English translation — שיחת ש"פ ויחי ה'תשמ"ז

First talk

(Part of the second talk –

edited by the Rebbe, may he live for many good years,

and published in separate pamphlets.

And below come the matters in the second talk that were not included in the above.

As mentioned above, then from the aspect of the decline of the generations, they show our generation explicit instructions, etc.

So just as we see the explicit instruction for the generation of “and he was placed

(Yosef)

in the coffin in Egypt” at the end of Parshat Vayechi,

that we strengthen ourselves with that which “Yosef” in our generation is found with us, and consequently we have nothing to fear from the darkness of exile, etc.

(as discussed above at length) –

so too we see an explicit matter relevant to our time at the beginning of Parshat Shemot

(which comes after the conclusion of the book of Bereishit –

“and he was placed in the coffin in Egypt”),

where it speaks about the beginning of the exile:

There was a matter of “come, let us deal wisely with him”!

A thing that seemingly has no place:

We know that Yosef

(in our generation)

is the master over all matters,

and without you no man shall lift his hand or his foot¹,

so much so that even in exile they only concluded “be strong, be strong, and we will be strengthened” with that which “and he was placed

(Yosef)

in the coffin in Egypt” together with Jews –

so how does a matter of “come, let us deal wisely with him” suddenly come –

this is indeed a “kutchke federech”

(as one would say),

for what can Pharaoh and the magicians of Egypt and the wise men of Egypt possibly do?!

And especially since the Nasi of our generation testified² that everything has already been completed,

“stand ready, all of you”,

one only needs to “fasten the buttons”³ –

so why was there “come, let us deal wisely with him”?

And one cannot say that it was merely to cause distress,

but surely this must have an explanation.

What is the explanation in this? One must look into the Torah,

as every Jew believes with complete faith,

that the Torah has an answer and instruction for everything. Sometimes it is explicit,

and sometimes one must seek it –

but it is certainly there. And in the language of the Mishnah⁵

[for one who errs in a Mishnaic matter returns⁶,

because initially there is no error]:

“Turn it over and turn it over, for everything is in it.” Sometimes it requires “turn it over”,

and sometimes “turn it over and turn it over”,

but it is certain that “everything is in it”.

So it is clear that in the Torah there is an explanation of how a matter of “come, let us deal wisely with him” suddenly comes.

And since here there can be a question even for a simple person and a small child –

the explanation in this must be understood simply. And together with this –

a true explanation,

as is known that one must have a special caution that one must not tell a child a false thing⁷,

and as is also explained in Sefer Chassidim⁸

[even though there is in general the prohibition of “distance yourself from a false word”⁹].

One finds the explanation in this in the discourses of Chassidus¹⁰ where they explain the matter of trials,

“and God tested Avraham”¹¹. “Tested” (also)

from the term banner and elevation:

Since we are already at the conclusion of the exile,

when everything has already been accomplished

(as above) –

one must say that the entire matter of “come, let us deal wisely with him” is only as a trial,

like “and God tested Avraham”,

from the term banner and elevation,

in order that one should reach the ultimate elevation,

even higher than where one stood until now.

That is, that not looking at the perfection that existed until now

(like the perfection that existed by Avraham before “and God tested”,

where by him there was certainly no deficiency, Heaven forbid) –

the Holy One, blessed be He, wanted to elevate Jews,

you and me and that one, etc., even higher than where they stood until now –

He made another trial.

[Continuation of the matter –

included in the aforementioned pamphlet from section 5 onward. And below come the matters that were not included there].

[In continuation of the matter that the trial is through a thing that has no reality at all,

and its entire purpose is only to effect a banner and elevation,

like it was in the tenth trial of Avraham,

that the Satan “went¹² and became before them a great river,

immediately Avraham descended into the water...

when he reached the middle of the river the water reached his neck,

at that hour Avraham lifted his eyes to heaven,

he said before Him, Master of the Universe, etc., I am engaged in Your command, etc.,

immediately the Holy One, blessed be He, rebuked and the river dried up and they stood on dry land”]:

That is, the entire "great river" that already, "half the river, the water reached up to his neck" –

had absolutely no existence

(not only not in spirituality, but)

also not in this physical world,

and it was nothing more than a mere illusion. And therefore,

at the time that Avraham demonstrated that he was not affected by it

(rather he continued on the path to fulfill the will of Hashem),

and "Avraham lifted his eyes to heaven" and asked "what is this,"

he is going to fulfill the will of Hashem –

the truth was revealed,

that there is no existence of a river at all,

"the river dried up and they stood on dry land,"

and on the contrary –

the only thing that remains from it is only the matter of a miracle and elevation,

as Avraham was elevated through this even higher.

And similarly in our case –

that the trial has no existence even in this physical and material world.

That is, not only does it have no existence in spirituality,

but even in this physical and material world,

even in the "world of kelipot" –

which is also an existence and a world created by the Holy One, blessed be He

[as is known that at the beginning of creation the world of kelipot was created,

only then it was below all the worlds,

comparable to the peel that guards the fruit etc.¹³,

unlike afterwards, through the sin, it became intermixed with the higher worlds etc.,

and this too is in order to strike the Jews with the service of refining the sparks etc.] –

even in the world of kelipot the trial also has no existence!

