Ohr haShemesh (Nehar Shalom Daf 2, Col. 2)

אוֹר הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ-נְהַר שָׁלוֹם דַּף ב׳ טו״ב

Indeed, it is necessary to understand (אַמְנָם צָרִיךְ לְהָבִין), what the Rav, may his memory be blessed, wrote (מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב הָרַב זָלְעֵהוּ), that in all the Partzufim of A"B"Y"A (כִּי בְּכָל פַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע), that event of the kings occurred (הָיָה מִקְרֵה הַמְּלָכִים הַהוּא). How is it possible (אֵיךְ אֶפְשָׁר), that that event occurred in B"Y"A (שֶׁהַמִּקְרֶה הַהוּא הָיָה בְּבִּי״ע), and behold the three worlds of B"Y"A (וְהֲלֹא ג׳ עוֹלָמוֹת בִּי״ע), are not complete worlds like the world of Atzilut (אֵינָם עוֹלָמוֹת גְּמוּרִים כְּמוֹ עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), for they are only the extension of the powers of the Nukvah of Atzilut (כִּי אֵינָם אֶלָּא הִתְפַּשְׁטוּת כֹּחוֹת הַנֻּקְבָּא דְּאֲצִילוּת), and her legions and her hosts (וְחֵילֶיהָ וְצִבְאָהּ), and they are all in the aspect of Nukvah (וְכוּלָּם בְּחִינַת נֻקְבָּא), and there is in them no male at all (וְאֵין בָּהֶם דְּכוּרָא כְּלָל). As it is written in Mavo She‘arim, Gate Two, Section Three, Chapter Eight (כְּמַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בְּמָבוֹא שְׁעָרִים ש״ב ח״ג פ״ח), and as it is written in Etz Chayim (וּכְמַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בָּע״ח), and their entire existence and standing is by the power of the remainder of the Birurim [Clarifications] of the Kelim [Vessels] (וְכָל קִיּוּמָם וְהַעֲמָדָתָם הוּא בְּכֹחַ שְׁאָרִית בֵּרוּרֵי הַכֵּלִים), and the 288 lights from the kings of Atzilut (וּרְפ״ח אוֹרוֹת דְּמְלָכִים דְּאֲצִילוּת).

And when all the Birurim [Clarifications] will be completed (וּכְשֶׁיֻשְׁלְמוּ לְהִתְבָּרֵר כָּל הַבֵּרוּרִים), then will be said, “Behold, My servant shall prosper, he shall be exalted and lifted up and become very high” (אָז נֶאֱמַר: הִנֵּה יַשְׂכִּיל עַבְדִּי יָרוּם וְנִשָּׂא וְגָבַהּ מְאֹד) (Isaiah 52), and then “the heavens shall vanish like smoke, and the earth shall wear out like a garment” (וְאָז: הַשָּׁמַיִם כֶּעָשָׁן נִמְלָחוּ, וְהָאָרֶץ כַּבֶּגֶד תִּבְלֶה) (Isaiah 51), as it is written in Etz Chayim, Gate Three, end of chapter two (כְּמַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בְּעֵץ חַיִּים ש״ג סוֹף פ״ב), see there (עַיֵּין שָׁם). And furthermore (וְעוֹד), for if there were kings among them (כִּי אִם הָיוּ בָהֶם מְלָכִים), where did their Kelim [Vessels] fall at the time of their death? (הֵיכָן נָפְלוּ הַכֵּלִים שֶׁלָּהֶם בְּעֵת מִיתָתָם), for regarding the kings of Atzilut it was explained (כִּי בְּמַלְכֵי הָאֲצִילוּת נִתְבָּאֵר), that the inner vessels of the kings (כִּי הַכֵּלִים הַפְּנִימִיִּים דְּמְלָכִים), fell to Beri’ah (נָפְלוּ לִבְּרִיאָה), and the middle ones to Yetzirah (וְהָאֶמְצָעִיִּים לִיצִירָה), and the outer ones to Asiyah (וְהַחִיצוֹנִיִּים לַעֲשִׂיָּה). But regarding the kings of B"Y"A (אֲבָל בְּמַלְכֵי בִּי״ע), it was not explained where they fell (לֹא נִתְבָּאֵר הֵיכָן נָפְלוּ), and at present the Rav, may his memory be blessed, has not informed us of such a matter (וְכַעֵת לֹא הִשְׁמִיעֵנוּ הָרַב ז״ל כָּזֹאת לְהֵיכָן נָפְלוּ), and similar to these are many such questions (וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָאֵלּוּ שְׁאֵלוֹת רַבּוֹת).

Indeed, according to what is known from several places (אַמְנָם לְפִי מַה שֶּׁנוֹדַע מִכַּמָּה מְקוֹמוֹת), and especially in the seventh derush from Gate Thirty (וּבִפְרָט בִּדְרוּשׁ שְׁבִיעִי מִשַּׁעַר ל׳), that no Partzuf is called by the name “Partzuf” (כִּי אֵין כָּל פַּרְצוּף נִקְרָא בְּשֵׁם פַּרְצוּף), unless it is composed of ten Sefirot (אֶלָּא עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא כָּלוּל מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת), each of which is composed of A"B"Y"A (אֲשֶׁר כָּל סְפִירָה מֵהֶם כְּלוּלָה מֵאבי״ע). Thus, every Partzuf from among the individual Partzufim of A"B"Y"A (וְנִמְצָא כִּי כָּל פַּרְצוּף מִפְּרָטֵי פַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע), is composed of ten inclusive Sefirot (הוּא כָּלוּל מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת כוֹלְלוֹת), and they are ten Partzufim (וְהֵם עֲשָׂרָה פַּרְצוּפִים), which clothe one another equally (מַלְבִּישִׁים זֶה אֶת זֶה בִּשְׁוֶה), beginning from the navel of Adam Kadmon until the end of Asiyah (מַתְחִילִים מִטַּבּוּר דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן עַד סוֹף הָעֲשִׂיָּה), as will be explained below with the help of Hashem (כַּמָּשֶׁכָּתוּב לְקַמָּן בְּעֶזְרַת ה׳).

And each Sefirah of those ten Sefirot of each Partzuf (וְכָל סְפִירָה מֵאוֹתָם הַי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכָל פַּרְצוּף), emerged from the eyes of Adam Kadmon (יָצְאָה מֵעֵינַיִם דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן), and descended through the ears, nose, and mouth (וְיָרְדָה דֶּרֶךְ אַח״פ), and received their illumination (וְקִבְּלוּ הַאֲרָתָם), and descended and clothed the Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod of Adam Kadmon (וְיָרְדוּ וְהִלְבִּישׁוּ לְתנ״ה״י דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן). And upon the light reaching the boundary of Atzilut (וּבְהַגִּיעַ הָאוֹר לִגְבוּל הָאֲצִילוּת), the event of the nullification of the Melakhim occurred (אֵרַע בָּהֶם עִנְיַן בִּטּוּל הַמְּלָכִים), and the vessels fell - inner, intermediate, and outer (וְנָפְלוּ הַכֵּלִים, פְּנִימִי אֶמְצָעִי וְחִיצוֹן), along with the 288 lights (עִם אוֹרוֹת דְּרפ״ח), to the lower B"Y"A corresponding to that Sefirah (לִבִּי״ע הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים דְּאוֹתָהּ הַסְּפִירָה), as it is written in the derashot of the Rav, may his memory be blessed (כַּמָּשֶׁכָּתוּב בִּדְרוּשֵׁי הָרַב ז״ל). And so it was (וְכֵן הָיָה), in every Sefirah from the ten Sefirot of each Partzuf among the individual Partzufim of A"B"Y"A (בְּכָל סְפִירָה מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכָל פַּרְצוּף דְּפְרָטֵי פַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע), that upon the emergence of their Kelim [Vessels] and their light from the eyes of Adam Kadmon (שֶׁבְּצֵאת הַכֵּלִים וְהָאוֹר שֶׁלָּהּ מֵעֵינֵי אָדָם קַדְמוֹן), and upon the light reaching the boundary of Atzilut (וּבְהַגִּיעַ הָאוֹר לִגְבוּל הָאֲצִילוּת), there occurred in them the nullification of the kings (הָיָה בָּהֶם בִּטּוּל הַמְּלָכִים), in the Atzilut aspect within them (בְּאֲצִילוּת שֶׁבָּהֶם), in the manner explicitly described in the derashot of the Rav, may his memory be blessed (כְּסֵדֶר הַמְּפוֹרָשׁ בִּדְרוּשֵׁי הָרַב ז״ל), but not in the lower B"Y"A (אֲבָל לֹא בִּבִּי״ע הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים).

Thus, all the derashot of the Rav (בְּאוֹפֶן שֶׁכָּל דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב), speak only regarding the Partzufim of A"B"Y"A of one Sefirah from the ten Sefirot of each Partzuf (אֵינָם מְדַבְּרִים אֶלָּא בְּפַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע דְּסְפִירָה אַחַת מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכָל פַּרְצוּף), among the individual Partzufim of A"B"Y"A (מִפְּרָטֵי פַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע). Thus, how could there have been a nullification of the kings in B"Y"A? (הֲרֵי אֵיךְ הָיָה בִּטּוּל הַמְּלָכִים בְּבִּי״ע), and it is only in the Atzilut within them, as mentioned above (וְאֵינוֹ אֶלָּא בְּאֲצִילוּת שֶׁבָּהֶם כַּנַּ״ל).

And it is known (וְנוֹדַע), that one of the reasons for the death of the lower seven (כִּי סִיבָּה אַחַת מִסִּיבוֹת מִיתַת הַז״ת), was their diminished reception from the light of the ear of Adam Kadmon (הָיָה עַל מִעוּט קַבָּלָתָם מֵאוֹר הָאֹזֶן דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן). And Abba and Imma, who received only the illumination of the ear (וְאו״א שֶׁקִּבְּלוּ הַאֲרַת הָאֹזֶן לְבַד), their faces were sustained (נִתְקַיְּמוּ הַפָּנִים שֶׁלָּהֶם), and Keter, who received the essence of the light of the ear (וְהַכֶּתֶר שֶׁקִּבֵּל עַצְמוּת אוֹר הָאֹזֶן), was entirely sustained (נִתְקַיֵּים כֻּלוֹ). And because he received from afar (וְעַל שֶׁקִּבֵּל מֵרָחוֹק), the back of his Netzach, Hod, Yesod were damaged (נִפְגְּמוּ אֲחוֹרֵי הַנה״י שֶׁלּוֹ). And therefore, the Keter, which has strength (וְעַל כֵּן הַכֶּתֶר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ כֹּחַ), clothed the lower half of Tiferet of Adam Kadmon (הִלְבִּישׁ לַחֲצִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן דְּתִפְאֶרֶת דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן), and receives alone the light of the navel (וּמְקַבֵּל לְבַדּוֹ אֶת אוֹר הַטַּבּוּר), which is the point of the Cholem (שֶׁהוּא נְקוּדַּת הַחוֹלָם). But Abba and Imma, who received only the illumination of the ear (אֲבָל או״א שֶׁלֹּא קִבְּלוּ כִּי אִם הַאֲרַת הָאֹזֶן), clothed the two upper joints of the Netzach, Hod, Yesod of Adam Kadmon (הִלְבִּישׁוּ אֶת הַב׳ פְּרָקִין עֶלְיוֹנִים דְּנה״י דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן), and both receive the light of the Yesod (וּשְׁנֵיהֶם מְקַבְּלִים אֶת אוֹר הַיְסוֹד), which is the vowel of Shuruk (שֶׁהוּא נִיקוּד שׁוּר״ק), and they do not have the strength to receive from two openings (וְאֵין לָהֶם כֹּחַ לְקַבֵּל מִשְּׁנֵי נְקָבִים).

And the lower seven, who did not even receive its illumination (וְז״ת שֶׁלֹּא קִבְּלוּ אֲפִלּוּ הַאֲרָתָהּ), receive only from the toenails of Adam Kadmon (אֵינָם מְקַבְּלִים אֶלָּא מִצִּפְרְנֵי אָדָם קַדְמוֹן). And behold, so was the matter (וְהִנֵּה כֵּן הָיָה הָעִנְיָן), in every Partzuf and Partzuf (בְּכָל פַּרְצוּף וּפַרְצוּף), from among the individual Partzufim of A"B"Y"A (מִפְּרָטֵי פַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע), in which the event of the kings occurred (שֶׁהָיָה בּוֹ מִקְרֵה הַמְּלָכִים). And it is known (וְנוֹדַע), that a Partzuf is not called a Partzuf (כִּי אֵין הַפַּרְצוּף נִקְרָא פַּרְצוּף), until it is composed of ten Sefirot (עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא כָּלוּל מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת), each of which is composed of A"B"Y"A (אֲשֶׁר כָּל סְפִירָה מֵהֶם כְּלוּלָה מֵאבי״ע). Thus, it results necessarily (וְנִמְצָא כִּי מֻכְרָח הוּא), that all the Partzufim of A"B"Y"A (כִּי כָּל פַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע), in which the event of the kings occurred (שֶׁהָיָה בָהֶם מִקְרֵה הַמְּלָכִים), clothe one another equally (מַלְבִּישִׁים זֶה אֶת זֶה בִּשְׁוֶה), from the navel of Adam Kadmon until the end of Asiyah (מִטַּבּוּרָא דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן עַד סוֹף הָעֲשִׂיָּה).

For every Sefirah from the ten Sefirot of each Partzuf from the Partzufim of A"B"Y"A (כִּי כָּל סְפִירָה מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכָל פַּרְצוּף דְּפַרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע), emerged from the eyes of Adam Kadmon (יָצְאָה מֵעֵינַיִם דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן), and passed through the ears, nose, and mouth (וְעָבְרוּ דֶּרֶךְ אַח״פ), and the Keter within it received the light of the ear (וְהַכֶּתֶר שֶׁבָּהּ קִבֵּל אוֹר הָאֹזֶן), and the Chokhmah and Binah within them received only its illumination (וְחָכְמָה וּבִינָה שֶׁבָּהֶם קִבְּלוּ הַאֲרָתָהּ לְבַד), and the lower seven did not receive even its illumination (וְז״ת לֹא קִבְּלוּ אֲפִלּוּ הַאֲרָתָהּ), and they descended and clothed the Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, and Yesod of Adam Kadmon, as mentioned above, until the end of Asiyah (וְיָרְדוּ וְהִלְבִּישׁוּ אֶת תּנ״ה״י דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן כַּנַּ״ל עַד סוֹף הָעֲשִׂיָּה). All of this applies to every Sefirah from the ten Sefirot of each Partzuf of the Partzufim of A"B"Y"A (כָּל זֶה בְּכָל סְפִירָה מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכָל פַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע), and this suffices (וְדָ״ל).

And it is found (וְנִמְצָא), that every place where the Rav writes that the upper three emerged complete (כִּי כָל מָקוֹם שֶׁכּוֹתֵב הָרַב דְּג״ר יָצְאוּ שְׁלֵמוּת), and Ze’ir Anpin emerged in the six parts of the point alone (וְז״א יָצָא בְּו׳ חִלְקֵי הַנְּקוּדָּה לְבַד), and the Nukvah in one part the Malkhut within her alone (וְנוּקְבָא בְּחֵלֶק אֶחָד מַלְכוּת שֶׁבָּהּ לְבַד), this refers to the upper three and the Ze'ir anpin and nukvah of each one of the five inclusive points of each Partzuf (הֲרֵי זֶה בַּג״ר וּבְזו״ן דְּכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מֵה׳ נְקוּדוֹת הַכּוֹלְלוֹת דְּכָל פַּרְצוּף). But the five inclusive points of that Partzuf (אֲבָל הַה׳ נְקוּדוֹת הַכּוֹלְלוֹת דְּאוֹתוֹ פַּרְצוּף), emerged complete (יָצְאוּ שְׁלֵמוּת), as explained in chapter six of Sha‘ar Shevirat haKelim [Vessels] (וּכְמְבוֹאָר בְּפ״ו מִשַּׁעַר שְׁבִירַת הַכֵּלִים).

