... וחיי עולם
Friday, April 30, 2010
An unsensed pleasure
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/30/10 Friday 16 Iyar 5770
Page 27. Starts a new discourse.
His personal secret
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/29/10 ThursdayNight 15 Iyar 5770
Page 20 – second line from the top of the page. Starting at: “vehagum”
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
As a result of putting himself aside he becomes more aware of the inyan above rather than how it is to him. Thus in the ratzu, which is a personal experience of questing, but at its height he gains an awareness of the higher kavanah/intention.
This is also the matter of the shofar blast that was at the giving of the torah. Shofar is called yovel, which is one with yuval which is binah.
At the 50th gate there is not difference between chochmah and binah. Also the blast comes from a narrow place. “No thought can grasp Him” so thus the only way to relate is by bitul – a narrow place.
Every blast of shofar is to join the opposites of ratzu and shuv that we have explained up until now. In shofar is chesed and gevurah – which are ratzon and shuv. From His right hand he gave them a law of fire – fire is gevurah and the right is chesed.
Page 20 – second line from the top of the page. Starting at: “vehagum”
As a result of putting himself aside he becomes more aware of the inyan above rather than how it is to him. Thus in the ratzu, which is a personal experience of questing, but at its height he gains an awareness of the higher kavanah/intention.
This is also the matter of the shofar blast that was at the giving of the torah. Shofar is called yovel, which is one with yuval which is binah.
At the 50th gate there is not difference between chochmah and binah. Also the blast comes from a narrow place. “No thought can grasp Him” so thus the only way to relate is by bitul – a narrow place.
Every blast of shofar is to join the opposites of ratzu and shuv that we have explained up until now. In shofar is chesed and gevurah – which are ratzon and shuv. From His right hand he gave them a law of fire – fire is gevurah and the right is chesed.
... וחיי עולם
Thursday, April 29, 2010
A river flows into the garden...
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/29/10 Thursday 15 Iyar 5770
Page 19 – seventh line from the top of the page. Line starts, “hen betokfun”
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
It is a tree of life... All torah's pathways are peace”. Through the torah comes the essence of the ein sof that becomes a presence here below, and this brings peace, based not just on lack of conflict, but on a real union. A union not based on compromise, but a real union.
To understand this it is explained that a river comes our from Eden to water the garden. This river feeds all growth in the garden, including the tree of life, which is one of the trees of the garden. The tree of life is torah. So the river brings eden into this tree. “He implanted within us eternal life”. It can also be said that all the trees of the garden are mitzvot and the tree of life is torah.
Why everlasting life from the tree of life, but not from a mitzvah tree? This is because the effect of a mitzvah can be blemished, by an aveira, but not the effect of torah.
Page 19 – seventh line from the top of the page. Line starts, “hen betokfun”
It is a tree of life... All torah's pathways are peace”. Through the torah comes the essence of the ein sof that becomes a presence here below, and this brings peace, based not just on lack of conflict, but on a real union. A union not based on compromise, but a real union.
To understand this it is explained that a river comes our from Eden to water the garden. This river feeds all growth in the garden, including the tree of life, which is one of the trees of the garden. The tree of life is torah. So the river brings eden into this tree. “He implanted within us eternal life”. It can also be said that all the trees of the garden are mitzvot and the tree of life is torah.
Why everlasting life from the tree of life, but not from a mitzvah tree? This is because the effect of a mitzvah can be blemished, by an aveira, but not the effect of torah.
... וחיי עולם
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
When it comes down to the wire...
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/27/10 Wednesday 14 Iyar 5770
Page 19 – third line from the top of the page.
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
When he comes to the essence he sees the real intent and he's able to let go of his desire and go back to doing what the real higher intent desires.
Kavanah is different from ratzon. Ratzon is constant and an actual force – it brings itself to bear on a situation. Kavanah doesn't force itself on the situation. It is non-tangible. It has no direct effect on what's being done. Ratzon is a koach. Kavanah cannot be referred to by itself – its whole presence is due to the one who has it – that's why we say, “kavanah haelyon”.
Without bitul his ratzu becomes all encompassing. With bitul he sees behind the kevanah of shuv there is a simcha lemayla and he is a participant not only in the deed below, but also the experience that is above. This is showing how bitul results in simcha. If it comes from himself it contradicts the bitul. By means of the bitul he experiences the simcha above.
There is a certain perfection in the shuv, and by his bitul he senses the truth behind the shuv. The truth is that He wants it and He has simcha in it.
This simcha begins a new movement of ratzu. This gilui ohr elyon allows for the unity of ratzu and shuv.
Page 19 – third line from the top of the page.
When he comes to the essence he sees the real intent and he's able to let go of his desire and go back to doing what the real higher intent desires.
Kavanah is different from ratzon. Ratzon is constant and an actual force – it brings itself to bear on a situation. Kavanah doesn't force itself on the situation. It is non-tangible. It has no direct effect on what's being done. Ratzon is a koach. Kavanah cannot be referred to by itself – its whole presence is due to the one who has it – that's why we say, “kavanah haelyon”.
Without bitul his ratzu becomes all encompassing. With bitul he sees behind the kevanah of shuv there is a simcha lemayla and he is a participant not only in the deed below, but also the experience that is above. This is showing how bitul results in simcha. If it comes from himself it contradicts the bitul. By means of the bitul he experiences the simcha above.
There is a certain perfection in the shuv, and by his bitul he senses the truth behind the shuv. The truth is that He wants it and He has simcha in it.
This simcha begins a new movement of ratzu. This gilui ohr elyon allows for the unity of ratzu and shuv.
צ
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Service within ecstasy
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/27/10 Tuesday 13 Iyar 5770
Page 19 – third line from the top of the page.
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
We are looking at how there can be a shuv after the ratzu without any reduction in the strength of the ratzu.
While he's engaged in ratzu there is an inherent bitul in that he is not looking for satisfaction, but rather to be with the truth, or do avodat hashem.
The higher he goes the more he sees the kavanah / intention hidden in the ein sof.
The nekudah, of all activity, is for a positive reason, not to avoid or address a negative. This is always representative of the etzem and this is the shuv.
In the shuv is an element of the etzem. A mitzvah is “I do what He wants me to do” - this is not something that can be explained from a worldly perspective. Essence is expressed and present through this shuv.
Four sages went into the “garden” - the higher world and there was some negative affect on each of them except for Rabbi Akivah. This was on account of his bitul and hachnachat atzmuso – putting himself aside for the supreme intent.
For video, click here.
Page 19 – third line from the top of the page.
We are looking at how there can be a shuv after the ratzu without any reduction in the strength of the ratzu.
While he's engaged in ratzu there is an inherent bitul in that he is not looking for satisfaction, but rather to be with the truth, or do avodat hashem.
The higher he goes the more he sees the kavanah / intention hidden in the ein sof.
The nekudah, of all activity, is for a positive reason, not to avoid or address a negative. This is always representative of the etzem and this is the shuv.
In the shuv is an element of the etzem. A mitzvah is “I do what He wants me to do” - this is not something that can be explained from a worldly perspective. Essence is expressed and present through this shuv.
