LM 30.5 — Meishra d'Sakina, Part 5 of 5 · תורה ל׳

Be'ezrat Hashem, we are up to the fifth שיעור of Torah ל, we're holding by paragraph ט, and we will be pushing through to the end. By now, we've already seen all of the ideas that are going to come up in this Torah, and we will build them back into the מאמר חז״ל that we started off with, which is the second to last Torah, I think, that is going through the מאמרי חז״ל by the סבי דבי אתונא, the discussion between Rabbi Yehoshua ben Chananya and the Athenian scholars. Like we've mentioned before, as we come to the end of these תורות, הדרן עלך והדרך עלן, as we finish up, the Torot really are like a spiral.

You could really just come all the way back around to the same spot, restart the same Torah, and we'd be holding at a totally different altitude, building in all of the ideas and insights that we've seen till now. But but we push forward, and this is the journey, and Be'ezrat Hashem, we'll we will have ample opportunity to revisit everything that we've seen through the through the new lens as we as we build our knowledge base, as we build our own depth and insights and perspectives. So, I'm just going to use, I try to do this at the beginning of each שיעור, just in case it's been a while since we saw the the previous summary, although we gave a pretty good summary I think at the beginning of the last שיעור, number four, so you can go back and listen to that.

But אין בית מדרש בלא חידוש, and we will, I'm going to use again Rav Chaim Kramer's notes, I think is the easiest way to go through the summary. So, give me half a second. It is on page, page 316 in the English. Says: "In review: Perceptions of Godliness, השגת אלוקות, must be contracted in order for them to be grasped." And we explained that we are in this world in order for us to build a relationship with HaKadosh Baruch Hu, to receive goodness from HaKadosh Baruch Hu, and therefore, we have to be able to have a relationship with HaKadosh Baruch Hu, but השגת אלוקות, this is something that is beyond our frame of reference.

How are we able to have a relationship, to understand, to interact with something that is beyond the כלים that we have? So, this this question really presents itself in two ways. Number one, HaKadosh Baruch Hu designed this system, anything HaKadosh Baruch Hu does is designed perfectly, and therefore, Kivyakhol, from HaKadosh Baruch Hu's perspective, what did He implement in order to be able to give to us in order that we should be able to receive? And then the other side of that coin is how do we build up our כלים in order to receive? So, in the first paragraph, we dealt with the idea of Tzimtzumim, the idea, call them contractions, to have something distilled.

But this is in itself a miracle, the idea that you can take something and you can distill it down so that the recipient can receive it accurately and with integrity and without any distortion. If we are finite beings, then anything that we receive is going to be in a finite way. HaKadosh ברוך הוא, the Ribbono Shel Olam, is outside any of those boundaries. So, if you're going to take something infinite, something that is without any limitations, and package it up or put it into a כלי to be able to receive, then by definition, you're going to be sacrificing some of what you're trying to give over.

So, this this miracle of Tzimtzumim, this mechanism, this catalyst is how HaKadosh what HaKadosh Baruch Hu created in order to be able to give us. And okay, so how are we able to attach ourselves to this? So, Rabbeinu explained in paragraph two that this necessitates a רבי גדול מאוד מאוד, a very, very great teacher, somebody that understands the target לימוד, right, what it is that we're trying to grasp, somebody who understands the limitation of the כלי, of any particular כלי, right? A Rebbi needs to understand the תלמיד, not just that he understands the information, but in his role as a Rebbi, in his role as a מחנך, as an educator, that actually is defined by the educational process and by the student.

Somebody who is extremely brilliant and understands the material and is unable to convey it, or doesn't have any תלמידים or students, is not called the teacher or a Rebbi, he's just called a Talmid Chacham or somebody who's extremely brilliant. So, the idea of being able to bridge the gap between something that's incredibly lofty and something that has extreme limitations, that is going to need somebody who is a very, very great teacher, to understand all the way at the at the height, to understand the the limitation, how it's going to be heard, received, understood, what those particular biases are, to build up the students in order to in order to receive it.

What is the bridge between those two points? Paragraph three: He does this by drawing the upper intellect, which is what we call the שכל העליון, through the channels of Torah and mitzvot, so as to enclothe it in the lower intellect. And the Torah and the mitzvot by themselves, we said, have at least are presented by way of צמצומים, by way of limitations. The Torah is given to us in the form of letters, right, speech. There's certain parameters, there's words, there's פסוקים, there's a way that ratzon Hashem is enclothed, there's a הלבשה in the Torah. We've addressed the Baal HaTanya throughout, but in פרק ד, I think ה, maybe, around there, the idea of being able to interact with a king, but through the clothing that he's wearing, you wouldn't say that that's a limitation.

You, in order to be able to to interact, there's a הלבשה. So, first of all, we understood that how we are able to understand and and relate to ratzon Hashem through the Torah, and the mitzvot themselves have שיעורים, they have specific we're about to go into Pesach בעזרת השם יתברך, everything has שיעורים, very specific measurements, ways of doing things, and even in the physical world, if you have wires that are a certain way or something is turned into a certain frequency, then then it will match up. And if the circuit is broken, if things are not very specific, even though we might not understand why it has to be that way, what difference should it make, but in order to in order to be able to receive, to be able to be tuned in to relate to something much greater, the radio is now tuned into the frequency and it's able to receive, or remote control is able to give over those signals, it has to be done in a certain way, למשל.

