Picture of the author
Picture of the author

Borders On Holiness? How Can the Holy Land Have Borders?

The 12 Kabbalistic Sections of Eretz Yisroel. Likkutei Torah Maasei Maamar Veyarad Hagvul. Part One

1 hr 14 min

Class Summary:

The 12 Kabbalistic Sections of Eretz Yisroel. Likkutei Torah Maasei Maamar Veyarad Hagvul. Part One

Please leave your comment below!

  • KT

    Kayo, Tokyo -12 years ago

    3 faculties
    Do Chochuma, Beina, and Daat have to have limitations, too?

    Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

    • A

      Anonymous -12 years ago

      Re: 3 faculties
      In contrast to the MIddos?

      Ultimately everything accept for G-d has some definition which is it's limit.

      Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

  • KT

    Kayo, Tokyo -12 years ago

    Growth
    B"H



    Dear Rabbi paltiel,



    Thank you for your replay. However, your answer that I should grow in small and consistant increments, I think, does not conform Rabbi Mendel Kaplan's words that "avodah is to break yourself". And Rebbe said, "you are a Jew, you can do impossible." How can I reconcile them?

    Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

  • A

    Anonymous -12 years ago

    12
    12 tones in the Western musical scale.

    Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

  • KT

    Kayo, Tokyo -12 years ago

    Beyond our comfort?
    B"H



    Dear Rabbi Paltiel,

    The Rebbe tells us that to do avoda, we have to go beyond our comfortable zoon. It seems that to go beyond our comfortable zoon is to go to the realm of extreem compared to our regular ordinary road, does it? How do we reconcile with the teaching of the Rebbe Rashab?

    Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

  • KT

    Kayo, Tokyo -12 years ago

    Which Midos?
    B"H



    Dear Rabbi Paltiel,



    The midot talked here are of Nefesh Elokis? or of Nefesh Habehims?

    Shalom

    Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

    • RP

      Rabbi Paltiel -12 years ago

      Re: Which Midos?
      The word "Mida" actually means measure.

      Anything and any level denoted with this term is therefore included in this discussion. The greater novelty here is not the Midos of the Nefesh HaElokis (this is included without any doubt) but the Sfiros of Atzilus: Atzilus is both G-dly (One) and formed(3 Kavin, Top, middle and bottom) etc. So, Atzilus is a dicotomy.

      Still, the Middos of Atzilus are limited and therefore, in the discussion about the limitations of the 12 meetings and combinations of Middos.

      Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

  • KT

    Kayo, Tokyo -12 years ago

    Shema
    B”H



    Dear Rabbi Paltiel,



    I am trying to meditate on Shema based on this class. I am thinking that Elokeinu is nature, hence limited. But through that limitation, I can meet Havayah. Am I correct?

    Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

    • RP

      Rabbi Paltiel -12 years ago

      Re: Shema
      I think this is true. Much success.

      Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

  • BC

    Ben CH -12 years ago

    Angels (at least most of them) are creations.
    Our prayers delineate that different (types of classes of) Angles reside in the 3 Worlds and I assume they are creations of the caliber of the 3 Worlds. How do u differentiate other than that? Eg we use expressions Michael - Chesed, Gavrial - Gvurah...Vs say Angels which are sent on Mission. Are there Melachim with intrinsic existence like existence of Neshama (Be mi Nimloch ...)

    Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

    • RP

      Rabbi Paltiel -12 years ago

      Re: Angels (at least most of them) are creations.
      Malachim is a long complicated Parsha, that can not be addressed thoroughly a s a response to a comment made in Maamar class.

      There are many categories of angels even some that are G-dly. See Rishonim (Ramban, R. Bechyey t=etc.) to the Possuk HaMalach HaGoel.

      Some are part of the Merkava (like Michoel etc.) and they are nivraim (nivdalim not Netiyos).

      While others are more periferral even than that.

      Some are actually Klipa.

      None however serve their own purpose. No there is no bmi nimlach in malachim.

      See at length More' Nivuchim section 2 the first 11 chapters. As well a sHil. Yesodei HaTorah ch. 2.

      Enough.

      Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

  • BC

    Ben CH -12 years ago

    "spirituality is much closer to physicality than it is to G-dliness"
    Rabbi,

    Ur comments above say that spirituality is not G-dliness.("spirituality is much closer to physicality than it is to G-dliness") pls explain / expand? (I thought G-d was the ultimate state of spirituality)(perhaps u mean "not limited to only spirituality..)

    Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

    • RP

      Rabbi Paltiel -12 years ago

      Re: "spirituality is much closer to physicality than it is to G-dliness"
      Exactly.



      One of the greatest mistakes people make is to equate spirituality with G-dliness when in fact they have nothing (that's right, nothing) in common. I'll put it very plainly: the worst sin in the entire Torah is idolatry which is in its entirety a spiritual sin. If spirituality and G-dliness were synonymous, how could so grave a sin be spiritual?



