English translation — תולדות ג

A.

On the verse¹

"Dwell in this land" Chazal say²,

that Yitzchak was not allowed to go out from Eretz Yisrael to outside the land,

because he was a "perfect burnt-offering.

Just as a burnt-offering, if it goes outside the curtains it becomes invalid, so too if he goes outside the land he becomes invalid".

And as the commentators³

explain,

that the whole of Eretz Yisrael "is considered by him like the Courtyard",

and outside the land — "like outside the Courtyard".

And therefore,

being a "perfect burnt-offering" — "which is Holy of Holies",

he may not go out from Eretz Yisrael,

in the manner that "Holy of Holies does not go out to outside the Courtyard".

The reason why Yitzchak has the holiness of a perfect burnt-offering in the manner that "if it goes outside the curtains it becomes invalid"

— At first glance: <b>the</b> holiness comes specifically after one offers the burnt-offering upon the altar,

but a perfect burnt-offering <b>living</b> is not applicable that it should become invalid by going out⁴

It is understood from the words of our Sages⁵

on the verse⁶

"And he offered it as a burnt offering instead of his son,"

that the offering of the ram was in place of Isaac

("instead of

his son"),

and it is as if Isaac had been the sacrifice that was offered.

And in the language of Rashi*⁶

"as if my son were slaughtered ..

his blood sprinkled ..

my son flayed as if he were burned and turned to ashes".

And since it is as if all these services were performed with Isaac,

he was offered upon the altar,

therefore he became sanctified with the sanctity of a perfect burnt offering that is invalidated by going outside.

Based on this, however — that Yitzchak has a definition of a sacrifice that has already been offered on the altar — one needs an explanation: Regarding the merit of the Akeidah, Chazal say in several places⁷,

that "the ashes of Yitzchak are as if they are piled upon the altar."

And from the precise wording of Chazal "piled <b>upon the altar</b>" — not

(as the language of Rashi in that place⁸)

"piled and ready for atonement"

(and the like)

— it is proven,

that the merit of the Akeidah is connected with that which "the ashes of Yitzchak" are

("<b>re- main</b>")

upon the altar.

: "The altar, from where did they know

(from where did they know at the building of the Second Temple where is

the place of the altar)..

“The ashes of Isaac were seen lying in that place” — from “the ashes of Isaac” they knew to <b>determine</b> the place of the altar].

It is not understood: the place of the “ash” that remains from the offering — whose analogue

(by Isaac)

is “the ashes of Isaac”

(which has the same definition as the “ash” of the ram¹⁰)

— is <b>not</b> “on top of the altar”,

because it must be the removal of the ash and the taking out of the ash¹¹

; so how does one say that the ashes of Isaac are “piled

(and lying¹²)

<b>on top of</b> the altar”¹³?

2.

The explanation of this simply

(in the manner of the revealed)

is,

that at the offering of the ram there were not the matters of the removal of the ashes and the taking out of the ashes:

The removal of the ashes was not relevant,

because the service of the lifting of the ashes leads

distinguish oneself with that "and his name is near the altar"¹⁴,

and by the binding

(which is a law of a small private altar¹⁵)

there is not the reality of "<b>near the altar</b>" — if not on top of the altar it is in the category of "<b>outside</b>"¹⁶

also — the reason for the removal of the ash is

(as Rashi¹⁷

says)

because "there is no place for the arrangement" — if one will not remove the ash from the altar there will not be a place for the next arrangement¹⁸

; by the altar that Abraham built for the binding of Isaac,

of course,

the reason does not apply.

it is logical that the ash &lt;b&gt;remained&lt;/b&gt; upon the altar,

because

The law is indeed "whoever touches the altar becomes holy"&lt;sup&gt;19&lt;/sup&gt;,

and "even a disqualified offering that ascended upon it..

shall not descend"&lt;sup&gt;20&lt;/sup&gt;,

and consequently,

when there is no obligation

(and reason)

to remove the ash,

it is "shall not descend".

(And see below section 3)].

And therefore also "the ash of Yitzchak"

(in analogy to the "ash" of the ram)

— "piled upon the altar".

