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

Daily Morning Lesson: November 4, 2026

Part 2: Baal HaSulam. Study of the Ten Sefirot. Vol. 1. Part 2. Inner Observation

Reader: Hello, friends. We are back in studying TES, “The Study of the Ten Sefirot.” There was a long break since we studied it last time. So we're going to remind you that we are in “The Study of the Ten Sefirot,” Part 2, "Inner Observation." And today, we're in Lesson 13 in this series. So, in order to be easier to enter this, we're going to see a short clip that a friend prepared for us from Lesson 12, where Rav reminds us briefly where we are in this study. And today in this lesson, we're just going to keep going. 

Reader: Yes, we must exert in connecting everything we're reading now to us. We were in an action seemingly very external, on the other hand, very internal. And one common feeling we had in these actions we did, one had a regional, external Congress, but one common, internal, powerful feeling. So how to think for this? That's the question. And now in this lesson, we will investigate even more this topic of internality and coarseness, externality and refinement, or purity. Very confusing, very powerful. We're talking here about the inverse relationship between lights and vessels that Baal HaSulam... Rav tells us this, that Baal HaSulam added this to what the ARI writes, this topic of the inverse relationship between lights and vessels. It's such an emotional and confusing topic that specifically because of this, we have to effort even more to understand this. Also, what we hear from Rav, every word, every meticulous refinement here, every word here, we have to make every effort to understand, to try to understand. We evoke the reforming lights, the surrounding lights upon us that can save us and correct us. So again, internality and coarseness are the same. Externality and refinement are the same. This we must deepen and hold on to. Now, we are in "Inner Observation." Yes, our effort is internal, and we are starting with item six. But before that, we are in page 56 in the Hebrew text. We are in item six. I want to read, because we are already inside deep water, then we need to maybe, and we didn't learn for a long time, TES. So maybe we'll read the headings we had so far in "Inner Observation" in short.

I'll read from "Inner Observation," Part Two, “Circles and Straightness,”: containing 10 chapters. The first one, circles are regarded as GAR. That's the upper three. In the ten Sefirot of circles, the more external is more important. In the ten Sefirot of straightness, the more internal is more important. Two manners of reception in the vessel, A - through its internality, and B - through its externality. The first three phases only cause the appearance of phase four, but they themselves cannot receive. They are like four layers in the wall of the vessel. 

And now we're in item six that we're about to start with now, the final one. Internality and coarseness are the same. Externality and refinement are the same. So, just to add briefly before a clip, it's worth really hearing the definitions that Rav gives. He gives a few sentences with definitions, and he draws pictures, and it's, I recommend drawing what Rav is drawing. It becomes easier to read. So let's go to a short clip of two minutes from lesson 12, and then we'll watch lesson number 13. So please.

M. Laitman: (05:02) What does this give us for our discernments? Where are the circles and where the straightness in me by which I can associate, let's say, or attribute opinions, thoughts, or my feelings in straightness or in circles? The screen defines everything. If I work with my desires without a screen, the more refined I am, it is better for me. This is coarseness on the level of root, Shoresh, the coarseness of root in circles. This is in the Keter of circles. This is in Keter of circles, coarseness root. In the Keter of line or straighthood, I must be in coarseness of phase four, plus the screen. Then I reach the Keter of the line. There's an inverse relationship between lights and vessels. That's what the circles and the straightness tell us. The circles bring us the quality of the light, and the line brings us the quality of the vessel. In the light, Keter is the circle of Keter. In line, Keter is the power of the screen. How I equalize in my coarseness to the light. They speak of two completely different things, but that go to become equalized between them. The bestower gives me light. I give to the bestower just the intention of the vessel. That's why it turns out that it's opposite circles and straightness for us. Circles are the intention of the Creator, and straightness are the intention of the created being.

Reader: Let's go to our lesson of today, number 13.

Reader: We're reading from the Study of the Ten Sefirot, chapter 2, "Inner Observation," item 6. 

Reading: (07:52) Inner Observation 

Internality and coarseness are the same; externality and refinement are the same.

