Short review
Parshas Shemos
1. On the verse,1 "ויאמר אלקים אל משה אהי' אשר אהי'" ("And G‑d said to Moshe: I will be what I will be"), the Midrash2 states: "Rabbi Yochanan said: 'I will be' for 'those for whom I will be' — with individuals; but with the many, against their will and not to their liking, when their teeth are broken,3 I rule over them, as it is said:4 'חי אני נאום ה' אלקים אם לא ביד חזקה גו' אמלוך עליכם' ('As I live, says the L‑rd G‑d, surely with a mighty hand… will I rule over you')."
The commentators5 explain the words of the Midrash as follows: "'For those for whom I will be'" — meaning that G‑d's "I will be" as their G‑d is not (absolute and in every case) but only "for those for whom I will be," for those for whom He will (in actuality) be G‑d, by their own choice and desire, while if they do not wish it, it is in their power to throw off His yoke — this was said only with regard to individuals; "but the many I will not allow to throw off the yoke of Heaven…, for even if they think to turn away from Me, I will rule over them against their will." Therefore, regarding the Jewish people who were in Egypt — even though there were many wicked people among them,6 nevertheless, since they are "many," the Holy One, blessed be He, redeems them.7
The meaning of this is: although the verse "with a mighty hand… will I rule over you" refers to the manner of the redemptions from the days of Yechezkel onward, including also the future Redemption,8 it nevertheless also alludes to the redemption of the Exodus from Egypt. For that redemption, too, was of this kind: the Holy One, blessed be He, took them out of Egypt "with a mighty hand" — against their will.9 However, the fact that G‑d used, as it were, a "mighty hand" was only in order to compel "the many" — the Jewish people as a whole — but not with regard to individuals. As the Midrash10 states explicitly, those wicked people who did not want to leave Egypt died during the three days of darkness.
2. Now, at first glance one could say: since in this verse, "surely with a mighty hand… will I rule over you," the intent is the future Redemption, and the Midrash learns from it with regard to the Exodus from Egypt — then, conversely, in this matter one should learn from the redemption from Egypt about the future Redemption: namely, that the "mighty hand" of the future Redemption, too, is intended only for "the many." That is to say, the Torah's assurance,11 "ושבת עד ה' אלקיך גו' ושב ה' אלקיך גו'" ("And you will return to the L‑rd your G‑d… and the L‑rd your G‑d will bring back…"), and "שסוף ישראל לעשות תשובה בסוף גלותן ומיד הן נגאלין" ("Israel will ultimately do teshuvah at the end of their exile, and they will immediately be redeemed"),12 was stated with regard to the many and the Jewish people as a whole, and not with regard to individuals.
But in truth it is impossible to explain it this way. As is explicit in Rashi's commentary on the verse "and the L‑rd your G‑d will bring back…," the intent is each and every individual; in Rashi's words: "He will literally take hold with His hands of each and every person… 'and you will be gathered one by one, O children of Israel.'"13 And the assurance of the Redemption and its manner, "and the L‑rd will bring back," comes as a continuation of, and as the effect of, the "cause" of the Redemption, "and you will return to the L‑rd your G‑d" — "Israel will ultimately do teshuvah at the end of their exile." This means that this, too, applies to each individual Jew.
So too the Alter Rebbe writes14 that every Jew "will certainly ultimately do teshuvah… for none who is banished will remain banished from Him."15
Accordingly, all the wicked are included in this as well, even those who will not want to leave the exile: G‑d will arouse them, too, to teshuvah and will redeem them from the exile. As we find explicitly in the verse:16 "והי' ביום ההוא יתקע בשופר גדול ובאו האובדים בארץ אשור והנדחים בארץ מצרים והשתחוו לה' בהר הקודש בירושלים" ("And it shall come to pass on that day that a great shofar will be sounded, and those who are lost in the land of Ashur and those who are cast away in the land of Egypt will come, and they will bow down to the L‑rd on the holy mountain in Jerusalem") — that even those who sank so deeply into their exile that they became "lost" and "cast away," and have no desire to leave the exile — they too17 will be aroused to teshuvah, until they come "and bow down to the L‑rd on the holy mountain in Jerusalem."
