Likkutei Amarim Tanya - Chapter 37 - Part 12

00:00 We’re reviewing Tanya, at the bottom of page 49. This is the continuation of the lesson, at the words “And nevertheless.” So the Alter Rebbe explains here, at the end of what we’ve learned so far: On the one hand, there is the special quality of action, of actually performing mitzvos. That’s what we’ve discussed throughout the last few chapters—35, 36, and 37. The special quality of fulfilling a mitzvah lies specifically in good deeds. This is precise in the wording of the verse, “to do it,” and also in the expression “good deeds.” Specifically action. What is it about action, specifically? After all, Torah and mitzvos are the will of Hakadosh Boruch Hu. That is their special quality compared with love and fear. Love and fear are feelings of the heart, but they are created things, whereas Torah and mitzvos belong to the Creator. So why the emphasis on good deeds, specifically on action? The Alter Rebbe explains at length throughout the last few chapters that the special quality of action is the refinement it brings about—the refinement of the body and the animal soul. Through this, we bring about a dwelling place in the lower realms: we take something from kelipah, from kelipas nogah, and make it into a dwelling place for Him, blessed be He. We connect it to G-dliness. This is the essence of the work of refinement. Refining the animal soul and refining the world happen specifically through practical mitzvos. That is true both of the object used for the mitzvah—mitzvos are performed primarily with physical things; we take something belonging to nogah and connect it to G-dliness through the mitzvah—and of the soul’s part in the mitzvah: the animal soul participates more in performing practical mitzvos. Torah study, by contrast, is connected primarily with the G-dly soul. So the Alter Rebbe explains at length that this, specifically, is the special quality of the lower realms, and that it is through this, specifically, that all the revelations of

02:21 light and G-dliness are brought about. Everything depends on it. Here at the end of page 49, the Alter Rebbe asks: How does this whole explanation fit with the teaching of our Sages that “Torah study is equal to them all”? There it seems to be the opposite: Torah study is loftier, equal to them all—including the practical mitzvos. That is what the Mishnah is discussing there. So the Alter Rebbe gives two explanations. In the first, he says that, even in terms of refinement, Torah study has an advantage in one particular respect: through Torah study, we refine the soul’s inner garments. Action cannot refine the inner garments, only the outer garment. And to refine the inner garments—and, even more than that, the very essence—Torah has the power to refine the Chabad, the intellect, of the animal soul. That refinement can be achieved specifically through Torah study. The middos cannot be refined in that way; that is difficult, and a beinoni does not succeed in refining them. But the intellect can be refined. In any case, that was one point: since there are aspects of refinement that only Torah can accomplish, and they are the more inward aspects, closer to the essence of the animal soul, Torah has an advantage even in the work of refinement. That was the first explanation. In the second explanation, the Alter Rebbe says—and this is the main explanation—that beyond all this, Torah has a quality that mitzvos do not have at all: the quality of light. In the Alter Rebbe’s words, Torah is... how does he put it? The infinite light that shines in Torah is incomparably greater than what shines in mitzvos. For a mitzvah is in the category of a limb, and a limb, after all, has its own distinct existence. Even though limbs are also subordinate to the soul, a limb is still a distinct thing,

