Introduction

According to Rambam’s approach, it is possible to understand why the Torah refers to G‑d as wise and as kind, for He is identified with His attributes. However, according to Maharal, it is difficult to understand the Torah’s use of such descriptions, for G‑d transcends all definition.

In resolution: Maharal explains that for G‑d, knowledge is merely an activity. Neither it, nor any of G‑d’s attributes, are identified with G‑d as He is in His Essential state. The Sefiros are like tools through which G‑d works, but they are not identified with Him.

The Tzemach Tzedek questions Maharal’s resolution, because if knowledge is merely a tool through which G‑d knows, that would mean He would know with knowledge that is outside of Him. Thus, there would be other entities – i.e., knowledge and other attributes – that exist independent of G‑d.

The Tzemach Tzedek resolves that difficulty by elaborating upon the way in which G‑d interacts with the Sefiros and the union between the oros (lights) and the keilim (vessels). In doing so, he explains that Rambam’s statement that G‑d is “the Knower, the Knowledge, and the Object of Knowledge” is an appropriate description of the union between G‑d and the Sefiros of Atzilus.

— IV —

Nevertheless, according to the above, explanation is required with regard to the descriptions of G‑d found in the Torah

אַךְ לְפִי זֶה צָרִיךְ לְהָבִין בְּעִנְיַן הַתֹּאָרִים שֶׁבָּאוּ בוֹ יִתְבָּרֵךְ בַּתּוֹרָה

and the titles our Sages ascribed to Him;

וְכִנּוּ לוֹ חַזַ"ל גַּם כֵּן

e.g., wise, generous, etc.

כְּגוֹן חָכָם וְחָסִיד כוּ'

As explained in sec. 3, Rambam had offered a resolution of the question of how the Torah’s identification of G‑d with particular attributes is not a contradiction to the principle of His Oneness. Maharal refuted Rambam’s resolution, stating that G‑d is simple and transcendent, with no definition whatsoever. Seemingly, it would follow that He could not be described as wise. That is not an appropriate term to refer to G‑d, since wisdom is an entity with a specific definition, and He is above all definitions. Accordingly, it is necessary to offer a different explanation of the original question.

To resolve this difficulty, in Gevuros HaShem, the Gaon Maharal continues to explain as follows:

הִנֵּה לְתָרֵץ זֶה אָמַר הַגָּאוֹן הַנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל עוֹד שָׁם וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ

From the very fact that He is utterly simple…

וּמִזֶּה בְּעַצְמוֹ שֶׁהוּא פָּשׁוּט כוּ'

Selections from Derech Mitzvosecha (SIE)

Derech Mitzvotecha dives into reasons behind mitzvot such as tzitzit, tefillin, prayer, belief in G-d, loving a fellow Jew, starting a family and many others. Five generations later, the author`s grandson and successor, the Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, has often advised those seeking to begin study of Chasidic philosophy to study this fundamental work.

as will be explained (Maharal’s explanation is quoted above in sec. III),

עַד כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר (מֻעְתָּק לְעֵיל פֶּרֶק ג')

we are compelled to say that He can also express Himself through wisdom or creation, for if He would not know everything or there would be an entity that did not come into existence from Him,1 i.e., that He would not be able to define Himself in a specific way,

וְאִם לֹא הָיָה בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁיֻּגְדַּר בְּדָבָר מְיֻחָד

Were He not able to do so, if so, this quality would be beyond Him, outside His range, as it were.

This cannot be true, because He cannot be limited at all.

וְזֶה אֵינוֹ כִּי לֹא יֻגְדַּר

Just as it cannot be said that He is defined as being a particular quality, for that would limit Him, so too, saying He does not possess a particular quality would also put a limit on Him. There would be a boundary that would constrict Him, as it were. Thus, He cannot be defined by any positive definition (“He is...”), nor can He be defined by any negative definition (“He is not....”). Hence, we are forced to say He includes everything.2

This matter is clear.

וְדָבָר זֶה בָּרוּר

He knows everything with His wisdom and brings about everything with His power.

וְהוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ יוֹדֵעַ הַכֹּל בְּחָכְמָתוֹ וּפוֹעֵל הַכֹּל בְּכֹחוֹ

And there is no difference between the understanding with which He comprehends all existence

כִּי אֵין חִלּוּק בֵּין הַהַשָּׂגָה שֶׁהוּא מַשִּׂיג הַנִּמְצָאִים

and the other activities He performs.

אוֹ מַה שֶּׁהוּא פּוֹעֵל שְׁאָר פְּעֻלּוֹת

Maharal is thus differing with Rambam, for Rambam distinguishes between knowledge – which he identifies with G‑d – and other activities. Maharal is explaining that our Sages did not identify G‑d with any attribute. By describing Him as wise, they were merely implying that He understands the world with His wisdom.

For understanding is also an activity

כִּי הַהַשָּׂגָה גַם כֵּן פּוֹעֵל

and is expressed as an active verb, as it is said: “And G‑d knew,”

וְיָבֹא בִּלְשׁוֹן פּוֹעֵל שֶׁיֹּאמַר וַיֵּדַע אֱלֹקִים

just as it is said, “and G‑d spoke.”…

כְּמוֹ שֶׁיֹּאמַר וַיְדַבֵּר אֱלֹקִים וְכוּ'

Once we state that His Essence is not knowledge,

וְכַאֲשֶׁר נֹאמַר שֶׁאֵין הַיְדִיעָה עַצְמוּתוֹ

no problem at all should not arise from the fact

שׁוּב לֹא יִקְשֶׁה לְךָ כְּלָל

that His knowledge changes, He gains new information, as it were.

כִּי תִּהְיֶה יְדִיעָתוֹ מִשְׁתַּנֶּה

There is no reason to think that His Essence would change,

וְיִהְיֶה עַצְמוּתוֹ מִשְׁתַּנֶּה

for His Essence is not knowledge.

כִּי אֵין עַצְמוּתוֹ הַיְדִיעָה

He is merely described as all-knowing.

רַק הוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ מְתֹאָר שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ כֹּל

This is the path of life for the entire Jewish people to know and believe.

וְזֶהוּ דֶּרֶךְ הַחַיִּים שֶׁרָאוּי לְכָל יִשְׂרָאֵל לָדַעַת וּלְהַאֲמִין

This concludes his words.

עַד כַּאן לְשׁוֹנוֹ

Similar concepts are quoted in Maharal’s name by his disciple, the author of the Tosfos Yom Tov,

וְכֵן הֵבִיא תַּלְמִידוֹ הַתּוֹסְפוֹת יוֹם טוֹב מִשְּׁמוֹ

in his gloss to Avos, ch. 5, mishnah 6, saying:

פֶּרֶק ה' דְּאָבוֹת מִשְׁנָה ו' וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ

In his text Derech Chayim,3 our master

וְרַבֵּנוּ בְּדֶרֶךְ חַיִּים

gave wondrous counsel that brought about great salvation4

הִפְלִיא עֵצָה הִגְדִּיל תּוּשִׁיָּה

by resolving this question

לְהָסִיר זוֹ הַשְּׁאֵלָה

(i.e., that there could be a change of will Above

(רוֹצֶה לוֹמַר עִנְיַן שִׁנּוּי רָצוֹן לְמַעְלָה

and, nevertheless, it would not involve a change in His Essence, Heaven forbid),

שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי כֵן אֵינוֹ שִׁנּוּי בְּעַצְמוּתוֹ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם)

saying that His knowledge and His potential for activity are all part of His actions,

אָמַר כִּי הַיְדִיעָה וְהַיְכֹלֶת הַכֹּל מִפְעֲלוֹתָיו

as it says: “And G‑d knew,”

כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב וַיֵּדַע אֱלֹקִים

i.e., using knowledge as a verb.

הוּא לְשׁוֹן פְּעֻלָּה

And just as His other acts do not logically obligate Him to have undergone any change,

וּכְמוֹ שֶׁשְּׁאָר פְּעֻלּוֹת אֵין מְחַיְּבִים בּוֹ שִׁנּוּי

In a certain sense, performing an activity does not involve a change in the person who performed it. As soon as he ceases the activity, he returns to his previous state. All that was necessary is that for a given amount of time, he had to invest himself in the activity. His character, who he is as a person, is fundamentally unaffected by the performance of the activity.

However, in a more absolute sense, this is not an appropriate analogy. For while performing the activity and even before (for preparation is necessary), a human being is involved, and afterwards, the activity he performed does bring about a change within him. Nevertheless, this is because man is acting in a world that exists outside of himself. Hence, every interaction with that external environment involves change.

By contrast, nothing exists outside of G‑d. Hence, the activities He performs – His knowledge, His creation, and His maintaining existence – do not cause Him to change.

nor do they bring about multiplicity within Him,

וְלֹא רִבּוּי

so too, these, i.e., will and knowledge, do not bring about change or multiplicity.

כָּךְ גַּם אֵלּוּ

For these explanations, Maharal relied on the knowledge of Kabbalah. Consult that text.

וְנִסְמַךְ בְּזֶה בְּחָכְמַת הַקַּבַּלָּה עַיֵּן שָׁם

This concludes his words.

עַד כַּאן לְשׁוֹנוֹ׃

The words of Maharal and his disciple can be explained as follows:

בֵּאוּר דִּבְרֵיהֶם

They differ with Rambam and his followers

כִּי הֵם חוֹלְקִים עַל הָרַמְבַּ"ם וְסִיעָתוֹ

with regard to Rambam’s identification of knowledge with G‑d’s Essence,

בְּמַה שֶּׁכָּתַב שֶׁהַיְדִיעָה הִיא עַצְמוּתוֹ

as Rambam says: “He is the Knower, He is the Object of Knowledge, and He is the Knowledge itself.”

וְהוּא הַיּוֹדֵעַ וְהוּא הַיָּדוּעַ וְהוּא הַדֵּעָה עַצְמָהּ כוּ'

Instead, Maharal explains that His Essence is elevated and exalted far above the category of intellect,

אֶלָּא שֶׁמֵּאַחַר שֶׁכְּבָר הִתְבָּאֵר שֶׁעַצְמוּתוֹ רָם וְנִשְׂגָּב לְמַעְלָה מַּעְלָה מִגֶּדֶר שֵׂכֶל

and He is, rather, a simple Being

אֶלָּא הוּא הֲוָיָה פְּשׁוּטָה

Who cannot be defined at all.

לֹא יֻגְדַּר בְּשׁוּם דָּבָר,

Accordingly, the fact that He recognizes His truth as it is

אִם כֵּן מַה שֶּׁהוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ מַכִּיר אֲמִתּוֹ כְּמוֹ שֶׁהִיא

cannot be considered knowledge at all, Heaven forbid.

אֵינוֹ בִּבְחִינַת יְדִיעָה כְּלָל חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

Rather this recognition is far above knowledge, in a very lofty way, as explained above. G‑d’s identification with His own Being is not intellectual knowledge, but an inner self-recognition.

אֶלָּא לְמַעְלָה מַּעְלָה עִלּוּי רַב כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל

Therefore, it is not appropriate,

וְלָכֵן לֹא שַׁיָּךְ

nor is it necessary, to say concerning G‑d’s recognition of Himself

וְאֵין מֵהַצֹּרֶךְ לוֹמַר עַל זֶה

that “He is the Knower, … and He is the Knowledge itself.”

הוּא הַיּוֹדֵעַ וְהַדֵּעָה וְכוּ'

With regard to His knowledge of the entities that come into being from Him, it is relevant to speak of the category of knowledge.

רַק שֶׁמַּה שֶּׁהוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ יוֹדֵעַ הַנִּמְצָאִים מִמֶּנּוּ עַל זֶה שַׁיָּךְ לוֹמַר גֶּדֶר מַדָּע

For this was G‑d’s choice: to know the entities that come into being from Him through knowledge,

כִּי כָּךְ בָּחַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לֵידַע הַנִּמְצָאִים בִּבְחִינַת דַּעַת

and through this knowledge they live and are maintained

וּבִידִיעָה זוֹ יִחְיוּ וְיִתְקַיְּמוּ

so that they will be entities that possess knowledge and are limited and defined.

כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּהְיוּ הֵם בַּעֲלֵי דֵעָה וּבִבְחִינַת גְּבוּל וְתַכְלִית

G‑d did not have to create through knowledge. Nevertheless, to make a world as we know it – a world with limited and defined entities and moreover, entities that possess knowledge – He chose to bring about knowledge within His own being and through that knowledge, create our existence.

If, by contrast, He would shine to the created beings from His simple light,

מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן אִלּוּ הָיָה מֵאִיר עֲלֵיהֶם מֵאוֹרוֹ הַפָּשׁוּט

they would also be unlimited and undefined,

הָיוּ הֵם גַּם כֵּן בִּבְחִינַת בְּלִי גְבוּל וְתַכְלִית

and also above the ability to be known.

וּלְמַעְלָה גַם כֵּן מִבְּחִינַת דַּעַת וְהַשָּׂגָה,

Thus, the knowledge with which He knows them is an action, an activity performed that is distinct from His essential being.

וְאִם כֵּן הַיְדִיעָה זֶה שֶׁהוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ יוֹדֵעַ אוֹתָם הוּא פְּעֻלָּה,

The philosophers and the kabbalists were faced with a paradox. There are two axioms of faith that are seemingly contradictory. On one hand, as the Tzemach Tzedek has and will further explain, G‑d does not change, nor is there any multiplicity within Him. He is – simple, undefined, and unchanging.

Simultaneously, G‑d is one with all existence. Nothing exists outside of Him. Were there to be such an entity, it would also be a god, as it were.

Now, since our world is made up of different elements and undergoes changes, how can G‑d be one with such a world and yet be simple and unchanging?

These are the inner issues around which the difference of opinion between Rambam and Maharal revolves. As the Tzemach Tzedek will explain, Chassidus resolves this paradox by expounding upon the interaction between the oros, G‑d’s lights, and the keilim, the vessels in which they are enclothed.