And this is his language: “And do not be amazed how the lower ones emerged after the breaking of the upper ones” (וְז״ל: וְאַל תִּתְמַהּ אֵיךְ יָצְאוּ הַתַּחְתּוֹנוֹת אַחַר שְׁבִירַת הָעֶלְיוֹנוֹת), “and also how every aspect of the upper three in each point of the five points was not broken” (וְגַם אֵיךְ כָּל ג״ר שֶׁבְּכָל נְקוּדָה שֶׁל הַה׳ נְקוּדוֹת לֹא נִשְׁבְּרוּ), “while the lower seven of the earlier points were broken” (וְהַז״ת דְּנְקוּדוֹת רִאשׁוֹנוֹת נִשְׁבְּרוּ). And the answer is (וְהַתְּשׁוּבָה הִיא), that in each and every point there is a type of light corresponding to the value of that point (כִּי בְּכָל נְקוּדָה וּנְקוּדָה יֵשׁ מִין אוֹר אֶחָד שָׁוֶה לְעֵרֶךְ הַנְּקוּדָה הַהִיא), and then the light of the upper three can be received (וְאָז הָאוֹר שֶׁלָּהֶם שֶׁל הַג״ר יוּכְלוּ לְקַבֵּל), and the lower seven within it could not be received (וְהַז״ת שֶׁבּוֹ לֹא יָכְלוּ לְקַבֵּל). And in this way, in every point of the five points, this occurred (וְכֵן עַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה בְּכָל נְקוּדָה וּנְקוּדָה מֵה׳ נְקוּדוֹת אֵרַע כָּךְ).

In such a manner (בְּאוֹפֶן), that all the derashot of the Rav (שֶׁכָּל דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב), which speak about the Partzufim of Atik and Arich Anpin and Abba and Imma and Ze’ir Anpin and Nukvah (הַמְדַבְּרִים בִּפַּרְצוּפֵי עַתִּיק וְא״א וְאו״א וְזו״ן), are not speaking about the inclusive ones (אֵינוֹ מְדַבֵּר עַל הַכּוֹלְלִים), but only about the five Partzufim of the first point (אֶלָּא בְּה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים דְּנְקוּדָה אַחַת), that is, the ten Sefirot of the first Partzuf from the Partzufim of A"B"Y"A (דְּהַיְנוּ י׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּפַרְצוּף א׳ מִפַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע), and from this we infer to the rest (וּמִמֶּנָּה נַקִּישׁ אֶל הַשְּׁאָר).

Shemen, Siman 2

(שֶׁמ״ן סִימָן ב׳)

Behold, Rav Shar-Shalom, may his memory be blessed, did not show us (הִנֵּה לֹא הֶרְאָה לָנוּ הָרַב שַׁר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל), where it is mentioned in the derashot of the Rav, may his memory be blessed (הֵיכָן נִזְכַּר בִּדְרוּשֵׁי הָרַב ז״ל), that the event of the kings occurred in the worlds of B"Y"A (שֶׁמִּקְרֵה הַמְּלָכִים הָיָה בַּעֲלָמוֹת בִּי״ע), for in all the derashot the matter of the shattering is not mentioned except in the world of Atzilut (שֶׁהֲרֵי בְּכָל הַדְּרוּשִׁים לֹא נִזְכַּר עִנְיַן הַשְּׁבִירָה רַק בְּעוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), for even the place of the worlds of B"Y"A did not yet exist at the time of the shattering (כִּי אֲפִלּוּ מְקוֹם עוֹלָמוֹת בִּי״ע עֲדַיִן לֹא הָיָה בִּזְמַן הַשְּׁבִירָה). And what is mentioned in the words of the Rav, may his memory be blessed (וּמַה שֶּׁנִּזְכַּר בִּדִבְרֵי הָרַב זָלְעֵהוּ), is that the aspect of the kings of Atzilut was included within the aspect of B"Y"A (הוּא כִּי הַבְּחִינָה הַמְּלָכִים דְּאֲצִילוּת הָיוּ כְּלוּלִים בְּבְחִינָה דְּבִי״ע), and of all the created beings (וּדְכָל הַנִּבְרָאִים). And this is his language in Sha‘ar haMitzvot, parashat Eikev (וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ בְּשַׁעַר הַמִּצְוֹת פָּרָשַׁת עֵקֶב):

“Know that from the beginning of the Atzilut the known seven kings were emanated” (דַּע כִּי מִתְּחִלַּת הָאֲצִילוּת נֶאֶצְלוּ ז״מ הַנּוֹדָעִים), “and when they died and descended below the world which is now called Atzilut” (וּכַאֲשֶׁר מֵתוּ וְיָרְדוּ לְמַטָּה מֵעוֹלָם שֶׁהוּא נִקְרָא עַתָּה אֲצִילוּת), “behold, within them were included all the worlds and all the created beings” (הִנֵּה בָּהֶם הָיוּ כְּלוּלִים כָּל הָעוֹלָמוֹת וְכָל הַנִּבְרָאִים), “and within them were included the four worlds A"B"Y"A” (וּבָהֶם הָיוּ כְּלוּלִים ד׳ עוֹלָמוֹת אבי״ע), “therefore, when they returned and were rectified…” (וְלָכֵן כַּאֲשֶׁר חָזְרוּ וְנִתְקָּנוּ כו׳), “at first the choicest among them was selected and rectified and became the world of Atzilut” (בַּתְּחִלָּה הֻבְרַר הַמֻּבְחָר שֶׁבָּהֶם וְנִתְקַּן וְנַעֲשָׂה עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), “and what was lower than it became the world of Beri’ah” (וְהַיּוֹתֵר גָּרוּעַ מִמֶּנּוּ נַעֲשָׂה עוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה), “and from what was lower than that became the world of Yetzirah” (וּמֵהַיּוֹתֵר גָּרוּעַ נַעֲשָׂה עוֹלַם הַיְצִירָה), “and from what was lower than that became the world of Asiyah” (וּמֵהַיּוֹתֵר גָּרוּעַ נַעֲשָׂה עוֹלַם הַעֲשִׂיָּה), etc. - see there (כּו׳ יְעוּשַ״ב).

And in Parashat Behar Sinai and also in Etz Chayim, Gate of Mayin nukvin [Female waters], chapter three, he wrote (וּבְפָרָשַׁת בְּהַר סִינַי וְכֵן בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר מ״ן פ״ג כָּתַב): “Know that at the time of the death of the kings, when they descended below, all the aspects of A"B"Y"A were within them” (דַּע כִּי בְּעֵת מִיתַת הַמְּלָכִים, כַּאֲשֶׁר יָרְדוּ לְמַטָּה הָיָה בָּהֶם כָּל הַבְּחִינָה שֶׁהֵם אבי״ע כו׳). And likewise there in Sha‘ar Derushei A"B"Y"A, chapter thirteen (וְכֵן שָׁם בְּשַׁעַר דְּרוּשֵׁי אבי״ע פ״י״ג): “All the worlds of A"B"Y"A were clarified from the Berur of the kings” (כָּל עוֹלָמוֹת אבי״ע הֻבְרְרוּ מִבֵּרוּר הַמְּלָכִים), “the most refined of which became Atzilut” (הַיּוֹתֵר מְעוּלֶה בַּאֲצִילוּת), “and the lower one became Beri’ah” (וְהַגָּרוּעַ מִמֶּנּוּ בִּבְּרִיאָה), “and from it was made Beri’ah” (וּמִמֶּנּוּ נִתְהַוְּתָה בְּרִיאָה), “and in this way Yetzirah, and afterward Asiyah” (וְעַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה בִּיצִירָה וְאַחַר כָּךְ בַּעֲשִׂיָּה), etc. see there (כּו׳ עַיֵּין שָׁם).

And in Mavo She‘arim, Gate Five, section two, chapter one, he wrote (וּבְסֵפֶר מָבוֹא שְׁעָרִים ש״ה ח״ב פ״א כָּתַב), that the seven kings are inclusive from the Ze'ir anpin and nukvah of Atzilut until the end of the world of Asiyah (כִּי ז׳ הַמְּלָכִים הֵם כְּלוּלִים מִז״ו״ן דְּאֲצִילוּת עַד סוֹף עוֹלַם הָעֲשִׂיָּה), “and remember this general principle…” (וְזָכוֹר כְּלַל זֶה כו׳). And the matter - know (וְהָעִנְיָן דַּע), that in these seven kings there are within them all the aspects of A"B"Y"A, as stated above (כִּי בָּאֵלּוּ הַז׳ מְלָכִים יֵשׁ בָּהֶם כָּל בְּחִינַת אבי״ע כַּנַּ״ל), and there are within them parts fit to become Atzilut (וְיֵשׁ בָּהֶם חֵלָקִים רְאוּיִים לַעֲשׂוֹת אֲצִילוּת), and parts not fit to become Atzilut, only Beri’ah (וְחֵלָקִים שֶׁאֵינָם רְאוּיִים לְהֵעָשׂוֹת מֵהֶם אֲצִילוּת רַק בְּרִיאָה), and in the same way Yetzirah and Asiyah (וְכֵן עַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה יְצִירָה וַעֲשִׂיָּה). And all of this is in a general way (וְכָל זֶה בְּדֶרֶךְ כְּלָל), for it is also so in a detailed manner (כִּי גַּם הוּא בְּדֶרֶךְ זֶה בִּפְרָטוּת), for there are parts suitable for Arich (כִּי יֵשׁ חֵלָקִים רְאוּיִים לַאֲרִיךְ), and some for Abba (וְיֵשׁ לְאַבָּא), and some for Imma (וְיֵשׁ לְאִמָּא), and some for Ze’ir Anpin (וְיֵשׁ לְז״א), and some for Nukvah (וְיֵשׁ לְנוּקְבָא), etc. - see there his explanation (כּו׳ עַיֵּין שָׁם בֵּיאוּרוֹ).

Behold, it is made clear from all of these places (הֲרֵי מְבוֹאָר מִכָּל אֵלּוּ הַמְּקוֹמוֹת), how there were only the seven Kings of the world of Atzilut (אֵיךְ לֹא הָיָה רַק הַז׳ מְּלָכִים דְּעוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), and within them were included the aspects of B"Y"A (וּבָהֶם הָיוּ כְּלוּלִים הַבְּחִינָה דְּבִי״ע), from which the worlds were later brought into being, at the time of the Tikkun and the Berur (אֲשֶׁר מֵהֶם נִתְהַוּוּ אַחַר כָּךְ בִּזְמַן הַתִּקּוּן וְהַבֵּרוּר). And their entirety-this was the world at the time when the Kings of Atzilut were emanated (וּכְלָלוּתָם זֶה הָיָה בָּעוֹלָם כַּאֲשֶׁר נֶאֱצְלוּ הַמְּלָכִים דְּאֲצִילוּת), for it is this aspect of the Kings of Atzilut alone that was emanated (דְּאֲצִילוּת, אֲשֶׁר זֶה הַבְּחִינָה דְּמְּלָכִים דְּאֲצִילוּת הוּא לְבַד מַה שֶּׁנֶּאֱצַל), and within them were included B"Y"A and all created beings (וּבָם הָיוּ כְּלוּלִים בִּי״ע וְכָל הַנִּבְרָאִים). If so, how can it be said that the Rav, may his memory be blessed, wrote that the event of the Kings occurred in B"Y"A (וְאִם כֵּן אֵיךְ אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר שֶׁהָרַב זָלְעֵהוּ כָּתַב שֶׁמִּקְרֵה הַמְּלָכִים הָיָה בְּבִי״ע), for it is explicitly explained in his derashot to the contrary (שֶׁהֲרֵי מְבוֹאָר בִּדְרוּשָׁיו בְּהֶפֶךְ), that the aspect of the seven Kings was only those which were in Atzilut (שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְּחִינַת הַז׳ מְּלָכִים רַק אוֹתָם אֲשֶׁר בָּאֲצִילוּת). And it appears at first glance that his proof is from what he wrote in the derush of the Da‘at mentioned above (וּלְכָאוֹרָה נִרְאֶה שֶׁרְאָיָתוֹ הִיא מִמַּה שֶּׁכָּתַב בִּדְרוּשׁ הַדַּעַת הַנ״ל), for he wrote above, and this is his language (שֶׁכֵּן כָּתַב לְעֵיל וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ): “For the event of the Kings was not only in the particulars of the five points” (כִּי לֹא בִּפְרָטֵי הַה׳ נְקוּדוֹת בִּלְבַד הָיָה מִקְרֵה הַמְּלָכִים), “but was in every kind of ten Sefirot, and the ten Sefirot of every Partzuf from the individual Partzufim of A"B"Y"A” (אֶלָּא הָיָה בְּכָל מִין י׳ סְפִירוֹת וְי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכָל פַּרְצוּף דְּפְרָטֵי אבי״ע). As it is written in the derush of Da‘at: “All the Partzufim of A"B"Y"A…” (כַּמָּשֶׁכָּתוּב בִּדְרוּשׁ הַדַּעַת וְזֶ״ל: כָּל פַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע כו׳), as explained above in the previous siman (כַּמַּ״שׁ לְעֵיל בַּסִּימָן הַקּוֹדֵם). If so, according to his words, may his memory be blessed (וְאִם כֵּן לְפִי דְּבָרָיו ז״ל), the languages of the Rav, may his memory be blessed, contradict one another (נִמְצְאוּ לְשׁוֹנוֹת הָרַב ז״ל סָתְרֵי אהֲדָדִי).

However, in my humble opinion, there is no proof from there at all (אֲמְנָם לְעַ"ד אֵין מִשָּׁם רְאַיָּה כְּלָל), for the Rav’s intention there is not to say that there was a shattering in Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (שֶׁאֵין כַּוָּנַת הָרַב שָׁם לוֹמַר כִּי הָיְתָה שְׁבִירָה בְּבִּי״ע), for that which he wrote at the beginning - “all the Partzufim of A"B"Y"A,” etc. - refers to after the Tikkun (כִּי מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב בִּתְחִלָּה כָּל פַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע כו׳, הוּא אַחַר הַתִּקּוּן), and that which he wrote “and at first emerged the Seven Kings,” etc., he is speaking of Atzilut, what occurred in the beginning (וּמַה שֶּׁכָּתַב וּתְחִלָּה יָצְאוּ ז״מ כו׳, הוּא מְדַבֵּר בַּאֲצִילוּת מַה שֶּׁהָיָה בַּתְּחִלָּה), for it was specifically there that the shattering occurred (כִּי שָׁם דַּוְקָא הָיְתָה הַשְּׁבִירָה). And the matter is that at the beginning he said that all the Partzufim of A"B"Y"A are comprised of M"H and B"N, which are Chesed and Gevurah (וְהָעִנְיָן, כִּי בַּתְּחִלָּה אָמַר כָּל פַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע כְּלוּלִים מִמ״ה וּב״ן שֶׁהֵם חו״ג), and each aspect from the two contains the Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah, Chayah, and Yechidah of each Partzuf (וְכָל בְּחִינָה מִבֵּית יֵשׁ בָּהּ נרנח״י דְּכָל פַּרְצוּף), and this speaks of after the Tikkun, when the Name M"H had already emerged (אֲשֶׁר זֶה מְדַבֵּר אַחַר הַתִּקּוּן, שֶׁכְּבָר יָצָא הַשֵּׁם מ״ה). And this is difficult - for how could there be Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah, Chayah, and Yechidah in them? For behold, M"H and B"N are always in the mystery of Ruach and Nefesh (וְקָשֶׁה עַל זֶה, כִּי אֵיךְ יֵשׁ בָּהֶם נרנח״י, כִּי הֲרֵי מ״ה וּב״ן תָּמִיד הֵם בְּסוֹד רוּחַ וְנֶפֶשׁ), and for this reason he said “and at first emerged…” etc., referring to what was in the beginning in Atzilut (וְלָזֶה אָמַר וּתְחִלָּה יָצְאוּ כו׳, שֶׁמְּדַבֵּר מַה שֶּׁהָיָה בַּתְּחִלָּה בְּאֲצִילוּת).

