Parshas Tzav
1. Regarding the mitzvos that G‑d told Moshe so that he would transmit them to the Jewish people, we find three expressions: "דבר" ("speak"), "אמור" ("say") and "צו" ("command")1. And although all mitzvos, including those that were stated with the expressions "speak" and "say," are called by the name "mitzvah" — the root of the word "mitzvah" being "tzavah" (with only a mem added) — because they too are (not merely a speaking or a saying, but) an instruction and a command2,
nevertheless, from the fact that the Torah uses the expression "tzav" only for a certain category of mitzvos, it is understood that in those mitzvos the element of command is greater than in the mitzvos that come with the expressions "speak" and "say" (although they too are commands).
This is why the Toras Kohanim (and Rashi) states at the beginning of our parsha3: "אין צו אלא זירוז מיד ולדורות" ("'Tzav' always denotes urging, immediately and for all generations") — because when one is instructed to do a certain thing with "urging, immediately and for all generations," the element of command is expressed more openly.
2. Chassidus states4 that "mitzvah" derives from the expression "צוותא וחיבור" ("togetherness and connection") — for the point of mitzvos is that through them one becomes bound and "attached," so to speak, with G‑d.
And since all interpretations in Torah are connected with one another5, it is understood that the two interpretations of the word "mitzvah" — from the expression of command (an instruction and an order) and from the expression of togetherness and connection — are connected with each other: the togetherness and connection of a Jew with G‑d through the fulfillment of the mitzvos comes about precisely when he fulfills them as a command. That is, through fulfilling mitzvos (not because of reason, feeling and the like6, but) because of G‑d's command (kabbalas ol malchus Shamayim, accepting the yoke of Heaven's sovereignty) — then the element of (mitzvah in the sense of) togetherness and connection takes effect: he becomes attached to G‑d, Who commands the mitzvos.
From this it is understood that in the mitzvos that were stated with the expression "tzav," since the element of command is greater in them, there is also more of the element of "togetherness and connection."
3. This will be understood by first introducing the explanation of Chassidus7 regarding the "togetherness and connection" brought about through mitzvos:
A created being and the Creator, in and of themselves (without the bond created through mitzvos), have no relationship of any comparable kind between them — to the point that in comparison to the "existence" of the Creator, created beings are not in existence at all. Chassidus explains this at length with the analogy of a great sage, whose entire existence as a person, because of his great wisdom, is only the matter of intellect; and a simple person who has nothing to do with intellectual matters is, relative to that sage, of no existence at all.
This absence of relationship between the created being and the Creator means that they do not even have a relationship of a negative kind; that is, it is not that the existence of the Creator negates the existence of the created being, but rather that relative to the Creator, the created being is not present at all. Chassidus guards against this with the analogy of the great sage and the simple person: one should not think that the created being has at least a relationship, in a negative way, with the Creator; rather it is like the non-presence of a simple person in the eyes of a great sage — relative to the superiority of the sage's intellect, the simple person does not exist8.
Just as intellect does not exist in the category of existence that can be grasped by the sense of touch — which does not mean that intellect has some kind of relationship with touch, only that because of the refinement of intellect the sense of touch cannot grasp it; rather it means that intellect is an altogether different category of existence — an existence that is utterly free of the limitations of the six physical directions, and consequently the existence of intellect is entirely absent from the world of touch; as the Alter Rebbe says in Tanya9 that if someone were to say of a (lofty and deep) wisdom that "אי אפשר למששה בידים מפני עומק המושג" ("it cannot be touched with the hands because of the depth of the concept"), then "כל השומע יצחק לו" ("everyone who hears will laugh at him");
and in this the existence of intellect (spirituality) differs from things that are spirituality within physicality, such as sound, sight and smell, of which "אין בהם משום מעילה" ("they are not subject to the law of me'ilah," misuse of sanctified property)10: although they too cannot be grasped by the sense of touch, they nevertheless have (a certain "bond" with a physical object that can be touched with the hands, and consequently —) a relationship with touch, at least in a negative way; that is, it is appropriate to say of them that because of their fineness and refinement they cannot be touched (and this very fact, that touch is negated of them, points to a certain relationship with touch). It is different, however, with a truly spiritual existence, such as intellect, which has no relationship whatsoever with touch — for example, the reasoning that one who admits part of a claim must take an oath11, which is not found at all in the world of touch.
