Reishis Goyim Amalek

[Yankel Nosson]

The Rebbe Rayatz writes: "...'in the end he [Amalek] shall be destroyed,' for klipah will ultimately be annihilated - if 'at the appointed time.' If, however, as a result of Divine service in the realm of beirurim, [Moshiach arrives] 'in haste', then it is possible for the nations to undergo some form of rectification."

"In either case there will be an increase in the light of holiness, except that if the klipos are nullified by being rectified, this holy light will radiate with far greater intensity."

Should we take the Rebbe's statements about the buttons being polished, the birur of Eisav being complete, as indicating that the work has been done to nullify the klipos via rectification?

[chassidus]

I would say yes. And the Rebbe said that we did merit Moshiach in haste. Now our Avodah is different. The vessel is ready and we have to begin bringing in the light. It seems that this is from learning Inyonei Moshiach and Geulah, as well as the deep Chassidus, especially that of the Mittler Rebbe.

[chassidus]

That is, it seems that way from the sichos of 5751/2 and other places in Chassidus.

[Jude]

In 5743, in preparation for Beis Nissan, the anniversary of the day the Rebbe Rayatz became nasi, the Rebbe told the directors of Otzar HaChassidim to publish the Rebbe Rayatz’s first maamer, “Reishis Goyim Amalek,” which was said on Parshas Tzav after Mincha, the final day of Shiva for his father, the Rebbe Rashab. It is based on the maamer of Purim 5680, the final maamer the Rebbe Rashab said in public. As Chazal say, “This one began where the other left off.”

When the maamer was published, following the Rebbe’s directive, it was studied everywhere by Anash, particularly by the Tmimim. Reb Mendel Futerfas once approached one of the talmidim and asked him, “Tell me, what is the nekuda (point) of the maamer?”

The boy had learned the maamer well, so he didn’t have to hesitate before answering. The maamer discusses the difference between kav ha’mida and k’nei ha’mida, he said. Kav ha’mida is the limitation imposed upon the light so that it can illuminate and be revealed, whereas k’nei ha’mida is limitation for the sole purpose of concealing.

Reb Mendel was utterly shaken by this response. Although it is true that this topic is discussed throughout the maamer, is it the nekuda? Is that what one is to be left with from the entire maamer? Indeed, the maamer provides a penetrating account of the wiles of the animal soul:

Each individual knows from his own experience the great suffering and pressure that comes from his yetzer ha’ra and animal soul. They never rest; they challenge him every step of the way and confuse him with many immoral thoughts, inciting him and goading him with deception. Sometimes they raise him to lofty heights and say to him that these hidurei mitzva are not worth his while, and that it would be better for him to delve into Torah or to do a mitzva. The intention in this is evil, so that he does not do good. And sometimes they degrade him, saying: “This service is far over your head. Why are you mingling with the great and wondrous?” He is thus made to demand the truth (demanding that everything be done with truth). The intention in this is to prevent him from doing what he ought to do.

A second point of the maamer is contained in the amazing words about the greatness of hiskashrus and the holiness of a tzaddik:

One can say that this is the idea of “holiness does not depart from its place”… The place of Torah and avoda of a tzaddik maintains its holiness also after he rises up from physical life to true life, and the illumination of the light of his avoda remains in its place. The place where he learned and delved into Torah, and all the things he used for the purpose of avoda, all have holiness, as part of his refinement of the world.

I once saw my father, the Rebbe, enter the room of his father, my grandfather, the Rebbe, which had been left exactly as it was in his lifetime. (This was about 5645 or 5646). He entered it wearing a gartel, and stood near the desk facing the chair. His lips moved as though he spoke, and he cried profusely.

The bachur could have gotten so much out of the maamer in terms of his attitude towards how to respond to a directive of the Rebbe, how to respond to the schemes of the yetzer ha’ra, and how to have true hiskashrus. But he chose to ignore these very important lessons. That’s why Reb Mendel was irate: What did you find in the maamer? Only the haskala (intellectual aspect) about kav ha’mida and k’nei ha’mida! Chassidus is much more than just intellectual concepts.

[chassidus]

"Chassidus that doesn't make you into a chasid isn't Chassidus."--FR

[Chabad Friend]

Litvaks know that this is the case with Chabad Chassidus. They aren't so afraid of the other seforim for some reason.

[Yankel Nosson]

Can anyone point me to sources that help explain the seemingly impossible concept of rectifying Amalek, which the FR brings in the maamar?

This is the meaning of Achashverosh's command to Haman, "Make haste and take the garment..."(Esther 6:10) Why the haste? Achashverosh was simply giving him some sound advice. Ultimately Haman (as the epitome of evil) was sure to be nullified. If this were to take place "at the appointed time", then he would be utterly obliterated.

Achashverosh therefore advised him to be rectified by means of birur, by elevating the sparks of holiness embedded in the world - by serving as a garment to adorn Mordechai the tzadik. If this took place "in haste", he would not be totally nullified - but rather rectified. Besides, there would be a corresponding increase of illumination in the realm of holiness.

