kol almin, because it says “I,” and Chassidus generally explains that “I” refers to sovev, to the Essence—to sovev kol almin. Yet it says, “Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?” So we see that the word “fill” is used for sovev kol almin as well. Now, sovev is seemingly a makif, something outside. But the Alter Rebbe himself explains at length later in chapter 48 of Tanya, Likkutei Amarim, that the truth is not as some people think—that the difference between sovev and memalei is that memalei is present inwardly, while sovev is outside, encompassing. The truth is that sovev kol almin also “fills.” The Alter Rebbe explains at length in chapter 48 that sovev kol almin does not mean that it encompasses from above and is not present within, G-d forbid. Rather, one can say that it is also present inside, deep inside, within every single created being. The only reason we call it sovev is in relation to the created being’s perception: the created being does not sense it. From the created being’s perspective, it is not revealed or felt

06:06 Speaker 1 inwardly. But in reality, sovev is present in the lower realms too, inwardly as well. So we can use the word “fills” in reference to sovev too. That is how the Tzemach Tzedek understands it. First comes “how He fills all the worlds, upper and lower”—memalei, filling the space of the world. Then comes “and even this entire earth is filled with His glory,” which refers to sovev, to sovev kol almin. There are some places, if I remember correctly, that explain it the other way around—I don’t remember where I saw it now; it was a long time ago. I think perhaps it was Rabbi Levi’s father. I’d have to look it up, yes? They explain that “how He fills all the worlds, upper and lower” refers to sovev kol almin. Yes? He fills all the upper and lower worlds; He encompasses everything. For filling the upper and lower worlds is like “Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?”—a verse that relates to sovev. Whereas “even this entire earth is filled with His glory” relates to memalei. In Likkutei Torah, in the second “Ani Ledodi” maamar, and in several places in Chassidus, we find this question: In one place it says, “Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?” In another, it says, “The entire earth is filled with His glory.” So you might say there is a contradiction between the verses. Here it says, “Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?”—“I,” His very Self—while there it says, “The entire earth is filled with His glory,” where “glory” is only the light. The Rebbe answers this in the second “Ani Ledodi” in Likkutei Torah. So you see that he answers that “Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?” refers to sovev kol almin, while “the entire earth is filled with His glory” refers to memalei kol almin. Glory is the light, the light from sovev. So if that’s the case, it comes out that—so

07:49 Speaker 1 If so, the meaning here comes out the other way around. The words “fills the upper and lower realms” refer to sovev kol almin, which encompasses all worlds, because they resemble the wording of the verse, “I fill the heavens and the earth.” And the words “the whole earth is full of His glory” relate more to memale kol almin, which fills all worlds. But the Tzemach Tzedek, in his summary, understands it the first way we mentioned. Seemingly, that fits better with the order of ideas in Tanya, which proceeds from below upward. Apparently, the sequence is that first we contemplate memale kol almin, then sovev kol almin, and then we come to a third idea: “Everything before Him is truly of no account.” That is a third level. There is memale kol almin, there is sovev kol almin, and there is “Everything before Him is truly of no account,” referring to a level even higher than sovev kol almin—Atzmus. And the Alter Rebbe is precise in his wording here: “Everything before Him is truly of no account.” What is the significance of “truly of no account”? Everything before Him is of no account. What does this “truly” add? In other words, there is a way in which everything before Him is of no account, but not truly so, and then there is the idea that it is truly of no account. What does “truly” add here? The explanation is this: Seemingly, even with respect to sovev kol almin, everything before Him is of no account. Seemingly, that is also true of sovev kol almin. After all, what does sovev kol almin mean? That it surrounds and encompasses all the worlds equally. Why equally? With memale, we say that there is more in the higher worlds and less in the lower worlds. With sovev, we say that all worlds are equal. Why are all worlds equal? Because relative to sovev, the worlds are of no significance. There’s an explanation for that, right? Because relative to sovev—whereas with memale they do have significance, so there is more in the higher worlds and

