פרשת בלק

Parashat Balak: A Study on the Path of Service and the Secret of the Cup of Blessing

Every Parasha and Its Mitzvot: The Practical Difference

Our parasha is Parashat Balak. We have already said more than once that every parasha, and every deed mentioned in the Torah, and especially those deeds from the days in the wilderness, are arranged in such a way that they contain narratives, events that occurred, stories of righteous people, stories of the Children of Israel in the wilderness, and alongside all these there is also a mitzvah. That is to say, from the action, from the deed, from the tikkun (rectification) that was made or broken, from everything that occurred there remains a remembrance, there remains a kind of practical difference or a kind of memorial to that thing that happened in the world. These are the mitzvot that we learn. For example, from “And Korach took and his congregation” (Numbers 16:1) comes the mitzvah of Parashat Korach, one of the mitzvot, and there are other mitzvot and the like.

And we have already learned once that the same is true with the Exodus from Egypt. There is the deed that we left Egypt, that the Holy One, blessed be He, took us out from there, and there is also a mitzvah not to return, as it is written explicitly “You shall not continue to return on this path again” (Deuteronomy 17:16), where the verse explains explicitly that it is a mitzvah. The “you shall not continue” is a prohibition to return to Egypt, and opposite it there is a mitzvah to leave Egypt. Besides the fact that the deed was that we left Egypt, that the Holy One, blessed be He, took us out, there is a mitzvah for the Children of Israel to leave Egypt, and it is fulfilled by not going to Egypt to buy horses there and the like.

Two Paths: God’s Deeds and Human Deeds

Thus every deed can be depicted with the aspect that is God’s deed that the Holy One, blessed be He, does, that the Holy One, blessed be He, cast Korach into the earth and the like, and the aspect that people do, that they do afterward that same thing itself. And it is possible to express this in another way, and these are two paths that one must examine whether they align: that the deed itself is while the doubt still stands. That is to say, on one hand perhaps Korach is right and on the other hand perhaps Moses is right, on one hand perhaps one should strike the rock and on the other hand one should speak to the rock, and from this emerges something actually, a real deed, the Song of the Well. This we already say from the resolution of the doubt, like a conclusion of the matter. It is possible that both things align and it is possible that it is something else, and I do not know. But either way, we always want to learn from this to that.

And in other words, whenever we learn the deed we should understand that a mitzvah is hidden within it. And this is what is called in other language learning “on the path of service.” Everything that occurred, or we can even say this—what is the meaning of “path of service”? This is one of the words that we seek in recent lessons to clarify its meaning. For there is learning on the path of truth, or on the path of theory, and there is learning on the path of service. It is a somewhat difficult thing, and very common. This is one of the words very commonly used in Hasidic language, that they learned Kabbalah and the like on the path of service, but it is not at all clear what its meaning is.

What is the Path of Service: The Path of Deed versus Human Deeds

One of the possible explanations is this. The path of deed in its simple sense is things as they are, as the Holy One, blessed be He, made them, and included in it—and this is somewhat the opposite of the second path—that this is more in the category of the general, it is simple, it is so and not otherwise. Whereas the path of service is always to find what people do with it, and in other words what we do with it. And in truth, even when we learn a deed that occurred, even when we learn in the teaching of deed, we still learn on the path of service, for the establishment of Torah and the study of Torah is also service, is also a mitzvah, is also something we do. And in other words, it is also something that is not complete.

Clarified and Unclarified: What Does “Already Occurred” Mean

The language of the Kabbalists sometimes uses this language: there are things that are complete, which are called clarified and rectified, and there are things that are not complete. The complete things—we essentially have nothing in them, the Holy One, blessed be He, already completed them, already did them, they already were. “Which God created to do” (Genesis 2:3) already was, according to the simple meaning, “And the heavens and the earth were finished” (Genesis 2:1) already finished, and in what is finished you have nothing to do.

But when we learn even the six days of creation on the path of service, we say that the thing is not complete. What is written that it is complete—that there was tohu vavohu (chaos and void), and afterward light and darkness were made and the entire order of creation—is partial, a part was made. And the language of the Rashash is that the aspect of the six days of creation was already made, but the aspect of the gar (the three upper sefirot), the aspect of the mochin (intellects), the aspect of the three bound lights has not yet been made, and it is still being made when we make it.

And what does it mean at all when we say it already occurred, and what is its relevance to us? For if we say it already occurred, a difficulty arises. What do you prefer: if it has not yet occurred, if it still depends on choice and service, what benefit is there in your telling me a story? And it is even possible to say, what benefit is there in having a mitzvah here that seemingly says do this and do not do that, or at least one can say the mitzvah in a more general way, do what is proper and do not do what is improper—what benefit is this to me? The principle of the matter: on the part that is already known, on the part that is already clarified, service is not relevant, and service is only on the part that is not clarified, on the part that has not yet arrived, that Mashiach has not yet come. And on that part we do not know. So what benefit is it to me?

The Answer: We Learn from the Rectified about the Unrectified

The answer is that the order of tikkun depends on learning from the part that is already rectified. In other words, if it were indeed so, the thing would not begin at all; if the entire world were tohu vavohu one hundred percent, we would not even have with what to begin, we would not even know how to ask the question, we would not even know in what we are sick, in what we are broken, in what we are shattered, so that we could find a tikkun. And certainly we would not know, and secondly, we would not have a path—we would not know how to begin to do, and what at all to begin to do.

The fact that the Holy One, blessed be He, made the world, or that one can say in the Torah that already exists, the deeds that already occurred, and we already have a result, and we already learned from them that here is good and here is bad, that on the seventh day we rest and on the six days we work—the order of things is already clear to us. For if not, we would not know at every moment whether to rest or to work, whether to rest or to work, and we would not know. This has already become a fixed rule, “Six days you shall work and on the seventh day you shall rest” (Exodus 34:21). And now we know from this, and from this we learn, and this is like learning something from something, or from asking a sage half an answer. And the entire world, in the sense that it still has no answer—that the world has not yet done teshuva (repentance), that it is not yet, that we still stand in “today if you will hear His voice” (Psalms 95:7), that we do not yet stand in what has already been completed, in the complete tikkun, in Mashiach, in the future to come, in the end of days, we are not yet there.

The Connection Between the Rectified and the Unrectified

But even the part where we do not yet stand has, one can say, a certain structure, and is not completely lost, for the part that is already rectified is connected. The simple meaning is not that there is a part that is completely unrectified and a part that is rectified, and there is nothing between them. It is not so, but they are connected to each other. The part that is unrectified goes in the same order, or is connected in the same world, in the same structure, in the same form as the rectified part. And therefore, from what is already rectified we can learn toward the parts that are not rectified. And not that it is possible to copy and paste; for if it were possible to copy and paste simply, then the simple meaning is that it is already rectified, and one can say that what is lacking is literally like the completion of work, and we do not speak of this. We speak of the fact that one still needs to use knowledge, still to bring mochin in order to rectify the new parts, but this we learn from the parts that already were.

Learning Ma’aseh Bereishit and Ma’aseh Merkavah on the Path of Service

And this is the meaning of learning the comprehension, learning ma’aseh bereishit (the work of creation)—which is Kabbalah—ma’aseh bereishit and ma’aseh merkavah (the work of the chariot) on the path of service. Path of service means just as we learn Parashat Balak, Parashat Chukat, Parashat Korach, every parasha in the Torah on the path of service. On the path of service—people might think it means on the path of remez (hint), that everywhere they say this hints at the evil inclination and this at the good inclination. This is not worth money. But the depth of the matter is the recognition that all that we know that Balak and Bilam were wicked, and all those details of Bilam’s deed, and for example, in a simpler matter, all that we know that Pharaoh was wicked and we are the good ones—in this Mashiach has already come, that Mashiach already came, that thing was already resolved, that thing already finished, already was, and we have nothing to do with it.

That is to say, one who wants to learn as if not on the path of service, his intention is that it already occurred, and since it already occurred we have nothing to do with it. But on the other hand, if a person will say everything is on the path of service, and will say there is nothing here, perhaps Pharaoh is the righteous one and Moses the wicked, perhaps specifically Korach is the righteous one and Moses the wicked, if he says this completely—the thing teaches us nothing, and there is nowhere to begin, and therefore what shall we say, we remain in the world of doubt, in the world of complete doubt. And it is possible that in a certain sense there we all begin, every day and every moment, and all life begins, and indeed we know nothing.

But when we learn, and learn the deeds that are as if already holy and rectified, what we learn is that the thing is not yet complete, that we have not yet completely defeated Bilam, for if not we would not learn the deed. A great principle: an enemy we have already completely defeated does not stand in the Torah, but one we have not yet completely defeated stands in the Torah. But what we have already defeated to some extent—that we do not tell just failures, but we tell at least half a success or a certain success—that certain success teaches us how, in what manner, with what tactics, in what ways to deal with such a type of problem, and one can say literally with such a nation, or with such a problem more in spirituality, this is the simple meaning.

Thus learning on the path of service means also to understand that the deed that was was not predetermined, was not necessary to be so, but there was doubt in it and the doubt was resolved; and also that there is still today a certain doubt, that the doubt has not yet been completely resolved, but the part, the way in which we will resolve today’s doubt, we hope and try to use the forms and distinctions that already were, that the Holy One, blessed be He, already made. This is generally the process as I understand it. It is possible to explain it further more broadly and to bring more examples, but this is generally the process as I understand what learning on the path of service is.

The Deed of Parashat Balak

A Simple Summary of the Parasha

Now, then, let us try with this to approach the deed of our parasha. Here the truth should be said: the foundation I am about to say now is literally like a summary of a machine, and it is almost a blessing in vain. But this is a summary that the verse itself makes in a certain sense. However, the true learning is not this. The summary is: Bilam wanted to curse Israel, Balak wanted to hire Bilam to curse Israel, he hired him and wanted to pay. In practice he did not succeed, and instead of cursing Israel he blessed Israel, and said how good Israel is and how well it will be for them. These are more or less Bilam’s blessings.

And now we see literally as they say, that he read a long novel and it is about one war, one began and one finished. The Torah lengthens, there is great length here, the entire parasha: how he sent messengers twice to Bilam that he should come, and three times the angel stopped him on the way, and three times they took him to other places, and he offered sacrifices and said prophecies, and four times he said prophecies, and said three prophecies the fourth time, and said “Come, I will advise you what this people will do” (Numbers 24:14). All these details, I say, that we will not arrive at anything if we do not learn all these details. This is the sugya (Talmudic topic), and this is the way to truly enter the subject.

But it is still important, and presumably after we enter the subject in detail—which I have not done here and cannot do now—we will understand that the subject is something completely different. In other words, even though one can say the same title—and many times when learning a book, the same title and the same category I say—in truth its meaning is something else after learning than before learning.

The Summary of the Verse in Deuteronomy

The title is as written in the book of Deuteronomy, “Who hired against you Bilam son of Beor from Pethor of Aram Naharayim to curse you, and Hashem your God was not willing to listen to Bilam, and Hashem your God turned the curse into a blessing for you because Hashem your God loves you” (Deuteronomy 23:5-6). This is the summary verse of Parashat Balak. And there are even early commentators who learn such ways in the parasha, like the Rashbam, and one can even say that the reason the entire deed was written is to explain the verse. For it is written “An Ammonite and Moabite shall not enter the congregation of Hashem… because they did not greet you with bread and water on the way when you left Egypt and because he hired against you Bilam son of Beor” (Deuteronomy 23:4-5), and there is only one line there, “who hired against you.” And that same thing is mentioned in the book of Joshua, and Micah in the haftarah we read mentions it, and it is mentioned two or three times, and Yiftach mentioned it in last week’s haftarah. It turns out this is something mentioned, from the foundations of the mitzvah, and there is a message in it, and therefore we want to know what was. This is the deed.

Before Entering the Deed: The Questions

But in truth the deed is much more detailed, and before entering the deed it is proper simply to enter the service in it, the questions. What are the questions here mainly: why did he want to go, why did he want not to go, why did he want to bless, why did he want not to bless. There is doubt here, and one must understand what it is. But in the most general way this is the deed: he wanted to curse, he wanted to hire someone to curse, and in the end he blessed. This is the deed.

