Prologue

The Tzemach Tzedek begins with the question: Is faith in G‑d considered one of the 613 mitzvos or not? In resolution, the Tzemach Tzedek quotes Rambam, who defines faith in G‑d as a mitzvah, citing as a prooftext, the verse, “I am G‑d, your L‑rd....” Rambam maintains that it is a mitzvah to believe that G‑d is the prime cause of all creation.

In his discussion of Rambam’s ruling, Ramban quotes the view of Halachos Gedolos who says that faith in G‑d should not be considered a mitzvah in its own right, because faith is the basis of our acceptance of G‑d’s commandments and not a specific commandment. Nevertheless, although he quotes Halachos Gedolos, Ramban himself, however, agrees with Rambam that faith should be considered a mitzvah.

The mystic tradition in Judaism as reflected by the Zohar also maintains that faith in G‑d is a mitzvah, as stated in Raya Mehemna, one of the component texts of the Zohar, which asserts that “the first of all the mitzvos [is] to know that there is a Sublime Sovereign.”

Raya Mehemna – and Rambam – also distinguish between faith in G‑d and the belief in His Oneness, which they count as a separate commandment.

Section 1

The Tzemach Tzedek again poses the question: How can faith in G‑d be considered a mitzvah when it is the basis of all mitzvos? If a person believes that there are mitzvos, he also believes that there is a Commander Who has given these mitzvos. He quotes the resolution offered by R. Yitzchak Abarbanel that the mitzvah of faith is not just to believe in G‑d’s existence, but to believe that His existence is the most perfect form of being possible.

The Tzemach Tzedek then explains that according to Kabbalah and Chassidus, the resolution proposed by R. Yitzchak Abarbanel – that the mitzvah of faithinvolves a higher level of faith than simply believing that G‑d exists – should be understood differently. According to Chassidus, faith involves relating to G‑d’s Essence, a level that transcends Chochmah (wisdom), the most elevated of all the Sefiros. Thus, faith relates to the dimension of G‑dlinesss that is sovev kol almin, i.e., which transcends all the worlds.

There is an element of G‑dliness, memale kol almin (lit., which permeates all worlds), that we can relate to through knowledge. Now, it’s true that we cannot know G‑d in the sense of comprehending His Being, but we can know that He exists, following the motif: “From my flesh, I see G‑dliness.” Understanding how the soul enlivens the body brings us to an awareness of the existence of G‑d. Just as seeing that the body is alive makes us aware that the soul exists even though we cannot define what it is or how it enclothes itself in the body, similarly, our perception of life in the world enables us to comprehend that there is a G‑dly life-force that maintains it.

This recognition of G‑dliness should not be described as belief, for belief refers to something that cannot be known, whereas G‑d’s existence can, in fact, be known. Indeed, our awareness of G‑d’s activating force in the world can be so potent, it is almost as if His presence can be seen.

The maamar then proceeds to address a secondary issue: The prooftext for the commandment to believe in G‑d is the verse, “I am G‑d your L‑rd” which begins the Ten Commandments. Some interpret that as a charge to know G‑d. The Rabbis debate whether a commandment to know G‑d is necessary. One might think that since G‑d’s existence can be readily perceived, there is no need to command one to know Him. Nevertheless, the Tzemach Tzedek explains, a command is appropriate, for the command obligates deep, concentrated thought instead of merely knowing Him with fleeting or superficial thought.

We are also warned: “Take heed lest you forget G‑d,” implying that we should not divert our attention from our awareness of G‑d. Ramban includes this as one of the 613 mitzvos in his reckoning of the negative commandments. Although Rambam does not include this in his reckoning of the negative commandments, it can be explained that it is omitted because he considers this as one of the comprehensive mitzvos.

Section 2

The Tzemach Tzedek asks: How it is possible for G‑d’s existence to be known? For the Zohar clearly states: “No thought can grasp Him at all,” indicating that created beings are incapable of grasping G‑d with their knowledge and comprehension.

This can be reconciled, the Tzemach Tzedek explains, on the basis of Rambam’s statement that the existence (metzius) of the Creator can be known, but not the inner nature (mahus) of His Being. This concept can also be understood from the analogy of the body and the soul mentioned in section 1. We know that the soul exists, but we don’t understand exactly what it is or how it operates.

Parenthetically, the maamar explains how the soul is manifest in all the limbs and organs of the body equally, in an encompassing manner. Proof of this is that as soon as a person desires to move a limb, he does so without any time or effort necessary to instruct the limb to move. This indicates that thought and will – which are manifestations of the soul – exist in all organs of the body.

The Tzemach Tzedek then returns to the analogue of the relationship between the soul and the body: G‑d’s existence within the world. Just as the soul’s existence can be known but not its nature, so, too, the existence of G‑d can be known, but not the nature of His Being.

The term “knowledge” in this context refers to the knowledge that an entity exists. Nevertheless, the fact that our knowledge of G‑d relates only to His existence is not a negligible matter. Although we cannot comprehend His Being, our realization of G‑d’s existence can be so powerful that it is almost as if it is seen.

There is, of course, a difference between the knowledge of G‑d’s existence and the comprehension of the nature of His Being. The comprehension of the nature of G‑dliness produces awesome and wondrous pleasure which cannot be experienced from the mere knowledge of His existence. Nevertheless, deepening one’s knowledge of the different manifestations of G‑d’s existence can lead to deep pleasure, like a wealthy man who derives satisfaction from the knowledge of his wealth even though he does not see it at all times.

Indeed, all emotional experience arises from knowledge, as indicated by the Zohar,whichrefers to Daas, knowledge,as “the key that includes six.” For Daas is the catalyst for the expression of the six emotional qualities. Nevertheless, Daas involves only the knowledge of an entity’s existence and not the nature of its being.

In contrast to Daas (“knowledge”), Emunah (“faith”) does not have as lasting and as powerful an effect on one’s emotions. Indeed, faith can allow for an inner dichotomy, as our Sages teach: “A thief, before breaking in, calls to G‑d and asks: ‘Master of the world, save me!’” One on hand, the thief believes that G‑d can save him, and yet he performs an act that constitutes rebellion against Him. This is possible because faith is a koach makkif (lit., “encompassing power”). It is transcendent, above the person’s ordinary understanding and therefore, does not motivate the emotions in the same way as knowledge.

We are commanded to relate to G‑d through both Daas and Emunah;i.e., with Daas, to know those aspects of G‑dliness that can be known, and with Emunah, to connect to those which transcend knowledge.

On the basis of all the above, it is possible to explain the basis for the two opposing views whether or not to include the knowledge of G‑d as a mitzvah. The opinion of the author of the Halachos Gedolos is that the knowledge of G‑d cannot be counted as a mitzvah. His rationale is that a commandment necessitates that a person be presented with a choice. Since the knowledge of G‑d’s existence is grasped and this awareness produces feeling, according to this approach, there is no choice involved in believing in G‑d.

Rambam and those who follow his approach, however, do include the mitzvah of knowing G‑d in the enumeration of the mitzvos. Their rationale is that although knowledge of G‑d’s existence can beattained without effort, the commandment mandates that we deepen our understanding and contemplate a deeper level of G‑dliness. A second dimension of this mitzvah is to relate with Emunah to those dimensions of G‑dliness that cannot be grasped through knowledge. In sum, according to Rambam, the first of his positive commandments includes: a) deepening our knowledge of His existence and b) faith in Him.

Rabbeinu Yonah considers these as two separate mitzvos. The Sefer HaChinuch defines the mitzvah as: knowing what is capable of being known about G‑d, and believing that which cannot be known.

Section 3

In sections 1 and 2, the Tzemach Tzedek explained that the mitzvah of faith involves not merely believing and knowing that G‑d exists, but appreciating His transcendence and relating to Him on that level. In this section, the Tzemach Tzedek initiates a logical process of intellectual development that makes that possible. He explains the principles of faith, and in that way, provides us with tools to deepen our understanding of G‑d’s existence.

In this and the subsequent sections, he focuses on the first five of Rambam’s Thirteen Principles of Faith (for the other principles do not deal with the existence of G‑d, but with the concepts of reward and punishment and the Divine origin of the Torah). These five principles are:

1) that G‑d is mechuyav hametzius;i.e., His existence is from His own Being and is not a result of a prior cause, Heaven forbid;

2) that He is True Oneness;

3) that He is not a body, nor any bodily power;

4) that He is not dependent on time; and

5) that He has infinite power, that He acts willfully, and that He controls the world Himself; Therefore, it is fitting to serve Him. Included in the Fifth Principle is the concept that G‑d is faultless and has no deficiencies. For this is included in the concept that He is infinite and boundless.