And just as intellect is not present in the world of touch, so too the reverse: in the world of intellect there is no place for touch and its matters — not that because of the coarseness of touch intellect is precluded from it, but that in the world of intellect there is no existence that has anything to do with touch. From this the lack of relationship between a simple person and a great sage is understood: relative to the spiritual superiority of the intellectual existence of the great sage, the simple person (because he lacks the quality of intellect) does not exist at all.
And if this is so in comparing a simple person with a great sage — although both are created beings — then all the more so regarding a created being and the Creator: relative to the existence of the Creator, a created being (even as it stands at its utmost perfection, the highest quality among created beings being wisdom12) does not exist at all13 — not that [the intellect of] the created being is too small and too coarse and is therefore precluded from occupying some place of presence before the Creator, but rather that relative to the Creator, a created being is not a thing of existence.
4. Based on the above it is understood that the fact that "mitzvah" [in the sense of togetherness and connection] binds Jews with G‑d comes (not only through the fulfillment of the mitzvah, but also) from the command itself. That is, the very instruction regarding the mitzvah already creates a relationship between those who are instructed and G‑d, Who instructs14
— and this relationship remains even when the created being transgresses the command. For when the created being transgresses the command and rebels, G‑d forbid, against the One Who commands, he thereby becomes precluded from togetherness with the Creator — he acts against the Creator's will. But this very fact, that it is appropriate to say of him that he acts against the will, is proof that he has a relationship with the Creator's will; only his relationship is in a negative way.
This is one of the explanations of the saying of our Sages15, "אע״פ שחטא ישראל הוא" ("Although he has sinned, he is still Yisrael"), and he still remains incomparably higher than the nations of the world: regarding the nations of the world the word "sin"16 — acting contrary to the will — does not apply at all; they have no relationship whatsoever with the Creator's will, not even in a negative way. For since they have from the outset no bond at all with the will — they were not commanded regarding the fulfillment of the mitzvos of a Jew (for the seven Noahide mitzvos are altogether17 of a different nature18) — the concept that they act contrary to the will, which is at least a relationship in a negative way, does not apply to them;
whereas a Jew, who was given and commanded the 613 mitzvos — "although he has sinned," he is nevertheless "Yisrael," the initials of "יש ששים רבוא אותיות לתורה" ("there are six hundred thousand letters in the Torah")19 — he is still an existence bound up with Torah and mitzvos (and consequently with the Giver of the Torah and the Commander of the mitzvos20); only his relationship is in a negative way.
5. Accordingly we will also understand that although in all mitzvos there is "togetherness and connection" (already from their being commanded21), the principal element of mitzvos — togetherness and connection — is found in the mitzvos that were stated with the expression "tzav":
The difference between "emor" and "dabeir" on the one hand and "tzav" on the other is this: "emor" means "say," and "dabeir" means "speak," but "tzav" means "instruct" (command). The distinction is: when one speaks to someone or tells him that he should do something, one leaves him the entire choice to do as he wishes; but when one instructs him (and commands him) to do the thing — which applies only when the one commanding has (some) authority over the one commanded — it follows that one does not leave the matter entirely to him, but rather, as it were, compels him to carry out the command.
Accordingly, regarding the mitzvos that were stated with "dabeir" and "emor," since at their giving the choice was left entirely to the Jewish people, the "togetherness and connection" (the element of "mitzvah") that is brought about by the speakings and sayings themselves (before their fulfillment) is only the connection brought about by the very act of instructing them22;
whereas regarding the mitzvos with which the expression "tzav" is written, since already through the instruction it is certain (or at least nearer to certain) that Jews will fulfill them — with these commands the togetherness and connection takes effect, even before their fulfillment, in a binding way, similar to the togetherness and connection brought about at the time the mitzvos are fulfilled.
6. But we need to understand: Jews have free choice regarding the fulfillment of all mitzvos, including the mitzvos stated with the expression "tzav" (and that is why for those mitzvos too full reward or punishment is given, since reward and punishment come about because of the free choice one has23). How then can it be said that with these mitzvos it is certain that the one commanded will fulfill them?