And therefore, the the mitzvot and the Torah are they there are very specific שיעורים, but when this is in a certain way, because of the way Hakadosh Baruch Hu designed the process, that this particular צמצום, that these particular qualifications, this way of giving over should be able to contain the infinite, the ratzon Hashem, as we relate to it, this is going to be how we receive. So we have the שכל עליון, the ratzon Hashem, we have our keli, we have the Rebbe who's able to help us bridge that gap through the Torah and mitzvot, giving over the Torah and through the performance of mitzvot.

And paragraph ד' we said a person is not able to attain the lower intellect unless he despises monetary gain. So we addressed the top part of this funnel, the שכל עליון and how Hakadosh Baruch Hu delivers it to us, but on the other hand, we have to build up our keli. At the end of the day, if you put light through a lens, so there is a risk of distortion. If I tell you over a message, and you have certain preconceived notions in the way that you're going to hear and understand something, then that message will be limited, it's only going to be as powerful and as meaningful as you hear it.

So how is it that we are able to build ourselves up in order to relate to this שכל עליון? And in the Torah we explain, and again, none of these meshalim is perhaps exactly perfect, but we're trying to hone in on different ideas. If you would shine light at something, and you'd want it to be reflected accurately, so if the wall was painted in a certain way, when the light, the white light, shone at that wall, if it was painted red, orange, blue, whatever it was, the way that if you were looking at the wall, then you would see the light being reflected off of it with some of those characteristics of the wall.

But if something was a absolute, clean mirror, nothing got in the way, there were no characteristics other than to reflect, we in the Torah we, I think in this Torah and others certainly, we've given the example of the moon reflecting the sun, right? Or in a different context, we've explained the difference between a keli, which gives shape, or a pipe, which the idea is to be able to deliver it in a way where it can be received from the source. So by having התבטלות, by turning ourselves into something that can reflect, by not imposing our own characteristics, נגיעות, biases, that is how we can accurately reflect and connect to the רצון העליון, and ultimately bring the Shechinah into the world.

What is what is representative, if if we had to to to label something as as attaching ourselves to the ultimate purpose, so if we think about a process as a means to an end, then the opposite of that, if we inverted that process, if we substituted what the tachlit, the end, was, we would be taking the means and turning it into an end in and of itself. So instead of everything in our life, whether it's our likes, our dislikes, our our mind, our physical capabilities, and monetary resources, instead of everything being exactly perfectly designed to bring our potential, our כח אל הפועל, to fulfill our purpose, our piece in this world, what we are designed to do so that we can bring the Shechinah into the world, we would be shifting our center of gravity.

So, for instance, certain pleasures might be self-serving. Instead of coming to see HaKadosh Baruch Hu and the tov, the good of HaKadosh Baruch Hu in the world around us, they come to be self-serving or for some other purpose. What is representative of the idea of taking something that is koach, something that is a resource, into an end in and of itself? And we used mamon. Money does not other pleasures, we could say, a person should use them in service of Hashem instead of being self-serving, but at the end of the day, there is some sort of a pleasure that could be associated with it.

Money, perhaps uniquely, money represents a so that. You have money in order to spend it on necessities, pleasures, on whatever you're going to spend it on. The idea of sacrificing in order to gain money in and of itself, again, not to get more money so that you can have more pleasure, the idea of ta'avot mamon in and of itself, even to the point that a person might sacrifice physical pleasures, they're going to forego going on vacation or doing other things in order to just amass wealth and build up build up career, build you know, work on business deals, they'll sacrifice relationships, you know, and so on.

That is at the core of taking something that is definitionally a means and and turning it into an end of itself to the point that it's it's almost like what we've said before, the yetzer hara's yetzer hara. A person will even sacrifice doing other physical pleasures, other דברים אסורים, in order to build up their wealth. So this is the ultimate yetzer hara in this regard, the ultimate negiah, the ultimate bias, the ultimate inversion of this process. So that was paragraph four, in order to build up our keli, a person has to despise monetary gain. And I think that this fits into the process, we have to tap into the tachlit.

We have to tap tap into the end. We have to understand things in the context of what is HaKadosh Baruch Hu's purpose for which He wants from us. He gave us the Torah, He gave us Chazal, He gave us a way to tap in and to understand everything in our life, what is the tachlit, what is the end, and what is the means. Paragraph five, we said having attained this lower intellect, and now we're building up our keli, we have to draw vitality, chayut, into the keli. How do we build up this keli, now that it's pointed in the right direction, now that it exists?

We have to bring energy into it, that comes through simchah of mitzvot. This is where we find ourselves. We've discussed simchah at length, but through the joy and the mitzvot, and we explain why this is specifically associated with the שלש רגלים. You can go through the shiur, but this idea specifically of where the mitzvot, the heart of the year, the the the what pulses, what brings life into the year, is the שלש רגלים, when we go into the בית המקדש. We said that there is an idea of grieving the אור פנים, that אור פני רבו, a person grieves his rebbe's face, which again, if the rebbe's function is to be able to bridge this gap, to bring us the שכל עליון, how do we build up our keli?

By tapping into the אור פנים of the שלש רגלים of simchah shel mitzvah. So this is how we build up our keli. Now, what happens if instead of the keli, the receptacle or the pipe, which is tapped in directly into the source and understands its purpose totally to be reflective of רצון השם, what happens when it does have a negiah? What happens when it is directionally off, the center of gravity is different? So instead of the beauty coming to allow us to appreciate and have gratitude for HaKadosh Baruch Hu, we start appreciating the humanities, our contribution to sciences.