The Mitzvah: An Ammonite and Moabite Shall Not Enter

The Law of An Ammonite and Moabite Shall Not Enter

And from the deed comes a mitzvah, and there is a practical halachic difference, “An Ammonite and Moabite shall not enter the congregation of Hashem, even the tenth generation shall not enter the congregation of Hashem forever” (Deuteronomy 23:4). It is forbidden to marry an Ammonite and Moabite. “You shall not seek their peace and their good all your days forever” (Deuteronomy 23:7)—not only not to marry, but even not to seek their peace and good. And he learns that there is a law, that if we make war with Ammon and Moab we do not make a call for peace. There is a special law not to arrange their peace and good. And why? Because he is so wicked, because he did what he did—even though he did not succeed.

And this is an interesting thing. One can say that we discover that he is evil. Balak was hidden, Moab was hidden, and seemingly it would have been enough that we not go to him. And it was not enough, but we need to tell that he did not succeed. For if he had succeeded these would be good news, a problem.

However, what is relevant here to the matter? What enters into the law of “an Ammonite and Moabite shall not enter”? If he had succeeded, certainly we would forbid him with “an Ammonite and Moabite shall not enter the congregation of Hashem.” And the addition here, “and Hashem your God was not willing,” seemingly has no connection with “an Ammonite and Moabite shall not enter the congregation of Hashem.” It seems like something incidental, “and Hashem your God turned,” that it is mentioned that the Holy One, blessed be He, loves us. And it is possible. For in the book of Deuteronomy many times Moses our teacher seeks to remind Israel that the Holy One, blessed be He, helped them and that He loves them, and inserts this even in a place where it has no connection there. But it seems that here this also has a connection with the mitzvah, with the mitzvah of “an Ammonite shall not enter,” with the mitzvah of relating to Moab, with the mitzvah of “you shall not seek.” And one can say in the language “My people, remember now what Balak king of Moab counseled and what Bilam son of Beor answered him” (Micah 6:5), the verses in the haftarah, which is also in the category of remember something from this, understand something from this.

The Mitzvah as a Test and as Doubt

This sounds like a very simple mitzvah, like a black-and-white thing. Ammonite and Moabite, and nothing more. But it is simple and certain that in spirituality this is how we understand it, and I believe that even in this world, the depth of spirituality and also the practical side, earthliness, completely cynical materialism, are similar. So simple, that if we need to speak about this so much, and there is such a sharp verse, the meaning is that we have business here. We need to know to learn from him what his intention is, if he can convert, or perhaps the verse still does not know of the concept of conversion, and does not speak from the teaching of a convert—and it is possible that a female convert indeed helps, and it is even possible that if he converts he will not marry a Jew. We see that the Sages made from this a kind of law, and even though from the time of the Sages it is no longer practiced, in any case “an Ammonite and Moabite shall not enter the congregation of Hashem.”

But it is certain that if there is a verse, and we also see in the book of Nehemiah that he brings the verse and says that this was actually a question, the meaning is that there is a test here. And a test, in truth is very similar to doubt. For a test, when a person knows what he must do, this is not a test. A test means there is such an aspect, there is such a hava amina (initial assumption), there is such a case. In other words, there is a ruling that has not yet been decided. There is still an Ammonite and Moabite that we need to know if they belong to the congregation of Hashem or not. And what does this mean inwardly: what is the quality of Ammonite and Moabite, and if he belongs to the congregation of Hashem, and what is he doing wrong, and what is the thing that must be done or not done.

The Two Sins of Moab

And if we need to know what is Ammonite and Moabite, what he must do and what is forbidden to him, the verse says “because they did not greet you”—two things: “they did not greet you with bread and water,” and “who hired against you Bilam.” That is to say, if we want to fulfill, if we want to know how to fulfill the parasha, we need to greet Israel with bread and water, and also to hire for the blessing of Israel and not to hire for the curse of Israel, and to understand something better, the love of the Holy One, blessed be He, for Israel, the “because He loves you,” the “and He turned.”

The Secret of the Cup of Blessing

A Cup is the Quality of the Receiver

Behold we learned in the introductions to the Zohar about the “cup of blessing.” The “cup of blessing” is a word for the Shechinah (Divine Presence). And the “cup of blessing” we lift with two hands, we take it in the right hand so that the left will not grasp it. What we take in the right hand is “the cup of salvations I will lift,” the rose that is found among five mighty oaks.

And we must understand two things: first, why is it called a cup, and second, what is the cup of blessing. Cup means—and this is also written explicitly in other places—that cup in gematria is Elokim (God), and cup indicates the quality of the receiver. That is to say, the last quality. The last quality is when there already is, when there is already abundance, when there is already the reality that we call in this world, the last level, the end, the end of days, the last day, that Malchut (Kingship) is called the end of days, the last of the days called in the seven sefirot Shabbat, it already exists.

“She Has Nothing of Her Own”: The Shechinah Has No Choice

And now, from the aspect that it is a cup, from the aspect that it is like the moon, we say about it “she has nothing of her own.” What does it mean that she has nothing of her own? It means essentially that as if she has no choice. In other words, as we said, one who only receives the Torah, one who is only among those about whom it is written that a convert is called “under the wings of the Shechinah,” who only receives the Torah, he knows what is already good and what is already not good, and fulfills it. But he adds nothing of his own, he cannot add anything of his own, he does not have the ability, he is not that type of person. This is a cup, this is the last, this is the end.

And into this cup, since he cannot decide and cannot do anything, enters what enters. And therefore we say that the Shechinah has two qualities, and we said here white and red, like a rose whose root is in two colors. And in truth it is somewhat ridiculous to say she has two qualities in this sense. The simple meaning is that she has nothing. Chesed (kindness) and Gevurah (severity) are only, what comes, “I will praise from this and from this,” what comes—this she receives. She has no definition of her own. She has no definition of her own.

Therefore we say that the Shechinah has two qualities, and they said there is white and red, like “a rose among thorns” (Song of Songs 2:2), “a rose that has two colors.” And in truth it is somewhat ridiculous to say she has two qualities in this sense. The simple meaning is that she has nothing. Chesed and Gevurah are only, what comes, “In Him I will praise the word, in God I will praise the word” (Psalms 56:11). What comes—this she receives. She has no definition of her own. And if she has no definition of her own, then she is both this and that.

The Dispute of the Chazon Ish with the Chassidim About Bitachon

Now we need to understand if this thing is reconcilable. I mean: if the quality that we call to receive both chesed and gevurah—let us say, to each person according to his path to truth—is the quality neutral, or is the quality both chesed and gevurah, or is it neither of them. For it is possible to think—and in my opinion this is not correct, but initially one can think—that this is like the dispute that the Chazon Ish has with the Chassidim about the quality of bitachon (trust). The Chazon Ish says there are people, Chassidim, who think that bitachon means to believe that it will always be good, or that it is already good, to see that it is good, to believe and hope that it will be good, to trust that it will be good. This is the simple Chassidic meaning. And the Chazon Ish explains that it is not so. Who told you it will be good? Bitachon means that what occurred occurred, and what occurred the Holy One, blessed be He, does, and to accept what occurred. A person cannot know if it is good or not. This is the approach of the Chazon Ish.

According to the simple meaning of the Chazon Ish, as if the quality of Malchut is neutral. It has no color. It receives what it is. And the Chassidim say no, but it is essentially good. And one can understand that the Chassidic books always hold that if a person nullifies himself, if he goes to receive, “nullify your will”—and this is a Mishnah, “Nullify your will before His will so that He will make your will like His will” (Avot 2:4)—if he does that it does not concern him, it becomes good. And one must understand this: why will it become good?

Petor: The Secret of the Table

The Two Sins are One Sin

The truth is that the matter is more complex. I do not have enough to say this clearly today, but the truth is that the matter is more complex, and it is possible to understand it thus. We said there are two things, and this is somewhat a drash (homiletical interpretation), but it is more or less the drash of the Zohar. Let us say there are two things that Moab did not do properly: one, that they did not bring bread and water, and two, “because he hired against you Bilam son of Beor.” And it seems, and everyone asks the difficulty, that it is somewhat like something they say: murder, arson, and crossing the street not at a crosswalk. Indeed he wanted to kill them, and also did not bring bread and did not bring salt, and dipped the motzi without salt. The thing has no sense.

But the Zohar expounds thus, it is possible to expound according to the Zohar inwardly, and the Zohar says that it is written “Bilam son of Beor from Petor.” “Petor” son of Haran is from the language of table. Like a table that is written “who set a table for Gad” (Isaiah 65:11), and it is written “And you shall make a table… and you shall set upon the table showbread before Me continually” (Exodus 25:23-30). There is a table that we set before Hashem. And that table, as we see that they make the table similar to the altar, and the Shabbat table of ours, a Shabbat table, or they make the altar itself as a table, or the table that they would place there. And there is “who set a table for Gad,” that they would set a table for the constellation, a kind of sorcery like this.

The Lights That a Person Makes, Thus He Receives

The Zohar says that the truth is that this is how the thing works. The truth is that as we set, so we receive. And this is the foundation that the Zohar calls it, that the lights that a person makes, thus he receives. This is a very difficult foundation—and not that it is difficult, but that we say it and do not understand what its meaning is. We need to understand, for example, one practical difference, that is written explicitly in the Zohar, in last week’s parasha, regarding Elijah on Mount Carmel with those people who fought there, the prophets of the Baal.

We are accustomed, that they will say thus—and I am not speaking just the simple Lithuanian meaning—to think that the Holy One, blessed be He, is the master, and this is the faith. The faith is that the Holy One, blessed be He, is the master of ability over everything. And all kinds of Bilam, he can curse from today until tomorrow, it will not harm us, he has no power.

And one who understands a bit, and one who learns Parashat Balak, sees that this is not the simple meaning. If the Holy One, blessed be He, loved them so much, He should have nullified Bilam’s curses. One can say rationalistic simple meanings, that Balak thought, and one can say all kinds of answers, but it is very clear from the deed itself that we take Bilam’s curses seriously. Bilam is not just—even though the Holy One, blessed be He, indeed wants, the Holy One, blessed be He, does not want, and this is a very complex sugya to understand, but it is certain that Bilam indeed can do something. As it is written in all the early commentators who argue, for example if the Rambam, and all the Rambam—and this is not our discussion now—that there is power to sorcery, for example, and they ask what its meaning is.

The Table Does Nothing: It Only Takes What is Set Upon It

And the Zohar explains that there is an order. That is to say, in other words, this that we say that the world is a receiver, the table—what kind of receiver is it? A table is a tish (table) upon which we place things. The table is not something that does things. The earth sprouts things, “who brings forth bread from the earth,” the earth does something as if; even the earth is a kind of receiver that does things. But the table does nothing, we place prepared food upon it, we place upon it, and it takes what we place upon it. As they say “the paper suffers everything,” the paper suffers everything. A table is something that suffers everything. We place stuffed fish upon it—behold it is stuffed fish; we place lettuce upon it—behold it is lettuce; we place sweets upon it—there is no difference, it is a table.

Setting the Table: What We Prepare, Thus It Comes

And now, this table it is possible to set, as it is written “You set before me a table opposite my enemies” (Psalms 23:5). A table, as if a guest comes and we set a table for him, we prepare a table in honor of a guest, in honor of Shabbat, in honor of something. And that type of table that we are about to prepare, that type of thing it is about to bring. The simple meaning is not that he will bring a gift and think what table. We will speak of the mood of the guests, of the mood of the person sitting at the table. When a person prepares a table, this is such a preparation, such a preparation of preparing a table for Shabbat, great work.

