2054 —הבדלים בין השפעה על ידי לבוש או מעבר, ורמות המחשבה

B"H, 15 Adar, 5713.

Brooklyn.

Haraha"g vavac"h iy"a oseik b-tzt"z cho"b etc. Yitzchak Hutner

Shalom u'Vrachah!

In response to your letter from the 9th of Adar regarding your comments on Biurei Zohar Parshas Vayechi, page 30a. You ask how it is possible for there to be an influence from the Sefirah of Yesod without going through the Sefirah of Malchus. Indeed, you are correct that all influences in the worlds must come through Malchus; however, there is a difference whether this occurs through enclothing or by way of passing through. If it is by means of enclothing, it is called by the name of the garment, as explained in Tanya, Kuntres Acharon, page 158a. This matter is also discussed in Hemshech Resav (which I believe you have), discourse beginning "Ko Amar Berisi Yomam V'Lailah," and in many places in Chassidus.

Thank you for your comment regarding what is explained in Even HaEzer about the distinction between hirhur (contemplation) and machshavah (thought), based on what is written in Chiddushei HaRashba on Berachos 15: "In contemplation there is no concept of speech." However, if we understand Rashba's words simply—that "no concept of speech applies," meaning one thinks about matters but not their letters—then it would be difficult based on what we find in Shas that even such contemplation is considered as speech. Therefore, from Scripture we must learn both ideas: that one must make it audible to his own ears and that it can be said in any language. Perhaps one could interpret Rashba with difficulty as meaning that there is no sanctity of language and its advantage—and then this would also fit with what is explained in Biurei Zohar. Now I saw in Tzelach (15d): "See Chiddushei Rashba who wrote that if one fulfills with intention of the heart, it proves he fulfills in any language since intention is primary."—and this pleased me.

With honor and blessing.

Note: A) The words in Biurei Zohar are based on what is written in Likkutei Torah by the Arizal at the beginning of Bereishis: why creation began—thought, contemplation, speech, and action correspond to Atzilus, Beriah, Yetzirah, Asiyah (Avi"a). It is known that the reason for the name Beriah (creation) is because it comes from nothingness into existence—as Ramban explains at the beginning of his commentary—and that vessels first exist in Beriah. It is explained elsewhere that letters and vessels are essentially identical. Yet apparently this contradicts what is written in Zohar III 229b that contemplation and thought are Chochmah and Binah—which seems opposite to all above—(also brought in Pardes Shaar Archei HaKinuyim under Machshavah). I have not yet found anyone who comments on this. Seemingly one could say there exists a contemplation higher than thought and a contemplation lower than thought; for generally contemplation means something light without substance; contemplation lower than thought means lighter than speech; contemplation higher than thought means lighter than thought itself; this can be connected to what follows:

B) It is clear and simple that although generally contemplation excludes thought, sometimes it includes even very subtle thought. This phenomenon appears with many synonyms: although they differ generally or especially when both appear together, often when only one term appears it includes also the other(s). For example: "Contemplations... are more severe than sin," which refers even to very subtle thoughts not yet formed into letters—even higher—as seen from Rabbeinu Bachya on Nitzavim 29:18 s.v. "And if someone asks." See also Moreh Nevuchim II ch.8 (in Bachya's edition ch.25; apparently should be III ch.8). Similarly see Tanya ch.12: "But immediately upon its ascent..."

C) Seemingly according to the distinction between contemplation and thought one can explain Shas Kritut 19b regarding intent versus thought: since he forgot—what difference does his earlier intent make at time of action? Thus it must be that even at time of action there remains intent even if he thinks differently then; according to above this would mean one aspect relates to contemplation and another to thought (and 'thought' here parallels 'garab' in Bechoros 41a). Much more could be said.

I am enclosing herewith the booklet I suggested should be studied during last Purim.

Summary

The Rebbe distinguishes between different modes of spiritual influence—whether via enclothing or mere passage—and clarifies nuanced differences between levels of thought such as hirhur and machshavah using sources from Tanya and Zohar for deeper understanding.