English translation — מאמר בחודש השלישי תשכ"ט

With the help of Heaven.

Shabbos Parshas Bamidbar,

Rosh Chodesh and Erev Rosh Chodesh Sivan,

5729

"In the third month of the children of Israel's going out from the land of Egypt, on that day they came to the Sinai desert."

And it is brought in the Gemara,

It is written here "on that day they came to the Sinai desert" and it is written there

"This month shall be for you the beginning of months,"

just as there it is Rosh Chodesh, so too here it is Rosh Chodesh.

And Tosafos questioned,

for in Tractate Pesachim

it is brought

(on the verse

"And Hashem spoke to Moshe in the Sinai desert in the second year... in the first month"),

it derives "desert" from "desert,"

it is written here "in the Sinai desert" and it is written there

"And Hashem spoke to Moshe in the Sinai desert, in the Tent of Meeting, on the first of the second month,"

just as there it is on Rosh Chodesh, so too here it is on Rosh Chodesh,

and since in the verse "in the third month" it also says "desert,"

why did it not derive here "desert" from "desert"?

And it needs to be understood,

for ostensibly,

the derivation from the gezeirah shavah of "this" "this" reveals that the explanation of "on that day" is Rosh Chodesh,

unlike if they had learned from the gezeirah shavah of "desert" from "desert"

[where the teaching is only that the matter stated in the verse

("they came to the Sinai desert")

was on Rosh Chodesh]

the explanation of "on that day" would not be understood

[And there is a further advantage in the gezeirah shavah of "this" "this" over the gezeirah shavah of "desert" from "desert,"

for "this month" its explanation is Rosh Chodesh,

unlike "Sinai desert" and "first of the month"

(Rosh Chodesh)

which are two separate matters],

and what is the reasoning of Tosafos that it should have derived "desert" from "desert"?

2)

And this will be understood according to what is explained in Torah Ohr, the discourse beginning with the word "Zeh,"

that the essence

of receiving the Torah is as it is written

(at the beginning of the matter of the Giving of the Torah)

"And Elokim spoke all these words, saying,"

for the explanation of the word "saying" in this verse is that at the time of the Giving of the Torah, the power was given to every single Jew,

that his study of Torah

[all these words,

which also refers to the entire Torah]

would be in the manner of "to say,"

to repeat the matters that the Holy One, blessed is He, says,

as it is written

"My tongue will answer Your word,"

that the Torah is "Your word,"

that my tongue answers like one who answers after the speaker.

And this is the connection of the Giving of the Torah to the holiday of Shavuos,

for on Shavuos is the drawing down of Kesser

[and as is known

in the explanation of the verse

"You shall count fifty days,"

that on Shavuos the fiftieth gate of Binah is drawn down,

and the fiftieth gate is Kesser],

and this that at the Giving of the Torah the power was given that the Torah study of Israel would be in ultimate self-nullification,

that he has no independent existence at all and is only like one who answers after the caller,

is because at the Giving of the Torah the revelation of Kesser was drawn down.

And this is, "In the third month... on this day they came to the wilderness of Sinai,"

that on Rosh Chodesh Sivan was the preparation for receiving the Torah,

because on Rosh Chodesh is the birth of the moon,

when then

(at the time of the birth)

it is only a single point,

and this indicates its bittul (self-nullification),

that it has nothing of itself at all.

And so it is with Israel, who are similar and count by the moon,

that on Rosh Chodesh is a time fit for revealing the power of bittul that exists in each one of Israel.

Therefore on Rosh Chodesh Sivan is the preparation for receiving the Torah,

that a person's study of Torah should be with bittul,

like one who answers after the one who calls out.

3)

And the maamar continues with further explanation of this, that Rosh Chodesh Sivan is the preparation for receiving the Torah,

for when Israel left Egypt they began to count the Omer,

which is the preparation for receiving the Torah,

and the seven weeks of the counting of the Omer

("Seven weeks you shall count for yourself")

correspond to the seven sefiros (midos),

and on Rosh Chodesh Sivan, which is the third day of the seventh week, there already exist the three sefiros of Chesed, Gevurah, and Tiferes

(which are the primary sefiros)

of the counting of Malchus,

and it is as if the entire seventh week already exists,

and therefore on Rosh Chodesh Sivan they came to the wilderness of Sinai, because then the main preparation for the Giving of the Torah was completed.

