Parshas Emor
1. It is well known what is stated in the Midrash1, that all the mitzvos which the Almighty commanded the Jewish people to fulfill, He Himself fulfills. From this it is understood also regarding the warning to Kohanim that they should not become defiled, that the Almighty too — of Whom it is said "אלקיכם כהן הוא" ("your G‑d is a Kohen")2 — guards Himself, as it were, from becoming "defiled." Therefore Tosafos3 explains that there is no difficulty as to how the Almighty "was permitted" to become defiled at the burial of Moshe Rabbeinu — since "ישראל נקראו בנים למקום" ("Israel are called children of the Omnipresent"), and for a "son" a Kohen may become defiled.
Similarly, it is stated in the Zohar4 regarding the future Redemption — when the Almighty will, as it were, become "defiled" in taking the Jewish people out of the exile of Edom (as the verse says: "מי זה בא מאדום חמוץ בגדים גו' וכל מלבושי אגאלתי" ("Who is this coming from Edom, with garments stained crimson… and I have soiled all My raiment")5) — that the Jewish people are, as it were, "אחותו (של הקב"ה) הבתולה הקרובה אליו אשר לא היתה לאיש" ("His (the Holy One, blessed be He's) virgin sister, who is close to Him, who has not been wed to a man"), and therefore "לה יטמא" ("for her he may become defiled").
This needs to be understood: the Almighty is (not merely an ordinary Kohen, but) a "Kohen Gadol"6, and a Kohen Gadol may not become defiled "על כל נפשות מת" ("for any dead person"), not even for his son or for his virgin sister. So again it is not understood: how did the Almighty become defiled for Moshe, and how will He become defiled for the sake of the Jewish people7?
2. The Maharsha8 explains here that in truth defilement has no relevance whatsoever Above, "כי דבר הרוחני לא יקבל טומאה" ("for a spiritual thing does not receive defilement"). And what the Gemara3 says, that the Almighty (after the burial of Moshe Rabbeinu) "immersed" Himself, as it were, "בנורא" ("in fire"), is no more than an answer in line with the question and false view of that heretic, who assumed that the Almighty is an entity in a physical form.
According to this explanation of the Maharsha, the above question regarding Tosafos' answer would be resolved: since in truth the concept of defilement is altogether irrelevant Above, Tosafos' explanation comes only to explain why the heretic, according to his own view9, did not find it difficult "היאך נטמא" ("how did He become defiled") — and for him the answer "Israel are called children of the Omnipresent" suffices, since he only knew that "your G‑d is a Kohen," but not that the Almighty is a Kohen Gadol.
However, besides the fact that it is difficult to say that an entire matter and discussion in the Gemara should be only according to the heretic's view — it is evident from the aforementioned Zohar10 that also Above there exists, as it were, a concept of defilement.
And since that is so, the question returns to its place: how does the Almighty, a Kohen Gadol, become "defiled," as it were, for "His son" and for "His virgin sister"?
3. The explanation of this is as follows:
The fact that below, all the matters of creation are arranged in one manner or another is because that is how they are Above, in their source, from which they are drawn forth. And although the source Above is incomparably higher than having the definitions and forms of the created beings below — nevertheless, since (their source,) the attributes Above [are not in a state of absolute simplicity, like the Ein Sof Light in itself, which is utterly simple, but they] have a certain definition and form — Chessed, Gevurah, etc. — therefore there already exist in them certain similarities to the particular created beings below which come into being from them11, and in which the particular quality of the source appears in a pronounced and defined manner. For example, water, whose nature is to descend from above to below12, is akin to the attribute of Chessed (which is the source of the category of water13), whose nature is to draw down from above to below14. And the same applies to the other created beings.
Therefore created beings, in relation to their source, are in the category of a "משל" ("analogy"), for through them one can attain a certain comprehension of the "נמשל" ("the thing the analogy illustrates") — of their source Above15.
And since it is the Supreme Will that there be knowledge and comprehension of the levels Above, even of the Ein Sof Light (as the expression16 is: "שיכירו גדולתו" ("that they should recognize His greatness"), etc. — His greatness, which is) utterly simple, He therefore also placed into creation things that are in a state of simplicity (relative to creation), so that through them, as through an "analogy," one can attain some kind of conception, as it were, of the simplicity of the Almighty.
4. Although the things in creation that are in a state of simplicity, which serve as an "analogy" for the simplicity of the Almighty, are (not merely an analogy and nothing more, but this is) because these created beings are drawn from levels that are higher than the chain of descent (Hishtalshelus) [similar to how the limitations and forms which are an analogy for the attributes Above are so because "נשתלשלו מהן" ("they evolved from them")17 — they evolve from the supernal attributes, as mentioned above in section 3] —
it is nevertheless understood that because they are created beings, they must have various definitions and limitations. Therefore, when one uses these simple things as an "analogy" for the simplicity of the Almighty, their definitions and limitations (which they must have, being created beings) must not be mixed in — for in this respect they are not an analogy for the Ein Sof Light, blessed be He.
