Partie 2 · Observation intérieure 4

Chapter FourExplains the preciise meaning of the four phases of coarseness, as our sages wrote about the four phases (Pesachim 25): 1. Impossible and not intending. 2. Possible and not intending. 3. Impossible and intending. 4. Possible and intending.Explanation of the four phases in the desire according to the four phases in possible and intending.In order to provide an accurate and elaborate explanation, now I will clarify this to you through the words of our sages (Pesachim 25): “It is said, ‘A pleasure that comes to a person against his will, Abaie [name of a sage] said, ‘permitted,’ and Raba [name of another sage] said, ‘forbidden,’ possible and intending, impossible and intending, the whole world does not dispute that it is forbidden. Impossible and not intending, the whole world does not dispute that it is permitted. They were disputed over possible and not intending.’” RASHI interpreted that it is possible, possible for him to be separated. Intending, he intends to come near in order to enjoy it, like a scent of sin, see there.

Phase one is impossible and not intending.Four phases of receiving pleasure are found in their words: Phase one is “impossible” for him to be separated and “not intending” to come near and enjoy, for by receiving a forbidden pleasure in such a way, the whole world does not dispute that it is permitted since the reception and the desire do not matter when there is no way or a choice not to receive, and there is also no desire to draw near to the forbidden in order to enjoy it.

Phase two is possible and not intending.Phase two is possible for him to be separated, and not intending to draw near and enjoy. Regarding the reception of the forbidden in such a way, Abaie and Raba are disputed: Abaie thought that although it is possible, meaning that there is a choice to draw far and refrain from enjoying the forbidden, it is still permitted to draw near and enjoy it because he is not intending. In other words, because there is no desire in his heart to draw near the forbidden, it is not regarded as reception, although he does draw near and enjoys the forbidden. Raba said that because he can refrain from approaching and enjoying the forbidden, he is forbidden to come near and enjoy. It is so even if he has no desire to draw near the forbidden and enjoy.

Phase three is impossible and intending.Phase three is impossible and intending. This means that it is impossible for him to be separated and to draw far from the forbidden so as to refrain from enjoying it. Intending means that he has a desire to enjoy the forbidden. There is no dispute in the whole world that enjoying the forbidden in such a way is forbidden. Although he cannot, and has no way to separate himself from the forbidden and refrain from enjoying, because he has a desire in his heart to enjoy and approach, this desire is regarded as reception of pleasure from something that is forbidden to enjoy, and he sins. Yet, some say that even here, Abaie thought that it was permitted.

Phase four is possible and intending.Phase four is possible and intending. This means that it is possible for him to be separated and move away from the forbidden and refrain from enjoying it, and he is also intending, meaning that he has a yearning to draw near and enjoy the forbidden. Here, the whole world agrees that it is forbidden since it is receiving pleasure from the forbidden in the crassest way, for he craves the pleasure, it is possible for him to separate himself, and he does not do so. Therefore, it is regarded as the greatest will to receive in its final form, which is forbidden according to everyone. Even according to those who speak according to Abaie, who permitted in the third phase, here they admit it is forbidden.

Their above words provide us with the precise terms by which to define each and every phase of the four phases of the will to receive in a way that hits the mark and does not miss the desired purpose. They have given us four degrees, one below the other, in the sin of forbidden pleasure, which depends on the will to receive of the sinner. In the first three degrees—impossible and not intending, possible and not intending, and impossible and intending—the prohibition on pleasure is not agreed by all, but only in phase four.

We see that our sages put two things together here: the possibility to separate and not receive the pleasure, and the yearning and attraction of the heart to want that pleasure. The combination of these two creates the four phases. Now we will accept these words and examine them regarding our matter in the upper worlds, which are the roots of every kind of desire in reality, and from the lower one, we shall learn the upper one.