But one still needs an explanation: the above explanation is only a reason why "the ash of Yitzchak" &lt;b&gt;can&lt;/b&gt; remain and remained "piled upon the altar"; from this, however, that Chazal connect the merit of Yitzchak with that which "his ash..

piled upon the altar" implies,

that this is connected with &lt;b&gt;the merit of the Akeidah itself&lt;/b&gt;.

One must say,

that even though the "ash" of an olah must be taken down

(generally)

from the altar

(although an olah is <b>entirely</b> for Hashem)

— but the "holiness of olah" of Yitzchak

(through the Akeidah)

is in a manner,

that his "ash"

(ash)

remains "piled

(and placed)

upon the altar".

3.

And one may say,

and with an introduction:

a)

In general it is proven,

also from practical halacha,

that when a thing becomes ash,

it is <b>not</b> the previous reality²¹.

For example regarding the removal of chametz — according to the opinion that there is no removal of chametz except by burning²².

Although after

burning, ash remains from it,

this is however a new reality²³.

b)

The <b>action</b>

(satisfaction)

of an olah offering — whose offering is completed with its burning <b>upon the altar</b> — is through that it is a <b>pleasing</b> aroma

("And the Lord smelled the pleasing aroma, etc."²⁴),

that is

to say

<b>while</b> it is being burned and is going and becoming ash,

but not after the time —

According to this, it is not smooth what one says that the merit of the Binding stands for generations,

in the expression "<b>his ash</b> of <b>Isaac</b>" — "ash" emphasizes the <b>opposite</b>,

that the Binding

(and the action of the offering)

is not!

And therefore it seems to me,

And with the introduction,

That there are several ways how a merit and the action of the commandment works <b>after time</b>²⁵

A)

A merit that was created

(<b>and was completed</b>)

in the past.

I.e.

That is,

The doing of the commandment creates a merit which remains with the person for later

(always),

But the cause of the merit was completed entirely <b>in the past</b>.

b)

The <b>doing</b> of the commandment

(and its merit)

was in the past,

but the effect of the commandment is a matter <b>drawn out</b> and consequently also its merit — it draws itself later,

including — it draws itself into the time when one needs <b>that</b> merit.

c)

The previous <b>doing</b> — holds

(afterwards)

in a constant <b>being renewed</b>,

so,

So it is exactly as if the mitzvah is &lt;b&gt;now done&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;26&lt;/sup&gt;.

With this it is understood what it says by King David&lt;sup&gt;27&lt;/sup&gt;

: "At the time that David entered the bathhouse and saw himself standing naked he said, 'Woe is me that I will stand naked without a mitzvah,

and when he remembered the circumcision in his flesh his mind was calmed etc.'"

— At first glance: certainly there was &lt;b&gt;noticeable&lt;/b&gt; in the mind and heart of David the "subjugation of the heart and mind"&lt;sup&gt;28&lt;/sup&gt;

from his previous laying of tefillin

(and the like),

today why did he see himself "naked without a commandment"?

So the explanation in this: the subjugation of the heart and mind is a continuous effect from his &lt;b&gt;previous&lt;/b&gt; laying of tefillin,

but the actual doing of the commandment itself he does not have now; unlike the commandment of circumcision*&lt;sup&gt;28&lt;/sup&gt;

is renewed every moment&lt;sup&gt;29&lt;/sup&gt;,

and consequently it is as if he had &lt;b&gt;now&lt;/b&gt; been circumcised.

And this is also the wonder of the Akeidah: the merit of the Akeidah is in a manner that it is as if Yitzchak is &lt;b&gt;now&lt;/b&gt;

(at every moment)

&lt;b&gt;burned anew&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;30&lt;/sup&gt;

upon the altar; and consequently "the ashes of &lt;b&gt;Yitzchak&lt;/b&gt; ..

piled upon the altar" — he is &lt;b&gt;now&lt;/b&gt; burned upon the altar and is now a "&lt;b&gt;pleasing&lt;/b&gt; aroma".

4.

And in the service of man, it will be explained:

The explanation of "deshen" in the service of man is³¹

The concept of ash in itself

(not from the cause and circumstance which made it ash)

is — the ultimate of materiality.