6. Now you have thoroughly learned the internality and externality that we must distinguish in every vessel. Because there are necessarily four phases in every vessel, the last of which is called the Toch and the internality of that vessel, as it is the main phase of reception in the vessel. The phases that precede it in order to reveal the final phase, are regarded as the externality of the vessel. The further the degree is from the last phase, the more external it is considered to be. You should also know that phase one is more refined than phase two, and phase four is the coarsest. It turns out that internality and coarseness are one and the same, and the reason that phase four is regarded as the phase that receives the abundance is because it is the coarsest. Similarly, externality and refinement are one and the same because her desire is faint and refined, and closer to the Emanator. For this reason, it is the most external, meaning the farthest from reception, which is Toch and internality.

M. Laitman: (09:25) This is very difficult. In our awareness, in our feeling, it's not received, not perceived. How could it be that there's an inverse relationship between lights and vessels? Although, according to the explanation, yes, it happens that way. But in our feeling, we're not capable of feeling these things. How could it be that the coarser I am inside, when I'm within, in my ego, within my desires, and they're revealed. And it's not that I'm there and I don't exist. Each time we talk about a person, about what's being revealed in him, not that it can be revealed, or it once was revealed, or it will be revealed, that later in the final correction it will be. We are talking about where he is. As the Creator says, the Creator judges a person by where he is, what he's in. What's revealed in us, that's where He judges us and demands this action from us. So, I need at once to feel, in the same state, how coarse, crude, mean, deceitful, prideful, all those things on one hand. On the other hand, I need to feel purity, bestowal, love, truly righteous, as if I have nothing. These two opposite things can't, at the moment, exist in us at once because we're in one nature—the desire to receive. That's it. Whereas if we acquire a desire to receive that will be in order to bestow, or the intention of bestowal upon the desire to bestow in order to bestow, then we have two forms of nature: the nature of receiving and the nature of bestowing, the nature of the Creator and the nature of the created beings; the coarseness, and the screen, and reflected light upon it. Then we can digest what he's telling us here, that in the coarseness we receive lights according to the coarseness, and in refinement we receive illumination according to this refinement. And there's an inverse relationship between lights and vessels. And there's the pure part, or the refined part, and the coarse part. In us, at the moment, we don't have this. That's why these things are always confusing us. So where are we? Oh, this, the refined part? Oh, no, the coarse part? But when they are as one, it's very difficult. It's simply to feel it is impossible. To imagine to oneself a little bit, to depict it, is to be less confused than is usual, not more than that. That's why internality and coarseness, or refinement and externality are opposing things, and these are actually, this is actually the great explanation that Baal HaSulam added to the ARI, and which helps us greater, at least somewhat to understand the matter of attracting or drawing the light by the coarse vessel and the clothing of the light in a refined vessel.

Reading: (13:27) Number seven

Closeness to and remoteness from the Emanator are evaluated according to the measure of reception in the emanated being.

7. This is what the ARI wrote about the Sefirot of the circles, that all that is the more external is better and closer to the Emanator, since the root phase, called Keter, is the most refined and closest in form to Ein Sof, meaning close to the Emanator. This is called that she is the most external, meaning very far from the Toch and the internality, meaning from reception. After her comes phase one, which is more internal than Keter, meaning closer than her to reception. Phase two is more internal than her, meaning closer to phase four, which is the phase of reception. Finally, phase four is the real inner one, meaning that the abundance is received in her. For this reason, her form is the furthest from the Emanator.

M. Laitman: So, nearness and distance from the Creator is associated with the relationship of the created being to the Emanator. This relationship, meaning the extent in which a Kabbalist, the emanated, who receives the abundance, is towards his vessels of reception and towards his vessels of bestowal. By this, he defines the distance he has or the nearness. So what, according to the relationship of the reception of the Emanator, meaning the emanated defines his relationship to reception or bestowal, according to whether he's close or far from the Emanator. The degrees by which we build in our relationship to the vessel of reception and bestowal define our state in relation to the Creator, towards the Creator.  

Reading: (15:46) Number eight

In the ten Sefirot of straightness, the degree is measured according to the reflected light that rises from the coarseness in the screen. The greater the coarseness, the greater the reflected light.

