English translation — ש״פ בשלח, ט״ו שבט התשמ״ז

Completions to the first three sichos that were reviewed by the Rebbe shlita and printed above

[Regarding the concept of “Just as his seed is alive, so too is he alive” –

added:]

Regarding Jews,

certainly chassidim –

one does not need any proof that “he is alive,”

because for them this is simple;

but for “people of the world”¹,

intellectuals,

one needs a proof that “he too is alive” from “just as his seed is alive.”

And this is something understandable also to intellectuals,

to one who wants and seeks knowledge in spiritual matters

[and it is known that also intellectuals have faith,

only the difference is whether it is in the encompassing or in the filling,

as explained in Chassidic discourses,

and especially from the festival of Pesach²] –

because “the life of the tzaddik is not physical life but spiritual life,

which are faith, fear, and love,”

as the Alter Rebbe explains in Igeres HaKodesh regarding Chassidus,

but this is also understood intellectually,

also for an intellectual,

who seeks to understand a matter of spirituality;

and since the life of the tzaddik is “spiritual life” –

it is understandable that “just as his seed is alive,”

and their life is in accordance with the life of the tzaddik –

so “he too is alive.”

[Regarding that in this year they give an abundance of powers for the service]

And the main thing is action in practice,

“the action is the main thing”³ –

to utilize these powers in practice,

and to utilize them immediately and at once,

not to put it off for later. For although we have the teaching⁴ that nothing is lost,

nevertheless we have the teaching from the maamar of the yahrtzeit –

at the conclusion of the first maamar –

that “who is he who knows his time and season etc.,”

therefore every moment is precious,

and one may not push off a thing that one can do earlier,

and certainly there may not be “I will sin and then repent”⁵.

[In introduction to the study from “Mikdash Adonai, Your hands established” in the Song of the Sea]

First and foremost, one must focus on an eternal matter,

which has more force than other matters. For generally, the entire Torah is eternal,

but within the Torah itself there are matters where the eternity is more revealed.

And generally, this is –

the weekly portion that is read every Shabbos,

in a constant and eternal manner.

And on this Shabbos –

this is primarily in the part of the Torah portion of the Song of the Sea,

which is such a primary matter of this Shabbos –

that the entire Shabbos is called by this name –

“Shabbos Shirah,”

after the Song of the Sea that is read on this Shabbos.

And although “Shabbos Shirah” is also after the Song of Devorah in the haftarah⁶ –

nevertheless, the eternity in the haftarah is not as emphasized as in the reading of the Song of the Sea in the Five Books of the Torah,

for the Song of the Sea is always read on Shabbos Shirah,

but not so regarding the haftarah

(the Song of Devorah)

there are cases when it is not read,

such as when there is a groom and the like

(although the custom today is not so).

And in addition to this:

In the Five Books of the Torah, eternity is more revealed than in the Prophets and Writings,

as we find that the term “Written Torah” sometimes includes only the Five Books of the Torah⁷,

and the Prophets and Writings are “its explanation” of the Written Torah.

And in the Song of the Sea itself –

the concept of eternity is especially emphasized in the verse “Mikdash Adonai, Your hands established,

Hashem will reign forever and ever.”

[Continuing the concept that on the yahrtzeit each and every year, the baal hahillula ascends in an incomparable ascent (and therefore Kaddish is recited),

and correspondingly –

it is fitting to add a new matter in continuation from the yahrtzeit of this year until the next year]

And in the meantime, surely there will be “Awake and sing, you who dwell in the dust”⁸ and the baal hahillula among them –

then there will come even more perfection in the “worker of salvations in the midst of the earth” on the yahrtzeit of the coming year,

and all the more so and a fortiori:

If when he is a soul above he is a “worker of salvations in the midst of the earth,”

all the more so when he is a soul in a body down here in this physical world,

“in the midst of the earth,”

and all the more so –

after he will be in this physical world after this, having passed through Gan Eden,

therefore he also does not have the limitations of a soul in a body in a physical place and of the concealment of the world

(as explained in the aforementioned Igeres HaKodesh, the superiority of a soul in Gan Eden over a soul in a body).

[Conclusion of the second sichah:]

And may it be His will that through Jews making a “small sanctuary”

(“Mikdash Adon-ai”)

now –

this will hasten even more the building,

or the descent of the third Beis HaMikdash,

“Mikdash Adonai, Your hands established,”

which is built and perfected above⁹,

And then one comes

(from Parsha Beshalach)

to "And Yitro heard etc."

(What report did he hear and come)

"all that G-d had done for Moshe and for Israel His people"¹⁰,

i.e., that

(the occurrences with)

Jews had an effect on Yitro¹¹,

and likewise on the other side –

"And Yitro heard" brought about an addition in Jews and Torah,

as explained in the Zohar¹¹,

Until one comes

(in Parsha Yitro)

to the Giving of the Torah –

"a new Torah shall go forth from Me"¹²,

And to a novelty in all other matters that will be in the future,

including –

the novelty of the Resurrection of the Dead,

as the ruling in Chassidus¹³ that the ultimate reward is the Resurrection of the Dead¹⁴,

eternal life as souls in bodies –

because specifically then it is a true novelty,

in contrast, if afterwards there is a change back to souls without bodies,

it is known in halachah¹⁵ that a change that reverts to its original state is not a true change,

and specifically when it is a change that does not revert to its original state,

one can make an acquisition

(as explained at length in the later authorities,

and briefly in the early authorities,

and whoever wishes can look there himself).

And likewise a novelty in all matters of the world –

as our Sages, of blessed memory, said¹⁶ that in the future the Land of Israel will produce fine cakes and wool garments etc.

And all this –

will be a redemption and novelty for all Jews,

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

and speedily, in our very own time.