As the Alter Rebbe explains in Tanya³²,

that the ash that remains from a "tree that is burned" is the element "the earth within it that descends downward and fire has no dominion over it etc. the earth is more material than all of it

(the other elements)

And this is the concept of the ash of the altar: the part of the offering that is burned upon the altar,

alludes to the refined matters of the world,

which can be entirely elevated and included in holiness.

Which in general are the matters of the world with which one fulfills a commandment³³,

utensils of a commandment,

utensils of holiness³⁴

etc.

But the ash that remains from the offering is a hint to the lower things of the world which can

<![CDATA[<b>not</b> be included in the fire of the altar]]>

(become <b>completely</b> holy).

And in general, these are the matters of <b>the permissible</b> with which a Jew occupies himself.

And therefore the ash cannot remain on top of the altar — the ultimate holiness.

In this itself there are two levels³⁵

(a)

The "deshen" with which one fulfills terumat hadeshen,

that the deshen remains at least "etzel hamizbe'ach".

(b)

The deshen which one takes out "outside the camp".

And it can be said that this is the difference between the two modes of service³⁶

of "all your deeds should be for the sake of Heaven"³⁷

and "in all your ways know Him"³⁸

"All your deeds should be for the sake of Heaven" means,

that at the time he does the deeds they are for him in a manner of deeds of

matters of the permitted,

only he does them "for the sake of Heaven",

for the sake of holiness,

afterwards he will have from them a benefit in matters of Heaven.

This is hinted at in the ash that is taken out "outside the camp" — it is not in the camp of holiness³⁹

; there however it is "

(to)

a place pure",

he

He does the mundane matters for the sake of Heaven,

for the sake of holiness.

A higher level in divine service

(with mundane matters)

is — "In all your ways <b>know Him</b>": not that through his doing them he will come <b>afterwards</b> to "know Him",

but <b>in them themselves</b>

("<b>In</b> all your ways")

— "know Him"; they are indeed "your ways" — mundane matters,

but the mundane matters themselves become a matter of holiness.

In the manner of the removal of the ashes,

which on the altar itself cannot remain

(It is "Your ways"),

but — "and he shall place it next to the altar",

it remains in proximity to the altar and is absorbed in its place⁴⁰.

5.

Based on this one will understand why "the ashes of Isaac are as if piled upon the altar":

The act of the Binding of Isaac is — the matter of self-sacrifice &lt;b&gt;in actuality&lt;/b&gt;,

surrender of the body in its simple sense.

By Abraham's being thrown into the furnace of fire

(Ur of the Chaldees)&lt;sup&gt;43&lt;/sup&gt;,

there was not the &lt;b&gt;in actuality&lt;/b&gt;,

because the fire did not touch him at all&lt;sup&gt;42&lt;/sup&gt;

; but not so by Isaac,

at the time of the Binding — "the soul of Isaac flew out and departed"&lt;sup&gt;43&lt;/sup&gt;,

and afterwards there was by him &lt;b&gt;resurrection of the dead&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;43&lt;/sup&gt;.

&lt;b&gt;The&lt;/b&gt; level&lt;sup&gt;44&lt;/sup&gt;

of self-sacrifice derives from the essence of the soul itself,

which is attached in a special way to G-dliness in the ultimate unity,

so that it permeates all parts of the person equally,

also the material of the body&lt;sup&gt;45&lt;/sup&gt;.

And therefore it comes out in surrender of &lt;b&gt;the body as well&lt;/b&gt; for the sake of the Most High.

And therefore,

through the Binding, Yitzchak became sanctified in a manner that

(also)

his <b>body</b> became <b>entirely</b> <b>holy</b> — and consequently also the <b>physical</b> matters of Yitzchak were elevated to a higher level,

<b>entirely for G</b>d: his physical matters were so nullified and unified with holiness,

until he altogether "did not feel" their "physicality"⁴⁶,

their essence was only — the service of G‑d.

And six.

As discussed once at length⁴⁷

in the commentary on that which is stated in Pirkei d'Rabbi Eliezer⁴⁸

on the verse⁴⁹

"And Yitzchak sowed": "But did Yitzchak sow grain<b> heaven forbid</b>

Rather, he took all the tithe of his money and sowed charity for the poor, as it is said&lt;sup&gt;50&lt;/sup&gt;

“Sow for yourselves for charity” —

A verse does not depart from its plain meaning&lt;sup&gt;51&lt;/sup&gt;,

Then Yitzchak sowed grain in its plain sense,

And that was his money from which he took tithe a.

z.

v.

