Ohr haShemesh (Nehar Shalom Daf 7, Col. 2)

אוֹר הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ-נְהַר שָׁלוֹם דַּף ז׳ טוּר ב׳

And the order of the division and joining of the ten Sefirot of M”H with the ten Sefirot of B”N of the Partzufim of A"B"Y"A was in this manner (וְסֵדֶר הִתְחַלְּקוּת וְהִתְחַבְּרוּת י׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּמ״ה עִם י׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּב״ן דְּפַרְצוּפֵי אֲבִי״ע הָיָה בְּאֹפֶן זֶה): And behold, if all the lights of the Kings—which are the Malkhuyot of B”N mentioned above—had been purified and ascended and been rectified (וְהִנֵּה אִם הָיוּ מִתְבָּרְרִים וְעוֹלִים וְנִתְקָּנִים כָּל הָאוֹרוֹת שֶׁל הַמְּלָכִים שֶׁהֵם הַמַּלְכֻיּוֹת דְּב״ן הַנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל), then also the nine upper Sefirot of B”N of every element would have emerged complete in all their aspects together with the Name M”H, by means of the aforementioned Zivug [Union] of A"B and S"G of Adam Kadmon (אָז הָיוּ יוֹצְאִים גַּם כֵּן הַט״ס הָעֶלְיוֹנוֹת דְּב״ן דְּכָל פְּרָט שְׁלֵמִים בְּכָל בְּחִינוֹתֵיהֶם עִם שֵׁם מ״ה עַל־יְדֵי הַזִּוּוּג הַנִּזְכָּר דְּע״ב וְס״ג דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן). And the Name B”N would then have been complete in ten fully complete Sefirot (וְהָיָה שֵׁם ב״ן שָׁלֵם בְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת שְׁלֵימוֹת), and then the ten Sefirot of M”H would join with the ten Sefirot of B”N—Keter with Keter, and Chokhmah with Chokhmah, etc (וְאָז הָיוּ מִתְחַבְּרִים י׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּמ״ה עִם י׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּב״ן כֶּתֶר עִם כֶּתֶר וְחָכְמָה עִם חָכְמָה וְכוּ׳), as is mentioned in chapter six of Sha‘ar Shevirat [Breaking] ha-Kelim [Vessels] and in many places (וּכְנִזְכָּר בְּפ״ו מִשַּׁעַר שְׁבִירַת הַכֵּלִים וּבִכְמָה מְקוֹמוֹת). However, not all the lights of the Malkhuyot of the Kings of B”N mentioned were purified (אֲבָל לֹא נִתְבָּרְרוּ כָּל הָאוֹרוֹת דְּמַלְכֻיּוֹת דְּמַלְכִים דְּב״ן הַנִּזְכָּר), but only part of them—those portions of the lights necessary to rectify from them the Partzufim of A"B"Y"A corresponding to that time and era, which necessarily had to exist prior to the creation of Adam HaRishon (אֶלָּא מִקְצָת מֵהֶם אוֹתָם חֶלְקֵי הָאוֹרוֹת הַמֻּכְרָחִים לְתַקֵּן מֵהֶם פַּרְצוּפֵי אֲבִי״ע הַמִּתְיַחֲסִים לְאוֹתוֹ הָעֵת וְהַזְּמַן אֲשֶׁר הֵם מֻכְרָחִים לְהִמָּצֵא קֹדֶם בְּרִיאַת אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן). And the remainder of the Birurim [Clarifications] were left to be purified through the prayers and commandments that Adam HaRishon, peace be upon him, would perform (וְשְׁאָרִית הַבֵּרוּרִים נִשְׁאֲרוּ לְהִתְבָּרֵר עַל־יְדֵי הַתְּפִלּוֹת וְהַמִּצְוֹת שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן ע״ה). And since sin caused that only what was fitting and corresponding to him alone was accomplished by his hands (וְכֵיוָן שֶׁגָּרַם הַחֵטְא וְלֹא נַעֲשָׂה עַל־יָדוֹ כִּי אִם מַה שֶּׁהָיָה רָאוּי וּמִתְיַחֵס אֵלָיו בִּלְבַד), as is known, “for unto Him, may He be blessed, all outcomes are prepared” (כִּידוּעַ כִּי לוֹ יִתְבָּרַךְ נִתְכְּנוּ עֲלִילוֹת), it remained that purification would occur in every generation through the prayers and commandments that Israel would fulfill in every generation (נִשְׁאֵר לְהִתְבָּרֵר בְּכָל דּוֹר וָדוֹר עַל־יְדֵי הַתְּפִלּוֹת וְהַמִּצְוֹת שֶׁיְּקַיְּמוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּכָל דּוֹר וָדוֹר).

For they are the souls that are drawn from the quarry of the Neshamot (שֶׁהֵם הַנְּשָׁמוֹת הַנִּמְשָׁכוֹת מִמַּחְצַב הַנְּשָׁמוֹת), and come in every generation to complete and raise the Birurim [Clarifications] from the quarry of the Sefirot and Neshamot that correspond to that generation (וּבָאוֹת בְּכָל דּוֹר וָדוֹר לְהַשְׁלִים לְהַעֲלוֹת הַבֵּרוּרִים דְּמַחְצַב הַסְּפִירוֹת וְהַנְּשָׁמוֹת הַמִּתְיַחֲסִים לְאוֹתוֹ הַדּוֹר). Manifold and multiplied over the ancient souls (כְּפוּלִים וּמְכוּפָּלִים מֵהַנְּשָׁמוֹת יְשָׁנוֹת), to complete the Birurim [Clarifications] of those generations that have passed (לְהַשְׁלִים הַבֵּרוּרִים שֶׁל הַדּוֹרוֹת הָהֵם שֶׁעָבְרוּ), until all the Birurim [Clarifications] of B”N will be finished being purified (עַד שֶׁיֻּשְׁלְמוּ לְהִתְבָּרֵר כָּל הַבֵּרוּרִים דְּב״ן). And then the joining of the ten Sefirot of M”H with the ten Sefirot of B”N—Keter with Keter, etc.—will be equalized (וְאָז יִשְׁתַּווּ חִבּוּר י׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּמ״ה עִם י׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּב״ן כֶּתֶר עִם כֶּתֶר וְכוּ׳). And this will be at the coming of our righteous Mashiach, speedily in our days, amen, may it be His will (וְזֶה יִהְיֶה בְּעֵת בִּיאַת מָשִׁיחַ צִדְקֵנוּ בִּמְהֵרָה בְּיָמֵינוּ כִּי״ר). And behold, the M”H is comprised of M”H and B”N (וְהִנֵּה הַמ״ה כָּלוּל מִמ״ה וּב״ן), and likewise the B”N is comprised of M”H and B”N (וְכֵן הַב״ן כָּלוּל מִמ״ה וּב״ן), for they are the Zeir anpin and Nukvah of Adam Kadmon (כִּי הֵם הַזּו״ן דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן), each one comprised of Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod (כָּל אֶחָד כָּלוּל מֵחַג״ת נְהִי״ם), for the six extremities of each one are the M”H within it (כִּי הַו״ק דְּכָל אֶחָד הֵם הַמ״ה שֶׁבּוֹ), and the Malkhut is the B”N within it (וְהַמַּלְכוּת ב״ן שֶׁבּוֹ). However, relative to themselves (אֲמְנָם בְּעֶרֶךְ עַצְמָם), each one is comprised of A”B S”G M”H B”N (כָּל אֶחָד כָּלוּל מֵע״ב סַ״ג מ״ה ב״ן), which are the Ta‘amim–Nekudot–Tagin–Otiyot [Cantillation Marks–Vowel Points–Crowns–Letters] (טַנְת״א שֶׁבּוֹ).

And behold, Atik was rectified and made from the ten Sefirot of the Keter of M”H (וְהִנֵּה עַתִּיק נִתְקַּן וְנַעֲשֶׂה מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכֶּתֶר דְּמ״ה) and from the purification of the upper half of the Keter of B”N (וּמִבִּירוּר חֲצִי עֶלְיוֹן דְּכֶּתֶר דְּב״ן), and the lower half of the Keter and nine other Sefirot were added to him anew in order to complete the ten Sefirot of the Keter of B”N (וְנִתְּוֹסְפוּ לוֹ מֵחָדָשׁ חֲצִי תַּחְתּוֹן דְּכֶּתֶר וְט״ס אֲחֵרוֹת לְהַשְׁלִים י׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכֶּתֶר דְּב״ן). He also took the upper three of the Chokhmah of B”N (גַּם לָקַח ג״ר דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן), and the four upper of the Binah of B”N (וְד״ר דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן), and the seven Keterim of the seven lower Sefirot of B”N (וְז׳ כְּתָרִים דְּז״ת דְּב״ן). And all these that he took are from those nine Sefirot of B”N of each Partzuf which emerged anew and did not undergo Shevirah [Breaking] (וְכָל אֵלּוּ שֶׁלָּקַח הֵם מֵאוֹתָם הַט״ס דְּב״ן דְּכָל פַּרְצוּף שֶׁיָּצְאוּ מֵחֲדָשׁ אֲשֶׁר לֹא הָיְתָה בָהֶם שְׁבִירָה). And from all these were made the male and female of Atik (וּמִכָּל אֵלּוּ נַעֲשׂוּ דְּכוּרָא וּנְקוּבָא דְּעַתִּיק): the male from M”H and B”N of M”H (הַדְּכוּרָא מִמ״ה וּב״ן דְּמ״ה) and he stands on the side of the face (וְעוֹמֵד בְּצַד הַפָּנִים), and the female from M”H and B”N of B”N (וְהַנְּקוּבָא מִמ״ה וּב״ן דְּב״ן) and she stands on the side of the back (וְעוֹמֶדֶת בְּצַד הָאָחוֹר), and both their faces face outward (וּפְנֵי שְׁנֵיהֶם לַחוּץ), and all their backs inward—an extraordinary union (וְכָל אֲחוֹרֵיהֶם לַבַּיִתָה חִבּוּר נִפְלָא). And they were integrated one within the other (וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and they were enclothed one within the other (וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and they enclothed the Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod of the Yosher [Upright Configuration] of Adam Kadmon until near the end of the legs of Adam Kadmon, as mentioned above (וְהִלְבִּישׁוּ לִתְנָה״י דְּיוֹשֶׁר דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן עַד קָרוֹב לְסִיּוּם רַגְלֵי אָדָם קַדְמוֹן כנז״ל). And Arich Anpin and Nukvah were rectified and made from the ten Sefirot of the Chokhmah of M”H (וְא״א וְנוּקְבָּא נִתְקְּנוּ וְנַעֲשׂוּ מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּחָכְמָה דְּמ״ה) and from the lower half of the Keter of B”N (וּמֵהַחֲצִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן דְּכֶּתֶר דְּב״ן), and the upper half of the Keter and nine other Sefirot were added to him to complete the ten Sefirot of the Keter of B”N (וְנִתְּוֹסְפוּ לוֹ עוֹד חֲצִי עֶלְיוֹן דְּכֶּתֶר וְט״ס אֲחֵרוֹת לְהַשְׁלִים י׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכֶּתֶר דְּב״ן).

The male is from M”H and B”N of M”H (הַדְּכוּרָא מִמ״ה וּב״ן דְּמ״ה), and he stands on the right side (וְעוֹמֵד בְּצַד יָמִין), and the female is from M”H and B”N of B”N (וְהַנּוּקְבָּא מִמ״ה וּב״ן דְּב״ן), and she stands on the left side (וְעוֹמֶדֶת מִצַּד שְׂמֹאל). And these were integrated one within the other (וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and these became enclothed one within the other (וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and they enclothed the Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet and Netzach, Hod, Yesod of the Yosher [Upright Configuration] of Atik until the end of Atzilut (וְהִלְבִּישׁוּ לְחַג״ת וְנְהִי״ם דְּיוֹשֶׁר דְּעַתִּיק עַד סוֹף הָאֲצִילוּת). And all these four Partzufim are called Chokhmah, Binah, Da'at within the Keter (וְכָל אֵלּוּ הַד׳ פַּרְצוּפִים נִקְרָאִים חָכְמָה־בִּינָה־דַּעַת שֶׁבַּכֶּתֶר), for they are the roots of the Mochin [Intellects] (שֶׁהֵם שׁוֹרְשֵׁי הַמּוֹחִין): Chokhmah and Binah are Atik and its Nukvah (חו״ב הֵם עַתִּיק וְנֻקְבָּא), and the Da’at that includes Chesed and Gevurah are Arich Anpin and its Nukvah (וְדַעַת הַכּוֹלֵל חו״ג הֵם א״א וְנוּקְבֵיהּ), and they are the Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah of Neshamah (וְהֵם נר״ן דְּנְשָׁמָה). And Abba and Imma, which are the Chokhmah and Binah of B”N (וְאו״א שֶׁהֵם חו״ב דְּב״ן), were supplemented with nine additional Sefirot of B”N for each one (נִתְוֹסְפוּ ט״ס אֲחֵרוֹת דְּב״ן לְכָל אֶחָד), to complete ten Sefirot of B”N for each one (לְהַשְׁלִים י׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּב״ן לְכָל אֶחָד). And from these ten Sefirot Atik took certain portions from the upper three of the Chokhmah and from the four upper of the Binah (וּמֵאֵלּוּ הַי׳ סְפִירוֹת לָקַח עַתִּיק אֵיזֶה חֲלָקִים מִג״ר דְּחָכְמָה וּמִד״ר דְּבִינָה), except that they are in doubt whether they are lights or Kelim [Vessels] of the back or of the front (אֶלָּא שֶׁהֵם בְּסָפֵק אִם אוֹרוֹת אִם כֵּלִים דְּאָחוֹר אוֹ דְּפָנִים).

In such a manner that there remained for Abba, from the Chokhmah of B”N, its six extremities—which are its Zeir anpin and Nukvah—complete (בְּאוֹפֶן שֶׁנִּשְׁאַר לְאַבָּא מֵהַחָכְמָה דְּב״ן הַו״ק שֶׁבָּהּ שֶׁהֵם הַזּו״ן שֶׁבָּהּ שְׁלֵמִים); and likewise from the Binah of B”N for Imma (וְכֵן מִבִּינָה דְּב״ן לְאִמָּא). And between them they divided ten Sefirot (וּבֵין שְׁנֵיהֶם חָלְקוּ י׳ סְפִירוֹת), which are Abba and Imma and Zeir anpin and Nukvah of M”H and B”N of the Binah of M”H (שֶׁהֵם או״א וּזו״ן דְּמ״ה וּב״ן דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה): half to Abba, which are Abba and Zeir Anpin of the Binah of M”H (חֲצִי לְאַבָּא וְהֵם אַבָּא וְז״א דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה), and half to Imma, which are Imma and the Nukvah of Zeir Anpin of the Binah of M”H (וְחֲצִי לְאִמָּא וְהֵם אִמָּא וְנוּקְבָּא דְּז״א דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה).

And it is found that Abba was rectified and made from the six extremities—which are the Zeir anpin and Nukvah—of the Chokhmah of B”N (וְנִמְצָא כִּי אַבָּא נִתְקַּן וְנַעֲשָׂה מֵהַו״ק שֶׁהֵם זו״ן דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן), and these are the M”H of B”N (וְהֵם מ״ה דְּב״ן), and from Abba of Zeir Anpin of the Binah of M”H (וּמֵאַבָּא דְּז״א דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה), and these are the M”H of M”H (וְהֵם מ״ה דְּמ״ה). And Abba of the Binah of M”H joined with the Zeir Anpin of the Chokhmah of B”N (וְנִתְחַבְּרוּ אַבָּא דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה עִם ז״א דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן), and these were integrated one within the other (וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ). And they became enclothed one within the other (וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and they enclothed the right side of Arich from the throat until the chest (וְהִלְבִּישׁוּ לְצַד יָמִין דְּא״א מֵהַגָּרוֹן עַד הֶחָזֶה), on all its sides (מִכָּל צַדָּדָיו), corresponding to the two hidden Chasadim of the Yesod of Atik (כְּנֶגֶד ב׳ חֲסָדִים וַחֲצִי הַסְּתוּמִים דִּיסוֹד דְּעַתִּיק). And these two aspects are called the Supernal Abba and Imma (וּב׳ בְּחִינוֹת אֵלּוּ נִקְרָאִים או״א עִילָּאִין). And likewise, the Zeir Anpin of the Binah of M”H joined with the Malkhut of the Chokhmah of B”N (וְכֵן נִתְחַבְּרוּ ז״א דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה עִם מַלְכוּת דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן), and these were integrated one within the other (וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and they became enclothed one within the other (וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and they enclothed the right side of Arich Anpin from the chest until the navel (וְהִלְבִּישׁוּ לְצַד יָמִין דְּא״א מֵהֶחָזֶה עַד הַטַּבּוּר), on all its sides (מִכָּל צַדָּדָיו), corresponding to the two revealed Chasadim and the half that is revealed of the Yesod of Atik (כְּנֶגֶד ב׳ חֲסָדִים וַחֲצִי הַמְגֻלִּים דְּיִסּוֹד דְּעַתִּיק). And these two aspects are called the Lower Abba and Imma (וּב׳ בְּחִינוֹת אֵלּוּ נִקְרָאִים או״א תַּתָּאִין), and in general they are called Yisrael-Saba (וּבְכְלָלוּת נִקְרָאִים יִש״ס), and they are also called Yesod–Saba and Tevunah (וְגַם נִקְרָאִים יִשְׂסו״ת). And Imma was rectified and made from the six extremities—which are the Zeir anpin and Nukvah—of the Binah of B”N (וְאִמָּא נִתְקַנָּה וְנַעֲשֵׂית מֵהַו״ק שֶׁהֵם זו״ן דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן), and these are the B”N of B”N (וְהֵם ב״ן דְּב״ן), and from Imma and the Nukvah of the Zeir Anpin of the Binah of M”H (וּמֵאִמָּא וְנוּקְבָא דְּז״א דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה), and these are the B”N of M”H (וְהֵם ב״ן דְּמ״ה). And Imma of the Binah of M”H joined with the Zeir Anpin of the Binah of B”N (וְנִתְחַבְּרוּ אִמָּא דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה עִם ז״א דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן), and these were integrated one within the other (וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ). And they became enclothed one within the other (וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and they enclothed the left side of Arich from the throat until the chest (וְהִלְבִּישׁוּ לְצַד שְׂמֹאל דְּאַרִיךְ מֵהַגָּרוֹן וְעַד הֶחָזֶה), on all its sides (מִכָּל צַדָּדָיו), corresponding to the two Gevurot and the revealed half corresponding to the concealed one of the Yesod of Atik (כְּנֶגֶד ב׳ גְּבוּרוֹת וַחֲצִי הַמְגֻלִּים שֶׁכְּנֶגֶד הַסָּתוּם דְּיִסּוֹד דְּעַתִּיק). And these two aspects are called the Upper Yesod–Saba and Tevunah (וּב׳ בְּחִינוֹת אֵלּוּ נִקְרָאִים יִשְׂסו״ת עִילָּאִין), and in general they are called the Upper Imma (וּבְכְלָלוּת נִקְרָאִים אִמָּא עִילָּאָה).

For relative to the Supernal Abba and Imma mentioned above (כִּי בְּעֵרֶךְ או״א עִילָּאִין הַנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל), these are called the Upper Yesod–Saba and Tevunah (נִקְרָאִים אֵלּוּ יִשְׂסו״ת עִילָּאִין), and relative to the designation of those Abba and Imma as “Supernal Abba” (וּבְעֵרֶךְ מַה שֶּׁאוֹתָם או״א נִקְרָאִים אַבָּא עִילָּאָה), these too are called the Supernal Imma (גַּם אֵלּוּ נִקְרָאִים אִמָּא עִילָּאָה). And likewise, the Nukvah of the Zeir Anpin of the Binah of M”H joined with the Nukvah of the Zeir Anpin of the B”N (וְכֵן נִתְחַבְּרוּ נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה עִם נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א דְּב״ן), and these were integrated one within the other (וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and they became enclothed one within the other (וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and they enclothed the left side of Arich from the chest until the navel (וְהִלְבִּישׁוּ לְצַד שְׂמֹאל דְּאַרִיךְ מֵהֶחָזֶה וְעַד הַטַּבּוּר), on all its sides (מִכָּל צַדָּדָיו), corresponding to the two Gevurot and the half that is revealed of the Yesod of Atik (כְּנֶגֶד ב׳ גְּבוּרוֹת וַחֲצִי הַמְגֻלִּים דְּיִסּוֹד דְּעַתִּיק). And these two aspects are called the Lower Yesod–Saba and Tevunah (וּב׳ בְּחִינוֹת אֵלּוּ נִקְרָאִים יִשְׂסו״ת תַּתָּאִין), and in general they are called Tevunah (וּבְכְלָלוּת נִקְרָאִים תְּבוּנָה). Behold, these are eight Partzufim of M”H and B”N (הֲרֵי הֵם ח׳ פַּרְצוּפִים דְּמ״ה וּב״ן), and they are four pairs (וְהֵם ד׳ זוּגוֹת). And at times—this being when Mochin [Intellects] of Gadlut are drawn to Zeir Anpin and Nukvah (וּלְפָעָמִים וְהוּא כְּשֶׁנִּמְשָׁכִין מוֹחִין דְּגַדְלוּת לְזו״ן)—the Yesod of Atik splits open (נִבְקַּע הַיְסוֹד דְּעַתִּיק), and all the Chesed and Gevurah become revealed (וּמִתְגַּלִּין כָּל הַחו״ג). And then all the eight Partzufim mentioned are integrated together (וְאָז נִכְלָלִין כָּל הַח׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הַנִּזְכָּר), and they become two Partzufim from the throat to the navel (וְנַעֲשִׂים ב׳ פַּרְצוּפִים מִן הַגָּרוֹן עַד הַטַּבּוּר). And all of this is after the final detail (וְכָל זֶה הוּא אַחַר הַפְּרָט הָאַחֲרוֹן).

And after these were integrated one within the other and these were enclothed one within the other (וְאַחַר שֶׁנִּכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), then their differentiation and their standing was in the manner mentioned (וְאָז הָיָה חִלּוּקָם וַעֲמִידָתָם בְּאֹפֶן הַנִּזְכָּר). And behold, they also divide in another manner (וְהִנֵּה גַּם הֵם נֶחְלָקִים בְּאֹפֶן אַחֵר), and this is that the inner aspect of all the eight Partzufim mentioned, in their form and likeness (וְהוּא כִּי פְּנִימִיּוּת כָּל הַח׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הַנִּזְכָּר בְּצִבְיוֹנָם וּדְמִיוֹנָם), is called Supernal Abba and Imma (נִקְרָא או״א עִילָּאִין), and is called the Chokhmah of Atzilut (וְנִקְרָא חָכְמָה דַאֲצִילוּת), and is called the Atzilut within Atzilut (וְנִקְרָא אֲצִילוּת דַאֲצִילוּת), and is called the Upper Three (וְנִקְרָא ג״ר), and is called “the Face” (וְנִקְרָא פָּנִים), and is called the Nefesh, Ruach, Neshama, Chayah, Yechidah of Chayah of Atzilut (וְנִקְרָא נרנח״י דְּחַיָּה דַאֲצִילוּת), and is called the World to Come (וְנִקְרָא עוֹלָם הַבָּא). And their Zivug [Union] is called a complete Zivug [Union] (וְזוּוּגָם נִקְרָא זוּוּג שָׁלִים), except that it is comprised of complete and not-complete (אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא כָּלוּל מִשָּׁלִים וּדְלָא שָׁלִים), and the totality of the two is called complete (וּכְלָלוּת שְׁנֵיהֶם נִקְרָא שָׁלִים). And from their Zivug [Union], Mochin [Intellects] are drawn to Zeir Anpin and Nukvah (וּמִזִּוּוּגָם נִמְשָׁכִים מוֹחִין לְזוּ״ן), through the prayers and the Torah and its blessings (עַל־יְדֵי הַתְּפִלּוֹת וְהַתּוֹרָה וּבִרְכוֹתֶיהָ), which are the mitzvot dependent on the mouth (שֶׁהֵם מִצְוֹת הַתְּלוּיוֹת בַּפֶּה). And corresponding to these in man are the windpipe and the lung (וְכְנֶגְדָּם בָּאָדָם הֵם הַקָּנֶה וְהָרֵיאָה). And behold, at times even the four upper Partzufim mentioned above, which enclothe from the throat of Arich Anpin until the chest, as mentioned above (וְהִנֵּה לְפָעָמִים גַּם הַד׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הָעֶלְיוֹנִים הַנִּזְכָּר הַמַלְבִּישִׁים מֵהַגָּרוֹן דְּא״א עַד הֶחָזֶה כְּנִזְכָּר לְעֵיל), in their externality and their internality (בְּחִיצוֹנִיּוּתָם וּפְנִימִיּוּתָם), are designated by these terminology as well, as is written with the help of Heaven (מִתְכַּנִּים בְּכִנּוּיִים אֵלּוּ וּכְמָה שֶּׁנִּכְתַּב בְּעֶזְרַת הַשֵּׁם). And the externality of all the eight Partzufim mentioned, in their form and likeness (וְחִיצוֹנִיּוּת כָּל הַח׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הַנִּזְכָּר בְּצִבְיוֹנָם וּדְמִיוֹנָם), is called Yesod–Saba and Tevunah (נִקְרָא יִשְׂסו״ת), and is called the Binah of Atzilut (וְנִקְרָא בִּינָה דַאֲצִילוּת), and is called the Beri’ah within Atzilut (וְנִקְרָא בְּרִיאָה דַאֲצִילוּת), and is called the six extremities (וְנִקְרָא ו״ק), and is called “the Back” (וְנִקְרָא אָחוֹר), and is called the Nefesh, Ruach, Neshama, Chayah, Yechidah of Neshamah of Atzilut (וְנִקְרָא נרנח״י דְּנְשָׁמָה דַאֲצִילוּת), and is called This World (וְנִקְרָא עוֹלָם הַזֶּה). And their Zivug [Union] is called the not-complete Zivug [Union] (וְזוּוּגָם נִקְרָא זוּוּג דְּלָא שָׁלִים), except that it is comprised of complete and not-complete (אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא כָּלוּל מִשָּׁלִים וּדְלָא שָׁלִים), and the totality of the two is called not-complete (וּכְלָלוּת שְׁנֵיהֶם נִקְרָא דְלָא שָׁלִים). And from their Zivug [Union], Mochin [Intellects] of vitality and sustenance are drawn to Zeir Anpin and Nukvah (וּמִזִּוּוּגָם נִמְשָׁכִים מוֹחִין דְּחַיּוּת וּמָזוֹן לְזוּ״ן). And at times even the four lower Partzufim mentioned above, which enclothe from the chest of Arich Anpin until the navel, as mentioned above (וְלְפָעָמִים גַּם הַד׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים הַנִּזְכָּר הַמַלְבִּישִׁים מֵהֶחָזֶה דְּא״א וְעַד הַטַּבּוּר כְּנִזְכָּר לְעֵיל), in their externality and their internality, are designated by these same terminology (בְּחִיצוֹנִיּוּתָם וּפְנִימִיּוּתָם מִתְכַּנִּים בְּכִנּוּיִים אֵלּוּ).

And the totality of these four pairs is called the lower Chokhmah, Binah, Da'at (וּכְלָלוּת ד׳ זוּגוֹת אֵלּוּ נִקְרָא חָכְמָה־בִּינָה־דַּעַת הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים), and they are the two crowns of Chokhmah and Binah (וְהֵם הַב׳ עֲטָרִין חָכְמָה וּבִינָה), and the Da’at that includes Chesed and Gevurah which spreads forth (וְדַעַת הַכּוֹלֵל חֶסֶד וּגְבוּרָה הַמִּתְפַּשֵּׁט), and the Chokhmah and Binah which are the two crowns are called Abba and Imma (וְהַחו״ב וְהֵם הַב׳ עֲטָרִין נִקְרָאִים או״א), and the Da’at that includes Chesed and Gevurah is Yesod–Saba and Tevunah (וְדַעַת הַכּוֹלֵל חֶסֶד וּגְבוּרָה הוּא יִשְׂסו״ת), and it is called the Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah of Ruach (וְנִקְרָא נֶפֶשׁ־רוּחַ־נְשָׁמָה דְּרוּחַ), and it is also called Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet (גַּם נִקְרָא חַג״ת). And Zeir Anpin and Nukvah were rectified and made from the seven lower Sefirot of M”H and from the seven lower Sefirot of B”N (וְזו״ן נִתְקַּנוּ וְנַעֲשׂוּ מִז״ת דְּמ״ה וּמִז״ת דְּב״ן), for they emerged and were supplemented with the nine upper Sefirot to complete ten Sefirot for each Malkhut from the seven Malkhuyot of the seven lower Sefirot of B”N (כִּי יָצְאוּ וְנִתְּוֹסְפוּ לָהֶם ט״ס עֶלְיוֹנוֹת לְהַשְׁלִים י׳ סְפִירוֹת לְכָל מַלְכוּת מִז׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת דְּז״ת דְּב״ן).

And from these nine upper Sefirot that were added to each Malkhut, Atik is the one who took those seven Keterim of the seven lower Sefirot of B”N, as mentioned above (וּמֵאֵלּוּ הַט״ס עֶלְיוֹנוֹת שֶׁנִּתְּוֹסְפוּ לְכָל מַלְכוּת הוּא שֶׁלָּקַח עַתִּיק אוֹתָם הַז׳ כְּתָרִים דְּז״ת דְּב״ן כְּנַ״ל), except that it is in doubt whether he took them or not (אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא סָפֵק אִם לְקָחָם אִם לָאו). And the six extremities—which are the Zeir Anpin of M”H—joined with the six extremities—which are the Zeir Anpin of B”N (וְנִתְחַבְּרוּ ו״ק שֶׁהֵם ז״א דְּמ״ה עִם ו״ק שֶׁהֵם ז״א דְּב״ן), and these were integrated one within the other (וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and these became enclothed one within the other (וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and they enclothed the Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod of Arich Anpin from the navel downward (וְהִלְבִּישׁוּ לִתְנָה״י דְּא״א מֵהַטַּבּוּר וּלְמַטָּה), on all its sides—front and back (מִכָּל צַדָּדָיו פָּנִים וְאָחוֹר). And they are called the Great Zeir Anpin and Nukvah (וְנִקְרָאִים זו״ן הַגְּדוֹלִים), for the six extremities of B”N are called Rachel the Great, the Malkhut that is within His body (כִּי ו״ק דְּב״ן נִקְרָא רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה מַלְכוּת שֶׁבְּגוּפוֹ), and at times she is called Leah (וּלְפָעָמִים נִקְרָא בְּשֵׁם לֵאָה).

And in their totality they are called Zeir Anpin (וּבִכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרָא ז״א). And the six extremities of M”H are called the letters themselves literally (וְו״ק דְּמ״ה נִקְרָא אוֹתִיּוֹת עַצְמָם מַמָּשׁ), and the six extremities of B”N are called the aspect of the numerical reckoning of the letters of Zeir Anpin (וְו״ק דְּב״ן נִקְרָא בְּחִינַת חֶשְׁבּוֹן דְּאוֹתִיּוֹת דְּז״א). And likewise, the Malkhut, the Nukvah of the Zeir Anpin of M”H, joined with the Malkhut, the Nukvah of the Zeir Anpin of B”N (וְכֵן נִתְחַבְּרוּ מַלְכוּת נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א דְּמ״ה עִם מַלְכוּת נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א דְּב״ן), and these were integrated one within the other (וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and these became enclothed one within the other (וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and they enclothed the Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod of the Great Zeir Anpin and Nukvah (וְהִלְבִּישׁוּ לִתְנָה״י דְּזו״ן הַגְּדוֹלִים). And these are called Jacob and Rachel (וְאֵלּוּ נִקְרָאִים יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל), and in their totality they are called the Nukvah of Zeir Anpin (וּבִכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרָא נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א).

Shemen, Siman 24

(שֶׁמ״ן סִימָן כ״ד)

Consider above in section fifteen (עֲיֵן לְעֵיל בְּסִימָן ט״ו) what I wrote concerning what is written here (מָה שֶׁכָּתַבְתִּי עַל מַ״שׁ כָּאן), and since the sin caused (וְכֵיוָן שֶׁגָּרַם הַחֵטְא), and nothing was done by him except what was fitting and relating to him alone (וְלֹא נַעֲשָׂה עַל יָדוֹ כִּי אִם מַה שֶּׁהָיָה רָאוּי וּמִתְיַחֵס אֵלָיו בִּלְבַד), it remained to be purified in every generation (נִשְׁאַר לְהִתְבָּרֵר בְּכָל דּוֹר וָדוֹר) through the prayers and the commandments that Israel will fulfill (עַל־יְדֵי הַתְּפִלּוֹת וְהַמִּצְווֹת שֶׁיְּקַיְּמוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל), etc (וְגוֹ׳), for at first glance this contradicts what was written there (כִּי לְכָאוֹרָה זֶה סוֹתֵר לְמַ״שׁ שָׁם). However, what is written here is primary (אֲמְנָם מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב כָּאן הוּא הָעִקָּר), consider there (עֲיֵן שָׁם).

I also saw another distinction from here to there (עוֹד רָאִיתִי הֶפְרֵשׁ אַחֵר מִכָּאן לְשָׁם), and it is that there are two aspects of clarifications (וְהוּא כִּי הִנֵּה ב׳ בְּחִינוֹת בִּירוּרִים יֵשׁ): one is the remainder of the clarifications that remained to be clarified before the creation of Adam (א׳ הֵם שְׁאֵרִית הַבִּירוּרִים שֶׁנִּשְׁאֲרוּ לְבָרֵר קֹדֶם בְּרִיאַת אַדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן), two, those to clarify what caused Adam to fall through the sin, from that which had already been clarified before Adam was created (ב׳ הֵם לְבָרֵר מַה שֶּׁגָּרַם לְהַפִּיל אֲדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן עַל־יְדֵי הַחֵטְא מִמַּה שֶּׁכְּבָר הֻבְרַר קֹדֶם שֶׁנִּבְרָא אֲדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן), as mentioned there above (כַּנִּזְכָּר שָׁם לְעֵיל). And according to what is written here it implies (וּלְפִי מַ״שׁ כָּאן מַשְׁמַע) that what was fitting and relating to Adam to rectify—which is what he caused through the sin—has already been rectified (כִּי מַה שֶּׁהָיָה רָאוּי וּמִתְיַחֵס לַאֲדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן לְתַקֵּן, שֶׁהוּא מַה שֶּׁגָּרַם עַל־יְדֵי הַחֵטְא, כְּבָר תִּקְּנוֹ).

However, the remainder of the clarifications were not clarified by him (אֲמְנָם שְׁאֵרִית הַבִּירוּרִים לֹא נִבְרְרוּ עַל־יָדוֹ), for so he wrote (שֶׁכֵּן כָּתַב): and the remainder of the clarifications remained to be clarified by the commandments and prayers that Adam would perform (וּשְׁאֵרִית הַבִּירוּרִים נִשְׁאֲרוּ לְהִתְבָּרֵר עַל־יְדֵי הַמִּצְווֹת וְהַתְּפִלּוֹת שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן), and since the sin caused (וְכֵיוָן שֶׁגָּרַם הַחֵטְא), and nothing was done by him except what was fitting and relating to him alone, etc (וְלֹא נַעֲשָׂה עַל־יָדוֹ כִּי אִם מַה שֶּׁהָיָה רָאוּי וּמִתְיַחֵס אֵלָיו בִּלְבַד וְגוֹ׳), it remained to be clarified in every generation by Israel, etc (נִשְׁאַר לְהִתְבָּרֵר בְּכָל דּוֹר וָדוֹר עַל־יְדֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְגוֹ׳).

Thus it is explained that what was fitting and relating to him was already done by him (הֲרֵי מְבוֹאָר כִּי מַה שֶּׁהָיָה רָאוּי וּמִתְיַחֵס אֵלָיו כְּבָר נַעֲשָׂה עַל־יָדוֹ). Whereas above he wrote thus (וְאִלּוּ שָׁם לְעֵיל כָּתַב וְז״ל): and then death was decreed upon him (וְאָז נִגְזַר עָלָיו מִיתָה), and he was expelled from the Garden of Eden (וְנִתְגָּרֵשׁ מִגַּ״ע) to return and clarify what caused the fall (לַחֲזוֹר לְבָרֵר מַה שֶּׁגָּרַם לְהַפִּיל), until he will complete clarifying and rectifying what he damaged through the sin in the Sefirot and the souls (עַד שֶׁיַּשְׁלִים לְבָרֵר וּלְתַקֵּן מַה שֶּׁפָּגַם עַל־יְדֵי הַחֵטְא בַּסְּפִירוֹת וּבַנְּשָׁמוֹת), and then he will return to his place, to the Garden of Eden, etc (וְאָז יַחֲזוֹר לִמְקוֹמוֹ לְגַ״ע וְגוֹ׳). Thus it is explained that even what was fitting and relating to him—which is what he caused through the sin—also this was not rectified by him (הֲרֵי מְבוֹאָר כִּי גַּם מַה שֶּׁהָיָה רָאוּי וּמִתְיַחֵס אֵלָיו, שֶׁהוּא מַה שֶּׁגָּרַם עַל־יְדֵי הַחֵטְא, גַּם זֶה לֹא נִתְקַן עַל־יָדוֹ).

Shemen, Siman 25

(שֶׁמ״ן סִימָן כ״ה)

And behold, also in what he wrote (וְהִנֵּה גַּם בְּמַ״שׁ) that the upper three of Chokhmah (כִּי הַג״ר דְּחָכְמָה) and the dalet rishonot of Binah (וְהַד״ר דְּבִינָה) and the seven crowns of the lower seven (וְז׳ כְּתָרִים דְּז״ת) which Atik took (שֶׁלָּקַח עַתִּיק), they are from those nine Sefirot of B"N of each Partzuf (הֵם מֵאוֹתָם הַט״ס דְּב״ן דְּכָל פַּרְצוּף) which emerged anew (שֶׁיָּצְאוּ מֵחָדָשׁ), in which there was no Shevirah [Breaking] (אֲשֶׁר לֹא הָיָה בָּהֶם שְׁבִירָה).

In my humble opinion, I do not know who compelled him to say so (לְעַנְיָן דַּעְתִּי לֹא יָדַעְתִּי מִי הֶכְרִיחוֹ לוֹמַר כֵּן), for on the contrary (כִּי אַדְּרַבָּא), from the simple phrasing of the Rav of blessed memory (מִפְּשָׁטוּת לְשׁוֹנוֹת הָרַב ז״ל), it implies the opposite (מַשְׁמַע לְהֶפֶךְ): that all these aspects which Atik took (כִּי כָּל אֵלּוּ הַבְּחִינוֹת שֶׁלָּקַח עַתִּיק) are from the aspect of the Nekudot of B"N (הֵם מֵהַבְּחִינָה דְּנְקֻדוֹת דְּב״ן), which had in them the aspect of Shevirah [Breaking] (שֶׁהָיְתָה בָהֶם בְּחִינַת הַשְּׁבִירָה).

For behold, it is written in Etz Chayim, Gate of Atik, Chapter One (כִּי הִנֵּה כָּתַב בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר עַתִּיק פ״א), and these are his words (וְז״ל): “And behold, also from the other vessels which are Chokhmah and Binah of S"G (וְהִנֵּה גַּם מִבֵּי הָאֲחֵרִים שֶׁהֵם חָכְמָה וּבִינָה שֶׁל ס״ג), some of them were clarified in order to make from them Atik” (הֻבְרְרוּ מֵהֶם קְצָתָם לַעֲשׂוֹת מֵהֶם עַתִּיק). “For from the aspect of the Keter he took only half, as mentioned above” (כִּי מִבְּחִינַת הַכֶּתֶר לֹא לָקַח רַק חֶצְיוֹ כַּנַּ״ל). “And behold, what he took from Chokhmah were the three upper aspects from Chokhmah of S"G” (וְהִנֵּה מַה שֶּׁלָּקַח מֵחָכְמָה הֵם ג״ר מֵחָכְמָה דְּס״ג), “and the two lower aspects from Binah of S"G” (וְד״ר מִבִּינָה דְּס״ג), “and from these three aspects of S"G was made the Nukvah of Atik, etc.” (וּמֵאֵלּוּ ג׳ בְּחִינוֹת שֶׁל ס״ג נַעֲשָׂה נוּקְבָא דְּעַתִּיק כו׳) — see there his explanation (יַעֲיֵין שָׁם בֵּיאוּרוֹ).

Behold, the aspects that Atik took, he said he took them from the name S"G (הֲרֵי שֶׁהַבְּחִינוֹת שֶׁלָּקַח עַתִּיק אָמַר שֶׁלָּקְחָם מִשֵּׁם ס״ג), and it is known that the name S"G is called the Nekudot that first emerged before the Tikkun (וִידוּעַ כִּי שֵׁם ס״ג נִקְרָא הַנְּקֻדוֹת שֶׁיָּצְאוּ מִתְּחִלָּה קֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן), for after the Tikkun it is called the name B"N (כִּי אַחַר הַתִּקּוּן נִקְרָא בְּשֵׁם ב״ן). And also from what he wrote: “some of them were clarified” (וְגַם מִמַּה שֶּׁכָּתַב: הֻבְרְרוּ קְצָתָם), for the general expression of Birur [Clarification] is indeed relevant to the aspect of the first Nekudot which had Shevirah [Breaking] in them (כִּי סְתַם כִּינוּי בִּרוּר שַׁיֵּיךְ שַׁפִּיר בְּבְחִינַת הַנְּקֻדוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת שֶׁהָיְתָה בָהֶם שְׁבִירָה). And likewise there in the Mahadura Batra he wrote: “Know that Atik clarified from the name B"N the Rosh d’Keter of B"N (וְכֵן שָׁם בְּמַהֲדוּרָא בַּתְרָא כָּתַב: דַּע כִּי עַתִּיק בֵּרֵר מִשֵּׁם ב״ן ה״ר דְּכֶתֶר דְּב״ן), and the upper three from Chokhmah of B"N (וְג״ר מֵחָכְמָה דְּב״ן), and the two lower ones from Binah of B"N (וְד״ר דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן), and seven Ketarim from the lower seven of B"N (וְז׳ כְּתָרִים דְּז״ת דְּב״ן), and from all of this was made the Nukvah, etc.” (וּמִכָּל זֶה נַעֲשָׂה נוּקְבָא כו׳).

Behold, also here he said “he clarified” (הֲרֵי שֶׁגַּם כָּאן אָמַר בֵּרֵר), and moreover (וְעוֹד), from the fact that in these two places (כִּי מִמַּה שֶׁבִּב׳ מְקוֹמוֹת אֵלּוּ), and likewise in all the places where it mentions what Atik took (וְכֵן בְּכָל הַמְּקוֹמוֹת אֲשֶׁר מַזְכִּיר מַה שֶּׁלָּקַח עַתִּיק), he includes all the aspects that he took in a single statement (כוֹלֵל כָּל הַבְּחִינוֹת אֲשֶׁר לָקַח בְּבַת אַחַת), it implies that all the aspects he took are from one equal category (מַשְׁמַע שֶׁכָּל הַבְּחִינוֹת אֲשֶׁר לָקַח הֵם מִבְּחִינָה אַחַת שָׁוֶה). And just as the half of the Keter of B"N that he took is from the Nekudot that emerged initially (וּכְמוֹ שֶׁהַחֲצִי כֶּתֶר דְּב״ן שֶׁלָּקַח הוּא מֵהַנְּקֻדוֹת שֶׁיָּצְאוּ בַּתְּחִלָּה), so too the rest of the aspects that he took (כֵּן שְׁאָר הַבְּחִינוֹת שֶׁלָּקַח הוּא), are from those same Nekudot (מֵאוֹתָם הַנְּקֻדוֹת).

For if not so (דְּאַלְכֵּי), he should not have mentioned and joined together (לֹא הוּא לֵיהּ לְהַזְכִּירָם וּלְעָרְבָם יַחַד) what he took from the Nekudot that emerged at first — which is the half of the Keter of B"N (מַה שֶּׁלָּקַח מֵהַנְּקֻדוֹת שֶׁיָּצְאוּ בַּתְּחִלָּה שֶׁהוּא חֲצִי כֶּתֶר דְּב״ן), with the other aspects that he took (עִם שְׁאָר הַבְּחִינוֹת שֶׁלָּקַח), which would be from something newly added and come afterward (שֶׁהֵם מִמַּה שֶּׁנִּתוֹסַף וּבָא מֵחָדָשׁ). And there at the end of that chapter he wrote (וְשָׁם בְּסוֹף אוֹתוֹ הַפֶּרֶק כָּתַב): that what is called Atik — Reisha de-La Ityada [the Unknowable Head] - its explanation is (כִּי מַה שֶּׁנִּקְרָא עַתִּיק רֵישָׁא דְּלָא אִתְיָדַע בֵּיאוּרוֹ הוּא), upon the aspect of the Name B"N that is there as mentioned (עַל בְּחִינַת שֵׁם ב״ן אֲשֶׁר שָׁם כַּנִּזְכָּר), for it clarifies from the clarifications that are in the Name B"N (כִּי הוּא מְבָרֵר מִן הַבֵּרוּרִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּשֵׁם ב״ן), and joins them to himself (וּמְחַבְּרָן עִמּוֹ), and they become the Nukvah to him, etc (וְנַעֲשִׂים נוּקְבָא אֵלָיו כו׳). And in Chapter Three he wrote (וּבְפ״ג כָּתַב): “And let us now return to explain the matter of the doubts” (וְנַחֲזוֹר עַתָּה לְבָאֵר עִנְיַן הַסְּפֵקוֹת), “that we said there are in Atik” (שֶׁאָמַרְנוּ שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּעַתִּיק), “regarding the aspect of what he takes for himself” (בְּבְחִינַת מַה שֶּׁלוֹקֵחַ לְעַצְמוֹ), “from part of the aspect of the Name B"N” (מֵחֵלֶק בְּחִינַת שֵׁם ב״ן), “which are the Nekudot” (שֶׁהֵם הַנְּקֻדוֹת), “which are the aspect of the Kings, etc.” (שֶׁהֵם בְּחִינַת הַמְּלָכִים כו׳). And as he was clarifying from the aspect of the Name B"N (וּכְאַשֶּׁר הָיָה הוּא מְבָרֵר מִבְּחִינַת שֵׁם ב״ן), which are the Kings as mentioned above (שֶׁהֵם הַמְּלָכִים כַּנַּ״ל), which also contain ten Sefirot, as explained above (אֲשֶׁר גַּם בָּהֶם י׳ סְפִירוֹת כַּנַּ״ל), behold, he clarified one part (הִנֵּה הוּא מְבָרֵר חֵלֶק אֶחָד), and connects it — in the aspect of the Keter of B"N — to the Keter of M"H (וּמְחַבְּרוֹ בְּבְחִינַת הַכֶּתֶר דְּב״ן אֶל הַכֶּתֶר דְּמ״ה), and afterward he clarifies another part from the Name B"N (וְאַחַר כָּךְ מְבָרֵר עוֹד חֵלֶק אֶחָד מִשֵּׁם ב״ן), from the Chokhmah of the Keter of B"N (מִן הַחָכְמָה דְּכֶתֶר דְּב״ן), and connects it to the Chokhmah of the Keter of M"H (וּמְחַבְּרוֹ עִם הַחָכְמָה דְּכֶתֶר דְּמ״ה), and so on with all of them (וְכֵן בְּכֻלָּם), until he clarifies the tenth part from the Name B"N (עַד שֶׁמְּבָרֵר חֵלֶק עֲשִׂירִי מִשֵּׁם ב״ן), and connects it to the Mem of the Keter of M"H (וּמְחַבְּרוֹ עִם מ׳ דְּכֶתֶר דְּמ״ה), and then the Partzuf of Atik is completed — end (וְאָז נִשְׁלַם פַּרְצוּף עַתִּיק ע״כ).