Four sages went into the “garden” - the higher world and there was some negative affect on each of them except for Rabbi Akivah. This was on account of his bitul and hachnachat atzmuso – putting himself aside for the supreme intent.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Going beyond comprehension
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/26/10 Monday 12 Iyar 5770
Page 18 – last2 lines from the end of the page. At the parentheses.
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
Rebbe is explaining how there can be the combination of opposites. Although ratzu consists of a desire to know Him, nevertheless within this desire is the ability to “put itself aside”.
If someone likes something very much – this is an experience at the kochot level and one could say he should stay above this, but this is not the “tokef haratzu” - its strength in this case is from the nefesh – the nefesh is a flame/fire.
Sechel, even at the most profound level, deals with finite things. One may think, he identifies elokus with his sechel and at the same time recognizes the limitations of sechel and he wants to go beyond it – but now it sounds like an appetite like any other. But this does not fully capture the tokef haratzu – the strength of the urge. Here the sechel is just opening the gateways to the nefesh. Hanachat atzmuso – putting oneself aside here – is putting aside the nefesh to do shuv.
For video, click here.
Page 18 – last2 lines from the end of the page. At the parentheses.
Rebbe is explaining how there can be the combination of opposites. Although ratzu consists of a desire to know Him, nevertheless within this desire is the ability to “put itself aside”.
If someone likes something very much – this is an experience at the kochot level and one could say he should stay above this, but this is not the “tokef haratzu” - its strength in this case is from the nefesh – the nefesh is a flame/fire.
Sechel, even at the most profound level, deals with finite things. One may think, he identifies elokus with his sechel and at the same time recognizes the limitations of sechel and he wants to go beyond it – but now it sounds like an appetite like any other. But this does not fully capture the tokef haratzu – the strength of the urge. Here the sechel is just opening the gateways to the nefesh. Hanachat atzmuso – putting oneself aside here – is putting aside the nefesh to do shuv.
For video, click here.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Even when it's not there, it's there – it's an invulnerable presence
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/25/10 Sunday 11 Iyar 5770
Page 18 – about a third from the end of the page. Line starts, “kuli”.
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
There is a revelation that encompasses everything. This is a revelation of atzmus ohr ein sof.
We can now understand the unity of the opposites ratzu and shuv. Each one comes with full power. How to they combine?! This unity exisits in two ways: 1. the ratzu brings along or includes the shuv, because the shuv is present in the ratzu. And so too the opposite, within the shuv is the ratzu. And 2. they do not bring about their opposite element, rather each is focused just on itself. But even if the ratzu is in full force, without inclusion of the shuv, it will nevertheless be followed by shuv.
The first kind of inter inclusion is by virtue of softening and including the opposite. The second kind, is that even in the state of each being a simple / full force opposite of the other, nevertheless these opposing natures can be combined and become like one! How? Because they are nullified in the very essence of their existence.
The chesed and gevurah are opposites in their nature, but there is an element of yeshus there. There is a distinction between, “this is my view” and “this is the reality”. Chesed sees reality present because the reality is chesed. But then there is reality that is not defined as chesed or gevurah. They exist not because of themselves, but due to this higher level that is higher than either of them and at this level there is no conflict.
Originally what caused the conflict and lack of unity is that each see itself as simple reality and if anything else exists it is an opposition to my truth/metziut. But then there is a level where they say “i'm simple reality and you're simple reality and that's okay”. It can say it is okay because it says it is everything, but on the level of metziut.
This is like a conflict between two ministers, who then come before the king. The ministers had been addressing their mandates from a practical perspective. The king is beyond this – he does not have a vulnerability / scarcity perspective. So when the ministers come before the king their arguments vanish. These midot or ministers are still in a pshitus state, but they “lose their footing”.
The ministers restrain themselves before the king and they have no sense that they are restraining themselves and “giving in”.
Within the all consuming ratzu is an element of serving hashem.
He doesn't need or gain from our actions, but He wants to be revealed in our world.
Page 18 – about a third from the end of the page. Line starts, “kuli”.
There is a revelation that encompasses everything. This is a revelation of atzmus ohr ein sof.
We can now understand the unity of the opposites ratzu and shuv. Each one comes with full power. How to they combine?! This unity exisits in two ways: 1. the ratzu brings along or includes the shuv, because the shuv is present in the ratzu. And so too the opposite, within the shuv is the ratzu. And 2. they do not bring about their opposite element, rather each is focused just on itself. But even if the ratzu is in full force, without inclusion of the shuv, it will nevertheless be followed by shuv.
The first kind of inter inclusion is by virtue of softening and including the opposite. The second kind, is that even in the state of each being a simple / full force opposite of the other, nevertheless these opposing natures can be combined and become like one! How? Because they are nullified in the very essence of their existence.
The chesed and gevurah are opposites in their nature, but there is an element of yeshus there. There is a distinction between, “this is my view” and “this is the reality”. Chesed sees reality present because the reality is chesed. But then there is reality that is not defined as chesed or gevurah. They exist not because of themselves, but due to this higher level that is higher than either of them and at this level there is no conflict.
Originally what caused the conflict and lack of unity is that each see itself as simple reality and if anything else exists it is an opposition to my truth/metziut. But then there is a level where they say “i'm simple reality and you're simple reality and that's okay”. It can say it is okay because it says it is everything, but on the level of metziut.
This is like a conflict between two ministers, who then come before the king. The ministers had been addressing their mandates from a practical perspective. The king is beyond this – he does not have a vulnerability / scarcity perspective. So when the ministers come before the king their arguments vanish. These midot or ministers are still in a pshitus state, but they “lose their footing”.
The ministers restrain themselves before the king and they have no sense that they are restraining themselves and “giving in”.
Within the all consuming ratzu is an element of serving hashem.
He doesn't need or gain from our actions, but He wants to be revealed in our world.
Friday, April 23, 2010
Lifted to a new level
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/23/10 Friday 9 Iyar 5770
Page 18 – at the middle of the page. Line starts, “metziusam”.
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
We saw how the unity was due to exposure to the ohr elyon – the superior light.
Each one, that had been focused on his own view, but is now lifted up to a new level. All aspects are now in complete unity.
This is like a traffic light. One driver is frustrated by the fact that he has to wait. Another driver recognizes that others also have the right to drive through the city in different directions and this traffic light makes it possible. This is recognizing other people, but “after the fact”.
Then there is a third driver – he has the king's perspective – he has a national perspective. He realizes that the others on the road are contributing to the status and function of the city. There is a great unity.
Torah fosters this unity - “they encamped opposite the mountain, like one man”. They had different views, but were unified like one person – Yisroel.
At matan torah the revelation was from “anochi” - He Himself – essence beyond name.
The unity between ratzu and shuv is now explained. Ratzu leads to etzem and finds there is rooted the kavanah, which contains the shuv! The ratzu is not restrained in any way. It, itself brings to the level of shuv.
Page 18 – at the middle of the page. Line starts, “metziusam”.
We saw how the unity was due to exposure to the ohr elyon – the superior light.
Each one, that had been focused on his own view, but is now lifted up to a new level. All aspects are now in complete unity.
This is like a traffic light. One driver is frustrated by the fact that he has to wait. Another driver recognizes that others also have the right to drive through the city in different directions and this traffic light makes it possible. This is recognizing other people, but “after the fact”.
Then there is a third driver – he has the king's perspective – he has a national perspective. He realizes that the others on the road are contributing to the status and function of the city. There is a great unity.
