Friday, December 19, 2008

Chabad - The Rebbe runs the world? II/ Defense

This is the video from "Chabad - The Rebbe runs the world? I". Refer to that for the previous comments. This post is specifically regarding AH Bochur's defense of Rabbi Cunin's comments





Rabbi Cunin: "They will understand and see that the Rebbe runs the world and will take us out of golus".

A H Bochur's Defense

The short answer is, that R. Kunin's words are in fact the Rebbe's words, verbatim (for instance here):

כיון ש"צדיקא דאתפטר אשתכח בכולהו עלמין יתיר מבחיוהי" [זח"ג עא, ב. הובא ונת'
בתניא אגה"ק ביאור לסי' ז"ך], "שגם בזה העולם המעשה אשתכח יתיר" [ראה תניא
שם] – בודאי שהרבי מנהיג את העולם כולו, ואנ"ש בפרט, ומעורר רחמים רבים
וכו', כמו שהי' עד עתה, ואדרבה, ביתר שאת וביתר עוז.

וכשם שעד עתה הי' מונח ("אָפּגעלייגט") אצל כאו"א מאתנו שהרבי יוליכנו לקראת משיח צדקנו – צריך להיות מונח כן גם עתה.

--משיחת ש"פ תרומה, פ' זכור, ח' אדר, ה'שי"ת

Since the Rebbe was someone who authored a prolific amount on the topic of Achdus Hashem, and since the Rebbe is familiar with more philosophic Kabbala than the rest of us, that alone is enough for R. Shlomo Kunin, and that is why that isn't shocking.

---

The long answer is that Kabbala has all sorts of forces "running the world", with the innovative distinction that they are b'achdus with Hashem; this is in fact what Kabbala is mostly here to accomplish: to define the status of the ייחוד various עולמות and ספירות. There are some who lose sight of the point, and get involved in lengthy pilpulim on the exact "direction" זרועות דאריך אנפין are facing; that may have importance, but the essential point of Kabbala remains the gauging of the increasing unity of the material and then spiritual forces the closer G-d is approached.

But while that certainly suffices for someone who is familiar with Kabbala and it's ideas (and not only strictly it's technicalities), I'll note for now an explicit source which deals specifically with people running the world. It is from a famous letter penned by a leading disciple of the Maggid of Mezerich, R. Mendel of Vitepsk.

At the moment I don't have a copy of the entire letter, but I'll provide that as soon as I get a copy of Pri Ha'aretz.

R. Mendel had received a letter requesting that he bestow the author with children. R. Mendel replied that he doesn't control the world, although the Baal Shem Tov did:

בושת פני כסתני, כי התחת אלקים אני – היו
היה דבר ה' ביד הבעל שם, ויגזור אומר ויקם. אחד היה, ומהקדמונים לא קם
כמוהו, ואחריו לעפר מי יקום.

that translates roughly, "I am throughly embarrassed because I cannot stand in G-d's stead. The Baal Shem [could, for he] had the word of G-d in his power, and he would decree and it would be. He was unique, since the ancient there were none like him, and who could be after him?"

So R. Mendel has stated that the Baal Shem is תחת אלקים and can control the world. This actually is alluded to in the Yerushalmi (
תענית פ"ג ה"י):

ותגזר אומר ויקם לך, אפילו הוא אומר הכין ואת אמר הכין, דידך קיימא דידי לא קיימא

Furthermore, the reference to דבר ה' is in fact to the עשרה מאמרות which are Kabbalistically the spiritual force upon which all existence exists. So R. Mendel has stated that the Besht's powers derived from the fact that he could manipulate the very core of existence.

While it is impossible to teach these extremely detailed concepts in the comments to a blog, I'll suffice by explaining that all normative Jewish though and philosophy is seen by Kabbala to apply only within the סדר השתלשלות
העולמות which begins with the עשר ספירות דאצילות. Whereas what is higher, for instance בחינת הכתר, has complete power of veto over any "worldly" notion.

Kabbala and Chassidus entertain the possibility of man "reaching" that level, and then they indeed may "control the world". That is peshat in the Yerushalmi.

