לקוטי שיחות חלק ט״ו - וישלח ב / י״ט כסלו

Parshas Vayishlach

Yud-Tes Kislev

1. On the verse¹ "קטנתי מכל החסדים גו׳ כי במקלי עברתי את הירדן הזה ועתה הייתי גו׳" ("I am unworthy of all the kindnesses... for with my staff I crossed this Jordan, and now I have become [two camps]"), there are two opposite interpretations:

a) The plain interpretation (as rendered by the Targum and by Rashi in his first interpretation, and others), that Yaakov crossed the Jordan having nothing at all with him except "his staff." According to this interpretation, it emerges that the words "for with my staff I crossed this Jordan" express (not the kindnesses that G‑d did for Yaakov, but, on the contrary) the materially impoverished state of Yaakov Avinu when he crossed the Jordan. It is a preface that further highlights the greatness of the later kindness, "and now I have become two camps," which is stated afterward in the verse.

b) The Midrashic interpretation (also cited in Rashi's commentary), that "נתן מקלו בירדן ונבקע הירדן" ("he placed his staff in the Jordan and the Jordan split")². According to this interpretation, the words "for with my staff..." themselves contain an element of G‑d's kindnesses^2*.

And the interpretations are utterly opposite: according to the first interpretation, utter poverty; according to the second interpretation, [Yaakov was] worthy of so great a miracle, and in the words of our Sages³: "כמה נפיש גברא כמשה ושתין רבוון, שנחלק להם ים סוף" ("How great is the man, like Moshe and the sixty myriads for whom the Sea of Reeds was split").

2. To understand the connection between the two interpretations (for, as has been discussed many times⁴, all interpretations of the same word, verse, or matter have an inner connection between them),

and especially since in Aggadas Bereishis^4* they come in sequence, one after the other,

we must preface with the wording of the Alter Rebbe in his well-known letter "Katonti"⁵ (which he wrote upon coming from Petersburg, after the redemption of Yud-Tes Kislev): "מפני היות קטן יעקב במאד מאד בעיניו מחמת ריבוי החסדים כי במקלי כו׳" ("Because Yaakov was exceedingly small in his own eyes on account of the abundance of kindnesses, 'for with my staff etc.'") (end of quote, as relevant to our subject).

Seemingly, this is not understood: since the Alter Rebbe wishes here to emphasize the "abundance of kindnesses" that G‑d did for Yaakov (which is what evoked in him the "I am unworthy"), he should also have cited (and, on the contrary, primarily) the conclusion of the verse, "I crossed this Jordan, and now I have become two camps"?

Seemingly, one could explain that with "for with my staff etc." the Alter Rebbe is alluding to the Midrashic interpretation cited above: "he placed his staff in the Jordan and the Jordan split." But one cannot say so, because: a) it still remains difficult why he does not also mention the second kindness, which is stated explicitly in the verse: "and now I have become two camps"? b) Chiefly: if, with the proof from the verse, the Alter Rebbe means the miracle (according to the Midrashic interpretation) that "the Jordan split," then for that very reason he should have cited the continuation, "I crossed this Jordan," in which the miracle that was performed with "my staff" is alluded to⁶?

One cannot say that the Alter Rebbe does in fact mean the entire verse, but for the sake of brevity he cites only the beginning of the verse and alludes to its conclusion with the word "כו׳" ("etc.")⁷. For a) at the very least, the one additional word "עברתי" ("I crossed") should have been cited; b) if so, as explained once at length⁸, it should have said "וכו׳" ("and etc.," with the additive vav); since it says "כו׳" (without a vav), this proves that the continuation of the verse is not relevant to the content under discussion (and the addition of "etc." (or "וגו׳") serves to uphold what our Sages⁹ said, that "כל פסוקא דלא פסקיה משה אנן לא פסקינן" ("Any verse that Moshe did not divide, we do not divide")).