And it can be said,

that which the maamar explains two explanations regarding this, that Rosh Chodesh Sivan is the preparation for receiving the Torah,

is,

because in the preparation for receiving the Torah there are two matters.

The perfection of the person,

that in order for him to be fit to receive the Torah, he must be at the ultimate level of perfection.

And his bittul (self-nullification).

For since the Torah is infinitely higher than the person

(all the more so than it is higher than the upper worlds),

therefore,

when the person has a sense of self-existence,

his existence is

(like)

the opposite of the Torah,

and in order for the person to receive the Torah, it is through his bittul.

And therefore the maamar explains,

that this—that on Rosh Chodesh Sivan they came to the wilderness of Sinai and were prepared to receive the Torah—

is,

because on Rosh Chodesh Sivan there exist both matters.

This, that on Rosh Chodesh is the birth of the moon,

when then it is only a single point,

bittul.

And this, that on Rosh Chodesh Sivan the primary sefiros were completed

(also)

in the counting of Malchus—the perfection of the person.

And two matters in the perfection of the person that is accomplished through the counting of the Omer.

That the counting of the Omer is the matter of refining and purifying the midos (attributes),

and that through the counting of the Omer there is the drawing down of the forty-nine gates of Binah (understanding).

4)

And this is, "On this day they came to the desert of Sinai,"

and it is explained in Torah Ohr,

that "midbar" (desert) is from the term "dibur" (speech),

and it is called "midbar" with the addition of the letter mem

(for mem is one of the letters of Emanti"o that indicate a diminishment of the matter26)

to indicate that the speech is in a state of self-nullification.

[And this concept also applies to a desert in its simple sense,

"a land not sown"27,

for when speech is according to one's intellect and will,

the intellect and will are the sowing through which the growth of speech occurs.

And the concept of a desert, a land not sown, is that the speech of Torah that one speaks is the word of G-d and is not sown from his own intellect and will28].

And "Sinai" is that hatred descended upon the nations of the world29,

and it is that the Torah is called "Tushiyah"30

because it weakens the power of the sitra achra.

And it can be said,

that this that "on this day they came to the desert" is because on this day

(Rosh Chodesh)

the moon

[and likewise Israel who count by the moon]

is only a point,

and this that on this day they came to Sinai, that hatred descended upon the evil inclination31,

is because on this day

(Rosh Chodesh Sivan)

the refinement of the core traits of the animal soul was completed.

5)

And it needs to be understood,

that according to the above,

this that on Rosh Chodesh Sivan the core traits were completed is an explanation in the perfection of man,

and in the discourse in Torah Ohr it connects this with that on Rosh Chodesh is the birth of the moon,

the concept of self-nullification.

And the explanation of this can be said,

that the concept of the birth of the moon is

(not its self-nullification,

but rather on the contrary32)

that its existence is born,

by the light of the sun being drawn into it.

And this that at the time of its birth it is only a point,

which indicates its self-nullification

(as above),

is,

that the existence of the moon,

its light,

is in a state of self-nullification,

so that it is felt that the light within it is not from itself and it only receives from the sun.

And likewise is it with Israel who count by the moon,

that the concept of the self-nullification of Rosh Chodesh in the service of man is that his existence is in a state of self-nullification.

[And it can be said that this is what is explained in Torah Ohr, that this that Rosh Chodesh is called "this day"

(without specification)

is because "this day" is love that is in the aspect of self-nullification

[for "day" is light, as it is written33

"And G-d called the light day," and love is light,

and this is yichudah ila'ah

(therefore Moshe Rabbeinu prophesied with this34),

and "this day" is love that is in the aspect of self-nullification of yichudah ila'ah],

for one of the reasons that love is called by the name "light,"

is,

because love is an expansion35

[and therefore fear, which is a contraction

(the opposite of expansion)

is called by the name "darkness"36],

and the self-nullification of Rosh Chodesh is not in a manner that one is nullified from his existence

(like the self-nullification of fear),

but rather,

that the expansion

(the existence)

of his is in a state of self-nullification].