Behold, it is explained that all which is mentioned that Atik clarified (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר שֶׁכָּל הַנִּזְכָּר שֶׁבֵּרֵר עַתִּיק), is from the Nekudot which are the aspect of the Kings (הוּא מֵהַנְּקֻדוֹת שֶׁהֵם בְּחִינַת הַמְּלָכִים), and it is known that the Nekudot which are the aspect of the Kings (וִידוּעַ כִּי הַנְּקֻדוֹת שֶׁהֵם בְּחִינַת הַמְּלָכִים), are those which emerged at first (הֵם אוֹתָם אֲשֶׁר יָצְאוּ בַּתְּחִלָּה), in which occurred the Shevirah [Breaking] (אֲשֶׁר בָּהֶם הָיְתָה הַשְּׁבִירָה). And at the beginning of Chapter 85 he wrote (וּבְרֹאשׁ פ״ה כָּתַב): “And behold, the doubts that exist in the Reisha of Atik have been explained” (וְהִנֵּה נִתְבָּאֲרוּ הַסְּפֵקוֹת שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּרֵישָׁא דְעַתִּיק), “and now we shall explain the aspect of the seven Ketarim of the lower seven” (וְעַתָּה נְבָאֵר בְּחִינַת הַז׳ כְּתָרִים שֶׁל הַז״ת), “which are the Kings that died, etc.” (שֶׁהֵם הַמְּלָכִים דְּמֵתוּ כו׳) — see there (עֲיֵן שָׁם). Behold, it is explained also regarding the seven Ketarim that they are from the Kings that died (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר גַּם בַּז׳ כְּתָרִים שֶׁהֵם מֵהַמְּלָכִים דְּמֵתוּ). And in the book Mavo She’arim, Gate 3, Part 1, Chapter 3, he wrote (וּבְסֵפֶר מָבוֹא שְׁעָרִים ש״ג ח״א פ״ג כָּתַב): “You must know what are the aspects of the Name B"N that ascended in the Nukvah of Atik” (צָרִיךְ שֶׁתֵּדַע מָה הֵם הַבְּחִינוֹת דְּשֵׁם ב״ן שֶׁעָלוּ בְּנוּקְבָא דְּעַתִּיק). “Know that the ten Nekudot of the Name B"N” (דַּע כִּי הָעֶשֶׂר נְקֻדוֹת דְּשֵׁם ב״ן), “each one is certainly composed of ten” (וַדַּאי שֶׁכָּל אַחַת כְּלוּלָה מֵעֶשֶׂר), “corresponding to the Name M"H, where each of the ten Sefirot in it is composed of ten” (דּוּגְמַת שֵׁם מ״ה שֶׁכָּל אַחַת מֵהָעֶשֶׂר סְפִירוֹת שֶׁבּוֹ כְּלוּלָה מֵעֶשֶׂר). “And behold, the Keter of the Name M"H has ten Sefirot” (וְהִנֵּה הַכֶּתֶר דְּשֵׁם מ״ה יֵשׁ בּוֹ י׳ סְפִירוֹת), “and they extend in the male aspect of Atik” (וְהֵם מִתְפַּשְּׁטִים בְּדְכוּרָא דְּעַתִּיק). “And corresponding to it there are ten Sefirot in the Keter of the Name B"N” (וּכְנֶגְדּוֹ יֵשׁ י׳ סְפִירוֹת בְּכֶתֶר דְּשֵׁם ב״ן). “However, he does not take all of it, only the upper five of the Keter of B"N” (וְאֶמְנָם אֵינוֹ לוֹקְחוֹ כֻּלוֹ רַק ה״ר דְּכֶתֶר דְּב״ן), “and to complete the lack of the five lower ones, he also took the upper three of the Chokhmah of B"N” (וּלְהַשְׁלִים חֶסְרוֹן ה׳ תַּחְתּוֹנוֹת לָקְחָה גַם כֵּן ג״ר דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן), “and the two lower ones of Binah of B"N” (וְד״ר דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן), “and the seven Ketarim that are in the lower seven of B"N” (וְז׳ כְּתָרִים שֶׁבַּז״ת דְּב״ן), “and even with all this, may it be that it completes the lack of the five lower ones of the Keter of B"N” (וְהֲלוַאי שֶׁמִּכָּל אֵלּוּ יוּשְׁלַם חֶסְרוֹן ה׳ תַּחְתּוֹנוֹת דְּכֶתֶר דְּב״ן), “and from all these aspects the Nukvah of Atik is made, etc.” (וּמִכָּל אֵלּוּ הַבְּחִינוֹת נַעֲשָׂה נוּקְבָא דְּעַתִּיק כו׳) — see there (עֲיֵן שָׁם).

Behold, he first prefaced that the ten Nekudot of B"N (הֲרֵי כִּי בַּתְּחִלָּה הִקְדִּים כִּי הָעֶשֶׂר נְקֻדוֹת דְּב״ן), each one is composed of ten (הֵם כָּל אַחַת כְּלוּלָה מֵעֶשֶׂר), in order to explain afterwards what is taken from them (כְּדֵי לְבָאֵר אַחַר כָּךְ מַה שֶּׁלוֹקֵחַ מֵהֶם). For if he would not first preface that each one is composed of ten (כִּי אִם לֹא יַקְדִּים תְּחִלָּה שֶׁכָּל אַחַת כְּלוּלָה מֵעֶשֶׂר), he could not say that he took the upper five of Keter (אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לוֹמַר שֶׁלָּקַח ה״ר דְּכֶתֶר), and the upper three of Chokhmah (וְג״ר דְּחָכְמָה), and the two lower of Binah (וְד״ר דְּבִינָה), and the seven Ketarim of the lower seven (וְז׳ כְּתָרִים דְּז״ת). For a simple Nekudah is a single aspect (כִּי סְתַם נְקוּדָה הִיא בְּחִינָה אַחַת), and therefore he prefaced that the ten Nekudot of B"N (וְעַל כֵּן הִקְדִּים תְּחִלָּה כִּי הָיָה נְקוּדוֹת דְּב״ן), each one is composed of ten (הֵם כָּל אַחַת כְּלוּלָה מִי׳). And it is known that the Nekudot of B"N are those that emerged at first, in which was the Shevirah [Breaking] (וִידוּעַ כִּי הַנְּקֻדוֹת דְּב״ן הֵם אוֹתָם שֶׁיָּצְאוּ בַּתְּחִלָּה שֶׁבָּהֶם הָיְתָה הַשְּׁבִירָה). If so, it is from them that Atik took (וְאִם כֵּן מֵהֶם הוּא אֲשֶׁר לָקַח עַתִּיק), in order to complete the aspect of his Nukvah (כְּדֵי לְהַשְׁלִים בְּחִינַת הַנּוּקְבָא שֶׁלוֹ).

In this manner, according to the simple and surface-level reading of the words of the Rav, of blessed memory (בְּאוֹפֶן כִּי לְפִי פְּשָׁטוּת וּשְׁטִיחוּת לְשׁוֹנוֹת הָרַב ז״ל), it appears that what Atik took from the Name B"N (נִרְאֶה שֶׁמַּה שֶּׁלָּקַח עַתִּיק מֵהַשֵּׁם ב״ן), is from the aspect that emerged first (הוּא מֵהַבְּחִינָה שֶׁיָּצְאוּ בַּתְּחִלָּה), in which the Shevirah [Breaking] occurred (שֶׁבָּהֶם הָיְתָה הַשְּׁבִירָה). And furthermore (וְעוֹד), for indeed if what he took is from the aspect that emerged initially (כִּי בְּשֶׁלְמָא עִם מַה שֶּׁלָּקַח הוּא מֵהַבְּחִינָה שֶׁיָּצְאוּ בַּתְּחִלָּה), then the language used everywhere fits well (אָשֵׁר הַלָּשׁוֹן הָאָמֻר בְּכָל מָקוֹם), that Atik took the upper three of Chokhmah and the lower two of Binah of B"N (שֶׁעַתִּיק לָקַח ג״ר דְּחָכְמָה וּד״ר דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן), for these two aspects of Chokhmah and Binah alone (כִּי אֵלּוּ הַב׳ בְּחִינוֹת דְּחו״ב לְבַד), are those which emerged from Abba and Imma of B"N (הֵם מַה שֶּׁיָּצְאוּ מֵאוּ״א דְּב״ן). But if what he took is from what was added later to Abba and Imma (אֲבָל אִם מַה שֶּׁלָּקַח הוּא מִמַּה שֶּׁנִּתוֹסַף לְאוּ״א), since they already possess all ten Sefirot of B"N completely (כִּי כְּבָר יֵשׁ לָהֶם כָּל הַי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּב״ן שְׁלֵמוּת), then he should not have said simply that Atik took the upper three of Chokhmah and the lower two of Binah of B"N (אִם כֵּן לֹא הֲוָה לֵיהּ לוֹמַר סְתָם שֶׁלָּקַח עַתִּיק ג״ר דְּחָכְמָה וּד״ר דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן), but rather he should have said that Atik took the upper three of Chokhmah of B"N from Abba, and the lower two of Binah of B"N from Imma (רַק הֲוָה לֵיהּ לוֹמַר שֶׁלָּקַח עַתִּיק ג״ר דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן דְּאַבָּא וּד״ר דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן דְּאִמָּא). And in stating it simply (וּבְאֹמְרוֹ סְתָם), it is possible to understand that the upper three of Chokhmah of B"N (אֶפְשָׁר לְהָבִין כִּי ג״ר דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן), are the Keter, Chokhmah, and Binah of Abba after it was completed (הֵם הַכ״ח״ב דְּאַבָּא אַחַר שֶׁנִּשְׁלְמוּ), for the general term “Chokhmah of B"N” refers to Abba (כִּי סְתַם חָכְמָה דְּב״ן הוּא אַבָּא); and likewise the lower two of Binah of B"N (וְכֵן ד״ר דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן), are the Chokhmah, Binah, and Chesed of Imma in their completion (הֵם הַכ״ח״ב וְחֶסֶד שְׁלֵמוּת), for the general term “Binah of B"N” is Imma (כִּי סְתַם בִּינָה דְּב״ן הִיא אִמָּא).

And furthermore (וְעוֹד), for indeed if what he took from Chokhmah and Binah is from the aspects that emerged at first (כִּי בְּשֶׁלְמָא אִם מַה שֶּׁלָּקַח מֵהַחו״ב הֵם מֵהַבְּחִינָה שֶׁיָּצְאוּ בַּתְּחִלָּה), then it is well stated that he took from Chokhmah and Binah (אָשֵׁר מַה שֶּׁלָּקַח מֵהַחו״ב), for these are the aspects that emerged (כִּי אֵלּוּ הֵם הַבְּחִינוֹת שֶׁיָּצְאוּ). But if what he took is from that which was added afterwards (אֲבָל אִם מַה שֶּׁלָּקַח הוּא מִמַּה שֶׁנִּתוֹסַף אַחַר כָּךְ), behold, there were added to Abba and Imma their own Ketarim (הֲרֵי נִתְּוֹסְפוּ בְּאוּ״א הַכְּתָרִים שֶׁלָּהֶם), and if so (וְאִם כֵּן), it would have been more fitting that he take the upper three of the Keter of Abba and the lower two of the Keter of Imma (יוֹתֵר הֲוָה שַׁיֵּיךְ שֶׁיִּקַּח ג״ר דְּכֶתֶר דְּאַבָּא וּד״ר דְּכֶתֶר דְּאִמָּא), for these aspects relate more to Atik, which is entirely of the aspect of Keter (שֶׁבְּחִינוֹת אֵלּוּ שַׁיָּיכִין יוֹתֵר בְּעַתִּיק אֲשֶׁר כֻּלּוֹ הוּא בְּחִינַת כֶּתֶר). And why did he leave their Ketarim and take from their Chokhmah and Binah? (וְלָמָּה הִנִּיחַ הַכְּתָרִים שֶׁלָּהֶם וְלָקַח מֵהַחָכְמָה וְהַבִּינָה שֶׁלָּהֶם). And furthermore, it seems to me to prove (וְעוֹד נִלְעַ"ד לְהַכְרִיעַ), that what Atik took is specifically from the aspects that emerged first (שֶׁמַּה שֶּׁלָּקַח עַתִּיק הוּא דַּוְקָא מֵהַבְּחִינָה שֶׁיָּצְאוּ תְּחִלָּה), and not from what was added later (וְלֹא מִמַּה שֶּׁנִּתוֹסַף אַחַר כָּךְ). For behold, this matter that it was said (כִּי הִנֵּה זֶה הָעִנְיָן שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר), that were added the lower half of the Keter and the other nine Sefirot in Atik (שֶׁנִּתוֹסַף חֲצִי תַחְתּוֹן דְּכֶתֶר וְט״ס אֲחֵרוֹת בְּעַתִּיק), and likewise in Arich Anpin (וְכֵן בְּא״א), and likewise nine other Sefirot in Abba and Imma (וְכֵן ט״ס אֲחֵרוֹת בְּאוּ״א), was brought in Etz Chayim, Gate of the Tikkun, Chapter 85 (הוּבָא בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר הַתִּקּוּן פ״ה), and there it is written (וְשָׁם כָּתוּב): “At first the essence was complete, and the Kelim [Vessels] were small” (שֶׁמִּתְּחִלָּה הָיָה הָעַצְמוּת שָׁלֵם וְהַכֵּלִים קְטַנִּים), “and afterwards, through the Tikkun, the missing Kelim [Vessels] were added to each and every aspect” (וְאַחַר כָּךְ בַּתִּקּוּן נִתְּוֹסְפוּ הַכֵּלִים הַחֲסֵרִים לְכָל בְּחִינָה וּבְחִינָה) — see there well (יַעֲשֶׂ״ב).

It is thus found that what was added pertains only to the Kelim [Vessels] (נִמְצָא שֶׁמַּה שֶּׁנִּתוֹסַף אֵינוֹ רַק בְּבְחִינַת הַכֵּלִים), for the essence — which is the Light — was already complete (כִּי הָעַצְמוּת שֶׁהוּא הָאוֹר כְּבָר הָיָה שָׁלֵם). And in the Derush haSefekot it is explained (וּבְדְּרוּשׁ הַסְּפֵקוֹת מְבוֹאָר), that there is a doubt (שֶׁיֵּשׁ סָפֵק), whether from these upper three of Chokhmah and lower two of Binah that Atik took (אִם מֵאֵלּוּ הַג״ר דְּחָכְמָה וּד״ר דְּבִינָה שֶׁלָּקַח עַתִּיק), whether he took the lights and the Kelim [Vessels] (אִם לָקַח הָאוֹרוֹת וְהַכֵּלִים), or only the lights (אוֹ אוֹרוֹת לְבַד), or only the Kelim [Vessels] (אוֹ כֵּלִים לְבַד), whether from the Back or from the Face (דְּאָחוֹר אוֹ דְּפָנִים) — see there (יַעֲיֵן שָׁם). And if so (וְאִם כֵּן), if indeed what he took is from what emerged initially (אִם בְּשָׁלְמָא מַה שֶּׁלָּקַח הוּא מִמַּה שֶׁיָּצָא בַּתְּחִלָּה), where lights and Kelim [Vessels] emerged (שֶׁיָּצְאוּ כֵּלִים וְאוֹר), it is reasonable to be in doubt whether he took lights and Kelim [Vessels], or only lights, or only Kelim [Vessels] (אִיכָּא לְסַפְּקוּיֵי אִם לָקַח אוֹרוֹת וְכֵּלִים אוֹ אוֹרוֹת לְבַד אוֹ כֵּלִים לְבַד), because there are lights and Kelim [Vessels] present (מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיֵּשׁ אוֹרוֹת וְכֵּלִים). But if what he took is from what was added later (אֲבָל אִם מַה שֶּׁלָּקַח הוּא מִמַּה שֶׁנִּתוֹסַף אַחַר כָּךְ), behold, what was added is only the aspect of Kelim [Vessels] (הֲרֵי מַה שֶּׁנִּתוֹסַף אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא בְּחִינַת כֵּלִים), and surely what he took is only Kelim [Vessels] (וּבוַדַּאי שֶׁמַּה שֶּׁלָּקַח אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא כֵּלִים), for that is what was added (כִּי זֶה הוּא מַה שֶּׁנִּתוֹסַף), and what room is there to doubt whether he took lights (וּמַה אִיכָּא לְסַפְּקוּיֵי אִם לָקַח אוֹרוֹת), since what was added is not of the aspect of lights (מֵאַחַר מַה שֶּׁנִּתוֹסַף אֵינוֹ בְּחִינַת אוֹרוֹת). And likewise there in Chapter 85 of Sha‘ar Atik it is explained (וְכֵן שָׁם בְּפ״ה מִשַּׁעַר עַתִּיק מְבוֹאָר), that the seven Ketarim which he took from the lower seven are in the aspect of their lights (כִּי הַז׳ כְּתָרִים שֶׁלָּקַח מֵהַז״ת הוּא בִּבְחִינַת הָאוֹרוֹת שֶׁלָּהֶם). And if what he took is from what was added (וְאִם מַה שֶּׁלָּקַח הוּא מִמַּה שֶּׁנִּתוֹסַף), behold, nothing was added in them except Kelim [Vessels] (הֲרֵי לֹא נִתְּוֹסַף בָּהֶם רַק כֵּלִים).

And further (וְעוֹד), that there in Chapter 85 of Sha‘ar haTikkun it is written (כִּי שָׁם בְּפ״ה מִשַּׁעַר הַתִּקּוּן כָּתוּב), that nine Kelim [Vessels] were added in Abba, apart from the Kli [Vessel] of Chokhmah which was already there from the outset (כִּי נִתְּוֹסְפוּ ט׳ כֵּלִים בְּאַבָּא זוּלַת כְּלִי הַחָכְמָה שֶׁבָּהּ שֶׁכְּבָר הָיָה בּוֹ מֵעִיקַּרָא), and nine Kelim [Vessels] were added in Imma, apart from the Kli [Vessel] of Binah which was already there from the outset (וְנִתְּוֹסְפוּ ט׳ כֵּלִים בְּאִמָּא זוּלַת כְּלִי הַבִּינָה שֶׁבָּהּ שֶׁכְּבָר הָיָה בָּהּ מֵעִיקַּרָא) — see there (יַעֲיֵן שָׁם). And if so (וְאִם כֵּן), since what Atik took is from the Chokhmah and Binah (כֵּיוָן שֶׁמַּה שֶּׁלָּקַח עַתִּיק הוּא מֵהַחו״ב), it must necessarily be from what emerged at first (אִם כֵּן עַל כּוֹרְחִין הוּא מִמַּה שֶׁיָּצָא בַּתְּחִלָּה), for the Chokhmah and Binah after the Tikkun are themselves the same Chokhmah and Binah from before the Tikkun (שֶׁהֲרֵי הַחו״ב שֶׁל אַחַר הַתִּקּוּן הֵם עַצְמָם הַחו״ב דְּקוֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן), for in them nothing was added (כִּי בָּהֶם לֹא נִתְּוֹסַף דָּבָר), for what was added was apart from the Chokhmah and Binah (כִּי מַה שֶּׁנִּתוֹסַף הוּא זוּלַת הַחו״ב).

And if so (וְאִם כֵּן), how is it possible to say that what Atik took is from what was added afterwards (אֵיךְ יִתָּכֵן לוֹמַר שֶׁמַּה שֶּׁלָּקַח עַתִּיק הוּא מִמַּה שֶׁנִּתוֹסַף אַחַר כָּךְ), since what he took is from the Chokhmah and Binah (מֵאַחַר שֶׁמַּה שֶּׁלָּקַח הוּא מֵהַחו״ב), which were already there from the outset and were not added afterward (שֶׁכְּבָר הָיוּ מֵעִיקַּרָא וְלֹא נִתְּוֹסְפוּ אַחַר כָּךְ). And since that which he took from the Keter, Chokhmah, and Binah of B"N is from what emerged at first (וְכֵיוָן שֶׁמַּה שֶּׁלָּקַח מֵהַכַּח״ב דְּב״ן הוּא מִמַּה שֶׁיָּצָא בַּתְּחִלָּה), then certainly the seven Ketarim which he took from the lower seven (אִם כֵּן וַדַּאי שֶׁהַז׳ כְּתָרִים שֶׁלָּקַח מֵהַז״ת הֵם מֵהַכְּלָלוּת שֶׁהָיָה בָּהֶם כְּשֶׁיָּצְאוּ בַּתְּחִלָּה). And what is even more astonishing to me, in my humble opinion, is his own language in what he wrote afterwards (וּמִן הַיּוֹתֵר תֵּימָא לְעַנְיָן דַּעְתִּי הוּא הַלָּשׁוֹן שֶׁלּוֹ עַצְמוֹ בְּמַה שֶּׁכָּתַב אַחַר כָּךְ): “And Abba and Imma, which are the Chokhmah and Binah of B"N, had added to them nine other Sefirot of B"N” (וְאוּ״א שֶׁהֵם חו״ב דְּב״ן נִתְּוֹסְפוּ ט״ס אֲחֵרוֹת דְּב״ן), “so that each one would be completed to ten Sefirot for one” (דְּכָל אֶחָד לְהַשְׁלִים י׳ סְפִירוֹת לְאֵל א), “and from these ten Sefirot, Atik took certain parts from the upper three of Chokhmah and the lower two of Binah, etc.” (וּמֵאֵלּוּ הַי׳ סְפִירוֹת לָקַח עַתִּיק אֵיזֶה חֲלָקִים מִג״ר דְּחָכְמָה וּד״ר דְּבִינָה כו׳), “in such a way that what remained for Abba from the Chokhmah of B"N are the six lower ones in it, which are the Zeir anpin and Nukvah within it, complete” (בְּאוֹפֶן שֶׁנִּשְׁאָר לְאַבָּא מֵהַחָכְמָה דְּב״ן הַו״ק שֶׁבָּהּ שֶׁהֵם הַז״ו״ן שֶׁבָּהּ שְׁלֵמִים), “and likewise from the Binah of B"N to Imma” (וְכֵן מִבִּינָה דְּב״ן לְאִמָּא). And it is found that Abba was rectified and came from the six lower ones, which are the Zeir anpin and Nukvah of Chokhmah of B"N, etc.” (וְנִמְצָא כִּי אַבָּא נִתְקַן וְנַעֲשָׂה מֵהַו״ק שֶׁהֵם ז״ו״ן דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן כו׳), “and Imma was rectified and became from the six lower ones, which are the Zeir anpin and Nukvah of Binah of B"N, etc.” (וְאִמָּא נִתְּקְנָה וְנַעֲשֵׂית מֵהַו״ק שֶׁהֵם ז״ו״ן דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן וכו׳).

And it is difficult in my humble opinion to withhold (וְקָשֶׁה לְעַנְיָן דַּעְתִּי מִלֹּא יִמָּנַע), that if this statement — that the six extremities of Chokhmah and Binah of B"N were rectified into Abba and Imma (שֶׁאִם זֶה שֶׁאָמַר שֶׁמו״ק דְּחו״ב דְּב״ן נִתְּקְנוּ אוּ״א), if they are the six extremities of the Chokhmah and Binah of B"N that emerged initially (אִם הֵם הַו״ק דְּחו״ב דְּב״ן שֶׁיָּצְאוּ בַּתְּחִלָּה), then also the upper three and lower two of Chokhmah and Binah which Atik took (אִם כֵּן גַּם הַג״ר וְד״ר דְּחו״ב שֶׁלָּקַח עַתִּיק), are from the Chokhmah and Binah that emerged at first (הֵם מֵהַחו״ב שֶׁיָּצְאוּ בַּתְּחִלָּה), for this is the reason why what remained from them is the six extremities used for the rectification of Abba and Imma (כִּי עַל כֵּן מַה שֶּׁנִּשְׁאַר מֵהֶם הֵם הַו״ק לְתִקּוּן אוּ״א). But if what is stated — that the six extremities of B"N rectified Abba and Imma — refers to what was added later (וְאִם מַה שֶּׁאָמַר שֶׁמו״ק דְּב״ן נִתְּקְנוּ אוּ״א הוּא מִמַּה שֶׁנִּתוֹסַף אַחַר כָּךְ), then how can the language say that Abba and Imma were rectified from the six extremities of Chokhmah and Binah of B"N (אִם כֵּן מַה הַלָּשׁוֹן אוֹמֶר שֶׁאוּ״א נִתְּקְנוּ מֵהַו״ק דְּחו״ב דְּב״ן), for behold they were rectified from all that was added from the Name B"N (וְהֲלֹא נִתְּקְנוּ מִכָּל מַה שֶּׁנִּתוֹסַף מִשֵּׁם ב״ן).

For indeed, if these six extremities of Chokhmah and Binah of B"N — from which Abba and Imma were rectified — are from the original Chokhmah and Binah (כִּי בְּשָׁלְמָא אִם אֵלּוּ הַו״ק דְּחו״ב דְּב״ן שֶׁמֵהֶם נִתְּקְנוּ אוּ״א מֵחו״ב הֵם הָרִאשׁוֹנִים), then the statement that Abba and Imma were rectified from the six extremities of Chokhmah and Binah of B"N is perfectly fine (אָשֵׁר מַה שֶּׁאָמַר שֶׁאוּ״א נִתְּקְנוּ מֵהַו״ק דְּחו״ב דְּב״ן), for even though additional nine Sefirot were added to them (שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּתוֹסְפוּ בָהֶם עוֹד ט״ס אֲחֵרוֹת), the attribution of their rectification to the six extremities of Chokhmah and Binah is appropriate (שַׁיֵּיךְ שַׁפִּיר כִּינוּי תִּקּוּנָם אֶל הַו״ק דְּחו״ב), because they are the root and essence of them (מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵם הַשֹּׁרֶשׁ וְהָעִקָּר שֶׁלָּהֶם), and the rest is an addition relative to them (וְהַשְּׁאָר הוּא תּוֹסֶפֶת אֶצְלָם).

But if these six extremities of Chokhmah and Binah are from what was added (אֲבָל אִם אֵלּוּ הַו״ק דְּחו״ב הֵם מִמַּה שֶּׁנִּתוֹסַף), then why should the rectification of Abba and Imma be ascribed to the six extremities of Chokhmah and Binah more than to all of what was added (אִם כֵּן לָמָּה נִתְּקְנָה תִּקּוּן אוּ״א אֶל הַו״ק דְּחו״ב יוֹתֵר מִכָּל מַה שֶּׁנִּתוֹסַף), since all of it is an addition (כֵּיוָן שֶׁהַכֹּל הוּא תּוֹסֶפֶת).

And furthermore (וְעוֹד), if so, it follows that ten Sefirot were added to each one (דְּאִם כֵּן נִמְצָא שֶׁנִּתוֹסְפוּ י׳ סְפִירוֹת בְּכָל אֶחָד), whereas earlier it was said that only nine other Sefirot were added to each one (וֶהֱלֹא מִתְּחִלָּה אָמַר שֶׁנִּתוֹסְפוּ ט״ס אֲחֵרוֹת בְּכָל אֶחָד), and this is compelled by what was written earlier in Sha‘ar haTikkun, Chapter 85 (אֲשֶׁר זֶה מֻכְרָח כְּפִי מַה שֶּׁנֶּאֱמַר לְעֵיל מִשַּׁעַר הַתִּקּוּן פ״ה), in a manner that I was not able to understand these words of the Rav, of blessed memory (בְּאוֹפֶן שֶׁלֹּא יָכֹלְתִּי לְהָבִין לְשׁוֹנוֹת ז״ל), and I do not know who compelled him to speak in this manner — contrary to the plain understanding from the derashot of the Rav (וְגַם לֹא יָדַעְתִּי מִי הֶכְרִיחוֹ לוֹמַר בָּזֶה הָאֹפֶן הֶפֶךְ הַמּוּבָן מִדְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב), both from the simplicity of the language and from what I have demonstrated above according to my humble opinion (הֵן מִפְּשָׁטוּת הַלְּשׁוֹנוֹת וְהֵן כְּפִי מַה שֶּׁהֶכְרַחְתִּי לְעֵיל לְפִי ענ״ד).

Shemen, Siman 26

(שֶׁמ״ן סִימָן כ״ו)

And behold, in this matter of the distinction between the Partzufim of Abba and Imma and Yisrael-Saba and Tevunah (וְהִנֵּה בָּזֶה הָעִנְיָן דְּחִלּוּק הַפַּרְצוּפִים דְּאוּ״א וְיִשְׂרָאֵל סַבָּא וּתְבוּנָה), which Rabbi Sar Shalom, of blessed memory, wrote about (שֶׁכָּתַב הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל), there are differing derashot in the writings of the Rav, of blessed memory (יֵשׁ דְּרוּשִׁים חֲלוּקִים בִּכְתְבֵי הָרַב זלה״ה). However, the order that Rabbi Sar Shalom, of blessed memory, wrote (אֲבָל זֶה הַסֵּדֶר שֶׁכָּתַב הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל), was brought in Sha‘ar haMochin [Intellects] of Ze‘ir Anpin, Chapter Ten — see there (הוּבָא בְּשַׁעַר מוֹחִין דְּז״א פ״י עֲיֵן שָׁם). For that reason, I do not know why he did not mention also the Keter of Binah of M“H which Abba took, as mentioned there (כִּי עַל כֵּן לֹא יָדַעְתִּי לָמָּה לֹא הִזְכִּיר גַּם אֶת כֶּתֶר דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה שֶׁלָּקַח אַבָּא כַּנִּזְכָּר שָׁם). And also in what he changed — saying that Abba was rectified and became from the six lower ones which are the Zeir anpin and Nukvah of Chokhmah of B"N (וְגַם בְּמַה שֶׁשִּׁינָּה שֶׁאָמַר כִּי אַבָּא נִתְקַן וְנַעֲשָׂה מֵו״ק שֶׁהֵם זו״ן דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן), why did he say “six extremities” and not “Zayin Tachtonot [Seven Lower Sefirot]”? (דְּלָמָּה אָמַר ו״ק וְלֹא אָמַר ז״ת), for the six extremities are not Zeir anpin and Nukvah — only Ze‘ir Anpin (כִּי הַו״ק אֵינָם זו״ן רַק ז״א), and the seventh, which is Malkhut, is the aspect of the Nukvah (וְהַשְּׁבִיעִית שֶׁהִיא הַמַלְכוּת הִיא בְּחִינַת נוּקְבָא). And as he himself specified afterwards, saying (וּכְמוֹ שֶׁהוּא עַצְמוֹ פֵּרֵט אוֹתָם אַחַר כָּךְ שֶׁאָמַר): “And Abba of Binah of M“H was joined with Ze‘ir Anpin of Chokhmah of B"N, etc.” (וְנִתְחַבְּרוּ אַבָּא דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה עִם ז״א דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן כו׳), and likewise: “Ze‘ir Anpin of Binah of M“H was joined with the Malkhut of Chokhmah of B"N, etc.” (וְכֵן נִתְחַבְּרוּ ז״א דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה עִם מַלְכוּת דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן כו׳). And he wrote there thus, saying: “And indeed, from B"N Abba took the six lower ones of Chokhmah of B"N, and the Malkhut of Chokhmah of B"N was taken by Yisrael Saba, etc.” — see there (וְכָכָה כָּתַב שָׁם וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ: וְאָמְנָם מִב״ן לוֹקֵחַ אַבָּא ו״ק דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן וּמַלְכוּת דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן לָקְחָה יִשְׂרָאֵל סַבָּא כו׳ עֲיֵן שָׁם). And also what he wrote — that Imma was rectified and became from the six extremities which are the Zeir anpin and Nukvah of Binah of B"N, etc (וְגַם מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב וְאִמָּא נִתְּקְנָה וְנַעֲשֵׂית מֵו״ק שֶׁהֵם זו״ן דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן כו׳), he should not have said “six extremities” but rather “five lower ones” (לֹא הֲוָה לֵיהּ לוֹמַר ו״ק רַק ה׳ תַּחְתּוֹנוֹת), for behold, the Chesed of Binah of B"N was taken by Atik (כִּי הֲרֵי הַחֶסֶד דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן לָקְחוֹ עַתִּיק).

And thus he wrote there (וְכֵן כָּתַב שָׁם): “And indeed, from Binah of B"N, the first four — Chokhmah, Binah, Chesed — were taken by Atik (וְאָמְנָם מִבִּינָה דְּב״ן הַד׳ רִאשׁוֹנוֹת כ״ח״ב חֶסֶד לָקְחָם עַתִּיק), and then the five extremities of Binah of B"N — which are Gevurah, Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod — were taken by Imma (וְאָז ה׳ קְצָווֹת דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן הֵם גתנְהִ״י לָקְחָם אִמָּא), and the Malkhut of Binah of B"N was taken by Tevunah” (וּמַלְכוּת דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן לוֹקְחָה תְּבוּנָה) — see there (עֲיֵן שָׁם). And also, these terms that he mentioned — “Upper and Lower Abba and Imma” and “Upper and Lower Yisrael-Saba and Tevunah” — at this time I have not found in the writings of the Rav, of blessed memory (וְגַם אֵלּוּ הַכִּנּוּיִים שֶׁהִזְכִּיר אוּ״א עֶלְיוֹנִין וְתַתָּאִין וְכֵן יִשְׂסו״ת עֶלְיוֹנִין וְתַתָּאִין לְעֵת כָּזֹאת לֹא מָצָאתִי בִּדְבַרֵי הָרַב זלה״ה), except for “Upper Abba and Imma” and “Yisrael-Saba and Tevunah” (רַק אוּ״א עֶלְיוֹנִים וְיִשְׂסו״ת), and so he concluded there in Sha‘ar haMochin [Intellects] of Ze‘ir Anpin, with the following: (וְכֵן סִיֵּים שָׁם בְּשַׁעַר מוֹחִין דְּז״א וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ): “And it is found that Abba has both M“H and B"N, and Imma has both M“H and B"N, and Yisrael-Saba has M“H and B"N, and Tevunah has M“H and B"N” — see there (וְנִמְצָא כִּי אַבָּא יֵשׁ לוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן וְאִמָּא יֵשׁ לָהּ מ״ה וּב״ן וְיֵש״ס מ״ה וּב״ן וּתְבוּנָה מ״ה וּב״ן עֲיֵן שָׁם).

And also what he wrote regarding the Partzufim in terms of their externality and internality (וְכֵן מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב בְּעִנְיַן הַפַּרְצוּפִים בִּבְחִינַת חִיצוֹנִיּוּתָם וּפְנִימִיּוּתָם), this too I do not know where its source is at present (גַּם אֶת זֶה לֹא יָדַעְתִּי אֵי מְקוֹמוֹ לְעֵת כָּזֹאת), for what is written in the words of the Rav, of blessed memory, is that the Zivug [Union] of externality is attributed to Yisrael-Saba and Tevunah (כִּי מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בִּדְבַרֵי הָרַב זלה״ה שֶׁזִּוּוּג חִיצוֹנִיּוּת מְכַנֶּה אוֹתוֹ אֶל יִשְׂסו״ת), and the Zivug [Union] of internality is attributed to Abba and Imma (וְזִוּוּג דְּפְנִימִיּוּת מְכַנֶּה אוֹתוֹ אֶל אוּ״א), as mentioned in Sha‘ar haKavanot, Drush Vav of Keri’at Shema (כַּנִּזְכָּר בְּשַׁעַר הַכַּוָּנוֹת דְּרוּ״ש ו׳ דְּק״ש), and see in Etz Chayim, Sha‘ar Chitzoniyut [Externality] and Penimiyut [Internality], Chapter One (וְעֲיֵן בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר חִיצוֹנִיּוּת וּפְנִימִיּוּת פ״א). Also, the term “Olam haBa [World to come]” — according to the words of the Rav, of blessed memory — appears to be in Tevunah (גַּם כִּינוּי עוֹלָם הַבָּא לְפִי דִּבְרֵי הָרַב זלה״ה נִרְאֶה שֶׁהוּא בִּתְבוּנָה), as it is written in Etz Chayim, Sha‘ar haZivugim [Unions], Chapter 5 (כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר הַזִּוּוּגִים פ״ה).

Shemen, Siman 27

(שֶׁמ״ן סִימָן כ״ז)

And behold, also regarding what he wrote — that the six extremities of M“H and the six extremities of B"N were included one within the other and enwrapped one within the other (וְהִנֵּה גַּם בְּמַה שֶּׁכָּתַב כִּי ו״ק דְּמ״ה וְו״ק דְּב״ן נִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and are called the great Zeir anpin and Nukvah (וְנִקְרְאוּ זו״ן הַגְּדוֹלִים), for the six extremities of B"N is called the great Rachel, the Malkhut that is in his body (כִּי ו״ק דְּב״ן נִקְרֵאת רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה מַלְכוּת שֶׁבְּגוּפוֹ), and sometimes it is called by the name Leah (וּלְפָעָמִים נִקְרֵאת בְּשֵׁם לֵאָה), and in their totality they are called Ze‘ir Anpin (וּבִכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרָא ז״א). And likewise the Malkhut, the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin of M“H, joined with the Malkhut, the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin of B"N (וְכֵן נִתְחַבְּרוּ מַלְכוּת נוּקְבָא דְּז״א דְּמ״ה עִם מַלְכוּת נוּקְבָא דְּז״א דְּב״ן), and they were included one within the other and enwrapped one within the other (וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), and they clothed the Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, and Yesod of the great Zeir anpin and Nukvah (וְהִלְבִּישׁוּ לְתַּנֵ״ה"י דְּזו״ן הַגְּדוֹלִים), and these are called Ya‘akov and Rachel (וְאֵלּוּ נִקְרְאוּ יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל), and in their totality they are called the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin — thus ends the quote (וּבִכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרֵאת נוּקְבָא דְּז״א עכ״ל).

And behold, according to his language, which we shall write below (וְהִנֵּה כְּפִי לְשׁוֹנוֹ שֶׁנִּכְתֹּב לְקַמָּן), and likewise in all the order of the kavvanot which he arranged (וְכֵן בְּכָל סֵדֶר הַכַּוָּנוֹת אֲשֶׁר סִדֵּר), it is explained that the essential Zeir anpin and Nukvah mentioned in the writings of the Rav, of blessed memory, are these that are called the great Zeir anpin and Nukvah (מְבֹאָר שֶׁעִקַּר זו״ן הַנִּזְכָּר בִּדְבַרֵי הָרַב זלה״ה הֵם אֵלּוּ הַנִּקְרָאִים זו״ן הַגְּדוֹלִים), for the six extremities of M“H is Ze‘ir Anpin (כִּי ו״ק דְּמ״ה הוּא ז״א), and the six extremities of B"N is Rachel the Great (וְו״ק דְּב״ן הִיא רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה), and they are always included together in the secret of “He is in Netzach, and She is in Hod” (וְתָמִיד הֵם כְּלוּלִים יַחַד בְּסוֹד אִיהוּ בִנְצַח וְאִיהִי בְּהוֹד). And the two Malkhuyot of M“H and B"N — which he said are called Ya‘akov and Rachel — that is to say, that Ya‘akov is the Malkhut of M“H and Rachel is the Malkhut of B"N (וְהַמַּלְכֻיּוֹת דְּמ״ה וּב״ן שֶׁאָמַר שֶׁהֵם נִקְרְאוּ יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל דְּהַיְינוּ כִּי יַעֲקֹב הוּא הַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וְרָחֵל הִיא הַמַלְכוּת דְּב״ן), and in their totality they are called the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin (וּבִכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרֵאת נוּקְבָא דְּז״א) — his intention is not upon the general Malkhut of all Atzilut, which is the point of the letter Heh and the Partzuf of the Heh of the Five Partzufim of the general Atzilut (אֵין כַּוָּנָתוֹ עַל הַמַלְכוּת דְּכְלָלוּת הָאֲצִילוּת שֶׁהִיא נְקֻדָּה הֵ״א וּפַרְצוּף הֵ״א דְּה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים דְּכְלָלוּת הָאֲצִילוּת), but rather his intention is upon the seventh Sefirah of Ze‘ir Anpin, which is the seventh king — the Malkhut of Ze‘ir Anpin (רַק כַּוָּנָתוֹ עַל הַסְּפִירָה הַשְּׁבִיעִית דְּז״א שֶׁהוּא הַמֶּלֶךְ הַשְּׁבִיעִי דְּז״א), as will be explained below (וּכְמוֹ שֶׁמְּבוֹאָר לְקַמָּן). And likewise, in all the order of his kavvanot, wherever the Rav, of blessed memory, says “the Nukvah,” his intention is to arrange Ya‘akov and Rachel — that is, these mentioned above (וְכֵן בְּכָל סֵדֶר כַּוָּנוֹתָיו בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁהָרַב זלה״ה אוֹמֵר נוּקְבָא הוּא ז״ל מְסַדֵּר יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל שֶׁהֵם אֵלּוּ הָאֲמוּרִים).

Indeed, he did not show us in which derush of the Rav, of blessed memory, it is stated (הֲאָמְנָם לֹא הֶרְאָה לָנוּ בְּאֵיזֶה דְּרוּשׁ מִדְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב זלה״ה נֶאֱמַר), that the six extremities of M“H and B"N, which were included and enwrapped one within the other (כִּי הַו״ק דְּמ״ה וּב״ן שֶׁנִּכְלְלוּ וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ), are those that are called the great Zeir anpin and Nukvah (שֶׁהֵם נִקְרְאִים זו״ן הַגְּדוֹלִים), that the six extremities of B"N are called “Rachel the Great” (כִּי הַו״ק דְּב״ן נִקְרָא רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה), and likewise that the Malkhut of M“H is called “Ya‘akov,” and the Malkhut of B"N alone is called “Rachel” (וְכֵן שֶׁהַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה נִקְרֵאת יַעֲקֹב וּמַלְכוּת דְּב״ן לְבַד נִקְרֵאת רָחֵל).

For behold, from the words of the Rav, of blessed memory, it does not appear so (שֶׁהֲרֵי מִדִּבְרֵי הָרַב ז״ל לֹא מַשְׁמַע כֵּן). For behold, in Etz Chayim, Sha‘ar Shevirat haKelim [Vessels], Chapter Six, he wrote (כִּי הִנֵּה בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר שְׁבִירַת הַכֵּלִים פ״ו כָּתַב): “Know that there is no Sefirah, even among the ten individual Sefirot in each and every Partzuf (דַּע כִּי אֵין לְךָ סְפִירָה וּסְפִירָה אֲפִלּוּ בַּי׳ סְפִירוֹת הַפְּרָטִיּוֹת שֶׁבְּכָל פַּרְצוּף וּפַרְצוּף), that does not contain the aspect of male and female (שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ בְּחִינַת זָכוּ״ן), and they are the B"N of the Nekudot and the new M“H, etc.” (וְהֵם ב״ן דְּנְקֻדוֹת וּמ״ה הֶחָדָשׁ כו׳). The general principle is (כְּלַל הַדְּבָרִים): that there is no small spark in all of Atzilut that does not contain M“H and B"N (שֶׁאֵין שׁוּם נִצּוֹץ קָטָן בְּכָל הָאֲצִילוּת שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן). And it follows that the male forces in Atzilut — which are Keter, Chokhmah, and Tiferet — have in them both M“H and B"N (וְנִמְצָא שֶׁהַזְּכָרִים שֶׁבָּאֲצִילוּת שֶׁהֵם כֶּתֶר חָכְמָה תִּפְאֶרֶת יֵשׁ בָּהֶם מ״ה וּב״ן), and the female forces in Atzilut — which are Binah and Malkhut — also have in them M“H and B"N (וְהַנְּקֵבוֹת שֶׁבָּאֲצִילוּת שֶׁהֵן בִּינָה וּמַלְכוּת שֶׁבָּאֲצִילוּת יֵשׁ בָּהֶן מ״ה וּב״ן).

And in the same way with the ten Sefirot within every Partzuf (וְעַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה בַּי׳ סְפִירוֹת שֶׁבְּכָל פַּרְצוּף), and likewise all five Partzufim (וְעַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה כָּל הַה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים), that in them all are included M“H and B"N (שֶׁבָּהֶם הֵם כְּלוּלִים מִמ״ה וּב״ן). And at the time of the emanation of the world of Nekudim, all five Partzufim emerged, each one composed of ten Sefirot (וּבְעֵת הָאֲצָלַת עוֹלַם הַנְּקוּדִים יָצְאוּ כָּל הַה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים כָּל אֶחָד כָּלוּל מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת), and all of them were from the Name B"N, etc (וְכוּלָּם מִשֵּׁם ב״ן וכו׳).

