Likkutei Amarim Tanya - Chapter 33 - Part 3

00:01 Speaker 1 We’re looking here at page 42, at the line beginning “He alone.” Here, in chapter 33, the Alter Rebbe comes to explain how a person can attain joy—true joy of the soul. How? By contemplating the unity of Hashem, His true unity. The Alter Rebbe gives several details here in explaining the true unity of Hashem. First he speaks about “filling all worlds” and “encompassing all worlds.” Then there is the matter of the Shechinah’s self-effacement. And then he brings up the point that Hakadosh Boruch Hu alone is the only existence in the higher and lower realms. Just as it was before creation, so it is now, after creation, without any change. Even in the very place where the order of creation and the world now exist, He alone was there, and He alone remains there now, without any change. How do we explain that? It isn’t only a matter of faith; we also need some intellectual understanding of it. What is the rational explanation? How can we understand what we’re saying: that although a world exists, all the worlds are nevertheless nullified to Hakadosh Boruch Hu exactly as they were before creation? How can that be? After all, a world has actually been created here. So the Alter Rebbe explains it rationally. He says, in the fourth line: “Behold, all created beings are utterly nullified in His presence.” He explains why we say that Hakadosh Boruch Hu is the same now as He was before creation: because all created beings are completely nullified to Him, utterly so. “Their nullification is like the nullification of the letters of speech and thought.” What kind of nullification is this? What does it mean to be utterly nullified? He wants to emphasize that this is complete nullification, total nullification—not just the nullification of an existing entity, but nullification

02:09 Speaker 1 of its very existence. To emphasize what total nullification means, he gives an example: “the nullification of the letters of speech and thought within their source and root.” It is like the way the letters of speech and thought are nullified within their source and root. What is their source and root? “The essence and core of the soul.” There is the essence and core of the soul—the soul itself. What is that? The Alter Rebbe says that it is “its ten faculties: Chochmah, Binah and Daas.” The essence and core of the soul are its ten faculties. As is well known, the Alter Rebbe’s explanation in Tanya differs from what appears later in other maamarim. In Tanya, he explains that the essence and core of the soul are its ten faculties. Later, in maamarim, we learn—the Rebbe explains—that the ten faculties of the soul are not the soul itself. They are only faculties. The soul’s essence is the yechidah; indeed, even the yechidah is not the soul’s essence. There is an essence of the soul beyond the yechidah, as discussed in the maamarim, where we learn about higher levels. But in Tanya, as is well known, the Alter Rebbe does not speak of anything higher than the ten faculties. The highest he goes is Chochmah. We see this in chapters 18 and 19 and the other chapters where the Alter Rebbe discusses mesirus nefesh: the highest level he reaches is the Chochmah of the soul, where the light of Ein Sof shines. In the Alter Rebbe’s Tanya, particularly in… [unclear] Chochmah. We’ve spoken about this several times already. So in Tanya, the Alter Rebbe speaks of the soul’s essence as its ten faculties. That is the soul’s essence. We can also understand why. Why, really? How can the faculties be the soul’s essence? That sounds contradictory. Throughout the maamarim it says that the ten faculties are not the essence. Yet in Tanya too, the Alter Rebbe uses this expression several times, not just here: that the essence and core of the soul are its ten faculties. He says it in chapter 12 and in several other places.

04:03 Speaker 1 How do we explain that? Why are the ten faculties called the soul’s essence? The straightforward explanation is that Tanya speaks primarily about the beinoni. For a beinoni, the main work concerns the soul’s garments—thought, speech and action. That is the central concern of the beinoni: to refine the garments. And that is what Tanya is about—explaining how thought, speech and action should be, and how a person can be a beinoni whose thoughts are as they should be. Since we’re speaking at this level, relative to it, the soul’s essence is its faculties. We’re speaking in terms of the world of garments, the world of thought, speech and action. Relative to that, the essence and core of the soul are its ten faculties, because we aren’t discussing anything beyond that here. Of course, elsewhere we speak about higher levels—about the avodah of tzaddikim, or even about baalei teshuvah, mesirus nefesh and various higher levels discussed in Kabbalah. That isn’t what I meant. Tanya isn’t speaking about those things here. It begins by speaking to beinonim, and that is the level it sometimes reaches. So we say that there are the soul’s garments and there is the soul itself, and that is why the ten faculties of the soul are called the soul’s essence. All of this is a side point. The Alter Rebbe says this in Likkutei Torah as well, in the explanation of “Nesach Simlah.” There, in Likkutei Torah, in Parshas Tzav in the volume of Vayikra, the Alter Rebbe writes explicitly that when Tanya says the soul’s essence is its ten faculties, that is only relative to its garments. It is stated explicitly there in Likkutei Torah, Vayikra.

