Chapter 1 - Second Lesson

00:00 We are up to the line in Tanya that begins “But the point is that”—the central point. Here the Alter Rebbe begins with the teachings of our Sages that explain it. The Alter Rebbe wants to arrive at the essential point of the beinoni, so he starts with the teachings of our Sages that will help us understand the purpose of this entire book. So let’s read it inside, and then we’ll explain. The Alter Rebbe says: “But the point is that we find in the Gemara five categories.” To understand the oath—what exactly this oath means when, on the one hand, a person is told, “Be a tzaddik,” and on the other, “Do not be a rasha,” and then is told that even if he is righteous in his own eyes, he should regard himself as a rasha—what exactly “as a rasha” means, and how it should affect a person. Joy, bitterness—all the questions the Alter Rebbe asked. To understand all of this, we first need an introduction. The Alter Rebbe says: “For we find in the Gemara five categories”: a tzaddik who fares well, a tzaddik who fares badly, a rasha who fares well, a rasha who fares badly, and a beinoni. There isn’t one passage in the Gemara that lists all five levels. The Alter Rebbe is bringing several passages together. It’s not that one passage lists five categories. One passage speaks of a tzaddik who fares well, a tzaddik who fares badly, a rasha who fares well, and a rasha who fares badly. Another passage divides people into tzaddikim, beinonim, and resha’im. The Alter Rebbe brings the two together, and from them we understand that there are, in fact, five levels. That’s what the Alter Rebbe means. When we look at several places in the Gemara in tractate Berachos together, we reach the conclusion that there are five categories. As the Gemara explains, a tzaddik who fares well is a complete tzaddik, and a tzaddik who fares badly is an incomplete tzaddik. There the Gemara relates that Moshe Rabbeinu asked Hakadosh Boruch Hu why there is a tzaddik who fares well,

02:18 a tzaddik who fares badly, a rasha who fares well, and a rasha who fares badly. That was the question Moshe Rabbeinu asked Hakadosh Boruch Hu: Why do we see two kinds of tzaddikim and two kinds of resha’im in the world? Some tzaddikim fare well and some fare badly; some resha’im fare well and some fare badly. On the simple level, he was speaking about material circumstances. He asked a question everyone has: Why do we see tzaddikim whose material lives go well, and tzaddikim whose material lives go badly? And the same is true, in reverse, of resha’im: some fare well and some fare badly. Hakadosh Boruch Hu answered him that there is a complete tzaddik and an incomplete tzaddik, and likewise with a rasha. In other words, the answer to Moshe Rabbeinu’s question was that, because there are different kinds of tzaddikim, the way a person is treated by Heaven—Heaven’s judgment—depends on the level he is at. If he is a complete tzaddik, he fares well; if he is an incomplete tzaddik, he fares badly, as the Gemara explains throughout that discussion. And the reverse applies to a rasha: if he is a complete rasha, he fares badly; if he is an incomplete rasha, he fares well. There are all the explanations given for this in the revealed teachings of Torah—why Hashem gives certain people good lives materially, and others the opposite. But in Ra’aya Mehemna—so that was the Gemara; now, Ra’aya Mehemna on Parshas Mishpatim explains that “a tzaddik who has evil” means that the evil within him is subordinate to the good, and so on. Ra’aya Mehemna is part of the Zohar. The Zohar gives a deeper explanation. The Zohar says that “a tzaddik who fares badly” does not just mean that things go badly for him materially. There is a spiritual meaning here: “a tzaddik who has evil” means there is evil, because we are talking

