Transcription is made from simultaneous translation, which leaves a possibility for differences in the audio

Morning Lesson February 15, 2024

Part 2: Baal HaSulam. Foreword to The Book of Zohar. #16

Reading #16 (00:28) “Now you have thoroughly learned these four manners…”

1. S. (06:18) Baal HaSulam describes that through the world of Beria and the light that is revealed there, that's clear, but how do we reveal a new matter, let's say the word of Atzilut? I’m in a certain matter and I reveal whatever I can according to the same matter. How do I reveal new matter?

R. It's just through the upper light that shines on you, and then you discover yourself in a new state.

S. And what should he do in order to reveal that new matter?

R. You have to yearn for more influence of what you have on your own.

S. And then the matter changes?

R. No, It doesn't change. It’s the Creator who shines on you in a certain light, a greater light elevates you to a higher level.

2. S. (07:33) It sounds that there's a division between the light and the matter. Is it right to understand that there's matter in creation and the light that shines within the matter and that's what we reveal, that form? So, if the form that is stripped from the form, is the light the essence, is that also connected?

R. The essence is deeper, more inner discernment. He says form clothed in matter, abstract form and essence.

S. So we have the matter, and we have the light, but the essence is about both of them or is the essence of the matter that we don't attain? The essence of what, of the light or of the matter?

R. Essence.

S. I understand that there's the matter of creation and the light that shines. When they come together we have an attainment and feeling and the light that is stripped from the matter, so we don't talk about it and the essence, of what, of the abstract light? Is there something more internal than the abstract light or is the essence of the matter that we don't attain when there's no light on it?

R. But you cannot say that because you don't have any perception in the essence. As he says in the fourth matter; we have no perception in the essence.

S. But the essence of what? What essence do we not attain?

R. We also cannot say that.

S. Early in the article we read?

R. Read it from the beginning of Item 16. Rav reads: “The fourth manner, which is the essence, and we have no perception of it at all whatsoever. The third manner is a concept that might be perceived. And only the first manner which is matter, in a second manner, which is form clothed in matter, and they are both given to us by the upper Governance for clear and sufficient attainment.”

S. There's one, that is matter, then two there is the form clothed in the matter?

R. Yes.

S. Then we understand in this example that there's a light that is clothed in the matter then we can talk about it. But then it's not clear, the essence of what? The essence of the form that is revealed when there's a connection, let's say we're talking about a table, so I see a table and I can talk about it. The essence of the matter itself that I cannot understand the electrons, the invisible part of it, the essence of the matter or the essence of the light that I can’t even experience this form? What essence do we not reveal? It sounds like there’s a division between light and matter and then it's not clear which essence?

R. He says that in matter and form clothed in matter you have reception. Talk about that, it’s one and two. But three, which is a concept it might mislead, you might be mistaken because it’s not connected to matter any more.

3. S. (12:07) When we say to attain something in a matter and in a form that is clothed in the matter, what does that mean? Let’s say we say faith, what does it mean to attain the matter and the form of the matter in that term and not beyond?

R. We were given to feel, first of all I don't think if you're talking about faith that it’s matter, and then form clothed in matter, the second matter, it's not, I don’t know it.

S. What is that right attitude, I took faith as an example, it can be Sefira, it can be any other word. What should be the right relation when we study such a thing? He says we only have to the matter and the form attained in the matter and nothing beyond that?

R. In everything that we feel, we have to divide it at least into two, matter and the form that is clothed in matter. Okay? The abstract form and the essence, drop it for now. So what are you asking?

S. If it's something that we don't feel yet but we want to feel it?

R. The matter?

S. We want to feel it in the matter, yes. We want to attain it.

R. So?

S. So I took an example, a word like faith that it is obvious that we don’t feel it but we want to feel it?

R. But you are starting from something that is above your perception of attainment.

S. For now. But I want it to be in my perception, like a table or like any other concept?

R. You can’t do that. You are starting from a degree that is above you.

S. So what is to study correctly, this is the forward to The Book of Zohar. We are reading all kinds of terms and we want to attain them?

R. Yes.

S. That is the question, what is the right relation to this study that we will feel it or attain it in the matter and in the form clothed in the matter?

R. You want to attain something so give the degree that you do attain. You cannot begin from something that you don’t attain. It will be philosophy.

S. But it's clear for instance faith, it's clear that I don't know what it is now but I want to know what it is?

R. Yes.

S. And that's what we learned, that's the right relation to study the Book of Zohar or any book of Kabbalah?

R. You have nothing to grip on, I don't understand how you can begin from such states?

S. So where do I start from? I’m not talking about a table, I'm talking about something now that we can absorb in our senses?

R. If it's not perceived you cannot talk about it.

S. But it's written?

R. Okay, where is it written?

S. Faith, a concept like faith?

R. But where is it written?

S. In the Book of Zohar.

R. But it is not written here when we study degrees.

S. Here, he’s teaching limitations how to study The Book of Zohar correctly, right?

R. Right.

S. He gives an example of a table. It’s clear I don’t know what the essence of a table is and I don’t know what the abstract form is, that is an example. How do we relate to terms that we have no perception in them whatsoever?