And afterward, an interesting thing, a person is likely to think—and we do not deal enough with returning the heart to a broader matter, what is called circular causality, things that work a bit less than the simple simple meaning, a bit more complex. One says: ‘Indeed I made the table, so what does it matter to me that the table is set nicely?’ Thus one is likely to say, a great Litvak like this, a rationalist: ‘What does it matter to me? Indeed I myself made the table, it should be nice. Why should I be impressed that it is nice?’ But it is not so. After a person sets the table, and it is set nicely—and indeed a table is only preparation—he places the cup there, and a cup is part of the preparation, it is a table as we spoke, he places a cup, places a bowl, chair, plate, all these things, the fork, everything vessels, he prepares the vessels. And afterward he sits, and with this a meal is appropriate.

And suddenly, we will speak of the spirituality, of the feeling. We spoke at a meal, and we did not think this week—a wedding, and they even detailed, ‘one who enjoys a wedding meal does not bring joy.’ For one who enjoys is one who thinks that a meal is a place where we eat. No, but simply the joy of the groom.

One Who Toiled on Erev Shabbat: The Union of Person and Table

And here, according to what he prepared himself, like “one who toiled on Erev Shabbat will eat on Shabbat” (Avodah

One Who Toiled on Erev Shabbat: The Union of Person and Table

And here, according to what he prepared himself, like “one who toiled on Erev Shabbat will eat on Shabbat” (Avodah Zarah 3a). There is also the simple simple meaning, that he will not have what to be ashamed of. And there is also, that he prepared for himself such a beautiful golden plate. Now, the food that we place upon it is not the same food as food that we place on a paper plate. This is the fact. And I am not speaking now—even the taste tastes different, for a person tastes with his mind, a person does not taste only with his senses, but tastes with his mind, tastes with his soul, with what he is as a person. It is certain that he feels differently, that he is different.

Thus one who prepares the table—even if a person sits alone by himself, even if a person sits alone, he prepared the table and afterward sits at it, as it is written that one must sit by the table, for it is a yichud (unification). A person with a table is a yichud. A table is Malchut. A person is Tiferet (Beauty). “Like the beauty of a person to dwell in a house” (Isaiah 44:13). A person sits by a table—this is a yichud. And one must eat from the fish. These are already hints how a person should conduct himself literally in his sitting.

But the very preparation of the table makes the thing occur—not the simple meaning that one does not need to cook separately, one needs to cook separately, but the preparation, like the preparation of the vessels, makes the abundance come in this way. If a person prepares a table thus, neither here nor there, the meal will be neither here nor there. And when he sets it nicely and prepares it, the meal is to the point, it has taste. He places a zemirot (song booklet), places his silver goblet, what a person has—these are mitzvot of kavod Shabbat (honoring the Shabbat).

Kavod Shabbat versus Oneg Shabbat: The Question of the Chazon Ish

He distinguishes between kavod (honor) and oneg (delight). And I saw an interesting thing—and I do not disagree with the Chazon Ish, I believe everything is the approach of the Chazon Ish, and I am not saying there are no things that are difficult to decide—I saw in one of the books of the Chazon Ish a question, that there is a contradiction between kavod Shabbat and oneg Shabbat. And what is the contradiction? That for example, kavod Shabbat is to sit in a bekitche (robe) at the meal, but oneg Shabbat is to sit without the bekitche, if it is hot, in the climate of Bnei Brak. And he asked, what prevails, kavod or oneg? And presumably it depends. But I believe that if one will say that oneg always prevails over kavod, he does not understand even the oneg. For kavod Shabbat means this, that he sets a table, prepares the table. As we learn, “A person should always set his table on Motza’ei Shabbat even though he only needs a kezayit (olive’s volume)” (Shabbat 119b). And Motza’ei Shabbat, I believe its simple meaning is seudah shlishit (the third meal), there is no difference. When we prepare the meal, even though he does not need to eat—meaning that the eating is a side matter. But in other words, the spiritual abundance, a table is not the simple meaning that it is oneg. The truth is that the oneg is according to the kavod, according to how much he prepares the candles, places flowers, places all kinds of things that are beauty.

The Flowers Make the Fish Taste Better

And it is not as the rationalists often think—it is not rational, by the way. I just call this rational all the time, and in truth it is something else: a person who has no taste, a person who has no vitality in his life, is a dry person. What does it matter to you that you have flowers? It is not written in the Gemara that one must buy flowers for Shabbat—I am not saying. What will rebuke you about the flowers? The flowers make the fish taste better. This is how it is. The flowers, in other words, according to Kabbalah, this is what is written in the Zohar.

This is how the Zohar understands, and the Zohar places this at much higher levels of reality, but one must know to understand at one level, and afterward it is possible to place it at greater levels. That we place flowers on the table, this is the rose, “a rose among thorns” (Song of Songs 2:2), and this makes that to the table will come better challah, better wine. A nicer cup makes the wine become better. This is the fact. And one can even say thus: a person has a nice cup, he has a good goblet for kavod Shabbat, it is not appropriate that he place cheap Kedem wine in it, he pours, it has no taste. He has a cup, he buys a golden goblet, and in the golden goblet—if it is expensive wine, if there is taste. And this also awakens in the person his desire. But even let us say he has what he has, it will still be a different type of wine, it will still be a different type of abundance. The preparation of the receiver makes the abundance.

Backward Causality: The Returning Light

Even though the receiver initially receives only what it is, the matter is much more complex than this. There is also backward causality here, even something I did myself returns afterward to me. It returns in a cycle, like returning light. I do something myself and it returns to me. This is how the world works, the entire world. The Holy One, blessed be He, made the world, everything He made very good, and afterward as if this returns to Him, He receives pleasure from the world, He receives—meaning from where. And afterward, how do we understand this, with the Holy One, blessed be He, with all the theological problems there are—we express in a small way the idea, that there can be such a thing, that it can be that a person did something and afterward enjoys from it, becomes a receiver from the thing he did. A wonder. I am the master of the house, I made the table—what is my enjoyment from the table? But thus, it passes, and thus the enjoyment is written: if we prepare the table before he comes home, and he comes home from the synagogue and the table is set—he himself prepared, or his wife prepared, it is set—and now he enjoys, he receives from this inspiration, he receives from this orchin (guests), because it is set. This is how the world works.

Bilam and Setting the Table for Evil

Moab Cannot Curse: He Must Set a Table

And this is the meaning of the cup of blessing. And now we need to understand, seemingly we should teach that here is the subject of Bilam, and first of all we need to understand that the two of Moab—and I believe this is even in the Zohar, even though I did not examine the language now, but I saw that it speaks of the matter—that the two sins of Moab are one sin. The “they did not greet you with bread and water” is the same thing itself as “he hired against you Bilam son of Beor to curse you.” And why? Because Israel comes, “Behold a people has come out of Egypt” (Numbers 22:5). Moab says: I am passive, I am Moab, I am the part certainly connected to the quality of Malchut, the honor of the king. Necessarily Moab is a subject of malchut, malchut of holiness or malchut that is not proper, I understand.

And when they come, I cannot do anything. What can I do? I need to find one who understands, he has power in the mouth, one who understands the quality of Malchut, who understands how to deal with a problem in which I cannot do anything, that I cannot curse. I can ask that Bilam curse, and even this I cannot do, but I can pay him.

The Torah says: Who told you that you cannot do anything? Set a table for this. Israel leaving Egypt, prepare them, set yourself—instead of the daughters of Moab that you sent, set yourself with bread and water. This is the problem. And this is the reality. They say, for example, literally according to the simple meaning, that a person—sometimes a person comes and he is dangerous, and the first thing they remove you.

The Zohar’s Question: Why Did They Not First Honor Bilam

I saw that the Zohar asks a very beautiful question, very beautiful because it expresses how the Zohar understood what should have been done, and it answers without moving from the basic assumption. The Zohar asks thus: We see that Bilam toiled with Balak, and Balak toiled with Bilam, he does not want to come, he does not want to come, he does not honor him enough, he honors him enough. The Zohar says: I do not understand, Balak is foolish, you know it is not so, that when we want something from a person, first we honor him and afterward we ask from him what we need. Why, says the Zohar, should Balak have sent first to Bilam words of peace, words of honor, you are a great prophet, you are a great blessed one, and to give him gifts and all kinds of things, and afterward he should have said: You know what, perhaps you will curse Israel for me? This would have been proper. Why the first thing, “And he sent messengers to Bilam,” the first thing “Behold a people has come out of Egypt… Come now, curse for me” (Numbers 22:5-6)? This is foolishness.

The Zohar answers and says: From this we see that Bilam’s greatest pleasure was to curse Israel. This was for him the gift. Not that they did not bring afterward kesomim (divination fees) and kesamim (sorcery fees), they brought something, kesomim are gifts. But this very thing was setting the table for Bilam. And we see clearly—and this everyone understands—that when we want to ask something from a person, first we honor him with bread and water, even if he is your enemy, “from much hatred I fed him bread.” We see many times that this works on everything.

Setting a Table Works: Even with Enemies

First, I once saw an Israeli who spoke—a long time ago—how to speak with the enemies, whether to make peace or not. He said: I do not know if they will make peace, I do not know. One thing: if we speak, we already stand better. And why? That if I speak with another, even if we sit in the same room, first of all I know that he does not eat glass, he is a person, he eats, we drink coffee together, and already—I am not speaking of this, they think it is bribery, an action. But this is setting a table, this works.

And that same thing itself is with the Holy One, blessed be He. Now, there is an obligation “we should greet Moab with bread and water,” meaning before Shabbat we receive him, but every morning, “Modeh Ani” (I give thanks). And I am not saying God forbid that what he does is good; you are not acknowledging something new, you are not grasping that if we make a l’chaim, if we make a lechacha (toast) and a drink, the countenance looks different. This truly changes the abundance, and I am not speaking of the fact that the Zohar further lengthens on this that indeed this is how the thing works, it changes, and it truly works thus. This is the foundation of “we should greet with bread and water,” which is the same secret.

Sorcerers Understand Setting a Table for Evil

Now, then we understand, and the Zohar says that Bilam and all the sorcerers understand this very well. The sorcerers are not crazy, the sorcerers do this. The sorcerers are people who know how to arouse the impurity, how to set a table so that it will be evil, so that he can kill Israel with it. This is what he does, this is Bilam’s work, and it is great work, there was great toil, he had to find, to make a miracle, to find advice how to turn a curse into a blessing.

The Role of the Tzaddik: Not to Let the Holy One, Blessed Be He, Sit

Rabbi Nachman: Why Do We Let the Holy One, Blessed Be He, Sit

But the truth is that the turning of curse into blessing, I believe it is possible to understand—it sounds a bit laughable, I do not know if so, one needs to go into more complex depth also in this—but I believe it is possible to understand that what Bilam says all the time, “What Hashem puts in my mouth, that I will speak” (Numbers 22:38), this is not a Chassidic way of speaking.

There is in the name of Rabbi Nachman of Breslov that he said he does not understand why we let the Holy One, blessed be He, sit. He spoke a difficulty on the tzaddikim. Then they spoke, when the decrees of the Cantonists of the Czar began, that there were great troubles for Israel. Rabbi Nachman said: It seems to him that all the tzaddikim are too calm, too satisfied with what the Holy One, blessed be He, does. Why do they sit and let the Holy One, blessed be He, do what He wants? And is this the role of a tzaddik, to let the Holy One, blessed be He, do what He wants? “What Hashem puts in my mouth, that I will speak”? To be nullified?

And what is written, what is the role of a Jew? The role of a Jew, certainly one cannot tell the Holy One, blessed be He, what to do—but how do we do Him good? Set a table for Him. The Holy One, blessed be He—and the truth is so, and I am not now saying the theology in the matter, I am saying the practical side—the truth is that only good comes, but how is it done, how did Bilam think he would do evil, that he would make sacrifices, a kind of sacrifices that cause to arouse judgments, he will arouse judgments on Israel.

But in a somewhat deeper sense, he sought to find all the problems, and this indeed exists in truth, it is objective, objectively there are always problems, objectively there are parts of destruction in the world, this is the objective. But who told you to be so passive? Who told you to let the Holy One, blessed be He, do what He wants? Set a table!