This is as has been discussed several times18 regarding the meaning of the words of our Sages19 in the answer to the question of the "wicked son" in the Pesach Haggadah: "אילו הי' שם לא הי' נגאל" ("Had he been there, he would not have been redeemed"). At first glance this is puzzling: what is the need, and what is the benefit, in telling the wicked son something that has no connection to the "Seder," which is a remembrance of the Exodus from Egypt? The explanation is that the intent is not to push the "wicked son" away*19 from the "Seder" and to inform him that the Redemption excludes him. On the contrary, in the answer to him we emphasize that only "there" (in Egypt) "he would not have been redeemed"; but in the future Redemption, since it comes after the Giving of the Torah, he too will be redeemed. Consequently,20 he is aroused to the wondrous effect of the Giving of the Torah: from the time the Holy One, blessed be He, said "אנכי ה' אלקיך" ("I am the L‑rd your G‑d"), in the singular, "Havayah" has been drawn down to become the strength and vitality of every single Jew.21 Therefore every Jew, even a wicked one like him, is assured that through this strength of his he will ultimately be redeemed.
3. However, we need to understand: a) The reason G‑d redeemed the Jewish people from Egypt is, as it is written in our parsha,22 "בני בכורי ישראל ואומר אליך שלח את בני גו'" ("Israel is My son, My firstborn; and I say to you: Send forth My son…") — that is, by virtue of the bond between "our Father" and the Jewish people, who are "children of the Omnipresent." It is therefore understood that every Jew who was in Egypt, even the very lowest, was included in "My son, My firstborn, Israel." For the bond of father and son is natural and essential, not subject to change or exchange, as our Sages say:23 "בין כך ובין כך אתם קרויים בנים" ("Either way, you are called children"), and (therefore) "I cannot exchange them for another nation."24 This being so, why were not all the Jewish people redeemed at the Exodus from Egypt?
b) In the Egyptian exile there were several kinds of wicked people,25 and even idol worshippers,26 to the point that even when they left Egypt "the idol of Michah passed along with them";27 and nevertheless they merited the redemption from Egypt. Why, then, were those who did not want to leave Egypt not redeemed?
4. This will be understood by first explaining the atonement of Yom Kippur. The view of Rebbi28 is that "for all the transgressions in the Torah, whether one did teshuvah or did not do teshuvah, Yom Kippur atones";29 however, "Rebbi concedes regarding the kares of the day itself"30 (when one violates the prohibitions of affliction and of work of Yom Kippur itself31) that Yom Kippur does not atone for it.
At first glance this, too, is puzzling: since "for all the transgressions in the Torah Yom Kippur atones," even for severe transgressions32 — why does it not atone for "the kares of the day itself"?
The Rogatchover explains this33 as follows: since the sin concerns Yom Kippur itself, Yom Kippur itself falls into the category of that which causes the sin. It is therefore impossible that what causes the sin should also be what atones for it, for "an accuser cannot become a defender."34
The explanation in the style of the teachings of Chassidus:35 On Yom Kippur the essential bond of the soul with G‑dliness is revealed in every Jew, and relative to this level, sin and iniquity have no standing at all.36 However, regarding "the kares of the day itself," since the sin strikes at and opposes the revelation of the bond, it is once again impossible for this bond to be effective in atoning for the sin.37
So too in our case: The arousal and revelation from Above to take the Jewish people out of Egypt stemmed from the revelation of the bond of the Holy One, blessed be He, "our Father," with the Jewish people, as explained above. And since this is an essential bond that cannot undergo change, all the Jewish people were therefore redeemed from Egypt, even the wicked, for "either way they are My children." However, those wicked who refused to leave Egypt (and [chose] to be a servant of servants — which is the opposite of "they are My servants," and certainly the opposite of "My son, My firstborn"), since by this they opposed the revelation of the bond itself, it was impossible that this revelation should bring about their redemption from Egypt (as stated above in the terminology of nigleh: "an accuser cannot become a defender").38
5. But it is still not understood: the desire not to leave the exile, just as it stood in opposition to G‑d's bond with "My son, My firstborn, Israel" in the redemption that preceded the Giving of the Torah, so too it opposes the bond and union that was added at the Giving of the Torah ("I am the L‑rd your G‑d" — your strength and your vitality), which brings about the future Redemption of the Jewish people. If so, according to the rule that "an accuser cannot become a defender," how will there be a redemption, in the future Redemption, for those who will not want to leave the exile?
