The three hundred and forty-seventh "cheder" in the palace of Hayom Yom.
Tuesday, 11 Marcheshvan 5704.
Lessons: Chumash, Vayeira, third portion, with the commentary of Rashi.
Tehillim, for the 11th of the month, from chapter 60 through chapter 65 inclusive.
Tanya: On this day we begin Iggeret 27, from the start of the letter with the word "Ahuvai". The lesson concludes on page 146 with the words "netzach selah va'ed".
On the Torah Or of the Alter Rebbe there are glosses and corrections in the holy handwriting of the Rebbe Rashab, which he inscribed on his own copy of the Torah Or, and they are printed at the end of the Torah Or. There is a set of corrections that the Rebbe Rashab recorded, and among them are quite a number of teachings. Throughout the Hayom Yom, the Rebbe brings the corrections of the Rebbe Rashab in the appropriate parshiyot, integrating them into one of the sayings.
In the present teaching there are two corrections to the maamarim of Torah Or on the weekly parsha, Parshas Vayeira, with a certain reference to one of the maamarim. The first correction, in its wording, "In Torah Or, the maamar beginning "Pasach Eliyahu" (Parshas Vayeira)" — the first of the maamarim in Torah Or on Parshas Vayeira, which opens with the words "Pasach Eliyahu," a quotation of the well-known phrase in the Zohar — "in the section beginning "Vehinei hatzimtzum"".
Here we should take note of something we have already mentioned: unlike Likkutei Torah, in which the chapters are marked with the letters alef, beis, gimmel, and the like, in Torah Or there is no division of the passages into sections. Therefore, when one wishes to note a correction in Torah Or, the wording is "in the section beginning with such-and-such words." And in the section beginning "Vehinei hatzimtzum," which is the fourth section of the maamar, the Rebbe brings a correction from the Rebbe Rashab of two words that should be here.
What is the correction? In the printed maamar it reads "that the aspect of eynayim is the source of the aspect of keilim," and the Rebbe Rashab corrected it to say that "it should read 'which are the aspect of eynayim and the source of the aspect of keilim'."
Let us provide a bit of background in order to understand the subject. In the maamar "Pasach Eliyahu," the Alter Rebbe explains the concept used by the holy Arizal, that the Holy One, blessed be He, before the creation of the world, concealed the Ohr Ein Sof, and in the language of the holy Arizal, "there came to be a vacuum and empty space." The Alter Rebbe explains in the maamar that, Heaven forbid, one should not say that "empty space" means a state in which the Holy One, blessed be He, is, Heaven forbid, not present there. He says: there is the ohr (light) and there is the maor (luminary) — "maor" is a designation for the Creator — and Heaven forbid to say that this is an empty space with respect to the maor. What occurred is that the Divine light became absorbed within its source, and the absorption of the light within its source is called "empty space."
To this end, he brings several examples. One example is from the soul: it possesses many capacities to give life to a body, yet before it becomes enclothed in a body it does not enliven a body. The capacities exist, but they are not active and not expressed, for they have no place in which to be carried out, since they have not yet descended into the body. This state, in which the powers are still within the soul and do not radiate, is in the category of "empty space and vacated place."
A second example from the wise man: when he speaks words of wisdom and teaches, his wisdom is revealed and active; but when he does not reveal his wisdom, and even is not, at that moment, thinking words of wisdom to himself — this does not mean that he is not wise. Where is his wisdom? It is contained within him and is not in a state of activity. This state, in relation to the power of wisdom, is called "an empty void and vacated space."
A third example from the power of sight: when a person opens his eyes — he sees. And when his eyes are closed, does he then lack the power of sight? Certainly he possesses it, only that at the moment his eyes are closed, the power of sight is contained within the eyes and is not active. This state, relative to the power of sight, is called a "void and empty space." These are the examples brought by the Alter Rebbe.
Within these examples, as noted in the tikkun, the Alter Rebbe describes that when the Holy One, blessed be He, does wish to reveal, and to contract, and to make a source for the sefirot — the wording is, as we read in the tikkun, that "the tzimtzum is called the aspect of 'eyes'," meaning as though the eyes are open, as though there is a source to contract in order that there be lights, vessels, and worlds. This is the first tikkun.
The second correction is from the following maamar, "there, the discourse beginning Erdah Na, in the section beginning V'hineh baZohar" — the second maamar in Torah Or on parashat Vayeira — which opens with the verse that the Holy One, blessed be He, spoke before He overturned Sodom: "Erdah na v'er'eh" ("I will descend now and see"). In this maamar he explains at length what this "descent" and "knowing" mean, as it were, and clarifies that there are angels through whom the information about what transpires in the world reaches its Source. Within the maamar he discusses the various types of angels, and even divides them into angels called "males" and angels called "females," with the differences in the roles between them.
Where do we see that there are angels of the category of males and of the category of females? The maamar brings two verses, which seemingly are different expressions: one verse says "the eyes of Hashem, they roam meshotetot throughout all the earth," and another verse says "the eyes of Hashem, they roam meshotetim throughout all the earth." And the maamar explains why in one instance it is written "meshotetot" in the feminine form, and in another "meshotetim" in the masculine form — and it directs this to the two types of angels with their different roles.
And in the quotation appearing there from the Zohar there is one correction. In the discourse beginning "Ardah na," in the section beginning "Vehinei baZohar," on the printed wording "peirush meshotetim" — the Rebbe Rashab corrects that in this quotation from the Zohar it should be written "defeirush meshotetot." This is the second correction.
The third point that the Rebbe brings in the teaching relates to the first maamar we mentioned, "Patach Eliyahu." On this maamar the Rebbe Rashab wrote various glosses and a complete elucidation, and the glosses are already printed today in a book called "Hagahos leDibbur haMaschil Patach Eliyahu 5658," which contains all the Rebbe Rashab's glosses on this maamar.
The Rebbe mentions here a bit of background and history in a few words, saying: "To the discourse beginning Pasach Eliyahu there are glosses from my revered father and master [the Rebbe Rashab] of blessed memory, which he began writing in the winter of 5652" — that is, glosses from the Rebbe Rashab. When did he begin writing them? In the winter of 5652, but he finished writing them later, in 5658; and therefore the title of the printed sefer is "Glosses to the Discourse Beginning Pasach Eliyahu 5658".
There are details here that are not mentioned in the teaching. When the Rebbe Rashab wrote the hagahos, it was for himself, and the matter was not made public. There was a chassid named R' Avraham Paris, who heard that there was a manuscript of the Rebbe Rashab in which he kept for himself hagahos on this maamar. He decided that this secret ought to be revealed, and so he "stole" the Rebbe Rashab's writings, gave them to someone to copy, distributed them among the chassidim, and returned them to their place. Over the years the hagahos were known in an unofficial manner.
According to the story, the Rebbe Rayatz punished the copyist, or R' Avraham Paris [I have seen various sources on the matter]. But it is interesting that the Rebbe, in one of the sichos in 5729, spoke of R' Avraham Paris and said that he was a genuine chassid, and that the Rebbe Rashab said of him, "Would that there were others who steal like this." That is to say, his theft was nothing other than an expression of his thirst for Chassidus, and in its merit, in the end, the sefer was printed, and today it is official, printed, and available as a possession of the entire public. It all began with his desire to reveal the secret — and these are the hagahos of which the Rebbe speaks here in the daily teaching.