Likkutei Amarim Tanya - Chapter 33 - Part 4

00:01 Speaker 1 So [unclear]. And to reach the soul’s true joy, a person must contemplate the oneness of Hashem—His true unity. What does the oneness of Hashem mean? The Alter Rebbe explains that He alone exists in the upper and lower realms, just as He alone existed before the Six Days of Creation, without any change whatsoever. Why? Because all created beings are completely nullified to Hakadosh Boruch Hu, just as they were before the Six Days of Creation. The Alter Rebbe gives two analogies for this. One is the letters as they are contained within the soul—utter nullification. The second is sunlight and the sun. Why does the Alter Rebbe need two analogies? Why isn’t one enough? On the plain level, the reason he doesn’t stop with the first analogy but also gives the second is that the second is a physical analogy. The Alter Rebbe himself says, “And for anyone who finds this difficult ... a physical analogy for this.” In other words, because the first analogy is spiritual, the analogy itself needs an analogy. It is quite spiritual in its own right. By contrast, the analogy of the sun is more physical, so it is easier to relate to. That seems to be the point of the Alter Rebbe’s second analogy: its advantage is that it is physical. If so, the question arises: Why didn’t he give the second analogy to begin with? Why did the Alter Rebbe also give the first? The explanation is that the first analogy has an advantage too. In fact, its advantage is so significant that the Alter Rebbe gives it first: it is a better analogy for explaining the overall idea. Its drawback, though, is

02:39 Speaker 1 that it is a spiritual analogy, so he needs to give the second one as well. But for the overall point under discussion, the first analogy is better. Why? What is its advantage? The first analogy is about letters. When the letters are contained within the soul, they have no existence of their own. What are we trying to explain here? The letters in the word of Hashem, which bring a created being into existence. Those letters, after all, constitute the created being’s existence. “By the word of Hashem the heavens were made, and by the breath of His mouth all their hosts.” The existence of created beings consists of the letters that give them life, bring them into being, and create them at every moment. So we want to say that the letters that bring created beings into existence are nullified to the Ein Sof, just as letters are nullified to the soul. Because the analogy of letters is closer to the subject we are explaining, the Alter Rebbe gives it first. It is a more fitting analogy for what we are discussing. Then the Alter Rebbe gives a second analogy, that of sunlight, whose advantage is that it is physical. That is one way to understand why the Alter Rebbe gives both analogies. But there is a somewhat deeper point, which the Rebbe explains in one of the maamarim. We see something interesting: the oneness of Hashem is explained in Tanya three times. It is mentioned briefly a few other times, but we can say that it is treated as a subject in its own right three times. In chapter 21 of Likkutei Amarim, the Alter Rebbe explains the oneness of Hashem once; then in chapter 33, which we are studying here; and then in the opening chapters of Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah. So the Alter Rebbe explains the subject of Hashem’s oneness three times. Notice something interesting: in chapter 21, the Alter Rebbe gives only the analogy of letters. He does not give the analogy of the sun. The whole of chapter 21 uses only

04:56 Speaker 1 the analogy of how letters are nullified to the soul’s speech. That is the whole point: the letters are nullified to the source of speech, speech to the source of thought, and thought to the essence of the soul. It is about the nullification of the letters. That is the analogy the Alter Rebbe uses to explain the oneness of Hashem. In chapter 3 of Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, the Alter Rebbe gives only the analogy of the sun; he does not give the analogy of the letters. Here, in chapter 33, the Alter Rebbe gives both—the analogy of the letters and the analogy of the sun. Why? First, let’s explain the two ends of the spectrum: chapter 21 and chapter 3 of Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah. In chapter 21 of Tanya, the Alter Rebbe explains nullification within Divine unity. That is, he comes to explain how the letters are nullified—how the letters of the word of Hashem are nullified to His essence, to the Ein Sof. In chapter 3 of Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, the Alter Rebbe is not discussing the nullification of the letters to the Ein Sof. There he discusses the nullification of the created being to the letters. We are talking about two different things. We’re studying ... we already know Tanya; we have the class. When you look at Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, you see that in chapters 1, 2, and 3, the Alter Rebbe discusses how created beings are nullified to the word of Hashem. Look at the world: you see something that exists. The Alter Rebbe says in the name of the Baal Shem Tov that it is not that Hakadosh Boruch Hu created the world once; rather, at every moment, each created being must be brought into existence from nothing anew. Therefore, if the eye were given permission to see, we would not see a created being as an independent existence, because we would see that its entire existence is nothing but the word of Hashem. So what is the Alter Rebbe discussing there? The created being in relation to the word of Hashem. And for that, the Alter Rebbe gives the analogy of

