I have heard from my master: when a soul comes from {the world/sphere of} Atzilut to the World of Action and he sees how there the Husk has prevailed and {sees} how it has become light in their eyes the glory of the great reigning King, he then awakens himself to give more praise to the glory of the king, King of the World (1), that he is not one of them veculu and the words of the righteous a charm
Toldos YY, VaYeitzei, 22d
There is always the possibility that the Besht is talking about Man's general birth in which he (in sync with Jewish Tradition) descends from the higher worlds into a more mundane existence. The terms used "Atzilut" and "World of Action" do support such an interpretation as they both signify just that; 'Atzilut' as the source of all Jewish souls and 'World of Action' as our realm, our world, our realm of experience. It would however require us to understand it in a rather simplistic mode of events: the tzaddik shows up in this world and at some point in his life {whether early on as an infant or later in life} has an epiphany relating to how terrible people are, and as a result, turns to God and focuses on praising him even more.
The Toldos, however, seems to have understood it as a psychological journey spanning the entire life of the tzaddik. To the Toldos, the point is that the tzaddik uses everything that comes to his attention as a means to connect to himself/god. He must learn something from every experience, as it is God-sent. Now, when the tzaddik comes in contact with people in whom finds no redeeming qualities to learn or respect, the Besht teaches that he may still utilize this experience to get inspired to connect even stronger to God by being glad that he is not like those people.
However, the very idea that the tzaddik knows and feels that he is a tzaddik and receives satisfaction and pleasure just from the fact that he knows that he is a tzaddik-- was played down in later generation Chassidic literature where the tzaddik must forever live in a state of humbleness by doubting himself.
There is much Beshtian material that suggest that the tzaddik {and every man, for that matter} must believe in himself (2), which leads me to believe that doubt -though frequently present in the Besht {and nearly every other seeker}- was nevertheless considered by him to be a deterrent rather than an active productive part of service (3).
Being that the previously mentioned thought has roots in the Besht’s teachings, I would like to compare and contrast this idea with a few other teachings of the Besht that appear to be expressing a similar message. I shall attempt to go through any such teachings and examine them more closely:
One:
I have heard in the name of my master... that if one feels that one is {in a state of} cleaving to Him Blessed {Be}, than {it must be that in reality} one is far from Him. But when one feels that he is away {from God}, than one {must be} close {to God} (4)
Is this text implying that it is impossible to be close and feel close, to God, at the same time?!
A more in-depth reading of the text reveals that the Besht is not saying this, but is merely describing the {rather unfortunate} reality that the closer one gets to God the further away one feels.
A tzaddik may feel that he is close to God {especially in comparison to the average human being} and derive pleasure from it- he naturally does so at times and he should do so {advises the Besht above in our shtikel}.
In real life, however, natural doubt occurs. The Besht in our text maybe telling us not to pay too much attention to temporary feelings of alienation from God, as one maybe close and feel far and vice versa.
The Toldos (5) must have understood it to be so, as he ties in our text with the following analogy:
and I have heard a parable {of} one who went to receive the king who dwells {in a palace adorned} with various kinds of balconies and {circular} staircases to go round from bellow {i.e. the lower floors} to above {i.e. the higher floors,} when he stands bellow {in the center of the room for instance} he can see the king {who is all the way up on the highest floor} and {yet} when he comes closer -meaning {once he starts} climbing the steps (6) vechulu and the moral of the story is understood and the words of the wise a charm
The sinner may have a better view of God, as he is farther out, but the tzaddik is closer. In other words, its part of the game. Upon seeing the king from far bellow, one is inspired to ascend upward toward the king, and as a result, one is bound to temporarily have the king out of sight. {another comparable parable is of a king looking out of his palace window; were he to invite someone up, that individual would surely have to walk through many rooms and corridors corridors etc. before he is to see the king again}.