And the only reason for this trial is in order to achieve an elevation. And therefore,

at the time that one "lifted..

his eyes to heaven,"

it was revealed in a manner visible to all that the entire matter had no existence,

and what remained was only for the sake of the miracle and elevation that resulted from it –

that through this one comes to more in the spreading of the wellsprings outward,

through the addition in the publication and printing of the writings of our Rabbis, our leaders etc.

However, since a Jew has free will

("and you shall choose life"¹⁴) –

it can occur to him a thought,

that he will begin to mention about the existence that was,

and say "aha!"

etc. –

One must know that the substance of the trial has absolutely no existence. And therefore, speaking about it is a thing that has no substance,

even not in this physical and material world

(all the more so not in spirituality),

and consequently –

without any benefit,

and on the contrary –

through the fact that one speaks about it and considers it an existence,

one confuses oneself without the evil inclination etc.,

and in relation to the evil inclination one creates an existence of a thing that was not in existence!

The thing itself

(which has no existence)

cannot be made into an existence –

in the language of our Sages¹⁵ "if all the inhabitants of the world gather to create a mosquito etc."

[or even "one wing"¹⁶ (of a mosquito)]

they cannot do it;

but he has the power to create a thing that confuses himself.

But the only true existence that is present in this –

is the miracle and elevation

(that emerged from it),

the intention and purpose of the trial,

in order that through this there should come an addition in the dissemination of Torah and Judaism and the spreading of the wellsprings outward.

From this it is understood,

that there is absolutely no place to speak and write and print all these foolish things,

and gematriot,

even making a matter of "chronicles,"

that "it happened in the days of Achashverosh" was such and such etc.!

It is different when the Torah says that one should write a "chronicle,"

like the Megillat Esther

("it happened in the days of Achashverosh") –

this is a matter according to the Torah of truth etc.;

but on one's own to make a "chronicle" has no place ab initio,

and especially a "chronicle" of a thing that has no existence –

as stated above,

that the entire matter was not in existence,

and no remnant or survivor remained from it –

how can one make from it a "chronicle" –

it has no "chronicles,"

because it is absolutely not an existence?!

The only thing that must come out of this is –

that one must utilize all the vitality and enthusiasm etc. for "and keep My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My Torahs"

(as it is stated by our father Avraham¹⁷),

and if he does not know what this means,

he should go ask a five-year-old for Scripture. Even a five-year-old who has not yet learned this verse –

one need only show it to him,

he will interpret that this means learning Torah and fulfilling mitzvos with beautification,

as it is stated in Shulchan Aruch,

or at least Kitzur Shulchan Aruch,

or at least –

the abbreviations that are in the Alter Rebbe's Siddur.

Beginning with learning the books and writings of Chassidus

(with the introduction of learning the revealed part of Torah –

"his study is in his hand"¹⁸),

i.e., when a new book comes out,

a pamphlet or a maamar etc., or a book of revealed Torah and halacha etc.,

he must learn it,

and not rely that others have learned it,

rather "each and every person is obligated to say, 'For my sake the world was created'"¹⁹,

and in our case –

for your sake,

because of you they printed the book,

pamphlet or maamar!

And it is incomprehensible the foolishness that instead of utilizing the time for learning Torah and becoming unified with the wisdom and will of the Holy One, blessed be He

(as explained in Tanya²⁰),

one should write and print foolish things –

which every moment of it is a nullification of Torah!

And even if he has conducted himself like a fool until now –

in addition to the fact that there is no lost thing

(as is known the saying of my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe²¹),

he can from now on conduct himself as one must.

[Continuation of the sicha –

regarding the emphasis on all this in the year of Shemittah,

and during the days of Chanukah,

and the month of Teves etc. –

is included in the aforementioned kuntres.

And at the conclusion of the sicha he said:]

And from "And these are the names etc."

(at the beginning of the exile),

the term of revelation,

which "on account of the redemption of Israel they are mentioned here"²²,

one comes to "This is my G-d and I will glorify Him"

(as it is stated in the Song at the Sea after their exodus from Egypt) –

"Then Moshe sang"²³,

that all Jews –

even the fetuses in their mothers' wombs²⁴ sang the same song with the same fervor and delight,

And so may it be for us –

"It does not say 'he sang' but 'he will sing'"²⁵ in the future redemption,

and one sings the tenth song²⁶,

and immediately –

still in the time of the ra'aya d'ra'aya,

in the true and complete redemption through Moshiach our righteousness,

and speedily in our days, literally.

Maamar (in the manner of a sicha)

beginning "And Yaakov lived etc."

It is also customary to dwell on a matter in the weekly parshah together with Rashi's commentary,

a matter in the notes of my father on the Zohar of our parshah,

and a matter in the daily Rambam study.

We will dwell on one Rashi that many have pointed out.

At the beginning of the parshah where it discusses that Yosef brings his children to Yaakov their father so that he should bless them,

Rashi comments²⁷ on "And Yisrael saw Yosef's sons and said, 'Who are these?'",

and he explains:

"And Yisrael saw Yosef's sons –

he sought to bless them but the Divine Presence departed from him because Yeravam and Achav were destined to descend from Efrayim, and Yehu and his sons from Menasheh. And he said, 'Who are these?' –

from where did these come who are not worthy of blessing."

Afterwards²⁸ it states "And Yosef said to his father, 'They are my sons whom G-d has given me here.' And he said, 'Take them, please, to me, and I will bless them.'"

And Rashi explains:

"Here –

he showed him the document of betrothal and the marriage contract etc.