The explanation is as follows:
Mitzvos in general are divided into three lines: there are mitzvos that belong to the right line, mitzvos that belong to the left line, and mitzvos that belong to the middle line; and the expression in which G‑d transmitted a mitzvah through Moshe corresponds to the line of that mitzvah:
The mitzvos of the right line G‑d stated with the expression "emor," for "saying" is a soft expression24; the mitzvos of the left line were stated with the expression "dabeir" — a harsh expression25; and the mitzvos of the middle line were stated with the expression "tzav," which expresses the quality by which the middle line is distinguished from the right and left lines26.
And just as the middle line, although it includes within itself both lines — right and left — does not have its essential nature in that, but rather is an entity in its own right27, so too the expression in which the mitzvos of this (middle) line were stated is not an intermediate expression between a soft expression and a harsh expression (or an expression that includes both), but the expression "tzav" — which has no relation at all to the matters of soft and harsh. And this expression expresses the essential nature of the middle line.
7. Among the principal features and advantages of the middle line (by which it is distinguished from the right and left lines) are:
a) It ascends up to the inner dimension of Kesser; the right and left lines reach only the external dimension of Kesser28.
b) It "מבריח מן הקצה אל הקצה" ("extends from end to end"); that is, in its entire extension — from the highest "end" to the lowest "end" — the light of the line is the same. With the light of the right and left lines (besides the fact that they contain only the external dimension of Kesser, the light itself too), the lower the line extends, the more it is diminished. But the middle line possesses at the end of its extension the same strength (of the inner dimension of Kesser) exactly as at the beginning of its extension29. As is known30 regarding the teaching "אין קישוי אלא לדעת" ("there is no arousal except with conscious intent")31, that in the sefirah of Yesod (the middle line) the inner dimension of Daas is expressed (and in Daas is found the inner dimension of Kesser32).
8. The explanation of the superiority of the middle line — that it ascends up to the inner dimension of Kesser — in simple terms, and as it relates to mitzvos:
The mitzvos of the right line and of the left line do indeed "touch" the Supernal Will (from which they derive), but only the external dimension of the Will — in the language of Kabbalah, the external dimension of Kesser. But the mitzvos of the middle line "touch" and grasp the inner dimension of the Supernal Will (up to the Master of the Will).
Therefore these mitzvos (of the middle line) were stated with the expression "tzav" — "instruct." Since they touch the inner dimension of the Will, the expression of saying and speaking alone ("emor" or "dabeir") is not sufficient for them; rather there must be an instruction for them, an urging that they be carried out — because they reach deeper and higher.
And just as there is this difference between these mitzvos (from those of the right and left lines to those of the middle line) from the standpoint of the One Who commands, as above, so too they differ regarding the one commanded, the Jew: the mitzvos of the right line and the left line, just as in the One Who commands they touch the external dimension of the Will, so too in the one commanded they touch the external dimension of his soul; and the mitzvos of the middle line, just as they touch and grasp the inner dimension of the Will of the One Who commands, so too they touch and grasp the inner dimension of the soul of the one commanded. For since the middle line is equal from its beginning to its end, there is no difference in it between the One Who commands and the one commanded — the inner dimension Above descends into the inner dimension below.
9. And this is the explanation of why, with the category of mitzvos stated with the expression "tzav," it is certain that the Jew will fulfill the mitzvah, although he has free choice: the whole matter of choice — choosing the path of good or the opposite, G‑d forbid — applies only in the external dimension of the soul; there, there is room for the possibility of inclining to the side of not-good as well as to the side of good. But in the inner dimension of the soul there is no second side opposed to the side of holiness, G‑d forbid. And even at the time of the sin, it — the point of the soul — is "באמנה אתו ית'" ("in faithfulness with Him, may He be blessed")33, as the Rambam rules34 that when a Jew sometimes commits a sin, it is only because "יצרו הוא שתקפו" ("his evil inclination overpowered him");
— for seemingly, the Rambam himself says35: "רשות לכל אדם נתונה .. ועושה כל מה שהוא חפץ .. הטוב או הרע" ("Free choice is granted to every person… and he does whatever he desires… good or evil"), which means that even when he does the opposite of good, G‑d forbid, it is by the choice of his own will. How then can one say "his evil inclination overpowered him" — a coercion of his will? But the meaning is as above: the fact that a Jew can choose this way or that comes specifically from the external dimension of his soul. But the inner dimension of his soul always wants, even at the time of the sin, "לעשות כל המצות ולהתרחק מן העבירות" ("to fulfill all the mitzvos and to distance himself from transgressions")34; and the failure of a sin is only "coercion" by his evil inclination.