(Although the author of the Ikkarim includes all these principles as one – the first being primary and the remaining four secondary details – Rambam separates these details into five separate principles.)

After listing these five principles, the Tzemach Tzedek begins to explain the principle of G‑d’s True Oneness; i.e., that He is not a composite of any powers or attributes, Heaven forbid, but is simple in utter simplicity.

The Tzemach Tzedek cites the question raised by many Jewish philosophers: How can G‑d be described as possessing particular attributes – wisdom, kindness, mercy, and the like – for wouldn’t identifying Him with these qualities detract from His Oneness? There would be G‑d as He exists above all powers, and G‑d as He is identified with wisdom or kindness, etc., and this would imply multiplicity within Him, Heaven forbid.

In resolution, the Tzemach Tzedek offers the explanation given by Rambam that “He is the Knower, He is the Object of Knowledge, and He is the Knowledge itself. It is all one.” Unlike mortal knowledge in which these exist as three separate entities – for man (the knower) knows with knowledge that exists independent of himand he knows entities and concepts that exist outside of himself – G‑d’s knowledge is perfect oneness.Similarly, G‑d unites with His other attributes – which are manifest in the Sefiros of Atzilus – in perfect oneness.

The Tzemach Tzedek quotes the Alter Rebbe who explains that Rambam’s statement is true with regard to the manner in which the G‑dly light enclothes itself in the Sefiros, but not as He exists above Atzilus.

To explain the Alter Rebbe’s statement, the Tzemach Tzedek quotes the challenge to Rambam made by Maharal of Prague who rejects the concept of identifying G‑d with intellect (or any other particular attribute). To quote: “Intellect has a specific definition: it is the comprehension of the concept as it is. G‑d, by contrast, has no definition that can describe Him. Were one to say that His Essence is intellect, he would have given Him a definition.” In other words, identifying G‑d with intellect (or any other quality) defines Him, and for G‑d to be G‑d, He must be simple without any definition.

The Tzemach Tzedek substantiates Maharal’s objection, explaining that G‑d is truly transcendent, and thus, all entities other than His Essence – whether Chochmah, the most elevated Sefirah in the realm of Atzilus, or physical existence – are equally of no significance before Him.

Therefore, G‑d’s Essence cannot be comprehended or grasped by man, for it is utterly transcendent, surpassing the level of intellect, which is the highest faculty man possesses. Accordingly, man does not possess the tools or the faculties to comprehend anything above that which his intellect can perceive.

How can we relate to G‑d as He exists in His simplicity? Through the power of faith. This is the point of the mitzvah of faith: to establish a connection to G‑d as He exists in utter transcendence.

Section 4

In this section, the Tzemach Tzedek expands on the issues discussed in the previous section. Rambam had offered a resolution of the question of how identifying G‑d with particular attributes is not a contradiction to the principle of His simple Oneness. Since Maharal refuted Rambam’s resolution, the Tzemach Tzedek offers a different explanation of the original question.

Maharal explains that knowledge – and similarly all the other attributes ascribed to G‑d – is merely an activity that He performs. Thus, 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, but not that He is His wisdom. This leads to another point: that just as His performance of other activities – creation, miracles, etc. – do not logically necessitate Him to have undergone any change, so, too, His knowledge does not necessitate change.

Maharal does not accept Rambam’s identification of knowledge with G‑d’s Essence, as Rambam states, G‑d is “the Knower and theKnowledge,” for Maharal emphasizes that G‑d’s Essence is elevated far above wisdom or any other quality. G‑d is, rather, a simple Being Who cannot be defined at all. Although He knows His truth, this recognition cannot be describedby the term “knowledge” as we know it. Therefore, it is not appropriate, nor is it necessary, to say concerning His self-recognition that, “He is the Knower, ... and He is the Knowledge itself.”

Similarly, when speaking about G‑d’s knowledge of the created beings, it is also not necessary to say “He is the Knower,... and He is the Knowledge itself,” because He need not be identified with His Knowledge. Instead,...

Mahadura Kamma

..the knowledge with which He knows all existence is an activity, like any of the other activities He performs. Thus, the Sefiros (which represent the attributes used to describe G‑d)are not identified as being Him. Instead, they are like tools which He uses to perform activities.

The Tzemach Tzedek states that Maharal’s resolution requires explanation, because if knowledge is merely a tool through which G‑d knows, then 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.

To resolve this difficulty, the Tzemach Tzedek cites two approaches in Kabbalah regarding the definition of the Sefiros:that of Rav Menachem Recanti, that the Sefiros are keilim (“vessels”); and the other, the perspective of Rav David, that the Sefiros are expressions of his infinite light and identified with Him.

The difference of opinion between these kabbalists resembles the difference of opinion between Rambam and Maharal mentioned above. Those who say that G‑d is “the Knower...” appear to share the perspective of Rav David. And the perspective of Maharal appears to be that of Rav Menachem. Nevertheless, it is also possible to explain that Maharal’s approach follows the approach of Ramak: that the Sefiros involve both His light and keilim.

To explain Ramak’s approach: Light emanates from G‑d. This light is simple and infinite as He is, 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).

(Later in the maamar, the Tzemach Tzedek also explains that the keilim are also expressions of G‑dliness. Indeed, we are forced to say so. Otherwise, there would be entities outside of G‑d and that would be a contradiction to His Oneness.)

An analogy for this is the life-force of the soul that is enclothed in the body. Like the light, this life-force is simple when compared with the body (the analogue to the k’li).When the soul’s life-force shines within the eye, its vitality takes on the form of the power of sight; and when it shines within the foot, it takes on the form of the power of movement. Thus, the change is brought about by the k’li, i.e., the eye or the foot, but the activity performed by these organs is attributed to the light of the soul within them.

Similarly, in the analogue in the spiritual realms, the act of G‑d’s knowing through the medium of Daas (knowledge) comes about through the power of His light that shines in the Sefirah of Daas,just as the power of sight operates through the life-force of the soul in the eye. If so, G‑d does not know through knowledge that is outside of Himself, Heaven forbid, for the knowledge stems from Him. His simple light takes on a specific form, identifying with knowledge or other specific attributes, because His light shines through a k’li,whose character is defined.

The above explanation, however, raises another fundamental question, because through enclothing itself in the Sefiros, G‑d’s simple light appears to change. Now, saying G‑d’s light changes might be interpreted as meaning that He changes. That would run contrary to the fundamentals of our faith, for it would contradict His Oneness: there would be G‑d as He exists before having undergone the change and as He exists afterwards.

The Tzemach Tzedek resolves this difficulty by saying that the light itself does not change; it is only that the difference in the keilim through which it shines brings 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. Similarly, G‑d brings about manyvaried activities depending on the Sefirah through which His light shines.

The entire discussion above refers to G‑d’s light alone. 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 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. Moreover, their very existence would seem to be a contradiction to His Oneness, for there would exist entities outside of Him. Hence, the Tzemach Tzedek concludes that although the keilim 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 and reiterated at the beginning of this section. The reason the Torah and our Sages could identify G‑d with certain attributes is that this relates to the level of G‑d’s Oneness as it exists in Atzilus, and not in His Essence. To explain: Wisdom is the k’li of Chochmah of Atzilus. That k’li is G‑dliness.Nevertheless, the concept that G‑d’s Essence – which is far above the level of Chochmah as explained above – is called the Wise One refers to Him as He enclothes Himself in Chochmah.

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

The Tzemach Tzedek explains the approach of Maharal, who maintains that the knowledge with which G‑d knows all existence is an activity, like the activity involved in a person’s acquisition of information. For the person, this acquisition of knowledge is something new; in the analogue, it is comparable to the creation of the body of a created being.

As the different sages of Chakirah have explained, each one according to his own approach, the existence of a multiplicity of created beings does not necessitate multiplicity within G‑d, just as a person’s performance of many activities does not necessitate multiplicity within his essence.

Similarly, the Maharal maintains, a multitude of knowledge, which is fundamentally a multitude of activities, does not necessitate multiplicity within G‑d, Heaven forbid, for His knowledge is a form of activity as is creation.

