In ch. 18 the Alter Rebbe began to explain how it is very near and accessible to each of us to serve G‑d out of a feeling of love and awe, by means of awakening the hidden love latent in us all. To clarify how this hidden love can lead to the observance of all the mitzvot, the Alter Rebbe proceeded to discuss the relationship of all the mitzvot to the precept of belief in G‑d’s unity and to the prohibition against idolatry. The unity of G‑d, he explained, means not only that there is but one G‑d; rather that G‑d is the only existing being, and all else is contained within Him. Conversely, idolatry does not necessarily mean a denial of G‑d’s existence, or of His being unique. Any assertion that something exists beyond and separate from G‑d also constitutes idolatry.
In ch. 23, the Alter Rebbe went on to state that through Torah and mitzvot, in which the Divine Will stands revealed, one reaches a perfect union with G‑d. In this chapter he explains that a transgression has exactly the opposite effect of a mitzvah. Whereas a mitzvah joins one to G‑d, a transgression severs one from Him; whereas a mitzvah attests to G‑d’s unity, a transgression implies idolatry.
וזה לעומת זה
Since everything in the realm of holiness has its counterpart in the unholy realms of the sitra achra, there is also an unholy counterpart to the observance of the mitzvot and to Torah study, which produce union with G‑d. Their counterpart is:
הן שס״ה מצות לא תעשה דאורייתא, וכל איסורי דרבנן
the 365 prohibitions stated in the Torah, and all the Rabbinical prohibitions.
מאחר שהן נגד רצונו וחכמתו יתברך והפכם ממש, הם נפרדים מיחודו יתברך ואחדותו יתברך בתכלית הפירוד ממש
Since they are contrary to and the very opposite of G‑d’s Will and wisdom, they represent total and complete separation from His unity and oneness.
כמו הסטרא אחרא והקליפה הנקראת עבודה זרה ואלקים אחרים, מחמת הסתר פנים של רצון העליון כנ״ל
They are the same as the sitra achra and the kelipah which are called “idolatry” and “other gods,” since the internal aspect of the Divine Will is concealed from them, as explained above1 — that they receive their life-force from the “hinder-part” of the Divine Will, the level of ,אחוריים and for this reason they are called אלקים אחרים — “other gods.”
וכן ג‘ לבושי הנפש שמקליפת נוגה שבישראל, שהם מחשבה דבור ומעשה המלובשים בשס״ה לא תעשה דאורייתא ודרבנן
Just as the forbidden actions themselves represent separation from G‑dliness so too the three garments of a Jew’s animal soul, which stems from the kelipah of nogah — namely, the thought, speech and action that are clothed in i.e., that think, speak or act in violation of the 365 Torah-prohibitions, or any of the Rabbinic injunctions,
וכן מהות הנפש עצמה המלובשת בלבושיה
and similarly the essence of the soul itself which is clothed in its garments, since it is the soul itself, after all, which thinks, speaks and acts through its “garments” — the faculties of thought, speech and action,
כולם מיוחדים ממש בסטרא אחרא וקליפה זו הנקראת עבודה זרה
— all of them become completely united with this sitra achra and kelipah called “avodah zarah,” i.e., idolatry.
ולא עוד אלא שבטלים וטפלים אליה, וגרועים ופחותים ממנה מאד
Not only are they united with the kelipah, and thus equal to it, but furthermore they become secondary and subordinate to it, and much lower and more debased than it.
כי היא אינה מלובשת בגוף חומרי, ויודעת את רבונה ואינה מורדת בו לפעול פעולתה במשלחת מלאכי רעים שלה, שלא בשליחותו של מקום, ברוך הוא, חס ושלום
For the kelipah is not clothed in a corporeal body and hence is more exposed to the divine light; it knows its Master and does not rebel against Him (G‑d forbid) by any independent act of sending its evil messengers, other than in the service of G‑d.
Any evil act of the sitra achra is performed only in the service of G‑d. Thus, the kelipot that are not clothed in a body cannot rebel against G‑d’s Will; only the animal soul clothed in the human body can do so. Hence, it is even lower than the kelipah.
וכמאמר בלעם: לא אוכל לעבור את פי ה’ וגו‘
So did Bilaam say: 2 “I cannot violate the Word of G‑d”
Although Bilaam was a kelipah clothed in a body, yet when he spoke for the spiritual kelipah within him, viz., the unholy prophetic power with which he wished to curse the Jewish people, he said, “I cannot violate the Word of G‑d.”
ואף שנקרא עבודה זרה, הא קרו ליה אלקא דאלקיא
Although the kelipot are called avodah zarah, idolatry, which is a denial of G‑d, yet they refer to Him as “the G‑d of gods,” indicating that they do not deny Him completely.
ואינם יכולים לעבור כלל על רצונו יתברך, כי יודעים ומשיגים שהוא חיותם וקיומם, שיונקים מבחינת אחוריים דאחוריים של רצון העליון, ברוך הוא, המקיף עליהם
They cannot violate G‑d’s Will, for they know and perceive that He is their life and sustenance, since they derive their nurture from the “hindermost aspect” of the Divine Will which encompasses them.
אלא שיניקתם וחיותם היא בבחינת גלות בתוכם, להחשיב עצמן אלקות, והרי זו כפירה באחדותו
It is only the sustenance and life-force that is within them, i.e., the internal life-force which constitutes the identity of every created being, as explained in ch. 22, that is in a state of exile, so that they regard themselves as gods — which is a denial of G‑d’s unity.
