והרבה שלוחים למקום

and9 “G‑d has many agents” through whom He can act.

Hence, even if the offending party had chosen otherwise, the incident would have befallen the victim in any case.

This discussion recalls the teaching of the Mechilta cited by Rashi on the verse,10 והאלקים אנה לידו — “and G‑d caused it to happen to him.” For to such a case the Mechilta applies the verse,11 “From evildoers there emerges evil.” This means that though it was decreed from above that someone should sustain an injury, G‑d brings it about that a particular person should inflict it.

That context, however, speaks of an unwitting injury. In the case of a potentially willful offender, if instead of choosing freely to act in an evil manner he chose to do otherwise, the event would still have occurred, for “G‑d has many agents,” as quoted above.

At any rate, it is thus clear that the victim has no cause to be angry with the offender, for the true cause of the offense was not him, but a heavenly decree.

The Alter Rebbe now takes this one step further: Not only does the heavenly decree give the offender an undefined potential to do harm, but moreover, the particular thought to do it and the power to do it, all come about from G‑d. (At the same time, since man has freedom of choice, he can of course choose to reject such a thought and refrain from doing such a deed.)

Anger thus remains unjustifiable. For the offended party is not angry that the other party made an evil choice; what angers him is the damage done to him. His anger thus results from his lack of belief that the true cause for his mishap is not a particular individual’s evil choice, but a heavenly decree.

ולא עוד

And not only this, that a heavenly decree gave permission in principle and made it possible that he suffer injury,

אלא אפילו בשעה זו ממש, שמכהו או מקללו

but even at that very moment at which [the offender] strikes or curses him,

מתלבש בו כח ה׳ ורוח פיו יתברך, המחייהו ומקיימו

there is vested in him (in the offender) a force from G‑d and the breath of His mouth, which animates and sustains him;

וכמו שכתוב: כי ה׳ אמר לו, קלל

as it is written:12 “For G‑d told him, ‘Curse!’”

והיכן אמר לשמעי

Now where did He say so to Shimi? Where do we find it written that G‑d told him to curse David?

אלא שמחשבה זו, שנפלה לשמעי בלבו ומוחו, ירדה מאת ה׳

But this thought that occurred in Shimi’s heart and mind to curse David, descended from G‑d, Who was thus responsible for such a thought entering Shimi’s mind;

ורוח פיו, המחיה כל צבאם

and13 “the breath of His mouth, [which animates] all the hosts [of heaven],”

החיה רוחו של שמעי, בשעה שדיבר דברים אלו לדוד

animated the spirit of Shimi at the time he spoke those words to David.

כי אילו נסתלק רוח פיו יתברך רגע אחד מרוחו של שמעי, לא יכול לדבר מאומה

For if the breath of G‑d’s mouth had departed from the spirit of Shimi for a single moment, he could not have spoken at all.

* * *

וזהו כי ה׳ אמר לו בעת ההיא ממש: קלל את דוד

(14And that is the meaning of the statement, “For G‑d told him (at that very moment when Shimi was speaking these words), ‘Curse David!’

I.e., G‑d did so by providing Shimi at that time with life and the power of speech.

ומי יאמר לו וגו׳

And who shall say to him, [‘Why did you do so?’]”

In the Table of Glosses and Emendations (Luach He’arot VeTikkunim) which is appended to standard editions of the Tanya, the Rebbe notes that the words “to him” (לו) seem to be unnecessary, inasmuch as the above-quoted verse simply states, without this addition, “And who shall say, ‘Why did you do so?’”

It has been suggested that the Rebbe notes that these words merely “seem” superfluous, rather than stating outright that they are, because at this point the Alter Rebbe is actually referring to another verse:15 “For the word of a king rules, and who shall say to Him, ‘What are You doing?’”

