The transcript has been transcribed and edited from English simultaneous interpretation, thus there may be potential semantic inaccuracies within it.
Daily Lesson (Morning) April 16, 2024.
Part 2: Baal HaSulam. The Freedom.
Reader: We are learning, “The Freedom” article by Baal HaSulam, continuing in the subtitle, The Will to Receive - Existence from Absence.
Reading Article: (00:22) The Will to Receive - Existence from Absence.
To move a step forward in a scientific manner here, all we need is the wisdom of Kabbalah. This is because all the teachings in the world are included in the wisdom of Kabbalah. Concerning spiritual lights and vessels (in the commentary on Tree of Life, Branch 1), we learn that the primary innovation, from the perspective of creation, which He has created existence from absence, applies to one and only aspect, defined as the “will to receive.” All other matters in the whole of creation are not innovations at all; they are not existence from absence but existence from existence. This means that they extend directly from His essence, as the light extends from the sun. There, too, there is nothing new, since what is found in the core of the sun extends outwards.
However, the will to receive is complete novelty. Prior to creation such a thing did not exist in reality since He has no quality of will to receive at all, as He precedes everything… so from whom would He receive?
For this reason, this will to receive, which He extracted as existence from absence, is complete novelty. But everything else is not considered an innovation that could be called “creation.” Hence, all the vessels and the bodies, from spiritual worlds and from physical worlds, are deemed spiritual or corporeal substance whose nature is to want to receive.
M. Laitman: (03:16) That's clear, right? So, let's move on.
Reader: (03:23) Two Forces in the Will to Receive: An Attracting Force and a Rejecting Force.
You need to discern further that we distinguish two forces in that force called “will to receive”:
The attracting force.
The rejecting force.
The reason is that each body, or vessel, defined as the will to receive, is indeed limited, meaning how much it will receive and the quality it will receive. Therefore, all the quantity and quality that are outside one’s boundaries appear to be against one’s nature; hence, he rejects them. Thus, that “will to receive,” although it is deemed an attracting force, it is compelled to become a rejecting force, as well.
Question (Petah Tikva Center): (04:57) It's strange. Why is there no quality in us to bestow? We are the will to receive.
M. Laitman: Yes.
Student: And in order to reach the will to bestow, we have to exit ourselves. Something between us we have to find. So, why, why is there nothing from bestowal on us?
M. Laitman: Because it doesn't belong to creation. Creation is outside the Creator. Therefore, it's only including the will to receive.
Student: But in order for us to have some aspiration to bestow, we have to have..?
M. Laitman: So, we have Reshimot, we have something. We have records but these are not really forces. I don't have anything to say. The force of attraction, the force of rejection, these are all forces in creation, especially the attracting force.
Reader: (06:23) One Law for All the Worlds.
Although the wisdom of Kabbalah mentions nothing of our corporeal world, there is still only one law for all the worlds (as written in the article, “The Essence of the Wisdom of Kabbalah,” section “The Law of Root and Branch”). Thus, all the corporeal entities in our world, that is, everything within that space, be it still, vegetative, animate, a spiritual object or a corporeal object, if we want to distinguish the unique self of each of them, how they differ from one another, even in the smallest particle, it amounts to no more than that “desire to receive.” This is its entire particular form, from the perspective of the generated creation, limiting it in quantity and quality. As a result, there is an attracting force and a rejecting force in it.
Yet, anything that exists in it besides these two forces is regarded as the bounty from His essence. That bounty is equal for all creatures and presents no innovation with respect to creation as it extends existence from existence.
Also, it cannot be ascribed to any particular unit, but only to things that are common to all parts of creation, small or large. Each of them receives from that bounty according to the limit of its will to receive, and this limit defines each individual and unit.
Thus, I have evidently—from a purely scientific perspective—proven the self (ego) of every individual in a scientific, completely criticism-proof method, even according to the system of the fanatic, automatic materialists. From now on, we have no need for those lame methods dipped in metaphysics.
And of course, it makes no difference whether this force of the will to receive is a result and a fruit of the material that had produced it through chemistry, or the material is a result and a fruit of that force. This is because we know that the main thing is that only this force, imprinted in every being and atom of the “will to receive,” within its boundaries, is the unit by which it is separated and distinguished from its environment. This applies to both a single atom or a group of atoms, called a “body.”
All other discernments in which there is more than that force are not related in any way to that particle or group of particles, with respect to itself, but only with respect to the whole, which is the bounty extended to them from the Creator, which is common to all parts of creation together, without distinction of specific created bodies.
Now we will understand the matter of the freedom of the individual, according to the definition of the first factor, which we called the “source,” where all previous generations, which are the fathers and forefathers of that individual, have imprinted their nature. As we have clarified, the meaning of the word “individual” is but the boundaries of the will to receive, imprinted in its group of molecules.