[Beginning of the third talk:]

Those who ask questions –

can still ask:

When their teachers taught them the Gemara¹⁷ that "your father, in what was he especially careful",

they interpreted it simply:

In what was he more careful –

so who says to interpret that this means,

that the mitzvah becomes the "gate" through which all other mitzvos ascend?

Therefore, one needs an explanation in the revealed aspect regarding what was discussed above,

that there are times when a certain service is the main and head of the service,

and that service then becomes the "gate" through which all other matters ascend.

An example of this and a directive is a fundamental matter in Torah –

the matter of the Exodus from Egypt¹⁸:

The Torah commands,

that a Jew must remember and mention the Exodus from Egypt every day,

both by day and by night¹⁹,

and this is also mentioned in the other daily prayers,

even on Shabbos and Yom Tov,

when the matter of the Exodus from Egypt is emphasized more than on weekdays

(in Kiddush,

Musaf etc.),

but then it is also connected with other matters

[although the Exodus from Egypt is "a great foundation and a strong pillar etc." (as the Chinuch writes²⁰) in all the mitzvos of the Torah (and the Ten Commandments begin "I am Hashem your G-d Who took you out of the land of Egypt"²¹),

and it is known that a "foundation" is not a separate thing from the "building",

rather upon the foundation the entire building is built]

this still does not evoke the impression and resonance that the same matter evokes on the festival of Pesach,

once a year,

when the Exodus from Egypt is the essence of the festival,

and the central point of the entire Seder of Pesach,

with the four cups,

matzah and maror and the Haggadah etc.,

all of which emphasize the matter of the Exodus from Egypt with the greatest emphasis,

understandably,

that then the matter is absorbed and engraved in memory at the highest level,

and the impression extends into all the days of the year,

including the days of the festival of Pesach itself.

And likewise regarding the service of making a "Mikdash Me'at" –

that now this must become not just another service among other matters,

but the "foundation",

the "gate" through which all other matters ascend,

as above.

And the wise will understand and add wisdom.

[It was stated here that this directive (of making a "Mikdash Me'at") also applies to young children. And as is especially emphasized on Shabbos Shirah,

according to the custom instituted by the Maharal,

to gather young children on Shabbos Shirah etc. –

and would that this custom be renewed in our time, in all Jewish communities –

in every holy congregation.

And about this he said:]

But just as regarding several matters,

no one paid attention to this, that on Shabbos Shirah one should conduct oneself according to the custom that the Maharal instituted,

to bring the children to the synagogue courtyard and tell them about the Splitting of the Sea,

and give them porridge etc.,

with all the aforementioned details.

No one paid attention to this –

they are sleeping.

There are, however, influencers whose role is to arouse regarding matters such as these –

they also sleep,

and their sleep is pleasant to them! Consequently, it is a simple matter –

that this causes their influenced ones to fall into a deeper sleep!

And there is no need to elaborate on the matter of words of rebuke to Jews.

– Once, people were very careful about speaking words of rebuke to Jews,

so as not to offend a Jew. Until I realized –

that now this reasoning does not apply,

because after the words of rebuke, everyone thinks that “it does not mean him”! Consequently, it turns out that no one was offended,

because everyone thinks that it refers to someone else,

not him,

for he is already perfect,

he is a complete tzaddik,

and the only thing he might possibly lack –

is perfection relative to his own perfection,

consequently, it cannot be that the words of rebuke are directed at him,

for one does not suspect the worthy²²,

and certainly not complete tzaddikim!

And if this is so regarding those who are present at the farbrengen and hear the words,

all the more so regarding those who are not here –

and all the more so and a fortiori:

since everything is by Divine Providence,

and by Divine Providence he is not present at the farbrengen –

it is a proof –

he argues –

that the words do not pertain to him,

for if they pertained to him,

the Almighty would surely have arranged for him to be at the farbrengen to hear the words!

What is the practical outcome? That everyone thinks that all these words are not directed at him but at someone else

– and the only change that the farbrengen effects in him is –

that he becomes tired from jostling and needs to rest;

Or, because he thinks that the words are appropriate allegorically, esoterically, rhetorically, etc.,

he receives the impression,

and boasts about it that he has a large shelf that can hold many impressions! –

Consequently, it turns out,

that by speaking these words of rebuke, not a single one was affected,

because everyone thinks that it refers to someone else!

And there is no need to elaborate on a distressing matter –

a thing that certainly gives us no pleasure;

and regarding the listeners –

let them have what they have...

Discourse (in the manner of a talk)

beginning “And it was when Pharaoh sent out the people, etc.”

It is also customary to study a verse from the weekly portion together with Rashi’s commentary,

and also additional Torah lessons:

in the inner dimension of the Torah –

a topic from the notes of my father on the Zohar of our portion;

in the revealed aspect of the Torah –

a topic from today’s lesson in Rambam

And especially since today is the Shabbat after the Tenth of Shevat,

when the study of the book of Rambam was completed,

and tomorrow, with Hashem’s help, a celebration of the completion will take place,

and with a multitude of people is the King’s glory, etc.

Regarding Rashi –

several questions on Rashi in our portion were raised,

but,

as has been said many times,

one only dwells on the well-known and usual questions,

for example:

the words that Rashi quotes in the beginning of the comment,

why he brings two proofs or explanations for one thing,

and the like –

but regarding other types of questions,

where one needs to think a bit,

and certainly the “blatant questions” –

one does not dwell!

Regarding this as well, one need not fear that one is offending anyone –

because everyone thinks

(as above, section 22)

that it does not mean him...

We will dwell on one matter in Rashi that was raised:

Rashi comments on the words “And Amalek came, etc.”²³,

and explains:

“He juxtaposed this section to this verse,

to say,

‘I am always among you and ready for all your needs, yet you say, “Is Hashem in our midst or not?”²⁴,

This is a parable of a man who placed his son on his shoulder and went out on the road. That son saw an object and said, “Father, take this object,” and he gave it to him,

and he gave it to him, and so a second time, and so a third time,

They met a certain person; that son said to him,

“Have you seen my father?”