Therefore it is rightly so that regarding these mitzvos which are (stated with the expression "tzav" because they are) of the middle line, there is certainty that the person commanded will fulfill them — there will be in him the togetherness and connection in a binding way — because they reach into the inner dimension of the soul, and the inner dimension of the soul always chooses only good.
But a question still remains: the fulfillment of mitzvos must be carried out with the revealed powers. What then is gained from the fact that in the inner dimension of his soul he wants to fulfill the mitzvah, since in the revealed powers there is room for an inclination opposed to holiness?
To this we say that the middle line is equal from its beginning to its end; that is, the strength of the inner dimension of the soul descends also into the revealed powers, and in the "end" of the revealed powers the very same strength is expressed as in the "beginning" — the inner dimension of the soul.
10. Based on the above we will also understand the connection of [the mitzvos stated with] the expression "tzav" with "urging, immediately and for all generations":
A lack of alacrity is caused by something that hinders the decision of the intellect in the mind from descending into actual deed; and even when there is no hindering factor and it does descend from the intellect into the lower powers, this happens through many contractions, etc., and consequently alacrity is lacking. But when we are speaking of the middle line, which is equal from its beginning to its end, as soon as it receives and hears the command of G‑d in the mind of Daas, it descends immediately — with alacrity, and with full strength — into Yesod and into Malchus.
And since "גם את העולם נתן בלבם" ("He has also placed the world in their heart")36, when a person brings about in his heart, in his soul-powers, this alacrity — this absence of the limitations, contractions and distinctions that exist between his intellect (the highest power) and deed (the lowest power) — he thereby draws into the "world" as well the absence of limitation: "immediately and for all generations," so that the limitations of past, present and future in time fall away, and there is no difference between "immediately" and "for all generations."
11. And this is also what Rabbi Shimon adds (in the Toras Kohanim — according to Rashi's version): "ביותר צריך הכתוב לזרז במקום שיש בו חסרון כיס" ("Scripture must urge especially where there is a monetary loss") — that with the mitzvah of tzedakah, which is bound up with "monetary loss," more urging is needed:
Although urging in general derives from the middle line, as above, which reaches into the inner dimension of the soul, nevertheless, to fulfill the mitzvah of tzedakah properly, extra urging is required — that is, an inner element within the middle line itself, which reaches even further into the inner dimension of the soul.
And as is known37, tzedakah is connected with "בכל מאדך" ("with all your might"), and "me'odecha" has two meanings: money, and "very much" (without limit). "With all your heart and with all your soul" are a limited service compared with the level of "with all your might"; and with tzedakah, "where there is a monetary loss," one must arrive at "with all your might."
12. This will be understood more clearly according to what is explained in Tanya38 regarding the superiority of the mitzvah of tzedakah over all other mitzvos (even over the mitzvos of the middle line): that it is equal to all the mitzvos39 (and it is called40 simply "the mitzvah," because it is the essence of all the mitzvos), and even more: it "עולה על כולנה" ("surpasses them all")41, because it affects the entirety of one's animal soul — since "with this money he could have bought life for his vital soul," when he gives the money away to G‑d, he is "giving the life of his soul to G‑d."
Another superiority of tzedakah over other mitzvos: tzedakah is connected not only with one's animal soul but also with "his portion in the world." For the money he gives to tzedakah is something external to the body of the giver; it is a part of the world.
And according to the known principle that refining the very lowest requires the very highest power, it is understood that since tzedakah is a mitzvah that encompasses both the entirety of one's animal soul and his portion in the world outside him, one must reach even further and deeper into the inner dimension of the soul.
Accordingly the allusion in the wording is all the sweeter: "Scripture must urge especially — במקום שיש בו (not a single word, כשיש) monetary loss": where extra urging is needed, reaching deeper into the inner dimension of the soul — (a) "במקום" ("in a place"): when it is connected with place, with an area of the world that is outside the person performing the mitzvah; (b) "שיש בו חסרון כיס" ("in which there is monetary loss"): it affects the person himself too, touching the entirety of his vital soul, in that he deprives himself of something with which "he could have bought life for his vital soul."