P.S. there are more sources on the topic of התחת אלקים אני which I'll hopefully post soon.

17 comments :

  1. Your quote is not. I hope that wasn't intentional. I suspect it wasn't intentional, and indeed, neither was R. Cunin's ending statement. If anything, he sounds like someone who starts saying something and quickly attempts to qualify it.

    I think what he said is not acceptable (it was also wrong), but it isn't remarkable either.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The long answer is that Kabbala has all sorts of forces "running the world", with the innovative distinction that they are b'achdus with Hashem; this is in fact what Kabbala is mostly here to accomplish: to define the status of the ייחוד various עולמות and ספירות. There are some who lose sight of the point, and get involved in lengthy pilpulim on the exact "direction" זרועות דאריך אנפין are facing; that may have importance, but the essential point of Kabbala remains the gauging of the increasing unity of the material and then spiritual forces the closer G-d is approached.
    ===============================

    Actually the Ben Ish Hai spends the majority of Petichah Shalosh of his work Daat U'Tevunah arranging various sources from the Zohar, Kitvei HaAri, and classic Mekubalim demonstrating that this is not the case. That God alone runs the world, and that the rest is not in Achdut with him, but rather subordinate to him. The Ben Ish Hai does state, quoting R' Haim Vital in Eitz Haim Heikhal Adam Kadmon, that to believe there is any Achdut whatsoever is Kefira.

    You have obviously put in a great amount of time learning Torat Chabad. Personally I do not feel that I am on a level to judge whether or not it is true Torah. I can say, that of all you have explained so far, it is apparent to me that Chabad theology is outside of what Sephardi Rabbanim and Mekubalim believe to be within the bounds of acceptable belief.

    Do you feel that such views are widely held within the greater Chabad movement?

    This point aside, for clarity sake can you give us what you would feel is a mainstream or acceptable Mashiachist view within Chabad.

    It is obvious that this view is troubling to more than just the few as this Maariv Article:
    http://www.nrg.co.il/online/11/ART1/675/999.html
    and this Jewish Week article:
    http://www.thejewishweek.com/viewArticle/c39_a1694/News/International.html
    point out.

    I would like nothing more than to at least consider some elements within Chabad as mainstream. However, with the beliefs on Achdut illustrated above, and the mashiachist issue, it seems that the vast majority of the Gedolim and Rabbanim are opposed at least in some way. Perhaps this dialogue will help to shed light on that, and whether or not the Gedolim were perhaps mistaken.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ah Bochur said...
    d) regarding אנכי מי שאנכי d) regarding אנכי מי שאנכי specifically, the Zohar states that this is בחינת הכתר. Have you ever learned that certain deeds etc. could reach כתר? Well, אברהם was a מרכבה to ספירת החסד and acquired its properties, יצחק was a מרכבה to גבורה, and משה on הר סיני encountered and approached the דרגא of אנכי, אנכי מי שאנכי, and the אתפשטותא דמשה בכל דרא have maintained that דרגא. So Ginsberg is saying that while physically, the Rebbe is flesh and blood, spiritually, he has attained the דרגא of כתר and its properties. ודי בזה.
    ==============================

    The Zohar you quote, according the Ari, as found in Shaar Maamrei D'Rashbi, as well as Eitz Haim Shaar A"K, is referring to the Keter of A"K which is the Keter of Atzilut.

    However in Shaar Ruach HaKodesh, Drush Alef, states that Moshe Rabbeinu only acheived the Gevurah and Hod of Zeir Anpin, of Beriah as it was clothed in the Tiferet of Z"A of Yetzirah.

    Quite literally you are talking worlds apart. If you are going to tell me that Rebbe arrived at the Keter of A"K you are telling me, in essence, that he has surpassed Moshe Rabbeinu. I am sorry but I see this as a problematic statement. I am left with three possible conclusions:
    1) You have misunderstood something vital and key within the Rebbe's words.
    2) The Rebbe misunderstood something vital key within the words of Kabbalah.
    3) The Rebbe, as unfortunate this may be, claimed an aspect of divinity as that is ultimately what the Keter of A"K is.

