להבין אמרי בינה
“To comprehend the words of understanding,” i.e., the words of Torah,2
מה שכתוב בספר הנקרא צוואת ריב״ש
stated in the book called Tzavaat Rivash3 (“The Testament of the Baal Shem Tov),”
הגם שבאמת אינה צוואתו כלל, ולא ציוה כלל לפני פטירתו
though in fact it is not at all4 his will or testament, and he did not ordain anything before his passing;
רק הם לקוטי אמרותיו הטהורות
they (i.e., the teachings in this book) are merely gleanings of his pure sayings
The adjective (“pure”) recalls the phrase in the morning blessings, טהורה היא, that describes the pristine purity of a soul before it descends from the World of Atzilut; likewise the verse,5 כעצם השמים לטוהר (“as pure as the very heavens”).
שלקטו לקוטי בתר לקוטי
that were gathered as6 “compilations after compilations,”
ולא ידעו לכוין הלשון על מתכונתו
and [the compilers] did not know how to phrase his teachings exactly.
For the Baal Shem Tov used to speak in Yiddish, and the teachings in Tzavaat HaRivash are recorded in Hebrew.
אך המכוון הוא אמת לאמיתו
The connotation, however, of the teachings is absolutely true.
The Alter Rebbe now begins to explain the statement in Tzavaat HaRivash, sec. 120.
והוא בהקדים מאמר רז״ל: כל הכועס, כאילו עובד עבודת כוכבים ומזלות
And this [will be understood] by first considering the teaching of our Sages, of blessed memory:7 “Whoever is in a rage resembles an idolater.”
והטעם מובן ליודעי בינה
The reason [for this] is clear to those who8 “know un-derstanding,”
לפי שבעת כעסו, נסתלקה ממנו האמונה
because at the time of his anger, faith in G‑d and in His individual Divine Providence has left him.
כי אילו היה מאמין שמאת ה׳ היתה זאת לו, לא היה בכעס כלל
For were he to believe that what happened to him was G‑d’s doing, he would not be angry at all.
ואף שבן אדם, שהוא בעל בחירה, מקללו או מכהו או מזיק ממונו
True, it is a person possessed of free choice that is cursing him, or striking him, or causing damage to his property,
ומתחייב בדיני אדם ובדיני שמים על רוע בחירתו
and [therefore] guilty according to the laws of man and the laws of heaven for his evil choice.
The perpetrator for his part cannot plead innocence on the grounds that he is merely an instrument in the hands of Divine Providence.
אף על פי כן, על הניזק כבר נגזר מן השמים
Nevertheless, as regards the person harmed, this [incident] was already decreed in heaven,
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.
