What Is the Difference between a Field and a Man of the Field, in the Work?

Article No. 6, 1988

It is written in The Zohar (Toldot), “‘And Isaac loved Esau because he had game in his mouth.’ He wrote here, ‘a skillful hunter, a man of the field,’ and it is written there, ‘He was a mighty hunter.’ As there, it means that was hunting people’s minds and misleading them into rebelling against the Creator, so here, ‘a man of the field’ means in order to rob people and to kill them. He is a man of the field because his inheritance is not in an inhabited place, but in a desolate place, in the desert, in the field. For this reason, he is called ‘a man of the field.’”

Concerning Isaac, we also see that it is written “field,” as it is written (Genesis 24:63), “And Isaac went out to wander in the field.” Also, it is written about Jacob, “And he said, ‘Behold, the scent of my son is as the scent of a field that the Lord has blessed.’”

We should understand the difference between the fields, where it was said about Esau, who is called “a man of the field,” that The Zohar interprets “to rob people and to kill them,” whereas concerning Isaac, it is written, “to wander in the field,” which is a great thing, as our sages said that Isaac established the afternoon prayer because of the verse, “And Isaac went out to wander in the field.” We should also understand why it is written about Jacob that Isaac said, “The scent of my son is as the scent of a field that the Lord has blessed.” Therefore, we should understand the differences between “a man of the field,” “to wander in the field,” and “the scent of a field.”

It is known that Malchut is called a “field.” Since Malchut has many changes because of the Tzimtzum [restriction], Malchut has many names, one of which is a “field.” When we speak of Malchut, the rule is that we speak of Malchut of Ohr Yashar [Direct Light], where she was using the will to receive for herself. In that respect, there are no changes in her but is as the Emanator created the will to receive in order to receive the delight and pleasure that He wished to impart upon the creatures. This is called Malchut with respect to the Ohr Yashar in her.

For this reason, this Malchut is called Ein Sof [infinity/no end], for Malchut did not put a stop on the upper light, meaning she did not say, “No more!” I do not want to receive with my self, called “receiving in order to receive.” While she was receiving with her self, there were no changes, which is why it is called by the name, “Everything was one light.”

However, afterward, Malchut desired equivalence of form, called “decoration,” at the point of desire. That is, she did not want to receive in order to receive, but in order to bestow. In that respect, we can call Malchut by the name “field,” meaning that the field must be plowed, and plowing means inverting that which is below and placing it above, and that which is above, we place below.

Likewise, here in Malchut, who is called a “field,” for the will to receive, reception is important and is considered “of superior importance,” while matters of bestowal are of inferior importance. In Kedusha [sanctity/holiness], there is the matter of plowing, that we must till the land, meaning turn the will to receive, which is on top, to be below, and the will to bestow to be on top. Specifically by this can we yield crops that are good to eat. Otherwise, there is no way we will be able to eat food of Kedusha, as it is written (Proverbs 14:4), “Much crop comes by the strength of the ox.” That is, the force of the ox yields much crop.

The meaning of “ox” is as our sages said, that Malchut [kingdom] of heaven must be as an ox to the burden and as an ass to the load.” Baal HaSulam said that “an ox to the burden” means that the burden of faith must be as one places the yoke on the ox so as to plow the field, without any consideration of its will, if it agrees with it. Instead, we place the yoke on it against its will. Likewise, man must take upon himself the burden of the kingdom of heaven, since an ox means knowing, as it is written, “The ox knows its master.” For this reason, faith is regarded as a burden to one who needs knowledge.

It therefore follows that a field is Malchut with respect to self-reception, which requires plowing, which is the correction of the field to turn the vessel of reception, which is of high importance, and make it low importance, while the vessels of bestowal, which are of low importance, raise them so as to be of high importance.

It is known that the will to receive is in mind and heart, and both require correction. In the mind, the correction is faith above reason. In the heart, the correction is that every pleasure he receives will be in order to bestow. And more precisely, every act he does will be in order to bestow; otherwise, he will not make a single move.

