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

Daily Morning Lesson: January 26, 2026

Part 2: TES Lesson With RABASH

Baal HaSulam. Study of the Ten Sefirot, Vol. 2, Part 5, Item 5 

Reader: We are going to learn from the lesson by Rabash about “The Study of the Ten Sefirot.” We are going to read from Part 5, starting with item 5, “If the upper light had been extended down to their place.” Before that, we're going to read from part five, from the words of The ARI. 

Reading: (00:44) The reason they need to raise MAN for the Ibur is because these vessels of Akudim are the first vessels that were emanated. And above them, no vessels were emanated, since the light is great there, and the vessels cannot exist there. For this reason, if the upper light had been extended down to their place when they are in their vessels, the vessels would have been annulled. Thus, it was necessary that only the lights of ZON in the vessel would rise up.

Reader: So, we are reading in “The Study of the Ten Sefirot”, part five, item five. In the words, “therefore, if the upper light had been extended downward.” 

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): (02:15) So let's see. He writes about the upper light. What does he write? If the upper light had been extended down to their place when they are in their vessels, the vessels would have been annulled in their light. If the upper light had been extended down, the vessels would have been annulled. It means that if the level of Keter had expanded back to the vessels as it first was before its departure, the vessels that were made during the departure would have been annulled again, for the reason The ARI mentioned above. So what's he telling us here? How were the vessels made? We learned that. As the light departed, so there's a recognition of the vessels. The vessels have coarseness. And there The ARI asked, if you're saying that in Malchut there's light and vessel in one another, so you can't tell between them. That means that the light is an equivalence in order to bestow. The light in order to bestow, the light is bestowing. And the screen with the reflected light that came from Malchut is also in order to bestow. It's equivalence of form, so there's no recognition of the vessels. Only after the light departs, then you can recognize the vessels of the coarseness that it's receiving, and the light is bestowing. So he asks, if so, in the second expansion, when the light returns by the screen, while there's equivalence of form, so there's also no difference between the light and vessel. All the vessels were annulled. So, he explains there, since the light of Hochma came in the vessel of Keter, we find that in each and every vessel, a deficiency of coarseness remains. So, there is a recognition of the vessels. Here he says it, he elaborates, he says, if the upper light had been extended down, as it was before, to the light of Keter, the vessels would have been annulled. What came before the vessels annulled? So he says here, in “The Inner Light,” if the upper light had been extended down, the vessels would have been annulled. If the level of Keter had expanded back to the vessels as it was, as it first was in Galgalta, before its departure, the vessels that were made during the departure would have been annulled again, for the reason that The ARI mentioned above, that they were mixed in one another.

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): (05:35) In Partzuf Galgalta, there were the first vessels that were emanated. There weren't any vessels, but in AB, there was already a recognition of the vessels. Why didn't it return to phase three, he was asking, according to that? We have to understand this. According to what he says, that the light of Hochma in the vessel of Keter, and the light of Bina in the vessel of Hochma. So there's a question, am I speaking about Partzuf AB in new vessels, or am I speaking about Partzuf Galgalta, about the older vessels? When we are speaking here about the fulfillment, that the higher light comes, meaning the light of Hochma in the vessel of Keter, but Partzuf was in AB, or the light of Keter in the vessel of Keter. So, the new vessels are always each light in its own vessel. That's why there's equivalence of form. Only what? The light of AB clothes in the vessels of Galgalta so you can recognize it. We find that in the new vessels of Partzuf AB, there also wasn't a recognition. What was there? Partzuf SAG, so he says, there's always a rule that on every degree, there are new vessels and older vessels. The main vessels are the older ones, there there is a recognition. 

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (07:53) So if it returns, there won't be a recognition? 

RABASH: The same thing. That's why you have to learn it this way: that on every degree there are older vessels and newer vessels. In the older vessels, there's a recognition of the vessel; in the newer vessels, no, there's equivalence of form. Because we, here there's a different question. If we say that the screen refined, how can you come to the light of Keter? There's a reality for the light of Keter, that's the question. So he explains that if it was so, it can’t be so. There's no screen. 

