The transcript has been transcribed and edited from English simultaneous interpretation, thus there may be potential semantic inaccuracies within it.

Daily Lesson (Morning), July 14, 2024.

Part 2: Rabash Letter 73

Reader: We are reading from the writings of Rabash, this is letter number 73.

Let me clarify a bit concerning your question, “What is decoration at the point of desire,” which you said was difficult for you to understand.

To understand the meaning of decoration we must first understand to what things are referring, meaning what is perplexing to him and what he wants to explain.

We know that there are only two things in the world: Creator and creatures. This means that the Creator wants to bestow pleasures upon the creatures, as it is written, “His desire to do good to His creations.” Out of that discernment, the first world that emerged is called “the world of Ein Sof [no end],” which means that since He desires to do good, He has created “existence from absence” a desire to receive the pleasure that He wants to give.

Of course, that desire was precisely the size suitable for reception of all the light, for otherwise, meaning if the Kli [vessel] is smaller than the light, the creature will not emerge whole, and the certain Creator created something whole, meaning that He has created a desire to receive that specific light that He has allocated for the creatures.

And according to that desire, the light extended and filled it completely. This is regarded as the upper light filling the whole of reality, which is why it is called Ein Sof, since the will to receive did not put a stop and conclusion on the light, but rather expanded into the vessel of reception. That is, had that discernment been drawn back, there would have been no room where Godliness were felt in the world. Even when Adam was immersed in the lust for reception of pleasures only for himself, he still felt Godliness. Only once the Tzimtzum [restriction] on receiving with the intention for oneself alone took place, it came about that one who is immersed in lust does not feel Godliness and the beginning of one’s work is to believe that there is Godliness in the world. This is so only because of the concealment that was done by the Tzimtzum.

We learned that in the world of Ein Sof, “it came up in His will … and He restricted Himself.” He interprets that by this he means that there was an ascent of the desire, since the will to receive is opposite from the desire to bestow, which is why he chose more Dvekut [adhesion]. Dvekut means equivalence of form, and he wanted to be similar to the giver, so he restricted himself. This means that in Ein Sof there seems to have been oppositeness between the Kli and the giver to the point that He had to correct it, and that for this correction he had set up the Tzimtzum.

He introduces Pirkey de Rabbi Eliezer, where it is written that before the world was created there was “He and His name are one.” This means that there was no difference between the light, which is called “He,” and “His name,” which is the Kli, meaning the will to receive. He interprets that the Kli is called “His name” because Shmo [His name] in Gematria is Ratzon [desire]. But according to this, it is perplexing, for if there were no oppositeness between the Kli and the light, why was there a need to perform a correction that there will be equivalence, to the point that for this reason he performed the Tzimtzum? This is why he explains that this correction was not due to a lack, where he felt that there was oppositeness, but in order to decorate.

We can understand the difference between decoration and a lack through an allegory. A town’s rabbi made a convention and sent for all the wealthy and respectable people in town to gather in the synagogue, for he wanted to tell them something. The rabbi came on stage and gave a heartfelt sermon about the greatness and importance of charity. Afterwards he told them that since and good man, a wise disciple, has just arrived from overseas, and he had children and a family of eight, and they did not have food for even one meal, no place to stay, and the family is now in the women’s section of the synagogue, so he would like each one to donate even more than he can because it is really a matter of life and death, as they have no place to stay. And the rabbi wept bitterly.

Naturally, the people of Israel are all merciful and each one gave more than he could, and he collected thousands of pounds for that family, since everyone felt the lack, and therefore everyone took part in mending the lack that they felt.

The following year, the rabbi assembled the town’s powerful and respectable and gave them another heartfelt sermon, and cried and sighed so bitterly that it could break one’s heart. He let them know the merit of the Mitzva [good deed/commandment] of mercy—that through mercy we will come out of exile and be rewarded with complete redemption.