Thus, according to Maharal, Rambam was incorrect in identifying G‑d’s Essence with His knowledge. As Maharal explains, there is one level of G‑dly knowledge that is so much loftier than the concept of knowledge as we know it that it cannot be called knowledge in the simple sense. On that level, it is inappropriate to speak about G‑d or His knowledge as being defined at all. And on the lower level of knowledge, G‑d is not one with His knowledge because His knowledge is merely an activity.

According to Maharal, however, the concept that G‑d is not one with His knowledge is not a contradiction to His Oneness. According to Rambam, the statement that G‑d is one with His knowledge is a logical necessity. Otherwise, Rambam would be faced with the difficulty of how G‑d’s multitude of knowledge – knowing each created being in a particular manner – would not necessitate multiplicity within Him. Therefore, Rambam stated that He knows all of His creations as self-knowledge which is knowledge characterized by oneness. That explanation, however, was only necessary because Rambam identifies knowledge with His Essence.

According to Maharal,by contrast, knowledge is not identified with His Essence but is actually one of His creations. As such, G‑d’s multitude of knowledge does not necessitate multiplicity within Him, just as the 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, explains the Tzemach Tzedek, 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; and in this he 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 our framework, knowing it, and identifying with that knowledge in perfect oneness.

To describe by analogy, it is like a teacher who contracts his wisdom in order to teach something to a young child according to the child’s understanding. Although it has undergone contraction, the teacher’s intellect is not a separate entity from the teacher himself. Even when contracting his knowledge to relate to the level of the child, it is still his knowledge.

Thus, in the analogue, G‑dliness contracts itself and brings into being the Sefiros,and more particularly, their keilim (see section 4, Mahadura Kamma). These Sefiros are described as G‑dliness (Getlich). Implied is that they are not G‑d’s Essence, but an expression of His powers. And yet, even at this level, they are not separate entities, but are identified with Him.

Because the Sefiros are G‑dly, it is appropriate to say that the knowledge with which G‑d knows the created beings is actually what endows every created being with life, for G‑dliness is the source of life. Although this knowledge is distant from G‑d’s Essence, it is, nevertheless, identified with G‑d to the extent that it possesses a uniquely Divine power, the potential to bring a created being into existence from nothingness.

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

It was stated above in the name of Maharal that just as a multitude of activities does not necessitate multiplicity within Him, Heaven forbid, the same is true regarding diverse dimensions of knowledge. But the very basis of the issue has still not been answered: How is it possible for a multitude of entities to 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.

Were G‑d to have shined forthHis infinite light without any contraction or limitation, there would be grounds for this question. In truth, however, G‑d’s light shines through the medium of Chochmah – and through Chochmah to all the other Sefiros – and in this manner brings about the existence of these diverse entities. For from Chochmah, different forms of existence are already possible,for Chochmah is not comparable to His Essence. Thus, from Chochmah emanate the other nine Sefiros and then from the interrelation of these Ten Sefiros, multitudinous forms of existence are brought into being.

Thus, the creative force – G‑d’s light – is simple Oneness, but because it shines through the medium of Chochmah and the subsequent Sefiros,there is the possibility for different expressions. The Pardes offers a well-known analogy for this: the effect of the sun or fire. With one of their powers – heat – they melt wax, cause liquids to congeal, cook, burn, cause certain entities to turn black and others to turn white. The difference between these effects depends on the different nature of the objects coming into contact with the heat. The different reactions to the heat do not necessitate multiplicity within the essence of the fire itself.

Parenthetically, the Tzemach Tzedek states that the question of how a multitude of entities can come into being from simple Oneness does not present a genuine conceptual difficulty. For the supposition on which this question is based – that only oneness can come into being from oneness – is only true regarding natural entities that are not endowed with free choice and can only perform the activities dictated by the natural tendency that the Creator implanted in them.

G‑d, by contrast, is true Oneness, different by nature than the oneness we ordinarily conceive of. We conceive of oneness as set aside in a category of its own, distinct from entities whose existence is characterized by particular qualities. This cannot be said about G‑d’s Oneness; instead, His Oneness is not defined in any given way. He also possesses the quality of free choice and can bring anything into being. Unbounded multiplicity is thus, a natural expression of His nature and reflects – rather than contradicts – His Oneness.

Nevertheless, were G‑d to extend His light to the created beings without contracting it, the entities He would bring into being would not be limited like the created beings of our world. Instead, they would be unlimited in nature. Moreover, there would be an infinite multitude of entities. For since He is boundless and endless, were He to bring existence into being without tzimtzum, those beings would reflect His infinity.

Since we see that the created beings are limited and measured, we must assume that His creative power is being expressed through an intermediary: the keilim.

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.

His Essence cannot be defined at all and is above all of these attributes. Hence, the infinite light that radiates from His Essence must undergo a tzimtzum to enclothe itself in these keilim. For the keilim do not have the potential to generate any activity on their own. Instead, it is G‑d Who acts through them and it is the interaction between them and His light which brings all existence into being.

Nevertheless, the description of the keilim as utensils is not entirely accurate, for the keilim are actual G‑dliness, and not separate entities as are tools. This point is conveyed by Rambam’s statement: “He is the Knower, He is the Object of Knowledge, and He is the Knowledge itself.”

In this context, Rambam’s words are correct, in contrast to the opinion of those who maintain that the keilim are separate entities, Heaven forbid. On this basis, we can understand Rambam’s statement that by knowing Himself, G‑d knows all the created beings. The knowledge of Himself, i.e., the knowledge of these keilim, is actually the knowledge of all the created beings. For through this knowledge the created beings are brought into existence, and it is their life-force.

Nevertheless, in relation to G‑d’s Being and Essence, this knowledge is comparable to an actual deed, just as the creation of a created being is an actual deed. In this, Maharal was correct in saying that knowledge is not G‑d’s Essence. Nevertheless, since the Sefiros are G‑dliness (i.e., not His Essence but expressions of Him), Rambam’s words are correct in describing the wondrous nature of the unity of knowledge with Him. Thus, it can be said that “He is the Knower and the Knowledge,” and with the knowledge of Himself, He knows all the created beings.

The words of Maharal are also correct, however, 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.

Rambam’s words, on the other hand, are correct with regard to the unity he describes, for they 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.

Section 5

In the previous section, the Tzemach Tzedek stated that the keilim of Atzilus are G‑dliness. Here, he raises a question regarding that statement, for how can it be said that they are G‑dliness when they are not comparable to His Essence? They are defined entities and His Essence is simple and infinite.

Another point raised in the previous section requires clarification. There, it was explained that the keilim are utensils and the difference in influence from Above depends on the variation in the keilim through which His light flows.

Now, the keilim do not act independently as some mistakenly thought. That approach is flawed because it would imply that G‑d does not control the world Himself, but instead entrusts it to the Sefiros. Instead, G‑d’s light invests itself in the Sefiros and that light is the source for all influence that is expressed through the keilim.

The Tzemach Tzedek illustrates this concept by citing an analogy offered by Ramak: the life-energy of the soul enclothed in the limbs of the body. This life-energy is simple when compared to the body, which is a composite of different organs and limbs. Because of their different natures, the organs of the body bring about different activities when the life-energy of the soul is manifest in them. For example, the life-energy manifest in the eye becomes expressed in the power of sight and the life-energy manifest in the foot becomes manifest in the power of walking.

Ramak also states that the difference is not only in the activity produced, but in the life-energy itself. The life-energy of the soul adapts itself to the organs in which it is manifest. Similarly, the vitality of the essential light enclothed in the keilim Abovetakes on a form that is adapted somewhat to fit the nature of each individual k’li. If so, it appears that there is change and activity within G‑d’s essential light and thus, it might be considered as if G‑d underwent change.

To resolve this difficulty, Ramak explains that the change in the light is not genuine and illustrates this idea through an analogy of water whose color appears to change according to the color of the container in which it is held. The change of color is not genuine, as evident from the fact that after the water leaves the container, its appearance returns to its natural state. Similarly, in the analogue, Ramak also emphasizes that the change brought about by the enclothement of the light in the Sefiros involves only G‑d’s light, but not His Essence. His Essence remains in its original state.

On this basis, the Tzemach Tzedek states that we can arrive at the perfect definition of faith: It involves belief that everything that transpires stems from Him with individual Divine providence and that He watches over every created being in a particular manner through His knowledge. Nevertheless, implicit in this belief is that in His Essence, there is no change or activity, as it is written (Malachi 3:6): “I, G‑d, have not changed.”