The explanation of the matter: Regarding the novelty and elevation of the bond between G‑d and the Jewish people that came about at the Giving of the Torah, we find two matters: a) At the time of the Giving of the Torah, G‑d chose the Jewish people, as is evident also from practical halachah — in the Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe:39 "When one says 'ובנו בחרת (מכל עם ולשון)' ('And You have chosen us [from every nation and tongue]'), one should remember the Giving of the Torah." b) The Jewish people became "subjugated"40 and servants to G‑d, as our Sages say:41 "The ear that heard at Mount Sinai, 'For the children of Israel are servants to Me; they are My servants'42…" And as it is said concerning the Giving of the Torah in our parsha:43 "בהוציאך את העם ממצרים תעבדון את האלקים על ההר הזה" ("When you bring the people out of Egypt, you will serve G‑d on this mountain"). And these two matters are connected with one another, as will be explained below.
6. Now, the novelty and advantage of the bond that came through G‑d choosing the Jewish people, over their bond by virtue of their being children of the Omnipresent,44 will be understood from the matter of choice in a person below:
We see empirically that when a person chooses something, this desire is more powerful than the natural desire he has for something.
The reason for this: The content of a person's nature is the boundaries of his being (and from this nature also come the manner of definition and measure by which his faculties, senses, traits, etc., are defined). Therefore, when he desires something because of his nature, the strength of the desire corresponds to the strength and measure of his nature.45
True choice, however, stems from his very essence as it is above the boundaries of human nature —
[For the truth of choice is when there are no reasons or causes for the choice, meaning that he has no inclinations that compel him to choose the thing chosen, but he chooses it by his free choice; whereas when he chooses something because of his nature (and his makeup), he is compelled in his choice by his nature]46 —
as is evident also from the very matter of choice, in that a person can choose even something that is the opposite of what his nature compels him to desire. Therefore, the desire that stems from choice is more powerful, since it comes from his essence.47
So too, as it were, Above: the desire and love of G‑d for the Jewish people by virtue of their being "children of the Omnipresent" — "our Father" — is akin, as it were, to the desire and love of a father for his son. That is, it is a bond stemming from a particular form and level,48 as it were.48* In contrast, at the time of the Giving of the Torah, when G‑d chose the Jewish people, the choice stems from the very essence of the Chooser,49 which is above any such form;50 that is, the desire and the bond stem from His very Essence and Being, which transcends all descriptions.51
And this elevation also brought about an effect in the bond of the Jewish people with G‑d after the Giving of the Torah — that it should stem not only from their nature and makeup, but from their essence. And this is what was newly introduced in them at the Giving of the Torah: that they are also at the level of servants.52
As explained in the Hemshech 566653 regarding the difference between the level of "son" and the level of "servant" in the service of G‑d: the "son's" mode of service is like a nature in his soul. Just as it is the son's nature to be drawn after his father with love and with wholehearted service, etc., so too with the souls that are called "children": it is like a nature in their soul to be drawn to Him with the fervor of love and to serve Him, etc. But this is not service from their own strength and their own choice, and therefore it is not called "service" at all.54
In contrast, the service of the servant does not stem from his nature; on the contrary, the service is contrary to his nature. Rather, of himself and by his own strength he bound himself and gave himself over to Him, to serve Him, to the point that he is nullified in his entire essence and being and has no being or existence of his own at all; his entire existence is only the existence of the Master.55
7. In light of the above, the difference will be explained between the redemption from the Egyptian exile — in which those who did not want to leave Egypt were not redeemed, since they opposed the revelation of the bond of "our Father in Heaven" with "My son, My firstborn, Israel," which brought about the Exodus from Egypt (and an accuser cannot become a defender) — and the future Redemption, in which every single Jew will be redeemed, even those who will not want to leave the exile, even though this, too, seemingly stands in opposition to the revelation of "I am the L‑rd," which is the source of the future Redemption, as explained above:
Since this bond of the Jewish people with G‑d by virtue of their being "children of the Omnipresent" stems from nature, it was therefore possible for a Jew (in Egypt) to oppose this natural bond by the power of his free choice, since [free choice] comes from his (the person's) essence, which is above the boundaries of his nature.56 For this reason, the bond was not effective in taking them out of Egypt, as explained above.