10:01 Speaker 1 less in the lower worlds. But relative to sovev, the worlds are of no significance, and therefore heaven and earth are equal. So it follows that even relative to sovev kol almin, everything before Him is of no account. But what? Although we say that relative to sovev everything before Him is of no account, it is not truly of no account. Ultimately, as explained in Chassidus, since it is sovev kol almin, it has a connection to the worlds, a relationship to them. So although they are of no account, they are not truly of no account. There is some measure of relation, at least a relationship of negation—and a relationship of negation is also a relationship, as the maamarim explain on this subject. There is no need to elaborate here. Not so with the level of Atzmus, which is higher than sovev kol almin and is called the true sovev. About this we say that it is completely beyond any connection to the worlds, and therefore “everything before Him is truly of no account”—completely of no account. To explain this, at least, with a story about haskalah—intellectual understanding in Chassidus. So now we’ll talk about haskalah. I see that as soon as the students hear that we’re starting to discuss a little haskalah, they start drifting off. We say they start daydreaming, looking at the clock and waiting for the study session to end. So let’s at least explain it with something that happened; a story makes everything easier to understand. There is the well-known story told about Reb Brislever [unclear]. Now, Reb Brislever [unclear] was a thinker, one of the great thinkers in Chassidus. He was a chossid of the Rebbe Maharash and was among the great thinkers in Chassidus. He also received his understanding of Chassidus from Reb Aizik of Homil. Reb Brislever [unclear] said, “My understanding, compared to Reb Aizik’s understanding—the distance between my understanding of Chassidus and Reb Aizik’s is like the difference between my understanding and a cat’s.” The distance between a cat and me—that same distance exists... A cat is “the cat” in English, a ketzele, nu. No, it’s all right. [unclear]. So he says that the relationship of my understanding to Reb Aizik’s is like that of the cat to... the same distance. As though I were a cat compared to Reb Aizik. And Reb Aizik’s understanding compared to the Rebbe’s understanding—I’m apparently speaking about the Tzemach Tzedek—the distance is like the distance between the cat and Reb Aizik. So, more precisely, you might think that... ah, how should I put it? Reb Aizik is closer to the Rebbe, I’m farther away, and the cat is farther away still. By that calculation, Reb Aizik’s relationship to the Tzemach Tzedek is one thing, Reb Shmuel Ber’s relationship to the Tzemach Tzedek is another, and the cat’s, lehavdil, is a third. But no. Relative to the Rebbe, Reb Aizik, the cat and I are all the same. That was Reb Shmuel Ber’s point. So what does this mean? Incomparability can still allow for some slight connection. Just as the cat has no connection or relation whatsoever to Reb Shmuel Ber, so too Reb Shmuel Ber’s understanding has no connection or relation whatsoever to Reb Aizik’s. Reb Aizik does have a connection to the Tzemach Tzedek. But when we say that the cat, Reb Aizik and Reb Shmuel Ber are all entirely equal, that means we are speaking here of true incomparability. It is truly of no account. And that slight connection exists with respect to

11:53 Speaker 1 The difference between my understanding of Chassidus and Reb Aizik’s is like the difference between my understanding and a cat’s. The distance between a cat and me—that same distance exists... A cat is “the cat” in English, a katzele. Well, no, that’s fine. That’s in the introductory lesson and... [unclear]. So he says: the relationship between my understanding and Reb Aizik’s understanding is like the relationship between a cat and me. In other words, I’m like a cat compared to Reb Aizik. And Reb Aizik’s understanding compared to the Rebbe’s understanding—I’m apparently talking about the Tzemach Tzedek—is as far apart as a cat and Reb Aizik. So you might think that Reb Aizik is closer to the Rebbe, I’m farther away, and the cat is farther away still. By that reckoning, Reb Aizik’s relationship to the Tzemach Tzedek is one thing, Reb Shmuel Ber’s relationship to the Tzemach Tzedek is another, and the cat’s relationship, lehavdil, is a third thing. But no. Compared to the Rebbe, Reb Aizik, the cat, and I are all the same. That was Reb Shmuel Ber’s point, the fundamental idea. So what does that mean? To be incomparable can still mean that there’s some tiny degree of connection. Just as a cat has no connection or relationship at all to Reb Shmuel Ber, so too Reb Shmuel Ber’s understanding has no connection or relationship at all to Reb Aizik’s. Reb Aizik, though, does have a connection to the Tzemach Tzedek. But when we say that the cat, Reb Aizik, and Reb Shmuel Ber are all exactly the same, that means this is true incomparability. It’s utterly beyond comparison. And that tiny degree of connection exists with respect to