Thus you see that all the tendencies he has inherited from his ancestors are indeed no more than boundaries of his will to receive, either related to the attracting force in him, or to the rejecting force in him, which appear before us as tendencies to stinginess or generosity, a tendency to mingle with people or to be a hermit, and so on.
Because of this, they really are his self (ego), fighting for its existence. Thus, if we eradicate even a single tendency from that individual, we are regarded as cutting off an actual organ from his essence. It is also considered a genuine loss for all creation, since there is no other like it, nor will there ever be someone like him in the whole world.
After we have thoroughly clarified the just right of the individual according to the natural laws, let us turn and see just how practical it is, without compromising the theory of ethics and statesmanship. And most important: how this right is applied by our holy Torah.
Question (Petah Tikva Center): (14:30) He writes here that each one receives from the bounty according to the limits of his will to receive. So, the bounty is felt on the border, and if not a border, you can't feel it.
M. Laitman: You can also say that.
Student: Is the border the source?
M. Laitman: I don't want to get into all kinds of wisecracks. It's enough what he writes.
Student: The will to receive develops from the attracting force or also from the rejecting force?
M. Laitman: Seems as from both.
Student: What does it mean that it's not attracting something but rejecting it? Is that also a form of attraction?
M. Laitman: Yes.
Student: What exactly does he reject?
M. Laitman: That forms him according to that inclusive which is outside and which acts on him.
Student: He rejects more than attracts?
M. Laitman: Could be.
Reader: (15:50) Taking After the Collective.
Our scriptures say: “Take after the collective.” This means that wherever there is a dispute between the collective and the individual, we are obliged to rule according to the will of the collective. Thus, you see that the collective has a right to expropriate the freedom of the individual.
But we are faced with a different question here, even more serious than the first. It seems as though this law regresses humanity instead of promoting it. This is because while most of humanity is undeveloped, and the developed ones are always a small minority, if you always determine according to the will of the majority, which are the undeveloped and the reckless, the views and desires of the wise and developed in society, which are always the minority, will never be heard and be taken into consideration. Thus, you seal off humanity’s fate to regression, for it will not be able to make even a single step forward.
However, as is explained in the article “The Peace,” section “Necessity to Practice Caution with the Laws of Nature,” since we are ordered by Providence to lead a social life, we have become obligated to observe all the laws pertaining to the sustenance of society. And if we are somewhat negligent, nature will take its revenge in us, regardless of whether or not we understand the reasons for the laws.
And we can see that there is no other arrangement by which to live in society except following the law of “Taking after the collective,” which sets every dispute and tribulation in society in order. Thus, this law is the only instrument that gives society sustainability. For this reason, it is considered one of the natural Mitzvot [commandments] of Providence, and we must accept it and guard it meticulously, regardless of our understanding.
This is similar to the rest of the Mitzvot in the Torah: All of them are nature’s laws and His Providence which come to us from above downward. I have already described (“The Essence of the Wisdom of Kabbalah,” “The Law of Root and Branch”) how the whole of reality seen in the nature of this world is only because they are extended and taken from laws and conducts of upper, spiritual worlds.
Now you can understand that the Mitzvot in the Torah are but laws and conducts set in higher worlds, which are the roots of all of nature’s conducts in this world of ours. Hence, the laws of the Torah always match the laws of nature in this world as two drops of water. Thus, we have proven that the law, “Taking after the collective,” is the law of Providence and nature.
M. Laitman: (20:42) And here we see that he already arranges for us an explanation about the whole of creation. It's clear, right?
Question (Petah Tikva Center): (21:03) How does the law of following the many work with the previous paragraph that you can't eradicate any tendency of the individual? How do you watch over the individuals and over societies?
M. Laitman: It seems like by this observation over individuals and society.
Question (Petah Tikva Center): (21:30) I have a question but I'm not sure that there's an answer for it right now. The Upper law tests the whole world, the laws of how the world conducts itself and reaches the end of correction. It's a study of the Ten Sefirot, and he says that this world is exactly conducted like the Upper world. So, my question is: How can we here give a little drop in order to be equivalent in form with the Upper One to that corrected world that we all want to reach?
M. Laitman: We need to really reach equivalence, in that we act in nature and in that nature we perform our role correctly, and then it is called that we have reached correction; to our end of correction.
Question (Petah Tikva Center): (22:44) In the beginning of this paragraph, he asks, he says that if we follow the many, so humanity will deteriorate and he doesn't answer that. In the end, it ends like, well, these are the laws of nature, this is how it works. So, what do you do with that question? Is it really right that humanity is destined to deteriorate?
M. Laitman: If humanity would follow the collective, take after the collective?
Student: Yes, that's what he says, that if humanity follows the many it will go down. And then he doesn't answer it. He just says, that's it, it's a law and..?
