Nefesh HaChayim, Gate III

And these two contexts mentioned above, from His (blessed be He) perspective and from ours, they [emphatic] themselves are the matter of the tzimtzoom808Heb.: tzimtzoom—The Torah speaks in terms that people can understand. In the parts of Torah we call Kabbalah (Torat Che”N), it employs a temporal/spatial metaphor to model the process of creation. This model is called tzimtzoom, which we translate hereafter as “the Constraining”. We must keep in mind at all times that the Constraining is a model that necessarily has severe deficiencies. It serves only to give us a very minimal ability to think about and discuss what is fundamentally beyond thought and words. Existence as we experience it implies an underlying structure of time and space. As Rav Chayyim has discussed so far in this Gate, Ein Sofe is emphatically not a being and not within time and space—the universe is not Ein Sofe’s place; rather, Ein Sofe is time and space’s place. From the Ein Sofe’s perspective (so to speak) there is no creation, no time and no space; everything now is just as it was before creation. This is so at odds with our experience that it’s exceedingly difficult for us to grasp how the infinite distance between the Ein Sofe’s perspective and ours could be bridged. The Ariza”l, at the beginning of the Etz Chayyim, provides us with a description that can be considered a model of the process of creation, the process that bridges the infinite distance. With an exceedingly keen awareness of its deficiencies, he builds the model upon what he acknowledges is a fundamentally deficient temporal/spatial metaphor, describing the Ein Sofe as an infinite, uniformly distributed presence (so to speak). Speaking as-if from our perspective, he describes how at a certain moment (so to speak), a perfect sphere (so to speak) within that presence was modified (so to speak), creating a sphere within which the presence was no longer perceptible. and the kahv809Heb.: kahv—literally line. In the context of the plumbing metaphor used by the Ariza”l it might be translated as pipe, while in the context of an electrical/electronic/optics metaphor it might be translated as wire, or optical fiber or cable, or beam of directed energy. In this era of information and communication theory, a better rendering might be channel. I chose to translate it hereafter as Channel. (We continue with the description of the model.) A Channel was made to extend from the top outside surface of the sphere into the sphere, extending not quite to the bottom inner opposite surface of the sphere. As it enters the sphere, the Channel descends and spreads out in specifically defined ways. The Channel provides a way for the light of Ein Sofe to enter (so to speak) the sphere in a very tightly controlled and constrained manner. mentioned in the Ariza”l’s writings. And it is explained there that from the perspective of the Constraining there’s no justification for asserting any variation or difference in place, above and below, front and back810“Above and below” and “front and back” are prototypical examples of variations in place., only an absolutely genuine uniformity. All the matters of the variations and differences between places, and all the names and appellations, are all applied solely from the perspective of the Channel811I.e., from our perspective.. Refer to the beginning of the book O-tz’rote Chayyim812The O-tz’rote Chayyim is an early part of Rabbi Chayyim Vittals’ writings, compiled by Rav Yaakov Tzemakh, that were incorporated into the Etz Chayyim by Rav Moshe Papirsh. It is considerably shorter than the Etz Chayyim, which is a compilation of various versions and sources. [for more detail]. Know that everything that the Ariza”l wrote regarding these recondite topics are only metaphors, and the inner meaning of the matter of the Constraining and the Channel, the intention regarding these two contexts as mentioned above, is that they are, in essence, completely one context and one matter.

For the definition of the word “Constraining” here, is not a way of referring to leaving a space, or transporting from place to place, to cause Himself to enter and to cause Himself to connect to Himself (so to speak), to actualize a vacant space (heaven forefend). Rather the matter is as stated in Bereshit Rabba, at the end of parsha 45: “She constrained her presence813Heb.: pa-neh-ha—literally “her face” and she did not perceive the King”. And in Eikha Rabbatee at the beginning of the alphabetic section “ah-nee ha-gevver”: “She went and constrained her presence behind the column”, whose explanation there is: using the language of being hidden and covered (refer to the Ahrookh in the entry for Tz-M-Tz-M814The four Hebrew letters tzaddik, mem, tzaddik, mem.). So too here [is found] the word Constraining, namely, being hidden and covered.

And the intention is that His unity (blessed be His name), in the aspect of His essence that permeates all the worlds with absolute uniformity, is what we refer to as “Constraint” as a result of His unity that permeates all the worlds being constrained and hidden from our perception, per the context of: “Indeed, you are a God-Ei”l who conceals Himself” (Yeshayahu 45:15).

And our conception of what we are able to grasp, of the extending/unfolding815Heb.: hish-tahl-sh’loot—this word has the sense of something that is rooted above and then extends, unfolds, stretches, extrudes, unwinds, or radiates progressively only in one direction, in this case downward. An example would be an extension ladder based firmly on the ground that opens up progressively by extending upwards. Its root word implies relevance to the structure of a chain. We translate it as “extends/unfolds”. of the worlds one above the other in various qualities, is what we refer to as “Channel”, which is similar to a channel that extends/unfolds. And this is what the Ariza”l stated, that from the perspective of the Constraint—namely from the perspective of His (blessed be He) essential unity in the worlds that permeates everything—from our perspective He appears to be constrained and concealed, while from the perspective of His essence it’s incorrect to attribute “above and below”. It’s only from the perspective of the Channel—namely, from the perspective of our perception that we, from our perspective, grasp the structure of the worlds using the metaphor of an extending/unfolding like a channel—that our perspective [that there exist qualities of] above and below is correct.