04:13 here about evil within the soul. Not material misfortune, but spiritual evil. There is evil within the soul—the evil of the animal soul. “A tzaddik who has evil” means that the evil is subordinate and nullified to him. From this we understand that every teaching of our Sages the Alter Rebbe brings here is relevant to Tanya as a whole. The Alter Rebbe isn’t just tossing in teachings of our Sages to display his knowledge of the subject. Every detail relates to Tanya as a whole; every detail matters to what the Alter Rebbe wants to say here. First, the Gemara shows us that there are five kinds of people. Second, from the Gemara we understand that the difference between the two kinds of tzaddikim is that one is a complete tzaddik and the other an incomplete tzaddik. The same applies to a rasha: there is a complete rasha and an incomplete rasha. But the Gemara seems to be speaking in the plain sense, about material circumstances. Then Ra’aya Mehemna comes and tells us: We are not talking about material circumstances. There is spiritual evil, and that is what “a tzaddik who has evil” refers to: there is some evil within him, but it is subordinate and nullified to him. Accordingly, “a tzaddik who has good” would mean that he has no evil at all; he is entirely good, as the Alter Rebbe will explain in the following chapters. And we will likewise get to the resha’im. “And it is stated in the Gemara at the end of chapter nine of Berachos”—now he brings another passage from the Gemara. At the end of chapter nine of tractate Berachos, the Gemara says: “Tzaddikim are judged by their good inclination,” and so on. The Gemara there discusses the difference between tzaddikim, beinonim, and resha’im. It gives three categories: tzaddikim, beinonim, and resha’im. As we said, the Alter Rebbe is joining two passages in the Gemara. The discussion of a tzaddik who fares well and a tzaddik who fares badly is near the beginning of Berachos, in the first chapter. The discussion of tzaddikim, beinonim, and resha’im is

06:01 at the end of Berachos, at the end of chapter nine. There the Gemara says there are three levels and explains the distinction between them: “Tzaddikim are judged by their good inclination,” and so on; “resha’im are judged by their evil inclination”; and “beinonim are judged by both,” and so on. What do we see from this passage? We see that there is a distinction—a more essential, more inward distinction—that tells us what a tzaddik is. What is the definition of a tzaddik? “A tzaddik is judged by his good inclination.” He is a person for whom there is only the good inclination, only one thing. His good inclination judges him; it is the only judge. With a rasha, the Gemara says, “His evil inclination judges him”—only the evil inclination judges him. With a beinoni, both judge him. Now, we still don’t understand exactly what this means. We don’t yet know how to interpret it. What does “his good inclination judges him” mean? Does it mean he has no evil inclination at all? And conversely, when it says of a rasha that his evil inclination judges him, does that mean he has no good inclination at all? Is that what it means? And with a beinoni, “both judge him”—does that mean he has both a good inclination and an evil inclination? How do we explain this? And what does the word “judge” mean? What is the definition of a judge? In other words, there is some sort of battle here, so there are judges. What is the judge’s role? These are the kinds of things we see in the Gemara. What do we understand from this passage? We understand that there is something deeper, something more inward, in what the Gemara is telling us about tzaddik, beinoni, and rasha. The question is: What is that deeper meaning? What is going on here? “Rabbah said”—this is the continuation of the Gemara, and this also comes into it. Rabbah said: “Someone like me is a beinoni.” After the Gemara states the distinction between a tzaddik, a beinoni, and a rasha, it goes on to say that Rabbah came and said he was a beinoni. He said of himself, “Someone like me is a beinoni.” Abaye said to him, “Master, you leave no life for anyone,” and so on. What was Abaye saying to him? He was saying, “If you are a beinoni, you leave no life for anyone.” What does “you leave no life for anyone” mean? What was the exchange between Abaye and Rabbah? We know that Rabbah was a very exceptional person. Rabbah was also Abaye’s uncle, which is why Abaye addressed him respectfully. As we know, Abaye was an orphan and grew up in the home of his uncle Rabbah. He respected him greatly because he studied under him and was his student. So that is what happened here. Rabbah, who was the leader of the generation and the head of the yeshivah at the time, came and said of himself that he was a beinoni. Abaye said to him, “If you are a beinoni, you leave no life for anyone.” What does that mean? The Rebbe explains it in two ways. The straightforward meaning is just as it sounds: “You leave no life for anyone.” It’s like saying to someone, “If that’s what you say about yourself, you make it impossible for anyone else.” It’s an expression people sometimes use. You’re saying, “What does that leave for us? If that’s how you describe yourself, you’ve left nothing for people like us.” So when Rabbah says, “I’m a beinoni,” he has left nothing for us. I know that we are utterly incomparable to you, so you’ve left us nothing. That is the simple sense of the expression; the Gemara uses “Master, you leave no life for anyone” several times. More