The Principle Works for Good and for Evil

And this is the truth, and the truth is that we did this, we defeated Bilam, and we also brought into Bilam that he should do so, and one must examine—this is the version, one must examine in the verses, in the entire order, and I believe this can only be at the end, and perhaps we will be able to learn the parasha on Shabbat with this finally—but we need to find how Bilam, this very thing was something that the Holy One, blessed be He, aroused him to do so that a blessing would be made.

And the truth is that Balak was right, that you do not want, you want, he makes himself as if. A person receives what he gives, the truth, and one must remember. This is a principle that works for good and for evil. If a person wants evil, he receives evil; if a person wants good, he will set such a table that such a cup will come. He will prepare such a goblet that such wine will come. This is how the thing works. Bilam prepared such a goblet. And the truth is that it seems he had to change also his will, that he should prepare a goblet that the blessing will come in it. It is impossible that he truly wants to say curses and a blessing will come out. There is no such thing. This is against the laws of prophecy, against wisdom.

Elijah on Mount Carmel: The Prophets of Baal Forgot

The Zohar says this with Elijah on Mount Carmel last week, and then the thing became so clear to me. It is written “And they called in a loud voice” as if they did not hear. Elijah repeated and said “And they made cuts according to their custom.” They made their meal, and fire did not come from heaven. The prophets of Baal were not crazy, they knew well that it should have come. And therefore the Gemara says “Answer us Hashem, answer us”—the opposite simple meaning, but in any case, it was a miracle that they forgot, they forgot their intentions, they forgot how to do this, and therefore the fire did not come. If they had succeeded, if they had remembered, it would have come.

And that same thing itself with Bilam. If Balak’s plan had succeeded in his hand, if he had brought his kesomim and his gifts, it would have succeeded in his hand. The fact that Bilam did not take Balak’s gifts seems to be part of the miracle. But we need to understand that this is the way the world works.

Return to the Halachah: An Ammonite and Moabite Shall Not Enter

Moab: One Who Does Not Prepare Himself

In other words—and we will return and derive a practical halachah—the service of “an Ammonite and Moabite shall not enter the congregation of Hashem.” Ammonite and Moabite mean, I will say thus: Moab is “me’av” (from father), as it is written, that Lot’s daughter called her son Moab, “me’av.” And Moabite means one who says that everything is from the Father, from Wisdom, from the Holy One, blessed be He, and he does not prepare himself even for this. This is Ammonite and Moabite. Ammonite and Moabite is the quality of “what will come will come.” And there is no such quality. This is “shall not enter the congregation of Hashem.” We must greet with bread and water. That we should greet with bread and water, and through this we will turn the curse into a blessing. The curse is from the side of judgment, the curse is that in reality there are curses. But when we greet with bread and water, then we turn the curse into a blessing.

The Tzaddik Places the Cup in the Right Hand

This is all the service of the sacrifices. How do we do the opposite? A sacrifice comes, we appease with it, we turn the quality of judgment into the quality of mercy. Tzaddikim who are indeed complete tzaddikim—and this is what I say—take the cup and place it in the right hand. This is the work of a tzaddik, to place the cup in the right hand. In other words, to make such a cup that only blessing will be appropriate in it. This is the role of a person in the world.

And what we must do is not a simple thing to do, and many times our mind is confused from reality.

This reversal is a double blessing. This is all the service of the sacrifices. Even if you do the opposite, a sacrifice appeases, turns in secrets and with mercy. Tzaddikim when the decree went out—the Holy One, blessed be He, sweetens in secrets, as they say, he takes the cup and places it in the right hand. This is the work of the tzaddik, to place the cup in the right hand. In other words, you make such a cup that only blessing will be appropriate in it. This is the role of a person in the world.

An Invitation of Settling the Mind

And what we must do is not a simple thing to do. Many times our mind is confused from reality, many times our mind is confused from the Holy One, blessed be He. But for this there is an invitation of settling the mind, for this there is bread and water. We need to settle and make an invitation of settling the mind for Shabbat, a few minutes. This is a simple thing. Then I prepare the bread and water, I prepare a cup, and I lift a cup, and in this cup I want blessing to enter and not curse.

Purity and Holiness: The Secret of Physical Pleasures and the Accusation of Bilaam the Wicked

Dear friends, today is Erev Shabbos Parshas Chukas-Balak, and in Eretz Yisrael it is only Parshas Balak. It seems to me that our shiur’s subject is more about Balak than Chukas, and perhaps someone will find some connection to Parshas Chukas as well, but surely it is impossible to learn the entire parsha.

Investigating Two Parshiyos Read Together

There is a well-known investigation, from the Lubavitcher Rebbe I believe, or from others, regarding two parshiyos that are read together: Is the simple understanding that these are two parshiyos, but we combine them and learn both; or perhaps the simple understanding is different, namely that we must divide the parshiyos over the year, and when the year is short and doesn’t have as many Shabbosos, we divide the parshiyos differently — such that in truth this is one parsha. And the practical difference regarding this matter is: for we are not obligated to say pshat in the Torah on every deed and deed in the parsha and on every parsha and parsha within it, for we only speak about a portion. And therefore, if we say this is one large parsha but they divided it differently, there is no problem speaking only about one of the parshiyos, just as there is no problem not speaking about the entire parsha every time we engage with it.

Whereas those who hold that these are two parshiyos, but there is here an encompassing holiness of two Shabbosos — according to what we spoke in previous weeks that there is a point of truth in the text of the parshiyos, that one should not change the order of the thirteen parshiyos that were established in them intentionally — according to them one should indeed speak from both parshiyos, for this is a double parsha. And accordingly it would also be fitting to make two kugels on Shabbos when there are two parshiyos, just as on a special Shabbos when we take out two sifrei Torah — Shabbos Mevorchim, or Shabbos of the four parshiyos, or Shabbos Rosh Chodesh when we read two subjects — it would be fitting to conduct ourselves this way also with two parshiyos.

But in practice we don’t find this, we don’t see that people are happier when two parshiyos are read, except for the baal korei who must toil harder and prepare two parshiyos. It appears therefore that the simple pshat is that this is one long parsha, but we divide it differently and interrupt it differently, because it must be completed within the year. This seems to me the simple and correct pshat, and the entire investigation is not such a serious investigation.

In any case, therefore we will speak primarily from Balak, and whoever finds a connection also in Chukas — he too will be happy.

Purity: Negation of the Mixture of Physical Pleasures

We are thus returning to the order of Eretz Yisrael, and in that very order, for they have already read Parshas Balak there. And we must still continue and explain the matters we left from the previous shiur — the question of holiness and purity in a special way regarding physical pleasures, bodily pleasures. We said that there are here two levels that we call purity and holiness.

And it is understood that this relates to Parshas Chukas, for it speaks of purity from tumas meis (impurity of the dead). But I already noted in that shiur — and I already dealt with this in a shiur from several years ago on Parshas Chukas, and one should look into it — that purity means that a person grasps only the life-force within him, which is the portion of the soul in man, the spiritual part, the intellectual part, and this is purity, for man is alive, and this is the foundation of tumas meis.

Every person is alive, but tumas meis highlights the matter even more: that he is mixed, the impurity is not pure, it is not like a pure wolf alone, it is not only a destructive force, but it is mixed — life and death together. And in other words: it is mixed body and soul, or physical pleasures and spiritual pleasures together, according to our way. And the purity of Shabbos Kodesh must be in a way that a person cleanses himself from physical pleasure, and there should be in him only spiritual pleasure, pleasure of the intellect, pleasure of the soul, pleasure of Torah, pleasure of prayer, pleasure of service of Hashem. This is what is truly called purity.

A Distinction That Still Requires Explanation

After this there is holiness. And the holiness I did not explain clearly — what is the difference between it and purity. And in truth it seems to me that I don’t have a clear explanation now, but I emphasized certain questions and even certain verses that one should contemplate and discuss.

Holiness appears to be a positive thing. And from where do I know this? We said, and we will explain in depth what the distinction is. I said that purity is the negation, negation of the mixture of physical pleasures, the mixture with the body. And this very thing must be understood better — what is the nature of the involvement with the body. And therefore I use the language ‘life-force’ instead of ‘life and death’, for the root, the essence of purity, is that the father of fathers of impurity is tumas meis, and the father of fathers of purity is to live. And therefore there is no place even for a hava amina that the intention is chas v’shalom to die, but it must be understood in terms of life-force. But this is not our main subject now; our subject is to understand a bit what holiness is.

The Foundation of Washing Hands, Cleanliness and Preparation

Holiness — this, we say, is the ‘good side’ of the matter, the life-force itself, or according to our way, the drawing down of light as it is called in Kabbalah. That is, in Kabbalah it is explained that one must push away the external forces and draw down the light, as is learned much in the writings of the Arizal and in the mekubalim.

The order is explained in the Gemara, ‘One who wishes to accept upon himself the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven completely… should relieve himself and wash his hands and put on tefillin and recite Shema and pray’ (Berachos 14b-15a) — a person who wishes to accept the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven completely. And the Arizal explains at length that one of the foundations of the explanations of the kavanos of Shacharis every day is built on this Gemara, and he explains that all this corresponds to the four worlds.

But in any case, what are the first two things here? They are ‘his face, hands and feet’, to remove the waste, to remove the evil in the body. Just as in the body in a physical way waste accumulates — during eating waste accumulates and must be removed — so too here. There is cleanliness, and ‘cleanliness leads to purity’, and there is deeper waste. Washing hands is already a bit more refined, this is not exactly the filth of the body that comes out from the orifices, but filth that is on the body.

And after this there are even deeper kelippos, from thoughts, from speech, from the more internal parts of man, and there more subtle mixtures. And all this is an aspect of purity, an aspect of preparation, ‘I will wash my hands in cleanliness and encircle Your altar, Hashem’ (Tehillim 26:6), to purify oneself from the mixture in which a person is mixed. When he rises, every day a person becomes somewhat mixed, for whatever reason — I don’t know what the reality is, and there is no need to justify it, everyone knows this — and he must purify himself a bit: goes to the mikveh, washes his hands, and all kinds of purifications that exist.

Honor of Shabbos: Washing Face, Hands and Feet

Or as before Shabbos it is customary to go to the mikveh, or in any case according to the law one must wash. The Rambam rules this exactly as an obligation, as we learned this week: honor of Shabbos — ‘washes his face, hands and feet in hot water on Erev Shabbos’ (Rambam Hilchos Shabbos 30). And everyone understands that washing face, hands and feet in hot water, or immersion in a mikveh that the mekubalim added apparently, is nothing but cleanliness and purity — cleaning from the mundane of the weekdays, this is the intention, the main intention of immersion on Erev Shabbos: cleaning from the mundane, cleaning from the accumulated filth.

There is external filth — a person works and becomes dirty; and there is internal filth — he has all kinds of mixtures, read too much news, good news, bad news, there is no difference, became confused, became bewildered, scattered and dispersed because of them. One cleans, one clarifies — this is purity.

Immersion for Additional Holiness: A Parenthetical Statement

But all this is only preparation for holiness, ‘purity leads to holiness’, everything is only preparation for Shabbos itself. And on Shabbos itself we don’t wash. True, among us Chassidim go to the mikveh on Shabbos in the morning, and there is in this also an additional matter, that it is possible to do the next level of holiness and purity. Incidentally, I don’t truly understand this matter well.

That is, if one must go to the mikveh because of a certain impurity — incidentally, there is in this also a mitzvah, but there is in this a certain impurity, whatever the law may be perhaps the prayer of Ezra — I understand that they would go to the mikveh on Shabbos morning. But what the Arizal says that one should go to the mikveh even one who did not become impure, even just so, for additional holiness — I must say that in my humble opinion I don’t understand this. Perhaps someone will explain it. And I am not saying that one doesn’t do this, and I am not saying what I do in practice and what is fitting to do in practice, but I am only saying that according to what I am learning here, it is very difficult for me to understand the concept of immersion for additional holiness, the matter doesn’t settle for me. Immersion is about purity, not holiness. One doesn’t become holy from going to the mikveh.