From all this it is understood that the matter of "for with my staff" alone, without the matters in the continuation of the verse, suffices to bring about in Yaakov the "I am unworthy."

3. The Tzemach Tzedek cites in Or HaTorah¹⁰ from the Shelah¹¹ that "כי במקלי" ("for with my staff") is an acronym for "ברוך כבוד ה׳ ממקומו¹² לישועתך קויתי ה׳" ("Blessed be the glory of G‑d from His place; for Your salvation I hope, O G‑d"), and the Tzemach Tzedek adds: "ור״ל ע״ד שנתבאר בתו״א כו׳ בענין משפט וצדקה ביעקב אתה עשית שצ״ל ב׳ הבחינות צדקה ומשפט והיינו ב׳ הבחינות בכה״מ ושיהי׳ לישועתך קויתי וכו׳" ("This means, along the lines of what is explained in Torah Or¹³ etc., regarding 'Justice and charity in Yaakov You have made'¹⁴, that there must be both aspects, charity and justice; namely, the two aspects of 'Blessed be the glory of G‑d from His place' and 'For Your salvation I hope,' etc.").

The explanation of this is: from the statement "משפט וצדקה ביעקב אתה עשית" ("Justice and charity in Yaakov You have made"), it is understood that Yaakov possessed both attributes¹⁵, and G‑d's conduct with him was likewise both justice and charity. Yet seemingly they are opposites: justice means that what one demands is due to him by law; whereas the meaning of charity is that, by law and justice, one is not obligated to give to him, but it is given to him as charity.

Seemingly, one could say that this refers to two separate aspects: from the standpoint of the soul, a Jew can demand his needs from G‑d by way of "justice," for the soul's needs are due to it by law; whereas from the standpoint of the body, he can only ask for them as charity.

This, however, does not hold up, for the verse says "Justice and charity in Yaakov You have made," i.e., both (opposite) attributes are within (in relation to the same realm, the same world, of) "You have made," actual Asiyah.

The explanation of this is: even when one stands at a level that entitles him to demand the bestowal of good from G‑d on the basis of law, as the Gemara¹⁶ says on the verse¹⁷ "שמעו אלי אבירי לב הרחוקים מצדקה" ("Listen to Me, you stout-hearted, who are far from charity"), that "כל העולם כולו ניזונין בצדקה והם ניזונין בזרוע" ("The entire world is sustained through charity, and they are sustained by [their own] strength"), nevertheless one must ask for it as charity, as it is written¹⁸, "לך אד-ני הצדקה" ("Yours, my L‑rd, is the righteousness").

4. This is also the reason for Yaakov's fear of Eisav, although he had already received an assurance about this from G‑d ("והנה אנכי עמך וגו׳" ("Behold, I am with you, etc.")¹⁹). For, true, he feared "שמא... נתלכלכתי בחטא" ("lest... I have become soiled with sin")²⁰, but this itself requires explanation: our Sages²¹ say that "כיון שיצאו רוב שנותיו של אדם ולא חטא שוב אינו חוטא" ("Once most of a person's years have passed and he has not sinned, he will no longer sin"). Consequently, it would follow that Yaakov no longer had any reason to worry "lest I have become soiled with sin," since "most of his years" had already passed²²?

But all this applies when one's own existence occupies a place in his eyes, and therefore the reckoning can bring him to the conclusion that most of his years have passed without sin, and consequently "he is assured that he will no longer sin"; and if he is one of the "stout-hearted," he can demand "by [his own] strength," because it comes to him by justice.

When, however, he stands in true self-nullification, so that in his own eyes he has no existence at all, then, because of the feeling of smallness and nullification, "נדמה בעיניו שחטא" ("it seems in his eyes that he has sinned")²³: he worries that there is a sin, or at least a deficiency²⁴, in his service, and therefore he is inclined to feel that he can receive the bestowal of good only as charity.