08:07 The Gemara goes on to say that Rabbah came and said he was a beinoni. He said about himself, “Someone like me is a beinoni.” Abaye said to him, “Master, you leave no one any room to live,” and so on. So what was Abaye saying to him? Abaye was saying, “If you’re a beinoni, you leave no one any room to live.” What does that mean? What was the back-and-forth between Abaye and Rabbah? We know that Rabbah was a very special person. Rabbah was also Abaye’s uncle, which is why Abaye addressed him respectfully. As we know, Abaye was an orphan and grew up in the home of his uncle Rabbah. He respected him greatly, because he studied under him; he was his student. So that’s what happened here. Rabbah, who was the leader of the generation and the head of the yeshivah at the time, said about himself that he was a beinoni. Abaye said to him, “If you’re a beinoni, you leave no one any room to live.” What does “you leave no one any room to live” mean? The Rebbe explains it in two ways. The straightforward meaning is just what it says: “You leave no one any room to live.” It’s like when you say to someone, “If you say such-and-such about yourself, you leave the rest of us no room to live.” It’s an expression. You’re saying, “What have you left for us? If that’s what you say about yourself, you’ve left nothing for people like us.” So when Rabbah comes and says, “I’m a beinoni,” he’s left us nothing. We know we’re on a completely different level from him, so he’s left us nothing. That’s the simple meaning of the expression, because the Gemara uses it several times: “Master, you leave no one any room to live.” More

10:02 On a deeper level, the Rebbe cites Reb Levi Yitzchak, his father, who explained this based on the Gemara in Rosh Hashanah, which the Alter Rebbe will bring later in the chapter. The Gemara in Rosh Hashanah says that on Rosh Hashanah there is judgment: there are tzaddikim, beinonim, and resha’im. The tzaddikim are immediately inscribed for life, the resha’im are immediately inscribed for death, and the beinonim wait until Yom Kippur. That is the idea of “until Yom Kippur.” So that is why Abaye said to Rabbah, “If you are a beinoni, then we are all resha’im.” And if we are all resha’im, then we have no life: according to the Gemara in Rosh Hashanah, resha’im have no right to live. That is the explanation the Rebbe cites from Reb Levi Yitzchak. Let’s see. Both explanations tell us something, but what does the Alter Rebbe want to bring out? What is the fundamental point the Alter Rebbe wants to make here? As the Alter Rebbe goes on to say: “To understand all this clearly.” What exactly is troubling the Alter Rebbe, that he brings all these passages from the Gemara? The point we see from all of them—especially the last one—is this: there was a disagreement between Rabbah and Abaye. Rabbah says, “I am a beinoni.” The very fact that Rabbah says that tells us that being a beinoni is not something simple. There must be something deeper to it. Because if beinoni simply means someone with half mitzvos and half transgressions, it would be absurd to think Rabbah said that about himself. As the Alter Rebbe will ask later, how could Rabbah say he was a beinoni if that is what beinoni means? How could you say that about yourself? Even humility has to have some basis. Humility is not falsehood. It is not what chassidim used to call “Slutsk humility”—false humility, false lowliness. I…

