Part 2 · Chapter 20

Separate Nature of the Ten Sefirot of Chaos 0:02

ולזה בבחינת עשר ספירות דתוהו הן בלתי מיוחדים ומתכללים זה עם זה. And therefore the ספירות דתוהו do not unite or include with each other at all, אלא הן זו תחת זו, זה תחת זה, they're one under the other, כמו שכתוב וימלוך וימת וכו' by each of the the kings of תוהו, the kings of עשו or what says represent the kings of תוהו, כמו רצון העצמי שבא בגילוי חסד, הגם שכלול בשכל וכו' לא יתחבר עם רצון עצמי היפוכו הבא בבחינת הדין.

So even though a guy has an עצם רצון for חסד, like you see this type of thing very much in politics or something like, right? That a guy has a, he really, because of whatever reason, so he is liberal leanings and another person has like conservative leanings, whatever.

Or like you see this even like when people that are like any type of thing, they believe in, it's really a belief, it's really just an עצם נקודה they are connected to it, or like people with missionaries and stuff like that, they believe whatever it is.

Even though because of this they're willing to come into שכל to try to convince you, but they're not there there it's not actually, even though they're both going to come, both sides will come into שכל, but the שכל is not is not really שכל, it's really רצון, it's really still their belief.

And so therefore they you could talk to one of these guys till you're blue, you're never going to convince them anything, cuz it's a one-way שכל. They are using to them, שכל's a puppet to convince you of what they believe. I mean that's this is not necessarily a bad thing, this is the way that that it starts off. שכל was originally built as a a way to on the on the this level, that's what שכל does.

It just it just interprets and expresses to somebody else what you believe. But it's it's not able to convince somebody if their עצם נקודה somewhere else. And this is what like why also, I mean when any anytime you come to like a thing like this, like like in Israel with the Jews and the Arabs, because it's a religious thing, democracy doesn't work. You can't tell two people to sit down and compromise if their inner goals are in conflict.

When it comes down to things that are on the side of the goal, that are just, then then then you can make a compromise. But when it comes to the actual goal itself, there's no room to compromise, because my עצם רצון is exact opposite of your עצם רצון.

It's not a thing of like, well, you can tell me that if I'll do this, then I'll get what I want. That's the way that you make a compromise, that we both want we can want two different things, but if we figure out a way that there's some thing that we can do that will be to our mutual benefit, then we'll agree to compromise to do that, cuz then we both will gain.

When Core Goals Conflict: No Compromise 3:01

But what happens if there's something that is the is the issue itself, like it comes between one guy's life and the other guy's life? So you can't say, well, make a compromise. You can't do that. It's an all-or-nothing deal.

And so the same thing, like a person that's

מצד these עצם רצונות, within a person himself, you can only really have like one at a time. So a person that like some people they kind of live in תוהו, עיגולים, so they like lock on to חסד and they say, that's it, I'm going to be totally nice always, kindness is is their goal, and they're not able like they they're not able to bring it they're not And and if a person doesn't have a mature view, then they're not going to realize that sometimes to accomplish חסד, you have to do something that בחיצוניות גבורה, even if that's your real goal, and which is the ענין of תיקון.

So a person doesn't do that, if then they'll just try to be like totally altruistically nice, which is their ultimate goal, they would like to be able to be like that all the time. And then what happens is then they get stepped on and they and eventually they they they it doesn't work, or like a person will try to do that for a country, whatever, anything, classroom, it would eventually it would it would fail, so it would die.

And then the person says, "Oh, so now I'm going to do גבורה." Now he But גבורה also he's going to do like in a way of תוהו. And so now he doesn't anybody ask asks him to pass the salt, he says, "Get it yourself." And like everything is totally גבורה and and and there is a מעלה to doing things in a way to making people to work and whatever, but then but you can't you can't have only if you're going to be like completely like only get what you deserve, then it's also not going to work, and so that also dies.

And so every single one of these things, a person does would, or a society would do all of like take one of these things and try to make it the the cure-all, it wouldn't work.

And it's also only possible to have one at a time because they're they're בעצם contradict each other.

Beit Shammai vs Beit Hillel: Core Differences 5:10

כמחלוקת בית שמאי ובית הלל וכאי גוונא, that בית שמאי and בית הלל, their reason they're arguing that why why didn't they convince each other? I mean, they're reasonable people. There's, say, the reason why is because their מחלוקת was coming from an עצם difference, not מצד the שכל. But the difference is that even though they were the difference was that their מחלוקת was coming from their like עצם שורש הנשמה, which is like in like a תוהו type of thing, but then they were they were in holiness, so that that's why this why it's in parentheses, the התפשטות, is because this is not this is not a full example, because that then once they פסקנד the הלכה, then בית שמאי did like בית הלל and בית הלל did like בית שמאי, depending on which way they פסקנד.

In other words, that they're מצד their their עצם like leaning, they were biased to to see things in a certain way, to deal with things a certain way.

But they had a deeper connection to תורה, and so if תורה says that they should do like this, even though they saw that as being not the way that they that they would understand it, they would still do it.