Another rather interesting “Beshtian” teaching asserting this very point, is to be found in the teachings of the Maggid of Koshnitz (7):
...as I myself have one time seen Rabbi Israel Baal Shem in a dream and I asked him {to explain how it is} that in the beginning of my service as began to get acquainted with the tzaddikim to learn from their works and as I disciplined myself to serve God, I used to feel a change for the good from day to day in the study of Torah “for her sake” and in {regarding} intention of Prayer and other works. But now I do not feel any change at all and it appears to me as if yesterday is the same day as today and so will be tomorrow. And he {the Besht} answered by way of a parable, when a child learns The Aleph Beis or {how to read} the Prayer Book or Chumash {then} every single day the change could be witnessed for he learns more {today} than he did yesterday. For example last week he learned one chapter and now he learns two chapters etc. not so once he goes on and grows {to the point that he can now} learn the Talmud with Tosefot’s commentary and he is a great scholar (“Mefulpal Godol”) {then} the change cannot be seen from day to day. However from a rational {point of} view (“einei ha’sechel”) certainly what a person achieves when more mature on a daily basis {continuously achieving a greater spiritual level} is a million times greater than all levels combined that a child would grow all year, since {the child} is {too} young {to understand, nor make progress, in anything (seemingly) significant. The child cannot learn much} until here are his {the Besht’s words}, and it is truly a wondrous wisdom and through this aforementioned concept you can grasp numerous concepts in the Sphere in “greatness” and “smallness”
Second:
One principle I have heard in the name of my master ZLLH”H the understanding of the verse {Psalms 126:6} “He that goeth forth and weepeth, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing his sheaves with him.” That there are two kinds of farm-workers etc. one would pay attention (“mashgiach”) if there is seed etc. and with this {it} is understood that he who is on the level of “He that goeth forth and weepeth” than {he comes} “bearing precious seed” not so he who thinks that he is {already} close to the Name Blessed Be, on the level of “shall doubtless come again with rejoicing” than {the result will be} “bringing his {empty} bundles with him”(8)
Now, you may very well see this to be saying that only he who goes about worrying and crying all day {about spiritual matters}, makes it to the finish line (9).
Lets explore a few questions: where is the finish line when the tzaddik may indeed rejoice; is in this world or the next? If in this world, the lesson may be to see things through and not stop at anything until the goal is achieved. Is this finish line in the world to come? If so, it is going against the very grain of the Beshtian teaching which is all about belief, trust and serving God with joy and happiness.
Is it possibly along the lines of the last shtikel- describing the psychological mindset of the tzaddik?
The text seems to imply that this is more than a mere description.
Is it about cautiousness (not to be stupidly happy prematurely, lest it ruins the very cause of this happiness)? In which case, it ends up being more about the path to succeed - both spiritually and materially.
Here’s a parable by the Besht that may shed some light:
Two people who grew grains, one {planted} a little and the other {planted} a lot; the one who grew a lot was eating, drinking, going to the bar and singing since he planted much, and the one who planted little went every moment of every day weeded his grains from thorns, weeds and other harmful materials. Meanwhile the other was a fool who had planted much and isn’t supervising his grains because of his haughtiness, which was a result of his plenty. Meanwhile his grains was all grown over with thorns, [and] nettles had covered the face thereof, and the stone wall thereof was broken down (10) All that pass by the way spoil {i.e. rob} him (11) ...and this parable pierces through and goes deep for one who has the heart to comprehend and understand and an eye to see and observe with a good and aware eye on ones {own} issues and deeds whether a lot or a little (12)
Third:
for it is said {“issa”} in the name of my master and grandfather ZLLH”H {regarding the saying of our sages} “He who lives in Israel is like one who has a God (13)” meaning he that it appears to him that he dwells in the upper land {i.e.} that he is close to God he is as one who has a God but really he does not. And he who lives outside of the land {of Israel} meaning he who it appears to him that he still has not entered the upper land, in this case it appears as if he has no God but really he does. until here are his {the Besht’s} words (14)
True, this version by the Degel does seem to be saying that anyone who thinks that he is a tzaddik is not. (The Degel seems to be comfortable with this idea not bothering to explain why this is so).