And based on this, the connection of the two concepts of Rosh Chodesh Sivan can be explained

(the self-nullification of the moon and the completion of the core traits),

for the concept of the birth of the moon is that the existence is in a state of self-nullification.

6)

And based on this, it can be explained what the Tosafos questioned, that it should have learned "midbar" from "midbar,"

for this that on Rosh Chodesh Sivan they came to the aspect of "midbar" is a self-nullification more elevated than that Rosh Chodesh is called "this day."

For the concept of "this day" is that it has existence

(even to the extent of the existence of expansion,

"day")

except that its existence is in a state of self-nullification

("this"),

but not so this that on Rosh Chodesh Sivan they came to the aspect of "midbar"

[that his speech is not his own speech at all,

and here the person is only a vessel for the word of G-d that speaks through him,

similar to "the word of G-d in the mouth of the prophet"37]

is a nullification of existence.

And since the main virtue of Rosh Chodesh Sivan is that on it they came to the self-nullification of "midbar,"

therefore there is room to say that the hint in the verse

(that this was on Rosh Chodesh Sivan)

is in the word "midbar"38.

And this that the lesson in the Gemara is from "on this day,"

is,

for the concept of "this day" of Rosh Chodesh Sivan is more elevated even than the self-nullification of "midbar,"

as will be explained below.

9)

And this will be understood based on what our Sages, of blessed memory, said:

"At the time that Israel preceded 'we will do' to 'we will hear,' the ministering angels came and tied two crowns to each and every Jew, one corresponding to 'we will do' and one corresponding to 'we will hear.'"

And the precise point in this is known,

that at the beginning of the statement, "at the time that they preceded etc.," it implies that this tying of two crowns to them was because they preceded "we will do" to "we will hear,"

while at the conclusion of the statement it says, "one corresponding to 'we will do' and one corresponding to 'we will hear,'"

meaning that the two crowns are for "we will do" and "we will hear" themselves.

And the Rebbe Maharash explains in his maamar beginning "B'sha'ah shehikdimu" said in Parshas Bamidbar one hundred years ago,

that "naaseh" is the acceptance of the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven, and "nishma" is the acceptance of the yoke of the commandments.

And the matter of the precedence of "naaseh" to "nishma" is as the statement of our Sages, of blessed memory:

"Why did the portion of 'Shema' precede 'V'hayah im shamoa'? So that one should first accept upon himself the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven, and afterwards accept upon himself the yoke of the commandments."

And he explains there,

that the first portion is ratzo (running/ecstasy) and self-sacrifice, and the second portion is shov (return).

And just as in ratzo and shov,

first there must be ratzo and then shov,

similarly it is regarding acceptance of the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven and acceptance of the yoke of the commandments,

that before the acceptance of the yoke of the commandments there must be the acceptance of the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven.

And based on this, he explains there

what our Sages said, "at the time that they preceded etc.,"

that even though the two crowns are corresponding to "naaseh" and "nishma" themselves

[one corresponding to "naaseh" and one corresponding to "nishma"],

because in order for there to be the shov

(nishma),

there must be the precedence of ratzo

(naaseh).

And he continues in the maamar there,

that this tying of two crowns to them

(specifically crowns),

is,

because a crown is a makif (encompassing light),

sovev (surrounding),

and there are two matters in this,

the ascent of the memaleh (pervading light) into the sovev, and the drawing down of the sovev into the memaleh.

And seemingly the intention is,

that the crown corresponding to "naaseh"

(ratzo)

is the ascent of the memaleh into the sovev, and the crown corresponding to "nishma"

(shov)

is the drawing down of the sovev into the memaleh.

And it can be said,

that this which the maamar adds, that this tying of two crowns to them is because a crown is a makif,

is,

because from the language of our Sages, "at the time that they preceded etc., they tied two crowns to them," it implies that the precise point of the precedence of "naaseh" to "nishma" is related to the two crowns that are corresponding to "naaseh" and "nishma"

(and not to "naaseh" and "nishma" themselves),

therefore he explains that a crown is a makif and sovev, and the two crowns are two matters in the sovev,

because this is an explanation of the fact that the tying of the two crowns was specifically through their having preceded "naaseh" to "nishma"

(as will be explained below).

