Conversations With Kabbalist Dr. Michael Laitman - There is no division in the Ten
January 27, 2025
Student: We just heard a talk. We know according to one of our students, he’s going over our entire archive, taking thoughts from twenty or thirty years ago, everything that we have on tape. The tapes are deteriorating and so they’re being turned into digital, and it’s worked for several years. He found a talk from when we went together to Dublin in 2001. You were asked a question, and I’d really like to understand. The question was about management. How will we continue? Twenty-four years went by.
It was my question. The group sent me questions and I asked. What’s more important to a kabbalist, for you. That there will be a kabbalistic group after you, that you’ll leave a group of kabbalists, or dissemination. We’ll simply continue to disseminate, etc. It’s interesting. You said no, the most important thing is dissemination, if there are kabbalists. It’s not up to you, but the main thing is the system, the Arvut, that we’ll continue studying and disseminating, no less but even more than we’re disseminating now.
Is the question correct, because I also heard that if you ask, even in our Ten. They’ll tell you, no. The most important thing is kabbalists. So, what’s the most important thing to you?
M. Laitman: To me what’s important is that everyone is connected among themselves, everyone is studying how to come out of self-love and to reach love of the Creator. I have nothing further to say.
Student: There was another question—we talked about it in the group. Back then we had a group, we didn’t have Tens—that in the group, seemingly there’s a pyramid. There are those that come to the lesson, but sleep, but afterwards they work strongly. You gave this imagery of the body, that it doesn’t disturb you that people are sleeping, that people come or don’t come. The main thing is that they don’t interrupt and there’s room for everyone. So, this is a line that you’re leading for many years already. That’s clear.
We have to continue the same line and there’s room for everyone. In the Ten, is there also a pyramid, meaning those that more belong to the head, the intention to make decisions and those that belong more to the body of the Ten. In a group, it was clear, 120 people more or less, so obviously there was a pyramid. There are those that are with you and you don’t even know them, and you don’t see them. The pyramid is growing. In the Ten, should there also be a pyramid?
M. Laitman: I don’t think so. I never heard from Rabash that he divided the Ten into a pyramid, Rosh, Toh, Sof, that he doesn’t divide.
Student: And he did divide the group?
M. Laitman: If it’s a large group. What I understood from him is that this pertains only to the Ten, meaning that the Ten is the complete, whole group of students.
Student: Also today in our Tens, if there are those that have come every day, there are those that come one day they do, one day they don’t. They have roles or don’t have roles. There is a spectrum. In the Tens we have twelve, seventeen people. Our Ten is unique in this regard. The pyramid is not that someone…
M. Laitman: Why is your Ten unique?
Student: Because we’re small in quantity. Most of the Tens are between twelve to eighteen people. Therefore, they are naturally… There’s a pyramid. Not everyone comes, some, but there is more emphasis on dissemination, some more on intentions, and this is how it divides. It’s not an equal framework. Among us, more or less, we do keep… One student checked that we’re the only Ten that keeps the entire framework. There is the pyramid. Is it correct of not?
M. Laitman: I don’t think that we have a pyramid.
Student: Not in our Ten, but among other Tens, because each person keeps a different framework, so naturally what happens is that there is a pyramid. People can switch later. It’s not that someone determines that this is how the pyramid is, but a person by his participation determines where he is. If he comes three times a week, he doesn’t pay Maaser, he has no role, but someone does. They can be in the same Ten, and that’s why I asked, and the group said, no problem, there is room for everyone. The group is a large body. In the Ten, can there also be such a thing, or in the Ten everyone needs to be…
M. Laitman: I think that the main thing is not simply the group, but the Ten, and in the Ten there needs to be room for everyone. Besides that, there’s no division among them.
Student: If there is division inside the Ten and it did not split according to a spiritual room, meaning it’s not that someone comes and says, you go here, you go there. Naturally, some belong to the Rosh, some to the Toh, some to the Sof. Is there such a thing in the Ten or not?
M. Laitman: If they divide themselves in that way, then yes, but it’s not that someone divides them.
Student: What is this division? What does it mean inside the Ten that some belong to the Rosh, Some to the Toh, some to the Sof?
M. Laitman: It means that the Ten that you call a Ten… I don’t know what to call it.
Student: The part that belongs to the Rosh in a Ten, for example, the part that belongs to the Sof. One day, one friend can belong here, another day belong there, or not? By their spiritual one belongs to the Rosh and another belongs to the Sof. It’s something steady. It doesn’t change, today in the Rosh and tomorrow in the Sof.
M. Laitman: His place is a fixed place.
Student: What is his role in relation to Ten, if he belongs to the Rosh, for example?
M. Laitman: That for now he belongs to the Sof.
Student: What does it mean if he belongs to the Sof, for example? What is his function in relation to the Ten.
M. Laitman: Who divided the Ten?
Student: No one divided. We’re already a Ten. Is there another natural division in the Ten, not that someone points and says, you go here, you go there, but that it divides naturally, that some belong to the Rosh, some to the Toh, some to the Sof. Is it possible to look at the Ten that way, or is this entire approach to division incorrect? Looking at it that way, is it correct?
M. Laitman: No. I never heard about something like that.
Student: That means that in a Ten there can be people who, according to an external framework, are seemingly not equal, but internally they’re all equal. Is that possible? Meaning I invest a certain number of hours in dissemination and attend lessons, take on roles and do everything, etc. Someone else does much less than that, but we’re equal, because he was given certain conditions, and I was given others and that’s it. We’re all equal, right?
M. Laitman: Yes.
Student: If I were to see things in an essential way, I’d see that everyone is the same, even the one who comes the lesson only once a week, and maybe does dissemination a minute a week or a month, I should say that there’s nothing to do. In essence, we’re all people if we’re in a Ten, right?
M. Laitman: Probably so.