Thus, the analogy of a craftsman performing a task with a tool is not entirely appropriate to describe the manner in which G‑d creates and maintains the world through the Sefiros. For a craftsman must be actively involved and focused on his task. Such activity brings about a change in him, while G‑d’s activities do not cause Him to change at all.

The Tzemach Tzedek clarifies the above points through the explanation of the reason the kabbalists referred to the drawing down of Divine life-energy with the term or (“light”) instead of the term shefa (“influence”) used by the philosophers.

The word shefa refers to an activity that comes from an expression of energy from the essence of the mashpia (“source of influence”) to the extent that the mashpia himself is deeply involved. He does not remain passive, but instead, invests his energies in bringing about an activity. Therefore, there is a difference between his state beforehand – when the mashpia is in his natural state – and afterwards, when he becomes actively involved and uses his energy to perform an activity and/or convey shefa.

This applies not only to physical activities in which a person conveys physical energy through his hands or feet, but also intellectual or emotional activities. The mashpia is actively involved and therefore, undergoes change.

The term or suggests the opposite of the above. Although light also involves radiating energy from its source, giving off that radiance does not bring about any activity or change within the source. Accordingly, afterwards, the source is the same as it was before the light shined forth.

The Tzemach Tzedek illustrates this point through the example of the light of the sun: the fact that clouds block the light of the sun and the light will not be seen by us makes no difference to the sun itself, for the sun remains the same at all times.

From the fact that G‑d created beings that give off light withoutundergoingchange, we must certainly conclude that He possesses this property Himself.

There is, however, a point that must be clarified, for the analogy does not resemble the analogue entirely. In the analogy, the sun radiates its light effortlessly, but also inevitably. There is no power within the sun to prevent its radiance from shining forth. In this aspect, there is an advantage to a mashpia who conveys shefa when compared to the sun that gives forth radiance. For shefa from a mashpia is dependent on his will; he decides whether to convey influence or not.

In truth, these two concepts are dependent on each other. Something which comes from one’s own will requires his personal involvement. Hence, he has the choice whether to be involved in this activity or to withhold involvement. A ray that comes from a source of light, by contrast, emerges effortlessly, but the source of light has no choice.

This limitation applies, however, only with regard to the created beings. G‑d, by contrast, possesses both positive qualities, for all positive qualities emanate from Him. Thus, the shining forth of the ray of Divine light is dependent on His will. This refers to a simple, uncompounded will that is above the level of will that is identified with the Sefirah of Kesser.

Therefore, before the world was created, it can be said that G‑d’s light existed within His Essence; i.e., the potential to grant life to the world and shine in a radiant manner was “absorbed” within G‑d, so to speak. Afterwards, He willfully revealed this light and radiated it outward. This radiation does not involve change on His part. Thus, He possesses both positive qualities: He radiates light willfully and thus, invests Himself in the light, and yet the emanation of that light does not cause Him to change.

Section 6

In the previous section, the Tzemach Tzedek raised questions concerning both the definition of the keilim as G‑dliness and the fact that G‑d’s light does not change as it enclothes itself in them. To explain those points, he elaborated on the uniqueness of G‑d’s light, explaining that even though it radiates naturally from Him, He willfully chooses that the light should radiate from Him (unlike the sun which has no choice whether or not to radiate light).

Having clarified these ideas, the Tzemach Tzedek proceeds in this section to expand upon the subjects of or (“light”) and tzimtzum (“contraction”). He begins by quoting the AriZal’s description of the process in which the world came into being, relating that when it arose in G‑d’s simple will to create the world, He contracted His light in a central point and left vacant an evenly measured place on all sides. This is referred to as tzimtzum. Only a reshimo (trace) remained from the light that originally existed. Nevertheless, the light was not reduced, G‑d forbid; it was merely “moved to the sides,” as it were. Then G‑d drew down a thin kav (vector of light) into the empty cavity, and all existence was brought into being through it.

From the interaction of the reshimo and the kav, the keilim that were mentioned above in section 5 are brought into being. The oros which, as mentioned in section 5, are the essential lights enclothed in the keilim, stem from the kav.

G‑d’s light cannot be conceived of in physical terms at all. Accordingly, the Tzemach Tzedek questions the spatial relationships implied when speaking of G‑d’s infinite light undergoing a “contraction” and of it being “moved to the side.” Also, as mentioned above, one of the fundamental principles of faith is that G‑d does not change and, seemingly, the tzimtzum represents a great change.

The Tzemach Tzedek clarifies these points by elaborating on the meaning of the term Or Ein Sof (“G‑d’s infinite light”). Since the light is representative of the Source of Light, the light is also infinite like the Ein Sof (the Infinite One), having neither beginning nor end. It is within this infinite light and not within G‑d’s Essence, Heaven forbid, that the tzimtzum took place.

To explain the tzimtzum, it is necessary to first understand that the potential of G‑d’s infinite light (Or Ein Sof) to extend outward from Him is actually without any limit or end. The intent is not merely that the potential of the light is limitless quantitatively, but that it is infinite qualitatively as well; i.e., the light is incapable of being defined or categorized in any way. Accordingly, limited created beings such as those that exist now could not come into being from this light.

In order for a limited world to come into being from this infinite light, the light must undergo contraction so that afterwards there would shine forth only a small dimension of the original, general light. That small dimension of light is referred to as the kav. Also, there remains from the original light a reshimo (a trace), much like writing that has been completely erased, leaving a mere trace of the original writing.

The light that was removed was absorbed in the Source of Light, where it existed before it originally emanated outward. (The term “before” refers more to a causal relationship than a chronological one.) Therefore, this tzimtzum did not bring about any change in His Essence, Heaven forbid, because the light was one with Him before and after the tzimtzum. An analogy is given that the sun does not undergo any change regardless of whether its light reaches the world or not.

Even the ray of G‑d’s light itself does not undergo a change; it is merely included in the Source of Light. The Tzemach Tzedek explains this point with a second analogy: the life-energy of the soul that extends into the body and into the individual organs and limbs. When the eye is closed, the power of sight returns to the essence of the soul; it has not departed and disappeared entirely, as is evident from the fact that when the person opens his eyes, he has the ability to see immediately as he did before.

Similarly, with regard to the tzimtzum of G‑d’s infinite light: the light goes back to its Source and is reabsorbed in the Source of Light, G‑d’s Essence. Thus, there is no change within Him, Heaven forbid, for all of the activity happens within His light. Moreover, even in His light there is no fundamental change because it is not diminished; it is merely reabsorbed in its Source.

After the tzimtzum, G‑d shines forth a limited ray, the kav,which interacts with the reshimo to bring the keilim of Atzilus into existence . The need for there to be a tzimtzum to create the keilim reflects how the keilim are of a different nature from His Essence and even His light. For tzimtzum differs radically from a chainlike series of cause and effect relationships (ilah v’alul). In the latter type of relationships, the effect is comparable to the cause. Although the terminology of ilah v’alul is employed with regard to the Sefiros, this refers only to the chainlike progression from one Sefirah to another Sefirah but not to the emanation of the Sefiros from G‑d’s essential light.

The contrast between these two processes (tzimtzum and ilah v’alul) can be illustrated with the following analogies: In an example of ilah v’alul, Chochmah of Atzilus serves as the ultimate source for mortal intellect, enabling it to come into being through myriads of chainlike descents until it is enclothed in the Ten Sefiros of Asiyah. The distance between Chochmah of Atzilus and Chochmah as it is manifest in mortal intellect is somewhat reflected in the comparison between the sweetness of an idea and the sweetness of an apple. In both instances, subjects share the same name and yet their form is very different one from the other. Nevertheless, the difference between Chochmah of Atzilus and Chochmah of mortal intellect is not at all comparable to the difference between Chochmah of Atzilus and the simple light that shined before the tzimtzum. Therefore, in order for Chochmah and all the other attributes to come into being, an awesome tzimtzum – allowing for a transition from one type of being to another – is necessary. Thus, it is the tzimtzum that makes it possible for the keilim of Chochmah and the other Sefiros to come into being.

Nevertheless, although these keilim impart a specific, individual nature to each of the Sefiros, they are still called G‑dliness, for they are not separate and independent entities. There is thus, a difference between the Sefirah of Chessed (“kindness”) and the kindness embodied in the archangel Michael. For Michael is a separate and independent entity. True he yearns for G‑d, but thatitself shows how he has become a separate entity. In contrast, the k’li of Chessed is not an independent entity but is actual G‑dliness. It is His kindness.