04:28 just as it is physically. The body is incomparably different from the soul. It is subordinate to the soul and united with it, but what is it in itself? The body is not the soul. The soul’s vitality, by contrast, is bound to the soul. It is one with the soul, not a separate thing at all. The soul’s light is inherently part of the soul. The same distinction applies to mitzvos and Torah. Mitzvos are the “limbs of the King.” From this perspective, a mitzvah has its own distinct existence. Torah, by contrast—even Torah that discusses mitzvos, and particularly the Torah of the mitzvos—is like water: the Torah itself is the wisdom of Hakadosh Boruch Hu. When you study Torah, there is unity and closeness with Hakadosh Boruch Hu. As we explained in the previous lesson, these are the basic principles behind the explanation the Rebbe gives in the Dvar Malchus sicha: Torah has the quality of revelation, of light. The question is where G-dliness shines more openly, where there is a more openly revealed closeness—and that is in Torah. In this particular respect, Torah is loftier than mitzvos. Now let’s continue. After discussing the special quality of Torah here in the middle, the Alter Rebbe nevertheless returns to the special quality of mitzvos. That is because his purpose in this chapter is not really to explain the special quality of Torah in itself; that was an aside. His purpose here is actually the opposite: to explain the special quality of mitzvos. After all, he is continuing what we discussed earlier—the idea of a dwelling place in the lower realms, the revelations associated with making a garment, and the work of making a dwelling place in the lower realms and refining them. When we reach that point, the emphasis seems to be on mitzvos. But then the Alter Rebbe

06:06 asks how to reconcile this with the teaching that Torah study is equal to them all, and he answers it. So it was as though he inserted this explanation about Torah in the middle. Now the Alter Rebbe returns to what he said at the beginning, what we’ve discussed throughout the last few chapters. On the contrary: when it comes to the intent of the Divine will, the purpose of creation, mitzvos accomplish more than Torah. Let’s look inside. “Nevertheless, our Sages said: It is not study that is the main thing, but action.” The Alter Rebbe is saying that although Torah study is said to be equal to them all—because Torah has a quality that mitzvos do not, and the infinite light shines openly in Torah—nevertheless, our Sages say that it is not study that is the main thing, but action. In other words, action, specifically, is the main thing. “Today, to do them.” Similarly, in Parshas Va’eschanan it says, “Today, to do them.” In other words, the main emphasis today is specifically on doing. And the Alter Rebbe also brings the practical halachah. What does the halachah say? We interrupt Torah study to fulfill a practical mitzvah. When a person has a mitzvah to do and Torah to study, halachah requires him to interrupt his study in order to fulfill the mitzvah. The Gemara says that even Rashbi would interrupt his Torah study for lulav and tefillin. In other words, even Rashbi would stop studying in order to fulfill practical mitzvos. So what do we see from this? The opposite: action, specifically, is more important than Torah. Although the infinite light is more openly revealed in Torah, with all its advantages, nevertheless, when it comes to practical action

08:10 They say specifically that practical mitzvos are more important, because they cannot be done by others. But even that has a condition, as the Alter Rebbe will explain shortly: the obligation to go and perform a mitzvah does not apply at all times. Some bochurim take this very seriously. Since it says here to perform a mitzvah, they run off to do mitzvos in the middle of seder. There are plenty of bochurim who love doing mitzvos, whether during seder or during a break. If you tell one of them in the middle of seder to go on mivtzoim, he will do it with every hiddur. If you tell him that there is a Jew, G-d forbid, who needs someone to go and put tefillin on him, he will even go with mesirus nefesh. Why? Because he is performing a mitzvah. So the Alter Rebbe writes explicitly that this rule applies only when it cannot be done by others. If it can be done by others, Torah study takes precedence. By the way, this came up with the Rebbe, too, when he sent the bochurim on Friday afternoons to do mivtzoim. The Rebbe said that today, mivtzoim fall into the category of a mitzvah that cannot be done by others. In other words, the state of the world today requires the involvement even of bochurim from Tomchei Temimim, who ordinarily cannot be asked to interrupt their learning, go out, and engage in mivtzoim. Their main occupation needs to be their own learning. Nevertheless, bringing a Jew closer in our generation is a mitzvah that cannot be done by others: however much people have worked at it, it is still not enough to reach the particular Jew who needs to be reached. So they need to take part in this as well. But the Rebbe designated a specific amount of time for it, proportionate to their schedule. During Chanukah it was a little more, but during the rest of the year it was generally on

