Daily Tanya

Now, at first glance, what the words of this passage imply to those who lack understanding10

is that the study of [the laws of] ritual prohibition and permission and the Order of Taharot, where the laws of purity and impurity are found, relates [only] to the Tree of [Knowledge of] Good and Evil.

Now, this is most surprising in itself, that a particular area within the Torah should be designated as the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, thus relating it to kelipat nogah, which is an admixture of good and evil;

moreover, this contradicts the plain meaning of Scripture and the teachings of our Sages, of blessed memory, that the entire Torah that has been revealed to us and to our children, i.e., the dimension of nigleh, is called “a tree of life to those who hold fast to it”11 and not only the Book of the Zohar.

This is especially so since [the Zohar] was [still] concealed in their days;

indeed, the whole wisdom of the Kabbalah was hidden in their days and concealed from all the Torah scholars, except for a select few,

and even then, [it was studied] in a concealed manner and not publicly, as stated in the Gemara.12

Thus, Rabbi Yitzchak Luria, of blessed memory, stated13 that it is only in these latter generations that “it is permitted and obligatory to reveal this wisdom”—i.e., the Kabbalah, which illuminates the esoteric dimension of the Torah—but not in the earlier generations.

R. Shimon bar Yochai, too, stated in the sacred Zohar14 that permission to reveal [the secrets of the Kabbalah] was only granted to himself and his associates.

Now, this, too, is a remarkable wonder.

For if so, i.e., according to a superficial reading of the above quotation from Raaya Mehemna, from which it would appear that only the Zohar is called the Tree of Life while the revealed plane of the Torah is considered the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil,

then the study of [the laws of] ritual prohibition and permission, and surely [the study of] civil laws, such as litigation on monetary matters,15 should not override the obligation of prayer,

which is set out according to the secrets of the Zohar and on the supernal unions (of the various Divine Names and supernal sefirot) for those who are familiar with them,

such as R. Shimon bar Yochai and his associates.

But this is not the case. In fact, the study of the laws of what is ritually prohibited or permitted, and even the study of civil law, does override the obligation to pray at fixed times.

As stated in the Gemara,16 R. Shimon ben Yochai and his associates, and likewise any others whose Torah study is their sole occupation, do not interrupt [their Torah study] for prayer.17

[This applies] even when one is occupied with the study of civil law, like Rav Yehudah, all of whose studies were in the Order of Nezikin18 (lit., “damages”);

nevertheless, in order not to interrupt his studies, he prayed only every thirty days19 when reviewing his studies, as stated in the Gemara.20

Also, in the Jerusalem Talmud, in the first chapter of Berachot,21 R. Shimon bar Yochai is of the opinion that even for the Reading of Shema one interrupts only the study of Scripture, but not of Mishnah, the Oral Torah, the study of which is superior to the study of Scripture,22 according to R. Shimon bar Yochai.

He did not differentiate between [studying] the Orders of Zera’im, Moed, and Kodashim and [studying] the Orders of Taharot and Nezikin.23

(24Actually, he [here] contradicts his own opinion, given in a number of instances in Raaya Mehemna,25 that Mishnah (relative to Scripture) is termed a “handmaiden” (Heb.: shifchah), and so on,

and Scripture, the Torah of Moses, is surely superior to the Kabbalah, which is termed a “queen” (Aram.: matronita) in the above-quoted passage in Raaya Mehemna,

while the Written Torah is termed a “king” (Aram.: malka).

(26This is the yesod of abba vested in z’eyr anpin, as stated by Rabbi Yitzchak Luria, of blessed memory,27))

Moreover, we find that R. Shimon bar Yochai dealt considerably (not only with the mere statements of law in the Mishnayot but) also with the argumentation of problems and solutions, which (according to the original quotation from Raaya Mehemna) derive from the side of evil and from the spirit of impurity.

[This he did] even when he was in the cave where legal adjudication, especially in civil suits, was obviously uncalled for.

Indeed, the very fact that he underwent anguish [when forced to hide] in the cave made him worthy of these attainments.

For, as stated in the Gemara,28 he countered every problematic query posed by R. Pinchas ben Yair with twenty-four solutions,

and [R. Shimon] said to him: “If you had not seen me like this,” in this sorry state in the cave, [“you would not have found me like this”].

(29In fact, their principal occupation in the cave—the principal occupation of Rashbi and his son, R. Eliezer—must have been with the teachings of the Mishnayot, i.e., the six hundred Orders extant in those days30 until the time of our holy Master, R. Yehudah Hanasi, who compiled the Mishnayot in six Orders.

For he could have completed the Zohar and the Tikkunim, the Tikkunei Zohar, in two or three months, for surely he did not repeat the same subject twice.31)

Moreover, our Sages, of blessed memory, have taught32 that “Since the day the Temple was destroyed, the Holy One, blessed be He, has only the four cubits of Halachah.” The study of Torah law thus takes the place of the Holy Temple.