His father said to him:

“Do you not know where I am?”

He threw him off, and a dog came and bit him.’”

The question was asked –

what all the commentators of Rashi ask:

what is difficult in the juxtaposition of the sections that Rashi comes to say "he juxtaposed this section to this verse to say etc.";

the juxtaposition is understood simply:

the section of "And Amalek came" is simply placed immediately after the preceding section,

the section of the manna and the section of the waters of strife –

in juxtaposition both in place and in time:

The section of the manna occurred in "the wilderness of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai"²⁵. The section of the waters of strife occurred after "the entire congregation of the children of Israel journeyed from the wilderness of Sin etc. and they encamped in Rephidim"²⁶. And the war of Amalek was in that same place in Rephidim –

"and he fought with Israel in Rephidim"²⁷

(and afterwards "they journeyed from Rephidim and came to the wilderness of Sinai" in the following section²⁸) –

not only in juxtaposition but in the same place where the section of the waters of strife was beforehand!

Likewise, both sections are in juxtaposition in time:

The descent of the manna began on the fifteenth of Iyar²⁹,

and afterwards it speaks about the Sabbath day

(the seventh day)

after the beginning of the descent of the manna,

which is the twenty-second of Iyar. And afterwards in the following section³⁰ it states that "in the third month etc. on this day –

on Rosh Chodesh

(Sivan) –

they came to the wilderness of Sinai",

i.e., seven or eight days after the first Sabbath after the descent of the manna. And in between were the section of the waters of strife and the war of Amalek,

one must say that the war of Amalek came in temporal proximity to the section of the waters of strife.

Now why does Rashi come to derive a lesson from the juxtaposition of the sections,

as if to say that really the sections should not have stood in juxtaposition:

there is no other place to put the section of Amalek –

for where else should it stand if not here,

in the place and time where it occurred!

The question becomes even stronger:

what does Rashi answer regarding the juxtaposition of the sections –

not that they were in juxtaposition in time and place,

but a completely different lesson. The additional question becomes:

what is the foundation and source of Rashi's words in his entire commentary –

when the juxtaposition of the sections is understood simply?

And although Rashi's commentary is taken from the Midrash³¹,

it has been said many times³² that Rashi interprets thus not because it is stated thus in the Midrash,

but because this is the simple interpretation of the verses

(and especially since here he does not write "our Sages expounded" and the like)³³.

Also, one must understand:

A) After Rashi says "he juxtaposed this section to this verse,

to say,

always I am among you and ready for you for all your needs,

and you say, 'Is Hashem in our midst or not?'

by your lives, the dog comes and bites you and you cry out to Me and you will know where I am" –

what does the parable that Rashi brings afterwards add?

And on the contrary:

in the parable Rashi changes and detracts from the moral:

in the moral it says "always I am among you and ready for you for all your needs",

but in the parable it says that the father gives the son the object only three times,

"and he gives him once, and a second time, and a third time",

not "always" and "all your needs"?!

And although Rashi writes in the parable only three times,

because in the Chumash one sees only three matters

(even though "always I am among you") –

but in the content of the matter, the parable still detracts from the moral where it says "always etc. for all your needs".

B) The detail in the parable "a man who mounted his son on his shoulder" –

is not found in the moral. What is this in the moral? And what is its practical relevance to the moral?

Another matter that one must understand –

in the preceding section:

When the Jews in Rephidim demanded water,

the verse relates³⁴ that "Hashem said to Moses, 'Pass before the people etc. and go. Behold, I stand before you there on the rock in Horeb, and you shall strike the rock and water will come out of it and the people will drink.'"

The five-year-old student of Scripture asks:

"Horeb" is Mount Sinai

(as he learned earlier in the portion of Shemot³⁵).

And Mount Sinai is a journey from Rephidim

(where the Jews were then),

which is why the Almighty says to Moses "and go". Consequently, several questions arise:

A) How did the water come from "the rock in Horeb" to the Jews in Rephidim

("and the people will drink")?

The Ramban writes³⁶,

"that water came out from the rock in Horeb, cold flowing waters, they went to Rephidim and there they drank them." But Rashi does not hint at this anywhere.

And the main point:

Since the Almighty had to make a miracle in any case

(that water should come out of a rock) –

He could have made it from a rock that was in Rephidim,

where the Jews were at that time?!

However, the second time that the Almighty makes the miracle,

that water should flow from a rock –

one can explain,

that since there is a rock that was already designated for this from before,

therefore one does not make a miracle with a new rock;

but here we are speaking about the first time that the miracle occurred –

could the Almighty not have made it in a rock in Rephidim?

And as will be explained below.

The matter of "And Amalek came" exists in every generation.

And about this one says to a Jew,

that he should know that "I am always among you and ready for you for all your needs etc.,

a parable of a man who placed his son on his shoulder and went out on the road,

that son saw an object and said, Father, take this object, and he gave it to him, and he gives it to him, and so a second time, and so a third time."

That is, even when one is in exile,

one must know that the Almighty is with us,

"I am always among you,"

and in the manner of "placed his son on his shoulder." And the Almighty provides us with all the things we need,

"ready for you for all your needs etc.,

"that son saw an object and said, Father, take this object, and he gave it to him, and he gives it to him."

That is, one must indeed cry out "Until when" will the exile last,

but together with this one must know that the Almighty is with us and provides us with everything,

therefore,

at the time when Jews have a request

("Until when" and the like) –

they should ask it of our Father in heaven –

"Father, take this object and give it to me,"

and it is a certain thing that "he gives it to him"

(all the more so from the father in the parable).

All the more so when one is not merely in a situation of "went out on the road,"

but one is in exile,

"exiled from their Father's table,"³⁷

in the "wilderness of the peoples"³⁸ of "fiery serpent, scorpion, and thirst, where there is no water,"³⁹

and all the more so since the exile has already lasted over 1900 years –

one says:

Jews,

cry out "Until when,"⁴⁰

"Father, take this object and give it to me,"

and it is certain that "he gives it to him" – the object of redemption!