For at the beginning emerged the Seven Kings (כִּי בַּתְּחִלָּה יָצְאוּ ז׳ הַמְּלָכִים), and they are Ze’ir Anpin and Nukvah - the seven extremities within each Partzuf (וְהֵם זו״ן ז״ק שֶׁבְּכָל פַּרְצוּף), and the meaning is: from the Partzufim of Atzilut, in the aspect of Nefesh, which are called the Seven Kingships within the seven extremities, from the aspect of B"N (וְהַכַּוָּנָה מִפַּרְצוּפֵי הָאֲצִילוּת בִּבְחִינַת נֶפֶשׁ, הַנִּקְרָאִים ז׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת שֶׁבְּז״ק מִבְּחִינַת ב״ן), and they were broken (וְנִשְׁבָּרוּ). And afterwards came the seven extremities of M"H from the aspect of Nefesh, and they repaired them (וְאַחַר כָּךְ בָּאוּ ז״ק דְּמ״ה מִבְּחִינַת נֶפֶשׁ, וְתִקְּנוּם). And afterwards came the Ruach, Neshamah, Chayah, and Yechidah of M"H, and they drew forth the Ruach, Neshamah, Chayah, and Yechidah of B"N, which had not yet been emanated (וְאַחַר כָּךְ בָּאוּ רנח״י דְּמ״ה, וְהִמְשִׁיכוּ אֶת רנח״י דְּב״ן, שֶׁלֹּא נֶאֶצְלוּ עֲדַיִן), for what had been emanated was only Nefesh (כִּי מַה שֶּׁנֶּאֱצַל, לֹא הָיָה רַק נֶפֶשׁ), since he only said “they were emanated,” because he is speaking in Atzilut (כֵּיוָן שֶׁלֹּא אָמַר רַק נֶאֶצְלוּ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּדַבֵּר בַּאֲצִילוּת), where what was emanated at first was only the Nefesh of Atzilut - these are the Kings of Atzilut (אֲשֶׁר מַה שֶּׁנֶּאֱצַל בַּתְּחִלָּה לֹא הָיָה רַק נֶפֶשׁ דַּאֲצִילוּת, שֶׁהֵם הַמְּלָכִים דַּאֲצִילוּת) - for this is the primary aspect that was emanated (שֶׁזֶּהוּ עִקָּר מַה שֶּׁנֶּאֱצַל), and the other aspects are included within them (וּשְׁאָר הַבְּחִינֺוֹת הֵם כְּלוּלִים בָּהֶם).

Behold it has been clarified how in M"H and B"N there is Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah, Chayah, and Yechidah in each one of them (הֲרֵי נִתְבָּאֵר אֵיךְ בְּמ״ה וּב״ן יֵשׁ נרנח״י בְּכָל אֶחָד מֵהֶם), and all of these aspects - namely, the Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah, Chayah, and Yechidah of M"H and also the Ruach, Neshamah, Chayah, and Yechidah of B"N - all of them emerged included in the secret of (וְכָל אֵלּוּ הַבְּחִינוֹת, דְּהַיְינוּ הַנרנח״י דְּמ״ה וְגַם הָרנח״י דְּב״ן, יָצְאוּ כֻּלָּם כְּלוּלִים בְּסוֹד): an addition within Ze’ir Anpin and Nukvah, which are the seven extremities in each general structure (תּוֹסֶפֶת בִּזו״ן, שֶׁהֵם ז׳ קְצָווֹת שֶׁבְּכָל כְּלָל), that is, the seven lower Sefirot in the generality of each world of A"B"Y"A (דְּהַיְינוּ ז״ת דִּכְלָלוּת כָּל עוֹלָם וְעוֹלָם דְּאבי״ע), and in each particular - that is, the seven extremities within each and every Partzuf of each world of A"B"Y"A (וּבְכָל פְּרָט, דְּהַיְינוּ ז״ק דְּכָל פַּרְצוּף וּפַרְצוּף דְּכָל עוֹלָם דְּאבי״ע). For certainly the aspects of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah that were included in the Seven Kings of Atzilut (כִּי וַדַּאי כִּי הַבְּחִינָה שֶׁל בְּרִיאָה יְצִירָה עֲשִׂיָּה, שֶׁהָיוּ כְּלוּלִים בְּז׳ הַמְּלָכִים דַּאֲצִילוּת), were not there in their complete state, fully contained within the Seven Kings (לֹא הָיְתָה שָׁם כָּל בְּחִינָתָם בִּשְׁלֵימוּת, כְּלוּלָה בְּז׳ הַמְּלָכִים).

For behold, the aspect of Atzilut itself was only in the secret of Nefesh (כִּי הֲרֵי בְּחִינַת הָאֲצִילוּת עַצְמוֹ לֹא הָיוּ רַק בְּסוֹד נֶפֶשׁ), all the more so the aspects of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah that were included in them (וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן הַבְּחִינָה דְּבִּי״ע הַכְּלוּלוֹת בָּהֶם). Therefore, afterwards there came to all of them the rest of the aspects of Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah, Chayah, and Yechidah, in the form of an addition (וְלָכֵן אַחַר כָּךְ בָּא לְכוּלָּם שְׁאָר הַבְּחִינוֹת דְּנרנח״י, בְּסוֹד תּוֹסֶפֶת). And then all the Partzufim of A"B"Y"A were found to be complete in their Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah, Chayah, and Yechidah (וְאָז נִמְצְאוּ כָּל פַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע שְׁלֵמִים בְּנרנח״י שֶׁלָּהֶם), and this addition is called by the name “gift” (וַאֲשֶׁר תּוֹסֶפֶת זֶה נִקְרָא בְּשֵׁם מַתָּנָה), which departs at the time of blemish, Heaven forbid (שֶׁמִּסְתַלֵּק בְּעֵת הַפְּגָם ח״ו). And this is what he concluded - “and all this you will understand from the commandment of the inheritance of the dead in Parashat Pinchas, and look there and examine well” (וְזֶהוּ שֶׁסִּיֵּם: וְכָל זֶה תָּבִין מִמִּצְוַת יְרוּשַׁת הַמֵּתִים בְּפָרָשַׁת פִּינְחָס, וְעַיֵּין שָׁם וְדוֹק הֵיטֵב). And you will see that when he mentioned the matter of the Kings, he mentioned only Atzilut (וְתִרְאֶה כִּי כְּשֶׁהִזְכִּיר עִנְיַן הַמְּלָכִים, לֹא הִזְכִּיר רַק אֲצִילוּת), and in the Tikkun he also mentioned Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (וּבְתִקּוּן הִזְכִּיר גַּם בִּי״ע).

And behold, in order to understand what the Rav, may his memory be for a blessing, wrote - that Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah were included within those Seven Kings of Atzilut (וְהִנֵּה, כְּדֵי לְהָבִין מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב הָרַב זַלָּה״ה, כִּי בִּי״ע הָיוּ כְּלוּלִים בְּאוֹתָם הַז׳ מְלָכִים דַּאֲצִילוּת) - in my humble opinion, it can be understood with clear reasoning from that which is written in Etz Chayim, Gate Nineteen, Gate A"N"K, chapter five (לְעַ"ד יוּבַן בְּטוּב טַעַם עַל מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר י״ט שַׁעַר אנ״ך פ״ה), whose opening wording we already wrote in the previous section, at the words “And in Etz Chayim, Gate Nineteen, chapter five,” until “and they were broken” - see there (אֲשֶׁר תְּחִלַּת הַלָּשׁוֹן כָּתַבְנוּהוּ בַּסִּימָן הַקּוֹדֵם ד״ה וּבְעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר י״ט פ״ה, עַד וְנִשְׁבָּרוּ עַיֵּין שָׁם). And afterwards he wrote: “And know, that it is not only those who emerged in the aspect of Atzilut, who are the Penimiyut [Internality] of B"N, but even their back parts, which are Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah, came out with them” (וְאַחַר כָּךְ כָּתַב: וּדְעָא, כִּי לֹא דַי אֵלּוּ שֶׁיָּצְאוּ בִּבְחִינַת הָאֲצִילוּת, שֶׁהֵם הַפְּנִימִיּוּת דְּב״ן, אֶלָּא גַּם אֲחוֹרֵיהֶם שֶׁהֵם בִּי״ע יָצְאוּ עִמָּהֶם). And know, that even in Atzilut there is “Front” and “Back,” but all of them are called “inward,” relative to Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah, which are considered “outer” (וּדְעָא, כִּי גַּם בָּאֲצִילוּת יֵשׁ פָּנִים וְאָחוֹר, אֲבָל כֻּלָּם נִקְרָאִים פְּנִימִיּוּת בְּעֵרֶךְ בִּי״ע שֶׁהֵם חִיצוֹנִיּוּת). And the matter is: Beri’ah was the outer aspect of the inner side of B"N (וְהָעִנְיָן, כִּי בְּרִיאָה הָיְתָה חִיצוֹנִיּוּת דְּפָנִים דְּב״ן), and Yetzirah was the outerness of B"N (וִיצִירָה חִיצוֹנִית דְּב״ן), and Asiyah was an even further outer externality - the back side of B"N (וַעֲשִׂיָּה חִיצוֹנִיּוּת יוֹתֵר חִיצוֹן דְּאָחוֹרַיִים דְּב״ן). And when they were broken, not everything that was broken was rectified - only a small portion (וּכְשֶׁנִּשְׁבְּרוּ, לֹא נִתְקְנוּ כָּל מַה שֶּׁנִּשְׁבְּרוּ, רַק מְעַט), and they will not be completed in their clarification until the coming of the Mashiach, with the help of Hashem (וְלֹא יוּשְׁלְמוּ לְהִתְבָּרֵר עַד בִּיאַת הַמָּשִׁיחַ בְּעֶזְרַת ה׳) - end quote (עַ״כּ).

Behold, it is explained how Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah were included within the Kings of Atzilut (הֲרֵי מְבוֹאָר, אֵיךְ בִּי״ע הָיוּ כְּלוּלִים בַּמְּלָכִים דַּאֲצִילוּת), in that they were in the aspect of their externality (שֶׁהָיוּ בִּבְחִינַת חִיצוֹנִיּוּתָם), and that the aspect of the Kings was only those of complete Atzilut (וּשֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְּחִינַת הַמְּלָכִים, רַק אוֹתָם דַּאֲצִילוּת הַגָּמוּר). And therefore, upon the descent of the Kelim [Vessels] below (וְלָכֵן בְּרִדַּת הַכֵּלִים לְמַטָּה), the Penimiyut [Internality] of the Kli [Vessel] fell into the world of complete Beri’ah (נָפַל פְּנִימִיּוּת הַכֵּלִי בְּעוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה הַגָּמוּר), and the externality of the Kli [Vessel] into the world of complete Yetzirah (וְחִיצוֹנִיּוּת הַכֵּלִי בְּעוֹלַם הַיְצִירָה הַגָּמוּר), and the externality of the externality into the world of complete Asiyah (וְחִיצוֹנִיּוּת שֶׁל חִיצוֹנִיּוּת בְּעוֹלַם הַעֲשִׂיָּה הַגָּמוּר). And based on the above, we may say that even in the complete Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah, there was a resemblance of the shattering (וְעַל פִּי הָאֲמוּר, נוּכַל לוֹמַר כִּי גַּם בְּבִּי״ע הַגְּמוּרִים, הָיָה דִּמְיוֹן הַשְּׁבִירָה), for the event of the Kings is never in any aspect except in the complete Atzilut (כִּי לְעוֹלָם אֵין בְּחִינַת מִקְרֵה הַמְּלָכִים, רַק בְּעוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת הַגָּמוּר), which is above the complete Worlds of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (אֲשֶׁר הוּא עֶלְיוֹן מֵעֲולָמוֹת בִּי״ע הַגְּמוּרִים), which are beneath it (הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים מִמֶּנּוּ), for it is only there that the Seven Kings emerged (אֲשֶׁר שָׁם לְבַד הוּא שֶׁיָּצְאוּ הַז״מ).

But since, when the Kli [Vessel] of one Sefirah of Atzilut - which is the Penimiyut [Internality] - is broken and falls into the lower Worlds of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (אֲבָל כֵּיוָן שֶׁבְּהִשָּׁבֵר הַכֵּלִי שֶׁל סְפִירָה אַחַת דַּאֲצִילוּת, שֶׁהוּא פְּנִימִיּוּת, וְנוֹפֵל לַעֲולָמוֹת בִּי״ע הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים), how much more so does its externality - which is already in the aspect of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah - fall with it into the lower Worlds, which are Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (כָּל שֶׁכֵּן שֶׁחִיצוֹנִיּוּתוֹ, שֶׁהוּא בְּחִינַת בִּי״ע, נוֹפֵל עִמּוֹ לַעֲולָמוֹת הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים, שֶׁהֵם בִּי״ע). And this is the aspect of shattering as it applies to the aspect of the Worlds of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (וְזוֹ הִיא בְּחִינַת שְׁבִירָה אֶל הַבְּחִינָה שֶׁל עֲולָמוֹת בִּי״ע). For behold, until now they had been included within the boundary of the World of Atzilut, in the aspect of its externality (שֶׁהֲרֵי עַד עַתָּה הָיוּ כְּלוּלִים בִּגְבוּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת, בִּבְחִינַת חִיצוֹנִיּוּתוֹ), and now they have fallen into other worlds, which are Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (וְעַתָּה נָפְלוּ בַּעֲולָמוֹת אֲחֵרִים, שֶׁהֵם בִּי״ע). And in the place where the Kli [Vessel] fell - which was broken from the World of Atzilut, which is the Penimiyut [Internality] into the Worlds of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (וּבְמָקוֹם אֲשֶׁר נָפַל הַכֵּלִי, שֶׁנִּשְׁבַּר מֵעולַם הָאֲצִילוּת, שֶׁהוּא הַפְּנִימִיּוּת בַּעֲולָמוֹת בִּי״ע), there also fell its externality, which are the aspects of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (שָׁם נָפַל הַחִיצוֹנִיּוּת שֶׁלוֹ, שֶׁהֵם הַבְּחִינוֹת דְּבִי״ע).

Thus it is found that the occurrence of the Kings never took place except in the World of Atzilut (נִמְצָא שֶׁלְּעוֹלָם לֹא הָיָה מִקְרֵה הַמְּלָכִים, רַק בְּעוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), for it is specifically there that the Kings emerged (אֲשֶׁר שָׁם דַּוְקָא הוּא שֶׁיָּצְאוּ הַמְּלָכִים), and from it the Shevirah [Breaking] was drawn also into actual Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (וּמִמֶּנּוּ נִמְשְׁכָה הַשְּׁבִירָה גַּם בִּבִּי״ע מַמָּשׁ), for they were in the aspect of externality in relation to the aspect of Atzilut, which is Penimiyut [Internality] (שֶׁהֵם הָיוּ בִּבְחִינַת הַחִיצוֹנִיּוּת אֶל בְּחִינַת הָאֲצִילוּת, שֶׁהוּא הַפְּנִימִיּוּת), for there, specifically, was the occurrence of the Kings within the generality of the World of Atzilut (כִּי שָׁם דַּוְקָא הָיָה מִקְרֵה הַמְּלָכִים בִּכְלָלוּת עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), and not in the Atzilut of Atzilut (וְלֹא בַּאֲצִילוּת דַּאֲצִילוּת). And similarly, the shattering that was drawn from it into Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah is within the generality of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (וְכֵן הַשְּׁבִירָה הַנִּמְשֶׁכֶת מִמֶּנּוּ בִּבִּי״ע, הִיא בִּכְלָלוּת בִּי״ע), truly similar to Atzilut, from which it was drawn into Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (דּוֹמֶה מַמָּשׁ אֶל הָאֲצִילוּת, אֲשֶׁר מִמֶּנּוּ נִמְשְׁכָה אֶל בִּי״ע).