Behold, it is explained how he is speaking about the five Partzufim that encompass all of Atzilut (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר אֵיךְ הוּא מְדַבֵּר בַּה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת), and about the general M“H and B"N (וּבְמ״ה וּב״ן הַכּוֹלְלִים), and he mentioned, in regard to the aspect of the female forces, only Binah and Malkhut (וְלֹא הִזְכִּיר בִּבְחִינַת נְקֵבוֹת רַק בִּינָה וּמַלְכוּת), as he also wrote further after this, and these are his words (וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַב עוֹד אַחַר זֶה וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ): “And it is known that the general Name B"N is the Mem of Adam Kadmon” (וְנוֹדָע כִּי שֵׁם ב״ן הַכּוֹלֵל הוּא מ״ם דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן), “and the new Name M“H which encompasses all of Atzilut is Ze‘ir Anpin of Adam Kadmon” (וְשֵׁם מ״ה הֶחָדָשׁ הַכּוֹלֵל כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת הוּא ז״א דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן). And therefore, all the Nekudot are called Kings (וְעַל כֵּן כָּל הַנְּקֻדוֹת נִקְרְאוּ מְלָכִים), because they are all in the aspect of B"N, which is the general Malkhut (כִּי כֻלָּם בִּבְחִינַת ב״ן שֶׁהוּא מַלְכוּת הַכּוֹלֶלֶת). But afterward, there is in the Name M“H haKolel a particular aspect of Malkhut and a particular aspect of Binah (אֲבָל אַחַר כָּךְ יֵשׁ בְּשֵׁם מ״ה הַכּוֹלֵל בְּחִינַת מַלְכוּת פְּרָטִית וּבְחִינַת בִּינָה פְּרָטִית), and even though they are female forces (וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵם נְקֵבוֹת), and M“H is masculine (וּמ״ה הוּא זָכָר), and likewise in B"N — even though it is feminine — there is Keter, Chokhmah, and Ze‘ir Anpin, which are masculine (וְכֵן יֵשׁ בְּב״ן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא נְקֵבָה יֵשׁ כֶּתֶר וְחָכְמָה וְז״א זְכָרִים כו׳). And afterward, he detailed the matter of the Shevirah [Breaking] among the five general Partzufim mentioned (וְאַחַר כָּךְ פֵּרֵט שֵׁם הַשְּׁבִירָה בַּה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הַכּוֹלְלִים הַנִּזְכָּר), until he reached Malkhut, where he wrote (עַד הַמַלְכוּת שֶׁכָּתַב): “And afterward, came forth the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin — the Malkhut, etc.” (וְאַחַר כָּךְ יָצְאָה הַנְּקֵבָה דְּז״א הַמַלְכוּת כו׳). Afterwards, he wrote the following: “And afterward, came forth the Name M“H and was joined with B"N in every Sefirah and Sefirah, as stated above in all the details” (אַחַר כָּךְ נָצָא שֵׁם מ״ה וְנִתְחַבֵּר עִם ב״ן בְּכָל סְפִירָה וּסְפִירָה כַּנַּ״ל בְּכָל הַפְּרָטִים).

And it is found that there is in Abba and in Yisrael-Saba both M“H and B"N in each of them (וְנִמְצָא שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּאַבָּא וּבְיִשְׂרָאֵל סַבָּא מ״ה וּב״ן בְּכָל אֶחָד מֵהֶם), and likewise in Imma and Tevunah, both M“H and B"N in each of them (וְכֵן בְּאִמָּא וּבִתְבוּנָה מ״ה וּב״ן בְּכָל אֶחָד מֵהֶם), and likewise in Ze‘ir Anpin and the Nukvah — Rachel the Upper, which is Leah (וְכֵן בְּז״א וְנוּקְבָא רָחֵל עִילָּאָה שֶׁהִיא לֵאָה), and Ya‘akov and the Lower Rachel, from the chest and below — all of these have M“H and B"N in each of the four Partzufim, etc (וְיַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל תַּתָּאָה מֵהַחָזֶה וּלְמַטָּה יֵשׁ מ״ה וּב״ן בְּכָל אֶחָד מֵהַד׳ פַּרְצוּפִים כו׳) — see there (עֲיֵין שָׁם).

Behold, from what he wrote — that there is M“H and B"N in each one of the four Partzufim — it is explained how in Ze‘ir Anpin alone there is M“H and B"N (הֲרֵי מִמַּה שֶּׁכָּתַב יֵשׁ מ״ה וּב״ן בְּכָל אֶחָד מֵהַד׳ פַּרְצוּפִים מְבוֹאַר אֵיךְ בְּז״א לְבַדּוֹ יֵשׁ בּוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן), apart from the Nukvah, Rachel Ila‘ah, which also on its own contains M“H and B"N (מִלְּבַד הַנּוּקְבָא רָחֵל עִילָּאָה שֶׁגַּם בָּהּ לְבַדָּהּ יֵשׁ בָּהּ מ״ה וּב״ן). Yet according to the words of Rabbi Sar Shalom, of blessed memory, the six extremities of M“H is Ze‘ir Anpin, and the six extremities of B"N is the Nukvah, Rachel Ila‘ah (וְאִלּוּ לְפִי דִּבְרֵי הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל הַו״ק דְּמ״ה הוּא הַז״א וְהַו״ק דְּב״ן הִיא הַנּוּקְבָא רָחֵל עִילָּאָה). But according to the words of the Rav, the six extremities of B"N is the B"N within Ze‘ir Anpin himself, in his own Partzuf, and it is not the aspect of the Nukvah, Rachel Ila‘ah (אֲבָל לְפִי דִּבְרֵי הָרַב הַו״ק דְּב״ן הוּא הַב״ן דְּז״א עַצְמוֹ שֶׁבְּפַרְצוּפוֹ שֶׁלּוֹ וְאֵינָהּ בְּחִינַת הַנּוּקְבָא רָחֵל עִילָּאָה). And likewise, it is explained how in Ya‘akov alone there is M“H and B"N (וְכֵן מְבוֹאַר אֵיךְ בְּיַעֲקֹב לְבַדּוֹ יֵשׁ בּוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן), apart from the Nukvah, Rachel Tata‘ah, which also on its own has M“H and B"N (מִלְּבַד הַנּוּקְבָא רָחֵל תַּתָּאָה שֶׁגַּם בָּהּ לְבַדָּהּ יֵשׁ בָּהּ מ״ה וּב״ן).

And yet, according to the words of Rabbi Sar Shalom, of blessed memory, the Malkhut of M“H is Ya‘akov, and the Malkhut of B"N is the Nukvah, Rachel Tata‘ah [the Lower Rachel] (וְאִלּוּ לְפִי דִּבְרֵי הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל הַמַּלְכוּת דְּמ״ה הִיא יַעֲקֹב וְהַמַּלְכוּת דְּב״ן הִיא הַנּוּקְבָא רָחֵל תַּתָּאָה). And one cannot say that these M“H and B"N mentioned here are the M“H and B"N of M“H and the M“H and B"N of B"N (וְאֵין לוֹמַר כִּי אֵלּוּ הַמ״ה וּב״ן הַנִּזְכָּר כָּאן הֵם מ״ה וּב״ן דְּמ״ה וּמ״ה וּב״ן דְּב״ן), and that the M“H and B"N that were said to be in Ze‘ir Anpin and Ya‘akov are the M“H and B"N of M“H (וְאִם כֵּן הַמ״ה וּב״ן שֶׁבְּז״א וְיַעֲקֹב שֶׁאָמַר הֵם מ״ה וּב״ן דְּמ״ה), and the M“H and B"N that were said to be in the Nukvot — Rachel Ila‘ah [Upper] and Tata‘ah [Lower] — are the M“H and B"N of B"N (וְהַמ״ה וּב״ן שֶׁבַּנּוּקְבוֹת רָחֵל עִילָּאָה וְתַּתָּאָה שֶׁאָמַר הֵם מ״ה וּב״ן דְּב״ן).

For behold, it is explained from the beginning of the derush until its end (כִּי הֲרֵי מְבוֹאָר מִתְּחִלַּת הַדְּרוּשׁ וְעַד סוֹפוֹ), how he is not speaking of the particular M“H and B"N, only of the general M“H and B"N (אֵיךְ אֵינוֹ מְדַבֵּר בְּמ״ה וּב״ן הַפְּרָטִיִּים רַק בְּמ״ה וּב״ן הַכּוֹלְלִים). And furthermore, a proof: that later on, regarding the aspect of Arich, when he enters into doubt, he explicitly spoke of the particular M“H and B"N (וְעוֹד רְאָיָה כִּי אַחַר כָּךְ בְּבְחִינַת אֲרִיךְ שֶׁנִּסְתַּפֵּק שָׁם דִּבֵּר בִּפֵירוּשׁ בְּמ״ה וּב״ן הַפְּרָטִיִּים), implying that the M“H and B"N mentioned earlier are the general ones (מִכְּלַל שֶׁהַמ״ה וּב״ן הַנִּזְכָּר קֹדֶם הֵם הַכּוֹלְלִים), as is explained from the beginning of the aforementioned derush (וּכְמוֹ שֶׁמְּבוֹאָר מִתְּחִלַּת הַדְּרוּשׁ הַנ״ל). Also, it is explained from the entire derush (גַּם מְבֹאָר מִכָּל הַדְּרוּשׁ), how he is speaking about the five Partzufim that encompass the whole world of Atzilut (אֵיךְ הוּא מְדַבֵּר בַּה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת). And he said at the beginning that the males are Keter, Chokhmah, and Tiferet (וְאָמַר בַּתְּחִלָּה כִּי הַזְּכָרִים הֵם כֶּתֶר חָכְמָה תִּפְאֶרֶת), and the females are Binah and Malkhut (וְהַנְּקֵבוֹת הֵם בִּינָה וּמַלְכוּת).

If so, when afterwards he detailed each Partzuf of the four Partzufim into two Partzufim (אִם כֵּן כַּאֲשֶׁר אַחַר כָּךְ פֵּרֵט כָּל פַּרְצוּף מֵהַד׳ פַּרְצוּפִים לִשְׁנֵי פַּרְצוּפִים), then it is necessary that Abba and Yisrael-Saba are included in one Partzuf, which is the second Partzuf from the five general Partzufim of all Atzilut (אִם כֵּן מֻכְרָח כִּי אַבָּא וְיֵש״ס נִכְלָלִים בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד שֶׁהוּא הַפַּרְצוּף הַבֵּית מֵהֶ״פ הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת). And likewise Imma and Tevunah are included in one Partzuf, which is the third Partzuf from the five general Partzufim of all Atzilut (וְכֵן אִמָּא וּתְבוּנָה נִכְלָלוֹת בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד שֶׁהוּא פַּרְצוּף הַשְּׁלִישִׁי מֵהֶ״פ הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת). And likewise Ze‘ir Anpin and Ya‘akov are included in one Partzuf, which is the fourth Partzuf from the five general Partzufim of all Atzilut (וְכֵן ז״א וְיַעֲקֹב נִכְלָלִים בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד שֶׁהוּא הַפַּרְצוּף הָרְבִיעִי מֵהֶ״פ הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת). And likewise Rachel Ila‘ah [Upper] and Rachel Tata‘ah [Lower] are included in one Partzuf, which is the fifth Partzuf of the general five Partzufim that encompass the entire world of Atzilut (וְכֵן רָחֵל עִילָּאָה וְרָחֵל תַּתָּאָה נִכְלָלוֹת בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד שֶׁהוּא הַפַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי מֵהֶ״פ דְּכְלָלוּת הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת).

If so, it follows that in all the totality of Atzilut there are only two female aspects (וְאִם כֵּן נִמְצָא כִּי אֵין בְּכָל כְּלָלוּת הָאֲצִילוּת), which are Binah and Malkhut (זוּלַת שְׁתֵּי בְּחִינוֹת נְקֵבוֹת שֶׁהֵן בִּינָה וּמַלְכוּת), which are the third and the fifth of the five general Partzufim that encompass the entire world of Atzilut (שֶׁהֵם הַפַּרְצוּפִים הַשְּׁלִישִׁי וְהַחֲמִישִׁי מֵהֶ״פ הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), as he wrote at the beginning of the discourse (כַּאֲשֶׁר כָּתַב בְּתְחִלַּת הַדְּרוּשׁ). And yet, according to the words of Rabbi Sar Shalom, of blessed memory (וְאִלּוּ לְפִי דִּבְרֵי הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל), there are more female aspects — namely Binah, and Rachel the Great, and Ya‘akov, and Rachel — besides the fifth Partzuf of the five general Partzufim of Atzilut, which is the all-inclusive Nukvah (יֵשׁ יוֹתֵר בְּחִינוֹת נְקֵבוֹת שֶׁהֵן הַבִּינָה וְרָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה וְיַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל מִלְּבַד הַפַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי מֵהֶ״פ דְּכְלָלוּת הָאֲצִילוּת שֶׁהִיא נוּקְבָּא הַכּוֹלֶלֶת).

And this, in my humble opinion, is not as the words of the Rav, of blessed memory (וְזֶה לְעַנְיָן דַּעְתִּי אֵינוֹ כְּדִבְרֵי הָרַב זלה״ה). And it is also explained that Rachel Ila‘ah is not, in totality, one entity together with Ze‘ir Anpin (וְגַם מְבֹאָר כִּי אֵין רָחֵל עִילָּאָה הִיא בִּכְלָלוּת אֶחָד עִם ז״א יַחַד), but she is, in totality, one with Rachel Tata‘ah, which is the fifth Partzuf of the five Partzufim of general Atzilut (רַק הִיא בִּכְלָלוּת אֶחָד עִם רָחֵל תַּתָּאָה שֶׁהִיא הַפַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי מֵהֶ״פ דְּכְלָלוּת הָאֲצִילוּת), which is the true and essential Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin mentioned in every derush of the Rav, of blessed memory, by the name “Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin” and by the name “Rachel” (אֲשֶׁר הִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא הָאֲמִתִּית וְהָעִקָּרִית דְּז״א הַנִּזְכֶּרֶת בְּכָל דְּרוּשׁ הָרַב זלה״ה בְּשֵׁם נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א וּבְשֵׁם רָחֵל). And Ya‘akov is not included with her to be called “Nukvah,” but is included with Ze‘ir Anpin, male like him (וְאֵין יַעֲקֹב נִכְלָל עִמָּהּ לְהִקָּרֵא בְּשֵׁם נוּקְבָּא רַק נִכְלָל עִם ז״א זָכָר כְּמוֹהוּ), which is the fourth Partzuf of all Atzilut (שֶׁהוּא הַפַּרְצוּף הָרְבִיעִי דְּכָל הָאֲצִילוּת). And Rachel Ila‘ah is, in totality, one with Rachel Tata‘ah, the fifth Partzuf of all Atzilut, the true and essential Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin (וְרָחֵל עִילָּאָה הִיא בִּכְלָלוּת אֶחָד עִם רָחֵל תַּתָּאָה הַפַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי דְּכָל הָאֲצִילוּת נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א הָאֲמִתִּית וְהָעִקָּרִית), as is explained in all the derashot of the Rav, of blessed memory (וּכְמוֹ מְבֹאָר בְּכָל דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב זלה״ה).

And these are his words in Etz Chayim, Sha‘ar Partzufei Zeir anpin and Nukvah, Chapter One (וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר פַּרְצוּפֵי זו״ן פ״א): “And now it is necessary to explain the matter of Zeir anpin and Nukvah — who they are, etc.” (וְעַתָּה צָרִיךְ לְבָאֵר עִנְיַן זו״ן מִי הֵם כו׳). “And the matter is, behold, that the Ze‘ir Anpin mentioned in all the Zohar and all our writings is what is called Yisrael” (וְהָעִנְיָן הוּא כִּי הִנֵּה הַז״א הַנִּזְכָּר בְּכָל הַזֹּהַר וּבְכָל חִבּוּרֵינוּ הוּא הַנִּקְרָא יִשְׂרָאֵל), and he is the aspect of the six extremities of the totality of the world of Atzilut — from Chesed until Yesod (וְהוּא בְּחִינַת ו״ס שֶׁל כְּלָלוּת עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת מֵהַחֶסֶד עַד הַיְסוֹד). “And the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin is the tenth Malkhut in the ten Sefirot of the general world of Atzilut, also” (וְנוּקְבָּא דְּז״א הִיא הַמַּלְכוּת הָעֲשִׂירִית שֶׁבְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכְלָלוּת עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת גַּם כֵּן), and she is called Rachel, the mistress of the house (וְהִיא הַנִּקְרֵאת רָחֵל עֲקֶרֶת הַבַּיִת).

In such a manner, Zeir anpin and Nukvah are called Yisrael and Rachel (בְּאוֹפֶן כִּי זו״ן הֵם הַנִּקְרָאִים יִשְׂרָאֵל וְרָחֵל). And so he wrote there in Sha‘ar haNukvah, Chapter One (וְכָכָה כָּתַב שָׁם בְּשַׁעַר הַנּוּקְבָּא פ״א): “And we shall begin with Rachel, who is called the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin in truth” (וְנַתְחִיל בְּרָחֵל הַנִּקְרֵאת נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א בֶּאֱמֶת), “for she is the tenth point of the ten points that encompass all the world of Atzilut” (כִּי הִיא הַנְּקֻדָּה הָעֲשִׂירִית מֵהָעֶשֶׂר נְקֻדוֹת הַכּוֹלְלוֹת כָּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), “and she is the Malkhut among them” (וְהִיא הַמַּלְכוּת שֶׁבָּהֶם), “and she is the wife of Yisrael, who is called Ze‘ir Anpin everywhere” (וְהִיא אֵשֶׁת יִשְׂרָאֵל הַנִּקְרָא ז״א בְּכָל מָקוֹם). Thus ends the quotation (ע״כ).

Behold, it is explained how the point and the final Sefirah of the entire totality of Atzilut — which is Malkhut — is the true and essential Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin mentioned everywhere (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר אֵיךְ הַנְּקֻדָּה וְהַסְּפִירָה הָאַחֲרוֹנָה דְּכָל כְּלָלוּת הָאֲצִילוּת שֶׁהִיא הַמַלְכוּת הִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא הָאֲמִתִּית וְהָעִקָּרִית דְּז״א הַנִּזְכֶּרֶת בְּכָל מָקוֹם), and it is known that she is the fifth Partzuf of the five Partzufim of the general Atzilut, as explained (וִידוּעַ כִּי הִיא הִיא הַפַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי מֵהֶ״פ פַּרְצוּפִים דְּכְלָלוּת הָאֲצִילוּת וּכְמְבֹאָר). In Sha‘ar haHakdamot, at the beginning of the derushim of Partzuf Rachel, it is written thus (בְּשַׁעַר הַהַקְדָּמוֹת בִּתְחִלַּת דְּרוּשֵׁי פַּרְצוּף רָחֵל וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ): “I have already informed you that the true Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin is Rachel, and she is the tenth Sefirah among the ten Sefirot that encompass all the world of Atzilut” (כְּבָר הוֹדַעְתִּיךָ כִּי נוּקְבָּא הָאֲמִתִּית דְּז״א הִיא רָחֵל וְהִיא הַסְּפִירָה הָעֲשִׂירִית שֶׁבְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת הַכּוֹלְלוֹת כָּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת), “for she is the fifth Partzuf of the five Partzufim that encompass all the world of Atzilut” (כִּי הִיא הַפַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי מֵה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת) — thus ends his words (עַכ״ל).

Behold, it is explained as stated (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר כַּאֲשֶׁר אָמַרְנוּ). And it is clarified how he is speaking about the totality of the world of Atzilut and about the five Partzufim that encompass the entire world of Atzilut (וּמְבֹאָר הוּא אֵיךְ הוּא מְדַבֵּר עַל כְּלָלוּת עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת וְעַל הֶ״פ פַּרְצוּפִים הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת). Therefore, one cannot say that he is speaking of the particulars of one Partzuf, as in the introduction of Rabbi Sar Shalom, of blessed memory (כִּי עַל כֵּן אֵין לוֹמַר שֶׁמְּדַבֵּר בִּפְרָטֵי פַּרְצוּף דְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד כְּהַקְדָּמַת הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם זלה״ה). Consequently, Ya‘akov is not included with Rachel, the lower Nukvah, the Malkhut of M“H and B"N (בְּאוֹפֶן כִּי אֵין יַעֲקֹב נִכְלָל בְּרָחֵל נוּקְבָּא תַּתָּאָה מַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּב״ן), but is included with Ze‘ir Anpin, male like him (רַק נִכְלָל בְּז״א זָכָר כְּמוֹהוּ). And likewise Rachel Ila‘ah is not included with Ze‘ir Anpin in the six extremities of M“H and B"N (וְכֵן אֵין רָחֵל עִילָּאָה נִכְלֶלֶת בְּז״א בְּו״ק דְּמ״ה וּב״ן), but is included with Rachel, the lower Nukvah, female like her (רַק נִכְלֶלֶת עִם רָחֵל נוּקְבָּא תַּתָּאָה נְקֵבָה כְּמוֹהָ), the Malkhut of M“H and B"N, the tenth Sefirah among the ten Sefirot of the general Atzilut, the fifth Partzuf of the five Partzufim that encompass all Atzilut (מַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּב״ן הַסְּפִירָה הָעֲשִׂירִית שֶׁבְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכְלָלוּת הָאֲצִילוּת כֻּלּוֹ פַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי מֵהֶ״פ הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת), the true and essential Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin mentioned in all the derashot of the Rav, of blessed memory (נוּקְבָּא הָאֲמִתִּית וְהָעִקָּרִית דְּז״א הַנִּזְכֶּרֶת בְּכָל דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב זלה״ה).

And in Sha‘ar Abba and Imma, Chapter Four, he wrote (וּבְשַׁעַר אוּ״א פ״ד כָּתַב): “Abba and Imma took between them the Binah of M“H” (אוּ״א לָקְחוּ בֵּין ב׳ בִּינָה דְּמ״ה), “and indeed, from B"N Abba took the seven lower ones of Chokhmah” (וְאַמְנָם מִב״ן לָקַח אַבָּא ז״ת דְּחָכְמָה), “and Imma took the six lower ones of Binah of B"N” (וְאִמָּא ו׳״ת דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן), “and likewise Ze‘ir Anpin and Nukvah — Ze‘ir Anpin took the six extremities of M“H and the seven extremities of B"N” (וְכֵן זו״ן ז״א לָקַח ו״ס דְּמ״ה וְז״ס דְּב״ן), “and the Nukvah took the Malkhut of M“H and the Malkhut of B"N” (וְנוּקְבָּא לָקְחָה מַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּמַלְכוּת דְּב״ן). “And therefore they were male and female separate one from another, because each one of them has M“H and B"N — whether in Abba, or in Imma, or in Ze‘ir Anpin, or in the Nukvah” (וְעַל כֵּן הָיוּ זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה נִפְרָדִים זֶה מִזֶּה כִּי כָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶם יֵשׁ בּוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן בֵּין בְּאַבָּא בֵּין בְּאִמָּא בֵּין בְּז״א בֵּין בְּנוּקְבָּא). “However, in Atik and Arich, the male and female within each of the two are not separated, but male and female are in one Partzuf” (אֲמְנָם בְּעַתִּיק וַאֲרִיךְ הַזָּכוּ״ן שֶׁבְּכָל אֶחָד מִב׳ אֵינָם נִפְרָדִים רַק זָכוּ״ן בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד). “But Imma and the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin — since they have M“H and B"N — are able to separate from the males, and likewise the male can separate from them” (אֲבָל אִמָּא וְהַנּוּקְבָּא דְּז״א שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶם מ״ה וּב״ן יְכוֹלִים לְהִפָּרֵד מִן הַזְּכָרִים וְכֵן הַזָּכָר נִפְרָד מֵהֶם). “And for this very reason Imma and the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin are called true female Partzufim, complete Partzufim — for one is not called a Partzuf except by a combination of M“H and B"N” (וְגַם לְסִבָּה זוֹ עַצְמָה נִקְרָאִים אִמָּא וְנוּקְבָּא דְּז״א נוּקְבִּין מַמָּשׁ בְּפַרְצוּפִים גְּמוּרִים כִּי אֵינוֹ נִקְרָא פַּרְצוּף אֶלָּא בְּשִׁתּוּף מ״ה וּב״ן). “But in Atik and Arich no female Partzuf is mentioned, for in them there is only B"N alone, etc.” (וַאֲמְנָם בְּעַתִּיק וְא״א אֵין נִזְכָּר פַּרְצוּף נוּקְבָּא כִּי אֵין בָּהֶם רַק ב״ן לְבַד כו׳) — see there (עֲיֵן שָׁם).

Behold, it is explained how he mentioned, in the entirety of Atzilut, only two aspects of Nukvah — namely Binah and the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר אֵיךְ לֹא הִזְכִּיר בְּכְלָלוּת הָאֲצִילוּת רַק ב׳ בְּחִינוֹת שֶׁל נוּקְבָּא שֶׁהֵם בִּינָה וְנוּקְבָּא דְּז״א). And if so, the particular aspects of the female forces in Atzilut — namely Tevunah and Rachel Ila‘ah — must necessarily be included within them (וְאִם כֵּן בְּחִינוֹת הַנְּקֵבוֹת הַפְּרָטִיּוֹת אֲשֶׁר בָּאֲצִילוּת שֶׁהֵם הַתְּבוּנָה וְרָחֵל עִילָּאָה מֻכְרָח שֶׁיִּהְיוּ נִכְלָלוֹת בָּהֶם).

For just as Tevunah is included with Imma (כִּי כְּמוֹ שֶׁהַתְּבוּנָה נִכְלֶלֶת עִם אִמָּא), so Rachel Ila‘ah is included with the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin, which is the Malkhut of M“H and B"N (כֵּן רָחֵל עִילָּאָה נִכְלֶלֶת עִם נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א שֶׁהִיא הַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן). And Rachel Ila‘ah is not included with Ze‘ir Anpin (וְאֵין רָחֵל עִילָּאָה נִכְלֶלֶת עִם ז״א), as is also explained in what he wrote: that the six extremities of M“H and of B"N are the Partzuf of Ze‘ir Anpin himself (וּכְמְבֹאָר גַּם כֵּן בְּמַה שֶּׁכָּתַב כִּי הַו״ק דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן הֵם הַפַּרְצוּף דְּז״א עַצְמוֹ), and he did not mention in it any aspect of Nukvah except for the Malkhut of M“H and B"N, which is his Nukvah (וְלֹא הִזְכִּיר בּוֹ שֵׁם בְּחִינַת נוּקְבָּא כִּי אִם הַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן שֶׁהִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא שֶׁלּוֹ). And likewise in Sha‘ar A”N”K, Chapter Five, he wrote (וְכֵן בְּשַׁעַר אַנ״ך פ״ה כָּתַב): “And these are his words, in brief, regarding the particulars of the Tikkun after the conclusion of investigation” (וְזֶ״ל בְּקִצּוּר פְּרָטֵי הַתִּקּוּן אַחַר תַּכְלִית הָעִיּוּן): “Behold, all of Atzilut, which are the five Partzufim, are made from two aspects — the Name M“H and the Name B"N, etc.” (הִנֵּה כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת שֶׁהֵם הֶ׳ פַּרְצוּפִים נַעֲשִׂים מִב׳ בְּחִינוֹת שֶׁהֵם שֵׁם מ״ה וְשֵׁם ב״ן כו׳). “And in Atik and Arich Anpin, the male and female were joined together in one Partzuf — the male from M“H and the female from B"N” (וּבְעַתִּיק וְא״א הָיוּ הַזָּכוּ״ן מְחוּבָּרִים יַחַד בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד הַזָּכָר מִמ״ה וְהַנּוּקְבָא מִב״ן). “But from there onward, the male separated from the female; for Abba is male and Imma is female, separated into two Partzufim — the male by himself and the female by herself” (אֲבָל מִשָּׁם וָאֵילָךְ נִפְרַד הַזָּכָר מִן הַנּוּקְבָא כִּי אַבָּא זָכָר וְאִמָּא נוּקְבָא נִפְרָדִים בִּשְׁנֵי פַּרְצוּפִים זָכָר לְעַצְמוֹ וְהַנּוּקְבָא לְעַצְמָהּ). “And this also caused another change, for since they are separated, if the male would be M“H alone and the female B"N alone, there would be complete separation between them and no sweetening of judgments” (וְגַם זֶה גָּרַם שִׁנּוּי אַחֵר כִּי כֵיוָן שֶׁהֵם נִפְרָדִים אִם יִהְיֶה הַזָּכָר מ״ה לְבַדּוֹ וְהַנּוּקְבָא ב״ן לְבַדָּהּ יִהְיֶה פִּירוּד גָּמוּר בֵּינֵיהֶם וְאֵין שָׁם מִיתּוּק הַדִּינִים). “Therefore it was necessary that the male be composed of M“H and B"N — mercy and judgment — and likewise the female be composed of M“H and B"N — mercy and judgment” (וְלָכֵן הֻכְרַח שֶׁיִּהְיֶה הַזָּכָר כָּלוּל מִמ״ה וּב״ן חֶסֶד וָדִין וְכֵן הַנּוּקְבָא כְּלוּלָה מִמ״ה וּב״ן חֶסֶד וָדִין). “And with this, there would be between the male and female some connection, although not a complete connection in the male-and-female as in the Partzuf of Atik and the Partzuf of Arich Anpin” (וְעִם זֶה יִהְיֶה בֵּין הַזָּכוּ״ן קְצָת חִבּוּר אֲפִלּוּ שֶׁאֵינוֹ חִבּוּר גָּמוּר בַּזָּכוּ״ן כְּמוֹ פַּרְצוּף עַתִּיק וּפַרְצוּף א״א). “And so is the matter with Zeir anpin and Nukvah” (וְכֵן הָעִנְיָן בְּזו״ן). “Thus, according to this, four males and four females encompass Atzilut” (נִמְצָא כִּי כְּפִי זֶה ד׳ זְכָרִים וְד׳ נְקֵבוֹת כּוֹלְלִים הָאֲצִילוּת). “However, the two upper males and females — each pair is one Partzuf — called Atik, and the male is M“H alone and the female B"N alone; and so also in the second pair, which is Arich Anpin” (וְאֲמְנָם ב׳ זְכָרִים וּב׳ נְקֵבוֹת הָעֶלְיוֹנִים כָּל זוּג מֵהֶם פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד הַנִּקְרָא עַתִּיק וְהַזָּכָר מ״ה לְבַדּוֹ וְהַנּוּקְבָא ב״ן לְבַדָּהּ וְכֵן בַּזוּג הַב׳ שֶׁהוּא א״א). “But the third and fourth pairs — Abba and Imma, and Zeir anpin and Nukvah — are male and female in two Partzufim, and the male is mixed of M“H and B"N, and the female is mixed of M“H and B"N” (אֲבָל זוּג הַג׳ וְהַד׳ אוּ״א וּזו״ן זָכָר וְנְקֵבָה ב׳ פַּרְצוּפִים וְהַזָּכָר מְעֹרָב מִמ״ה וּב״ן וְהַנּוּקְבָא מִמ״ה וּב״ן). “And behold, it is found that all the general Atzilut is made from M“H and B"N in their generality” (וְהִנֵּה נִמְצָא כִּי כָּל כְּלָלוּת הָאֲצִילוּת נַעֲשֶׂה מִמ״ה וּב״ן בִּכְלָלוּתָם). “However, each one of these has four aspects, for the Name M“H has within it A”B, S”G, M”H, B”N (כִּי שֵׁם מ״ה יֵשׁ בּוֹ עַ״ס מ״ב), and likewise the Name B"N has within it A”B, S”G, M”H, B”N (וְכֵן בְּשֵׁם ב״ן יֵשׁ בּוֹ עַ״ס מ״ב). “And behold, the male of Atik took the A“B of M“H, which is Keter” (וְהִנֵּה זָכָר דְּעַתִּיק לָקַח עַ״ב דְּמ״ה שֶׁהוּא כֶּתֶר), “and the female took the upper half of the A“B of B"N — half of Keter” (וְהַנּוּקְבָּא חֲצִי עֶלְיוֹן דְּעַ״ב דְּב״ן חֲצִי הַכֶּתֶר). “And Arich Anpin — the male took the S“G of M“H, which is Chokhmah” (וְא״א הַזָּכָר לָקַח ס״ג דְּמ״ה חָכְמָה), “and the female took the lower half of the A“B of B"N — half of Keter” (וְהַנּוּקְבָּא חֲצִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן דְּעַ״ב דְּב״ן חֲצִי כֶּתֶר). “And Abba, male, took half of M“H of M“H — Binah” (וְאַבָּא דְּכוּרָא לָקַח חֲצִי מ״ה דְּמ״ה בִּינָה), “and Imma, female, took half of M“H of M“H — half of Binah” (וְאִמָּא נוּקְבָּא לָקְחָה חֲצִי מ״ה דְּמ״ה חֲצִי הַבִּינָה). “However, from the Name B"N, Abba took Chokhmah — S“G — and Imma took Binah — M“H of B"N” (אֲמְנָם מִשֵּׁם ב״ן אַבָּא לָקַח חָכְמָה ס״ג וְאִמָּא בִּינָה מ״ה דְּב״ן). “And Ze‘ir Anpin took the six extremities of B"N of M“H and the six extremities of B"N of B"N” (וּז״א לָקַח ו״ק דְּב״ן דְּמ״ה וּו״ק דְּב״ן דְּב״ן), “and the Nukvah took the Malkhut of B"N of M“H and the Malkhut of B"N of B"N — see there” (וְנֻקְבָּא לָקְחָה מַלְכוּת ב״ן דְּמ״ה וּמַלְכוּת ב״ן דְּב״ן יַעֲוֹשׂ״ב).

Behold, it is explained how he is speaking about the entirety of all Atzilut and about the aspect of the five Partzufim that encompass all of Atzilut (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר אֵיךְ הוּא מְדַבֵּר בְּכְלָלוּת כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת וּבִבְחִינַת הֶ״פ פַּרְצוּפִים הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת). And he said that Ze‘ir Anpin is made from the six extremities of M“H and the six extremities of B"N, and he is a male, included and intermingled from M“H and from B"N (וְאָמַר כִּי הַז״א נַעֲשֶׂה מֵהַו״ק דְּמ״ה וּמֵהַו״ק דְּב״ן וְהוּא זָכָר כָּלוּל וּמְעֹרָב מִמ״ה וּב״ן), and he did not mention in him, in his essence, any aspect of Nukvah (וְלֹא הִזְכִּיר בּוֹ בְּעַצְמוֹ שׁוּם בְּחִינַת נוּקְבָּא).

And on the contrary, if it were according to the words of Rabbi Sar Shalom, of blessed memory — that the six extremities of B"N which Ze‘ir Anpin took is the aspect of Rachel Ila‘ah included within him — then Ze‘ir Anpin would also be like the Partzuf of Atik and the Partzuf of Arich Anpin, which are male and female in one Partzuf, the male from M“H and the female from B"N (וַאֲדַרְבָּא אִם כְּדִבְרֵי הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל שֶׁהַו״ק דְּב״ן שֶׁלָּקַח ז״א הִיא בְּחִינַת רָחֵל עִילָּאָה כְּלוּלָה בּוֹ אִם כֵּן גַּם הַז״א הוּא כְּמוֹ פַּרְצוּף עַתִּיק וּפַרְצוּף א״א שֶׁהֵם זָכוּ״ן בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד הַזָּכָר מִמ״ה וְהַנּוּקְבָּא מִב״ן). And it is also explained how the fifth Partzuf of the five Partzufim that encompass all of Atzilut is the Malkhut of M“H and B"N, from which the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin is made (וְגַם מְבֹאָר אֵיךְ הַפַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי מֵהֶ״פ פַּרְצוּפִים הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת הִיא הַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן שֶׁמֵּהֶם נַעֲשִׂית נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א). And also, since he said that she is a female Partzuf blended and included from M“H and B"N (וְגַם כִּי הֲרֵי אָמַר כִּי הִיא פַּרְצוּף נוּקְבָּא מְעוֹרָב וּכְלוּל מִמ״ה וּב״ן), and he did not mention in her, in her essence, any aspect of male — which would be Ya‘akov (וְלֹא הִזְכִּיר בָּהּ בְּעַצְמָהּ שׁוּם בְּחִינַת זָכָר שֶׁהוּא יַעֲקֹב). And on the contrary, if it were according to the words of Rabbi Sar Shalom, of blessed memory — that the Malkhut of M“H is Ya‘akov and the Malkhut of B"N is Rachel, and they are included together — then even this Nukvah which the Rav, of blessed memory, says is made from the Malkhut of M“H and of B"N would be like the Partzufim of Atik and Arich Anpin, which are male and female within one Partzuf, the male from M“H and the female from B"N (וַאֲדַרְבָּא אִם כְּדִבְרֵי הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל שֶׁהַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה הוּא יַעֲקֹב וְהַמַלְכוּת דְּב״ן הִיא רָחֵל וְהֵם כְּלוּלִים יַחַד אִם כֵּן גַּם הַנּוּקְבָּא הַזּוֹ שֶׁאוֹמֵר הָרַב זלה״ה שֶׁנַּעֲשֵׂית מִמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן הִיא כְּמוֹ פַּרְצוּפֵי עַתִּיק וְא״א שֶׁהֵם זָכוּ״ן בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד הַזָּכָר מִמ״ה וְהַנּוּקְבָּא מִב״ן).

And this is the opposite of the words of the Rav, of blessed memory — both regarding the Nukvah and regarding Ze‘ir Anpin — and examine well (וְזֶה הֶפֶךְ דִּבְרֵי הָרַב זלה״ה בֵּין בְּנוּקְבָּא בֵּין בְּז״א וְדוֹק). And likewise in Sha‘ar Mochin [Intellects] de-Zei‘ir Anpin, Chapter Ten, when he is speaking about the division of the Binah of the Name M“H and the Chokhmah-and-Binah of the Name B"N in the Partzufim of Abba and Imma and Yisrael-Saba and Tevunah (וְכֵן בְּשַׁעַר מוֹחִין דְּז״א פ״י בְּהִיוֹתוֹ מְדַבֵּר בְּהִתְחַלְּקוּת הַבִּינָה דְּשֵׁם מ״ה וְהַחו״ב דְּשֵׁם ב״ן בִּפַּרְצוּפֵי אוּ״א וְיִשְׂסו״ת), he concluded there with these words (סִיֵּים שָׁם וְזֶ״ל): “And it is found that Abba has within him the Name M“H and the Name B"N” (וְנִמְצָא כִּי אַבָּא יֵשׁ לוֹ שֵׁם מ״ה וּב״ן), “and Imma has within her M“H and B"N” (וְאִמָּא יֵשׁ לָהּ מ״ה וּב״ן), “and Yisrael-Saba has M“H and B"N” (וְיֵש״ס מ״ה וּב״ן), “and Tevunah has M“H and B"N” (וּתְבוּנָה מ״ה וּב״ן). “But Arich Anpin and Atik are not so, for the males take M“H alone and the female takes B"N alone; therefore they are joined in one Partzuf” (אֲבָל א״א וְעַתִּיק אֵינָם כֵּן רַק הַזְּכָרִים לוֹקְחִים מ״ה לְבַדּוֹ וְהַנּוּקְבָּא ב״ן לְבַדָּהּ לָכֵן הֵם מְחוּבָּרִים בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד). “But in Abba and Imma — since they are male and female, separated — it is necessary that one of them contain M“H and B"N, so that they not be completely separated” (אֲבָל בְּאוּ״א שֶׁהֵם זָכָר וְנְקֵבָה נִפְרָדִים מֻכְרָח שֶׁלְּאֶחָד מֵהֶם יִהְיֶה בּוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִתְפָּרְדוּ לְגַמְרֵי). “And this is the secret of ‘the son in Chokhmah, and the sage in Binah’” (וְזֶ״ס הַבֵּן בַּחָכְמָה וְחָכָם בַּבִּינָה). “And in the same manner with Zeir anpin and Nukvah; for Ze‘ir Anpin has in him the Six extremities of B"N and the Six extremities of M“H” (וְכֵן עַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה בְּזו״ן כִּי הַז״א יֵשׁ בּוֹ ו״ק דְּב״ן וּו״ק דְּמ״ה), “and the Nukvah has in her the Malkhut of M“H and the Malkhut of B"N” (וְהַנּוּקְבָּא יֵשׁ בָּהּ מַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּמַלְכוּת דְּב״ן) — see there (עֲיֵן שָׁם).

Behold, also here it is explained (הֲרֵי גַּם כָּאן מְבֹאָר), how Ze‘ir Anpin resembles Abba and Imma (אֵיךְ נִדְמֶה הַז״א לְאוּ״א), for he took the six extremities of M“H and B"N (שֶׁלָּקַח הַו״ק דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן), and he is male (וְהוּא זָכָר), and no Nukvah is mentioned in him (וְלֹא נִזְכַּר בּוֹ נוּקְבָּא). And likewise the Nukvah (וְכֵן הַנּוּקְבָּא), who takes the Malkhut of M“H and B"N (שֶׁלוֹקַחַת מַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן), and she is female (וְהִיא נוּקְבָּא), and no male aspect is mentioned in her (וְלֹא נִזְכַּר בָּהּ זָכָר). And if it were so as Rabbi Sar Shalom says (וְאִם אִיתָא כְּדִבְרֵי הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם), that the six extremities of B"N in Ze‘ir Anpin are Rachel Ila‘ah (שֶׁהַו״ק דְּב״ן בַּז״א הֵם רָחֵל עִילָּאָה), and that the Malkhut of M“H in the Nukvah is Ya‘akov (וּמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה בַּנּוּקְבָּא הִיא יַעֲקֹב), then why did he not specify them (אִם כֵּן לָמָּה לֹא פֵּרֵט אוֹתָם), as he specified the Binah of M“H and the seven lower of Chokhmah and the six lower of Binah of B"N (כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁפֵּרֵט בִּינָה דְּמ״ה וְז״ת דְּחָכְמָה וְו״ת דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן), in the Partzufim of Abba and Imma and Yisrael-Saba and Tevunah (בִּפַּרְצוּפֵי אוּ״א וְיִשְׂסו״ת).

And furthermore, as said above (וְעוֹד כְּמַשֶּׁלּ״ה), if according to his words Zeir anpin and Nukvah resemble Atik and Arich (שֶׁאִם לְפִי דְּבָרָיו זו״ן דּוֹמִים לְעַתִּיק וְא״א), and not Abba and Imma (וְלֹא לְאוּ״א), this is opposite the words of the Rav, of blessed memory (הֲפֶךְ דִּבְרֵי הָרַב ז״ל). And in Mavo She‘arim, Gate Five, Part One, Chapter One, he wrote (וּבְסֵפֶר מָבוֹא שְׁעָרִים ש״ה ח״א פ״א כָּתַב): “After writing that Abba and Imma took from the Name B"N — which are the aspect of the Seven Kings — two Sefirot, Chokhmah and Binah, the aspect of the seven lower ones within these two Sefirot” (אַחַר שֶׁכָּתַב כִּי אוּ״א לָקְחוּ מִשֵּׁם ב״ן שֶׁהֵם בְּחִינַת הַז״מ ב׳ סְפִירוֹת חו״ב בְּחִינַת ז״ת שֶׁבִּשְׁתֵּי סְפִירוֹת אֵלּוּ), “and from the new Name M“H only one Sefirah — namely Binah, which is the aspect of the Tagin of M“H” (וּמִשֵּׁם מ״ה הֶחָדָשׁ סְפִירָה אַחַת לְבַד וְהִיא בִּינָה שֶׁהִיא בְּחִינַת תַּגִּין דְּמ״ה), “we shall now explain what Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah take, etc.” (נְבָאֵר עַתָּה מַה שֶּׁלוֹקְחִים זו״ן כו׳). “For Ze‘ir Anpin took from the Name B"N the six extremities — from Chesed until the end of Yesod” (כִּי הַז״א לָקַח מִשֵּׁם ב״ן הַו״ק מֵחֶסֶד עַד סוֹף יְסוֹד), “and the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin took the lowest Sefirah — Malkhut of B"N” (וְנוּקְבָּא דְּז״א לָקְחָה הַסְּפִירָה הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה מַלְכוּת דְּב״ן). “Also, Ze‘ir Anpin took complete six extremities from the new Name M“H — which are the letters of M“H” (גַּם הַז״א לָקַח ו״ק שְׁלֵמוֹת מִשֵּׁם מ״ה הֶחָדָשׁ וְהֵם אוֹתִיּוֹת דְּמ״ה), “and the Nukvah took the entire lowest Sefirah, which is Malkhut of M“H — also the letters of M“H” (וְנוּקְבָּא לָקְחָה סְפִירָה תַּחְתּוֹנָה כֻּלָּהּ שֶׁהִיא מַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וְהֵן אוֹתִיּוֹת גַּם כֵּן דְּמ״ה). “And thus all ten Sefirot of M“H and all ten Sefirot of B"N are completed, to spread and divide from the head of Atzilut to its end” (וְהֲרֵי נִשְׁלְמוּ כָּל הַי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּמ״ה וְי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּב״ן לְהִתְפַּשֵּׁט וְלְהִתְחַלֵּק מֵרֹאשׁ הָאֲצִילוּת וְעַד סוֹפוֹ) — thus ends (עַכ״ל).

Behold, also here it is explained (הֲרֵי גַּם כָּאן מְבֹאָר), how the six extremities of M“H and of B"N belong to Ze‘ir Anpin himself (אֵיךְ הַו״ק דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן הֵם לְבְחִינַת הַז״א עַצְמוֹ), and likewise the Malkhut of M“H and of B"N belong to the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin herself (וְכֵן הַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן הִיא לְבְחִינַת הַנּוּקְבָּא דְּז״א עַצְמָהּ). And that she is the lowest Sefirah in Atzilut (וְשֶׁהִיא הַסְּפִירָה הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה שֶׁבָּאֲצִילוּת), where the end of Atzilut is, beneath which there is no Sefirah of Atzilut (אֲשֶׁר שָׁם הוּא סוֹף הָאֲצִילוּת וְאֵין עוֹד סְפִירָה דְּאֲצִילוּת תַּחְתֶּיהָ). As he wrote: “and thus all the Sefirot of M“H and of B"N are completed to extend from the head of Atzilut to its end” (שֶׁכָּךְ כָּתַב וְהֲרֵי נִשְׁלְמוּ כָּל סְפִירוֹת דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן לְהִתְפַּשֵּׁט מֵרֹאשׁ הָאֲצִילוּת וְעַד סוֹפוֹ). And she is the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin mentioned in all the derashot of the Rav (וְהִיא הִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא דְּז״א הַנִּזְכֶּרֶת בְּכָל דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב ז״ל), who is the fifth Partzuf of the five Partzufim of Atzilut (שֶׁהִיא הַפַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי מֵהֶ״פ הָאֲצִילוּת).