    In either case the statement applying this to the Lubavitcher Rebbe, at least in the light of the Kabbalah of the AriZ"L very problematic. If you want to tell me that Chabad has in some way developed their own Kabbalah apart from the teachings of the AriZ"L and the Zohar that is fine. However then you need to explain exactly what this statement means in regards to a Chabad understanding.

    Personally I find it sad that you feel the need to degredate and defame Gedolei HaTorah and Gedolei HaDor such as R' Kaduri, R' Darzi, R' Mordechai Sharabi, R' Yaakov Hillel, and R' Haddayya. You do realize that R' Kaduri was a student of the Ben Ish Hai, and all that he taught he received from the Ben Ish Hai, including his views on Tanya.

    You Said...
    c) You are extremely unique in refusing to accept sources, even from the Baal HaTanya himself. Your attitude is unparalleled and strange. I find no need to respond to your revolting words regarding the Baal HaTanya, as his fame and stature infinitely surpasses that of your teachers and comrades.
    ============================

    Actually these are not very unique views. These are the views that I have received from my teachers within Kabbalistic Yeshivot. For instance I heard it from the lips of the Rosh Yeshiva of Beit E-l(the oldest Kabbalistic Yeshiva in the World with an unbroken tradition from the RaShaSh, the gilgul of the Holy Ari), "We have never allowed Tanya within the walls of our Yeshiva, because the Baal HaTanya did not understand what he read, and it would only lead those who read his work astray."

    I make my apologies if it discomforts you that a large number of mekubalim do not see emet within the pages of Tanya, but that is the tradition that I have received. As far as the Baal HaTanya's fame surpassing that of my teachers, I am sure that it does. My teachers are Mekubalim, they believe in highest levels of tzniut and humility, they would appalled if they were widely known. As far as their stature... that becomes more a matter of opinion. Personally I would put the Ben Ish Hai, R' M. Sharabi, and R' Kaduri well above the Baal HaTanya. Considering that in his own life R' Kaduri was considered to have surpassed the Holy RaShaSh, the most pre-eminent mekubal since the Ari, I believe that it is a fair statement. However, my loyalty is to my Rabbanim just as your loyalty is to your Rebbeim in the end it is a matter of opinion.

    So far you have tried to make the case that Chabad at large does not view the Rebbe as a form of divinity, and I would only be happy to accept that. However, statements such as these:

    "The Rebbe is the "master of the house" with respect to all that happens to him and all that happens in the world. Without his agreement no event can take place, and if it is his will, he can bring about anything, "and who can tell him what to do" ….In him the Holy One Blessed be He rests in all His force just as He is (because of his complete self-nullification to God, so that this becomes his entire essence)." From R' Ginsberg

    "We Lubavitch hassidim believe that the House of our Rabbi in Babylonia [i.e., 770 Eastern Parkway] is the Temple, and the Rebbe is the Ark of the Covenant standing on the Foundation Rock in which [referring to the Rebbe/ark] the divine Being and Essence rests." From Rav Segal

    As well as the quote in the video from R' Cunin, seem to imply there is an aspect of divinity.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ah Bochur said...
    As an equal resident of this universe, I maintain the right to inform you what Lubavitchers worship and what they don't. You have no right however to assert what you maintain Ginsberg must believe, and expect me to have to dance to your tune (a theme which I sadly see runs through everything that you write). As the one in the know, I'll kindly inform you, that neither I, nor R. Nachman Shapiro, nor R. Shalom Charitonow, nor R. L.Y. Ginsberg consider the Rebbe G-d or pray to or worship him. If you think their words imply otherwise, know then that you have not understood them
    ===================================

    I think you have mistaken me. I am not maintaining what R' Ginsberg or any of the others must believe. Rather I am stating what it sounds to me, and apparently to others as well, that they believe based upon the words they speak/write and the language they choose to use. I hear implied in those words very dangerous thoughts.

    I never degraded you as a person, and yes you are an equal member of this universe and one is who probably eminently more qualified to explain their beliefs. However, so simply say, "They don't believe that" is not a valid defense or explanation. I can say that the sky is pink but that does not make it so.