Torah fosters this unity - “they encamped opposite the mountain, like one man”. They had different views, but were unified like one person – Yisroel.
At matan torah the revelation was from “anochi” - He Himself – essence beyond name.
The unity between ratzu and shuv is now explained. Ratzu leads to etzem and finds there is rooted the kavanah, which contains the shuv! The ratzu is not restrained in any way. It, itself brings to the level of shuv.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
A higher light shines on them
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/21/1020 ThursdayNight Iyar 5770
Page 18 – about 14 lines from the top of the page. Line starts, “kuli”.
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
Relative to this position of the higher reality, the other opinions are totally nullified. They are unified in the higher position. It does not mean necessarily that the rise to that level, but when the ruling is given then they see it.
The higher light is of a higher category and shines on them and results in even the level that was in a state of simple strength being absorbed into it since they lose their principle metziut.
Page 18 – about 14 lines from the top of the page. Line starts, “kuli”.
Relative to this position of the higher reality, the other opinions are totally nullified. They are unified in the higher position. It does not mean necessarily that the rise to that level, but when the ruling is given then they see it.
The higher light is of a higher category and shines on them and results in even the level that was in a state of simple strength being absorbed into it since they lose their principle metziut.
For video, click here.
Rights and purpose
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/21/10 Wednesday 7 Iyar 5770
Page 18 – about 9 lines from the top of the page. Line starts, “daas shlishi”.
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
We are bringing an illustration for the daas shlishi, that resolves the difference of opinions between the 2 judges.
The third way does not overpower the opposition, but rather both the judges are in true agreement and unity, within the daas hamachria.
There is an apparent question - “since we said the two judges were basing their position on personal recognition, that opposed each other, how can they agree to something that is opposite to their recognition?”
This is because the daas of the machriah, is on a level that is totally beyond theirs. The machriah approaches the matter totally differently. His relationship / cognizance is beyond daas. He grasps the matter as it is beyond daas.
Because we know the ultimate of knowledge is in that level that is not knowable.
In respect to this level the judges are nullified and united in the higher opinion.
What type of knowledge is this, where the level is in the unknowable? This can be illustrated by a halacha. There is a discussion of two gardens, one above another. Some kind of growth protrudes out from the wall between the two gardens. The roots are in the one garden and the plant is in the air space of the other garden. Who owns it? Then comes a conclusive answer, “as far as the hand of the higher gardener, is his, the rest is for the lower gardener.”
The third opinion is not based on land ownership. “what was given to you? Ultimately the land was given to you by Him. It is yours for the purpose of what you can gain, not for your option to destroy the plant. True you (both) have the right to uproot/destroy the plant, but there is a higher purpose here. This focus, on who will benefit (what is the plant given for), not the possibility of destruction is an element of lo-nodah (the unknowable). The case was initially approached from the perspective of ownership – since these are the facts on the ground, and the daas hamachria comes from the perspective of “who gives the land? What is the purpose here?”
Page 18 – about 9 lines from the top of the page. Line starts, “daas shlishi”.
We are bringing an illustration for the daas shlishi, that resolves the difference of opinions between the 2 judges.
The third way does not overpower the opposition, but rather both the judges are in true agreement and unity, within the daas hamachria.
There is an apparent question - “since we said the two judges were basing their position on personal recognition, that opposed each other, how can they agree to something that is opposite to their recognition?”
This is because the daas of the machriah, is on a level that is totally beyond theirs. The machriah approaches the matter totally differently. His relationship / cognizance is beyond daas. He grasps the matter as it is beyond daas.
Because we know the ultimate of knowledge is in that level that is not knowable.
In respect to this level the judges are nullified and united in the higher opinion.
What type of knowledge is this, where the level is in the unknowable? This can be illustrated by a halacha. There is a discussion of two gardens, one above another. Some kind of growth protrudes out from the wall between the two gardens. The roots are in the one garden and the plant is in the air space of the other garden. Who owns it? Then comes a conclusive answer, “as far as the hand of the higher gardener, is his, the rest is for the lower gardener.”
The third opinion is not based on land ownership. “what was given to you? Ultimately the land was given to you by Him. It is yours for the purpose of what you can gain, not for your option to destroy the plant. True you (both) have the right to uproot/destroy the plant, but there is a higher purpose here. This focus, on who will benefit (what is the plant given for), not the possibility of destruction is an element of lo-nodah (the unknowable). The case was initially approached from the perspective of ownership – since these are the facts on the ground, and the daas hamachria comes from the perspective of “who gives the land? What is the purpose here?”
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Entering into the reality of the situation
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/21/10 Wednesday 7 Iyar 5770
Page 18 – End of 6th line from the top of the page. Line starts, “ubechinat daas”.
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
Sechel cannot relate to reality in the same way. Daas can relate to the reality of the world. Bar sechel sees the precariousness of the world and the bar daas sees the reality.
The judge has to come to daas and hakara to have a stake in the situation. He can't judge with a wave of the hand.
A child may be smarter than an adult, but he's not a bar daas – he doesn't have a stake in it.
How do we come to a resolution between two differing judges?
These are two realities, each sees the situation from their angle. They will only come to a resolution through a daas hamachriah – this presents an alternative and absorbs both of the opposing opinions.
The daas hamachriah is known as daas shlishi. The third daas. And both can agree we with it. Dass hamachriah is not a synthesis. It is from above – it is a new paradigm. Even if this third opinion comes out practically like one of them it is still a third position.
For video, click here.
Page 18 – End of 6th line from the top of the page. Line starts, “ubechinat daas”.
Sechel cannot relate to reality in the same way. Daas can relate to the reality of the world. Bar sechel sees the precariousness of the world and the bar daas sees the reality.
The judge has to come to daas and hakara to have a stake in the situation. He can't judge with a wave of the hand.
A child may be smarter than an adult, but he's not a bar daas – he doesn't have a stake in it.
How do we come to a resolution between two differing judges?
These are two realities, each sees the situation from their angle. They will only come to a resolution through a daas hamachriah – this presents an alternative and absorbs both of the opposing opinions.
The daas hamachriah is known as daas shlishi. The third daas. And both can agree we with it. Dass hamachriah is not a synthesis. It is from above – it is a new paradigm. Even if this third opinion comes out practically like one of them it is still a third position.
For video, click here.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
“I am accepting that I have a King”
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/20/10 Tuesday 6 Iyar 5770
Page 18 – 3rd line from the top of the page. Line starts, “aleph mamash”.
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
We are talking about a level of unity that is not dependent on the features of the components.
It is able to combine opposites, while they are in full force. This is affected by an ohr elyon – a cognizance of something superior to them, that is higher than their source. Yesterday we spoke of the king that is on a different level from the ministers. Even the man of “infinite” wealth does not compare to the king. The wealthy man is based on resources. The king is not based on resources.
Each ministry has a function and the king is above function. When they recognize something above function, they are in another realm. The ministers rise up to a different perspective completely. This is a level that is higher than their source.
Another way to understand this: it is like two judges looking at a case. One convicts and one aquits. They come to their conclusions based on their daas and hakarah, beyond the arguments of logic / sechel.
One recognizes that the matter is thus, and the other sees it completely differently. Each judge went through the process of logic and proof and reached a perspective beyond sechel. Neither can be swayed, it would be like trying to convince a living human being that 2x2=5.