It is, however, &lt;b&gt;G-d forbid&lt;/b&gt; to say that his “vayizra” was in &lt;b&gt;content&lt;/b&gt; a matter of sowing grain; rather &lt;b&gt;his&lt;/b&gt; “sowing grain” was — “sow for yourselves for charity.”

And to note according to a second [statement] of Chazal: Yitzchak instituted ma'asros⁵²,

and since ma'aser is specifically from one's own produce⁵³,

therefore he

(and only for that reason)

sowed grain,

for the sake of separating ma'aser.

And it can be said that this is the same: the root of the mitzvah of ma'asros and the like is tzedakah⁵⁴.

7.

And therefore "the ashes of Isaac ..

are piled upon the altar",

because through the Binding, Isaac became sanctified to the extent that it gives no place for "chol"

(which belongs to the outside)

— also "&lt;b&gt;his ashes&lt;/b&gt;"

(his physical matters)

are "piled upon the altar",

all of him — entirely to G‑d*⁵⁴.

And this is also the reason that one expresses the merit of the Binding specifically with the language and concept of "ashes": the merit of the Binding consists in the manner of self-sacrifice of Isaac — the elevation of his self-sacrifice is in the matter of "his ashes ..

piled upon the altar"**⁵⁴,

as above.

8.

The lesson from this in the service of each and every one:

One of the reasons that we say the portion of the Binding of Isaac every day is — "in order to subdue his evil inclination to serve the L-rd, as Isaac gave his soul"⁵⁵.

One must know,

that the subjugation must bring to this,

that the "<b>ash</b>"

(materiality)

of a Jew should be "piled upon the altar".

The matter in this:

Prayers were instituted corresponding to the daily offerings⁵⁶,

that the daily offering is a burnt offering which is entirely for G‑d.

Because the perfection of prayer is,

that a Jew should completely give himself over to the Most High⁵⁷.

But the self-nullification and self-sacrifice of prayer gives "a place",

that after prayer the Jew should go out "outside the camp" and occupy himself with material matters.

True indeed,

that the service of prayer brings about in him that this should be only

"To a pure place" — all your deeds for the sake of Heaven — but still it is <b>outside</b> the camp.

Upon this comes the clarification,

that the reason for the removal of the ash is because "there is no place for the arrangement",

but if there <b>is</b> "place for the arrangement" one does not take down the ash: the "permission" to occupy oneself with physical matters

(in a manner of "outside the camp")

is only if from this emerges a benefit for the coming arrangement — through this one will be able to pray tomorrow even better⁵⁸

The place of a Jew must be and is inside.

Ay,

he is a soul in a body and has physical needs — it is sufficient when his involvement in physicality is "near the altar"; but going out "outside the camp" — that is not the true place of a Jew.

Even when he does in his permitted matters for the sake of Heaven — it is an inferior service; he is not pouring a cup for his master,

but cooking a pot for his master and needs to change his "garments"⁵⁹

(the boil in the "cooking" — from his action speech and thought&lt;sup&gt;60&lt;/sup&gt;).

And therefore one precedes the recitation of the portion of the Binding to all matters of the day,

because in order to hear this one prepares the self-sacrifice of Yitzchak.

The self-sacrifice at the time

Prayer must be in a manner that "takes along" his body and all his physical matters,

until he feels that by him there is no "outside the camp",

and his physicality is entirely permeated with holiness.

And then it is even when he goes out

(after prayer)

"outside the camp" to occupy himself with matters of the world,

conduct yourself with them in a manner of derech eretz⁶¹

— feels

He that his being "outside the camp" is only in externality; his inwardness and especially from the aspect of his soul,

the aspect of Yitzchak within him,

is also "&lt;b&gt;its ash&lt;/b&gt; ..

upon the altar".

And with the power of this, his involvement with material matters is in a manner that his entire intention therein is solely for the benefit that will come from it in his service of G-d,

in the place of the arrangement.

(From the talk of Shabbos Parshas Baha”b 5728)