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (08:40) But he went to the Rosh, the Rosh would give him a screen in return. 

RABASH: No we don't say that. What do you mean that the last phase was lost? 

Student: So, that's the explanation he gives you. 

RABASH: No, he says that he was refined, he couldn't receive anymore. The last phase is lost. That means that the lower one can receive. And here he says that he doesn't want it to remain. So, he says there are two tastes, or many tastes, that's easier. As always, there's a lot of tastes for everything, there's thousands of tastes. So, if the light would extend, that also wouldn't have been good. What's written above? 

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): (09:38) Thus, it was necessary that only the lights of ZON in the vessel would rise up. So, he says here, how's that connected? Let's see. It was necessary that only the lights of ZON in the vessel would rise up. These ZON of Keter that rose above, the screen that was refined, only have coarseness of phase three. Hence, they extend only the level of Hochma, and the light of Hochma closed in the vessel of Keter. The light of Bina in the vessel of Hochma, etc. You find that each vessel lacks much of the measure of light intended for it. Since the vessel of Keter now has only the light of Hochma, which is much lower than it, also the vessel of Hochma has only the light of Bina, etc. Because of this, the coarseness became apparent in the vessels in a way that they could not be annulled. You have to explain a bit his words from above. Look above what he writes. What's he writing in the last line? In order for the vessels not to annul, so it was necessary that only the lights of ZON in the vessel would rise up. What is he saying here? That's why there has to be a male and female, clothing and coarseness. The clothing could not extend the light of Keter in return. So who does extend it? The coarseness. Coarseness is the lower degree. That's why it remains in the vessel. But if there wasn't male and female but only the record of coarseness of phase four, it would extend the light of Keter in return. And there was a recognition, not in the vessel; the vessel would annul. 

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): (12:21) Sixth. Now we shall explain the existence of this ascent. It is said that when it's not expanding in Keter, since ZON of Keter rise up to the place of the Keter at the end of the upper roots. What's written here? Here we need to explain. Now we shall explain the existence of this ascent. What ascent? He means what's written afterwards. Why should it ascend? It's in Yesod of Malchut. So, it is said, he explains, that when it is not expanding in Keter, it's not expanding in Keter, and we say that by that the coupling takes place and they ascend. So he explains, since the ZON of Keter rises up to the place of this Keter, at the end of the upper roots, they cannot be together there, because he, the light of Keter, is greater than them, hence they, who is they? The records. They remain at the place of Keter, and he rises to the place of the root of Malchut, or the Keter ascends to the place of Malchut, and the root of Malchut also rises to the root of Yesod. You therefore find, who causes the ascent, when it is not expanding in Keter? They rise in the place of Keter, it causes the ascent. He asks about it, the reason for the ascent, where they both remain as Yesod. According to the order, they should also rise to Yesod, or to rise up. No, since they are in ZON, you find that, what is in Yesod ZON? Which ZON? Malchut and Yesod. Then, the root of the upper Keter bestows below after there is already a preparation for the lower ones to receive. In other words, the screen that rose and was incorporated in the screen, already has the strength to receive from the upper Keter. At that time, the Nukva, phase three, is incorporated in the male, and light expands the record of clothing, and the record of coarseness is incorporated in the record of clothing. Clear? 