09:52 Friday afternoons. Back to our point: from all this we see that action has an advantage over Torah study. Why is that? What is the explanation? The Alter Rebbe explains: “For this is the whole purpose of man, and the purpose of his creation and descent into this world: that He, blessed be He, should have a dwelling in the lower realms specifically.” The entire purpose of the soul’s descent below is to bring about a dwelling in the lower realms: “to transform darkness into light,” to turn the darkness of the lower realms into light, into a dwelling for Hakadosh Boruch Hu. “And the glory of Hashem will fill the entire physical earth, and all flesh will see together, as explained above.” Since this is the whole purpose of man, when Torah study and a mitzvah both present themselves, the mitzvah makes the dwelling in the lower realms, while Torah study brings revelation—as we said, light, the revelation of Ein Sof. So when I have an opportunity to perform a mitzvah, I turn to the mitzvah, because it fulfills the purpose of creation. That is what Hakadosh Boruch Hu intended. Here is the distinction: from the standpoint of the person, of his soul—his G-dly soul—the soul wants Torah study more than mitzvos. In Torah study, its connection to G-dliness is stronger and more apparent. G-dliness is much more perceptible in Torah study than in mitzvos, and that is why the soul seeks Torah study. And the soul should seek it. A person should want to use every moment specifically for Torah study, because Ein Sof shines in Torah. There, Hakadosh Boruch Hu is present openly, whereas the G-dliness in a mitzvah is concealed. Since the soul wants the revelation of G-dliness, it wants Hakadosh Boruch Hu to be revealed, and therefore it wants Torah study. That is how a person should feel: he should want to learn Torah. But when he has an opportunity to perform

11:56 a mitzvah that cannot be done by others, he must set aside his own desire for the supernal will. After all, Hakadosh Boruch Hu wanted a dwelling in the lower realms. [unclear] From the standpoint of my soul, the soul itself wants Torah study, because in Torah study it feels attached to G-dliness. There, Hakadosh Boruch Hu is revealed, so the soul wants Torah study. But the supernal will, the intent of Atzmus, is for a dwelling in the lower realms. Ah, there is no revelation here—but that is what Atzmus wanted. Atzmus is beyond revelation, beyond everything, and this is precisely what He wanted. This is what Hakadosh Boruch Hu chose. There is no explanation to offer for it; this is what Hakadosh Boruch Hu Himself wanted. He wanted specifically a dwelling in the lower realms, and that comes about specifically through a mitzvah. Therefore, when it comes to mitzvos that cannot be done by others, we must do what Hakadosh Boruch Hu wants, not what the soul wants. Hakadosh Boruch Hu wants a dwelling in the lower realms, so the mitzvah specifically must be performed. That, it would seem, is the meaning here in Tanya. What does the Alter Rebbe explain? He qualifies this: that is not the case when it can be done by others. The dwelling in the lower realms must be brought about, but if someone else can bring about this drawing down, then it is not a mitzvah that obligates me to do it. There is a mitzvah I must perform myself, such as wearing tzitzis. But there are mitzvos that, if I do not perform them, someone else can. If a mitzvah can be done by others, we do not interrupt Torah study for it. And that is despite the fact that the entire Torah is only an explanation of the mitzvos. What does that mean? In light of what we have said, it is difficult to understand. The whole Torah is an explanation of the mitzvos. So