5. This, however, is not understood: since Yaakov's self-nullification brought him to the mode of charity, how then can it say "Justice and charity in Yaakov etc.", which implies that (Yaakov had, and consequently that) there must^24* also be the mode of justice?

The explanation of this is: when one truly is (or it seems to him that he is) in a state of asking of G‑d only as charity, this asking for charity is no proof of self-nullification, since he has no other choice. More deeply: this is in accordance with his (self-nullified) existence, measure, and limitation. And, measure for measure, the bestowal from Above also comes according to the measure and limitation that is in charity, as the Gemara²⁵ says that the obligation of charity is "די מחסורו אשר יחסר לו" ("sufficient for his need, whatever he lacks")²⁶, but "אי אתה מצווה עליו לעשרו" ("you are not commanded to make him rich"). One gives him what he lacks according to his "existence," to which he is accustomed (which can also be a great abundance, but still, it is measured according to what he is used to: if he was accustomed to having a horse to ride on and servants to run before him, he must be given this as well²⁷), but "you are not commanded to make him rich."

But when he is in a state and existence in which he is worthy of receiving the bestowals, and consequently he could demand them by way of "justice," and nevertheless he comes to G‑d (not with the claim of justice, but) with a request as charity²⁸, this proves that he has gone beyond reckonings, measures, and limitations, that he has gone out of his own existence²⁹.

And then the bestowal of charity is in a manner that transcends measure and limitation, which is not bound up with his existence and "whatever he lacks"³⁰.

6. These two aspects, [(a) a state of asking as charity; (b) a state of being "stout-hearted" who can demand "by [his own] strength," and nevertheless he asks for charity, whereupon the charity comes in a boundless manner], correspond to the two matters: a) "לישועתך קויתי הוי׳" ("For Your salvation I hope, O G‑d"); b) "ברוך כבוד הוי׳ ממקומו" ("Blessed be the glory of G‑d from His place").

"For Your salvation I hope, O G‑d" means that he can rely only on G‑d's salvation, because he is not worthy of making any claim, and therefore he hopes for G‑d's salvation, as charity.

"Blessed be the glory of G‑d from His place" refers to the drawing down of the glory of G‑d that derives from "His place," the true "place" of the glory of G‑d³¹; and this is drawn down ("ברוך" ("blessed") connotes drawing down³²) to the very lowest level. That is, the drawing down of the Infinite here below, which is brought about through the nullification of existence of "the stout-hearted, who are far from charity"³³.

7. In light of all the above, we understand what the Alter Rebbe writes, "Because Yaakov was exceedingly small in his own eyes on account of the abundance of kindnesses, 'for with my staff etc.'" (and does not cite the continuation and conclusion of the verse): since Yaakov possessed both opposite aspects of "justice and charity"³⁴, which are alluded to in "for with my staff"³⁵, as mentioned above, he attained the level at which all bestowals are in the mode of "kindnesses" and "an abundance of kindnesses"; the bestowal is in the manner of "Blessed be the glory of G‑d from His place," an abundance of kindnesses in a boundless manner. And since the greatness and the "abundance of kindnesses" came to him as a result of "for with my staff," this "קרבת אלקים ממש" ("actual closeness to G‑d")³⁶ brought him to the "I am unworthy" in its utmost perfection, "exceedingly small."

And this is also what the Alter Rebbe continues: since "Yaakov was exceedingly small in his own eyes on account of the abundance of kindnesses, 'for with my staff etc.,'" therefore "ואינו ראוי וכדאי כלל להנצל כו׳ וכמארז״ל שמא יגרום החטא שנדמה בעיניו שחטא" ("he is not at all fit and worthy to be saved etc., as our Sages said, 'lest sin cause,' for it seemed in his eyes that he had sinned").

Since Yaakov stood in utter self-nullification, he attained the level at which the existence and (consequently also) the service of created beings occupy no place at all; and therefore "it seemed in his eyes that he had sinned"³⁷: he stood in a state of "sin" (in the sense of) lack, and of nullification in essence³⁸, and his service held no significance in his eyes³⁹.

