Forum Replies Created
- Replies
Wow, what a beautiful answer. Mind blown, and I truly appreciate it! This makes sense now. So, the restriction isn’t a literal diminishment of the Infinite but rather the concealment necessary for the will to receive to awaken, mature, and learn to receive in order to bestow. The Light itself remains unchanged; only perception shifts, allowing creation to discover equivalence with the Divine.
What I think you’re also saying is that the apparent paradox between Lurianic contraction and Hasidic concealment is merely dialectical and not oppositional. Specifically, from the human or vessel perspective (the lower), the contraction feels real: there truly is distance, darkness, limitation. Yet from the Divine perspective (the higher), there is no change at all: the Light remains infinite and omnipresent. I think this is what the Hasidic masters (especially the Baal Shem Tov, the Maggid of Mezritch, and later the Alter Rebbe) meant when they said: “Tzimtzum lo kipshuto” (the contraction is not literal). Yet this also affirms that Luria and the Hasidic reading are both true, simply depending on the level of consciousness one is describing.
Also, when you say, “It’s written, ‘I, the Lord, do not change,” (Malachi 3:6), this serves as the key proof-text in Scripture that the Divine Essence never undergoes any change, withdrawal, or alteration, even when creation perceives separation. Thus, change is only in perception, not in God; i.e., nothing changes in the Divine–only in the revelation experienced by creation.
Now, when you say that “Malchut of Eyn Sof restricted itself… so that it would never again receive pleasure unless it was in order to bestow,” I believe that you’re quoting Isaac Luria’s inner logic but reframing through Baal HaSulam’s psychological reading? Specifically, Malchut (the will to receive) is the vessel’s core essence. Before restriction, it received Light freely. After restriction, it chose not to receive unless it could do so altruistically — “in order to bestow.” In other words, the “restriction” wasn’t an act of God limiting Himself in essence, but rather an act of the created will aligning itself ethically with Divine intention.
So, one might say that the “contraction” is the beginning of conscious participation in divinity, perhaps even the birth of moral self-awareness in creation?
Finally, “The Light hasn’t changed; but a concealment was placed over it…” Is it correct to say that the Light (God’s essence) remains unaltered; only the perception is veiled. The metaphor of being in the king’s treasury but unaware reminds us that we live in the midst of Infinite Light but, because of concealment, we still feel separate (so frustrating! lol). But if only that concealment was lifted, we would instantly realize we have always been surrounded by Ein Sof.
So, if I may summarize, Ein Sof never ceases to be Infinite. The “contraction” is not a change in God but a veil over revelation. Both views (Lurianic and Hasidic) are correct depending on which side of the veil one stands.
And finally, the purpose of the veil is to create the possibility of ethical relationship — to “receive in order to bestow.”I truly appreciate all your insight!
Ah, thank you again! So, if I understand your answer correctly, infinity is qualitative, not quantitative. Every vessel (even a finite world) can be infinitely fulfilled because it is filled completely according to its capacity, no matter what its size (thimble-sized, gallon-sized, etc.). Infinity isn’t a number line; it’s a state of perfect desire and perfect fulfillment. Before creation, there was only this perfection, so no ‘infinity’ could be conceived. After creation, the vessels (finite beings) experience lack — and through their fulfillment, they taste the Infinite again.
If I may take this one step further: my original question was really about what happens within the Ein Sof Itself during the act of restriction. I understand that, from the perspective of the vessels, the Light becomes concealed so that independent perception and desire can emerge. But does anything actually occur within the Ein Sof in that process?
I’ve read that some Lurianic interpretations describe a real contraction — as if the Infinite genuinely withdraws its presence — while later Hasidic readings speak of concealment only, meaning that the Infinite remains fully present but hidden from our awareness.
Could you clarify which of these best reflects the tradition you’re teaching? In other words, is Tzimtzum understood as an actual change in the Divine, or purely as a shift in the way creation perceives the Divine Light? Todah rabah!
Shalom! Today, a friend and I were discussing how the Ein Sof contracted its infinity in order to create the finite world in which we live. In an attempt to understand this better, we constructed two mental models and wonder if either, both, or neither is correct. Model #1: God actually sacrificed His infinity in order to create the finite. But then, does that mean that God is no longer infinite? Or is God just a different type of infinity now? (For example, in math, we can have varying sizes of infinite sets.) Model #2: Or is it more like this analogy: suppose we have the infinite set of whole numbers (all positive and negative integers). Within this infinite set, we can create a finite, closed set (for example, the set of numbers from 1-10). This finite set exists in its own defined right yet is still interwoven and contained within the greater Infinity.
Or is it something else that defies either model? Todah rabah!
I’ve been inspired by the fact that all of Kabbalah, and the Torah, can be summed up in the phrase: “Love God and your neighbor as yourself.” I’ve known this truth my whole life but have never understood, as I do now, why it is so crucial to practice it daily. I now monitor my thoughts and deeds daily like never before, trying to identify and then root out ego as much as possible. I am beginning to treat every interaction with another person as part of a living lab to practice daily and am taking more time for relational, rather than transactional, spiritual practice. I wish everyone an easy and speedy trip back up the ladder, back Home, and should you need any help along the way, I’m here for you. Wishing you all every blessing!
When we support others, it’s not only a reciprocal state of energy that ensues, motivating and allowing us to keep going, it also has an amplifying effect on us that allows us to push even higher than before. I would never climb a mountain without a partner–not only for safety but for encouragement–and climbing the spiritual ladder is no different. We can’t go it alone. We need each other.