      To us, physical creations, spirituality seems closer to G-d as we can't relate to spirituality. But that is only a perspective and a false one at that.



      G-dly means one with G-d, no ego, no self identity other than it's reflecting it's Maker.



      Spirituality (on the other hand) is a creation that exists in a world that is spiritual. But the basic definitions of all creations apply equally there as here They are: 1) Bound by some concept of time and space, 2) Have a self awareness as the first truth 3) Have an ego, 4) Be imperfect and under certain circumstances even violate the Divine will. All this is absolutely true among spiritual creations.

      The philosophers actually refer to angels [and even the cloud that represents G-d in appearing the Yidden in the Midbar] as "Kovod Nivra" the created representation of His glory. The intent is unmistakable: Angels and the spiritual realms know themselves first and G-d second. They therefore (by nature) must give priority to themselves first and G-dliness second.



      There is absolutely nothing G-dly about (most) Angels.



      Alternatively, S'firos (G-dliness) is called in the Gemara (Chagiga and elsewhere): Netiyos (plants) connoting a connection to a higher source; while Angels (spirituality) is called Nivdalim (lit: separated ones) meaning they are (both) separated from the physical but are also (and equally) separated from the divine.



      This is enough.

      Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

  • G

    Gila -12 years ago

    borders, fences of Torah
    so could we apply this idea further that the borders and fences of yiddishkeit are what bring about the reality of G-dliness and the experience of kedusha? and without those borders the reality is not what it should be and we do not experience G-dliness in it is true state?

    Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

    • RP

      Rabbi Paltiel -12 years ago

      Re: borders, fences of Torah
      Yes and Yes. Without borders there would be no world period. There would no reality, and no-one to experience G-dliness. There would only be G-dliness.

      Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

  • S

    soro -12 years ago

    middot
    with the example of the box, the top and bottom of the box do not meet. If these are supposed to represent the middot which 2 middot do not come together?

    2) what has a love of delights got to do with understanding that the 12 points of meeting come from keser?

    Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

    • RP

      Rabbi Paltiel -12 years ago

      Re: middot
      1) The top and the bottom DO meet they simply don't touch. If they didn't meet they wouldn't be a top and abottom.

      In general these kind of physical analogies are difficult (for ther lay person; and I'm certainly a lay person where this question is concverned) to match each aspect in the mashal to each aspect of the nimshal. Kabbalistic mishalim are called "Mishalim Michuvanim" where each detail is percise (since "nishtalshelu meihem") but it takes a real expert (a Rebbe) to do this.

      2) I don't recall the link being made between the 12 points and Keser. To the contrary. The link is betweenn the love of delight and the world converging, which requires the infinite entering into the order and finity of the 12 points.

      Please wait for next week's class. These ideas will be BLN explored further.

      Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

  • M

    Michale -12 years ago

    Limits and existings
    Dear Rabbi! First of all, sorry for my ignorance, maybe, something, I will ask, is not correct, or I did not understand. I can understand that multi-dimensions creates a space, existing. And your examples are good. What about Adam and Garden Eden? Adam was moved there after creation. And Garden Eden is described as having one river, but outside of it there are four rivers, corresponding four different forces. Here you have the case with one dimension. And Adam was very holy. Then Angels are very holy, they are exist, but not in our material multi-dimensional world. What will be in the next World: will we exist as only spiritual beings? The same concerns Israel too. Now it has limits in the space. In the next World it will be expended and will take all the space, as I read. Will it have one dimension, etc. it will be spiritual only too? We all will be holy, no citra achra and so on…

    Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

    • RP

      Rabbi Paltiel -12 years ago

      Re: Limits and existings
      1) There are two ideas: Eden and Gan Eden. Your question may apply to Eden which is not really a space but an idea. Gan Eden, holy though it may be is called a garden connoting spatial association.

      2) The one andf four rivers are not about wheather there's space or not (there certainly is space) but about unity. The one river indicates G-dliness and unity; while the four rivers that flow from Gan Eden to the world are the beginning of devision and concealment.

      3) Angels (at least most of them) are creations. This means that they are contained by some concept of time and space. No time and space is in the G-dly realms only, not the spiritual ones. Spirituality is much closer to physicality than it is to G-dliness. Thus, angels have alot more in common with physical creaytions then you might think.

      4) The next world will be a synthesis of space (limitation) and no space. There will be space, yet it won't limit. It is similar to the idea found in Gemara about the holy Ark occupying but not being bound by space (and time).

      5) The same can be said of Israel. Yaakov refferred to the Beis Hamikdash as a home (not a mountain- Avrohom, or field- Yitzchok) Yet Yaakov's limited "Home" is more infinite than the expansive "Mountain and Field" described by Avrohom and Yitzchok.

      Reply to this comment.Flag this comment.

Please help us continue our work
Sign up to receive latest content by Rabbi YY

Join our WhatsApp Community

Join our WhatsApp Community

Ways to get content by Rabbi YY Jacobson
Connect now
Picture of the authorPicture of the author