[Yankel Nosson]

Can anyone point me to sources that help explain the seemingly impossible concept of rectifying Amalek, which the FR brings in the maamar?
Shaarei Orah, tzadik-zayin ("Yaviu Levush Malchus")

[Yankel Nosson]

Can anyone point me to sources that help explain the seemingly impossible concept of rectifying Amalek, which the FR brings in the maamar?
Shaarei Orah, tzadik-zayin ("Yaviu Levush Malchus")

I learned this ois of the maamar, where Amalek is likened to the placenta which covers and protects the fetus in the womb, but when it is born the placenta is thrown away because it has no use of its own.

Thus far, we see that Amalek has no hope. But then the Mitteler Rebbe brings the same posuk that the FR brings, that Amalek can become a levush ("levush d'noga"). This latter idea is not explained and I don't understand what it means. Can anyone offer clarification.

[Yankel Nosson]

Amalek is the da'as of klipah, described as being located "between the shoulders" of kedusha. The Beis Hamikdash was located "between the shoulders" of shevet Binyomin. The Rebbe explains that the mitzvah to build the Beis Hamikdash upon entering the Land follows after we fulfill the mitzvah to wipe out Amalek. Does Amalek reside in the location of the Beis Hamikdash, so we can't build it 'til he's gone?

(Just thinking out loud)

[Yankel Nosson]

The understanding b'pashtus is that Amalek must be wiped out. He has no tikkun, impossible to elevate.

Yet we see above that there is a concept of a tikkun for Amalek.

I can see two possibilities:

1) The concept of "shvirasam zehu tiknasam" -- when the Jews overcome and actively destroy Amalek then Amalek becomes a levush for the Yidden (as a result of having revealed in them the power to overcome him). This would mean that the FR is saying that Amalek's end is to be destroyed regardless; if the Jews do it then it is a tikkun; if it comes "derech mimeileh" (passively) then there is no tikkun or elevation. But either way he must be destroyed.

2) That Amalek can truly be elevated, in the sense the Rebbe develops in the various "Padah b'Shalom" maamorim (though no mention of Amalek there) -- that the menaged becomes the ohev (the opposition becomes a supporter).

I haven't found any support for the position 2; to the contrary there are the Rebbe's statement in 5751 about the need for the destruction of those elements which cannot be elevated, such as:

Bo 5751: "The destruction and nullification of those aspects of worldliness which cannot be elevated. Concerning these elements of existence, it is said, 'their destruction represents their purification.' Furthermore, their destruction adds power to the realm of holiness."

Beshallach 5751: "for G-d's sovereignty to be revealed, Amalek must be nullified."

[Yankel Nosson]

Klipas noga can be elevated to kedusha, whereas the 3 completely impure klipos can only have a tikkun through being pushed away.

I see that in Toras Menachem volume 9 p.169 the Rebbe explains the expression "shvirasan zohi taharasan" that the tahara that is occurring is going on the nitzutzos of kedusha that are in the impure things. Then he says that it also goes on the impure thing itself, which achieves an elevation by being pushed away by Yisroel.

[Yankel Nosson]

http://www.kabbalaonline.org/WeeklyTorah/ChabadDiscourses/Amalek_Eradicated_or_Elevated$.asp

I didn't read it through, but Rabbi Yosef Marcus adapts Reishis Goyim Amalek and states: Rambam rules (Laws of Kings ch. 5, beg.) that although the Torah instructs us to wipe out Amalek, nevertheless, if they are prepared to live with us in peace and accept the seven laws of Noah, they are to be spared. [For a halachic discussion on Rambam's source for this ruling, see Pesach Eynaim by the Chida on Sanhedrin 96b; Ayn Zocher 3:1; Avnei Nezer 1:508; Responsa of Dovev Mesharim 3:66; et al.]

[Aharon Benjamin]

http://www.kabbalaonline.org/WeeklyTorah/ChabadDiscourses/Amalek_Eradicated_or_Elevated$.asp

I didn't read it through, but Rabbi Yosef Marcus adapts Reishis Goyim Amalek and states:

Yes. Sorry I overlooked this thread until now. This is exactly what I believe the main theme of Reshis Goiim Amalek is - I think that Rabbi Marcus's interpretation is right on the money.

[Yankel Nosson]

But he doesn't bring any sources to back up his interpretation!

[Aharon Benjamin]

But he doesn't bring any sources to back up his interpretation!

What about the one's that you just posted above? Also, for example of another source suggesting the same concept (that the geulah will come about through the teshuvah of the world rather than through its destruction - see - Likutei Sichos 32:82,3 where the Rebbe clearly states that this will be the case.

BTW there was a comment that you made about two weeks ago that I wanted to respond to but now I don't know where it is. Wanabe had commented on my posting so many lechaiims :lchaim: by my posts, and I said that I had been told that the Rebbe said that one can make a lechaiim on air. You then said, yes but only if the cup is overflowing - ;) -

In response to that I wanted to ask you, what about the Mittler Rebbe telling his Chasidim to chazer Chasidus even if they become like an onion - aber chassidus darf men chazerin - so how does that fit with the shita of "kosi revaia"? (Or perhaps I misunderstood your comment.)