However, rather than adopt this labored assumption, that the Alter Rebbe suddenly changes direction and interpolates one word from another verse, it appears more reasonable to say that the words “to Him” are not intended as a quotation. Rather, since some commentators hold that the conclusion of our verse (“And who shall say to him…”) refers to Shimi, the Alter Rebbe here makes it clear that it in fact speaks of G‑d. I.e., having first related that G‑d “told” Shimi what to do, the verse ends by asking, “Who can possibly say to Him, ‘Why did You do so?’”

וכנודע מה שאמר הבעל שם טוב ז״ל על פסוק: לעולם, ה׳, דברך נצב בשמים

The teaching of the Baal Shem Tov, of blessed memory, on the verse,16 “Forever, O G‑d, Your word stands firm in the heavens,” is well known:

As mentioned above in Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah, ch. 1, the Baal Shem Tov expanded and disseminated the following concept that appears in Midrash Tehillim:

שצירוף אותיות שנבראו בהן השמים, שהוא מאמר יהי רקיע כו׳

The combinations of the letters with which the heavens were created, i.e., the creative utterance,17 “Let there be a firmament…,”

הן נצבות ועומדות מלובשות בשמים לעולם, להחיותם ולקיימם

stand and remain vested in the heavens forever, to animate and sustain them.

As the Alter Rebbe explained in greater detail in Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah, chs. 1 and 2, this is also the case with regard to all created beings.

ולא כהפלוסופים שכופרים בהשגחה פרטית

This differs from the view of the philosophers who deny the individual Providence of the Creator over each and every one of His creations.

ומדמין בדמיונם הכוזב את מעשה ה׳, עושה שמים וארץ, למעשה אנוש ותחבולותיו

Using their false analogy, they liken the work of G‑d, the Maker of heaven and earth, to the work of man and his devices.

כי כאשר יצא לצורף כלי, שוב אין הכלי צריך לידי הצורף

For when a metal-smith has completed a vessel, [it] no longer needs the hands of the smith;

שאף שידיו מסולקות הימנו, הוא קיים מעצמו

though his hands are removed from it, it remains intact by itself.

Some philosophers apply this model to the creation of heaven and earth, and imagine that once G‑d created them they need Him no more, G‑d forbid. These thinkers thus deny hashgachah pratit, individually-directed Divine Providence — the Creator’s constant and ongoing contact with His created beings.

וטח מראות עיניהם ההבדל הגדול שבין מעשה אנוש ותחבולותיו

But their eyes are bedaubed so that they cannot see the great difference between man’s work and schemes,

שהוא יש מיש

which is [the production of] something out of something (yesh miyesh),

רק שמשנה הצורה והתמונה

where he merely changes the form and the appearance,

The shapeless piece of silver that a craftsman transforms into a vessel (a) already existed, and (b) was innately malleable. The craftsman has thus innovated nothing, and the vessel once shaped will therefore not be dependent on him.

The philosophers, however, do not see the difference between this,

למעשה שמים וארץ, שהוא יש מאין

and the creation of heaven and earth, which is creatio ex nihilo (yesh me’ayin), creating something out of nothing.

As the Alter Rebbe will soon point out, something brought into existence out of nothing cannot continue to exist unless the power that creates it remains constantly vested within it.

והוא פלא גדול יותר מקריעת ים סוף, על דרך משל

This — the creation of heaven and earth ex nihilo — is an [even] greater wonder than, for example, the splitting of the Red Sea,

אשר הוליך ה׳ ברוח קדים עזה כל הלילה, ויבקעו המים

which G‑d drove back18 “by a strong east wind all that night,… and the waters were divided,” and stood upright like a wall.

ואילו פסק הרוח כרגע, היו המים חוזרים וניגרים במורד, כדרכם וטבעם, ולא קמו כחומה

If the wind had ceased even for a moment, the waters would again have flowed downward, as is their way and nature, and they would not have stood upright like a wall,

In the corresponding passage in Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah, the Alter Rebbe adds the words “without a doubt.”