Parshas Bechukosai
1. On the verse "ואולך אתכם קוממיות" ("I will lead you upright [komemiyus]")1, the Gemara says2: "ר' מאיר אומר מאתים אמה כשתי קומות של אדם הראשון. ר' יהודה אומר מאה אמה כנגד היכל וכתליו שנאמר אשר בנינו כנטיעים מגודלים בנעוריהם בנותינו כזויות מחוטבות תבנית היכל" ("R' Meir says: Two hundred amos, like two heights of Adam HaRishon3. R' Yehudah says: One hundred amos, corresponding to the Heichal and its walls, as it is said*3: 'That our sons are like saplings grown up in their youth; our daughters are like cornerstones, carved in the form of a Heichal'").
Studying the Gemara in its plain sense, it emerges that R' Meir's source for learning "two hundred amos, like two heights etc." is the word "komemiyus," which (with a vav4) is a plural form; whereas R' Yehudah's source for learning "one hundred amos" is [not the word "komemiyus" — for, on the contrary, as mentioned, that wording actually points to two heights — but rather] the verse "That our sons... the form of a Heichal," and on that basis he learns that "komemiyus" means only one height (of Adam HaRishon5), as if the word "komemiyus" were written without a vav.
And before the proof, "as it is said etc.," R' Yehudah first states "corresponding to the Heichal and its walls" — because the Heichal alone (without the walls) measured less than one hundred amos. He therefore adds "corresponding to the Heichal and its walls," meaning that "the form of a Heichal" refers to the Heichal as a whole: the Heichal together with its walls, which together came to one hundred amos6.
According to this, however, the following is not understood:
a) Since R' Yehudah disputes R' Meir in the interpretation of the word "komemiyus," holding that it means not "two heights" but "one height," he should have stated first (immediately after the words "one hundred amos") his own interpretation (his novel point), "like one height of Adam HaRishon"7, and only afterwards brought the proof for this interpretation from the verse "That our sons... the form of a Heichal." Why does he immediately begin with "(corresponding to the Heichal and its walls,) as it is said etc."? Moreover, he does not state his interpretation of "komemiyus" at all!
b) From the fact that (a) R' Yehudah says the words "corresponding to the Heichal and its walls" before he brings the verse "the form of a Heichal," and (b) from the wording "corresponding to the Heichal etc.," it is evident that "corresponding to etc." is [not merely an interpretation of "the form of a Heichal," namely that the walls are also included in it, but rather it is] a reason for the fact that a person's height will be one hundred amos.
This is not understood: the dispute between R' Meir and R' Yehudah is seemingly only about how many heights "komemiyus" means (one height or two); but according to R' Yehudah too, "komemiyus" means (not the height of the Heichal8, but) the height of Adam HaRishon. If so, why does he say "corresponding to the Heichal and its walls" and not "like the height of Adam HaRishon"?
c) The same question also applies to the verse "That our sons... the form of a Heichal": why does King David in Tehillim compare the height of the Future to "the form of a Heichal," when the Torah compares it to the height of Adam HaRishon?
d) Logically, too: when one looks for something to which to compare the height of "our sons" and "our daughters" in the Era to Come, the most fitting thing would seemingly be to compare it to the height of a person, and especially to Adam HaRishon, from whom all people descend. Why then does the verse say "the form of a Heichal" and not "the height of Adam HaRishon"?
e) As to the source for R' Meir's view, to learn "like two heights of Adam HaRishon" — although "komemiyus" (a plural form) indicates only "two heights," it does not indicate which heights — the Maharsha9 explains that this is a simple matter which needs no proof, because "הבריאה דאדם לעתיד ודאי לא תגרע מהבריאה דאדם הראשון שבעוה"ז" ("the creation of man in the Future will certainly not be less than the creation of Adam HaRishon in this world").
According to this, it is not understood according to R' Yehudah: "למה לי קרא סברא היא" ("Why do I need a verse? It is logical!")10 What novelty is there in the verses "I will lead you upright" and "That our sons... the form of a Heichal," since by logic alone one knows for certain that the height of a person in the Future will not be less than one hundred amos11?
2. The explanation of all this will be understood by first noting what is stated in Chassidus12 on the verse "והתהלכתי בתוככם וגו'" ("I will walk among you etc.")13: "Vehis'halachti," a plural form, means two kinds of walking: a walking from Above to below — or yashar (direct light), and a walking from below to Above — or chozer (reflected light).