And in Etz Chayim, Sha‘ar Chitzoniyut [Externality] and Penimiyut [Internality], Chapter Six, he wrote (וּבְעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר חִיצוֹנִיּוּת וּפְנִימִיּוּת פ״ו כָּתַב): “And behold, at the time the Kings emerged, the three upper ones — which are Arich Anpin and Abba and Imma — emerged complete in ten full Sefirot” (וְהִנֵּה בְּעֵת צֵאת הַמְּלָכִים יָצְאוּ הַג״ר שֶׁהֵם א״א אוּ״א שְׁלֵמִים בְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת גְּמוּרוֹת), “but it was from the aspect of B"N alone — which is the aspect of Nefesh” (אֲבָל הוּא מִבְּחִינַת ב״ן לְבַד שֶׁהוּא בְּחִינַת נֶפֶשׁ), “but they were not rectified in the aspect of Partzuf, since the Name M“H — which is the Ruach — had not yet arrived” (אֲבָל לֹא הָיוּ מְתֻקָּנִים בִּבְחִינַת פַּרְצוּף כֵּיוָן שֶׁלֹּא בָּא עֲדַיִן שֵׁם מ״ה שֶׁהוּא הָרוּחַ). “And Ze‘ir Anpin emerged in the aspect of six extremities alone of B"N — essence and vessels — vessels of the rectification of Partzuf” (וְהַז״א יָצָא בִּבְחִינַת ו״ק לְבַד דְּב״ן עַצְמוּת וּכֵלִים כְּלֵי תִּקּוּן פַּרְצוּף). “And the Nukvah emerged in the aspect of one Sefirah alone — essence and vessels — from the Name B"N” (וְנוּקְבָּא יָצְאָה בִּבְחִינַת סְפִירָה אַחַת לְבַד עַצְמוּת וּכֵלִים מִשֵּׁם ב״ן). “And at the time of the Tikkun, Atik, Arich, and Abba and Imma received added in them the Name M“H — essence and vessels” (וּבְעֵת הַתִּקּוּן עַתִּיק א״א וְאוּ״א נוֹסַף בָּהֶם שֵׁם מ״ה עַצְמוּת וּכֵלִים), “and through this, their Name B"N received completion of Tikkun and became Partzuf” (וְעַל יְדֵי כֵן נוֹסַף תִּקּוּן בְּשֵׁם ב״ן שֶׁלָּהֶם שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה פַּרְצוּף). “And Ze‘ir Anpin received added in him from the Name B"N the three upper ones — essence and vessels — and from the Name M“H all ten Sefirot — essence and vessels” (וְהַז״א נוֹסַף בּוֹ מִשֵּׁם ב״ן ג״ר עַצְמוּת וּכֵלִים וּמִשֵּׁם מ״ה כָּל הַי׳ סְפִירוֹת עַצְמוּת וּכֵלִים). “And the Nukvah received added in her the nine upper ones from the Name B"N — essence and vessels — and from the Name M“H ten Sefirot — essence and vessels” (וְנוּקְבָּא נוֹסַף בָּהּ ט״ס מִשֵּׁם ב״ן עַצְמוּת וּכֵלִים וּמִשֵּׁם מ״ה י׳ סְפִירוֹת עַצְמוּת וּכֵלִים). “And from this you will understand how in every Partzuf of the five Partzufim there is the aspect of M“H and of B"N — both in males and in females — and they are the aspect of the Nefesh and the Ruach of that Partzuf” (וּמִזֶּה תָּבִין אֵיךְ בְּכָל פַּרְצוּף מֵהֶ׳ פַּרְצוּפִים יֵשׁ בּוֹ בְּחִינַת מ״ה וּב״ן בֵּין בִּזְכָרִים בֵּין בַּנְּקֵבוֹת וְהֵם בְּחִינַת נֶפֶשׁ וְרוּחַ שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ פַּרְצוּף). “Also it is found that at the moment of the blemish, the three upper ones of B"N — called the Gadlut — depart from Ze‘ir Anpin, and also all ten Sefirot of his M“H” (גַּם נִמְצָא כִּי בְּעֵת הַפְּגָם מִסְתַּלְּקִים מֵהַז״א ג״ר דְּב״ן הַנִּקְרָא גַּדְלוּת וְגַם כָּל הַי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּמ״ה שֶׁלּוֹ). “And from the Nukvah depart the nine first ones of B"N and the ten Sefirot of M“H” (וּמִן הַנּוּקְבָּא מִסְתַּלְּקִין ט׳ רִאשׁוֹנוֹת דְּב״ן וְי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּמ״ה). “And it is found that the B"N is the body of the Nefesh” (וְנִמְצָא כִּי הַב״ן הוּא הַגּוּף שֶׁל הַנֶּפֶשׁ). “And after he completed the body and Nefesh of B"N, afterwards he returned to acquire the second body of Ruach from the Name M“H with his Ruach — and this is the secret of the letters and the vowels, etc.” (וְאַחַר שֶׁהִשְׁלִים גּוּף וְנֶפֶשׁ דְּב״ן אַחַר כָּךְ חָזַר לִקְנוֹת גּוּף בֵּית שֶׁל הָרוּחַ מִשֵּׁם מ״ה עִם הָרוּחַ שֶׁלּוֹ וְהוּא סוֹד הָאוֹתִיּוֹת וְהַנְּקֻדּוֹת כו׳) — see there (עֲיֵן שָׁם).

Behold, it is explained how what Ze‘ir Anpin took from the Name B"N is for his own essence — for the aspect of his body and Nefesh (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר אֵיךְ מַה שֶּׁלָּקַח הַז״א מִשֵּׁם ב״ן הוּא לְעַצְמוּתוֹ לִבְחִינַת גּוּף וְנֶפֶשׁ שֶׁלוֹ), and no aspect of Nukvah is mentioned in him regarding the B"N he took (וְלֹא נִזְכַּר בּוֹ בְּעַצְמוֹ שׁוּם בְּחִינַת נוּקְבָּא בְּבְחִינַת הַב״ן שֶׁלָּקַח). And likewise it is explained how what the Nukvah takes from the Name M“H is for her own essence — for the aspect of her Ruach (וְגַם מְבֹאַר אֵיךְ מַה שֶּׁלוֹקַחַת הַנּוּקְבָּא מִשֵּׁם מ״ה הוּא לְעַצְמוּתָהּ לִבְחִינַת רוּחַ שֶׁלָּהּ), and no male aspect is mentioned in her regarding what she takes from the Name M“H (וְלֹא נִזְכַּר בָּהּ שׁוּם בְּחִינַת זָכָר בְּמַה שֶּׁלוֹקַחַת מִשֵּׁם מ״ה). And it is also explained how the tenth point of the Name B"N is precisely the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin mentioned in all places (וְגַם מְבֹאַר אֵיךְ הַנְּקֻדָּה הָעֲשִׂירִית דְּשֵׁם ב״ן הִיא הִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא דְּז״א הַנִּזְכֶּרֶת בְּכָל הַמְּקוֹמוֹת), that afterward were added to her the nine upper ones of B"N and the ten Sefirot of M“H (שֶׁאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְּוֹסְפוּ לָהּ הַט׳ רִאשׁוֹנוֹת דְּב״ן וְי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּמ״ה), because she also takes the Malkhut of M“H for her essence (מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא לוֹקַחַת גַּם כֵּן מַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה לְעַצְמוּתָהּ). And she is the fifth Partzuf of the five Partzufim that encompass all Atzilut (וְהִיא הִיא הַפַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי מֵהֶ״פ הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת), as he wrote (כַּאֲשֶׁר כָּתַב).

And from this you will understand how in every Partzuf of the five Partzufim there is the aspect of M“H and B"N — both in males and in females (וּמִזֶּה תָּבִין אֵיךְ בְּכָל פַּרְצוּף מֵהֶ״פ יֵשׁ בּוֹ בְּחִינַת מ״ה וּב״ן בֵּין בִּזְכָרִים בֵּין בַּנְּקֵבוֹת). And the five Partzufim which he mentioned are Arich Anpin, Abba and Imma, and Zeir anpin and Nukvah (וְהֶ״פ אֲשֶׁר הִזְכִּיר הֵם א״א אוּ״א וּזו״ן). If so, the fifth Partzuf is the Nukvah — the tenth Sefirah of B"N which emerged at first before the Tikkun (וְאִם כֵּן הַפַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי הִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא הַסְּפִירָה הָעֲשִׂירִית דְּב״ן אֲשֶׁר יָצְאָה בַּתְּחִלָּה קוֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן), and afterward in the Tikkun were added to her the nine upper ones of B"N and the ten complete Sefirot of M“H (וְאַחַר כָּךְ בַּתִּקּוּן נִתְּוֹסְפוּ לָהּ הַט׳ רִאשׁוֹנוֹת דְּב״ן וְי׳ סְפִירוֹת שְׁלֵמוֹת דְּמ״ה), and she was completed and became the true and essential Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin mentioned in all the derashot of the Rav, of blessed memory (וְנִשְׁלְמָה וְנַעֲשֵׂית נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א הָאֲמִתִּית וְהָעִקָּרִית הַנִּזְכֶּרֶת בְּכָל דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב זלה״ה). And in Sha‘ar A”N”K, Chapter Six, it is explained in detail (וּבְשַׁעַר אַנ״ך פ״ו מְבוֹאָר בִּפְרָטוּת), how Zeir anpin and Nukvah were rectified, each from the Name M“H and from the Name B"N (אֵיךְ נִתְקַּנוּ זו״ן כָּל אֶחָד מִשֵּׁם מ״ה וּמִשֵׁם ב״ן).

And we shall quote his words briefly, that which we require later, with Hashem’s help (וְנַעֲתִיק לְשׁוֹנוֹ בְּקִצּוּר שֶׁאָנוּ צְרִיכִים לוֹ אַחַר כָּךְ בְּעֶזְרַת ה׳). “And behold, in the first Ibbur of Zeir anpin and Nukvah, the six extremities of B"N began to be clarified — which are the Kings that died” (וְהִנֵּה בְּעִיבּוּר רִאשׁוֹן דְּזו״ן הִתְחִילוּ ו״ק דְּב״ן לְהִתְבָּרֵר שֶׁהֵם הַמְּלָכִים דְּמֵתוּ). “And this is through the power that now also the six extremities of M“H emerged and intermingled with them” (וְזֶה בְּכֹחַ שֶׁגַּם יָצְאוּ עַתָּה וְנִתְעָרְבוּ עִמָּהֶם ו״ק דְּמ״ה). “And it is known that every extremity is composed of ten Sefirot” (וְנוֹדַע כִּי כָּל קָצֶה הוּא כָּלוּל מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת). “And behold, at first, at the moment of the Zivug [Union], the six Malkhuyot of the six extremities of B"N were clarified” (וְהִנֵּה תְּחִלָּה בְּעֵת הַזִּוּוּג נִתְבָּרְרוּ ו׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת שֶׁבְּו״ק דְּב״ן), “and the six Malkhuyot of the six extremities of M“H ha-chadashim joined with them and were rectified” (וְנִתְחַבְּרוּ עִמָּהֶם ו׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת שֶׁבְּו״ק דְּמ״ה הֶחֲדָשִׁים וְנִתְקַּנוּ). And afterward, during the continuation of all nine months of the Ibbur (וְאַחַר כָּךְ בְּהֶמְשֵׁךְ כָּל ט׳ חָדְשֵׁי הָעִיבּוּר), the Netzach, Hod, Yesod in each extremity of all the six extremities of B"N were clarified (נִתְבָּרְרוּ נְה״י שֶׁבְּכָל קָצֶה מִכָּל הַו״ק דְּב״ן), through the fact that the Netzach, Hod, Yesod in each extremity from the six extremities of the new M“H came into them (עַל יְדֵי שֶׁבָּאוּ נְה״י שֶׁבְּכָל קָצֶה מֵו״ק דְּמ״ה הֶחָדָשׁ).

And behold, in the Ibbur there were “three included in three,” since they were six Malkhuyot (וְהֲרֵי שֶׁבָּעִיבּוּר הָיָה ג׳ כְּלִילָן בְּג׳ כִּי הָיוּ ו׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת). However, when the aspect of the Netzach, Hod, Yesod grew, only the Netzach, Hod, Yesod in each extremity of them grew (אֲבָל כְּשֶׁנִּתְגַּדְּלוּ בְּחִינַת נְה״י לֹא נִתְגַּדֵּל אֶלָּא בְּחִינַת נְה״י שֶׁבְּכָל קָצֶה מֵהֶם). Therefore, the matter of the Ibbur is only the aspect of Netzach, Hod, Yesod alone (וְלָכֵן עִנְיַן הָעִיבּוּר אֵינוֹ רַק בְּחִינַת נְה״י לְבַד), except that it is within each extremity of the six extremities (אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא בְּכָל קָצֶה מֵהַו״ק). Afterwards, in the stage of Yenikah [Nursing] (אַחַר כָּךְ בְּיִנִיקָה), the aspects of Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet in each extremity of the six extremities of B"N were also clarified (נִתְבָּרְרוּ גַּם בְּחִינַת חַג״ת שֶׁבְּכָל קָצֶה מֵהַו״ק דְּב״ן), and likewise the Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet in each and every extremity from the six extremities of the new M“H came into them (וְכֵן בָּאוּ חַג״ת שֶׁבְּכָל קָצֶה וְקָצֶה מֵהַו״ק דְּמ״ה הֶחָדָשׁ).

And behold, now the six extremities of every extremity were completed (וְהֲרֵי עַתָּה נִגְמְרוּ ו״ק כָּל קָצֶה), each one composed of the six extremities of B"N and likewise of M“H (כָּלוּל מִו״ק דְּב״ן וְכֵן דְּמ״ה). Afterwards, in Gadlut, first came the Chokhmah, Binah, Da‘at in each extremity of the six extremities of B"N (אַחַר כָּךְ בְּגַדְלוּת בָּאוּ תְּחִלָּה חָב״ד שֶׁבְּכָל קָצֶה דְּו״ק דְּב״ן), and the Chokhmah, Binah, Da‘at in each extremity of the six extremities of M“H (וְחָב״ד שֶׁבְּכָל קָצֶה דְּו״ק דְּמ״ה). It is thus found that the six extremities of Ze‘ir Anpin were now completed (נִמְצָא שֶׁכְּבָר ו״ק דְּז״א נִגְמְרוּ), each one from the ten Sefirot of M“H and of B"N (כָּל אֶחָד מֵי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּמ״ה וּב״ן). And therefore they are called the Mochin [Intellects] of the six extremities of Gadlut of the Names M“H and B"N (וְלָכֵן נִקְרָאִים הֵם מוֹחִין דְּו״ק דְּגַדְלוּת דְּשֵׁמוֹת דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן). Afterwards the upper three came the first time (אַחַר כָּךְ בָּאוּ ג״ר בְּפַעַם אַחַת), each one consisting of ten Sefirot of B"N and ten Sefirot of M“H (שֶׁכָּל אֶחָד כָּלוּל מֵעֶשֶׂר סְפִירוֹת דְּב״ן וְעֶשֶׂר סְפִירוֹת דְּמ״ה), and then Ze‘ir Anpin is called “great and complete,” thirteen years old (וְאָז הַז״א נִקְרָא גָּדוֹל וְשָׁלֵם בֶּן י״ג שָׁנָה). And afterwards the Keter of M“H and B"N entered, within all ten Sefirot of the Keter, in one day (וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִכְנַס כֶּתֶר דְּמ״ה וּב״ן בְּכָל הַי׳ סְפִירוֹת שֶׁבַּכֶּתֶר בְּיוֹם אֶחָד), and behold he is thirteen years and one day (וְהֲרֵי הוּא בֶּן י״ג שָׁנָה וְיוֹם אֶחָד כו׳).

And behold, the same occurred to the Nukvah as to Ze‘ir Anpin (וְהִנֵּה גַּם לַנּוּקְבָּא אֵירַע כֵּן עַל דֶּרֶךְ הַז״א), for at first in the Zivug [Union] it was the Malkhut of M“H and the Malkhut of B"N (כִּי הָיְתָה תְּחִלָּה בַּזִּוּוּג מַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּמַלְכוּת דְּב״ן), and in the Ibbur the Netzach, Hod, Yesod of M“H and the Netzach, Hod, Yesod of B"N (וּבָעִיבּוּר נְה״י דְּמ״ה וְנְה״י דְּב״ן), and in the Yenikah [Nursing] the Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet of M“H and the Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet of B"N (וּבְיִנִיקָה חַג״ת דְּמ״ה וְחַג״ת דְּב״ן). And it is found that in the Zivug [Union] she was as the measure of Atarat ha-Yesod, which is the Malkhut within Malkhut (וְנִמְצָא כִּי בַּזִּוּוּג הָיְתָה כְּמִדַּת עֲטֶרֶת הַיְּסוֹד שֶׁהִיא הַמַלְכוּת שֶׁבְּמַלְכוּת), and in the Ibbur she grew to the measure of Yesod in its height and of Netzach–Hod in their width (וּבָעִיבּוּר גָּדְלָה כְּמִדַּת הַיְּסוֹד בְּגָבְהוֹ וְנ״ה בְּרָחְבָּם), and in the Yenikah [Nursing] she grew to the measure of Tiferet in its height and Chesed–Gevurah in their width (וּבְיִנִיקָה גָּדְלָה כְּמִדַּת הַתִּפְאֶרֶת בְּגָבְהוֹ וְחַ״ג בְּרָחְבָּם). And in Gadlut, as the measure of Da‘at in its height and also in its width toward Chokhmah and Binah (וּבְגַדְלוּת כְּמִדַּת הַדַּעַת בְּגָבְהוֹ גַּם בְּרָחְבָּהּ לְחו״ב).

And behold, the measure of the Malkhut-of-Malkhut of M“H was completed in her, in all ten Sefirot within her (וְהֲרֵי נִשְׁלְמוּ בָּהּ מִדַּת מַלְכוּת דְּמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה בְּכָל י׳ סְפִירוֹת שֶׁבָּהּ), and the measure of the Malkhut-of-Malkhut of B"N in her ten Sefirot (וּמִדַּת מַלְכוּת דְּמַלְכוּת דְּב״ן בְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת שֶׁבָּהּ). And all this is only one Sefirah — the single Malkhut of the Nukvah alone (וְכָל זֶה אֵינוֹ רַק סְפִירָה אַחַת הַמַלְכוּת דְּנֻקְבָּא לְבַד). And the reason is, behold, Ze‘ir Anpin emerged as six Nekudot, and she is one Nekudah (וְהַטַּעַם כִּי הִנֵּה הַז״א יָצָא ו׳ נְקֻדּוֹת וְהִיא נְקֻדָּה אַחַת), therefore when all the six extremities of Ze‘ir Anpin grow in the Mochin [Intellects] of six extremities of Gadlut, as stated above (אִם כֵּן כְּשֶׁיִּגְדְּלוּ כָּל הַו״ק דְּז״א בְּמוֹחִין דְּו״ק דְּגַדְלוּת כְּנַ״ל), then she grows only one extremity — which is the Malkhut within her alone (אָז נִגְדֶּלֶת הִיא קָצֶה אַחַת לְבַד שֶׁהוּא הַמַלְכוּת שֶׁבָּהּ לְבַד).

And afterwards, when the upper three of Ze‘ir Anpin of Gadlut were completed (וְאַחַר כָּךְ כְּשֶׁנִּגְמְרוּ ג״ר דְּז״א דְּגַדְלוּת), then the measure of that Malkhut was divided into ten Nekudot (אָז נֶחְלְקָה מִדַּת הַמַלְכוּת הַנִּזְכֶּרֶת לְעֶשֶׂר נְקֻדּוֹת), and each Nekudah of these became one Sefirah (וְכָל נְקֻדָּה מֵהֶן נַעֲשֵׂית סְפִירָה אַחַת), and she became ten complete Sefirot, just like Ze‘ir Anpin (וְנַעֲשֵׂית בְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת גְּמוּרִים כְּמוֹ הַז״א). And the matter, explained further (וְהָעִנְיָן יוֹתֵר בְּבֵיאוּר), is that at first she grew in the Ibbur in her Netzach, Hod, Yesod (כִּי תְּחִלָּה הִגְדִּילָה בָּעִיבּוּר נְה״י שֶׁבָּהּ), and in the Yenikah [Nursing] in her Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet (וּבְיִנִיקָה חַג״ת), and in the Mochin [Intellects] of the six extremities in her Chokhmah, Binah, Da‘at (וּבְמוֹחִין דְּו״ק חָב״ד שֶׁבָּהּ). And all of these are only ten Nekudot — the ten Malkhuyot of her ten Sefirot (וְכָל זֶה הֵם עֶשֶׂר נְקֻדּוֹת לְבַד שֶׁהֵם עֶשֶׂר מַלְכֻיּוֹת שֶׁל י׳ סְפִירוֹת שֶׁלָּהּ). And afterwards, when the upper three of Ze‘ir Anpin were completed (וְאַחַר כָּךְ שֶׁנִּגְמְרוּ ג״ר דְּז״א), then each Malkhut of these ten Malkhuyot grew and became one Sefirah (אָז כָּל מַלְכוּת מֵאֵלֶּה הַי׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת נִתְגַּדְּלָה וְנַעֲשֵׂית סְפִירָה אַחַת). And the matter is that into the Malkhut-of-Keter came nine other Nekudot — the Chokhmah, Binah, Da‘at, Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod of Keter-Chokhmah (וְהָעִנְיָן כִּי בָּא בְּמַלְכוּת הַכֶּתֶר ט׳ נְקֻדּוֹת אֲחֵרוֹת שֶׁל חָב״ד חַג״ת נְה״י שֶׁבְּכֶתֶר חָכְמָה). And likewise, into the Malkhut-of-Chokhmah came nine other Nekudot — the Chokhmah, Binah, Da‘at, Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod of Chokhmah within her (וְכֵן בְּמַלְכוּת חָכְמָה שֶׁבָּהּ בָּאוּ ט׳ נְקֻדּוֹת אֲחֵרוֹת שֶׁהֵם חָב״ד חַג״ת נְה״י שֶׁבְּחָכְמָה שֶׁבָּהּ). And in this manner for all of them (וְכֵן עַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה בְּכוּלָּם), as explained by us in the Alef-Bet of ATBaCH p2-0(כְּמְבֹאָר אֶצְלֵינוּ בְּאַל״ף בֵּית דְּאַטְב״ח עֲיֵן שָׁם). And afterwards she too was completed in ten Sefirot, parallel to Ze‘ir Anpin (וְאַחַר זֶה נִגְמְרָה גַּם הִיא בְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת דּוּגְמַת הַז״א), yet still they remained “back-to-back” (וְעֲדַיִן הֵם אַב״א ע״כ).

Behold, it is explained in this derush in detail (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר בְּדְרוּשׁ זֶה בִּפְרָטוּת), how the six extremities of B"N were rectified with the six extremities of M“H, to make from them the essence of the Partzuf of Ze‘ir Anpin (אֵיךְ הָיָה תִּקּוּן הַו״ק דְּב״ן עִם הַו״ק דְּמ״ה לַעֲשׂוֹת מֵהֶם עַצְמוּת פַּרְצוּף הַז״א), for they themselves are Ze‘ir Anpin truly (כִּי הֵם הֵם הַז״א מַמָּשׁ), and no aspect of Nukvah included within him is mentioned in the aspect of the six extremities of B"N (וְלֹא נִזְכַּר בּוֹ שׁוּם בְּחִינַת נוּקְבָּא כְּלוּלָה בּוֹ בְּבְחִינַת הַו״ק דְּב״ן). And likewise it is explained in detail (וְכֵן אֵיךְ הָיָה בִּפְרָטוּת), how the Nukvah was rectified from the Malkhut of M“H and of B"N, to make from them the essence of her Partzuf (תִּקּוּן הַנּוּקְבָּא מִמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן לַעֲשׂוֹת מֵהֶם עַצְמוּת פַּרְצוּפָהּ), and no aspect of male included within her is mentioned in the aspect of the Malkhut of M“H (וְלֹא נִזְכַּר בָּהּ שׁוּם בְּחִינַת זָכָר כְּלוּל בָּהּ בְּבְחִינַת הַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה). Rather she, in her entirety, is female (רַק הִיא כָּל כְּלָלוּתָהּ נְקֵבָה), and she is the essential Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin (וְהִיא הִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא הָעִקָּרִית דְּז״א). And when she was before the Tikkun, being in the aspect of one point alone (וַהֲרֵי בִּהְיוֹתָהּ קֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן בִּבְחִינַת נְקֻדָּה אַחַת לְבַד), afterwards she was in Ibbur with Ze‘ir Anpin (אַחַר כָּךְ הָיְתָה בָּעִיבּוּר עִם הַז״א), as explained in all the derashot of the Rav, of blessed memory (כְּמְבֹאָר בְּכָל דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב זלה״ה).

And especially in Sha‘ar haHakdamot, in the derushim of Partzuf Rachel (וּבִפְרָט בְּשַׁעַר הַהַקְדָּמוֹת בִּדְרוּשֵׁי פַּרְצוּף רָחֵל), after the wording which we wrote above — where he said that the true Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin is Rachel, and she is the tenth Sefirah of the ten Sefirot that encompass all Atzilut, for she is the fifth Partzuf of the five Partzufim that encompass all Atzilut (אַחַר הַלָּשׁוֹן אֲשֶׁר כָּתַבְנוּ לְעֵיל שֶׁאָמַר כִּי נוּקְבָּא הָאֲמִתִּית דְּז״א הִיא רָחֵל וְהִיא הַסְּפִירָה הָעֲשִׂירִית שֶׁבְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת הַכּוֹלְלוֹת כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת כִּי הִיא הַפַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי מֵה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת). Afterwards he explained there how her Ibbur with Ze‘ir Anpin occurred, and the order of her rectification during the periods of the rectification of Ze‘ir Anpin (אַחַר כָּךְ פֵּרֵשׁ שָׁם אֵיךְ הָיָה עִיבּוּרהּ עִם הַז״א וְסֵדֶר תִּקּוּנָהּ בִּזְמַנֵּי תִּקּוּן הַז״א) — see there his explanation (עֲיֵן שָׁם בֵּיאוּרוֹ). And in Mavo She‘arim it is also explained (וּבְסֵפֶר מָבוֹא שְׁעָרִים מְבֹאָר גַּם כֵּן), how the fifth Partzuf of the five Partzufim of Atzilut existed (אֵיךְ הָיָה הַפַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי דְּהֶ״פ הָאֲצִילוּת), as he wrote there in Gate Three, Part Two, Chapter One (שֶׁכָּתַב שָׁם בְּש״ג ח״ב פ״א): “The general conclusion is that they are only five points” (הַכְּלָל הָעוֹלֶה כִּי הֵם אֵינָם רַק ה׳ נְקֻדּוֹת), “and since the upper three — each one complete in all its ten parts — are bound with their parts in strong connection” (וּלְהִיוֹת הַג״ר כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד שְׁלֵימָה בְּכָל עֶשֶׂר חֲלָקֶיהָ מְקוּשָׁרוֹת הַחֲלָקִים בְּחִבּוּר נִמְרָץ), “therefore each one is called only one point, to indicate the firmness of their connection” (לָכֵן לֹא נִקְרָא כָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶם רַק בְּשֵׁם נְקֻדָּה אַחַת לְהוֹרוֹת עַל טוּב חִבּוּרָם). “But the fourth point — which is of Ze‘ir Anpin — etc., is only seven parts of one point” (אֲכֵן הַנְּקֻדָּה הָרְבִיעִית שֶׁל הַז״א כו׳ אֵינָם רַק ז׳ חֶלְקֵי נְקֻדָּה אַחַת), “and the fifth point — which is Malkhut — etc., is only the tenth part of one point” (וְהַנְּקֻדָּה הֶחֲמִישִׁית שֶׁל מַלְכוּת כו׳ אֵינָהּ רַק חֵלֶק עֲשִׂירִי מִנְּקֻדָּה אַחַת). “Thus they are only five points, and they are called ten points for the reason mentioned” (בְּאוֹפֶן שֶׁהֵם ה׳ נְקֻדּוֹת לְבַד וְנִקְרְאוּ י׳ נְקֻדּוֹת לַסִּיבָּה הַנִּזְכָּר). “And from these five points, after the Tikkun, the five Partzufim were made — Arich Anpin, Abba and Imma, and Zeir anpin and Nukvah” (וְאֵלּוּ הַה׳ נְקֻדּוֹת מֵהֶם נַעֲשׂוּ אַחַר הַתִּקּוּן ה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים שֶׁהֵם א״א וְאוּ״א וּזו״ן). “And behold, the first point is the ‘thorn of the Yod’ of the Name Havayah, which includes all the world of Atzilut” (וְהִנֵּה הַנְּקֻדָּה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה הִיא קוֹץ הַיּוֹ״ד שֶׁבְּשֵׁם הוי״ה הַכּוֹלֶלֶת כָּל עוֹלַם הָאֲצִילוּת). “And the second point is the body of the Yod” (וְהַנְּקֻדָּה הַב׳ הִיא גּוּף הַיּוֹ״ד). “And the third point is the first Heh of the Name” (וְהַנְּקֻדָּה הַג׳ הִיא הַה״א הָרִאשׁוֹנָה שֶׁבְּשֵׁם). “And the fourth point — since it divides into six parts as mentioned — is therefore hinted in the Vav of the Havayah” (וְהַנְּקֻדָּה הַד׳ לִהְיוֹתָהּ נֶחֱלֶקֶת לְו׳ חֲלָקִים כַּנִּזְכָּר לָכֵן הִיא רְמוּזָה בְּו׳ שֶׁל הַהוי״ה הַנִּזְכָּר). “And the fifth point is the final Heh of the Havayah” (וְהַנְּקֻדָּה הֶחֲמִישִׁית הִיא הַה״א הָאַחֲרוֹנָה שֶׁבְּשֵׁם הוי״ה הַנִּזְכָּר). Thus ends (עַכ״ל).

Behold, it is explained (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר), that the Malkhut which emerged in the time of the Kings, as one single point (כִּי הַמַלְכוּת אֲשֶׁר יָצְאָה בִּזְמַן הַמְּלָכִים בִּבְחִינַת נְקֻדָּה אַחַת בְּלָבַד), is the one that becomes the fifth Partzuf of the five Partzufim that encompass all Atzilut after the Tikkun (הִיא אֲשֶׁר נַעֲשֵׂית פַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי דְּהֶ״פ הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת אַחַר הַתִּקּוּן), for she is the final Heh of the Name Havayah that includes all Atzilut (כִּי הִיא הַה״א הָאַחֲרוֹנָה שֶׁבְּשֵׁם הוי״ה הַכּוֹלֶלֶת כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת).

And behold, even though in every place among the places mentioned above (וְהִנֵּה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁבְּכָל מָקוֹם וּמָקוֹם מִן הַמְּקוֹמוֹת הַנִּזְכָּרִים לְעֵיל), we proved how they speak concerning the totality of Atzilut (הוֹכַחְנוּ אֵיךְ הֵם מְדַבְּרִים עַל כְּלָלוּת הָאֲצִילוּת), therefore one cannot answer and say that they are speaking about the particulars of the Partzufim of a single Partzuf, as in the introduction of Rabbi Sar Shalom, of blessed memory (כִּי עַל כֵּן אֵין לְתָרֵץ וְלוֹמַר שֶׁהֵם מְדַבְּרִים בִּפְרָטֵי פַּרְצוּפֵי פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד כְּהַקְדָּמַת הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל).

Nevertheless, even if we force ourselves to say the opposite of the understood and explained meaning — that they are speaking of the particulars of the Partzufim of one Partzuf, as in the introduction of Rabbi Sar Shalom (אַף עַל פִּי כֵן גַּם אִם נִדְחֹק עַצְמֵנוּ לוֹמַר הֶפֶךְ הַמּוּבָן וְהַמְּבֹאָר בָּהֶם שֶׁהֵם מְדַבְּרִים בִּפְרָטֵי פַּרְצוּפֵי פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד כְּהַקְדָּמַת הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל), still it is difficult (אַכְתִּי קַשֶּׁה), for in all the places it is said that the six extremities of B"N are the essence of the Partzuf of Ze‘ir Anpin (שֶׁהֲרֵי בְּכָל הַמְּקוֹמוֹת נֶאֱמַר שֶׁהַו״ק דְּב״ן הֵם עַצְמוּת פַּרְצוּף הַז״א), and nowhere is it said that they are the aspect of Rachel ha-Gedolah, the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin (וְלֹא נֶאֱמַר בְּשׁוּם אֶחָד מֵהֶם שֶׁהֵם בְּחִינַת רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א). And likewise in all the places where the aspect of M“H and B"N of Ze‘ir Anpin is mentioned (וְכֵן בְּכָל הַמְּקוֹמוֹת שֶׁנִּזְכַּר בָּהֶם בְּחִינַת הַמ״ה וְהַב״ן דְּז״א), it is said that these are the aspects of the Partzuf of Ze‘ir Anpin (נֶאֱמַר בָּהֶם שֶׁהֵם בְּחִינַת פַּרְצוּף הַז״א), and nowhere is it said that the six extremities of B"N are the aspect of Rachel Ila‘ah, the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin (וְלֹא נֶאֱמַר בְּשׁוּם אֶחָד מֵהֶם שֶׁהַו״ק דְּב״ן הֵם בְּחִינַת רָחֵל עִילָּאָה נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א). And even though Rabbi Sar Shalom wrote that “in their totality they are called Ze‘ir Anpin” (וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁכְּבָר כָּתַב הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל שֶׁבִּכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרָא ז״א), the matter does not depend on the assigned name (הֲרֵי אֵין הַדָּבָר תָּלוּי בִּקְרִיאַת הַשֵּׁם), for at the end of the day, according to his words, they are “Ze‘ir Anpin and Nukvah ha-Gedolim,” the six extremities of B"N being Rachel ha-Gedolah, an aspect of Nukvah (שֶׁהֲרֵי סוֹף סוֹף הֵם זו״ן הַגְּדוֹלִים שֶׁהַו״ק דְּב״ן הִיא רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה בְּחִינַת נוּקְבָּא לְפִי דְּבָרָיו ז״ל).

And likewise in all the places where the Malkhut of M“H and B"N is mentioned (וְכֵן בְּכָל הַמְּקוֹמוֹת שֶׁנִּזְכַּר בָּהֶם מַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּב״ן), it is said that from them the Partzuf of the Nukvah is made (נֶאֱמַר בָּהֶם שֶׁמֵּהֶם נַעֲשֶׂה פַּרְצוּף הַנּוּקְבָּא), and nowhere is it said that the Malkhut of M“H is the aspect of Ya‘akov (וְלֹא נֶאֱמַר בָּהֶם שֶׁהַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה הוּא בְּחִינַת יַעֲקֹב). And even though here too Rabbi Sar Shalom wrote that “in their totality they are called the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin” (וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁכָּאן גַּם כֵּן כָּתַב הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל כִּי בִּכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרֵאת נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א), we have already written that the matter does not depend on the name (כְּבָר כָּתַבְנוּ שֶׁאֵין הַדָּבָר תָּלוּי בִּקְרִיאַת הַשֵּׁם), for at the end of the day, the “Mem of M“H” is Ya‘akov, an aspect of male (שֶׁהֲרֵי סוֹף סוֹף הַמ״ם דְּמ״ה הוּא יַעֲקֹב בְּחִינַת זָכָר).

And likewise it is difficult from the expressions which we wrote above from Sha‘ar Anach, Chapter Five, and from Sha‘ar Mochin [Intellects] de-Zei‘ir Anpin, Chapter Ten (וְכֵן גַּם כֵּן קָשֶׁה מִן הַלְּשׁוֹנוֹת אֲשֶׁר כָּתַבְנוּ לְעֵיל מִשַּׁעַר אַנ״ך פ״ה וּמִשַּׁעַר מוֹחִין דְּז״א פ״י), wherein it is said that the difference between the Partzufim of Atik and Arich Anpin and the Partzufim of Abba–Imma and Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah is that the Partzufim of Atik and Arich Anpin are each male-and-female in one Partzuf — the male from M“H and the female from B"N (אֲשֶׁר נֶאֱמַר שָׁם כִּי הַהֶפְרֵשׁ שֶׁיֵּשׁ בֵּין פַּרְצוּפֵי עַתִּיק וְא״א לְפַרְצוּפֵי אוּ״א וּזו״ן הוּא כִּי פַּרְצוּפֵי עַתִּיק וְא״א הֵם כָּל אֶחָד זָכוּ״ן בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד הַזָּכָר מִמ״ה וְהַנּוּקְבָּא מִב״ן). But Abba–Imma and Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah — each one is two separate Partzufim, the male alone a Partzuf, included and intermingled from M“H and B"N, and the female alone a Partzuf, likewise included and intermingled from M“H and B"N (אֲמְנָם אוּ״א וּזו״ן הֵם כָּל אֶחָד פַּרְצוּפִים נִפְרָדִים הַזָּכָר לְבַדּוֹ פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד כָּלוּל וּמְעוֹרָב מִמ״ה וּב״ן וְהַנּוּקְבָּא לְבַדָּהּ פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד כְּסֵדֶר כָּלוּל וּמְעוֹרָב מִמ״ה וּב״ן).

If so, even when it is said that these derashot speak of the particulars of the Partzufim of a single Partzuf (וְאִם כֵּן גַּם כַּאֲשֶׁר נֶאֱמַר שֶׁדְּרוּשִׁים אֵלּוּ הֵם מְדַבְּרִים עַל פְּרָטֵי פַּרְצוּפֵי פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד), it is certain that this difference mentioned between Atik and Arich Anpin and Abba–Imma and Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah refers to the particular Partzufim of that very Partzuf (וַדַּאי הוּא שֶׁזֶּה הַהֶפְרֵשׁ הָאָמּוּר בֵּין פַּרְצוּפֵי עַתִּיק וְא״א לְפַרְצוּפֵי אוּ״א וּזו״ן הוּא בַּפַּרְצוּפִים הַפְּרָטִיִּים שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף הַהוּא עַצְמוֹ). And if it were according to the words of Rabbi Sar Shalom, of blessed memory, that the six extremities of M“H and of B"N of the Partzuf are the “great Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah” of that Partzuf — for the six extremities of B"N are Rachel ha-Gedolah, the Nukvah of the “great Ze‘ir Anpin” of the Partzuf (וְאִם אִיתָא כְּדִבְרֵי הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל שֶׁהַו״ק דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף הֵם זו״ן הַגְּדוֹלִים שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף כִּי הַו״ק דְּב״ן הֵם רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף), then the Ze‘ir Anpin of that Partzuf would be like the Atik of that Partzuf and the Arich Anpin of that Partzuf — male-and-female in one Partzuf, the male from M“H and the female from B"N (אִם כֵּן הֲרֵי הַז״א שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף הוּא כְּמוֹ עַתִּיק שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף וְא״א שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף שֶׁהֵם זָכוּ״ן בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד הַזָּכָר מִמ״ה וְהַנּוּקְבָּא מִב״ן). And if it is because “in their totality they are called Ze‘ir Anpin” (וְאִם הוּא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁבִּכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרָא ז״א), then likewise so is it in Atik and Arich Anpin — for in their totality they are called Atik, and in their totality they are called Arich Anpin (הֲכִי נָמֵי הוּא בְּעַתִּיק וְא״א כִּי בִּכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרָא עַתִּיק וּבִכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרָא א״א).

And likewise it is difficult regarding the Nukvah (וְכֵן קָשֶׁה בְּבְחִינַת הַנּוּקְבָּא), for if indeed the Malkhut of M“H and of B"N in the Partzuf are Ya‘akov and Rachel in the Partzuf — for the Malkhut of M“H is Ya‘akov in the Partzuf, an aspect of male (דְּאִם אִיתָא שֶׁהַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף הֵם יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף כִּי הַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה הוּא יַעֲקֹב שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף בְּחִינַת זָכָר), then the Nukvah in the Partzuf would also be like the Partzufim of Atik and Arich Anpin in that Partzuf — male and female in one Partzuf, the male from M“H and the female from B"N (אִם כֵּן גַּם הַנּוּקְבָּא שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף הִיא כְּמוֹ פַּרְצוּפֵי עַתִּיק וְא״א שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף שֶׁהֵם זָכוּ״ן בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד הַזָּכָר מִמ״ה וְהַנּוּקְבָּא מִב״ן). And if it is because “in their totality they are called the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin” (וְאִם הוּא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁבִּכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרֵאת נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א), behold also there — in their totality they are called Atik, and in their totality they are called Arich Anpin (הֲרֵי גַּם שָׁם בִּכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרָא עַתִּיק וּבִכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרָא א״א).

If so, there would be no distinction between the Partzufim of Atik and Arich Anpin in the Partzuf, and the Partzuf of Ze‘ir Anpin and the Partzuf of the Nukvah in the Partzuf (וְאִם כֵּן אֵין הֶפְרֵשׁ בֵּין פַּרְצוּפֵי עַתִּיק וְא״א שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף לְפַרְצוּף הַז״א וּלְפַרְצוּף הַנּוּקְבָּא שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף), which is the opposite of the words of the Rav, of blessed memory (הֶפֶךְ דִּבְרֵי הָרַב זלה״ה). And in this manner one may also say regarding what was written above (וְעַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה יֵשׁ לוֹמַר עָלָיו גַּם מַה שֶּׁנֶּאֱמַר לְעֵיל), concerning the detailed division of the Partzufim of Abba–Imma and Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah (בִּפְרָטוּת הִתְחַלְּקוּת פַּרְצוּפֵי אוּ״א וְיִשְׂסו״ת), where he wrote (שֶׁכָּתַב): “And Abba of the Binah of M“H joined with the Ze‘ir Anpin of the Chokhmah of B"N, and they were included one within the other, etc.” (וְנִתְחַבְּרוּ אַבָּא דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה עִם ז״א דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ כו׳), “and these two aspects are called the Upper Abba–Imma, and in general they are called Abba Ila‘ah” (וּב׳ בְּחִינוֹת אֵלּוּ נִקְרָאִים אוּ״א עֶלְיוֹנִים וּבִכְלָלוּת נִקְרָא אַבָּא עִילָּאָה). “And likewise, the Ze‘ir Anpin of the Binah of M“H joined with the Malkhut of the Chokhmah of B"N, and they were included one within the other, etc.” (וְכֵן נִתְחַבְּרוּ ז״א דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה עִם מַלְכוּת דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ כו׳), “and these two aspects are called the Lower Abba–Imma, and in general they are called Yisrael-Saba, and also called Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah” (וּב׳ בְּחִינוֹת אֵלּוּ נִקְרָאִים אוּ״א תַּתָּאִים וּבִכְלָלוּת נִקְרָא יֵש״ס וְגַם נִקְרָא יִשְׂסו״ת). “And Imma of the Binah of M“H joined with the Ze‘ir Anpin of the Binah of B"N, and they were included one within the other, etc.” (וְנִתְחַבְּרוּ אִמָּא דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה עִם ז״א דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ כו׳), “and these two aspects are called the Upper Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah, and in general they are called Imma Ila‘ah” (וּב׳ בְּחִינוֹת אֵלּוּ נִקְרָאִים יִשְׂסו״ת עֶלְיוֹנִים וּבִכְלָלוּת נִקְרָא אִמָּא עִילָּאָה). “And likewise, the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin of the Binah of M“H joined with the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin of B"N, and they were included one within the other, etc.” (וְכֵן נִתְחַבְּרוּ נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה עִם נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א דְּב״ן וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ כו׳), “and these two aspects are called the Lower Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah, and in general they are called Tevunah” (וּב׳ בְּחִינוֹת אֵלּוּ נִקְרָאִים יִשְׂסו״ת תַּתָּאִים וּבִכְלָלוּת נִקְרָא תְּבוּנָה) — as his wording above states; see there (כַּמּוֹ שֶׁאָמַר לְשׁוֹנוֹ לְעֵיל עֲיֵן שָׁם).

For if, according to his words (דְּאִם כְּפִי דְּבָרָיו), the M“H and B"N that Abba took and were included together are called Upper Abba–Imma (שֶׁהַמ״ה וְהַב״ן שֶׁלָּקַח אַבָּא וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ נִקְרָאִים אוּ״א עֶלְיוֹנִים), and the M“H and B"N that Yisrael-Saba took and were included together are called Lower Abba–Imma and called Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah (וְכֵן הַמ״ה וְהַב״ן שֶׁלָּקַח יֵש״ס וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ נִקְרָאִים אוּ״א תַּתָּאִים וְנִקְרָאִים יִשְׂסו״ת), and the M“H and B"N that Binah took are called Upper Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah (וְכֵן הַמ״ה וְהַב״ן שֶׁלָּקְחָה הַבִּינָה נִקְרָאִים יִשְׂסו״ת עֶלְיוֹנִים), and the M“H and B"N that Tevunah took and were included together are called Lower Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah (וְכֵן הַמ״ה וְהַב״ן שֶׁלָּקְחָה הַתְּבוּנָה וְנִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ נִקְרָאִים יִשְׂסו״ת תַּתָּאִים), even if this is within the particulars of one Partzuf (גַּם שֶׁיִּהְיֶה בִּפְרָטֵי פַּרְצוּפֵי פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד), behold each one becomes like the Atik and A"A of that Partzuf — male and female in one Partzuf (הֲרֵי הֵם כָּל אֶחָד כְּמוֹ הָעַתִּיק וְהָא״א שֶׁבַּפַּרְצוּף שֶׁהֵם זָכוּ״ן בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד), the male M“H and the female B"N (הַזָּכָר מִמ״ה וְהַנּוּקְבָּא מִב״ן), and no difference remains between them (וְאֵין הֶפְרֵשׁ בֵּינֵיהֶם). And we already wrote above (וְכְבָר כָּתַבְנוּ לְעֵיל), that this division of Binah-of-M“H, lower seven-of-Chokhmah-of-B"N, and lower six-of-Binah-of-B"N in the Partzufim of Abba–Imma and Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah (שֶׁסֵּדֶר הִתְחַלְּקוּת זֶה דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה וְז״ת דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן וְו״ת דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן בִּפַּרְצוּפֵי אוּ״א וְיִשְׂסו״ת), arranged by Rabbi Sar Shalom, is brought in Etz Chayim, Sha‘ar Mochin [Intellects] of Z"A chapter ten (הוּבָא בְּעֵץ חַיִּים בְּשַׁעַר הַמּוֹחִין דְּז״א פ״י).