And he said, 'Take them, please, to me, and I will bless them' –

this is what the verse says²⁹ 'And I taught Efrayim to walk, taking them by their arms,'

I accustomed My spirit in Yaakov for the sake of Efrayim until he took them upon his arms."

The question arises:

Why does Rashi not explain simply –

as other commentators learn³⁰ –

that Yaakov asked "Who are these?"

because "Yisrael's eyes were heavy with age, he could not see"³¹?

(Although this is stated afterwards and the five-year-old has not yet learned it – a)

Rashi knows of this,

b) it is also implied in the preceding verses."

What if Rashi had explained thus –

simply –

it would have blocked the entire explanation –

which is seemingly not so simple –

"He sought to bless them and the Divine Presence departed etc.",

with the entire continuation.

Also in this second matter in Rashi on the words "And he said, 'Take them, please, to me, and I will bless them' –

this is what the verse says 'And I taught Efrayim to walk, taking them by their arms,'

I accustomed My spirit in Yaakov for the sake of Efrayim until he took them upon his arms" –

it is entirely incomprehensible:

The words "And he said, 'Take them, please, to me, and I will bless them'" are entirely simple.

So why does Rashi need to say anything about this at all? And further:

How does it fit here to bring a verse from Hosea

(that "this is what the verse said, etc.") –

when nothing is lacking here? And c) the verse

(from Hosea)

has no connection to "And he said, 'Take them, please, to me, and I will bless them'":

In that verse there is no word about blessing

("and I will bless them"),

and in our verse

("And he said, 'Take them, please, to me, and I will bless them'")

there is no word about "his arms"?!

With further precise points –

and as will be explained below.

We will also raise another perplexing matter in Rashi in our portion:

In Jacob's blessing to Simeon and Levi it says ³² "Simeon and Levi are brothers." Rashi explains:

"With one counsel regarding Shechem and regarding Joseph,

and they said each man to his brother, etc. and now let us go and kill him³³,

who are they?

If you say Reuben or Judah,

behold they did not agree to his killing, etc.,

of necessity they are Simeon and Levi, whom their father called brothers."

One must understand:

Why did Rashi not give this explanation earlier on the verse "And they said each man to his brother, etc.",

that this means Simeon and Levi,

with the entire reasoning that this does not mean Reuben, etc.?

In the notes of the Tatte on the Zohar in our portion, he raises³⁴ the point that it says in the Zohar³⁵ regarding the blessing of the tribes –

"All blessings are those with which he blessed them, such as Judah, you your brothers shall praise³⁶,

Dan shall judge his people³⁷,

from Asher, rich is his bread³⁸,

and so all of them",

which is seemingly a "strange" thing,

that the Zohar should enumerate specifically these three,

And the Tatte explains:

"It took as examples these three: Judah,

Dan, Asher,

because until Judah, that is Reuben, Simeon, Levi,

he did not bless them but rebuked them, etc.,

and the blessings began from Judah. And Judah is the head of the banners,

he took after him Dan, etc.,

because Dan is the end of the banners, etc.,

and from this there will be proof that he blessed all of them,

since he blessed the beginning and the end

[including also in quality –

as is known that Judah is among the greatest of the tribes,

and Dan –

the lowliest of the tribes³⁹] etc.,

and they are in the aspect of right and left, etc.,

and he took afterwards Asher, whose blessing is 'from Asher, rich is his bread',

this is because the blessing of Asher is an effluence from Binah,

which is above the aspect of right and left, which are Chesed and Gevurah,

from which his bread is drawn,

bread of Vav...

that is drawn to the letter Vav in the Name...

and it is in the central line...

and through this, right and left, which are Judah and Dan, etc., also become rich.

And thus in these three, which are the aspect of right, left, and middle,

that Jacob blessed,

all the tribes are included, because the three lines include everything...

Therefore regarding the rest it says 'and so all of them',

and he does not need to explain them."

One must still, however, understand the concept in this according to Chassidus,

and in the service of man –

and as will be explained below.

In the lesson of the Rambam from this Shabbos⁴⁰ and from Erev Shabbos⁴¹

(one who toiled on Erev Shabbos will eat on Shabbos⁴²) –

we learn about monetary laws and capital laws and the various laws in each of them,

and afterwards the Rambam makes a summary and enumerates the differences between them,

"What is the difference between monetary laws and capital laws?

Monetary laws [are judged] by three,

capital laws by twenty-three, etc."⁴³.

One must understand:

One of the special matters and differences of capital laws regarding monetary laws is this –

what the Rambam writes earlier⁴⁴ –

that "A Sanhedrin that all of them began in capital cases first and all of them said 'guilty', behold this one is exempt, until there are some who acquit who will argue for his merit and the condemners will increase, etc." And this law does not exist in monetary laws.

The question arises:

Why did the Rambam not count it among the aforementioned differences between monetary laws and capital laws?

Seemingly one could answer:

After the Rambam enumerates the differences between monetary laws and capital laws,

he writes:

"Both capital laws and lashes laws... these laws are equal in them"⁴⁴. And since the aforementioned law

(that "A Sanhedrin that all of them began, etc. first and all of them said 'guilty', behold this one is exempt")

also does not exist in lashes laws –

therefore the Rambam does not count it.

Also one must understand the reasoning in this very law "A Sanhedrin that all of them began in capital cases first and all of them said 'guilty', behold this one is exempt" –

what is the logic in this,

and the commentators of the Talmud and commentators of the Rambam have already discussed this⁴⁵.

