English translation — י"ב סיון

1.

The Alter Rebbe rules in his Siddur¹

that one does not say Tachanun — "from Rosh Chodesh Sivan until the 12th²

thereof inclusive, i.e., five days after the festival of Shavuos, because the festival has completion all seven days" — and as the Gemara³

learns it from

(that the festival of Shavuos has completion)

from a verse⁴

"in the Festival of Matzos and in the Festival of Shavuos and in the Festival of Sukkos" — it compares the Festival of Shavuos to the Festival of Matzos: just as the Festival of Matzos has completion all seven days, so too the Festival of Shavuos has completion all seven days.

One must understand: by the Festival of Matzos and the Festival of Sukkos the days of completion are days which are a part of the festival,

days of Chol Hamoed and the festival.

And in many matters they are Yom Tov⁵

; but not so by the Festival of Shavuos the days of completion are "complete weekday"⁶.

It is not smooth: how can one derive completion for the Festival of Shavuos from the completions of Pesach and Sukkos,

when by Shavuos there comes a great novelty — to offer the festival sacrifice on a complete weekday?

Further: regarding the make-up offerings of Passover and Sukkot there is a dispute<sup>7</sup>

whether "his make-up is for the first" or "his make-up is for each other": "his make-up is for the first" means that "the one day the Scripture made primary in all of them"<sup>8</sup>

one who was not obligated on the first day and only in the later days became obligated,

he is not obligated to bring the offerings,

because at the time of obligation

(on the first day)

he was not obligated)

; and "make-up for each other" means that "there is no day among them that its obligation is not dependent on itself"<sup>9</sup>

(and therefore,

even one who is not fit to bring the offering on the first day,

an obligation applies to him on the subsequent day).

It states in Tosafot<sup>6</sup>,

that this dispute is only regarding Passover and Sukkot,

but regarding Shavuot, whose make-up days are "completely ordinary weekdays," it is "not reasonable to say make-up for each other"

(that in the ordinary weekdays after the festival there should be "its obligation dependent on itself").

It turns out,

that the make-up [offerings] of Shavuos have

(according to the Gemara "make-up [offerings] one for another")

a different category than the make-up [offerings] of Pesach and Sukkos — so there is no analogy

(complete)

from Chol HaMo'ed to these two¹⁰?

B.

And one must say the explanation is this:

The concept of completion-prayers is in accordance with the content of the festival.

And likewise regarding the festival of Shavuot: that the days of completion-prayers of the festival of Shavuot are on weekdays,

is not a matter of mere consequence — because Shavuot is only one day it is necessary that the days of completion-prayers of Shavuot be on weekdays — rather this is precisely: the content of Shavuot causes that its completion-prayers should be on weekdays

(as below section 11).

one must say,

that just as in the simple understanding of matters,

the days of completion-prayers of Shavuot are weekdays because Shavuot is one day — likewise in the content of matters,

that this content in the festival of Shavuot which obligates that its completion-prayers should be on weekdays,

is also connected with that the festival of Shavuot is one day].

And therefore one can learn the completion of Shavuos from Pesach and Sukkos

(Also according to the opinion that "completion is one from the other")

: The lesson is on the generality of the matter that also by Shavuos there is a matter of its completion; but after that one knows that also by Shavuos there is completion,

it is "established in its place"^11,,

that the definition of its completion is in accordance with the content of Shavuos.

3.

The aforementioned matter — that the completions of Shavuos are on the weekdays is connected with the content of the holiday,

is even more compelled according to the explanation in the language

Chazal mentioned above

(regarding the make-up days of the three pilgrimage festivals)

— "its make-up [days] all seven [days]".

For at first glance it is perplexing:

The offering of the festival sacrifices on the first Yom Tov is not a make-up [offering],

rather that is their time of obligation,

the essence of the obligation¹²

; and especially according to the

(opinion vav)

halacha¹³

that "all of them are make-up [offerings] for the first [day]",

then surely the essence of the obligation is on the first day — so how does one say "its make-up [days] all seven [days]",

when the time of make-up is only in the six days that come after the first day¹⁴?

One of the explanations in the¹⁵

: There is a distinction between the matter of completion-offerings by the festival-offerings and the matter of completion-offerings by other matters of Torah:

In general, the meaning of completion-offerings — that one completes a missing thing.

d.

e.

One completes a thing that one previously missed.