In such a manner that even if we wish to speak of an aspect of shattering in Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (בְּאֹפֶן, כִּי גַּם אִם נִרְצֶה לוֹמַר בְּחִינַת שְׁבִירָה בִּבִּי״ע), there is no contradiction (קֻשְׁיָא לֵיתָא), for it exists only in the generality of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah, and not in the Atzilut within Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (וְאֵינוֹ אֶלָּא בִּכְלָלוּת בִּי״ע, וְלֹא בַּאֲצִילוּת דְּבִי״ע). From now we will come to that which was answered by the Rav, Rabbi Sar Shalom, of blessed memory (מֵעַתָּה נָבוֹא לְמַה שֶּׁתִּירֵץ הוּא הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל), regarding that which is written in Etz Chayim, Gate 30 (עַל מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר ל׳), that no Partzuf is called by the name Partzuf unless it is comprised of ten Sefirot (כִּי אֵין כָּל פַּרְצוּף נִקְרָא בְּשֵׁם פַּרְצוּף, אֶלָּא עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה כָּלוּל מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת), each one of which is comprised of A"B"Y"A, etc. (אֲשֶׁר כָּל סְפִירָה מֵהֶן כְּלוּלָה מֵאבי״ע כו׳).

As was stated above (כְּמַשֶּׁל״ה), but I in my lowliness did not understand it that way (כִּי אֲנִי בְּעוֹנְיִי לֹא הֲבִינֹתִי כֵן), for this rule - that no Partzuf is called a Partzuf, etc. - this applies only after the Tikkun (כִּי זֶה הַכְּלָל, כִּי אֵין כָּל פַּרְצוּף נִקְרָא פַּרְצוּף כו׳, זֶה אֵינוֹ רַק אַחַר הַתִּקּוּן), when the Partzufim were enlarged and completed in the aspect of their Mochin [Intellects] (אֲשֶׁר נִתְגַּדְּלוּ וְנִשְׁלְמוּ הַפַּרְצוּפִים בִּבְחִינַת הַמּוֹחִין שֶׁלָּהֶם). But before the Tikkun, and especially in the time of the event of the Kings (אֲבָל קֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן, וּבִפְרָט בִּזְמַן מִקְרֵה הַמְּלָכִים), this rule does not apply at all (אֵין שַׁיָּכוּת כְּלָל לָזֶה הַכְּלָל), for they all emerged only in the aspect of their Malkhuyot (שֶׁהֲרֵי כֻּלָּם לֹא יָצְאוּ רַק בִּבְחִינַת הַמַלְכִיּוֹת שֶׁלָּהֶם), Kelim [Vessels] of Nefesh (כֵּלִים דְּנֶפֶשׁ), which is the aspect of Asiyah within that Sefirah (שֶׁהוּא בְּחִינַת עֲשִׂיָּה שֶׁבַּסְּפִירָה הַהִיא). And their name proves concerning them, for they are called Nekudot (“points”) (וּשְׁמָם מוֹכִיחַ עֲלֵיהֶם, שֶׁכֵּן נִקְרָאִים נְקוּדוֹת), for a nekudah is the Asiyah of a Sefirah (כִּי נְקוּדָה הִיא עֲשִׂיָּה שֶׁבַּסְּפִירָה).

And as explained there in that Gate (וּכְמוֹ שֶׁמְּבוֹאַר שָׁם בְּאוֹתוֹ שַׁעַר), see Derush seven (לִי [דָּרוּשׁ ז׳]), and these are his words (וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ): And this is the secret that Ze’ir Anpin is called “six Nekudot,” and is a single Nekudah (וְזֶה סוֹד שֶׁז״א נִקְרָא ו׳ נְקוּדוֹת, וְהִיא נְקוּדָה אַחַת), and they did not say that it is six Sefirot, and it is one Sefirah (וְלֹא אָמְרוּ שֶׁהִיא ו׳ סְפִירוֹת, וְהִיא סְפִירָה אַחַת), for the Sefirot of Asiyah are extremely small (כִּי הַסְּפִירוֹת דְּעֲשִׂיָּה הֵם קְטַנִּים בִּתְכֵלִית), and it is called nekudah in relation to a full Sefirah (וְנִקְרָאת נְקוּדָה בְּעֵרֶךְ הַסְּפִירָה). For it is not called Sefirah unless it is comprised of all of A"B"Y"A (כִּי אֵינוֹ נִקְרָא סְפִירָה, רַק בְּהִיוֹתָהּ כְּלוּלָה מִכָּל אבי״ע), but when they are in the aspect of Asiyah alone, it is called nekudah (וּבְהִיוֹתָם בִּבְחִינַת עֲשִׂיָּה לְבַד, נִקְרָא נְקוּדָה). And understand this very well - the concept of nekudah in every place, what it refers to (וְהָבֵן זֶה מְאֹד, עִנְיַן נְקוּדָה בְּכָל מָקוֹם, מַה עִנְיָנוֹ), for it is the Asiyah of that particular aspect (שֶׁהוּא הָעֲשִׂיָּה שֶׁל הַבְּחִינָה הַהִיא). But the term Sefirah applies when it is complete in all aspects of A"B"Y"A within it, etc. (אֲבָל לְשׁוֹן סְפִירָה הוּא, בִּהְיוֹתָהּ שְׁלֵמָה בְּכָל חַלְקֵי אבי״ע שֶׁבָּהּ כו׳), see there (יַעֲיֵין שָׁם). And if so, since they were in the aspect of Nekudot that emerged in the aspect of the Malkhuyot within them (וְאִם כֵּן, כֵּיוָן שֶׁהֵם בִּבְחִינַת נְקוּדוֹת שֶׁיָּצְאוּ בִּבְחִינַת הַמַלְכִיּוֹת שֶׁבָּהֶם), as is known in many places (כְּנוֹדָע מִכַּמָּה מְקוֹמוֹת), and as he, of blessed memory, wrote below - that Malkhut is the Asiyah within the Sefirah (וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַב הוּא ז״ל לְקַמָּן, אֲשֶׁר מַלְכוּת הִיא עֲשִׂיָּה שֶׁבַּסְּפִירָה), and the Kelim [Vessels] of Nefesh are likewise Asiyah (וְכֵלִים דְּנֶפֶשׁ שֶׁהִיא גַּם כֵּן עֲשִׂיָּה).

If so, how can we say this general principle - that at the time of the occurrence of the Kings, all those Sefirot that emerged from the eyes of Adam Kadmon (אִם כֵּן, אֵיךְ נוּכַל לוֹמַר כְּלָל זֶה, שֶׁאָז בִּזְמַן מִקְרֵה הַמְּלָכִים, כִּי כָּל אוֹתָם הַסְּפִירוֹת שֶׁיָּצְאוּ מֵעֵינֵי אָדָם קַדְמוֹן) were comprised of their A"B"Y"A? (הָיוּ כְּלוּלוֹת מֵאבי״ע שֶׁלָּהֶם) And when the light reached the boundary of Atzilut of that Sefirah (וּכְשֶׁהִגִּיעַ הָאוֹר לִגְבוּל הָאֲצִילוּת דְּאוֹתָהּ סְפִירָה), the event of the Kings occurred within it (אֵרַע בָּהּ בִּטּוּל הַמְּלָכִים), and the Kli [Vessel] fell into the lower Worlds of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah of that Sefirah (וְנָפַל הַכֵּלִי לְבִּי״ע הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים דְּאוֹתָהּ סְפִירָה), and behold, there is in it only the aspect of Kelim [Vessels] of Nefesh, which is the Asiyah within them (וְהֲלֹא אֵין בָּהֶם רַק בְּחִינַת כֵּלִים דְּנֶפֶשׁ, שֶׁהִיא הָעֲשִׂיָּה שֶׁבָּהֶם), which is the Malkhuyot within them (שֶׁהֵן הַמַלְכִיּוֹת שֶׁבָּהֶם), and in this aspect was their emergence from the eyes of Adam Kadmon (אֲשֶׁר בִּבְחִינָה זוֹ הָיְתָה יְצִיאָתָם מֵעֵינֵי אָדָם קַדְמוֹן).

And as is explained in Sha‘ar Shevirat haKelim [Vessels], chapter 8 (וּכְמוֹ שֶׁמְּבוֹאַר בְּשַׁעַר שְׁבִירַת הַכֵּלִים פ״ח), and these are his words (וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ): “And know, that in the Atzilut of the Kings, they did not emerge in Ze’ir Anpin and Nukvah (וּדְעָא, כִּי בְּאֲצִילוּת הַמְּלָכִים, לֹא יָצְאוּ בִּזו״ן), only the Seven Malkhuyot (רַק הַשֶּׁבַע מַלְכֻיּוֹת), in the two aspects: the outer and the middle (שֶׁבִּב׳ הַבְּחִינָה הַחִיצוֹנָה וְהַתִּיכוֹנָה). And these are the Malkhuyot of Netzach, Hod, Yesod and Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet (וְהֵם הַמַלְכֻיּוֹת דְּנה״י וְחג״ת). And therefore the Malkhuyot are called Nekudot, for a nekudah is Malkhut, as is known (וְלָכֵן נִקְרָאוּ הַמַלְכֻיּוֹת נְקוּדוֹת, כִּי נְקוּדָה הִיא מַלְכוּת כְּנוֹדָע). And not only this, but even these were not clothed one within the other, nor were they bound together (וְלֹא דַּי בָּזֶה, אֶלָּא שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ אֵלּוּ לֹא הָיוּ מְלוּבָּשִׁים זֶה בָּזֶה, וּמְקוּשָּׁרִים יַחַד), and they were also not divided into lines, etc. (וְגַם לֹא הָיוּ נֶחְלָקִים לִקְוִים כו׳). But rather, each one was separated by itself, and therefore they died (אֲבָל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד נֶחְלָק בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ, וְלָכֵן מֵתוּ). But now, they are clothed one within the other, and also ordered in the manner of lines, and therefore they endure, etc.” (אֲבָל עַתָּה נִתְלַבְּשׁוּ זֶה בָּזֶה, וְגַם הָיוּ דֶּרֶךְ קְוִים, וְלָכֵן נִתְקַיְּמוּ כו׳) - see there (עַיֵּין שָׁם).

And similarly in Derush haDa‘at, which we cited in the previous section (וְכֵן בְּדְרוּשׁ הַדַּעַת, אֲשֶׁר כָּתַבְנוּ לְשׁוֹנוֹ בַּסִּימָן הַקּוֹדֵם), he wrote: “And at first the Seven Kings emerged” (כָּתַב: וּתְחִלָּה יָצְאוּ ז׳ מְלָכִים), “and they are the seven extremities of Ze’ir Anpin and Nukvah in each Partzuf” (וְהֵם זו״ן ז״ק שֶׁבְּכָל פַּרְצוּף), “in the aspect of Nefesh” (בִּבְחִינַת נֶפֶשׁ), “which are called the Seven Malkhuyot,” etc., as stated above - see there (הַנִּקְרָא ז׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת כו׳, כְּמַשֶּׁ״ל עַיֵּין שָׁם).

And in Sha‘ar haTikkun, chapter five, and in Sha‘ar Tikkun haNukvah, chapter two (וּבְשַׁעַר הַתִּקּוּן פ״ה, וּבְשַׁעַר תִּקּוּן הַנֻּקְבָּא פ״ב), he wrote in general principle nine, and these are his words (כָּתַב בִּכְלָל ט׳, וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ): “And behold, at the time of the emergence of the Kings” (וְהִנֵּה בְּעֵת צֵאת הַמְּלָכִים), “they emerged from the aspect of the Name B"N” (יָצְאוּ מִבְּחִינַת שֵׁם ב״ן), “from the eyes of Adam Kadmon” (מֵעֵינֵי אָדָם קַדְמוֹן). “And there were ten lights of the ten Sefirot of B"N” (וְהָיוּ בוֹ עֲשָׂרָה אוֹרוֹת שֶׁל י׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּב״ן), “which are the totality of the entire World of Atzilut” (שֶׁהֵם כְּלָלוּת כָּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת כֻּלוֹ). “And at first the aspect of Kelim [Vessels] was formed” (וּתְחִלָּה נַעֲשׂוּ בְּחִינַת כֵּלִים), “and afterward the lights emerged to enter the Kelim [Vessels]” (וְאַחַר כָּךְ יָצְאוּ הָאוֹרוֹת לִיכָּנֵס בַּכֵּלִים). “And however, those Kelim [Vessels] were small” (וְאַךְ הָיוּ כֵּלִים הָאֵלּוּ קְטַנִּים), “and were called Nekudot” (וְנִקְרְאוּ נְקוּדוֹת). “Meaning: that each Kli [Vessel] was not large enough” (פֵּירוּשׁ: כִּי לֹא הָיָה כָּל כְּלִי), “so that all ten parts of the light of that Nekudah” (כְּדֵי שֶׁיוּכְלוּ כָּל עֲשֶׂרֶת חַלָּקֵי הָאוֹר שֶׁל הַנְּקוּדָה הַהִיא), “could expand within it in the form of the image of Adam” (לְהִתְפַּשֵּׁט בְּתוֹכוֹ דְּמוּת צוּרַת אָדָם), “as it is now after the time of the Tikkun” (כְּמוֹ שֶׁהוּא עַתָּה אַחַר זְמַן הַתִּקּוּן), “but only one-tenth part alone” (רַק חֵלֶק הָעֲשִׂירִי לְבַד). “In such a manner that each Kli [Vessel] was only the size” (בְּאֹפֶן שֶׁכָּל כְּלִי מֵהֶם הָיָה גָּדוֹל), “of the Kli [Vessel] of Keter as it is now, of that Nekudah” (כְּשִׁעוּר כְּלִי שֶׁל כֶּתֶר שֶׁל עַתָּה שֶׁל הַנְּקוּדָה הַהִיא), “which is one-tenth of the full Kli [Vessel]” (שֶׁהוּא עֲשִׂירִי אֶחָד מֵעֲשֶׂרֶת חַלְקֵי הַכְּלִי), “and that tenth is called Nekudat haKeli [Point of the Vessel]” (וְאוֹתוֹ עֲשִׂירִית נִקְרָא נְקוּדַּת הַכֵּלִי), “for the nekudah is Yod, which is a tenth” (כִּי הַנְּקוּדָה הִיא יו״ד, שֶׁהִיא עֲשִׂירִית). “And therefore they were called ten Nekudot,” etc. (וְלָכֵן נִקְרְאוּ עֲשֶׂרֶת נְקוּדוֹת כו׳).

See there his explanation on the distinction between upper three and Ze’ir Anpin and Nukvah (יַעַיֵּין שָׁם בֵּיאוּרוֹ, הַהֶפְרֵשׁ שֶׁבֵּין הַג״ר לְזו״ן). Thus, it is clearly explained according to all we have said (הֲרֵי מְבוֹאָר כְּכָל מַה שֶׁאָמַרְנוּ). If so, how is it possible to say that at the time of the event of the Kings (וְאִם כֵּן, אֵיךְ יִתָּכֵן לוֹמַר, כִּי בִּזְמַן מִקְרֵה הַמְּלָכִים), each Partzuf was composed of ten Sefirot (הָיָה כָּל פַּרְצוּף כָּלוּל מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת), and each Sefirah composed of its A"B"Y"A (וְכָל סְפִירָה כְּלוּלָה מֵאבי״ע)? And further, in Sha‘ar Ma’amaré haRashbi, may peace be upon him, on Parashat Pekudei (וְעוֹד, בְּשַׁעַר מַאֲמָרֵי הָרַשְׁבִּ״י ע״ה פָּרָשַׁת פְּקוּדֵי), and likewise in Sha‘ar Ma’amaré Razal, in the explanation of the Midrash on Ruth (וְכֵן בְּשַׁעַר מַאֲמָרֵי רַז״ל, בְּפֵירוּשׁ מַאֲמַר מִדְרַשׁ רוּת), he wrote (כָּתַב): “And then those Seven Kings descended below into the World of Beri’ah” (וְאָז יָרְדוּ אוֹתָם הַז״מ לְמַטָּה בְּעוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה), “beneath the place of Malkhut of Atzilut” - see there (תַּחַת מְקוֹם מַלְכוּת דַּאֲצִילוּת עַיֵּין שָׁם).

