English translation — שיחת ש"פ בא, ח' שבט ה'תשמ"ז

The first three sichos —

were reviewed by the Rebbe shlita,

and published in a separate pamphlet *.

A maamar (in the form of a sicha)

beginning "Vayehi be'etzem hayom hazeh etc."

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

a topic in the notes of the Tatte on the Zohar of our parshah,

and a topic in today's Rambam lesson.

And before this, mention will be made regarding a matter of actual deed in connection with the day of the hillula of the Tenth of Shevat:

The day of the hillula of the Tenth of Shevat,

like every important thing,

requires preparation¹.

Therefore, we arouse that since there is still time until the Tenth of Shevat,

one should utilize it to make the appropriate preparations for the day of the hillula,

Including and especially —

according to the proposal² —

through the three "aspects" as preparation for the Tenth of Shevat,

and particularly the last aspect,

which must be immediately before the Tenth of Shevat,

And then on the day of the hillula itself,

and the days after it —

to strengthen oneself in going "in the straight path which He has taught us from His ways, and we will walk in His paths" in a manner of "eternity, forever and ever"³,

and also to influence other Jews,

so that every Jew should become one of those who go "in the straight path which He has taught us from His ways etc."

And in general —

the dissemination of Torah and Judaism and the spreading of the wellsprings outward,

conducted with the matter of love of Israel to the extent of the unity of Israel. And particularly, the spreading of the wellsprings outward itself is a matter of unity —

unity between the "wellsprings" and "outward."

Beginning with unity through the study of Torah —

the lessons that are equal for every soul

(the matter of unity),

the lessons of Chumash, Tehillim, and Tanya,

Chumash, Tehillim, and Tanya,

as instituted by the Baal HaHillula.

And correspondingly, the lessons of the Rambam.

And in particular —

that on the bright day of the Tenth of Shevat in this year, we will complete the study of the Rambam as it has been divided into daily lessons,

according to the custom that has been accepted and spread throughout the Jewish diaspora⁴ —

which further strengthens the unity of Israel.

And in this itself, there is a special elevation in the completion of the Rambam this year

(on the Tenth of Shevat) —

because on this day, all types of students of the Rambam become united,

both those who study three chapters a day

(who complete the third cycle),

and those who study one chapter a day

(who complete the first cycle),

and those who study Sefer HaMitzvos.

And we hasten from the beginning to the completion⁵ —

immediately afterward, we begin studying the lessons anew. Including also —

arousing other Jews who until now have not participated in the study of these lessons,

that they too should participate in this study every day,

in one of the three aforementioned ways,

and how good —

in the first way

(three chapters a day),

which will be completed

(with Divine Providence,

certainly from the fact that everything in the world is with Divine Providence)

on the 24th of Teves of the coming year.

In this matter of unity mentioned above, there is further strengthening —

when one accepts these good resolutions at a farbrengen in public,

of several tens of Israel and several hundreds of Israel —

for "a man helps his friend and says to his brother, 'Be strong'"⁶

(in Yiddish, "strong, strong, and we will be strengthened"⁷),

and in a manner of "great is a meal that brings close"⁸.

And particularly, since at the farbrengen, Jews from various places have gathered,

even from distant places —

both distant physically and distant spiritually,

and they have all come together for one purpose within the four cubits of the Nasi of our generation,

who unites them all,

for "one thing for a generation and not two things for a generation"⁹,

"and My servant

(in the singular)

David shall be king over them"¹⁰,

and "the Nasi is everything"¹¹,

consequently, this unites all those who have gathered at the farbrengen within these four cubits.

And "a man helps his friend and says to his brother, 'Be strong.'" And furthermore —

since there are "new faces" here, even from distant places

(as above) —

this brings renewal, addition, and joy to those who are here,

as is known the effect of "new faces" regarding "Sheva Berachos"¹². And particularly, this is also the day of Shabbos —

for Shabbos itself is a "new face"¹³.

And correspondingly, on the other side:

For the guests, those who are here are "new faces,"

consequently, this brings them a new joy etc.

And especially —

to further unite and strengthen ourselves to go "in the straight path which He has taught us from His ways etc.,"

as above.

And with emphasis —

then the service consists of "do good,"

spreading light and goodness within oneself and among others around oneself.

Even if there is an existence of an "evil spirit"

(as it says in the Midrash¹⁴) —

it becomes nullified,

"sins shall cease" and not sinners¹⁵;

and our work is only in "do good,"

until in the manner of mehadrin,

and mehadrin min hamehadrin, etc.

And all this will further hasten the fulfillment of the prophecy of "Awake and sing, you who dwell in the dust,"

and the Baal HaHilula among them and at their head,

and "with our young and with our old we will go, with our sons and with our daughters, etc."

(as it says in this week's portion¹⁶),

"a great congregation shall return here"¹⁶*,

in the true and complete redemption,

and out of joy and goodness of heart.

And one should connect this with a matter in Rashi on our portion,

where it discusses the matter of redemption:

At the beginning of Parshat HaChodesh in our portion¹⁷ it says "And Hashem spoke to Moses and to Aaron in the land of Egypt, saying." Rashi comments on the words "in the land of Egypt" and explains:

"Outside the city. Or is it only within the city,

the verse states 'when I go out of the city, etc.'¹⁸,

and if a light prayer he did not pray within the city because it was full of idols,

a serious matter such as this, all the more so."

This was discussed in the journals,

but they focused on secondary matters relative to the "main difficulty":

Rashi contradicts himself. At the beginning of the commentary he explains "in the land of Egypt —

outside the city."

That is, Rashi explains that "in the land of Egypt" according to the simple meaning means "outside the city." Then Rashi writes,

"Or is it only within the city,"

and he brings for this another proof

(that this means "outside the city")

"the verse states 'when I go out of the city, etc.'"

The question arises:

Rashi established a rule¹⁹ that "I have come only for the plain meaning of the verse" —

so whichever way you look at it:

If the simple explanation of "in the land of Egypt" is "outside the city," why does he then write "Or is it only within the city" and need to arrive at another proof from a kal vachomer;

and if one must arrive at this kal vachomer —

why does Rashi begin that this is the simple explanation of "in the land of Egypt"?!

Also, one must understand —

in general regarding the matter:

Rashi's way in most places is,

that he does not first bring a difficulty and then state a conclusion,

rather he writes initially the conclusion²⁰,

and thereby addresses all matters. Why does Rashi write here first a difficulty "Or is it only within the city,"

and then state "the verse states, etc." —

he could have initially written that this means "outside the city,"

and bring the proof from the kal vachomer?