Luckily, a milder version survives in the work of the Toldos(15):
for I have heard from my master ZLH”H the understanding of the Talmud, end of Kethobot (13), “one who lives in Israel is like one who has a god, one who lives outside of Israel is like one who has no god” look it up over there. And the implications {of these two Talmudic statements- in the original Hebrew} have been shown to be contradictory, and besides, “יציבא בארעא vechulu” {"The native-born Jew, [always] upon the earth; a proselyte, in the heavens of heavens!" meaning: how could it possibly work this way?! (16)}? And he {the Besht} explained it according to his understanding of the Mishnah (17) “what is the difference between the disciples of our Father Abraham and the disciples of Bilam the Wicked vechulu” (18), and so too here, he who is of the disciples of our Father Abraham and is persistent in {the study of} Torah and the service of God all day- and he is the one who is called “he who lives in Israel”- and {when} one time it occurred that he wasted {an opportunity to} study Torah or prayer, when {he is called} “he who lives outside of Israel”, it appears to him as if he had no God. and {the same is true} the other way around {i.e. he who doesn’t serve god, the “one who lives outside Israel”- if he once finally does a good deed, it “appears to him as if he has a god” when in reality nothing changed} and the words of the wise, a charm
Here, in the above version, the complete opposite is the whole point: a tzaddik who is at the point of despair because “it appears to him as if he has no God”- should understand that in reality it is not so. God is with him as if nothing unusual would have happened.
Fourth and last:
and he said in the following {exact} words “I hereby swear to you that there is a man in this world who hears teachings from the mouth of the Holy One Blessed Be He, and his matron not from the the mouth of an angel and not from the mouth of vechulu and {yet} he does not believe {in} himself that he will not be pushed away from the holy one blessed be he, god-forbid. for with great ease {one} could get cast away to the “female of the Immense Abyss” (19) and he {said that he} leans himself on the verse (Deuter. 30:12-3) {For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off} It is not in heaven...neither is it beyond the sea {that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?}.” {May} God bring us close with the right hand of His righteousness(20)
This does express doubt, but about one’s future -and not about one’s present- being a tzaddik. An important distinction, as one could feel a tzaddik and be thrilled about it yet worry whether one could also maintain one’s amazing feeling of closeness to God- since it is “with great ease” that “{one} could get cast away to the “female of the Immense Abyss””.
But even with doubts about one’s spiritual future: it seems clear that the Besht wasn’t happy with such doubts, as is evident from the fact that he needed to seek refuge with the following verses, which we must look at in its
full context:
For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.
Devorim, 30:12-14
I presume that the Besht leaned upon these verses to get comfort and courage; to trust himself that ultimately it was not so easy for man of his stature {or, for that matter, anyone} to “get cast away to the “female of the Immense Abyss””(21)(22)!
Bibliography:
The Zohar: Pritzker Edition, translated with commentary by Daniel C. Matt (Stanford, 2004).
Hebrew Titles:
TTY = Toldot Ya’akov Yosef Rabbi Yakov Yoseph of Polnoye (Koretz, 1780?).
ZP = Tzofnat Pane’ah. Rabbi Yakov Yoseph of Polnoye (Koretz, 1782).
BPY = Ben Porat Yosef Rabbi Yakov Yoseph of Polnoye (Koretz, 1781).
KP = Ketonet Pasim. Rabbi Yakov Yoseph of Polnoye (Lvov, 1866).
DM = Divrei Moshe, Moshe Shoham of Dolina. (publication place lacking, 1801).
Or Torah, Dov Ber of Mezrich (Brooklyn, 1973).
Sefer Baal Shem Tov. Compiled by Shimon Menahem Mendel of Goverchov. (Lodz, 1938).
Avoydas Yisroel, Rebbe Yisroel Hopsztajn, the Maggid Kozhnitz. (Lemberg, 1878). http://hebrewbooks.org/30802 .
Shivhei ha-Besht. Trans. and Edit. By Dan Ben-Amos and Jerome Mintz (1970).
Notes:
(1) See a slightly different version in BPY 22A where the tzaddik “takes pleasure that he is not one of them”. Also TYY 15a “or by seeing the works of the evil, and he {knows that he } is not in their category , he takes pleasure and appreciates the light through the darkness, and this pleasure spreads to all worlds.”
(2) See for instance: BPY 99d “and the main thing is faith to believe that through speech and prayer it {his reality} immediately happens like that {as he prayed}, beyond any doubt”; 99a “and regarding thoughts: it is as with dreams that follow the mouth {i.e. ones own interpretation. See B. Talmud, Ber. } vechulu if one believes vechulu”; TYY 172c “as I have heard from my master that the great humbleness of man causes {one} to be distanced from the service of God, that because of his {perception of self as} lowly he does not believe that man -through his prayer and Torah study- could cause abundance to all the worlds, and {it also prevents him from seeing that} the angles too get sustained by his {man’s} Torah study and prayer. For if man would believe so {and wouldn’t be so humble} how great would he have served God with happines and awe {surrounded} by abundance of all things”.