07:05 Speaker 1 sunlight within the sun. Sunlight within the sun is nothing in its own right; its entire existence is the sun. Within the sun, sunlight has no independent existence at all. All that exists there is the sun. The same is true of a created being: it has no independent existence. Its entire existence is the word of Hashem—the word of Hashem. The created being and the word of Hashem. So what represents the sun here? The word of Hashem, while the light represents the created being. Just as the light is nullified within the sun, the created being is utterly nothing in relation to the word of Hashem. By contrast, in chapter 21 of Likkutei Amarim, the Alter Rebbe is not discussing the created being in relation to the word of Hashem. He already explained that in Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah. There he explains a higher level of Hashem’s oneness. The word of Hashem—fine; the created being and the word of Hashem, all well and good. But ultimately, the word of Hashem, speech, also has a kind of existence. Speech involves expressing oneself outwardly. Speech implies someone else. Speech is something. So even from the perspective of speech, there is a certain sense of existence. True, the created being is nothing in its own right; its entire existence is the word of Hashem. But the very fact that Hakadosh Boruch Hu says, “Let there be light,” already allows some room for created beings. So the Alter Rebbe explains through the analogy of letters that letters are nullified to the soul. Similarly, the letters of the word of Hashem are nullified to their Creator. The existence of Hakadosh Boruch Hu is present everywhere. So we are discussing two sides of this. Here the Alter Rebbe takes both explanations and puts them together. Here he gives both analogies together. Why? Here the Alter Rebbe gives both the analogy of the sun and the analogy of the letters.

08:51 Speaker 1 The reason is that here, in Shaar— in chapter 33, the Alter Rebbe is speaking about the unity of Hashem in a way... Here the Alter Rebbe comes to explain the unity of Hashem as it is from the perspective of G-dliness, not as it is from the perspective of the world. This is a third point in the unity of Hashem. It is specifically here, in chapter 33, that the unity of Hashem is explained in the deepest way. In Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, he explains it with regard to created beings, to the world. There is a world. What is the reality of the world? The Alter Rebbe explains that the reality of the world is not as it appears to our eyes, as it appears to eyes of flesh—that it is an independent existence. The truth is that the reality of the world is the word of Hashem. That is the idea of... And that is why the Alter Rebbe brings both analogies together here, because what matters here is not the differences between one analogy and the other. What matters here is the general point. What matters here is explaining the unity of Hashem in its fullest sense: a Jew needs to understand that Hakadosh Boruch Hu is the only reality, that there is nothing besides Him, that He is the only true reality. Through that, he will come to joy. Because when he knows and feels this, and contemplates the true unity of Hashem—that Hakadosh Boruch Hu is present below just as He is above, the whole idea that He is with you—it will bring a person true joy in Hakadosh Boruch Hu. True joy, as I am about to explain. So the point here is not the nullification of the created being; the point here is the unity of Hashem. And that is why the Alter Rebbe brings both analogies together here, because what matters here is not the differences between one analogy and the other. What matters here is the general point. What matters here is explaining the unity of Hashem in its fullest sense: a Jew needs to understand that Hakadosh Boruch Hu is the only reality

11:21 Speaker 1 and everything is nullified. That is why the Alter Rebbe uses both the analogy of the letters and the analogy of the sun. Now, something very interesting—truly remarkable. This point, that chapter 33 is different from the discussion in Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, reveals something remarkable. There is a subject index that the Rebbe made for Tanya. And the subject index the Rebbe made for Tanya is, as is well known, extremely precise. Someone might think that making a subject index was a job anyone else could have done: making an index is just taking, uh, taking, how do you say it, texts and putting words in, and then making an index out of them. But the Rebbe’s index is very deep. You can learn very, very special things from it. There are many new insights into Tanya that can be understood on the basis of the subject index. So come, let’s look at something remarkable in the Rebbe’s subject index to Tanya. There are also several letters from the Rebbe on this subject, where you can see the Rebbe explaining how precise it is: why he referred to this place, why he did not refer to that place. People asked the Rebbe why he did not include this reference, why he included that one, and so on. And the Rebbe explains that every detail in the index is precise. So let’s see something remarkable. The subject index is at the back of Tanya; in each edition it is on a different page. In the red Tanya I have, it is on page 185. In other editions of Tanya, it is probably on another page. So let’s take a look at the subject index. Under the entry “Light”—let’s start with light. Yes. Under “Light,” the Rebbe indicates where the concept of light is explained in Tanya. He lists I, 51. “I” means Likkutei Amarim, and “51” means chapter 51. Then he lists II—“II” is Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah—chapters 2 and 3, the light of the sun within the sun. What about chapter 33? He does not list it.