8. And this is also the connection between the two interpretations of the words "for with my staff" (the plain interpretation: "לא הי׳ עמי כי אלא מקלי לבדי" ("I had nothing with me but my staff alone")⁴⁰; and the Midrashic interpretation: "he placed his staff in the Jordan and the Jordan split"), for both interpretations express the two opposite movements that were present in Yaakov:

On the one hand, he had nothing at all, and he asks of G‑d only as charity; on the other hand, he stands at so exalted a level that he merits miraculous conduct, "the Jordan split," which itself proves that he is worthy of receiving the bestowals of kindness by way of justice⁴¹.

And the "Justice and charity in Yaakov You have made," which caused the aspect of "I am unworthy" to be in its utmost perfection, was the preface and preparation for the fulfillment of the prayer, "הצילני נא גו׳ ואתה אמרת גו׳ ושמתי את זרעך כחול הים אשר לא יספר מרוב" ("Rescue me, please... And You said... and I will make your offspring like the sand of the sea, which cannot be counted for multitude")⁴².

9. The lesson from this for the service of each and every person:

It is known⁴³ that every Jew has, as an inheritance, a measure of the modes of service that the Patriarchs had ("אין קורין אבות אלא לשלשה" ("Only three are called Patriarchs")⁴⁴). From this it is understood regarding our subject: not only is every Jew fit to ask G‑d for the bestowal of kindness "as charity," but he is also worthy of receiving it "by way of justice."

For since "כל ישראל בני מלכים הם" ("All Jews are children of kings")⁴⁵, therefore (as my revered father-in-law, the Previous Rebbe, once said) even the slightest exertion of a Jew is reckoned as backbreaking labor^45*, and on account of this he can already demand from G‑d all the wealth of the world⁴⁶: children, life, and ample sustenance.

And as the Alter Rebbe says in Torah Or⁴⁷, that if Nevuchadnetzar, who walked three steps in honor of G‑d, was given kingship, etc., for three generations in return⁴⁸, then all the more so with Jews, regarding whom "אין לך אדם מישראל שלא כיבד את המקום [בכל יום]" ("There is no Jew who does not honor G‑d [every day]"); hence "כל טוב עוה״ז כדאי הוא לו" ("all the good of this world is fitting for him").

And the fact that one sees a Jew experiencing suffering in this world is only "להכניעו ולהשפיל גסות רוחו" ("to subdue him and to lower his coarseness of spirit")⁴⁹. When, however, a Jew stands at "justice and charity," that although he is worthy by way of justice, he nevertheless asks of G‑d as charity, which reflects the movement of self-nullification and lowliness, as mentioned above, then the blessing of G‑d "from His place" is drawn down: success beyond all measure and limitation is drawn down in all his affairs, children, life, and sustenance in an ample manner, and all disturbing matters are nullified, so that he may be "יושב בשלוות עוה״ז" ("dwelling in the tranquility of this world")⁵⁰.

10. This is also the connection of these matters to the redemption of the Alter Rebbe. The Alter Rebbe gave himself over with self-sacrifice for spreading the inner dimension of the Torah; he tore himself away from his own affairs in order to spread the teachings of Chassidus, even to the outside. It is certain, then, that he could have demanded his release by way of law and justice; yet he asked for it as charity, as he elaborates in his letters⁵¹, that his redemption was the kindnesses of G‑d⁵², which "הפליא והגדיל ה׳ לעשות בארץ" ("G‑d has done wondrously and greatly in the land").

And therefore this brought about that the redemption was in the manner of "פדה בשלום נפשי" ("He redeemed my soul in peace")⁵³: the opposition to the teachings of Chassidus was nullified, and, on the contrary, they became "with me," in a manner of "peace"⁵⁴, as the verse concludes, "כי ברבים היו עמדי" ("for the many were with me")⁵⁵.