A rav has to give a ruling base on what he thinks. He has to understand the issue on a personal basis after he has gone through all the resources.
Page 18 – 3rd line from the top of the page. Line starts, “aleph mamash”.
We are talking about a level of unity that is not dependent on the features of the components.
It is able to combine opposites, while they are in full force. This is affected by an ohr elyon – a cognizance of something superior to them, that is higher than their source. Yesterday we spoke of the king that is on a different level from the ministers. Even the man of “infinite” wealth does not compare to the king. The wealthy man is based on resources. The king is not based on resources.
Each ministry has a function and the king is above function. When they recognize something above function, they are in another realm. The ministers rise up to a different perspective completely. This is a level that is higher than their source.
Another way to understand this: it is like two judges looking at a case. One convicts and one aquits. They come to their conclusions based on their daas and hakarah, beyond the arguments of logic / sechel.
One recognizes that the matter is thus, and the other sees it completely differently. Each judge went through the process of logic and proof and reached a perspective beyond sechel. Neither can be swayed, it would be like trying to convince a living human being that 2x2=5.
A rav has to give a ruling base on what he thinks. He has to understand the issue on a personal basis after he has gone through all the resources.
Monday, April 19, 2010
The ministers and their king
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/19/10 Monday 5 Iyar 5770
Page 17 – bottom third of the page. Line starts, “ribui hashalom”.
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
We discussed how opposites can correlate. This is shalom. This is based on the fact that opposites contain each other. They are not absolute and hence can recognize their opposites.
A second cause of peace / shalom and the integration is not due to the fact that each element contains also its opposite, because then when each koach is in a state of pshitus and atzmiut, like water and fire in their pure state, then it is not possible for them to be joined.
But there is an element of shalom / peace that is superior to what has been discussed till now, and it can make peace between in their essential level. Even Michael – the angel of water and Gavriel – the angel of fire, who serve Him through their method, at their essential state are able to be joined together with inter-inclusion. How is it possible? Two essential opposites combined? Unless we're talking about them losing their essential natures.
Since they are creations He could take them out of existence, but this would not be unity.
How is this achieved? This is because upon them is shining an ohr elyon (a superior light) that is from malchus of atzilus that is superior to the source of their existence.
This is like two ministers, who oppose each other to the extreme. And each is a strong presence. But when they come before the king who is superior and separate completely then they will lose their existence and will be like one thing, not merely in a compromised / mediated way, but rather as if they are of one thought, one mind!
The king represents the whole country and his presence is absolute, like the country is a sure presence. The ministers are important, yet there is an element of transience – they can be replaced. The king is at a level of reality that doesn't exist for the ministers.
When in the king's presence, they still function in their capacity, but in terms of a self-identity they don't exists. They function from a basis of bitul. The only reality is that of the king. They don't function on their own basis.
Page 17 – bottom third of the page. Line starts, “ribui hashalom”.
We discussed how opposites can correlate. This is shalom. This is based on the fact that opposites contain each other. They are not absolute and hence can recognize their opposites.
A second cause of peace / shalom and the integration is not due to the fact that each element contains also its opposite, because then when each koach is in a state of pshitus and atzmiut, like water and fire in their pure state, then it is not possible for them to be joined.
But there is an element of shalom / peace that is superior to what has been discussed till now, and it can make peace between in their essential level. Even Michael – the angel of water and Gavriel – the angel of fire, who serve Him through their method, at their essential state are able to be joined together with inter-inclusion. How is it possible? Two essential opposites combined? Unless we're talking about them losing their essential natures.
Since they are creations He could take them out of existence, but this would not be unity.
How is this achieved? This is because upon them is shining an ohr elyon (a superior light) that is from malchus of atzilus that is superior to the source of their existence.
This is like two ministers, who oppose each other to the extreme. And each is a strong presence. But when they come before the king who is superior and separate completely then they will lose their existence and will be like one thing, not merely in a compromised / mediated way, but rather as if they are of one thought, one mind!
The king represents the whole country and his presence is absolute, like the country is a sure presence. The ministers are important, yet there is an element of transience – they can be replaced. The king is at a level of reality that doesn't exist for the ministers.
When in the king's presence, they still function in their capacity, but in terms of a self-identity they don't exists. They function from a basis of bitul. The only reality is that of the king. They don't function on their own basis.
Fire in everything
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/18/10 Sunday 4 Iyar 5770
Page 17 – about a third from the top of the page. Line starts, “ve-hispashtus”.
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
We are saying that in the 4 elements, all are included in each, and this will be more easily seen in midot.
Both chesed and gevurah are rooted in the etzem. And each is the correct way to express the etzem.
When chesed is being examined and viewed from a wholesome perspective, and its effect is evaluated, it is looked at in terms of “not how I feel, but how I relate to others.” Then the other elements can be seen in it. For chesed to be effective it has to be restrained. This is the weakening and the softening of the the chesed - “we should not be self contained and self focused – there are other elements that give me a real presence”, says chesed.
Gevurah is a little more illusive. To teach a child restraint, one may say, “to give in to her is not a good thing”, but if you disassociate from the child you don't accomplish – ie gevurah cannot be effective without a little chesed.
Chesed gives, without restraint – it says “its yours to begin with, and I have no reason to withold”, gevurah on the other hand is demanding - “you have to know where it comes from and you have to deserve it.” Gevurah realizes to be effective there has to be an element of connection/chesed.
When you have 4 elements on one line then you have 16 combinations, but if extended to a plane or to three dimensions then infinite possibilities are possible.
Midot are dependent on there being a recipient. But it is a real midah not a response to a situation. The midot are in contrast to sechel, which can deal with the hypothetical. Midot work in reality only. There has to be a sense of reality. The midah is dependent on others, yet it is a real midah – a human being is not meant to be alone in the world.
The question is, what brings about the hiskalelus? And how can ratzu and shuv relate to each other? Shem mah in tikun is the effect of bitul on the midot. This softens them so that chesed should see the gevurah that is within itself and vice versa, resulting in harmony between them. From the 6 midot come out 600 000 combinations.
From the harmony comes great variety. With shalom bayit each person is different, and a general approach is one of compromise, but here something else is being said – a higher purpose gives place for all the midot. It places the midah in a real environment, so its not about compromise, but about pursuing the common goal.
The sages increase / foster peace in the world since they show how two opposites can be connected.
This is the explanation of how there can be a partnership of 2 opposites. This is because the 2 are only opposites on a superficial level.
Page 17 – about a third from the top of the page. Line starts, “ve-hispashtus”.
We are saying that in the 4 elements, all are included in each, and this will be more easily seen in midot.
Both chesed and gevurah are rooted in the etzem. And each is the correct way to express the etzem.
When chesed is being examined and viewed from a wholesome perspective, and its effect is evaluated, it is looked at in terms of “not how I feel, but how I relate to others.” Then the other elements can be seen in it. For chesed to be effective it has to be restrained. This is the weakening and the softening of the the chesed - “we should not be self contained and self focused – there are other elements that give me a real presence”, says chesed.
Gevurah is a little more illusive. To teach a child restraint, one may say, “to give in to her is not a good thing”, but if you disassociate from the child you don't accomplish – ie gevurah cannot be effective without a little chesed.