— Mahadura Kamma5

I.e., like one who performs an act of knowledge through the qualities of knowledge and intellect,

כְּלוֹמַר כְּמוֹ שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה מַעֲשֵׂה הַיְדִיעָה עַל יְדֵי הַדַּעַת וְהַשֵּׂכֶל

which are Sefiros.

שֶׁהֵם הַסְּפִירוֹת

Similar concepts apply with regard to the Divine attributes which are identified with the other Sefiros.

For Him, they are only like tools

וְהֵם רַק אֶצְלוֹ כְּמוֹ כְּלִי אוּמָנוּת

with which a craftsman performs work.

שֶׁהָאוּמָן עוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה בָּהֶם

By describing the Sefiros as tools and as actions, the Tzemach Tzedek is clarifying the approach of Maharal who sees them as different from His Essence.

Obviously, the tool is not at all comparable to the craftsman’sessence.

שֶׁאֵין הַכְּלִי מֵעֶרֶךְ עַצְמוּתוֹ

Similarly, knowledge and intellect are among the Ten Sefiros,

כֵּן הַדַּעַת וְהַשֵּׂכֶל שֶׁהֵם מִכְּלַל הַי' סְפִירוֹת

they are keilim,

הֵם כֵּלִים

and G‑d caused them to exist and brought them into being

וְהוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ פָּעַל אוֹתָם וְהִמְצִיאָם

so that, through their medium, He could convey influence to the created beings.

כְּדֵי שֶׁעַל יָדָם יַשְׁפִּיעַ בַּנִּבְרָאִים

For by knowing a created being through the medium of knowledge, He grants it life, bringing it into being from nothingness.

שֶׁעַל יְדֵי שֶׁיֵּדַע אֶת הַנִּבְרָא בְּדַעַת זֶה יְחַיֵּהוּ מֵאַיִן לְיֵשׁ

And just as He performs a multitude of other activities and creates an infinite number of entities,

וּכְמוֹ שֶׁהוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ פּוֹעֵל רִבּוּי פְּעֻלּוֹת וְנִבְרָאִים לְאֵין קֵץ

so, too, he causes the existence of knowledge and intellect.

כָּךְ פָּעַל אֶת הַדַּעַת וְהַשֵּׂכֶל,

There is, however, an advantage to knowledge over the other entities He caused to exist and which were created from Him.

אֶלָּא שֶׁבְּזֹאת מַעֲלָתָם יְתֵרָה עַל שְׁאָר הַפְּעֻלּוֹת שֶׁנִּבְרְאוּ מִמֶּנּוּ

For knowledge and intellect are tools

בִּהְיוֹתָם אֶצְלוֹ כְּלִי אוּמָנוּת

through which He acts and grants influence to the created beings.

שֶׁעַל יְדֵיהֶם פּוֹעֵל וּמַשְׁפִּיעַ לַנִּבְרָאִים

G‑d interacts and works with His attributes. In contrast, the created beings themselves are brought into being from these attributes without direct connection with Him.

From this we can conclude that the different descriptions used to refer to G‑d do not necessitate that there be multiplicity within His Essence, Heaven forbid,

וְיָצָא לָנוּ מִזֶּה שֶׁרִבּוּי הַתֹּאָרִים אֵינָן מְחַיְּבוֹת רִבּוּי בְּעַצְמוּתוֹ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

since they are merely activities which He performs and brings into being,

מֵאַחַר שֶׁהֵם פְּעֻלּוֹת שֶׁהוּא פָּעַל אוֹתָם וְהִמְצִיאָם

and they are not His Essence, Heaven forbid.

וְלֹא שֶׁהֵם עַצְמוּתוֹ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

Thus, we need not say, “He is the Knower…,” as Rambam maintained, or identify G‑d with any other of His qualities.

Similarly, a change in His will does not obligate a change in His Essence, Heaven forbid,

וְכֵן יָצָא לָנוּ שֶׁשִּׁנּוּי הָרָצוֹן אֵינוֹ מְחַיֵּב שִׁנּוּי בְּעַצְמוּתוֹ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

since will is an activity and not His Essence.

מֵאַחַר שֶׁהָרָצוֹן הוּא פְּעֻלָּה וְלֹא עַצְמוּתוֹ כוּ',

And thus the concept of a change in His will – a philosophical quandary debated over the centuries – does not present a challenge to a believer, for His will is merely an activity that He performs.

Nevertheless, these concepts require explanation, and indeed, extended explanation.

אֶלָּא שֶׁדִּבְרֵיהֶם צְרִיכִים לְפָנִים וְלִפְנַי וְלִפְנִים

For if knowledge is merely a tool through which He knows,

כִּי אִם הַיְדִיעָה הִיא כְּמוֹ כְּלִי וְעַל יָדָהּ הוּא יוֹדֵעַ

then He would know with knowledge that is outside of Himself, Heaven forbid.

אִם כֵּן יוֹדֵעַ בִּידִיעָה שֶׁחוּץ מִמֶּנּוּ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם,

This would be a contradiction to His Oneness, for it would imply that there is something – His knowledge – apart from Him. Thus, Heaven forbid, there would be existence outside of Him.

The explanation of this concept is found at length in the Pardes by Ramak,6 Shaar Atzmus VeKeilim, ch. 4,

אַךְ בֵּאוּר זֶה נִתְבָּאֵר בְּאֹרֶךְ בַּפַּרְדֵּ"ס מֵהָרְמַ"ק שַׁעַר עַצְמוּת וְכֵלִים פֶּרֶק ד'

and in chs. 1-3 of that source,

וְשָׁם פֶּרֶק אב"ג

where he also cites two perspectives regarding this matter:

הֵבִיא גַם כֵּן ב' דֵעוֹת בְּזֶה

one perspective, that of Rav Menachem Recanti,7

דַּעַת רַבִּי מְנַחֵם מֵרֶקַנְטִי

that the Sefiros, i.e., ChaBaD, etc., are keilim (“vessels”);

שֶׁהַסְּפִירוֹת שֶׁהֵם חָכְמָה־בִּינָה־דַּעַת וְכוּ' הֵם כֵּלִים

and the other, the perspective of Rav David,8

וְדַעַת רַבִּי דָוִד

that the Sefiros are His Essence.

שֶׁהֵם עַצְמוּתוֹ

The difference of opinion between these kabbalists resembles the difference of opinion between Rambam and Maharal mentioned above.

וְקָרוֹב עִנְיָן זֶה לְמַה שֶּׁנִּתְבָּאֵר לְעֵיל הַהֶפְרֵשׁ בֵּין

Those who say that G‑d is “the Knower…” appear to follow the perspective of Rav David.

דַּעַת הָאוֹמְרִים שֶׁהוּא הַיּוֹדֵעַ וְכוּ' שֶׁהֵם כְּדַעַת רַבִּי דָוִד

Thus, the Attributes – Chochmah, Chessed, etc. – are expressions of G‑d’s light and thus identified with Him, as Rambam states.

And the perspective of the Gaon Maharal appears to be that of Rav Menachem, that G‑d’s light is above all attributes and merely expresses itself through them.

וּבֵין דַּעַת הַגָּאוֹן מַהֲרַ"ל שֶׁהוּא כְּדַעַת רַבִּי מְנַחֵם

Nevertheless, it is also possible to explain that Maharal’s approach parallels that of Ramak who states –

אַךְ שֶׁיֵּשׁ לְפָרְשׁוֹ גַם כֵּן כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַב הָרְמַ"ק שָׁם

and this is the truth –

וְהוּא הָאֱמֶת

that the Sefiros are a composite of His Essence, i.e., His light, as will shortly be explained, and keilim.

שֶׁהַסְּפִירוֹת הֵם עַצְמוּת וְכֵלִים,

Ramak’s approach identifies G‑d’s attributes as a dynamic fusion between the oros (lights) and keilim (vessels).

The intent is that Maharal established a fundamental principle:

רוֹצֶה לוֹמַר כִּי זֶהוּ הַנָּחָה מְקֻיֶּמֶת כְּמוֹ שֶׁהִנִּיחַ הַגָּאוֹן הַנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל

that G‑d’s Essence is a simple Being

שֶׁעַצְמוּתוֹ יִתְבָּרֵךְ הוּא הֲוָיָה פְּשׁוּטָה

that is not within the grasp of intellect,

וְאֵינוֹ בְּגֶדֶר שֵׂכֶל

but is loftier and exalted infinitely above it.

אֶלָּא מְרוֹמָם וּמִתְנַשֵּׂא לְאֵין קֵץ כוּ'

Intellect is brought into being through it, that is,

וְהַשֵּׂכֶל הוּא נִפְעָל מִמֶּנּוּ

He brought intellect into being and caused it to exist,

שֶׁפָּעַל וְהִמְצִיא לִהְיוֹת מְצִיאַת שֵׂכֶל

creating the existence of intellect which is called the k’li (“vessel”) of Chochmah.

וְהוּא הַנִּקְרָא כְּלִי הַחָכְמָה

In it shines the light of G‑d’s Essence

וּבְתוֹכוֹ מֵאִיר אוֹר הָעַצְמוּת

which is a simple entity,

שֶׁהוּא הֲוָיָה פְּשׁוּטָה

for the light is representative of the source of light.

כִּי הָאוֹר הוּא מֵעֵין הַמָּאוֹר

Hence, just as G‑d’s Essence is a simple, transcendent entity, so, too, the light that comes into being from His Essence is also simple and transcendent.

This light grants life to the k’li

וְאוֹר זֶה הוּא הַמְחַיֶּה אֶת הַכְּלִי

and brings about activity through the medium of the k’li,

וְהוּא הַפּוֹעֵל עַל יְדֵי הַכְּלִי

i.e., it gains wisdom through the medium of Chochmah.

רוֹצֶה לוֹמַר שֶׁמַּשְׂכִּיל עַל יְדֵי הַחָכְמָה

Similarly, the light knows the created beings through Daas

וְיוֹדֵעַ הַנִּבְרָאִים עַל יְדֵי הַדַּעַת

and generates kindness through Chessed.

וּמִתְחַסֵּד עַל יְדֵי הַחֶסֶד

The expression of G‑d’s qualities in the world stems from an interaction of the light (or) and the different keilim. The or is the source of life and vitality, because it is connected to its source. Nevertheless, because it reflects its source, which is undivided and simple, it is transcendent and therefore above all particular activities such as knowledge or kindness. Those activities are performed through the medium of the k’li, which is defined according to the particular quality that defines its nature.

Thus, through the k’li, form is given to the simple light which is referred to as the essence,

וְנִמְצָא עַל יְדֵי הַכְּלִי נַעֲשֶׂה תְּמוּנָה בְּאוֹר הַפָּשׁוּט הַנִּקְרָא עַצְמוּת

causing it to be defined as a specific quality,

לִהְיוֹת נִגְדָּר בְּדָבָר פְּרָטִי

e.g., Chochmah, Binah, Chessed, or Rachamim.

כְּמוֹ חָכְמָה אוֹ בִּינָה אוֹ חֶסֶד וְרַחֲמִים

Thus, G‑d does not know with knowledge that is outside of Himself, Heaven forbid,

וְיָצָא לָנוּ מִזֶּה שֶׁאֵין הוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ יוֹדֵעַ בְּדֵעָה שֶׁחוּץ מִמֶּנּוּ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

for the activity of the k’li in truth is attributed to the light and vitality that is enclothed in it,

כִּי הֲרֵי פְּעֻלַּת הַכְּלִי אֵינָהּ מִתְיַחֶסֶת בַּאֲמִתַּת אֶלָּא לְהָאוֹר וְחַיּוּת הַמִּתְלַבֵּשׁ בָּהּ

i.e., the uncompounded, essential light which shines within them.

שֶׁהוּא הָעַצְמוּת הַמֵּאִיר בָּהֶם

In that source, Ramak cites an analogy that describes this:

וְהֵבִיא שָׁם מָשָׁל לְזֶה

the vitality of the soul which is enclothed within the body.

כְּמוֹ שֶׁחַיּוּת הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַמְלֻבָּשׁ בַּגּוּף

It is also simple when compared with the body.9

שֶׁהוּא גַם כֵּן פָּשׁוּט בְּעֶרֶךְ הַגּוּף

When the soul shines within the eye, its vitality takes on the form of the power of sight,

וּכְשֶׁמֵּאִיר בָּעַיִן נַעֲשָׂה בּוֹ תְּמוּנַת כֹּחַ הָרְאִיָּה

and when it shines within the foot, it takes on the form of the power of walking.

וּכְשֶׁמֵּאִיר בָּרֶגֶל נַעֲשָׂה בּוֹ תְּמוּנַת כֹּחַ הַהִלּוּךְ

Thus, the change is within the k’li, i.e., the eye or the foot,

וְאִם כֵּן הַשִּׁנּוּי הוּא בַּכֵּלִים שֶׁהֵם עַיִן וְרֶגֶל

but the activity performed by these organs is truly attributed to the light of the soul within them,

וְהַפְּעֻלָּה מִתְיַחֶסֶת בַּאֲמִתּוּת לְאוֹר הַנֶּפֶשׁ שֶׁבָּהֶם

which is simple.

שֶׁהוּא פָּשׁוּט

It performs different activities because of the differences in the keilim,i.e, the organs,

וּפוֹעֵל פְּעֻלַּת שׁוֹנִים מֵחֲמַת שִׁנּוּיֵי הַכֵּלִים

but it, i.e., the uncompounded soul, is the active force.

וְעִם כָּל זֶה הוּא הַפּוֹעֵל

Similarly, in the analogue in the spiritual realms,

וְאִם כֵּן כְּמוֹ כֵן לְמַעְלָה

the fact that G‑d knows through the medium of Daas

מַה שֶּׁהוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ יוֹדֵעַ עַל יְדֵי הַדַּעַת

comes about through the power of the Essence that shines in Daas,

יְדִיעָה זוֹ הִיא דַוְקָא בְּכֹחַ הָעַצְמוּת הַמֵּאִיר בְּדַעַת

just as the power of sight operates through the vitality of the soul in the eye

כְּמוֹ שֶׁהָרְאִיָּה הִיא עַל יְדֵי חַיּוּת הַנֶּפֶשׁ שֶׁבָּעַיִן

and not merely the eye’s physical substance.

