Parte 8 · Capítulo 65

El texto del Ari

Aún no disponible en Español: se muestra English

And in ZON there is another deficiency, for the more the Partzufim proceed and descend from their level, the more their separation is revealed — the aspect of Mah from the aspect of Ban. Therefore the separation increases in the portion of Mah and Ban that is in ZON. The matter is that ZA is entirely the aspect of Mah, and the Nukva is entirely the aspect of Ban, and they are separate, at times back to back and at times face to face.

Luz Interior

Aún no disponible en Español: se muestra English

Este comentario aún no se ha asociado a cada inciso: los elementos se muestran en orden de lectura, y el número junto a cada uno cuenta las propias notas, no los incisos del texto del Ari.

Sin asociar a un inciso

1The more the Partzufim proceed and descend from their degree, the more their separation is revealed — the discernment of the MA from the discernment of the BON: And this depends on the measure of the flaw that is in BON. And it has already been brought above that there are three discernments in this (page 624, the passage beginning ‘And from this you shall understand,’ see there): For what came out in Nekudim in the discernment of Katnut from the very emanation is the first, choicest discernment in BON, and Atik took it. And what came out there in the discernment of an addition, through the coupling of AB and SAG, which illuminated by way of the Tabur to the GAR of Nekudim, and brought the bottom Hey down from the Einayim of Keter to the Peh of Nekudim, and returned the GAR to AVI, is the second discernment of BON, which is worse than the first discernment, because the matter of nullification occurred in it, since it came out in the discernment of an addition; and AA and AVI took it. And what came out there through the MAN of the Vav and dot, which illuminated by way of the Yesod of AK, that is, from the discernment of the coupling of the look of the Einayim of AVI with one another and onward, is the third discernment of BON, the worst of all, of which the GAR of Atzilut, namely Atik, AA and AVI, took nothing at all for the correction of the essence of their Partzufim; but ZON necessarily received from it, for this Vav and dot of the Yesod of AK, which became MAN in AVI of Nekudim, is the entire essence of ZA, being the discernment of the root drop of ZA, as stated in Part 7. Study it there well.
Therefore the MA and BON of Atik are joined to one another with a most wondrous joining, because in the BON that Atik took there is no flaw at all, for no nullification whatsoever occurred in it at the time of the breaking of the vessels. And the MA and BON of AA are worse than the MA and BON of Atik, for in his BON nullification had already occurred, and therefore the difference from his MA to his BON is discernible, in the discernment of right and left — whereas in Atik it is entirely right. And in the MA and BON of AVI there is a greater difference, in that they became two bodies, except that they are joined to one another at one wall, face to face, as above. However, within each of them there is MA and BON in complete union, face to face, for in Aba there is MA and BON, and in Ima there is MA and BON, as above in the preceding item, see there. But in ZA there is a great difference and separation between his MA and his BON, since he is from the third discernment, the worst of all, and therefore the MA and BON within him stand back to back.
2ZA is entirely the discernment of MA, and the Nukva is entirely the discernment of BON, and they are separate, at times back to back and at times face to face: This does not contradict what the ARI writes in Etz Chaim, Gate 20, Chapter 10, that ZA took VAK of BON and VAK of MA, and the Nukva took Malchut of MA and Malchut of BON, see there. Thus there is MA and BON in ZA, and MA and BON in the Nukva. How, then, does he say here that ZA is entirely MA, and the Nukva entirely BON? The matter is that ZON, too, were divided into two Partzufim at their chest, like AVI, called ZON the great and ZON the small, as the ARI writes shortly. In such a way that VAK of MA and VAK of BON are called ZON the great, or ZA and Rachel who are equal in their stature, and Malchut of MA and Malchut of BON are called ZON the small, or Jacob and Rachel the small, or the Nukva of ZA. And it was explained above, in the preceding item, regarding AVI, that the ARI is speaking here of when AVI and YESHSUT are included in one Partzuf, see there. And likewise here, regarding ZON, he is speaking also from when ZON the great and ZON the small are included in one Partzuf. At that time, all the ZAT of MA are regarded by the name ZA, and all the ZAT of BON by the name Nukva. For in the VAK of MA, called ZA the great, Jacob, who is the Malchut of MA, is included; and in the VAK of BON, called Rachel the great, Rachel the small is included. And in this state, ZA together with Jacob is found to be entirely MA, and the Nukva the great together with Rachel the small is entirely BON. And what is written in the aforementioned Etz Chaim, that ZA took VAK of MA and VAK of BON, refers to ZON the great together, both of whom are sometimes called by the name ZA alone, and VAK of BON is regarded as the Nukva within his body. And likewise, what is written, that the Nukva of ZA took Malchut of MA and Malchut of BON, refers to ZON the small, both of whom are sometimes called by the name the Nukva of ZA.
And this is what is meant by ‘ZA is entirely the discernment of MA, and the Nukva is entirely the discernment of BON, and they are separate, at times back to back and at times face to face,’ that is, as above, that ZA includes with himself also the small Jacob, so that they now contain the ZAT of MA, and the Nukva the great includes also the small Rachel, so that they now contain the ZAT of BON. And they are regarded as separate from one another, for even while they are joined to one another, they are then in the discernment of back to back, which is regarded as separation. And when they are face to face, they are then entirely separate from one another. And this is what is meant by ‘at times back to back,’ which is regarded like separation, ‘and at times face to face,’ at which point they are truly separated.

Aún no disponible en Español: se muestra English