(And despite that being so, that from the perspective of the Constraint, namely, that even though He (blessed be His name) constrained and concealed from our perception the light of His essential unity that permeates everything, even so, we [still] couldn’t attribute to Him “above and below” even from the perspective of our perception, if we were able to perceive an absolutely uniform degree of concealment in all places, like the matter of an encompassing sphere to which we couldn’t attribute the matter of “above and below”, or variations in place.816Rav Chayyim seems to be saying that, even within the universe of constraint, if His essential unity permeating all the worlds was uniformly distributed, then from our perspective we wouldn’t be able to perceive it in any way. In reality we perceive, based on place, variations in the degree of revelation of God’s presence; because of that we are able to perceive God’s presence in our universe. But from the perspective of the Channel, His Will (blessed be He) decreed that after the Constraint and the concealment we perceive the degree of concealment as not being uniform across all places equally. We perceive a range of perceptions based on variations in specific features, similar to the way a beam of light propagates, that it illuminates our perception to perceive the revelation of His (blessed be He) light in the worlds and diverse powers, so that the higher a world or power, the revelation of the godly light within it is greater.817From our perspective, we perceive more of God’s light in the higher worlds than we do in the lower worlds.

And also, our perception of the revelation of His (blessed be He) light in this world is also as a range of features and levels based on place, as the sages (OBM) enumerated (Kei-lim 1:6): “ten [levels] of holiness” and “three [levels of] holy camps”, one higher than the other in degree of their holiness. So from the perspective of our perception of the revelation of the Channel of His (blessed be He) light, it is correct to attribute “above and below” and all variations in places and diverse features and their specifics that are explained in the words of the Ariza”l. And this is also the context for the phrases “supernal God-Ei”l” (Bereshit 14:19) and “our God-Elohi”m is in heaven” (Tehillim 115:3), “residing in heaven” (Tehillim 2:4) and many others similar to them, that from our perspective it makes sense to say that in that place even we recognize a greater revelation of His (blessed be His name) godly light compared to another place, for the revelation of His (blessed be He) light has the quality of being concealed from our perception. And this is like the context of our Patriarch Yaakov (OBM) when he stood on the site of the Temple, as our teachers (OBM) interpreted “this is none other than God’s residence” (Bereshit 28:17), intending to convey that in this place as perceived by human perception, that there is only a revelation of His (blessed be He) godly light alone.)

And this is the matter of the void and the vacant place that the sages (OBM) mentioned, and that the point of the matter of the Constraint was for the revelation of the containers. Namely, that His Will decreed, for reasons hidden with him, to conceal the light of oneness of His essence (blessed be He) within that space, the space where the worlds and creatures exist, to actualize in that way this wondrous situation, so that the existence of worlds and powers should appear and be perceived via a process of levels and extension/unfolding, and to illuminate them with revelation of His (blessed be He) light as a subtle light, with exquisite control and care, via an infinite number of attenuating partitions, until it is possible—thanks to the extension/unfolding and incredible attenuating partitions— that there should even be places that are not pure, and powers of impurity, and evil and husks, at the depths of the lowest levels, so that it appears and seems as if it is (heaven forefend) a void that is vacant of the light of oneness of His essence (blessed be His name). And we are unable to perceive anything but a very slight, subtle impression818Heb.: r’shee-ma. This is an impression made (as if ) by something that was once there and subsequently departed, leaving only a subtle impression of it having been there. and minimal amount of light like in the form of a Channel (as a metaphor), until when it finally arrives via the structure of levels and many attenuating dividers at the lowest of the lowest powers, the powers—the power of impurity and evil—we don’t perceive the revelation of His light (blessed be He) at all. And this is what was stated that the Channel of light does not extend to the bottom inner surface [of the sphere] and does not contact its bottom surface, and in this way are actualized qualities of “above and below”, refer there. And it is now explained to one who can understand.

819The original paragraph was one long sentence that was very hard to parse, so I broke it up into numbered sections. The Constraint and the Channel are identical. And it’s advisable to say that:1. Even though it is certain that in the space where all the worlds and creations are, it’s completely permeated, even now, only with His (blessed be His name) essence alone, just as it was before the creation,2. It is, however, in the state of Constraint, namely, having the quality of concealment alone, wondrous and hidden from our perception,3. So that because of this constraint and concealment our entire perception is of the worlds via the process of extension/unfolding.4. And the drawing down of the revelation of His (blessed be He) light within them is via the process of levels alone, like the metaphor of a channel as we previously discussed.

And this is what is stated in Sha-ar Eegoolim V’yosher820In the Etz Chayyim (ahnaf 2), that the channel of the thread of light is not drawn all at once to the bottom, but rather little by little, intending to convey that it happens via very many levels, with exquisite control and care, according to what is needed for us to perceive the matter of the worlds and the structure of their levels. And one who is wise will understand according to what we’ve discussed—based on what he knows—the complete foundations of this matter as discussed there, for it is impossible to accurately detail and explain his (OBM) entire exposition there.