We actually, chas v'shalom, rachmana litzlan, factor Hakadosh Baruch Hu out of the process. We end up saying that there's other מלכויות, instead of Hakadosh Baruch Hu being the ultimate מלך, the CEO, כביכול כביכול, as part of the process, where everything in the world is just one integrated whole that's all meant to relate to and bring out רצון השם, but no, every מלכות has its own priorities, its own culture its own culture, its own prerogative. That would be represented by the ד׳ מלכויות. So instead of the כלי, which is the resources understanding that there are means to an end, now being directionally focused to to build themselves up, that would be like the like the כלי, like the מלכות falling in and being יונק and serving other prerogatives, other priorities, the the ד׳ מלכויות.

So now, this really becomes a question of of perspective, a frame of reference, of what's driving us. The the the pieces are not necessarily different, it's the way that they're pointed and the way that they're focused. Even let's say, am I doing something for רצון השם to build up kavod shamayim, or am I doing it for my own own kavod? It could be the mamash the same act. The same act of tzedakah could be an act of giving, or it could be an act of taking. If directionally I'm giving tzedakah in order to, let alone get prizes, but to build up my own kavod, that becomes directionally mamash a different act.

Physically, if I was going to take a snapshot photo of it, it would be the same act, but the act itself, whether it's an act of giving outward, or it's an act of taking, it's a totally different act. And therefore, how is it that I can cut off the מלכיות, it's now become integrated, it's become part of a different process, how can I re- reassociate it? How can I cut it off? I have to make havdalah, I have to separate it. That same act of giving that has turned into an act of kavod, I have to take that מלכות, and I have to separate it out from the ד׳ מלכויות.

That is going to happen through chesed, and that chesed is a function of תוכחה. So when the tzadikim come, and they give us תוכחה, which we explained, I think, in the last shiur, we brought Rashi says in a few different places in Sefer Bereishit, that תוכחה is a לשון of making בירור, of creating clarity, right? A person gives תוכחה, it doesn't mean to beat somebody over the head, maybe sometimes they have to beat somebody over the head, but it's the act of of making a proof, להוכיח, of making בירורים, of clarifying, right? So when we can reclarify, we can reassociate everything in this world as mamash being a function of רצון השם, of serving our purpose, of serving our תכלית in the world, then the ד׳ מלכויות will essentially fall away.

Instead of being their own kingdom, their own culture, their own priority, like we like the Gemara tells us, at the end of the days every nation Nations are going to come and say, "Yes, everything that we did was for כלל ישראל," and they're not going to be lying. The question was the framing, the question was the intention, not the act itself. They're not going to be lying, otherwise you would ask a question, how could they lie at the end of days? The answer is that no, it's really a question of intention. So when we reassociate ourselves with Hakadosh Baruch Hu, the ד' מלכיות will fall away, and that will happen through a process of תוכחה, we can define it as rebuke, and that is really the ultimate chesed.

So we had asked a question: Sometimes this תוכחה from the tzaddik is going to come with בזיונות, and how could that be? If anything, we said if a tzaddik's tachlit in this role is to be the מוכיח, to be the person who's the rebbe, to bring us back around, it should be given in a way that we could appreciate. How do we understand when a tzaddik gives us בזיונות, and then we have to accept it for our benefit? And parenthetically, we explained a lot of times we have to separate out the way that a message is given and the message itself.

Sometimes we don't like the way that somebody tells us something, that doesn't mean that the message is wrong. We can't allow our emotions and our defense system to get up and push off what somebody tells us if maybe that is takeh what we need to hear. But taking a step back, we had said, instead of, you know, each one of us has our own avodah, but there is also an avodah of the klal. Mamash if you're listening to this now, we just finished the parshiyot of Vayakhel and Pekudei. We said that every single person donated their piece to the Mishkan.

Ultimately, we discussed the נשיאים and so on as well. And then the only one, it seems, that didn't contribute to the Mishkan was Moshe Rabbeinu. Moshe Rabbeinu's contribution was to assemble, to create a שלימות from each individual piece that had its own שלימות. Then it all came to Moshe Rabbeinu, and he had the siyata dishmaya, the beams were extremely heavy, he had the siyata dishmaya. Moshe Rabbeinu, Moshe Mashiach is the one who was able to put together, to assemble the Mishkan, so now instead of just, you know, so to speak, a bag of parts, now it became the Mishkan.

Now it facilitated and brought down the השראת השכינה. So we had used a mashal of let's say, you know, a manager, director, vice president, president, CEO, at every level of leadership, of every level of accountability within a system, each individual person is responsible for their part. But the person who is their leader is not just directing, they're the one who actually bears ultimate responsibility. In our example, if Moshe Rabbeinu's job, kivayachol his tachlit in this process was to make it that the Mishkan should have השראת השכינה, then yes, every person at their piece, at their piece of the puzzle, at their altitude, had to perfect their individual giving.

But now, when all the pieces are together, at the highest level of this system, who bears the ultimate responsibility, the ultimate success, the ultimate leadership? That is Moshe Rabbeinu, and therefore, they're the ones who actually feel the failure the most acutely, even if it was of those people in their charge, because remember, their role is also to be the educator, the leader, not just to assemble the Mishkan, but the success of the individuals is also their success, and the failure is also their failure, which means that when there is a deficiency, they also feel that deficiency.