And there these names — Upper and Lower Abba–Imma, Upper and Lower Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah — are not mentioned (וְשָׁם לֹא נִזְכְּרוּ שֵׁמוֹת אֵלּוּ), but only Abba–Imma and Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah (רַק אוּ״א וְיִשְׂסו״ת). For Abba took Keter and Chokhmah of the Binah of M“H and the six extremities of the Chokhmah of B"N (כִּי אַבָּא לָקַח כֶּתֶר וְחָכְמָה דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה וְו״ק דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן), and Imma took Binah of the Binah of M“H and the five extremities Gevurah, Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod of the Binah of B"N (וְאִמָּא לָקְחָה בִּינָה דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה וְה׳ קְצָווֹת ג״תְנ״ה״י דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן), and Yisrael-Saba took six extremities of the Binah of M“H and Malkhut of the Chokhmah of B"N (וְיֵש״ס לָקַח ו״ק דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה וּמַלְכוּת דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן), and Tevunah took the Malkhut of the Binah of M“H and of B"N (וְתְבוּנָה לָקְחָה מַלְכוּת דְּבִינָה דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן).

And he concluded there (וְסִיֵּם שָׁם): “And it is found that Abba has M“H and B"N, and Imma has M“H and B"N, and Yisrael-Saba has M“H and B"N, and Tevunah has M“H and B"N” (וְנִמְצָא כִּי אַבָּא יֵשׁ לוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן וְאִמָּא יֵשׁ לָהּ מ״ה וּב״ן וְיֵש״ס מ״ה וּב״ן וּתְבוּנָה מ״ה וּב״ן). “But Atik and A"A are not so; the male takes M“H alone and the female B"N alone; therefore they are joined in one Partzuf” (אֲבָל עַתִּיק וְא״א אֵינָם כֵּן רַק הַזָּכָר לוֹקֵחַ מ״ה לְבַדּוֹ וְהַנּוּקְבָּא ב״ן לְבַדָּהּ לָכֵן הֵם מְחוּבָּרִים בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד). “But in Abba–Imma, who are separated male and female, each must contain M“H and B"N so as not to separate entirely — and this is the secret of the son in Chokhmah and the sage in Binah, etc.; see there.” (אֲבָל בְּאוּ״א שֶׁהֵם זָכוּ״ן נִפְרָדִים שֶׁכָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶם יִהְיֶה בּוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִתְפָּרְדוּ לְגַמְרֵי וְזֶ״ס הַבֵּן בַּחָכְמָה וְחָכָם בַּבִּינָה וְכוּ׳ עֲיֵן שָׁם).

Behold, in that very chapter and in that very place from which he, of blessed memory, brought the division of the Partzufim of Abba–Imma and Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah (הֲרֵי בְּאוֹתוֹ פֶּרֶק וּבְאוֹתוֹ מָקוֹם אֲשֶׁר מִשָּׁם הֵבִיא הוּא ז״ל סֵדֶר הִתְחַלְּקוּת פַּרְצוּפֵי אוּ״א וְיִשְׂסו״ת), it is explained the distinction that exists between the Partzufim of Atik and Arich Anpin and the Partzufim of Abba–Imma and Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah (מְבֹאָר הַהֶפְרֵשׁ שֶׁיֵּשׁ בֵּין פַּרְצוּפֵי עַתִּיק וְא״א לְפַרְצוּפֵי אוּ״א וְיִשְׂסו״ת), and as is likewise explained in Sha‘ar Anach, Chapter Five (וְכַמְּבֹאָר גַּם כֵּן בְּשַׁעַר אַנ״ך פ״ה), this very same distinction (זֶה הַהֶפְרֵשׁ עַצְמוֹ), as the wording was cited above (כַּמָּ״שׁ הַלָּשׁוֹן לְעֵיל). This is contrary to his words, of blessed memory (הֶפֶךְ דְּבָרָיו ז״ל), for according to his words there is no distinction between Atik and Arich Anpin on the one side and Abba–Imma and Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah and Ze’ir anpin and Nukvah on the other (כִּי לְפִי דְּבָרָיו אֵין הֶפְרֵשׁ בֵּין עַתִּיק וְא״א לְאוּ״א וְיִשְׂסו״ת וּזו״ן), but all of them are equal — male-and-female in one Partzuf, the male being M“H and the female being B"N (רַק כֻּלָּם שָׁוִין זָכוּ״ן בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד הַזָּכָר מִמ״ה וְהַנּוּקְבָּא מִב״ן). And calling them, in their totality, “Abba Ila‘ah,” “Imma Ila‘ah,” “Yisrael-Saba,” “Tevunah,” “Zei‘ir Anpin,” and “Nukvah” (וּקְרִיאַתָם בִּכְלָלוּתָם אַבָּא עִילָּאָה וְאִמָּא עִילָּאָה וְיֵש״ס וּתְבוּנָה וְז״א וְנוּקְבָּא), does not change anything (זֶה אֵינוֹ מַעֲלֶה וְלֹא מוֹרִיד), as stated above (כַּמָּ״שׁ לְעֵיל).

For behold, even Atik — in the totality of its M“H and B"N — is called Atik (שֶׁהֲרֵי גַּם עַתִּיק בִּכְלָלוּת הַמ״ה וְהַב״ן שֶׁלּוֹ נִקְרָא עַתִּיק), and likewise Arich — in the totality of its M“H and B"N — is called Arich Anpin (וְכֵן גַּם אֲרִיךְ בִּכְלָלוּת הַמ״ה וְהַב״ן שֶׁלּוֹ נִקְרָא א״א). If so, all of them are equal (אִם כֵּן כֻּלָּם שָׁוִין). And behold, it is true and correct (וְהִנֵּה אֱמֶת נָכוֹן הַדָּבָר), that all these derashot of the Rav, of blessed memory, and those like them, speak concerning the aspect of the Shevirah [Breaking] that occurred in the general Z"T of Atzilut (כִּי כָּל אֵלּוּ דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב זלה״ה וְדוֹמֵיהֶם הֵם מְדַבְּרִים בִּבְחִינַת הַשְּׁבִירָה שֶׁהָיְתָה בִּכְלָלוּת הַז״ת דְּאֲצִילוּת). However, we have already written above in Siman 1 (אַף עַל פִּי כֵן כְּבָר כָּתַבְנוּ לְעֵיל בְּסִימָן א׳), how also in the derashot of the Rav, of blessed memory, it is said that the Shevirah [Breaking] occurred in particular — that there were seven kings in Arich Anpin, and seven kings in Abba, and seven kings in Imma, and seven kings in Ze‘ir Anpin, and seven kings in the Nukvah (אֵיךְ גַּם בִּדְרוּשֵׁי הָרַב זלה״ה נֶאֱמַר אֵיךְ הַשְּׁבִירָה הָיְתָה בִּפְרָטוּת שֶׁהָיוּ ז׳ מְלָכִים בַּא״א וְז׳ מְלָכִים בַּאֲבָא וְז׳ מְלָכִים בָּאִמָּא וְז׳ מְלָכִים בַּז״א וְז׳ מְלָכִים בַּנּוּקְבָּא).

And afterwards the seven kings of each aspect were rectified by means of the new Name M“H (וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִתְקְּנוּ הַז״מ דְּכָל בְּחִינָה וּבְחִינָה עַל־יְדֵי שֵׁם מ״ה הַחָדָשׁ). If so, one must say that the Malkhut of M“H and of B"N of each and every aspect is the Nukvah of the Ze‘ir Anpin of that aspect (וְאִם כֵּן עַל־כֵּן צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר כִּי הַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן דְּכָל בְּחִינָה וּבְחִינָה הִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא שֶׁל הַז״א דְּאוֹתָהּ בְּחִינָה). Therefore Rabbi Sar Shalom, of blessed memory, follows his own reasoning — that the Shevirah [Breaking] was in particular; and thus he said that the Malkhut of M“H and of B"N is the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin, besides the general Nukvah which contains all the particulars (וְעַל־כֵּן הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל לְשִׁיטָתֵיהּ אָזִיל שֶׁהַשְּׁבִירָה הָיְתָה בִּפְרָטוּת וְלָכֵן אָמַר שֶׁהַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן הִיא נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א מִלְּבַד נוּקְבָּא הַכּוֹלֶלֶת אֲשֶׁר יֵשׁ בָּהּ כָּל הַפְּרָטִים). As he said later (כַּמָּ״שׁ לְקַמָּן), that she too has a Ze‘ir Anpin in particular — which are her six extremities — and her Malkhut is the Nukvah of her Ze‘ir Anpin, just as the general Ze‘ir Anpin, whose Malkhut is his Nukvah (וְאִם כֵּן גַּם לָהּ יֵשׁ לָהּ ז״א בִּפְרָטוּת שֶׁהֵם הַו״ק שֶׁלָּהּ וְהַמַלְכוּת שֶׁלָּהּ הִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא שֶׁל הַז״א שֶׁלָּהּ כְּמוֹ שֶׁהַז״א הַכּוֹלֵל הַמַלְכוּת שֶׁלּוֹ הִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא שֶׁלּוֹ). However, in my humble opinion, this is not so (הֵן לְעַנְיוּת דַּעְתִּי לֵיתָא לְהָאי): for not because the Shevirah [Breaking] was in particulars were the Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah multiplied — Heaven forbid — to become male and female in Ze‘ir Anpin and male and female in the Nukvah (כִּי לֹא בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁהַשְּׁבִירָה הָיְתָה בִּפְרָטוּת נִתְרַבּוּ הַזו״ן ח״ו לִהְיוֹתָם בִּבְחִינַת זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בַּז״א וְזָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בַּנּוּקְבָּא). Rather, it is as in the general case (כִּי אִם עַל־דֶּרֶךְ הַכְּלָלוּת): just as in the generality there is only one aspect of Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah — that the Ze‘ir Anpin is male and the Nukvah is female, as mentioned in all the derashot of the Rav (כִּי כְּמוֹ שֶׁבַּכְּלָלוּת לֹא נֶאֱמַר רַק בְּחִינָה אַחַת שֶׁל זו״ן שֶׁהַז״א הוּא זָכָר וְהַנּוּקְבָּא הִיא נְקֵבָה הַנִּזְכָּר בְּכָל דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב זלה״ה), so too in the particulars there is only one aspect of Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah — that the male is the general Ze‘ir Anpin and the female is the general Nukvah, and nothing further (כֵּן בַּפְּרָטוּת לֹא יֵשׁ רַק בְּחִינָה אַחַת שֶׁל זו״ן שֶׁהַזָּכָר הוּא הַז״א הַכּוֹלֵל וְהַנּוּקְבָּא הִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא הַכּוֹלֶלֶת וְתוּ לָא).

That is: all seven kings of Ze‘ir Anpin, when rectified with the new Name M“H, became only the male Ze‘ir Anpin (דְּהַיְינוּ כָּל הַז׳ מְלָכִים דְּז״א בְּהִתְתַּקְּנָם עִם שֵׁם מ״ה הֶחָדָשׁ נַעֲשׂוּ בְּחִינַת ז״א זָכָר לְבַד), and all seven kings of the Nukvah, when rectified with the new Name M“H, became only the female Nukvah — the Nukvah of the general Ze‘ir Anpin (וְכָל הַז׳ מְלָכִים דְּנֻקְבָּא בְּהִתְתַּקְּנָם עִם שֵׁם מ״ה הֶחָדָשׁ נַעֲשׂוּ בְּחִינַת הַנּוּקְבָּא נְקֵבָה לְבַד נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א הַכּוֹלֵל). And these are the Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah mentioned everywhere (וְאֵלּוּ הֵם הַזו״ן הַנִּזְכָּרִים בְּכָל הַמְּקוֹמוֹת). And the proof for this is as follows (וְהָרְאָיָה לָזֶה), for behold, in Etz Chayim, Sha‘ar Z“A, chapter three (כִּי הִנֵּה בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר ז״א פ״ג), when he is demonstrating that Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah — each of them — contains M“H and B"N in the Ze‘ir Anpin and M“H and B"N in the Nukvah (בְּהִיוֹתוֹ מַכְרִיחַ אֵיךְ זו״ן כָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶם יֵשׁ בּוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן בַּז״א וּמ״ה וּב״ן בַּנּוּקְבָּא), he wrote (כָּתַב): “And see in the Sifra di-Tzeni‘uta, in Pekudei and Naso, and you will understand how the seven kings are the Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah of B"N” (וְזֶ״ל וַעֲיֵן בְּס״ה בְּפְקוּדֵי וּנְשֹׂא וְתָבִין אֵיךְ הַז׳ מְלָכִים הֵם זו״ן דְּב״ן), “and afterwards seven other kings emerged, and they are Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah — male and female — also from M“H, and they are called Hadar and Mehitavel” (וְאַחַר כָּךְ יָצְאוּ ז׳ מְלָכִים אֲחֵרִים וְהֵם זו״ן זָכוּ״ן גַּם כֵּן דְּמ״ה וְנִקְרָאִים הֲדַר וּמְהֵיטַבְאֵל). “Hadar is the Ze‘ir Anpin of M“H — which are the six kings; and Mehitavel is the Nukvah of M“H” (הֲדַר שֶׁהוּא הַז״א דְּמ״ה שֶׁהֵם ו׳ מְלָכִים וּמֵהֵיטַבְאֵל נוּקְבָּא דְּמ״ה). “And through these, the first seven were rectified” (וְעַל־יְדֵי אֵלּוּ נִתְקְּנוּ ז׳ רִאשׁוֹנוֹת). “And the totality of these seven — of M“H and of B"N — are called Hadar and Mehitavel” (וְכְלָלוּת ז׳ אֵלּוּ דְּמ״ה וּב״ן נִקְרָאִים הֲדַר וּמְהֵיטַבְאֵל). “And in my humble opinion, certainly ten of M“H emerged; but since the essential Tikkun is to the Seven Kings of B"N alone, therefore only seven were mentioned — but surely they were composed of ten Sefirot” (וְנִלְעַ״ד כִּי וַדַּאי שֶׁיָּצְאוּ י׳ דְּמ״ה אֶלָּא כֵּיוָן שֶׁעִקַּר הַתִּקּוּן הוּא אֶל הַז״מ דְּב״ן לְבַד לָכֵן נִזְכְּרוּ בְּשֵׁם ז׳ אֲבָל וַדַּאי שֶׁהָיוּ כְּלוּלוֹת מֵי׳ סְפִירוֹת). “For behold, also the three upper ones — Atik, Arich, Abba–Imma — were rectified through M“H, as stated above” (כִּי הֲרֵי גַּם ג״ר שֶׁהֵם עַתִּיק א״א אוֹ״א נִתְקְּנוּ עַל־יְדֵי מ״ה כַּנַּ״ל). “Another answer is as written in Naso in his commentary: that seven kings were in Arich Anpin, and seven in Ze‘ir Anpin, and seven in the Nukvah” (וְגַם תִּירוּץ אַחֵר כַּמָּ״שׁ בְּנָשֹׂא בִּפְרוּשׁוֹ כִּי ז׳ מְלָכִים הָיוּ בַּא״א וְז״מ בַּז״א וְז״מ בַּנּוּקְבָּא). “If so, the seven mentioned here — meaning the seven within each aspect of the three — then also in Arich Anpin there were the seven earlier kings in its seven extremities, and seven others from M“H came to rectify them; and likewise in Ze‘ir Anpin, and likewise in the Nukvah” (וְאִם כֵּן הַז׳ הַנִּזְכָּרִים כָּאן ר״ל הַז׳ שֶׁבְּכָל בְּחִינָה מֵהַג׳ אִם כֵּן גַּם בַּא״א הָיוּ בּוֹ ז׳ מְלָכִים קַדְמָאִין בְּז׳ קְצָווֹת שֶׁלּוֹ וּבָאוּ ז׳ אֲחֵרִים דְּמ״ה לְתַקְּנָם וְכֵן בַּז״א וְכֵן בַּנּוּקְבָּא).

If so, also from here there is proof of the above (אִם כֵּן גַּם מִכָּאן רְאָיָה אֶל הַנַּ״ל), for in Ze‘ir Anpin alone there is M“H and B"N (כִּי בַּז״א לְבַדּוֹ יֵשׁ מ״ה וּב״ן), and likewise in the Nukvah alone there is M“H and B"N (וְכֵן בַּנּוּקְבָּא לְבַדָּהּ יֵשׁ מ״ה וּב״ן). Also from another place you may understand (גַּם מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר תָּבִין), how Ze‘ir Anpin himself after the Tikkun took the six extremities of the Kings that died of the Name B"N (אֵיךְ הַז״א עַצְמוֹ אַחַר הַתִּקּוּן לָקַח ו״ק שֶׁל הַמְּלָכִים דְּמֵתוּ דְּשֵׁם ב״ן), and likewise in the Nukvah — she took the seven (וְכֵן בַּנּוּקְבָּא נָטְלָה הַז׳). If so— (אִם כֵּן). Certainly Ze‘ir Anpin has within him M“H and B"N (וַדַּאי הַז״א יֵשׁ בּוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן), and likewise in the Nukvah there is M“H and B"N (וְכֵן בַּנּוּקְבָּא מ״ה וּב״ן). And also in Parashat Naso we wrote there (וְגַם בְּפ׳ נָשֹׂא כָּתַבְנוּ שָׁם), that there were five kinds of kings in Arich Anpin and in Abba–Imma and in Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah (כִּי ה׳ מִינֵי מְלָכִים הָיוּ בַּא״א וּבְאוּ״א וּבְזו״ן), and each aspect is the Seven Kings (וְכָל בְּחִינָה הִיא ז״מ).

And behold, you will see that the five Partzufim exist, and each one has M“H and B"N (וְהִנֵּה תִּרְאֶה כִּי ה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הֵם וְכָל אֶחָד יֵשׁ בּוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן). However, the Partzuf of Arich Anpin alone is without a female (אֲבָל פַּרְצוּף א״א לְבַדּוֹ הוּא בְּלִי נְקֵבָה), and the four other Partzufim — each of them becomes a female to its companion, even though each one has M“H and B"N (וְהַד׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הָאֲחֵרִים כָּל אֶחָד נַעֲשֶׂה נְקֵבָה לַחֲבֵרוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּכָל אֶחָד מ״ה וּב״ן). How so? (כֵּיצַד) Arich Anpin has M“H and B"N (א״א יֵשׁ בּוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן), and he is one Partzuf that has no mate at all in any other Partzuf (וְהוּא פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד שֶׁאֵין כְּנֶגְדּוֹ בַּת זוּגוֹ כְּלָל בְּפַרְצוּף אַחֵר). And so it was in Atik, which is above the five Partzufim and is not included in their count (וְכֵן הָיָה בְּעַתִּיק שֶׁהוּא לְמַעְלָה מֵהֶ״פ וְאֵינוֹ נִכְנָס בִּמְנְיָנָם), for he is the root of all and is the Malkhut of the supernal world that becomes enclothed afterward in them (כִּי הוּא שֹׁרֶשׁ הַכֹּל וְהוּא מַלְכוּת הָעוֹלָם הָעֶלְיוֹן הַמִּתְלַבֵּשׁ בָּהֶם). Afterwards, the Partzuf of Abba is Chokhmah, composed of M“H and B"N (אַחַר כָּךְ הַפַּרְצוּף דְּאַבָּא הוּא חָכְמָה כָּלוּל מִמ״ה וּב״ן), which is Abba and the Binah, and all of this is one Partzuf in Hod (שֶׁהוּא אַבָּא וְהַבִּינָה וְהַכֹּל פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד בְּהוֹד). “And the son in Chokhmah” (וְהַבֵּן בַּחָכְמָה), and he has another Partzuf, his mate, called Binah, included of M“H and B"N — which are Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah (וְיֵשׁ לוֹ פַּרְצוּף אַחֵר בַּת זוּגוֹ נִקְרֵאת בִּינָה נִכְלֶלֶת מִמ״ה וּב״ן שֶׁהֵם יִשְׂסו״ת), and they are one Partzuf (וּשְׁנֵיהֶם פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד), and all this Partzuf is the mate to the upper Partzuf of Chokhmah (וְכָל זֶה הַפַּרְצוּף הוּא בַּת זוּגוֹ לַפַּרְצוּף הָעֶלְיוֹן דְּחָכְמָה).

Afterwards, the Partzuf of Ze‘ir Anpin is composed of M“H and B"N (אַחַר כָּךְ הַפַּרְצוּף דְּז״א כָּלוּל מִמ״ה וּב״ן), and he has another Partzuf, his mate, the Nukvah called Malkhut, which includes M“H and B"N (וְיֵשׁ לוֹ פַּרְצוּף אַחֵר בַּת זוּגוֹ נוּקְבָּא הַנִּקְרֵאת מַלְכוּת הַכּוֹלֶלֶת מ״ה וּב״ן), and both are one Partzuf (וּשְׁנֵיהֶם פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד), and all this Partzuf is the mate to the upper Partzuf, which is Ze‘ir Anpin (וְכָל זֶה הַפַּרְצוּף הוּא בַּת זוּגוֹ לַפַּרְצוּף הָעֶלְיוֹן שֶׁהוּא הַז״א). If so, do not be astonished if Ze‘ir Anpin is composed of M“H and B"N and likewise the Nukvah (וְאִם כֵּן אַל תִּתְמַהּ אִם הַז״א כָּלוּל מִמ״ה וּב״ן וְכֵן הַנּוּקְבָּא), for thus it is in Chokhmah–Binah — each of them composed of M“H and B"N, as stated above (כִּי כָּךְ הוּא חו״ב כָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶם כָּלוּל מִמ״ה וּב״ן כַּנַּ״ל). Thus ends his wording (עַכְ״ל).

Behold, it is explained (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר), how in the very place where he wrote the matter of the Shevirah [Breaking] in particular — that there were seven kings of B"N in Ze‘ir Anpin, and seven others of M“H came to rectify them (אֵיךְ בְּמָקוֹם אֲשֶׁר כָּתַב עִנְיַן הַשְּׁבִירָה בִּפְרָטוּת שֶׁהָיוּ ז׳ מְלָכִים דְּב״ן בַּז״א וּבָאוּ ז׳ אֲחֵרִים דְּמ״ה לְתַקְּנָם), and likewise in the Nukvah there were seven kings of B"N, and seven other kings of M“H came to rectify them (וְכֵן בַּנּוּקְבָּא הָיוּ ז״מ דְּב״ן וּבָאוּ ז׳ מְלָכִים אֲחֵרִים דְּמ״ה לְתַקְּנָם), he wrote that the M“H and the B"N in Ze‘ir Anpin are the Partzuf of Ze‘ir Anpin alone (כָּתַב כִּי הַמ״ה וְהַב״ן שֶׁבַּז״א הוּא הַפַּרְצוּף דְּז״א לְבַדּוֹ), and he did not mention any aspect of Nukvah within his Partzuf (וְלֹא הִזְכִּיר שׁוּם בְּחִינַת נוּקְבָּא בְּפַרְצוּפוֹ). And likewise, the M“H and the B"N in the Nukvah are the Partzuf of the Nukvah (וְכֵן הַמ״ה וְהַב״ן שֶׁבַּנּוּקְבָּא הוּא הַפַּרְצוּף שֶׁל הַנּוּקְבָּא), and he did not mention any aspect of male within her Partzuf (וְלֹא הִזְכִּיר שׁוּם בְּחִינַת זָכָר בְּפַרְצוּפָהּ).

Rather, he wrote that the Partzuf of the Nukvah — composed of her M“H and her B"N (רַק כֵּן כָּתַב כִּי הַפַּרְצוּף שֶׁל הַנּוּקְבָּא הַכּוֹלֵל מִמּ״ה וּמִב״ן שֶׁלָּהּ), which are her seven kings of B"N and her seven of M“H — is entirely the feminine mate of the upper Partzuf of Ze‘ir Anpin (שֶׁהֵם ז׳ מְלָכִים דְּב״ן וְהַז׳ דְּמ״ה שֶׁלָּהּ כֻּלּוֹ הוּא בַּת זוּגוֹ נוּקְבָּא אֶל הַפַּרְצוּף הָעֶלְיוֹן דְּז״א), which is composed of his M“H and his B"N — his seven kings of B"N and his seven of M“H — who is the male, her mate (הַכּוֹלֵל מִמּ״ה וּמִב״ן שֶׁלּוֹ שֶׁהֵם ז׳ מְלָכִים דְּב״ן וְהַז׳ דְּמ״ה שֶׁלּוֹ אֲשֶׁר הוּא הַזָּכָר בֶּן זוּגָהּ). And it is explained (וּמְבֹאָר הוּא), how he speaks of the five Partzufim that include all Atzilut — the first is Arich Anpin, the second Chokhmah which is Abba–Imma, the third Binah which is Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah, the fourth Ze‘ir Anpin, and the fifth the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin (אֵיךְ הוּא מְדַבֵּר עַל הֶ״פ פַּרְצוּפִים הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת אֲשֶׁר הָרִאשׁוֹן א״א וְהַשֵּׁנִי חָכְמָה שֶׁהֵם אוּ״א וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁי בִּינָה שֶׁהֵם יִשְׂסו״ת וְהָרְבִיעִי ז״א וְהַחֲמִישִׁי הַנּוּקְבָּא דְּז״א). And Atik is not counted among them (וְעַתִּיק אֵינוֹ בְּמִנְיָנָם), for he is the root of all and is in the aspect of the Malkhut of Adam Kadmon (כִּי הוּא שֹׁרֶשׁ הַכֹּל וְהוּא בִּבְחִינַת מַלְכוּת דְּאָדָם קַדְמוֹן).

If so, even when it is said that the Shevirah [Breaking] was in particulars (אִם כֵּן גַּם כַּאֲשֶׁר נֶאֱמַר שֶׁהַשְּׁבִירָה הָיְתָה בִּפְרָטוּת), there is only one aspect of Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah: the male is the general Ze‘ir Anpin, the fourth Partzuf of the five Partzufim, and the female is the general Nukvah, the fifth Partzuf of the five Partzufim (לֹא יֵשׁ רַק בְּחִינָה אַחַת שֶׁל זו״ן שֶׁהַזָּכָר הוּא הַז״א הַכּוֹלֵל פַּרְצוּף הָרְבִיעִי מֵהֶ״פ וְהַנְּקֵבָה הִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא הַכּוֹלֶלֶת פַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי מֵהֶ״פ הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת), and these are the Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah mentioned in all the derashot of the Rav (וְהֵם הֵם הַזו״ן הַנִּזְכָּרִים בְּכָל דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב זלה״ה). And it is also explained (גַּם מְבֹאָר), how in this chapter he mentioned the matter of the kings both in general and in particular (אֵיךְ בְּפֶרֶק זֶה הִזְכִּיר בְּחִינַת הַמְּלָכִים בֵּין בְּכְלָלוּת וּבֵין בִּפְרָטוּת), and he did not say in any of the aspects that the six extremities of B"N included in Ze‘ir Anpin are the aspect of Rachel ha-Gedolah, the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin (וְלֹא אָמַר בְּשׁוּם בְּחִינָה מִשְׁתֵּיהֶם כִּי הַו״ק דְּב״ן הַכְּלוּלִים בַּז״א הֵם בְּחִינַת רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א). Nor did he say that the Malkhut of M“H included in the Nukvah is the aspect of Ya‘akov, masculine (וְכֵן לֹא אָמַר שֶׁהַמַּלְכוּת דְּמ״ה הַכְּלוּלָה בַּנּוּקְבָּא הִיא בְּחִינַת יַעֲקֹב דְּכוּרָא).

Rather, on the contrary, he demonstrated from both aspects (אֶלָּא אֲדַרְבָּא הֶכְרִיחַ מִן הַבּ׳ בְּחִינוֹת), how Ze‘ir Anpin himself — the essence of his Partzuf — is composed of M“H and B"N (אֵיךְ הַז״א עַצְמוֹ עַצְמוּת פַּרְצוּפוֹ כָּלוּל מִמּ״ה וּב״ן), and likewise the Nukvah (וְכֵן הַנּוּקְבָּא גַּם כֵּן). As he wrote at the beginning of the chapter (וּכְמַ״שׁ בִּתְחִלַּת הַפֶּרֶק): “In such a manner, there is none among all the ten Sefirot who has M“H and B"N in the male and M“H and B"N in the female — except Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah, etc.” (בְּאוֹפֶן שֶׁאֵין בְּכָל הַי׳ סְפִירוֹת מִי שֶׁיִּהְיֶה בּוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן בִּזְכָר וּמ״ה וּב״ן בַּנְּקֵבָה כִּי אִם זו״ן וְכוּ׳). And it is difficult (וְקָשֶׁה), for behold at the end of the chapter he said that all of them — Arich Anpin, Abba–Imma, Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah — have M”H and B"N (כִּי הֲרֵי בְּסוֹף הַפֶּרֶק אָמַר שֶׁכֻּלָּם א״א אוּ״א יִשְׂסו״ת יֵשׁ בָּהֶם מ״ה וּב״ן).

Rather certainly the distinction is (אֶלָּא וַדַּאי שֶׁהֶהֶפְרֵשׁ הוּא), that in Arich Anpin there is M”H and B"N in one Partzuf, but he has no mate opposite him (כִּי בְּא״א יֵשׁ מ״ה וּב״ן בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד אֲבָל אֵין כְּנֶגְדּוֹ בַּת זוּג), and in Abba–Imma there is M"H and B"N, but they are Chokhmah–Binah made into one Partzuf (וּבְאוּ״א יֵשׁ מ״ה וּב״ן אֲבָל הֵם חו״ב שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד), and likewise Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah, which became one Partzuf, have M"H and B"N and are in the aspect of a mate to the Partzuf of Chokhmah–Binah (וְכֵן יִשְׂסו״ת שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד יֵשׁ בָּהֶם מ״ה וּב״ן וְהֵם בְּחִינַת זוּג לְפַרְצוּף הַחו״ב). But Ze’ir Anpin alone has M”H and B"N (אֲבָל הַז״א לְבַדּוֹ יֵשׁ בּוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן), and he has a mate, the Nukvah, and she alone also has M”H and B"N (וְיֵשׁ לוֹ בַּת זוּגוֹ שֶׁהִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא וְגַם בָּהּ לְבַדָּהּ יֵשׁ בָּהּ מ״ה וּב״ן).

It follows that Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah, on one side, resemble Arich Anpin, for they have M”H and B"N within one Partzuf (נִמְצָא שֶׁזו״ן מִצַּד אֶחָד דּוֹמִים לְא״א שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם מ״ה וּב״ן בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד), and on the other side resemble Abba–Imma, for they are a pair with one another (וּמִצַּד אַחֵר דּוֹמִים לְאוּ״א שֶׁהֵם בַּת־זוּג זֶה לָזֶה). In such a manner, according to all the above (בְּאוֹפֶן כִּי לְפִי כָּל הָאֲמוּר), Rachel ha-Gedolah is not included in one Partzuf with Ze’ir Anpin in the six extremities of B”N within Ze’ir Anpin (אֵין רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה נִכְלֶלֶת בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד עִם הַז״א בַּו״ק דְּב״ן שֶׁבַּז״א), but is included with Rachel, the tenth Sefirah of the ten Sefirot of the general Atzilut — the fifth Partzuf of the five Partzufim that include all Atzilut, who is the true Nukvah of Ze’ir Anpin (רַק הִיא נִכְלֶלֶת עִם רָחֵל סְפִירָה עֲשִׂירִית דְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכְלָלוּת הָאֲצִילוּת פַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי דְּה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת שֶׁהִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא הָאֲמִתִּית דְּז״א).

And therefore they are included together, for they are two aspects of Nukvah (וְלָכֵן נִכְלָלוֹת יַחַד כִּי ב׳ בְּחִינוֹת נוּקְבָּא). And below, with Hashem’s help, we will explain what Rachel Ila'ah is (וּלְקַמָּן בְּעֶזְרַת ה׳ נְבָאֵר מָה הִיא רָחֵל עִילָּאָה). And also that Ya‘akov is not included with the Nukvah — who is the Malkhut of B"N — in one Partzuf (וְגַם כִּי אֵין יַעֲקֹב נִכְלָל עִם הַנּוּקְבָּא שֶׁהִיא מַלְכוּת דְּב״ן בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד), but is included with Ze’ir Anpin, a male like him (רַק נִכְלָל עִם הַז״א זָכָר כְּמוֹהוּ). However, Ya‘akov unites with her (אֲבָל יַעֲקֹב מִזְדַּוֵּג עִמָּהּ), and below we will explain the aspect of Ya‘akov, may he be blessed (וּלְקַמָּן נְבָאֵר בְּחִינַת יַעֲקֹב בָּרוּךְ הוּא). And in Sha‘ar Abba–Imma, chapter sixteen, he wrote as follows in brief (וּבְשַׁעַר אוּ״א פ״ט ו׳ כָּתַב וְזֶ״ל בְּקִצּוּר): Behold, you will see that Atik includes M”H and B"N, and both of them are male-aspects in one Partzuf (וְהִנֵּה תִּרְאֶה כִּי עַתִּיק כּוֹלֵל מ״ה וּב״ן וּשְׁנֵיהֶם זָכוּ״ן פַּרְצוּף א׳), and they are the two “faces” of M”H and B"N, etc (וְהֵם ב׳ הַפָּנִים דְּמ״ה וּב״ן וְכוּ׳). And Arich Anpin also is M”H and B"N — male-aspects in one Partzuf, M”H on the right and B"N on the left (וְא״א גַּם הוּא מ״ה וּב״ן זָכוּ״ן פַּרְצוּף א׳ מ״ה בִּימִין וּב״ן בִּשְׂמֹאל). But in Abba there is M”H and B"N, only that they are two Partzufim, but they are attached always face-to-face like Atik (אֲבָל בְּאַבָּא יֵשׁ מ״ה וּב״ן אֶלָּא שֶׁהֵם ב׳ פַּרְצוּפִים אֶלָּא שֶׁהֵם דְּבוּקִים יַחַד תָּדִיר פַּב״פ דּוּגְמַת עַתִּיק), and so strongly are they joined that they are considered as only one Partzuf called Abba (וְכָל כָּךְ הֵם דְּבוּקִים עַד שֶׁנֶּחְשָׁבִים ב׳ פַּרְצוּף א׳ לְבַד הַנִּקְרָא אַבָּא). And so it is with Imma, that they are two Partzufim — M”H and B"N — but they are very strongly attached face-to-face like Atik (וְכֵן בְּאִמָּא הוּא כָּךְ שֶׁהֵם ב׳ פַּרְצוּפִים דְּמ״ה וּב״ן אֲבָל הֵם דְּבוּקִים מְאֹד פַּב״פ דּוּגְמַת עַתִּיק). And in Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah there is another deficiency (וּבְזו״ן יֵשׁ גֵּירָעוֹן אַחֵר), for the lower the Partzufim descend from their level, the more their separation — the aspect of M”H from the aspect of B"N — becomes revealed (כִּי כָּל מָה שֶׁהוֹלְכִים הַפַּרְצוּפִים וְיוֹרְדִים מִמַּדְרֵגָתָם מִתְגַּלֶּה מְאֹד פִּירוּדָם בְּחִינַת הַמ״ה מִבְּחִינַת הַב״ן). Therefore, additional separation was added in the portion of M”H and B"N that is in Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah (וְלָכֵן נוֹסַף פִּירוּד בְּחֵלֶק מ״ה וּב״ן שֶׁבְּזו״ן). And the matter is that Ze‘ir Anpin is entirely the aspect of M”H, and the Nukvah entirely the aspect of B"N (וְהָעִנְיָן כִּי הַז״א כּוּלוֹ בְּחִינַת מ״ה וְנֻקְבָּא כּוּלָּהּ בְּחִינַת ב״ן), and they are separated at times back-to-back and at times face-to-face (וְהֵם נִפְרָדִים לִזְמַנִּים אַב״א וְלִזְמַנִּים פַּב״פ).

And behold, corresponding to Abba–Imma are Ze‘ir and Rachel, equal in their stature (וְהִנֵּה דּוּגְמַת אוּ״א הֵם זְעֵיר וְרָחֵל הַשָּׁוִים בְּקוֹמָתָם), and corresponding to Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah are Ya‘akov and Rachel, the smaller ones from the chest downward of Ze‘ir Anpin (וְדּוּגְמַת יִשְׂסו״ת הֵם יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל הַקְּטַנִּים מֵהַחָזֶה וּלְמַטָּה דְּז״א). And understand this (וְהָבֵן זֶה). And know that there is a Ya‘akov who is the lower half of Ze‘ir Anpin, and he mates with the small Rachel (וְדַע כִּי יֵשׁ יַעֲקֹב שֶׁהוּא חֲצִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן דְּז״א וְהוּא הַמִּזְדַּוֵּג עִם רָחֵל הַקְּטַנָּה). And there are Ya‘akov and Leah, who are the back-aspects of Abba–Imma (וְיֵשׁ יַעֲקֹב וְלֵאָה שֶׁהֵם בְּחִינַת אֲחוֹרַיִים דְּאוּ״א).

The general conclusion is that (כְּלָל הָעוֹלֶה כִּי), there exist Atik and Arich Anpin of M”H, and Atik and Arich Anpin of B"N (יֵשׁ עַתִּיק וַאֲרִיךְ דְּמ״ה וְעַתִּיק וַאֲרִיךְ דְּב״ן), and corresponding to them exactly are Abba and Yisrael-Saba of M”H, and Binah and Tevunah of B"N (וּכְנֶגְדָּם מַמָּשׁ אַבָּא וְיֵש״ס דְּמ״ה וּבִינָה וּתְבוּנָה דְּב״ן), and corresponding to them exactly are Ze‘ir and Ya‘akov of M”H, and Leah and Rachel of B"N (וּכְנֶגְדָּם מַמָּשׁ זְעִיר וְיַעֲקֹב דְּמ״ה וְלֵאָה וְרָחֵל דְּב״ן). Behold there are three sets of four, four, four (וְהֲרֵי הֵם ג׳ בְּחִינוֹת ד׳ ד׳ ד׳), for thus Arich-male is to Atik-male, just as Yisrael-Saba is to Abba, and just as Ya‘akov is to Ze‘ir Anpin (כִּי כָּךְ הוּא אֲרִיךְ דְּכוּרָא לְגַבֵּי עַתִּיק דְּכוּרָא כְּמוֹ יֵש״ס לְגַבֵּי אַבָּא וּכְמוֹ יַעֲקֹב לְגַבֵּי הַז״א). And likewise the Nukvah of Arich Anpin is to the Nukvah of Atik, just as Tevunah is to Binah, and just as the small Rachel is to the upper Rachel (וְכֵן כָּךְ הִיא נוּקְבָּא דְּא״א לְגַבֵּי נוּקְבָּא דְּעַתִּיק כְּמוֹ תְּבוּנָה לְגַבֵּי בִּינָה וּכְמוֹ רָחֵל קְטַנָּה לְגַבֵּי רָחֵל עִילָּאָה).

It follows that when we combine all the aspects (נִמְצָא כִּי כְּשֶׁנְּחַבֵּר כָּל הַבְּחִינוֹת), there will be three aspects of male-female pairs (יִהְיוּ ג׳ בְּחִינוֹת דְּזָכוּ״ן); and they are: first, Atik and his Nukvah, and within them are included Arich Anpin and his Nukvah (וְהֵם א׳ עַתִּיק וְנוּקְבָּא וּבָהֶם נִכְלָלִין א״א וְנוּקְבָּא); second, Abba–Imma, and within them are included Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah (ב׳ אוּ״א וּבָהֶם נִכְלָלִים יִשְׂסו״ת); third, Zeir anpin and Nukvah, and within them are included Ya‘akov and Rachel (ג׳ זו״ן וּבָהֶם נִכְלָלִין יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל) — thus ends (עַכ״ל). And behold, from what he wrote at the beginning, “and corresponding to Abba–Imma are Ze‘ir and Rachel, equal in their stature” (וְהִנֵּה מִמַּ״שׁ בַּתְּחִלָּה וְהִנֵּה דּוּגְמַת אוּ״א הֵם זְעִיר וְרָחֵל הַשָּׁוִים בְּקוֹמָתָם), and “corresponding to Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah are Ya‘akov and Rachel, the small ones from the chest downward of Ze‘ir Anpin” (וְדּוּגְמַת יִשְׂסו״ת הֵם יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל הַקְּטַנִּים מֵהַחָזֶה וּלְמַטָּה דְּזַעִיר), it appears at first glance to support the words of Rabbi Sar Shalom, of blessed memory (נִרְאֶה לִכְאוֹרָה סִיּוּעַ לְדִבְרֵי הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל). For he already said earlier that Abba–Imma are two Partzufim of M”H and B"N, only they are attached together until both are considered one Partzuf (שֶׁהֲרֵי כְּבָר מִקּוֹדֶם אָמַר כִּי אוּ״א הֵם ב׳ פַּרְצוּפִים דְּמ״ה וּב״ן אֶלָּא שֶׁהֵם דְּבוּקִים יַחַד עַד שֶׁנֶּחְשָׁבִים שְׁנֵיהֶם לְפַרְצוּף אֶחָד).

And if so, their parallel are Ze‘ir and Rachel, equal in stature, who are two Partzufim of M”H and B"N attached together in one Partzuf, which is Ze‘ir Anpin (וְאִם כֵּן דּוּגְמָתָם הֵם זְעִיר וְרָחֵל הַשָּׁוִים בְּקוֹמָתָם שֶׁהֵם ב׳ פַּרְצוּפִים דְּמ״ה וּב״ן דְּבוּקִים יַחַד בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד שֶׁהוּא הַז״א). And this is exactly what Rabbi Sar Shalom wrote — that the six extremities of M”H and B"N were included and enclothed one within the other and are called the “great Zeir anpin and Nukvah,” for the six extremities of B"N is Rachel-ha-Gedolah, and in their totality they are called Ze‘ir Anpin (וְהוּא עַצְמוֹ מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל כִּי הַו״ק דְּמ״ה וּב״ן נִכְלְלוּ וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ וּנְקָרְאוּ זו״ן הַגְּדוֹלִים כִּי הַו״ק דְּב״ן הִיא רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה וּבִכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרָא ז״א). And likewise he already said earlier that Binah is two Partzufim of M”H and B"N attached together in one Partzuf, which is the Nukvah (וְכֵן כְּבָר מִקּוֹדֶם אָמַר כִּי הַבִּינָה הִיא ב׳ פַּרְצוּפִים דְּמ״ה וּב״ן דְּבוּקִים יַחַד בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד שֶׁהוּא הַנּוּקְבָּא).

And this is exactly what Rabbi Sar Shalom wrote — that the Malkhut of M”H and B"N are included and enclothed one within the other and are called Ya‘akov and Rachel, for the Malkhut of M”H is Ya‘akov, and in their totality they are called the Nukvah of Ze‘ir Anpin (וְהוּא עַצְמוֹ מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל כִּי הַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּב״ן נִכְלְלוּ וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ וְנִקְרָאִים יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל כִּי הַמַלְכוּת דְּמ״ה הוּא יַעֲקֹב וּבִכְלָלוּתָם נִקְרֵאת נוּקְבָּא דְּז״א). But in my humble opinion, in truth it is not so (אֲבָל לְעַנְיוּת דַּעְתִּי לְפִי הָאֱמֶת אֵינוֹ כֵּן), For behold, before he said “and corresponding to Abba–Imma are Ze‘ir and Rachel, equal in their stature,” etc (כִּי הֲרֵי קֹדֶם שֶׁאָמַר וְהִנֵּה דּוּגְמַת אוּ״א הֵם זְעִיר וְרָחֵל הַשָּׁוִים וְכוּ׳), he said close to it and it seems (אָמַר סָמוּךְ וְנִרְאֶה), that Ze‘ir Anpin is entirely the aspect of M”H and the Nukvah entirely the aspect of B"N and they are separated (כִּי הַז״א כּוּלוֹ בְּחִינַת מ״ה וְנֻקְבָּא כּוּלָּהּ בְּחִינַת ב״ן וְהֵם נִפְרָדִים). And if so, how is it possible to say that what he said afterward — that Ze‘ir and Rachel, equal in their stature, are the counterpart of Abba–Imma — means that in Ze‘ir Anpin there are two Partzufim of M"H and B"N joined together in one Partzuf (וְאִם כֵּן אֵיךְ אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר שֶׁמַּה שֶּׁאָמַר אַחַר כָּךְ שֶׁזְּעִיר וְרָחֵל הַשָּׁוִים בְּקוֹמָתָם הֵם דּוּגְמַת אוּ״א שֶׁהַכַּוָּנָה הִיא שֶׁבַּז״א יֵשׁ ב׳ פַּרְצוּפֵי דְּמ״ה וּב״ן דְּבוּקִים יַחַד בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד), which is the opposite of what he prefaced — that Ze‘ir Anpin is a separate Partzuf entirely the aspect of M”H (שֶׁהוּא הֶפֶךְ מַה שֶּׁהִקְדִּים כִּי הַז״א הוּא פַּרְצוּף נִפְרָד כּוּלוֹ בְּחִינַת מ״ה). And since the analogy of Ze‘ir and Rachel to Abba–Imma is not as stated (וּמֵאַחַר שֶׁהַדּוּגְמָה דְּז״א וְרָחֵל לְאוּ״א אֵינָהּ כַּאֲמוּר), so too the analogy of Ya‘akov and Rachel, the small ones, to Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah is not as stated (גַּם הַדּוּגְמָה דְּיַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל הַקְּטַנִּים לְיִשְׂסו״ת אֵינָהּ כַּאֲמוּר).