    I do have a right to bring what I feel are problematic statements and say something like, "these are the conclusions that I and others draw from them." If you would like to maintain that I have misunderstood them, the burden of proof is upon you, to show me where. That is how honest debate and dialogue work.

    Quite honestly a statement such as, If you think their words imply otherwise, know then that you have not understood them, is not honest dialogue or debate. These are statements that cult leaders employ to keep their masses under control when they start asking questions and seeing through the smoke and mirrors. I would like to think that you are above that. In which case why don't you explain to me and the greater reading public, how I have so horribly misunderstood these men.

    ReplyDelete
  5. A few remarks to A H Bachur:

    1- The Rebbe's words here are not edited. Do you find in his edited works that he stated in such fashion. For to cite this a source for R. Cunin's remarks in that fashion requires a more accurate source to know context and exact meaning of the phrase.

    2- "it is the Rebbe who runs THE world" is diffent that the usual chabad explanation that the REbbe is merely totally nullified so that HASHEM IS THE ONE WHO RUNS THE WORLD.

    Interesting enough one would find thousands of times Rebbe expressing himself "Boreh OlamUmanhigoh"!

    3- Note that context in the other sources it is no different than "tzadik gozer vehakodosh boruch mekyayem".

    4- Interesting that the source you quote from the REbbe's work he states that previous REbbe would lead us TOWARDS MASHIACH TZIDKEYNO implying the PR is NOT the mashiach!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Daas Torah. You have quotes on what Rabbi Cunin said, and those are not the words I heard on the video. Please correct.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Isaac Balbin said...

    Daas Torah. You have quotes on what Rabbi Cunin said, and those are not the words I heard on the video. Please correct.
    =================
    Those were the words that came with the video - they are an accurate paraphrase of what I heard. Considering that the actual speech is right there I don't see the significance of your comment. I changed it a bit. But feel free to write a transcript of what he said and I'll add that to the post.

    ReplyDelete
  8. you should not put a paraphrase in quotes.
    given the context, i am surprised you didn't exercise academic integrity

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hashem THE source of blessing!December 22, 2008 at 2:15 AM

    Apropos this discussion I find it interesting that recently a new series of the Lubavitcher Rebbe's Zt"lletters was printed where there is a fascinating response to someone who has received a blessing that she would be able to get pregnant and she aborted and asked the Rebbe "how could this have happened". The Rebbe answered amongst other answers that the couple has forgotten that Hashem is THE source of the blessings and it's given, and put their whole trust in a man of flesh and blood me (ie. the Rebbe)!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Yes, there are stark differences between some of the Tanya's kabbalistic explanation/positions, and those of certain major kabbalists. Certainly then, "eilu v'eilu divrei elokim chayim", especially as these are not matters of psak halacha. However to the earlier poster 'mekubal' stating that Rav Kaduri "was considered to have surpassed the Holy RaShaSh..." ,
    that statement is outrageously presumptuous. Considered by WHO ? Who alive today can estimate relativity to the RaShaSh ?!!!

    ReplyDelete
  11. chaimshmeel said...

    Yes, there are stark differences between some of the Tanya's kabbalistic explanation/positions, and those of certain major kabbalists. Certainly then, "eilu v'eilu divrei elokim chayim", especially as these are not matters of psak halacha. However to the earlier poster 'mekubal' stating that Rav Kaduri "was considered to have surpassed the Holy RaShaSh..." ,
    that statement is outrageously presumptuous. Considered by WHO ? Who alive today can estimate relativity to the RaShaSh ?!!!
    ===============================
    As far as why these can't be considered "elu velu..." is simple. How can something that R' Vital in the name of the Ari and the Ben Ish Hai in the name of R' Vital say is kefira be considered "elu v'elu..." It either is kefira or it is not. We are not talking about a simple question of how many partzufim are in each sephira and how the sephirot are arranged. We are talking things that major Rabbanim and Mekubalim have said that to think in such a way is kefira.