So now it's interesting, we've discussed the tzaddik, the rebbe, talmid chacham, all in different ways, צדיק הדור, all in different ways. This person who is acting as the rebbe, who is acting as the מוכיח, if this person is also the tzadik, they also, as it were, take it personally. Why? Because yes, on one hand, they're going and they're giving musar, they're giving tochacha to this person that has a chesaron because this piece is lacking. On the other hand, to the extent that there's this deficiency, the tzadik in his role as the leader of the generation of Klal Yisrael, this failure is also felt by them.

K'vayachol, perhaps we could say, l'mashal, again not a perfect mashal, the best coach of a losing team is still a losing coach. Now they wouldn't necessarily be faulted for that, right, they might have done their best. But on the other hand, right, we quoted the Gemara that said that there were certain Tannaim, Amoraim who would have mamash experienced נבואה if the people were ראוי for it. And on the other hand, there's Rashi mamash in this week's parsha, in Parashat Vayikra, that said that Moshe Rabbeinu, after the מרגלים, did not experience a level of נבואה because at that point the people weren't ראוי.

So, in a role as a leader, it's not a matter of the individual's level of ruchniyut what they reached, but they are going to be limited by the people in their charge. אין מלך בלא עם, right? So therefore, the tzadik in that role will feel it. But also, because they are defined by this leadership role, by this educational role, by this role as a Rebbe, and they understand the potential, they understand what everybody's capable of. If we are in this world, that means that the world would be deficient without us, there are no extra pieces.

They look at every member of Klal Yisrael, every one of, so to speak, the 600,000, they see the potential, the piece that we individually can fulfill. We don't see it ourself, we just think that, you know, we're maybe mediocre, we do our best. But They're the ones who understand what our full capabilities are, and they feel that pain when we do not fulfill our potential. They're the ones whose job it is to bring us along, and therefore the tzadik feels this pain extremely individually, personally, acutely. And when they give the tochacha, they're not detached. And since they feel it personally, there is a certain amount of pain to that, and therefore that's why it's delivered with בזיונות.

When a person is in an emotional state, right, they're giving over, so to speak, an intellectual message from an emotional state. On one hand, they feel this pain as a as an individual, as a person, within their role, and on the other hand, they're meant to give over this message to the other people. So that therefore we are able to understand why the tzadik sometimes delivers the tochacha with the בזיונות. But now, separately from that, they have to give this tochacha. How is it that they are sensitive to where these failings are? And we further explained that the middah of azut is really has two sides.

On one hand, there is a positive aspect of azut, azut d'kedushah, and there's a negative aspect. And I think that the framework that we used to explain it, at least that I think it worked within the Torah, azut is a breaking out of limitations that, you know, so to speak, makes sense. So if there are social norms, if there's a, you know, a natural a natural system, and we have to break out of that. We don't feel comfortable asking asking questions, we would be embarrassed. We have to attach ourselves to the Torah, and we have to do things that are certain times unacceptable.

That would be an azut d'kedushah. We're breaking out of everything that would ultimately try to confine us to a certain path, because we are going to attach ourselves to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. We need to attach ourselves to the Torah, and Torah, again, אין הביישן למד, the the the the Torah and also tefillah. We're approaching Hakadosh Baruch Hu, the מלך מלכי המלכים הקדוש ברוך הוא, in order to tell him why the system that he put in place should be changed, Rachmana litzlan. Somebody who doesn't have parnasa, somebody who doesn't have health, and we're coming and telling him that the system should be changed.

Now, the I think perhaps going back to a point that we discussed earlier, if a person is doing this because of retzon Hashem, we need health for us, for our loved ones, parnasa in order to fulfill retzon Hashem, so now we're not on the other side of the table from Hashem. That tempers the azut. What we're really doing is arguing, yes, the reason why maybe a person doesn't have parnasa or health was the old person, but now that they're going to reorient themselves with Hakadosh Baruch Hu, they're going to use all of their resources for Hashem, so now the the playing field has changed.

But notwithstanding that, there's a certain amount of azut to get up in front of Hakadosh Baruch Hu and ask for something, tefillah, as well as with Torah. The negative side of that azut is where a person has the appropriate limitations. They there there's the Torah and the mitzvot, and instead of breaking out of the world towards Hashem to be anchored in the truth, the objective truth of emet, they're breaking out for other priorities, other prerogatives, just to be a לץ, whatever it is. And that's going to be a negative a negative azut. So this middah, we're in this world, and one way or the other, we're either going to be breaking away from the world to elevate it, breaking past ceilings to get in touch with Hakadosh Baruch Hu, or breaking out in a negative way, leaking out the sides for our own for our own priorities, whatever it is.

The tzadik, through the tefillah, through the the the encountering the person and realizing where their azut lies, we explained how the the tefillah's the tzadik's role within his his own personal tefillah, but in within the tefillah of a tzibur, the tefillah of the nation, again, sort of leading the charge of of connecting all of Klal Yisrael with Hakadosh Baruch Hu, and therefore, since since the azut will present itself in tefillah, and we explained in last shiur two different reasons why davka during tefillah the azut will present itself. Perhaps it's worth it to go back and listen to the shiur just so we don't go too, you know, too far down any any particular rabbit holes.

But certainly, you know, at the very least we could say that when a person has these negative thoughts or certain things creep into their mind during tefillah, instead of being upset, the avodah perhaps is in the response, not in the fact that a thought presented itself. That is actually part of the process, right? If anything, the Baal HaTanya says that that would be ga'avah to say, "Oh, I should never have had a negative thought." Why, is it that you think that you're a tzadik? No, here this thought presented itself to you during tefillah, and now your avodah is in is in the response.