However, after G‑d chose the Jewish people at the time of the Giving of the Torah — this bond, since it stems from choice, that is, from His very Essence and Being, also brought about in the Jewish people that their bond with G‑d should stem from their essence, and consequently from their entire essence, being and existence. It is therefore understood that it is no longer (essentially) possible for a Jew to oppose this bond,57 since in his being and essence he has chosen G‑dliness;58 and the fact that outwardly he does not want to leave the exile is contrary to the truth of his essential choice.59
Therefore it is understood that ultimately his essential choice will be revealed — that he will choose G‑d as his portion and his lot60 openly as well — and "(each and every one of) Israel will ultimately do teshuvah at the end of their exile, and they will immediately be redeemed."
(From the sichos of Acharon Shel Pesach 5728 and 20 Menachem Av 5732)
Notes
1) Our parsha, 3:14.
2) Shemos Rabbah 3:6.
3) Even though for them it brings brokenness of spirit and a setting of the teeth on edge (Matnos Kehunah, ibid.).
4) Yechezkel 20:33.
5) Matnos Kehunah; Yefeh To'ar; Commentary of the Maharzu.
6) See Shemos Rabbah 1:34-35. See also below, notes 25 and 26.
7) See also the Midrash (Shemos Rabbah 3:2): "Thus You assured Moshe: whether they do Your will or do not do Your will, You will redeem them." And although what is discussed there is that "they will in the future pain Me in the desert… and nevertheless I do not refrain from redeeming them," it is impossible to say that this exposition holds like the preceding exposition, "I see them… receiving My Torah… the deed of the Golden Calf… angering Me with it; nevertheless I do not judge them according to the deeds they will do in the future, but according to the present matter." For since He assured "whether they do Your will or do not do Your will, You will redeem them," what difference does it make whether He judges them according to their present deeds or not?
8) See Sanhedrin 105a: "Rav Nachman said…," and Rashi there.
9) Compare Rashi at the end of our parsha: "'With a mighty hand he will drive them out of his land' — against the will of Israel he will drive them out…"
10) Shemos Rabbah 14:3; Tanchuma, Va'eira 14; Rashi on Bo 10:22. See also Mechilta, beginning of Parshas Beshalach.
11) Nitzavim 30:2-3.
12) Rambam, Hilchos Teshuvah 7:5.
13) See at length Likkutei Sichos, vol. 9, first sicha on Parshas Nitzavim.
14) Hilchos Talmud Torah 4:3; Tanya, end of ch. 39.
15) See at length what is cited in "Teshuvos U'Biurim," sec. 8, that ultimately every single Jew will merit the life of the World to Come (the Resurrection of the Dead) — even those of whom it is said in the Mishnah "All Israel" (Sanhedrin 90a), "And these have no portion…": they too — their soul, which is "the branch of My planting" — will rise at the Resurrection (in another body).
16) Yeshayahu 27:13.
17) Maamar "Vehayah Bayom Hahu…" 5703 (Sefer HaMaamarim, Yiddish, p. 78). See also the maamar "Hagil" in Likkutei Torah (Derushim for Rosh Hashanah 60a).