One of the ways to cry out "Until when" and bring the redemption –

is through Jews gathering together in unity,

and they demonstrate that no trace of the cause of exile remains

(the opposite of baseless hatred⁴¹),

and there is only love of Israel and unity of Israel.

In general, through the farbrengens that will take place in the coming days in connection with a conclusion of the book of the Rambam,

or the establishment of "Chabad Houses."

Therefore, all those who have provided drink for this,

"great is drinking that brings close,"

should now go up and say "L'chaim,"

and include and unite all those present,

by announcing about the gatherings and inviting everyone,

Together with singing a melody of joy,

and all the more so a Chassidic melody –

which is beyond the measure of joy,

And this should be a close preparation for singing the tenth song in the future to come,⁴²

and before this –

"Awake and sing, you who dwell in dust,"

And we will all go together,

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

to our holy land,

"a land which etc., the eyes of Hashem your God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year to the end of the year,"⁴³

and there itself –

in Jerusalem, the holy city,

and there itself –

on the Temple Mount,

and in the third Holy Temple,

the perfection and primary House of Torah,

service and acts of kindness,

and from it light goes forth to the entire world.

And all this –

in the manner of "the place did not delay

(even)

for the blink of an eye,"⁴⁴

"a great congregation shall return here."⁴⁵

[After the distribution of bottles of drink,

and the announcements about the time and place of the gatherings –

the Rebbe shlita began to sing "And I will empty out for you a blessing."]

As mentioned earlier,

we will also dwell on a matter in the notes of the Tatte on the Zohar of our parshah. And with the help of Heaven –

a matter connected with Rashi in parshas Vayikra. And to explain what can be derived from it in the service of Hashem.

And also a matter in today's lesson of Rambam –

the beginning of the Book of the Hand

(the Book of Knowledge),

which comes in continuation of the conclusion of the Rambam on the day of the hilula. And also in this, to explain a lesson in the service of Hashem –

in accordance with what the Rambam writes⁴⁶ that "most of the laws of the Torah are only etc. to correct the opinions and to straighten all deeds."

And as will be explained below.

The explanation in Rashi:

Rashi's wording is "He juxtaposed this portion to this verse",

not like his usual wording

(regarding juxtaposition of portions) ⁴⁷,

"Why was the portion of etc. juxtaposed to the portion of etc."

That is, Rashi here does not focus on the juxtaposition of the portion of Amalek with the entirety of the portion of Mei Merivah –

because the juxtaposition is understandable simply as above –

but on the juxtaposition of the portion of Amalek

("this portion")

"to this verse",

the last verse in the portion of Mei Merivah –

"And he called the name of the place Massah and Merivah because of the quarrel of Bnei Yisrael and because of their testing Hashem, saying, 'Is Hashem in our midst or not?'"

and this juxtaposition

(between "this portion and this verse")

is not understandable:

The doubt of Yisrael "Is Hashem in our midst or not?" was simply before the miracle of the water from the rock –

at the time of "And the people quarreled with Moshe etc." ⁴⁸,

because after they received water through a miracle,

the doubt "Is Hashem in our midst or not" should seemingly have fallen away. For immediately after one sees a miracle from the Most High,

it is difficult for a doubt "Is Hashem in our midst or not" to arise. As a five-year-old understands by himself,

that immediately after he receives something from his father,

he has no doubt whether his father is with him. Only after a period of time passes,

then a doubt can be aroused in him.

Accordingly, the verse

("And he called the name of the place Massah and Merivah etc. 'Is Hashem in our midst or not?'")

should have stood before the miracle. And not at the conclusion of the portion,

adjacent to

(the following portion –)

"And Amalek came etc."

Moreover:

The continuation of "And Amalek came and fought with Yisrael" further strengthens the doubt "Is Hashem in our midst or not" –

because we see that Amalek had the power to fight and strike Yisrael, may the Merciful One protect us,

to the extent that specifically "And it was when Moshe raised his hand, Yisrael prevailed",

but "when he lowered his hand, Amalek prevailed" ⁴⁹,

and they had to come to "And they took a stone and placed it under him and he sat on it, and Aharon and Chur supported his hands, one on this side and one on that side" ⁵⁰.

Thus, the verse "Is Hashem in our midst or not" should have stood before this,

and the conclusion of the portion should have been with another matter

(the miracle of the water from the rock).

And afterwards would come the new portion of "And Amalek came etc." as a matter in its own right,

not as a continuation of the content of the preceding portion

(and to the preceding test ("Is Hashem in our midst"),

but as a separate test (like "And they tested Me these ten times" are our tests),

but when "And Amalek came" comes as a continuation of "Is Hashem in our midst or not",

is this (not a matter in its own right,

but) a continuation and a strengthening of the test and doubt "Is Hashem in our midst or not"?

Therefore Rashi says that "He juxtaposed this portion to this verse"

(even though logically "this verse" should have stood earlier)

comes to teach something novel:

When we learn the portion of Amalek here, the question arises:

After the Most High gives Yisrael all good

(as recounted in the verses before this) –

how does a matter of "And Amalek came and fought with Yisrael" come about

(to the extent that "when he lowered his hand, Amalek prevailed")?

Rashi says,

that the Torah answers this by juxtaposing "this portion to this verse" –

"To say: Always I am among you and ready for you for all your needs, and you say, 'Is Hashem in our midst or not?'

By your life, the dog comes and bites you, and you cry out to Me, and you will know where I am."

That is, since "you say, 'Is Hashem in our midst or not?'" even though "Always I am among you and ready for you for all your needs" –

therefore the punishment comes that "And Amalek came etc.",

"that the dog comes and bites you, and you cry out to Me, and you will know where I am."