Therefore, these Sefiros are referred to as Atzilus and not Beriah. For the meaning of the name Atzilus is indicated by the phrase (Bamidbar 11:25): “And He brought about an emanation (vayatzel) from the spirit that was upon [Moshe,] and endowed it upon the seventy Elders.” Similarly, the Sefiros of Atzilus represent the radiance and the light of the Ein Sof. They are not creations with separate identities. For this reason, they are called Atzilus, for that term also has the connotation of eitzel,“close [to Him],” and near. The term Beriah, by contrast, implies the creation of a new entity from nothingness.

Now, the nature of these keilim is very different from the nature of G‑d’s infinite light which transcends them utterly. Indeed, the degree of its transcendence is infinitely greater than the degree of the transcendence of the Sefiros over a created being. In truth, the Sefiros and a created being are considered the same before Him. Thus, the verse “You made them all with wisdom” can be interpreted as meaning that the Sefirah of Chochmah and an inanimate object in the world of Asiyah are actually the same not only in relation to G‑d’s Essence, but even in relation to His simple light. For although this simple light is only a ray, it is still representative of the Source of Light.

Nevertheless the Sefiros of Atzilus are called actual G‑dliness, for they are His Wisdom and His Understanding, etc. Because they are identified with Him, the Sefiros are able to grant life to the created beings and bring them into being from nothingness.

Thus, a resolution has been offered for the first question raised in section 5: How is it possible for the keilim to be considered actual G‑dliness and yet be incomparable to the Essence and Being of G‑d? For the interpretation of the term “G‑dliness” is “expressions of Him,” but not G‑d Himself, Heaven forbid. As a parallel, when we speak of powers of the soul – the soul’s potential for thought, speech, and the like – these are not the essence of the soul, but the expressions of its powers. Nevertheless, they are not separate entities in the way that one person is separate from another.

The second point – the fact that G‑d’s light does not change as it enclothes itself in the Sefiros – can be explained as follows: The kav,which shines in the keilim,comes from the light that preceded the tzimtzum. Nevertheless, when compared to the light and radiance of the Ein Sof itself, the light of the kav is merely a ray. It is thus, a ray of a ray from G‑d’s Essence and Being.

The light of the kav is simple, except that it is given form through its enclothement in the keilim. For the ray that shines in the k’li of Chochmah takes on the characteristics that enable it to serve as the power and vitality for Chochmah;and the ray that shines in the k’li of Chessed takes on the characteristics to serve as the power and vitality for Chessed. The difference between these different expressions of the light does not affect the true essence of the light. Instead, it is like the color of water that appears to change depending on the color of the container in which it is placed, or the difference that appears in the color of sunlight according to the color of the glass through which it shines.

The enclothement of the kav in the keilim can be understood through an analogy to the power of pleasure. Pleasure is one quality, yet it enclothes itself and vitalizes all of the other powers of the soul. Similarly, through the enclothement of the kav in the keilim, the keilim are endowed with life-energy as explained above; for the keilim are like the body, or vessel, for the light of the soul enclothed in it. Through the enclothement of the light in the keilim, Divine life-energy is drawn down to lower levels, bringing the worlds into existence from nothingness .

On this basis, it is possible to resolve the second question raised in section 5: How can there be no change in the Ein Sof even though He brings about different activities through different keilim?The Tzemach Tzedek explains that G‑d is not like a craftsman who personally undergoes changes because of the different keilim (tools) he uses , because the enclothement of His light in the different keilim to bring about these different activities involves only His light and more particularly, only a ray of a ray. Moreover, the radiance itself does not undergo a true change. Thus, His Essence does not undergo any change, Heaven forbid, although all the different activities stem from Him, as explained above.

Section 7

Having described the Sefiros in the previous sections, the Tzemach Tzedek returns to the issue raised in section 4 – the association of G‑d with different attributes and emotional states. The maamar previously focused on how Rambam and Maharal differed on this issue; here the concepts are explained based on Chassidus and Kabbalah.

The Tzemach Tzedek begins by stating why it was difficult for the philosophers to resolve this concept – because it cannot be said that G‑d undergoes change, and were He to experience different emotional states, He would be undergoing change. Therefore, they interpreted all the verses that speak about G‑d’s happiness, anger, and the like according to the principle that “The Torah speaks in the language of men.” Implied is that G‑d brings about activities that are similar to those activities that we carry out when we are emotionally aroused. Nevertheless, the activities brought about by G‑d do not cause or result from any emotional arousal in Him.

Moreover, the very existence of attributes and qualities presented a problem for the philosophers, for that implies the existence of something outside of G‑d.

Kabbalah accepts the concept of the existence ofattributes within G‑dliness, identifying them as the Ten Sefiros of Atzilus. These attributes are not of the same type as the emotional qualities that exist within man; indeed, they transcend mortal attributes entirely. Nevertheless, they are defined entities, with distinct qualities. Their existence does not, however, necessitate change or multiplicity within Him, for as we prefaced above, although the Sefiros are called G‑dliness, they are not His Essence. Instead, these attributes exist within His light. Moreover, even that light undergoes tzimtzum.

After this tzimtzum, the G‑dly light has descended to a level at which it may be aroused by the deeds of man and there will be a response of kindness or might, laughter or anger. Nevertheless, these responses only involve the Sefiros;G‑d’s Essence, by contrast, does not change, as explained above.

The Tzemach Tzedek notes that this explanationis problematic. If the emotional arousal takes place solely within the Sefiros, it would appear to be divorced from G‑d, as it were. That cannot be said, for in several places the TaNaCh speaks about G‑d’s happiness and anger, appearing to imply that He, and not only the Sefiros, are involved. The Tzemach Tzedek proceeds to explain that G‑d Himself is involved, for His essential light shines through the Sefiros. However, because His involvement is expressed through His light, it does not cause any change in His Essence.

Moreover, this activity does not even bring about change in the essential light. It merely appears to do so, as in the analogy of water whose appearance changes according to the color of the container in which it is held. Nevertheless, even this semblance of activity and change does not apply with regard to G‑d’s Essence.

Similarly, all the terms used to describe G‑d – the Wise, the Understanding, the Generous, the Mighty and the Awesome – are all expressions of the essential light as it is enclothed in the attributes of Atzilus. For example, when this light is enclothed in Chochmah, He is called Wise because He is the source of this wisdom and gives it life through the essential light described above.

After having explained that the attributes of Atzilus are G‑dliness, the Tzemach Tzedek continues, describing the process through which influence from Atzilus is drawn down into this world. To use kabbalistic terminology, the keilim of Atzilus become the lights for the worlds of Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah. Now, there is a fundamental difference between the two; the Ten Sefiros of Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah are created beings and not G‑dliness, while the Ten Sefiros of Atzilus are identified as G‑dliness. Therefore, in order for the active expression of these qualities in Atzilus to be drawn down to generate the influence in this material world that comes as a result of them, a further process of enclothement is necessary. There are myriads upon myriads of levels of spiritual existence that come into being in a downward chain of progression until the influence from the emotional qualities of Atzilus mentioned above descends to bring into being an arousal of spiritual energy that is close enough to serve as a source for influence on the physicalplane.

Nevertheless, although the influence undergoes a descent as it passes through the various levels of the Spiritual Cosmos (Seder HaHishtalshelus), G‑d is the source of this influence. For the influence conveyed by these intermediate levels comes about through the radiance of Atzilus enclothed within them.

Man’s conduct in this world brings about an arousal from the corresponding Sefirah in the world of Atzilus. The radiance of Atzilus then shines through the intermediate spiritual levels to produce an activity that reflects man’s conduct; for example, man’s acts of kindness evoke kindness Above. That in turn brings about expressions of Divine beneficence in our world. Nevertheless, the activity of the Sefiros of Atzilus does not bring about activity or change within G‑d’s Essence, because the emanation of the Sefiros involves merely the radiation of a light and a ray, and this has no effect on His Essence.

These explanations resolve the apparent contradiction between the following two fundamental principles: a) that G‑d oversees His world and all influence comes from Him as stated in the Fifth Fundamental Principle of Faith, but b) He does not undergo any change at all; for, as stated in the Second Fundamental Principle, He is true unity.