18) See also Likkutei Sichos, vol. 1, p. 252.
19) Mechilta, Bo 13:8, 14 (cited in Rashi on 13:8, but there the wording is: "You were not worthy of being redeemed." Similarly in the Yerushalmi (Pesachim 10:4): "He would not have been fit ever to be redeemed from there"). The wording cited in the text is from the Pesach Haggadah.
*19) See Torah Or, Bo, on 12:26.
20) As explained in many places, that the wicked son — in his talent he is a neighbor of the "wise son," from [the verse] "they are wise to do evil."
21) See Likkutei Torah, beginning of Parshas Re'eh, and in many other places.
22) 4:22-23.
23) See Kiddushin 36a* (Responsa of the Rashba, vol. 1, sec. 194); Rus Rabbah, Pesichta 2; see also Bamidbar Rabbah 2:15; and elsewhere.
*) Rabbi Yehudah disagrees there, holding that when you do not conduct yourselves as children, you are not called children. But (in addition to what is explained in the Responsa of the Rashba there, that "although in a dispute between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehudah the halachah follows Rabbi Yehudah, here Rabbi Meir bases himself precisely on the verses"), see Sifri (Haazinu 32:5), from which it is implied that Rabbi Yehudah conceded to Rabbi Meir.
24) And although in Kiddushin there the verses brought for this were said after the Giving of the Torah; and likewise one cannot object that the above saying of our Sages, "I cannot exchange them for another nation," speaks of the Jewish people as a whole and not of the individual Jew — [neither objection holds,] for since already while they were in Egypt they were called children, and this bond and love of a father for his son (which does not depend on anything) is something in the nature of creation, as is seen also with a father and son below,* and in nature there is no change between before the Giving of the Torah and after the Giving of the Torah. It is also understood that each individual is a child of the Holy One, blessed be He (see Tanya, ch. 1 and beginning of ch. 2: that every Jew, whether righteous or wicked, has two souls… and the second soul in Israel is… as it is written, "My son…"), and this bond applies also to the individual.
*) Even though the son becomes separate from the father. All the more so with the Holy One, blessed be He, and the Jewish people, where the soul is not separate from Him at all (see Likkutei Torah, Rosh Hashanah 62d).
25) See Zohar II, 190b. See also Shemos Rabbah 1:30; Tanchuma, our parsha, 10; Rashi on 2:14.
26) Zohar, ibid.; Mechilta, Shemos 14:28; Yalkut Reuveni, Shemos 14:26; Shemos Rabbah [OCR unclear: ספ"ג ח]; Tanchuma, Ki Sisa 14. And one cannot say that [they merited redemption] because they were "the many" — for the Jewish people (even while in Egypt) "are believers, children of believers" (Shabbos 97a).
27) See Sanhedrin 103b (the second explanation in Rashi); Tanchuma, ibid. (see Etz Yosef there); Shemos Rabbah 24:1; and sources cited there.
28) Yoma 85b, and sources cited there.
29) Except for one who throws off the yoke, one who interprets the Torah falsely, and one who annuls the covenant of the flesh, regarding which there is a special derivation that Yom Kippur does not atone without teshuvah (Shevuos 13a, and Rashi there).
30) Shevuos, ibid.
31) Rashi, ibid.
32) See the Mishnah in Yoma, ibid., and the Gemara there, 86a.
33) Tzafnas Pa'neach, Hilchos Yibum, ch. 4, halachah [OCR unclear: הי"כ], at the end.
34) Accordingly it is resolved why the Gemara (in Shevuos, ibid.), on the question "Where do we find kares on Yom Kippur according to Rebbi?" (if we do not say that Rebbi concedes regarding the kares of the day itself), does not answer that it is found in the case of "I will sin and Yom Kippur will atone," where Rebbi concedes that it does not atone (Yoma 87a [OCR reads סז, א]) — for both (the kares of the day itself, and "I will sin and Yom Kippur will atone") have one reason: an accuser cannot become a defender. The same applies to "I will sin and I will repent," where one is not given the opportunity to do teshuvah (Yoma 85b), "since the teshuvah causes him to sin" (Iggeres HaTeshuvah, ch. 1).