05:54 Speaker 1 Let’s return to our subject. What is the Alter Rebbe saying here? What is the Rebbe saying here? There are the letters of thought and speech as they exist in their source, within the essence of the soul. The letters of thought and speech are contained within Chochmah, within the soul’s essence, with its boundless intellect or very great wisdom. So even though it has the potential for the garment of letters, while they are still within the soul they are not yet letters. Before it is clothed in the garment of thought, there are no letters there yet. There, within the essence and core of the soul, they transcend letters; they have not yet been clothed in any garment. So when the letters of thought and speech are contained within the soul itself, within Chochmah, Binah and Daas, their nullification is so complete that we say they are not yet letters at all; they do not even fall into the category of letters. The same is true of the world in relation to Ein Sof, as it says in chapters 20 and 21, on the first page. Let’s explain this. I know everyone is tired at this hour, but we need to understand it. We need to understand what the Rebbe is saying here. These are fundamental matters in serving Hashem. To attain true, boundless joy, we need to understand the matter of will and nullification. So the Rebbe gives an analogy here. Let’s try to explain the analogy of the soul. The Alter Rebbe himself points out that he discussed this at length in chapters 20 and 21. There, the matter is explained over two chapters; here, the Alter Rebbe says it in three or four lines. But let’s try to understand, in brief, what the Rebbe is saying here. We know that the soul has, as the Rebbe says here, its essential faculties and its garments. There are the letters of thought, speech,

07:56 Speaker 1 In practice. So let’s take the letters of speech. The Alter Rebbe makes a simple calculation there in Tanya. I’ll go over it briefly: When I say one word, that word is limited. What is one word compared to the power of speech? The power of speech—not the power... the power of speech, the source of words. Where does a word come from? From the power of speech. One word has no significance compared to the power of speech. Why? Simply because the power of speech is unlimited. In terms of its potential, a person can speak endlessly, yet he speaks one word. So one word has no significance compared to the power of speech. It’s like the finite compared to the infinite. But still, the power of speech is the source of speech. There is some relationship between them. Let’s... let’s go further. One word has even less significance compared to the power of thought. Compared to the essence of the soul, it has no significance whatsoever. One word—or say, one letter. Letters are something entirely external, something that comes out to another person, and so on. So one word, compared to the essence of the soul, to the soul itself, certainly has no significance at all. In other words, one word has no significance compared to the power of speech, but that is only a difference of quantity. One is finite and the other unlimited, but they are still related in kind. After all, this is the power of speech, the source of speech. Compared to the soul itself, though, the word is insignificant in every respect—in quantity, in quality, in its entire nature. Still, they are of the same kind. So compared to the essence of the soul, one word has no significance or importance. But the word is, after all, somewhere other than where the soul is. When I speak a word, then where... where

10:04 Speaker 1 does my word come out? From my mouth. I say one word. I say “pit.” The word “pit” is a word I sound with my mouth; it goes out and is heard by someone else. But where is my soul? The soul, the intellect, understanding—they are in another world, on another level. So it’s true that this word has no significance compared to the essence of the soul, but they are in two different worlds. One is in the world of speech, and the other is in the world of the soul. They are on two different levels. So the fact that speech is so utterly insignificant relative to the soul applies in the world of the soul. But in the world of speech, I do have an existence. Here, I really am speaking. Now imagine the word “pit” as it exists within the soul before it comes out. When that word is within the soul’s intellect, within the essence of the soul, then certainly the word has no independent existence; it has no place at all. It is completely nothing there. This is what the Alter Rebbe explains in chapters 20 and 21. That is the distinction. This is what we mean—and we’ll get to the worlds, to created beings. Yes, we’ll get to the difference between the analogy and what it represents. Above, too, there is the same idea. There is the speech of Hakadosh Boruch Hu. “By the word of Hashem”—the world was created through ten utterances. There was the utterance “Let there be a firmament,” and the letters of “Let there be a firmament” created the firmament. That utterance brings about a creation. It is one utterance, “Let there be a firmament”—two words in Hebrew. Does it have any significance compared to Ein Sof, compared to the very essence of Ein Sof, compared to Hakadosh Boruch Hu? Certainly not. None at all. If, in a created being, we say that one word