Rather, the intention of the analogy is (רַק כַּוָּנַת הַדּוּגְמָה הִיא), that in the same manner that Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah relate to Abba–Imma, so Ya‘akov and Rachel the small relate to Ze‘ir Anpin and Rachel equal in stature (כִּי בְּעֶרֶךְ שֶׁהֵם יִשְׂסו״ת לְגַבֵּי אוּ״א כֵּן הֵם יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל הַקְּטַנִּים לְגַבֵּי ז״א וְרָחֵל הַשָּׁוִים בְּקוֹמָתָם). For these correspond to Abba–Imma and those correspond to Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah (כִּי אֵלּוּ הֵם כְּנֶגֶד אוּ״א וְאֵלּוּ הֵם כְּנֶגֶד יִשְׂסו״ת). And as he wrote afterward (וּכְמַה שֶּׁאָמַר אַחַר כָּךְ): that just as Yisrael-Saba is to Abba, so Ya‘akov is to Ze‘ir Anpin, and just as Tevunah is to Binah, so the small Rachel is to the upper Rachel (כִּי כַּאֲשֶׁר יֵש״ס לְגַבֵּי אַבָּא הוּא יַעֲקֹב לְגַבֵּי ז״א וּכְמוֹ תְּבוּנָה לְגַבֵּי בִּינָה הִיא רָחֵל הַקְּטַנָּה לְגַבֵּי רָחֵל עִילָּאָה).

For his intention is that all the Partzufim proceed in one single pattern — Atik and Arich Anpin, Abba–Imma and Yisrael-Saba–Tevunah, Ze‘ir and Rachel, and Ya‘akov and Rachel — as he wrote afterward, “the general principle that follows,” etc (כִּי כַּוָּנָתוֹ כִּי כָּל הַפַּרְצוּפִים הֵם הוֹלְכִים בְּדֻגְמָה אַחַת עַתִּיק וְא״א אוּ״א וְיִשְׂסו״ת ז״א וְרָחֵל וְיַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל וּכְמַה שֶּׁאָמַר אַחַר כָּךְ כְּלָל הָעוֹלֶה וְכוּ׳). If so, on the contrary, from here there is some support for our words (וְאִם כֵּן אֲדַרְבָּא מִכָּאן יֵשׁ אֵיזֶה סִיּוּעַ לְדִבְרֵינוּ), how Rachel ha-Gedolah is not included in one Partzuf with Ze’ir Anpin (אֵיךְ אֵין רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה הִיא נִכְלֶלֶת בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד עִם הַז״א), and likewise how Ya‘akov is not included in one Partzuf with Rachel ha-Ketannah, who is the Nukvah (וְכֵן אֵיךְ אֵין יַעֲקֹב נִכְלָל בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד עִם רָחֵל הַקְּטַנָּה שֶׁהִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא). Moreover, it is already explained what the aspect of Ya‘akov is (וּמָה גַּם כִּי כְבָר מְבֹאָר מָה הִיא הַבְּחִינָה שֶׁל יַעֲקֹב), from which it is explained how he is included only in Ze’ir Anpin specifically (אֲשֶׁר מִשָּׁם מְבֹאָר אֵיךְ אֵינוֹ נִכְלָל רַק בְּז״א דַּוְקָא). For behold, when he mentioned Ya‘akov and Rachel the small ones from the chest and below of Ze’ir Anpin (כִּי הֲרֵי כַּאֲשֶׁר הִזְכִּיר אֶת יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל הַקְּטַנִּים מֵהַחָזֶה וּלְמַטָּה דְּז״א), he immediately said: “And know that there is a Ya‘akov who is the lower half of Ze’ir Anpin, and he is the one who mates with the small Rachel” (תֵּכֶף אָמַר וְדַע כִּי יֵשׁ יַעֲקֹב שֶׁהוּא חֲצִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן דְּז״א וְהוּא הַמִּזְדַּוֵּג עִם רָחֵל הַקְּטַנָּה).

This comes to inform us what the aspect of the Ya‘akov he mentioned is (שֶׁבָּא לְהוֹדִיעֵנוּ מָה הִיא בְּחִינַת הַיַּעֲקֹב שֶׁאָמַר), and since the lower half of Ze’ir Anpin is called Ya‘akov (וְאַחַר שֶׁחֲצִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן דְּז״א הוּא נִקְרָא יַעֲקֹב). And the matter is explained with what was written in Sha‘ar Partzufei Z”N, chapter five (וְהָעִנְיָן מְבֹאָר עִם מַה שֶּׁנֶּאֱמַר בְּשַׁעַר פַּרְצוּפֵי זו״ן פ״ה): “Know that Ze’ir Anpin at the time of Ibbur [Gestation] was in the aspect of Netzach, Hod, Yesod alone,” etc (דַּע כִּי הַז״א בְּעֵת הָעִיבּוּר הָיָה בְּבְחִינַת נְה״י לְבַד וְכוּ׳), “and these are the Asiyah within Ze’ir Anpin, a complete Partzuf, and it is only Netzach, Hod, Yesod” (וְאֵלּוּ הֵם עֲשִׂיָּה שֶׁבְּז״א פַּרְצוּף שָׁלֵם וְאֵינוֹ רַק נְה״י), “and his head is the measure of the two-thirds of Tiferet in the time of Yenikah [Nursing]” (וְהָרֹאשׁ שֶׁלּוֹ שִׁעוּר ב׳־שְׁלִישֵׁי הַתִּפְאֶרֶת דְּזְמַן הַיְּנִיקָה). “And behold, the Malkhut and the Nukvah of this Partzuf is equal with him, since she is grown back-to-back, as is known” (וְהִנֵּה הַמַּלְכוּת וְהַנּוּקְבָּא שֶׁל הַפַּרְצוּף הַזֶּה הִיא שָׁוָה בְּשָׁוֶה אֵלָיו אַחַר שֶׁהִיא גְּדוֹלָה אַב״א כַּנּוֹדָע), “and these two are equal in their stature, and they are called Ya‘akov and Rachel,” etc (וְאֵלּוּ הַב׳ שָׁוִים בְּקוֹמָתָם וְנִקְרָאִים יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל וְכוּ׳) — see there his explanation (עֲיֵן שָׁם בֵּיאוּרוֹ).

Behold, it is explained how the Partzuf of Netzach, Hod, Yesod of Ze’ir Anpin, which is called the Partzuf of Ibbur [Gestation], when it is a complete Partzuf — which is after the Gadlut of Ze’ir Anpin — this Partzuf is called Ya‘akov (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר אֵיךְ הַפַּרְצוּף נְה״י דְּז״א שֶׁנִּקְרָא פַּרְצוּף דְּעִיבּוּר בְּהִיוֹתוֹ פַּרְצוּף שָׁלֵם שֶׁהוּא אַחַר הַגַּדְלוּת דְּז״א הִנֵּה פַּרְצוּף זֶה נִקְרָא יַעֲקֹב), and it begins from the chest of the general Ze’ir Anpin (וְהוּא מַתְחִיל מֵהַחָזֶה דְּכְלָלוּת הַז״א). And this itself is what he said here — that Ya‘akov is the lower half of Ze’ir Anpin and he is the one who mates with Rachel the small (וְהוּא עַצְמוֹ מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב כָּאן כִּי יַעֲקֹב הוּא חֲצִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן דְּז״א וְהוּא הַמִּזְדַּוֵּּג עִם רָחֵל הַקְּטַנָּה), who is the Partzuf of the Nukvah when her measure is from the chest of Ze’ir Anpin and below (שֶׁהִיא פַּרְצוּף הַנּוּקְבָּא בְּהִיוֹת שִׁעוּרָהּ מֵהַחָזֶה דְּז״א וְלְמַטָּה), and not that she is a different Nukvah, for the Nukvah is one — she is the tenth Sefirah of the ten Sefirot which include all of Atzilut, the fifth Partzuf of the five Partzufim that include all Atzilut (וְלֹא שֶׁהִיא נוּקְבָּא אַחֶרֶת כִּי הַנּוּקְבָּא אַחַת הִיא שֶׁהִיא הַסְּפִירָה הָעֲשִׂירִית דְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת הַכּוֹלְלוֹת כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת פַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי מֵהֶ״פ הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת).

Rather she has aspects of Partzufim (אֶלָּא שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ בְּחִינוֹת פַּרְצוּפִים), as he wrote there: “And with this you will understand how many kinds of Partzufim there are in Rachel — either up to the chest, or up to Da‘at, or up to Keter; and they are complete Partzufim, one within another, and all of them are Rachel when included in one Partzuf, etc.” (וּכְמַ״שׁ שָׁם וְזֶ״ל וּבְזֶה תָּבִין כַּמָּה מִינֵי פַּרְצוּפִים יֵשׁ בְּרָחֵל אוֹ עַד הַחָזֶה אוֹ עַד הַדַּעַת אוֹ עַד הַכֶּתֶר וְהֵם פַּרְצוּפִים גְּמוּרִים זֶה בְּתוֹךְ זֶה וְכֻלָּם רָחֵל בְּהִכָּלְלָם בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד וְכוּ׳) — see there his explanation (עֲיֵן שָׁם בֵּיאוּרוֹ). And when her Partzuf is up to the chest of Ze’ir Anpin (וּבְהִיוֹת פַּרְצוּפָהּ עַד הַחָזֶה דְּז״א), for this Partzuf of hers also is the Partzuf of Netzach, Hod, Yesod of all her totality (כִּי גַּם פַּרְצוּף זֶה שֶׁלָּהּ הוּא פַּרְצוּף נְה״י דְּכָל כְּלָלוּתָהּ), and it is called her Partzuf of Ibbur [Gestation] (וְהוּא נִקְרָא פַּרְצוּף עִיבּוּר שֶׁלָּהּ), for also in the Ibbur [Gestation] the aspects of her Netzach, Hod, Yesod grow, as explained in Sha‘ar Anach, chapter six mentioned above (כִּי גַּם בָּעִיבּוּר הֵם נִגְדָּלִים בְּחִינַת נְה״י שֶׁלָּהּ כְּמְבֹאָר בִּשְׁעַר אַנ״ך פ״ו הַנַּ״ל). This Partzuf is called Rachel the small, which is from the chest of Ze’ir Anpin and below (זֶה הַפַּרְצוּף נִקְרָא רָחֵל הַקְּטַנָּה שֶׁהִיא מֵהַחָזֶה דְּז״א וּלְמַטָּה). And with her mates Ya‘akov the small, who is the Partzuf of Netzach, Hod, Yesod of Ze’ir Anpin, which is from the chest of Ze’ir Anpin and below (וְעִמָּהּ מִזְדַּוֵּג יַעֲקֹב הַקָּטָן שֶׁהוּא הַפַּרְצוּף נְה״י דְּז״א שֶׁהוּא מֵהַחָזֶה דְּז״א וּלְמַטָּה). And this is what he wrote there in Sha‘ar Arich Anpin mentioned above — “Ya‘akov and Rachel the small from the chest and below of Ze’ir Anpin” (וְזֶהוּ מַה שֶּׁנֶּאֱמַר שָׁם בְּשַׁעַר א״א הַנַּ״ל יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל הַקְּטַנִּים מֵהַחָזֶה וּלְמַטָּה דְּז״א).

And likewise it is explained in Etz Chayim, Sha‘ar haZivugim [Unions], chapter one, in Ma’amar Bet, and also brought in Sefer Olat Tamid (וְכֵן מְבֹאָר בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר הַזִּוּוּגִים פ״א בְּמ״ב וְהוּבָא גַּם כֵּן בְּסֵפֶר עוֹלַת תָּמִיד): “Understand that the three yichudim that are in Zeir anpin and Nukvah, called Nefesh, Ruach, and they are Havayah–Ehyeh, Havayah–Elohim, Havayah–Adnai” (וְזֶ״ל תָּבִין כִּי ג׳ יִחוּדִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּזו״ן הַנִּקְרָאִים נ״ר וְהֵם הוי״ה אהי״ה הוי״ה אֱלֹהִי״ם הוי״ה אֲדנָ״י), “correspond to the three Partzufim that are in the Nukvah of Ze’ir Anpin, or the ten Sefirot of the back-side, which are her Ibbur [Gestation], in the standing of Lachash, which is below in the Netzach, Hod, Yesod of him, which is also his Partzuf of Ibbur [Gestation], and then their union is face-to-face, and is called Havayah–Adonai” (וְהוּא כְּנֶגֶד ג׳ פַּרְצוּפִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּנוּקְבָּא דְּז״א אוֹ י׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּאֲחוֹרַיִּים שֶׁהֵם עִיבּוּר שֶׁלָּהּ בַּעֲמִידָה דְּלַחַשׁ שֶׁהִיא לְמַטָּה בְּנְה״י שֶׁלוֹ שֶׁהוּא גַּם כֵּן פַּרְצוּף שֶׁלוֹ דְּעִיבּוּר וְאָז חִבּוּרָם פַּב״פ וְנִקְרָא הוי״ה אֲדנָ״י). “And when the Zivug [Union] is face-to-face in the secret of his Partzuf of Yenikah [Nursing] with her Partzuf of Yenikah [Nursing], then it is called the Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet of Ze’ir Anpin, and then she too rises, as mentioned, at the standing of the Amidah, and then the union is Havayah–Elohim” (וּכְשֶׁהַזִּוּוּג פַּב״פ הוּא בְּסוֹד פַּרְצוּף שֶׁלוֹ דְּינִיקָה עִם פַּרְצוּף שֶׁלָּהּ דְּינִיקָה שֶׁאָז הוּא נִקְרָא חַג״ת דְּז״א וְאָז שֵׁם עוֹלָה הִיא גַּם כֵּן כַּנִּזְכָּר בְּחֲזָרַת הַעֲמִידָה וְאָז הוּא חִבּוּר הוי״ה אֱלֹהִי״ם). “And when the Zivug [Union] is face-to-face in the aspect of the Partzuf of Gadlut in him with the Partzuf of Gadlut in her — which is called the Chokhmah, Binah, Da‘at of Ze’ir Anpin, and she rises up to there — then it is Havayah–Ehyeh, for she is already in the aspect of Binah, which is Ehyeh complete with ten Sefirot of Gadlut, and this is at the time of Nefilat Apayim, when the Yesod is opened in the mystery of Vayavor” (וּכְשֶׁהַזִּוּוּג הוּא פַּב״פ בִּבְחִינַת פַּרְצוּף דְּגַדְלוּת שֶׁבּוֹ עִם פַּרְצוּף דְּגַדְלוּת שֶׁבָּהּ שֶׁאָז נִקְרָא חָב״ד דְּז״א וְעָלְתָה עַד שָׁם וְאָז הוּא הוי״ה אהי״ה שֶׁכְּבָר הִיא בִּבְחִינַת בִּינָה הַנִּקְרָאת אהי״ה שְׁלֵמָה בְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּגַדְלוּת וְאָז הוּא בְּעֵת נְפִילַת אַפַּיִם שֶׁנִּבְקַע הַיְּסוֹד בְּוַיַּעֲבֹר).

Or in my humble opinion it is only on Shabbat morning (אוֹ נִלְעַ״ד שֶׁאֵינוֹ אֶלָּא בְּשַׁחֲרִית דְּשַׁבָּת), and see in its place (וְעֲיֵן בִּמְקוֹמוֹ), and you will see that in every Amidah of Lachash and repetition of weekday Shacharit there is a Zivug [Union] (וְתִרְאֶה כִּי בְּכָל עֲמִידָה דְּלָחַשׁ וַחֲזָרָה דְּחוֹל דְּשַׁחֲרִית יֵשׁ זִוּוּג), and if so, how is it that the Zivug [Union] exists only in Nefilat Apayim? (וְאִם כֵּן אֵיךְ אֵין זִוּוּג אֶלָּא בְּנְפִילַת אַפַּיִם) And with this it is resolved that in each one there is a Zivug [Union], only the upper Zivug [Union] is in Nefilat Apayim (וּבְזֶה יִתְרוֹצֵץ כִּי בְּכָל אֶחָד יֵשׁ זִוּוּג אֶלָּא שֶׁהַזִּוּוּג הָעֶלְיוֹן הוּא בְּנְפִילַת אַפַּיִם), and they are not Ya‘akov and Rachel the small ones of Lachash (וְאֵינָם יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל הַקְּטַנִּים דְּלָחַשׁ), and understand this well (וְהָבֵן זֶה מְאֹד) — thus ends (עַכ״ל).

Behold, it is explained how the Zivug [Union] in the Amidah of Lachash [Silent Amidah] , which he wrote at first to be the Partzuf of Ibbur [Gestation], his Netzach, Hod, Yesod with her Netzach, Hod, Yesod (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר אֵיךְ הַזִּוּוּג בָּעֲמִידָה דְּלָחַשׁ שֶׁכָּתַב בַּתְּחִלָּה שֶׁהוּא פַּרְצוּף דְּעִיבּוּר נְה״י שֶׁלּוֹ עִם פַּרְצוּף דְּעִיבּוּר שֶׁלָּהּ), he later called the Zivug [Union] of Ya‘akov and Rachel the small ones of Lachash [Silent Amidah] (קָרָא אוֹתוֹ לְבַסּוֹף זִוּוּג דְּיַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל הַקְּטַנִּים דְּלָחַשׁ). Also it is explained how the Nukvah is one (גַּם מְבֹאָר אֵיךְ הַנּוּקְבָּא אַחַת הִיא), only she has aspects of Partzufim corresponding to the Partzufim in Ze’ir Anpin, who also is one (אֶלָּא שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ בְּחִינוֹת פַּרְצוּפִים כְּנֶגֶד הַפַּרְצוּפִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ בַּז״א שֶׁגַּם הוּא אֶחָד), only he has Partzuf-aspects joined within him in the states of Gadlut (אֶלָּא שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בְּחִינוֹת פַּרְצוּפִים הַמִּתְחַבְּרִים יַחַד בּוֹ בִּבְחִינוֹת הַגַּדְלוּת שֶׁבּוֹ). And so with the Nukvah — she has Partzuf-aspects joining within her in her Gadlut until she becomes equal to Ze’ir Anpin (וְכֵן הוּא בַּנּוּקְבָּא שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ בְּחִינוֹת פַּרְצוּפִים וּמִתְחַבְּרִים יַחַד בָּהּ בִּבְחִינַת הַגַּדְלוּת שֶׁבָּהּ עַד הֱיוֹתָהּ שָׁוָה לְז״א). And she — who until now was only up to the Netzach, Hod, Yesod of Ze’ir Anpin — she herself is the one who rises to the Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet of Ze’ir Anpin, as he wrote “and then she rises also” (וְאוֹתָהּ שֶׁהָיְתָה עַד נְה״י דְּז״א הִיא עַצְמָהּ הִיא הָעוֹלָה עַד חַג״ת דְּז״א כְּמַה שֶּׁאָמַר וְאָז שָׁם הִיא עוֹלָה גַּם־כֵּן), meaning she grew to there by the drawing of her second Partzuf (דְּהַיְינוּ שֶׁנִּגְדְּלָה עַד שָׁם עַל־יְדֵי שֶׁנִּמְשַׁךְ לָהּ הַפַּרְצוּף הַבּ׳ שֶׁלָּהּ). And she is the one who rises up to the Chokhmah, Binah, Da‘at of Ze’ir Anpin, as he wrote “and she rose to there” (וְהִיא הִיא הָעוֹלָה עַד חָב״ד דְּז״א כְּמַה שֶּׁאָמַר וְעָלְתָה עַד שָׁם), meaning she grew to there by the drawing of her third Partzuf (דְּהַיְינוּ שֶׁנִּגְדְּלָה עַד שָׁם עַל־יְדֵי שֶׁנִּמְשַׁךְ לָהּ הַפַּרְצוּף הַג׳ שֶׁלָּהּ).

Thus we have merited the conclusion (בְּאֹפֶן כִּי זָכִינוּ לְדִין), that Ya‘akov is not the Malkhut of Ze’ir Anpin of M”H included in the Nukvah Rachel (כִּי אֵין יַעֲקֹב הוּא הַמַּלְכוּת שֶׁל הַז״א דְּמ״ה הַנִּכְלֶלֶת בַּנּוּקְבָּא רָחֵל), but rather he is included in Ze’ir Anpin himself (רַק הוּא בִּכְלַל הַז״א), for he is the Partzuf of Netzach, Hod, Yesod of the general Ze’ir Anpin from the chest downward (כִּי הוּא עַצְמוֹ הַפַּרְצוּף דְּנְה״י דְּכְלָלוּת הַז״א מֵהַחָזֶה דְּז״א וּלְמַטָּה), and he is the one who mates with Rachel the small (וְהוּא הַמִּזְדַּוֵּּג עִם רָחֵל הַקְּטַנָּה), who is the Nukvah herself who initially took the Malkhut of M”H and of B"N and is called “small” because her measure is likewise from the chest of Ze’ir Anpin and below (שֶׁהִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא עַצְמָהּ שֶׁלָּקְחָה בַּתְּחִלָּה הַמַּלְכוּת דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן וְנִקְרֵאת קְטַנָּה בְּהִיוֹתָהּ גַּם־הִיא שִׁעוּרָהּ מֵהַחָזֶה דְּז״א וּלְמַטָּה). And this itself is what was written in Sha‘ar Shevirat haKelim [Vessels], chapter six, mentioned above (וְזֶה עַצְמוֹ הוּא מַה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בְּשַׁעַר שְׁבִירַת הַכֵּלִים פ״ו הַנַּ״ל), where he said: “and Ya‘akov and the Nukvah, Rachel the small, from the chest and below of Ze’ir Anpin,” which refers to both of them (שֶׁאָמַר וְיַעֲקֹב וְנֻקְבָּא רָחֵל תַּתָּאָה מֵהַחָזֶה וּלְמַטָּה דְּקָאֵי עַל שְׁנֵיהֶם). And now we will explain the aspect of Rachel Ila’ah, who is also called Leah (וְעַתָּה נְבָאֵר בְּחִינַת רָחֵל עִילָּאָה הַנִּקְרֵאת גַּם כֵּן לֵאָה), and it will be explained how she is not included with Ze’ir Anpin in one Partzuf (וְיִתְבָּאֵר אֵיךְ אֵינָהּ נִכְלֶלֶת עִם הַז״א בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד).

For behold, we have already proven above how in the Nukvah — Rachel herself — there are aspects of Partzufim, one above the other (הִנֵּה כְּבָר הוֹכַחְנוּ לְעֵיל אֵיךְ בַּנּוּקְבָּא רָחֵל עַצְמָהּ יֵשׁ בָּהּ בְּחִינוֹת פַּרְצוּפִים זֶה לְמַעְלָה מִזֶּה), which when combined together are called Rachel (אֲשֶׁר בְּהִכָּלְלָם יַחַד נִקְרֵאת רָחֵל). And it is explained there in Sha‘ar Partzufei Z”N, chapter five (וּמְבֹאָר שָׁם בְּשַׁעַר פַּרְצוּפֵי זו״ן פ״ה), where he wrote, and these are his words briefly (שֶׁכָּתַב וְזֶ״ל בְּקִצּוּר): “Afterwards, in the time of Yenikah [Nursing], the three middle ones called Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet come to him… a complete Partzuf of ten Sefirot…” (אַחַר כָּךְ בִּזְמַן הַיְּנִיקָה בָּאִים לוֹ ג׳ אֶמְצָעִיּוֹת הַנִּקְרָאִים חַג״ת כו׳ פַּרְצוּף שָׁלֵם שֶׁל י׳ סְפִירוֹת כו׳), “and this second inner Partzuf is called Yenikah [Nursing] and is called six extremities, etc.” (וְזֶה הַפַּרְצוּף הַב׳ הַפְּנִימִי נִקְרָא יְנִיקָה וְנִקְרָא ו״ק כו׳). “And also in this Partzuf, called Yenikah [Nursing], which is the Yetzirah of Ze’ir Anpin, and which is the Chesed, Gevurah, Tiferet of Ze’ir Anpin, there is one head, and it corresponds to the lower two-thirds of the Da‘at of Gadlut” (וְגַם בַּפַּרְצוּף הַזֶּה הַנִּקְרָא יְנִיקָה וְהוּא יְצִירָה דְּז״א וְהוּא חַג״ת דְּז״א יֵשׁ בוֹ רֹאשׁ אֶחָד וְהוּא כְּנֶגֶד ב׳ שְׁלִישֵׁי הַדַּעַת דְּגַדְלוּת). “And also in this second Partzuf of Yenikah [Nursing], he has a Nukvah equal in stature with him, beginning from the end of the first third of the Da‘at of Gadlut, and she is called Leah, etc.” (וְגַם בַּפַּרְצוּף הַזֶּה הַב׳ דְּיְנִיקָה יֵשׁ לוֹ נוּקְבָּא שָׁוָה בְּשָׁוֶה בְּקוֹמָתוֹ מִתְּחִלַּת מְסוֹף הַשְּׁלִישׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁל הַדַּעַת דְּגַדְלוּת הַנִּקְרֵאת לֵאָה כו׳). “Afterwards, in the time of Gadlut, the three upper ones, which are Chokhmah, Binah, Da‘at, come to him, and these are also aspects of ten complete Sefirot, etc.” (אַחַר כָּךְ בִּזְמַן הַגַּדְלוּת בָּאִים לוֹ ג״ר שֶׁהֵם חָב״ד וְאֵלּוּ הֵם גַּם כֵּן בְּחִינוֹת י׳ סְפִירוֹת שְׁלֵימוֹת כו׳).

And behold it is now found that they are three Partzufim, each one of ten Sefirot, etc (וְהִנֵּה נִמְצָא עַתָּה שֶׁהֵם ג׳ פַּרְצוּפִים כָּל אֶחָד מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת כו׳), and the totality of these three Partzufim, one within the other, is called Ze’ir Anpin (וּכְלָלוּת ג׳ פַּרְצוּפִים אֵלּוּ זֶה בְּתוֹךְ זֶה נִקְרָא ז״א). And also this innermost Partzuf of them all has one Nukvah equal with him, etc (וְגַם לָזֶה הַפַּרְצוּף הַפְּנִימִי מִכֻּלָּם יֵשׁ נוּקְבָּא אַחַת שָׁוָה בְּשָׁוֶה עִמּוֹ כו׳). Afterwards there is a fourth aspect, which is the fourth Partzuf, which is the Keter of Ze’ir Anpin, etc (אַחַר כָּךְ יֵשׁ בְּחִינָה רְבִיעִית וְהוּא פַּרְצוּף ד׳ וְהוּא כֶּתֶר דְּז״א כו׳). And behold they are four Partzufim, each one of ten Sefirot, and all of them together are called Ze’ir Anpin (וְהֲרֵי הֵם ד׳ פַּרְצוּפִים כָּל אֶחָד מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת וְכוּלָּם יַחַד נִקְרָא ז״א). And in each Partzuf of them there is male and female equal in their stature, joined together (וּבְכָל פַּרְצוּף מֵהֶם יֵשׁ בּוֹ זָכוּ״ן וְנֻקְבָּא שָׁוִים בְּקוֹמָתָם מְחֻבָּרִים יַחַד), and upon them is enwrapped one Partzuf composed of male-and-female in the manner of the five Partzufim (וַעֲלֵיהֶם מַלְבִּישׁ פַּרְצוּף אֶחָד כָּלוּל מִזָּכוּ״ן עַל דֶּרֶךְ הֶ׳ פַּרְצוּפִים).

And it is found that just as we explained regarding the totality of the entire Atzilut — that there are Arich Anpin, Abba–Imma, and Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah, and each is composed of ten Sefirot, except that one clothes within another and a portion remains revealed in each Partzuf — so too is the matter within every Partzuf of the five Partzufim: each one divides into five Partzufim, one within the other, etc (וְנִמְצָא כִּי עַל דֶּרֶךְ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בְּכְלָלוּת הָאֲצִילוּת כֻּלּוֹ שֶׁיֵּשׁ א״א וְאוּ״א וּזו״ן וְכָל אֶחָד כָּלוּל מִי׳ סְפִירוֹת אֶלָּא שֶׁזֶּה מִתְלַבֵּשׁ בְּתוֹךְ זֶה וְנִשְׁאַר קִצְתּוֹ מְגֻלֶּה בְּכָל פַּרְצוּף וּפַרְצוּף כֵּן הָעִנְיָן בְּכָל פַּרְצוּף וּפַרְצוּף מֵהֶ״פ פַּרְצוּפִים כָּל אֶחָד נֶחְלָק לַה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים זֶה בְּתוֹךְ זֶה כו׳). And with this you will understand how many kinds of Partzufim there are in Rachel — either up to the chest, or up to Da‘at, or up to Keter — and they are complete Partzufim, one within the other, and all of them are Rachel when they are included in one Partzuf (וּבְזֶה תָּבִין כַּמָּה מִינֵי פַּרְצוּפִים יֵשׁ בְּרָחֵל אוֹ עַד הַחָזֶה אוֹ עַד הַדַּעַת אוֹ עַד הַכֶּתֶר וְהֵם פַּרְצוּפִים גְּמוּרִים זֶה בְּתוֹךְ זֶה וְכוּלָּם רָחֵל בְּהִכָּלְלָם בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד). And each Partzuf begins from the chest of the inner Partzuf toward it, etc (וְכָל פַּרְצוּף מַתְחִיל מִן הַחָזֶה שֶׁבְּפַרְצוּף הַפְּנִימִי אֵלָיו כו׳). And when all four Partzufim of Ze’ir Anpin clothe one within the other, then he is fully complete, a complete Partzuf from all of them, etc (וּכְשֶׁמִּתְלַבְּשִׁים כָּל הַד׳ פַּרְצוּפֵי ז״א זֶה בְּתוֹךְ זֶה אָז הוּא שָׁלֵם לְגַמְרֵי פַּרְצוּף גָּמוּר מִכֻּלָּם כו׳). And when all four Partzufim of Rachel clothe one within the other, she is called Rachel, a complete Partzuf equal to Ze’ir Anpin — “two kings using one crown” (וְכָל ד׳ פַּרְצוּפֵי רָחֵל הַמִּתְלַבְּשִׁים זֶה בְּתוֹךְ זֶה נִקְרֵאת רָחֵל פַּרְצוּף שָׁלֵם שָׁוֶה אֶל הַז״א שְׁנֵי מְלָכִים מִשְׁתַּמְּשִׁים בְּכֶתֶר אֶחָד).

However, all the male-and-female pairs in each Partzuf of Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah are equal together (אֲבָל כָּל הַזָּכוּ״ן שֶׁבְּכָל פַּרְצוּף וּפַרְצוּף שֶׁבְּזו״ן הֵם שָׁוִים יַחַד), only that the Nukvah begins as one single point (אֶלָּא שֶׁהַנּוּקְבָּא תְּחִלָּתָהּ נְקֻדָּה אַחַת), and afterwards grows corresponding to the three Sefirot of Netzach, Hod, Yesod (וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִגְדֶּלֶת יוֹתֵר כְּשִׁיעוּר ג׳ סְפִירוֹת נְה״י), and afterwards, through her Partzuf of Yenikah [Nursing] which enters her, she grows up to Da‘at (וְאַחַר כָּךְ עַל־יְדֵי הַפַּרְצוּף דְּיְנִיקָה שֶׁלָּהּ הַנִּכְנָס בָּהּ נִגְדֶּלֶת עַד הַדַּעַת), and in the same manner for all that was mentioned in Ze’ir Anpin — thus ends (וְכֵן עַל־דֶּרֶךְ זֶה בְּכָל הַנִּזְכָּר בְּז״א עַכ״ל).

Behold, it is explained as we wrote (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר כְּכָל מַה שֶּׁכָּתַבְנוּ), how the Nukvah Rachel has aspects of Partzufim one above another (אֵיךְ הַנּוּקְבָּא רָחֵל יֵשׁ לָהּ בְּחִינוֹת פַּרְצוּפִים זֶה עֶלְיוֹן מִזֶּה), which all together are called Rachel (אֲשֶׁר כֻּלָּם יַחַד נִקְרָאִים רָחֵל). Therefore her lower Partzuf, the Partzuf of Netzach, Hod, Yesod from the chest of Ze’ir Anpin downward, is called Rachel the small (וְאִם כֵּן הַפַּרְצוּף הַתַּחְתּוֹן שֶׁלָּהּ הוּא פַּרְצוּף נְה״י מֵהַחָזֶה דְּז״א וּלְמַטָּה נִקְרָא רָחֵל הַקְּטַנָּה). And her upper Partzufim, which grow in her and join with her, are called Rachel Ila’ah (וְהַפַּרְצוּפִים הָעֶלְיוֹנִים שֶׁלָּהּ הַנִּגְדָּלִים בָּהּ וּמִתְחַבְּרִים עִמָּהּ נִקְרָאִים רָחֵל עִילָּאָה), and are called Leah, after her Partzuf of Yenikah [Nursing] which grows up to the Da‘at of Ze’ir Anpin (וְנִקְרָאִים לֵאָה עַל שֵׁם פַּרְצוּף הַיְּנִיקָה שֶׁלָּהּ הַנִּגְדָּל עַד הַדַּעַת דְּז״א). And since this Yenikah [Nursing]-Partzuf, which is above her Netzach, Hod, Yesod Partzuf, is called Leah (וּמִשּׁוּם שֶׁפַּרְצוּף דְּיְנִיקָה שֶׁלָּהּ עֶלְיוֹן עַל פַּרְצוּף נְה״י שֶׁלָּהּ נִקְרָא לֵאָה), therefore all her upper Partzufim are sometimes called Leah and sometimes Rachel Ila’ah (לָכֵן כָּל פַּרְצוּפֶיהָ הָעֶלְיוֹנִים נִקְרָאִים לִפְעָמִים לֵאָה וְלִפְעָמִים רָחֵל עִילָּאָה). Thus the Rav of blessed memory was precise not to say “Rachel the great,” but “Rachel Ila’ah,” to hint that she is the upper aspect above Rachel the lower (וְעַל כֵּן דִּקְדֵּק הָרַב ז״ל לֹא לוֹמַר רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה אֶלָּא רָחֵל עִילָּאָה לְרַמֵּז שֶׁהִיא הַבְּחִינָה הָעֶלְיוֹנָה עַל רָחֵל הַתַּתָּאָה). Thus Rachel Ila’ah is not included with Ze’ir Anpin in one Partzuf (וְנִמְצָא שֶׁאֵין רָחֵל עִילָּאָה נִכְלֶלֶת עִם הַז״א בְּפַרְצוּף אֶחָד), but is the upper Partzufim of Rachel the lower herself (רַק הִיא הַפַּרְצוּפִים הָעֶלְיוֹנִים שֶׁל רָחֵל הַתַּתָּאָה עַצְמָהּ), which when combined together are called Rachel, a Partzuf equal to Ze’ir Anpin (אֲשֶׁר בְּהִכָּלְלָם יַחַד נִקְרֵאת רָחֵל פַּרְצוּף שָׁוֶה אֶל הַז״א). And every private Partzuf of hers is equal to the corresponding private Partzuf of Ze’ir Anpin (וְכָל פַּרְצוּף פְּרָטִי שֶׁלָּהּ שָׁוֶה לַפַּרְצוּף הַפְּרָטִי שֶׁכְּנֶגְדּוֹ בְּז״א). And she is the Nukvah of Ze’ir Anpin — one — the one mentioned everywhere, the tenth Sefirah of the ten that include all Atzilut, the fifth Partzuf of the five Partzufim that include all Atzilut (וְהִיא הַנּוּקְבָּא דְּז״א אַחַת הִיא הַנִּזְכֶּרֶת בְּכָל הַמְּקוֹמוֹת סְפִירָה הָעֲשִׂירִית דְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכְלָלוּת הָאֲצִילוּת פַּרְצוּף הֶחָמִישִׁי מֵהֶ״פ הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל הָאֲצִילוּת).

And behold, in Sha‘ar Ze’ir Anpin, chapter three, Ma’amar Bet, he wrote at the beginning of the chapter (וְהִנֵּה בְּשַׁעַר ז״א פ״ג מ״ב כָּתַב בְּתְחִלַּת הַפֶּרֶק): “Ze’ir Anpin selected the six extremities of M”H (ו״ק דְּמ״ה) and became male (וְנַעֲשֶׂה דְּכוּרָא), and selected from B״N the six extremities except for the crowns (ו״ק מִן ב״ן זוּלָתִי הַכְּתָרִים), and she is the Malkhut within him (וְהִיא מַלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ). And the Nukvah selected the seven of M”H and the seven of B״N except for the Keter” (וְנֻקְבָּא בִּירְרָה הַז׳ דְּמ״ה וְהַז׳ דְּב״ן זוּלָתִי הַכֶּתֶר) — thus ends (עַכ״ל). And behold, in what he wrote that the six extremities of B״N which Ze’ir Anpin took are the Malkhut within him (וְהִנֵּה בְּמַה שֶּׁכָּתַב כִּי הַו״ק דְּב״ן שֶׁלָּקַח הַז״א הִיא מַלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ), it is possible to explain in two ways: the first is by prefacing what he wrote in Sha‘ar Shevirat haKelim [Vessels], chapter eight (הָאֶחָד לְהַקְדִּים מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב בְּשַׁעַר שְׁבִירַת הַכֵּלִים פ״ח): “The general principle is that the general Name B״N is Nefesh, and it is the seven kings which are in Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah, and this emerged in the aspect of Igulim [Circular Configuration]” (וְזֶ״ל כְּלָל הָעוֹלֶה שֵׁם ב״ן הַכְּלָלִי הוּא נֶפֶשׁ וְהוּא ז׳ מְלָכִים שֶׁהֵם בְּזו״ן וְזֶה יָצָא בִּבְחִינַת עִגּוּלִים), “and they are M”H and B״N which are in the general Name B״N; and afterward emerged Hadar and Mehitavel, and they are M”H and B״N which are in the general Name M”H, and these are the six extremities of Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah — meaning the six extremities of Ze’ir Anpin and the six extremities of the Nukvah” (וְהֵם מ״ה וּב״ן שֶׁבְּשֵׁם ב״ן הַכְּלָלִי וְאַחַר כָּךְ יָצָא הֲדַר וּמְהֵיטַבְאֵל וְהֵם מ״ה וּב״ן שֶׁבְּשֵׁם מ״ה הַכְּלָלִי וְהֵם ו״ק זו״ן פֵּרוּשׁ ו״ק דְּז״א ו״ק דְּנֻקְבָּא). “And these became the Partzuf Adam in Yosher [Upright Configuration], and by them also the Igulim [Circular Configuration] were sustained, for they are the aspect of Ruach that sustains the Nefesh” (וְאֵלּוּ נַעֲשׂוּ פַּרְצוּף אָדָם בְּיוֹשֶׁר וּבְסִבְּתָם נִתְקַיְּמוּ גַּם הָעִגּוּלִים כִּי הֵם בְּחִינַת רוּחַ הַמְקַיֵּם הַנֶּפֶשׁ). “And behold, at the time of Ibbur [Gestation], which is the Tikkun, then those kings were selected and rectified in the secret of Ibbur [Gestation] within the Igulim [Circular Configuration] of Abba–Imma, and afterward they became Igulim [Circular Configuration] also, and were not broken again” (וְהִנֵּה בְּעֵת הָעִיבּוּר שֶׁהוּא הַתִּקּוּן אָז אוֹתָם הַמְּלָכִים נִתְבָּרְרוּ וְנִתְקַּנוּ בְּסוֹד הָעִיבּוּר תּוֹךְ הָעִגּוּלִים דְּאוּ״א וְאַחַר כָּךְ נַעֲשׂוּ עִגּוּלִים גַּם כֵּן וְלֹא נִשְׁבְּרוּ פַּעַם אַחֶרֶת). “Also in the life of Hadar and Mehitavel were six extremities, and they entered the Ibbur [Gestation] within Abba–Imma in Yosher [Upright Configuration] and emerged Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah of Yosher [Upright Configuration] as six extremities alone — which is the matter of the Ruach alone to sustain the Nefesh, which are the Igulim [Circular Configuration]” (וְגַם בְּחַיֵּי הֲדַר וּמְהֵיטַבְאֵל הָיָה ו״ק וְנִכְנְסוּ בְּסוֹד עִיבּוּר בְּתוֹךְ אוּ״א בְּיוֹשֶׁר וְיָצְאוּ זו״ן דְּיוֹשֶׁר בִּבְחִינַת ו״ק לְבַד שֶׁהוּא עִנְיַן הָרוּחַ לְבַד לְקַיֵּם הַנֶּפֶשׁ שֶׁהֵם הָעִגּוּלִים). “And afterward, when Ze’ir Anpin grew, also his upper three grew and the upper three in the Nukvah, which are the aspect of Netzach, Hod, Yesod, and then they were completed in all their details” (וְאַחַר כָּךְ בְּהִגְדַּל הַז״א נִתְגַּדְּלוּ גַּם כֵּן ג״ר שֶׁלּוֹ וְג״ר שֶׁבַּנּוּקְבָּא שֶׁהֵם בְּחִינַת נַח״י וְאָז נִשְׁלְמוּ בְּכָל פְּרָטֵיהֶם). “And with this you will understand why Ze’ir Anpin has only ten Sefirot — for the Malkhut within him is the aspect of Igulim [Circular Configuration], and in Yosher [Upright Configuration] he is only ten Sefirot, and so in his Nukvah” (וּבְזֶה תָּבִין לָמָּה הַז״א אֵין בּוֹ רַק ט״ס שֶׁהַמַלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ הִיא בְּחִינַת עִגּוּלִים וְיוֹשֶׁר אֵינוֹ רַק ט״ס וְכֵן בְּנוּקְבִּיָּה עַכ״ל).

Behold, it is explained that the six extremities of B״N — the six kings — which Ze’ir Anpin took, became the aspect of Igulim [Circular Configuration] within him: they are his Malkhut (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר כִּי הַו״ק דְּב״ן שֶׁהֵם הַו׳ מְלָכִים שֶׁלָּקַח הַז״א נַעֲשׂוּ בְּחִינַת עִגּוּלִים בּוֹ שֶׁהֵם בְּחִינַת הַמַלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ). And therefore he remains only nine Sefirot in Yosher [Upright Configuration] (וְעַל־כֵּן נִשְׁאַר הוּא בְּבְחִינַת ט״ס בִּלְבַד בְּבְחִינַת הַיּוֹשֶׁר). And this is what he wrote here in Sha‘ar Ze’ir Anpin: that “Ze’ir Anpin selected from B״N the six extremities, and she is the Malkhut within him” (וְזֶה הוּא מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב כָּאן בְּשַׁעַר ז״א כִּי הַז״א בִּירֵר מִן ב״ן ו״ק וְהִיא מַלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ). For he follows his own reasoning — what he wrote there is the “later recension” and here also is Ma’amar Bet (כִּי לְשִׁיטָתֵיהּ אָזִיל מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב שָׁם שֶׁהוּא מַהֲדוֹרָא בַּתְרָא וְכָאן גַּם כֵּן הוּא מ״ב). And if this is correct, then there is no place at all for what Rabbi Sar Shalom wrote — that the six extremities of M”H and B״N which Ze’ir Anpin took are the “great Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah,” and that the six extremities of B״N is Rachel ha-Gedolah (וְאִם כֵּנִים הַדְּבָרִים שֶׁכַּוָּנָתוֹ כֵּן אִם כֵּן אֵין מָקוֹם כְּלָל לְמַה שֶּׁאָמַר הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם שֶׁהַו״ק דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן שֶׁלָּקַח הַז״א הֵם זו״ן הַגְּדוֹלִים וְהַו״ק דְּב״ן הִיא רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה). For behold, it is explained here that the six extremities of B״N which Ze’ir Anpin took is his Malkhut, and that they are the Igulim [Circular Configuration] — the six kings — which are the six extremities of B״N in him (כִּי הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר כָּאן אֵיךְ הַו״ק דְּב״ן שֶׁלָּקַח הַז״א הִיא הַמַלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ וּמְבֹאָר שָׁם שֶׁהֵם הָעִגּוּלִים שֶׁהַמַלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ שֶׁהֵם הַו׳ מְלָכִים), and therefore he has only nine Sefirot in Yosher [Upright Configuration] (וְעַל־כֵּן אֵין בּוֹ רַק ט״ס בְּבְחִינַת הַיּוֹשֶׁר שֶׁבּוֹ).

Further, one may explain (עוֹד אֶפְשָׁר לְפָרֵשׁ), that what he wrote — “that the six extremities of B״N are the Malkhut within him” — the intention is Aṭeret ha-Yesod of Ze’ir Anpin (שֶׁמַּה שֶּׁכָּתַב שֶׁהַו״ק דְּב״ן הִיא הַמַּלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ הַכַּוָּנָה עֲטֶרֶת הַיְּסוֹד שֶׁלּוֹ), as the Rav of blessed memory prefaced in Sha‘ar Beri’at ha-Olamot, section five (כְּמוֹ שֶׁהִקְדִּים הָרַב ז״ל בְּשַׁעַר בְּרִיאַת הָעוֹלָמוֹת עֲנָף ה׳), saying (וְזֹאת לְשׁוֹנוֹ): “One must know that the Sefirah of Malkhut in every Partzuf of these five Partzufim is thus: that the Malkhut in a Partzuf called ‘male,’ such as Abba and Ze’ir Anpin, is the aspect of the crown upon the Tzaddik called Yesod” (עוֹד צָרִיךְ לָדַעַת כִּי סְפִירַת הַמַּלְכוּת שֶׁבְּכָל פַּרְצוּף וּפַרְצוּף מֵאֵלּוּ הַה״פ הִיא בְּאוֹפֶן זֶה כִּי אִם מַלְכוּת אֲשֶׁר בַּפַּרְצוּף הַנִּקְרָא זָכָר כְּגוֹן אַבָּא וְז״א הִיא בְּחִינַת הָעֲטָרָה שֶׁעַל הַצַּדִּיק הַנִּקְרָא יְסוֹד). And according to this explanation it is also not applicable to say that the six extremities of B״N — which became his Aṭeret ha-Yesod — are the aspect of Rachel ha-Gedolah (וְגַם לְזֶה הַפֵּרוּשׁ לֹא שַׁיָּךְ לוֹמַר שֶׁהַו״ק דְּב״ן שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ עֲטֶרֶת יְסוֹדוֹ הֵם בְּחִינַת רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה). All the more so, according to what Rabbi Sar Shalom wrote — that the six extremities of M”H and B״N were included and dressed within one another and connected, and clothed the Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod of Arich Anpin below the navel, on all sides, front and back, and are called “the great Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah” (וּמַה גַּם לְפִי מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם שֶׁהַו״ק דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן נִכְלְלוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ וְנִתְלַבְּשׁוּ אֵלּוּ בָּאֵלּוּ וְנִתְחַבְּרוּ וְהִלְבִּישׁוּ לְתַנֵּה״י דְּא״א מֵהַטַּבּוּר וְלְמַטָּה מִכָּל צְדָדָיו פָּנִים וַאֲחוֹר וְנִקְרָאִים זו״ן הַגְּדוֹלִים), that none of these aspects can apply to Aṭeret ha-Yesod (שֶׁאֵין שׁוּם בְּחִינוֹת מֵאֵלּוּ שַׁיָּךְ בַּעֲטֶרֶת הַיְּסוֹד).