14:09 Speaker 1 sovev as well. It, too, is of no account, but there is still some measure of relation. We say that this level is incomparable to that level, but both are levels of greatness. One level is so great that the other is insignificant relative to it. That other level is limited; it lacks many things. But true [unclear] is demonstrated by the level itself: whether it is a great level or not, it is all the same. So that is the point we need to discuss. First, there is contemplation of memale kol almin. Then there is contemplation of sovev kol almin. That already concerns Hakadosh Boruch Hu Himself [unclear]. And then, beyond that, “everything before Him is of no account”—everything is of no account relative to the Infinite Atzmus, which is higher even than sovev. So, relative to Him, [unclear]. All of this brings one to a sense of wonder before Hakadosh Boruch Hu. Yes, but saying that the entire world is of no account relative to Hakadosh Boruch Hu still does not express the idea of Hashem’s true unity. It explains that, relative to Hakadosh Boruch Hu, the worlds [are of no account]. But what about the existence of the worlds themselves? In practice, worlds were created and do exist. Seemingly, the worlds have an existence outside the unity of Hakadosh Boruch Hu. So now the Rebbe comes to explain that, in truth, the worlds are included within Hakadosh Boruch Hu. “He alone is He.” This Hakadosh Boruch Hu, the very Hakadosh Boruch Hu we are speaking about, before whom we say everything is truly of no account—the Infinite Atzmus—we say of this Atzmus that “He alone is He in the upper and lower realms, literally,” that Hakadosh Boruch Hu alone is He. What does it mean when we say, “He alone is He”? This is not a repetition. He alone

16:00 Speaker 1 He. You could say “He alone” twice. So the Rebbe explains that the precise wording is “He alone is.” It is like saying in Yiddish—or in Hebrew, though the Rebbe says it in Yiddish; I’ll say it the way the Rebbe does—“He alone is.” Saying “He” twice is like saying, “Er iz der zelbike”—He is the very same. But the question is: when you say He is the same, that is the point. The emphasis is on the “He” when you say, “He alone is.” It is as though you are saying not only that He is alone, but that “He alone is”: the same He, the same “alone.” Just as we say of Ein Sof that He alone is, and that in relation to Him “everything before Him is considered as absolutely nothing,” so too, now, after the worlds were created, it is exactly the same in the higher and lower realms. What does that mean? It does not mean merely that He Himself is alone. It means that He alone is in the higher and lower realms, even within the reality of the worlds themselves. So even within the reality of the worlds, what is their true reality? What is present in them? What is their reality? He alone is in the higher and lower realms. Just as He was alone before the six days of Creation, before there was a world. Before there was a world, before there were higher and lower realms, certainly He alone was: there was only Him, only He Himself. “There is nothing else besides Him.” He alone was there. In essence, there is nothing else besides Him; in truth, there is nothing at all apart from Him. And here the Rebbe says “literally”: that very same essential truth of “there is nothing else besides Him,” as it is in His very essence, remains exactly the same now, without any change whatsoever. So if we break this down, there are four points of contemplation here. First, one contemplates the One Who fills all worlds. Then

17:53 Speaker 1 one rises higher and contemplates the One Who encompasses all worlds. Then one rises higher still and contemplates how “everything before Him is considered as nothing,” and thus reaches the fourth stage. He says that this is what shines forth, what is present, and what constitutes the true reality of all the worlds, even after they were created, exactly as before. Now the Rebbe adds and presents an even deeper point: “And also in this place in which this world, the heavens and the earth and all their hosts, were created.” That is, this is not a fifth point; it is a further explanation of the fourth point, as we will see shortly. “And also in this place in which this world, the heavens and the earth and all their hosts, were created.” This place we have here, where the heavens and the earth—all the worlds—were created: He alone filled this place. Before Creation, before... Think about “before Creation.” What was here, in this place? What was here in the very place where we are sitting now? What was in Argentina five thousand seven hundred and sixty-nine years ago? What was in this place? What was here? So what was here, in this place? He alone. Eh? Dani, what did you say? Eh?

19:16 Speaker 2 Water.

