The above explanation (that the exodus from Egypt is a continuous thrust within our divine service, motivating a deeper dimension of self-transcendence each day) enables us to understand a further point: that in the time of exile our exodus from limitations involves a departure from more subtle limits than the limits which [the Jews] had to transcend during the era of the Beis HaMikdash. Within the era of exile itself, the generations of ikvesa diMeshicha, the age when Mashiach’s approaching foot­steps can be heard, and more particularly the last generation in that era, are given the challenge of transcending the most subtle forms of limitations.

[To explain:] Every subsequent day sees the purification and elevation of more and more sparks of holiness, which in turn draws us closer to the arrival of Mashiach.12 Moreover, each day leads to an exodus from a subtler state of Egypt; i.e., a more-inclusive departure from limitation.

Through making the exodus from Egypt [a functional dynamic] in our divine service during the final days before Mashiach’s arrival — and thus transcending even the subtlest forms of limitation — we will merit the Future Redemption in the immediate future. And this will bring about a departure from all limitations whatsoever.

To clarify this concept — that the revelation of the Future Redemption will come about (primarily) because of the divine service at the end of exile — it is first necessary to explain the idea that the Future Redemption involves transcending all limitations, even the subtlest forms of restraint.

This concept can be understood in the following manner. As [the Previous Rebbe] explains in his discourse,3 all of the worlds (even the refined) are termed mitzrayim, “straits,” since they confine and conceal [G‑dliness]. More particularly, there are two reasons why they are called “straits”: a) because they themselves are limited in nature; b) because it is [only] through the con­cealment of Divine light that they could come into existence.

As is renowned,4 the First Tzimtzum, ([the first and most fundamental stage in the process of self-contraction of the Or Ein Sof, “G‑d’s infinite light”,] which made possible the existence of the worlds) reflects total withdrawal, the complete concealment of all illumination. This parallels5 the Mitzrayim of unholiness (Egypt as it exists within our material world), [where G‑dliness is] concealed.

On this basis, we can understand why [the Previous Rebbe] continues6 [explaining the relationship between the limits of our world and the concept of Mitzrayim] by stating that there are three implications of the Hebrew term for “world,” olam : a) the simple meaning of the term “world” that denotes [the existence of a realm defined by] time and space;7 b) the dimension associated with the Hebrew word helam , meaning “concealment”8 (the aspect of hester, hiddeness9); c) and the dimension associated with the Hebrew word ilem 10 which connotes “youthfulness” and “strength.”

The Previous Rebbe explains the connection between these three interpretations {of the word olam as follows}: the conceal­ment and hiddeness [of G‑dliness] within our world (which is defined by time and space) is very forceful and vigorous. It is possible to explain that [to demonstrate the parallel between our world and Mitzrayim] it is not sufficient to explain the concept of “world” in its simple sense (that the world is defined by time and space); it is necessary to add the connection between olam and the terms helam and ilem. For the fact that their existence is de­fined by time and space explains only why the worlds are deemed to be Mitzrayim, a limited realm. In order to explain that the degree of limitation that characterizes the worlds (can be compared to the concealment and hiddeness of actual Egypt11), it is necessary to add that the word olam relates to the words helam and ilem — implying that the concealment and hiddeness [of G‑dliness] within the worlds is vigorous and forceful.