אבל מכל מקום אינן כופרים וכחשו בה’ לגמרי ולומר לא הוא, אלא דקרו ליה אלקא דאלקיא, דהיינו חיותם וקיומם הנמשך ויורד עליהם מרצונו יתברך
But they are not so completely heretical as to deny G‑d and to assert that He does not exist. On the contrary, they regard Him as “the G‑d of gods,” recognizing that their life and existence ultimately derive from His Will.
ולכן אינן עוברין רצונו יתברך לעולם
Therefore they never rebel against G‑d’s Will.
ואם כן האדם העובר על רצונו יתברך הוא גרוע ופחות הרבה מאד מהסטרא אחרא וקליפה הנקראת עבודה זרה ואלקים אחרים
It follows, then, that the person who does violate G‑d’s Will is greatly inferior to and more debased than the kelipah and sitra achra which are called avodah zarah and “other gods.”
והוא בתכלית הפירוד מיחודו ואחדותו של הקב״ה יותר ממנה, וכאלו כופר באחדותו יותר ממנה, חס ושלום
He is separated completely from G‑d’s unity and oneness even more than they are, as though denying His unity even more radically than they, G‑d forbid.
וכמו שכתוב בעץ חיים שער מ״ב סוף פרק ד’, שהרע שבעולם הזה החומרי הוא שמרי הקליפות הגסות כו‘, והוא תכלית הבירור וכו’
This is similar to what is written in Etz Chayim, Portal 42, end of ch. 4, that the evil in this corporeal world is the dregs of the coarse kelipot; it is the sediment of the purifying process, and so on.
I.e., after whatever sparks of good that are found in the kelipot have been isolated and elevated, what remains is kelipah in its lowest, coarsest form. This kelipah is the evil found in this material world.
ולכן כל מעשה עולם הזה קשים ורעים, והרשעים גוברים בו וכו‘
For this reason, all matters of this world are harsh and evil, and the wicked prevail in it, and so forth.
ולכן אמרו רז״ל על פסוק כי תשטה אשתו: אין אדם עובר עבירה כו’
This explains the commentary of our Sages on the verse, 3 “If a man’s wife turns aside [and commits adultery].” 4 — “No man commits any transgression unless a spirit of folly has entered into him.
The Sages thus relate the root ofתשטה — ”turns aside,“ toשטות — ”folly“.
דאפילו אשה המנאפת, שדעתה קלה, היתה מושלת ברוח תאותה לולי רוח שטות שבה
For even an adulterous woman, with her frivolous nature, could have controlled her passionate drive were it not for the spirit of folly within her,
המכסה ומסתיר ומעלים את האהבה מסותרת שבנפשה האלקית, לדבקה באמונת ה‘ ויחודו ואחדותו, ולא ליפרד חס ושלום מאחדותו, אפילו נוטלים את נפשה ממנה, לעבוד עבודה זרה, חס ושלום
which covers and conceals the hidden love within her divine soul, that yearns to cleave to her faith in G‑d, and to His unity and oneness, and that resists even on pain of death, any separation from His unity through idol-worship, i.e., even this adultress would willingly sacrifice her life, rather than submit to coercion to practice idolatry,
ואפילו בהשתחואה לבדה, בלי שום אמונה בלב כלל
even if this idol-worship would consist merely of an empty act of prostrating herself before the idolized object, without any belief in her heart in the validity of idol-worship.
וכל שכן לכבוש היצר ותאות הניאוף שהם יסורים קלים ממיתה, ה’ ישמרנו
Now, if her hidden love of G‑d has the power to enable her to face death rather than be separated from Him, surely then it is within its power to overcome the temptation and lust for adultery, which is lighter suffering than death (May G‑d protect us!).
It is only the ”spirit of folly,“ i.e., the notion that her sin will not tear her away from G‑dliness, that leads her to commit adultery.
It might be argued, however, that she differentiates between idolatry and adultery; she regards the former as much more heinous (and thus more certain to tear her away from G‑d) than the latter. Perhaps this differentiation (not the ”spirit of folly“) is why she would sacrifice her life rather than practice idolatry, yet at the same time she would not sacrifice her temptation for adultery. In answer, the Alter Rebbe states:
וההפרש שאצלה בין איסור ניאוף לאיסור השתחואה לעבודה זרה, הוא גם כן רוח שטות דקליפה
The distinction she makes between the prohibition against idolatry and that against adultery is also but a ”spirit of folly“ stemming from the kelipah.
It renders her insensitive to the enormous breach between herself and G‑d that is created by every sin. If she were aware of this breach, she would certainly overcome desire and refrain from sin.
המלבשת לנפש האלקית עד בחינת חכמה שבה, ולא עד בכלל, מפני אור ה‘ המלובש בחכמה כנ״ל
Yet the ”spirit of folly“ envelops the divine soul only up to, but not including, its faculty of Chochmah which, as explained in ch. 18, represents the power of faith in G‑d; this faith is unaffected by the ”spirit of folly,“ because of the Divine light that is clothed in the faculty of Chochmah, as explained above. 5
Therefore, when confronted with a matter that directly bears on her faith in G‑d, such as idolatry, where the ”spirit of folly“ is powerless, she would willingly sacrifice her life. But when faced with the temptation for adultery, where the ”spirit of folly“ can — and does — conceal her faith in G‑d and her hidden love for Him, she succumbs. As stated, the subjective distinction between the two stems from foolishness and insensitivity.