For according to his words, it sounds as if they are equal in stature and clothe Arich Anpin equally, and therefore are called “the great Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah” (כִּי לְפִי דְּבָרָיו מַשְׁמַע כְּאִלּוּ הֵם שְׁוִים בְּקוֹמָתָם וּמַלְבִּישִׁים לְא״א בְּשָׁוֶה וְלָכֵן נִקְרָאִים זו״ן הַגְּדוֹלִים). And how can this apply to Aṭeret ha-Yesod of Ze’ir Anpin? (וְזֶה אֵיךְ שַׁיָּךְ בְּעֲטֶרֶת הַיְּסוֹד דְּז״א) Therefore, in my humble opinion, I do not know from where Rabbi Sar Shalom derived this matter (בְּאוֹפֶן כִּי לְעַנְיוּת דַּעְתִּי לֹא יָדַעְתִּי מֵאַיִן יָצָא לוֹ לָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם זֶה הַדָּבָר), for he showed us no place of it in the derashot of the Rav (כִּי גַּם הוּא לֹא הֶרְאָה לָנוּ אֵי זֶה מְקוֹמוֹ בְּדְרוּשֵׁי הָרַב). And according to what was said (וְעַל־פִּי הָאָמֻר), that the six extremities of B"N which are the six kings that Ze’ir Anpin took (כִּי הַו״ק דְּב״ן שֶׁהֵם הַו׳ מְלָכִים שֶׁלָּקַח הַז״א), are the aspect of the Malkhut within him which is his Ateret Yesod [Crown of his Yesod] (הֵם בְּחִינַת הַמַּלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ שֶׁהוּא עֲטֶרֶת יְסוֹדוֹ), it is possible to understand what was written above in Sha‘ar Arich Anpin, chapter sixteen (אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁיּוּבַן מַה שֶּׁנֶּאֱמַר לְעֵיל מִשַּׁעַר א״א פ״ט ו״ו), for at first glance it contradicts all the derashot of the Rav, of blessed memory (כִּי לְכָאוֹרָה הוּא הֶפֶךְ כָּל דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב ז״ל), which we wrote above (שֶׁכָּתַבְנוּ לְעֵיל). For there in Sha‘ar Arich Anpin it is written that Ze’ir Anpin is entirely M"H and the Nukvah entirely B"N (כִּי הֲרֵי שָׁם כָּתַב כִּי הַז״א הוּא כֻּלּוֹ מ״ה וְהַנּוּקְבָּא כֻּלָּהּ ב״ן), whereas in all the derashot it is said that Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah each has M"H and B"N (וְאִלּוּ בְּכָל הַדְּרוּשִׁים נֶאֱמַר כִּי זו״ן יֵשׁ בְּכָל אֶחָד מֵהֶם מ״ה וּב״ן), as written above (כְּמַה שֶׁכָּתַבְנוּ לְעֵיל). And behold, there in Sha‘ar Arich Anpin I saw one marginal note on this — I do not know to whom among the holy ones it belongs (וְהִנֵּה שָׁם רָאִיתִי הַגָּהָה אַחַת עַל זֶה לֹא יָדַעְתִּי לְמִי מִקְּדוֹשִׁים), and these are its words (וְזֹאת לְשׁוֹנוֹ): “Specifically after the Nesirah [Severance], and it does not contradict what is written in Sha‘ar Ze’ir Anpin; see on the following page,” thus ends (דַּוְקָא אַחַר הַנְסִירָה וְאֵינוֹ סוֹתֵר לְמַה שֶׁכָּתוּב בְּשַׁעַר ז״א וְעֲיֵן בַּדַּף שֶׁלְאַחַר זֶה עַכ״ל).

And the intention is clear (וְהַכַּוָּנָה מְבֹאָרֶת): for in Sha‘ar Ze’ir Anpin it is written that there is none among all the ten Sefirot who has M"H and B"N in the male and M"H and B"N in the female except Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah (כִּי בְּשַׁעַר ז״א כָּתַב כִּי אֵין בְּכָל הַי׳ סְפִירוֹת מִי שֶׁיִּהְיֶה בּוֹ מ״ה וּב״ן בִּזְכָר וּמ״ה וּב״ן בַּנְּקֵבָה כִּי אִם זו״ן), which is the opposite of what is written here — that Ze’ir Anpin is entirely M"H and the Nukvah entirely B"N (וְהוּא הֶפֶךְ מַה שֶׁכָּתוּב כָּאן כִּי הַז״א כֻּלּוֹ מ״ה וְהַנּוּקְבָּא כֻּלָּהּ ב״ן). And therefore he said that what is written here applies specifically after the Nesirah [Severance] (וְלָכֵן אָמַר כִּי מַה שֶׁכָּתוּב כָּאן הוּא דַּוְקָא אַחַר הַנְּסִירָה), and see on the following page — which is what he wrote there at the end of the chapter (וְעֲיֵן בַּדַּף שֶׁלְאַחַר זֶה שֶׁהוּא מַה שֶׁכָּתַב שָׁם בְּסוֹף הַפֶּרֶק): “And also understand that since Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah are completely separated, they were required first to be attached in complete attachment, such that Ze’ir Anpin includes M"H and B"N — Chesed and Gevurah — so that after the Nesirah [Severance] he will always have attachment with the Nukvah, and then he remains with M"H and she with B"N,” thus ends (וְזֶ״ל גַּם תָּבִין כִּי זו״ן כֵּיוָן שֶׁהֵם נִפְרָדִים לְגַמְרֵי הוּכְרְחוּ לְהִדָּבֵק בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה דְּבֵקוּת גָּמוּר שֶׁיִּהְיֶה הַז״א כּוֹלֵל מ״ה וּב״ן חו״ג כְּדֵי שֶׁאַחַר הַנְּסִירָה תָּמִיד יִהְיֶה לוֹ דְּבֵקוּת עִם הַנּוּקְבָּא וְאָז נִשְׁאַר הוּא בְּמ״ה וְהִיא בְּב״ן עַכ״ל). And at first glance it seems forced to say (וְלִכְאוֹרָה נִרְאֶה שֶׁזֶּה דּוֹחֵק לוֹמַר), that all the derashot of the Rav, of blessed memory, which state that Ze'ir anpin and Nukvah each is composed of M"H and B"N speak only before the Nesirah [Severance] (שֶׁכָּל דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב ז״ל שֶׁכָּתוּב בָּהֶם שֶׁזו״ן כָּל אֶחָד כָּלוּל מִמ״ה וּמִב״ן הֵם מְדַבְּרִים קוֹדֶם הַנְּסִירָה). Further, even granting that Ze’ir Anpin’s portion of B"N was given to the Nukvah in the Nesirah [Severance] so he remained entirely M"H (וְעוֹד כִּי תֵינַח ז״א שֶׁהַב״ן שֶׁלּוֹ נִתַּן אֶל הַנּוּקְבָּא בַּנְּסִירָה וְלָכֵן נִשְׁאַר הוּא כֻּלּוֹ מ״ה), but the Nukvah — who had M"H which she originally took — how is she entirely B"N, and what became of her M"H? (אֲבָל הַנּוּקְבָּא שֶׁהָיָה לָהּ מ״ה שֶׁלָּקְחָה בַּתְּחִלָּה אֵיךְ הִיא כֻּלָּהּ ב״ן וּמָה נַעֲשָׂה הַמ״ה שֶׁלָּקְחָה בַּתְּחִלָּה). And further, how is it possible to say that Ze’ir Anpin remained entirely M"H? (וְעוֹד אֵיךְ אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר כִּי הַז״א נִשְׁאַר כֻּלּוֹ מ״ה).

And behold, we wrote above in Sha‘ar Ḥitzoniyyut and Pnimiyyut, chapter six (וְהֲרֵי כָּתַבְנוּ לְעֵיל מִשַּׁעַר חִיצוֹנִיּוּת וּפְנִימִיּוּת פ״ו), that at the time of the blemish, Heaven forbid, the upper three of B"N depart from Ze’ir Anpin, and the ten Sefirot of M"H (כִּי בְּעֵת הַפְּגָם ח״ו מִסְתַּלְּקִין מִז״א הַג״ר דְּב״ן וְהַי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּמ״ה); behold, it is explained that he always has B"N, for the departure of his B"N on account of the blemish is not before the Nesirah [Severance], but only at the moment of the blemish, Heaven forbid, whenever it may be (הֲרֵי מְבֹאָר שֶׁתָּמִיד יֵשׁ לוֹ ב״ן שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵין הִסְתַּלְּקוּת הַב״ן שֶׁלּוֹ מִפְּנֵי הַפְּגָם הוּא קוֹדֶם הַנְּסִירָה רַק בְּעֵת הַפְּגָם ח״ו בְּכָל עֵת שֶׁיִּהְיֶה). And likewise it is written there also that at the time of the blemish, Heaven forbid, the nine Sefirot of B"N and the ten Sefirot of M"H depart from the Nukvah (וְכֵן כָּתוּב שָׁם גַּם כֵּן כִּי בְּעֵת הַפְּגָם ח״ו מִסְתַּלְּקִין מֵהַנּוּקְבָּא הַט״ס דְּב״ן וְהַי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּמ״ה); if so, it appears that she always has the aspect of M"H (אִם כֵּן נִרְאֶה שֶׁתָּמִיד יֵשׁ בָּהּ בְּחִינַת מ״ה). And further, for in Sha‘ar A’N’K, chapter seven, he wrote that after they returned to Face to Face, there is M"H and B"N in Ze’ir Anpin and M"H and B"N in the Nukvah (וְעוֹד כִּי בְּשַׁעַר אַנ״ךְ פ״ז כָּתַב כִּי אַחַר אֲשֶׁר חָזְרוּ פ״ב״פ יֵשׁ מ״ה וּב״ן בְּז״א וּמ״ה וּב״ן בַּנּוּקְבָּא), and it is known that the return of Face to Face of Zeir anpin and Nukvah is after the Nesirah [Severance] (וְיָדוּעַ כִּי חֲזָרַת פ״ב״פ שֶׁל זו״ן הוּא אַחַר הַנְּסִירָה); and he said that there is M"H and B"N in Ze’ir Anpin and likewise in the Nukvah (וְאָמַר שֶׁיֵּשׁ מ״ה וּב״ן בְּז״א וְכֵן בַּנּוּקְבָּא). And it is true that the M"H and B"N in Zeir anpin and Nukvah which he stated there mean that in Ze’ir Anpin there is M"H of M"H and M"H of B"N, and in the Nukvah there is B"N of M"H and B"N of B"N (וְהֵן אֱמֶת כִּי הַמ״ה וּב״ן שֶׁבְּזו״ן שֶׁאָמַר שָׁם הוּא כִּי בְּז״א יֵשׁ מ״ה דְּמ״ה וּמ״ה דְּב״ן וּבַּנּוּקְבָּא יֵשׁ ב״ן דְּמ״ה וּב״ן דְּב״ן).

If so, it would be possible to say that in this aspect he is speaking in Sha‘ar Arich Anpin; for what he wrote, that Ze’ir Anpin is entirely M"H, the intention is M"H of M"H and of B"N; and what he wrote, that the Nukvah is entirely B"N, the intention is B"N of M"H and of B"N (אִם כֵּן הָיָה אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר שֶׁבְּבְחִינָה זוֹ מְדַבֵּר בְּשַׁעַר א״א כִּי מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב שֶׁהַז״א כֻּלּוֹ מ״ה הַכַּוָּנָה מ״ה דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן וּמַה שֶּׁכָּתַב שֶׁהַנּוּקְבָּא כֻּלָּהּ ב״ן הַכַּוָּנָה ב״ן דְּמ״ה וּדְּב״ן).

Yet it does not appear from there that he is speaking of the particular M"H and B"N, but only of the inclusive M"H and B"N, as is apparent from the beginning of the chapter—the M"H and B"N which he mentioned in Atik and Arich Anpin and Abba and Imma, which certainly refer to the inclusives (הַאֲמְנָם אֵין נִרְאֶה מִשָּׁם שֶׁמְּדַבֵּר בְּמ״ה וּב״ן הַפְּרָטִיִּים רַק בְּמ״ה וּב״ן הַכְּלָלִיִּים כְּנִרְאֶה מִתְּחִלַּת הַפֶּרֶק הַמ״ה וּב״ן שֶׁהִזְכִּיר בַּעֲתִיק וְא״א וְאו״א שֶׁהֵם עַל הַכְּלָלִיִּים בְּוַדָּאי). And it is also apparent from the beginning of the subject, which he began in chapter fifteen, how he is speaking of the inclusive M"H and B"N and of the first aspects of B"N which all of them took (וְכָל זֶה נִרְאֶה מִתְּחִלַּת הָעִנְיָן שֶׁהִתְחִיל מִפֶּרֶק ט"ו אֵיךְ הוּא מְדַבֵּר עַל הַמ״ה וּב״ן הַכְּלָלִיִּים וְעַל הַבְּחִינוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת דְּב״ן שֶׁלָּקְחוּ כֻּלָּם), for thus he wrote: that Atik took Keter of M"H and half of Keter of B"N, and Arich Anpin took Chokhmah of M"H and the lower half of Keter of B"N, and Abba took the half of Binah of M"H and the lower seven of Chokhmah of B"N, and Imma took the half of Binah of M"H and the lower six of Binah of B"N (שֶׁכֵּן כָּתַב כִּי עֲתִיק לָקַח כֶּתֶר דְּמ״ה וַחֲצִי כֶּתֶר דְּב״ן וְא״א לָקַח חָכְמָה דְּמ״ה וַחֲצִי תַּחְתּוֹן דְּכֶתֶר דְּב״ן וְאַבָּא לָקַח חֲצִי בִּינָה דְּמ״ה וְז״ת דְּחָכְמָה דְּב״ן וְאִמָּא לָקְחָה חֲצִי בִּינָה דְּמ״ה וּו"ת דְּבִינָה דְּב״ן).

And all of this makes clear how he is speaking of the inclusive M"H and B"N and of the first aspects of B"N (וְכָל זֶה מְבֹאָר הוּא אֵיךְ הוּא מְדַבֵּר בְּמ״ה וּב״ן הַכְּלָלִיִּים וּבַבְּחִינוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת דְּב״ן). For it is known that in all these first aspects of B"N which they took initially, the remaining aspects of B"N which were lacking at first were afterwards added, as explained in the words of the Rav Sar Shalom, of blessed memory, which we cited (כְּנוֹדָעַ כִּי בְּכָל אֵלּוּ הַבְּחִינוֹת דְּב״ן שֶׁלָּקְחוּ בַּתְּחִלָּה נִתְּוֹסַף עֲלֵיהֶם שְׁאָר הַבְּחִינוֹת דְּב״ן שֶׁחָסְרוּ מִתְּחִלָּה וּכְמְבֹאָר בְּלָשׁוֹן הָרַב שַׂר שָׁלוֹם ז״ל שֶׁכָּתַבְנוּ). If so, when afterwards he mentioned the aspect of M"H and B"N of Zeir anpin and Nukvah, it does not appear that he is speaking of the particulars but of the inclusives, similar to the M"H and B"N which he mentioned earlier in the other Partzufim, which are the inclusive M"H and B"N (וְאִם כֵּן כַּאֲשֶׁר אַחַר כָּךְ הִזְכִּיר בְּחִינַת הַמ״ה וּב״ן דְּזו״ן אֵינוֹ נִרְאֶה שֶׁמְּדַבֵּר עַל הַפְּרָטִיִּים רַק עַל הַכְּלָלִיִּים כְּדִמְיוֹן הַמ״ה וּב״ן שֶׁהִזְכִּיר בַּתְּחִלָּה בִּשְׁאָר הַפַּרְצוּפִים שֶׁהֵם הַמ״ה וּב״ן הַכְּלָלִיִּים). If so, the difficulty returns to its place—how is it that after the Nesirah [Severance] Ze’ir Anpin remains with M"H and the Nukvah with B"N, when from all other sources it appears that Zeir anpin and Nukvah always have M"H and B"N in each of them (וְאִם כֵּן חָזְרָה קֻשְׁיָא לִדְּוּכְתָּא כִּי אֵיךְ הוּא שֶׁאַחַר הַנְּסִירָה נִשְׁאַר הַז״א בְּמ״ה וְהַנּוּקְבָּא בְּב״ן מֵאַחַר שֶׁמִּכָּל הַמְּקוֹמוֹת נִרְאֶה שֶׁתָּמִיד הַזּו״ן יֵשׁ בְּכָל אֶחָד מֵהֶם מ״ה וּב״ן), and especially from what is written in Sha‘ar Ze’ir Anpin and in Sha‘ar Chitzoniyut and Pnimiyut mentioned above (וּבִפְרָט מִמַּה שֶּׁכָּתַב בְּשַׁעַר ז״א וּבְשַׁעַר חִיצוֹנִיּוּת וּפְנִימִיּוּת הַנַּ״ל).

Indeed, according to what was said, it is possible that it may be understood (אֲַמְנָם עַל פִּי הָאָמּוּר אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁיּוּבַן), and beforehand we shall preface to understand the expression that we wrote above from Sha‘ar A“N“K, chapter six (וְקֹדֶם נַקְדִּים לְהָבִין הַלָּשׁוֹן שֶׁכָּתַבְנוּ לְעֵיל מִשַּׁעַר אַנ״ךְ פ״ו), which concludes there: “And after this she also was completed with ten Sefirot parallel to the Ze’ir Anpin, and yet they are still back-to-back”—finished there (שֶׁסִּיַּם שָׁם וְאַחַר זֶה נִגְמְרָה גַם הִיא בְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת דּוּגְמַת הַז״א וַעֲדַיִן הֵם אַב״א עַכ״ל). For behold he had already written before this that each Malkhut of the ten Malkhuyot within her grew and became one Sefirah, for the other Sefirot came (שֶׁהֲרֵי כְּבָר כָּתַב קֹדֶם זֶה כִּי כָּל מַלְכוּת מֵהַי׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת שֶׁבָּהּ נִגְדְּלָה וְנַעֲשֵׂית סְפִירָה אַחַת כִּי בָּאוּ שְׁאָר הַסְּפִירוֹת), and if so, she had already been completed to ten Sefirot (וְאִם כֵּן כְּבָר נִשְׁלָמָה לְי׳ סְפִירוֹת). And what is this that he says, “And after this she was completed with ten Sefirot parallel to the Ze’ir Anpin”? (וּמַאי הָאִי דְּקָאָמַר וְאַחַר זֶה נִשְׁלָמָה לְי׳ סְפִירוֹת דּוּגְמַת הַז״א). And it will be understood with what is written in Sha‘ar Chitzoniyut [Externality] and Penimiyut [Internality], chapter seven (וְיִוָּדַע עִם מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בְּשַׁעַר חִיצוֹנִיּוּת וּפְנִימִיּוּת פ״ז), and these are his words in brief (וְזֶ״ל בְּקִצּוּר): “Know that at first, in the Ibbur [Gestation], there was in the Ze’ir Anpin only the aspect of Nefesh alone within him, and it is the Malkhut within him for his six extremities” (דַּע כִּי תְּחִלָּה בָּעִיבּוּר לֹא הָיָה בַּז״א רַק בְּחִינַת נֶפֶשׁ לְבַד שֶׁבּוֹ וְהוּא מַלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ לְשִׁשָּׁה קְצָווֹתָיו). “And when he was born the Ruach came to him, and his six extremities were completed in the days of nursing” (וּכְשֶׁנּוֹלַד בָּא לוֹ הָרוּחַ וְנִשְׁלַם לוֹ ו״ק בִּימֵי הַיְּנִיקָה). “But the Nukvah—before the time of Ibbur [Gestation]—there was in her only the point of Nefesh within Nefesh, the Malkhut within the Malkhut, and its measure is the crown (Atarah) at the Yesod of the Ze’ir Anpin, which is from his Nefesh” (וֶאֱמְנָם הַנּוּקְבָא קֹדֶם זְמַן הָעִיבּוּר לֹא הָיָה בָּהּ רַק נְקוּדַת נֶפֶשׁ שֶׁבַּנֶּפֶשׁ מַלְכוּת שֶׁבַּמַלְכוּת וְשִׁעוּרָהּ עֲטָרָה שֶׁבְּיִסוֹד דְּז״א שֶׁהוּא מִנֶּפֶשׁ שֶׁבּוֹ). “And afterwards, in the Ibbur [Gestation], were added to her the six extremities of the Nefesh, and this is called the Ruach within Nefesh, and then she grew to the measure of the Yesod of the Ze’ir Anpin, which is his Ruach, but they are not complete six extremities like his” (וְאַחַר כָּךְ בָּעִיבּוּר נִיתּוֹסַף בָּהּ ו״ק הַנֶּפֶשׁ וְנִקְרָא רוּחַ שֶׁבַּנֶּפֶשׁ וְאָז גָּדְלָה כְּמִדַּת הַיְּסוֹד דְּז״א שֶׁהוּא רוּחַ שֶׁבּוֹ אֲבָל אֵינָם ו״ק שְׁלֵמִים כְּמוֹהוּ). “And afterwards, during nursing, she grew into the Neshama within Nefesh, and the three Kelim [Vessels] of Nefesh–Ruach–Neshama within her became apparent, yet they are all aspects of Nefesh” (וְאַחַר כָּךְ בְּיִנִיקָה גָּדְלָה הִיא נְשָׁמָה שֶׁבַּנֶּפֶשׁ וְנִכָּר ג׳ כֵּלִים דְּנֶפֶשׁ־רוּחַ־נְשָׁמָה שֶׁבָּהּ אֲבָל הֵם בְּחִינַת נֶפֶשׁ). “In such a manner that the ten Malkhuyot within her were completed, which are called a complete Nefesh, and all of them are only one measure, the measure of the Tiferet of the Ze’ir Anpin” (בְּאוֹפֶן שֶׁנִּשְׁלַם בָּהּ י׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת שֶׁבָּהּ הַנִּקְרָא נֶפֶשׁ גְּמוּרָה וְכוּלָּם אֵינָם רַק מִדָּה אַחַת כְּמִדַּת תִּפְאֶרֶת דְּז״א). “And then the Ze’ir Anpin had complete six extremities, and she was one complete extremity” (וְאָז הָיָה הַז״א ו״ק גְּמוּרִים וְהִיא קָצֶה אַחַת גְּמוּרָה). “Afterwards the Ze’ir Anpin grew into complete ten Sefirot, and the Neshama came to him” (אַחַר כָּךְ גָּדַל הַז״א י׳ סְפִירוֹת גְּמוּרוֹת וּבָאָה לוֹ נְשָׁמָה). “And then she grew into the aspect of Ruach at once, for that measure of the ten Malkhuyot mentioned became ten Sefirot, as is known from A“B of ATBaCH” (וְאָז הִיא נִגְדֶּלֶת בְּבְחִינַת רוּחַ בְּפַעַם אַחַת כִּי אוֹתָהּ מִדָּה שֶׁל י׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת הַנִּזְכָּר נַעֲשׂוּ י׳ סְפִירוֹת כַּנּוֹדָע מֵא״ב דְּא״ט ב״ח). “And behold they are now back-to-back, but she still has only Nefesh and Ruach, for behold she is still from the chest downward, etc.” (וְהֲרֵי הֵם עַתָּה אַב״א אֲבָל עֲדַיִן אֵין בָּהּ רַק נֶפֶשׁ וְרוּחַ כִּי הֲרֵי הִיא עֲדַיִן מִן הַחָזֶה וּלְמַטָּה כו׳). “For in the Ze’ir Anpin himself there is there only Ruach, and therefore only her Ruach reached her, for her Neshama was given to the Malkhut of the Ze’ir Anpin himself, as stated above” (שֶׁאֵין שָׁם בַּז״א עַצְמוֹ רַק רוּחַ וְלָכֵן לֹא הִגִּיעַ אֵלֶיהָ רַק הָרוּחַ שֶׁלָּהּ כִּי הַנְּשָׁמָה שֶׁלָּהּ נִתְּנָה לְמַלְכוּת דְּז״א עַצְמוֹ כַּנִּ״ל). “And afterwards the Mochin [Intellects] emerged and were given to her herself, and then she grew in all the back, for now she has Neshama like him” (וְאַחַר כָּךְ יָצְאוּ הַמּוֹחִין וְנִתְּנִין אֵלֶיהָ עַצְמָהּ וְאָז גָּדְלָה בְּכָל הָאֲחוֹר כִּי כְבָר יֵשׁ בָּהּ נְשָׁמָה כְּמוֹהוּ). “And know and understand very well that then the entire aspect of the Malkhut of the Ze’ir Anpin himself—which is his B“N as mentioned elsewhere, and it is parallel to the upper Binah, and it is parallel to the Tevunah which becomes a complete Partzuf when they unite with the Binah—behold the Kelim [Vessels] are cut and adhere to her, since the Neshama entered her, which is the Neshama of the cut Kelim [Vessels], which is the B“N of the Ze’ir Anpin, lights–Kelim [Vessels]” (וְדַע וֶהֱבֵן מְאֹד כִּי אָז כָּל בְּחִינַת מַלְכוּת דְּז״א עַצְמוֹ שֶׁהוּא ב״ן שֶׁלוֹ כַּנִּזְכָּר בְּמָ"א וְהִיא דּוּגְמַת בִּינָה עֶלְיוֹנָה וְהִיא דּוּגְמַת הַתְּבוּנָה הַנַּעֲשֵׂית פַּרְצוּף גָּמוּר בְּהִתְחַבְּרָם עִם הַבִּינָה וְהִנֵּה הַכֵּלִים הֵם נִנְסָרִין וְנִדְבָּקִים בָּהּ כֵּיוָן שֶׁהַנְּשָׁמָה נִכְנְסָה בָּהּ שֶׁהוּא נִשְׁמַת הַכֵּלִים הַנִּנְסָרִים שֶׁהוּא ב״ן דְּז״א אוֹרוֹת כֵּלִים), and understand this very much (וְהָבֵן זֶה מְאֹד). End of quote (עִכְל).

Behold, it is explained how, after the Malkhuyot that she possessed were completed into ten Sefirot (הֲרֵי מְבוֹאָר אֵיךְ אַחַר אֲשֶׁר הָיָ׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת שֶׁהָיוּ לָהּ נִשְׁלְמוּ לְי׳ סְפִירוֹת), she did not grow except up to the chest of the Ze’ir Anpin (לֹא נִגְדְּלָה רַק עַד הַחָזֶה דְּז״א), and afterwards she grew again a second time in all the back of the Ze’ir Anpin (וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִגְדְּלָה עוֹד הַפַּעַם בְּכָל הָאֲחוֹר דְּז״א). And this is what is written there in Sha‘ar A“N“K: “And after this she also was completed with ten Sefirot parallel to the Ze’ir Anpin” (וְזֶהוּ מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב שָׁם בְּשַׁעַר אַנ״ךְ וְאַחַר זֶה נִגְמְרָה גַם הִיא בְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת דּוּגְמַת הַז״א), meaning that she grew according to the measure of the Ze’ir Anpin back-to-back (דְּהַיְנוּ שֶׁנִּגְדְּלָה כְּשִׁעוּר הַז״א אַב״א). And thus he said, “and they are still back-to-back” (וְזֶ״שׁ וְעֲדַיִן הֵם אַב״א). And therefore he wrote there afterwards at the beginning of chapter seven, and these are his words (וְלָכֵן כָּתַב שָׁם אַחַר זֶה בְּרֹאשׁ פ״ז וְזֶ״ל): “And you must know that the ten Sefirot of the Nukvah occupy the entire length of the Ze’ir Anpin” (וְצָרִיךְ שֶׁתֵּדַע כִּי י׳ סְפִירוֹת שֶׁל הַנּוּקְבָא הֵם תּוֹפְסִים כָּל אֹרֶךְ הַז״א), “except that they are divided into two: the upper half—Leah is clothed there, and the lower half is Rachel” (אֶלָּא שֶׁנֶּחְלָק לִב׳ חֲצָאִים הָעֶלְיוֹן מִתְלַבֶּשֶׁת שָׁם לֵאָה וְחֶצְיוֹ הַתַּחְתּוֹן הוּא רָחֵל). “And the reason is that Leah is the back side of Tevunah, and they become internal relative to the head of Rachel, and she is clothed within them; therefore the entire upper half of Rachel is called by the name of Leah; and understand this very well” (וְהַטַּעַם כִּי לֵאָה הִיא אֲחוֹרַיִים דְּתְבוּנָה וְנַעֲשִׂים פְּנִימִיִּים בְּעֵרֶךְ רֹאשׁ רָחֵל וְהִיא מִתְלַבֶּשֶׁת בָּהֶם לְפִיכָךְ כָּל מַחֲצִית הָעֶלְיוֹן שֶׁל רָחֵל נִקְרָא עַל שֵׁם לֵאָה וְהָבֵן זֶה מְאֹד). End of quote (עַכ״ל).

Behold that immediately after he said, “and after this she also was completed with ten Sefirot parallel to the Ze’ir Anpin, and they are still back-to-back,” he said, “and you must know that the ten Sefirot of the Nukvah occupy the entire length of the Ze’ir Anpin”—meaning that through this is understood what was stated earlier: “and after this she was completed also with ten Sefirot, etc.” (הֲרֵי כִּי תֵּכֶף אַחַר שֶׁאָמַר וְאַחַר זֶה נִגְמְרָה גַם הִיא בְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת דּוּגְמַת הַז״א וְעֲדַיִן הֵם אַב״א אָמַר וְצָרִיךְ שֶׁתֵּדַע כִּי י׳ סְפִירוֹת שֶׁל הַנּוּקְבָא הֵם תּוֹפְסִים כָּל אֹרֶךְ הַז״א כְּלוֹמַר כִּי בָּזֶה מוּבָן הָאָמוּר קֹדֶם וְאַחַ״ז נִגְמְרָה גַם הִיא בְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת כו׳). And it is also explained from here how the Partzuf of the Nukvah, Rachel—when it is according to the full measure of the entire length of the Ze’ir Anpin back-to-back—is divided into two, upper half and lower half (וּמְבֹאָר מִכָּאן גַּם כֵּן אֵיךְ פַּרְצוּף הַנּוּקְבָא רָחֵל בְּהִיוֹתוֹ כְּשִׁעוּר כָּל אֹרֶךְ ז״א אַב״א נֶחְלָק לִב׳ חֲצִיִּים עֶלְיוֹן וְתַחְתּוֹן), except that because in the upper half Leah is clothed there, it is called by the name of Leah (אֶלָּא שֶׁמִּפְּנֵי שֶׁבַּחֲצִי הָעֶלְיוֹן מִתְלַבֶּשֶׁת שָׁם לֵאָה נִקְרָא עַל שֵׁם לֵאָה).

But forever it is the aspect of Rachel, for when she joins with her, her Partzuf grows to the measure of— (אֲבָל לְעוֹלָם הוּא בְּחִינַת רָחֵל כִּי כְּשֶׁמִּתְחַבֶּרֶת עִמָּהּ נִגְדָּל פַּרְצוּפָּהּ כְּשִׁעוּר) the Ze’ir Anpin equally (ז״א בְּשָׁוֶה). And this is what he wrote there in Sha‘ar Chitzoniyut [Externality] and Penimiyut [Internality] above (וְזֶהוּ מַה שֶּׁמָּ״שׁ שָׁם בְּשַׁעַר חו״פ הַנַּ״ל), and know and understand (וְדַע וְהֱבֵן), that then the entire aspect of the Malkhut of the Ze’ir Anpin himself (כִּי אָז כָּל בְּחִינַת מַלְכוּת דְּז״א עַצְמוֹ), which is his B”N, as mentioned elsewhere (שֶׁהוּא ב״ן שֶׁלוֹ כַּנִּזְכָּר בְּמָ״א), and it is parallel to the upper Binah (וְהוּא דּוּגְמַת בִּינָה עֶלְיוֹנָה), and it is parallel to Tevunah (וְהִיא דּוּגְמַת תְּבוּנָה), and all his back-sides are cut and given to her (וְכָל הָאֲחוֹרַיִים שֶׁלּוֹ נִנְסָרִין וְנִתְּנִין אֵלֶיהָ), and through this she is completed (וְעַל יְדֵי זֶה נִשְׁלֵמָה), for she is parallel to the Tevunah that becomes a complete Partzuf when joined with Binah (כִּי הִיא דּוּגְמַת הַתְּבוּנָה הַנַּעֲשֵׂית פַּרְצוּף גָּמוּר בְּהִתְחַבְּרָם עִם הַבִּינָה). Meaning, this completion of her Gadlut (כְּלוֹמַר כִּי זֶה הַשְּׁלֵמוּת דְּגַדְלוּת שֶׁלָּהּ), in the full length of his back (כְּכָל אֹרֶךְ הָאֲחוֹר שֶׁלּוֹ), is through the Malkhut of the Ze’ir Anpin (הוּא עַל יְדֵי הַמַלְכוּת דְּז״א), which is his B”N (שֶׁהוּא ב״ן שֶׁלוֹ), the aspect of his back-sides that he gives to her (בְּחִינַת הָאֲחוֹרַיִים שֶׁלּוֹ שֶׁנוֹתֵן אֵלֶיהָ). For this aspect of the Ze’ir Anpin that he gives to her (כִּי זֶה הַבְּחִי׳ דְּז״א שֶׁנוֹתֵן אֵלֶיהָ), is parallel to the upper Binah, from the chest and above (הוּא דּוּגְמַת בִּינָה עֶלְיוֹנָה מֵהַחָזֶה וּלְמַעְלָה). And that which she had, that her measure was up to the chest of the Ze’ir Anpin (וּמַה שֶּׁהָיָה לָהּ שֶׁהָיְתָה שִׁעוּרָהּ עַד הַחָזֶה דְּז״א), is parallel to the Tevunah (הִיא דּוּגְמַת הַתְּבוּנָה). And through this which the Ze’ir Anpin gives to her (וְעַל יְדֵי זֶה שֶׁנוֹתֵן לָהּ הַז״א), she is completed into a complete Partzuf (נִשְׁלְמָה לְפַרְצוּף גָּמוּר), in the full length of the Ze’ir Anpin (כְּכָל אֹרֶךְ הַז״א). For she is parallel to the Tevunah that becomes a complete Partzuf when joined with Binah (כִּי הִיא דּוּגְמַת הַתְּבוּנָה הַנַּעֲשֵׂית פַּרְצוּף גָּמוּר בְּהִתְחַבְּרָם עִם הַבִּינָה).

For that which she had previously—her measure up to the chest of the Ze’ir Anpin (כִּי מַה שֶּׁהָיָה לָהּ מִקֹּדֶם שֶׁהוּא שִׁעוּרָהּ עַד הַחָזֶה דְּז״א), which is parallel to the Tevunah (שֶׁהִיא דּוּגְמַת הַתְּבוּנָה), joins with what the Ze’ir Anpin gives to her (מִתְחַבֶּרֶת עִם מַה שֶּׁנוֹתֵן לָהּ הַז״א), which is parallel to the upper Binah from the chest and above (שֶׁהוּא דּוּגְמַת בִּינָה עֶלְיוֹנָה מֵהַחָזֶה וּלְמַעְלָה), and through this she is completed into a complete Partzuf across the entire length of the Ze’ir Anpin (וְעַל יְדֵי זֶה נִשְׁלְמָה לְפַרְצוּף גָּמוּר בְּכָל אֹרֶךְ הַז״א), like the joining of Tevunah with Binah (דּוּגְמַת חִבּוּר הַתְּבוּנָה עִם הַבִּינָה). And with this is understood the reason mentioned above (וּבְזֶה מוּבָן הַטַּעַם מִשֶּׁלְּעִיל), what Sha‘ar A“N“K wrote (מַה שֶּׁכָּתַב אַנ״ךְ), that the ten Sefirot of the Nukvah occupy the entire length of the Ze’ir Anpin (כִּי י׳ סְפִירוֹת הַנּוּקְבָא תּוֹפְסִים כָּל אֹרֶךְ הַז״א), except that it is divided into two: upper half and lower half (אֶלָּא שֶׁנֶּחְלָק לִב׳ חֲצָאִים חֲצִי עֶלְיוֹן וְחֲצִי תַּחְתּוֹן).

For the lower half is the aspect she already possessed (כִּי הַחֲצִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן הוּא הַבְּחִינָה שֶׁהָיְתָה לָהּ), from the chest and below of the Ze’ir Anpin (מֵהַחָזֶה וּלְמַטָּה דְּז״א), and this aspect is parallel to the Tevunah (שֶׁבְּחִינָה זוֹ הִיא דּוּגְמַת הַתְּבוּנָה). And the upper half is parallel to the upper Binah (וְהַחֲצִי הָעֶלְיוֹן הוּא דּוּגְמַת בִּינָה עֶלְיוֹנָה), which is what the Ze’ir Anpin gives to her from what is his (שֶׁהוּא מַה שֶׁנּוֹתֵן לָהּ הַז״א מִשֶּׁלּוֹ), which is his Malkhut, his B”N, the aspect of his back-sides (שֶׁהוּא הַמַּלְכוּת שֶׁלּוֹ ב״ן שֶׁלּוֹ בְּחִינַת הָאֲחוֹרַיִים שֶׁלּוֹ). And therefore they are two parts (וְלָכֵן הֵם ב׳ חֲלָקִים): the first is her own part, the lower one (הָרִאשׁוֹן חֶלְקָהּ וְהוּא הַתַּחְתּוֹן), and the second is the part the Ze’ir Anpin gives her, the upper one (וְהַשֵּׁנִי הַחֵלֶק שֶׁנָּתַן לָהּ הַז״א וְהוּא הָעֶלְיוֹן).

Thus these two places—Sha‘ar A“N“K and Sha‘ar Chitzoniyut [Externality] and Penimiyut [Internality]—are understood well together (בְּאוֹפֶן כִּי אֵלּוּ הַשְּׁנֵי מְקוֹמוֹת דְּשַׁעַר אַנ״ךְ וְשַׁעַר חו״פ מוּבָנִים בְּטוֹב טַעַם זֶה עִם זֶה), and from both we learn how the Partzuf of Rachel divides into two parts (וְנִלְמַד מִשְּׁנֵיהֶם אֵיךְ הַפַּרְצוּף דְּרָחֵל נֶחְלָק לִב׳ חֲלָקִים): the lower part is called Rachel alone (חֵלֶק הַתַּחְתּוֹן נִקְרָא רָחֵל לְבַד), and the upper part is called by the name of Leah (וְחֵלֶק הָעֶלְיוֹן נִקְרָא עַל שֵׁם לֵאָה), because she is clothed within it (מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמִּתְלַבֶּשֶׁת בּוֹ). But forever it is the upper part of Rachel (אֲבָל לְעוֹלָם הוּא חֵלֶק עֶלְיוֹן דְּרָחֵל), for these two parts of Rachel are parallel to Binah and Tevunah (כִּי ב׳ חֲלָקִים אֵלּוּ דְרָחֵל הֵם דּוּגְמַת בִּינָה וְתְבוּנָה). And this upper part of Rachel is drawn to her from the Ze’ir Anpin (וְזֶה הַחֵלֶק הָעֶלְיוֹן דְּרָחֵל נִמְשָׁךְ לָהּ מֵהַז״א), who gives her his B”N (שֶׁנּוֹתֵן לָהּ אֶת הַב״ן שֶׁלּוֹ), which is his Malkhut (שֶׁהוּא הַמַּלְכוּת שֶׁלּוֹ), which are those Malkhuyot of his aspect of Ibbur [Gestation] (שֶׁהֵם אוֹתָן הַמַּלְכֻיּוֹת דְּבְחִינַת עִיבּוּר שֶׁלּוֹ). And as explained further there in Sha‘ar Chitzoniyut [Externality] and Penimiyut [Internality], chapter nine (וּכְמְבוֹאָר יוֹתֵר שָׁם בְּשַׁעַר חִיצוֹנִיּוּת וּפְנִימִיּוּת פ״ט): “And the Malkhut in the Ze’ir Anpin is also ten other Sefirot” (וְזֶ״ל וְהַמַּלְכוּת שֶׁבַּז״א הִיא גַּם כֵּן י׳ סְפִירוֹת אֲחֵרוֹת), “and they are the back-sides of the six extremities of the Ze’ir Anpin, called nursing and smallness” (וְהֵם אֲחוֹרַיִים שֶׁל הַו״ק דְּז״א הַנִּקְרָא יְנִיקָה וְקַטְנוּת). “And understand well that because the aspect of the Malkhut of the Ze’ir Anpin is called back-sides” (וְהָבֵן הֵיטֵב כִּי לִהְיוֹת בְּחִינַת מַלְכוּת דְּז״א נִקְרָא אֲחוֹרַיִים), “they are given to the Nukvah as an aspect of Penimiyut [Internality]” (וְנִתָּנִים אֶל הַנּוּקְבָא בִּבְחִינַת פְּנִימִיּוּת), “for the Malkhut of the Ze’ir Anpin, the crown within him, is the Penimiyut [Internality] within the Nukvah” (כִּי מַלְכוּת דְּז״א עֲטָרָה שֶׁבּוֹ הוּא פְּנִימִיּוּת שֶׁבַּנּוּקְבָא).

And behold they are three aspects (וְהֲרֵי הֵם ג׳ בְּחִינוֹת): ten external Sefirot, the Kelim [Vessels] of the Malkhut within the Ze’ir Anpin (י׳ סְפִירוֹת חִיצוֹנִיּוֹת כֵּלִים דְּמַלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ דְּז״א), these are called true back-sides (אֵלּוּ נִקְרָאִים אֲחוֹרַיִים מַמָּשׁ), which are given to the Nukvah at the moment of the cutting (הַנִּתָּנִים אֶל הַנּוּקְבָא בְּעֵת הַנְּסִירָה), and through them she grows (וּבְכֹחָם נִגְדֶּלֶת), for they become for her Mochin [Intellects], the aspect of the upper three within her (כִּי נַעֲשִׂים לָהּ מוֹחִין שֶׁהֵם בְּחִינַת ג״ר שֶׁבָּהּ), for they were the back-sides to the Ze’ir Anpin (שֶׁהֵם הָיוּ בְּחִינַת אֲחוֹרַיִים אֶל הַז״א). And further, an intermediate aspect of the Ze’ir Anpin himself, ten Sefirot of six extremities of Yenikah [Nursing] (וְעוֹד בְּחִינַת אֶמְצָעִית דְּז״א עַצְמוֹ י׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּו״ק דִּינִיקָה). And further, the Penimiyut [Internality], the Kelim [Vessels] of the ten Sefirot of Chokhmah and Binah within him, spreading within him, etc (וְעוֹד בְּחִינַת הַפְּנִימִיּוּת הַכֵּלִים דְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּחו״ב שֶׁבּוֹ הַמִּתְפַּשְׁטִים בְּתוֹכוֹ כּו׳).

And with this you will understand (וּבְזֶה תָּבִין), that the Elohim of Ibbur [Gestation] is the Nefesh of the Malkhut of the Ze’ir Anpin (כִּי אֱלֹהִים דְּעִיבּוּר הוּא נֶפֶשׁ מַלְכוּת דְּז״א), and the Elohim of Yenikah [Nursing] is the Ruach of the six extremities themselves (וֶאֱלֹהִים דִּינִיקָה הוּא רוּחַ דְּו״ק עַצְמוֹ), and see there (וְעַיֵּן שָׁם). This is called the Ze’ir Anpin Elohim, as is known (זֶה נִקְרָא ז״א אֱלֹהִים כַּנּוֹדָע), for the Elohim of Ibbur [Gestation] is the Malkhut within him (כִּי אֱלֹהִים דְּעִיבּוּר הוּא מַלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ), and it is the aspect of Keter of the Nukvah, as is known (וְהוּא בְּחִינַת כֶּתֶר דְּנוּקְבָא כַּנּוֹדָע), for they are one aspect—Atarah and Keter (כִּי הֵם בְּחִינָה אַחַת עֲטָרָה וְכֶתֶר), Atarah to him and Keter to her (עֲטָרָה לוֹ וְכֶתֶר לָהּ). And in the end, the entire aspect flows to her (וְסוֹף סוֹף נִמְשָׁךְ לָהּ כָּל הַבְּחִינָה), and understand this well (וְהָבֵן זֶה הֵיטֵב). For after the cutting, the ten Sefirot of her Keter within him (כִּי אַחַר הַנְּסִירָה י׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּכֶתֶר שֶׁלָּהּ בּוֹ), are all the strengths of the male, as is known (הֵם כָּל הַגְּבוּרוֹת הַזָּכָר כַּנּוֹדָע), and as mentioned in the intention of the two days of Rosh HaShanah (וְכַנִּזְכָּר בְּכַוָּנַת ב׳ יָמִים דְּרֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה), end of quote (עַכ״ל).