Another question —

the question that was asked in the journals:

Earlier, regarding the plague of the firstborn, it says²¹ "And Moses said, 'Thus says Hashem, about midnight I will go out into the midst of Egypt,'"

and Rashi explains "This prophecy was said to him while he was standing before Pharaoh, for once he left his presence he did not again see his face." Now how does this accord with what Rashi says here,

that the speech of the Holy One, blessed be He, to Moses and Aaron was "outside the city, etc., because it was full of idols"²²?

One wanted to answer,

that "this prophecy was said to him" in thought,

not in speech openly so that Pharaoh also heard it,

and consequently it could be also "while he was standing before Pharaoh"

(within the city)

even though it was "full of idols,"

because it is understood and simple that the idols did not affect Moses our teacher.

[And note from the Mishkal L'David here,

but this is not sustainable according to the simple meaning,

therefore it will not be repeated,

and whoever wishes can look into it himself].

However, one cannot say so,

because the prophecy pertained to Pharaoh and Pharaoh's astrologers who were standing there certainly heard it in speech

(as Rashi explains on "about midnight,"

"Moses said 'about midnight' implying close to it, either before or after it, and he did not say 'at midnight,'

lest Pharaoh's astrologers err and say Moses is a liar,

but the Holy One, blessed be He, who knows His times and moments, said 'at midnight.'" It turns out that Pharaoh and Pharaoh's astrologers heard "this prophecy" ("Thus says Hashem, about midnight, etc."),

because if not, they could not have been precise in Moses' words).

(This passage is unclear).

Consequently, the question remains:

What is the difference between Makat Bechorot and Parshat HaChodesh —

that regarding Makat Bechorot, "this prophecy was said to him while he was standing before Pharaoh"

(even though it was "full of abominations"),

whereas Parshat HaChodesh was said "outside the city... because it was full of abominations"?

With further nuances —

and as will be explained below.

Another matter in Rashi's commentary that was raised:

On the verse²² "a night of watching for all the children of Israel throughout their generations," Rashi focuses on the words "watching for all the children of Israel throughout their generations" and explains:

"Guarded and protected from harmful forces, as it is said, 'and He will not allow the destroyer to come...'"

It was asked:

Why does Rashi also quote the word "throughout their generations" from the verse —

how does that relate to his explanation?

The question becomes even stronger —

because "throughout their generations" seemingly contradicts Rashi's explanation:

Our Sages say²³ that "throughout their generations" includes also the future to come,

that in Nisan they were redeemed and in Nisan they will be redeemed in the future. The five-year-old student of Scripture asks —

what will be then? They answer,

that then it will be "not in haste shall you go forth,"²⁴

because there will be no harmful forces. So why then

(in the future)

will there need to be "watching,"

"guarded and protected from harmful forces" —

when there will be no harmful forces?!

Furthermore:

It is stated in the Midrash²⁵ "for in haste you went out of the land of Egypt,²⁶ but in the future you will not go out in haste...,"

a parable: to a merchant who entered an inn to rest for Shabbat, he stayed there all day,

at night he arose, took what was his, and went on his way,

the innkeeper stood... and began to scream... he arose at night and took all that was mine... so Israel prepared themselves at night to go out in darkness, the Egyptians stood... and said, let us pursue them because they took all that was ours...,

the Holy One, blessed be He, said to them: what caused all this for you?

The haste with which you went out,

from now on, for you will not go out in haste," and "in the future the night will become day." So the question arises:

How can it be said "a night of watching... throughout their generations,"

for the future —

when the redemption will be in a manner that "the night will become day"?

It follows from this,

that "throughout their generations"

(according to the aforementioned explanation that it refers to the future)

which Rashi quotes,

not only does it not add anything,

but it actually contradicts his explanation "guarded and protected from harmful forces..."

And as will be explained below.

In the notes of my father, he focuses²⁷ on what the Zohar says in our parshah²⁸ regarding the mezuzah

(a matter of the love of Israel before the Holy One, blessed be He):

"In many places the Holy One, blessed be He, had compassion on His children,

a person builds a house and the Holy One, blessed be He, says to him: write My name and place it at your entrance, and you dwell inside the house, and I will sit outside at your entrance to guard you."

And my father writes on this:

"See Netzutzei Orot on the Ein Yaakov. And seemingly it is closer to explain that 'My name' refers to the name Shaddai that is on the outside of the mezuzah,²⁹ which is the guardian,³⁰ as it is written 'He guards the doors of Israel'³¹

(unlike his explanation that 'My name' refers to mezuzah which equals the numerical value of Ado-nai,

for the word mezuzah and the name Ado-nai are not written in the mezuzah, so how can it say 'write My name').

Also, it can be hinted that 'My name' refers to the name Havayah

(the letters of Havayah)

which is inside, and Shaddai which is outside,

which together equal the numerical value of 'name'..." And my father concludes:

"I later found this in the RaMaZ"

[And nevertheless, he brings his previous explanation —

because in addition to the fact that he subsequently found a source for it (from the RaMaZ),

the explanation is also logical].

However, a question arises regarding the entire matter:

Why is it necessary to come to the name that is outside the mezuzah —

when in the passages inside the mezuzah there are several explicit names

(not merely in a manner of a name that is not hinted at by any letter or any stroke...),

beginning with "Hear O Israel, Hashem our God, Hashem is One,"

the name Havayah twice,

corresponding to the lower Havayah

(in Zeir Anpin)

and the upper Havayah

(in Atik),³²

and then several more names.

However, my father does not explain this. Because his purpose in the notes on the Zohar is to explain the precise language of the Zohar,

and regarding the general matters he relies that one will understand it on one's own,

based on what is explained in other places, etc.

And as will be explained below.

In today's lesson of the Rambam,³³ we study about the laws of war:

"The³⁴ king does not wage war first except a commanded war. And which is a commanded war? This is the war against the seven nations,

and the war against Amalek."

Afterwards, he explains the details of the laws of the war against the seven nations and the war against Amalek:

"The positive commandment 35 is to destroy the seven nations, as it is stated: 'You shall utterly destroy them.'

And anyone who comes across one of them and does not kill him transgresses a negative commandment, as it is stated: 'You shall not keep alive any soul.'" And the Rambam adds and concludes:

"And their memory has already been lost."