Accordingly, we can interpret why it is written about Esau, “a man of the field,” meaning that while he is in a state of “field,” and must assume the burden of the kingdom of heaven as an ox to the burden, he thinks he is complete and does not need any corrections. This is called “for he had game in his mouth.” This is as it is written in The Zohar (above), “And Esau said that he was in the field in order to pray, and he hunted and deceived Isaac with his mouth.”

In the work, we should interpret that “he had game in his mouth” means that his mouth and heart were not the same. His mouth is externality, meaning that in actions, he was righteous, because there is nothing to add to actions, but in his heart, meaning the intention, he was not as the act. The act that is apparent to people implies that he wants to observe the commandments of the Creator in order to please Him by doing His will in observing the Mitzvot [commandments/good deeds]. But in his heart, he thinks only about his own benefit and not about the benefit of the Creator. Thus, his mouth and heart are not the same.

Therefore, in action, Esau appeared complete, like a completed person. This is the meaning of “Esau was a man of the field,” meaning that he had no more work to do in the field, since the work of the field begins with plowing, which is about inverting the vessels of reception. This is not for him because it is enough for him to keep everything in externality, which is called “his mouth,” meaning that his mouth and heart are not the same. This is why Esau is called “a man of the field,” meaning that a field is receiving for oneself, and in this he is complete and has nothing more to add.

This is not so with Isaac and Jacob. To them, the work of the field was labor and prayer in the field, as it is written about Isaac, “And Isaac went out to wander in the field,” which is prayer. It is as our sages said, that Isaac established the afternoon prayer, when he prayed to raise the Shechina [Divinity] from the dust, meaning that the vessel of bestowal, which should be in the kingdom of heaven in mind and heart, will be in order to bestow.

However, Esau, who was a man of the field, corrected nothing so as to work in order to bestow. Rather, with him, everything was only for his own sake. This is why The Zohar interpreted “‘a man of the field,’ to rob people and to kill them.” The Zohar also interprets “a man of the field,” since his inheritance is not in an inhabited place, but in a desolate place, in the desert, in the field. This is why he is called “a man of the field.”

When one works only for oneself, that state is regarded as stealing the aspect of man that is in him, meaning the aspect of “You are called ‘man,’ and the nations of the world are not called ‘man.’” That aspect is robbed from him when he works for his own benefit.

Even worse, because transgression induces transgression, he kills the man when he is for himself. This is the meaning of the words of The Zohar, “And to kill them.” It says about it, “Because his inheritance is not in an inhabited place,” where “an inhabited place” is where people dwell, as in “You are called ‘men,’” “but in a desolate place,” the place of the breaking of the vessels, for because the will to receive for himself was revealed there, the world became desolate.

However, it is written about Jacob, “And he said, ‘Behold, the scent of my son is as the scent of a field that the Lord has blessed,’” since Jacob established the evening prayer, as it is written, “And he came to a place,” meaning he established the evening prayer. It is also written about Jacob, “And behold, a well in the field, and three flocks of sheep lying there beside it.” The Zohar interprets (VaYetze, Item 92), “‘And he looked, and behold a well in the field.’ He saw the well of above, which is the Nukva, one opposite the other, meaning that the well of below was directed opposite the well of above.”

We should interpret that when Jacob established the well of below, his intention was his own well, which is the field, meaning that he established it to be as above. That is, as above, Malchut of Kedusha is a Masach [screen], meaning that on the will to receive for himself, there is a Masach that raises Ohr Hozer [Reflected Light], meaning that everything she wants to receive is because she wants to bestow. Likewise, he established himself so that all his actions would be in order to bestow.

Hence, when Jacob came to Isaac, since Jacob is the middle line, where all the wholeness appears, this is why it is written that Isaac said, “And he said, ‘Behold, the scent of my son is as the scent of a field that the Lord has blessed.’” That is, when the kingdom of heaven, called a “field,” received the correction of the middle line, it is called “a field that the Lord has blessed,” meaning that here appear the delight and pleasure that the Creator has prepared for the creatures. This is the difference between “a man of the field,” “wander in the field,” and “as the scent of a field.”