English translation — תזריע א

A.

We learned in tractate Nega'im¹

: "If the bright spot preceded the white hair, impure,

And if the white hair preceded the bright spot, pure.

And if it is uncertain, impure,

And Rabbi Yehoshua says 'keihah'"².

And it explains in the Gemara³

: "What is 'keihah'? - 'Keihah and pure'.

And the reason of Rabbi Yehoshua is explained in the Gemara there: "The verse says⁴

to purify him or to defile him,

since the Scripture began with him in purity first".

And in tractate Bava Metzia⁵

it is stated: "They were disputing in the heavenly academy,

If the bright spot precedes the white hair, impure,

And if the white hair precedes the bright spot, pure.

Uncertain,

The Holy One, blessed be He, says pure and all the heavenly academy say impure.

And they said who will prove,

Let prove Rabbah bar Nachmani,

For Rabbah bar Nachmani said I am unique in negaim, I am unique in ohalot.

They sent a messenger after him etc. He said pure pure".

And at first glance - it is puzzling: how is it possible that the yeshiva on high should argue against the Holy One, blessed be He?

And what is the explanation that Rabbah bar Nachmani could decide between them<sup>6</sup>?

B.

And behold, it is known<sup>7</sup>

regarding the matter of the decision between two opposing opinions,

that its meaning is not that the decider "agrees with one of the two opinions"

(the rationales),

but rather it is a third opinion that "contains" and includes both opinions.

And this is the reason that "the law is according to the words of the decider"<sup>8</sup>

- because the view of the decider includes <b>both </b>opinions

(also the view of the one who disagrees with him in the conclusion of the matter),

consequently the dissenting rationale is not <b>opposite </b>to the rationale of the decider,

therefore the law is according to him.

And as an example of what we find that the third attribute,

the attribute of mercy

(T.T.)

which includes and decides between the attribute of kindness and the attribute of judgment

(might)⁹

- even though also the attribute of mercy

(like the attribute of kindness)

"says" that one must bestow good upon everyone,

nevertheless it also includes the attribute of might.

And the explanation of this: The attribute of kindness sees good in every person,

and consequently, they are all <b>worthy</b> of the bestowal of good and kindness - and to this the attribute of might <b>opposes</b>,

whose essence is to scrutinize most stringently, so that even the heavens are not meritorious in its eyes.

But the bestowal through the attribute of mercy, which is

(<b>not</b> because they are <b>worthy</b> of it,

for in this it agrees with the attribute of might,

that the bestowal of good does not reach them - and nevertheless one must bestow upon them)

from the aspect of <b>compassion</b> upon them,

and against this there is no opposition of the attribute of might¹⁰.

3.

From this will be understood in our matter - in the decision of Rabbah bar Nachmani between the opinion of the Holy One, blessed be He, and the opinion of the Heavenly Academy - that the opinion of Rabbah "pure, pure"

(<b>is not</b> from that reasoning for which "the Holy One, blessed be He, says pure",

but rather)

it is a third reasoning

(which includes both reasonings),

to which even the reasoning of the Heavenly Academy does not oppose it.

And the reason that Rabbah bar Nachmani was able to decide between the Holy One, blessed be He, and the Heavenly Academy,

is — as it is brought in the Gemara there: "Rabbah bar Nachmani argued,

for Rabbah bar Nachmani said: I am unique in [the laws of] plagues, I am unique in [the laws of] tents."

That is,

that from this aspect that Rabbah was "unique in [the laws of] plagues" and "unique in [the laws of] tents",

therefore he was able to innovate a reasoning that includes both rationales and to decide between them.

4.

And this will be understood,

by prefacing what is explained in Likkutei Torah on our portion¹¹

regarding the matter of "the Holy One, blessed be He" and "the Heavenly Academy",

that "the Holy One, blessed be He" is the aspect of Divinity that is above worlds — the aspect of "He encompasses all worlds",

therefore He is called by the name "<b>Holy</b>, blessed be He" — because He is holy and separate from worlds¹²

: and the light that shines in the "Heavenly Academy" is from the aspect of Divinity that is relative to the worlds — the aspect of "He fills all worlds".

And this is "A doubt,

the Holy One, blessed be He, says pure,

and all the academy of heaven say impure":

The matter of impurity comes from the side of selfhood

(And its purification through immersion — the letters of nullification¹³).

