Rav Hai Gaon on Thirteen Sefirot and the Madness of the Kabbalists | Pardes Rimonim Gate 1 Chapter 7 (1) (Auto Translated)

Chapter 7 of Pardes Rimonim: To Save from Error – The Dispute Regarding Thirteen Sefirot and the Sources of Chug HaIyun

Introduction: The Ramak’s Intent in Chapter 7

Okay, rabbosai (gentlemen), we’re going to learn Chapter 7, and he titled the chapter “Lehatzil min HaTa’ut” (To Save from Error) – that there are those who have argued based on their expertise and the like, understand? There are always… he didn’t write the chapters, he wrote that there is a key, I didn’t ask. That is to say, there are, he is something very – we already spoke last time – he is something very “into” the matter that there are only ten sefirot.

And there were people, they were experts, you know there is some kind of system. He says, no, no, you don’t understand that system. That’s basically his claim.

And we spoke that there was Rabbi Yosef – what was his name? We mentioned last week the guy who encountered in the “early editions” the words, and he was presumably an expert, or one of the people who were.

And the interesting thing is that the Ramak is going to use – it’s not really the topic here, there’s a whole discussion about this – and he uses many times, one must understand the idea well: the Ramak is “going to use” the person’s source, the reasoning that says there are thirteen sefirot, for a very basic foundation of his way of understanding Kabbalah. Not just “you don’t understand” – you think it’s just another number, here stands something else, a whole foundation that is very basic, that doesn’t contradict anything. That’s his thing.

The Two Sources That the Ramak Brings

He says as follows, after we have learned “bechezkat emunatenu hamuskemet lefi kol hamekubalim” (with the presumption of our faith accepted according to all the kabbalists) – this is a faith “accepted” by all kabbalists, that there are ten – one must nullify the matter of an error, which comes from a question “nish’al leRav Hai Gaon” (asked to Rav Hai Gaon).

So, he doesn’t bring here from where one finds the question? We need to catch for a second where the question is. He’s going to bring two sources:

One, the question to the responsa of Rav Hai Gaon.

And second, a book called “Braita of Rabbi Shimon HaTzaddik vetikrav Chamai Gaon beSefer HaIyun sheChiber” (and Chamai Gaon drew near in the Book of Iyun that he composed).

Now, the books… “what are they”? It’s understood that it’s not from Rav Hai Gaon, yes? If you don’t know the answer.

The Responsum Attributed to Rav Hai Gaon

So one must read the history of the people. Teshuvat hameyucheset (the attributed responsum) – well, that’s how it appears in Sha’ar HaTzachtzachot, that’s the responsum. So, where is it from? Ah, here: “Nish’al lamorah hagadol rabbeinu chacham rabbeinu Hai me’et Rav Pelati vechavrav” (Asked to the great teacher our rabbi the sage our rabbi Hai from Rav Pelati and his colleagues).

So I think, whose responsum is it? We know the responsum from the Pardes, basically. It exists in manuscripts, but the novelty is this: Teshuvot HaGeonim (Responsa of the Geonim) was once very rare, it was a secret. What can you say that you want, it says in Teshuvot HaGeonim.

But thanks to the Cairo Genizah and other such things, we know more or less what a responsum from a Gaon looks like. Not that we have every responsum, there are still many responsa that we don’t know who wrote them, and so on. But we know basically – first of all, we know that Rav Hai Gaon is one of the Geonim that we know a lot about. He’s not some mysterious figure that we don’t know what he thought. We know more or less what he thought, including about topics like Kabbalah.

There are responsa that are brought in Tractate Chagigah, in Otzar HaGeonim on Chagigah. There is the equivalent of an introduction to the responsum to open the window. Huh? You’re talking about that? Today you’re already here more, even more responsa. But a person who is convinced. There is Radal, father it’s also like this also the window. Anyway what you’re learning, what you say that it’s not.

So, it depends what the responsum is. Let’s say very clearly: there are different responsa. There are responsa about names and stuff like that. So how can so this here is an is an is an – this brings the dispute in the yeshiva whether the righteous can perform miracles, something like that about Shi’ur Komah. He brings a dispute about this. It’s not 100% about it, it’s not clear maybe what the answer is. He disputes this. He is yes authentic, there he brings it against R’ Shmuel Chofni.

The point is, if it’s not there, as if if he didn’t write… for two people in different ways, it could be possible. We don’t know, either way someone wrote it.

The Question About Ma’aseh Bereishit and the Sefirot

Okay, the important thing, let me tell you… I wasn’t messing. Right. The more important thing here is the question from the people of Persia, what is Ma’aseh Bereishit, and he says yes, sages engage with each other, and so understand Kabbalah. That’s where the point is, and I think that the point is, firstly, the constant sefirot, the understood our sefirot, perhaps the priests need something else already. That’s number 1.

Chug HaIyun: A Whole Group of Books

Number 2, the more interesting thing is, so this is a whole series of books basically, as you see here, the Ramak already understood that the books go together: the responsum of Rav Hai Gaon, and the Braita attributed to Shimon HaTzaddik, Rabbi Shimon HaTzaddik, which is attributed, from someone Rav Chamai Gaon. I don’t think there ever was a person Rav Chamai Gaon.

So, that’s that, that’s that, that’s that. No, that’s that. We don’t know his name. Rav Chamai is from Sefer HaBahir. Rav Chamai is from his name, it doesn’t say. So, it says Rav Avraham ben Rimon, but it’s a mistake, he meant Rav Avraham ben Rimon. We know when Rav Avraham ben Rimon was, and someone else. So what is this Rabbi Chamai and the Sefer Iyun?

So this is the whole group of books, which modern Kabbalah scholarship is already called Chug HaIyun (the Iyun Circle), because basically there is a Sefer Iyun, which the nicest book that was written is called Sefer Iyun, which he brings here in the name of Rabbi Chamai Gaon, who are Geonim who didn’t really exist. And there’s a whole list of Geonim, they have traditions received from one another.

And it’s not, again, it could be there were people in the time of the Geonim who said this Torah, everything could be. One has Geonim in the sense of someone who was the Rosh Yeshiva in Babylonia, probably not.

There is… what is there? One said… what Yosef Danems should and all these people. R’ Moshe wrote Kabbalat Yeshiva Shlishit. He wrote himself in language written in commentary on part of the books, land of Kabbalat HaGeonim. The point is, the interesting thing is that certain distinct kabbalistic traditions, certain ideas.

The problem with all this is that the right becomes clear, that the further they go, the further they go, the further they go. We don’t know.

The Story of R’ Elimelech and the Manuscripts from Babylonia

I remember the whole story of R’ Elimelech. R’ Elimelech didn’t know from the original story, yes. His grandfather. Yes, yes. That name. R’ Elimelech said that he said that he said that he now, he had a chest, he asked there manuscripts, yes? Goes back to this R’ Klonimus received from R’ Leon, some such funny name, no, one who came from Babylonia, he brought a chest with manuscripts, with a Torah, he doesn’t know the same exact Torah as the books, others it’s also, he settled on his funny ways, and not clear to him.

Ah, there were certainly people. But you see that he had some Kabbalah, so when exactly did he come. So maybe so is so is the thing or not. I have my own, like, thoughts in all things. But the… first of all, it doesn’t make a big difference from us what matters so him what by.

The more interesting thing is, the thing or not. I have my own, like, thoughts and all things. But the… coming on it. The interesting thing is, the… what this is, the Ramak built on the Kabbalot HaGeonim certain very important ideas, but Eliyahu is explained in these are with something that is important ideas, because I don’t want to ensure that one must them for their ideas, one can think about this.

But in any case, this is the group of books, which they all seem to circle around some other ideas or some ideas. And all kinds of individual Geonim. I don’t know what is the deal with Geonim here.

What is the problem? The problem is that Geonim of Babylonia, the sense of Geonim, can always be that there were mystics, kabbalists there always were. Whoever says there weren’t, there are always such people who are interested in such sorts of speculations, they want to know. That’s not the distinction.

How Did People Find Kabbalah Books?

What was anyway the connection between the Ma’aseh Merkavah people? I don’t know. Can you imagine that any person, generally in the Zohar, any person who was curious about these sorts of things, matters of Kabbalah, what we call today Kabbalah, would have used whichever book he found from his tradition, but it speaks about such things.

How does one find books? Are there traditions? A room? In the beit midrash one found a book, I guess, if one holds a manuscript. It’s an important book, it says in the thing, in a book that nobody knows. Again, books weren’t held that it was a manuscript. So let’s say that manuscript I also have.

The interesting thing would not be a book, the interesting thing would only be a book, the interesting thing would only be a real tradition that one would learn person to person.

The Problem of Tradition and Attribution in Kabbalah Books

The Reality of Manuscripts in the 1200s

Okay, but there were people like that, and then we have some people with secrets of the Torah all over Europe. Is there no connection? I don’t know.

Can you imagine that any person, generally Israel, any person who was curious about these sorts of things, matters of Kabbalah, what we call today Kabbalah, would have used whichever book he found from his tradition that speaks about such things. How does one find books? In the 1200s, you go into a beit midrash and you find a book? I guess that he had a manuscript that he said to his son, to his student, “Guard it, it’s an important book, there are things written here that nobody knows.”

Could be, and it could also be that not. Because most of the books that were held were a manuscript, one of the names was Rav Ada bar Ahava, whatever. So let’s say that even manuscript I also have, and they have all these books, not all that they had, perhaps more.