13:36 how can you tell a person: You have an opportunity to learn. True, someone else can perform the mitzvah, but if Torah is only an explanation of the mitzvos, how can I set aside the mitzvah for its explanation? What is the reasoning? But according to what we explained earlier, it makes sense. “For it is the aspect of Chabad of Ein Sof, blessed be He; and by engaging in it, one draws upon himself the light of Ein Sof, blessed be He, with far greater intensity and with an infinitely greater radiance than the light and drawing down brought about through the precepts, which are the limbs of the King.” The revelation of Ein Sof, the revelation of Hakadosh Boruch Hu, is greater in Torah study. Therefore, when a mitzvah can be done by others, the dwelling in the lower realms will be brought about anyway; that drawing down will take place. The dwelling in the lower realms will be there. So a person should seek out where Hakadosh Boruch Hu is more openly revealed, and Torah study should therefore be more important to him than performing that mitzvah. That is what this whole discussion is about. We can actually divide this discussion into parts. At first glance, the Alter Rebbe is not saying anything new here. He is returning to what he said earlier. Earlier, he discussed the advantage of action and the advantage of Torah study, and now he says again: nevertheless, action is paramount. You could say that the Alter Rebbe is simply emphasizing a point here. He has already said it, true, but perhaps he is stressing a new point, something that was not emphasized as much earlier. Earlier, we discussed the advantage of mitzvos over Torah study in terms of birurim, the refinement they accomplish. Mitzvos refine more of the animal soul, more of kelipah, and that is the advantage of birurim. So what does that mean? The advantage of Torah study is indirect; the mitzvah is involved in birurim. Mitzvos refine the animal soul. The refinement

15:46 Of the animal soul, this happens primarily through a mitzvah, precisely because a mitzvah reaches the very lowest, most external part of the animal soul. The main work of refining the darkness takes place through the mitzvah. Yes, and Torah has an advantage in terms of revelation. Here there is an advantage in refinement, and there is an advantage in revelation. Now the Alter Rebbe adds another point. It isn’t really a separate point, but a further emphasis on the advantage of doing a mitzvah. The advantage of practical mitzvos lies in the intent of the Divine Essence, the intent that there be a dwelling place in the lower realms. That is, what we just explained. In other words, Torah has an advantage, and mitzvos have an advantage. But the advantage of a mitzvah is not just one advantage among others; it is a matter of fulfilling the ultimate purpose. In other words, like this: Until now, you could say, the emphasis was more on the respective advantages. This has an advantage, that has an advantage; a mitzvah has an advantage, and so does Torah. The advantage of Torah is the refinements—the refinement of darkness. The new thing a person accomplishes, turning darkness into light, the advantage of refinement: that is primarily in a mitzvah. Whereas Torah is more about revelation. There is an advantage to revelation, to Divine revelation, and there is an advantage to refinement, which requires darkness. Each has its advantage. Here the Alter Rebbe says: It isn’t a question of advantages, or of reasoning things out. The question is what Hakadosh Boruch Hu wants. Hakadosh Boruch Hu wants a dwelling place in the lower realms. Hakadosh Boruch Hu desired to have a dwelling place in the lower realms. That is what He wants from this whole world. The purpose of the creation of the worlds is a dwelling place in the lower realms. The actual deed of a mitzvah is precisely that. That is what “the lower realms” means: so low that there is nothing lower. The very fact of action. In other words, it isn’t so much the refinements of the... but the very existence of the... That is what I mean to say. In other words, there is a way of looking at mitzvos

17:55 in terms of the refinement they accomplish: through the mitzvah, the kelipos are refined, and all that. And there is an aspect of doing a mitzvah that lies in the deed itself, because that is what Hakadosh Boruch Hu wanted. Hakadosh Boruch Hu wanted the actual deed. Hakadosh Boruch Hu wanted the performance of the mitzvah. Not because of what will come of it, or what new thing will result—the refinement it will bring about. Rather, the point is that action is primary. “It is not the study that is primary, but the deed.” That is Hakadosh Boruch Hu’s desire for a dwelling place in the lower realms. Now, in any case, this is what is being explained here. And by Divine providence, we are now in the week of Parshas Vayigash. So, by Divine providence, the teachings in the Rebbeim’s maamarim and the Rebbe’s teachings on Vayigash all discuss this subject. We see it in quite a few maamarim and quite a few sichos on the weekly parsha: they discuss the point that action is primary. They speak about Yosef and Yehudah, and cite the Gemara on this. The Gemara in Kiddushin says: Is study greater, or is action greater? There was a disagreement. Some of the sages of Israel said study is greater; others said action is greater. The Gemara in Kiddushin reaches the conclusion: “Study is greater, because it leads to action.” The Alter Rebbe does not cite that here. In fact, he does not bring up that whole discussion at all. What does he cite instead? A Mishnah in Pirkei Avos, which says, “It is not the study that is primary, but the deed.” Seemingly, that Mishnah follows the view that action is greater. In other words, the Gemara records a disagreement over whether study or action is greater, and its conclusion is that study is greater. But why? Study is greater not on its own account,