"And likewise, there is a positive commandment to obliterate the memory of Amalek,

as it is stated: 'You shall blot out the memory of Amalek,'

and a positive commandment to always remember his evil deeds and ambush,

in order to stir up enmity against him,

as it is stated: 'Remember what Amalek did to you,' etc."

However, there is an exception to this:

"One does not wage war against anyone in the world until calling out to them for peace,

whether it is a discretionary war or a commanded war,

as it is stated: 'When you approach a city to wage war against it, call out to it for peace.'

If they make peace and accept the seven commandments that the children of Noah were commanded upon them, no soul is killed from them, and they are subject to tribute,

as it is stated: 'They shall be for you as tribute and shall serve you,' etc."

This also applies regarding the war against the seven nations and the war against Amalek —

as the Rambam writes further:

"But regarding the seven nations and Amalek who did not make peace, no soul is left alive from them, as it is stated: 'Thus you shall do to all... only from the cities of these nations you shall not keep alive any soul,'

and likewise it says regarding Amalek: 'You shall blot out the memory of Amalek.'

And from where is it derived that it speaks only of those who did not make peace? As it is stated: 'There was no city that made peace with the children of Israel except the Hivites, inhabitants of Gibeon; they took all in battle, for it was from the Lord to harden their hearts to meet Israel in battle, in order to destroy them,'

implying that they sent to them for peace and they did not accept."

In this, several matters must be understood:

Even though in the enumeration of the commandments there is the principle that "we do not count commandments that are not applicable for generations" —

the Rambam counts the commandment to destroy the seven nations in the enumeration of the commandments,

even though he writes that "their memory has already been lost" —

as the Rambam explains it in Sefer HaMitzvot,

and this is his language:

"And perhaps one might think that this commandment is not applicable for generations,

since the seven nations have already been lost, etc.,

for a commandment that is fulfilled upon reaching its purpose, without this being dependent on a specific time, cannot be said to be not applicable for generations,

but it is applicable in every generation in which the possibility of that matter exists, etc.,

and in general, it is fitting for you to understand and know the difference between the commandment and the matter that we were commanded about,

for many times the commandment is applicable for generations, but the matter we were commanded about has already ceased in one of the places in the generations,

and the cessation of the matter we were commanded about does not render the commandment inapplicable for generations."

And likewise regarding the commandment to obliterate Amalek and destroy the seven nations:

"Do you think that when the Blessed Name will destroy the seed of Amalek and cut it off to its end, as will happen speedily in our days,

as He promised us, saying: 'For I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek,'

it is not for generations?

This cannot be said,

but it is applicable in every generation, as long as any of the seed of Amalek exists, there is a commandment to cut it off. And likewise, to kill the seven nations and destroy them is a commandment we were commanded, and it is a commanded war, and we are commanded to search after them and pursue them in every generation until they are finished and no person remains from them. And so we did until they were finished and cut off in the days of David, and the remnants were scattered and mixed among the nations until no root remained of them,

and not because they were cut off will the commandment we were commanded to kill them be inapplicable for generations, even after their completion and destruction,

because these commandments are not tied to a time or a specific place, like the commandments specific to the desert, but they are tied to it as long as it exists that the possibility of that commandment exists."

"But it will be inapplicable for generations when the matter is the opposite. That is, when a matter exists in one of the aspects,

and he is obligated to perform a certain action or judgment at a certain time, and today it is inapplicable, even though that matter exists in that aspect. Like a Levite who was disqualified in the desert and is qualified for us today."

[And likewise regarding the commandments connected to the descent of the manna in the desert (for example:

"Do not leave any of it until morning,"

etc.),

they are not applicable for generations,

even if the manna had descended after the forty years].

However, another question arises here:

It is known that the 248 positive commandments correspond to the 248 limbs of a person,

as the Rambam also brings it in the introduction to his book

("Two hundred and forty-eight positive commandments, their sign is the number of a person's limbs").

And as explained in Likkutei Torah regarding the matter of "Be wholehearted with the Lord your God,"

that the wholeness and perfection of a person is specifically when he has all 248 positive commandments,

which correspond to the 248 limbs

(and the 365 negative commandments,

which correspond to the 365 sinews).

According to this, the question regarding the positive commandments of destroying the seven nations and erasing Amalek arises:

Even if one has the aforementioned explanation that this is not a contradiction to the eternity of the commandments

(because there is always the possibility to fulfill these commandments, etc.) —

the question still remains regarding the Jews who are opposite to these commandments:

Since one cannot fulfill the commandments —

consequently, the perfection of the limbs is lacking;

and what becomes of that limb,

if one cannot fulfill the commandment corresponding to that limb

(which brings completeness and perfection into that limb)!

One must also understand what the Rambam writes,

that "if they made peace and accepted the seven commandments that the children of Noah were commanded, we do not kill any soul from them" even regarding the seven nations and Amalek:

According to this, it turns out that then one does not fulfill the eternal positive commandment in the Torah "to destroy the seven nations, as it is said 'you shall utterly destroy them'" 52*,

and "whoever has one of them come into his hand and does not kill him transgresses a negative commandment, as it is said 'you shall not keep alive any soul.'"

And likewise regarding Amalek —

if they made peace, one does not fulfill the eternal positive commandment "to obliterate the memory of Amalek,

as it is said 'you shall blot out the memory of Amalek'",

and to such an extent that even "a camel and a tree of Amalek must be obliterated."

The difficulty becomes even stronger according to Chassidus:

Chassidus explains the reason why there must be "you shall blot out the memory of Amalek",

and to such an extent that "his end is destruction" —

because the kelipah of Amalek has no

(refinement),

for the kelipah of Amalek pertains to the matter of selfhood and pride,

which is the "beginning" of all kelipos

("the beginning of nations is Amalek"),

consequently one must completely nullify it

(unlike the seven nations,

which correspond to the seven emotional attributes,

which can be refined. And on the contrary —

the main service of man is to refine the seven emotional attributes).

Based on this, it is entirely incomprehensible how this accords with the possibility of making peace with Amalek and allowing it to remain in existence?!

One cannot answer,

that it is revealed and known that Amalek will never come to make peace and accept the seven commandments of the children of Noah —

because:

a) It is not possible to say "revealed and known" regarding another person —

this is dependent on that other person. b) What difference does it make whether it is revealed and known how the reality will be in actuality —

since the Rambam rules that if one could imagine that such a reality existed

(even if it is revealed and known that it will not be in actuality)

this is an eternal law in the Torah

(similar to what was discussed earlier regarding the commandments of destroying the seven nations and erasing Amalek when the actual reality does not exist),

consequently the question remains how this accords with the fact that the kelipah of Amalek has no refinement?

