Tanya/ Iggeres Ha’Kodesh - The Holy Epistle, Epistle 15, Class 6
___
The category of netzach also comprises prevailing39 and standing up against anything, from within or from without, that withholds from his son the transmission of beneficial influence or learning.
וְגַם בִּכְלַל בְּחִינַת "נֶצַח" הוּא לְנַצֵּחַ וְלַעֲמוֹד נֶגֶד כָּל מוֹנֵעַ הַהַשְׁפָּעָה וְהַלִּימּוּד מִבְּנוֹ מִבַּיִת וּמִחוּץ,
“From within” means firmly resisting the attribute of gevurah and tzimtzum within the father himself,
מִבַּיִת – הַיְינוּ לְהִתְחַזֵּק נֶגֶד מִדַּת הַגְּבוּרָה וְהַצִּמְצוּם שֶׁבָּאָב עַצְמוֹ,
for it arouses (within his will) contentions against his son,
שֶׁהִיא מְעוֹרֶרֶת דִּינִים בִּרְצוֹנוֹ עַל בְּנוֹ,
arguing that he is not yet fit for this [profound knowledge].
לוֹמַר שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לְכָךְ עֲדַיִין
There now follows a parenthetical note in the text which states:
(A note in the manuscripts: Omission.)
(בכתב יד נרשם: חָסֵר)
I.e., according to some of the manuscripts which were compared to the previous printed editions of Iggeret Hakodesh when the current edition was being prepared for publication,40 there is an omission here in the text.
The Rebbe notes that prevailing over influences “from without” is even more important to explain than prevailing over influences “from within.” The fact that this explanation is lacking points to an omission in the text.
In addition: According to the translation offered above that “The category of netzach also comprises…,” there is nothing amiss in the Alter Rebbe’s failure to explain a corresponding aspect within hod, for hod comprises no such corresponding aspect. However, the translation may also be rendered: “In general, the category of netzach also entails….” If this is indeed the proper rendition, then the question arises, why was there no corresponding statement as to the general function of hod? Its absence likewise demonstrates that there is an omission in the text.
The Alter Rebbe now goes on to explain the attribute of yesod.
The category of yesod is, by way of example, the bond by which the father binds his intellect to the intellect of his son
וּבְחִינַת "יְסוֹד" הִיא, עַל דֶּרֶךְ מָשָׁל, הַהִתְקַשְּׁרוּת שֶׁמְּקַשֵּׁר הָאָב שִׂכְלוֹ בְּשֵׂכֶל בְּנוֹ
while teaching him with love and willingness, for he wishes his son to understand.
בִּשְׁעַת לִמּוּדוֹ עִמּוֹ בְּאַהֲבָה וְרָצוֹן, שֶׁרוֹצֶה שֶׁיָּבִין בְּנוֹ;
Without this [bond], even if the son would hear the very same words from the mouth of his father [41as he speaks and studies to himself],
וּבִלְעֲדֵי זֶה, גַּם אִם הָיָה הַבֵּן שׁוֹמֵעַ דִּבּוּרִים אֵלּוּ עַצְמָם מִפִּי אָבִיו [שֶׁמְּדַבֵּר בַּעֲדוֹ וְלוֹמֵד לְעַצְמוֹ]
he would not understand [them] as well as now,
לֹא הָיָה מֵבִין כָּל כָּךְ כְּמוֹ עַכְשָׁיו,
when his father binds his intellect to him and speaks with him face-to-face42 with love and desire, because he desires very much that his son understand.
שֶׁאָבִיו מְקַשֵּׁר שִׂכְלוֹ אֵלָיו וּמְדַבֵּר עִמּוֹ פָּנִים אֶל פָּנִים בְּאַהֲבָה וָחֵשֶׁק, שֶׁחוֹשֵׁק מְאֹד שֶׁיָּבִין בְּנוֹ,
The father does not merely want to enlighten his son; his desire stemming from yesod is powerful because it is driven by pleasure.
[43In the holy handwriting of the Tzemach Tzedek, of blessed memory, (in the discourse entitled Ki Yedaativ, sec. 13,44 where this passage is quoted,) the above words (“as he speaks and studies to himself”) are not to be found.]
[בכתב יד קודש אדמו"ר בעל צמח צדק נשמתו עדן, (בדרוש "כי ידעתיו" סעיף י"ג שהועתק שם לשון זה) – ליתא תיבות אלו]
The reason for this omission: Not only is there a difference between (a) what the son passively absorbs when he hears his father studying independently and (b) what he absorbs when his father actively teaches him, but even when the father is actually teaching, the presence or absence of the quality of yesod will determine whether or not his son’s mind will be ignited by the fire of his own desire to communicate.
And the greater the desire and delight of the father, the greater is the influence and the learning,45
וְכָל מַה שֶּׁהַחֵשֶׁק וְהַתַּעֲנוּג גָּדוֹל, כָּךְ הַהַשְׁפָּעָה וְהַלִּימּוּד גָּדוֹל,
because then the son is able to absorb more and the father communicates more, proportionally.