Thus it is explained that the fall was in the generality of the World of Beri’ah (הֲרֵי מְבוֹאַר, כִּי הַנְּפִילָה הָיְתָה בִּכְלָלוּת עוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה), beneath the generality of the World of Atzilut (תַּחַת כְּלָלוּת עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), whose end is Malkhut of Atzilut (אֲשֶׁר סִיּוּמוֹ הוּא מַלְכוּת דַּאֲצִילוּת). And similarly it is explained in the book Mavo She’arim, second section, second part, chapter five (וְכֵן מְבוֹאָר בְּסֵפֶר מָבוֹא שְׁעָרִים ש״ב ח״ב פ״ה), and these are his words in brief (וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ בְּקִצּוּר): “We will explain there the emergence of the Seven Kings” (נְבָאֵר בוֹ יְצִיאַת הַז״מ), “where the Kelim [Vessels] descended, and where the lights remained” (הֵיכָן יָרְדוּ הַכֵּלִים, וְהֵיכָן נִשְׁאֲרוּ הָאוֹרוֹת). “Behold, at first emerged the light of Da‘at” (הִנֵּה בַּתְּחִלָּה יָצָא אוֹר הַדַּעַת), “and within it were included the other lights” (וּבוֹ כְּלוּלִים שְׁאָר הָאוֹרוֹת), “and it entered its Kli [Vessel]” (וְנִכְנַס בְּכֵלִי שֶׁלּוֹ), “and the Kli [Vessel] was broken” (וְנִשְׁבַּר הַכֵּלִי). “And it descended into the World of Beri’ah” (וְיָרַד בְּעוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה), “meaning: the Beri’ah that was destined to be” (ר״ל הָעָתִיד לִהְיוֹת בְּרִיאָה). “For the ten Nekudim were spread” (כִּי הֶעָשָׂר נְקוּדִים נִתְפַּשְּׁטוּ), “along the vertical stature of the World of Atzilut” (בְּקוֹמַת אוֹרֶךְ עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), “meaning: the Atzilut that would later be called by that name - that is, after the Tikkun” (ר״ל הָעָתִיד לְהִקָּרֵא אֲצִילוּת, שֶׁהוּא אַחַר הַתִּקּוּן). “And beneath the place of the spreading of the 10 Nekudah” (וְתַחַת מְקוֹם הִתְפַּשְּׁטוּת נְקוּדָּה הַיּ), “there afterward became the World of Beri’ah” (שָׁם הָיָה אַחַר כָּךְ עוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה), “and there fell the Kli [Vessel] of Da‘at” (וְשָׁם נָפַל הַכֵּלִי שֶׁל הַדַּעַת). “And the light of Da‘at also fell” (וְהָאוֹר שֶׁל הַדַּעַת נָפַל גַּם הוּא), “but it did not descend into Beri’ah” (אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא יָרַד בִּבְרִיאָה), “only into Malkhut of Atzilut” (רַק בְּמַלְכוּת דַּאֲצִילוּת), “which is the end of all Atzilut” (שֶׁהִיא סוֹף כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת), “for the light of Malkhut of Atzilut had not yet emerged to rule within its Kli [Vessel],” etc. - see there his explanation (כִּי ע֛֚דַ֚יִן לֹֽא יָצָא אוֹר הַמַלְכוּת דַּאֲצִילוּת לִמְלֹךְ בְּכֵלִי שֶׁלָּהּ כו׳ עַיֵּין שָׁם בֵּיאוּרוֹ).

Thus, it is explained how the fall was in the generality of the World of Beri’ah itself (הֲרֵי מְבוֹאַר, אֵיךְ הַנְּפִילָה הִיא בִּכְלָלוּת עוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה מַמָּשׁ), which begins its aspect beneath the end of the generality of the World of Atzilut (הַמַּתְחִיל בְּחִינָתוֹ תַּחַת סִיּוּם כְּלָלוּת עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת). For all ten Nekudot were spread along the vertical length of the World of Atzilut (כִּי כָּל הַי׳ נְקוּדוֹת נִתְפַּשְּׁטוּ בְּאֹרֶךְ עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), and beneath their end - which is the Malkhut of Atzilut (וְתַחַת סִיּוּמָם, שֶׁהִיא הַמַלְכוּת שֶׁל הָאֲצִילוּת), which is the ten points of the ten Nekudot (שֶׁהִיא הַנְּקוּדָה הַי׳ מֵהַי׳ נְקוּדוֹת) - there the World of Beri’ah begins (שָׁם מַתְחִיל עוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה). And there was the fall (וְשָׁם הָיְתָה הַנְּפִילָה), and not in the Beri’ah-Yetzirah-Asiyah of the Sefirah (וְלֹא בְּבִי״ע שֶׁל הַסְּפִירָה). And there in chapter 3, and in Etz Chayim, Sha‘ar Shevirat haKelim [Vessels], chapter 3, he wrote (וְשָׁם פ״ג, וּבְעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר שְׁבִירַת הַכֵּלִים פ״ג כָּתַב): “When the Kli [Vessel] of Da‘at was broken” (כִּי כְּשֶׁנִּשְׁבַּר כְּלִי הַדַּעַת), “it descended below into the World of Beri’ah” (יָרַד לְמַטָּה בְּעוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה), “meaning: into the place that was destined to later become the World of Beri’ah” (ר״ל בַּמָּקוֹם שֶׁהָיָה עָתִיד לִהְיוֹת אַחַר כָּךְ עוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה).

For the World of Beri’ah had not yet been created (כִּי הֲרֵי עֲדַיִן לֹא נִבְרָא עוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה), and its reality had not yet been revealed, etc. - see there (וְלֹא נִתְגַּלָּה מְצִיאוּתוֹ כו׳ - עַיֵּין שָׁם). And if according to his words, of blessed memory, that in the time of the occurrence of the Kings (וְאִם כְּדְבָרָיו ז״ל, שֶׁבִּזְמַן מִקְרֵה הַמְּלָכִים), each Partzuf, from among the specific Partzufim of A"B"Y"A (הָיָה כָּל פַּרְצוּף מִפְּרָטֵי פַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע), was composed of ten Sefirot (כָּלוּל מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת), and each Sefirah was composed of A"B"Y"A (וְכָל סְפִירָה כְּלוּלָה מֵאבי״ע). And when the light reached the boundary of Atzilut of that Sefirah (וּכְשֶׁהִגִּיעַ הָאוֹר לִגְבוּל הָאֲצִילוּת שֶׁל הַסְּפִירָה), the Kli [Vessel] was broken (נִשְׁבַּר הַכֵּלִי), and descended into the Beri’ah-Yetzirah-Asiyah of that Sefirah (וְיָרַד לְבִּי״ע שֶׁל אוֹתָהּ סְפִירָה).

If so, the difficulty cannot be avoided (אִם כֵּן, קָשֶׁה מִלִּי מִנָּע), for if the Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah of the Sefirah is not the location of the Worlds of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (שֶׁאִם בִּי״ע שֶׁל הַסְּפִירָה אֵינוֹ מְקוֹם עוֹלָמוֹת בִּי״ע), then it is difficult - how can the Rav, of blessed memory, say (אִם כֵּן קָשֶׁה, אֵיךְ אוֹמֵר הָרַב זַלָּה״ה), that the Kli [Vessel] fell into the place of the World of Beri’ah (שֶׁנָּפַל הַכֵּלִי לִמְקוֹם עוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה), meaning: into the place that would later become the World of Beri’ah (ר״ל לִמְקוֹם שֶׁעָתִיד אַחַר כָּךְ לִהְיוֹת עוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה)? And behold, the fall was not in the actual World of Beri’ah (וְהֲלֹא הַנְּפִילָה לֹא הָיְתָה בְּעוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה), but in the Beri’ah of the Sefirah itself (רַק בְּבְרִיאָה שֶׁל הַסְּפִירָה עַצְמָהּ), and this had already been revealed (אֲשֶׁר זֶה כְּבָר נִתְגַלָּה), for the Sefirah is comprised of A"B"Y"A (שֶׁהֲרֵי הַסְּפִירָה הִיא כְּלוּלָה מֵאבי״ע). And if the Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah of the Sefirah is truly the location of the actual Worlds of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (וְאִם בִּי״ע שֶׁל הַסְּפִירָה הוּא מְקוֹם עוֹלָמוֹת בִּי״ע מַמָּשׁ), as is compelled by his words of blessed memory (כְּמוֹ שֶׁמוּכְרָח בְּדְבָרָיו ז״ל), for he says that each of the ten Sefirot of all the Partzufim of A"B"Y"A (שֶׁהֲרֵי אוֹמֵר, שֶׁכָּל סְפִירָה מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכָל פַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע), enclothes the Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod of Adam Kadmon over the ten Sefirot of Asiyah (מַלְבֶּשֶׁת לְתנ״ה״י דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן ע״ס הָעֲשִׂיָּה) Still it is difficult, for if so (עֲדַיִן קָשֶׁה, דְּאִם כֵּן), then the place of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah has already been created and revealed (כְּבָר נִבְרָא וְנִתְגַלָּה מְקוֹם בִּי״ע), for behold the shattering occurred also in the Atzilut of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (שֶׁהֲרֵי הַשְּׁבִירָה הָיְתָה גַּם כֵּן בַּאֲצִילוּת דְּבִי״ע), and the fall reached into the Beri’ah, Yetzirah, Asiyah of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, Asiyah (וְנָפַל לְבִּי״ע דְּבִי״ע).

Yet the Rav, of blessed memory, said that in the time of the event of the Kings (וְהָרַב ז״ל אָמַר, שֶׁעֲדַיִין בִּזְמַן מִקְרֵה הַמְּלָכִים), the place of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah had not yet been created or revealed (לֹא נִבְרָא, וְלֹא נִתְגַלָּה מְקוֹם בִּי״ע), only that it would be revealed afterward (רַק שֶׁעָתִיד לְהִתְגַלּוֹת אַחַר כָּךְ). And further, it is difficult (וְעוֹד קָשֶׁה), for behold, it is explained in the above texts (כִּי הֲרֵי מְבוֹאָר בַלְּשׁוֹנוֹת הַנִּ״ל), that all the ten Nekudot were not spread (שֶׁכָּל הַי׳ נְקוּדוֹת לֹא נִתְפַּשְּׁטוּ), except along the vertical length of the boundary of the World of Atzilut (רַק אֹרֶךְ גְּבוּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת). If so, how could he, of blessed memory, say (וְאִם כֵּן, הֵיכִי קָאמַר הוּא זַלָּה״ה), that each Sefirah was enclothing the Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod of Adam Kadmon over the ten Sefirot of Asiyah? (שֶׁכָּל סְפִירָה הָיְתָה מַלְבֶּשֶׁת לְתנ״ה״י דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן ע״ס הָעֲשִׂיָּה)

And furthermore, I am astonished by him, in my humble opinion (וְעוֹד תְּמִיהָ אֲנִי עָלָיו לְעַנְיַת דַּעְתִּי), for this rule - that a Partzuf is not called a Partzuf (כִּי זֶה הַכְּלָל, שֶׁאֵין הַפַּרְצוּף נִקְרָא פַּרְצוּף), until it is composed of ten Sefirot (עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה כָּלוּל מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת), and each Sefirah is comprised of its A"B"Y"A (אֲשֶׁר כָּל סְפִירָה כְּלוּלָה מֵאבי״ע שֶׁבָּהּ) - These A"B"Y"A that are spoken of are not the actual Worlds of A"B"Y"A (אֵין אבי״ע אֵלוּ הָאֲמוּרִים, שֶׁהֵם עוֹלָמוֹת אבי״ע), but rather, as explained there in that very chapter of Sha‘ar 30 (רַק כְּמְבוֹאָר שָׁם בְּאוֹתוֹ פֶרֶק עַצְמוֹ דְּשַׁעַר ל׳): That the Netzach, Hod, Yesod of the Partzuf are called the Asiyah of the Partzuf (כִּי הַנּה״י שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף, נִקְרָא עֲשִׂיָּה שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף), and the Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet of the Partzuf are called the Yetzirah of the Partzuf (וְהַחג״ת שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף, נִקְרָא יְצִירָה שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף), and the Keter, Chokhmah, Binah, Da’at of the Partzuf are called the Beri’ah and Atzilut of the Partzuf (וְהַכחב״ד שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף, נִקְרָא בְּרִיאָה וַאֲצִילוּת שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף).

And even these - each one is itself comprised of A"B"Y"A (וְגַם אֵלּוּ כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד הוּא כָּלוּל מֵאבי״ע), for the Netzach, Hod, Yesod of the Netzach, Hod, Yesod of the Partzuf are called the Asiyah of the Asiyah of the Partzuf (כִּי הַנּה״י דְּנה״י שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף, נִקְרָא עֲשִׂיָּה דְּעֲשִׂיָּה שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף), and the Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet of the Netzach, Hod, Yesod are called the Yetzirah of the Asiyah (וְהַחג״ת דְּנה״י, נִקְרָא יְצִירָה דְּעֲשִׂיָּה), and the Keter, Chokhmah, Binah, Da’at of the Netzach, Hod, Yesod are called the Beri’ah and Atzilut of the Asiyah of the Partzuf (וְהַכחב״ד דְּנה״י, נִקְרָא בְּרִיאָה וַאֲצִילוּת דְּעֲשִׂיָּה שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף). And in the totality of it, it is called the Asiyah of the Partzuf (וּבִכְלָלוּתוֹ, נִקְרָא עֲשִׂיָּה שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף). And likewise, in the Chesed, Gevurah, and Tiferet of the Partzuf (וְכֵן בַּחֶסֶד גְּבוּרָה תִּפְאֶרֶת שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף), the Netzach, Hod, and Yesod of the Chesed, Gevurah, and Tiferet are called the Asiyah of the Yetzirah of the Partzuf (הַנּצַח הוֹד יְסוֹד דְּחֶסֶד גְּבוּרָה תִּפְאֶרֶת, נִקְרָא עֲשִׂיָּה דְּיְצִירָה שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף), the Chesed, Gevurah, and Tiferet of the Chesed, Gevurah, and Tiferet are called the Yetzirah of the Yetzirah (וְהַחֶסֶד גְּבוּרָה תִּפְאֶרֶת דְּחֶסֶד גְּבוּרָה תִּפְאֶרֶת, נִקְרָא יְצִירָה דְּיְצִירָה), and the Keter, Chokhmah, Binah, and Da’at of the Chesed, Gevurah, and Tiferet are called the Beri’ah and Atzilut of the Yetzirah of the Partzuf (וְהַכֶּתֶר חָכְמָה בִּינָה דַּעַת דְּחֶסֶד גְּבוּרָה תִּפְאֶרֶת, נִקְרָא בְּרִיאָה וַאֲצִילוּת דְּיְצִירָה שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף). And in its totality, it is called the Yetzirah of the Partzuf (וּבִכְלָלוּתוֹ, נִקְרָא יְצִירָה שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף). And in this same manner applies to the Keter, Chokhmah, Binah, and Da’at of the Partzuf (וְעַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה בַּכֶּתֶר חָכְמָה בִּינָה דַּעַת שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף), and in its totality, it is called the Beri’ah and Atzilut of the Partzuf (וּבִכְלָלוּתוֹ, נִקְרָא בְּרִיאָה וַאֲצִילוּת שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף).