R. But he is not starting from something you have no perception in. He begins with things you have perception in, in both matter and form.

S. But the Zohar is full of concepts that we don’t have perception in, like when he writes donkey or a rose, he is not talking of a donkey or rose that I know, right?

R. I don't know, but I cannot go by according to what you tell me because I have no basis, no foundation.

S. So what is the right foundation?

R. The right foundation is what we attain in our healthy senses.

S. When I study an article that talks about the donkey driver, I learn about a donkey. How should I relate to that word?

R. It is a donkey.

S. The Zohar didn’t mean this animal, right?

R. I don’t know, when I get to it I will know. In the meantime I don’t.

4. S. (18:40) He writes the action of, the essence we call that matter, and that we have four levels of matters, so is the first matter, do we attain the matter itself? It's not clear why there is attainment of matter?

R. We don't have it.

S. So we can only attain a form clothed in matter?

R. Yes.

5. S. (19:18) What does it mean that the vessel of creation of Beria, is red?

R. This is how we accept it, in order to distinguish between the vessels in the worlds, we give them another distinction by color.

6. S. (20:00) We're talking about the vessel and the clothing, can we say that the human body is the vessel and the behavior is the clothing?

R. No, it doesn't say that.

Reading #17 (20:24) “Along with it, the second manner has been clarified…”

7. R. (23:31) So again, what are we dealing with, the first manner and the second manner. What is the first manner? It is the three colors in the world of BYA and the second manner is the illumination of Atzilut in three colors. This is what we are dealing with.

8. S. (24:07) He writes when he doesn't clothe in Bina, Tifferet and Malchut, so there's no perception in the light of Hochma?

R. Yes.

S. And before Bina there's a perception?

R. I don't know, but in this there's no perception.

9. S. (24:40) If I understand simply, what he tells us is that we can only talk about the light that is clothed in the vessel, right?

R. Yes.

S. We cannot talk about the light on its own and obviously not about the Creator on its own. Also the vessel on its own we cannot talk about if there's no light in it and that's the essence of the vessel, and we cannot talk about that either?

R. Yes.

S. I wanted to ask, in the first part of the lesson we talked about the Torah and the Creator. How can we understand what the Torah is according to these four manners. What is the Torah?

R. The upper light that is clothed in the vessels. He also gives us a definition of what is the Torah.

S. Is the form that is clothed in matter according to what we just studied?

R. Yes.

S. So, what is the clothing he was talking about in the first part?

R. The Creator.

S. According to the definition we can attain the Creator?

R. So what?

S. Because In the first part of the article he says that it is not enough to study the Torah, we have to reach the feeling of the one clothing in the Torah so it sounds contradicting to what we just learned that we can attain the One clothing in it?

R. We do not attain the One who wears the Creator, we attain Him while He's clothed in the created beings, in the souls.

S. So what we just learned, it also sounds like a form that Is clothing in matter. It's not clear what the difference is between the Creator and the Torah, if it’s both something that is clothed in matter? What is the difference between the clothing and the one being clothed?

R. Before the clothing and after the clothing; before the clothing, before the wearing, before the clothing it’s called The Creator and after the wearing of the clothing it is called The Torah.

S. But before the clothing there's nowhere to attain, no point to talk about it, right?

R. We attain Him by what is called “by Your actions we will know You”.

S. What does it mean, if we only attain the actions, what does it mean, “we know You”?

R. “We will know You” means how He operates through his clothing in the Torah.

S. We only attain the deeds, right, we cannot attain Him?

R. Yes, the Creator is clothed in the Torah and we attain all kinds of manners of the Torah in which the Creator is clothed.

S. So, what is from your deeds we will know you, we only know his deeds and not Him?

R. This is why it is called this way, that in this way we attain the Creator.

S. So when we say the Creator it is His relation to us?

R. Yes.

10. S. (28:03) I want to continue with the friend if we are in the Ten so we're talking about a friend with quality he has and how he influences the group and we engage in the lesson with who the Creator is. Is that a relation we need in the group or do we have to search for the Creator behind his actions?

R. Again.

S. In the Ten we have a friend before us and we want to discover his quality, what quality he has in bestowal on the group, in the Ten. Unless the search of the Creator Himself, we want to remain on the ground, on the ground somewhat. How do we attain the action of the Creator through the action of the friend? What is attaining the Creator?

R. When we attain the actions of the friend by that we attain the Creator. Where are such actions in the Ten? From the Creator, right? So when I look at the friend and I see how much he is, let's say, directed towards connection with the group, by this I attain the Creator. It is the Creator who does it.

S. How am I able to remain as much as I can on the ground?

R. By connecting specifically to the friend and not to the Creator, I cannot connect to the Creator. I only learn by his actions that I see in the friend about the Creator.

S. In order to reveal that quality in the friend, is there something I have to develop in me, a similar quality to his in order to get that quality from him?