Then from this itself it is under- standable,

that the matter of completion-offerings is a "bedieved" matter,

that this is not the time of the matter.

that one must bring "the Paschal offering in its appointed time,

you shall make it in its appointed time^,,

it is only that if someone missed the obligation,

the Torah then gives him a possibility to complete it in the time

other — on Pesach Sheni¹⁷.

But ab initio one may not rely on Pesach Sheni,

because one must offer the first Pesach in its time — the 14th of Nissan].

But the make-up days of the festival offerings are different — regarding them the Torah gives from the outset seven days to bring the offering,

so,

that the time for the offering is from the outset seven days.

And even though that.

One who can be early and bring his offering on the first day of the festival may not delay and bring the offering on the make-up days,

and as the Rambam rules¹⁸

"It is a mitzvah to be early and to offer on the first ..

And whoever delays, behold this

disgraceful and about it it is said¹⁹

"mourners of the appointed time I gathered" — but this is not a law because of the time of the offering

(that one was lacking to bring the offering at the time of the offering),

but only that the one who delays is disgraceful,

a deficiency in the person²⁰

: the one who delays when one could be early,

is a conduct of the person "disgraceful".

But also when one brings it late,

after the first day,

it is an offering "in its time"²¹.

D.

A proof of this:

One of the sacrifices that one is obligated in on the festival is the Olat Re'iyah.

And since this is a burnt offering which is entirely for G-d,

Beit Shammai hold that one may not offer it on Yom Tov,

because it does not involve any need of "food for a soul,"

Here there is only the eating of the Most High but not "for you."

And according to their opinion, one brings the Olat Re'iyah only after the first Yom Tov.

It is seemingly most perplexing — according to Beit Shammai it turns out a contradiction: The Torah obligates a Jew in a sacrifice and says that the main obligation is on the first Yom Tov,

and in addition to this the Torah prohibits a Jew from bringing the sacrifice at the time of the main obligation,

Rather it tells him to bring it at the time of completion!

— also Beit Hillel

(and "many of Israel")

conducted themselves in this matter like Beit Shammai and brought the Olat Re'iyah on Motza'ei Yom Tov].

Moreover: On Chag HaShavuot it turns out entirely,

that the offering of the Olat Re'iyah of Yom Tov is specifically during the weekdays — after the Yom Tov has already passed!

is from this itself compelled*²⁶,

that

the matter of completion regarding the korbanot of Chol HaMoed is not a matter of b'dieved,

but rather this is l'chatchila the time of the korban.

and therefore Beit Shammai hold²⁷

that one may not push off Yom Tov for the offering of the Olat Re'iyah where there is no need of ochel nefesh,

because also on the next day it is in its time.

And based on this, understand the language "completion all seven":

According to the above that all seven days are the "time" of the offering,

one must say,

that the definition of completion in this matter is only from the side of the "person".

4.

5.

5.

That even one who lacks alacrity and did not offer on the first day — the Torah gives him the possibility to complete and bring the offerings on the subsequent days.

that "all are completions to the first" from which it is implied that the main obligation is on the first day and the later days are only "completions" —

Because the concept of "completions to the first".

Is only regarding the application of the obligation,

I.e.

That is

That the obligation to bring the sacrifice places itself

(Not on each of the seven days by itself — "there is no day among them whose obligation depends on itself" — rather the obligation takes effect)

On the first day,

And the obligation of the later days is only a continuation of the obligation on the first day

(And consequently,

If there is no obligation on the first day,

There can consequently be no continuation,

A sacrifice on the days thereafter).

But according to everyone,

is the bringing of the offerings after the first day not a sacrifice "bedieved",

if one misses the "time" of the offering,

rather this is the time of the offering²⁸].

And since that the definition of the completion-offering is

(mainly)

a matter from the aspect of alacrity of the person²⁹

— thus indeed the matter of completion-offering applies also regarding the first day.

Because from the aspect of the matter of alacrity one must be early to bring the offering as early as on the first day itself,

immediately "in the morning"³⁰.

And consequently when one does not hasten to bring the offerings immediately

"In the morning",

is the bringing later in the day

(on the first day itself)

a category of completion — it turns out,

that the matter of completion exists "all seven days"³¹.

— And according to all the above

(that the seven days are the "time" of the offering)

it turns out,

that regarding Shavuot, the Torah initially established the "time" of the festival offerings of it in a manner,

that the "seven days" of the time of the offerings include both the festival

(and specifically after the "morning")

and also the weekdays

(after the festival)

equally!