Afterwards he told them that his wife was at a wedding of a rich man who came from the United States, and she saw there that the rich man’s wife wore a costly fur that costs 3,000 pounds, and a diamond ring that costs another 3,000 pounds, so now she is asking him to buy her these Jewels for 6,000 pounds. The rabbi wept bitterly and asked for them to have mercy on him and give him that amount. He would not have asked them for it had he not seen that last year they gave him 6,000 pounds for the poor man so he could get by with his family, and it must be because they have merciful hearts, so he is asking them for that amount for Jewels for his wife, so he was crying and yelling, “Jews, O merciful Jews!”

Naturally, the more the rabbi cried, the more they laughed at him and said, “Should we feel sorry for your wife because she wants to decorate herself? What mercy is there here? With the poor man there was necessity, and this is called a ‘lack.’ We all felt the lack, so each of us felt compelled to mend it.”

From this allegory we can understand the difference between lack and decoration: a lack is when he is bear and destitute; then you can speak of mercy. But when you have a bountiful home but no jewelry, which is accessories that only a few in a generation have, you cannot speak of a lack, since they can live without it, too.

It is likewise here. The light filled the whole of the will to receive until there was no place empty, without abundance, as it is written that the upper light filled the whole of reality and there was no vacancy. This is called “He and His name are one,” when there is no discerned difference between the light and the Kli, since without a Kli, the light would not be able to expand, since the desire to do good to His creations would not be able to work without the existence of a desire to receive. Therefore, there was no distinction between the light and the Kli, as both are equally important with respect to the goal.

This brings up the question, “Why was there a Tzimtzum?” The answer to this is that the Tzimtzum was in order to decorate. This means that decorations are needed in order to improve the gift. Although now he has abundance because the light fills the whole Kli, it is still possible to make it better, meaning that the reception of the abundance will not be regarded as reception, but as bestowal, by making it reception in order to bestow, which is regarded as actual bestowal.

This is why the Tzimtzum is regarded as free choice, meaning that he had the choice to not perform a Tzimtzum, for who forced him? After all he was given and he received, and if he wanted, he could stay in that state and have abundance. However, he chose that it is better to perform a Tzimtzum and receive only in order to bestow, for by that he will be equal to the Emanator.

Only afterwards, after the Tzimtzum, it become a lack, for it is a rule that a desire in the upper one becomes a mandatory law in the lower one. Hence, the lower one no longer has a choice, meaning that even when he wants, he is not given. It follows that now, after the Tzimtzum, the will to receive is regarded as a lack because you can no longer receive anything in it, and it is discerned as darkness. Only when beginning to do things in order to bestow do we begin to equalize in form and begin to come out of the rule of the Tzimtzum. Then we begin to feel Godliness, to the extent that we can work in order to bestow.

If you have any more questions on that topic write me the places you find confusing, and I will try to explain to the best of my ability. But mainly, we should hope that the Creator will give and bestow upon us the reason of the upper one so we can understand and learn to hear, to learn and to teach ourselves, to keep, do, and observe.

M. Laitman: If anyone has any questions, please.

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (17:35) We learned that the restriction was due to the shame. 

M. Laitman: Yes. 

Student: Here it sounds like it's not a matter of shame. Let's put it this way, we learned that shame was a lack that we could not withstand, meaning something that the Kli could not tolerate in that state, and here it sounds like that wasn't the reason. Here I'm asking how to settle these two meanings, why the restriction was there. And here too, so we go just with what's written here. What is this matter of this decoration that the Kli needed called restriction? Why was it nevertheless important for it to do that?

M. Laitman: It was important for it to do it because if he wouldn't cover the gap between himself and the Creator, it would have meant apparently that the Creator created a flawed creation that's unsuitable for Him. But by raising the action of restriction to the degree of free choice, and that he's not doing it based on his own need, by that he raises the action of creation that the Creator created to an act of bestowal.