The Kohen Gadol and the Five Immersions

It is understood that one can ask from what is visible: Didn’t the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kippur perform five immersions and ten sanctifications? If so we see that there is a matter of separation between level and level perhaps through immersion. And this must be understood. And perhaps one can say that the matter depends on the value: according to the value of the holiness of Shabbos day there is Shabbos as it exists. And this is the difficulty you raise — for there are Chassidim who go to the mikveh before shofar blowing on Rosh Hashanah, for example.

And there was some Chassidic Jew, I don’t remember, a Chassidic rebbe, from the Ropshitz line I believe, who said he doesn’t understand why they would go to the mikveh. But if he already went to the mikveh before Shacharis, he doesn’t understand why he would go to the mikveh again after Shacharis before shofar blowing. He said: Did Shacharis make you impure? Shacharis cannot make one impure.

And what is the question? It depends on understanding. If we say that there is in general a matter of immersion for additional holiness — not for additional purity. For in purity there are laws, there are levels of purity, purity from tumas meis, from tumas sheretz, from an av hatumah, from a vlad hatumah and so on; but there is apparently no relevance to making additional purity. And as mentioned, this is a parenthetical statement, and this is not our subject. I am only saying that it requires explanation — the concept of immersion for additional holiness requires explanation, for apparently immersion is about cleanliness and purity, and is not about drawing down light and drawing down holiness. For drawing down holiness must be a different action, positive work, not of purification but of bringing light, of learning, of prayer, of doing actual mitzvos, from things that actually draw down light — or eating, and we will still contemplate this. But immersion I don’t see, except for what is said that there are levels: according to the value of Mussar, according to the value of shofar blowing — Shacharis made one impure. And one can say ‘impure’ for the sake of distinguishing between kodesh and kodesh.

Shabbos is Drawing Down Light: The Positive Holiness

In any case, on Shabbos we don’t go to the mikveh, we don’t practice decrees and partitions, we don’t wash face, hands and feet on Shabbos. Shabbos is not immersion, Shabbos is drawing down the light, it is holiness. As one can say afterward, as the Ramak says, that afterward he dons his beautiful Shabbos garments, the beketshe, the tallis with the tzitzis, as the Ramak says, wraps himself and wears beautiful garments and receives the holiness of Shabbos, Shabbos the Queen, Shabbos the King. This is drawing down the light, this is holiness, the positive holiness.

The Root of Purity: The Attribute of Malchus and the Attribute of Gevurah

And the matter is thus, and I request to explain these two levels. Let us first say a foundation, a kabbalistic foundation, a theological foundation, how to understand the root — what is the root of these two things. And it will be understood by all, and we already spoke about this before. The root of purity is the attribute of Malchus, and one can call it the attribute of Gevurah. And in other words, as we learned in the first shiur on this subject — there, in the place where is the gate to Hashem, in the place where we enter, as in the entrance of Shabbos, in Kabbalas Shabbos, meaning that we acknowledge that it is in the aspect of queen or aspect of malchus.

As you enter Shabbos — this is the aspect of queen or aspect of malchus, which is the last level. In the place where we begin, going out from the mundane, and there a person must separate, and there is holiness called separation. And this we now call purity. There a person must separate from the filth, from external things, and enter toward Shabbos.

The Created Side and the Creator Aspect Within It

Thus this matter relates, one can say, to the created beings, in terms of relationship. With the Holy One Blessed be He Himself there is certainly no purity. He is blessed and pure, He is holy from His essence, for He is separate, withdrawn and separated from the entire world. And one can say that He is blessed the greatest separation, but not separate in the sense we spoke about last week, of purity, like purity from tumas meis — there we spoke, as the Zohar says that we learned last week in Zohar Chukas, that all this is in terms of danger, and it relates to the Levites, and therefore one who touches it becomes impure, for he touches the impurity that relates there, and it relates to the attribute that touches the created beings.

And certainly there is here also — and it is necessary to say there is here also — an aspect of drawing down holiness, that one can call it the attribute of Gevurah: ‘cedar wood and hyssop and crimson thread’ (Bamidbar 19:6) that are thrown into the red heifer. The red heifer is said about the gevuros in malchus, but the cedar wood is the key thrown inside. And this is a certain power, a power of standing in a test that a person receives, and one can call it in service certain boundaries that he has, or courage that he receives, or a certain wisdom, a kind of special and particular light that is made to push away the external forces. It is made to stand against, to be standing in a test, to push away, and to make a distinction between Shabbos and weekday.

And all this, and nevertheless — even the level that you can say about it that it is somewhat positive, let us call it a certain courage, that a person overcomes, that he is a hero who conquers his inclination, and there is in it the attribute of Gevurah, it is already a positive thing, not only the negation of ‘don’t do this’, but there is in it a kind of affirmation — nevertheless this is the assisting part. And how is it the assisting part, and how is holiness distinguished, how is good distinguished from evil: good is a principle, and good must have a gatekeeper, and good must also be good that has no connection with evil at all. The lower level must have a gatekeeper, the guarding that we learned in Parshas Shelach, the aspect of ‘and you shall not stray after your hearts’ (Bamidbar 15:39).

Purity in Eating and Anointing with Oil: Water and Oil

And now we find that purity is the attribute that relates entirely to the created being. One cannot say ‘be pure as I am pure’. ‘Be pure in order to approach Me’ — this one can say; ‘be pure in order not to be impure’, in order to be alive. For ‘one who is impure’ is the law — one who is impure, the Temple of Hashem is impure, and he is not permitted to enter the Temple, lest he make the Temple impure, one must distinguish between the holy and the impure, and an impure person is not permitted to enter the Temple. But this is not enough — this is not enough to become holy, and holiness is not enough to be pure. Holiness and purity are not the same thing.

And one can see this — it seems to me that the matter of anointing with the anointing oil that is with the vessels, in the dedication of the Mishkan, in the education of the vessels, in the education of the Kohen, the Kohen Gadol and his brothers, ‘and you shall sanctify them with the anointing oil’ — relates more to holiness. And in other words: purification of the vessels, if they became impure they must be immersed, and this is purity, and this is the law that appears here throughout, that one doesn’t enter the Temple in impurity; but this is not enough, one must also draw down the holiness of the Temple. And for the holiness of the Temple there is a certain positive work, and it is symbolized — becomes a symbol — when they make the holy vessels and the holy people, it is symbolized and actualized in this world through anointing with oil. This is drawing down: oil is holy, as the Zohar says; oil indicates holiness. We learned last week, for example, that a Kohen has anointing and a Levi has no anointing, for the Levi stands on guard, and the Kohen — this is drawing down holiness, and holiness is the attribute of Chochmah from the right line. Oil is drawing down the light, it is what causes holiness to be brought into a vessel or into a person doing this.

Water, Wine and Song

As if to say: water relates to purity, water purifies, mei chatas (waters of purification), water with certain other components, but water is about purity, and oil is about holiness. And one can also speak of wine — wine also relates to purity. And why? For other reasons, for wine arouses the person, heats him up. And to drink wine in holiness — true, perhaps there are two parts in this, but one part of drinking wine is, as they say, ‘we only say song over wine’ (Berachos 35a). Everyone knows that song is a movement of purity. Song — most song dissolves, perhaps here, I say, it’s possible there are two kinds of songs, but generally, as we see when a person sings, sings zemiros, sings songs and praises, he does this to elevate himself, to leave himself a bit, to connect with the pleasure of the soul, to leave the pleasure of the body — this is song, and this is done over wine, and the wine itself arouses the person.

And a person who has no holiness at all — don’t give him wine to drink; and you too, don’t drink wine. And I am not entering the topic of wine, but I see that there are things here that need to be clarified so the structure fits. In any case, the virtue of drinking wine for a person who indeed has a certain holiness — as they say that on Purim we drink wine, or that Shabbos is a mitzvah to drink wine at Kiddush — its meaning is that the drinking in it is about the purity in it. And in other words: since every Jew has certain good desires, certain parts of holiness, each one of us has an internal part, but he is mixed up from many things. And drinking wine, as everyone knows, when he drinks a bit he can strengthen the part that he truly wants. A person in whom the evil outweighs the good, a person who is mostly yetzer hara, it is forbidden for him to drink wine, for then he will only arouse the yetzer hara and his fences will fall. But a person who is the opposite — and often with us the situation is reversed, we truly want to be good, but we are more embarrassed to be good than we are embarrassed to be bad, and often a person lives in such a state — for him wine helps to separate from this.

The Red Heifer: According to the Knowledge of Moshe and Divine Arousal

Thus all these are things that relate to purity, and automatically relate to the side of the created being. The side — as we said — that also has in it an aspect of Creator, has in it an aspect of drawing down light, an aspect of Atzilus. And one should not think so but rather know, and this knowledge is very important: not to err, not to damage, not to separate — as we spoke last week — not to separate the law of symbols, not to separate the heifer, and not to become from the one who makes impure ones pure. That is, it is forbidden to think — as the Ramban explains — and this is the reason there is a special intention in the red heifer, according to the knowledge of Moshe, not to err that this is a sacrifice to the outside.

And in other words, what is not to err that this is a sacrifice to the outside in terms of service? The Ramban asks: Why is it forbidden to offer it outside? How do they perform the slaughter of the heifer and it is outside? It is burned, it is similar to an ox that is stoned, as the Ramban says. And one can explain in terms of service thus: that there is here a complete service that relates entirely only to separate oneself from all the black years that exist. And a person would think that when he does this he is not attached, but he is — as I say — doing a true walking to the attributes that are from the side of the created being, to the attribute of Malchus.

Joy at the Time of Trial

And you would think that the attribute of Malchus is a separate thing, that then, when a person is stuck, he has a yetzer hara, then he must make a dance — true, every time a certain yetzer hara falls, as the Chassidic books say, every time a certain yetzer hara falls, he should rejoice, say song and drums, Baruch Hashem who sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us for this time to fulfill a positive commandment and a negative commandment — to fulfill the negative commandment of ‘do not go as a gossiper among your people’ (Vayikra 19:16), the negative commandment of ‘do not turn to idols’ (Vayikra 19:4), the negative commandment of that desire that is exactly his — he indeed separates from it, he fulfills a negative commandment. ‘One to whom a sin came and he was saved from it’, and everyone who does a mitzvah of sitting and not doing, thus when ‘a sin came to him’, he should rejoice. He is indeed not permitted to bring himself into this initially, but if the thing happened by itself — let him not fear, this comes by itself. And one doesn’t need to worry so much like Yonasan, this comes by itself. And then it is very easy to do the work.

The problem is that people feel that the work belongs to them, because we unfortunately are people who have biases, because we are people who have a yetzer hara, because we are people who read the newspaper. And therefore we have a yetzer, and therefore this is not holiness. Holiness — in my opinion — is from the side of the Creator, holiness is attachment, holiness is that a supernal inspiration should rest from the side of divinity. And here all this is from the side of the created beings. And what do they want therefore? What is the whole matter? And behold a person feels distant, feels that this is something he must do himself.

When a person merits the elevation of holiness, there is inspiration, there is mochin d’gadlus, and then he understands that this doesn’t relate to him, that this comes from above, this is inspiration that rises from above. But when a person struggles with his yetzer hara, with its nullification — nullification meaning wasting time, that he loves to stand and speak nonsense, in idle matters, in forbidden matters, whatever it may be — then he feels that he must do this himself.

One Who Comes to Purify is Helped

This teaches us that no: ‘And the Kohen shall take cedar wood and hyssop and crimson thread and throw them into the burning of the heifer’ (Bamidbar 19:6). The explanation, the secret, is that the Kohen makes a unification and intends according to the knowledge of Moshe, says ‘Moshe, reveal to the outside the reason for the heifer’. He says it is not correct. True it is difficult to understand how the thing can be, but the very possibility that a person can stand against the evil parts in his soul — this too is divine arousal. There is special siyata d’shmaya: ‘One who comes to purify is helped’ (Shabbos 104a), ‘one who comes to purify’. And so ‘one who comes to sanctify’ — and this is certainly found, ‘one who sanctifies himself a little they sanctify him much’ (Yoma 39a), this is holy work; but even pure work merits help, help comes to it. And who helps? As if angels. A good inclination comes, some angel from heaven comes and helps the young man overcome his inclination, and it is not he who does it.