And when the Partzuf is complete in all of these aspects (וּבִהְיוֹת הַפַּרְצוּף שָׁלֵם בְּכָל אֵלּוּ הַבְּחִינוֹת), then it is called a Partzuf (אָז נִקְרָא פַּרְצוּף), which includes ten Sefirot (שֶׁהוּא כוֹלֵל י׳ סְפִירוֹת), each Sefirah comprised of its own A"B"Y"A (אֲשֶׁר כָּל סְפִירָה כְּלוּלָה מֵאבי״ע שֶׁבָּהּ). As is explained at length in all those chapters as well, in Sha‘ar 30 (כְּמְבוֹאָר שָׁם בְּאֹרֶךְ בְּכָל אוֹתָם הַפְּרָקִים גַּם כֵּן דְּשַׁעַר ל׳). And all this subdivision within the Partzuf (וְכָל זֶה הַפְרָטוּת שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף), all of it is within the boundary of the upper, complete World of Atzilut (הַכֹּל הוּא בִּגְבוּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת הַגָּמוּר הָעֶלְיוֹן), which is above the boundary of the complete lower Worlds of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (מִגְּבוּל עוֹלָמוֹת בִּי״ע הַגְּמוּרִים הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים לְמַטָּה מִמֶּנּוּ), like the Partzuf of Ze’ir Anpin or the Nukvah of Atzilut (כְּמוֹ פַּרְצוּף זְעֵיר אַנְפִּין אוֹ נוּקְבָא דַּאֲצִילוּת), whose place is within the boundary of Atzilut specifically (אֲשֶׁר מְקוֹמָם הוּא בִּגְבוּל הָאֲצִילוּת דַּוְקָא), above Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (לְמַעְלָה מִבִּי״ע), and not that within the Partzuf or within the Sefirah there are the actual Worlds of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (וְלֹא שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף אוֹ בַּסְּפִירָה יֵשׁ עוֹלָמוֹת אבי״ע), only that the Partzuf of Atzilut (רַק שֶׁהַפַּרְצוּף דַּאֲצִילוּת), which stands within the boundary of Atzilut specifically (הָעוֹמֵד בִּגְבוּל הָאֲצִילוּת דַּוְקָא), includes within itself A"B"Y"A (הוּא כוֹלֵל אבי״ע), meaning: Keter, Chokhmah, Binah, Da’at; Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet; Netzach, Hod, Yesod - when they are complete (שֶׁהֵם כֶּתֶר חָכְמָה בִּינָה דַּעַת, חֶסֶד גְּבוּרָה תִּפְאֶרֶת, נֵצַח הוֹד יְסוֹד בִּהְיוֹתָם שְׁלֵמִים), as stated above (כְּנַזְכָּ״ל).

And in this manner are the Partzufim of Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah (וְעַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה פַּרְצוּפֵי בִּרִיאָה יְצִירָה עֲשִׂיָּה), which are beneath the World of Atzilut (אֲשֶׁר לְמַטָּה מֵעֲולַם הָאֲצִילוּת), each and every Partzuf (כָּל פַּרְצוּף וּפַרְצוּף), is composed of its own A"B"Y"A (הוּא כָּלוּל מֵאבי״ע שֶׁלּוֹ), in the same manner as stated (עַל דֶּרֶךְ הָאֲמוּר). And in Sha‘ar Ḥitzoniyut and Pnimiyut, second Derush, he wrote (וּבְשַׁעַר חִיצוֹנִיּוּת וּפְנִימִיּוּת דְּרוּשׁ ב׳ כָּתַב): “And behold, it is found that all three Kelim [Vessels] of Ḥitzoniyut are Names of Elohim,” etc. (וְהִנֵּה נִמְצָא, כִּי כָּל ג׳ כֵּלִים דְּחִיצוֹנִיּוּת, הֵם שֵׁמוֹת דְּאֱלֹקִים כו׳).

Also know (גַּם דַּע), that the three Kelim [Vessels] of the external aspect (כִּי ג׳ כֵּלִים דְּחִיצוֹנִיּוּת), they correspond to Beri’ah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah within Ze’ir Anpin (הֵם כְּנֶגֶד בִּי"ע שֶׁבְּז״א), therefore corresponding to them are three Kelim [Vessels] (לְכָךְ כְּנֶגְדָּם ג׳ כֵּלִים), and within them are Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah (וּבְתוֹכָם נֶר״ן), which are Malkhut, Tiferet, and Binah (שֶׁהֵם מַלְכוּת תִּפְאֶרֶת בִּינָה), which are B”Y”A (שֶׁהֵם בִּי״ע), which correspond to the spirituality of the three worlds of B”Y”A (שֶׁהֵם כְּנֶגֶד רוּחָנִיּוּת ג׳ עוֹלָמוֹת בִּי״ע). And the three Kelim [Vessels] of the internal aspect (וּג׳ כֵּלִים דְּפְנִימִיּוּת), they correspond to Atzilut of Ze’ir Anpin (הֵם כְּנֶגֶד אֲצִילוּת דְּז״א), for also in it there are three aspects (שֶׁגַּם בּוֹ יֵשׁ ג׳ בְּחִינוֹת), which are Binah, Tiferet, Malkhut within it (שֶׁהֵם בִּינָה תִּפְאֶרֶת מַלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ). And within it are Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah in the level of Atzilut itself (וּבְתוֹכוֹ נֶר״ן בִּבְחִינַת הָאֲצִילוּת עַצְמוֹ), and they are ten Havayot with vowels, etc. (וְהֵם עֶשֶׂר הויו״ת הַמְנֻקָּדוֹת כו׳). And it is found (וְנִמְצָא), that also in Ze’ir Anpin of Atzilut itself (כִּי גַּם בְּז״א דְּאֲצִילוּת עַצְמוֹ), there is B”Y”A corresponding to the lower B”Y”A (יֵשׁ בּוֹ בִּי״ע כְּנֶגֶד בִּי״ע הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים), and there is the inner B”Y”A corresponding to the B”Y”A of Atzilut itself (וְיֵשׁ בּוֹ פְּנִימִיּוּת בִּי״ע כְּנֶגֶד בִּי״ע דְּאֲצִילוּת עַצְמוֹ), even though all these six Kelim [Vessels] are Atzilut (עִם הֱיוֹת כָּל ו׳ כֵּלִים אֵלּוּ הֵם אֲצִילוּת), only that the three external ones are in the secret of the external B”Y”A of Atzilut (אֶלָּא שֶׁהֵם ג׳ חִיצוֹנִיִּים בְּסוֹד בִּי״ע חִיצוֹנִיּוּת דְּאֲצִילוּת), and the three internal ones are in the secret of the inner B”Y”A of Atzilut (וְהַג׳ פְּנִימִיִּים בְּסוֹד בִּי״ע דְּפְנִימִיּוּת דְּאֲצִילוּת).

Therefore you will see what is written in Sha‘ar haShemot (וְעַל כֵּן תִּרְאֶה מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בְּשַׁעַר הַשֵּׁמוֹת), that the three Kelim [Vessels] of the fully actualized lower B”Y”A (כִּי ג׳ כֵּלִים שֶׁל בִּי״ע גְּמוּרִים תַּחְתּוֹנִים), are all Names of Elohim (הֵם שֵׁמוֹת אֱלֹהִים כֻּלָּם), and it is in the manner that there is in the external B”Y”A of Ze’ir Anpin of Atzilut (וְהוּא עַל דֶּרֶךְ שֶׁיֵּשׁ בִּבִּי״ע דְּחִיצוֹנִיּוּת דְּז״א דְּאֲצִילוּת), and within them are enclothed the three inner Kelim [Vessels] of Atzilut of Havayot (וּבְתוֹכָם מִתְלַבְּשִׁים הַג׳ כֵּלִים פְּנִימִיִּים דְּאֲצִילוּת שֶׁל הויו״ת), and they become actual Neshamah for them (וְנַעֲשִׂים נְשָׁמָה מַמָּשׁ לָהֶם), in the manner of what exists here in Atzilut itself (עַל דֶּרֶךְ מַה שֶּׁהוּא פֹּה בְּאֲצִילוּת עַצְמוֹ). However, when these three inner Kelim [Vessels] are in Atzilut (אֲכֵן בִּהְיוֹת ג׳ כֵּלִים הַפְּנִימִיִּים הָאֵלֶּה בְּאֲצִילוּת), there are within them true Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah, as mentioned (יֵשׁ בְּתוֹכָם נֶר״ן אֲמִתִּיִּים כַּנִּזְכָּר כו׳), see there his explanation (עַיֵּין שָׁם בֵּיאוּרוֹ).

Behold, it is explained (הֲרֵי מְבוֹאָר), what are the aspects of A״B״Y״A within a Partzuf (מַה הֵם בְּחִינוֹת אבי״ע שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף), which are in the aspects of the external and internal Kelim [Vessels] (שֶׁהוּא בִּבְחִינַת כֵּלִים הַחִיצוֹנִיִּים וְהַפְּנִימִיִּים). And also that B״Y״A are the Binah, Ze’ir Anpin, and Malkhut within the Partzuf (וְגַם שֶׁבִּי״ע, הֵם הַבִּינָה וְהַז״א וְהַמַלְכוּת שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף), and Atzilut is the vowelized Havayot (וְהָאֲצִילוּת הוּא הַוְיֹוֹת הַמְנֻקָּדוֹת), which is the Chokhmah of the Partzuf (שֶׁהוּא הַחָכְמָה שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף). As is known, that Nekudot are from Chokhmah (כַּנּוֹדָע, כִּי נְקוּדוֹת מֵחָכְמָה), and this is itself what is written in Sha‘ar 30 mentioned above (וְהוּא עַצְמוֹ מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בְּשַׁעַר לִי הַנ״ל). As is known (כַּנּוֹדָע), that the aspect of Malkhut and the Netzach, Hod, Yesod are one single aspect (כִּי בְּחִינַת הַמַלְכוּת וְהַנֶּהִ״י, הֵם בְּחִינָה אַחַת), and it is the aspect of Asiyah (וְהוּא בְּחִינַת עֲשִׂיָּה). And the external Kli [Vessel] of the Partzuf and the Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet are the aspect of Ze’ir Anpin (וְכְלִי הַחִיצוֹן שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף וְהַחַג״ת, הוּא בְּחִינַת ז״א), and it is Yetzirah (וְהוּא הַיְצִירָה). And the middle Kli [Vessel] of the Partzuf and the Binah is Beri’ah (וְכְלִי אֶמְצָעִי שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף וְהַבִּינָה, הִיא הַבְּרִיאָה).

And the inner Kli [Vessel] of the Partzuf, and the Chokhmah and Keter, are the Atzilut within the Partzuf (וְכְלִי הַפְּנִימִי שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף וְהַחָכְמָה וְהַכֶּתֶר, הֵם הָאֲצִילוּת שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף). And it is also explained (וְגַם מְבוֹאָר), that all this is in the complete and upper Atzilut itself (כִּי כָּל זֶה הוּא בָּאֲצִילוּת עַצְמוֹ הַגָּמוּר הָעֶלְיוֹן), in contrast to the complete and lower B״Y״A (מִבִּי״ע הַגְּמוּרִים הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים). And certainly in the same manner (וּבוַדַּאי כִּי עַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה הוּא), it is so in the Partzufim of B״Y״A themselves (בִּפַּרְצוּפֵי בִּי״ע עַצְמָן), for each one is composed of A״B״Y״A within it (כִּי כָּל אֶחָד כָּלוּל מֵאבי״ע שֶׁבּוֹ), in this manner (עַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה). As it is written there at the end of the discourse (וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב שָׁם בְּסוֹף הַדְּרוּשׁ), and likewise every Sefirah and Sefirah is comprised of A״B״Y״A (וְכֵן כָּל סְפִירָה וּסְפִירָה הִיא כְּלוּלָה מֵאבי״ע), as it is written there also at the end of the aforementioned discourse (כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב שָׁם גַּם כֵּן בְּסוֹף הַדְּרוּשׁ הַנִּזְכָּר), for behold, every Sefirah and Sefirah has within it three Kelim [Vessels] and an interior, which are A״B״Y״A (כִּי הֲרֵי כָּל סְפִירָה וּסְפִירָה יֵשׁ בָּהּ ג׳ כֵּלִים וּפְנִימִיּוּת, שֶׁהֵם אבי״ע). And since we have explained what are the aspects of A״B״Y״A within every Partzuf (וְכֵיוָן שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ מַה הֵם בְּחִינוֹת הָאבי״ע שֶׁבְּכָל פַּרְצוּף), and within every Sefirah (וּשְׁבְּכָל סְפִירָה).

If so (אִם כֵּן), in the time of the Kings (בִּזְמַן הַמְּלָכִים), which emerged only as aspects of Malkhuyot (אֲשֶׁר לֹא יָצְאוּ רַק בְּחִינוֹת הַמַלְכוּיוֹת), and Kelim [Vessels] of Nefesh (וּכֵלִים דְּנֶפֶשׁ), how is it possible to say (אֵיךְ יִתָּכֵן לוֹמַר) that at that time (שֶׁבְּאוֹתוֹ הַזְּמַן), the Partzufim were each composed of ten Sefirot (הָיוּ הַפַּרְצוּפִים כָּל אֶחָד כָּלוּל מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת), and that within each Sefirah was included A״B״Y״A (וּשֶׁבְּכָל סְפִירָה מֵהֶם כְּלוּלָה מֵאבי״ע)? And also according to what was said above (וְגַם לְפִי מַה שֶּׁנֶּאֱמַר לְעֵיל), that every aspect of A״B״Y״A of a Partzuf (שֶׁכָּל בְּחִינַת הָאבי״ע שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף), is only within the boundary of that world (אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא בִּגְבוּל אוֹתוֹ הָעוֹלָם), meaning (דְּהַיְנוּ): the Partzufim of Atzilut (פַּרְצוּפֵי הָאֲצִילוּת), their A״B״Y״A (הָאבי״ע שֶׁלָּהֶם), is within the boundary of the world of Atzilut itself (הוּא בִּגְבוּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת עַצְמוֹ), which is above B״Y״A (הָעֶלְיוֹן מִבִּי״ע); and the Partzufim of Beri’ah (וּפַרְצוּפֵי הַבְּרִיאָה), their A״B״Y״A (הָאבי״ע שֶׁלָּהֶם), is within the boundary of the world of Beri’ah (הוּא בִּגְבוּל עוֹלַם הַבְּרִיאָה), which is below Atzilut (שֶׁהוּא לְמַטָּה מֵהָאֲצִילוּת), and likewise in Yetzirah and Asiyah (וְעַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה בִּיְצִירָה וַעֲשִׂיָּה).

If so (אִם כֵּן), how is it possible to say (אֵיךְ אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר) that each Sefirah enclothes from the navel of Adam Kadmon (שֶׁכָּל סְפִירָה מַלְבֶּשֶׁת מִטַּבּוּרָא דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן), to the ten Sefirot of the world of Asiyah (עַד עֶשֶׂר סְפִירוֹת עוֹלַם הָעֲשִׂיָּה)? For behold, even if we say (כִּי הֲרֵי אַף אִם נֹאמַר), that at that time each Sefirah was composed of A״B״Y״A (שֶׁבְּאוֹתוֹ הַזְּמַן כָּל סְפִירָה, הָיְתָה כְּלוּלָה מֵאבי״ע), this A״B״Y״A is only within the boundary of that world (זֶה הָאבי״ע אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא בִּגְבוּל אוֹתוֹ הָעוֹלָם), meaning (דְּהַיְנוּ), even within the boundary of the world of Atzilut (דַּאֲפִילוּ בִּגְבוּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), meaning in the thickness of that world itself (דְּהַיְנוּ בְּעֹבִי דְּאוֹתוֹ הָעוֹלָם), and within the boundary of that Sefirah of that world (וּבִגְבוּל אוֹתָהּ הַסְּפִירָה שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ הָעוֹלָם), and it is not in the vertical length of the lower worlds of B״Y״A (וְאֵינוֹ בְּאֹרֶךְ עוֹלָמוֹת בִּי״ע הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים), in order that it should enclothe the ten Sefirot of Asiyah (כְּדֵי שֶׁתְּלַבֵּשׁ עֶשֶׂר סְפִירוֹת הָעֲשִׂיָּה). And all the more so (וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן) there is no necessity at all from here (שֶׁאֵין מִכָּאן הֶכְרֵחַ כְּלָל), that the ten Sefirot of the specific Partzuf (שֶׁהָיוּ סְפִירוֹת שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף הַפְּרָטִי), are ten Partzufim enclothing one another equally (הֵם עֲשָׂרָה פַּרְצוּפִים מַלְבִּישִׁים זֶה לָזֶה בְּשָׁוֶה), from the navel of Adam Kadmon to the ten Sefirot of Asiyah (מִטַּבּוּרָא דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן עַד עֶשֶׂר סְפִירוֹת הָעֲשִׂיָּה).