8. In the Sefirot of straightness, there is the matter of reflected light that rises from the coupling of the screen with the upper light (Part One, Questions and Answers on the Meaning of Words, the word “screen”). The amount of that reflected light is measured by the amount of coarseness in the screen that makes a coupling with the upper light. The coarsest screen, namely phase four, reveals a complete level of ten Sefirot, which is up to Keter. If the measure of coarseness in the screen is less by one phase, consisting only of phase three, it reveals only ten Sefirot where each of them has only the level of Hochma, and the Keter is missing. If all it has is coarseness of phase two, it reveals only ten Sefirot where each has the level of Bina, without Keter and without Hochma. If the screen has only the coarseness of phase one, it only reveals ten Sefirot where each has only the level of Zeir Anpin. Finally, if the screen is refined and does not have even the coarseness of phase one, it does not reveal any level, but only the phase of Malchut. The reason for this will be explained below, in Part Three.‎

M. Laitman: (17:46) It's clear, yes? To the extent in which one works with a greater coarseness, he reaches attainment, bestowal, light that is greater. This is the NRNHY that he reveals within these vessels he attains: Keter, Hochma, Bina, Zeir Anpin, and Malchut. It's the same levels, the same qualities of bestowal, or its equivalence, or its adaptation to the Creator. And this is attained by working with the coarseness, upon which degree of coarseness he is capable to bring his screen to the intention in order to bestow. Meaning, we draw the screen here usually, before the vessel, but it's not correct. Before the Kli, there's the first restriction. When a person restricts himself from the entry of pleasures into him, that's how we can draw it. But actually, the screen actually stands here at every phase, depending on where I place it, where I can overcome it. Let's say I have a screen that is no more than, let's say, phase one. So, all the rest, if I have, upon that I will have a restriction. And upon these two, I will work in order to bestow. That is the intention of in order to bestow. So, the screen will stand here for me in phase one, and no more. Here, it will be restricted. So, my light will be only until the degree of Ruach, and I will reveal the degree of Zeir Anpin, meaning I will be the Zeir Anpin, like Zeir Anpin and no more than that. A greater light will be revealed to me, meaning a greater coarseness will be revealed to me. I will be able to work and will want to work in order to bestow on it. I will correct it, and then I will reach the degree of Neshama, let's say, the degree of Bina in understanding, in attainment, in what I am, in my level. A person's attainment in spirituality says about who he is, because the desire to receive is the matter, but what form it rides upon the matter, what form the matter takes on. We have a bull, an eagle, another, until Adam, until we reach the degree of Adam, where he is in phase four of degrees, and then he can equalize and resemble himself in all the degrees to the Creator. We will talk about these animals also, that the Zohar talks about why they are the ones that precede a person, the bull, eagle, lion, and man.  

Question (Jerusalem): (21:21) What is the coarseness of the screen? What does that mean?

M. Laitman: The coarseness of the screen is that coarseness upon which the screen can ride upon, control, and it cannot control another coarseness. Let's say pleasures come my way, just as we speak about the table, yes? Pleasures. So, I choose for myself meat, fish, well, what? Salad. What else? Bread, beer, water. At least. Yes. That's it. I look at this. I choose for myself: beer, bread, salad. That's it. Yes? More than that, I'm not capable. You're saying that's also good. You can enjoy that too, right? Here we're talking about the extent in which I discover the maximal pleasure which beyond, I cannot. Let's say that up to here, including the salad, these three pleasures that are here, these are pleasures. This is not their clothing. These are the pleasures, yes? These pleasures, I look at them. I have a desire for them all, yes? But I look: beer, bread, and salad, up to here. Thus far, I'm willing to deal with. But fish and meat, I'm not capable. It's too much. Now, I check: beer, bread, and salad. How much? Let's say also in them, I can be only partially, and not in everything, and also not completely. Meaning, when I fill myself in them too to a certain extent of fulfillment, and no more than that. In our corporeal pleasures, the more I fill myself, I am in a diminishing desire to receive. And it's not so bad, because I can fill myself completely. Because of a half a portion, or three quarters of a portion, I'm not so hungry. I can finish that portion. The desire to receive diminishes. In spirituality, no. In spirituality, the more I work with the desire to receive in order to fill it in order to bestow, I reveal even greater and greater pleasures. And then for me to limit that portion is a problem. It's not like with us where I was given a glass of water to drink, and I was very thirsty, so I drank three quarters. It's like somewhat I was filled. In spirituality, no. It's the opposite of that, the last drop is the tastiest. So, I discovered on myself, and I checked that only in this vessel I can work in order to bestow. Accordingly, I define my degree. So I use this whole vessel now, enjoying it. But this pleasure I feel, I want to feel, connects to the Emanator, to the Giver. And in this Giver, I want to feel how I delight Him, how I give Him pleasure. This action that I do here is called a commandment, a Mitzva. And that which I already receive as a result, the reward of a commandment is to know the Commander, to connect. "And Adam knew Eve," to enter into a coupling with the Giver. The reward of a commandment is to know the One who commands it.  

