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

Daily Morning Lesson: February 26, 2026

Part 2: Part 2: TES Lesson With RABASH

Baal HaSulam. "Study of the Ten Sefirot" (TES). Vol. 2. Part 5. #40

Original lesson date: 01/01/1980

Reader: We're going to learn from a TES lesson with Rabash, we'll read from the Study of Ten Sefirot, Volume 2, part 5; we are reading Item 40.

Reading: (00:33) Baal HaSulam. "Study of the Ten Sefirot" (TES). Vol. 2. Part 5. #40

40. Afterwards, the light returns light returns to being Matei in Keter, and then both HB ascend there because of the desire they have. Then you find that there is a great distance between the sons and the light of GAR, for there are two distances between them, Bina and Hochma, in which there is no light. Hence, at that time, the light of Hesed rises to Bina and is called not Matei in Hesed. In that state, the vessel of Hesed turns its anterior and gives the six lights below in Gevura.

Reader: We'll move to the lesson.

_______________________________

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): (01:26) So let's summarize:

When we learn expanding or not expanding, expanding in Hesed, expanding in VAK. So finally, there is a difference: If I say that Partzuf AB, that illuminates Hochma, while there's a screen in the middle, The posterior is not caught up, or is it caught up, I'm asking? So there's Hochma in general, what is it in private? How could it descend? So there's no Hochma. That's why it's a simple answer for your question that you asked earlier. I explained – I didn't ask, I explained –since when I say expanding in Keter, so there's no Hochma on that degree, why didn't it go below the Tabur? I asked the question, question. If we say it was expanding in Keter, so there's no light of Hochma in the whole degree, so is that caught up or not because there's no Hochma there? So, if it's Hassadim, is it called, AB, or not, that's what I'm asking? Seems so, seems so but in general, it's phase three – one and three, four and three, but it's three. But there's a general name for Hochma and there are individual cases, where I say that the light of Hassadim illuminates and not Hochma, but it is Partzuf AB, that's why it's called Hochma. Otherwise, in Bina it wouldn't expand anymore, it's phase three, meaning it would want to extend; that's AB, meaning phase three is AB, then we can discern whether it expands or not. 

Student: So there's no Nekudot of SAG, here, is it already refined completely now? 

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): (04:17) That's why it says that the Ta'amim of SAG can descend, but the Nekudot couldn't. How's it called, it's not called SAG, it's not called AB, only SAG. In phase two, there's no belonging to AB, to Hochma, but what we're mentioning here from AB is coarseness. According to what's written here, we should ask, he's saying that Partzuf AB came out and filled the vessels of Galgalta. Don't forget, where was the coupling in the Rosh in Partzuf Galgalta? In the Guf, there wasn't an expansion; in the Guf, there was no expansion of clothing. As we learned here, the Keter of the Guf, is there expansion of phase four of clothing or not? In Keter, itself, yes. 

Student: In Ta'amim? 

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): (06:18) In the Ta'amim, the Keter of the Guf, but not in the Nekudot. So when I say the Partzuf of the Ta'amim, so what Ta'amim does he mean? On the vessel of Keter, we find according to that, when I speak about Nekudot of SAG, there's already a different matter that isn't similar to this. Again, we shouldn't wait till there. So again, what is the meaning here? When the vessel of Keter expands below, called, the Partzuf Ta'amim, there is phase four of clothing, phase three of coarseness, and Hochma, but can it illuminate more? It doesn't, meaning, Nekudot of the vessel of Hochma, meaning expanding in Keter and not expanding in Hochma. Same thing when we speak about Partzuf SAG, we'll say the same thing. In the vessel of Keter it's called, Ta'amim. There's phase three of coarseness called Hochma, and in Nekudot, there is no Hochma. So, there the Nekudot can illuminate below the Tabur, and here it cannot, because of phase three of coarseness. I want to ask about what we were asking before, earlier. 

Student: Why can't the Nekudot of AB descend? 

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): (08:21) Because it's AB, it's a degree of Hochma; so also when I say that it didn't expand in Hochma, but on the degree of AB, the light of Hochma illuminates in phase three. But when I say that Nekudot of SAG is something else, what does that mean? That there's no phase of clothing there, also not for itself; and in phase two, there is no Hochma. 