(3) From all I could gather {from the many passages that discuss the function and greatness of the tzaddik that seem to be autobiographical and the basic character of the Besht as he appears in the (more or less reliable) “Shivchei HaBesht”}: the Besht seems to have thought of himself as a tzaddik who was aware of his uniqueness, status and powers! See also KP 12a “for I have received from my master that one could know {that he is connected} to the world of death if one desires to speak bad {of other people} or laugh at them. And so too is {true} the other way around; if one desires {to study} Torah or {to do} good deeds, he should know in his soul that he is connected to the world of life. and the words of the wise a charm.” though this piece is more concerned with knowing where one is at the moment rather than one’s bestowing upon oneself the permanent title of tzaddik {and therefore does not directly express the right of the tzaddik to know that he is one}- it does however suggest such a possibility. It may also reveal the desire, and perhaps even, the need of the tzaddik {or, at least- of the Besht personally} to know that he is in the right.
(4) an anonymous quote in TYY, Mishpotim, 62c. also, see BPY 23c, 81d where it is brought in the name of Maharam, probably refering to R’ Menachem Mendel the Maggid of Baar. See SBST, 93a note 143, who tries to attribute this parable to the Besht himself. As in so many other cases like these, he fails to make a case.
(5) Toldos, Kedoyshim, 99d (where he finds this to present a challenge: how can one possibly get close to God if every time he even dares thinking that one is close to God, he is -in reality, we are told- moving further away?!). also mentioned in BPY 23c and ZP 81d. notice the change of verses from “though art god” (Jer. 14:22) to “you are our god” (not to be found unless he is referring to Jer. ibid. “you are YHVH our God {“Eloyheinu”}”).
(6) presumably a double meaning is intended; ‘madreigoh’ denotes both “step” and “spiritual level.”
(7) Avoydas Yisroel, Shmini, 35c.
(8) ZP 29a. Also mentioned in KP 12c, BPY 25a where he finishes off by saying: “and so too here if he thinks {of} himself as one who has come {i.e. he thinks} that he has already come into Torah and the service of God is the worst of all three groups “ , ZP 13d, 81d. also see DME, Ki Teitzei, 95c for a more elaborate version. See also another version in Or Toyreh 72b where (not being attributed to the Besht) it is interpreted to mean the man who feels that he has no need to further explore himself spiritually.
(9) Even the Toldos seems to have accepted this interpretation- at least in some places {does this translate to sometimes?}, see note # 10.
(10) Quoting Proverbs 24:31
(11) Quoting Psalms 89:41 {in the Hebrew- 89:42}
(12) DME 95c where the Besht is recorded to have said it in relation to our verse {Psalms 126:6} “He that goeth forth and weepeth etc.” See also DM 42b who heard this parable from the Besht who said it in the name of his brother-in-law R’ Gershon of Kituv. The version he records is along these (the DME) lines but deals specifically with the matter of prayer (“And behold I have heard from the holy mouth of my master the pious divine the rabbi the Besht Z”L who cautioned about quickness and fast-pace in the matter of prayer for people like him in order to be saved from strange thoughts and he said in the name of his brother-in law “ etc. etc.)
The Toldos has it in an independent version in TYY 47c, 194c, ZP 81d, KP 12c. the Toldos’ version though is a lot more intense and he does seem to imply that the whole service of the tzaddik is to constantly worry and cry. (something that elsewhere he terms as “Deeds of the tzaddik {which are} fasting, abstention of drink, crying and mourning” but however advises the tzaddik that when he is feeling sad he should engage in “the Deeds of the Evil” which is “eating, drinking, jolliness and laughter”, see ZP 83c, BPY 35d).
(13) Talmud B., Ketubot, 110b
(14) DME, likutim to Devorim, 106c Also mentioned briefly in BPY 60d, ZP 29b,
(15) BPY 53b, the Degel’s use of ‘issa’ implies that he read it somewhere. Since, PBY would be a probable source, it at least opens the door to the possibility that the Degel’s version is a misreading of BPY ibid (see note 21).