13. Based on the above we will also understand the (special) connection of the statement "especially… monetary loss" with its author — Rabbi Shimon:
The one who can draw from the inner dimension of the soul "especially" (even deeper within the middle line) and bring it down to the very lowest — into the entirety of the animal soul and even into one's portion in the world — this lies within the power of Rabbi Shimon specifically:
Rashbi (who is the "R. Shimon" mentioned without qualification42) reached the most exalted level of "בחד קטירא אתקטרנא" ("with one bond I am bound [to Him]")43 — the ultimate connection — and he brought this down below into this world, as is known44 that he brought about the falling of rain — here below in this world — through saying Torah: "Above and below are equal"45. Therefore he has the power to draw from "especially… to urge" (the inner dimension of the soul) into "a place in which there is monetary loss" (the animal soul and one's portion in the world) — joining the depth below with the depth above46.
(From the sichah of Shabbos Parshas Tzav, 5725)
Notes
1) As in Rashi's wording at the beginning of Parshas Vayikra (and see also Toras Kohanim there): "for all the speakings, for all the sayings and for all the commands."
2) As is also evident from the wording of the blessing over mitzvos (for all the mitzvos): "אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו" ("Who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us").
3) So too in Toras Kohanim, Parshas Emor (24:1), and Kiddushin 29a. In the Sifri at the beginning of Parshas Nasso it appears differently; this is not the place to elaborate.
4) Likkutei Torah, Bechukosai 45c. The sources cited in note 7. And elsewhere.
5) See at length Likkutei Sichos vol. 3, p. 728. And see also Likkutei Sichos vol. 6, p. 156.
6) See also Likkutei Sichos vol. 8, p. 128 ff.; vol. 9, p. 73 ff., and the notes there.
7) The maamar beginning "Rebbi Omer," 5700, end of ch. 1 ff.; the maamar beginning "BaYom HaShemini Atzeres" [year: OCR unclear], at its beginning; HaTamim vol. 1, p. 25 ff.
8) See the maamar "BaYom HaShemini Atzeres" there: "This nullification is not that the sage nullifies him; rather it is in such a way that it does not even rise to the name 'nullification' at all. For the concept of nullification is that in itself it is something, only it is nullified and subordinate; but the simpleness of the simple person… is truly nullified, as if it does not exist at all."
9) Part 2 [Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah], ch. 9.
10) Pesachim 26a. And even regarding smell, which according to the conclusion of the Gemara there is subject to me'ilah, that is because "there is substance in the spices" (Rashi there), but not in the smell itself.
11) Bava Metzia 3a, end of side a, ff.
12) Tanya, part 2, ch. 8 (85b).
13) See there, ch. 9: "He is exalted and uplifted ten thousand myriads of levels of exaltation more than the exaltation of the level of wisdom over the level of the vitality in a stone, which is an exaltation of only five levels." See there at length.
14) See the maamar "Rebbi Omer" there and HaTamim there. And see also the maamar beginning "Shofar" [OCR unclear] (in Sefer HaMaamarim 5699), ch. 8: that through the command he becomes connected with the sage, and through fulfilling the command he becomes important to him. And see also the maamar "BaYom HaShemini Atzeres" there.
15) Sanhedrin 44a, beginning.
16) See Eichah Rabbah on the verse (1:8) "Jerusalem has sinned greatly": the nations of the world, etc., even though they sin, are nothing. And see the Reshimos of the Tzemach Tzedek on Eichah there (Or HaTorah, Nach vol. 2, p. 1062); Likkutei Sichos vol. 4, p. 1209.
17) See at length Likkutei Sichos vol. 5, pp. 159–160.
18) Therefore their fulfillment does not require a prior acceptance of His sovereignty [unlike the 613 mitzvos (Mechilta, Yisro 20:3), where the "togetherness and connection" comes about specifically through fulfilling them as a command (as above, section 2) — the acceptance of the yoke]; for all seven mitzvos there is the same punishment — the death penalty (Sanhedrin 57a; 58b, end; Rambam, Laws of Kings 9:10; and see at length Likkutei Sichos there); and more.