וְלֹא מִצַּד גּוּף הָעַיִן

If so, G‑d does not know through knowledge that is outside of Himself, Heaven forbid,

וְאִם כֵּן אֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ בְּדֵעָה שֶׁחוּץ מִמֶּנּוּ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

for the knowledge stems from Him.

כִּי מִמֶּנּוּ דַוְקָא הוּא

It is only that the transition that enables this simple essential light to take on a specific description and form

אֶלָּא שֶׁמַּה שֶּׁהִשִּׂיג אוֹר עַצְמוּת זֶה הַפָּשׁוּט תֹּאַר וּתְמוּנָה פְּרָטִי

– e.g., to become the form of knowledge –

לִהְיוֹת צוּרַת יְדִיעָה עַל דֶּרֶךְ מָשָׁל

comes about because He brings about this knowledge through a k’li

זֶהוּ לְפִי שֶׁפָּעַל יְדִיעָה זוֹ עַל יְדֵי הַכְּלִי

whose character is defined as the k’li of Daas,

שֶׁעִנְיָנָהּ כְּלִי הַדַּעַת

which parallels our knowledge that involves knowing an entity outside one’s soul.

לֵידַע דָּבָר שֶׁחוּץ לְנַפְשׁוֹ כוּ'

Nevertheless, this does not involve a true change,

וְעִם כָּל זֶה אֵינוֹ שִׁנּוּי אֲמִתִּי

It would seem that the enclothement of G‑d’s light in the keilim would involve a change within the light because it is given a specific character and form as a result of this enclothement. Such a statement would be untenable, for the implication would be that G‑d is changing, as it were, and that would run against the fundamentals of faith, as it is written (Malachi 3:6): “I, G‑d, have not changed.” Among the philosophical difficulties that arise is that this would contradict His Oneness; there would be G‑d as He exists before having undergone the change and as He exists afterwards.

i.e., the light of His Essence does not change in the k’li, Heaven forbid,

שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּנָּה אוֹר הָעַצְמוּת שֶׁבַּכֵּלִים חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

for in truth, it is simple as it was before its enclothement.

כִּי בֶּאֱמֶת הוּא פָּשׁוּט כְּמוֹ שֶׁהָיָה

The intent is merely that the change involves only the activity that is brought about,

אֶלָּא רוֹצֶה לוֹמַר הַשִּׁנּוּי הוּא לְעִנְיַן הַפְּעֻלָּה

To illustrate this concept, Ramak gives the example of light which shines through colored glass, as will be explained.

i.e., in this manner, there is a specific activity, for example, knowledge, that is brought about, enabling Him to know a created being.

שֶׁפָּעַל פְּעֻלָּה פְּרָטִית אֲשֶׁר הִיא הַיְדִיעָה שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ אֶת הַנִּבְרָא עַל דֶּרֶךְ מָשָׁל

This knowledge is actually an activity.

שֶׁיְּדִיעָה זוֹ פְּעֻלָּה מַמָּשׁ הִיא

G‑d’s knowledge of this created being is the life-energy of this created being.

וְהִיא חַיּוּת הַנִּבְרָא

It comes into being from His simple, essential light,

וְנִפְעֲלָה עַל יְדֵי אוֹר הָעַצְמוּת הַפָּשׁוּט

because that essential light brought about activity through the medium of a k’li.

מֵחֲמַת שֶׁפָּעַל זֶה בְּאֶמְצָעוּת הַכְּלִי

Therefore, even though this activity comes from the power of His light, which is a simple entity,

שֶׁלָּכֵן הֲגַם שֶׁהַפְּעֻלָּה הִיא בְּכֹחוֹ שֶׁהוּא הֲוָיָה פְּשׁוּטָה

there will nevertheless be specific activities

עִם כָּל זֶה תִּהְיֶה הַפְּעֻלָּה פְּרָטִית

because of the difference in the k’li being employed.

מֵחֲמַת שִׁנּוּי הַכְּלִי שֶׁבְּאֶמְצָעִיתוֹ פּוֹעֵל

For example, a person can carry out different activities with the same hand depending on the different utensils he employs.

כְּמוֹ שֶׁהָאָדָם יִפְעַל בְּיָדוֹ שֶׁהִיא אַחַת פְּעֻלּוֹת שׁוֹנִים עַל יְדֵי כֵּלִים שׁוֹנִים

He writes with a pen and cuts with a knife, etc.

שֶׁבְּקֻלְמוֹס יִכְתּוֹב וּבְסַכִּין יַחְתּוֹךְ וְכוּ'

Similarly, in the analogue, with regard to G‑d’s other activities,

וְעַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה הוּא בִּשְׁאָר פְּעֻלּוֹת

He performs kindness through the attribute of Chessed.

שֶׁהוּא מִתְחַסֵּד עַל יְדֵי הַחֶסֶד

Thus, the power for this activity comes through the essential light which shines in the Sefirah of Chessed.

וְנִמְצָא כֹּחַ הַפְּעֻלָּה עַל יְדֵי אוֹר הָעַצְמוּת שֶׁבְּחֶסֶד

That light is simple.

שֶׁהוּא פָּשׁוּט

Nevertheless, it brings about a specific activity, a type of Chessed,

וּמַה שֶּׁפְּעֻלָּתוֹ פְּרָטִית מִין חֶסֶד

because it functions through the k’li of Chessed.

זֶהוּ לְפִי שֶׁפָּעַל עַל יְדֵי הַחֶסֶד כוּ'

Similar concepts apply with regard to all the other emotional qualities.

וְכֵן הוּא בְּכָל הַמִּדּוֹת,

The above refers to the activities that He brings about within the created beings

וְכָל זֶה הוּא לְעִנְיַן הַפְּעֻלּוֹת שֶׁפּוֹעֵל בַּנִּבְרָאִים

through the medium of the Ten Sefiros

שֶׁהוּא פּוֹעֵל עַל יְדֵי הַי' סְפִירוֹת

which are ChaBaD, ChaGaT, NeHYM,

שֶׁהֵם חב"ד חג"ת נהי"ם (חָכְמָה־בִּינָה־דַּעַת חֶסֶד־גְּבוּרָה־תִּפְאֶרֶת נֶצַח־הוֹד־יְסוֹד־מַלְכוּת)

The above terms are acronyms for the groupings of the Sefiros: Chochmah, Binah and Daas; Chessed, Gevurah, and Tiferes; and Netzach, Hod, Yesod, and Malchus.

i.e., He knows them through Daas

שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ אוֹתָם עַל יְדֵי הַדַּעַת

and endows wisdom through Chochmah.

וּמַשְׁפִּיעַ חָכְמָה עַל יְדֵי הַחָכְמָה כוּ'

Nevertheless, it cannot be said that He knows with a knowledge that is outside of – i.e. separate from – Himself, Heaven forbid,

וְעִם כָּל זֶה אֵינוֹ נִקְרָא שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ בְּדֵעָה שֶׁחוּץ מִמֶּנּוּ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

because all of these activities are performed with His simple light, as explained above.

כִּי כָּל פְּעֻלּוֹת אֵלּוּ הֵם בְּאוֹרוֹ הַפָּשׁוּט כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל,

It is not, however, appropriate to describe His recognition of Himself with the term “knowledge”

אֲבָל מַה שֶּׁמַּכִּיר עַצְמוּתוֹ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם אֵין נוֹפֵל בְּזֶה לְשׁוֹן יְדִיעָה

and thus be required to say “He is the Knower, He is the Object of Knowledge, and He is the Knowledge itself,”

עַד שֶׁנִּצְטָרֵךְ לוֹמַר עַל זֶה שֶׁהוּא הַיּוֹדֵעַ וְהוּא הַיָּדוּעַ וְהוּא הַדֵּעָה עַצְמָהּ

as Rambam states.

כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַב הָרַמְבַּ"ם זַ"ל

For His Essence is not comparable to an entity that can be known.

כִּי אֵינוֹ בְּעַצְמוּתוֹ בְּעֶרֶךְ בְּחִינַת מְצִיאוּת יְדִיעָה

For the existence of knowledge and conceptualization is a new creation brought into being from nothingness

כִּי מְצִיאוּת הַיְדִיעָה וְהַהַשְׂכָּלָה הוּא בְּרִיאָה מְחֻדֶּשֶׁת מֵאַיִן לְיֵשׁ

which He brought about through the medium of the appropriate k’li as explained above,

שֶׁהוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ פָּעַל אוֹתָהּ עַל יְדֵי הַכֵּלִים כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל

and He Himself is exalted and separate from this knowledge,

וְהוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ רָם וְנִבְדָּל מִזֶּה

to the extent that for Him knowledge is actually like a physical deed.

וְיִחוּסָהּ אֶצְלוֹ כְּעֶרֶךְ הָעֲשִׂיָּה גוּפָנִית מַמָּשׁ

Thus, just as it is inappropriate to say that G‑d cannot be grasped by the power of touch, Heaven forbid,

וּכְמוֹ שֶׁאֵינוֹ נוֹפֵל עָלָיו לוֹמַר שֶׁאֵינוֹ נִתְפָּס בְּמִשּׁוּשׁ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

so, too, it is inappropriate to use the terms comprehensible or not comprehensible in relation to His Essence.

כָּךְ מַמָּשׁ לֹא נוֹפֵל לְשׁוֹן הַשָּׂגָה מֻשָּׂג אוֹ בִּלְתִּי מֻשָּׂג

For these terms are appropriate only with regard to a limited entity,

כִּי כָּל זֶה אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא בְּדָבָר מֻגְבָּל

Knowledge and comprehension involve the objective appreciation of an entity: knowing what it is. This is possible only when the entity is defined and limited. Hence, it is not only that man cannot comprehend G‑d – because man is finite and G‑d is infinite – but rather, G‑d is unknowable, because He defies the very limits of knowledge. Thus, the concept that G‑d is unknowable is plain and obvious like the concept that He cannot be grasped through physical touch.

i.e., any of the entities that came into existence from non-being.

שֶׁהֵם כָּל הַנִּמְצָאִים שֶׁנִּתְחַדְּשׁוּ אַחֲרֵי הַהֶעְדֵּר

G‑d created everything yesh me’ayin, from utter nothingness. By definition, a created entity has specific limits; i.e., it is made in a given manner that delineates what it is. This allows it to be known.

G‑d, Who exists alone, above the entire framework of Creation,

אֲבָל הוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ שֶׁהוּא לְבַדּוֹ הוּא

and aside from Him, nothing exists,

וְאֵין בִּלְתּוֹ

is not comparable to this type of existence.

אֵינוֹ מֵעֶרֶךְ זֶה

He is true Oneness

וְהוּא אֶחָד הָאֱמֶת

and there is truly nothing else aside from Him.

שֶׁאֵין עוֹד מַמָּשׁ

If one will ask, if He is indefinable, then what is He?

וְאוּלַי תֹּאמַר אִם כֵּן מַהוּ,

I have already explained the answer to this above in section 3.

כְּבָר כָּתַבְתִּי לְעֵיל פֶּרֶק ג' תְּשׁוּבָתוֹ בְּצִדּוֹ

For who can have the boldness of heart to research this?

כִּי מִי הוּא וְאֵיזֶהוּ אֲשֶׁר מְלָאוֹ לִבּוֹ לַחֲקוֹר עַל זֶה

How and what will he research?

וְאֵיךְ וּבַמֶּה יַחְקוֹר

For all the senses can do is perceive entities appropriate for that sense.

כִּי כָּל חוּשׁ תּוֹפֵס מוּחָשׁוֹ

And just as one cannot see with his feet,

וּכְמוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יוּכַל לִרְאוֹת בְּרַגְלוֹ

so, too, he will not be able to grasp with his mind an entity that is above the paradigm of intellect.

כָּךְ לֹא יוּכַל לִתְפּוֹס בְּשִׂכְלוֹ מַהוּת בִּלְתִּי נֶעֱרָךְ לְהַשֵּׂכֶל

Instead, the medium with which to realize this dimension of G‑dliness is emunah, faith;

אֶלָּא כְּלִי לִתְפּוֹס זֶה הוּא עִנְיַן הָאֱמוּנָה

to believe that this is the truth and there is no other truth.

רוֹצֶה לוֹמַר לְהַאֲמִין שֶׁכֵּן הוּא וְלֹא זוּלָתָהּ

This is sufficient for a man of understanding.

וְדַי לַמֵּבִין:

Behold, although we stated that the Ten Sefiros are keilim,

וְהִנֵּה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמַרְנוּ שֶׁהַי' סְפִירוֹת הֵם כֵּלִים

for as explained above, His Essence transcends entirely knowledge and intellect – and certainly, He transcends the powers below intellect –

וּכְמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר לְעֵיל שֶׁעַצְמוּתוֹ יִתְבָּרֵךְ אֵינוֹ מֵעֶרֶךְ בְּחִינַת דַּעַת וְשֵׂכֶל,

these keilim are not separate from Him;

אַף עַל פִּי כֵן אֵין הַכֵּלִים נִפְרָדִים

they do not resemble an axe in the hand of chopper, entities with an independent existence that G‑d uses to perform tasks.

כְּמוֹ הַגַּרְזֶן שֶׁבְּיַד הַחוֹצֵב,

Instead, they are also G‑dliness

אֶלָּא הֵן גַּם כֵּן בְּחִינַת אֱלֹקוּת

Were this not to be true, it would be impossible for His light to be enclothed within them, for unbounded and infinite G‑dliness could not be enclothed within a limited being. Moreover, their very existence would seem to be a contradiction to His Oneness, for there would exist entities outside of Himself.

and they are drawn down from the Essence of G‑dliness,

וְהֵם נִמְשָׁכִים גַּם כֵּן מֵעֶצֶם הָאֱלֹקוּת

except that the process in which they come into being involves manifold and awesome tzimtzumim.

אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא עַל יְדֵי צִמְצוּמִים רַבִּים וַעֲצוּמִים

His simple light becomes contracted and hidden

שֶׁנִּתְצַמְצֵם וְנִסְתַּתֵּר הָאוֹר הַפָּשׁוּט

until the entities of Chochmah and Daas come into being from it.

עַד שֶׁנִּתְהַוָּה מִמֶּנּוּ מְצִיאַת חָכְמָה וָדַעַת,

This is the meaning of the phrase G‑dliness (Getlich),

וְזֶהוּ פֵּרוּשׁ לְשׁוֹן אֱלֹקוּת (גֶעטְלִיךְ בִּלְשׁוֹן אִידִישׁ)

i.e., expressions of Him,

כְּלוֹמַר שֶׁהֵם הִתְפַּשְּׁטוּת

but not His Essence.

וְלֹא עַצְמוּתוֹ מַמָּשׁ,

The keilim are nevertheless not separate from Him,

אֲבָל עִם כָּל זֶה אֵינָן נִפְרָדִים

as are created beings which are separate entities.

כְּמוֹ הַנִּבְרָא שֶׁהוּא בִּבְחִינַת דָּבָר בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ,

To illustrate, the Chessed of Atzilus is G‑d’s Chessed, i.e., the love and the kindness that He showers upon His created beings. The Chessed of Beriah is identified with the angels it brings into being, the Serafim, “those that burn.”They are given that name because they are on fire with the love of G‑d to the extent that they are consumed with it and lose their identity. Nevertheless, despite this great love for G‑d, they are nevertheless, separate entities who love Him. The Chessed of Atzilus, by contrast, is identified with Him and does not have any sense of individual identity.

This paradoxical concept, that the keilim are identified with a specific quality and yet are G‑dly, is further explained in sec. 5.

Accordingly, G‑d’s simple light enclothes itself within the keilim

וְלָזֹאת הָאוֹר הַפָּשׁוּט מִתְלַבֵּשׁ בְּתוֹךְ הַכֵּלִים

and brings about activity using them as a medium.

וּפוֹעֵל עַל יָדָן,

On this level, Rambam’s statement “He is the Knower, He is the Object of Knowledge, and He is the Knowledge itself” is appropriate.

וְאָז שַׁיָּךְ לוֹמַר מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב הָרַמְבַּ"ם שֶׁהוּא הַיּוֹדֵעַ וְהוּא הַדֵּעָה עַצְמָהּ וְהוּא הַיָּדוּעַ

For the light becomes one with the k’li in an awesome and wondrous unity

כִּי הָאוֹר מִתְיַחֵד עִם הַכְּלִי בְּיִחוּד עָצוּם וְנִפְלָא

until they become truly one entity;

עַד שֶׁהָיוּ לְדָבָר אֶחָד מַמָּשׁ,

i.e., the knowledge with which He knows

דְּהַיְנוּ שֶׁבְּחִינַת הַדַּעַת שֶׁבּוֹ יוֹדֵעַ,

and G‑d’s simple light enclothed within it that is referred to as the Knower

עִם הָאוֹר הַפָּשׁוּט שֶׁבְּתוֹכוֹ הַיּוֹדֵעַ,

are actually one, with perfect unity.

הוּא אֶחָד מַמָּשׁ אַחְדּוּת גָּמוּר,

And He is the object of Knowledge.

וְהוּא הַיָּדוּעַ,

“There is no power within our mouths to make this statement, nor within our ears to hear it, nor within a mortal heart to comprehend it thoroughly,”10

וְדָבָר זֶה אֵין כֹּחַ בַּפֶּה לְאָמְרוֹ וְלֹא בְּלֵב הָאָדָם לְהַכִּירוֹ עַל בֻּרְיוֹ

i.e., to comprehend how the unity is achieved and what is its nature.

אֵיךְ וּמָה הוּא הַיִּחוּד הַלָּז,

Just as His Essence is above knowledge,

וּכְמוֹ שֶׁעַצְמוּתוֹ הוּא לְמַעְלָה מֵהַדַּעַת

so, too, the manner in which He unites with the Ten Sefiros is above knowledge and comprehension.

כָּךְ אֹפֶן הִתְיַחְדּוּתוֹ עִם הַי' סְפִירוֹת הוּא לְמַעְלָה מֵהַדַּעַת וְהַהַשָּׂגָה

Therefore, the Ten Sefiros are called11 “the secret of faith.”

וְלָכֵן נִקְרָאוֹת הַי' סְפִירוֹת רָזָא דִמְהֵימְנוּתָא

For understanding the manner in which G‑d unites with them and they radiate influence to the world involves faith that transcends comprehension.

שֶׁהֵם בִּבְחִינַת אֱמוּנָה גַם כֵּן שֶׁלְּמַעְלָה מֵהַהַשָּׂגָה,

In this regard, Rambam’s words were accurate when he said: “He is the Knower….”

וּבְזֶה צָדְקוּ דִּבְרֵי הָרַמְבַּ"ם בְּמַה שֶּׁכָּתַב שֶׁהוּא הַיּוֹדֵעַ כוּ'

Rambam did not speak about the transcendent levels of G‑dliness above Atzilus. His statement emphasizes the absolute unity of G‑d’s light with the attributes of Atzilus.

Implied is the negation of the perspective of those who postulated that the Ten Sefiros are separate entities from G‑dliness,

דְּהַיְנוּ לֹא כְּמוֹ שֶׁחָשְׁבוּ הָאוֹמְרִים שֶׁהַכֵּלִחם דְּי' סְפִירוֹת הֵם בְּחִינַת דָּבָר נִבְדָּל מֵהָאֱלֹקוּת

like an axe which is separate from the chopper who uses it.

כְּמוֹ הַגַּרְזֶן וְכוּ'

Instead, they are G‑dly,

אֶלָּא שֶׁהֵן הֵן אֱלֹקוּת

and the simple light unites with them in ultimate oneness as explained above.

וְהָאוֹר הַפָּשׁוּט מִתְיַחֵד עִמָּהֶן בְּתַכְלִית הַיִּחוּד כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל

His Essence, however, transcends them, as explained above.

אָמְנָם עַצְמוּתוֹ הוּא לְמַעְלָה מַּעְלָה מִזֶּה כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל,

On this basis, it is explained in Etz Chayim12 that the keilim of Atzilus become the soul for Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah,

וְלָכֵן מְבֹאָר בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שֶׁכֵּלִים דַּאֲצִילוּת נַעֲשִׂים נְשָׁמָה לִבְרִיאָה־יְצִירָה־עֲשִׂיָּה

giving life

לְהַחֲיוֹת

and bringing into being limited created beings from nothingness.

מֵאַיִן לְיֵשׁ נִבְרָאִים וּבַעֲלֵי גְבוּל

This is only possible because they are G‑dliness, as explained above, for only G‑d can create something from nothingness.

מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן אֱלֹקוּת וְכַנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל,

To explain: All created beings have a specific identity. They are made with a defined capacity of what they can do. To express that capacity is not considered as creating something new. And to act beyond that capacity is not in their reach. Only G‑d’s essence which is truly undefined and unlimited is capable of creating something new and not within existing definitions. Since the keilim of Atzilus are one with His Essence, they too can create.

This is the explanation of the descriptions and titles ascribed to G‑d,

וְזֶהוּ פֵּרוּשׁ הַתֹּאָרִים שֶׁנִּקְרָא הוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ

e.g., the Wise One, the Generous One.

חָכָם וְחָסִיד כוּ'

For wisdom is the k’li of Chochmah of Atzilus, which is G‑dliness.

שֶׁבְּחִינַת הַחָכְמָה הִיא כְּלִי הַחָכְמָה דַאֲצִילוּת שֶׁהִיא אֱלֹקוּת

Similarly, generosity is the k’li of Chessed.

וְכֵן הַחֶסֶד הוּא כְּלִי הַחֶסֶד,

Nevertheless, the concept that G‑d’s Essence

אָמְנָם מַה שֶּׁעַצְמוּתוֹ יִתְבָּרֵךְ

– which is far above the level of Chochmah as explained above –

שֶׁהוּא לְמַעְלָה מַּעְלָה מִגֶּדֶר הַחָכְמָה כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל

is called the wise,

נִקְרָא חָכָם

for the titles are describing G‑d, not merely His qualities.

refers to Him as He enclothes himself in the k’li of Chochmah,

הַיְנוּ עַל שֵׁם הִתְלַבְּשׁוּתוֹ בִּסְפִירַת הַחָכְמָה

at which point He expresses wisdom through it

שֶׁאָז הוּא מִתְחַכֵּם בָּהּ

and knows the created beings through knowledge, Daas, as explained above.

וְיוֹדֵעַ הַנִּבְרָא בְּדַעַת זֶה כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל:

— V —

Nevertheless, in truth, a difficulty remains, for it is still necessary to understand how the Ten Sefiros themselves came into being.

אַךְ בֶּאֱמֶת צָרִיךְ לְהָבִין עֲדַיִן בְּעִנְיַן הִתְהַוּוּת הַי' סְפִירוֹת עַצְמָן

For they are keilim,

שֶׁהֵם בְּחִינַת כֵּלִים

like Daas,

בְּחִינַת דַּעַת

which are not comparable to His simple Essence.

שֶׁאֵינוֹ מֵעֶרֶךְ עַצְמוּתוֹ יִתְבָּרֵךְ הַפָּשׁוּט.

The remainder of Section 5 continues after the Mahadura Basra.

Synopsis

Maharal explains that knowledge is merely an activity. Neither it, nor any of G‑d’s attributes, are identified with G‑d as He is in His essential state. According to this perspective, the Sefiros are like tools with which G‑d works, but they are not identified with Him.

— Mahadura Kamma —

The Tzemach Tzedek states that Maharal’s resolution requires explanation, because if knowledge is merely a tool through which G‑d knows, that would mean He would know with knowledge that is outside of Himself. Thus, there would be other entities – i.e., knowledge and other attributes – that exist independent of G‑d.

The Tzemach Tzedek explains that the resolution to the above difficulty is based on the conception that the Sefiros involve both His light and His keilim. G‑d’s light is simple and infinite as is He, for light reflects the character of its source. This light unites itself with the keilim, which give it form and expression. Thus, G‑d does not know with knowledge that is outside of Him, for the act of knowledge involves both the light (identified with G‑d, the Knower) and the k’li (which establishes a connection with the object of knowledge). He explains this with an analogy of the life-force of the soul that is enclothed in the body and adapts itself according to the nature of the body’s organs and limbs.

This explanation, however, raises a fundamental question, because through enclothing itself in the Sefiros, G‑d’s simple light appears to change. The Tzemach Tzedek resolves this difficulty by saying that the light itself does not change; it is only that the different keilim through which it shines bring about a change in the activities produced. He explains this with an analogy of a person who can perform different activities with the same hand depending on the tool he uses.

The entire discussion above refers only to G‑d’s light. G‑d Himself, however, is totally above our comprehension, for He is utterly infinite and thus undefinable. The medium with which to relate to this dimension of G‑dliness is Emunah, faith; to believe that He exists and that there is nothing outside of Him.

The Tzemach Tzedek then proceeds to state that the keilim are not separate from G‑d. They are called G‑dliness (Getlich), i.e., expressions of Him. For if they were not G‑dly, it would be impossible for His light to be enclothed within them. For unbounded and infinite G‑dliness could not be enclothed within a limited being. Although they are defined – each k’li being identified with a specific attribute – they are not limited, but are G‑dly.

On this level – i.e., as G‑d’s light unites with the keilimRambam’s statement “He is the Knower, He is the Object of Knowledge, and He is the Knowledge itself” is appropriate; i.e., His infinite light (the Knower) is united with the k’li (the Object of Knowledge) producing Knowledge, the Sefirah of Daas as it exists in Atzilus. The nature of this union is, however, beyond our powers of comprehension.

On this basis, we can resolve the question raised at the beginning of section 3. The Torah and our Sages identify G‑d with certain attributes because they are describing G‑d’s Oneness as it exists in Atzilus and not in His Essence. On that level, Rambam’s statement “He is the Knower, He is the Object of Knowledge, and He is the Knowledge itself” applies. Similar concepts apply with regard to G‑d’s other attributes identified with the other Sefiros of Atzilus.

Mahadura Basra means “the later version.” Originally, the Tzemach Tzedek wrote Derech Mitzvosecha at a relatively young age, and revised different portions of it later in life. In the following section, he explains the approach of Maharal – in contrast to that of Rambam – that G‑d’s knowledge is an activity that is not united with His essence. The Tzemach Tzedek then explains the approach of the Arizal as explained by the Alter Rebbe, which fuses together both approaches.

— Mahadura Basra —

Thus, according to Maharal, the knowledge with which G‑d knows a created being is an activity, i.e., like one who performs an act of knowing,

כְּלוֹמַר כְּמוֹ שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה מַעֲשֵׂה הַיְדִיעָה שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ אֶת הַנִּבְרָא

This knowledge is a new creation,

וְהוּא בְּרִיאָה חֲדָשָׁה

comparable to the creation of the body of the created being.

כְּמוֹ מַה שֶּׁבָּרָא גּוּף הַנִּבְרָא,

Although G‑d’s conception and comprehension of the created beings are spiritual, they nevertheless involve the conception and comprehension of entities that feel separate from G‑d. The very conception and comprehension of this separation are, as it were, creations, for they are new entities that did not exist within G‑d’s simple Oneness.

Nevertheless, the existence of a multitude of created beings does not necessitate that there be multiplicity within Him,

וּכְמוֹ שֶׁרִבּוּי הַנִּבְרָאִים אֵין מְחַיְּבִים בּוֹ רִבּוּי חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

because a multitude of activities does not necessitate multiplicity within the O ne who brought them about, Heaven forbid,

כִּי מֵרִבּוּי הַפְּעֻלּוֹת לֹא יִתְחַיֵּב רִבּוּי בַּפּוֹעֵל חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

as the different sages of Chakirah have explained, each one according to his own approach.