And as will be explained below.

One of the aspects of the kelipah of Amalek is —

"who encountered you on the way",

the matter of coldness

(coldness),

including the coldness between one Jew and another, may G-d forbid.

Which was the cause of the exile —

the opposite of the matter of unconditional love.

Thus it is understandable that the main service now

(in order to nullify the exile)

must consist of nullifying the coldness of the kelipah of Amalek,

and to bring about the matter of love of Israel and unity of Israel.

And in continuation of this —

there are those who have provided drinks,

"great is drinking that brings close",

for various farbrengens and gatherings in connection with the celebration of the completion of the Rambam,

or the establishment of a Chabad house.

Let them now go up and say "L'chaim",

and then include and unite those assembled here —

by announcing the time and place of the gathering and inviting those assembled here,

which will further add to the love and unity of Israel,

which nullifies the cause of the exile,

and when the cause is nullified,

the effect is automatically nullified,

and the true and complete redemption comes,

and all Jews will go to the Holy Land,

"with the clouds of heaven."

It is not, however, the meaning,

that when Moshiach comes all these farbrengens and dinners etc. will be nullified, may G-d forbid,

but on the contrary:

all Jews will celebrate them "all of us as one",

"as one person with one heart",

and go to our holy land,

"a land which the L-rd your G-d cares for; the eyes of the L-rd your G-d are always upon it, from the beginning of the year to the end of the year",

to Jerusalem the holy city,

to the Temple Mount,

to the third Holy Temple,

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

and speedily in our very own days.

[Afterwards he said:

Since it is Shabbat,

one should distribute a portion of the drink here.

After the distribution of the drink jugs and the announcements about the time and place of the gatherings, the Rebbe Shlita began to play "And I will pour out for you a blessing"].

The explanation in Rashi:

When one learns the verse "And Hashem said to Moses and to Aaron in the land of Egypt, saying" —

immediately the question arises:

Why do the words "in the land of Egypt" appear,

they are seemingly superfluous,

because:

a) What is the practical difference?

b) Even if there is a practical difference —

one knows on his own that the speech was "in the land of Egypt,"

because Moses and Aaron were at that time simply in Egypt:

Aaron was there all his days. And Moses came there from Midian on the mission of the Holy One, blessed be He, to take the Jews out of Egypt?

One must say,

that "in the land of Egypt" comes here to teach something new.

Therefore Rashi explains:

"In the land of Egypt" —

"outside the metropolis." "In the land of Egypt"

(and not "in the city of Egypt")

comes to teach that the speech was "outside the metropolis." According to the simple interpretation of "the land of Egypt,"

that this is not in a specific city or metropolis,

but in the land in general,

outside a settled place,

in the field and the like.

And the reason also for this that the speech was "in the land of Egypt"

("outside the metropolis") —

a child of five years of age understands simply:

"It is full of idols." In a city, a settled place,

in a town,

where people live;

but outside of that,

in the field

("the land of Egypt") —

one is not accustomed to bring the idols.

And based on this, the precision "outside the metropolis" is also understood,

and not "outside the city"

(as it says in the verse that Rashi brings later "when I go out of the city") —

because a metropolis is larger than a city,

there are more people there than in a city. Therefore it is even more "full of idols."

Afterwards Rashi continues "or perhaps it is only within the metropolis." Because the words "in the land of Egypt" only compel that there is a novelty in this. But from this there is no proof what the novelty is.

One can indeed learn that the novelty is "outside the metropolis"

(as the initial assumption of Rashi),

as is also from the expression "in the land of Egypt,"

as above,

and especially that why should the Almighty tell the portion of the new month to Moses and Aaron "within the metropolis" where Pharaoh and the Egyptians are located —

what relevance does it have to them;

But for this there is no clear proof from the verse on the spot,

because one can learn that the novelty is exactly the opposite —

"or perhaps it is only within the metropolis":

that even though "within the metropolis" is indeed "full of idols,"

the verse teaches that the speech of the Holy One, blessed be He, was "within the metropolis." In the same metropolis where Moses and Aaron were accustomed to speak with Pharaoh,

which was simply not in the land of Goshen,

the place of Moses and Aaron and all the children of Israel

(because nowhere is such a thing stated,

and moreover the main point —

it is not at all plausible to say that Pharaoh king of Egypt,

who argued that "I do not know Hashem,"

would come to Moses and Aaron in Goshen in order to hear his rebuke!...),

but within the metropolis of Pharaoh,

in the palace of Pharaoh

(except for that one time when "go to Pharaoh in the morning, behold he goes out to the water."

And even though it is indeed somewhat forced

(relative to the first interpretation),

there is however no clear proof from the verse that the interpretation is not so. And moreover:

There is a rationale to say in this manner

("within the metropolis"),

because the Almighty did not want to trouble Moses and Aaron that they need to go out of the metropolis. Furthermore:

One can say that the Almighty specifically told them the portion of the new month specifically "within the metropolis,"

in order that this should add to the pain of Pharaoh and the Egyptians,

hearing the portion of the redemption. And as it will be "And I will pass through the land of Egypt on this night and I will strike every firstborn in the land of Egypt etc.,"

and as this will become a holiday for the Jews

(as is discussed in the second half of the portion of the new month).

Therefore Rashi needs to bring a proof from another place —

"The Torah says 'when I go out of the city etc.' and a light prayer he did not pray within the metropolis because it was full of idols,

a serious matter such as this, all the more so",

and this decides in favor of the first interpretation in the novelty of "in the land of Egypt,"

that this means "outside the metropolis."

What is understood from the style of Rashi,

that first he brings the difficulty "outside the city",

then he says "or it is only inside the city"

[although Rashi takes it from the Mechilta,

but Rashi does not bring it because it is written that way in the Mechilta,

rather because this is the simple meaning of the verse,

as discussed many times] —

because "in the land of Egypt" only compels that there is a novelty here,

but the novelty can be learned in two ways:

"outside the city",

"or it is only inside the city".

And in this itself, the order in Rashi is first "outside the city",

then "or it is only inside the city" —

because according to the simple explanation, it is more plausible to say that the novelty of "in the land of Egypt" is "outside the city",

as above;

but for this there is no clear proof from "in the land of Egypt". Therefore Rashi must bring a proof from a fortiori argument from another place,

"the verse says 'when I go out of the city, etc.'".