The interesting thing would have been, it wouldn’t have been a book, the interesting thing would have been a real tradition that one would learn person to person. And this is something that is very hard to believe that it actually existed, just because of the magnitude, not about it can’t be. It certainly can be. It’s not about the magnitude. The Rambam said that he doesn’t believe that anyone… It could be, it could be.

False Names and Attributions

Some of the names, like Rav Chamai Gaon, the Chafetz Chaim means to say that it’s the language of chamusi, the language of them. Some of the names, like Rav Shmuel Gaon, means the language of love, not Gaon, Rav Chamai from Sefer HaBahir. It’s very obviously fake names. It’s not like really… Always could be that a love group was Rav Chamai. I’m not saying. Just as there are people named Ahava, that Rav Ada bar Ahava is a real person, apparently. But, eh, it’s hard, like it seems too good.

The point is, they are using the authority of Geonim, and like, it’s not, it’s not really matching with the Geonim. And not only does it not match, let’s understand, Rav Saadia Gaon tries to contradict the Zohar, but it doesn’t match what he says, because it doesn’t match with the Zohar’s Kabbalah either. Certainly, everything can be explained, but explain you can already Rav Saadia Gaon also if you want.

The Rambam’s Position in Chapter 71

That’s the interesting thing. This is the Rambam’s problem in Chapter 71. The Rambam says that he doesn’t believe that any Gaon had a tradition about the secrets of the Torah. And then, depending on how you take that, it at least means that the Rambam didn’t hear of any tradition that he took seriously. The Geonim, of course, all claim to have traditions of everything, that doesn’t mean the Rambam believed them. So, all this can be done.

The Group of Books in the Name of Rav Hai Gaon

Yes, it has a yes. But the point is, the group of books that he brings in the name of Rav Hai Gaon, belongs to the group, there is the group that the Torat HaOlah printed all the manuscripts that exist about this. Also he said, I don’t know finish what he printed more with one counted books in his book. It was almost not until then. There was printed a little bit one piece here, a piece there. This is all basically from manuscript. And they’re all more or less… You could read the book and try to figure out what they’re saying. They’re all more or less saying similar things, and basically nobody knows what was the real source of them before the Zohar.

Yes, that’s it. Others say, there are all these lists, there are certain names of the kabbalists that we know, who learned, who explained the reasoning. So, people even earlier, a little bit before the Zohar came out. Yes, or in Provence or in Spain, wherever. Not one hundred percent clear. I mean that there was what one claimed that Rabbi… what’s his name? There was it is prayers for them was Sefer Yetzirah, which already is forded… perhaps yes, in short, somewhere in the time of the Rishonim that we call the period of the Rishonim, not the period of the Geonim.

That’s the interesting thing, I think, that it could be there are things from Rav Hai Gaon that you say in Recanati that I have to do with the texts. It’s very hard to figure out which way things go, because they don’t write clearly. That’s the problem. A person who doesn’t speak clearly one can’t say anything, so one can’t know.

The Question of Rabbi Moshe de Leon

I mean what he brings here that there were people who claimed that maybe people still argue that some of these responsa were written by Rabbi Moshe de Leon also. I remember that there is not everything written. I remember already the same thing. A person, waiting, there is a person. It’s true, but there’s also some better rates than other is about certain things.

So, there is Teshuvat HaGeonim, Sha’arei HaTeshuva, it’s called, right? It’s like an old compilation of Teshuvat HaGeonim. I like the responsum, do you have two versions? Like one, like simple, another one that looks so similar to be, and so quotes a part of them. Perhaps first he tried to be from Geonim, afterward he wasn’t successful, the Geonim don’t buy anyone, you know, Tramer has the whole thing. What are all these things that can be… He was a second.

Sefer HaKanah and Sefer HaPeliah

He brings here also a prayer of Rabbi Nechunia ben HaKanah, I forgot, another thing that also is only printed, it belongs to the group of books. I’ll answer, it’s not from Rabbi Nechunia ben HaKanah, I’ll be.

What is Sefer HaKanah? Well, Sefer HaKanah is he after himself. I am the one who kills, well, Sefer HaKanah is he himself. Kabbalists are full of people writing in the names of other people. And what are the kabbalists? Sefer HaKanah is a new book, by the way. It’s not who radical. There are two books, Sefer HaKanah and Sefer HaPeliah, which were by the same person, and this is one influencing on Recanati. And attribution, nobody knows. It was wanted that one should think that it’s Rabbi Nechunia ben HaKanah, or the HaKanah itself. I only know what this is anyway is.

But it’s certainly not, it’s very late, it’s late, this is certainly later, even after what is. It’s a Kabbalah, it’s a Kabbalah, it’s a Kabbalah, it’s many hints, apparently later.

The Ramak’s Position on Sefer HaKanah

The Ramak wrote about this at length in Shi’ur Komah, and he is very not happy with it. He says that he makes himself like a Rishon, like a Tanna, he wasn’t really fooled by him. Yes, but the Ramak wasn’t, he knew how to identify some things fake, so he wasn’t completely uncredible.

In Short: Different Approaches to Sefer HaKanah

In short, this is a different discussion. I think that the Arizal had many teachings that the Arizal knew from Sefer HaKanah, he didn’t… One of my secret revelations that I got from a professor who wrote about this, who wrote about this, who wrote about this, okay, that he was a genius in Zohar. No, but the Arizal, very much of the Arizal is good ideas. We even have the notes that prove this. I haven’t found everything, but many things when you search in the writings of the Arizal you can find it there. So, whatever.

Perhaps that’s why one shouldn’t learn it. No, I don’t know that the author makes confusion with HaKanah. That’s something else. Is it forbidden in itself? Yes. There’s something, some connection, it’s not… very important. Sefer HaKanah, maybe. Yes, but… hello, he used to turn the same thing, I have an answer day and answer night.

The Versions of the Responsum

In short, practically speaking, there’s a piece here, okay? There’s another version here, let’s see in a manuscript of the… of the same letters. It’s like this, not by Rav Hai Gaon. So, again, I don’t know, not Rav Hai Gaon but a second one. He asked such a question. Also, the question is in the responsa, whatever, it could be that a person himself wrote the question and the answer, who knows. How is this, God forbid?

The Question About the Thirteen Attributes of Mercy

Here, “to our rabbis,” comes, a Jew asked a good question practically. It’s an interesting question, I like the question always. There’s the question he asked the righteous one.

What was his question? I heard from the Sages who said “thirteen attributes that Moses our teacher received.” This is yes, because it says in the Gemara that there’s such a thing as the thirteen attributes of mercy, which is kind of interesting, because nobody knows how they arrived at thirteen attributes.

The Number Comes Before the List

It looks more like they had an idea that the number should be thirteen, and afterwards they put in the attributes, how they counted and they arrived at thirteen, right? Agree? If there are 17 opinions of Rishonim how to land on 13, then there aren’t 13. There is if you count it in a certain way.

And the 13 attributes are the same. The 13 attributes are the same, they have three or four versions in Tanchuma, it’s never the same. So it doesn’t look in the Chumash on the simple meaning that there’s a list of 13 attributes. But the Sages had an idea to say the number 13. Perhaps 13 is gematria echad (one)? I don’t know why. You see many things, they had an idea to make the number, afterwards they arranged it.

Other Examples of This Principle

And the 613 commandments, the number came before the list, right? Perhaps then also people will want… ten utterances, we spoke about this, right? The number comes before the list, because in the list it doesn’t say ten utterances, because you will… what? The ten utterances is already the world was created. It’s not there, there are 9 or 11. There are 10 guests. You go out.

It seems that thirteen is also a number. For a moment it’s gematria Torah. Torah plus 2. It’s based on the Torah of only Rav. Everything could be that the Gemara stands as it is today there’s a teacher of commandments, it was also something inserted, the number was forgotten. Something is without us. Could be affected he arrived at his number. Now, you count it, you count it this way. Everything could be.

I think that the number itself has yes a secret, it has a meaning. That is, the number, the number is 248 and 365. It comes wanted story Eiger.

248 Limbs and 365 Sinews

248 and 365 is… how did he know that there are 248 limbs, this yes was counted. This is not accurate. No, people have only ideas on how limbs limbs limbs. Sinews is not true. Sinews, nobody knows what this is first of all.

Secondly, what is a sinew? Even the translation. No, 365 sinews doesn’t say in the Gemara. In the Gemara it says 365 days of the solar year, which is true. Sinews is a Midrash, I think it says in the Zohar for the first time. But 365 days of the solar year makes sense.

Okay. Okay. So the tomorrow wouldn’t have been able to find him? But it wouldn’t have been already from the don’t and wouldn’t have been after the rabbis.

The Answer of Rav Chaim Gaon: Ten Sefirot and Thirteen Attributes

The Basic Question: Sefirot and Attributes

Instructor: Again, you could count limbs in different ways. Sinews is not true. Sinews, nobody knows what this is first of all. Secondly, what is a sinew? Even the translation. 248 sinews doesn’t say in the Gemara. In the Gemara it says 365 days of the solar year, which is true. Sinews is a Midrash, I think it says in the Zohar for the first time. But 365 days of the solar year makes sense.

Okay, okay. I said that you shouldn’t have wanted to find? I said that you shouldn’t have wanted? No, perhaps there’s a matter of life and death. That’s what… one shouldn’t, one shouldn’t, one shouldn’t.

In short, he asks such a question. He says good, that the Sages say that there are 13 attributes from Moses our teacher, and Abraham our father however had ten attributes. It becomes interesting, because Abraham our father wrote Sefer Yetzirah in his name. You see, whoever wrote this responsum didn’t believe that Abraham our father wrote Sefer Yetzirah. He says that one of our rabbis wrote it in his name, and he called it Sefer Yetzirah. And there it says ten sefirot. One needs to know this further.