For the A״B״Y״A of the Partzuf is only within the boundary of that world (כִּי הָאבי״ע שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף, אֵינוֹ רַק בִּגְבוּל אוֹתוֹ הָעוֹלָם), and likewise the A״B״Y״A of the Sefirah is within the boundary of that Sefirah (וְכֵן אבי״ע שֶׁל הַסְּפִירָה, הוּא בִּגְבוּל אוֹתָהּ סְפִירָה), and this is the precision of the wording of the Rav, of blessed memory (אֲשֶׁר זֶה הוּא דִּקְדּוּק שֶׁל לְשׁוֹן הָרַב ז״ל), who said: “until the Sefirah becomes complete in all the parts of A״B״Y״A within it” (שֶׁאָמַר עַד שֶׁתִּהְיֶה הַסְּפִירָה שְׁלֵמָה, בְּכָל חַלְקֵי אבי״ע שֶׁבָּהּ), and did not say “in all the parts of A״B״Y״A” in general (וְלֹא אָמַר בְּכָל חַלְקֵי אבי״ע סְתָם). And if so (וְאִם כֵּן), when the light reaches the boundary of Atzilut of the Sefirah (כַּאֲשֶׁר בְּהַגִּיעַ הָאוֹר בִּגְבוּל הָאֲצִילוּת שֶׁל הַסְּפִירָה), the Kli [Vessel] is broken (נִשְׁבַּר הַכֵּלִי), and it falls into the B”Y”A of that Sefirah (וְנָפַל לְבִי״ע שֶׁל אוֹתָהּ הַסְּפִירָה).

Behold, these B”Y”A of the Sefirah (הֲרֵי בִּי״ע אֵלוּ שֶׁל הַסְּפִירָה), are within the boundary of Atzilut itself (הוּא בִּגְבוּל הָאֲצִילוּת עַצְמוֹ), and if so, this is not called death nor Shevirah [Breaking] (וְאִם כֵּן, אֵין זֶה נִקְרָא לֹא מִיתָה וְלֹא שְׁבִירָה), for behold, it remains standing within the boundary of that very world (שֶׁהֲרֵי בִּגְבוּל אוֹתוֹ הָעוֹלָם עַצְמוֹ הוּא עוֹמֵד), and it did not pass into another world (וְלֹא הָלַךְ לְעוֹלָם אַחֵר). For even though it fell from its place to a lower place (כִּי אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנָּפַל מִמְּקוֹמוֹ לְמָקוֹם תַּחְתּוֹן), this is not called death (אֵין זֶה נִקְרָא מִיתָה), since it still remains within the boundary of that world (כֵּיוָן שֶׁעֲדַיִן עוֹמֵד בִּגְבוּל אוֹתוֹ הָעוֹלָם), similar to the Achora’im of the Netzach, Hod, Yesod of Keter (דוּגְמַת אֲחוֹרֵי הַנֶּהִ״י דְּכֶתֶר), and the Achora’im of Chokhmah and Binah (וְהָאֲחוֹרַיִים דְּחָכְמָה וּבִינָה), of which it is not said that there is death (שֶׁלֹּא נֶאֱמַר בָּהֶם מִיתָה), only blemish and nullification (רַק פְּגָם וּבִטּוּל), since they remain within the boundary of the world of Atzilut (מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנִּשְׁאֲרוּ בִּגְבוּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת). For even according to his words of blessed memory (כִּי אֲפִלּוּ לְפִי דְּבָרָיו ז״ל), that the A״B״Y״A of the Partzuf or of the Sefirah (כִּי הָאבי״ע שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף אוֹ שֶׁל הַסְּפִירָה), are in the vertical length of the ten Sefirot of Asiyah (הֵם בְּאֹרֶךְ עֶשֶׂר סְפִירוֹת הָעֲשִׂיָּה), it is still difficult (עֲדַיִן קָשֶׁה זֶה): for when the Kli [Vessel] falls into the B”Y”A of that Sefirah (כִּי בְּנְפוֹל הַכֵּלִי לְבִי״ע דְּאוֹתָהּ הַסְּפִירָה), why should it be called death (לָמָּה יִקָּרֵא מִיתָה), since this B”Y”A is from the essence of that same world (כֵּיוָן שֶׁבִּי״ע הַזֶּה, הוּא מִמַּהוּת אוֹתוֹ הָעוֹלָם), and from the essence of that Sefirah (וּמִמַּהוּת אוֹתָהּ סְפִירָה), like the case of the Seven Kings (כְּמוֹ ז״מ). For when the light reaches the boundary of Atzilut, of the A״B״Y״A of the Sefirah of Chesed of Ze’ir Anpin (כִּי בְּהַגִּיעַ הָאוֹר לִגְבוּל הָאֲצִילוּת דְּאבי״ע דְּסְפִירַת הַחֶסֶד דְּז״א), the Kli [Vessel] is broken (נִשְׁבַּר הַכֵּלִי), and falls to the B”Y”A of the Chesed of Ze’ir Anpin of Atzilut (וְנָפַל לְבִי״ע דְּחֶסֶד דְּז״א דְּאֲצִילוּת). Behold, this B”Y”A is from Chesed of Ze’ir Anpin of Atzilut (הֲרֵי זֶה הַבִּי״ע, הוּא מֵחֶסֶד דְּז״א דְּאֲצִילוּת), which is from the aspect of Atzilut (שֶׁהוּא מִבְּחִינַת אֲצִילוּת), and from the aspect of Chesed of Atzilut (וּמִבְּחִינַת חֶסֶד דְּאֲצִילוּת), that all of it is from the essence of the world of Atzilut (שֶׁהַכֹּל הוּא מֵהוּת עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), from which these B”Y”A come forth (שֶׁמִּמֶּנּוּ הֵם אֵלּוּ הַבִּי״ע). And if so, why should it be called death (וְאִם כֵּן, לָמָּה יִקָּרֵא מִיתָה)?

For behold, it fell only to the lowermost of that very world, from its essence (כִּי הֲרֵי לֹא נָפַל כִּי אִם לְתַחְתִּיּוּת אוֹתוֹ הָעוֹלָם עַצְמוֹ מִמַּהוּתוֹ), and did not fall to another world that is not from its essence (וְלֹא נָפַל לְעוֹלָם אַחֵר שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִמַּהוּתוֹ), in order that it be called death (כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּקָּרֵא מִיתָה). Rather, certainly what is called “death” (אֶלָּא וַדַּאי כִּי מַה שֶּׁנִּקְרָא מִיתָה), is because the fall is into the complete lower B”Y”A (הוּא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַנְּפִילָה הִיא בִּבִּי״ע הַגְּמוּרִים הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים), which is a completely different world in essence (שֶׁהוּא עוֹלָם אַחֵר מַמָּשׁ בְּעֶצֶם), that is not from the essence of that Kli [Vessel] that fell (שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִמַּהוּת אוֹתוֹ הַכֵּלִי שֶׁנָּפַל), and not from the essence of the world from which it fell (וְלֹא מִמַּהוּת הָעוֹלָם שֶׁנָּפַל מִמֶּנּוּ), and the fall is not into the B”Y”A of that Sefirah (וְאֵין הַנְּפִילָה בִּבִּי״ע שֶׁל אוֹתָהּ סְפִירָה), which is from its own essence and from the essence of its world (שֶׁהִיא מִמַּהוּתָהּ וּמִמַּהוּת הָעוֹלָם שֶׁלָּהּ), for this is not called death (כִּי אֵין זֶה נִקְרָא מִיתָה), for the tail of a lion is a lion (כִּי זַנְבָּא דְאַרְיֵי, אַרְיֵה הוּא). Rather, the fall is into the complete lower B”Y”A (אֶלָּא הַנְּפִילָה בִּבִּי״ע הַגְּמוּרִים הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים), in accordance with the plain meaning of the expressions of the discourses of the Rav, may his memory be a blessing (כְּפְשָׁטוּת לְשׁוֹנוֹת דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב זלה״ה). And further (וְעוֹד), how can we say (כִּי אֵיךְ נוּכַל לוֹמַר), that before the Tikkun in the world of Nekudim (כִּי קֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן בְּעוֹלַם הַנְּקוּדִים), the Partzufim and the Sefirot were enclothing one another (הָיוּ הַפַּרְצוּפִים וְהַסְּפִירוֹת מַלְבִּישִׁים זֶה לָזֶה)? For it is simple and clear (כִּי פָּשׁוּט וּבָרוּר הוּא), in every place in the discourses of the Rav, may his memory be a blessing (בְּכָל מָקוֹם בִּדְרוּשֵׁי הָרַב זלה״ה), that then they were called Reshut haRabim( “The domain of separation” ) p1-5(שֶׁאָז נִקְרְאוּ רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים), for each Sefirah was separate from its companion (כִּי כָּל סְפִירָה נִפְרֶדֶת מֵחֲבֶרְתָּהּ), and they were not bound one to another (וְלֹא הָיוּ נִקְשָׁרוֹת זוֹ בָּזוֹ), and therefore they were broken (וְלָכֵן נִשְׁבְּרוּ), in the secret of the parable of the reeds (בְּסוֹד מָשָׁל הַקָּנִים), “and their heart was divided - now they shall be guilty” (וְחָלֵק לִבָּם עַתָּה יֶאְשָׁמוּ).

And these are his words (וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ), in Etz Chayim, Gate of the Tikkun, chapter 5 (בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר הַתִּקּוּן פ״ה): At first (תְּחִלָּה), there were ten Sefirot (הָיוּ י׳ סְפִירוֹת), encompassing the entire world of Atzilut (הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), essence and Kelim [Vessels] (עַצְמוּת וּכֵלִים), only the essence was whole (אֶלָּא שֶׁהָעַצְמוּת הָיָה שָׁלֵם), and the Kelim [Vessels] were small (וְהַכֵּלִים הָיוּ קְטַנִּים), and therefore they died (וְלָכֵן מֵתוּ). Explanation (פֵּירוּשׁ): the Kli [Vessel] of the Nekudah of Atik (כְּלִי נְקֻדַּת עַתִּיק), was half of the Keter of Atik until its navel (הָיָה חֲצִי כֶּתֶר דְּעַתִּיק עַד הַטַּבּוּר שֶׁלוֹ). And the Kli [Vessel] of the Nekudah of Arich (וּכְלִי נְקֻדַּת אֲרִיךְ), was the lower half of the Keter alone (הָיָה חֲצִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן שֶׁל כֶּתֶר לְבַד), and within it were included all ten Sefirot (וּבוֹ נִכְלָלִים כָּל י׳ סְפִירוֹת), and likewise in Atik (וְכֵן בְּעַתִּיק). And the Kli [Vessel] of Abba (וּכְלִי אַבָּא), was Chokhmah alone (הָיָה חָכְמָה לְבַד), and within it were included all ten Sefirot of his (וּבוֹ כְּלוּלִים כָּל י׳ סְפִירוֹת שֶׁלוֹ). And the Kli [Vessel] of Imma (וּכְלִי אִמָּא), was Binah alone (הָיָה בִּינָה לְבַד), and within it were included all ten Sefirot of hers (וּבוֹ כְּלוּלִים כָּל י׳ סְפִירוֹת שֶׁלָּהּ). And the Kli [Vessel] of Ze’ir Anpin (וּכְלִי זו״ן), was seven Kelim [Vessels] (הָיָה ז׳ כֵּלִים): the first from Chesed alone (הָא׳ מֵחֶסֶד לְבַד), the second from Gevurah alone (הַב׳ מִגְּבוּרָה לְבַד), the third from Tiferet alone (הַג׳ מִתִּפְאֶרֶת לְבַד), the fourth from Netzach alone (הַד׳ מִנֵּצַח לְבַד), the fifth from Hod alone (הֶ׳ מֵהוֹד לְבַד), the sixth from Yesod alone (הַו׳ מִיסוֹד לְבַד), the seventh from Malkhut alone (הַז׳ מִמַלְכוּת לְבַד), and all ten Sefirot were included within them (וְכָל י׳ סְפִירוֹת שֶׁלוֹ כְּלוּלִים בָּהֶם). And the Kli [Vessel] of Malkhut (וְכְלִי הַמַלְכוּת), was from the actual Malkhut within her (הָיָה מֵהַמַלְכוּת מַמָּשׁ שֶׁבָּהּ), and all ten Sefirot within her were included in her (וְכָל י׳ סְפִירוֹת שֶׁבָּהּ כְּלוּלִים בָּהּ). And another distinction was among them before the Tikkun (וְעוֹד שִׁנּוּי אַחֵר הָיָה בָּהֶם קֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן): that each one was above the other (כִּי כָּל אַחַת זוֹ לְמַעְלָה מִזּוֹ), and this one was not enclothed in that one at all (וְאֵין זוֹ מִתְלַבֶּשֶׁת בְּזוֹ כְּלָל). And thus it is found (וְאָז נִמְצָא), that all was called one single Partzuf only (שֶׁהַכֹּל נִקְרָא פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד לְבַד), and also without the enclothing of any Sefirah within its companion (וְגַם בְּלִי הִתְלַבְּשׁוּת שׁוּם סְפִירָה בַּחֲבֶרְתָּהּ), and its stature was (וְהָיְתָה שִׁעוּר קוֹמָתוֹ), exactly as it is now (כְּמוֹ שֶׁהוּא עַתָּה מַמָּשׁ), the entire length of Atzilut (כָּל אֹרֶךְ הָאֲצִילוּת). End of quote (ע״כ).