Behold it is explained (הֲרֵי מְבוֹאָר), how the Malkhut of the Ze’ir Anpin that he gives to the Nukvah to enlarge her (אֵיךְ הַמַּלְכוּת שֶׁל הַז״א שֶׁנוֹתֵן אֶל הַנּוּקְבָא לְהַגְדִּילָהּ), is that aspect of his Ibbur [Gestation] (הוּא אוֹתָהּ הַבְּחִינָה דְּעִיבּוּר שֶׁלּוֹ), which are the Malkhuyot mentioned here (שֶׁהֵם הַמַּלְכֻיּוֹת הַנִּזְכָּר כָּאן), at the beginning of chapter seven where he prohibited (בְּרֹאשׁ פֶּרֶק ז׳ שֶׁאָסַר), for at first in Ibbur [Gestation] there was in the Ze’ir Anpin only the Malkhut within him to his six extremities (כִּי בִּתְחִלָּה בְּעִיבּוּר לֹא הָיָה בַּז״א רַק מַלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ לְו׳ קְצָווֹתָיו). And as explained also at the beginning of chapter six of Sha‘ar A“N“Kh above (וּכְמְבוֹאַר גַּם כֵּן בְּרֹאשׁ פֶּרֶק ו׳ דְּשַׁעַר אַנ״ךְ הַנַּ״ל), these six Malkhuyot are the six extremities of B”N (וְאֵלּוּ הו׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת הֵם הַו״ק דְּב״ן), which the Ze’ir Anpin took (אֲשֶׁר לָקַח הַז״א), which are the first aspects of B”N that emerged first (שֶׁהֵם הַבְּחִינוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת דְּב״ן אֲשֶׁר יָצְאוּ תְּחִלָּה), for these are repaired in the secret of Ibbur [Gestation] first of all (שֶׁאֵלּוּ הֵם הַנִּתְקָנִים בְּסוֹד הָעִיבּוּר תְּחִלָּה הַכֹּל), as explained in Sha‘ar Shevirat haKelim [Vessels], chapter eight above (וּכְמְבוֹאַר בְּשַׁעַר שְׁבִירַת הַכֵּלִים סְפ״ח הַנַּ״ל), and in Sha‘ar A“N“K, chapter six above (וּבְשַׁעַר אַנ״ךְ פ״ו הַנַּ״ל). And afterwards, in Gadlut, they become the aspect of the Atarat haYesod of the Ze’ir Anpin (וְאַחַר כָּךְ בְּגַדְלוּת הֵם נַעֲשִׂין בְּבְּחִינַת עֲטֶרֶת הַיְסוֹד שֶׁלּוֹ), which is what is written in Sha‘ar Ze’ir Anpin, chapter three above (אֲשֶׁר זֶה הוּא מַה שֶׁכָּתַב בְּשַׁעַר ז״א פ״ג הַנַּ״ל): “And he separated from B”N the six extremities, which is the Malkhut within him, which is the Atarat haYesod of the Ze’ir Anpin” (וּבֵירֵר מִן ב״ן ו״ק וְהִיא מַלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ שֶׁהוּא עֲטֶרֶת הַיְסוֹד שֶׁלּוֹ), “made from the six extremities of B”N” (הַנַּעֲשִׂית מֵהַו״ק דְּב״ן), “which are the first six Malkhuyot repaired in Ibbur [Gestation]” (שֶׁהֵם הַו׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת הַנִּתְקָּנִים בְּעִיבּוּר). Thus, what the Ze’ir Anpin gives to the Nukvah at the time of the cutting, to enlarge her (בְּאוֹפֶן כִּי מַה שֶׁנּוֹתֵן הַז״א אֶל הַנּוּקְבָא בְּעֵת הַנְּסִירָה לְהַגְדִּילָהּ), is his back-sides (הוּא הָאֲחוֹרַיִים שֶׁלּוֹ), which is the Malkhut within him (שֶׁהוּא הַמַּלְכוּת שֶׁבּוֹ), which are the first six extremities of B”N (שֶׁהֵם הַו״ק דְּב״ן הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת), which are those six Malkhuyot (שֶׁהֵם אוֹתָן ו׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת), which were repaired in Ibbur [Gestation] (אֲשֶׁר אֵלּוּ נִתְקְּנוּ בְּעִיבּוּר).

For these Malkhuyot are those that emerged first (כִּי אֵלּוּ הַמַּלְכֻיּוֹת הֵם אֲשֶׁר יָצְאוּ תְּחִלָּה), and they are those repaired first (וְהֵם אֲשֶׁר נִתְקְּנוּ תְּחִלָּה), as also explained in the Derush haDa‘at whose wording was brought above in section one (כְּמְבוֹאַר גַּם כֵּן בְּדְרוּשׁ הַדַּעַת הוּבָא לְשׁוֹנוֹ לְעֵיל בְּסִימָן א׳), see there (עַיֵּן שָׁם). And this is what he gives to the Nukvah to enlarge her Partzuf (וְזֶה הוּא מַה שֶׁנּוֹתֵן אֶל הַנּוּקְבָא לְהַגְדִּיל פַּרְצוּפָהּ). But the other aspects of B”N that flow and are added and given to the Ze’ir Anpin (אֲבָל שְׁאָר הַבְּחִינוֹת דְּב״ן הַנִּמְשָׁכִים וְנִיתּוֹסְפִים וְנִתָּנִים לַז״א), these remain in the Ze’ir Anpin for his own Partzuf (אֵלּוּ נִשְׁאָרִים בַּז״א לְפַרְצוּפוֹ שֶׁלּוֹ עַצְמוֹ). Thus there is a distinction between the Ze’ir Anpin and the upper Partzufim (בְּאוֹפֶן כִּי יֵשׁ הֶפְרֵשׁ בֵּין הַז״א לִשְׁאָר הַפַּרְצוּפִים הָעֶלְיוֹנִים). For in the other Partzufim, those aspects of B”N that emerged first before the Tikkun (כִּי בִּשְׁאָר הַפַּרְצוּפִים אוֹתָם הַבְּחִינוֹת דְּב״ן שֶׁיָּצְאוּ בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה קֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן), and they took them afterwards in Tikkun (וְלָקְחוּם אַחַר כָּךְ בַּתִּקּוּן), always remain attached within them in their Partzuf (תָּמִיד נִשְׁאָרִים אוֹתָם הַבְּחִינוֹת דְּבוּקִים בָּהֶם בִּפְרָצוּפָם).

But the Ze’ir Anpin—his aspect that emerged first before the Tikkun and that he took after the Tikkun (אֲבָל הַז״א אוֹתָהּ הַבְּחִינָה שֶׁלּוֹ שֶׁיָּצְאָה בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה קֹדֶם הַתִּקּוּן וְלָקְחָהּ אַחַר הַתִּקּוּן), did not remain in him, but was given to the Nukvah at the cutting (לֹא נִשְׁאֲרָה בּוֹ רַק נִתְּנָה אֶל הַנּוּקְבָא בַּנְּסִירָה). Thus the M“H” within him separates from his B”N (נִמְצָא הַמ״ה שֶׁבּוֹ נִפְרָד מֵהַב״ן שֶׁבּוֹ), meaning that that aspect of M“H” which receives from that first B”N (דְּהַיְנוּ אוֹתָהּ הַבְּחִינָה דְּמ״ה הַמְּקַבֶּלֶת לְאוֹתָהּ הַבְּחִינָה דְּב״ן הָרִאשׁוֹנָה), they are separated from one another (הֵם בְּפֵירוּד זֶה מִזֶּה). Thus the Ze’ir Anpin remains in this aspect entirely M“H” (נִמְצָא כִּי נִשְׁאָר הַז״א בְּבְּחִינָה זוֹ כֻּלּוֹ מ״ה). And this is what he wrote there in Sha‘ar Arich Anpin (וְזֶ״שׁ שָׁם בְּשַׁעַר א״א): “And therefore an added separation exists between the M“H” and B”N in Zeir anpin and Nukvah” (וְלָכֵן נִתּוֹסַף פֵּירוּד בְּחֵלֶק מ״ה וּב״ן שֶׁבְּזו״ן), “for the Ze’ir Anpin is entirely M“H” (כִּי הַז״א כֻּלּוֹ בְּחִינַת מ״ה), “and the Nukvah entirely B”N” (וְנֻקְבָא כֻּלָּהּ בְּחִינַת ב״ן), “and they are separated” (וְהֵם נִפְרָדִים). And we already wrote above (וְכְבָר כָּתַבְנוּ לְעֵיל), that the portion of B”N mentioned there which the Partzufim take (כִּי חֵלֶק הַב״ן הַנִּזְכָּר שָׁם שֶׁלָּקְחוּ הַפַּרְצוּפִים), is the first aspect of B”N that emerged first and which they took after Tikkun (הוּא הַבְּחִינָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה דְּב״ן שֶׁיָּצְאוּ בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה וְלָקְחוּם אַחַר הַתִּקּוּן), and these always remain attached with the aspect of M“H” that receives them (וְנִשְׁאָרוּ דְּבוּקִים בָּהֶם תָּמִיד עִם בְּחִינַת הַמ״ה הַמְּקַבֶּלֶת לָהֶם). But the portion of M“H” and B”N of Zeir anpin and Nukvah were separated (אֲבָל חֵלֶק הַמ״ה וְהַב״ן דְּזו״ן נִפְרָדוּ), for that aspect of B”N of the Ze’ir Anpin (כִּי אוֹתָהּ הַבְּחִינָה דְּב״ן דְּז״א), the Ze’ir Anpin gave to the Nukvah (נָתַן הַז״א אֶל הַנּוּקְבָא), and it separated from his M“H” (וְנִפְרָדָה מֵהַמּ״ה שֶׁלּוֹ).

For he remained entirely M“H” (כִּי נִשְׁאַר הוּא כֻּלּוֹ מ״ה), in the aspect of that first B”N which separated from him (בְּבְּחִינַת בּ״ן זוֹ הָרִאשׁוֹנָה שֶׁנִּפְרְדָה מִמֶּנּוּ), and the Nukvah entirely B”N (וְנֻקְבָא כֻּלָּהּ בּ״ן), in this aspect which flowed to her (בְּבְּחִינָה זוֹ שֶׁנִּמְשְׁכָה אֵלֶיהָ), of B”N separated from its M“H” (דְּב״ן שֶׁנִּפְרָדָה מֵהַמּ״ה שֶׁלָּהּ). And since Zeir anpin and Nukvah are separate Partzufim (וְכֵיוָן שֶׁהַזו״ן הֵם פַּרְצוּפִים נִפְרָדִים), it was necessary that this aspect be given into the Ze’ir Anpin first (לָכֵן הוּצְרַךְ שֶׁיִּנָּתֵן בְּחִינָה זוֹ בַּז״א תְּחִלָּה), so that after the cutting he would have attachment with the Nukvah (כְּדֵי שֶׁאַחַר הַנְּסִירָה יִהְיֶה לוֹ דְבֵקוּת עִם הַנּוּקְבָא), for since her aspect had been attached to him at first (כֵּיוָן שֶׁבְּחִינָתָהּ הָיְתָה דְבוּקָה בּוֹ בַּתְּחִלָּה), he adheres to her always after the cutting (הוּא נִדְבָּק בָּהּ תָּמִיד אַחַר הַנְּסִירָה). Thus one may say (כָּךְ אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר), but even this is difficult (אֲבָל גַּם זֶה דּוֹחַק). And further, it is possible to reconcile this wording of Sha‘ar Arich Anpin (וְעוֹד אֶפְשָׁר לְיַישֵּׁב זֶה הַלָּשׁוֹן דְּשַׁעַר א״א), by prefacing what is written there in Sha‘ar Chitzoniyut [Externality] and Penimiyut [Internality], chapter eight (בְּהַקְדִּים מַה שֶׁכָּתוּב שָׁם בְּשַׁעַר חִיצוֹנִיּוּת וּפְנִימִיּוּת פ״ח), and these are his words (וְזֶ״ל): “And understand this well (וְהָבֵן זֶה הֵיטֵב), for during the Yenikah [Nursing] all that existed before the death of the kings returned to be repaired” (כִּי בִּזְמַן הַיְּנִיקָה חָזְרוּ לְהִתְקֵּן כָּל מַה שֶׁהָיָה טֶרֶם מִיתַת הַמְּלָכִים), “for behold he is six extremities connected, and she is the seventh extremity rectified” (שֶׁהֲרֵי הוּא ו״ק מְחוּבָּרִים וְהִיא קָצֶה ז׳ מְתוּקָּן), “and necessarily, in the points of the kings there were two aspects—Panim [Fronts] and Achor at least” (וּבְהֶכְרֵחַ כִּי בְּנְקוּדַּת שֶׁל הַמְּלָכִים הָיוּ בָּהֶם ב׳ בְּחִינוֹת שֶׁהֵם פָּנִים וְאָחוֹר עַל כָּל פָּנִים), “and therefore these two aspects are missing from no Partzuf” (וְלָכֵן אֵלּוּ הַב׳ בְּחִינוֹת אֵינָם חֲסֵרִים מִשּׁוּם פַּרְצוּף). “And now need to be repaired the upper three of the Ze’ir Anpin” (וְעַתָּה צְרִיכִין לְהִתְקֵּן ג״ר דְּז״א), “and the nine last of the Malkhut, which never came even in the time of the kings” (וְט׳ אַחֲרוֹנוֹת דְּמַלְכוּת שֶׁמֵּעוֹלָם לֹא בָאוּ אֲפִלּוּ בִּזְמַן הַמְּלָכִים). “And these come in the secret of addition” (וְאֵלּוּ בָּאִים בְּסוֹד תּוֹסֶפֶת), “and now they come mixed and repaired with M“H” and B”N in Gadlut” (וְעַתָּה בָּאִים מְעוֹרָבִים וּמְתוּקָּנִים עִם מ״ה וּב״ן בְּגַדְלוּת), “for in Katnut all are of B”N, as is known” (כִּי בִּקְטַנּוּת כֻּלָּם דְּב״ן כַּנּוֹדָע). “For the seven kings were all of B”N” (כִּי ז׳ מְלָכִים כֻּלָּם מִבּ״ן הָיוּ), “and even after the Tikkun each took M“H” and B”N, as is known” (וְגַם אַחַר הַתִּקּוּן לָקְחוּ כָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶם מ״ה וּב״ן כַּנּוֹדָע), “and then they were completed” (וְאָז נִשְׁלֵמוּ). “And understand this well” (וְהָבֵן זֶה הֵיטֵב): “for there is no M“H” in Katnut at all, only in Gadlut” (כִּי אֵין מ״ה בִּקְטַנּוּת כְּלָל רַק בְּגַדְלוּת), “and it is M“H” of all ten of his and of hers” (וְהוּא מ״ה כָּל הַי׳ דִּילֵיהּ וְדִילָהּ), “and B”N is three of his and nine of hers” (וּב״ן ג׳ דִּילֵיהּ וְט׳ דִּילָהּ). “And behold Atik and Arich Anpin, the male, take all the M“H”” (וְהִנֵּה עַתִּיק וְא״א הַזָּכָר לוֹקֵחַ כָּל הַמ״ה), “and the Nukvah took all the B”N to be sweetened” (וְהַנּוּקְבָא לָקְחָה כָּל הַב״ן לִהְיוֹתָהּ נִמְתֶּקֶת), “and she does not need him in that” (וְאֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה אֵלָיו). “But from Abba and Imma and onward” (אֲבָל מֵאו״א וָאֵילָּךְ), “the males needed to take first the B”N of the female, even her Katnut” (הֻצְרְכוּ הַזְּכָרִים לִיקַּח תְּחִלָּה ב״ן שֶׁל הַנְּקֵבָה אֲפִלּוּ הַקְּטַנּוּת שֶׁבָּהּ), “in order to sweeten her” (כְּדֵי לְהַמְתִּיקָהּ), “and afterwards they gave it to her entirely” (וְאַחַר כָּךְ נָתְנוּ אֵלֶיהָ לְגַמְרֵי), “and within them remained its root from the Katnut” (וְנִשְׁאַר בָּהֶם שׁוֹרְשׁוֹ מִן הַקְּטַנּוּת). “And in Gadlut he takes—” (וּבְגַדְלוּת הוּא לוֹקֵחַ). Also his and hers, even of B”N (גַּם כֵּן שֶׁלּוֹ וְשֶׁלָּהּ אֲפִלּוּ דְּב״ן), and afterwards he gives her the B”N alone for her Partzuf (וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹתֵן לָהּ הַב״ן לְבַדּוֹ לְפַרְצוּפָהּ), and the M“H” — its illumination only (וְהַמ״ה הַאֲרָתוֹ לְבַדּ), which are the illumination of the Chasadim alone (שֶׁהֵם הַאֲרַת הַחֲסָדִים לְבַדָּם), and not their essence (וְלֹא עִיקָּרָם), for their essence remains in him (כִּי עִיקָּרָם נִשְׁאָר בּוֹ). And the opposite regarding B”N (וְהֶהֵפֶךְ בְּב״ן): for its essence is in her (כִּי עִיקָּרוֹ בָּהּ), and in him only an illumination (וּבוֹ הַאֲרָה בִּלְבַד). Yet despite this (אַךְ עַכ״ז), since at first they both took it (כֵּיוָן שֶׁתְּחִלָּה לָקְחוּ), behold he has a strong root from it (הֲרֵי יֵשׁ לוֹ שֹׁרֶשׁ גָּדוֹל מִמֶּנּוּ), and therefore his Da‘at is complete (וְלָכֵן דַּעְתּוֹ שָׁלֵם).

But the Nukvah does not take from M“H” except an illumination alone (אֲבָל הַנּוּקְבָא אֵינָהּ לוֹקַחַת מִמּ״ה רַק הַאֲרָה לְבַדּ), and her essence is from B”N (וְעִיקָּרָהּ מִבּ״ן), and therefore her Da‘at is light even in Gadlut (וְלָכֵן דַּעְתָּהּ קַלָּה אֲפִלּוּ בְּגַדְלוּת). And all this — the M“H” and the B”N of Gadlut (וְכָל זֶה הַמ״ה וְהַב״ן דְּגַדְלוּת), is called Tosefet [Addition] which departs (נִקְרָא תּוֹסֶפֶת הַמִּסְתַּלֵּק), and nothing remains except the B”N of Katnut in both of them (וְלֹא נִשְׁאָר כִּי אִם בּ״ן דְּקַטְנוּת בִּשְׁנֵיהֶם). And this is in Zeir anpin and Nukvah (וְזֶה בְּזו״ן), for in Abba and Imma it always remains within them (כִּי בְּאו״א לָעוֹלָם נִשְׁאָר בָּהֶם), for there the complete B”N was with them initially, at the time of the kings, all ten Sefirot (כִּי כְּבָר שָׁם ב״ן שָׁלֵם הָיָה לָהֶם תְּחִלָּה בְּעֵת הַמְּלָכִים כָּל י׳ סְפִירוֹת).

However, even they required M“H” and B”N (אֲבָל גַּם הֵם הֻצְרְכוּ לְמ״ה וּב״ן), in the manner mentioned in the Ze’ir Anpin (עַל דֶּרֶךְ הַנִּזְכָּר בַּז״א). And the essence of M“H” is in the male (וְעִיקַּר הַמ״ה בַּזָּכָר), and its illumination in the female (וְהַאֲרָתוֹ בַּנּוּקְבָא), and the opposite regarding B”N (וְהֶהֵפֶךְ בְּב״ן כו׳). And when they are cut (וּכְשֶׁנִּנְסָרִין), she who took the Mochin [Intellects] — they are only half (שֶׁהִיא שֶׁלָּקְחָה הֵם הַמּוֹחִין שֶׁהֵם חֲצָאִים לְבַדּ), which are Binah and Gevurot (שֶׁהֵם בִּינָה וּגְבוּרוֹת). Then her B”N extends there, as is known (אָז נִמְשָׁךְ שָׁם בּ״ן שֶׁלָּהּ כַּנּוֹדָע), for the Binah and Gevurot of the Ze’ir Anpin are B”N (כִּי בִּינָה וּגְבוּרוֹת דְּז״א הֵם בּ״ן כַּנּ״ל). And she is still lacking the illumination of the Name M“H” (וְעֲדַיִן חֲסֵרָה הַאֲרַת שֵׁם מ״ה). Then his Achorayim [Backs] — the external ones of Ibbur [Gestation] — are given into her (וְאָז נִתְּנוּ בָהּ הָאֲחוֹרַיִים שֶׁלּוֹ הַחִיצוֹנִיִּים דְּעִיבּוּר), and they become Penimiyut [Internality] within her (וְנַעֲשָׂה פְּנִימִיּוּת בָּהּ כּו׳). And upon their return face-to-face (וּבְחָזְרָתָם פָּב״פ), he gives her, in one Zivug [Union], the B”N of Gadlut (נוֹתֵן לָהּ בְּזִוּוּג א׳ שֵׁם ב״ן דְּבְחִינַת גַּדְלוּת), and she is completed (וְנִשְׁלָמָה). And afterwards, in a second Zivug [Union] (וְאַחַר כָּךְ בְּזִוּוּג ב׳), he gives her the M“H” (נוֹתֵן לָהּ הַמ״ה), which are the Chasadim, for the sake of the Neshamot (שֶׁהֵם הַחֲסָדִים לְצוֹרֶךְ הַנְּשָׁמוֹת), end of quote (עַכ״ל).

Behold, it is clear (הִנֵּה בָּרוּר הוּא), how he speaks about the inclusive M“H” and B”N (אֵיךְ הוּא מְדַבֵּר עַל הַמ״ה וּב״ן הַכּוֹלְלִים). And it is explained in it (וּמְבוֹאָר בּוֹ), that the six extremities of the Ze’ir Anpin and the seven of the Nukvah, which are of B”N (כִּי הַו״ק דְּז״א וְהַז׳ דְּנֻקְבָא שֶׁהֵם מִבּ״ן), are never lacking from Zeir anpin and Nukvah (אֵינָם חֲסֵרִים מִזּו״ן לְעוֹלָם). And the Ze’ir Anpin does not give from these six extremities to the Nukvah (וְאֵין הַז״א נוֹתֵן מֵהַו״ק אֵלּוּ אֶל הַנּוּקְבָא), except the back-sides of Ibbur [Gestation], which is his Malkhut (זוּלָת הָאֲחוֹרַיִים דְּעִיבּוּר שֶׁהוּא הַמַּלְכוּת שֶׁלּוֹ), as stated above (כַּאֲשֶׁר נֶאֱמַר לְעֵיל). For his Malkhut is the back-sides of the six extremities of his Yenikah [Nursing] (כִּי הַמַּלְכוּת שֶׁלּוֹ הֵם הָאֲחוֹרַיִים שֶׁל הַו״ק דִּינִיקָה שֶׁלּוֹ). But the Katnut of the Nukvah, the Ze’ir Anpin first took (אֲבָל הַקְּטַנּוּת דְּנֻקְבָא לָקַח הַז״א תְּחִלָּה), and afterwards he gave it to her (וְאַחַר כָּךְ נְתָנוֹ אֵלֶיהָ). But all the other aspects of B”N that afterwards flow (אֲבָל כָּל שְׁאָר הַבְּחִינוֹת דְּב״ן הַנִּמְשָׁכוֹת אַחַר כָּךְ), the Ze’ir Anpin takes first (לוֹקְחָם הַז״א תְּחִלָּה), and afterwards gives them to the Nukvah at the cutting (וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹתְנָם אֶל הַנּוּקְבָא בַּנְּסִירָה). And nothing remains in him from the B”N except illumination alone (וְלֹא נִשְׁאָר בּוֹ מֵהַבּ״ן כִּי אִם הֶאָרָה לְבַדָּהּ). Yet this illumination is a great root (אֶלָּא שֶׁהֶאָרָה זוֹ הִיא שֹׁרֶשׁ גָּדוֹל), that remains in him (שֶׁנִּשְׁאַר בּוֹ), because at first the entire aspect of B”N was in him (כֵּיוָן שֶׁתְּחִלָּה הָיָה כָּל בְּחִינַת הַבּ״ן בּוֹ).

Thus nothing remains in the Ze’ir Anpin from B”N except its illumination alone (בְּאוֹפֶן כִּי לֹא נִשְׁאַר בַּז״א מֵהַבּ״ן רַק הֶאָרָתוֹ לְבַד), so that his Da‘at not be light (כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיֶה דַּעְתּוֹ קַלָּה שֶׁכַּ״כּ). And in Gadlut he also takes his and hers, even from B”N (וּבְגַדְלוּת הוּא לוֹקֵחַ גַּם כֵּן שֶׁלּוֹ וְשֶׁלָּהּ אֲפִלּוּ דְּב״ן). And afterwards he gives her the B”N alone for her Partzuf (וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹתֵן לָהּ הַבּ״ן לְבַדּוֹ לְפַרְצוּפָהּ), and the M“H” — its illumination, etc (וְהַמ״ה הֲאָרָתוֹ כּו׳). For “his,” which he said, does not mean his B”N (כִּי שֶׁלּוֹ שֶׁאָמַר אֵין הַכַּוָּנָה הַבּ״ן שֶׁלּוֹ), but the M“H”, which is his (רַק עַל הַמ״ה שֶׁהוּא שֶׁלּוֹ). And “hers” is the B”N (וְשֶׁלָּהּ הוּא הַבּ״ן). For if “his” referred to the B”N of the Ze’ir Anpin, then afterwards when he gives her B”N alone, it would mean he gives her his own B”N (כִּי אִם “שֶׁלּוֹ” שֶׁאָמַר הָיְתָה הַכַּוָּנָה בּ״ן שֶׁלּוֹ לֹא הָוָ״ל, וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹתֵן לָהּ הַבּ״ן לְבַדּוֹ—הֲרֵי נוֹתֵן לָהּ הַבּ״ן שֶׁלּוֹ). Rather, he gives her her own B”N (רַק נוֹתֵן לָהּ הַבּ״ן שֶׁלָּהּ). And furthermore (וְעוֹד), if he already had his own B”N in him (כִּי אִם כְּבָר יֵשׁ בּוֹ הַבּ״ן שֶׁלּוֹ), then his Da‘at would be complete (הֲרֵי דַּעְתּוֹ שָׁלֵם), and why would he need the root of her B”N in order that his Da‘at be completed? (וְלָמָּה הוּצְרַךְ לְשֹׁרֶשׁ הַבּ״ן שֶׁלָּהּ כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּשְׁתַּלֵּם דַּעְתּוֹ). And what he said at the end of the wording—“then was drawn there her B”N” (וּמַה שֶׁבְּסוֹף הַלָּשׁוֹן אָמַר אָז נִמְשַׁךְ שָׁם בּ״ן שֶׁלָּהּ)—the meaning is: that it is hers (הַכַּוָּנָה שֶׁהוּא שֶׁלָּהּ), that the Name B”N is her portion (שֶׁהַשֵׁם בּ״ן הוּא חֶלְקָהּ). And the proof is that he said “as is known, for the Binah and Gevurot of the Ze’ir Anpin are B”N” (וְהָרְאָיָה שֶׁאָמַר כַּנּוֹדָע כִּי בִּינָה וּגְבוּרוֹת דְּז״א הֵם בּ״ן), meaning: these are what flow to her at the cutting (כְּלוֹמַר שֶׁאֵלּוּ הֵם הַנִּמְשָׁכִים אֵלֶיהָ בַּנְּסִירָה), which are the B”N that is her portion (שֶׁהֵם הַבּ״ן שֶׁהוּא חֶלְקָהּ).

In such a manner that nothing remains in the Ze’ir Anpin from the B”N except its illumination alone (בְּאוֹפֶן כִּי לֹא נִשְׁאַר בַּז״א מֵהַבּ״ן רַק הֶאָרָתוֹ לְבַד), and certainly this illumination is the upper three of B”N (וּבוַדַּאי כִּי זוֹ הַהֶאָרָה הֵם הַג״ר דְּב״ן), which he said at the beginning that there are in the Ze’ir Anpin (שֶׁאָמַר בַּתְּחִלָּה שֶׁיֵּשׁ בַּז״א), and all the ten Sefirot of M“H”, whose essence is in him (וְכָל הַי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּמ״ה שֶׁעִקָּרָם בּוֹ). And in the Nukvah it is the opposite (וּבַנּוּקְבָא הוּא בְּהֶפֶךְ), for all of the B”N — its essence is in her (כִּי כָּל הַבּ״ן עִקָּרוֹ בָּהּ), and the ten Sefirot of M“H” within her are the illumination of the M“H” (וְהַי׳ סְפִירוֹת דְּמ״ה שֶׁבָּהּ הֵם הֲאַרַת הַמ״ה). And all this — the M“H” and the B”N, the essence and the illumination — is a tosefet that departs (וְכָל זֶה הַמ״ה וְהַבּ״ן הָעִקָּר וְהַהֶאָרָה הוּא תּוֹסֶפֶת הַמִּסְתַּלֵּק). Say now (אָמֹר מֵעַתָּה), that in all places which speak of the Ze’ir Anpin having M“H” and B”N, and the Nukvah having M“H” and B”N (כִּי בְּכָל הַמְּקוֹמוֹת הָאֲמוּר בָּהֶם כִּי בַּז״א יֵשׁ מ״ה וּב״ן וּבַנּוּקְבָא יֵשׁ מ״ה וּב״ן), they are speaking of the essence and the illumination which each one possesses (הֵם מְדַבְּרִים עַל הָעִקָּר וְעַל הַהֶאָרָה אֲשֶׁר בְּכָל אֶחָד מֵהֶם). And in the place where he says that the Ze’ir Anpin is entirely M“H” and the Nukvah entirely B”N (וּבִמְקוֹם שֶׁאוֹמֵר כִּי הַז״א הוּא כֻּלּוֹ מ״ה וְהַנּוּקְבָא הִיא כֻּלָּהּ ב״ן), such as in Sha‘ar Arich Anpin (כְּמוֹ בְּשַׁעַר א״א), he speaks of the essence in each of them (הוּא מְדַבֵּר עַל הָעִקָּר שֶׁבְּכָל אֶחָד מֵהֶם). And if you will say: if so, what is the difference stated there in Sha‘ar A”A between Abba and Imma and Zeir anpin and Nukvah? (וְאִם תֹּאמַר אִם כֵּן מַה הוּא הַהֶפְרֵשׁ הָאֲמוּר שָׁם בְּשַׁעַר א״א בֵּין או״א לְזו״ן), for according to what is said here, also in Abba and Imma it is so — the essence of M“H” is in Abba and the essence of B”N is in Imma (שֶׁהֲרֵי לְפִי הָאֲמוּר כָּאן גַּם בְּאו״א הוּא כֵּן כִּי עִקַּר הַמ״ה בַּאֲבָא וְעִקַּר הַבּ״ן בְּאִמָּא).

The difference is (הַהֶפְרֵשׁ הוּא): that after all, they are glued in total bonding in one Partzuf (כִּי סוֹף סוֹף הֵם דְּבוּקִים דִּיבּוּק גָּמוּר בִּפְרָצוּף אֶחָד), but Zeir anpin and Nukvah are separate Partzufim (אֲבָל זו״ן הֵם פַּרְצוּפִים נִפְרָדִים). And what he wrote in Sha‘ar A“N“Kh, chapter seven above (וּמַה שֶׁכָּתַב בְּשַׁעַר אַנ״ךְ פ״ז הַנַּ״ל), that in the Ze’ir Anpin there is “M“H” of M“H” and M“H” of B”N” (כִּי בַּז״א יֵשׁ מ״ה דְמ״ה וּמ״ה דְּב״ן), and the Nukvah has “B”N of M“H” and B”N of B”N” (וְהַנּוּקְבָא בּ״ן דְּמ״ה וּב״ן דְּב״ן), it is possible that the illumination which the Ze’ir Anpin takes from the B”N (אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁהַהֶאָרָה שֶׁלוֹקֵחַ הַז״א מֵהַבּ״ן), is from the M“H”-of-B”N (הוּא מִמּ״ה דְּב״ן), and the Nukvah’s part is from the B”N-of-M“H” (וְהַנּוּקְבָא מִבּ״ן דְּמ״ה). And according to what was said (וְעַל פִּי הָאָמֻר), that the Ze’ir Anpin gives to the Nukvah his Malkhut (כִּי הַז״א נוֹתֵן אֶל הַנּוּקְבָא אֶת הַמַּלְכוּת שֶׁלּוֹ), which is his B”N (שֶׁהוּא בּ״ן שֶׁלּוֹ), which is that aspect of Ibbur [Gestation] (שֶׁהוּא אוֹתָהּ הַבְּחִינָה דְּעִיבּוּר), which are the six extremities of B”N (שֶׁהֵם ו״ק דְּב״ן), which are the six Malkhuyot in his six extremities (שֶׁהֵם הַו׳ מַלְכֻיּוֹת שֶׁבְּו״ק שֶׁלּוֹ). And this aspect, when it is given into her at the cutting (וּבְחִינָה זוֹ כְּשֶׁנִּתֶּנֶת בָּהּ בַּנְּסִירָה), while she is in the Achor [Back] through the Ze’ir Anpin (בְּהִיוֹתָהּ בָּאֳחוֹר עַל־יְדֵי הַז״א), it is added as the upper half of the Nukvah (נִתְּוֹסַף חֲצִי עֶלְיוֹן שֶׁל הַנּוּקְבָא), from the chest of the Ze’ir Anpin and above (מֵהַחָזֶה דְּהַז״א וּלְמַעְלָה), through the entire length of the Ze’ir Anpin (בְּכָל אֹרֶךְ הַז״א). For before this Malkhut of the Ze’ir Anpin was given to her (כִּי קוֹדֶם שֶׁנִּתַּן לָהּ זֶה הַמַּלְכוּת דְּהַז״א), her measure was from the chest downward (הָיְתָה שִׁעוּרָהּ מֵהַחָזֶה וּלְמַטָּה). And these two parts of hers — the upper and the lower, the one that preceded and the one added (וּשְׁנֵי חֲלָקִים אֵלּוּ שֶׁלָּהּ הָעֶלְיוֹן וְהַתַּחְתּוֹן הַקּוֹדֵם וְהַנִּתּוֹסָף), are in the aspect of Binah and Tevunah (הֵם בְּבְּחִינַת בִּינָה וּתְבוּנָה). For the upper part is parallel to Binah (כִּי הַחֵלֶק הָעֶלְיוֹן הוּא דּוּגְמַת בִּינָה), and the lower is parallel to Tevunah (וְהַתַּחְתּוֹן דּוּגְמַת תְּבוּנָה). And when they join together they become a complete Partzuf (וּבְהִתְחַבְּרָם יַחְדָּו נַעֲשִׂים פַּרְצוּף גָּמוּר), like the Tevunah when it joins with the Binah (כְּדוּגְמַת הַתְּבוּנָה כְּשֶׁמִּתְחַבֶּרֶת עִם הַבִּינָה). And this upper portion of Rachel, the Nukvah of the Ze’ir Anpin (וְזֶה הַחֵלֶק הָעֶלְיוֹן דְּרָחֵל נֻקְבָּא דְּהַז״א), is called by the name Leah (נִקְרֵי עַל־שֵׁם לֵאָה), because she is clothed within it (מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמִּתְלַבֶּשֶׁת בְּתוֹכוֹ).

Behold, in my opinion (הִנֵּה לַע״ד), these aspects are those mentioned in Sha‘ar Shevirat haKelim [Vessels] and in Sha‘ar Arich Anpin above (בְּחִינוֹת אֵלּוּ הֵם הַנִּזְכָּר בְּשַׁעַר שְׁבִירַת הַכֵּלִים וּבְשַׁעַר א״א הַנַּ״ל), where he said that corresponding to Abba–Imma are the Ze’ir Anpin and Rachel, equal in their stature (שֶׁאָמַר כִּי דּוּגְמַת או״א הֵם ז״א וְרָחֵל הַשָּׁוִים בְּקוֹמָתָם), which is the aspect of the Ze’ir Anpin from the chest upward (שֶׁהוּא בְּחִינַת הַז״א מֵהַחָזֶה וּלְמַעְלָה), and the aspect of the upper half added in the Nukvah Rachel (וּבְחִינַת חֲצִי הָעֶלְיוֹן הַנִּתְּוֹסָף בַּנּוּקְבָא רָחֵל), which is parallel to Binah (אֲשֶׁר הִיא דּוּגְמַת הַבִּינָה). And in this aspect she is equal to the stature of the Ze’ir Anpin (וּבְבְּחִינָה זוֹ הִיא שָׁוָה כְּקוֹמַת הַז״א), and these are the Ze’ir Anpin and Rachel who are equal in their stature (וְאֵלּוּ הֵם ז״א וְרָחֵל הַשָּׁוִים בְּקוֹמָתָם). And corresponding to Yisrael–Saba and Tevunah are Ya‘akov and the small Rachel (וְדּוּגְמַת יִשְׂרָאֵל־סָבָא וְתְבוּנָה הֵם יַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל הַקְּטַנָּה).

For Ya‘akov is the aspect of the Partzuf of the Ze’ir Anpin from the chest downward (כִּי יַעֲקֹב הוּא הַבְּחִינָה דְּפַרְצוּף הַז״א מֵהַחָזֶה וּלְמַטָּה), as he writes afterwards (וּכְמוֹ שֶׁאָמַר אַחַר כָּךְ), that there is a Ya‘akov which is the lower half of the Ze’ir Anpin (כִּי יֵשׁ יַעֲקֹב שֶׁהוּא חֲצִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן דְּז״א), as written above (וּכְמוֹ שֶׁנִּכְתַּב לְעֵיל). And he is parallel to Yisrael–Saba (וְהוּא דּוּגְמַת יִשּׂ״ס), which is from the chest of Abba downward (שֶׁהוּא מֵהַחָזֶה דְּאַבָּא וּלְמַטָּה). And the small Rachel is the lower half of the Nukvah Rachel (וְרָחֵל הַקְּטַנָּה הִיא חֲצִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן שֶׁל הַנּוּקְבָא רָחֵל), which is from the chest of the Ze’ir Anpin downward (שֶׁהוּא מֵהַחָזֶה דְּז״א וּלְמַטָּה), which corresponds to Tevunah (שֶׁהִיא דּוּגְמַת הַתְּבוּנָה), which is from the chest of Binah downward (שֶׁהִיא מֵהַחָזֶה שֶׁל הַבִּינָה וּלְמַטָּה).

Thus (בְּאוֹפֶן), the Ze’ir Anpin and Ya‘akov are the totality of the Partzuf of the Ze’ir Anpin, the upper half and the lower half (כִּי ז״א וְיַעֲקֹב הוּא כְּלָלוּת פַּרְצוּף הַז״א חֲצִי הָעֶלְיוֹן וְחֲצִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן). And Rachel, who is equal to the stature of the Ze’ir Anpin, together with the small Rachel (וְרָחֵל הַשָּׁוָה כְּקוֹמַת הַז״א עִם רָחֵל הַקְּטַנָּה), is the totality of the Partzuf of the Nukvah Rachel, the upper half and the lower half (הוּא כְּלָלוּת פַּרְצוּף הַנּוּקְבָא רָחֵל חֲצִי הָעֶלְיוֹן וְחֲצִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן). And we already wrote above (וְכְבָר כָּתַבְנוּ לְעֵיל), that the Ze’ir Anpin — his essence is M“H” (כִּי הַז״א עִקָּרוֹ מ״ה), and the Nukvah — her essence is B”N (וְהַנּוּקְבָא עִקָּרָהּ בּ״ן). And therefore he said afterwards (וְלָכֵן אָמַר אַחַר כָּךְ), that corresponding to Abba and Yisrael-Saba, which are of M“H” (כִּי כְּנֶגֶד אַבָּא וְיִשּׂ״ס דְּמ״ה), are Ze’ir and Ya‘akov, which are of M“H” (הֵם זְעֵיר וְיַעֲקֹב דְּמ״ה). And corresponding to Binah and Tevunah, which are of B”N (וְכְּנֶגֶד בִּינָה וּתְבוּנָה דְּב״ן), are Leah and Rachel, which are of B”N (הֵם לֵאָה וְרָחֵל דְּב״ן). For Leah mentioned there (כִּי לֵאָה הַנִּזְכָּר), is the upper half of the Nukvah Rachel (הִיא חֲצִי הָעֶלְיוֹן שֶׁל הַנּוּקְבָא רָחֵל), which is called “Ayin Sham” (שֶׁנִּקְרֵאת עַיֵּין שָׁם),

Leah, because she is clothed within it (לֵאָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמִּתְלַבֶּשֶׁת בְּתוֹכוֹ). And so he wrote afterwards (וְכֵן כָּתַב אַחַר כָּךְ), that just as Yisrael-Saba is relative to Abba (כִּי כְּמוֹ יִשּׂ״ס לְגַבֵּי אַבָּא), so is Ya‘akov relative to the Ze’ir Anpin (כֵּן הוּא יַעֲקֹב לְגַבֵּי הַז״א). And just as Tevunah is relative to Binah (וְכְמוֹ תְּבוּנָה לְגַבֵּי בִּינָה), so is the lower Rachel relative to the higher Rachel (כֵּן הִיא רָחֵל תַּתָּאָה לְגַבֵּי רָחֵל עִלָּאָה).

This is the same as what he said above in Sha‘ar Chitzoniyut [Externality] and Penimiyut [Internality] (וְהוּא עַצְמוֹ מַה שֶׁאָמַר לְעֵיל מִשַּׁעַר חִיצוֹנִיּוּת וּפְנִימִיּוּת), that what the Ze’ir Anpin gave her, together with what she had, are parallel to Binah and Tevunah (שֶׁאָמַר שָׁם שֶׁמַּה שֶׁנָּתַן לָהּ הַז״א עִם מַה שֶׁהָיָה לָהּ הֵם כְּדוּגְמַת בִּינָה וּתְבוּנָה), end of citation (עַשְׁל״ם). And therefore he did not say “Rachel the Great,” but “Rachel the Upper” (וְלָכֵן לֹא אָמַר רָחֵל הַגְּדוֹלָה כִּי אִם רָחֵל עִילָּאָה), to hint that she is the upper half of her (לְרַמֵּז כִּי הִיא הַבְּחִינָה חֲצִי הָעֶלְיוֹן שֶׁלָּהּ). And afterwards he said (וְאַחַר כָּךְ אָמַר), that Yisrael-Saba and Tevunah are included in Abba-Imma (כִּי יִשּׂ״ס וְתוּנָא נִכְלָלִים בְּאו״א), and Ya‘akov and Rachel are included in Zeir anpin and Nukvah (וְיַעֲקֹב וְרָחֵל נִכְלָלִים בְּזו״ן).

For Ya‘akov is included with the Partzuf of the Ze’ir Anpin (כִּי יַעֲקֹב הוּא נִכְלָל עִם פַּרְצוּף הַז״א), and Rachel is included with the Nukvah, the upper Rachel (וְרָחֵל נִכְלָלֶת עִם הַנּוּקְבָא רָחֵל עִילָּאָה), which is the aspect of her upper half (שֶׁהוּא בְּחִינַת חֲצִי הָעֶלְיוֹן שֶׁלָּהּ עַצְמָהּ). And this is itself what he said above in Sha‘ar Partzufei Zeir anpin and Nukvah, chapter five (וְזֶה עַצְמוֹ יִהְיֶה מַה שֶׁאָמַר לְעֵיל מִשַּׁעַר פַּרְצוּפֵי זו״ן פֶּרֶק ה׳), that the Nukvah Rachel has several Partzufim, one above the other (שֶׁיֵּשׁ אֶל הַנּוּקְבָא רָחֵל בְּחִינֵי פַּרְצוּפִים זֶה לְמַעְלָה מִזֶּה), and all of them are Rachel when combined together (וְכוּלָּם רָחֵל בְּהִכָּלְלָם יַחַד). For through the aspect which the Ze’ir Anpin gives her (כִּי עַל־יְדֵי הַבְּחִינָה שֶׁנּוֹתֵן לָהּ הַז״א), these Partzufim of hers grow (נִגְדָּלִים אֵלּוּ הַפַּרְצוּפִים שֶׁלָּהּ). Thus the Ze’ir Anpin and Ya‘akov (בְּאוֹפֶן כִּי ז״א וְיַעֲקֹב), both are the aspect of the Partzuf of the Ze’ir Anpin himself (הַכֹּל הוּא בְּחִינַת פַּרְצוּף הַז״א עַצְמוֹ), for they are one (כִּי אֶחָד הוּא). And Ya‘akov is called the lower half of the Ze’ir Anpin (וְיַעֲקֹב נִקְרָא חֲצִי הַתַּחְתּוֹן דְּז״א עַצְמוֹ), which in its totality is the six extremities (אֲשֶׁר בְּכְלָלוּתוֹ הוּא הַו״ק), of all Atzilut (שֶׁל כָּל עוֹלַם הָאַצִּילוּת), the fourth Partzuf of the five Partzufim that include all Atzilut (פַּרְצוּף הָד׳ מֵה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל עוֹלַם הָאַצִּילוּת). And the upper Rachel and the lower Rachel (וְרָחֵל עִילָּאָה וְרָחֵל תַּתָּאָה), all is the aspect of Rachel herself (כָּל הוּא בְּחִינַת רָחֵל עַצְמָהּ), the Nukvah which includes the tenth Sefirah (נֻקְבָּא הַכּוֹלֶלֶת סְפִירָה הָעֲשִׂירִית), of the ten Sefirot that include all Atzilut (מֵהַי׳ סְפִירוֹת הַכּוֹלְלוֹת כָּל עוֹלַם הָאַצִּילוּת), the fifth Partzuf (פַּרְצוּף הַה׳), of the five Partzufim that include all Atzilut (מֵה׳ פַּרְצוּפִים הַכּוֹלְלִים כָּל עוֹלַם הָאַצִּילוּת). She is one (אַחַת הִיא), the Nukvah of the Ze’ir Anpin mentioned in all the teachings of the Rav, of blessed memory (נֻקְבָּא דְּז״א הַנִּזְכֶּרֶת בְּכָל דְּרוּשֵׁי הָרַב ז״ל). And likewise the Ze’ir Anpin mentioned (וַאֲפִלּוּ הַז״א הָאָמֻר), is the one mentioned everywhere (הוּא הַנִּזְכָּר בְּכָל הַמְּקוֹמוֹת). And these two together are the Zeir anpin and Nukvah mentioned everywhere (וּשְׁנֵיהֶם יַחַד הֵם זו״ן הַנִּזְכָּר בְּכָל הַמְּקוֹמוֹת), Hashem is One and His Name One (ה׳ אֶחָד וּשְׁמוֹ אֶחָד), Thus it appears to me in my humble opinion, to be true, correct, and enduring (כנלע״ד אנק״ד).