Basically, the question is like this: granted when you say that sefirot and attributes are not the same thing, right? That’s the whole question. So, to say, okay, there are ten sefirot or ten attributes? Perhaps there are thirteen sefirot? Not the… So, what’s the matter? Perhaps there will be thirteen sefirot and ten attributes? It’s ten attributes and thirteen sefirot. What’s the deal? Because that’s basically the question up to here. Right?

The Ramak Brings the Answer

Instructor: And behold, the Rav explained them, this brings the answer. He says that the entire answer he brings at length in Sha’arei HaTzachtzachot, and here he brings only the summary. Let’s read his summary and take the section the length as above.

> “The Rav explained them, that the 13 attributes are the faces of the offspring that emerge from ten levels called sefirot, these corresponding to these, with three hidden at their head, if there’s no existence for them, they are a tradition to the ancients, person from person’s mouth until from the mouth of the prophets. And the offspring are the actions called attributes, whose roots which are the fathers are called sefirot, not because they have a number etc.”

He says that he’s going to copy the whole thing in a different gate, every gate of Tzachtzachot, and it’s copied only thanks, he’s copying at great length the entire language, he’s also explaining. There’s a whole page here of the answer. A whole page here, and he’s explaining the place, he’s explaining the matter, he’s trying to ask the whole thing.

He says like this, I’ll say a summary. He says to me that the question was already asked a long time before you, in the days of our ancient elders, and the explanation is long to take up one day and to take up days, if it’s held in the ropes of the supernal wisdom, the secret of the hidden in the secrets of the fourth in the tradition of the wise masters of the records. He speaks in flowery language why he can’t answer the question. In any case, I see from your question that you understand a bit of the question, and I’ll try to say briefly the answer.

Question on the Answer

Student: But you said the answer only three external. You seem to be saying two different things, that’s my question. Perhaps when the question will indeed go to be explained.

Instructor: That is, he says that there are… the basic of the first piece says that there are, in other words, is the solution is that really leaders there are ten sefirot which they are the roots. Offspring means it in benefits which they are attributes.

Student: Okay, but then he changes there is. Your is or theory, then he said that there are truly ten, even when in the roots there are another three roots called heads of heads. So I don’t get his answer. Understand my question? That there are ten, what the ten come from three?

Instructor: No. No. He says that there are thirteen attributes which they come from ten sefirot.

Student: It happens how to do sefirot, but also three roots. There are the books which it’s ten, two different answers to the question.

Instructor: At the same time, which I don’t need to be any understand. Understand what? Thirteen attributes come from the ten plus three.

Student: True. So, how does that work? That you see here thirteen sefirot also?

Instructor: Not sefirot, but something else. Ten and then three. By the attributes yes there are entirely thirteen. That’s essentially an answer. Therefore both halves of the answer would have been enough. One could have said, yes, I could have said a simple answer.

Student: What says both external things?

Instructor: Yes, what does the Zohar really say? That in Keter itself there are thirteen attributes. All thirteen attributes are in Keter. That’s the Zohar’s answer.

Discussion: The Approach of the Zohar

Instructor: In general, to answer the question, I don’t want to say question, but… This isn’t excluded to say who it means nothing. I agree that it’s a good question. 100%, I agree that it’s a good question. The answer begins the Torah that one can say everything. In Atzilut there is creation, in Atzilut there is Atzilut. 100%, but I’m just saying that I think it’s a good question. If you take these things seriously, I agree that it’s a good question.

Student: But what is your answer?

Instructor: I could tell you, I can tell you in class, I can tell you the Zohar’s answer. I think it’s a good question. The answer is that all thirteen attributes are all details of one sefirah, that’s all from mercy. Therefore one calls it attributes of mercy. There are more attributes, attributes of judgment, don’t belong at all to that list. Although according to the simple meaning it is yes, but according to the Midrash, the 13 attributes of mercy, all attributes of Keter.

This the Idra says this explicitly, and the Zohar in many parts of no one implies this, that all 13 attributes of mercy are Keter. Perhaps it also says, one must look, people say the answer.

And in short, the sefirot are the real thing, the real structure is sefirot. 13 attributes is one of the actions or one of the stations of the one sefirot that it’s thirteen. Why brings thirteen? I want to say, the time of the Rishonim is 13 attributes games is very important, the selichot one doesn’t look at like 13 attributes. I want to say, the structure of 13 attributes isn’t in the further. I want to say that 13 attributes has more things, one wasn’t millions of things, is only a big deal. It’s a big deal.

Student: No, by the further is… by the way, yes, I agree with your that. I wrote about this, and last year I never finished it, no custom, but I want not written two pieces about the service of mercy, more what connects it to the Ramban. I was agreeing there that this is a basic concept on what the attributes are. According to Kabbalah, according to the Zohar is still very important, because all we’re trying to get, it’s being sweetening the judgment, to bring the illumination from the Keter on all the other sefirot, may Your mercies increase and Your attributes, as the difficult stands in the Midrash.

Instructor: As it’s correct that the Kabbalists still demoted in a significant way, that now their structure isn’t in the thirteen attributes. Their structure is the essence that exists, which the root of everything is ten sefirot. Somewhere one must fit in the thirteen attributes in this. This isn’t no what he has a discussion, he brings out a better quest. But this isn’t an excuse from the structure. I mean, it could be that it looks like it should yes take up.

Therefore the Ramak thought, or the blessed Ramak wants to say with him, that here one sees that there is yes a partner, and here one says that there are thirteen sefirot, because there are indeed 13 attributes, it’s indeed the sefirah of attributes, right? It’s indeed the basic sod, I mean not.

And he says, I don’t understand so well his answer, I’m only saying the question here, perhaps sometimes we’ll do, we’ll find the answer, but I see only here that what? I could here say other answers, I can here go other answers. Sefirot is indeed the most structure, that’s what days people seem to be saying, also. But when this is another thing, it comes from, Samael, what connection does it have? I don’t know, one must figure out how to connect.

The Distinction Between Actions and Roots

Instructor: Actions, attributes are actions, sefirot are not actions, sefirot are above attributes, sefirot are roots. Who it says thing, he says only, he says only, but he says only, he should be not only. So he says only, he should be not only, he should be not only, he should be not only. He should be not only, he should be not only, he should be only. He should be not only, he should be only, he should be only.

That’s how the world is set up. The attributes is how God’s life to the people. And the 13 attributes are the reflections of the ten sefirot. So, eh, there are ten, there are thirteen. Right? So, this goes the Ramak tries to learn the whole thing at length Sha’arei HaTzachtzachot. Right?

Rav Chaim Gaon’s Approach: Truly Thirteen

Instructor: So, there is that they believe, this is Rav Chaim Gaon, says yes that there are truly thirteen. So, it becomes yes a true problem for the approach of ten sefirot, because he wants yes that the 13 attributes aren’t arbitrary, it’s not just there, ah, you know, notzer chesed la’alafim (preserving kindness for thousands), this is just a thing that isn’t from the sefirot. No, it is yes. This isn’t clear. He doesn’t explain.

Rav Chaim Gaon’s Names for the Sefirot

Instructor: And he gives a list actually. You can actually continue to read, and you’ll see that he gives actually a list. He says that there are ten sefirot, first of all, are divided into three upper and seven lower, and he has other names for them, by the way, which is also very interesting. He has other names for the sefirot. The first three he calls wondrous light, incomprehensible light, and… I don’t know what is the third, it’s not clear. Wondrous light, incomprehensible light, and the intellect, I don’t know, thought, he doesn’t explain what is the third. And the intellect, maybe. It’s not very clear. Yes, the measure and the intellect. Wondrous light, incomprehensible light, and the lights of the measure and the intellect. Whatever. These are words that mean nothing, right?

By the way, whoever wrote this, he meant something. Because to say wondrous light and other lights, incomprehensible light, says nothing. It’s just codes. It’s not even codes, it’s nothing. The words tell me nothing. And we can make just as much sense from this as Chochmah Binah Da’at, by the way, because Netzach Hod Yesod means nothing.

Student: No, it’s not true, there also there are codes.

Instructor: I think that there also there are codes. But at least the codes, I’ll say the bold difference, at least the codes that the Kabbalists, the standard codes that we know, are connected to verses.

The Three Supernal Lights Above the Ten Sefirot

The Problem with Codes Without Context

Instructor: These are words that mean nothing, right? By the way, whoever wrote this, he must have meant something. Because to say “wondrous light” and another light is “second wondrous light,” you’re saying nothing. It’s just codes. It’s not even codes, it’s nothing. The words mean nothing.

And one can make just as much sense from this as I make from the words, by the way, because “Netzach and Hod” means nothing. It’s true, here also there are codes, I agree that here also there are codes. But the codes, the Kabbalists, the standard codes that we know, are connected to verses. So the context, the connotation comes from verses.

If I had five hundred books from him, I could see how he uses “wondrous light,” how he uses “second wondrous light,” I would understand what he’s talking about. Since I have here one half book, one note, I don’t know what he’s talking about. And it would be a different approach, I can make what it should be. I could say some concept, use, basically use or concept, turnover, whoever speaks from him.

Student: This half book. They have the kind in English. This is the only manuscript?

Instructor: The Rebbes of Haba speaks of this? I remember, he already answered this, the language. You know that Mincha doesn’t say rain your code?

Student: Now, he wouldn’t have been able to open it in it. He wouldn’t have been able to open it in it.