Accordingly, another question of the commentators is answered:

The place of Amalek is in "Mount Seir",

which is at a distance from "Refidim"

["One thousand six hundred mil",

as it states in Chibburah ⁵¹. But even a five-year-old (who has not learned Chibburah),

understands that this is a distant place].

Now why did Amalek suddenly decide now to come so far in order to wage war with Yisrael?

The answer to this is,

that this did not come from Amalek himself,

but as a punishment from the Most High upon Yisrael because of "you say, 'Is Hashem in our midst or not?'",

the Most High caused that Amalek should now come from afar to wage war with them

("that the dog comes and bites you").

And then Rashi gives a mashal for this –

"A mashal to a man who mounted his son on his shoulder and went out on the road etc." –

Because with this Rashi explains the severity of the punishment,

seemingly: True,

they certainly deserve a punishment

(for what they said "Is Hashem among us or not"),

but why did the punishment have to be so severe,

and such a punishment that came immediately after the sin,

and not a time after this?

Therefore Rashi gives a mashal for this "to a man who mounted his son on his shoulder and went out on the road etc.":

Even if the matter that "I am always among you and ready for you for all your needs" would have been in the ordinary manner –

a punishment would also have come for what Jews think "Is Hashem among us or not";

all the more so at a time when "I am always among you and ready for you for all your needs" was not in the ordinary manner,

that the Supreme One influences Jews on earth,

but in the manner of "mounted his son on his shoulder",

that the Supreme One lifts Jews "on His shoulder" as it were –

then the insolence of crying out "Is Hashem among us or not" is incomparably stronger,

and therefore they deserve a severe punishment for this!

Where was "mounted his son on his shoulder" in the nimshal? For a ben chamesh lamikra this is no question –

because he had previously learned ⁵²,

that the Supreme One surrounded Jews with

[the "cloud of Hashem" ⁵²*]

the clouds of glory –

which is the matter that the Supreme One also lifts Jews "on His shoulder" in heaven.

Afterwards the ben chamesh lamikra learned that the Supreme One gave Jews "bread from the heavens" ⁵³. The question arises:

Jews only asked for "bread to satiety" ⁵⁴,

i.e. bread according to the comprehension of Jews,

bread as they were accustomed to eat in Egypt –

bread from the earth

(and about the existence of "bread from the heavens" they did not know at all) –

so why did the Supreme One give them "bread from the heavens",

He could have made a miracle that they should have "bread from the earth"

(just as He gave them meat of quail,

meat in its simple sense,

to which Jews were ordinarily accustomed?)

Only in this we see how the Supreme One wanted to influence Jews in the manner of "mounted his son on his shoulder",

not that the Supreme One in heaven influences Jews on earth,

but He lifts the Jews "on His shoulder",

to Himself in heaven,

and gives them specifically "bread from the heavens",

heavenly bread

(not "bread from the earth").

Likewise also the water that the Supreme One gave to Jews

(through the miracle of striking the rock) –

was not ordinary water,

but in the manner of "mounted his son on his shoulder".

And based on this one will understand why the water came specifically from the "rock in Chorev"

(not from a rock in Refidim):

The ben chamesh had previously learned in Parshat Shemot

(as above)

"And he came

(Moshe)

to the mountain of G-d, Chorev",

and the Supreme One revealed Himself to him there

(and later there will be "And Hashem descended upon Mount Sinai" ⁵⁵).

Consequently it is understandable why the water came specifically from the "rock in Chorev" –

because this is a most elevated place,

"the mountain of G-d" and the Supreme One wanted to give Jews not ordinary water,

but water in the manner of "mounted his son on his shoulder" in heaven,

therefore it came from the "rock that is in Chorev",

water from "the mountain of G-d"

(in the manner that bread was "bread from the heavens").

Based on this one will also understand why in the mashal Rashi writes that the father gives the son an object three times

("And he gives it to him, and a second, and a third"),

although in the nimshal it says "I am always among you and ready for all your needs" –

because although "I am always among you and ready for all your needs" is found, nevertheless only three times where this was in the manner of "mounted his son on his shoulder". The Supreme One indeed made many miracles for Jews,

beginning from the Exodus from Egypt and the Splitting of the Sea etc.,

in the manner of "always etc. for all your needs",

but aside from three times they were not in a manner that the Supreme One lifted Jews "on His shoulder" in heaven.

For example:

The miracle of the Splitting of the Sea was not in a manner that the Supreme One lifted Jews "on His shoulder"

(in heaven),

but "And the children of Israel walked on dry land" ⁵⁶

(on earth)

specifically,

where the Egyptians walked. And on the contrary:

"They walked on dry land in the midst of the sea",

below the earth.

But the three miracles of a) surrounding the Jews with the Clouds of Glory,

b) "bread from heaven" and c) the water from the rock –

were in the manner of "on His shoulder,"

as above.

And because the Jews had such great audacity,

that not looking at how the Supreme One conducted Himself with them not merely in the manner of "I am always among you and available for all your needs,"

but in the manner of "He mounted us on His shoulder,"

they cried out "Is Hashem in our midst or not?" –

therefore such a severe punishment came upon them,

that immediately "Amalek came, etc."

And Rashi adds another detail in the parable,

which further strengthens the severity of the sin,

and consequently the severity of the punishment for this –

"He met a certain man,

that son said to him,

Have you seen my father?"

It seems:

What is this relevant here,

and where is this in the allegory?

The explanation of this is,

that this further strengthens the severity of the sin:

Not only did the Jews think to themselves "Is Hashem in our midst or not,"

but they asked this to another person

("He met a certain man"),

which is even more degrading to the father who carries his son "on his shoulder,"

when his son asks another person "Have you seen my father."