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): (15:46) Let's see what's written below, “Inner Light.” Lo Mate [not there] expanding in Keter, since ZON of the Keter rise up. The matter of the departure of the level of Keter of the first expansion, is called Lo Mate in Keter. What does it mean, Lo Mate in Keter? This is the matter of the departure of ZON of the Keter upward, meaning, they rise there to be incorporated in the upper coupling together. Meaning, that then, what is written in Lo Mate in Keter, this is the matter of the departure of ZON. Why is it Lo Mate in Keter? What does it mean, Lo Mate, not expanding in Keter? The light that was previously in the vessel of Keter has now departed, first of all, the literal. So, he explains, Lo Mate in Keter means, the matter of the departure of the level of Keter of the first expansion is called Lo Mate in Keter. Next, this causes, we should say, this is the matter of the departure of ZON of the Keter upward. Meaning, what does it mean, it rises up? Meaning, they rise there to be incorporated in the upper coupling in Malchut of the Rosh, when there is departure of the light, it cannot remain in the dark, and this causes the records to rise up and receive light anew. Since we learned that while there is a coupling in the Rosh, the coupling that is done in the Rosh does not depart, therefore, they rise and are incorporated in the coupling in the Rosh. This has already been explained elaborately, et cetera. I shall only bring an extract here, sufficiently to explain the words of The ARI here. It explains there that the whole reason for the departure of lights from the first expansion of Akudim was only because of the ascent of Malchut. What does it mean, only Malchut? Meaning, the refinement of the screen in the vessel of Malchut. Meaning, when Malchut rose to ZA, which is phase three, then he can no longer use that Keter. The level of Keter disappeared without Malchut, without reflected light. It's forbidden to use afterwards. When it also rose from ZA to Bina, where the screen of the reflected light can no longer do on three phases but only on two phases, the level of Hochma disappeared as well. After that, when it rose from Bina to Hochma, the level of Bina disappeared. And when it rose from Hochma to Keter, the level of ZA disappeared as well, which emerged on the coarseness of Hochma. Afterwards, when it rose from the vessel of Keter, from root coarseness to the Emanator, who is the Emanator of the Guf, meaning to Malchut of the Rosh, all the light of that expansion disappeared, called Partzuf Galgalta. Thus, all those lights that were shining, that departed from there, left records after them in their vessels, except for Malchut, meaning phase four. What is our phase? Phase four is called receiving in order to receive, except she has the power of the screen. No record remains of the light of her screen, so she can draw phase four again. He asks, why did the surrounding light cancel that force that was weakened? 

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (21:00) That's the last phase disappearing? 

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): This is called the last phase disappearing, meaning lost, yes. He says, meaning phase four, which did not leave any record after her departure. He's also explained there that Malchut, meaning the screen in her, thus far departed. We talked about the records that remained in the vessels of Galgalta, one record. It is also explained there that Malchut, meaning the screen in her, where the light rises from below upward, when it is refined and ascends from phase to phase, is incorporated with that screen in the records that the lights left behind in those phases. Meaning, when the screen is refined from phase four to phase three, which is the vessel of ZA, it is incorporated with the record that remained there from the light of ZA. What is he saying? Since the last phase is lost, so he speaks of the records, but Malchut also remains. The light that remains there from the light of ZA after its departure, also afterwards, when it rose to phase two, which is the vessel of Bina, it was incorporated in the record that remained there from the light of Bina after her departure. Likewise, when it rose to Hochma, it was incorporated in the record of Hochma, and when it rose to Keter, it was incorporated in the record of Keter, root coarseness. Thus, afterwards, when it rose from Keter to the Emanator, to Malchut of the Rosh, the screen incorporates all the records that exist in the ten Sefirot of the first expansion of Partzuf Galgalta. All the records that exist in the ten Sefirot of the first expansion, except the record of phase four of the screen, since it disappeared even from Malchut of the first expansion. What is he saying here? We are saying two things here. One, the vessels of Galgalta are called the first expansion, and records remain in the vessels. He also tells us the screen that rose from phase to phase was also incorporated with the records that shone; besides Malchut, it was not incorporated in the screen. Why? In its own vessel, it also did not remain. Again, the screen is incorporated with all the records. First listen, then ask. The screen is incorporated with all the records except for phase four. The screen is not incorporated. He also says, since even in their own vessels, not from the screen, we learned, all the records remain in the vessels, and Malchut does not leave a record. This is one. Then I'm saying, second records that were incorporated in the screen. It first comes into the vessels. First in the vessels, it did not remain. So how can they remain in the screen? That's what he says here. Even in its own vessels, it also did not remain. So with what is the screen incorporated? What is incorporated in the vessels? It too is incorporated with it, which did not remain in the first expansion. Even in the vessels, it is not incorporated.