שֶׁהַבֵּן – יוּכַל לְקַבֵּל יוֹתֵר, וְהָאָב – מַשְׁפִּיעַ יוֹתֵר,
For through the desire and delight, and with a contented disposition, his own insight is heightened and amplified so that he can bestow enlightenment upon his son and teach him.
כִּי עַל־יְדֵי הַחֵשֶׁק וְהַתַּעֲנוּג, מִתְרַבֶּה וּמִתְגַּדֵּל שִׂכְלוֹ בְּהַרְחָבַת הַדַּעַת לְהַשְׁפִּיעַ וּלְלַמֵּד לִבְנוֹ
(46This parallels, to draw a metaphor from [the attribute of yesod in] the sphere of the truly physical, the profusion of spermatozoa that results from heightened desire and delight,
(וּכְמוֹ עַל דֶּרֶךְ מָשָׁל בְּגַשְׁמִיּוּת מַמָּשׁ, רִבּוּי הַזֶּרַע הוּא מֵרוֹב הַחֵשֶׁק וְהַתַּעֲנוּג,
through which much is elicited from the brain, which is its source.
וְעַל־יְדֵי זֶה מַמְשִׁיךְ הַרְבֵּה מֵהַמּוֹחַ,
This is why the Kabbalists, seeking to illustrate the imparting of knowledge out of a sense of pleasure, used the analogy of a physical union, for there are a number of similarities between these two expressions of the attribute of yesod, as will be explained.)47
וְלָכֵן הִמְשִׁילוּ חַכְמֵי הָאֱמֶת לְזִיוּוּג גַּשְׁמִי, כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר).
Now, these emotive attributes—those involved in imparting enlightenment, and the like—are the external aspects of the soul.
וְהִנֵּה, מִדּוֹת אֵלּוּ הֵן בְּחִינוֹת חִיצוֹנִיּוֹת שֶׁבַּנֶּפֶשׁ,
Within them are vested the inner attributes, which bring about the external attributes involved in the actual imparting of knowledge,
וּבְתוֹכָן מְלוּבָּשׁוֹת מִדּוֹת פְּנִימִיּוֹת,
i.e., the faculties of love and awe, and so on.
שֶׁהֵן בְּחִינוֹת אַהֲבָה וְיִרְאָה כוּ'.
This may be compared to the case of a father who bestows enlightenment upon his son because of his love for him,
דְּהַיְינוּ, עַל דֶּרֶךְ מָשָׁל, בָּאָב הַמַּשְׁפִּיעַ לִבְנוֹ מֵחֲמַת אַהֲבָתוֹ,
The internal aspect of the attribute involved is love, and its external aspect is kindness.
and withholds his influence because of his dread and fear lest [his son] come to some downfall, heaven forfend.
וּמוֹנֵעַ הַשְׁפָּעָתוֹ מִפַּחְדּוֹ וְיִרְאָתוֹ, שֶׁלֹּא יָבֹא לִידֵי מִכְשׁוֹל, חַס וְשָׁלוֹם.
The father’s fear and dread are thus the internal aspect of his gevurah, the attribute that completely or partially withholds the flow of instruction.
The remaining emotive attributes are all offshoots of love and fear (as explained in Part I, ch. 3, above), and accordingly, they too possess internal and external aspects.
Having dealt with the middot, the seven emotive attributes of the soul, the Alter Rebbe now proceeds to discuss the intellective attributes which give birth to them.
______
39. The Hebrew root of netzach comprises three meanings—to prevail, to be enduring, to be victorious.
40. Note by the Rebbe: “As noted in the Introduction of R. Asher Shu”b [p. 2 of the standard Hebrew Tanya], the printed letters of Iggeret Hakodesh were compared to copyists’ manuscripts (and not to the Alter Rebbe’s original letters).”
41. Brackets are in the original text.
42. Note by the Rebbe: “Though it is possible to understand the acronym פא"פ as meaning פה אל פה (‘mouth to mouth,’ i.e., without an intermediary; cf. Ibn Ezra on Parashat Behaalotcha 12:8), the phrase פנים אל פנים (‘face-to-face’) describes a higher level [of communication and is therefore the preferred rendition], for here, the Alter Rebbe is speaking of the highest qualities of yesod to the degree that the father ‘desires greatly.’ Moreover, it is specifically this phrase (‘face-to-face’) that is the antithesis of the contrasting situation described above, in which the father ‘speaks to himself.’”
43. Brackets are in the original text.
44. Printed in Or Hatorah, Vayera 98b.
45. Note by the Rebbe: “Perhaps this should read גדל [with a kamatz and tzeirei so that the sentence would mean, ‘And the more the desire and delight of the father grow, the more do the influence and the learning grow’], instead of גדול [with a kamatz and cholam, as translated above].”
46. Parentheses are in the original text.
47. In his Hebrew annotations to the original Yiddish text of the present work, the Rebbe explains why the Alter Rebbe does not discuss the attribute of malchut. The learned explanation, which hinges on the comparative dynamics of the various sefirot, is not readily translatable.