M. Laitman: It's a law, where in the end of it all we understand that we need to take after the individual.
Student: So, if humanity will really follow the many, by the way that's kind of what we see around us in reality?
M. Laitman: They will learn that, yes.
Student: So, from a different direction, how can we show outward to humanity that they are going down and not advancing, because everybody's in a feeling, if you talk to people not from here, that we're advancing, look what we have, we have this and that, and..?
M. Laitman: Okay, we still haven't reached the recognition of evil.
Student: Except for suffering, they won't have any recognition of evil?
M. Laitman: No, for no person at all.
Question (Petah Tikva Center): (24:24) Who is that individual he's writing about that we have to follow?
M. Laitman: Seems like that same greatest of the generation who would reveal, who will be accepted by everyone.
Student: So, now there is no reason, we don't talk about individuals?
M. Laitman: Now we are not taking after the individual.
Student: Yes, we're not but if we find that individual here?
M. Laitman: There is none, none.
Student: How do we know when he will come?
M. Laitman: So, he will become revealed in some kind of way.
Student: Do we need […]? Will they need to acknowledge him as the individual?
M. Laitman: Seems yes.
Student: He will have to prove it.
M. Laitman: It also seems, yes.
Reader: (25:26) A Path of Torah and a Path of Suffering.
Yet, our question about the regression, which had emerged from this law, is still not settled by these words. Indeed, this is our concern—to find ways to mend this. But Providence, for itself, does not lose because of this, for it has enveloped humankind in two ways—the “path of Torah,” and the “path of suffering”—in a way that guarantees humanity’s continuous development and progress toward the goal without any reservations (“The Peace,” “Everything Is in Deposit”). Indeed, obeying this law is a natural, necessary commitment.
M. Laitman: (26:30) Meaning nature in any case pushes us forward so that we will come to know that law.
Question (Baltia 3): (26:55) I want to understand, in our world there is a minority that is smarter, richer, maybe more in control. If that minority takes advantage of the many, does that mean that they don't know about this law that has to be revealed only through attainment?
M. Laitman: They don't want to accept that law. But you need to understand that if I have power and all kinds of means, I'll do whatever I want with the world.
Student: But this law is only attained through spiritual attainment?
M. Laitman: Yes.
Student: So, only through spiritual attainment?
M. Laitman: Yes.
Question (Women Eng 1): (28:00) I have a question that has been lingering for a long time and I think this article will bring it to a close. I wondered about anomaly. Many people, especially here seem to have the quality of bestowal, and I'm going to venture to say they've had it for a long, long time. Can we inherit the tendency to bestow?
M. Laitman: Yes. That's what we actually do in our connection in the tens and our work, our common work, yes.
Reader: (29:19) The Collective’s Right to Expropriate the Freedom of the Individual.
We must ask further: Things are justified when matters revolve around issues between people. Then we can accept the law of “Taking after the collective,” through the obligation of Providence, which instructs us to always look after the well-being and happiness of the members. But the Torah obliges us to follow the law of “Taking after the collective” in disputes between man and the Creator, as well, although these matters seem completely unrelated to the existence of society.
Therefore, the question still stands: How can we justify that law, which obligates us to accept the views of the majority, which is, as we have said, undeveloped, and reject and annul the views of the developed, who are always a small minority?
As we have shown in the second tractate (“The Essence of Religion and Its Purpose,” “Conscious Development and Unconscious Development”), the Torah and the Mitzvot were given only to purify Israel, to develop in us the sense of recognition of evil imprinted in us at birth, which is generally defined as our self-love, and to come to the pure good defined as “love of others,” which is the one and only passage to the love of the Creator.
Accordingly, the Mitzvot between man and the Creator are considered tools that detach man from self-love, which is harmful for society. It is thus obvious that the topics of dispute regarding Mitzvot between man and the Creator relate to the problem of society’s sustainability. Thus, they, too, fall into the framework of “Taking after the collective.”
Now we can understand the conduct of discriminating between Halachah [Jewish law] and Agadah [legends]. This is because only in Halachot [plural for Halachah] does the law, “individual and collective, Halachah [law] as the collective” apply. It is not so in the Agadah, since matters of Agadah stand above matters that concern the existence of society, for they speak precisely of the matter of people’s conducts in matters concerning man and the Creator, in that part where the existence and physical happiness of society has no consequence.
Thus, there is no justification for the collective to annul the view of the individual and “every man will do that which was right in his own eyes.” But regarding Halachot that deal with observing the Mitzvot of the Torah, they all fall under the supervision of society since there cannot be any order except through the law, “Take after the collective.”
M. Laitman: (34:07) Okay, we will finish here for the time being.
Reader: (35:01) Announcements for Passover. And we will end with a song.
Song: (35:44)