And this which he explains beforehand, that the need to precede "naaseh" to "nishma" is because "naaseh" and "nishma" are like ratzo and shov,

is an explanation of the fact that the crown corresponding to "nishma"

(makif and sovev)

is specifically when the "nishma" is after the precedence of "naaseh."

Because makif and sovev is above any connection to worlds,

and since "nishma" is shov and a drawing down below,

therefore,

this tying of a crown

(makif and sovev which is above the world)

corresponding to "nishma"

(a drawing down below)

is specifically because the "nishma" was after the precedence of "naaseh,"

ratzo and ascent above.

8)

And explanation is needed,

after all, the entire matter of acceptance of a yoke,

even the acceptance of the yoke of the commandments

(nishma),

is bittul (self-nullification),

for the matter of bittul is that a person goes out of his own existence,

and the tying of the crown corresponding to "nishma" is specifically when the "nishma" is after the precedence of "naaseh."

And the explanation of this can be said based on what is known,

that the makif of keter is the true makif that is above the makif that is related to the internal.

For this is the difference between keter and gulgalta,

that gulgalta is a makif that is related to the internal,

analogous to the skull in a person which encompasses the brain but is related to it,

for the skull is from his body like the brain.

And the makif of keter is a makif that is above any connection to the internal,

analogous to a crown in its simple sense, which is a circlet upon the brain and skull and has no connection to them

(for the crown is made of precious stones and not from the person's body).

And although gulgalta is also called by the name "keter,"

this is in a general sense,

but the essence of the crown is the makif that is not related to the internal

(which is above the makif of gulgalta).

And this is analogous to the will in a person,

for will is a makif upon all the faculties and limbs,

and it has two levels.

The will to do some thing through one's faculties,

for this will, although it rules over all the faculties because it encompasses them,

nevertheless,

this very fact that it desires the action of the faculties,

is proof that it has a connection to them — this is the makif of gulgalta.

And it is a descent relative to the will itself as it is above the will to do — this is the makif of keter.

And behold, that which on the holiday of Shavuos is the drawing down of the crown,

it is the true crown that is above Gulgalta.

And similarly, regarding the two crowns corresponding to Naaseh and Nishma that were drawn on the eve of Shavuos,

they are encompassing lights that are above any relation to the internal.

And based on this, we can explain that the binding of the crown corresponding to Nishma was specifically through their having preceded Naaseh to Nishma,

because the self-nullification of accepting the yoke of mitzvos is a self-nullification to the will,

and since the mitzvos are commands to the person,

behold, the will of mitzvos is in the manner of the will

(of the person)

who wants to act through his powers,

[this is] the encompassing light of Gulgalta.

And the drawing down of the encompassing light of the crown

(an encompassing light that is above any relation to the internal)

is through the self-nullification of accepting the yoke of the kingdom of heaven,

self-nullification to the Owner of the will.

And by their having preceded Naaseh to Nishma,

they bound for themselves two crowns, one corresponding to Naaseh and one corresponding to Nishma,

because through the precedence of Naaseh to Nishma,

even the self-nullification of accepting the yoke of mitzvos is in a manner that there is felt within it in revelation

that it comes from the self-nullification of accepting the yoke of the kingdom of heaven,

self-nullification to the Owner of the will.

And the explanation of the elevation that occurs in the self-nullification of Nishma through the precedence of the self-nullification of Naaseh,

will be understood by first prefacing,

that just as Above,

the self-nullification of accepting the yoke of mitzvos is to the will

(revelation)

and the self-nullification of accepting the yoke of the kingdom of heaven is to the Owner of the will,

so too is it regarding the person,

that the self-nullification of accepting the yoke of mitzvos is in the revelations of the person,

that he will do all that he is commanded, and moreover that this

(doing what he is commanded)

will be his will,

and the self-nullification of accepting the yoke of the kingdom of heaven is in the person himself,

that his entire existence is that he is a servant of the King,

the King of kings, the Holy One, blessed be He.