For instance, the sun — in that it is not changed by the light and vitality that issue from it, it is an analogy for "אני הוי' לא שניתי" ("I, Havayah, have not changed")18 [and — according to the above — the fact that the sun is an analogy for "I, Havayah, have not changed" is because19 it is drawn, as it were, from "שמש הוי'" ("the sun of Havayah")20] — yet it is understood that the various limitations, etc., which exist in the light of the sun (because it is a created being) are not21 an analogy for the Ein Sof Light22.
5. From this one can understand regarding our subject — the difference between the level of an "ordinary Kohen" and a "Kohen Gadol" Above:
It is indeed true that the Kohen Gadol below is an analogy and example for the "Kohen Gadol" Above — but it is understood that he is an analogy in the particular aspect of the additional priesthood and holiness that is found in the Kohen Gadol below; however, the aspects of the Kohen Gadol below that are in him because he is a created being, a soul in a body — these are not an analogy for the level of Kohen Gadol Above.
Therefore it is understood that since the Kohen Gadol below, by virtue of the high priesthood within him, is above (and separate from) the matter of defilement23, to the point that even "לאביו ולאמו לא יטמא" ("for his father and his mother he shall not become defiled") [and the fact that it is possible for him to become defiled is not because of the high priesthood within him, but because he is defined within the limitations of a body] — therefore, at the level of "Kohen Gadol" Above, the matter of defilement is not relevant.
By contrast, the level Above that is called an ordinary "Kohen" (which is the "source" of an ordinary Kohen — a Kohen Hedyot below): since in the case of a Kohen Hedyot below, defilement is relevant even by virtue of the priesthood within him — for which reason he may, and must24, become defiled "לשארו הקרוב וגו'" ("for his close relative, etc.") — therefore this exists, as it were, also at the level of Kohen Hedyot Above.
According to the above, it will be understood how the Almighty, as it were, involved Himself in the burial of Moshe, and the matter of "and I have soiled all My raiment": at the level of Kohen Gadol, defilement is not relevant to begin with; the question arises only from the perspective of the level of "Kohen Hedyot" Above — and to this the answer is, as stated above, that "Israel are called children of the Omnipresent" and "ולאחותו הבתולה גו' לה יטמא" ("and for his virgin sister… for her he may become defiled").
6. There is a further point in this:
On the verse "ואתם תהיו לי ממלכת כהנים" ("And you shall be to Me a kingdom of Kohanim")25, the Baal HaTurim26 writes that this means Kohanim Gedolim. That is to say, at the time of the Giving of the Torah every Jew entered the level of a Kohen Gadol. From this it is understood that just as at the level of Kohen Gadol Above defilement is not relevant at all (as explained above in section 5), so too it is regarding the Jewish people, by virtue of the level of Kohen Gadol within them. [This is similar to what is known27, that the Yechidah level of a Jew cannot be "touched" by any defilement.]
From this we see the great love for the Jewish people, which is expressed in "and I have soiled all My raiment": with regard to the essence of the soul, the matter of sin (and defilement) is not relevant to begin with, and consequently neither is the matter of exile and "I have soiled"; defilement and exile pertain only to the revealed powers. Nevertheless, the Almighty will, as it were, become "defiled" in order to take the revealed powers of the Jewish people out of exile, for even these He cannot, as it were, leave in exile28. And He redeems all Jews, with all their matters, in the true and complete Redemption through Moshiach Tzidkeinu, speedily in our days.
(From the maamar and sicha of Shabbos Parshas Emor, 5724)
Notes
1) Shemos Rabbah 30:9. Yerushalmi Rosh Hashanah 1:3.
2) Sanhedrin 39a, end. On the concept of priesthood Above according to Chassidus, see the maamar beginning "ויקחו לי תרומה" 5628.
3) Sanhedrin, ibid.
4) On our parsha, 89a. It is explained in the maamarim beginning "ולאחותו הבתולה" 5627 and 5629.
5) Yeshayahu 63:1–3.
6) See Zohar III, 17b.
7) See on this R. Shimshon of Ostropoli (and also the gloss there), who answers that it is well known in the Zohar that, because of the great affection for Israel, G‑d makes Himself like a Kohen Hedyot (in the gloss there: that only in Eretz Yisrael is He called a Kohen Gadol) — printed in Likkutei Shoshanim at the end of the sefer Karnayim.
8) Sanhedrin, ibid. Similarly in Yad Ramah: "According to your words, even if He needed to immerse, I could tell you that He immersed in fire, and you could not challenge me from the verses… However, G‑d forbid that there should be defilement before the Holy One, blessed be He; nothing soils Him such that He would need to immerse in fire or in anything else."
9) As in the wording of Tosafos: "This is not difficult for him, etc."
10) This is also implied in Shemos Rabbah 15:5. See Yefeh To'ar there.