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (26:05) What's the difference between a state where there's illumination from above, and a person who restricts it, or any other state where there's a record, and you don't implement it? Because we say that anyway, the first restriction just controls all the pleasure. So, what's the difference between an illumination from above, and I can reject it and restrict it, to any other state that I don't implement?

M. Laitman: That's the difference, that you're not implementing. I don't understand. Maybe you want to ask, how will I define in advance? So, it depends on your preparation. I don't know what to say.

Question (Petah Tikva Center): (27:02) Does the measure of coarseness that is revealed in order to attain a higher degree, is it the same for every person or relative to a person's place in the system of Adam HaRishon?

M. Laitman: Everything depends on the place in Adam HaRishon and the root of the soul. Each is different from the other and not similar to the other in any way. We don't need to engage in comparisons whatsoever, because you can't compare. It's impossible. It's not that we're not capable, it's impossible to equalize. How can you compare how strong he is, and how wise he is, and how fast he is, or diligent, or something else? It's impossible to compare. You can't bring these qualities to some form of equivalence or comparison. We are only equalized in the common denominator between each of us. All together, in all my qualities and forces to what extent am I going to bestow. And the second, and the third, on the degree of bestowal, that's where we work in this whole collection of our forces in order to bestow, that is where we can measure whether he's greater or smaller. And also, in the form of the degree itself: did I attain it, did I not attain it? But what at the end of the path is, no one knows. What's the root of each and everyone's soul can be revealed, but only to truly great, great souls. From there, when they receive and operate upon all the rest of the souls, they're capable to discover what the reason for each one, the destiny for each one, and the path for each. It's not simple. Anyway, I don't need to engage in that whatsoever, the business of others. I need to reach bestowal. I need to see everyone and see the final correction. I need to see that the Creator's force is clothed in them. I need to ask for the force of Arvut for them. It all depends on the force of my appeal. The group is complete, it's a whole group. I don't need to demand that from it. In spiritual work, I have no demands for anyone. So, why should I make such calculations? I, for my work, don't need this whatsoever. We are continuing. 

Reader: Chapter two explains the five primary discernments in the five worlds of AK and ABYA. We are going to number nine. 

Reading: (30:05) Number nine

The differentiation between the five worlds AK and ABYA is primarily according to the coarseness in their screen, where in AK, it is phase four. 

9. Know that the main distinction between the five worlds AK and ABYA of straightness is the measure of the coarseness of the screen of their vessels. The screen of the vessels in the world of Adam Kadmon is very coarse, meaning coarseness of phase four, the greatest coarseness in all the worlds. Therefore, its ten Sefirot are complete, meaning all of them are on the level of Keter, the closest to Ein Sof, which is the first, and most important world, reaching from end to end: from Ein Sof to this world. For this reason, it is regarded as standing in the internality of all the worlds, for you already know that internality and coarseness are one and the same. Because the screen in the vessels of this Adam Kadmon is of phase four, meaning the coarsest, it is therefore the most internal. 