There is a Rishon⁴⁶ who writes,

that with what the Gemara says⁴⁷ that "A Sanhedrin that all of them saw [him] as liable, they acquit him",

"they acquit him" means from death,

"they hasten to kill him immediately."

One cannot, however, say this in the Rambam,

because the Rambam wrote his book "in clear language" and "in a pure language",

and one cannot say that the language of the Rambam "behold, this is exempt" –

a phrase that the Rambam writes hundreds of times in his book –

means here "exempt" from the death penalty,

not as the simple interpretation of this,

and in all other places in the Rambam!

And in addition to this:

In general, it is not reasonable to say like the first authority,

because if "they exempt him" means from the death penalty –

why do the commentators trouble themselves with this!

And as will be explained below.

Monetary laws and capital laws

(like all commandments and laws)

also exist above, by the Most High,

as it is said "He declares His words to Jacob, His statutes and judgments to Israel",

and from this they become channeled into the laws as they are between man and his fellow.

And the explanation of the matter:

The order in which the Most High punishes one who conducts himself improperly is from the light to the severe –

first "monetary laws", then "capital laws", may it not happen.

As Rashi explains at the end of Parshat Behar,

that "these sections were stated in order,

first He warned about the Sabbatical year,

and if he coveted money and was suspected regarding the Sabbatical year, he eventually sells movable property, etc.,

if he did not repent, he eventually sells his ancestral land,

if he did not repent, he eventually sells his house,

if he did not repent, he eventually borrows with interest,

all these latter ones are more severe than the former ones,

if he did not repent, he eventually sells himself, etc." –

that is, first "monetary laws",

a matter that touches his money,

and then if he did not repent –

"capital laws",

a matter that touches his soul

("he sells himself").

And in accordance with this distinction that "monetary laws" are lighter than "capital laws" –

there is also the distinction that "monetary laws are judged by three, capital laws by twenty-three"

(and the other distinctions between them):

in order that there be "monetary laws" below, it requires an action from

(only)

three levels above

(or even one level –

as this is from the Torah,

that monetary laws can be judged by one);

however, "capital laws" –

come from twenty-three levels above,

this touches a multitude of levels above.

For this, however, one must know,

that the intention of the punishments of the Torah –

the Torah of kindness –

their ultimate purpose is kindness,

"so that through this there will be a rectification for the soul of the sinner",

because "from the mouth of the Most High does not go forth evil",

and the Most High is the essence of good and the nature of the good is to do good.

That is, that the punishments of the Torah –

including the aforementioned punishments in monetary laws and capital laws –

are in their inwardness a matter of kindness and good,

in order to remove an undesirable thing that has "attached itself" to the sinful person

(through his sin),

and in order to bring benefit to the person,

until he reaches an even higher level than before the descent,

like the advantage of the service of repentance over the service of the righteous.

And therefore, in all the laws and punishments above, the levels above are intermingled:

In monetary laws –

three levels above,

and in capital laws –

twenty-three levels,

because these laws are not merely laws,

but their ultimate purpose is to bring a rectification for the soul of the sinner,

therefore it touches upon and requires levels above:

In monetary laws –

three levels,

and in capital laws –

which are even more severe –

twenty-three levels.

And from this is channeled the distinction between monetary laws and capital laws in the laws of human beings. And as follows.

It was discussed here that the aforementioned principle

(that the punishments of the Torah from the Holy One, blessed be He, Who is the essence of good –

their ultimate purpose is good and kindness)

also applies regarding the descent of the children of Israel into exile,

"for a small moment I have forsaken you",

whose ultimate purpose is to bring about the greatest elevation,

"great wealth",

but nevertheless, the children of Israel cry out "until when" –

all this is included in the aforementioned pamphlet that will be printed, with the help of Heaven.

[At the conclusion of this talk –

the entire audience cried out together and in a loud voice several times:

"Until when". And His Honor, our master, teacher, and rabbi, the Rebbe, may he live for many good days, Amen, motioned with his holy hands to increase the cry. And afterwards he added:]

Since "great is a toast that brings close" –

it is also worthwhile that everyone say "L'Chaim",

and this will further bring close one Jew to another,

and through this –

bring close the redemption

(which is dependent on love of Israel,

the opposite of the cause of the exile),

Then "with our young ones and with our elders, with our sons and with our daughters,"

"a great congregation shall return here,"

and their silver and their gold with them,

the physical and the spiritual,

one goes into our holy land,

which will be in its perfection,

until "the Lord your God will enlarge your border,"

and there itself –

in Jerusalem, the holy city,

to the holy mountain,

in the third Holy Temple,

And immediately and instantly –

"they will not delay even for the blink of an eye."