Student: Meaning it's kind of like completing the intention. 

M. Laitman: Yes. 

Student: So nevertheless, there is something that we learn and talk a lot about, is this bread of shame, that a person is ashamed to eat the bread of shame.

M. Laitman: But that happens only at a time when the person is preparing his vessel. But when he has an opportunity to respond to the feeling of the receiver, he doesn't remain with a lack, he's not lacking.

Student: Yes, he also writes here that the desire in the upper becomes mandatory in the lower one. 

M. Laitman: A law.

Student: Yes, a law. So, the feeling of shame that Rav is talking about, that is received during the building of the Kli, is because it already became a law that he has to observe. So, in the Kli, it's already felt as shame, yes? In the Kli, when he's building it, he already feels it as shame, although at first it wasn't because of that.

M. Laitman: Yes.

Student: But during the work, it becomes shame. 

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (21:18) What is decoration in our work? How do we actually decorate? He says here that the decoration is meant to refine the gift. And we learn that our relation, attitude, needs to be not to the gift, but to the giver of the gift. So, what does it mean to refine the gift?

M. Laitman: It's when the Creator is giving us the ability to reach a state where we bestow to Him. The Creator doesn't need our bestowal, but we do it, and this is therefore called decoration. 

Student: He actually gave us a Kli for necessity to receive the abundance He wants to give us.

M. Laitman:  Yes. 

Student: But my question is whether every effort we make beyond that, growing the Kli, wanting to be more similar to Him, that's actually what refines, improves the Creator and makes Him more important. Is that the decoration?

M. Laitman: Yes.

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (22:35) I still didn't understand. If the created being has free choice, like he writes here, and then because of the free choice, he decides that he wants to receive only in order to bestow, and not to receive in order to receive, how can it be that we're saying that envy burns and you can't withstand it? I can't bridge between this gap here because both here and there, it's talking about the fourth phase and the first cascading, and there weren't two stages here, or maybe there are, I don't know. 

M. Laitman: I don't understand.

Student: We learn like this, there's root 1, 2, 3, 4, phase 4 became the receiver in order to receive, felt the shame, made a restriction, and put a screen upon herself.

M. Laitman: Yes. 

Student: How does that work together with the fact that it's a decoration and it's free choice of fourth phase? What is the correction of restriction, that's what he's talking about here?

M. Laitman: Yes.

Student: So how can it be that on one hand it's decoration, meaning it's free choice of a created being, on the other hand this envy was burning, and you couldn't withstand it, I'm sorry, not envy, shame. 

M. Laitman: I got it. So, shame is burning, and you cannot withstand it, that forces him to equate his form with the giver.

Student: That's how it sounds like, there's no free choice. 

M. Laitman: Yes.

Student: But here he's saying there is free choice, he truly says this, that's why the restriction is considered the matter of free choice, which is that he had a choice not to do a restriction. 

M. Laitman: What to do?

Student: I don't know, to continue to receive in order to receive. 

M. Laitman: And then to say that the Creator did it.

Student: Probably.

M. Laitman: He wants to resemble the Creator, meaning he's creating the restriction not out of deficiency, out of a lack, but as a form of decoration, because he wants to resemble the Creator. The way the Creator gives, he also wants to give, although as a created being, he can only receive. 

Student: Isn't the whole purpose, in the end, for the created being to be similar to the Creator? Where is there a free choice here, that's why I can't understand. The whole process of cascading, of four phases of direct light, as we learned it, is a process in which in the end, the created being will be similar to the Creator, that's the gift. 

M. Laitman: So, he gives to the Creator, and by that, he becomes similar to the Creator.

Student: So, where's the free choice here? 

M. Laitman: He's choosing it.

Student: But he has to do this. 

M. Laitman: Why?

Student: Because there's shame. He can't stand that gap that's between him and the Creator. 