M. Laitman: (31:21) Why is it so great, so long? Because it received the force of bestowal from Malchut of Ein Sof, which was filled with the light of Ein Sof and felt there all the intensity and power of the light, felt the Emanator there, the Giver, the Host, and received there the feeling of shame as the greatest blow of all. And the oppositeness, the coarseness, was revealed from the Host, the greatest of all, all those discernments, these sharp discernments from one end to the other bring the power of the screen that he starts to work with. That's why Galgalta and all these Partzufim that emerge after her emerge with the greatest screen possible. And Galgalta has the greatest screen of all. Because after it comes the feeling of the shame, the feeling of Ein Sof, the complete fulfillment, the oppositeness to the Emanator; this entire clash that it received within is the Malchut, and is expressed in Galgalta. That's why its action is the greatest one of all. On one hand, it has the coarseness of the screen that's the greatest. On the other hand, it has this refinement of the greatest degree. And this is why she is from one end to the end, where its refined form touches Ein Sof, and its coarsest edge touches this world, and all the rest of the worlds are included, incorporated in Galgalta. They seemingly interpret or scrutinize what is included and exists in Galgalta. That is the created being after the first restriction and the emptiness from the first restriction, where it wants to perform an act of bestowal. It actually from itself is willing to do an act of bestowal all the way to the end, to do the final correction, right now and immediately. But that it's not working out for it right now, and the nature which he's sitting in, which is coarser, crueler, more egoistic, more lustful, and more prideful, greater, this is gradually being revealed within. He didn't feel it immediately, and that's why after Galgalta, when he didn't manage to do this at once, he goes in the same direction, and when all the rest of the desires are revealed to him, and the intentions, and this cruelness in him, and crudeness, this all clarifies the same action, the same thought that's in the Rosh of Galgalta. Meaning, from the very beginning of the operation in Galgalta after the restriction, its decision to work by Malchut of Ein Sof, and work according to the screen until the conclusion of all the degrees, until we come through the exiles and all those things now to this first point of free choice, all of that is that thought in the head of Galgalta, it comes out to be actual, to be in practice. In all the worlds, Adam Kadmon and ABYA, in all the worlds, throughout all of history, until a point in the heart comes to a person, and then he begins to receive the ability, the possibility for free choice and his ascent to self-building. All these actions from above down until the point in the heart are the decision of Galgalta. And the truth is that also onwards comes the decision of Galgalta until the end of our correction as well. But here, it's already with the participation of those desires that have not been revealed there. But through the shattering they're revealed later, the desires of Adam HaRishon, which enable us to be in free choice. And then we implement that same intention of Galgalta to reach the final correction, to receive in order to bestow the whole light of Ein Sof. Meaning, this is the true giving that can be from the created being towards the Creator. We implement this, but here we already participate with our free choice, meaning we add to that intention that was there in our scrutiny, in our correction. But nevertheless, until the final correction, it's the same decision of Malchut of Ein Sof after the first restriction. Everything is to receive in order to bestow.  

Question (Jerusalem): (36:59) Work, constantly, desires of this world are awakening in me. So, should I restrict those desires and concentrate on the studies, or just fill them up so they won't disturb me?

M. Laitman: First of all, fill them so that they don't bother is impossible. A person can't die unless half of his passion, his desire is still in his hands. So, before he finishes half his desires to fill, he'll die. It's a waste of an incarnation. We'll have to come back here and once more go through those same things. That means to go and supply to all the desires is impossible. But there are necessary desires, these necessity desires that the body demands to exist. The body, family, things that a person must have according to more or less those ways of conduct that are acceptable in his time, in his society, where each must be in that and also not escape the public, you know, "I dwell amongst my people," meaning truly be as usual. As usual meaning, of course, not chase after all the lusts that the world is chasing, but make for himself what we call normal conditions; not to be, you know, humble, or as righteous that make of themselves truly that they think that to suffer is holiness. There's no such thing. But we learn that it all depends on the way a person relates to life. That's it. There are examples how Rabbi Akiva used to run before his friend like a servant because he was accustomed to that. Meaning this his custom, this regular way is important. Oh, I'm sorry. It was Rabbi Hillel, the old Hillel, not Rabbi Akiva. So what I'm trying to say is it all depends on the way a person relates to things. If I need to eat five portions and by that I calm my, my animal, my beast, and I have a possibility, then eat them, and it's not considered that I'm being, you know, excessive, or that I'm doing anything more with my passions, but I need this for my body, and with it, I can exist. This is called necessary existence. There's reality, and there's the observing or existing of my reality. And the way a person relates defines this. And these are all things that belong to the body, to one who organizes his life this way. 