מִטַּעַם שֶׁכָּתְבוּ הַחוֹקְרִים כָּל אֶחָד כְּשִׁיטָתוֹ,

The Tzemach Tzedek explains this concept according to Chassidus later in this section.

Similarly, a multitude of knowledge,

which, according to Maharal,is fundamentally a multitude of activities,

שֶׁהֵם גַּם כֵּן רִבּוּי פְּעֻלּוֹת

For Maharal sees knowledge as an activity like other activities.

does not necessitate that there be multiplicity within G‑d, Heaven forbid,

אֵין מְחַיְּבִים רִבּוּי בּוֹ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

for His knowledge is also nothing but a creation and an activity.

שֶׁיְּדִיעָה זוֹ גַם כֵּן אֵינָהּ אֶלָּא בְּרִיאָה וּפְעֻלָּה,

The terms “creation” and “activity” imply that the inner nature of the one creating or performing the activity is not involved in the creation or the activity. It relates only to his external dimensions. When applying this concept to G‑d, this means that since His inner nature is not involved in Creation, the fact that there is multiplicity within Creation does not necessitate that there be multiplicity within Him, for He transcends the beings He creates. Similarly, G‑d’s knowledge of the different created beings does not bring about multiplicity with Him, because it is merely an activity and does not affect His Essence.13

According to this understanding, Rambam’sstatement – that through the knowledge of Himself, He knows all the creations – is no longer fitting.

וּמֵעַתָּה הֲגַם שֶׁלֹּא נוּכַל לוֹמַר מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב הָרַמְבַּ"ם שֶׁבִּידִיעַת עַצְמוֹ יוֹדֵעַ כָּל הַנִּבְרָאִים,

For according to the above explanations, this statement is not true in an ultimate sense.

שֶׁזֶּה אֵינוֹ

For knowing Himself is not knowledge in the ordinary sense,

כִּי יְדִיעַת עַצְמוֹ אֵינָהּ בִּכְלַל יְדִיעָה כְּלָל

but far above the quality of knowledge, as explained above.

אֶלָּא לְמַעְלָה מַּעְלָה מִגֶּדֶר מַדָּע כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל,

Rambam also maintains that G‑d knows Himself in a way that differs from ordinary knowledge. Our knowledge retains a dimension of subjectivity, for the knower, the knowledge, and the known entity are separate. Such separation does not exist with regard to G‑d’s knowledge, and in that way, His knowledge surpasses ours entirely. Nevertheless, Rambam postulates that G‑d knows Himself through His own knowledge, while according to the approach of the kabbalists explained here, G‑d is fundamentally above knowledge. For knowledge can only grasp a limited entity. Therefore, they understand His self-knowledge as being a totally different type of knowledge.

In contrast, He knows the created beings through actual knowledge.

וּמַה שֶּׁיּוֹדֵעַ הַנִּבְרָאִים הוּא בִּבְחִינַת יְדִיעָה מַמָּשׁ,

Just as mortal knowledge involves knowledge of a separate entity, so too, according to Maharal, G‑d’s knowledge of the created beings is comparable to the knowledge of a separate entity, as it were.

To explain: it is written:14 א־ל דעות ה׳, meaning “G‑d is a G‑d of knowledge.” Chassidus explains15 that the plural form of the term דעות (knowledge) indicates that G‑d possesses two levels of knowledge: one in which He knows the creations on His terms – this is the Self-knowledge mentioned above – and another in which He understands them as they perceive themselves, i.e., as created beings with a separate identity. According to Maharal, it is not appropriate to say “He is the Knower, He is the Knowledge…” with regard to either of these levels. On the higher level, there exists no distinction between the Knower and the knowledge, for everything is subsumed in His Essence. And on the lower level, there exists a difference between the Knower and the knowledge, for this lower level of knowledge is an activity that is separate from G‑d’s Essence, as it were.

Nevertheless, the Maharal’s conception that G‑d is not one with His knowledge, i.e., the lower level of knowledge mentioned above, does not raise a question that challenges our approach.

אַף עַל פִּי כֵן לֹא יִשָּׁאֵר קֻשְׁיָא כְּלָל עָלֵינוּ,

For Rambam was forced to say that G‑d is one with His knowledge

כִּי הָרַמְבַּ"ם הֻכְרַח לוֹמַר כֵּן

so that he would not be faced with the difficulty that the multitude of knowledge

כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִקְשֶׁה עָלָיו שֶׁרִבּוּי הַיְדִיעוֹת

knowing every created being in a particular manner

שֶׁל כָּל נִבְרָא

would seemingly create multiplicity within Him.

הֵם בְּחִינַת רִבּוּי בּוֹ יִתְבָּרֵךְ

Therefore, he stated that G‑d knows them all as self-knowledge

וְלָזֶה אָמַר שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ כֻּלָּם בִּידִיעַת עַצְמוֹ

which is one comprehensive knowledge in which G‑d is identified with the process of knowledge and the known entities in total unity.

שֶׁהוּא יְדִיעָה אַחַת,

All of this, however, is only necessary because of Rambam’s approach which identifies knowledge with His Essence.

וְכָל זֶה הוּא לְשִׁיטָתוֹ שֶׁהַיְּדִיעָה הִיא עַצְמוּתוֹ

If so, i.e., if He is one with His knowledge, were there to be a multitude of different aspects within G‑d’s knowledge,

וְאִם כֵּן אִם הָיָה אֶצְלוֹ יְדִיעוֹת רַבּוֹת חֲלוּקוֹת

that would imply a multitude within His Essence,

הֲרֵי זוֹ בְּחִינַת רִבּוּי בְּעַצְמוּתוֹ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

for He is identified with His knowledge.

שֶׁהוּא עַצְמוֹ הַיְדִיעָה,

Therefore, Rambam postulates that by knowing Himself, He knows all the created beings.

וְלָזֶה אָמַר שֶׁבִּידִיעַת עַצְמוֹ יוֹדֵעַ כָּל הַנִּבְרָאִים

Nevertheless, since it was explained that according to Maharal knowledge is not identified with His Essence

אֲבָל מֵאַחַר שֶׁהִתְבָּאֵר שֶׁהַיְדִיעָה אֵינוֹ עַצְמוּתוֹ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

but is actually one of His creations,

וְהִיא בְּרִיאָה מַמָּשׁ מִמֶּנּוּ

then a multitude of elements of knowledge does not obligate multiplicity within Him, Heaven forbid.

אִם כֵּן אֵין רִבּוּי הַיְדִיעוֹת מְחַיְּבוֹת רִבּוּי בּוֹ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

Hence, it is possible that He will know every created being

וְאִם כֵּן יִתָּכֵן שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ כָּל נִבְרָא

and know it in an individual way, with His knowledge of one created being differing from that of another created being

וְהִיא יְדִיעָה מְיֻחֶדֶת מִידִיעָה שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ נִבְרָא הַשֵּׁנִי

rather than knowing everything as one.

לֹא שֶׁבִּידִיעָה אַחַת יוֹדֵעַ,

According to Rambam’s approach, none of the created beings are known in an individual manner. Instead, through G‑d’s knowledge of Himself, He knows them. Maharal’s approach, by contrast, allows for individual knowledge of every created being, for according to Maharal, G‑d knows the created beings from their own perspective.

The many different elements of knowledge are in fact the creation of many entities,

וְרִבּוּי הַיְדִיעוֹת הֵם בְּרִיאַת דְּבָרִים רַבִּים

described as knowledge of each entity,

הַנִּקְרָא יְדִיעָה כָּל אֶחָד

just as the creation of the body of the created being is a new creation.

כְּמוֹ שֶׁבְּרִיאַת גּוּף הַנִּבְרָא הִיא בְּרִיאָה חֲדָשָׁה

Just as bringing a created being into existence is a new creation, i.e., an activity in which G‑d extends beyond His Essence, as it were, so too, the knowledge of a created being is an activity in which G‑d extends beyond His Essence, as it were. Thus, the knowledge can be termed a new creation.

The multitude of objects known does not obligate that there be multiplicity within the Creator.

וְרִבּוּיָים אֵין מְחַיְּבִים רִבּוּי בַּבּוֹרֵא,

All of the above represents the approach of the Gaon Maharal

כָּל זֶה הוּא בֵּאוּר דִּבְרֵי הַגָּאוֹן

and his disciple, the author of Tosfos Yom Tov, in their refutation of Rambam’s approach.

וְתַלְמִידוֹ הַתּוֹסְפוֹת יוֹם טוֹב,

Their words are very true with regard to their statement that knowledge is not G‑d’s Essence,

וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁדְּבָרָיו צוֹדְקִים מְאֹד בְּמַה שֶּׁכָּתַב שֶׁהַיְדִיעָה אֵינָהּ עַצְמוּתוֹ

for He is exalted and uplifted above the parameters of knowledge, as explained above.

כִּי הוּא רָם וְנִשָּׂא מִגֶּדֶר מַדָּע כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר

If so, for Him, knowledge is comparable to the body of a created being,

וְאִם כֵּן בְּחִינַת הַיְדִיעָה אֶצְלוֹ מַמָּשׁ כְּעֶרֶךְ גּוּף הַנִּבְרָא

as implied by the expression: “You made them all with Chochmah,

וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב כֻּלָּם בְּחָכְמָה עָשִׂיתָ

i.e., Chochmah and actual physical deed are the same for Him.

שֶׁהַחָכְמָה וַעֲשִׂיָּה גוּפָנִית שָׁוִים,

Nevertheless, according to the conception of the AriZal as explained by the Alter Rebbe, knowledge is not considered a creation in the sense that it is considered a separate entity,

אַף עַל פִּי כֵן אֵין הַיְדִיעָה בְּחִינַת בְּרִיאָה לְעִנְיָן שֶׁהִיא בְּחִינַת נִפְרָד

like the body of a created being which is a separate entity in and of itself.

כְּמוֹ שֶׁגּוּף הַנִּבְרָא הוּא נִפְרָד לְעַצְמוֹ,

For then G‑d would be knowing with knowledge that exists apart from Him, as explained in the Mahadura Kamma.

On the contrary, knowledge can be described as actual G‑dliness,

אֶלָּא לְעִנְיָן זֶה נִקְרֵאת הַיְדִיעָה בְּחִינַת אֱלֹקוּת מַמָּשׁ

i.e., it is His knowledge,

כְּלוֹמַר שֶׁהִיא יְדִיעָה שֶׁלּוֹ

for He made Himself One Who knows.

שֶׁהוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ עָשָׂה עַצְמוֹ יוֹדֵעַ

To describe by analogy, it is like a teacher

כְּמוֹ עַל דֶּרֶךְ מָשָׁל הָרַב

who lowers himself to share wisdom with a young child according to the child’s understanding.

שֶׁמַּשְׁפִּיל עַצְמוֹ לְהִתְחַכֵּם עִם תִּינוֹק קָטָן לְפִי הַשְׂכָּלָתוֹ,

Nevertheless, the contraction of the teacher’s intellect is not a separate entity from the teacher himself and his own understanding.

שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי כֵן צִמְצוּם הַשְׂכָּלַת הָרַב אָז אֵינוֹ בְּחִינַת נִפְרָד

He himself is actually involved, but he has contracted himself.

וְהוּא הוּא מַמָּשׁ אֶלָּא שֶׁצִּמְצֵם עַצְמוֹ,

Nevertheless, the analogy is not comparable to the analogue,

וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין הַמָּשָׁל דּוֹמֶה לַנִּמְשָׁל

for the intellect of the teacher is identified with his being,

כִּי שֵׂכֶל הָרַב הוּא מַהוּתוֹ מַמָּשׁ,

while Above, the nature of knowledge is far removed from the nature of the Holy One, blessed be He,

מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן הַדַּעַת מַהוּתוֹ רָחוֹק מִמַּהוּת הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא

Who is the ultimate of simple transcendence.

הַפָּשׁוּט בְּתַכְלִית,

This, however, is nothing but a greater distance,

אֵין זֶה אֶלָּא רִחוּק יוֹתֵר

i.e., it was necessary for G‑d to contract His light into a more distant entity.

שֶׁצִּמְצֵם אוֹרוֹ לִהְיוֹת בְּמַהוּת רָחוֹק יוֹתֵר,

It is, nevertheless, not separate from Him, Heaven forbid.

אֲבָל עִם כָּל זֶה אֵינוֹ נִפְרָד חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

The Tzemach Tzedek is explaining that the comparison between G‑d and His knowledge and the teacher and the knowledge with which he relates to a small child is not appropriate, because the relative distance between G‑d and His knowledge and the teacher and his knowledge are incomparable. Nevertheless, the nature of the union of G‑d with His knowledge is comparable to that of the teacher and his knowledge.

This is what is implied by describing the Sefiros as G‑dliness (Getlich),

וְזֶהוּ לְשׁוֹן אֱלֹקוּת (גֶעטְלִיךְ בִּלְשׁוֹן אִידִישׁ)

i.e., they are the outpouring of Divine powers,

כְּלוֹמַר הִתְפַּשְּׁטוּת כֹּחוֹת אֱלֹקִיִּים

but not His Essence itself,

וְלֹא עַצְמוּתוֹ מַמָּשׁ

just as thought and speech are called powers of the soul,

וּכְמוֹ שֶׁנִּקְרְאוּ הַמַּחֲשָׁבָה וְדִבּוּר כֹּחוֹת נַפְשִׁיּוֹת

for they are the outpouring of the soul’s light,

שֶׁהֵם הִתְפַּשְּׁטוּת אוֹר הַנֶּפֶשׁ

but not its essence.

וְלֹא עַצְמוּתָהּ,

Nevertheless, they are not separate entities.