Section 8

In the previous sections the following question was raised: How can the attributes and activities ascribed to G‑d in the Torah be true descriptions of His G‑dliness when, as we have learned, there is no change and activity within G‑d’s Essence? This was resolved through the explanation that all these attributes and activities came into being after the tzimtzum, existing only as extensions of a ray of G‑dliness. Therefore, these attributes and activities exist without causing a change within G‑d’s Essence in any way.

In this section, the Tzemach Tzedek focuses on a further difficulty raised by the philosophers: Even after it has been explained that the emotional activity described in the Torah does not involve any change in G‑d’s Essence, a question still remains: If everything comes from G‑d, what could possibly motivate Him to emotional activity? What could cause Him to be happy or angry?

People respond emotionally when affected by other persons to whom they relate. Their feelings are aroused by situations around them that touch their hearts. Can such statements be made about G‑d? Nothing exists outside of Him. Who or what could possibly call forth an emotional response from Him?

In the previous sections, it has been explained that G‑d’s activities and qualities are expressions of G‑dly radiance that shines after the tzimtzum. Hence, these qualities and activities do not present a contradiction to the axiom that He does not change, for in truth, within His Essence, there is no change. The happiness and the anger do not exist in His Essence. Instead, it is only after a great tzimtzum that it is possible for these qualities to exist within His light. Hence, their existencedoes not cause change within Him.

Even with the resolution of this issue, it remains, however, difficult to understand: Why should He be aroused to emotional activity? Who or whatwill arouse Him since there is no existence outside of Him?

In resolution, it can be explained as follows: In His Essence, there is no activity at all. He is not angered nor does He rejoice. Instead, He is exalted far above all these qualities. In relation to G‑d’s Essence, it is written (Iyov 35:7): “If you acted righteously, what have you given Him?” and (ibid.:6): “If your transgressions multiply, what have you done to Him?” On this level, neither our mitzvos nor our transgressions are significant at all, and they do not cause Him to be affected by them. It is not relevant to speak of emotion arousal at all.

Nevertheless, the ray of G‑dliness that shines from Him after the tzimtzum has descended to the level where it is affected by man’s actions. Although the Sefiros brought into being by this ray are G‑dly, since they are the result of an awesome tzimtzum, it is possible that the deeds of the righteous and the wicked will elicit happiness and anger respectively. For on this lower level of G‑dliness, the created beings are significant.

This explanation is, however, problematic. For the Sefiros are not created as independent beings as arethe other elements of creation. They are emanations from His Essence and still united with it. Hence, just as mortal conduct is of no significance to – and creates no emotional response in – His Essence, one might think that it would not generate emotional response within the Sefiros as well.

The Tzemach Tzedek resolves this difficulty with an analogy of a father who desires to train his one-year-old child to walk or talk, for example, and shows him a happy or angry countenance in order to bring about positive or negative reinforcement in the child. Now, the son’s actions are in and of themselves not significant enough to call forth the father’s anger or happiness. He is only expressing these responses for the son’s benefit so that he will learn to perform the particular task. The child’s capabilities are of such a vastly lower level than those of the father, that his actions can hardly generate genuine emotional arousal. Nevertheless, out of the father’s commitment to his son’s development, he makes an outward display of these emotions.

Similarly, in the analogue, the created beings are of no significance in relation to G‑d’s Essence. Nevertheless, He chooses to involve Himself with them and respond to their conduct.

There is, however, a difference between the analogy and the analogue. In the analogy, the father is not truly emotionally aroused; he is merely acting out the emotions so it will appear to the son that he is emotionally aroused. In the spiritual realms, by contrast, these emotions – the Chessed and Gevurah of Atzilus,(the Father’s emotions, as it were) – do genuinely exist.

To illustrate the contrast between the father’s emotions and the Sefiros of Atzilus, the Tzemach Tzedek explains that there is a fundamental difference between mortal thoughts and G‑d’s thoughts. Our thoughts are no more than thoughts; unless we act upon them, they will have no tangible effect. This is not true with regard to G‑d’s thoughts. When it arises in His will and thought to bring into being and emanate a framework of existence, His thought alone is sufficient to bring about this emanation and cause its existence. Thus, the higher spiritual realms can be understood as parallels to levels within G‑d’s thought and desire to create. The Sefiros of Atzilus exist because He desires to relate to our world. This desire brings about the existence of these Sefiros on the level of thought.

Parenthetically, the Tzemach Tzedek explains that the statement “Everything is ‘as of’ no importance before Him,” should not be interpreted as meaning that everything is nothingness and void – that the world and everything in it do not actually exist. For, as explained in Tanya, Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah, ch. 6, the intent is not that there is no existence, but that the existence of the world has no importance. The world does exist, but it does not have an independent identity.

In explanation, the Tzemach Tzedek employs an analogy: the radiance of the sun as it exists in the orb of the sun. Although it exists, it has no existence of its own. Its existence is batel, subsumed in the existence of the sun.Similarly, with regard to the worlds as they exist after creation: they do exist, but before Him they are of no importance, like the nullification of the radiance of the sun in the orb of the sun described above.

The Tzemach Tzedek also raises the question: Why is it necessary for Him to undergo tzimtzum in order to be aroused by the deeds of the created beings? Seemingly, it would have been preferable for Him to control His world through His great light that transcends the limited ray enclothed in the worlds. In this way, He could express His kindness in an unlimited fashion, as is His nature.

In resolution, he states that, as explained in section 6, without His light undergoing tzimtzum, the worlds would not be able to come into existence in the limited state they are now. And just as the tzimtzum is necessary to bring them into being, so, too, it is necessary to maintain their existence.

Section 9

The previous sections explained that the changes in the emotional states which the Torah and our Sages attribute to G‑d do not involve a change within His Essence, because the change takes place only at the level at which G‑d’s light enclothes itself in the keilim.

The light itself is simple. It is the differences in the keilim that bring about the difference in the manner in which it is expressed.

In this section, the Tzemach Tzedek focuses on the question of a change in G‑d’s will. This is a more problematic issue because just as with a person, the power of will is closer to his “self” than his emotions are, so too, the power of G‑d’s will is closer to His Essence and is less affected by a k’li.

This is a very relevant issue, for in our prayers we are continually requesting a change in G‑d’s will as we ask, for example, that the sick be healed or the Beis HaMikdash be rebuilt. There is a Rabbinic opinion that all the “changes” within G‑d’s will – like the parting of the Sea and other miracles –are not truly a change in His will but were included in His original will for creation. Nevertheless, the more widely accepted view is that espoused by Rambam, that G‑d’s will does change. This, of course, is difficult for us to comprehend. In a person, a change in his will causes the person himself to change, for it involves making a decision and reorienting one’s approach. G‑d’s will, however, does not resemble our will – just as His wisdom does not resemble our wisdom. Hence, His will can change without His Essence being changed.

This position can be explained based on the statements of Sefer Yetzirah that describe the Ten Sefiros of Atzilus as being בלי מה, “without substance,” i.e., the Chochmah, Chessed, etc., of Atzilus are not comparable to these same powers as they exist in a person’s soul. The powers of the soul exist as defined entities, with particular characteristics. The Sefiros as they exist in Atzilus, by contrast, are transcendent. Since they are still identified with the G‑dly potential that is their source like the sun’s light as it exists within the orb of the sun, their individual qualities are subsumed in their G‑dly source. Similarly, His will is not the same type of will as ours at all and cannot be conceived by us at all. Although willful action by man brings about change within himself, that does not apply Above, for His will is so radically different from ours.

The above represents an explanation of the position of Rambam and those who follow his perspective that, as explained in section 3, will, like G‑d’s other powers, is identified with His Essence. By saying that He acts willfully, their intent is that we should understand that He is not acting because He is compelled to do so; no external force is compelling Him to act. Their words should not be understood as implying that His will is comparable to ours.

According to the explanation given in section 4, all these powers, including will, are merely (keilim) and His Essence is truly incomparable to them. On that basis, the question regarding a change in G‑d’s will can be resolved on a deeper level: All G‑d’s powers, including will, are like garments. Therefore, a change in G‑d’s will is comparable, for example, to a king changing from a red garment to a white one. Obviously, the fact that the garments are different does not bring about a change in the body of the king himself.

To explain this concept, the Tzemach Tzedek gives a detailed analogy of the powers of the soul, stating that a given power can express itself in many different mediums. For example, a person with wisdom and skill in one craft, e.g., calligraphy, also has the potential to use his wisdom to develop his abilities in another craft, e.g., weaving. Thus, his power of wisdom is a general, undefined potential that expresses itself in many different ways.