M. Laitman: Well, not too bad, he should overcome the shame.

Student: Okay, so the shame is something that the created being theoretically could… 

M. Laitman: The created being couldn't have, because by that, he would have pulled down the Creator, brought him down. Understand?

Student: Meaning, the created being wants to refine creation, and therefore he performs an action, although he didn't have to do it.

M. Laitman: He didn't have to.

Student: And this action that he's doing, we call it a decoration. Here, it's called a decoration. 

M. Laitman: Yes.

Student: Okay, I still need to think about it, but okay. 

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (26:40) For what need, that's my question. He gave the example of coming in the same form to the synagogue, the Rav, once it was for the sake of something necessary, and one for decorations for his wife. And the response was different. Yes, I observe this, many times, I miss the… for what need? How can I aim myself in the Ten, in life, in the need of the other friend and the other person, to discover what lack is and operate from there? I see this problematic matter here even before the shame.

M. Laitman: Pray to the Creator to give you understanding, to open it up for you. 

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (27:40) Rav, actually the example is kind of like a negative example, and the second time he comes with something that no one understood why he needs it. But how is that created? The wife saw someone from America whose wife did have it, she was envious of that, and then she came to the Rav and said, I also want. Now, let's say if we translate this to our world, we also need to produce a desire to equalize the Creator and perform a restriction. We don't have it, it doesn't exist necessarily. How do we create such a desire that will impact us in such a way that we’ll say, this is what we need, even though it's not necessary? 

M. Laitman: This is rooted in nature. The fact that you forget about it, and you leave your envy behind, that's nature. But in truth, if you were to continue this, you wouldn't be calmed down, you would constantly have a deficiency.

Student: But it's a deficiency for something that's not in reality, it's above the nature. So how do we create this envy, just like that wife saw that rich woman? We also need to see something and to want constantly for that to be. 

M. Laitman: You have friends around you, you have a great society. Look how many people are sitting here. They want to receive something. Look at them and incorporate in them. 

Student: So that's actually the solution, the influence of the environment. 

M. Laitman: Yes, the influence of the environment.

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (29:50) More on this matter, I think that this approach that Rabash is writing here is much closer to man's work as we're taught that we need to bestow to the Creator, not because I'm missing it in the will to receive, but because I want to bestow. On the other hand, we learn that a person needs to come to a complete lack, but it seems like the main work is that you don't have a deficiency to awaken that deficiency. So, what is it when a person in general, when he works, needs to come to a certain lack, or only to be capable of working without a lack in the desire to receive, and just work as much as possible?

M. Laitman: I lack to have a lack to bestow to the Creator, 

Student: But if I’ll have a deficiency for that, then I'll work for the deficiency, not for the decoration. 

M. Laitman: No, it is a decoration already, because you don't have that deficiency. You wanted to have it, and it's a decoration.

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (31:23) I didn't understand what this addition of a decoration is, if the created being is doing a correction.

M. Laitman: He doesn't have to, it did not become necessary, rather He accepts it as an addition, a decoration.

Student: Who needs this decoration, the created being? 

M. Laitman: The created being. 

Student: What's the addition? 

M. Laitman: The addition is he wants to bestow to the Creator.

Student: But he already corrected, and he's bestowed, so what's this extra light that is in the form of a decoration?

M. Laitman:  He does it out of his own free will and choice.

Student: And before the decoration, it wasn't like that? 

M. Laitman: No.

Student: So why is it a decoration? It's a necessary thing, it's not some nice addition.

M. Laitman: He did it as a necessity, but in truth it's not necessary.

Student: What actually is there to add here to the perfection that's there? As if there was something here that was flawed beforehand.

M. Laitman:  His wholeness is truly not wholeness according to nature, but by what's happening above nature. He wants to resemble the Creator by that, he wants to bestow to the Creator through that, since in this way they become equals.

Student: What's the difference between correction and decoration? 

M. Laitman: His correction is called decoration.

Student: And the decoration is an addition? 