וכאי גוונא, דגם שמנגדו יקשה עליו, even if the opposition will ask questions to him, ולא יוכל למצוא טעם, and he won't he's not able to find an explanation, ישתוק, he'll be quiet, but he will not turn, he'll just say I don't know, but he won't be able to turn back on his opinion, because his opinion is not really based on a logical consideration, but rather that he essentially perceives things a certain way.

And even if he can't, he's just trying the שכל is just to try to find the right words. This is really the way it works in תורה is that is that they they perceive it ברוחניות, and then they're just trying to find the right words to express it, to bring it into שכל אנושי, but שכל אנושי not really the the שורש of it.

אבל לא יוכל להודות ולחזור בו ולהסכים, he's not able to admit and then change his mind, בדעה שמנגדו כלל, to the opposite opinion at all. He's not at all able to to be מודה. And the reason is because each one has a a certain point which is an עצמיסטיק thing, and אלו ואלו דברי אלקים חיים, and there's no reason that they should be מודה. אבל בחינת התיקון היינו כאשר המידה באה מבחינת נקודה שלה להתפשטות, חוץ מן העצמיות, רצון ושכל שבה.

Tikkun: Shifting from Goal to Means 7:33

The ענין of תיקון is that now we're not dealing with your עצם רצון, we're dealing with not not In other words, not talking about your goal.

Okay, whatever your goal is, forget about the goal. Now we're talking about how to accomplish your goal. When it comes to the goals, when it comes to and when it comes to your essential goal, which is the this thing of religion, religion is about ultimate truths, right? It's just talking about the the ultimate reality and the ultimate goal of a person and and of the world. So there there can only be one truth, you can't have pluralism in religion.

But when it comes to the means to accomplish it, so okay, so that's your goal, but now how are we going you have to recognize that, like, for example, if you want to go if you if you're you're you you have trying to travel somewhere, so you have to know your destination and that you can't change. You can only be going to one place at once. If you're going to going to New York, you you can't be going to Chicago, you have to pick.

But sometimes, if in order to get to somewhere that's north, you have to go south to go around something or whatever. So you have to it's a whole separate רצון. There's the רצון like a person that that that wants to go a certain place and just starts going in that direction, then he's going to come up with all these walls and things in his way, that's not the best way to do it.

Travel Analogy: Short Long Way vs Long Short Way 8:56

Like that story with the long short way and the short long way? So the guy wanted to get to the palace, so a person can say, okay, I want to get to the palace, so they can go the short long way, that they just go straight, and they end up very close, but there's a wall in front of them and they can't actually get into the palace, so it was really short, but it's long, because it's impossible to get in.

The long short way means that they are willing to compromise and and go a slow route, but it's short because we're actually getting there.

Like they say shortcuts make for long delays. That's that expression, right? That's a If a person tries to make תחבולות with these kind of things, it's it's not כדאי.

So this is the ענין of תיקון, is that when you're ready to actually now now we're not dealing with the עצם רצון, we're dealing with the רצון of how to accomplish it in a particular instance. דהיינו כמו מידת החסד כאשר יולד הרצון והשכל להטות כלפי חסד ולא זולתו מצד שאסור לה טובה. For example, we're not talking about that you're being kind because בעצם you want to always be kind to everybody.

Kindness Motivated by Personal Benefit 10:00

You want to be nice to somebody because he did you a favor. In other words, that your real your real goal is not that you just want to be kind to everybody all the time. You want to have, let's say the guy whatever, he wants his personal happiness or he wants money or whatever it is, if a guy is helping him out, so then he's going to want to be kind to this person in, I mean the שכל is that he'll for the future, that it will help him out more in the future.

Or or maybe just because he has an עצם thing of gratitude, so then once the guy does it, so then he'll. But, but in other words he's not acting this way to to everybody. He doesn't just believe that you should always be completely nice to everybody, it depends what the person does. If you should be nice to people that are nice to you, people that are not nice to you you should not be nice to.

Right, it's like a, yeah. ולא מצד עצם הטוב והחסד הבא בגילוי בהכרח מטבע הטוב שבעצמות נפשו. מצד the עצם מדת חסד, then it's like he has to be nice to everybody, because that's his טבע, so it doesn't matter what the person did to him or not. אדרבה, יכול להיות אכזרי בטבע. The person could be cruel naturally.

ולמי שחננו והצילו ממות וכיוצא בזה ירצה להיטיב ויטה שכלו עליו תמיד לחסד ולזכות וכו' וכו'. But to somebody that saved his life, that did a lot of kindness to him and saved his life, so for that person he's going to want to be he's going to always be gracious to and he's always going to be biased to look at them favorably.

So now he he connected his עצם רצון to them, but the amount of connection that he has to this person is dependent on what he did for him.

Complex Desire and When to Be Kind 12:08

And the more kindness that a person does for you, the more you're going to connect your רצון to it. So that's a very different type of a thing, because now it becomes complicated. When do you when are you nice and when are you not nice? This is called the the רצון מורכב, right? Like he's going to say now.