And in the allegory this is –

the matter that the Jews came with complaints against the Supreme One to Moshe Rabbeinu

("He met a certain man"),

for since Moshe was the agent who took them out of Egypt,

they complained to him. From this it is understood,

that it was not merely a complaint in thought,

but the Jews expressed it in speech to Moshe. Consequently, it already became a public utterance. Consequently, it further strengthens the degradation of the Holy One, blessed be He,

that not looking at how "He mounted us on His shoulder,"

they ask a person "Have you seen my father."

And therefore the punishment came to them immediately –

"By your lives, the dog will come and bite you,"

"His father said to him:

Do you not know where I am?

He threw him off of him and the dog came and bit him."

And in the allegory this is the matter of "Amalek came, etc.,"

the possibility for which could have been precisely when the Jews complained "Is Hashem in our midst or not,"

for then it became "He threw him off of him,"

but as long as "He mounted us on His shoulder,"

within the Clouds of Glory,

no one could touch them.

Based on this (that "He mounted us on His shoulder" also applies to the Clouds of Glory)

it is also understandable what Rashi explains further on the verse⁵⁷ "Go out, fight Amalek" –

"Go out from the cloud and fight him":

The punishment of "Amalek came" came only upon those Jews who complained "Is Hashem in our midst or not,"

who "He threw them off of him,"

outside the cloud

[The details of this the five-year-old will further learn in Parshat Teitzei,

"All those who lag behind you,"

"lacking strength due to their sin, for the cloud would spew them out,"

but already here in Parshat Beshalach he understands the content of the matter of the parable "He threw him off of him"].

But regarding Yehoshua and the other Jews regarding whom there was no "He threw him off of him" –

Amalek could not touch them.

And therefore Moshe told Yehoshua "Go out from the cloud and fight him,"

because as long as he was "on His shoulder" of the Holy One, blessed be He,

within the cloud,

he could not come into any contact with Amalek,

but specifically through "Go out from the cloud" could he wage war with him.

Based on the above, all these precise points in Rashi's commentary are understood,

and one sees how every detail in Rashi's commentary is with utmost precision in understanding the plain meaning of the verse.

The matter in the notes of the Tatte on the Zohar of our Parsha:

In the notes⁵⁸ the Tatte explains "what Rashi wrote in Chumash Parshat Vayikra on the verse 'And He smelled the pleasing aroma' of the bird offering⁶⁰,

'A pleasing aroma is said regarding a bird and a pleasing aroma is said regarding an animal⁶¹ to tell you: One who increases and one who decreases are the same, provided he directs his heart to Heaven' see there.

And behold this is from the Mishnah at the end of Tractate Menachot and in the Gemara in a Baraitha there⁶²,

and there it is also stated 'And it is said regarding a meal-offering, a fire-offering, a pleasing aroma'⁶³,

and why did he not bring in his commentary on the Torah also the meal-offering as our Sages stated,

and explain all this on the verse 'a fire-offering, a pleasing aroma' of the meal-offering."

And the Tatte answers:

"He did not bring the meal-offering because regarding one matter it is not possible to say about a meal-offering that it is diminishing" because "with a meal-offering one offers his soul, as it is written⁶⁴ 'And when a soul offers a meal-offering,'

thus this is incomparably greater than an animal or bird offering, with which one does not offer his soul, and it is impossible to say them in the same category 'one who increases and one who decreases, etc.'"

Then the father adds:

“And one can say further that in Rashi’s commentary there is a different intention,

and it is that ‘one who offers much’ refers to a bird and ‘one who offers little’ refers to an animal,

and therefore Rashi placed bird before animal just as he placed ‘one who offers much’ before ‘one who offers little’”

[although in several places in Rashi’s commentary the order is that Rashi begins with what he concluded,

but in most places he explains a matter in order,

the first first and the last last].

And as the father explains this there through gematriot etc.

And this can be explained

(why “one who offers much refers to a bird and one who offers little refers to an animal”) –

simply:

In relation to the part that is offered

(and the part that remains)

of a sacrifice –

the offering of a bird is in a manner of “one who offers much” relative to the part of the animal that is offered –

because the part of the bird that is offered is greater

(and the part that remains is smaller)

than with an animal,

where the part that is offered is not such a large portion of the animal,

and a large portion also remains,

in addition to the quantity of the animal,

also the hide of the animal which has value etc.

It follows,

that “one who offers much refers to a bird and one who offers little refers to an animal”,

because the offering of a bird is in a manner of “one who offers much”

(in relation to the part of the bird that is offered)

relative to the part of the animal that is offered.

The lesson from all this in the service of Hashem –

is simply:

When one sees a Jew in a certain situation,

that outwardly it appears that he is “one who offers little” –

one must know that “do not look at his appearance” ⁶⁴ –

because “a pleasing fragrance” is stated both regarding a bird,

and regarding an animal,

and regarding the meal offering of a poor person –

“to tell you: one who offers much and one who offers little, provided that he directs his heart to Heaven”.

The matter in the daily study of the Rambam –

chapter one,

and three of the Laws of the Foundations of the Torah –

the content of each chapter:

In chapter one:

Today’s Rambam study is the beginning of

(the body)

the book of the Rambam ⁶⁵

(after the introduction and the count of commandments,

which the Rambam himself calls “introduction”,

meaning that this is not a part of the body of the book),

“The foundation of foundations and the pillar of wisdoms is to know that there is a First Existence and He brings into existence all existence and all existences from the heavens and the earth and what is between them only exist from the truth of His existence” *⁶⁵.

And this

(the beginning of the body of the book)

follows the conclusion of the book ⁶⁶ –

“they join the beginning to the completion” ⁶⁷ –

“at that time etc. the entire world’s occupation will be solely to know Hashem,

and therefore Israel will be great sages etc. as it is said ⁶⁸ for the earth will be filled with knowledge of Hashem as the waters cover the sea”.

And the connection between the conclusion of the book and the beginning of the book is seen simply:

The perfection of “the foundation of foundations and the pillar of wisdoms to know

(and not to believe)

that there is a First Existence”,

will be “at that time” when “the entire world’s occupation will be solely to know Hashem etc. the earth will be filled with knowledge of Hashem as the waters cover the sea”.