And one should not think to exclude that he can effect that same thing; on the contrary, it can indeed be that that same thing causes that a person can truly reach attachment from this. And to such an extent, that there can be a person who will have a trial of entering into a trial. Generally we don’t want to enter into a trial, we want the thing itself. And generally it is very difficult to imagine that a person would want to bring himself into a situation where he has a desire for something of immorality, for something truly evil, and to overcome it because it is a mitzvah of standing in a trial. It is written in books and in Chazal that one should not request trials, that one should not bring oneself into trials. And we never had a trial of bringing ourselves into a trial.

And why not? Because we always think that the work of the trial relates only to the black years, meaning from the side of the created being. But this is not correct — it is also from the side of the Creator. There is also a divine attribute called the attribute of Malchus, a divine attribute called the attribute of Gevurah. That is, as if we say that ‘the Holy One Blessed be He conquers His inclination’. And what is relevant? They ask this, and this is a difficult question, a difficult question from a philosophical perspective, theological, and even kabbalistic, to understand how such an attribute is relevant. But now we are speaking in terms of faith, that there is such an attribute, and the practical difference is not to think that when a person has gatherings and all those things, the rejection that he needs he must supply himself, that he must establish everything himself.

Rather for this we request siyata d’shmaya, for this there are prayers, and the Holy One Blessed be He already sends His messengers. As the Rambam says regarding tzitzis and tefillin, that one who wraps himself in them — these are angels of hosts, servants of the angels — this is one thing that the Holy One Blessed be He sent. The Holy One Blessed be He gave the mitzvos of tzitzis and tefillin and other garments that we have, and other ways that each one can make for himself, or that he has, that the Holy One Blessed be He sends to remind him at the time he is in a place of sin — not at the time he is at a level. To such an extent that he can truly enter into attachment from this, he can have a trial, and perhaps he merits more such trials that give him a special taste, he has in this a taste in itself, there is a certain taste in that divine light of conquering the inclination. An awesome thing.

But all this is from the side of purity, and now they added an important thing: not to think that purity is separate from holiness. And this explains better what we spoke last week, about another separation that can be between the two things, that because of that separation they can incline to what they immerse the sin in on Purim. And therefore it is forbidden to make Purim customs according to the knowledge of Moshe Rabbeinu, ‘granted we didn’t see, we saw their fall’, for most people are forbidden to know from this, lest they think this is a black angel, when the Holy One Blessed be He sends the forces, even the forces of God, the gevuros, for counsel.

The Secret of Drawing Down Holiness: The Positive Thing

And now we must continue and explain the secret of holiness itself, the secret of drawing down holiness. And this is an important thing that we must explain.

What is the positive thing? Let us understand thus, and we will explain an awesome and wondrous secret. Granted when we speak of Shabbos, of Shabbos meals — let us first say not meals, we will immediately speak of meals, for ‘meal’ is the language. Granted when we speak of prayers, of doing mitzvos, of deeds that are all mitzvos, and let us say even of helping others, of acts of kindness, of learning Torah, of one who engages in wisdom — this is something that it seems to me is easy to understand that here we are engaged in drawing down light, that now we are engaged in bringing concepts of divinity into my mind, now we are engaged in bringing concepts of divinity into my body through putting on tefillin and wearing tzitzis, which are mitzvos on the body, and we bring into the body concepts of divinity. This I understand.

The Question: What is Eating in Holiness?

But I forgot that we reached Shabbos meals. And it is also understood — the example we began to say, that this is simple. Let us therefore quickly ask the difficulty and then we will answer it. What is relevant to speak of holiness of eating or holiness of marital relations? I understand that one can speak of purity of marital relations, not to be given over to it from the side of physical pleasure, to do no less and no more than what is required, what must be the need of the body, the need of the soul and the need of mitzvah. This one can understand. But it is very difficult for most people to understand what is eating in holiness. Not eating in purity — not one who is careful a bit and doesn’t lick every last crumb of ice cream, this is purity — but what is the meaning of eating in holiness?

What is the meaning? And the greatest example, the greatest reality of eating in holiness, is certainly oneg Shabbos. There is a mitzvah — it is written in the Gemara, written in Shulchan Aruch, written in the Rambam, written in all the poskim — to eat on Shabbos, a quarter meal, ‘to delight in delights, with fattened birds and quail and fish’ (Shabbos 118b), all kinds of good things. And we make three Shabbos meals, ‘one who fulfills three meals on Shabbos’ (Shabbos 118a), and written in the Gemara about this are all kinds of great praises about the mitzvah, about the great matter of making three Shabbos meals.

And there is here something that must be understood: Granted if a person says that on Shabbos perhaps we eat with gross desire less — I hear. But what is the meaning, how is it possible at all that the eating itself is the secret of holiness? And certainly from what we spoke before, that the attribute of holiness generally — one can say that here the holiness is from all the mitzvos, but generally it is always spoken of holiness regarding, as Rashi says, the fence of immorality, or regarding forbidden foods. The two things that the Rambam brought into Sefer Kedusha, he brought the two things: forbidden foods and forbidden relations.

The Rambam’s Approach: And I Have Separated You from the Peoples

The Rambam explains — and this is something I say only because it fits me very well to the way we see that holiness relates to eating and relations, but one must understand what is the secret of holiness, and perhaps therefore there

The Rambam’s Approach: And I Have Separated You from the Peoples

The Rambam explains — and this is something I say only because it fits me very well to the way we see that holiness relates to eating and relations, but one must understand what is the secret of holiness, and perhaps therefore there is the Rambam’s approach and other approaches that don’t align. The Rambam explains why he placed these matters in Sefer Kedusha. The Rambam says in the introduction to the book — I believe in the introduction to Mishneh Torah — that in these two things the Holy One Blessed be He sanctifies Israel and separates them from the nations. About both of them it is said ‘and I have separated you from the peoples to be Mine’ (Vayikra 20:26), in Parshas Acharei and in Parshas Shemini-Tazria. About matters of forbidden relations and forbidden foods, about both things the language of holiness is said in the Torah, and this says — the Rambam brings the language, true this is the language of the verse — that in these two Israel are holy and separated from the nations.

And there are Geonim who learned that apparently the simple pshat of the verse is that holiness means to be designated for Him, and automatically separated from the peoples. And in other words, designated for Him, designated for the Holy One Blessed be He, and not mixed with the nations of the world — this I understand.

But it appears that the Rambam learns that the holiness — or if we say in another way, this is one thing, and then the verse is settled. But if we learn according to the Rambam’s way apparently that holiness — perhaps not, and perhaps therefore he doesn’t say so, but if we learn that holiness relates to separation, relates to drawing down light, or to purity, or to holiness of what relates to the attribute of eating and the attribute of relations — it is very difficult to understand what this has to do with the verse ‘and I have separated you from the peoples’. Whether there will be gentiles, or whether there will be gentiles — this is already another question. Very interesting how the separation from the peoples enters here. Separation from the peoples would be understood if the matter were a matter of separation, a matter of distinction, a matter of purity, but why would the thing be called holiness? Thus there is here a certain question, how ‘and I have separated you from the peoples’ enters, and one must contemplate this deeply, and one can certainly delve deeply. And I am not saying this except as a speaker.

Holy Shall You Be For Holy Am I: The Precision in the Verse

But what I request to continue and say is thus: About holiness it is said in the verse — as I said, about purity this is not said, but about holiness it is said ‘holy shall you be for holy am I’ (Vayikra 19:2). And one must be very precise here, for there is here an important investigation, very important. Everyone knows the language of the Gemara ‘just as He is merciful so you be merciful’ (Shabbos 133b), meaning ‘to cleave to Him to walk in His ways’, all those things. And there is a deep investigation whether this is said in the verse, whether the verse says at all the matter of ‘just as He so you’. That is ‘to resemble Him’, ‘to be as a resemblance to above’.

And this is an important question, for in the verse only once is clearly said the kaf, the kaf of resemblance, the kaf of comparison between man and God, and this is in the words of the serpent: ‘and you shall be like God knowing good and evil’ (Bereishis 3:5). Explicit. Thus according to the words of the Sages there is here apparently a kaf, ‘and you shall be like’, like the Holy One Blessed be He. They don’t say exactly this language, they say ‘just as He’, but this is the language of the Sages, when they say ‘just as He’, that there is a common denominator — just as He, as He visits the sick so you visit the sick, as He is holy so you be holy. Thus they bring at least part of the language also regarding holiness.

This is what the Sages say, but in the Torah it appears that there is a lack of ‘like God’. And one can explain this very far according to what we are learning, for holiness without purity will not go. I am only saying that apparently this is not said. And what is indeed said? ‘Holy shall you be for holy am I’. It is not said ‘holy shall you be like Me’. And one can say that apparently this is different language — it is said that because I am holy you must be holy. And what is the connection of the two things? Certainly, a person is subject to feeling, for we have a rule that people will be like their gods, and therefore ‘holy shall you be for holy am I’.

But one can explain in another way. One can explain that ‘for holy am I’ — since I have sanctified you, ‘for holy am I’, and the thing that must be completed here, as the verse itself completes in other places. The verse itself doesn’t complete the matter of ‘like God’. When ‘like God’ is said in the verse it is an evil thing. The verse itself, if we learn it according to the lamed, explains and completes: ‘for holy am I and I have sanctified you from the peoples to be Mine’. This is the thing that must complete what is missing. ‘For holy am I’ — what do I care about this? Its meaning is: since you are designated for Him, you must be holy for Him. Thus it would be possible to explain, ‘holy shall you be for Me for holy am I and I have sanctified you for Me’. Thus would apparently be the simpler simple pshat.

But despite this, even at the level of pshat, and certainly in the pshat of the Sages, this is a matter of comparison, a matter of resemblance, that Israel should be holy like His holiness or from His holiness. And there are here deeper matters that must be understood — like His holiness, from His holiness: that one should be sanctified with the holiness of the Place, or like the holiness of the Place, or similar to the holiness of the Place.

Holiness from the Side of the Creator: The Attribute Coming Upon the Created Being

But I negate all those things, for the matter is exactly the opposite of what we spoke regarding purity. Purity is an attribute that relates entirely to the side of the created being. Holiness is an attribute that relates entirely to the side of the Creator. In truth, the only Holy One, the only One who is holy not for Him — meaning that He is not holy except in terms of relationship — but that He is holy in Himself, is the Holy One Blessed be He. ‘Holy, holy, holy is Hashem of hosts, the whole earth is full of His glory’ (Yeshayahu 6:3). The Holy One Blessed be He is holy, as He says ‘holy am I’.

That is, this is exactly the opposite of purity. Purity truly relates to man, but we say that as if it begins from below, and yet we say that the Holy One Blessed be He also purifies: ‘and before whom are you purifying yourselves and who purifies you? Your Father in Heaven’ (Yoma 85b). The Holy One Blessed be He purifies Israel. Very good. But holiness is the opposite. Holiness truly relates only to the Holy One Blessed be He. Holiness is one of the definitions, at least, of what it means to be the Holy One Blessed be He — to be holy. And whatever the meaning of the thing may be. Holy, unique, good — you can say all kinds of things. Everything that has in it from the good, from the perfection, every good thing that you can imagine, must relate to the holiness that we say relates to the Holy One Blessed be He.

And if a created being wants to have holiness, he must ask it from the Holy One Blessed be He. He must receive it in partnership, in borrowing, in drawing down, in some way in the image of the Holy One Blessed be He. Just as the Holy One Blessed be He is holy, you too can be holy. And in other words: He will be holy through you, or ‘and I shall be sanctified among the children of Israel’ (Vayikra 22:32) — you must contemplate this verse, that you have a matter in it.

And in whatever way it will be, in whatever manner it will be, from the side of the created being — holiness is the attribute of the Creator coming upon the created being. Purity is the attribute of the created being that the Creator does. From the side of the Creator, not from the side of the created being. And it is understood by all, that everything is the Creator. When Israel are holy, the Creator is the Holy One. About this He says ‘He is holy in them’ — not ‘and I shall be sanctified in them’ but ‘and I shall be sanctified among them’. He is holy in them, for the holiness is the attribute of the Creator, but people can participate in it, can borrow a bit, can imitate a bit. This is the meaning of the definition of holiness.