19) Megaleh Amukos, ofen 186 (cited in Yalkut Reuveni, beginning of Bereishis; in Yalkut Chadash, entry "Torah," §178; and elsewhere). Some have noted [OCR unclear] on Rus, on the verse "Now this was formerly the custom in Israel." Regarding the number of six hundred thousand among the Jewish people, see Tanya ch. 37 (48a), that this number is the number of the roots, and each root divides, etc. Regarding the number of six hundred thousand letters in the Torah, it is explained in Likkutei Torah, Behar (41b, and elsewhere) that this is together with the connecting letters that exist in thought. See there. (From this the superiority of every Jew is seen even more — even one who has sinned: even after the sin he is bound with the letters of the thought of the Holy One, blessed be He, which are higher than the letters of speech, the root of the angels. See at length the Hemshech Rosh Hashanah 5666, p. 447 ff.)
20) For the Torah and the mitzvos are His wisdom and His will, and He, His will and His wisdom are one (Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah, ch. 8; and see Tanya, ch. 23).
21) That is why they too are called by the name "mitzvos" (in addition to the togetherness and connection brought about through their fulfillment).
22) And although it is clear that ultimately every Jew will fulfill all the mitzvos, since "no one banished will remain banished from Him" (and note Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar 13c) — that is because of the promise "no one banished, etc." But from the standpoint of the command itself, in these mitzvos that were stated with "dabeir" and "emor" it is not certain that they will fulfill them; therefore they were not stated with "tzav," for in the speakings and sayings the element of togetherness and connection is not in a binding way, as in the text.
23) Rambam, Laws of Teshuvah 5:4.
24) Mechilta and Rashi, Yisro 19:3; Sifri and Rashi, Behaaloscha 12:1.
25) Makkos 11a, beginning; Sifri and Rashi, Behaaloscha there.
26) As for several mitzvos being stated with two of the above expressions — that is because these mitzvos contain elements of two lines.
27) Pardes, gate 1, ch. 2. Explained in the series of maamarim beginning "Vayomer Elokim Yehi Rakia," 5665; in the maamar "Padah V'Shalom," 5673 (in Hemshech 5672, vol. 1); and "Yechayeinu," Siyumim 5707, ch. 1.
28) "Padah V'Shalom" there; "Yechayeinu" there, ch. 2.
29) "Padah V'Shalom" there; "Yechayeinu" there. And see also Zohar I, 1b; Zohar II there.
30) Torah Or 105c ff.; Or HaTorah, Vayechi 398b; and elsewhere.
31) Yevamos 53b, end.
32) Likkutei Torah, Shelach 3a, and elsewhere. And see also Zohar II, 175b; Likkutei Torah, Tazria 22c.
33) Tanya, end of ch. 24.
34) Laws of Divorce, end of ch. 2.
35) Laws of Teshuvah, beginning of ch. 5.
36) Koheles 3:11. And see Zohar I, 195b; Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar 5, beginning of side b.
37) Berachos 54a — in the Mishnah. Likkutei Torah, Masei 91c; Re'eh 25a; and elsewhere.
38) Ch. 37 (48b).
39) Bava Basra 9a.
40) "Throughout the Jerusalem Talmud" (Tanya there).
41) Tanya there. In the middle line too there are these two aspects: it includes the two lines of right and left — "equal"; and its essential nature, which is above the other lines — "surpasses them all." [Note that in Torah too — the middle line — we find a parallel to these two aspects: Torah study in itself is greater than the other mitzvos; from the standpoint that it leads to action, it is equal to them (the Alter Rebbe's Laws of Torah Study 4:3).]
42) Rashi, s.v. "Mishmo" (Shevuos 2b); Rashbam, s.v. "Mishum" (Bava Basra 102a); and elsewhere.
43) Idra Zuta, Zohar III, 288a.
44) See Hemshech Rosh Hashanah 5666, end of p. 44 ff.; and elsewhere.
45) Zohar III, 59b.
46) See also Likkutei Sichos vol. 3, p. 1004.
Key Lesson
G‑d's very command binds a Jew to Him, and the innermost core of every Jewish soul always chooses good — even a Jew who has sinned remains bound to G‑d's will. When a person draws that inner commitment down into his revealed powers, he serves G‑d with alacrity, and above all in giving tzedakah, where his money becomes the vehicle for elevating his animal soul and his portion in the world.