And more deeply:

How can it indeed be that “the entire world’s occupation will be solely to know Hashem etc.,

the earth will be filled with knowledge of Hashem as the waters cover the sea”,

that “the entire world”

(the earth)

will be “filled” and covered with knowledge of Hashem,

just as the reality

(the ground)

of the sea and the fish in it are entirely covered by the waters of the sea ⁶⁹ –

because “there is a First Existence and He brings into existence all existence and all existences from the heavens and the earth and what is between them only exist from the truth of His existence”.

From that which the Rambam writes that “all existences from the heavens and the earth and what is between them only exist from the truth of His existence” –

it is understood,

that not only the upper worlds and the great creations derive from “the truth of His existence”,

but all creations,

“from the first form to a small gnat that is in the navel of the earth” ⁷⁰

(and a small fish in the sea ⁷¹),

derive from “the truth of His existence”. Not from intermediate levels in Divinity

(between “the truth of His existence” and the lower creations),

but from “the truth of His existence”.

And this is the same content that the Alter Rebbe says in Iggeret HaKodesh ⁷²,

that the power for the bringing into existence of something from nothing is specifically from “His essence and being of the Emanator, blessed be He, whose existence is from His own being and is not caused by any cause that preceded Him, Heaven forbid, and therefore He alone has the power and ability to create something from nothing and absolute nothingness without any cause or other reason preceding this something”.

That is, every something,

“all existences”,

derives from “His essence and being”,

“the truth of His existence”

(and not from any intermediate levels),

and in this there is no difference whatsoever between one something and another,

between “the first form” and “a small gnat that is in the navel of the earth” –

both derive specifically from “the truth of His existence”.

Only afterwards does it come down from "the Truth of His Existence" into "First Existent",

not merely "Existent" as He is in Himself,

but "First Existent" which has a second

(and third, etc.),

as "the Truth of His Existence" connects, as it were, with the existents;

but this is all as "the Truth of His Existence",

His Essence and Being, blessed be He.

And since "all existents, heaven and earth and all that is between them, exist only from the Truth of His Existence" –

that "this" God is truth⁷³,

"He alone is truth, and no other has truth like His truth"⁷⁴ –

therefore "the truth of Hashem endures forever"⁷⁵,

it must ultimately be revealed in all existents

("heaven and earth and all that is between them")

the truth of their existence,

that this derives from "the Truth of His Existence",

Therefore, throughout the entire world the knowledge of Hashem will surely be certain

(as at the conclusion of the Rambam's book).

"The entire world will be occupied only with knowing Hashem alone etc.,

the earth will be filled with knowledge of Hashem as the waters cover the sea",

so that in "the entire world" the truth of His Existence will stand revealed –

as it is "filled" and covered with knowledge of Hashem,

"the Truth of His Existence".

And the reason why it says "the earth will be filled with knowledge of Hashem etc."

(even though here it certainly means the entire world,

also heaven,

"heaven and earth and all that is between them") –

is not because it excludes "heaven",

but because the main novelty of "the earth will be filled with knowledge of Hashem"

("the Truth of His Existence")

is in "earth",

for heaven itself is in a state of "the heavens are the heavens of Hashem"⁷⁶,

but "the earth He gave to mankind"⁷⁶,

and the novelty is that even there they reveal "the Truth of His Existence".

Similarly, we will dwell on a puzzling matter in the second chapter of

(today's Rambam lesson in)

the Laws of the Foundations of the Torah –

for which, for now, I have not found any explanation:

The Rambam begins that chapter:

"This honored and awesome God commands to love Him and fear Him, as it is said⁷⁷ 'And you shall love Hashem your God' and it is said⁷⁸ 'You shall fear Hashem your God'."

The question arises:

Why does the Rambam here suddenly describe the Most High with the name "El"

("the honored and awesome God"),

especially since until now he used the title "the Truth of His Existence",

"Elokah",

"the Holy One, blessed be He",

"Havayah",

and the like?

Granted, regarding the titles "the honored and awesome" –

one could say that they correspond to the two matters of love and fear

("the honored" –

love,

"the awesome" –

fear)

which are discussed in this law;

but why does he use the name "El"?

True, "El" is one of the seven names that may not be erased⁷⁹,

but the Rambam himself writes⁸⁰ that the name Havayah is the explicit name etc. –

he should have used the name Havayah –

"Hashem, the honored and awesome"?

Moreover:

In the verse⁸¹ it indeed says "this honored and awesome name, Hashem your God"

(which is simply the basis of the Rambam's wording "the honored and awesome (God)")!

The question becomes even stronger:

In both verses which the Rambam himself brings in this law it says "Hashem your God" –

it would have been very fitting for the Rambam to use that name –

"Hashem your God"

(or "Hashem God") –

why does the Rambam change and write "the God"?!

In the third chapter of

(today's lesson in)

the Laws of the Foundations of the Torah, the Rambam begins to speak about "Maaseh Bereishit"⁸²,

beginning with the spheres:

"The spheres are called heaven, firmament, Zevul, and Aravot,

and they are nine spheres etc.",

and the Rambam enumerates them in detail.

The commentators⁸³ explain,

that even though in the Gemara⁸⁴ it says "there are two firmaments,

as it is said⁸⁵ 'Behold, to Hashem your God belong the heavens and the heavens of the heavens etc.'"

[and according to Reish Lakish –

seven firmaments] –

both things are true,

because in general there are two firmaments,

and in particular –

they are divided into nine spheres

(firmaments)⁸⁶,

until in greater particularity –

they are divided into ten spheres⁸⁷,

For ten is the perfection of number,

therefore "Maaseh Bereishit" is arranged in ten –

"With ten utterances the world was created"⁸⁸,

and ten spheres.