13:35 Speaker 1 He does not list chapter 33, I, 33. But we have just learned the analogy of sunlight and the sun. We are learning it here in chapter 33. The Rebbe does not list it. Okay? Moving on. Look under the entry “Nullification of the worlds.” No, before that. Before that there is “Unity.” “One.” On that same page there is “One,” the entry “One, Unity.” He lists I, 21, the unity of Hakadosh Boruch Hu. I, 21—that is chapter 21. Continuing on, then I, 33. That is what we are learning now, chapter 33: the unity of Hakadosh Boruch Hu. II, 7. He does not list II, 3. He does not list chapter 3 of Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah here. And for the unity of Hashem, he lists chapter 21, yes, and chapter 33 as well. He does not refer to chapter 3 of Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah. Let’s continue. “Nullification.” We come to “Nullification of the worlds.” Yes, there is an entry “Nullification.” Under “Nullification,” what does he list? I, 21, the nullification of all creation; II, 3, as above—that is Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, chapter 3. Here he does include chapter 3. He does not include chapter 33. Another thing: we said that under “Light”—what did he list under “Light”? He listed Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, but not chapter 33. Look under the entry “Sun.” Let’s go to the end. Under “Sun,” under “Sun,” he lists I, 33. He does include the radiance of the sun within the sun, and also II, 3, the radiance of the sun within the sun. So, for example, under “Light” he does not include chapter 33; he includes only chapter 3 of Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah. Under “Sun,” he does include chapter 33. What is going on here? What is the explanation? With this point, it makes sense. In Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, the point is to explain

16:19 Speaker 1 the nullification of the worlds. There the Alter Rebbe comes to explain how created beings are nullified before Hakadosh Boruch Hu. That is the point. The Alter Rebbe’s purpose in chapter 33... So that is the nullification in the analogy of the sun, and that is why the Rebbe refers to it under “Nullification”: he refers to chapter 3 of Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah. In chapter 33, the Alter Rebbe does not come to explain the nullification of the worlds. He does explain nullification, but that is not the point here. The point here is not to explain what happens to created beings. The point here is to explain the unity of Hashem, so that a Jew will be joyful through contemplating that unity. The Creator, creation, and kingship—those are among the explanations. The main point is the unity of Hashem, not the nullification of created beings. That is why, under “Unity,” he refers to chapter 33, while under “Nullification,” he does not refer to chapter 33. Conversely, in Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, chapter 3, the point is to explain the nullification of created beings. Unity is not the point there. The discussion of unity comes later, in chapter 7. That is why, under “Unity,” he does not refer to chapter 3 of Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, but he does refer to chapter 33. The same applies to the analogy. In chapter 3 of Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, what is the main emphasis of the analogy of the sun? The created being in relation to the Creator. What does that mean? We are examining the reality of the created being. So he gives the analogy of sunlight and the sun: outside the sun, the light has an existence; within the sun, the light has no separate existence. The entire discussion in Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah is about the reality of the light, because from that we understand the reality of the created being. So under which entry does the Rebbe refer to it? Under “Light.” Under “Light,” the Rebbe refers to Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah. He does not refer to chapter 33. Why? Because in chapter 33 the Alter Rebbe does not come to speak about the light, about the created being. The Alter Rebbe comes