When the will to receive was revealed in Malchut of Keter, she went out from Keter and became phase one.We should distinguish two phases in phase one, which is called Hochma, as well as Haya (Part Two, Inner Observation, Item 27): The first phase is her first substance. You already know (Part Two, Inner Observation, Item 23) that it is her Malchut of the upper one, meaning Malchut of Keter, which received the form of the will to receive. In this new form, Malchut of Keter received a new name: phase one. You already know that when a spiritual entity acquires a new form, it becomes distinguished as a new authority in and of itself. So it is with Malchut of Keter, who is the will to bestow in the Emanator. When the desire to emanate was seemingly born in Him, He certainly does not need a tool of action. Rather, His desire was instantly carried out, meaning that she received the form of the “will to receive” which is the first substance of the emanated being, who is called phase one.

The exit of Malchut of Keter to phase one is like lighting a candle from another, where the first is not diminished.Here you should remember that there is no absence in the spiritual. What is said about Malchut of Keter receiving the form of phase one does not mean that Malchut of Keter is now absent from Keter. Rather, Malchut of Keter retained her initial merit, unchanged. It is like lighting a candle from another without the first being diminished. That Malchut of Keter, which received phase one did not diminish Keter in any way, but only added a new phase. In other words, Malchut of Keter remained in her place, as complete and virtuous as before, but a new phase of Malchut of Keter has been added, namely the Malchut that received phase one and became the first substance in the Sefira Hochma. Remember this henceforth and you will not be confused.

After the first substance received the light, the vessel of Hochma herself was revealed.The second phase is of the substance of that vessel after it received its light. At that time, the vessel is completed and is called Hochma. In other words, before she received her light, she was named only after her own phase, meaning phase one, and was still not a vessel of Hochma, but only Malchut of Keter. This can be likened to a fetus in its mother’s abdomen. Before it is born and given its light and vitality, it does not have a name. So it is with the first substance: Before it receives its light, it does not bear the name Hochma, but is still incorporated in Malchut of Keter. Afterwards, when the substance draws its light, called Haya, it acquires its unique name, meaning Hochma (Item 27). We should distinguish these two phases in each and every Sefira. They are: the vessel before it receives the light, when it is still named after the upper one, and the vessel after it receives the light, for then it is regarded as its own authority.

From the perspective of the first substance, Hochma is regarded as impossible. From the perspective of her being filled with light, she is regarded as not intending.Now you will understand that phase one, which is Hochma, is regarded as impossible and not intending. From the perspective of her first substance, which Malchut of Keter, when she received the new form of phase one, when the Sefira Hochma still did not have its own name, that appearance of the will to receive is certainly regarded as impossible with regard to the Sefira of Hochma itself. Also, from the perspective of Malchut of Keter, she is regarded as impossible, since she cannot emanate the Hochma without Hochma having a will to receive, for receiving the abundance without the will to receive it is regarded as coercion and a burden, the opposite of the intention of the Emanator, which is to do good and delight.She is also regarded as not intending, meaning she has no attraction and yearning to receive the light, for you already know that there is no wholeness in the desire before the yearning and attraction to the light appear in it (Part One, Chapter One, Item 50). It has also been thoroughly clarified there that the yearning appears only when there is no light and abundance in the vessel, since it is possible to yearn for it. However, that cannot come to be when the vessel is still filled with her light. Thus, because the above vessel of Hochma is filled with its light, it still has no yearning for the abundance. This is why Hochma is regarded as not intending, meaning that she does not have attraction and yearning for the abundance.

The intensification in the desire in Bina is regarded as possible. Because it comes to her from the first substance, it is regarded as not intending.Phase two, which is Bina, is regarded as possible and not intending. Her first substance (Part Two, Inner Observation, Item 29) is her Malchut of the upper one, meaning Malchut of Hochma that received within her the new form of phase two, meaning through her intensification (Part One, Chapter One, Item 50). From that perspective, the intensification of that desire is regarded as possible. This means that it was possible for her to avoid awakening that desire.She is also regarded as not intending because it is Malchut of Hochma, and is filled with her light. For this reason, the yearning is not revealed in her. You should understand that any additional appearance of the desire that were made in phase two more than in phase one, is only regarded as possible. In other words, it is the intensification of the desire that she made by the power of the emanated being himself (Part One, Chapter One, Item 50).

