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

Reader: (00:05) We will learn from a lesson with Rabash, we will read from the Study of the Ten Sefirot, Volume 2, Part 5. We are in the Inner Light, item 35, we'll begin from the paragraph "not Mati in Keter," starting from You already know that these vessels of the second expansion. And before we enter the lesson with Rabash, we'll read Item 35, together.

Item 35

RABASH (Source Text/Commentary): You already know, not Mati, we must thoroughly explain the meaning of Mati and not Mati. It is said that in the beginning, the light comes in Keter and all nine lights are contained in it. Afterwards, it returns to being not Mati. When the light that reaches Keter exits it once more, but the nine other lights remain in Keter since Keter has the power to tolerate them.

In that state, when the light is not Mati in the Keter, the Keter extends the nine lights to Hochma face to face and places them in Hochma. At that time, Hochma turns her interior after receiving the nine lights and shines to Bina face to face. It is only illumination, but she still does not give her the seven lights.

RABASH: (01:54) When we say the vessel of Keter, we already get confused, why? He teaches there that there was phase four there, the light of Keter. The first light in the vessel of Malchut emerged in this, what is the vessel of Malchut? That there was phase four there, the light of Keter in the vessel of Keter, he says, there was not yet light. From what perspective? That afterwards, when Malchut rose to Zeir Anpin, then the level of Hochma was shining, so it was the light of Hochma in the vessel of Keter. It turns out that Hochma is not yet called, a vessel; that Keter is not yet called a vessel; it has Yud, at least, but does not have light. It turns out that at the end, when I say the vessel of Keter, it means that it was refined to the coarseness of the root, what light was shining in the vessel of Keter? The light of Malchut. And afterwards, when it told the vessel of Keter to also be refined, there is no light at all in the vessel of Keter so the level of Keter is called an empty vessel. Now, which vessel of Keter am I talking about? It implies that Keter that remained from the vessels of Ta'amim, only what? There was still light from the lower degree, is where we got confused.

We learned that Partzuf AB, the empty, took the empty vessels of Partzuf Galgalta; therefore, when I say expanding in Keter, which vessel am I talking about? Either I'm talking about Keter of Partzuf AB – and here he's not talking about Keter of Partzuf AB – where is the Rosh of AB? He's not talking about it at all, when we speak about expanding and not expanding, the departure of the light is only in the Guf. It turns out that the ARI here is not talking about the Rosh of AB at all, what is he talking about? About the coupling that was in the Rosh of Galgalta and needed to expand the Guf of Galgalta, which we call, the Guf of Galgalta, named after AB, that he took the vessels. What am I confused about? It is Partzuf AB, and we are talking about the vessels of the Guf of Galgalta from which the light departed. Now, when he tells us that when we have Hochma, Bina, Zeir Anpin, Malchut that were left within Partzuf Galgalta, when the light departed. Now he, when he tells us that there are vessels of Keter, Hochma, Bina, Zeir Anpin from which a light departed, so now he says that the Partzuf Galgalta first emerged on the coarseness of phase four. There was a level of Keter there, so the light was shining in the vessel; on the contrary, light was mixed with the vessel. It was not called a vessel, what happens afterwards? Through the clash of the inner and surrounding lights, then the Partzuf Galgalta, the level of Ta'amim. The level of Keter was refined from phase four to phase three. Now, regarding the Ta'amim, we consider ten Sefirot, when I say that Malchut was emptied, the question arises: was only Malchut emptied or from all the levels, from the entire Keter, from all the ten Sefirot, did the light depart?

(06:38) We learn that from all the ten Sefirot, the light departed, so the ARI asks: why do I say only Malchut was emptied since afterwards, a coupling was made on phase three called, Malchut rose to Zeir Anpin? Then Keter to Zeir Anpin was filled in a smaller light. This is not yet considered, he says, an empty vessel; afterwards, when phase three was also refined, and it was shining at the level of Bina, then Zeir Anpin, too, has no pit, it has no light. Therefore, it is also considered as a vessel of Keter, Hochma, and Bina.

No translation

(08:28) When Keter was refined, maybe the record from the light of Malchut, the coarseness of the root. And afterwards, when we learn that light came to the vessel of Keter, so I consider that vessel by the name of Ta'amim. It has phase four over three and I do not consider it as Malchut, only Keter. Where was the Keter built from? It is a bit strange. So I say Keter had Ta'amim, where? On the first degree, in the first state, and then they came to the light of Nefesh, to the coarseness of root, not Malchut. I consider it the upper quality, why did Keter have the upper quality? It had phase four. We learned, in Part Four, that first there was a refinement – there was the clash of the inner and surrounding in Partzuf Galgalta. And there was a refinement of the screen until the screen rose to the Rosh, and what are you asking? In the Rosh, its records rise and since the last phase is lost, the surrounding light weakened the screen. Therefore, the Rosh of Galgalta, there is no phase four over three. Who raised it to the Rosh of Galgalta? We learned it was the screen of the Tabur; the screen of the Tabur rose to the Rosh of Galgalta with all its records.