Instructor: Yes, yes, he is. This is one version on it.

Student: No, no, this isn’t the manuscript. This is the Gaon.

Instructor: Wait, Joel see. Wait, wait, another scout.

The Ten Sefirot in the Ancient Text

Lecture on Early Kabbalah – Part 3

Instructor: Okay, let’s see. I just want to say what he says, because we’re giving a lecture, because he says that there are three, well, these are three leshonos (expressions), or regular three leshonos, right?

> The seven are specified in a regular Chabad or similar system. The seven lower ones are very arousing, what they call themselves, first, kaf zechus (scale of merit), kaf chovah (scale of obligation), and lashon haslichim (language of forgiveness), but the eye understands. Thus one applies the name Sefer Yetzirah, kaf zechus, kaf chovah, and lashon haslichim, and thus one applies shefa yetzirah (emanation of formation).

And why does he switch from lashon chok (language of law) to lashon selichah (language of forgiveness), whatever that means.

> “And the fourth light renews the world of souls, the masters of records called it yesod olam (foundation of the world).”

It’s written here, no?

> “And the sages of the Talmud called it tzaddik yesod olam (the righteous one, foundation of the world).”

That’s the yesod.

> “There is also an outer light called esh ocheles (consuming fire),”

That’s the malchus.

> “It divides the light that is on the north and right.”

So that’s, I guess, netzach and hod. So that’s how we already have ten.

> “It is the end of all the lights, and it is the purpose of all actions.”

That’s the malchus.

That’s all ten Sefiros, okay? It seems to be the regular ten Sefiros, or more or less, right? In different codes, but you can recognize the ten Sefiros here, right?

The Three Upper Lights — Above the Ten Sefiros

Instructor: And then he says:

> “And now we hint to you that there are three upper lights above the formations, they have no beginning because they are name and essence to the root of all roots.”

I have the same language for you.

> “And thought cannot grasp them.”

I guess he just printed the Pardes here.

> “And thought cannot grasp them, because comprehension is prevented, and a light thing was created before comprehension. But in the name of our holy grandfather”

— he also had some grandfather, Rabbi Aharon Gaon.

Student: Seriously, man? Who?

Instructor: Rabbi Aharon Gaon.

Student: Yeah, okay.

Instructor: Somewhere there’s the holy grandfather Rabbi Aharon.

Student: Wasn’t Rabbi Aharon the Ropshitzer Rebbe’s grandmother’s holy grandfather?

Instructor: They certainly had grandfathers. They certainly had lineage. They had lineage from the Gaon. They considered themselves descendants.

Student: My teacher, are you talking about Rabbi Sherira? All the way to Bustanai?

Instructor: Yeah, yeah, yeah. King David. Okay, in short, he heard the names.

Receiving the Names — The Importance of Names

Instructor: By the way, this is very interesting, because the mekubalim all have this thing, that there’s a written code, and they’re so happy that they have it. He’s going to tell you the names. What difference does it make what the name is? Call it whatever you want.

No, it makes a difference what you call it. Kabbalas hasheimos (receiving the names), receiving how to call the root.

The Three Names of the Three Lights

Instructor: The three roots, and they’re called:

> “Or penimi kadmon (primordial inner light),”

That’s the first one,

> “Which spreads in the hidden root and bursts forth in the power of simplicity like the image of two great lights.”

So this first one somehow divides into two, interesting. Then there’s

> “Or metzutzach (polished light),”

And then there’s

> “Or tzach (clear light),” “All one light and one essence and one hidden root to the Ein Sof.”

So, usually it’s said that the three lights are called or kadmon, or metzutzach, or tzach. Nobody knows what these things mean. This is again, just codes. You see?

He says that it’s simply that it’s hidden from the Ein Sof, or hidden in the Ein Sof, there are other versions. It’s infinitely hidden. What does that mean? I can’t find the hidden.

Why the Three Aren’t Called “Sefiros”

Instructor: In short, and then he says:

> And the sages of mystery,

It’s said that one shouldn’t explain it,

> Therefore it says “do not inquire into what is beyond you, and do not investigate the sealed matters.”

And what it says that the primordial Sefiros are lights, this is not like the light of the sun, but spiritual lights.

> And I intended in all this the way of recognition,

To know, ah, this is interesting,

> If for names that they should not be separated in themselves as those below them.

What does that mean? The names shouldn’t be separated, like different, because they all basically have the same three names, or (light).

So, he wants to have a verse, just like the Torah when there are normal words he looks for some verse for it. He says:

> We found appellations and agreed knowledge that they have no known name, except for the remnants that were called by a known name.

That means, all these Sefiros are called lights, but they also have names, like kaf zechus, kaf chovah, they have actually different names from each other. Whereas the three don’t have special names, just the word lights, or tzach, or kadmon, or metzutzach.

> And so the root that has no beginning is called or ein sof (infinite light), it has no known name except light alone, because it is the cause to illuminate for all,

As it says

> “Light and salvation,” “the commandment is a lamp and Torah is light.” And all the words of the prophets are not different, and the Name of four letters all the more so which preceded before the emanation of the created glory.

The Name Havayah and Kavod Nivra — A Radical Position

Instructor: So, you see that he’s after the Geonim, because kavod nivra (created glory) was invented by Rav Saadia Gaon.

Student: Yeah yeah.

Instructor: And regarding Rav Hai Gaon, before Rav Saadia Gaon, he didn’t believe in kavod nivra.

Student: So, you can say that Rav Saadia Gaon invented kavod nivra and you believe him?

Instructor: Okay, anything’s possible. But by the way, he says a very radical thing here. He says that the Name Havayah is before the kavod nivra. Even Rav Saadia Gaon didn’t believe in that. That’s what I mean.

Student: What do you mean he says, because we’re going with the idea that the or ein sof has no name, you can’t say any word about it, because they believe that a name is a real thing, a name is not just a pointer, even if it’s not a pointer, then it wouldn’t be interesting, the name has some kind of power, it has some kind of existence. So, consequently therefore, if there’s a name, it must be at least on the first three halves, half names, or penimi, and then the Sefiros, where they really names, and then kavod nivra, maybe it means that the Sefiros are also equal to kavod nivra, I don’t know.

The Name Havayah — Further Details

Instructor: And he explains the Name Havayah, this is the next article, there it strengthens that it’s one point:

> It’s written and known to the masters of records for a wondrous foundational light, that a spiritual golem was hidden and concealed from the power of the three levels, the name essence of the root,

The ideal must have the name, the Jew also has something turning things in it, and from this comes another spreading, and there becomes

> The power of measure and power of intellect,

That’s the binah.

> It’s the point that received, the power of form, the Torah in ten levels of fine form, all the number to number ten,

Or the whole. Ah, that’s the yud of the Name.

> And the power of this point, which our teachers achieved from our rabbis and from one of our grandfathers,

Ah, there’s actually more at home, or after this it became, in short,

> And therefore the sages of the Sefiros call the Sefiros the vision of the hidden world, or six. The power of pursuit became six commandments, and then became the last knowledge,

In short,

> All these are the order of levels, only with me there’s power to write, because they are the honored and awesome foundation, and especially that they blessed from my hand, and the glory of the Creator of all, He gave you a heart to know and eyes to see the secrets of Torah, and remember how much to pour out our prayer and His spirit with you within you, and peace to all our holy friends.

Words of Praise and Thanks

Instructor: The problem with all these texts, the ratio of words of praise and thanks to words of content is about half and half. Okay, I’m exaggerating. There are two in the six paragraphs that exist, two of them are just how amazing the secret is, and all so on.

In short, the story, this is some theory of the righteous, what they said. That there are three things, the before the ten Sefiros, that’s basically what he’s explaining here. They’re not called Sefiros because they’re so hidden.

This is, by the way, a small note. Why is it called chochmah though? I don’t know from where.

A Poem Against Philosophy

Instructor:

> “Woe to the world that relies on its disgrace and investigation, and its head goes and its feet go, and equates the secrets of the rabbis and sages of the children of Israel, and learns the wisdom of philosophy, which is wisdom held like the wisdom of sorcerers and magicians, like feet without a head and life, and like a female without the eyes of a male and no light, woe to the world that bears not receiving and not bearing, that both are as if he learned wisdom from the mouth of that one, and like his eyes and heart the secrets of truth.”

I wrote a nice poem against philosophy, I don’t know. It’s anything by the way, no comment, no argument, you hear? I don’t need to know how this connects to this.

Student: A sage from the sages of emotion?

Instructor: Emotion today is a… Okay, well, I don’t know, no sense.

What Should We Do With the Three Sefiros?

Instructor: So, so, how do we deal with that? What should we do with the three Sefiros? If the study of Kabbalah is… It’s good, it’s good. You have to be a very great Jew to know one small true holiness and not go crazy. That’s how I think about it.

What it says here, you want to really know what I think here? What it says that… May I say this on camera? Nobody learns it anyway, just the machine.

What it says that one shouldn’t reveal the secret or you’ll go crazy is true. And most of the mekubalim we have are from those who went crazy, not from those who stayed healthy. Because the one who stayed healthy, he didn’t write anything, because he understood that keeping the secret is itself a great secret.

Most people… Did I already tell you this? It doesn’t look like the secret. None of the mekubalim we read kept anything. Some of them are very bad writers and very bad explainers.

The Structure of Mystical Tradition in Temple Times

Who Studies Kavanos and Why They Go Crazy

Nobody learns it anyway, just those who meditate on kavanos. What it says that one shouldn’t reveal the secret or you’ll go crazy, is true. And most of those who meditate that we have are from those who went crazy, because not from those who are healthy. Because those who are healthy, didn’t speak, didn’t write.