The light of Hochma is sufficient, and she did not have to intensify and draw Hassadim.We might ask: “But Malchut of Keter, when she became phase one in the Sefira Hochma, also had the same possibility not to take on that new form of the will to receive. Thus, why is phase one regarded as impossible?” Indeed, there is a big difference here: Malchut of Keter could not emanate the emanated being without it having a will to receive. Conversely, Malchut of Hochma, who is the emanated being itself, could settle for her own will to receive, without an awakening with a desire to bestow, which is phase two, and drawing light of Hassadim, since the light of Haya is quite sufficient for the emanated being, and he does not need any addition.

Zeir Anpin is regarded as impossible because he lacked the light of Hochma.Phase three, which Zeir Anpin, is regarded as impossible and intending. It is impossible because after phase two awakened and drew the light of Hassadim, it caused a delay on the light of Hochma in the emanated being. The will to bestow is opposite from phase one, which is a will to receive, where there is light of Hochma. Since the light of Hochma is the essential vitality of the Partzuf, that light is called Haya [alive/life]. For this reason, Malchut of Bina necessarily drew illumination of the light of Hochma once again into her light of Hassadim, and when Malchut of Bina drew it and created that new form, she emerged from being phase two and became phase three, called Zeir Anpin (Part Two, Inner Observation, Item 30).

Zeir Anpin is regarded as intending because it had a yearning for Hochma.We should discern two things in this extension, which is phase three: The first is Impossible, meaning she has no other choice since the light of Haya was absent in the emanated being. The second is Intending, for here there is yearning for the illumination of Hochma that she drew, because she drew it when she was empty from it because phase two was covering the light of Hochma and there was only light of Hassadim in her, without Hochma. For this reason, her Malchut, which drew the illumination of Hochma, drew it as a yearning called intending. Hence, the phase of Zeir Anpin is called impossible and intending.

Malchut is regarded as “possible” because she could have settled for the Hochma in Zeir Anpin, and as “intending” because she had a yearning.Phase four, which is Malchut, is regarded as possible and intending. It is possible because there is already illumination of Hochma in Zeir Anpin, meaning in phase three. Thus, Malchut of Zeir Anpin does not have to perform this intensification once more in order to draw a greater light of Hochma than in phase three. It is regarded as intending because this intensification, after the light of Hochma, created a yearning. In other words, when she does not have light of Hochma, it is then that the yearning appears.

The difference between light of Hochma and illumination of Hochma.We might ask: “Since there is illumination of Hochma in phase three, which is why phase four is regarded as possible, how then does the yearning for light of Hochma appear in phase four?” You must understand that there is a big difference between the illumination of Hochma and the light of Hochma. Illumination of Hochma means that the self of the degree is the light of Hassadim, but it receives illumination from the light of Hochma. conversely, the light of Hochma, the entire self of the light is Hochma, and not Hassadim at all. Illumination of Hochma is quite sufficient for the sustenance of the degree, as it is in phase three, which is Zeir Anpin. This is why Malchut of Zeir Anpin, which intensified her desire to draw light of Hochma, did not have to have it. Rather, there was a yearning in her for the self of the light of Hochma, which is much higher than the illumination of Hochma in phase three. With regard to the above-said light of Hochma, she is regarded as empty of that light. Hence, it is possible that a yearning for it will appear in her.

Phase four alone is regarded as a vessel of reception because she is possible and intending.Thus, we find that not all the desires are regarded as vessels of reception, but only phase four. This is because the desire is not regarded as reception, except under the two conditions—possible and intending. This means that there should not be coercion for reception, and a yearning to receive will appear in it. It is the opposite with phase three: Although there is a yearning to receive there, meaning intending, because the reception is compulsory, since it is its necessary vitality, it is not regarded as a vessel of reception. Conversely, although phase two does not have to receive, since there is no yearning there, she is not regarded as a vessel of reception. It is all the more so with phase one, who has neither, for she must receive her light, which is her vitality, and at the same time she has no yearning. Thus, it is certainly a completely faint desire.