M. Laitman: Addition. 

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (33:21) Rav, it seems like there are two restrictions, one restriction from above, that the Creator gives a person the opportunity… 

M. Laitman: The light restricted itself. 

Student: Yes, exactly.

M. Laitman: And the second restriction from the Creator being when? 

Student: When he receives the light, and the Kli… 

M. Laitman: When He doesn't want to receive the light. 

Student: When He doesn't want to receive the light. He feels the light, he feels the perfection of the Kli, and then decides in this reception, I'm actually different from the Creator, and therefore I'm performing a restriction. And the second restriction is what's called the decoration? Because it gives the reception of the light, it kind of refines the reception by respecting the Creator? 

M. Laitman: Yes.

Student: It's a really beautiful process, where the first restriction from the Creator gives the created being a place to work on faith, to grow faith. And the second restriction is already…what is he doing there, what's his correction there? 

M. Laitman: To reach equivalence.

Student: But there's no matter of faith here. 

M. Laitman: Faith was from the beginning.

Student: Here he’s in knowledge, the Kli is already Ein Sof, it's full, but he's choosing  during the filling, during, as the Kabbalists call, in daylight, he chooses to do one additional action, not to just receive like a parasite, but to truly receive it correctly.

M. Laitman: Yes. 

Student: So how…is there a connection between the faith, that is during the time of darkness, and the daylight that he receives later, or are they not dependent on one another? 

M. Laitman: No. 

Student: They're not like cause and consequence, they're not connected. 

M. Laitman: No.

Student: So, in the time of darkness, he needs to grow the faith, so the Creator fills all, His glory fills all the earth and everything, and I just need to connect to the friends to come closer to Him, that's our work. 

M. Laitman: Yes.

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (35:58) I have a question from this special letter. The writing style is, he doesn't start, my dear friend, and how's your family, and how are you doing, and your family. He also doesn't finish, it just goes right to the point. Is there something here?

M. Laitman: I don't know. Is that how the letter went, or it was edited? 

Reader: No. 

Student: Everyone's asking about the very beginning. He also tells them in the end, I wish you all the best, and this and that, and to your family, and all the good. 

M. Laitman: I don't recall what was in the original, but it is a special letter, yes, I agree. 

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (37:01) Why is his lack for the ring for his wife and what he needs for his wife, why don't we receive that like an empty envelope? He has a lack, but we actually judge it in our vessels. 

M. Laitman: That's how he delivers it to us. He raises himself to sorrow, to crying, all kinds of things, and these secondary things. 

Student: And maybe to others, but for him it's a  necessity. Why isn’t it like the empty envelope? There's a lack, you don't see it, but there is a deficiency.

M. Laitman: Again, I'm saying, in the eyes of the created beings, this deficiency is not necessity. That's it, it's not necessary. 

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (38:04) He writes here, in this world, in a place where a person is immersed in lust, he doesn't feel godliness, and the beginning of his work is that he needs to believe that there is godliness in the world. So actually, the faith is the only opening to exit our world to the spiritual world? 

M. Laitman: Yes.

Student: And another question, as fuel you can think this thought, that through the restriction I take the Creator out of concealment, can you think that way? 

M. Laitman: Yes, yes, because He's concealed, and through these actions where we wish to bring Him out of concealment, that's how we correct ourselves.

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (39:03) Maybe to continue what the friend said, and also according to the allegory that he wrote, I noticed that a friend asks for forces from the Ten, for an act of bestowal, and the response of the friends is as if he asked for a decoration. But if he's asking for the forces for his health, or for his sustenance, all of a sudden everyone responds, all of a sudden everyone... So, I want to ask, what's the advice for a Ten to change our attitudes, to see in an act of bestowal, necessity, as if the friend asked for his life?