These two modes of walking are brought about through the service of the tzaddikim and the service of the baalei teshuvah: through the service of the tzaddikim, G‑dliness is drawn down from Above to below, and through the service of teshuvah there comes about the ascent from below to Above.
And since each kind of walking has an advantage over the other14 — in the matter of "revelations," or yashar is higher, but on the other hand there is the advantage of "or chozer," that specifically through it one grasps Atzmus (the Essence) — the verse therefore says "I will walk among you": in the Future both advantages will exist.
3. This superiority of "vehis'halachti," which includes both advantages (the advantage of or yashar and the advantage of or chozer), can come about in two ways:
One way is that the combination of both advantages is found in the same person. This way too is (an exceedingly great advantage, and for that reason it is) one of the things foretold (the novelties) of the Future. For since "or yashar" and "or chozer" are two opposites, it is not possible (now) for one and the same person to be permeated in all15 his powers by two opposite movements.
A second way is that both matters, "or yashar" and "or chozer," are (not merely in the same person, but) in one and the same movement: the refinements (beirurim) of "or chozer" themselves will take place in a manner of revelation, in the way of or yashar16.
4. This is the dispute between R' Meir and R' Yehudah, whether Jews will then be "two hundred amos" or "one hundred amos":
Both hold that all ten powers of the soul (each power as it is in its completeness, comprising all ten powers — which gives the number "one hundred") will be permeated both by the service of the tzaddikim and by the service of teshuvah — in keeping with the plain meaning of "komemiyus" (a plural form), which points to two heights (also according to R' Yehudah, as will be explained below).
Their dispute is only whether the two kinds of service will be in two separate matters, or whether they will become united in one matter:
R' Meir holds that they will be two movements. He therefore learns that a person (even in his physical body) will be "two hundred amos, like two heights etc.," meaning that the two matters (or yashar and or chozer) will be in separate amos: one hundred amos of or yashar and one hundred amos of or chozer.
R' Yehudah holds that both matters will be in one movement, and he therefore holds that both heights will be in the same one hundred amos17.
5. Accordingly, we will also understand why R' Yehudah uses the expression "corresponding to the Heichal and its walls," and why he says it immediately after the words "one hundred amos" (before "as it is said etc."): with these words he explains the reason for his view that both heights will be in the same one hundred amos.
"Adam" (man), even Adam HaRishon, indicates a matter of "form" (tziyur) and order; he is made up of several levels18. And even man as he will be in the Future — higher even than Adam HaRishon, to the point that he will be "like two heights of Adam HaRishon" (both advantages, "or yashar" and "or chozer," will be in him) — nevertheless, since "Adam" is the aspect of form, the two heights are two separate matters.
If so, how will the two heights (according to R' Yehudah) be one matter — one hundred amos? To this he says "corresponding to the Heichal and its walls": this is because then there will be in a Jew something "corresponding to the Heichal and its walls," namely, that which was present in the "Heichal and its walls" — a matter higher than the aspect of "Adam."
Accordingly, it is also understandable why in Tehillim the one hundred amos of the Future are compared to "the form of a Heichal," although the Torah says "I will lead you upright," which means the height of Adam HaRishon. The verse "I will lead you upright" relates that in the Future every Jew will have two heights (spiritually — we are not speaking of how this will be physically); and the verse "That our sons... carved in the form of a Heichal" (adds and) introduces a novelty, that the two heights will be in the same one hundred amos. This matter relates to "the form of a Heichal," for in the Beis HaMikdash the two matters of or yashar and or chozer were together, as will be explained.
6. In the Beis HaMikdash there were, in general, two things: "ועשו לי מקדש" ("They shall make Me a Sanctuary") — service from the side of below; and "ושכנתי בתוכם" ("and I will dwell among them") — a drawing down from Above. These two things were [one] matter, as was also seen openly in the fact that "מקום (מדת) הארון אינו מן המדה" ("the place19 (measure) of the Ark was not included in the measurement")20: the "They shall make Me a Sanctuary," the service from below, was itself in the manner of "and I will dwell among them" — a drawing down from Above. And by virtue of the aspect of "Sanctuary" that exists "within each and every Jew"21, Jews too will have both heights in one movement — one hundred amos.
This is also why R' Yehudah emphasizes "corresponding to the Heichal and its walls": the above matter (that the drawing down from Above and the ascent from below were one matter in the Beis HaMikdash) is expressed in the "Heichal and its walls." The walls of the Heichal served to interrupt and separate between one thing and another, yet they themselves were part of the "Heichal," whose essence is unity.
