The transition from governance to providence

הַמַּעֲבָר מִן הַהַנְהָגָה אֶל הַהַשְׁגָּחָה

And behold, when one discerns all the distinctions in the arrangement of governance precisely (וְהִנֵּה בְּהַבְחִין כָּל חִלּוּקֵי סִדּוּר הַהַנְהָגָה הֵיטֵב), to assign names to them according to their nature (לִקְרֹא לָהֶם שֵׁמוֹת לְפִי עִנְיָנָם), another matter is found (נִמְצָא עוֹד עִנְיָן אַחֵר), and it is that which stands between governance and providence, which is the above-mentioned connection (וְהוּא בֵּין הַהַנְהָגָה וְהַשְּׁגָחָה, שֶׁהוּא הַקֶּשֶׁר הַנַּ״ל).

The meaning of the matter is, that when the Emanator, blessed be He, wills and is aroused and acts thus (פֵּירוּשׁ הָעִנְיָן, כִּי בִּהְיוֹת הַמַּאֲצִיל בָּרוּךְ הוּא רוֹצֶה וּמִתְעוֹרֵר הוּא וּפוֹעֵל כָּךְ) - that is the aspect of governance (זֶהוּ בְּחִינַת הַהַנְהָגָה). And when the matter reaches those below in the mode of providence (וּבִהְיוֹת הַדָּבָר נִמְשָׁךְ אֶל הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים בְּבְחִינַת הַשְּׁגָחָה) - that is the connection between the conductor and his governed ones (זֶהוּ קֶשֶׁר הַמְּנַהֵג עִם נְהוּגָיו).

However, you have already heard that providence and connection - in their mode as providence and connection - are equal (אֲבָל הִנֵּה כְּבָר שָׁמַעְתָּ שֶׁהַשְּׁגָחָה וְהַקֶּשֶׁר - בִּבְחִינַת הַשְּׁגָחָה וְקֶשֶׁר - הוּא שָׁוֶה), for in them the distinction of Chesed, judgment, or mercy does not apply (שֶׁאֵין שַׁיָּךְ בָּהּ חִלּוּק חַד״ר), for such is providence and connection whether it be for Chesed, or for judgment, or for mercy (שֶׁכָּךְ הִיא הַשְּׁגָחָה וְקֶשֶׁר אִם תִּהְיֶה לְחֶסֶד, כְּמוֹ שֶׁהִיא אִם תִּהְיֶה לְדִּין אוֹ לְרַחֲמִים). And since this providence conforms to governance in all its changes and variations to bring forth what is needed below (וּלִהְיוֹת הַשְּׁגָחָה הַזֹּאת מִשְׁתַּוָּה אֶל הַהַנְהָגָה לְפִי הִשְׁתַּנּוּתָהּ וְחִלּוּפֶיהָ לְהַשְׁפִּיעַ כָּךְ לְמַטָּה), behold this too is another action - a transition from governance into providence (הִנֵּה זֹּאת גַּם כֵּן פְּעוּלָה אַחֶרֶת - מַעֲבָר מִן הַהַנְהָגָה אֶל הַשְּׁגָחָה).

For every component and condition of action we must distinguish precisely (כִּי כָּל חַלְקֵי וּתְנָאֵי הַפְּעוּלָה אָנוּ צְרִיכִים לְהַבְחִין הֵיטֵב). It is found that there are here three actions, all for governance (נִמְצָאִים פֹּה שְׁלוֹשָׁה פְּעוּלוֹת, כֻּלָּם לְהַנְהָגָה), and one for connecting the conductor with his governed ones - this is the providence I mentioned (וְאַחַת לְקֶשֶׁר הַמְּנַהֵג עִם נְהוּגָיו - הִיא הַשְּׁגָחָה שֶׁזָּכַרְתִּי). governance and providence are two primary categories (הַהַנְהָגָה וְהַשְּׁגָחָה הֵם ב׳ עִקָּרִיּוֹת), the governance of the governance and the transition from governance to providence are secondary (הֲנָהֲגַּת הַהַנְהָגָה וּמַעֲבָר הַהַנְהָגָה אֶל הַשְּׁגָחָה - הֵם מִתְלַוּוֹת אֶל הַשְּׁתַּיִם), and among them all is the full act of governance in all its parts (וּבֵין כֻּלָּם - מַעֲשֵׂה הַהַנְהָגָה הַזֹּאת בְּכָל חֶלְקֶיהָ).