M. Laitman: I didn't understand.

Student: I saw that if a friend asks for thoughts, forces, for an act of bestowal, for an act to connect more, to awaken the society, the response of the friends is not the same response like if you were to ask for his health or for his living, his basic sustenance. So, I'm asking how would it be recommended to the Ten, I think that the way we relate to this should be no less. And what is the advice to a Ten to change our attitude as if the friend asked for his health? 

M. Laitman: It can't be because he's not asking about his health, he's asking about things that are less important. 

Student: Less important to who, to the Ten?

M. Laitman: To each and every one, doesn't matter. Because health is health, life is life, and decoration is decoration. 

Student: But don't we need to come to a point where an action for the sake of the friends is no less in importance than an act of asking for one's health?

M. Laitman: It depends on the action. What is the friend lacking?

Student: The friend is now before an action that is for the society. Is that a decoration? A person is now a friend, the society asked him for something. It's not easy for him, he's asking the friends for help. It's not easy for him before this action. The friend's response is as if he asked for a decoration, just like in the allegory. And I think that you would expect, according to what we learn, it's as if he asked for his health, no less.

M. Laitman: Can someone answer him? 

Answer (Petah Tikva Center): (42:38) That's exactly our choice, that it's not like that. Support a friend when he's asking for an act of bestowal, naturally, is not like for his health. But it's precisely why the decoration is our free choice. Because we are trying to heighten the necessity for spirituality and that's why we got the freedom from the Creator. 

Student: Is it desirable even though I don't feel; even if I feel that the friend now asked for a decoration, as far as I'm concerned, in my feeling it's like that. Is it desirable for me to respond to this request for the decoration that I feel, as if he asked for his life? 

M. Laitman: That's a different question. How do I treat the request of the friend as a request in and of itself, or I raise it the way it is, or I raise it to the degree of necessity? So, we need to explore that. If in each Ten it is it's accepted as a necessary thing, I also accept it as a necessity.

Student: I'm simply asking about the desirable. Is it desirable to come to such a level? 

M. Laitman: There's no such thing as desirable. We need to work according to our lives, according to the information that we have. If he's asking for things that are not necessary, do I also need to treat them this way? He's crying about something that he must have, and I have to accept it according to his tears. How should I judge this?

Student: I need to judge him in my opinion, according to the essence of his request. 

M. Laitman: How can you enter the essence of the request and judge it truthfully? 

Student: Because there's an agreement, in the example of what we read right now, there's an agreement in the society that to ask for a ring is to ask for decoration, and to ask for help, or for sustenance, it's necessity. It's the same thing in a spiritual society. To ask for an act of bestowal should be a standard of necessity. That's the desirable, that's what I meant by desirable. The fact that I don't succeed to see in this necessity, here I have room for work. And here's the question, what do I do in order to see in this action that I'm now perceiving as a decoration, what do I do in order to see it as necessity? So, what if I don't see it right now as necessity? But what do I do to, yes, see it as necessity? That was my question. 

M. Laitman: Okay, want to add, please?

Petah Tikva Center: (46:38) I'll continue the words of the friend. The friend has a certain problem. He cannot receive what he wants. And it's probably because he can't receive the light. He has a flawed intention and when a friend comes to the society and asks, when it comes to the demand of the Ten, we need to pray for him to be able to receive the correction in order to receive what he's missing. He cannot receive because he's in order to receive. So, we can pray for him in all kinds of ways, so he will receive what he needs to receive, but not in order to receive, or something like that. That's correction. 

Petah Tikva Center: (47:33) It could be also in the continuation, I'm also connecting it to what the friend said. A friend who comes and asks, no matter what, he's already asking. For him, when he asks from the society, it says that it’s something necessary, he needs it.

M. Laitman: He says it's necessary. He cries. I must get this diamond.

Student: Yes. Does the society need to judge a friend? I hear a friend that's crying, he wants the diamond and I'm doing like a certain, I'm kind of like critiquing the request, and I'm saying, no, he wants a diamond. I don't want to help him attain the diamond. It's nonsense. But if he comes and asks, according to my conditions, that I think that it's really this time necessary, then I will help him. I will exert for him to achieve to attain this.