And from this it is understood,

that the superiority of accepting the yoke of the kingdom of heaven over accepting the yoke of mitzvos is also in the matter of self-nullification.

For in accepting the yoke of mitzvos,

there remains with him and in him an existence that is not nullified,

and the true self-nullification is in accepting the yoke of the kingdom of heaven,

that his entire existence is that he is a servant of the King.

[And this is that there must be

(also)

accepting the yoke of mitzvos, in order that the self-nullification be

(also)

regarding the actual fulfillment of Torah and mitzvos].

And when the self-nullification of Nishma

(accepting the yoke of mitzvos)

is after and through the precedence of the self-nullification of Naaseh

(accepting the yoke of the kingdom of heaven),

such that it is felt in revelation that this one who accepts upon himself to do all that he is commanded is because he himself is a servant of the King,

then,

even the self-nullification of Nishma is in his entire existence

(regarding his revealed powers),

and it is not at all possible that he will not fulfill the command.

9)

And we may add,

that just as in ratzo vashov,

the ultimate intention of the ratzo is for the sake of the shov that comes after the ratzo,

so too is it with Naaseh

(accepting the yoke of the kingdom of heaven)

and Nishma

(accepting the yoke of mitzvos)

which are like ratzo vashov,

that the ultimate intention of Naaseh is that it bring about Nishma.

And through the precedence of Naaseh to Nishma,

that Naaseh is a preface to Nishma,

an elevation is added in Naaseh.

For the self-nullification of Naaseh

(in and of itself),

although it is a self-nullification of mesirus nefesh which is the most elevated self-nullification,

it is the self-nullification of the person,

and by Naaseh being a preface to Nishma, to accept upon himself the yoke of mitzvos

(shov and drawing down below),

through this the intention is completed that the Holy One, blessed be He, desired to have a dwelling place in the lower realms,

the intention of the Awtsmoos.

And we may add,

that the superiority of Nishma that comes through the precedence of Naaseh over the matter of Naaseh itself is also in the self-nullification.

For the self-nullification of Naaseh

(in and of itself)

is that he is not an existence unto himself

(and he is only a servant of the King),

and through the precedence of Naaseh to Nishma,

[such] that the self-nullification of Nishma is analogous to the self-nullification of Naaseh,

the self-nullification is also in the very existence of the person.

10)

And 4)

And likewise is it regarding the two matters of Rosh Chodesh Sivan,

the self-nullification of this day and the self-nullification of the desert57,

that the superiority of the self-nullification of this day over the self-nullification of the desert is in two matters.

That the self-nullification of this day

(where the love is in a state of self-nullification)

is also within the reality of the person.

And that specifically through this the intention of a dwelling place in the lower realms is completed.

And one may add,

that this—that the self-nullification of this day is drawn also into the reality of the person

[and even after the self-nullification that is drawn into his reality, it is

(not a nullification of existence,

but rather)

a nullification within existence],

is through the drawing down of Atzmus (Awtsmoos),

for in the power of Atzmus (Awtsmoos) is to unite two opposites

(self-nullification and existence).

And it can be said that this is also hinted at in the language of the verse "on this day."

For it is explained in Likkutei Torah58,

that the term "this,"

which is a thing that one can point to with a finger and say "this,"

applies only to the Holy One, blessed be He,

as it is written59

"This is my G-d and I will glorify Him,"

for "the whole earth is full of His glory"60.

And it is explained elsewhere61

that the true concept of "this" applies only to Atzmus (Awtsmoos).

For the meaning of "this" is that the thing about which one says "this"

is the very existence of that thing,

and since all existing things,

including even the most sublime revelations,

their existence is not from themselves but is dependent upon the will of Atzmus (Awtsmoos)62,

one cannot say of them in a complete sense "this thing,"

and the true concept of "this" applies only to Atzmus (Awtsmoos).

And this is "on this day,"

that even the existence of the diffusion

(day)

is in a state of self-nullification

(this),

is through the revelation of the power of Atzmus (Awtsmoos),

day

(revelation)

this.