12:00 There was an expression, “the humble man from Slutsk,” about a person who kept saying of himself, “I’m nothing, I’m nothing, I’m nothing.” He presented himself as humble. But when someone once began to bother him, he was deeply offended. “Do you know who you’re dealing with? The humble man from Slutsk!” In other words, he was simply a person who thought he was a tzaddik and told everyone he was humble. Real humility means that a person genuinely considers his standing to be lower. So the fact that Rabbah said, “I am a beinoni,” means that being a beinoni must be a high level. It cannot simply mean half mitzvos and half transgressions. On the other hand, the fact that Abaye asked him, “Master, you leave no life for anyone,” means that Abaye understood Rabbah in the plain sense. Abaye understood beinoni as the Gemara describes it: half merits and half transgressions. So he said to him, “If that is so, then we are all resha’im.” And as the Gemara in Rosh Hashanah says, resha’im have no right to live. But what do we learn from all this? And this is really the main point to understand here: the Alter Rebbe wants to tell us that there are two ways of explaining tzaddik, beinoni, and rasha. There is the plain, practical, outward meaning, as the Alter Rebbe will also say later in the chapter, with regard to reward and punishment. These categories of tzaddik, beinoni, and rasha have practical significance, and they are real. They are not a mistake. Some people think the Alter Rebbe comes to reject them altogether. On the contrary, these categories have practical significance, and they are valid according to Torah as well, as we see in the Gemara in Rosh Hashanah.

14:00 The Gemara speaks of someone who is judged righteous. On Rosh Hashanah, three books are opened: a book of tzaddikim, a book of resha’im, and a book of beinonim. So when Abaye spoke to Rabbah, he meant beinoni in its plain sense. On the other hand, we understand from the Gemara quoted above that there is something deeper here. And from the Gemara the Alter Rebbe will bring later, we will see that in its true sense, being a beinoni is something much deeper. A beinoni cannot be a person with even one transgression—let alone half his deeds being transgressions—and yet he is called a beinoni. That is why Rabbah said he was a beinoni: there is a level called beinoni, and it is something altogether different. Now, before we go into all the explanations the Alter Rebbe gives us in Tanya—before we learn how he will explain this whole subject in practice, which is what the entire Tanya will address—there is a very important point we see right at the beginning of Tanya. In fact, it is the point of the entire book. We see two directions, two broad approaches that the Alter Rebbe follows throughout Tanya. On the one hand, the Alter Rebbe emphasizes the importance of action. One of the things Tanya comes to emphasize is the importance of doing. Action is primary: the main thing is to do. A dwelling for Hashem in the lower realms is made specifically through actual deed. The Alter Rebbe devotes a number of chapters in Tanya to this, particularly the later chapters. In chapters 35, 36, and 37, where the Alter Rebbe explains the whole subject of a dwelling in the lower realms, we will see that Tanya emphasizes the power and importance of actual deed, and that it is primary. Every Torah and mitzvah is

16:17 a matter of concrete action. That is why action is primary and is the ultimate purpose. On the other hand, the Alter Rebbe, in Tanya, does not want action to remain merely external. If action is primary, then what difference does it make what you feel or how you fulfill a mitzvah? The main thing is that you do it. The Alter Rebbe says: No. It has to be “in your heart.” In Tanya, the Alter Rebbe expects this of us and devotes entire chapters to explaining how to awaken love and awe of Hashem. This is relevant to serving Hashem not only for tzaddikim, but for every Jew. Each of us must strive to serve Hashem in a way that is “in your heart, to do it,” with love and awe. And this is, you could say, the distinctive contribution of Tanya. As we discussed at the beginning, on Tanya’s title page the Alter Rebbe calls it “a long and short way.” Tanya is called a long and short way because throughout it, the Alter Rebbe asks two things of us. On the one hand, he teaches us how central action is, and therefore how important it is for a person to guard his thought, speech, and deed. He explains that this is within everyone’s ability and under everyone’s control: everyone must, can, and has the strength to master their actions, and that should be their main achievement. At the same time, the Alter Rebbe says we must work to make it come from an inner feeling, with a sense of love and awe as well. Throughout Tanya, these two directions run together; broadly speaking, this is what is called the long and short way. There is the emphasis that action is primary. In practical terms, what matters is the actual deed—that is a kind of short way. And at the same time, the need for it to come with a feeling of love and awe is a kind of long way. Where do we see the