Student: But in phase three, there is Hochma.

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): (08:54) Just when I say that the Hassadim illuminates, too, so it's also the degree of Hochma because it's phase three of coarseness – but now, when we go deeper, we'll understand it more. So, what does it mean when I say the Partzuf AB is called, phase three of coarseness, where there is Hochma? At the same time, you say that we heard that it expanded in Keter, so there is no Hochma on the degree, so why is it called, AB? That's why the meaning is that AB of Hochma is a degree on its own right. And whether it expands or doesn't expand, the light of Hochma illuminates – that's another matter. In general, the degree there is Hochma, and privately, the Hochma illuminates. It's two things, meaning the Hassadim of phase three, also called, Hochma. There's no words about it but we have to know that the upper phase, called phase three of coarseness, is Hochma, in general. Even when the light of Hassadim illuminates, there is Hochma. So, when I say that the vessel of Keter is filled with Hochma, it's a different matter, it's a private case. But in general, the degree is called, AB. There is Hochma in everyone. Even though I say that it's not being used, so we have to find a difference between Partzuf AB called, the degree of Hochma – even though I say that it illuminates in its posterior, which is only Hassadim. So, it's also called the degree of Hochma, why doesn't he explain that? If so, in AB on its own, which is the degree of Hochma, there is face and posterior, sometimes there's Hochma, sometimes there isn't. 

Student: And even if there isn't Hochma, so it's still there, because it's a general degree?

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): (11:16) What did I just say? We are lacking words to understand what the meaning of AB is. Even though, for example, he comes and tells us – we'll learn that later – that AB was the light of Hochma in the vessel of Keter, the light of Bina for the vessel of Hochma, until we find the light of Malchut in the vessel of Yesod, you remember that? So, he comes and tells us. You know, Yesod is called, narrow and long, what is narrow and long? Narrow of Hassadim and long in Hochma – why is there no Hassadim since phase one, which we call the light of Hassadim and the illumination of Hochma, starts from Hesed until Yesod. So when we learn that the light of Hesed in the vessel of Bina, there's also questions about that. So we find that the light of Yesod in the vessel of Hod, we find the vessel of Hod has phase one of coarseness, which is Hassadim and Hochma. But below Hod, meaning below the light of Yesod, there is already the light of Malchut. So, we find that we learn the light of Malchut in the vessel of Yesod. Malchut is called, coarseness of the root, there is no Hassadim, there's only Hochma. So where is the Hochma from? From the light of Malchut since in Partzuf AB, he says, AB in general is Hochma. We find that when I say Gevura, there is no Hassadim – there is no Hochma, it's also called AB, how? Because in general, there's a general Hochma there. In the private instance, there isn't, so we have to understand what the general and the particular mean. In general, it's the light of Partzuf AB, in the individual case, sometimes Hochma illuminates and sometimes it doesn't, but in general, there's illumination of Hochma. 

I'll tell you what he's asking; he's asking, if we're speaking of the external Partzuf AB that raises the empty vessels or not. So I said, we speak from the external AB, from Partzuf AB – where was the Rosh of AB clothed? On the Guf of Galgalta. In the Rosh, we learn that it does illuminate with the clothing – expanding or not expanding, Keter and Hochma – because the whole Rosh illuminates from the Peh until the Chazeh. So how could it expand and not expand? On behalf of the Guf, that's called, Yadayim de Rosh – hands and head. So you understand the question of why? He didn't understand it. Okay, again, I'll explain it again. 