(16) see B. Kama 42a
(17) Avot 5:19.
(18) See TYY 109c; BPY 122a. (Also briefly mentioned in BPY 70c, ; ZP 4b, 47a, 92b; KP 7b, 34a, 47d). Since it is vital to the understanding of this piece, I will quote KP (7b)- which is the most clear and detailed, though also the most elaborate:
“for the wicked man has the above traits in materialism, {meaning, that when it come to} the good of this world {the wicked} has an evil eye that all the good that he attained is not enough, he is not satisfied and desires more. As our Sages said {Midrash Rabah, Koheles, 1:13} “one does not die with {even} half of his desire {attained}.” Not so the tzaddik who has an evil eye in {matters pertaining to} spirituality, that his eye is not filled by all the good deeds that he has done- exactly as the wicked man has an evil eye in {matters pertaining to} materialism. And so too {when it comes to} “proud spirit”; that the wicked man has {or, expresses} this bad trait in materialism while the tzaddik has this trait in spirituality {using it} against his evil inclination who seduces him {by saying} “what is man that he should {dare} to walk in such greatness to serve blessed God {who is} the principle and root of all worlds,” and {it is} against this {that} he has a proud spirit. Also {regarding} “haughty soul,” that a tzaddik desires with all the {humanly} possible passion to serve God, while the wicked man has this trait in materialism, the {endless} desire for decadence in this world. Likewise, the tzaddik has a “generous eye” pertaining material matters. Not so the wicked man who possesses a generous eye {pertaining to spiritual matters} who is satisfies the three pillars {that uphold the world (Avot 1:2)} {in the following ways:} concerning the Pillar of Torah {he is satisfied} with little Torah study even if it isn’t {being studied} for the sake of heaven but for show; with little “works,” he is satisfied by going to Shul every morning and this too is done out of habit and hastily; {pertaining to the Pillar of Kindness}, with little charity, without ever having spent any money on an esrog or Megillah- he is satisfied by giving money for candles {once a year} on Erev Yom Kippur in order to drink vechulu. And “a humble spirit” {is employed} by the tzaddik materialistically, and {by} the wicked man spiritually saying” who am I {to be} so valuable and important to enter the gates of piety.” With these matters he has a humble spirit but when it comes to desires of this world he says that no one but himself deserves riches and honors.”
So- though the Toldos does not mention the nature of the connection of “the disciples of our Father Abraham” to
“he who lives in Israel”- it is obvious that it is in regards to the “haughty soul” which the tzaddik uses in relation to things of spirit.
(19) A Zoharic term for Lilith, a severe aspect of the kelipa. See, for instance, Zohar 1:5a. I have translated nukveh as “female”, since it is probably what the Besht meant by the term. The first one to translated it as such- as far as I know- is the Ari Z”L (Etz Chayim, Gate 48 ch. 2, etc. etc.), who had somewhat of an influence on the Besht. See, however, Matt (Zohar, vol. 1 pg. 28) who translates nukveh as “the chasm {“steep-sided opening in the earth's surface”} of the immense abyss” (Matt has a point as we can find the Zohar employing ‘nukveh’ as “chasm” in relation to tehoma raboh, “the immense abyss.” See for instance, Zohar (1:30a; 3:138a, 201b etc. etc.)- but so does the Ari Z”L as the Zohar, at least in one place(3:19a), clearly states Lilith as being the Nukveh d’Tehoma Raboh.
(20) DME, Likutim, 113b. He mentions that the Besht said all this while explaining Tikunei Zohar 131a.
(21) Two opposing opinions regarding this matter, of whether a tzaddik can go bad, are presented in B. Talmud, Ber. 29a. The Besht’s stand on the matter, is recorded to be affirmative: see DME 47b; 66a but that maybe a misreading of TYY 185c. Inspired by Beshtian thought on the ebb and flow (for instance, TYY 17b; 27d; 48b; 83c; 200d; ), I am inclined to believe that this is so. More on the Degel, his sources and reliability, another time.
(22) A more general note: This whole paper is based on an assumption -which I hope to continuously prove on this platform- that the Besht was consistent enough with his teachings that putting them together a bigger and clearer picture emerges. There is, however, the possibility that he was not. In which case, a synthesis would be out of place, incorrect and unnecessary.