We learned, there is a novel there, that the screen of the Tabur was incorporated in the coarseness of Malchut of the Rosh called, below upward. That it itself can draw light, and a coupling by striking was made. And Malchut is called, not the coupling Malchut, but the one that makes a coupling by striking. Afterwards, we learned that the Rosh of Galgalta made a coupling, phase four over three. So, the main coarseness of the screen of the Tabur, which already has the ability to receive – which is the quality of Gufim, no Rosh – would descend downward to its place. But it did not descend to the place of the Tabur to place of phase four, or phase four did not come into being, only phase three, it is still lacking. And we learned that this light filled the empty vessels of Partzuf Galgalta; and afterwards, we learned that this is called, the inner AB, what is inner? This AB, phase three over four is found in the inner part of the vessels of Galgalta. Afterwards, we learned that the screen of the Tabur which rose upward was incorporated in Malchut of Rosh, which returned to being below, after the coupling by striking that was on phase three over four in Rosh of Galgalta and descended to the Chazeh.

(12:35) It awakens by itself its coarseness from below upward, and draws a light like Malchut of the Rosh, which is called, the coupling of Malchut. From Chazeh to Peh the Rosh of AB emerged – from the Chazeh downward, the Guf of AB emerged. This is what we learned, here, about this, I asked earlier. We are missing altogether that he does not speak about Rosh of AB, we need to learn. First, Rosh of AB emerged, then Guf of AB, Ta'amim of AB. And then the Ta'amim of AB need to be refined, and then the Nekudot of AB, as we always learn. Here, he says that,

Empty vessels remained,

Meaning from Peh downward they remained. If so, which vessels is he talking about? That vessels passed to AB, when do I speak about them Either I speak about them from before AB emerged at all, and so he says immediately that the vessels will pass even before AB emerges. Look at page 319:

You already know that these vessels of the second expansion are the same empty vessels that remained after the first expansion. Also, the order of making of these vessels have been explained in the ARI’s words above. First, Malchut was made. Why? Since she was the first to be emptied of her light. Afterwards, the vessel of Zeir Anpin was emptied from its light. The vessel of Zeir Anpin was made. Then, when the vessel of Bina was emptied, the vessel of Bina was made, etc. The reason for this is that the vessels were made, here we need to speak about the recognition of the vessels, of the coarse light that remains below, which did not rise and depart with the direct light, with the abundance, as the ARI said above. Hence, each and every vessel was made with a departure of light within it, since then the coarse light remained below and became a vessel. You find that the vessels we arranged from the time they were made, one above the other, first Malchut, Malchut first, Zeir Anpin, Bina, Tifferet, Bina, Tifferet, up to the vessel of Keter above them all. By this you know that here, too, the second expansion in Partzuf AB, even before the lights expanded, the vessels are already arranged to stand from above downward. Keter on top and Malchut at the bottom, meaning as they emerged in the first expansion, the vessels one after the other.

(16:43) What is written here, as they emerged in the first expansion – the vessels one after the other – that is after the departure.

Thus, when the lights expanded and emerged from the coupling of the vessel of the above mentioned Keter, Hochma, were those Sefirot on an equal level close to Keter, they have found the vessel of Keter suited for them, standing ready for them. Only the vessels of the Guf of Galgalta,

And where was the coupling of the Rosh of Galgalta? The Rosh of AB does not speak here at all. It turns out that all the refinements from everything we learned, we learned from phase three of AB, how it was. What we learned is this question: That he was, that there was a coupling in Rosh of Galgalta, in Hey, and it filled vessels in the inner part of the Guf of Galgalta. And afterwards, we learned that Rosh of AB emerges, and the Guf of AB. Or at the Tabur of the Guf of AB, there was a clash of inner and surrounding, and then there was the order of refinement of Ta'amim and Nekudot. And here, he speaks about the empty vessels that passed, he does not speak about Rosh of AB at all. And he does not say that we are speaking about the Rosh of Galgalta either; he only speaks that, about the vessels of Galgalta that passed to Partzuf AB, and what are we missing? We should have said here that the Guf of Galgalta passed to the Guf of AB – this is difficult for us, why? We learned, this is the order of the clothing, that Rosh of Galgalta clothes HGT of Galgalta from Chazeh to the Peh, we learned. And the Guf clothes Chazeh of Tabur of Galgalta. If we are missing this order in what he tells us, and when we learn about the clash of inner and surrounding, this already was in Partzuf AB and not Partzuf Galgalta. There, we were not in sight, not from what happened, he does not speak about it. We learned that in Partzuf AB, that it's Tabur, there was a clash of inner and surrounding, what we learned. There emerged Ta'amim, Nekudot, the level of Keter, the level of Hochma, Keter, Hochma, Bina. And here, this is missing, he does not elaborate.