Similarly, in the analogue, G‑d’s light is simple. It expresses itself in different ways according to the garments in which it is enclothed. Thus, a change in G‑d’s will is like Him changing from a red garment to a white one. It does not necessitate a change within the One Who wears the garment.

The concept that a change in will brings about a change in the one whose will is involved applies to mortals, for their personality is a compound; their essence is intertwined with their powers. Thus, when a person’s will is aroused, the essence of his soul is also affected. Therefore, a change in will involves activity within the soul itself. With regard to G‑d, by contrast, His will is only like a garment, and when He wills something, His Essence is not affected, just as the essence of the soul is not affected by a garment or like the analogy of water placed into a colored container mentioned in previous sections. This is the intent of the request in our prayers “May it be Your will”: that He enclothe Himself in one will rather than another by changing the garment.

The potential to bring about a change in G‑d’s will is given over to the Jewish people, just as the potential to motivate a king to change his garments only exists within one who is close to the king.

Why do the Jews have this power? Because a radiance of Ein Sof that stems from G‑d’s Essenceis manifest within the souls of the Jewish people. This essential connection is reflected in the Jews’ potential to sacrifice themselves with mesirus nefesh. Therefore, because they are essentially one with G‑d, the Jews alone have the potential to change His will.

When G‑d’s will is changed, influence is drawn down from His Essence, through the Sefiros of Atzilus to Sublime Speech, the letters through which worldly existence is brought into being. From those levels, it continues descending through the Spiritual Cosmos (Seder HaHishtalshelus) until eventually it brings about a change in entities on the material plane. The changes in His will, in the Sefiros,and in Sublime Speech are all merely changes of garments that do not bring about change within the One Who clothes Himself in them.

Another interpretation of the request “May it be Your will” can be offered that relates to the mitzvah of teshuvah and G‑d’s granting of forgiveness.There are several levels that exist within G‑d’s will, the highest of which is “the will of wills.” The expression “May it be Your will” is a request that a new will be drawn down from “the will of wills” – the will that is the source of all wills. This new will is the source for the forgiveness granted to a sinner.

There is a lower level of Divine will that is modulated by intellect and that level does not allow for repentance, as our Sages state: The attribute of Chochmah was asked: “How can a soul that sinned gain atonement?” And the attribute of Chochmah replied that the sinner should die. However, on a higher level of will, G‑d desires teshuvah and will grant atonement. When we say “May it be Your will,” the intent is for influence to be drawn down from the sublime will that transcends intellect to the level of will that is shaped by intellectandrelates to worldly existence. This is the meaning of the request “May it be Your will,” i.e., reveal Your simple will, the higher level of will which is associated with mercy, within the lower will .

All of these changes in His will do not involve a change in the essential light enclothed in the Sefiros. To use an analogy, it is like light shining through colored glass. Certainly, there is no change in His Essence, for the essential light in the Sefiros is merely a ray, and the ray of light does not bring about any change in the Source of Light.

Section 10

In the previous sections, the Tzemach Tzedek explained various questions stemming from Rambam’s Second and Fifth Principles of Faith. In this section, he proceeds to the explanation of the Third Principle of Faith: that G‑d “is not a body, nor any bodily power.”

Chassidus explains that G‑d’s Being truly transcends all physical and spiritual existence. In that context, this fundamental principle can be interpreted as meaning that He is not of the same type of existence as the spiritual powers in the higher realms. There are some spiritual entities that have spiritual bodies and others that do not. Nevertheless, His Being is of a different nature from even the most refined spiritual entities. Just as material existence cannot be ascribed to Him, Heaven forbid, so, too, is intellectual and spiritual existence an inappropriate description. Indeed, in relation to Him, there is no difference between material and spiritual existence and it cannot be said that a spiritual being is closer to Him than a material one.

This is the mystic secret implied by the verses (Tehillim 113:5-6): “Who is like G‑d our L‑rd Who dwells on high; Who lowers Himself to look upon heaven and earth.”

These verses reflect the contrast between the Jewish conception of G‑d and the gentile one. The gentiles say that G‑d’s “glory is upon the heavens,” i.e., manifest in spiritual existence but not in material existence, i.e., “on earth.” They consider Him as more exalted than, but fundamentally of the same type as, other spiritual entities. Therefore, they say, “His glory is upon the heavens”: manifest in the spiritual realms, but too elevated to be manifest within the lowly physical earth. Instead they maintain that “G‑d abandoned the earth” to intermediaries – the forces of nature and the lower elements of the spiritual cosmos, e.g., the angels – that control them. The Jews, by contrast, maintain that “He dwells on high,” i.e., far above all comprehension, to the extent that He is not on the level of these spiritual entities at all. Instead, spiritual and physical existence are equally removed from Him, for the tzimtzum is necessary to bring both of these forms of existence into being. Therefore, just as He “lowers Himself to look upon the heavens,” and becomes manifest in spiritual existence, so, too, He “lowers Himself to look upon” even the “earth” and manifests His presence within our world.

Section 11

This section explains the Fourth Fundamental Principle of Faith mentioned by Rambam: that G‑d is kadmon (lit., “first”); i.e., His existence does not have a beginning in time. This cannot be said about anything else in existence. For every other entity has a beginning in time; i.e., the moment it was brought from a state of non-being into being.

The description of G‑d as kadmon does not merely refer to chronological precedence; i.e., that He existed before the world. Instead, the intent is that He exists before everything, even before time, for time is also one of His creations and therefore, was brought into being from G‑d Who existed before it.

G‑d exists, has existed, and will exist forever. He was not brought into being, Heaven forbid, and thus, exists independent of time, above the entire framework of chronology. He simply is.Even now He exists above time, for time came into being with the creation of the world and is only relevant to the created beings.

The Tzemach Tzedek then continues, describing the nature of the limitations of time, stating that time is a composite of limited units, for time is divided into segments. A day is one-365th of a year. An hour is one-24th of a day. Since every one of these larger units is comprised of smaller units, it is impossible for any of these units to be actually infinite; i.e., one cannot say that an infinite amount of time passed. For it is impossible to gather many limited units until one amasses something unlimited, for limitation can never produce something unlimited.

Since time is divided into segments, and a moment and an hour are portions of the total span of time that has existed since the creation of time, logically, we are forced to say that the total span of time has a finite number of portions. For we see that as time proceeds, the span of time becomes greater. Since it becomes greater from the addition of limited units, we must say that it is also limited. For were it to be unlimited, it would not be increased by the addition of a limited entity, for an unlimited quantity is not comparable to anything limited.

Since time is limited, then – as is true with the creation of every limited being – it was preceded by non-existence. As such, before time came into being, there would have to have been a state of existence in which there was no time at all. For, like all other creations, time is a creation that was brought into being from nothingness. Only G‑d is independent of time.

Just as we cannot comprehend what G‑d’s Essence is, we cannot comprehend what it means for Him to exist above time. Nevertheless, we know with certainty that this is so, in the same way we know G‑d exists even though we can’t comprehend His nature, as described in section 2.

We can gain a certain appreciation of this idea by comparing it to a parallel concept: spiritual reality which is not bound by spatial limitations. All space – even the empty areas of outer space – is limited, for it is divisible into units: e.g., in the Talmudic era: cubits, handbreadths, fingerbreadths, and the like; at present, inches, feet, and yards. Our entire frame of reference is encompassed by space, for every physical entity – inanimate objects, plants, animals, and humans – exists only within space.Now, although we can understand that the entities of the spiritual realms (such as angels or souls) are not bound by these limitations and are above the concept of space entirely, we cannot comprehend the nature of their existence. This is what is meant by knowing that something exists but not comprehending its nature. Similarly, when speaking about existence that is beyond the parameters of time, we can know clearly that there exists this type of existence, even though we cannot comprehend its nature.

The Tzemach Tzedek notes that our Sages state: “The ‘order of time’ existed before Creation” and questions: “If the ‘order of time’ preceded Creation, how can it be said that time did not exist before Creation?”He resolves the matter by explaining that there is a difference between time and “the order of time.”

He states that unlike G‑d Who is truly timeless, the “order of time” is also a creation that came into existence from a state of non-being. Although it preceded the actual creation of the world – existing when time as we know it did not exist – it is closer to the concept of time than the timelessness we ascribe to G‑d.