7. According to all the above, one can also explain (by way of possibility) the connection of the two views, "two hundred amos" and "one hundred amos," to R' Meir and to R' Yehudah:
The matter of "one hundred amos" [that the two aspects — drawing down from Above (light) and ascent from below (vessel) — are one matter] can come about only by virtue of Atzmus. From the standpoint of the level of "Or" (light) — although it too contains not only the perfection of the infinite (light) but also the perfection of the finite (vessel)22 — the infinite and the finite are nevertheless two lines. Only Atzmus, which is beyond all descriptions — "the negation of limitation and the negation of the infinite"23 — only in relation to It are limitation and infinity one matter24.
This is why R' Meir holds "two hundred amos" and R' Yehudah "one hundred amos":
R' Meir's essence is (and his name derives from the word) "light" (or)25. Since from the standpoint of "light," drawing down (light) and ascent (vessels) are two matters, he holds "two hundred amos" — two separate heights. R' Yehudah, by contrast, derives from the term hodaah (acknowledgment)26, and since through hodaah one grasps Atzmus27, therefore28 he holds "one hundred amos" — it becomes one matter.
(From the sichos of Shabbos Parshas Behar-Bechukosai, 5724)
Notes
1) Our parsha, Vayikra 26:13.
2) Bava Basra 75a; Sanhedrin 100a.
3) This requires further study in light of Bava Basra 58a: "As the outer measure, so is the inner measure"; and similarly in light of the end of Tractate Soferim: "Avraham Avinu, whose height was equal to that of seventy-four men." This requires research in the seforim.
*3) Tehillim 144:12.
4) Chiddushei Aggados of the Maharsha on Bava Basra, ibid. And in the Rashbam there: "He expounded the two mems."
5) One cannot say, however, that according to R' Yehudah the verse "I will lead you upright" is not speaking about the measure of height in the Future [and that "komemiyus" means "with upright stature" (as in [OCR unclear] and Rashi's commentary), or the like], because: (a) From the verse "That our sons... the form of a Heichal" itself there is no proof for "one hundred amos," since the verse may well refer to the height of the First Heichal (see I Melachim 6:2; ibid. 6:20; II Divrei HaYamim 3:4). On the contrary, in its plain sense the Heichal spoken of in Tehillim by David is that of the First Beis HaMikdash — the Heichal built according to "the form" which "from the hand of... G‑d, He made me (David) understand" (I Divrei HaYamim 28:19).* It is therefore reasonable that R' Yehudah, too, explains "komemiyus" as the height of Adam HaRishon, and from the verse "the form of a Heichal" he proves only that "komemiyus" is one height of Adam HaRishon. (b) The plain wording of the Gemara, "'I will lead you upright' — R' Meir says etc.; R' Yehudah says one hundred amos," implies that "R' Yehudah says one hundred amos" is an interpretation of "I will lead you upright." (c) In Toras Kohanim it is stated explicitly: "R' Yehudah says: One hundred amos, like Adam HaRishon."
*) To account for the interpretation that it is like the Heichal of the Second Beis HaMikdash, one may say: the verse under discussion, "That our sons...," speaks of the Era to Come, and therefore its conclusion, "the form of a Heichal," also refers to the Heichal of the Third Beis HaMikdash. Now, the height of this Heichal is not specified in the verses of Yechezkel, "for we do not find in all these verses an explicit measure of the height, except etc." (Biur of the Gra on Yechezkel 40:14). It is therefore reasonable to say that it will be as explained in Tractate Middos, for "the benefit of (its recording the measurements of the Second Beis HaMikdash)... is that when it is rebuilt, speedily in our days, one must preserve and make that form" (Rambam, Commentary on the Mishnah, in his introduction, in explaining the order of the tractates; see also Tosafos Yom Tov, introduction to Tractate Middos). This is also implied to be Rashi's view, since in his commentary (Yechezkel 41:13) he also copied the words "through Divine inspiration," although this is not spoken of in the verse there. See Rashi ibid. 41:8; Radak ibid.; Malbim ibid. and [OCR unclear: ור"ט] 42.
6) See Rashi (Sanhedrin, ibid.), in his first interpretation.
7) As in Toras Kohanim, ibid. (quoted in note 5).