18:20 Speaker 1 to speak about the sun. The sun represents the Ein Sof, the unity of Hashem. That is why, under the entry “Sun,” the Rebbe does refer to chapter 33. Because under “Sun,” it is an analogy for the unity of Hashem: the sun is the only reality, and within the sun the light has no separate existence. So it is the same with the analogy: the sun represents Hakadosh Boruch Hu. He is the only reality, and everything is nullified. That is why, under “Sun,” he does refer to chapter 33. But under “Light,” he does not refer to chapter 33, because the point of chapter 33 is not the created being; the point here is the unity of Hashem. Along these lines, there are several other precise details in the wording of Tanya. On this basis, too, we spoke in the previous class about how here he says “included,” while there he says “found.” That is also connected. All sorts of things—there are several other details. I will give all the particulars. There are many precise details in the wording of Tanya that can be understood through this fundamental difference: in Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, the Alter Rebbe is mainly speaking about the nullification of the worlds. What is the reality of the created being in relation to Hakadosh Boruch Hu? From below upward, in other words. Whereas in chapter 33, the Alter Rebbe comes to explain the concept of the true unity of Hashem. To explain the concept of the true unity of Hashem, the Alter Rebbe uses all the analogies. And the main emphasis of the analogy is not how the lower relates to the higher, not how the light relates to the sun, but the reverse: how the sun relates to the light. And here, too, there is another precise detail in what the Alter Rebbe says: “Rather, there it is utterly nullified in its existence.” Let’s go back to the text of Tanya, to Tanya on page 42, folio 42. So when the Alter Rebbe brings the analogy of sunlight and the sun, the Alter Rebbe’s wording is that the sunlight

20:11 Speaker 1 It is inside the sun. So even there, it exists in its source. The Alter Rebbe says: “But there it is utterly nullified in its source, as though it does not exist at all.” All right, one moment—I want to finish first. Actually, I didn’t go through this quickly. Maybe I do need to explain. In the previous class, we noted that in chapter 33 the Alter Rebbe says that the sun’s light exists even within the sun. There is light inside the sun too. What is the wording? “There too it radiates with even greater intensity,” but it is utterly nullified. By contrast, in Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, the Alter Rebbe says that the sun “has the capacity to shine.” The wording is “has the capacity to shine,” not that light emanates from it. Because “has the capacity to shine” describes an attribution. In short, I don’t want to go into this at length. But it relates to what we were discussing: in Shaar Hayichud Vehaemunah, the Alter Rebbe wants to emphasize the nullification of the created being—how little independent existence it has. So the Alter Rebbe stresses that when the light is inside the sun, it is not an entity at all; there is only the capacity to shine. There is no actual light there, only an attribution to light. And an attribution is not an entity at all. It means there is nothing there, only an attribution. Through this, the Alter Rebbe emphasizes how completely a created being is nullified in its source: its entire existence is merely an attribution, as though nothing exists there apart from that source. So to emphasize the created being’s nullification in the fullest sense, the Alter Rebbe stresses there that the light is merely the sun’s capacity to shine, not an entity at all. Here, by contrast, the Alter Rebbe is not trying to explain just how nullified the created being is. That is not the point here. Quite the opposite. As the Rebbe will explain shortly, the joy is that Hakadosh

22:09 Speaker 1 Boruch Hu is here together with me. I am here too. My nullification is not so much the point; what matters here is that Hakadosh Boruch Hu—His oneness—is present here. So here the Alter Rebbe does not deny the light’s existence. There is light. On the contrary, the light radiates with even greater intensity and strength. But what? It is inside the sun, so the light is utterly nullified. The same applies to all created beings. It is not that no light reaches the world. There may be light reaching the world, but what constitutes the entire existence of that light? The sun. The oneness of Hakadosh Boruch Hu. The point here is that the oneness of Hakadosh Boruch Hu is present everywhere, in everything. That is why the wording here is not “has the capacity to shine,” but that the light exists and shines with even greater intensity and strength. There is another nuance in the wording. That’s enough fine points to keep track of, so stay with me. At least the machine is keeping track. Now look at the wording in Tanya. The Alter Rebbe says: “with even greater intensity and strength.” That’s all. “But there it is utterly nullified in its source, as though it does not exist at all.” Notice that the words “in its source” seem unnecessary. What is he talking about here? He is talking about the light inside the sun. He says that when the sun’s light is inside the sun, it is utterly nullified there. Where is “there”? Inside the sun. So why does the Alter Rebbe say that there it is utterly nullified “in its source”? We already know, without those words, that he is talking about the light inside the sun. He could have said only that there it is utterly nullified. So the wording seems redundant. But there is no such thing as redundant wording in Tanya. What, then,