Therefore,

when there is a doubt whether to purify or to make impure

(that is,

whether the selfhood of the person has enough in it to make him impure,

or not),

the academy of heaven say that he is impure — because the light that is clothed in the worlds

(the light <b>that is grasped </b>in the academy of heaven)

gives place to existence and selfhood,

and the nullification in the worlds that comes from this light is only "nullification of the self"¹⁴,

therefore,

when there is a doubt and concern that the person has become impure

that there is concern that he has become impure,

is a proof that he is not as he should be¹⁵]

— he is impure

(from a doubt, at least¹⁶)

And the Holy One, blessed be He, says,

that he is pure — because the aspect of the light that is above the worlds does not give place to selfhood,

and the nullification that comes from this light is the aspect of "nullification in existence"¹⁴,

therefore,

anyone for whom it is not known with certainty that the person has become impure — he is pure.

5.

And behold, it is known that also "the light that encompasses all worlds",

has a connection to worlds, for it "encompasses" the worlds¹⁷.

And for this reason the encompassing light is called by the name "the Holy One, blessed be He",

that the explanation of "holy" is <b>separated</b> as above — because from this that it is necessary "to make known"¹⁸

that He is separated from worlds,

behold it is proven that the discussion is about a level of Divinity that has some connection to them; for if He were above all connection to worlds,

it would also not be applicable to say about Him that He is separated from them¹⁹.

And from this it is understood,

that also the nullification of worlds that comes from the aspect of this light,

even though it is "nullification in existence",

it is not in a manner that absolutely negates the existence of worlds from their root,

but rather that there is some "existence" that is nullified to Him, blessed be He

(and the nullification is in the manner of "nullification in existence").

However²⁰

Above the aspect of bittul (self-nullification) is the aspect of the bittul of the worlds that stems from "His Essence and Being, blessed be He" "Who is not in the category of worlds at all".

For this bittul is in a manner that negates <b>from its very root</b> any existence other than Him, blessed be He

(Unlike the bittul that stems from the aspect of the Or HaSovev (Surrounding Light),

which is in a manner that gives place to the "existence" of the worlds, except that this existence is nullified to Him, blessed be He,

as above,

as above).

And therefore it is explained,

that regarding His Essence, blessed be He, "the word 'one' does not apply to Him" — because "one" <b>does not</b> indicate the negation of the existence of the worlds entirely

(for there is also "a numbered one" that has a second to it),

and the matter of the unity in "Hashem is One" is that the existence of the worlds is unified with Him, blessed be He

(hinted at in the letter chet of "Echad")

and the four directions of the world

(hinted at in the dalet of "Echad"),

and they are unified with the Holy One, blessed be He, the Master of the world

(hinted at in the alef of "Echad")²¹]

— and the matter

(of the unity in the manner)

this applies only to the aspect of the light that is in the category of worlds.

However, the yichud (singular unity) that stems from His Essence, blessed be He, is

(not in the manner of "Echad",

but rather)

in the manner of "Yachid",

that is, "that He alone is, and nothing besides Him".

6.

According to the above, it is to be explained — in a possible way — the novelty in what Rabbah said "pure pure" that it is not the same concept of "the Holy One, blessed be He, said pure",

and therefore specifically the opinion of Rabbah decided the opinion of the "heavenly academy":

Regarding the aspect of "the Holy One, blessed be He",

that the nullification and unification of the worlds that come from this aspect is in the aspect of "One",

meaning <b>that there are </b>worlds

(except that they are nullified,

— behold, regarding this aspect there is a place of grasp for worlds

(and for the comprehension of the world and its understanding).

And therefore "all of them &lt;b&gt;the academy &lt;/b&gt;of heaven — whose essence

(in the manner of the study of Torah below)

understanding and comprehension specifically — said 'impure' — even though they knew that the Holy One, blessed be He, says 'pure' — because the revelation of the aspect of "the Holy One, blessed be He"

(namely the self-nullification of "One" that comes from the aspect of the Surrounding)

that shone in them,

was in the manner of a surrounding light&lt;sup&gt;22&lt;/sup&gt;,

but it is not grasped in their intellect, which remains in its existence,

as above)

as above&lt;sup&gt;23&lt;/sup&gt;,

and from the perspective of their level they

(the aspect of the Filling all worlds)

reason dictates that it is impure,

as above section 4;

But not so Rabbah bar Nachmani, who was "&lt;b&gt;the unique one &lt;/b&gt;in [the laws of] plagues",

namely that there shone in him from the aspect of "Unique"&lt;sup&gt;24&lt;/sup&gt;

which is not within the category of worlds at all — relative to this aspect, the worlds

(and the intellect within them)

occupy no place at all,

and therefore the reasoning of Rabbah decided the opinion of the "academy of heaven",

because since he was from the aspect of "Unique",

therefore he drew down this aspect also &lt;b&gt;into the worlds &lt;/b&gt;

(and into the &lt;b&gt;intellect &lt;/b&gt;within them)

— and it is in the manner of the ruling of Rav&lt;sup&gt;25&lt;/sup&gt;

that when they asked him the reason, he &lt;b&gt;was silent &lt;/b&gt;

(and did not explain it in letters of comprehension)

but he did not retract from this ruling&lt;sup&gt;26&lt;/sup&gt;.