18:24 This? We see it in these passages of Gemara. In these teachings of our Sages, we see both sides. On the one hand, we see their emphasis on action. These teachings show us just how central action is. As the Alter Rebbe will now go on to demonstrate with all the proofs, every action, every thought and every word matters—everything connected with actual practice. At the same time, we understand from these teachings that there is also a deeper distinction, one connected with inner work. As we will see in the coming chapters, if we look at the matter as it truly is, a beinoni commits no sins. And if a beinoni commits no sins, then seemingly there is no difference between a beinoni and a tzaddik—whether a tzaddik vetov lo or a tzaddik vera lo. In practice, the beinoni is just like a tzaddik of either kind. The entire distinction between a tzaddik vetov lo, a tzaddik vera lo, and a beinoni is an inner distinction of the heart: how much he has accomplished with his love and fear of Hashem, and how much he has accomplished with his animal soul. So that is the whole foundation here. On one hand, the emphasis is on action; on the other, there is an emphasis on inner work as well, so that one’s actions are permeated with the feelings of love and fear. Of course, there are many details to this, which we will learn in the coming chapters. But this is the foundation the Alter Rebbe comes to teach us here in Tanya, and this is what the Alter Rebbe means when he says that we must understand all this thoroughly. So this is what we need to understand thoroughly: What is going on here? Is the main thing actual practice? Is the main thing inner life? And how do we explain the difference between a tzaddik, a beinoni, and a rasha? What exactly distinguishes each one?

20:29 “And also to understand what Iyov says in Bava Basra, chapter 1: ‘Master of the Universe, You created tzaddikim and You created resha’im,’ etc.—yet it is not said whether one will be a tzaddik or a rasha.” Now the Alter Rebbe adds another question, which also brings us to the point we were discussing. What does the Alter Rebbe say? There is a contradiction between teachings of our Sages. The Gemara in Bava Basra says that when Iyov complained, he said, “You created tzaddikim and You created resha’im.” In other words, what is Iyov saying? He is claiming to Hakadosh Boruch Hu that You created people who are tzaddikim and people who are resha’im, just as You created people who are rich or poor, wise or foolish. But another Gemara, in Tractate Niddah, says that before a person is born, it is declared whether he will be rich or poor, wise or foolish, and so on—but it is not declared whether he will be a tzaddik or a rasha. “It is not said whether one will be a tzaddik or a rasha.” And that is readily understood, because there must be free choice. How could it be declared Above who will be a tzaddik and who will be a rasha? Then there would be no free choice. Now, when Iyov said this in the Gemara in Bava Basra—the bochurim studied it recently—his friends did not tell him, “That is not true.” They did not say, “It is not declared whether one will be a tzaddik or a rasha.” They told him that there is Torah, and Torah is the antidote. In other words, they too accepted that what he said was true. How can that be? What do we see from this Gemara? Again, we see that there are two kinds of tzaddik and rasha. There is a tzaddik or rasha in actual conduct, and about that it says that no declaration is made. Hashem does not tell a person, “You will be a tzaddik; you will be a rasha.” There is free choice. How could He say that? That is regarding conduct. But when we speak of a tzaddik and a rasha inwardly, in the soul—a tzaddik who has completely transformed

22:47 his entire animal soul, and a beinoni, a person whom “both judge,” as we said, who has inner battles—that is already a matter of the soul. In that regard, one can say, “You created tzaddikim and You created resha’im.” There are souls whose task is to be tzaddikim, and therefore Hakadosh Boruch Hu gives them that ability, that strength. And most souls are meant to be beinonim. So “You created tzaddikim and You created resha’im” means that the resha’im are beinonim who have the inner battles of resha’im, but in practice they have control over their actions, as the Alter Rebbe will explain in the coming chapters. So here too, from this Gemara, we understand this point: there is a tzaddik and a rasha in actual conduct, and there is a tzaddik and a rasha in the soul. In any case.