The explanation in Rashi:

When the five-year-old studying Scripture learns that Jacob asked "who are these?" –

a stormy question arises in him:

Even if one says that "the eyes of Israel were heavy with age, he could not see" –

Jacob certainly understood simply that when Joseph came to him with two people,

they are the children of Joseph,

Because when Jacob became "ill,"

he himself understood that they would tell Joseph. And especially according to the words of Rashi on the verse "and he said to Joseph, behold your father is ill,"

that "Ephraim was accustomed to being before Jacob in study,

and when Jacob became ill in the land of Goshen, Ephraim went to his father in Egypt to tell him." And it is reasonable to say,

that Ephraim said to Jacob that he is going to tell Joseph that "your father is ill";

and even if he did not tell him,

Jacob himself understood it –

Consequently, he understood that Joseph would come with his sons in order to receive a blessing before his passing,

all the more so from the fact that Jacob received a blessing from his father Isaac before he left him and went to Padan Aram,

only for "a few days until your brother's anger subsides,"

how much more so that Joseph would come to receive a blessing for himself and for his sons before Jacob's passing

[and as the five-year-old knows about the matter of the blessing of the children,

as he sees on the eve of Yom Kippur,

and the like],

as it actually was,

that "and he said to Joseph, behold your father is ill, and he took his two sons with him, Manasseh and Ephraim,"

"so that Jacob would bless them before his death."

And consequently,

when Jacob hears that the door opens and Joseph enters

– and he knew that this is Joseph,

because they told him

("and it was told to Jacob, and he said, behold your son Joseph comes to you")

and he spoke with him knowing that he is Joseph his son

("and Jacob said to Joseph, etc.") –

together with two additional people,

Jacob certainly understood that they are the two sons of Joseph

(as Jacob knew that he had two sons,

"and now your two sons who were born to you, etc., Ephraim and Manasseh, etc."),

because it is entirely unreasonable to say that Jacob did not understand who they are

(and especially since Jacob at that time stood on a very high level,

and he spoke prophecies about Rachel, etc.),

and especially since "Ephraim was accustomed to being before Jacob in study"

(and from this it is understood also regarding Manasseh –

as it indeed states in the Midrash,

but even according to the simple interpretation it is also reasonable to say so),

he certainly knew who he was –

Consequently, the question arises for the five-year-old studying Scripture:

When "Israel saw the sons of Joseph" –

why did Jacob ask "who are these?"?!

Even if one says that Jacob "could not see,"

he certainly understood simply that they are the sons of Jacob!

Therefore, Rashi

(according to the simple interpretation)

cannot explain

(as other commentators do)

that the reason for this is because "the eyes of Israel were heavy with age, he could not see,"

because Jacob certainly knew who they were,

rather, there must have been another thing that happened which caused Jacob to ask "who are these."

Therefore, Rashi explains,

that "he sought to bless them and the Divine Presence departed from him,"

therefore he said "who are these,"

"from where did these come who are not worthy of blessing."

The five-year-old asks:

Why indeed did "the Divine Presence depart from him"? Rashi explains the reason for this:

"because Jeroboam and Ahab are destined to descend from Ephraim, and Jehu and his sons from Manasseh."

That is, by stating the reason why "the Divine Presence departed from him"

("because it is destined, etc.")

Rashi does not mean to say that Jacob knew of this,

simply, Jacob did not know of this

(therefore he asked "who are these,"

and he needed to arrive at Joseph's answer,

as follows) –

because there is no necessity at all to say that Jacob knew of this,

for why should they reveal to him a distressing matter

(that "Jeroboam and Ahab are destined to descend from Ephraim, and Jehu and his sons from Manasseh"),

Rashi says this "midili" in order to explain to the Ben Chamesh L'Mikra why indeed "the Shechinah departed from him" –

for ostensibly, Ephraim and Menasheh were great,

as Rashi explained earlier that "Ephraim was accustomed to be before Yaakov in Talmud",

and simply it is understood that also Menasheh was a great one,

as is proven from this very thing that afterwards there was the dispute who is greater than whom,

until Yaakov said that "also he

(Menasheh)

will become great, but his younger brother will become greater than him",

from this very thing it is proven that Ephraim was indeed greater,

but they were approximately equal to each other

(because otherwise there would be no room for comparison).

Consequently, the Ben Chamesh L'Mikra asks:

since they were great –

why indeed was "the Shechinah departed from him".

So Rashi explains to him:

"Because in the future Yeravam and Achav will descend from Ephraim, and Yehu and his sons from Menasheh."

And afterwards in the verse it continues,

that Yosef said to Yaakov regarding his question "Who are these?",

"From where did these come who are not worthy of blessing?" –

("And Yosef said to his father,)

They are my sons whom G-d has given me here":

The novelty of Yosef's words is not that "They are my sons whom G-d has given me" –

because Yaakov knew this earlier as above

(and as Yaakov said earlier "your two sons who were born to you"),

and nevertheless "the Shechinah departed from him",

rather the novelty of Yosef was that "They are my sons whom G-d has given me" is "here":

"Here"

(which is seemingly superfluous)

compels one to say that Yosef showed something to Yaakov –

as is known also in the simple meaning of the verse,

that "this" means pointing with a finger and saying "this".

That is, that Yosef did not simply say "They are my sons whom G-d has given me"

(which Yaakov knew as above),

rather he thereby showed him something –

"here" –

and a matter connected with his children,

in order to remove Yaakov's perplexity "Who are these?".

Therefore Rashi explains:

"Here –

he showed him the document of betrothal and the document of marriage"

[unlike according to the explanation of other commentators,

it is not understood why "here" is written].

And the explanation:

At the time of "the Shechinah departed from him" a doubt could have been aroused in Yaakov "Who are these?":

True indeed that they are the sons of Yosef,

but perhaps they were not born with the utmost fitness and beauty etc.

(due to the fact that Yosef was in Egypt for many years).