    As far as who said this statement about R' Kaduri, they would be R' Ovadia Yosef, R' Mordechai Eliyahu, and R' Moshe Tzadaka, at the funeral of R' Kaduri. As well as being whispered by several of the Roshei Yeshivot of Kabbalistic Yeshivot. It is also rumored that R' Eliashiv made a similar statement, though I have no solid support for that.

    The sentiment is universal enough that on just about any biography that you search for the RaShaSh you find this statement

    The recently-departed, great 20th century kabbalist, Rabbi Yitzhak Kaduri, who is considered greater than the Rashash, was even a great admirer of the Rashash, was noted for praying using 'Rashash intentions'.
    As the below links will show.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shalom_Sharabi

    http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Rashash

    http://www.answers.com/topic/shalom-sharabi

    http://www.jewishsearch.com/article_449.html

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hi, I'm back. As you realize, I mainly spend my time in Beis Midrash, not commenting on blogs.

    My goal was to provide text sources for employing terminology similar to Cunin's. You have seen the Rebbe (who of course writes often that only G-d runs the world, and that as a Rebbe, he is merely a mortal of flesh and blood), and R. Mendel of Vitepsk (along with the Ruzhiner). I also cited the ירושלמי which is the basis for this idea.

    As I mentioned, similar ideas are expressed by the Kedushas Levi and the Ohev Yisroel regarding התחת אלקים אני. They state that אלקים is a relative state; one can reach above the דרגא of אלקים, and then one can accomplish what one wants. The Toldos Yaakov Yosef writes that Hashem's issues forth only the אותיות for his השפעות. It is the שליח, the צדיק, that is charged with arranging the letters to spell whatever specific השפעה is needed (and מעשה רב, that the בעש"ט changed a state of רעש to a state of ערש).

    That a Tzadik could do that is a universal belief; that's what underlies the concept of קבלה מעשי[ו]ת. A perhaps blunt way of referring to all of the above is that the Tzadik is מנהיג את העולם.

    There are many other sources, but I will not belabor myself and you. If you are reading this, I trust you can also do the research yourself in the appropriate ספרים.

    Having accomplished what I intended, I trust that I can safely exit the conversation on this blog having vindicated R. Cunin, at least a tenth of the world's religious Jewry, and our sacred השקפות.

    I will end with a recommendation: 100 years before the בעל שם טוב, the חיד"א's grandfather authored the ספר חסד לאברהם. It was intended as a primer on Kabbala's השקפה on all aspects of Judaism. It is solidly based on קבלת הרמ"ק והאר"י. It was universally accepted.

    I dare say there isn't a "strange" idea in Chabad or Chassidus itself that isn't found there. I also dare say that until every concept of that ספר is מונח במושכל ראשון, that is, patently obvious, one is disqualified from מביע דעה בהשקפה at all.

    I would phrase it like this: every religion has its culture; one reason why many irreligious (or modern) scholars are led to erroneous conclusions regarding Judaism is because it is precisely this cultural understanding that they are lacking. It's as if they are missing a third dimension, without which all the books in the world will remain inscrutable. They err in refusing to realize this.

    Similarly, many on this blog and others make the identical error. For instance, posters have insisted that התקשרות to a צדיק is a violation of the fifth עיקר. In truth, ספרים such as these explain that the principle only applies to prayer for one's needs. But as regards דביקות, one certainly does use the תורה, the מצוות, and yes, a צדיק, as a medium to connect to G-d, even to his essence.

    The ספר חסד לאברהם serves as framework through which to understand everything that has been written and printed previously and subsequently. I am confident that after one acquaints himself with its concepts, one will see everything in a completely different light. It is more than כמות, it is איכות.

    Not surprisingly, one chapter in this ancient ספר is on צדיקים והנהגת העולם.

    **

    And lastly, to our friend the Mekubal.

    I have not been blessed with the ability to produce such a prolific amount of material in such a limited amount of time. I count on this being my last comment.

    Before I leave though, I wish to clarify a few things.

    But as a prologue, let me just say something on rhetoric versus substance. Throughout these discussions, the thing I found most difficult to engage, was your rhetoric. The same points posed as questions or inquiries (especially since you say you have not learned much of Chabad's Torah), could be answered with ease to everyone's satisfaction. While when you frame everything as assertive declarations, and contend that I am in fact merely attempting to defend "missionaries", my chances of successfully responding are greatly reduced. My every word is limited to whatever space you've left for my existence. And that's not fair.