It’s very bad readers and very bad at self-expression. I have no idea what they’re saying. But they do say, he has a drive to say. And, hopefully you’re a really great person, you have a good grasp on context and knowledge. And maybe you need to learn sciences and philosophies and other things. And also politics, as the Rema says, you need to learn how to conduct yourself with people. In order to at all know you should, you should be quieter.

The Parable of the King and the Secret

Just a story, the Baal Shem Tov tells a story. Baal Shem Tov, I think. The daughter of Reb Nachman, I think maybe both have versions of this story that the king sent someone with a secret, and he described three other versions of how not to reveal the secret.

One told everyone that he has a secret, he didn’t say it, and in the end they tortured him until he said it.

The second told everyone, didn’t hint that he has it, until he revealed it.

The third had to endure, and they tortured him, and he didn’t reveal the secret.

And the point is that the fourth didn’t tell anyone a secret. And good day, and nobody bothered him. He didn’t have any test, and basically he said that him I meant.

But to do that, I’m the Rambam the first, I’m the Rambam the Rambam ends. And these are the greatest tzaddikim, the greatest tzaddikim, the simple meaning is the greatest… right, the hidden ones, the ones, and he wants to know that the hidden tzaddikim.

The Problem With Shabsai Tzvi and False Messiahs

You know after the incident you need to have… Rabbi Zalman of Kaziridz, nobody knows who. You know after the incident you need to have to be an old tzaddik? It’s a whole trick, anyway, you didn’t just hear from me that it’s a trick.

What’s so popular there’s a movie about it, a documentary about it, the story of Shabsai Tzvi, whatever. There were millions of stories of Shabsai Tzvi, nobody knows about them, because they kept it so secret, they couldn’t reveal it to anyone, because nobody knew about it.

But on the other hand, yes, I have a lot of empathy for all people who went crazy, and are crazy in all kinds of ways, because first of all, some of the people who are simple, I don’t know exactly what to call them, not all of them are… but some of them, perhaps there are a few who are true sages who wanted to reveal something. There are such people today too. But there is a portion of them who are simply as stupid as it looks on the surface, and there’s no secret there at all.

The Great Innovation of the Mekubalim: The Revelation of Secrets

So, number one, at least when you’re younger you very much respect the people who tell you that there’s something. Okay, that’s first of all.

And second, I need to, I spoke with you about the Sefer HaBahir and everything. I don’t know exactly how I learn myself, but it seems to me that one of the great innovations of the mekubalim is not that there are secrets, and even what the secrets are, and so on. The great innovation, and perhaps the thing that needs to be spoken about, is the revealing of the secrets, that they stopped keeping it secret.

The mekubalim aren’t those who had secrets, they’re those who stopped keeping the secrets secret. That’s why we know about them.

That’s why we know about them. Such secrets always existed, people had this. Certainly they had it, but they kept it secret. These things are natural, in a certain sense.

Student: But I mean there must be some tradition that you can do this, because…

Instructor: Yes, yes, I understand what you mean. It’s a problem.

Why Secrets Must Be Revealed: The Point of the Mekubalim

The point is that the mekubalim aren’t just stupid, because they have a point. The point is that Moshe Rabbeinu gave us a Torah, but there’s something more, this isn’t all there is, right? There’s something more that you need to do, places where you can come to understand and make.

And if nobody tells it to anyone, the person who comes up with it will be a heretic. What do you mean? There’s a Torah, what are you coming with? It must be that someone should have some authority to say that I have a secret. He needs to somewhere keep throwing in a word, a hint, because when someone stands up and says “I have a secret,” they tell him “what’s the secret?” He means that he interprets something. That when Moshe said “a prophet like you,” ah, I’m the prophet like you. Okay, please, you have something in the Torah.

So Chazal threw in a word that there’s a secret, there’s Chazal, just to notify you that there is, it exists. And some people, over time, transmitted, perhaps not the whole secret, but some of it.

I agree with you that that and that. I agree with you that in the situation of exile, this like feeling and half-way feeling has a very important purpose, because we’re religious and we’re weird swallowers of the Torah, of the halachah. If it doesn’t say somewhere, and you’re allowed to do something besides putting on tefillin in the morning, nobody will catch on.

I think that probably… well, I don’t mean… yes, whatever. In short, you say it’s clearly with claims, it’s idolatry. That’s not a claim that… that’s what I’m saying. Because I dared to say it’s natural, because a person turns in the world, why are we going to be visionaries. This is such the same thing. But if the world is very primitive, then one can hide it in short. Maybe, maybe not.

The Structure of a Healthy Society

Moshe set up a society, he has a vision how it should work, and the society has a framework. You can’t say what you want. If everyone goes to set up a vision, he’s going to tell me…

So, what I think, and what I… my fantasy. I mentioned, yes young men there’s no fear of a rabbi. I mean that one can think for oneself that for example in the time of the Temple, and when I say Temple I mean the First Temple, I don’t know the Second Temple. In the Second Temple nobody knows anything, that one can from the Jews that it made sense for a few minutes. I’m still so cynical. I mean anyway, the Second Temple is everything in exile. There was no chareidi home, fanatic mizrachists, kamaists. Everything was already there, Pharisees, Sadducees, with Josephus what we are. It’s very modern, but it’s the same thing.

So, the flies are annoying. That’s a sign that I’m not holy, because in the desert there was no environment. And here’s the… anyway.

My grandfather said that whoever learns Moreh Nevuchim will become a heretic. He was a chassid, you can’t trust the chassidim.

The Beis HaMikdash as a Mystical Institution

So, my point is this, that the Beit Hamikdash (Temple), the Beit Hamikdash is a mystical thing. Okay, you can say there are mitzvot (commandments), it’s written in the Torah, we had to have a Beit Hamikdash. But in practice, it was made that there one speaks with God, there the angels turn.

The Story of Eli the Kohen and Shmuel the Prophet

I mean, you know how Shmuel Hanavi (the Prophet Samuel), Eli Hakohen (the Priest) taught Shmuel, yes? Eli Hakohen taught Shmuel, “Ah, this is the voice of God. Next time speak with Him, and this is how it sounds.” There was some kind of learning. You see clearly in the prophet, obviously, Eli Hakohen had a tradition, or from wherever he got it, he knew how one becomes a prophet. Shmuel didn’t know, he hadn’t yet, he skipped a grade, he hadn’t yet done the course. So he told him, “Ah, you’re already at that point? Okay, then I’ll teach you how it works,” right?

Obviously, one needs to know, sometimes, I think, every tradition of mysticism has ways of knowing when it’s the Satan, when it’s the Almighty, when it’s just your own fantasy. One needs to be able to distinguish this.

But there was an established tradition, the Kohanim (priests), the prophets, Eliyahu Hanavi (Elijah the Prophet) had a beit midrash (study hall), whatever it was. They were the professional chassidim (pious ones), like the fantasy that the bnei haneviim (sons of the prophets) were chassidic Jews. They were the opposite, they were monasteries, they were structured. It was, one didn’t just turn around in bed, one knew who was turning there. They didn’t let in just anyone. Shmuel Hanavi said, “Okay, I’ll let you in there for a few minutes, you’ll still bite a pillar.” He actually shone. They didn’t just let a person in there. There was a certain structure, and everyone knew that these are the people. People went to ask them for blessings, and if you lost a donkey you went to ask them sometimes.

The Nature of Secrets in Beit Hamikdash Times

But, firstly, there was no dogma. Not every Jew believed that there are ten sefirot (divine emanations). Perhaps they didn’t know how many sefirot there are, but this was said literally in a whisper, no one knew. Shmuel Hanavi taught Shaul (Saul), it was a living tradition. You don’t have to have books, you don’t have to tell everyone. Everyone knows that the Beit Hamikdash, of course, can be corrupted, but there are the people there, and the Beit Hagadol (Great Court) was there, and the Beit Hagadol was there, whatever. They came there, they were the daughters, they had to learn, fast, eat, I don’t know what they had to do, become a nazir (Nazirite), ask a nazir.

The Matter of a Nazir

When someone is… There is, what is a nazir for? Do we need to have a nazir? People will… when someone says he’s a nazir, people say, “Ah, a nazir, just, just crazy.” A nazir is obviously a person who is somehow more something, yes, he has yes sins, he doesn’t have sins, what is the halacha (Jewish law)? Obviously, his job is to be like outside of society and to be a tzaddik (righteous person), and that’s his job.

The halachot (laws) that we have are only like the remnants of remnants. It doesn’t tell us how to be a nazir, it only tells us two halachot of when you are a nazir, what you do in such and such a case, that’s the halacha. Okay, there was a nazir who didn’t follow the halacha, right? That’s why we say the halacha. But a nazir is something besides the halachot.

Halachot Are Only “Blueprints”

By the way, it’s like Shabbat (Sabbath), it’s like everything in the Torah besides the halachot. The halachot is the zecher b’alma (mere remembrance). It’s like you don’t have the house, you have the blueprints. You only know that the mezuzah (doorpost scroll) needs to be there. Okay, what is a mezuzah? Ah, we still know, we know that the alef needs to be written. Okay, what is this alef? It has a certain meaning, it has a certain… And perhaps not everyone knows the meaning, and perhaps on a certain level not everyone knows the meaning.

But if you have a society that is actually healthy and it actually exists, and if it’s a divine society, and every ancient society was a divine society, there were better and worse ones, but every society was a kind of… There were prophets, there were priests, there were nazirites, and their job was to deal with these things.