Holiness of Eating: To Eat as the Holy One Blessed be He Gives Bread

If so, we return to what we spoke in the previous shiur, that purity means that when a person eats, he should eat less in the aspect of a created being, meaning that he should not eat in evil ways that incline too much after the pleasure of the body and so on, that we call evil regarding this. But when we speak of holiness of eating, we think in terms of from the side of the Creator, not from the side of the created being. We think as the Holy One Blessed be He thinks. And in other words: a person eats, and the Holy One Blessed be He is the One who feeds, He is the One who bestows, He is ‘who gives bread to all flesh’ (Tehillim 136:25). When a person eats, he eats as the Holy One Blessed be He gives bread to all flesh. He is the receiver from the bread, the person’s body is indeed the receiver from the bread that the Holy One Blessed be He gives to all flesh, or from the spiritual pleasure, the pleasure that the Holy One Blessed be He gives from marital relations.

But the person doesn’t think about this as the world would generally think, but he thinks as the Holy One Blessed be He thinks about this as if. And even though the person cannot think at all as the Holy One Blessed be He thinks, nevertheless a bit — he imitates the Holy One Blessed be He. He thinks that the Holy One Blessed be He also thinks about this, why He did this, why He conducts him, why He is good to people, and I play as the Holy One Blessed be He. Thus far the simple meaning of the words.

The Gemara in Niddah: Counts the Couplings of Israel

And about this is written in Parshas Balak an important Gemara in Maseches Niddah, which must be deeply studied. And it is understood that every thing we bring a statement from the verse, from the Sages, and we establish it as a drop from the sea, as an example, as something we understand here — always when we begin to delve deeply we see that there are many more things connected to this, much more that must be understood, that must be entered into, and always more is written.

And in the Gemara in Maseches Niddah — and Rashi hints here in Parshas Balak to this Gemara — it is written that Bilaam the wicked said ‘who has counted the dust of Yaakov and the number of the fourth part of Israel’ (Bamidbar 23:10). And the Gemara explained — and Rashi brings this section — that ‘rova’ is from the language of revi’ah (coupling). Rova is exactly the language of coupling, of making revi’ah, like one who couples and is coupled. Rova is from the language of revi’ah. And why is it called from the language of revi’ah? Very interesting. Fourth, the fourth thing — what does the fourth thing have to do with coupling? According to Kabbalah the matter is settled, for there are two things called Yesod: the sixth, the sixth sefirah, is the attribute of Yesod, but also the fourth. If we count Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferes, and don’t count the small details of Netzach and Hod, we find that it is the fourth. Or you can say that it brings the fourth — which is Malchus — to the three upper levels that are called in general three, and then it is the fourth. I don’t know. But ‘rova’ in the language of the Sages and in a kind of holy language means revi’ah.

And the Gemara says thus, and one must be precise in what the Gemara says: ‘Rav Avira expounded’ — Rav Avira expounded a drasha — ‘What is written, who has counted the dust of Yaakov and the number of the fourth part of Israel? This teaches that the Holy One Blessed be He sits and counts the couplings of Israel, when will come the drop from which the tzaddik will be formed’ (Niddah 31a). The Holy One Blessed be He counts the couplings, the unions of Israel. And what does He think? What does He count, number, who counts? Who? The Holy One Blessed be He who counts the dust of Yaakov and the rova of Israel — what does He think? ‘When will come the drop from which a tzaddik will be formed.’ It is not just that the Holy One Blessed be He looks. The Holy One Blessed be He looks when will come the drop from which a tzaddik will be born.

This is the continuation of the Gemara speaking there, for the Gemara deals in general in the entire sugya how from which drop, from which part of the drop, the child is formed. Rav Shmuel said first that a person takes the food and the waste, that there is selection in every drop. And we know today that the thing works in a certain way, one can see it with eyes, and it works a bit like this: that in seed there are very many drops, very many parts that could become a child, and always nature — meaning the order of the Holy One Blessed be He — selects the best. The best from that case, and in general the Holy One Blessed be He selects the best from the drops that a person gives, so that from them the tzaddik will be born.

And this is the hint that he continues to speak about, that there is selection — there is selection in physicality, the strongest part of the seed enters and becomes a child, and thus in general with people: the strongest, the best, that has in it spiritual qualities or the right talents and so on that are in the seed — the Holy One Blessed be He waits, counts one and two, and expects that a tzaddik will be made.

The Eye of Bilaam the Wicked Was Closed

And the Gemara says further: ‘And this thing Bilaam the wicked gazed upon’ — and about this the eye of Bilaam the wicked was blinded. Bilaam said: ‘He who is pure and holy and His servants are pure and holy will gaze upon this thing?’ He who is pure and holy and His servants are pure and holy — the Holy One Blessed be He is holy, the Holy One Blessed be He is pure, He has no connection, He is the only thing that has no connection at all with all those things, and this is the lowest thing, it is despised. And will He gaze upon such a thing? ‘Immediately it was taken from him’, and about this it is said ‘and Hashem put a word in Bilaam’s mouth’ (Bamidbar 23:5), meaning immediately after this it is said ‘and Hashem turned the curse into a blessing’. And the simple meaning that he was blinded — and why? Because he accused as if, he said how is it possible that the Holy One Blessed be He who is pure and holy, and His angels are pure and holy, and His servants are pure and holy, gazes, seeks, supervises Israel? They blinded him, meaning: don’t look. And it is not explicit what the pshat is.

And the Gemara continues and brings more statements, from which we see that the Holy One Blessed be He takes into account, that there is a calculation from which drop which seed is made, that the thing is not random, but there are calculations, physical calculations, spiritual calculations, how from which drop a tzaddik is made, from which sowing, from which birth, from which time a tzaddik or Torah scholar and so on is born.

The Explanations in Bilaam’s Claim: Providence and Holiness

And many Chassidic books explain thus, and one must contemplate whether this is the correct pshat, or in other words — what is truly Bilaam the wicked’s claim? What does he want? And why was his eye closed, what does this have to do with that?

The First Pshat: The Matter of Providence

There is one pshat that I saw in the Rishonim, and it seems to me that perhaps it is a very reasonable pshat, that the matter relates to the matter of providence. That is Bilaam — again, the historical Bilaam — in what did he indeed believe in providence? We see that he speaks with the Holy One Blessed be He. But there was a philosophy of philosophers very common in the time of the Rishonim, that said that the Holy One Blessed be He indeed sees, but only very great things. The Holy One Blessed be He truly supervises angels, principles, the principles of principles of the world, such great things, but very little on the small things, the infantile things, the thing is not fitting — according to their intellect it is not fitting that the Holy One Blessed be He should look at it, at this He doesn’t look.

Thus they explained that this is Bilaam’s claim. Bilaam wants to say: certainly there are tzaddikim in the world, certainly necessarily they have some connection with nature, but the thing is random, it just happened that so-and-so’s father fathered a baby and the baby became a tzaddik, there is no calculation, there is no order in all these things. And about this his eyes were blinded, about this he received punishment, he was blinded, because he denied providence. Providence is the eyes of Hashem, the Holy One Blessed be He indeed looks, and you say He doesn’t look — you receive punishment of blindness of eyes. Thus they explain. And it’s possible that the thing is not disconnected from this, and I am not convinced this is the simple meaning of the Gemara, it requires much — as I say, it requires much more, and surely one must increase in toil of Torah, to toil much more to truly understand and extract exactly the simple meaning of what is the matter of such statements.

The Pshat of Rabbi Tzadok: There is a Way of Holiness

But in any case, what we can say for now is thus: In many Chassidic books, in Rabbi Tzadok and in other Chassidic books, they explain that Bilaam’s dispute with the Gemara, with Rabbi Abahu, with the verse, with Israel, is at another point, or at a similar but different point. And they explain that the thing goes with the question — in other words, the question we already mentioned last week from the Iggeres HaKodesh attributed to the Ramban that speaks on this matter. I don’t remember who brings the statement itself, but innovations of many books establish the statement of the Gemara at the sugya, saying — and thus he continues, and we already spoke whether the thing is correct — he says that certain philosophers said, Aristotle perhaps said, that the thing is not fitting, that there is only a lack of divine providence. As we said we find that there is only a despised thing, that the matter of marital relations is a most despised thing, and automatically the Holy One Blessed be He doesn’t supervise it, and automatically there cannot be in it essential holiness, there cannot be in it a way to do it in resemblance to God, there cannot be a positive deed. And automatically it must be in it as little as possible, not to seek to be drawn, not to enjoy too much from the physical part and so on — this everyone can understand; but they didn’t believe that there could be in it a positive thing, a deed, how this will be made a mitzvah, how this will be made a drawing down of holiness.

And this was Bilaam’s error, and this is very good. For thus the Gemara says — what is the meaning, how can you say? For here this is the difficulty: how can you say that a union of man and woman from which comes a tzaddik, from which are born all the mitzvos dependent on this, all the holinesses that the tzaddik will do, all the repentances he will lead — everything comes from the relations and the time that his father and mother did. And you say that the whole thing — for this is according to Bilaam’s approach, and according to the approach that says, and also people who walk in Bilaam’s approach, that it is impossible that there should be in it positive holiness, that there is in it only the escape as much as possible from the yetzer hara — that it is impossible to say that this itself is a thing of holiness, we find that all of Klal Yisrael is truly disqualified.

Bilaam’s Downfall: To Commit Treachery Against Hashem Regarding the Matter of Peor

And this is not a small thing: ‘About these things the eye of that wicked one became blurred, and he said who can stand in this sign’. You don’t see at all any good thing, for all the praises you say about Israel — you don’t understand one of them. You say that Israel are so wonderful, that they are tzaddikim, that they are companions to the Shechinah, that tzaddikim are part of what the true world deals with, this is the meaning ‘if the King and Queen sit there’ — that the Holy One Blessed be He consulted with the souls of tzaddikim and created the world. When we speak what is the world truly — the tzaddikim, Israel, those who understand truth, people with their actions, when they make Kiddush the world is aroused, when they blow the shofar things change in the world — it includes the entire world within it. This is a tzaddik, this is a person. He does mitzvos, not just mitzvos.

And you say — contemplate yourself, they indeed say — and from where is that person made? He does mitzvos with his body. And even he is a soul — true, the soul comes from above through a supernal union, one must also understand that side, truly a wonder — but all the mitzvos he does, he does with hands, with feet, with physical tools, with the body that his father and mother gave him at the time they did the low and despised thing. We thus find: either low and despised, or without providence, for the Holy One Blessed be He has no connection with low and despised things, and there is no holiness in it. Thus this is a low and despised thing, and also a thing that there is no providence over it. The Holy One Blessed be He — they cover the mezuzah, the Holy One Blessed be He is not there, there is no holiness there, the Holy One Blessed be He turns His gaze away when Israel do the mitzvah of onah. If so all matters of drawing down divinity, all the individual sacrifices that the tzaddik says — everything is beautiful and good, but the root of the thing, that everything depends on some deed that has no divine name in it, there is no Holy One Blessed be He there, there is no divinity there, there is no providence there, this is a random thing — we find that the whole thing is a fraud. The whole thing is a fraud. Very nice, wears a beketshe, lights a candle, sings ‘Lecha Dodi’, and meanwhile, at the time he effects ‘I was brought forth and I sinned before You’ — there is no deed and nothing at all.

Whereas David HaMelech said that there is holiness below in this. But this is what comes out from Bilaam the wicked’s accusation. Rabbi Tzadok HaKohen says: See what happened with that Bilaam? Why? Because he thinks thus, what happened with him in the end? A great ascetic he is, a great tzaddik, thinks that one must be an ascetic and completely ascetic, it is impossible that the Holy One Blessed be He should look at the number of Israel and the rova of Israel, Heaven forbid. And what does he do a week later? ‘Come, I will advise you’ — he gives advice to the daughters of Moav. ‘Behold, these caused the children of Israel through the word of Bilaam to commit treachery against Hashem regarding the matter of Peor’ (Bamidbar 31:16). The idolatry of Peor, and the daughters of Moav, the daughters of Midian, doing all the deeds. A great breacher of the world’s fence in immorality — he breaches the world’s fence, teaches the girls to go and catch the boys, to worship idolatry, despised idolatry, despised immorality he does.