    Now bearing in mind that this comment is my last, I will address some of your points בניחותא.

    1) the פרדס שער עצמות וכלים has a lengthy discussion on the גדר of ספירות etc. Nothing he says is different than what תורת חב"ד has to say. So anything you've understood otherwise, is merely your own misunderstanding. It is also inconceivable that you should already proclaim with certainty that חב"ד is at odds with the Arizal etc. That is not fitting behavior for someone who endeavors to represent all of Kabbala on a blog. This is a topic that entire ספרי חב"ד are devoted to. Please do not ask any further questions before reading them.

    2) re אנכי מי שאנכי, the ספרי חב"ד devote a lot of time to the discussion of the exact גדר of משה רבינו and his אתפשטותא דבכל דור ודור. I provided you with a link to that information on the old comments page. Suffice it to say, that every single page of עץ חיים is quoted somewhere or another in ספרי חב"ד. There is nothing they could possibly say that is at odds with the very texts they quote. I could answer your specific question, but I'm sure you understand that this is really beyond the scope of this blog, and it is not fair to challenge me to explain this here and now.

    3) Do you think that I degraded your teachers? I'm sorry, but neither you nor they are entitled to degrade the Baal HaTanya and Chassidus. You should understand that you cannot refer to the Tanya as a poisonous vine without deserving a מחאה כדת וכדין.

    4) you say that you have a קבלה from R. Kaduri who received from the Ben Ish Chai. This cannot be true, for R. Kaduri is reputed to have tought himself Kabbala when already in Eretz Yisroel. He merely met the Ben Ish Chai as a child.

    Also, R. Kaduri signed a joint letter with the Baba Sali in response to violance against Lubavitchers who taught Tanya in Williamsburg. The letter stated that Chabad is entitled to teach their Torah to everyone as יסודתה בהררי קודש. Every time R. Shach would speak against Chabad, R. Kaduri would issue hand-written counter-statements negating R. Shach. Your reports don't seem very reliable.

    5) While Kabbala may have been transmitted in Iraq as well, you must understand that the premier site of study and scholarship has been the European continent. Chassidim are the Mekubalim of Europe. The Baal HaTanya is one of the ראשי המקובלים of Europe. This is not Kabbala versus Chabad. Chabad is just as a legitimate Kabbalistic circle as any other. Your entire attitude demonstrated that you don't realize this.

    6) To say that the Baal HaTanya is more famous than you teachers because of their humility is disgusting. Firstly, when the Tanya was first printed (and instantly became a European best-seller) it was widely hailed as being written by a great עניו for it was printed anonymously. His "fame" and stature derive from the fact that thousands of European Rabbanim and Mekubalim accepted him as the undisputed king. They wouldn't put the Rashash, never mind R. Kaduri va'chaveirov anywhere near that. You can ignore the majority of Klal Yisroel but don't expect everyone to join you under the table (to borrow from R. Nachman).

    The descendants of those Europeans also don't consider today's Mekubalim qualified to determine the status of Mekubalim past and present.

    *

    I hope that settles most issues sufficiently, at least until Nittel Nacht next year...

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hashem THE source of blessing!December 25, 2008 at 10:07 AM

    I would like to post the words of the Rebbe in his letter where he states the need to put the trust in Hashem more than in a human of flesh and blood (even in a Tzadik like the Rebbe!).