(From the sichos of Yud-Tes Kislev 5726)

---

Notes

1) Our parsha, 32:11.

2) Aggadas Bereishis, ch. 45, 4. Tanchuma (Buber), Vayeitzei 3. See also Midrash Aggadah here.

2*) See the Re'em and the Gur Aryeh, among the commentators [on Rashi].

3) Chullin (7a), and Rashi there.

4) Likkutei Sichos, vol. 3, p. 782, and elsewhere.

4*) Ibid. And so it is in Tanchuma (Buber), ibid.

5) Iggeres HaKodesh, sec. 2 (103b).

6) This is what compels this interpretation, for otherwise, why mention the Jordan? It should have written, "For with my staff I came here" (Gur Aryeh here).

7) Even if we were to say that in this, too, the transcriptions of Iggeres HaKodesh are precise (although they were "scattered among the disciples," as stated in the approbation of the Rabbis, the sons of [the Alter Rebbe], etc.), it appears that in his letters the Alter Rebbe was not particular to write "וגו׳" [when citing a verse] and "כו׳" when citing a [rabbinic] statement (see Tishbi, entry "גמר": "Our Sages customarily, when citing a verse and not completing it... write 'וגומר' ('and the rest')... and when citing a statement of their own and not completing it, they write 'וכולי' ('and so on')").

8) Likkutei Sichos, vol. 5, p. 387, and elsewhere.

9) Megillah 22a.

10) On our parsha, 233a.

11) 295b.

12) In the Shelah there: "'כי ב״מ,' which is the Name מכב״י... from the acronym of the verse 'Who is like You among the mighty, O G‑d.'" One may say that what the Tzemach Tzedek wrote is based on the Shelah, 259a, that "מכבי" is also the acronym of "Blessed be the glory of G‑d from His place." See Or HaTorah, Beshalach, p. 551; the discourse beginning "Mi Chamocha," 5688.

13) Beshalach 63b.

14) Tehillim 99:4.

15) And also what is said regarding Avraham (Vayeira 18:19), "to do charity and justice": "Avraham himself was created only in the merit of Yaakov, etc., and there is no charity and justice except in Yaakov, as it says, 'Justice and charity in Yaakov, etc.'" (Vayikra Rabbah 36:4; cited and explained in Or HaTorah, Vayeira 96a; see also there, 99a).

16) Berachos 17b, and Rashi there.

17) Yeshayahu 46:12. See Or HaTorah on this verse.

18) Daniel 9:7.

19) Vayeitzei 28:15.

20) Rashi's wording here. In Berachos (4a): "lest sin cause [harm]." In Iggeres HaKodesh (ibid.) he adds: "for it seemed in his eyes that he had sinned." See Likkutei Sichos, vol. 5, p. 398, note 67. See also below in the text, end of sec. 4 and end of sec. 6.

21) Yoma 38b, end.

22) For when Yaakov went to Charan (the time of the assurance), he was seventy-seven years old (Rashi, Toldos 28:9). Note also Rashi on his saying, at the age of eighty-four, "for my days are fulfilled" (Vayeitzei 29:21). See Ramban (Bereishis 5:4), that in the days of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov, people's days were seventy and eighty years. Moreover, it had already been said (Bereishis 6:3), "and his days shall be one hundred and twenty years" (see Midrash HaGadol there, that this decree came because of the Flood). Furthermore, Yaakov, the choicest of the Patriarchs, was a prophet (see Rashi, Vayigash 45:27), all the more so considering the Matriarchs (Rashi, Vayeitzei 29:34) and Avraham (Vayeira 20:7).

And although regarding Yitzchak's statement, "I do not know the day of my death," the reason given was that he had reached the age of his mother (Toldos 27:2, and Rashi there), one may say that there the case is different, for once it diverges, it diverges (Gittin 28a). See the commentators on the verse, Vayigash 47:9. [See] above, p. 217 ff.