6.

The explanation in this:

It is known that at the time of the giving of the Torah there was free choice in the Jewish people.

As the ruling of the Magen Avraham³²

— brought down in the old Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch³³

— that when saying

(in the blessings of Kriyas Shema)

"And us You chose from every nation and tongue" one must intend for the giving of the Torah³⁴.

In what consists the novelty of "choice" regarding the Jewish people compared to before?

Also before the Giving of the Torah, Jews were already distinguished from all other nations.

As we find even before the Exodus from Egypt that already then Jews are called "My firstborn son Israel"³⁵

; so why does one say that only at the Giving of the Torah did the Almighty choose the Jews?

And the explanation of this

(as discussed already several times³⁶)

: the true meaning of choice is — that one selects an item with free choice; the word "choice" means that one selects the item only from the side of one's own good will,

without any reason that compels the chooser.

From this is understandable,

that the true essence of the matter of free choice is not bound with the virtues that the chosen object possesses — because when one wants a thing because of its virtues — it is not free choice: the person is compelled to want the thing because of the virtues that it possesses.

7.

And this is also the superiority that was revealed at the giving of the Torah relative to before:

When one selects an object because of its virtues,

the essence of the person is “not” in the selection,

the cause of the choice is

(not he — not from him,

but)

the virtues which are present in the object

(outside of him).

Specifically when one selects an object in a manner of free choice — which comes only from the side of the chooser — in this is present the essence of the chooser.

And likewise in our matter: before the Giving of the Torah, the distinctiveness of Jews was from the side of their great virtues and holiness.

And therefore,

even though the Most High "bound" Himself with Jews,

this is not the matter of the choice of the essence.

Specifically at the Giving of the Torah,

when "You have chosen us from all the nations" — not

(only)

from the side of the virtues of Jews,

but because thus the Most High chose,

in His free choice — then a bond was opened between Jews and the Most High from the side of His essence and Self, may He be blessed.

8.

Just as it is regarding the choice of the Holy One, blessed be He, in the Jewish people — so too it is from the side of Jews,

that at the Giving of the Torah it was revealed that their service is from the aspect of the humility of the choice³⁷

Before the Giving of the Torah, the service of Jews came from the aspect of that they perceived the greatness of the virtue of being a servant of G‑d etc. the G‑d of my father Abraham etc. the Creator of the world etc.

And since the reason for their attachment to the Above was from the aspect of the virtue of the service of G‑d,

their very essence was not in this.

One did not take hold of their very essence.

At the Giving of the Torah,

when the Almighty chose the Jewish people,

this effected in the children of Israel that they should choose the Almighty.

The fact that a Jew serves the Almighty is not only from the "considerations" that serving God is a good thing,

but because thus he chooses with his free choice: a Jew chooses,

without any reason or cause

(from outside),

to be a servant of God.

And since the reason for his service is

(not only the inherent virtue of serving God,

but)

his choice,

Therefore his entire essence becomes "occupied" in the service.

Based on this one will understand<sup>38</sup>

what the verse<sup>39</sup>

says,

"Life and death I have placed before you, the blessing and the curse, and you shall choose life."

This is seemingly perplexing<sup>40</sup>

: Since the Almighty shows a Jew<sup>41</sup>

how through "good" one receives "life" and through "evil" comes "death"<sup>42</sup>

— what then is the command "and you shall choose life"?

Does one need to tell a person that he should choose "life" instead of "death"?

One of the explanations of this is,

that the precise point here is "and you shall choose life": The Torah tells a Jew,

it is true that "I have placed before you" life and good, so that you see with your eyes how through "good" one attains "life" — nevertheless,

in what manner must the service of G-d be,

in a manner of "and you shall choose life".

The reason for your doing "good" should not be only because your intellect will compel you, because good brings to life,

rather do so with your free choice: you choose "life"

(even if there would be in this no advantage whatsoever),

and do not mix in calculations of intellect<sup>43</sup>.

9.

The above-mentioned matter,

then the Giving of the Torah revealed that the service of the Jews should be

from the aspect of choice — expresses itself in the Giving of the Torah itself.

And the explanation of this:

The Ten Commandments are the most simple things⁴⁴,

which also human intellect obligates them.

Even more: Chazal say⁴⁵

that by "each and every utterance of the Holy One, blessed be He, their souls departed."