And likewise in the book Mavo She'arim, Second Gate, Section Three, chapter seven (וְכֵן בְּסֵפֶר מְבוֹא שְׁעָרִים ש״ב ח״ג פ״ז כָּתַב), that before the Tikkun (כִּי קֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן), the ten Sefirot (הָיוּ הַי׳ סְפִירוֹת), each was in its own place (כָּל אַחַת בִּמְקוֹמָהּ), one above the other (זוֹ לְמַעְלָה מִזּוֹ), and the one did not enter into the boundary of its companion beneath it (וְאֵין הָאֶחָת נִכְנֶסֶת בִּגְבוּל חֲבֶרְתָּהּ שֶׁלְּמַטָּה מִמֶּנָּה). But after the Tikkun (אֲבָל אַחַר הַתִּקּוּן), they were extended (נִתְאַרְכוּ), and all of them spread (וְנִתְפַּשְּׁטוּ כֻּלָּם), until below at the end of Atzilut, etc. (עַד לְמַטָּה בְּסוֹף הָאֲצִילוּת כו׳). See there (עַיֵּין שָׁם). And likewise in Sha'ar Ma'amaré Rashbi, peace be upon him, on Parashat Pekudei (וְכֵן בְּשַׁעַר מַאֲמָרֵי הָרַשְׁבִּ״י ע״ה פָּרָשַׁת פְּקוּדֵי), and in Sha'ar Ma'amaré Razal, in the explanation of the Midrash on Ruth (וּבְשַׁעַר מַאֲמָרֵי רַז״ל בְּפֵירוּשׁ מַאֲמַר מִדְרַשׁ רוּת), he wrote (כָּתַב): Know that before the world of Atzilut was emanated (דַּע כִּי טֶרֶם שֶׁנֶּאֱצַל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), those ten Sefirot were emanated (נֶאֶצְלוּ בְּחִינוֹת הַי׳ סְפִירוֹת הָהֵם), in a different manner than they are now (בְּבְחִינָה אַחֶרֶת שֶׁאֵינָהּ כֵּן עַתָּה). And that is (וְהוּא): that the ten Sefirot of Atzilut (שֶׁהַי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּאֲצִילוּת), were emanated individually (נֶאֶצְלוּ הֵם לְבַדָּם), one atop the other (זוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי זוֹ), and this one below that one (וְזוֹ לְמַטָּה מִזּוֹ), and this one received flow from that one (וְזוֹ מְקַבֶּלֶת שֶׁפַע מִזּוֹ), and this one gave flow to that one (וְזוֹ נוֹתֶנֶת שֶׁפַע לְזוֹ). And even the six lower Sefirot (וַאֲפִילּוּ הַוו״ק), which are from Chesed until Yesod (שֶׁהֵם מֵחֶסֶד עַד הַיְסוֹד), were not connected and joined together (לֹא הָיוּ מִתְקַשְּׁרוֹת וּמִתְחַבְּרוֹת), in the form of the structure of a Partzuf Adam (כְּצוּרַת פַּרְצוּף אָדָם), rather each one stood beneath its companion (אֶלָּא כָּל אַחַת עוֹמֶדֶת תַּחַת חֲבֶרְתָּהּ), etc. See there his explanation (כו׳. עַיֵּין שָׁם בֵּיאוּרוֹ).

Behold, it is clearly explained (הֲרֵי מְבוֹאָר), thoroughly and well (בָּאָר בְּהֵיטֵב), from all these places (מִכָּל הַמְּקוֹמוֹת הָאֵלֶּה), how before the Tikkun (אֵיךְ קֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן), no Sefirah enclothed in its companion (אֵין שׁוּם סְפִירָה מִתְלַבֶּשֶׁת בְּחֲבֶרְתָּהּ). And if so (וְאִם כֵּן), how can we say (אֵיךְ נוּכַל לוֹמַר), that before the Tikkun (כִּי קֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן), the ten Sefirot of the Partzuf (הָיוּ הַי״ס שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף), were ten Partzufim (עֲשָׂרָה פַּרְצוּפִים), enclothing one another equally (מַלְבִּישִׁים זֶה אֶת זֶה בְּשָׁוֶה), and that all the Partzufim (וְשֶׁכָּל הַפַּרְצוּפִים), enclothed one another equally (מַלְבִּישִׁים זֶה אֶת זֶה בְּשָׁוֶה)? For so too he wrote later on (שֶׁכֵּן גַּם כֵּן כָּתַב הוּא ז״ל לְקַמָּן), that before the Tikkun (כִּי קֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן), all the Partzufim were enclothing one another equally (הָיוּ כָּל הַפַּרְצוּפִים מַלְבִּישִׁים זֶה אֶת זֶה בְּשָׁוֶה), and spreading in length (וּמִתְפַּשְּׁטִין בְּאֹרֶךְ), from above to below (מֵעִילָּא לְתַתָּא), as his language appears below, with the help of Hashem (כְּמוֹ שֶׁלְּשׁוֹנוֹ לְקַמָּן בְּעֶזְרַת ה׳). And certainly (וּבוַדַּאי), such sources were not hidden from him, may his memory be a blessing (שֶׁמְּקוֹמוֹת כָּאֵלּוּ לֹא נֶעֶלְמוּ מִמֶּנּוּ ז״ל), for behold, later regarding the matter of the Tikkun (שֶׁהֲרֵי לְקַמָּן לְעִנְיַן הַתִּקּוּן), he brought the language of Sha'ar HaTikkun (הֵבִיא הוּא ז״ל הַלָּשׁוֹן דְּשַׁעַר הַתִּקּוּן). Only, according to his method (אֶלָּא שֶׁלְפִי דַרְכּוֹ), he is compelled to interpret them (מֻכְרָח לְפָרְשָׁם), about one Sefirah (עַל סְפִירָה אַחַת), from the ten Sefirot (מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת), of one Partzuf (דְּפַּרְצוּף אֶחָד), of the particular Partzufim of A"B"Y"A (דְּפַּרְטֵי פַּרְצוּפֵי אבי״ע).

Indeed, in my humble opinion (אֲמְנָם לְעַנְיוּת דַּעְתִּי), not every mind can bear this (לָאו כָּל מוֹחָא סָבִיל דּאָ), for behold, in all of them it is explained (שֶׁהֲרֵי בְּכֻלָּם מְבוֹאָר), that they are speaking about the generality of the world of Nekudot (שֶׁמְּדַבְּרִים עַל כְּלָלוּת עוֹלַם הַנְּקוּדוֹת). For behold, in Sha‘ar haTikkun he wrote at the beginning of the discourse (שֶׁהֲרֵי בְּשַׁעַר הַתִּקּוּן כָּתַב בִּתְחִלַּת הַדְּרוּשׁ): “At first there were ten Sefirot encompassing all the world of Atzilut, etc.” (תְּחִלָּה הָיוּ י׳ סְפִירוֹת הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת כו׳). And likewise, in Sha‘ar Ma’amaré Rashbi, peace be upon him, he wrote (וְכֵן בְּשַׁעַר מַאֲמָרֵי רַשְׁבִּ״י ע״ה כָּתַב): “The ten Sefirot of Atzilut were emanated, etc.” (הַי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּאֲצִילוּת נֶאֶצְלוּ כו׳). And how can it be interpreted (וְאֵיךְ יְפוֹרַשׁ), from one extreme to the very opposite (מִן הַקָּצֶה אֶל הַקָּצֶה הָאַחֲרוֹן), as referring to one individual Sefirah (עַל סְפִירָה אַחַת פְּרָטִית)? And likewise (וְכֵן), what relevance is there to say (מַה שַּׁיָּיךְ לוֹמַר) regarding one Sefirah (בִּסְפִירָה אַחַת), “and this one does not enclothe in that one” (וְאֵין זוֹ מִתְלַבֶּשֶׁת בְּזוֹ)? And likewise, what he wrote (וְכֵן מַה שֶׁכָּתַב): “Then it is found that all is called one Partzuf only” (וְאָז נִמְצָא שֶׁהַכֹּל פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד לְבַד)-what finding is there here? (מַה מְצִיאָה שַׁיֵּיךְ בְּכָאן) For indeed this is the truth (כִּי כֵן הוּא הָאֱמֶת), that one Sefirah is one Partzuf (כִּי סְפִירָה אַחַת הִיא פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד).

For granted (כִּי בְּשֶׁלְמָא), according to the truth (לְפִי הָאֱמֶת), that he is speaking about the generality of the Nekudim (שֶׁהוּא מְדַבֵּר עַל כְּלָלוּת הַנְּקוּדִים), it works out well (אֲתִי שַׁפִּיר)-that is (כְּלוֹמַר), even though in truth (כִּי אַף עַל פִּי), they are five aspects: Keter, Chokhmah, Binah, Ze’ir Anpin, and Malkhut (שֶׁהֵם הֵ׳ בְּחִינוֹת כֶּתֶר חָכְמָה בִּינָה זו״ן), nevertheless (עַל כָּל זֹאת), since they are one above the other (כֵּיוָן שֶׁהֵן זוֹ לְמַעְלָה מִזּוֹ), and this one does not enclothe in that one (וְאֵין זוֹ מִתְלַבֶּשֶׁת בְּזוֹ), it is found as if it is one Partzuf (נִמְצָא כְּאִלּוּ הַכֹּל הוּא פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד). And furthermore (וְעוֹד), since he, may his memory be blessed, later (כַּאֲשֶׁר הוּא ז״ל לְקַמָּן), regarding the matter of the Tikkun (עַל עִנְיַן הַתִּקּוּן), brought this very discourse of Sha‘ar haTikkun (הֵבִיא זֶה הַדְּרוּשׁ דְּשַׁעַר הַתִּקּוּן), on the matter of Tikkun spoken of there in this discourse (עַל עִנְיַן הַתִּקּוּן הַנֶּאֱמָר שָׁם בַּדְּרוּשׁ הַזֶּה), and interpreted it (וּפֵרֵשׁ אוֹתוֹ), as referring to one inclusive Nekudah (עַל נְקֻדָּה אַחַת כּוֹלֶלֶת), if so (וְאִם כֵּן), how is it possible (אֵיךְ יִתָּכֵן), that the beginning of the discourse which speaks of before the Tikkun (כִּי תְחִלַּת הַדְּרוּשׁ שֶׁמְּדַבֵּר קֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן), where the Chokhmah, Binah, Ze’ir Anpin, and Malkhut are mentioned (שֶׁיָּזְכִּיר שָׁם חָכְמָה בִּינָה זו״ן), that they would be interpreted (שֶׁיְּפוֹרְשׁוּ), as those of one particular Sefirah (שֶׁהֵם שֶׁל סְפִירָה אַחַת פְּרָטִית), and then afterward, at the end of the discourse (וְאַחַר כָּךְ בְּסוֹף הַדְּרוּשׁ), which speaks of Chokhmah, Binah, Ze’ir Anpin, and Malkhut in rectified form (שֶׁמְּדַבֵּר עַל חָכְמָה בִּינָה זו״ן הַנִּתְקָנִים), those would then be interpreted (שֶׁיְּפוֹרְשׁוּ), as being of one inclusive Nekudah (שֶׁהֵם שֶׁל נְקֻדָּה אַחַת כּוֹלֶלֶת)?

Rather, certainly (אֶלָּא וַדַּאי), those mentioned as being rectified at the time of the Tikkun (שֶׁאֵלּוּ הַנִּזְכָּרִים שֶׁנִּתְקְנוּ בִּזְמַן הַתִּקּוּן), they themselves are those previously mentioned (הֵם עַצְמָם הֵם הַנַּזְכָּ״ל), who emerged without Tikkun before the Tikkun (שֶׁיָּצְאוּ בְּלִי תִּקּוּן קֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן), and they are of one inclusive Nekudah (וְהֵם שֶׁל נְקֻדָּה אַחַת כּוֹלֶלֶת), which is one inclusive Partzuf (שֶׁהוּא פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד כּוֹלֶל), and he said (וְאָמַר): “No Sefirah was enclothed in its companion” (שֶׁאֵין שׁוּם סְפִירָה מִתְלַבֶּשֶׁת בְּחֲבֶרְתָּהּ), which is the opposite of his words (שֶׁהוּא הֶפֶךְ דְּבָרָיו ז״ל), where he said (שֶׁאָמַר): “The ten Sefirot of the Partzuf were enclothed one in the other” (שֶׁהַי״ס שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף הָיוּ מִתְלַבְּשׁוֹת זוֹ בָּזוֹ).

And furthermore (וְעוֹד), for he, may his memory be blessed, already established for us a rule (כִּי כְבָר כָּלַל לָנוּ הוּא ז״ל כְּלַל), that all the discourses of the Rav, may his memory be blessed (שֶׁכָּל דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב ז״ל), which speak in the Partzufim of Atik and Arich and Abba and Imma and Ze’ir Anpin and Nukvah (שֶׁמְּדַבְּרִים בְּפַרְצוּפֵי עַתִּיק וַאֲרִיךְ וְאו״א וְזו״ן), they are speaking of the five Partzufim of one Nekudah (שֶׁהֵם מְדַבְּרִים בְּה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים דִּנְקֻדָּה א׳), as mentioned above (כַּמָּשַׁ״ל). And behold, in this discourse from Sha‘ar HaTikkun (וְהֲרֵי בַּדְּרוּשׁ הַזֶּה דְּשַׁעַר הַתִּקּוּן), he speaks of Atik and Arich, etc. (מְדַבֵּר בְּעַתִּיק וַאֲרִיךְ כו׳), and said (וְאָמַר) that no Sefirah was enclothed in its companion (שֶׁאֵין מִתְלַבֶּשֶׁת שׁוּם סְפִירָה בְּחֲבֶרְתָּהּ). And further difficulty (וְעוֹד קָשֶׁה), that even if we say (שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ נֹאמַר), that this discourse from Sha‘ar HaTikkun (כִּי דְּרוּשׁ זֶה דְּשַׁעַר הַתִּקּוּן), speaks about one individual Sefirah (מְדַבֵּר עַל סְפִירָה אַחַת פְּרָטִית), behold he concluded (הֲרֵי סִיֵּים): “And its stature was like it is now, the full length of Atzilut” (וְהָיְתָה שִׁעוּר קוֹמָתוֹ כְּמוֹ שֶׁהוּא עַתָּה מַמָּשׁ כָּל אֹרֶךְ הָאֲצִילוּת), whereas according to his words, may his memory be blessed (וְאִלּוּ לְפִי דְבָרָיו ז״ל), each and every Sefirah (כָּל סְפִירָה וְסְפִירָה), extended in length (הָיְתָה מִתְפַּשֶּׁטֶת בְּאֹרֶךְ), until the end of Asiyah (עַד סוֹף הָעֲשִׂיָּה).

So that, in my humble opinion (בְּאֹפֶן שֶׁלְעַנְיוּת דַּעְתִּי), and due to the shortness of my knowledge (וּלְקֹצֶר יְדִיעָתִי), I did not know how to reconcile his words, may his memory be blessed (לֹא יָדַעְתִּי לְהַשְׁווֹת דְּבָרָיו ז״ל), with the discourses of the Rav, may his memory be blessed (עִם דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב זלה״ה). For even in those places where they can be reconciled (כִּי גַּם בַּמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁתַּווּ), it is only through great strain (הוּא עַל יְדֵי הַדְּחַק), by altering the plain meaning of the expressions of the discourses of the Rav, may his memory be blessed (בְּשַׁנּוֹתוֹ פְּשָׁטוּת לְשׁוֹנוֹת דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב זלה״ה), from their meaning (מִמַּשְׁמָעוּת שֶׁלָּהֶם). And who placed us into this contention (וּמִי הִכְנִיסֵנוּ בְּתִגְרָא זֶה), that for the sake of one difficulty (שֶׁבִּשְׁבִיל קֻשְׁיָא אַחַת), we should change all the sacred writings, the expressions of the Rav, may his memory be blessed (נְשַׁנֶּה כָּל כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ לְשׁוֹנוֹת הָרַב זלה״ה), and force them (וְנִדָּחֵק בָּהֶם), against the plain sense of their language (הֶפֶךְ פְּשָׁטוּת לְשׁוֹנָם). And all the more so, and with greater force (וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן וְקַל וָחוֹמֶר), when the difficulty can be answered in another manner (כַּאֲשֶׁר יִתָּרֵץ הַקֻּשְׁיָא בְּאֹפֶן אַחֵר), and the language of the Rav, may his memory be blessed, will remain (וְיִשָּׁאֲרוּ לְשׁוֹנוֹת הָרַב ז״ל), in their form and image (כִּדְמוּתָם כְּצַלְמָם), without strain or alteration (בְּלִי דּוֹחַק וְשִׁנּוּי), as mentioned above at the beginning of Siman 10 (כַּמַּשֶּׁ״ל בִּתְחִלַּת סִי׳ י׳). This is what appears correct in my eyes (זֶה מַה שֶּׁנִּלְעַ״ד), I am dust and ashes before the Holy One Blessed Be He (אֲנָ״ק דְּקֻדְשָׁא בְּרִיךְ הוּא). And see further below in Siman 17, what is written there (וְעַיֵּין עוֹד לְקַמָּן סִימָן י״ז מ״ש שָׁם).