That is:

In the first root –

all ten spheres are included together in one level –

in the "First Existent",

"the Truth of His Existence",

that "all existents",

and all ten spheres,

"exist only from the Truth of His Existence";

But even afterward, when they become actualized in "Maaseh Bereishit" and they separate from each other –

they divide into ten spheres,

the completeness of the number.

That is, they have within themselves completeness not only as they are found in their source in "the truth of His existence,"

but also as they later descend into heaven and earth,

"Maaseh Bereishit" –

they are in the completeness of the number ten.

[And although it is explained in the commentaries ⁸⁹,

that there are many spheres (more than nine and ten) –

this, however, is already as it appears in particular details,

not as it pertains to the totality of the world. And therefore the Rambam does not count them –

because in Sefer HaMada,

which is written in clear language and a concise manner ⁹⁰,

he speaks only about the spheres as they are connected to the totality of the world,

which appear as nine,

and in particular –

as ten,

the completeness of the number].

And based on this, one can connect this matter with what was previously discussed regarding the connection between the conclusion and the beginning of the Rambam's book –

that in "all existences" the truth of their existence from "the truth of His existence" is openly revealed

("the earth will be filled with knowledge of Hashem as the waters cover the sea"):

The matter is explained in more detail further in the Rambam,

in the third chapter etc.,

where he explains the completeness of "Maaseh Bereishit,"

the spheres etc.,

which all derive from "the truth of His existence,"

and this is drawn down openly also into "Maaseh Bereishit" –

as the spheres appear in the completeness of the number ten.

And as mentioned above,

that since all existences,

including all these spheres,

derive from "the truth of His existence,"

the truth must ultimately be revealed,

"the truth of Hashem endures forever" ⁹¹,

therefore it can and will be that "the earth will be filled with knowledge of Hashem as the waters cover the sea,"

as the conclusion of the Rambam's book,

as above.

[And although this also speaks about the spheres in the heavens –

nevertheless the expression "the earth will be filled" is stated,

because there is the main novelty,

as above].

And the matter,

that "the truth of Hashem endures forever,"

is further revealed through the fact that Jews study the entire Torah,

through the fact that Jews study

(and complete)

the entire book of the Rambam,

"Mishneh Torah,"

which includes "the entire Oral Torah,"

"therefore I called this composition Mishneh Torah,

because a person first reads the Written Torah and then reads this and knows from it the entire Oral Torah and does not need to read any other book between them" ⁹⁰.

And afterward one begins to study the Rambam's book anew,

"the foundation of foundations and the pillar of wisdoms to know that there is a First Existence and all existences etc. came into existence only from the truth of His existence,"

with an even higher and deeper understanding –

one then reaches an even higher level in knowledge of Hashem,

because this comes after the study of the entire Rambam's book,

and surely one remembers what one studied

(because "one who forgets a single matter of his study etc. ⁹²,

except if he is compelled ⁹³),

and especially when one is in the category of "wise men and prophets"

(in the language of the Rambam at the conclusion of his book ⁹⁴).

And those who argue,

that one cannot understand the Rambam –

woe to them...

[Missing].

I always wondered how the Rambam could write

(in his introduction)

that "a person first reads the Written Torah and then reads this and knows from it the entire Oral Torah and does not need to read any other book between them,"

and nowhere does he warn that there are others who do not rule like him,

until the opinion of the Rosh ⁹⁵

(brought in Kuntres Acharon of Hilchot Talmud Torah of the Alter Rebbe ⁹⁶)

that one may not rule from the Rambam's book.

Until I realized that the Rambam warns about this in the introduction to the book –

where he writes about the composition of the book:

"that I remained, I Moshe ben Maimon the Sephardi etc., and I saw fit to compile things that are clarified etc. regarding the matter of the forbidden and the permitted, the impure and the pure, along with the rest of the laws of the Torah etc."

What does the Rambam intend to emphasize here by writing "Moshe ben Maimon the Sephardi –

what is the practical difference?

And even if there is a practical difference,

it is understandable from the fact that he is "Moshe ben Maimon,"

because the name "Maimon" exists only among Sephardim

[unlike "Moshe" which is a name both among Sephardim and among Ashkenazim].

One could say that the Rambam describes himself with his full title in detail

(“Moshe ben Maimon the Sefardi”)

in order to indicate which Jews should accept his rulings,

in the book Mishneh Torah,

including the first principle that “a person first reads the Written Torah and then reads this and knows from it the entire Oral Torah and does not need to read any other book between them” –

that these are the rulings of “Moshe ben Maimon the Sefardi,”

consequently they apply only to those Jews,

Sefardim,

who accept the rulings of Moshe ben Maimon the Sefardi,

or other Jews who accept his rulings

(like the Sages of Lunel and the like),

but regarding other Jews –

they must accept the rulings of the Sages in their place, “the Sages of the West”

(as the Rambam brings in many places),

or of Rabbi Shlomo from the Mountain

(who argued with the Rambam),

and the like,

or of the Rosh who rules that one should not rule from the book of the Rambam –

For so is the law,

that in the place of Rav one rules like Rav and in the place of Shmuel one rules like Shmuel⁹⁷,

and likewise in the place of “Moshe ben Maimon the Sefardi” –

the halachah is like the Rambam,

and in the place of the other Sages the halachah is like them.

[Missing].

His Holiness the Rebbe, may he live for many good years, began to sing “He will build the Holy Temple, etc.”

[He aroused regarding the above-mentioned matter about establishing this year as a year for establishing houses of Torah, prayer, and charity –

included in the sichah that was edited by His Holiness the Rebbe, may he live for many good years,

and printed above].

His Holiness the Rebbe, may he live for many good years, began to sing “He will build the Holy Temple, etc.”

Afterwards he said:

Those who need to make a final blessing,

will surely make a final blessing. Until the “final blessing” upon this exile,

and the true and complete redemption will come,

speedily in our days, literally.