M. Laitman: How can you evaluate it? 

Student: That's the question. How do I know if this diamond is maybe, how do I know? How do I know as the one who's hearing the request? Do we, as a Ten, as a society, need all together to judge whether it's necessary for a friend or not? Or if the friend asked and cried, I will do everything for him to get it. That's the question.

M. Laitman: You're saying like this, according to how much he cries, that's how we will judge him? 

Student: That's the question. If he's a good actor, if he cries better, then maybe that's the question here, whether I'm even judging this request of the friend. It's an essential question.

Petah Tikva Center: (49:41) I'd like to expand the question if possible. Let's put two cases. One case, a friend says, I haven't been working for a long time, I need work, I'm going to an interview. Pray for me to receive the job. That's one. Two, a friend says, I'm not working a long time, I need a workplace. I'm going to a workplace now. Pray for me to remember you and the Creator during the time I'm looking for the work.

M. Laitman: That takes us away to other decisions.

Student: What's the difference between these two decisions? 

M. Laitman: On the one hand, he's asking for the success of work. On the other hand, he's asking for adhesion.

Student: So, what should excite us more and inspire us more, make us really think about him?

M. Laitman: Of course, a second request, of course. Because we agree with him that if he won't forget about us, he will succeed. He will succeed. 

Student: So why the first one kind of indirectly, if he had the work, then he'd be calm, and he'll be able to think about us. It also sounds like..

M. Laitman: That's indirect. 

Student: I think that maybe that's what the friend was asking. No? 

Petah Tikva Center: (51:16) Is it correct, it raises the allegory about a son with a child who's crying, and people turn to him and say, oh, what a cruel father you are. Give the child who's crying what he wants. He says he wants a needle to scratch his eye. How can I give him such a thing? Is it correct to think about that allegory also in this state? 

M. Laitman: No, we have to change it. So, it would seem as if what he's asking for, it's incorrect. It will work against him to his detriment.

Student: So, can we move it to a more correct request to the Ten? 

M. Laitman: Yes, more correct. 

Petah Tikva Center: (52:25) As I understand it, the decoration is actually the lack of my friends in the Ten. If I clothe their deficiency, that's the decoration. Now I, as a friend in a Ten who's supposed to pray all day long, it shouldn't even interest me what they're asking, even if they don't open their mouth. I actually need to constantly be asking for Dvekut for them. That's the lack that they're missing, even if they don't know that that's what they're lacking.

M. Laitman: That's a correct preparation. 

Student: Yes, that's what I want to hear. 

Petah Tikva Center: (53:10) When a friend asks for something, he needs to tell the friends why it's necessary for him. Otherwise, if it's necessary, then he has to detail why it's necessary for me to get this in order to attain the goal. I can't without this. If it's things that for me are not necessary to attain the goal, and for him it is acute. So, I have to find that point that he has to overcome and to ask for him. Clearly. 

M. Laitman: This is practical.

Question (Kyiv): (53:53) In this example, these decorations, they point to a certain degree?

M. Laitman: I didn't understand. 

Student: In the example, he says how the decoration is something a person doesn't quite need and that's why no one will get all these decorations for this Rav, who needs it for his wife. But nevertheless, we speak about how decoration for a person; it developments him spiritually but here he’s against me.

M. Laitman: Look here the decoration is, actually talking about the decoration and that the wife of the Rabbi wants decorations. There’s nothing necessary about it, that’s way they’re laughing about it.

Student: Something that is above necessity; he could have received these decorations in order to bestow. Is that possible?

M. Laitman: That’s already a completely different story, because here we’re already talking about the result of for what does he needs decorations.

Student: It says the restrictions is the result of the need for decorations, or for what can we ask to perform our restriction?