How They Kept the Secrets

And they kept it all very well secret. They literally didn’t say the names, the… how the names of the names of the names are called they already said, but according to level, once in seven years, as it says in the Gemara (Talmud), they said what the Shem Mem-Bet (42-letter Name) looks like. And it’s literally letters.

Criticism of the Rambam’s Interpretation

And the Rambam (Maimonides) says, “Ah, it has a meaning also.” Yes, certainly. If I would catch the Rambam, I would say he has a far-fetched interpretation. The Rambam says, you know the Rambam, yes? In chapter 62, that Shem ben yud-bet otiyot (the 12-letter Name), whatever, “the wise one reveals it once in seven years.” The Rambam says simply, it’s talking about a few letters, I can write it on a paper. It means the meaning.

No, I mean that for seven years one had to learn with the rabbi, and once in seven years he said the letters. Afterwards, after seven years he took to say what it means. It was literally a secret in that sense. Because otherwise, what will happen is you’ll get Kabbalah. And Kabbalah in the situation that we don’t have it, there are two—

Secrets of the Torah: The Ideal of Keeping and the Arizal’s System

The Shem ben Yud-Bet Otiyot — A Real Secret

If I had the Rama, I would say a very far-fetched interpretation. The Rama says, you know the Rama, yes, in chapter 62, that the Shem ben yud-bet otiyot from the rabbi, the wise one reveals it to one person in seven years. Simply speaking about a few letters, I can’t possibly speak for papers. Mean the custom? No, I mean this. For seven years one had to learn with the rabbi, and once in seven years he said the letters. Afterwards, after seven years, he took to say what it means today.

That was literally a secret in that sense. Because otherwise, what you have is you get Kabbalah. A Kabbalah in this situation that we don’t have that, and what’s between the choices is to have anything, just like there are Jewish Jews who still pray at tefillah (prayer), whatever, it’s not the sin, it’s the confusion, or a mixture of pieces, certainly it’s better than not being Jewish Jews.

But that’s still not the ideal. The ideal is it will stay a secret. Therefore all Jews who cry that Mashiach (Messiah) will come and we’ll keep the secrets of the Torah again. It will be able to be normal, it will be, certainly, both tzaddikim, of course, the Rebbe, even the tzaddikim, only will know the secrets of the Torah, can be only one of the hidden ones, one needs immersions that one needs immersions seven times in the river of fire, in order to be able to integrate, it’s not just whoever wants can learn it.

And but then it will be, again we don’t keep the secrets, we keep it again we put the Aron (Ark) there inside with a parochet (curtain), it should close it, one should come see it once a year, with immersions, with festivals, one should come see it. It’s never decided, decided in these things. And this is why I think that sometimes it’s like given to fools, and actually fools, and sometimes even they were not fools, they became fools, because if you know one thing and you don’t know it completely, and it’s very hard to know it completely, because there are no fools, there are no fools, there’s a tradition of all kinds of such crazy people.

The Arizal’s Great Principle: Revealing the Secrets Is Hiding Them

And like, by the way, the Arizal (Rabbi Yitzchak Luria), for example, in a certain sense, the Arizal says it clearly, that giluy hasodot hu hastaram (revealing the secrets is hiding them). This is the Arizal’s big statement that he understands in Kabbalah also. The problem is that the light is too big, not that it’s too small. And the tikkun (rectification) is to clothe and to cover it all. This is the Arizal’s big theory of the secrets and of the evil middot (character traits) and of everything. It’s one of his biggest things, but I don’t know. One of the great things.

The Arizal and the Ramak — One System

And the Arizal by the way says, by the way, you see we learn the Ramak (Rabbi Moshe Cordovero), you see the things that the Ramak brings are even more messed up than him, right? And the Arizal, you see, when you say what does one do with the criticism, this is the internal Kabbalah criticism. The Arizal is the one that comes, and the Ramak basically, the Arizal and the Ramak are one system, I don’t look at them as separate. The Arizal and the Ramak come and they say, “Look, all early mekubalim (kabbalists) are nuts.” They say all good things, much of his teachings come from those books. Certainly, they’re not just complete liars, everyone caught some truth. It’s like a forbidden school, one shouldn’t say the truth in the beit midrash, certainly. But what he’s saying is that you people are not integrated, you don’t have a system that you can teach, you can’t teach it.

The Arizal’s Life Project: Not to Reveal, But to Hide

The Arizal says, “I’m going to make a system.” He’s basically going to hide it, so that you can be a mekubal without being a mekubal. That’s actually the purpose. Because there needs to be a way, and then slowly, theoretically, there needs to be a rebbe, like the Arizal or a chassidic rebbe, who should actually go with people through the process. The Arizal’s life project is not to reveal secrets, it’s to hide them. He makes a whole system that fits, to integrate. He says, “Okay, this is the kavanah (intention) of Shabbat, this is of Yom Tov (holiday).” The early mekubalim, none of them say the difference between Shabbat and Yom Tov. Even halachically, when Shabbat comes, “or penimi (inner light), or makif (surrounding light),” what is the difference exactly? Ah, ah, ah… Either they don’t have words, but having good words in itself means that now you can have a school. Now you can make a proper kollel (advanced Torah study group), one learns Kabbalah. And of course, most people is not gonna do anything to it, but even the people, so they don’t deserve it, but it’s like building a Beit Hamikdash. The Beit Hamikdash also wasn’t for every person.

The Beit Hamikdash as a Model for Mysteries

By the way, the image of the Beit Hamikdash, Plato had it also. They all had the image of great mysteries. I mean that, again, presumably in the Beit Hamikdash we had somewhat different structures, we had better secrets. But they had the idea of mysteries and mystery religions, and it was around the same religion as everyone. Only that the god or the Name isn’t for everyone. You can come stand outside, the kohen will come out to you, you’ll give him a coin, he’ll bring in your thing. You want to come in? You want to understand something? Turn around seven times hakafot (circuits), and immerse yourself forty times in a mikveh (ritual bath), and say such and such, and learn such and such, and be a person, they’ll tell you.

The Mekubalim Build a Beit Hamikdash in the Torah

The mekubalim, since they don’t have a Beit Hamikdash, they can’t build a Beit Hamikdash practically, they build the Beit Hamikdash in this. For example, you know what ten sefirot are? This is the gate of the Beit Hamikdash. Everyone can come to the gate, one can say the words. This is like coming to the gate. Now you wanna come in? Ah, that’s already a different… Again, we don’t really have, I think like in some, like in their ideal, like in the Arizal’s like imagined like beit midrash, which he had a real beit midrash, by the way, he had a kollel the Arizal. He also paid for the kollel young men. Someone paid, or he himself, I don’t remember, or how, or, how, or, how, you want to call, or, and, or, or, or, yes, many people come just to learn, and even a little Kabbalah also, it says. And the few, they have the… I’m going already, I’ll say such things.

The Solution: A Proper System That Fits

In this sense, you can see the mekubalim self-reorganize, and most of the friends are nuts, and the solution will be to have a real system that is worked out, and it fits with most, with the nigleh (revealed Torah), and it fits with halachot, it needs to fit a bit with life, with normal life. And this is still the opposite what they didn’t realize it was the truth, it’s the causes of the understanding that it’s very hard, and this is because the fruits that exist are very hard, and this is because of a hidden side.

The Claim Against Revealers of Secrets

Also a claim, always, they say, except already mother, employed, they are such phony people who reveal secrets. Most people, even those who know they don’t reveal. General rule, those who don’t know, they do reveal. It’s like, I read all the phony things, and so we are drunk people, anyone can think him seriously by necessarily idle. You need to understand, he saw the Shechinah (Divine Presence) itself, you need to not take him seriously. Why? Who are you? He’s still a kollel young man. Come hear more. The angel Michael gave it to me. The question is was there credibility. He doesn’t. Now, maybe somewhere he doesn’t. But the city, he works hard. But he needs this. He needs to give himself space to be what he is.

Reb Asher’le — An Example of a Real Mekubal

How does he do it? He says, then he sees, he says nonsense. Yes, because he didn’t know everything yet. And only is a real mekubal. I saw Reb Asher’le just this. He wrote a few versions on his book. First he wrote a commentary on Etz Chaim (Tree of Life), Panim Meirot U’Panim Masbirot (Illuminating and Explaining Faces). And he said, and he said, “I’m not learning that book. I won’t say what I’m learning. I’m learning the next book. I won’t learn from one of the sides, because if so my system isn’t complete. I knew two things, I didn’t know the third thing. I must be very basic.”

Learning Is Hard — Crazy Expectations

It goes back to what we talked about. Learning is very hard, and it takes so much time. And we have this, we grew up, both the religious and the… We have such crazy expectations of people.

The Zohar’s “Mistakes”

One learns Zohar (foundational kabbalistic text), one sees that the Zohar made seventeen mistakes, he says seventeen mishnayot (Mishnaic teachings) backwards. Okay, you know what? You write a book. And remember, he didn’t have Otzar Hachochmah (digital Torah library) with search to check every mishnah that one writes, right? Everything was from memory. Everything. One can look up a verse, but… right? You know what? You write without making a mistake in seventeen assumptions. He was a talmid chacham (Torah scholar), he knows thousands of halachot, a few halachot he said backwards from how it’s written.