8) For according to the first interpretation in Rashi, Sanhedrin ibid., it is the length of the Heichal. And also according to the interpretation ("another version" in Rashi there; Rashbam on Bava Basra there) that it refers to the height of the Second Beis HaMikdash, it is reasonable to say that "komemiyus" refers to height in general, i.e., the height of a person (in our case — Adam HaRishon) (see above, note 5).
9) Bava Basra, ibid.
10) Kesubos 22a. See also Tosafos, s.v. Ibais (Shevuos 22, end of side b), at its end. This is not the place to discuss it at length.
11) The Maharsha there cites from the Yalkut (and note that this is also so in Toras Kohanim): "I only know men; from where do I know women? The verse says, 'our daughters... the form of a Heichal.'" The Maharsha explains there: "For men to be one hundred amos, a verse was not needed." But [besides the fact that in our text of the Talmud it reads as in the main text, even according to the above-mentioned Yalkut and Toras Kohanim] it is still not resolved: the verse "I will lead you upright" speaks primarily of men* (only that it also concerns women), so what novelty is there in their being one hundred amos?
*) For they are the ones who pursue the enemies and who are occupied with the threshing floors, "bringing out the old etc." — as is spoken of before "I will lead you upright."
12) Maamar beginning "Vehis'halachti Besochechem," 5701. See Likkutei Torah, Re'eh 26a; Ohr HaTorah on our parsha (vol. 2), maamar of the same title (and there, pp. 653 and 672 — an explanation of the dispute between R' Meir and R' Yehudah [OCR: באר"א — perhaps "in a different manner"]).
13) Our parsha, Vayikra 26:12.
14) See the sources cited in note 12.
15) For otherwise, this is possible even now, as our Sages say in the Sifri on the verse "You shall love the L‑rd your G‑d": the two [modes of] service of G‑d — love and fear together.
16) Perhaps one can say that there is an example of this even now: teshuvah that comes about through the drawing close of the Luminary etc., before the service of "Seek" and "Call upon Him" (see Derech Chaim 21b–c, 91a; Kuntres HaAvodah, end of ch. 5; and elsewhere).
17) Accordingly, the statement of the Baal HaTurim here is all the more pleasing: "Two crowns on the kuf, for their height is destined to be one hundred amos" — for there are two matters in the kuf, two in "the one hundred amos."
18) Hemshech "V'kachah" 5636, ch. 20 (and elsewhere).
19) Megillah 10b, and the sources cited there.
20) For the Ark, and the Beis HaMikdash in general, although made from the side of below — "They shall make etc." — were nevertheless (not merely a place fit for the resting of the Shechinah, but) a vessel for "and I will dwell" (see at length the maamar beginning "Padah VeShalom," 5687; and there, that in the place of the Beis HaMikdash "the yesh itself is the Name Havayah"). Note also the Ramban at the beginning of Parshas Terumah [and see Likkutei Sichos vol. 4, p. 1346, note 24, that the Rambam too does not disagree with him on this]: "The main purpose of the Mishkan (and the Beis HaMikdash) is the resting place of the Shechinah, which is the Ark." And the fact that "the place of the Ark was not included in the measurement" means [not that in the place of the Ark there was revealed a level above space (which is outside it, and only that the resting of this level was in the place of the Ark), but rather] that "even the aspect of limitation and measure of the Ark (itself) was in a state of infinity" (Imrei Binah, Pesach HaShaar, ch. 46 (3b); see there).
21) Cited in Likkutei Sichos vol. 3, p. 906.
22) As stated in Avodas HaKodesh (Part 1, ch. 8): "The Ein Sof light — just as it has power in the infinite, so it has power in the finite... and the finite that first comes into being from it is the vessels."
23) Hemshech 5666, beginning of p. 168, and elsewhere.
24) See similarly above, p. 103, note 35.
25) See Eruvin 13b.
26) See Hemshech "V'kachah," cited above, ch. 80.
27) See the Siddur (with Chassidus), Shaar Lag BaOmer (306b).
28) One may say that this is also the reason why the matter of "one hundred amos" is alluded to specifically in Tehillim (see above, section 5): for the songs and praises of Tehillim are akin to hodaah (acknowledgment).
Key Lesson
This Sicha teaches that in the Future the two paths of Divine service — the tzaddik's drawing down from Above and the baal teshuvah's ascent from below — will not only coexist in each Jew but will merge into one, just as in the Heichal the very walls that separated were part of its unity. That fusion comes only from G‑d's Essence, which a Jew reaches through hodaah, self-nullifying acknowledgment; even now, each of us can begin to make our own avodah one whole.