M. Laitman: For us, these decorations are not important because they’re completely not going on the same direction like our intentions.

Question (Darom 1): (56:20) About the question, if a friend is asking from the Ten. Let’s say he’s asking because he’s going to his place of work and doesn’t have a job and he want to get a new job. In my mind I need to judge him if this work is for the benefit of our path, our way; but if it’s a kind of work that takes up all his time, disturb him, then maybe I will judge it as I’m necessary. Is this the way to judge it?

M. Laitman: Very well. No, no; what we need to do, that’s not what we’re taking about right now, because you are taking us completely in a different direction. Okay, we are yet to talk about that.

Question (Women MAK): (57:29) Can we say that everything that comes from me to the Creator with the goal of loving Him the way He loves me, is that decoration?

M. Laitman: Yes, you can say it that way.

Student: If anyone wants to do a good deed, without any reason, and someone doesn’t want to do something good; of course that acts pure bestowal as in the second instance. How to convince the Creator that I want to love the desire of the friend and fill it in order to reach bestowal to Him?

M. Laitman: In us this is expressed through the restriction against my restriction. When I restrict my desires, rise above them and develop a good attitude towards my friends, let's say, not the connection that I received from it. The main thing is for them to have it good from it.

Student: If I can continue; in order to learn how to love the Creator, to bestow to Him; do I need to feel inside of me, not the love of the friends or the Creator or your love, but my love?

M. Laitman: You’re right, we need that too. We’ll talk about that.

Question (Women Ukraine 2): (59:19) A friend is asking, did she hear correctly, that the deficiency for bestowal lacks necessity, rather it’s a gift.

M. Laitman: What does it mean, lack for bestowal?

Student: Meaning from the outset, according to the thought of creation, creation doesn't have a desire to bestow. 

M. Laitman: That’s correct. 

Student: And therefore, if the desire is like that, if it appears in me, that's our reward.

M. Laitman: Yes. 

Student: So that's a correction, that's our work. 

M. Laitman: Yes.

Question (Women PT33): (01:00:15) Do we need to reach a state where we measure luxury versus necessity, not relative to the lack of the friend, but relative to how much this lack in me is defined as necessity or luxury. Meaning the friend expresses a lack.

M. Laitman: Yes. 

Student: And we know that we don't check what is the deficiency of the friend, because the friend's corporeality is also my spirituality.

M. Laitman: Yes. 

Student: So, the friend expresses a deficiency, and I have to look inside of me. It's the deficiency that I feel from the friend to ask for this friend. Is this necessity or luxury? Is this where I need to measure it? 

M. Laitman: Yes. 

Student: And it doesn't matter what the friend is asking for. I don't check if it's luxury or not. 

M. Laitman: You check it together with everything.

Student: So, both. 

M. Laitman: Yes. 

Question (Turkiye 5): (01:01:31) When does the Creator think that someone wants spirituality for decoration? What can we do to truly lack spirituality in the eyes of the Creator?

M. Laitman: He needs to check it. He has friends. He has a group. He needs to examine it. Even if he's certain that it's correct or not correct, like this, like that. Anyway, he needs to go through the Ten.

Question (Turkiye 2): (01:02:18) How can a person come to the feeling that he lacks the greatness of the Creator?

M. Laitman: How can a person come to a feeling? 

Reader: …that he lacks the greatness of the Creator.

M. Laitman: That he's missing, that he's lacking the greatness of the Creator. You should think about it, you should think about it. To what extent the Creator is great. Let's say, in what can he measure? What can he weigh the greatness of the Creator? Yes? What needs to happen for him to think about himself or about his family or about the world or what, compared to the Creator? Yes? What action needs to be revealed before him, for him to be concerned only with the greatness of the Creator? Oh, wow. What else do we have, friend? 

Reader: You can go to Equal As One.

M. Laitman: So, let's at least go a little there.