23) The Alter Rebbe's wording in Iggeres HaKodesh, ibid.

24) From the wording, "I and my son Shlomo will be [counted as] sinners" (I Melachim 1:21).

24*) Especially since the Patriarchs were the "chariot," all of whose limbs were entirely, etc., solely [a vehicle] for the Supreme Will (Tanya, ch. 23).

25) Kesubos 67b.

26) Re'eh 15:8, and Rashi.

27) Kesubos, ibid. Rashi there.

28) See Rashi at the beginning of Parshas Va'eschanan (from the Sifri there): "Although the righteous could rely on their good deeds, they ask of G‑d only an unearned gift." See also below, note 39.

29) In Torah Or, Beshalach, ibid., the matter of justice is explained: that a person executes justice upon himself relative to the poor person, etc. But there, too, it is explained that in the justice that a person executes upon his own soul there is a higher nullification than the nullification of the aspect of charity alone, for justice means not giving nurture and vitality to the superfluities of the body; see there.

30) Note the ruling that one who has two hundred zuz may not take [charity]; [if he has] less than that, one may give him at once (as charity) even a thousand (Pe'ah, end; Tur and Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah, beginning of sec. 253).

31) See the discourse beginning "V'ulam Chai Ani" (Derech Mitzvosecha 178b ff.).

32) See Torah Or 36c, and elsewhere.

33) In Torah Or, Beshalach, ibid.: from the aspect of charity in itself, one arouses from Above the aspect of His boundless kindness; but since it is in the aspect of the Infinite, it "is equal and equalizes," and regarding this aspect it is said, "the spider grasps with its hands," [meaning] that there is nurture for the sitra achra. And through the justice that a person executes upon his own soul regarding the superfluities of his bodily life, he brings about Above the aspect of justice, so that vitality will not be drawn down to the sitra achra.

This does not contradict what is explained in the text, based on the known principle that the nurture of the sitra achra is from the external aspect of the encompassing light, the aspect of "[Is not] Eisav [a brother] to Yaakov," and in order that there be no nurture, this is through the drawing down from the inner aspect of the encompassing light (the true Infinite), where specifically "and I loved Yaakov"; and this comes about through justice within charity, as explained there.

34) See Or HaTorah on Nach, cited in note 17, which explains that Yaakov is called "אביר" ("mighty") as the aspect of Tiferes, which includes Chesed and Gevurah, in connection with the matter of "the stout-hearted," etc.

35) See Torah Chaim on our parsha, 54c. There: "'For with my staff I crossed' is the nullification of will, of fear and teshuvah"; see there.

36) The wording of Iggeres HaKodesh, ibid.

37) See at length the discourse beginning "Vayikanu Ami," 5651. There: "And this is why they said 'we have sinned,' etc., because their service is not true at all relative to the aspect of His true Essence, etc."

38) That is, not that it seemed in his eyes that there was a deficiency in his service, but rather that it is a nullification in essence, similar to what is explained (Likkutei Sichos, vol. 3, p. 36 ff., and in the notes there) regarding the humility of Moshe Rabbeinu, which is an aspect of nullification and humility in essence, like the humility of Keser. See also the Pnei Yehoshua and Or HaTorah cited in the next note (and in Or HaTorah there, that Moshe's request for an unearned gift is like the nullification of Keser; see there).

39) See the Pnei Yehoshua at the beginning of Parshas Va'eschanan (cited in Or HaTorah there, p. 118), that the reason Moshe prayed only for G‑d's kindnesses, as an unearned gift... is "because of the greatness of their recognition of the greatness of the Creator, their good deeds become very small in their eyes, as Yaakov Avinu said, 'I am unworthy of all the kindnesses.'" See also Or HaTorah there, sec. 7.

40) Rashi's wording here.