    עמוד 30 (הערה :נכתבה כז חשון ל"ד אשה שהפילה ר"ל לאחרי שקיבלה מענה וברכת כ"ק אדמור שאם ישמרו טהרת המשפחה לא תחשוש מלתהעבר וכפי דבריהם שמרו בכל הפרטים הפילה עוה"פ והאשה חזרה וכתבה לכ"ק אדמו"ר ולא קיבלה מענה על מכתבה וביקשה לשאול פירש הדבר שאחרי הברכה והמענה היה יכול להיות כזאת ):

    “..., ד- הזוג שכחו שהשם הוא מקור הברכה ונותנה וכו' ובטחו רק בבן אדם בשר ואדם, בי...”.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Since Chabad Philosophy is known to be derived partially from Sheloh, I thought an appropriate quote: In the parshah veyshev-miketz-vayigash page 27a "והוא יוסף...והוא העמוד שהעולם עומד עליו כי העולם עומד על עמוד אחד וצדיק שמו...וסוד ענין כי הצדיק הוא יסוד עולם, וכל השפעות וצינורות הספירות הכל הם ביסוד ומיסוד הולך צינור אל המלכות כמבואר בפרדס בשער הצינורות, והלכות הוא מנהיג העולמות מכח הסיפרות בכח א"ס המשפיעים בה ע"כ נקרא מלכות עולם. ומי הוא העמוד שבו קיום העולם הזה שזכרתי שהיא המלכות הוא עמוד הצדיק יסוד כלומר הצינור שהלך מיסוד אל המלכות ....":

    It's the conduit that carries all the flow of energy and therefore considered the pillar upon which the world stands on, but the actual "running" of the world is through malchut by the power of the EYN SOF that flows there. G-D RUNS THE WORLD!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Uriel,

    Actually the same is echoed in the works of the first Lubavitcher Rebbe, Baal HaTanya. IN one of his works, Torah Ohr, amud lamed zayin (37) column one he writes: "...הנבראים מקבלים חיות מן הבורא ית'..על ידי בחינת מלוכה, שלפי שהוא ית' מלך עליהם הם חיים וקיימים...ואתה מחי' את כולם וצבא השמים לך משתחוים פי' כי לפי שאתה מחיה את כולם לכך וצבא השמים לך משתחוים בבחי' בטול והתכללות. והנה בחי' בטול זה הוא באוק א"ס ב"ה הנמשך ומתלבש בבחינת מלוכה להחיותם כי אליו ולא למדותיו כו'....טובך הוא השפעה וחיות שנמשך מעולם עד עולם כמ"ש אמרו צדיק כי טוב שהטוב הוא בחינת צדיק שהוא המקשר ומשפיע מעולם עד עולם כמו שכתוב ...ירידת מדרגות עד שיאיר אוא"ס ב"ה בבחינת מלכותו להוות ולהחיות נבראים עד אין קץ "

    The running of the worl comes from the Or Eyn Sof Baruch Hu (ALimighty) that is vested in malchut (and the nullification is towards "eylav to HIm Himself an not to vessels where the light vests itself in). The Tzadik represents the level which connects and sends forth all the hashpaot from "world to world". The source of flow is from the ALmighty; the "running of the world" is THE ALMIGHTY (elav velo LEMIDOTAV) the conduit that connects and brings down the flow of lfie is the level of Yessod the Tzadik HaYessod!.

    Like wise he writes a little later in column 3 of the same page: "ועל דרך זה תיקנו רז"ל ברכות המצות לפני כל מצוה ברוך אתה ...מלשון המבריך הגפן שכופף ראש הזמורה לארץ ומשם צומח גפן אחר, והיינו בחינת השפעה והברכה מעולם עד עולם לכן כתיב גבי יוסף ויקראו לפניו "אברך" לפי שהיה צדיק המקשר ומפשיע ומבריח מעולם עד עולם. וענין ברכה זו הוא להיות המשכה והברכה מעולם עד עולם כדי להיות גילוי מלך העולם להיות בחינת עולם בבחינת מלך דהיינו שיהא גילוי מלכותו ית' נראה לעין כל העולם שלא יהא העולם בבחינת העלם והסתר על בחינת המלוכה...":

    Again he elaborates the role of the Tzadik to bring down and connects the flow of life from Hashem so that there can be the revelation of the Kingdom of the Almighty! that it will be seen to everyone THAT HASHEM IS RUNNING THE WORLD! without anything concealing on His Kingdom! (and obviously as said before "elav veloy lemidotav").

    ReplyDelete
  16. Rabbi I live in crown heights, and i'm very confused by what i was taught- and I'm interested in getting in touch with you- how do i do that?

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.