Therefore Yosef said "They are my sons whom G-d has given me here" –

"he showed him the document of betrothal and the document of marriage" –

in order to demonstrate that his marriage with Osnas the daughter of Potiphera was a betrothal in fitness according to the Torah –

as is known that the Patriarchs fulfilled the Torah before it was given,

and likewise Yosef fulfilled the Torah before it was given,

and betrothal according to the Torah is "by money, by document, and by intercourse";

money he could not show to Yaakov,

because it was already many years after the marriage,

the only thing that he could show him is –

"document",

"document of betrothal".

The question arises:

Why did Yosef also need to show the "document of marriage"?

But a Ben Chamesh L'Mikra remembers what he learned earlier

[Not like a Jew with a white beard,

and especially if he also has Semichah for the Rabbinate,

he does not have time to study Chumash with Rashi,

this is for Jews who do not yet have Semichah... –

although our Nesi'im yearned that one should study Chumash with Rashi,

as printed in the talks of the Rebbe, my father-in-law, the Admor ]:

At the end of Parshas Chayei Sarah, Rashi explains

(regarding Hagar the concubine of Avraham)

"Wives with a marriage document, concubines without a marriage document."

Based on this, it is understandable why Yosef "showed him" also the "document of marriage" –

in order to demonstrate to Yaakov,

that his marriage was with the utmost perfection according to the Torah,

without any concerns –

not only with a "document of betrothal",

as a concubine,

but also with a "document of marriage",

which shows that she is his actual wife

(not merely a concubine).

That is, that although a concubine is also according to the Torah,

and the proof is that Avraham,

although he fulfilled the entire Torah,

had a concubine

[unlike Yitzchak –

who was a "perfect burnt offering" ] –

Yosef conducted himself with the utmost beauty,

and took her as a wife,

with a "document of marriage".

[And even though the "document of betrothal" and "document of marriage contract" was simply with Asenat –

how is it that Joseph had it in order to show Jacob –

Joseph certainly explained to her that he needs to have it in order to show Jacob that the children were born in kosher manner,

in order that Jacob should bless them,

she certainly agreed to this].

And after Joseph showed Jacob the "document of betrothal and document of marriage contract"

(in order to show him that the children are in the utmost kosher status),

Rashi continues,

"And Joseph sought mercy for the matter,

and the holy spirit rested upon him".

And in continuation of this Rashi continues,

that Jacob also said this –

"And he said, 'Bring them now to me and I will bless them.' And afterwards Rashi concludes, 'This is what the verse said, "And I taught Ephraim to walk, taking them by his arms,"

I accustomed my spirit in Jacob for the sake of Ephraim until he took them upon his arms.'"

That is, Rashi does not come to explain the words "And he said, 'Bring them now to me and I will bless them'"

(because they are entirely simple),

rather he quotes the words

("And he said, 'Bring them etc.'")

not as a new "opening discourse"

(with an explanation upon it),

rather as a continuation of how to read the continuation of the matter

(as is Rashi's way in many places),

and the "typesetter" did not understand,

and the words "This is what the verse said etc.",

do not come as an explanation upon "And he said, 'Bring them etc.'",

rather as a continuation upon the entire matter before this:

Instead of what was the opposite of "I taught Ephraim to walk"

("I accustomed my spirit in Jacob for the sake of Ephraim"),

because of what "the divine presence departed from him",

afterwards it became "I taught Ephraim to walk",

"Bring them now to me and I will bless them",

until also "taking them by his arms"

("until he took them upon his arms") –

as the verse continues afterwards "And he kissed them and embraced them",

for which

(embrace)

one needs to hug them with the arms etc.

And according to the above, the aforementioned precise points and many other precise points are understood.

The explanation in the notes on the Zohar:

The twelve tribes are the aspect of the lower chariot,

the twelve diagonal boundaries in the worlds of Creation, Formation, Action,

the world of separation.

However, Jacob is the aspect of Emanation. And the intention of the blessing of the tribes by Jacob is –

in order to elevate them and draw down into them from the world of Emanation.

As explained in many places in the words of our sages, that the tribes said to Jacob "Just as there is in your heart only One, so there is in our heart only One"

(and therefore Jacob said "Hear O Israel etc.",

and the tribes said "Blessed be the name etc.",

or the reverse) –

that in Jacob

("in your heart")

was the nullification of the aspect of the One of the world of Emanation

(the unity of the One),

and he drew this down also to the tribes in the worlds of Creation, Formation, Action,

even though Creation, Formation, Action is the world of separation.

And this was the entire matter of the blessings of Jacob –

to draw down from Emanation into the tribes who are in Creation, Formation, Action.

And this matter itself was primarily actualized through the three tribes,

Judah, Dan, and Asher,

corresponding to the three lines,

right, left, and middle,

as explained in the note of my father.

And upon the foundation of the explanation in the notes of my father,

that Judah, Dan, and Asher correspond to the three lines,

the line of the right, the line of the left, and the line of the middle –

one can say and explain the matter on even higher levels:

It is known that the middle line is not an intermediary and does not connect,

it compels from one extreme to the other extreme,

from Keter until the very lowest,

and just as it is above is Keter, so it is drawn down below.

And based on this it follows that the blessing of Asher

(the middle line)

is from the aspect of Keter,

as is known that Asher is the aspect of Ashur,

pleasure is the aspect of Keter,

the source of all the sefirot from which all the blessings are drawn –

as explained in the matter of one hundred blessings,

that they are the aspect of Keter

(the aspect of one hundred),

which is the source of all the ten sefirot

(the blessings),

as they stand in completeness –

ten included in ten

(one hundred).