The explanation of the difference between the plague of the firstborn, which "while standing before Pharaoh this prophecy was said to him", and the portion of the month, which was said "outside the city",

because inside the city it is "full of idols" —

is simply:

Rashi there explains the reason why "while standing before Pharaoh this prophecy was said to him" —

"for since he left his presence, he did not again see his face"

(as Pharaoh had previously said "do not continue to see my face",

and Moses "snatched himself away" and said "you have spoken correctly, I will not again see your face").

That is, that there was no choice, so to speak,

the prophecy had to be said "while standing before Pharaoh",

because afterward there would not be another opportunity for Moses to convey this to Pharaoh.

However, regarding the portion of the month, there was no compulsion that it should be said "inside the city",

therefore it was said "outside the city",

since the city is "full of idols".

And similarly regarding the plague of hail,

where it is written "when I go out of the city, I will spread my hands to the Lord"

(as Rashi brings here as a proof that this is "outside the city") —

there was no compulsion there that he should pray "inside the city".

According to this principle

(that in a place where there is no choice, so to speak,

the revelation of prophecy was even in a place that is "full of idols",

however in other places) —

many matters in these portions are resolved,

and in other places:

A) If the speech of the Holy One, blessed be He, cannot be in a city "full of idols"

(therefore it was "outside the city") —

how can it be that the Most High should perform a miracle and a plague "inside the city",

which is "full of idols"?!

Moreover:

The plague of blood was not only in a place that is "full of idols",

rather it was a matter of "striking their deity",

in the idols themselves!

And similarly, a question seemingly arises in other places in the Torah,

where one finds that the Most High revealed Himself in a place that is full of idols. For example:

We previously learned that "God came to Abimelech in a dream of the night, etc.",

the question arises:

Abimelech was simply an idol worshiper,

and idols are simply kept in the bedroom,

or at least in the house. So how is it that the Most High revealed Himself to him there in a dream

(which simply was in his bedroom in the king's palace,

and not anywhere else),

while there are idols there?

For a child of five years of age studying Scripture, this is initially not a difficulty,

because where there is no choice, so to speak,

the Most High reveals Himself

(or says a prophecy,

or performs a wonder)

also in a place that is full of idols. And where it is not necessary,

the Most High does not do so.

And for a child of five years of age studying Scripture, there is initially no question of how the Most High can perform a wonder or say a prophecy and the like in a place of idols —

because he understands simply,

he does not need an explanation for this,

that the Most High can do everything,

and if one must come to this —

the wonder also occurs in a place of idols,

even "striking their deity".

And similarly regarding the word of the Lord

(prophecy) —

if one must come to this, it also occurs in a place of idols.

And making a distinction between the word of the Lord and a miracle of the Lord —

for a child of five years of age studying Scripture, this is no distinction.

According to Chassidus, specifically one must have an explanation on this. And as discussed many times,

that one is accustomed to dismiss a matter as if it is a most simple thing,

when in truth it is a most difficult thing:

It is known that those who accepted the approach of tzimtzum literally held this way specifically because of His honor and greatness, blessed be He,

that from the perspective of the honor and greatness of G-d it is not fitting to say that He is located in a place full of abominations.

For although Chassidus indeed assumes that tzimtzum is not literal

(as the Alter Rebbe explains in Tanya 73*),

and with all these explanations and proofs,

that there is the power of the Infinite One,

and that creation is in a manner of yesh mei'ayin etc. —

nevertheless, also the approach of tzimtzum literally is brought in Chassidus,

and this is an approach of a great kabbalist,

which was even printed before the Alter Rebbe printed his approach in the book of Tanya.

And according to the approach of Chassidus

(that tzimtzum is not literal)

one must have an explanation of how indeed the Most High is found in a place "full of abominations."

The explanation in this Rashi on the verse "guarded for all the children of Israel for their generations" —

the child of five understands from what Rashi already warned earlier:

Rashi explained earlier

(on the verse 74* "and you shall not go out, each man from the entrance of his house until morning")

"night is the dominion of the destroyers, etc."

And based on this, the child of five understands the explanation of the verse "a night of guarding etc. guarded for all the children of Israel for their generations",

and why Rashi also cites the word "for their generations" —

because not only that night was a time of danger and one needed to attain "a night of guarding etc.",

but so it is also every single night,

because night in general "is the dominion of the destroyers." And therefore the verse says "guarded for all the children of Israel for their generations",

that this night

(the 15th of Nissan)

will be "guarded"

("protected and coming from the harmful forces")

not only in that year,

but every single year,

"for their generations."

That is, that according to the simple meaning, "for their generations" does not speak about the future to come

(as the interpretation of our Sages of blessed memory),

but about the night of the 15th of Nissan every single year,

"for their generations."

And it is sweetened in this that the Jews did not then know that there would be another exile and redemption

(the future redemption),

as Rashi explained earlier on the verse "I will be that which I will be" —

that when the Most High said to Moses our teacher "I will be with them in this distress which I will be with them in the servitude of other kingdoms",

Moses said "why should I mention to them another distress, they have enough with this distress",

the Most High said to him "you have spoken well, thus shall you say...

I will be one time."

The explanation in the notes on the Zohar —

one will understand according to what is explained in the discourse,

that there are two levels and matters in names,

a) it is heard in the name that it is itself a thing with Divinity,

b) it is heard that it is a separate thing and an alien thing.

That this is according to the difference between "Tzva'ot Havayah"

(which is written in the Torah),

"a term of construct,

that the hosts are attached to the name Havayah",

in the world of Atzilut,

the world of unity;

in contrast, "Havayah Tzva'ot"

(which is written in the Prophets)

is a name and matter in itself,

which is in the worlds of Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah,

the world of separation 78*.

And since the drawing down of the unity of "Havayah Tzva'ot"

is in the worlds of Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah

(the world of separation) —

therefore it is drawn from a more elevated place —

the aspect of "above Havayah",

"higher than the name Havayah"

(which is in Atzilut)",

because that which is most low derives from that which is most high.