Chesed gives, without restraint – it says “its yours to begin with, and I have no reason to withold”, gevurah on the other hand is demanding - “you have to know where it comes from and you have to deserve it.” Gevurah realizes to be effective there has to be an element of connection/chesed.
When you have 4 elements on one line then you have 16 combinations, but if extended to a plane or to three dimensions then infinite possibilities are possible.
For video, click here.
Midot are dependent on there being a recipient. But it is a real midah not a response to a situation. The midot are in contrast to sechel, which can deal with the hypothetical. Midot work in reality only. There has to be a sense of reality. The midah is dependent on others, yet it is a real midah – a human being is not meant to be alone in the world.
The question is, what brings about the hiskalelus? And how can ratzu and shuv relate to each other? Shem mah in tikun is the effect of bitul on the midot. This softens them so that chesed should see the gevurah that is within itself and vice versa, resulting in harmony between them. From the 6 midot come out 600 000 combinations.
From the harmony comes great variety. With shalom bayit each person is different, and a general approach is one of compromise, but here something else is being said – a higher purpose gives place for all the midot. It places the midah in a real environment, so its not about compromise, but about pursuing the common goal.
The sages increase / foster peace in the world since they show how two opposites can be connected.
This is the explanation of how there can be a partnership of 2 opposites. This is because the 2 are only opposites on a superficial level.
Friday, April 16, 2010
Kindness and severity
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/16/10 Friday 2 Iyar 5770
Page 17 – about 10 lines from the top of the page. Line starts, “ve-uvan yoter”.
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
We are explaining that every element, because it is rooted in the primal matter, thus within everything is contained all the other variations except here it is defined as only one element that became the main focus and all others are concealed in it. If you break it down into components then the main focus gets a weakness/softness, showing that its presence is not absolute and it can even relate to something that is opposite to it.
This can be better understood in the midos of chesed and gevurah. We can perceive the midos not only at their functional level, but at their inception.
At their inception, both gevurah and chesed have a fundamental connection to the nefesh and thus can focus exclusively on themselves. We attribute to rootedness in the nefesh both phases – the pshitus/simple strength and the softness/interinclusivity.
Tohu has midos in great intolerant power, due to it being near the source, but in the etzem itself, it varies by chitzoni and pnimi. The pnimius is indicating that everything has its place. This is like one in search of atzmus, till he gets there and realizes there is a higher level – the kavanah of atzmus.
The midah gets its pshitus from the nefesh and it claims to represent the nefesh and doesn't tolerate its opposite. But then divided into their details then it causes a softness so it will give space for its opposite. Chesed realizes that, “in order for me to be chesed all the way out to the recipient, then I have to restrain myself, after all chesed is not just a personal experience.”
Chesed is not created in this level of circumstance, where it reaches the recipient, it is a nefesh power and is created in the nefesh and calibrated as it comes into expression.
For video, click here.
Page 17 – about 10 lines from the top of the page. Line starts, “ve-uvan yoter”.
We are explaining that every element, because it is rooted in the primal matter, thus within everything is contained all the other variations except here it is defined as only one element that became the main focus and all others are concealed in it. If you break it down into components then the main focus gets a weakness/softness, showing that its presence is not absolute and it can even relate to something that is opposite to it.
This can be better understood in the midos of chesed and gevurah. We can perceive the midos not only at their functional level, but at their inception.
At their inception, both gevurah and chesed have a fundamental connection to the nefesh and thus can focus exclusively on themselves. We attribute to rootedness in the nefesh both phases – the pshitus/simple strength and the softness/interinclusivity.
Tohu has midos in great intolerant power, due to it being near the source, but in the etzem itself, it varies by chitzoni and pnimi. The pnimius is indicating that everything has its place. This is like one in search of atzmus, till he gets there and realizes there is a higher level – the kavanah of atzmus.
The midah gets its pshitus from the nefesh and it claims to represent the nefesh and doesn't tolerate its opposite. But then divided into their details then it causes a softness so it will give space for its opposite. Chesed realizes that, “in order for me to be chesed all the way out to the recipient, then I have to restrain myself, after all chesed is not just a personal experience.”
Chesed is not created in this level of circumstance, where it reaches the recipient, it is a nefesh power and is created in the nefesh and calibrated as it comes into expression.
For video, click here.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
The blue sky goes off into infinity
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/15/10 ThursdayNight 1 Iyar 5770
Page 17 – seven lines from the top of the page. Line starts, “aval ke-asher”.
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
It is the softness in each koach, that permits the opposite, that is within it.
When it is in its own simplicity it is 100% itself – it doesn't explain or justify itself. You should question you existence, since it is not prisine/simple, but rather formulated. If I am water or fire the pristine form can be presented this way. A doctor thinks the whole world stands on medicine, a politician on politics, a mechanic on mechanism, psychologist on psychology, an economist on economics – why? Since each sees himself in pashitus/simplicity he sees the world operating this way. He goes to the depth of the the matter till it resonates with his soul. When in it's simplicity it exresses itself with great strength.
This simplicity is an opposite of the softness. Only when breaking down into its details/specifics is it able combine with its opposite. A table and chair are very different, but if you examine the components of a table, and a chair they both have a board and four legs. By looking at what each one consists of do you find the commonality. To correlate and see similarity, one needs to get into the details.
For video, click here.
Page 17 – seven lines from the top of the page. Line starts, “aval ke-asher”.
It is the softness in each koach, that permits the opposite, that is within it.
When it is in its own simplicity it is 100% itself – it doesn't explain or justify itself. You should question you existence, since it is not prisine/simple, but rather formulated. If I am water or fire the pristine form can be presented this way. A doctor thinks the whole world stands on medicine, a politician on politics, a mechanic on mechanism, psychologist on psychology, an economist on economics – why? Since each sees himself in pashitus/simplicity he sees the world operating this way. He goes to the depth of the the matter till it resonates with his soul. When in it's simplicity it exresses itself with great strength.
This simplicity is an opposite of the softness. Only when breaking down into its details/specifics is it able combine with its opposite. A table and chair are very different, but if you examine the components of a table, and a chair they both have a board and four legs. By looking at what each one consists of do you find the commonality. To correlate and see similarity, one needs to get into the details.
For video, click here.
The answer that makes my questions disappear
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/15/10 Thursday 1 Iyar 5770
Page 16 – second line from the end of the page. Line starts, “hitkallut”
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
All the kochot are rooted together and have an element of the etzem in them.
Thus each has an element of its opposite, only that it is deeply concealed and is totally unrecognizable.
When koach or yesod is broken down into components, then are identified the opposite that is contained in it. This enables combinations between the kochot. Underneath the experience of the kochot there is a great similarity between them. This is true of the higher kochot of sechel and midot too.
Each koach (such as sight and hearing) comes with such simplicity that no unexpected element is noted in it. It has all the elements that allows it to be, and it self-justifies, it is what it is.
In this level of simplicity no opposite is sensed. It is defined yet simple and real. And no opposite is seen. Like water and fire – in their expressed state they are opposites and simple, although each contains the other.
Can we see water within fire? No, we cannot see it, but we can see the effect of water in fire. You light a candle, and if it is just a wick it will burn out, but if the wick is in the fuel it will burn for hours, so then there is something that is containing the fire and preventing it from instantly consuming everything, and at the same time it doesn't get extinguished. It is a slow burn – it is fire and its opposite.