לא תתורו אחרי לבבכם, but that means that there's something to turn away towards. But no, now a person steels themselves, they dig in in order to have the appropriate to reorient themselves, the appropriate relationship and approach to tefillah and to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. So again, last shiur we said two different reasons why this עזות will present itself during tefillah, but because the tzaddik is sensitive to our tefillah, he will see the עזות, he will see where we're holding, whether we're trying to break out of our limitations to Hakadosh Baruch Hu or away from Hakadosh Baruch Hu, and therefore they were able to understand for each individual what תוכחה it is they need so that they can, again, fill their piece of the puzzle and ultimately everybody comes together so that the tzaddik can build this into the Mishkan and bring down the השראת השכינה.

So now, plugging this back in to we will read through just it's pretty short, I'm going to read through the the מאמר חז״ל in from from all the way in the beginning of the Torah, I'm actually going to read these ideas into the Torah, into this idea, and then we're going to see it inside. So we had said the מישרא דסכינא במאי קטלי לה? A garden of knives, how is a person able to harvest it? The answer was בקרנא דחמרא, with the horn of a donkey. ומי איכא קרנא לחמרא? So the Athenian scholars said, רבי יהושע בן חנניה, you're telling me that we can harvest a garden of knives with a donkey's horn, does a donkey have a horn?

רבי יהושע בן חנניה said, ומישרא דסכינא מי הוי? Is there any such thing as a garden of knives? אייתי תרי ביעי, they brought him two eggs. אמרו ליה, they said to him, הי זוגסא חיוורתא והי זוגסא אוכמתא? Which of these is from a white pair and which is from a black pair? אייתי איהו תרי גביני, he brought them two cheeses. אמר להו, האי דעיזא חיוורתא והאי דעיזא אוכמתא? Which one is from a white goat, a white עז, and which one is from a black עז? And then we went and explained it. You know what, actually, let's let's see it inside and then we will put it together back into the summary.

Okay, inside. Now hopefully it should actually be pretty pretty pretty straight through. I think we summed up most of the points, but but a few things maybe we we didn't we left out as well. וזהו, this idea that was asked by the Athenian scholars to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Chananya: מישרא דסכינא, a garden of knives, היינו בחינת חכמה תתאה הנ״ל, בחינת מלכות הנ״ל. This מישרא דסכינא, this a סכין is something that's very sharp. חכמה is sharp. We said that our כלי, we're trying to receive from the שכל עליון to the שכל תחתון, the חכמה תתאה, that is represented by the סכין.

So this מישרא, this garden of the סכין, of the חכמה of the lower חכמה that that is our כלי, שהוא לימוד הנ״ל, when he says הנ״ל, he's referencing other other places, whether it's in paragraph ד, it's in paragraph ב, but he says, בחינת הסכן הסכנתי, לשון לימוד, כתרגומו: המאלף אליפנא. It's referencing the discussion between Bilam's donkey and Bilam, when Bilam's donkey at some point says, ההסכן הסכנתי, is this the way that I have knowing to act, is this how I'm accustomed to act? But but that is an accustomed is the way I'm learned to act.

So you see הסכן הסכנתי is a reference to learning something. And again, we had said that the Torah is the חכמה תתאה, but the Torah is also the channel by which we can act. Further, בחינת חרב נוקמת, שהיא בחינת מלכות הנ״ל. So the idea of a סכין, the idea of a knife represents מלכות in two different ways: number one, it's חכמה תתאה, because a סכין is a knife, הסכן הסכנתי is המאלף אליפנא, and second of all, a חרב is a בחינה of of מלכות, and a סכין is a knife like a sword, it's something that cuts off.

And therefore, we had already said in two different ways that we have to build up our our כלי, we have to build up the מלכות, and also, once the מלכות separates itself and it's יונק and it associates itself directly with the four מלכיות, we have to take a sword and we have to cut it away, we have to make that הבדלה. So when you have this מישרא דסכינא, which in a second we're going to associate מישרא with with the scream, the scream of the the disruption in the process where the משפיע can't be משפיע, הקדוש ברוך הוא can't give us, and we can't receive, this מישרא is the scream of the סכין, of the מלכות, of the חכמה תתאה, which can no longer receive, the question is is, how do we build that up?

So inside, מישרא, פירש Rashi: ערוגה, היינו בחינת זעקת מושל. זעקה is a scream, a מושל is a מלכות, so it's the scream of the מלכות. כמו שכתוב: כאיל תערוג, like the איל is associated, it's like a deer, but it's associated with the מלכות, תערוג is to scream, so we see that that that ערוגה, which is a garden, which is the מישרא, is associated with screaming, and therefore reinterpreting the מישרא דסכינא, when you have the סכין, the lower מלכות, which is screaming, it's in pain because it's no longer associated with the source, it's no longer receiving from Ratzon Hashem, how are we able to build it back up?

And this represents an extreme problem. If my head is sewed on straight and I then I and I know what I need, then I can try to detach myself from negative influences, but when the מלכות itself is reoriented, when I I lose my sense of straightness, I I I my own eyes become distorted, how can I reachieve that? I'm going to need something from the outside. במאי קטלי לה? How can I harvest it? How can I cut it off from the from the negative מלכיות? How can I turn it back straight? פירש Rashi: במה חותכין אותה?