19:17 Speaker 1 Yes. There was only Him alone. There was nothing else. There was only Hakadosh Boruch Hu. That was before, and it is so now as well. Yes, He alone, without any change whatsoever. So it is the same now, after the entire reality of Argentina and of this world, and the heavens and earth and all their hosts, were created: the very same “He alone” remains. It is exactly the same. And here the question arises: What is he adding here? What is the Rebbe adding to what he said earlier? Is he just saying the same thing in different words? The Rebbe already said earlier that He alone is in the higher and lower realms, just as He was alone before Creation. What is the Rebbe adding now with “and also in this place”? What happened? What have we added? He has already spoken about the higher and lower realms. So of course that includes this place: He was alone here, and He is alone here now as well. What has been added? And there is an extraordinary insight here. I don’t know if anyone noticed it. It is astonishing. What does “also in this place” mean when we are talking about before this place existed? Was there a place called Argentina before Argentina was created? So Argentina, as... What does it mean to say that He alone was “in this place” before this place existed? He “filled this place” before the tzimtzum? There was no place. What place are you talking about? The entire reality of place came into being, something from nothing, after the tzimtzum. What does it mean that He alone filled this place? So there is indeed a question here—and the two questions answer each other. The Alter Rebbe is revealing to us that, in truth, there was indeed a concept of place even before the tzimtzum. Everything we see here in the worlds after the tzimtzum was not first brought into being after the tzimtzum. It all existed before the tzimtzum as well. There was indeed a concept of place before the tzimtzum. We all know what is written in the Arizal’s writings and quoted in all the maamarim: before the tzimtzum, there was no place for the worlds to stand. It says explicitly that there was no place for the worlds to stand. The explanation, as stated in the Siddur, is that there was no place for the worlds to stand as they are now, in their present form. Worlds of the kind we have here now did not exist then. But the concept of place—the concept of place as part of the completeness of Ein Sof, in which everything exists even before the tzimtzum—did exist. Ein Sof contains everything. When both the finite and the infinite are utterly subsumed within Ein Sof, there is not only the aspect of infinity; there is also a vessel, there is also place. But the nature of place before the tzimtzum was not that of an independent existence, G-d forbid. Before the tzimtzum, the concept of place was an expression of Ein Sof. Just as Ein Sof is without limit, so the completeness of Ein Sof includes this aspect of place as well. It is like the well-known analogy of a teacher and student: the teacher’s world also contains the capacity for a student. Meaning, the teacher, before any tzimtzum and before he descends to the student’s level, already possesses that capacity, including the concept of the student. But the student there is not a separate part. There, the student is part of the teacher’s boundlessness; he is not an entity unto himself. Similarly, before the tzimtzum—no, nothing new came into being. Everything that exists after the tzimtzum was already there

21:45 Speaker 1 Nothing new came into being after the tzimtzum. Everything already existed before the tzimtzum as well. There was, in fact, a concept of space even before the tzimtzum. We all know what is written in the writings of the Arizal, as quoted in all the maamarim: before the tzimtzum, there was no room for the worlds to exist. It says explicitly that there was no room for the worlds to exist. The explanation, as it says in the Siddur, is that there was no room for the worlds as they are now, in their present form. Worlds of the kind we have here now did not exist before. But the very concept of space did exist, because of the perfection of the Ein Sof: the Ein Sof contains everything, even before the tzimtzum. The Ein Sof contains everything. When both the finite and the infinite are nullified within the Ein Sof, there is not only infinity; there is also the vessel, and there is also space. The difference is that before the tzimtzum, space was not an independent existence, G-d forbid. Before the tzimtzum, the concept of space was an expression of the Ein Sof. Just as the Ein Sof is infinite, its perfection also includes this aspect of space. It is like the well-known analogy of a teacher and a student: the teacher’s world also contains the capacity for a student. In other words, even before the teacher makes a tzimtzum, before he descends to the student’s level, he already has within himself the capacity for the student. But there, the student is not something separate. There, the student is part of the teacher’s boundlessness; he is not an entity unto himself. So too, before the tzimtzum, nothing new came into being. Everything that exists after the tzimtzum was already there.

23:38 Speaker 1 before. Before the tzimtzum, nothing truly new came into being. Elul and Adar came into being—yes, Elul and Adar. But, but, but the levels—all the levels existed before as well, including the level called place, the concept of place. And this is what the Alter Rebbe is saying. What the Alter Rebbe wants to tell us is that just as there was a concept of place before the tzimtzum, and yet it did not contradict Ein Sof—everyone understands that although there was a concept of this place before the tzimtzum, what was the nature of that place? It was wholly united; place existed only as part of Ein Sof. “He alone filled this place.” So yes, He alone. The same is true now. Nothing has changed in Hakadosh Boruch Hu. He is exactly the same now, and He likewise fills this place as... So this explains what we said earlier: in both the higher and lower realms, the oneness of Hashem certainly remains exactly as it was before.