And based on this, one can explain the reason why specifically "I have written My name",

which also refers to "the name Shaddai that is on the outside of the mezuzah"

(and not the names inside the mezuzah),

accomplishes the matter of "I

(the Holy One, blessed be He)

sit outside at your entrance to guard you":

The names in the sections inside the mezuzah are a part of the mitzvah of mezuzah,

a part of the

(matter that accomplishes this)

togetherness and connection with the Holy One, blessed be He

(like "Tzva'ot Havayah",

"that the hosts are attached to the name Havayah").

Therefore it cannot accomplish a novelty

(more than other mitzvot), that "

(and the minister inside the house)

and I sit outside

(outside)

at your entrance to guard you"

[in the language of our Sages of blessed memory 79*:

"you sleep on your beds and the Holy One, blessed be He, guards you from outside"),

notwithstanding the greatness of the elevation of the name Havayah,

the essential name, the explicit name, and the unique name,

and Havayah above and Havayah below;

Additionally, one needs to have the name Sha-dai that is on the outside of the mezuzah

(which is not a part of the commandment),

on the level of "Hashem Tzevaot" in the worlds of Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah,

the world of separation until the world of unity —

which draws from a higher place

(above the name Hashem that is in Atzilut),

therefore it has the power to effect "And I will sit outside your opening to guard you," until

(as it is stated in another place in the Zohar)

that the protection is in the land and in the manner of "Hashem will guard your going out and your coming in from now and forever,"

even when the members of the household go out of the house

(and all the times in between)

the Almighty protects them.

Regarding the explanation in today's lesson of the Rambam —

one can say a wonderful thing:

The Rambam writes in the Laws of Repentance "Do not say that repentance is only for transgressions that involve an action..

Rather, just as one must repent from these, so too must one search in his character traits..

And these sins are more severe than those that involve an action etc."

And according to what the Rambam said at the end of the Laws of Temurah,

that "most of the laws of the Torah are only etc. to correct character traits and to straighten all actions" —

it is understandable,

that also when one cannot actually fulfill the commandment of destroying the seven nations

("You shall not keep alive any soul")

because "their memory has already been lost"

(and the commandment of erasing Amalek "You shall erase the memory of Amalek")

in actual deed,

the commandments remain eternal always as they are in character traits:

One must contemplate in character traits and come to a feeling in the heart that "You shall not keep alive any soul, for you shall utterly destroy them etc. so that they will not teach you to do all their abominations etc.",

and "You shall erase the memory of Amalek."

That is, that in his character traits and in his feeling in the heart he is incensed and utterly negates the existence of evil of the seven nations and Amalek,

that if it were conceivable that there would be an actual existence of the seven nations and Amalek,

he would completely nullify it. And furthermore:

In his character traits and feeling in the heart he nullifies the evil of the "seven nations" of his character traits —

to such an extent,

that even though the children of Israel are by nature merciful,

his intellect and feeling in the heart are incensed with the force to effect "You shall not keep alive any soul" and "You shall erase the memory of Amalek."

And based on this it is understood,

that also when one cannot fulfill the commandment of destroying the seven nations and erasing Amalek "in action" —

one can fulfill it "in character traits,"

consequently one also rectifies the completeness and wholeness of the limbs corresponding to these commandments.

And moreover:

The commandments are rectified

(and the limbs corresponding to them)

elevated to an even higher level:

Previously they were commandments

(and limbs)

that are in action,

and now they are commandments

(limbs)

that are in intellect

(in the brain in the head and the feeling in the heart).

And based on this one will also understand the reason why "if they made peace and accepted the seven commandments that the descendants of Noah were commanded, we do not kill any soul from among them":

Since I have not found another explanation for this,

it is worthwhile for me to say that the explanation for this is simply,

in accordance with the clear and lucid language of the Rambam:

When there is a situation that the seven nations and Amalek "made peace and accepted the seven commandments that the descendants of Noah were commanded etc. they shall be to you for tribute and shall serve you" —

then there is no suspicion,

that "they will teach you to do all their abominations etc.",

because the very fact that "they made peace and accepted the seven commandments etc.",

with all the conditions that the Rambam enumerates there,

"they shall be to you for tribute and shall serve you etc.,

the servitude that they accept is that they will be despised and lowly and will not raise their heads in Israel but will be subjugated under their hand and will not be appointed over Israel for anything in the world,

and the tribute that they accept is that they will be prepared for the work of the king with their bodies and their money etc." —

these very details themselves guarantee that "they will not teach you to do all their abominations etc."

Therefore then the law is that "we do not kill any soul from among them."

And when there is such a case that "they made peace etc." —

the possibility also remains for the fulfillment of the commandments "You shall not keep alive any soul" and "You shall erase the memory of Amalek" —

as the matter is in the character traits and feeling of the person,

as above.

Based on this one also has an explanation according to the revealed aspect of Torah regarding a perplexing matter concerning Amalek:

There is a principle that "everything that the Holy One, blessed be He, created in His world, He did not create a single thing for naught,"

and "everything that the Holy One, blessed be He, created in His world, He created only for His glory."

The question arises:

Since regarding Amalek it is stated "You shall erase the memory of Amalek,"

to the extent that "his end is destruction" —

where is there in Amalek the "for His glory" of the Holy One, blessed be He?!

One can explain in this regard interpretations according to Remez and according to Chassidus,

that Amalek is the aspect of "your breaking is your repair" etc. —

but what is the explanation of this according to Nigleh?

According to the above, the explanation is understood simply:

Since even Amalek has the possibility of "they completed and accepted the seven commandments that were commanded to the children of Noah etc.,"

then "we do not kill any soul from them" —

he remains an existing entity "for the honor" of the Holy One, blessed be He.

Based on this, there is also a simple answer to the question of the commentators regarding what the Gemara says that "from the descendants of Haman

(and among them was Rabbi Shimon ben Shilat)

they learned Torah in Bnei Brak"

[in the same place where there was the "incident of Rabbi Eliezer etc. who were reclining in Bnei Brak and were recounting the Exodus from Egypt etc."]:

Since Haman the Aggagite is from the seed of Amalek

(as it states in Targum Sheni),

regarding whom the commandment is "you shall blot out the memory of Amalek,"

and "his end is destruction" —

how is it possible that "from his descendants etc. they learned Torah in Bnei Brak"?

According to the above,

one can answer,

that there was a reality of "they completed and accepted the seven commandments that were commanded to the children of Noah."

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

When a doubt falls into one in his service —

he must know that this comes from Amalek,

for Amalek has the numerical value of doubt.