How do I cut it away? היינו במה חותכין ומבדילין את המלכות הנ״ל? How do I cut away this מלכות, this חכמה תתאה, this כלי from being oriented and integrated with the with the negative influences, the negative מלכות, it's יונק the wrong things? How am I able to reattach it with the objective truth when it's already sunk now into the distorted perspective, כדי להציל מצעקה הנ״ל, in order to save it from the זעקה, from the scream, from the מיצר דסכינא, from the detachment, ובבחינת חתיכה לארבע כנפות הנ״ל, we had referenced this earlier, cutting into four pieces, but again cutting it away from the ארבע מלכיות, and this is the ultimate pain of potential unfulfilled, right, of of being held back from fulfilling from fulfilling our purpose.

והשיב להם, I mean the ultimate עבדות, again we're going into Pesach so it's not a הגדה שיעור, but when when a person is plugged into purpose, they are a servant of the truth, right? This is the only way. They're מוכרח, that is really בעצם the ultimate freedom. They're not held back from fulfilling purpose. Pharaoh represented the utter opposite, that was the ultimate in pain, the ultimate servitude represented, whether it's building in quicksand or having them the men and the women do each other's tasks, not being able to fulfill what their what's appropriate for them. והשיב להם בקרנא דחמרא, with the horn of a donkey.

קרנא is going to represent a קרן like a shofar, תוכחה, a קול, and חמרא we're going to associate with the רגלים. This is going to be with תוכחה, with the קול, with bringing out again purpose, of building our כלי up with the הארת פנים, with the אור of the שלש רגלים. This is going to be able to reorient ourselves towards הקדוש ברוך הוא, היינו על ידי תוכחה, שעל ידי זה נתגלה החסד, we explained why the תוכחה is associated with חסד, ובזה קוצרין וחותכין את הדלות. This is how we are going to cut, harvest the דלות.

דלות we said is דלית ליה מגרמיה כלום. The ultimate the מלכות, דלות is four, so it could be like the four מלכיות, but the ultimate מלכות is דלות which is four, but it's דלית. דלית we said is the ultimate התבטלות, is when not none of your own characteristics, biases get in the way. The ultimate מלכות דקדושה is when you're totally reflective of רצון השם, בבחינת קצרו לפי חסד כנ״ל, to harvest according to chesed, that's when the מלכות is revealed. קרנא זה בבחינת קול המוכיח, and קרן is going to be like the voice, the voice of the מוכיח, of the Rebbe, of the tzaddik reorienting, reclarifying, reassociating us with מלכות דקדושה, בבחינת קרן השופר which gives tochacha, which gives rebuke, it's תשובה, ובבחינת הרם כשופר קולך, lift your voice like the lift your קול, your voice like the שופר, והגד לעמי פשעם, and tell my nation their sins.

היינו תוכחה הנ״ל, this is how we get to this chesed which is able to cut us off from the מלכיות. חמרא זה בבחינת יששכר חמור גרם, that Yissachar bears the load the עול תורה like a strong חמור, like a strong donkey, בבחינת ומבני יששכר יודעי בינה לעתים. What was Yissachar? They were the ones who knew the bina. We explained already how bina is associated with the רגלים and with the לב, לעתים at the times, the רגלים, so we're associating the חמור represented by Yissachar who knew the times the way that the calendar worked, or with the מועדים, so we have already קרנא דחמרא, the קול, the tochacha associated with the רגלים, כי על ידי התוכחה מעלין את השכל לרגלים, through the tochacha we are able to raise our daat to the רגלים, שהוא בבחינת בינה לעתים, which is represented by understanding bina, daat, לעתים, to the times of the רגלים, to the שורש.

So, again, in the question and answer form, how is it that we are able to to address the pain of the מיצר דסכינא, of the disassociation of the חכמה תתאה, which now has has fallen into ארבע מלכיות, and now there's a pain, there's a scream of the משפיע not being able to give, and the כלי not being able to receive, to fulfill its function? We do this by cutting it off of the ארבע מלכיות through the קול of תוכחה, which reassociates it with the שמחה of the שמחת המצוה, the הארת פנים of the רגלים. The next question is actually, it's not brought in the Torah itself, but the notes the notes bring it from the Parpera'ot LaChochmah.

The next question is, and he says: Does a donkey have a horn? Meaning, who wants to receive this rebuke if it might be produced with בזיונות, in a demeaning manner? That was in paragraph seven. And רבי יהושע answered: Is there a garden of knives? Meaning, who can bear the מיצר, who can bear the scream of the knives? What's worse: the בזיונות that we experience when we receive תוכחה not the right way, or the agony of unfulfilled purpose, of being able to to to not achieve, to not express ourself in the way that's actually in line with our שורש?

That pain of the scream of disassociation, of being held back is even worse. And therefore, yes, we're going to be able to receive in the בזיונות, even though we might not want to receive that תוכחה, we will ultimately attach ourselves to our source and we'll be able to see past the way that it was given, the humiliation, the embarrassment of the way that we receive that rebuke. Okay, so now the next piece, it says אייתו ליה תרי ביעי. They brought him two eggs. Now in Aramaic, a ביצה, an egg is a ביעא, right? We say there's the Torah about why we call Maseches Beitzah, in Talmud Bavli we call it ביצה, ביעא, ביעא is the Aramaic way of saying an egg.

