June 29, 1927, London<\/p>\n\n\n\n
To the honorable students:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This week I received a double portion of letters from the portions Shlach<\/em>[Send] and Korah. Last week I did not receive any letters and I thought that you did not write because on the third day of the portion Korah, it has been a full year since I have left you.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Regarding the impression of … with the question … regarding, \u201cYou did not see any image,\u201d to the point that he wrote me that even Solomon\u2019s wisdom would not be enough to answer such a question, I call on him the words of our sages: \u201cDo not judge your friend until you are in his shoes.\u201d If he had even Moses\u2019 wisdom, of whom it was said, \u201cAnd he beholds the image of the Lord,\u201d he would be able to blunt his teeth, for there is a form in spirituality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I wrote is according to the view of fools who interpreted the word \u201cform\u201d and the word \u201cimage\u201d as one. But I am surprised at you\u2014in a place where I ground wheat into flour for human consumption, you turned the flour into wheat again to chew on like a wild beast.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I elaborated extensively on the matter of form and disparity of form, which is only the difference between the Emanator and the emanated. It is necessary that we find some discernment for which it will be called \u201cemanated\u201d and not \u201cEmanator,\u201d and I placed \u201cthe name\u201d on that discernment, to be able to engage in it and speak of it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is why I called it \u201cdisparity of form\u201d and \u201cequivalence of form.\u201d Sometimes I call it \u201cgreat Dvekut<\/em> [adhesion]\u201d and \u201clittle Dvekut<\/em>.\u201d It can also be named by any name we want in order to explain this matter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n After grinding [analyzing] the matters from several pages in the book, he made them wheat once more, and materialized the word \u201cform,\u201d clothed it in a corporeal image until his hands and legs were hopelessly tied up in this image. It is written explicitly in the Torah, \u201cFor you did not see any image,\u201d while here it writes that there is form, disparity of form, and equivalence of form … I elaborated in your words to evaluate your inclination toward externality, that one needs to look into one\u2019s actions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Concerning the precision that Rav … makes regarding the name Ein Sof<\/em>[infinity] and \u201cthe light of Ein Sof<\/em>,\u201d here are the words in the book, My Desire Is in Her<\/em>: \u201cAnd all those worlds and Malchut<\/em> were included in the upper world, each of them. Also, they are included in Keter<\/em>, and the whole of Ein Sof<\/em>, inside of which all the worlds were hidden, etc., and everything was one unity, and all was Ein Sof<\/em>,\u201d thus far his words, word for word.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And what he wrote in the name of the book The Holy Tongue<\/em>, p 20, I did not know the initials of that name, nor the suffixes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And what he imagines to be my words in the Pticha<\/em> [preface], that \u201cThe light and all the abundance are already included in His essence Himself,\u201d has no connection to my words regarding the Hitkalelut<\/em> [mingling\/inclusion] of the bottom worlds in Ein Sof<\/em>. There, I explain specifically the matter of Ohr Pashut<\/em>[simple light], which does not change wherever it is, and the difference between the Emanator and the emanated is precisely in the darkness. This is why I wrote very precisely, \u201cIn His essence,\u201d which has neither a name nor a word. I do not even refer there to the light of Ein Sof<\/em>, God forbid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I do not understand you whatsoever, how you scrutinize but do not taste what you are saying, and compare one issue to another like food to a barrel. It must be due to multiple engagements or a desire for multiple engagements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And what roams as a \u201cthought\u201d\u2014to know where it belongs, he caught my language in Bina<\/em> and in the order, ABYA<\/em>\u2014it is said in Atzilut<\/em>, as well as in Tikkuney Zohar<\/em> [Corrections of The Zohar<\/em>], \u201cUpper Hochma<\/em> is called \u2018a thought.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Indeed, it is from the wondrous and concealed secrets. But see in Gate to the Essays of Rashbi<\/em>, these are his words in \u201cThe Hidden Midrash of Ruth\u201d: Moses means Daat<\/em>, as in Tifferet<\/em>, and Rabbi Akiva is Bina<\/em>, called \u201cbeing.\u201d Had the Torah been given from the part of Bina<\/em>, the Klipot<\/em> would have had no clothing in the Torah. But the Creator wished to give them a part and a grip, similar to how the first sparks in Hochma<\/em> raised 320 sparks. This is the meaning of \u201cSo it came about in the Thought.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n You find here that Rabbi Akiva as Bina<\/em> is called \u201cbeing,\u201d but this is perplexing because it is known that \u201cbeing\u201d is the name of Hochma<\/em>. And yet, see in Branch 2 in Panim Masbirot<\/em> (as well as in the introduction on the AHP<\/em>) in the \u201cPreface\u201d regarding the ascent of Malchut<\/em> to Bina<\/em>. It explains that Behina<\/em>Dalet<\/em> rose to Hochma<\/em> and became Nukva<\/em> to Hochma<\/em> of Behina<\/em> Dalet<\/em> that was established as upper Ima<\/em>. This is why Bina<\/em>, which is Behina<\/em> Bet<\/em>, went out, meaning below Behina<\/em> Dalet<\/em>, whose Sium<\/em> is called Parsa<\/em>, since out of that Bina<\/em> that went out, the two Partzufim<\/em> YESHSUT<\/em> were established below the Parsa<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n By this you will understand that that Malchut<\/em> that went up, really did go up to Hochma<\/em> and acquired upper Ima<\/em> there, and she is called \u201cbeing.\u201d She is also called \u201ca thought,\u201d and there is the mitigation of the Dinim<\/em> with Rachamim<\/em>. This is why it is where the 320 sparks rose, as they are from Behina<\/em> Dalet<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, they did not rise to the actual Hochma<\/em>, but rather to upper Ima<\/em>, who is Hochma<\/em>. This is the meaning of \u201cAll is clarified in the thought,\u201d since there is their root.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sometimes Bina<\/em> is called Nukva<\/em> of Hochma<\/em>, which is why I said that Malchut<\/em>rose to Bina<\/em>, meaning received the form of upper Bina<\/em>, which is called \u201ca thought\u201d and \u201cexistence from absence.\u201d This is the deepest of the deep, which is why the authors were succinct here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And what I wrote in Panim Masbirot<\/em>, p 6, it writes, \u201cnine Sefirot<\/em>, Toch<\/em> and Rosh<\/em>,\u201d it is no longer in the pamphlets, but was written \u201cToch<\/em> and Sof<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n And what Rav … says that I should ask on his behalf, it is similar to a working steam engine. Any machine that you attach to the steam engine with a strap will be just as strong. Thus, it is only Dvekut<\/em> [adhesion] that we need.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yehuda Leib<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" June 29, 1927, London To the honorable students: This week I received a double portion of letters from the portions Shlach[Send] […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"parent":6225,"menu_order":0,"template":"","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}}},"topic":[25],"class_list":["post-10122","book","type-book","status-publish","hentry","topic-baal-hasulam"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n