35) See Likkutei Sichos, vol. 4, p. 1149 ff., and sources cited there.
36) See Likkutei Sichos, ibid., that the Rabbanan, too, hold that the essence of the day atones [as the Rambam writes (Hilchos Teshuvah 1:3), "and the essence of Yom Kippur atones," even though he rules like the Rabbanan (ibid., 1:3)]; except that they hold that reaching the atonement of the essence of the day (which is higher than the atonement achieved through teshuvah) comes through teshuvah.
37) It may be said that this is also the reason for the three matters mentioned in note 29, for which Yom Kippur itself does not atone. See Rashi, Shevuos, ibid., on the explanation of these three matters.
38) In contrast, "the many" who left Egypt against their will (see the beginning of this Sicha) are not those who did not want to leave the Egyptian exile (as is evident from the saying of our Sages cited in note 10), but those who did not want to go into the great and awesome desert, and the like, in which there is no opposition to the revelation of the bond.
39) Sec. 60, par. 4. See also Tanya, ch. 49.
40) See Rashi, Yisro 20:2 (from the Mechilta).
41) Kiddushin 22b; cited in Rashi, Mishpatim 21:6; Yerushalmi there, 1:2.
42) Behar 25:55. See also Ibn Ezra there, 25:42.
43) 3:12.
44) Compare Rashi (Re'eh 14:2): "'For you are a holy people' — your own holiness comes from your forefathers, and furthermore, 'and the L‑rd has chosen you.'"
45) See below, note 58.
46) See Likkutei Sichos, vol. 4, pp. 1147, 1309.
47) See Rambam, Hilchos Teshuvah, beginning of ch. 5; and Shemoneh Perakim, ch. 8; Likkutei Torah, Emor 38b.
48) Compare Tanya (ch. 2): "Just as the son is drawn from the father's brain, so, as it were, the soul of every Jew is drawn from His thought and wisdom…" Compare also the saying of our Sages (Yonas Elem, beginning of ch. 2; see Tosafos s.v. "Mikamei," Yevamos 3a; Rashi, Kesubos 92a, s.v. "Keba'al"): "A son is (only) the leg of his father." And in Likkutei Torah (Berachah 96b): this is [OCR unclear: בה"י].
48*) See the maamar "Ki Na'ar Yisrael" 5666 (p. 553).
49) Compare Sha'arei Orah, in the introduction (2, end of col. 1 ff.), regarding "the root of the self-sacrifice (that Jewish souls have) for Torah and mitzvos, for the sanctification of G‑d's Name," which is "because the root of the letters of the Torah is in the essence of the wisdom of the primordial Torah, which is the power of His essential wisdom itself, included in His very Essence (far higher even than the level of the power that generates Jewish souls in His likeness, etc.), and this was the self-sacrifice of Jewish souls at the time of the Giving of the Torah…" Perhaps it may be said that this is because the desire for Torah and mitzvos, "the deeds of the righteous," also stems from His choice (see Bereishis Rabbah, end of ch. 2) — see Likkutei Sichos, vol. 4, p. 1341, note 15; vol. 5, p. 66, notes 70, 74; vol. 6, p. 23, sec. 5. Accordingly, it is all the more understandable why the choice of the Jewish people took place specifically at the time of the Giving of the Torah.
50) See the maamar "Yivchar Lanu" 5703, sec. 4; Likkutei Sichos, vol. 4, p. 1309 and p. 1341.
51) And although the love of a father for his son is also an essential love (see the maamar "Al Shloshah Devarim" 5700, sec. 3, and elsewhere), since it is a natural love, this love stems from his nature, and not from his very essence as [described] in the text (see also below, notes 55, 58).