12:05 Speaker 1 has no significance compared to the power of speech—and all the more so compared to the life-force, and certainly compared to the essence of the soul—then surely one word, one utterance of Hakadosh Boruch Hu that brings the world into being, has no significance compared to His essence and being, which are truly infinite. But what is the difference between the analogy and what it represents? Here we come to a central point in understanding the unity of Hashem. In the analogy, as we said, there are two levels: the soul and speech. Speech leaves the soul, is expressed through the mouth, and is heard by someone else. Speech exists outside the soul. But above, nothing exists outside Him. Above, there is nothing else. Ein Sof is everywhere. Is there any place where Ein Sof is not present? Ein Sof is everywhere, and there is nothing besides Him. Since Ein Sof is everywhere, He is present even here, as we said earlier, in the place occupied by a created being in this world. So in the spiritual realm, there is no such thing as speech leaving the soul. In a human being, speech leaves the soul. Above, in the spiritual realm, speech—the word of Hashem—is always encompassed within Ein Sof, because nothing exists outside Him. It follows that the word of Hashem, the source of creation, is always encompassed within Ein Sof. Put it another way: The entire existence of the world is the word of Hashem, and the entire existence of the word of Hashem is Ein Sof, because it never leaves Ein Sof. It is always encompassed within Ein Sof. Nothing exists outside Him. Tzimtzum is not literal. According to those who hold that tzimtzum is literal, this world really does have an existence apart from Him, which detracts from the unity of Hashem. Because if you say tzimtzum is literal, that means Ein Sof is not present where the speech is. But according to

14:00 Speaker 1 the analogy the Alter Rebbe explains in Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, the whole foundation of Chassidus is that tzimtzum is not literal. That means Ein Sof is present right here, down below, in the speech, in events, at every level, within the created being itself. Consequently, the speech is always encompassed within Ein Sof. So nothing exists outside Ein Sof. That, in practical terms, is the meaning. That is the meaning: He alone is as He was before the world was created, even after the world was created. Before the world was created, nothing existed outside Ein Sof; and now, after the world was created, nothing exists outside Ein Sof either. Why? Because the speech is always encompassed within Ein Sof, so nothing exists outside Him. It follows that all the worlds are utterly nullified. That is the explanation. That is how the Alter Rebbe explains the unity of Hashem through this analogy. These are the two chapters, chapters 20 and 21. If you look, you’ll see that this is the difference between them. In chapter 20, the Alter Rebbe mainly explains how utterly incomparable the word of Hashem is to Ein Sof. He uses the analogy of speech in relation to the soul to show how incomparable they are, how the words count as nothing. In chapter 21, the Alter Rebbe adds the second point: where the analogy differs from what it represents. In the analogy, speech goes out. With Ein Sof, the speech does not go out. It is always encompassed within Ein Sof, and therefore nothing else exists outside Him. That is the true meaning of the unity of Hashem. All of this is one analogy. The Alter Rebbe continues and says: “As it is written.” Now the Alter Rebbe brings another analogy: “As it is also written elsewhere, there is a physical analogy for this.” Elsewhere, too, there is a physical analogy for this. What does “elsewhere” mean? Everyone knows that by “elsewhere,” the Alter Rebbe means Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah. That is where the analogy appears.

16:02 Speaker 1 this light from the sun, and the Alter Rebbe says, “as explained elsewhere.” As chassidim know, the Alter Rebbe wrote Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah first, before Likkutei Amarim. It is also known that the Alter Rebbe initially even considered printing Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah before Likkutei Amarim. In the end, he did it differently, but the wording remained as it was. So when the Alter Rebbe refers to Likkutei Amarim in Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, he uses the future tense: “as will be explained.” And when he brings something from Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah in Likkutei Amarim, he uses the present tense. We see it here too: “As explained elsewhere through a physical analogy for this”—that is, the same idea, only with a different analogy, a physical analogy: the nullification of the sun’s radiance and light within its source. The physical analogy is the nullification of the sun’s radiance and light: how sunlight is nullified within its source, within the body of the sun itself in the sky. This refers to the sun itself, the source of sunlight, which is in the sky. So we say that there too, inside the sun itself, within the sun, its radiance and light certainly shine and spread. The radiance is present there too, inside the sun. And not only is it present there—it is present “with greater intensity than when it spreads and shines,” and so on. No, not only is the sun’s radiance inside the sun; it is there in full force, far more than it is outside the sun. So on the one hand, we say that sunlight is present within the sun. Not only is it present; it is certainly there in full force. On the other hand, “there it is utterly nullified within its source, as though it has no existence at all.” There, inside the sun, the radiance is completely nullified within its source, to the point that it has no independent existence, as though it has no