19:57 but because it leads to action. It is, as it were, a combination of the two. But even if study is greater than action, what do they emphasize? Study. What they are saying is that the greatness of study is not only in study itself, in the revelations it contains, as he says here. There is also the principle that study is great because it leads to action. But the emphasis there is that through action, the boundlessness of study is revealed. Study leads to action; the emphasis is not so much on action for its own sake. In Pirkei Avos, by contrast, it sounds as though it follows the view that action is primary, because Pirkei Avos does not say that study leads to action. It says, “It is not the study that is primary, but the deed.” It rules out study as the primary thing and singles out action. And the Rebbe indeed explains in his sichos on Pirkei Avos that this Mishnah follows the view that action is greater. This is the hint to it that we find in nigleh, because in practical halachic rulings the conclusion that study leads to action is always cited. That is what the Gemara says. But in Chassidus, it is interesting: in all the maamarim on Vayigash, on “And My servant David,” and the others, we see something remarkable. They cite the Gemara in Kiddushin, the disagreement about whether study or action is greater, and the conclusion that study is greater because it leads to action. And all those maamarim say that this is only in the present era, but in the future, action will be greater. It is also brought in Hayom Yom; I am putting it briefly: in the future, action will be greater. What does that mean, “in the future”? Where does that come from? It does not say that in the Gemara in Kiddushin. Yet in the future, action will be greater. So the Rebbe says that, in nigleh, one source—or, in a certain sense, a source—for the idea that even after the ruling in favor of study, there is still room

21:41 for the idea that action is greater, is this Mishnah in Pirkei Avos. And we saw this with the Rebbe. The Mishnah in Pirkei Avos—sorry, it does not say “action” there—and with the Rebbe we saw it plainly. We saw that the Rebbe mentioned this teaching of our Sages in every single sicha. If someone were to do one of those things people do today—what do you call it? What? Which teaching of our Sages appears most often in the Rebbe’s sichos? Seemingly—I am not certain, but it seems to me—the teaching that appears most often is “action is primary.” It is simply hard to find even one sicha, perhaps, that does not say “action is primary,” throughout those forty years. “Action is primary” is a phrase that comes up again and again. What is the source of that teaching, “action is primary”? It is this Mishnah that he cites here: “It is not the study that is primary, but the deed.” [unclear] This is essentially the view that action is greater. Now, the maamar on Vayigash says that this will be the case in the future. The Gemara says that study leads to action; so in the future, action will be greater. Why does Chassidus speak about how things will be in the future? Because Chassidus is already a preparation for the revelation of Moshiach. Chassidus revealed the idea that action is greater. It revealed this idea: the distinctive advantage of action, of action itself. The maamarim discuss this and its meaning at length. I will not go into the whole subject. So what is the difference between “study is greater because it leads to action” and “action is primary”? Study also leads to action. The point is that, in that formulation, the advantage does not lie in action itself, but in the fact that action reveals the fullness of study. In other words, action expresses the boundlessness of study, that study