Rabbi Tzadok says: Yes, because he doesn’t understand that there is a matter of holiness. He thinks it is either this or that or the Holy One Blessed be He. And since he doesn’t truly have the Holy One Blessed be He, automatically his adultery, his trial, is the truest trial that can be. And the lesson from this literally: that is every one who thinks that there cannot be in it holiness but only purity, that as long as he is an angel he would perhaps be good, but since he is not an angel — Rabbi Tzadok says this in another way, but this is more the way he says it — since he is not an angel, we find that he has an even greater sin and a greater desire, and he causes evil results. For even the gentiles, if they thought that perhaps there is in this a good thing, it would be so extreme, it would be like Bilaam — and how is it possible? Then they would have an evil fence. Bilaam contemplated in his heart and said: ‘The Holy One Blessed be He is not here.’ Ah, the Holy One Blessed be He is not here? The strap was loosened. Good, but one who wants to be an angel, a man from the Torah of Moshe Rabbeinu peace be upon him, very good, let him fulfill the laws. But since we are not angels — even Bilaam was not an angel, he had a donkey with Torah scholars — we find that the whole strap was loosened, the whole thing was completely uprooted, and he still seeks to teach Israel the approach as well. And from this Pinchas came and said: ‘No, there is indeed a way of holiness.’

The Secret of Holiness: The Image and the Imagination

This is the pshat of the deed in the name of Rabbi Tzadok HaKohen of Lublin. But I must add here an explanation, an important explanation, about what does it truly mean? How is it possible? What is the meaning of holiness? What is truly the answer to the difficulty? We already said one word, we said that holiness means ‘holy like Me’. Holiness means a thing that relates to a person receiving inspiration from the way in which the Holy One Blessed be He is. But this requires a bit more explanation, and it is almost impossible to explain this without Kabbalah. Necessarily with Kabbalah, there is no choice.

There is No Coupling Except with Knowledge: The Images in Desires

And the matter is thus, let us say it as simply as possible. The thing is simple, and in the introduction we spoke about on Wednesday and Thursday, on Wednesday more than Thursday, and now we will say it according to the secret in it. We explained that a person is not only — even the pleasures, even the desires that a person does, even when he eats, even when he does marital relations, it is not a completely physical thing. It is built on a physical thing, on a bodily thing, but it is also built, and greatly, on what is called according to Kabbalah the tzelem, the imaginations, the images that a person has, according to which he does, contemplates, acts. And especially in marital relations, but also in eating.

It is impossible — as the Gemara says ‘there is no coupling except with knowledge’ (Yevamos 53b), and the Rebbe Yosef Dov Giloh peh kodesh also speaks here about the matter of knowledge, and we will still learn inside, for every thing can be expanded at length in wondrous endlessness — ‘there is no coupling except with knowledge’, even the physical arousal of a person necessarily must come with a certain image in his mind, with a certain idea that he has. It is not true that this is physical, only physical, for when the thing happens by itself — it doesn’t happen by itself, it happens with a certain image, with a certain knowledge.

And now, let us contemplate that there are many, very many different images. And the same thing in eating: people almost cannot eat physically without any appetite; one who has no appetite and must truly force the food into his mouth, necessarily has some image, some spiritual part, some taste. Thus when we contemplate this, we see — as we spoke — that there are very many images that can be for the thing. And each one — and this returns to what we explained, that holiness is also the separation from the nations of the world, for every people, every nation and tongue, every group of people, has a certain music they watch, certain books they read, certain images, certain pictures, certain scripts as we said, certain matters through which they live their desires. For the desires and the body are not the same thing, not at all. The body of all people is the same thing, all people and Chavah have the same body, but they don’t have the same part of the tzelem.

The Tzelem of Israel: Song of Songs and Kabbalah

And the essence of the holiness of Israel is written in the Zohar, and the essence of the holiness of marital relations relates — and it is written in Tanya in the name of Rabbi Chaim Vital, in the name of the Zohar — to the matter called tzelem. This is not the mind alone, the mind and the soul alone are above this, the body alone is below this, it doesn’t touch, everything is identical. But tzelem means the imagination. Or the tzelem is a spiritual thing, but there the imagination dwells. And we are not now explaining the topic of tzelem, there were already other shiurim about this. And in imagination each one receives not from himself, not from his body, not from his soul, but from his environment, from his father and mother, from every book he ever read that speaks of marital relations, from every book he ever glanced at. And not only what he saw — if he belongs to Israel, if his body belongs to Israel and his tzelem belongs to Israel, Israel has a kind of different imaginations than gentiles have. As long as a person lives in a Jewish community — I don’t know, unless he completely strays somewhere — but as long as he learns Torah, thus when they look in the Midrash, when a Jew thinks about marriage, he thinks about Avraham and Sarah, about Yitzchak and Rivkah, ‘and Yitzchak loved Rivkah’ (Bereishis 24:67), about Yaakov and Leah, about Yaakov and Rachel. These are the images. The Arizal sought examples to illustrate such a thing and called it the union of Yaakov with Rachel. But our entire lives are built on drashos.

Drashos in Eating and Marital Relations

And what is the meaning of drashos? For every person who has an arousal to do marital relations with his wife, the thing is built on a drash, for he once saw a deed that another did. Certainly not the body part, but the tzelem part, for it is integrated for him in all kinds of imaginations. Thus we live very much with drashos. When I eat kugel, this is a drash about how some rebbe ate kugel and had a certain intention, and I have a certain deed in my mind from this. This is the meaning of drash. When we eat a Shabbos meal and say: here is the meal of Atik Kadisha, here is the meal of Zeir Anpin, here is the meal of Chakal Tapuchin Kadishin — we say this is a drash.

We say, there is such an idea, I learned in books, there is a matter of eating — eating is a kind of unification, a kind of connection, we bring something inside, we draw down a certain light to the body, and there is an aspect of Atik, there is an aspect of Z”A, there is an aspect of Malchus, Chakal Tapuchin Kadishin, and I eat with this intention. This is very simple. These are not kavanos — I will explain what is the meaning of kavanos of eating, what is the meaning of kavanos of marital relations, in the simplest way I can. Just so is not enough. Each one must make attempts and try. These are not things that are sufficient. One can speak about this for several hours, and perhaps the audience will understand exactly what is being discussed.

When he is aroused, his relationship, his idea, the image he imitates, is what he learned in the Zohar: that there is such an aspect of the union of Malchus, of Tiferes, and his eating is an aspect of that union, there is a union of eating, there is actual union, there is union in thought, there are all kinds of unions, embrace and kiss and union, and so on, all the details are written in all the books.

A Jewish Bride: Marital Relations in Holiness

And now, to understand that this is completely different — most of Israel, there is such a thing as a Jewish bride, and it is not the same thing as a gentile bride. And why?

A Jewish Bride: Marital Relations in Holiness

And now, to understand that this is completely different — most of Israel, there is such a thing as a Jewish bride, and it is not the same thing as a gentile bride. And why? For a gentile, when he thinks about her, thinks about some foolish gentile woman he once heard did something. But when a Jew lives among gentiles, he thinks a bit — ‘the Israel within you, the Israel among the nations of the world’ — and he is in purity, he thinks; but a Jew has Judaism, and especially when he has that thing called Kabbalah. He learned Shir HaShirim — all people toil, that Shir HaShirim is a parable for a deeper meaning. No no, I say a new pshat: Shir HaShirim is a parable, speaks of the love of Knesses Yisrael and the Holy One Blessed be He, speaks of Tiferes and Malchus, of Chochmah and Binah, of all these things, and one must learn all the commentaries on Shir HaShirim. And in practice, one of the sides of this is that through it you can have marital relations in holiness.

After he learns Shir HaShirim and learns Kabbalah, then when he unites with his wife — certainly there is what found him, this is not only a cold thing. The deed dwelling in his mind, according to which he is aroused, and according to which he warms up, and according to which he connects and everything, is the deed he learned in Kabbalah. We find that when he does marital relations, his body does this, but the tzelem he does is the tzelem of their union, the tzelem of the Holy One Blessed be He and His Shechinah, the imagination in him, what is doing this now, for every person does something, does this also with imagination. That imagination is the imagination of the Holy One Blessed be He with Israel, the love of Knesses Yisrael, and Israel literally clothe themselves in his union.

And the same thing, or he thinks about tzaddikim — there is a world of souls, divinity — he thinks about tzaddikim, about Avraham and Sarah, Avraham Avinu. Rav Bruna found Avraham lying in Sarah’s bosom, it is written in the Gemara in Bava Basra, found Avraham loving — he thinks about this, for this is the hint written in the Gemara, he must have that imagination as the way the Rebbe does this. One who had a rebbe, or a rebbe who passed away, he also had something in the love that the rebbe feels for his students, and this is also a kind of union, and also a kind of unification. All those parables we learn, all those imaginations we learn, one of their functions is to merit us that now there will be such a thing as marital relations in holiness.

Marital relations in holiness — its intention is the unification of the Holy One Blessed be He and His Shechinah. And what is the intention? That he should think — when I say ‘the intention’, I say a simple thing — that the imagination he has connects there above. For here a person is mixed, and this is what is needed with purity — not to mix. But part of his imagination will be the imagination he learned in the Zohar, that there is a unification, a supernal unification, and the Zohar describes it in such romantic ways, so that when a person warms up romantically, there will also be part of the imagination that imagination written in the holy Zohar. This is the meaning of distinction in holiness.

The True Approach: The Greatest Drawing Down of Light

For ‘and this thing the eye of that wicked one became blurred’ — and this must be understood. He became confused. And the thing can do so, that learning from Bilaam the wicked — from it he fell with the daughters of Moav, from it Israel who walked in his approach fell with the daughters of Moav, and still fall. But the true approach is the way we learn — to sit everything in holiness, and to be truly a drawing down of mochin. And the greatest drawing down of light that can be, it seems to me, is to marry and make Jewish children. There cannot be a greater thing than this. And certainly when we eat we also make a Jew — Israel are the ones who do all the mitzvos. Making Jews necessarily must be a greater mitzvah than all the 613. Eating is the greatest mitzvah in itself, in which we sustain the person’s body, and certainly also the taste and the psychological vitality received from eating and so on — we sustain a Jew, and what mitzvah greater than this can there be? The only thing that can be greater than it is to make more Jews.

Be Fruitful and Multiply in Body and Be Fruitful and Multiply in Soul

Be fruitful and multiply. There is be fruitful and multiply in body, that we make more Jews, we marry and make children. There is no greater mitzvah than this, there cannot be greater joy and greater unification than this. And the same thing is be fruitful and multiply in soul: ‘and you shall teach them to your children’ (Devarim 11:19) — these are the students. That we learn Torah, and we never learn alone, we learn with other people. And this is only preparation, ‘to learn in order to teach, to guard in order to do’, and we make more Jews. This is the mitzvah, and all this is the same parable. Just as there is tremendous desire and love in the union of man and woman, and even greater desire when we understand from where the imagination comes, when he is truly a Jew who learned the holy Zohar —

The same thing, there is desire and wonderful love, which is perhaps greater or different, more intellectual, in the aspect of gar and not in the aspect of vak, when the upper intellectuals — the sefiros are called upper intellectuals — connect with each other, receive with din and din and give with love and permission to each other to be sanctified to their Creator, to be sanctified with the holiness of their Creator, to make nachas ruach for their Creator. And then the same thing, the same desire, the same love, exist between two Jews learning in chavrusa, between a rebbe and students learning, between students coming to the rebbe, and the rebbe coming to the students — everything is ‘desire and intense love’.

And this is our shiur for Erev Shabbos Kodesh Parshas Chukas-Balak 5784.