24:15 Speaker 1 do the words “in its source” emphasize here? The Rebbe wants to emphasize the nature of Hashem’s oneness. There is the true oneness of Hashem: Hakadosh Boruch Hu is the only reality, and everything is united with Him. The utter nullification is a nullification “in its source.” What does that mean? That the reality of the world is its source, just as when the light is inside the sun. So what does it mean that the light is nullified to the sun? Chassidus discusses several forms of nullification. One is called “of no account,” or the nullification of a lamp in daylight. For example, the light of a candle in the middle of the day is nullified. A candle gives off a small light. When you have daylight, that candlelight has no significance. It is swallowed up in the great light of day. It is as though the candlelight is not there at all, of no account. What value does the candle have? None whatsoever; it has no significance at all. You might think that the sun’s light is nullified within the sun in the same way. Chassidus sometimes describes it that way too: compared with the sun itself, this is only the sun’s light, so the light is entirely nullified, like a lamp in daylight. It has no significance at all. Inside the sun, what need is there for its light? Something along those lines is written in—I think—Lessons in Tanya, which explains the passage here that way. That is how it explains this passage, but it is not the meaning of Tanya here. Perhaps it offers that explanation to make the passage easier to understand at a basic level, but it is not the meaning here. The Rebbe therefore draws attention to the wording “utterly nullified in its source.” The nullification of the sun’s light within the sun is not the nullification of a lamp in daylight. A lamp in daylight means that the lamp and the daylight are

26:11 Speaker 1 two separate things. One is small and the other is great, so the smaller one is of no importance or value. But it still has an existence of its own. The true oneness of Hashem means that when the sun’s light is inside the sun, it is utterly nullified in its source. The sun’s light is nullified within the sun because its source is right there. So what defines the light there? Its reality is the reality of its source. There is no reality there apart from the source. This is not merely a nullification in which the light is of no account. The entire reality there is the source itself—the source of the light is present there. Similarly, when we speak of the true oneness of Hashem, we mean that a created being’s nullification to G-dliness is not a nullification due to a lack of perfection. It is an intrinsic nullification, which I am not going to explain now. How does all this relate to our subject? When a person reflects on the oneness of Hashem—on how the worlds are nullified to Hakadosh Boruch Hu—and thus on the true oneness of Hashem, that Hakadosh Boruch Hu is the only reality and there is nothing besides Him... The Rebbe says, “[unclear],” for just as it is nullified and has no existence in relation to its source, Hakadosh Boruch Hu, so too here. The worlds are nullified to Hakadosh Boruch Hu, entirely nullified to His will. Here too, it is a nullification in their source.

27:37 Speaker 2 Another fifteen minutes.

27:39 Speaker 1 Huh?

27:39 Speaker 2 Fifteen minutes.

27:40 Speaker 1 Yes, that too. Just one more story and then I’ll finish. I heard it from Rabbi Ringeld [unclear]. He had a mashpia named Reb Zalman Schneersohn. Zalman Schneersohn was known as Zalman Lodzer. He was a very great Jew. Later, remarkable things were told about him. They say that the Rebbe Rashab once said he had three chassidim. One of them was Reb Levi, the Rebbe’s father-in-law, and another was Reb Zalman Lodzer, Zalman Schneersohn. There was even a thought, after the Rebbe Rashab’s passing, that he might become his successor. That rabbi was said to be an extraordinarily righteous person, on a very high level. Rabbi Milen [unclear] spent a great deal of time in his home while growing up and studied with him, and so on. So Rabbi Milen [unclear] related that one Simchas Torah, when Reb Zalman was already advanced in years—he passed away in 5699, 1939, just a few weeks before the war began, I think, shortly before the Nazis came—he was already old and weak and could barely walk. He said that when Simchas Torah arrived and it was time for hakafos, Reb Zalman was sitting on a chair. There were Jews there [unclear]. Before the hakafos, Reb Zalman Lodzer said, “We have to dance at hakafos.” So he asked Rabbi Milen [unclear] to take a Tanya and begin reading chapter 33. He began reading the opening lines of chapter 33, and after a few lines, Reb Zalman Lodzer suddenly rose from his chair. Even though he was already so frail that he could barely move, he got up and began dancing around the table. He said Reb Zalman danced and danced and danced without stopping for about a full hour, until his body

29:53 Speaker 1 could no longer bear it. He collapsed. Yes, here was a Jew who lived with the message of chapter 33. He lived with Ahavas Yisroel. Simchas Torah had arrived; they had to dance. So what was it that brought him such joy? They read the lines of chapter 33, and that awakened his joy.