8237 —אודות שינוי שם ושימוש במילה 'מוכרח' בנוגע לה'

Shalom u'Vrachah!

Regarding your question about a name: It is brought in early and later halachic authorities that a person is the owner of his name, and if he changes it—even if you would say this constitutes a change—this becomes his name for all purposes.

I have read your articles (in the Toronto newspaper) about mitzvos, and you use several times the expression 'must' in reference to G‑d. Even though such language and similar terms like 'nature,' etc., are commonly used in many places—even in Kabbalistic works (see Pardes at the end of Sha'ar Beis, Eitz Chaim Sha'ar Alef at its beginning, Shomer Emunim Dialogue I section 141 onward and II section 113 onward, etc.)—it is understood that some explanation is required here. For there is no compulsion above, G‑d forbid; He is nimna ha-nimna'os (that which is impossible remains impossible for Him as well—see Responsa Rashba section 418), and this is also the conclusion of Chassidus.

The point is: We see that G‑d desired creation to follow certain laws and an established order (and He could—and even now can—desire otherwise). According to this order, the emergence of the Sefiros becomes necessary (for one of the laws is that what emerges from something simple must also be simple), etc., etc.

Part of this was printed in Likkutei Sichos vol. 7 p. 308; part in vol. 16 p. 572; and completed according to a copy from the secretariat.

Regarding the name: See also below letter Cheshvan. Must = muchrach (necessary/compelled). For its point: see also Likkutei Sichos vol. 30 p. 3 and elsewhere.

Summary

The Rebbe clarifies that while names can be changed according to halachah, using terms like 'must' regarding G‑d requires explanation since G‑d acts by choice, not compulsion; creation follows an order only because He desires it so.