R. Yes you need to depict it to yourself.

S. And according to what I feel from him and I have to start researching what the Creator’s actions are?

R. Yes, even before that.

S. What does it mean before that?

R. You have to be ready in advance to accept and receive all kinds of forms that you will discover in the friend.

11. S. (31:18) I'm asking about the matter and form. The matter he defined it as if it is an action and about the Godly light the form. What I don't understand is why is it divided into two actions, because we only discover through the light only if the light shines, and then why does revealing an action, I don't understand why it is separate. Do you understand my question?

R. Why matter and form clothed in matter?

S. Because the light comes and scrutinizes our actions and what to do, there is like a revelation of an action which is separate that we discover in the matter and then the light that later on that goes through the matter, it creates the forms. It is like there are two things that is hard for me to connect. I don't understand because revealing an action is also something that demands light?

R. Yes, but it's not the light itself you do not see the light you see the revelation the manifestation of the operation.

S. Can we say that revealing the action is surrounding light and this is internal light?

R. Now you are beginning to divide and define.

S. Can we say that though?

R. This approach is wrong, where do you take this is like this and this is like that.

12. S. (33:06) Can we say that the friend is in abstract form?

R. From what?

S. Because I do not attain what is outside of me. I can feel how I get inspired by the friend?

R. Yes.

S. The essence of the friend we have to relate to us as an abstract form all together. I want to attain my matter, my attitude.

R. Yes, so why is it abstract form?

S. Because as long as I did not correct my connection correctly I don't attain the essence itself, Him Himself.

R. So what, is He abstract?

S. Each one of us wants to reach a correction. As long as I did not correct, can I say that I can perceive a friend so he is abstract as long as I did not perform a correction on myself?

R. But, abstract indicates a certain attainment, in what are you attaining him?

S. When I approach connection with a friend, what is really outside of me, do I attain him?

R. With what or in what?

S. I'm asking?

R. No.

S. So it's abstract?

R. Abstract is an attainment, you don’t attain him so he is abstract.

13. S. (35:40) Can we say that the matter is the vessel?

R. Let's say that the matter is a vessel.

S. Can we say that the vessel is the will to receive?

R. Yes.

S. Is the friend the matter which is also the vessel to receive?

R. Also.

S When I and the friend connect I don't know what connection is, what is written about the connection. There is a feeling of light that is felt in this connection and this is the form clothed in in matter?

R. Meaning, that you attain him and what you attain is called a form clothed matter.

S. Him is the Creator, the light?

R. The friend.

S. The friend is the will to receive that I connect with?

R. Yes.

S. Then you can attain the form clothed in matter, the light?

R. Well, let's say.

S. Well that's the scrutiny?

R. We talked about it.

14. S. (37:00) Can it be that the person attains the Torah without the Creator?

R. What does it mean without the Creator, that he does not relate to the upper force?

S. Yes, can there be such a thing that he reveals the light without what is clothed in it, he reveals the Torah but he does not feel the Creator within it, can it be?

R. No.

S. If I understand correctly, the Torah is like a medium when only in Israel, so the Torah contains both the feeling of the Creator and the created being feels itself within it and only then there's revelation. It's like form clothed in matter when we say that Torah, Creator and Israel are one only then we receive the Torah because if you divide them there is no perception of either of them or separately. So the Torah is the medium that unites them and enables revelation?

R. No response.

15. S. (38:29) When we learn, do we learn it like a remedy, as a force like Baal HaSulam writes to awaken the surrounding lights that surround our souls?

R. Yes.

S. Suddenly we begin to read articles of Baal HaSulam and Rabash and we begin to feel what he's talking about, like it's clothed in us. What is this stage when it becomes something that we don't understand and all of a sudden something does and we feel it.

R. You are asking how it goes through you?

S. What is the transition between learning without understanding anything and when it suddenly becomes form clothed in matter?

R. I don't think it's a form clothed in matter but let's say it comes to you as additional light.

S. When I read something when I don't understand anything but I do it as a remedy what is this action of not understanding?

R. No understanding that is also attaining that for now you do not attain. We see that this article is not simple, right. There's a depth here much more than what we hear and read and can even think. That is why we need to make an effort a bit more, a bit more and a bit more.

16. S. (40:21) The prohibition on building statutes, what does it stem from?

R. From us starting to take spiritual discernment and try to make them corporeal and we will start to depict them as corporeal action.

S. So we are forbidden to make statutes whatsoever?

R. On us it does not really affect us because we're still not in this.

S What in our society might be a statute?

R. In our society anything that we accept as Godliness.

S. So are the things that do not belong to Godliness that we have to be careful not to do them?

R. It’s not worth talking about it, we're not connected to that, we have no connection to that.

17. S. (41:46) Can we use what we have been given in a book, author, story so that we accept the book as having the story in it and we want to constantly feel the author. Through engaging there's a reading of the story with the intention and then there's the intention that we constantly want to feel the author?

R. It is a completely different story from a completely different book. Slowly slowly we will go into this, it has to settle in and then we can start sorting it out and study correctly. It is terms that are not simple.