וְעִם כָּל זֶה אֵינָן נִפְרָדִים,

Therefore, it is appropriate to say that the knowledge with which G‑d knows the created beings is actually the vitality of that created being.

וְלָכֵן יִתָּכֵן שֶׁיְּדִיעָה שֶׁהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא יוֹדֵעַ אֶת הַנִּבְרָא הִיא חַיּוּת לְהַנִּבְרָא מַמָּשׁ

For this knowledge

כִּי הַיְדִיעָה הַזֹּאת

– even though with regard to G‑d’s Essence, it is considered distant,

אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלְּגַבֵּי מַהוּתוֹ וְעַצְמוּתוֹ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא הִיא רְחוֹקָה

as distant as the created being itself

כְּרִחוּק הַנִּבְרָא מַמָּשׁ

when considered in regard to the distance of the nature of its being from G‑d’s Essence

הַיְנוּ לְעִנְיַן רִחוּק הַמַּהוּת,

is, nevertheless, an outpouring of G‑dliness

אֲבָל מִכָּל מָקוֹם הִיא בְּחִינַת הִתְפַּשְּׁטוּת אֱלֹקִית

to the extent that it has the potential to bring a created being into existence from nothingness, for creation, bringing an entity into being from nothingness, can be performed only by G‑d, as will be explained.

עַד שֶׁתּוּכַל לְהַחֲיוֹת הַנִּבְרָא מֵאַיִן לְיֵשׁ כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר:

To explain this concept in breadth:

וַהֲבָנַת דָּבָר זֶה לַאֲשׁוּרוֹ,

It can be understood on the basis of the true resolution of the question: How does a multitude of different entities come into existence from the true Oneness?

יוּבַן עַל פִּי מַה שֶּׁאֲנַחְנוּ צְרִיכִים לְבָאֵר הַתֵּרוּץ הָאֲמִתִּי בְּעִנְיַן הִסְתַּעֲפוּת רִבּוּי הַנִּמְצָאִים מִן הָאֶחָד הָאֱמֶת,

For on the surface, it is truly problematic:

כִּי בֶּאֱמֶת לִכְאוֹרָה קַשְׁיָא

From simple oneness, it would appear that only oneness could come into being.

כִּי מִן הָאֶחָד הַפָּשׁוּט לֹא רָאוּי לִהְיוֹת רַק אֶחָד,

If so, the question would seemingly apply: How is it possible for diverse dimensions of knowledge to come into being from G‑d’s simple Oneness?

וְאִם כֵּן קֻשְׁיָא זוֹ תִּהְיֶה גַם כֵּן אֵיךְ יִהְיֶה הִתְפַּשְּׁטוּת יְדִיעוֹת חֲלוּקוֹת מֵאֶחָד הַפָּשׁוּט,

Maharal explained that just as a multitude of activities does not obligate multiplicity within Him, Heaven forbid, so too, the diverse dimensions of knowledge also do not.

וּמַה שֶּׁכָּתַב הַגָּאוֹן הַנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל כְּמוֹ שֶׁרִבּוּי הַפְּעֻלּוֹת אֵין מְחַיְּבִים בּוֹ רִבּוּי, כָּךְ גַּם אֵלּוּ,

But the very basis of the issue raises a question:

אַעִקָּרָא דְדִינָא קַשְׁיָא לִכְאוֹרָה,

How is it possible for a multitude of entities to come into being from simple oneness?

אֵיךְ נִמְשָׁךְ הָרִבּוּי הַמֻּפְלָג מֵאַחְדּוּת הַפָּשׁוּט,

The true answer to this is conveyed by the words of the psalmist:16 “How manifold are Your deeds, O G‑d! You made them all with Chochmah.

וְהַתֵּרוּץ הָאֲמִתִּי לְזֶה הוּא מַה שֶּׁאָמַר הַמְּשׁוֹרֵר מָה רַבּוּ מַעֲשֶׂיךָ ה' כֻּלָּם בְּחָכְמָה עָשִׂיתָ,

In truth, there is justification for an expression of wonder: “How manifold are Your deeds, O G‑d!”

כְּלוֹמַר בֶּאֱמֶת הָיָה פְּלִיאָה לִכְאוֹרָה מָה רַבּוּ מַעֲשֶׂיךָ

i.e., how can a multitude of entities come into being from simple oneness?

אֵיךְ נִמְשָׁךְ הָרִבּוּי מֵאַחְדּוּת הַפָּשׁוּט,

To this, the psalmist replies: “You made them all with Chochmah.

וְעַל זֶה הֵשִׁיב כֻּלָּם בְּחָכְמָה עָשִׂיתָ,

Implied is that were the different activities to be drawn down through G‑d shining His power and His light as they exist without contraction, there would be grounds for a question, for when infinite transcendence is expressed as it is, seemingly, there would be no way in which limited entities could come into existence from it.

כְּלוֹמַר אִלּוּ נִמְשְׁכוּ מִמֶּנּוּ הַפְּעֻלּוֹת עַל יְדֵי שֶׁהָיָה מֵאִיר עֲלֵיהֶם כֹּחוֹ וְאוֹרוֹ כְּמוֹ שֶׁהוּא, הָיָה קֻשְׁיָא,

But in truth, “You made them all with Chochmah,

אֲבָל בֶּאֱמֶת בְּחָכְמָה עָשִׂיתָ

i.e., G‑d brought about all these manifold entities through the medium of Chochmah.

שֶׁעָשָׂה אוֹתָם בְּאֶמְצָעוּת הַחָכְמָה

His light enclothed itself in the attribute which is called Chochmah

שֶׁנִּתְלַבֵּשׁ בִּבְחִינָה זוֹ הַנִּקְרֵאת חָכְמָה

and through it, this light shines and imparts influence to the created beings.

וּבָהּ וְעַל יָדָהּ הֵאִיר וְהִשְׁפִּיעַ בַּנִּבְרָאִים,

From Chochmah, there is already the possibility for different forms of existence,

וּמִן הַחָכְמָה כְּבָר יָכוֹל לִהְיוֹת הִתְחַלְּקוּת

for Chochmah is not comparable to His Essence, as explained above.

לְפִי שֶׁאֵינָהּ בְּעֶרֶךְ עַצְמוּתוֹ כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל

Due to the tzimtzum, Chochmah is already on a level where the Divine influence can be expressed in different forms and characters.

If so, since G‑d conveys His influence through Chochmah,

וְאִם כֵּן מֵאַחַר שֶׁהוּא מַשְׁפִּיעַ עַל יָדָהּ

it is not out of the question that even though He is simple Oneness, His influence will be manifest in different entities,

לֹא יִמָּנַע שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא אֶחָד פָּשׁוּט יִהְיֶה מַשְׁפִּיעַ דְּבָרִים חֲלוּקִים

because He grants influence with His great power through the medium that is called Chochmah

מֵאַחַר שֶׁמַּשְׁפִּיעַ בְּכֹחוֹ הַגָּדוֹל הַשְׁפָּעָה הָרְאוּיָה לִהְיוֹת עַל יְדֵי כְּלִי זֶה הַנִּקְרָא חָכְמָה,

and, subsequently, through the order of different entities – i.e., the Ten Sefiros

וְסֵדֶר הִתְחַלְּקוּת הַיְנוּ בְּחִינַת י' סְפִירוֹת

that emanate from Chochmah, which is called the “first.”

שֶׁנֶּאֶצְלוּ מִן הַחָכְמָה שֶׁנִּקְרֵאת רֵאשִׁית

Through these Ten Sefiros, He conveys influence to the created beings.

וְעַל יָדָם הוּא מַשְׁפִּיעַ בַּנִּבְרָאִים,

Therefore, the created beings vary according to the k’li through which He conveys influence.

וְלָכֵן יִתְחַלְּקוּ הַנִּבְרָאִים לְפִי הַכְּלִי שֶׁהִשְׁפִּיעַ עַל יָדָהּ

For example, entities receiving influence through the attribute of Chessed will be representative of Chessed.

כְּמוֹ הַהַשְׁפָּעָה הַבָּאָה עַל יְדֵי מִדַּת הַחֶסֶד יִהְיֶה כְּדֻגְמַת חֶסֶד

They include light and water,

וְהֵם אוֹר וּמַיִם

which were created on the first day of Creation, on which the attribute of Chessed shined forth.

שֶׁנִּבְרְאוּ בְּיוֹם רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁהֵאִיר מִדַּת הַחֶסֶד,

The influence from the attribute of Gevurahbrings into being entities representative of Gevurah,

וְהַהַשְׁפָּעָה הַבָּאָה מִכֹּחוֹ יִתְבָּרֵךְ עַל יְדֵי הַגְּבוּרָה יִהְיוּ כְּדֻגְמַת הַגְּבוּרָה

for example, the firmament, which is described by the Torah17 as “dividing.” This resembles Gevurah, which is the source for division in Creation.

וְהֵם רָקִיעַ כוּ'

Similar concepts apply with regard to the other emotional attributes, as will be explained with G‑d’s help.

וְעַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה בְּכָל הַמִּדּוֹת כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר אִם יִרְצֶה ה'

The multitude of types of created beings comes from the interrelation of the emotional qualities with each other.

וְרִבּוּי הַנִּבְרָאִים הֵם מֵהִתְכַּלְלוּת הַמִּדּוֹת זוֹ מִזּוֹ,

The general principle that applies is that the influence changes according to the nature of the k’li through which it passes,

וְהַכְּלָל בְּזֶה כִּי הַהַשְׁפָּעָה מִשְׁתַּנֵּית לְפִי הַכְּלִי שֶׁמַּשְׁפִּיעַ עַל יָדָהּ

even though the power generating the influence is One,

הֲגַם שֶׁכֹּחַ הַהַשְׁפָּעָה הוּא כֹּחַ אֶחָד

He Who is One and unified, Who is simple with ultimate simplicity.

הוּא הַיָּחִיד וּמְיֻחָד בָּרוּךְ הוּא הַפָּשׁוּט בְּתַכְלִית הַפְּשִׁיטוּת,

The Pardes,Shaar 4, ch. 2, provides a well-known analogy for this: the effect of the sun or fire.

וְהַמָּשָׁל בְּזֶה יָדוּעַ וּמוּבָא בַּפַּרְדֵּ"ס שָׁם פֶּרֶק ב' כְּעֵין הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ וְהָאֵשׁ

With one of its powers18 – heat –

שֶׁבְּכֹחַ אֶחָד שֶׁבּוֹ וְהוּא הַחֹם

it melts wax,

הוּא מַתִּיךְ הַשַּׁעֲוָה

causes liquids to congeal,

וְתַקְפִּיא דָּבָר לַח

cooks, burns, causes certain entities to turn black and others to turn white.

וּתְבַשֵּׁל וְתִשְׂרוֹף וְתַשְׁחִיר וְתַלְבִּין

The difference between these effects depends on the different nature of the recipients,

וְחִלּוּף הַפְּעֻלּוֹת הַלָּז הוּא מִצַּד חִלּוּף הַמְקַבְּלִים

without obligating that there be any multiplicity within the essence of the fire.

מִבְּלִי שֶׁיְּחַיֵּב זֶה רִבּוּי בְּעַצְמוּת הָאֵשׁ,

Furthermore, it can be said that in essence, the question raised above is not a question at all;

וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁבֶּאֱמֶת יֵשׁ לוֹמַר שֶׁהַקֻּשְׁיָא מֵעִקָּרָא דְדִינָא אֵינָהּ קֻשְׁיָא כְּלָל,

that is to say, the question “How is it possible for a multitude of entities to come into being from simple oneness?” in truth does not represent a conceptual difficulty.

רוֹצֶה לוֹמַר מַה שֶּׁהִקְשׁוּ אֵיךְ נִמְצָא הָרִבּוּי מִן הָאֶחָד הָאֱמֶת,

For the axiom on which this question is based – that from oneness, only oneness can come into being –

כִּי הַהַקְדָּמָה הָאוֹמֶרֶת כִּי מֵהָאֶחָד לֹא יִמָּצֵא מִמֶּנּוּ אֶלָּא דָּבָר אֶחָד,

is true with regard to natural entities that have no choice whether to perform the activities associated with them,

הִיא אֱמֶת בִּדְבָרִים הַטִּבְעִיִּים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם בְּחִירָה בִּפְעֻלָּתָם

but instead perform that activity innately, according to the natural tendency that the Creator implanted within them.

אֶלָּא פּוֹעֲלִים כְּטִבְעָם שֶׁהִטְבִּיעַ בָּהֶם הַבּוֹרֵא,

In that context, it is correct to say that something which has only one tendency will only bring about one type of activity and that type of activity will reflect its source.

וּלְמַה שֶּׁאֵין לוֹ כִּי אִם טֶבַע אֶחָד לֹא יִפְעַל כִּי אִם אֶחָד,

For this reason, the fact that fire causes melting, congealment, cooking, etc.,

וְלָזֶה הָיָה סִבַּת מַה שֶּׁהָאֵשׁ פּוֹעֶלֶת הַהַתָּכָה וְהַהַקְפָּאָה וְהַבִּשּׁוּל וְכוּ'

i.e., different effects, though it is only one power, the power of heat, does not present a question, because

שֶׁהֵם פְּעֻלּוֹת חֲלוּקוֹת, וְהִיא רַק כֹּחַ אֶחָד הוּא הַחֹם,

the difference in these effects comes about because of the nature of the recipients,

הִתְחַלְּפוּת פְּעֻלּוֹת אֵלּוּ הוּא מִצַּד הַמְקַבְּלִים

that they are prepared to change in these different manners:

שֶׁהֵם מוּכָנִים לְהִשְׁתַּנּוֹת כֵּן,

this one to melt and this one to congeal,

זֶה לְהַתָּכָה וְזֶה לְהַקְפָּאָה

comes as a result of one power, the power of heat.