And the blessing of Judah

(the line of the right),

from the greatest of the tribes,

is from the aspect of Chochmah,

the beginning of the sefirot –

because Judah begins with the letter Yud

(the aspect of Chochmah),

and Judah includes in itself all four letters of the name Havayah

(in which all ten sefirot are manifested).

And the blessing to Dan

(the lowest of the tribes)

is from the very lowest level in the sefirot.

And therefore,

when one has these three –

they include all the blessings of all the tribes.

And additionally it can be said:

Through the fact that there is the blessing of Yehudah,

the beginning of the sefirot,

and the blessing of Dan,

the end of the sefirot –

there becomes the "Acher Shalem",

which is a vessel for the flow of the middle line,

until the aspect of Keter,

the blessing of Asher,

Ashur –

"From Asher, his bread is fat",

"and through this, the right and left, which are Yehudah and Dan, also become fat",

the source of the blessings.

The lesson from this in the service of man:

Even when Jews find themselves in the world of separation

(at the level of the tribes,

not at the level of the patriarchs) –

one must not be fallen in oneself to them,

because through the fact that they connect themselves with Yaakov,

it becomes "just as in your heart there is only one, so in our heart there is only one",

and this takes his entire existence,

his entire structure,

from his highest level

(Yehudah,

Chochmah),

until his lowest level

(Dan),

and through this there becomes for him an "Acher Shalem" to receive the aspect of the middle line

(Asher) – Keter,

until the innerness of Keter.

From the lesson of the Rambam of these days concerning the laws of monetary matters and the laws of capital cases –

one has a general lesson regarding the virtue of the children of Israel

(in continuation of what was discussed above, how these matters are above):

Even when it speaks about the money of Israel

(not their lives) –

one must be in this extremely careful,

to the utmost end,

because "the Torah is sparing with the money of Israel". And therefore they say that a rabbi who goes to rule on a question in monetary laws –

he should know that this is called not simply "monetary matters",

but "laws of monetary matters",

because it is the money of Israel. To the extent that even when it speaks about one perutah –

the law of a perutah is like the law of a hundred.

And this is even though monetary laws are from the Torah –

for from the Torah, monetary laws can be [judged] by one;

all the more so after the decline of the generations,

and the decree of the sages was added,

that monetary laws must be [judged] by three –

there is even more emphasis on the caution regarding the money of Israel,

to the extent that a Jew can claim that now

(due to the decline of the generations)

he does not want to rely on one,

and he wants to have a court of three.

All the more so when it speaks about the laws of capital cases –

it is understood a fortiori from the caution in monetary laws how much one must be careful not to touch a Jew. As one sees it in all these laws

(in the Rambam in the lessons of these days)

how far one must investigate and be careful etc. in the laws of capital cases.

And this is (and a fortiori)

as one also sees in the laws of lashes –

for what difference is there between total killing and partial killing –

the magnitude of the prohibition of "do not add" more than thirty-nine lashes, as the law is "how many lashes do they give him? Forty minus one, as it is said 'in number forty',

a number that is close to forty", meaning that even though it is written "forty lashes",

the Torah itself says that it should be thirty-nine lashes,

so that one should not add more than necessary

[for here one sees,

incidentally,

a Torah commandment for the sake of a safeguard].

All the more so when it speaks about actual capital cases,

there must certainly be extreme caution.

One of the unique laws in the laws of capital cases –

where one sees with emphasis the magnitude of caution about touching a Jew –

is the aforementioned law in the lesson of Erev Shabbat:

"A Sanhedrin that all of them began in capital cases first and all of them said 'guilty', behold this one is exempt, until there are among them some who acquit so that they may argue in his merit and the condemners increase etc."

And one can say the explanation of this –

in two ways:

A) The entire matter of punishments in the Torah is

(not for the sake of revenge, heaven forbid, but)

in order to effect a rectification and atonement in the person

(as mentioned above).

Therefore,

if there is a case where someone committed such a sin that no punishment will help him for it –

one does not punish that one,

because the punishment has no benefit in rectification and atonement upon the sinful person.

And one can say,

that when there is a case where "a Sanhedrin that all of them began in capital cases first and all of them said 'guilty'" –

that all the members of the Sanhedrin,

of a valid Sanhedrin,

said "guilty" –

it proves that the person committed such a severe sin that no punishment

(death)

will help him, heaven forbid.

Therefore the law is "behold this one is exempt".

B) An explanation for the superiority

[And when one can explain it for the superiority,

why must one explain it for the inferiority]:

When one sees a case that "the Sanhedrin who all began with capital cases first (v)

and all said 'guilty'" –

one must say that they made a mistake,

because it concerns a Jew,

who has a soul,

which is "literally a part of G-d above." Therefore the law is that he is exempt.

Another matter in this lesson of the Rambam:

It is known the principle that "we do not follow the majority in monetary matters."

The question arises:

Why does the Rambam not count this among the differences between monetary laws and capital laws,

that in capital laws we follow the majority?

It will be understood by prefacing another question:

In yesterday's lesson

(of Erev Shabbat)

the Rambam writes "A court that was divided, some saying 'acquitted' and some saying 'guilty,'

we follow the majority...

in monetary matters."

The question arises:

How does this law accord with the principle that "we do not follow the majority in monetary matters"?