(20:22) We learn about the clash of the inner and surrounding; that the surrounding light comes and says, receive more. But at that time, when it is not yet received, what do you mean receive more? It was still the inner part of Galgalta and it was not revealed. Therefore, there must be a revelation of phase four over three in the Rosh of AB; afterwards, phase four over three revealed in the Guf of AB, up to here, more, I do not want to receive. It turns out, where did it stand, phase four over three, in the Rosh, the Tabur of AB. It says receive more but not yet finished receiving phase four over three, what it means to receive more, still haven't received, yet? We always learn, by way of an allegory, I can say, the light is nullified like a candle before the torch. If I say phase four over three, it should only be phase four over three. Who makes a coupling on phase four over three? The Rosh of Galgalta, so it teaches that one must demand phase four over three, alone; who made phase four over three? The Rosh of Galgalta, which has coarseness of phase four. Made a coupling on phase four of Hitlabshut and teaches a Rosh of the same degree must be the Rosh of his own degree. That, the quality of the potential, that it is no more than phase four of Hitlabshut. It does not have coarseness of phase four, and when was this? After it made a coupling of the Chazeh, from Chazeh of the Peh, the Rosh of AB emerged. Why is it not enough that there was a coupling in the Rosh of Galgalta on phase four over three, and it is done? AB emerged. Necessarily, the empty vessels of Partzuf Galgalta. So, he teaches two things:

(22:34) One is a rule, and afterwards we will discuss about understanding. He says,

Since Tabur of Galgalta, which rose upward during the refinement of Rosh of Galgalta, was incorporated in the quality of Rosh. Since it was incorporated in the quality of Rosh, it must reveal in Rosh.

Was incorporated.

It turns out that we are now speaking about the screen of Tabur, which is the essence, and rose upward because it had no screen to receive. The light that shines from above shines specifically on the coarseness of phase four, and this one does not have the surrounding nullified it. This screen has nothing to receive. So, it does not use any coarseness, and returns to its root, as before it emerged.

That's one thing.

Furthermore, we learn that the screen of the Tabur, which rose upward was incorporated with other records that passed over it.

Three

That it was incorporated in the coarseness of from below upward.

Here is a point to think about, what is it like?

As in the light of Galgalta, there is a quality of Malchut of Rosh that draws the light and makes a coupling by striking. Although it is a screen of Tabur, although it's a screen of the Guf, it's a screen only on the Guf regarding phase four.

But what was incorporated regarding phase three, this is something new.

It comes and tells us what did the surrounding light gain by nullifying its screen, since it wants to shine. On the contrary, now there is less than before. Before, there was shining, Tabur was taking from the Guf and now the Guf does not receive.

He says no, before the screen of the Tabur was called, concluding Malchut. The light does not go further – we will discuss in one subject.

In contrast, now that the screen of Tabur rose again through the refinement and was incorporated once more, and now the screen of Tabur was incorporated in the screen of the Rosh. This Malchut that descended downward from the Chazeh is no longer called, Malchut that concludes the degree, but rather the coupling Malchut. It draws a light and potential and from its downward,

There was already a Guf.

It turns out that the Malchut which before was called, the concluding Malchut is now called the coupling Malchut from which downward it receives light: I speak about one subject, I am this – I will gain that which before was saying I do not want to receive anymore.

Who?

The Malchut of the Tabur which now stands at the Chazeh.

What do I say now? I do want to receive on phase three.

_____________________________

Reader: (26:35) Let's go to the next part of the lesson, studying between friends.

Cabalá Media

Cabalá Media

Área personalIniciar sesión para me gusta, guardar y suscribirse a videos

Lección Diaria25 яну 2020(Mediodía)Preparación para la Lección

Preparación para la Lección

Preparación para la Lección

Cabalá MediaDerecho de autor 2003-2026 Benei Baruj ‘ Cabalá LaAm

Área personal
Iniciar sesión para me gusta, guardar y suscribirse a videos

Lección Diaria25 яну 2020(Mediodía)
Preparación para la Lección

Cabalá Media
Derecho de autor 2003-2026 Benei Baruj ‘ Cabalá LaAm