The fact that fire can exist in a controlled state, says that fire can relate to that which is not fire.
Page 16 – second line from the end of the page. Line starts, “hitkallut”
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
Thus each has an element of its opposite, only that it is deeply concealed and is totally unrecognizable.
When koach or yesod is broken down into components, then are identified the opposite that is contained in it. This enables combinations between the kochot. Underneath the experience of the kochot there is a great similarity between them. This is true of the higher kochot of sechel and midot too.
Each koach (such as sight and hearing) comes with such simplicity that no unexpected element is noted in it. It has all the elements that allows it to be, and it self-justifies, it is what it is.
In this level of simplicity no opposite is sensed. It is defined yet simple and real. And no opposite is seen. Like water and fire – in their expressed state they are opposites and simple, although each contains the other.
Can we see water within fire? No, we cannot see it, but we can see the effect of water in fire. You light a candle, and if it is just a wick it will burn out, but if the wick is in the fuel it will burn for hours, so then there is something that is containing the fire and preventing it from instantly consuming everything, and at the same time it doesn't get extinguished. It is a slow burn – it is fire and its opposite.
The fact that fire can exist in a controlled state, says that fire can relate to that which is not fire.
For video, click here.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Nothing can be destroyed
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/14/10 Wednesday 30 Nissan 5770
Page 16 – second line from the end of the page. Line starts, “hitkallut”
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
The principle of hiskalelut / interinclusion is facilitated by the fact that every koach inherently has an element of every other koach.
In general all matter in the world is a composite of 4 fundamental elements – fire, wind, water and earth. We see water as distinct from fire even though the world contains both. The each have a source above their defined state – this is chomer harishon – primal matter.
This primal matter is called chomer pashut – a presence without definition. From it are drawn the other forms.
In identifying an object there are two stages, there is something here, this is what it is. The “there is something here” could be seen as insignificant, but this stage is probably more important, something there is more compelling than the specifics of what it is. The cup is a subset of the presence of the object.
The article is so real, because it goes deeper than just being what it is.
The world is G-dly – everything in the world is indestructable – nothing can be destroyed, only its form can be changed, because it is all based on chomer hapashut.
Anything in a form needs time and space. The chomer pashus remains pashut and it is at the same time captured in this form. We don't question, “how can there be a cup?” – it has a real and fundamental presence.
Why is all of this significant? This is to understand how there can be hiskalalus between different things. There can be multiple opinions in torah, but not exact opposites – there is a place where all opinions converge. An opinion has to be rooted in the chomer pashut.
Page 16 – second line from the end of the page. Line starts, “hitkallut” The principle of hiskalelut / interinclusion is facilitated by the fact that every koach inherently has an element of every other koach.
In general all matter in the world is a composite of 4 fundamental elements – fire, wind, water and earth. We see water as distinct from fire even though the world contains both. The each have a source above their defined state – this is chomer harishon – primal matter.
This primal matter is called chomer pashut – a presence without definition. From it are drawn the other forms.
In identifying an object there are two stages, there is something here, this is what it is. The “there is something here” could be seen as insignificant, but this stage is probably more important, something there is more compelling than the specifics of what it is. The cup is a subset of the presence of the object.
The article is so real, because it goes deeper than just being what it is.
The world is G-dly – everything in the world is indestructable – nothing can be destroyed, only its form can be changed, because it is all based on chomer hapashut.
Why is all of this significant? This is to understand how there can be hiskalalus between different things. There can be multiple opinions in torah, but not exact opposites – there is a place where all opinions converge. An opinion has to be rooted in the chomer pashut.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
The start of our perception
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/13/10 Tuesday 29 Nissan 5770
Page 16 – second line from the end of the page. Line starts, “hitkallut”
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
Our perception starts at the functional level. Above that level we don't have a handle – we don't have a grasp.
The human being has a different perception – the human is a king by nature. He should be able to do what he needs to do in a proper way. The origin of the inventions and tools of the human being is related to the essence of the human being.
At the level of essence is the “table” defined? No, but it is rooted in that level. That level requires that things should be the right way and so lower down the table is invented and built.
Each koach (and object) is reflecting the etzem on its level.
Chochmah is the bringing of the ratzon into the level of sechel. A human act has value only if it is premeditated, this is the process of the nefesh coming down into sechel. A human doesn't just respond to circumstances. He needs to perceive the circumstances, put it through sechel and then act. This is the value of a human act, not that “such and such is accomplished”, rather it is reflective of acting al pi sechel. How to eat food without losing your human stature – that's sechel.
Each koach is made up of all the kochot even at its simple/essential level. This is because all are contained in the essence, which bears all of them. Each koach is a representation of the etzem. The essence is such a truth, that it can represent itself in all these different ways. And since each koach is rooted above it is correlated to each other koach.
Page 16 – second line from the end of the page. Line starts, “hitkallut”
Our perception starts at the functional level. Above that level we don't have a handle – we don't have a grasp.
The human being has a different perception – the human is a king by nature. He should be able to do what he needs to do in a proper way. The origin of the inventions and tools of the human being is related to the essence of the human being.
At the level of essence is the “table” defined? No, but it is rooted in that level. That level requires that things should be the right way and so lower down the table is invented and built.
Each koach (and object) is reflecting the etzem on its level.
Chochmah is the bringing of the ratzon into the level of sechel. A human act has value only if it is premeditated, this is the process of the nefesh coming down into sechel. A human doesn't just respond to circumstances. He needs to perceive the circumstances, put it through sechel and then act. This is the value of a human act, not that “such and such is accomplished”, rather it is reflective of acting al pi sechel. How to eat food without losing your human stature – that's sechel.
Each koach is made up of all the kochot even at its simple/essential level. This is because all are contained in the essence, which bears all of them. Each koach is a representation of the etzem. The essence is such a truth, that it can represent itself in all these different ways. And since each koach is rooted above it is correlated to each other koach.
For video, click here.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Many ways to the essence
Page 16 – third line from the middle of the page. Line starts, “kuli”
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
There is an incorporation of ratzu and shuv in each other, 'tho they are opposites, and seemingly self-contained and don't cause the opposite reaction, except they occur in such a way that they allow for the other phase to follow.
For this incorporated to take place is in fact the effect of a cognizance of a supreme light that is above both ratzu and shuv.
This is by means of Torah – about which it is said – those busy with torah effects peace in the gathering above and the gathering below.
What is this peace / shalom? End of conflict, quiete per se, like that of a cemetery is not peace. Peace allows for everything to express itself.
Everything is rooted in the etzem. Take a person – he has sechel and midot that are distinct, but as they come from the etzem, it is not that the etzem contains different, unrelated parts. Everything that comes from etzem comes from the same undifferentiated point. So how does an essence create seeming opposites? The etzem is of such a level of truth that you have to have all the various kochot / faculties to represent it and all there elements are rooted in the essence and represent an element of the essence.
Chochmah wants to reveal the etzem in its manner. So too for binah etc. thus the intent of each is to reveal the whole etzem. The etzem bears all of them – you look at the essence and at first you say its all chochmah, and then you see no its all binah etc...
The etzem is of such a truth/reality that it cannot be captured in a certain manner to the exclusion of another way.