And seemingly⁴⁶

: Granted, the utterance "I am" and "You shall not have" are essential matters that touch the essence of a Jew

(so that by them the law is that "he should be killed and not transgress").

But what connection do "Honor your father",

"You shall not steal",

and the like,

have with the departure of their souls⁴⁷?

But in this was expressed the innovation of the Giving of the Torah,

that even matters which are understandable in human intellect — a Jew does them not by virtue of his intellect and understanding of the nature of that thing,

but because so He chose to do.

And since one does it from choice,

one lies in it with the entire essence,

and as discussed earlier,

that choice reaches into the essence of man.

And therefore also the later utterances

(which are simple matters)

touched the essence of Jews and brought about the blossoming of their souls.

Yud.

The above-mentioned explanation regarding the Giving of the Torah also gives an explanation in what each Yom Tov has.

Mitzvos which are specific to this Yom Tov

(On Chag HaMatzos — the telling of Yetzias Mitzrayim,

eating matzah, etc.; on Chag HaSukkos — sitting in the sukkah,

the Four Species),

in contrast, Shavuos does not have any unique mitzvah.

why it is called "Atzeres" — because the thing that distinguishes the Yom Tov from the weekdays is "Atzeres",

the refraining from doing melachah,

which exists on all Yomim Tovim].

So the matter in this: the other festivals express particular matters and particular virtues in the connection,

as it were,

of the Most High with Jews etc.

i.e.

here one speaks about the connection between the Most High with Jews in a specific manner,

and correspondingly there were given commandments which should express the particular content of the specific festival.

But the festival of Shavuot,

the time of the giving of our Torah,

expresses the choice of the Most High in Jews and the choice of Jews in the Most High — which is not a particular matter,

and it has no "depiction"

(it is not limited to one manner or a second manner in the connection)

— rather it is that the essence of Divinity chooses in His people Israel and the essence of Jews chooses in the Holy One, blessed be He.

And therefore it cannot be connected with a particular commandment

(the cessation from work

And the joy — are "partners" in all the festivals).

Yes.

And this is also the explanation in that the completions of the Festival of Weeks are in the weekdays:

The other festivals that express the connection between the Almighty and Jews from the aspect of a particular content and quality — they are connected to a distinct time.

The particular content of the festival causes that the time of the festival should be distinct from other days,

that in this time the special subject of the festival is illuminated.

And therefore there is no place that the offerings of the festival should be in a time that has no connection to the festival

(which includes also — Chol HaMoed).

But the holiday of Shavuot emphasizes the connection of the Almighty with Jews from the aspect of free will which has no "depiction" and therefore it has no limitations

(And as above that therefore the holiday of Shavuot has no specific commandment).

And for this reason the "service" which is connected with the holiday of Shavuot — the offerings that pertain to this holiday — is not limited to the time of the festival,

rather one may bring the offerings of Shavuot also on days which are weekdays; and even more: the burnt-offerings of appearance many from Israel would bring initially after the festival

(As above section d)

— because the matter of free will is above the "depiction" and division of time

(the festival).

12.

Based on this, one will also understand the connection of the above-mentioned matter

(Regarding the

completion of Shavuos)

to that which Shavuos is one day:

The Alter Rebbe explains⁴⁹

the reason why the festival of Shavuot "is only one day alone, unlike Pesach and Sukkot which are seven days" — that Pesach and Sukkot are connected with the seven attributes,

and therefore it comes down in the time of seven days; unlike Shavuot, the time of the giving of the Torah,

"it is the aspect of yechidah which is above the division of the seven attributes",

and therefore it comes down in time in a manner of "one day"

(the number as it is above division).

D.

H.

: Pesach and Sukkot are connected with the revelation of G‑dliness which is clothed in the seven attributes,

the revelation is connected with a "form" so to speak and with a particular content

(above,

and likewise below in man)

; unlike on Shavuot the connection is such which is above division above,

and connected with the simplicity of yechidah,

because Shavuot is the time of choice.

And therefore is

It is one day only⁵⁰,

a unique one that is above a simple one⁵¹.

It turns out,

that also in the "time" of Shavuot it is emphasized how Shavuot is essentially a matter that is above the division of time; and therefore it becomes derived regarding the time of the festival offerings,

that it is above the division of Yom Tov and weekday,

the seven days include both the day of Yom Tov and the weekdays

(after Yom Tov)

— as one.

(From the talks of the second day of Chol HaMoed Sukkos and Shabbos Parshas Nasso 5743)