But ביעא, בעו means צלותא, בעותא is also the Aramaic word for tefilah. So, it says in the מאמר חז״ל says they brought him two eggs, they brought him multiple tefilot, entreaties, לשון צלותא, בעותא, בחינת תפילות. ואמרי הי דחיורתא והי דאוכמתא. Okay, so now you explained why the תוכחה, the קול is going to be able to achieve this purpose, but you need to have תוכחה for that and the tzadik is at the helm. He is sensitive to all of the tefilot of Klal Yisrael. How is he going to know which tefilah was the good one or the bad one even so that he can to be able to give the appropriate תוכחה to the right person?

היינו שאתה אומר שעל ידי תוכחה מעלין את המלכות כנ״ל. Through תוכחה you'll be able to raise up the מלכות back to the רגלים, יודעי בינה לעיתים. הלא איך אפשר להוכיח? Okay, but the tzadik has to give tochacha. How is he going to know, there's 600,000 Jews so to speak, how is he going to know who needs what tochacha? כי הלא התפילות באין ביחד. They're all the tefillot are coming together, all the pieces are brought are brought at once so to speak to the Mishkan, right? ואיך I go back, I'm using this example as well because the concept of the tzadik and the tefillot being put together, it's also mentioned at the end of Torah ב׳ which we've mentioned, which also discusses the interaction of Torah and tefillah and so on, and of course so does Torah א׳.

ואיך יודע להוכיח לפי התפילה? How is the tzadik going to know how to give tochacha according to the tefillah? כי אינו יודע איזה תפילה של הכשר או להפך. Who's the white and who's the black? Which egg, which ביעה, which tefillah comes from where? וזהו הי דחיורתא והי דאוכמתא, היינו איזה תפילה מאיש כשר או להפך. Which egg, which ביעה, which tefillah comes from which person? Even now that we've established that tochacha can re-establish the חכמת תתאה and re-associate it with its source, with become מלכות דקדושה, but how is that tochacha going to be achieved? אייתו תרי גבינות.

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Chananya brought two cheeses. היינו בחינת ״וכגבינה תקפיאני״. What's cheese? It's something that floats, we said earlier in the Torah. היינו בחינת תרי תורות הנ״ל. There's two ways that we associate, that we understand, that we relate to the presentation of Torah. Now, what we understand as Torah is the tip of the iceberg. We've mentioned the Zohar in Beha'alotcha a few times, we saw it quoted, that when you understand something as the הלבשה, as the outer interface, as the tip of the iceberg representing things that go, you know, infinitely deep beyond the surface, so then you can relate to it appropriately and keep on trying to break down break down, you know, levels and and and have deeper and deeper understanding, and that's the appropriate way that we understand the Torah, in terms of the תרי״ג מצוות that we have, in terms of in in terms of the stories that we encounter in Torah.

This is just the outer piece that we have. But chas veshalom, is this a a הגשמה, is this a physicality? This is not the outer limits of what we have. This is just the interface, the way that we that we are presented with it, and then we can go into the פנימיות infinitely. So that's it's as if the Torah that we have in this level until we have total דעת, this is as if it's floating on the top. That's one way of understanding Torah, in the appropriate way. The other way is to say that it's like chaff, chas veshalom rachmana litzlan.

The inappropriate way to relate to the Torah is that this is just this is all it is. It's not the tip of the iceberg, it's just only what's floating on the surface. So depending which way you relate to Torah, that's either the appropriate way, the תורה דקדושה, or chas v'shalom rachmana litzlan to call it the Torah of the סטרא אחרא. שהן בחינת כפוי וקל, בחינת פסולת, בחינת פסול לך. On one hand, we say that this is like, not again, not פסולת in a bad way, but this is what is above the surface, so to speak, what we see in terms of the Torah, that's the תורה הקדושה, בחינת ״לא תעשה לך פסל״ כנ״ל.

Or it's פסל is like in עבודה זרה, that's the הגשמה, that's disassociating the Torah from its source. It's taking the Torah and trying to define it by, you know, this-worldly ideas and ideologies, it's it's making it into a it's disassociating it from the expression of the infinite. ואמר להו, so he said to them, הי דאיזה חיורתא והי דאיזה אוכמתא, היינו תרי עזות כנ״ל. There there's two separate ways that we relate to the Torah, and those come from which way is this the עזות דקדושה like we explained, breaking through and relating to Torah and understanding the appropriate way that goes that breaks totally out of this world infinitely up, infinitely deep, however you say, or is this the עזות, no, this is just a surface deep, it's breaking out of the system of objective truth, right?

שהן עזות דקדושה ועזות דסטרא אחרא, שמהם תרי תורות הנ״ל. So the idea of two cheeses is relating to two different ways that things could float, with things that float being פסל representing in one way or the other, do we the the people are they relating to תורה דקדושה, or the Torah of סטרא אחרא כאילו. ולפי העזות, and according to the way that the people's עזות are, יכול לידע את התפילות כנ״ל. That will also represent its way in how they daven, in their tefillah. And since the tzaddik is sensitive to the tefillah, he will know where every individual is holding and what תוכחה they need.

שעל ידי זה יכול להוכיחם כנ״ל. And he'll be able to give them תוכחה. שעל ידי זה, through this תוכחה that comes through the חכם, they will each person will recognize what they need to work on, חותכין ומבדילין את בחינת המלכות, and they will be able to make a הבדלה, to cut. off, to reorient themselves into becoming a כלי for their having a מלכות דקדושה. So now they fulfill their piece, and again as part of the bigger klal as well, ומצילין אותה מצעקת מושל, saving themselves from the scream of the מושל, the scream of the מלכות, the scream of the מלכות represented by their particular כלי, and the scream of the מלכות of the משפיע that wants to be able to give over, to reattach herself, ומעלין אותה לבחינת אור הפנים המאיר ברגלים כנ״ל.