You remember? I’m going to ask you now how many people remember which is chalah al devar mitzvah (vow on a matter of mitzvah) and which not, a neder (vow) or a shevuah (oath). Remember? The Zohar made a mistake in this. He wrote by mistake the opposite. I don’t remember, even that I’m probably also saying backwards. Something like that, there’s a difference. Most people don’t remember it. Even the rav of the generation didn’t remember it. Reb Chaim Kanievsky would have remembered it, but… I myself didn’t always remember it. It’s hard to remember. Perhaps he didn’t always remember it. It’s normal.

The Rambam’s Verses

We have such crazy doubts. He says, “You see that he was an am ha’aretz (ignoramus). You see that he’s a talmid chacham who remembered.” Ah, he quoted a bunch of verses wrong. Okay, you say verses, can you quote everything from memory correctly? You remember that it says Shem Havayah (the Tetragrammaton), but Shem Elokim (the name God) is in that verse. Oy, I made a whole derasha (sermon). Okay, I say it, I make a mistake, it doesn’t say Shem Havayah there. What should I do?

I mean that the people who our… Ruach Hakodesh (Divine Spirit), you know, everything. No, as if if it’s a Tanna (Mishnaic sage), if Tannaim have mistakes in verses… But yes, we said that they didn’t make any mistakes.

Okay, I tell you… I mean that they didn’t make any mistakes.

What’s the quote? Tannaim? Ah, yes, okay. I forgot that people think that the Zohar was written by Tannaim. But my point is that… The Rambam quotes thousands of verses, and almost, I forget, there’s a percentage someone calculated, almost every second verse that he quotes, he quotes with a mistake. Someone would write that the virtue of the Rambam is that always the content he’s right. He doesn’t bring the verse opposite from the topic, he brings that it’s written with an ayin instead of an alef, or the word is in the wrong order, or whatever. Even the Gemara quotes verses wrong, the truth is.

I mean, okay, these are quotes, it’s a simple thing that’s easy to check. But you’re talking about the concepts, all the more so.

Most Mekubalim Knew Half Things

It’s certain that most mekubalim (kabbalists) knew half of these things, they didn’t know how to finish the sevara (logical argument) that they had. And if you read other books, I think that if you read like different philosophies and things that have worked out these kind of thoughts more to the end, you get a better picture of the world than the mekubalim, some of them have, because of that. What’s wrong that a non-Jew had such an idea and it’s better worked out? It’s not a contradiction to say according to kabbalah it’s not so. The mekubal simply didn’t have the next step.

Chassidic Books — Insightful but Not Consistent

The Baal Shem Tov, most chassidic books, they’re full of this. They are very insightful people, but none of them, or almost none of them, are good at like being consistent and… He says it’s a virtue, because what he says he meant, and not just repeating someone else’s teachings. And we say better, a really great person, let’s say someone is amazing, let’s say someone like the Rambam, or let’s say someone like the Ramak, whatever. I mean, on that level, says the Arizal, someone who is on that level, brilliant and inspired and everything, would be able to integrate it with everything. It’s not… It can be reconciled why there are ten or thirteen precisely, and it would all fit. What you say it’s a dochak (forced explanation), yes, but it’s a dochak that doesn’t scratch anymore, it doesn’t grate anymore. It’s already there, in short, it’s already after that… No, no, no. I will actually learn what the Ramak says himself on this piece.

Back to the Ramak’s Summary

Let’s go back to his summary. In short, he quotes the summary in these words, that in short there are indeed the three. In short,

The Ramak’s Answer to the Question of Thirteen Sefiros: The Roots Are Not Sefiros

The Ramak’s Explanation: The Three Roots Are Not Sefiros

Editor:

It can be reconciled why there are ten or thirteen precisely, it would all fit. What you say that it’s a dochak. Yes, but his dochak is, it doesn’t scratch anymore, it doesn’t grate anymore. It’s already there, in short, it’s already after that no. I need to learn what the Ramak says a lot on this piece. Let’s say what we’re calling summary. In short, he quotes in short on the language, that in short there are indeed the three. In short, the total is that the sefirah is the sefirah. He wrote a whole video about the sefirah that there are thirteen sefiros. I haven’t read it, I haven’t seen it. Yes, yes. The shitas ha’iyun (method of study), whatever they call it, that basically comes out to be 13 sefiros, almost official. The Ramak is right that the four medika, you say that this makes a distinction between the, so something is also a problem that there are 10 sefiros. He also knows that there are 10 sefiros, right? So it’s still like the four the fruits, and the fruits are right.

Says the Ramak, one must say:

> It is not the intention of the many who say three heads that their existence is three sefiros.

If that’s what he meant, he should have said, no problem. In Sefer Yetzirah in halacha. In halacha like Sefer Yetzirah, and it’s true there are thirteen sefiros. That’s not what he says. You see that he… Not only that, he carefully guards his language to reject this. He doesn’t even try to say… Sefer Yetzirah is not authoritative. He makes clear a distinction that there are ten sefiros. Besides that there are thirteen minutes. Besides that there are the three roots. He does make a difference in his language between these things.

So how, apparently he admits that the three are not sefiros in the worlds so that we should say there are 13, that they are not divinity in the worlds, an existence from the existence like the sefiros, because Moshe Rabbeinu our teacher from the roots below.

The Basic Theory: Roots Are the Potential of the Ein Sof

Basically, the basic theory in one line on the roots below is, that the three roots, and it’s clear because they are three and only ten, but that’s a good question, the three roots is the potential, but the word potential is complicated, but you can call it potential not exactly, the potential of the Ein Sof to create sefiros. So, in other words, everything before it exists, and the sefiros themselves you can see that this is relative to the next thing. But everything before it exists, it had a power. The word power is by the way related to potential. Although Aristotelianism says that power means potential, but according to kabbalah power doesn’t mean potential. Because potential is a problem, potential means there’s a lack, there’s a change. In any case, but the power, the ability, the yecholes (capacity), the ability, the power on the level before, of the Ein Sof, to create sefiros, you can see that the sefiros in the Ein Sof.

So the Ramak’s theory is that the hischatzvus (formation), the roots that we’re talking about, are not sefiros. The whole point is that they are not sefiros. They are actually what connects the sefiros to the Ein Sof. That’s the Ramak’s theory, because we say that there are sefiros, okay, the sefiros are not God, so how do you say it’s God? The answer is that God could have made the sefiros. So, and there are ten sefiros. The Ramak claims that the roots are really talking about that. And the sefiros in potential, and not the sefiros that we’re talking about, because they’re not yet things now, they’re still the power of the Ein Sof. By the way, they are the power of everything in the Ein Sof, only all sefiros, when we talk sefiros, is the power of the Ein Sof to have sefiros. And then when they reveal that this is what connects the sefiros to the Ein Sof, that’s the whole thing, that’s what makes it possible to say that the sefiros are divine.

Um, in short, therefore they’re certainly not sefiros. Says the Ramak, just as we have no problem, a whole son has a problem, I say there that you already understand, and he goes to explain it actually explicitly there in Sha’ar HaBi’ah, that there are ten sefiros in Atzilus doesn’t mean there are still ten sefiros, because it’s a different thing. The whole point of the roots is that they are not sefiros.

> Whether hidden existence or hidden sources, and when they are revealed they are a shadow to the higher ones.

And if you also see, in other words, this is only 10 sefiros, there are things before the sefiros, these are more hidden than the sefiros, and in other words, further, more unified, more religious aspects, or the existences on the one before that, like the yetzer hara (evil inclination). So there are afterwards other things that are only shadows of the sefiros. One doesn’t become all sefiros, which is the whole point, that the ten sefiros, the Beriah or Yetzirah, the Asiyah, are not ten sefiros, are shadows, tzelolim. It comes out that there are only the ten sefiros, and the three are sources, as he goes to explain in Sha’ar HaHischalchalos the actual point of the sources, of the sources of the sefiros, what they mean. Because we need to have the piece that there are sources in the Ein Sof, that’s the point.

The Distinction Between the Roots and the Sefiros: A Parable of Father and Son

So, only the word, it comes out as if if you want to specifically count the source with the… together be a new derush (interpretation), the Arizal’s derush from Etz Chaim, it comes out like this, that when we say ten sefiros, the main point of ten sefiros is the level that we can talk about it, but it’s still very strongly connected, it’s like the first revelation of the Ein Sof, which is already something separate but not separate, but still defined enough that it’s like distinct names, we can talk about each one extra, it makes sense. That’s what we call ten sefiros, that’s really only the ten. Okay, why we call it ten, he didn’t explain, but what we learn that there is before that, that’s exactly when we don’t talk about that, because we don’t say it’s sefiros, we say it’s the root of the sefiros. So now, the capability or the power, the possibility, of the Ein Sof to create sefiros, so it has something to do with sefiros. It’s not the possibility of the Ein Sof to create bugs, that would be something else. It’s the possibility of the Ein Sof to create sefiros, and this will become clearer and clearer.

Student:

No, the sefiros is entirely already a level beyond knowledge, a level whatever. Yes yes, we are bugs. True, true, true. I’m just saying, we’re only talking on one level. Yes, it’s explained. The one… One can ask the senses. Who made the three? Well, I didn’t make the three. Whatever you’re going to say, whatever thing you’re talking about, you’re going to have talked about anything which was talked about anything which was really, anything which was really had an existence in your effect. Sorry, anything which was really has in Chassidus the son in the mind of the father. Before the father, there’s a son in the father. He said in your example, he’s still entirely a father, you can’t look into the father’s mind and see a little son. It’s just the power of the father to create the son.