52) This is the meaning of the verse "יבחר לנו גו' את גאון יעקב" ("He chooses for us… the pride of Yaakov") (and not "Yisrael"), for "Yisrael" is the level of son and "Yaakov" — servant (Likkutei Torah, Balak, beginning of 70c, and sources cited in the next note, and elsewhere). See also the maamar "Yivchar Lanu," ibid., at the end of the section.
53) The maamar "U'Miknei Rav" and the maamarim following it (p. 308 ff.).
54) The maamar "U'Miknei Rav," at its beginning (pp. 308-309), and p. 319.
55) Also the fact that in the Future to Come there will be revealed to every Jew the level of the "satisfaction of the Creator" (which is higher than the reward of the mitzvos, the "satisfaction of the created" — Hemshech "VeKachah," end of ch. 12 and beginning of ch. 7) — the revelation of the very Essence (see Likkutei Sichos, vol. 5, p. 244 ff.) — comes mainly through the service of the simple servant specifically (as explained in Hemshech 5666, ibid., that the main satisfaction comes from the service of a simple servant). For in the simple servant, since his existence is only the existence of the Master, he has no satisfaction of his own at all; rather, "the satisfaction and delight Above — this itself is his satisfaction" (Hemshech 5666, p. 326).
According to what is explained further in that Hemshech (the maamar "Lech Lecha" (p. 63) ff.) regarding the difference between will and delight — that will, even essential will, is at the level of drawing-forth and revelation, whereas delight is within His very Essence — it may be said that this is also the difference between the bond by virtue of being children and G‑d's choosing of the Jewish people. The bond between Jewish souls and the Holy One, blessed be He, by virtue of their being children stems from the level of will (see there, beginning of p. 70, and p. 74), which is already at the level of drawing-forth and revelation, as it were, within His Essence; whereas G‑d's choice of the Jewish people is above the level of will, stemming from His very Essence, akin to the root of delight, which is in the innermost of His very Essence. But choice is higher even than the level of delight, for it is from His very Essence — "He" who delights.
56) For this choice in a person stems from [the fact that] "Behold, man has become like one of us" — similar to G‑d — and therefore "there is none who can hold back his hand," for he is not defined by any limitations (see the sources cited in note 47).
57) As for the fact that regarding Yom Kippur it is possible for him to oppose this bond — that is only temporary, and for this the choice was given to him. But regarding the Future to Come, this is the whole point of the choice that was newly established after the Giving of the Torah: that ultimately "none who is banished will remain banished from Him" (see also Toras Shalom — sicha of Purim 5670 (p. 220), and note 4 there).
58) Furthermore: since his desire for G‑dliness stems from his choice (and not from his nature, etc.), through this choice everything that is the opposite of G‑dliness becomes utterly negated and refuted. For when the negation of the opposite stems from the existence of the opposite, the evil has significance, and the measure of its negation corresponds to the measure of the "evil" in the evil.
This applies also to an essential desire for something, such as the aforementioned natural desire of a son for his father, and similarly with Jewish souls — the natural desire of the Jewish people for G‑dliness, by virtue of their being "children of the Omnipresent," and consequently the negation of desire for everything that is the opposite of G‑dliness. Since this is by way of compulsion and makeup within him — that the makeup of his existence is such that he desires G‑dliness and does not desire anything that opposes G‑dliness — the "evil" has some standing, for it is because of its makeup and nature (that of the opposite) that he does not desire it; and if so, the desire is not absolutely complete (even for G‑dliness). But when his desire stems from his choice, the affirmation of what he desires and the negation of what he does not desire are absolute. See Likkutei Sichos, vol. 4, p. 1341, and notes 14, 17 there.
59) See Rambam, end of ch. 2 of Hilchos Gerushin.
60) See Rambam, end of Hilchos Shemittah VeYovel.
Key Lesson
At the Exodus, those Jews who refused to leave Egypt were not redeemed, because the natural father-son bond could be overridden by free choice. But at the Giving of the Torah G‑d chose the Jewish people from His very Essence, making each Jew's bond with Him essential; therefore no Jew can truly oppose it, and in the future Redemption every single Jew, even the one who outwardly resists, will do teshuvah and be redeemed.