41) See the Shelah, ibid. (294b, end, and 295a, beginning ff.), that Rashi's first interpretation of "for with my staff" ("I had nothing, etc.") indicates his lowliness, namely, Yaakov's submission toward Eisav below; and the second interpretation ("that he split the Jordan, etc.") indicates his exaltedness, namely, the merit that Yaakov recalled before the Holy One, blessed be He. And these are also the two interpretations in Bereishis Rabbah (76:5) of "katonti": "I am not worthy" [and] "I am worthy."

42) Our parsha, ibid., 12–13.

43) Torah Or, beginning of Parshas Va'eira.

44) Berachos 16b.

45) Shabbos 67a. And in Zohar II (26b, beginning; Introduction to Tikkunei Zohar, at its start): "for they are kings."

45*) Along the lines of our Sages' statement (Sotah 11b) regarding [imposing] women's work on men.

46) See Bava Metzia (83a): "Even if you make for them a feast like that of Shlomo in his time, you have not fulfilled your obligation to them, for they are the children of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov."

47) Mikeitz 31c.

48) Sanhedrin 96a. Yalkut Shimoni, Melachim, remez 244.

49) Tanya, ibid.

50) Along the lines of the wording in Tanya, ibid. Torah Chaim, Mikeitz (78c).

51) Printed in Beis Rebbi, part 1, ch. 8. The Alter Rebbe's Igros Kodesh, sec. 38.

52) Based on what is explained in the text, one can also explain why, at the beginning of the letter, the Alter Rebbe writes "קטנתי מכל החסדים ומכל כו׳" ("I am unworthy of all the kindnesses and of all, etc."). For seemingly this is not understood: the intent was to continue "ומכל האמת" ("and of all the truth"); if so, he should have cited it explicitly. And if the matter of "truth" is not relevant here (and therefore he did not cite it), then the word "ומכל" ("and of all") is also not relevant here?

The explanation of this: the difference between "kindnesses" and "truth" is (as Rashi explains on the verse): kindnesses are what the Holy One, blessed be He, does of His own accord (like the attribute of charity); and "truth" is what He does because of His assurance, and this is the attribute of "justice," for He is, as it were, bound to the bestowal (because of His assurance).

Therefore: since the Alter Rebbe felt (because of his immense self-nullification) that all the good done for him was in the aspect of "charity" and "kindnesses," he did not cite the matter of "truth"; but on the other hand, since the true nullification, and the effect and matter of charity, is when the attribute of justice is also present (that he is worthy of it, and nevertheless asks by way of charity, as explained in the text at length), he alluded to it with "and of all, etc."

One may further explain (and more simply): the Alter Rebbe did not have an explicit and publicized assurance regarding his redemption (as Yaakov had), and therefore he did not cite "the truth"; nevertheless he alluded to it by citing "and of all, etc.," for there was the general assurance that he had heard from the Maggid, as related by our Rebbeim, our Nesi'im.

53) Tehillim 55:19. And as the Alter Rebbe writes in his letter (printed in Beis Rebbi, ibid.; Hayom Yom, p. 4; his Igros Kodesh, sec. 38; and elsewhere): "And when I was reading in the book of Tehillim the verse 'He redeemed my soul in peace'... I went out in peace from the L‑rd of peace."

54) Which is something that joins and mediates between two opposite extremes, etc. (Iggeres HaKodesh, end of sec. 30).

And regarding the connection of the redemption to the content of the verse "He redeemed in peace, etc.": its essence is "peace," as is evident from the Alter Rebbe's wording (cited in the previous note).

55) As expounded in the Jerusalem Talmud, Sotah, ch. 1, end of halachah 8.

---

Key Lesson

Every Jew, as a child of kings and heir to the Patriarchs, is truly worthy of G‑d's blessings by way of "justice." Yet when he nevertheless asks for them humbly as "charity," with genuine self-nullification, he draws down blessing beyond all measure and limitation, just as Yaakov's "I am unworthy" and the Alter Rebbe's humility on Yud-Tes Kislev brought boundless kindness and a redemption "in peace."