The pleasure of the King of kings
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/11/10 Sunday 27 Nissan 5770
Page 16 – below to the middle of the page. Line starts, “ki yachol lihiyot”
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
All terms applied Above are only allegorical. We use a human counterpart and say this is how we refer to that element Above, but there is not similarity. What is the significance of this allegory?
So we start with oneg / pleasure here below. A pleasure caused by something, “this is a tasty piece of cake” is not a soul pleasure – it is an experience of the palate not the neshamah. Sechel is reflective of the deeper kochot of oneg and ratzon. Does this mean that sechel is arbitary? “I understand the way I want to understand?” so we have to go to a deeper level. In our superficial understanding of man we see him as being exclusively reactive. As if to say, if there were no external effects why would man wake from his bed? As if all actions are reactions. Delving into sechel shows the fallacy of this approach.
We want to live. Not due to a fear of dying. There is nothing like life. It is beyond intellect. It is a G-dly gift. This is a spark of G-d. What is G-d? He is beyond the natural world and not dependent on anything. He is that which cannot, not be. His presence is of Himself. His presence is an imperative. We have no way to relate to these terms with our sechel. So in what way do we relate? We don't question the existence of the world - “it is G-d's will” and that extends itself to everything in our experience.
We realize this G-dly spark and we define it as oneg and ratzon (pleasure and will). Oneg is the only thing for which we do not seek an explanation. Our oneg is still an experience. Oneg Above is an inherent truth. “He had a desire / longing to make the world.” This longing is a truth in itself and limitless. By doing a mitzvah you are connecting to that level of desire and it is the most satisfying thing in life possible. This is possible only when passing beyond the limits of our rationale. One has to first get free from the clutches of the world and the body.
When the servant does the work down here, what does the Master get? There is an inherent oneg and he elicits it. Through his work the Master has oneg. Why does the Master have pleasure? The Master decided he needs it. That He decided it will give him oneg is also sourced in oneg. This is a G-dly element that defies explanation.
Not doing the ovodah / work means you are not using the soul powers that He put into you. The oneg in the Master is inherent, not reactive. A father sees his children and notices they are being kind to each other. So he may think, “that's great they'll support each other and me when they grow up” or he can see, “they have a real sense of reality and goodness” - it is a satisfying reality, without personal benefit. Hashem is like the father and he gets pleasure from seeing the children.
Inside the text the rebbe is asking what brings the cycle of ratzu and shuv and maintains it. The rebbe is saying there must be something that forces the cycle, since by himself, one would just stay in ratzu.
Katnus is a level of self satisfaction – this is like the cleaving the encompasses his powers. And this lacks reality because it is in his mind. It has not become a stand-alone reality. Gadlus sees it through to completion.
Page 16 – below to the middle of the page. Line starts, “ki yachol lihiyot”
All terms applied Above are only allegorical. We use a human counterpart and say this is how we refer to that element Above, but there is not similarity. What is the significance of this allegory?
So we start with oneg / pleasure here below. A pleasure caused by something, “this is a tasty piece of cake” is not a soul pleasure – it is an experience of the palate not the neshamah. Sechel is reflective of the deeper kochot of oneg and ratzon. Does this mean that sechel is arbitary? “I understand the way I want to understand?” so we have to go to a deeper level. In our superficial understanding of man we see him as being exclusively reactive. As if to say, if there were no external effects why would man wake from his bed? As if all actions are reactions. Delving into sechel shows the fallacy of this approach.
We want to live. Not due to a fear of dying. There is nothing like life. It is beyond intellect. It is a G-dly gift. This is a spark of G-d. What is G-d? He is beyond the natural world and not dependent on anything. He is that which cannot, not be. His presence is of Himself. His presence is an imperative. We have no way to relate to these terms with our sechel. So in what way do we relate? We don't question the existence of the world - “it is G-d's will” and that extends itself to everything in our experience.
We realize this G-dly spark and we define it as oneg and ratzon (pleasure and will). Oneg is the only thing for which we do not seek an explanation. Our oneg is still an experience. Oneg Above is an inherent truth. “He had a desire / longing to make the world.” This longing is a truth in itself and limitless. By doing a mitzvah you are connecting to that level of desire and it is the most satisfying thing in life possible. This is possible only when passing beyond the limits of our rationale. One has to first get free from the clutches of the world and the body.
For video, click here.
When the servant does the work down here, what does the Master get? There is an inherent oneg and he elicits it. Through his work the Master has oneg. Why does the Master have pleasure? The Master decided he needs it. That He decided it will give him oneg is also sourced in oneg. This is a G-dly element that defies explanation.
Not doing the ovodah / work means you are not using the soul powers that He put into you. The oneg in the Master is inherent, not reactive. A father sees his children and notices they are being kind to each other. So he may think, “that's great they'll support each other and me when they grow up” or he can see, “they have a real sense of reality and goodness” - it is a satisfying reality, without personal benefit. Hashem is like the father and he gets pleasure from seeing the children.
Inside the text the rebbe is asking what brings the cycle of ratzu and shuv and maintains it. The rebbe is saying there must be something that forces the cycle, since by himself, one would just stay in ratzu.
Katnus is a level of self satisfaction – this is like the cleaving the encompasses his powers. And this lacks reality because it is in his mind. It has not become a stand-alone reality. Gadlus sees it through to completion.
Friday, April 9, 2010
Joining opposites
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/9/10 Friday 25 Nissan 5770
Page 16 – close to the middle of the page. Line starts, “kuli amnum”
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
There is an incorporation of ratzu and shuv in each other, 'tho they are opposites, and seemingly self-contained and don't cause the opposite reaction, except they occur in such a way that they allow for the other phase to follow.
This doesn't explain how they are incorporated. They seem to be opposed to each other, but there is something extraneous that sets a limit.
By ratzu he rises in cleaving to G-dliness, and this need not lead to the second level of realizing the real cleaving will be through doing Torah and Mitzvoth. And 'tho it is an element of katnus / smallness that he stays exclusively on a path of ratzu it doesn't seem to lead to shuv.
For video, click here.
Page 16 – close to the middle of the page. Line starts, “kuli amnum”
There is an incorporation of ratzu and shuv in each other, 'tho they are opposites, and seemingly self-contained and don't cause the opposite reaction, except they occur in such a way that they allow for the other phase to follow.
This doesn't explain how they are incorporated. They seem to be opposed to each other, but there is something extraneous that sets a limit.
By ratzu he rises in cleaving to G-dliness, and this need not lead to the second level of realizing the real cleaving will be through doing Torah and Mitzvoth. And 'tho it is an element of katnus / smallness that he stays exclusively on a path of ratzu it doesn't seem to lead to shuv.
For video, click here.
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Not by design – a real human being
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/8/10 ThursdayNight 24 Nissan 5770
Page 16 – close to the middle of the page. Line starts, “vegum mize she hu eved”
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
We're looking at the question asked this morning. The question was after shuv there is a ratzu due to the oneg of doing avodat hashem and he is drawn into into it and this pulls him towards a ratzu. So he's in a state of shuv – and only doing His will and yet he goes back to shuv.
You may think he should not allow himself oneg and simcha and a return to shuv. The oneg draws him to understand more, know more and draw closer – this is shuv. Why is this? Maybe he should have focused on just doing His will.