18:09 Speaker 1 existence at all. So at first glance, it is the same analogy, only using something physical. What is the analogy? That sunlight exists within the sun. There is sunlight within the sun, and that makes sense. In other words, the Alter Rebbe presents two opposites here. On the one hand, the Alter Rebbe says there is sunlight within the sun. On the other hand, the Alter Rebbe says that when the light is within the sun, it is completely nullified, as though it has no existence at all. What does that mean? Both points can be understood logically. First, reason tells us that the sun’s radiance must be within the sun. It must be. Logically, the sun’s radiance has to be within the sun. It is a simple argument. The Alter Rebbe explains this in Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah. It is very simple: if something is found outside a source, it must be within that source. Something cannot come from me and be present outside me if it is not within me. If I produce something, I might produce it outside myself, but it cannot be something I do not have within me. There is no such thing. I cannot produce something externally, or convey something to someone else, if I do not have it myself. I cannot convey an idea if I have no understanding myself. If I convey an idea, it is because I have the understanding to convey it. The understanding cannot have originated outside my own being. I have understanding, and only when I go to convey it do I suddenly lose it? No. To produce something, I must already have it within me. The same applies to everything. I give tzedakah to someone. I give money to a poor person because I have money in my pocket. I cannot give something I do not have. It is simple. You do not have to be a Torah scholar to understand it. Every small child grasps

19:58 Speaker 1 that. So the same is understood regarding light. If the sun’s light spreads beyond the sun, that is because there is light within the sun. And not only that, says the Alter Rebbe, but it is there with even greater intensity and force. Why do we say it has greater intensity and force? Who says so? That too is simple reasoning. Simple reasoning tells us that the closer anything is to its source, the stronger it is. Take physical light: the farther it gets from its source, the weaker and weaker it becomes. There is less and less and less of it. Its presence weakens. So the closer it is, the stronger it is. We can therefore understand that the light within the sun, which has not gone out at all, is certainly even stronger. If you ask exactly what its strength is and how that strength is expressed, that can be explained in several ways. This is not the place to go into it at length. At any rate, the light within the sun is there. That much is certain. And you add that not only is it there, it is there with greater intensity and force. Perhaps we can at least say briefly what “greater intensity and force” means. Outside the sun, the light has no strength of its own. In other words, whatever strength the light has outside the sun is external. It is outside the sun; it exists apart from it. Within the sun, the light has the strength of the luminary itself, a more genuine strength, the strength of the essence. In simple words, without getting into deep concepts: the light outside the sun is here now. A little later it will be gone. Look outside—it is already beginning to get dark. A few minutes ago there was light here. Now the light is no longer here, because the light outside the sun is something whose entire existence depends on something else. It has no strength

21:56 Speaker 1 of its own. When the sun goes away, it is gone. But the light within the sun has the strength of the sun, and the sun’s strength is its own. The sun is there all the time. The light changes, but the sun does not. No, no, we will not go further into that. So what are we saying? On the one hand, reason tells you that there is light within the sun too, and with even greater intensity and force. At the same time, when the light is within the sun, it has no existence of its own. That too makes sense logically. How so? The luminary is the essence; light is a revelation. The whole concept of revelation does not apply within the essence itself. What does “revelation” mean? It means something that extends beyond the essence and becomes revealed outside it. When the essence itself is present, how can you speak of revelation? You have the essence itself. “Essence” means the thing itself; “revelation” means something that relates to what is outside it. Within the sun, how does the concept of revelation apply? In that sense, it does not exist. Now, you may say that the light cannot be outside the sun without being within it; the capacity for light must be within it. But to say that it exists there as a distinct entity—certainly not. When you have the sun itself, you cannot speak of revelation there. The concept of an actual revelation can apply only outside the sun. That is why the Alter Rebbe says that when the light is within the sun, it is “as though it has no existence at all.” And so it is here as well. In other words, what is the analogy? It is the same kind of analogy we discussed earlier with letters: as the letters exist within the soul, they have no distinct existence; they are completely nullified. The same is true here. The light within the sun has no distinct existence. Its entire existence there is the sun.

23:54 Speaker 2 Why “as though”?

23:56 Speaker 1 Why “as though”? Because there really is light there. It is not that there is no light at all. Rather, the essence eclipses it there, so it is as though the light does not exist. It is not simply that it has no existence whatsoever. That is the point you want to emphasize. There is light there, but the revelation of the light has no existence of its own. In other words, the luminary is there. Because the luminary is present, the light has no significance of its own. But it is not that there is no revelation there at all. That is why the wording is “as though.” We could explain this at length, but this is not the time. I will just point out something very interesting. People do not notice it, but if you read carefully, you see something remarkable. Here the Alter Rebbe brings the analogy of the sun and says that this radiance also shines and spreads across the earth. In Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah—the same analogy, which is the original source, as we said—look there and you will see that he brings the analogy of the sun. There the Alter Rebbe says, “If it spreads and shines so very far away, how much more so can it shine in its very own place.” He does not say that it is there; he says that it can be there. We will leave that for another lesson.