English translation — אמור ב

1.

It is known what is stated in the Midrash<sup>1</sup>

that all the commandments that the Most High commanded the Jews to fulfill,

He Himself fulfills them.

From this it is understood also regarding the warning to kohanim that they should not become impure,

that also the Most High — who "your God is a priest"<sup>2</sup>

— guards Himself, as it were, from becoming "impure."

Therefore Tosafot warns<sup>3</sup>

that it is not a question: how could the Most High have "allowed" Himself to become impure at the burial of Moses our teacher — because "Israel are called sons to the Omnipresent,"

and for His "son" a kohen may become impure.

About this it is also stated in the Zohar<sup>4</sup>

regarding the future redemption — that then the Most High,

as it were,

will become "impure" when taking out Jews from the exile of Edom

(as the verse says: "Who is this coming from Edom, with dyed garments, etc., and all my garments I have stained"<sup>5</sup>)

— that Jews are, as it were, "his sister

(of the Holy One, blessed be He)

the virgin who is close to him, who has not known a man,"

and therefore "for her he may become impure."

One must understand: The Most High is indeed

(not just a kohen,

but)

a "Kohen Gadol"

and a Kohen Gadol may indeed not become impure "for any dead person" even not for his son and his virgin sister — it becomes again not understandable: How did the Most High become impure for Moshe,

and how will He become impure for the sake of Jews?

B.

The Maharsha

explains there,

So in truth, above is not at all applicable to impurity,

"for a spiritual thing cannot receive impurity."

And that which the Gemara³

says that the Most High

(after the burial of Moses our teacher)

immersed Himself, as it were, "in fire,"

is this no more than an answer <b>according to</b> the question and false opinion of the heretic,

who assumed that the Most High is an existence in a physical depiction.

And according to the explanation of the Maharsha, the aforementioned difficulty would be resolved in relation to the answer of the Tosafot,

because <b>in truth</b>, above the concept of impurity is not at all applicable;

And the objection of Tosafos is only because &lt;b&gt;that&lt;/b&gt; &lt;b&gt;heretic&lt;/b&gt;,

in his opinion&lt;sup&gt;9&lt;/sup&gt;

was not troubled "how could it become impure" — and according to &lt;b&gt;him&lt;/b&gt; the answer of "Israel are called children to the Omnipresent" is sufficient,

because he only knew that "your God &lt;b&gt;is a priest&lt;/b&gt;",

but not that the Most High is a &lt;b&gt;High&lt;/b&gt; Priest.

But in addition to this,

that it is difficult to say that a whole matter and discussion in the Gemara,

should be only according to the heretic — it is indeed proven from the aforementioned Zohar&lt;sup&gt;10&lt;/sup&gt;

that also above, a concept of impurity is applicable, as it were.

And since so,

is then the question returns to its place: how is it that the Most High,

a High Priest,

makes Himself "impure" as it were to "His son" and "his sister the virgin"?

3.

So the explanation in this is:

That which below all the matters of creation are set out in such or another manner,

is this because so they are above,

in their root,

from where they are drawn.

And although the root above is incomparably higher than having the definitions and depictions of the creations below — nevertheless,

since that also

(the roots)

the attributes above

like the Essence of the Blessed One in Himself which is simple in the utmost simplicity,

but they]

have a certain definition and depiction — <b>chesed</b>,

<b>gevurah</b> etc.,

therefore there already exists in them certain similarities to the particular creations below which are brought into being from them¹¹

and in which the particular of the root comes in a prominent and defined manner.

Thus,

for example,

water whose nature of descent <b>from above to below</b>¹³

is analogous to the attribute of chesed

(which is the root of the aspect of water¹³)

whose content is a flow <b>from above to below</b>¹⁴

And likewise it is also with the other creations.

And therefore the creations relative to their root are in the category of "mashal",

for through them one can have a certain comprehension of the "nimshal",

in their root above¹⁵.

And since it is the supernal will that one should have knowledge and comprehension in the levels above,

also in Ohr Ein Sof

(as the language¹⁶

: that they will recognize His greatness etc. — <b>His</b> greatness which is)

the simple in the ultimate simplicity,

He therefore also placed into creation matters that are in the category of simplicity

(relative to creation),

so that through them,

as through a "parable",

one may have some concept of, as it were, the simplicity of the Most High.