This question leads us to principle of chassidus. The serving of hashem is not an artificial stance on the part of the human being. You can't make a chassid by design. It connects to the inner workings of the soul.
He comes close to elokus, and the closer he comes the more awed he is. This is superhuman, and how do I dare to approach it. This is not based on saying “I'll stick with the worldly level”, rather “it is a chutzpah for me to step into that arena.” “the villager doesn't dare ask for the princess's hand in marriage”.
He appreciates the elokus aspect, is drawn in and wants more. It takes a while till he realizes the awesomeness of his pursuit. When one is affected by the oneg and glory he doesn't, at first realize the awesomeness of it.
It is not based on a decision, it is all a reality experience.
This is not a natural organic process either – it involves neshama intellect.
When one contemplates infinity, we ask how can there be something that is unlimited? Then we realize it is not a thing, it is ein – nothing – elokus – not a created entity, but the Essence and he realizes he dare not go further, since he is not in his element. And he knows that this infinity is the source of Torah and Mitzvoth.
How can I be in the world and be connected to this truth that is beyond world – the answer is that you can be in the world and connected by Torah and Mitzvoth.
Life itself – chayut is ratzu and shuv – it provides for the body, but it is life/chayut, which is not body at all.
Page 16 – close to the middle of the page. Line starts, “vegum mize she hu eved”
We're looking at the question asked this morning. The question was after shuv there is a ratzu due to the oneg of doing avodat hashem and he is drawn into into it and this pulls him towards a ratzu. So he's in a state of shuv – and only doing His will and yet he goes back to shuv.
You may think he should not allow himself oneg and simcha and a return to shuv. The oneg draws him to understand more, know more and draw closer – this is shuv. Why is this? Maybe he should have focused on just doing His will.
This question leads us to principle of chassidus. The serving of hashem is not an artificial stance on the part of the human being. You can't make a chassid by design. It connects to the inner workings of the soul.
He comes close to elokus, and the closer he comes the more awed he is. This is superhuman, and how do I dare to approach it. This is not based on saying “I'll stick with the worldly level”, rather “it is a chutzpah for me to step into that arena.” “the villager doesn't dare ask for the princess's hand in marriage”.
He appreciates the elokus aspect, is drawn in and wants more. It takes a while till he realizes the awesomeness of his pursuit. When one is affected by the oneg and glory he doesn't, at first realize the awesomeness of it.
It is not based on a decision, it is all a reality experience.
This is not a natural organic process either – it involves neshama intellect.
When one contemplates infinity, we ask how can there be something that is unlimited? Then we realize it is not a thing, it is ein – nothing – elokus – not a created entity, but the Essence and he realizes he dare not go further, since he is not in his element. And he knows that this infinity is the source of Torah and Mitzvoth.
How can I be in the world and be connected to this truth that is beyond world – the answer is that you can be in the world and connected by Torah and Mitzvoth.
Life itself – chayut is ratzu and shuv – it provides for the body, but it is life/chayut, which is not body at all.
For video, click here.
The outpost and the headquarters
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/8/10 Thursday 24 Nissan 5770
Page 16 – about a third from the top of the page. Line starts, “gum ha simcha”
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
General discussion is about ratzu and shuv. Why does this cycle continue? If it is at an ultimate level, and the ratzu is to etzem, then from where is the element of shuv / return?
This is from kavanah – the intent. So as he reaches to the essence he realizes that to approach with his own kochot he would not dare, so the only way to do it is to recognize the intent the essence has in the creation – that there should be torah and mitzvoth down below and hence he goes there. Thus there is a shuv resulting from the ratzu.
There is personal oneg that there is simcha above and he participates and this is personal involvement.
He has joy in that he is a servant of the King of kings and can do His will and this elicits a great joy.
This simcha must be present in the work of serving the King. Though he may be totally nullified and in state of total lowliness, still nevertheless there must be the delight that percolates down from His pleasure in having His will fulfilled.
This pleasure is the essence of the created being. The essence of everything is oneg / pleasure.
The pleasure Above is sensed below, even though he is in a state of shiflus and bitul.
Within the shuv, there is the joy and delight of the nefesh (a reflection of the delight above), therefore he is already exposed to the inyan of elokus on a personal/experiential level and thus he his aroused again to a ratzu.
Why doesn't he put aside the personal and continue to serve Him down below?
The brief answer, is that the origin of the shuv is not that he is seeking to put himself aside. The core of the shuv is that he recognizes the presences of elokus and dare not approach and thus goes back to fulfill the intent down below. He puts himself aside to fulfill the intent of above, without seeking personal interest.
Since during shuv he's already involved in torah and mitzvoth, without self recognition and the joy he has is that of above, thus it doesn't interfere with his personal shiflus and he has no need to put aside this pleasure.
He's connected to the oneg above and experiences elokus and so he “turns away” from the shuv focus, and goes for ratzu.
Page 16 – about a third from the top of the page. Line starts, “gum ha simcha”
General discussion is about ratzu and shuv. Why does this cycle continue? If it is at an ultimate level, and the ratzu is to etzem, then from where is the element of shuv / return?
This is from kavanah – the intent. So as he reaches to the essence he realizes that to approach with his own kochot he would not dare, so the only way to do it is to recognize the intent the essence has in the creation – that there should be torah and mitzvoth down below and hence he goes there. Thus there is a shuv resulting from the ratzu.
There is personal oneg that there is simcha above and he participates and this is personal involvement.
He has joy in that he is a servant of the King of kings and can do His will and this elicits a great joy.
This simcha must be present in the work of serving the King. Though he may be totally nullified and in state of total lowliness, still nevertheless there must be the delight that percolates down from His pleasure in having His will fulfilled.
This pleasure is the essence of the created being. The essence of everything is oneg / pleasure.
The pleasure Above is sensed below, even though he is in a state of shiflus and bitul.
Within the shuv, there is the joy and delight of the nefesh (a reflection of the delight above), therefore he is already exposed to the inyan of elokus on a personal/experiential level and thus he his aroused again to a ratzu.
Why doesn't he put aside the personal and continue to serve Him down below?
The brief answer, is that the origin of the shuv is not that he is seeking to put himself aside. The core of the shuv is that he recognizes the presences of elokus and dare not approach and thus goes back to fulfill the intent down below. He puts himself aside to fulfill the intent of above, without seeking personal interest.
Since during shuv he's already involved in torah and mitzvoth, without self recognition and the joy he has is that of above, thus it doesn't interfere with his personal shiflus and he has no need to put aside this pleasure.
He's connected to the oneg above and experiences elokus and so he “turns away” from the shuv focus, and goes for ratzu.
Sunday, April 4, 2010
The servant and the master's joy
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/4/10 Sunday 20 Nissan 5770
Page 16 – about 10 lines from the top of the page. Line starts, “mah she ha-adon”
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
Video to follow.
Page 16 – about 10 lines from the top of the page. Line starts, “mah she ha-adon”
See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
Video to follow.
Friday, April 2, 2010
Long Distance
AyinBase with R' Paltiel 4/2/10 Friday 18 Nissan 5770
Page 15 – towards the very end of the page. Last line. See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
For video click here.
Page 15 – towards the very end of the page. Last line. See sidebar on the right hand side for copy of the text.
For video click here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)