The Tzemach Tzedek explains this concept as follows: In section 4, it was stated that the reason countless different types of entities could be brought into being from G‑d’s simple Oneness is that after the tzimtzum, the ray of His light was drawn down into the Ten Sefiros. The interaction between the light and the different types of keilim brings about the various types of created beings. Now, bringing these ten keilim into being from G‑d’s simple Oneness also requires an intermediary, one which can, on one hand, relate to the simplicity of G‑d’s light and on the other hand, relate to the varied identities of the keilim.

Elsewhere, an analogy for this intermediary level was given from the first stage of the descent of the soul’s life-force as it becomes enclothed in the body before it extends into the individual limbs. At this stage, all of the soul’s powers that will later become distinct are included in complete oneness.

Similarly, in the spiritual realms, there are several levels – among those singled out by the Tzemach Tzedek are the Ten Sefiros of the Akudim and the realm of Adam Kadmon – which serve as intermediaries between the revelation of G‑d’s light after the tzimtzum and the Sefiros of Atzilus.

This enables us to understand the Zohar’s statement that G‑d “looked into the Torah and created the world.” The Torah is identified with Adam Kadmon,which represents the primeval thought of creation in which G‑d gazed and surveyed all existence until the end of time.It contains within itself the potential for every element of existence, like a general conception of a project that includes all the details that will later emerge. When G‑d “looks into the Torah,” He shines G‑dly light into the Torah, enabling the particular elements of the world to come into existence. For example, as the Zohar continues: “In the Torah, it is written: ‘Let there be light.’” This represents the existence of the light as it was included in G‑d’s general thought. G‑d “looked into the Torah” and brought it down into revelation in the creation of a particular light.

The order of the downward progression of the spiritual cosmos follows the pattern in which particular entities are drawn down from a general category in a progression in which the particular entity on a higher level becomes the general category for the particular entities at the level below it.

For example, each one of the Sefiros of Atzilus serves as a general quality with regard to all of the particular created beings that are drawn down from that Sefirah in the worlds of Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah. Thus, from the attribute of Chessed of Atzilus are drawn down the 180,000 angels of the camp of the archangel Michael in the world of Beriah. Similarly, in the realms below Beriah, Chessed serves as a general category allowing for the existence of a multitude of particular created beings.

As the Divine vitality descends, it is expressed in even more particular levels. Nevertheless, “there is nothing in the particular levels that does not exist in the general category,” for the particular levels do not contribute a new dimension that did not exist within the general category. Instead, the particular dimensions that were not revealed in the general category came into expression. In a hidden manner, however, all of these particulars existed within the general category.

This concept is illustrated in the relationship between the Mishnah and the Gemara. All of the particular insights developed in the Gemara are included in the general presentation of the idea by the Mishnah, as Ilfa said(Taanis 21a): “Is there anything that you can ask me from a beraisa that I cannot resolve through a mishnah?”Or to cite another example, it is said (ibid.:9a): “Is there anything that is written in Scripture that is not alluded to in the Torah?”

To apply these concepts to the analogue: The most elevated general category in the spiritual realms is Adam Kadmon,which includes all existence as one. From it, are drawn down afterwards all the particular levels of existence. Adam Kadmon is thus, identified with the primeval thought of creation in which G‑d gazed and surveyed all existence until the end of time.

(The explanation of the concept of the “order of time” is concluded in the following section.)

Section 12

In this section, the Tzemach Tzedek continues the explanation of the principle that G‑d is above time and elaborateson the concept of “the order of time” that exists in the spiritual realms.

He explains that the manner in which time comes into being also follows the same pattern as that of particular entities coming into being from a general category. There is a general light that includes all the particular created beings as one, and this same light also includes all the units of time as one. This rung is identified with the level of Adam Kadmon at which G‑d “gazed and surveyed all existence until the end of time in one glance.” This one glance includes the entire span of the six millennia of the world’s existence.

Afterwards, from this glance, there is a division into several lesser units, each representing a different emotional attribute and each one including a large span of time; e.g., the first millennium is identified with the attribute of Chessed. Thus, it is said (Tehillim 90:4): “For 1,000 years are like yesterday in Your eyes.” For each of these divisions, referred to as “days,” includes a millennium.

Afterwards, these lesser levels of light divide into even smaller units, with each unit including a long span of time, but less than the previous level. For example, on Rosh HaShanah, a light that includes the entire span of 365 days of the year in one glance is drawn down. Afterwards, the light is further divided into twelve Rashei Chadashim, with each Rosh Chodesh including the span of (29 or) 30 days. Afterwards, it is divided into days and then from days into hours.

The explanation of the concept that many units of time (e.g., 365 days) can be included together as one (i.e., one year) can be understood on the basis of the concept explained previously, that G‑d’s Essence is entirely above time. The existence of the concept of time came about as a result of the contraction and expansion of G‑d’s light in the beginning of the creation of the world, as a result of the interaction of G‑d’s light (the kav) with the reshimo.

Thus, even though G‑d’s infinite light is above time, the entities that come into existence through His light follow an order of precedence, depending on the sequencein which they are drawn down. Initially, there was drawn down one general light that resulted from “one glance,” producing a single movement of contraction and expansion.

Afterwards, this light was divided into Six Attributes; i.e., the Six Middos of Atzilus alluded to in the verse (I Divrei HaYamim 29:11): “Yours is the greatness (i.e., Chessed)....” Each attribute is drawn down after the other. They are called six “days,” and each “day” includes a millennium as explained above.

This is what is meant by the expression “the order of time” used by the Midrash. This term was chosen because, in truth, it is not time as we know it, since it existed before the world and time were created. Nevertheless, it is called “the order of time” because it involves a sequence of separate units: first Chessed, then Gevurah, and then Tiferes, etc.

In this material world, G‑dly influence is divided into many different particular elements. So numerous are these divisions, that from one emotional attribute in Atzilus, for example,one thousand years are brought into being, for each Middah is divided into a thousand levels. Each one of those levels divides into 365 units, and each one of those divides into 24 forms which represent the hours. For in order that the life-force of every entity be enclothed in a material form in our world, it is necessary that it be divided into very many portions so that an interval of an hour would be brought into being, due to the collection of the phases of contraction and expansion, with each portion existing for the duration of a moment. For this is a great general principle: To the extent that Divine vitality is drawn down to lower levels, it is forced to divide to a greater degree. To cite an analogy, the actual flame of a candleoccupies a very small space, but the light that diffuses from it fills up a large area – an entire room or home.

The communication process between a teacher and a student also serves as an analogy for the above. When a teacher desires to communicate his thoughts to a student who is on a comparatively low level, he uses many words and ideas to break down his idea into individual points so that a student with a less developed thinking process can grasp it.

When, by contrast, he seeks to communicate to a student with a higher level of understanding, he does not have to explain the various concepts to such an extent. Instead, he may say “few words of great content,” with each word encapsulating much meaning, like a general principle that contains many particulars. Similar concepts apply with regard to the relationship between thought and speech. What will take a moment of thought will take a much longer time to explain in speech.

In the analogue, the higher (and therefore, the more general) the Divine influence is, the more particulars that will eventually be produced by it will be included on that original level. This is so on every level until in the first revelation of the general light after the tzimtzum, everything is included as one. This level refers to the “one thought and the one glance” that includes all time, as explained above. This represents the Torah’s source in Adam Kadmon, the first general category, where all existence is included as one.

G‑d’s Essence, by contrast, is above time so entirely and fundamentally that even to speak of “one glance” is not appropriate. Certainly, He has no connection to the “order of time” of Atzilus.

Parenthetically, the Tzemach Tzedek states that the above enables us to understand to a certain degree the apparent paradox between G‑d’s omniscience and a person’s free choice. G‑d’s omniscience refers to the first general category (Adam Kadmon) in which He surveys all time with one glance. Nevertheless, His knowledge on this level does not compel man’s choice. For man’s choice is on a lower plane, where particulars have already been drawn down and have emerged from the general category.

In conclusion, it can be explained that time was brought into being through tzimtzumim and because the process of withdrawal and expansion of Divine light brought about more particular levels. Nevertheless, the entire concept of tzimtzumim and withdrawal applies only with regard to us, but before His Essence, the entire Creation is as if it never existed; just as it was before the creation of the world. Hence, even the existence of time is of no consequence to G‑d, as we say in our prayers: “You were the same before the world was created and You are the same after the world has been created.”