11) To the extent that the attributes Above are called by the same names as the things that came into being from them (Derech Mitzvosecha 115a, end, and elsewhere; see also Shelah 13b, end, and onward).
12) Taanis 7a, end.
13) See also Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah ch. 1 (88b). There (and so too there, ch. 10 (86b, end, and onward)) it is stated that light, too, was created from the attribute of Chessed. But this is in general terms. See Likkutei Levi Yitzchak, Notes on Tanya, p. 27, end, that the level of Chessed from which light was created is "the Chessed in the Reishei Kesafin, which is above division." It may be said that this is why light is an "analogy" through which to understand the level of simplicity Above (see Hemshech 5666, pp. 497–498); see also below, note 18. According to this, one will understand what is explained in the maamar beginning "ויהי בנסוע" 5699, in explaining the Midrash's statement "From where was light created, etc." — that the reason for the wonder at the creation of light more than at all other created beings is that light, "by virtue of its superiority, being a revelation of the essence, would by nature rise upward… how is light in a state of descent and drawing down, contrary to its nature… as light and revelation to the worlds? Therefore he said that the Holy One, blessed be He, wrapped Himself in a garment, etc." — for seemingly, the coming into being of the light below from the level of light Above is [not that the light Above is drawn down below, but rather — like the coming into being of all created beings from their source Above —] by way of something from nothing; if so, what is the wonder "From where was light created"? The answer is that since the creation of light is from the level that is above division, therefore even as it is below it has a connection to the light Above from which it came into being*. Therefore, in order that "light was created," it is specifically through the garment of the "שלמה" ("cloak").
*) Similar to the absence of division in physical light itself: even when it shines in a small room, it is the very same light as in a large and spacious palace, only that it does not spread out there as much (maamar beginning "כי עמך" 5700, ch. 6, and elsewhere).
14) Iggeres HaKodesh, sec. 8, and elsewhere. See also Tanya, part I, ch. 4.
15) See at length the maamar beginning "מי כמוך" 5629; Hemshech "והחרים" 5631, p. 25, end, and onward.
16) Etz Chaim, Shaar HaKelalim, at the beginning: "When it arose in His blessed Will to create the world… so that they should recognize His greatness." See also Hemshech 5666, at the beginning.
17) See Tanya, beginning of ch. 3.
18) Likkutei Torah, Shelach [OCR unclear], 14c, and elsewhere. In Hemshech 5666, pp. 477–478, [it is explained] that (not only is the absence of change in the sun an analogy for "I, Havayah, have not changed," but) also the simplicity and absence of changes in its light is an analogy for the simplicity of the light Above (see above, note 13).
19) For this reason, several of its details — including also the measure of its size — resemble matters in the "sun of Havayah" (see Likkutei Levi Yitzchak, Notes on Tanya, beginning of p. 26).
20) Note Sotah 10a, and Rashi and Tosafos there.
21) See Hemshech 5666, p. 477, end: "For in truth the sun, too, is created and finite." See also Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah ch. 10 (85a): "And it is also enclothed in this world, which is limited and finite."
22) Based on what is said in the text, one will understand what is sometimes explained (maamar beginning "להבין ענין אוא"ס" 5627, sec. 2; Hemshech "וככה" 5636, ch. 100) as the reason why the bestowal of vitality from Him is called "light" (and not "flow"): "For in a spiritual thing expansion and contraction do not apply… only revelation and concealment… for behold, 'את השמים ואת הארץ אני מלא' ('I fill the heavens and the earth')." Seemingly, the manner in which light is drawn from the luminary is by way of "expansion" (Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah ch. 3) and not by way of "revelation," and where the light does not spread it is not present at all, not even in concealment (see Sefer HaMaamarim 5562, p. 280; Siddur 48b; Imrei Binah, Shaar Krias Shema, ch. 2 (23d, end)); how then can the term "light" serve as an analogy for understanding "I fill the heavens and the earth"? [The answer is] that the concept of "light" is by way of "revelation," and only in the light of the sun, because it is physical and bounded by space, is it by way of "expansion." This requires further study.
23) Note that a Kohen Gadol does not profane the service when he offers sacrifices while an onen (Rashi on our parsha, 21:12; Sanhedrin 84a, beginning).
24) Tur and Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah, sec. 393, par. 3.
25) Yisro 19:6.
26) Unlike in the Mechilta there.
27) See at length the maamar beginning "יהי ה' אלקינו עמנו" 5700, ch. 23, and elsewhere. See also Tanya, end of ch. 24; HaYom Yom, p. 19.
28) See Shemos Rabbah 15:5: "To exchange My terumah is impossible."
Key Lesson
At the level of "Kohen Gadol" within every Jew — the essence of the soul — no sin or defilement can ever take hold. Yet G‑d's love for the Jewish people is so great that He, as it were, "defiles" Himself to redeem even their revealed powers from exile, for He will not leave behind any part of a Jew. Knowing this should strengthen every Jew's confidence in his inner purity and in the true and complete Redemption through Moshiach.