Beyond that, it's already spiritual work. The boundary between this and that, we learn according to what Baal HaSulam says in the article "The Giving of the Torah," if I'm not mistaken, that if a person was happy to also not engage in his necessities that he makes for himself, for his family, if he could not be in that, then he checks that it's… whether it's necessities. If he enjoys from doing this and wouldn't give it up, that is called engaging in the Klipa. So, let's define right now everything I'm about to do. Do I enjoy the action itself, or do I do this in order to give my body the vitality of forces that it needs and then use it like a donkey to reach the goal? That's it. It's not that we're prohibited from enjoying, to love our children, or some tastes and the flavors, and the food, or all kinds of things. No, on the contrary, it's allowed. On the contrary, you must get married, have life, have a sexual life, have to eat, and eat good things. God forbid, you shouldn't prohibit any of those. But upon all that, the intention should be riding upon it. What am I doing with it? And this intention does not cancel out these flavors, these tastes. But it's desirable for you to specifically, the more you feel these tastes, with that be in the intention that you are incorporating this in order to advance, and that this intention will not neutralize the flavors. That's a little bit of a problem, I know. It's a problem because usually when a person is in intention of in order to bestow, to advance, and he tastes something, he nevertheless, the taste of the food disappears like he's chewing weed, a little grass. And either corporeally loses its flavor, or he disconnects from spirituality. And then he loses any taste in spirituality. How can you connect these two things together - that's the wisdom. And they do not need to neutralize one another, because the purpose of creation is to enjoy, to delight His created beings. The purpose of creation is pleasure, where the Creator wants us to enjoy. And we don't give up any desire. We must fill it and enjoy in it fully. So, Yerushalmi should make a calculation. I spin it a little bit here, a little bit like this on purpose so that it will remain like that. Well, please, let's continue.

Reading: (43:10) Number 10 

The world of Atzilut is from the screen of phase three. Therefore, it is external to AK, which is phase four.

10. The screen in the vessels of the world of Atzilut is not as coarse as that of the world of AK, since the coarseness in the screen of Atzilut is only of phase three. Consequently, the level of none of the ten Sefirot of straightness of Atzilut is higher than the level of Hochma and they lack Keter. Hence, they are regarded as low compared to the ten Sefirot at the level of Keter in the world of Adam Kadmon. They are considered external compared to the ten Sefirot in AK because the coarseness of phase three is external to coarseness of phase four, and refinement and externality are one and the same. Consequently, the world of Atzilut became a garment, meaning externality that clothes the world of AK, which is more internal than it.

M. Laitman: Next

Reading: (44:17) Number 11

The screen of Beria is from phase two; this is why it is external to Atzilut.‎

11. The screen in the vessels of the ten Sefirot of the world of Beria is even more refined than that of the world of Atzilut, consisting only of the coarseness of phase two. Thus, the level of these ‎ten Sefirot is not higher than the level of Bina.‎ Therefore, the world of Beria is regarded as more external than the world of Atzilut, where there is coarseness of phase three, making it more internal than the world of Beria, which is only the coarseness of phase two. Thus, the world of Beria is regarded as external and a garment over the world of Atzilut.

Reading: (45:08) Number 12

The screen of Yetzira is from phase one, which is why it is external to Beria.‎

12. The screen in the world of Yetzira has only the coarseness of phase one, the faintest. ‎For this reason, the level of the ten Sefirot in the world of Yetzira is short, reaching only the level of Zeir Anpin, and lack the first three Sefirot: Keter, Hochma, Bina. Hence, the world of Yetzira is more external than the world of Beria, for there, there is coarseness of phase two, which is internal to the coarseness of phase one in the world of Yetzira. For this reason, the world of Yetzira is regarded as external, clothing over the world of Beria.

Reading: (45:57) Number 13

The screen of Assiya comes from the root coarseness. This is why it is the most external.

13. The screen in the ten Sefirot of straightness in the world of Assiya is completely refined, lacking any coarseness. Consequently, there is no issue of coupling with the upper light in it, which raises reflected light. Because there is no reflected light in them, they also do not have upper light, since the upper light is not gripped in the Partzuf where there is no reflected light. Therefore, these ten Sefirot have only the degree of Malchut, lacking the first nine Sefirot, which are Keter, Hochma, Bina, and Zeir Anpin (containing the six Sefirot HGT NHY). Because the screen in them is more refined than in all the previous worlds, they are naturally regarded as external to all of them since you already know that refinement and externality are one and the same. Thus, the world of Yetzira, whose vessels have the screen of phase one, is nevertheless regarded as an internal world compared to the world of Assiya, and the world of Assiya is regarded as external to, and a garment of the world of Yetzira, and of all the worlds, for it is the most refined of all.

M. Laitman: Questions? If there are none, we're moving to the next stage.