עַל יְדֵי כֹּחַ אֶחָד הוּא הַחֹם,

In contrast, the essence of fire has only one effect, producing heat,

מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן מִצַּד עֶצֶם הָאֵשׁ לֹא יִהְיֶה רַק פּוֹעֵל אֶחָד הוּא הַחֹם,

because this is its nature and it has no choice in this regard, as explained above.

כִּי כָּךְ טִבְעָהּ וְאֵין לָהּ בְּחִירָה כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל,

G‑d, by contrast, is true Oneness

אֲבָל הַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרֵךְ שֶׁהוּא אֶחָד הָאֱמֶת

and acts willfully and by choice.

וּפוֹעֵל בְּרָצוֹן וּבְחִירָה

Hence, even though He is simple Oneness,

הִנֵּה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא אַחְדּוּת הַפָּשׁוּט

He can convey different types of influence.

יוּכַל לְהַשְׁפִּיעַ כַּמָּה חֲלֻקּוֹת,

Even if it would be postulated that oneness could only bring about one type of influence,

וַאֲפִלּוּ אִם תִּמְצֵי לוֹמַר שֶׁהָאֶחָד לֹא יִפְעַל רַק אֶחָד

even by acting willfully,

גַּם בְּפוֹעֵל בְּרָצוֹן

that is because it is defined in its oneness, set aside in a category of its own

זֶהוּ לְפִי שֶׁהֱיוֹתוֹ אֶחָד מֻגְדָּר בְּגֶדֶר מְיֻחָד

that separates it from other entities.

וְנִבְדָּל מִמֶּנּוּ זוּלָתוֹ

G‑d’s Oneness, by contrast,

מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן הֱיוֹתוֹ יִתְבָּרֵךְ אֶחָד

is not defined in any given way.

הַיְנוּ שֶׁאֵינוֹ מֻגְדָּר

As such, there is nothing that is separate from Him

וְאִם כֵּן אֵין כָּל דָּבָר נִבְדָּל מִמֶּנּוּ

and He can bring everything into being,

וְיָכוֹל לְהַוּוֹת הַכֹּל

as can be understood from what was cited in section 3 from the words of the Gaon Maharal.

וּכְמוּבָן מִמַּה שֶּׁנִּתְבָּאֵר פֶּרֶק ג' בְּדִבְרֵי הַגָּאוֹן הַנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל,

Nevertheless, were G‑d to convey influence to the created beings with His great power and light as it is, without contraction,

מִכָּל מָקוֹם הִנֵּה אִם הָיָה מַשְׁפִּיעַ לְהַנִּבְרָאִים בְּכֹחוֹ וְאוֹרוֹ הַגָּדוֹל כְּמוֹ שֶׁהוּא

the entities brought into being would also be without limitation or measure, for every one of the entities brought into being would reflect the infinite dimension of its source, G‑d’s light.

הָיוּ הַנִּמְצָאִים גַּם כֵּן בְּלִי גְבוּל וּמִדָּה,

To explain the latter point: Taanis 25a relates that the daughter of R. Chanina ben Dosa once accidently took vinegar instead of oil to prepare a lamp for Shabbos. When she realized her mistake, she became sad because it was too late to bring other fuel for the lamp. Her father comforted her, saying: “He Who said that oil should burn will say that vinegar should burn.” And indeed the vinegar burned for the entire Shabbos.

We regard that as a miracle. Why? Because according to the structure of the world at present, vinegar does not burn. But from G‑d’s perspective, as R. Chanina ben Dosa so eloquently explained, is there a reason why one substance should burn and not the other? And that is what miracles are: revelations of a higher reality in which the limits of our world do not apply.

This is what is meant by making entities with a distinct nature, but that those distinctions would be limitless, i.e., there would be limited entities, but they would not conform to any standard structure or pattern.

And there would be a multitude of entities without any end or limit at all.

וְגַם הָיָה רִבּוּיָם לְאֵין קֵץ מַמָּשׁ וְלֹא בִּבְחִינַת גְּבוּל כְּלָל

For, since He is infinite and endless,

כִּי מֵאַחַר שֶׁהוּא הַבִּלְתִּי בַּעַל גְּבוּל וּבִלְתִּי בַּעַל תַּכְלִית

were He to desire to make distinctions and create entities of a distinct nature,

כְּשֶׁיִּרְצֶה לְחַלֵּק וּלְהַוּוֹת נִבְרָאִים מִמֶּנּוּ בִּבְחִינַת הִתְחַלְּקוּת

those distinctions would also be limitless,

יִהְיֶה הַהִתְחַלְּקוּת גַּם כֵּן בְּלִי גְבוּל

just as He in His Essence is infinite.

כְּמוֹ שֶׁהוּא בְּעַצְמוּתוֹ בִּבְחִינַת אֵין סוֹף,

The Tzemach Tzedek is emphasizing a second point: that were G‑d not to create through tzimtzum, not only would every entity be unlimited in nature, He would bring into being an infinite number of created beings. Just as a person can continue counting ad infinitum, so too, there could be an unlimited number of Sefiros and worlds.19 Each of these Sefiros and worlds would be – like the vinegar mentioned above – fundamentally undefined in nature.

We see that the created beings are limited and measured,

וּמֵאַחַר שֶׁאָנוּ רוֹאִים שֶׁהֵם בִּבְחִינַת גְּבוּל וּמִדָּה

and they also have a specific dimension.

וְגַם יֵשׁ לָהֶם שִׁעוּר

“From the earth to the heavens is a distance of a 500-year journey.”20

מִן הָאָרֶץ לָרָקִיעַ ת"ק שָׁנָה

Each of the created beings has a specific measure, and each is distinct from one another.

וּבוֹ נִבְרָאִים בְּשִׁעוּר מֻגְבָּל וּבְהִתְחַלְּקוּת,

Hence, we are forced to say that the influence is not being conveyed from Him directly. Instead, He conveys light and influence through the keilim mentioned above,

זֶהוּ לְפִי שֶׁהוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ מֵאִיר וּמַשְׁפִּיעַ אוֹתָם עַל יְדֵי הַכֵּלִים הַנִּזְכָּרִים לְעֵיל

the first of them being Chochmah.

שֶׁרֵאשִׁיתָם הַחָכְמָה

Afterwards follow Binah, Daas, Chessed, Gevurah, etc.

וְאַחֲרֶיהָ הַבִּינָה וְהַדַּעַת וְהַחֶסֶד וְהַגְּבוּרָה וְכוּ'

These represent the ten garments in which, as our Sages say,21 G‑d enclothed Himself when He created the world.

שֶׁהֵם הָעֲשָׂרָה לְבוּשִׁים שֶׁאָמְרוּ רַזַ"ל שֶׁנִּתְלַבֵּשׁ בָּהֶן וּבָרָא בָהֶן אֶת הָעוֹלָם,

Because of their different natures, the effects brought about as a result of them also vary.

וּמִצַּד הִתְחַלְּפוּת מַהוּתָן כָּךְ יִשְׁתַּנּוּ הַפְּעֻלּוֹת,

(The order of the emanation of the keilim and the manner in which they are drawn down are explained in another source22

(וְסֵדֶר אֲצִילוּתָן וְהַמְשָׁכוּתָן הַכֵּלִים הַנִּזְכָּרִים לְעֵיל בְּעַצְמָן מְבֹאָר בְּמָקוֹם אַחֵר

with regard to the concept of Akudim, Nekudim, and Berudim.23

בְּעִנְיַן עֲקֻדִּים נְקֻדִּים וּבְרֻדִּים

At the outset, they were all in one k’li.

שֶׁמִּתְּחִלָּה הָיוּ כֻּלָּם בִּכְלִי אֶחָד

Afterwards they subdivided into ten,

וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְחַלְּקוּ לְי'

and each of these ten further subdivided into ten.)24

וְי' לְי')

As such, this true concept also serves as the resolution of the above question – how is it possible for a multitude to come into being from oneness?

וְאִם כֵּן זֶה הָעִנְיָן הָאֲמִתִּי הוּא תֵּרוּץ גַּם לְקֻשְׁיָא הַנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל דְּהִסְתַּעֲפוּת הָרִבּוּי מִן הָאַחְדּוּת

In truth, however, we don’t need to resolve the above question, for the essence of the question is not that problematic, as we explained.

הֲגַם שֶׁאֵין אָנוּ צְרִיכִים לָהּ מִצַּד עֶצֶם הַקֻּשְׁיָא הַנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל אֶלָּא כְּפִי שֶׁאָמַרְנוּ.

As explained, as G‑d’s infinite light diffuses, it is possible that diverse entities be brought into being. However, the distinction between these entities would not be fixed and permanent, as in the vinegar that burnt for of R. Chanina ben Dosa’s daughter mentioned above. Every entity would be unlimited in nature. However, our world is made up of entities that are fundamentally distinct. Oil is oil and vinegar is vinegar. How such distinctions come into being from G‑d’s simple light thus requires explanation.

The core of the concept is, as has been explained previously, that the radiance of the life-force is drawn down from Him through Chochmah and the other nine attributes mentioned above.

וּמֵאַחַר שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר שֶׁהֶאָרַת הַחַיּוּת מִמֶּנּוּ יִתְבָּרֵךְ נִמְשָׁךְ עַל יְדֵי הַחָכְמָה וּשְׁאָרֵי הַט' בְּחִינוֹת שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֲרוּ לְעֵיל

These are called keilim.

שֶׁהֵם הַנִּקְרָאִים כֵּלִים

The term keilim has the meaning of “utensils.” That is a fitting description in this instance, because here we are emphasizing how the Sefiros are the medium through which G‑d brings about change within the created beings. The term keilim also has the meaning “vessels” or “containers.” That meaning is more appropriate when speaking about the interrelationship between the oros, “lights,” G‑d’s creative energy, and the keilim within the Sefiros themselves.

That term is appropriate, because through them, He brings about all forms of existence.

שֶׁעַל יָדָם הוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ פּוֹעֵל הַנִּמְצָאִים,

They are called keilim because when compared to G‑d, they are like a utensil in the hand of a craftsman

וּמַה שֶּׁנִּקְרָאִים כֵּלִים הַיְנוּ שֶׁהֵם בְּעֶרְכּוֹ יִתְבָּרֵךְ כִּכְלִי בְּיַד הָאוּמָן

with which he builds or writes.

שֶׁבּוֹנֶה עַל יָדוֹ אוֹ כּוֹתֵב עַל יָדוֹ,

Thus, the difference and distinction that exists in our world and the worlds above stems from the keilim, the receptacles for G‑d’s light, which channel that light in diverse ways according to their individual natures. His light itself, by contrast, reflects His Essential Being, and hence is simple and undefined.

Nevertheless,

וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם

In the lines that follow, the Tzemach Tzedek explains an implied question: How can the keilim internalize G‑d’s light? G‑d’s light is infinite and simple, while the keilim are defined entities. How can infinite light be internalized within a defined entity? In resolution, the Tzemach Tzedek explains that

the attributes of Atzilus are not separate keilim like an axe in the hands of a craftsman,

אֵינָן כֵּלִים נִפְרָדִים מַמָּשׁ כַּגַּרְזֶן לְגַבֵּי הָאוּמָן

which is an entirely separate entity.

שֶׁהוּא נִבְדָּל מִמֶּנּוּ לְגַמְרֵי,

Instead, they are actual G‑dliness;

אֶלָּא הֵם אֱלֹקוּת מַמָּשׁ,

i.e., the Chochmah is actually His Chochmah

כְּלוֹמַר שֶׁהַחָכְמָה הַזֹּאת הִיא חָכְמָתוֹ מַמָּשׁ

with which He displays wisdom, i.e., Chochmah is not a distinct quality, existing independently, but is totally identified with Him.

שֶׁבָּהּ מִתְחַכֵּם,

Similarly, Chessed is actually His Chessed

וְכֵן הַחֶסֶד הוּא כֹּחַ חַסְדּוֹ מַמָּשׁ

with which He shows generosity.

שֶׁבּוֹ מִתְחַסֵּד,

Since the keilim of Atzilus are G‑dly, it is possible for G‑d’s light to rest within them.

True, His Essence is “not any of these attributes at all,”25 but rather is utterly transcendent, as explained above.

וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁבְּעַצְמוּתוֹ לַאו מִכָּל אִנּוּן מִדּוֹת אִיהוּ כְּלָל,

Nevertheless, in truth the descent of His light and its transition to these lower levelsis accomplished through the tzimtzum,

הִנֵּה זֶהוּ בֶּאֱמֶת עִנְיַן צִמְצוּם

whereby G‑d contracted and hid His simple light

שֶׁצִּמְצֵם וְהִסְתִּיר אוֹרוֹ הַפָּשׁוּט

until it was possible for there to appear from it entities comparable to the attributes described above:

עַד שֶׁיִּתְרָאֶה מִמֶּנּוּ דִּמְיוֹן כֹּחוֹת אֵלּוּ

the powers of wisdom, understanding, and knowledge.

כֹּחַ הַהִתְחַכְּמוּת וְכֹחַ הַהֲבָנָה וְכֹחַ הַיְדִיעָה

They are called the keilim of ChaBaD of Atzilus.

שֶׁהֵם הַנִּקְרָאִים כֵּלִים דְּחָכְמָה־בִּינָה־דַּעַת דַּאֲצִילוּת,

Similar concepts apply with regard to the emotional attributes, the powers of generosity (Chessed) and of might (Gevurah), etc.,

וְכֵן עַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה בַּמִּדּוֹת מַהוּת כֹּחַ הַהִתְחַסְּדוּת אוֹ כֹּחַ הַגְּבוּרָה כוּ'

which are called ChaGaT,

נִקְרָאִים חֶסֶד־גְּבוּרָה־תִּפְאֶרֶת,

as explained above in the analogy of the concept of the contraction of the intellect of the teacher,

וְכַנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל מִמְּשַׁל צִמְצוּם הַשְׂכָּלַת הָרַב

but indeed, it is far more wondrous.