Editor:

But I’m saying, I’m saying that the Sefiros… again, I may be wrong, but I’m saying that the Sefiros are not something… because people… Sefiros are something extra. No, it’s the way God… Right, but that’s… but that’s also what you’re saying. But I’m talking about the Ramak’s understanding that the Sefiros are a step after that. What he calls Sefiros, that’s true, one can say that the sefiros are essence, that’s why we call them… but then the Sefiros would be literally God and we wouldn’t even talk about them.

The Distinction Between Power, Plan, and Action

When you say that, you can call the sefiros something like, depending on how you understand it, but something like… for example, in my example, I’m not saying it’s exactly so, I’m just saying you should understand the distinction. You can say that a father, a physical father, has children in him, because he’s entirely a father, I’m not talking… but you can say that the father made a plan to have children. Now, that plan, he’s able to make that plan. Why is that plan him? Only because he has the capacity to create the plan and then create through the plan the kids. But the plan is separate from the power of himself.

Student:

Right, but I just want to say that the will is a thing which is…

Editor:

Exactly, but the Ramak explains that the will is not a part of him.

Student:

But he also makes a plan.

Editor:

Right, no, no, that’s… that would be the…

Student:

And the will is…

Editor:

I’m saying, let’s say we’re talking about the ability now, not will.

Student:

Yes, yes, it’s true, but…

Editor:

But wait, but… I’m telling you… no problem, let’s not get confused. Now we’re talking on two levels. If you want to call the sefiros a plan, a plan is not him. The power… there’s a power of him to have a plan. Again, I’m not going into details, if you want, within these two things. If you want, now I’m not going into will, I’m saying power. Will is a complicated word that I want to stop using. But, um, at least… whatever, it’s a different discussion. But the power… the word power is a good word. Not for the Ramak’s discussion, because the Rambam wouldn’t be happy with the word power, but we don’t mean what the Rambam would mean, that’s okay. I’m not saying… I don’t have now interest to… but the point is, the power to make a plan is not the same thing as the plan. That’s my point.

Sefiros, I think generally when we talk about Sefiros… there are people that talk about Sefiros as earlier than that, but I’m saying in the Ramak’s understanding, the sefiros are usually more something like… kind of, I don’t know, let’s say like the plan. So the plan is not you. You can still say it lies in you, it’s still a part of you, but it’s not an external thing. It’s not there yet.

Before the children, the children will be when you actually go and do. But it’s already… it’s already like a…

I can talk, for example, I can talk about parts. That’s the important thing, right? I can talk more about parts in a more serious way, right? I can say that the plan already has, I make the head of the son, not first, but there are different parts. The plan already has parts, and it’s written in a certain reality way. The power has no parts. It’s simply… if we talk about parts, it’s for the sake of the future, not for its own sake. There are no parts in the power to be the ten sefiros or to make the ten sefiros.

We talk about three, which we say is one, whatever. But there’s less sense of parts. A plan is something that’s already elaborated, it already has all the details, it already has all the things, it already has parts of you, but it’s not you. There’s a difference in the levels. Yes, we can divide many levels. That’s why people end up with five hundred million levels. But it’s not the point to say names, the point is to understand what we’re thinking about.

The Three Roots: Perhaps Three Aspects of the Power

What I wanted to say is, that in the structure of three, when you’ll talk about three roots, which we call them names, Ayin-Beis, Samech-Gimmel, Mem-Hei, Ban, whatever, we’re talking about the power of the one to… perhaps the three, as you say, perhaps the three roots are three ways of thinking, like the will, the plan, or the ability of ability, I don’t know.

Yes, yes, there are different structures. Perhaps the three are a certain way of thinking, three ways of thinking about the power, or something like that, or three aspects of it. I don’t know, I can think of teachings, but I don’t know offhand what to say.

And then, do you need to come already? Who’s there? Hello Shira? Six o’clock I’ll be ready, okay? I’m finishing with the ten sefiros.

Summary: The Answer to the Question

And then, what I wanted to say is, it comes out like this, that we go back to the answer to the question that it says three sefiros.

The Answer to the Question: Thirteen Attributes of Mercy Versus Ten Sefiros

The Foundation of the Answer: Ten Sefiros and Three Roots

Probably… so probably the three is a straight way of thinking about… free way of thinking about the power, something further, but the three aspects of it. Do I need to come already? What’s there? I’m finishing with the ten sefiros. And then, what I wanted to say is, so it turns out the answer to the question that it says thirteen attributes and ten sefiros, right?

So it turns out the answer is, certainly there are only ten sefiros, on what would there only be ten created on eternal things, only ten. Hey, there are three, there are still three, yes, there are still three hidden things. Let’s say the Name Hashem, which stands in the… what makes sense? I set names on God, mercy is already things that He does. Let’s say, ah, I’m doing this, this is you can think. By the way, a simple understanding of Hashem Hashem is not… whatever, I don’t know.

That’s how I would think about it. That’s the… the three before, and ten is the action. Now, when do we call it if so, why do we count? Why when the Sages talk about thirteen and not about ten many times? Why do they talk about thirteen?

Why Do Chazal Specifically Talk About Thirteen?

The answer is, when we talk about thirteen, we precisely want to show the connection of the source center and the articulation of it. What you see in the world is ten, before that, as science, as science one must talk about ten, because one can’t talk about ten and three and four at once, about ten other worlds. If you talk about things that already exist, there are only ten. If you talk about things that will exist, there aren’t ten, there are only three. It’s a different concept.

Our Father, merciful Father, right? You are a father, I was with You, and now I’m not with You. But please, remember that I was with You, not just with You, with a plan, with You, in Your essence, with You, and Your ability to be me, to become me. So, that’s why mercy is specifically when we think of the source, and we count the 13 attributes of mercy, because one can’t, in science one must say ten and not eleven, whether in science or in everything. But in prayer one must add three more, because the prayer of the 13 attributes or the matter of the 13 attributes is specifically when we connect the source and the result, when we count them in one series as it were. And although it’s double, it comes out that it’s three plus ten, it’s the same thing twice, but that’s what I want to do.

The Arizal’s Approach Regarding Thirteen

The Arizal says that he speaks many times about thirteen, and he has his way of saying that in every world there is the root of the previous world, there are the three, and he says the same thing with Malchut. And the Arizal says explicitly that he has different torot – any time we have ten sefirot, and then the Malchut of the higher world contains within it three roots for the world, or the world, he has different ways of describing it. That’s one way of saying it. The Malchut of Atzilut is the Keter, it is the root of roots for the roots for the next world. So Netzach-Hod-Yesod, the leg would be from Netzach-Hod-Yesod, first of all before Malchut. The Netzach-Hod-Yesod of Yetzirah is the root for… Chochma-Binah-Daat I had, well, Asiyah, and therefore the Arizal says that the kavana of the ascent of prayer is from the ten of the world of Asiyah, because we reckon as if there are the ten of the world of Asiyah and another three from the world of Asiyah.

Application in Prayer

This is why during prayer there are many thirteens, just as right before Hodu one says the thirteen middot by which the Torah is expounded. The Arizal’s kavana is that the first, as if the thirteen middot, is the world of Asiyah, the three lowest of the world of Asiyah, together with the world of Asiyah. These are found in Yissachar, we have thirteen middot over there, and so on regarding the Shemoneh Esrei there are thirteen with the blessings, whatever there is?

Question: He finds thirteen in every level of prayer?

Answer: No, there are more, there are sixteen, I remember, not thirteen, seventeen, there’s more. In Shemoneh Esrei there are the middle blessings that were, and all of prayer by him goes goes goes connecting not with the branches, as it’s called, the source and the result. So that becomes thirteen.

The kavanot of Havu, whatever, the Kabbalat Shabbat is “Havu l’Hashem bnei eilim”. “Havu” is gematria thirteen. We say it three times, and there one ascends three worlds, and the fourth is “Hishtachavu l’Hashem b’hadrat kodesh”, which is Atzilut. And then we bring out the seven details, that we make seven times and so on. In short, technically he has a way of describing it for us, but yeah, but the thirteen is there. “Havu gdula l’Elokeinu”. In short, this is my interpretation. I don’t know my interpretation, I don’t know how the interpretation is.

And then he continues to continue about this and so forth. Ah, he brings the approach that there is another path in truth which says that all thirteen are in Keter, and he brings this also from the prayer of Rabbi Nechunya ben Hakana. In short. Until here chapter 7, part 1.

The Broader Context: The Importance of Pardes Rimonim

I feel that it’s important to have the context, because one learns the writings of the Arizal, afterwards he says, “Ah, one can make thirteen, okay, one can make fourteen, one can make seven, one can make whatever one wants.” I’m sure that the Arizal knew Pardes and he thought about this. So it’s fundamental, and it’s not just, “And just what makes thirteen? Ah, because I need the hint to fit this way.” No, that’s the point in this.

The Ramban’s Approach: Fourteen

The Ramban places it on number fourteen, yes. And according to his system, what are there fourteen worlds? According to the Ramban, there are ten worlds. I have there still in the word, there are fourteen worlds. There are ten worlds, plus the elements. So the space is in the aspect of fourteen, and that one showed that even the Yad Hachazaka follows the order, and he said that the last four are in the world of Asiyah, of this world of ours. And the other rabbi, the other rabbi from Torah, the last four years are the elders, judges, officers, the hundred percent physical, it’s just, whatever, it’s almost silent, but that’s only 13, that’s 14, that’s 13 with a kollel. In short, I can do that too.

I have a thirteen for you, I want it cold. Mainly in Kiryat Shevuel. I don’t want to go into it. Eh, it’s the main thing. Well, it’s the fourth main thing. The fourth main thing is meant, one is from meant to be there in a positive way. Words tags by the number 4, and wait your numbers. Yes, okay.