23:38 It has no limits. It can find expression even in action, but that too is in the Likkutei. The main point there is to express that Hakadosh Boruch Hu has no limits: He reveals Himself even in the lower realms. So the emphasis is not on the lower realms in their own right, but on how, through them, the boundlessness of the Infinite is revealed. The boundlessness of the light is the point there. What we see here is an emphasis on the lower realms themselves. The very idea of the lower realms, and of making a dwelling in the lower realms, is not that they reveal the boundlessness of the Infinite—that Hakadosh Boruch Hu can descend even into the lower realms. Rather, the lower realms themselves are the purpose. The emphasis is on the lower realms in their own right, on the very mention of the lower realms, on the importance of action. The Chofetz Chaim says about the Rebbe—this is explained in the maamar of Vayigash. The Rebbe connects it in one of the maamarim with the story of the Tzemach Tzedek and the Rebbe Maharash. The Tzemach Tzedek said that the Geulah would come in 5608. It is known that the Tzemach Tzedek once said in a maamar that Moshiach would be revealed in 5608. But 5608 came and went, and Moshiach did not come. The Rebbe Maharash was deeply distressed by this. He came to the Tzemach Tzedek and said, “The year has passed, and Moshiach has not been revealed.” The Tzemach Tzedek answered him, “What do you mean? Likkutei Torah was printed this year!” For the Tzemach Tzedek, that was the coming of Moshiach. In other words, when he said Moshiach would be revealed in 5608, he meant the revelation of the inner dimension of Torah, because Likkutei Torah was printed for the first time that year. But the Rebbe Maharash said, “We need Moshiach in actuality. We want Moshiach in actuality.” So for the Tzemach Tzedek, Moshiach was already present as expressed in Likkutei Torah, while the Rebbe Maharash wanted Moshiach in actuality. The Rebbe explains that the difference between the Tzemach Tzedek and the Rebbe Maharash is the difference between these two

25:37 approaches. If the principle is that “study is greater because it leads to action,” with the emphasis on study, then for him Moshiach has already come within Torah. That already includes action as well; he already sees action as it exists within Torah. The Rebbe Maharash, by contrast, was on the level of “action is greater.” That means we need Moshiach not merely as we apprehend Moshiach, but in the world as it is in its own right, in actual deed. The Rebbe explains this. There is a maamar about it, and a sicha about the whole subject more broadly. We saw this especially with the Rebbe in our generation: the emphasis that our service of Hashem must focus specifically on action. In this respect, it is as though we are already in the days of Moshiach. When Moshiach is revealed, the dwelling in the lower realms will be realized in actuality. Then action will be greater in its own right; action itself will be like Moshiach himself. That is why we saw such an emphasis on it. In the Rebbe’s explanation, the main emphasis is on the need for action—specifically action. Nevertheless, that does not mean dismissing study. As the Rebbe himself says here, if the question is one or the other, there must be study; study must be preferred over action. For revelation, as the Rebbe explains, is part of the purpose: it must not only be a dwelling in the lower realms, but a dwelling in which there is revelation. And revelation comes specifically through Torah. There is a sicha of the Rebbe that anyone who wishes can study, in Likkutei Sichos, Vayigash, volume 25. There the Rebbe explains this at length in the style of a sicha. It also appears in the style of maamarim, but this is in the style of a sicha. It is the sicha on

27:11 Vayigash in volume 25. There the Rebbe explains it wonderfully. The whole subject is connected to the haftarah, where we see something interesting. On the one hand, the haftarah describes the superiority of Yehudah over Yosef: Yehudah represents action, while Yosef represents study. The whole haftarah, with its words “My servant David,” points to Moshiach coming from the tribe of Yehudah—specifically the idea of action. On the other hand, the account says to take pieces of wood. Hakadosh Boruch Hu told Yechezkel to take pieces of wood, join them together, and make them into one piece of wood. So the Rebbe asks: Why tell him to take wood? He should have been told to take stones. The maamar on Vayigash explains the difference between the plant kingdom and the inanimate: the inanimate represents action, while the plant kingdom represents study. So why was he told to take two pieces of wood, from the plant kingdom? He should have been told to take two stones, from the inanimate, since the principal virtue there is action. We see, then, that even when emphasizing the importance of action, the instruction is still to take wood. In other words, there must be action and study. That is what the Alter Rebbe says here: although action is primary, nevertheless, when there is a mitzvah to study, we must emphasize the importance of study. For revelation is part of the infinite light, and the revelation of the Infinite is found specifically in Torah. We need that too, for both, for [unclear].