זאת התורה החלה להאמר על הפסוק: ״ויהי מקץ״. This pasuk, Rabbi Nathan now adds on, Rabbi Nachman started to say by the פרשה ״ויהי מקץ״, אך לא סיים לבאר זה הפסוק על פי התורה הזאת, but Rabbeinu never finished explaining it in the context of that פסוק, ואמר אחר כך שאם היה רוצה לסיים פירוש הפסוק, היה צריך לומר עוד תורה כזאת כדי לבאר הפסוק. To explain it fully in the pasuk would have taken another Torah as long as this was. Period. Okay, so I think we, we summed it up as well as we could. The last paragraph, paragraph י', it says over here it's not clear if this is an addition, if this is a new idea, if it's associated with paragraph ט', but we had said from the קול, the voice has two ideas, I mean there's the breath and then there's the words, but there's the קול, there's the tone.

Depending on your קול, that totally, like we said, the intention, the way that a person has a קול totally defines what they say. A person could say, you know, what? You know, what? Whatever a person says, the קול, the voice, the tonality, that really comes to define it. Is it a directive? Is it a question? Is it with confidence? Is it מלכות? מקולו של אדם, and we said that this קול of the shofar, this is what comes to be able to assert the מלכות, the ממשלה, to reassert them as the מלך and to give the tochacha to the people in their charge, to bring them along.

So now the last paragraph says, associates קול and מלכות. מקולו של אדם יכולין לידע אז בחינת המלכות שלו. From the קול of a person you can tell where a person's holding as far as his מלכות is concerned. כי יש בכל אחד ואחד בחינת מלכות, והוא ניכר בקולו. Every person has this מלכות. If you're here, then you have the ability to connect. Every person has this מלכות, and where a person's מלכות is holding, we discussed it in terms of עזות, but it'll be recognizable from their קול, and we said קול also in תפילה. כי אין שני קולות שווין.

There's no two voices, there's no two קולות that are equal. כי קול של כל אחד ואחד משונה מחבירו. Every individual has their own task, and even within a person himself, the two קולות are not going to be, are not going to be the same. על כן יכולין להכיר את האדם בקולו. When you hear a voice, either between two people or even, you know, one person has one voice as opposed to another, כמו שנראה בחוש. Like we see, we can sense. כי כפי בחינת האדם, כן הוא קולו. Where a person is holding, that will be his voice: is it weak, is it strong, is it cautioned, confidence.

על ידי הקול יכולין להכיר אז בחינת המלכות שלו, and you'll be able to tell his מלכות in terms of how he is reflecting all of the, מלכות, sort of governance according to רצון השם. If a person has מלכות דקדושה, then their system of governance, the way that everything reflects, is going to be the רצון that, that gives חיות to the מלכות. כי יש קול ענות גבורה, וקול ענות חלושה. And the difference was not in what the words were, it was in the tonality. It's talking when Moshe Rabbeinu came down from Har Sinai. כפי בחינת המלכות של כל אחד ואחד.

Where do we see a ראיה to this? על כן שאול, who was chasing after Dovid when he saw that Dovid Hamelech would be the king, מצינו שם במקרא כשנזדמנו יחד שאול ודוד, when Dovid Hamelech and Shaul came together, אמר לו שאול לדוד: ״הקולך זה בני דוד?״ Is this the voice of my son Dovid? What does it mean? Shaul Hamelech knew who Dovid was. שהבין שאול בהקול, he understood from the קול of Dovid, the voice of דוד, שהוא חזק בבחינת מלכות. Shaul was the מלך and Shaul and he knew at this point that the מלכות, he was going to be losing the מלכות, and he understood from Dovid's voice this quality of מלכות.

ושאל את דוד: ״הקולך זה בני דוד?״ Is this your voice, my son Dovid? שתמה שאול על קול של דוד. He was, he was confused by the sound of this voice coming from Dovid. כי הבין שהוא קול של מלך ממש. He understood from the קול that this was the קול of מלכות. על כן רצה שאול לשאת את קולו, so Shaul wanted to raise his own voice to reassert himself, דהיינו להגביה את קולו למעלה מקולו של דוד, אבל לא היה יכול, but he wasn't able to. וזהו ״וישא שאול את קולו ויבך״. He raised his voice, but he cried, דהיינו שרצה לשאת להגביה קולו כנ״ל, he wanted to raise his own voice to reassert his own מלכות, אבל היה קול נבכה, but it was low, it was weak, it was a cry.

וזה בחינת ויבך, this is what it means that he cried, שהיה הקול נבכה, that the קול was a crying voice, קול נמוך של בכיה, was a low voice of crying. על כן אמר שאול אז אל דוד, so Shaul said to David: ״ידעתי כי מלוך תמלוך״. I know that you are going to be the one. That's why your voice is the קול of malchut and his was not. כי ידע זה על הקול, על קול הנ״ל כנ״ל. He understood this from the voice of David. Okay, so Be'ezrat Hashem, I think between the introduction and going through it, we, we spoke out the pieces that we could speak on this Torah, and Be'ezrat Hashem next week we start Torah ל״א. Go Mechayil el chayil, be'ezrat Hashem. Okay.