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): (15:29) We learned at the head of the degree illuminates the clothing matter. Only the expansion in the Guf is only in Ta'amim, it illuminates in the Guf. Now we say, expands in the Kli of Keter of Guf, of Galgalta, expands in Hochma, Guf of Galgalta, who fills them? The Rosh of AB, and Rosh of AB has light or not? There's light. If so, it illuminates in what vessels, vessels of Guf. And how do I say that it doesn't expand? After all, there's a Rosh that clothes this place, the Rosh should illuminate in the place of the Guf. Yes, in the Guf of Galgalta, when we say that it fills it, but it does not give us order, it only gives us a law. He says it this way:

Know that the empty vessels that remain in Partzuf AB, 

I mean Partzuf Galgalta, 

As they're arranged, they move to the Partzuf. If so, I'm speaking of the inner Partzuf AB, and he does not speak of this, only in general. The main thing we're talking about is what Partzuf AB took from the vessels of Galgalta to its part. Now, when he receives them, then he receives them as a Guf or as a Rosh, we should say it's the Guf – they receive. If so, if I were to arrange the Rosh of AB, I need to say Rosh of AB, so Rosh of AB has everything! Only when do I start to speak that there isn't any expansion in the Guf? This he does not speak of, he skips over that, but we need to say that Rosh of AB, who took the vessels of the upper one, they take it in the Rosh or in the Guf? This is also not that simple.

If I want to decide, there are places where he says that also in the Rosh – there are vessels of the Guf of the upper one, that's how we learn, we clothe it. And there is where only the Guf clothes upon the vessels from Chazeh down. And this is where he talks about the upper Partzuf or the lower Partzuf, therefore he cannot decide between them, did you understand the difference? Where he says that he receives to himself the vessels of the Upper One, then he understands Rosh to Rosh, Guf to Guf. Where he gives us how Partzuf AB is born, in Partzuf Galgalta, he gives us an order; whereas, in the Rosh illuminates, we learn as it's taught here. What is he telling us, look:

ZON of Keter, vessels of Guf rose to the Rosh. 

When they were in the Rosh, they had Hochma, interior. When they descended to the Guf, the light of Keter that was before in vessels of Galgalta and ascends below, stands below in Malchut of Rosh and doesn't let it illuminate in the Partzuf of Ta'amim, the ZON. Where is the Rosh of AB and what Rosh were they? When they're in the Rosh of Galgalta, they rose from there, certainly they rose to there.

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): (20:41) And here, they find the opposite, who will make a distinguishment between the external AB and the internal AB, meaning vessels of Galgalta as for themselves, and vessels of Galgalta that moved to Partzuf AB, lacking the Rosh of AB? He does not speak of that there, this will be hard anyway: How does it illuminate in Rosh of AB? Rosh of AB clothes from her to the Guf of Galgalta, already vessels of Guf. How can we say in Rosh of AB that there are phase 4 of clothing and phase 3 of coarseness? One more point: He says, we started in the beginning, where he says that ZON of the Guf of Galgalta ascends, that rose to the Rosh, there were two couplings – one coupling was upon phase 4, only in the incorporation of phase 3. And from this emerges phase 4 of clothing, afterwards in the coupling, it could not descend below due to the expansion in the Guf. 

Hence, afterwards there was another coupling upon phase three of coarseness, only four was included in it and phase three of coarseness, already there's an expansion in the Guf. So they descended below and clothed in the Guf.

Where's the Rosh of AB? He skipped over that. And here it means as if they descended in the Guf of Galgalta, and where was the coupling? In the Rosh? Here I would explain it this way: If we say that the Masach of Tabur of Galgalta that ascended to the Rosh, the screen of Tabur called the screen that completes the degree, when it ascended to the Rosh it was included from the coarseness from below upwards, in which she herself, later when Malchut of Tabur descends to the Chazeh. It has the, the matter of Rosh, meaning it extends the light, it's called Tabur only as far as phase four of coarseness. But phase four of clothing and phase three of coarseness is a new thing, it's considered now Rosh.

Hence it performs the coupling now as she descends in potential, phase four of course this descended to replace to phase three and seemingly awaken the coarseness from below upwards which extends the light. 

So I can say just like from below upwards it was, it could seemingly extend light in return; as well I can say that the phase of clothing that was illuminating in the Rosh also illuminates now in the Rosh of AB. The same incorporation that can give this incorporation is included in the coarseness from below upwards that can receive the light of clothing as well. If I were to learn Rosh and Guf, and we need to learn it, has to be this way. We're missing here something, he doesn't give us the details.