10)

A)

And it can be said,

that this is also the connection of "on this day" with

(the wilderness of)

Sinai,

that hatred descended upon the nations of the world who did not accept the Torah at that time.

For just as

Israel received the Torah because the Holy One, blessed be He, coerced them like a mountain suspended over them,

[this was] the revelation of love for Israel,

— "And He loves Yaakov,"

so too regarding the nations of the world who did not accept the Torah, this is because hatred descended upon the nations of the world — "And Esav I hated."

And this that "He loves Yaakov and Esav I hated" is not because of the virtue of Israel,

for the very fact that the Holy One, blessed be He, offered it

(the Torah)

to every nation and tongue

proves that the giving of the Torah is from the most exalted place,

where all virtues,

including even the virtue of "You are children to Hashem your G-d,"

have no standing there,

and both

(Israel and the nations of the world)

are equal — "Is not Esav a brother to Yaakov?"

Rather, in His free choice He chose to be "And He loves Yaakov and Esav I hated."

And this is the connection of "on this day" with the wilderness of Sinai,

that this hatred that descended upon the nations of the world is because He so chose in His free choice

(as above),

and the true essence of the concept of choice is only in Atzmus,

this.

And likewise regarding the matter of Sinai, that hatred descended upon the evil inclination

(within Israel),

through which the power was given to refine the emotions of the animal soul,

which is through the revelation of the power of Atzmus.

For that the G-dly soul is nullified to G-dliness,

including that even its extension

(love)

is in a state of nullification,

is not so novel,

and the main matter of the revelation of the power of Atzmus,

"on this day,"

is in this, that they came to the wilderness of Sinai,

the refinement and purification of the body and the animal soul.

However, even so, the main explanation

(at length and in detail)

in the discourse in Torah Or regarding the virtue of Rosh Chodesh Sivan is about the matter of the nullification of the aspect of wilderness,

for the virtue in this, that even the existence is nullified

[the refinement of the emotions of the animal soul,

and likewise that the existence

(love)

of the G-dly soul is in nullification]

is that through this the power of Atzmus is revealed

(as above),

but in order to arouse and draw down the matter of the giving of the Torah

(the drawing of Atzmus)

it is through the nullification that comes from the essence of the soul,

for this nullification reaches Atzmus.

And one can connect this with that on Rosh Chodesh Sivan all of Israel were as one man with one heart,

and the Holy One, blessed be He, said, "Behold, the hour has come that I will give them My Torah,"

for this that they were as one man with one heart is through the revelation of the root of the soul that is above the soul clothed in the body,

and as explained in Tanya,

that all of Israel are truly brothers,

(specifically)

from the aspect of the root of their souls,

and therefore this that they were as one man

reached Atzmus and aroused in Him, so to speak, the will to give them His Torah.

10)

2)

And this is, "In the third month... on this day...,"

for although the concept of "this day" exists in every Rosh Chodesh,

the main concept of "this day" is in the

(first of the)

third month.

And the explanation is

(as explained in the discourses of the Tzemach Tzedek73),

that the first month is the aspect of the moon,

Malchus.

For although on Rosh Chodesh Nissan there is also the union of the sun and the moon

(Zeir Anpin and Malchus),

nevertheless,

on Rosh Chodesh Nissan,

the main thing is Malchus.

And the month of Iyar is called Ziv74,

it is the Yesod that illuminates Malchus75.

And this that Yesod is called Ziv is because it is only a radiance and illumination.

And in the third month, Malchus receives from Tiferes,

for in Tiferes is the revelation of Havayah, which is the Name of the Essence76.

That is, the revelation of the third month is not a radiance

(like the revelation of the month of Iyar),

but rather a revelation of the Essence.

Therefore,

the main concept of "this day" is on Rosh Chodesh Sivan,

in the third month.

And through the preparation for receiving the Torah in the third month on this day

(Rosh Chodesh Sivan)

— both in the refinement of the traits of the animal soul

(Sinai),

and in the nullification

(desert)

of the G-dly soul,

and particularly in the matter of "as one man with one heart"

[for this

(love of Israel)

is the entire Torah, and the rest is its explanation77]

— they merit receiving the Torah with joy and inwardness,

and draw this into the entire year.