(not only in the worlds in general,

but)

also in the matter of "negaim"].

And based on this will be understood that the Holy One, blessed be He, said "pure"

(one time)

but not so Rabbah said "pure pure"

(two times)

- because that which the Holy One, blessed be He, said "pure" is

(only)

the matter of purity from the aspect of the light that is above the worlds - and therefore "pure" one time; but not so the decision of Rabbah is that also from the side of the worlds it is "pure" - and therefore he said "pure pure" two times: "pure" from the aspect of the light that is above the worlds,

and "pure" from the side of the worlds.

7.

And behold, this law that “a doubt

(whether the bright spot preceded or the white hair preceded)

is pure”,

is learned

(as above at the beginning of the sicha)

from the verse “to purify him or to defile him” at the end of our parshah.

And according to the principle “their end is embedded in their beginning and their beginning in their end”²⁷

- one must connect the aforementioned matter

(the ruling of Rabbah bar Nachmani²⁸)

with what is stated at the beginning of our parshah “A woman who conceives and gives birth to a male”,

from which our Sages learned²⁹

: “A woman who emits seed first gives birth to a male

(a man who emits seed first gives birth to a female)

And the explanation of this:

All physical matters are descended from their matter

(and their root)

in spirituality.

And regarding this matter: that in a man and woman

(as its simple meaning)

there is an advantage and superiority in "woman who emits seed first"

(over "man who emits seed first")

that specifically then - "she gives birth to a male",

this is because so it is in the spiritual "man" and "woman",

so to speak - the Holy One, blessed be He, and the Congregation of Israel.

7.

A.

That there is an advantage and superiority in the service of the Congregation of Israel

("<b>woman </b>who emits seed first"),

over the drawing down of Divinity that is drawn in an arousal from above

("man who emits seed first"³⁰).

And as our Rabbis, of blessed memory, said³¹

: Great are the deeds of the righteous

(service of the Congregation of Israel)

more than the making of heaven and earth

(the making of the Holy One, blessed be He).

And this is the connection between the beginning of the parshah

(the level of "a woman who emits seed")

and its end

(the ruling of Rabbah bar Nachmani²⁸)

Regarding the halachah that we do not pay attention to a Heavenly Voice and Torah is not in heaven — we cannot rule the law that it is pure because the Holy One, blessed be He, says pure,

and therefore the Rambam rules³²

that it is impure,

and this is what they said that in the presence of Rabbah etc. that he is unique in negaim etc. — and is he more unique than the Holy One, blessed be He,

Rather — that the Torah was given specifically below, and the Holy One, blessed be He, smiled and said, "My children have defeated Me"³³

And therefore Rabbah <b>below </b>³⁴

declared and said³⁵

that it is pure.

And likewise in the inner aspect of the matters: The Torah of Rabbah and his statement "pure, pure"

("The deed of the righteous" — "<b>a woman </b>emits seed")

is greater, as it were, than what <b>the Holy One, blessed be He, </b>said "pure"

("a man emits seed")

And the statement of Rabbah

(which drew down from the aspect of "the Singular One")

— it was that which decided the opinion of the Heavenly Academy.

And just as the advantage in the matter of "a woman who emits seed first"

(according to its simple meaning)

is - <b>"gives birth to a male"</b>,

that the quality of the male is that he has a strong intellect that does not change,

unlike women, whose intellect is light³⁶

So too in our case: in that <b>the Holy One, blessed be He</b> said "pure" - the possibility was not negated that they would dispute this in the Heavenly Academy.

And accordingly, it is found,

that in the aspect of "purity" that was drawn from the side of the Holy One, blessed be He - "a man who emits seed

(first)

" - "changes" apply to it, so to speak.

Unlike this, that <b>Rabbah</b> said "pure, pure",

that is, in the aspect of "purity" that was drawn through the study of his Torah and the ruling of his judgment of <b>Rabbah</b> - "a woman who emits seed first" - this decided the opinion of the Heavenly Academy³⁷

(And as above, that Rabbah drew down the aspect

(of unity and)

purity also into the world)

- "gives birth to a <b>male</b>"³⁸.

(From the talk of Shabbos Parshas Tazria,

5725)