Consequently, he has nothing to torment himself and become despondent that he stands in doubts —

for even Amalek was created "for the honor" of the Holy One, blessed be He,

in order that through this an addition should come in his service,

that he should cast away the doubt,

and furthermore —

through this an assistance and elevation should come in his service,

for a thing that falls to the very lowest takes from the very highest.

According to what is explained in Tanya,

that when unwanted thoughts fall into one during prayer, "let his heart not sink within him to be from this sad and despised," because the thought does not come from him,

but from the Other Side,

and the intention in this is "he should not respond anything and no argument and reply against the alien thought etc., only he should make himself as if he does not know etc. and remove them from his mind and add strength in the power of his intention."

Consequently,

when a doubt falls into you regarding any matter whatsoever connected with your serving the Most High —

do not complain and do not become downcast,

but on the contrary,

stand with joy and a good heart,

and say a Chassidic Lechayim,

knowing that the Most High has presented you with this doubt

(numerical value of Amalek)

in order that through you an addition should come in the execution of your service "for the honor" of the Holy One, blessed be He!

That is to say,

that regarding the doubt itself —

one must know,

that this is a thing that comes from the Other Side only in order to confuse a Jew,

and the intention in this is only in order that the person should demonstrate that he is not affected by it and continues his service,

and furthermore —

the intention in this from the outset is in order that through him should come a strengthening and addition in his service.

And as is known the incident with Rabbi Nachum of Chernobyl 94*,

that someone came to him for a sum of charity for the sake of a wedding. He thought to himself that he would give him the entire sum of money. Afterwards, however, a doubt fell into him,

perhaps it is better to divide the money and distribute it to various people,

which then has the advantage of charity for the many.

Until Rabbi Nachum caught himself that he must do as initially fell into him,

to give the entire sum for a wedding. And his proof and examination for this was simply:

When did the doubt and reasoning fall into him that he should give the money for charity for the many —

specifically after he had decided to give it to one person for a wedding —

he understood that the doubt came from the Other Side. That heard that he wanted to give charity,

it immediately threw in a doubt,

perhaps it is better to give it for the many,

in order to confuse him and in the end he should give to no one!

From this there is also a lesson for each and every one:

At a time when a doubt falls upon him regarding a certain holy work and good deed,

then perhaps he needs to do another holy thing

(we are not speaking about just another thing) —

he has a simple aspect:

let him remember when the doubt fell upon him,

whether this was before he wanted to do the good deed,

or after it!

Someone came to him for a sum of charity. A doubt fell upon him that perhaps it is better to give this to the priesthood and so forth. He needs to think when the doubt fell upon him:

Until that one came to him —

he did not give out a kopek for charity,

and now suddenly it fell upon him to give charity to so many and so many!...

It is therefore understandable,

that the doubt came from the opposing side,

which saw that he is about to do a good thing —

it comes to him not with external reasoning,

but with a Kitzur Shulchan Aruch,

and with the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch,

and with reasoning from halachah,

and that he first needs to go to the mikveh and learn the kavanos,

and already in...

drink juice —

meanwhile he does not give the charity,

or he does not do another good deed that he thought to do.

And so too regarding our subject —

the preparations for the Tenth of Shevat:

One asks him whether he has begun to prepare for the Tenth of Shevat. A reasoning and doubt falls upon him,

that he has a better head and he is smarter and knows better what for him is the proper time.

He thinks to himself,

why does he need to sit at a Chassidic farbrengen and push himself,

when he can learn a verse with Rashi and the like?

One speaks with him about "make for yourself a rav." Immediately a reasoning and doubt falls upon him —

that he is greater than the entire world,

a great one of the generation,

a Rosh Yeshivah,

how can he make for himself a "rav"? And he immediately brings a proof from Torah:

"The entire world was not created except to serve me,"

all people and the world are his servants —

and according to halachah, his servant cannot be his teacher!

He must, however, make a "rav" —

so says the Mishnah —

so it is a pity upon him...

In practice,

what comes out of all these doubts —

that meanwhile he does nothing!...

And so too,

as mentioned,

regarding the preparations for the Tenth of Shevat:

One speaks with him about making all the preparations for the Tenth of Shevat,

including through strengthening in the Torah study sessions,

and especially the Rambam study sessions,

and the completion of the Rambam on the Tenth of Shevat,

And so too regarding influencing other Jews who are hungry and thirsty,

and as the prophet says "not hungry nor thirsty for water but to hear the words of Hashem,"

"the word of Hashem, this is halachah"

[including the study of the book of laws of the Rambam],

"the word of Hashem, this is the end" —

He begins to think what he needs to do and how he needs to do it. He is an intelligent person,

a thinker —

consequently he needs to think about every matter. And the nature of intellect is,

that it has no rest:

at a time when a reasoning falls upon him,

immediately a reasoning to the contrary falls upon him,

and then a third reasoning and a fourth reasoning,

without end. —

What can he do,

so it is stated in Shaarei Orah,

that a sharp person constantly has reasonings fall upon him to here and reasonings to there,

and he has no rest!

Meanwhile the sun moves,

and then the moon and the stars move,

until the day of the hillula comes,

and he has in practice done nothing,

he is still in the middle of thinking!...

One must know from the outset that the entire doubt comes from the opposing side,

and the intention in this is,

that the person "should make himself as if he does not know, etc., and remove them from his mind and add strength in the power of his intention."

And regarding practice:

Since there is still a little time left until the day of the hillula —

let one immediately now accept good resolutions to make the appropriate preparations for the day of the hillula in the matters mentioned above,

with the intent to bring them down in actual deed,

beginning with the matters that one can do on the day of Shabbat,

and then —

on Motzaei Shabbat,

until the day of the hillula itself,

and then the continuation from this in the days after this.

Give to a wise man and he will become wiser, additional matters appropriate for the day of the hillula,

in addition to the matters mentioned above.

May it be His will that through the very good resolutions one should immediately receive the reward,

until the main and complete reward —

the true and complete redemption through our righteous Mashiach,

and we will all go out from exile,

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

"and their silver and their gold with them,"

And they shall awake and sing, you who dwell in the dust,

and the Baal HaHilula among them and at their head,

even before the tenth of Shevat,

consequently, they will celebrate the day of the Hilula together with the Baal HaHilula,

And all this —

speedily, in our very own days.

The Rebbe Shlita instructed to play "He will build the Beis HaMikdash, etc."

Afterwards he said:

Those who need to make a final blessing,

will certainly make a final blessing.

