Partie 12 · Chapitre 225

Le texte du Ari

Pas encore disponible en Français — affichage : English

The second interpretation is that the ten Sefirot of Katnut, which are entirely Elokim, are divided into two aspects, which are pregnancy and nursing. For the three lower ones of Elokim are pregnancy, and the six upper ones together are called nursing. And afterward, all the ten Sefirot of Gadlut, which are Havayot, are called the second pregnancy. And all these three aspects are called externality. And after all these three above-mentioned aspects, which are the aspect of Achor be-Achor (back to back), which are called externality, there are three corresponding aspects, which are the aspect of Panim be-Panim (face to face), and they are called internality. And indeed, all these two aspects — the externality called Achor be-Achor, and the internality called Panim be-Panim — all of them are from the NHY of Tevuna and Yeshsut. And there are two other aspects corresponding to them, namely the back and the face of the supernal Aba and Ima, and they are called externality and internality.

Lumière intérieure

Pas encore disponible en Français — affichage : English

Ce commentaire n'a pas encore été rattaché aux paragraphes individuels — les éléments sont affichés dans l'ordre de lecture, et le numéro à côté de chacun compte les notes elles-mêmes, et non les paragraphes du texte du Ari.

Non rattaché à un paragraphe

1The second interpretation, that the ten Sefirot of Katnut of Elokim, all of them, are divided into two discernments, which are Ibur and nursing, and so on; and afterward all the ten Sefirot of Gadlut are called the second Ibur, and so on; and after all these three discernments, which is the discernment of back to back, and so on — the discernment of face to face is called internality, and this is from YESHSUT, and corresponding to them in AVI: And there are here three changes as against the first interpretation. The first, that it does not divide the Mochin of Katnut into IYM [Ibur, nursing, and Mochin] of externality, but divides them only into two discernments, which are Ibur and nursing. The second, that the ten Sefirot of Gadlut of Havayot he calls by the name externality, whereas in the first interpretation he calls them internality. The third, that he adds here a whole order of IYM of a fourth Partzuf, which alone he calls by the name internality. The fourth, that he mentions here these four Partzufim also in the upper AVI.
And in truth there is no perceptible difference here except in the Partzuf of the soul (Neshama), which in the first interpretation he calls by the name internality, and in the second interpretation he calls by the name externality; and only to the fourth Partzuf, called the Partzuf of Haya, does he call by the name internality. And the reason for this change is that here the intention is to the matter of the birth of souls, and as long as there is no discernment of Haya in the Partzuf, it is not fit for the birth of souls, and is called by the name posterior, as written in Etz Chaim, Gate 6, Chapter 2, item 42, the passage beginning “and know.” However, the rest of the changes contain no contradiction at all, but only a change of language and an addition, plainly.
And you already know that the beginning of the Atzilut of ZA is from YESHSUT, and the discernment of Nefesh-Ruach of YESHSUT that it receives in the first Ibur, and in the two years of nursing — these were corrected within it in fixity. However, the discernment of the GAR of Ruach that it receives from YESHSUT in the second Ibur, after two years of nursing, and the third Partzuf of Neshama, and the fourth Partzuf of Haya, and the fifth Partzuf of Yechida, are no longer in fixity, but according to the deeds of the lower ones, as above. And how much more so all five Partzufim that it receives from the upper AVI, even the first Ibur among them, are not in fixity. And accordingly you will see that he does not descend here to this distinction that he wrote at the beginning of the matter, to divide the completeness of internality and externality according to the distinction of what is drawn from the discernment of the worlds as against the discernment of the souls. Rather, the matter of internality and externality here is only according to the distinction between Mochin that are not fit for procreation, which he terms by the name externality, and Mochin fit for procreation, which are called by the name internality, as written above.

Pas encore disponible en Français — affichage : English