It will be understood based on the question of the Tosafot on the principle that "we do not follow the majority in monetary matters":

"It is perplexing: what is the reason that we do not follow? Let it be derived by a kal vachomer from capital matters, as we say in Sanhedrin, and Rabbi Yoshiyah brings it by a kal vachomer from capital matters:

And if in capital matters, which are stringent, the Torah said 'go after the majority,' in monetary matters, is it not all the more so? etc.'"

And Tosafot answer:

"And it can be said: there, regarding judges, it is different, for their minority is considered as non-existent, etc."

But the answer of Tosafot is entirely incomprehensible,

because if the minority in the Sanhedrin is "as non-existent" –

then this is not a valid Sanhedrin! Even if one single judge of the seventy-one judges is missing –

it is not a Sanhedrin.

And one can say the answer in another manner:

The principle of "we do not follow the majority in monetary matters" applies specifically when the majority is in the actual monetary object itself

[like the concept of "majority" in the laws of tereifot –

a majority of perforations in the place of the sword,

the place of the perforation],

and for example:

If a sum of money was found,

and according to the majority it would belong to someone,

we do not give it to him;

but when the majority is

(not in the monetary object itself, but)

in the judges who rule on the law –

then we follow the majority even in monetary matters. As the Rambam rules as above.

And based on this it is also understood why the Rambam does not bring here

(in the Laws of the Sanhedrin)

the distinction between monetary laws and capital laws that "we do not follow the majority in monetary matters" –

because the principle

("we do not follow the majority in monetary matters")

does not concern a majority of judges,

where indeed we follow the majority.

Regarding the matter of the Redemption, there are now no differences of opinion on this,

and one need not come to the point that we follow the majority, etc. –

because according to all opinions, "all the deadlines have already passed,"

and all rule that it must be "Moshiach now." And specifically in English,

which is descended from the Holy Tongue.

And from this ruling it is thus actualized in practice –

that "Moshiach now,"

and he sees a multitude of rabbis

(because all fulfilled the command in the Mishnah "make for yourself a rabbi"),

and a multitude of "Chabad Houses,"

houses of Torah, prayer, and charity,

both general "Chabad Houses,"

and "Chabad Houses" which are made from one's own private houses and rooms,

he sees a multitude of "Chabad Houses,"

and a multitude of charity boxes,

in addition to a multitude of Torah and prayer.

And then the promise is immediately fulfilled that "all synagogues and all study halls in Babylon

[which includes all exiles]

will be established in the Land of Israel."

And there one also has the Third Holy Temple,

and just as one comes to see, so does one come to be seen, and just as one comes to be seen, so does one come to see,

below ten handbreadths,

in the true and complete redemption through our righteous Moshiach.

[Here he spoke about several instructions –

the establishment of Chabad Houses,

"make for yourself a rabbi,"

and with main emphasis –

the preparations for the Tenth of Shevat,

including –

through the aforementioned aspects, etc. –

all this is included in the aforementioned pamphlet published separately.

In continuation of the matter regarding the necessity to influence the rest of the Children of Israel –

he said:]

And all the more so and by a kal vachomer from this ruling of the Rambam that "Moses our Teacher commanded from the mouth of the Almighty to compel all inhabitants of the world to accept the commandments that were commanded to the children of Noah,"

and that they should fulfill them because "the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded them in the Torah and made it known to us through Moses our Teacher."

And as discussed at length many times,

that the necessity for this is even stronger now,

standing at the end of the time of exile,

as preparation for "and the kingdom shall be the Lord's,"

and "then I will turn to the peoples a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the Lord, to serve Him with one accord."

And as one saw in actuality the success of those who acted in this –

so it is certainly necessary to influence the nations of the world,

all the more so upon Jews

(to distinguish),

and especially since we have the commandment of "and you shall love your neighbor as yourself."

And the service of uniting oneself with other Jews –

one can already begin to do also on the Sabbath day,

including through the fact that one Jew says to another Jew "L'chaim,"

and through this it becomes "L'chaim u'l'shalom,"

until the manner of "Mechayei Chaim."

And just as during prayer there is a private redemption for the person praying

(as the Alter Rebbe explains in Igeret HaKodesh –

so one does through this for a private redemption for other Jews,

as understood according to what was said above,

that before prayer one includes oneself with all Jews together,

until that this also has a connection with one who prays in his home and intends for the same hour that the congregation prays –

consequently, the private redemption of one person's prayer also effects a private redemption for other Jews,

in general, as this is in the service of God –

that one inserts into exile

(golah)

the Alef of "Anochi Hashem Elokecha,"

it becomes from this "geulah,"

until the general redemption through Mashiach our righteous one,

"with our young and with our old, with our sons and with our daughters,"

"a great congregation shall return here,"

to our holy land,

which will be in the manner of "Hashem your God will enlarge your border,"

and speedily in our days, literally.

[His Holy Honor, our Master, our Teacher, the Rebbe, may he live for good long days, instructed the honorable R. Sh.Z.G., may he live, to announce about the Melaveh Malkah for the benefit of "Nshei" (and he gave him the food).

After the announcement, His Holy Honor, our Master, our Teacher, the Rebbe, may he live for good long days, hinted to the chazzan, may he live, to play "Yehi ratzon... that the Holy Temple be built..."].

Afterward he said:

Those who need to make a final blessing,

will certainly make a final blessing].

________ * ________