Completion of the first talks

[In the first talk,

regarding the matter that on the tenth of Shevat of this year an elevation was added to it relative to the tenth of Shevat of last year —

he added to say:]

Because in the meantime a year has passed,

from the term change,

which includes all the changes,

the six matters enumerated in the verse,

and also "year" from the term "Mishnah,"

that it repeats itself a second time

(for the better)

the matters as they were in the previous year,

only in a more elevated manner.

[Conclusion of the talk:]

Standing in this Shabbat Shemini, the day of the Hilula, the tenth of Shevat, is blessed,

one must accept good resolutions regarding going "in the straight path which He has taught us from His ways, etc." of the Baal HaHilula.

And through the very good resolutions —

it is known the saying of the Tzemach Tzedek transmitted by the Baal HaHilula —

that when one thinks good it will be good,

and he thereby not only transmitted the saying,

but also related the story connected with it,

which is "a deed of a great one,"

specifically from a deed one can extract a practical halachah

(as the Gemara says).

Until that even if there is something not good, may the Merciful One spare us —

through thinking good it becomes good,

until in a manner of transforming darkness into light and bitterness into sweetness,

the advantage of light from darkness and the advantage of wisdom from foolishness.

And especially when one stands on the eve of Shabbat of the redemption after midday,

when there is the "those who taste life merit"

(as discussed above at length),

of the completeness and rest and tranquility of "a day that is entirely Shabbat and rest for the life of the worlds,"

and especially on the Shabbat day which is reminiscent of "a day that is entirely Shabbat, etc."

Then there will be the completeness of the entire world,

and on the contrary —

higher than it was at the beginning of creation,

"These are the generations of Peretz" which is higher than "These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created."

And through the addition in our deeds and our service now,

one hastens even more the true and complete redemption,

in a manner of "I will hasten it,"

And then one also has completeness from our deeds and our service —

"and there we will perform before You as the command of Your will,"

the ultimate completeness in mitzvot,

and the ultimate completeness in all matters,

in the inanimate, the vegetative, the living, and all the more so the speaking

(as discussed many times).

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

(as it is stated in this week's portion),

as a "great congregation" in the singular,

in a manner of the unity of Israel,

"all of us as one"

(through which comes "bless us, our Father"),

one goes to our holy land,

land in the singular,

one land

(after it was previously a land of seven nations),

to Jerusalem, the holy city,

"the city that is united together,"

it unites all that is within it,

beginning with Jews,

and to the holy mountain in the singular,

and to the third Beis HaMikdash in the singular,

and to the Holy of Holies,

where the Ark will be revealed,

which was hidden in the days of Yoshiyahu,

and it remained existing

(rather, hidden)

throughout all the generations in exile,

and afterwards it will be revealed —

and also from this

(the Ark)

there is "those who taste life merit" on the eve of Shabbat of the redemption.

And simply —

the true and complete redemption through our righteous Mashiach,

and we will have the threefold completeness,

the completeness of the people and the completeness of the Torah and the completeness of the land,

And speedily, in our very own days.

[In the third talk,

regarding the matter of "I have come to My garden,"

that a garden is a place of delight —

he added:]

That is why in many places the expression "to stroll in the garden" is stated

(and the like),

"to stroll in the orchard" — as

(also)

the Rambam writes in his book of laws:

"It is not fitting to stroll in the orchard except one whose stomach is filled with bread and meat,

and bread and meat is to know the forbidden and the permitted and the like from the rest of the mitzvot"

(the content of the entire book of the Rambam).

And as discussed regarding the precision in this —

that specifically "to stroll in the orchard,"

meaning the delay and contemplation on these matters and delight in them

(in the analogy like one who strolls in an orchard literally) —

is specifically when this is "none may [engage] except one whose belly is filled [with knowledge of what is permitted and forbidden],"

but the study of these matters in a manner of "entry" must be even if one's belly is not filled —

as understood from the order of the laws in the Rambam itself,

that first come the four chapters regarding "The Work of the Chariot" and "The Work of Creation,"

and afterwards the laws regarding "the forbidden and the permitted and the like from the rest of the commandments,"

and it is known that the order in the Rambam is precise and relevant to the law and understanding of the words of the Rambam,

therefore it is understood that first one must study the first four chapters,

and specifically in a manner of comprehension and attainment

(which is a condition in the study of the Oral Torah,

and afterwards the laws regarding "the forbidden and the permitted etc."

[On the matter of "Hosts of Havayah" ("that the hosts are attached to the name Havayah"),

that every Jew is nullified to G-dliness —

he brought an analogy from the saying of the master of the hillula:]

And likewise the saying of the master of the hillula regarding Simchat Torah,

that a Jew becomes the feet of the Torah.

Meaning that the Torah needs and wants to dance,

but for this it must reach a Jew,

that the Jew,

with his mind and heart and all 248 limbs and 365 sinews,

becomes nullified and becomes the "feet" of the Torah scroll and through this the Torah scroll dances.

[He explained that these matters,

in the distinction between "Hosts of Havayah" and "Havayah of Hosts,"

Atzilut and BY"A —

can be explained even to a small boy and a small girl:]

But of course not with the letters of Atzilut and BY"A

(or even interpreted —

BY"A is an acronym for Beriah Yetzirah Asiyah),

but in their letters:

But this contains within itself the same content

[and the explanation of this is —

in the manner of the distinction between the state of a child in the morning when saying "Modeh Ani,"

when he is nullified to Him,

and the recitation of the morning blessings etc. —

as explained in the aforementioned pamphlet].

Because it is understood,

that when one teaches children a matter in Torah,

one tells them the entire truth,

and the attribute of truth "is called the central bolt that extends from one end to the other, from the highest levels and degrees to the end of all levels etc."

Meaning that the explanation that one tells a child is not merely according to Torah,

and not that it derives from the explanation in a higher world

(which pertains to adults),

but it is precisely the same thing,

like a central bolt that extends from one end to the other,

which is one and the same bolt at the lower end exactly as at the upper end.

That just as the order is in the study of Torah —

that the same explanations in a higher world,

exist in a lower world —

so too is this regarding the entirety of man's service. That its matter is to draw down and reveal His "truth of Havayah forever" in this lowest world beneath which there is no lower,

meaning that "truth of Havayah" should stand in revelation below,

that its matter is to draw down and reveal His "truth of Havayah forever" in this lowest world beneath which there is no lower,

meaning that "truth of Havayah" should stand in revelation below exactly as it is above.