4.

Although also the matters in creation which are in the category of simplicity that serve as a "parable" for the simplicity of the Most High,

it is

(not merely a parable in general,

but it is)

because the creatures are drawn from the aspects that are above the chain of descent

they become <b>descended</b> from the supernal attributes,

as above p. 63],

Yet it is understandable,

that from the aspect that they are <b>created beings</b>,

they <b>must</b> have various boundaries and limitations — and therefore,

when one uses these simple matters as a "parable" for the simplicity of the Most High,

their boundaries and limitations must not be mixed in here

(which they must have upon themselves,

because they are created beings)

— because in this they are not a parable for the Blessed Infinite One.

Just as the sun — that which with which it is not changed by the light and radiance that comes out from it, it is a parable for "I am Hashem, I have not changed"&lt;sup&gt;18&lt;/sup&gt;

Because it is &lt;b&gt;drawn&lt;/b&gt; as it were from "the sun of Hashem"&lt;sup&gt;20&lt;/sup&gt;]

— It is however understood,

That the various limitations etc. that exist in the light of the sun

(From the aspect of that it is a created being)

Are &lt;b&gt;not&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;21&lt;/sup&gt;

A parable for the light of the Ein Sof&lt;sup&gt;22&lt;/sup&gt;.

H.

From this it is understandable regarding our matter — the difference between the aspect of "ordinary Kohen" and "High Priest" above:

Indeed it is true that the high priest below is a parable and example to the "high priest" above — but it is understood that he is a parable in the particular aspect of <b>priesthood</b> and <b>additional</b> <b>holiness</b> that exists in the high priest below; but the matters of the high priest below that are in him by virtue of his being a created being,

a soul in a <b>body</b> — <b>they</b> are <b>not</b> a parable for the aspect of the high priest above.

And therefore it is understandable,

that since the high priest below,

by virtue of the aspect of <b>great</b> <b>priesthood</b> that is in him,

is higher

(and separate)

from the matter of impurity²³,

so that even "for his father and for his mother he shall not become impure",

is it not from the aspect of the matter of the &lt;b&gt;High&lt;/b&gt; Priesthood that is in him,

but from the aspect of that which he is defined in the limitations of the body],

is therefore in the aspect of "High Priest" above not relevant the matter of impurity.

But not so the level above that is called "kohen" simply

(which is a "root" for kohen simply — commoner below)

: Because regarding a kohen commoner below the matter of impurity applies also from the aspect of the priesthood that is in him — therefore he &lt;b&gt;may&lt;/b&gt; and must&lt;sup&gt;24&lt;/sup&gt;

defile himself "for his close relative etc." — therefore it is also, as it were, present in the level of kohen commoner above.

Based on the above it will be understandable — how the Holy One, blessed be He, as it were, occupied Himself with the burial of Moses and the matter of "and all my garments I have soiled" — because in the level of High Priest the matter of impurity is not applicable from the outset; the question is from the aspect of the level of "kohen commoner" above — and to this the answer is as above that "Israel are called sons to the Omnipresent" and "and for his virgin sister etc. he may defile himself."

6.

Another matter in this:

On the verse "And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests"²⁵

it says in the Baal HaTurim²⁶,

that this means great leaders.

4.

5.

That at the time of the Giving of the Torah <b>every</b> Jew became in the aspect of a High Priest.

From this it is understood,

that just as in the aspect of the High Priest above, impurity does not apply at all

(as above section 5),

so too is it also regarding Jews from the aspect of the High Priest that is in them.

that the aspect of yechidah of a Jew,

no impurity can "touch"].

One sees from this,

the greatness of the belovedness of Jews which expresses itself in this "all garments I have soiled": regarding the essence of the soul,

from the outset the matter of sin does not apply

(and impurity),

and consequently,

also not the matter of exile and soiling; the matter of impurity and exile is only in the revealed powers — and nevertheless the Most High will,

as it were,

make Himself "impure" in order to take out from exile the revealed powers of Jews,

and also them He cannot,

as it were,

leave in exile²⁸

and He redeems all Jews with all their matters in the true and complete redemption through our righteous Mashiach speedily in our days.

(From the maamar and sicha of Shabbos Parshas Emor,

5724)