אַךְ שֶׁהִיא בְּדֶרֶךְ נִפְלָאָה יוֹתֵר,

As mentioned, the distance and difference between G‑d and His wisdom is far greater than the distance and difference between a sagelike teacher and the wisdom that he conveys to a young child.

Nevertheless, these powers do not generate activity on their own.

וְעִם כָּל זֶה אֵין כֹּחוֹת אֵלּוּ פּוֹעֲלִים בְּעַצְמָם לְבָד,

Instead, it is G‑d Who acts through them.

אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא יִתְבָּרֵךְ פּוֹעֵל בָּהֶם,

He displays wisdom through Chochmah.

שֶׁמִּתְחַכֵּם עַל יְדֵי הַחָכְמָה

Through Daas, He knows all the created beings in all the worlds.

וְעַל יְדֵי הַדַּעַת לֵידַע כָּל הַנִּבְרָאִים שֶׁבָּעוֹלָמוֹת,

And He acts generously through the power of Chessed.

וְכֵן מִתְחַסֵּד עַל יְדֵי כֹּחַ הַחֶסֶד,

As such, the activity actually stems from His unlimited power,

וְאִם כֵּן הַפְּעֻלָּה מַמָּשׁ עַל יְדֵי כֹּחוֹ הַבִּלְתִּי בַּעַל תַּכְלִית

but it is expressed through the medium of a k’li.

אֶלָּא שֶׁבָּאָה בְּאֶמְצָעוּת הַכְּלִי

With regard to this, the analogy of one who chops with an axe is appropriate.

וּלְעִנְיָן זֶה הוּא כִּמְשַׁל הַחוֹצֵב בַּגַּרְזֶן

The analogy also conveys the distance between the level of the axe and that of the chopper,

וְגַם לְעִנְיַן רִחוּק מַהוּת הַגַּרְזֶן מִמַּהוּת הַחוֹצֵב

for in truth, in the analogue, the nature of Chochmah is comparable to physical deed in relation to His Being.

שֶׁכֵּן לְמַעְלָה מַהוּת הַחָכְמָה כַּעֲשִׂיָּה גוּפָנִית אֵצֶל מַהוּתוֹ יִתְבָּרֵךְ

Nevertheless, the Sefiros are considered actual G‑dliness, one with Him,

וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם נִקְרָא אֱלֹקוּת מַמָּשׁ

and in this regard, the analogy of the axe does not resemble the analogue, the keilim of the Sefiros.

וּלְעִנְיָן זֶה אֵין הַמָּשָׁל דּוֹמֶה לַנִּמְשָׁל,

Since each of the keilim is actually G‑dliness,

וּלְפִי שֶׁהַכְּלִי הִיא אֱלֹקוּת מַמָּשׁ

in this context, it is very appropriate to quote Rambam’s statement: “He is the Knower, He is the Object of Knowledge, and He is the Knowledge itself.”

לָכֵן בְּזֶה יִתָּכֵן מְאֹד מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב הָרַמְבַּ"ם הוּא הַיּוֹדֵעַ וְהוּא הַיָּדוּעַ וְהוּא הַדֵּעָה עַצְמָהּ

For knowledge, i.e., Daas of Atzilus, is actual G‑dliness.

שֶׁמֵּאַחַר שֶׁהַדֵּעָה שֶׁהִיא דַעַת דַּאֲצִילוּת הִיא אֱלֹקוּת מַמָּשׁ

Hence, He is the Knower and He is the Object of Knowledge without any separation at all.

אִם כֵּן הוּא הַיּוֹדֵעַ וְהוּא הַיָּדוּעַ בְּלִי פֵרוּד

“This concept is not within a man’s ability to understand,”

וְדָבָר זֶה אֵין בִּיכֹלֶת הָאָדָם לַהֲבִינוֹ

for a person conceives of knowledge as it exists within his own self,

לְפִי שֶׁהָאָדָם מְצַיֵּר מַהוּת דַּעַת כְּמוֹ שֶׁהוּא בּוֹ

and he and his knowledge are not the same.

שֶׁאֵין הוּא וְדַעְתּוֹ אֶחָד

Instead, they are two distinct entities,

אֶלָּא שְׁנַיִם

as stated in Tanya, Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah, ch. 8.

וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בְּלִקּוּטֵי אֲמָרִים חֵלֶק ב' פֶּרֶק ח',

These concepts apply only in the realm of Atzilus. Above Atzilus, by contrast,

מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן לְמַעְלָה מֵאֲצִילוּת

it is not appropriate to speak of the category of Daas at all, as explained above.

לֹא יִתָּכֵן לוֹמַר גֶּדֶר מַדָּע כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל,

The rationale is that Daas (knowledge) involves knowing a defined entity, and there is no concrete definition of existence above Atzilus.

Similarly, the statement that through the knowledge of Himself, He knows all the created beings is appropriate only when speaking of the keilim of Atzilus.

וְיִתָּכֵן לוֹמַר שֶׁבִּידִיעַת עַצְמוֹ יוֹדֵעַ כָּל הַנִּבְרָאִים

For the expression “the knowledge of Himself,”

דְּהַיְנוּ פֵּרוּשׁ יְדִיעַת עַצְמוֹ

that G‑d could be described with the term “knowledge,”

שֶׁנּוֹפֵל עַל עַצְמוֹ שֵׁם מַדָּע

is appropriate only on the level of the keilim of Atzilus,

הַיְנוּ בְּחִינַת כֵּלִים דַּאֲצִילוּת

for they are actual G‑dliness

שֶׁהֵן אֱלֹקוּת מַמָּשׁ

and they are the source of vitality for all the created beings.

וְהֵם מְקוֹרֵי הַחַיּוּת לְכָל הַנִּבְרָאִים

As stated in Etz Chayim, the keilim of Atzilus become the soul for the worlds of Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah.

כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שֶׁכֵּלִים דַּאֲצִילוּת נַעֲשִׂים נְשָׁמָה לִברִיאָה־יְצִירָה־עֲשִׂיָּה

In this regard, Rambam’s words are correct,

וּבְזֶה צָדְקוּ דִּבְרֵי הָרַמְבַּ"ם

unlike the views of others who maintain that the keilim are separate entities, Heaven forbid.

דְּלֹא כְּהַחוֹשְׁבִים שֶׁהַכֵּלִים הֵם בְּחִינַת דָּבָר נִבְדָּל חַס וְשָׁלוֹם

Instead, they are G‑dliness.

אֶלָּא הֵם אֱלֹקוּת

Thus, the knowledge of Himself, i.e., the knowledge of these keilim,

לָכֵן הֲרֵי יְדִיעַת עַצְמוֹ דְּכֵלִים הַנִּזְכָּרִים לְעֵיל

is actually His knowledge of all the created beings.

הִיא מַמָּשׁ יְדִיעַת כָּל הַנִּבְרָאִים

For through G‑d’s knowledge of them, these created beings are drawn into existence,

שֶׁנִּמְשְׁכוּ עַל יָדָן הַנִּבְרָאִים

and it is their vitality.

וְזֶהוּ הַחַיּוּת שֶׁלָּהֶם

Nevertheless, in relation to His Being and Essence,

וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם לְגַבֵּי מַהוּתוֹ וְעַצְמוּתוֹ מַמָּשׁ

this knowledge is comparable to an actual deed,

הֲרֵי יְדִיעָה זוֹ פְּעֻלָּה מַמָּשׁ הִיא

just as the creation of a created being is an actual deed.

כְּמוֹ שֶׁבְּרִיאַת הַנִּבְרָא הִיא פְּעֻלָּה,

This activity is performed by these keilim, as explained above.

וּפְעֻלָּה זוֹ נַעֲשֵׂית עַל יְדֵי כֵּלִים הַנִּזְכָּרִים לְעֵיל

In this, the GaonMaharal was correct in saying that knowledge is not G‑d’s Essence.

וּבְזֶה צָדְקוּ דִּבְרֵי הַגָּאוֹן הַנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל דְּהַיְנוּ מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב שֶׁהַיְדִיעָה אֵינָהּ עַצְמוּתוֹ,

Nevertheless, since the Sefiros are G‑dliness,

אַךְ לְפִי שֶׁמִּכָּל מָקוֹם הִיא בְּחִינַת אֱלֹקוּת

in that, Rambam’s words are correct

אִם כֵּן בְּזֶה צָדְקוּ דִּבְרֵי הָרַמְבַּ"ם

in describing the wondrous nature of His knowledge,

בְּהַפְלָגַת מַהוּת הַיְדִיעָה גַם כֵּן

and by saying that it is united with Him,

בְּאָמְרוֹ שֶׁהִיא מִתְיַחֶדֶת עִמּוֹ

i.e., with His radiance that is enclothed within it, as will be explained with G‑d’s help.

וְרוֹצֶה לוֹמַר עִם הֶאָרָתוֹ הַמִּתְלַבֶּשֶׁת בָּהּ כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר אִם יִרְצֶה ה',

On this level, it can be said: “He is the Knower and the Knowledge,”

שֶׁהוּא הַיּוֹדֵעַ וְהוּא הַדֵּעָה

and “with the knowledge of Himself, He knows all the created beings.”

וְגַם שֶׁבִּידִיעַת עַצְמוֹ יוֹדֵעַ כָּל הַנִּבְרָאִים

Thus, both perspectives – that of Rambam and Maharalare the words of the living G‑d.26

וּשְׁנֵיהֶם דִּבְרֵי אֱלֹקִים חַיִּים,

The words of the GaonMaharal are correct in his explanation of G‑d’s Being, that He cannot be defined in terms of a limited entity like knowledge.

דִּבְרֵי הַגָּאוֹן הַנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל צָדְקוּ בְּבֵאוּרוֹ עִנְיַן מַהוּתוֹ יִתְבָּרֵךְ שֶׁאֵין נוֹפֵל בּוֹ גַּם גֶּדֶר מֻגְבָּל כְּמוֹ שֵׂכֶל

Even the level of perfect knowledge explained by Rambam is not an appropriate description for Him.

Instead, He is a simple entity,

אֶלָּא הֲוָיָה פְּשׁוּטָה

whose Being is hidden from our comprehension.

נֶעְלָם מֵאִתָּנוּ

We can relate to this level only through faith, by believing that such an entity exists.

הִצְטַיֵּר מַהוּתוֹ רַק בִּבְחִינַת אֱמוּנַת אֹמֶן שֶׁיֵּשׁ מָצוּי זֶה,

And Rambam’s words are correct with regard to the unity he described,

וְדִבְרֵי הָרַמְבַּ"ם צָדְקוּ שֶׁהַיִּחוּד שֶׁבֵּאֵר הוּא,

for they are an apt description of the enclothement of G‑d’s light in the keilim of Atzilus,

הוּא עִנְיַן הִתְלַבְּשׁוּתוֹ בַּכֵּלִים דַּאֲצִילוּת

for they are G‑dliness, as explained above.

שֶׁהֵן אֱלֹקוּת כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל:

Synopsis

According to Maharal, the knowledge with which G‑d knows all existence is an activity, like the activity involved in a person’s acquisition of information. This does not create a philosophical problem, because just as a person’s performance of many activities does not necessitate multiplicity within his essence, so too, G‑d’s creation of a multiplicity of created beings – and, by the same token, His knowledge of them – does not necessitate multiplicity within Him.

Thus, according to Maharal, Rambam was incorrect in identifying G‑d’s Essence with His knowledge. Rambam stated that G‑d is one with His knowledge to resolve the difficulty of how G‑d’s knowing each created being in a particular manner would not necessitate multiplicity within Him. According to Maharal, by contrast, since knowledge is not identified with His Essence, His multitude of knowledge does not necessitate multiplicity within Him, just as creation does not necessitate multiplicity.

The Tzemach Tzedek accepts the basis of the approach of Maharal, but qualifies it somewhat. As Maharal states, G‑d’s Essence transcends knowledge entirely. Nevertheless, if G‑d’s knowledge were considered a separate entity, that would imply that something (knowledge) exists outside of Him. Instead, His knowledge must be described as actual G‑dliness, for He is identified with His knowledge. In this, the Tzemach Tzedek accepts Rambam’s view.

There are thus two dimensions: a) G‑d’s Essence, which is above our frame of reference entirely; and b) G‑d as He relates to the Creation through knowledge. Thus, G‑dliness contracts itself and brings into being the Sefiros, and more particularly, their keilim. These Sefiros are not G‑d’s Essence, but an expression of His powers. Nevertheless, they are not separate entities but are identified with Him.

The Tzemach Tzedek explains that G‑d’s Oneness with the Sefiros can be understood on the basis of a larger question: How do a multitude of different entities come into existence from True Oneness? It would appear that only Oneness could come into being from simple Oneness.

The Tzemach Tzedek bases the resolution of this question on an interpretation of the verse: “How manifold are Your deeds, O G‑d! You made them all with Chochmah.” The statement: “How manifold are Your deeds, O G‑d!” reflects the question: How can a multitude of entities come into being from simple Oneness? The resolution is: “You made them all with Chochmah.

The creative force – G‑d’s light – is simple Oneness, but because it shines through the medium of Chochmah and the subsequent Sefiros, i.e., keilim, there is the possibility for different expressions.

The term k’li means “utensil.” That term is used because when compared to His Essence, the keilim are like utensils in the hand of a craftsman who uses them to build or write. Nevertheless, the attributes represented by the keilim are not separate entities like an axe in the hands of a craftsman. Instead, they are actual G‑dliness; i.e., the k’li of Chochmah is actually His Chochmah with which He displays wisdom.

Fundamentally, Chassidus identifies with the Maharal’s position: that G‑d’s Being and Essence cannot be defined in terms of a limited entity like knowledge. Instead, He is a simple entity, transcending our comprehension. We can relate to this level only through faith, by believing that such a level of His existence exists.

However, Rambam’s words – that by knowing Himself, G‑d knows all the created beings – are a fitting description of the enclothement of G‑d’s light in the keilim of Atzilus, for they are G‑dliness, as explained above.